Quote:
Originally Posted by astra
Different sources - different quotes.
The source I mentioned says 6 books. Although, his letters would lend more credibility.
Even if I am wrong, and it is one book, it is still not a trilogy as it was told in previous posts.
My point is Tolkien never saw it as a trilogy. If you are right, then it is not trilogy  |
Like Harry said, they were afraid of running out of paper:
Quote:
|
For publication, due largely to post-war paper shortages, but also to keep the price down, the book was divided into three volumes: The Fellowship of the Ring (Books I, The Ring Sets Out, and II, The Ring Goes South,) The Two Towers (Books III, The Treason of Isengard, and IV, The Ring Goes East,), and The Return of the King (Books V, The War of the Ring, and VI, The End of the Third Age, plus six appendices). Delays in producing appendices, maps and especially indices led to the volumes being published later than originally hoped — on 21 July 1954, on 11 November 1954 and on 20 October 1955 respectively in the United Kingdom, and slightly later in the United States. The Return of the King was especially delayed. Tolkien, moreover, did not especially like the title The Return of the King, believing it gave away too much of the storyline. He had originally suggested The War of the Ring, which was dismissed by his publishers
|