You say 'Faeries' & I say 'Fairies'

[davem]

I suppose that, putting it simply, what Tolkien introduces into Faerie is Christian moral values. He has, effectively, 'baptized' the Elves into the Church. Though perhaps its more subtle - he gives us in his Elves perfect Christians. Some of them 'fall' - but again they fall as Christians fall, for the same reasons & with the same result. Having fallen they must 'repent' to be 'saved'.

Originally Posted by drigel

What I do notice in all these variations is that Faeries are not divine in and of themselves (although most are immortal), they do represent (in most cases), the transition, or go-between our world and the "divine" world. Either as messengers, couriers, propheters, or just because they can, and want to.

In the Legendarium this is certainly true, but in the essay Tolkien states:

BUT Faery is not religious. It is fairly evident that it is not Heaven or Paradise. Certainly its inhabitants, Elves, are not angels or emlssares of God (direct).

The 'sex' question in relation to Elves is interesting. In the Legendarium sexual desire for anyone but one's spouse, for any reason other than procreation, is seen as a sign of moral corruption: Wormtongue's desire for Eowyn, Celegorm's (& Morgoth's) for Luthien, Morgoth's for Arien, (& possibly Feanor's for Galadriel), Maeglin's for Idril - the list goes on. Sam clearly has a healthy sex life with Rose, but this is within marriage & produces children. Yet, as I said, the Elves & Fairies of tradition are infamous for seducing young men & women to gratify their desires (in the Ballad Tam Lin is placed as guardian of the Fairy site of Carterhaugh, & from any maiden unwise enough to tresspass there he 'takes a fee, either their rings or their mantles, or else their maidenhead'). This is very similar to the behaviour we find among the classical gods. Even Merlin is the child of a 'nun' & an otherworld inhabitant. The children of these unions in the tradition are natives of both worlds - a concept Tolkien adapts to produce the half-Elven. These children of both worlds were often seen as 'mediators', providing a link between the worlds. Some commentators have pointed out the similarity of these beings to Christ. RJ Stewart quotes a Gaelic invocation of Christ:

In the name of the Son of Light,the Son of Maria,
Keystone of the Arch of Heaven,
Who joins as one the forks upholding of the sky.
His the right hand, His the left hand.
His the rainbow letters in the rich fermented milk.
May you go in his ways, in all shapes of shapes,
In all colours of colours.
It is the Son of Light, the Son of Maria, saying:
'Ask in my Name, you shall not be cast out.'
Do you see us here, o Son of Light?
Says the Son of Light, 'I see'.

Jesus is also a 'Child' of two worlds - Paradise through His Father, earth through his Mother, & so provides the link between Earth & Heaven. The closest thing to a 'Christ' figure, or 'saviour' in Middle-earth is Earendel, who is also a child of two worlds.

Yet what is lacking in these Pagan figures is the Christian moral value system which we find in Tolkien. There is a (mistaken imo) belief that Tolkien, because he wasn't writing a Christian allegory, was writing within the 'Fairy tradition' - giving us Elves as they 'really' were. But he clearly wasn't. Yet, in both the Fairy Stories & the Smith essays, he seems to be at pains to tie himself into that authentic tradition & have us believe that he is presenting us with 'Just the facts, ma'am.' Now, did he really believe that he was presenting us with authentic Elves & Faeries, or was he deliberately trying to mislead us? If so, why? Did he see traditional Elves & Faeries as so 'dangerous' that he felt some kind of moral imperative to make them safe & suitable? Or was it that he just decided they were a suitable means to his didactic end - if so, what does that say about his real attitude to Faerie & its inhabitants? For all our discussions here, I don't think we've yet got the heart of the matter - why did he change the traditional Elves & Fairies to the extent that he did & more importantly perhaps why did he make out that he hadn't changed them at all?

[drigel]

At this point it's almost a philosophical debate. What were they (Faerie) to us really? One needs to answer this question first before attempting to describe the intent of the author.
Were they representations of nature and explanations to events that the ignorant could not themselves answer?
Were they representing actual gods and goddesses that have fallen (both physically and in regards cultural spiritualism) from importance?
Were they real agents of transition between the physical and spiritual?
You tell me. Im all ears

BUT Faery is not religious. It is fairly evident that it is not Heaven or Paradise.

This is where I get confused. All descriptions of Valinor (especially post Numenor) seem paradise-esque. But, as the essay says, Faery is Faery. Period. Hard to wrap the head around. Perhaps Faerie resides somewhere in the suburbs of Paradise?

Did he see traditional Elves & Faeries as so 'dangerous' that he felt some kind of moral imperative to make them safe & suitable? Or was it that he just decided they were a suitable means to his didactic end - if so, what does that say about his real attitude to Faerie & its inhabitants?

Forget balrogs wings - the heart of the matter of your thread is quite possibly IMO the most important question to ask the Prof if only one question could be asked of him. I wonder if the answer to one question would satisfy us..

If I were to imagine him answering, I would have a few alternatives.

1: Perhaps my grounding in Catholicism inadvertantly changed my motivation in dealing with fairie in the Legendarium.

2: It is a study of death and immortality. In my work, we have the Unfallen living alongside the Fallen. Adam and Eve living with Cain and Able. Or, (plug in any religion here Lif and Lifthrasir living with Sigmund and Borghild. Catholicism has nothing to do with it.

3: My faerie IS faerie. But, so is the traditional faerie. Truth is truth, morals are morals, dont confuse religion with that idea. I do not expect you to think I have changed Faery to suit my own needs, just as I do not expect you to think I have changed history to suit my own needs.

add more as you see fit please

[davem]

Originally Posted by drigel

At this point it's almost a philosophical debate. What were they (Faerie) to us really? One needs to answer this question first before attempting to describe the intent of the author.
Were they representations of nature and explanations to events that the ignorant could not themselves answer?
Were they representing actual gods and goddesses that have fallen (both physically and in regards cultural spiritualism) from importance?
Were they real agents of transition between the physical and spiritual?

Hmm... Well, to some people - the rural Irish (up to & including in this century) they were real beings - a 'real & present danger'. As they were (& still are) to some Icelanders. And to rural peoples everywhere. As to them being 'representations of nature and explanations to events that the ignorant could not themselves answer?' I suppose that would be a result of 'civilisation'. Originally they were not that at all. As beings in their own right they had their own mores & motives.

I suppose that they were available to Tolkien to make his own use of, in whatever way he wanted. But he doesn't say he's doing that - he claims he's giving them back to us as they 'really' are - or were. In this he's somewhat in the position of Jung as regards Alchemy.

This is where I get confused. All descriptions of Valinor (especially post Numenor) seem paradise-esque. But, as the essay says, Faery is Faery. Period. Hard to wrap the head around. Perhaps Faerie resides somewhere in the suburbs of Paradise?

Valinor, I suppose, is Middle-earth's 'Earthly Paradise' - yet there is no actual 'Paradise' in the Legendarium, only references to 'something' beyond the circles of the world. Faerie is used, in the early writings (& in TH & Roverandom) interchangeably with Valinor. I wonder about the connection between Niggle's Parish & the Halls of Mandos in Valinor. Both are equivalent to Purgatory - a middle ground, neither earth/hell or heaven. Faerie & its inhabitants are also 'betwixt & between'.

1: Perhaps my grounding in Catholicism inadvertantly changed my motivation in dealing with fairie in the Legendarium.

2: It is a study of death and immortality. In my work, we have the Unfallen living alongside the Fallen. Adam and Eve living with Cain and Able. Or, (plug in any religion here Lif and Lifthrasir living with Sigmund and Borghild. Catholicism has nothing to do with it.

2: My faerie IS faerie. But, so is the traditional faerie. Truth is truth, morals are morals, dont confuse religion with that idea. I do not expect you to think I have changed Faery to suit my own needs, just as I do not expect you to think I have changed history to suit my own needs.

Any of the above - & other possibilities, as you say. But I still wonder if there is any common ground between Tolkien's Faerie & traditional Fairie, between his Elves & traditional Elves. Can we say Tolkien's Elves are simply a variation on an existing theme, or are they wholly 'other'. In Appendix F he says he has used the name Elves as the nearest current equivalent for his Eldar. Fine - except that in his essays he stakes his claim to Faery.

And so we have Smith, in itself & particularly in the Smith essay. This particular 'Secondary World' & its inhabitants is another 'betwixt & between' realm, but this time it stands 'betwixt & between' the 'High', 'Christian' Faerie of the Legendarium & the simple 'rural' Faery of tradition. Yet even so it is closer to Middle-earth than to the 'Fair Elfland' of True Thomas. Perhaps if he had lived he would have moved even closer to the traditional Faery.

We seem to see in Tolkien a conflicted artist - 'torn in two'. Part of him is pulled towards the traditional Faery, part towards his religion & its requirements & values. At Birmingham Ronald Hutton gave a talk on 'Tolkien the Pagan', examining this question. It seems Tolkien was never able to give Faerie its head - he had to make it 'safe' - though maybe he had no choice in that. One gets glimpses, as I said, of traditional Faerie in his writings, but he never seems to feel it is entirely 'safe'. His mentions of 'pitfalls' & 'Dungeons' awaiting the overbold strayer into Faery seems as much a warning to himself as to his readers.

Yet maybe there was more going on. If the glimpse of the little Fairy Queen doll on the cake was better than no glimpse of Faery at all, & provided for some - both Smith himself &, according to the essay, his wife (who is named a 'walker in outer Faery in the essay) the entrance into it, maybe Tolkien intended his Legendarium to be a similar glimpse & means of ingress into traditional, 'real' Faerie? Maybe he gave us the Faery that we were capable of taking in at the time & offering us the chance of going on.

I don't know. I'm increasingly confused by the question. All I have is Tolkien's claim that he is telling 'what really happened' set against the fact that his Faerie is nothing like the Faerie we find in traditional tales & accounts, yet he tells me that it is the same 'place'.

Edit.

Thinking about it, (& with drigel's earlier mention in mind)I find the Elves of TH quite 'traditional' - even with their 'Tra-la-la-lally's - or maybe even because of them. In traditional Fairystories the inhabitants of Faery often behave in 'mad' or childish ways. There seems no contradiction between the behaviour of those Rivendell Elves & the Wood Elves encountered later, with their short tempers, self-importance, greed & drunkeness.

My point here being, it seems that in TH, which was originally not meant to be part of the Legendarium Tolkien felt able to set the Fairies free to be themselves. It was only the Legendarium Elves that were required to 'work for a living' & earn their bread.....

[drigel]

just for the record - when I ran off with the :
'representations of nature and explanations to events that the ignorant could not themselves' answer, I was thinking of the example of how elves were to blame when a child was born sickly. It was told that they were actually sickly elvish babies that were switched with the healthy human baby.

no offense intended toward the celts or any otherwise uncivilized culture

[Lalwendë]

Some more thoughts...

I think that the Faerie of SOWM quite literally is Tolkien's Faerie, but that's because Tolkien seems to have had a particular notion of what faerie was/is. I think that his Faerie, rather than being an Otherworld place was in fact the imagination, the realm within people. The star in SOWM could represent the imagination and the passing on of this could represent the encouragement of further generations to explore the Faerie within.

fairy-stories are not in normal English usage stories about fairies or elves, but stories about Fairy, that is Faërie, the realm or state in which fairies have their being.

Tolkien says that a fairy story is not about the people who live there, but about the place. How does this square up with his work set in Arda? We do not actually get to see very much of the Undying Lands, as the books are set in Middle-earth, and we might expect that the former would be the 'Faerie' of the story.

I think the answer to this depends on how much the books are about the places or about the people. If the answer tends towards the latter then maybe the books aren't about Faerie or Tolkien's idea of Faerie at all.

Getting back to what Tolkien said in On Fairy stories, I have to note that this was his opinion on what good Fairy Stories ought to be like, and though I agree with most of what he says, it does not necessarily apply to Faerie itself. He says that 'pigwiggenry' ought to have no place in a good fairy story, but that doesn't mean it would have no place in Faerie; if pixies wished to ride around on earwigs in Faerie then no doubt they would, it's that kind of tricksy place (I should imagine... ). What Tolkien was trying to get across in his essay is that a good Fairy story ought also to be good Art, while Faerie itself would have no respect for such a notion as Art.



Amusing Footnote: I was googling for a reference on 'pigwiggenry' and only about 14 entries came up, one of which was the latest canonicity thread on the Downs. Hmmm....

[drigel]

And to rural peoples everywhere.

Here as well to a certain extent. No fairies, but plenty of ghosts and spririts, mothmen and Jersey Devils. I probably shouldnt use ignorant as a descriptor. But, come to think of it, saying that tsunamis and hurricanes and earthquakes happen to people because God is angry with them is way, way ignorant IMO.

And so we have Smith, in itself & particularly in the Smith essay. This particular 'Secondary World' & its inhabitants is another 'betwixt & between' realm, but this time it stands 'betwixt & between' the 'High', 'Christian' Faerie of the Legendarium & the simple 'rural' Faery of tradition. Yet even so it is closer to Middle-earth than to the 'Fair Elfland' of True Thomas. Perhaps if he had lived he would have moved even closer to the traditional Faery.

It's what makes this all the more interesting - reading that I find that physicality of Faery in the essay very real. And the people and objects transitioning between here and there very real and mostly ordinary. It's almost approaching a middle ground of sorts in SOWM. Facinating! I agree with your conclusion here, and would find it much more interesting to see how he would evolve and/or combine these seemingly disparate Faeries, than reading anything about a 4th age "New Shadow". Alas..

Tolkien says that a fairy story is not about the people who live there, but about the place.

He says that 'pigwiggenry' ought to have no place in a good fairy story, but that doesn't mean it would have no place in Faerie

We seem to see in Tolkien a conflicted artist - 'torn in two'.

So is my brain trying to work this out. Is the stigma of validating things pagan too much of a conflict? Would it have been not so if Tolkien was Protestant? Agnostic?

[davem]

Its interesting that SoWM was the last thing Tolkien published. Of his other post LotR published writings, what do we have? The 'Notes for Translators of LotR published in Lobdell's A Tolkien Compass, the co-authored Road Goes Ever On - anything else?

Yet what we now find is that Tolkien didn't simply write Smith as a short story & leave it at that - he created a whole backstory for it, giving depth & history to the secondary world. In early drafts of Smith the story was to some degree linked into the world of Middle-earth:

When he got it down, he found that very little of the spices was left, and that was rather dry and musty, but in one compartment he found a ring, black-looking as if it was made of silver and was tarnished. 'That's funny!' he said, as he held it up to the light. 'NO, it isn't!' said a voice that made him jump; for it was the voice of his apprentice who had come in behind him, and he had never yet dared to speak first before he was spoken to. He was only a small boy; bright and quick, 'but he has a lot to learn yet' (so the cook thought).
So 'What do you mean, my lad' said the cook, not much pleased. 'If it isn't funny, what is it?' 'It's a magic ring' said the apprentice. Then the cook laughed. 'All right, all right,' he said. 'Call it what you like! You'll grow up someday. Now you can get on with stoning the raisins; and if you notice any magic ones tell me'.
'What are you going to do with the ring?' said the apprentice. 'Put it in the cake, of course,' said the cook. 'Surely you have been to children's parties
yourself, and not so long ago, where little trinkets like this were stirred into the mixture, and little silver coins and what not: it amuses the children.' 'But Cook? this is not a trinket, it's a magic ring' said the apprentice. 'So you've said before' said the Cook crossly. 'Very well, I'll tell the children. It'll make them laugh.'

One day, however, he was walking through a wood in Fairy, and it was autumn there, and there were red leaves on the boughs and on the ground. Footsteps came behind, but he was thinking about the leaves, and did not turn round. A man caught up with him, and said suddenly at his side: "Are you going my way, Gilthir?" For that was his name (Starbrow) in Fairy; at home he was called Alfred Smithson. "What is your way?" he answered. "I am going home", said the man, and Alfred looked at him and saw that it was the Apprentice: a tall man now, but he stooped a little, and had lines on his brow and face, though he was only a few years older than Alfred. "So am I," he said; "we will walk together."

Magic Rings & a Quenya name for Smith! Yet Tolkien removes these 'links' & moves the story away from Middle-earth. Perhaps he felt that such references would impose too many restrictions on his freedom & he wanted to explore another Faery - or explore Faery in a new way. He can't break free of his established Faery (ie Middle-earth) because the moral value system remains, yet it is in many ways a different world & the Faeries have new motives (albeit entirely Tolkienesque ones rather than traditional ones).

In speculating on possible endings for Smith Tolkien wrote:

When the Smith comes home after surrendering the star, should any more be said than has been about what became of him? In earlier draft it is said that he could go back to Fayery, for the mark of the star that had been on his brow was still visible to the folk of Fayery; but he could not go deep in, nor ever visit any new place or see any new thing that he had not already seen. (This has a significance, of course: a time comes for writers and artists, when invention and Vision' cease and they can only reflect on what they have seen and learned.)

So, we have Tolkien stating ' a time comes for writers and artists, when invention and Vision' cease and they can only reflect on what they have seen and learned.' at the same time as he is creating a brand new Secondary world - without the depth of Middle-earth, certainly, but still he is doing far more than merely 'reflecting on what he has seen & learned'. Indeed, this essay, in its own way, is as profound & important an exploration of Faery & Fairy stories as 'On Fairy Stories'. The analysis of the nature of Faery & the motives of its inhabitants is in some ways even more profound.

It is a 'Fairy Story', of the kind in which beings that may be called 'fairies' or 'elves' play a part and are associates in action with human people, and are regarded as having a 'real' existence, that is one in their own right and independent of human imagination and invention...

This is an interesting statement in light of the quote from OFS given by Lalwende

fairy-stories are not in normal English usage stories about fairies or elves, but stories about Fairy, that is Faërie, the realm or state in which fairies have their being.

He seems to be using a different definition of 'Fairy Stories' in the Smith essay - in OFS Fairy Stories are not stories about Fairies, but in SoWM - which is a Fairy Story according to Tolkien, Fairies are central characters - they are the initiators of the action. Smith is given the 'freedom of Faery':

In such stories there must be some way or ways of access from and to Faery, available at least to Elves as to favoured mortals. But it is also necessary that Faery and the World (of Men), though in contact, should occupy a different time and space, or occupy them in different modes. Thus though it appears that the Smith can enter Faery more or less at will (being specially favoured), it is evident that it is a land, or world of unknown limits, containing seas and mountains; also it is plain that even during a brief visit (such as one on an evening walk) he can spend a great deal longer in Faery than his absence counts in the world; on his long journeys an absence from home of, say, a week is sufficient for exploration and experiences in Faery equivalent to months or even years. ...

But then it gets interesting in other ways:

But also this must be considered: the Faery of this tale is a particular one. If one accepts it, while 'within' the tale, then clearly the Rulers of Faery — who are presented as interested in Men (not necessarily primarily) and beneficently - must be able to arrange that the experiences in Faery of favoured human persons may be enjoyed without dislocation of their normal human life. The time of their Faery must be different, even though it may be at points contiguous. For them human time is or may be also longer than that of Faery. The King dwells in Wootton for 58 years. ..

'This' Faery is a particular one - how many Faery's are there? According to OFS really just the one. Faery is, maybe, still the human imagination - or the human imagination fired by some 'Other' place or state, but it seems there is now more than one Faery. But however many there are they are not 'illusions', but objective states of being:

Entry into the 'geographical' bounds of Faery also involves entry into Faery Time. How does a mortal 'enter' the geographical realm of Faery? Evidently not in dream or illusion. Physical objects, such as the star, the Living Flower, and the elvish toy, survive transplantation from Faery to the World...

Faery(s) is not defined or limited, & it seems that only part of it has a relationship with the human world, only certain of its inhabitants are concerned with humanity - but those that are are on a mission to 'save' mankind & the human world (& by extension their own:

But in this tale Forest and Tree remain dominant symbols. They occur in three of the four 'remembered' and recorded experiences of the Smith — before his leave-taking of the Queen. They do not occur in the first, because it is at that point that he discovers that Faery is 'limitless' and is mainly involved in vast regions and events that do not concern Men and are impenetrable by them. ..

It is probable that the world of Faery could not exist* without our world, and is affected by the events in it — the reverse being also true. The 'health' of both is affected by state of the other. Men have not the power to assist the Fdvenfolk in the ordering and defence of their realm; but the Elves have the power (subject to finding co-operation from within) to assist mm the protection of our world, especially in the attempt to re-direct Men when their development tends to the defacing or destruction of their world. The Elves may thus have also an enlightened self-interest in human affairs. ..

Faery needs the human world, just as much as humans need Faery. Yet only the Faeries realise this at the beginning of the story. But Tolkien himself also recognises this need, this interrelationship. Except, according to him it is not traditional Faery that we need, but this very precisely defined creation that he sets before us.

Still no nearer....