4 ms·

As a Tolkien fan I have absolutely zero interest in any of these, no matter how well they could be written (and given what is happening with Amazon's The Rings

As a Tolkien fan I have absolutely zero interest in any of these, no matter how well they could be written (and given what is happening with Amazon's The Rings of Power, that's not a given). A fan of Tolkien's original stories is exactly that, not a fan of any story written by a random author with the same characters in it. There are plenty of fantasy novels that don't enjoy the same level of success for that reason. There is no lack of elfves, dwarves, wizards, and dragons. What is lacking is Tolkien's talent.

TheCondor 4y ago
Derivative works don't change the originals. They are still there. Obviously, if you're a purist, then don't consume any of the "newer" material. Is the fear that a derivative would some how make the original less successful? or fail itself or reveal some character attributes that you don't like?
- mikepurvis 4y ago
  Don't people argue that basically all Star Wars movies and recuts post-1983 have basically just served to dilute the brand? I guess it's a bit more murky when you start arguing about the whole expanded universe of novels, video games, TV shows, theme park attractions, and whatever else. But it does feel different when you invite new creators to step up to the plate and create new chapters in a story and then explicitly elevate those new chapters to the same level of canon as the original. This could even be said to apply to Lucas and the prequel trilogy, since Lucas did not direct Empire or Jedi, so the prequels were being made essentially be a completely different team than the originals (other than him). All that to say— this could be done, but it would be really important to manage the branding of it. It's not an "LOTR sequel", it's "LOTR Legends — new stories set in Tolkien's beloved world", with the clear implication that canon 0 is LOTR, canon 1 is the Christopher Tolkien-edited works like the Silmarillion, and the "Legends" are canon 2. Anything not associated with the estate is canon 3, and the movies, video games, and TV show are not canon at all.
  - dron57 4y ago
    > Don't people argue that basically all Star Wars movies and recuts post-1983 have basically just served to dilute the brand? Some of the expanded universe Star Wars is quite good. I personally loved the KOTOR game and the Yuzhaan Vong books while hating all the Disney movies. I suppose the same argument applies to the Silmarillion since it was heavily edited by Tolkien's son.
- leadingthenet 4y ago
  > Derivative works don't change the originals. Often repeated as a mantra, but do they actually not? Classic example: The plummeting of the rewatchability of Game of Thrones Seasons 1-4. Also, Star Wars.
  - themadturk 4y ago
    They don't have to, it depends on the reader/viewer. Stephen King says pretty much the same about adaptations of his own work...however badly they've butchered "The Stand" on TV, it hasn't changed the original book.
Cthulhu_ 4y ago
I feel like this about a lot of derived works - there's tons of novels derived from video games as well, for example. But they all feel like fanfiction. That said, there was a fantasy series I've read part of where the author himself started writing tons of spinoffs and whatnot; almost like writing fanfiction of their own works.

TheCondor 4y ago

Derivative works don't change the originals. They are still there. Obviously, if you're a purist, then don't consume any of the "newer" material. Is the fear that a derivative would some how make the original less successful? or fail itself or reveal some character attributes that you don't like?

mikepurvis 4y ago
Don't people argue that basically all Star Wars movies and recuts post-1983 have basically just served to dilute the brand? I guess it's a bit more murky when you start arguing about the whole expanded universe of novels, video games, TV shows, theme park attractions, and whatever else. But it does feel different when you invite new creators to step up to the plate and create new chapters in a story and then explicitly elevate those new chapters to the same level of canon as the original. This could even be said to apply to Lucas and the prequel trilogy, since Lucas did not direct Empire or Jedi, so the prequels were being made essentially be a completely different team than the originals (other than him). All that to say— this could be done, but it would be really important to manage the branding of it. It's not an "LOTR sequel", it's "LOTR Legends — new stories set in Tolkien's beloved world", with the clear implication that canon 0 is LOTR, canon 1 is the Christopher Tolkien-edited works like the Silmarillion, and the "Legends" are canon 2. Anything not associated with the estate is canon 3, and the movies, video games, and TV show are not canon at all.
- dron57 4y ago
  > Don't people argue that basically all Star Wars movies and recuts post-1983 have basically just served to dilute the brand? Some of the expanded universe Star Wars is quite good. I personally loved the KOTOR game and the Yuzhaan Vong books while hating all the Disney movies. I suppose the same argument applies to the Silmarillion since it was heavily edited by Tolkien's son.
leadingthenet 4y ago
> Derivative works don't change the originals. Often repeated as a mantra, but do they actually not? Classic example: The plummeting of the rewatchability of Game of Thrones Seasons 1-4. Also, Star Wars.
- themadturk 4y ago
  They don't have to, it depends on the reader/viewer. Stephen King says pretty much the same about adaptations of his own work...however badly they've butchered "The Stand" on TV, it hasn't changed the original book.

Cthulhu_ 4y ago

I feel like this about a lot of derived works - there's tons of novels derived from video games as well, for example. But they all feel like fanfiction. That said, there was a fantasy series I've read part of where the author himself started writing tons of spinoffs and whatnot; almost like writing fanfiction of their own works.