All made up?

[davem]

In one of the letters Tolkien refers to someone visiting him, & saying something like 'Of course, you don't really believe you made the whole thing up, do you?' (referring to LotR), & Tolkien replies, 'No, not any longer'.
1) Do we know who the visitor was?
2) Do we know how he meant the remark?
3) Do we know how Tolkien meant his response to be understood?

In other words, was the visitor implying more than just that Tolkien had used bits of myths & legends? Was he implying more than just some kind of religiously inspired allegory? Was the visitor implying something more precise, ie, that in some way Middle Earth is, or was, real? And did Tolkien understand his statement in that way?

[Legolas]

In other words, was the visitor implying more than just that Tolkien had used bits of myths & legends?

A little, perhaps.

Was he implying more than just some kind of religiously inspired allegory? Was the visitor implying something more precise, ie, that in some way Middle Earth is, or was, real?

No, not at all. I do think Tolkien knew exactly what he was talking about; if not immediately, then in the years afterwards that he thought about the conversation.

It was not at all an allegory. Allegory is a conscious attempt at depicting something using something else. Tolkien did not do this.

A few years ago I was visited in Oxford by a man whose name I have forgotten (though I believe he was well-known). He had been much struck by the curious way in which many old pictures seemed to him to have been designed to illustrate The Lord of the Rings long before its time. He brought one or two reproductions. I think he wanted at first simply to discover whether my imagination had fed on pictures, as it clearly had been by certain kinds of literature and languages. When it became obvious that, unless I was a liar, I had never seen the pictures before and was not well acquainted with pictorial An, he fell silent. I became aware that he was looking fixedly at me. Suddenly he said: 'Of course you don't suppose, do you, that you wrote all that book yourself?'
Pure Gandalf! I was too well acquainted with G. to expose myself rashly, or to ask what he meant. I think I said: 'No, I don't suppose so any longer.' I have never since been able to suppose so. An alarming conclusion for an old philologist to draw concerning his private amusement. But not one that should puff any one up who considers the imperfections of 'chosen instruments', and indeed what sometimes seems their lamentable unfitness for the purpose.

What he meant (which seems obvious to me) is that the stories were inspired and influenced by everything Tolkien had studied or been involved with up to that point. Any paintings, stories, or poems he was familiar with; any scenes he had saw for himself; or basically anything he had experienced. This would include any religious experiences as well. In that way, anyone/thing he had some sort of connection to might've had a hand in inspiring his wonderful stories. He couldn't have done it all on his own.

This is one of my favourite excerpts from the Letters.

'Of course you don't suppose, do you, that you wrote all that book yourself?'


That is Gandalf, no question. Reminds me of the last bit of The Hobbit:

"Of course!" said Gandalf. "And why should not they prove true? Surely you don't disbelieve the prophecies, because you had a hand in bringing them about yourself? You don't really suppose, do you, that all your adventures and escapes were managed by mere luck, just for your sole benefit? You are a very fine person, Mr. Baggins, and I am very fond of you; but you are only quite a little fellow in a wide world after all!"
"Thank goodness!" said Bilbo laughing, and handed him the tobacco-jar.

[ March 29, 2003: Message edited by: Legolas ]

[davem]

OK, allegory was a bad choice of word. It was a shorthand. What I meant was, an attempt to communicate a specific viewpoint on religion/philosophy, or explore specific themes - love, sacrifice, time, mortality, etc.
Was the visitor implying more than that?, That somehow Tolkien had tapped into 'something' else? And was Tolkien resonding to that, ie, saying yes, you're right, I didn't invent it, cobble it together, from bits & pieces, I was in touch with something else. One problem I have is that the whole world of Middle Earth is too 'coherent', it doesn't feel 'made up'. That, it seems to me, was what the visitor was saying.
What Tolkien himself was saying seems to me even more curious, that he was 'alarmed' by the idea. For that reason, I don't think Tolkien was implying that he considered it was just a 'rehash' of the myths & legends he was so familiar with.

[Morsul the Dark]

yes I have always thought Middle-Earth was far too...detailed perhaps?

lines of kings histories of legends languages written languages. culturesw fully developped.

but most importantly Tolkien did not know the full tale to some of the charactors he did not know what happened to the entwives or the blue wizards...if Tolkien fully created this world wouldnt he have known?

One problem I have is that the whole world of Middle Earth is too 'coherent', it doesn't feel 'made up'

this has bothered me as well...

[Lush]

The supreme coherence could just be a sign of an exceptional talent for immersing the reader completely in the events of the story. When I first read LotR, I would feel all weird when the phone would ring or some alarm would go off, bringing me back to my room, my house, my planet, my life. This is good writing, divine inspiration, probably (if you believe in that sort of thing), with its purposes, but was it actually portraying some sort of reality that would be tangible to our physical form? Probably not. If that's the case, I'd have to be seriously worried, because I experienced a similar immersion when I read and re-read Lolita. :eek: