[Lalwendë]

For myself, the conceit is one that is not strictly necessary to understanding Tolkien's work. The tales stand alone by themselves, and the fact that the conceit exists simply adds another dimension to them as being 'real' as opposed to being simply a story; the conceit is another helping hand as it were into the idea that this secondary world actually did exist. You could say, the conceit even helps us to acheive that sense of enchantment.

So if the conceit is not always necessary, then why did Tolkien use it? I've a few possible reasons:

To help us achieve that sense of enchantment. We are entering an entire world. LotR goes beyond simple story as it is so complex and has so many levels. As it is the life work of one man he has poured so many ideas into this that it in effect does exist on its own. To add in the idea that it is a discovered or translated work gives it the added air of authenticity, that we are indeed stepping into a document of a place which existed.

In addition to the above, Tolkien added layers of meaning by creating real etymologies for the languages he created. For such developments in language to occur, there has to be a history, a time frame for them to happen within. The notion of the texts being translated allows for this, and it also adds depth to the conceit.

Other works based upon mythologies are themselves created from translations, for example the Arthurian stories have been created from a whole range of older translated texts. As non-linguists most of us woud read texts such as the Eddas in translation. And Tolkien himself was a translator. So for him to use this conceit would be a quite natural act. Fully aware of the possibilities and consequences involved in translating myth, it must have seemed an interesting notion to have this concept as part of his own myth making.

There is also the incredibly convenient fact that if we know the work we are reading to be a translation, then we might be more prepared to allow for any inconsistencies! If a work is produced from a line of other texts, then like rumours, tales can change in the telling and re-telling. In something as complex as the work he was creating inconsistencies would be inevitable (and I'm always surprised there are not more), and the conceit of translated myth would allow for this!

This final possibility is rather a cynical one, I admit, so it is possible that this is more a convenient consequence of his using the conceit. I'm not sure Tolkien wished to exercise self parody, but at times he clearly does wish to intrude upon the story as there are instances where the text considers authorial issues and the nature of myth and story is discussed by characters. Having the conceit of a translation as part of his structure allows him to do this without it appearing that it is his voice we are hearing (even though in our logical mind, we know that it is him), and without such musings being intrusive. By way of contrast to the way Tolkien inserted his authorial voice, John Fowles did this in a deliberately intrusive manner in the French Lieutenant's Woman, building up a novel filled with historical detail only to bring it all crashing down.

So, I say that the conceit is not strictly neccesary to our understanding and appreciation of the text. If we are discussing what happened to X or why Y did what she or he did, then we do not always need to utilise the conceit in our arguments as the material is laid out for us and we have only to find it for ourselves (which is interesting as are we then acting as translators ourselves?). But, if we totally disregard the conceit then we are missing out on something important to the text, as it acts as a cement which holds together much of the detail, and clearly adds to the sense of enchantment.