The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum - View Single Post

Sauron the White · 04-01-2007, 11:58 AM

William

The calendar with the Tim Kirk illustrations was in 1975. Before that they went with JRRT illustrations from the books. They had to either scrap the idea of a yearly calendar or go outside of JRRT's own work since they needed 13 to 14 paintings each year. In ten years time that is some 130 or more works of art. I do not think it was the Kirk calendar which alerted the Estate to get more involved because they kept up that type of calendar for several more years. For the next few years they used a variety of illustrators. The Tolkien Estate and CT are most sensitive about the depiction of Beren and Luthien. It was the story closest to JJRT's own heart. Just look at the depiction of Beren and Luthien in the US 1981 calendar for the month of February. Luthien as a sexy scantily clad dancer and Beren as Robin Hood - artist was Rowena Morril. There is no way under heaven that CT or the Estate would have given their approval to something like that. So I think the years of more hands on involvement came much later than the 1097 Kirk calendar.

The "monster" comments attributed to Ted Nasmith are not from a print interview. They came in direct statements from himself. I remember well his use of the term monster and how the Estate did not want anything from the darker side of the mythos portrayed. I have copies of rough paintings Nasmith did depicting Angband and the persons of Morgoth, Ungoliant, Sauron and other darker beings that are wonderful ideas for full paintings but were rejected by the Estate for the specific "monster" reasoning.

Unless one is privy to the exact contractual terms that exist between the Estate and the publishers I think it is risky to state that interiors or calendar illustrations must be approved while covers need not be. This could be the case but we do not know this for a fact. What I do strongly suspect is that there is little chance that the official publishers would dare put something on the cover like a film photograph and go against the wishes of the Estate. It would be like cutting off your nose to spite your face. That is partly why I am willing to accept the idea that I saw in print that the Estate made a deal with the publishers to accept the film covers in return for a slightly higher royalty.

I would not read too much either way into the selection of Alan Lee to illustrate HURIN despite his work on the films. They simply like him. Period.

04-01-2007, 11:58 AM	#44
Sauron the White Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 903	William The calendar with the Tim Kirk illustrations was in 1975. Before that they went with JRRT illustrations from the books. They had to either scrap the idea of a yearly calendar or go outside of JRRT's own work since they needed 13 to 14 paintings each year. In ten years time that is some 130 or more works of art. I do not think it was the Kirk calendar which alerted the Estate to get more involved because they kept up that type of calendar for several more years. For the next few years they used a variety of illustrators. The Tolkien Estate and CT are most sensitive about the depiction of Beren and Luthien. It was the story closest to JJRT's own heart. Just look at the depiction of Beren and Luthien in the US 1981 calendar for the month of February. Luthien as a sexy scantily clad dancer and Beren as Robin Hood - artist was Rowena Morril. There is no way under heaven that CT or the Estate would have given their approval to something like that. So I think the years of more hands on involvement came much later than the 1097 Kirk calendar. The "monster" comments attributed to Ted Nasmith are not from a print interview. They came in direct statements from himself. I remember well his use of the term monster and how the Estate did not want anything from the darker side of the mythos portrayed. I have copies of rough paintings Nasmith did depicting Angband and the persons of Morgoth, Ungoliant, Sauron and other darker beings that are wonderful ideas for full paintings but were rejected by the Estate for the specific "monster" reasoning. Unless one is privy to the exact contractual terms that exist between the Estate and the publishers I think it is risky to state that interiors or calendar illustrations must be approved while covers need not be. This could be the case but we do not know this for a fact. What I do strongly suspect is that there is little chance that the official publishers would dare put something on the cover like a film photograph and go against the wishes of the Estate. It would be like cutting off your nose to spite your face. That is partly why I am willing to accept the idea that I saw in print that the Estate made a deal with the publishers to accept the film covers in return for a slightly higher royalty. I would not read too much either way into the selection of Alan Lee to illustrate HURIN despite his work on the films. They simply like him. Period.