The Scourge of The Dark Side...Tolkien and Modernism

[tumhalad2]

That is an interesting take on it...and I suppose I find much merit in it.

I'd like to bring up another aspect of Tolkien at this point, add it to the boiling pot:

The primary theme of his book, Tolkien said, was "death and the desire for deathlessness"...I was thinking about this the other day and it occured to me that Brin and his disciples largely miss the entire point about the Lord of the Rings. On top of that they assume Tolkien has included certain themes and ideas in his work because they assume he was writing, conciously or unconciously, on his social worldview.

Now, that may be the case with much modern literature, though I do not in fact believe Tolkien was, conciously or unconciously, injecting much of his worldview into the Lord of the Rings.

Allow me to explain: to begin lets look at some examples where that IS the case; where Tolkien's experiences or social outlooks have flavoured some scenario. Perhaps the most obvious is the Scouring of the Shire, which he says in the Foward to the Lord of the Rings can be attributed to his experiences as a child. Of course, this would all add to the point Brin et al are trying to make: Tolkien is anti-technology. I think it is a leap of faith to make that jump, and other forumers have already said much about technology and Tolkien's times. From the point of view of his experience then, some aspects of the work can be said to have been 'flavoured' in such a way that Brin would find, and does find, repulsive. It is also perhaps to be acknowledged, therefore, that technological progress was not Tolkien's favourite idea, though what form this distrust of technology took is not always clear and has indeed I think been wrongly manipulated by Brin and his compatriots.

From starting point, in a sense, Brin and the Star Wars forumers have 'deduced' that Tolkien was antimodern and his work infused with conservatism. As other forumers have more succinctly pointed out, this was, to a large degree, not the case and a misjudgement. However I have another idea about why Brin et al were entirely wrong.

They have a social agenda, and therein they trawl through Tolkien's books on the merits of its social outlook. However, I think they fail to realise that not all fiction is motivated, whether concious or uncouncious, by social concerns or themes. Rather, I believe Tolkien was almost entirely motivated by his concern for human nature and specifically the quest for human being to 'understand' death.

Thus, I believe the 'backward looking' elves and Numenorians are less products of Tolkien's love for the past, and more products of one side of the 'death' coin.

Elves are immortal; the elves of Lothlorien lived in a mortal world, thus naturally they attempted to keep that which would inevitably die from doing just that. For the elves, the death of any life, in a sense was unnatural. Similarly the Numenorians were concerned with the preservation of their own beings-also an unnatural act for them. So, these 'good' nations were ultimately pursuing policies unnatural to Middle Earth, hence the 'long defeat'. With the War of the Ring, the ability of the elves to preserve their world was diminished. Essentially the Elves were concerned with transcending time, for they were immortals in a wholly mortal and finite world, and so their nature was to attempt to transcend that.

Though I am a rather insuccinct writer and a little circumlocutory, I suppose I am trying to get across the point that Tolkien was conciously motivated by ideas wholly unrelated to 'social' themes, and while ultimately events, peoples and worldviews may appear 'backward' to those who wish to interpret the world that way, Tolkien's writings are more about exactly what he said they were, an exploration of 'death and the desire for deathlessness'

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by tumhalad2

They have a social agenda, and therein they trawl through Tolkien's books on the merits of its social outlook. However, I think they fail to realise that not all fiction is motivated, whether concious or uncouncious, by social concerns or themes.

Yes... I was trying to say something like that earlier:

Originally Posted by Nerwen

That only matters if you think the sole purpose of art is to promote the "right" political and social agenda (i.e. the one you happen to agree with).

and,

Originally Posted by Nerwen

What they seem to be saying is that no work which does not actively promote their own particular views can be taken seriously.

Originally Posted by tumhalad2

I suppose I am trying to get across the point that Tolkien was conciously motivated by ideas wholly unrelated to 'social' themes, and while ultimately events, peoples and worldviews may appear 'backward' to those who wish to interpret the world that way, Tolkien's writings are more about exactly what he said they were, an exploration of 'death and the desire for deathlessness'

That's very well put, tumhalad.

I'd say, though, that abuse of technology is at least a secondary theme of Tolkien's work (especially if you count the Ring itself)– but then, it's one of the major themes of science fiction!

I'm really not sure why he's such a favoured target of certain people.

In this case it looks almost like an automatic response: "Aaarrrgh! They're after us! Quick, throw them The Lord of the Rings!"

[skip spence]

To my mind, Tolkien was indeed conservative and not a follower of 'modenism' at all. He was also a devout christian. And he certainly infused his works with many 'messages' taken from his personal worldview and religious beliefs, some of which Boromir88 have taken up in his excellent post. Nerwen also mentioned how the hippies of the 60's and 70's loved LOtR. One reason why they did so was (I imagime) their agreement with the anti-war message and the ideals of living in harmony with nature expressed in the books.

But do you have to agree that monotomy is a moral obligation to enjoy Tolkien's books? Do you have to share Tolkien's religious beliefs? And can't you favour a secular, capitalist society with focus on technological development but at the same time appreciate nostalgia over past days (real or imagined)?

My answer is no, no, and yes.

I don't judge books according to how well they confirm my opinions. I have a lot of sympathy for Tolkien's ideas but certainly don't agree with all of them. I'm not a religious man nor am I very monogamous. But I love Tolkien's books nevertheless, and the conservative 'messages' in them take nothing away from that.

[tumhalad2]

Originally Posted by skip spence

To my mind, Tolkien was indeed conservative and not a follower of 'modenism' at all. He was also a devout christian. And he certainly infused his works with many 'messages' taken from his personal worldview and religious beliefs, some of which Boromir88 have taken up in his excellent post. Nerwen also mentioned how the hippies of the 60's and 70's loved LOtR. One reason why they did so was (I imagime) their agreement with the anti-war message and the ideals of living in harmony with nature expressed in the books.

But do you have to agree that monotomy is a moral obligation to enjoy Tolkien's books? Do you have to share Tolkien's religious beliefs? And can't you favour a secular, capitalist society with focus on technological development but at the same time appreciate nostalgia over past days (real or imagined)?

My answer is no, no, and yes.

I don't judge books according to how well they confirm my opinions. I have a lot of sympathy for Tolkien's ideas but certainly don't agree with all of them. I'm not a religious man nor am I very monogamous. But I love Tolkien's books nevertheless, and the conservative 'messages' in them take nothing away from that.

Well put, though once again I do not believe Tolkien's books are so 'infused' with so many conservative ideas to take it seriously as a social treatise, or social commentary at all. I suppose what Im saying is that even you're interpretation, to me, is in some way missing the point as well. I do not believe that Tolkien's books are in fact concerned with this subject matter, though as Nerwen mentioned there are indeed themes relating to the missuse of technology.

This idea that Tolkien was a Christian who's faith influenced his worldview I think is overrated as well; indeed he was a Catholic but I think the influence was less in terms of infusing his work with doctrine and more about reconciling aspects of Christianity with Norse myth etc. This hybrid, I believe, we find in the Lord of the Rings, though perhaps even more so in the Silmarillion.

In closing, I don't really believe that Tolkien has to be read as some outdaited pariah of the past; I simply don't think, in reflecting on his letters and his works as a whole, that 'nostalgia' was his point. If that is to be found in the Lord of the Rings I believe it is in the interpretation of the reader, not in the intent of the author. I also believe that ultimately, the Lord of the Rings is not about society, not even good or evil, it is fundementally about life and death, and how these things are dealt with by different races and characters in the legendarium.

[skip spence]

^Fortunately, Tolkien's books are first and foremost an attemt to tell good stories and in this he succeeded in spectacular fashion, I think we can all agree.

There are obviously many part of his books that can be read as a comment on contemporary issues, as in any good work of literature. I have never read any books about Tolkien or any of his letters and I'm sure there are many here who know much more than me about what Tolkien really wanted to convey with his work or at least what pretentious academics think he wanted to say.

I have read Tolkien's books myself however and made my own interpretations, and I think he is quite explicit on what ideals he as a writer represents. "Nostalgia" is not an ideal but he does seem smitten by it nevertheless. Tolkien never comes across as preachy though and his works are not meant to be primerly "a social treatise, or social commentary". There is social commentary in it, and it deserves to be taken seroiusly too, but Tolkien's main objective was the telling of a good tale. And like I said, judging by the almost unrivalled popularity of his works, he certainly succeded with this.

And btw, to accuse Tolkien of racsism is petty, false and reeking of political correctness coupled with a complete lack of historical knowledge. Not saying you did of course.

[tumhalad2]

haha no I understand...and yes those forumers should be told! I see what you're saying and I suppose there is little I can say against it. Ultimately, as you say, all literature is infused with some kind of social outlook, though with Tolkien I think it is, if anything, a byproduct of his concious attempts to explore entirely unrelated themes.

Though The Lord of the Rings may be infused with "nostalgia" I believe it would be dangerous to simply assume that this was because Tolkien had a particular fetish with it for its own sake; I don't think it is this simple and I believe people like Brin have manipulated this to their own advantage. Taking Tolkien's works as a whole, I think a lot more can be said not only for his 'telling a tale' but also for the themes of 'death and the desire for deathlessness' . I know I keep going on about it but I think theres something to be said for it.

[Gwathagor]

I've enjoyed reading this thread. Thanks for the interesting and insightful points.

I have a couple things to say about the Star Wars guys who have been abusing Tolkien:

1) Modernism is retarded and doesn't work. Unfortunately, modernists are, and will probably remain, oblivious to the fact that their brilliant cosmology hasn't worked since 1914. I'm actually surprised. I thought everyone knew that modernism is a proven failure. "Reason," they say, "Will bring us progress, prosperity, and peace." Progress is terrific, but reason is limited. It CAN'T bring us everything. (Post-modernists figured this out, but they've rather taken it to the opposite extreme.) This is why Tolkien's world is more realistic that the one the modernists have desperately tried to will into being for the last couple of centuries. Despite the fantastic setting, Tolkien paints the world as it is: change/progress is good and proper, but often involves a great deal of sacrifice and sadness. Middle-earth is a threat to the "modern" world, because it doesn't lie to us. The world isn't "modern".

2) I'm also surprised that Star Wars fans are trying to espouse modernism. They must not be doing it very seriously, or they'd realize that hardcore modernists would find Star Wars pretty useless.

3) What's wrong with fascism?

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Gwathagor

3) What's wrong with fascism?

Everything?

I saw this thread and thought "Ah, at last, a discussion on how Tolkien's work can be compared with the likes of Eliot and Joyce." But no, it's about how 'modern' he was with a small m. Still, of course the aspects of the modern world and of modern culture are a major feature in Modernist literature.

It might be helpful to know what we mean by 'modernist'. Are we merely assuming Tolkien is 'old school' because he writes of Kings, Elves and people who live a simpler lifestyle on the technological scale of development? Or are we also considering what messages his work conveys?

Because on that latter point, Tolkien is an out and out Modernist - with a capital M.

Just taking one aspect of his work, his approach towards warfare, Tolkien is in the company of the WWI poets, of Peake, of Lawrence. He presents us with ordinary people who are confronted with a far-off war; they go out of duty, because their friends go, because they believe that in some small way, they can play a part. Unlike WWI, these ordinary people are not forced to go, and this war is one which needs to be fought (unlike about 99% of wars in real life!) as there simply is no diplomatic facility to reason with Sauron! However, even though this war is about as 'just' as any war can get, Tolkien doesn't give us returning muscular heroes. No, he brings us back broken people. He kills some characters. He shows us the consequences.

That's a major feature of Modernism. Questioning authority and the idea that war is inherently our 'duty' to take part in, a duty which will glorify us - that's something which has been passed down from the ancient Greeks but never came under serious questioning until the 20th century and Modernist thinking. Tolkien himself went through all of this - how could he not have come out of that madness without questioning it? It even shook his faith to the core - with the result that the god he created in his work was a terrible god, a truly omnipotent creation.

You could discuss many, many aspects of Tolkien's work in the light of Modernism - as scholars are doing (there was recently a TS seminar on Tolkien & Modernism) already. And I think Shippey has done some work comparing Tolkien to Joyce?

I'm afraid Brin and the Star Wars geeks et al have latched onto Tolkien's faith as making him some kind of pseudo-Lewis figure when this couldn't be further from the truth. It's grossly unfair to condemn Tolkien as a has-been in the literary stakes just because of his religion when he doesn't exactly beat you over the head with it but instead in his clearly Modernist take on a lot of aspects of human existence, he raises interesting questions.

[skip spence]

Originally Posted by tumhalad2

haha no I understand...and yes those forumers should be told! I see what you're saying and I suppose there is little I can say against it. Ultimately, as you say, all literature is infused with some kind of social outlook, though with Tolkien I think it is, if anything, a byproduct of his concious attempts to explore entirely unrelated themes.

Though The Lord of the Rings may be infused with "nostalgia" I believe it would be dangerous to simply assume that this was because Tolkien had a particular fetish with it for its own sake; I don't think it is this simple and I believe people like Brin have manipulated this to their own advantage. Taking Tolkien's works as a whole, I think a lot more can be said not only for his 'telling a tale' but also for the themes of 'death and the desire for deathlessness' . I know I keep going on about it but I think theres something to be said for it.

Well, nostalgia is to me a negative concept as a nostalgic person concerns himself with something already lost and prefers to remember and cherish an often idealised past rather than trying to do something about the present situation.
Then again, most people (myself included) have a tendency towards bittersweet nostalgia and I certainly don't hold it against Tolkien if he harboured a wistful longing for a lost idealised English conuntyside. I didn't use to think that death and deathlessness was a major theme in LotR but now thinking about it I certainly see your point. These themes become even more important in his post LotR writings on ME, like what can be found in HoME X: Morgoth's Ring. Much of this book to me reads like the contemplations of an aging christian with a curious mind, trying to come to terms with his own mortality and religious beliefs.