Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

6437Re: [MEFAwards] Movie-verse versus Bookverse (Re: Question concerning Dwim's list)

Expand Messages
  • Marta Layton
    Dec 6, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi RSF,

      > See, I'd call that a blend right off the bat, as Bard is drawn
      > strictly from
      > the books and Gimli blowing the horn is definitely from the film, and
      > the
      > story is doing its best to bind those two things into a single
      > whole.   You,
      > I gather, feel that any hint of the films moves the story into the
      > movieverse, and even want authors to mention if there are moviebits in
      > summaries, almost like a warning for unpleasant topics or character
      > deaths.
      >

      So that's at least part of the problem: we're using the terms
      differently. If I don't see a story labelled as movieverse and I see
      an event that is in the movies but not in the books, I think of it as
      an authors' mistakes. I don't mean movie-inspired pieces per se, I just
      want to expect it. So for me as reader, I appreciate having this
      material labelled. And this is for the authors' good as much as
      anything else. My reading of an unlabelled movieverse story will
      probably be less forgiving than my reading of one for which I had fair
      expectations. It might be the difference between an 8 point and a 10
      point review.

      For the purpose of categorisation, I'm less sure. I think the first
      question we need to answer is whether movieverse stories should be
      their own category, and if so why. If we answer that I think it will be
      a lot easier to see what to do with blends.

      >
      > Part of the problem, I guess, is that I don't ask that question
      > first.  An
      > it is the first question on Dwim's form.
      >
      > To quote:
      >
      > [My story is:
      >
      > 1. Bookverse: based on the writings of J.R.R. Tolkien and/or drafts
      > made available by C. Tolkien
      > 2. Filmverse: based on a film adaptation of "The Lord of the Rings" or
      > "The Hobbit"...]
      >
      > Now when I think "Bookverse" I don't include anything from Tolkien's
      > letters
      > or HoME, or even Unfinished Tales.  If I were better acquainted with
      > the
      > Silmarillion, I'd definitely include that in my thinking, but mostly
      > I think
      > of The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings (and in their "most
      > corrected" form,
      > at that) as being the basic canon of the Bookverse.
      >
      > HoME, the Letters, etc., are in my noggin as "drafts and background
      > material".
      >

      Ah, the joys of being in such a complex canon! I'm for including the
      drafts of Tolkien's posthumously published works just to avoid
      controversy, because while the details might be different, the *medium*
      is at least the same, and Tolkien himself had some hand in choosing the
      details. Even if they weren't finished.

      And Rabidsamfan, at the risk of dividing the fandom into factions...
      you write mostly hobbit fic, right? While there is certainly
      information about hobbits in the Letters and HOME, but I think that
      most of the *events* at least are set out in LOTR and TH. I honestly
      can't imagine writing Gondor without knowing a lot more about the
      history of Numenor than we see in the appendices. This is even more
      true for the elves; I personally think the most interesting part about
      them are the allusions to the "deeper matters" that are only told in
      full in the Silm, or UT. In my mind, if it doesn't contradict the
      published books it's fair game.

      That's just my personal opinion, though. The main reason I'm allowing
      C. Tolkien's stuff is it side-steps a controversy on what just is
      canon. People have been arguing over that for decades, and I doubt
      we'll settle them in a manner that everyone will agree with.

      > So what if we skip that question for now, and save it for later.  Now
      > we
      > have two primary questions on the form (and again, they're not in the
      > form
      > I'd divide things.)...   Hmm.  I can see that what I really need to
      > do is
      > explain how I would do it if I were in charge of the universe.
      >
      > Okay.  Might take me a day or so, depending on the insomnia.  I'll go
      > hunt
      > up Dwim's most current form of the form and see if I can make a
      > coherent
      > contribution.  Not that I expect it to be used, mind you, but so you
      > can see
      > how I'm thinking.
      >

      By all means! I've thrown out my opinion, and I look forward to seeing
      how you'd handle these questions. And whenever you have the time to ldo
      that, of course.

      Marta
    • Show all 30 messages in this topic