Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man
To change the subject (  ), I found the following comment by Kuruharan on another thread ( Melkor's depiction by artists: Flawed?) interesting in this context:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuruharan
(It is kind of hard to disagree with how Tolkien drew Smaug in my own view)
|
Do we include Tolkien's own drawings and paintings of the peoples and locations of Middle-earth within "Middle-earth Canon"? It seems to me that they clearly fall within the third option on the poll, which refers to his "ideas" being included. Which would mean that any concept of Middle-earth which contradicted any of Tolkien's own illustrations would be non-canonical. |
I certainly do include Tolkien's illustrations as canon; with the caveat that he preferred Pauline Baynes' illustrations to his own, in style and spirit (so to speak.) He seemed to enjoy illustrating without feeling that he had mastered the art of it. I guess the way I see it is that the concepts presented in his artwork are canonical, even if one feels that he didn't quite express that concept as well as another artist might have.
Prime example: in the illustration of the front hall of Bag End-- Bilbo quite clearly has normally-proportioned feet. (Hildrebrants, you missed the boat on that one,
completely.)
I very much appreciate the artists who took Tolkien's basic design or sketch or visual concept, and added detail and polish. For instance, Nasmith's
"The Last Sight" of Hobbiton in the dark is a stunning makeover of Tolkien's original "The Hill".
Also interesting to note that in "The Last Sight", the hobbits have normally proportioned feet. Well done, Nasmith.