Tolkien Estate blocks new Tolkien book

[davem]

Originally Posted by Angie G

What prevented publication was, in effect, the belief on the part of TE that we were not to refer IN ANY WAY to any fact, feeling, comment, belief or incident that was referred to in any letter by JRR. As the book was about his relationship with his brother, the situatiion became untenable.

Hardly anything shocking, or actually ''unusual' (in that we have seen plenty of books about the relationship between a famous person & a family member or close friend). And nothing that impinges on the privacy of any living person. And Copyright law being used to prevent facts which could not 'harm' any family member from being made public.

I've gone over the top in some of my comments, but put simply, I find the behaviour of the Estate quite appalling, & little better than book burning (yes - that is me not going over the top - if anyone wants to explain how this differs morally from burning books simply because you don't like the facts they contain please enlighten me). Nothing 'shocking' or 'intrusive' included in the books, so this is simply an example of a large, wealthy organisation destroying the hard work of decent people out of sheer pettiness, & attempting to conceal the (entirely harmless) truth about two people who have been dead more than a quarter of a century.

When publication of other books has been prevented by the Estate (the recent one on Tolkien's translation of the Book of Jonah, & Drout's on Tolkien's Beowulf) I've been inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt, but, sorry, no longer. They begin not to look like the inheritors of the work of JRR Tolkien (Elves, & Hobbits, Dragons & Magical Rings, that sense of wonder which transformed the world for us readers) but a big corporate entity which likes to throw its weight around & shout 'Don't touch my stuff!'. Lost all respect for them.

[Nerwen]

So, davem, is this you backing down on your previous theory?

[davem]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

So, davem, is this you backing down on your previous theory?

(had to remove your smiley so I could use three of my own...)

Did I have a 'theory'?

I think I only went so far as saying 'At worst it will be something mildly embarassing such as......(& then made up some daft scenario as an example of such). Does seem like I was wrong about the Estate not caring about 'bland' stuff about Ronald & Hilary being published & so it must have been something 'significant' - seems it wasn't 'significant' in any 'bad' sense (ie something that would impinge on the privacy of any family member still alive, or reveal anything untoward about either of the brothers). I kind of hoped it would be something like that because then at least I could have understood their behaviour - even if I disagreed with it. However, it looks like they are just being petty & obstructive & pretty heartless overall.

Or to put it another way, previously I would have assigned the Estate to The Shire. Now I think they should be assigned to Orthanc, but heading East....

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by davem

I've gone over the top in some of my comments, but put simply, I find the behaviour of the Estate quite appalling, & little better than book burning (yes - that is me not going over the top - if anyone wants to explain how this differs morally from burning books simply because you don't like the facts they contain please enlighten me). Nothing 'shocking' or 'intrusive' included in the books, so this is simply an example of a large, wealthy organisation destroying the hard work of decent people out of sheer pettiness, & attempting to conceal the (entirely harmless) truth about two people who have been dead more than a quarter of a century.

...Lost all respect for them.

Hear, hear! I've already posted my disdain for this contemptible act on the part of TE in this thread. I just wanted to reiterate it.

Done.

[davem]

I know we've all absorbed the message that we should be grateful to Christopher Tolkien for making his father's unpublished writings available & obviously we've gained a massive amount through the work he's done. That said, it could equally be argued that he has been very restrictive in terms of what he has allowed to be published & over who has had access to it.

This really comes down to JRR Tolkien's status as a writer - was Tolkien simply another fantasy author, or should he be ranked alongside the literary giants of the 20th century? If, as I think, Tolkien was a major literary artist then there's a very big question mark over the way access to his archive is being restricted. Full access is unlikely to be granted for many years - if at all, given that much of it is in the form of manuscripts/letters/diaries in the possession of the family. Even when it is out of copyright it could still remain locked away in perpetuo. In other words, I'm beginning to have my doubts as to whether these documents will ever be bequeathed to the nation/a museum. If, as some individuals/organisations are pushing for, copyright is extended still further - some even wanting it extended indefinitely - then we could see even the documents in possession of others (as with these letters to Hilary Tolkien) never seeing the light of day.

If we had a situation where copyright ran in such a way, & an archive of unpublished personal papers/poems/plays by, say, Shakespeare was in the possession of one person, who only published what he wanted, when he wanted, in the form he wanted (with whatever excisions he decided on) & only allowed access to the rest of the archive to those he 'approved' of (whether these were the best/most informed/most competent individuals or not), & laid down draconian restrictions on what they could publish, & in some cases agreeing to permit publication & then changing his mind, how 'grateful' would we feel? Somewhat, given that without his authorisation we would have nothing at all, but also we'd be quite seriously miffed (imo) that the work of a literary artist of major significance was accessible only at the whim of this copyright holder.

To use copyright law in this way - to actually prevent an author discussing the relationship between two long dead brothers (with the full permission of the family of one of those brothers), when nothing intrusive or hurtful is involved, is pretty much beyond shocking - to the point that I'm starting to feel that any writer or academic that has to do with the Estate at the present time should seriously examine their consciences.

[davem]

It might be interesting to discuss Christopher Tolkien's approach to his father's work - of course, JRRT handed the unpublished material to Christopher to do with as he would, but what he has done with it has been very interesting. Some years back I started a thread 'Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes...' http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showthread.php?t=11338 on the changes made to the 50th anniversary edition of LotR. These were fairly significant in some ways, quite minor in others, but in total they run to between 300-400 alterations to the text. There is also a new index compiled by Hammond & Scull replacing the one authorised by JRRT himself - all (obviously) without the permission of the author. This re-writing of posthumous works is questionable from an artistic pov - & says a great deal about CT's attitude to his father's work. On a personal level I don't like the new editions (more for the approach taken by CT & the editors than for the final product - though as I've argued in the earlier thread there are some changes that I feel are simply wrong artistically & without any real justification - my initial post from that thread:

Ok, now, the obvious response would be that the published version is correct - ‘the Elves do not count the running years’, but in the 50th Anniversary edition, just published, the original version is reinstated, & in that edition the Elves are back to not needing to count the years.

Based on the assumption that this is to stand as the ‘official’ version of the text from now on - the changes have been authorised by CT himself, & the new HB edition of LotR, out in December, will carry the 50th anniversary text (& we can assume that all subsequent HB & PB version will do the same) - what effect does this have?

First, I suppose we have to ask whether Tolkien saw do & need as meaning the same thing. Almost certainly he didn’t: he was a Professor of English, & would have known the two words have completely different connotations. To say the Elves do not do ‘X’ is not the same as saying they need not do ‘X’’. ‘Do not’ is emphatic, it implies that they never count the running years. Why? Because of some agreement (tacit or otherwise) among them? Because their brains function differently from those of other races, & they ‘can’t’ count the running years? Because they’ve lost the knack?

Whatever, Legolas, for the last fifty years, has been telling us that ‘the Elves do not count the running years’. From now on, because of a change not authorised by Tolkien, he will tell us that ‘the Elves do not need to count the running years’.

Not needing to do something implies a choice in the matter - the individual Elf is free to decide whether he or she will count the running years or not.

Ok, you may argue, this is not as great a change as replacing do with need in other situations - Gandalf’s letter to Frodo, for instance, if :

was replaced by: ‘You need not use it again. You need not travel by night’?

But is it that simple?

Yet, if Tolkien, in reading over CT’s fair copy of the manuscript, wrote in do rather than need, why would he do that? Had he had second thoughts, & decided that do expressed his understanding of the Elves’ experience of time better than the original need did - the chapter was still in flux after all? Or was he simply in a rush & didn’t bother to check the original notes (this is CT’s explanation).

For myself, not only do I think that the ‘original’ version sounds better in the context of Legolas’ explanation (need sounds too ‘speculative’ - not really much of an ‘explanation’ at all - he seems effectively to be saying ‘This might be the reason or it might not’), but it also goes against my own understanding of the position the Elves are in at the end of the Third Age - basically, it gives them too much control over their situation, by implying that they can make choices over their ‘perceptions’, which really implies they can choose the way they think about the world, & that to a great degree they could fit in & adapt - they need not be isolated, they need not leave Middle-earth.

Its this increased implication of having a choice in the matter which makes me uncomfortable in this change from [‘i]do[/i] not’ to ‘need not’. My own sense is that even if it was a choice originally not to count the running years, by the end of the Third Age it was a matter of choice no longer - the Elves did not count the running years any longer’

(Whatever Christopher Tolkien may say.)

[LadyBrooke]

Well now that I’m properly paranoid about writing my paper about LotR and Tolkien for European History, here’s my thoughts:

First about copyright:

Originally Posted by Boromir88

I believe the UK laws are virtually identical. In the US, anything created after 1978 the copyright lasts during the duration of the author's life + 70 years. Same goes for anything created, but unpublished before 1978.

So, it does appear like we'll have a while yet to wait.

To my very limited understanding it is the same. Which means that it will be some time in 2043 before copyright expires if the current laws are kept. As time goes on I think we’ll probably see more pressure being put on the government to extend copyright’s far past the time they currently are which will anger many people but the corporations are the ones that have the lobbying money.

The primary thing of interest to me is the fact that its not even scandalous. Why should it matter then that the authors want to portray two brothers’ relationship? I am fairly certain that nothing in that book could be any worse then what my classmates and I wrote in our papers last term. In fact, my peers would probably prefer me to find something scandalous about Tolkien - the joys of having AP classes with teenage boys whose idea of history is unsubstantiated rumors about Catherine the Great. Of course those were written about people and events prior to 1800.

So, why is our culture so accepting of people long dead being remembered primarily for their scandals, but we are accepting of certain public figures who died just a short time ago having their reputations protected by their families. And why are we so willing to allow the Tolkien estate in particular to protect J.R.R. Tolkien’s memory? I have a strong disliking of historical figures being white washed. I don’t want to hear about somebody who was perfect. I want to hear about the real human being.

And now I’m going to go freak out about copyright laws and my paper.

[Bêthberry]

Just saw this on The Tolkien Shop and thought davem would be interested in it.

It is a photocopy of Tolkien's last will and testament and it is for sale. Of its contents:

Photocopy of the last will and testament Tolkien had made in July 1973, six weeks before he died. In it we get details on his wealth, his donations and under which conditions Christopher became his literary executor. Tolkien signed each page of the will. Prefaced with the proof that the document was registered in the District Probate Registry of the High Court of Justice at Oxford.

I don't know anything about the site.

[Morthoron]

Hmmm...Ten pounds for a photocopy -- what a deal! Now, is it a numbered photocopy where only a certain amount were copied and then the will was destroyed?

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

Just saw this on The Tolkien Shop and thought davem would be interested in it.

It is a photocopy of Tolkien's last will and testament and it is for sale. Of its contents:



I don't know anything about the site.

A will becomes a public document when probate is granted. Anyone can get a copy for a fiver.