# Canon and Contradictions



## cart (May 28, 2022)

Just a general curiosity as to how people view the literature as a whole, "bones" and all.

I suspect some look at it for what it is, a story with contradictions, that evolved over time and many square pegs going into round holes. Perhaps appreciating it as purely a legendary work of fiction, but fiction all the same and have views that are either true or theoretical, instead of imaginative. I suspect the more you know the harder it would be to look at the works and allow the works to be a playground for one's imagination as it was for me as a child, particularly once I received ... _A to Z: A complete guide to middle earth, _as it still is to this day. (Prior to that book, I just assumed the lineage charts and appendixes were all there was to middle earth. Little did i know...) Once I learned there were Blue Wizards, which due the concept term ill introduce next, became some of my favourite (and still are) characters as I would often go to sleep and dream up stories and tales of their own.

Which here I will introduce the term "headcanon" which im sure is a term known to most, but it is simply you own personal canon that fills in holes that may not be explored sufficiently for you so you fill it in yourself however you will, though generally (and really never should) be in contradiction to what is clearly canon. Though often what is "clearly" canon in this fictional world... you may find out there is nothing too clear about it.

*So, do you view his works in a more practical way and perhaps primarily as a grounds of study. Or perhaps a bit more like myself view it as a world that is fictional yet real where your imagination is set free upon concepts that (where ever you are in your reading) create your own canon or build upon concepts that in your view were not explored enough for your own interests. I expect most to be some blend of both, though I also suspect that some may be more on the imaginative side but while you continue your reading till you've read all or the majority of Tolkien's corpus of this world shift more towards an academic interest. *


----------



## 1stvermont (May 28, 2022)

cart said:


> Just a general curiosity as to how people view the literature as a whole, "bones" and all.
> 
> I suspect some look at it for what it is, a story with contradictions, that evolved over time and many square pegs going into round holes. Perhaps appreciating it as purely a legendary work of fiction, but fiction all the same and have views that are either true or theoretical, instead of imaginative. I suspect the more you know the harder it would be to look at the works and allow the works to be a playground for one's imagination as it was for me as a child, particularly once I received ... _A to Z: A complete guide to middle earth, _as it still is to this day. (Prior to that book, I just assumed the lineage charts and appendixes were all there was to middle earth. Little did i know...) Once I learned there were Blue Wizards, which due the concept term ill introduce next, became some of my favourite (and still are) characters as I would often go to sleep and dream up stories and tales of their own.
> 
> ...



Just so we are clear starting out, I am a bit on the crazy side so feel to ignore me. However, I tend to view Tolkiens writings as he desired us to. 
Tolkien wanted people to take his writings as historical events, he said, “I wanted people simply to get inside this story and take it as actual history.” He said, “To me, it is not an imaginary world…the theater of my tale is this earth…but the historical period is imaginary.” His authorized biographer, Humphrey Carpenter, said, “Tolkien believed that in one sense he was writing the truth…his stories were in some sense an embodiment of a profound truth.” Carpenter gave us some insight into Tolkien’s understanding of his mythology. 

_He says he has to clear up an apparent contradiction in a passage of Lord of the Rings that has been pointed out in a letter by a reader, the matter requires his urgent consideration…talking about his book not as a work of fiction but as a chronicle of actual events; he seems to see himself not as an author who has made a slight error that must know be corrected or explained away, but as a historian who must cast light on an obscurity in a historical document. (Humphrey Carpenter, J. R. R. Tolkien: A Biography [Boston, New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2000]) _


Carpenter said that Tolkien held to “his belief in the ultimate truth of his mythology.” He wrote that “he did not say of an apparent contradiction. This is not as I wish it to be: I must change it;” instead, he would approach the problem with the attitude—“what does this mean? I must find out.” Carpenter wrote, “His perfectionism…he felt he must ensure that every detail fit satisfactory into the total pattern.” 
Tolkien did extensive rewriting to correct the moon's placement at various times and locations. As a perfectionist, he wanted every last detail perfect and consistent. In Tolkien’s mind, there could be no contradictions. 

Further, Tolkien’s belief was that all myths were in part discovered, not created. In some form, they preexisted the author and came from God who created the human imagination. Authors were using their God-given abilities to do what they were designed to do sub-create.

Tolkien hoped his audience would take his works as he did. Tolkien received letters daily, Carpenter writes, “From readers who took the book almost as history, and demanded more information on many topics. This attitude to his story flattered him, for it was the type of response that he had hoped to arouse… [he] found that kind of thing only too fatally attractive.” 

As anyone who reads Tolkien’s letters knows, he spent a great deal of time answering supposed contradictions in his works that various readers brought to his attention. And no matter how small the issue, he sought to resolve them. And letter 214, shows the depth he would go to, to resolve minor contradictions. It is too bad we no longer have him to ask such questions. So I see Tolkien’s writings, not as evolving inventions but recordings of actual history in a mythological setting.


----------



## cart (Jun 2, 2022)

1stvermont said:


> Just so we are clear starting out, I am a bit on the crazy side so feel to ignore me. However, I tend to view Tolkiens writings as he desired us to.
> Tolkien wanted people to take his writings as historical events, he said, “I wanted people simply to get inside this story and take it as actual history.” He said, “To me, it is not an imaginary world…the theater of my tale is this earth…but the historical period is imaginary.” His authorized biographer, Humphrey Carpenter, said, “Tolkien believed that in one sense he was writing the truth…his stories were in some sense an embodiment of a profound truth.” Carpenter gave us some insight into Tolkien’s understanding of his mythology.
> 
> _He says he has to clear up an apparent contradiction in a passage of Lord of the Rings that has been pointed out in a letter by a reader, the matter requires his urgent consideration…talking about his book not as a work of fiction but as a chronicle of actual events; he seems to see himself not as an author who has made a slight error that must know be corrected or explained away, but as a historian who must cast light on an obscurity in a historical document. (Humphrey Carpenter, J. R. R. Tolkien: A Biography [Boston, New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2000]) _
> ...



Sorry it took me some time to get to this as life occurred.

I will say first off as someone who has only read a letter here and there (and not really having a clue as to how many letters of his are published) the quote where a "contradiction" arose and did not see it as a contradiction but "what does this mean? I must find out." is a great insight as to how he operated. Though I am hesitant to really dissect his writing methods too much as I feel for me *personally* may infringe on the enjoyment I gain from his works.. though I could be mistaken there.

When I read his material I perceive it as a real world with the understanding of it being a fictional world. Are you saying you view this in another way from me (in that regard?) 
I can understand viewing it as a mythology as it does seem to check the boxes of the little I know of greek mythology, being used to explain world happenings from weather, human nature, morality and so on. Though the Ancient Greeks believed these myths and the characters within to be real, generally speaking. And if I'm speaking generally, Socrates paid a heavy price for speaking against these myths, even though it was common at even his time that even the common people would recognize that some event that was attributed to some being in their myths was actually cause by some naturally occurring event. 

I suppose to simplify my often tangential mind...how can you view it as a mythology if you well know that it is all the work of a genius of literature/linguistics and someone who was well versed in the study of english and norse mythology.

Though I am admittedly quite lost about the "ultimate truth" that is being unveiled and what that truth might be. Perhaps you can fill me in. 

Thanks for replying.. was hoping more would take part. But 1 reply (and an interesting one I hadn't accounted for) is infinitely better than none


----------



## 1stvermont (Jun 3, 2022)

cart said:


> When I read his material I perceive it as a real world with the understanding of it being a fictional world. Are you saying you view this in another way from me (in that regard?)
> 
> 
> I suppose to simplify my often tangential mind...how can you view it as a mythology if you well know that it is all the work of a genius of literature/linguistics and someone who was well versed in the study of english and norse mythology.
> ...



I think you said it perfectly, "I perceive it as a real-world with the understanding of it being a fictional world." Tolkien understood it as a real-world, an actual history, but in a fictional period. Perhaps an alternative history. 

Tolkien did not see himself as an inventor of ME but someone who made a discovery. View it somewhat as an inspired writer of a book in the bible. God used that individual, his talents, his brain, perspective, and so on, but the inspiration was derived from another source. That would be how Tolkien viewed his works. 

Tolkien belived myths portrayed truth at a certain level. He belived myths were a form of learning and discovering truth. He belived his mythology was also a "discovery" that contained truth. Tolkien also belived his world was "true" in that these events happened, though in mythological form. 

Glad to discuss Tolkien with others. Don't get discouraged; this is a great forum where some knowledge posters like to contribute. But like any forum, there are up and downs, times of plenty, and times of famine.


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Jun 4, 2022)

I normally see the term "head-canon" used in the sense of piecing together a personally satisfactorily coherent "story" out of the sometimes radical changes made by the author, post-publication -- or in the case of the Silmarillion material, _no_-publication. You can ask Elthir about Galadriel (if you dare 😉).

I might call what you're talking about "head-fanfic", or something similar, which usually begins with "I wish he'd written more about. . ." and moving on to "I wonder if it would be like this --". One example for me was Aragorn's years of "errantry", and when the Amazon series was first announced, and there were rumors of "Young Aragorn", I was hoping they would include his adventures in the far south, "where the stars are strange". Alas. One of my own "head-stories" is about Boromir's great journey to Rivendell. 

As for your question about "imaginative" vs. "practical" or "academic", why not both, as you say? You can enjoy a symphony without knowing anything about sonata form, but such knowledge can only increase your appreciation. It's the same with any great piece of literature, in my experience.

Which brings me to "reality", though I'm not sure I understand you or 1stvermont clearly. Certainly, Tolkien approached his legendarium _as if _it were "real", and he did believe stories could convey valuable truths, but if what is meant is that he believed what he wrote about _actually happened_, I'd have to suspect him of being mentally unbalanced. Fiction is just that, fiction; it creates its own "universe", in a sense, but it's a literary universe, not a separate existential universe, however appealing the idea might be.

We can attribute his inspiration to the muse, or Eru, or whatever source we like, of course, especially when we read things like this:

_I have long ceased to _invent . . ._I wait until I seem to know what really happened. Or till it writes itself._
Letter 180

Make of that what you will. To me, it's one of countless examples of Story shaping itself, often to the frustration of authors, who find their characters saying and doing things they never intended, or, to use an example from Tolkien, the appearance of a totally unexpected character, just at the time when he was under heavy pressure to finish his book. The story "wrote itself".


----------



## cart (Jun 5, 2022)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> I normally see the term "head-canon" used in the sense of piecing together a personally satisfactorily coherent "story" out of the sometimes radical changes made by the author, post-publication -- or in the case of the Silmarillion material, _no_-publication. You can ask Elthir about Galadriel (if you dare 😉).
> 
> I might call what you're talking about "head-fanfic", or something similar, which usually begins with "I wish he'd written more about. . ." and moving on to "I wonder if it would be like this --". One example for me was Aragorn's years of "errantry", and when the Amazon series was first announced, and there were rumors of "Young Aragorn", I was hoping they would include his adventures in the far south, "where the stars are strange". Alas. One of my own "head-stories" is about Boromir's great journey to Rivendell.
> 
> ...


Yea, I would presume as I think I stated in the OP that most are a blend of both. But I would think people may (or may not) lean in certain directions in terms of either being say more imaginative versus a more academic approach.. Not to speak for @1stvermont but I do think (such as myself) that your description is what we both intended though he may part ways with me at some point in that regard. Though I do think of it as real while not being under some delusion that these were historical events.. and i think enough can be said on that topic.. would be odd if in 10 years someone stumbled on this thread and saw people discussing possibility of Tolkien recounting historical events.

Though I am curious with you in particular. Surely at one point there was little if any academic intrigue in Tolkien's works.. perhaps as I did when I was a kid (and even to this day) think up fantastical tales of the blue wizards.... or dawdle on some lines that might have you think that Saruman crafted a ring of power and so on (kinda surprised this isn't talked about more often.. when I was young I assumed it was a ring of power).. and then (I presume) the older you get but more importantly the more you read.. the more bones you dig up of his work.. you may "know to much" to think up such things. I (certainly in this forum.. and maybe only this forum) am not particularly well read... but know more than most fans of his works... well at least the many that i have met who are unaware of letters.. what an Arda is.. and that Feanor did nothing wrong. Though, I still would say I am quite imaginative with the characters... particularly the ones that don't have very much concrete written of them (or that I have yet to read.)

Appreciate your reply. I do think one's approach and perception of the work is interesting and likely not often discussed.


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Jun 5, 2022)

There have been some discussions of Saruman's ring here. I'll try to find some.

Or you could trawl through the forums, whern you have the time.


----------



## Erestor Arcamen (Jun 5, 2022)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> There have been some discussions of Saruman's ring here. I'll try to find some.
> 
> Or you could trawl through the forums, whern you have the time.











Saruman's Ring!


I have posted this thread before, but it did not get the attention is deserved, so I am posting it again hoping to get the answers I want. Don't be afraid to post, an opinion is neither right nor wrong, so, post away! Now, we know that Saruman had quite an extensive knowledge on the Lore of the...




www.thetolkienforum.com












The answer to Saruman's Ring


I have posted this thread before, but it did not get the attention is deserved, so I am posting it again hoping to get the answers I want. Don't be afraid to post, an opinion is neither right nor wrong, so, post away! Now, we know that Saruman had quite an extensive knowledge on the Lore of the...




www.thetolkienforum.com












Saruman's Ring........


saurumons ring when gandalf goes to isengard first tolkien points out that saurumon is wearing a ring.I know that one of saurumons names is "maker of rings" but i was wondering if there is a story behind the ring. I have a theory that the ring could have been given as a gift from sauron and...




www.thetolkienforum.com


----------



## cart (Jun 5, 2022)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> There have been some discussions of Saruman's ring here. I'll try to find some.
> 
> Or you could trawl through the forums, whern you have the time.


lol sorry that was just an example of the imaginative side i was talking about.. the question was: Was there a point where the more "bones" you gained limited ur imaginative side and you became more academic.. or maybe even and I'll use this term loosely but historic in terms of your relationship with the material? I'd type more but in a rush.

cheers!
edot: though i will check out those links.. it did seem lke he crafted a ring.. i know he wore one.. and said he was a ring maker.. and then it was kinda just moved on from lol


----------

