The Rings of Power has faced a lot of heat since it was first announced, but one of the greatest aspects of J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings won’t allow me to hate the series. As one of the most iconic pieces of fantasy, it’s no surprise that fans are intensely protective of The Lord of the Rings. I am often among those rolling their eyes when a great story is slaughtered for the screen. However, Tolkien’s unique method of storytelling makes Lord of the Rings a perfect source for adaptations, which is why I find many criticisms of Rings of Power unfair.
The controversy around Prime Video’s Rings of Power has been unending. A great deal of this comes from loyalty to Peter Jackson’s The Lord of the Rings trilogy, which has become the pinnacle of book-to-screen adaptations despite facing its own wave of criticism back in the early 2000s. However, there are also the Tolkien purists, who are frustrated with the many changes Rings of Power has made to the Second Age. Breaking canon is often a serious crime, and this is clear from Rings of Power’s reception. The problem is that Tolkien never had a single canon for The Lord of the Rings.
Tolkien Wrote His Lord Of The Rings Books Like Real-World Histories
Tolkien Approached His Work Like They Were Found Manuscripts Rather Than His Own Invention
Tolkien was a philologist, which basically means he was a historian and linguist with a profound interest in the passing down of written and oral storytelling. He was an expert in European history and folklore, and this played a significant role in The Lord of the Rings. Rather than simply writing a story about a creature called a hobbit who found a magical ring, Tolkien approached his work as if someone else had written them centuries before and that he had simply discovered and translated them. This “found manuscript” literary device allowed Tolkien a great deal of flexibility in his legendarium.
The central story of The Lord of the Rings was meant to be contained within the Red Book of Westmarch, an in-world volume written collectively by Bilbo Baggins, Frodo Baggins, Sam Gamgee, and Sam’s descendants.
The central story of The Lord of the Rings was meant to be contained within the Red Book of Westmarch, an in-world volume written collectively by Bilbo Baggins, Frodo Baggins, Sam Gamgee, and Sam’s descendants. Tolkien was meant to have discovered the Red Book and constructed an English translation of its contents into The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. The Appendices of Return of the King and posthumously published works like The Silmarillion were meant to be records of other such ancient texts written from the perspective of the Elves of Middle-earth, left behind to preserve their history.
Tolkien’s Approach Means There Isn’t Only 1 Version Of Canon
Tolkien Wrote Multiple Versions Of The Same Stories Just Like Real Histories Come With Different Perspectives
Tolkien’s “found manuscript” approach to his works meant a great deal of flexibility with his legendarium. For example, after The Hobbit had already been published, he conceived the idea for The Lord of the Rings but recognized that the original version of Bilbo’s story (in which Gollum willingly bet the One Ring and easily handed it over) contradicted the idea that Gollum’s ring was Sauron’s great weapon. So, he retconned the original story, republished a version in which Bilbo basically stole the One Ring, and included a note stating that Bilbo had simply lied about how he attained it.
Other examples can be found all throughout Tolkien’s Middle-earth legendarium. The Silmarillion and The Unfinished Tales of Numenor and Middle-earth are full of different versions of the same story. Tolkien’s various documented letters reveal that the author specifically left some questions unanswered (looking at you, Tom Bombadil, and Ungoliant) since real-world history doesn’t come with all the answers either. It’s a delightful way to tell a story and is how Tolkien managed to build one of the most complex literary worlds in history. What’s more, it makes Middle-earth’s stories perfect for screen adaptations.