# Christopher Tolkien - My Father's "Eviscerated" Work - Le Monde interview July 2012



## Eledhwen (Dec 31, 2012)

After 40 years of media silence, Christopher Tolkien speaks about the films and their effect on his father's legacy to the world.

This is the English translation of an interview given in French to Raphaëlle Rérolle of LE MONDE. The original French text is linked at the end of the article.

http://www.worldcrunch.com/culture-...arillion-lord-of-rings/c3s10299/#.UOGX7m-TroI


----------



## Maiden_of Harad (Dec 31, 2012)

*Re: Christopher Tolkien - My Father's "Eviscerated" Work - Le Monde interview July 20*

How frustrating the whole PJ enterprise must be to Christopher Tolkien! Even though I liked the films, I can still sympathise...
It looks like Tolkien's books made too much money for others to ignore. If I ever wrote a book that became famous, I do hope that my heirs aren't driven apart by money squabbles. Dragon-sickness, perhaps?


----------



## Sulimo (Jan 1, 2013)

*Re: Christopher Tolkien - My Father's "Eviscerated" Work - Le Monde interview July 20*

Great article. When you try to explain this kind of thing to people they don't get it, but it is very sad.


----------



## Prince of Cats (Jan 2, 2013)

*Re: Christopher Tolkien - My Father's "Eviscerated" Work - Le Monde interview July 20*

A wonderful read - thanks for sharing :*up Christopher is given a bad rap sometimes but he's certainly the greatest servant of his father and us readers


----------



## Thorin (Jan 4, 2013)

*Re: Christopher Tolkien - My Father's "Eviscerated" Work - Le Monde interview July 20*

Great article and very enlightening on how Christopher approached sorting through his father's work. This quote near the end stuck with me: "The commercialization has reduced the aesthetic and philosophical impact of the creation to nothing." - Christopher Tolkien. 

How true, how true...


----------



## Eledhwen (Jan 4, 2013)

*Re: Christopher Tolkien - My Father's "Eviscerated" Work - Le Monde interview July 20*



Thorin said:


> Great article and very enlightening on how Christopher approached sorting through his father's work. This quote near the end stuck with me: "The commercialization has reduced the aesthetic and philosophical impact of the creation to nothing." - Christopher Tolkien.
> 
> How true, how true...



The books will outlast the films, and I can't see a re-make being made before the copyright runs out. That's when the trouble really starts! At least we don't have to worry about Disney attacking the story; if they did it would become public knowledge that Tolkien could not stand their products. The risk is that Hobbits will leak out into other films with puerile storylines and children's books they have no business being in. Some will be made in mistaken homage to the originals; others will be cynical marketing exercises. I don't think the Tolkien Estate can do anything about this; other than to trade mark key Tolkien words; which would require them to trade within the market they seek to protect - UK Law doesn't allow them to sit on an unused trade mark. I doubt they would want to do this.


----------



## BelDain (Jan 4, 2013)

*Re: Christopher Tolkien - My Father's "Eviscerated" Work - Le Monde interview July 20*

Were the film rights to United Artists in perpetuity or will they revert to the Tolkein estate at some point?


----------



## Eledhwen (Jan 5, 2013)

*Re: Christopher Tolkien - My Father's "Eviscerated" Work - Le Monde interview July 20*

They are in perpetuity; but the rights are limited to only the usual merchandising paraphernalia. A quote from the article mentions this:


> However, the Tolkien Estate cannot do anything about the way New Line adapts the books. In the new Hobbit movie, for example, the audience will discover characters Tolkien never put in, especially women. The same is true for the merchandise, which ranges from tea towels to boxes of nuggets, with an infinite variety of toys, stationery, t-shirts, games, etc. Not only the titles of the books themselves, but also the names of their characters have been copyrighted.
> "We are in the back seat," Cathleen Blackburn comments. In other words, the Estate can do little but watch the scenery, except in extreme cases-- for example, preventing the use of the name Lord of the Rings on Las Vegas slot machines, or for amusement parks. "We were able to prove that nothing in the original contract dealt with that sort of exploitation."


Perpetuity, of course, ends when the oeuvre enters the public domain.


----------



## Cirdan (Jan 6, 2013)

*Re: Christopher Tolkien - My Father's "Eviscerated" Work - Le Monde interview July 20*

I think the problem with Christopher rests in the why: Why did J.R.R. publish the books he did (and for whom) vs. his son?


----------



## Dís (Jan 6, 2013)

*Re: Christopher Tolkien - My Father's "Eviscerated" Work - Le Monde interview July 20*



Thorin said:


> Great article and very enlightening on how Christopher approached sorting through his father's work. This quote near the end stuck with me: "The commercialization has reduced the aesthetic and philosophical impact of the creation to nothing." - Christopher Tolkien.
> 
> How true, how true...



this is NOT true. There are still lots of people around who grew up with the books and the philosophical impact and aesthetics. These do not just vanish only because the commercialization is more dominant right now. The influence of having grown up with Tolkien will outlast the movies easily. It may be, though, that in a couple of generations people will not always remember where these influences came from, but the same thing is true for the Bible. And the books - like the Bible - are still around. They can be read - and are read. Those who just jump on the band-waggon because of some nice pictures will drop off when the next block-buster comes along, anyway. Look at the dates of the threads in this forum, they date back years, years of discussions on a very high level. There are blogs keeping the Inkling's inheritance alive. They are not many, especially compared to the numbers at the box offices, but they are not nothing. It's the little things keep away the darkness :*).


----------



## Werrf (Jan 20, 2013)

*Re: Christopher Tolkien - My Father's "Eviscerated" Work - Le Monde interview July 20*

Is it cheeky, presumptuous or just plain rude to quote the father's words in disagreement with his son, especially when that son was chosen by the father to protect the work? Perhaps. And to do so in my very first post on the forum? Probably. But hey, this is why I signed up, so I may as well make it worth my while.

I understand and sympathise with Christopher Tolkien's position. The media frenzy around the films and the rest of the work is frequently crass and cheap. But the films are not simple Hollywood popcorn stuff - they are an illustration of what one very driven group of people found in the work. One cannot watch the films, or even more their appendices, and not be struck by the very real love and connection the makers felt with Professor Tolkien's work, or the meaning they found in them.

And that's where quoting the father's words come in, from the foreword in _The Lord of the Rings_:


The Lord of the Rings said:


> As for any inner meaning or 'message', it has in the intention of the author none. It is neither allegorical nor topical...I cordially dislike allegory in all its manifestations, and have done so since I grew old enough and wary enough to detect its presence. I much prefer history, true or feigned, with its varied applicability to the thought and experience of the readers. I think that many confuse 'applicability' with 'allegory'; but one resides in the freedom of the reader, and the other in the purposed domination of the author.



The films are primarily three people - the writers and director - sharing with us what they found in the Lord of the Rings, and in doing so they are surely following the path that Professor Tolkien declared he preferred. I fear that Christopher Tolkien's position is closer to the purposed domination of the author, than the freedom of the reader.

He is, of course, in the difficult position of not being the one producing the works, and trying to maintain his father's vision in a very different world than the one in which it was created, but I think that a certain careful opening of the boundaries, perhaps to allow other authors to write new stories in the legendarium with his oversight, could only improve and enhance the Estate.


----------



## Eledhwen (Mar 17, 2013)

*WB and Zaentz countersue Tolkien Estate*

Last November, Tolkien's estate and his publisher, HarperCollins, that filed an $80 million Law suit against the Warner Bros, alleging they lost out on royalties from ancillary sources of income—including The Hobbit online slot machines and games—since selling the film rights in 1969. On Monday, Warner Bros. filed a lawsuit against Tolkien's estate, claiming breach of contract over The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings licensing opportunities (or, in other words, "I'm suing you because you're suing me"). 

http://uk.eonline.com/news/397531/h...alleges-breach-of-contract-over-gaming-rights


----------



## Erestor Arcamen (Mar 17, 2013)

*Re: WB and Zaentz countersue Tolkien Estate*



Eledhwen said:


> Last November, Tolkien's estate and his publisher, HarperCollins, that filed an $80 million Law suit against the Warner Bros, alleging they lost out on royalties from ancillary sources of income—including The Hobbit online slot machines and games—since selling the film rights in 1969. On Monday, Warner Bros. filed a lawsuit against Tolkien's estate, claiming breach of contract over The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings licensing opportunities (or, in other words, "I'm suing you because you're suing me").
> 
> http://uk.eonline.com/news/397531/h...alleges-breach-of-contract-over-gaming-rights




This is turning into a battle similar to Apple vs Samsung lol


----------



## Eledhwen (Mar 17, 2013)

*Re: WB and Zaentz countersue Tolkien Estate*



Erestor Arcamen said:


> This is turning into a battle similar to Apple vs Samsung lol


Wouldn't it be ironic if the Law suit battle was turned into a screenplay!


----------



## Grond (Mar 21, 2013)

*Re: Christopher Tolkien - My Father's "Eviscerated" Work - Le Monde interview July 20*

I long ago resolved that one must look at the Works of J. R. R. Tolkien and the related "works" of Peter Jackson through different eyes in order to maintain sanity. As most of you know, I'm a purist and am terribly disappointed each and every time the evil Mr. Jackson makes "creative changes" to the canon. 

That leaves me with two choices,
1) Ignore the films altogether and focus solely on the written works or
2) Enjoy the films for what they are... a fictionalized account of a fictional mythological work.

I choose the latter. I'm able to enjoy our great author's works many times a year (yes... I still have vision but am wearing glasses now) and still watch the movies... always expecting unwanted and unwelcome changes (aka. what the [email protected]#$ is AZOG doing in the journey to Erebor?)

Unlike many purists, I can't wait for the next installment of The Hobbit to come out in December.

Cheers, 
Grond


----------



## Eledhwen (Mar 22, 2013)

*Re: Christopher Tolkien - My Father's "Eviscerated" Work - Le Monde interview July 20*



Grond said:


> Unlike many purists, I can't wait for the next installment of The Hobbit to come out in December.


Me too. I'm sorry for Christopher Tolkien; who must feel like the curator of the Louvre would on finding the Mona Lisa had acquired a moustache. My enjoyment was only marred by scenes which looked like they'd been taken straight from a video game of the film, like Radagast's Roscobel Rabbits, and the dwarves' very unlikely non-fatal fall through the deep chasms inside the Misty Mountains. I loved the final scene - especially when I realised that The Carrock was bear-shaped!


----------

