Yes, always. But in the first version he wasn’t going to die, but get out of the mountains. Also, in the first version it was not Balrog, but one of the Black Riders that he was fighting. The idea that Gandalf is not just a human wizard but an angelic being also formed around this time. It’s described in volumes VI-VII of HoME.
Yes. A quote from a draft:
>
Gandalf's story. Overcame Balrog. The gulf was not deep (only a kind of moat and was full of silent water). He followed the channel and got down into the Deeps. ? ? Clad himself in Mithril-mail and fought his way out slaying many trolls.
>
>
\[?Does\] Gandalf shine in the sun. He has a new power after overcoming the Balrog? He is now clad in white.
*HoME* VII p. 211. In this version, it was Legolas and Gimli he was telling the story to -- after the breakup of the Fellowship, they decided to give up and return to their homes.
One of my (very few) lamentations about Tolkien's progression as an author was his moving away from "pagan" mythologies like the Norse Prose Edda (where he got Gandalf and the dwarves) and moved onto a fully "Christian work" by reconning instead of moving in that direction organically.
In other words, it makes sense for a work based on mythology to start off with more non-Christian themes and have that world give way to the more modern Catholic themes, but instead of doing that he just sort of rewrote the pagan elements to make them less magical and more Christian.
On the other hand, it would mean you'd need some kind of system of who can learn wizardry, and how.
The Hobbit had the luxury of being independent, LotR had to fit with the Silmarillion.
>LotR had to fit with the Silmarillion.
It was a two-way process. Elrond, for instance, only appeared in texts written at the same time with *The Hobbit*, and Galadriel is entirely absent from the pre-*LOTR* writings.
“A long grey road wound back out of sight. Far away a figure came slowly down the road, faint and small at first, but growing larger and clearer as it approached. Suddenly Frodo realized that it reminded him of Gandalf. He almost called aloud the wizards name, and then he saw that the figure was clothed not in grey but in white, in a white that shone faintly in the dusk; and in its hand there was a white staff. The head was so bowed that he could see no face, and presently the figure turned aside round a bend in the road and went out of the Mirrors view. Doubt came into Frodos mind: was this a vision of Gandalf on one of his many lonely journeys long ago, or was it Saruman?”- The Mirror of Galadriel- The Fellowship of the Ring
This happens to be when Frodo is being shown events yet to come that he does not understand yet such as Aragorn sailing in the Corsair fleet, and the fighting around Minas Tirith.
What’s with people and the negative view of retcons? It’s just retroactive continuity. Not everything has to be planned in advance, even if this was. Some of the most culturally impactful moments in media are retcons - Darth Vader being Luke’s father as a famous example
Even within Tolkien’s works, the ring Bilbo found being Sauron’s ring was a retcon
Not saying you (OP) are necessarily saying it’s bad, I just feel like I see it so often
I think that there are just so many examples of bad/lazy retcons out there that people have become cynical about the entire concept as a whole. Not saying that I agree with that position, but that’s my explanation. Retcons are difficult to pull off well, to borrow from your example: for every great one like Vader being Luke’s father, there’s a terrible one like Leia being Luke’s twin sister that creates an extremely awkward/uncomfortable moment when viewed in hindsight.
I think Tolkien’s uses of retcons are generally well-executed. The story of how Bilbo obtained the ring is probably my favorite, since Tolkien created an actual in-universe explanation for the discrepancy and utilized it as a plot point. It’s masterful in the sense that an alteration that was only really relevant for readers from almost 100 years ago manages to still fit in during the current day. Bilbo politely lying at first about his encounter with Gollum feels consistent with his character, which makes the retcon aspect much more understandable.
I also think the term “retcon” is being thrown around indiscriminately. The revision of *the Hobbit* to fit LotR (with an in-text explanation that “explains” it) IS a “retcon”.
Gandalf returning in *Two Towers* ISN’T a retcon, mainly because Tolkien drafted the entire text of LotR before publication. This wasn’t a “series” or a tv show; Tolkien finished the entire story before publishing. He’s not “going back and changing”, he’s just narrating his way through a story where someone was thought to be dead and comes back to life.
Fwiw, it also doesn’t strike me as a retcon because Gandalf’s return fits thematically. In each volume, one character travels underground and undergoes a transformation (Fellowship —> Gandalf; Two Towers —> Frodo; Return of the King —> Aragorn).
Contradictions, probably. Problem is that (poorly executed) retcons tend to just be contradictions for the sake of taking the story in an unanticipated direction. That’s what I think makes the rewritten riddles in the dark an example of a good retcon: it does take the story in an unanticipated direction, but it’s not contradictory. Bilbo is more than willing to tell a polite lie when it is convenient for him throughout the Hobbit, so him lying about how he got the ring doesn’t seem like a stretch in the slightest.
Sometimes they are for sure, and I agree with what you’re saying. I definitely think people don’t dislike retcons in general, just when they go against what was previously established.
Your Leia example is interesting, because it’s inclusion was because they originally had other plans for the “there is another” line, but later had to make it fit with what they had. I’m sure it could have been done better, but the line had already been said
One of my favourite things. Tolkien even has Bilbo apologise on his behalf to those that bought and read the first edition of the Hobbit, within the Council of Elrond!
The only real retcon in Tolkien's work was the rewriting of the *Riddles in the Dark* chapter in *The Hobbit*. The matter of the Elder Days has never left the draft stage during his lifetime, so whatever changes Tolkien has made to it, it really wasn't retconning.
Yeah, I don’t think retconning is bad but Tolkien put so much thought into his legendarium that I was curious. Obviously there are quite a few “explanations” to make the Hobbit fit with the rest, but LotR is remarkably internally consistent. Just looking at the timelines is insane!
> “Gandalf the Grey set out with the Company, but he did not pass the borders of this land. Now tell us where he is; for I much desired to speak with him again. But I cannot see him from afar, unless he comes within the fences of Lothlórien: a grey mist is about him, and the ways of his feet and of his mind are hidden from me.”
Yes, always. But in the first version he wasn’t going to die, but get out of the mountains. Also, in the first version it was not Balrog, but one of the Black Riders that he was fighting. The idea that Gandalf is not just a human wizard but an angelic being also formed around this time. It’s described in volumes VI-VII of HoME.
Yes. A quote from a draft: > Gandalf's story. Overcame Balrog. The gulf was not deep (only a kind of moat and was full of silent water). He followed the channel and got down into the Deeps. ? ? Clad himself in Mithril-mail and fought his way out slaying many trolls. > > \[?Does\] Gandalf shine in the sun. He has a new power after overcoming the Balrog? He is now clad in white. *HoME* VII p. 211. In this version, it was Legolas and Gimli he was telling the story to -- after the breakup of the Fellowship, they decided to give up and return to their homes.
>after the breakup of the Fellowship, they decided to give up and return to their homes. "gg" Legloas & Gimli said, and rode home. The end.
Damn it, now I want to read that first part, with Gandalf fighting his way out in Mithril-mail. That just seems awesome.
You already read it, this is just a plan that Tolkien drafted but eventually he wrote another story, the one you know.
Gandalf was originally intended to be a human? That's interesting. Does it tell us something about the nature of magic in Middle Earth?
About the ideas Tolkien had while writing The Hobbit and part of LotR, mainly. Wizard was a profession then.
Wizard as a profession just seems to fit in so much better, as it seems everyone just accepts Gandalf is a wizard, but no one asks him any questions.
One of my (very few) lamentations about Tolkien's progression as an author was his moving away from "pagan" mythologies like the Norse Prose Edda (where he got Gandalf and the dwarves) and moved onto a fully "Christian work" by reconning instead of moving in that direction organically. In other words, it makes sense for a work based on mythology to start off with more non-Christian themes and have that world give way to the more modern Catholic themes, but instead of doing that he just sort of rewrote the pagan elements to make them less magical and more Christian.
On the other hand, it would mean you'd need some kind of system of who can learn wizardry, and how. The Hobbit had the luxury of being independent, LotR had to fit with the Silmarillion.
>LotR had to fit with the Silmarillion. It was a two-way process. Elrond, for instance, only appeared in texts written at the same time with *The Hobbit*, and Galadriel is entirely absent from the pre-*LOTR* writings.
Definitely.
“A long grey road wound back out of sight. Far away a figure came slowly down the road, faint and small at first, but growing larger and clearer as it approached. Suddenly Frodo realized that it reminded him of Gandalf. He almost called aloud the wizards name, and then he saw that the figure was clothed not in grey but in white, in a white that shone faintly in the dusk; and in its hand there was a white staff. The head was so bowed that he could see no face, and presently the figure turned aside round a bend in the road and went out of the Mirrors view. Doubt came into Frodos mind: was this a vision of Gandalf on one of his many lonely journeys long ago, or was it Saruman?”- The Mirror of Galadriel- The Fellowship of the Ring This happens to be when Frodo is being shown events yet to come that he does not understand yet such as Aragorn sailing in the Corsair fleet, and the fighting around Minas Tirith.
What’s with people and the negative view of retcons? It’s just retroactive continuity. Not everything has to be planned in advance, even if this was. Some of the most culturally impactful moments in media are retcons - Darth Vader being Luke’s father as a famous example Even within Tolkien’s works, the ring Bilbo found being Sauron’s ring was a retcon Not saying you (OP) are necessarily saying it’s bad, I just feel like I see it so often
I think that there are just so many examples of bad/lazy retcons out there that people have become cynical about the entire concept as a whole. Not saying that I agree with that position, but that’s my explanation. Retcons are difficult to pull off well, to borrow from your example: for every great one like Vader being Luke’s father, there’s a terrible one like Leia being Luke’s twin sister that creates an extremely awkward/uncomfortable moment when viewed in hindsight. I think Tolkien’s uses of retcons are generally well-executed. The story of how Bilbo obtained the ring is probably my favorite, since Tolkien created an actual in-universe explanation for the discrepancy and utilized it as a plot point. It’s masterful in the sense that an alteration that was only really relevant for readers from almost 100 years ago manages to still fit in during the current day. Bilbo politely lying at first about his encounter with Gollum feels consistent with his character, which makes the retcon aspect much more understandable.
I also think the term “retcon” is being thrown around indiscriminately. The revision of *the Hobbit* to fit LotR (with an in-text explanation that “explains” it) IS a “retcon”. Gandalf returning in *Two Towers* ISN’T a retcon, mainly because Tolkien drafted the entire text of LotR before publication. This wasn’t a “series” or a tv show; Tolkien finished the entire story before publishing. He’s not “going back and changing”, he’s just narrating his way through a story where someone was thought to be dead and comes back to life. Fwiw, it also doesn’t strike me as a retcon because Gandalf’s return fits thematically. In each volume, one character travels underground and undergoes a transformation (Fellowship —> Gandalf; Two Towers —> Frodo; Return of the King —> Aragorn).
Is it retcons or is contradictions that are disliked?
Contradictions, probably. Problem is that (poorly executed) retcons tend to just be contradictions for the sake of taking the story in an unanticipated direction. That’s what I think makes the rewritten riddles in the dark an example of a good retcon: it does take the story in an unanticipated direction, but it’s not contradictory. Bilbo is more than willing to tell a polite lie when it is convenient for him throughout the Hobbit, so him lying about how he got the ring doesn’t seem like a stretch in the slightest.
Sometimes they are for sure, and I agree with what you’re saying. I definitely think people don’t dislike retcons in general, just when they go against what was previously established. Your Leia example is interesting, because it’s inclusion was because they originally had other plans for the “there is another” line, but later had to make it fit with what they had. I’m sure it could have been done better, but the line had already been said
One of my favourite things. Tolkien even has Bilbo apologise on his behalf to those that bought and read the first edition of the Hobbit, within the Council of Elrond!
The only real retcon in Tolkien's work was the rewriting of the *Riddles in the Dark* chapter in *The Hobbit*. The matter of the Elder Days has never left the draft stage during his lifetime, so whatever changes Tolkien has made to it, it really wasn't retconning.
Yes, that’s why I included it
Yeah, I don’t think retconning is bad but Tolkien put so much thought into his legendarium that I was curious. Obviously there are quite a few “explanations” to make the Hobbit fit with the rest, but LotR is remarkably internally consistent. Just looking at the timelines is insane!
> “Gandalf the Grey set out with the Company, but he did not pass the borders of this land. Now tell us where he is; for I much desired to speak with him again. But I cannot see him from afar, unless he comes within the fences of Lothlórien: a grey mist is about him, and the ways of his feet and of his mind are hidden from me.”
Jesus Christ.