History of the Hobbit

talking of which. wheres Orwell?

Mrs Figg wrote:talking of which. wheres Orwell?

He realized that he could not well explain JDR's quote about the possibly once golden Noldor and is currently hiding somewhere in the south of France.

I'm just guessing. I am not guessing that he's hiding in France because this quote seems, so far, inexplicable, but the two things might be related if true.

I bet that he's hiding out with Christopher Tolkien while the two of them are protected by a small army of wild boars.

That's where I would go Eldorion. Wild boars mean safety!

It all fits now. We are on to you Orwell!

[Or]Well?

See what I did there, using the 'well' part of Orwell as in 'well' are you ever going to get to my question which was so long ago I forgot what it was.

Ahem. Anyway...

... don't tell me you stopped reading HOH before you got to the most interesting part of the book!

Hmm, apparently Rateliffe is releasing 'A Brief History Of The Hobbit' in September:

http://lingwe.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/a-brief-history-of-hobbit.html

I can't see the value in this myself, it might appeal to slightly lazy Tolkien nerds or completists, but much of the value I personally got from the HOTH was in Rateliffe's detailed commentary and essays, presumably this new edition is a strip back 'basics' version of the book (or it's simply a reprint in a very very small font...) designed to go hand in hand with the published Hobbit.

I'll pass.

On a side note, Rateliffe some how found room for a 13 page essay on Radagast (mentioned once), but he could never find room for an essay on the Talking Purse, I hope this is rectified in any reprints...
I wonder what else Rateliffe is working on...

I think I'll look into this abridged version when it is released. I have held off on purchasing History of The Hobbit due to price, availability, and general confusion on my part when it comes to the kindle edition. But I think I'll get this. Thanks for posting this, Malick!

My pleasure Bungo (remember to keep an eye on the release dates though). In September the Hobbit First Edition (1937 version) fascimile and the extended edition of The Adventures of Tom Bombadil are expected to be published.

I don't own a kindle but I gather they are a bit confusing to use, I ended up ordering the HOTH online-never saw it in the shops, it was annoying at first having to wait for Amazon to get new stock in, but it ended up being cheaper and more convenient than buying it in the high street ( I finally saw some copies for sale last month, 35 quid though).

Jason Fisher explains [thanks for the link and information]...

In other words, what John is pruning is his own commentary and notes. He’s cutting that down aggressively, aiming to preserve only the essentials, and leaving mostly just the original draft text of The Hobbit. It should be a welcome addition for those fans who might have found the complete History a bit overwhelming — although personally, I revel in minutiae.

I do too, usually, but I found HOH to go 'too far' off track sometimes, in my subjective opinion.

Not that my thread on Galadriel ever did. Ahem.

Anyway this is news to me, and I'll probably get it.


I assume JDR has read my 'hair commentary' and is accordingly revising his golden Noldor comments too  

Elthir wrote:[Or]Well?

See what I did there, using the 'well' part of Orwell as in 'well' are you ever going to get to my question which was so long ago I forgot what it was.

Ahem. Anyway...

... don't tell me you stopped reading HOH before you got to the most interesting part of the book!

I don't often come to these threads. I mean, they're full of intelligent conversations (or earnestly attempted intelligent conversations as a minimum standard) and discussions are often accompanied by some research (sometimes), and the discussions inherently require (as a minimun standard) at least a modicum of actual thinking from me - and often a majoritum* of thinking (which is not my strong suit)... You should know by now Elthir, I'm not really all that in to that kind of thing (you know, logical and learned thinking).


*finding the right word to suit an occasion is not my strong suit either -- though I'm not that bad at making words up to suit an occasion, methinks.  

O I like majoritum. And I like O instead of oh it seems.

And I think you have shown yourself to be both reasonable [which I much prefer to logical in any case] and learned Orwell.

I think it's likewise sensible to avoid defending this statement from JDR. As I noted, I don't remember what it was anymore [something about grey hair among the Noldor, or maybe it was about golden horses], or what my point was, but I think the overarching goal was to be seen as 'correcting' a known Tolkien scholar...

... which logically but not reasonably might be argued to mean that I could have handled The History of The Hobbit that much better than he did, if indeed I wrote the exact same things as JDR did in the rest of his book...

... minus the [forgotten] comment in question of course. I mean that seems logical to me.

Or at least it seems logical in the majorative sense.

For anyone interested A Brief History of The Hobbit is available to pre order on Amazon for £6.89:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Brief-History-Hobbit-John-Rateliff/dp/0007557256/ref=sr_1_8?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1404649929&sr=1-8&keywords=tolkien

I didn't even know there was an abridged version of HoTH. Pretty cool.

I wonder if an Abridged version of the H.O.M.E would ever happen? Alot of people seem to have difficluty with the footnotes and C.Tolkien's commentary.

Perhaps no one here will find it too strange that, in the following, I seem to defend nonsense.

JD Rateliff states of the Rivendell Elves: "If in some features the elves of the valley echo the worst excesses of Edwardian and Georgian fairy sentimentality, other elements suggest traditional fairy lore -- i. e., folk lore rather than fairy tales" Toward the latter point, Rateliff also notes the hints that Elves can be dangerous, for instance. Regarding the former he writes: "The other, the image of elves as delicate little fairy dancers or pipers, derives from Jacobean writers like Drayton and Shakespeare and is represented here by the Elves in the trees."

Stated generally, that's fair enough; so to argue with myself, I don't recall any specific description here to necessarily confirm delicateness here in The Hobbit, and regarding littleness, the Elf we meet is a "tall" young fellow. Yes, the Elves sing in trees, but I can't imagine the Elves of Lothlorien not singing in their Mallorn-trees, for instance -- they might not sing a nonsense song in The Lord of the Rings, or a ridiculous song...

... but then again, what about the arguable benefits of nonsense in life?

I wonder if Tolkien would have edited out this Elven-song, or replaced it. He could have in the third edition in the 1960s [and in the second as well, in theory, though JRRT appears more focused on the finding of the ring there, for obvious reasons], but, well, he "could have" done lots of things, and didn't, for whatever reason [meaning I realize such a statement only goes so far, and arguably not very]. In the 1960 Hobbit we get tantalizingly close to this section, and I think it would be easy enough to eject the song without too much ripple-effect... but again, should it be [in theory] ejected, even considering the larger legendarium? This might be a good place to introduce a little frivolity into even a "mostly" Noldorin culture, to possibly set against dirges and tears.

If "some features" refers to the Hobbit song and more, I'm guessing that the teasing is meant. Relatively speaking, the Rivendell elves aren't in the story for long, and I understand the general effect a reader might get by judging only what they find here. That said, Rateliff also notes: "The mocking of other's difficulties (people who can't swim crossing the fast-running stream) shows a traditional heartlessness out of keeping with Tolkien's Elves elsewhere [footnote: with possible exception of the Green Elves behavior in the Nauglafring, when they laugh at and mock the desperate Dwarves attempting to flee their ambush at the fords of Aros."]."

To me these scenarios don't seem that aptly comparable though, as in The Book Of Lost Tales II, the Green Elves had been slaying Dwarves, before their fleeing, Dwarven "illshapen figures" filled the Elves with mirth. Without digressing into this early tale (and the arguable early notion of Dwarves as well), to my mind the teasing in The Hobbit is rather light-hearted and merry, as fits with the welcome the Dwarves receive here.

The Elves tease the Dwarves and Bilbo for example, but in The Lord of the Rings, some of the Noldor [chapter with Gildor and Company] tease the hobbits a bit as well [".. and Hobbbits are so dull," they laughed"], and later, as I read it, some Elves lightly tease Bilbo in Elrond's House, laughing that Bilbo doesn't tire of reciting his own verses. Not teasing in a mean way, but with affection I would say, or merriment. I think the Elves of Rivendell are summed up nicely by Sam: "Some like kings, terrible and splendid; and some as merry as children."

I take it that these "some", who are merry as children, were rather merry when the Dwarves and Bilbo arrived years before. As Gandalf says [The Hobbit]...

"Some Elves have over merry tongues. Good night!"

{{ Oddly, given Tolkiens seeming almost complete disregard for Celtic myths and tales, his elves have been very consistent to me from TH through LotR's with the notion of the faery folk I have always known since childhood.

To give two brief examples that fit here- the Macleod clan has a faery flag, allegedly given to the Chief upon marrying a faery princess- the flag is magical and when unfurled in battle the Macleods cannot lose- it has been used twice so far, the last time in WW1- the Macleods were on the victorious side both times. This princess was taller than the average human female, beautiful and also slightly dangerous, in that there was a deal to be struck between mortal and immortal folk (there usually is, something Tolkien retains- a version of the idea of a bargain is there in the Arwen/Aragorn story- and interestingly its arguable that unusually for a tale between mortal/immortal deals, Arwen comes off worse off out of it by renouncing her faery- something she seems to regret in her later years).

Another tale concerns a piper who also struck a deal with faery folk but came out on the losing side- his fate was to have to play his pipes for the dancing and singing of the faery folk in their underground realms forever. And it is said that sometimes you can still hear the distant lament of his pipes coming from far underground.

Both tales are about elves by another name, but each version presents different aspects of them- they can be mischievous, devious, childlike, mocking, teasing and dangerous, or they can beneficial, bringing love to mortals and magical delights or most commonly striking bargains with mortals of some kind- with various outcomes good and bad. In other word more serious elves, more human almost.

So when I read the elves singing teasing words at the dwarves or Galadriels magnificent speech by the Mirror they dont seem at all estranged to me, just different aspects of the same faery folk. Sometimes they are light and silly, full of childish delights and joy simply at being, and at others they are deadly serious and deal with mortal perils. Again, not unlike humans.

I think Tolkien never took the 'nonsense' songs out of TH because they still felt true to him about elves- elves act like this. And to remove it would be to diminish the fullness of their races characterisation. As you point out its not  that they stop acting like this in LotR's just the times are darker and grimmer and so are they in response and there are less opportunities too- yet where opportunity arises, wherever they can stop a moment and forget the troubles of their current time they tend to fall back into mirth making, revelry, tale telling and teasing. }}}

Elthir wrote:O I like majoritum. And I like O instead of oh it seems.

And I think you have shown yourself to be both reasonable [which I much prefer to logical in any case] and learned Orwell.

I think it's likewise sensible to avoid defending this statement from JDR. As I noted, I don't remember what it was anymore [something about grey hair among the Noldor, or maybe it was about golden horses], or what my point was, but I think the overarching goal was to be seen as 'correcting' a known Tolkien scholar...

... which logically but not reasonably might be argued to mean that I could have handled The History of The Hobbit that much better than he did, if indeed I wrote the exact same things as JDR did in the rest of his book...

... minus the [forgotten] comment in question of course. I mean that seems logical to me.

Or at least it seems logical in the majorative sense.

You certainly have had me thinking on this Elthir... and when I have a witty, erudite and learned reply, I will reply... a reply worth thinking about, or thinking worthy of... and a reply worth thinking about is never late, it always arrives just when it does no earlier, nor later... nor in between, existentially speaking... just saying...

Excellent Orwell!

And do please try to avoid an in between timed reply... such a thing is sure to behorse, and have me, once again, involved with grass.

although to be honest, I'm not sure an unforseen behorsing wouldn't do me some green, green good, at the right moment

Yes, quite prudent, Elthir (whom I have on occasion suspected to be a doppelgänger by name Eldo, but which is neither here nor there) for we call it 'pipeweed' in these parts and it is not for the respectable, not publicly anyway, and even 'horse' can be interpreted by those who nowadays must dang well interpret 'everything'! As to any 'beholving': that is purely a matter for your discretion, I prefer no part it, for it sounds subversive, and therefore unrespectable, or maybe 'Victorian', and therefore indisputably Respectable, applying the capital. You see, a word that can be taken either way or even - Eru forbid! - both ways and so, as you must clearly note, open, yet again, to them dang well ' interpreters'! Just saying.

 

For the record though, my "speech" and speech patterns mark me as an older man. Eldo is a younger man despite his considerable skills and notable Tolkien knowery. No person I know under the age of thirty says "knowery" anymore, for example, and probably not "speech patterns" too, for all I know.

It's probably "SP" nowadays if anything.

who says nowadays, or these days, these days

Plus behorsing is sadly almost always a thing of the past, even for those still so blessed it kind of seems some senturies ago.

{{{ So little time, so little drinking time! But had to stop to say, Orwell my upside-down friend I knew I had missed your contributions of late, too few and far between (that one marks my age Elthir!) but not until reading through this exchange had I realized how much!
And in Elthir you have found a superbly able sparring partner.

In which light I propose to change for this years Forum Awards (yes there will be one, probably, I'm not allowed to officially say yet, shhhh!) and that henceforth (oh dear, I'm truly ancient now!) the Best Couple award be renamed Best Double-Act in order to broaden this years field of potential candidates.
Any one to second?! Or do the youthful types need an explanation of what a double-act is? (and no its not about sex!) }}}}

Not about sex? Mmmm... i think it fair to say if you could make it about sex, you may get more interest... just the mention of the word got me more interested... in a merely platonic way, of course... food for thought... melons and sausages... ????

Elthir wrote:  

For the record though, my "speech" and speech patterns mark me as an older man. Eldo is a younger man despite his considerable skills and notable Tolkien knowery. No person I know under the age of thirty says "knowery" anymore, for example, and probably not "speech patterns" too, for all I know.

It's probably "SP" nowadays if anything.

who says nowadays, or these days, these days

Plus behorsing is sadly almost always a thing of the past, even for those still so blessed it kind of seems some senturies ago.

Behorsing... of errantry, where has it gone.... as saith an ancient bard of whom I made up and so cannot identify.. not exactly...

SP has gone too far in not being spoken more often, the be frank, and even that, only you and I appear old enough to remember it - not that I was in memory of it until you reminded me: though maybe  I only thought you reminded me of it but in fact it was put first in my mind only just a moment ago when I read it... a great travesty nonetheless or all the more....

'Knowers', of course, was never but in the eye of the beholder it beholves me to say, though reluctantlly, being at the moment in grave (grey?) fear (risk, even) of behorsing the thrust of your jousting pole, and, of course, if i was to merely make mere mention of it, even in passing, would it not be not errantry, now or historically...???

Plus behorsing is sadly almost always a thing of the past, even for those still so blessed it kind of seems some senturies ago.

And so it seems with spelling Gawd loves us