Contradictions between the hobbit and LOTR?

[Ivriniel]

Originally Posted by R.R.J Tolkien

I am engaged in a discussion on supposed contradictions between the hobbit and the rest of Tolkien writings and I was looking for other posters opinions. I hold Tolkien's views like he said In letters 214 of supposed contradictions “Facts that may appear in my record, I believe, in no case due to errors, but omissions, and incompleteness of information.” He went to great lengths to resolve supposed contradictions. So given that, how would you respond to the following.



1-The uuse of the Ring by Bilbo is clearly inconsistent with the way it is described in LOTR


2- Gandalf is very much a different character than the angelic being that he would become.


3- the story of how the Elves and Dwarves became estranged. In the Silmarillion tradition, it goes back to the conflict between Thingol and the Dwarves over the Nauglamír. In The Hobbit, a similar story is told, but the Elf in question is the Woodland King. As Rateliff notes, when Tolkien wrote The Hobbit, the Woodland King was either meant to be Thingol himself or a character closely based on him. But when he wrote the sequel, he clarified that the Woodland King was Thranduil, a completely different character. Thus, two completely different and incompatible stories are told about the conflict between the two races.

We had a very animated discussion about this, some years back. "Originally written as a children's book", without continuity, in its inception with the materials we find in Shadow of the Past, then ringwraiths, and until the first appearance, I think it was on Weathertop, about Gil Galad being an Elven King of Him the Minstrels....and a reflection on Luthien and Beren, by Strider.

Although, we did have much, didn't we, in terms of First Age notes by 1927? In any case, it was also pointed out that there were magical variations in the Hobbit, like a Coffee Table that wandered off, and Cuff Links that were magically operated.

Nonetheless, Orcrest and Glamdring. I can't recall if there was mention of Mount Gundabad in the Hobbit?

My basic position on the Ring in the Hobbit (not a "R"ing yet, just a ring) was that invisibility messed with Bilbo's character, and Stealth implicit in its function was basically creepy, and immoral. Likewise, Sméagol/Gollum, slayed goblin by catching food whilst invisible. Likewise, Bilbo had his moral dilemma about jumping over Sméagol, not slaying him. Thus, I don't see discontinuity with LotR and I recall chastising myself in Shadow of the Past, because "I knew better at the time" (he found the ring) and "I tricked myself into the lure of the invisibility". That is, "I wanted one" of those kinds of rings with its advantages. All made me viscerally unbothered knowing The Hobbit had an amended copy by the 60's. However, despite the amendments, the invisibility is implicitly immoral, IMO, which is my 'goto' about the children's book, that does not have discontinuity with a notion that despite that, somewhere rattling around in Professor Tolkien's head must have been weaving his children's story into his primary passion and mythology in-the-make.

Does anyone recall which Letter has more to say about all this?