Now that TOLKIEN STUDIES vol. IV has arrived, I'm enjoying making my way through the reviews, which have the usual interesting match-ups between reviewer and topic reviewed. Having once myself written in a review that an author should be ashamed of herself for writing the book I was reviewing, I can appreciate a reviewer's being forced to confess that she finds one piece "a perfectly vile essay" (p. 247). But I was rather taken aback by Patrick Curry's piece on Dickerson and Evans's ENTS, ELVES, AND ERIADOR: THE ENVIRONMENTAL VISION OF JRRT, an investigation of JRRT's work as an expression of Catholic environmentalism -- not because his review is so negative (Curry wrote the only other significant book on Tolkien as an environmentalist, and objects to their exclusion of NeoPagan and New Age environmentalist thought) but because he gratuitously brings in Islam to make a point in a markedly jingoistic fashion.
Specifically, in response to Dickerson and Evans' statement that exploitation of nature is radically at odds with Christian faith, Curry retorts that this "is comparable to maintaining that Islam IS a religion of peace and Marxism IS a philosophy of liberation. They may be, metaphysically; and perhaps they should be, in earthly reality; but in effect, on the ground--where, I would say, it matters most--the truth of all three assertions should be radically doubted." (page 240). I take this to be D. and E. arguing that Xianity, properly understood, involves cherishing God's creation, and Curry responding that if so the record of Xians' stewardship is a poor one, but the form his rejoinder took surprised and dismayed me. The impulse to judge all other religions than your own by their worst manifestations is all too prevalent in the world today, but that doesn't mean we have to give in to it, and this seems a strange place to encounter it.
One unrelated question, from elsewhere in Curry's review: has Beorn struck anyone else as "ruthless[ly] Machiavellian" (p. 242)? I've read Machiavelli of course (including his play The Mandrake Root, which is rather fun) but I can't think of any application of the adjective 'Machiavellian' that I'd apply to the werebear; the only vaguely Machiavellian character I can think of in Tolkien offhand is the Master of Lake-Town, whose actions are wholly guided by self-interest (with ultimately disastrous results). Perhaps I just missed something, but seems an odd characterization of poor old Medwed/Beorn.
--JDR
Friday, June 15, 2007
Forthcoming Books
Just been taking stock at how many interesting books on Tolkien, or related to Tolkien studies, are coming out this year. We've already had THE COMPANY THEY KEEP by Diana Pavlac Glyer with David Bratman, the most important new book on The Inklings since Carpenter. Thanks to the newest issue of BEYOND BREE, I've just learned of ROOTS AND BRANCHES, a Walking Tree Press collection of more than twenty essays and speeches by Tom Shippey, which I of course ordered the next day. From Jessica Yates I learned that Shippey's other new book, a major study that has been in the works for a while, is now out: THE SHADOW-WALKERS: JACOB GRIMM'S MYTHOLOGY OF THE MONSTROUS, which revisits Grimm's seminal work TEUTONIC MYTHOLOGY (which Tolkien seems to have dipped into for inspiration repeatedly). Finally, from Jason Fisher's new blog I found out about Dirk Vander Ploeg's QUEST FOR MIDDLE-EARTH, which tries to give Tolkien's Middle-earth a Van Daniken treatment. I suspect Ploeg might turn out to be the same person who published a rather strange piece I came across a while back in which he claimed to be of either elven or Numenorean descent (I forget which); we'll see.
And of course these, all out now, come in addition to two much-anticipated volumes coming in October: The Fleiger-Anderson edition TOLKIEN ON FAIRY-STORIES, which comes out in the U.K. on October 1st, and the Anderson-Burns collection of Tolkien's interviews ON TOLKIEN: INTERVIEWS, REMINISCENCES, and Other Essays, which is due out over here on October 21st.
And finally, thanks to Diana Pavlac Glyer for letting me know that the U.S. edition of my book is finally listed as orderable on amazon.com, with a release date of September 21st. It'll be available both as two individual volumes and in a boxed set containing both volumes of my book along with the new seventieth anniversary HOBBIT.
--JDR
And of course these, all out now, come in addition to two much-anticipated volumes coming in October: The Fleiger-Anderson edition TOLKIEN ON FAIRY-STORIES, which comes out in the U.K. on October 1st, and the Anderson-Burns collection of Tolkien's interviews ON TOLKIEN: INTERVIEWS, REMINISCENCES, and Other Essays, which is due out over here on October 21st.
And finally, thanks to Diana Pavlac Glyer for letting me know that the U.S. edition of my book is finally listed as orderable on amazon.com, with a release date of September 21st. It'll be available both as two individual volumes and in a boxed set containing both volumes of my book along with the new seventieth anniversary HOBBIT.
--JDR
Monday, June 11, 2007
Anime: PAPRIKA
Yesterday had the rare treat of getting to see the new movie by one of my favorite directors. And, what's more, I got to see it in the theatre (the Varsity, on University Avenue in the U-District). And it was shown with the original dialogue, subtitled not dubbed, and I found out later that my favorite voice actress, Megumi Hayashibara, played the main character. It thus joins the very short list of anime I've seen on the big screen: SPIRITED AWAY, COWBOY BEBOP, HOWL'S MOVING CASTLE, and STEAMBOY.
For those who enjoy Satoshi Kon's work and have not yet seen PAPRIKA, I cannot recommend it highly enough: it's classic Kon, clearly from the same mind that gave us PERFECT BLUE, MILLENNIUM ACTRESS, and especially PARANOIA AGENT; elements of TOKYO GODFATHERS are here as well, but muted. There's a reason Kon was recently named the best director working in anime after the legendary Hayao Miyazaki (who's in a league all by himself) by a major anime magazine (PROTOCULTURE ADDICTS #90, Jan/Feb 2007).*
First and foremost, this is surrealism done right. First it throws you in the deep end by showing the audience scenes from a policeman's recurring nightmare, then it explains clearly and simply what's going on (a scientist has invented a device that enables those who use it to enter other's dreams as an advanced form of psychotherapy; Paprika is a sort of guide who appears in the dreams and interacts with the dreamer), then it shows the rules it's just laid down start to come unhinged as the situation spirals out of control (someone has stolen several prototypes and uses them to force others into dream-states, with disastrous consequences as their victims sleepwalk out of high windows and the like; the devices also have unanticipated side-effects). As with PERFECT BLUE, things which happen only in the imagination are shown as if they were happening in the real world; as with PARANOIA AGENT, things from the dream world escape into reality, with dire consequences.
Second, this is the best superhero movie I've ever seen. The title character, Paprika, has a joie de vie that's an enormous contrast with the mopey comic book heroes of the last few decades (is there anyone out there who started reading comics after the 1960s who remembers when they used to be fun?). Although created as a persona within the dreamscape by the film's main character, Dr. Chiba (the super-competent scientist in charge of the project who's trying to clean up this mess and find out who within her team sabotaged the experiment), Paprika is quite unlike her real-world analogue: younger, more vivacious, mercurial. Within the dreamscapes, she can go almost anywhere and make herself over into almost anything within whatever environment she finds herself in, but she's not all-powerful, and frequently resorts to 'running away, terribly fast' when the situation calls for it.
Third, it's a suspenseful film that takes the time for character development: all the members of Dr. Chiba's team are vividly presented, from the mad scientist who invented the dream-device (a childlike whale of a man who's both a genius and utterly guileless) to Dr. Chiba herself, as is the detective who becomes ensnared in the case and of course Paprika herself. One reviewer compared it (favorably) to Gaiman, but it's far more fluid, less sinister, and considerably more entertaining than, say, MIRRORMASK. This is definitely one I'll be buying as soon as it becomes available over here; like PERFECT BLUE it'll reward repeated viewings. And, with a dvd, I'll be able to check something I almost missed at the end: a character going into a theatre passes by three posters. The third is an ad for TOKYO GODFATHERS, and I think the second was for MILLENNIUM ACTRESS, but I didn't catch the in-joke and look in time. I'm suspecting the first was for PERFECT BLUE, rounding out all three of Kon's previous films, but we'll see. I'll be wondering if the movie the character is going to see shows up as Kon's next project, but that's probably a little too neat.
Short version: classic Satoshi Kon, and a must-see for anyone interested in his work; highly recommended for fans of anime in general and also those interested in fantasy and science fiction.
--JDR
*Being named the best after Miyazaki is roughly equivalent to being named the best fantasy writer after Tolkien. Hideaki Anno, of EVANGELION fame, came in next after Kon.
For those who enjoy Satoshi Kon's work and have not yet seen PAPRIKA, I cannot recommend it highly enough: it's classic Kon, clearly from the same mind that gave us PERFECT BLUE, MILLENNIUM ACTRESS, and especially PARANOIA AGENT; elements of TOKYO GODFATHERS are here as well, but muted. There's a reason Kon was recently named the best director working in anime after the legendary Hayao Miyazaki (who's in a league all by himself) by a major anime magazine (PROTOCULTURE ADDICTS #90, Jan/Feb 2007).*
First and foremost, this is surrealism done right. First it throws you in the deep end by showing the audience scenes from a policeman's recurring nightmare, then it explains clearly and simply what's going on (a scientist has invented a device that enables those who use it to enter other's dreams as an advanced form of psychotherapy; Paprika is a sort of guide who appears in the dreams and interacts with the dreamer), then it shows the rules it's just laid down start to come unhinged as the situation spirals out of control (someone has stolen several prototypes and uses them to force others into dream-states, with disastrous consequences as their victims sleepwalk out of high windows and the like; the devices also have unanticipated side-effects). As with PERFECT BLUE, things which happen only in the imagination are shown as if they were happening in the real world; as with PARANOIA AGENT, things from the dream world escape into reality, with dire consequences.
Second, this is the best superhero movie I've ever seen. The title character, Paprika, has a joie de vie that's an enormous contrast with the mopey comic book heroes of the last few decades (is there anyone out there who started reading comics after the 1960s who remembers when they used to be fun?). Although created as a persona within the dreamscape by the film's main character, Dr. Chiba (the super-competent scientist in charge of the project who's trying to clean up this mess and find out who within her team sabotaged the experiment), Paprika is quite unlike her real-world analogue: younger, more vivacious, mercurial. Within the dreamscapes, she can go almost anywhere and make herself over into almost anything within whatever environment she finds herself in, but she's not all-powerful, and frequently resorts to 'running away, terribly fast' when the situation calls for it.
Third, it's a suspenseful film that takes the time for character development: all the members of Dr. Chiba's team are vividly presented, from the mad scientist who invented the dream-device (a childlike whale of a man who's both a genius and utterly guileless) to Dr. Chiba herself, as is the detective who becomes ensnared in the case and of course Paprika herself. One reviewer compared it (favorably) to Gaiman, but it's far more fluid, less sinister, and considerably more entertaining than, say, MIRRORMASK. This is definitely one I'll be buying as soon as it becomes available over here; like PERFECT BLUE it'll reward repeated viewings. And, with a dvd, I'll be able to check something I almost missed at the end: a character going into a theatre passes by three posters. The third is an ad for TOKYO GODFATHERS, and I think the second was for MILLENNIUM ACTRESS, but I didn't catch the in-joke and look in time. I'm suspecting the first was for PERFECT BLUE, rounding out all three of Kon's previous films, but we'll see. I'll be wondering if the movie the character is going to see shows up as Kon's next project, but that's probably a little too neat.
Short version: classic Satoshi Kon, and a must-see for anyone interested in his work; highly recommended for fans of anime in general and also those interested in fantasy and science fiction.
--JDR
*Being named the best after Miyazaki is roughly equivalent to being named the best fantasy writer after Tolkien. Hideaki Anno, of EVANGELION fame, came in next after Kon.
Saturday, June 9, 2007
Book Review: IZ
IZ: ISRAEL KAMAKAWIWO'OLE: VOICE OF THE PEOPLE by Rick Carroll [2006]
Sometimes, you just have to take a break from your normal routine and do something a bit different. With me, this occasionally takes the form of reading something completely unrelated to anything I'm working on. Most recently, I just finished a book (#2668) about a Hawaiian singer with a fondness for recording shmaltzy old songs like "Wind Beneath My Wings", "Mona Lisa", "Wonderful World", and "Over the Rainbow" with ukulele accompaniment -- which is about as far as you can get from my own musical tastes. Fortunately, his life story is far more interesting to me than his music: here was someone about my own age (our birthdates are less than six months apart), with a lot of charisma and a lot of talent, who died from morbid obesity at age thirty eight, by which point he weighed about eight hundred pounds. He was literally a food addict, and it killed him; the account of his steadily increasing weight, from four hundred to seven hundred to finally eight hundred pounds, makes for painful reading, just as would the account of an alcoholic inexorable decay.
But the music and food addiction are only part of the story; another theme running through the book is his gradual involvement in the 'Hawaiian Sovereignty' movement. I was not aware what a hot topic this is in Hawaii until our visit there last September; essentially, just as many dispersed native american tribes want to reclaim tribal lands and official recognition as a legal entity, so too some Hawaiians want to restore the Kingdom of Hawaii. This is more quixotic than it sounds, since pureblood Hawaiians are almost extinct: I've seen estimates that range from a low of 400 to a high of about 8,000 survivors (out of a total state population of about 1.3 million) -- of whom Kamakawiwo'ole himself was not one, it should be noted; his death certificate (reproduced on page 135) lists him as "Hawaiian/Japanese". Without knowing more about the context, I suspect his music should be ranked with Paul Revere's & the Raiders' "Indian Reservation (Cherokee People)" [1971] as something that helped raised cultural awareness of past injustices -- though in each case it was only part of a wider movement (e.g., in the case of American Indians, Dee Brown's BURY MY HEART AT WOUNDED KNEE, one of those rare books that completely changes the worldview of any reader who pays attention). That wider spectrum ranged from those who wanted past injustices acknowledged (as Clinton did with the "Apology Bill" of 1993, which expressed regret for the US's role in overthrowing the Hawaiian monarchy) to those who want to ignore the consequences of the last two centuries and pretend they just never happened. At any rate, an oblique look into an interesting subject I'll have to keep on the look-out for more on it from both sides.
--JDR
current music: "Mr. Bellamy" by Paul McCartney (from Memory Almost Full)
Sometimes, you just have to take a break from your normal routine and do something a bit different. With me, this occasionally takes the form of reading something completely unrelated to anything I'm working on. Most recently, I just finished a book (#2668) about a Hawaiian singer with a fondness for recording shmaltzy old songs like "Wind Beneath My Wings", "Mona Lisa", "Wonderful World", and "Over the Rainbow" with ukulele accompaniment -- which is about as far as you can get from my own musical tastes. Fortunately, his life story is far more interesting to me than his music: here was someone about my own age (our birthdates are less than six months apart), with a lot of charisma and a lot of talent, who died from morbid obesity at age thirty eight, by which point he weighed about eight hundred pounds. He was literally a food addict, and it killed him; the account of his steadily increasing weight, from four hundred to seven hundred to finally eight hundred pounds, makes for painful reading, just as would the account of an alcoholic inexorable decay.
But the music and food addiction are only part of the story; another theme running through the book is his gradual involvement in the 'Hawaiian Sovereignty' movement. I was not aware what a hot topic this is in Hawaii until our visit there last September; essentially, just as many dispersed native american tribes want to reclaim tribal lands and official recognition as a legal entity, so too some Hawaiians want to restore the Kingdom of Hawaii. This is more quixotic than it sounds, since pureblood Hawaiians are almost extinct: I've seen estimates that range from a low of 400 to a high of about 8,000 survivors (out of a total state population of about 1.3 million) -- of whom Kamakawiwo'ole himself was not one, it should be noted; his death certificate (reproduced on page 135) lists him as "Hawaiian/Japanese". Without knowing more about the context, I suspect his music should be ranked with Paul Revere's & the Raiders' "Indian Reservation (Cherokee People)" [1971] as something that helped raised cultural awareness of past injustices -- though in each case it was only part of a wider movement (e.g., in the case of American Indians, Dee Brown's BURY MY HEART AT WOUNDED KNEE, one of those rare books that completely changes the worldview of any reader who pays attention). That wider spectrum ranged from those who wanted past injustices acknowledged (as Clinton did with the "Apology Bill" of 1993, which expressed regret for the US's role in overthrowing the Hawaiian monarchy) to those who want to ignore the consequences of the last two centuries and pretend they just never happened. At any rate, an oblique look into an interesting subject I'll have to keep on the look-out for more on it from both sides.
--JDR
current music: "Mr. Bellamy" by Paul McCartney (from Memory Almost Full)
Thursday, June 7, 2007
Context (1937)
Yesterday made a long-delayed trip down to Suzzallo-Allen to do a little research on the Marquette paper, which I started writing this week. Didn't have time to look up all the things I wanted, so concentrated on getting copies of what seem to be the very first pieces of scholarly criticism of Tolkien's work published, the two brief book reviews by his friend C. S. Lewis published in the TIMES LITERARY SUPPLEMENT (Oct. 2nd 1937) and the London TIMES (Oct. 8th). I had the text of the former thanks to Fr. Hooper's collection C. S. LEWIS ON STORIES (pages 81-82) but not the latter, although Doug Anderson quotes a goodly portion of it in THE ANNOTATED HOBBIT (rev. ed. page 18). It'd been far too many years since I'd last read it, so got to make the acquaintance of the library's new state-of-the-art microfilm reader -- which turns out to be just as touchy as any other microfilm reader, but with an impressive array of bells and whistles.
Of the two pieces, two things stand out. The first is that whereas in the TLS piece Lewis mainly compares THE HOBBIT to Lewis Carroll's ALICE books (taking a hint, most likely, from the blurb on the dust jacket; see LETTERS OF JRRT p. 21), in the TIMES piece it's Grahame's THE WIND IN THE WILLOWS instead that dominates. The second is a matter of context. For me, the significant thing about those two issues was the appearance there of these two pieces, but of course they are merely small items nestled among many other notices: in both case not a featured review but a second-tier mini-review. This makes the context amusing: among the more than a dozen other books with which the October 2nd piece shares the page is Steinbeck's OF MICE AND MEN and Rex Stout's THE RED BOX, one of the early Nero Wolfe novels. The October 8th piece similarly sits next to even shorter reviews of Hemingway's TO HAVE AND HAVE NOT and Charles Williams' DESCENT INTO HELL (and an ad for a book of James Thurber cartoons). A good example of how the coincidences of chronology remind us that we over-compartmentalize the things we know. How many people remember that Poe and Lincoln were the same age, or that Tolkien was born the same year as the Red Baron?
--JDR
Of the two pieces, two things stand out. The first is that whereas in the TLS piece Lewis mainly compares THE HOBBIT to Lewis Carroll's ALICE books (taking a hint, most likely, from the blurb on the dust jacket; see LETTERS OF JRRT p. 21), in the TIMES piece it's Grahame's THE WIND IN THE WILLOWS instead that dominates. The second is a matter of context. For me, the significant thing about those two issues was the appearance there of these two pieces, but of course they are merely small items nestled among many other notices: in both case not a featured review but a second-tier mini-review. This makes the context amusing: among the more than a dozen other books with which the October 2nd piece shares the page is Steinbeck's OF MICE AND MEN and Rex Stout's THE RED BOX, one of the early Nero Wolfe novels. The October 8th piece similarly sits next to even shorter reviews of Hemingway's TO HAVE AND HAVE NOT and Charles Williams' DESCENT INTO HELL (and an ad for a book of James Thurber cartoons). A good example of how the coincidences of chronology remind us that we over-compartmentalize the things we know. How many people remember that Poe and Lincoln were the same age, or that Tolkien was born the same year as the Red Baron?
--JDR
Wednesday, June 6, 2007
Errata errata'd
As "Trotter"'s comment makes clear, it's hard to get all the errata in one go. And of all errata, it's the omissions, the things that got left out, that are the hardest to spot. In proof of which, I forgot yesterday to mention one important omission from the Acknowledgments: my friend David Bratman's name should have been included among the participants in the Tolkien Symposiums whom I thank on page xxxiii. I've learned a lot from David's presentations, and I always look forward to them.
In addition, while it's not an errata, if there's another edition of the book down the road I'd certainly want to add a name to the acknowledgments on page xxxiv: that of Kate Latham, who saw the book through the final stages at the publisher's.
As for the point raised by "Trotter" in his comment, yes I should have specified that while THE TWO TOWERS came out in 1954, the second printing I use as a reference copy dates from 1955. In fact, I find it interesting that my copies of both THE TWO TOWERS and THE RETURN OF THE KING, which I picked up during a research trip to Oxford in May 1987, both originally belonged to the same person: one Jay O. Eastwick,* who bought them in Teheran in March 1956. I've long known about Stanley Unwin's enthusiasm for selling British books throughout the Empire (or Commonwealth, as it'd become by that time), but it's one thing to read about something in THE TRUTH ABOUT PUBLISHING or THE TRUTH ABOUT A PUBLISHER and quite another to come across first-hand evidence of his strategy in action.
--JDR
*[or possibly Guy O. Eastwick; can't quite read the handwriting]
In addition, while it's not an errata, if there's another edition of the book down the road I'd certainly want to add a name to the acknowledgments on page xxxiv: that of Kate Latham, who saw the book through the final stages at the publisher's.
As for the point raised by "Trotter" in his comment, yes I should have specified that while THE TWO TOWERS came out in 1954, the second printing I use as a reference copy dates from 1955. In fact, I find it interesting that my copies of both THE TWO TOWERS and THE RETURN OF THE KING, which I picked up during a research trip to Oxford in May 1987, both originally belonged to the same person: one Jay O. Eastwick,* who bought them in Teheran in March 1956. I've long known about Stanley Unwin's enthusiasm for selling British books throughout the Empire (or Commonwealth, as it'd become by that time), but it's one thing to read about something in THE TRUTH ABOUT PUBLISHING or THE TRUTH ABOUT A PUBLISHER and quite another to come across first-hand evidence of his strategy in action.
--JDR
*[or possibly Guy O. Eastwick; can't quite read the handwriting]
Sunday, June 3, 2007
Errata
So, every author, editor, and proofreader knows that with every book there will inevitably be typos. No matter how many times you go over your work, there's always something that slips past into print. You hope that when you do find it, it'll be a relatively innocuous blunder, not something that makes you cringe.
Case in point:
Last night I was reading through the description of several new audiobooks in the Blackstone Audio catelogue, when I was bemused by the following synopsis of a new book on Mitt Romney (A MORMAN IN THE WHITE HOUSE?: 10 THINGS EVERY AMERICAN SHOULD KNOW ABOUT MITT ROMNEY, by Hugh Hewitt, read by Lloyd James). It reads, in part, "Mitt Romney is a successful businessman and a fiscal and social conservative who won the governorship in one of the staunchest Republican states in America".
Massachusetts a staunchly Republican state? Since when?
This is of course the worst kind of error: one that appears in a perfectly grammatical sentence that makes sense, but happens to be completely wrong -- in this case, the exact opposite of the truth.
(1)
In the case of MR. BAGGINS, I've found one example that fits this category: on page 260 I proudly draw attention to the fact that on Plate VI we printed the Tolkien drawing "Firelight in Beorn's House" in color for the first time ever.
Except we didn't. Due to an unfortunate mix-up on my part, the image that actually appears on Plate VI is in black & white, just like all the earlier reproductions (e.g., in THE ANNOTATED HOBBIT, ARTIST & ILLUSTRATOR, &c.). So my text refers to what I thought the illustration would be, not to what actually appears in the book.
(2)
A second error belongs to the embarrassingly obvious category: the dreaded "see page 000". There were several hundred such cross-references in the book, and one remained that way all the way into the published text, on page 356 of Volume One. Luckily, the reference isn't necessary to make sense of the passage; it's simply a self-evident glitch I wish we'd caught. [Note: For those who are interested, the missing page number(s) are 731 & 761, which discuss the circumstances in 1944 and 1947 that led up to the accidental second edition of 1951.]
(3)
Third, there's one purely typographical error, on page 400; a hyphenated word that somehow got its second element capitalized ("ani-Mals" rather than "ani-mals"). I don't know quite how this happened, but while it looks a bit odd at least it doesn't affect the meaning of the passage from coming through.
(4)
Finally, there's one error that only fellow editors are likely to catch: a word that should be in italics that wasn't. I refer of course to the second caption on Plate III, where the word "Below" should be italicized, like all the other signposts in this section.
* * * * * * * *
So far, that's the crop; if anyone finds more, please let me know. I did catch one in Part Two while completing the Index, hopefully in time for them to have made the change: in one place I'd used the name "Naugladur" where I meant to say "Nauglath" -- a simple slip on my part. We'll see.
--JDR
Case in point:
Last night I was reading through the description of several new audiobooks in the Blackstone Audio catelogue, when I was bemused by the following synopsis of a new book on Mitt Romney (A MORMAN IN THE WHITE HOUSE?: 10 THINGS EVERY AMERICAN SHOULD KNOW ABOUT MITT ROMNEY, by Hugh Hewitt, read by Lloyd James). It reads, in part, "Mitt Romney is a successful businessman and a fiscal and social conservative who won the governorship in one of the staunchest Republican states in America".
Massachusetts a staunchly Republican state? Since when?
This is of course the worst kind of error: one that appears in a perfectly grammatical sentence that makes sense, but happens to be completely wrong -- in this case, the exact opposite of the truth.
(1)
In the case of MR. BAGGINS, I've found one example that fits this category: on page 260 I proudly draw attention to the fact that on Plate VI we printed the Tolkien drawing "Firelight in Beorn's House" in color for the first time ever.
Except we didn't. Due to an unfortunate mix-up on my part, the image that actually appears on Plate VI is in black & white, just like all the earlier reproductions (e.g., in THE ANNOTATED HOBBIT, ARTIST & ILLUSTRATOR, &c.). So my text refers to what I thought the illustration would be, not to what actually appears in the book.
(2)
A second error belongs to the embarrassingly obvious category: the dreaded "see page 000". There were several hundred such cross-references in the book, and one remained that way all the way into the published text, on page 356 of Volume One. Luckily, the reference isn't necessary to make sense of the passage; it's simply a self-evident glitch I wish we'd caught. [Note: For those who are interested, the missing page number(s) are 731 & 761, which discuss the circumstances in 1944 and 1947 that led up to the accidental second edition of 1951.]
(3)
Third, there's one purely typographical error, on page 400; a hyphenated word that somehow got its second element capitalized ("ani-Mals" rather than "ani-mals"). I don't know quite how this happened, but while it looks a bit odd at least it doesn't affect the meaning of the passage from coming through.
(4)
Finally, there's one error that only fellow editors are likely to catch: a word that should be in italics that wasn't. I refer of course to the second caption on Plate III, where the word "Below" should be italicized, like all the other signposts in this section.
* * * * * * * *
So far, that's the crop; if anyone finds more, please let me know. I did catch one in Part Two while completing the Index, hopefully in time for them to have made the change: in one place I'd used the name "Naugladur" where I meant to say "Nauglath" -- a simple slip on my part. We'll see.
--JDR
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
