View Single Post
Old 03-15-2012, 04:12 AM   #31
Findegil
King's Writer
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,694
Findegil is a guest of Tom Bombadil.
Posted by Galin:
Quote:
Can I ask what you mean by Christopher Tolkien enforcing a definition for a definitive version of The Silmarillion?
Christopher Tolkien over steped the task of an editor to get a coherent book from the scirpts of the Silmarillion komplex left to him by his father. Since his father entiteled him to do as he wished with his scripts, he is not to be blamed for it. And I did not mean 'enforcing' with any negativ conotation.
What he did was not enforcing a definition realy, he simply presented the result of such a definition: As long as nothing else was published, the product of that process 'The Silmarillion' of 1977 was THE 'definitive' version.

All publication about Middle-Earth that followed with the excaption of 'The Children of Húrin' were mere resource books showing JRR Tolkien's life long work on the theme. In his commentaries Christopher Tolkien himself does question some of his own decissions made for the 'The Silmarillion' of 1977, but he did not take the opportuinty to re-edit 'The Silamrillion' in these points when a new edition came out 2001.
Therefore the avarage reader will, if he is interrested enough to read that fare at all, come first to 'The Silmarillion'. Which makes that book still some kind of a definitiv version.

The alternative way (probably not possible in practise) would have been to start with 'Unfinished Tales' and 'The History of Middle-Earth' series. That would have meant no preselection or definition for devintivness by the editor but full freeness for the readers.

Thus in effect we have what was asked for: a 'definitive' version of 'The Silmarillion' of some kind. The issue is that we are not satisfied with it.

Respectfuly
Findegil
Findegil is offline   Reply With Quote