1,102 of 1,132 people found the following review helpful
Tolkien's true life work, ultimately unfinished though it is,
This review is from: The Silmarillion (Hardcover)
In the Tolkien canon, "The Silmarillion" is the most highly contested of all his works. Constructed as a prehistoric history of the Universe, the book has the cultural significance of the Bible in Tolkien's universe. It is Tolkien's primary work, but it's also his most troublesome, in more ways than one. One thing you need to know. In Tolkien scholarship, there are two primary ways to refer to the "Silmarillion". One is the Silmarillion, the legendarium proper, and then the 1977 "Silmarillion", which may or may not be what Tolkien envisioned.
"The Silmarillion" , the book Tolkien spent all of his adult life writing, was, sadly, incomplete when Tolkien died at the age of eighty one in 1973. Naturally, this begs the question why did it take him decades to write the book, and it still be unfinished after all that time? Well, to understand that, you need to understand two things: the scope of the project, and how Tolkien worked.
The scope of the book was a complete imaginary history, a totally self-contained mythology, all written and developed for his home country, England (my home country as well). Imagine the Greek and Roman mythologies, all those myths and gods, developed by one man. Imagine Homer completely inventing all the gods for his stories. Imagine how hard that would be to come up with your own mythological traditions as such. No wonder Tolkien had such a hard time completing the work.
Now, the scope (which is extremely ambitious for any artist) was compounded by how Tolkien worked. First, he was a philologist first and foremost, and so before the stories he invented languages. All of these languages (which would have taken a life-time to develop on their own) had their own history, and are so interlocked with the mythology that you cannot remove them. He developed the main body of legends around these languages. Many features of the central body of legends changed relatively little over the years, but he wrote different versions of them at different times and in different styles. Some of the legends were set in poetry, those in annalistic histories, others in condensed summaries, and others in the more traditional (at least, for modern readers) novel format. A lot of these writings are also unfinished, due to Tolkien's perfectionist tendencies. Christopher Tolkien said that for most of his father's writing there existed a stable tradition from which Tolkien worked from, but there was no such thing as a stable text for the primary legends.
All this is tied to how Tolkien worked. C. S. Lewis famously stated that you did not influence Tolkien, you may as well as try to influence a bandersnatch. Tolkien would either take no notice of your criticism, or else he would start all over from the beginning. And so he did. A lot. Tolkien would reach a certain portion of the draft, be unsatisfied, and began the whole thing over again, while never reaching the end. Or Tolkien would have two copies of the same manuscript, one to be the fair copy and one to be working copy. Well, Tolkien would make conflicting revisions on both copies at separate times. How do you decide his final intent? Good question. These tendencies presented major problems from Christopher Tolkien when he prepared the 1977 "Silmarillion"
Another problem with Tolkien's work also is that toward the end of his life, he began contemplating changing major features of the mythology that stretched back to the earliest versions. A lot of these changes had to do with cosmology, with the sun and moon, and changing Arda (the earth) from a flat-world to a round world. In the original mythology, and the 1977 version, Arda begins as a flat world but is made into a round world. Tolkien contemplated other major changes that would have totally changed much of the more distinguishable features of the mythology, stable features present from the very beginning. Consult "Myths Transformed" in Morgoth's Ring: The Later Silmarillion, Part One: The Legends of Aman (The History of Middle-Earth, Vol. 10), Vol. 10 of THE HISTORY OF MIDDLE-EARTH for more information.
Then we have the problem of The Lord of the Rings. Tolkien was tantalizing close to some sort of final version of the work in the late 1930s (indeed, the 1937 version of the "Quenta Silmarillion" is the only complete version he ever made of the primary work and which is heavily used in the 1977 "The Silmarillion"). Then, due to publisher demand, Tolkien began working on his masterpiece for the next fourteen years, leaving the "Silmarillion" legendarium completely untouched for over a decade. When Tolkien picked up the "Silmarillion" again, he now had to account for LOTR and somehow incorporate that major work into the mythology. Tolkien did a lot of work on the legendarium after the completion of LOTR, but this work was plagued with uncertainty and contemplation of radical rewriting.
And in the last years of his life, Tolkien also began moving away from strict narrative and began working extensively on theological matters, essays on Elvish culture and linguistics, and other matters not tied to the actual narrative of the main storyline.
So when Tolkien died in 1973, he left his son Christopher in quite the predicament. Decades of writing, much if it unfinished, with a staggering palimpsest of manuscripts from which to draw from would be daunting to anyone. As literary executor, he had to come up with a publishable version of the work (as clearly that was his father's wishes, and Christopher was the man for the job, being most acquainted with the work). So, in four years, with the assistance of Guy Gavriel Kay, he cobbled together a self-contained narrative, largely compatible with the Hobbit cycle. Due to Tolkien's tendency to not finish drafts, some of the narrative in the last portion of the work had not been touched by Tolkien in literally decades (The Fall of Gondolin never got a complete version other than the 1916 Lost Tales story The Book of Lost Tales, Part Two (The History of Middle-Earth, Vol. 2)). Thingol and Melian presented thorny problems, especially the Girdle of Melian (her magical protection around Doriath). Christopher and Kay constructed the chapter dealing with the ruin of Doriath from scratch, with no corresponding writing in Tolkien's own work.
Yet another major issue was, due to getting a version of the book published as soon as possible, Christopher rushed through much of material, and did not have access to all of his father's manuscripts, some of which had been sold off. While he always used post LOTR material as often as possible, Christopher was as many times incorrect as not when guessing his father's intentions for the work. In the ensuing twelve volumes of THE HISTORY OF MIDDLE-EARTH, where he had years to get to know the manuscripts, Christopher examines more closely his father's works, and there is much in those twelve volumes that were Tolkien's final intention for the work, but did not make it into the published version. Christopher has stated, given time, he may have produced a much different version than the one published. But he is now retired and will not revise the book (much of which would have to be wholesale).
That's quite a bit of history, and ultimately all that history may bog potential readers down in their journey into "The Silmarillion". For all of its imperfections, its unfinished nature, the endless debates on how much the 1977 version is what Tolkien really intended, the book is powerful mythology. The reading is dry, and the names are jawcracking trying to pronounce. While it's hard to keep track of the multitude of characters and all the permutations and migrations of the three main Elven tribes, there are unforgettable images in the book, and beautiful passages of despair and hope.
While the work is not the most accessible for modern readers, for those who persist you can see why Tolkien really did regard this as his life work, or, as Tom Shippey says in J.R.R. Tolkien: Author of the Century, "the work of his heart". And what a mighty work it is, despite its unfinished nature.
Back in the 1990s I wrote another review of "The Silmarillion", and including that as bonus content. 9-10-2012
"***** Tolkien's Bible" Hark now to The Silmarillion, the Bible of Tolkien's fantasy world. This is not a work to be taken lightly, for here we at last uncover the great truths of Middle-earth, and hear of its creation.
The Silmarillion, simply put, is a tragic book, beautiful, with one flaw that nearly kills it. It was unfinished. We do not know (or ever will) how much different it would have been if Tolkien live to complete his greatest work. Christopher his son has done as well as can be expected, but there are quite a few style shifts betraying his pen instead of his father's. This is to be read with such seriousness as The Illiad or The Odysse. It is a mythological work that should be studied. This is not for a conventional reader, this is for the serious student. Without the knowledge his other two novels (for Lord of the Rings is one novel, not a trilogy) The L. R. and The Hobbit, The Silmarillion is not near as rewarding as it would otherwise be. The Hobbit is for children, The Lord of the Rings is for adults, and The Silmarillion is for students of this great work. All students interested in literature should read this, flawed as it is because of the mortality of man.
It also shows how strong Tolkien believed in God. His world was very much a Christian world, set up in the likeness of God. God is never mentioned in the L. R., but as I remember he is in The Silmarillion. You see him with the Ainur create the world. Truly, this is a master of fantasy, and a great Christian man.
Tracked by 5 customers
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 11-20 of 21 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Sep 18, 2011 1:46:09 PM PDT
T. L. McGaa says:
spoken by someone who doesnt have much understanding of great things...when you read the review you saw only negatives and flaws...most of us saw explanations that lead to greater understanding. both of the book in question and of the author. as far as your opinion of what J.R.R. Tolkien deserves or does not deserve...when you have spent your lifetime creating such a masterpiece, then you will be in a position to say he does not deserve the highest praise for his work.
Posted on Jul 3, 2012 8:52:21 AM PDT
A singularly excellent review that leaves very little to add. Christopher Tolkien has said that, in retrospect, he made many errors in publishing THE SILMARILLION as it stands, one of the greatest being that the book, as is, is meant to be read TO an audience, not BY an audience---try reading THE SILMARILLION out loud and it becomes gripping. He also stated that he should have avoided any attempt at internal consistency and published it as a compendium of legends, essentially as Bilbo's "Translations From The Elvish."
Posted on Sep 28, 2012 11:13:37 AM PDT
I'm baffled as to how there are 13 (the number may even _increase_!) people who have given your review a negative vote. I will blame poor eyesight or Parkinsons, because the only alternative reason is soullessness (honoring Tolkien, this non-Catholic will employ the Catholic principle that "one ought not ascribe to wickedness or malice what may be accounted for by ignorance").
Also: best review this life-long lover of Tolkien has ever read on Amazon.com. Very informative.
Posted on Nov 18, 2012 4:31:06 PM PST
Thuan Nguyen says:
what a great review! thank you for that! my friend has mentioned lending me her copy of the book and I am glad i read your review beforehand so I have some background knowledge on it going it. I am a big fan of Tolkien's writing and am very much looking forward to reading it!
Posted on Dec 5, 2012 1:18:29 PM PST
Robert S. Jones says:
About halfway through that review I thought "Man, this guy knows his stuff." You've clearly done your homework. Very, very well done.
Posted on Dec 25, 2012 8:53:23 AM PST
D. Sujjavanich says:
I sincerely appreciate the detailed history behind the book. I will get a great deal more out of reading the book now than I would have if I had just picked it up off the shelf. The Tolkien books (JRR and Christopher) are intense, beautiful, and complicated works whose history is almost as interesting as the books themselves. Thank you for an extremely well-done review.
Posted on Mar 29, 2013 10:15:34 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Mar 29, 2013 10:18:29 AM PDT
Tricia M says:
Mike London, Thank you for your review. I tried to read the Silmarillion many years ago, and found it mind numbing, even though I've read thousands of books. I can see why Tolkien had trouble finishing it. You have inspired me to try again, maybe with the 1977 version. I'll get it from the library, though.
Posted on Jun 26, 2013 8:55:14 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 26, 2013 8:57:19 PM PDT
Carlos M says:
I found this to be a more than thorough review, and much more than most need to know in order to appreciate this fine work of art and fantasy fiction. However, it is useful to someone like me who is very interested in Tolkien's writings concerning Middle Earth. Having both read the print version and listened to the audio version numerous times. I find Quenta Silmarillion more compelling than the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings.
Posted on Jan 12, 2014 6:13:44 PM PST
Amazon Customer says:
I don't intend to contest that Tolkien was Christian, as I'm pretty sure he was, but I don't see how creating a fictional world with a god can really be seen as evidence of an author's faith. That said, I do appreciate how thorough and informative this review is. I've already read the Silmarillion, but it's interesting to read the history of the book.
Posted on Jan 25, 2014 9:34:11 PM PST
Amazon Customer says:
Insightful. It seems almost an addendum to the actual book. Like other reviewers noted, reading the Silmarillion will now take on a richer experience.