[Mithadan]

For all too many of us, "steeped in the lore," it is all too easy (and seductive) to spar with others about the "minutiae" and voice our displeasure at every deviation from "canon" (whatever that is). My views on canon have changed over the years. My desire to seek consistency has not. But I generally do not extend my views to the cinematic interpretations (with the exception of Jackson's Hobbit which I simply did not like and found far too unfaithful to the source material). I try to enjoy them, or not.

With Rings of Power, the source material is scanty. It is, primarily, the appendices to LoTR. Amazon does not have rights to the Silmarillion or HoME at all. I do not know how Amazon deals with the rights to LoTR that Tolkien conveyed during his lifetime to Zaentz (and further conveyed to New Line). I am told that the Estate can be asked to allow use of other materials, but it does not have to agree. The result is great gaps in the "lore" and an inability to address and use source material to which Amazon lacks rights. On the plus side, this leaves room to be creative, speculative or even to deviate from "canon" (that Amazon lacks rights to).

As an older fan, I can say this. If Rings of Power had come out in the 1980s (ignoring the lack of cinematic technology available then), I would have been overjoyed at the opportunity to watch a fantasy show of even moderate quality "based upon" Middle Earth. Becoming "steeped in lore" by HoME and repeated rereads of LoTR and the Silmarillion is a cause of viewer dissatisfaction, and I will concede that I am susceptible to this. But, so far, I have enjoyed the show and will try to do so going forward.

Am I concerned that viewers who have not read (or devoured) the books may view RoP as some type of "canon?" Yes. But places like the Barrow-Downs can help there. And if we end up with more folks encouraged to become "steeped in lore" then all the better.