The Tolkien Thread (2)

I was looking on AbeBooks for something else today when I came upon Arda Reconstructed: The Creation of the Published Silmarillion by Douglas Charles Kane. It was published in 2009 and looks fascinating. Has anyone read/seen this? (I'm thinking David, perhaps?)

The blurb reads:

"Douglas C. Kane reveals a tapestry woven by Christopher Tolkien from different portions of his father's work that is often quite mind-boggling, with inserts that seemed initially to have been editorial inventions shown to have come from some remote portion of Tolkien's vast body of work. He demonstrates how material that was written over the course of more than thirty years was merged together to create a single, coherent text. He also makes a frank appraisal of the material omitted and invented by Christopher Tolkien and how these omissions and insertions may have distorted his father's vision of what he considered-even more than The Lord of the Rings-to be his most important work. It is a fascinating portrait of a unique collaboration that reached beyond the grave. Kane documents the changes, omissions, and additions and traces how the disparate source materials were used to create what is in essence a composite work. He compares the published text with the source texts contained in the volumes of The History of Middle-earth as well as other works and identifies patterns of major and minor changes made to these source materials that resulted in the reconstruction of the finished text. He also cites the works of some of the most important Tolkien scholars, including Tom Shippey, Verlyn Flieger, Christina Scull, Wayne Hammond, Charles Noad, and David Bratman in an attempt to understand and explain why these changes may have been made."

There's also a useful 'review' under 'Product Description' on the Amazon website:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Arda-Reconstructed-Creation-Published-Silmarillion/dp/16...

_____________________

Edited to add that this is a continuation of the former thread at

http://www.librarything.com/topic/155649

I haven't read this, but it looks like just the thing I'd like to read. An overview of the the 'complete' History of Middle Earth, and with it the history of JRRT's writing, is a good thing. I think, ultimately, a second Silmarillion, by Christopher Tolkien or others, aiming at a new and wider synthesis, and reconciliation of Tolkien's lifetime of mythological writings, would be wonderful.

>2 Firumbras:

Yes, Silmarillion II - now there's a thought. At 88, it's unlikely that Christopher would take this on, but there are a few expert Tolkienists out there who should be equal to the task.

I have not read this Jonathan but I came across it on Amazon a few months back and I placed it in my Wish List for future purchase. It does look fascinating but I'm worried it will leave me dissatisfied with the Silmarillion because the author often criticizes Christopher Tolkien's editorial choices - particularly the relegation of a number of female characters and the less complex characterization given to Ungoliant.

There is a fascinating review and on line debate on Arda Reconstructed here -

http://themidhavens.net/heretic_loremaster/2009/05/a-review-of-douglas-charles-k...

>4 Quicksilver66:

Thanks for the link, David. I think the fact that Christopher Tolkien acknowledges that he was forced to rush publication of the Silmarillion and feels he didn't get it quite right allows others to approach the subject with a clear(er) conscience. After all, it can never be as Tolkien would have finally wanted it - even he couldn't make up his mind.

That’s true. In fact it’s open to anyone (assuming they had full access to all Tolkien’s papers) to try and construct an alternative Silmarillion - but they would not have the insight that Christopher has being Tolkien’s son and literary confidant for so many years. Fancy having a go (:

>6 Quicksilver66:

Not me! Even reading The History of Middle Earth for more than a few pages at a time "does my 'ead in!" I respect anyone who does try. At 88, Christopher is clearly not going to attempt much more. But we must be eternally grateful for what he has already achieved. Since JRRT's death in 1973, our knowledge of his work has exceeded all expectation, largely thanks to Christopher's hard work.

-7

Yes,amen to that. The Silmarillion followed by Unfinished Tales and then the monumental History of Middle Earth. What an achievement. All lovers of the Professors work owe his son so much. Did you read his recent interview translated from the French press? He is unhappy with the film treatment of his fathers work. I think he makes some good points -

http://www.worldcrunch.com/culture-society/my-father-039-s-quot-eviscerated-quot...

>8 Quicksilver66:

An interesting article. I can understand his fears for the Tolkien legacy, both to the world and to the family. The way the commercial world appears from his perspective to have "taken over" and left the family on the sidelines has happened all too often. On a smaller but still significant scale, the Awdry family lost control of Thomas the Tank Engine. In that case, though, they lost control of the books themselves, something which thankfully is not going to happen to the Tolkien estate. The integrity of the books will live on and the popularity of the films will lead many, as indeed they already have, to read the books for the first time. The book industry as it has developed is more than a match for Hollywood.

8
Thanks, great article, though sad.

> 10

Yes - you can feel the dignity, sadness and pride in his fathers achievement -

"Tolkien has become a monster, devoured by his own popularity and absorbed into the absurdity of our time," Christopher Tolkien observes sadly. "The chasm between the beauty and seriousness of the work, and what it has become, has overwhelmed me. The commercialization has reduced the aesthetic and philosophical impact of the creation to nothing. There is only one solution for me: to turn my head away."

11
Yes I think Christopher Tolkien must feel hollow at the desecration, for that is what it is, of his father's work. I enjoyed the Jackson trilogy of LOTR taking it with a pinch of salt, but the first instalment of The Hobbit has left me cold. I fear the rest will be a calamity of tits, invention and kung-fu.

> 12

"a calamity of tits, invention and kung-fu."

Sounds like my kind of film (:

>12 LesMiserables:, 13
Well, there are Bombur's moobs, I suppose....

Have you seen the new illustrated edition of The Hobbit, illustrations by Jemina Catlin.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Hobbit-J-R-Tolkien/dp/0007497903/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&...

>15 dfmorgan:

Yes. Mine arrived this morning!

_________________________

Edited to add,

Beware the "looking inside" feature in the link. In true Amazon fashion, Catlin's edition leads directly to that illustrated by David Wyatt!

Try this one instead:

http://www.tolkienlibrary.com/press/1091-the-hobbit-illustrated-jemima-catlin.ph...

>16 boldface:

Thanks for that, I hadn't used the Look Inside just looked at the pictures along the side.

>16 boldface:

Thanks for that, I hadn't used the Look Inside just looked at the pictures along the side.

eta - oooh thanks for the link, now tempted to go for the Slip Cased edition.

>16 boldface: My slipcased edition is waiting for me at my local Amazon Locker for me to collect tomorrow!

My Tolkien collection has mushroomed since The Tolkien Thread #1 started: rather unsurprisingly, my dollar collection has shrivelled.

Slip Cased edition now ordered and should be with me on Monday.

I ordered the slipcased edition after someone mentioned it earlier in the thread. Unfortunately I'm in the States so it won't be here for another few days. I'd be interested in what y'all think of it while I wait.

#20 I'm in the same boat.

Got an interview with Douglas Kane up here:
http://www.tolkienlibrary.com/press/873-Arda-Reconstructed-interview.php
Guessed that would be nice to read him explain the book!

haha indeed! Interesting to see this new edition... lovely!

Hello all,

I am clearing some shelf space and I have three volumes that I am going to put up on e-bay, but figured I would give you guys first stab since then I know they would go to a home where they will be appreciated.

1) Poems and Stories - 1980 - Allen & Unwin, New York - DE LUXE EDITION
2) The Lord of the Rings - 1982 - Allen & Unwin, New York - DE LUXE EDITION
3) The Hobbit or There and Back Again - 1976 - Allen & Unwin, New York - DE LUXE EDITION

They are all in VG+ to Near Fine condition.

If you are interested please PM me.

RAY

This thread continues from the very long, first, Tolkien thread in

http://www.librarything.com/topic/155649

Please write your posts here as the continuation. This will avoid having two second parts running concurrently.

Ok, I think I have all this straight now

EclecticIndulgence, I'm not going to re-post my reply here because it now already exists in two other places and I don't want to annoy anyone, but I'd definitely recommend you finish tracking down the deluxe set. They are probably a bit overpriced, and because the slipcase are a bit too big sometimes the books slide around in shipping and bump the spine ends, but they look great on the shelf, and they are definitely the only option if you want a matching, reasonable quality set that includes more than LOTR/Hobbit/Silmarillion.

And in my opinion, the paper and typesetting is superior to the Folio LOTR volumes.

I found a first edition hardback of the Silmarillion this afternoon, picked up in a charity shop for 66p! I've not read this before and I understand it's quite different to LOTR/Hobbit but should be interesting… I hope. I don't have any of the Folio Tolkien editions, just the recent hardback reprints (the three book 50th anniversary Lord of the Rings and a 2007 hardback of The Hobbit) and paperbacks of Roverandom and Tales from the Perilous Realm.

As far as the films are concerned, I've not seen either of the Hobbit films but I did enjoy the Lord of the Rings movies (the extended versions at least), though they certainly could have benefitted from a somewhat more serious approach at times! There are a few places where they are a bit cringeworthy to watch.

Some interesting Tolkien news today. HMH is going to publish his translation of Beowulf. I'm curious to see if he can give Heaney a run for his money. Another gorgeous deluxe edition is not doubt forthcoming. Publication date right now is May 22.

In-ter-esting! Thanks for the news, I've not yet read the Heaney but am eager to, and now also Tolkien's translation. Should be quite different approaches, stylistically.

I would love to see Folio do an edition of the Beowulf translation. I wish they would expand beyond the typical five Tolkien books. I ended up picking up Easton Press's Fall of Arthur.

I have the boxed Houghton Mifflin set of LOTR and the Simarrilian. Still need to pick up the matching Hobbit though I have the green boxed leatherette Hobbit copy. I did pick up a second edition (US) Return of the King Hardback with a nice DJ from a book-sale for $1.

I really enjoyed John Garth's book, Tolkien and the Great War. One of the top books I read last year and I recommend it to anyone interested in learning more about Tolkien.

A Folio edition of shorter works like "Farmer Giles", "Smith of Wooton Major", etc and the critical essays would be welcome. I've only purchased the LOTR set from Folio so far, but I don't own these various short pieces and would love a fine hardbound edition gathering most of them.

I acknowledge his academic articles aren't probably the best bet for a general audience, but there remain many short pieces already published which I think would appeal to those of us reading beyond the LOTR and Silmarillian.

I would like to see a fully illustrated Leaf by Niggle in 2º Folio with Bradel binding, richly adorned by the paintings of Milton, who of course we would have to resuscitate for the commission, but I'm sure he wouldn't mind at all.

I know this isn't Folio Society so I hope this isn't to gauche posting this here:

http://www.eastonpress.com/prod/D5B/TOLKIEN--HISTORY-OF-THE-LORD-OF-THE-RINGS_24...

If I didn't know about this I would want to....

EP Tolkien editions are not available to UK purchasers. But when it comes to Tolkien I prefer the Allen and Unwin/ Harper Collins editions to both the FS and EP versions.

I have the new Beowulf volume. I have not had a chance to look in detail but at first blush the Harper Collins volume is well produced and looks interesting. The Tolkien industry goes ever on and on...............

David the new Beowulf is on my wishlist. It was published yesterday. Totally forgot about it; better check Amazon

I just wish the deluxe editions were easier to get here in the states.

I will be getting this shortly when it comes out in Canada (Chapters is selling it for about $90). I know I can buy it from the bookdepository for about the same price but rather buy it local just in case there's any issue I can just return it. On a side note I have all the deluxe editions by HarperCollins except Tales from the Perilous Realm. Does anyone know if they will be reprinting it again? Tried emailing Harpercollins several times but have not gotten any reply.

David I'm interested in your comment that you prefer the HarperCollins deluxe editions to Folio. Could you elaborate?

>41 ironjaw: While I don't have the Folio editions, I don't think I'll ever consider them. Compared to Alan Le illustrations to be found in most Tolkien volumes, those in the Folio editions are positively lifeless. (In my opinion, of course.)

>42 Jason461: I've ordered the Folio editions and am still waiting for them to arrive. I believe the illustrations are based upon the Queen of Denmark's work. I've never seen Alan Le's illustrations.

-41

Faisel -there is nothing wrong with the Folio editions and in fact I like the illustrations ( and they are by Queen Margarithe of Denmark). However I still think the nicest current version of LOTR available are the individual hardback Harper Collins volumes - particularly if you can get the slipcased set. These are printed on nice paper and have Tolkien's cover illustrations. Harper Collins do quite a good job with their Tolkien titles. The original Allen and Unwin hardbacks are my favourites though, with their stained top edges. As for EP I'm not a fan of the cover designs or illustrations on their Tolkien set.

>44 Quicksilver66: Thanks for the advice David. I will be getting the slipcased deluxe Harper Collins volumes.

I've just seen these on the tolkien website and they seem interesting. Any thoughts on these. How does the box set compare?

http://www.tolkien.co.uk/product/9780007525546/The+Lord+of+the+Rings+


http://www.tolkien.co.uk/product/9780007581146/The+Lord+of+the+Rings+Boxed+Set+

>43 ironjaw: Never? Oh you are missing out. Time for a trip to the book store or even just a solid internet search.

I have the green, blue, and red FS Tolkien volumes. They make a lovely set, and I like that they are a neat octavo; about the size of an everyman. I once owned a slipcased harper Collins ed of LOTR, illustrated by Alan Lee, though that was not the deluxe set. I gave it away eventually - despite the wonderful illustrations, the design was unpleasing to me, and I dislike both the JRRT monogram and Harper Collins logo which appear on every volume's spine.

>45 ironjaw:

The one-volume version is quite heavy to hold for reading, but it does have the Alan Lee illustrations if that's what you want.

I much prefer the multi-volume set which includes the Companion volume by Tolkien expert Wayne Hammond. The three-volume version of LOTR is based on the original editions. They are not highly illustrated in the conventional sense except for one or two drawings and a fold-out painting of an "ancient" manuscript by Tolkien. The paper is nice and they have the fold-out maps at then end of each volume. They are also much more comfortable in the hand for reading.
_____________

I am awaiting the arrival of the Tolkien Beowulf deluxe edition. The volumes of the deluxe edition are printed on quite thick smooth paper and are solidly made. If there is a downside, it's the fact the boards are covered in paper rather than cloth. That said, they are protected by a slipcase and there is an attractive (and different) gilt decoration on each of the front boards.

>48 boldface: Thanks Jonathan for your opinion. I will grab the Beowulf deluxe edition too. I think I will order this box set as I am unable to find the HarperCollins deluxe slipcased edition.

Another question, looking at this image earlier posted by aaronpepperdine was the Lord of the Rings trilogy published individually as s deluxe slipcased edition? I can only find the one-volume edition.

>49 ironjaw:

Faisel, as far as I know, the deluxe LOTR was only ever published in the version shown in the photo, i.e., as a single volume.

45, 49

Nice pics.

In a hole in the ground there lived a credit card. Not a nasty, dirty, wet hole, filled with the ends of worms and an oozy smell, nor yet a dry, bare, sandy hole with nothing in it to sit down on or to eat: it was a credit card-hole, and that means solvency. ;-)

General question to those who have the deluxe editions: Which, if any, have substantially different illustrations from the standard hardbacks? I'm just starting to go after these, and I want to focus on those that have the most to offer.

The Simarillion looks un-illustrated and LOTR essentially is, with map and "child's" ! map, and is somewhat disappointing. Think it could have been done better, with the illustrations available, maybe it would have been better splitting it up.

Like LesMis I should have not read this web site and bought some of the set blind to have a more complete set but don't have all of them.

I originally bought The Hobbit at bookshop which looked a lot better with illustrations than the standard hardback. The Children of Huron also looks better with what seems to be more Illustrations. Tales of the Perilous Realm seems to be about the same however ths standard hardback is smaller than the other hardbacks.

I have the standard hardcover books of the LOTR bought separately as the box set above and I do like these the best for the LOTR book but again esentially un-illustrated and if properly illustrated would almost be perfect. Others seem to like them as well and shame the standard The Hobbit couldn't match them in quality.

The box set of these about to be reissued comes with an updated readers companion by Scull and Hammond. Is this an update of the two volume 'The J. R. R. Tolkien Companion and Guide issued in 2006 ? Seems to have been about 2000 pages. A lot of pages ! The box set seems to have a separate dustcover to the separately issued one of the companion. If anyone has an opinion to whether this is worth looking at and its readibility I would appreciate it

Has anyone read Stratford Caldecott's The Power of the Ring: The Spiritual Vision Behind the Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit?

This has been highly recommended by an eminent scholar along with Tom Shippey's JRR Tolkien: Author of the Century as the two best books written for understanding Tolkien and his works. (Caldecott's apparently winning by a nose)

The current issue of "The New Yorker" has an extensive feature article on Tolkien relating to his translation and the publication of Beowulf. I just received the electronic edition today. It includes a discussion of the comparison with the Heaney translation.

This is the link to the article:

http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2014/06/02/140602crbo_books_acocella...

Amended to add the link

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/5373529

Recording of jrr unearthed...

56

Yes I read that the other day. Old Tollers liked a pint and a smoke. A veritable hobbit!

>54 LesMiserables:

I haven't read Stratford Caldecott's book. It sounds like essential reading.

>55 Forthwith:

I've only just dipped into the Tolkien Beowulf translation as yet, but my first impression is that it reads more like a crib, very much reflecting the spare and concise idiom of the Old English itself, than the more fluid rendering of Heaney.

>56 JerryMmm:, >57 LesMiserables:

This is one to watch out for, assuming that the quality of the sound is better than the YouTube snippet and that the final published version doesn't have the musical accompaniment drowning it out!

> 45

Faisel, thanks for posting that link to the new Harper Collins one volume LOTR. This looks like a very nice edition with Alan Lee's illustrations. It looks a littlle like a Folio volume - I've ordered a copy.

I was tempted to order the De Luxe Beowulf but I resisted and have only bought the stanbdard hardback. This is a very nice edition with a classy dustjacket. I have been dissapointed with the Harper Collins De Luxe versions and I no longer think they are worth it. The slip case and boards show smudgy finger prints and the bindings are often tight.

Just this minute finished Tolkien: A Biography by Carpenter. Can't really commend it highly enough. Top notch. Balanced. Readable. Moving. Well done that man.

11 QS
Just to add further that having now watched the first two PJ installments of the Hobbit, I despair at the abomination that has been created. It is utter nonsense.

We need to remind ourselves that for Tollers, the word came first then the story. In the beginning was the word. Yes he had a religious concern in his language driven creation, not some drivel about action movies with cheap romantic subplots.

- 61

I agree Les Mis. The Hobbit movies are too commercial. That's what comes of taking a short and simple children's book and converting it into three three hour movies. The first movie was tolerable. The second movie was like watching a train crash in slow motion. I dread to think what the third movie will be like.

>45 ironjaw:

I have the individual three hardbacks (sans the companion volume) from your second photograph. They're not bad for standard publisher fare, though not up to Folio standard by any means. I do like the design though.

Well today I received Beowulf which is part of the deluxe edition HarperCollins have come out with. Now the only book that's missing is the elusive Tales from the Perilous Realms. Apparently it's OOP according to HarperCollins. I tried ordering it online through tolkien.co.uk a month ago, got charged then I called in because I still have not received it only to find out it is OOP and I was issued a refund. I'm a bit cheesed off with that experience so if ANYONE knows where I can obtain this book or you're willing to part with it pm me and maybe we can work something out...





For the non slipcase fans :)


There are differences between the books as they are printed and bound by different companies. The Fall of Arthur and The Legend of Sigurd and Gudrun are printed and bound by Clays Ltd in Great Britain, these two books have the characteristic of being tightly bound. The legend of Sigurd and Gudrun had to be "broken" in to even read it, book wouldn't stay open lol. Now Beowulf, The Unfinished Tale, and Children of Hurin are printed and bound in Italy by L.E.G.O Spa which is one of my favourite as they do it perfectly. All the books I own that was printed and bound by then have been flawless, and the pages just turn nicely. It just feels right!!. Both Clays Ltd and L.E.G.O Spa uses what feels like high quality papers, very thick and very smooth, smells nice too!! Now The Silmarillion, The Hobit, and The Lord of the Rings are printed and bound by Printing Express in Hong Kong. These three books feels just a bit lower quality IMO than the other books. Though it's not tight like the books from Clays Ltd the paper quality just seems low. It is extremely white almost as if they've bleached it, and the Silmarillion has a funky odour of some sort of chemicals. The best book of the three is The Hobbit as the paper is thicker and also has colour illustrations from Tolkien himself.

I also received a new version of The Lord of The Rings slipcase. This one is quartered bound in cloth with paper sides. It is printed and bound by South China Printing Co. This particular volume has Alan Lee's illustration which are magnificent piece of art. They should've included these in the other slipcase set. The only volume that has Alan Lee's illustration are The Children of Hurin and Tales from the Perilous Realm (I WANT). The paper is thicker than that of Printing Express (Hong Kong) and feels almsot like photo paper. What I don't like about the book is the slipcase is made out of cheap plastic. I understand that they probably went for the "see through" look but it just makes it look cheap. Not a fan of it.














It is slightly bigger than the other book and heavier but with the illustrations and the quality of the book, these would be my reading copy as I feel like it will provide me a better experience when I indulge myself in Tolkiens world.


Since The Children of Hurin has been one of my favourite books, I am now waiting for the super deluxe edition that is bound in leather and signed by both Christopher Tolkien and Alan Lee. I will post pic when I receive it. I'm also looking for the same version of The Legend of Sigurd and Gudrun but I'm patiently waiting for a decently priced one. By the way, DO NOT order from UKPAPERBACKSHOP or PAPERBACKSHOP, depending on which amazon website you go to they might have different names. I tried ordering both the said super deluxe editions from them only to be cancelled numerous times and then they will post the same books at a higher price. They'll lower it again they once bought cancel the order claiming not in stock but will re-list the item. I was a fool but really wanted the book. 4 times I've tried so 4 times I was a fool. Lesson learned.

>65 JuliusC:

Great pictures, Julius. I agree with your assessment of the various binders. L.E.G.O Spa produce the more satisfactory books here. Tales from the Perilous Realm, by the way, is bound by Clays and has all the characteristics you've mentioned.

This is why I love and hate LT.

You guys have just made me go in for Beowulf and Arthur. Not that I mind terribly, as I had been planning on getting the hardcovers, but once I saw that there were deluxe slipcased editions...well....

I am far more interested in Tolkien as an academic and in his interpretations of Norse mythology, so I suspect the only other book I'd want from the series is Sigurd and Gudrun.

EDIT:

Not that his LOTR series, etc. are worthless reading, of course! I already have far too many editions of these works, and after reading the comments on the paper and binding quality, I can't say I'm too surprised. Tolkien's stories are always going to be more popular than his academic translations and reinterpretations of Norse and Arthurian mythology, I think.

EDIT2:

I really hate (or love?) you lot now. I've caved for Unfinished Tales and Silmarillion, which I have been looking for in a nice edition (FS' edition just doesn't feel right to me).

Now to debate if I should preorder the 60th anniversary edition, as I prefer the LOTR series to be broken out into the three books Tolkien always intended.

>67 EclecticIndulgence: They also have the edition without the signature, at this point I'll take either one but I'm not going to overpay for it! ($400-$500) on abebooks.

>68 scholasticus: Legend of Sigurd and Gudrun is a great read, the good thing about the book is it has notes/explanation from Tolkien on why he went a certain route with the story and descriptions about the translation. I haven't read Fall of Arthur yet but if it's anything like Sigurd and Gudrun I'm sure it will be enjoyable as well. I'm looking forward to Beowulf as I've just finished reading Folios edition (Seamus Heaney) about 2 weeks ago and I'm curious to see variation in translation.

>69 JuliusC:

For another Beowulf translation, look up the Heritage Press edition, illustrated by Lynd Ward. It's been reprinted a few times, and is one of the few exceptions to the LEC first, HP second rule. (A LEC got printed in the 60s, I think.)

>71 EclecticIndulgence:

I haven't read the Leonard translation yet, but am planning to do so once my HP edition of Beowulf gets here, as I plan to read Beowulf thrice this year: Heaney, Leonard, and Tolkien. I'll post my thoughts on the three translations once I finish them if anyone's interested.

>73 EclecticIndulgence:

Very nice! I've read the Heaney, Crossley-Holland, and Alexander translations before. (Heaney was not in the FS edition, though.)

For me, I constantly have to read new translations of the great epics (Homer, Vergil, Dante, Beowulf, &c) - I always find something new every time I read an epic for the nth time.

I am super excited to find out that my package has arrived!! In it is the Super Deluxe Edition of The Children of Hurin. Oh and I also received the Epic of Gilgamesh from folio ;).

This book is housed in a leather (could be bonded, not sure) solander/clamshell case. The front has Tolkien's logo/sigil and the spine has the Helm of Hador.


Now if we open it up the interior of the case is lined with what feels like suede. It comes with a silk ribbon marker to help lift it up so to not compromise the quality of the book. On the front of the book has the Helm of Hador embossed in two different colour foil/leafs. The gold and red has a nice contrast to the blue leather. I believe it is goat skin leather that it's bound in. It is really soft very supple, feels like high quality leather was used here. The book is bound by LEGO Spa.






Now the spine of the book and the back has Tolkiens sigil. But what I really love about it is the raised ribs that is very well defined.




It is about the same size as the deluxe slipcase edition.


The pages are gilded which is a nice touch.




Internally the pages of both books are almost the same. The difference is the end papers are marbleized of course it has Christopher Tolkien and Alan Lee's signature. This is limited to 500 copies.




Again Alan Lee's illustration are quite stunning. It has both colour and each chapter includes a black/white pencil illustration. Very nice touch.




Much like Folios Aeneid LE the back has a genealogies tree connecting the characters and also list of each one explaining who they are so you can reference it if you start getting lost. Overall I'm very happy with this acquisition, the workmanship is top notch and one that I will cherish for a long time. Now to get my hands on the same super deluxe version of Sigurd and Gudrun.

I also have the super deluxe Children of Hurin and I agree - its a magnificent work of art. I also have the new Alan Lee illustrated Lord of the Rings - I like it. The slipcase is a little cheap but the book more than makes up for that. But the paper is a little slick for my taste, but that's not a major defect for me. The new edition of the Lord of the Rings Companion is nice as well - its produced on thinner. slicker paper than the first edition and feels very nice in the hand.

>76 Quicksilver66:

Has the Companion been revised, and, if so, is it significant?

The revisions do not appear to be significant - at first blush, at least. I think you could safely get by on the first edition - but the revised edition accommodates the different pagination found in the 60th Anniversary edition.

>78 Quicksilver66:

Thanks, David.

I don't know if this is accessible outside the UK. It's a typically quirky film about Tolkien, including interviews with him, made in Oxford by the BBC in 1968.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/archive/writers/12237.shtml

Hello All,

I am a new member and an avid Tolkien fan. For my own geek activity I am starting on a handwritten leather bound journal style diary of a faithful Hindi translation of 'The Hobbit' complete with drawings and all. Something, as done by Indy Magnoli (please follow the link below to see) but in Hindi.

http://www.indyprops.com/pp-rb.htm

If any body is interested in their own copy then please contact me through my email deepak.agrawal.msoe@gmail.com

>81 deepak.agrawal:
Good grief! What an awesome and demanding task, I wish you all the best with this.
Has a Hindi translation been done by someone else previously?
Can you buy a copy of the Red Book of Westmarch that your link goes to?

I'm enjoying an overdue Tolkien Haul:
Beowulf, and the Death of Arthur. These are fascinating books, which I enjoy as much for Christopher Tolkien's editorial writing as the texts. Beowulf has an intro, commentary, and extracts from JRRT's lectures on the poem, not to mention the translation, and two paraphrases/ reworkings of Beowulf by JRRT.
I've also bought a dust-jacketed ed of Hammond & Scull's Reader's Companion to LOTR (beautifully produced- lovely paper; a sizeable volume), and, in lieu of re-reading Shippey's Road to Middle Earth have bought Author of the Century, in paperback. I'm interested to see how the completion of the History of Middle Earth since first publication of Road adjusts Shippey's readings.
Lastly, picked up a reasonably-priced a first ed with d-j, of Christopher Tolkien's text and translation of the Norse Saga of Heidrek the Wise, for Nelson's Icelandic texts.
Nothing left to buy, for now, alas!

>80 boldface:
For the first time in quite a while am I happy to be a (semi-) loyal servant of the British Empire.

(I work for a UK-based multinational; hence, all our Web traffic appears to originate in Derby - most convenient when one wishes to peruse the BBC archives... :-))

Most interesting. Thank you.

Hi all,

I'm interested in starting to buy the deluxe edition books. I have only the funds to buy one of each book at the moment, so I was wondering if the deluxe editions are worth the investment?

Have read and watched a fair bit on these editions including the posts of JuliusC (thanks) and I know that certain of the books are lacking compared to others in the collection and against some newer indiviual releases, namely build quality (need a better word) and the inclusion of illustrations. Ultimately, they still look to be good solid and durable editions and the only set that can be assembled as a collection.

I realised I missed the boat in purchasing them all from tolkien.co.uk in the last 12-18months for very good prices. With that in mind where might I be able to get them that is both affordable and reliable?

Are there any future plans to release an updated collection and does anyone know if Harper Collins plan to release any more Tales from the Perilous Realm again?

Thanks.

>85 mstrmind5:
Whether or not it's worth the "investment" is subjective. I guess it's how comfortable you are in spending the $$. To me it's worth it , although it is on the pricey side it does look beautiful on the book shelf. There are numerous "deluxe" editions out there from HarperCollins and other publishers so careful in collecting as you might find yourself in a financial hole with Tolkiens works ;).

The only books that are OOP are Tales from the Perilous Realm and The Legend of Sigurd and Gudrun so no need to purchase them through tolkien.co.uk. Save yourself some $$ and buy them through amazon. I've spoken with a rep from harpercollins/tolkien.co.uk through the phone and they said that there are no plans to reprint Tales from the Perilous Realm. Kinda kicking myself since I did have the opportunity to purchase it when it was available but for what ever reason I procrastinated.

I was chiefly considering the HarperCollins deluxe set (multi-coloured) you had mentioned in post 65. I love the look of the set, as you say populating a book-shelf they do look beautiful. Would you say that the books made by Printing Express are still good books at that price bracket compared to the quality of the others in the set? Just wish that LotR and some others had illustrations included, like the newer cloth offering of LotR. I take it this set is very durable and will withstand long-term reading. As I am only going to be buying the one set (at the moment), I'd like the books to last.

Price wouldn't be an issue with Amazon like you say, but do you have any knowledge or experience with speedyhen uk?

Should I consider used ones, or is better to get new?

I don't know if you are UK based and I'm not sure if this one is signed as well, but there is an ebay listing for TftPR if you haven't already seen to complete your collection: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/191338117506

Thanks.

>87 mstrmind5: The LOTR deluxe edition I think is going around $120 which is pricey. To me unless you want to obtain the whole collection the new slipcase edition is the way to go. Bigger book so bigger font size, thicker paper although it is glossy, but the plus side is it has Alan Lee's illustration. It essentially has everything the 50th anniversary edition have but cheaper about $70. Sorry never used speedyhen before. I either buy my books through amazon, ebay, abebooks, or chapters (canadian books store). If you could get a great deal used then why not.

Here is a picture of the 1st Impressions of the current nine HarperCollins Deluxe Editions (2004-2014), alongside the prior generation of HarperCollins Deluxe Editions (1997-2002). There was some comment earlier in the thread about "The Hobbit" and "LoTR" being printed by Printing Express in Hong Kong. The first impression of The Hobbit (4000 copies) and at least the first three impressions of LoTR were printed by LEGO, sPA, as was the first impression of the Silmarillion. I've seen the Printing Express Hobbit (which interestingly doesn't identify itself as a reprint), and I wasn't that impressed with the quality. The paper was less textured and the green was much brighter and less subtle than the LEGO, sPA version. Generally the quality drops off in terms of the slipcases from TFtPR onwards, as the sides of the slipcases become much thinner.

An earlier poster had commented on the TFtPR being signed. This was in fact, only for 500 of the copies sold by www.tolkien.co.uk (out of a print run of 2,000 copies in total). The signed copies are identical other than the signature and the sheet of paper within the shrink wrap. Both signed and unsigned copies carry both ISBNs on the copyright page.

A couple of people have complained that they aren't the Alan Lee illustrated editions (except for CoH and TFtPR). Honestly, I think that is a good thing. I far prefer Tolkien's illustrations of the Hobbit (for example), and if I'm getting a deluxe edition, I'd rather it was broadly as Tolkien envisioned, rather than an embellished version. I don't need pictures -- I'd rather just let my mind's eye do the work. CoH, of course, was always published as an illustrated edition, so the deluxe edition was naturally also illustrated. I think there is a place for the illustrated editions, but I'm not sure that this Deluxe series was the right place.

(As an aside, I don't really consider the 2004-2014 books to be Deluxe, just by virtue of them being bound in paper-covered boards. They are really just "slipcased editions". The 1997-2002 books were at least bound in leather and cloth, and despite having some uniformity issues with the slipcases, were way better quality, albeit at a higher price).

> Now to get my hands on the same super deluxe version of Sigurd and Gudrun.

Just be aware that the Super Deluxe S&G (Clays) is not as nicely done as the SD CoH (LEGO, sPA). It is still a very nice book by normal standards, but oddly bland when compared to CoH. You may want to have a look at a few pictures of it before committing to purchasing a copy (which will probably set you back 180 - 200 GBP on eBay)

90

Nice set. I read the LOTR last year using that edition. My only complaint is that the cover easily soils, easily mopping up sudoriferous and sebaceous deposits from the fingers and hands, leaving noticeable darkened smudged areas.

I suppose one can go the white glove treatment but...

>92 LesMiserables:

Yeah, I'm not convinced they are durable enough for use as reading copies (and that goes for the earlier black quarter bound copies as well as the more recent ones). The cloth on the earlier set is prone to getting dusty marks and the textured paper on the later ones will suffer with finger oils. I'm happy enough that I collected them, but I'm glad that there aren't any more coming out. Nine volumes is (more than) enough, as they are quite expensive for what they are (albeit all of them cost much less than RRP through the usual channels). For reading copies of LoTR, I can't go past the 1981 Unwin Paperbacks version with the Pauline Baynes cover. Lightweight and costs next to nothing to replace if it falls in the bath.

Of the black ones, the one that is proving elusive for me is the third impression of LOTR. I have the first impression (1000 copies), second (980 copies) and fourth (3061 copies), but the third just doesn't seem to show up inexpensively when I am looking (and there are a couple of thousand copies, so it absolutely isn't rare). The impressions are all different (and the first two have cloth slipcases, last two have faux leather), so getting them all isn't entirely nuts...

The 25th anniversary PB in cardboard slipcase here

http://pics.cdn.librarything.com/picsizes/9a/af/9aafe302229306b6370652b6877434b4...

cost 50p from a Charity shop a couple of years ago. Great for dropping in the bath or crammng into a pocket.

Good read too.

>90 Studedoo: How does one differentiate if a copy of LoTR, Hobbit, and Silmarillion is printed by LEGO Spa? Are the ISBN different?

>95 JuliusC:

Unfortunately, the ISBNs haven't changed, so the only way you can be sure what you are getting is to get a photo of the copyright page -- which has the details of the company that printed it. Obviously that is a non-starter when buying from the big online retailers.

If you do have a non-stock photo of the outside of the books, a trained eye can be pretty much certain which is which. The LEGO Silmarillion, for instance has a slight line which runs vertically right down the center of the spine where there appears to be join in the underlying board (you can see the way the light catches it on my picture in post 90). That isn't a defect on my particular copy - they are all like that. The Non-LEGO reprint doesn't have that line and has a flatter spine. With the Hobbit, the Printing Express green is that way brighter and the "HOBBIT" text on the spine seems to run closer to the edges of the spine, which is noticeably flatter. The increased brightness also goes for the Silmarillion and LOTR. Unfortunately I don't own any of the later prints, so I can't do a side-by-side photo to compare and contrast.

I'm not sure if the Printing Express reprints have themselves been reprinted as yet, so it isn't clear whether they will have a correct number-line (and whether that number-line will include the LEGO prints). The Printing Express Hobbit that I examined close up did not have a number line, even though it should have had. The other ones were still in shrinkwrap, so I couldn't look at the copyright page to verify one way or the other.

If you are buying new, LOTR, Silmarillion and The Hobbit will most likely be the Printing Express versions. Buying used on eBay is probably the way to go to get the earlier impressions (which aren't uncommon -- there were 5,250 copies total of LOTR in the first three impressions, and the first impression of The Hobbit ran to 4000 copies). Not sure how big the first print of the Silmarillion was, but I'd hazard a guess at 2,500 copies, based on known print runs of some of the subsequent volumes.

The other thing that is worth mentioning is that the first 4 books were available in a 2007 boxed set (500 copies) which contained 1/1 Hobbit, 1/2 LOTR, 1/1 CoH and 1/1 Silmarillion. I'll dig out my set and post a picture.

There is also a 5 book set (2012 or 2013 -- can't remember which), which also includes TFTPR. Not sure of the exact impressions in that one, but I believe they are all Printing Express versions, other than CoH and TFTPR, which is the first impression (as it hasn't been reprinted as yet). There were only 100 copies of that set, and at least 10 were destroyed in transit.

>96 Studedoo:
Thanks for the info, really informative. Just an update I've finally completed my collection as I've acquired elusive TFTPR even though I somewhat over paid for it but I'm happy. Although now knowing that The Hobbit, Silmarillion, and LoTR were printed by LEGO Spa kinda makes me want to acquire those as well to replace the Printing Express version.

As of the Super Deluxe Legend of Sigurd and Gudrun, yes all of the comments that I've read indicates that the Children of Hurin is by far the better book as it does have the 2 foil stamping, 2 signatures, and illustrations by Alan Lee. However, I think both will look nice together as a set. I just hope I could find a copy that's reasonably priced.
Edit: Also all the vendors I've inquired does not ship to either US or Canada. Is this book only sold in the UK?

>75 JuliusC:

Here are a few iPhone pictures that show some of the differences (different dimensions and styling details) between the Super Deluxe CoH and S&G.

The chief differences are:

Tray Case:
* S&G Uses a lift-up flap attached to a black ribbon to lift the book out. CoH uses a blue ribbon without the flap
* S&G is slightly shorter and less deep.
* JRRT Logo is more deeply stamped on CoH.

Book
* S&G Corners of pages are curved to match the curve of the boards. CoH are square.
* S&G has genuine marbled end-papers (done with oil/water/pugments). CoH has "fake" printed marbling.
* S&G spine hubs are squarer than CoH and are not in exactly the same position as those on CoH
* S&G is a much softer and less textured leather than CoH
* S&G HarperCollins spine logo much lower than same on CoH.
* JRRT Logo on rear board is deeply stamped on CoH.
* S&G has flatter spine, CoH more rounded.

Overall, the CoH is much nicer, IMHO. I think the only thing better about the implementation of the S&G is the use of higher quality marbling. Everything else either feels like a slightly poorer design decision or slightly poorer implementation. LEGO did a really good job with the CoH, I think (arguably the best UK super-deluxe edition to date). Clays did an OK job with S&G. S&G would probably have looked better if it had had multi-coloured foil stamping in the main logo in the front board to make it a little less bland. Both very nice books, but one appreciably nicer than the other.

>98 Studedoo: Great pics! Now I really must have this book. Interesting that although it looks similar in design there is a slight variation to them.

>97 JuliusC:

>Is this book only sold in the UK?

The CoH was initially only sold to UK customers, but S&G was available worldwide from Launch from tolkien.co.uk. If you contact HarperCollins, they may well do you a deal on it. It was originally sold at an introductory price of 250 pounds (100 less than the RRP), and I have heard from others that they have applied a similar discount subsequently when asked. The market for the Super Deluxe S&G is positively tiny relative to the CoH, and they still haven't sold the 500 copies of CoH as yet.

>99 EclecticIndulgence:

That is a great read! I happened across it in a public library on an outing with my sons. As I recall JRRT dealt mainly in W.

Out of curiosity, how often do you good folk read The Hobbit or The Lord of the Rings? (Granted only a small part of JRRTs work)

I read both of these last year and also listened to the BBC productions.

Nothing yet this year, but no doubt the Hobbit will get an airing around the same time as my predictable Advent reads, Kidnapped and a Christmas Carol.

I read The Hobbit to my then four, now five-year-old daughter earlier this year and she became obsessed with it such that I think I'll be reading it quite often for a while. As for LOTR, I've read it three times all together, so maybe once every 7 or 8 years. It is an awfully long book, so it's hard to justify reading it more than that.

>103 LesMiserables:

Out of curiosity, how often do you good folk read The Hobbit or The Lord of the Rings? (Granted only a small part of JRRTs work)

It is a good question. Honestly, for me it isn't that often. I read the second edition of the Hobbit a few weeks back, but prior to that I hadn't read any variants of the Hobbit for a few years.

It has also been a few years since I read LOTR from beginning to end, but I'm just about to give that another outing. I tend to listen to the BBC Radio LOTR more often than I read the books, just because it easy to do other stuff and listen to it at the same time (plus it is very good and true to the books).

104, 105

My reading of The Lord of the Rings, last year, was I think my fourth in total. I'm 46 now and first read The Lord of the Rings when I was around 14, the Hobbit a couple of years earlier.

So it has taken me 32 years and 4 reads, averaging around the same 7 or 8 years, like Jason.

I thoroughly enjoyed the read last year to the point of it feeling like new book.

I first read LotR when I was ten at the recommendation of a very good English teacher. As I am now in my late 60s this was a very long time ago, and I still have that first edition, although it is rather tattered, having been read at least a dozen times.
I am about to start yet another reading, but this time of a new edition - the super deluxe version pictured by Studedoo above.
I never get tired of it, and this should be an even more enjoyable experience reading such a fine edition.

I first read LotR at about the time the Second Edition came out, that is in about 1966. I was thirteen. I didn't read The Hobbit until after I had read its sequel - not the ideal order! I've only re-read them a couple of times since, so I reckon another perusal of both is long overdue. With the BBC Radio versions and Peter Jackson's films more fresh in the memory, it will be very interesting to return to the source.

I first read LotR over a long summer near Narbonne , in a tent shared with my sister and a million mosquitos , by torchlight, about 30-40 pages a night over several weeks. I was aged 11 and had read the Hobbit the previous year. It was camping sauvage , no toilets apart from a chemical one in my parents' caravan and the scree on the deserted hillsides next to us. The only buildings were derelict WW II pill-boxes. The days were broiling and spent on the local beach at La Palme , with bread, water, cheese and ham. I am sure the extreme and evocative environment ensured that this would become my favourite book and I have re-read it several times, often coming close to recapturing the magic of the first time. Until last year I hadn't read it for 15 yrs, scared to be disappointed and to spoil memories; I shouldn't have been so concerned.

Is there a consensus on the best three-volume non-deluxe version of LotR available now, with the most up-to-date corrections, etc?

>110 boatofcar:

My current favourite 3-vol hardback version of the latest text is:

http://www.tolkien.co.uk/product/9780007203543/The+Fellowship+of+the+Ring+

http://www.tolkien.co.uk/product/9780007203550/The+Two+Towers+

http://www.tolkien.co.uk/product/9780007203567/The+Return+of+the+King+

It's printed on decent paper and it follows the original editions in layout.

Thanks! How are the "classic" editions at 20GBP different than the "deluxe" editions at 16.99?

This one looks cool as well:
http://www.tolkien.co.uk/product/9780007581146/The+Lord+of+the+Rings+Boxed+Set+



>43 ironjaw: has an opinion on that one.

Yes it does, though I would like to know whether the commentary can be bought in a matching HarperCollins Deluxe edition?

>112 boatofcar:

I haven't examined the £16.99 "deluxe" editions so I can't offer any firm advice on the comparison. If the website picture is anything to go by the "deluxe" edition doesn't have dustjackets but the books look sturdy enough. I see that JerryMmm in #113 has a picture of the boxed set "classic" edition which comes with the excellent Lord of the Rings : A Reader's Companion by Wayne G. Hammond and Christina Scull (2005). Hammond and Scull are responsible for many of the recently corrected Tolkien texts, including LotR. I strongly recommend this box set, but beware! There are frequent references in the Companion to other great Tolkien reference works, e.g., Tom Shippey's books and, not least, Christopher Tolkien's The History of Middle Earth. If you're not careful, you'll soon be on the slippery slope of rampant TAD (a particularly pernicious sub-strain of FAD)!

I'd prefer not to have dust jackets, if possible. I'm just wondering how different the text itself is in the two books, since the deluxe editions say "Detailed Edition: Collector’s edition" while the books mentioned in post 111 say "Detailed Edition: 50th Anniversary edition."

It would be nice if the site offered more information as to what that means exactly.

>116 boatofcar:

I agree, the HarperCollins site should give more bibliographic information, particularly when they produce such a plethora of editions.

The new incarnation of the 2005 box set, as pictured in #113 above, claims to have "some additional text corrections" and the Companion has been "fully updated since its first publication in 2005". The so-called 'Collectors' Edition' was published in 2013, so should, in theory, have at least the 2005 corrected text. But without comparing the two side-by-side, it's impossible to say for sure. Perhaps someone else here has both and can enlighten us.

That said, the latest box set (#113 above) undoubtedly has the most "corrected"* text so far. And you can always remove the dust jackets if you don't want them.

* There's actually a lot of hype about these corrections. It actually largely depends on how important the correct accents on Tolkien's invented names and vocabulary are to your enjoyment of the story.

Thanks for the explanation! One last question- If you remove the dust jackets, are the same designs on the book covers themselves, or are they blank?

>117 boldface: do you have a link ready from somewhere that discusses these corrections?

>118 boatofcar:

The boards are plain black with gilt titles to the spines.

>119 JerryMmm:

The textual history of LotR is long and complex. When the 'Second Edition' was published in 1966 at least one major narrative error by Tolkien, concerning the number and disposition of the Palantiri, was corrected. The second impression of the 2nd edition of The Two Towers contained a further correction of a similar nature. Since then, it's mainly been a matter of printing errors. Each new edition (and we're talking both British and US editions, hardback and paperback, 3-volume and 1-volume, which didn't come out necessarily in tandem) corrected old errors but inevitably introduced new ones. In about 1994, the text was computerized and, although now a single base text could be used for all editions, new ones were introduced during the encoding process. Since then the text has been gradually cleaned up with more success, culminating in the 2004 '50th Anniversary Edition'. When this was reprinted in 2005 and boxed up with the Reader's Companion some further corrections were made.

There are various articles in print about these latest corrections and the general textual history of LotR. See, for example:

1. Changes to the Editions of 2004-5 in Wayne G. Hammond and Christina Scull, The Lord of the Rings : A Reader's Companion (2005), pp. 783-812.
This lists all the corrections, "excepting only a few corrections of spacing, indentation, and misaligned marks of punctuation", made to the 2004 '50th Anniversary Edition' and the 2005 reprint.

2. A Note on the Text by Douglas A. Anderson (May 2004) in The Fellowship of the Ring, 50th Anniversary Edition (2004 and 2005 reprint).

3. The sections, Publication and Later Editions, within the article, 'The Lord of the Rings', in Christina Scull & Wayne G. Hammond, The J. R. R. Tolkien Companion and Guide : A Reader's Guide (2006), pp. 540-45 and pp. 546-7, respectively.

As for online sources, the first port of call should be:

http://www.hammondandscull.com/addenda.html

This lists the very latest corrections to LotR and other Tolkien-related publications by Hammond and Scull.

John Rateliff, author of The History of The Hobbit, has an interesting website at
http://www.sacnothscriptorium.com/

and The Tolkien Gateway, though tending to the nerdy end of the spectrum, has some useful stuff:
http://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Main_Page

There will be other useful sources, I'm sure, but that's a start!

This box set is sold out everywhere I look. Anybody know if the books are any good?



The Hobbit, The Two Towers and The Return of the King are available from Tolkien.co.uk and other places for cheap, but The Fellowship of the Ring is sold out everywhere as well. Would it be worth it to get the others and wait until I can pick up the FotR from somewhere?

I like the design.

>121 JerryMmm:

I have this set. The quality is fairly disappointing (flimsy slipcase, rubbish paper quality, glued bindings, no colour illustrations in The Hobbit), although the overall design is quite nice. There are two impressions of this set so far, both identical.

It is somewhat typical of the overpriced poor-quality output from HarperCollins. I'd only recommend it if you can get it cheaply on eBay.

>113 JerryMmm:

That image is of the original 1st impression version of the set. The current (2014) version has a few differences. The Readers Companion has a white cover and has been updated. The gilt on the dust jackets has been replaced by a bronze coloured ink. If you compare the 1st impression books against the 2014 editions, the printing of the DJs looks very pixelated. It is better than the Hobbit/LOTR collectors edition set, but is not as good as the original 2004 set.

>118 boatofcar:

Thanks for the explanation! One last question- If you remove the dust jackets, are the same designs on the book covers themselves, or are they blank?

Other than the text on the spines, they are blank.

122, thanks for the review! You've saved me quite a bit of money.

Not sure if it has been reprinted or if these are copies of the first print, but for anyone who was having trouble completing the deluxe collection because of unavailability of TFtPR, there are 5 copies available here

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/NEW-Tales-from-the-Perilous-Realm-by-J-R-R-Tolkien-Ha...

Edit:Sold out, 4 copies (at 50 pounds) to one buyer. There was another batch of 3 copies (for approx 30 pounds each) a couple of hours earlier and they also sold out to a single buyer

>127 EclecticIndulgence:

That's a shame. The listing was a bit odd, in that after 5 were sold, it updated to show 5 still available. I wonder if they only had 5 and then sold extra copies by accident.

Keep an eye on eBay, though. A signed copy sold on eBay Australia for $50 a couple of weeks ago with only two bidders, so they definitely can be acquired for a sensible price with a bit of patience (plus the inflated market price will likely fall anyway).

Just in case anyone missed it:

http://www.eastonpress.com/books/prod/E42/BEOWULF_3006.aspx

I posted this to the Folio FB page with a note that it would be lovely to see this published: http://makezine.com/2011/08/25/art-student-hand-illuminates-binds-a-copy-of-tolk...

>129 Studedoo:
Stu,
do you have this set?

http://www.eastonpress.com/Books/prod/A09/TOLKIEN-CLASSICS_0193.aspx

What kind of paper do they use? Is it thick?
I really like the spines and covers, don't like the few illustrations they have on that webpage (although, to be fair, I have never seen a single Tolkien illustration I liked - I guess an artist's imagination must match mine for me to like it; interestingly, this is the case for me with Tolkien only). But I can't find any more information on this edition.
Any help would be appreciated! They're running a 20% off sale this weekend, so I'm contemplating.

I have yet to buy an easton press book simply because of the terrible easton press' marketing - horrendous website with not nearly enough information to make a decision, and silly gimmicky sales strategies...

>129 Studedoo:

The paper thickness would be pretty standard for decent hardcover editions of these books. Thicker than, say, the HarperCollins 50th anniversary editions, but on a par with the 70s/80s/90s UK Hardcovers. Paper Quality seems good and doesn't appear to suffer from any age toning. The illustrations are limited to the frontispieces of the three LOTR volumes, and are the Michael Hague images. I have a soft spot for them, as I enjoyed his illustrated A&U Hobbit back in the 80s, but in truth, they aren't great.

The Silmarillion has no illustrations and the Hobbit thankfully has Tolkien's illustrations, albeit the B/W illustrations have been rendered against a green background (for no obvious reason other than they could). The design of The Hobbit feels a bit American to me - It sort of feels 1980s "Readers Digest", in terms of the typesetting. There is a green bar below the header on each page, which just looks off. Like I say, the design feels quite American, so it may not be as jarring to anyone other than people like myself who are primarily used to UK books. The other 4 books do not suffer from this strangeness of design.

Note that they have maps that are just laid in, so you need to make sure that those are still present if you buy second hand.

Overall, they are a nice enough set, but I would only buy on discount. I got mine second-hand in as-new condition for a couple of hundred dollars (and at the time, EP would not ship this set outside of the US). I wouldn't consider paying more than that for them. They have been printed in huge volumes, so they are not remotely rare and aren't worth paying a premium for.

Also, don't fall for the eBay sellers who claim "1st Print" for any of these books. They have no way of knowing, especially as they are often still in shrink, and the sellers know perfectly-well that they are being dishonest, IMHO. EP does not include any printing history in these books. The earlier print(s?) of The Hobbit are of a different (slightly larger) size than the later ones, so a genuine set of first prints would 5 books of non-matching size.

If you want any photos, let me know.

>132 Studedoo:
Thanks Stu, that's extremely helpful!
If you have some free time and it won't take more than a minute, I would be really grateful if you snap a photo of a Hobbit page with a green bar, and a page from Silmarillion or any of the LoTR books so I could see the typesetting.

Interesting that you mentioned dishonest ebay sellers. I've already noticed that some ebay sellers of EP books tend to label their listing as First Editions, First Prints etc. while they either can't say for sure as you mentioned or they are quite obviously not such. Also not sure what they're trying to achieve, as I don't think there are many ebay buyers of EP books who would believe such claims and be ready to shell out more money.

>133 EclecticIndulgence:

Technically the EP LOTR books are, of course, based on the Second Edition text (1965 onward, and stated on the EP copyright page) and the Hobbits are Fourth editions (1978 onward, but stated as (c)1966 on EP copyright page, as per HM editions). I've never seen any statement of impression number or a number-line on any of the EP Tolkien Books (and from what I read sometime back, even EP have no idea how many times they have reprinted the 5-book Tolkien Collection set).

The Atlas of Middle-Earth (by K.W. Fonstad) has definitely been reprinted at least once, but I haven't knowingly seen a reprint to verify there is no reprinting statement. I believe that Fall of Arthur has also had a fairly rapid second printing, but again, I haven't seen the reprint. UT, BoLT 1 / BoLT 2 have not been reprinted, and some time back, EP claimed to have no specific plans to reprint those. The Complete Guide to Middle-Earth (Foster) has not been reprinted, and EP no longer have the rights. Father Christmas Letters has not been reprinted, but EP have said that they might reprint at some stage.

>134 elladan0891:

As requested, some pics of The Hobbit in its odd green glory. The Silmarillion and LOTR just look like any other HM edition of either, so I haven't taken photos.

>137 EclecticIndulgence:

Yeah, other than the Hobbit which is a bit odd looking inside, all the others are pretty much just standard Houghton Mifflin editions with nicer paper and the usual Easton Press binding details. A few of them have the single extra frontispiece image, which is unique to EP, but that is it for "special features". I've never been 100% sure about how I feel in terms of the gilt cover art, but I think it has grown on me over the years!

>136 Studedoo:
Thank you!
Really appreciate it.

Interesting that you mentioned standard Houghton Mifflin editions - I don't own them, so not sure how they look, but I do own their deluxe slipcased Hobbit, and guess what - turns out EP Hobbit is just like that inside! Well, I can't confirm it with a 100% certainty - my library is split between 3 countries at the moment, but the map is exactly like that, illustrations are Tolkien's, and the green bar is probably there too - that's one detail I can't recall.
While the green bars might look odd by themselves, I think they're ok as part of the overall green theme.
HM Deluxe Hobbit is also green throughout - I pulled a pic off the internet:



I actually like my copy - both the overall design and the paper quality.

I do like EP gilded covers. I think I will go for the set in the near future. Will be my first EP books.

Thanks again for the help!

Though apparently the only illustrations are the frontspieces, I believe that these are the only LOTR volumes illustrated by Michael Hague (you can find his Hobbit in other versions, though), which makes them a bit more compelling to me.

>140 aaronpepperdine:

As far as I am aware, you are correct. I know of no other versions of the LOTR that contain the three Michael Hague illustrations used by EP.

Hobbit 3 movie is abysmal and will scandalise you who appreciate the Tolkien canon.

I had to go watch the third instalment just to confirm how truly atrocious the three movies are.

Save yourself the pain.

>142 LesMiserables:

I learned my lesson after the first two, which were unwatchable. I managed to get through the first one in two sittings on a long haul flight, but it was very hard going. The second one I watched at home, and it just made me angry, then bored, then more angry.

The third one isn't getting anywhere near my optic nerves :)

>142 LesMiserables:, >143 Studedoo:

I have not seen a single minute of any of the three Hobbit films, nor do I ever plan on doing so. LOTR is hard enough for me to watch, though I'll admit that the extended edition version does add more stuff from the books. Even then, quite a few of Jackson's liberties, whether they be reinterpretations of characters (coughFaramirforonecough) or bizarre chronological arrangements so insipid movie audiences who can't be bothered to, you know, actually read the books can have tense climaxes and denouements every five minutes drive me crazy. Because, apparently, it's boring having to follow the Company when their Quest enters its boring/quiet/oddly relaxed bits!

And yet people are stunned when I tell them that LOTR is barely over 1000p long (excepting the wonderful appendices which are what, 130p or so?). But then again, these are the same people who can't be arsed to read Martin's Song of Ice and Fire series or Rothfuss' wonderful Kingkiller Chronicles (come on, finish it already, Rothfuss!) because the books are just TOO LONG.

Though my brother depressed me two days ago when he said that it was 'horrible' (yes, horrible!) that I should subject myself to reading a 1000p. trilogy when I could just watch the movies in half a day.

I pointed out that I could very reasonably read the entire trilogy before he finished watching the ~12h that comprise the extended edition.

I shudder to wonder what gross liberties Jackson took to turn a roughly 300p book into nearly 8 hours' worth of viewing. (I obtained this figure by adding up the film runtimes from IMDB.com.)

144

It was tragic farce.

A Woodland Elf Princess in a love affair with Kili.

Billy Connolly as Dain on a battle hog, swearing and fighting seemingly with divine protection against a horde of Orcs, without a scratch.

Stone eating giant worms, tunneling for Orc armies to attack Erebor at close range yert undetected till the last.

The Pale Orc (yawn and groan) remains as the linchpin of the whole 'trilogy'.

However(!) Unlike the first instalment of the Hobbit, Jackson has no Transformer type stone monsters to annoy Tolmkien fans, but much else that did not come from JRR's brilliant mind.

I could go on, but the whole thing was just rubbish.

While the Hobbit films are disastrous, I think the LOTR movies are masterpieces of film. Wonderfully done all the way through. The changes made are generally necessary for the transition to a different genre. But I'm not one who thinks faithfulness to source material is super important.

The Worms certainly are a bizarre addition , almost a Dune hommage (mole...?). I think if you approach the 3 films as something almost ,but not quite, entirely unlike tea they are fine as fun movies; as a reproduction of JRRT , they are awful

I thought the LOTR movies were the best adaptions of any I had any attachment to - some things were cut but all-in-all, stupendous.

When I first heard The Hobbit was also to be a trilogy my first thought was 'How?'. The answer, of course, is to make as much stuff up as necessary to fill the time. Sigh.

I wish Jackson would have filmed the one movie necessary, and then came back with endless made-up installments to line the studio's pockets. One could probably make one good movie out of the three to tell the tale.

>148 kcshankd:
Completely agree. I could have seen two movies, with one using LOTR appendices material to transition from The Hobbit to LOTR.

We just rewatched the LOTR movies and, as I said to my wife, if the Peter Jackson who made The Hobbit films had made the LOTR films, not only would Tom Bombadil have been included, but there would have been an orc battle at his house.

>149 Jason461:

Very good points! Especially the one about the inevitable 45-minute orc battle at Bombadil's house. Although, why stop there? Jackson could go for literary accuracy and do a hour-long Battle of the Bywater at the end of the third LOTR film. Least Saruman and Wormtongue would leave the stage the way Tolkien meant for them to.

Truth be told, I chatted with my kids afterwards, doing the inevitable postmortem, and we all agreed that had Radagast and his 'team' of sleigh pulling rabbits, joined the final battle, wearing black-belted ninja robes, complete with Karate-Kid headbands, we would not have been shocked.

Regarding the LOTR movies, I have said previously, I enjoyed on balance the production but regretted the Arwen nonsense, the killing-off of Saruman and the subsequent loss of the Scourging of the Shire, plus the omission of the Old Forest.

LOTR Trilogy - 8/10

Hobbit Trilogy - 0/10

>151 LesMiserables:


LOTR Trilogy - 8/10

Hobbit Trilogy - 0/10


I think you were a bit generous on the scoring for "The Hobbit". The two Hobbit movies that I saw sucked the life out of me, and can only be scored negatively:

LOTR Trilogy : 7/10

Hobbit Trilogy : -5/10

I'm preaching to the converted here, nonetheless, a resolution for this year should be for all Tolkien fans, to read two small works that for me are in total the sum of JRRT's beliefs: On Fairy Stories and Leaf by Niggle.

>153 LesMiserables:, >154 EclecticIndulgence:

For me, my current Tolkien reading is The Monsters and the Critics and Other Essays. I'm focusing on Tolkien's academic work this year.

>156 EclecticIndulgence:

I ended up just getting the paperback edition. It suits my purposes quite well. I admit that for a moment I thought you were talking about the HarperCollins edition of Tolkien's Beowulf with the blue cover.

>156 EclecticIndulgence: I've been trying to get my hands on a copy of that in the blue hardcover... but so expensive.

The 1983 blue GA&U Hardcover does come up from time to time on eBay UK. You just have to get a bit lucky that no one else is paying attention on that particular auction. I got a near fine unread copy for 32 pounds mid last year, and a VG (or possibly better) copy went for 20 shortly afterwards. I've seen it go for over 100 pounds in the same period, but that is a bit silly for a book with 5000 copies! I do like the A&U Tolkien books from that era as they all had the coloured top-stains, which were abandoned shortly after.

The key with eBay is finding the auctions with poor titles. My copy didn't mention "Tolkien" (if I remember correctly) in the title and was listed as "Monster and the critics", so I think a few potential bidders overlooked it. Also, target auctions that won't ship outside the UK, if you can (I just ship to my in-laws and my wife brings a suitcase of books back once a year :)).

EP Tolkien Beowulf - I think someone asked about it way up the Thread.

https://www.librarything.com/topic/186199

About to finish LOTR and man this book is tooo long. Very exhausting read. Will not be reading this for another 10 years...this and I'm probably in the minority, is where I actually enjoy watching the movie than reading the book. Hobbits however I thought was an abomination.

Question: Why is it that the HarperCollins printing commands a higher price the those of HM even though at times the volumes looks exactly identical?

>160 JuliusC:

"Question: Why is it that the HarperCollins printing commands a higher price the those of HM even though at times the volumes looks exactly identical?"

For no other reason than because they can get away with it. Most American editions aren't identical, but several have been (other than for the logo on the spine and the copyright page) over the years. The deluxe S&G and CoH, Alan Lee 3 volume hardbacks, etc, all came out of the same printers, but cost 50-100% more in the UK. In the case of S&G, the books were printed in the UK and then shipped to the US where they were sold for half the price of the UK version!

Historically, the US has always been much cheaper than any other first world countries for pretty much everything, so the market will simply will not bear such a high price as the UK. I'd imagine HarperCollins would spout some guff about economies of scale, but it I suspect it is just good ol' price discrimination.

It is no different than trying to buy an Apple product in Australia or NZ. Same product, wildly different price -- because they can.

>161 Studedoo:

I've bought quite a few US editions (not Tolkien, but the same point obviously applies), which, even with high postage costs, have still worked out cheaper than buying the UK equivalent from over here. Book prices in the UK are scandalous except for bodice-ripping bestsellers and popular tv tie-ins.

In case anyone is interested, the Deluxe Tales From the Perilous Realm has been reprinted. It is available from Tolkien.co.uk or (more cheaply) from various eBay sellers:

http://www.tolkien.co.uk/product/9780007286188/Tales+from+the+Perilous+Realm+

>163 Studedoo:

And the price has just risen by 25%!

>164 boldface:

Yeah, still a lot less than the daft money the 1st print has been trading for on eBay of late! Apparently 420 copies have been reprinted this time. Price seems to have increased in line with the pricing for the final one on the series (Beowulf), which was also 75 pounds. To be fair to HC, I suppose, they kept the RRP at 60 pounds on these books (the series as a whole - excluding LOTR) for 10 years, so the price increase is probably somewhere in line with inflation over the period. And of course, no one pays RRP these days.

>166 EclecticIndulgence:

Glad you got it.

Only 500 copies of the first printing were signed, and these were sold exclusively via the tolkien.co.uk website. The remaining 1,500 copies were unsigned. Other than the signature to the title page, the only actual difference is the slip of paper that is included with the shrink-wrap (which mentions it is signed and has the ISBN for the signed version).

When you get your copy (if you haven't already), it would be great if you could post with (a) whether there is any statement of it being a second printing (or a number-line), and (b) who is listed as the printer. I'm wondering if they used Clays again or if - like the other reprints - it got farmed off to Printing Express in Hong Kong, and (c) Does the copyright page still bear the ISBNs for both the signed and unsigned versions?

I'd be interested in the printing scoop on the reprint of Deluxe Perilous Realm above as well (Studedoo convinced me to pick up the Harper Collins slipcased Deluxe editions of Tolkien's books, over other editions, and I'm having a heck of a time finding Western printers for less than like, oh $900 or so).

Regarding The J.R.R. Tolkien Companion and Guide, does anyone know how many editions and printings there are? I am going to pick up a copy and am wondering if all are first/first, at least aside from the quarter bound leather editions which opened these Tolkien threads.

(Edit: I confused myself and everyone else probably. Sorry. I am shopping for both the History of Middle Earth edited by C.T., and the Companion/Guide by Scull and Hammond, so any scoop on either is appreciated now that I think of it. But I did jumble them above.)

By the way, I only relatively recently learned how to read a printing number line--and it has ruined my life.

I have not read the Hobbit since the beginning of 2013 and the Lord of the Rings since late 2013.

Time for another read not only for the sheer enjoyment that Tolkien provides, but to counteract those awful abominations recently produced by Peter Jackson.

>168 SgtStryker0331:

Not sure if the Companion & Guide got reprinted. There was definitely a pretty large initial print run, though. I think the UK copies might have run out at some point as the (essentially identical) US version seemed to be the one bookstores like book depository were carrying for a while. There have never been any deluxe editions of these, and I don't think they have been revised as yet (unlike the LOTR Reader's companion, which was definitely revised last year). Hammond and Scull have online addenda/corrigenda to their books here: http://www.hammondandscull.com/addenda.html

The History of Middle-Earth 3 volumes (non-deluxe) have been reprinted numerous times. There is a boxed set of 1st printings which is only marginally distinguishable from a similar boxed set that initially contained the 6-5-5 printings (and possibly later ones subsequently). The 6-5-5s are definitely printed by Clays. Can't speak for any later ones that may or may not exist.

>171 EclecticIndulgence:

Yes it is OOP. I'd guess it will be reprinted fairly soon as it has been OOP for quite a while now. Thus far, HarperCollins have reprinted each volume that has gone OOP (some multiple times), and S&G is the only one currently unavailable. Just keep an eye on Book Depository and/or put a watch on eBay. They will milk every last penny out of this series and whilst there are buyers, they will undoubtedly reprint (and have recently indicated this is the case).

Did we ever learn where the reprint of Deluxe Perilous Realm is printed? We talked about it a few posts above. Probably China, but just checking.

>173 SgtStryker0331:

Not as yet. Hopefully someone will chime up when they get a copy.

Chp.7: In the House of Tom Bombadil.
It's just great to be doing a reading again :-)

http://tolkiengateway.net/w/images/2/2d/Anna_Lee_-_Goldberry.jpg

Brand new member here. Thanks to all of the excellent information. I started in October buying the Harper Collins deluxe versions after seeing some of the images posted here on Google. Now that I am one book away from a set (Legend of Sigurd and Gudrun) I see that I likely have bunch of lower quality later impressions sitting on my bookshelf ;) Serves me right for spending before doing my research. Then again prices for earlier editions seem insanely high if bought from dealers and sourcing 1st/1st seems very difficult even on eBay where most copies are still sealed or brand new from companies. The hunt continues. I keep waiting for HC to run a sale on the COH Super Deluxe...

Chris

>176 cstojano:

If you are after the SuperDeluxe CoH or S&G, contact HarperCollins via the tolkien.co.uk website. They have been known to drop the price to GBP 250, even outside of the sale periods, if asked. These books have been VERY slow sellers for them. Nicely made, but overpriced.

S&G was initially 250 for the first couple of months of sale, and both books have been sold at the reduced price at one time or another. Definitely don't pay more than 250 per book - no need to do that at all, even if you have to wait.

Thank you, even more confusing is that dealers are offering these same books for twice the MSRP. Some are low numbers I understand but as far as I know the books are identical print runs. I may just email them and ask about the COH. 250 pounds is still a lot in USD for one book.

>178 cstojano:

Dealers have always offered these at daft prices, even though they are still available from the publisher. They are just looking for suckers. There is only one print each of the Super Deluxe CoH and S&G, numbered 1 - 500 (although a couple of un-numbered ones have been seen in the wild). I wouldn't be surprised if CoH sells out at some point, but I can't see S&G selling out, ever.

I wouldn't get too worried about the whole low number thing. I personally don't think it means much. I have #3 of CoH and #19 of S&G. The CoH might be worth a bit more to someone, but I doubt it would be worth much more.

They do sometimes sell on eBay for sub-200 if you are happy going used.

I just opened my Perilous Realm deluxe freshly delivered from thebookdepository.com. I wish I knew how to post images here but there is a I under the HarperCollins 2008 publication date which I think means first impression. The ISBN is 9780007286188. Set in Stempel Garamond, Printed and bound in China. It does not given a printer's name.

Edit: I am trying to quote posts as I see other do but the Reply button doesn't seem to do that??

>180 cstojano:

Thanks for that info. The first impression was printed by Clays in the UK. I suspected that the second impression would be Chinese, as that seems to be HarperCollins' modus at the moment, sadly. They charge western-world prices for product printed cheaply in the east. They are also being cheeky by leaving off the correct number line (with the lowest number being "2" or higher), which would ordinarily indicate a reprint.

The easiest way to upload pictures is to use tinypic.com. Load the picture up there and then click on the button that gives you a URL for the image. You then cut and paste that into your post.

If you could load up a picture of that page, including the "I" numberline, that would be much appreciated.

Let's try this: To confirm this is Tales from Perilous Realm Harper Collins Deluxe, purchased February 2015 from Book Depository in the UK (US Buyer).

If you compare to the first impression, you can see the original shows it was printed by Clays and also gives the ISBN of the signed edition (both my copies are the Alan Lee signed edition, but the book is identical to the unsigned version). If HarperCollins were remotely competent, the reprint would have a "2" instead, but they got this wrong on The Hobbit as well (and very likely the other reprints). What can one expect from a company owned by Rupert Murdoch.......

The top ISBN is the same as the single version ISBN that I posted. The bottom ISBN on the first version posted by Studedoo is for the signature edition (anyone selling that one?).

I am perplexed that what I thought were industry conventions are not being followed. Makes it very tough to track down the early editions as most on eBay are being sold sealed and even a third party seller will be hesitant to open a sealed set. To be honest I wish these weren't sealed at all.

Studedoo is it possible to post a list of each deluxe book with the first impression information in one place in this thread?

>185 cstojano:

The top ISBN is the same as the single version ISBN that I posted. The bottom ISBN on the first version posted by Studedoo is for the signature edition (anyone selling that one?).

That's correct. When first published, 500 of the 2000 copies were signed. However, the books were absolutely identical (other than the paper slip in the shrink-wrap and Alan Lee's signature to the title page), so the copyright page had to bear both ISBNs to save HarperCollins having two variants of the book. We were all quite miffed back in 2008 as HC billed it and pre-sold it at RRP as an exclusive special edition, but it turned to out to be identical the normal one.

I am perplexed that what I thought were industry conventions are not being followed.

It is very frustrating as buyers and sellers will mistakenly think they are buying first prints, when - in fact - they are not. How many buyers will know that in some cases a "1" doesn't really mean "1"? In the case of "The Hobbit", complete lack of a number-line does not mean it is a first impression (unless printed by LEGO, in which case it is). HarperCollins make mistakes like this all the time. They just reprinted Smith of Wootton Major in "pocket format", and it claims to be the 2005 first impression. I don't think they care at all about the accuracy of the info on the copyright page.

Studedoo is it possible to post a list of each deluxe book with the first impression information in one place in this thread?

Yep, can do.

>185 cstojano:

As requested...

It is worth noting that HarperCollins have claimed "Available for a Limited Time Only" on these books, since they started in 2004. That limited time is now 11 years for The Hobbit and LOTR....

Thanks so much for this, a great help. So it looks like I just need to improve my Hobbit, LOTR, Silmarillion and Tales from the Perilous Realm.

I wonder what impressions are in the 5 book set released in 2012. More importantly have any of the 100 sets ever been opened. I wonder if HC will roll out another one of these boxed sets in the future, seems a certainty.

Has anyone ordered the custom slip cases from the Tolkien bookshelf for this set?

Thanks

I bought a couple 2012 sets when there was a misprice on Amazon.co.uk shortly after it was released. Hobbit is one of the unidentified Chinese reprints. LOTR is a 7th printing, Silmarillion a 2nd. Hurin and Tales are obviously firsts.

I'm not sure that it's a certainty there will be more boxed sets given the small run of the 2012, but I really have no idea how they make those decisions.

>Studedoo

Thanks for the nice spreadsheet. How did you obtain the print run numbers?

>189 kronnevik:

I bought a couple 2012 sets when there was a misprice on Amazon.co.uk shortly after it was released. Hobbit is one of the unidentified Chinese reprints. LOTR is a 7th printing, Silmarillion a 2nd. Hurin and Tales are obviously firsts.

You have quite rare set(s) there. 10 of them were damaged/destroyed on the way to Tolkien Library, so there are a maximum of 90 surviving out there (probably less as these large sets tend to get postal damage as often as not). I thought about buying a set when they were sub-150 on tolkien.co.uk (they had a sale), but decided against. I already have two sets of the original boxed set (65 pounds each -- so pretty cheap) and I couldn't face having more of the damn things in the house :)

Can you confirm that the 2nd of the Silmarillion is Printing Express and whether it has a number-line (and what that states)? Also, who is the printer for the 7th LOTR?

How did you obtain the print run numbers?

They were originally discussed on the tolkienguide.com forum. Not sure where the original posts are (but they will show up with a bit of digging), but I noted them down at the time. The original source was David Brawn at HarperCollins. I know the question was asked re the print-runs for UT and Beowulf, but I don't think there was any answer from HC.

>188 cstojano:

Thanks so much for this, a great help. So it looks like I just need to improve my Hobbit, LOTR, Silmarillion and Tales from the Perilous Realm.

I wouldn't necessarily be replacing the books you have. The early prints are obviously a bit better than the later ones (and the heights of the slipcases seem to be a bit more consistent), but I'd question whether there is enough of a difference to justify you buying a bunch of them again, unless you happen across them cheaply. 99% of people aren't going to know or care about the differences. Arguably, they aren't ever going to be valuable, so I'd probably recommend spending the same money on one of the Christopher Tolkien signed editions. They may never go up in value, either, but at least they are significantly different from something you already have!

Has anyone ordered the custom slip cases from the Tolkien bookshelf for this set?

David Miller (Tolkien Book Shelf) seems to produce reasonable quality slipcases. I honestly don't see the point of slipcasing books that are already slipcased, though. I'd personally be saving my money. The outer slipcase for my opened 2007 set is still in its cardboard shipping box. I doubt I'll ever put it on display.

These prices are insanely cheap given the 5 book set is being offered at 1000 and 1500 US and the 4 book set is being offered just under 1000 US. I have yet to see either appear on eBay but haven't been on the trail that long. As a newcomer these prices hurt ;)

I suppose you are right about the value here, likely not worth the effort to buy the first runs. I was a bit surprised when I finally opened mine how regular it felt, like mentioned above not much deluxe about it.

2nd Silmarillion and 7th LOTR are both Printing Express. LOTR has the number line 7 9 8 but Silmarillion just has 2. I have only one of the sets. I traded two to David Miller for a pristine 1987 green leather deluxe Hobbit (unsigned, but I think Christopher's signature on The Hobbit is silly anyway) which I think was a decent deal given the price I paid. I must say I vastly prefer the earlier LEGO (and Clays) printings. I have a 2007 set, signed Tales, and the rest on display and "The Nine" look lovely all lined up. The 2012 set with the 3 inferior Chinese reprints, rare though it may be, sits hidden away behind the rest for completeness but not display.

I wonder why HC abandoned LEGO for Clays for books 5-7 in the series. Though much better than Printing Express, these volumes lack the quality of the LEGO volumes. And I don't know who's in charge of picking the colors for each volume, but they dropped the ball in my opinion after the first 4 or 5. The series began with such a lovely, rich color palette, but then brown - grey - dark brown - what gives? How about a deep burnt orange or crimson. I don't mind the UT color, but two browns and a grey seem out of place. A similar ball-dropping occurred more recently with the pocket series. The boards on the first four went green (Hobbit), red (Roverandom), tan (Farmer Giles), blue (Tom Bom), and then the latest volume (Smith of WM) went back to the exact same dreary tan of Farmer Giles. While I keep the dust jackets on (which are all lovely), I still think there should be some aesthetic consistency in the colors of the boards. HC could learn some lessons from FS in this department (and others!).

>192 kronnevik:

Thanks for that confirmation on the printer for the Sil. 2nd and LOTR 7th. I imagine the reason HC abandoned LEGO for a while would just be financial. I expect they take a spec and hand it out to a few printers and the one that comes back with the best quote gets the job. It would explain why the reprints are predominantly Chinese - they are probably able to come back with a much better price for smaller print-runs than their EU competitors. Sadly the quality is just not where it really needs to be for a product being sold as "premium".

I agree with you on those pocket editions. "Smith" had very drab looking boards. I'm really not a fan of the pocket editions -- they just seem like the cheapest possible way to produce the product. If you look at the previous format for Father Christmas Letters and Mr. Bliss it was SO much better, and I would have been much happier if they had continued to add to those. With HarperCollins' Tolkien offerings it has always been a case of provide the minimum and charge the maximum. Sometimes they just push that philosophy a bit far, IMHO.

I'm sure you're right about HC trying their best to maximize profits - it's a shame when the product goes downhill. I agree that the slightly larger and much sturdier format for Father Xmas and Mr Bliss is superior to the current series. I do really like the jacket designs on the pocket series, though, and I love that Giles, Tom, and Smith feature Baynes's original jacket designs (without any titles or markings) on the endpapers. I have a set of matching 1978 Houghton Mifflin volumes of those 3 titles and it always bothers me that most of the back side is covered with a synopsis - obscuring almost half of the wonderful artwork by Baynes. I know some of the earlier printings of these editions (at least the British versions) did not obscure the artwork and had jackets. Or is that only true for Tom Bombadil? Do the matching versions or Giles and Smith (GA&U 2nd editions) cover the artwork on the back like the HM versions?

I'm glad I read (well, skimmed) these threads as I had been considering buying a copy of the Collins deluxe Hobbit to replace my standard 2007 hardback (pasted in pages - yuk!), but it looks as though the quality and longevity aren't there to justify £40+. I'd hoped at the time that my copy of the Hobbit would match the 50th Anniversary hardbacks of LOTR but it doesn't. I may just live with the copy I have, I am not really a fan of the folio edition (have seen copies secondhand, something about it didn't really appeal) but although they look lovely I really couldn't justify paying for any of the super deluxe editions!

>196 EclecticIndulgence: That's not good, but seems typical of online chain booksellers - when I bought my 50th Anniversary Tolkien editions along with some fairly expensive books (including one of the New Naturalists) from waterstones they delivered them to store by courier with no protection other than a thin plastic postage bag. The problem is that unless you live in a city where there are some very large bookstores then the likelihood of getting hold of anything outside the very common bestseller type books is low (especially hardbacks).

>196 EclecticIndulgence:

They should be able to send you another one, though, presumably? I've found with the Deluxe books, you have about a 30% chance of it coming through undamaged. I had to have a couple replaced by Amazon, but got an undamaged set in the end.

If you are willing to pay full price I would recommend Hatchards. Their packaging is so protective that not even a tank would damage the books.

>200 EclecticIndulgence:

I'd have been taking a new one, rather than the discount. A damaged book is worthless unless it is just a reading copy, IMHO. Plus online booksellers need to apply a bit more common sense with packaging heavy/expensive books.

>194 kronnevik:

I know some of the earlier printings of these editions (at least the British versions) did not obscure the artwork and had jackets. Or is that only true for Tom Bombadil? Do the matching versions or Giles and Smith (GA&U 2nd editions) cover the artwork on the back like the HM versions?

I actually don't have those. I have the first editions, but not later ones (yeah, I know what kind of pathetic collector am I? :-)). If you ask the question at tolkienguide.com, you will definitely get an answer from someone who actually knows.

So here's a question for the group. Lacking good sales on eBay I was wondering if people had a good sense of current fair market value for the black Harper Collins slipcover editions of the Hobbit, The Lord of the Rings, the Silmarillion, and the History of Middle Earth volumes (x3). I am referring to these: http://www.tolkienbooks.net/php/gallery.php?subsection=79
I assume impressions matter here as well.

Thanks
Chris

>203 cstojano:

So here's a question for the group. Lacking good sales on eBay I was wondering if people had a good sense of current fair market value for the black Harper Collins slipcover editions of the Hobbit, The Lord of the Rings, the Silmarillion, and the History of Middle Earth volumes (x3).

I paid GBP 45 for the second impression (cloth slipcase) of the 1997 HC LOTR a few years back. I then got another second for GBP 35 a couple of years ago (I just bought it as a BIN on the off chance it was a 1st). I saw a second impression LOTR sell in Australia 6 months or so back for AUD 25, which was very cheap, but I have seen several go in the sub 50 pounds price bracket. You just need to buy in the auctions where no one else is interested or paying attention. The asking prices are often quite high (and most often the 4th impression - vinyl slipcase - which is VERY common). The ones with high asking prices mostly don't sell, but occasionally do (or appear to), distorting the perception of value for anyone who isn't really following prices. Realistically, I'd say expect to pay around 50 pounds for a 2nd - 4th, but if you get lucky it will be a bit cheaper. 1st are quite a lot more expensive, and I'm not sure what they go for at the moment. Numerically, the second impression in the rarest, being just under the 1000 copies of the 1st.

It is worth pointing out that the first deluxe HarperCollins LOTR is not the 1997 edition, but is in fact this one (http://www.tolkienbooks.net/php/details.php?reference=83300) from 1992. It is quite rare (turns up once or twice a year in eBay), but is well worth collecting. I paid 59 pounds a couple of years ago.

HoME would be the most expensive - I'd guess at a couple of hundred pounds each for Vol 1 and 2, a bit less (maybe 150-ish) for vol 3. They used to be more expensive than they are now. One impression (1000 copies of each volume). Cloth slipcase only. All printed by different printers, and not very well matching as a set.

Prices of the Hobbit may be elevated at the moment, so I wouldn't even bother unless an obviously good deal arises. There are two impressions - the first (cloth slipcase) seems more common (2500 copies), but is probably worth more than the second (vinyl slipcase). These are the only ones of this series that aren't india paper, for obvious reasons.

Silmarillion - Definitely less than 100 pounds. One impression (a bit under 2,500 copies), vinyl slipcase only. Appalling print quality for the first few pages. Dishonest book dealers like to claim these are limited to 1,000 copies, so they can justify a higher asking price.

I think overall they are a decent set of books, despite some production flaws, and are worth collecting. They come up relatively often, and there is no need to pay really silly money for any of them.

(as a word of warning the_merp_shop in Germany quite often lists these books at very high prices. In addition to the excessive prices, I'd recommend avoiding this seller as he has been known to use pictures of different books than the actual ones he is selling (current example here, where the headline picture is for a different impression - http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/LORD-OF-THE-RINGS-deluxe-2nd-print-LEATHER-limited-TOL.... I've also seen him describe things incorrectly. As a recent example, he described the 1992 HarperCollins Deluxe LOTR as leather. It isn't, it is textured paper. In fact, it is obviously not leather. I corrected him and then the next time he listed it -- leather, again)

Man am I glad I asked about this, these prices you are quoting are way less than I assumed based on the asking prices. Still I am finding it hard to key word search for these on eBay in comparison to other things I collect. And thanks about the merp_shop, I had several bookmarked.

>205 cstojano:

Just remembered there was a thread on the Deluxe HoME prices 2011-2014, last year on tolkienguide (http://www.tolkienguide.com/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=2265&forum=15&post_id=13988#forumpost13988)

You will see that I paid $527 (GBP 352) for my HoME vol 1. back in 2007. I think that was at their peak price (d'oh!!!!!). As you can also see, I paid 201 Euro (GBP 145) for Vol 2 and GBP 129 for a shrink-wrapped Vol 3 (also back in 2007), so those were much cheaper.

If you look at the link, you will see that prices of Vol.1 have dropped quite a bit and Volumes 2 and 3 have probably dropped a bit or remained static. I don't really understand why Vol 1 is harder to get, but it definitely is.

So here is what I could find for recent sales of the original Harper Collins deluxe series

Ebay 151615704761, LOTR HC 2000, 2nd impression (I think) AUD 199

Ebay 251783308814, newer set of HC slipcovers, USD 1400! Jan 13, 2015

Ebay 181647055851, ALan Lee 1992 LOTR 3 volume set, unmatched numbers, some wear, GBP 380+40 shipping. Feb 1, 2015

>207 cstojano:

Ebay 151615704761, LOTR HC 2000, 2nd impression (I think) AUD 199?
Yep, they will sometimes sell at this level (just over a hundred pounds) or more. Equally, on 12/11/14, a copy sold for AU30 (I made a mistake in my prior post -- I had misremembered it as being $25). Like I say, I've seen them go multiple times for sub-50 pounds in the last two years, since I last bought one (2nd imp on 05/07/13 for 35 pounds). If you are happy to take your time, you can get a cheap copy on eBay, if not, you can get a copy for $200 today on Abe!

Ebay 181647055851, ALan Lee 1992 LOTR 3 volume set, unmatched numbers, some wear, GBP 380+40 shipping. Feb 1, 2015
This one isn't really relevant to the black edition costs. This was the green leather/cloth Alan Lee signed "Super Deluxe" set from 1992. There are a few posts related to that specific auction here (http://www.tolkienguide.com/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=1817&viewmode=flat&order=ASC&type=&mode=0&start=590). It sold a couple of weeks prior for GBP 230 (my max bid was just under), and was an oddity. In the first sale, it actually had dust-jackets from the standard illustrated edition of the time. Note that this set typically sells for several hundred pounds. The first sale of this one was a bargain, because the dust jackets made it seem like the cloth edition.

Ebay 251783308814, newer set of HC slipcovers, USD 1400! Jan 13, 2015
Again, not really relevant to the black quarter-leather prices. What can I say, though? - People are idiots and will sometimes pay double the real-world value! This is an outlier, though, and you will find daft sales prices on eBay all the time. Some of them are fake, mind, and you will see the same item back for sale a couple of weeks later by the same seller (who hopes people will think the value is much higher because of the prior "sale"). Another example of stupidity here: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/The-Lord-of-the-Rings-50th-Anniversary-Deluxe-Edition-...

The key thing about buying books on eBay is to simply not care if you win the auction. Set a low-end fair price in a bid-sniper (such as Auction Sniper) and forget about it. Unless the book is amazingly rare this is the strategy to follow.

Good luck with finding the books!! - It took me a couple of years to get them all back in 2006-2007, but other than volume 1 of HoME (which I overpaid for), all the prices I paid were fairly reasonable, and I see no evidence at all that "average market" prices have increased for these (Temporary Exception:Hobbit). Do remember, however, that the final Hobbit movie was just released, and any effect of this may last a few months. Now is a bad time to buy GA&U Hobbits, for example.

(Edit: The last HarperCollins Black Deluxe Hobbit 1st Imp I can see sold for GBP 185 on 6th Feb ( http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Hobbit-JRR-Tolkien-Hardback-1999-cloth-slipcase-limite... ) and another one sold for GBP205 on 3rd Feb ( http://item.ebay.co.uk/271760174234?item_hash4=a1fb4fce&LH_Complete=1&LH... ). Like I say, you would be wise to wait a while for Hobbits, albeit they are always more expensive than the LOTRs ).

(Edit: Some additional sales prices. I can't find too many of the cheaper ones, but this is unsurprising as the lower priced auctions usually don't have the word "deluxe" in the title, which is why there aren't many bidders. I usually just see them when looking for "tolkien" (or tolkein) and trawling through:

LOTR 2nd Impression $137.80 (GBP 87) 23/01/12
LOTR 3rd Impression $135 (GBP 83) 15/04/12
LOTR 3rd Impression $158.16 (GBP 96) 16/04/12
LOTR 4th Impression $158.06 (GBP 100) 27/01/13

Hobbit 2nd Impression $176.79 (GBP 107) 27/03/11 (shrink-wrapped)
Hobbit 1st Impression $240.70 (GBP 153 ) 23/01/12
Hobbit 2nd Impression $124.09 (GBP 75) 25/01/13
Hobbit 2nd Impression $195 (GBP 117) 10/12/13

Silmarillion $136.86 (GBP 80) 24/04/12
Silmarillion $130.88 (GBP 80) 06/05/12
Silmarillion $106.80 (GBP 66) 22/07/13
Silmarillion $137.91 (GBP 85) 11/07/13

Mostly originally in GBP. Currency conversions based on approx rate at time of sale. The original US dollar values were already conversions, and I have converted them back to pounds, so both values will be a bit off.

)

I have to say this is why the dealers ask so much more, these things don't seen to trade hands very often based on these data. In the short time I've been looking it seems to be the same pieces relisted at high prices.

>209 cstojano:

I have to say this is why the dealers ask so much more, these things don't seen to trade hands very often based on these data. In the short time I've been looking it seems to be the same pieces relisted at high prices.

The ones listed at high prices indeed to not sell easily, and will keep being relisted until someone uninformed (or well heeled) buys it or the seller gives up for a while. This is very typical of the sales cycle for Tolkien books, generally.

The data above (in post 208) is VERY incomplete. I used worthpoint to get the ones listed, and I'd estimate that - at best - it only captures 25% of the actual sales (I've never seen a single one of my prior purchases show up on a worthpoint search), and it never seems to show much in the last 18 months. The one I purchased in 2013 doesn't show up, and the one I saw recently in AU doesn't show up, nor any of the other ones I've seen sell recently. Of the ones I know about, worthpoint has a zero percent hit rate!

(My theory is that worthpoint only captures and stores enough info to make it look like a legitimate service, so people will give them their credit card details and sign up for a trial. I definitely wouldn't give them my credit card details -- just as a warning!)

That said, the prices of the Hobbit and Sil from the worthpoint search are pretty much in line with what I have observed. LOTR you can definitely get cheaper. I didn't bother searching for HoME -- these are well covered with actual sales data for the last 5 years or so that I linked to earlier.

They actually do show up quite often (quite a few distinct copies of each book every year). I do an eBay search for Tolkien books listed in the last 24 hours in the UK once a day, and have fairly religiously done this for the last couple of years (and less regularly since the early 2000s). All of these books turn up relatively often, and not always listed with the word "deluxe". The only ones I haven't seen lots of are the HoME volume 1s. But even those have repeatedly been listed in the last year and either not sold or have taken many repeat listings to sell. The 1st impression of LOTR, however, also does not turn up often at all (I can't remember seeing one in recent memory).

If a book can easily be sourced at a reasonable price within 3 months, it isn't rare. All these books fall into that category. I have a specific copy of Unfinished Tales that took me 5 years to obtain. That's rare, and I wouldn't trade it for a full set of these deluxe edtions :)

So do you search specifically for listings from the UK? I see you are in NZ, I am in the US and eBay defaults by region. Then again, so few hits come up for that I do scroll down to see the international listings as well.

I have to admit I am very new to this (although I have collected Tolkien for close to 20 years - not books) so I really am going for the "snazzy on the bookshelf sets" not necessarily the really rare items, yet. I mostly am going with what I like the look of, although this is quickly changing (all of a sudden I like the Pauline Baynes art).

I did knock off a biggee for me though. I went from 50 dollar deluxe HCs sources through regular online retailers to a really nice set of the 1992 Centenary boxed set.

Can you share what is rare about the Unfinished Tales you posted?

>211 cstojano:

So do you search specifically for listings from the UK? I see you are in NZ, I am in the US and eBay defaults by region. Then again, so few hits come up for that I do scroll down to see the international listings as well.

Yeah, I pretty much limit myself to ebay UK and eBay Australia. With the exception of having a full set of HoME US firsts and the Easton Press books (plus a handful of other titles), I do not collect American editions. Shipping from the US tends to be very expensive (although it didn't used to be -- I probably paid about $10 a book surface mail for the HoME editions), and a lot of sellers use eBay Global Shipping, so I just can't be bothered. I'm fortunate that my in-Laws are still in the UK, so I can buy from any UK auction and just ship to them. My wife goes back to the UK once a year, so she brings books back for me (cursing at me, obviously!). It is worth going direct to the UK site, as international listings on .com won't necessarily show if the seller hasn't listed that they will ship overseas

I did knock off a biggee for me though. I went from 50 dollar deluxe HCs sources through regular online retailers to a really nice set of the 1992 Centenary boxed set.

Which one? This one?



These are quite rare, and have two states "Trade" and "Encore". Mine is Encore, and instead of saying "Harper Collins" on the spine of the box, it states "Encore" but has a HarperCollins logo. I was very lucky to get that late last year from eBay Australia for $25 AU with no other bidders. The box has some scuffing (which is almost universal with this set), but the books/jackets are fine and unread. It is currently sitting at a friend's house in Perth, and he will bring it over for me next time he visits.

Or this one?



Again, there are two states of this. One with slightly wider page blocks. I only know of one person that has the second (wider) state, so it may have been a prototype. This was another lucky eBay Australia purchase. I can't remember exactly, but it was in the $25 - $35 AU region and the seller chucked in a mint 1st Thus HarperCollins Hobbit (which i didn't have, so was very welcome).

Can you share what is rare about the Unfinished Tales you posted?

It is the only version of Unfinished Tales that matches the UK Hardback History of Middle-Earth series. I don't know how many copies were printed, but I would be very surprised if it was more than a couple of hundred. Back then, the older UK HoME hardbacks were only selling in the order of 25 copies a year, so I don't think there was much imperative for a big print run. It usually comes up for sale once every couple of years. A copy came up as Buy It Now a couple of months back and sold within an hour (for 35 pounds). It got re-listed the following week for 350 pounds, and sold off-eBay. I was lucky when I got mine, because it is unread and near fine within a near fine wrapper, and I snapped it up for 45 pounds (or thereabouts). I was fortunate that the seller had listed it in the wrong category, plus at least one other collector that I know of intended to bid but forgot! If you want a full matching set of HoME, it is a must, though!

For me, the fun is in the chase, and I'm not interested in throwing huge amounts of money at books. I have strict spending limited and probably only buy 10-15 Tolkien books/sets a year.

http://www.tolkienbooks.net/php/details.php?reference=82560

This is the set I picked up.

Thanks for the info about the UT volume.

Congrats on that one - It is a very nice set! Even that one has a couple of versions. There were an additional 250 produced only for Australia (which identify themselves as such on the copyright page). I don't have it myself (although I have come very close a few times). I have the matching Hobbit and Silmarillion though. They have all become a bit too expensive for my tastes.

Is the matching Hobbit the first impression of the HC deluxe? In some images it looks to have the same green tone and slipcase but it is hard to tell.

The LOTR set seems very hard to find without some rubbing to the spine. Most copies seem to have it now and I would hate to buy a 3000 Euro sealed set and open it to find that the contact between books over the years has damaged the books. There is a UK seller that pulled for 4 sets from Abe that is having them restored. He was under 500 USD per set but has told me the restoration is 100 GBP per set so they will come back to market mint, restored and more expensive. Curious what people think about restoration...

>215 cstojano:

No, the Hobbit that matches your 1992 Super Deluxe set is red (http://tolkienbooks.net/php/details.php?reference=84200), and is the illustrated version (Alan Lee). The Silmarillion is an orange/red http://tolkienbooks.net/php/details.php?reference=85200, and is also illustrated (Ted Nasmith).

These books are all a larger format than the black quarter leather series that started with LOTR in 1997, none of which are illustrated (except the Hobbit, which has Tolkien's original illustrations, of course).

The 1992 Super Deluxe Books all use the pages from the first edition illustrated Hardback editions. The Blue boxed set showed in post 212 is essentially identical to your super deluxe, if you add the leather quarter-binding, gilt edges and cloth slipcase instead of cardboard. The same goes for the Hobbit and Silmarillion (although neither of those had slipcases available in the standard hardback format).

You are right that the LOTRs tend to have rubbing between the volumes, particularly at the top of the spines. Restoration is generally considered to be bad, but if you can't tell, who cares? But I'm confused - I thought you had already bought this set?

(By the way, anyone that pays 3000 EU for a set of these, mint or otherwise in absolutely nuts (unless money is genuinely no object -- which is obviously the case for some people). They are nice books, but it is hard to see that kind of value in a 1992 edition of a 1955 work that uses the pages of an edition that sold for GBP 17.99 per volume! Also, I tend to be dubious about shrink-wrap - how do you even know it is original? I imagine it usually is, but I wouldn't pay extra for it. $500 for the slightly scuffed copies seems reasonable, though)

Sorry, to confirm I do have the set. Was shopping for them and this one dealer's inventory came up. He and I discussed the sets he had and that's when he told me of the restoration. I suppose if the 2012 5 volume HC slipcased set is a 1500 dollar item then 3k for the sealed 1992 Alan Lee isn't bad ;)

Thanks for the links to those other books. Indeed I have my eye on that version of the Hobbit, more so if it is deemed a companion piece to the LOTR set. I imagine they are pricey.

Boy do I wish everyone book ever had a unique ISBN number. Would make it so much easier to search for them.

>217 cstojano:

The Hobbits aren't as pricey as the Silmarillions, due - I think - to the fact that the Silmarillions are signed by Christopher Tolkien. 600 pounds +/- 50 pounds seems to be the going rate for a fine Sil in a fine slipcase. The price has been pretty static the last few years. That is the most expensive book I have ever bought (by a factor of at least two -- and probably the most expensive I ever will) -- I paid 595 pounds*. I do think it will hold its value (or close to). The Hobbit shouldn't be more than two-thirds of that.

*And I only was prepared to pay that as my mum gave me a couple of hundred quid towards it for my 40th. A ridiculous amount of money for a book!

Hmm, maybe I should focus on these two and forego the late 90s-early 00s HC deluxe sets for the time being. The Silmarillion seems to be a unique ISBN though.

A knife in the dark.

>219 cstojano:

Forget the ISBN. The Silmarillion does have a unique ISBN, but it isn't printed in the book (it has the trade hardback ISBN). The chances of anyone selling the book having the correct ISBN in the listing are close to zero. Just search for "Silmarillion 1998 Deluxe". I don't use ISBNs at all, to be honest. You can expect a two or three of them to turn up each year. A shrinkwrapped one went for 600 pounds-ish a few months back, and I'm fairly sure I saw another one over the same time period (but couldn't swear to it) that maybe went closer to 500.

Apologies to everyone that this thread has dissolved into the tedious (for many) minutiae of book prices, rather than pictures of nice books

Sorry all, Stu if there is a better place for this discussion please let me know.
Chris

I find the discussion interesting.

222, 223

So do I do. But I also like talking about the Shire and Longbottom Leaf.

>222 cstojano:

I don't know of any specific better place. I'm pretty new to LibraryThing to be honest!

>224 LesMiserables:

I've always felt the Shire would be a nice place to settle down. I'm still looking for it, though -- and I'm starting to think that although it does not exist, it may even have no acceptable real-world analogue.

224

I have not smoked for going on 25 years after giving up cigarettes.

But you know, there's something about an elongated clay pipe, a pointy hat and a tankard of ale that is curiously tempting.

>226 LesMiserables:

I must admit, I sometimes like the smell of a pipe (as opposed to other types of smoking smells that make me want to hurl). All a bit too hazardous, these days.

Here is a different one, from 2011 (although states 2012 on the copyright page). I don't normally collect American editions. For some reason, I ordered this one when it came out, and was as well I did. The publishers hadn't got their rights in order, so it was withdrawn from sale pretty much immediately. I'd ordered from Book Depository, and it didn't arrive after a month, so I got a refund (and disappointment). Then a few weeks later it finally turned up - having presumably gone on a trip around Australia. I've not seen it come up for sale since. It is a pity they couldn't work it out with the rights holder, as it is quite a nice little children's book (and if you see one, snap it up!).

So here's something I don't think has been discussed but what do people think about the custom leather rebinds?

>229 cstojano:

Don't have any personally, but have seen some genuinely very nice ones (and also some fairly rubbish ones). For me, they aren't a substitute for having an unmolested original book, but they would be a nice addition if I had money to spare (which I don't!). I find it hard to put a value on them, to be honest.

Anyone got the deluxe Hobbit illustrated by Jemima Catlin? Any thoughts? Looks nice from the pictures might just have to get it.

Yeah that is my issue with the custom bindings, how do you value them, But the ones that sell at Sothebys seem to be do very well.

>231 JuliusC:

I have the standard Catlin version (signed), and the unsigned deluxe. There isn't really any difference between the two versions other than the colour of the binding (and obviously the slipcase). The pages and dimensions are identical. The deluxe looks quite nice, though, and is definitely worth buying if you haven't already got the standard version. Has a big fat typo on the contents page, mind.

I like the Deluxe. It feels very tight in the case, not in a bad way but the piece feels well put together. The boards of the case are also fairly think which gives it a polished look, unlike the more recent deluxe versions from HC that have thinner cases.

Anyone know how rare these are? I seem to be a sucker for slipcases like this.

http://www.tolkienlibrary.com/tolkien-book-store/001260.htm

>235 cstojano:

Not terribly rare (although not terribly common, either). And the paper quality of the books is abominable.

Looking at a set now with the spine sun faded on TTT. Bummed about that.

That the set on eBay Australia? You could always replace the TT - Not an expensive book. A set that is worth picking up if inexpensive, but IMHO not worth spending a lot on. Probably the worst of the Hardback LOTR sets. The 1987 Unwin set (which is the direct prior version of the non-illustrated books) is much better in pretty much every regard.

Yeah that's it, the guy will do 90 shipped to me, the shipping from Australia is pretty high as you can imagine. I based all my prices on what the two major dealers are offering so 90 seemed like a steal. I am still struggling with sourcing specific books on eBay

Sounds like a fair price. Just be aware that the well-known dealers (Tolkien Library, Tolkien Bookshelf, etc) are all excessive when it comes to prices, so don't use them to judge if something is a good deal or not. They are often triple (and usually at least double) what the books sell for on eBay. They make their money from people with plenty of cash and no patience, which is fine -- there is a market for what they provide. I personally think there is a degree of "condition exaggeration" amongst the main Tolkien dealers, also. "Mint" doesn't mean mint (e.g. you really wouldn't think you could list a copy of the The Hobbit with a green leather spine that has faded all the way to bright red as "mint").

Yeah that spine faded Hobbit is quite stark. Thanks again.

>238 Studedoo:

http://www.tolkienbooks.net/php/details.php?reference=82400

This set? Damn I like this one too

Yep, that one is a favourite. The books have really nice covers, the maps are the proper fold-out ones, and the paper quality is good. This was my first hardback set of LOTR, back when it came out. Doesn't come up for sale that often (although the individual books are easily obtained). A set with a slightly tatty slipcase sold for 24 pounds a few weeks ago, though. Note that the spines of the books may state "UNWIN HYMAN" or may have the Unwin Hyman logo instead. The earlier copies have the text, later ones the logo. Both types come in the slipcase.

So a nice thank you to Stu and other posters here. Based on the advise I got about looking for the Children of Hurin Super Deluxe for a deal I waited. I placed an order with Amazon Germany and sure enough they just shipped it, the total was about 250 US shipped for a brand new book, beats the 350 Pounds (580USD) the publisher is charging. If you are in the EU there is a used copy of Amazon.de that looks nice (they sent me pics) but won't ship to the states. They are asking 170 Euros. Crossing fingers it gets here undamaged but as its Amazon selling it I am not worried. Now looking for the Legend Super Deluxe for a song and the crazy expensive Harper Collins deluxe version of the same title.

Well done, that is an excellent price. I don't think you are ever likely to get a better deal on it than that, and I think it will probably go up in value eventually. Be interesting to see what kind of deal you manage to find for the corresponding S&D.

Has anyone visited the LOTR set in NZ?

I am a relatively short flight away being in the Brisbane area of Australia.

I know someone who had visited 'Hobbiton' and had a pint in the Green Dragon.

>246 LesMiserables:

Yeah, I can see Dimrill Dale out of my lounge window (or at least I can see the Remarkables mountains directly above), and I go walking around the ford of Bruinen (Arrowtown) a couple of times a week. My wife has been to the Hobbiton set in North Island (which I think is the only commercialised set). She reckoned it was absolutely crap.

There are quite a few movie locations around Queenstown/Arrowtown, and the dead marshes are over at Glenorchy. I've never been that into location hunting to be honest. I figure if you like the movies, then deconstructing them spoils them, and if you like the scenery of NZ, why pretend it is somewhere else. That's just me, though.

Areas of North Island are very Shire-like (or at least are how I imagine the Shire), and that was the first thing I thought when I went there for the first time (prior to the movies). South Island has a lot of Misty-Mountain and Mordor-like terrain.

>248 EclecticIndulgence:

I think it was completely rebuilt prior to the Hobbit Movies, so it may be better then when my wife went eight or nine years ago. I could never bring myself to go. My hatred of all things PJ is too great (:)), plus I'm a bit over the Jackson/Howe/Lee idea of Middle-Earth.

Well full confession, I am am absolute nut for all things Bakshi, which by default makes me anti-PJ to a degree. It might have to do with age, I was just the right age for the animated versions of Tolkien's work to come out including the Rankin Bass cartoons (songs and all). Having said that I like the LOTR films well enough but man he butchered the soul of the books and really mishandled pivotal scenes like Eowyn's dispatching of the Witch king. The new Hobbit movies are unwatchable though. An absolute travesty.

>251 cstojano:

I actually really like the Bakshi LOTR animated movie a lot, incomplete as it is (despite all the "Aruman" nonsense). Like you, I was at an age where I saw it long before the PJ movies.

As adaptations go, I can't really go past the 13 hour 1982 BBC Radio LOTR. For me, that is the definitive adaptation, and I don't think it would actually be possible to do a better job. When I read Gandalf dialogue, it is Sir Michael Hordern's voice that I hear. I think radio is great for something like LOTR as it allows the listener's mind to fill in the blanks, rather than being force-fed from someone else's imagination (which isn't bad if it is the authors imagination, but not when it is John Howe, Alan Lee, et. al). There is something I just don't like about their Middle-Earth, which I can't put my finger on. It is over-engineered and fake. The big things are too big. The elven things are too ornate. It has no depth or reality to it. Alan Lee as a book illustrator is fine, as those images are more restrained than the movie designs.

For me, the closest I can get to Middle Earth is to go out for a walk in the mountains or woods on my own, and let my imagination fill in the blanks. I fill them in very differently than PJ and his gang. I think if I had been brought up with the movies, I would not be able to dissociate the movie imagery from my own (in the same way as the Radio Gandalf can't be dissociated), and I think that would be a hell of a loss.

>253 Studedoo:

Interesting thoughts. I pretty much agree with everything you say, although I'm not perhaps as averse to Howe and Lee as you. I definitely subscribe, though, to the idea of letting your own imagination picture the scenes. That goes, indeed, for books generally.

Thanks also for your information on editions. Personally, I long since abandoned completism with regard to Tolkien. There are just too many of them for me thanks to the Harper Collins bandwagon. One can't blame them, of course. Business is business! However, I do occasionally go for the more interesting ones, such as the recent Catlin Hobbit.

As I re-read the LOTR books after some absence I am shocked at two things. First, how much easier these are to read than COH or Simarillion or the Unfinished Tales mythology. Everyone knows this but the writing in LOTR is really quite straightforward. Second, I had forgotten just how much IS left to the mind in the books. Bakshi recently gave an interview where he commented on this, and how his film, for better or worse, created many of the visuals that people have come to accept as cannon. I know this is blasphemy on a book collecting forum but my other haunts (mostly the collectible realm) are filled with people who have never read the books and likely have no clue just how much Bakshi laid the groundwork for the VISUAL representation of Tolkien's work.

Funny you mentioned the Aruman business. This has been on eBay for some time

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1978-Press-Photo-Movie-Lord-of-the-Rings-/351349988908?p...

>254 boldface:

I couldn't agree more about completism with regards to Tolkien collecting. In the end it just becomes a chore. HarperCollins produce such a lot of absolute dross* that it would be pointless, anyway. I have strict rules - No paperbacks, No movie tie-ins, Nothing after 2013 unless it is (a) genuinely new or (b) a continuation of a series that I have already wasted money on. I generally prefer getting the older stuff anyway, and in terms of HarperCollins' output, it is generally better to pick it up second hand (often for next to nothing) than pay their exorbitant RRPs. The only downside is that the good prices on eBay are mostly in the UK, which means my wife has to lug 'em back once a year (the downside being that she complains about it for a month :)).

*The amount of ugly dross (pretending to be books) associated with the Hobbit movies has been astounding. When a publisher puts out a paperback boxed set with The Hobbit split into two volumes, you know they are just taking the pi**.

The Hobbit in two volumes, now that's cute.

I do keep a copy of the 7 volume LOTR for my reading copy. My understanding is that this was JRRT's preference for release but the publisher wouldn't have it. The smaller books are easier to handle.

I would still like an explanation why HC released Children of Hurin and Legend of Sigurd and Gudrun as the only two super deluxe releases. I can see COH given its newness but to follow that up with LSG makes it seem like someone wanted an excuse to kill the line.

>257 cstojano:

LSG was also new, remember, as it only came out in 2009. It made no sense as a Super Deluxe, but it was newly published, and I think HC figured they could milk some money out of it. They probably could have done, but not at 500 copies.

See this thread here, where we predicted they would find it hard to sell:
http://www.tolkienguide.com/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=1053&viewmo...

I don't think anyone needed an excuse to "kill the line". They produce books if they think they can make money from them, and they produce as many as they think they can sell. They just got it wrong with the 2007-2009 Super Deluxe titles, both in terms of the number produced and the price. Greed got the better of them, but they did realise their mistake, and have not produced any further titles. I think their choice to sell through Tolkien.co.uk was a mistake, as well, as they limited the product's exposure to the marketplace (benefit to them being not handing over a large cut to the retailer, of course). This came after a pretty poor couple of years of them operating that website, with lots of issues with order fulfilment, communications, and general cockups. With CoH, they had already burned their initial buyers by selling the books at 350 pounds and then adding a series of discounts, eventually at 40%. When S&G came along, their potential market was a bit less trusting (although to be fair, they recognised their earlier mistake and sold the later book for 250 pounds to early buyers, and they have subsequently done very little advertised discounting).

I got lucky with my S&G and ended up with two for the price of one -- that is probably fair value and I doubt I will lose money. Can't see me ever making a profit on my spare CoH, though :)

I'm waiting with bated breath for the inevitable release of the deluxe limited edition (only 500,000 copies printed) of the 10 Volume 'Riddles under the Mountain' complete with authentic wearable Gollum action eyes and and machine stitched kerchief of Bilbo.

>259 LesMiserables:

You underestimate them. They could push out at least a million copies of that (for a "limited time only"), and stretch to at least 20 volumes....

Surely a three volume hobbit would come with a completely blank third book. Maybe call it a journal...Frankly, movie first viewers would likely be shocked at how little of the book is in the movie, or do I have that backwards.

I would really like to see them do a Super Deluxe effort for some of the other efforts.

Just wait till the film of the Appendices comes out - or is that six films?!

> 260

Yes, the Red Book, in deluxe faux leather cover with blank paper to write your own adventure. Bonus!!! - Buy now and receive an authentic hen feather to scratch your own runes.

>261 cstojano:

I would really like to see them do a Super Deluxe effort for some of the other efforts.

Honestly, I hope they leave the Super Deluxe format alone for a LONG time. If they just chuck out an SD of every Tolkien work, it ceases to be special and just becomes like the endless "Deluxe Limited Editions" that Easton Press and the like churn out. I think, given the difficulty they have had selling these recent (2007/2009) SDs, that there is little prospect of any additional ones at this stage. Even the earlier SDs back in the 1990s sold very slowly (despite being very collectable now). They were planning on a facsimile 1st Edition Hobbit in a box, but that seems to have been cancelled now after being pushed back each year for the last 3.

>257 cstojano:

I do keep a copy of the 7 volume LOTR for my reading copy. My understanding is that this was JRRT's preference for release but the publisher wouldn't have it. The smaller books are easier to handle.?

I believe JRRTs original desire was for it to be published as a single volume, but the book's cost would have been prohibitive, so it ended up being 3 volumes to allow for a lower price (per volume). The 7 volume edition is just HarperCollins taking the proverbial :)

Really, damn all these years... I swear I read this somewhere

Went for a walk this afternoon. This has a bit of an Ephel Dúath feel to it (except that the path had loads of brambles/blackberries on it, and I'm pretty sure that would be unlikely for Mordor and thereabouts)...

>269 JeromeJ:

I'd agree with you about the GA&U editions - along with Unwin Hyman editions, these are my favourites. All the GA&U editions you mention just feel nicely done (possibly with the exception of the Biography, which is a bit of an odd size and has cover art that is perhaps a bit dated). There is a thread with some good pictures of GA&U and Unwin Hyman brochures here: http://www.tolkienguide.com/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=2092&viewmo...

I think the 50th Anniversary LOTR you mention is pretty good. I'd be perfectly happy with it as my sole copy. All the words are in the right place, and it isn't likely to fall apart on you! I think there have been some minor text corrections since, but it seems like that process will go on forever (albeit one would hope the text being in digital format these days will prevent errors creeping back in). I think the majority of readers, myself included, wouldn't even notice the majority of textual errors in the various editions of LOTR (except the early errors such as dwarfs/dwarves, of course). With LOTR, I usually just read tatty 1981 paperbacks (http://tolkienbooks.net/php/details.php?reference=82360), as these are what introduced me to LOTR. They smell and feel just right!

GA&U printed the first four volumes of HoME, then Unwin Hyman the next four, and finally HarperCollins the last four. Unsurprisingly, the last ones - particularly 11 and 12 - are of fairly poor quality, and are very prone to serious age-toning. The first four are the best and have the GA&U coloured topstains. As a set that came out over 13 years, they match pretty well, but not perfectly (the last 5 volumes have larger text for the titles on the spines). I guess I like the set as a whole as I got them each year as they came out, so they feel "right" to me.

The 2002 three volume HoME (available individually or in a single oversized slipcase http://tolkienbooks.net/php/details.php?reference=86350) isn't quite printed on India Paper, but it is printed on fairly thin paper, somewhere between "normal" weight and India. The slipcase isn't really durable enough for that weight of books and there aren't any thumb holes, so they are hard to remove. The first issue of the slipcase is a bit better than the later ones (albeit much less common).

Personally, I prefer the twelve individual volumes as being much easier to handle, and first impressions have become much cheaper in recent times. Only the last two or three are still a bit expensive, and they can now be purchased as matching hardback PODs ( as per the Index ). If you aren't fussed about first impressions, later impressions of many can be obtained very inexpensively (again, except for the final books where there is only one impression).

With regards to the 2000/2001 deluxe individually slipcased three quarter-bound volume HoME (http://tolkienbooks.net/php/details.php?reference=86150 http://tolkienbooks.net/php/details.php?reference=86200 http://tolkienbooks.net/php/details.php?reference=86250), they are India paper. Nice books, and well made, but I don't really see them as practical for actually reading. The paper is good, but prone to occasional folded corners and a degree of waviness, even brand new. Each volume was printed and bound by a different company, and there are significant differences. The black cloth used in the slipcases and boards is very prone to picking up dust and marks, so they are better as expensive shelf adornments...

To answer your question on the Super Deluxe CoH, the pages are absolutely identical to the Deluxe, with the exception that they have been gilded, the copyright page has been replaced and the limitation/signature page has been added in. According to HarperCollins, the SD was produced with the first 500 Deluxe sheets off the press. Whether this is true or just marketing is probably open to debate. The pages are smyth-sewn, and the leather covered binding is really very good with a lot of attention to detail. I'll give HarperCollins their due, they did a good job with this, despite it being too expensive.

>271 JeromeJ:

The paper on the (LEGO) LOTR is not really similar to paper they used in CoH. Obviously CoH is fairly short, so they used a thicker paper (and big borders around the text) to pad it out! The LOTR Deluxe paper is thinner, whiter and less textured (a bit too white for my liking). Don't know anything about the paper used in the later printings of the deluxe, unfortunately, as I haven't inspected one closely beyond the differences in the binding. The LEGO LOTR binding, however, is in line with that on the CoH (unlike the CoH, it has a cutout on the front that reveals the image of the ring from the front board, rather than simply having it duplicated).

I much prefer the paper on the 50th anniversary standard three-volume edition (http://tolkienbooks.net/php/details.php?reference=44640) I can't swear for all printings - and there are quite a few (5 for FoR and TT, 4 for RoTK), but the first is certainly pretty good with nice paper. After those printings, there were some revisions and the "50th Anniversary" tag line was dropped (starting with the 6-6-5 printings). The paper is a little whiter (but not as white as the deluxe one volume), and the Dust jackets lost the gilt text and replaced it with a bronze (i.e. orange!) ink. You can also see the dots that make up the colours in the latest jackets if you look very closely, which irked me, given that this was not the case on the earlier impressions.

Steer clear of the 2013 3-Vol "Collectors" Edition. It is junk.

Like I say, I'm happy with an old pre-HarperCollins paperback, so it is more just a pointless collecting thing for me (and if my collection gets destroyed or otherwise lost, I won't be replacing it). I will say, though, that HarperCollins don't generally constitute good value in terms of price vs quality these days, and there is far better buying to be had on the used market, IMHO (and most have never been read, to be honest).

> 271

JeromeJ I wish you luck trying to find these earlier editions of the deluxe Harper Collins books. I to wouldn't mind to upgrade mine to the earlier sets although it has already been pointed out that the difference is pretty minor. The problem is finding one. You have to ask sellers some specific questions and most books on the used market are still sealed, or have condition issues.

>274 JeromeJ:

That's the one I have - all first printings. My only issue is the pages are somewhat transparent

Yes, they are possibly a tiny bit more transparent than some of the other editions. I just had a quick look at a few other examples from the 50s through to the 80s and they all seem to have a degree of transparency. It is funny that I had never really noticed!

Im surprised you don't read one of your nice editions, that ultimately is what they were made for and you like the stories.

To be honest, I just like the early-mid 80s Unwin paperback set. Ordinarily I'm not a paperback reader, but my love of Tolkien's works started with that edition, so it feels and smells just right. There is no real logic to it, other than it sends me back to when I was younger and my imagination was stronger. I don't feel the same way about The Hobbit at all, and the last copy I read was a 1963 GA&U Hardback (and next time it will likely be a different hardback - maybe 1946). I couldn't ever see me reading a paperback of The Hobbit. Like I say, no logic to it!

I notice that the deluxe Beowulf was made by LEGO SPa in 2014. Is it true to believe that *any* copy I buy of the deluxe Beowulf this week must be a LEGO Spa printing?

I can't guarantee it, but I would be very, very surprised if the Beowulf Deluxe has been reprinted as yet. So far as I am aware, the only ones reprinted so far are LOTR, Hobbit, Sil and TftPR. TftPR was OOP and unavailable for quite a while before being reprinted, as was The Hobbit. I think you would be pretty safe buying a copy from wherever is cheapest.

>277 JeromeJ:

Not sure I'd give Bakshi a 10, but it was quite good and it is a pity that he didn't get to do Part 2 as he had originally wanted. I'd agree with your other scores, although perhaps The Hobbit deserves a negative value as it sucks life out of the viewer. Jackson's Hobbit is very much like the One Ring itself.

>276 JeromeJ:

I would have thought you could get the first impressions of the first four HoME books for fifty pounds or less without too much trouble. Significantly less if you don't mind later GA&U impressions (which aren't lower in quality). I've personally used eBay for most of my purchases (although I already had a set of HoME purchased as they came out). I've never had too much trouble finding stuff, although I known that I have missed many good books at great prices. HoME isn't rare, so I imagine you could pick up the first few books in no time.

I still don't get the hatred some have for Jackson's LotR. I think they are very, very good films with the changes generally necessary for the transfer from text to film. I haven't seen the Bakshi in years, but I recall finding it confusing as a teenager, and that was when I'd read the books and obsessed over them.

No one (that I've seen) has mentioned the animated Hobbit, which my daughter started watching after I read her the Hobbit (we're reading it again now). It's not bad at all. Very true to the book, and much more in the spirit than Jackson's Hobbit abominations are.

>279 Jason461:

Jackson's LOTR started quite well with Fellowship and then just went downhill from there. It absolutely isn't totally unwatchable in the same way The Hobbit is, but it isn't something I feel the need to revisit. I've never seen the animated Hobbit.

281

I would use the word disgust rather than anything else, but only with the Hobbit Films. The LOTR trilogy, although fanciful in some areas (Arwen) and lacking in others (Tom Bombadil), was generally a good effort and I enjoyed them.

>283 JeromeJ:

The best reading of The Hobbit is on the abridged Nicol Williamson records (Merlin in the Boorman Excalibur).

Nicol Williamson was fantastic in Boorman's Excalibur.

"Are you just a dream, Merlin?"

"A dream... to some..... A NIGHTMARE TO OTHERS!!!"

I wonder how LOTR would have turned out if Boorman and Pallenberg had made it, as they planned. Probably would have been rubbish due to being time constrained and ridiculously adapted, but would have been awesome artistically. Excalibur kills Jackson's LOTR in terms of pure visual style.

Not all the way through this but Galadriel as a sex object with Frodo winning the trophy?

>286 JeromeJ:

Thanks for that. I think it is best that Boorman turned his ideas into Excalibur. That's a pretty whacky rendition of LOTR, although the horse with no skin would probably have been pretty cool.

>289 JeromeJ:

As I don't read my books at that magnification, it's not an issue for me.

>289 JeromeJ:

I can't detect it on my copy. Any roughness just seems to conform to the fibres in paper. I took an iPhone pic and zoomed it, and it didn't seem nearly as bad as in the picture in thread one. That said, like boldface, I don't read at high levels of magnification and I would probably need to strain to see the raggedness at normal size.

>293 JeromeJ:

Here is the pic from my 1st impression copy. Looks OK to me when I look at the book unmagnified (unlike the 2002 HarperCollins Deluxe Silmarillion, which looks like utter crap). I wouldn't go paying 70 Euro for a copy, personally. I think I paid 20 pounds for mine (it did travel around Australia for a year before I finally got it, mind, as the seller sent it to the wrong address).

>295 JeromeJ:

Sorry, JeromeJ, I didn't mean to belittle your valid point. Like Studedoo, my first impression (1997) is fine. Likewise my FS deluxe edition, for which they bound up sheets from the 4th printing (2003). I don't know what printing is being referred to in your link.

>295 JeromeJ:

Oh. I will avoid. What is the matter with it, not LEGO SPa like CoH?

Just to clarify, I'm talking about the 2002 black quarter leather/cloth edition (printed by Sphincal in Belgium), not the later Blue/Grey edition, printed by LEGO (which is very nicely printed on nice, smooth paper).

The problems with the 2002 edition are mainly with the revised foreword, which seems to have been photo offset from a poor source. It is very pixelated and almost looks like it was printed in a dot-matrix printer. The rest of the book is adequate in terms of print and paper (but still marginal, IMHO), but the foreword leaves me with such a sour taste, it isn't a book I ever look at. At the time, it took 3 copies from Amazon to get one where the quarter binding was even remotely lined up properly (the first copy had to be seen to be believed), so there were definitely some quality problems with that edition. I definitely wouldn't recommend that anyone ever purchase a shrink-wrapped copy - you need to see the front and back boards of the book to verify it is assembled correctly. The other black quarterbound editions are decent enough - the Sil seems to be the odd one out.

>298 JeromeJ:

Personally, I prefer the 2007 HarperCollins edition than the Folio, if I had to choose between them. Both decent editions, though.

With regards to the ME stuff, I'd have to go with

FoTR
TT
RoTK
Silmarillion
Hobbit
CoH

The Silmarillion and CoH contain interesting stories, but I don't think they are particularly well written by any conventional definition, which isn't to say I didn't enjoy them (more so the Silmarillion than CoH, which I can take or leave). If they weren't Tolkien, and if not for LoTR, no publisher would have gone within a a ten-foot pole of either of them, and rightly so. As standalone units, they are unpublishable. The Silmarillion, in particular, adds real depth to the "conventionally-written" stuff, though, so I am glad they were published. The Hobbit is a funny one, as it feels to me like a mixed bag of different tones. Some of it works well, and some not so well. Overall I like it, but wish some things had been done a little differently. For me, LoTR is just right.

Some of HoME is interesting. Return of the Shadow was probably the best for me (being concerned with FoTR). I really enjoyed that one. Most of the rest of it, I'm happy to occasionally pick at for an hour or two, but couldn't read cover to cover. I doubt very many people have read the whole thing.

I most admit, of the more recently published stuff, I prefer S&G to CoH. I haven't actually read Beowulf properly as yet (just skimmed), so I can't really rate that one.

I'd like to think we are just about done printing Tolkien's unpublished stuff. Journals such as Tolkien Studies feel like a more appropriate place for some of it to be published, rather than trying to squeeze out ever more books padded out with commentary to make up for the limitations in the source material.

What was shocking to me was how much COH changed with the simple addition of the last page or so. The draft in the Unfinished Tales just sort of ends but CT's inclusion of the grave site scene, to me, really made it tragic. After reading the Silmarillion (finally all the way through)) and COH twice picking up LOTR is like child's play. I imagine the Hobbit will seem even more so.

Hi all fellow Tolkien fans,
Is there anyone who could fill me in on the differences (if any) between the different Tolkien: Artist and Illustrator editions (hardcover HC 1st edition from 1995, HC paperback from 1998 (not the rebound ones), Houghton Miffin paperback from 2000 and the newest HC hardcover edition from 2004) and recommend one of them over the others in terms of quality?

>303 Edrick:

Sorry, I only have the first UK Hardback. You might want to pose the question on tolkienguide.com. Wayne and Christina lurk there under the username "Findegil". I would imagine that they can recommend the "best" edition to go for.

Info on addenda/corrigenda from Wayne and Christina's site: http://www.hammondandscull.com/addenda/artist.html

Does anyone have any strong opinions on this Unfinished Tales (and its apparently matching Silmarillion)?

http://www.tolkienbooks.net/php/details.php?reference=64400

I have the 2006 20th anniversary edition (same ISBN-10) and is quite average. Paper quality is quite flimsy (I swear I can read what's in the next 2 pages through the paper). But I guess there are not many "nice" editions of the Unfinished Tales (deluxe slipcased one and the first edition, but that's about it), in contrast with other Tolkien books. Any specific details, just ask.

>305 cstojano:

I quite like those ones, for the jackets, more than anything (there is also a 1995 Hobbit that matches in terms of sizing of the top/bottom borders. The 1991/1998 LoTR 3 volume is also a match). Paper/glued binding nothing special. The UT is oddly thick, and unlike the edition Edrick refers to, you definitely can't read the following pages through the page you are reading. The paper is cheap and prone to age-toning, though, particularly on the top-edge (although nothing like on the same scale as the final two HoME books). You can get these editions very cheaply - I paid GBP 1.25 for the Silmarillion and little more for the UT. I'm pretty sure The Hobbit was thrown in free with something else.

Thanks, the only copy I can find of the UT is 70 dollars, listed on Abe. For me it is the covers as well, a glossier version of the current sets being offered.

>308 cstojano:

Those UTs do seem to be less common than one might expect, but from what I have seen, 15 pounds should definitely secure a copy given enough loitering on eBay UK. There are three essentially identical impressions, if I remember correctly, and I suspect that if you are dead set on the 1st thus it might take you a bit longer than if you aren't fussed which you get.

>310 JeromeJ:

Yes, they are Tolkien's illustrations.

In terms of Art, Hammond & Scull's books " Tolkien - Artist & illustrator" and "The Art of The Hobbit" are good, as is JRRT Tolkien Pictures (http://www.tolkienbooks.net/php/details.php?reference=87220). Those deal with Tolkien's own art. In terms of books of Middle-Earth art by different artists, that isn't something I have really looked into.

The Tolkien Bestiary has some interesting pictures. As a book it is - IMHO - not the best. Plus, the single time I have had to deal with David Day (he didn't like an Amazon review), I found him to be completely and never-endingly obnoxious.

My particular bugbear with him is the fact that his books have been published and republished under such an array of titles that it is easy to end up with multiple copies of the same book. He does not accept this criticism as valid, but I think once essentially the same text is available under 8 different titles, maybe that author or his publishers are "taking the piss". I guess myself and the author have to agree to disagree on the subject. As to the accuracy of the books, I think the crux of the matter is that there are arguably better works out there (or at least ones that don't seem to have courted any controversy online), so I'd personally rather just use one of those.

The various titles of his Tolkien books are listed here:
http://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/David_Day

(I expect The Bestiary has probably spawned another few variants since I started typing this. it is like a Mogwai that has been splashed with water...)

I have nothing to do with that website/page or its contents, by the way (so any errors or spurious info are nothing to do with me). I was just unlucky enough to describe one of his books in less-than-endearing terms on Amazon. Apparently if you don't like his books you are part of some "Tolkien Taliban" that is out to get him. He accused me specifically (on Amazon) of having made a career of criticising him (he also accused some guy called Nelson Goering of the same thing). Other than that single one or two paragraph review I had never written a word about him anywhere. It was a strange response, as I think the "Nelson Goering" review had been up there for years.

>312 JeromeJ:

That was my understanding of the Amazon review process. Frankly after 35 years of selling the same material again and again, I think it was a bit rich for him to get upset at this stage.

Some of the illustrations aren't bad standalone, but it wasn't conceived primarily as an art book, and some variants lack the colour pictures, so the text becomes rather more important in that context. I would have a lot more time for the book if it had not been milked to within an inch of its life for 35 years. I'm not as aggressively anti the text as some other reviewers, I'm anti the way the book has been sold. And obviously I'm much, much more anti it now after conversing with the author. But I'll say no more, as I don't want to give life to Day's (probably imaginary) "Tolkien Taliban"!

>314 JeromeJ:

I don't think we should be here to judge each other on our opinions of art. For the record, I actually didn't say I had a low opinion of the art (that's your interpretation of what I wrote). Since when is "not bad" or "interesting" a low opinion? The reason I use the word "standalone" is because I'd rather see it divorced from the book. I prefer the art in the Bestiary to that of Alan Lee and John Howe if that helps you judge me further... As for it reflecting on me, I assume you mean that as a perjorative?

Nevertheless, I have the first hardback edition, and I don't agree with you that it is just an "art book". It is an illustrated reference book. I can't be bothered to unbox it to see what it says on the cover. I have another later (but essentially identical) version here which describes it as "a comprehensive, sumptuously illustrated reference guide".

But anyway, I'm not here to argue about art interpretation or the Tolkien Bestiary/Guide To Tolkien/Tolkien Dictionary/Characters From Tolkien/&c. I'm glad you like the book(s), and I'm certainly not judging you for doing so. I can't imagine ever doing so (or judging someone on what pictures they prefer, frankly). Please afford me the same courtesy! (Thanks :))

You said, "Some of the illustrations aren't bad standalone". Presumably the rest are bad in your opinion so you do have a "low opinion" which is what I said.

No, I don't have a low opinion of the (majority) of the illustrations, and you inferring a broad negative from the lack of a broad positive is ridiculous. I'm not sure why you seem to want me to hate the illustrations, when I have never claimed to (anywhere, to anyone -- in my life). There aren't any that I love, but there aren't any that I hate, either. They are, as I said, "not bad". That's my opinion, nothing more. Your opinion is that they are "phenomenal". Great.

Anyway, I'm not discussing it further with you, as I don't *care* whether you or anyone else likes the book, and you shouldn't care whether I do, either. I've stated my main issue with the book(s), and it isn't the art. Let's leave it.

So, my daughter had just snookered me into reading her The Hobbit for the third time (she just turned six). Her copy is the new edition with Catlin's illustrations, and looking at this time, I could help but think that I would relish a copy of LotR that was so lushly and colorfully illustrated. I don't know that Catlin's style is exactly right for LotR (though I think it's perfect for The Hobbit), but I would love to see Tolkien's estate do something like this with LotR. No doubt, it would be much more expensive. but I'd gladly pay for it.

Does anyone else share this thought?

Jason
Sadly I haven't opened the deluxe edition I purchased of this title. But yes I would buy an LOTR for sure.

Glad to see this thread picking up again. Since a couple months ago when I asked about different editions and printings, I've picked up Harper Collins deluxe editions for Children of Hurin, Unfinished Tales, Fall of Arthur, and Beowulf. I prioritized those with only one printing, being the GB and Italian printings (maybe I'll hunt first printings of the others later). Big thanks again for all the advice, as these books are beautiful. It's true, Fall of Arthur by Clays Ltd (GB) is bound too tightly and in that way maybe slightly inferior to the LEGO Spa (Italy) printings, but still no complaints. I also happened onto a great price for The Silmarillion in the prior leather edition, so I picked that up as well. Also nice, and appreciated since finding a first (western) printing of the newer series isn't so easy.

I can't compare the western printers to the eastern, nor any of these to Folio's or Easton Press's Tolkiens yet, but for anyone on the fence about the Harper Collins deluxe editions, I recommend them.

Thanks again for all the advice from everyone, and to Studedoo especially, for his time in answering all my questions, and for the spreadsheet above! It helped a lot as I was trying to get my mind around the details.

>320 SgtStryker0331:

Glad I was able to help, and great that you have acquired some of the books and are enjoying them. I haven't been quite so into my books lately (it tends to be one of those things that ebbs and flows). Spare time consumed by porting the old ZX Spectrum Hobbit Adventure game to Mac OSX (purely as a learning exercise). Almost complete, after quite a lot of hours thrown at it here and there.

I am approaching my one year anniversary of collecting Tolkien in October and hope to post a "damage done" photo. I thought I had a lead on some ones I had wanted but the guy came back with prices of:

400 ACE paperback set (I should have known there I was in trouble)
2700 for the HC HOME 3 volume set
1350 for the 1998 Silmarrilion
1000 for the 1st UK Tom Bombadil

I am also finding myself caving on my plans to not buy SC sets. I tend to like the variety of cover and case designs on things like the Methuen set and the Canadian Unwin set.

I think the quoted prices are steep for the ACE set (unless it's fine) and for the Bombadil; I think you can do hundreds of dollars better.

Yup, my thoughts exactly, the 98 Silmarillion is dealer pricing and 2700 for the HOME set is above dealer pricing.

Yep, those prices are all totally ridiculous. You could pick up the 3 volume HoME Deluxe for half that price tomorrow, without even trying. '98 SD Sil. might take a little longer, just because they aren't available all the time, but around $800 would seem to be the going rate (hasn't really changed much the last few years).

Finally got a "Pleasure In Reading" Hobbit. I've only seen 4 of them for sale, ever. They were created for the Primary School market, so few of them seem to have survived (and those seem to be tatty). Ugly but interesting :)

Definitely some cool and different art on that one.

The same seller also has the Ballantine 3 volume soft cover set in the green slip case for...500! I actually can't a find a good comparable on that one.

65

I feel that I must indulge in the edition with the 50 watercolours from Alan Lee. Thanks, nice photos.

Coming out of my usual lurking place to ask if anybody have any experience with this book binder? He evidently rebinds the books and will also guild the pages but I'm not sure if I want to spend the money on an unknown.

https://www.etsy.com/listing/106187287/the-hobbit-hardback-book-dragon-skin?ref=...
https://www.etsy.com/listing/122065345/the-lord-of-the-rings-trillogy-hardback?r...

328

Update. got it but complete with manufacturer defects

Well at least you now have a rare limited edition you can post on ebay with a starting bid of 10k lol
Has anyone here bought the The Hobbit Facsimile First Edition: Boxed Set? I think it came out last month in the UK but will not be released here in Canada until the end of the month. I've been searching the web and I've yet to see any pics.

>331 JuliusC: "Has anyone here bought the The Hobbit Facsimile First Edition: Boxed Set? I think it came out last month in the UK."

That's news to me. I've had it on order for literally years, with frequent updates to tell me it's publication has been delayed yet again." I need to check this out.

If I recall bookdepository had its released pushed back to this year from last year. Since I don't see any images of the book floating around one can assume that it's delayed yet again.....

331

Ah yes, how devious, you mean like a Penny Black ;-)

There must be an industry term for the issue with the book. Anyone know it?

>334 LesMiserables:

There must be an industry term for the issue with the book. Anyone know it?

Printed in China.

Ah ha. I knew it would have to be something Technical :-)

>332 boldface:

I don't believe this was released, and last I heard was that if the date slipped again, then that would probably be it. The date then slipped (for about the fifth year), so I assume it is dead, but simply still sitting in the databases used by Amazon and Bookdepository.

It is a shame, as it would be preferable, IMHO, to an endless parade of re-releases with slightly different packaging.

>337 Studedoo:

I fear you're right.

It is a shame, because the facsimile edition would have been a good read for people that can't afford (or don't want to spend daft money on) a genuine first. I was lucky enough to pick up a 1946 (1st /4th) for sub-$100, but if it wasn't for that, there is no way I would have read the original version.

328:

What printing is your new book? Just wondering if they are still in the first printing of that edition, though I doubt it. Sorry yours is a mess. Hope you get it squared away.

340

It says, Published by Harper Collins 2005 (with a numeral 2 in the line below it)

>341 LesMiserables:

2005? Really? HarperCollins are so slack with their copyright information and numberlines - lots of mistakes recently.

Mine says (c) 2014 (with the 1 for the numberline).

342

Yes 2005 with 2 on number line

Sorry about the quality

Interesting, but not surprising. I think more than half of the recent Tolkien stuff has incorrect information on the copyright page (failing to have a correct numberline, wrong copyright date, describing Hardback as Paperback, etc, etc).

Do you guys recommend the FS Tolkien books? Are the options you believe to be superior for any reason?

>345 lechacal:

I'm not personally a big fan of the FS Tolkien books. I guess it is just a matter of personal taste, really. If you like the style of the covers and illustrations, they seem good enough (I only have The Hobbit and Silmarillion, though).

>345 lechacal:

I agree with Studedoo. The illustrations are exclusive to FS. Otherwise, the texts used predate the current "corrected" ones. However, as there's no such thing as a text free from all mistakes, that doesn't necessarily matter to most readers.

Amazon is showing the pub date for the facsimile Hobbit as September 2016.

>348 cstojano:

Yeah, won't happen. 3 months before Sept 2016 it will change to Sept 2017 (and I will get an email about the pre-order being pushed back). Has been going on for years :)

Frustratingly, I can't find the post where it was written, but David Brawn at HarperCollins was quoted as saying that the then specified publication date would either be met (i.e not pushed back a further time) or most likely it would not actually be released at all. This was at least one "date shift" back, so I think it is actually probably dead at this stage, unless HC have changed their tune on it.

Any clues why this would be delayed?

>350 cstojano:

No, but I assume the reason is economic and they don't think they will get enough profit out of it. Easier to just pump out another crappy boxed re-release of something already in print...

>350 cstojano:

Perhaps they're now waiting for the 80th anniversary of publication in 2017.

>352 boldface: I guess it is possible. I will continue to leave my several-years-old Amazon pre-order in place, and if a book eventually turns up one year, I'll certainly be both happy (and surprised).

So up above Studedoo posted the breakdown of the different editions of the Harper Collins deluxe editions. I finally tracked down some of these earlier editions and shot some comparisons for The Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings. The Hobbit is vastly different. In all images the one on the left is the newest printing from China whereas the one on the right is the earlier edition from Clays. You can see the major color difference and more minor differences in the thickness of the case (thicker on first printing), the placement of the title on the spine (more distant from the edge in the first printing and the curvature of the spine (more curved in the first printing). Anyway I just wanted to help contribute to the community since I have learned so much for reading this thread.

For the Lord of the Rings we have the same differences with the spine curvature and case thickness (which is admittedly very slight). The color differences are pretty subtle and the color is more apparently in the images than in hand. In these images the first printing is on the left (sorry I reversed this - wasn't thinking).

Thanks for posting those. I've had both old and new in my hands, but never at the same time. The contrast between printings of the Hobbit is even greater than I had realised (and I knew it was significant). The difference on LOTR is arguably a bit less than I had suspected.

Did you notice an odd odour with the Chinese ones. Not sure if it was earlier in this thread or on another one, but I had read a comment somrwhere about an unpleasant odour (the ones I had handled were still in the bookstore in shrinkwrap, so I hadn't noticed any myself)?

>353 Studedoo:

Same here. It's not the only book I currently have on perpetual order!

I didn't notice any particular smell actually. I was really shocked at the Hobbit differences as well. As a fairly new collector (

May I suggest starting a new thread? I'm a lurker on this particular thread as I have a passing interest in Tolkien's books, but even I must admit that this thread is taking a while to load with all the images throughout.