Canon: what ARE we babbling about?

[mark12_30]

Originally Posted by obloquy

The Canon is built from all extant writings. It contains all concepts that do not conflict with either tone or letter of the rest of the canon: for example, we cannot consider The Hobbit strictly canonical due to anomalies (or abandoned ideas). With regard to The Hobbit, it is important to view the story as an embellished or fanciful adventure novel from Bilbo's perspective.

Here was the departure from the discussion of canon to the discussion of tone and conflicts.

Saucie and I disagree that The Hobbit is any less canonical because it has a more whimsical style. Bilbo is just a more whimsical hobbit. Shall we imagine what LotR would have been like had it been penned entirely by Sam? Or Pippin? But though the tone would have been quite different, the tale would not have been less "MIddle-Earth", or less from "The Perilous Realm".

Edit: On the changes to The Hobbit: I think they were brilliant. It turns the whole thing into a living tale. "I have Bilbo's *original* version that he told the dwarves! Cool!"