Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
|
06-05-2002, 06:54 PM | #1 |
Desultory Dwimmerlaik
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Pickin' flowers with Bill the Cat.....
Posts: 7,816
|
The Canon
I'm going to confess my ignorance here, since I've read only The Hobbit, The LOTR trilogy, The Silmarillion, and Roverrandom & have just started The Book of Lost Tales I.
What exactly is being referred to as 'canonical' when that word is used here?
__________________
Eldest, that’s what I am . . . I knew the dark under the stars when it was fearless - before the Dark Lord came from Outside. |
06-05-2002, 07:44 PM | #2 |
Wight
|
As I understand it, Hobbit, LotR and Silmarillion, as well as the HoME series (which I have yet to read . . .stupid exams/lack of money).
But I may be wrong, so wait a bit and see what the more knowledgeable post.
__________________
"I once spent two weeks in a tree trying to talk to a bird." --Puck, Brother Mine si man i yulma nin equantuva? [my blog] |
06-05-2002, 08:50 PM | #3 |
Wight
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Earthsea, or London
Posts: 175
|
The canon in a literary sense is commonly understood to mean the body of (published) works by an author. In Tolkien's case this becomes a little confusing - The Silmarillion was put together, so to speak, by his son, in the form of a complete narrative, based on a vast number of definitively 'unfinished' and sometimes obscurely linked drafts and notes. Unfinished Tales (which at various times contradicts the chronology or other aspects of The Silmarillion) is more of a collection of this kind of supplementary or draft material by Tolkien, again collated, edited and in some cases addended by his son Christopher.
However, as Tolkien himself never appears to have considered any of his major works (published or not) as definitive or final, and was constantly revising and revisiting, the notion of a set 'canon' representing the author is a little fluid. In conversational terms, I would assume the term to apply to all his published works as of now, or perhaps all that deal with Middle Earth. Peace [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img] |
06-05-2002, 11:03 PM | #4 |
Hidden Spirit
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,436
|
LotR. Everything else is debatable. LotR is also debatable.
__________________
What's a burrahobbit got to do with my pocket, anyways? |
06-06-2002, 12:18 AM | #5 |
Desultory Dwimmerlaik
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Pickin' flowers with Bill the Cat.....
Posts: 7,816
|
One of the reasons I asked was because I had asked,on another thread, a question about something from The Book of Lost Tales I & two respondents said this book was not canonical - see HERE
So, if someone could just clarify this issue, at least for this Board's purposes of reference, I would appreciate it [ June 06, 2002: Message edited by: piosenniel ] [ June 06, 2002: Message edited by: piosenniel ]
__________________
Eldest, that’s what I am . . . I knew the dark under the stars when it was fearless - before the Dark Lord came from Outside. |
06-06-2002, 12:33 AM | #6 |
Hidden Spirit
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,436
|
With Middle-earth stuff there are many varying levels of canon. The most canonical is LotR, it is one of the things used to judge if something else is canon. The other thing is author's intent. I may not be very far off base if I were to say that BoLT is the least canonical work that has been published. By the end of his life Tolkien had abandoned or modified nearly every aspect of BoLT. In my mind The Silmarillion, parts of UT, and parts of HoME inhabit the same level of canon, just lower than LotR. After that, in the third level down, is The Hobbit and much of the rest of UT and HoME. Then the remainder of UT, HoME, and the majority of BoLT. Keeping in mind that the order after LotR is just my opinion, and subject to change.
__________________
What's a burrahobbit got to do with my pocket, anyways? |
06-06-2002, 06:15 AM | #7 |
Spirit of the Lonely Star
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 5,135
|
What about the Letters? So many times I've gone to the Letters when figuring out a question of interpretation. What "level of authenticity" is given to that?
sharon, the 7th age hobbit
__________________
Multitasking women are never too busy to vote. |
06-06-2002, 08:34 AM | #8 |
Spirit of Mist
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Tol Eressea
Posts: 3,310
|
The term "canon" is probably both misused and overused in the context of Tolkien's work. Middle Earth related books published by Tolkien are generally considered part of the canon; i.e. LoTR, Hobbit, Road goes ever on and Tom Bombadil (with the last two given less emphasis due to "poetic license"). As someone else commented, Silmarillion was compiled, edited and in some places actually written by Christopher Tolkien. He accepted the daunting task of reviewing such of his father's drafts as he had found, picking and choosing between inconsistent or stylistically different versions, and editing/authoring to make the story flow with some degree of consistency. All this was done in the space of about 3 years after JRRT died in 1973. As Christopher later set out to review, edit and publish others of his father's writings he became aware that, in some places, he may have chosen poorly among drafts. He also revealed he himself had written segments such as the fall of Doriath. As a result, Silmarillion is not considered "canonical" as it may not reflect the tale as JRRT actually intended it to be. The same goes for UT which includes some of Tolkien's best writing which was left sadly unfinished.
HoME, which is the source of much of the debate, complicates matters greatly. In HoME we see many of the conflicting drafts and CT reveals places where he may have used early ideas instead of later ones. BoLT 1 and 2 are the very earliest of JRRT's Middle Earth writings. BoLT was begun around 1918 and much of the detail included was later superceded or omitted, and is the least canonical of the HoME series. Although I am a member of the Canon project on this website, I am reluctantly leaning towards the view that there can be no real "canon" gleaned from Sil., UT and HoME other than might satisfy personal taste (sorry Lindil). If you want my view on degrees of canonicity (if that is a word), the books can be graded in this order: (1) LoTR; (2) Hobbit; (3) HoME 12 (made up of portions of what had been prepared for inclusion in LoTR appendices but were omitted primarily due to space constraints; (4) Sil., UT and HoME 5, 10 and 11(take your pick); (5) Tom Bombadil and Road Goes Ever On (some would place this as number 4); and (6) everything else. Letters is impossible to grade. Because Sil. was a constantly changing work, Letters discussing Sil. cannot be viewed as more authoritative than Sil itself (and UT, portions of HoME etc.). But letters addressing LoTR and Hobbit, to the extent they don't contradict anything which was published, are more "canonical". [ June 06, 2002: Message edited by: Mithadan ]
__________________
Beleriand, Beleriand, the borders of the Elven-land. |
06-06-2002, 08:56 AM | #9 |
Cryptic Aura
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 6,165
|
*dances a merry greeting to burrahobbit and Child of the 7th Age*
If I may be so bold as to speak up even though newly arrived at the Barrows,I would join this interesting discussion of canonicity. Why place The Hobbit below LOTR and The Silmarillion, particularly since Christopher Tolkien edited his father's papers so extensively to produce it? The Hobbit is thoroughly Tolkien Sr.'s work. I perhaps speak a form of heresy when I suggest that, as fascinating as [i]The Silmarillion[i/] is, it is apocryphal rather than authoritative. Perhaps the confusion lies in distinguishing between consistency of the mythology and canonicity of authorial intent? In my travels around Middle Earth, I have found that people who question an author's Letters are readers who deny an author any ....authority. *curtsies respectfully and hopes her dance is not out of place, belonging as it does to the Old Forest* Bethberry Edit: *acknowledges the insightful post of Mithadan which I had not seen before I posted* [ June 06, 2002: Message edited by: Bethberry ]
__________________
I’ll sing his roots off. I’ll sing a wind up and blow leaf and branch away. |
06-06-2002, 10:22 AM | #10 |
Desultory Dwimmerlaik
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Pickin' flowers with Bill the Cat.....
Posts: 7,816
|
Welcome to the Downs, Bethberry!! thanks for your comments.
And thanks, Mithadan, Child, and burrahobbit for your input. I now have some parameters within which to work. It would be interesting to hear Lindil's comments on what is canonical.
__________________
Eldest, that’s what I am . . . I knew the dark under the stars when it was fearless - before the Dark Lord came from Outside. |
06-06-2002, 11:58 AM | #11 | ||
Hidden Spirit
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,436
|
Quote:
Quote:
That being said, I think that I like Mithadan's order better than mine.
__________________
What's a burrahobbit got to do with my pocket, anyways? |
||
06-06-2002, 01:25 PM | #12 |
Spirit of Mist
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Tol Eressea
Posts: 3,310
|
Welcome to the Barrow-Downs Bethberry!
__________________
Beleriand, Beleriand, the borders of the Elven-land. |
06-06-2002, 09:06 PM | #13 |
Shade of Carn Dűm
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 358
|
Some* would place The Road Goes Ever On at number 2, and follow it with A Guide to Names in LotR (or consider them even equal to LotR).
*'Some' refers to myself. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]
__________________
Tar-Elenion |
06-06-2002, 09:18 PM | #14 | |
Ghastly Neekerbreeker
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: the banks of the mighty Scioto
Posts: 1,757
|
Quote:
|
|
06-06-2002, 10:02 PM | #15 |
Cryptic Aura
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 6,165
|
Thank you, Mithadan. Mae Govannen.
Your project is as challenging as any ring-bearer's. I hope you have an Old Tom to scare away any post-modernist nay-sayers. May you find the larger way. Bethberry
__________________
I’ll sing his roots off. I’ll sing a wind up and blow leaf and branch away. |
06-06-2002, 10:25 PM | #16 |
Spirit of the Lonely Star
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 5,135
|
This is very interesting. Why were vols. 5, 10, and 11 of HoMe considered "more canonical" than the others? (omitting 12 and 1 and 2 which have already been discussed as special cases)
Why was Road Goes Ever On placed so relatively low? I know there are some ideas in the notes where Tlkien seems to stick his neck out further on some issues like the Vala. Is this why? Welcome Bethberry. Glad to meet you. [ June 07, 2002: Message edited by: Child of the 7th Age ]
__________________
Multitasking women are never too busy to vote. |
06-07-2002, 06:54 AM | #17 |
Spirit of Mist
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Tol Eressea
Posts: 3,310
|
HoME 5, 10 and 11 contain the last versions of the Sil that were written by Tolkien. I have heard that Christopher may have relied more heavily on the HoME 5 versions in his editing of that work. Road is rated somewhat lower (by me) because it contains Bilbo's poetry rather than "lore". It could be subject to debate whether some of the information in the poem itself is subject to poetic license. Some have criticized Tolkien's notes in Road as not entirely consonant with other writings. Just goes to show what a thorny mess the whole issue of canon is.
__________________
Beleriand, Beleriand, the borders of the Elven-land. |
06-08-2002, 02:42 AM | #18 |
Wight
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Finland
Posts: 118
|
To most of us lowly fanfiction writers, the canon is simly: The Hobbit, Lord of the Rings and Silmarillion, and the other stuff can be used too, but nobody understands them, so why bother? :-) Seriously speaking, I haven't got any point.
__________________
Wistful, willful, wingless, fly! |
06-08-2002, 09:53 AM | #19 |
Spirit of the Lonely Star
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 5,135
|
The last humorous post actually raises a serious point. Exactly who is "canon" important to? Presumably, if you are trying to do the kind of project as you guys are doing on the Silm, it's very, very important since so many editing decisions would stem from it. And if you are doing scholarly writing for an academic journal, it would bear some relevence.
But the latter point isn't even %100 true. The book of essays Tolkien's Legendarium certainly has articles in it which cite heavily off the books that are lower down in the canon. And these essays are pretty highly thought of. (At least that's what T.A. Shippey says.) (I'm especially thinking of the great article on the role of Elf-friends.) But what about the "average" Tolkien fan (whatever that means). To tell the honest truth, if I read something that speaks to me, I don't always look to see where it stands in terms of "canon". Now, I'm no expert on HoMe and these other pieces, but as I learn more I find that I really like some of the later writings, precisely because Tolkien seems willing to push himself further on some issues, be more explicit, than he is in LotR. I'm talking about things like the notes in the Road Goes Ever on, writings in Morgoth's Ring like Athrabeth Finrod ah Andreth, the osanwe-kenta stuff in Vinyar Tengwar, and the article on Galadriel in UT. However scholars rate these pieces, I'm personally always going to think of them as the most fully developed and truest expression of some of Tolkien's ideas. And I suspect there may be others who feel this way too. So where does that leave "canon"? I know this sounds funny, but is "canon" really something we can define when we're still so close to Tolkien's life? If we assume LotR is going to last and become a "classic", don't we have to get some perspective on his writng before we can make definitive statements on canon--although I do understand anyone doing an editing job has to make some practical decisions about what to include. sharon, the 7th age hobbit
__________________
Multitasking women are never too busy to vote. |
06-13-2002, 03:28 PM | #20 | |
Seeker of the Straight Path
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: a hidden fastness in Big Valley nor cal
Posts: 1,681
|
Mithadan tipped me off to the thread here, so I thought I would take a peek....
"What exactly is being referred to as 'canonical' when that word is used here?" There is no one answer. Almost everyone agrees on LotR/Bombadil/Guide to names and places, most would also consider the Hobbit and Silm. I will say that for myself who had the good fortune [?] to read Silm, UT and BoLT has they came out Canon became an early and curious question that could not hope to be answered till the HoME series was completed [ and now even that must be revised a bit in the light of the gems being supplied by CRRT to the Vinyar Tengwar journal }. I left off serious M-E study from Lays till 2000, and when I came back the whole world had changed!!! For younger folks [ or newer older readers!] the lines of division between HoME, Silm and UT must seem considerably thinner than to us elder ; ) readers. For a decade or so Silm was indisputibly cannonical in all but the most obscure and highly placed circles. The passing references in UT where not enough to despoil the idea that CRRT had done anythong other than a masterful job of creating the Silm. Now we see however, esp w/ HoME 4, 5 and 10-12, that CRRT himself admits errors [ Gil-Galad's parentage being the most glaring ] , and that CRRT even has come to believe a canonical version or i should say final version of the Silmarillion was impossible, and wished he had not tried. I for one am very glad he did, otherwise the lacuna posed by the Turin/Doriath material might never have been filled by anyone w/ the name of tolkien and a senitivity to M-E. personally i wish he had been even bolder and done as Brian Herbert has and really made the world his own. but alas we are left w/ a myriad of cannonical confusions to which I also believe there is no perfect solution. One can be interested in the question for a few reasons that I am aware of:
Ironically enough last I heard the Silmarillion as pub. by CRRT is official canon here at the downs [ in terms of the encyclopedia] kind of ironic huh? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= anyway can there be a definitive canon of writings ? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= probably not - only CRRT in my opinion had the authority and means to do what he tried to do w/ ' the Silmarillion'. The only other possiblility [which I consider only somewhat less likely than ever seein an honest president in the white house again] is that a group of legendariumists [ a large number, say at least a few dozen if not at least 1 gross] get together and debate and vote and then re-edit. Only time can tell whether their decisions and productions would be taken seriously [ it would of course probably succeed only in producing bitterly opposed camps and even possibly law suits!] . I confess to being at one time crazy enough to try and engineer a form of the above mentioned council. unfortunately most of the Tolkien world seems wiser than me and realized, silently it would seem the futilility of the project, and declined to waste precious mental energy, and who can blame them there are too many tid-bits o trivia to query , not too mention polls on 'one's favorite tolkien inspired death metal' and Balrog Wings /Bombadillian debates. that aside aside, there does not seem to be the time or patience for a concilliar canon. What can be done then? Well most legendariumists have come to the intelligent conclusion that to worry their little heads about is pointless, why i will just enjoy the stories and get on w/ my life! others will attemt to form a fripp might say 'small, mobile and intelligent units' that work on the myriad of issues and texts irresepctive of their place in legendarium history. there a re a stunning number of such works on the Silmarillion: Canon, Drafts and Theories forum. And a couple of people are still laboring at odd and irregular intervals to create new texts according to dictates that each group must decide on. perhaps the term 'sub-canon' is appropriate. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] Why can no canon be decided upon a few might ask ? : 1. tolkien fans have other priorites 2. CRRT decided against trying a second time. 3. JRRT left such a mass of semi and/or unresolved thorny issues [ creation of the Sun and moon, nature of orcs, galadriel, the 2nd doom of mandos, who is the compiler < BB or Aelfwine or a combination> number of balrogs [ forget the wings!], not too mention the fact that he left Turin and Doriath in tatters along w/ a tantalizing bit on hurin's wanderings. So in short I will sayy that in all liklihood we will all be given the task of deciding our own canon! A sort of Protestant legendariumism, being Orthodox myself , I like the idea of councils better , but hey as child o' the 7th age said: Quote:
sorry for the ramble!! [ June 13, 2002: Message edited by: lindil ]
__________________
The dwindling Men of the West would often sit up late into the night exchanging lore & wisdom such as they still possessed that they should not fall back into the mean estate of those who never knew or indeed rebelled against the Light.
|
|
06-14-2002, 12:15 AM | #21 |
Spirit of the Lonely Star
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 5,135
|
Lindil --
I really wanted to thank you for taking the time to provide such a thoughtful post. I made a copy of it on my printer to save in a notebook where I keep things that seem particularly helpful. And I will make sure to look at those other later writings of Tolkien which you cited as being personal favorites in addition to the ones I was familiar with. I can definitely see how useful it would be to have a conciliar body define what canon is. (I am a medieval historian, and your words reminded me of the conciliar movement within the Church in the 14th century!) But, knowing how many academics are, I think you are right--it would be an impossible task to get such individuals to agree to meet, let alone to actually come to an agreement on the literature itself. Too bad. What that means, I think, is that the battle may, by default, be fought out on a smaller scale in projects such as your own as well as in scholarly articles in journals and monographs. I know that two of the articles in Tolkien's Legendarium, for example, dealt with the question of the Elf-friend narrator/compiler. The biggest problem is that it will take a long, long time, if ever, for any kind of concensus to be achieved. I guess there is no possibilty of using an existing group like the Mythopoeic Society or the Tolkien Society to try and sponsor something like this. (Probably not.) sharon
__________________
Multitasking women are never too busy to vote. |
06-14-2002, 12:40 AM | #22 |
Visionary Spirit
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 633
|
My Own Personal Canon Law a la Tolkien:
If it's got JRR Tolkien's name on it as being the author, and if I enjoy it, it's canon. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img] Sure, it might make for a pleasant afternoon with a cup of tea under a nice shade tree in the summer to wonder once in a while how much Christopher had a hand in things. And musing about various ambiguities or inconsistencies can be good for broadening one's horizons in appreciation for a myriad of imaginative alternative scenarios and possibilities ... but as for outright settling such matters, I'd rather just allow Tolkien the leeway to which poetic licence entitles him. Just my leisurely two pieces of mithril, Gandalf the Grey |
06-14-2002, 10:48 AM | #23 |
Desultory Dwimmerlaik
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Pickin' flowers with Bill the Cat.....
Posts: 7,816
|
Lindil - thank you for taking time to give your thoughts on the subject. That was a very clarifying post on a somewhat slippery subject, as I have learned.
One of the reasons I originally asked the question was that I had seen a fair number of posts in discussions where a respondent would use the word 'canon' to validate his position or invalidate another's. I wanted to see the yardstick by which such replies were being measured.
__________________
Eldest, that’s what I am . . . I knew the dark under the stars when it was fearless - before the Dark Lord came from Outside. |
06-14-2002, 11:51 AM | #24 | |
Regal Dwarven Shade
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: A Remote Dwarven Hold
Posts: 3,685
|
Quote:
This usually only leads to further confusion on the part of everyone. So I guess that the answer to your question is that the "yardstick" itself is rather murky.
__________________
...finding a path that cannot be found, walking a road that cannot be seen, climbing a ladder that was never placed, or reading a paragraph that has no... |
|
11-01-2016, 07:23 AM | #25 | ||
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,031
|
Quote:
Quote:
Aww. Especially after you raised a good point: it's confusing to know which First Age endings/bits are canon and which aren't... because so much of it wasn't published by Tolkien himself. The confusion stems, in part, from the incanonosity of it all! If you want First Age canon, I refer you to Strider's tale of Tinúviel (on topic! in the thread this was lifted from) in A Knife In The Dark, for example, or section I of Appendix A, The Numenorean Kings (especially the revised, second edition. It begins: "Feanor was..."). Anyway it's not a fight, despite this... |
||
11-01-2016, 07:29 AM | #26 |
Loremaster of Annúminas
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,301
|
From 2002? 14 years ago?
"The ways of Sauron and the necromancers are of Melkor."
__________________
The entire plot of The Lord of the Rings could be said to turn on what Sauron didn’t know, and when he didn’t know it. |
11-01-2016, 07:31 AM | #27 |
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,031
|
It had the best title (in my opinion) of already existing canon debates.
|
11-01-2016, 08:02 AM | #28 |
Loremaster of Annúminas
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,301
|
The whole thing becomes a mess largely because Tolkien himself futzed around for nearly 20 years after the LR was published and never got the Silmarillion finished. Therefore it's hard to tell what he considered "done" (and even then of course he would still go back and change things). It's easy, but in my mind misleading, just to draw a bright line distinction between 'published' and 'unpublished'; confusion and uncertainty are part of Tolkien studies, not something to be airbrushed out of the picture. (Was Celeborn a Danian, a Sinda, or a Teler? All three).
There are a couple of cases where it's fairly safe to say the work was "finished" and in Tolkien's mind ready for publication, whenever the rest of the volume was done. These would include the Akallabeth, which T was willing to leave unaltered once done and which CT hardly had to edit (the only significant change was Fionwe > Eonwe); Ak also happens to be fully consonant with the LR appendices. Things get a lot messier when it comes to the First Age, especially the early (pre-rebellion) and late (post-Turin) portions: the former because Tolkien decided in the late 50s on a massive cosmological upheaval, and the latter because he just never got around to it.
__________________
The entire plot of The Lord of the Rings could be said to turn on what Sauron didn’t know, and when he didn’t know it. |
|
|