The
works of Tolkien are a body of work which, even more than most, seem in some
way inseparable from their creator. While one could easily argue that any
author puts something of themselves in their writing, it seems that in some peculiar
way Tolkien has gone a step further, and is worked more inextricably into his
story than most. On the very first page of The Lord of the Rings, almost the
first text in the book, is two lines of Tengwar, which translated read “of
Westmarch by John Ronald Reuel Tolkien. Herein is set forth the history of-the
War of-the Ring and the Return of the King as seen by the hobbits.” While this
is by far the most obvious way in which Tolkien has worked himself into his
secondary reality, the more one reads of Tolkien’s works (especially those
distinct from The Lord of the Rings itself) and private writings the more clear
it becomes that Tolkien may have come into his stories in more subtle ways.
Many elements of Tolkien’s stories
seem to bear direct or indirect resemblance to elements of Tolkien’s own life.
This is especially true of the opening chapters of The Lost Road, the
protagonist of which, a man named Albion, seems to share many characteristics
with Tolkien himself. Even at an early age Alboin displays an intense interest in
languages, and as a young man studies many of the same languages that Tolkien
himself studied at that age, and which proved so formative for the languages
that he created throughout his life. These same languages, which Tolkien often refers
to as something he has been working on as long as he can remember are also
something which connects him to Albion, who spends most of his life developing a
language which he refers to as Elf-Latin, or Eressëan. Similarly, the process by
which Alboin uncovers this language (and it does seem to be an uncovering,
rather than an inventing) resembles quite closely the process which Tolkien
describes in many of his letters. He often describes his stories as coming to
him as if they already existed, and it was his task simply to put the pieces
together—exactly what Alboin is shown to do. Specifically, Alboin draws these
stories and languages from his dreams, which are a recurring theme in Tolkien’s
works and feature prominently not only in The Lost Road but in The Notion Club
Papers as well. Moreover given the frequency with which Tolkien mentions the
impact on his stories of his unconscious (again the footnote regarding the
creation of the ents comes to mind) it is worth considering that dreams may
have had a similar significance for Tolkien. In fact, we know of at least one
example from Tolkien’s letters of a recurring dream, the image of a towering
wave, which was the initial inspiration for his story of the fall of Númenor.
Having noted this many similarities
between Tolkien and his character Albion, it is difficult not to consider to
what extent Tolkien’s works may be autobiographical, or how much he has (either
consciously or unconsciously) written himself not only into the outer framework
of the stories but into their very substance. While these similarities may be
the most obvious based on the material mentioned so far, there are other
similarities which have been touched on. For example, one might note the
similarity between the father-son relationships of Alboin and Audoin and of JRR
Tolkien and his son Christopher, who shared his father’s dream of the great
wave and who has continued his father’s work for many years. In the case of
Albion, Christopher even notes in his annotations of the story that the
character bears a striking, nearly autobiographical resemblance to his father.
Elements of Tolkien’s life seem to have worked their way into The Lord of the
Rings as well, as Tolkien mentions in his letters giving Faramir the same dream
which he and his son shared, and as in one letter that he wrote he describes
himself as “a Hobbit (in all but size).” (letter 213, Letters)
As tempting as it may be, however,
to take this approach and examine in what ways Tolkien’s life, experiences, and
dispositions have shaped the world or taken on autobiographical tones, one must
also consider how appropriate of a reading this is of the works. One the one
hand, as we have discussed there seems to be a very real way in which Tolkien
himself is an Elf Friend as much as Frodo or Alboin. In this way just like
other elf friends of note Tolkien is not merely story teller or medium, but simultaneously
the framing device and a crucial part of the story itself. As Verlyn Flieger says
in her essay “The Footsteps of Ӕlfwine,” “by this time the ‘book’ as such, and
the elf-friend character(s) are no longer a simple frame. Not only are they
deeply woven into the fabric of the story, they have in fact become the story.”
(p 194, Tolkien’s Legendarium)
From this perspective then, it is
clear that the impact of Tolkien’s “character,” so to speak, is just as significant
as that of Frodo or any other elf friend. To ignore it seems frankly
ridiculous. However, in a letter to Deborah Webster, written in 1958 Tolkien
expresses quite the opposite opinion.
I do not like giving 'facts' about myself other than 'dry' ones (which
anyway are quite as relevant to my books as any other more Juicy details). Not
simply for personal reasons; but also because I object to the contemporary
trend in criticism, with its excessive interest in the details of the lives of
authors and artists. They only distract attention from an author's works (if
the works are in fact worthy of attention), and end, as one now often sees, in
becoming the main interest. But only one's guardian Angel, or indeed God
Himself, could unravel the real relationship between personal facts and an
author's works. Not the author himself (though he knows more than any
investigator), and certainly not so-called 'psychologists'. (Letter 213, Letters)
Faced with these two opposing ideas about the significance of the author
in interpretation of the work, the reader is then left to their own devices and
considerations. While reading Tolkien’s writings on languages and dreams, both
in his stories and in his own life, it is made excessively clear that there are
many connections between Tolkien’s stories and his experiences and tastes.
However, it is still unclear what if anything this says about the stories
themselves, or how they should be read. The role of the author in their
creation is then something which any devoted reader of Tolkien must carefully
consider, especially if they intend to follow the path of the sub-creator and
become an author in their own right.
--EF
3 comments:
Dear EF,
Thanks for an engaging and insightful (though ultimately unsatisfying!) post. You nicely raised the theme of Tolkien’s inclusion and role within the framing device (both for LoTR and the Hobbit, actually). In this way, “Tolkien has worked himself into his secondary reality.” (Does “Leaf by Niggle” also hint at Tolkien’s desire to enter his subcreation?)
To substantiate this theme, you nicely supply the parallels between Alboin and young Tolkien, and the repeated recurrent dream (Tolkien, Alboin, Faramir, Christopher).
From these parallels you then moved to the question of whether Tolkien’s works might be ‘autobiographical.’ (However, is ‘autobiographical’ really the only way to describe Tolkien’s hints at self-inclusion within his worlds? There is something of “autobiographical resemblance,” but are there no other ways to name this similarity than ‘autobiography?’)
After building the case for the biographical links to his fiction, you nicely set up the tension: Tolkien himself disavowed such readings (in Letter 213).
But the lack of (attempts at) resolution, then, is why this reader found your ending unsatisfying. After so nicely building up an (apparent?) conflict between Tolkien’s denials and the evident links to his biography, there is no resolution, suggested or implied. You wrote: “Faced with these two opposing ideas about the significance of the author in interpretation of the work, the reader is then left to their own devices and considerations.”
I recognize you may not have the answer at hand, or many not have time to develop it. But please come up with ideas, hypotheses, or suggested directions or unlikely directions. Leaving the problem (that you so careful constructed) to the ‘readers’ own devices’ is unsatisfying because it seems to amount to shrugging one’s shoulders and dismissing the question. (Or did I misunderstand something?)
Commenters! Can you help us?
~Robert / Radegundus the Green
Frankly, I agree with the OP's confusion. It seems extremely obvious to me that Alboin IS Tolkien and his son IS Christopher. This is not a matter of inferring metaphors, this is about as clear as it gets. However, in the Letters, Tolkien implies that he generally does not insert himself into his stories--knowing Tolkien's own life story will not help readers understand his works any better. This doesn't make much sense when looking at The Lost Road--it is clearly referencing Tolkien's life. In LOTR, though, and other fairy stories, it does make more sense. He outright states that readers who think he is Gandalf are misguided, and I believe he implies therefore that he is not any character in the story. I argue that all of Tolkien's works cannot be taken as a single work to which all of the same rules apply. Just because he places himself as Alboin, that doesn't mean that he must also insert himself into the Lord of the Rings or Farmer Giles or anything else.
Anna M
I think you have outlined a most common difficulty one encounters when reading Tolkien not just as a random stroller through his meticulously-constructed and poetic universe but as a careful reader wishing to approach his work the way he wishes one to. Both his literary creative process (In Notion Club Papers, Lowdham repeatedly dreams of Numenor through its language, which is reflective of Tolkien’s own creative attitude--viewing his legendarium as a gradual discovery or revelation, based on language, rather than invention) and his personal life (Beren and Luthien are reminiscent of himself and Edith.) in the primary world are transfered into his secondary world somehow, yet we cannot simplistically call the latter “autobiographical”. I suspect that Tolkien would hate having his work deemed “autobiographical” as much as, if not more than, “allegorical”. Indeed it is a long-standing concern among authors to be considered not for the universal value in one’s works but for the personal experiences that allegedly produced them.
I think your point on Tolkien being an Elf-friend could be elaborated to address this difficulty. To Tolkien, the relationship between the primary world and the secondary world is not simply that of projection. Their boundary is blurred. For example, the boundary between the secondary world (Lowdham’s works) within a secondary reality (The Notion Club)--shall we call it a tertiary world--and the secondary world is so indefinite that Akallabeth in the first coincides with a storm in the second. The Elf-friends thus serve as a bridge, not by projecting their experiences of one world into the other but by being simultaneously inside both. Therefore his experiences in both worlds must converge. For by projection we imply that one is less real than the other, while to Tolkien this is clearly untrue.
Sophie Zhuang
Post a Comment