He said; she said: where the critics led
 

I have just found online a very well argued critical review of Tolkien scholarship. The review is scholarly but not deadly. (Well, not in the negative sense; as legitimate readers of Tolkien, these authors probably do deserve our own playful title of "dead.")

"Tom Shippey's JRR Tolkien: Author of the Century and a Look Back at Tolkien Criticism since 1982" by Michael D.C. Drout and Hilary Wynne

Drout and Wynne believe that Shippey and Flieger are the best critics on Tolkien and they substantiate their argument. They also review other trends and critics with wit and flair.

This is a tremendously rich barrow for raiding in search of inspiration for topic ideas here on the Barrow Downs.

Some of the topics covered:

the problem with equating the identification of a source with discovery of meaning in Tolkien's art;
the right way and the wrong way to talk about Good and Evil;
bibliographies of articles;
authoritative texts;
why we need to defend Tolkien and why we don't;
mythology for England.

Drout and Wynne provide a good summation of what attracts so many to Tolkien, that Tolkien is himself an exile speaking to exiles and giving voice to this longing of not belonging. They suggest that Treebeard is Tolkien's voice: "I am not altogether on anybody's side because nobody is on my side."

Drout and Wynne are particularly fair to fans of Tolkien who face the derision of academic critics. I had a good chuckle out of this line, probably because I belong to both these camps:

Bêthberry

Well, I'm glad that we all finally get some recognition! I've been waiting for that for a while. No one appreciates our unique culture. In fact, on standardized tests now, whenever it asks for religion, I'm putting Valarin (Middle-earth doesn't have an official religion, so I made one up).

Well the Numenoreans worshipped Illuvitar, but I don't think they had priests as such. It is more individual worship, I think, rather than a structured religion like the Churches.

They sound a bit up themselves though, don't they? 'We're the best Tolkien critics around?'

Finwe, I would be more inclined to think that our cult would centre upon Tolkien, who brought us the word--um, song--of Ilúvatar, rather than the Valar, wouldn't you think?

Gwaihir the Windlord, let us hope we Tolkien cultists don't re-enact the fate of the Númenóreans. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] And, yes, those miserable MLA types do tend towards that form of self-satisfaction.

[ June 18, 2003: Message edited by: Bêthberry ]

Bethberry: That's true. I do think that our "cult" or "religion" should be centered around Tolkien rather than the Valar, but what should it be called then? Somehow, I like saying that I'm Valarin rather than I'm a Tolkienist. Of course, it could also be because I love the Valar! Especially Oromë! Hunters on horseback are just my thing.

I also sincerely hope that we do not become like the Numenoreans. But then again, we don't have a Sauron to worry about. Or at least I hope we don't. [img]smilies/eek.gif[/img] There isn't a Ban placed on us, so there isn't really anything to rebel against.

For some reason, Middle Earth seems bigger, almost more legitimate, than the man himself, its very creator. Strange, isn't it?

That is interesting, and follows in the "elucidation of truth" vein, rather than a "creation of new truth" vein. I suppose this is what is meant by "sub-creation?" I don't have the benefit of having read criticism, although it would be interesting! I did read in one of Tolkien's letters, I forget which one and I don't have them to hand, but someone had asked him if he was into visual art, to which he replied he was not especially, the person had replied that artists had been drawing his world for a long time and that "you don't think YOU wrote that entire story yourself, do you?" in response to which Tolkien reflected "Pure Gandalf!"

Also, on the Valarin theme, I find it interesting that different camps have their own favorite Vala; perhaps Varda is most beloved, for she gave the Eldar the Stars to see by, even when there was no light in ME, but then there are those who would worship Yavanna, for having given them the lights of the Sun and Moon...interesting also that such ill-fortune could be attached to the vessels of the pure Light of the Trees of Valinor, the Silmarils. Does this say something about a lesser being's attempts to encapsulate an indefinable Light of the Universe? The inevitable discord realizing the fullness of the designs of Eru? I'm sure I'm going off the track now, and I'll stop there! Thanks for listening!

Cheers,
Lyta

uppers...

I hate MLA format, and MLA "professors." I also can't stand being politically correct, history books have been altered because of the big thing now, being "politically correct." Now, you have someone practically standing over you, "nope nope nope, can't call them that....they must be referred as this."

Boro - I agree totally. This might rub some downers the wrong way, but some of the academia analysis of Tolkien (especially early on) totally missed the point. I think a lot of it had to do with the timing: The post WWII environment did not lend a very sympathetic critical ear to a story based on northern european/germanic mythology.