John D. Rateliff's Blog, page 106
November 13, 2016
Abandoned or in Abeyance? (Another Tolkien/Lewis project)
So, while trying to find out more about the Tolkien/Lewis film that I saw at the Milw. Film Festival, I came across mention online of a play about the two men's friendship. Most of what I could find out about it dated to two years back, and I've not been able to find out if the project is still in the works or has drifted off into the last of might-have-beens; I'll give an update if I do find out more.
First, here's the link to the Indiegogo pitch, during which they raised just over $3500, which had been their goal to fund the drafting and development of the play. I'm curious if anyone who backed this project got a copy of the play (the reward for the $75 donation) or the Tolkien/Lewis timeline he compiled (what he called his 'eReseach' and was offering to share at the $250 level).
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-tolkien-lewis-new-play-project#/
Next, there's this piece from the Tolkien Library site, which includes an interview with Reed about the project.
http://www.tolkienlibrary.com/press/1165-play-about-friendship-between-jrr-tolkien-and-cs-lewis.php
Finally, there's this piece from a local (Vancouver-area) source
http://churchforvancouver.ca/ron-reed-and-upcoming-movies-take-on-the-tolkien-lewis-project/
Putting all three of these together, we learn that the playwright is Ron Reed, who's associated with the Pacific Theatre in Vancouver and has performed in their production of FREUD'S LAST SESSION (he played Freud) as well as elsewhere playing CSL in SHADOWLANDS; he's also in the past written a play about Geo. MacDonald (A BRIGHT PARTICULAR STAR)
Reed was attracted to the idea of telling the story of Tolkien's friendship with Lewis by the idea that by day Tolkien was the most boring lecturer in the most boring subject at Oxford,* while by night he was creating what became a a seminal work of great modern literature.
The idea, at least at one point, was for the play to focus on Tolkien & Lewis's friendship: starting when they first met, Tolkien's role in Lewis's conversion (or more properly I suppose re-conversion), Lewis's encouragement of Tolkien's works,** and their drifting apart over differing opinions of each other's works and CSL's marriage with Joy Gresham.
Reed is to be the playwright, while someone named Shauna Johannesen was to be the project's 'dramaturg', which as described by them seems to be roughly what at TSR we called "editing" and which in other contexts I've seen called "development": taking a complete draft and turning it into a polished publishable piece.
The only other interesting detail I could glean was that David Downing was apparently involved in the project in some way, since an autographed copy of his book was being offered as the reward for one of the higher levels of donation in its Indiegogo pitch.
My main questions, after reading what these various websites had to say, are
(1) how far did this project get? Is the a finished play (polished or unpolished)?
(2) if a script does exist, is there any way to get a copy, now that the Ingiegogo pitch has expired?
(3) also, did any of the backers of that pitch see the T/L Chronology? It sounds like a really useful research tool in and of itself?
(4) finally, is this project still in the works, or has it expired and quietly been put aside? I suspect the latter, given that the most recent mention I cd find of it dated back about a year and a half -- but you never know, so if anyone with more information out there is willing to share, I'd be interested in learning more about the current status of this project.
--John R.
current reading: THE GOLD VOLCANO by Jules Verne (posthumous publ.)
*I suspect some, such as Tom Shippey, would object strongly and eloquently to that characterization.
**by which I suppose they mean Lewis being hurt over Tolkien's dislike of Narnia.
First, here's the link to the Indiegogo pitch, during which they raised just over $3500, which had been their goal to fund the drafting and development of the play. I'm curious if anyone who backed this project got a copy of the play (the reward for the $75 donation) or the Tolkien/Lewis timeline he compiled (what he called his 'eReseach' and was offering to share at the $250 level).
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-tolkien-lewis-new-play-project#/
Next, there's this piece from the Tolkien Library site, which includes an interview with Reed about the project.
http://www.tolkienlibrary.com/press/1165-play-about-friendship-between-jrr-tolkien-and-cs-lewis.php
Finally, there's this piece from a local (Vancouver-area) source
http://churchforvancouver.ca/ron-reed-and-upcoming-movies-take-on-the-tolkien-lewis-project/
Putting all three of these together, we learn that the playwright is Ron Reed, who's associated with the Pacific Theatre in Vancouver and has performed in their production of FREUD'S LAST SESSION (he played Freud) as well as elsewhere playing CSL in SHADOWLANDS; he's also in the past written a play about Geo. MacDonald (A BRIGHT PARTICULAR STAR)
Reed was attracted to the idea of telling the story of Tolkien's friendship with Lewis by the idea that by day Tolkien was the most boring lecturer in the most boring subject at Oxford,* while by night he was creating what became a a seminal work of great modern literature.
The idea, at least at one point, was for the play to focus on Tolkien & Lewis's friendship: starting when they first met, Tolkien's role in Lewis's conversion (or more properly I suppose re-conversion), Lewis's encouragement of Tolkien's works,** and their drifting apart over differing opinions of each other's works and CSL's marriage with Joy Gresham.
Reed is to be the playwright, while someone named Shauna Johannesen was to be the project's 'dramaturg', which as described by them seems to be roughly what at TSR we called "editing" and which in other contexts I've seen called "development": taking a complete draft and turning it into a polished publishable piece.
The only other interesting detail I could glean was that David Downing was apparently involved in the project in some way, since an autographed copy of his book was being offered as the reward for one of the higher levels of donation in its Indiegogo pitch.
My main questions, after reading what these various websites had to say, are
(1) how far did this project get? Is the a finished play (polished or unpolished)?
(2) if a script does exist, is there any way to get a copy, now that the Ingiegogo pitch has expired?
(3) also, did any of the backers of that pitch see the T/L Chronology? It sounds like a really useful research tool in and of itself?
(4) finally, is this project still in the works, or has it expired and quietly been put aside? I suspect the latter, given that the most recent mention I cd find of it dated back about a year and a half -- but you never know, so if anyone with more information out there is willing to share, I'd be interested in learning more about the current status of this project.
--John R.
current reading: THE GOLD VOLCANO by Jules Verne (posthumous publ.)
*I suspect some, such as Tom Shippey, would object strongly and eloquently to that characterization.
**by which I suppose they mean Lewis being hurt over Tolkien's dislike of Narnia.
November 12, 2016
a second Tolkien film (TOLKIEN'S ROAD)
So, while on the subject of Tolkien films, and picking up where I left off a month or so ago, there's another Tolkien film I've seen recently, this one on-line.
TOLKIEN'S ROAD is a short student film, made in 2014. About half an hour long, it's available free on You Tube (apparently there's no way to get it in more permanent form, e.g. on dvd) -- at any rate, not that I've found so far anyway.
To be fair, it's important not to hold this little film to too high a standard: it's not a professional release, it's been made available for free, and the whole thing is pretty much an ambitious student project.
That said, there's nothing in this film to warm the cockles of a Tolkien scholar's heart. This film is terrible. It takes the approach to Tolkien that appears in Humphrey Carpenter's radio play IN A HOLE IN THE GROUND THERE LIVED A TOLKIEN, in which JRRT wanders about muttering smaggabaggins at neighbors while burning breakfast, and J. I. M. Stewart's fictionalized Tolkien analogue Prof. J. B. Timbermill, who winds up sitting on the green chatting with hippies and motorcycle gang members, completely cut off from reality.
This film's Tolkien wanders around Oxford, occasionally meeting up with C. S. Lewis (we know it's Lewis because Tolkien calls him 'Jack' and he smokes a pipe) as well as running into characters from his mythology all the time. He's haunted by recurring nightmares in which he relives his experiences on the Western Front, seeing his friend G. B. Smith and the rest of the TCBS being bayonetted by orc-faced German officers. This ongoing trauma has prevented him from finishing THE BOOK OF LOST TALES, whereupon a quaint little man with furry feet steals Tolkien's only copy of the (unconvincingly neat and tidy) BOOK OF LOST TALES; the rest of the story is Tolkien's attempt to get it back while distracted by elf-maidens, confronted by what is either a balrog or a black rider, rescued by a Strider-analogue* and a Gandalf look-alike, &c, &c, &c. Like I said, it's quite short (only thirty-five minutes long) but seems a lot longer; it took me three tries to get all the way through it.
In the end, it's not the amateur nature of this production that puts me off, it's their conception of Tolkien. The idea of Tolkien as someone who wandered around with flowers in his hair, blowing off lectures, and generally hallucinating his way through life is so far from my conception of the man that I can't enjoy its presentation here. The character called 'Tolkien' here is closer to the protagonist of "The Sea Bell" than anything like the real JRRT. And I've found I really care when I see a fictional portrayal of a real person that doesn't in any way correspond to what that person was really like, whether it's the many recent distorted portrayals of H. P. Lovecraft, the longer tradition of thinking that Conan Doyle in real life was anything like Sherlock Holmes (Holmes was far less gullible), and now the depiction of Tolkien as some kind of out-of-it loon. The real person was far more interesting; why not try portraying him as he was, or something at least approximating him.
Here's the link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTCc6Z3dAZI
--JDR
*bizarrely, in the 'Prancing Pony' scene the locals sing a song lifted from the LotR Musical (one of the better numbers, luckily)
TOLKIEN'S ROAD is a short student film, made in 2014. About half an hour long, it's available free on You Tube (apparently there's no way to get it in more permanent form, e.g. on dvd) -- at any rate, not that I've found so far anyway.
To be fair, it's important not to hold this little film to too high a standard: it's not a professional release, it's been made available for free, and the whole thing is pretty much an ambitious student project.
That said, there's nothing in this film to warm the cockles of a Tolkien scholar's heart. This film is terrible. It takes the approach to Tolkien that appears in Humphrey Carpenter's radio play IN A HOLE IN THE GROUND THERE LIVED A TOLKIEN, in which JRRT wanders about muttering smaggabaggins at neighbors while burning breakfast, and J. I. M. Stewart's fictionalized Tolkien analogue Prof. J. B. Timbermill, who winds up sitting on the green chatting with hippies and motorcycle gang members, completely cut off from reality.
This film's Tolkien wanders around Oxford, occasionally meeting up with C. S. Lewis (we know it's Lewis because Tolkien calls him 'Jack' and he smokes a pipe) as well as running into characters from his mythology all the time. He's haunted by recurring nightmares in which he relives his experiences on the Western Front, seeing his friend G. B. Smith and the rest of the TCBS being bayonetted by orc-faced German officers. This ongoing trauma has prevented him from finishing THE BOOK OF LOST TALES, whereupon a quaint little man with furry feet steals Tolkien's only copy of the (unconvincingly neat and tidy) BOOK OF LOST TALES; the rest of the story is Tolkien's attempt to get it back while distracted by elf-maidens, confronted by what is either a balrog or a black rider, rescued by a Strider-analogue* and a Gandalf look-alike, &c, &c, &c. Like I said, it's quite short (only thirty-five minutes long) but seems a lot longer; it took me three tries to get all the way through it.
In the end, it's not the amateur nature of this production that puts me off, it's their conception of Tolkien. The idea of Tolkien as someone who wandered around with flowers in his hair, blowing off lectures, and generally hallucinating his way through life is so far from my conception of the man that I can't enjoy its presentation here. The character called 'Tolkien' here is closer to the protagonist of "The Sea Bell" than anything like the real JRRT. And I've found I really care when I see a fictional portrayal of a real person that doesn't in any way correspond to what that person was really like, whether it's the many recent distorted portrayals of H. P. Lovecraft, the longer tradition of thinking that Conan Doyle in real life was anything like Sherlock Holmes (Holmes was far less gullible), and now the depiction of Tolkien as some kind of out-of-it loon. The real person was far more interesting; why not try portraying him as he was, or something at least approximating him.
Here's the link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTCc6Z3dAZI
--JDR
*bizarrely, in the 'Prancing Pony' scene the locals sing a song lifted from the LotR Musical (one of the better numbers, luckily)
November 11, 2016
Another Tolkien BioPic Project
So, thanks to a posting on the MythSoc list (thanks Douglas), we now know about yet another Tolkien-related film project in the works-- if by 'in the works' we mean is a hopeful spark afloat on the vast sea of films-that-never-get-made. I've maintained for a while now that we're not likely to see any SILMARILLION movies for a long, long time to come, if ever, and that the likeliest Next Big Thing in the way of Tolkien films would be a biopic. Here's the link:
http://deadline.com/2016/11/james-strong-j-r-r-tolkien-middle-earth-the-lord-and-the-rings-unique-features-bob-shaye-michael-lynne-1201849947/
This announcement is mostly about the writer/director/producers and doesn't provide much in the way of information about the film itself. The following snippet seems to be about all we know at this point about the plot:
"Story follows Tolkien’s early life and love affair with Edith Bratt, whom he later married. The couple lived happily in Oxford, surrounded by friends, but when war broke out in 1914 Tolkien embarked on four years of battle and hardship, an experience that influenced his Middle Earth stories."
This of course bears only a passing similarity to reality, and while we shdn't judge too strictly from an offhand account like this, it suggests that this will be a work of fiction. If we're lucky some historical and biographical fact will find its way into the film, but I wdn't count on it. It'll probably be very pretty, though, given the BBC-style talent involved: I suspect it aspires to be a 'Merchant Ivory' type film.
Fletcher, the author, seems to be full of projects currently in the works but little that's actually come out yet. The piece mentions his having devoted six years to researching the film and interviewing people: presumably this would be Tolkien biographers such as John Garth (given that Tolkien's main biographer, Humphrey Carpenter, has been dead for over a decade now).
Strong, the director, has worked on a number of well-regarded British shows, from DOWNTON ABBEY to DOCTOR WHO.
Shaye and Lynne famously committed New Line to supporting Peter Jackson's LotR films. Though with a projected budget of twenty million dollars we shd see much less here in the way of special effects. And just in case anyone was wondering, no Sir Peter in sight.
As for the second piece, it reveals a lot more of the mindset with which Fletcher intends to approach the project: Tolkien with PTSD (post-traumatic stress) -- or, as they used to call it in Tolkien's time, shell-shock (which, by the way, Tolkien never had: the record is pretty clear about that). Note that while the first article concentrates on the John Ronald/Edith love story against a background of war, the second (earlier) piece doesn't even mention her.
It'll be interesting to see what becomes of this project, if anything, and who winds up starring in it
Here's the link:
http://oncampus.osu.edu/telling-tolkiens-story/
--John R.
current reading: THE GOLD VOLCANO by Jules Verne
http://deadline.com/2016/11/james-strong-j-r-r-tolkien-middle-earth-the-lord-and-the-rings-unique-features-bob-shaye-michael-lynne-1201849947/
This announcement is mostly about the writer/director/producers and doesn't provide much in the way of information about the film itself. The following snippet seems to be about all we know at this point about the plot:
"Story follows Tolkien’s early life and love affair with Edith Bratt, whom he later married. The couple lived happily in Oxford, surrounded by friends, but when war broke out in 1914 Tolkien embarked on four years of battle and hardship, an experience that influenced his Middle Earth stories."
This of course bears only a passing similarity to reality, and while we shdn't judge too strictly from an offhand account like this, it suggests that this will be a work of fiction. If we're lucky some historical and biographical fact will find its way into the film, but I wdn't count on it. It'll probably be very pretty, though, given the BBC-style talent involved: I suspect it aspires to be a 'Merchant Ivory' type film.
Fletcher, the author, seems to be full of projects currently in the works but little that's actually come out yet. The piece mentions his having devoted six years to researching the film and interviewing people: presumably this would be Tolkien biographers such as John Garth (given that Tolkien's main biographer, Humphrey Carpenter, has been dead for over a decade now).
Strong, the director, has worked on a number of well-regarded British shows, from DOWNTON ABBEY to DOCTOR WHO.
Shaye and Lynne famously committed New Line to supporting Peter Jackson's LotR films. Though with a projected budget of twenty million dollars we shd see much less here in the way of special effects. And just in case anyone was wondering, no Sir Peter in sight.
As for the second piece, it reveals a lot more of the mindset with which Fletcher intends to approach the project: Tolkien with PTSD (post-traumatic stress) -- or, as they used to call it in Tolkien's time, shell-shock (which, by the way, Tolkien never had: the record is pretty clear about that). Note that while the first article concentrates on the John Ronald/Edith love story against a background of war, the second (earlier) piece doesn't even mention her.
It'll be interesting to see what becomes of this project, if anything, and who winds up starring in it
Here's the link:
http://oncampus.osu.edu/telling-tolkiens-story/
--John R.
current reading: THE GOLD VOLCANO by Jules Verne
November 10, 2016
The Inklings Discuss . . . Horror Comics?
So, as part of my work on the festschrift, which is ongoing, I had to confirm some quotes and page references today. And you know how it is: you pick up a book to try to locate one specific passage you need and in the process various odds and bits you've never paid proper attention to before catch your eye. And it was that way with me today.
I was looking up something relating to THE HOMECOMING OF BEORHTNOTH and came across a mention of an Inklings meeting that was held at the Eagle & Child in Oxford on November 9th, 1954: exactly sixty-two years ago yesterday. Present were CSL and Warnie, McCallum, Mathews, JRRT, and semi-Inkling Roger Lancelyn Green (to whose diary entry we're indebted for this account). They discussed Tolkien's just-released LotR, and horror comics, and who was the greatest man to come from each country in the British Isles, deciding on Edmund Burke for Ireland, Sir Walter Scott for Scotland, and Shakespeare for England, although there were dissident votes for Pitt or Wellington for the latter spot (apparently the Welsh need not apply).
The first and third topics here sound pretty much in line with the sort of things I'd expect to read that the Inklings were talking about, but the middle topic brought me up short, and I was surprised not to have noticed it before on any previous reading of this passage. We know that Warnie, Lewis, and Tolkien were quite open in admitting that they read and enjoyed works in the then rather disreputable field of science fiction. But that they would be conversant in comic books came as a bit of a surprise, and horror comics at that. I tried to come up with a mental image of Professor Tolkien, or CSL, reading, say, EC Comics, and I admit the image wdn't come. Curious.
Of course it's possible that they were discussing horror comics without having actually read any of them; the topic was a hot one at the time, that being the same year that the notorious book SEDUCTION OF THE INNOCENT came out, which I gather more or less argued that reading comics lead to a life of crime.
So, one of those occasional bits of evidence that challenges our preconceptions. They're good for you, if occasionally disconcerting.
--John R.
most recent viewing: MISS HOKUSAI and THE MARTIAN.
current reading: THE GOLD VOLCANO by Verne.
P. S.
I forgot to include the important detail of what book I was looking things up in when I found this: it was the invaluable Scull & Hammond CHRONOLOGY, page 444. --JDR
I was looking up something relating to THE HOMECOMING OF BEORHTNOTH and came across a mention of an Inklings meeting that was held at the Eagle & Child in Oxford on November 9th, 1954: exactly sixty-two years ago yesterday. Present were CSL and Warnie, McCallum, Mathews, JRRT, and semi-Inkling Roger Lancelyn Green (to whose diary entry we're indebted for this account). They discussed Tolkien's just-released LotR, and horror comics, and who was the greatest man to come from each country in the British Isles, deciding on Edmund Burke for Ireland, Sir Walter Scott for Scotland, and Shakespeare for England, although there were dissident votes for Pitt or Wellington for the latter spot (apparently the Welsh need not apply).
The first and third topics here sound pretty much in line with the sort of things I'd expect to read that the Inklings were talking about, but the middle topic brought me up short, and I was surprised not to have noticed it before on any previous reading of this passage. We know that Warnie, Lewis, and Tolkien were quite open in admitting that they read and enjoyed works in the then rather disreputable field of science fiction. But that they would be conversant in comic books came as a bit of a surprise, and horror comics at that. I tried to come up with a mental image of Professor Tolkien, or CSL, reading, say, EC Comics, and I admit the image wdn't come. Curious.
Of course it's possible that they were discussing horror comics without having actually read any of them; the topic was a hot one at the time, that being the same year that the notorious book SEDUCTION OF THE INNOCENT came out, which I gather more or less argued that reading comics lead to a life of crime.
So, one of those occasional bits of evidence that challenges our preconceptions. They're good for you, if occasionally disconcerting.
--John R.
most recent viewing: MISS HOKUSAI and THE MARTIAN.
current reading: THE GOLD VOLCANO by Verne.
P. S.
I forgot to include the important detail of what book I was looking things up in when I found this: it was the invaluable Scull & Hammond CHRONOLOGY, page 444. --JDR
November 8, 2016
The New Arrival: THE LAY OF AOTROU & ITROUN
So, the newest book by J. R. R. Tolkien was published this past week, on Thursday.
Waiting is hard: my copy is currently on its way to me but the time between the 3rd, when it came out, and the 17th, when it's due to arrive, seems long.
And this even though I've had a copy of the poem itself for years that I've read many times since
getting a photocopy of the original magazine publication back around 1978, when I was in college (thanks Jessica) and making a concerted effort to find and copy all Tolkien's misc. pieces (and all the pieces about him I cd locate with the aid of Richard West's TOLKIEN CHECKLIST). And I like this poem quite a bit: I've written about it (in my contribution to the Shippey festschrift) and even helped organize a dramatic reading of the whole piece (at Kalamazoo, several years back).
So why am I so glad to soon have the same poem in book form? For one thing, it'll be easier to shelve and keep track of than the photocopy has been (though I mostly solved that problem a few years back by putting the now somewhat battered copy in its own binder, as I also did with other pieces such as "Imram" and "For W. H. A.").* And for another I've been curious to learn whether the volume would contain any other of what we might call Tolkien's medieval poetry (or more accurately, poems in medieval modes), most of which is uncollected, some even unpublished.
And then, a ray of light: thanks to Janice pointing out that the book was already available on Kindle. As a result, I've been able to get and read it before my (paper) copy has even arrived. And for those who, like me, are curious, here's a quick breakdown of this slim volume's contents:
Note on the Text by Christopher Tolkien
This is followed by Verlyn Flieger's introduction, wh. puts the piece in context (both among Tolkien's other works and from Breton legendry (Villemarque et al)
part one: the published LAY.
just over 500 lines, plus explanatory notes
part two: the two CORRIGAN poems
first poem: about a changeling (76 lines)
second poem: about the witch in the woods, the sinister Fey (104 lines). this piece later formed the core of A&I.
part three: draftings
fragment (29 lines)
manuscript drafts (5 pages and 12 pages)
fair copy (490 lines)
typescript (also 490 lines), with notes re. revisions; probable text-copy for the 1945 publication.
part four: comparison of specific passages
--sources (Breton, French, English)
--Tolkien variants (e.g., the second Corrigan poem vs. corresponding passages in A&I)
And for the book as a whole?
My advice: pick this one up. Sooner rather than later.
It's a great chance to see a very different side of Tolkien from that on display in, say, FARMER GILES OF HAM or the Hobbit works.
As Verlyn Flieger says in the very first line in her Introduction: "Coming from the darker side of J. R. R. Tolkien's imagination . . ."
--John R.
current reading: THE CURSE OF SAGAMORE by Kara Dalkey
Waiting is hard: my copy is currently on its way to me but the time between the 3rd, when it came out, and the 17th, when it's due to arrive, seems long.
And this even though I've had a copy of the poem itself for years that I've read many times since
getting a photocopy of the original magazine publication back around 1978, when I was in college (thanks Jessica) and making a concerted effort to find and copy all Tolkien's misc. pieces (and all the pieces about him I cd locate with the aid of Richard West's TOLKIEN CHECKLIST). And I like this poem quite a bit: I've written about it (in my contribution to the Shippey festschrift) and even helped organize a dramatic reading of the whole piece (at Kalamazoo, several years back).
So why am I so glad to soon have the same poem in book form? For one thing, it'll be easier to shelve and keep track of than the photocopy has been (though I mostly solved that problem a few years back by putting the now somewhat battered copy in its own binder, as I also did with other pieces such as "Imram" and "For W. H. A.").* And for another I've been curious to learn whether the volume would contain any other of what we might call Tolkien's medieval poetry (or more accurately, poems in medieval modes), most of which is uncollected, some even unpublished.
And then, a ray of light: thanks to Janice pointing out that the book was already available on Kindle. As a result, I've been able to get and read it before my (paper) copy has even arrived. And for those who, like me, are curious, here's a quick breakdown of this slim volume's contents:
Note on the Text by Christopher Tolkien
This is followed by Verlyn Flieger's introduction, wh. puts the piece in context (both among Tolkien's other works and from Breton legendry (Villemarque et al)
part one: the published LAY.
just over 500 lines, plus explanatory notes
part two: the two CORRIGAN poems
first poem: about a changeling (76 lines)
second poem: about the witch in the woods, the sinister Fey (104 lines). this piece later formed the core of A&I.
part three: draftings
fragment (29 lines)
manuscript drafts (5 pages and 12 pages)
fair copy (490 lines)
typescript (also 490 lines), with notes re. revisions; probable text-copy for the 1945 publication.
part four: comparison of specific passages
--sources (Breton, French, English)
--Tolkien variants (e.g., the second Corrigan poem vs. corresponding passages in A&I)
And for the book as a whole?
My advice: pick this one up. Sooner rather than later.
It's a great chance to see a very different side of Tolkien from that on display in, say, FARMER GILES OF HAM or the Hobbit works.
As Verlyn Flieger says in the very first line in her Introduction: "Coming from the darker side of J. R. R. Tolkien's imagination . . ."
--John R.
current reading: THE CURSE OF SAGAMORE by Kara Dalkey
October 27, 2016
John Oliver re. Third Parties
I've been meaning to add this as an addendum to my earlier political post, but have decided it's too good to bury.
Here's John Oliver giving the minor party candidates, Gary Johnson and Dr. Jill Stern, the same kind of treatment usually reserved for the major party nominees.
His conclusion: things are just as weird at that end of the spectrum. No, really.
Here's the clip, with the usual warnings about (a) language and (b) politics, either of which might offend.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3O01EfM5fU
Thanks to Alex W. for letting me know this was out there.
--John R.
Here's John Oliver giving the minor party candidates, Gary Johnson and Dr. Jill Stern, the same kind of treatment usually reserved for the major party nominees.
His conclusion: things are just as weird at that end of the spectrum. No, really.
Here's the clip, with the usual warnings about (a) language and (b) politics, either of which might offend.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3O01EfM5fU
Thanks to Alex W. for letting me know this was out there.
--John R.
Cat Walking Wednesday (10/26-16)
After the weekend Kitten Event, we’re now at five cats in the Cat Room: bonded pair BABY KITTY and ELEANOR MANYTOES, wide-eyed VACA, and newcomers YUKI (kitten mom) and FUJI (kitten).
It was nice to make the latter two’s acquaintance. They definitely seem to be unbonded: Yuki hissed at little Fuji when I held him up to her, and he backed away as soon as he could. Mostly they ignored each other, and neither seemed to distinguish the other from all the other cats in the room.
It was a good day for walking: everyone but Yuki had an outing. Fiirst came little FUJI, who got carried all around the story, taking it all in with big eyes. He rode on my shoulder the whole time, not feeling safe when I occasionally put him down to see if he wanted to do any exploring on his own four feet (the answer each time was no). He was petted for a while by a man in a wheelchair over by the dog-grooming room, and while wary of dogs didn’t seem particularly afraid of them. Think he’ll be leading us on the leash all around the store in another week or two, if he’s not adopted by then.
The next walk was ELEANOR Manytoes, who also got carried around. She gave voice a time or two but on the whole think the change of pace was good for her. Mostly she likes to be atop the higher of the two cat-stands, happy to be petted and happy to be out of her cage for a while, snoozing in her favorite spot.
VACA is by far our best walker of all the cats we have right now. She knew where she wanted to go (towards the back of the store) but didn’t want to get too close to the dogs at Banfield. Showing that she’s pretty smart, she worked out a route around the dogs, then explored the center of the store. She was out a long time and I think thoroughly enjoyed it.
The last walk of the day was BABY KITTY, who clung to me the whole time she was out. I petted and reassured her while carrying her about, but she was still alert to the possibility that something might pounce if she didn’t keep a sharp look-out. Still think the being out and about did her good; she was alert and playful when back in the room.
I thought about walking newcomer YUKI but didn’t think I’d gained her confidence enough yet to trust me if there were anything that suddenly startled or frightened her. Did pet her and found that while very shy she’s also in need of attention; she rubbed her head against my hand and cuddled up against my arm while being petted. I did lift her out of her cage so I could hold her and pet her, letting her look out the big window in the smaller room (the one with the bench and cat-stands). Two really big dogs came up and Yuki was wary of them but not frightened.
Games: little Fuji wanted to play every game there was, but Vaca also joined in on the action quite a lot. The two of them went wild over the laser pointer, but they thought the feathers and string game were well worth their while too. All the cats wanted petting, some while awake and some while asleep and some both.
The Cricket: at one point Fuji spotted a cricket that’d somehow escaped the fate of crickets and found its way into the cat room. He got very excited and slipped immediately into little predator mode. I helped the cricket get away, but had much to-do to keep him distracted from live prey.
Health concerns: Yuki’s eyes seemed fine but her ears needed some cleaning; we shd keep an eye on them.
We had several visitors, some in or just outside the cat-room, some encountered around the store while walking.
—John R.
It was nice to make the latter two’s acquaintance. They definitely seem to be unbonded: Yuki hissed at little Fuji when I held him up to her, and he backed away as soon as he could. Mostly they ignored each other, and neither seemed to distinguish the other from all the other cats in the room.
It was a good day for walking: everyone but Yuki had an outing. Fiirst came little FUJI, who got carried all around the story, taking it all in with big eyes. He rode on my shoulder the whole time, not feeling safe when I occasionally put him down to see if he wanted to do any exploring on his own four feet (the answer each time was no). He was petted for a while by a man in a wheelchair over by the dog-grooming room, and while wary of dogs didn’t seem particularly afraid of them. Think he’ll be leading us on the leash all around the store in another week or two, if he’s not adopted by then.
The next walk was ELEANOR Manytoes, who also got carried around. She gave voice a time or two but on the whole think the change of pace was good for her. Mostly she likes to be atop the higher of the two cat-stands, happy to be petted and happy to be out of her cage for a while, snoozing in her favorite spot.
VACA is by far our best walker of all the cats we have right now. She knew where she wanted to go (towards the back of the store) but didn’t want to get too close to the dogs at Banfield. Showing that she’s pretty smart, she worked out a route around the dogs, then explored the center of the store. She was out a long time and I think thoroughly enjoyed it.
The last walk of the day was BABY KITTY, who clung to me the whole time she was out. I petted and reassured her while carrying her about, but she was still alert to the possibility that something might pounce if she didn’t keep a sharp look-out. Still think the being out and about did her good; she was alert and playful when back in the room.
I thought about walking newcomer YUKI but didn’t think I’d gained her confidence enough yet to trust me if there were anything that suddenly startled or frightened her. Did pet her and found that while very shy she’s also in need of attention; she rubbed her head against my hand and cuddled up against my arm while being petted. I did lift her out of her cage so I could hold her and pet her, letting her look out the big window in the smaller room (the one with the bench and cat-stands). Two really big dogs came up and Yuki was wary of them but not frightened.
Games: little Fuji wanted to play every game there was, but Vaca also joined in on the action quite a lot. The two of them went wild over the laser pointer, but they thought the feathers and string game were well worth their while too. All the cats wanted petting, some while awake and some while asleep and some both.
The Cricket: at one point Fuji spotted a cricket that’d somehow escaped the fate of crickets and found its way into the cat room. He got very excited and slipped immediately into little predator mode. I helped the cricket get away, but had much to-do to keep him distracted from live prey.
Health concerns: Yuki’s eyes seemed fine but her ears needed some cleaning; we shd keep an eye on them.
We had several visitors, some in or just outside the cat-room, some encountered around the store while walking.
—John R.
October 26, 2016
The New Arrival (2017 Tolkien Calendar)
So, I've known for a while that this coming year's Tolkien calendar would be one of the good ones, featuring Tolkien's own art. Now that it's arrived, it lives up to all expectations -- beautiful reproductions of all nine of his full-page black and white drawings for THE HOBBIT, plus the half-page Mirkwood halftone. I was surprised to see a piece I was pretty sure I'd never seen before (and I've seen a lot of Hobbit art): a black-and-white drawing version of the November image, "Conversation with Smaug".
Turns out I was only surprised because I skipped right to the art and jumped over the v. nice introduction by Alan Lee,* who explains that two of the illustrations are 'new pen-and-ink renditions' of two of Tolkien's watercolors, redrawn by one Nicolette Caven esp. for this calendar. I don't know Caven's work otherwise, but she did a fine job here.**
All in all, an excellent calendar, and one I'm looking forward to hanging up up in my office come the new year.
Also newly arrived is the latest of the C. S. Lewis-as-detective books from Kel Richards. The fourth so far, THE SINISTER STUDENT, which I find I've taken to calling in my head 'Murder at the Inklings'. It repeats the pattern of the first three: from what little I've read of it so far it's notable mainly for including a fictional meeting of the Inklings early on: Lewis, Warnie, Tolkien, Coghill, Fox, and latecomer Dyson, as well as series character Tom Morris and the student of the title, one Auberon Willesden (a modernist who's come so he can feel superior). Tolkien reads them the last chapter of THE HOBBIT. It's rather surprising that Havard isn't there, but then the real-life Inklings and Inklings-as-chacters in Richard's books has always been a casual fit (for example, he calls Warnie 'The Major' throughout, though he was still Captain Lewis before his WW II service).
More on this one when I've had a chance to read it, if more seems merited.
--John R.
current reading
THE FALL OF THE HOUSE OF CABAL by Jonathan Howard (having now reached about the mid-point)
*Lee traces influence on Tolkien as an artist from Jennie Harbour, Kay Nielsen, Arthur Rackham, Wm Morris, other Pre-Raphaelites, and, rather surprisingly, Rudyard Kipling (one of those many English writers deft with little drawings, like GKG and CSL).
** the other redrawn piece is "Rivendell" (for March).
All five of Tolkien's watercolors for THE HOBBIT are included, but four of them are shrunk down to quarter-page size, leaving only one (Conversation w. Smaug) for full-page full-color glory.
Turns out I was only surprised because I skipped right to the art and jumped over the v. nice introduction by Alan Lee,* who explains that two of the illustrations are 'new pen-and-ink renditions' of two of Tolkien's watercolors, redrawn by one Nicolette Caven esp. for this calendar. I don't know Caven's work otherwise, but she did a fine job here.**
All in all, an excellent calendar, and one I'm looking forward to hanging up up in my office come the new year.
Also newly arrived is the latest of the C. S. Lewis-as-detective books from Kel Richards. The fourth so far, THE SINISTER STUDENT, which I find I've taken to calling in my head 'Murder at the Inklings'. It repeats the pattern of the first three: from what little I've read of it so far it's notable mainly for including a fictional meeting of the Inklings early on: Lewis, Warnie, Tolkien, Coghill, Fox, and latecomer Dyson, as well as series character Tom Morris and the student of the title, one Auberon Willesden (a modernist who's come so he can feel superior). Tolkien reads them the last chapter of THE HOBBIT. It's rather surprising that Havard isn't there, but then the real-life Inklings and Inklings-as-chacters in Richard's books has always been a casual fit (for example, he calls Warnie 'The Major' throughout, though he was still Captain Lewis before his WW II service).
More on this one when I've had a chance to read it, if more seems merited.
--John R.
current reading
THE FALL OF THE HOUSE OF CABAL by Jonathan Howard (having now reached about the mid-point)
*Lee traces influence on Tolkien as an artist from Jennie Harbour, Kay Nielsen, Arthur Rackham, Wm Morris, other Pre-Raphaelites, and, rather surprisingly, Rudyard Kipling (one of those many English writers deft with little drawings, like GKG and CSL).
** the other redrawn piece is "Rivendell" (for March).
All five of Tolkien's watercolors for THE HOBBIT are included, but four of them are shrunk down to quarter-page size, leaving only one (Conversation w. Smaug) for full-page full-color glory.
October 21, 2016
The Voter Pamphlet Arrives . . .
So, our Voter's Pamphlet arrived a few days ago, a sure sign the election really is coming at last. Here's hoping it spells the end of Crazy Season, which has been going on for a year and more by this time.
The initiatives I haven't been paying any attention to up to this point, so I have some catching up to do there. Most of them seems to have the 'argument against' mantra of 'we can't afford that; we need all that money for education' -- a good argument but at first glance of dubious relevance. We'll see.
On the other hand, the statewide offices and Senate/Congress ones are all down to just two contestants each, thanks to the primary having weeded out the plethora of minor candidates (the judicial candidates are always tricky but hopefully Grubbstreet will do his usual good job there).
The most important election, the presidential one, by contrast has seven contenders: the only place the minor parties make an appearance. There are the two major parties (Democrat & Republican), two minor parties (Libertarian and Green), and three fringe parties (The Constitution Party, the Socialist Workers' Party, and the Socialism & Liberation Party -- the latter two of whom shd really have combined efforts, so similar are their write-ups).
To tackle the small parties first: the Constitution Party is all about 'sovereignty', as they wd define it. They want an end to foreign wars (something I cd get behind). And foreign aid (which is where we part company). And for us to pull out of the U.N. And abolish the Federal Reserve. And go back on the gold standard. And not only put a stop to abortion but to get Congress to pass laws to prevent the Supreme Court from ever being able to rule on that issue again. Which only goes to show that for all that they call themselves the 'Constitution' party, they don't seem to have much of a grasp of what our Constitution actually is.
As for the two Socialist parties, they really shd have co-ordinated better and made some kind of common cause instead of splitting their micro-share of the electorate. Both want to bring an end to Capitalism, they both want the same three political prisoners freed (none of whom I'd ever heard of). One has a more quirky approach, embracing the cause of Lavoy Finicum (the guy who was shot dead during the Bundy-led Oregon standoff a few months back when he pulled a gun on federal agents) and wants recognition for the good work Cuban 'volunteers' did in Angola back in 1974 or '75 (I forget which; back in the Jerry Ford era anyway). The other includes concern for environmentalism as well as a wide array of specific points, such as shutting down all our overseas bases, cutting Israel loose, and a call for Puerto Rican independence (something the Puerto Ricans don't actually want).
Of the two minor parties, I have sympathies with the Greens and would consider voting for them if I thought they stood the ghost of a chance, which they don't. I don't have any sympathy for the Libertarians, though I must admit their write-up of Gary Johnson makes it sound as if the man could walk on water. good job whoever wrote that up. Though his boast about being incapable of working with his state legislature (he brags that he cast more vetoes than all the other governors of his state put together) is unsettling. And a few minutes' look at Wikipedia shows that he's a booster of school vouchers (which I view as a way to loot public schools for private ones, making an end run around integration laws in the process) and, what's even worse, private prisons (quite aside from the fact that essential public services shd not be lobbed off to the lowest bidder, private prisons have a nasty record all their own).
That just leaves the two major party candidates, Trump and Clinton. Fivethirtyeight.com shows Mrs. Clinton with a massive lead, barring some 'October surprise'. We'll soon know which one becomes president.
--John R.
The initiatives I haven't been paying any attention to up to this point, so I have some catching up to do there. Most of them seems to have the 'argument against' mantra of 'we can't afford that; we need all that money for education' -- a good argument but at first glance of dubious relevance. We'll see.
On the other hand, the statewide offices and Senate/Congress ones are all down to just two contestants each, thanks to the primary having weeded out the plethora of minor candidates (the judicial candidates are always tricky but hopefully Grubbstreet will do his usual good job there).
The most important election, the presidential one, by contrast has seven contenders: the only place the minor parties make an appearance. There are the two major parties (Democrat & Republican), two minor parties (Libertarian and Green), and three fringe parties (The Constitution Party, the Socialist Workers' Party, and the Socialism & Liberation Party -- the latter two of whom shd really have combined efforts, so similar are their write-ups).
To tackle the small parties first: the Constitution Party is all about 'sovereignty', as they wd define it. They want an end to foreign wars (something I cd get behind). And foreign aid (which is where we part company). And for us to pull out of the U.N. And abolish the Federal Reserve. And go back on the gold standard. And not only put a stop to abortion but to get Congress to pass laws to prevent the Supreme Court from ever being able to rule on that issue again. Which only goes to show that for all that they call themselves the 'Constitution' party, they don't seem to have much of a grasp of what our Constitution actually is.
As for the two Socialist parties, they really shd have co-ordinated better and made some kind of common cause instead of splitting their micro-share of the electorate. Both want to bring an end to Capitalism, they both want the same three political prisoners freed (none of whom I'd ever heard of). One has a more quirky approach, embracing the cause of Lavoy Finicum (the guy who was shot dead during the Bundy-led Oregon standoff a few months back when he pulled a gun on federal agents) and wants recognition for the good work Cuban 'volunteers' did in Angola back in 1974 or '75 (I forget which; back in the Jerry Ford era anyway). The other includes concern for environmentalism as well as a wide array of specific points, such as shutting down all our overseas bases, cutting Israel loose, and a call for Puerto Rican independence (something the Puerto Ricans don't actually want).
Of the two minor parties, I have sympathies with the Greens and would consider voting for them if I thought they stood the ghost of a chance, which they don't. I don't have any sympathy for the Libertarians, though I must admit their write-up of Gary Johnson makes it sound as if the man could walk on water. good job whoever wrote that up. Though his boast about being incapable of working with his state legislature (he brags that he cast more vetoes than all the other governors of his state put together) is unsettling. And a few minutes' look at Wikipedia shows that he's a booster of school vouchers (which I view as a way to loot public schools for private ones, making an end run around integration laws in the process) and, what's even worse, private prisons (quite aside from the fact that essential public services shd not be lobbed off to the lowest bidder, private prisons have a nasty record all their own).
That just leaves the two major party candidates, Trump and Clinton. Fivethirtyeight.com shows Mrs. Clinton with a massive lead, barring some 'October surprise'. We'll soon know which one becomes president.
--John R.
John D. Rateliff's Blog
- John D. Rateliff's profile
- 38 followers
John D. Rateliff isn't a Goodreads Author
(yet),
but they
do have a blog,
so here are some recent posts imported from
their feed.
