‘Canonicity’: the Book or the Reader?

[Lord of Angmar]

What is the purpose of constructing your canon -- whatever it may be? Are you striving for a comprehensive version of Middle-Earth or a truthful one? That is, are you trying get it all, or are you trying to get it right?

That is a very pertinent question, since I think the word canon has been thrown around far too much. For myself, I love the Silmarillion, the BoLT, HoME, etc. I am a little "iffy" on the authenticity of each or all as a comprehensive history, since while I do tend to use them as a historian might use his history books when making an argument, at the same time I recognize that they may not entirely (or even remotely, who knows?) resemble what Tolkien intended to be a part of the history of Middle-earth. As far as 'canon' goes, I do believe that only LotR is a 100% 'canonical' part of Middle-earth. The rest of the 'Legendarium' as we know it, with the possible exception of The Hobbit, is a cluster of branches on a tree which, beautiful and enthralling as it may be, will never bear any verifiably canonical fruits.