Quote:
|
One might follow this with Unfinished Tales and the History, but the appreciation and understanding seem already to be there by then.
|
Good point,
littlemanpoet! I do find that the mindset I had upon the second reading of LOTR was much more conducive to understanding and appreciation than the first time around, when I was distracted and could not fully delve into the meanings I wished uncovered in my reading. Perhaps the difference lies in the concentration of detail, some of the richness of Tolkien lies in the dense resonance that his Silmarillion and histories, etc. create within a tale that, to my mind, is self-contained, even with its references to the greater histories. (I must say that a subsequent reading of LOTR after the Silm. yields yet more richness). It is to the Professor's credit that this vast source material DOES exist, for in most works, we can only guess at meanings and intentions. But it does not mean that the source material is necessary for an appreciation of the core trilogy. It is simply a great bonus that, once read, cannot be forgotten; thus it is automatically merged with the LOTR in the mind as the one great tale that never ends, as Sam observed so perceptively and yet without the full perception that, say, Elrond, might have enjoyed. But the tale is full and deep for both Elrond and Sam, only in different ways. So I return to the tale, enriched by the Silmarillion, but still able to feel it as Sam does! [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]
Cheers,
Lyta