21st Century Tolkien

[Lalwendë]

What is the future of Tolkien and Tolkien fandom?

Tolkien's creation has now spawned films, fan fiction, graphic novels, computer games, toys, enough books to fill a small library, many websites, a musical, maybe an entire sub-culture? To me, there now seems to be a whole Tolkien industry.

Of course, there must be the enormous profits made by manufacturers of toys, posters, pens, PlayStation games, mugs, keyrings etc generated by the films. But it is not only the films which generated profit. I know a lot of us eagerly snap up the book-based board games, and there are also book-based toys (even a Barrow-Wight!) and large amounts of paraphernalia such as Tolkien art posters, cards and figurines to collect.

People are making small fortunes on sites like e-bay selling everything from first editions of The Hobbit to plastic cups with film promo pictures on. Even first editions of HoME and copies of Amon Hen (Tolkien Society journal) are now seriously expensive and rare.

There are the conventions which have grown to epic proportions in terms of size (and cost). The Tolkien Society Oxonmoot used to meet in a pub, so I understand. Last year they had five days of it in Birmingham with people from all over the world attending and I'm sure I wasn't the only one overawed by it all.

But this new industry even includes the enormous associated fame of academics such as Verlyn Flieger, who attracted a huge queue of people wanting her autograph at Tolkien 2005, and Tom Shippey who was indeed listened to with reverential awe as one of the newspapers reported. Books signed by the academics reach high prices on e-bay, never mind books signed by Tolkien himself!

I thought that the machine might have stopped rolling once the films had passed into memory, but it seems to have taken new forms. Games Workshop might now be losing money on their LOTR gaming figures, but go into Forbidden Planet in London and they have an entire separate section devoted to Tolkien books; they had more of these than they had of Star Wars books.

Can all this continue?

For those of us who remember the years before the films, being a Tolkien fan back then was a strange experience. This was also pre-Internet. I did not know of the Tolkien Society, I only occasionally met other Tolkien fans. Yet now I am on the Downs, and we have this large community (just one community amongst many others), and we even seem to have factions in this community, e.g. Non-Wingers, Pro-Pointy-Ears etc. Not only can I now find fellow fans, but certain types of fan. This was just not possible a few years ago.

What do you think? Has the nature of fandom changed? If so, has it been a good change? Have the numbers of fans increased? Will we all still be rabid fans in 10 years time? 20 years?

[Hilde Bracegirdle]

Has the nature of fandom changed? I don't think the book fans have changed radically, though I only knew a handful before finding the Downs.

If so, has it been a good change? It is a bit of frighteningly diverse and large crowd these days!

Have the numbers of fans increased? In view of the movies, I think so.

Will we all still be rabid fans in 10 years time? 20 years? Speaking for myself, I know I'm still the same fan I was 20+ years ago, and plan to be for 20+ more.

The internet has been a wonderful tool for finding information and so forth, but I'm not fond of the commercialism that has been introduced in RL.

[Rhod the Red]

I think it can continue, perhaps expanded by a movie for The Hobbit.

[Thinlómien]

I think there will never be a time when there weren't Tolkien fans. Some of us have been fans for decades, some have been fans for half of their lifetime. I can't believe such people would never drop Arda or LotR from their lives. I (belonging to the second category I mentioned) wouldn't, for one. Of course there are surely some (movie) fans who may have read the book that will forgot it in near future, if they already haven't.

After all we devoted fans of this time lie peacefully in our graves, there is a new generation walking on Earth. But surely some of them have found Tolkien and taken his books into their hearts.

Tolkien's works have such an ability to alllure readers, that as long as there exists copies of them in some form, and someone reads them, there will be people who love them and become fans.

[goldfinger]

I don't think the fans will die off. I didn't even know anything about LotR or Tolkien until the movies came and there was a huge amount of fans before those movies even came out.

[ninja91]

As long as there are people like us who keep the fire alive, Tolkien and his works will never fade. Fans will come and go, but the flow of topics, mysteries, and excitement of Middle-Earth will never run dry.

I think that no matter what kind of fangirl we are we are still all Lord of the Rings fans and that should be respected.
Though I sometimes do get annoyed when someone misspells the names or laughs at me for reading Tolkien's original.

[Hookbill the Goomba]

Originally Posted by frodoHarrypotter

Though I sometimes do get annoyed when someone misspells the names

Watch that tong, there are dyslexics present.

The future of Tolkien may be interesting. I am looking forward to film versions of his other works, imagine a Roverandom film! Of course, films aside, the books themselves always have and we would hope always will spark an interest and spark the imagination of the world.
Even those who are not particularly fans of his work admit that he is a significant author who deserves respect amongst scholars of mythology and Anglo-Saxon. His essay on Feairy tales is remarkable and many have taken deep interest in feairy after reading it (I know I certainly did).

The more dedicated fans of Tolkien will most certainly continue! I know that the lecturer I will have the pleaser of being taught by next year at University is a Tolkien fan and scholar. I shall first have to discover his opinion on wings...
When one looks at the dramatisations of Tolkien's work: The Lord of the Rings, the Hobbit, Tales from the Perilous realm and others have been done by the BBC in particular. I like to imagine some of these becoming Television dramatisations at the least. (I say this because I once had a dream that BBC One was going to show a dramatization of Leaf by Niggle ).

Of course, if Malbeth the Seer were here, we might know all the better.

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Hookbill

The more dedicated fans of Tolkien will most certainly continue! I know that the lecturer I will have the pleaser of being taught by next year at University is a Tolkien fan and scholar. I shall first have to discover his opinion on wings...

Are you going to Central Lancashire?

I wonder if, after all the hype of the films, we are soon due for a period again when Tolkien will once more be unfashionable as his work seemed to be during the 80s, which followed the initial fandom of the 60s/70s. We are still in the post-film period where other fantasy films are being made and marketed, as they will for a few more years as the LOTR films have stirred a thirst for such films, but as the quality of these films inevitably declines, will the currently high star of fantasy fall a little?

I know that one of the big LOTR film fan conventions was cancelled last year, as interest was lower than expected. Yet last year we had Tolkien 2005 and now Tolkien's Oxford, the fabulously expensive convention run by Second Spring. Of course, Oxonmoot continues as ever. Is it that the fandom has now matured as those who loved the films have moved on to the books?

I think that sites such as the Downs have helped foster a deeper interest in the books, and in pursuing questons at a more in depth level. Had the Internet not existed during the period the films were out I wonder whether fans would have found as many ways to form communities? Its the community aspect that keeps us going and maintains our interest. Just when you think there is nothing more that is new to say, someone comes out with a good point or challenging theory. Without the net we would never have that.

Is Tolkien fandom being kept going and increased by the Internet alone?

[Hookbill the Goomba]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Are you going to Central Lancashire?

Liverpool John Moors, my lady. I'm studying Imaginative writing.

As with any random spurred on by films, time will filter out the passing interested and the dedicated. Take the Barrow Downs, for a start, I'm sure there was a mass influx of members during the initial film period, yet how many of those are still fans, I wonder.
There will always be geeks, of course, proud and strong!
Apparently, (someone will have to correct me if I am wrong), there was, once upon a time (and still is, as far as I am aware), courses one could take a university course in Tolkien, or at least a part of a course was concerned with his writings. I only assume this is still going on as I still hear of people being Tolkien scholars.

The Internet has expanded the fandom, I will agree. Or perhaps, the once segregated and far sundered Tolkien groups and fans are here being brought together. I am sad not to have been a part of the pre film fandom in any big way (in my defence, I did read The Hobbit before the films came out).

Time will tell.

[Bêthberry]

Internet forums ebb and flow, like the tides of the moon. They are never static, but in some form of flux, even those with conscientious moderators and admins.

I suspect that any forum has a shelf life of about two years--the pounding of the surf changes the shore line as much as each wave has its own hight and depth. Within that length of time, enough members will leave and enough new members come online that the community and its interests subtly or not so subtly change. Groups and sub-groups form, sometimes great divides are wrenched open, sometimes just the same questions get asked again in different forms and with different perspectives. Time was on the Downs that Books and N & N were the busiest forums, now it is Mirth. Both pop and the internet are disposable cultures for instant gratification (which is not to denigrate them) so it isn't surprising that people come and go and topics surge up and down. People age too and after five years people's interests can change. You can surf the crests or tumble in the troughs; you can swim or float idly or just build sand castles at the edge of the shore; but water remains a shapeless medium--at least in either a liquid or gaseous state. And who wants to be as inflexible as ice--unless it is to tinkle in a cooling beverage?

[davem]

Bear with me while I digress.

The last five years have been my most intense period of interest in Tolkien. I first read LotR nearly 30 years ago & after about seven years, in which I read TH, The Sil, UT every year (& BoLT 1&2 once) I drifted into fairly regular readings of LotR & TH & TS & UT occaisionally, along with regular listenings to the BBC adaptation.

It was, ironically, the appearance of the movies which inspired me to get into Tolkien seriously, since when I've read HoM-e through & collected 60+ volumes of 'Tolkieniana', been to Oxonmooot & stood by Tolkien's grave 3 times, spent 5 days at an international Tolkien conference in Birmingham, joined the Down's & met someone who's changed my life.

Whether my interest will continue at this level I've no idea. I'll never not be a lover of Tolkien's work, but I suspect that as the general interest fades (& hence the books & conferences disappears) I'll drift back into my 'simpler' approach, which I think I really preferred in a way. You can analyse things to death.

So, my feeling is that Tolkien will become increasingly accepted in academic circles as a 'serious' writer as the years pass, but I'll probably drift back to TH & LotR every year or so, along with the BBC series, & the rest of the collection will probably find its way onto a bookcase in a back room to be taken down occasionally to check some obscure 'fact'.

I'm looking forward to it, in a way.....

[tom bombariffic]

I know that the lecturer I will have the pleaser of being taught by next year at University is a Tolkien fan and scholar

Sounds good, they seem to be everywhere. My tutor was even taught by Tolkien himself at Oxford! Needless to say he's an absolute hero. One of the world's leading authorities on Old Norse they say...

To bring this back to the topic, I'd say to find the answer, just look at the member list. Hundreds of people on it come, post a dozen times and never return. However, there is a dedicated section of fans who stick around, and I think there always will be. Therefore, I'd say that the nature of fandom has changed, but only in that it is on average more widespread and less fanatic. Once you get to the centre though, it's the same as ever.

bombariffic

[Nogrod]

Even though this is somewhat personal, I think this will also say something of a more general nature.

My father read us the LotR when we were children - we never got finished, but that made me read the stuff myself. That was in the 70's.

I went to see Roy Bakshi's animation when it came to the theatres and I surely was impressed. That was the early 80's.

I read the books (LotR, Hobbit, Silm.) to my children as they were 4-6 year-old. They have been hooked ever since - Lommy particularly (her little sister will not join the BD on priciple as we two - on her mind - are too enthusiastic with it ). That was the 90's - and is today.

Now Lommy has persuaded me to come here - and I just have loved my time around. I admit being most taken by the RPG's and WW'ing, but the other threads have been interesting too, truly.

Anyhow, there seems to be different kinds of people posting in here as Bêthberry noted. I'm not good at the Tolkien trivia, and I admit it. Still I have read the books a couple of times and have my own impression of them from the decades before the PJ-films and I love them! I love Tolkien's world and I'm not hesitant to say this. It's so great to see a community of this kind! This is just how it should be!

And to try to answer Lalwende's opening question: yes, there are different generations of Tolkien-lovers. And we should not ignore those who have taken their first glimpse of the "Tolkien world" via the movies by PJ. How do these people differ from those who got into Tolkien in the 60's because of their friends and Led Zeppelin? That was the popular culture of the time.... or people like me, being read the stories on my childhood? We "elders" shouldn't discrace people getting interested on Tolkien just because they got interested in him / his works via Hollywood, unlike we did?

I just love the internet-age. There wouldn't be a Barrow Downs without it...

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by davem

Bear with me while I digress.

The last five years have been my most intense period of interest in Tolkien. I first read LotR nearly 30 years ago & after about seven years, in which I read TH, The Sil, UT every year (& BoLT 1&2 once) I drifted into fairly regular readings of LotR & TH & TS & UT occaisionally, along with regular listenings to the BBC adaptation.

It was, ironically, the appearance of the movies which inspired me to get into Tolkien seriously, since when I've read HoM-e through & collected 60+ volumes of 'Tolkieniana', been to Oxonmooot & stood by Tolkien's grave 3 times, spent 5 days at an international Tolkien conference in Birmingham, joined the Down's & met someone who's changed my life.

Whether my interest will continue at this level I've no idea. I'll never not be a lover of Tolkien's work, but I suspect that as the general interest fades (& hence the books & conferences disappears) I'll drift back into my 'simpler' approach, which I think I really preferred in a way. You can analyse things to death.

So, my feeling is that Tolkien will become increasingly accepted in academic circles as a 'serious' writer as the years pass, but I'll probably drift back to TH & LotR every year or so, along with the BBC series, & the rest of the collection will probably find its way onto a bookcase in a back room to be taken down occasionally to check some obscure 'fact'.

I'm looking forward to it, in a way.....

Ah, davem has turned the thread into a soppy moment now.

...but I'm not so sure the collection will find its way into a back room now it has taken all that effort to reorganise the shelves.

I suppose from that respect I've had two phases of being a mad fan, first in the early/mid 80s and then in more recent years. As soon as it became news that the films were coming out I would get asked about them by friends - what they were about and so on. So of course I had to do more reading to make sure I gave them the right answers, and had to find good arguments when someone woulnd me up about 'Legless' and 'Bilblob' and so on... Of course this time around two things have been different. Firstly, I have the money to buy the peripheral books instead of having to get them from the library. Secondly, I have the net and the opportunity to talk to people who do not wind me up about 'Legless'!

I have no doubt that my interest will not diminish. It never has. But I also have the reason that Tolkien brought davem to me, and that's as good a reason as any. More soppiness.....

[The Saucepan Man]

I suspect that I have somehow morphed from a Tolkien fan with an interest in surfing the net into a Barrow-Downs fan with an interest in Tolkien - if that makes any sense ...

[Formendacil]

As long as I live, there will be at least one Tolkien fan in the world. Once I'm dead, 'tis my hope and expectation to meet Tolkien- and finally read a complete, authoritative, and canonical Silmarillion.

Meanwhile, here on this Earth, I foresee no end to the Tolkien fandom. There have been enough generations now to prove that it's a fairly timeless tale. We should, with the movies gone, reach a more or less constant plateau of fan numbers (or back to the slower, steady growth of the pre-movie days).

When the Silmarillion and the HoME finally (if ever) go into the Public Domain (an event that, incidentally, I dread...) I suspect that we shall see a number of new Silmarillions on the market. Quite frankly, I don't see that as a bad thing- unless it should confuse beyond reckoning what the "real" Middle-Earth is. And, while I may not like that inevitable befuddlement, I think that Tolkien might rather approve the confusing of tradition and the infusion of new, alien elements... It gives it a greater air of historical tradition. And it'll be fun, if nothing else, to see what people come up with... a complete "Notions Paper", anybody? How about "The Lost Road"? Or "Tal-Elmar"? I predict MANY variations of the "New Shadow".

So, as a bit of a reactionary by nature, I'm not eager to see such things happen (although I must confess that I have asperations- if no more- to put together my own Silmarillion), but they will be exciting times indeed. And even if I dreaded the coming of the movies, I cannot say that they have been for ill...

I also predict more Tolkien movies within my lifetime... though I dare not say when. Certainly a Hobbit. And, hopefully, a whole series on the Silmarillion.

[narfforc]

Every day someone new enters into the world of Faery, walking into Middle-earth can be dangerous you know. It was forty years ago I first met Mr Bilbo Baggins, and my life has never been the same since. So what type of fan (I use the term loosely) am I, well I like to break things down so as to understand things better, here are my observations:

1. 'I read the Hobbit at school, but couldnt get into LotR, the films were ok though'

2. 'I have read LotR, and tried the Silmarillion, but couldnt get passed the first chapter'.
3. 'I have read LotR, Sil, UF and HoME, I have a number of Tolkien related books'.

4. 'I have over 250 Tolkien/and related books (40 copies of LotR), I have 13 swords, 6 helmets, 2 axes, 2 shields, 2 staffs, Nenya Vilya Narya (twice) The Ring of Barahir, one of the Seven, two of the Nine, 10 board games, lots of painted models, oh and two of The One Ring (just in case I lose The Precious). I have read LotR non-stop every day for the last 2yrs, in an attempt to give the world a loving piece of fan parody, I go to fancy dress parties dressed as a blue wizard and everyone asks who am I, to which I reply (To the Ladies) if you guess correctly I will marry you...................

So there you go, and what do we gain from this knowledge, the vast majority of people we meet, will be number 1s, especially when we are drooling. There are quite a few people who are number 2s, and they shrink away from conversations about The Really Big Dark Lord. On this site we encounter numbers 3 and 4, although there are not many number 4s, because if there were, me and the fellow that pulls funny faces at me in my bathroom mirror, might get worried.

On a serious note, I have no worries, I will continue to attend Oxonmoot each year, and there meet new people, every day someone new enters into the world of Faery..................................

[Mister Underhill]

Originally Posted by Lal

But this new industry even includes the enormous associated fame of academics such as Verlyn Flieger, who attracted a huge queue of people wanting her autograph at Tolkien 2005, and Tom Shippey who was indeed listened to with reverential awe as one of the newspapers reported. Books signed by the academics reach high prices on e-bay, never mind books signed by Tolkien himself!

This is probably the thing I like least about modern fandom -- all the critics and the "Tolkien scholars" and the literary and academic acceptance that so many Tolkien fans have craved for so many years. With every twist and turn in the development of the texts traced, every source and inspiration thoroughly analyzed and linked, every Old English allusion and philological inside joke neatly catalogued, every mystery laid bare, Middle-earth sometimes seems to lay there like a roughly dissected corpse.

I have visions of a future in which LotR becomes just another "classic" that kids are forced to read, and for which they'll be taught certain rote interpretations. I liked it better when everybody had their own crackpot theories about and interpretations of Tolkien. They may have been crazy or ill-informed, but they were the readers' interpretations, not the regurgitated views of a handful of scholars.

But maybe I'm just being a nostalgic auld grump. As a Tolkien fan, can you blame me?

[davem]

Originally Posted by Mister Underhill

This is probably the thing I like least about modern fandom -- all the critics and the "Tolkien scholars" and the literary and academic acceptance that so many Tolkien fans have craved for so many years. With every twist and turn in the development of the texts traced, every source and inspiration thoroughly analyzed and linked, every Old English allusion and philological inside joke neatly catalogued, every mystery laid bare, Middle-earth sometimes seems to lay there like a roughly dissected corpse.

I think the commentators can be divided into two classes - the ones who are attempting to analyse Tolkien's work & draw out the meaning & relevance of it in as objective a way as possible, in order that the reader can come to their own understanding - & the ones with an 'agenda', who seek to use the work to confirm & promote their own agenda (showing the 'Christian' sub-text or 'revealing' the 'racist' sub text).

In the first group I'd put Humphrey Carpenter, Verlyn Flieger, Tom Shippey, Michael Drout, et al. In the second, Joseph Pearce, Bradley Birzer, Germaine Greer & others. The first group have contributed immeasurably to Tolkien studies, the second are a nuisance & I'm sure their books will disappear pretty soon.

[Lalwendë]

Even with the Tolkien scholars who are trying to do serious analyses of the work I sometimes feel a slightly bitter taste though. We must remember that they are only readers like we are and despite books, articles and professorships, we do not have to accept their word as law. I did notice that the scholars have fan worshippers of their own when I was at Tolkien 2005 (and fair enough, most of them are highly entertaining speakers, especially Tom Shippey). But few in the audience dared to challenge them in the Q&A sessions. I didn't, even though I occasionally wanted to; it would have drawn sharp intakes of breath, and drawn daggers, I feared!

I wonder if their fellow scholars ever feel slightly jealous of their fame and book sales? I'll bet Tom Shippey makes a tonne more money than his colleagues who may teach less popular topics!

[Estelyn Telcontar]

Tolkien himself used the theme of "change" in his works, so it shouldn't surprise us that his fandom is subject to that. I've been pondering this question and have divided several aspects of development, both general and personal, into Ages. These are not definitive and certainly subject to additions and revisions.

General Tolkien Fandom

First Age - (1950s to early 60s) The books are published and read, mostly in England at first. There are readers, but perhaps not to be called fans as yet.

Second Age - (late 1960s to early 70s) The books are published in paperback in the US, thereby reaching a great number of young people who become enthused fans. Societies are founded, fanzines written, artwork published as calendars, some merchandise is available, though not much. I would set the end of this age in 1973, with Tolkien's death.

Third Age - (70s to 90s) Some of Tolkien's works are published posthumously; especially the Silmarillion excites fans as new material about Middle-earth is now available. The animated movies attract some attention and keep interest in the books alive. HoME is published to satisfy the growing group of Tolkien scholars and experts.

Fourth Age - (2000 to ?) Peter Jackson's movies get a huge amount of publicity and attract new and old fans alike. The internet provides the medium for communication and communities, with discussions, fan fiction and amateur art (and parodies!) being made available to a huge public audience. Tons of merchandise accompany this and are bought by millions of fans. Secondary literature, which has been on the sideline with relatively few readers, booms as well. LotR wins readers' polls in numerous countries.

That last Age is fading now, in my opinion, and I'm sure the Fifth Age of fandom will carry on, but I would not venture to predict what it will be like. Serious scholarship will certainly be a part of it, and Society members will continue to share their ideas. What other new elements might enliven fandom, I have no idea...


Barrow-Downs Fandom

Though the main site, with its various features and games, began earlier, the discussion forum started in 2000. It too has passed through several ages:

First Age - (2000 - 2001) Pre-movie hype, speculation and news; book discussions; close-knit community spirit with relatively few members

Second Age - (2002 - 2004) Movie discussions; continued book discussions, with more details, additional works besides LotR, and secondary literature as topics; fan creativity in role-playing games, fan fiction and art; highest number of members

Third Age - (2005 - ?) Post-movies: CbC and SbS discussions; continued RPing (though less volume and participation); more fun and games, especially the Werewolf craze; continued community feeling with some long-time and some new members


My Personal Fandom

First Age - Introduction to LotR and Hobbit in 1973 by a boyfriend (Wouldn't I like to know if he's still a fan as well?!); loved the book at first read, sighted the first calendar but didn't like it because it didn't jive with my images.

Second Age - Exile: I moved to Germany a few months later, so had no one to whom I could talk about LotR and became a closet fan, rereading it occasionally. Never could warm up to the German translation(s), so neglected reading them to my own children.

Third Age - Movie hype and discovery of the internet fandom. Downs membership, spending hours of time discussing on the forum and in the chat room, leading to involvement as moderator and more creative writing than I'd ever done in my whole life (RPGs and fan fiction). Lots of reading of additional literature, from Sil and UT to biography, Letters, "minor works", HoME and supplementary books. Real life meetings with other members, trip to Oxford and Tolkien's grave, participation in the big international conference in Birmingham (my personal highlight so far!), seeing the movie exhibition, deciding to join the German Tolkien Society and attending some of their functions.

Fourth Age - Coming up, as I see it. My intensive internet involvement is gradually fading; though I'm spending more time in other activities, my personal interest will continue, I will retain my membership in the Tolkien Society and perhaps be involved there to a certain degree; I will most certainly reread the books as time allows, and probably rewatch the movies ditto. I hope that some of the friendships that began online will survive into future years...


I think the interesting thing will be to be surprised by developments we can't foresee now - after all, who would have thought 10 years ago that a blockbuster movie LotR would be so hugely successful?! I think the most important thing we fans can do to keep Middle-earth alive is to fill in the corners of the world that Tolkien created, to be sub-creators ourselves. Then history will become legend, and legend will become myth...

[Azaelia of Willowbottom]

I feel like fandom is already changing. I came on the boat in '01, just before the movies came out.

The arc of my personal fandom goes something like this.

In January of '00, I was fascinated by the covers of the books that a couple of my classmates were reading, and decided to find a copy for myself. At that time I was primarily a Star Wars geek, and mainly into the sort of fast-paced books and movies that sort of fit into that particular genre. The books were, in short, a little too slow for me. I made it all the way through FOTR, but quit at that point. There was a sense of something great there, tantalizing, just out of my reach, but I just wasn't ready for it. I put the copies of the book back on the shelf, feeling vaguely disappointed in myself for not being mature enough to read them.

I then went on and forgot about them. Almost a year passed. I became sick of Star Wars. And then, in November of '01, I saw the trailer for FOTR. I was entranced. (Honestly, in retrospect, Frodo probably had a big part in this. What can I say? I was a 13 year old.) I thought, "Now is the time". So I got my mom's books back out again, and fell into Middle-earth. Every page was exhilerating. I was caught, hook, line, and sinker. I was wandering in Middle-earth, and loving every beautiful second.
Shortly after finishing the books, I hit the internet. I'd been familiar with the Star Wars online community, and it only took a few seconds of thinking to realize that there had to be something out there for LOTR fans. And so I hit google. And found the Barrow-Downs...the first Tolkien forum I joined. Honestly, at first, it was a little much for me. I was a book fan, but I wasn't ready for such complex literary discussion, and everyone seemed so much older than me. I faded into the background, watched and listened, and learned.

The next phase has no determined beginning. Gradually, I got back into the Barrow-Downs, and found that I generally understood everything people were saying, and that I could contribute to discussions. My fandom now is different than it was before. I participate in discussion more. I feel like I know more about Tolkien than I did before. I learned how to write in tengwar, and I've finished the Sil (Except for the last few pages--they're the last new Tolkien thing I'll ever read, so I'm saving them for a special occasion. I'm a little too attached, and I want to save the exhileration of reading new Middle-earth material.) I was never a leggybopper (gasp! no!), but I still appreciate the movies. I am, however, swinging more toward the books at the moment. I go back and forth. Either way, I'm enjoying every minute of the experience.

As for fandom itself, I think we're mostly back the way things were before the movies, numbers-wise. During the movies and the time immediately after, fandom got a huge influx of fans from the movies, many of whom hadn't read the books, and probably never would. There were, however, a handful of them who would read the books, stay on, and become just as knowledgeable on Tolkien as anyone else. People drift in and drift out, but I think that for the most part, the number has stabilized again.

I haven't had time this year for my yearly re-reading of LOTR, but I am planning on starting it again on Wednesday, when I have a half day of school. I haven't seen ROTK or TTT since ROTK went out of the theaters. I am going through Tolkien withdrawal.

Over all, I can't say if all that has happened was good for fandom or not, but fandom is an ever-evolving, changing entity, and it just took it all in stride. Things will never be the way they were before the movies again, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.

I'm proud that I stayed on in fandom after November 2001. I'm very glad I chose to give Tolkien a second chance. And I am so happy to have walked in Middle-earth with all of you. I feel like you've all watched me grow up. When I came, I was an eighth grader. I am now about to graduate from high school and hit the road for college, to persue a career in acting (which was inspired by the movies). So excuse any oversentiment that may be present. I love the Downs. I love fandom. And I love Middle-earth. No matter what may change in the personality of Tolkien fans as a whole, that will always be true.

[davem]

I suppose the greatest change will be that interpretations & back story will both become more & more defined. There will be less & less for a reader to add. Now, that may seem odd coming from me, but I'm not talking about bringing in stuff from the primary world in terms of interpretation, just about the way the story/meaning will become increasingly 'fixed'. There will be less & less room for speculation - about the nature of Orcs, what happens to Frodo, what all those odd references scattered throughout LotR & TH to an older history actually refer to. In a sense we've been told too much by CT.

I'm not sure it would be true to say that I loved Tolkien's work more when I only knew LotR & TH, but I certainly loved it differently. It was kind of like the background history was like seeing a city on the horizon, & only being able to make out bits of it clearly. It was full of possibilities. But then you go to the place & get to know it - the mystery is gone. I half wish I could forget the Sil, UT, HoM-e, all the stuff by Flieger & Shippey et al, & just go back to that 'innocent' time. I'm sure our debates here would be livelier if we didn't all know so much. Too often someone asks a question & an 'expert' comes along & answers it with quotes & references. We can no longer believe that 'Frodo Lives', or that there may still be Elves & Hobbits just over the next hill, because we now 'know' that mortals do not become immortal when they enter the Undying Lands, & that if Elves remain in M-e they 'fade'. Knowledge takes away so much. Yet, there is no real going back, I suppose.

When all the experts have done, all the questions have been answered, what will we do?

There are more reasons, other than just the story becoming too dark & upsetting, for saying 'Shut the book now, dad, we don't want to read any more.' Me, I often wish I was still back in the pre-Sil days, with just my original paperbacks of LotR & TH on the shelf (Oh, & Smith, of course).

[Boromir88]

Well I wouldn't say that Tolkien wasn't "popular" before the movies came out. I mean since the movies it has certainly grown rapidly, and the "enterprise" has expanded, but the books were still rather popular before the movies.

New Line cinema's showing of FOTR on the internet some months before released in theatres attracted over 80 Million viewers. And their second showing a week before release in Theatres over 220 million.

Credit to Jackson and his team for expanding Tolkien's books to a wider audience and bringing readers back to Tolkien (which was my experience. As I read the books and laid them aside for 20 years).

I guess atleast one downside to Jackson's movies is it may not be the best to bring fans into the world of Tolkien, but Jackson's "interpretation" of it, and in many cases Jackson's "interpretation" is way off base. As I see threads of "What parts do you skip?" This is probably the big downside to the movie, because though I do selective reading, sometimes I feel like just reading certain chapters, but I still appreciate the book as a whole. Perhaps, it's just me, but I feel like those who have seen the movies first (the majority, for I know it's not always the case), but I think a lot of them go to the parts they like. And don't appreciate the book as a whole, and find important chapters like The Council of Elrond, Treebeard, The Window on the West, as dull and uneventful, therefor no bother in reading it.

I honestly don't think the "fandom" will die down. When I took my niece to go see the movies (and she hadn't read the books before), she was dissapointed in the ending of ROTK. Not because of "it was too long" but she felt like it wasn't long enough. What happens to the rest of the Fellowship? What happens after? (Which case I introduced her to the books ). So, I think Jackson did a great job of bringing out this story and it left in the case of at least one person of "I wnat to find out more." And for those purists who were dissappointed in Jackson's movies they will always and forever adore Tolkien's books.

I suppose the greatest change will be that interpretations & back story will both become more & more defined. There will be less & less for a reader to add. Now, that may seem odd coming from me, but I'm not talking about bringing in stuff from the primary world in terms of interpretation, just about the way the story/meaning will become increasingly 'fixed'. There will be less & less room for speculation - about the nature of Orcs, what happens to Frodo, what all those odd references scattered throughout LotR & TH to an older history actually refer to. In a sense we've been told too much by CT~davem

I disagree. Certainly I think we have all come to learn more and gain more knowledge from the books. Because sites like this bring together some of the most adored fans and "greatest minds" where we share thoughts and ideas, countless threads of those very questions you ask. But I think the fact remains that Tolkien left his stories unfinished. And as Christina Skull points out (one in which I agree with):

Practically speaking of course, none of the Matter of Middle-earth was ';finished'; but continued to evolve, and was open to second thoughts while Tolkien lived.~The Development of Tolkien's Legendarium- in Tolkien's Legendarium edt, Flieger and Hostetter

Whether Tolkien left his story purposefully unfinished or not, he didn't have it finished when the books were first introduced. (He didn't even intend on writing as much as he did). But, the story is left unfinished in many circumstances and even while Tolkien was alive he watched it grow and adapt. Which was I think part of his purpose, and why he didn't like allegories. Because allegories strictly set meaning to the text, and Tolkien wanted his readers to experience freedom when interpretting. So, I still think that no matter how much we debate or find out, or analyze the books, the story is left unfinished and there will always be "more debate." Who knows perhaps long after we're dead, and society has evolved, it will have a whole different view about what Tolkien's books "means." And when interpretting it, the meaning will be much different than what is thought of today.

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by davem

There are more reasons, other than just the story becoming too dark & upsetting, for saying 'Shut the book now, dad, we don't want to read any more.' Me, I often wish I was still back in the pre-Sil days, with just my original paperbacks of LotR & TH on the shelf (Oh, & Smith, of course).

Not me.

Shippey, Flieger, edhc... well, I can take them or leave them- and generally I leave them.

But not have the Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales, or the HoME? I'd rather lose the Lord of the Rings than the Silmarillion at this stage in my fandom. That bittersweet feeling of the Fall of Noldor, the endless progression of defeat after defeat until the final and sudden eucatastrope of Eärendil... it comes to mean more to mean than the success of Frodo.

Mind you, I dearly love the Tale of the Ring- but I love it far more in the context of the Silmarillion. Having read the Akallabêth, I am far more in love with mystique of fading Gondor and the Dúnedain of the North than otherwise. Knowing the Lay of Leithien, I am far more enamoured of Arwen than I would be if all I knew were what lay covers of the RotK.

I have no use for critics or experts... but the whole of Middle-Earth, from the Book of Lost Tales to Tal-Elmar, and all the tales of Hobbits, Elves, and Men that lie between are a part of my fannishness.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Formendacil

But not have the Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales, or the HoME? I'd rather lose the Lord of the Rings than the Silmarillion at this stage in my fandom. That bittersweet feeling of the Fall of Noldor, the endless progression of defeat after defeat until the final and sudden eucatastrope of Eärendil... it comes to mean more to mean than the success of Frodo.

I can see what you mean. However, much as I love The Sil, it has never touched my heart in the way TH & LotR always have. Its very big & impressive (& I mean that), but just as, with age, Frodo & Sam's story have come to mean more to me than the Three Hunters, Helm's Deep & Pelennor Fields, so, the epic tales of the First & Second Age mean less to me as I grow older. LotR is Tolkien's great work, because of the smallness, the intimacy & humanity, of Frodo & Sam's struggle through Mordor, & of Frodo's last days & departure. If the tales of The Sil have any real meaning & relevance, it is because of the simple humanity given them by the Hobbits. If it wasn't for the existence of Frodo, Sam, Bilbo & all the 'charming, absurd Boffins, Bolgers & Bagginses' I wouldn't care at all for Beren & Luthien, Feanor, Earendel, Turin & the rest. Mr Baggins (as far as I'm concerned) didn't 'stray into their world', they 'strayed into his'.

Now, I can see & accept that LotR is properly part of the Legendarium, & that the events of The Sil are what 'explain' LotR, but LotR is what gives The Sil meaning. As far as I am concerned, there are 'two' works here - The Sil/LotR (excluding TH for reasons of style, depth, characterisation of the Elves & Trolls, etc) - & TH/LotR (only including The Sil peripherally if at all, due to its absence of Hobbits & what they symbolise in the main). Originally I read the 'first', & that was the story I came to love. Later I came to favour the 'second'. Now, for whatever reason (or none at all) I find myself increasingly moving back to my first love. Maybe its a phase I'm going through.

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by davem

I can see what you mean. However, much as I love The Sil, it has never touched my heart in the way TH & LotR always have. Its very big & impressive (& I mean that), but just as, with age, Frodo & Sam's story have come to mean more to me than the Three Hunters, Helm's Deep & Pelennor Fields, so, the epic tales of the First & Second Age mean less to me as I grow older. LotR is Tolkien's great work, because of the smallness, the intimacy & humanity, of Frodo & Sam's struggle through Mordor, & of Frodo's last days & departure. If the tales of The Sil have any real meaning & relevance, it is because of the simple humanity given them by the Hobbits. If it wasn't for the existence of Frodo, Sam, Bilbo & all the 'charming, absurd Boffins, Bolgers & Bagginses' I wouldn't care at all for Beren & Luthien, Feanor, Earendel, Turin & the rest. Mr Baggins (as far as I'm concerned) didn't 'stray into their world', they 'strayed into his'.

'tis the opposite for me- and perhaps therein one may see some light cast upon our rather different looks at many matter in the Legendarium- the Hobbits were my first love, above and beyond the High and Mighty, with my interest gradually shifting to fading and forgotten Númenor, and now resting at last with the tragedy of the Elves and Valar. I cannot say that my interests shall not shift back to Hobbits at some distant date... but I shall never likely see my interest in the Elves fade. The painful bittersweet has more tug on my heart than the charming and absurd- for which reason Frodo is my favourite hobbit, and his end the most satisfying.

Now, I can see & accept that LotR is properly part of the Legendarium, & that the events of The Sil are what 'explain' LotR, but LotR is what gives The Sil meaning. As far as I am concerned, there are 'two' works here - The Sil/LotR (excluding TH for reasons of style, depth, characterisation of the Elves & Trolls, etc) - & TH/LotR (only including The Sil peripherally if at all, due to its absence of Hobbits & what they symbolise in the main). Originally I read the 'first', & that was the story I came to love. Later I came to favour the 'second'. Now, for whatever reason (or none at all) I find myself increasingly moving back to my first love. Maybe its a phase I'm going through.

I agree that, as presented, there is a bit of a "lack" to the Silmarillion- that it does, in fact, require some "meaning", as you put it- or as a "grounding" in our world. However, where you find this meaning in the Lord of the Rings, as do most readers, I suspect, I'm increasingly come to find it in the so sadly neglected tale of Ælfwine/Eriol... And here the Book of Lost Tales plays a major part- but not the only one. Although there was really no way Christopher Tolkien COULD have written the Silmarillion into a publishable form, while keeping Ælfwine and remaining as close as possible to his Father's works, I wish indeed that it HAD been completed by Tolkien as such...

[davem]

I think it was with LotR that Tolkien found his voice as a writer & was where he gave us his Art in its purest form. Like Rivendell itself, in LotR there's something for everyone - TH & The Sil, Smith & Niggle, the High & the Mundane. On its own The Sil is too High & tragic, 'For God's sake let us sit upon the ground & tell sad stories of the death of kings' about sums up The Sil. Its one of those books that I'm glad to have read, but not one that I actually enjoy reading very much anymore. Oh, there re moments of grandeur I wouldn't be without, clever things, interesting things, but I'm not sure its a book (especially not in CT's redaction) that one could 'love' in the way so many of us love LotR & TH. There's no-one in there that I can truly relate to. Its rather like Morris's fantasies which inspired Tolkien.

I think Carpenter's (??) analogy between The Sil & the Old Testament & LotR & the New is valid. I'm sure our medieval ancestors would have favoured The Sil over LotR, because TS is a High Epic of Gods & Heroes, whereas LotR (&TH) are stories of ordinary blokes doing extraordinary things. So, for me, Sam is Tolkien's greatest hero. He's who we are at our best - or what we'd like our best to be. Sam 'earths' the whole Legendarium & gives it meaning. The world of TS is too 'distant', the world of the Hobbits still feels as if its 'just round the corner'. They are what provide the link to the world of TS, & what give it whatever attraction it has for me.

[Ainaserkewen]

I keep encountering former Tolkien lovers on other non-related forums. People with usernames like "elvenlady" and "LordMorgoth" and I ask them if they are fans and they say "I used to be, now I can't change my username." And I ask them about their former fanhood. Many tell me that they were right in there, reading the Silm, the various companions, going to the big websites and talking about nothing but the Lord of the Rings. Now they're just usernames.

I know it will never die for me. I've got my book collection and my three movie posts looming over my bed. A reminder that it's part of me.

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by davem

I'm sure our medieval ancestors would have favoured The Sil over LotR, because TS is a High Epic of Gods & Heroes, whereas LotR (&TH) are stories of ordinary blokes doing extraordinary things. So, for me, Sam is Tolkien's greatest hero. He's who we are at our best - or what we'd like our best to be. Sam 'earths' the whole Legendarium & gives it meaning. The world of TS is too 'distant', the world of the Hobbits still feels as if its 'just round the corner'. They are what provide the link to the world of TS, & what give it whatever attraction it has for me.

Hmm. I'm not so sure that our medieval ancestors would necessarily have gone always for High Epic of Gods & Heroes. Think of Chaucer's Canterbury Tales. Some of the most boring stories--and told at the expense of their pilgrim tellers--are the high ones. And The Miller's Tale with all its ribald humour was quite popular, as is The Wife of Bath's prologue and tale. And the most scurrilous pilgrim tells the most pious tale. I don't think a medieval audience would have looked askance at Sam. There's much there with his pans and his conies that would have fit right in with medieval life--not the Arthurian kind maybe, but Arthur's Round Table is not necessarily the most representative of the art of the time.

Gosh, elempi, there we go again.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

Some of the most boring stories--and told at the expense of their pilgrim tellers--are the high ones. And The Miller's Tale with all its ribald humour was quite popular, as is The Wife of Bath's prologue and tale. And the most scurrilous pilgrim tells the most pious tale. I don't think a medieval audience would have looked askance at Sam. There's much there with his pans and his conies that would have fit right in with medieval life--not the Arthurian kind maybe, but Arthur's Round Table is not necessarily the most representative of the art of the time.

I think they would have loved Sam as comic relief, but not accepted him as a 'hero'. Chaucer satirises the ordinary folk as much, if not more than he 'celebrates' them. I don't think his original hearers/listeners would have found the 'high' tales 'boring' - or if they did they would not have admitted it. I'm not sure the Canterbury Tales would ever have been considered 'high' or 'serious' literature in the way Malory, Chretian or The High History of the Holy Grail was.

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

Hmm. I'm not so sure that our medieval ancestors would necessarily have gone always for High Epic of Gods & Heroes. Think of Chaucer's Canterbury Tales. Some of the most boring stories--and told at the expense of their pilgrim tellers--are the high ones.
------------------------
I don't think a medieval audience would have looked askance at Sam. There's much there with his pans and his conies that would have fit right in with medieval life--not the Arthurian kind maybe, but Arthur's Round Table is not necessarily the most representative of the art of the time.

Arthur's Round Table (from Malory version onwards, or something?) could easily be seen as more of a story of a "pre-pre-romantic" upperclass. But the stories had been about for centuries, not as rigid tales of Christian might and the things high and noble, but as living tradition of stories about people and their fortunes.

So in this I side with Bêthberry. If you look at medieval culture at large, you shouldn't forget the distinction between the high & low (well that shouldn't be forgotten in any phase of the history). The canon of "great works" just rarely reflects the ideals of the common folks. Think about the success of Rabelais as an exception (I haven't ever studied litterature, so I'm not sure about it's initial reception by the high-class, but could imagine it got somewhat well into them because of all those philosophical jokes etc): folksy-humour with the lowest common denominator attached with picking on trendy theories of the upper-class.

SEEM TO BE CROSS-POSTING...

= Davem
I'm not sure the Canterbury Tales would ever have been considered 'high' or 'serious' literature in the way Malory, Chretian or The High History of the Holy Grail was.

That's just the point. They would not have been considered "high", but would have been loved... unlike the one's you cite there. They are the official canon, made by the theologians and other university-people (who knows history? what's the percentage of them in the Middle-ages, 2%?)...

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by davem

I think it was with LotR that Tolkien found his voice as a writer & was where he gave us his Art in its purest form. Like Rivendell itself, in LotR there's something for everyone - TH & The Sil, Smith & Niggle, the High & the Mundane. On its own The Sil is too High & tragic, 'For God's sake let us sit upon the ground & tell sad stories of the death of kings' about sums up The Sil. Its one of those books that I'm glad to have read, but not one that I actually enjoy reading very much anymore. Oh, there re moments of grandeur I wouldn't be without, clever things, interesting things, but I'm not sure its a book (especially not in CT's redaction) that one could 'love' in the way so many of us love LotR & TH. There's no-one in there that I can truly relate to. Its rather like Morris's fantasies which inspired Tolkien.

LOTR will always be Tolkien's finest work for me. Of course, I love his other works, but LOTR easily outshines them all. davem is right that the book does have something for everybody both in terms of character and plot. The style even shifts throughout the book, but the one constant is that with this book, Tolkien demonstrated the power of story.

Story is most definitely there in The Hobbit, and it is also present in Smith, though the former lacks the higher tone of LotR and the latter is not as developed as LotR. The Sil, however, lacks that essential element of Story. At times it can read like extracts from a notebook giving outline plots for other novels; the stories therein are not very detailed, and the characters do not have the room to grow and develop. In reality, The Sil could have been the basis for many other novels which Tolkien did not have the time to write. Had Tolkien been for much of his adult life a professional writer I feel that he would have developed these tales into true novels, however he was an academic with a full time job, and a perfectionist too. He simply would not have had the time to really develop these tales if he had wished to. How many modern professional writers would be jealous of this wealth of stories waiting to be developed?!

I think the Silmarillion is wonderful, but also very frustrating as it offers so many tantalising glimpses of what might have been. And it is also so different in style that it is absolutely clear to me that it was not all Tolkien's own work. It does not have his 'voice' like other works do.

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

I think the Silmarillion is wonderful, but also very frustrating as it offers so many tantalising glimpses of what might have been. And it is also so different in style that it is absolutely clear to me that it was not all Tolkien's own work. It does not have his 'voice' like other works do.

In a way, though, that's a part of its charm- at least for me. The Silmarillion ISN'T supposed to be Tolkien's voice, or a novel... it's historically impersonal. In the Lord of the Rings and elsewhere, we hear Tolkien's voice. In the Silmarillion we hear... history's voice. All we hear is a translator, or, at best, an Elf ala Lost Tales: ie. Pengolod. One could say that Tolkien was SUCCESSFUL in suppressing his own voice, since it is the LACK of a person's idiosyncratic voice that truly makes the stories of the Silmarillion seem real. Told in a normal fashion, such as a novel, the Lay of Leithien, for example, seems merely like a

Mind you, I'm not so much trying to convert everyone to Silmarillionism as I am trying to show that there is an alternative view to these things. The Lord of the Rings has everything... well, of that everything, 'twas the Silmarillion-esque part that truly acquires my interest.