>The Lord of the Rings is often erroneously called a trilogy, when it is in fact a single novel consisting of six books plus appendices, sometimes published in three volumes.-Note on the text, Douglas A. Anderson, 1993What is a book, as Anderson (and presumably Tolkien) means it? For me naively a book and a bound volume is the same thing. Did Tolkien intend for the Lord of the Rings to be published as six books? Wouldn't that make it a hexalogy?
>>24951767The three-volume split was imposed by his publisher Allen & Unwin for practical post-war economic reasons (paper was expensive, and a single massive volume would have been too expensive). Tolkien didn't want this.>Six booksWhen Anderson (and Tolkien himself) use the word "book" they're using it in the older, classical sense, like the way Homer's Iliad has 24 "books" or Virgil's Aeneid has 12 "books.">HexalogyIt wouldn't be a hexalogy because those six books aren't six independent works—they're divisions within one work, just as the Aeneid isn't a "dodecalogy." A trilogy or hexalogy implies separate, complete narratives that form a series. Tolkien's work is formally one story divided for publishing reasons.
>>24951780>the older, classical sense,Meaning?>like the way Homer's Iliad has 24 "books" or Virgil's Aeneid has 12 "books."More examples doesn't answer my question. What is a book?>because those [...] books aren't six independent worksIsn't that what makes things trilogies? They're _connected_ works. If they're independent works there's nothing linking them into a trilogy.
>>24951793>What is a book?A division of a work that's longer than what could be called a chapter.
>>24951918Classical books are shorter than chapters though
>>24951767A book (liber) used to be written on a scroll (volumen). A larger work would be organized into books, with the length of each book limited by what could be fit on a single scroll. Eventually the bound book (codex) came into fashion, which could store much more text than a scroll, so when copying older works you'd have multiple books collected into a single bound book.
>>24952099 (Me)Also, scrolls had to be unfurled compared to bound books which could be flipped through, which I assume was another consideration when organizing a work into multiple scrolls.
>>24951793>More examples doesn't answer my question. What is a book?NTA, but think of the bible.Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, etc.Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, etcEach of those are considered to be a "book", in the classic sense. They all get compiled into a collected works, and then we lazily call that a "book" too, but that's a much more recent understanding of a book. It's more recent, because it wasn't viable to produce collected works, until we had the printing press. Before then, a collected works were super rare and expensive, because it had to be copied by hand. It's why christians will commonly say stuff like "Umm.... Ackchyually the Bible is a library and not a book".Contemporarily, a book is a complete story, regardless of it's stand-alone or part of a greater series.Book has 3 obvious meanings, depending on when it's being used.
>>24952086No?
>>24952281Yes. Read literally any roman historian.
>>24952338I have.
