Tolkien Forums

you're confusing me
why should it not be considered lore, just as any other of the books...it is after all a book based on the knowledge gathered by the Elves during the First Age...so I'd say it is Lore
perhaps an echo of lore only in the respect that much information had been taken from songs or tales such as the Aldudenie, that were then retold in the Silmarillion
still, why should it not be considered lore just as the original versions of the story?
I don't think considering the Sil lore underestimates the original material in any way, the original material just served as a source of information for the Sil

of course that could have been done, but Tolkien simply didn't do that
isn't a part of LOTR the same?
the appendices and the tale of the years, are just as well only lore repercussions, but I don't think that this underestimates the scrolls of Gondor in any way.

How do you know he had less ability? In The Silmarillion it does not say which parts were edited ansd which were not so how can you judge Chris Tolkien's ability?

Hmmmmm. Let's start the answer with, as stated in my previous post, it's my opinion, to which I am entitled.

That was the easy unsupported answer. For the more drawn out version, I would offer speculation based on what is known. Within the body of Tolkiens letters and the Unfinished Tales we find references to what Tolkien himself thought of the Silmarillion and some of its tales. I cannot say that I accept the notion that Tolkien did not have the time in his life to finish his work, since it appears that he simply was not satisfied with it and shelved the project. My comment on his ability is based on the way in which the works were posthumously published. If he had his father's ability he could have simply completed the task in a more cohesive manner. Again this is just my opinion when comparing the Silmarillion, which I truly enjoy, to the Hobbit and LoTR series.

The publishing of UT just shows us that he didnt really have the intention of completing or adding significantly the work and I would further suggest that much of what CT published was not in an effort to build upon his father's work.


Not that my opinion of CT is the topic of this thread, but rather the consistency of the Silmarillion and I offered the fact that it was not entirely desired by JRR Tolkien that it should be published its form at his death which would give an insight into why Gollum does not perceive it as lore.

The Ainulindalë is the piece wherein Tolkien made most effort to achieve the epic tone of elven bards. In comparison to the tales, it is closer to the quintessence of lore.

If we merely follow non-reason in discerning genres, we might classify Tolkien's love letters as lore using the name of the author as an argument. I disapprove of defending fiction from unbiased analysis.

Regarding the tone, in retrospect: Do you remember my previous thread[s] questioning the worth and categorization of LotR and related pieces? Tolkien was an average poet, both in terms of quantity and quality. What would genuine elvish literature be like? I think of British classics, like Byron or Tennyson or Keats or Milton, of course not indigeniously Earthly but deprived of unrestrained rampant romanticistic cheesines. I picture it somewhat somber, in between modern black metal lyrics and Illiad, all majestically framed into flawless meter.

What I mean to say is, I suppose, we do not grasp the elven lore, not because we are not J. R. R. T. but because we are not inhuman.

[With honourable exceptions. But these are the more distant form E lore the more extreme they are. Yes I permit exceptions to the previous statement also, but I constantly think of Nietzsche. He wrote poems, too.]

As I have mentioned in other threads, I find Ainulindale and Valaquenta a bit more difficult to read for the first time. Perhaps it is that quality which Gollum refers to as epic tone of the Elven bards.

Because it is fantasy literature which I read for enjoyment more than anything else, I am not qualified to compare Tolkien to Byron, Keats, or Milton, except aesthetically, which is highly subjective and thus not worth doing. And I have not read Tennyson.

I am intrigued at the suggestion that Elvish lit would be comparable to a black metal / Illiad hybrid in flawless meter. I had actually never considered such a creation. I will agree with your conclusion that we lack the ability to think as the Elves due to our limitations.


MoS - Might I suggest the OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY?



-- Edited by Celethil at 04:27, 2006-10-05

That was intended in good humour (note the British -our), not malice or spite.

I very much enjoy the Silmarillion and yes I can see how some would find it harder to read than some of the other books.  I have always taken the information from the book as part of the lore of the whole.  Yes there are many holes and questions, but it seems the book would have to be thousands of pages long in order to tell all the tales for the length of time the book covers.  I think that the reason why Tolkien did not want to publish it was because he felt it was incomplete and would of if he could, have made the book thousands of pages long.  So for my part, I take the Silmarillion as part of the whole lore, whether it be correct or not.

For a retold Echo, the Sil has definitely a lot of power. When I was reading it for the first time, I got Goosebumps. It inspired me so much, that within reading 30 pages of it, I wrote a poem about what I had read. It's a jumble to be sure, seeing I was brandnew to Tolkien and his writings, but the words had a power, I for myself, could not deny.

mos, that's incorrect
As stated in the Prologue of LotR, some portions of The Thain's Book (a copy of the Red Book of Westmarch) are available to modern readers. The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings are derived from the original Red Book. The Appendices found at the end of The Lord of the Rings contain material that was added to The Thain's Book in Minas Tirith, such as The Tale of Aragorn and Arwen. The Silmarillion is a compiled from Bilbo's Translations from the Elvish.

So as you see, all of these books had fictional writers, Bilbo for the most part with additional writing by Frodo and Sam, and more annotations and corrections by Gondor's lore masters.

So actually, the Silmarillion is based on Bilbo's Tranlations from the Elvish, which again is based on an Elvish account of the First Age kept in Rivendell.