[Mithalwen]

Having known and loved the books for so long and having been traumatised by the Bakshi cartoon version, I had absolutely no desire whatsoever to see the films so I can only imagine how much more strongly given his much closer connection to the books the level of disinclination Christopher Tolkien felt. I should think it would be more or less unbearable. And I can certainly understand the attitude that since he had no control he would rather stay right away. Given that he has no control of the contents, and that I doubt that Hollywood blockbusters are among the particular interests of elderly academics resident in France, I am frankly a little surprised that people are particularly surprised he isn't interested in watching Peter Jackson's view of his father's creation to which he has devoted decades of his life.

I did watch the films (having seen a trailer) and I do own them but compared to the books they are peripheral. I am not an action movie person so the things I like about them is the way they look and I think it was a clever move to use Alan Lee and John Howe since as a result Middle Earth looks familiar to those of use whose books are illustrated by them. when I saw the trailer I realised that the sets and the costumes had been designed by people who loved the books and that was enough to make me go. The look of the film has lingered and parts were well done - the ride of the Rohirrim, for example, and I thought it was clever the way they made clear the paralel of Sam and Elrond at the Crack of Doom, but overall they didn't have the impact of the Radio Version... which I heard soon after I first read the books, and to which I listen every couple of months while the EEs sit on the shelf unwatched.

While it may have introduced some people to Tolkien it is clear that a lot of people never make the transition to the books whereas most of the book people have seen the films. And there are a lot of them. The Lord of the Rings was voted book of the century BEFORE the films came out, discovered by generations of adolescents in turn.

However I do wonder if age is a factor here - not age itself but the fact of having grown up in a world without so much constant visual stimulus. When I was a child there were 3 television channels and they didn't broadcast 24 hours a day - for a large part of the day all one of them showed was a picture of a girl with a few toys. Children's television programmes were few and centred largely on story telling.

I did have a computer game (and if I can find it it might be worth something) which consisted of two lines and a dot. The plus side was that we had a lot more freedom to roam around outside, but without computers, videos and 24/7 dedicated TV you were a lot more reliant on books and your own imagination for entertainment. Maybe that is why more of the slightly older generation prefer our own images to those presented to us.

I am not against the movies as such and I understand a lot of the reasons for the changes but I could leave them as easily as take them. I am not very keen on a lot of the art either - in fact a lot of it is quite hideous but it is much easier to ignore! I guess the films are always going to be more significant to those who were introduced to Tolkien by them. And least significant to Christopher Tolkien of anyone living.