Unpublished Tolkien Letter for sale!

[davem]

Found [/QUOTE]here

A remarkable, unpublished and unusually detailed letter, over 1000 words long, in which Tolkien candidly discusses the process of writing The Lord of The Rings. Tolkien states that his intent was ‘to write a story that would be "exciting" and readable, and give me scope for my personal pleasure in history, languages, and "landscape"’ Tolkien rules out the allegorical reading of his books, remarking that he has ‘never found books on myths and symbolism attractive . for me they miss the point and destroy the object of their enquiry as surely as a vivisectionist destroys a cat or rabbit’ Instead he chose ‘deeply rooted "archetypal" motifs’ and put them ‘into an entirely new setting, carefully devised, that gives the sense of reality’. Tolkien discusses at length how characters arise ‘out of the necessities of narrative . whatever may really happen, this sensation is rather that of someone getting to know strangers and oberving, often with surprise and sometimes with charm, their revelation of themselves - which one is helpless to alter’. He describes specifically the origin of Aragorn and being ‘astounded as slowly the revelation of the majesty of his lineage . and the weight of his doom unfolded’, and being particularly fond of writing this perilous kind of character: ‘if you become slack . and treat them as something soft (like India rubber) you find that that is only insulation covering a live wire connected with a dynamo - and you get anything from a smart titillation to a severe shock’. Tolkien addresses his critics, comparing his treatment to a chemical analysis, ‘Alas! there are so many people who cannot "enjoy" anything’, and writes here also on a number of other subjects: his sympathy for Gollum; the value of the verse in The Lord of the Rings and how it escapes most readers; the trilogy’s non-alignment with any existing religion; and writing the prequels.

Now, if anyone wants to buy me this I'll certainly share the text with other Downers. However, do the hints given shed any new light on Tolkien's work? I find the comment that he ‘never found books on myths and symbolism attractive . for me they miss the point and destroy the object of their enquiry as surely as a vivisectionist destroys a cat or rabbit’ very interesting - what can he mean - he never found books on myths interesting?

The words on the development of Aragorn's character are interesting too, as are the comments on the way characters develop. And as for his statement about the trilogy’s non-alignment with any existing religion, well, what can we make of that?

Any thoughts?

[Bêthberry]

You know, the author A. S. Byatt has an interesting character who deals in authors' letters. I wonder how applicable her character is to this situation.

I have no intention of selling my car to finance such a purchase. And those irregularities in punctuation belong in one of our Barrow Downs threads.

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

You know, the author A. S. Byatt has an interesting character who deals in authors' letters. I wonder how applicable her character is to this situation.

I have no intention of selling my car to finance such a purchase. And those irregularities in punctuation belong in one of our Barrow Downs threads.

The evil Mortimer Cropper? He who snaps up just about anything related to Ash and whisks it away to New Mexico? I often think of that character when I think of the massive trade in Tolkien material worldwide and how much of it has been taken away to the wealthy Marquette.... Then it is fed to us poor saps in little, expensive drips via £100 scholarly journals.

Maybe there is a lesson that Tolkien fans ought to be rummaging away in the backs of obscure books hidden in the stacks of the Bodleian library for secret letters from Tolkien.

Possession is my second favourite book by the way.

[Mister Underhill]

Am I crazy? Is there anything mentioned in this (as Bb noted, quite clumsy) summary that even sounds new?

Tolkien states that his intent was ‘to write a story that would be "exciting" and readable, and give me scope for my personal pleasure in history, languages, and "landscape"’

Tolkien discusses similar motives -- in the Foreword, no less -- not to mention several published letters.

Tolkien rules out the allegorical reading of his books, remarking that he has ‘never found books on myths and symbolism attractive . for me they miss the point and destroy the object of their enquiry as surely as a vivisectionist destroys a cat or rabbit’

Tolkien's expressions of dislike for allegory and allegorical interpretation of LotR are legion.

Tolkien discusses at length how characters arise ‘out of the necessities of narrative . [...] He describes specifically the origin of Aragorn and being ‘astounded as slowly the revelation of the majesty of his lineage . and the weight of his doom unfolded’, and being particularly fond of writing this perilous kind of character: ‘if you become slack . and treat them as something soft (like India rubber) you find that that is only insulation covering a live wire connected with a dynamo - and you get anything from a smart titillation to a severe shock’.

This part is the most interesting -- but also sounds the least like Tolkien. Amazing that there is no picture of the letter, or at least some sort of guarantee of authenticity, considering the asking price. That aside, though, I wonder if there's much more here than Tolkien expressed elsewhere, even in particular of Aragorn in #163: "Strider sitting in the corner at the inn was a shock, and I had no more idea who he was than had Frodo..." and so on.

the trilogy’s non-alignment with any existing religion

I'd be surprised if this was anything substantially different from the idea expressed in #131: "Myth and fairy-story must, as all art, reflect and contain in solution elements of moral and religious truth (or error), but not explicit, not in the known form of the primary 'real' world."

All those topics in a mere 1000 words? I reckon the letter to Auden is at least three times that length. Twenty-five thousand my furry foot.

[Estelyn Telcontar]

I can't help but wonder if this is a hoax. Considering the fact that I know someone who once proposed a similar hoax for fun (but didn't do it), it seems to me that, like Underhill says, there's nothing new mentioned. Now, if I were going to initiate a believable hoax, I wouldn't overdo it by using Balrog wing evidence or such for the contents, so it could sound like this summary. As a matter of fact, what with photo manipulation being so easy and looking so professional these days, I wouldn't even believe that this letter actually exists even if a picture was shown.

Mind you, there may be letters out there, waiting to be discovered, but is this actually one of them? We've seen "Hitler's diary" and other documents "discovered", only to be exposed as forgeries. How reliable is this source? And even if it is trustworthy, it can be deceived by a dishonest person...

[Child of the 7th Age]

Esty,

You could be right, but, if this letter is a fake, then they've really pulled the wool over the eyes of two of the most "reputable" of the antiquarian book dealers/jobbers. Simon Finch is a fancy place with wonderful things but which many people feel is overpriced. (They have a first edition of the Hobbit currently listed at 24,000 pounds.) Hence the crazy price tag on this letter. Abe Books is also very well known.

[HerenIstarion]

Originally Posted by davem

very interesting - what can he mean - he never found books on myths interesting?

I suppose these must be books on myths, not containing myths in. Like: This behavior of hero X of the myth X2 is paralleled by behavior of hero Y in mythY2, which both must be repetition of the theme set by the hero Z as exhibited in myth Z3, and this latter in its turn is nothing more than Oedipus Complex crudely repeated in less developed norhern cultures... Message being, how clever I, the author, PhD, K.B. etc, am in analysing all these fool's tales