From: "KMW5511" Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: LOTR on tape. BBC or NPR? Lines: 10 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 00:23:49 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.160.224.134 X-Complaints-To: abuse@rr.com X-Trace: twister.rdc-kc.rr.com 1073521429 24.160.224.134 (Wed, 07 Jan 2004 18:23:49 CST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 18:23:49 CST Path: redlance.franklin.ch!pfaff2.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!elnk-pas-nf1!newsfeed.earthlink.net!cyclone.socal.rr.com!cyclone2.kc.rr.com!news2.kc.rr.com!twister.rdc-kc.rr.com.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail Xref: redlance.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:136710 I have seen two versions of LOTR on tape at a local bookstore. One has BBC on the box and the other NPR. Which is the better of the two? Or are they the same? I am thinking of getting this as a gift for my wife and any help would be appreciated. ###### From: MP Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: LOTR on tape. BBC or NPR? References: User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.2 (PPC Mac OS X) Message-ID: Lines: 45 NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.228.98.175 X-Complaints-To: abuse@comcast.net X-Trace: attbi_s03 1073531842 12.228.98.175 (Thu, 08 Jan 2004 03:17:22 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 03:17:22 GMT Organization: Comcast Online Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 03:17:22 GMT Path: redlance.franklin.ch!pfaff2.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!newshub.sdsu.edu!elnk-nf2-pas!newsfeed.earthlink.net!attbi_feed3!attbi.com!attbi_s03.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: redlance.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:136723 In article , "KMW5511" wrote: > I have seen two versions of LOTR on tape at a local bookstore. One has BBC > on the box and the other NPR. Which is the better of the two? Or are they > the same? > > I am thinking of getting this as a gift for my wife and any help would be > appreciated. If the BBC version is the radio dramatization done in the 1950s, keep in mind that Tolkien loathed it and thought it silly. I caught only a short slice of the NPR version when it ran on the air, but what I heard seemed quite good. The one negative, if I remember right, is that the orcs spoke Cockney English (no h's). The English snooty classes (and NPR) may equate Cockney with foulness, but Tolkien did not and specifically called for the BBC version not to do that. That said, also keep in mind that Tolkien did not think that LOTR could be dramatized very easily. By that, he seemed to mean that when all the background comments from the book were taken out and the tale became almost pure dialogue, too much was removed. Those remarks seem to apply only to radio/audio dramatizations. From his letters to his publisher, he seems to have believed that his tale could be adapted for a movie. Christopher Tolkien's hostility to the film trilogy probably goes back to a confusion between his father's skepticism about a radio dramatization versus his greater openness to a film adaptation. You can do much, much more in film. Keep in mind that there are also unabridged versions of the book itself on tape and CD. Your wife might like that better since it isn't subject to any editing. Right now, I'm listening to The Fellowship of the Ring on tape when I go for walks. Listening, I hear things in the text I never see when I read it. --Mike Perry Author: Untangling Tolkien -- **************** Preorder Lord of the Ring DVDs and videos. http://www.inklingbooks.com/ **************** ###### From: Stan Brown Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: LOTR on tape. BBC or NPR? Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 13:44:42 -0500 Organization: Oak Road Systems Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.60 X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 33 Path: redlance.franklin.ch!pfaff2.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!irazu.switch.ch!switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-04!sn-xit-06!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: redlance.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:136823 It seems "KMW5511" wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien in article : > > >I have seen two versions of LOTR on tape at a local bookstore. One has BBC >on the box and the other NPR. Which is the better of the two? Or are they >the same? > >I am thinking of getting this as a gift for my wife and any help would be >appreciated. Both are dramatizations, and I'm not intimately familiar with either. Let me at least suggest that instead you consider a _reading_, specifically the one by Rob Inglis. It's every word of the novel and prologue (but not the appendices, I think). He does an outstanding job IMHO of making the different voices live. My hunch is that people who liked the movie tend to prefer a dramatization when choosing an audio format, whereas people who prefer the book tend to prefer a reading. But it's just my hunch. Anyway, the choice of mode is a personal preference. -- Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com Tolkien FAQs: http://Tolkien.slimy.com (Steuard Jensen's site) Tolkien letters FAQ: http://users.telerama.com/~taliesen/tolkien/lettersfaq.html FAQ of the Rings: http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/ringfaq.htm Encyclopedia of Arda: http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/default.htm more FAQs: http://oakroadsystems.com/tech/faqget.htm ###### Lines: 39 X-Admin: news@cs.com From: lordnerdonhigh@cs.comcrap (Lord Nerd on High) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Date: 09 Jan 2004 04:09:50 GMT References: Organization: CompuServe (http://www.compuserve.com/) Subject: Re: LOTR on tape. BBC or NPR? Message-ID: <20040108230950.15860.00001601@mb-m21.news.cs.com> Path: redlance.franklin.ch!pfaff2.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!irazu.switch.ch!switch.ch!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!newsfeed.stueberl.de!small1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!ngpeer.news.aol.com!audrey-m2.news.cs.com!not-for-mail Xref: redlance.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:136984 I prefer the BBC version over the NPR one. The acting in the BBC version I think is much more subtle and I think opens up elements of the text that (at least for myself) never came out even after numerous readings. One drawback to the NPR version is that many of the voices are kind of silly sounding. It might be more realistic that hobbit voices would be higher pitched since they are smaller, but it can sound cartoonish at times. With the BBC version everyone sounds properly english and no one sounds like a cartoon character. The one drawback I have with the BBC version is that it is completely dramatized and so for the most part you hear the action in real time. With the NPR edition for some of the key action scenes a narator switches over and usually just reads what Tolkien wrote to describe the action. The climax in Mt. Doom with the BBC version sounds rather silly, with Frodo and Gollum whispering to one another and then grunting and gurgling as they fight each other. In the NPR version the narrator belts out some of those fantastic sections of text strait from the book. I should note though that how the BBC treats the battle of Helm's Deep is very minimalist, yet very potent. It has a kind of Shakespearean quality where between a chorus of male vocals the characters meet up in the thick of battle to exchange some words. It works very well. Even this those problems I think the BBC version still comes out on top. The attention to emotional detail that the BBC performers strive for is very well done, and since most of the story really is about the relationships between the main players this provides for the most reward. Another poster said that the BBC version came out in the 50's. Perhaps there was another one but I doubt it. On my copy of the audio BBC production it has 1987 as when it was copyrighted. It's also hard to imagine that Ian Holm (Frodo in the BBC production, Bilbo in the BBC Hobbit AND Bilbo in Jackson's LotR) would have been anything but a tike in the 50's. He's an older guy but not that old. Thus, it's hard to imagine that Tolkien disliked this production as he was already dead. == remove the crap to email ###### From: Matthew Woodcraft Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: LOTR on tape. BBC or NPR? Date: 09 Jan 2004 19:12:03 +0000 (GMT) Organization: Linux Unlimited Lines: 12 Message-ID: References: <20040108230950.15860.00001601@mb-m21.news.cs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: rapun.sel.cam.ac.uk Originator: mattheww@chiark.greenend.org.uk ([193.201.200.170]) Path: redlance.franklin.ch!pfaff2.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!peer.news.zetnet.net!peernews.manap.net!peernews.mcc.ac.uk!server1.netnews.ja.net!pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk!not-for-mail Xref: redlance.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:137060 Lord Nerd on High wrote: >Another poster said that the BBC version came out in the 50's. >Perhaps there was another one but I doubt it. On my copy of the audio >BBC production it has 1987 as when it was copyrighted. There was indeed another one in 1955, which is the one Tolkien criticised. I don't think any recordings have survived. The later version was first broadcast in 1981. I'm not sure where 1987 comes from. -M- ###### Lines: 12 X-Admin: news@aol.com From: ilweran@aol.com (Ilweran) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Date: 10 Jan 2004 23:04:12 GMT References: Organization: AOL, http://www.aol.co.uk X-Newsreader: Session Scheduler (Queue Name: usenet_offline-m07) Subject: Re: LOTR on tape. BBC or NPR? Message-ID: <20040110180412.25815.00005830@mb-m07.aol.com> Path: redlance.franklin.ch!pfaff2.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!irazu.switch.ch!switch.ch!syros.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news-out1.nntp.be!propagator2-sterling!news-in-sterling.newsfeed.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!audrey-m1.news.aol.com!not-for-mail Xref: redlance.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:137210 In article , Matthew Woodcraft writes: >The later >version was first broadcast in 1981. I'm not sure where 1987 comes >from. I think maybe it was originally broadcast as half hour episodes, & was later broadcast as 1 hr episodes, so maybe thats where the 1987 date comes from. ilweran ******************* ###### From: Matthew Woodcraft Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: LOTR on tape. BBC or NPR? Date: 10 Jan 2004 23:21:09 +0000 (GMT) Organization: Linux Unlimited Lines: 9 Message-ID: References: <20040110180412.25815.00005830@mb-m07.aol.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: rapun.sel.cam.ac.uk Originator: mattheww@chiark.greenend.org.uk ([193.201.200.170]) Path: redlance.franklin.ch!pfaff2.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!colt.net!diablo.netcom.net.uk!netcom.net.uk!194.72.7.126.MISMATCH!news-peer-test!btnet!peer.news.eu-x.com!server2.netnews.ja.net!hgmp.mrc.ac.uk!pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk!not-for-mail Xref: redlance.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:137214 Ilweran wrote: >I think maybe it was originally broadcast as half hour episodes, & was later >broadcast as 1 hr episodes, so maybe thats where the 1987 date comes from. No, the hour(ish) episodes must have been only a year or two after the first broadcast. I remember the weeks took just as long to go by the second time as the first. -M- ###### Message-ID: <20040112020249.31832.qmail@nym.alias.net> From: Igenlode Author-Address: Igenlode_W nym alias net Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 23:35:14 GMT Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: LOTR on tape. BBC or NPR? References: <20040108230950.15860.00001601@mb-m21.news.cs.com> Organization: The Ivory Tower ( http://curry.250x.com/Tower ) Mail-To-News-Contact: postmaster@nym.alias.net Lines: 39 Path: redlance.franklin.ch!pfaff2.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.esat.net!fr.ip.ndsoftware.net!news.completel.fr!news2.telebyte.nl!newsfeed.mountaincable.net!news.glorb.com!news.alt.net!anon.lcs.mit.edu!nym.alias.net!mail2news Xref: redlance.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:137361 On 9 Jan 2004 Matthew Woodcraft wrote: > Lord Nerd on High wrote: > >Another poster said that the BBC version came out in the 50's. > >Perhaps there was another one but I doubt it. On my copy of the audio > >BBC production it has 1987 as when it was copyrighted. > > There was indeed another one in 1955, which is the one Tolkien > criticised. I don't think any recordings have survived. The later > version was first broadcast in 1981. I'm not sure where 1987 comes > from. > It was rebroadcast, I understand, in 1987 in 13 hour-long parts instead of 26 half-hour episodes. At any rate, the copyright will be for the boxed-set format recordings issued for sale in that year (and still 'in print' - remarkable!) Audio review from Saturday's 'Guardian' (from an otherwise non-book-fan who opens by writing, of another recording, "It was a mistake to see the film of /The Return of the King/ before I had finished listening to the audiobook" and complains of Tolkien's "rambling description" and "prolix digression"): "Whether Peter Jackson would agree that radio has the best pictures isn't on record, but.... (visual effects featuring giant spiders and prehistoric mammoths ridden into battle by Nazguls[?!] are lost on me), this is the perfect way to assimilate the myth and magic of Middle-earth. Brian Sibley's adaptation... concentrates on plot, pace, characters, actions and atmosphere. In this last respect he's helped by composer Stephen Oliver, whose dark, relentless theme tune perfectly evokes danger and quest." (and adds, in self-justification, "[Michael] Horden [playing Gandalf] never finished the book. When Gandalf is killed in Moria in book one, he complained that his agent had promised he'd be in 22 episodes.") -- Igenlode Lurker Extraordinaire -I never shot anybody before... -This is one hell of a time to tell me! ###### Message-ID: <20040112024157.9917.qmail@nym.alias.net> From: Igenlode Author-Address: Igenlode_W nym alias net Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 00:38:05 GMT Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: LOTR on tape. BBC or NPR? References: <20040108230950.15860.00001601@mb-m21.news.cs.com> Organization: The Ivory Tower ( http://curry.250x.com/Tower ) Mail-To-News-Contact: postmaster@nym.alias.net Lines: 39 Path: redlance.franklin.ch!pfaff2.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!news.alt.net!anon.lcs.mit.edu!nym.alias.net!mail2news Xref: redlance.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:137370 On 9 Jan 2004 Matthew Woodcraft wrote: > Lord Nerd on High wrote: > >Another poster said that the BBC version came out in the 50's. > >Perhaps there was another one but I doubt it. On my copy of the audio > >BBC production it has 1987 as when it was copyrighted. > > There was indeed another one in 1955, which is the one Tolkien > criticised. I don't think any recordings have survived. The later > version was first broadcast in 1981. I'm not sure where 1987 comes > from. > It was rebroadcast, I understand, in 1987 in 13 hour-long parts instead of 26 half-hour episodes. At any rate, the copyright will be for the boxed-set format recordings issued for sale in that year (and still 'in print' - remarkable!) Audio review from Saturday's 'Guardian' (from an otherwise non-book-fan who opens by writing, of another recording, "It was a mistake to see the film of /The Return of the King/ before I had finished listening to the audiobook" and complains of Tolkien's "rambling description" and "prolix digression"): "Whether Peter Jackson would agree that radio has the best pictures isn't on record, but.... (visual effects featuring giant spiders and prehistoric mammoths ridden into battle by Nazguls[?!] are lost on me), this is the perfect way to assimilate the myth and magic of Middle-earth. Brian Sibley's adaptation... concentrates on plot, pace, characters, actions and atmosphere. In this last respect he's helped by composer Stephen Oliver, whose dark, relentless theme tune perfectly evokes danger and quest." (and adds, in self-justification, "[Michael] Horden [playing Gandalf] never finished the book. When Gandalf is killed in Moria in book one, he complained that his agent had promised he'd be in 22 episodes.") -- Igenlode Lurker Extraordinaire -I never shot anybody before... -This is one hell of a time to tell me! ###### From: Alison Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: LOTR on tape. BBC or NPR? Reply-To: news.poster@ntlworld.com Message-ID: References: <20040108230950.15860.00001601@mb-m21.news.cs.com> <20040112020249.31832.qmail@nym.alias.net> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 20 Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 09:43:11 +0000 NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.255.204.55 X-Complaints-To: abuse@ntlworld.com X-Trace: newsfep4-glfd.server.ntli.net 1073900593 62.255.204.55 (Mon, 12 Jan 2004 09:43:13 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 09:43:13 GMT Organization: ntlworld News Service Path: redlance.franklin.ch!pfaff2.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!colt.net!pop-news-1.colt-telecom.nl!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsfeed.bit.nl!newsfeed.bit.nl!news2.euro.net!newspeer1-gui.server.ntli.net!ntli.net!newsfep4-glfd.server.ntli.net.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail Xref: redlance.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:137432 On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 23:35:14 GMT, Igenlode wrote: >Audio review from Saturday's 'Guardian' (from an otherwise non-book-fan >who opens by writing, of another recording, "It was a mistake to see the >film of /The Return of the King/ before I had finished listening to the >audiobook" and complains of Tolkien's "rambling description" and "prolix >digression"): > >"Whether Peter Jackson would agree that radio has the best pictures >isn't on record, but.... (visual effects featuring giant spiders and >prehistoric mammoths ridden into battle by Nazguls[?!] are lost on >me), It ought to be made quite clear here that the reason the spectacular visual effects of Jackson's film are wasted on the reviewer is that she is registered blind. -- Alison ###### Message-ID: <20040114050936.17851.qmail@nym.alias.net> From: Igenlode Author-Supplied-Address: Igenlode_W nym alias net Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 00:39:13 GMT Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: LOTR on tape. BBC or NPR? References: <20040108230950.15860.00001601@mb-m21.news.cs.com> <20040112020249.31832.qmail@nym.alias.net> Organization: The Ivory Tower ( http://curry.250x.com/Tower ) Mail-To-News-Contact: abuse@dizum.com Lines: 36 Path: redlance.franklin.ch!pfaff2.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeeder.edisontel.com!news.newsland.it!newsfeed.nextoneserver.com!news.assertive.ca!news.bananasplit.info!news.dizum.com!sewer-output!mail2news Xref: redlance.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:137705 On 12 Jan 2004 Alison wrote: > On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 23:35:14 GMT, Igenlode > wrote: > > >Audio review from Saturday's 'Guardian' (from an otherwise non-book-fan > >who opens by writing, of another recording, "It was a mistake to see the > >film of /The Return of the King/ before I had finished listening to the > >audiobook" and complains of Tolkien's "rambling description" and "prolix > >digression"): > > > >"Whether Peter Jackson would agree that radio has the best pictures > >isn't on record, but.... (visual effects featuring giant spiders and > >prehistoric mammoths ridden into battle by Nazguls[?!] are lost on > >me), > > It ought to be made quite clear here that the reason the spectacular > visual effects of Jackson's film are wasted on the reviewer is that > she is registered blind. > *Is* she now? I did wonder how she managed to resist the temptation to skim-read the novel with her cinema ticket approaching, instead of labouring through hours of audio-book - that would account for it :-) -- Igenlode Lurker Extraordinaire When men are jaded in their emotions they demand monstrous things to arouse them ###### From: oscwr@netscape.net (Calvin Rice) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: LOTR on tape. BBC or NPR? Date: 13 Jan 2004 17:49:46 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 10 Message-ID: <22680de.0401131749.277a11e8@posting.google.com> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.144.22.57 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1074044987 17719 127.0.0.1 (14 Jan 2004 01:49:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 01:49:47 +0000 (UTC) Path: redlance.franklin.ch!pfaff2.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!postnews2.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: redlance.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:137670 MP wrote in message news:... > ... > Christopher Tolkien's hostility to the film trilogy probably goes back > to a confusion between his father's skepticism about a radio > dramatization versus his greater openness to a film adaptation. ... What might much more readily explain any hostility of Christopher to the film trilogy could be that he has seen it. -cr ###### From: Stug Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: LOTR on tape. BBC or NPR? Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 13:17:56 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: References: X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.92/32.572 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 32 Path: redlance.franklin.ch!pfaff2.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newshosting.com!nx02.iad01.newshosting.com!140.99.99.194.MISMATCH!newsfeed1.easynews.com!easynews.com!easynews!elnk-pas-nf1!newsfeed.earthlink.net!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-04!sn-xit-01!sn-xit-06!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: redlance.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:139488 On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 00:23:49 GMT, "KMW5511" carved in mystic runes upon the very living rock: > > >I have seen two versions of LOTR on tape at a local bookstore. One has BBC >on the box and the other NPR. Which is the better of the two? Or are they >the same? > >I am thinking of getting this as a gift for my wife and any help would be >appreciated. I think most people who have heard both much prefer the BBC version. I'm familair with the BBC version which I find to be nearly perfect. I've heard *some* of the NPR (Mind's Eye) version and I found the acting to be horrible and the voices quite irritating to listen to, though it's not without its redeeming moments. Put it this way, you can't go wrong choosing the BBC version first. BTW, the audio book read by Rob Inglis does include Appendix A (but he mercifully skips the long list of kings). This might help: http://www.telerama.com/~taliesen/tolkien/lotr_editions.html#audio Stug "Can a tale not conceived dramatically but epically, be dramatized -- unless the dramatizer is given or takes liberties, as an independent person? I feel you have had a very hard task." -- JRR Tolkien (Remove 'stug' from e-mail address to contact me) FAQ-like Guide to the Letters of JRRT: http://users.telerama.com/~taliesen/tolkien/lettersfaq.html Guide to U.S. Editions: http://users.telerama.com/~taliesen/tolkien/editions.html