The Lord of the Rings discussion: Foreword and Prologue

[azalea]

Lord of the Rings discussion: Foreword and Prologue

This was certainly more difficult than I think the intros for the actual story chapters will be. It was impossible for me to follow my own given format when writing this, and it ended up being long due to all the information they contain. So I hope it will still allow for discussion. I tried to bring out the points that I felt were important, and I actually cut out a lot of the notes I had written while I read! Although I haven’t asked any questions for discussion, I’ve tried to bring up enough points of interest to get things started. I hope it’s sufficient. So here goes – enjoy J (and participate!)

In my book, which is a newer edition, there is also a note on the text, which I thought I’d include here as well. It was written in 1993 by Douglas A. Anderson, whom I guess was the head of Houghton Mifflin at the time. He starts out by giving some facts about the book and its publishing history. He mentions that Tolkien experienced errors in printing and intentional “corrections� of his usage of some words (dwarves, etc.). Wouldn’t you know that a philologist would be particularly perturbed by this, and you’d think they would have known to consult him. But then he wasn’t as well known at the time, and it would have taken too long by mail, I guess. So in later printings these were corrected. It was interesting to read how involved he was in the publishing process, right down to correcting typos. I wonder if authors still have that kind of involvement, but nowadays so many are published in such a short time. Plus the process is probably much more advanced now, in terms of technology. Interesting to note that so many different versions appeared, some including certain minor details, while they were left out of others unintentionally.
This is one thing that bothers me sometimes. I respect Tolkien’s need to revise, and am happy it added to the end result, but I also in some ways see it as a breach of contract with the reader. One would like to think that what he read originally was complete and accurate in the author’s mind, and for him to change details seems to be unfair to the first readers. ADDING new info, such as in the Appendices, is no problem, nor are corrections of typos and the like; it’s things within the text that are changed that I find to be problematic, which renders previous versions inaccurate. Furthermore, it caused discrepancies in the different editions, and no one could be sure if it was an author’s revision, or simply a printing error. Adding to this problem was that there were too many publishers, A&U, HM, and Ballantine. It would have been better to have had them all printed in the UK and exported, but that would have been too expensive and inefficient, esp. back then. Now that we are in the computer age, hopefully all the different editions will be aligned in terms of correct content.
The new edition put out in the US in the mid-sixties with a new foreword probably helped fuel its popularity in the counterculture.

Foreword

As he begins, he talks about “a war [the story] which it was my task to conduct [this being his acknowledgement of himself as the author], or at least to report [this being a reference to the device of his being the translator of an existing but forgotten history, or perhaps even a reference to a writer’s need to write a story that seemingly comes from no where – that “writes itself�].� He mentions his detractors calling LotR “boring, absurd, contemptible.� They of course have no precedent for reviewing an “adult fairy tale,� which is what a lot of fantasy is. Fantasy heretofore having been children’s literature or classic tales (such as Arthur), they saw this as a failed attempt at contemporary “literature.� Instead it was revolutionary. Tolkien then makes a dig at other genres – ha ha! He mentions his urge to revise it (curb it, man! ), and that it is too short – yes! J
Then comes his bit about allegory, and that any “inner� meaning found by the reader is not intended by the author. But that is not to say that there weren’t intended EXPLICIT meaning in it, and I think people go too far sometimes when they say there is no meaning, that it’s simply a story. There are obvious messages in it; that doesn’t make it an allegory, but it does make it a story where certain actions or character traits mean something. Saying that he has assigned value to things in the story doesn’t contradict his assertion that it’s not an allegory. It’s interesting that he then details how it would look if it HAD been allegorical, and in doing so in so many words he states his contempt for WWII, saying that there would have been no victory for the Hobbits. Did the Hobbits in this allegorical version lose the war indeed, if we are to assume Hobbits are the common folk?
Then his famous paragraph – “I prefer history, true or feigned, with its varied applicability to thought and experience of readers� – meaning freedom for the reader rather than a purpose set by the author. He’s saying, IOW, that LotR is art, not a tool. Furthermore, he admits that he cannot escape his experiences influencing him, but that one should not assume that because you (the reader) see something in it that speaks to a real life issue in your experience, that he has intended it to be that way.

[azalea]

Prologue
In some ways, I see the Prologue as Tolkien’s compromise for not being able to publish The Silmarillion along with LotR. It also serves to reduce the amount of exposition in the tale proper.
It’s funny that he begins by basically suggesting that this amazing and wonderful story is merely an avenue for gaining knowledge about hobbits and their history! He sets up reader attitude – his words guide the reader to view him as the relayer of the story, not the author. This is for suspension of disbelief, essential to a successful fantasy. He does it in a way that makes it even more real. He doesn’t just dive in and expect the suspension by virtue of the reader KNOWING it’s a fantastic tale, he takes the time to make it a history (which also allows him to tie it with The Silm).
The Hobbits = “simple� country folk. They are described as follows: agrarian, surprisingly tough, with no general love of learning, clannish, skillful in craft, good natured but not beautiful, loving to laugh, eat and drink, enjoying simple pleasures, disliking “machines,� having a close friendship w/ the earth, NOT MAGICAL (as opposed to wizards or elves, although this is later qualified), this last being more of the same as mentioned above, making the fantasy realistic, and also making hobbits like the reader. If the “heroes� were magical, the reader would be too separated from them, and also it wouldn’t fit into ME, which is supposed to be our earth.
Bandobras Took: here is given some foreshadowing of M&P’s growth in height. The story of Bandobras makes it even more realistic. It’s one of those details that doesn’t directly involve the plot, but serves to make them like us, as I mentioned above. The Bandobras story is like American tall tales (like Paul Bunyon – riding a horse not something hobbits can normally do, just like, for ex., Paul’s feats as a lumberjack, and his height being so much more than any other human). This in turn is like ancient mythology, with its “hero� figures, which is exactly how Tolkien views Middle Earth – a mythology! J All this adds to the realism and the familiarity. He explicitly states that hobbits are closer relatives to humans than elves or dwarves, which first is in keeping with the mythology, and secondly, further allows the reader to associate them with the “simple� country folk of “our world,� and thirdly it sets them up as sympathetic, the heroes of the story, so the reader can identify with them.
Here’s another aspect about which I’ve disagreed with others who’ve made certain statements about the elves. People seem to think there are no more elves, or that they ALL left when Celeborn did. I think elves are still supposed to exist, or at least did (not just beyond the sea). Tolkien says, “Only the elves STILL [my emphasis] preserve any records of that vanished time…� His tone and use of words tell me that we are not only supposed to believe that hobbits, though scarce, are still around, but also that there are elves that didn’t leave, and still exist here, although we cannot see them (and I don’t mean just the Avari).
The mention of hobbits having “lived quietly before…other folk became… aware of them� is another reference to their being simple country folk; it also sets them up as the “unlikely heroes,� which adds interest for the reader, who would naturally identify with that (the little guy having an influence on events of international importance).

Okay, I’m breaking my own rule here, but I just have to mention this criticism that people had of the movie – the opening line by Galadriel. She says, “the world is changing.� Tolkien says, “the shape of all the lands has been changed� since the events in the book, so it is true that the world was changing, both physically and in terms of the world society, at the end of the third and the beginning of the fourth ages. He establishes that hobbits mainly dwell in Britain and the Nordic countries.
He establishes Shire Reckoning, a convenient device that allows for ease of explanation (no written records of hobbits before then, only legend, which he posits as factual) of their later isolation, establishing them as separate from the world of Men, and how they became blind to the evils of the world outside, wrapped up in their own simple world. It makes their heroism more unlikely, and thus greater, because of the stark contrast to the way hobbits seem. It also gives the reader a sense of time in the world of Middle Earth.
Throughout the Prologue Tolkien mentions language, “evidence of their peculiar WORDS [my emph.] and customs.� He discusses the hobbits’ westwards movement – a Greater Mythology reference. Also, he establishes the Anduin as their “home� (which ties in later to Gollum), and establishes a reason for their movement (“multiplying of Men�), which adds realism – we know that’s why they are scarce now, and also because of a “shadow� – some foreshadowing.

The three types of hobbit (wherein lie a couple of rare references to the fact that hobbits did occasionally wear boots) and my speculation on a family example for each kind (or a family that had strong strains of a type):
Harfoots – Dwarf-like (Bagginses)
Stoors – Man-like (Brandybuck)
Fallohides – Elf-like (Took) “more adventurous,� “skill in language� (another lang reference, we can see he regards this w. importance)

Here he mentions the Dunedain and their relationship with hobbits. Hobbits were allowed to settle in their lands because there was “room for newcomers,� as opposed to the ancient days when lands were protected from each other (somewhat rigid boundaries between elves, dwarves, and men). Also mentions Bree. We see more ties to Men here – learning their letters and language. We see their isolation a kind of contrast to the Kingdom at large, kind of like country folk were isolated from the goings-on in London in the olden days. There is an emphasis here of the unseen protection given; aside from the real world –type parallel, it gives an explanation as to why they were unaware (for the most part) of the growing evil in the world, and why it didn’t enter The Shire. Without this, we’d just have to suspend our disbelief that great evil was in the world, but even though the citizens aren’t magic, no evil ever entered. This protection is discussed in the story. JRRT emphasizes their love of peace, which I believe mirrors his own.
He talks about wolves only being the stuff of tales. This coincides with The Hobbit, in which we are told that Bilbo had never seen or heard a wolf, but knew that the howls he heard were those of wolves because of tales he’d been told. Tolkien also establishes that there are weapons in The Shire, and hobbits’ skills with a bow, which sets us up for the Scouring.

The Elf Towers – I forget, what were those originally?

[azalea]

We are told of the Hobbits’ fear of water, which parallels their fear of outsiders and the unknown, a negative side of their love of the ordinary. This is also a trait of some country folk, but it’s also another reason for their isolation.
Frodo and Bilbo’s bachelorhood is unusual – he sets the heroes up as already being different, as well as in other things. This also gives them a lack of baggage that allows them a little more freedom to take off (it would be sad if they had kids at home and took off to risk their lives, or if they went across the sea and left a wife or something).
Family Trees – JRRT is really describing himself here, mentioning their extreme interest in such things “if they are accurate.�

Concerning Pipeweed – Tolkien is poking a little fun at smoking, a strange when you think about it, but enjoyable habit. He also sets up the Scouring, and gives another bridge from the readers world to that of ME.
Tobold – this story is so detailed, yet so unnecessary, and from this we can see Tolkien’s true pleasure in writing, and such an imagination! It is speculated that pipeweed was originally brought from over the sea – heaven sent! *chuckle*
Here there is a reference to Gandalf. Merry’s explanation helps the reader to reconcile Gandalf and the dwarves’ smoking in The Hobbit.

Of the Ordering of the Shire:
Emphasis on peace, comfort and no need for government. It’s like paradise. The hobbits’ love of order and the status quo helps them to self-govern. They want to stick to the Rules, because that’s how it is, there’s nothing unexpected, and they like to keep it that way. This also sets up the Scouring (all this set up makes me think Tolkien thought the Scouring a very important part of the book J ). The Bounders are mentioned, and we hear that strange characters have been about. This is pulling us in, we want to know who they are, and why they’re suddenly there.

Of the Finding of the Ring:
This establishes the Ring as the central plot of the story.
Talks about Bilbo’s sense of pity toward Gollum, but also of fair play – the goodness in his heart prevails though he’s faced with mortal danger.
There is discussion about the discrepancy in the tale, about why the chapter in The Hobbit changed from the original version. He discusses Bilbo’s lie, and his shame (disguised as anger at Gandalf), and how this is disturbing to the wizard. There is mention of his calling it a present. Therein lies a parallel – both Gollum and Bilbo convince themselves it was freely given to them as a present, which is a loving gesture. But nothing was further from the truth. And they both kept it a secret. Here’s the lead in to the story – it takes up where The Hobbit left off.
Note on Shire Records:
Here he is kind of giving away the ending without really telling anything.
This satisfies Tolkien’s need to relate more “history,� telling how he came across this “account� -- again giving us motivation to suspend disbelief.
Here he uses a device – the Thain’s Book – to explain how we get the more complete history, since the Bagginses didn’t have all of the information, and left before some of it happened (Sam’s kids, etc.). This one was written long enough afterwards to cover everything. He gives an explanation for the lack of a complete Translations from the Elvish, which he thought would be included in the second edition.
More details – Merry’s natural interest in the languages and hist. of Rohan.
The hobbits’ interests in geneology, language and history of Middle Earth strangely mirrors JRRT’s. J
Merry visited Rivendell more than once later on, which again strengthens my assertion that the elves didn’t all immediately leave when the Fourth Age began. It even says his sons long remained there with others. And he says Celeborn’s departure marks the last LIVING memory of the Elder Days, but isn’t saying everyone is gone. It just means that no one that was alive in the Elder Days is still there. Many younger ones remain.

So I hope my rambling has provided some fodder for discussion. As I said, this portion is quite different than the rest (until the Appendices), so it makes sense that the intro look different than the others will. Anyway, there certainly was enough info in these few pages, so if you read something I didn’t mention that you’d like to discuss, please bring it up!

[Valandil]

Originally posted by azalea
The Elf Towers – I forget, what were those originally?

I believe there's mention somewhere that they were built either by Elendil or Gil-galad... the tallest perhaps built by Gil-galad FOR Elendil to house a palantir (the one with a fixed view to the True West). I think JRRT leaves it a little open-ended who actually built them... to make it more like 'ancient history'

These are the ones called the Emyn Beraid.

[Valandil]

btw... great job Azalea - and great start! I'll be back later with more observations, questions and maybe even some points to differ with you on! (but not the one about the Elves hanging around into the Fourth Age!)

[Tuor of Gondolin]

"The Bandobras story is like American tall tales"
_____________________________
So you're saying the Bullroarer didn't invent the game of golf? Bummer. Hmm, maybe that first story about the Ring wasn't the only exaggeration Bilbo put in "There and Back Again."
Good thing Frodo and Sam were honester chroniclers.

[Beor]

Excellent intro, azalea, regardless of your format .

I like what you said about the pipe-weed, how he must have had an incredible imagination. I agree, to just jump off on a tangent like that is cool. Telling the history of such a small thing, in my opinion, is one of the aspects of his writing that makes it so enjoyable, that every detail is explained throughouly (Sp?).

Good job, again.

[azalea]

Originally posted by Tuor of Gondolin
"The Bandobras story is like American tall tales"
_____________________________
So you're saying the Bullroarer didn't invent the game of golf? Bummer. Hmm, maybe that first story about the Ring wasn't the only exaggeration Bilbo put in "There and Back Again."
Good thing Frodo and Sam were honester chroniclers.

Well, I'm not really saying that, I meant that when Bilbo says he was 4'5'' and could ride a horse, it may be true (or it could be an exaggeration), but that the way it sounds is like a lot of our tall tales. The invention of golf, well, if you're looking at it as factual, then no, I guess I would say he didn't REALLY invent it, but within the context of the story, sure, I believe it.
That's what makes him seem like a "larger than life" figure. I think Bilbo was just writing down what had been told orally, but that aside from the episode with Gollum, what he wrote was pretty factual. He may have embellished it, making it seem perhaps a little more dangerous or scary than it was, but that's part of the point of telling a story isn't it, to make it compelling? Then again, any encounter with trolls, goblins, giant spiders, and a dragon would be that scary to me, so maybe it wasn't embellished!
Maybe the embellishments were done more on the sections about hobbits -- just like anyone likes to do on their own people when in a strange land. I knew a woman from Omaha, who had just moved to another state. She would always tell us about great things Omaha-ans had done, or that Omaha was the hub of this or the major exporter of that. I guess it was because Omaha is looked at by most Americans as small-townish, or rural because it's in Nebraska, so she wanted to pump up some respect for it. Same with Bilbo -- in telling about his "insignificant" people, he wanted to tell of great things they'd done (this is before two of them had SAVED THE WORLD of course ), and what makes them important or worthy of admiration.

[Tuor of Gondolin]

"Foreword
As he begins, he talks about “a war [the story] which it was my task to conduct [this being his acknowledgement of himself as the author], or at least to report [this being a reference to the device of his being the translator of an existing but forgotten history"
________________________________
Interesting. I've taken that as a reference to his work in World War II, since he mentions 1944, not writing LOTR, but since Tolkien did little that I know of directly about the war (other then taking a turn watching for German bombers- that never attacked Oxford and arranging syllabuses for brief courses by officers at Oxford) such an interpretation seemed curious (what was he reporting about, and to who?). Your interpretation may well be correct.
=============================
About his trouble with proof-readers: In Letters #148:
"Jarrold's appear to have a highly educated pedant as a chief
proof-reader, and they started correcting my English without reference to me: elfin for elven; farther for
further; try to say for try and say and so on. I was put to the trouble of proving to him his own ignorance, as well as rebuking his impertinence. So, though I do not much care, I dug my toes in about nasturtians. I have always said this. It seems to be a natural anglicization that started soon after the 'Indian Cress' was naturalized (from Peru, I think) in the 18th century; but it remains a minority usage. I prefer it because nasturtium is. as it were, bogusly botanical, and falsely learned."
==========================
And for more information on changes in rewriting affecting the Ring in The Hobbit, The Annotated Hobbit [Douglas A. Anderson] has some insights.

[Rían]

Originally posted by azalea
Here’s another aspect about which I’ve disagreed with others who’ve made certain statements about the elves. People seem to think there are no more elves, or that they ALL left when Celeborn did. I think elves are still supposed to exist, or at least did (not just beyond the sea). Tolkien says, “Only the elves STILL [my emphasis] preserve any records of that vanished time…� His tone and use of words tell me that we are not only supposed to believe that hobbits, though scarce, are still around, but also that there are elves that didn’t leave, and still exist here, although we cannot see them (and I don’t mean just the Avari).

I guess I thought that referred to the Elves that had taken ship to Valinor. What do you think?

It amazes me, too, how he can just jump off on a tangent, like pipeweed, and write the most interesting stuff, and touch on even other things that he doesn't get into, but you just know there's a story behind those things, too!

I like how in my version he comments about being ripped off by the American publishers and likens it to an act of Saruman! (can't find my FOTR right now, will try to quote it later)

[Rían]

Here it is:

from the foreward of FOTR
I hope that those who have read The Lord of the Rings with pleasure will not think me ungrateful: to please readers was my main object, and to be assured of this has been a great reward. Nonetheless, for all its defects of omission and inclusion, it was the product of long labour, and like a simple-minded hobbit I feel that it is, while I am still alive, my property in justice unaffected by copyright laws. It seems to me a grave discourtesy, to say no more, to issue my book without even a polite note informing me of the project: dealings one might expect of Saruman in his decay rather than from the defenders of the West. However that may be, this paperback edition and no other has been published with my consent and co-operation. Those who approve of courtesy (at least) to living authors will purchase it and no other. And if the many kind readers who have encouraged me with their letters will add to their courtesy by referring friends or enquirers to Ballantine Books, I shall be very grateful. To them, and to all who have been pleased by this book, especialy those Across the Water for whom it is specially intended, I dedicate this edition.

(I think an American company had published LOTR in America, which was not technically against copyright laws)

[Artanis]

Originally posted by RÃ*an
I guess I thought that referred to the Elves that had taken ship to Valinor.

I thought so too RÃ*an. Nevertheless I agree with azalea in that not all the Eldar left Middle-Earth. It may be that all the Noldor left, Elves who had been in Valinor before, but I would think that many of the Silvan Elves remained and also some of the Sindar. There were still Elves left in Lórien when Celeborn sailed west.

How the Ring was found: This explanation on why the story is changed is simply a stroke of genius. It really adds to the authenticity of the story.

[brownjenkins]

great job!

i did find interesting all the talk he gave about unauthorized copies... i assume it must have been quite an issue back then

on the pipeweed... i think the inclusion was mostly due to it being something he greatly enjoyed... one must remember smoking was quite a different thing in his day

for the rest i just want to pull out one quote about hobbits that i had forgotten about, but truely appreciated:

Hobbits delighted in such things (genealogical trees), if they were accurate: they liked to have books filled with things that they already knew, set out fair and square with no contradictions

quotes like this make me think that in many ways hobbits were a reflection of his own attitude towards life... or at least how he would like it to be

[Tuor of Gondolin]

Originally posted by Brownjenkins
i did find interesting all the talk he gave about unauthorized copies... i assume it must have been quite an issue back then

_______________________
There's a good, and rather entertaining account of "The War
over Middle-earth" in Humphrey Carpenter's Tolkien,
p. 226-229. (Houghton Mifflin, 1977).

An excerpt:

The publishers were Ace Books, who (when challenged) alleged there was nothing illegal in their paperback, even though it was printed entirely withoput the permission of Tolkien or his authorized publishers, and even though no royalty payment had been offered to the author.....clearly a lot of people were going to buy their edition until an authorized paperback could be issued. An urgent request was sent to Tolkien to complete the revisions (which it was assumed he had been working on assiduously)...he turned not to The Lord of the Rings for which revision was urgent, but to The Hobbit for which it was not.....he found a good deal of it 'very poor' and had to restrain himself from rewriting the entire book.....Ace Books for all their 'moral piracy' had employed a cover artist who knew something about the story, but Ballantine's cover picture seemed to have no relevance whatever to The Hobbit, for it showed a hill, two emus, and a curious tree bearing bulbous fruit. Tolkien exploded: 'What has it got to do with the story? Where is this place? Why emus? And what is the thing in the foreground with pink bulbs?" When the reply came that the artist hadn't had time to read the book, and that the object with pink bulbs was 'meant to suggest a Christmas tree', Tolkien could only answer: 'I begin to feel I am shut up in a madhouse."

There was a happy ending for all concerned, and Ace for many years published good, and cheap sci-fi with two stories, reversed, with one story starting at each end of a book, and some by quite good sci-fi writers, including Jack Williamson.

[brownjenkins]

why emus?

[azalea]

I see what you mean, Rian, that is possible. But then how would he KNOW they still do? I assume HE hadn't been to Valinor and back . It's just my way of trying to prove to people that hobbits and elves still live here. They DO still live here, they DO, they DO!!

I love the line brownjenkins quoted "they liked to have books filled with things that they already knew." Hee, hee!

On my dad's copies, which are the ones I used to read before I finally bought my own, it has the quote on the back about "this paperback edition and no other," etc. I think that was the foreword to the first edition, and the one I have in mine is the one to the second.

"...had to restrain himself from rewriting the entire book..."
SEE!? SEE?! This is unfortunately why we didn't get a whole lot from him published in his lifetime of the same scope as at least The Hobbit, much less LotR. He was perfectionistic. This was partly what made him such an outstanding writer, but I repeat once again what I said about the published work being a kind of "contract" between author and reader, and once it's there you can't tamper with it too much, because it's too late. I think changing the ch. in The Hobbit was great, and probably unprecedented, but it's a slippery slope, and I'm glad he didn't rewrite the whole book. I like it how it is! It would be fun to find out what he had in mind though!( ) He probably could have written many tales about Bilbo, the dwarves, etc., but preferred his "higher" tales.

[Nurvingiel]

Originally posted by brownjenkins
Hobbits delighted in such things (genealogical trees), if they were accurate: they liked to have books filled with things that they already knew, set out fair and square with no contradictions
quotes like this make me think that in many ways hobbits were a reflection of his own attitude towards life... or at least how he would like it to be

Didn't Tolkien once describe himself as a Hobbit in all but stature?

Nice work on the intro Azalea, don't worry I don't feel that I need to match you in length.

[Tuor of Gondolin]

Originally posted by Nurvingiel
Didn't Tolkien once describe himself as a Hobbit in all but stature?

"I am in fact a Hobbit (in all but size). I like gardens, trees and unmechanized farmlands; I smoke a pipe, and like good plain food (unrefrigerated), but detest French cooking; I like, and even dare to wear in these dull days, ornamental waistcoats. I am fond of mushrooms (out of a field); and have a simple sense of humour (which even my appreciative critics find tiresome); I go to bed late and get up late (when possible). I do not travel much. I love Wales (what is left of it, when mines, and the even more ghastly sea-side resorts, have done their worst), and especially the Welsh language."

From Letters #213

[Earniel]

I just read the prologue yesterday night in bed, (All those memories came back from reading LoTR in the middle of the night in my old room, constantly turning off my light when I thought my parents where coming upstairs in the hope they wouldn't notice I was still up! ) and there were two things that struck me in particular.

The first one was that Hobbits liked to dress in bright colours, preferably green and yellow. I had forgotten all about that and IMO it really adds something to the cheerful image of Hobbits. It's a pity that has gotten lost a bit in the movie.

The second things was reading about all the copies of the Red Book; where they were, who had copied them and what they contained. And why they were different from one another because of the accents the copiers wanted to place. It adds such a feeling of reality, of legitimacy to the story of Lord of the Rings: it isn't just history because somebody says it it, you really have the feeling it is just by tracking the sources, in this case the later copies of the Red Book.

[Valandil]

*sigh* this is the 19th reply... so it's doomed to oblivion at the bottom of the first page. Just when I came up with some things to say.

First of all... like Tuor, I had thought his reference to 'conducting a war... or rather reporting it' (however exactly worded) had to do with WW2... I had never considered, but think you could be right (because of 'conducting' - changed to 'reporting' in keeping with the 'wilful suspension of disbelief') that he's talking about reporting 'the War of the Ring'... I'll look closer at it and decide.

Second... not sure he was totally dissing the way WW2 was handled by the Allies... I think he was just explaining how HIS story differed from actual recent history. Sauron and The Ring were different problems from Hitler, Germany and Atomic Bombs. Different problems require different solutions. I don't think he was saying that Germany should have been destroyed (as Mordor was), etc. And while he conveys shock elsewhere about the first use of an atomic bomb (sorry if I'm going 'out of bounds' for those just learning about LotR - but there's a book containing a collection of his letters - and he wrote one to a son of his on the topic... I imagine it caught the whole world by surprise in 1945 though), I don't think he was saying that atomic weapons could be destroyed like the One Ring could... the Ring was one thing, in one place... atomic weapons were being developed in many places - and if one place would be wiped out in a raid, the knowledge and will to create them would still exist in another.

Third - types of hobbits: I had never thought of the three types as being representative of Elves, Men and Dwarves... and not sure I'd agree. I see what you're saying though, but you threw me a bit at first by saying that the Harfoots were representative of Dwarves and the Stoors representative of Men... that MAY be right in a representative sense (although again, I see no reason to buy it! ), but he DOES mention that the Stoors are the most dwarf-like of the three types of hobbits, physically.

Fourth - about how hobbits like books full of things they know, set out fair and square, with no contradictions: I think he's talking not ONLY about himself, but also about those with simple tastes, maybe country folk in general... heck, maybe even PEOPLE in general. Can't we ALL be like that at times? I know I can... and it seems like a lot of 'mooters are that way too.

I'll try to think of more to add later.