More! More! More!

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by alatar

Do we truly want more, or is it that we just want that feeling back that we had when we first read LotR, when we were innocent and Middle Earth was brand new? Is this feeling nothing more than the adrenaline rush that we got when we first walked across Middle Earth with Frodo?

Good point, alatar, on whether we want to get back to the garden. But in a post-lapsarian world, what are we to do?

I'm going to go out on a limb here and hope it is an entish limb that will catch me should I fall.

To be entirely honest, it wasn't any of Tolkien's glimpses that got me reading more, nor was it Middle-earth itself (herself?). Nor was it the hobbits, who are so endearing, nor Gandalf, who as the Grey is one of the bestest wizards ever. There are two things that have compelled me to delve deeper into Tolkien lore, ever watchful for balrogs along the way.

First, it was Tolkien's essay On Fairie Stories that intrigued me so much I wanted to know more of his brand of fairie. That got me reading the Minor Works and rereading TH. And, then, it was this forum which prompted me to read on, read on. Had I not seen the enthusiasm for the Legendarium and the intense curiosity for The Silm which many of you Downers passionately declare, I might never have bothered to finish The Silm, which I treat as an encyclopedia rather than a story. Even now it remains for me a bit of a curiosity piece rather than a good old fashioned page-turner, which LotR and TH are, for me.

So credit must rightfully belong to you Downers and not only The Professor. It is you also who fuel the magic.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

So credit must rightfully belong to you Downers and not only The Professor. It is you also who fuel the magic.

Interesting. So your desire is external. Think that the first 20 or so times that I read LotR and the Sil that this site didn't even exist; the internet wasn't even created for many of those readings. In my case then the magic was that there was more, and I think that, in retrospect, though I liked the additional information I was in reality chasing that initial thrill in the appendices and Sil. Surely I must have given up on that long ago, but by then I was hooked, in love perhaps, and so the rush wasn't as important.

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by alatar

Interesting. So your desire is external. Think that the first 20 or so times that I read LotR and the Sil that this site didn't even exist; the internet wasn't even created for many of those readings. In my case then the magic was that there was more, and I think that, in retrospect, though I liked the additional information I was in reality chasing that initial thrill in the appendices and Sil. Surely I must have given up on that long ago, but by then I was hooked, in love perhaps, and so the rush wasn't as important.

Oh, I first read LotR and TH looong before the Internet and looong before we knew The Silm! It's The Silm I am mainly referring to here. And in between, I was introduced to Tolkien's academic work, too.

But I don't quite get your distinction between external and internal. Maybe it is all the paint fumes I've been breathing lately, but it seems to me that whether we read internet posts or books on the printed page, that desire is created, is mediated, in the space between the object we read and our eyes.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

But I don't quite get your distinction between external and internal. Maybe it is all the paint fumes I've been breathing lately, but it seems to me that whether we read internet posts or books on the printed page, that desire is created, is mediated, in the space between the object we read and our eyes.

You state that the "magic" resides not only in the Professor's works but also in our fellow Downers' writings. To me that means that some percentage of your desire is external, meaning that if not for this site, you would read/have read less etc. If I were to have access only to the books and no other materials, I would still read them at least once per year. Surely this site keeps me 'thinking Tolkien' a bit more of my day than if it weren't available, but it doesn't effect my desire that much more.

Hopefully I've painted a better picture this time.

[Boromir88]

To explain a little more about internal and external. Internal influence would be the books themselves, the words, the writings, the 'glimpses,' its the 'primary source.' External would be anything related to the books, but not the books themselves...so a forum, a guidebook, anything related to the books that gets you stimulated and created the 'magic.'

I think Bethberry, you and I are very similar than. I do read The Lord of the Rings quite a bit. But, this forum and others like it sort of keep me in it. With The Sil, or Book of the Lost Tales...etc I treat more as a reference. Not something I go cover to cover with and read. Because, I get a different feeling with them.

The Lord of the Ring's is a progressive storyline, it's got a quest motif. And it just seems awkward jumping somewhere in the middle, and just reading that part. It's one progressive story, where we follow the characters, the quest to destroy the Ring, and then all the other little subplots. And to hop right in the middle of that, just feels wierd. It seems like I have to read it from cover to cover.

Where The Silmarillion and books like that, it isn't that same feel. The Sil reminds me a lot like Graham Greene's Power and the Glory (which I did absolutely love). The Power and the Glory has this choppy pattern. The Priest (which I don't think is ever named) is trying to avoid the police because there is a mass extermination of them during this time in Mexico. But the chapters are very choppy. The Priest is in one town, he gets out of a problem, then next chapter, he's suddenly in another place, and the action picks right up again. You don't get to see what goes on 'inbetween the chapters,' the priest is from one place to the next. I feel the same way when reading the Sil...there is a rough timeline of stories, but we have a collection of stories, put together. We go from one to the next, and there's really nothing to 'connect them.' Where the Lord of the Rings is much more tightly written and progressive from one chapter to the next.

So, it doesn't feel as awkward jumping into the middle of the Sil and reading something, because of the way the chapters and the stories go. With the Silmarillion there was no 'quest' to follow our characters a long the entire way, it was a collection of stories from earlier ages and the battles of those earlier ages. We pretty much jump from one story to the next.

Maybe, after devoting much of his life to Middle Earth, Tolkien wanted to get away from fulfilling the insatiable fan requests and simply just write greeting card text.

That's what I thought as well, for a little while, and perhaps it bogged him down more, but he never really seemed to lose love for his stories. In Letter 250, with his declining health he is still jokingly referring to him being like the Ents. And also:

Of course the L.R. does not belong to me. It has been brought forth and must now go its appointed way in the world, though naturally I take a deep interest in its fortunes , as a person would of a child.~Letter # 328

I think he took a great interest in watching his stories grow and develop with the 'public's opinion,' and he never lost love for his stories. (As he always seemed to staunchly defend them if someone - Zimmerman - made a screen play or wanted to make them into 'movies.') I do think that he probably got frustrated, hampered down, but all the fan mail and people asking for 'more.' Of course I don't really know that, but I certainly would and could put myself in his situation...with his ailing health, answering letters, I think Sqautter brings up some good points with his 'perfectionism' of The Sil, making it fit with LOTR, it all bogged him down and had an effect...but I don't really think he ever lost a passion of the magic for his stories and still took interest in watching his books develop after being published.

[Lalwendë]

Personally I like the way that there a lots of shifting details around the edges of Tolkien's work. For one, it denies any pain in the bum Mr Logic type to come along and lay down the law about everything, as there are just so many points to be argued over! And also because it allows the imagination room to grow and breathe within Middle-earth; possibly one of the reasons why so many readers are taken with the place - it seems all the more 'real' for remaining unexplored by us.

Yes, I'd love to know the final word on exactly what Saruman was up to with his experiments with Light, but I'm also pleased that we don't know, as I'm able to think about it, to consider, and to speculate.

Why did Tolkien not write more than he did? Frankly I'm amazed that he managed to write what we have got! He must have had an incredible mind to keep all that complex, interweaving information in his head (no PCs with databases!), and he was a perfectionist, paying a great deal of attention to detail, rather than giving us silly made-up-names and thinly painted places.

Its also worth remembering that Tolkien was not a full time writer holed up his house, devoting all his time to his novels, he was also an academic, part of a cut-throat world of intellectual one-upmanship and will have had to devote much of his time to maintaining the position he held. Not only that but he had the practicalities of tutoring and raising a family, running a house, meeting friends. During the 60s there was the additional burden of all those letters to read and write. I seem to remember reading something about how he could not ignore a letter or a question and aimed to answer as many as possible. So maybe the fans, in a way, have only themselves to blame if they wanted more!

[Raynor]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

He just stops and leaves The Silmarillion to rest.

I wouldn't agree; he wrote about the Elder Days all the way till 1970, as noted in Late Writings, HoME XII, for example.

So, are you somebody who likes the 'glimpses' we get in LOTR? Is that what makes the story 'magical.' Or are you driven to wanting 'more, more, more' , because of these 'glimpses?' And after reading the Silmarillion, 'going to the untold places, people...etc' did it destroy that magic (for you) that is established in The Lord of the Rings?

Tolkien stated in the On Fairy-stories essay that magic [_in_ the stories] should not be explained away and I guess it can be inferred that too much explanation would also negatively affect the magic _of_ the stories. That being said, I am not satisfied with glimpses

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by alatar

You state that the "magic" resides not only in the Professor's works but also in our fellow Downers' writings. To me that means that some percentage of your desire is external, meaning that if not for this site, you would read/have read less etc. If I were to have access only to the books and no other materials, I would still read them at least once per year. Surely this site keeps me 'thinking Tolkien' a bit more of my day than if it weren't available, but it doesn't effect my desire that much more.

Hopefully I've painted a better picture this time.

Ah, I see-- Primary versus Secondary Bibliography! Is our reading canonical or not?

Actually, I'm not sure I would accept that statement I would have read less. After all, for quite some time, all readers had were just TH and LotR. I half suspect that it is the rise of all the secondary material that stimulates much rereading. I mean, once one knows The Silm, does one go back to LotR to catch all the references to the Legendarium? Does Aragorn the character make more sense after reading The Silm?

Then again, I suppose it all depends on what one does when one reads, how one reads Tolkien. It's like there are different ways of reading The Bible. I don't mean different interpretations, but differing attitudes towards the activity.

Do Tolkien's books turn one inward, so that one ritually rereads Tolkien, as a kind of mantra? (I could certainly see Entish easily substituting for a focus word enabling concentration. Hooommm. Hoooommmm.) Or do his books turn one to reading other books? His OFS, for example, makes a fascinating template against which to consider other writers of fantasy and earlier fantasy/mythology. His hints of other mythologies lead out to a variety of myths, legends and folklore while his rhythms turn towards other writers-- W.H. Auden, for instance -- who sought to recover the old forms of Old English for modern times. To say nothing of the utterly fascinating way that Tolkien has influenced SF writers who have come after him.

Perhaps it all depends on what one means by "more" -- more of the same or more sub-creation.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

Ah, I see-- Primary versus Secondary Bibliography! Is our reading canonical or not?

Don't even go there...I have no clue what that all even means and I think that that's due to my mind retreating from some horror in the past .

Actually, I'm not sure I would accept that statement I would have read less.

Um, I'm not exactly how else one would read the following words:

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

And, then, it was this forum which prompted me to read on, read on. Had I not seen the enthusiasm for the Legendarium and the intense curiosity for The Silm which many of you Downers passionately declare, I might never have bothered to finish The Silm, which I treat as an encyclopedia rather than a story.

Then again, as I'm not able to recreate you nor your history sans the Downs, I'll never to be able to know for sure, so my observation is purely conjecture. Still, I would say that there's a high probability that in some parallel universe where the Downs doesn't exist that there's one Bêthberry that never finished the Sil.

After all, for quite some time, all readers had were just TH and LotR. I half suspect that it is the rise of all the secondary material that stimulates much rereading.

Weren't the LotR and TH the books that got the craze started for more? I reread these two, and the Sil not as much - as you say, it's more of a reference book that, if I could ever find it, would be pulled out when conversing in a thread with davem. Anyway, the rereading, the magic that I'm trying to recapture, is from the LotR text. The other material just adds volume to the siren's song.

Does Aragorn the character make more sense after reading The Silm?

No. That took the Peter Jackson's movies ("If it weren't for Brego the Horse...").

Do Tolkien's books turn one inward, so that one ritually rereads Tolkien, as a kind of mantra?

Don't think that I reread LotR as a mantra. It's more like a vacation from Real Earth.

Or do his books turn one to reading other books? His OFS, for example, makes a fascinating template against which to consider other writers of fantasy and earlier fantasy/mythology. His hints of other mythologies lead out to a variety of myths, legends and folklore while his rhythms turn towards other writers-- W.H. Auden, for instance -- who sought to recover the old forms of Old English for modern times. To say nothing of the utterly fascinating way that Tolkien has influenced SF writers who have come after him.

I've looked elsewhere for the same fix, and have yet to find it (Frank Herbert is a whole other drug). Jordan's WoT books, I was told, were comparable, but I never got the initial rush and so have never had the urge to pick one of those books up ever again (despite the plethora of external material).

[HerenIstarion]

Have to be (not able not to be?) a little clumsy here:

A. Original thrill - oh yeah, I would have dearly liked to feel it once again. I remember how it was in first reading, and I remember what if felt like to see scraps of other writings published/circulated from hand to hand in amateur translations.

B. Yet, I would not like to have volumes upon volumes explaining everything (literally) from botanies to astronomy (per aspera ad astra, heh). On the other hand, I do not normally read everything there is written about this, primary world, so that seems natural - I'm interested in certain things and not at all in others. (Per instance, I would dearly love to read more about Gandalf, but I would not care to look at hobbit genealogies. So, to be more precise, I would like to have said volumes, but I would not read them all, or, maybe I'll be tempted to, but than it will be selective reading - when (and if I manage to) I'm through with Gandalf, than bring in the genealogies, if you follow my meaning.

C. As for Bb's point, it seems quite valid one to me, as I do not see external/internal distinction you make, guys - it's all in the head, now ain't it? Quite often certain members here have given me insights on things I thought of in different manner/haven't thought at all before and thus made me reread some passages or entire volumes again. Good half (or good nine tenths more likely) of my posting here is reaction to what my co-Downers have to say on Tolkien's Middle-Earth (or even, on their own version of Middle-Earth) than to what Tolkien himself had to say about it. Interaction with Tolkien is more direct in a way - I rather feel/appreciate/listen/go along/enjoy than think per se about ME when I settle down to read for reading's sake. Than I do not need discussion board. It is good afterwards, when evaluation/understanding etc is what i'm after. It is my version of ME I share here, and that now is in permanent state of altering under your (Downers) influence. Or to try and clarify it a little bit more - reading a book and talking about it we truly do different things, but both are part of the fun for sure? I was very lonely when nobody round me have heard about Tolkien, let alone reading, let alone being crazed with him. I don't suppose I would have given ME up even if I were lone inhabitant of an island, but I feel so much more alive for being able to talk about him now, that it is part of the whole thing for me now.