Did JRRT encourage new ME stories?

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by davem

Well, yes, but even if one accepted that authorial intention is neither here nor there (hence one is perfectly ok to read LotR as an actual history book - or to put it another way 'What's reality got to do with anything?'), there is a major difference between choosing to see Sauron as a tragic hero & ignoring an author's right to object to people ripping him or her off.

Yep. Alas that kind of theory allows people to plagiarise and be able to have some way of defending it intellectually. However the biggest drawback is that in seeking to 'liberate' the readers it actually alienates them. They are supposedly 'freed' and allowed to respond in their own way despite the fact that they were free to do that anyway - people were seeing Milton's Satan as seductive when Barthes was just a twinkle in Le Milkman's eye. However, now readers are under no obligation to justify their claims with any kind of evidence. So you are, quite literally, free to make any kind of claim that you wish - I can claim Tolkien was writing a Neo-Fascist meisterwerke and there's nothing you can do to disagree with that as that's my right as a reader to respond how I feel. You cannot chuck me a quote out of letters about how much Tolkien despised fascism because it's irrelevant now.

Yet this is exactly why Barthes was full of rubbish - people have feeling and reason and inevitably as humans want to refute such claims. But you can't! You must accept it!

And as humans we seek meaning. We do soul-less jobs and travel on cattle-class public transport and are subject to directives and rules, rules, rules by those supposedly 'superior' to us. We crave Meaning.

The theories of Barthes were meant to stand alongside militant Atheism in a Brave New World. But the world aint like that, humans have proved they want Soul. So they watch an odd, quirky film like Donnie Darko or Lost In Translation and the first thing they say is "But what does it all mean?"

Being told "whatever you want it to" is so alienating.

Is it an already published writer - do people want Steven Erikson, Neil Gaiman, Robert Jordan, Ursula Le Guin? Or do they want someone who's written a piece of fanfic they've read & enjoyed to be authorised - if so, gives us a link to it.

Or are we still on the 'If you authorise it, he will come.' kick? All the Estate has to do is give permission & this visionary artist will magically appear, manuscript in hand?

Not a chance. It's ruddy hard work getting a name and a reputation as a writer, let alone as a decent writer. No-one reputable is going to put that on the line to risk writing a book that will be torn to shreds by the fan community. Even those few who might look forwards to something about Middle-earth not written by Tolkien being commercially available in Wal-mart or wherever would rip it apart - inevitable as the reader would want to see if they could have done a better job themselves.

They'd be very lucky to get a hack writer. More likely it would be an inexperienced one.

[Fordim Hedgethistle]

The Author is dead! But long live the disembodied Internet discussion board participant!

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Bb

SpM, I appreciate your loyerly attempt to impose some sort of clerical order on the discussion here. However, the fact that a topic might never have a definitive conclusion, as you put it, has never stopped any Downs discussion in the past and there is little reason to believe it shall in the future; nor does it provide any kind of evidence as to the value or pleasure of said discussion.

Far be it from me to attempt to bring this debate to any conclusion. There is, however, perhaps some merit in pointing out that some issues are incapable of any definitive conclusion, given the tendency of some to characterise their opinions as such, without necessarily imposing any finality on the debate.

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

Far be it from me to attempt to bring this debate to any conclusion. There is, however, perhaps some merit in pointing out that some issues are incapable of any definitive conclusion, given the tendency of some to characterise their opinions as such, without necessarily imposing any finality on the debate.

Your clarification makes an eminently worthy case and cause. I must say that in this instance I applaud the author's intention.

Originally Posted by Thenamir

Interesting that Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time volumes (for which, apparantly, he gets paid by the pound) are plastered with a quote from a New York Times reviewer, "Robert Jordan has come to dominate the world Tolkien began to reveal." One can scarcely imagine the disgust such a quote engenders on this site.

With such talk of domination, some readers might be forgiven for thinking that Jordan is Sauron returned.

[Sauron the White]

At its heart here it look like there is a contradiction which is sending two very different messages. One the one hand we have the oft-quoted statement from Tolkien

Which seems to indicate - at least in 1951 - that JRRT wanted others to contribute to his ME mythology at the least through other artistic expressions such as paint, music and drama.

But then we have his will over 20 years later - years of success and royalty checks and giving him something substantial to protect and give to others - where he now says its all up the legalisms of Estates and lawyers and rights and permissions.

Obviously the will takes legal precedent over the 1951 statement in a letter.

But I wonder what would be said in court if one wrote a dramatic play based on events only "sketched" from the First or Second Age, put music to it, employed artists to illustrate it and then offered it to the public. Even JRRT said that "a solitary art is not art". I agree that the legal force of the law would be employed to show the individual putting on this drama had no permission. They would most likely, most probably, lose in court.

But I would love to hear the explaination of an Estate spokesperson on the witness stand who would have to publicly resolve the obvious contradiction.

We also have the entire idea of what is DRAMA? Is it the strictly limited theater production associated with the stage? Or is it a broader definition that could be used to describe TV, films or other such things?

It really seems to me that you can couch all this in very well meaning and high sounding terms and debate all about the nuances of the various issues but , in the end, this all comes down to $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. On all sides.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

But I would love to hear the explaination of an Estate spokesperson on the witness stand who would have to publicly resolve the obvious contradiction.

Why? The Letter was private correspondence, not intended for publication, so cannot be taken to have any weight legally. Also, Tolkien clearly states in the letter that, while that had been his intention at some point in the past, it no longer is ('my crest has long since fallen').

I am now assuming that the proposed new work(s) will be written by this unnamed 'genius'.

Could you please tell me who you think is going to write this 'play'? Please, ONE name, one author who you think will do a decent job.

Of course, I don't expect to get one - because whoever you name someone is going to object, & say they aren't the right person for the job. You see, the problem you have is that while in a fantasy world you can simply invent a writer of genius, in the real world you can't. Suitable writers don't just appear when you snap your fingers, or because you fancy reading a new M-e novel. Asking 'what would happen if someone wrote a 'dramatic play' (sic) based on First/Second Age events?' is a bit like asking 'What would happen if aliens landed in front of the White House & turned George Bush into a three headed chicken?' I can't prove that such an event is impossible, but before I spend time & energy speculating on how the free world would cope with a three headed chicken with its claw on The Button, I'd want some evidence its anything like a real possibility.....

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

It really seems to me that you can couch all this in very well meaning and high sounding terms and debate all about the nuances of the various issues but , in the end, this all comes down to $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. On all sides.

Indeed. Which is why I feel strongly. For all that people chunner about mythologies, being an intellectual hippy, Barthes, whatever, it does come down to wanting to earn some cash. And if anyone has a moral right to cash made from Tolkien's work it is the family alone - he struggled to bring them up and they deserve some financial legacy, and it's not as if they are living the life of riley like Paris Hilton, they give the bulk of it to charity.

As for dramatisations - there have been many, many more than you would think. For example, I know of one of The Hobbit by Rony Robinson - no Tolkien expert, just a BBC Radio Sheffield DJ.

[Quempel]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Indeed. Which is why I feel strongly. For all that people chunner about mythologies, being an intellectual hippy, Barthes, whatever, it does come down to wanting to earn some cash. And if anyone has a moral right to cash made from Tolkien's work it is the family alone - he struggled to bring them up and they deserve some financial legacy, and it's not as if they are living the life of riley like Paris Hilton, they give the bulk of it to charity.

As for dramatisations - there have been many, many more than you would think. For example, I know of one of The Hobbit by Rony Robinson - no Tolkien expert, just a BBC Radio Sheffield DJ.

I agree. The idea of others making profit off of the Tolkien works and his idea is rather sickening. The whole NL/PJ fiasco is a prime example of two different people/institutions that have made billions off of Tolkien's ideas. I know the estate made money off of the movies, but not nearly as much as NL or PJ and co. But the bottom line is if JRR Tolkien was not the master writer and genius he was, both NL and Peter Jackson would be turning out nothing so grand and profitable as the movies were. Neither NL or PJ has the ability or billiance to actually write a something as magnificent as the ME stories. That alone belongs to JRR Tolkien. Does it mean someone else can not write a brilliant story about ME, no it does not, but the chances are highly unlikely. Neither Shay nor Jackson put together has that much brain power.

Of course I am probably only one of a few that hate to see the Tolkien ideas get raped by mass media and hack writers in an attempt to make money. If someone wants to write a play about elfs and shiny jewels then they can write the book first. Maybe they can even stretch their brains enough to actually produce a new story, not a rip-off of Tolkien. But then again most don't care they just want more ME stories, take take take until its all gone. Disregard Tolkien so long as we get more ME stories. We don't care about Tolkien nor his children or grandchildren, we wants it all precious, its ours. Sorry I not Gollum or Melkor or Sauron. I don't need to cut down Tolkien to make pretty jewels so I can think for one minute that I am as great of a writer as Tolkien, or that I deserve his light.

[Raynor]

Well, while we are at it, I nominate Valandil, moderator at www.entmoot.com . You can check some of his writtings:
Letters of Firiel
Tales of Nolduryon
Visitors Come to Court

[Sauron the White]

davem ... I have deep respect for your knowledge of Tolkien and his writings. I find your posts well written and well thought out.

However, comparing the writing of a drama about the First Age with the ridiculous possibility of aliens and Bush transforming into a chicken is simply absurd and demeans your own intelligence. One is a very real possibility given the realities of the world we live in. The other is just you being silly.

What good does a comparison like this do?

And I agree that Tolkien changed his mind from his earlier position. I agree that JRRT had that right and there is nothing wrong with his decision. I agree that he had a right to dispose of his property, real or intellectual or otherwise, anyway he deemed fit. Regardless, it is interesting that, at one time at least, his mind was of a different orientation regarding such contributions to his mythology.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Raynor

Well, while we are at it, I nominate Valandil, moderator at www.entmoot.com . ]

Well, the links are incredibly slow, but I'll keep trying.

For now I'll just ask, is it worth it? Once the Estate authorises a new M-e novel the floodgates will be open. M-e will no-longer be Tolkien's creation, but a franchise. There will be a stream of novels, as with the Star Wars/Star Trek franchises, some good, some bad, accepted by some, rejected by others - & all of them, ultimately, unnecessary.

Originally Posted by STW

However, comparing the writing of a drama about the First Age with the ridiculous possibility of aliens and Bush transforming into a chicken is simply absurd and demeans your own intelligence. One is a very real possibility given the realities of the world we live in. The other is just you being silly.

Reductio ad Absurdam & all that......

What you're suggesting (a 'genius' appearing to continue Tolkien's work, & enhance & deepen his creation) is just as 'absurd'. You only think its a real possibility because you've convinced yourself this 'genius' is out there, just waiting to start writing.

[Raynor]

Originally Posted by davem

Well, the links are incredibly slow, but I'll keep trying.

Sorry to hear that; the links still work for me.

Reductio ad Absurdam & all that

Reductio ad absurdam means that you derrive an absurd outcome from the premise, which indicates that the initial premise was wrong. I don't see any absurd conclusion in this case.

[davem]

Interesting in this context:

http://www.epinions.com/content_374810250884

The Fantasy Disconnect

Tolkien is often credited for inspiring the modern genre of fantasy literature, and in many ways his influence is inarguable. But The Children of Hurin reemphasizes the fact that what Tolkien was about was something very different from what fantasy has become.

While the express purpose behind publishing this book was to give the story an opportunity to stand alone, something it accomplishes only with a significant introductory note, it is always clear that the mode has more in common with history or legend than it does with the adventures found in today's bookstore aisles. This can be felt in the amount of context and trivia surrounding the story, the use of elevated language, and the narrative tone, which insists the book be read as the summary of events ancient and wonderful, as opposed to a full and neat telling of a story with the immediacy and involvement we've come to expect from fantasy.

Do not come looking for a child of prophecy, called to free his people, slay the dragon, save the princess, and defeat the dark lord. In The Children of Hurin those tropes are all twisted to evil parodies, and the hero's theme is failure and defeat. It is a far cry from the eucatastrophies of popular fantasy, or even of The Lord of the Rings.


Provident Evil

The victory of evil over the fading flower of a more glorious age is central to Tolkien's elegiac ethos, his inheritance from the Northern literature he studied as a preeminent philologist. A central mystery in The Children of Hurin is whether Morgoth truly has the power he claims: "The shadow of my purpose lies upon Arda, and all that is in it bends slowly and surely to my will."

[davem]

Perhaps Tolkien's creation was really the last of the Saga genre, rather than the first of the modern fantasy genre. And I think that's the problem with most fanfic - its written by people who read Tolkien in the wrong way. What I mean is that too many of them read Tolkien's stories as 'fantasy' novels, when in reality they belong with works like the Kalevala, the Eddas & the Icelandic Sagas. Anyone who is familiar with Saga literature would recognise CoH as pretty typical of that genre -in both substance & style. Most fanfic feels wrong because it is written in the wrong 'style' & forced to conform to the standards of modern fantasy. Anyone attempting to write a convincing M-e story would have to be steeped in the Sagas, & forget completely any fantasy (in fact any 'novels') they had read. Actually the closest thing I've read to CoH is Poul Anderson's 'The Broken Sword'. Maybe, just maybe, Anderson could have done it, but Anderson's dead.

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

It really seems to me that you can couch all this in very well meaning and high sounding terms and debate all about the nuances of the various issues but , in the end, this all comes down to $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. On all sides.

Wouldn't that more precisely be ₤?

But seriously (I always give reverence to Serious Cat), was Milton in it for the money? I seem to recall something about justifying the ways of God to man. Or the visionary Blake? Why must you assume the money would be the only motivator? It certainly wasn't uppermost in Tolkien's mind.

Originally Posted by davem

Could you please tell me who you think is going to write this 'play'? Please, ONE name, one author who you think will do a decent job.

Perhaps we could ask Fordim to set up a poll. I nominate Mithadan for one of the names. And then maybe our Silm project collective.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

Wouldn't that more precisely be ₤?

But seriously (I always give reverence to Serious Cat), was Milton in it for the money? I seem to recall something about justifying the ways of God to man. Or the visionary Blake? Why must you assume the money would be the only motivator? It certainly wasn't uppermost in Tolkien's mind.

"No one but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money."
-- Dr. Samuel Johnson (1704-1789)

Not saying this was necessarily Tolkien's case, as writing was his hobby for most of his life, not his vocation; however, based on his letters, he was certainly happy when those royalty checks began to come in regularly from Rayner & Unwin.

"If a writer has to rob his mother, he will not hesitate; the 'Ode on a Grecian Urn' is worth any number of old ladies." -- William Faulkner (1897-1962)

The above quote has nothing whatsoever to do with Tolkien; I just found it amusing.

As far as the original premise of this thread, I believe Tolkien inferred that he would like others to add to his comsology, but as in many of his quotes he has proven to be elusively vague and infuriatingly contradictory. If you look at his early career, he was certainly interested in joint projects (with Lewis and the Inklings, for instance, and earlier with his schoolmates), but as he grew older he became more conservative and protective of his works, until at the end he only trusted his son, Christopher, with his corpus. I believe the entire idea of others working in tandem on his creation atrophied as he did.

Now it is merely conjecture. One might as well ask whether balrogs have wings. *winks*