Did JRRT encourage new ME stories?

[davem]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

I would love to see well written and carefully researched Middle-earth tales which fit in to the historical timelines that JRTT gve us. There are huge and chasmlike gaps that would make for very good stories.
I would like the author selected by the Tolkien Estate and would like that same author to recieve guidance and assistance to make sure the stories keep to the faithfulness of the ME that Tolkien created.

This is the whole problem as I see it. This approach sidelines Tolkien, & reduces him to the status of a provider of synopses. No-one, but no-one, can write Middle-earth tales like Tolkien did - it was his creation. Its like asking for a composer to complete a few manuscript pages by Mozart, or a poet to 'finish off' a poem left unfinished by Dylan Thomas. These stories do not exist, & to get someone to knock them up is a completely pointless exercise.

Tolkien could (& did) change his creation as he wrote - everything from storylines, through characters, to the languages his characters spoke. Tolkien could take off on the maddest tangents, & make the most extreme changes (look at 'Myths Transformed). Who could be authorised to do the same kind of thing? No, what you'd get is yet more fantasy novels.

Middle-earth is JRR Tolkien, & JRR Tolkien is Middle-earth & that's the long & short of it. This is why, however you feel about the quality or otherwise of the movies, radio series or stage shows, they are not, & can never be, Middle-earth, because JRR Tolkien didn't make them. The only thing that anyone else can produce, whether authorised by the Estate or not, is a fake. I still say that those who want more M-e stories by other writers are like those who want more Dylan Thomas poems or Van Gogh paintings & decide that as there aren't any more, they'll get someone to knock up some more. The point is, however good these new M-e tales might be, they would be fakes. This is nothing more than an attempt to remove Tolkien from M-e, to treat it as though it is something that exists external to Tolkien.

Middle-earth is not a 'mythology'. Middle-earth is the vision of a man, who had specific experiences, lived in a specific time, believed specific things, a ferocious intellect who created a visionary masterpiece. 'Let's get Fred Bloggs to knock up another trillogy for the fans.' misses the point by a very, very long way.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Ay-men, Brother!!!

No one can prevent anyone from writing or publishing new books based on Tolkien's (as far as I know, at least)

Oh yes they can...

[Elmo]

When does the copyright on Lord of the Rings run out? When it does, wouldn't that open the floodgates?

[Sauron the White]

davem ... the overwhelming weight of my post was in response to yours as a stereotpyed characterization of people who want more Middle-earth tales. I thought then, and still do now, that you set up these people as weak strawmen and then you dealt with them with derision and sarcasm. I thought that was unfair. You are obviously an extremely well informed Tolkien scholar who has very well thought out opinions. For my two cents, you stand on much more solid ground when you deal with the actual issue at hand rather than attempt to unfairly stereotype people with ideas different than the ones you hold.

[davem]

The whole problem is in the way people who want continuations of Tolkien's stories are looking at this. Its as if they see Middle-earth as equivalent to Ancient Egypt . A Historian writes a series of books on the history of Egypt, but leaves gaps in the narrative. Unfortunately he dies before he can complete his project, but some readers are so fascinated by the period that they demand other historians take up the baton & complete the story. And that's possible because Egypt has a history, & the truth about it can be discovered & made available.

Now, Middle-earth in not like that. The gaps in the story are there because Tolkien never invented anything to fill them. There is nothing to be discovered. The fact that Tolkien failed to fill the gaps, while at the same time focussing on other parts of the story to the extent that he re-wrote them over & over, tells us a great deal about the man who invented the world. To 'fill' those gaps is effectively to create a false impression of the creation.

Look. its like an American fan wishing that Tolkien had visited the US in the 50's to promote LotR. The fan decides that in order to satisfy his desire he will invent a promotional tour by Tolkien, including meetings with prominent American fantasy & Science Fiction writers, & attempt to get this included in a reprint of Carpenter's biography - why not, if its a good story, well written, & serves to entertain other Tolkien fans?

Well, because its not true. Tolkien never went to America in the 50's. Just as Tolkien never completed his Legendarium. But its incompleteness is part of its nature. To add new stories by new writers just to 'fill in the gaps' is equivalent to deciding to stick arms on the Venus de Milo. Of course you could get a decent sculptor to knock up a pair of arms & attach them in order to 'finish the thing off' - in fact, that at least could be justified in that the statue did have arms at one time.

But look at this, an unfinished work by Michelangelo http://www.ablemuse.com/premiere/bho...unfinished.htm

Should we hire someone competent to finish it off? Read the accompanying poem. If we got someone to finish off the sculpture, what, exactly would we have gained, in comparison to what we would lose?

Its the very fact that the Legendarium is incomplete that adds to the poignancy, the feeling of what might have been, if only...

Its a metaphor for life

[Raynor]

Originally Posted by davem

The gaps in the story are there because Tolkien never invented anything to fill them.

While this is valid for issues like Bombadil & co, I doubt we can safely generalise this for all the gaps. From what can be seen from CT's comments in various places, in many cases Tolkien simply forgot to close gaps.

Look. its like an American fan wishing that Tolkien had visited the US in the 50's to promote LotR. The fan decides that in order to satisfy his desire he will invent a promotional tour by Tolkien, including meetings with prominent American fantasy & Science Fiction writers, & attempt to get this included in a reprint of Carpenter's biography - why not, if its a good story, well written, & serves to entertain other Tolkien fans?

However, can we equate writing fiction with presenting false events (the tour) as being real?

Originally Posted by davem

Should we hire someone competent to finish it off? Read the accompanying poem. If we got someone to finish off the sculpture, what, exactly would we have gained, in comparison to what we would lose?

Its the very fact that the Legendarium is incomplete that adds to the poignancy, the feeling of what might have been, if only...

The "Legendarium written by Tolkien" will remain incomplete, no matter how many books, written by others, appear to complete it; it is a truism. Your analogy does not hold because if we attach arms to Venus, it will most likely destroy its unicity; same with the Michelangelo's work. However, the unicity of the Legendarium will remain, no matter what other books of fiction appear; it cannot be affected.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Raynor

While this is valid for issues like Bombadil & co, I doubt we can safely generalise this for all the gaps. From what can be seen from CT's comments in various places, in many cases Tolkien simply forgot to close gaps.

I was referring to the untold, or unfinished stories - like the fall of Gondolin & the War of Wrath, or Beren & Luthien.

However, can we equate writing fiction with presenting false events (the tour) as being real?

We can in this case, as the fiction, in a real sense, is the man.

The "Legendarium written by Tolkien" will remain incomplete, no matter how many books, written by others, appear to complete it; it is a truism. Your analogy does not hold because if we attach arms to Venus, it will most likely destroy its unicity; same with the Michelangelo's work. However, the unicity of the Legendarium will remain, no matter what other books of fiction appear; it cannot be affected.

Why the desire for other writers to tell new M-e stories then? The generally expressed reason is that people want to know more, to have the gaps in the Legendarium filled for them. They're using that letter to Waldman to support 'other hands' taking up the story & continuing it.

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hickli

Oh yes they can...

Too right. I think the day the Tolkien estate allows 'novelisations' is a long, long, long time off - if ever. Tolkien will be no 'Virginia Andrews'!


Seriously, this stuff is great for fun, or if you do something completely different - some humour, satire, parody, smut, incorporating aspects into wholly new creations blah blah...but if you have the talent to spend hours writing fan fic, why not take the leap and write some of your own stuff? Even fan fic is OK in comparison to some of the 'serious' or 'scholarly' attempts to rewrite and so forth - a certain TS member is alleged to have browbeaten one of the family into allowing a certain rewritten book to be published but even then they only allowed a print run of something like 50 copies, and it's a long way from being accepted! These fans are probably the ones wasting talents more than anyone. Please, get out there with your own work! It's not that the Tolkien written work is not good (on the contrary so much of it is wonderful) but it will never be officially sanctioned and I often lament about the original books that will never be written.

It's worth noting Tolkien envisioned art, music or drama to enrich his writings - isn't there enough there to be getting creative with?