The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum - View Single Post

Bêthberry · 10-02-2002, 12:05 PM

*waves a greeting to All while swimming still deeper*

There is no denying the 'presence' of Old English words in Tolkien's works and it is quite true that recognizing them brings added delight to the reading, echoes of an ancient tongue and time. One of Tolkien's earliest poems has Earendel the mariner sailing to strange lands, and that name is from an OE poem on Christ. The tension between pagan and Christian is shot through Old English literature. This presence, however, I would argue is not limited solely to Old English, but pertains to all the Northern epics. Turin Turambar looks to Kullervo in the Finnish Kalevala, not to an English 'source'. And that epic begins with the Virgin of the Air, Ilmatar, descending on the water to begin creation.

However, I question this idea of some primal, original, first impulse. I am deeply suspicious of all impulses to identify an original motive or source for texts, as if something were always 'behind' a text, a psychoanalytic motive, or a prior literary text, or an historical event, or an author's intention. This impulse is usually always highly reductive, formed after the fact of the writing of the text, and tends to be blind to the multitude of forces which inspire the creative act. I recognize that you do not mean to disregard the many other aspects of Tolkien's text, Child, but for me, the selection process in determining original motives needs to be considered with healthy scepticism.

As for the metaphor of the onion, I have seen it used, by Northrop Frye, to describe the slow unfolding of character in novels. There is much to say in its behalf.

Yet I am not so sure it adequately reflects Tolkien's writing process, though. The onion is an isolated object. Its layers are discrete, separate, not interconnected. It suggests an activity of digging down much like the dwarves' delving of Kazhad-dûm, except that at this centre, nothing holds. Peeling an onion makes one cry. (I am not trying to be flippant here but valiantly suggesting that dry as dust scholarship need not be painfully boring. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img])

It seems to me to ignore the evidence of very fertile interconnectedness of the three main works, TH, The Silm, and LOTR. Interwoven, I should say, over a lifetime of writing.

So, I would prefer Richard Jeffery's metaphor of root and tree. It is fecund, organic, implies a soil to which elements return and return, yet offers fruits repeatedly of its own for rebirth. Somewhere among those roots are Old English, Norse myths, Faith, life, just as they can be recharted among the branches.

And the end of all our posting might be to return to the first place and know it again for the first time. *apologies to T.S. Eliot*

Bethberry

[ October 02, 2002: Message edited by: Bethberry ]

10-02-2002, 12:05 PM	#30
Bêthberry Cryptic Aura Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 6,003	waves a greeting to All* while swimming still deeper* There is no denying the 'presence' of Old English words in Tolkien's works and it is quite true that recognizing them brings added delight to the reading, echoes of an ancient tongue and time. One of Tolkien's earliest poems has Earendel the mariner sailing to strange lands, and that name is from an OE poem on Christ. The tension between pagan and Christian is shot through Old English literature. This presence, however, I would argue is not limited solely to Old English, but pertains to all the Northern epics. Turin Turambar looks to Kullervo in the Finnish Kalevala, not to an English 'source'. And that epic begins with the Virgin of the Air, Ilmatar, descending on the water to begin creation. However, I question this idea of some primal, original, first impulse. I am deeply suspicious of all impulses to identify an original motive or source for texts, as if something were always 'behind' a text, a psychoanalytic motive, or a prior literary text, or an historical event, or an author's intention. This impulse is usually always highly reductive, formed after the fact of the writing of the text, and tends to be blind to the multitude of forces which inspire the creative act. I recognize that you do not mean to disregard the many other aspects of Tolkien's text, Child, but for me, the selection process in determining original motives needs to be considered with healthy scepticism. As for the metaphor of the onion, I have seen it used, by Northrop Frye, to describe the slow unfolding of character in novels. There is much to say in its behalf. Yet I am not so sure it adequately reflects Tolkien's writing process, though. The onion is an isolated object. Its layers are discrete, separate, not interconnected. It suggests an activity of digging down much like the dwarves' delving of Kazhad-dûm, except that at this centre, nothing holds. Peeling an onion makes one cry. (I am not trying to be flippant here but valiantly suggesting that dry as dust scholarship need not be painfully boring. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]) It seems to me to ignore the evidence of very fertile interconnectedness of the three main works, TH, The Silm, and LOTR. Interwoven, I should say, over a lifetime of writing. So, I would prefer Richard Jeffery's metaphor of root and tree. It is fecund, organic, implies a soil to which elements return and return, yet offers fruits repeatedly of its own for rebirth. Somewhere among those roots are Old English, Norse myths, Faith, life, just as they can be recharted among the branches. And the end of all our posting might be to return to the first place and know it again for the first time. apologies to T.S. Eliot Bethberry [ October 02, 2002: Message edited by: Bethberry ] __________________ I’ll sing his roots off. I’ll sing a wind up and blow leaf and branch away.