|Re: Is the old Sillmarrillion in BOLT the same as the new one?|
Subject: Re: Is the old Sillmarrillion in BOLT the same as the new one?
by Khamûl on 2009/2/3 4:40:58
Indeed, the answer is basically no. I think if you want to put the published Silmarillion in context, you really have to read HoME; altho' the Hx LotRs is perhaps not essential.
Funny Stu, I think (I'm guessing tho', since I was a small child when this series first came out!) most people when the series came out quite like BoLTs; and were quite disappointed at some of the later books. Perhaps because the BoLTs books can be viewed (and read) as stand alone volumes; and don't 'interfere' with the published Silmarillion so much as some of the later volumes do.
Personally I'm the least interested (hard to say that!; still very interested...) in the volumes that cover LotRs, from a 'Middle-earth' perspective i.e. the are really (to me) primary world texts, showing Tolkien the author; very interesting just like Rateliff's Hx Hobbit. But Shaping, MR, Jewels, & Peoples really have an abundance of 'new' material so to speak. These (in my mind) sit in a hazy, indistinct world between primary world Tolkien (biography, author), and secondary world Tolkien (Middle-earth).
This cross-over between primary and secondary reaches it most complex in these later volumes: this 'soup' of redactors, translations, oral tradition, texts, 'lost' texts, multiple texts, history, conflicting versions, condensed story, authorship, editorship, publication etc etc -something which I feel plays out in the real history of the published Silmarillion i.e. the work of father & son (and Kay!). Which I suppose strikes at the heart (if my stab at explaining why I think I like Tolkien made any sense!) of why I'm totally obsessed with The Silmarillion .