[davem]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

No, it doesn't because

1. The Silm as a satisfactorily completed book was just a gleam in JRRT's and CT's eyes when TH and LotR were published, so the original inclusion of LEP had nothing to do with any kind of statement about the Legendarium.

Well, one could argue that the mythology was fully formed (certainly in Tolkien's mind) when Tolkien began TH, & despite Rateliff's arguments to the contrary TH was not written with anything but a very indirect relation to the Legendarium - yes, the early drafts contain references to Beren & Luthien, along with Gondolin & such, but they also contain references to China, the Hindu Kush & Shetland ponies.

2. Inclusion of LEP was related to the fact that Tolkien started LotR as a sequel to TH. Even if LotR grew beyond that intention, the original intention is not negated.

It could be argued that by the time The New Hobbit became LotR it had ceased to be a sequel to TH & become the final movement of the Silmarillion. Tolkien clearly stated that he 'did not approve of The Hobbit' preferring instead his own mythology. Of course, once LotR did become part of the Sil proper he was stuck with TH - which is neither part of the mythology proper (in CT's opinion - which is the main reason TH is not included in HoM-e). I think this is confirmed by the fact that he struggled & failed to make it (or a version/retelling of it) fit the mood & style of the Legendarium. Flieger doesn't count it as part of the Legendarium either, & dislikes it intensely (which I don't - its one of my favourite books)

3. Inclusion of such chapters as LEP was a publishing strategy related to marketing. It was designed to inspire readers to buy more books (and maybe even pad a smallish book to make it seem more substantial). It was not designed to make a statement about any kind of authorial universe, about which readers at the time knew nothing.

That I accept - a clear marketing strategy. Of course, most recent pb editions of TH have included LEP. Personally, I find it leaves TH feeling 'unfinished'. Rather than a complete tale in its own right, with a beginning, middle & end it is reduced to a prequel to LotR.

4. Removing LEP from an edition of TH which is not represented as an exact reprinting of the original first edition and which includes several other items would represent a revision to the history of publication of TH. It happened. Discussing it of course is legitimate--many people do enjoy the wriggling aspect of argument--but to erase it is the worst sort of historical revisionism.

I don't see how it constitues 'revisionism' at all. Tolkien never authorised LEP to be included in TH, & it seems to me to be simply an extended advert for LotR.

I think the bottom line is Th wasn't written as a sequel to or continuation of the mythology as it existed at the time of writing, once the New Hobbit had become part of The Sil mythology Tolkien was stuck with TH & repeatedly tried & failed to properly integrate it & in the end gave up. TH should be seen as a stand alone tale, not as the precursor to something greater. If readers want to see it as a part of the Legendarium proper they are free to do so - Rateliff provides enough 'evidence' to convince those who want to be convinced (against the clear statements of both Tolkien pere & fils) but adding LEP is an attempt to tie TH directly into LotR & thus to The Sil mythology, when there is a strong (some of us would say convincing) argument to be made that it it not.

EDIT more from Rateliff on this here http://sacnoths.blogspot.com/2007/09...-seen-two.html