tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5746173806126403959.post6247286064386667540..comments2023-11-07T06:20:12.181-08:00Comments on Tolkien: Medieval and Modern: Tolkien’s Style: Fluidity between the Humble and the Sublime"Tolkien: Medieval and Modern"http://www.blogger.com/profile/04348913969813157482noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5746173806126403959.post-82985082614397074022014-04-19T10:56:06.830-07:002014-04-19T10:56:06.830-07:00Continuing on the topic of Tolkien’s interweaving ...Continuing on the topic of Tolkien’s interweaving of the low and the high, I’m wondering to what degree this hallmark of a particularly “Christian” style is actually embedded in the way the concept of the elf-friend structures The Lord of the Rings specifically and fantasy and “fairy stories” in general. In “From Elfland to Poughkeepsie,” LeGuin seems to echo Tolkien’s characterization of the “perilous realm” and the necessity of the elf-friend without explicitly citing it; in explaining what fantasy is, she writes, “Fantasy….is a real wilderness, and those who go there should not feel too safe. And their guides, the writers of fantasy, should take their responsibilities seriously” (79). These guides are responsible for conveying their readers to the perilous realm while simultaneously impressing upon them the tenuous, liminal nature of outsiders’ participation in Faërie–a task which in itself seems to necessitate the deliberate foregrounding of the contrast between the earthly and the magical. For both Tolkien and LeGuin, the feeling of disorientation is integral to the experience of fantasy–to recognize that we are no longer in Poughkeepsie and that the inhabitants of the new, perilous realm are both potentially dangerous and “not primarily concerned with us” (“On Fairy Stories” 38). We’ve now discussed the ways in which Tolkien marshals a host of linguistic styles within The Lord of the Rings to convey the depth of its universe and especially to detail the complexity of the hobbits’ interactions with vastly different beings in the perilous realm beyond the Shire. While Auerbach identifies the fusing of the low and the high as characteristic of a specifically Christian style, it seems that this practice (whether done in the same way as Tolkien achieves or no) is in fact elemental to the creation of the kind of fantasy LeGuin argues is worth reading. It is the conflict and communion of the two that makes fantasy compelling, and ultimately “real” (92). <br /><br />--Ariadne"Tolkien: Medieval and Modern"https://www.blogger.com/profile/04348913969813157482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5746173806126403959.post-8145627539452117282014-04-19T01:39:14.321-07:002014-04-19T01:39:14.321-07:00Dear AK,
Thanks for your vigorous defense of Tolki...Dear AK,<br />Thanks for your vigorous defense of Tolkien's style in LoTR as 'one style despite all the variances it contains' against his critics who dislike the perceived mix of styles. I am intrigued by the idea that Tolkien's style - here perhaps using 'style' in more abstract terms than the critics used it - necessitates the "transitions in speech" and "changes" in prose and poetry because Tolkien was aiming at depicting the mix of the sublime and the humble, "the ennoblement of the ignoble." But could not one also say that Tolkien does vary styles for this same purpose? Why is it necessary to maintain it is a unitary style to keep the ennoblement theme?<br /><br />Secondly, it is a good point to remember the framing device and point us back to the Red Book! Rather than 'translator' Tolkien "drew" the LoTR account "mainly from the Red Book" (Note on Shire Records, 2nd paragraph). How should we be reading the style of the LoTR with the varying reports and documents of the Red Book in the background? In other words, how might this framing device change our reading of the LoTR's style?<br />Thanks for picking up on an alternate viewpoint here.<br />~RobertUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16340002157728895236noreply@blogger.com