Tolkien Canon

[ZehnWaters]

We do not find them involved with helping the Free Peoples in any way in any work - published by Tolkien or otherwise. And I believe "somewhere" it's written only Gandalf was successful and returned. (though my sapwood isn't producing the right stuff to locate the citation at the moment.)

The writing where Tolkien names them Morinehtar and Rómestámo states they were successful as they went into the East and hindered Sauron's recruitment there, otherwise his forces from the East would have easily overwhelmed the West. It's so funny, because there's only one document, from what I can tell, that says the Blue Wizards fell from their purpose but because it got published first it's the one everyone sticks with and feels is more "canon"..

 

[ZehnWaters]

What about that much of it that takes place in the books Tolkien published for a once and future readership?

I'm unsure what you're asking.

 

[Elthir]

I'm unsure what you're asking.

When you say this: "It's a fictional setting and since so much of it takes place in conflicting notes and letters, I'm allowed to make up whatever I want for "canon".

I'm simply asking about the material published by Tolkien > as opposed to conflicting notes and letters, which were not (published by Tolkien) > in other words, do you put author-published text first, accepting it as canon, and then, with respect to all else (notes, letters, what-have-you) "make up" whatever you want for canon.

It's so funny, because there's only one document, from what I can tell, that says the Blue Wizards fell from their purpose but because it got published first it's the one everyone sticks with and feels is more "canon".

And as far as I know, there's only one text in which Tolkien called the "other two" wizards blue, and in a later letter said he didn't know the colours > and never again called them "blue" slash described them this way (at least as far as we know today).

And yet the blue description remains relatively popular

 

[Vardarianna]

Whatever I cobble together in my headcanon. It's a fictional setting and since so much of it takes place in conflicting notes and letters, I'm allowed to make up whatever I want for "canon". For instance, Morinehtar and Rómestámo are the offical Blue Wizards. They come in the Second Age and are successful and return West after the War of the Ring.

 

[Ent]

The writing where Tolkien names them Morinehtar and Rómestámo states they were successful as they went into the East and hindered Sauron's recruitment there, otherwise his forces from the East would have easily overwhelmed the West. It's so funny, because there's only one document, from what I can tell, that says the Blue Wizards fell from their purpose but because it got published first it's the one everyone sticks with and feels is more "canon"..

I will look into this with great care.
What is the document again? (if it's already identified above, I'll go back, find its citation, and review it all in context etc.)
Thank you.

 

[ZehnWaters]

I will look into this with great care.
What is the document again? (if it's already identified above, I'll go back, find its citation, and review it all in context etc.)
Thank you.

The Peoples of Middle-earth, "XIII. Last Writings",

 

[ZehnWaters]

When you say this: "It's a fictional setting and since so much of it takes place in conflicting notes and letters, I'm allowed to make up whatever I want for "canon".

I'm simply asking about the material published by Tolkien > as opposed to conflicting notes and letters, which were not (published by Tolkien) > in other words, do you put author-published text first, accepting it as canon, and then, with respect to all else (notes, letters, what-have-you) "make up" whatever you want for canon.

Yes. Published largely comes first unless Tolkien explicitly seemed to desire a revision.

And as far as I know, there's only one text in which Tolkien called the "other two" wizards blue, and in a later letter said he didn't know the colours > and never again called them "blue" slash described them this way (at least as far as we know today).

And yet the blue description remains relatively popular

Easier descriptor. Otherwise it's just "the other two". Since he didn't give us an alternative other than "I don't know".

 

[Ricardo]

Well, I honestly don't think anything can be consider "canon", not even LOTR and the Hobbit.

We already have the example on how Tolkien changed the story on how Bilbo got the ring.

Tolkien never could make up his mind in many topics. The only reason why LOTR got to a final form was because to pressure from the editors. I don't think Tolkien was completely satisfied with everything.

Yet, we need to have something to follow, and in that sense I don't believe we can ignore the Silmarillion.

Simply put, without the Silmarillion, LOTR doesn't make much sense as a full story, there are so many things based on past ages, even the appendices are not enough, like what are the Valar, what are the elves for that matter?

It's true that the final version of the Silmarillion was compiled by CT, not JRRT, but he did an amazing job finding the stories and putting them together. The History of Middle Earth shows how that process worked, and I don't believe that anyone knew JRRT's work as well as CT.

I see it as a collection of myths, some based on reality of what really happened, some not, and it's up to us to decide which of those myths we consider real, not forgetting that absolutely nothing that is written in Tolkien's world actually happened, it's a fantasy but it does have its boundaries, within it there is some logic but it can be interpreted in different ways.