Discuss Carpenter #148: Letter from J.R.R. Tolkien to Katharine Farrer on 7 August 1954

Sadly not. I've been looking for this one for a number or years without luck. I thought I had a copy on its way to me a few years ago alas for it to be the wrong issue of the Sunday Times.

I've asked Matt who is a review nut if he has a copy.

Sadly not - though here's a question - Johnson's bibliography has the article in The Times dated 8 August 1954 - a Sunday indeed. I haven't watched the video, but the heading implies the letter was dated 7 August i.e. the day before the review would have appeared.

Might he have been shown a copy of the review in advance? Or is there some other factual error somewhere?

Predictable Matt wrote:

Sadly not - though here's a question - Johnson's bibliography has the article in The Times dated 8 August 1954 - a Sunday indeed. I haven't watched the video, but the heading implies the letter was dated 7 August i.e. the day before the review would have appeared.

Might he have been shown a copy of the review in advance? Or is there some other factual error somewhere?

That is an interesting point. I don't have an answer to that!

I will look at who we know who has a subscription to the Times (thanks Matt for the suggestion).

Good catch! Another question Matt you may be able to answer having dug deeper than me on this one...

Johnson's Six Decades of Criticism lists two reviews by J.W. Lambert, both in the Sunday Times, and both titled "New Fiction". August 8 and December 12, 1954 (Johnson B124 and B125, p. 29). She then footnotes these two reviews with a cross reference to B1645, which is "Early Review of Books by J.R.R. Tolkien" by Geroge H. Thomson in Mythlore #40, pp. 56-60.

I took at look at that issue of Mythlore to see if there was any additional information on these reviews, but I don't see them at all there! Am I missing something?

Also, Chronology entry for 6, 8 August (just prior to the entry on 7 August where this letter is described) notes that Tolkien added a note on the 8th to a letter dated 6 August to Miss Perry ^{Letter from J.R.R. Tolkien to Miss Perry • 6 August 1954 (#1061)[1]} talking about the Sunday Times review. Perhaps he did the same to this letter.

Carpenter probably just noted the date from the top of the letter, but it doesn't necessarily mean it was sent on the 7th - he might have started the letter on the 7th but not sealed and posted it until Monday the 9th.

Urulókë wrote:

Good catch! Another question Matt you may be able to answer having dug deeper than me on this one...

Johnson's Six Decades of Criticism lists two reviews by J.W. Lambert, both in the Sunday Times, and both titled "New Fiction". August 8 and December 12, 1954 (Johnson B124 and B125, p. 29). She then footnotes these two reviews with a cross reference to B1645, which is "Early Review of Books by J.R.R. Tolkien" by Geroge H. Thomson in Mythlore #40, pp. 56-60.

I took at look at that issue of Mythlore to see if there was any additional information on these reviews, but I don't see them at all there! Am I missing something?

I have an answer (well, partial anyway) - the reviews of FOTR annotated by Thomson span across Part I (in Mythlore 40) and Part II (in Mythlore 41). The "L" entries (incl. Lambert) are in Part II.

Partial - because only the review on 8 August is mentioned/annotated by Thomson. The reason for this, I suspect, is that Thomson decided to "cut" the 12 December review from his Part II, which was published after Johnson went to print. The fact of him having made a note of the 12 December review can be inferred from Johnson B1646 which refers to the "unpublished annotated bibliography...generously shared" by Thomson.

Urulókë wrote:

Also, Chronology entry for 6, 8 August (just prior to the entry on 7 August where this letter is described) notes that Tolkien added a note on the 8th to a letter dated 6 August to Miss Perry talking about the Sunday Times review. Perhaps he did the same to this letter.

Carpenter probably just noted the date from the top of the letter, but it doesn't necessarily mean it was sent on the 7th - he might have started the letter on the 7th but not sealed and posted it until Monday the 9th.

Yes of course! A perfectly feasible explanation - though one that does not come to mind as easily as it would have done before electronic mail was devised 😀