Christopher Tolkien at it again....

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Sardy

I think that what you meant to ask, is 'Would the Estate have legal recourse to put a stop to it?' In which the answer would (and rightly should) be 'No.'

Actually, I was asking would they be right from a moral standpoint. My thought would be "yes".

[Sardy]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

Actually, I was asking would they be right from a moral standpoint. My thought would be "yes".

Hmm... My thought would be "no" ...but that's the thing with "moral standpoints" isn't it?

[Pitchwife]

Originally Posted by Zil

Why should the quality of works by other authors using Tolkien's name and imaginative products not be a consideration for the Estate when deciding whether or not to authorize them? If I wanted to make a comic book featuring Tolkien as a costumed superhero who went around punching chipmunks and eating raw fish, would it be improper for the Estate to want to put a stop to it?

You're mixing up two different issues here, literary quality and accuracy of the way a historical character is portrayed. They may overlap, but they're not the same. Should lack of literary quality be a criterium for suppressing books? Now maybe that's not such a bad idea, looking at today's book market, but who gets to set the standards?
As to your second question, the issue is not whether it would be improper/morally right/understandable for them to want to stop it (I've already said that I can sympathize with their feelings), but whether they should have the power to do so; and I'm afraid I think they shouldn't. (I mean, where do you draw the line? I suppose Hookbill should be very careful about publishing any further stories about Robot Tolkien in the Downer...)

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Pitchwife

Should lack of literary quality be a criterium for suppressing books? Now maybe that's not such a bad idea, looking at today's book market, but who gets to set the standards?

Who would be better qualified than family of the author?

Originally Posted by Pitchwife

As to your second question, the issue is not whether it would be improper/morally right/understandable for them to want to stop it (I've already said that I can sympathize with their feelings), but whether they should have the power to do so; and I'm afraid I think they shouldn't. (I mean, where do you draw the line?

Well, where the line is drawn is for the court to decide. And like I said, I think the Estate will likely be on the losing end here anyway.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

Who would be better qualified than family of the author?

But what if we weren't talking about Tolkien - this decision, if it went in favour of the Estate would bring the person/character under copyright. It would, as I stated, make it impossible for any writer to use a historical figure (certainly one of recent times) in a fictional setting. That's not too far a step from being able to prevent any 'unauthorised' biographies. It would hand control of a huge chunk of our cultural history over to famous individuals' Estates.

This is not a power they have had before, & the Estate is pushing the boundaries. And their wealth & power could well mean that their opponents in this case actually decide not to fight the case in the end & just give in. And that would seriously deter anyone else from following them in writing not just about Tolkien but any other figure from recent history whose decendents are rich enough to do the same. The Estate's actions here (as pointed up in the Techdirt article I first linked to) could lead to major difficulties for historical novelists.


Ok, so to the book itself. I'm a bit further on, & its growing on me slightly - & read these reviews on the Amazon.com site http://www.amazon.com/Mirkwood-Novel...DateDescending particularly the first one, as this guy has written some very knowledgeable reviews of Tolkien's books in the past. Of course there's the odd wince inducing moments - where Tolkien, at an Inklings' meeting talks about 'pants' instead of trousers' (note for US writers: 'pants' are what you wear under your trousers!)

[Mänwe]

Originally Posted by davem

I'm curious - if the Tolkien Estate won this case & was able to prevent Tolkien being used as a character - & surely that decision would set a legal precedent which could be used by the Estates of other famous people (maybe not so nice as Tolkien) - how would that affect historical novelists? Wouldn't success in this court case result in one of the most extreme examples of cultural censorship imaginable? You'd hardly be able to write novels about any major event in the 20th century.

Therein lies the point of my earlier question; that the law can entertain these cases, personally, annoys/worries me more. And yes, CT might just open a 'Pandora's box' of future litigation.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Mänwe

Therein lies the point of my earlier question; that the law can entertain these cases, personally, annoys/worries me more. And yes, CT might just open a 'Pandora's box' of future litigation.

I think the courts have little choice - if someone brings an action before them which may be valid they have to deal with it. I suspect CT/the Estate care little for the bigger implications of their action. They seem to be driven by a feeling of possessiveness re JRRT - someone is daring to tresspass on their 'land' use their 'stuff' & they're lashing out. Add to that their statement in their action that they somehow worry that this book might be taken for a work by Tolkien himself & they may lose money as a result - or somesuch nonsense & any capacity or willingness to step back & ask whether this is a wise move is lost.

Suffice to say that if their desired interpretation of the law was in place already then CT would already have broken it himself by publishing the Notion Club Papers in HoM-e 9 which he himself acknowledges depicts the Inlkings in all but name. Tolkien uses his friends as characters in his story, but Hillard is not allowed to use Tolkien in his story. Surely if the Estate 'own' the character & person of JRRT then the estate of Lewis, Williams & Barfield own their characters/persons? It would be nicely ironic if the decision went the Estate's way & the first person dragged before the courts for impingement was CT himself - & if the next book that had to be destroyed was Sauron Defeated...

[Lalaith]

Ok, here's my cod-psychological ha'porth.

I have a friend who suffered a series of horrible, random, life-shattering events. Her response ( she was already a careful, painstaking, disciplined kind of person) was to develop anorexia. It was, I believe, an attempt to find the one area of her life she *could* control, ie her weight and food intake, and then irrationally over-control it.
Similarly, I wonder if Christopher Tolkien, who had devoted so much of his life to a careful, painstaking and disciplined editing of his father's work, was not traumatised by the lack of control he had over the films and the liberties those films took - particularly as this 'bastardised' film version has became the 'definitive' one when it comes to most of the world's concept of Middle Earth.

The Estate's reaction - over-control to the point of absurdity over the areas it actually can control - therefore becomes more understandable.