?

[The Ben]

What is so interesting about a history book??

[gimli7410]

it tells what happened before the lord of the rings books. it gives an insight how history had happened and how one thing leads to another

[Shadowfax]

I don't really consider the Silmarillion a history book exactly. Yes it's full of "history" (people and events that occured before LotR), but it's full of amazing stories about events of the past. So yeah it's history, but when I'm reading it I'm not thinking of it as a history book or a text book, but as a collection of stories from the First and Second Ages, which it is. I hope that made some sort of sense.

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by The Ben
What is so interesting about a history book?? Well, in the case of this particular book, it tells how the world was created and talks in depth about the awakening of Elves and Men. It explains the differences in the two races and talks about the immortality of the Elves and the Gift of Death from Eru (God) to Men. It details the struggle of the Elves in the First Age against the first Dark Lord, Morgoth. It takes you through the War of Wrath, where Morgoth is overthrown, and through the uprising of Sauron and the creation of the Rings of Power, the destruction of Numenor, the reshaping of the world, and the Last Alliance of Elves and Men. It indeed amplifies the Lord of the Rings. It is a mavelous book.

[The Ben]

Ah. Maybe reading it a few hundred more times will make me understand.

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by The Ben
Ah. Maybe reading it a few hundred more times will make me understand. If you are really interested, you may want to check out the project that is going on in this forum. We are discussing the Silmarillion chapter by chapter.

[The Ben]

Originally posted by Sister Golden Hair
If you are really interested, you may want to check out the project that is going on in this forum. We are discussing the Silmarillion chapter by chapter.

Can you send me a link?

[Artanis]

You don't need a link. Look at the 3 sticky threads on top of the first page in this forum (the Silmarillion Forum). These are the chapter assignments and the thread for the ongoing chapter, which is chapter 8. You'll also find threads for chapter 7 and chapter 6 on the first page of this forum. Look a few pages back and you'll easily find the threads for the previous chapters.

I quite understand if you think the Sil is a hard read, because it is. But it's also very rewarding when you finally 'get' it. :)

[Ragnarok]

I consider it more of a collection of shortened stories that significantly relate with each other giving the events and history of Middle Earth as well as providing background information for LotR. Unfinished Tales is similar to the Sim as well giving brief accounts of people, places and things in Middle Earth.

[markedel]

The writing-more beautiful than LOTR.

[Lanelf]

What's so great about it??? *keels over* EVERYTHING!
Lanelf.

[Maedhros]

From the Book of Lost Tales I: Foreword
The Silmarillion is commonly said to be a 'difficult' book, needing explanation and guidance on how to 'approach' it; and in this it is contrasted' to The Lord of the Rings. In Chapter 7 of his book The Road to Middle-earth Professor T. A. Shippey accepts that this is so ('The Silmarillion could never be anything but hard to read', p. 201), and expounds his view of why it should be. A complex discussion is not treated justly when it is extracted, but in his view the reasons are essentially two (p. 185). In the first place, there is in The Silmarillion no 'mediation' of the kind provided by the hobbits (so, in The Hobbit, 'Bilbo acts as the link between modern times and the archaic world of dwarves and dragons').
There is, then, and very evidently, a question of literary 'taste' (or literary 'habituation') involved; and also a question of literary 'disappointment' -- the '(mistaken) disappointment in those who wanted a second Lord of the Rings' to which Professor Shippey refers. This has even produced a sense of outrage -- in one case formulated to me in the words 'It's like the Old Testament!': a dire condemnation against which, clearly, there can be no appeal (though this reader cannot have got very far before being overcome by the comparison). Of course, 'The Silmarillion' was intended to move the heart and the imagination, directly, and without peculiar effort or the possession of unusual faculties; but its mode is inherent, and it may be doubted whether any 'approach' to it can greatly aid those who find it unapproachable.
I guess that it's not for everyone. If people find it unapproachable then it's not for you.

[Ruinel]

The Sil is more than a 'history' book. The Sil is the background for the LotR stories and The Hobbit.

Interesting, I didn't need any help reading The Sil and I didn't find it a 'difficult read' at all. :p I found myself drawn into it's very pages and enveloped by it's every word.

[Silpion]

I have never thought of The Silmarillion as just a history book :). Although the information inside of the book enriches The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, I would like to believe that The Silmarillion can be enjoyed on its own. To me, each chapter makes an impact and it engages my interest, my imagination, and my curiousity.

[Attalus]

IMHO, the problem arises mainly from the "Ainulindalë," which is not so much difficult as puzzling. For me, once I got into "Quenta Silmarillion" all difficulties vanished.

[Kirinki54]

Originally posted by Attalus
IMHO, the problem arises mainly from the "Ainulindalë," which is not so much difficult as puzzling. For me, once I got into "Quenta Silmarillion" all difficulties vanished.

I agree with you there. But one of the difficulties I think many new readers encounter, is the seemingly difficult barrier of "religion". This is not what they expected. The freedom of thought they might have expected is thus suddenly severely limited. The "new" world have a lot of built-in prerequisites.

[Dreran the Green]

Its a good book once you get it. The first time I read it it just confused me and I stopped before I finished the first chapter. But now I love it. And getting just a bit off topic, how did you get a custom title The Ben? You only have a hundred something posts:confused:

[Sister Golden Hair]

And getting just a bit off topic, how did you get a custom title The Ben? You only have a hundred something postsHis brother is an admin.

[Maedhros]

His brother is an admin.
Good to know that the forums rules are applied the same to all the members.

[Artanis]

Hm - I doubt his title is meant as an honour. :rolleyes: Pardon me if I'm wrong.

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by Artanis
Hm - I doubt his title is meant as an honour. :rolleyes: Pardon me if I'm wrong. You are absolutely right Artanis, and Meadhros, if you ever read the FAQ, you would know that. His title is diciplinary action that I gave him. Now, would you like that title?;)

[Elf Girl]

What did he do that is so dire? He seems just a little clueless to me.

[Sister Golden Hair]

Well, go to the FAQ and read it. It will tell you what the "Smelly Orc" title is given for.

Back on topic.

[Maedhros]

From the Faq
The default titles for moderators and administrators are "Huorn" and "Ent," respectively. Staff members and certain users may have their own custom titles. In some situations, the title "Smelly Orc" is given to spammers.
Now on topic.
From the Book of Lost Tales I: Prologue
One quality which [The Lord of the Rings] has in abundance is the Beowulfian 'impression of depth', created just as in the old epic by songs and digressions like Aragorn's lay of Tinúviel, Sam Gamgee's allusions to the Silmaril and the Iron Crown, Elrond's account of Celebrimbor, and dozens more. This, however, is a quality of The Lord of the Rings, not of the inset stories. To tell these in their own right and expect them to retain the charm they got from their larger setting would be a terrible error, an error to which Tolkien would be more sensitive than any man alive. As he wrote in a revealing letter dated 20 September 1963:

I am doubtful myself about the undertaking [to write The Silmarillion]. Part of the attraction of The L.R. is, I think, due to the glimpses of a large history in the background: an attraction like that of viewing far off an unvisited island, or seeing the towers of a distant city gleaming in a sunlit mist. To go them is to destroy the magic, unless new unattainable vistas are again revealed. (Letters, p. 333)

To go there is to destroy the magic. As for the revealing of 'new unattainable vistas', the problem there -- as Tolkien must have thought many times -- was that in The Lord of the Rings Middle-earth was already old, with a vast weight of history behind it. The Silmarillion, though, in its longer form, was bound to begin at the beginning. How could 'depth' be created when you had nothing to reach further back to?

[Attalus]

Well, we have this whole Forum, among others, to prove that JRRT's fears were groundless. Too bad Tollers didn't live long enough to publish the Silmarillion that he wanted to: equal in size to LotR. :p

[Ruinel]

Originally posted by Attalus
Well, we have this whole Forum, among others, to prove that JRRT's fears were groundless. Too bad Tollers didn't live long enough to publish the Silmarillion that he wanted to: equal in size to LotR. :p
*drools* That would have been GREAT!

[Maedhros]

One interesting thing to point out is that, in the Tales, it is very interesting that they were told to Eriol in Tol Eresëa by either Lindo, Vairë, Rúmil, etc and he wrote them down in the Golden Book of Tavrobel, just like the Qenta, that is in Home 4: The Shaping of Middle-Earth, which is the only complete Silmarillion that JRRT ever wrote. It seems that JRRT abandoned the idea of the narrator Eriol/Ælfwine and the ones who wrote the stories and the how they came to us, unlike in the Lord of the Rings, where the concept of the Red Book still remained.

[Attalus]

Yes, I prefer to do without the narrator-device and have it written like a third-person history of the Elves. Of course, then, we get problems like Gurthang's speech, which no one can figure how anyone knew that, since the only ones present were Turin and the sword.

[Blue Scout]

quote:
Yes, I prefer to do without the narrator-device and have it written like a third-person history of the Elves. Of course, then, we get problems like Gurthang's speech, which no one can figure how anyone knew that, since the only ones present were Turin and the sword (end of quote)

That's not really a problem, if you can, for example, imagine a schizophrenic archaeologist digging up Turin at some point in the Fourth Age, perhaps, and being just mad enough to try and talk to the sword for no particular reason. It makes sense to me. There's so no reason Gurthang should lose its powers of speech when it was broken

[Blue Scout]

Hi, by the way. I'm new here. I guess.:)

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by Blue Scout
Hi, by the way. I'm new here. I guess.:) Welcome to Entmoot Blue Scout. Be sure to drop by the General Messages forum and introduce yourself in the "Welcome" thread. Enjoy your stay.:)

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Mae govannen, and welcome to our humble abode. :)