New Republic Article - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

***Mister Underhill*** · 02-01-2002, 05:29 PM

I personally don’t see much in Jenkyns's “analysis” that is worthy of respect. For instance, his principal criterion for qualifying a book as worthy of analysis as an “adult” book seems to be that the work must include meditations upon/revelations about sex and/or religion. I happen to disagree with this assumption. Additionally, just because there are no examples of religious ritual in LotR doesn’t mean that it is devoid of metaphysical content; quite the contrary.

I think he shows that he’s missed the boat by describing LotR as a “work that presents itself as the representation of a whole world”. It isn’t an almanac of Middle-earth – it’s an epic adventure story. I disagree that it’s a major flaw that the book doesn’t elaborate the details of Middle-earth’s religious and sexual practices. This fundamentally wrong assumption obviates a number of his other opinions on what the book supposedly lacks. Interestingly, Jenkyns seems most incensed over Shippey’s unpardonable suggestion (he is “wrong above all”) that it is impertinent for “literary critics... to find fault with [Tolkien’s] prose style.” Maybe that’s why he lays on the condescension extra thick in his “Bored of the Rings” analysis, or maybe he always writes like that, I don’t know. In any case, most of what he’s expressed here is opinion, which can’t be argued against except to offer a differing opinion. You can’t “prove” that Tolkien’s prose is beautiful or that his dialogue is stirring. Besides, his essay seems carefully designed to tweak the noses of Tolkien fans and elicit just the sort of responses that you’ve seen.

I wonder if you could elaborate a bit on your opinion that “Tolkien's works are not very convincing as a mythology”. I think a major reason for LotR’s enduring appeal is that it works so well and is so rich on a mythological plane. His work established the conventions and archetypes (and set the bar, which has yet to be surpassed) for a whole genre of fiction.

[ February 01, 2002: Message edited by: Mister Underhill ]

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Threaded Mode

02-01-2002, 05:29 PM	#18
*Mister Underhill* Dread Horseman Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Behind you! Posts: 2,744	I personally don’t see much in Jenkyns's “analysis” that is worthy of respect. For instance, his principal criterion for qualifying a book as worthy of analysis as an “adult” book seems to be that the work must include meditations upon/revelations about sex and/or religion. I happen to disagree with this assumption. Additionally, just because there are no examples of religious ritual in LotR doesn’t mean that it is devoid of metaphysical content; quite the contrary. I think he shows that he’s missed the boat by describing LotR as a “work that presents itself as the representation of a whole world”. It isn’t an almanac of Middle-earth – it’s an epic adventure story. I disagree that it’s a major flaw that the book doesn’t elaborate the details of Middle-earth’s religious and sexual practices. This fundamentally wrong assumption obviates a number of his other opinions on what the book supposedly lacks. Interestingly, Jenkyns seems most incensed over Shippey’s unpardonable suggestion (he is “wrong above all”) that it is impertinent for “literary critics... to find fault with [Tolkien’s] prose style.” Maybe that’s why he lays on the condescension extra thick in his “Bored of the Rings” analysis, or maybe he always writes like that, I don’t know. In any case, most of what he’s expressed here is opinion, which can’t be argued against except to offer a differing opinion. You can’t “prove” that Tolkien’s prose is beautiful or that his dialogue is stirring. Besides, his essay seems carefully designed to tweak the noses of Tolkien fans and elicit just the sort of responses that you’ve seen. I wonder if you could elaborate a bit on your opinion that “Tolkien's works are not very convincing as a mythology”. I think a major reason for LotR’s enduring appeal is that it works so well and is so rich on a mythological plane. His work established the conventions and archetypes (and set the bar, which has yet to be surpassed) for a whole genre of fiction. [ February 01, 2002: Message edited by: Mister Underhill ]