Did JRRT encourage new ME stories?

[Macalaure]

Originally Posted by Estelyn

But what about the high quality fan fiction/RPGs that fill the empty spaces in Tolkien's spirit? Non-canonical stories could be rejected, but would the good ones still be valid?

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hickli

He was violently opposed. When one reader wrote him with an outline of a proposed fanfic 'sequel' to Lord of the Rings, he called him a "young ***" and referred the matter to Allen & Unwin's lawyers. Tolkien very clearly felt that he was the only qualified 'historian' of Middle-earth.

Originally Posted by Child

One of the other members of Tolkien's family actually did a fanfiction tale based on either Hobbit or LotR. Possibly a teenage son, but don't hold me to that identity. Of course, it wasn't called "fanfiction". Tolkien incidentally said he was delighted with it.

I think I would (rather unqualifiedly) say that the difference between the two is the same difference that lies between 'sub-creation' and 'creation'. The one tries explore the possibilities within the given limitations, while the other tries to impose new things upon the whole. Of course J.R.R. Tolkien was opposed to the latter, especially when it concerned his own work. What he would have thought of works with the intention of sub-creation, and of high quality, is debatable I guess.

Originally Posted by davem

Note - he specifies 'paint, music, & drama' - not new tales.

But he also doesn't mention sculpture. Does that mean he was opposed to it? I would doubt that.

Originally Posted by the letter quoted by davem

The cycles should be linked to a majestic whole, and yet leave scope for other minds and hands, wielding paint and music and drama.

I think the important matter here is not the specification of paint, music and drama, but the question what this "scope" includes and what it excludes.


(sorry for excessive quoting)

[davem]

Originally Posted by Macalaure

But he also doesn't mention sculpture. Does that mean he was opposed to it? I would doubt that.I think the important matter here is not the specification of paint, music and drama, but the question what this "scope" includes and what it excludes.

I think Tolkien is pretty clear - he doesn't object to depictions in other media of what he's created. He's careful to exclude other minds & hands adding to the stories. In fact, the only person he's ever authorised to add to or alter his work is Christopher. Raynor Unwin even stated in an interview that 'One did not edit Tolkien' - or words to that effect.

And I would also add that in that letter Tolkien is attempting to 'sell himself' to a potential publisher, & perhaps is being overly careful not to come across as too 'precious' regarding his work.

[narfforc]

I do not wish to lower the standard of this wonderful thread, I have kept up with the various statements and find it enthralling. However all I can say is I wish he had said ' In written form also', I have been ardent in my believe that someone if not some others could write a sequel within canonicity. If my poor skill as a wordsmith was somewhat greater I am sure that I could work with another to bring forth a credible storyline. I have said before on this site that I have already done this thing, however it was for myself and some very close friends, I do not believe I made any mistakes although you would be asked to make some great leaps of faith, but they wouldn't be absurd. I am not sure of this new story, I am positive especially if the person I was working alongside had been a Christopher Tolkien, another who I feel could do this thing is the very learned Alex Lewis, maybe working with Tom Shippey and Charles Noad, what I am trying to say is that it would not be impossible to write a very good story, as long as the reader would not approach the finished result with any bias against it on the basis of negativity due to the idea that Middle-Earth is sancrosanct, of course the world would be split on this one.


Niggle wants some help to finish...............................something?

.

[The 1,000 Reader]

You could capitalize your name.

[narfforc]

My name starts with an invisible and silent A, a capital one .


.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

I doubt it would really be possible to fill Tolkien's shoes. To write new M-E stories might be possible, even if one expects a standard rather higher than that of typical pulp fantasy; but to reproduce the magic? Tolkien was Tolkien precisely because he was an intimidatingly intelligent and learned man. Who else could remotely reproduce the story-mould of that utterly unparallelled mind? It's like those computer programs that can spit out a "Bach" fugue: technically correct, but lifeless. The hand of the Master is missing.

(I might as well throw in the elegy (almost certainly by Ford) which Norton insisted on including in its latest Shakespeare anthology, even though a blind mule could tell the Bard never so much as spat upon that piece of turgid dreck).

[narfforc]

Yes William you are right, anything written would be like Celebrimbor trying to recreate the Slimarils, I for one would marvel at a jewel he made that maybe glistened at times yet I would discard a lump of dead glass created by Melkor. It would be unfair to say that no-one will ever be born that would or could not recreate the magic, never is a long time.