In the first French translation, a confusion between "Hobbit" and the English "rabbit" led the translator to call them "les lapins". They live in burrows, have big hairy feet and spend their time eating ...
There's also many inconsistencies in that translation, with several Frodin and Moromir popping up, as well as a strange obsession for the very niche verb "brilloter" (to twinkle).
It was revenge because Tolkien tried to remove all traces of French from English, such as refusing to call it a cul-de-sac, referring to Bilbo's address as "bag end".
Reminds me of this quote by George R. R. Martin “Everywhere you look, there are more screenwriters and producers eager to take great stories and ‘make them their own. No matter how major a writer it is, no matter how great the book, there always seems to be someone on hand who thinks he can do better, eager to take the story and ‘improve’ on it”.
He’s right. But if not to ‘improve’ it, then somehow to ‘fix’ it, which is normally not only a lie, but often rooted in a childish reason pertaining the story’s age. Rings of Power is actually a prime example of something needlessly and, naturally, poorly being subject to alterations because it’s somehow ‘flawed’ due to Tolkien’s writings being an older story, despite there nothing actually being wrong or even offensive in any of the books published by the Tolkien Estate.
@ Jackson never aimed to ‘improve’ anything, at least not as if he felt the source material was flawed in any way for any reason. Unlike those who came after him, Peter felt it was important to relay Tolkien’s messages, regardless of his personal feelings of doing such a thing. Though I will admit, it’s debatable if it was a better call to have Aragorn be reluctant to embrace his kingly lineage, have Elrond give him Anduil later in the story and/or have Eówyn face the Witchking _despite_ being afraid over being fearless like she was in the books.
@@teleportedbreadfor3days That is just not true. He made many changes that were not "necessary" for adapting the film...and he did them to improve the story (because what is the alternative? he wanted to make the story worse?). For example, Aragorn was in no way an "unfilmable" character, but he was changed extensively. Movie Aragorn is wracked with self-doubt about his potential "weakness" and did not want to be King of Gondor despite being 100% obviously the heir to the throne. Tolkien's Aragorn leaves Rivendell not to go with Frodo to Mordor, but to Gondor specifically to claim the throne and be King (a throne he had a claim to...but not one he obviously was heir to...Isildur was _never_ King of Gondor and lived 3,000 years before Aragorn's time). Tolkien's Aragorn reforged Narsil into Andúril before leaving Rivendell because it helped his claim to the throne and when they disarmed him in Edoras he threatened to kill any man of Rohan who touched it. He never fretted over his weakness or his destiny as future King of Gondor. Then, a second example, the role of Arwen was famously expanded. Why? because they wanted to improve on Tolkien by given more depth to a female character. Some of Jackson's changes arguably *did* improve the story too, in my opinion (YMMV), and some made it worse. On the positive side: * The funeral of Theodred and Theoden's weeping afterwards was a wonderful scene. * Aragorn's kneeling before the Hobbits and saying "you bow to know one" gets me in the feels. That is likely adapted to improve on the "Fields of Cormallen" where it says Aragorn "bowed his knee" to take before Frodo's and Sam's hands and then lead them to a throne where he shouts, "Praise them with great praise!" But then there are others-many others-some I like, but that Tolkien would have hated and were notable changes. Some more examples (some better, some worse) in no particular order: * Gimli was not comic relief. Gimli was more more philosopher-warrior made into a comedic character for the films. I guarantee you Tolkien would have hated that. * Aragorn never fell off a cliff or was thought to be dead. No one in the theater fell for that, so all the grief they showed among the characters was kind of a waste of time. * The Army of the Dead couldn't kill anyone, they were only able to frighten people. And they never went to the Battle of Pelennor Fields at all in the books, which really undermined the sacrifices of Rohan who in the films died just to delay Sauron's army for about 20 minutes until the unstoppable killing machines that were the Army of the Dead arrived. The guess the Rohirrim got Merry and Eowyn to the Battle, and that was needed...but them attacking the Haradrim up close was mostly needless suicide. * The Witch King never broke Gandalf's staff. If they understood Tolkien, they'd know that was just laughable...and it just did not happen. * Frodo never broke faith with Sam and told him to go home...and it is not clear Sam would have listened anyway. Tolkien would have especially hated that addition to the story, though in my youth I liked it. * Aragorn never beheaded the Mouth of Sauron, which would have been a war crime. Tolkien would have hated that too as that is Aragorn breaking a well understood law of war. You don't kill people who come to a parley, it's basically murdering a diplomat. * There was no ambush in the road to Helm's Deep. This seems to have been added to insert an action scene, but it was not in the book. If he wanted he could have just moved the nighttime "no ordinary wolves" attack at Hollin (pre-Moria) to this section of The Two Towers, but instead the writers made up something brand new. I could go on (and on), because there are lot more changes beside these. There were changes that were made that I would agree were normal adaptation choices, like moving Shelob from The Two Towers to Return of the King or changing internal monologues to spoken parts, eliminating Tom Bombadil and the Scouring of the Shire (even though they had time to add entire scenes to the story elsewhere). But there were plenty of story changes that were clearly intended to improve on Tolkien for a modern audience.
Fun fact: this book Tolkien och den Svarta Magin (Tolkien and the Black Magic) is actually a rare collectible now, as very few copies were ever printed due to its libellous nature.
@@GloomdrakeThe Swedish translation and the derived Icelandic version of Dracula are very different from the original novel. There is debate on whether they were based on an early draft of the original or were outright fraudulent translations. The Icelandic version was translated into English, and can be found under the name Powers of Darkness
This just goes to show that being a fan of Tolkien's work does not make you qualified to adapt it. You can supposedly love his writings while not knowing what the heck you're doing and arrogantly thinking you can do better.
Not just Tolkien any author's work should be adapted without trying to put your own spin on it. Or if you do make changes obtain the approval of the author, in recent times I think it is provided for as part of an author's moral rights as per law in my country.
You sometimes get the same with 'fan since childhood' show-runners of long-running TV series too. Some are perfectly good producers, but then there are those that (arguably) take 'their' franchise off in positively dire directions.
If only Ohlmarks had the wit to just write his own damm Swedish fantasy epic and just let Tolkien be Tolkien. It would have saved him from (the well earned) paranoia that plagued his last years
While it might be opening a can of worms, Andrzej Sapkowski pretty much did that, having started doing the Polish translations of the Elric books by Moorcock (though HEAVILY borrowed from those in creating the Witcher) before writing his own stuff...
Translators are not supposed to rewrite or reinterpret the original work. What the guy in Sweden did was unethical. He sought to replace the original work with his fan made version.
@@TheHoveHeretic not really, I doubt he was hired or the studios had interest in a proper verbatim recreation, not to say he was the right choice at all but he was specifically hired to write his own version.
@@TheHoveHereticNo. Not like that. JJ was hired specifically to do a reinterpretation. Whether it was a good interpretation I will leave for the star trek fandom to decide.
@@TheHoveHeretic Completely unrelated instance that has no relation to the argument. You're either trolling, stupid or both. If you ever write a book and submit a translation I hope they change everything without your permission. I wonder how you'd react if your main character was renamed as the Austrian Painter or the Georgian Priest.
Tolkien ded in 1973. 3 for elven kings, 7 for dwarf lords, 9 for men, 1 to rule them all. Ohlmarks died in 1984. That book about misinformation and lies becoming truth
Åke Ohlmarks was despised as an idiot among Swedish Tolkien fans. Also his translations are considered sloppy as well as violating the intention of Tolkien.
Fortunately back for the fifty anniversary of LOTR's first edition far more competent and respectful people with udnerstanding and comprehension of Tolkien's linguistic nature etc made a new Swedish translation of LOTR and later The Hobbit that are far superior and corrects all of that mentally ill person's errors, including fixing the title itself to a proper translation.
It's pretty clear from the translation that Ohlmarks didn't read the entire thing before he started, he translated as he read the books. Some locations change names as more information is revealed etc.
My first name from birth is Elbereth. I was named before the movies were even an idea in Hollywood. People have tried to translate my name into Elizabeth. My name has never and will never be Elizabeth. I could see why he would be so upset about the formal name changes. Changing someone's name is the same as changing who they are. Ohlmarks was a butthead.
A Elbereth Gilthoniel silivren penna míriel o menel aglar elenath! Na-chaered palan-díriel o galadhremmin ennorath, Fanuilos, le linnathon nef aear, sí nef aearon!
That's the sweetest tribute! I was the 11 year old out singing that song to the trees in the woods, in the summer before my little sister was born. I didn't know until the movies came out that there was such a fandom in the world. I love your name. It's perfect.
Ohlmarks may have had a genuine love for Tolkien's work, but he apparently wasn't above his own arrogance. It is the height of arrogance and conceit to try to rewrite the work of another with the idea that you could do it better. Ohlmarks further proved this about himself when he couldn't take the criticism of Tolkien as something he could learn from. Tolkien wasn't perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but he knew his world better than anyone else.
The Czech translations of Tolkien's works are (at least in my opinion) some of the best in Czech literature, but there is one thing that irks me now. "Wizard" is translated as "čaroděj". The word wizard is derived from the word "wise", whereas čaroděj means something like "line maker"; some sort of druid that makes lines on the ground, which Gandalf is not. The word wizard should be translated as "mudrc" (from moudro, wisdom), but everyone keeps using čaroděj.
Changing Isengard to Isendor and Isendal “because Swedish doesn’t like loan words” is wild, when one considers that the “gard” part of the name is itself Norse, as in Asgard, meaning something like “walled enclosure”. Asgard is the Enclosure of the Gods (the Aesir). Isengard is obviously the enclosure of the river Isen - it’s a big walled off enclosure ffs 🤦🏻♂️.
@ sure, I get putting the accent on would make sense. I don’t think that would have bothered Tolkien. That just doesn’t exist in English, but if that’s the correct way to render what is effectively the same word in Swedish, then yes, it makes sense to do it. That’s just how we write the same thing in our two different writing systems. It’s not fundamentally changing the word to a completely different word.
@@willmosse3684 I might be pedantic now, but changing one letter can in principle change the word completely. Changing from the letter A to Å changes the meaning in Swedish as much as changing from C to G in creed/greed in English.
@ Sure, I hear you. But, if you want to transliterate the Swedish word into English, you will have to use the A without the circe above it, because we don’t have the one with the circle. So therefore, looking at it in reverse, an A in English can represent either the A with the circle or the A without the circle in Swedish. So when Tolkien uses an A in the English in the word Isaengard, that could represent the A either with or without the circle in Swedish. Either would be an accurate transliteration.
“Someone who prefers his own fancy to facts, and very ready to pretend to knowledge he doesn’t have.” I know a lot of people that describes perfectly, and shall be keeping this barb in my quiver for later use.
I mean their were plenty occult folks who more or less went undercover in the church from their perspective that’s all black magic Wonder how many “christians” inquisitors put down
Unfortunately, Tolkien still gets those accusations leveled against him to this day. I in fact encountered it from someone who was supposed to be getting a degree in Tolkien studies. He left it all because of a couple of examples that he claims are proof of Tolkien's racism. So, yeah, those accusations are still kicking.
It is unfortunate, especially given one reason Tolkien didn't like Wagner was his antisemetic views. Though the irony of that is that while Wagner definitely held those it was more nuanced than that, Wagner himself was part Jewish and maintained friendships with both full blooded and religiously practicing Jews. I take no joy in Tolkien being smeared for his much more milquetoast racism, if you even want to call it that, but it is kind of karmic.
This seems like a VERY misleading comment. Accusing Tolkien, correctly or not, of holding racist views, is not the same as accusing him as accusing him of being a crypto-notsee cult leader.
@@Thumbdumpandthebumpchump OP didn't claim that it was, they were just using the racism accusations as an example of the libel still going around about Tolkien.
I recall reading about the Swedish translation in the Finnish translator's book, but I didn't know that it went that far. Anecdotally the Finnish translator was a fledgling when she started, so it would be interesting to hear Tolkien's thoughts on it as Tolkien had learned Finnish for the Kalevala
Christopher Tolkien was the best son a man could ask for in how he protected his fathers legacy. Sadly Christopher's son Simon has been about the worst grandson in this regard, the polar opposite to his father. All this to say that I do fear that such things as this may again happen in the comming days under the stewardship of Simon.
Yep, while Christopher wasn't the storyteller his father was, he was a superior historian with things. I wish it was still up, but when Christopher died, Standing Stone Games had a thing with interviews about interactions with him tied to Lord of the Rings: Online...several of their writers pointing out that after he died it became harder to make things that fit the setting as well as when they could call him to talk about things for it. He was heavily involved in the Bingo Boffin story as well there.
I knew Ohlmarks took some liberties, especially with names, but had no idea it was this bad. It was this version of The Lord of the Rings (or The Saga of the Ring, as Ohlmarks named it) I read. Luckily atleast The Hobbit had been translated a second time and I was spared any mention of a "hompen". There is one infamous passage in The Lord of the Rings that many swedish Tolkien fans talked quite a bit about, where Ohlmarks had made a major mistake. "The orcs were roaming the field" was turned into "Orcherna råmade på fältet" ("The orcs mooed on the field". And yes, for some reason he spelled 'orc' as 'orch' throughout the books).
"Orch" sounds much better in swedish though than orc, which is too reminiscent of "orka". Orcerna strövade på fälten. I'm not sure if it has the same ring to it, imo. "orch" sounds more ominous i think.
same is true of Frodo Bagger, which sounds like a proper swedish name, rather than Frodo Säcker, which is the newer translation. I get it, "säck" is more of a direct translation of "bag". But the point of a translation is also to make it seem as it was written in that language, rather than try to copy it.
Ohlmarks translation is a mixed bag. He’s got a good feeling for names (and there is a lot of names since he doesn’t care to remember when a character has appeared previously and gives that character a new name) and I really like the name Sagan om ringen. However, he doesn’t know what a wild-goose chase is so he translates it word for word to great comic effect. He also mistakes the word roam for roar.😂 I say, without Ohlmarks many a laughter had been missed. Meeting another (swedish) Tolkien fan over a beer can be a moment of great hilarity.
Back in the 70`s, before the LOTR was completely translated into Finnish, I read it first in Swedish and a bit later, in English. I made comparisons and found out the Swedish translator had even included a full sentence of his own!
@@1Butcher In the original text: (Both very loosely quoted) "What do you fear I would have said to him?" and the Swedish translation: "What do you fear I would have said to him? That I have a rebellious dwarf scoundrel here that I would gladly trade for a subservient orc?"
In defense of Åke Ohlmarks: To start off: he Lord of the Rings translation is a far better read than 'Hompen' and while he may have been sloppy and inconsistent with some names and sentences, he had a vastly better grasp on the Swedish language than Professor Tolkien ever did, and so, most of the name translations of Åke are quite good (i.e. Hobbit -> Hob, Middle-Earth -> Midgård). On the other hand, Åke saw it as his prerogative to make the translation more into a kind of adaptation, embellishing the, in his view, harsh language of the original with more flourish. I think this is the main thing the translation should be criticized for. On 'Tolkien and the Black Magic' (Tolkien och den svarta magin): It's a fun read, if you can get hold of it. Full of vitriol and listing every single grievance Tolkien or the Tolkien Society has ever caused him (including a TV quiz show host waking him in the middle of the night for clarifications on a question about Aragorn's race, or having to deal with delusional Tolkien fans, or how he was treated poorly by Cristopher etc. ) . Of note, he put's the Merry Kills the Witch-King debacle squarely on Tolkien, and calls it stupid how he gave the glory to the silly hobbit, instead of the woman. (Could possibly be a typo in the translation manuscript her -> he? but at the writhing of this, Åke Ohlmarks was practically delusional so who's to say. In any case this was corrected in later editions of the Ohlmarks translation, with the change of a single vowel 'han -> hon') As correction: Åke doesn't call Tolkien himself a Nazi or black magic user, but does go into a conspiracy theory on how the Swedish Tolkien Society grooms kids into the occult/Naziism with their rituals and symbolisms. Bear in mind this is during the heights of the stupid 'roleplaying is occult' moral panic years, so he was not alone in being an idiot.
@@eric2500 I think it goes without saying, but any translation is going to need to alter the prose to be palatable to the native reader. A direct translation is going to feel very clunky. This is twice as important when the original is, as you say 'written like poetry'. Åke Ohlmarks surely went a bit too far afield, but I'm not sure if it is actually much worse than the new translation.
Midgård is actually a good translation of Middle-Earth. And much of the poetry is pretty good as well, although it might be quite different from the English original. I have actually not read the new translation so can’t really compare.
This is interesting because the first Spanish translation, which was endorsed and advised by Tolkien, but poorly received by the public, did adapt the words, turning hobbit into "hobito" and the like. The second one translates most of the wordplay but keeps first names and such intact. The first translation got the "children's book" treatment of the time, and indeed was done by a children's author, while the second one was the "novel for adults" treatment and was much better received. The LotR translation is generally considered very good, but still has many, to me obvious, errors, which have not all been fixed through the many, many reprintings, for instance, "not all that is gold glitters" is consistently translated as "not all that glitters is gold," totally missing the inversion of the saying being intentional and not an errata.
Geeze. It's amazing how much of his life that Ohlmark spent obsessing over and then trying to tear down the work of a fellow linguist and author. I understand the concept of envy, not everyone can be the best - but it seems very clear that he would have found more fulfillment in life just writing his own book. I have to conclude that he lazy as well. He had the passion, he had a story he wanted to tell, but he was more willing to try and twist the words another man had obsessed and slaved over than to actually buckle down and lay some words himself. I think that the Catholic concepts of Envy, and Pride, while not always applicable, fit to a "T" in the case of Mr. Ohlmark. One self-destructive character flaw, and another flaw that prevented him from changing; because how can you change what you see as perfect already?
I remember growing up thinking Merry killed the Witch-King due to that flawed passage. Ohlmarks actually wrote quite a few interesting books about mythology and folklore, but in this regard he was seriously deluded and spiteful.
Maybe this is ironic to comment on a Tolkien video, but I say this as constructive criticism: get to the point. If the video title references accusations of black magic, get to the point, then add context, rather than getting more than halfway through the runtime and addressing the title. I find the context interesting, sure, but it wasn't why I clicked. Also, the music in the background was slightly too loud. Great presentation of the information though, and the context really was interesting, if a little lengthy. All the best.
Have you not noticed? Ink and Fantasy makes rather high-quality videos in and off themselves, but he always knows they won't gather enough views if simply called it something like "Tolkiens mild critique of shakespeare" or "Tolkiens troubles with translation" to instead he calls "Why tolkien HATED shakespeare" or "Why tolkien was accused of black magic". It's an ongoing thing that this yyutuber's got going on.
@ChupacabraRex actually that was my first video by this creator that I've come across. I generally like this style of content, the title just threw me off a little, and I do find that sort of bait a little bit annoying. It will be easier to overlook if the rest of his videos are also thoroughly researched and equally interesting.
@@danieldowney7621 I thought as much. All his videos are of a similarly high quality, and I genuinely enjoy them, but they all posses similarly clickbaity titles.
This reminds me of the final books of The Wheel of Time which were authored by fan Brandon Anderson following the death of original author Robert Jordan.
Tolkien and Lewis' knowledge of Christian, Jewish, Greek and Scandinavian metaphysics/mythologism was so vast and so deep that they didn't need to be members of any secret esoteric society to inspire their respective lores. These conspiracy-minded critics are simply very ignorant Christians.
This video is fascinating, I love the idea that Tolkien wrote his books to help flesh out his languages. My favourite Tolkien language has to be Entish; I used to imagine how it would sound and what trees would want to say. On the subject of language have you heard of the controversy surrounding the translation of The Hobbit into Swedish. I saw an 'Ink and Fantasy' video that deals with this, you may like to see; "Why Tolkien was accused of black magic ".
I grew up with Ohlmark's translation and there are a number of alterations between the two texts. I was deeply surprised on a number of occasions when I read the English original. Which, I suppose, is one way of keeping the work fresh.
When you got to the part about black magic and a secret cabal of evil Tolkien fans worldwide I actually burst out laughing. Bro really had a few screws loose!
Just a tiny fyi the book covers you showed at the end is not the 2005 edition, but 2020 something. The 2005 had John Howe and Alan Lee illustrations on its covers.
I readed Tolkien's work in Thai translated, it's absolutely beautiful. All of the poems is the best poems I've ever read compare to old poet tales in thai which i used to study in school days. Translater used beautiful languages and rhymes, it filled with passion and soul, yet it so easy to read and understand unlike Thai's old poems by famous great poet (it really old and use mostly old words and i was just a student so... Fair enough). I might not understand everything because I'm still young at this age but I've readed Beren and Luthien for 4 times now. It really good and better each times.
But it's not "readed", though. In english it's just read, both when you say "To read a book" and also in past tense, "I've (Short for I have, past tense) read 'The Hobbit', but I've never read 'The Lord Of The Rings'."
Not as bad as things used to be, such as Operation Ten Go being removed when *Space Battleship Yamato* was -translated- localized into *Star Blazers* so as to hide its Japanese origin. Then there was 4Kids...
Kids back then recognized the Yamato, because WWII ships and planes were a big topic for kids' books. The localization then was about the FCC rules for kids' television, like no alcohol, and no gunfire that wasn't Elmer Fudd jokes.
@@martabachynsky8545 - Sorry, as far as I know the only way to watch *Space Battleship Yamato/Uchū Senkan Yamato* is with English subtitles or the difficult and lengthy task of learning Japanese.
I think there was a black magician mind in England and Scotland (Even some influence in Shakespeare). The experience with these mind energies makes Tolkien such a good read. Tolkien was not a black magician himself. It’s possible that the burning of his house was based on black magic that he drew towards himself. The black magic mind is very strong and lives for centuries, we find the influence of this alien mind in all the major religions.
This is why I'm glad I'm a polyglot and can read the original versions of many stories. I'm certain many translators do amazing jobs. Nevertheless, it never hurts to be safe.
I remember reading my mothers old books as a kid, loving the story but being sooo very annoyed by the changing names and things not adding up. My mother explained this situation, as well as she knew it. Then I learned English instead, and now 98% of all I read is in the original language (for some languages that means having both original works and english translations side by side; I am not trusting translators ever again).
Only scandinavians can truly understand, so we have to forgive our non-scandi brothers and sisters, and also teach them the right way to say the scandi words/letters.
In Poland we have at least two translations of The Lord of the Rings. The newer one is terrible and few people like it, but it is more widely published these days and apparently follows Tolkien's instructions for translating proper names.
As someone who did a PhD on fantasy, I can say the sorts of opinions attributed to Ohlmarks here are pretty standard among modern academics. Tolkien gets damned as a dangerous lunatic fairly regularly and Tolkien societies are routinely dismissed as what happens when you get the Hitler Youth stoned. I do my best not to mention him in my job apps because he's so widely hated. This is what happens when an academic writes a book that sells more than 500 copies.
We should write a book "Lord of the Keys" and it ends with all of an academic professor's books being burned in a volcanic meltdown following decades of publishing about how volcanoes were a folk myth. Or something like that.
“And the best parts were written by cs lewis” 😂😂 damnnn. I love Lewis, but olhmarks clearly was aware of the real life lore and knew how to wield it 😂.
That's interesting Tolkien wasn't inspired by Wagner. That means there's a source that both Wagner and Tolkien shared in common. Probably the Poetic Edda.
Tolkien stories closely resemble that of the testament of Solomon, probably one of the scariest Bible testaments you'll ever read basically it's this. God gives King Solomon a ring to control demons to build the temple. but it so much more as well he then goes on to marry the witch Queen of Ethiopia. yeah, it's like that
Given how vehemently anti-fascist Tolkien was, even going so far as to tell the Nazis that he wished he was Jewish, the poor guy must have been spinning in his grave at Ohlmark's disgusting remarks.
Fun fact: Ohlmarks also produced his own swedish translation of the Quran. Not from arabic but from an already flawed german translation. Neither muslims nor academic researchers rate it very highly.
how does a pro translator hired to translate an epic work just up and decide to interpret it into his native tongue instead of fulfilling his contract wtf.
Perhaps I should read the newer translations. I grew up on the Ohlmarks translations myself. Heard there were some controversy, but never figured out it was that bad.
In the first French translation, a confusion between "Hobbit" and the English "rabbit" led the translator to call them "les lapins".
They live in burrows, have big hairy feet and spend their time eating ...
There's also many inconsistencies in that translation, with several Frodin and Moromir popping up, as well as a strange obsession for the very niche verb "brilloter" (to twinkle).
Thats hilarious! I've never made those connections
🇫🇷: “ ‘awbeet! “
🇫🇷: “ ğawbeet! “
Very understandable
It was revenge because Tolkien tried to remove all traces of French from English, such as refusing to call it a cul-de-sac, referring to Bilbo's address as "bag end".
Not exactly wrong! Lol
Reminds me of this quote by George R. R. Martin “Everywhere you look, there are more screenwriters and producers eager to take great stories and ‘make them their own. No matter how major a writer it is, no matter how great the book, there always seems to be someone on hand who thinks he can do better, eager to take the story and ‘improve’ on it”.
He’s right. But if not to ‘improve’ it, then somehow to ‘fix’ it, which is normally not only a lie, but often rooted in a childish reason pertaining the story’s age. Rings of Power is actually a prime example of something needlessly and, naturally, poorly being subject to alterations because it’s somehow ‘flawed’ due to Tolkien’s writings being an older story, despite there nothing actually being wrong or even offensive in any of the books published by the Tolkien Estate.
…and turn it to Hollywood tripe
Agreed. Even Peter Jackson's films, as good as they are, couldn't help but try to "improve" on the work they all loved.
@ Jackson never aimed to ‘improve’ anything, at least not as if he felt the source material was flawed in any way for any reason. Unlike those who came after him, Peter felt it was important to relay Tolkien’s messages, regardless of his personal feelings of doing such a thing. Though I will admit, it’s debatable if it was a better call to have Aragorn be reluctant to embrace his kingly lineage, have Elrond give him Anduil later in the story and/or have Eówyn face the Witchking _despite_ being afraid over being fearless like she was in the books.
@@teleportedbreadfor3days That is just not true. He made many changes that were not "necessary" for adapting the film...and he did them to improve the story (because what is the alternative? he wanted to make the story worse?). For example, Aragorn was in no way an "unfilmable" character, but he was changed extensively. Movie Aragorn is wracked with self-doubt about his potential "weakness" and did not want to be King of Gondor despite being 100% obviously the heir to the throne. Tolkien's Aragorn leaves Rivendell not to go with Frodo to Mordor, but to Gondor specifically to claim the throne and be King (a throne he had a claim to...but not one he obviously was heir to...Isildur was _never_ King of Gondor and lived 3,000 years before Aragorn's time). Tolkien's Aragorn reforged Narsil into Andúril before leaving Rivendell because it helped his claim to the throne and when they disarmed him in Edoras he threatened to kill any man of Rohan who touched it. He never fretted over his weakness or his destiny as future King of Gondor.
Then, a second example, the role of Arwen was famously expanded. Why? because they wanted to improve on Tolkien by given more depth to a female character.
Some of Jackson's changes arguably *did* improve the story too, in my opinion (YMMV), and some made it worse. On the positive side:
* The funeral of Theodred and Theoden's weeping afterwards was a wonderful scene.
* Aragorn's kneeling before the Hobbits and saying "you bow to know one" gets me in the feels. That is likely adapted to improve on the "Fields of Cormallen" where it says Aragorn "bowed his knee" to take before Frodo's and Sam's hands and then lead them to a throne where he shouts, "Praise them with great praise!"
But then there are others-many others-some I like, but that Tolkien would have hated and were notable changes. Some more examples (some better, some worse) in no particular order:
* Gimli was not comic relief. Gimli was more more philosopher-warrior made into a comedic character for the films. I guarantee you Tolkien would have hated that.
* Aragorn never fell off a cliff or was thought to be dead. No one in the theater fell for that, so all the grief they showed among the characters was kind of a waste of time.
* The Army of the Dead couldn't kill anyone, they were only able to frighten people. And they never went to the Battle of Pelennor Fields at all in the books, which really undermined the sacrifices of Rohan who in the films died just to delay Sauron's army for about 20 minutes until the unstoppable killing machines that were the Army of the Dead arrived. The guess the Rohirrim got Merry and Eowyn to the Battle, and that was needed...but them attacking the Haradrim up close was mostly needless suicide.
* The Witch King never broke Gandalf's staff. If they understood Tolkien, they'd know that was just laughable...and it just did not happen.
* Frodo never broke faith with Sam and told him to go home...and it is not clear Sam would have listened anyway. Tolkien would have especially hated that addition to the story, though in my youth I liked it.
* Aragorn never beheaded the Mouth of Sauron, which would have been a war crime. Tolkien would have hated that too as that is Aragorn breaking a well understood law of war. You don't kill people who come to a parley, it's basically murdering a diplomat.
* There was no ambush in the road to Helm's Deep. This seems to have been added to insert an action scene, but it was not in the book. If he wanted he could have just moved the nighttime "no ordinary wolves" attack at Hollin (pre-Moria) to this section of The Two Towers, but instead the writers made up something brand new.
I could go on (and on), because there are lot more changes beside these. There were changes that were made that I would agree were normal adaptation choices, like moving Shelob from The Two Towers to Return of the King or changing internal monologues to spoken parts, eliminating Tom Bombadil and the Scouring of the Shire (even though they had time to add entire scenes to the story elsewhere). But there were plenty of story changes that were clearly intended to improve on Tolkien for a modern audience.
Fun fact: this book Tolkien och den Svarta Magin (Tolkien and the Black Magic) is actually a rare collectible now, as very few copies were ever printed due to its libellous nature.
Well yeah, the book is total trash written by someone who couldn't take Tolkien's criticism of his terrible translation.
I tried to find a copy 20 years ago, but gave up.
@@jespernielsen8549 with a research you could find one but it's more than 800€.
So even Tolkien had to deal with incompetent localizers with malicious chips on their shoulder for what they're adapting.
Look up the translation of Dracula by Bram Stoker
@@rohanmulgaokar5682which one, specifically?
@@GloomdrakeThe Swedish translation and the derived Icelandic version of Dracula are very different from the original novel. There is debate on whether they were based on an early draft of the original or were outright fraudulent translations. The Icelandic version was translated into English, and can be found under the name Powers of Darkness
Word Vomit
@@Gloomdrake The Swedish one.
This just goes to show that being a fan of Tolkien's work does not make you qualified to adapt it. You can supposedly love his writings while not knowing what the heck you're doing and arrogantly thinking you can do better.
Yup
But are you really a fan if you think you can do better than the author and intentionally avoid asking for help despite Tolkien having offered help.
Reminds me of a certain Amazon series
Not just Tolkien any author's work should be adapted without trying to put your own spin on it. Or if you do make changes obtain the approval of the author, in recent times I think it is provided for as part of an author's moral rights as per law in my country.
You sometimes get the same with 'fan since childhood' show-runners of long-running TV series too. Some are perfectly good producers, but then there are those that (arguably) take 'their' franchise off in positively dire directions.
If only Ohlmarks had the wit to just write his own damm Swedish fantasy epic and just let Tolkien be Tolkien. It would have saved him from (the well earned) paranoia that plagued his last years
While it might be opening a can of worms, Andrzej Sapkowski pretty much did that, having started doing the Polish translations of the Elric books by Moorcock (though HEAVILY borrowed from those in creating the Witcher) before writing his own stuff...
Translators are not supposed to rewrite or reinterpret the original work. What the guy in Sweden did was unethical. He sought to replace the original work with his fan made version.
That last sentence begs the question.... You mean like letting JJ Abrams loose with Star Trek?
@@TheHoveHeretic not really, I doubt he was hired or the studios had interest in a proper verbatim recreation, not to say he was the right choice at all but he was specifically hired to write his own version.
@@TheHoveHereticMore like with anime localisers
@@TheHoveHereticNo. Not like that. JJ was hired specifically to do a reinterpretation.
Whether it was a good interpretation I will leave for the star trek fandom to decide.
@@TheHoveHeretic Completely unrelated instance that has no relation to the argument. You're either trolling, stupid or both. If you ever write a book and submit a translation I hope they change everything without your permission. I wonder how you'd react if your main character was renamed as the Austrian Painter or the Georgian Priest.
Tolkien ded in 1973. 3 for elven kings, 7 for dwarf lords, 9 for men, 1 to rule them all.
Ohlmarks died in 1984. That book about misinformation and lies becoming truth
Oof
Wow. That's eerie and kind of cool.
The old geezer predicted his own dispatch into the afterlife.
Ooooohhhh - that’s weird and wild….
The Hobbit first published in 1937.
1+19, The Two Towers. Both destroyed, 1 by earthquake, the other by flood.
Åke Ohlmarks was despised as an idiot among Swedish Tolkien fans. Also his translations are considered sloppy as well as violating the intention of Tolkien.
It sounds like he was fairly prolific as a translator. How's his reputation with regards to the other things he translated?
Fortunately back for the fifty anniversary of LOTR's first edition far more competent and respectful people with udnerstanding and comprehension of Tolkien's linguistic nature etc made a new Swedish translation of LOTR and later The Hobbit that are far superior and corrects all of that mentally ill person's errors, including fixing the title itself to a proper translation.
@@The_Real_Mr_AlYes, it does cover that in the video.
That is the gist of this video.
Is he really though? They used his new names in the subtitles to all the movies.
It's pretty clear from the translation that Ohlmarks didn't read the entire thing before he started, he translated as he read the books. Some locations change names as more information is revealed etc.
My first name from birth is Elbereth. I was named before the movies were even an idea in Hollywood. People have tried to translate my name into Elizabeth. My name has never and will never be Elizabeth. I could see why he would be so upset about the formal name changes. Changing someone's name is the same as changing who they are. Ohlmarks was a butthead.
A Elbereth Gilthoniel
silivren penna míriel
o menel aglar elenath!
Na-chaered palan-díriel
o galadhremmin ennorath,
Fanuilos, le linnathon
nef aear, sí nef aearon!
@@oldoneeye7516 That's the one!
That's the sweetest tribute! I was the 11 year old out singing that song to the trees in the woods, in the summer before my little sister was born. I didn't know until the movies came out that there was such a fandom in the world. I love your name. It's perfect.
My favorite translated name for a lotr character is the Spanish name for treebeard. They went with Barbol, as in barba and arból
In Polish is Drzewiec (drzewo[dzhevo) - tree)
In Italian it's Barbalbero, same idea.
in hungarian he is called Szilszakáll, which i think sounds pretty awesome, almost like an elven name. szil means elm, szakáll means beard
In Turkish its sizilikĥeviakhnamjen.
The Spanish translation of LOTR that I’ve read by Domenech and Horne is truly amazing. I’m in awe of their work.
Ohlmarks may have had a genuine love for Tolkien's work, but he apparently wasn't above his own arrogance. It is the height of arrogance and conceit to try to rewrite the work of another with the idea that you could do it better. Ohlmarks further proved this about himself when he couldn't take the criticism of Tolkien as something he could learn from. Tolkien wasn't perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but he knew his world better than anyone else.
reminds me of Saruman and Gandalf. Like how he was jealous of gandalf and started doing all shite because he didn't get the ring of fire from Cirdan
The Czech translations of Tolkien's works are (at least in my opinion) some of the best in Czech literature, but there is one thing that irks me now. "Wizard" is translated as "čaroděj". The word wizard is derived from the word "wise", whereas čaroděj means something like "line maker"; some sort of druid that makes lines on the ground, which Gandalf is not. The word wizard should be translated as "mudrc" (from moudro, wisdom), but everyone keeps using čaroděj.
Changing Isengard to Isendor and Isendal “because Swedish doesn’t like loan words” is wild, when one considers that the “gard” part of the name is itself Norse, as in Asgard, meaning something like “walled enclosure”. Asgard is the Enclosure of the Gods (the Aesir). Isengard is obviously the enclosure of the river Isen - it’s a big walled off enclosure ffs 🤦🏻♂️.
The one being used in the later parts, Isengård, is good. It's consistent with the Swedish versions, Asgård and Midgård.
@ sure, I get putting the accent on would make sense. I don’t think that would have bothered Tolkien. That just doesn’t exist in English, but if that’s the correct way to render what is effectively the same word in Swedish, then yes, it makes sense to do it. That’s just how we write the same thing in our two different writing systems. It’s not fundamentally changing the word to a completely different word.
@@willmosse3684 I might be pedantic now, but changing one letter can in principle change the word completely. Changing from the letter A to Å changes the meaning in Swedish as much as changing from C to G in creed/greed in English.
@ Sure, I hear you. But, if you want to transliterate the Swedish word into English, you will have to use the A without the circe above it, because we don’t have the one with the circle. So therefore, looking at it in reverse, an A in English can represent either the A with the circle or the A without the circle in Swedish. So when Tolkien uses an A in the English in the word Isaengard, that could represent the A either with or without the circle in Swedish. Either would be an accurate transliteration.
@willmosse3684 I would transliterate Å -> O or to AW (the latter only for British English)
“Someone who prefers his own fancy to facts, and very ready to pretend to knowledge he doesn’t have.” I know a lot of people that describes perfectly, and shall be keeping this barb in my quiver for later use.
‘Ah yes, the devote Catholic, user of black magic’
I mean their were plenty occult folks who more or less went undercover in the church from their perspective that’s all black magic
Wonder how many “christians” inquisitors put down
Among other things
There is blood sacrifice and cannibalism involved......
@@liamschulzrules only if u eat the bread wrongly
There are so so so many Catholics who have practiced black magic. Ever heard of the Jesuits? Read some of Loyola's work!
Unfortunately, Tolkien still gets those accusations leveled against him to this day. I in fact encountered it from someone who was supposed to be getting a degree in Tolkien studies. He left it all because of a couple of examples that he claims are proof of Tolkien's racism. So, yeah, those accusations are still kicking.
Even those in the current Tolkien Society itself!
It is unfortunate, especially given one reason Tolkien didn't like Wagner was his antisemetic views. Though the irony of that is that while Wagner definitely held those it was more nuanced than that, Wagner himself was part Jewish and maintained friendships with both full blooded and religiously practicing Jews.
I take no joy in Tolkien being smeared for his much more milquetoast racism, if you even want to call it that, but it is kind of karmic.
This seems like a VERY misleading comment. Accusing Tolkien, correctly or not, of holding racist views, is not the same as accusing him as accusing him of being a crypto-notsee cult leader.
@@Thumbdumpandthebumpchump OP didn't claim that it was, they were just using the racism accusations as an example of the libel still going around about Tolkien.
@tgbluewolf "Those accusations" seems pretty clear to me.
I recall reading about the Swedish translation in the Finnish translator's book, but I didn't know that it went that far. Anecdotally the Finnish translator was a fledgling when she started, so it would be interesting to hear Tolkien's thoughts on it as Tolkien had learned Finnish for the Kalevala
"The goblins were made from lost elves."
--"Oh so dark elves."
"Oh dear how could this happen"
In my book goblins are made first but their Creator God doesn't like them so he makes them go underground lol
Christopher Tolkien was the best son a man could ask for in how he protected his fathers legacy. Sadly Christopher's son Simon has been about the worst grandson in this regard, the polar opposite to his father.
All this to say that I do fear that such things as this may again happen in the comming days under the stewardship of Simon.
Yep, while Christopher wasn't the storyteller his father was, he was a superior historian with things.
I wish it was still up, but when Christopher died, Standing Stone Games had a thing with interviews about interactions with him tied to Lord of the Rings: Online...several of their writers pointing out that after he died it became harder to make things that fit the setting as well as when they could call him to talk about things for it. He was heavily involved in the Bingo Boffin story as well there.
Something called, "Three generation Rule"
I knew Ohlmarks took some liberties, especially with names, but had no idea it was this bad. It was this version of The Lord of the Rings (or The Saga of the Ring, as Ohlmarks named it) I read. Luckily atleast The Hobbit had been translated a second time and I was spared any mention of a "hompen".
There is one infamous passage in The Lord of the Rings that many swedish Tolkien fans talked quite a bit about, where Ohlmarks had made a major mistake. "The orcs were roaming the field" was turned into "Orcherna råmade på fältet" ("The orcs mooed on the field". And yes, for some reason he spelled 'orc' as 'orch' throughout the books).
Hompen är skoj: "dvärgarna runkade på skäggen" :D
@@Tarmslitaren :-)
"Orch" sounds much better in swedish though than orc, which is too reminiscent of "orka". Orcerna strövade på fälten. I'm not sure if it has the same ring to it, imo. "orch" sounds more ominous i think.
same is true of Frodo Bagger, which sounds like a proper swedish name, rather than Frodo Säcker, which is the newer translation. I get it, "säck" is more of a direct translation of "bag". But the point of a translation is also to make it seem as it was written in that language, rather than try to copy it.
@@maxion5109 Those points I can only agree with. Jotack, 'orc' känns väldigt fel på svenska och 'Säcker' är ännu värre.
Ohlmarks translation is a mixed bag. He’s got a good feeling for names (and there is a lot of names since he doesn’t care to remember when a character has appeared previously and gives that character a new name) and I really like the name Sagan om ringen.
However, he doesn’t know what a wild-goose chase is so he translates it word for word to great comic effect. He also mistakes the word roam for roar.😂
I say, without Ohlmarks many a laughter had been missed. Meeting another (swedish) Tolkien fan over a beer can be a moment of great hilarity.
You briefly mentioned the Dutch translations. Those are considered pretty good translations. And recieved Tolkien's blessing.
Received. I before E except after C (generally).
Received. I before E except after C (generally).
Back in the 70`s, before the LOTR was completely translated into Finnish, I read it first in Swedish and a bit later, in English. I made comparisons and found out the Swedish translator had even included a full sentence of his own!
I think he did that repeatedly did he not?
What was said?
@@1Butcher In the original text: (Both very loosely quoted) "What do you fear I would have said to him?" and the Swedish translation: "What do you fear I would have said to him? That I have a rebellious dwarf scoundrel here that I would gladly trade for a subservient orc?"
Well he did put Black Speech *uncensored* in his book! Never before has Imaldris Publishing accepted such filth!
*Imladris, I believe. But I'm not an expert on Tolkien, but that's what they call Rivendell in Elvish in the movies.
Knowing that Tolkien was a devout Catholic makes the accusation quite funny to me
Knowing the real reason why Jesus was executed along with other pedophiles makes me laugh at your conclusion.
😂 not surprising to me
Ohlmark is literally Morgoth
He’s not that big a deal. I think he’s more like Grima Wormtongue.
Gods, I WISH the world were run by a secret Tolkien fan cabal. 'Twould be a very different world than this one.
Dude! Thank you! I thought I had heard everything about JRRT but this is news to me.
In defense of Åke Ohlmarks:
To start off: he Lord of the Rings translation is a far better read than 'Hompen' and while he may have been sloppy and inconsistent with some names and sentences, he had a vastly better grasp on the Swedish language than Professor Tolkien ever did, and so, most of the name translations of Åke are quite good (i.e. Hobbit -> Hob, Middle-Earth -> Midgård).
On the other hand, Åke saw it as his prerogative to make the translation more into a kind of adaptation, embellishing the, in his view, harsh language of the original with more flourish. I think this is the main thing the translation should be criticized for.
On 'Tolkien and the Black Magic' (Tolkien och den svarta magin): It's a fun read, if you can get hold of it. Full of vitriol and listing every single grievance Tolkien or the Tolkien Society has ever caused him (including a TV quiz show host waking him in the middle of the night for clarifications on a question about Aragorn's race, or having to deal with delusional Tolkien fans, or how he was treated poorly by Cristopher etc. ) .
Of note, he put's the Merry Kills the Witch-King debacle squarely on Tolkien, and calls it stupid how he gave the glory to the silly hobbit, instead of the woman. (Could possibly be a typo in the translation manuscript her -> he? but at the writhing of this, Åke Ohlmarks was practically delusional so who's to say. In any case this was corrected in later editions of the Ohlmarks translation, with the change of a single vowel 'han -> hon')
As correction: Åke doesn't call Tolkien himself a Nazi or black magic user, but does go into a conspiracy theory on how the Swedish Tolkien Society grooms kids into the occult/Naziism with their rituals and symbolisms. Bear in mind this is during the heights of the stupid 'roleplaying is occult' moral panic years, so he was not alone in being an idiot.
Excellent and very interesting comment, thank you.
He tried to FIX Tolkien.
Sorry he was delusional, but altering prose written like poetry is an aesthetic high crime!
@@eric2500 I think it goes without saying, but any translation is going to need to alter the prose to be palatable to the native reader. A direct translation is going to feel very clunky. This is twice as important when the original is, as you say 'written like poetry'. Åke Ohlmarks surely went a bit too far afield, but I'm not sure if it is actually much worse than the new translation.
Midgård is actually a good translation of Middle-Earth. And much of the poetry is pretty good as well, although it might be quite different from the English original. I have actually not read the new translation so can’t really compare.
Wow. I was ready to think Tolkien was just being persnickety, but I've seen better translations coming from things like ChatGPT.
Chat gpt is actually great when it comes to translating.
The art in that version of the hobbit is kinda amazing in a “not accurate way”, but a technically correct translation of the words as description.
Ohlmark sounds like a fanfiction writer who got told off for missing the plot points by the original author.
I wonder if Ohlmarks had any grandkids. And whether they now work at Amazon.
This is interesting because the first Spanish translation, which was endorsed and advised by Tolkien, but poorly received by the public, did adapt the words, turning hobbit into "hobito" and the like.
The second one translates most of the wordplay but keeps first names and such intact.
The first translation got the "children's book" treatment of the time, and indeed was done by a children's author, while the second one was the "novel for adults" treatment and was much better received.
The LotR translation is generally considered very good, but still has many, to me obvious, errors, which have not all been fixed through the many, many reprintings, for instance, "not all that is gold glitters" is consistently translated as "not all that glitters is gold," totally missing the inversion of the saying being intentional and not an errata.
As a Swede, this was very interesting, since I could read directly of the swedish translations within the video. Thanks
The man's ego could rival Sauron's
Geeze.
It's amazing how much of his life that Ohlmark spent obsessing over and then trying to tear down the work of a fellow linguist and author.
I understand the concept of envy, not everyone can be the best - but it seems very clear that he would have found more fulfillment in life just writing his own book.
I have to conclude that he lazy as well. He had the passion, he had a story he wanted to tell, but he was more willing to try and twist the words another man had obsessed and slaved over than to actually buckle down and lay some words himself.
I think that the Catholic concepts of Envy, and Pride, while not always applicable, fit to a "T" in the case of Mr. Ohlmark.
One self-destructive character flaw, and another flaw that prevented him from changing; because how can you change what you see as perfect already?
Tolkien was the linguist and author. Ohlmark was just a jealous wannabe.
I remember growing up thinking Merry killed the Witch-King due to that flawed passage. Ohlmarks actually wrote quite a few interesting books about mythology and folklore, but in this regard he was seriously deluded and spiteful.
Sounds like someone made a decision, JRR didn't like it, and when he criticized it, the culprit got offended. Happens every day in American politics.
3:21 “Humping would go on to leave a very bitter taste in the professor’s mouth”
I’ve heard that
Ohlmarks was the living embodiment of fuming pinkjak.
Maybe this is ironic to comment on a Tolkien video, but I say this as constructive criticism: get to the point. If the video title references accusations of black magic, get to the point, then add context, rather than getting more than halfway through the runtime and addressing the title. I find the context interesting, sure, but it wasn't why I clicked. Also, the music in the background was slightly too loud. Great presentation of the information though, and the context really was interesting, if a little lengthy. All the best.
Have you not noticed? Ink and Fantasy makes rather high-quality videos in and off themselves, but he always knows they won't gather enough views if simply called it something like "Tolkiens mild critique of shakespeare" or "Tolkiens troubles with translation" to instead he calls "Why tolkien HATED shakespeare" or "Why tolkien was accused of black magic". It's an ongoing thing that this yyutuber's got going on.
@ChupacabraRex actually that was my first video by this creator that I've come across. I generally like this style of content, the title just threw me off a little, and I do find that sort of bait a little bit annoying. It will be easier to overlook if the rest of his videos are also thoroughly researched and equally interesting.
@@danieldowney7621 I thought as much. All his videos are of a similarly high quality, and I genuinely enjoy them, but they all posses similarly clickbaity titles.
This reminds me of the final books of The Wheel of Time which were authored by fan Brandon Anderson following the death of original author Robert Jordan.
There is also a weird conspiracy going on around Christian circles that both Tolkien and Lewis were memebers of the Hermetic Golden Dawn.
Even though the Order was disbanded when Tolkien was 11
@SonofSethoitae Yeah, Little Studios may have good intentions but they are idiot.
@@TSN-WVK08 Well on that we can totally agree. It also doesn't help that they miss the mark in their cultural analysis videos.
@davidhays2846 Christian groups like Little Light Studios like to spread it around. Don't know where they get their sources from but it does exist.
Tolkien and Lewis' knowledge of Christian, Jewish, Greek and Scandinavian metaphysics/mythologism was so vast and so deep that they didn't need to be members of any secret esoteric society to inspire their respective lores.
These conspiracy-minded critics are simply very ignorant Christians.
This video is fascinating, I love the idea that Tolkien wrote his books to help flesh out his languages. My favourite Tolkien language has to be Entish; I used to imagine how it would sound and what trees would want to say. On the subject of language have you heard of the controversy surrounding the translation of The Hobbit into Swedish. I saw an 'Ink and Fantasy' video that deals with this, you may like to see; "Why Tolkien was accused of black magic ".
This comment is kind of strange
Wow so Rachel Maddow wasn't the first fruit loop to call us Tolkien fans all kinds of names?
I grew up with Ohlmark's translation and there are a number of alterations between the two texts. I was deeply surprised on a number of occasions when I read the English original. Which, I suppose, is one way of keeping the work fresh.
This is going to be a good one.
I've always disregarded this translation because of the Tolkien Letters. Now I want an English translation of Ohlmarks translation!
When you got to the part about black magic and a secret cabal of evil Tolkien fans worldwide I actually burst out laughing. Bro really had a few screws loose!
Now I want a exact translation of the Swedish translation to read this totally different version of the hobbit and LOTR
What a contrast! He said what Tolkien said about hobbits and the sea with more words and no poetry!
Thank-you for an interesting and informative video. 💐
What a despicable man. Truly, if it were me, I'd have put him in his place.
I have to imagine the thing about loanwords in Swedish as Ohlmarks as the soyjack and Tolkien as the Chad
Just a tiny fyi the book covers you showed at the end is not the 2005 edition, but 2020 something. The 2005 had John Howe and Alan Lee illustrations on its covers.
I readed Tolkien's work in Thai translated, it's absolutely beautiful. All of the poems is the best poems I've ever read compare to old poet tales in thai which i used to study in school days. Translater used beautiful languages and rhymes, it filled with passion and soul, yet it so easy to read and understand unlike Thai's old poems by famous great poet
(it really old and use mostly old words and i was just a student so... Fair enough).
I might not understand everything because I'm still young at this age but I've readed Beren and Luthien for 4 times now. It really good and better each times.
But it's not "readed", though. In english it's just read, both when you say "To read a book" and also in past tense, "I've (Short for I have, past tense) read 'The Hobbit', but I've never read 'The Lord Of The Rings'."
This reminds me of the current Anime Localizers who forcefully change things in anime, games and manga to push their ideology.
Also a frequent problem of anime adaptations of manga and light novels.
Not as bad as things used to be, such as Operation Ten Go being removed when *Space Battleship Yamato* was -translated- localized into *Star Blazers* so as to hide its Japanese origin. Then there was 4Kids...
Kids back then recognized the Yamato, because WWII ships and planes were a big topic for kids' books. The localization then was about the FCC rules for kids' television, like no alcohol, and no gunfire that wasn't Elmer Fudd jokes.
@@tominiowa2513 I remember watching Star Blazers as a kid in the '70s/80s. I loved it! Is there a more-correctly dubbed version into English?
@@martabachynsky8545 - Sorry, as far as I know the only way to watch *Space Battleship Yamato/Uchū Senkan Yamato* is with English subtitles or the difficult and lengthy task of learning Japanese.
I think there was a black magician mind in England and Scotland (Even some influence in Shakespeare). The experience with these mind energies makes Tolkien such a good read. Tolkien was not a black magician himself. It’s possible that the burning of his house was based on black magic that he drew towards himself. The black magic mind is very strong and lives for centuries, we find the influence of this alien mind in all the major religions.
This is why I'm glad I'm a polyglot and can read the original versions of many stories. I'm certain many translators do amazing jobs. Nevertheless, it never hurts to be safe.
"Hompen"...lol
This title sounds like an Onion article
I remember reading my mothers old books as a kid, loving the story but being sooo very annoyed by the changing names and things not adding up. My mother explained this situation, as well as she knew it. Then I learned English instead, and now 98% of all I read is in the original language (for some languages that means having both original works and english translations side by side; I am not trusting translators ever again).
5:25 Åke is pronounced Awkay.
Thank you!!
@@InkandFantasy You are welcome!
To an Anglophpne, a certain alternate pronunciation suggests itself.
@@TheHoveHeretic Yes, that's why the specifics about Å (note the ring on top) have to be pointed out.
Only scandinavians can truly understand, so we have to forgive our non-scandi brothers and sisters, and also teach them the right way to say the scandi words/letters.
Start at 13:00 for the answer, you're welcome.
Just because you know "unknowable " things means nothing. It is all hidden in languages/ symbol
This reminds me a bit of what L. Sprague de Camp did with the works of Robert E. Howard... 😕
Ohlmarks is pretty infamous. I have an old newspaper opinion piece saved where he goes on a rant accusing the Tolkien society of satanist sex orgies.
So he (Ake Ohlmarks) was the first localizer?
Tolkien was dealing with localizers with an agenda, too??? The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Har inte hört om detta. Svensklärare måste tycka att det är pinsamt. Bägge översättningarna är knepiga. Kan man bör man läsa/lyssna på engelska.
First Portuguese Edition, "O Gnomo" 😂
😂😂porras
In Poland we have at least two translations of The Lord of the Rings. The newer one is terrible and few people like it, but it is more widely published these days and apparently follows Tolkien's instructions for translating proper names.
As someone who did a PhD on fantasy, I can say the sorts of opinions attributed to Ohlmarks here are pretty standard among modern academics. Tolkien gets damned as a dangerous lunatic fairly regularly and Tolkien societies are routinely dismissed as what happens when you get the Hitler Youth stoned. I do my best not to mention him in my job apps because he's so widely hated. This is what happens when an academic writes a book that sells more than 500 copies.
We should write a book "Lord of the Keys" and it ends with all of an academic professor's books being burned in a volcanic meltdown following decades of publishing about how volcanoes were a folk myth.
Or something like that.
“And the best parts were written by cs lewis” 😂😂 damnnn. I love Lewis, but olhmarks clearly was aware of the real life lore and knew how to wield it 😂.
Fascinating video.
Loving the work then calling it boring reminds me of guys hitting on girls and calling them ugly if rejected. 😂
It’s a shame that someone’s Medieval mindset and beliefs was so strong that they made such a fool of themselves
I bet "Hobbel" was a part of the Dutch controversy?
Where can I find out more about it?
Wow what a possessed man. Honestly I see no other reason for that level of disconnect
That's interesting Tolkien wasn't inspired by Wagner. That means there's a source that both Wagner and Tolkien shared in common. Probably the Poetic Edda.
Tolkien stories closely resemble that of the testament of Solomon, probably one of the scariest Bible testaments you'll ever read basically it's this. God gives King Solomon a ring to control demons to build the temple. but it so much more as well he then goes on to marry the witch Queen of Ethiopia. yeah, it's like that
Given how vehemently anti-fascist Tolkien was, even going so far as to tell the Nazis that he wished he was Jewish, the poor guy must have been spinning in his grave at Ohlmark's disgusting remarks.
In the first Hungarian translation in 1979, Hobbit was Babó (baby, babe, doll)
Fun Fact: New Age stores don't sell Bibles, but sell C.S Lewis and Tolkiens' books.
As an atheist and a skeptic who doesn't believe in magic, I would have mocked his belief in black magic.
It’s like this guy just decided to write fanfiction and publish it as the real thing. Too bad Wattpad didn’t exist yet
I have now learned about a new person that I despise with a passion, thanks for posting! Seriously, what a horrible human being this guy was.
I am Ssedish and my parents had the Åke Ohlmarks translation but threw them away because they where so bad lol
Did he know about Camp Hobbit?
I'd love to see what people 200 years from now will say what Tolkien meant
thankfully Sweden finally got a good version
Fun fact: Ohlmarks also produced his own swedish translation of the Quran. Not from arabic but from an already flawed german translation. Neither muslims nor academic researchers rate it very highly.
I've heard the nonsense about C.S. Lewis having written a bunch of Tolkien's work. I wonder if this silly man is the one who first produced it.
how does a pro translator hired to translate an epic work just up and decide to interpret it into his native tongue instead of fulfilling his contract wtf.
That guy was not mentally well throughout the entire thing, and it got to straight delusion at the end.
Perhaps I should read the newer translations. I grew up on the Ohlmarks translations myself. Heard there were some controversy, but never figured out it was that bad.
8:45 was he getting paid per word?