1960 version of The Hobbit?

B

BountyHunter

The Shire
I read on another forum (that I can't post on yet) that Tolkien was working on a new edit of The Hobbit around 1960 or so, that was going to add more references from LoTR. Is this true? What can you tell me about this?

It's the first I've heard of it.
 
In Rateliff's 'History of The Hobbit' (2007), the manuscript of a thoroughly revised version of the children's classic is printed. It ends when the gang is about halfway to Rivendell.

After he'd completed The Lord of the Rings, Tolkien often commented that he wasn't pleased with the 'childish' aspects of The Hobbit, that differed in tone from the nominal 'sequel', LotR. So he began a rewrite, taking out all the condescending language, the chatty narrator, the anachronisms (at least the ones that didn't also occur in LotR), etc.

As Rateliff reports the event, Tolkien sent the first few chapters to a female relative to get a reaction. Evidently she said something along the lines of, it's perfectly nice but it isn't The Hobbit!

Tolkien had second thoughts, abandoned ship, and only very lightly edited a third edition of The Hobbit for a paperback edition a few years later. The Hobbit remains The Hobbit - not quite in the world of The Lord of the Rings, but obviously closely linked to it. We might say that LotR looks back fully on TH, but TH does not look forward at all to LotR.
 
Tolkien had second thoughts, abandoned ship, and only very lightly edited a third edition of The Hobbit for a paperback edition a few years later. The Hobbit remains The Hobbit - not quite in the world of The Lord of the Rings, but obviously closely linked to it. We might say that LotR looks back fully on TH, but TH does not look forward at all to LotR.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say that. The 1966 revision does alter the details of Bilbo's acquisition of his 'magic ring' as a direct result to the revelations to be made in The Lord of the Rings.
 
What changes to the story of Bilbo's finding the Ring were made in the 1966 paperback edition of The Hobbit?
 
For the 1966 edition Tolkien substantially rewrote "Riddles in the Dark" and the following chapter to bring them in line with LotR. Bilbo's encounter with Gollum originally went essentially according to the story that he gave to Gandalf and the dwarves (again keeping the ring a secret).
 
So you can read these changes in The History of The Hobbit? I'm curious now,
Click to expand...

Douglas A. Anderson also quotes extensively from the original text in The Annotated Hobbit. Anderson, however, does not much (if at all) concern himself with the abandoned 1960 version. He does include, as Appendix A, Tolkien's essay "The Quest of Erebor".
 
Last edited:
As Rateliff reports the event, Tolkien sent the first few chapters to a female relative to get a reaction. Evidently she said something along the lines of, it's perfectly nice but it isn't The Hobbit!

Tolkien had second thoughts, abandoned ship, and only very lightly edited a third edition of The Hobbit for a paperback edition a few years later.
Click to expand...

We can't ever be sure, though. Tolkien had a habit of jumping from writing one part of his legendarium to another, especially when it came time to bring any one of his stories to a close: he had a hard time finishing stories.

So, the heavily revised version of The Hobbit could have remained unmade for that reason, and not just because his test audience was unenthused.
 
But I'm pretty certain the changes you're referring to, the substantial revision to the 'Riddles in the Dark' chapter of The Hobbit to bring that story in line with what The Lord of the Rings said happened, were executed in the second edition of The Hobbit, which was issued in 1951.

The changes were based on a purported thought experiment by Tolkien as he came to the end of writing LotR in the late 1940s: he sent his publisher a kind of "this is how it should have been - what do you think?" manuscript. But at the time no reprint of The Hobbit was in the works. A few years later the second edition was issued, and Tolkien affected to be shocked and surprised to see his changes set in print!

I have an older reprint of that edition, from the early 1960s, and there is a funny note just before the story begins, where the author explains the changes from the first edition.

"In this reprint several minor inaccuracies, most of them noted by readers, have been corrected. .... More important is the matter of Chapter Five. There the true story of the ending of the Riddle Game, as it was eventually revealed (under pressure) by Bilbo to Gandalf, is now given according to the Red Book, in place of the version Bilbo set down in his diary. This departure from truth on the part of a most honest hobbit was a portent of great significance. It does not, however, concern the present story, and those who in this edition make their first acquaintance with hobbit-lore need not trouble about it. Its explanation lies in the history of the Ring, as it is set out in the chronicles of the Red Book of Westmarch, and it must await their publication."​
In short, the change hit The Hobbit before The Lord of the Rings was published, and made no particular sense to fond and loyal readers of The Hobbit at the time! And that major change to the first book was practically ancient history by 1960, when the even more major rewrite was aborted.

Getting back to the 1966 third edition, I myself cannot remember what the changes were, which is why I referred to them as minor, particularly in comparison to what Tolkien had hoped to do in 1960 about rewriting the book from start to finish to align it in style and tone with the trilogy.
 
It may be that the 1966 edition included minor revisions and corrections and I should have been thinking of the 1951 revision. In fact, a second look at Douglas Anderson's annotations confirms this! My apologies. [blush]
 
I really wanted to see how he would handle a re-write of the "tra-la-la-lally" Elves, but alas, that Bilbo never got as far as Rivendell.
 
Would be great if Tolkien had finished the whole story. Maybe The Hobbit movies would have been as great as LOTR too! [;)]
 
Last edited:
Whatever happened to all of his original writings? Are they tucked away with the family or in a museum or simply scattered all over the place?....or all of the above?
 
The Tolkien Estate has maintained vigilant control over everything in its possession. Most of the rest, along with material about his life, is at Marquette University in a special collection. Several years ago Marquette provided a small exhibit in NYC in conjunction with the live Fellowship of the Ring concert. Grammaboodawg and I, among other TORnsibs, visited it; you might have especially liked some literal back-of-the-envelope figuring about the moon phases in Book III.
 
you might have especially liked some literal back-of-the-envelope figuring about the moon phases in Book III.
Click to expand...
You've got that right. I would have loved seeing that. I do wish there would have been more astronomy in the movies but that's okay. The stars looked pretty realistic when the Ents were having their meeting and also there was the scene when Legolas mentioned "the stars are veiled" and their entrance into Erebor with the crescent Moon....woops, this is the reading room, not the movie thread *walks out embarressed*
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top