Login

Or
Register Now


Already have an account?
Username:

Password:

Remember me

Lost Your Password?
Main Menu
Collector's Guide Table of Contents
Recent Visitors

Earl
35 minutes ago

Qweniden
37 minutes ago

Stu
1 hour 23 minutes ago

Berelach
2 hours 45 minutes ago

Trotter
4 hours 13 minutes ago

laurel
5 hours 23 minutes ago

onthetrail
5 hours 57 minutes ago

Deagol
6 hours 15 minutes ago
   All Posts (Trotter)


« 1 ... 5 6 7 (8) 9 10 11 ... 358 »


Re: Dr Tom Shippey on Beowulf
Shirrif
Joined:
2006/6/5 22:04
From Essex, England
Group:
Shirefolk
Fellowship
Shirrif
Posts: 1981
Offline
I have posted all three videos now, and they are very good apart from a technical problem in the first video with the webcam, I ended up just listening to the audio from Dr Shippey.

Posted on: 2/8 0:24:12


Re: Pictures by JRRT vs. Art of LOTR?
Shirrif
Joined:
2006/6/5 22:04
From Essex, England
Group:
Shirefolk
Fellowship
Shirrif
Posts: 1981
Offline

St. Troy wrote:
Both Pictures by J.R.R. Tolkien and The Art of The Lord of The Rings contain JRRT's artwork for LOTR. How do they compare to each other? Does one have more images? Any quality issues?


These are very different books, Pictures by J.R.R. Tolkien was the first book to come out, apart from yearly calendars, that contained Tolkien's illustrations, but has been very much superseded by Scull & Hammond's excellent three books on Tolkien's illustrations, J.R.R. Tolkien: Artist and Illustrator, The Art of the Hobbit and The Art of the Lord of Rings.

To answer your question on images, a lot more in these books and a much more comprehensive description about the images than is in Pictures by J.R.R. Tolkien, and on quality, all four are very good.

From a Tolkien as an illustrator point of view, I would go for Scull & Hammond's books first, but as a collector then all four of them.

Posted on: 2/7 4:40:46

(edited)


Re: Complete Guide vs. Complete Companion?
Shirrif
Joined:
2006/6/5 22:04
From Essex, England
Group:
Shirefolk
Fellowship
Shirrif
Posts: 1981
Offline

Urulöké wrote:
As an additional note - I tend not to use Foster/Tyler any more because I have been spending much time in the Reader's Guide and Reader's Companion volumes from Scull/Hammond. Well worth getting! Not exactly the same purpose, though.


I have to agree with Urulöké, I have both of these books but tend to use Scull & Hammond's excellent Reader's Guide and Reader's Companion.

If you don't have a copy then a revised edition is coming out later this year, probably in September

https://wayneandchristina.wordpress.co ... mpanion-and-guide-2nd-ed/

Posted on: 2/5 6:05:39


Re: Black and white cover of early american hobbit?
Shirrif
Joined:
2006/6/5 22:04
From Essex, England
Group:
Shirefolk
Fellowship
Shirrif
Posts: 1981
Offline

dunedain wrote:
Hi Trotter,

IMO its awfully hard to be better than the UK 1st or 2nd impressions. But, I do like the larger size of the US. Made for more comfortable reading, to me.


I had forgotten about that, and you are right, I also like the larger font size of the US edition

Posted on: 2/4 4:32:32


Re: Black and white cover of early american hobbit?
Shirrif
Joined:
2006/6/5 22:04
From Essex, England
Group:
Shirefolk
Fellowship
Shirrif
Posts: 1981
Offline
Just made me look at the Wikipedia article, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_American_editions_of_The_Hobbit, which was quoted in the eBay sale.

"Some consider the first American edition of The Hobbit to be the most beautifully designed of any edition. Houghton Mifflin chose to print it in a larger size and on heavier stock than Allen & Unwin's first edition, and they chose to include four color plates of Tolkien's original artwork."

Did anyone really think this, or is it a bit of Wikipedia nonsense?

The UK first edition, second impression gets my vote on being a better edition, because of the damage done to Tolkien's illustrations by Houghton Mifflin in the US Hobbit first edition.

Posted on: 2/3 13:36:26



 Top
« 1 ... 5 6 7 (8) 9 10 11 ... 358 »




© 2016 TolkienGuide.com and respective authors. Contact Us