[Bêthberry]

EDIT: I'm glad to see davem's posts have been restored.

Originally Posted by nerwen

. . . (I will say, though, that I find your equation of demanding the removal of material from a book with burning every copy of it to be a fairly notable bit of hyperbole.)

More to the point is whether the suppression of scandalous, or at least embarrassing, facts is "what is being done here". Now, as far as my memory of it goes* you spent the thread talking yourself into being totally convinced it was– you started out with an "if" and ended up with a "must"–

I do believe you've met your match, davem.

Originally Posted by davem

. . . if that material in question was completely bland then the Estate would not care if it was out there, & the writers/publishers would not feel that the book could not be published without it.

Not necessarily. There could well be a principled insistence that any aspect of personal lives, especially those which have no immediate, direct bearing on literary concerns, is of no concern to readers. It doesn't matter whether the information is positive, embarassing, scandalous, or banal. The point is simply, any and all personal information. And the authors could feel that it is important to produce a picture of normal family life that has been omitted from other bios. It doesn't have to be nefarious.

I could (were I that way inclined) argue that I seem to be the only party even attempting to ask what the nature of this material is - no-one else seems even vaguely interested. And that is something that has puzzled me all through this thread - why is no-one else even curious about what it could be . . .

Well now, I can guess what that "m" stands for on your screen name, davem--martyr.

Actually, as I have stated previously, anyone who attended Oxonmoot has seen some of this stuff, so our curiousity is satisfied. *imagine winking smilie here as I've used up my quota of smilies*

. . . but no-one is even attempting to get at what the issue might be. There are letters which the Estate will not allow to be quoted - or paraphased - & they are requesting 20 pages of the book concerning this material be removed. And no-one seems the slightest bit curious about the whole thing. No-one seems any more bothered about it than to state 'well, they are being a bit obstructive'.

I guess you are that way inclined. (see above quote) *imagine rolled eyes here*

My argument all along has been that (as far as I'm concerned) preventing the publication of a work of scholarship is a serious matter (& I'm fairly certain Tolkien himself would agree with that statement - even though he might not approve of the publication of this particular work - who knows (certainly not us now....)) & requires more than the vague statement 'Its our stuff, so nerrrr!'

I'm actually very angry about this behaviour on the part of the Estate - anyone who prevents books being published better have a very good reason - & I don't think the Estate has provided one.

There is an inherent contradition or conflict in the Estate, as no one has explained what to do should there be a genuine literary reason for publishing something when the holder of the copyright also has a personal vested interest in withholding the information. This is also the reason why biographies or letters which are "authorised" come, whether justified or not, with at least a wiff of suspicion. This pertains to all cases and not simply the one we are discussing here.

And now, back to my previous statement that I shall have nothing further to say because I have nothing new to add. *insert smilie laughing at myself*