C# - Bind A Grid To An Anonymous LINQ Result, Then Commit Changes To DB?

I've been looking into how best to do this and wisdom would be appreciated. For read only purposes, I've been happily using LINQ and binding it to a grid. For editing purposes, I've used the LinqDataSource control, enabled the Edit/Delete operations in the process, and I have a nice editable grid bound to some or all of the table's fields.Now I have a situation where I want to edit a few fields in table A, but there are various values in linked table B that I want to display in that grid too (no editing of those). So my query looks like the below. The fields in tblDupes (cleared, notes) are what I want to edit, but I'd like to display those tblVoucher ones.

var theDupes = from d in db.tblDupes
where d.dupeGroup == Ref
select new

[code]...

A similar but different question LINQDataSource - Query Multiple Tables? sent me looking at scott Guthrie's blog entry http://weblogs.asp.net/scottgu/archive/2007/09/07/linq-to-sql-part-9-using-a-custom-linq-expression-with-the-lt-asp-linqdatasource-gt-control.aspx, where he handles various events to have a LinqDataSource with a custom query across tables. This still seems aimed at explicitly designed classes though, even if the class has only a subset of the fields.

So my question is: is there an easy way to allow committing of the changes made to the anonymous collection (a changes.Submit type action), or just an easy way to 'display' fields from another table while not involving them in the updating?EDIT: Thinking more, it doesn't have to be anonymous really. I'd be happy to define a class to contain the elements in that query, since it won't change often. But, those elements would be across two tables, even though only one needs updating. Not sure if that suggests entity framework would be more suitable - I get the feeling it wouldn't - I don't want the whole 'model' always grouping the fields in this way.