Did JRRT encourage new ME stories?

[Thenamir]

Forgive me for stamping my foot so loudly, I believe I broke a bone or two. I suppose that one of my points was that the story is a great story, even if you don’t get all the English class references when you read it in German or Chinese. I would propound a new question for discussion here, directly related to the original thread topic.

Assume for a moment that gifted writers would be allowed with the blessing of the Tolkien Estate to write books or collections of short stories as additions to “canon”. Assume further that the overarching LOTR story can be understood and appreciated as genius in other languages, despite the lack of nuance that, presumably, only English readers will “get.” Can new stories be written within the inviolable boundaries of races, lands, and the rich history of the original works, and yet be written in French, Russian, or even the ghastly American dialect, and still be good stories, perhaps even great stories, in themselves?

I maintain that they can. I don’t find anything particularly wrong with a snorting elf, because within my inferior USian experience a “snort” is not the haughty, rude, and disdainful thing that it seems to be to proper English gentry. If I was writing it, I perhaps would revise it to “(insert elf character name here) lifted an eyebrow in disdain,” but that essentially expresses the same thing to me.

It could even be said that if the story was rewritten to use different phrasing or perhaps different cultural settings when translated into a new language, it might have equally deep and nuanced meaning as the English version does for the English. I shudder to think what a US-inner-city version of LOTR would look like (the mind recoils in horror at the thought of Bilbo “rappin’” his poetry), but it would perhaps “reach” people that the original does not.

I’m sure the divine Miss Bb could speak better to those issues of words and communication, but to drag this wordy post back on topic, dialect and cultural trappings are not what makes LOTR special – it is the inner consistency and the universality of the themes. If someone, and it certainly won’t be me, can propound such themes within the bounds of the existing Tolkienesque sub-universe and make a good story out of it, I don’t find that invalid, even if someone writes pop-guns and pickles into a story supposedly set before such things existed…oops, that was Tolkien himself.

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Thenamir

It could even be said that if the story was rewritten to use different phrasing or perhaps different cultural settings when translated into a new language, it might have equally deep and nuanced meaning as the English version does for the English. I shudder to think what a US-inner-city version of LOTR would look like (the mind recoils in horror at the thought of Bilbo “rappin’” his poetry), but it would perhaps “reach” people that the original does not.

Quite frankly, they can go and listen to Enimem or Sneaped Doggy Doo-Dah or Puffed Daddy or whatever.

If you're arksin', it already 'reaches' people.

There's nowt more vomit-worthy (and patronising) than writers/artists trying to 'get down with ver kids' and churning out bogus nonsense. Ugh. It makes me think of David Cameron and his hoody hugging.

Respeck.

***

But seriously, such a notion takes away all the subtlety of the work. It would be like burning the Mona Lisa and replacing it with a Paint-By-Numbers Fuzzy Felt version.

I suppose it all depends upon whether you just like the stories or if you like the whole package. You know, like the difference between the films and the books - the former are decent enough, but the latter is the Real Thing.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Thenamir

Assume for a moment that gifted writers would be allowed with the blessing of the Tolkien Estate to write books or collections of short stories as additions to “canon”. Assume further that the overarching LOTR story can be understood and appreciated as genius in other languages, despite the lack of nuance that, presumably, only English readers will “get.” Can new stories be written within the inviolable boundaries of races, lands, and the rich history of the original works, and yet be written in French, Russian, or even the ghastly American dialect, and still be good stories, perhaps even great stories, in themselves?

Yes, but how far can one move away from the original & still have the story be considered 'genuine'? I think the point that's being missed is that the Shire is not England per se, but rural Warwickshire/Berkshire at the time of Queen Victoria's Diamond Jubilee - hence pickles, tomatoes & potatoes. Pop guns & express trains are in there because they are references that the original audience (Tolkien's children) for TH would have gotten. The style & references are of their time.

I maintain that they can. I don’t find anything particularly wrong with a snorting elf, because within my inferior USian experience a “snort” is not the haughty, rude, and disdainful thing that it seems to be to proper English gentry. If I was writing it, I perhaps would revise it to “(insert elf character name here) lifted an eyebrow in disdain,” but that essentially expresses the same thing to me.

No, 'snort' in reference to Elves is a bit like 'gross' in reference to Hobbits....

It could even be said that if the story was rewritten to use different phrasing or perhaps different cultural settings when translated into a new language, it might have equally deep and nuanced meaning as the English version does for the English. I shudder to think what a US-inner-city version of LOTR would look like (the mind recoils in horror at the thought of Bilbo “rappin’” his poetry), but it would perhaps “reach” people that the original does not.

Oh, I'm sure that any sequel would be designed to appeal to as wide an audience as possible. CoH would not have had a chance - that 'boring' start with all the family history, & that depressing ending - & who could identify with that crazy Turin?? Except that anyone familiar with Saga literature would recognise all that as part of the Saga genre, & realise that Tolkien was actually emulating Saga literature. Even Morwen is a classical saga mother-figure. People (& critics in particular) don't read the Sagas & don't get what Tolkien was doing - they don't recognise that, uniquely in modern literature, Tolkien has produced a saga equal to the Icelandic greats. In other words, what Tolkien produced was high art, not stories about Elves & Hobbits, & its the subtleties which are often (dis)missed which are essential to that.

[Raynor]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Have a flick round the Downs. It's been discussed many, many times.

It is better in a discussion to present actual arguments, rather than send people on a wild goose chase - esspecially if it was you in such a thread that mentioned the Shire a case of anarchism.

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by davem

'fraid the middle classes are the most class conscious of all - they just like to think they aren't....

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Aye, spoken as only a modern middle-class Englishman could

Help! Help! I'm being stereotyped ...!

Now, if you will excuse me, I'm far too busy keeping up with the Joneses next door to post any more just now.

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Thenamir

No question, none whatsoever. And I do not in any wise advocate dumbing-down LOTR to the lowest common denominator -- to do so would be like setting a Shakespeare play in New York City...oh, wait, they did that -- wife and kids were watching Romeo and Juliet, with all the original Elizabethan Englishe, but costumed and set in NYC. I can't imagine something similar done to LOTR, but a different English setting was not my point.

How can I, as an American (i.e. one-who-speaks-only-one-language), have any assurance that the Russian who has read LOTR in only his native tongue knows the subtleties of the English version? I have to trust that the translator has made a good faith effort to become familiar enough with the work so as to render a sound and faithful translation. But to render near-verbatim English-to-(insert favorite language here) translations would mean that nothing short of an annotated version in each language, explaining the context in terms understandable to each varied culture, would suffice to convey the meanings as Tolkien intended.

I hate to keep using Shakespeare as an example, but how many moderately educated people have started to read Hamlet or Richard III, and given up after the first few scenes because the language is so archaic? Unless you annotate the text to bring the meaning up-to-date, so to speak, the brilliance of the Bard will be lost to the masses.

What am I saying by all this? That cultural trappings are not the substance. Yes, they are important, even critical, to emulating the style of an author, and even more so playing in his sandbox. But I submit that I have read stories (the aforementioned "The Hobbits" is well worth a read, though I doubt that purists will find it anything other than rubbish) that, for me, were an extension of that world that JRRT first opened for me. Do I confuse them with the originals? Not at all. But they are enjoyable reads for me, and the authors have worked hard and done their best, and I like them. (aside: I've also read much fan trash to find the few treasures...that makes them all the more special.)

Now a few things spring to mind...

First off, I know full well that a lot of kids feel 'alienated' by being presented with Shaespeare to read, but that is not their problem, nor is it Shakespeare's. It is the teacher's problem, and given the right teaching, ALL readers can come to enjoy Shakespeare! I really, really hate dumbed down curricula which, with the best intentions usually, only deny certain sectors of society from access to quality literature and quality learning. For example, this trend to kids studying excerpts instead of works. A 'sexed-up' modern version (e.g. a film, comic book etc) can stand alongside an original as a fab teaching aid (or as fun - I personally love 'graphic versions' of books), but it can never be a replacement.

Now onto language...a comparison between an British English speaker and any other English speaker might also be found in a modern English speaker and a speaker of Middle English. When I read Chaucer I pretty much understand what he wrote, but inevitably over time nuances have been lost - someone needs to tell me what these are! I am not upset nor is my intelligence insulted that someone steps in (usually a teacher or whoever writes the footnotes) to tell me what that word means, what it meant back then. Let's bring up Shakespeare again (you did so I can :P) - there are many words in his work I didn't understand until I was told what they meant - swive for example, and sneap - this latter I only discovered from talking to a modern day person from Nuneaton who uses the word in her everyday slang. I am really pleased I can find out what these words meant, it gives me greater understanding!

So, I'm not sure why folk get so indignant when say davem brings up examples of language use that are specifically English (as in culturally not linguistically), but I think this could be down to the influence of Political Correctness. It's an uncomfortable, yet inevitable fact to me that when I pick up some Goethe to read (and I do like Faust, it's ace) I will inevitably, as a non-native German speaker (actually a pretty poor speaker of German at all) not understand the full meaning of some of the words therein unless someone tells me about them. However I'm not going to get in a hissyfit over it - it's life.

As for other variations of English, yeah, I struggle with those too, and it causes much hilarity when I get American biscuits confused with English ones (along the lines of: Eyuw! Gravy? On Chocolate Hobnobs? You savages!) for example. but I'm not going to come over all insulted when a kindly American explains the difference! It's actually both funny and interesting to me. Same with a lot of songs - I just do not 'get' the references in the lyrics. Fact of life.

So we have choices:
we accept that sometimes some readers will not 'get' everything.
we accept that annotated versions are actually useful.
we don't get the hump when someone explains something from the culture of the writer.
we carry on as we are, having hissy fits because we have a chip* about thinking the other person considers us a 'colonial' or a 'foreigner' - errr, no we don't, we just want to explain what it means because it's useful and informative. Otherwise it really is Political correctness gone mad...

*it can be one from a sealed foil bag or one out of a dep fat fryer, I don't care either way...

Originally Posted by Raynor

It is better in a discussion to present actual arguments, rather than send people on a wild goose chase - esspecially if it was you in such a thread that mentioned the Shire a case of anarchism.

Hmmm, but there is a search function, and you shall find many inteersting discussions that way. Alas I aint got time to cross-reference with abandon

[Sauron the White]

Throughout this thread there has been mention of fan fiction. It has been said that much of it is rather bad but there are a few treasures among the stuff. Would it be possible for anyone - or several people - to provide links to the absolute best of such Middle-earth fan fiction? Are there any gems, on this site or any other, that many knowledgable fans have developed a consensus as to their quality? I would love to read them if I had a link... or two ... or more.

[Raynor]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Hmmm, but there is a search function, and you shall find many inteersting discussions that way. Alas I aint got time to cross-reference with abandon

Well, you don't need to "cross-reference with abandon". A few evidences would be enough to have a discussion. That is, if you want your new interpretation on this issue of classes to be taken as more than just a personal opinion.

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Raynor

Well, you don't need to "cross-reference with abandon". A few evidences would be enough to have a discussion. That is, if you want your new interpretation on this issue of classes to be taken as more than just a personal opinion.

It in't a new interpretation, plenty of folk have seen how Tolkien gets class and 'status' into his work - the Hobbits are the prime example but you even get it amongst Men, Elves and Orcses. In fact you could say that it's one of the major themes of his work - how even those from the humblest of backgrounds, people like Sam, are just as important as the Aragorns of this world - and how those from the highest strata of society can go astray, people like Boromir.

But no, I really don't have time to be rooting up juicy quotes from aged threads - I'm trying to keep an eye on the flooding situation round here and have been since this time yesterday. Do you really think I would pass up another chance to discuss class in Tolkien's work? I'm not here to write an A level essay, just to have a natter about Tolkien.

[Estelyn Telcontar]

Sauron, our very own fan fiction site needs to be promoted more actively! Unlike general fan fiction sites, which often have few restrictions, it is moderated, so that a certain standard of writing is maintained. It is located here. Since recommendations would be taking this thread off-topic (as if it were still on... ), I will start a new thread in the Novices and Newcomers section for fan fiction infos and recommendations. It will be 'stuck' to the top, so do check it out there!

[The Saucepan Man]

For what it’s worth, davem and Lalwendë are, as one would expect, correct in their description of English terminology differing between the classes. In my experience, this is far less of an issue these days, although it can still crop up from time to time (as in the case of the recent fuss over words used by Kate Middleton’s mother, which I personally found rather cruel and silly). However, I still have my lunch during the day and my dinner in the evening, and would find it strange to do otherwise (although I use serviettes, rather than napkins, and relax on the sofa in the lounge, rather than sitting on the settee in the sitting-room ).

It is also fairly clear, in my view, that Tolkien based Hobbit society primarily, although not wholly, on English country life around the turn of the century, and that there is a palpable “class system” in the Shire.

That said, I find the evidence suggesting that Tolkien used the word “lunch” in LotR to support this portrayal of Hobbit society extremely thin. Had he intended to do so, I strongly suspect that he would have been more careful in his use of terminology when acting as narrator, particularly in describing proceedings at the Long Expected Party, and he would not have had Old Nokes use the term “dinner” to describe an evening meal (and nor would he have had Bilbo, an affluent middle-classed Hobbit, use the same term for the midday meal).

However, while (for these reasons) I find the substance of this digression irrelevant to the main thrust of this thread, it does raise a valid issue, which is the one that Thena has been trying to tease out. Given that Tolkien, being an individual, had a unique perspective on life, no one (not even Christopher, although he would come the closest) could ever write a tale set within Middle-earth which would be entirely consistent with Tolkien’s own Middle-earth writings. None of us would be able to ‘get’, let alone reproduce, every single ingredient which went into making his tales what they are. Does that mean that no one should try? Leaving aside the question of authorisation, which is a matter for the Estate, I cannot for the life of me see why not. If people derive pleasure from writing fan-fic and others derive pleasure from reading it, what is the problem? What does it matter if Hobbits do lunch or Elves snort? If you do not like it, you do not have to read it.