| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It was published in 3 volumes. Fellowship was first published in July 1954. Two Towers was published in November 1954. Return of the King was published in October 1955.
It wasn't an interesting subject anyway. Joss Whedon has an opinion, poor troll tries to start a flamewar by badmouthing Whedon, people generally agree that while Star Wars V is a good movie, Whedon is kind of right, it's not a full movie and it lacks an ending. Topic done, the thread moves on.
I rather liked the discussions on 'trilogies and the function of middle movies' and 'waiting times between installments, how much is too much'. These random tangents can be much more interesting.Edit: Can we now make this thread about threads going into tangents and evolving? Seems like it could be an interesting conversation...
that's...one interpretation.
Tolkien may not have been happy with the decision, but I don't believe it was initially published as a single unit.
Lord of the Rings was written as a single novel and intended to be read as such. It is not a trilogy, or a hexology, and originally was published in a single volume. However, it only really took off big time commercially when the decision was taken by the publishers to split it into three more managable-sized volumes - a decision Tolkien himself wasn't originally happy with.
I... thought it was supposed to be two books instead?
EDIT: what I mean is that from my memory, Tolkien meant to have two books, but the publisher demanded that he split it into three.
Either way Tolkien wasn't happy with it, and no one could figure out what "The Two Towers" were supposed to be about because there were more than two towers involved.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
From the liner-notes of Belle and Sebastian's Dear Catastrophe Waitress album:
The subject moves round to "The Two Towers."
"I mean, what were the Two Towers anyway? In the film it makes out they were Saruman's bit and Sauron's bit. I always thought it was meant to be Minas Tirith and Minas Morgul."
I kind of agree with him. That would make the most poetic sense. There are four towers to chose from though. Orthanc, Morgul, Tirith and Barad-Dur.
"I'm surprised Tolkien didn't give the Hobbits a tower as well."
Well they had a sort of mound.
--
Belle and Sebastian video that reminds me of a bunch of kitchen-sink Britishiznoid films
From the liner-notes of Belle and Sebastian's Dear Catastrophe Waitress album:
The subject moves round to "The Two Towers."
"I mean, what were the Two Towers anyway? In the film it makes out they were Saruman's bit and Sauron's bit. I always thought it was meant to be Minas Tirith and Minas Morgul."
I kind of agree with him. That would make the most poetic sense. There are four towers to chose from though. Orthanc, Morgul, Tirith and Barad-Dur.
"I'm surprised Tolkien didn't give the Hobbits a tower as well."
Well they had a sort of mound.
--
Belle and Sebastian video that reminds me of a bunch of kitchen-sink Britishiznoid films
I've read LOTR about 10 times over 44 years and almost every time I thought The Two Towers referenced Orthanc and Barad-dur. Only when I read the appendix at the end of Return of The King and had recently read The Similarian and other works do I think it could also mean Minas Tirith and Minas Morgul. The the thing is Mina's Tirith doesn't really play much part in The Two Towers, and Minas Morgul is only referenced in the second book.
But yeah, there are lots more towers..Amun-sul aka WeatherTop where Frodo is stabbed, the tower in the grey havens where the one of the Palantir looks forever westward, the twoer on top of Moria where Gandalf casts down the Balrog ..etc.
EDIT: what I mean is that from my memory, Tolkien meant to have two books, but the publisher demanded that he split it into three.
Close.
Tolkien intended it to be two books:
Book 1: Lord of the Rings
Book 2: The Silmarillion
The Silmarillion wasn't published until 1977, posthumously.
EDIT: what I mean is that from my memory, Tolkien meant to have two books, but the publisher demanded that he split it into three.
Close.
Tolkien intended it to be two books:
Book 1: Lord of the Rings
Book 2: The SilmarillionThe Silmarillion wasn't published until 1977, posthumously.
That doesn't really make any sense. If anything, Tolkien intended it to be two books, The Hobbit and the Silmarillion. His proposal for the Silmarillion (or at least some version of what was later published as the Silmarillion) was rejected as unpublishable. IIRC, it was suggested he write something more with the hobbits :)
He always wanted to get the First Age mythology published, but it wasn't linked directly to publishing LotR. Certainly not in any Book 1, Book 2, kind of way.
Nor did he ever complete it into any kind of publishable state. Instead he kept going back over and revising it. The existing Silmarillion is compiled from draft versions at different stages of development.
It's not the text of the letter, but it is a summary. Note, the letter is 13 years after the first publication of The Hobbit. His intention of a duology was LotR and Silmarillion and as late as 1950 he was still trying to publish it in that form.
Threads evolve dude. No thread stayed on topic for more then 4 pages...
Though, that does make me wonder - where's the Paizo "stay on topic" brigade? Or do they only show up when it suits them? They're over-seen in a number of threads...
Hmmm...
I imagine that if we started calling each other names over what Tolkien's original plans were, or started insulting each other over differing opinions on Joss Whedon, they'd show up.
As it is, we're just kicking it about books and movies. Not much need for a brigade.
Oh, btw,
Threads evolve dude. No thread stayed on topic for more then 4 pages...Though, that does make me wonder - where's the Paizo "stay on topic" brigade? Or do they only show up when it suits them? They're over-seen in a number of threads...
Hmmm...
If no one's flagging a thread for derailing (a "breaks other guidelines" selection), then they wouldn't know to come check.
Also, I think they normally show up for more intentional derails (people spamming a thread with "popcorn" jokes, or more seriously with efforts to distract from an issue they don't want to discuss), than when the conversation just sort of oozes into a different direction.