Brian, you have some very good points in your latest rebuttal. However, I think you missed the whole point of my previous article. Tolkien was, just like the rest of us, very much a human, and I certainly don't dispute that. He was human, which meant he cared enough about his creations to protect them from even the most insignificant things. Take, for instance, the lion on the front cover of the American paperback. Would anyone except the most protective person dispute it? I would simply be happy that my book had been published, AT ALL, and not try and argue with the publisher over the front cover illustration.

Am I saying Tolkien was a lunatic? Not at all. If you spent 20 years of your life working on one story you would be protective too. That's why I don't believe that Tolkien would have allowed a movie, and certainly not in this day and age.

I remember a quote from the "Lord of the Rings" trailer which was recently released. The quote was from Jackson, "The technology has finally caught up with the incredible imagination that Tolkien injected into the story, and so, now's the time." On the contrary to Mr. Jackson's opinion, I believe now is anything but the time. Tolkien, I firmly believe, would hold this same opinion if he were a live today.

Do you really believe Tolkien would have stood for an sword-wielding, bratty, rebellious, immature, XenArwen when he didn't even want a small lion on the front of an American paperback? Would he have stood for the exclusion of Bombadil? I think that the protection of Tolkien's world would win out over any money Jackson could offer him.