England's Mythology?

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Lalaith

All this leads me to wonder - is it in fact possible to draw as many parallels between myth and folk tradition as we are all wont to do? Are they that connected?
Perhaps myth is what Tolkien called " 'high', purged of the gross" - metaphysical questions, the nature of creation, art and knowledge; folk tradition is much more concerned with the basic human requirements: food (lack of or plenty); fidelity (ditto, whether between men and women, brothers-in-arms, or men and beasts), and fighting.
And where do fairy tales fit in? Perhaps most fall into the folk category, although some, like the Cupid & Psyche variants (Beauty and the Beast/East of the Sun West of the Moon etc) might have more mythical elements.
The themes of the Silmarillion tales seem more metaphysical/mythical than folk tradition: Feanor (art and creation) Beren and Luthien (love beyond death) The children of Hurin (fate and despair).

I think ultimately they are all leaves on the same tree. Mythology could be said to be concerned mostly with 'creation', the cosmology of a world and it's Gods while folklore is concerned more with the everyday, or else putting the 'high' into an everyday context. But the problem is where does one end and the other begin?

The other problem is that all mythology and folklore has once been the belief or religion, the 'truth' of its day or society. So if I include the Bible in this I am not deliberately setting out to offend.

If we consider the Bible, it includes not only Genesis, but also The Song of Solomon which is much more 'earthy'; we also have the Gospels which consider the metaphysical questions of Christianity alongside everyday concerns and life. Both high myths and low folktales contain lessons and truths, and all can work on many levels. We can see this today in our own culture - the film Troy talkes the 'high' myth of Achilles and brings it to the level of entertainment and action; we could even say that about the film versions of LotR (though many also get this pleasure from the books)!

Even 'high' creation myth can be 'gross', Cronos castrates his own father, Uranus, and then goes on to eat his own children.

If we look at Tolkien's work, even here it is hard to discern between what is myth and folklore, if there is such a big difference; both are melded together in one whole. If the tales of the Silmarillion seem to work more on the level of myth, then I would think it is the style in which they are written as opposed to the themes; Frodo's story alone is more than worthy of 'mythical' status, and yet it seems at face value to be much more intimate and contemporary.

[davem]

Myth blurs into legend, legend into folktale. We see this in the Legendarium. The Sil begins as high myth, becomes legend after the return of the Noldor, LotR mixes legend & folktale in its styles & subject matter. The BoLT is more earthy than the later Quenta. But we see this in ancient mythologies. Homer is 'higher' than Ovid. The Illiad & the Odyssey were taken as 'sacred' texts by the ancient Greeks, along with Hesiod & the 'Homeric Hymns'. The Metamorphoses were taken by the Romans as entertainment, yet the subject matter was the same. Norse myth has the Thrimskvida http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trymskvida at one extreme & the Voluspa http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voluspa at the other

Tolkien never decends to the level of 'crudity' we find in ancient Myths, so it is lacking to some degree, but then many modern readers would find the cruder side of the ancient tales distasteful - maybe that's why his work speaks to us.

[A_Brandybuck]

I do not think, that Tolkien really wanted to attach his work as the 'mythology' of England, that he wanted to write the past of 'real' England.
I rather think, that he wanted to write a mythology, how a mythology 'could' have been in the past. A mythology, which fits in the whole context of Germanic mythologies.
The main reason, which let me think, that he didn't want to attach the mythology to 'our' world, is his Christian belief.
Although he excluded the religious aspect in his works, there is a God in it, Eru, and it is not the Christian God. Attaching this mythology would mean, that he agrees in the existance of another God in the world. And this would mean 'Blasphemy'. We all know, that Tolkien was very religious, and my personally meaning (or rather interpretation) is, that he would not dare to it.

Tolkien was sad, that there aren't a mythology for England, because he loves the other Germanic mythologies. But he knew, that these mythologies were grown over ages and include the culture of a people. I would say, that he would never arrogate, that he is the one, who gave England a mythology, because of his knowledge, how the other mythologies come into existance.

Consequently he tried to write a mythology for England, how this could have been, but not is.