CT's lawyer lays the facts down

[Hyarion]

It looks like with the news of The Children of Hurin being released, CT's lawyer is back to work making sure JRRT's son is being portrayed in a positive light. He has sent a letter to a blogger who referred to CT as a "big prick" and wrote some incorrect facts to which the lawyer has corrected. It's nice to finally get some authentic information on CT as most of the time it is just skewed by the media and I rarely know what to believe. Christopher Tolkien's Lawyer Speaks

Here's the good stuff:

1. The rights in The Hobbit are not controlled by Christopher Tolkien.
2. There was no dispute between Christopher Tolkien and his son, Simon Tolkien, as a result of Simon Tolkien going to see the first Lord of the Rings film.
3. Simon Tolkien was never on the Board of any Tolkien company and was not 'removed' from any such position by Christopher Tolkien.
4. Nor has Christopher Tolkien 'disowned' Simon Tolkien.
5. Christopher Tolkien does not guard his house with a wild boar.
6. Permission has never been sought from either Christopher Tolkien (or the Tolkien Estate) for a 'mathom-house' in New Zealand.
7. Christopher Tolkien is neither 'a lunatic' nor 'out of control'

[Mänwe]

Hyarion, It is good to see that Christopher Tolkien still does well in countering any pointless critisism. Said blogger should be shot.

[The Squatter of Amon Rûdh]

Nobody should be shot. Pilloried and lampooned maybe, but not shot.

This sort of idle gossip and speculation is always rife when somebody remains out of the public eye. In fact, a certain type of journalism feeds it in vengeance when someone refuses to give interviews. C.T. likes his privacy, and unfortunately that means that a lot of foolish ideas about him aren't countered as often or as authoritatively as they ought to be. Add to that the amateurish reportage of the average weblog and you have a recipe for this sort of wild misinformation.

Perhaps we should even be thankful that someone's comments have provoked a definitive statement from those in the know. I've heard each and every one of those rumours before, and they always sounded rather fishy. It's nice to have both sides of the story.

[MatthewM]

Thanks for posting this. I really wish C.T. was more open about certain stuff...can't he just write a book already with all his LotR thoughts? Of course that won't happen, but I would love to hear an authentic right from his mouth confirmation on some things, and things he may like to share concerning J.R.R.

Anyway, I found this part in the original blog very harsh:

When Christopher's son Simon went to see the first film, he was removed from the Tolkien Company board and disowned by his father: “I never saw the films as a threat and I’ve enjoyed the movies for what they are, but I crossed my father on a Tolkien issue ... he will never speak to me again as long as he lives, he will never see my children and will never have anything to do with me.” --S.T.

I know that C.T.'s lawyer said this was completely false, but has Simon Tolkien ever spoken up about the issue? How did that mumbo jumbo BS ever get released? Has S.T. ever truly commented about this rumour?

[Child of the 7th Age]

You might want to glance at this: here.
I am having trouble with the link....just in case I will quote the portion. This is a very long article that goes on and on -- this is just a tiny part of it.

In 2001, Christopher issued a statement declaring that the "Tolkien estate would be best advised to avoid any specific association with the films." This dispelled any rumor that director Jackson had received his blessing. But not every member of the Tolkien Company, the board that maintains the relationship between the estate and the outside world, was in agreement. Simon Tolkien, one of J.R.R.'s six grandchildren, expressed interest in cooperating with the filmmakers. For Simon's traitorous views, Christopher removed his son as a trustee.

My several attempts to reach Christopher or interview an estate lawyer were handily deflected. But via telephone I did reach Simon.

"The essential thing was that I crossed my father on a Tolkien issue, and he never looked back," Simon, 44, says from London. "I never saw the films as a threat. I've enjoyed the movies for what they are."

Obviously hurt by his father's rejection, Simon hasn't spoken to him in 4 1/2 years. He's not permitted to discuss the estate. "I do have a relationship with the money, but I can't talk about it. If what you're after is someone who will tell you the estate's attitude toward this and that, I can't. I'm cut off. It's a source of grievance for me."

Of course, we don't know who is in the "right" here, or even if there is a "right". It is perhaps wise to remember that Christopher was divorced from his first wife, and that Simon is the son of that wife. I know nothing about the family situation, but it would not be unusual to have bad blood in a situation like this where divorce is involved.

I think some legitimate complaints can be made against Christopher, despite his dedication. For example, as this article indicates, only four scholars have been given direct access to the linguistic papers. There is tremendous unhappiness about this among other linguists, since the material has been released very, very slowly. You can find websites where this is discussed, not by crackpots but legitimate scholars. Other scholars have complained about uneven access to the materials, with certain old favorites getting the nod. I am no expert on this, and undoubtedly there are different viewpoints here. Certainly, the blog cited above is ridiculous, and the author of this newspaper article is no fan of CT, but legitimate concerns could exist.

[MatthewM]

Wow...that is really harsh. It's interesting that he is the son of CT's divorced wife, but come on now...if that is true, I have lost a lot of respect for CT. Would J.R.R. be so strict in regards to something like that? I mean...ST is CT's son, no matter the mother...

[Child of the 7th Age]

Matthew,

There is no doubt that Simon feels estranged from his father and says that he was "cut off".. However, we can never really know the whole truth behind that. So often in life, even when both parties have good intentions, things are misunderstood and bad feelings result. That definitely seems to be the case here.

It does sound as if these misunderstandings go back a very long time and that they have shaped Simon's whole outlook on his life:

"My parents split up when I was 5. My mother was working full time as a teacher. I spent an incredible amount of time alone. I read a lot, including 'The Lord of the Rings.' I would go and stay with my grandfather for a weekend or a week at a time. I spent a lot of time with him on a one-to-one basis.

"He lived in a seaside town. We did lots and lots of word games. We skimmed stones in the sea and walked on the beach. I asked him endless questions about 'The Lord of the Rings.' He was patient and very nice about it. We had a lot of fun together."

Four years ago, Tolkien began reading his grandfather's works to his son, Nicholas, now 12. He says it's one way he's tried to bond with his son as he and his father never have.

"When my relationship with my father broke down, there was not an innate sense of love and affection... to get us through that difficult time," says Tolkien, who is also the father of 1-year-old Anna.

"I've been very conscious with my own son of having a different relationship. We've had a lot of fun together. When the troubles and the difficulties come, we'll be able to get through them."

Christopher is a very private man and chooses not to open up in this way, which is definitely his right. But because he is so private, we can only guess at many things in his life, even the answers to some of our questions about the Legendarium, such as who is going to inherit the mantle and make the decisions for the future.

And there are undoubtedly people who feel that Simon should have kept more to himself. Still, you might enjoy looking at Simon Tolkien's website. He has some interesting reminiscences about his grandfather. Just poke on the various links. Website...

[Lalwendë]

Laying aside all matters of family discord, which are not ours to comment on, I feel that Christopher is the victim of some very peculiar thought. And some wrong thought, as in the Boston news article Child links to, which is full of errors. CT was chosen by his father as the person best suited to oversee what is both a complex and highly lucrative estate. We must trust that JRR chose the right person putting all family issues aside.

The legacy is financially lucrative, but the family are not leeches, they have a trust which donates widely; we must also realise that they do have the right to control unpublished material which could be lucrative in future. They are also right to control what critics and writers have access to as they have Tolkien's reputation to maintain. Of the writers mentioned in the Boston news article as having exclusive access, their number includes Scull & Hammond who are thoroughly reputable and reliable; the guy mentioned (Perry) who had his book stymied by the estate unfortunately wrote an inaccurate book, therefore proving that the Tolkien Estate are correct in restricting access to such a high degree.

Some of these articles would lead those not in the know to believe that the Tolkien family are weird, when in fact they are only protecting a literary asset (and a father and grandfather's good name) from ravening hordes of critics and fans, both sensible and freakish. The truth is that the family have been fully involved with fans, especially via the Tolkien Society, and are entitled to enlist passing on further parts of Tolkien's legacy only through those they trust. If anyone wants to get 'in on the act', then the avenue is there for the sensible and they are remarkably welcoming and friendly (as one or two here will vouch for ).

Approach all negative tales of CT and the estate with great caution.

[Saurreg]

Originally Posted by Child of the 7th Age

I think some legitimate complaints can be made against Christopher, despite his dedication. For example, as this article indicates, only four scholars have been given direct access to the linguistic papers. There is tremendous unhappiness about this among other linguists, since the material has been released very, very slowly. You can find websites where this is discussed, not by crackpots but legitimate scholars. Other scholars have complained about uneven access to the materials, with certain old favorites getting the nod. I am no expert on this, and undoubtedly there are different viewpoints here. Certainly, the blog cited above is ridiculous, and the author of this newspaper article is no fan of CT, but legitimate concerns could exist.

Hmm. I am divided between respect for private property and the betterment of the masses here. Is it really that wrong of CT to control the works of his father from hordes of legitimate scholars with nevertheless unknown agendas that we can only guess?

Ultimately what will be the final result of their research used for? Does it say, help humanity worldwide to understand the syntax of discovered but indecipherable ancient languages and as such serves as an advancement in mankind? Or does it simply serve an elite few in these world for mere amusement and interest?

[Child of the 7th Age]

Laying aside all matters of family discord, which are not ours to comment on, I feel that Christopher is the victim of some very peculiar thought. And some wrong thought, as in the Boston news article Child links to, which is full of errors. CT was chosen by his father as the person best suited to oversee what is both a complex and highly lucrative estate. We must trust that JRR chose the right person putting all family issues aside.

Hmm. I am divided between respect for private property and the betterment of the masses here. Is it really that wrong of CT to control the works of his father from hordes of legitimate scholars with nevertheless unknown agendas that we can only guess?

I believe these two statements, though seemingly contradictory, both contain a great deal of truth. No decent person would want the kind of name calling and innuendo that appears in the original blog, and a writer like the one for the Boston Globe clearly has a personal axe to grind and is more concerned with grinding that axe than arriving at the truth.

Even so, there are troubling things that have previously been discussed on the BD and in other articles and websites concerning the actions of the estate. Many people of good will on this site and others have used words like "over-litigious" to describe what is going on. (I could link to prior posts but won't.) CT is rightfully the one who still makes the big decisions on things like this, and personal comments about him often surface in the course of these wider discussions, which has to be frustrating.

Still, Saurreg asks a legitimate question: exactly where should the line be drawn? I have a personal bias here. I was a librarian in charge of book selection for a large metropolitan system, and I feel there are legitimate issues of free expression.

It goes far beyond serving the interests of an "elite few". For instance, there used to be many Tolkien map sites on the web with a variety of resources. Some of these maps were copyrighted, but others were simply produced by readers who were responding to the books. These were small websites so financial considerations were not an issue. The estate threatened to bring lawsuits and all these sites were shut down so that it is now difficult to find a good online map. Writers outside the circle chosen by the estate have had trouble publishing some materials.

I also feel that studying Quenyan and Sindarin is more than an esoteric exercise reserved for a few. It gets into scholarly questions of the crafting of man-made languages and how these are different and similar to so-called natural languages. It is at least a legitimate question to ask if access to the linguistic papers should be restricted to just four people, when many others have petitioned to use them. These are not crackpot media types but legitimate scholars trying to do work.

The most vexing problem to me is the one posed by Tolkien's translation of Beowulf. A few years ago, everyone was abuzz with the news that Profesor Michael Drout had been authorized to begin preparing that manuscript for publication. A short time later, after undue media hype and craziness, the estate withdrew that permission, though Drout himself was not involved in anything inappropriate. No one knows if and when Tolkien's scholarly work on Beowulf will ever see the light of day. That flies in the face of everything I believe about academic inquiry, to say nothing of the many people who will never get a chance to read what Tolkien has written.

The sad fact is that decisions about Tolkien's writings are tainted by commercial considerations as well as the fact that the press acts irresponsibly. Although Beowulf may be a scholarly work, its publication could again place the family in the spotlight, and they are undoubtedly sick of that. Still, it is immeasurably sad that Tolkien's work as a medievalist is being hidden away because of problems like this. It's also impossible to say whether this situation will improve or not once control of the estate passes to the next generation. It is looking more likely that this control will rest not only with family representatives but scholars like Hammond and Scully. Christopher's son Adam also seems to be taking a larger role, and he is doing an excellent job in interviews. See here for Adam Tolkien's discussion of the upcoming Children of Hurin, which is a fascinating read. (Scroll down past the Spanish for English.)

[Lalwendë]

I think that the Boston Globe writer was more pursuing an angle than grinding an axe, even though he hit a saw point....but that's enough of the toolshed references...

It is a 'fine line' but I'd err on the side of the estate. We tend to think of Tolkien's work as 'ours' to do what we like with, but it isn't. What's more, there's a lot of that work yet unpublished that cannot simply be used as it is. The executors must think carefully about how that new material will be used, as it will go out with Tolkien's name attached to it, which is why they seek to approve everything that does go out in his name. Quite rightly.

And rightly for another reason. It helps us to sort out the merely speculative and the absolute dross from the genuinely useful (especially as these crit texts are deadly expensive and there are hundreds of 'em!). 'Approved' names like Flieger, Hammond, Scull, Vinyar Tengwar etc are marks of quality. It's all worth it if I never have to read a pile of tripe 'critical' book again!

Yes it's frustrating! But I'd rather be frustrated than have a free-for-all seeing the vultures picking over the remaining bones of the corpus. If scholars are genuine and have the right aims in mind, and the right understanding, then its up to them to convince the right people. 'Free access' is all well and good if we're talking about a less popular writer, but the fanaticism for Tolkien's work is a whole different kettle of fish to interest in Tennyson's for example.

[Boromir88]

We all know about the part of the will that named CT as JRR's literary executor. Here are some other moments when JRR talks about the importance of Christopher in the writing process and which is probably why Christopher has so many strong feelings about the books and upset over film adaptations:

A map of the Gondor area is perhaps the most urgent. I am hoping to get my son Christopher to produce one from my drafts, as soon as possible.~Letter 150

'This book {LOTR} has become to be more and more addressed to you, so that your opinion matters more than any one else's.'~Letter 78 (Dated Aug. 12, 1944 to Christopher).

"But I made a very great effort to finish the Hobbit sequel, and chapters went out to Africa and back to my chief critic and collaborator, Christopher, who is doing the maps"~Letter 105

JRR clearly felt that Christopher was an important person when it came to creating his story. And I think CT has taken on that duty quite admirably because as the will states...Upon trust to allow my son Christopher...he was trusted by his father to act as his Literary Executor over all unpublished works. I believe this is why CT has such strong beliefs about movie adaptations, just as his father did, because he was placed in such a position to do so.

I don't know Simon, it seems like he had great times with his grandfather, but if you ask me he seems like there was a strain between him and Christopher even before the movies came out:

Life wasn't great after his death....
My father moved to the South of France with his second family and I hated having to be away at school. I missed my grandfather very much. My father has always been in charge of my grandfather's literary estate, and about four years ago he started to think about who would succeed him on the board of the company which administers the Tolkien estate. He named new directors to join him and I was not one of them.

Here is the full account Simon tells...I greatly enjoyed reading the memories Simon had with his grandfather.

[Mithalwen]

A lot of good stuff has been said but I would point out both that Simon Tolkien was publicising his first novel when these stories emerged ( and that sensation sells.) and that the world has changed a lot in the past forty years, fathers are generally much more involved with their children and the needs of children of separated parents are better understood. So even if there is an element of truth it wouldn't make CT particularly monstrous by the standards of the time. Even in families that stay together it is not unusual for a child to have a better relationship with one parent than another ..it certainly was the case in mine..

I am just now reading the letters and from them, you can glean the deep love Tolkien had for all his family. If you look at the donations of the Tolkien Trust you can see the kind of people the family are by the wide range of humanitarian causes they put the money from the estate to. And having recently had the pleasure of receiving a charming personal reply to a communication that demanded no response at all, from Adam Tolkien I can second Lalwende's comments. But I did not need that or a lawyers statement to know that the blog was ludicrous and libellous and guess the Simon Tolkien quotes "spun" ... frankly it would not be saying a lot for JRRT's judgement if it were even half true.

As for access ..I am sure we would all love to get our claws on everything. It isn't possible but HoME is enoughfor most ..and I believe that some of the Trust money is going on making some of the archive available in a more accessible form.

Originally Posted by Hyarion

Here's the good stuff:

It's times like this that make me realize what a sheltered life I lead in some respects. I swear I had never even heard any rumors about any of those seven points that are now being contradicted! (Why on earth would anyone use a wild boar to guard his house? Wouldn't it make more sense to use a tame boar that could distinguish its master and members of his family from any other stray humans that happened to get dangerously close to it? )


I think I can honestly say that I have never gone out of my way to try to learn any details, good or bad, of Christopher Tolkien's personal life. Why bother?

(No, I don't read the tabloids -- or even "People" magazine, as a rule -- to keep up-to-date with the latest juicy rumors about celebrities, either. I've always been weird that way.)

I do sympathize with the man's desire (according to what others have said in this thread) to have some personal privacy. Going off on a bit of a tangent, I remember reading something interesting about the assassination of John F. Kennedy and the aftermath. The claim was that Daniel Patrick Moynihan (later a U.S. Senator from New York) was working as a White House staffer at the time of JFK's death, and that he quickly realized this was going to become the centerpiece of all sorts of wild conspiracy theories. With that in mind, he tried to persuade the surviving members of the Kennedy family to let copies of the full autopsy report be handed out to the press and the general public, which they were not legally required to do.

However, the Kennedys had never had this sort of thing happen to them before, came from a rich family that tended to have a bit more faith in official reports and verdicts than the average American, didn't take Moynihan seriously when he suggested that keeping anything relevant private would just inspire big conspiracy theories and general suspicion of the government's "honesty" in figuring out what had really happened, etc. Also, the Kennedys felt that the gruesome details of JFK's death as analyzed in the autopsy report were really nobody else's business. So they refused to give permission for it to be publicly released. Years later, Senator Moynihan, looking back on it, allegedly felt that this sort of thing (maybe not just the autopsy report, but other stuff as well) threw fuel on the fire to make Americans scratch their heads and ask each other, "What are they hiding? Why all the cover-up? Why can't outsiders look at certain reports, documents, etc., to see if there's anything really, really peculiar being hidden away from the light of day?"

Senator Moynihan's feeling appeared to be, according to what I read somewhere, that the Kennedy family's strong desire for "privacy" in their time of grief only made it that much likelier that people would develop elaborate theories of cover-ups and try to invade their privacy in the future with thousands of rude questions. (However, that doesn't mean they didn't have the legal and moral right to withhold the details of the autopsy report if they felt like it!)

[Lalwendë]

Let's clear something up about Wild boar. My friend's brother owns a manor house in the Pyrenees and wild boar live in the woods there (their dog lost its mind from the scent of boar everywhere, driven mad by hunting instinct), so maybe someone saw some wild boar in the woods near CT's house. Certainly nobody would allow them to run wild near their house! A wild boar is certainly not a pet or a substitute guard dog, it can't be 'trained', and one can easily kill a full grown adult.

[Mänwe]

Squatter, you are right, my language was inappropriate. Lampooned it is then! I believe that Christopher is in his right to challenge certain publications of his fathers material.

Oringinally posted by Child of the 7th Age

The estate threatened to bring lawsuits and all these sites were shut down so that it is now difficult to find a good online map. Writers outside the circle chosen by the estate have had trouble publishing some materials.

I think this is no different to those on this site and other forum sites who make a point to correct other members of their points made in their posts. To some degree we seek for a perfection in the understanding of Tolkien's world and with it at times comes said correction of others.

In a way Christopher is performing this "correction", he is preserving the Tolkien estate from being completely diluted by the masses. He is very much of the same "thought" stock as Tolkien himself. Who in his letters we see is disappointed with certain representations of characters by critics.

I can quote a fair amount from the letters, mostly to Allen & Unwin,

"An abridgement by selection with some good picture-work would be pleasant, & perhaps worth a good deal in publicity; but the present script is rather a compression with resultant over-crowding and confusion, blurring of climaxes, and general degradation: a pull-back towards more conventional 'fairy-stories'. People gallop about on Eagles at the least provocation; Lórien becomes a fairy-castle with 'delicate minarets', and all that sort of thing. But I am quite prepared to play ball, if they are open to advice..." (Letter #201)

"As far as I am concerned personally, I should welcome the idea of an animated motion picture, with all the risk of vulgarization; and that quite apart from the glint of money, though on the brink of retirement that is not an unpleasant possibility. I think I should find vulgarization less painful than the sillification achieved by the B.B.C." (Letter #198) [My bold]

I could continue and bloat my post to the most hideous of distended proportions, including much of letter #210, of which many of the points are critisisms. Tolkien is at best scathing of the attempts at an adaptation. Much like the Tolkien estate today, and referring back to Child of the 7th Age's example of their "censoring". Despite the possibility of money coming their way in return (I refer to my bold).

Christopher is Tolkien pure and simple, far more interested in protecting the interests of his father's work and the work itself, who, to use a term Tolkien frequently wrote, would "degrade" the story. Long live Christopher and his sensible censorship!

[Boromir88]

Let's clear something up about Wild boar. My friend's brother owns a manor house in the Pyrenees and wild boar live in the woods there (their dog lost its mind from the scent of boar everywhere, driven mad by hunting instinct), so maybe someone saw some wild boar in the woods near CT's house. Certainly nobody would allow them to run wild near their house! A wild boar is certainly not a pet or a substitute guard dog, it can't be 'trained', and one can easily kill a full grown adult.

Also, when reading that, it really doesn't make sense...how could a wild boar guard someone's house? I mean it would have to be a tamed boar if it was set up serve as a guard dog, err boar...right?

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Also, when reading that, it really doesn't make sense...how could a wild boar guard someone's house? I mean it would have to be a tamed boar if it was set up serve as a guard dog, err boar...right?

You wouldn't go anywhere near a wild boar without some kind of weapon at hand! Even pigs, domesticated boar, can be incredibly vicious creatures (especially the males). As soon as I read this about CT and his 'wild boar' I thought - Hmmm, someone's been taking the Thomas Harris book (and film) Hannibal too seriously.

[The Squatter of Amon Rûdh]

The story about keeping wild boar does seem ridiculous, but it originated in an article in a respected British newspaper.

I remembered the article from the time, and I've tracked it down using the Internet Archive Wayback Machine. It appeared on the website of the Daily Telegraph on 7th January 2001, and its author was Daniel Foggo.

Since pages from the archive often take a long time to load, and may disappear altogether, I've quoted the relevant parts below.

Originally Posted by telegraph.co.uk

Father John Tolkien, a retired Roman Catholic priest, says that family members are already constantly harassed by devotees of his father's work and predicts that the extra interest generated by the films will mean that anyone with the Tolkien name will now have to disguise their origins.

"The Tolkien family is under perpetual abuse of one kind or another. It goes on all the time," said Fr Tolkien, 83. "I am anticipating endless bother when the film actually comes out." His outburst sheds light on rumours within the film industry of a rift between the Tolkien family and New Line Cinema, the makers of the film. The film rights to The Lord of the Rings have not been owned by the Tolkien family since the 1960s, leaving New Line Cinema with no legal obligation to consult the author's children.

...

Fr Tolkien said: "It's quite incredible. When I think when we were growing up these were just stories that we were told. Personally, when you've grown up with something you don't want someone else putting their finger on it." He added that many of those harassing the family were "people wanting money". Others were obsessed fans wanting to catch a glimpse of their idol's relatives. His brother Christopher was already in hiding, he said.

"Christopher, who acts as literary editor for the Tolkien estate, doesn't live in England any more and when he comes to England he doesn't use his own name. Christopher lives in France and has had some trouble recently with people trying to get at him. He keeps wild boar in his garden, which is a little bit dangerous but they are useful when people become a nuisance."

So there you have it: a silly story, probably untrue, but originating in the Tolkien family and reported by a British broadsheet.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

I realize this is an ancient thread, but since I stumbled on it I thought I would clear up the wild boar story:

1) CT has assured me, personally, that he doesn't keep wild boar and the story is nonsense.
2) His property isn't walled or fenced anyway.
3) Both of CT's brothers were fond of spinning yarns and pulling people's legs. In this case Fr John might well have figured that starting this rumor would be both amusing, and a deterrent to overzealous fans.