What is Tolkien's Canon?
Vložit
- čas přidán 18. 02. 2024
- Explore the best of fantasy and sci-fi in depth, with analysis of the worlds of Lord of the Rings, Game of Thrones, The Witcher and more.
For more Lord of the Rings content: • Video
Join me on Patreon - / indeepgeek
Visit my main channel for more videos - / indeepgeek
My audiobook channel: The Well Told Tale - / thewelltoldtale
Follow me on:
Twitter - @indeepgeek
Instagram - indeepgeekofficial
Facebook - / indeepgeek
TikTok - @indeepgeek
For merch, audiobooks, and all things In Deep Geek, explore my website - www.indeepgeek.com
Thank you to the talented artists who allowed their work to be featured in this video. You can find them and buy your own prints by following the links below:
Jerry Vanderstelt - store.vandersteltstudio.com/m...
Heraldo Mussolini - heraldo.mussolini
Miriam Ellis - www.miriamellis.com/
Kip Rasmussen - fineartamerica.com/profiles/k...
Jerry Vanderstelt - store.vandersteltstudio.com/m...
Matthew Stewart - www.matthew-stewart.com/
Anna Kulisz - www.kuliszu.art
Ralph Damiani - www.artstation.com/ralphdamiani
Aegeri: Lida Holubova - / gnome_z_lesa
Thumbnail art by Miriam Ellis - www.miriamellis.com/
This video was brought to you with support from my amazing Patreon community - special thanks to
Stephanie Frederick, Joshua Clark, Maura Lee, Rabbi Rob Thomas, Brooke Geer Person, Josh Bielemeier, Jane, Vance, Amy Southerland, Ivie Hilburn, Jimmy, Vercingetorix, John-Paul DeLuca, Filbert, Mike Hanna, Martin Sandberg, Frank Glad, lemmy101, The Lady Gordon, Edward Ryan, Stephanie B, Coleen, Ben Androvich, Nana L, Brennan Barnes, Ivanka Hainzl, Howland’s Little Sister, Charis Messalina de Valence, Donna Daley, Cade Norman, Murray D, NOscar, Rick Hoppe, Leathery Wings, James Pisano, Bridget Boyle, TheStarkInWinterfell, Ellemcee, Alannah Prestayn of Braavos, Raymond Joy, Jonathan Harrison, Petyr Pebble, Jason Mauleon Rosario, Milton Christopher Appling, Edward Ennett, Katy Smith, 26Artgirl, Karen Thomas, Rickon, Cathrine Furseth, James Fitzpatrick, Doug Hughes, lawnduck20, Perseffanie, Emily Mole, Lady Dane, The Late Escapist, Natalie Donald, J. Gregory Henderson, whalawitsa, Luna Cascade, Dan MacKay, Johnny Targs, Kevin Warner, Julie Bernard, Bear, Susan Lonergan, Bo Riley, Lyle Hammac, Taryn Giles, Alex Butter, Pam Peterson, Bettina Charlotte Nielsen, T boz, Angela Marie Young, Sarah Awesomesauce, Stephanie Erickson, KaliKo_Jack, SeaGreenMango, GeorgeRRTolkien, Antihero Association, Richard Woodard, Caiden Timmons, ThatVBGuy, Tyler Barnhart, John H. Austin, Jr, NikFromNJ, Ty Farnsworth, Beesman, EJ, Willow Button, Julia Kendall, Jonny Ceriani, Mary Frances Angelini, Emma Sheiman, Joseph Jones, Christine Denny, Julien Dubois, Leland, Max Kingdom, Tricia Brady, LiK, Simen Dalstein, Scott Maraldo, Shelley J, Karen Wennerlind, Nathan Drumm, Martin Sjöstrand, Kristen H, King of Imps, Minerva Gale, Eric Nelson, Michiel Venema, Kate, Brandie Roberts, Kendra Summers, reed m, Commander Ray, Mayra Lawson, Lola Roebuck, Mark P, Nicole Stewart, Norse Sultan, Rasler, Steven Spaulding, Your Last Great kNight, Patrick Ward, Amy vh Hines, Slippery1989, Una Haller, Almo71, Ravi Kakarala, Jacob Culp, Janet Lyn, NikFromNJ, Magepie, Ms. Fox, Jon Greenwood, Jahan, Justice, Courtney, Biscuit Jones, Biscuit Jones, Cookie Tywyn, Matt (Man of War) Rubin, Ranabir Mitra, Petar Kosovac, CRChesnutt, Kip Ingram, Savannah Smith, Tadeo D'Oria and Mario Murray
Affiliate Links - (buying books from our Bookshop.org shop supports this channel and local bookshops at no extra cost to you.)
Books for fans of Lord of the Rings:
uk.bookshop.org/lists/lord-of...
Other books we love:
uk.bookshop.org/shop/indeepgeek
Thanks for watching!
(All pictures used are in the public domain, or used under fair use copyright laws or with the express permission of the artist). - Zábava
I actually really like the vagueness, mystery, and unknowability of it all. It seems fitting for the fantasy genre, especially in light of Middle Earth's oral traditions and the reshaping of narratives it is prone to.
It has enough detail to make it seem real but vague enough to give one’s imagination room to roam.
The odd thing I remember was that the maps, like in the real world at the time, had white areas where no one had ever been. A lost idea, these days...
I was going to comment almost exactly this, but you did it first. I like the inconsistencies, as it indicates that over millennia, even the memories of elves becomes hazy on the details...
In some ways it's like real history. We have a lot of writings from Tolkien, which would be like direct sources (which, while immediate in time and place, might still be speculative, incorrect, or biased), and we have pieces put together by Christopher (which is like historians in past times researching and commenting the past, which may have incomplete perspectives, but are still valuable as they had access to sources we no longer have).
"Seeing the beauty in the act of creation itself" Perfect!
I always believed that Tolkien, as a student of myth, would reject the idea of “one canon to rule them all”. Glad to see I was right!
As Tolkien himself said, the world he presented was our own world in a different stage of imagination. He left room in his writings and his world for OUR imagination, too. It's not a finished world. It's a foundation for all of us to dream up our own stories, and for the legendarium to grow as new tales are told.
After all, that world is OUR world - yours and mine - in a different stage of OUR imagination.
lmao, what does that actually mean. even if i wrote my own tale in the world of middle earth its still not apart of the legendarium. its fan fiction
@@kekons23 "Fan fiction" is not an evil term. Yeah, a lot of it is crap, but there is good fan fiction in the world. (Just an aside, I know you weren't specifically addressing it, but I was hoping there was no derision in your thinking of that genre).
He is talking about our lost and forgotten history. Like the desolation of Ireland and the true world before that. In a different stage of imaginative writing.
I doubt he meant Anything Goes.
@@the_real_littlepinkhousefly where did i use the word "evil"? I was making a distinction between fan fiction and legendarium. Don't presume to understand where i was coming from.
but you're called a weirdo and unoriginal if you write down what your imagination comes up with.
I don't think there has ever been a fictional world that has been as fleshed out and detailed as Middle Earth. It's mind blowing. What a brilliant man Tolkien was.
Asking what is canon in Tolkien's work is akin to asking what is canon in Greek
or Norse mythology. Different versions say and omit different things.
Above all else, Tolkien wanted to re-create a mythology for England, complete with all of the difficulties and uncertainties that arise when one sets down an oral tradition in ink.
He did, though by his admission he failed; which is why he created a Northwest European historical piece ~
Somewhere back in the files there is a version in which Gandalf Shot First.
Good one.
I think a key point here is that Tolkien framed his work in-universe as being a historian and literary scholar working to understand and retell ancient tales which have come into his possession. Seen through this lens, his entire legendarium is built from scraps of myth, originally recorded by people with their own biases and agendas, then garbled and tangled through millennia of retellings. It is inconsistent for the same reasons that Norse sagas and Arthurian romances are inconsistent. Tolkien, his son Christopher, and all of us who love these legends share the work of retelling them, each in our own way, all making the whole more beautiful and magical.
Beautifully put.
In case you're unaware, there are two Silmarillion's. I highly recommend you and any other Tolkien fan watch the interview with Christopher Tolkien before his death. It's very informative about his father's works. As for the question in hand, I consider everything written and published by the Professor and/or published and edited by Christopher Tolkien as canon. Anything else is licenced work. Christopher was very clear in his narratives about what were rough notes and outline sketches and what was actually considered by his father to be part of the lore. He also knew the mind of his father very well.
Tolkien changed his mind all the time until something was out and published, so random notes and letters shouldn't be considered canon, in my opinion. Doesn't mean they're not interesting to read, but they're just ideas in various different stages.
Love you Robert, thank you for all the great content!
Having the uncertainty and different unfinished versions of these stories does something else that we wouldn't get otherwise, which is give us insight into JRRT himself, which is something we should appreciate. I am thankful that we have LotR and the Hobbit as authoritative sources, and to a lesser extent the Silmarillion, but these other tangential and inconsistent myths, and why and how they changed, really let us know so much about the man behind it all.
JRRT was well-aware of ancient legends, of how creation myths, heroes, conflicts and salvation evolved through time, cultures and traditions. Surely he may have imagined his own made world becoming legend, with origins and certainties lost with the effluxion of time and memory.
He also noted in one of his letters that he would love his work to be continued by other people, artists, musicians, storytellers, but thought this idea to be too unrealistic. Though this is indeed how myths work...
@@mairepresSo he was pro-fanfiction?!?!?? Way better than Martin just because of that
Sometimes I forget that Guy Kaye- who is my favourite author- worked on The Silmarillion. His own two mooned world of Jaddites, Asharites and Kindath, of Seressa and Sarantium seems so far from Tolkienesque fantasy that my mind no longer associates the one with the other.
But Fionavar is basically Tolkien fanfic.
When I come across an inconsistency is a series I typically look at it like history, in that the people recording it can exaggerate, lie, misremember, be misinformed, etc. Just because you come across a piece of information doesn't mean it's accurate because man is fallible.
The actual canon is what actually happened back then. Unfortunately there are hardly any archaeological finds from those ancient times and the texts Tolkien found and translated cover only a small fraction of what happened. But there are still some who were there when it all unfolded. We didn't all sail to west and have not yet completely faded away. It is difficult to remember all especially after the crazy 5th and 6th age though.
Long-time subscriber but first time commenting. Thank you Robert for your well produced video on Tolkien's legendarium. It was very thought provoking and reverential to The Professor. Keep up the good work!
Tolkien was always a scholar of mythology and it is in the nature of mythology that there are different oral traditions and narratives or "cannons". The very existence of this kind of conversation about his work is something that I think he would appreciate. Everyone has their own interpretations and tellings of his work, all are valid and important. Personally I like to think that Tolkien's legendarium is rhe true history of England, and I am a descendant of hobbits of the shire. That world is a better world to live in than any religion has ever proposed.
Love your work Robert, keep it up 😁
Just don't forget that all Toliken's work is fundamentally religious. He was a devout Catholic, and it shows up throughout his writings.
There's the primary canon - Lord of the Rings and the second edition of The Hobbit and then there's various degrees of secondary canon, and further out. The Silmarillion is very close to primary canon, while the Rings of Power is a long way out.
A long, LONG way out.
There's primary canon, secondary canon, and adaptations which can be good but are not canon at all.
@@kylenetherwood8734And then there are works which are neither canonical nor very good on their own merits.
@@kylenetherwood8734 That's one position to hold, and not an unreasonable one in the case of Tolkien's works, but it doesn't hold up universally - ideas from adaptations can filter back into the originals when series are ongoing - just ask Harley Quinn and Renee Montoya!
Rings of Power isn't even lowly pulp fan fiction - it's a commodity and vehicle for the hubris and subversive ideology of Hollywood hacks lol
Perhaps Tolkien was a Admirer of Mona Lisa and of Davinci's continuation of its canvas as a work ever in progress! Always life given to a project without end ever expanding until ones final rest. There is poetry in such a rationale. It is still a world in flux today and ever growing which i am thankful for!
Ambiguities possess a very strong potential in aesthetics
@@saeedshahbazian9889 Indeed they do!
Here to suggest the next LOTR video, I'd love a dedicated video on the Hall of Mandos, its an important location of Middle Earth, but we know very little about it, might make for an interesting topic.
In my headcannon, the (often abandoned) versions of the History of Middle Earth that speak of Lovecraftian gods older than the Valar; the Second-Age wars of religion; Sauron making a Tsunami in Númenor; alien life on Eä; Astral Time Travel (etc, etc) - are other chroniclers who wrote their versions in times remote from the period in which Bilbo translated/copied such events.
Headcannon? Are you a robot?
'alien life on Eä; Astral Time Travel' - wait what?! What's all this about?
"head cannon" is no different than the old Star Wars "Extended Universe", sure they were seen as approved for writing and for business but they are just some other writer's headcannon, a writer who did not have the imagination nor creativity to CREATE the universe that George Lucas created and all because there was a business demand by consumers...not as a creative intent by the original creator and the same holds true of Tolkien because your "headcannon" is no different from fan fiction aka you did not create this and you are stitching together unrelated materials into a larger universe with stuff the original creator never created.
Headcannon and fan fiction is also disrespectful towards the original creators because you refuse to accept the original story and are trying to embellish and expand the material with stuff that does not make sense specifically because it was not and never was created by the original writer.
@@apollosungod2819 r2dezki is referring to the misspelling of "canon" -- the one with two "n's" is a gun. Thus "are you a robot?" because there is a cannon coming out of his head.
It's the name that Tolkien gave to a special howitzer in the Royal Artillery during WW1.
I think it is analogous to King Arthur... the truth is lost in the mists of time, and we are left with a Story that may be told and retold in many different ways
What a beautiful video. Honestly I hadn't given it much thought but you've really made me think. I have always been so grateful for Christopher's dedication to his father's work and do consider everything Christopher has published to be part of Tolkien's legendarium.
I would greatly appreciate a video on the events of The Redhorn Gate and Caradhras in the Fellowship of the Ring. The book and film differ greatly and there is much that is left to interpretation.
The film centers Saruman as the cause of the bad weather in the pass. However, this is never mentioned as a possibility in the book. At first Gandalf seems to place the blame on Sauron. Then, Aragorn states "There are many evil and unfriendly things in the world that have little love for those that go on two legs, and yet are not in league with Sauron.” What does Aragorn mean by this?
Does Sauron have the ability to control the weather? There are many mentions of weather being more than a coincidental barrier to the Company in the chapters The Ring Goes South and A Journey in the Dark. If it is not Sauron, what force might be at fault?
could we perhaps get a video about the Myth of the Tree in Lotr? As in how tolkien might've been inspired by this myth present in folklore, leading to things like the 2 trees of valinor, Nimloth and the white tree of gondor. The video could end by making a comparation as to how mythical trees are portrayed in lotr compared to in folklore
Hey Robert, did you study history or something writing related? Your videos are always super well structured, like an Essay in University.
Even when you talk about some irrelevant topic in asoiaf, your argumentation is flawless like a master thesis
I like an idea that's been floated on this channel before: Tolkien wrote as if writing a history. Some parts are reliable and backed up many sources. Others were based off just one or two manuscripts and folktales. As he "found" more sources, he updated the history to be more accurate.
You can also add "Lore" as a term often used that I think doesn't fit Tolkien's Legendarium, as it gives an idea that everything is set in store like in other fictional lore.
I would have to say everything published by the father and son is what I consider to be his true works considering who he originally wrote them for his children. I honestly have never thought about what is canon or not. I would love to see you do some in-depth takes on the works of Edgar rice Burroughs works especially the barsoom series of tales and even some Tarzan.
Along with the "legendarium" concept, I think you touched on an important point by speaking of "traditions" in the plural. One thing about Tolkien's works is that he's very open, even forward, about these being stories, that is, the telling or tellings of events, and not the events themselves. It's not as if the different versions are objective transmissions of different multiverses (to refer to an overused recent concept) with photographic accuracy, but rather that these are different recountings that have come down to us. as mythic stories do, and as such subject to uncertainty and variation. One would expect no less from a man immersed in ancient literature.
I read _The Hobbit_ and _The Lord of the Rings_ as being the events narrated directly. There is obviously an authorial presence, but we 'see' events 'as they happen,' for the most part. The characters and events that are directly stated within these narratives are 'real' to readers in a sense that characters like Isildur - the legends _within_ the depicted narrative - are not.
@@Spearca it sounds like you need to read the appendices to the Lord of the Rings, among other material
@@johnkeck I have, years ago. What are you thinking of?
My great uncle, Samuel Hanks Bryant collaborated with Tolkien on some of the calligraphy and flourish on the edition of The Road Goes Ever On that’s displayed at 1:57
Great Works of Art are never Finished, Only Abandoned - said someone.
Douglas Adams noted that all the different versions of the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy - the original radio play, the later studio recording, the original books and revisions, and television mini series - were strikingly different to each other. Events could be back to front, things could happen or not happen, characters could act differently or act the same for entirely different reasons. In putting together his final omnibus edition of the Hitchhiker’s Guide novel (a trilogy in four or even five parts), he noted in his foreword that if this didn’t finally set the story straight then it at least set it “firmly crooked,” and that if it was wrong here it was wrong forever.
Mind you, when it comes to George Lucas and what he did to the original Star Wars Trilogy you really wish there was someone with a ruler who’d just follow him around and give his fingers a good painful thwack and say, “Leave it alone! It’s fine!”
Yeah, I was deeply imprinted upon by the original radio series.
Every effort afterwards (except the books) became increasingly worse, the more money the producers seemed to procur.
@@qarljohnson4971 Just for me personally, the BBC TV miniseries from the 80s was a very good compacted version of the story. They also had plenty of time for dialogue and to walk slowly through events, unlike the big movie which just rushed through it all to cash in on Adam's death. As much as I like Bill Nighy, his depiction of Slarti paled in comparison to Richard Vernon.
Delightful as always! Thank you Robert! 🌿
Great work Robert, thank you. It's this is how we need to look at his work, it's like real life in a way, think of how many people we think we know and then new information whether good or bad surfaces and we are amazed at how little we knew them or how wrong we were about them.
Although, I don’t disagree with the conclusions of this video, there is the misleading implication that authors usually establish what is canon. Scholars of the author are usually who establish what is canon. It seems like Tolkien scholars are conflicted, but it is safe to say, Tolkien’s works published during his lifetime or otherwise are not contradicted by other works, are more canon, than those stories which conflict with each other. The idea of canon isn’t essential, but it is important in the way that people agree on the meanings of words in the same language. Without that agreement, quality communication is not possible and arguments are just chaos.
100%. It's like an archery target or tree rings where the published works are in the center, and the additional works as compiled by Christopher are on the layers heading out from there
Great video as always. thank you for this
I think this is what makes Tolkien's work so satisfying to read and think about. It's real history. In other words, like real history, it's a weaving of fact and fiction, myth and legend, and true evens all told from many different perspectives, cultures, and time frames. It's all canon, everything with John or Christophers fingerprints, and we have the joy of sorting through it.
Really enjoyed this musing Robert, one of your best!
I've always felt that if a piece of art makes you feel something; it doesn't matter if the author meant it, you still felt it. So maybe "canon" can be a personal preference? If someone prefers the first/second/third/whatever edition of The Hobbit, that's fine.
I draw the line at stuff that Tolkien didn't write. I don't think it's an unreasonable line to draw and i don't think bad fanfiction like Shadow of War (despite the fact that the gameplay was actually great) or Rings of Power has any room in it.
Yeah dude! Black people are not Canon get them out of my lord of the rings universe!! I'll REE!
And don't get me started on them damn Mexicans
Then add the Jackson movies to your dismissive and sneering concept of "fan fiction"
@@ericbouchard5273shadow of war is terrible fanfiction.
Brave of you to declare the video games where you literally 1v1 a physically manifested Sauron to not be canon 😂
Wonderful video! Thank you. ❤😊
You gotta remember that Tolkien saw himself as a historian that wrote down a translation of his research and findings. Thus things could change as he found new sources and information.
Seeing it that way... nothing is really canon. As the original writings of tolkien himself is to be considered translations of older material.
I tend to refer mostly do his later works and internally change my thought process when reading his earlier works woth the info fron later ones
I like to think of Tolkien as a visitor to the world of middle earth. Casually traveling the back roads much as Gandalf did. Hearing tales and writing them down as best he could remember them. In doing so, it's easy to understand why and how there would be slight changes in his work from time to time.
This needs a part 2. Just pick up where this left off, with the legendarium. Something of a guide to the books for people who have only seen the movies
Tolkien's lengendarium is a quintessential part of experiencing his canon and gifts us with a deeper understanding of his creation and artistry.
I like to remember that in the Lord of the Rings and Hobbit, Tolkien pretended that he was just the translator of the Red Book and that these are the histories passed down through the ages. That mean like actual history books, they agree on most of the facts, but, particularly with accounts from antiquity, there are a lot of inconsistencies between stories. In that regard all of his writing counts.
All I know for sure about what’s canon for Tolkien is there’s a guy named Bilbo. Everything is else is up in the air.
Splendid video!
Some mysteries and unfiled gaps can be fun. And It may be "hard" to perfectly define, but at the end of the day, canon it is extremely important and needed. Without canon you end up with something that is not special and unique. You end up with something like unchecked hebrew d&d, where absolutely anything goes, like RoP. Making the hole thing generic, messy and ultimately wortless.
Tolkiens canon is similar to chekovs gun. in that if an amazing concept is introduced in the first act, the third act will be even more legendary
*Gosh, utterly a shame Tolkien hasn't explored much outside of Eriador: Rhun and Harad, the former being the ancestral home of the Elder; or even the Blue Wizards' ventures throughout the East and South! Dare I say what would have been incredible would have been Tolkien's expansion of Earendil's journey to those lands, or the section in the early drafts of Quenta Silmarillion wherein Earendil battles Ungoliant in Haradwaith ... ~ Even the Lamp of the Valar in the South, so on and so forth ...*
The ambiguity of the canon fits the literary conceit that Tolkien used. The idea was that these were ancient works of Middle-earth that he had found and "translated." It makes sense that there would be multiple versions and traditions that were passed down through the ages. I like to think of all the books as "canon" in the sense that they existed in-universe and any contradictions are a result of different lore-masters' accounts of what happened.
Nice work dude thanks
personally i think it's acceptable to say that the four "final" books published during his lifetime are canon, and all his original writings with Christopher's reworking, notes, and exposition expand the universe and help us better understand the things which are in canon. even where original drafts conflict, at the end of the day we are reading a mythology and those older drafts show us a much quickened version of how mythos develops naturally over decades, centuries, and millennia.
i will never see the likes of his kind of genius again before it is my turn to take the road to its "whither then", and i am honored to be able to get to know as much of that genius as possible :)
thank you so much for making these AMAZING videos which help further inform my knowledge of this universe as well as helps me appreciate Tolkien's genius that much more!
It has always felt to me that Tolkien wasn't the creator of this world, but that it had always existed and that he was simply the man chosen to reveal it to the rest of us. In this way whatever he says has to be taken with a pinch of salt and the knowledge that he is fallible and that it is never going to be perfect in its delivery or entirely truthful in its end-state. It is, however, beautiful and endlessly compelling and as long as we don't take it too seriously we can always remember how lucky we are to have so much of it.
Hi Robert, a question. Why dont many of the ancient elves get reborn like feanor? It seems only glorfindel came back?
It seems inconceivable he wouldn't return to get the silmarils back and he was such an early elf, he must of been towards the front of the queue?
There are two parts to that.
Firstly, elves that die spend different amounts of time in the Halls of Mandos. They don't return to life until they're ready, and that's its own complicated thing. Glorfindel's return was uncommonly fast.
Secondly, while a lot of elves undoubtedly had returned to life by the end of the Third Age of the Sun, when The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings take place, they returned to life in Valinor, and, after the first rising of the Sun, there were few trips from Valinor to Middle Earth - throughout the First Age, the seas were closed, until Earendil made his voyage, and the Host of the Valar launched the War of Wrath against Morgoth. Following the War of Wrath, the exile of the Noldor was lifted, and all elves were once again invited to migrate to the Undying Lands. During the Second Age, travel was possible in both directions, but the net flow was overwhelmingly one-way. And following the reshaping of the world at the end of the Second Age, it became impossible for any to travel from Aman to Middle Earth without the aid of the Valar - and the only beings we know of who did are the Wizards (at least Gandalf, Saruman and Radagast - the Blue Wizards may have come during the Second Age, as Glorfindel himself did).
So it's partly that most elves took longer to return to life, and partly that those who did return to life didn't return to Middle Earth, so didn't enter into the histories we have.
@@rmsgrey thanks for your reply. It still seems inconceivable that feanor wouldn't return for the silmarils to me? Are we to assume that he was not rebodied before the third age? Or perhaps, when he is rebodied do they forget their previous life etc?
@@timcook6178 I'm not sure there's a lot of evidence to support my opinion, but I've always felt that the elves only became re-embodied after they had worked through the traumas and hurts they suffered in their previous body. For that reason, I've also always assumed that Feanor simply never became re-embodied; his anger and ego have stood in the way of his return to the physical world, and he's trapped in the Halls of Mandos because of it.
As I said, though, I'm not sure there's any direct evidence one way or the other about this particular issue.
Elves dont get a say when they are reborn. Its up to Mandos who interprets Eru Iluvatars will. Glorfindel was reborn again because of the good deeds he did while he was alive. Finrod was reborn almost immediately. Feanor won't be reborn for a VERY long time, if ever. Dude started the First Kinslaying.
good video, ty
1:31 What about "The City of the Gods", "Light as Leaf on Lindentree", and "The Happy Mariners"?
I think its a little bit like real history, we have many things we are sure about but quite many things are unknown or needed to be change because of new discoveries. Like The first versions of "the Hobbit". It relaid mainly on Bilbos writings, that's why the interaction with Gollum was different to the "version" by Frodo.
Thank you, Robert, for doing videos about J.R.R. Tolkien. I know nothing about the Song of Ice and Fire or the Witcher. I only come to listen to your videos about Tolkien.
Great points, Robert - I agree!
A beautiful perspective.
Another thing to note is that Tolkien had really high standards for what he would publish, so he probably never would have dreamed of publishing any of his earlier writings. So maybe he did have a notion of a consistent and completed world to present to the world, but he never got the chance.
The simplest answer is also the most complex. I think his idea of canon would be based on “his interpretation and translation” of the Red Book.
I think he meant for the Red Book to never truly be finished. To him, canon would be different for everyone based on their interpretation of the Red Book and his other “findings and research” in a story that will continue to develop long after we are gone.
To think differently I believe would be like comparing him to the first archaeologists to discover a mummy, reading a published work about the mummy, and saying that is the entirety of Egyptian history.
He wants us to seek adventure and curiosity, but remember that the little things in life are what matter most.
You can argue about the movies and other works being canon or not, but that’s not the point. Do your own research and see what fits with the Red Book. If you think it fits, it’s your canon. If you don’t think it fits, it’s not canon to you. Most authors have clear canon and non canon. In this case though, canon is the byproduct of curiosity and life lessons.
One of the best ways I’ve heard this question addressed is to remember why the world was created. Tolkien loved languages and wanted to create a new language.
But a language without a living world, without a history, is a dead one. Like Latin is currently. Tolkien wanted to avoid that.
Which is why he created this world in the first place. This world is an alternative history to our own.
And just as our own understanding of our own history is lost, rediscovered, and evolving, so too, is Tolkien’s history.
Which is, interestingly enough, how it’s still living. It’s why I had no issue with the interpretation of Shelob in the war of morder games. It doesn’t contradict, it fits the lore, and could be how it went.
It’s why I loved the hobbit movies, someone said that the hobbit books as we have it was written by bilbo, AFTER he had been corrupted by the ring, so how trustworthy is his narration?
The answer of, it’s a legendarium is beautiful. Because Tolkien did something few authors achieve, he created a legend, which to this day is still evolving and growing.
You've mentioned wanting content suggestions -- Can you address the Tom Shippey theory that Denethor actually saw an image of Frodo in captivity in Cirith Ungol on March13th? The arguments for and against this theory, whether Tolkien intended this, and how this would have affected the story?
Reading Tolkien's writings and asking what he envisioned is like reading Hesiod and trying to assess what the ancient Greeks really believed about their gods. Hesiod was the compiler of myths, some of which were ancient even when he was writing, and which had glaring inconsistencies among them. Tolkien's fantastical explanation was that he was the compiler and translator of the Legendarium from ancient texts, some of which had been badly preserved, badly transcribed, poorly translated, or even willfully altered, and whose original authors were perhaps not always telling the truth (*cough* Bilbo *cough*). When asked a novel question, or queried about an inconsistency, Tolkien in interviews would do a close reading and analysis of his own text to decide on an answer - exactly as if he were trying to wring facts by inference from an ancient manuscript.
What is canon? It all is - including adaptations and even fan fiction. Or rather, some writers - including Tolkien's characters supposedly doing the writing - are closer to the events and places than others, and their accounts may be more reliable.
The answer to "What is the Tolkien Cannon" in short it is similar to the "Armstrong Cannon" although smaller and significantly less prominent, however it is still a splendid specimen
I like to think that Tolkien was compiling from various middle-earthen sources, from several authors made over hundreds of years, all having different points of view and measures of importance applied to what happened in those days ;)
5:36 love that the first and last columns, the infinitive words of course, are Finnish words. Maybe some day I'll have enough patience to dwell into his great works and discover exactly how much and which ways did Kalevala inspire them
Having read the Kalevala first (I'm Hungarian) and suddenly going "WAIT A FUCKING MINUTE" when getting to that part in Túrin's story was certainly fun.
One thing that I think Tolkien wanted to imply and that many dont understand is that the legendarium, much like real life history isnt meant to be seen as completely authoritative. History is written by beings with wills and those wills often muddle up what really happened. George RR Martin embraces this fully in his writing about the song of ice and fire. He tries his best to show us how perceptions skew reality and how one mans truth is anothers lie.
'Continuity is a fool's stricture'
If you think of canon in terms of Tolkien’s stamp of approval, there are certain elements of The Silmarillion that are more definitively ‘canon’ than others. Everything that is recapped in the appendices - Fëanor and the Silmarils, Beren and Lúthien, Eärendil’s voyage, the fall of Númenor… - is guaranteed canon. Whereas those that aren’t explained in the appendices are much vaguer. Still, I applaud Christopher’s efforts and accomplishments, and gladly embrace his contributions to the legendarium in The Silmarillion.
Tolkien was remarkably consistent throughout his published writing. I would think that anything that Christopher published would be fine with JRR since he cleaned up a lot of the issues in his notes.
Tolkien indeed wrote a mythological series, just like in real world where myths has variable versions, Tolkien rethinking his world is kinda how the myths evolved over the centuries.
Would you consider doing a piece on the songs in LOTR and in Poems of Middle-earth? I had in mind especially Bilbo's song in Rivendell the night before the Fellowship set off. Poignant. I used to sing Donald Swann's setting so long ago that I almost think it was in another life, or that was another person.... If you compared Errantry with Bilbo's song of Earendil, and described The Sea-Bell, linking it with Frodo's dreams, I'm sure you would make another excellent video.
I agree that “legendarium” or simply “mythology” is a good descriptor of Tolkien‘s body of fantasy, and more useful than “cannon.” The myths of any given culture never conform to a fixed, rigid canon. Stories about a particular mythic character (say, Heracles or Loki) or event (say, the Trojan War) tend to be fairly consistent with o e anothe, , but accounts vary noticeably, especially from region to region. Certainly before oral traditions were set down in writing, there were many local variations. But even written accounts varied. We have only a small number of surviving Greek tragedies, but Aristotle and others write of numerous popular versions of the Oedipus story: Sophocles himself is said to have penned at least 5 versions. Tolkien made Middle-earth more than roomy enough for competing accounts of almost everything he wrote about.
Imagine if Tolkien was around the modern age of tech and instead of writing books for his story he just made the greatest live service RPG of all time, always updating it over time the same way he did he writing
In the world of J.R.R. Tolkien's Middle-earth, the canonical books are primarily those written by Tolkien himself, as they form the core of the legendarium. The most significant works considered canonical include:
1. **The Hobbit**: Published in 1937, this novel follows the adventures of Bilbo Baggins, a hobbit who is swept into a quest to reclaim treasure guarded by the dragon Smaug.
2. **The Lord of the Rings**: This epic fantasy trilogy consists of three volumes:
- **The Fellowship of the Ring**
- **The Two Towers**
- **The Return of the King**
These books follow the journey of the hobbit Frodo Baggins as he sets out to destroy the One Ring, accompanied by a diverse fellowship of companions.
3. **The Silmarillion**: Published posthumously in 1977, edited by Tolkien's son, Christopher Tolkien, this book provides a comprehensive overview of the mythology, history, and cosmology of Middle-earth. It includes stories of creation, the struggles of the Valar and Maiar, the First Age of Middle-earth, and the rise and fall of great kingdoms and heroes.
4. **Unfinished Tales**: Also edited by Christopher Tolkien and published in 1980, this book contains a collection of unfinished and fragmentary tales set in Middle-earth, along with extensive commentary and notes by Christopher.
5. **The History of Middle-earth**: This series consists of twelve volumes edited by Christopher Tolkien, published between 1983 and 1996. It provides extensive analysis, commentary, and unpublished material related to the development of Tolkien's legendarium, including early drafts, alternate versions of stories, and detailed background information.
These works, authored by J.R.R. Tolkien and edited or published posthumously by his son Christopher Tolkien, form the core of the Tolkien canon and are considered authoritative sources for understanding the mythology and history of Middle-earth. Other works, such as "The Adventures of Tom Bombadil," "The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien," and various collections of Tolkien's essays and lectures, also contribute to the broader understanding of Tolkien's world but may not be considered as central to the canon as the aforementioned texts.
According to ChatGPT
I would love to see a tradition of passing along the responsibilities of authorship and ongoing creation experimented with. I think we get a little too preoccupied with the concept of “legitimate” in some cases.
Given what's been happening to adaptations lately, I think the obsession is more than fair.
@@nothing4mepls973 I get it. It just seems that, in the world’s we really fall in love with, we will always crave more detail and storyline than 1 person could reasonably produce. Maybe building a tradition of apprenticeship in fiction could help with that. 🤷🏻 just a thought.
@free2trudge I see what you mean. It's a good idea, passing the torch and all. I can think of one example of that in the works right now. Let's see how Berserk goes now that it's original creator is gone.
Great video 😊I think the different manuscripts mirror Tolkiens development as a person and a writer, at least that's a way I like to see it and I can enjoy all of his work without focusing on what's right or wrong... If that makes any sense 😅 keep up the good work 😊
There is something symmetrically beautiful with Tolkien's works though that allows just about anything to be dropped into the Canonical Universe and storey lines. Since he was writing it with heavy religious textual implications like the Bible, Book of Invasions, Edda of the Old Norse, etc; his Universe was very repetitive and cyclical in terms of the underlying story and struggle for the protagonists and antagonists to play roles in over and over. It's a recount to the choices of doom that were made during the first singing and the struggle of Melkor and Manwe for Ilvitar's attention. It always involves someone being well meaning and trying to protect something, while the other is trying to corrupt, but they both end up doing great harm over all and in time. Once in Arda you have the ages before the lamps and before the trees where Melkor is literally acting like a spoiled child because no ones playing the game the way he wants them to, then when the Children of Iluvatar start to awaken the Valar attempt to shelter the Elves which gives the Elves a superiority complex and causes the whole curse on Feanor's people, the Elves then do the same thing with man that the Valar did to them, etc until you get to the point where the main evil is Sharky (Saruman) and what he chooses to dominate is the Shire with Mary, Pip, and Sam liberating it and killing Saruman and Grima. It's a slow process of Middle Earth filtering and diluting the great evil and great zeal both Melkor and Manwe projected into Arda shifting it from Arda as it should be until everything understands each other including Melkor and Manwe and this Arda can end and the second singing can begin.
You could call the illustrations Tolkien did himself canon, including the emblems and heraldry. There’s also recordings of the him reading-and sometimes singing-his chapters and poems. I’d consider them “canon” for the pronunciations of names, tones of voices (his Gollum is VERY good), and tunes for the songs.
Unfortunately it also means the tunes by Donald Swann are canon too-I prefer Shore’s versions, personally-since they got the Professor’s stamp of approval and at least one, Namárië, was based on his own humming.
@Letsthinkaboutit-mb7nn Well now I have a question to ask if I ever meet Andy Serkis! 😂
I think Tolkien’s canon is to enjoy his world in a vague understanding of his purpose. I feel he created it to be enjoyed. Don’t think too much into it, there are loose ideas as to who the characters are, and what they could’ve done in different situations. His 4 books are all that should be looked at as canon, everything else is really just ideas of what could be.
I actually in some cases prefer Tolkien's earlier versions of his stories. It's really cool the insight Christopher Tolkien gave us into how the stories developed over time.
Good job 👍
I would love a review of the rings of power from your perspective. What you think based on what you know about JRR Tolkiens writings.
Given that Tolkien didn't come up with any of this, and that he was merely translating lost texts which document the real history of our world, I forgive him his inconsistencies, as it's not easy assembling a puzzle with so many missing pieces.
I always say that canon is whatever the author says it is. Like people get on Rowling for changing a few things after she finished the 7 main books, and I remind them that Tolkien literally re-wrote the Hobbit after it was first published to fit the LotR and even changed things from LotR in his later writings.
In the case of Tolkien, we cant ask him anymore but it was clear he was fundamentally against having a canon.
My rule for what is canon allows for this. Basically, everything is canon that he ever wrote.
Maybe Tolkien's true canon is the friends we made along the way
What a beautiful idea!
Man, Golem isn't canon :(
Immediately researching Sherlock Holmes Canon and come right back!
Had an interesting conversation with a friend on the subject of "canon" which led to Babylon 5... Apparently JMS would read fanfic and would decide whether it was Canon whether he liked it or not. I like this and hope there's truth in it haha
I've got a question I think is worth exploring... how much was the total estimated value of the troll hoard that Bilbo and the dwarves came across and buried? How much was retrieved by Bilbo and other dwarves afterward, and how much of the total value was relative to how much treasure Bilbo brought home? I think the fact that Bilbo only took one (or two?) small chest(s) home after his adventure is worth talking about, not only because it's pretty much all he could carry and hope to want, but because he chose to continue on with the dwarves at that point. I feel like after all is said and done, whether the treasure came from the troll hoard or the Lonely Mountain, it would have been the same volume. So in retrospect, Bilbo could have taken the shared riches from the troll encounter and gone home with as much wealth as he did at the end of the adventure. Not that he ever would have, of course. Just a topic I think is worth making a video out of :)
What’s your opinion on if we should have a ‘new’ revised Silmarillion? A lot of things were discovered by Christofer and others after ‘77 and maybe it’s time for someone to re-construct the book?
Tolkien's shifting canon:
Lost Tales (the prototype Silmarillion that was almost complete minus the Tales of Earendil)
1926 Sketch of the Mythology (short but completed)
1930 Silmarillion (the first one called as such and the only "completed" Silmarillion.
1937 Quenta Silmarillion (about three quarters completed)
The Hobbit (which only had vague connections to the mythology)
Lord of the Rings (the deliberate sequel to the Hobbit BUT the accidental sequel to the Silmarillion and Tolkien's prototype Numenorian writings; it is an ending but messes up the beginning and middle parts of the mythology)
Early 1950s Silmarillion (reworked to try and transform the various Silmarillions into a true prequel for Lord of the Rings; this was probably half completed)
Post 1954: Varying short stories, commentaries, philological essays, and histories expanding upon or altering the varying Silmarillions, the First Age, the Second Age, the Third Age and Lord of the Rings. This kind of bridged the gap between LOTR and the Silmarillion but only created further plotholes, new unexplored plots and even greater shifts in writing style.
1977: Christopher Tolkien's edited Silmarillion- or as I like to call it: Bilbo's Silmarillion (Translations of Eldar Tales) which was the closest the Silmarillion got to a LOTR prequel.
TL;DR version: The moment Tolkien left the Tales of Earendil unfinished this began the pattern of Tolkien leaving incomplete most of his works and thus doomed the Silmarillion to a rushed and unfinished ending.
I consider anything Tolkien wrote as well as all the things his son Christopher published or helped publish as possible canon. For me, it's all about what makes the most coherent whole with a bias towards what he wrote later. But there will always be lots of room for individual interpretation. At the same time, that room should not be used for adding things that do not fit the spirit of the Legendarium.
Difference between canon and legendarium is that canon seeks precision while legendarium is intentionally vague.
Just trying to imagine Sam taking a picture with his Canon of Frodo shooting a cannon and coming to a conclusion that Canons and cannons in Tolkien's canon are uncanonical
Imagine if, when Saruman introduced his dynamite at Helm's Deep, everyone, even Sauron started giving him a cold shoulder. As if he just did something incredibly distasteful and low-brow. Violence is one thing, but adding this "modern" approach into our world... You may have called Radagast the fool, but this is just tone deaf drunk at an opera stage.