Authorial Control and World Building

[PrinceOfTheHalflings]

Originally Posted by Alcuin

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_C._Clarke ...

Clarke served in the RAF in England during World War II. I do not know if he had any association with Tolkien; but perhaps there were friends in common.

Arthur C. Clarke and C.S. Lewis corresponded between 1943 and 1954 (some of the letters have been published: http://www.amazon.com/Narnia-Space-O.../dp/0743475186).

Clarke met C.S. Lewis, and Tolkien was also present at one meeting. They spent an afternoon at an Oxford pub, the Eastgate, discussing various matters. Tolkien certainly read some science-fiction, and no doubt at least read Clarke's Childhood's End (1953) because it was highly praised by Lewis.

This contains many of Lewis' comments regarding that particular novel:

https://schriftman.wordpress.com/200...solute-corker/

As I recall, Clarke thought highly of The Lord of The Rings - although I can't find a specific quote, other than a quote from him comparing Frank Herbert's Dune to The Lord Of The Rings that was on the back cover of the first paperback edition of Dune around 1970:

"DUNE seems to me unique among modern sf novels in the depth of characterization and the extraordinary detail of the world it creates. I know nothing comparable to it except THE LORD OF THE RINGS."

[Zigûr]

Originally Posted by PrinceOfTheHalflings

As I recall, Clarke thought highly of The Lord of The Rings - although I can't find a specific quote, other than a quote from him comparing Frank Herbert's Dune to The Lord Of The Rings that was on the back cover of the first paperback edition of Dune around 1970:

Also, in Clarke's 2010: Odyssey Two, Heywood Floyd references The Lord of the Rings when describing the surface of the moon Io, quoting part of the description of Orodruin:

Do you remember how I introduced you to The Lord of the Rings, when we were kids back at that Oxford conference? Well Io is Mordor: look up Part Three. There's a passage about "rivers of molten rock that wound their way . . . until they cooled and lay like twisted dragon-shapes vomited from the tormented earth." That's a perfect description: how did Tolkien know, a quarter century before anyone ever saw a picture of Io? Talk about Nature imitating Art.

I always thought that quote was a little odd from an intertextual point of view, because I feel as if Orodruin is meant to look obscene and horrifyingly grotesque, whereas Clarke seems to be trying to convey a more neutral impression of awe at natural phenomena.

To contribute something more on-topic, Professor Tolkien's personal interpretation of the themes of his work is interesting when it appears that he to an extent sees ideas of humility and moral necessity in The Lord of the Rings not as themes in themselves but rather components of his ideas about Fall, Mortality and the Machine. This may be something not unusual with creative people, however; it is always possible that there are ideas or even stories which seem very clear to them but have not necessarily been conveyed on paper in a way which every reader will notice. I think Professor Tolkien is a minor case; I've noticed more egregious examples in interviews where defensive writers (especially for television) seem to have swathes of additional characterisation and plotting in their heads that they have never conveyed to the audience, and become frustrated when the confused audience is revealed to not be composed of mind-readers!

[Kuruharan]

Originally Posted by Zigûr

To contribute something more on-topic, Professor Tolkien's personal interpretation of the themes of his work is interesting when it appears that he to an extent sees ideas of humility and moral necessity in The Lord of the Rings not as themes in themselves but rather components of his ideas about Fall, Mortality and the Machine. This may be something not unusual with creative people, however; it is always possible that there are ideas or even stories which seem very clear to them but have not necessarily been conveyed on paper in a way which every reader will notice.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. I think in the Letters, Tolkien was describing the underlying impulses that informed his story but where manifested imperfectly, or perhaps obscurely metaphorically, in the actual story itself.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

GLoB:

I think you're looking at the Machine/Magic issue a bit orthogonally, using "magic creatures" for Elves and Dwarves whereas "machines" means things that operate mechanically with cogs and gears, a primary-world frame of reference.

Think of Machines instead as "devices that harness the laws of physics for material ends"- given that in Tolkien's universe "magic" is one of the laws of physics. Elves and dragons are as natural as horses and men. In a universe so constituted, with what we call "magic" as one of the inherent forces of nature, one can build a tool or machine that uses heat, pressure, leverage, runes, spells, and/or enchantments: ultimately the issue is making a labor-saving device which alters physical reality according to one's desire, whether Grond or a Great Ring.

Magia/goetia is a bit different, since here Tolkien is talking about illusion or vision not actual physical effect. He's trying to distinguish the "deceits of the enemy"- illusions calculated to deceive, such as Sauron's trap for Gorlim - with "faerian drama" which is intended as Art even if thickheaded mortals confuse the effects as "real", and with things like the Mirror of Galadriel or the palantiri which present Truth even if in a confusing manner.

[Even that distinction isn't a bright line; the Dead Marshes could be seen as an exercise in Art according to a dark Sauronian aesthetic, whereas Finrod's "arts" disguising himself and Beren as Orcs were clearly aimed at deception]