Quote:
|
Originally Posted by William Cloud Hickli
Ironically, JDR's thesis (with condiderable supporting evidence) is that The Hobbit was always tied to the Silmarillion universe.
.
|
Well, I'm up to the point where the party leave Rivendell, & I've read a lot of Rateliff's 'evidence' & I have to say I'm not convinced. Of course, its clear that Tolkien drew on the Legendarium for background for the story, but its set in a 'fairy tale' world &only touches the Sil world tangentially - its hardly a part of the Legendarium. Yes, there were references to Beren & Luthien in the first version, & references to Gondolin survived, but there were also references to Shetland ponies, the Hindu Kush, tinkers, & 'policemen on bicycles'. Clearly the original version Tolkien set down had no stronger links with the Legendarium than Roverandom did.
We also have Tolkien stating in one letter that
Quote:
|
“I don’t much approve of The Hobbit myself, preferring my own mythology (which is just touched on) with its consistent nomenclature – Elrond, Gondolin and Esgaroth have escaped out of it – and organized history, to this rabble of Eddaic-named dwarves out of Volüspá, newfangled hobbits and gollums (invented in an idle hour) and Anglo-Saxon runes.”
|
I think its clear from this statement that Tolkien, even in 1937 when TH was complete, didn't consider it part of the Legendarium - & hardly even to be set in the same world as The Sil - Elrond, Gondolin & Esgaroth, to Tolkien's mind, didn't belong in the world of TH, but had 'escaped' out of the Sil into it - as had 'Faerie in the West' into Roverandom.
Rateliff puts the case for TH being part of the Legendarium, but doesn't offer the counter argument.
In short, I don't see that TH is 'tied' all that strongly to the Legendarium itself, merely that it makes use of some characters & places in order to give 'depth'.