OT: What should a fine press Hobbit & Lord of the Rings include?

The Folio Society recently sold out of their limited edition The Hobbit
https://www.foliosociety.com/usa/the-hobbit-limited-edition.html
At $850 before shipping and tax, it was an easy pass for me. That said, kudos to all that purchased it.
This is a few years after their Lord of the Rings, which was a whooping $1500 before shipping and tax, also very quickly sold out --
https://www.foliosociety.com/usa/the-lord-of-the-rings-limited-edition.html

However, what I did not realize is that basically none of the illustrations are exclusive to the FS. Alan Lee's illustrations are all found in the far more affordable William Morrow edition:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0063392933

Alan Lee is a phenomenal illustrator, so nothing wrong with using his beautiful illustrations of course! That said, I would feel rather disappointed learning that ostensibly nothing in this limited edition is unique to the limited edition. I would love to one day own a true fine press Hobbit and LoTR. Obviously letterpress is a must, but what else? Here is my wish list:

*Appropriate Middle-Earthish font, still easily readable of course
*Beautiful drop caps in Tolkien's style at the start of each chapter
*Illustrations... okay, this is tough. I would definitely want some of Tolkien's own illustrations: https://www.tolkienestate.com/painting/
I also think that Tim and Greg Hildebrandt's art is iconic and at least some of the illustrations must be included
https://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/The_Brothers_Hildebrandt

My other favorite Tolkien illustrator is Ted Nasmith: https://www.tednasmith.com/tolkien/


So ultimately, I would want a different iconic illustrator for each volume! I'm thinking something like -- the frontispiece for each volume could be one of Tolkien's original illustrations. Then each volume would include illustrations from aforementioned artists. So Fellowship of the Ring might have the Hildebrandt's art, and The Two Towers Nasmith's, Alan Lee Return of the King - something like that.

*Each volume would include a scholarly introduction.
*The cover... I'm thinking quarter-bound in dragon hide! Or goat, if dragons are scarce. I'm not a fan of having a large illustration on the front board as is done with the FS and William Morrow editions. I would prefer something more subtle. I actually think the FS's original covers to their LoTR were elegant and not bombastic --

*In terms of signatures, the one I really want is Tolkien's, but that's not going to happen! Sadly, both Tim and Greg have also passed away. Although fortunately for us Mr. Nasmith and Alan Lee are still here! Still, I honestly don't think the signature sheet is what is going to make this. Anyway, this is probably not going to happen, but who knows, maybe Suntup or someone else one day will be able to complete such a challenging undertaking!

Besides the obvious (good font choices, brilliant layout, superb bindings), I think one thing I'd like to see is newly commissioned art. There are a lot of great established LotR artists, but we've all seen it before too. If whoever did the books could find a new, proper artist (none of this AI-looking digital paint crapdoodle), that would really cinch it for me.

>1 astropi: 🤔 Great question. I’ve a copy of the FS ltd ed (inc. the Hobbit & Silmarillion) - I recall paying £275 for LotR new and thought that was being reckless (part of my student loan). They are lovely books - I’ve always had a soft spot for the original illustrations. But…… I too have pondered a similar question. For me, letterpress would be a minimum. Paper would be of central importance - preferably handmade, we’re hypothesising after all. Personally, with the right font, paper and binding illustrations needn’t feature.
If my numbers ever came in, I’d love to commission a ‘National copy’ - hand scribed on vellum, measuring at least 30” by 15” with illuminated capitals in the form of the Winchester Bible - flights, I know. And then have displayed in the British Library.

I really like art by JRR himself. Lee is okay, but something about JRR's watercolors just makes me feel at home in the world. Edit: it would be really nice, too, if it was printed a five books as originally intended. Only one set like that I know of, and the quality isn't superb.

Actually, I also agree that illustrations aren't required. The books paint such vivid pictures with words that what you imagine may surpass any illustration anyway.

If a press does do it, I would like them to commit to the Ring trilogy plus Hobbit and Silmarillion at minimum, all in compatible format.

I have a hybrid fine press edition of the Hobbit. The text block is from the 1977 Folio Society edition, printed letterpress (the paper is nothing special, though). It was rebound by Rich Tong of Ludlow Bookbinders in full goatskin, with a gilt dragon embossed on the front cover with a hot iron.

I've always thought the Hobbit / the Lord of the Rings should be illustrated in medieval style wood engravings. i.e. Kelmscott Press kind of inspiration. Not that the text sounds medieval, but it draws on a lot of mythological and medieval sources. To me, the book should feel mythological - and digital prints just don't do that for me.

My criteria:

- Letterpress (let's be realistic - printed on a cylinder press, not with the hand press)
-Mouldmade paper (again, let's be realistic, handmade paper would make it too expensive, although perhaps handmade paper could be used for a deluxe state)
-Appropriate typface/font (with a medieval flavor, but not tiring to the eyes to read for long periods)
- At least two-color ink throughout (red for title, chapter headings, and drop-caps; black for regular text; perhaps vary the non-black color for each volume)
-High quality materials for covers (perhaps full linen with a leather spine label for a standard state and full goatskin for a deluxe state)
- Hand-sewn binding with hand-sewn head and tail bands
- Medieval-style woodcut illustrations, printed from the block
- Sturdy cloth covered slipcase for the entire set

>7 921Jack: Great minds think alike! Very much agreed

>8 ultrarightist: I like! I would add to your specs that it be hand-sewn on tapes or cords (preferably cords), not Smythe sewn. Big difference. Sewn on cords would get you that medieval flavor you seek.

>4 Cardboard_killer: You mentioned "it would be really nice, too, if it was printed a five books as originally intended".

Do you have a reference for this? (or was it perhaps an error?) I always understood that 'The Lord of the Rings' was six books, plus appendices.

I tried doing an online search for a 5-book set, but that didn't yield anything. For clarity too, we're talking just about 'The Lord of the Rings'. We're not trying to call 'The Hobbit' one book, the 'The Lord of the Rings' another three, and the 'The Silmarillion' a fifth, right?

It was my understanding that each of (A) 'The Fellowship of the Ring', (B) 'The Two Towers', and (3) 'The Return of the King' are split into 2 smaller books. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

>10 Glacierman: Good idea - very much agreed!

>11 Tuna_Melon: Oops, yes six volumes of LotR plus appendices. For some reason, I always think of RotK as one original volume.

>8 ultrarightist: >10 Glacierman: I think y'all have nailed it, this sounds like the perfect edition. Now to find a press to make it!

>14 Shadekeep: I thought the challenge is getting the rights more than the financial and resource commitment

>15 SebRinelli: Yes. My statement was more one of enthusiasm than of practicality.

Perhaps a 2025 Thornwillow Kickstarter. Paper wrapper edition to be delivered in 2030 followed by leather in 2035.

>17 L.Bloom: Thank you for a genuine laugh-out-loud moment.

>13 Cardboard_killer: As Tolkien originally conceived it, LotR was a single volume work. It was a the publisher's decision to break it into three parts as publishing it in one go was not practical from their standpoint, and it upset JRRT quite a bit, but it was either that or nothing. He reluctantly conceded to the publisher's wishes, thus fixing in the public's consciousness the idea that LotR is a trilogy rather than a single work.

The various single-volume editions, starting with the red pseudo-leather Collector's Edition, are what Tolkien had intended.

Any division of the work is not original with the author, but is strictly a publishing decision.

>17 L.Bloom: lol. 2035 for the leather a bit ambitious.

>19 Glacierman: As already noted, Tolkien originally envisioned it would be 6 internal books. I had long heard that publishing it as three volumes was a publisher's decision, one which is fine by me. I don't think it's necessary to have huge massive volumes personally, they're not that comfy to read! Anyway, I had never heard of Tolkien being "upset" by the decision. Curious if you know of some sources to substantiate that?

I sometimes think I would be the only fine press collector not excited by an edition of Lord of the Rings.

>22 edkennedy: To be fair, there have been SO many "limited" and "anniversary" and "deluxe" editions of Lord of the Rings that I don't blame you. That said, I truly am not aware of a single letterpress edition.

>23 astropi: The original FS edition was printed letterpress.

>23 astropi: Since the book was published in the 50s I assume that the early trade editions were all letterpress, though maybe I am wrong. I believe that letterpress was not fully replaced as the commercial printing method until the 60s and 70s.

>25 edkennedy: No, it's a common misconception that somehow offset printing is "new" or was not around a few decades ago. Ira Rubel invented offset printing around 1904, and just a few years later it was already being used in large commercial productions.
https://www.historyofinformation.com/detail.php?id=560

>21 astropi: Anyway, I had never heard of Tolkien being "upset" by the decision. Curious if you know of some sources to substantiate that?,

Oh, boy. I read that sooo many years ago that I can't begin to remember where. It stuck with me, although I cannot cite a specific source. Would that I could.

And for my part, I have never heard that his original conception was as 6 volumes, but then I haven't read anything recent about him or his works, so I would be ignorant if it was something that has been published in the last 10 or 15 years.

>27 Glacierman: According to Tolkien's private letters released to the public in the 1980s, the writer did not envision or create The Lord of the Rings as a three-part saga. Instead, the entire story from Bag End to Mordor and back again was penned as a single, giant tome, which Tolkien hoped would then be followed by a second work, The Silmarillion. Upon completion, The Lord of the Rings was divided into six books by the author, and although he wanted it published in one hit, Tolkien confirmed in his letters that he thought of this new Middle-earth adventure as six separate books.
https://screenrant.com/lord-of-the-rings-tolkien-6-books-why/

Maybe whomever at some point produces a fine press LoTR could publish it as 6 separate volumes! I'd be okay with that, as long as we have a good slipcase/clamshell :)

>26 astropi: Regardless many books continued to be printed using letterpress well into the 50s, 60s, and even 70s. Does anybody know if Lord of the Rings was one of them?

>28 astropi: Thank you! I haven't read his collected letters, so that is how I missed that bit of information. Looks like I was only half right.

>29 edkennedy: I would say it most likely was not.

>28 astropi: I would be very happy with the books in six volumes, easier to hold and read. Did he perchance have title suggestions for each of the six, or where they simply to be numbered?

>29 edkennedy: Hello, I was fortunate to inherit my Grandfather’s copy he had purchased from Folio - it’s a second printing (from 1980 I think, not to hand atm) and I can confirm it’s printed letterpress - so at least the first two print runs were printed in that manner. Aside from sentimental value, it’s one of my favourite copies.

>32 Shadekeep: 1. The Ring Sets Out
2. The Ring Goes South
3. The Treason of Isengard
4. The Ring Goes East
5. The War of The Ring
6. The End of The Third Age
7. Appendices

>33 cottonoverwood: Could you please take a pic of the colophon/copyright page for us? I'm really curious if it states it was printed letterpress?

>34 Cardboard_killer: Thanks. I have to say those are functional but hardly inspirational titles. Half of them are good, but the ones starting "The Ring ..." just don't grab me. They sound like a series of 1950s rom-com films. "Doris Day and Jack Lemmon get engaged in Mexico and hilarity ensues in The Ring Goes South!"

>34 Cardboard_killer: Where did you get those? The link I included above gives the following:

Near the turn of the millennium, as Peter Jackson's movie trilogy loomed, modern publishers thought to release The Lord of the Rings in 6 volumes, closer to what Tolkien had originally intended. Guided by prospective titles from Tolkien's letters and his son, Christopher, the books were named:

The Return of the Shadow
The Fellowship of the Ring
The Treason of Isengard
The Journey To Mordor/The Two Towers
The War of the Ring
The Return of the King

>37 astropi: I like that list better. Here's one example of the previously stated list in the wild: https://www.amazon.com/LORD-RINGS-Treason-Isengard-Appendices/dp/0007123817

>38 Shadekeep: I remember seeing that in the bookstores at the time. Always regretted not grabbing a set. Now I understand the divisions. Interesting.

>38 Shadekeep: Is that Tolkien or something the publishers did? At any rate, I got this info from an AI :)
J.R.R. Tolkien originally intended to name the first book of "The Lord of the Rings" as "The Lord of the Rings: The First Volume" or "The Return of the Shadow." However, he eventually settled on the title "The Fellowship of the Ring." There is no indication that he specifically wanted to name it "The Ring Sets Out."

>40 astropi: https://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/The_Lord_of_the_Rings/Publication_history_and_ga...

In 1999, HarperCollins released a "Millennium edition" of The Lord of the Rings, consisting of seven volumes which were originally conceived by J.R.R. Tolkien, with book titles suggested by him: (emphasis added)

1. The Ring Sets Out
   
2. The Ring Goes South
   
3. The Treason of Isengard
   
4. The Ring Goes East
   
5. The War of the Ring
   
6. The End of the Third Age
   
7. Appendices
   

Not that I trust a wiki much more than I do LLM-generated stuff. I already miss the days of authoritative data sources.

>41 Shadekeep: That might very well be correct. AI is often wrong after all, although I'd love to hear the answer from, as you say, an authoritative source.

>35 astropi: I’ll give it a go tomorrow - not having posted a pic here before, it may take a little time.

>43 cottonoverwood: I was looking at some older FS Hobbits for sale on eBay, and I did not see anything that indicated they were published letterpress. That said, they have had a bunch of different publications over many years, and it would be lovely if it was printed letterpress, but I remain skeptical.

>44 astropi: I have a FS edition of The Hobbit printed letterpress. Before FS shifted from letterpress to offset printing in the late 70s, FS never explicitly that a book was printed letterpress. You'll look in vain and pass over the letterpress printed volumes.

>45 ultrarightist: Before FS shifted from letterpress to offset printing in the late 70s, FS never explicitly that a book was printed letterpress. You'll look in vain and pass over the letterpress printed volumes.

Interesting. What year was your Hobbit printed? I do have a beautiful copy of the FS Castle of Otranto, from 1976, and in the colophon it specifically notes the book is printed letterpress --

>46 astropi: Interesting. I stand corrected about not explicitly indicating letterpress. My letterpress printed copy of the Hobbit was printed in 1979, and the colophon does not explicitly indicate letterpress.

>1 astropi:

Worth saying that some of the illustrations were exclusive to Folio at the time of release. The HarperCollins edition that included this extra material (and yet more illustrations) was only released this year.

>4 Cardboard_killer:

It was never intended to be printed as 5 books. Tolkien wanted a single volume. The three volumes was to make them more affordable and at the behest of GA&U. The 6 ‘books’ that the story is split into are a structural element for the narrative, but not something that was ever intended to be a physical split.

>49 stubedoo: That's how I understood it.

>44 astropi: My apologies, I’ve taken a photo of the colophon(s) but have yet to post 🙄 I can see no explicit reference to letterpress use. However, I can confirm the impression of the print is sufficient to suggest it was used.

>45 ultrarightist: Again, I’ve a second printing and, as with your copy, it too is printed letterpress. This is why I always seek out earlier/first print runs of Folio books as, before c.1980 they’re printed letterpress. ‘Cold Comfort Farm’ is a good example of this - a great novel with a distinct bite to the text. If I’m correct, it’s also the first time Folio used Quentin Blake as an illustrator which, imo, is perfect for the text.

Silver ink. I think a decorative frame around the illustrations in silver ink would be awesome!