The Fall of Arthur

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Originally Posted by davem

Any reference to Williams' Arthurian poems in the book? I've often wondered if one reason Tolkien left FoA was because of Taliesin Through Logres. Apparently Tolkien dropped FoA around 1937 & 'Taliesin' was published in 1938. Lewis & Williams were corresponding from, what, 1936 so would he have read TTL & made Tolkien aware of it?

Or is this all covered in the book?

Tolkien had never met Williams at the time Arthur was written (1933-34)

[davem]

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hicklin

Tolkien had never met Williams at the time Arthur was written (1933-34)

A) I knew that, and

B) that wasn't one of the questions I asked.

May I assume CT doesn't mention Williams' work at all? Would Tolkien not have brought up his own poem on Arthur when Williams was reading from RotSS during Inklings meetings?

[Faramir Jones]

I've just bought it, and will let people know what I think.

[Aiwendil]

Originally Posted by Davem

May I assume CT doesn't mention Williams' work at all? Would Tolkien not have brought up his own poem on Arthur when Williams was reading from RotSS during Inklings meetings?

I don't recall any mention of Williams, no.

As for the possibility of Williams's work being a reason that Tolkien abandoned the poem - I suppose one can't rule that possibility out, but it's worth noting that although Tolkien stopped working on the poem after the 1930s, he referred to it in a letter of 1955 saying that he still hoped to finish it. It seems to me more likely that it was the beginning of his work on a sequel to The Hobbit in 1937 that led to the abandonment of "The Fall of Arthur".

[davem]

Originally Posted by Aiwendil

I don't recall any mention of Williams, no.

As for the possibility of Williams's work being a reason that Tolkien abandoned the poem - I suppose one can't rule that possibility out, but it's worth noting that although Tolkien stopped working on the poem after the 1930s, he referred to it in a letter of 1955 saying that he still hoped to finish it. It seems to me more likely that it was the beginning of his work on a sequel to The Hobbit in 1937 that led to the abandonment of "The Fskids tf Arthur".

I do seem to recall reading (Carpenter's Inklings?) that Tolkien hated Williams' Arthurian poems. It would be odd if he didn't bring up his own attempts during meetings - especially if he hadn't abandoned FoA altogether. I do wonder whether Williams' publication of his Arthurian poems didn't have an effect on Tolkien's decision not to pick up the work again during the war. It was clearly very significant to Williams and maybe Tolkien felt he would be 'stepping on Williams' toes' if he continued. Whatever, it seems odd that CT wouldn't even mention Williams' greatest work even in passing, given the common subject matter - not to mention the amazing coincidence that both of them happened to hit on the idea of writing an epic poem on the subject at the same time.

[Aiwendil]

Originally Posted by Davem

Whatever, it seems odd that CT wouldn't even mention Williams' greatest work even in passing, given the common subject matter - not to mention the amazing coincidence that both of them happened to hit on the idea of writing an epic poem on the subject at the same time.

Well, without any evidence linking the two works, anything CT might have said would have been pure speculation. And in his commentary on the Arthurian legends, he makes a point of only discussing the chronicle tradition of the 12th-15th centuries, the works to which 'The Fall of Arthur' bears the closest relation (rather understandably, I think; any attempt to give even a cursory summary of the entire corpus of Arthurian literature would have made the book many times as long).

[jallanite]

In Humphrey Carpenter’s The Inklings on page 123 and following there is a poem by J. R. R. Tolkien written about Charles Williams. In this poem Tolkien mentions his joy in Williams’ wisdom and virtues and his companionship. But Tolkien also makes it quite plain that Tolkien did not very much like Williams’ Arthurian poems.

Tolkien writes:

Geodisy say rather; for many a ‘fen’
he wrote, and chapters bogged in tangled rhymes,
and has surveyed Europa’s lands and climes,
dividing her from P’o-L’u’s crawling slimes,
in her diving buttocks, breast, and head
(to say no fouler thing), where I instead,
dull-eyed, can only see a watershed,
a plain, an island, or a mountain-chain.

In short Tolkien did not appreciate Williams’ geographical allegories, which is not surprising as, in general, Tolkien did not like allegories.

Tolkien also disliked Williams’ praise of Byzantium as an image of heaven where Tolkien only saw an enormous city famed for its slaves and eunuchs. For him Byzantium is rather a symbol “of Rule that strangles and of Laws that kill.”

Tolkien also did not much like what Williams had made of Taliessin, although in his poem Tolkien believes, wrongly, that the historical Taliesin “in the days of Cymbeline he wrought.” In fact the historical Taliesin flourished some time following the traditional Arthurian period and was a bard of King Urien of Rheged. At least Taliesin presents himself as such in the poems now accepted as authentic.

Christopher Tolkien in The Fall of Arthur does not mention anything of the very little that Tolkien wrote on Arthur elsewhere and I don’t see that any mention of such scraps would add much to his essays. These cover the traditions of Arthur which lie behind this poem and trace the development of the poem and give hints of where it was going.

The poem is traced mainly to Laȝamon’s Brut, the alliterative Morte Arthure, the stanzaic Morte Arthur, and Malory’s Le Morte d'Arthur, in short the main works written in Middle-English that cover the matter of Tolkien’s poem. Tolkien also invents a lot from his own imagination.

Christopher Tolkien indicates that his father's last work on The Fall of Arthur occurred in 1937 when he started work on The Lord of the Rings and seems to see that as the main reason why he did not return to it at that time; he had become absorbed in other matters.