[davem]

Originally Posted by Mr U

Which davem am I talking to? The one who thinks Authorial Intention is all, or the one who apparently stands ready to jettison a whole book and (apparently) slash whole sections of LotR even over the claims of the author, all on the basis of the opinion of some Tolkien scholar? The latter -- at least for the present -- it seems.

I don't think I said I think 'authorial intention is all'. I said in other threads that we should try to just experience the art in as pure & uncluttered a way as possible. I've never suggested 'jettisoning' TH. I said it doesn't fit, in mood, tone or feeling, with the rest of the Legendarium. It doesn't - & everyone's attempts to make it fit require some \pretty convoluted 'explanations'. 'Bilbos' tale grew in the telling' 'He was 'middle class' & the tone reflects that bias' or SpM's

Whether you dismiss parts of Bilbo's tale as fanciful or consider them merely whimsical, the point is that the events that he related occured, within your "secondary world" as part of the history of Middle-earth.

(which btw is something I said myself earlier on.)

I never suggested 'slashing whole sections of LotR' either.

Of course there are the annoying facts of the Shire, the Ring, Gollum, old fairy-tale Bilbo himself, Elrond, Gandalf, Gloin, Balin, the Beornings, the Sackville-Bagginses (Heaven forbid! Too silly by far!), etc. and so on ad infinitum with which we must contend.

No, we don't have to contend with those things at all. We just see & treat TH as at best 'secondary' M-e literature'. All that the Legendarium requires of Bilbo's story is encapsulated in LotR. TH should be seen as a M-e 'fantasia'. You're trying way too hard to keep it as a primary text, equal with LotR & The Sil writings.

Originally Posted by SPM

I would add Frodo and co's encounter with Bilbo's Stone Trolls into the mix too. Wether they were called William, Tom and Bert or Wollyam, Tzomm and Bhat matters not. They existed. Bilbo and the Dwarves encountered them. And they ended up turned to Stone. Oh, and their cache included Glamdring and Sting, both of which played their part in the War of the Ring.

Whether you dismiss parts of Bilbo's tale as fanciful or consider them merely whimsical, the point is that the events that he related occured, within your "secondary world" as part of the history of Middle-earth.

We're not talking about the events of the story but the kind of story it is. It doesn't belong in the Legendarium as a primary text. Its relation to the Legendarium is the same as that of Roverandom & the TB verses.

All I'm getting is that you guys want to keep it in for sentimental reasons. The fact that Bilbo & the Dwarves encountered three trolls, they found the swords & went to Rivendell is accepted. We're not discussing the events depicted - which are part of the Legendarium - we're talking about whether an (in parts condescending) childrens fairy story should be considered a primary text in the Legendarium.

As for the argument that the style of LotR is different from that of The Sil - this won't wash either, as there are Sil writings (the Narn & Tuor & his coming to Gondolin among others) which are in the style of LotR, & Appendix B of LotR is in the 'Annalistic' style of the Grey Annals & the Annals of Valinor etc). Only TH is out of place in terms of style, tone & mood - & the mental gymnastics required to make it 'belong' merely prove that.

I'm not saying you can't have TH. I'm saying it doesn't belong in the Legendarium. Sentimental justifications apart I don't see that anyone has offered any convincing arguments for that.