Forums » Reading Corner » Read Thread

Okay, myadventuregame.com community, it doesn't seem anyone else has truly done this yet, so here's a bit of information on the greatest fantasy author of the twentieth century, John Ronald Reuel Tolkien.  Let's start with some "fun facts":

• He was born on January 3, 1892, in Bloemfontein, South Africa, of British colonists in the present-day Free State Province.
• He had a brother, Hilary Arthur Reuel Tolkien, who was born on February 17, 1894.
• When Tolkien was three, he and his family traveled to England to visit family. 
• His father, however, died of rheumatic fever, and his mother, Mabel, took the children to live with her parents.
• In 1900, Mabel, a Baptist, converted to Catholicism.
• Four years later, she died of medical difficulties resulting from diabetes.
• For some reason or another, young John (or Ronald as he was known in the family) always considered her something of a martyr for Catholicism, and remained a devout Catholic for the rest of his life.
• He married Edith Mary Bratt in 1916.  This came about in a very interesting manner, and I'm sure I'll add to it in time.
• Tolkien was a great intellectual, an Oxford professor, and a fellow of Pembroke.  This is also very interesting, and will be elaborated upon in the future.
• His first novel, The Hobbit, was published on September 21, 1937 (one day before Bilbo and Frodo's shared birthday, for the particularly knowledgeable reading this), followed by The Lord of the Rings, his masterpiece, which boasted a darker tone, more in-depth plot, and of course three ample spines....
• The first volume, The Fellowship of the Ring, was published in 1954, after having been written between '37 and '49, followed by The Two Towers and The Return of the King  in 1955.
• Note that The Lord of the Rings was a SINGLE NOVEL.  In fact, Tolkien would have actually preferred it to have been published in a single book; the three titles we know today only exist for convenience.
• The rest of his works relating to his legendarium, such as The Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales, and both volumes of The Book of Lost Tales, were published after his death in 1973 by his youngest son Christopher.

Go cry about it

Good writing.

Alright, I can see that no one does, so I guess I'll write some more "fun facts" about Tolkien's life:

• In 1908, when he was sixteen, he met his future wife, Edith Bratt, who was nineteen years old at the time.
• The young couple "fell in love", as they say, but Tolkien's legal guardian (recall that both of his parents were deceased by this point in his life), a priest, would have none of it; he forbade the young Tolkien to have ANY contact with her until he was TWENTY-ONE (21) years of age.
• Tolkien reluctantly obeyed him, but, nearly five years later, on the night of his twenty-first birthday, he wrote a letter to Edith professing his love and asking her to wed.
• Although she already engaged to another man (believing Tolkien had forgotten her), she agreed, and the two were married on March 22, 1916.

I think a trilogy is dependant on the intent of the writer.  Tolkien wrote one book and called it "The Lord of the Rings."  The publishers made him split it into three parts.

Side example:  Tad Williams's "Memory, Sorrow, and Thorn" trilogy.  The third book was published in two parts.  It's still a trilogy.

True actually LOTR was a trilogy undoubtedly however that was not the way J.R.R Tolkien wanted it to be.  Look up the definintion of Trilogy, LOTR matches it perfectly.

I will change that answer on my quiz, but not because I agree with you--look at the official source, guys!  That man's trilogy (I've momentarily forgotten his name.  Sorry... ) ideally should not be called a trilogy either.  I would define a trilogy (no matter what the modern dictionaries say!) as three independent, but inter-connected stories, whereas The Lord of the Rings is one continuous story.  The Fellowship of the Ring does not have an end, but just kind of abruptly halts after the fellowship is broken.  The Two Towers has neither a beginning nor an ending--it begins and ends at two nearly abitrary points in the story.  The Return of the King has no beginning, but an ending.  If one who had not read the novel before were to check the second or third volume out of a library, he/she would have absolutely no idea what was happening in the first chapters (unless of course he/she saw the Peter Jackson films, which I think are decent even if they did take some liberties, particularly in The Return of the King).  A modern example of a trilogy that I'm sure all of us are familiar with is the classic StarWars films.  Each one of them has a distinct beginning and a distinct ending, and, when taken together, form a complete, inter-connected story.

And also, The Silmarillion isn't some "weird, dualist" thing.  Dualism is the belief in two equal-but-opposite divine figures, usually representing good and evil, emphasizing the balance of life and the universe.  The Silmarillion features one all-powerful god--Eru, the One--and a number of created angelic beings--the Valar and Maiar--, some of which "fall" (their leader being Melkor, later known as Morgoth), and become like the demons of religion and mythology. 

I would define a trilogy (no matter what the modern dictionaries say!) as three independent, but inter-connected stories

So waht your saying is that, your opinion is "more right" then a dictionary.

Thats funny.

Precisely, what the author intended has nothing to do with it.. Its about the number of books.

But there are three volumes, JJJ and others, not three books.  There are six books.

"The Lord of the Rings is often erroneously called a trilogy when in fact it is a single novel, consisting of six books, published for convenience in three volumes..." --page v of The Fellowship of the Ring, Houghton-Mifflin.

Im done arguing. You cannot change my mind.

And on this ongoing trilogy-or-novel debate, I'm not quoting an expert--everyone knows "experts" cannot agree on anything!    I'm quoting the publishers, the same publishers you claim made The Lord of the Rings a trilogy.  By the way, I detest the term "Ringers".  It is the name I apply to people who have read "LOTR" as you call it, and nothing else of Tolkien's, barring perhaps The Hobbit.  Also, I'll take the word of the author for a million dollars, madglee.  Publishers have a tendency to think with dollar signs in their eyes....

madglee, we know your right.

"The Lord of the Rings is an epic high fantasy novel  written by English academic J.R.R. Tolkien.  The story began as a sequel to Tolkien's earlier fantasy book, The Hobbit and soon developed into a much larger story. It was written in stages between 1937 and 1949, with much of it being created during World War II.  It was originally published in three volumes in 1954 and 1955 (much to Tolkien's annoyance, since he had intended it to be a single volume), and has since been reprinted numerous times and translated into at least 38 languages, becoming one of the most popular works in 20th-century literature."

--http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lord_of_the_Rings 

(Emphasis mine on the word novel.)

AND my second American edition of The Oxford Desk Dictionary and Thesaurus offers some interesting secondary definitions for the word book including, and I quote:

"main division of a literary work, or of the Bible".

Just as the Bible is a single volume consisting of sixty-six independent books, or Homer's Iliad is divided into twenty-four books, all of which form a single epic, the three volumes, even call them books if you like (the distinction I made earlier wasn't technical--I merely needed a second word to use alongside volume), of The Lord of the Rings form a single complete novel.

So The Fellowship of the Ring can be called a book, just as, say, the Acts of the Apostles, but is ultimately only a single installment in a complete novel, like the books of Acts is only one part of the Christian Bible.

The books were published under a 'profit-sharing' arrangement, whereby Tolkien would not receive an advance or royalties until the books had broken even, after which he would take a large share of the profits. An index to the entire three-volume set at the end of third volume was promised in the first volume. However, this proved impractical to compile in a reasonable timescale. Later, in 1966, four indices, not compiled by Tolkien, were added to The Return of the King. Because the three-volume binding was so widely distributed, the work is often referred to as the Lord of the Rings "trilogy". In a letter to W. H. Auden, Tolkien himself made use of the term "trilogy" for the work.

Same source you used buddy.

"One of the most popular "trilogies" of fantasy books, The Lord of the Rings by J. R. R. Tolkien, is not a trilogy, though it is often referred to as such. Tolkien regarded it as a single work and divided it into a prologue, six books, and five appendices. Because of post-World War II paper shortages, it was originally published in three volumes."

--EXACT same source as you used, JJJ. 

(I was too lazy to remove the hyperlinks this time....)

"A trilogy is a set of three works of art, usually literature or film, that are connected and can generally be seen as a single work as well as three individual ones" (per Wikipedia, emphasis mine.)

How's that for a compromise?

Actually its J.R.R Tolkien and his works. So thats not true Prince.

As for you Lance, I believe you have disregarded at least as many.

GIVE IT UP GUYS!!! Is it really important whether it's a trilogy or novel?!?!