Does LotR have cross-cultural appeal?

[HerenIstarion]

You may well be aware, as I've mentioned the fact in other threads and places, that I've first read Tolkien in Russian. And though the Hobbit translation (by Nina Rakhmanova) had distinctive taste of 'Englishness' about it, the case with LoTR was different - Muraviev and Kistakovsky (best, in my opinion, despite numerous blunders, Russian translation) obviously tried, and succeded in a way, to make LoTR 'russian' cultural phenomenon. The language is very 'living', for lack of better term, and at times it bears similarity to Russian 'bilina's (thing approximately correlative with Svandinavian 'saga's)

I ascribe to this very translation (it being the first as well) the popularity Tolkien has in Russia. It subsided of late, but there certainly was a phenomenon known as 'Tolkien craze', which burst out (and was mainly manned with young people - teenagers main part, but up to people in their 'late tweens') by the end of 80s, following publication of 'short version' translation of LoTR in 1982 and first full translation in 1988. There was much fuss about it in Russian media in 90's, there was even an insulting term coined (tolkienutiy - roughly, 'banged on the head with Tolkien'), but it was (and to a point, still is) wide and vast movement of RPG players and people involved in arts (poetry, music, costumes etc). Media accused participants of Tolkien movement of being anything from escapists (which they, up to a point, were - given intensity of social changes and collapse of the whole governmental system and istability in all post Soviet Union space in the 90s) to sword-armed maniacs and satanists. Orthodox Church was also divided in evaluating of the phenomenon - those priests who, presumably, only gathered some bits of media fuss accussed the movement of betraying 'orthodox values' for the sake of 'faulty' or even 'heretical' 'Western values', but there were actual priests in the movement itself.

Some occultists and 'would-be-extrasensors' and 'wizards' (number of which grew like mushrooms after the rain in aftermath of collapse of mainly materialistic state) tried to exploit Tolkien as 'visionary' giving glimpses of 'spiritual world' as well.

One of my dearest ambitions in 90s was to go to Moscow (I would not have been allowed to go alone, seeing as I was too young, and we lacked means to afford the proper trip) and participate in gatherings which took place in Neskuchny Garden every Thursday, which 'tolkienists' (the term 'tolkienutiy's' applied to themselves) termed Eglador. Several years latere there was much disquiet, as Eglador turned by and by to become what is now known (or was known in 2000-2001, I don't know if all activity hasn't diet out by now) as 'Poganishe' (Foul Place) - as majority of original members dropped out and instead of poetry-contest/musical/criticism/discussion gatherings Neskuchny showed tendency of having drunk youngsters impersonating orks and 'dark forces' on Thursdays.

Intensity of 'Tolkien Craze' during the 90s was such that there was actually a book written 'from another side's point of view' (the feat David Brin only toyed with the idea of) - somoene under the name of 'Nienna' published book named 'Dark Wings of the Wind' (if my memory is not failing me), which is supposed to be Silmarillion from Melkor's position.

Again, intensity was such that another chap, Nick Perumov, has written the whole series of so-called 'original' books, the first of which is a feeble essay in writing 'what happened next', as the hero is the hobbit and the events take place some 3 centuries after the War of the Rings. He made a real mess-up of it, though, as he tried to become more original.

There is quite a number of sites dedicated to Tolkien in Russia. One of them I know of (Arda-na-kulichkax) has a number of people who participated in original Tolkien movement, and grew up to become real good poets and writers and scholars (basing number of doctorates on Tolkien, even).

I suppose the release of the movies revived the interest, but I have no data to account for what happened over last several years. What I know for sure it there is not so much fuss in media about 'escapists' and 'satanists' of late.

As for Georgia, the Hobbit was just published some two or three years ago, the LoTR was not translated ever, and the movies where just movies. Not much of what should be called 'craze', rather number of people, mainly from what maybe called intelligentsia, with good reading Russian infested with some of Russian craze, but nothing wide-spread. Tolkien was lucky personally for me, as my examiner in University entry examination was in love too, and I was lucky we've found it out, but that's another story.


PS I promised not to evaluate, but based on my memory of once made 'Map of the Barrowdowns', there were no members from Muslim countries. But I know, based on first hand experience, that there are Tolkien lovers in Azerbaijan. But again, as in Georgia, those are mainly people with good reading Russian catching the infection from Russian craze

[Lyta_Underhill]

I meant that to me the settings - particularly the parts set in the Shire, & the Hobbits themselves seem so English that I've always been surprised that non-English readers can relate to them so deeply. When I read a book or watch a movie set in another country/culture there's always for me a feeling of 'distance' - sometimes very small, but there nonetheless.

There are some people who read books set in their own country who still feel that sense of 'distance,' though, even though the work be that of one's own countryman. I can't understand the urban culture, as I live deep in the country. City folk who visit my area get bored really quick; that's because they haven't learned to enjoy talking to trees! For the trees, this would be an urban center! And, as a result of this country slowness, I think the residents here become like Hobbits, slow to change, set in their ways, thoughts and beliefs. Of course, they speak with more of a twang than any Hobbit of the Shire ever would. And if you live in the South long enough, you can tell a Georgia twang from an Alabama twang from a Tennessee twang from a Kentucky twang, etc. etc. just like Sam could tell that another Hobbit must be from a suspicious part of the Shire (i.e., not Hobbiton!).

But none of this could have been part of Tolkien's original vision for the Shire. It is all applicability and not authorial intention. I think I would be appalled to hear Galadriel say "Sure!" or think that Sam is saying "damn it all" to awaken Frodo, as if he were having to shake him frantically out of sleep; so we lose a little more of authorial intention and the applicability is diluted due to awkward translation.

As a matter cross cultural comparison, I've recently become enamoured of a Japanese cartoon called "Keroro Gunso," translated roughly as "Sergeant Frog." The only place I can get the later episodes in English language version is from Hong Kong. So I watch this obviously hilarious anime that is fraught with bright Japanese characters across the screen that the folks in Hong Kong didn't feel worth translating and watch the horrendous translated subtitles at the bottom of the screen and wonder what I'm missing. However, I still get the main idea, and the situational comedy is still quite amusing! I get the sense I'm missing something, but I also enjoy what I do get out of it. Obviously, there are pieces that are so Japanese that I will never understand them, especially through the Hong Kong filter. But I still keep coming back for more, and it is my favorite current show of any type (albeit I don't have regular television!) But I'm sure I don't experience it in the same way as a Japanese person can, they having access to it in its original language.

As a corollary to my current obsession with things Japanese, I have been reading "the Chrysanthemum and the Sword," with its analysis of the Japanese social order, and there was something rather interesting mentioned therein--that the Japanese do not struggle with the notion of good vs. evil, that either is acceptable if it fulfills the requirements of an obligation. So, in that way, I imagine it would be difficult to translate Lord of the Rings into something that would make sense to a Japanese person who thinks in terms of 'circles of obligation,' rather than the struggle between 'good and evil.' However, this work was written just after World War II and attitudes in Japan have a way of changing very quickly, so I am sure I am not up to date in this observation. I can see how one could relate to the struggle of Frodo and of Aragorn to live up to their great obligations while not violating the smaller ones could appeal to a culture structured in this way. In fact, good and evil might not have to enter in as a concept, merely Frodo's obligation to Middle Earth and his more personal obligations also, and Aragorn's obligation to his country and to Elrond personally, etc., if you see what I mean.

So the story can be cast in different ways, according to the tenets of the culture. I'd think any story must gain and lose meanings in translation, though, for the very reason of cultural and expressive differences...

Cheers!
Lyta

[Novnarwen]

By Davem

I meant that to me the settings - particularly the parts set in the Shire, & the Hobbits themselves seem so English that I've always been surprised that non-English readers can relate to them so deeply. When I read a book or watch a movie set in another country/culture there's always for me a feeling of 'distance' - sometimes very small, but there nonetheless

Davem, settings or story? In your first post you said that you were surprised, and found it odd, that Non-English speakers ’even got the story’. Now, you’re saying that you meant the ‘settings.’

Surely, the settings of a story is not what determines whether a person will ‘understand’ (or ‘get’) a story. The setting is but a small part of a book, and to be quite frank I believe that to understand or ‘get’ a story/book the subject plays a far greater part than the settings. And even though, settings may play a great part, why should we underestimate everyone who hasn’t grown up in green surroundings and think it odd and surprising that they ‘get the story’? Do you honestly think these people can’t picture a ‘green field,’ ‘a river,’ ‘tall trees’ and ‘forests’? (Tolkien uses these words, among others, in his descriptions in LoTR.) How hard can it be? Thank God for imagination, I say, for with these words they ought not to understand, get the story, or setting…

When it comes to the ‘story,’ (as you referred to in your first post) I can’t see what brilliance in Tolkien no one outside of England aren't supposed to understand. Short, it’s a story about good vs. evil. I don’t think I’m exaggerating that all books, (at least those I’ve read ,) is about this, one way or another. Why should people have difficulties understanding, or ‘getting the story’, when probably the greatest fraction of the books they’ve read too, deals with this subject? (By this, I would also claim, again, that LoTR has a cross-cultural appeal, because I see it as VERY likely that everyone who reads has touched upon the subject of LoTR many a times when reading, and I dare say that the subject itself hasn't stopped the majority from reading similar books.)

By Davem

For instance, I've grown up in an area parts of which are still reminiscent of the Shire - ''woods, fields, little rivers' - so I've been able to wander in places which strongly reminded me of the books, & I've encountered people very like the Hobbits. So I have that connection with the books that people living in a different landscape wouldn't have.

A question I have to ask is why you think it odd that people can still relate to Tolkien’s books so deeply when the settings are so ‘very English’. Again, I emphasize the importance of the subject of the books, rather than the settings. Additionally, has it occurred to you that people that find themselves in other landscapes than the ones described in LoTR can perhaps relate to everything else in Tolkien’s books such as personalities etc.?

It’s not odd that everyone who reads LoTR can relate as deeply to the books as you do. Personal interpretations again, I say. You let the settings enchant you to grow so deeply fond of Tolkien, but there are still many other elements in LoTR that can enchant others just as well. To me, the setting plays no great part in any of it. If Tolkien had chosen the Shire to be a desert, or to be an underwater realm, I would still find myself relating to the story, characters, personalities and events etc. just as deeply as I do now.

(I’ve started repeating myself, so I’ll stop.)

By HereIstarion

PS I promised not to evaluate, but based on my memory of once made 'Map of the Barrowdowns', there were no members from Muslim countries. But I know, based on first hand experience, that there are Tolkien lovers in Azerbaijan.

From this, I draw the conclusion that you can find yourself enchanted by LoTR, enjoy the story and belong to a culture or a religion that differ from English/European/Scandinavia, but don't hang around at BD. BD could be representative; it should also be questioned. There are Muslims in Europe and America, too, (According to a site here, 2% of Europe total population are Muslims) and excluding them as a group (as well as Buddhists and Hindus etc.) due to 'cultural and religious differences' sounds too simple.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Esty

I don't know of three translations in German, but I have looked briefly into both the old and new. The latter is rejected by many German fans because it doesn't do the spirit of the work justice, yet the former is a bit wooden. Quite frankly, since I read the original first, I can't get myself to settle for second or third best, so I don't read the translations.

The three translations mentioned in the articel are by Margaret Carroux (1969/70), Roswith Krege-Meyer (1991) & Wolfgang Krege (2000). According to the article the 'revised & corrected' translation (Krege-Meyer) was around for a while but is now out of print.

Originally Posted by Novnarwen

Davem, settings or story? In your first post you said that you were surprised, and found it odd, that Non-English speakers ’even got the story’. Now, you’re saying that you meant the ‘settings.’

I suppose I don't distinguish between settings & story - perhaps to me the setting is the story. the Legendarium is the story of Middle earth.

I am prepared to accept that I'm completely wrong about it, of course.....

[Mithalwen]

As for the settings, apart from the Shire I never felt them especially English and other than always identifying the New Forest where I grew up as Mirkwood, my strongest "this is middle earth" experiences overseas - albeit in anglophone countries. One was in Gippsland in Victoria, Australia, the other was watching dawn over the approaching Rockies. I felt like Bilbo seeing the Misty Mountains in the Hobbit.

[Lalwendë]

I'm certain that the whole subject of translation does have an important bearing on whether a book becomes popular worldwide. It may be that one country does not ahve access to good translations as H-I has said happened in Georgia while another country may be 'blessed' with particularly good versions. I would guess that many countries are just like the UK and that the majority of the population do not possess a decent enough knowledge of a foreign language to tackle a book as long and complex as LotR if it is not in their native tongue. So those people would rely on good translations.

I particularly love Goethe's Faust and I got hold of a very old copy in the original German to see if it was any better in the original; I took German up to the age of 18 but my knowledge was nowhere near good enough to tackle Faust. In addition, I have never used the language practically so I was unable to read it. In practical terms I can imagine it is much the same for other people wanting to read something 'in the original language'. I have known many people who have taught themselves English through sheer determination just to read a book or enjoy pop music better (I even know one woman who learned English via MTV - the mind boggles) but it does take a huge amount of effort and possibly natural talent, sadly.

Considering those who are English speaking but from different cultural backgrounds, there could be other factors to take into consideration. Maybe there are a lot of Tolkien fans who are from different backgrounds, but it might simply be that they do not use forums such as this. In my experience, not many British people of Asian descent use internet forums (at least not the ones I use, and they are not all specialised like this), but I think this may have a lot to do with the 'digital divide' and the lack of opportunity to get access to the net.

One thing that does interest me is whether people from different backgrounds/ages get different things from the story, e.g. do they enjoy it as a simple adventure, do they appreciate the action more than the description, and so on? Is there something about your personality (as oppsed to your background) that might 'pre-dispose' you to be a Rings fan?

[Formendacil]

Hmm... countryside...

I think that people tend to associate what they know with what they read. As an Alberta boy, my visions of the Misty Mountains are inevitably coloured by the Rockies. Mirkwood becomes BC. Lorien becomes the Edmonton-area parkland. The plains of Rohan become Saskatchewan. Anduin becomes the Red Deer River..

And so on...

But with things like the Shire, where the description is of a general countryside with which I am unfamiliar, of small hills and farms, and trees like oaks, I am admittedly at a loss. I imagine that if I ever visited rural England, I would be able to see it a lot more clearly.