Has it all been said?

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by davem

Yet CT seems desirous that his father's creation be seen, & treated, not as a mythology, but as a literary work.

This is hardly surprising given that CT is an academic, a literary academic and more than anyone must have been aware of the amusement bordering on scorn with which his father's work was treated by colleagues in his lifetime and the literati since.


While I desperately wanted Middle Earth to be real when I was 12, now I can't help thinking that to treat it as a mythology primarily is to demean Tolkien's achievement in creating what seems plausible as a mythology, what seems plausible as a world.

For myself, I don't have a problem with the scholarly works - and in most bookshops you are unlikely to find many on the shelf so I don't think they are going to daunt that many people.

I own all of HoME and have gained great pleasure from some of it ( I like knowing what Elf marriage rites were and the names of Imrahil's children ) other parts I haven't even looked at yet. People will find their own level.

I enjoy some fanfic and RPG but I wouldn't want any "authorised". And HoME is a great resource for those of us who want to RPG with respect to the integrity of Tolkien's creation. Personally I am very glad that CT inclination or duty turned him to editing his fathers notes rather than using them to create "new" stories. THe only caveat is that there must be so much he "knows" through conversations etc but hasn't included in HoME due to lack of documentation. I just hope that he has recorded it somewhere....

I do find it a little ironic that having been embarrassed by my love of Tolkien during my degree that it is cause for compalint that JRRT is being taken TOO seriously by the scholars.

The companion is wonderful by the way...

[Lalwendë]

No, I don't want any 'authorised' fan-fic either. Not because I think it is bad (much of it is very good), but because I don't want the waters to be muddied. I want to read what Tolkien wrote, and to know that any other 'spin-offs' are just that, spin-offs. I want clear lines where possible.

Aside from anything else, this helps keep it clear what Tolkien wrote and what he did not. I've read a fair few posts/articles where people have named all the Nazgul and claimed their information was correct because 'it's in the books'. But it isn't. That info came from a computer game as far as I know. Imagine how much misinformation there would be if we had authorised fan fiction?

The other thing is that Tolkien's work is not a natural mythology, it is a created one. I wonder how much it really has to say about the history of our real world? Do 'natural' mythologies have more to say about the 'truth'? I'd hate to think that people ditched what was left of England's actual folklore and myth in favour of what Tolkien had written down. That would be very sad indeed.

[davem]

Mith. I understand what you mean. I also own (& have read!) HoM-e (in paperback & the three volume hardback set in the slipcase. I'm not saying it shouldn't have been produced - we all owe CT a debt of thanks.

I also own a good 50-60 volumes of secondary literature on Tolkien, so I'm not opposed to such things. My point was that the important things on Tolkien seem to have been said & what we're getting now is really not all that important - essays in the last two volumes of Tolkien Studies have speculated on the possible influence on Tolkien of King Solomon's Mines & The Old Curiosity Shop. We've had a slew of books showing how LotR is a 'fundamentally Christian work', or 'revealing' the Norse & Celtic influences on Tolkien's writings. The point is - we know all that - whether we agree with it or not is another matter.

now I can't help thinking that to treat it as a mythology primarily is to demean Tolkien's achievement in creating what seems plausible as a mythology, what seems plausible as a world.

I don't see that it is - that was Tolkien's desire - to create a mythology he could dedicate to his country. Neither am I arguing for an 'authorised' sequel(s). I'm making the point that all we are getting now is a scholarly dissection (with an increasing obsession with the obscure & unnecessary) & that that is not what attracted us to Tolkien's creation in the first place, or what draws us back to it.

[Mithalwen]

I mean that if people think of it as a "true" mythology as opposed to a synthetic one it means that Tolkien's role is forgotten... so successful he disappears.

While there may be a good deal of dross to gold, if it means that Tolkien takes his proper place in the literary world rather than being regarded as "unplaceable".

Actually, having read Haggard and seen paralels drawn elsewhere ..I think that sounds interesting. I haven't read The Old Curiosity Shop (can't get beyond Wilde's comment about the death of Little Nell) so that would be less so.... interesting is very subjective...... Tolkien recognised this....... I guess even the most hardened fan has to admit that there is a point where interest flags (mine did in the early volumes of HoME but I read the History of LoTR ones from cover to cover) and accept that there are people more obsessed than you. In some ways that is comforting......

[davem]

I mean that if people think of it as a "true" mythology as opposed to a synthetic one it means that Tolkien's role is forgotten... so successful he disappears.

I suspect he may have wanted that.The art transcends the artist. I'm not sure what we gain by knowing so much about Tolkien's personal history. Doesn't it get in the way? If we read The Passage of the Marshes with thoughts of Tolkien's Somme experiences in our minds we are not fully 'there' with Frodo & Sam & the power of the moment will be lost on us. Same with the 'fact' that there are 'similarities' between the descriptions of Mordor & Dickens description of factory polluted northern towns.

While there may be a good deal of dross to gold, if it means that Tolkien takes his proper place in the literary world rather than being regarded as "unplaceable".

Is that really important? I'm less & less interested in whether Tolkien is accepted into the Literature Hall of Fame. I just want to wander in Middle-earth. That's why I came to love Tolkien's work in the first place. I didn't read LotR or TH for the first time thinking 'Well, I'm shocked that this wasn't in the classics section along with Cervantes & Austen! I must campaign to get this book accepted by the literati!' I just fell in love with world Tolkien had created.

As I say, my complaint is that the scholars don't seem to be saying anything of any great importance anymore. Shippey's Author of the Century is an important work, so is Fliger's Splintered Light, & A Question of Time. But those books are years old. What we are getting now is just more & more about less & less. And none of it has any of the 'magic' that I find in an actual reading of the stories.

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by davem

Is that really important? I'm less & less interested in whether Tolkien is accepted into the Literature Hall of Fame. I just want to wander in Middle-earth. That's why I came to love Tolkien's work in the first place. I didn't read LotR or TH for the first time thinking 'Well, I'm shocked that this wasn't in the classics section along with Cervantes & Austen! I must campaign to get this book accepted by the literati!' I just fell in love with world Tolkien had created.

I fell in love with the world and then had to spend 4 years more or less in the closet during my literature degree. Tolkien fandom was a love that dare not speak it's name outside linguistics class. So I am glad that he is being taken seriously. As someone who prefers the world to the stories, the idea that it was influenced by the Somme, which had never occured to me, may actually get me to reread what I found one of the most tedious parts of the book.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

I fell in love with the world and then had to spend 4 years more or less in the closet during my literature degree. Tolkien fandom was a love that dare not speak it's name outside linguistics class. So I am glad that he is being taken seriously. As someone who prefers the world to the stories, the idea that it was influenced by the Somme, which had never occured to me, may actually get me to reread what I found one of the most tedious parts of the book.

Having missed out on 'Higher' education this is a trauma I have managed to avoid. I'm not sure I would have cared all that much about the reaction of others even so. As to Tolkien being 'taken seriously' I think those who love the stories have always taken him seriously & as far as the others are concerned I simply couldn't care less about them or their opinions - on Tolkien or probably anything else.

the idea that it was influenced by the Somme, which had never occured to me

John Garth's book, Tolkien & the Great War, will tell you everything you want to know. And that one is another of the very few recent books on Tolkien that is worth reading. Also full of interesting stuff on the early phases of the Legendarium.

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by davem

Having missed out on 'Higher' education this is a trauma I have managed to avoid. I'm not sure I would have cared all that much about the reaction of others even so. As to Tolkien being 'taken seriously' I think those who love the stories have always taken him seriously & as far as the others are concerned I simply couldn't care less about them or their opinions - on Tolkien or probably anything else.
.

Well since they marked my essays I had to care to a point . As for my peers, I wasn't particularly confident at 19 and the flaky - barking mad thing isn't an entirely recent development. Fortunately by the time I left, I had learnt to discern between sophistication and pretentiousness...... which is why I am still in touch with only a couple of people on my course....