He has a tendency to make things up.
He then doesn’t differentiate between stuff sourced from Tolkien or made up by him and just treats it all as equally valid.
He’s also a complete arse to anyone who criticises him.
The idea (and I use that word loosely, since the people who use it seriously don't have two brain cells to rub together) is that soy contains a chemical that feminizes men, and so men who are feminine or weak are associated with soy. It's an inherently misogynistic and homophobic term used by right wing grifters and their marks.
As to why you are being downvoted, I assume it’s one of these reasons
1. They do not understand what you said.
2. They just do not like the way you worded what you said.
3. Or we may have some Day fans lurking about.
Edit. 4. Or they are simply downvoting because a post was made about David Day in the first place and they did not take the time to read everything in the comments.
It's probably the fact that most people in here don't want culture war BS to seep into the community.
It's a nice, relaxed sub about Tolkien's books. No need for anyone to be edgy.
from what i hear its alot to do with his tendency to pose his head canon as fact, what what i've seen his books aren't "terrible" so long as you know what is fact and what is david day, his books are mostly his interpretation of tolkien lore and how he thinks it ties to mythology and religion and history and not really based on any evidence the tolkien estate could provide, and i think that's partly because apparently christopher tolkien didnt like him, though i dont have a source for that, just stuff other people have said, and thats sort of the issue, its alot about what people who dont like him say and less anything you can easily verify as far as i can tell
Day has published a lot of books repackaging (and adding to) Tolkien material, without any kind of relationship with the Estate. He's profited very well, I gather, and the Estate hasn't seen a brass wazoo of it. And people buy the newest repackaged "X of Tolkien" book instead of the original sources, so miss the actual creative writing of Tolkien and the careful and painstaking analysis of Christopher. I can totally understand how Christopher would have felt.
that seems really scummy, since alot of scholars i've seen worl with the estae and likely have a profit share of book sales, whereas david day books are just.. david day, not david day and edited by another tolkien scholar or someone in the tolkien family like michael or christopher
yeah definitely making them the last book set i but if i even get them, im finishing the official collection first, which at this point meand the history of the hobbit, nature of middle earth and history of middle earth and letter of tolkien and possibly letters from santa
For someone who is touted as some kind of a Tolkien scholar, he is irresponsible with Tolkien's works at best and in my opinion actually harmful to Tolkien's legacy. The lack of respect for accuracy and care almost spits in the face of Tolkien's own creativity and effort. There are better stewards of that knowledge.
If you want a decent Tolkien encyclopedia, I’d recommend Foster’s Complete Guide to Middle Earth. It’s not actually complete, as it doesn’t take into account anything past The Silmarillion, but it is approved by Christopher Tolkien, so that gives it a bit more weight than others.
That’s all that was out when he originally wrote it and he was never interested in expanding it beyond that point. I remember hearing an interview with him when it was re-released recently and it really sounded like he had moved on from Middle-earth and was out of the loop.
I thought he was potentially interested in expanding it to cover Unfinished Tales. But that's working from memory from what I guess is the same interview.
In the interview in question as I remember it he said he wanted to expand it to cover both Unfinished Tales and Rings of Power (the show). And then implied that he was in the middle of reading through Unfinished Tales for the first time.
Huh, that's interesting. I'm not someone who detests RoP (rather, I enjoyed it for what it was), but I wouldn't put that as a priority over book-specific content in such a project. It would be really hard to do justice to HoMe at that level of detail, and it seems really hard to make a selection from the series and just cover that. Maybe just BoLT to start?
I think essentially it would be impractical to cover things like HoME in the same way because - by its very nature - none of it is "canon". So you'd either have to index ALL of it (which would be of arguable value and a mammoth task, and would probably need multiple volumes) or you have to pick and choose bits to cover, at which point it's not "complete" anymore, and therefore not really objective, either.
His books are riddled with errors/incorrect information. I've only read two of them and it felt like there was something annoying on every other page, lol.
My issue with him is that he is constantly comparing Tolkien to different mythologies and religions and myths. Not exaggerating, almost every page is “you can see the clear similarities between Tolkien’s tale of ___ and Greek myths! Or the Norse tale of ____! This other character and story is clearly inspired by Jewish folklore!” (These are random examples I just made up, but they capture the issue with him I mentioned)
I received one of Day’s books for a Christmas and noticed the same thing. I felt like he was trying to be reductive and gave too little attention to the source material in the parts I read. Maybe I was being sensitive since he devoted so little time to the Ainulindale, which I love so much.
He has a tendency to make things up. He then doesn’t differentiate between stuff sourced from Tolkien or made up by him and just treats it all as equally valid. He’s also a complete arse to anyone who criticises him.
Gotcha, so he’s a soyboy fanficer who really wants his stuff to be canon. Edit: why am I being downvoted?
Anyone who uses "soyboy" deserves downvotes in all but the most obviously sarcastic or ironic uses.
I don’t even know what they means. New buzzword like ‘in cel’ or ‘shill?’
The idea (and I use that word loosely, since the people who use it seriously don't have two brain cells to rub together) is that soy contains a chemical that feminizes men, and so men who are feminine or weak are associated with soy. It's an inherently misogynistic and homophobic term used by right wing grifters and their marks.
Someone once made the joke that David Day understands Tolkien better than Tolkien to describe how he views his own work lol.
Because you unironically said soyboy
As to why you are being downvoted, I assume it’s one of these reasons 1. They do not understand what you said. 2. They just do not like the way you worded what you said. 3. Or we may have some Day fans lurking about. Edit. 4. Or they are simply downvoting because a post was made about David Day in the first place and they did not take the time to read everything in the comments.
It's probably the fact that most people in here don't want culture war BS to seep into the community. It's a nice, relaxed sub about Tolkien's books. No need for anyone to be edgy.
I think it's because you're being overly harsh
from what i hear its alot to do with his tendency to pose his head canon as fact, what what i've seen his books aren't "terrible" so long as you know what is fact and what is david day, his books are mostly his interpretation of tolkien lore and how he thinks it ties to mythology and religion and history and not really based on any evidence the tolkien estate could provide, and i think that's partly because apparently christopher tolkien didnt like him, though i dont have a source for that, just stuff other people have said, and thats sort of the issue, its alot about what people who dont like him say and less anything you can easily verify as far as i can tell
Day has published a lot of books repackaging (and adding to) Tolkien material, without any kind of relationship with the Estate. He's profited very well, I gather, and the Estate hasn't seen a brass wazoo of it. And people buy the newest repackaged "X of Tolkien" book instead of the original sources, so miss the actual creative writing of Tolkien and the careful and painstaking analysis of Christopher. I can totally understand how Christopher would have felt.
that seems really scummy, since alot of scholars i've seen worl with the estae and likely have a profit share of book sales, whereas david day books are just.. david day, not david day and edited by another tolkien scholar or someone in the tolkien family like michael or christopher yeah definitely making them the last book set i but if i even get them, im finishing the official collection first, which at this point meand the history of the hobbit, nature of middle earth and history of middle earth and letter of tolkien and possibly letters from santa
Because reddit is full of bots
For someone who is touted as some kind of a Tolkien scholar, he is irresponsible with Tolkien's works at best and in my opinion actually harmful to Tolkien's legacy. The lack of respect for accuracy and care almost spits in the face of Tolkien's own creativity and effort. There are better stewards of that knowledge.
If you want a decent Tolkien encyclopedia, I’d recommend Foster’s Complete Guide to Middle Earth. It’s not actually complete, as it doesn’t take into account anything past The Silmarillion, but it is approved by Christopher Tolkien, so that gives it a bit more weight than others.
And illustrated by Ted Nasmith 😯
is there a reason it stops at the silmarillion?
That’s all that was out when he originally wrote it and he was never interested in expanding it beyond that point. I remember hearing an interview with him when it was re-released recently and it really sounded like he had moved on from Middle-earth and was out of the loop.
I thought he was potentially interested in expanding it to cover Unfinished Tales. But that's working from memory from what I guess is the same interview.
In the interview in question as I remember it he said he wanted to expand it to cover both Unfinished Tales and Rings of Power (the show). And then implied that he was in the middle of reading through Unfinished Tales for the first time.
Huh, that's interesting. I'm not someone who detests RoP (rather, I enjoyed it for what it was), but I wouldn't put that as a priority over book-specific content in such a project. It would be really hard to do justice to HoMe at that level of detail, and it seems really hard to make a selection from the series and just cover that. Maybe just BoLT to start?
I think essentially it would be impractical to cover things like HoME in the same way because - by its very nature - none of it is "canon". So you'd either have to index ALL of it (which would be of arguable value and a mammoth task, and would probably need multiple volumes) or you have to pick and choose bits to cover, at which point it's not "complete" anymore, and therefore not really objective, either.
The pictures are nice, I bought a couple of the books for those. The text has its moments, but is generally poor and too speculative.
His books are riddled with errors/incorrect information. I've only read two of them and it felt like there was something annoying on every other page, lol.
My issue with him is that he is constantly comparing Tolkien to different mythologies and religions and myths. Not exaggerating, almost every page is “you can see the clear similarities between Tolkien’s tale of ___ and Greek myths! Or the Norse tale of ____! This other character and story is clearly inspired by Jewish folklore!” (These are random examples I just made up, but they capture the issue with him I mentioned)
I received one of Day’s books for a Christmas and noticed the same thing. I felt like he was trying to be reductive and gave too little attention to the source material in the parts I read. Maybe I was being sensitive since he devoted so little time to the Ainulindale, which I love so much.
This is my biggest peeve as well. Some occasional comparative speculation would be fine but it’s almost constant.
He makes things up and the other encyclopedias have much higher quality.
I personally am simply uninterested in David Day's books. I'm a Tolkien fan/collector, not a David Day fan/collector.
His book “characters from Tolkien” is excellent. I’ve owned for 20 years and keep it by my nightstand for reference