Canon: what ARE we babbling about?

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by davem

So is Roverandom part of the Middle-earth canon? .

No, it is part of Tolkien's canon.

EDIT:

Originally Posted by davem

And, let's not forget that the main reason LotR is dismissed by so many critics as a 'children's' book is because it is read in the light if TH. From that perspective TH may have done more harm to Tolkien's literary reputation than good.

Hmm. This must be yours (or Flieger's ?) interpretation, but that is not the full story of critical appraisal of Tolkien.

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by davem

So is Roverandom part of the Middle-earth canon?

I have never read Roverandom, but I’m guessing that it does not (and was never intended to) form part of the “History of Middle-earth” and therefore that it does not. Although I must say that talking dogs are not a far cry from sentient foxes and eagles. Perhaps we should excise the fox from LotR for not “fitting” the tone of the rest of the story.

Originally Posted by davem

TH was never written to be part of the Legendarium & Tolkien had to rewrite it to make it fit even as weakly as it does.

The point is, though, that he did deliberately make it part of the Legendarium, even if that was not his intention at the outset. Should we not therefore bow to authorial intent and accept it as such?

It’s your opinion that it fits only weakly, and you are obviously entitled to it. But, from what has been said so far, others are clearly of a different opinon. For my part, I do not see the expanations that Helen, HI and Lalwendë have given as being over-elaborate. The explanation that Bilbo was exagerrating much of it, however, I do find unconvincing. Bilbo the whimsical I can accept. Bilbo as Walter Mitty I cannot.