defence of Tolkien needed
calvin
The Lord of the Rings from writings that the accuser did
not name is something that I don't know enough to deal
with. All I know is that Tolkien used some Eddaic names
for Dwarf names in The Hobbit. I wonder if someone here
could outline a proper defence for the accusation below.
tomcervo wrote:
> Yeah. Never saw 'em, since I had a bellyful of Tolk[ie]n
> and his acolytes in the 60's and 70's--while I [was] reading
> the stuff he cribbed LOTR from, and had to hear otherwise
> dignified profs try and pitch the Kalevala as the source for
> same.
> ...
Troels Forchhammer
<8029fd31-2e36-40ed...@d20g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>
calvin <cri...@windstream.net> spoke these staves:
I am not familiar with the phrase 'cribbed' -- the implication seems
to be negative, and in context implies an inappropriate level of
'borrowing' or perhaps even plagiarism on Tolkien's part.
Plagiarism can, of course, be quite easily dismissed as baseless --
there was nothing of the kind of LotR before Tolkien wrote LotR, and
while it would be a very tedious and unnecessary job, it will be
fairly easy to demonstrate that whatever set of 'stuff' the OP would
come up with Tolkien added much more that was uniquely his own than
he borrowed from these sources.
However, the question of when inspiriation and sources go from
applaudable intellectualism to inappropriately unimaginatism is
extremely subjective, and if the OP has decided to dislike Tolkien
with the kind of ignorant arrogance displayed in the above, then
there is no amount of actual facts that will change his mind.
The dignified professors referred to obviously are more knowledgeable
as they correctly identify Kalevala as an inspiration -- mainly and
most obviously the story of Kullervo as the inspiration for T�rin
Turambar (i.e. _The Silmarillion_, not _The Lord of the Rings_). The
T�rin story actually started as an attempt to retell the story of
Kullervo in English (IIRC it was not meant as a translation, but as a
retelling), but when Tolkien started out on the _Book of Lost Tales_
much of his earlier work (including a number of poems) got absorbed
into this new legendarium and thus ideas to a retelling of a part of
Kalevala ended up as a part of _The Silmarillion_. Tolkien was,
however, strongly affected by the Kalevala and though I cannot
pinpoint anything specific, I am sure there is something to be found
in Tolkien Scholarship that shows how elements from the Kalevala got
absorbed even into LotR.
Other sources are equally easy to identify: the dwarven names from
the list in V�lusp�, echoes of St. Augustine in the Ainulindal�, etc.
But then there is something uniquely Tolkien in the story of Beren
and L�thien which was inspired by a picnic during Tolkien's
convalescence after the Somme when Edith danced for her husband among
the hemlocks in the forest.
Without something more specific it is probably futile to go on -- the
OP combines arrogance with lack of actual knowledge (the OP possibly
read LotR, but in that case it was too long ago to actually remember
any of it, and the misunderstanding about Kalevala shows that he
hasn't read anything else of Tolkien).
Finally I am reminded of Franz Moln�r's words:
Aus einem Buch abschreiben gibt Plagiat.
Aus zwei B�chern abschreiben gibt Essay.
Aus drei B�chern abschreiben gibt Dissertation.
Aus Vier B�chern abschreiben gibt ein f�nftes gelehrtes Buch.
To copy from one book gives a plagiarism
To copy from two books gives an essay
To copy from three books gives a dissertation
To copy from four books gives a fifth learned book
J.R.R. Tolkien had many sources -- from ancient pagan mythologies to
contemporary fiction (e.g. Lord Dunsany), but he combined them in
entirely new ways and always added something uniquely his own.
For something more specific I'll recommend to look up some of the
scholarly writings on Tolkien.
--
Troels Forchhammer <troelsfo(a)googlewave.com>
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.
People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom
of thought which they avoid.
- Soren Kierkegaard
pmh
Since this poster does not identify the alleged material, it's safer &
easier to assume it does not exist. The burden of proof is on him, not
you.
calvin
wrote:
> I am not familiar with the phrase 'cribbed' -- the implication seems
> to be negative, and in context implies an inappropriate level of
> 'borrowing' or perhaps even plagiarism on Tolkien's part.
Thanks for your response, and that of pmh. I posted
it back so that the accuser will see it. Probably he will
name his source, and I will give it here.
Dirk Thierbach
> In the post quoted below, the charge that Tolkien 'cribbed'
> The Lord of the Rings from writings that the accuser did
> not name is something that I don't know enough to deal
> with. All I know is that Tolkien used some Eddaic names
> for Dwarf names in The Hobbit.
Well, he did use other bits and pieces. General themes from mythology
and fairy tales (like "the return of the king"), and sometimes even
specific scenes (like the scene with Hama the doorward, which is
copied to a large degree from Beowulf).
> I wonder if someone here could outline a proper defence for the
> accusation below.
Taking ideas from other sources is quite ok. I think all authors do
that (and Tolkien actually writes about this process in OFS). It's
the resulting mix that is interesting and unique.
What is not ok is taking a larger piece of work and then basically
copying it, just changing details (like The Sword of Shannara did
with LotR).
> tomcervo wrote:
>> Yeah. Never saw 'em, since I had a bellyful of Tolk[ie]n
>> and his acolytes in the 60's and 70's--while I [was] reading
>> the stuff he cribbed LOTR from, and had to hear otherwise
>> dignified profs try and pitch the Kalevala as the source for
>> same.
Kalevala is (one of) the source(s) for the SIL, not for LotR :-)
- Dirk
Derek Broughton
> I am not familiar with the phrase 'cribbed' -- the implication seems
> to be negative, and in context implies an inappropriate level of
> 'borrowing' or perhaps even plagiarism on Tolkien's part.
Precisely. I'm always astonished when we manage to use an idiomatic term
that manages to stump you scands :-) I guess it's more typically English,
but most American/Canadian English speakers would get it.
> Plagiarism can, of course, be quite easily dismissed as baseless --
> there was nothing of the kind of LotR before Tolkien wrote LotR, and
I thought Tolkien time-travelled and stole from Terry Brooks ...
> while it would be a very tedious and unnecessary job, it will be
> fairly easy to demonstrate that whatever set of 'stuff' the OP would
> come up with Tolkien added much more that was uniquely his own than
> he borrowed from these sources.
Yet, I'm sure he'd be the first to say he borrowed from historical sources.
But it's a long way from using themes and forms from Beowulf, Kalevala and
the Eddas, to copying them.
> However, the question of when inspiriation and sources go from
> applaudable intellectualism to inappropriately unimaginatism is
> extremely subjective, and if the OP has decided to dislike Tolkien
> with the kind of ignorant arrogance displayed in the above, then
> there is no amount of actual facts that will change his mind.
And we wouldn't want to wast our time :-)
> Finally I am reminded of Franz Moln�r's words:
>
> Aus einem Buch abschreiben gibt Plagiat.
> Aus zwei B�chern abschreiben gibt Essay.
> Aus drei B�chern abschreiben gibt Dissertation.
> Aus Vier B�chern abschreiben gibt ein f�nftes gelehrtes Buch.
>
> To copy from one book gives a plagiarism
> To copy from two books gives an essay
> To copy from three books gives a dissertation
> To copy from four books gives a fifth learned book
Ah, we cribbed that in English: "to copy from one source is plagiarism - to
copy from two is research" :-) The Germans always were more verbose!
>
> J.R.R. Tolkien had many sources -- from ancient pagan mythologies to
> contemporary fiction (e.g. Lord Dunsany), but he combined them in
> entirely new ways and always added something uniquely his own.
Which can't be said enough.
--
derek
Weland
> calvin <cri...@windstream.net> wrote:
>> In the post quoted below, the charge that Tolkien 'cribbed'
>> The Lord of the Rings from writings that the accuser did
>> not name is something that I don't know enough to deal
>> with. All I know is that Tolkien used some Eddaic names
>> for Dwarf names in The Hobbit.
>
> Well, he did use other bits and pieces. General themes from mythology
> and fairy tales (like "the return of the king"), and sometimes even
> specific scenes (like the scene with Hama the doorward, which is
> copied to a large degree from Beowulf).
I wouldn't say copied so much as recast.
It is much like the literatures that influenced Tolkien. Ancient and
medieval poets and authors took existing stories and rewove into new
works. So did Tolkien (and one can argue so does every other author,
but that's a different discussion).
calvin
tomcervo came back and posted more:
(my question)
> So, what was the stuff you read that Tolkien cribbed
> LOTR from?
==================================================
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalevala
Which is no great sin in medieval literature; the test was not
originality but what you did with what you borrowed. My only regret
is
that the Pythons never got their hands on LOTR.
==================================================
I don't think you know what a crib is, at least in the literary
sense.
It's a version of what we now call Sparknotes--a handy translation
and
interpretation of a somewhat difficult classic, but a pale imitation
of an inimitable original. So yes, I found LOTR to be a pallid
imitation of things like the Mabinogian, Gawain and the Green Knight,
the Niebelungenlied, Malory, Njal's Saga, The Tain . . .etc. Tolkien
was clearly trying to reproduce the works he'd spent his life
studying, and he made a lot of people happy. Lucky you. You have your
library and I have mine.
As noted, you seem to have no sense of medieval copyright; the old
joke about Chaucer being asked why he never used original stories:
"Are we reduced to that?" Virtuosity was seen as taking old materials
and using them in a new way. Handel's defence, they called it: he
played a new air and his friend noted that it sounded like something
Arne had written, and Handel replied ye, but look what HE did with
it.
I just don't see Tolkien's books as improvements on the things that
inspired them, so why bother spending much time reading them?
==================================================
You really shouldn't feel the need to defend yourself--I certainly
don't--it's merely a differing point of view. Adults disagree.
Strange
that anyone thinks that what gets said on usenet will have the
slightest effect on what we're talking about--works more than a
millennium old---or works of genuine worth. I've nothing against
Tolkein; he did a fine job of editing the version of Gawain I read in
college. I just don't feel like wasting my time on his medieval
imitations while so much of the real thing is out there.
===================================================
Dirk Thierbach
> tomcervo came back and posted more:
: So yes, I found LOTR to be a pallid imitation of things like the
: Mabinogian, Gawain and the Green Knight, the Niebelungenlied,
: Malory, Njal's Saga, The Tain . . .etc.
BTW, I'd recommend reading some of those :-)
: Tolkien was clearly trying to reproduce the works he'd spent his
: life studying, and he made a lot of people happy. Lucky you. You
: have your library and I have mine.
It looks like this is mostly a matter of taste. Tomcervo is obviously
entitled to his opinion, though he puts it forward somewhat impolitely,
but I wouldn't say the LotR is a "pallid imitation" or a "reproduction".
While it's clearly based on those to some degree, LotR has its own
strengths (and these works have their own weaknesses). It's not clear
that one is "better".
: As noted, you seem to have no sense of medieval copyright; the old
: joke about Chaucer being asked why he never used original stories:
: "Are we reduced to that?" Virtuosity was seen as taking old materials
: and using them in a new way. Handel's defence, they called it: he
: played a new air and his friend noted that it sounded like something
: Arne had written, and Handel replied ye, but look what HE did with
: it.
I think this misses the point: Tolkien certainly didn't do it to
"improve" the original works, but recreate something similar
in a context where he found there were too few such works (namely,
in connection to England, see letter #131).
: I just don't see Tolkien's books as improvements on the things that
: inspired them, so why bother spending much time reading them?
Because it can be as fascinating as reading the other works. For
similar, but still different reasons. Why else should one read
something? :-)
: You really shouldn't feel the need to defend yourself--I certainly
: don't--it's merely a differing point of view. Adults disagree.
Exactly. Good closing words :-)
- Dirk
Paul S. Person
<Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid> wrote:
>In message
><8029fd31-2e36-40ed...@d20g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>
>calvin <cri...@windstream.net> spoke these staves:
>>
>> In the post quoted below, the charge that Tolkien 'cribbed'
>> The Lord of the Rings from writings that the accuser did
>> not name is something that I don't know enough to deal
>> with. All I know is that Tolkien used some Eddaic names
>> for Dwarf names in The Hobbit. I wonder if someone here
>> could outline a proper defence for the accusation below.
<snippo>
>I am not familiar with the phrase 'cribbed' -- the implication seems
>to be negative, and in context implies an inappropriate level of
>'borrowing' or perhaps even plagiarism on Tolkien's part.
For someone who is not familiar with, you managed to peg its meaning
pretty well!
I believe it is related to a "crib", also called a "cheat-sheet",
which is (traditionally) a list of answers to the questions known to
be on a test. You use the "crib" to pass the test. You are, of course,
cheating. But since you are also copying the answer from the crib to
the test paper, and since this is dishonest (to say the least), the
verb slides over easily to worse and worse behavior, all the way
"intentional and knowing plagiarism". Which can have severe legal and
economic consequences. It doesn't always mean that; your summary seems
to me to be the usual meaning.
--
Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, "I never knew him."
Öjevind Lång
"calvin" <cri...@windstream.net> skrev i meddelandet
news:8029fd31-2e36-40ed...@d20g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
> In the post quoted below, the charge that Tolkien 'cribbed'
> The Lord of the Rings from writings that the accuser did
> not name is something that I don't know enough to deal
> with. All I know is that Tolkien used some Eddaic names
> for Dwarf names in The Hobbit. I wonder if someone here
> could outline a proper defence for the accusation below.
Of course, Tolkien used older sources for inspiration, and he was not quite
as uninfluenced by "Das Ring der Niebelungen" as he claimed. There was more
to it than just "both rings being round". Still, by and large his work does
not lose its originality or merit because of such influences. The only part
of his writings about which I would say the charge of plagiarism is
justified is when it comes to the tale of T�rin. That one is in parts very
closlely calqued on the story of Kullervo in the Kalevala, especially the
unwitting incest with a sister, the sister drowning herself and the hero
then killing himself on his talking sword.
�jevind
Öjevind Lång
news:20091215083018...@dthierbach.news.arcor.de...
> calvin <cri...@windstream.net> wrote:
>> In the post quoted below, the charge that Tolkien 'cribbed'
>> The Lord of the Rings from writings that the accuser did
>> not name is something that I don't know enough to deal
>> with. All I know is that Tolkien used some Eddaic names
>> for Dwarf names in The Hobbit.
>
> Well, he did use other bits and pieces. General themes from mythology
> and fairy tales (like "the return of the king"), and sometimes even
> specific scenes (like the scene with Hama the doorward, which is
> copied to a large degree from Beowulf).
There is also the killing contest between Gimlia and Legolas at Helm's Deep,
which is copied straight from "King Solomon's Mines" by L. Rider Haggard, a
writer whom Tolkien is known to have read with rgeat enjoyment.
�jevind
Weland
Obviously your interlocutor doesn't understand or hasn't really read
LoTR or Tolkien. There is simply no comparison between "Spark Notes" or
"Cliff Notes" and their plot summaries and thematic discussions and
Tolkien's novel vis a vis various medieval literatures. It's rather
like saying a fruit bowl on the table and a newspaper report about a
fruit bowl on a table are the same thing.
Whether Tolkien's LoTR is in some way an imitation, that I would agree
with, in the best sense of Imitatio and Mimesis. But LoTR is certainly
not a mimesis of any one particular thing (and another point where the
comparison to Spark Notes fails), but of a certain type of thing.
What makes this so very odd, though, is that it has been my experience
that those who love Mabinogian, Malory, Beowulf, SGGK, etc also love
Tolkien whereas those who do not generally don't like Tolkien. This
interlocutor of yours is the first I've met who claims to love and read
the literature that inspired Tolkien and not at least like Tolkien. It
would be interesting to hear why he finds Tolkien "pale" and
"anemic"...specifically, not just general denigration.
Troels Forchhammer
<news:20091215163903...@dthierbach.news.arcor.de>
Dirk Thierbach <dthie...@usenet.arcornews.de> spoke these staves:
I was pleased to see that my understanding of 'crib' was not what was
intended (in particular since my vanity was satisfied by seeing
others share my misunderstanding ;-) ). While I still disagree that
the new description is an apt description of Tolkien's work, it does,
at least, not seem intended to carry quite the negative connotations
I got from it (of 'cheat' or 'plagiarism').
>: So yes, I found LOTR to be a pallid imitation of things like the
>: Mabinogian, Gawain and the Green Knight, the Niebelungenlied,
>: Malory, Njal's Saga, The Tain . . .etc.
>
> BTW, I'd recommend reading some of those :-)
I'll second that -- though of course I prefer the V�lsungasaga to the
Niebelungenlied ;-)
I'd disagree with the use of 'imitation', however -- not so much
because Tolkien was not trying to imitate something of the 'air' of
these things, but because the statement, when standing alone, is far
too simplistic -- reductio ad nauseam.
>: Tolkien was clearly trying to reproduce the works he'd spent his
>: life studying, and he made a lot of people happy.
Once more the statement does contain an element of truth -- Tolkien
did indeed try to reproduce some elements of the works he studied,
but that was not all he tried, and in the event this motivational
element was certainly of less importance in _The Lord of the Rings_
than in e.g. _The Book of Lost Tales_ or the earliest version of _The
Silmarillion_. Again, it is not untrue, but it _is_ reductio ad
absurdum -- an absurd level of simplification.
It is one of the main points in Shippey's _J.R.R. Tolkien: Author of
the Century_ that Tolkien, in spite of all his medievalisms, is
clearly a twentieth century author -- a point which Garth also
hammers home very convincingly in _Tolkien and the Great War_. The
main point here is Tolkien's work is no more _just_ a reproduction of
earlier work than is Shakespeare's or, for that matter, the very
sources referred to above.
<snip>
>: I just don't see Tolkien's books as improvements on the things
>: that inspired them, so why bother spending much time reading
>: them?
Because they are not intended to be improvements on anything, nor
should they be read as such. If one doesn't like what they are, then
one really shouldn't waste much time on them, but to reject them
because they are not something they don't try to be is like refusing
to read my post because it is not written in a very good French . . .
:-)
>: You really shouldn't feel the need to defend yourself--I
>: certainly don't--it's merely a differing point of view. Adults
>: disagree.
>
> Exactly. Good closing words :-)
Indeed!
--
Troels Forchhammer <troelsfo(a)googlewave.com>
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.
The idea that time may vary from place to place is a
difficult one, but it is the idea Einstein used, and it is
correct - believe it or not.
- Richard Feynman
calvin
I think he has said all that he is going to say to me,
whether I post more from the people in this group
or not. In the other group, the general consensus is
he has expressed more proper opinion than I did by
overreacting to his claim that t
calvin
> I think he has said all that he is going to say to me,
> whether I post more from the people in this group
> or not. In the other group, the general consensus is
> by overreacting to his claim that ...
[previous post continued]
... to his claim that Tolkien 'cribbed' The Lord of the
Rings. I called that a 'vicious lie', causing everyone in
the thread to turn against me. Nothing else that I can
say there or here will help. The other usenet group
is rec.arts.movies.current-films, and the thread is
Ebert's Rave Review of Avatar. Thank you for your
comments.
Dirk Thierbach
> On Dec 15, 5:53 pm, calvin <cri...@windstream.net> wrote:
>> I think he has said all that he is going to say to me,
>> whether I post more from the people in this group
>> or not. In the other group, the general consensus is
>> that he has expressed more proper opinion than I did
>> by overreacting to his claim that ...
>
> [previous post continued]
>
> ... to his claim that Tolkien 'cribbed' The Lord of the
> Rings. I called that a 'vicious lie', causing everyone in
> the thread to turn against me.
Well, that *was* overreacting :-)
> Nothing else that I can say there or here will help.
I agree with tomcervo that there's no need to "defend" Tolkien here.
And I don't think there's lot of disagreement, merely some differing
tastes and some accidents of choice of words.
> The other usenet group is rec.arts.movies.current-films, and the
> thread is Ebert's Rave Review of Avatar.
BTW, there's this feature called "crossposting", where you can
discuss relevant subjects in more than one newsgroup. I initially
had the impression this other discussion was happening on some webforum.
- Dirk
Dirk Thierbach
> Of course, Tolkien used older sources for inspiration, and he was not quite
> as uninfluenced by "Das Ring der Niebelungen" as he claimed. There was more
> to it than just "both rings being round".
I still think that this was referring especially to Wagner's treatment
(just happened too see bits and pieces of the Walkuere yesterday on TV,
while zapping, and the way Wagner does the alliterations are sometimes not
that pleasing.)
It's obvious that Tolkien was influenced by the Nibelungenlied and the
other Siegfried tales, but these are quite different from what Wagner
turned them into.
- Dirk
Dirk Thierbach
> There is also the killing contest between Gimlia and Legolas at
> Helm's Deep, which is copied straight from "King Solomon's Mines" by
> L. Rider Haggard, a writer whom Tolkien is known to have read with
> rgeat enjoyment.
Ah, so that's where it comes from. Thank you. I always suspected that
this is counting game is a nod to some existing story, but I could
never place it (I haven't read Haggard yet).
- Dirk
calvin
wrote:
Christopher Tolkien says essentially the same thing
in his foreword to The Legend of Sigurd and Gudrún (p.10).
calvin
wrote:
> calvin <cri...@windstream.net> wrote:
> > On Dec 15, 5:53 pm, calvin <cri...@windstream.net> wrote:
> >> I think he has said all that he is going to say to me,
> >> whether I post more from the people in this group
> >> or not. In the other group, the general consensus is
> >> that he has expressed more proper opinion than I did
> >> by overreacting to his claim that ...
>
> > [previous post continued]
>
> > ... to his claim that Tolkien 'cribbed' The Lord of the
> > Rings. I called that a 'vicious lie', causing everyone in
> > the thread to turn against me.
>
> Well, that *was* overreacting :-)
>
> > Nothing else that I can say there or here will help.
>
> I agree with tomcervo that there's no need to "defend" Tolkien here.
> And I don't think there's lot of disagreement, merely some differing
> tastes and some accidents of choice of words.
tomcervo sweetened up when he came back to the thread
and saw Mr. Forchhammer's comments that I posted there.
Also, I seem to be the only one who noticed that he changed
his story at that time. In his original post he had specifically
denied that the Kalevala was what he had been reading that
Tolkien 'cribbed' LOTR from; and he disparaged the 'otherwise
dignified' professors who thought so. Then, on his return, he
answered my question,"what was the stuff you read that Tolkien
cribbed LOTR from?", by posting a link to Kalevala in Wikipedia.
All of this can be seen reproduced above in this thread.
In any case he was induced to soften his original indictment
of Tolkien, and that is the important thing. Knowing tomcervo
as I do, from many such encounters, I don't believe for a
minute that his original use of the word 'cribbed' was intended
as any less than a slap at Tolkien admirers (acolytes), his
disdain for whom was contained in his post.
Clams Canino
"calvin" <cri...@windstream.net> wrote in message
news:f2c2e63a-9fc6-439d-a2a6-
In any case he was induced to soften his original indictment
of Tolkien, and that is the important thing. Knowing tomcervo
as I do, from many such encounters, I don't believe for a
minute that his original use of the word 'cribbed' was intended
as any less than a slap at Tolkien admirers (acolytes), his
disdain for whom was contained in his post.
_______________________________________________
After reading it all I agree. He chose 'cribbed' for a reaction - and then
you gave him one. :)
-W
Dirk Thierbach
> In his original post he had specifically denied that the Kalevala
> was what he had been reading that Tolkien 'cribbed' LOTR from; and
> he disparaged the 'otherwise dignified' professors who thought so.
> Then, on his return, he answered my question,"what was the stuff you
> read that Tolkien cribbed LOTR from?", by posting a link to Kalevala
> in Wikipedia.
Can one actually make a connection between the Kalevala and LotR?
The SIL-connections are obvious, but I don't see the LotR-connection.
- Dirk
Weland
I agree: One really should treat as separate works
Niebelungenlied and Wagner's Das Ring der Niebelungen.
I wonder though, Dirk, if it is obvious and if we can not find similar
scenes in other Germanic or Classical literature that are just as much
an influence.
Öjevind Lång
Yes, but was Tolkien specifically accused of plaigiarizing Wagner? I thought
the statement which riled him so much was that there were parallels bectween
his work and Wagner's because they used the same source.
Öjevind
Öjevind Lång
>> There is also the killing contest between Gimlia and Legolas at
>> Helm's Deep, which is copied straight from "King Solomon's Mines" by
>> L. Rider Haggard, a writer whom Tolkien is known to have read with
>> rgeat enjoyment.
>
> Ah, so that's where it comes from. Thank you. I always suspected that
> this is counting game is a nod to some existing story, but I could
> never place it (I haven't read Haggard yet).
I think you'd enjoy his books, especially "She".
Öjevind
Clams Canino
"Dirk Thierbach" <dthie...@usenet.arcornews.de> wrote in message
> I still think that this was referring especially to Wagner's treatment
> (just happened too see bits and pieces of the Walkuere yesterday on TV,
> while zapping, and the way Wagner does the alliterations are sometimes not
> that pleasing.)
>
> It's obvious that Tolkien was influenced by the Nibelungenlied and the
> other Siegfried tales, but these are quite different from what Wagner
> turned them into.
This must be 'Richard Wagner" week for me. He just keeps coming up.
I was just reading a book on the origins of the 3rd Reich and I ran across a
quote that effectively said that "one cannot understand Hitler's thinking
process - without first understanding the works of Wagner and the underlying
mythologies. " Hmmmmmmmm
-W
Dirk Thierbach
> "Dirk Thierbach" <dthie...@usenet.arcornews.de> skrev i meddelandet
>> I still think that this was referring especially to Wagner's treatment
>> (just happened too see bits and pieces of the Walkuere yesterday on TV,
>> while zapping, and the way Wagner does the alliterations are sometimes not
>> that pleasing.)
>> It's obvious that Tolkien was influenced by the Nibelungenlied and the
>> other Siegfried tales, but these are quite different from what Wagner
>> turned them into.
> Yes, but was Tolkien specifically accused of plaigiarizing Wagner? I thought
> the statement which riled him so much was that there were parallels bectween
> his work and Wagner's because they used the same source.
IIRC the point that angered him was that even though he interpreted
the source material quite differently from the way Wagner did, he was
still compared to him.
But the quote is from the biography, which I don't own, so I cannot look
it up. Maybe someone else can?
- Dirk
Dirk Thierbach
> This must be 'Richard Wagner" week for me. He just keeps coming up.
> I was just reading a book on the origins of the 3rd Reich and I ran across a
> quote that effectively said that "one cannot understand Hitler's thinking
> process - without first understanding the works of Wagner and the underlying
> mythologies. " Hmmmmmmmm
That's nonsense. It's just the other way round -- Hitler used the Germanic
mythologies to justify his ideology. Wagner just fit in -- bombastic
enough for Hitler's megalomania, *and* also based on the mythologies.
And that Wagner hated Jews was just the icing on the cake.
If you want Tolkien's opinion:
: Ruining, perverting, misapplying, and making for ever accursed, that
: noble northern spirit, a supreme contribution to Europe, which I have
: ever loved, and tried to present in its true light.
So the germanic mythologies in their original form have nothing to do
with it. Wagners treatment by itself doesn't either. (If you really
want to find out, go read the libretto :-)
- Dirk
calvin
wrote:
> Clams Canino <cc-mar...@earthdink.net> wrote:
> > This must be 'Richard Wagner" week for me. He just keeps coming up.
> > I was just reading a book on the origins of the 3rd Reich and I ran across a
> > quote that effectively said that "one cannot understand Hitler's thinking
> > process - without first understanding the works of Wagner and the underlying
> > mythologies. " Hmmmmmmmm
>
> That's nonsense. It's just the other way round -- Hitler used the Germanic
> mythologies to justify his ideology. Wagner just fit in -- bombastic
> enough for Hitler's megalomania, *and* also based on the mythologies.
> And that Wagner hated Jews was just the icing on the cake.
>
> If you want Tolkien's opinion:
>
> : Ruining, perverting, misapplying, and making for ever accursed, that
> : noble northern spirit, a supreme contribution to Europe, which I have
> : ever loved, and tried to present in its true light.
Please be clear. Was Tolkien referring to Wagner or Hitler?
> So the germanic mythologies in their original form have nothing to do
> with it. Wagners treatment by itself doesn't either. (If you really
> want to find out, go read the libretto :-)
I have them in PDF form, but it's much more enjoyable to
watch DVDs of Ring productions, with subtitles for the
libretto, for example Levine and the Met.
I don't care if Tolkien hated Wagner's Ring or not. I love
it and have no problem holding both Wagner's work and
Tolkien's work in high regard.
Öjevind Lång
> On Dec 16, 6:47 pm, Dirk Thierbach <dthierb...@usenet.arcornews.de>
> wrote:
>> Clams Canino <cc-mar...@earthdink.net> wrote:
>> > This must be 'Richard Wagner" week for me. He just keeps coming up.
>> > I was just reading a book on the origins of the 3rd Reich and I ran
>> > across a
>> > quote that effectively said that "one cannot understand Hitler's
>> > thinking
>> > process - without first understanding the works of Wagner and the
>> > underlying
>> > mythologies. " Hmmmmmmmm
>>
>> That's nonsense. It's just the other way round -- Hitler used the
>> Germanic
>> mythologies to justify his ideology. Wagner just fit in -- bombastic
>> enough for Hitler's megalomania, *and* also based on the mythologies.
>> And that Wagner hated Jews was just the icing on the cake.
>>
>> If you want Tolkien's opinion:
>>
>> : Ruining, perverting, misapplying, and making for ever accursed, that
>> : noble northern spirit, a supreme contribution to Europe, which I have
>> : ever loved, and tried to present in its true light.
>
> Please be clear. Was Tolkien referring to Wagner or Hitler?
To Hitler, whom he called "that ruddy little ignoramus".
�jevind
Clams Canino
>> that effectively said that "one cannot understand Hitler's thinking
> > process - without first understanding the works of Wagner and the
underlying
> > mythologies. " Hmmmmmmmm
>
> That's nonsense. It's just the other way round -- Hitler used the Germanic
> mythologies to justify his ideology. Wagner just fit in -- bombastic
> enough for Hitler's megalomania, *and* also based on the mythologies.
> And that Wagner hated Jews was just the icing on the cake.
While not untrue, that's a gross oversimplification.
Hitler was most likely a clinical psychopath. But apart from periods that he
was wracked with self doubt, he really *believed* that he was the
fulfillment of the mythologies. His status as the only surviving son of
many dead siblings, his survival in the trenches of WWI (despite many acts
of bravery and death all around him), and later his survival of countless
attempts on his life, all reinforced his belief that he was "special" and
"the man of destiny" that Germany was waiting for. He really believed that
he was "chosen" to do great deeds. That he alone could lead a hurt and
broken Germany to "rise again" to its proper stature.
Wagner provided Hitler with much more than mythologies to play into.
Performances of Wagner inspired him, refreshed his soul, recharged his
batteries, calmed his turbulent spirit, and (in his mind) made him a better
more willful person. The music (as well as the mythologies) reached him in a
place nothing else could ever reach. Wagner inspired him as an early teen,
before he had even constructed his ideology or cared much for politics. He
was not just a fan, he was a desciple. (Today we'd call him "a disturbed
fan".) I'll go as far as to say that Hitler revered or looked up to no
man - except Richard Wagner.
And you're correct - that Wagner hated the Jews was just the icing on the
cake. It was not the source of Hitlers antisemitism by any means, but it
reinforced his thinking.
And Wagner would be horrified that he actually inspired such a man to
"action". But inspire and move he really did. And we can't fault Wagner for
that.
-W
calvin
Thank you for saying we can't fault Wagner for that.
After what you wrote you might just as well have said
"And we can fault Wagner for that."
Clams Canino
>Thank you for saying we can't fault Wagner for that.
>After what you wrote you might just as well have said
>"And we can fault Wagner for that."
Art and Music often inspire people. If you thought I was in any way
"blaming" Wagner for his effect of one bizarre individual - you made your
own leaps.
I think it's a safe bet that Wagner in his wildest dreams never thought he'd
inspire *that*. An artist can't chose who his fans will be. But artists
often move and inspire people, it's a gift that they share - usually with
better results.
"Disturbed fans" are more common in the news today, just ask John Lennon.
-W
calvin
> "calvin" <cri...@windstream.net> wrote:
> >Thank you for saying we can't fault Wagner for that.
> >After what you wrote you might just as well have said
> >"And we can fault Wagner for that."
>
> Art and Music often inspire people. If you thought I was in any way
> "blaming" Wagner for his effect of one bizarre individual - you made your
> own leaps.
> I think it's a safe bet that Wagner in his wildest dreams never thought he'd
> inspire *that*. An artist can't chose who his fans will be. But artists
> often move and inspire people, it's a gift that they share - usually with
> better results.
And perhaps there have been some people inspired
by Wagner who have done some very big things on
a grand scale which have benefitted humanity.
John W Kennedy
Let us remember that what Wagner's "Ring" is ultimately /about/ is the
necessity to learn compassion.
--
John W. Kennedy
"The blind rulers of Logres
Nourished the land on a fallacy of rational virtue."
-- Charles Williams. "Taliessin through Logres: Prelude"
Derek Broughton
> Clams Canino <cc-m...@earthdink.net> wrote:
>> This must be 'Richard Wagner" week for me. He just keeps coming up.
>> I was just reading a book on the origins of the 3rd Reich and I ran
>> across a quote that effectively said that "one cannot understand Hitler's
>> thinking process - without first understanding the works of Wagner and
>> the underlying
>> mythologies. " Hmmmmmmmm
>
> That's nonsense. It's just the other way round -- Hitler used the Germanic
> mythologies to justify his ideology. Wagner just fit in -- bombastic
> enough for Hitler's megalomania, *and* also based on the mythologies.
> And that Wagner hated Jews was just the icing on the cake.
It doesn't seem the other way round at all - Hitler used _Wagner's_
adaptations (or at least his interpretation of Wagner's adaptations) of the
mythologies to justify his ideology.
>
> If you want Tolkien's opinion:
>
> : Ruining, perverting, misapplying, and making for ever accursed, that
> : noble northern spirit, a supreme contribution to Europe, which I have
> : ever loved, and tried to present in its true light.
>
> So the germanic mythologies in their original form have nothing to do
> with it. Wagners treatment by itself doesn't either. (If you really
> want to find out, go read the libretto :-)
Of course not. Nobody can but Hitler can be blamed for Hitler.
--
derek
Clams Canino
>And perhaps there have been some people inspired
>by Wagner who have done some very big things on
>a grand scale which have benefitted humanity.
We can surely hope so....
I only brought Wagner "up" because he came up twice in the same day for me -
in two totally different areas of study.
The proper way for me to understand his work better is to see it
*performed*. (As Tolkien said: "one should not merely READ Shakespeare")
Of course only a performance in the proper German would give the full
effect. And alas, that is where I fail, absent a knowledge of the German
language. And I fear merely reading English translations will, for my
purpose, not suffice.
-W
Clams Canino
news:jhlov6-...@morgen.pointerstop.ca...
> Dirk Thierbach wrote:
>
> > Clams Canino <cc-m...@earthdink.net> wrote:
> >> This must be 'Richard Wagner" week for me. He just keeps coming up.
> >> I was just reading a book on the origins of the 3rd Reich and I ran
Hitler's
> >> thinking process - without first understanding the works of Wagner and
> >> the underlying
> >> mythologies. " Hmmmmmmmm
> >
> > That's nonsense. It's just the other way round -- Hitler used the
Germanic
> > mythologies to justify his ideology. Wagner just fit in -- bombastic
> > enough for Hitler's megalomania, *and* also based on the mythologies.
> > And that Wagner hated Jews was just the icing on the cake.
>
> adaptations (or at least his interpretation of Wagner's adaptations) of
the
That's what I was getting at.
For whatever reasons, Wagner "spoke" directly to Hitler, gave him "focus"
for his ideology, and helped inspire him to "greatness" (in Hitler's
thinking). The more you learn of this strange "relationship" the more
bizarre it seems to get.
This is not meant to disparage the works of Wagner. It's more like a tragic
historical footnote to Wagner's legacy. And one that sparked my curiosity.
-W
Weland
In brief terms, the 19th century creation of the "Germanic national
mythos" that Wangner's opera promotes is what really appealed to Hitler
and was used by him.
Dirk Thierbach
> On Dec 16, 8:44 pm, "Clams Canino" <cc-mar...@earthdink.net> wrote:
>> "Dirk Thierbach" <dthierb...@usenet.arcornews.de> wrote:
>>>> that effectively said that "one cannot understand Hitler's
>>>> thinking process - without first understanding the works of
>>>> Wagner and the underlying mythologies. " Hmmmmmmmm
>>> That's nonsense. It's just the other way round -- Hitler used the Germanic
>>> mythologies to justify his ideology. Wagner just fit in -- bombastic
>>> enough for Hitler's megalomania, *and* also based on the mythologies.
>>> And that Wagner hated Jews was just the icing on the cake.
>> While not untrue, that's a gross oversimplification.
Well, yes :-) It was late at night here, and I was trying to be brief.
[Snipped good expansion]
> Thank you for saying we can't fault Wagner for that.
Exactly. That was the point I was trying to make.
BTW, if you want to understand the Nazi movement (not just Hitler by himself),
you might be interested in a movie called "The Wave". IMBD entry:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083316/
It's about an American school where one day during a history class about
Nazi Germany a pupil says "but that couldn't happen today, could it?"
So the teacher tries a little demonstration...
It's from the 80s, so it might be a bit hard to find, but it contains
an eye-opener or two.
- Dirk
Julian Bradfield
> The proper way for me to understand his work better is to see it
> *performed*. (As Tolkien said: "one should not merely READ Shakespeare")
>
> Of course only a performance in the proper German would give the full
> effect. And alas, that is where I fail, absent a knowledge of the German
> language. And I fear merely reading English translations will, for my
> purpose, not suffice.
I'm not so sure. I have (involuntarily) heard the Ring cycle more
times than I care to remember as a child, and (voluntarily) sat
through a performance of the cycle as an adult. My German is not good,
but the libretto is not exactly challenging, especially if you have it
on paper in front of you! It doesn't seem to me that there's all that
much difference between the original German and a decent English
translation - though it would be interesting to hear the views of
German speakers on this.
Incidentally, are there any German speakers here who could comment on
the German translation of LotR? I read it once, and found it very
flat - stylistically unvarying, and just lacking in everything that
makes Tolkien's language great. For a while I assumed it was just my
poor German (I read slowly rather than fluently), but then I read some
actual German literature where I was greatly moved by the language -
so it is actually a poor translation?
Dirk Thierbach
> On 2009-12-17, Clams Canino <cc-m...@earthdink.net> wrote:
>> Of course only a performance in the proper German would give the full
>> effect. And alas, that is where I fail, absent a knowledge of the German
>> language. And I fear merely reading English translations will, for my
>> purpose, not suffice.
It will give you a good idea what he did with the text. AFAIK Wagner
wrote the librettos himself (or at least a large part), and he's a much
better composer than writer :-)
I performed /Der fliegende Hollaender/ as part of the choir, which
meant I had to learn the text by heart, and it's not very good: The
grammar is sometimes a bit doubtful (I noticed because when singing,
I'd automatically replace some words by others); he doesn't know a lot
about sailing, so some things he puts in the mouth of the sailors just
don't make any sense; and of course there's a lot of cheesy drama.
I don't know the text of the /Ring der Nibelungen/ equally well, but
it looks very similar in this respect.
> I'm not so sure. I have (involuntarily) heard the Ring cycle more
> times than I care to remember as a child, and (voluntarily) sat
> through a performance of the cycle as an adult. My German is not good,
> but the libretto is not exactly challenging, especially if you have it
> on paper in front of you! It doesn't seem to me that there's all that
> much difference between the original German and a decent English
> translation - though it would be interesting to hear the views of
> German speakers on this.
That would be easier with a concrete translation :-) IIRC there were
mixed english/original texts available on the WWW somewhere, but I don't
remember where.
> Incidentally, are there any German speakers here who could comment on
> the German translation of LotR?
Which one? There are two, the old one by Margaret Carroux, and the
new one by Wolfgang Krege.
> I read it once, and found it very flat - stylistically unvarying,
> and just lacking in everything that makes Tolkien's language great.
That's probably the old one. Carroux herself said that while
translating, she had to sacrifice many of the differences in style of
the original, and she was a bit unhappy about it. On the positive
side, what she retained is the rhythm, flow and naturalness of the
language. Just like the original, the Carroux translation is really
good for reading out loud. The translation of names is great. Overall, a
very good translation (if you can live with the lack of stylistic
change).
Krege tried to introduce more variety in style, but didn't succeed:
The result feels artificial, the pseudo-modern slang he's using from
time to time isn't genuine, and on about every second page I noticed
some expression that made we want to throw the book against a wall.
One example that stuck was that he translated "by your leave" ("mit
Eurer Erlaubnis") as "gebt mir Urlaub" (literally "give me holidays").
While "Urlaub" may actually be an old form of "Erlaubnis" (I didn't
check), for the modern reader this is just silly.
My impression is that most people who know both actually prefer the
Carroux translation over the Krege translation.
> For a while I assumed it was just my poor German (I read slowly
> rather than fluently), but then I read some actual German literature
> where I was greatly moved by the language - so it is actually a poor
> translation?
Translating is *hard*, you always must sacrifice one aspect or the other.
I think Carroux made a good trade-off. I always enjoyed reading her
version. Yes, German does have a wider range of style, and one can
even write poetry in it if one tries hard enough :-), but there's more
to a translation than just style.
- Dirk
Clams Canino
"Clams Canino" <cc-m...@earthdink.net> wrote in message
> This is not meant to disparage the works of Wagner. It's more like a
tragic
> historical footnote to Wagner's legacy. And one that sparked my curiosity.
When we remember that Hitler did not read to "learn" or "grow", instead he
read to "confirm his ideas"; then Wagners' influence becomes more important.
However, while I want to make clear that I do not wish to disparage the
*artistic* works of Wagner; I do not approve one bit of his other writings
and tracts regarding race, Jews, or politics. In that regard he was indeed
an enabler to his "biggest fan".
Only Hitler is responsible for Hitler, and Hitler had many influences, but I
don't think it's much of a stretch to say that Wagner (the man) was his
"spiritual mentor" in a lot of ways.
-W
Matthew Woodcraft
> Öjevind Lång <ojevin...@bredband.net> wrote:
>> There is also the killing contest between Gimlia and Legolas at
>> Helm's Deep, which is copied straight from "King Solomon's Mines" by
>> L. Rider Haggard, a writer whom Tolkien is known to have read with
>> rgeat enjoyment.
>
> Ah, so that's where it comes from. Thank you. I always suspected that
> this is counting game is a nod to some existing story, but I could
> never place it (I haven't read Haggard yet).
I disbelieve that King Solomon's Mines contains any close parallel to
Gimli and Legolas's counting game (though I agree that Tolkien has many
echoes of H Rider Haggard).
-M-
Clams Canino
> �jevind L�ng <ojevin...@bredband.net> wrote:
> > There is also the killing contest between Gimlia and Legolas at
> > Helm's Deep, which is copied straight from "King Solomon's Mines" by
> > L. Rider Haggard, a writer whom Tolkien is known to have read with
> > rgeat enjoyment.
>
> Ah, so that's where it comes from. Thank you. I always suspected that
> this is counting game is a nod to some existing story, but I could
> never place it (I haven't read Haggard yet).
This came up is discussion of the Jackson film as well. For whatever reason,
the counting game also stood out there as "odd". Which led to it seeming a
bit "out of place" in my next reading of LotR.
I of course dismissed that as influence on me - from the film. Seeing the
above, I feel better now.
-W
Öjevind Lång
"Matthew Woodcraft" <mat...@woodcraft.me.uk> skrev i meddelandet
news:87hbrpr...@golux.woodcraft.me.uk...
I may misremember it being in "King Solomon's Minnes", though I don't think
so. I can assure you that a killing contest exactly like the one between
Gimli and Legolas happens during a battle in one of Haggard's books. One of
the two contestants is Umbopa, which very much makes me inclined to think
that the episode takes place in "King Solomon's Mines".
Öjevind
Öjevind Lång
[snip]
> Krege tried to introduce more variety in style, but didn't succeed:
> The result feels artificial, the pseudo-modern slang he's using from
> time to time isn't genuine, and on about every second page I noticed
> some expression that made we want to throw the book against a wall.
> One example that stuck was that he translated "by your leave" ("mit
> Eurer Erlaubnis") as "gebt mir Urlaub" (literally "give me holidays").
> While "Urlaub" may actually be an old form of "Erlaubnis" (I didn't
> check), for the modern reader this is just silly.
I believe this German translation includes an episode which has been
censored away in all English-language editions of LotR. I am, of course,
referring to the incident by the Falls of Rauros in which Sam tells Frodo
that he is fed up and wants to return home to the Shire for a loong
vacation. Frodo haughtily refuses to grant him a holiday, and Sam is too
cowed to press his demand.
Krege probably recovered the suppressed episode at great personal peril.
Praise him, for truth shall set you free!
�jevind
Noel Q. von Schneiffel
wrote:
> Julian Bradfield <j...@inf.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> > Incidentally, are there any German speakers here who could comment on
> > the German translation of LotR?
>
> Which one? There are two, the old one by Margaret Carroux, and the
> new one by Wolfgang Krege.
>
> > I read it once, and found it very flat - stylistically unvarying,
> > and just lacking in everything that makes Tolkien's language great.
>
> That's probably the old one. Carroux herself said that while
> translating, she had to sacrifice many of the differences in style of
> the original, and she was a bit unhappy about it. On the positive
> side, what she retained is the rhythm, flow and naturalness of the
> language. Just like the original, the Carroux translation is really
> good for reading out loud. The translation of names is great. Overall, a
> very good translation (if you can live with the lack of stylistic
> change).
>
> Krege tried to introduce more variety in style, but didn't succeed:
> The result feels artificial, the pseudo-modern slang he's using from
> time to time isn't genuine, and on about every second page I noticed
> some expression that made we want to throw the book against a wall.
> One example that stuck was that he translated "by your leave" ("mit
> Eurer Erlaubnis") as "gebt mir Urlaub" (literally "give me holidays").
> While "Urlaub" may actually be an old form of "Erlaubnis" (I didn't
> check), for the modern reader this is just silly.
The Carroux translation is obviously inspired by Tolkien himself, who
gave her spiritual guidance and helped her achieve true greatness. It
is therefore the only valid edition. Ah, the beauty of the language!
The abhorrent forger and bumbler Krege must be condemned and boycotted
by all true fans. It is our duty to break into all German bookshops,
steal his edition and dump it in a bog in lower Ostfriesland, so that
Carroux' edition is restored to its rightful place on the bookshelf.
Noel
Pseudonymus al-Faqha'ter III
> "Dirk Thierbach" <dthierb...@usenet.arcornews.de> skrev i meddelandetnews:20091217111306...@dthierbach.news.arcor.de...
Are the authors of the so-called "e-text" (an infamous project to
deceive innocent students) Krege's sockpuppets, then?
Derek Broughton
> BTW, if you want to understand the Nazi movement (not just Hitler by
> himself), you might be interested in a movie called "The Wave". IMBD
> entry:
>
> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083316/
>
> It's about an American school where one day during a history class about
> Nazi Germany a pupil says "but that couldn't happen today, could it?"
> So the teacher tries a little demonstration...
>
Ugh. I can see how that would play out.
--
derek
Paul S. Person
<ojevin...@bredband.net> wrote:
>"Matthew Woodcraft" <mat...@woodcraft.me.uk> skrev i meddelandet
>news:87hbrpr...@golux.woodcraft.me.uk...
>> Dirk Thierbach <dthie...@usenet.arcornews.de> writes:
>>
>>> �jevind L�ng <ojevin...@bredband.net> wrote:
>>>> There is also the killing contest between Gimlia and Legolas at
>>>> Helm's Deep, which is copied straight from "King Solomon's Mines" by
>>>> L. Rider Haggard, a writer whom Tolkien is known to have read with
>>>> rgeat enjoyment.
>>>
>>> Ah, so that's where it comes from. Thank you. I always suspected that
>>> this is counting game is a nod to some existing story, but I could
>>> never place it (I haven't read Haggard yet).
>>
>> I disbelieve that King Solomon's Mines contains any close parallel to
>> Gimli and Legolas's counting game (though I agree that Tolkien has many
>> echoes of H Rider Haggard).
>
>I may misremember it being in "King Solomon's Minnes", though I don't think
>so. I can assure you that a killing contest exactly like the one between
>Gimli and Legolas happens during a battle in one of Haggard's books. One of
>the two contestants is Umbopa, which very much makes me inclined to think
>that the episode takes place in "King Solomon's Mines".
I haven't read it at all recently, but I honestly don't remember it
from /King Solomon's Mines/, /She/, or /Alan Qatermain/ (which I have
in one volume thanks to a purchase from Dover Books in Feb 1983).
/Alan Qatermain/ is a sequel to /King Solomon's Mines/, so Umbopa
might appear in it. Unless, of course, he dies in /King Solomon's
Mines/, of course.But I really don't remember.
--
Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, "I never knew him."
Öjevind Lång
news:vb1li5t80e7cu2n0g...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 15:56:44 +0100, �jevind L�ng
[snip]
> I haven't read it at all recently, but I honestly don't remember it
> from /King Solomon's Mines/, /She/, or /Alan Qatermain/ (which I have
> in one volume thanks to a purchase from Dover Books in Feb 1983).
>
> /Alan Qatermain/ is a sequel to /King Solomon's Mines/, so Umbopa
> might appear in it. Unless, of course, he dies in /King Solomon's
> Mines/, of course.But I really don't remember.
Isn't "The Mines" the one in which Umbopa regains the throne of his
ancestors? Rather like Aragorn, when one thinks about it.
�jevind
Matthew Woodcraft
> "Matthew Woodcraft" <mat...@woodcraft.me.uk> skrev i meddelandet
>> I disbelieve that King Solomon's Mines contains any close parallel to
>> Gimli and Legolas's counting game (though I agree that Tolkien has many
>> echoes of H Rider Haggard).
>
> I may misremember it being in "King Solomon's Minnes", though I don't think
> so. I can assure you that a killing contest exactly like the one between Gimli
> and Legolas happens during a battle in one of Haggard's books. One of the two
> contestants is Umbopa, which very much makes me inclined to think that the
> episode takes place in "King Solomon's Mines".
Maybe it's Umslopogaas? It sounds like his style. But I don't think it's
in /Allan Quartermain/ either. Maybe /Nada the Lily/? I haven't read
that for ages.
The lake-and-cave-and-river sequence leading to the hidden land in
/Allan Quartermain/ reminds me rather of the geography of the beginning
of Tuor.
-M-
Öjevind Lång
> Öjevind Lång <ojevin...@bredband.net> writes:
>
>> "Matthew Woodcraft" <mat...@woodcraft.me.uk> skrev i meddelandet
>>> I disbelieve that King Solomon's Mines contains any close parallel to
>>> Gimli and Legolas's counting game (though I agree that Tolkien has many
>>> echoes of H Rider Haggard).
>>
>> I may misremember it being in "King Solomon's Minnes", though I don't
>> think
>> so. I can assure you that a killing contest exactly like the one between
>> Gimli
>> and Legolas happens during a battle in one of Haggard's books. One of the
>> two
>> contestants is Umbopa, which very much makes me inclined to think that
>> the
>> episode takes place in "King Solomon's Mines".
>
> Maybe it's Umslopogaas? It sounds like his style. But I don't think it's
> in /Allan Quartermain/ either. Maybe /Nada the Lily/? I haven't read
> that for ages.
You know, that could be it. I only remembered the name of Umbopa.
> The lake-and-cave-and-river sequence leading to the hidden land in
> /Allan Quartermain/ reminds me rather of the geography of the beginning
> of Tuor.
Yes, it does, actually.
Öjevind
Troels Forchhammer
Weland <gi...@poetic.com> spoke these staves:
>
> Dirk Thierbach wrote:
>>
>>
>> 锟絡evind L锟絥g <ojevin...@bredband.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Of course, Tolkien used older sources for inspiration, and he
>>> was not quite as uninfluenced by "Das Ring der Niebelungen" as
>>> he claimed. There was more to it than just "both rings being
>>> round".
>>
>> I still think that this was referring especially to Wagner's
>> treatment
[...]
Yes, I am sure that you are right -- Tolkien was refusing the
suggestion that he was inspired by _Wagner's_ version specifically.
>> It's obvious that Tolkien was influenced by the Nibelungenlied
>> and the other Siegfried tales, but these are quite different from
>> what Wagner turned them into.
>
> I agree: One really should treat as separate works
> Niebelungenlied and Wagner's Das Ring der Niebelungen.
What about the German and the Norse versions? The version that _The
Legend of Sigurd and Gudr锟絥_ is based on is obviously the Norse
version (Sigurd rather than Siegfried), which is (of course) also the
version that I am familiar with, but how much different is the
V锟絣sungasaga from the old Niebelungenlied?
> I wonder though, Dirk, if it is obvious and if we can not find
> similar scenes in other Germanic or Classical literature that are
> just as much an influence.
Are you thinking of any specific scenes or themes? Clearly Tolkien
was not only inspired by the V锟絣sungasaga in a general manner, but I
also think that there are specific scenes, such as e.g. T锟絩in's
attack on Glaurung, that are specifically inspired by the
V锟絣sungasaga. Whether this applies to the One Ring is another
question -- while it seems to me likely that the One Ring does
inherit some elements from Andvari's ring, I believe that it also
inherits elements from many other sources as well as receiving
elements that are uniquely Tolkien's own.
--
Troels Forchhammer <troelsfo(a)googlewave.com>
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.
Scientific reasoning works only with measurements: only
when we have a number and a unit. Thus, topics for which
we have no measurements, scientific investigation is not
useful. No math, no science. When we do have
measurements, scientific reasoning cannot be ignored.
- Dr Nancy's Sweetie on usenet
Message-ID: <ds159c$p45$1...@pcls4.std.com>
Steve Hayes
wrote:
>"Matthew Woodcraft" <mat...@woodcraft.me.uk> skrev i meddelandet
>news:871vitq...@golux.woodcraft.me.uk...
>> �jevind L�ng <ojevin...@bredband.net> writes:
>>
>>> "Matthew Woodcraft" <mat...@woodcraft.me.uk> skrev i meddelandet
>>>> I disbelieve that King Solomon's Mines contains any close parallel to
>>>> Gimli and Legolas's counting game (though I agree that Tolkien has many
>>>> echoes of H Rider Haggard).
>>>
>>> I may misremember it being in "King Solomon's Minnes", though I don't
>>> think
>>> so. I can assure you that a killing contest exactly like the one between
>>> Gimli
>>> and Legolas happens during a battle in one of Haggard's books. One of the
>>> two
>>> contestants is Umbopa, which very much makes me inclined to think that
>>> the
>>> episode takes place in "King Solomon's Mines".
>>
>> Maybe it's Umslopogaas? It sounds like his style. But I don't think it's
>> in /Allan Quartermain/ either. Maybe /Nada the Lily/? I haven't read
>> that for ages.
>
>You know, that could be it. I only remembered the name of Umbopa.
>
>> The lake-and-cave-and-river sequence leading to the hidden land in
>> /Allan Quartermain/ reminds me rather of the geography of the beginning
>> of Tuor.
>
>Yes, it does, actually.
And was in turn inspired by
In Xanadu did Kubla Khan...
--
Steve Hayes
Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/litmain.htm
http://www.goodreads.com/hayesstw
http://www.bookcrossing.com/mybookshelf/Methodius
Weland
> In message <news:hgb1vt$lc8$1...@news.eternal-september.org>
> Weland <gi...@poetic.com> spoke these staves:
>> Dirk Thierbach wrote:
>>>
>>>> Of course, Tolkien used older sources for inspiration, and he
>>>> was not quite as uninfluenced by "Das Ring der Niebelungen" as
>>>> he claimed. There was more to it than just "both rings being
>>>> round".
>>> I still think that this was referring especially to Wagner's
>>> treatment
> [...]
>
> Yes, I am sure that you are right -- Tolkien was refusing the
> suggestion that he was inspired by _Wagner's_ version specifically.
>
>>> It's obvious that Tolkien was influenced by the Nibelungenlied
>>> and the other Siegfried tales, but these are quite different from
>>> what Wagner turned them into.
>> I agree: One really should treat as separate works
>> Niebelungenlied and Wagner's Das Ring der Niebelungen.
>
> What about the German and the Norse versions? The version that _The
> version that I am familiar with, but how much different is the
Same thing. I mean, it is interesting on the one hand to compile and
read all the existing versions of a tale, but in doing so one should not
just treat the Volsungasaga and the Niebelungenlied as the same text.
To answer the question I'd have to go back and reread both and set them
together...I might be able to find something that does that for us though.
>
>> I wonder though, Dirk, if it is obvious and if we can not find
>> similar scenes in other Germanic or Classical literature that are
>> just as much an influence.
>
> Are you thinking of any specific scenes or themes?
How shall I name them all? Certainly the Aeneid plays a part, as does
the Bible, I've meant to make a catalog some day of all the passages and
influences starting with LoTR and moving out from there, but have yet to
begin such a project.
Clearly Tolkien
> was not only inspired by the V�lsungasaga in a general manner, but I
> also think that there are specific scenes, such as e.g. T�rin's
> attack on Glaurung, that are specifically inspired by the
> V�lsungasaga. Whether this applies to the One Ring is another
> question -- while it seems to me likely that the One Ring does
> inherit some elements from Andvari's ring, I believe that it also
> inherits elements from many other sources as well as receiving
> elements that are uniquely Tolkien's own.
Yes, I'd say that the rings, for example, in Yvain are as influential.
Yvain in the course of the story is given a ring that makes him
invisible and later another that makes him invincible (unable to be
defeated, so near enough to invincible). Brosing necklace is called
sometimes a ring, and causes death to the human wearer.
Matthew Woodcraft
> What about the German and the Norse versions? The version that _The
> version (Sigurd rather than Siegfried), which is (of course) also the
> version that I am familiar with, but how much different is the
Really rather different. Many of the same events occur, but the
circumstances and motivations are radically changed. All a bit Peter
Jackson really.
Of particular relevance, the Niebelungenlied doesn't involve a magic
ring.
-M-
John W Kennedy
> Troels Forchhammer<Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid> writes:
>
>> J.R.R. Tolkien had many sources -- from ancient pagan mythologies to
>> contemporary fiction (e.g. Lord Dunsany), but he combined them in
>> entirely new ways and always added something uniquely his own.
>
> Could you elaborate on Dunsany as a source for Tolkien? Although
> there are obvious similarities of atmosphere in some of Dunsany's work, I
> hadn't seen that connection stated before.
I remember noting a certain resemblance between the "Valaquenta" and
"The Gods of Pegāna".
John W Kennedy
> I'm not so sure. I have (involuntarily) heard the Ring cycle more
> times than I care to remember as a child, and (voluntarily) sat
> through a performance of the cycle as an adult. My German is not good,
> but the libretto is not exactly challenging, especially if you have it
> on paper in front of you! It doesn't seem to me that there's all that
> much difference between the original German and a decent English
> translation - though it would be interesting to hear the views of
> German speakers on this.
My German is weak, but I am a semi-pro opera singer. I'd say that the
biggest problem is that no translation can really duplicate the poetic
effects, and that the German nonsense words (the Rhinemaidens' songs,
"Hojotoho!", etc.) sound as clumsy to an English ear as I dare say
"Falalalala, derry-down, derry-down" sound to a German. But that's true
of all translations -- assuming that this is a translation to be read;
translations meant to be sung are almost invariably vile.
Clams Canino
"John W Kennedy" <jwk...@attglobal.net> wrote in message
news:4b2da32d$0$5001
> My German is weak, but I am a semi-pro opera singer. I'd say that the
> biggest problem is that no translation can really duplicate the poetic
> effects, and that the German nonsense words (the Rhinemaidens' songs,
> "Hojotoho!", etc.) sound as clumsy to an English ear as I dare say
> "Falalalala, derry-down, derry-down" sound to a German. But that's true
> of all translations -- assuming that this is a translation to be read;
> translations meant to be sung are almost invariably vile.
That was my fear.... that even if I saw it in German with an English
translation sheet in front of me - I'd still not quite get the desired
effect.
-W
Julian Bradfield
But can't one generalize John's statement to "opera libretti are
almost invariably vile, even before translation";-? (Gilbert and
Sullivan excepted, of course!)
Troels Forchhammer
Matthew Woodcraft <mat...@woodcraft.me.uk> spoke these staves:
> Troels Forchhammer <Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid> writes:
>>
>> What about the German and the Norse versions?
>> how much different is the V�lsungasaga from the old
>> Niebelungenlied?
[...]
> Of particular relevance, the Niebelungenlied doesn't involve a
> magic ring.
Neither does the V�lsungasaga -- the ring, Andvaranaut, becomes a
symbol of Andvari's hoard of gold and it is the hoard as such that is
cursed to bring death to anyone who owned the ring and the rest of the
gold.
--
Troels Forchhammer <troelsfo(a)googlewave.com>
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.
Lo! we have gathered, and we have spent, and now the time
of payment draws near.
- Aragorn, /The Lord of the Rings/ (J.R.R. Tolkien)
John W Kennedy
It is unfortunate that the golden age of opera largely overlaps with the
tinfoil age of theater -- i.e., the late 18th and 19th centuries. Most
operas, believe it or not, are based on hit plays of the time. It is
also true that most librettists were at about the Brill-building level
of sophistication. Still, some were talented poets and/or playwrights --
Boito is universally recognized as the greatest of the Italians, Mozart
had Da Ponte and Schikaneder, and Wagner is always at least workmanlike.
Even Gilbert sometimes nods. The first-act finale of "Iolanthe" uses the
old hack's rhyme-forcing trick of "noun so adjective" three times. But
at times, he can be as good a poet as anyone else in Victorian England,
as in "Is Life a boon?".
Paul S. Person
<mat...@woodcraft.me.uk> wrote:
>Troels Forchhammer <Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid> writes:
>> What about the German and the Norse versions? The version that _The
>> Legend of Sigurd and Gudr�n_ is based on is obviously the Norse
>> version (Sigurd rather than Siegfried), which is (of course) also the
>> version that I am familiar with, but how much different is the
>> V�lsungasaga from the old Niebelungenlied?
>
>Really rather different. Many of the same events occur, but the
>circumstances and motivations are radically changed. All a bit Peter
>Jackson really.
>
>Of particular relevance, the Niebelungenlied doesn't involve a magic
>ring.
Then I guess Anna Russel was incorrect when she stated that the ring
had to power to make its owner the master of the Universe, provided he
renounced love.
That sounds plenty "magical" to me!
Steve Morrison
> What about the German and the Norse versions? The version that _The
> Legend of Sigurd and Gudr�n_ is based on is obviously the Norse
> version (Sigurd rather than Siegfried), which is (of course) also the
> version that I am familiar with, but how much different is the
> V�lsungasaga from the old Niebelungenlied?
Some differences: in the /Nibelungenlied/, Siegfried's parents are still
alive (and are the King and Queen of the Netherlands), whereas in the
Saga (and the Eddaic lays it's based on) Sigmund is killed before
Sigurd's birth and Sigurd's mother Hj�rdis has remarried. In the
/Nibelungenlied/, Hagen is merely one of the Gebichung thanes, but in
the Norse versions he is one of the Gebichungs themselves. Moreover,
Hagen is Siegfried's murderer in the /Nibelungenlied/, but in the Saga,
the killer is another brother named Guttorm. The Saga also has an
incident in which Gudrun deliberately provokes Hagen to kill one of her
children in order to start the fight between the Burgunds and the Huns,
but the /Nibelungenlied/ doesn't have Kriemhild do any such thing.
Then too, the entire action of the /Nibelungenlied/ takes place in a
smaller span of time, since Siegfried is already a famous hero at the
beginning, and the story ends with the death of the Burgundians. Of
course, the Saga tells the whole story of the Volsungs beginning with
Sigurd's great-great-grandfather and continuing to the death of Gudrun's
children by a third marriage.
Troels Forchhammer
Paul S. Person <pspe...@ix.netscom.com.invalid> spoke these staves:
<snip>
>> Of particular relevance, the Niebelungenlied doesn't involve a
>> magic ring.
>
> Then I guess Anna Russel was incorrect when she stated that the
> ring had to power to make its owner the master of the Universe,
> provided he renounced love.
>
> That sounds plenty "magical" to me!
I hope you'll forgive me, but I'm getting a bit confused, and I
suspect that I may not be the only one . . . :)
We have, as far as I know, been discussing at least three different
tellings of this story:
The V�lsungasaga (I hope you'll forgive me for starting closest to my
heart): This is the old Norse version telling the story of the
V�lsungar, a line of legendary kings and warriors, including the
story of Sigurd who killed the dragon Fafnir. As far as I know, this
is the earliest version and while no text survives from that period,
illustrations survive from before AD 1000 (if anyone know better, I
am eager to learn about it).
The Nibelungenlied, which Steve (and thanks for that!) explains tells
only the story of the dragon-slayer who is, in this story, called
Siegfried. This is the tale for which Matthew notes that it, like the
V�lsungasaga, does not involve a magic ring. This epic lay is, as far
as I have been able to find, probably composed in the thirteenth
century.
Wagner's Ring-cycle (Der Ring des Nibelungen), based upon the
Niebelungenlied, but differing from it in many ways, this tale _does_
involve a very powerful magical ring.
We might add Tolkien's _The Legend of Sigurd and Gudr�n_, which, as
far as I know, is a rather close retelling of a part of the
V�slungasaga (but, again as far as I know, _not_ just a translation).
There is probably also a German tradition that predates the
Nibelungenlied which we can call the Nibelungensaga to distinquish
the earliest 'Siegfried-tradition' from the Old Norse 'Sigurd-
tradition' (this is possibly what Larry is thinking of when he says
it is the 'same thing' as the V�lsungasaga?)
There is a Wikipedia article on an 'Anna Russel' that notes that she
has commented upon Der Ring des Nibelungen,
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Russell>, but I don't know if
you're thinking of a different Anna Russel, or if she has also
commented upon the Nibelungenlied?
Hmm -- I'm not sure that this attempt to list the main variant
'strands' of this tale has really helped me get less confused ;-) and
I hope that any errors that I have made will be corrected by those
who know more than I . . .
--
Troels Forchhammer <troelsfo(a)googlewave.com>
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.
In this case the cause (not the 'hero') was triumphant,
because by the exercise of pity, mercy, and forgiveness of
injury, a situation was produced in which all was redressed
and disaster averted.
- J.R.R. Tolkien, /The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien/ #192
Dirk Thierbach
> We have, as far as I know, been discussing at least three different
> tellings of this story:
BTW, in RtME there is a diagram of various variants of the story, and
their relationship. IDHTBH, but IIRC it's at least five different
versions.
- Dirk
Weland
> In message <news:gcjvi5pievpf45eb5...@4ax.com>
> There is probably also a German tradition that predates the
> Nibelungenlied which we can call the Nibelungensaga to distinquish
> the earliest 'Siegfried-tradition' from the Old Norse 'Sigurd-
> tradition' (this is possibly what Larry is thinking of when he says
> it is the 'same thing' as the V�lsungasaga?)
Ah, sorry....let me reconstruct a little....
Someone, I've forgotten whom, apologies for that, made a comment about
the Niebelunglied being a source, but not the same as, Wagner's Der
Ring. I wanted to reinforce that idea and make it even more explicit,
so I said something along the lines of the Niebelungenlied and Der Ring
being different stories and need to be kept separate. Troels then
brought up the Volsungasaga by asking "What about the Norse sources?" I
replied "Same thing". *I* meant that the same principle should apply:
even though drawing on the same narrative tradition and belonging in the
same fork of the Tree of Tales, the Volsungasaga and the Niebelungenlied
are different stories and shouldn't be treated as the same. That's all.
Steve Morrison
Ah, thanks. I was about to point out that the /Nibelungenlied/ wasn't in
fact Wagner's main source; he usually draws more from the /Volsungasaga/
and the /Poetic Edda/ instead. Perhaps the reason for the misperception
is that Wagner usually prefers German names of characters to Norse forms
(naturally, since he was German!) so the names he uses are much closer
to those in the /Nibelungenlied/ than in any of the Scandinavian
versions. I think Christopher Tolkien actually says this in the preface
to /The Legend of Sigurd and Gudr�n/.
Of course, by the same token, we shouldn't just equate the /Saga/ with
the Eddaic lays it was derived from, either. Or the various Eddaic
versions with each other!
Steve Morrison
> Yes, I'd say that the rings, for example, in Yvain are as influential.
> Yvain in the course of the story is given a ring that makes him
> invisible and later another that makes him invincible (unable to be
> defeated, so near enough to invincible). Brosing necklace is called
> sometimes a ring, and causes death to the human wearer.
Rateliff believes that Yvain's ring is the most direct source for
Bilbo's ring, as he says here:
Paul S. Person
<Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid> wrote:
In message <news:gcjvi5pievpf45eb5...@4ax.com>
>Paul S. Person <pspe...@ix.netscom.com.invalid> spoke these staves:
>>
>> On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 15:55:15 GMT, Matthew Woodcraft
>> <mat...@woodcraft.me.uk> wrote:
>>>
>
><snip>
>
>>> Of particular relevance, the Niebelungenlied doesn't involve a
>>> magic ring.
>>
>> Then I guess Anna Russel was incorrect when she stated that the
>> ring had to power to make its owner the master of the Universe,
>> provided he renounced love.
>>
>> That sounds plenty "magical" to me!
>
>I hope you'll forgive me, but I'm getting a bit confused, and I
>suspect that I may not be the only one . . . :)
<snippo list of items under discussion>
>There is a Wikipedia article on an 'Anna Russel' that notes that she
>has commented upon Der Ring des Nibelungen,
><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Russell>, but I don't know if
>you're thinking of a different Anna Russel, or if she has also
>commented upon the Nibelungenlied?
That's the one.
She explains the whole thing. Takes about 25 minutes.
Troels Forchhammer
Steve Morrison <rim...@toast.net> spoke these staves:
> Weland wrote:
>>
>> Ah, sorry....let me reconstruct a little....
>> *I* meant that the same principle should apply: even though
>> drawing on the same narrative tradition and belonging in the same
>> fork of the Tree of Tales, the Volsungasaga and the
>> Niebelungenlied are different stories and shouldn't be treated as
>> the same. That's all.
Thank you for the clarification.
I looked up the diagram that Dirk mentions (and thanks a _lot_ to
Dirk for that reference!) from _The Road to Middle-earth_ (it's in
chapter 9 'The Course of Actual Composition', page 354 in my edition)
and which I had forgotten all about, and after reading Shippey's
explanation, the relationships between the texts do seem a bit more
understandable (though just looking at the diagram at first made
things even more confusing).
According to Shippey, all the surviving versions are actually
_retellings_ of earlier poems that have been lost (Shippey's diagram
hypethesises two original *-poems), but, as far as I understand what
you say, we should nevertheless be careful not to consider these
stories as _just_ versions of the same thing? Isn't this a risk that
is also inherent in asking about the differences? That we may treat
them as the same story told in different ways? (Perhaps this was the
very point you wanted to make?)
Shippey uses this to move on to a discussion of Tolkien's story of
Beren and Tin�viel in its many extant versions (Shippey lists nine).
In that case, however, I am tempted to claim that it is, in essence,
the same story that is told in different ways.
Is it possible, without going into too much detail, to elaborate a
bit on the way in which the different retellings of the Nibelung /
V�lsunga cycle are different stories? I am of course also interested
in knowing to what extent this can or should be applied to e.g. the
different versions of Tolkien's Beren and Tin�viel story.
> Ah, thanks. I was about to point out that the /Nibelungenlied/
> wasn't in fact Wagner's main source; he usually draws more from
> the /Volsungasaga/ and the /Poetic Edda/ instead.
I didn't know that, thank you!
To be honest, I don't much like Wagner's music, which is too pompous
for my taste, and as a result I have never been interested in
studying any aspect of Der Ring des Nibelungen. I suppose it is not
just a matter of taking story-elements from one side and names from
another, but of taking elements from all versions and adding a lot of
his own? (And what about the Lied fom H�rnen Seyfrid, which Shippey
calls 'a late and poor-grade poem'?)
> Perhaps the reason for the misperception is that Wagner usually
> prefers German names of characters to Norse forms (naturally,
> since he was German!) so the names he uses are much closer to
> those in the /Nibelungenlied/ than in any of the Scandinavian
> versions.
Quite possibly. I would like to be able to say that I had this
misconception from somewhere, but I think it is primarily due simply
to the focus on the Nibelung name -- whether the song or the ring of
the Nibelung ;-)
> I think Christopher Tolkien actually says this in the preface to
> /The Legend of Sigurd and Gudr�n/.
I am increasingly coming to the conclusion that I probably ought to
buy this book -- I can always justify the expense by my enjoyment of
Tolkien's alliterative poetry in the scaldic style (the only poetic
retelling I've got does, to my great disappointment, not follow the
scaldic alliterative 'meter').
> Of course, by the same token, we shouldn't just equate the /Saga/
> with the Eddaic lays it was derived from, either. Or the various
> Eddaic versions with each other!
It is a very interesting question, and one that is certainly not
irrelevant to the study and discussion of Tolkien's legendarium. Even
if we know that the different versions of Tolkien's central tales all
have only one author, they do, within their narrative conceit, each
have different authors, different contexts, different purposes and
even different narrative styles, so much of the same conceptual
apparatus and terminology should be applicable to Tolkien's
legendarium.
--
Troels Forchhammer <troelsfo(a)googlewave.com>
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.
The idea that time may vary from place to place is a
difficult one, but it is the idea Einstein used, and it is
correct - believe it or not.
- Richard Feynman
Troels Forchhammer
>
> Troels Forchhammer wrote:
>>
>> In message <news:hgb1vt$lc8$1...@news.eternal-september.org>
>> Weland <gi...@poetic.com> spoke these staves:
>>>
<snip>
>>> I wonder though, Dirk, if it is obvious and if we can not find
>>> similar scenes in other Germanic or Classical literature that
>>> are just as much an influence.
>>
>> Are you thinking of any specific scenes or themes?
>
> How shall I name them all?
Sorry -- I got the impression that you were thinking of a specific
element for which the Nibelung-cycle (in one variant or another) has
been attributed as a source, but for which you felt that other
sources were 'as much an influence', and so I got curious. At the
general level, I naturally agree ;-)
> Certainly the Aeneid plays a part, as does the Bible,
Indeed -- and Beowulf and many other besides.
> I've meant to make a catalog some day of all the passages and
> influences starting with LoTR and moving out from there, but
> have yet to begin such a project.
That would be a huge project and perhaps not one that can even be
finished. Perhaps it would be possible to start with the more obvious
examples -- places where Tolkien seems to have borrowed an entire
scene or tableau from a source (the approach to Meduseld, the slaying
of Glaurung, the T�rin / Nienor story etc.), but these are possibly
also the least interesting cases?
> Yes, I'd say that the rings, for example, in Yvain are as
> influential. Yvain in the course of the story is given a ring that
> makes him invisible and later another that makes him invincible
> (unable to be defeated, so near enough to invincible). Brosing
> necklace is called sometimes a ring, and causes death to the human
> wearer.
I think it is useful to distinguish between Bilbo's ring in _The
Hobbit_ and the sources for that, and then the change into the Master
Ring and the sources for that change. Obviously the sources for the
former get absorbed into the latter in the transformation of the
ring, but the transformation is so profound that I nevertheless think
it is useful to separate things. When people see a parallel between
Wagner's ring and Tolkien's One Ring, it is the Master Ring in LotR
they think of, but the primary source for that ring is Bilbo's ring
in _The Hobbit_ . . .
--
Troels Forchhammer <troelsfo(a)googlewave.com>
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.
For animals, the entire universe has been neatly divided
into things to (a) mate with, (b) eat, (c) run away from,
and (d) rocks.
- /Equal Rites/ (Terry Pratchett)
Dirk Thierbach
> On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 22:16:07 +0100, Troels Forchhammer
>> There is a Wikipedia article on an 'Anna Russel' that notes that she
>> has commented upon Der Ring des Nibelungen,
> That's the one.
> She explains the whole thing. Takes about 25 minutes.
It's on Youtube, BTW: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TM15dEexiu0
Funny enough. Though her pronounciation of German is terrible. I swear
she's making up at least half of the words. (And "Weiche!" means "Go
away!", not "Be careful!". Though that would spoil the joke, of
course).
- Dirk
Derek Broughton
> Paul S. Person <pspe...@ix.netscom.com.invalid> wrote:
>> On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 22:16:07 +0100, Troels Forchhammer
>
>>> There is a Wikipedia article on an 'Anna Russel' that notes that she
>>> has commented upon Der Ring des Nibelungen,
I hope you weren't expecting learned commentary - for any who don't know,
Russel was a trained singer who found she had a much better talent for
comedy. Particularly for spoofing opera.
>
>> That's the one.
>> She explains the whole thing. Takes about 25 minutes.
>
> It's on Youtube, BTW: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TM15dEexiu0
>
> Funny enough. Though her pronounciation of German is terrible. I swear
> she's making up at least half of the words. (And "Weiche!" means "Go
> away!", not "Be careful!". Though that would spoil the joke, of
> course).
So would have pronouncing the words appropriately :-) I think she probably
could have managed a better job, if that's what she was trying to do. (and
I expect she _is_ making up the words).
--
derek
Thomas Koenig
> (And "Weiche!" means "Go
> away!", not "Be careful!".
That reminds me of a terrible joke I once heard...
One of the opera singers performing in the Ring was supposed
to be very stand-offish and cold. There was a bet on that
one of the others would make her laugh during a performance.
On stage, he asked here in a low voice
"Moegen Sie lieber harte oder weiche Eier zum Fruehstueck?"
(Do you like soft-boiled or hard-boiled eggs for breakfast?)
And she had to sing, in reply
"Weiche, Wotan, Weiche"
(soft-boiled ones, Wotan, soft-boiled ones).
Paul S. Person
Making up German words (while not, perhaps, all that common) is not
all that uncommon, at least in the USA. Someone who has actually
studied German can do this much better, of course.
This was much more the case in the 50's and 60's, of course, since a
large part of the adult population had been in Europe during WWII and
so exposed to all sorts of German expressions (most of which, to be
sure, cannot be said in polite company, at least, not in polite
company that actually understands what they mean).
This also happened to some extent with Japanese, although actually
making words up isn't that common. German is an easier target, because
it is much closer to English to begin with.
I recall reading a printed card in the 50's that was supposed to be
advice to the public at a computer center; I don't recall the whole
thing, but the punch line was something like "so sit still and watch
the blinkenlights".
I think this may be one reason why /The Longest Day/ and /Tora! Tora!
Tora!/ were so successful even though half the scenes (more or less)
were subtitled: it felt right to audiences in the USA for the Germans
to speak German and the Japanese to speak Japanese.
Steve Morrison
> I recall reading a printed card in the 50's that was supposed to be
> advice to the public at a computer center; I don't recall the whole
> thing, but the punch line was something like "so sit still and watch
> the blinkenlights".
Dirk Thierbach
> Making up German words (while not, perhaps, all that common) is not
> all that uncommon, at least in the USA.
Yes, I know. And I've seen /The Great Dictator/. I just thought that
she was singing actual excerpts, when with a bit of closer listening
it looks like she isn't.
BTW, the Germans take revenge by making up English words :-) Like
"showmaster". Or "handy".
> I think this may be one reason why /The Longest Day/ and /Tora! Tora!
> Tora!/ were so successful even though half the scenes (more or less)
> were subtitled: it felt right to audiences in the USA for the Germans
> to speak German and the Japanese to speak Japanese.
I only wish they'd show subtitled movies on TV here (no matter if
American, British, French, or Japanese, or whatever).
- Dirk
Derek Broughton
They don't? I spent a few months on business in Belgium, where I was
getting French & German TV, as well as Belgian. I always watched the movies
on German TV because the English movies were subtitled, where the French
channels were all dubbed.
--
derek
John W Kennedy
> I only wish they'd show subtitled movies on TV here (no matter if
> American, British, French, or Japanese, or whatever).
The bad German dubbing of "Babylon 5" is a legend even in the US!
Dirk Thierbach
> On 12/23/09 4:05 PM, Dirk Thierbach wrote:
>> I only wish they'd show subtitled movies on TV here (no matter if
>> American, British, French, or Japanese, or whatever).
> The bad German dubbing of "Babylon 5" is a legend even in the US!
Don't even get me started on that. Though I'm surprised this is known
in the US.
But to be fair, sometimes they do a really good job with the dubbing.
Star Wars (the first one, of course), for example. I still prefer
Princess Leia speaking with an accent that actual sounds royal instead
of that dreadful American one in the original.
- Dirk
Dirk Thierbach
>> I only wish they'd show subtitled movies on TV here (no matter if
>> American, British, French, or Japanese, or whatever).
> They don't? I spent a few months on business in Belgium, where I was
> getting French & German TV, as well as Belgian. I always watched the movies
> on German TV because the English movies were subtitled, where the French
> channels were all dubbed.
Then you didn't watch German TV, but something else :-) *All* movies
on German TV are dubbed. The only exception is "arte", which is a
French/German cooperation, where you sometimes get both a French and a
German channel. Which isn't particularly helpful for English movies.
If want you want see English movies in the original language, you need
to live near a major city, because some cinemas do that (but not many).
It's really a shame, because AFAIK many scandinavian countries show
subtitled versions, which means the kids pick up a much better
pronounciation.
- Dirk
Raven
news:20091224081651...@dthierbach.news.arcor.de...
> It's really a shame, because AFAIK many scandinavian countries show
> subtitled versions, which means the kids pick up a much better
> pronounciation.
But not politicians. Mocking the English pronunciation of our
politicians is a favourite Scand pastime in our media.
Rabe.
JJ
wrote:
>
> BTW, the Germans take revenge by making up English words :-) Like
> "showmaster". Or "handy".
>
"handy" is an English word: it means 'useful' or similar! :o)
Dirk Thierbach
Our politicians don't even attempt to speak English publicly. Which
is probably a wise decision.
- Dirk
Dirk Thierbach
> On Dec 23, 9:05 pm, Dirk Thierbach <dthierb...@usenet.arcornews.de>
> wrote:
>> BTW, the Germans take revenge by making up English words :-) Like
>> "showmaster". Or "handy".
> "handy" is an English word: it means 'useful' or similar! :o)
Yes, but in German, it means a cell phone/mobile phone (in case you
didn't know; I'm not sure how to interpret the smiley).
- Dirk
Derek Broughton
> On Dec 23, 9:05 pm, Dirk Thierbach <dthierb...@usenet.arcornews.de>
> wrote:
>>
>> BTW, the Germans take revenge by making up English words :-) Like
>> "showmaster". Or "handy".
>
> "handy" is an English word: it means 'useful' or similar! :o)
In the immortal words of Red Green, "If they can't find you handsome, they
should at least find you handy".
--
derek
I'm a man, but I can change
If I have to
I guess
Clams Canino
"Dirk Thierbach" <dthie...@usenet.arcornews.de> wrote in message
> > "handy" is an English word: it means 'useful' or similar! :o)
>
> Yes, but in German, it means a cell phone/mobile phone (in case you
> didn't know; I'm not sure how to interpret the smiley).
One of my favorite German words is the perfectly explicit Schwimmwagen
(swimming car) that was used to describe a wartime variant of the
Volkswagen. Where the English speaking world came up with various (sentence
long) descriptive names for an amphibious vehicle, Schwimmwagen said it
all - in one word.
I first saw one at an event highlighting WW2 aircraft. Seeing the rather
strange antique vehicle, I asked the man what on earth it was. "It is a
Schwimmwagon" said he. "Ahhh, Of course it is" said I ; instantly
enlightened by, and yet amused by, the sheer simplicity of the name.
-W
Clams Canino
"Clams Canino" <cc-m...@earthdink.net> wrote in message
> Seeing the rather
> strange antique vehicle, I asked the man what on earth it was. "It is a
> Schwimmwagon" said he. "Ahhh, Of course it is" said I ; instantly
> enlightened by, and yet amused by, the sheer simplicity of the name.
Ooops, I forgot to add:
Later in life we obtained a German Shepard Dog. The dog was a fine specimen,
from a reputable breeder. While he proved to be a most remarkable pet,
companion, and family member; he was drawn to, dare I say *enthralled* by,
water. This is significant because we have a swimming pool, and live very
near a lake. When you let the dog out to "do business" he invariably came
back in both late and soaking wet - all year round.
Remembering the lesson... I took to referring to him as der schwimmhund.
-W (alas, der alte schwimmhund had to be put down last year at age 13 - he
is missed)
Paul S. Person
wrote:
That's it all right.
IIRC, it got printed onto either a heavy cardboard or thin wooden
plaque, my dad bought one, and we put it in the vicinity of our
breadbox so we could read it often.
Paul S. Person
I was a bit amazed, when I saw the James Bond film called /For Your
Eyes Only/ in English, in a German theater to find that they had
dubbed ... the parrot!
Then again, when I finally got a four-part letterboxed DVD of the
Bonderchuck /War and Peace/ in Russian with English subtitles, I found
that, on the first two parts, the French bits were repeated in Russian
a few moments later. Is this, perhaps, a convention dating from a time
when most Russian moviegoers would have had trouble reading the
subtitles?
I think the only real conclusion is that different cultures have
different customs. And customs change over time: both /Judgement at
Nuremberg/ and /The Hunt for Red October/ start out bilingual, but
switch to English-only after a few minutes.
Paul S. Person
When I spent a night in Belgium (a port, I don't recall the name), I
saw /Evil Under the Sun/. It was in English with /three/ sets of
subtitles! All showing at once, occupying the lower third of the
screen!
Derek Broughton
> On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 09:16:51 +0100, Dirk Thierbach
> <dthie...@usenet.arcornews.de> wrote:
>
>>Derek Broughton <de...@pointerstop.ca> wrote:
>>>> I only wish they'd show subtitled movies on TV here (no matter if
>>>> American, British, French, or Japanese, or whatever).
>>
>>> They don't? I spent a few months on business in Belgium, where I was
>>> getting French & German TV, as well as Belgian. I always watched the
>>> movies on German TV because the English movies were subtitled, where the
>>> French channels were all dubbed.
>>
>>Then you didn't watch German TV, but something else :-) *All* movies
>>on German TV are dubbed. The only exception is "arte", which is a
>>French/German cooperation, where you sometimes get both a French and a
>>German channel. Which isn't particularly helpful for English movies.
German language stations out of Luxembourg? I wouldn't have thought so,
but...
>>If want you want see English movies in the original language, you need
>>to live near a major city, because some cinemas do that (but not many).
>>
>>It's really a shame, because AFAIK many scandinavian countries show
>>subtitled versions, which means the kids pick up a much better
>>pronounciation.
>
> When I spent a night in Belgium (a port, I don't recall the name), I
> saw /Evil Under the Sun/. It was in English with /three/ sets of
> subtitles! All showing at once, occupying the lower third of the
> screen!
Brussels' cinemas all had the same thing I saw on TV - one copy of the film
dubbed in French and one subtitled in Flemish. I first saw Contact and /Men
in Black/ in Brussels.
--
derek
John W Kennedy
> John W Kennedy<jwk...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>> On 12/23/09 4:05 PM, Dirk Thierbach wrote:
>>> I only wish they'd show subtitled movies on TV here (no matter if
>>> American, British, French, or Japanese, or whatever).
>
>> The bad German dubbing of "Babylon 5" is a legend even in the US!
>
> Don't even get me started on that. Though I'm surprised this is known
> in the US.
Because Joe Straczynski participated heavily on
rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated, fans from all over the world who
could read and write English flocked there. As a result, Americans who
were regulars on rastb5m learned a great deal about world television
practices -- including German dubbing.
Öjevind Lång
"Dirk Thierbach" <dthie...@usenet.arcornews.de> skrev i meddelandet
news:20091224081651...@dthierbach.news.arcor.de...
[snip]
> If want you want see English movies in the original language, you need
> to live near a major city, because some cinemas do that (but not many).
>
> It's really a shame, because AFAIK many scandinavian countries show
> subtitled versions, which means the kids pick up a much better
> pronounciation.
That's the norm here, yes, except with children's films. Disney films such
as "Aladdin" were shown both dubbed (for chidlren) and subtitled (for older
people).
One of my most profound film memories is hearing Paul Newman speak German
in "Absence of Malice", shown on the ferry from Travem�nde to Sweden. He had
to speak very swiftly, since the German translation contained many more
syllables than the American original. And wild west movies dubbed ito French
are a riot too. However, for experiences less reminiscent of Monty Pythin, I
do prefer subtitled films.
�jevind
Paul S. Person
No, no. All three were shown at the same time on the same copy of the
same film to the same audience in the same theater. No multiple
copies, films, audiences, or theaters involved.