The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum


Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page

Go Back   The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum > Middle-Earth Discussions > The Books
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-18-2006, 05:56 AM   #81
davem
Illustrious Ulair
 
davem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,256
davem is battling Black Riders on Weathertop.davem is battling Black Riders on Weathertop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bęthberry
I find this observation fascinating, as I think this could be the first time that anyone here has put forth the idea of distance between Tolkien's view, as author or as narrator, and his characters' view. We have the external evidence that he did change or alter Galadriel's character so that she came more and more to represent his developing theological ideas and we also have Tolkien's letters which show that he did not idealise women in real life.

What can be gained in our understanding of LotR if we examine it to see if the story in fact does not support Gimli's adoration of Galadriel?
Its certianly significant that when (predominantly male) characters 'fall in love' with a Lady it is love at first sight - they don't actually know the Lady as a person - she is a symbol of beauty, of perfection, which she embodies for the male (Frodo, Gimli, Aragorn, Beren). In a real sense then, they don't 'love' her at all, because they don't know her. It is perhaps, in the Jungian sense, an 'Anima' projection. She symbolises the Other, the Unknown, the Unconscious, 'Mystery'. I think this is why sexual desire is absent - or more probably is subsumed into overwhelming feelings of awe, of 'worship'.

Yet, in LotR at least, Galadriel the woman is not 'worthy' of Gimli's worship - she is an unforgiven rebel, one who sought power & control over others. She is actually an Elf-Woman, clad in simple white - something Frodo comes to see after the incident at the Mirror, but which Gimli never does see. Frodo's 'projection' is withdrawn at that point & he sees her for what she truly is - Gimli's projection never is.

For Tolkien, however, Galadriel is always an Elf-Woman, clad in simple white - he never 'worships' her. In showing the withdrawing of Frodo's projection onto her he makes plain who & what she is, & tells us plainly that there is something else going on with Gimli.
davem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2006, 09:06 AM   #82
littlemanpoet
Itinerant Songster
 
littlemanpoet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The Edge of Faerie
Posts: 7,072
littlemanpoet is battling Black Riders on Weathertop.littlemanpoet is battling Black Riders on Weathertop.
Good thoughts, davem. This tells me that Tolkien was well acquainted with the romantic man's idealisation, and in control of it in his writing.
littlemanpoet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2006, 12:12 PM   #83
davem
Illustrious Ulair
 
davem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,256
davem is battling Black Riders on Weathertop.davem is battling Black Riders on Weathertop.
It seems as if Eowyn's 'love' for Aragorn is of the same kind. Interestingly this doesn't seem to be the case with her love for Faramir - though it does seem to happen with Faramir for Eowyn - he compares her to a flower (which Aragorn does too - yet with Aragorn it is a flower stricken dead by frost). Her reluctance to accept Faramir's suit seems to imply that this kind of initial 'projection' is the rule for love relationships. She doesn't feel an instantly overwhelming 'love' for him, so its as if she thinks there can be nothing between them.

Yet, as I said, Tolkien is a very detatched observer of the Lovers' characters. He understands the overwhelming effect of this kind of idealisation of the beloved on the lover, yet he never presents the beloved in this light for the reader. Maybe what we are seeing is an expression of the conflict he experienced in himself between hope & pessimism which we are told was his natural state much of the time - or maybe it is his 'ironic' comment on the medieval 'Courtly Love' literature, but I wonder.....

Of course, he experienced the same kind of thing with Edith (she was his Luthien as he put it, yet he must also have realised that she was 'simply' a woman). I suspect that one reason Tolkien speaks to us (& appalls others) is this very acknowledgement of the lover's idealisation of the beloved. Modern authors seem (apart from the writers of Mills & Boon/Barbara Cartland' type 'Romantic' novels) desperate to give us a 'detached', realistic view of their protagonists, to the extent that they deny this kind of idealisation of the beloved on the part of the lover - or if they do show it it is almost always depicted as foolishness or the cause of coming disaster for one or both parties. Tolkien acknowledges the simple reality of this 'idealisation' while at the same time making it clear that it has nothing to do with the reality of who the beloved is.

Now I'm thinking of William's 'Romantic Theology', but that's a whole other tangent...
davem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2006, 02:55 PM   #84
Bęthberry
Cryptic Aura
 
Bęthberry's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 6,159
Bęthberry is wading through snowdrifts on Redhorn.Bęthberry is wading through snowdrifts on Redhorn.Bęthberry is wading through snowdrifts on Redhorn.Bęthberry is wading through snowdrifts on Redhorn.
Ring

Quote:
Originally Posted by davem
Its certianly significant that when (predominantly male) characters 'fall in love' with a Lady it is love at first sight - they don't actually know the Lady as a person - she is a symbol of beauty, of perfection, which she embodies for the male (Frodo, Gimli, Aragorn, Beren). In a real sense then, they don't 'love' her at all, because they don't know her. It is perhaps, in the Jungian sense, an 'Anima' projection. She symbolises the Other, the Unknown, the Unconscious, 'Mystery'. I think this is why sexual desire is absent - or more probably is subsumed into overwhelming feelings of awe, of 'worship'.

Yet, in LotR at least, Galadriel the woman is not 'worthy' of Gimli's worship - she is an unforgiven rebel, one who sought power & control over others. She is actually an Elf-Woman, clad in simple white - something Frodo comes to see after the incident at the Mirror, but which Gimli never does see. Frodo's 'projection' is withdrawn at that point & he sees her for what she truly is - Gimli's projection never is.

For Tolkien, however, Galadriel is always an Elf-Woman, clad in simple white - he never 'worships' her. In showing the withdrawing of Frodo's projection onto her he makes plain who & what she is, & tells us plainly that there is something else going on with Gimli.
This is a fascinating view, davem, and a very seductive one. However, like many theories, it is one which cannot fit all the details.

How would, for instance, this idea of the projected Jungian anima fit Gilgamesh? You are positing a sublimation of sexuality here which accords with the story at hand, but is this sublimation in accord with Jung? I don't know Jung well enough to say if you are retooling his idea to suit this story or not.

Also, you seem to conflate the Galadriel of The Silm with the Galadriel of LotR. The latter has much less of the unforgiven rebel in her. Even with the hints of the Legendarium in LotR, I'm not sure it is appropriate to "bring in" those details. A bit too much analysis?

Furthermore, Aragorn will not contenance any harsh words about Galadriel--"Speak no evil of..." What would it suggest if the future king never rids himself of this 'projection' while Frodo does? For your idea--and it is a very attractive idea--to be fully at play one would expect to see Aragorn also come to this position. Or perhaps this is a problem with so many heroes? We must wait until later to see how Aragorn handles his Lady?

Nor do I think it is quite in agreement with the textual descriptions of Galadriel to say that for Tolkien she is always just an elf-woman. Until the scene with the mirror, the text, if I am not mistaken, fully invites the reader to partake of the mystification of the Lady which these males fall under (or into?). What changes in the Mirror scene is Galadriel herself, who allows that in Frodo she has met her match in courtesy at least. It is she who refuses the offer to be loved by all and who, in rejecting the Ring, allows Frodo to see the plain elf woman.

The Mirror scene is remarkable, for it is meant to be an encounter with the goddess. The symbolism of the round bowl, the water, the seeing-beyond, the roiling waters turning to steam which curl around the edges of the open bowl, all suggest a highly charged experience between the two. And Galadriel is changed as is Frodo, who sees the eye of the One. The goddess is unthroned to become simply "a living vision of that which has already been left far behind by the flowing stream of Time".

In Tolkien's vision, the female principle, in standing in for elves, is the one reduced, diminished. That much of the development of monotheism Tolkien seems to have recognised.
__________________
I’ll sing his roots off. I’ll sing a wind up and blow leaf and branch away.

Last edited by Bęthberry; 07-18-2006 at 04:41 PM. Reason: removed previous edit as more appropriate for 'nother post
Bęthberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2006, 03:18 PM   #85
davem
Illustrious Ulair
 
davem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,256
davem is battling Black Riders on Weathertop.davem is battling Black Riders on Weathertop.
Its also possible that Galadriel deliberately acted so as to break Frodo's Anima projection on her - he must be shown that he faces not just real threats but 'Glamour' in the form of 'Powers, Thrones & Dominions', To do that she must make herself a 'Goddess' in his eyes, a monster, manifestation of the Numinious - & then shatter the image, reveal the truth underneath. What Frodo learns is that there is no 'SuperWoman (or -Man) who can take it all away & let him go back to his comfortable life in the Shire. The 'Goddess' is a delusion, one that can inspire, raise up (Gimli, Legolas & her own folk), but Frodo's need is different, so she has to shatter the illusion he has about her. I'm not sure that she hadn't already faced her own crisis some while back. But that's just my reading.

As to your point about Aragorn, I'm not sure Aragorn is projecting anything onto Galadriel - if he is projecting his Anima on anyone it is Arwen. However I wouldn't push this idea too far with Aragorn

I don't think I am bringing in the Galadriel of the Sil in this. At the time of LotR Galadriel was one of the Noldor, & all the Noldor were 'rebels', 'fallen' & unforgiven (Appendix A 'The Numenorean Kings') . I'm deliberately focussing on Galadriel as we know her from LotR. And as to Gilgamesh, its too long since I read it, & I've just started on The Paston Letters, so it'll have to wait a bit
davem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2006, 05:00 PM   #86
Bęthberry
Cryptic Aura
 
Bęthberry's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 6,159
Bęthberry is wading through snowdrifts on Redhorn.Bęthberry is wading through snowdrifts on Redhorn.Bęthberry is wading through snowdrifts on Redhorn.Bęthberry is wading through snowdrifts on Redhorn.
Quote:
Originally Posted by davem
The 'Goddess' is a delusion, one that can inspire, raise up (Gimli, Legolas & her own folk), but Frodo's need is different, so she has to shatter the illusion he has about her
This seems a likely place for a final comment to this chapter of the discussion: it is well to recall that, in this unquaintly substition of the gaze (O Fordim, where art thou?), the only injunction is "Look but don't touch."

Quote:
Originally Posted by lmp
this thread is . . . supposed to be about . . . what's in the spirit of Tolkien and what's not.
Is that spirit as opposed to letter? And does it include parody?
__________________
I’ll sing his roots off. I’ll sing a wind up and blow leaf and branch away.

Last edited by Bęthberry; 07-18-2006 at 08:03 PM.
Bęthberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2006, 07:21 PM   #87
littlemanpoet
Itinerant Songster
 
littlemanpoet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The Edge of Faerie
Posts: 7,072
littlemanpoet is battling Black Riders on Weathertop.littlemanpoet is battling Black Riders on Weathertop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bb
Quote:
Originally Posted by lmp
this thread is . . . supposed to be about . . . what's in the spirit of Tolkien and what's not.
Is that spirit as opposed to letter? And does it include parody?
I confess that I fail to comprehend the import of your questions. Your erudition, as has often been the case, confounds me.
littlemanpoet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2006, 08:34 PM   #88
mark12_30
Stormdancer of Doom
 
mark12_30's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Elvish singing is not a thing to miss, in June under the stars
Posts: 4,407
mark12_30 has been trapped in the Barrow!
Send a message via AIM to mark12_30 Send a message via Yahoo to mark12_30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bęthberry
Is that spirit as opposed to letter?

And does it include parody?
Hmmm. Did Tolkien write parody...? How shall we qualify Giles?

And with regards to Spirit vs Letter, my reaction would be-- Perhaps neither; Perhaps either; Perhaps both. If both then it calls us higher still. Or as Lewis said "Further up and further in".

I think it depends on what you are writing. If you are writing something as an addendum to Tolkien's existing writings, then IMO you are oblidged to strive for canonicity as best you can both of spirit AND letter. By letter I mean fitting in the details to the best of your ability. And if you are writing something to fill in something he only hinted at and gave very few connections to, then your freedom is increased, and you are less obliged to follow his work "to the letter."

If you are writing outside the legendarium, which I suspect is also included in this discussion, then spirit becomes the primary thing. At which point I would ask, why worry about the spirit of Tolkien, really? Write what is in your heart; if your heart is full of light, so will the fruit of your work be. The whole thing goes to a higher plane.
__________________
...down to the water to see the elves dance and sing upon the midsummer's eve.
mark12_30 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2006, 09:54 PM   #89
Parmawen
Haunting Spirit
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Stuck in the center of Spooky Hollow...
Posts: 75
Parmawen has just left Hobbiton.
I think there's a big difference between writing in the spirit of Tolkien and just plain mirroring his work. For instance...writing in the spirit of Tolkien is incorporating his subtle nuances and sense of humour into your work, almost as if Tolkien himself could have written it. Unlike using his plot lines or ideas to suit one's own work.

For example, my brother claims Terry Brook's The Sword of Shanara (i think that's correct) is "writing just like Tolkien" but in reality, it's a similar story (and still a good one)...but the writing lacks the characteristics of Tolkien.

I think a lot of stories today are given that description...but I've yet to see a book that when I read, I immediately think of Tolkien or could ever mistake as his own writing.
__________________
I sang of leaves, of leaves of gold, and leaves of gold there grew.
Of wind I sang, I wind there came, and in the branches blew...
-Galadriel
Parmawen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2006, 08:49 AM   #90
littlemanpoet
Itinerant Songster
 
littlemanpoet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The Edge of Faerie
Posts: 7,072
littlemanpoet is battling Black Riders on Weathertop.littlemanpoet is battling Black Riders on Weathertop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark12_30
I would ask, why worry about the spirit of Tolkien, really?
Well, I'd quibble over 'worry', but that's minor. To your question: because he did something unique, profound, and important that I believe is so far, but should not be, a lone tree with no forest having grown from its seeds.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mark
Write what is in your heart; if your heart is full of light, so will the fruit of your work be. The whole thing goes to a higher plane.
Ah but the heart is a dicey thing, and how full of light it is depends on a few key factors; and even after that is ascertained, it may be that what is in your heart is not after all a seed from that same tree, though it may be good seed.
littlemanpoet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2006, 10:11 AM   #91
mark12_30
Stormdancer of Doom
 
mark12_30's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Elvish singing is not a thing to miss, in June under the stars
Posts: 4,407
mark12_30 has been trapped in the Barrow!
Send a message via AIM to mark12_30 Send a message via Yahoo to mark12_30
Quote:
Originally Posted by littlemanpoet
Well, I'd quibble over 'worry', but that's minor. To your question: because he did something unique, profound, and important that I believe is so far, but should not be, a lone tree with no forest having grown from its seeds.

Ah but the heart is a dicey thing, and how full of light it is depends on a few key factors; and even after that is ascertained, it may be that what is in your heart is not after all a seed from that same tree, though it may be good seed.
OK. I grant you your points. But I think that there are times for writing to (in essence) please Tolkien; a valid goal (eg. Tapestry) and there are times for writing to please the master of your soul. Which do you aim for when, and why? And I would argue that the second is a more valid pursuit than the first, unless one is specifically aiming to add to Tolkien's legendarium. If one is creating one's own legendarium (as you are) then you are not beholden to Tolkien for guidance or example; and while you may strive in that direction, the work that you produce will be purer if you strive to write as you are called, rather than to write as he was called.

If the seed that is in your heart is not from that same tree, still, who gave you the seed? And should you challenge the source-- or should you nurture that seed with all the skill that you have, and let the seed produce what it was meant to produce? To stretch the analogy: If Tolkien's tree was a mighty beech, and your seed is an apple seed, are you doing your seed justice if you strive to imitate the beech? Or pick any other seed. Pine, hemlock, maple, oak. Still a proud member of the forest; mighty in its own right; and deserves to be cultivated as what it is, not as what it is not.

Taking that thought to its logical extreme, then I would suggest that writing in the spirit of Tolkien is to profoundly and deeply cultivate the seed in your own heart-- illumination, real water, good soil. See Psalm 1.
__________________
...down to the water to see the elves dance and sing upon the midsummer's eve.
mark12_30 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2006, 10:10 AM   #92
littlemanpoet
Itinerant Songster
 
littlemanpoet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The Edge of Faerie
Posts: 7,072
littlemanpoet is battling Black Riders on Weathertop.littlemanpoet is battling Black Riders on Weathertop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark12_30
If the seed that is in your heart is not from that same tree, still, who gave you the seed? And should you challenge the source-- or should you nurture that seed with all the skill that you have, and let the seed produce what it was meant to produce? To stretch the analogy: If Tolkien's tree was a mighty beech, and your seed is an apple seed, are you doing your seed justice if you strive to imitate the beech? Or pick any other seed. Pine, hemlock, maple, oak. Still a proud member of the forest; mighty in its own right; and deserves to be cultivated as what it is, not as what it is not.
All valid points; if the two are not the same. And if they are the same, there is no dissonance.

Quote:
Taking that thought to its logical extreme, then I would suggest that writing in the spirit of Tolkien is to profoundly and deeply cultivate the seed in your own heart-- illumination, real water, good soil. See Psalm 1.
Yes and no.

You see, part of what writing in the spirit of Tolkien has to do with, is love of language and lore; another part is cherishing aspects of western culture that the west has largely set aside, namely Christian world view and Northern culture-stock (including its myths and legends). Meanwhile the Latin/Greek aspects of western culture are not derided, but understood as imports. (YOu may wish to ask me: Why is Latin/Greek culture-stock an import and Christian world view not? ... because the former is a matter of the mind whereas the latter is a matter of the heart; the latter goes deeper; and Northern culture stock is in our heart already.)
littlemanpoet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2006, 01:52 PM   #93
Lalwendë
A Mere Boggart
 
Lalwendë's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: under the bed
Posts: 4,814
Lalwendë is battling Black Riders on Weathertop.Lalwendë is battling Black Riders on Weathertop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark12_30

I think it depends on what you are writing. If you are writing something as an addendum to Tolkien's existing writings, then IMO you are oblidged to strive for canonicity as best you can both of spirit AND letter. By letter I mean fitting in the details to the best of your ability. And if you are writing something to fill in something he only hinted at and gave very few connections to, then your freedom is increased, and you are less obliged to follow his work "to the letter."

If you are writing outside the legendarium, which I suspect is also included in this discussion, then spirit becomes the primary thing. At which point I would ask, why worry about the spirit of Tolkien, really? Write what is in your heart; if your heart is full of light, so will the fruit of your work be. The whole thing goes to a higher plane.
I agree with all this! If you are writing fan fic, RPGs etc, then there should be at least an effort to reflect Tolkien's ideas and the tone of the world he created, even if you are creating the types of characters and situations that he did not tackle. There's even room to deal with morally ambiguous characters as Tolkien himself created fascinating characters such as Boromir, Denethor, Eol and last but not least, Gollum. There's room for humour, rom for tragedy and room for horror. All of which can be played with inside a ready made framework.

But when it comes to creating your own worlds, this is the time when its probably wise not to think about Tolkien too much. His influence is overbearing and when the writer thinks about the extent and complexity of his creation, that influence is stifling and daunting. I think the only way a writer should try to emulate Tolkien is by doing what he did and turning that churning mass of myth and story and experience that we carry around in our heads into unique creations.

There cannot be another Tolkien, just as there cannot be another Hardy or Plath or Blake. There can be a You though.
__________________
Gordon's alive!
Lalwendë is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:58 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.