Tolkien Estate blocks new Tolkien book

[davem]

My first thoughts on reading this were that it was a copyright matter - any letters/docs/personal photos from JRRT are copyright JRRT & his Estate. The Estate may simply being a bit precious. What I find curious is that the author has worked with Hilary Tolkien's family on this book, & from what I know of Angela Gardener via the Tolkien Society & buying books from Daeron's Books, I know it would have been an entirely respectful work, so I'm not sure what the Estate's objection could be, other than 'This our stuff & you can't use it!'

However, reading between the lines of the publisher's statement:

Despite many revisions and changes made at the insistence of The Tolkien Estate it appears that The Tolkien Estate will seek to take court action to prevent the release of this book regardless. Everyone involved in the publication has worked hard to meet the requests of The Tolkien Estate time and time again, however it would be misleading to release a Biography on Hilary Tolkien without proper reference to his close relationship with his brother.

it seems a bit more complex - the issue seems to be not so much about the use of the photos/pix/letters referred to in the blurb, but about the book's making 'proper reference to his close relationship with his brother'.

Which seems a bit much - stopping a book going ahead because it touched on the relationship between Tolkien & his brother from Hilary's perspective. I don't know if any more info will be released on the exact issues but I don't think we'll ever see the book in print now - after the Estate's recent victory over New Line they have a VERY lot of money for lawyers.....

[elronds_daughter]

That's just tragic. I would've much liked to see JRR a bit through the eyes of his family. (And also know more about his family.) Why must the Estate be so possessive?

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

As I haven't read the manuscript, it's hard to say precisely why the estate would block it, but I can see one legitimate reason. The book may be ostensibly about Hillary, but if it was overly emphasizing his relationship with JRRT, it could be argued by the estate that the author or publisher was using that connection as a sales hook, possibly to the point that the book was really indirect memoirs of JRRT more than a biography of the life of Hillary himself. Why, for instance, make a point of mentioning things like the autographed photo of JRRT? It would interest his fans and encourage them to buy a book they might otherwise not purchase. The estate's complaint may be one of misrepresentation, and is possibly legitimate. One would have to read the manuscript in order to know the truth, and as the public cannot make that judgment for itself at this time, the media can put whatever spin they like on the actions of the estate.

[elronds_daughter]

You do have a point, Ibrin. I can definitely see the publishers using the Tolkien connection as a selling point. (And I realize my comment above falls under the Tolkien-fan-reading-his-brother's-bio-to-find-out-more-about-JRR category. So, case in point.)

As you said, one would need to read the manuscript to be sure, but (thinking about the aforementioned category), if even a part of their market is Tolkienites (which it certainly must be; one cannot possibly write a book about a Tolkien and not expect JRR's followers to jump on the bandwagon), they might, however unintentionally, skew it to be more a sideways biography of the Man himself rather than his brother, as advertised. In that case, I suppose the complaints of the Estate would be perfectly legitimate. I would expect that they might be willing to settle for royalties (I would, if it were me), but it may well be that they tried and the publisher refused.

And of course we'll probably never know the real reasons.

So, much as I would love to read a biography of Hilary, I suppose I can try for an all-sides view and see how the Estate might be unhappy about such a thing.


P.S. Apologies for all the parentheticals.

[Mithalwen]

I doubt there would be many takers for the bio of an Evesham fruit farmer if he weren't JRR's brother. But I am suprised that they can stop it since there are so many unauthorised Celebrity bios that most people have to put up with.

Can you libel the dead? Surely copyright is the only thing?

It dos seem a bit extreme especially when Gardener is such a mainstay of Oxonmoot and the TS which is proud and protective of its relationship with the surviving family.

[Morwen]

^^No, libel is only for the living.

[Tuor in Gondolin]

Originally posted by Mithalwen
Can you libel the dead?

So you've seen the movie Death on the Nile
with Peter Ustinov, Mia Farrow, Angela Lansbury, etc.

[Mithalwen]

I have - and not only that version but I can't get the significance ..I remember whodunnit and how but nothing in the motive for libel.

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by Ibrîniðilpathânezel

As I haven't read the manuscript, it's hard to say precisely why the estate would block it, but I can see one legitimate reason. The book may be ostensibly about Hillary, but if it was overly emphasizing his relationship with JRRT, ..... The estate's complaint may be one of misrepresentation, and is possibly legitimate. One would have to read the manuscript in order to know the truth, and as the public cannot make that judgment for itself at this time, the media can put whatever spin they like on the actions of the estate.

Even if that were the case I don't think that it was misrepresentation. No offence to Hilary who was no doubt a fine and decent man but there would almost certainly no book (other than perhaps a private family memoir) were he not JRRT's brother. There have been cases here where a sibling relationship has been exploited for a book and the "celebrity" has had to tolerate it and I really can't see how the estate can block the publication of Hilary's family reminiscences about Uncle Ronald (or whatever they called him) even if they now hate any aspect of JRRT's private life emerging into the public domain. I usually am the first to defend the estate against all comers but I am baffled about this.

I can't believe that the book was so scandalous but you can't but wonder. I can't help thinking that this would have had a very limited circulation of fairly devoted fans at £30 a pop had they left well alone.

What on earth was it that was so problematic

[davem]

Angela Gardener, the author, is a member of the downs (only one post so far http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showpos...64&postcount=3), but she may not feel able to discuss the matter. Just so curious to know what the score is.

[Tuor in Gondolin]

Originally posted by Mithalwen
I can't believe that the book was so scandalous but you can't but wonder. I can't help thinking that this would have had a very limited circulation of fairly devoted fans at £30 a pop had they left well alone.

What on earth was it that was so problematic

Exactly. Are UK copyright, publishing laws etc. so much stricter
then other countries? Or EU regulations. And if so could it be
published in other countries (U.S., Canada, Australia)?

Btw, I'd like to read a bio like this, but at 60+ dollars.....

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Tuor in Gondolin

Btw, I'd like to read a bio like this, but at 60+ dollars.....

Perhaps you can satisfy (or whet) your appetite with the first small volume which came out of Hilary's papers: Black and White Ogre Country: The Lost Tales of Hilary Tolkien.

I've linked to an interview with the illustrator, Jeff Murray, on Tolkien Library, but that page includes a link to Amazon uk for ordering the book. At either ₤7 or ₤9, it's hardly pricey.

There's a bit of explanation, too, of the provenance of the material.

Originally Posted by Mister Underhill

Ironically, the most detailed information I could find was right here on the Downs -- in fact Google is so swift that your post in this very thread, Bb, was near the top of the list.

gulp! But I know nuffink of the matter except that it happened--shows you how good teh interwebs are.

Originally Posted by Mister Underhill

I suppose serious fans of both Tolkien and Beowulf comprise a relatively small demographic, but I would've expected some ongoing curiosity from Anglo-Saxon scholars at least.

It's a very small demographic. Very few universities require Old English--which needs to be learnt as a separate language--from their English majors. I suspect I come from one of the very few North American ones that do and I know of English ones which do not as well.

Even medieval studies--which are in the dialects of middle English and look recognisable to modern English readers--are being lost because not many wish to undertake a rigorous training in reading old literature these days.

Also, with recent translations such as Seamus Heaney's there's less need for another, even one from a pre-eminent OE scholar.

Originally Posted by Mister Underhill

Then again, none of us are getting any younger, are we?

At my back I always hear time's winged chariot hurrying near.

[PrinceOfTheHalflings]

Originally Posted by davem

My first thoughts on reading this were that it was a copyright matter - any letters/docs/personal photos from JRRT are copyright JRRT & his Estate. The Estate may simply being a bit precious. What I find curious is that the author has worked with Hilary Tolkien's family on this book, & from what I know of Angela Gardener via the Tolkien Society & buying books from Daeron's Books, I know it would have been an entirely respectful work, so I'm not sure what the Estate's objection could be, other than 'This our stuff & you can't use it!'

However, reading between the lines of the publisher's statement:



it seems a bit more complex - the issue seems to be not so much about the use of the photos/pix/letters referred to in the blurb, but about the book's making 'proper reference to his close relationship with his brother'.

Which seems a bit much - stopping a book going ahead because it touched on the relationship between Tolkien & his brother from Hilary's perspective. I don't know if any more info will be released on the exact issues but I don't think we'll ever see the book in print now - after the Estate's recent victory over New Line they have a VERY lot of money for lawyers.....

It might be that the book can't make 'proper reference to his close relationship with his brother' without using letters and other personal documents.

What the Estate can't do is simply block bios of members of the Tolkien family - it doesn't matter how many fancy lawyers you have if your case has no legal substance - sure, the Estate can issue injunctions against books they don't like, but there are loads of Tolkien related books being published every year, so it's not like they block everything.

I'm puzzling over the argument that the book was a "misrepresentation". Normally, if the book represents "false claims" or "false advertising" (eg, a book about JRRT masquerading as being about Hilary) then that would be a matter for the UK Advertising Standards Authority and also perhaps the Office of Fair Trading. There is certainly no obvious basis for a civil lawsuit - unless the authors of the book signed a contract with the Estate regarding the use of certain materials owned by the Estate. The Estate may be complaining that they were deceived as to the nature of the book when they (the Estate) agreed to the use of those materials. In fact, that's the only explanation that makes sense to me.

[Calcifer]

As authors who have worked with the Tolkien Estate in producing books containing copyrighted material, and are known to contribute to Tolkien fan forums, we have been asked to forward the following official statement:

Statement of the Tolkien Estate - Wheelbarrows at Dawn

The J R R Tolkien Estate has been made aware of a statement by ADC Publications concerning its cancellation of its proposed publication Wheelbarrows at Dawn by Angela Gardner and Neil Holford.

ADC's statement suggests that the publication has been cancelled as a result of the Tolkien Estate's threats to take court action preventing the release of the book.

As this statement is highly misleading, the Tolkien Estate considers it important that the true facts be clarified for those concerned.

The book in question was presented by ADC as a biography of J R R Tolkien's brother Hilary. However, the publication included numerous personal letters from J R R Tolkien to his brother and from other family members that were reproduced virtually verbatim.

The copyright in these private, unpublished letters belongs to the Tolkien Estate. As the guardian of these rights and of the privacy of the Tolkien family, both of which it takes great care to protect, the Estate quite properly declined permission for the letters to be reproduced in this way.

However, the Estate made clear to ADC that it had no issue with the publication of the book providing the material in question - affecting only 20 pages out of a total of some 300 - was removed.

Although ADC's response was to agree to this, what it then did in practice was to paraphrase the letters, something that had been made clear from the outset would not resolve the issue.

Despite the Estate's devoting considerable resource to helping ADC, not least by suggesting specific editorial changes which would meet its concerns, ADC then announced the cancellation of the book.

=====

Wayne Hammond & Christina Scull

[Bêthberry]

Thank you very much, Wayne Hammond and Christina Scull for providing that statement for the benefit of discussion here. Please thank the members of the Tolkien Estate as well for explaining their position.

I'm sure I speak for all Downers when I say we would be delighted to see Calcifer contribute to our discussions, particularly when we can benefit from your great expertise and wide knowledge of all things Tolkien. I am reading, slowly and carefully, through your Companion and Guide and have found it as refreshing and enlightening as any Ent draught.

[davem]

Still not sure whether the issue is

a)Simply that the authors are paraphrasing the letters - ie its not about what the letters contain, but simply because the copyright on the material belongs to the Estate, & that they object on principle to its being used.

Or

b) Whether its because the letters contain information the Estate do not want to be published - but I suspect that if the content of the letters was along the lines of 'Dear Hilary, went into Birmingham today & had tea. It rained for a bit, but then the sun came out & made the whole place seem rather Elvish. Yours Ronald' then no-one at the Estate would be bothered if it was published.

However, I accept that we'll never be told one way or the other, so further speculation seems pointless.

Narfforc, via Facebook, made me aware of this novel 'Looking for the King: An Inklings Novel '[Hardcover] http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/1586...pt#reader-link In it, Tolkien, Lewis & the other Inklings appear as supporting characters, & we've seen other novels where the same thing happens (ie 'Here, There Be Dragons (Chronicles of the Imaginarium Geographica' http://www.amazon.com/There-Dragons-...9942839&sr=1-1 ). I begin to feel that Tolkien is moving towards being a 'fictional' character himself, the dreamy, slightly bumbling old professor with his pipe. We may never get to know the real man.

[Lalaith]

The copyright in these private, unpublished letters belongs to the Tolkien Estate. As the guardian of these rights and of the privacy of the Tolkien family, both of which it takes great care to protect, the Estate quite properly declined permission for the letters to be reproduced in this way.

I'm still a bit baffled by this. Firstly, because most 20th century literary figures eminent enough to have biographies written about them, have letters that are published as part of biographies, and it isn't generally seen as a problem by the estates of these writers.
Secondly, from whom did the authors obtain the letters in question, if not the family?
Thirdly, why could the letters not be paraphrased? If I paraphrased the plot of LotR I would not be in breach of copyright, although if I copied it word for word I clearly would.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Lalaith

Thirdly, why could the letters not be paraphrased? If I paraphrased the plot of LotR I would not be in breach of copyright, although if I copied it word for word I clearly would.

I wasn't aware that a paraphrase or synopsis is a breach of copyright either, but I'm sure a very long, exorbitantly expensive, court case would be able to determine whether that is actually the case or not. What one would need is two very rich individuals/organisations to be prepared to argue it out in front of a judge.

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by Lalaith

I'm still a bit baffled by this. Firstly, because most 20th century literary figures eminent enough to have biographies written about them, have letters that are published as part of biographies, and it isn't generally seen as a problem by the estates of these writers.
Secondly, from whom did the authors obtain the letters in question, if not the family?
Thirdly, why could the letters not be paraphrased? If I paraphrased the plot of LotR I would not be in breach of copyright, although if I copied it word for word I clearly would.

The physical letters are presumably in the possession of Hilary's family whereas the copyright resides with the estate. So Hilary's family have the right to show them to whom they like the reproduction of the contents is verboten without the permission of the estate. "Eyes only" in effect.


As for paraphrasingtaking Dave's example, if I write "He wrote to Hilary that he had gone into Birmingham today & had tea. It had rained briefly , but then the sun had emerged giving the place an Elvish quality ". I don't think substituting some vocabulary, using reported speech and so on is enough for me to say that is no longer essentially Dave's writing. You could say that a film or radio script is essentially a paraphrase and both require the authority of the copyright holder.

All in all it seems rather sad that it has got to this stage. I don't blame the Estate for protecting its rights but it shows how tight the laager has been drawn if even Angie Gardner with the cooperation of Hilary's family has fallen foul. But the price of Tolkien being taken more seriously as an author is legitimate interest in his life. There is a danger of babies being thrown out with bathwater....