Re: [mythsoc] Fw: "The J.R.R. Tolkien Companion & Guide: Chronology: 1"
- John Davis wrote:
>Peter Jackson has gotten a lost of unjustifiedIf it wasn't meant to do so, you shouldn't have said it.
>criticism...Except for occasional moments where he used Tolkien's own
>Jackson's films shouldn't be thought of as the 'actual' representation of
>secondary world, but as Jackson's own artistic responses to Tolkien's
>Disclaimer: that was a joke. A joke, I tell
>you. Insert smiley faces and multiple exclamation marks if necessary. It
>absolutely wasn't intended to rekindle the tired old debate.
There's one big difference above all. Swann's musical setting is just one
among many. It's not being widely touted as the incarnation of every
Tolkien fan's dream to hear his poetry set to music, acclaimed as
rejuvenating a tired old book, etc etc.
If Jackson's movie were just one of a dozen or more dramatic interpretations
of Tolkien out in the marketplace, and none of them got any particular
hoopla, I'd be delighted to offer my own particular opinion of its merits
(which I do not consider to be zero), listen to others' opinions, and leave
it at that, which is what we do with the Tolkien music. And also what we do
with Tolkien fan fiction and movies: "The Hunt for Gollum" four years ago
got a certain amount of abuse, but even those who liked it didn't try to
defend it with the rapture that Jackson's defenders brought to it.
I would be DELIGHTED if Jackson fans treated his work as an entirely
separate work of art whose only connection to Tolkien's was that Jackson was
artistically inspired by him. And, indeed, scholarly articles on Jackson
that make no reference to Tolkien, or that compare the two the way they'd
compare Tolkien to any other similar author, are making their appearance.
The only objections that I'm making, and that I have made all along, are to
the claim that Jackson's movies do fairly incarnate the book, and to the
contradictory (but sometimes made by the same people) claim that if they
don't, they were forced not to by commercial considerations. See my article
in "Tolkien on Film" nearly a decade ago, which has those as its two
headings. If I don't personally like the movies very much, I have
absolutely no objection to other people liking them more.
- John, I thought it was funny (and I read lot for lost).A joke with added typo, sadly. Sigh. lost=lot. Obviously.----- Original Message -----From: John DavisSent: Thursday, January 17, 2013 3:10 PMSubject: Re: [mythsoc] Fw: "The J.R.R. Tolkien Companion & Guide: Chronology: 1"Peter Jackson has gotten a lost of unjustified criticism...Except for occasional moments where he used Tolkien's own words, Jackson's films shouldn't be thought of as the 'actual' representation of the secondary world, but as Jackson's own artistic responses to Tolkien's books.Disclaimer: that was a joke. A joke, I tell you. Insert smiley faces and multiple exclamation marks if necessary. It absolutely wasn't intended to rekindle the tired old debate.----- Original Message -----From: David BratmanSent: Thursday, January 17, 2013 6:54 AMSubject: Re: [mythsoc] Fw: "The J.R.R. Tolkien Companion & Guide: Chronology: 1"
"John Rateliff" sacnoth@...> wrote:
>I'm sorry to say Wm Elvin's singing is no better than I remembered.
Tolkien liked his name, but he's not a very good singer: stiff and
inexpressive. Every other performance of the cycle I've heard (all live; I
don't know of any other recordings) I've liked better.
>Somehow I can't suspend my disbelief that Sam found a piano in Cirith Ungol
>to accompany himself for "In Western Lands".
Swann has gotten a lot of unjustified criticism for this. Except for
"Namarie", for which he used Tolkien's own melody, Swann's songs shouldn't
be thought of as the "actual" music of the secondary world, but as Swann's
own artistic responses to Tolkien's poetry, in the manner of art songs by
the likes of Schubert on down.
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.2890 / Virus Database: 2638/6038 - Release Date: 01/16/13