Christopher Tolkien to finish lost Middle Earth novel

[Lalaith]

Appleyard is quite well-respected as a journalist, though - apart from taking the Murdoch dollar. I was surprised (as I've already mentioned on the Flieger thread - so I also apologise for referring to conversations/links past) how much of this article he'd actually lifted from the original AN Wilson piece in the Telegraph, back in 2001. Wilson did a biography of Lewis and does seem to be a Tolkien fan, albeit a critical one. Here, the expletives are not deleted. Interesting that the Telegraph was less prudish six years ago than the Sunday Times is today. The Wilson piece is much better, but then Wilson, although I often disagree with him, is very smart.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main...w24.xml&page=1

Wow Man! Like, I had to read that twice!
The Silmarillion feels right. Refering to Strider as Trotter feels wrong.
The continuity of the Silmarillion. There's an inter-connectedness and a common diction that is recogonized, a word usage, diction, that is matured, grown more serious and plausible, where at other times in the more detailed, incomplete renditions, which I still find illuminating at points and troubling at others, in the Unfinished and the Lost Tales, there is a change in tone and diction that makes me feel seperated in a way. I cannot verify all my opinions, and I challenge men such as your self to debates, and want to provoke attacks on myself, not because I believe I will always win, but because sometimes, I know I will lose. And that I find that very thought provoking and it compels me to think in new paradigms.
I know about CT and the Silmarillion buddy. You see, I have a bit of a mean-streak. And whatever respect I had for one died with the other.
And: I enjoyed your subtle cheapshots at the end. Very respectful criticism, just perfectly within the bounds of the acceptable. What can I say? I tell myself that it would only be vanity at the most that would compell me to reference books, check indexes, and make perfect qoutes and accurate refrences to base each expostulated supposition, which becomes, in effect, presupposition, thanks either to my virtuous humility, or my scholarly laziness. You decide. Either way, it is the missing scale in me belly. Aim at it my good man, aim at it!
I'm the toughest, smartest, best looking [sweet ol' boy] I ever met, and don't care what anyone says, I know I ain't ever lost a fight in my life!!!!

[lindil]

"I do not read ANY of CT's middle Earth history because much of that material was rejected by Tolkien himself as it did not entirely harmonize with his inner vision."

Newsflash: CJRT edited the Silm. sometimes heavily, sometimes lightly. Some sections [thingols death are pure CJRT fan-fiction]. You want tolkien's 'purest' silmarillion? Better go buy HoME X & XI, as they are:

• JRRT's last revised drafts of the Silm material
• written after the LotR, his craft only got better w/ age
• have much more material than the more 'remote' compressed Pre-LotR summaries CJRT favored in his SilM.

Ultimately every Silmarillion reader who wishes to dive deeper than CJRT's Silmlite has to go to the virtually unedited [in terms of the texts being altered or polished or redacted] volumes of the History.

[Lalwendë]

The same Christopher chosen by JRRT himself to be his literary executor and the same Christopher who his father decided was the one person most qualified to handle his unfinished work?

I have to wonder who would have been better qualified to write The Silmarillion?

I'm quite happy that the father's choice, being one he was happy with, was the right choice and am also quite happy to enjoy Christopher's lifelong work. None of us can say with certainty what Tolkien did and did not want including from his jumble of drafts and notions in The Silmarillion, but we can say that Christopher would know what to include better than any of us could.

[Lalaith]

Thanks for pointing out the dud link, Beth. I've fixed it.

[davem]

Just seen over on the Tolkien.co.uk forum that Foyles bookshop in London have broken the embargo & have copies of CoH on sale now.

[davem]

Amazon.com interview with Alan Lee - with pics http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/061...d_i=1000072721

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Lalaith

I was surprised (as I've already mentioned on the Flieger thread - so I also apologise for referring to conversations/links past) how much of this article he'd actually lifted from the original AN Wilson piece in the Telegraph, back in 2001. Wilson did a biography of Lewis and does seem to be a Tolkien fan, albeit a critical one. Here, the expletives are not deleted. Interesting that the Telegraph was less prudish six years ago than the Sunday Times is today. The Wilson piece is much better, but then Wilson, although I often disagree with him, is very smart.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/mai...nw24.xml&page=1

Quite. I would suspect that, should that little bit of "journalistic appropriation" be pointed out in arenas that care about such things, Mr. Sunday Times flack might find himself in a bit of a tight spot. But then, I'm not thoroughly familiar with the ethics of Murdoch papers, being more familiar with those of the Lord of Black Harbour--no, um, it's Cross Harbour.

Originally Posted by Squatter

This pointless babble from News International I can do without: what isn't obvious or derivative in it is wrong.

But very sadly he's achieved what yellow journalism is all about: he's got highly respected scholars replying to him, attention all over the internet, and fans in an uproar. In the twisted values of rags, he's got his minutes of fame. His article has drawn more readers to the online paper. He's made the advertisers happy. Frankly, he sounds very much like some members of online forums who think that scruffles are what it's all about. And the more we reply to this fellow, the more his puppet masters will crow. Although I commend Squatter for not naming him. Cleverly done!

Laliath, your link here isn't working for me, to the Wilson piece, although I read it when you linked elsewhere.