Psychological depth in Tolkien's characters - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Legolas · 11-15-2003, 12:31 AM

I see no specific argument for a case other than Aiwendil/lindil's general statement that Tolkien does this, but I don't believe that this is the case with Tolkien's work. In such a long work, there is definitely a requirement of correlating information found in different chapters, but as for other sources, I'm not so sure. I find little (nothing?) in The Lord of the Rings that actually requires the reader to step into a different book (Is that the point that was being made?). It seems to me that every conflict emphasized in the book (as a major or minor sequence in the plot) to be explained sufficiently within the book itself.

There are a number of details in The Silmarillion or Unfinished Tales that may enhance a reader's understanding of the events of The Hobbit and/or The Lord of the Rings, but Tolkien does not depend on this 'outside' knowledge to get his points across within the latter works. He couldn't, even, because these outside stories were not complete (or even close to complete) at the time of the others' publication.

One does not have to read the chapter on the Istari in UT to understand what the wizards are up to or what sort of role Gandalf is there to play. A read of The Silmarillion is not required to understand what the elves are dealing with. Their immortality and tendency to be preservers is presented enough within the Third Age books. The 'outside' books undoubtedly enhance the experience (or at least further understanding of what's going on in the grand scope of this history), but they are not depended upon.

[ November 15, 2003: Message edited by: Legolas ]

11-15-2003, 12:31 AM	#11
Legolas A Northern Soul Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Valinor Posts: 1,847	I see no specific argument for a case other than Aiwendil/lindil's general statement that Tolkien does this, but I don't believe that this is the case with Tolkien's work. In such a long work, there is definitely a requirement of correlating information found in different chapters, but as for other sources, I'm not so sure. I find little (nothing?) in The Lord of the Rings that actually requires the reader to step into a different book (Is that the point that was being made?). It seems to me that every conflict emphasized in the book (as a major or minor sequence in the plot) to be explained sufficiently within the book itself. There are a number of details in The Silmarillion or Unfinished Tales that may enhance a reader's understanding of the events of The Hobbit and/or The Lord of the Rings, but Tolkien does not depend on this 'outside' knowledge to get his points across within the latter works. He couldn't, even, because these outside stories were not complete (or even close to complete) at the time of the others' publication. One does not have to read the chapter on the Istari in UT to understand what the wizards are up to or what sort of role Gandalf is there to play. A read of The Silmarillion is not required to understand what the elves are dealing with. Their immortality and tendency to be preservers is presented enough within the Third Age books. The 'outside' books undoubtedly enhance the experience (or at least further understanding of what's going on in the grand scope of this history), but they are not depended upon. [ November 15, 2003: Message edited by: Legolas ] __________________ ...take counsel with thyself, and remember who and what thou art.