Talk:The Children of Húrin

Untitled discussion

Can anyone find any more detailed sources about this? In particular: how much new stuff? I rather thought he'd sworn off writing new stuff. Morwen - Talk 14:45, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

So did we all, but apparently he's been keeping this a secret for the past three decades. With this announcement some of the rather oblique references in HoMe (particularily regarding The Wanderings of Húrin) begin to make sense: I think Chris, upon the discovery of Wanderings, decided to complete the Narn. None of the usual places has info yet on the content, but I think it's a sure bet that it will draw heavily on the Narn and the Wanderings. -- Jordi·✆ 15:12, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm not surprised he's been careful about it. Given Tolkien's outline, the sort of writers who do the extended Star Wars stuff could produce something that would sell. But something worthy? That has to take a long time and be very difficult. I am however looking forward to it. --GwydionM 15:28, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

"keeping this a secret for the past three decades"? That figure only refers to the time since the publication of the The Silmarillion - it seems that CJRT has only been working on this for the past year or so, building on various other work done in those 30 years, most of which, of course, was to do with other stuff, rather than the "Children of Hurin". The popular press have been widely and inaccurately reporting this as "taking three decades to write". That statement is not in the article here, and we should keep it that way. Carcharoth 13:45, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Who or what are you replying to?

By the way, I have gone through various articles and removed references to TCOH as a work "written and not completed" in 1918, which is an obvious misinterpretation of the press releases. I think the press has taken the fact that Tolkien's first Túrinssaga was written down in 1918, and as usual misinterpreted it. In truth of course Tolkien was continually revising the saga until his death, as we've already seen in the Silm, UT, and HoME. I look forward to CJRT's book, a complete and comprehensive narrative seems hard to do, and it will be interesting to see what is included and what not. -- Jordi·✆ 13:59, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

I was replying to you, as I quoted what you wrote. Sorry if it wasn't clear. Carcharoth 20:25, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

The official website says he hasn't written any new stuff, which rather implies it will be resting heavily on texts not previously presented in Unfinished Tales or History of Middle-earth. Should be interesting. Morwen - Talk 08:59, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I think the version of the tale in the Silmarilion is pretty much complete in that it has a beginning, the key events are there, and there is a resolution to each strand of the story. The other versions which exist have varying degrees of detail in different parts and aspects of the tale, with some inconsistencies or conflicts with the Silmarilion version and some areas of the broader story not covered at all. Chris has not had to write any new material (and if he did I'd personally throttle him) but has had a difficult job in compiling and editing a version which flows smoothly, is stylistically consistent, does justice to each key element of the tale and doesn't contradict the broader story of the Silmarilion. Next up: Beren and Luthien --JamesTheNumberless 09:08, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Elves of the First Age

I think the book will have an interesting effect on the mass of fans, those who haven't read The Silmarillion, never mind the Histories. They'll see Elves of a very imperfect sort, notably the bigot Saeros. --GwydionM 15:35, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I would be worried about anyone reading this book without having read the Sil first. Lord of the Rings fans will find a very different world from that which they know and will miss crucial background stories to Doriath, Nargothrond and the whole war of the Silmarils. --JamesTheNumberless 09:00, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Reception

How has the book been received by critics and by the Tolkien fanbase? There seems to be little on the subject in this article. --JamesTheNumberless 08:55, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Wondering the same. None of the controversy reported in the media is mentioned here, and only glowing reviews have been cited with critical or neutral ones ignored: http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/fiction/article1639071.ece (UK The Sunday Times), http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070418/FEATURES05/704180408 (Detroit Free Press), http://www.smh.com.au/news/books/fans-queue-for-final-tolkien/2007/04/18/1176696888059.html (Sydney Morning Herald). http://www.salon.com/books/feature/2007/04/17/hurin/ (Salon) It didn't take long to find these. Wiki is supposed to be balanced, but this seems like PR astroturfing to me. I suggest quoting the spectrum of reviews, not just the glowing ones. Frondfall 02:56, 23 April 2007 (UTC) Why are all the reviews those from the US, when it's a British author?Jatrius 11:46, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Germany

Simultaneously (April 17) published in Germany as Die Kinder Húrins. Worth mentioning? --128.176.233.115 16:31, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

-- It has also been published in Portugal as Os filhos de Húrin.

Title page within the book...

Gives it's name in both the English and Elvish, openly. The beginning of this page should identify it by both names that the author and editor retained for it. --Chr.K. 12:33, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

References in other media

I have also added this in the discussion on the Túrin Turambar-page. I noticed the game Castlevania: Symphony of the Night contains at least two weapons from Children of Húrin. One is a black sword and is directly referred to as "Mormegil". The other is an icebrand which is said to belong to "Mîm". Should such things be added to the page? Cyanid (talk) 17:28, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Literary Themes

I know this is a fairly new work, and as such there has not been much scholarly review of it, but I think a "Literary Themes" section would add a great deal. The Biblical themes (which Tolkien certainly intended) are obvious. In many ways it resembles the book of Job, as the primary antagonist--Morgoth/Satan--does everything in its power to make the protagonist miserable, but without physically harming him. In addition, there is also the Old Testament theme of mortals failing to heed the counsel of the wise (angels and God in the OT, elves and Melian in the Narn), and this following their own counsel consistently leads to disaster.

I would love to add something about this to the main page, but I'm unsure if it's appropriate to do without citing sources.

Synopsis

It seems weird to have the synopsis written in the past tense: I can't think of a single synopsis I've ever read which isn't in the present tense. I'm tempted to change this one, but I imagine that there are a few Tolkien fans who are quite protective of his works so I'm checking in here first to ask if anyone has any objections to me doing so Dom Kaos (talk) 16:34, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

No objections, so I have done so Dom Kaos (talk) 16:20, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

WP:MeS 1.9.1 and [1] state that it should be written in the past tense. Double sharp (talk) 11:28, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Synopsis length

Following recent edits, the synopsis is now at least twice as long as necessary. -- Elphion (talk) 01:41, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Illustrations

(quote) "Alan Lee, illustrator of other fantasy works by J. R. R. Tolkien (The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings) created the jacket painting, as well as the illustrations within the book."

This makes the interior illustrations an afterthought. The infobox unusually identifies Lee as cover artist rather than illustrator. Is the number of interior illustrations unusually small? Is there another rationale? --P64 (talk) 22:23, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Sketch Map of Beleriand.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:16, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Notability of Morwen Eledhwen

This is currently a redirect here. pl:Morwena Eledhwen was recently kept after finding this academic source, which arguably provides some SIGCOV. It's just one source and en wiki requires 2+ generlaly, per GNG. @Chiswick Chap for a possible to-do project. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 23:16, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Certainly sounds marginal at best, but could earn her a mention somewhere. Hurin is the article that needs work from someone interested. Chiswick Chap (talk) 02:39, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Children of Húrin/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Vanamonde93 (talk · contribs) 23:15, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

I'll be happy to review this one: perhaps embarrassingly I haven't read the book, but that's not the worst thing in a reviewer. Vanamonde (Talk) 23:15, 27 August 2023 (UTC) Also, good to see you, Chiswick Chap, been a while, hope you're well. Vanamonde (Talk) 02:33, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Vanamonde, thank you, and good to interact with you again. I've addressed all your points below. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:55, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks: I've looked it over and nothing else sticks out to me, so passing. Interesting read. Vanamonde (Talk) 16:31, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Sources

• Beginning with source checks, I believe each of the sources present here is fine as far as they go (refreshing, not to have to flag a half-dozen...). That said, I have some notes:

  Thank you.

• I would strong prefer secondary sources being used for anything that isn't plot material; so all of the author section. I would also think it possible to construct a "setting" subsection, sourced to secondary sources, separate from the in-universe background (which is fine in and of itself).

  Added refs. I think the combination of the Authorial context and the In-universe setting sufficient.

• There's a dozen decent scholarly sources out there. Even at FAC it would not be expected that you use them all, but I'm seeing three sources by two authors, only one of which is specific to this story at all. I wonder if you could work in a couple more? I would suggest the following: [10.1353/tks.0.0022], [2], [3].

  Done.

• Footnote 12 strikes me as out of place. I think you could work that link into the prose, but we shouldn't be referring to other Wikipedia articles as sources. Certainly the link isn't actually supporting the text it footnotes, and I don't think you meant it to.

  Moved to Notes, it was never a ref.

Spotchecks:

• FN2 is okay on substance, but I think you need to make it clear it's referring to Tolkien's writing as it appeared in the Silmarillion; the source predates the publication of the Children of Hurin. Also: I think the page range is incorrect? I can only access fragments, but 155-156 make no mention of the Valkyrie, Siegmund and Sieglinde, or Nienor.

  Glossed; added the other source I'd also used.

• T4: I don't think you should be using a primary source for analytical claims about influences; at best the content needs to be rephrased to a bare retelling of what's in the source material.

  Edited.

• FN7 checks out.

  Noted.

  FN8 checks out, though the author is referring to a specific chapter...suggest working that in.

  Done.

• FN11 checks out.

  Noted.

  FN16 checks out.

  Noted.

  Link seems to be broken for FN19; could you find an archived version?

  Added.

Prose matters:

• Both themes and reception feel a little thin to me, themes especially so. We don't need a dozen paragraphs; this isn't FAC; but we could manage more detail, surely?

  See "Sources" above on themes. Reception has a dozen sources already, and it discusses a wide range of opinions.

• I confess I don't love the parentheticals in the reception section: to me it makes the prose choppy, and as a reader I'm more interested in the why than in whether the review was positive or negative. I cannot fault the construction based on any objective reading of the criteria, so I'm not going to do more than note this here.

  Edited them out.

• The lead, also, feels a little thin. I would include a little bit about the influences and themes, and perhaps detail from reception. Two paragraphs is what I would suggest for an article this length; perhaps a doubling of what's there?

  Done.

• The origin of orcs in-universe is murky, as I recall, and not contemporaneous with other races (which indeed also emerge at different times)...

  True, but since we haven't said when any of them emerged here, it's for other articles to discuss.

• Gloss Beleg and Saeros at first appearance (you could also omit Saeros altogether; see note about length above).

  Glossed. Saeros is in a way key as he's the start of the killing-spree that characterizes T's life... and death.

• Brandir could likewise be omitted, I think.

  Not really, he occurs repeatedly, close to the core of the story.

• "having monkeyed with his father's text" strikes me as a little colloquial.

  Replaced.

Miscellaneous notes:

• I'm under the impression that the "preceded" and "followed" fields in the infobox are for series; you could use the appropriate middle earth volumes, but given the history I would omit altogether; I don't see how Sigurd and Gudrun is in any way a successor of this work.

  Removed.

• At 927 words, the plot summary is pushing the length limit. Could you tighten? 700 is what I typically aim for, but you could lose a 100 words or so quite easily I think.

  Trimmed.

• @Chiswick Chap: That's all I have for the moment, I'll take a second pass once you've dealt with my comments: ping me when you're done, if you would. Vanamonde (Talk) 02:33, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Number one or number two?

This source seems to indicate that it reached number one for one week:https://archive.nytimes.com/query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage-9B0CE0DD133EF935A35756C0A9619C8B63.html The current ref in the article goes to the most current book list.Hardyplants (talk) 10:23, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Many thanks, done, the NYT archive does better than Archive.org in this case. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:16, 28 August 2023 (UTC)