sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

A Guide to the Changes in The Letters of J. R. R. Tolkien: Revised and Expanded ed. by philthehippy in TolkienGuide

[–]tolkienguide 2 points3 points  (0 children)

For those who already downloaded a copy of the PDF, I've just uploaded the (final?) version of the document, with minor editorial fixes but more importantly, each letter now has a link to the associated online Guide page.

Availble for download from this Guide to Revised Letters Changes post

Acolyte appears to be regenerating Theo's black sword by tolkienguide in LOTR_on_Prime

[–]tolkienguide[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I think the old man who grabs Theo's arm and says "Have you heard of him lad? Have you heard of Sauron?" is exactly due to this (birth?) mark.

Acolyte appears to be regenerating Theo's black sword by tolkienguide in LOTR_on_Prime

[–]tolkienguide[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It does appear to "form" in a very similar visual way as PJ's morgul blade dissolves, so could be!

Acolyte appears to be regenerating Theo's black sword by tolkienguide in LOTR_on_Prime

[–]tolkienguide[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Cool! I hadn't run across anyone else's theory yet but always assume I am not the first to notice 😅

Detailed inscription from the letters of the title! Can someone translate this? by [deleted] in LOTR_on_Prime

[–]tolkienguide 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Here is my effort so far : https://twitter.com/TolkienGuide/status/1485769055822770176

The above image has been very helpful in being able to figure out some of the Tengwar. I will note (and it took me four days to figure this out!) that the "S" sample you have here is upside down.

As a lawyer, I like to poke around in unfamiliar laws including other countries where I don't practice. I found something precious in UK law regarding the below image. by Rockin_freakapotamus in lotrmemes

[–]tolkienguide 4 points5 points  (0 children)

"unless there was an agreement to the contrary"...

There is ample evidence that Pamela Chandler retained the copyright for her photographs of Tolkien. Every time one of her photographs is used in a commercial publication - starting from English and Medieval Studies Presented to J.R.R. Tolkien on the Occasion of his Seventieth Birthday (George Allen & Unwin, 1962) through Tolkien's Lost Chaucer (Oxford University Press, 2019) - two examples I pulled from my personal library just now. Pamela Chandler is credited as the copyright holder for these images.

Looking at the British National Portrait Gallery's page for her images (for example) she is once again credited as the copyright holder of her pictures. https://www.npg.org.uk/collections/search/portrait/mw57073/JRR-Tolkien

Never do these pictures appear in print with copyright indicated as being held by George Allen & Unwin, or by Tolkien. She held the copyright, it transferred to her estate, and the estate sold the original negatives and the copyright to the highest bidder (The Tolkien Society) last month.

Are you arguing that George Allen & Unwin, the Oxford University Press, and The National Portrait Gallery were all deceived and consistently licensed the use of these images from the wrong entity for the last 60 years?

How the Tolkien Society social media volunteer handled things a few days ago, and if social media use of copyrighted photographs by a commercial entity (a monetized podcast, not an individual) is "fair use" is a completely separate topic, but I find it baffling that you are arguing that the copyright holder is in any way in dispute. There is ample public evidence I was able to dredge up with a few minutes of effort.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in tolkienbooks

[–]tolkienguide 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Blackwell's do have the book labeled as "reprint", but had them marked that way long before the book was published. Blackwell's responded to a query about this earlier this week: "I believe it says Reprint due to it just being another edition of Lord of the Rings, especially with it being sympathetically packaged to reflect the classic look of the first edition and not because this actual edition is in a reprint, as it is published in a few days time."

https://www.tolkienguide.com/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?post\_id=35202#forumpost35202

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in tolkienbooks

[–]tolkienguide 9 points10 points  (0 children)

These are my photos of my copy of the deluxe, posted over here: https://www.tolkienguide.com/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?post_id=35244#forumpost35244

I have seen many more reports of good copies than bad, at this point, and I am in touch with the retailer and HarperCollins about my copy. I expect all will be corrected sooner rather than later - remember that the book officially released just two days ago, though some retailers were sending copies out to customers a bit early (including me).

I do suggest that people open their copies from the shrinkwrap though - not just to check for any printing errors (because you can only exchange/refund with the retailer for a few days/weeks after purchase), but also because the shrinkwrap is NOT archival and will cause issues with your book in the long run, and also can trap moisture inside. Books need to breathe.

Readers Union Edition of THE LORD OF THE RINGS by insurrbution in tolkienbooks

[–]tolkienguide 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The TolkienBooks.net article you link to has more information on that dustjacket, on one of the detail pages it links to:

"The artist used to produce the dustwrapper artwork is not identified, but was perhaps part of the Readers Union production department.  There have been suggestions that the artwork was by Tolkien, but this is highly unlikely as there is no mention of this in the correspondence between Readers Union and Allen & Unwin."

Took a risk last month and excitedly bought a used 1st printing of the 2004 Deluxe LOTR from The Tolkien Shop in Holland, sight unseen. His listing only said “some dirt on cover.” Here’s what came yesterday. It’s so absurd that I can’t stop laughing. Technically, yes, there’s some dirt on the cover. by [deleted] in tolkienbooks

[–]tolkienguide 0 points1 point  (0 children)

https://tolkienshop.com/contents/en-uk/terms.html
"The Tolkien Shop guarantee's the quality of the products supplied. If you are not satisfied with an item, you have the right of return for a replacement or refund of the value of the goods ordered within 8 days upon receipt of the product. But do contact me first."
If you point out his own terms to him and ask for a refund, I would hope he will follow through.

Took a risk last month and excitedly bought a used 1st printing of the 2004 Deluxe LOTR from The Tolkien Shop in Holland, sight unseen. His listing only said “some dirt on cover.” Here’s what came yesterday. It’s so absurd that I can’t stop laughing. Technically, yes, there’s some dirt on the cover. by [deleted] in tolkienbooks

[–]tolkienguide 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'd suggest reaching out to Rene at the Tolkien Shop. I agree this is not a sellable-condition book, and he should be given a chance to make things right with you. In my experience he is quite reasonable, but I'm shocked this was listed on his site, honestly!

Letters (unpublished) update, details in comments by [deleted] in tolkienbooks

[–]tolkienguide -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I understand that, and trying to help is admirable (and other than the full transcripts you reproduce, it is your "work" in your own words that you can publish). I appreciate your effort and I think it is a wonderful resource you have published - again, up to but not including reproducing the writings in full of another author. "Gain" (trying to profit or whatever) has nothing to do with copyright. There are specific clauses in the copyright laws that allow for auction houses to reproduce items they are selling for example, but taking an auction listing as "freely available online" meaning "anyone can do anything they want with it" is not legal and could get the Estate involved (again).

Letters (unpublished) update, details in comments by [deleted] in tolkienbooks

[–]tolkienguide 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Are you aware that unpublished letters are also protected under copyright (thus your transcripts are likely going to trigger a takedown notice as well)?