Mieville's thoughts...

[Nerwen]

Aw, c'mon tumhalad, not this again! What "thoughts, opinions, rebukes?" can we come up with now that we haven't already provided the several other times somebody or other has criticised Tolkien on ideological grounds, and it's got you worried?

Look, you don't need the permission of China Miéville, David Brin, Michael Moorcock, the loony fanboys at Stardestroyer.net, random Amazon reviewers, or anyone else to like Tolkien's writing. Heck, you don't even need my permission!

Besides, writers are notorious for jealousy and back-stabbing. Did you think the world of literature was one big happy family?

[tumhalad2]

I take offence to your tone of condescension. This is a forum for discussion, and I could't care less that you think we've already covered the same issues. It's not that I need permission (I take offence to that assumption as well). I'm not intersted in your "providing" me answers to placate my fears, I am intersted in discussion. By taking the stance that you do, you all but imply the discussion is over; that all the "rebukes" have been given by our illustrious forumers, etc. Well, and I'll use the word again, that is incredibly fatuous. Despite what you might think, Mielville's comments may be of interest to some people on these boards, and therefore fruit for chit chat. I'm interested in people's thoughts about the specifics of what Mieville has to say. I think the quote is an interesting distillation of the attitude held by Mieville, Brin et al.

Did I think the world of literature was one big happy family? Nice way to insinuate I am some kind emotionally retarded fool! Evidently, you completely misunderstand my motivation for posting the quote. Of course I don't believe that! That there are debates in literature is no reason not to engage in them and sit idly by, content in your own moral superiority. I certainly don't agree with Mieville, and I have a right not to do so and to make the fact known. Likewise, forumers have a right to comment on this thread without others insinuating that they are being repetative, or disingenuous, or whatever. In fact, I'm not quite sure what the point of you're post was at all. Why not read the quote, and engage with it? It's interesting, has a lot to say, and there's a lot to discuss. That is what this board is for.

[Nerwen]

Hey, tumhalad, sorry if I was rude. I guess I was. I'm not in a great mood at the moment, for completely unrelated reasons.

It's just this to me seems a re-hash of past topics posted by you– it's not like Miéville is saying anything those other people hadn't.

Also, maybe I was jumping to conclusions this time, but it's because the other times I certainly seem to remember you saying you were quite shaken by the criticism. Okay?

[Nerwen]

However–

Originally Posted by tumhalad

That is no reason to ignore them and sit idly by, content in your own moral superiority.

What on Earth makes you think I'm doing that? You, know, for somebody who gets offended pretty readily, you're not what I'd call careful about what you say to others, mate.

[tumhalad2]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

However–


What on Earth makes you think I'm doing that? You, know, for somebody who gets offended pretty readily, you're not what I'd call careful about what you say to others, mate.

Ok, fine, allow me to explain myself. Having posted the quote, quite innocently, and without any thought to offend anyone, you come along and insinuate that Im am wasting...what exactly, your time? space on an internet message board? There was absolutely no reason for you to have posted that at all; you failed to engage with the quote at all and you merely criticised me. And you wonder why I might accuse you of possessing an air of moral superiority? Well, it only seemed to follow from the tone and content of your post.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by tumhalad2

Ok, fine, allow me to explain myself. Having posted the quote, quite innocently, and without any thought to offend anyone, you come along and insinuate that Im am wasting...what exactly, your time? space on an internet message board? There was absolutely no reason for you to have posted that at all; you failed to engage with the quote at all and you merely criticised me. And you wonder why I might accuse you of possessing an air of moral superiority? Well, it only seemed to follow from the tone and content of your post.

No, what I'm querying is your phrasing,

Originally Posted by tumhalad

That there are debates in literature is no reason not to engage in them and sit idly by, content in your own moral superiority.

which makes it sound like you're talking about some "duty" you believe people have to engage in each and every debate. If you just mean I sounded like I was annoyed at you– well, yes, I was, kind of– but I've already apologised for that. I admit I was out of line.

And yet, I am making a serious point that I don't believe Miéville is raising anything that hasn't already been brought up here, here, here, and here, not to mention
here. Of course people can decide to go over the same ground again if they want to, but I do think it is pretty well-trodden ground.

[tumhalad2]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

...which makes it sound like you're talking about some "duty" you believe people have to engage in each and every debate. If you just mean I sounded like I was annoyed at you– well, yes, I was, kind of– but I've already apologised for that. I admit I was out of line.

Why criticise me? If you don't want to engage in this debate, then don't. Why is it so frustrating for you that I've made this post? Who cares if some of these points have been raised before - in that case all the better. Thanks for providing the links, people now have an opportunity to regail themselves of some similar discussions that have gone on in the past. But there are always new people coming to the boards, there's new ground to cover, new thoughts to hear, new ideas to canvass, and new points to be made. Once again, I disagree that Mieville's points have "all been made before". Yes, they are rather generic points in some ways, but that is in itself interesting. If we have a whole lot of threads here, including this one, that all supposedly deal with the same ideas, why not offer some thoughts as to why that is? What is it exactly that unites these commentators? Which ideas do they have in common, and what does Mieville emphasise particularly in the quote above? I suggested above that we scrutinise his points about On Fairy Stories. Is he right in saying that it amounts to a kind of "manifesto" for "conservative" fantasy unwilling to "challenge" us (apparently to Mieville) socially retarded readers? How should Tolkien critics who are generally sympathetic respond? To say the ground is well trod is fine, but to insinuate that all conversation must cease because of this is not, in my opinion.

[tumhalad2]

A misunderstanding:

Indeed, in the past, I did post a thread about David Brin's ideas in which I expressed some loss of faith, if you like, so I can see why you may have thought that. Nonetheles, that was some years ago now, and I'm over it.

This time around, however, I'm posting because I came across the quote and thought it had some interesting things to say. Sure, alot of these people say similar things, but Mieville is interesting because of where his focus is - on Tolkien's On Fairy Story's essay, for example, and the implicit idea that literature should afford some sort of "challenge" to readers, presumably by not doing what Tolkien did and offer a conciliatory ending. I'm not hugely familiar with On Fairy Stories; is this a good or accurate formulation of Tolkien's ideas, or are they misconstrued?