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

Re: [mythsoc] red letter day

Expand Messages
  • Walter Padgett
    Greetings, A Red Letter Day, indeed! Today (Friday, November 10th) I defend my thesis in the English Dept conference room at 1:00 PM. My thesis is about
    Message 1 of 49 , Nov 10, 2006

      A Red Letter Day, indeed! Today (Friday, November 10th) I defend my thesis
      in the English Dept conference room at 1:00 PM. My thesis is about Tolkien,
      of course, as many of you well know.

      Now, alas, it is done. The horrific obstacle is behind me. I have only to
      show up decently dressed with the right attitude and the rest is pretty much
      already set out.

      How exciting for me. But I think we all may celebrate the value of this
      Tolkien community. For it is through this list that I was inspired by you
      all to never give in, never quit.

      Everyone is so proud, and I can't wait to show my work to anyone interested
      in the finished product. It's not for sale, yet. But I am having it
      copyrighted, and I'll be having 25 bound copies of that made up for a first
      run. Friends and family have spoken for only a couple or three of those, so
      the rest will be made available for borrowing upon request.

      I am still working out an abstract. It is several chapters. The title of
      the MA thesis in English and American Literature and Humanities from Indiana
      State University, Terre Haute, is _Myth and Ideology in J.R.R. Tolkien's

      The feeling is more manic than intoxicating at this point. Luckily, I am
      pretty well cared for here.

      Cheers All,

      PS. Check my blog on this at http://artofthemetaphysicalmind.blogspot.com/

      Thanks, Walter

      On 11/9/06, Mike Foster <mafoster@...> wrote:
      > Optimist [thus a Chicago Cubs fan] that I am, I presumed otherwise. I
      > was paid, but only a fraction of what the encyclopedia would cost me.
      > I agree, though, that a chance to read proof on my contribution would
      > have been appreciated. I just caught a Spellcheck Howler ["vile" for
      > "vial"] in an essay, not mine, which is the kind of thing one dreads.
      > Mike
      > David Bratman wrote:
      > > At 01:55 PM 11/8/2006 -0600, Mike Foster wrote:
      > >
      > > >The news on the J.R.R. Tolkien Encyclopedia is less good, to say the
      > > >least. I was one of many contributors, no doubt, who added to the
      > > >volume in the hopes of receiving the traditional contributor's copy. A
      > > >20% discount isn't very encouraging, and "only $140" is a bit
      > > >oxymoronic. We share Michael Drout's regret over the way this has
      > > >turned out.
      > >
      > > I was paid for my contributions, as I trust were you. The contract said
      > > nothing about a contributor's copy, so my presumption was that there
      > > wouldn't be one. I was surprised to read in Drout's blog that he had
      > > expected that there would be contributor copies. You never know. I made
      > a
      > > few small contributions to the Clute/Grant Fantasy Encyclopedia some
      > years
      > > ago, and nothing was said about a contributor's copy of that either, so
      > I
      > > was absolutely floored when I received one soon after publication.
      > >
      > > What was far more disturbing to me was the lack of an opportunity to
      > read
      > > proofs of one's articles. When I learned (through the grapevine, not
      > from
      > > the publisher) that the proofs were out, I e-mailed and asked: no reply.
      > > Drout tells the story, and explains why the project's dedicated e-mail
      > > address had gone dead, in the blog. (That's wormtalk.blogspot.com)
      > >
      > > I haven't seen the book, and am concerned over its accuracy. I made a
      > > number of statements of fact in my articles which I am confident are
      > > correct, but which I expected to get queries about. Who knows what other
      > > contributors put in their articles - at least one contributor once
      > > published a whole book on Tolkien full of factual errors - or what
      > > problems
      > > may have been introduced in the typesetting and printing process.
      > >
      > > - David Bratman
      > >
      > >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Walter Padgett
      Yes, Ms. Dean, A great tale, indeed, is _The Silmarillion_. Yet how many operas would one fit into a movie of about 2 hours? What from the story would be
      Message 49 of 49 , Nov 21, 2006
        Yes, Ms. Dean,

        A great tale, indeed, is _The Silmarillion_. Yet how many operas would one
        fit into a "movie" of about 2 hours? What from the story would be
        selected? One Great Tale" is _The Silmarillion_, yet who could begin to
        understand all its nuances of meaning and fulfillment? And a more
        perplexing question yet-- to whom could the monumental tasks of reviewing
        and reading the existent body of literary criticism connected to that
        particular book be entrusted, if the purpose of making a movie out of the
        book were to be approached with what one could call "care"?

        No single individual could capture all the important nuances of the Hobbit.
        Yet in the hypnotic voice of John Houston the person of Gandalf entered out
        of Tolkien's book and into the life of the mind in a new and important
        way through the well-known animated version (78 min?) of that book. Just
        ask John Rateliff.
        We in part know Gandalf because of our understanding of the history of the
        "VOICE" of John Houston. This is my point.

        Who is Gandalf, now? Temporally, or con temporarily speaking, isn't it Sir
        ...... Mc ..... ?

        Isn't he also "Magneto"? (yes ... for X-Men fans, you get it)

        Do Hobbits play in the Silmarillion? Should Gandalf be played by John
        Houston in the movie version of The Silmarillion?

        Such questions should be considered in the making of a movie, either the
        HOBBIT or The Silmarillion.

        Did anyone enjoy *Arnold Schwarzenegger's *(aka, the brute's) versions of
        Robert E. Howard's CONAN THE BARBARIAN books? You should read the books and
        then check out those movies again. It can be quite arousing in that

        The Hobbit ... The Silmarillion ... whatever. Who cares who makes the
        money? WE only live so long, and the movies will last a lot longer than
        US. Money motivates, but does it actually make the movie? NO. Does it
        even sell the movie? ... ? Nooooo....

        The point is clear. WE have the spirit and the initiative to teach about
        Tolkien's writings. It is WE who should endeavor to do so.

        Thanks, Walter.

        On 11/21/06, Margaret Dean <margdean@...> wrote:
        > Walter Padgett wrote:
        > >
        > > First of all, the Hobbit is a movie. It's doable, unlike LOTR; however
        > PJ
        > > would have done it, given his abilities.
        > >
        > > Second, The Silmarillion is an OPERA.
        > Oh, the Silmarillion is =several= operas. My Tolkien discussion
        > group once decided that the tale of Turin would make a trilogy of
        > operas in the Wagnerian style, the story of Beren and Luthien
        > should be a ballet, and the Fall of Gondolin a disaster movie!
        > :)
        > --Margaret Dean
        > <margdean@... <margdean%40erols.com>>

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.