Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes... - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

davem · 02-05-2006, 07:27 AM

I've just got the new 3 volume 50th Anniversary edition of LotR & in Return of the King there's a revised index (this wasn't in the 2004 50th Anniversary edition but is entirely new).

Hammond & Scull have started from scratch & the new index is 38 pages long, as opposed to 24 pages in the original. What I'm wondering is whether the original index, which Tolkien agreed on (it was actually prepared by Nancy Smith & revised by Tolkien) should be considered part of the text itself & therefore not touched, or whether it is supplimmentary, & not to be considered 'canonical'?

We didn't do a thread on the Index in the CbC discussion, but should we have? This is another example of something being excised from the original & replaced by 'experts' - who have their hearts in the right place, no doubt. As the editors say, the old index was in many ways unsatisfactory, but it was the Index Tolkien gave us, it was his work (as reviser at least), & we can only assume that it is now lost for good, as all new editions will contain the new one.

Any thoughts - or am i just being an old pedant?

02-05-2006, 07:27 AM	#40
davem Illustrious Ulair Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties Posts: 4,240	I've just got the new 3 volume 50th Anniversary edition of LotR & in Return of the King there's a revised index (this wasn't in the 2004 50th Anniversary edition but is entirely new). Hammond & Scull have started from scratch & the new index is 38 pages long, as opposed to 24 pages in the original. What I'm wondering is whether the original index, which Tolkien agreed on (it was actually prepared by Nancy Smith & revised by Tolkien) should be considered part of the text itself & therefore not touched, or whether it is supplimmentary, & not to be considered 'canonical'? We didn't do a thread on the Index in the CbC discussion, but should we have? This is another example of something being excised from the original & replaced by 'experts' - who have their hearts in the right place, no doubt. As the editors say, the old index was in many ways unsatisfactory, but it was the Index Tolkien gave us, it was his work (as reviser at least), & we can only assume that it is now lost for good, as all new editions will contain the new one. Any thoughts - or am i just being an old pedant? __________________ “Everything was an object. If you killed a dwarf you could use it as a weapon – it was no different to other large heavy objects."