On Fairy-Stories (Was Re: How did Orodruin work in the second age?)
Belba Grubb from Stock
think this Chesterton-Tolkien is fascinating and with much potential
for discussion.
Have just finished "On Fairy-Stories" again, and there is a great deal
to it that I won't go into just now as it merits a discussion not a
soliloquy. Suffice to say that JRRT mentions Chesterton three times:
1) with regard to children as an intended audience for fairy-stores (a
contemporaneous quote taken from GKC's "The Coloured Lands," published
in 1938);
2) Mooreeffoc, from a GKC essay on Dickens, though JRRT commented on
the limitation of such an approach in acting "as a time-telescope
focused on one spot" rather than a door to recovery of the sense of
wonder we once had regarding ordinary things; and
3) use of a Chesterton quote (from where and when, I don't know) to
illustrate the insignificance of some modern things, in JRRT's
example, electric street lights, when compared to something "more
permanent and fundamental...[l]ightning, for example."
However, there is much in Tolkien's speech that reminds me of things I
have read in Chesterton. And I just know GKC would have loved "The
old that is good does not wither; deep roots are not touched by the
frost."
What had really gotten me going on the whole business, however, was
comparing a quote from Akallabeth --
"'Avallone is vanished from the Earth and the Land of Aman
is taken away, and in the world of this present darkness they
cannot be found. Yet once they were, and therefore they still
are, in true being, and in the whole shape of the world as at
first it was devised.' ...the loremasters of Men said that a
Straight Road must still be, for those that were permitted to
find it. And they taught that, while the new world fell away,
the old road and the path of the memory of the West still
went on, as it were a mighty bridge invisible...."
with what GKC had to say at the very end of "Logic of Elfland":
We have all read in scientific books, and, indeed, in all
romances, the story of the man who has forgotten his name.
This man walks about the streets and can see and appreciate
everything; only he cannot remember who he is. Well, every man
is that man in the story. Every man has forgotten who he is.
One may understand the cosmos, but never the ego; the self is
more distant than any star. Thou shalt love the Lord the God;
but thou shalt not know thyself. We are all under the same
mental calamity; we have all forgotten our names. We have all
forgotten what we really are. All that we call common sense
and rationality and practicality and positivism only means
that for certain dead levels of our life we forgot that we
have forgotten. All that we call spirit and art and ecstasy
only means that for one awful instant we remember that we
forgot.
Tolkien's "[y]et once they were, and therefore they still are, in true
being, and in the whole shape of the world as at first it was devised"
and what he says about the path of memory (echoes, or more probably
premonitions of which are heard in his discussion of Recovery in "On
Fairy-Stories") is very similar to GKC's "remember[ing] that we
forgot." I wonder if it could be said that is another way to describe
the way to the Straight Path, and if what GKC calls "common sense and
rationality and practicality and positivism" are all things that
partake of the world of mortals, in which the paths are bent. That is
to say, GKC may be describing in somewhat more realistic terms what
JRRT draped in beautiful fantasy.
Just some woolgathering.
And I loved Mythopoeia: "...I bow not yet before the Iron Crown, nor
cast my own small golden sceptre down."
GKC was aware of and kept a tight grip on the sceptre he carried, too.
Barb
____
____
Freedom means never having to be political.
____
A Tsar Is Born
"Belba Grubb from Stock" <ba...@dbtech.net> wrote in message
news:q6703053gb926fvl3...@4ax.com...
> And I loved Mythopoeia: "...I bow not yet before the Iron Crown, nor
> cast my own small golden sceptre down."
>
> GKC was aware of and kept a tight grip on the sceptre he carried, too.
Well it's a very GUELF way of looking at life, and both Chesterton and
Tolkien were devout Catholics and regretted the Reformation. The Star Wars
movies are also very Guelf. As a Ghibelline from wayback (at least Fred
Barbarossa) I rather resented them for that. In Tolkien's world, happily,
there is no papacy (unless Gandalf be it) so I can accommodate without
difficulty.
Tsar Parmathule
Belba Grubb from Stock
This is about myths and Faerie, not about politics of any sort.
Chesterton in "Logic of Elfland" and more so in that essay's larger
setting of "Orthodoxy" (the first chapter of which is most
appropriately entitled "The Maniac"), and JRRT in "Mythopoeia," are
writing about belief in something beyond oneself and its influence on
oneself after it is acquired. In particular, Mythopoeia is addressed
to C.S. Lewis prior to that individual's conversion to theism: "To
one who said that myths were lies and therefore worthless, even though
'breathed through silver.'"
"On Fairy-Stories" additionally tackles some of the actual building
blocks, so to speak, and process. It's fascinating to read now,
knowing what JRRT was about to create ("The Lord of the Rings").
It so happens that the early 20th Century Catholic Church in Britain
influenced both men, but if the named works by GKC and JRRT are
actually opposed to anything apart from what they themselves actually
describe, it is to the sort of demand Robert Frost, rooted in the
Industrial Revolution and the science it spawned (wearing "The Iron
Crown," if you will), once made of a star, although he did eventually
learn his lesson from the thing. The very much smaller, more highly
circumscribed and self-centered concerns of "Guelf" and "Ghibelline"
are below both men's interests and scope here. At least Frost was
looking in the right direction (outside himself).
Barb
Stan Brown
>Ach, that's all politics, which I don't do.
WHAT's all politics?
I stopped reading at this point because I couldn't figure out what
you were referring to.
Then I scanned down and saw the problem:
makes it harder to follow discussions.
before the material you're commenting on, it
When you put your comments
http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/unice.htm#upside
--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com
Tolkien FAQs: http://Tolkien.slimy.com (Steuard Jensen's site)
Tolkien letters FAQ:
http://users.telerama.com/~taliesen/tolkien/lettersfaq.html
FAQ of the Rings: http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/ringfaq.htm
Encyclopedia of Arda: http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/default.htm
more FAQs: http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/faqget.htm
Christopher Kreuzer
> makes it harder to follow discussions.
> before the material you're commenting on, it
> When you put your comments
But it is a very interesting discussion. I might join in when I've found
the time to read Mythopoeia and Orthodoxy. That'll probably be sometime
next year. :-(
Belba Grubb from Stock
<the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>makes it harder to follow discussions.
>before the material you're commenting on, it
>When you put your comments
Cute. However, this post you're referring to does immediately follow
the original post to which it responds and is appended to it: there is
no real confusion there for anyone actually following the thread.
Perhaps you need a better newsreader, one that indents messages made
in reply to earlier messages in a thread.
Now, was there anything in the substance of the posts that you would
care to comment on?
Barb
Belba Grubb from Stock
<spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>But it is a very interesting discussion. I might join in when I've found
>the time to read Mythopoeia and Orthodoxy. That'll probably be sometime
>next year. :-(
"Orthodoxy" will tie you up for a long time -- don't do it unless you
really like Chesterton (and even then you should probably read
"Heretics" first). It's mostly all off topic anyway. This is limited
only to that small essay, called by some "The Logic of Elfland" (see
http://www.phys.ucalgary.ca/~bjackel/misc/logic_of_elfland.html), in
roughly the middle of Chapter IV of "Orthodoxy." Not long at all. I
selected it because it's good and also because it most directly
addresses fairy tales/nursery stories at that point (although GKC does
briefly mention Andrew Lang later in the chapter, another nexus with
JRRT's speech on fairy-stories).
And "Mythopoeia" is really just a poem -- not time-taxing in the
least. See RABT post that contains it at (watch the wrap)
http://www.google.com/groups?q=+%22on+fairy+stories%22+group:rec.arts.books.tolkien&start=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=1993Apr5.095842.2607%40news.yale.edu&rnum=162
What will really take a lot of time and mental energy is "On
Fairy-Stories." That's very long and <opinion mode on> written by a
genius at a time when he was just about to embark on his masterpiece
<opinion mode off>. Written for other geniuses, too. It's not a
quick read. GKC is more accessible. JRRT, though, is more thorough
and makes deeper, more well thought out points. Enjoy! See ya next
year. (g)
Barb
_____
"They had moored their boat one night under a bank veiled in high
grasses and short pollarded trees. Sleep, after heavy sculling, had
come to them early, and by a corresponding accident they awoke before
it was light. To speak more strictly, they awoke before it was
daylight; for a large lemon moon was only just setting in the forest
of high grass above their heads, and the sky was of a vivid
violet-blue, nocturnal but bright. Both men had simultaneously a
reminiscence of childhood, of the elfin and adventurous time when tall
weeds close over us like woods. Standing up thus against the large low
moon, the daisies really seemed to be giant daisies, the dandelions to
be giant dandelions. Somehow it reminded them of the dado of a nursery
wall-paper. The drop of the river-bed sufficed to sink them under the
roots of all shrubs and flowers and make them gaze upwards at the
grass. 'By Jove!' said Flambeau, 'it's like being in fairyland.'
"Father Brown sat bolt upright in the boat and crossed himself. His
movement was so abrupt that his friend asked him, with a mild stare,
what was the matter.
"'The people who wrote the mediaeval ballads,' answered the priest,
'knew more about fairies than you do. It isn't only nice things that
happen in fairyland.'
"'Oh, bosh!' said Flambeau. 'Only nice things could happen under such
an innocent moon. I am for pushing on now and seeing what does really
come. We may die and rot before we ever see again such a moon or such
a mood.'
"'All right,' said Father Brown. 'I never said it was always wrong to
enter fairyland. I only said it was always dangerous.'"
--- Chesterton, "The Sins of Prince Saradine" (1911)
********************************
"The realm of fairy-story is wide and deep and high and filled with
many things: all manner of beasts and birds are found there; shoreless
seas and stars uncounted; beauty that is an enchantment, and an
ever-present peril; both joy and sorrow as sharp as swords. In that
realm a man may, perhaps, count himself fortunate to have wandered,
but its very richness and strangeness tie the tongue of a traveller
who would report them. And while he is there it is dangerous for him
to ask too many questions, lest the gates should be shut and the keys
be lost."
--- J.R.R. Tolkien, "On Fairy-Stories" (1938)
Stan Brown
>in reply to earlier messages in a thread.
The issue is not indention, but your posting upside down. Please see
the FAQ.
Belba Grubb from Stock
<the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>It seems "Belba Grubb from Stock" wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien:
>>Perhaps you need a better newsreader, one that indents messages made
>>in reply to earlier messages in a thread.
>
>The issue is not indention, but your posting upside down. Please see
>the FAQ.
I did and have done so in the past. Your FAQ is extensive, very well
done, and where it relates to JRRT and his writing it has proved very
helpful to me before and will continue to be very helpful to me for a
long time to come.
However, when any FAQ is used to the detriment of a thread -- and in
this particular thread, the issue is neither message layout nor
correct quoting sequence (which as we see all around us all of the
time is a matter of individual taste, not an order dictated as if it
were a programming requirement of some sort of a Usenet "operating
system"); the issue, rather, is one of nursery tales and fairy-stories
and discussion of the opinions on same of Tolkien and another writer,
Chesterton, who possibly had a strong influence on JRRT's view of the
matter -- when any FAQ is used to distract from the actual thread,
then that FAQ is not helpful but harmful and should be let go.
Let it go, Stan. I'm not going to do this with you. There are
better, more fun things to talk about.
Again, is there anything in the substance of the posts that you might
care to comment on?
Barb
_____
"The important thing is to be in love with something."
Ray Bradbury, 2/5/2004
Stan Brown
>done, and where it relates to JRRT and his writing it has proved very
>helpful to me before and will continue to be very helpful to me for a
>long time to come.
It's not my FAQ. Evidently you have not read it with attention.
>However, when any FAQ is used to the detriment of a thread
Translation: when _you_ are doing things wrong to the detriment of a
thread, and someone points out to you that not only is this bad but
it had been documented to be bad ...
Belba Grubb from Stock
Begone, sir -- your dyscatastrophe cannot darken the joy of this
eucatastrophic experience of "On Fairy-Stories"; and in "The Logic of
Elfland" there are no FAQs (other than "Is it true?") -- there is only
wonder.
Barb
TeaLady (Mari C.)
> However, when any FAQ is used to the detriment of a thread
> -- and in this particular thread, the issue is neither
> message layout nor correct quoting sequence (which as we see
> all around us all of the time is a matter of individual
> taste, not an order dictated as if it were a programming
> requirement of some sort of a Usenet "operating system");
It is a usenet convention to not top-post. It is also
mannerly, and makes reading the replies easier, as you get a
sense of what the replies are referring to.
It is also a usenet convention to trim when replying, for many
of the same reasons as above, which very few people here even
try to enforce. Having to scroll past 60+ lines of 4 other
posters' replies to read a single one line comment on the 3rd
sentence of the 4th paragraph is very annoying.
As I've only seen Bella top-post once, and have seen her post
properly many other times, I don't see that there was a need
for a public spanking about it. There isn't a need to whine
about being spanked, either, as it was a transgression.
--
mc
Belba Grubb from Stock
<spres...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>It is a usenet convention to not top-post. It is also
>mannerly, and makes reading the replies easier, as you get a
>sense of what the replies are referring to.
>
>It is also a usenet convention to trim when replying, for many
>of the same reasons as above, which very few people here even
>try to enforce. Having to scroll past 60+ lines of 4 other
>posters' replies to read a single one line comment on the 3rd
>sentence of the 4th paragraph is very annoying.
>
>As I've only seen Bella top-post once, and have seen her post
>properly many other times, I don't see that there was a need
>for a public spanking about it. There isn't a need to whine
>about being spanked, either, as it was a transgression.
Thank you, TeaLady. I'll be more careful about following the
convention from now on.
Barb
_____
Evil is unspectacular and always human and
shares our bed and eats at our own table.
-- W. H. Aulden, quoted by Dan Warner