|
 |
|
Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: Canonicity means: | |||
| The author's published works, during his lifetime |
   
|
3 | 15.00% |
| The author's published works including those edited/published posthumously |
  
|
5 | 25.00% |
| ALL of the author's works, notes, letters, and ideas, published or not, conflicting or not |
  
|
9 | 45.00% |
| What the reading community says is Canon |
  
|
0 | 0% |
| What the BarrowDowns community says is Canon |
  
|
1 | 5.00% |
| What the critics say is Canon |
  
|
0 | 0% |
| Canon is whatever I, the reader, want it to be |
|
1 | 5.00% |
| Something completely (or slightly) different [if you choose this last option, please explain yourself in the thread. Thank you] |
|
1 | 5.00% |
| Voters: 20. You may not vote on this poll | |||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
08-21-2005, 01:38 PM
|
#1 |
|
A Mere Boggart
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: under the bed
Posts: 4,737
 |
In terms of the whole Tolkien canon it is the works which deal with Middle-earth which have the highest 'value' if such a price could be placed on his texts. We read and enjoy works like Smith etc. but like it or not we do use these texts to apply what they say to our own understanding of Tolkien's Middle-earth creation. The Hobbit ought not to be used in this way; to use it as source material to define our understanding of the 'serious' work does denigrate it. Why should it not be used in this way? Simply because it is part of the Middle-earth story. It is where we first meet many of the characters and gain our first understanding of that world. Whether or not Tolkien was successful at fitting it into the Legendarium is beside the point as try to fit it in he did. Which indicates that in Tolkien's opinion it is part of the Legenadrium, however clumsily or not it fits.
__________________
Gordon's alive!
|
|
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
|
|
Hybrid Mode
