Discussion: BoLT1 - Foreword

[Nenya Evenstar]

I have since read Myth's transformed, but I still wonder why CT says that in BoLT's foreword that he thinks now that he was mistaken in not making it definite. I do not see why that is a mistake?

I agree whole-heartedly. I stumbled over this part in my reading and couldn't quite twist it to make any sense.

 

[jallan]

Christopher Tolkien’s instroduction to The Book of Lost Tales 1 is in part in response to negative criticism and often wrong-headed criticism of the published Silmarillion.

People did have difficulty into getting into it, a difficulty that would have been alleviated for some had it been presented in a framework in which it was shown to be a summary of more extensive legends.

J.R.R. Tolkien considered the Silmarillion to be an existing chronicle within the world of The Lord of the Rings, but within that world to be garbled legend rather than history.

Obviously J.R.R. Tolkien did intend some sort of introduction of that kind, so set the work in a context, without which there is a certain lack.

Christopher Tolkien might, for example, have reprinted the Note on Shire Records, followed by some of his father's remarks discussing the legendary origins of the Silmarillion material that now appear in Morgoth’s Ring.

This, without any invented editorial additions by Christopher Tolkien would have provided the missing framework.

 

[Arvedui]

This thread has been moved out of the Guild of Scholar's Hall, and will hopefully be filled with the thoughts of more members.