From: loos@amber.mgh.harvard.edu (William D.B. Loos)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: Tolkien Book List:  FOLLOWUP -- request for titles
Date: 14 Sep 92 08:19:00 GMT
Organization: Molecular Biology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41


In article <1992Sep10.171502.9230@pbhyc.PacBell.COM>, djdaneh@PacBell.COM (Dan'l DanehyOakes) writes...
>In article <10SEP199201321341@amber.mgh.harvard.edu> loos@amber.mgh.harvard.edu (William D.B. Loos) writes:
> 

Thanks for your kind words, Dan'l.

>.. . . an excellent and useful article indeed, which I commend highly and
>recommend Mr Loos convert into a periodic-posting with updates.  (See the
>"Holmes Book List" and "Arthurian Reading List" in rec.arts.books for
>examples of how useful these can be).  (William, if you're not willing to
>take on that responsibility, I will.)

Yes, I'll do that.  I am familiar with the Holmes and Arthurian lists.  Both 
are attempts to give complete lists on their respective subjects, something I 
wanted to avoid because the number of secondary works has grown so large.  On 
the other hand, there's nothing wrong with a partial list, as long as it's 
made clear that that's the case, and I'm sure the Net can suggest many books 
that were left off.  (Tolkien's own work will continue to appear, but probably 
at the same one-book-per-year rate at which it has so far).  I had also wanted 
to restrict the list to books for which I could give some definite recom-
mendation, but those which come with recommendations can easily be put in a 
different category from those without.

This will also allow inclusion of some other books which I left out.  I had
considered having a section on "books to stay away from" but didn't like having 
to rely on hearsay for three out of the four entries.  [The three: the two by 
Randel Helms, said to be Freudian interpretations, and The Individuated Hobbit,
said to be a Jungian interpretation.  The Tolkien Encyclopedia, OTOH, I have 
examined personally and it's useless: riddled with inaccuracies and altogether
lame in other ways as well.]

So I now make the REQUEST: if people know of any books about Tolkien or his
writings, either critical studies or books of Middle-earth "lore", please
email me whatever information you have.  If you can comment on the quality
of a given book, so much the better.  Feel free to send info on Tolkien 
periodicals or societies as well, though I can probably get these from the
Tolkien mailing list.  Thank you.

                  *                  *                  *

As for the other comments...

>>2) There have been numerous special editions of both The Hobbit and LotR; only
>>  generic editions have been included here.  
> 
>.. . . eh?  The ANNOTATED is certainly a non-generic.

A case not of a fuzzy mental picture but of a choice of words which didn't 
accurately reflect a clear mental picture.  The set of books of which only 
"generic" editions were to be included was those books which contain the text 
of The Hobbit and nothing else.  Thus, the HM and Ballentine editions were 
included while the ones bound in leather, the 50th anniversary edition, and 
various illustrated editions were all left off.  The ANNOTATED, however, 
contains so much additional information that it seems it should be in a 
different category.  On the other hand, it does include the full text, and 
as such is an excellent way to introduce someone to the story.  So section
A) included both the "generic" examples of the text-only group plus a useful
addition.  Perhaps "standard" would have been a better choice than "generic".
(For that matter, the Centennary edition is neither generic nor standard.)

>>The best maps available are 
>>those made by Christopher Tolkien (CJRT) for his father.  
> 
>Fonstead's ATLAS OF MIDDLE-EARTH, based carefully on CJRT's cartography, is 
>also quite good, and while you list it properly below, I think it deserves a 
>mention in this section.  Strachey's book, well, I like it but I gather 
>opinions vary.

Very true.  I've only caught Fonstad in one small error so far.  The amount of
work was phenomenal, and she was also careful to state when there was insuf-
ficient information and that she had had to make assumptions.

>Your summary of the history of the maps is excellent, btw!

It was inspired by outrage at the replacements.


>>B) Related Middle-earth Works: 
> 
>Actually, I would suggest that if
> 
>>  The Road Goes Ever On: A Song Cycle.  Poems by J.R.R. Tolkien set to music 
>>      by Donald Swann.  HM, 1967, 1978  (ISBN 0-395-24758-6) [op].  Allen & 
>>      Unwin, 1968, 1978 (ISBN 0-04-784011-0) (British edition).
> 
>goes in this section, then THE ADVENTURES OF TOM BOMBADIL certainly ought
>to, as it contains M-e stuff not in either LotR or tRGEo, while -- excepting
>JRRT's introductory essay -- tRGEo contains nothing that is not in either
>tAoTB or LotR.

I agree about Tom Bombadil, though in fact the amount of new information is
quite small.  The poems, which all (with one exception) pre-date LotR, have 
nothing to do with Middle-earth at all (though the fact that the characters
of Tom, Goldberry, Old Man Willow, and even the barrow wight, and thus the
inspiration for Ch. 6, 7, and 8 of FR, all came from the poem The Adventures
of Tom Bombadil is probably reason enough to include tAoTB here).  In his
Preface Tolkien creates the fiction that the poems were found scribbled on
loose leaves of the Red Book and fits them into the Middle-earth context in
various ways.  In the course of this he reveals the name of Sam's granddaughter
(Firiel) as well as a handful of details about Shire geography and Hobbitic
customs, but that's it.

However, I can't agree with the rating of the Road Goes Ever On below tAoTB in 
informational content.  The casual dismissal -- "excepting JRRT's introductory
essay" -- seems an underestimation.  I assume the reference is to Tolkien's
appendix on the Elvish songs Namarie (Galadriel's Lament) and A Elbereth 
Gilthoniel (the song Frodo heard in Rivendell).  These are 12 pages of trans-
lations, calligraphy, and notes on pronunciation, meter, and linguistic fine
points.  Among other things, he states that in Namarie "The word-order and 
style of the chant is 'poetic', and it makes concessions to metre.  In a 
clearer and more normal style the words would be arranged as below ..."  He
then follows with a the correct word order plus a literal translation.  He
also notes that the last line, translated as "Maybe even thou shalt find it",
actually should have expressed "rather a wish than a hope, and would be more
closely rendered 'may it be that (thou wilt find)'".  There are also more 
general comments about the Ban on Galadriel's (neither his first nor his last
notion about that matter) and on religion in Middle-earth.  All in all, a 
rather packed twelve pages.


>>C) The History of Middle-earth:
>>      A careful and exhaustive presentation of J.R.R. Tolkien's unpublished 
>>  writings as edited by his son Christopher.  Note that this is literary
>>  scholarship, no more, no less, *NOT* new stories.
> 
>Not quite true.  Some of the "Lost Tales" failed to make it into the final
>SILMARILLION in any version; and certainly such things as THE LOST ROAD and
>THE (whatsit) CLUB PAPERS (in SAURON DEFEATED) are entirely new.  The latter,
>of course, are completely incomplete (if you follow me), while most of the 
>"Lost Tales" are, at least, complete drafts.

Ah.  Not having finished Lost Tales yet, I didn't know that.  As you hint, The 
Lost Road and The Notion Club Papers (closely related to The Lost Road), while 
new, are too disconnected and surrounded by commentary to be read as stories.  
Actually, my comment above was in the nature of a pre-emptive response to those
who talk sneeringly of a "Tolkien industry" and portray HoMe as either worth-
less, a ripoff, an exploitation of JRRT, or all three.


>>J) Secondary Works II -- Critical Works: 
> 
>>  J.R.R. Tolkien: Six Decades of Criticism; by Judith A Johnson.  
>>      (Bibliographies & Indexes in World Literature Series No. 6).  
>>      Greenwood Press, 1986 (ISBN 0-313-25005-7).
> 
>Perhaps this would be K) Tertiary Works
>:*)

Which would make my list a Quaternary work, no?




William D.B. Loos
loos@frodo.mgh.harvard.edu