Tolkien- what did he do for us?
 

This is me being sneaky- I have my General Studies exam this week, and in past papers they've asked the "legacy" and social role of artists, sculptors, architects and scientists. I think it's a possiblity they might do the same for novelists, and so I would choose Tolkien. But what to write about? These are my ideas so far.

POSITIVE- Social issues addressed, eg race relations (Legolas-Gimli), urbanisation and conservation.
- Inspired a genre
- A set of role models (for Christians or anyone who wants to "be good")
-Created a mythology for Britain

NEGATIVE- Idealistic, backward thinking, too critical of technology and development
- Role of women
- Fuedal class system

Please please help me by developing any of these or giving me any new ideas! (It would be shameful to be stuck if the question did come up) [img]smilies/redface.gif[/img]

[ June 08, 2003: Message edited by: Lyra Greenleaf ]

Just a quick response, Lyra. Why have you characterized being 'idealistic' under negative?

Perhaps you could also include inspiration for the study of languages.

Bêthberry

Positive- the change of some small stereotypes in fantasy writing. (eg, Elves being tiny and winged, though I am not sure whether that would work.)

~Menelien

Positive:
~expanded span of imagination
~people read more
~broader view
~apprechiation of nature

Negative:
~getting lost in ME (scary, but true: there was a girl who thought she was Juliet from Romeo and Julietand she ended up killing herself. That could happen to a Tolkien-obsess)

Edit: OMG, Lyra, you have a PT!!!!! Congrats! [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

[ June 08, 2003: Message edited by: Manardariel ]

Sorry, Bethberry, I meant over-idealistic I suppose, hankering after something that would not exist again and that most of us (if we're honest) probably wouldn't even like, though it sounds good. (No computers?) I'm trying to think objectively.

Thank you Manardariel! It still shocks me!

Those are all things that I would write down in regards to Tolkien and his effect on society. This is kind of a hard question because this is about all I could think about. Though I did look at a Time article from a little while ago that was very negative about all fantasy writing, and one of the major things that they bring up is that the stories could cause trouble because they cause people to instead of facing the troubles in the future run towards the past. They talk about mainly how the world of Middle Earth can be too simple for todays complicated society, and that the story does not prepare young people for today's world. Everything is either evil or good, there is no grey area in between.

It can basically be said that Middle Earth is too simple, bad influence on today's society, the enemies that we face are not so simple, makes us run away from current issues.

The person who wrote this thinks it is a negative.

EDIT: that is kind of the same as backward thinking, but it kind of goes into more detail.

[ June 09, 2003: Message edited by: Gorwingel ]

To include a couple of things that haven't made the lists so far:

~Positive: Beer.

~Negative: A simplification of the nature and appearance of evil.

Dear Lyra Greenleaf,

Please, do not feel you must apologize to me for classifying idealism as negative. I was simply curious as to your reasons, not criticizing or challenging them! I could not understand why creating a mythology for Britain would be positive while idealism would be negative.

Positive: The value of social play, respite, relaxation, particularly in the face of a grinding view of labour and industry


Negative: The inability to conceive of high heroism using the contemporary vernacular language

Bêthberry

Positive:
I'd put clear delineation between good and evil as a positive. I don't see evil as oversimplified but simply stripped down and revealed as the malicious destructive force it really is.
I think Tolkien has had a profound effect on how we in a post-modern society accept epic tales and heroes. I think much fantasy, both print and film, has roots in Tolkien. The way he blended mythology, theology, and anti-mechanization shows up in Star Wars, the Matrix and the works of many modern fantasy writers.

Negative:
It's not Tolkien's fault, but some people retreat into Middle Earth rather than picking up their own personal rings and trudging through Mordor with the rest of us.

In the sixties many used Hobbit habits as justification for their own excesses in the way of drugs and bad mushroom art. Again, not Tolkien's fault.

Positive-
Tolkien stressed in his books things like forgiveness (GOLLUM) and friendship/loyalty (SAM). The problems that the characters face can be related to almost any problem that people face in their lives. For fans of the book asking WWFD (what would frodo do?) he gives answers that aren't always easy, but come out to be the right thing to do in the end.
ALSO- With Eowyn, my all-time-favorite-character-in-anything, he shows that sometimes rules need to be broken if you believe that what you're doing is right.
Negative-
Wow, that was really idealistic. BUT WHY ISN'T THERE MORE IDEALISM??? I believe that we need to keep hoping and working towards a better society, even if it means being idealistic and "foolish" So it's really a positive. [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

I don't think that one of the negative points of Tolkien's work is the solid line between good and evil in all his works. I don't think that line was any solider than what it is today! Look at Boromir! He's the perfect example.
If you strip evil down to what it truly is, then it is obviously different than good. Even a child could tell the difference. I don't think strong differences like that are negative qualities. We really need to learn how to separate matters like that today. It would probably help the entire world if it learned how to separate good from evil and follow the "good" path.

On the subject of evil, Tolkien wasn't using an oversimplification of evil, he was operating on the theory establishe by St. Augustine (or maybe it was Aquinas, oh well.) In his theory, evil wasn't really anything...it existed as simply the denial or corruption of the good. Such it is with evil in ME, for example the corruption elves to make orcs. Anyway, I'd better get back on topic.

Positive: strengthening of the virtues of friendship and honesty (anytime in LOTR anyone lies, they end up losing out in some way)

Negative: a world where certain escapists can "hide" from their problems

On the subject of evil: I don't think I expressed my point well enough there. I was talking about Orcs and Goblins and other nasty filthy things that are clearly, without a doubt, creatures a normal person isn't likely to consort with. Naturally, Sauron and Saruman could appear quite charming, and fool a whole lot of people, but I cannot say the same for their minions (minus the human ones, and we can tell from Sam's reaction to the fallen enemy fighter that Tolkien understood this problem well enough).

Basically, it's easy, I think, to point an arrow at an Orc. Too easy for my taste. However, I choose not to argue about taste. For me, the portrayal of Orcs and similar creatures was negative in the context of war, but I recognize the fact that a fairy story needs its monsters.

And for the positive: A genius ability to inspire arachnophobia in "sane" people!

One of the most positive aspects of Tolkien's writing is its general appeal to so many. Before Harry Potter came around, the LOtR books were some of the only "safe bet" reads for high school kids... meaning, a huge percentage of kids (especially boys) who normally aren't avid readers, have been turned on to lit by these works.

This is just to say thank you everybody. I even changed the icon, I'm so happy. I had one essay about the inetrnet and whether it's good or bad- big example the BDs. I had another about whether literature is better if it reflects reality- one page on Tolkien! I had to twist a lot of the ideas you gave me to fit, but I included most of them. So thanks again!