Michael’s Comments (group member since Jun 10, 2010)

Michael’s comments from the J.R.R. Tolkien group.

I think Tolkien made a few changes to the US edition so that it could be marketed as the "official" version. Does anybody know if I'm remembering that correctly?

I think that Jackson has done a sterling job within the confines of the film medium. It's simply not possible to deliver the totality of Tolkien's vision on screen, and only a niche audience would want to watch it (us!).

On the other hand, how many people have read LotR due to having seen the films? It must be thousands, if not hundreds of thousands. I love the films on their own terms, understanding that they are an interpretation of Tolkien's work. Whether you like the interpretation is a matter of taste.

EDIT: Here's a poll for whether you you read-books/saw-films, or saw-films/read-books.

Personally, I'd anticipated reading the first volume now and the second volume some time later - probably to coincide with the release of the films, being a two parter also. However, if enough people want to read them back to back (and it's possible I'll change my mind!), then I can schedule part 2 to be read too.

Slinker or Stinker!!

I've finished the chapter on the "Pryftan Fragment", the earliest version of part of the first chapter that's survived. On it's own, it's a curiosity: "Oh, look, Tolkien changed that word, or crossed out that line, or changed that name. Hmm, interesting." What this book is really about is Rateliff's incredible work of scholarship.

It's the extensive notes that provide the background and depth and helps you to appreciate what Tolkien was doing, what his sources were (often he was being self-referential to his own, then unpublished, works, as we all know), why it was that he changed that little word or sentence and how that made the story better.

This is a two-bookmark volume: one for the text, one for the notes!

To go Arthurian for a minute - Sir Balin is such a tool! I always want to slap him. But, that's an indication of how well drawn his character is. Malory's often criticised for his characters lacking depth and, while there is some justification for that, with Balin and Balan I think you really do get two reasonably well fleshed-out people.

Don't worry about "repeating obvious stuff" - I only knew about the specific name derivation because I just read it. It's all grist to the mill :-)

Not obnoxious at all :-)

The derivation of the dwarvish (not dwarfish) names is explained in the book, with Balin being the odd one out. As you say in your post, and as mention in the book, the brother knights Balin/Balan seems the most likely source of his name. Their tragic story is one of my favourite tales from Malory.

The thing I'm having most difficulty with is remembering that that "Gandalf" in the original version is actually Thorin!

I'm still on the introduction, but already loving it!

Oh, yes! Not sure whether I'm channelling my inner Slinker or Stinker, though.

My first impression is a practical one - the edition I have is just too nice to carry around with me! I'll therefore be keeping it at home and reading it here only, so it might take me a bit longer to get through than planned. Now, I need to decide which book is going to be my portable read!

Ok, here we go: Starting this one today: anybody with me? If not, we'll have a discussion with ourselves, Precious, won't we?

Hi Christine - Welcome to the Group :-D

Hi, Victor. Thanks for joining the Tolkien Train!! (I've got to think of some better greetings!).

That looks really interesting, Norbert.

The original Italian edition was in Goodreads, but not the new English one you've referred us to, so I've now added it:

The Broken Scythe: Death and Immortality in the Works of J.R.R. Tolkien

Hi Piotr and Norbert. Nice to have you both aboard :-D

Based on our poll results, this will be the Group Read for Autumn, running from 01 September 2012 to 31 December 2012.

You should definitely catch Sherlock. Even if you don't know the original stories that well, they're excellent, but if you do know them then there's loads of little references that really enrich the show.

The writer, Mark Gattis, plays Sherlock's brother, Mycroft.

Back to the Hobbit film: I think they're basing the Necromancer section on what Gandalf tells Frodo about the history of the One Ring.

Based on the poll results, I've lined up The Children of Húrin for the Autumn read, then Fellowship would be next for winter, but I'm not sure if we could maybe read the whole trilogy - methinks another poll is needed!

Oh, yeah - Amazon! I could have checked that, couldn't I? ;-D

You might want to check out the reviews on Goodreads - they're rather mixed.

Becky wrote: "Hey, i'm Becky. I didn't read Tolkein's books until after I watched Lord of the Rings, since then i've read "The Lord of the Rings" and "The Hobbit". I loved them, I plan on reading more of his boo..."

Hi Becky

The films have been great in broadening Tolkien's appeal. I hope you'll get a lot pleasure from exploring his work further.

We've just finished a Group Read of the Silmarillion, so you might want to give that a try and join in the discussions. It's generally reckoned to be a bit more heavy-weight, but I found it to be a hugely enjoyable read (even though I did have to keep double-checking the names if the huge cast of characters!).

Are you looking forward to the Hobbit movie?