Re: Which order should I read the books?

Author:    Steuard Jensen
Email:     sjensen -aaatt- hmc -daht- edu
Date:      1998/05/12
Forums:    rec.games.roguelike.angband, rec.arts.books.tolkien
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quoth <<<mhayden -aaatt- tsoft -daht- com>>> (Michael Hayden):
> In article <6j47cj$3gs$1@News.Dal.Ca>,
> Joseph William Dixon  <<<aa343 -aaatt- chebucto.ns -daht- ca>>> wrote:
> >  Order to read:
> >   The Hobbit
> >   The Lord of the Rings
> >   the Appendices to The Lord of the Rings
> ><<if you like those, then read...>>
> >   The Silmarillion
> >   Unfinished Tales
> >
> >  Do *NOT* read the History of Middle Earth books - they were written
> >almost completely by Christopher Tolkien and have about as much validity
> >as a source of information as ICE's Middle Earth Role-Playing game does...

> I'm just cross-posting this to r.a.b.tolkien to give them a chance to fill
> us in.

Thanks for the opportunity!

Others can comment on this with more authority than I, but I have to
disagree with this last comment.  In fact, the History of Middle Earth
books make a very clear distinction between what is by J.R.R. Tolkien
and what is by his son Christopher.  For those who don't know, the
History of Middle Earth books consist of various drafts and versions
of everything JRRT wrote about Middle Earth, together with Christopher
Tolkien's commentary on when each draft was probably written and its
relationship to drafts of other stories.

On the other hand, _The Silmarillion_ was LITERALLY written almost
entirely by Christopher, based on the exact same rough drafts and
conflicting versions of the stories which were later published in
unedited form as the History of Middle Earth.  Along the way,
Christopher made quite a few editorial changes, some of which were
arguably unnecessary and clearly contrary to JRRT's actual intent.

Because _The Silmarillion_ was not (directly) written by JRRT and the
History of Middle Earth books contain many rough and conflicting
drafts of the stories, die hard Tolkien fans tend not to regard
_either_ as completely canonical (though both are infinitely more so
than Middle Earth Role Playing by ICE).  The very most informed
debates about Middle-earth tend to regard _The Lord of the Rings_ as
completely canonical and to reconstruct all other "historical"
information from JRR Tolkien's latest intention (stated or implied) as
derived from sources in the History of Middle Earth books.  In those
debates, direct quotes from _The Silmarillion_ are rarely used.

At any rate, I agree with the original suggested reading order, but I
would also add (to the end of the list) the first two books of the
History of Middle Earth series: _The Book of Lost Tales_, Parts 1 and
2.  Only the truly insane need to continue beyond that point (though
there are some wonderful poetic fragments in book 3 of HoME: _The Lays
of Belariand_).

                                                Steuard Jensen