|
Seems to me some people have this Tolkien shaped blindspot as far as this discussion goes. Its being seen as a case of the Tolkien Estate (Good Guys) defending JRR Tolkien (Good Guy), & therefore 'real' fans ought to align themselves with them against their 'foes' - whether that's the authors of the Hilary Tolkien biography & Stephen Hillard (Bad Guys). To oppose the Estate & object to their behaviour in these cases is seen almost as a 'betrayal' of Tolkien himself (I suspect that's certainly Garm's position reading his comments). One ought not to even question the behaviour/choices of the Estate because they simply cannot be wrong due to their connection with JRR Tolkien.
This is not about whether JRR Tolkien should be used as a character in a fantasy novel. Its about whether a writer of historical fiction should be free to use historical persons in their fiction. Or whether in a non-fiction work its acceptable to speculate on an individual's actions/motivations & play 'what -if'. To argue that they should not (because you can't write a law purely to protect JRR Tolkien from being used in such a way - its everyone or no-one who get's that protection) would put an end to most historical fiction, much biography, & would in effect turn a real once living, breathing person into a commodity. And that in effect is what the Estate is attempting here - to reduce JRR Tolken to a product which they own & can sell on or withhold.
So, you don't like JRRT being presented in such a way, turned into a character - fine - as long as you take the same position regarding every other work of historical fiction which uses real people as characters. If you support the Estate in this then get rid of your Malory, your Shakespeare, your Tolstoy, your Titanic DVD (& your Doctor Who DVDs too), your King's Speech, Lawrence of Arabia, Frost/Nixon & All the President's Men - well, you get the point.
|