Letter 242 - Revision history

Gamling at 01:05, 22 June 2011

2011-06-22T01:05:51Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:05, 22 June 2011
Line 6:		Line 6:
	}}{{letter\|242}}		}}{{letter\|242}}
	==Summary==		==Summary==
−	Following the publication of ''[[The Adventures of Tom Bombadil]]'' six days earlier, two reviews had been published: one by ''The Times Literary Supplement'', and one in ''The Listener''. Both were positive, but Tolkien ~~thinks~~ both reviewers started out not wanting to be amused. He ~~remains~~ puzzled as to why "if a 'professor' shows any knowledge of his professional techniques it must be 'waggery', but if a writer shows, say, knowledge of law or law-courts it is held interesting and creditable."	+	Following the publication of ''[[The Adventures of Tom Bombadil]]'' six days earlier, two reviews had been published: one by ''The Times Literary Supplement'', and one in ''The Listener''. Both were positive, but Tolkien thought both reviewers started out not wanting to be amused. He remained puzzled as to why "if a 'professor' shows any knowledge of his professional techniques it must be 'waggery', but if a writer shows, say, knowledge of law or law-courts it is held interesting and creditable."
	{{letters}}		{{letters}}

Mith: Changed date format

2011-06-11T11:47:55Z

Changed date format

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:47, 11 June 2011
Line 2:		Line 2:
	\| #=242		\| #=242
	\| to=[[Allen and Unwin]]		\| to=[[Allen and Unwin]]
−	\| date= [[~~1962#~~November~~\|November 28~~]], [[1962]]	+	\| date= [[28 November]] [[1962]]
	\| subject=''[[The Adventures of Tom Bombadil]]''		\| subject=''[[The Adventures of Tom Bombadil]]''
	}}{{letter\|242}}		}}{{letter\|242}}

Ederchil at 14:19, 31 August 2010

2010-08-31T14:19:08Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:19, 31 August 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	{{letter\|242}}	+	{{letter infobox
		+	\| #=242
		+	\| to=[[Allen and Unwin]]
		+	\| date= [[1962#November\|November 28]], [[1962]]
		+	\| subject=''[[The Adventures of Tom Bombadil]]''
		+	}}{{letter\|242}}
	==Summary==		==Summary==
−	~~This fragment of a letter, dated [[November 28]], [[1962]], was addressed to [[Stanley Unwin]]. It involves~~ the ~~publishing~~ of ''[[The Adventures of Tom Bombadil]]'', six days earlier~~. At the time~~, two reviews had been published: one by ''The Times Literary Supplement'', and one in ''The Listener''. Both were positive, but Tolkien thinks both reviewers started out not wanting to be amused. He remains puzzled as to why "if a 'professor' shows any knowledge of his professional techniques it must be 'waggery', but if a writer shows, say, knowledge of law or law-courts it is held interesting and creditable."	+	Following the publication of ''[[The Adventures of Tom Bombadil]]'' six days earlier, two reviews had been published: one by ''The Times Literary Supplement'', and one in ''The Listener''. Both were positive, but Tolkien thinks both reviewers started out not wanting to be amused. He remains puzzled as to why "if a 'professor' shows any knowledge of his professional techniques it must be 'waggery', but if a writer shows, say, knowledge of law or law-courts it is held interesting and creditable."
	{{letters}}		{{letters}}

Ederchil at 11:46, 22 June 2008

2008-06-22T11:46:41Z

New page

{{letter|242}}
==Summary==
This fragment of a letter, dated [[November 28]], [[1962]], was addressed to [[Stanley Unwin]]. It involves the publishing of ''[[The Adventures of Tom Bombadil]]'', six days earlier. At the time, two reviews had been published: one by ''The Times Literary Supplement'', and one in ''The Listener''. Both were positive, but Tolkien thinks both reviewers started out not wanting to be amused. He remains puzzled as to why "if a 'professor' shows any knowledge of his professional techniques it must be 'waggery', but if a writer shows, say, knowledge of law or law-courts it is held interesting and creditable."
{{letters}}