Skip to main content

tolkiens legendarium - Was The Hobbit meant to be an adaptation of There and Back Again by Bilbo?


I know that The Hobbit was written before LOTR and retconned to be part of the legendarium in the second edition. I also understand it was to some extent a children's book. Both of these explain the stylistic differences between it and LOTR.


Another possible (albeit fictional) explanation of this is that The Hobbit is an adaptation of Bilbo's book, There and Back Again - in which case the style would be expected to differ from LOTR. For example, the discrepancy between calling what are apparently the same creature Goblins in The Hobbit and Orcs in LOTR can be explained in terms of Bilbo's understanding of what these creatures are called.


Can anyone say anything about whether The Hobbit was intended to be understood this way?



Answer



The Hobbit was not an adaptation, but a translation.


Tolkien envisioned himself as a translator of ancient manuscripts that had made their way into his hands. The Red Book of Westmarch, in which Frodo had compiled Bilbo's notes and consisted of There and Back Again and The Downfall of the Lord of the Rings and the Return of the King, amongst other works. Tolkien had acquired these works and translated them into Old English, and then further into Modern English (as outlined in this comment).



While never explicitly stated by the Professor himself, it is implicit in the way many of the sections of the Lord of the Rings (LR) outside the story were written. One example is the Prologue, written in the style of a modern editor describing a time long past. Other examples exist in an introductory note to the revised edition of the Hobbit (TH), the Preface to The Adventures of Tom Bombadil, and Appendixes A, D and F, especially the note on Shire records, which invents a manuscript tradition (that the original Red Book had not survived but a copy had).


As for the stylistic difference, this from an out-of-universe perspective is because of the later addition of TH to the Legendarium when Allan & Unwin had asked for a sequel (LR), and it is worth noting that Book 1 (the first half of the Fellowship of the Ring) is stylistically closer to TH than the rest of LR, which Tolkien claims to be intentional. In-universe according to the translator theory, the stylistic change would not have been because of an adaptation but because TH was penned by Bilbo Baggins, while LR was written by Frodo, after the War of the Ring. Book 1, could therefore be stylistically closer to TH because Frodo would've been able to tell Bilbo about his adventure thus far up to their meeting in Rivendell:



What about helping me with my book, and making a start on the next?




Then Bilbo would read passages from his book (which still seemed very incomplete). or scraps of his verses, or would take notes of Frodo's adventures.
Fellowship of the Ring - Book II, Chapter 2: Council of Elrond



Given that Bilbo had most of his own tale to write about during the War of the Ring, as well as the possibility of beginning on LR, this would explain the similarity in style between Book 1 and TH, and the sudden change in the rest of LR.



Below is a plot of the Transmission of the Legends in The Chronicles of Arda by Måns Björkman


Key:


" " = Important Work,        * * = Author  
( ) = Translations, _ _ = Regions
> = Direction of flow

*Quennar i Onótimo*
"Of the Beginning of Time..."
"Yénonótië"
"The Tale of Years"

*Rúmil* | "Parma Culuina"
"Annals of Aman"---<---| _Doriath_ |
"Ambarcanta" | "The Grey Annals" |
"Ainulindalë" | | |
| | | *Pengolodh* | *Dírhaval*
|--------->-----+----->----"Quenta Silmarillion"--<--"Narn i Chîn Húrin"
| "Lammas"
| |
|----------------<-------------------+
|

|------------>--------+--------->--------+
| | |
| _Númenor_ _Rivendell_
| "Indis i·Ciryamo" "Books of Lore"
| | |
| | |
| _Arnor and Gondor_ |
| | | *Bilbo Baggins*
| "Book of the Kings" | "My Diary"
| "Book of the Stewards" +-("Translations from the Elvish")

| "Akallabêth" |
"Quentalë | *Torhir Ifant* | *Frodo Baggins* |
Ardanómion" | "Dorgannas Iaur" | *Sam Gamgee* |
| | | |----->----"The Lord of the Rings" |
| | | | | |
| | | | "The Red Book of Westmarch"
| | | | *Findegil* |
| | | |-->--"The Thain's Book"------<------|
| | | | | [Many copies] _The Shire_
| *Ælfwine* | | | | "The Tale of Years"

("Quenta Silmarillion") | +----------->----------| |
("Annals of Aman") | | |
("Grey Annals") | | |
| | | |
+-------->------------|-------------------<----------------+-------<-------+
|
*J. R. R. Tolkien*
("The Hobbit")
("The Lord of the Rings")
("The Silmarillion")

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

futurama - How much time is lost in 'Time Keeps on Slippin''

In time Keeps on Slippin' , Farnsworth creates a basketball team which he matures by abusing Chronitons. This leads to time skipping forward by random, but ever increasing amounts. How much time was skipped in this way? Answer Unfortunately, I don't think a good estimate can be made for this, for two reasons: Many of the time skips move forward by an indeterminate amount of time. At one point, the Professor mentions localized regions of space skipping forward much more than others. We then see two young boys on the street below complaining about having to pay social security, only to suddenly become senior citizens and start complaining about wanting their money. Thus, each individual could have experienced a different amount of time skippage.

game of thrones - Is Syrio Forel dead?

In the episode 'The Pointy End' (Season 1 Episode 8) when Arya runs from the Lannister guards you hear the sound of a sword being dropped (around 4:56): [embedded content] After that neither Syrio or Ser Meryn Trant is never mentioned or seen in the show again, except when Arya mentions to the Hound that Ser Meryn Trant killed Syrio. Is there any mention in the books that Syrio actually dies?

tolkiens legendarium - Difference between elves and dwarves blacksmithing in the Lord of the Rings

Both the elves and the dwarves were famous for their metal work in the Lord of the Rings trilogy, but what is the difference between what they made, and which one had the better skill of making amours and swords? Answer James Christopher's answer sums up the second part of your question well, but as to the difference in what they made, a little more detail is needed. Once the Elves learned to forge with steel, the shape of the sword changed, now being able to take on the form of a great broadsword or a light and agile curved sword. Additionally, they took great pride in decorating their swords. As we see in the Lord of the Rings , some swords like Sting had magical properties such as glowing blue when orcs are near. As far as the use of Mithril, lotr.wikia has two contradictory passages: Thus, Elven blades became renowned as great weapons, capable of performing deeds beyond the skill of their handlers and were even more glorious when the use of Mithril was allowed to the Elves. ...

How do Pokemon trainers collect their winnings?

According to Bulbapedia , Prize money is the money that a Trainer pays out at the end of a battle. So we know that the money comes directly from the trainer that just lost, and not some third-party committee or sponsor. But how is this done? It can be easy seeing the random trainers who challenge you along the way wanting to wager and then, after admitting defeat, sticking to their word and handing over their hard-earned pokebucks. Then there are the likes of Team Rocket and Giovanni, who also give money once they lose. This doesn't seem like something people in a criminal organization would willingly do. From this it appears that trainers have no say in whether or not they cough up the dough after losing, but I can't find anything on how exactly the funds are transferred from loser to winner. So how do Pokemon trainers receive their winnings?