Canon: what ARE we babbling about?

[davem]

Originally Posted by Mr U

Now try making your explanation of why TH isn't a Middle-earth book to a schoolboy and see which one is more strained and convoluted.

I'm not sure how that's relevant. There are lots of true things which are not easily explicable to schoolchildren.

On our side is the opinion of the author himself that TH was an integral part of his world, as well as connections of plot, character, geography, and history. Sorry, but if you want to see The Hobbit excluded from the Legendarium, the burden of a convincing argument falls on your shoulders. TH is self-evidently a book which takes place in and is about Middle-earth. The only "evidence" you've presented to the contrary is yours and Flieger's opinion about its tone and style.

The 'historical' references in TH are few & are only there - as Tolkien stated - to give a sense of historical 'depth'. I didn't just offer 'tone & style' - I offered the out of character behaviour of Elves, Dwarves, Trolls (& of Gnadalf himself come to that).

It perhaps wasn't begun as part of the Sil saga, but that quickly
changed.

This is untrue, or at least misleading. Tolkien did not complete TH and then later attempt to integrate it into the world of the Sil. It was drawn into the world of the Sil as he wrote.

No, it didn't - that's what happened with LotR. TH from beginning to end was never part of the Legendarium, & its sequel 'The New Hobbit' was not part of the Legendarium when Tolkien began it. Only when LotR became the culmination of the Legendarium did Tolkien feel it was necessary to find a way to make TH fit. Again, I'd offer Anderson's Annotated Hobbit & HoMe 6 as proof of that.

Davem. However many times you restate your argument, you are not going to convince me. Nor, I suspect, the majority of contributors to this thread.

I'm not looking to convince anyone.