"Genuine fairy-story" ?

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Freebie at end of Post! Please skip if you want a gift!

Thanks for reposting that link, Lal. It would be great to have other Downers read OFS and contribute their thoughts here.

Originally Posted by Lal

OFS in some ways is his attempt to tie up all of the things he was and all the things he had seen; it is not in any way the Law on Faerie. Nor on Faerie Tale.

Just a small clarification here in case anyone interprets this comment to suggest that Tolkien gives us the One Springle--er, Fairie--Ring. I don't think anyone here has said that Tolkien wrote Chapter and Verse on Fairie or Faerie Tale. We've been considering some of the characteristics he sees in Fairie and applying them to his work and then his work to other works. (Well, really just to generalisations outside of his work, as I don't think anything other than Gawain and Beowufl have yet been tendered, of early Fairie, although Strange and Norrell have also been mentioned and of course Grimm's also, but there's not yet been any substantive discussion of other fairy tales. Links to early fairy tales might be very welcomed!

I also hasten to point out that the thread title is offered in quotation marks as befits its genesis as a phrase used by Tolkien. The question mark is wholly mine, though, and as such it does provide a prophylactic against automatic acceptance of Tolkien's ideas--an invitation to consider them if you will.

As an aside, would anyone have any links to some authentic online versions of the Beowulf tale before it became codified in the Old English poem? I'm not aware of any myself.

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by Bethberry

There is not just unexpected deliverance in Tolkien’s theory, but an accompanying recognition of imperfection of the world, of evil, of doom. Frodo accepts his defeat before Gollem becomes the agent of the deliverance, just as Gawin submits to his fate, not expecting reprieve at the hands of the Green Knight. It is not simply that something redeems the sorry or perilous state of the hero, but that the hero must come to accept his final defeat, this tragedy or catastrophe, before he will be for the time being delivered from it.

So the hero must utterly fail and recognize his/her failure in order for the 'sudden turn' to be the eucatastrophe as described by Tolkien. I think you are right. This definitely clarifies the concept, and limits its application to LotR as well as other fairy tales/myths. Are there other myths/fairy tales that exhibit eucatastrophe, whether ancient (Beowulf, Gawain) or modern (Out of the Silent Planet, Star Wars, Harry Potter, etc.)?

Originally Posted by Lal

...the tale Tolkien created was not an amoral one, and it is possibly due to his wish to create a myth that was "purged of the gross", as to be honest, Faerie Tale is not about redemption or hope or joy or any of those things, its about danger, wicked fun, dreams, bodily fluids and death.

First, regarding the latter (not underlined) part: is this your opinion, or do you have evidence for this that contradicts Tolkien's own statement that fairy stories are, at their highest and best, about redemption and hope and joy? Regardless, it seems reductionist.

Second, regarding the underlined section, I think you are right that Tolkien wrote a moral fairy tale in because he wanted to create a myth that was "purged of the gross"; but why did he want it 'purged of the gross'? To make it moral? That would be circular reasoning, so there has to be a separate reason outside either of them. Is it, perhaps, to have made LotR 'consciously Catholic in the revision'?

Originally Posted by Lal

Ungoliant most defintely is ambiguous...

But not morally so. By the way, I've read the Spider thread and the theory built thereon such that Ungoliant cannot be a Maia, and may in fact be co-eval with Iluvatar, seems extremely weak.

[Aiwendil]

LMP wrote:

but why did he want it 'purged of the gross'? To make it moral? That would be circular reasoning, so there has to be a separate reason outside either of them. Is it, perhaps, to have made LotR 'consciously Catholic in the revision'?

I do not think that religion is the only viable explanation. Above, Bethberry posited an interesting alternative in philology.

I might propose another alternative, though it's one that certain literary critics wouldn't react well with: the work of art is better that way. Perhaps a less controversial way of putting it would be to say that Tolkien liked it better that way (so do I, as it happens, and I imagine so do a great many others). If Tolkien found certain elements of many fairy-stories distasteful or uninteresting, why shouldn't he write stories purged of such elements? We need not follow the likes of Edwin Muir and Edmund Wilson in claiming that any story that isn't about sex is juvenile.

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by Aiwendil

I do not think that religion is the only viable explanation. Above, Bethberry posited an interesting alternative in philology. ... Perhaps a less controversial way of putting it would be to say that Tolkien liked it better that way (so do I, as it happens, and I imagine so do a great many others). If Tolkien found certain elements of many fairy-stories distasteful or uninteresting, why shouldn't he write stories purged of such elements? We need not follow the likes of Edwin Muir and Edmund Wilson in claiming that any story that isn't about sex is juvenile.

Your suggestion is based in aesthetics. I have no disagreement with it. Regarding philology, whereas it is true that Tolkien's entire Legendarium used philology as a generative strategy, I don't see how it affects the issue of "purging of the gross". Care to elucidate?

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Tolkien

The realm of fairy-story is wide and deep and high and filled with many things: all manner of beasts and birds are found there; shoreless seas and stars uncounted; beauty that is an enchantment, and an ever-present peril; both joy and sorrow as sharp as swords. In that realm a man may, perhaps, count himself fortunate to have wandered, but its very richness and strangeness tie the tongue of a traveller who would report them. And while he is there it is dangerous for him to ask too many questions, lest the gates should be shut and the keys be lost.

That's what Faerie is all about. Be afraid...

Originally Posted by Bethberry

Just a small clarification here in case anyone interprets this comment to suggest that Tolkien gives us the One Springle--er, Fairie--Ring. I don't think anyone here has said that Tolkien wrote Chapter and Verse on Fairie or Faerie Tale. We've been considering some of the characteristics he sees in Fairie and applying them to his work and then his work to other works. (Well, really just to generalisations outside of his work, as I don't think anything other than Gawain and Beowufl have yet been tendered, of early Fairie, although Strange and Norrell have also been mentioned and of course Grimm's also, but there's not yet been any substantive discussion of other fairy tales. Links to early fairy tales might be very welcomed!

Good good. We would all be very foolish if we took what Tolkien said on Faerie Tale as The Law, and I'm sure Tolkien, as an academic would also think we were fools if we only followed his rules.

Some sources, AKA more free stuff:

Andrew Lang's Fairy Books here. Tolkien liked these, but he disapproved that they were geared towards kids only and had in some cases been Bowdlerised and had the sinister magic taken out of them.

Joseph Campbells' Popular Tales of the West Highlands here.

Joseph Jacobs' tales here.

Grimm's Tales here. In German and Dutch too.

Norske Folkeeventyr here. Also in Norwegian here.

The Mabinogion, the Eddas, the Kalevala, of course, which should all be on Sacred Texts. There's enough on that site to keep you going for ever. One of the joys of the Net is that finally people can collect together folk lore and tales, without the intervention of the Collectors, who I must now post a health warning - DO put their own spin on things a lot, particularly pre-war ones. One of the things Tolkien railed against was indded the pruging of the 'gross' and difficult elements from what are supposed to simply be 'collections'.

Anyone interested should also look out for collections by Ruth Manning-Sanders, and of course, Angela Carter, an expert on the matter.

Which brings me to:

Originally Posted by lmp

First, regarding the latter (not underlined) part: is this your opinion, or do you have evidence for this that contradicts Tolkien's own statement that fairy stories are, at their highest and best, about redemption and hope and joy? Regardless, it seems reductionist.

Second, regarding the underlined section, I think you are right that Tolkien wrote a moral fairy tale in because he wanted to create a myth that was "purged of the gross"; but why did he want it 'purged of the gross'? To make it moral? That would be circular reasoning, so there has to be a separate reason outside either of them. Is it, perhaps, to have made LotR 'consciously Catholic in the revision'?

No, it's not my opinion but current thought on fairy tale and folklore, gained from the simple evidence that the tale puts before us, in particular from going direct to the most untainted fairy tales we can find, usually those told by women in remote locations. Like it or not, uncollected and unedited tales are indeed about visceral matters, perilous matters and can be quite disturbing.

What is important to remember about Fairie Tales is that they are not 'owned' nor are they 'fixed'. Likewise they can't be categorised. Some are moral tales, others tell about the natural world, still others are creation myths, some are entertainments. You can subject them to all kinds of interpretation, and Tolkien's is just a tiny fraction (and not really one of the most important ones in the minds of the scholars who go in for folklore) in the huge mass of others.

Fairy Tales indeed can be functional texts - mainly orally based, used to pass on knowledge through cultures through recognisable archetypes, and also instructional in passing on cultural norms and expectations. Peig Sayers says that Fairy Tales are intended as oral tales, as collections of images; they could take weeks to tell and used words to create images in the mind, using them over and over. 'Living shapes that move from mind to mind' as Tolkien says. Think of the Tarot, which works in the same way.

We should not underestimate the importance of Women's role in telling these tales, and some would argue that many are indeed Women's Stories. A feminist critic might argue that Tolkien wished his tales to be free 'of the gross' because he wished to expunge the elements of sex and bodily functions which were a major component of these tales, a way for women to pass on vital knowledge to their daughters about how their bodies worked, and most of all, how to deal with men.

Other reasons why Tolkien might have wanted his tales to be 'high' might include for aesthetic reasons. I think he sought in some ways to pull stock figures such as Elves out of Faerie where they are tricksy and make them into noble creatures (though why a King is more noble than a boggart to some, I don't know). And of course the most glaringly obvious answer why is this - he wanted to create an epic on the level of the Kalevala, dealing with momentous events, the movements of the Gods, a big broad swoop rather than intimate details of how individuals should live their lives. Style and feel rather than message.

[littlemanpoet]

I am reminded that Tolkien and his fellow Inklings were trying to do something with the vast leaf-mould of folk tale, legend, and myth that was fundamentally at odds with two separate branches of naturalistic interpretations. The two branches are, on one hand, a modernist and 'chronologically snobbish' rejection of the old tales, legends, and myths precisely because of their connection with the numinous; and on the other hand, an embracing of the earthy aspects of the tales while rejecting (or at least skeptically questioning) the numinous.

I think that Tolkien's response to such a feminist critique as you describe would be not unlike his remark regarding Edmund Wilson's review to LotR back from the '50s. He would say, based on that comment, that an emphasis on sex and bodily fluids is essentially adolescent. Our own culture's current obsession with such things bespeaks a cultural degradation that is not celebratory.

Tolkien is not 'the Law' on Fairy stories, but what he says needs to be dealt with seriously rather than merely dismissed as 'just one perspective', precisely because LotR has been so influential amongst publishers and readers since its publishing. This is even more the case because he and his fellow Inklings were attempting something unique.

I feel at a loss, frankly, to adequately describe what it is I'm trying to say, but it is momentous and important, and I feel that we are in danger of missing it by concentrating on aspects of folk tale that Tolkien himself set aside.

[Lalwendë]

Now, that's a bit naughty because those who write about folklore and indeed know quite a lot about it, are not polarised in that way. Not at all. Indeed in OFS you will find that Tolkien himself dislikes Bowdlerisation, and would rather they stayed in their true 'adult' form. He did not set the aspects some readers are uncomfortable with 'aside' from his view of Fairy Tales.

In fact, and this has been asked before, was LotR and The Sil (the Hobbit is excluded from this) Faerie Tale at all? Was it not something different, i.e. myth? If indeed it was, then being 'high, purged of the gross' would fit perfectly.

On the point of 'cultural degradation' arising from concern with bodily matters, ahem, I'm going to resist giving you a lecture on how the culture of ordinary people, particularly women, has always included lots of this, as far back as we can identify 'culture'. It might be distasteful to some men (and women), and indeed we might ask if it was distasteful to Tolkien (and it's a fair question, and if indeed it was, then I am not saying if this is right or wrong). By the by, Tolkien's work might not have that much sex in it, but it is certainly there (in extreme forms such as incest) and he does not shy away from the Gothic and horror.

Oh, and another good writer on Fairy Tales - Maria Tatar. They had a book with an intro by her lying around in one of our art galleries today and it was very interesting stuff.