My new Tolkien book has been released!!! The Road Goes Ever On and On A New Perspective on J. R. R. Tolkien and Middle-earth.

It is finally out and available at major retailers. Due to the high-quality paper needed for the colored images, the physical copy usually runs between $34-39. However, the eBook version is under $10. I would love your support if you're able to help.

Link to Barnes and Noble
https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-road-goes-ever-on-and-on-jeb-smith/1143215790

Amazon
https://www.amazon.com/Road-Goes-Ever-Jeb-Smith/dp/1685701256/?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_w=m4V7E&content-id=amzn1.sym.bc5f3394-3b4c-4031-8ac0-18107ac75816&pf_rd_p=bc5f3394-3b4c-4031-8ac0-18107ac75816&pf_rd_r=RTEJ5DYWG0WNQY2M79F0&pd_rd_wg=Lcv5P&pd_rd_r=88a7057d-8c28-4342-af37-d41dceaa8252&ref_=pd_gw_ci_mcx_mr_hp_atf_m

Blurb

J.R.R. Tolkien’s Middle-earth has captured the imaginations of millions of readers around the world for generations. He is considered the father of modern fantasy, but few understand how Tolkien’s worldview impacted his mythology. The Road Goes Ever On and On is the first book of its kind to place Tolkien within his proper context, giving the reader a deeper understanding of Tolkien and Middle-earth. Smith takes us on a quest through a wide range of Tolkien’s writings to unlock Tolkien’s perspective—a perspective that, like the elves who have sailed into the West leaving Middle-earth, has faded away from our world. You will gain an in-depth knowledge of Tolkien’s views on politics, environmentalism, religion, and much more. From the Valar to Hobbits, the free peoples closely follow Tolkien’s sentiments. In contrast, forces under the Shadow represent what Tolkien believed was immoral. Covering a wide range of topics, The Road Goes Ever On and On is filled with breathtaking illustrations bringing Middle-earth to life like never before, making this the ‘one book to rule them all.’

Reviews

Engrossing...Tolkien’s principles—patriotism, Medievalism, localism, Catholicism—are certainly out of fashion today. And yet they’re the foundation for all his books, which have sold hundreds of millions of copies. Mr. Smith does a wonderful job of explaining why modern readers are so enthralled by Tolkien’s reactionary vision. Whether you’re a casual Lord of the Rings fan or a serious Tolkien scholar, every page of Mr. Smith’s book will delight and fascinate. And if anyone ever tells you that fairy-tales are only for children, hand him this book. Tolkien ought to be regarded as one of the great social critics of our time, as Mr. Smith so masterfully demonstrates.
-Michael Warren Davis is an editor for Sophia Institute Press and the author of The Reactionary Mind: Why Conservative Isn’t Enough. You can find him on his blog, The Common Man.

As the popularity of Tolkien's work continues to endure, the importance of Jeb Smith's work continues to grow. This is because of a prolonged siege against Tolkien's work: the attempt to dislodge it from its Christian and Biblical foundations. Jeb Smith's insights are immensely helpful to this and future generations of Tolkien admirers.
Scott L. Smith, author of Lord of the Rings and the Eucharist

{{ First congratulations on getting your work published. No small feat in itself. Nicely done.

I am still however personally a bit wary of the subject matter, as while there is no doubting the religous framework upon which Tolkien built his secondary world, that is not the same as it being a religous work in itself. In fact Tolkien was not at all keen on preaching or evangalising in his works to his readers, but rather that a reader may find resonance within the works of the greater 'one true myth' as Tolkien put it of Christianity (Catholism really). But he was not keen on it been overt or forced upon anyone, so to define LotR's as a religous work, or perhaps to even use that angle to evangalise off the books popularity would not be fitting for me (not that I am saying you do that, I'd need to read it first before I decided on that). }}

Pettytyrant101 wrote:{{ First congratulations on getting your work published. No small feat in itself. Nicely done.      

I am still however personally a bit wary of the subject matter, as while there is no doubting the religous framework upon which Tolkien built his secondary world, that is not the same as it being a religous work in itself. In fact Tolkien was not at all keen on preaching or evangalising in his works to his readers, but rather that a reader may find resonance within the works of the greater 'one true myth' as Tolkien put it of Christianity (Catholism really). But he was not keen on it been overt or forced upon anyone, so to define LotR's as a religous work, or perhaps to even use that angle to evangalise off the books popularity would not be fitting for me (not that I am saying you do that, I'd need to read it first before I decided on that). }}

Your concerns are understandable!!! Tolkien was not into allegory one bit. But I do detail his clarification of how a work can not contain an allegory yet WILL include the author's worldview. That is the story I aim to tell.

{{ I look forward to reading it for myself in due course (and finances permitting, I have at least one other thing that is long overdue to be sorted first mind you), but I do hope to get it and if so I will post my review and thoughts here.

One thing Im not sure about, and its not your book or your words, but rather that of one of your  reviewers you quote, particularly, "This is because of a prolonged siege against Tolkien's work: the attempt to dislodge it from its Christian and Biblical foundations."

In all my time in Tolkien debates and such Ive never encountered this once, let alone a prolonged seige. The entire statement puzzles me as I've never seen a even half-serious discussion on Tolkien which doesnt start off with the base knowledge of the catholism of the work at core, its hard to deny when the author openly discusses it elsewhere. Ive never heard of anyone distancing Tolkiens work from its Christian inspiration or trying to deny it.

Well Peter Jackson maybe    seeing as my main gripe, the worst thing for me he did in his adaptation was screw up the Mt Doom scene and if not remove entirely, seriously downplay the role of Providence in the Rings destruction (and by doing so everyones sacrifices, pity etc to that point allowing for it to happen) in favour of a proactive mortal heroes action. It could not be more the opposite of what Tolkien wrote, what the whole point was and what his notion of a eucatastrophe was all about.}}

Pettytyrant101 wrote:{{ I look forward to reading it for myself in due course (and finances permitting, I have at least one other thing that is long overdue to be sorted first mind you), but I do hope to get it and if so I will post my review and thoughts here.

One thing Im not sure about, and its not your book or your words, but rather that of one of your  reviewers you quote, particularly, "This is because of a prolonged siege against Tolkien's work: the attempt to dislodge it from its Christian and Biblical foundations."

In all my time in Tolkien debates and such Ive never encountered this once, let alone a prolonged seige. The entire statement puzzles me as I've never seen a even half-serious discussion on Tolkien which doesnt start off with the base knowledge of the catholism of the work at core, its hard to deny when the author openly discusses it elsewhere. Ive never heard of anyone distancing Tolkiens work from its Christian inspiration or trying to deny it.

Well Peter Jackson maybe    seeing as my main gripe, the worst thing for me he did in his adaptation was screw up the Mt Doom scene and if not remove entirely, seriously downplay the role of Providence in the Rings destruction (and by doing so everyones sacrifices, pity etc to that point allowing for it to happen) in favour of a proactive mortal heroes action. It could not be more the opposite of what Tolkien wrote, what the whole point was and what his notion of a eucatastrophe was all about.}}

I am unsure of what he is specifically reffering to, he often speaks on Tolkien with his group of Catholic nerds and I am sure he has mentioned it there.

https://www.thescottsmithblog.com/p/catholic-nerds-podcast.html

Thank you for taking on the project, and please do let me know when you post your review!!! I will be more than interested to see it the good, the bad, and the ugly.

I have read more than a couple of articles (and an occasional author of a book or paper) that question any sort of Christian influence in Middle Earth. How long has this been occurring, and is it fringe, I am less certain to say. These authors would admit to Tolkien's faith but not that it impacted Middle Earth in any way.

{{ I just find it bizarre anyone with a passing knowledge of Tolkien could try to claim no Christian influence when you have the author saying things like,

"The Lord of the Rings is of course a fundamentally religious and Catholic work; unconsciously so at first, but consciously in the revision. That is why I have not put in, or have cut out, practically all references to anything like 'religion', to cults or practices, in the imaginary world. For the religious element is absorbed into the story and the symbolism."

Bit tricky to deny there is no Catholic influence after that! }}

Pettytyrant101 wrote:{{ I just find it bizarre anyone with a passing knowledge of Tolkien could try to claim no Christian influence when you have the author saying things like,

"The Lord of the Rings is of course a fundamentally religious and Catholic work; unconsciously so at first, but consciously in the revision. That is why I have not put in, or have cut out, practically all references to anything like 'religion', to cults or practices, in the imaginary world. For the religious element is absorbed into the story and the symbolism."

Bit tricky to deny there is no Catholic influence after that!   }}

Agreed.

{ I think above else for Tolkien however, even beyond the religious in his work was the freedom of the reader. Not to implant or impose directly any religous view on the reader, but rather to have 'faith' that the resonance of the religious undercurrents of Prime Creation, rather than his own Secondary world would echo into the work and 'get through' regardless. Indeed when I first read Fellowship at about 12 years old I didnt have the religous background or knoweldge (certainly not of Catholism) to even see the religous connections, it was just an amazing world, tale, characters and adventure. But its the fact those undertones and connections are there that it did resonate so deeply and has lasted to this day nearly 40 years later.

But that freedom of the mind in the reader was important to Tolkien, incuding the freedom to not see any religious nature to the work and to just read it as a big exciting tale, I believe that is why he has no religion overtly in ME, no churches or such, to do so would have been the first step in drawing to the readers attention an intent or allegory of the author, which Tolkien detested in Lewis's Narnia work and saught to avoid in his own. }}

Pettytyrant101 wrote:{ I think above else for Tolkien however, even beyond the religious in his work was the freedom of the reader. Not to implant or impose directly any religous view on the reader, but rather to have 'faith' that the resonance of the religious undercurrents of Prime Creation, rather than his own Secondary world would echo into the work and 'get through' regardless. Indeed when I first read Fellowship at about 12 years old I didnt have the religous background or knoweldge (certainly not of Catholism) to even see the religous connections, it was just an amazing world, tale, characters and adventure. But its the fact those undertones and connections are there that it did resonate so deeply and has lasted to this day nearly 40 years later.

But that freedom of the mind in the reader was important to Tolkien, incuding the freedom to not see any religious nature to the work and to just read it as a big exciting tale, I believe that is why he has no religion overtly in ME, no churches or such, to do so would have been the first step in drawing to the readers attention an intent or allegory of the author, which Tolkien detested in Lewis's Narnia work and saught to avoid in his own. }}

Once more, we agree!!! Tolkien stated as such. I never tell the reader you must understand something a certain way, or even that Tolkien desired you to; rather, I say Tolkien was influenced by his beliefs, and this is how it affected his mythology, intentionally or not, regardless of how the reader was to understand it.

{{ Well that bodes well for when I get the chance to read your book that I will not find it objectable in its aims! I look forward to it. I will post the eventual review on this thread, so if you have this thread marked to watch you will get a notification anyway when anything is posted here. }}

Pettytyrant101 wrote:{{ Well that bodes well for when I get the chance to read your book that I will not find it objectable in its aims! I look forward to it. I will post the eventual review on this thread, so if you have this thread marked to watch you will get a notification anyway when anything is posted here. }}

Perfect, thank you.

Tolkien did a VERY good job at hiding the Catholicism. Even after having the author himself point it out I had to read other books to walk me through it. I think what he does is more along the lines of setting up the reader's mindset to be more able to accept Catholicism rather than give any arguments or hint of it underlying the work.

halfwise wrote:Tolkien did a VERY good job at hiding the Catholicism.  Even after having the author himself point it out I had to read other books to walk me through it.  I think what he does is more along the lines of setting up the reader's mindset to be more able to accept Catholicism rather than give any arguments or hint of it underlying the work.

Right, it is not purposely Catholic, but as a Catholic himself his works were influenced by his Catholicism.