10 year old me watched LOTR for the 1st time, and I was so fascinated by the whole universe that I wanted to learn more about its lore. During those days, our PC had the LOTR: Battle for Middle Earth and I played it with passion. A year or two later, the Hobbit movies came out, and they still felt just as magical as LOTR (reading The Hobbit changed my mind).
I loved LOTR, but I still wanted to learn more about Tolkien’s work, so I used to read Wikipedia articles & get fascinated every time. I was so excited when I heard the news about RoP, but I was extremely disappointed after watching the 1st season.
I had always wanted to read the books, but I wasn’t much of a reader until after the COVID era. After reading other books for 2-3 years, I decided to return to my childhood love of LOTR. I read all 4 books and learned so many details that were missing from the movies. That’s when I decided to take the leap and read The Silmarillion.
My expectations were high because many people had described it as the Bible of the LOTR universe. But when I started reading it, beginning with the Ainulindalë, it felt like a spiritual experience, almost like reading scripture.
This book is a masterpiece, and I would like to appreciate Christopher Tolkien, who did a great job curating his father’s legacy.
At times, the story felt like one loss after another for the Elves, but despite all the suffering, it still offers hope. Hope for salvation in the face of torment and darkness. And in this current age of darkness, we need that hope to keep fighting the forces of evil all around us.

I think one of the most underrated parts of Tolkien's wizard lore is that the Istari weren't sent to Middle-earth simply to defeat Sauron in a magical showdown. Their purpose was to encourage resistance, guide others, and help the Free Peoples find the courage to fight for themselves.

That's what makes Gandalf so compelling to me. He can be powerful and terrifying when he needs to be, but his greatest victories often come from inspiring someone else to act. He recognizes the importance of an ordinary hobbit, trusts people who seem insignificant, and understands that power alone isn't enough to save Middle-earth.

Saruman's downfall makes that contrast even clearer. He becomes obsessed with power, machinery, and controlling others, eventually turning away from the very purpose for which the Istari were sent.

I think Tolkien's point is that having the power to dominate everyone isn't the same as having the wisdom to save them. Gandalf succeeds partly because he understands the limits of his role, while Saruman fails because he wants to become the very kind of ruler he was supposed to oppose.

It also makes me wonder how different Middle-earth would have been if the Valar had intervened directly instead of sending the Istari in limited forms. They might have defeated their enemies through sheer force, but would the peoples of Middle-earth have learned to stand on their own?

Hi, a few years back, someone on reddit posted a link to an unofficial audiobook of LOTR that used the Howard Shore soundtrack and the guy did all the voices and had sound effects. I have unfortunately lost the audiobook and was wondering if anybody knew where I could get it again. I'm genuinely gutted I've lost this. Thanks for any help.

I feel worse for Faramir.

Imagine spending your whole life trying to get your father's approval, watching him favor your older brother, and then even after Boromir dies, your father still treats you like a disappointment.

And the frustrating part is that Faramir is genuinely a good man. He doesn't need to prove he's brave by doing something stupid, and he understands the Ring is dangerous when so many others convince themselves they could use it for good.

The line about preferring to be a great captain of Gondor than its king always sticks with me. He knows who he is, even when his own father refuses to see his worth.

I honestly think Denethor's treatment of him makes the whole story around the Ring even sadder.

It never sat well with me that the established situaton seems to be that wizards = the Istari, and the Istari = wizards. This implies that there's never been any other wizards apart from those five, and it's as if the term was invented specifically for them. But that can't be true - wizards, wizardry, and related terms have appeared in Tolkien's writings long before he came up with the Istari.

For example, in the Book of Lost Tales we meet Tu (Túvo) the wizard, who was "more skilled in magics than any that have dwelt ever yet beyond the land of Valinor," although he's not a human or elf, but a fay (a being in Tolken's early conception closest to the later Maiar). He is also said to be the oldest of wizards, implying that there were other, younger ones. This character was soon abandoned, but the "mantle" of the wizard was picked up by Thu, the progenitor of Sauron.

In fact, the Quenya Lexicon (started in 1915-16) has a group kuru 'magic, wizardry', kuruvar 'wizard', kuruni 'witch', with a note: 'of the good magic'. The Gnomish Lexicon has curu 'magic', curug 'wizard', curus 'witch'.

In the Lay of the Children of Hurin, Beleg shows a Gandalf-like quality of being able to make fire in wet wood, with "his wizard's cunning".

In the Lay of Leithan, "Dairon the dark with ferny crown / played with bewildering wizard's art / music for breaking of the heart." Also in the Lay of Leithian, Curufin persuades the Elves of Norgothrond to abandon open war against Morgoth, and to defend their realm through "secrecy, ambush, spies, and lore of wizardry, with silent leaguer / of wild things wary, watchful, eager, / of phantom hunters, venomed darts, / and unseen stealthy creeping arts".

And when Gandalf first appeared in the Hobbit (named Bladorthin in the early drafts), he was very much a typical fairytale wizard. As John Rateliff notes in The History of the Hobbit, "Bladorthin is very much a traditional fairy-tale enchanter: among his recorded exploits are rescuing ‘many princesses, earls, dukes, widow’s sons and fair maidens’ and slaying ‘unlamented giants’, exactly what we would expect of a hero from one of the old stories collected by Joseph Jacobs or Jacob & Wilhelm Grimm." Gandalf's true nature as a Maia and his role as an emissary of the Valar was only (and gradually) developed in the process of the writing of LotR and even some time after.

These are just some of the examples. I'm thinking of doing a deep dive into "The History of Wizards in Middle-earth", like I did with the Rings of Power.

Basically my thought was, would Morgoth have continued pouring his essence into Arda until he was so weak that he could not assert rule over his subjects directly, becoming more of a spirit of evil haunting the world?

I was recently listening to Blind Guardian’s Nightfall in Middle-earth, which reminded that I wanted to write down some musings about the legality of derivative works (this is not legal advice!). 

Derivative works in this context are fan-art, fan-fiction, and (particularly important in the Tolkien context) fan-made music. There’s a ton of these online, from Tolkien fan-art on Tumblr (and even sold on Etsy), to Tolkien fan-fictions on AO3, to Tolkien music on Youtube (Clamavi de Profundis is amazing). 

Now, the Tolkien estate hates derivative works, stating on their website: 

CAN I PUBLISH FAN FICTION OR OTHER BOOKS OR MATERIAL BASED ON TOLKIEN’S WORKS?
The Tolkien Estate has a duty to protect the integrity of Tolkien’s original writings and artworks and takes copyright very seriously. This means that you cannot copy any part of Tolkien’s writings or images, nor can you create materials which refer to the characters, stories, places, events or other elements contained in any of Tolkien’s works. 

(https://www.tolkienestate.com/frequently-asked-questions-and-links/) 

This strikes me as legally meaningless. What derivative works are legal to publish is determined by copyright law. 

And copyright law in the EU is pretty open to derivative works. (The UK’s law about this is based on EU law, but UK courts don’t have to follow CJEU interpretations anymore.)

Article 5(3)(k) of Directive 2001/29 (EU) provides that Member States may provide for exceptions or limitations [to copyright] in the case of use for the purpose of caricature, parody or pastiche. Importantly, Article 17(7) of Directive 2019/790 (EU) subsequently provided that Member States shall ensure that users in each Member State are able to rely on any of the following existing exceptions or limitations when uploading and making available content generated by users on online content-sharing services: (a) quotation, criticism, review; (b) use for the purpose of caricature, parody or pastiche. That is, the facultative exception became mandatory: EU member states must provide a pastiche exception to copyright protections now. 

In introducing precisely this exception into German domestic law, the German parliament noted (in preparatory materials) that what is meant by pastiche specifically includes fan-fiction and fan-art, as well as sampling and memes (BT-Drs. 19/27426, p. 91). But of course, the final arbiter of EU law in the EU is the CJEU. 

And, recently, the CJEU clarified what pastiche means: 

1. Article 5(3)(k) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society must be interpreted as meaning that the exception for ‘pastiche’, within the meaning of that provision, does not have a catch-all nature (Auffangtatbestand) but covers creations which evoke one or more existing works, while being noticeably different from them, and which use, including by means of sampling, some of those works’ characteristic elements protected by copyright, in order to engage with those works in an artistic or creative dialogue that is recognisable as such and that can take different forms, in particular the form of an overt stylistic imitation of those works, of a tribute to them or of humorous or critical engagement with them.

2. Article 5(3)(k) of Directive 2001/29 must be interpreted as meaning that, in order for use to be ‘for the purpose’ of pastiche, within the meaning of that provision, it is sufficient that the ‘pastiche’ nature be recognisable for a person who is familiar with the existing work from which the elements have been borrowed.

(https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:62023CJ0590) 

Basically, the CJEU ok-ed sampling as being capable of falling under the pastiche exception to EU copyright protection. 

And the way the judgment is written, even though it never refers to fan-fiction or fan-art or fan-music (since that’s not the subject of the litigation in question), I’d say that it’s very much applicable to those. The court specifically states that, to be a pastiche, the derivative work must “use […] some of those works’ characteristic elements protected by copyright”, and that the imitation doesn’t need to engage with the original work on a “humorous or critical” level, but rather that it can simply be a “tribute” to the original work. And note that there’s no requirement for the derivative work not to have any commercial purpose! That doesn’t mean that all fan-fiction etc will fall under the pastiche exception, but rather, that it’s capable in principle of meeting the requirements. 

The US, of course, has its fair use doctrine. It’s not been properly tested where fan-fiction is concerned, and it’s generally a bit of a mess. Of course, maybe don’t try to sue the Tolkien estate for copyright infringement when you’re selling LOTR fan-fiction (https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-67753073). Note that, using very different language from the Tolkien estate itself, even the Tolkien estate’s UK lawyer said about this case: 

This is an important success for the Tolkien Estate, which will not permit unauthorised authors and publishers to monetise JRR Tolkien’s much-loved works in this way.
This case involved a serious infringement of The Lord of the Rings copyright, undertaken on a commercial basis, and the estate hopes that the award of a permanent injunction and attorneys’ fees will be sufficient to dissuade others who may have similar intentions. 

(https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-67753073) 

Taking all of this together, I can’t help but wonder why the Tolkien estate has such a black-and-white statement trying to forbid all derivative works for any purpose and in any form on its website, while even their lawyer stresses that the estate will not allow monetisation of Tolkien’s works by other writers. 

It also feels odd that the Tolkien estate is so strict on their website, while Tolkien musicians on Youtube and the like don’t seem to be getting copyright strikes or anything, and while the law seems significantly less black-and-white. 

And in my opinion, engaging with an original work via fan-fiction and fan-music is just as valuable and often just as scholarly as engaging with it via critical essays. Not all of it is scholarly, of course—there is a great deal of smut—but there is a great deal of Tolkien fan-work online that engages with the original work with a lot of knowledge and respect. 

Anyway, some musings (that, again, do not constitute legal advice). What do you think about the Tolkien estate’s stance? Do you know of other legal cases that they pursued? 

Hi there.

I hope this is the right place for a little guidance. I'm trying to translate a word from English to one of Tolkien's languages for Middle-Earth for a project I'm working on. The word(s) is/are "storyteller" or "story teller".

According to several sites - but not all - "story" translates via Sandarin to "narn". And according to at least one site (Lamethir), "teller" translates to "nara". Other sites are giving me different responses to my translation query, especially as it relates to "teller".

While I understand that no translation is perfect, I'm trying to be as close-to-accurate as I can. Is there a preferred site for translations? Or is there an expert or forum I can post this message to?

Apologies if this is not the place for this question.

One thing I love about Tolkien's legendarium is how a seemingly minor name or reference can lead to an entire story that happened thousands of years before the events of The Lord of the Rings.

A name mentioned in passing might connect to the First Age, an old Elvish kingdom, or a character whose choices shaped the history of Middle-earth long before Bilbo or Frodo were even born.

Sometimes I wonder how different the books would feel if we knew nothing about the Silmarillion or the earlier histories.

What's a detail in LOTR that became much more interesting after you learned the deeper lore behind it? I'm especially interested in smaller references that are easy to miss on a first read but have a whole history attached to them.

Tolkien had such a gift for making words feel like they belong to an entire world, not just a language. Some names and words in his legendarium have a sound or meaning that makes them feel almost ancient and familiar at the same time.

For me, Eärendil has a beautiful, almost musical quality to it.

What word, name, or phrase from Tolkien’s works do you find the most beautiful, and is it because of its sound, its meaning, or the story behind it?

Reading the first chapter of *The Hobbit* again and I am struck by Bilbo's description of Gandalf as one who used to tell such tales of dragons and goblins "and the rescue of princesses and the unexpected luck of widows' sons."

On one level, you can read this as a generic reference to fairy stories and folklore. But on another level:

Those tales are in Middle-earth's lore (and in *The Silmarillion*) but inverted. There's a princess's rescue in the sense that the princess is doing the rescuing (Beren and Luthien), so that it's *her* rescue *of* her beloved. And Turin Turambar is all about the unexpected luck of a widow's son, but it's unexpected *bad* luck instead of unexpected *good* luck. And "The Unexpected Party" is all about inverted or disrupted expectations (chiefly Bilbo's, but also the dwarves' expectations of Bilbo and the reader's expectations of the tale, too) - so this delighted me when I realized it.

I was just curious as to how much information was shared between the Eldar of the Blessed Realm and those dwelling in Middle Earth before the Noldor marched forth towards ME. Would they know of the prevailing events in ME or would it just be a distant dream? What would they know of the topography of Beleriand, ME etc.? Were there any means of communication between the elves in Aman and those in ME? Was Feanor's war strategy (landing in Losgar, then proceeding to Angband) devised on the fly, or did they know of these exact locations beforehand?

The only really long thing that was too much for me on my second read was "Of Beleriand and its realms". The rest of the descriptions are necessary to build the atmosphere of the world, which has a lot of focus on nature unlike other books like dune. I feel like without them lotr would not be the same.

I am referring to resurrected Glorfindel here.

Edit: Not sure why I'm being downvoted so hard just for asking this?

Why didn't Maedhros & Maglor attempt to take the Silmaril from Eärendil during War of Wrath? Did they consider him beyond reach in the sky, or was their focus strictly on recovering the jewels from Morgoth?

I might just be unaware of the specific details, but does someone have an explanation for this?

I think the most beautiful word Tolkien invented was Ainulindalë. I love how it just flows off the tongue like water. If anyone has a different choice, I'd love to hear it.

Currently in Sarehole Mill Museum, and there’s a board with the following information:

“In Edgbaston are two towers, with which Tolkien was familiar as a boy. One is Perrott’s Folly, built by John Perrott in 1758. The other is Edgbaston Water Works Tower. They are thought to be the inspiration for ‘The Two Towers’.”

I’ve not read this elsewhere, so my question is … thought by whom? Does anyone have source for this?

As far as i know Hobbits are fairly unknown, including where they come from amongst men of Middle Earth. I wonder though if men like Denethor knew of their lands

This question has probably been asked before, but I've always been surprised that Gildor but not Glorfindel was in the group departing with Elrond and Galadriel. Both were Exiles of course, but Gildor was the more minor character, and it was a bit strange to seem him return that way at the end of the book.

Elrond's sons I can see wanting to stay on for awhile, and of course Celeborn staying is a whole other story. But wasn't Glorfindel one of those whose job in Middle-Earth was done, as it were?

Throughout the late Second Age, the Numenorians were total shits to the peoples south-east of Gondor. The enslaved them, sacrificed them as tribute, and generally fucked them over. Is it any surprise that Sauron the Powerful was able to rally them against Gondor, the descendants of the evil men who had persecuted them for so long?

We view Sauron as evil, and such he was, for in time he would have brought even his allies under his iron hand, but from the perspective of the Easterlings, he was a liberating force. I wonder how Sauron approached the Easterlings, and how his power was manifest in their realms. Was Sauron benevolent among them? Did he bring aid in their times of need?

‘But the wearing is slow in Lorien,’ said Frodo. ‘The power of the Lady is on it. Rich are the hours, though short they seem, in Caras Galadhon, where Galadriel wields the Elvenring.’

That should not have been said outside Lorien, not even to me,’ said Aragorn.

The ownership of the Three appears to be such a serious secret that Aragorn scolds Frodo for even mentioning it within the Fellowship. But a few chapters later, Gandalf starts singing in public:

In Dwimordene, in Lorien
Seldom have walked the feet of Men,
Few mortal eyes have seen the light
That lies there ever, long and bright.
Galadriel! Galadriel!
Clear is the water of your well;
White is the star in your white hand;

Now your average Edoras guard isn't going to get the reference, but Wormtongue might report it to Saruman who could pass it on to Sauron. As a ring owner himself, shouldn't Gandalf be a little more discreet instead of writing lyrics about it?

Faramir met Aragorn in the midst of those there assembled, and he knelt, and said: ‘The last Steward of Gondor begs leave to surrender his office.’ And he held out a white rod; but Aragorn took the rod and gave it back, saying: ‘That office is not ended, and it shall be thine and thy heirs’ as long as my line shall last. Do now thy office!’

This fuckin book. Catches you up when you least expect it

And by the time I got to Aragorn announcing Beregrond’s doom, it was full on waterfalls

Theory:Theory: The Ring didn't just corrupt people. It exposed what they already wanted most.

Think about it.

• Boromir wanted to save Gondor. • Galadriel wanted to protect and rule her own realm. • Gollum became consumed by his desire for the Ring. • Even Frodo, who resisted it for so long, eventually struggled to let it go.

They all reacted differently because they were different people, with different desires and weaknesses.

So here's my question:

Was the One Ring actually creating evil in its victims, or was it taking their existing desires and turning them into something monstrous?

And if that's true, would ANYONE have been able to destroy it without eventually falling to its power?

I want to hear your theories. 👀💍