Talk:J. R. R. Tolkien: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 05:09, 13 May 2005

Latest revision as of 18:37, 27 July 2025

Line 1:

{{Talk header}}

===Biography===

{{Article history

|action1=FAC

|action1date=13:28, 21 November 2005

|action1link=Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/J. R. R. Tolkien/archive1

|action1result=not promoted

|action1oldid=28837868

|action2=FAC

>Tolkien and Edith had four children: John Francis Reuel ([[November 17]], [[1917]]),

|action2date=15:52, 5 May 2006

|action2link=Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/J. R. R. Tolkien

|action2result=promoted

|action2oldid=51501298

|action3=FAR

My copy of _A Biography_ by Humphrey Carpenter says that it is November 16. Is ther any correction or other source of birthday? --[[User:RedDragon|RedDragon]] 03:59, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

|action3date=16:19, 2 May 2009

|action3link=Wikipedia:Featured article review/J. R. R. Tolkien

|action3result=kept

|action3oldid=287430223

|maindate=November 15, 2006

===bibliography===

|currentstatus=FA

|otd1date=2020-01-03|otd1oldid=933633775

|otd2date=2023-01-03|otd2oldid=1131111031

}}

{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|class=FA|vital=yes|listas=Tolkien, J. R. R.|blp=no|1=

{{WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia}}

{{WikiProject Biography|a&e-priority=high|a&e-work-group=yes}}

{{WikiProject Children's literature|importance=top}}

{{WikiProject Constructed languages|importance=top}}

{{WikiProject Middle-earth|importance=top}}

{{WikiProject England|importance=mid}}

{{WikiProject University of Oxford|importance=mid}}

}}

<!--En-JRRTolkien.ogg-->

{{British English Oxford spelling|date=September 2010}}

<!--- Auto archiving configured by [[User:Mlpearc]] --->

I have added to the bibliography, drawing on [[de:Tolkien]]. It is now organized in 'academic works', 'prose', 'poetry' and 'posthumous publication'. I think this is an improvement over a strict chronological list, mixing academia and fiction (which is still the case in the poshumous section, though. but these are not publications ''by'' Tolkien, anyway, and they often consist of a substantial portion of editor's comments). The poetry sections aims at listing all poems by date of composition (although in cases with very involved histories, eg. Lay of Leithan, this is impossible). Ideally, for each poem should be added where it was published, e.g. ''Bilbo's last song'', composed 1966, published 1978 in The Road Goes Ever On (2nd edition), 1974 (poster) and 1990. [[User:Dbachmann|Dbachmann]] 12:53, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)

{{User:MiszaBot/config

|algo = old(60d)

|archive = Talk:J. R. R. Tolkien/Archive %(counter)d

|counter = 6

|maxarchivesize = 100K

|archiveheader = {{tan}}

|minthreadstoarchive = 1

|minthreadsleft = 4

}}

== Semi-protected edit request on 11 December 2024 ==

the heading "Fiction and poetry" should maybe become "non-academic", since it also contains autobiography.

{{edit semi-protected|J. R. R. Tolkien|answered=yes}}

:How about turning also "In Journal Articles" into its own article? It is rather long and most people won't be able

In the biography, under his childhood, it states that "(Tolkien) thought Alice's Adventures in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll was "amusing but disturbing". using J.R.R. Tolkien: A Biography as a source. This is not the case, in fact, on page 28, the author tells how Tolkien was "amused by Alice in Wonderland, though he had no desire to have adventures like Alice." I do not believe that having no desire to have similar adventures are the same as finding a story amusing but disturbing. [[User:Somemineral|Somemineral]] ([[User talk:Somemineral|talk]]) 23:37, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

:to easily find those articles. They are also probably heavily edited and commented, being published in a linguist

:journal, so they are not any more purely JRRTs work, in a way they are also academic works by someone else

: (I'm guessing and drawing from my poor memory here, I've only once seen copies of VT, years ago.)

:[[User:Jhi|Jhi]] 06:11, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

:I forgot to list the author, J.R.R. Tolkien: A Biography by Humphrey Carpenter. [[User:Somemineral|Somemineral]] ([[User talk:Somemineral|talk]]) 23:38, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

----

::{{done}}<!-- Template:ESp --> In what seems to be a clear case of [[WP:CITOGENESIS]], this quote can be found in a number of places on the web, but all cited back to Wikipedia. [[User:PianoDan|PianoDan]] ([[User talk:PianoDan|talk]]) 23:53, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

== Ancestry ==

Greetings to all Tolkienists from the Quenyaland (Finland).

The ancestry section is too large. [[User:Jack Upland|Jack Upland]] ([[User talk:Jack Upland|talk]]) 04:53, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

I have been lately editing the J.R.R.Tolkien entry a bit but now I ran into a moral dilemma. I find the mention about Esperanto in the main section:

:It's around 300 words, under 4% of the article, which does not seem unreasonable. Its 'main' link to [[Tolkien family]] is to a 4,500 word article, so a 300 word summary seems reasonable from that point of view too. [[User:Chiswick Chap|Chiswick Chap]] ([[User talk:Chiswick Chap|talk]]) 08:52, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

:''Tolkien had some familiarity with the artificial language, Esperanto, which he learned at 17 years of age. Though he did not claim to be an Esperantist, he was quoted as promoting its use.''

== Removed content ==

to be rather out-of-place, and especially the second sentence rather jarring and non-neutral. While mentioning Esperanto is not completely irrelevant (it is an artificial language, and Tolkien did know it), I do find its placement (and especially the second sentence) rather odd.

@[[User:Catfish Jim and the soapdish|Catfish Jim and the soapdish]] I was just wondering, is there a specific reason for removing what you did? [[User:CoolDino1|CoolDino1]] ([[User talk:CoolDino1|talk]]) 21:12, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

My inclination would be either to remove both sentences, or to start a complete new section talking about Tolkien's fascination with languages, and there possibly his knowledge of Esperanto (but still not his promotion of it) could be mentioned.

:I thought I was quite clear in my edit summary. David Ibata is not talking about JRR Tolkien's views, he's talking about Peter Jackson's views. '''''[[User:Catfish Jim and the soapdish|<span style="COLOR:#313F33">Catfish</span>]] [[User talk:Catfish Jim and the soapdish|<span style="COLOR:#313F33">Jim</span>]]<small style="COLOR:#313F33"> and the soapdish</small>''''' 21:23, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

Comments?

::Oh, I see, thanks. [[User:CoolDino1|CoolDino1]] ([[User talk:CoolDino1|talk]]) 18:45, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

-- [[User:Jarkko Hietaniemi|Jhi]]

:::No problem, here is what Ibata said:

:::''As a Japanese American, I cannot help imagining how the movie “Rings” would have been received had it appeared in 1942 instead of 2002. It would quickly have been seized upon as allegory, and there would have been no doubt whom the Orcs and Urak-hai represented: The “Japs.” Consider how closely the non-human adversaries in “Rings” resemble some of the worst depictions of the Japanese drawn by American and British illustrators during World War II.''

:::'''''[[User:Catfish Jim and the soapdish|<span style="COLOR:#313F33">Catfish</span>]] [[User talk:Catfish Jim and the soapdish|<span style="COLOR:#313F33">Jim</span>]]<small style="COLOR:#313F33"> and the soapdish</small>''''' 19:04, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

== Birthplace ==

Something (quotes below) towards a '''political beliefs''' section, perhaps? Can we get the exact quote, and ensure it's not out of context? I might have a look in bookshops/the library today and see what I can find; after that, I could do a decent 'political' section, I think.. -- [[User:Sam Francis|Sam]]

Tolkien' birthplace should be changed to Bloemfontein, Free State. It isn't the Orange free state anymore. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/152.110.103.151|152.110.103.151]] ([[User talk:152.110.103.151#top|talk]]) 13:18, 27 July 2025 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:''In an enlightening letter written to his son, Christopher, in 1943, Tolkien vented his frustration with government and the industrial age, "My political opinions lean more and more to anarchy (philosophically understood, meaning abolition of control not whiskered men with bombs) -- There is only one bright spot and that is the growing habit of disgruntled men of dynamiting factories and power stations."'' [http://www.infoshop.org/inews/stories.php?story=02/12/30/6884556]

:But it was part of the [[Orange Free State]] when Tolkien was born. That is more relevant than to what province the city belongs today (which can be learned from the article [[Bloemfontein]]). No need to change anything. --[[User:Qcomp|Qcomp]] ([[User talk:Qcomp|talk]]) 15:05, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

:''Here's one especially interesting quote from Tolkien: "My political opinions lean more and more to Anarchy (philosophically understood, meaning abolition of control not whiskered men with bombs) - or to `unconstitutional' Monarchy. I would arrest anybody who uses the word state (in any sense other than the inanimate realm of England and its inhabitants, a thing that has neither power, rights nor mind); and after a chance of recantation, execute them if they remained obstinate!" (The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, 1995, p. 63)'' [http://www.postpolitics.com/blogs/archives/000077.html]

:I think that a political section is quite in order, because Tolkien's political beliefs are very important to the interpretation of his fictional work. He vehemently denied any allegory of current events, but the political significance is evident. -[[User:Smack|Smack]] 01:23 22 Jul 2003 (UTC)

:Read Shippey's book before trying to assume too much politicial allegory. Middle-earth is complicated enough that one could do a Nostradamus and see patterns to fit one's desired conception. If there's a political theme, it's arises out of the modernity vs tradition conflict. Keep in mind that this is an encyclopedia, and we should be quoting published interpretations (citing the publications of course), not making up our own stuff. (BTW, as a magical realm Lothlórien hardly needs an economy. If we can have wizards, dragons, and seeing stones, why are we getting picky about science?) [[User:Stan Shebs|Stan]] 02:32 22 Jul 2003 (UTC)

:: Well I'm sure that ''some'' of Tolkien's politics influenced his stories. He did not like factories much and he did love trees, and Ted Sandyman's brick mill was a bit of a rallying cry against industry. Also his dislike of French food and sauces is illustrated in Bilbo's similar likes and dislikes. [[User:Vfp15|Vincent]] 06:24, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

----

Removed this stupid statement:

"One characteristic of Tolkien's fictional work that appeals to readers is its simplicity, which tends to preserve the noble and the evil while eschewing the complex and the uninspiring. Middle-earth has [[government]], but no [[bureaucracy]]; [[agriculture]] and [[craftsmanship]], but no [[economics]]; [[life cycle]]s, but no [[sex]]; [[deity|deities]], but scarcely any [[religion]]; and [[Magic (paranormal)|magic]], but no [[science]]. It is also highly unrealistic; for instance, Tolkien makes no attempt to explain how the [[forest]]ed and un-agricultural kingdom of [[Lothl&oacute;rien]] was able to sustain itself in the middle of hostile territory."

It really annoyed me, especially as it's not true.

[[User:Alun Ephraim|Alun Ephraim]] 15:01, 26 Oct 2003 (UTC)

:Alan, did you also remove the line about "the father of high fantasy"? This change goes too far, I think -- the statement may have needed softening but there is good reason to indicate the lasting influence and ground-breaking nature of the work. [[User:Jgm|Jgm]] 15:06, 26 Oct 2003 (UTC)

:just picture JRRT's reaction if someone had called him "father of high fantasy" to his face. enough said :)

: I also rephrased the stupid opposition ''"'''While''' his works are popular bla bla, ''scholars'' say they are heavily derived etc."''; you don't need to be a scholar to know the dwarves' names are from the Edda, and if you do know this, your enjoyment is likely to increase rather than decrease. [[User:Dbachmann|Dbachmann]] 12:53, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)

== added link ==

Just added a link to http://www.lotrlibrary.com It's a good site for information on the Tolkien's works that fits well on the list

== Prequel? ==

I'm not sure The Hobit is a prequel. As far as I'm aware (and Merriam Webster backs me up on this) a prequel is a work where the events preceed those of an earlier work. Hence, The Hobit can only a prequel if he wrote it after The Lord of the rings, which he didn't.

Dan

:Moreover, the word "prequel" wasn't even coined (to my knowledge - what does M-W say about that, I wonder?) at the time any of this was written and thus probably shouldn't be used to describe the work. I seem to recall that JRRT himself characterized the relationship between these stories in the introductions to one of the later editions of The Hobbit (but of course I do not have a copy available to check), one solution might be to use that terminology. [[User:Jgm|Jgm]] 18:21, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)

:I agree - ''LotR'' is a sequel (or better "follow-on"), but ''Hobbit'' is not a prequel. Why are there reversion wars going on here? [[User:Stan Shebs|Stan]] 08:09, 20 Dec 2003 (UTC)

its totally a seperate work, written (and i think) published before LOTR. it does '''preceed''' LOTR, but preceed and prequel mean totally different things [[User:Selphie|Selphie]] 16:00, GMT

::Ah! But in fact JRRT rewrote key portions of the Hobbit (Riddles in the Dark) to have it match the facts in LOTR. Better still, JRRT has Bilbo apologize to Oin during the Council of Elrond: "If others have heard the account told differently before... I was only trying to claim the ring as my very own". This way, JRRT justifies his own re-writing of the Hobbit. Now, can the ''re-written'' version be called a prequel? [[User:Vfp15|Vincent]] 06:30, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

"Prequel" is not a real word. At least not one JRRT would have considered using. Tolkien started to write a ''sequel'' to the Hobbit because he was asked to, and the LotR just grew from there, somehow (as he says in ''Letters'' somewhere) -- [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] 06:39, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

:Actually I fully agree, and prequel is an ugly word anyway. I only recently learned that the version of the Hobbit I read was the later one. I was at first very disappointed and a little disillusioned; I felt cheated that Tolkien didn't make LOTR compatible with the Hobbit UNTIL I realized how clever Tolkien's ploy was. I'm quite sure it was intentional, a pet theory you understand, but can it proved? Did Tolkien explicitly write or say that Bilbo's apology was in a way, his? Or at least a justification? After all both the Hobbit and the Red Book are presented as Bilbo's own work which Tolkien 'translated' from the Westron. The original Hobbit would have been a translation of Bilbo's original public version. [[User:Vfp15|Vincent]] 08:23, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

::Hmm, this should be in [[The Hobbit]]. I'll go make some edits. [[User:Anárion|[[Image:Anarion.png]]]] 08:30, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

:::Some info was there, but I've rewritten and added it. Please check [[The Hobbit#Alternative_Version]]. [[User:Anárion|[[Image:Anarion.png]]]] 08:42, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

::::Actually, the technical term I've heard for this (when the sequel to a book so far outshines it that it is seen as an introduction to a larger epic) is a "prelude"; not that many people call it that. ---Ricimer

== Was J. R. R. Tolkien really a Christian? ==

My youth pastor of my church challenged me with this question...Was J. R. R. Tolkien really a Christian or did he just say he was?? i find it very hard to see whether he is or not. As a Christian i do not want to judge him in anyway and do not want anyone who reads this to think that. Reading the book Lord of the Rings really surprised me. Even though it has some Christian meaning to it....it still has lots of fighting...which i think is wrong. i would like to read others input on this. please add a comment on this subject and that would be very helpful!!

:He was a devout Roman Catholic. Read his biography (by Humphrey Carpenter), read his letters, read almost anything published about him; you will find his religious beliefs made clear. (And if you think fighting is automatically wrong, read Mark 11:15 :-) [[User:Mirv| ]]&mdash;[[User:Mirv|MIRV]] [[User talk:Mirv|(talk)]] 01:07, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)

:Is the bible not full of wars, sacrifices and fights? A large number of very different people call themselves &quot;christian&amp;quot; and I don't see why we shouldn't allow Tolkien to call himself that if that was what he did. Besides, being a christian doesn't mean that you have to only write things about christianity. [[user Talk:MikeCapone|MikeCapone]]

:for all practical purposes, everyone who calls himself a christian is a christian. it's not like you have to pass an exam or something, and last time I checked, Tolkien had not been excommunicated by the pope, so he may fairly be called a catholic, too [[User:Dbachmann|Dbachmann]] 12:42, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

::In his last recorded interview, he presents himself as a devout Roman Catholic, apart from Mirv's comments about his works, letters... [[User:Pfortuny|Pfortuny]] 16:25, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

== External link policy? ==

It strikes me that this entry (like many others) could benefit from some sort of well-defined policy on how to choose and sort external links. For example, a link was recently added at the very top of the list to the page "[http://www.indepthinfo.com/tolkien/index.shtml Tolkien's World]". That seems like a perfectly fine site, but it doesn't contain all that much information (I don't know that it says much more on any topic than the Wikipedia itself, much less some of the other great links that were already here).

On the one hand, adding new links and new information is a good thing, and I'd hate to have battles over whether any given site "deserved" to be listed, and where. On the other hand, this is an encyclopedia entry, not an index of every Tolkien site on the web: there's a real value in presenting only the most "useful" information. With that in mind, I moved the "Tolkien's World" link down from the top of the list to what seemed like a more reasonable place.

The thing is, if I were writing this entry on my own, I probably wouldn't include it at all. That's not to say it's a bad site! It just doesn't rise to my idea of "extremely useful". For that matter, I feel like there are probably better places for quite a few links that are currently on the list. If it were up to me, I'd probably keep less than ten of the current links as part of this main entry. (I already rearranged the list of links substantially some time ago, and nobody complained bitterly at the time, but it would be nice to have a more distributed way of monitoring such things.)

So what's the best way to handle these issues? Is there any sort of established Wikipedia protocol? (I can't imagine that this is the first time the issue has come up.) And in particular, what should we do here (and in the other Tolkien entries)? --[[User:Steuard|Steuard]] 20:14, Apr 21, 2004 (UTC)

:I think you handled it well the times you made your modifications. I don't see a need for a debate over a standard policy that covers all articles, and unless there is disagreement over edits to this article's list of links, then a policy by which to resolve such issues is not needed. - [[User:Bevo|Bevo]] 20:23, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)

:There's no standard. Easy test is to pretend to be a random reader, who's just been partly sated by reading all of WP's detail, and wants more - does the external link provide additional material for you the reader? Could be more in-depth explanation, source texts, pictures, etc. If the site has negligible content not already in WP, strike it, it won't help our readers. [[User:Stan Shebs|Stan]] 21:42, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)

::Also, choose text that describes the external link from that point of view. One additional value that an external resource can have is to persist as a resource that can be checked periodically for updated content (even if after the update, the article contains the essential information in the link, it facilitates later updates to retain it in the list embedded in the article) - [[User:Bevo|Bevo]] 21:58, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)

:::there are far too many links. Like the (general WP) tendency to stuff all into the main article, we have here a tendency to include links that would be much more at home in other articles:

::*Informational, Works, Places in Tolkien's life: are on-topic as far as I'm concerned.

::*Encyclopedic -> [[Middle Earth]] / [[Arda]] / [[Legendarium]]

::*Thematic -> [[Languages of Middle-Earth]] / [[Works inspired by J. R. R. Tolkien]]

::*Movies -> [[The Lord of the Rings movie trilogy]] / [[Works inspired by J. R. R. Tolkien]]

::[[User:Dbachmann|dab]] 11:01, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

== Name style ==

Is there any reason why Tolkien's name is typed in as "J. R. R. Tolkien" with those clunky and bookish spaces in between the initials? This isn't proper MLA style for online text (or even printed work anymore, if I'm correct). And just look at it -- ridiculous and awkward. So I've been changing names to "J.R.R. Tolkien" whenever I find it, but I'd like to establish this as the accepted style for wikipedia. -- [[User:Alcarillo]]

:It's a controversial issue discussed at [[Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions#Vote: spaces after periods between initials?|Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions]]~. Spaces are used in Tolkien's books [[User:Ausir|Ausir]] 16:05, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

::It's currently better to use a standard style across Wikipedia: if we need to fix it later, we can do this programmatically, as with the display of dates. It's easier to do this if the style is consistent in the source text. -- [[User:The Anome|The Anome]] 16:55, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

::: Thanks for the quick replies. Spaces may be used in print because it's often easier on the eye. However, in an online environment, this doesn't work, even when not using a monospace type. That's why the traditional two spaces before a new sentence isn't used here either. BTW, I cast my vote to remove the spaces. And if you hunt around, you will find online styles from various universities that don't use spaces; here's one [[http://www.rpi.edu/web/writingcenter/apa.html APA style guide]]. [[User:Alcarillo|Alcarillo]] 18:11 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

::::Two spaces instead of the normal one after each period won&#8217;t work in HTML anyway, as any series of spaces, tabs, and linefeeds is merged into just one space. [[User:Anárion|Anárion]] 13:05, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)

::::[If spaces are easier on the eyes in print, how can they not be when online??] Since it's a wikipedia-wide issue, I think we can archive this section somewhere ("no spaces" is fine, especially since it gives a hint to parsers that it's not a sentence-ending full stop. But until there is a consense, editing to and fro is pointless) [[User:Dbachmann|Dbachmann]] 15:26, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)

:::::This should actually probably be "J.&thinsp;R.&thinsp;R. Tolkien" with thin spaces rather than either "J. R. R." with full spaces or "J.R.R." with no spaces. This is the convention used in print – note that following whatever style guides you might prefer is not entirely appropriate here. We're not writing manuscripts for typographers to prettify. [[User:Taion|taion]] 05:04, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

== Emphasis ==

I haven't taken it upon myself to change this hallowed page without prior discussion; I'm sure various taboos are in effect. But in the opening paragraphs, shouldn't Tolkien's authorship of LOTR come ''first'', and his academic career ''second''? Whatever Tolkien himself would have preferred, he would never have become a household name on the strength of his academic record, and the only reason he's in Wikipedia at all is because of the LOTR and Middle-Earth, not because of his Oxford lectures or his translatation of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. If there is general agreement, I'd like to arrange the intro accordingly. [[User:Vfp15|Vincent]] 06:15, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

It is indeed open for improvement. Personally, I don't like ''Outside academia, many people have come to know Tolkien as the author of The Lord of the Rings'' -- it sounds chatty, like a family program, not like an article. [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] 06:42, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

:I agree with the above, and [[Wikipedia:Be bold|have boldly]] made the change. [[User:Anárion|[[Image:Anarion.png]]]] 07:42, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

::Wot?!? Without waiting for a wiki consensus? (Sorry for the sarcasm, I've recently been involved in a couple of edit wars.)[[User:Vfp15|Vincent]] 08:14, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

:::It's easier to make the change: if anyone really disagrees it can always be reverted, and a discussion then started on talk. Serious disagreements seldom arise fortunately, and if they do they can usually easily be resolved. The "trick" is to assume good faith. [[User:Anárion|[[Image:Anarion.png]]]] 08:18, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

:::: Were you went, I followed and acted boldly. Swapped the Fiction and Academic listings in the bibliography. [[User:Vfp15|Vincent]] 04:41, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)

::::That's just a detail, of course, but I am not sure this was well done: it separates the literary works from the posthumous publications (which are of course -mostly- fictitious). Well, the bibliography could be arranged in several ways, and there's probably not a single best way.... (btw, the list of poems I included here would maybe be better exported to eg. [[Poems by J. R. R. Tolkien]], since they are not strictly part of the bibliography. [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] 12:04, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

:::::Perhaps the list should be split more clearly... [[User:Anárion|[[User_talk:Anárion|&#1040;&#1055;&#1040;&#x0301;&#1044;&#1030;&#1054;&#1055;]]]] 12:54, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

:::::: I thought of that, but I reasoned it was OK to have the posthumous works placed after since only what was published in JRRT's lifetime was published to his liking. The rest was pieced together by Christopher Tolkien, and we can only speculate on whether or not Tolkien would have approved. Of course if "Leaf by Niggle" (my favourite of all of Tolkien's works) is any indication, he probably no longer cares... [[User:Vfp15|Vincent]] 05:33, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)

== Category ==

Right now, J.R.R. Tolkien is listed in the categories "Middle-earth", "Fantasy writers", "British writers", "British Army officers" and "Residents of Birmingham, England". How do you feel about a new category, "J.R.R. Tolkien", specifically dedicated to Tolkien? [[User:Aecis|Aecis]] 01:13, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)

:I'm not sure I understand the intention. Just to have him listed in a smaller number of categories? --[[User:Aranel|[[User:Aranel|Aranel]] ("[[User:Aranel/Sarah|Sarah]]")]] 17:15, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)

::Not really, that would just be a side effect. I personally feel that Tolkien deserves a category of his own, and I also think that creating a specific category for Tolkien (with relevant subcategories) would create a clearer structure of the enormous amount of articles on Wikipedia concerning him and his works. [[User:Aecis|Aecis]] 15:49, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

:::The idea being that "[[:Category:Middle-earth]]" would be a sub-category? And then there could be another sub-category for material that is not actually related to Middle-earth? My primary concern with a "Tolkien" category is that it would seem almost by definition to include only the only article... --[[User:Aranel|[[User:Aranel|Aranel]] ("[[User:Aranel/Sarah|Sarah]]")]] 17:25, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

:::clearly, a category "Tolkien" ''beside'' a category "Middle-Earth" would be over the top. Look at all the lists-of-all-things-Tolkien at [[Template:middle-earth]]... I think there is only so much systematization that still makes sense.... [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] 18:00, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

::::The category could contain such subcategories as (just to give examples, not actual proposals) ''Middle Earth'' (as mentioned), ''Lord of the Rings'' etc. etc. The variety of categories is almost infinite, considering the enormous amount of articles on Wikipedia concerning Tolkien [[User:Aecis|Aecis]] 16:46, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

:::::What would go in a ''Lord of the Rings'' sub-category that isn't already contained in [[:Category:Middle-earth]]? The distinction between articles relating to LotR and Tolkien's other works is not always clear. --[[User:Aranel|[[User:Aranel|Aranel]] ("[[User:Aranel/Sarah|Sarah]]")]] 16:53, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

::::::I think that articles such as [[The Fellowship of the Ring (book)|The Fellowship of the Ring]], [[The Two Towers (book)|The Two Towers]] and [[The Return of the King (book)|The Return of the King]] fit better in a ''Lord of the Rings''-category than in a category of ''Middle Earth books''-category. I also think that the articles covered by the ''Middle Earth''-category are best covered by a ''J.R.R. Tolkien''-category, for the sake of clarity. (Middle Earth could also be a subcategory of J.R.R. Tolkien, dealing with the lands, cities, bays and other geographical features of Middle Earth.) [[User:Aecis|Aecis]] 17:07, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

:::::::It sounds like you are basically advocating a switch from the current use of the term "Middle-earth" to designate articles referring to Tolkien's world. We've been using "Middle-earth" for some time now, and the meaning is clear - it does refer to the continent, but it has long been used as a generic designation for Tolkien's inventions. Aricles relating to Middle-earth do fit better in [[:Category:Middle-earth]]. There are very few that would fit better in a [[:Category:J. R. R. Tolkien]]. [[User:Aranel|[[User:Aranel|Aranel]] ("[[User:Aranel/Sarah|Sarah]]")]] 19:29, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

This is how the category listing stood:

[[:Category:1892 births]]

[[:Category:1973 deaths]]

[[:Category:British Army officers]]

[[:Category:British writers]]

[[:Category:Christian writers]]

[[:Category:Fantasy writers]]

[[:Category:Middle-earth]]

[[:Category:Residents of Birmingham, England]]

This is getting ridiculous. I removed the first two (because the information content is small) and resorted the others in a more reasonable order of priority. Tolkien could just as easily also be listed in [[:Category:Linguists]] (and, hey, what about [[:Category:Roman Catholics]]?). Is there any way we can get these down to a more reasonable number? Maybe produce some additional combination sub-categories? [[:Category:Christian fantasy writers]]? [[:Category:Birmingham writers]]? [[User:Aranel|[[User:Aranel|Aranel]] ("[[User:Aranel/Sarah|Sarah]]")]] 19:29, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

what is the point of all those categories again? I suppose it is for people to find articles by browsing categories, not to find categories by browsing articles. Therefore, an article may be listed in any number of categories as long as they are appropriate. We just need to find a way to prevent too great a number of categories from cluttering up the article, but thats a problem of layout, not of encyclopedia structure... [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] 20:10, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

From [[Wikipedia:Categorisation_of_people#Non-.22Business_Card.22_categories|Wikipedia:Categorisation_of_people]]: "Try to limit the number of categories to what is most essential about this person, something in the vein of: "give me 4 or 5 words that best characterise this person". This is not set in stone, but it's a convention.

From [[m:Help:Category]]: "Each page is typically in at least one category. It may be in more, but it may be wise not to put a page in a category and also in a more general category." Is the fact that Tolkien was a British officer significant? Possibly - his war experiences definitely influenced his writing. Is it really all that important that he lived in Birmingham? Unless you're from Birmingham, you probably don't list that as something that everyone should know about him. It also seems to me that if an article is in, say, three different "writers" categories, there ought to be a way to use sub-categories to eliminate something. --[[User:Aranel|[[User:Aranel|Aranel]] ("[[User:Aranel/Sarah|Sarah]]")]] 21:47, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I'm not really defending the over-categorization. I'm just saying it does no harm. At the moment, we have the following (consider for each category if a link to Tolkien would be helpful for someone browsing the category):

*Fantasy writers

:needed.

*Christian writers

:needed.

*British writers, British academics, Residents of Birmingham, England, British Army officers

:at least one of these is needed to put him in the super-category "brits". But do we need all? All academics are writers, I suppose. The officers and Birmingham may both be helpful for people browsing for "what other people I know are from Birmingham / were in the army".

*Middle-earth

:I don't know. Tolkien is not a creature of Middle earth, and nobody browsing the ME category will be helped much by a link to Tolkien.

[[User:Dbachmann|dab]] 17:08, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

==derivative works==

''Artists who have found inspiration in Tolkien's works include''... &mdash; This list could go on forever (eventually including everybody who put his drawing of Gandalf on an internet archive), without any direct relevance to Tolkien's person. I think we should restrict it to artists who were known to Tolkien and had his approval (Baynes, Swann,...) - [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] 15:20, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

:Alan Lee and John Howe as well, as they are currently the best known Tolkien illustrators... [[User:Ausir|Ausir]] 16:59, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

:Well, yes, and any notable ones beside. But, imho, under some middle-earth heading, [[Middle-Earth Illustrators]], [[Artists inspired by J. R. R. Tolkien]] or something. This article is supposed to be about the author himself. His work may not be clearly separable from his person, but people ''inspired'' by his work (and not having met him personally) are at least two steps removed (or, let me put it this way: "Tolkien Illustrators" rarely illustrate ''Tolkien'' himself ;). [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] 17:50, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

: I'm not against cutting the list of artists from the JRRT main page - but it looks like what we had was now just cut away and thrown away :-( (with the exception of Baynes and Swann)

[[User:Jhi|Jhi]] 21:06, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

:Oops, never mind. Found the [[Works inspired by J. R. R. Tolkien]].

[[User:Jhi|Jhi]] 21:11, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

::that's right; but I'm not too sure about my present version yet. Mostly, I fear I'm citing ''Letters'' too extensively. Feel free to improve it. My point was that the section should reflect Tolkien's stance towards derivative works. [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] 08:51, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

==The picture==

I know the picture with the pipe (actually, the 2nd one, not the one included in this article) is the best known picture of Tolkien ever, but what is its copyright status? Given the Wikipedia copyright policy, wouldn't it be better to replace it with a public ___domain 1916 picture of JRRT ([[:Image:Tolkien 1916.jpg|Tolkien 1916.jpg]])? [[User:Ausir|Ausir]] 17:07, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[[ru:&#1058;&#1086;&#1083;&#1082;&#1080;&#1085;, &#1044;&#1078;&#1086;&#1085; &#1056;&#1086;&#1085;&#1072;&#1083;&#1100;&#1076; &#1056;&#1091;&#1101;&#1083;]] has a whole collection of images. If they are fair use there, they are fair use here, too (it's on the same server...). We shouldn't be too intimidated by possibilities of Copyright violation. The pictures can always be removed if a Copyright holder turns up (and we'll always have the 1916 picture to hold on too in that case). [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] 14:16, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

==[[Elfcon]], [[Elvish Linguistic Fellowship]], [[Carl F. Hostetter]]==

I added a list of snippets published in journals to the bibliography. I then tried to find out more about how this material was published. I have summarised what I found out in the article [[Elfcon]]. Since it involves a serious controversy, I would like others to look it over and try to make the account as unbiased as possible. And, in case you find the article acceptable, to put it on your watchlist to guard against biased changes: C. F. Hostetter ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Contributions&target=128.183.221.44 128.183.221.44]) has removed the entire account shortly after I wrote it. I have reverted the removal, since I think the account is central to understanding how unpublished writings by Tolkien are likely (or unlikely) to be published in the future. But since the subject is touchy, I would like to be on the safe side. It is true that some of the views quoted show Mr Hostetter in an unpleasant light, but this is unfortunately the state of affairs as I found it, and I tried to keep quotes containing direct personal attacks out of the article. [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] 10:20, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

:To me it looks like you have tried to be fair and balanced in this, but I don't know much about the matter other than what I have learned here since it mostly happened back before I discovered that there were people other than me interested in this stuff. [[User:Aranel|[[User:Aranel|Aranel]] ("[[User:Aranel/Sarah|Sarah]]")]] 14:25, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

:I'll do what I can to look over this material at some point, though I'm not really an expert on the controversy myself. For the record, I very much doubt that Carl will make any seriously unacceptable changes to the relevant pages at this point, as it sounds like he's mainly interested in moving the article away from its Lisa-Star-inspired origins. I count Carl as a friend, and I think he's a good person who's trying his best to do the right thing. On the other hand, I think of David Salo as a friend, too, and I think he's a good person as well. I've always been disappointed that they're on opposite sides of this schism (but that gives me hope that it might one day be partially healed).--[[User:Steuard|Steuard]] 14:11, Sep 28, 2004 (UTC)

::I agree, and I tried to give the article a 'historical' touch, treating the issue as one of the past. As an anonymous editor has added, recently, the hostility is unlikely to rise to the level of the 90s again. My take on the issue is influenced by my acquaintance with ancient languages (as is, I imagine, Salo's), where the texts belong to everybody and should be edited, unannotated, as rapidly as possible, to enable academic discussion. I have no respect for Copyright laws, morally, and I think no hastiness in publication could even remotely approach the rape of Tolkien's "intellectual property" perpetrated by [http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/rpg/tlotrthethirdage/screenindex.html "licenced" derivations] (not to mention [http://ringthing.ch/ "parodies"]). But I accept that the laws are there, and I'm not out to change the world, so peace to CFH and the Trust, the law is on your side, end of story. [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] 16:52, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

==Posthumous Publications==

Could we move the list of VT articles to the [[Vinyar Tengwar]] page, please? (Probably it would make just as much sense to move the articles from other journals to their respective articles as well.) The journal publications&mdash;which are not on the same standing as the books by Christopher Tolkien&mdash;are threatening to overwhelm the rest of the article.

:arguably, yes. the point is that these are all texts by Tolkien, commented by editors, and that I thought it was nice to have one place where they are all listed (since most are quite obscure, and I haven't seen all of them, myself). Because they are not all from VT, maybe we could also export them to, say, [[posthumously published texts by J. R. R. Tolkien]] or something, where the individual texts from the HoME series could be listed, as well, without remorse for wasted space? I don't know the best way to arrange it, so be bold. My final aim would be a readily available index of all texts published. [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] 14:50, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Also, they're articles, so shouldn't they be in quotes, not italics? [[User:Aranel|[[User:Aranel|Aranel]] ("[[User:Aranel/Sarah|Sarah]]")]] 14:25, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

:well, they are not the article titles themselves, but rather the name of the texts edited or quoted in the articles (which is often, but not always, identical). [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] 14:50, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

:I think moving the academic articles to a wikiarticle of their own would be a good idea. I would like to keep the

:posthumous books at the front page, however. I think the academic articles are very different from the books, in

:their accessibility (both physically and technically). Also, while I think the VT (and similar) articles are fine, I think

:in the general case starting to include the academic articles are a bit of a slippery slope: if we are really getting

:into Tolkien academia certainly some of the Tolkien scholars like Shippey, Flieger, Bibire, etc. should get their turn

:since their work illuminates and explores the writings?

:[[User:Jhi|Jhi]] 18:03, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

::by all means! I was planning on slowly adding all information about Tolkien academia I can get hold of. Not in this article, of course. I agree that the more obscure writings, even if written by JRRT himself, can be moved elsewhere, and be linked from the bibliography. My idea was to certainly keep the posthumously published books, HoME etc, in this main article, while giving a more detailed account, maybe, in this proposed 'external' bibliography. The list on this page was of course only intended to give original publications of works ''by'' Tolkien. [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] 18:33, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

:::I now split off the long list of (mostly VT) articles into a new wikiarticle, [[Tolkien research]]. As usual, feel free to edit either the small stub left in the Tolkien main page, or the newly created article. The "as a writer" bit could probably use a lot of meat around its bones. I also added a link to the VT page pointing to the nes article.

[[User:Jhi|Jhi]] 10:07, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

==Mabel Suffield==

I am glad for Draconiszeta's edits, they do improve the article's style. But: JRRT's mother was '''not''' born in Suffield. She was ''a'' born Suffield. I had just changed that back from another well-meaning "correction". Please check your facts.

*http://www.google.com/search?&q=Mabel+Tolkien+Suffield

[[User:Dbachmann|dab]] 08:59, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

=="Languages"==

I support the removal of the list of languages JRRT purportedly had "varying fluency" in. The "Languages" section is the weakest we have in the article now, and somebody should rewrite it, so that someday we can get this to FA status. Links are still piling up, and what is this strange "publications" table at the bottom? We already give a detailed bibliography. Categories are also getting worse again, "People with asteroids named after them", "Polyglots" -- hello?? How about [[:Category:People who liked to have a pint or two at the local pub after work]]? As far as I know, Tolkien was not a notable polyglot. He was a philologist/linguist, sure, and he could read Latin and Greek and German I suppose, but there were not many languages he was fluent in. [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] <small>[[User_talk:Dbachmann|('''&#5839;'''</small>)]] 17:46, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

==Tolkien's anarchism==

According to [http://www.thirdway.org/files/articles/anarchomon.html this article], Tolkien was (by his own admittance) an anarchist. I think this should be mentioned here. -- [http://uk.geocities.com/[e-mail] James]

"My political opinions lean more and more to Anarchy (philosophically understood, meaning abolition of control not whiskered men with bombs) - or to 'unconstitutional' Monarchy. I would arrest anybody who uses the word state (in any sense other than the inanimate realm of England and its inhabitants, a thing that has neither power, rights nor mind); and after a chance of recantation, execute them if they remained obstinate!" -- ''The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien'', 1995, p. 63. (Quoted [http://www.mises.org/fullstory.aspx?control=899 here])

See also [http://www.lewrockwell.com/carson/carson10.html here] -- [http://uk.geocities.com/[e-mail] James]