tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2239062544101975016.post4350157688911027483..comments2024-03-28T14:05:25.134-07:00Comments on Sacnoth's Scriptorium: Was Tolkien "An Inveterate Meddler"?John D. Rateliffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12324926298336489295noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2239062544101975016.post-54222249945730680622013-07-07T17:26:32.909-07:002013-07-07T17:26:32.909-07:00Hi Carl
Yes, that is Stanley's exact point. T...Hi Carl<br /><br />Yes, that is Stanley's exact point. That disrespect for the manuscripts they were working with inadvertently led OE scholars into replacing what may well have been genuine readings with "corrections" that fit their preconceptions of what the passage SHOULD have said. The more creative and imaginative the scholar, the higher in quality the proposed changes would be, and at some point they can cross over where a brilliant scholar overcorrects a mediocre poet. <br /><br />--John R.John D. Rateliffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12324926298336489295noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2239062544101975016.post-4930259827907054662013-07-07T07:59:55.014-07:002013-07-07T07:59:55.014-07:00I'd have to check (which I can't do at the...I'd have to check (which I can't do at the moment), but I doubt that in editing the Old English "Exodus" Tolkien gives any indication that he was producing "a 'correction' that's better than what the Old English poet actually wrote", since I doubt that he thought the sole MS we have of the poem preserves in every detail the authorial text. It would be more accurate, I think, to say that Tolkien thought he was producing a correction of the copy (of a copy of a ...) of the text that better reflects what the Old English poet actually wrote. Aelfwinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04750294376581801762noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2239062544101975016.post-23034926632898311872013-07-06T17:08:19.894-07:002013-07-06T17:08:19.894-07:00Dear Anna
Glad you're finding the book usefu...Dear Anna<br /> <br />Glad you're finding the book useful.<br /><br />I drafted a comment in response, but it seems to have vanished into the ether. So I'll keep this replacement one brief.<br /><br />As long as it is, there still wasn't room to discuss everything I'd have liked within the H.o.H. I talk more about the Bretherton letter in my article "A Fragment, Detached", which can be found online at the Tolkiendil site.<br /><br />Hope this helps.<br /><br />--JDR<br />John D. Rateliffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12324926298336489295noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2239062544101975016.post-32134974560606975102013-07-06T14:24:56.162-07:002013-07-06T14:24:56.162-07:00Hi John,
First of all, thanks for your work on th...Hi John,<br /><br />First of all, thanks for your work on the History of the Hobbit, it is an invaluable resource for those of us who strive to learn more about Tolkien and his work. I have not found a way to contact you other than through this blog - I would be very grateful if you told me an e-mail address or contacted me at avlevit@yahoo.com - I have read your analysis of Elrond (pages 121-123 in the single-volume edition) and I wonder why you make no mention of Tolkien's letter #257, where he wrote that at the time of composition of The Hobbit Elrond was not THE Elrond but rather a case of a recycled name that turned out to be quite fortuitous. "Elrond. The passage in Ch. iii relating him to the Half-elven of the mythology was a fortunate accident, due to the difficulty of constantly inventing good names for new characters. I gave him the name Elrond casually, but as this came from the mythology (Elros and Elrond the two sons of Eärendel) I made him half-elven. Only in The Lord was he identified with the son of Eärendel, and so the greatgrandson of Lúthien and Beren, a great power and a Ringholder." <br /><br />Thank you for your answer.<br /><br />Respectfully,<br /><br />AnnaAnnahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10861173791832669397noreply@blogger.com