Sunday
I got up a little late on Sunday (skipping breakfast) so as to get as
much sleep as possible (the auction had ended not long before 1 AM)
before it was time for my own fifteen minutes (or rather thirty) in
the spotlight. Having had my paper printed, I sat down to read it
through critically for the first time, ending up with an insane
amount of hand-written corrections, additions and deletions to keep
track of, but in the end I think I got through reasonably well (i.e.
without loosing my thread more than a couple of times). My paper,
'"in the memory of old wives" -- Old Tales and Fairy-stories in
Middle-earth' was inspired by an old discussion in AFT & RABT in
which Steuard asked which the stories Gandalf had told to the Hobbits
were, and Larry noted that something might be done in terms of
investigating how the metafictional fairy-stories contributed to the
portrayal of peoples in LotR. In the end, however, the paper was
based on the idea that Tolkien not only constructed _The Lord of the
Rings_ to be a highly successful fairy-story according to the
principles he laid out in his essay 'On Fairy-Stories,' but that he
also exemplifies several of his points by letting his characters
experience the effects of metafictional fairy-stories.
<
http://www.returnofthering.org/timetable_items.php#Forchhammer>
I was followed by Maureen Mann, to whom I had afterwards to
apologize, because it took me the first ten minutes of her
presentation to get back to the here and now, and when I finally
caught up with the thread of her talk on '"various queer things": The
House of Tom Bombadil and Fairie,' I realized that it was highly
interesting, and that it took up very excellently where I had left
off (had the programming been reversed, I would have just as smoothly
taken up the thread where she had left it). Maureen Mann dealt with
one episode from _The Lord of the Rings_ that I had left out: Tom
Bombadil's power of narrative enchantment, which she discussed in
depth and in further context. Where I had merely skated the surface,
barely scratching it, in my presentation of an overarching idea,
Maureen Mann expertly drilled through the ice in one spot and drew
from there crystal-clear waters. (I have since been mailing with
Maureen, and I look forward to digging into her paper at my leisure
later this weekend).
<
http://www.returnofthering.org/timetable_items.php#Mann1>
The last spot in our session was a talk about 'Tolkien's Faerian
Drama: Origins and Valedictions' by Janet Brennan Croft. This took up
the idea of the dream-vision as an example of Fa锟絩ian drama, the
enchantment Tolkien describes in 'On Fairy-Stories,' and investigated
this topic with examples from other authors as well as from Tolkien.
I very much enjoyed the presentation, particularly the attempt to
extract some common characteristics of a Fa锟絩ian Drama Dream-vision
(which includes the meeting, the intersection, of aesthetic and
ethic) based on examples ranging from medieval stories (such as
_Pearl_) via Dickens to Tolkien. Going through my notes and writing
up these comments, I come to wonder how she deals with Tolkien's
rejection of dream-stories as proper fairy-stories (I can see at
least a couple of possible routes, none of which might be the one
that Croft would choose).
<
http://www.returnofthering.org/timetable_items.php#Croft>
After lunch I went to another session on 'Tolkien's Sources',
starting with Yoko Hemmi who spoke on 'Tolkienesque Transformations:
Post-Celticism and Possessiveness in 'The Lay of Aotrou and
Itroun'.' The paper (at least as it seemed to me) had two main
theses. One was the idea of 'post-celticism,' which, as I understood
it, is created by adding 'the fair elusive beauty that some call
Celtic (though it is rarely found in genuine ancient Celtic things)'
(_Letters_, no. 131) to the authentically celticism of the ancient
Breton lays, and the other was that Tolkien, in his _Lay of Aotrou
and Itroun_ also added possessiveness as a moral flaw (the following
discussion also suggested a connection of possessiveness and the
desire for immortality). The presentation as a whole followed very
well on to Verlyn Flieger's presentation on Saturday, though I am
afraid that this somewhat bland summary doesn't do it justice.
<
http://www.returnofthering.org/timetable_items.php#Hemmi>
Next up was Gerard Hynes with a presentation that fell directly
within one of the areas of Tolkien studies that I am _very_
interested in. Speaking of 'Tolkien's Boethius, Alfred's Boethius.'
Gerard Hynes argued that the changes made to the text in the Old
English translation of Bo锟絫hius' _Consolation of Prophecy_ attributed
to King Alfred (Hynes called it a re-interpretation rather than
merely a translation) makes the translated text a more likely source
for Tolkien than the original Latin. Summarising Hynes' summary of
the relevant differences, Alfred's version loosens causality,
allowing a greater option for changing providence -- the Latin
version deals with the freedom to _think_, the Old English version
with the freedom to _act_. Thinking of this presentation afterwards,
this summary seems to me to match nearly perfectly the differences in
the operation of free will between Men and Elves in Tolkien's world
(as described by Verlyn Flieger, Charles Noad and myself -- you have
no idea what pleasure it gave me to write this comment :-) ): Elves
following the model of the Latin Bo锟絫hius and Men following the model
of the Old English Alfredian Bo锟絫hius. Such a model would seem also
strangely appropriate in other ways (which is probably why I am at
once attracted to it and reluctant to adopt it).
<
http://www.returnofthering.org/timetable_items.php#Hynes>
The last presention of this session on sources took moved the focus a
few centuries forward to discuss 'Tolkien and Romanticism.' The basic
idea of Anna Thayer (n锟絜 Slack) was to place Tolkien in a Romantic
tradition, though not quite as radical as the original romanticists,
and I think the idea went down quite well. It does certainly seem
straightforward that Tolkien incorporates a number of ideas / themes
/ images adopted from romanticism, though I would probably be more
cautious about calling Tolkien a romanticist as such (a claim, it
must be emphasised, that Anna Thayer did _not_ make!). Ending with
the image of the piercing beauty, and the consolation gained from the
untouchability and eternalness of Sam's sighting of a star while in
Mordor closed the loop nicely to several other presentations
(including my own) touching on Tolkien's idea of Fa锟絩ie.
<
http://www.returnofthering.org/timetable_items.php#Thayer1>
The last of the day's multi-track sessions, I spent with a panel on
'Tolkien Research' chaired by Janet Brennan Croft (editor of
_Mythlore_) and including Verlyn Flieger, Bob Blackham, John Garth,
and Angie Gardner (note that only one of these was a university
professor doing academic research on Tolkien). There were several
very positive and inspiring things to get from this panel: it _is_
possible to access most of the things if you have a good reason (and
someone to recommend you in the case of the Bodleian), the exceptions
being all the Silmarillion papers and the private papers (both in the
Bodleian) that are controlled by the Estate. Part of what I took away
from this panel is a list of libraries featuring important archives
of Tolkieniana, including what they contain and how to get into them
(though 'present myself' at the Marquette might present a bit of an
obstacle, but only due to it being in Wisconsin, USA and my living in
Denmark). Overall I found the session informative, inspiring and
encouraging -- what more can one hope for in a session focusing on
the possibility for contributing to Tolkien studies by independent
researchers and scholars.
<
http://www.returnofthering.org/timetable_items.php#EduPanel4>
Actually the above wasn't really the last of the multi-track events.
Just before dinner we had to choose again -- this time between Nancy
Martsch's 'Thirty Years of Tolkien Fandom' and the Christine Davidson
Memorial Lecture, given by Ben Barootes titled 'These Fading Days:
Language, Loss, and Recovery in Tolkien's Legendarium.' This was a
tough choice, but I ended up listening to Ben Barootes, whom I had
talked with over dinner one day (I had also spoken with Nancy
Martsch, and I would have loved to hear her talk).
Martsch' talk:
<
http://www.returnofthering.org/timetable_items.php#Martsch>
Barootes' talk:
<
http://www.returnofthering.org/timetable_items.php#CDML>
I am not sure that I could do justice to Ben's presentation (there is
a good reason why he won the award that was set up to let a promising
young Tolkien scholar participate in the Return of the Ring
conference and give this lecture). He took his outset in the
narrator's comments on Frodo's vain attempt command the Ringwraiths
at the Ford of Bruinen to go back to Mordor, 'but Frodo had not the
power of Bombadil,' and then asked why? The answer to this question
should, according to Ben Barootes, be found in Northrop Frye's model
of evolution of language in three phases (see URL). Ben Barootes
wove, with great eloquence, ideas concerning language, word- and
name-magic (and song-magic), 'the long defeat' and other ideas
together to a tapestry of compelling force, and though I am not sure
that I can walk the whole nine yards with Ben, I'll be there with him
for the seven or eight of them, and I am impressed with the
explanatory power of his model.
<
http://fryeblog.blog.lib.mcmaster.ca/2009/09/24/the-phases-and-
modes-of-language>
<
http://preview.tinyurl.com/cg8ldx3>
The final point on the agenda before the grand Banquet also covered
thirty years with a relation with Tolkien's work. Having to call my
wife (Sunday was, after all, her birthday), I missed the start, but
still got to hear most of Brian 'Sibley in Middle-earth: A Thirty-
Year Ramble.' Full of entertaining anecdotes, this 'ramble' (let's
honour Brian Sibley by keeping his own name for it) also proved
thought-provokingly interesting for me as a firm book-lover (who put
any adaptation far below the original, and any _narrative_ adaptation
even lower . . .) -- I have certainly learned a greater respect for
adapting artists (regardless of whether or not I like their
adaptation _as an adaption_).
<
http://www.returnofthering.org/timetable_items.php#Sibley>
After hearing Brian Sibley, I had to rush back to my room to change
for the banquet. Fortunately it was little delayed, so I was still in
good time to enjoy the company at the table, which included one whose
name I never did catch fully, Beregond (from Forodrim, the Stockholm
Tolkien Society), Christopher Kreuzer, Allan Turner, Janet Brennan
Croft, Johan Olin and his brother, H锟絢an. For anyone who had
previously been to events in the Tolkien Society the Standing Silence
and the toasts to the Professor and to absent friends were of course
expected and familiar as old friends, but though one has read about
it, it is a different matter to actually be there and be a part of
it. Rituals have the function of tying people together, of
strengthening the sense of unity and common purpose and interests,
and this sense of community is, at least for me, a very valuable
addition to being a Tolkien enthusiast. As the food disappeared from
plates and tables, the social aspect of course became more and more
prominent. A number of participants went to the Q&A session with a
couple of the people behind _The Fellows Hip_ -- a film celebrating
gamer culture and _The Lord of the Rings_, while others chose to
continue the socializing outside where the temperature was
approaching comfortable levels (at least as perceived by this Dane).
--
Troels Forchhammer
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)
gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.
If I have seen farther than others, it is because I was
standing on the shoulders of giants.
- Sir Isaac Newton