This last week on X, a debate raged in Tolkien fandom, splitting into two equally wrong camps: those who dismiss The Silmarillion as Christopher Tolkien’s glorified fan fiction, and those who invoke Tolkien’s stated wish for a living mythology to justify Amazon rewriting the Second Age wholesale.
"those who invoke Tolkien’s stated wish for a living mythology to justify Amazon rewriting the Second Age wholesale"
This is like saying that because Italian cuisine is a living and vibrant tradition, it is acceptable to pour ketchup over dog turds and call it Spaghetti Bolognese.
I would eat that over watching the whole Rings of Power series. I'd shovel it down as quickly as possible before gargling the highest proof vodka from the lowest shelf.
At least my misery and disgust would be quick and physical rather than stretched over hours of spiritual and mental torture.
When Tolkien wrote that stuff about imagining a living mythology with room for other minds and hands etc, he was talking about the Lost Tales phase, and called the dream absurd, "my star has long since fallen" etc. After LOTR came out he didn't want people writing their own sequels or expansions, privately calling them impertinent young asses with their tripe etc. So no it's not an excuse for stuff like Rings of Power, it's conveniently ignoring the context. Category error.
I may be oversimplifying here, but regardless of "version," I consider what Professor Tolkien wrote canon; the garbage spewed out by Amazon in his name is not...
The testicular self over-estimation of Hollywood is collapsing under its own immense gravitational well and is threatening to become a reality devouring singularity.
If someone else could write a legendarium like Tolkien, they would have already.
It's been decades. No one has, and at the going rate, no one will. We only had one Homer, one Shakespeare, and one Tolkien.
The only mildly redeeming thing we ever got from the imitators were a few decades of Del Rey books feverishly publishing Terry Brooks immitating Tolkien (and worse) others immitating Terry Brooks immitating Tolkien.
But at least that was respectful. There's a flattery in imitation. Hollywood, however, sneers, declares it can do better, and pushes out some fecalized cinematic abortion and then goes on a press tour declaring it both stunning and brave.q
"those who invoke Tolkien’s stated wish for a living mythology to justify Amazon rewriting the Second Age wholesale"
This is like saying that because Italian cuisine is a living and vibrant tradition, it is acceptable to pour ketchup over dog turds and call it Spaghetti Bolognese.
Cards on the table:
I would eat that over watching the whole Rings of Power series. I'd shovel it down as quickly as possible before gargling the highest proof vodka from the lowest shelf.
At least my misery and disgust would be quick and physical rather than stretched over hours of spiritual and mental torture.
I knew I was doing a real disservice to ketchup and dog crap, but it was the most fitting analogy I could come up with.
My dog likes both of those things. They can't be that bad.
When Tolkien wrote that stuff about imagining a living mythology with room for other minds and hands etc, he was talking about the Lost Tales phase, and called the dream absurd, "my star has long since fallen" etc. After LOTR came out he didn't want people writing their own sequels or expansions, privately calling them impertinent young asses with their tripe etc. So no it's not an excuse for stuff like Rings of Power, it's conveniently ignoring the context. Category error.
I may be oversimplifying here, but regardless of "version," I consider what Professor Tolkien wrote canon; the garbage spewed out by Amazon in his name is not...
The testicular self over-estimation of Hollywood is collapsing under its own immense gravitational well and is threatening to become a reality devouring singularity.
If someone else could write a legendarium like Tolkien, they would have already.
It's been decades. No one has, and at the going rate, no one will. We only had one Homer, one Shakespeare, and one Tolkien.
The only mildly redeeming thing we ever got from the imitators were a few decades of Del Rey books feverishly publishing Terry Brooks immitating Tolkien (and worse) others immitating Terry Brooks immitating Tolkien.
But at least that was respectful. There's a flattery in imitation. Hollywood, however, sneers, declares it can do better, and pushes out some fecalized cinematic abortion and then goes on a press tour declaring it both stunning and brave.q