[continued from previous message]   
      
   into publishable form"; Christopher discusses the difficulties involved   
   in the book's Foreword.  To understand why /The Silmarillion/ took the   
   form that it did (and why it is rarely considered "canonical", as   
   mentioned in question III.A.2), it is worth exploring those editorial   
   changes.  The full story can be found in the "History of Middle-earth"   
   books, particularly /Morgoth's Ring/ and /The War of the Jewels/   
   (volumes X-XI).   
      
      The most basic editorial decision was which writings to include in   
   the book at all.  The "Quenta Silmarillion" is of course the central   
   text, but Tolkien also wrote numerous associated stories and essays.   
   Charles Noad explored this question as part of his essay "On the   
   Construction of 'The Silmarillion'" (published in /Tolkien's   
   Legendarium/; see question III.A.5), where he suggests an "outline for   
   'The Silmarillion' as Tolkien may have intended it". In addition to the   
   texts in the published book, Noad includes expanded versions of four   
   stories: "The Lay of Leithian" (possibly in poetic form), "Narn i Chin   
   Hurin", "The Fall of Gondolin", and "Earendil the Wanderer" (which   
   Tolkien never even fully sketched).  He also includes five   
   "Appendices": writings about Middle-earth and its inhabitants such as   
   "Laws and Customs among the Eldar" and the "Athrabeth Finrod ah   
   Andreth" (most of these were published in HoMe X-XI).  Sadly, a book   
   with this outline could never be made satisfying with just the texts   
   that Tolkien left us.   
      
      Moving on to the texts that were actually included in /The   
   Silmarillion/ as published, there were three types of problems to   
   overcome.  In the worst cases, there were crucial gaps in the narrative   
   where Tolkien had never written more than an outline of the story (or   
   where the most recent version was hopelessly outdated). Much more   
   frequently, Tolkien's years of revisions led to factual inconsistencies   
   between stories written at various times (especially between writings   
   before and after /The Lord of the Rings/). And finally, Tolkien's   
   writings differed markedly in tone, ranging from vivid narratives to   
   terse annals to philosophical essays.  To assemble a single text,   
   consistent in style and detail, from such a range of source material   
   clearly required substantial editing.   
      
      Despite that pessimistic assessment, the vast majority of the   
   published /Silmarillion/ is taken directly from Tolkien's work and   
   seems to come quite close to what he intended, as far as it goes. (None   
   of the "expanded" tales were ever completed, but what exists of them   
   can be found for the most part in /Unfinished Tales/, /The Lays of   
   Beleriand/, and the other "History of Middle-earth" books mentioned   
   above.)  Still, mild editing is not uncommon, and can be difficult to   
   identify even by comparison to the source texts as published in HoMe.   
   Thus, /The Silmarillion/ is often not treated as a final authority in   
   scholarly discussions of Middle-earth.  (A classic example is its   
   mistaken ancestry of Gil-galad, as discussed in question III.B.8.)   
      
      The greatest concern, of course, comes from those few cases where   
   large gaps had to be filled by the editors.  This happened to some   
   extent for "Of Tuor and the Fall of Gondolin" and "Of the Voyage of   
   Earendil and the War of Wrath", but the most substantial editorial   
   "invention" came in the chapter "Of the Ruin of Doriath".  The episode   
   was of crucial importance and thus could not be left out or glossed   
   over, but Tolkien had written almost no description of the event since   
   1930 (long before even /The Hobbit/ was published) and the mythology   
   had changed drastically since then.  Moreover, Tolkien was never happy   
   with some aspects of the story, in particular with the question of how   
   the Dwarves could invade Doriath despite the Girdle of Melian.  The   
   published version was directly inspired by some of Tolkien's drafts of   
   the tale (those which seemed easiest to reconcile with the rest of the   
   story), but was essentially rewritten to be consistent with the rest of   
   the book and to include a few ideas from Tolkien's later writings.   
   That meant some major changes: for example, in Tolkien's own drafts,   
   the Nauglamir did not exist before it was made to hold the Silmaril   
   (out of raw gold from Nargothrond), and Thingol was not slain until the   
   full Dwarvish army attacked.   
      
      In his comments on "Of the Ruin of Doriath" (an appendix to "The   
   Tale of Years" in /The War of the Jewels/), Christopher Tolkien   
   concludes with the regret that "the undoubted difficulties could have   
   been, and should have been, surmounted without so far overstepping the   
   bounds of the editorial function."  Elsewhere in that book, at the end   
   of the section "The Wanderings of Hurin", he speaks of other omissions   
   and alterations, and says,   
      
      it seems to me now, many years later, to have been an excessive   
      tampering with my father's actual thought and intention: thus   
      raising the question, whether the attempt to make a 'unified'   
      /Silmarillion/ should have been embarked on.   
      
   Whatever failings /The Silmarillion/ as published may have, I think   
   that most of its readers are grateful to have it, and would assure   
   Christopher Tolkien that his work was worthwhile.  He undertook a great   
   task in bringing it to print, and despite his later misgivings I think   
   most would agree that he did an excellent job.   
   -------   
      
   4. Which are "The Two Towers"?   
      
      Tolkien was never very happy with the title.  In Letters #140 and   
   #143 he considers many interpretations of it, each with its own   
   rationale, and even comments that it could be left ambiguous.  It   
   seems, however, that he eventually settled on one interpretation.   
      
      The note at the end of /The Fellowship of the Ring/ in three-volume   
   editions of LotR states that   
      
      The second part is called /The Two Towers/, since the events   
      recounted in it are dominated by /Orthanc/, the citadel of Saruman,   
      and the fortress of /Minas Morgul/ that guards the secret entrance   
      to Mordor.   
      
   According to Wayne Hammond's /J.R.R. Tolkien: A Descriptive   
   Bibliography/, Tolkien submitted that note a month after his indecision   
   in Letter #143.  And a month later, Tolkien submitted an illustration   
   for the dust-jacket of /The Two Towers/; as can be seen in /J.R.R.   
   Tolkien: Artist and Illustrator/ (plate [180]), that illustration shows   
   Minas Morgul and Orthanc as well.  It seems clear that this was   
   Tolkien's final decision.   
   -------   
      
   5. Which books /about/ Tolkien are good, and which aren't?   
      
      A few disclaimers.  First, this is a very subjective question, and   
   what follows is largely a matter of individual opinion.  This list was   
   gleaned from discussions on the newsgroups and it reflects some level   
   of consensus, but no verdict was unanimous.  Second, this list is   
   /very/ incomplete, but there simply isn't space to list all of the   
   excellent scholarship on Tolkien that has been produced. Unfortunately,   
   this means that only books will be included, and I will focus on only   
   the best known of those (and even then, I'm sure some are missing).  My   
   apologies to anyone who has been overlooked.   
      
      With that being said, these are some of the best secondary works   
   about Tolkien, in no particular order.  I have included general   
   descriptions for books whose titles do not make their content clear.   
      
      * /The Complete Guide to Middle-earth/, by Robert Foster.  A   
         detailed and very trustworthy glossary of people, places, and   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)