Saucepan man
I think the '77 Sil is important, because I think its useful to have that kind of 'synopsis' for those who want it. But I think it could also be seen as a kind of 'primer'. Beyond those things a 'Silmarillion' of any academic value
cannot be put together, IMO, because there never
was a completed Sil & there never would have been, because what Tolkien wanted a Sil to do changed too often & too quickly for him ever to bring one to completion before he found himself wanting another kind of Sil. I can't see any evidence that Tolkien had a clear sense at
any point in his creative career of exactly what the Silmarillion was supposed to be. He began with an idea of the kind of thing he wanted, but, as i said, before it could be completed his idea had changed. As for any academic value it may have - I can see it having some curiosity value, but there is a danger of it creating the false impression among new readers that this 'perfect' Sil would one day have existed - if only Tolkien had had the time to write it. Tolkien's creative life was a process, but it wasn't a process of evolving a single vision & setting it down - though it may look like that to us, looking back on his life's work. The vision changed, though the settings & characters were kept - at least their surface appearance was. As i said, there wasn't one Galadriel - there were at least two, very different characters. Same with Gollum. Same with Sauron.
And Gandalf - Gandalf (1) (from the Hobbit) is by no means the same character as Gandalf(2) (from LotR) & both are different from Gandalf(3) (the figure from the later writings - ie 'Of the Rings of Power & the Third Age'). but if you put together a 'revised Sil' which presents Gandalf (1)(2)&(3) as a single character by removing all the contradictions between accounts, then what you end up with is Gandalf(4) who is not a character created by Tolkien, but by the revisers.
Oh, the 'conversation' is not between you & a Tolkien beyond the grave, but between a living you & a living Tolkien both existing at different places in space-time. The point is that the Tolkien telling the stories
is alive when he tells them (or writes them down) & you are alive when you read them, so the communication takes place living mind to living mind, over a distance in space-time. The text is not 'alive', it is the means of communication. Interestingly this is one of the means of communication between 'past-present-future' which is used in Notion Club Papers, along with dream & language. And as for two way communication - maybe some of the fanfics & ideas which spring to mind when we discuss or think about Tolkien's works - are
not our own 
(And for anyone who hasn't got this yet - this is a bit like the 'Trotter' story - a 'fanfic' using ideas from Tolkien's writings in order to explore the idea of 'canonicity' from a slightly different angle')
I think you may have a point re 'archetypal' ideas & images in Tolkien's work which spark a response in us as we read - though I wouldn't think it was as straightforward as I've just expressed. Tolkien did say that he felt he hadn't 'made it all up' - so he felt he was tapping into something (across space-time
). If that something
has some kind of 'objective' (psychological)existence - ie relating to the Collective rather than personal unconscious, then its possible that our feelings of what's 'right' & waht's 'wrong' in Tolkien's works come from there.
Maedhros I
'm relieved that you haven't taken any offence from my posts - absolutely none was intended. My quarrel is with the idea, not with you guys. As I've said, if being involved has deepened your appreciation & understanding of Tolkien, that's great.