In this relatively short book, Claudio Testi covers a lot of ground in a synthesis of Tolkien’s work. Testi looks at all of the Legendarium, not just In this relatively short book, Claudio Testi covers a lot of ground in a synthesis of Tolkien’s work. Testi looks at all of the Legendarium, not just The Lord of the Rings, to definitely answer the question of whether Middle-earth is primarily (or exclusively) Christian, or primarily (or exclusively) pagan. Taking each of these perspectives in turn, Testi shows that each viewpoint selects and excludes in order to add force to the argument. The answer to whether Middle-earth is Christian or pagan: Yes. Through his sub-creating, Tolkien gives us a world that brings paganism and Christianity into harmony. This synthesis gains strength from looking at the sources that Tolkien knew and valued, and then seeing ways that he brought those characters and outlooks into Middle-earth. Tolkien’s vision thus invites us into a bigger world than an either–or dispute. As so often, his writing leads us to the kind of understanding that is just what we need right now.
The book is a lot more complex than that brief summary. The scope of works (fiction, published and unpublished; letters; scholarly lectures and publications) that Testi considers is amazing. He really knows Tolkien, as much as any of us can through the writing Tolkien left us.
A book as significant as this deserved a better English translation. In the translated text, I see the kind of scholarly stance that I’ve often noted in Italian academics. The translation would have been an opportunity to also translate that tone into what better suits scholarship in other countries. Also, the layout and design of the book could be improved so that this serious work doesn’t feel self-published.
Surface critiques aside, I’m grateful this book is available in English at all, and I’ll return to it as often as I encounter the basic question of whether Tolkien’s world is Christian or pagan....more
This excellent collection of essays focuses on the translation of Tolkien’s work to Jackson’s films, but the content of many of the essays will be useThis excellent collection of essays focuses on the translation of Tolkien’s work to Jackson’s films, but the content of many of the essays will be useful even to people primarily interested in the books, not the films. By looking at aspects of the films’ storytelling, the authors enhanced my understanding of the books in helpful ways. I look forward to bringing some of these insights to my teaching. Here are brief comments on the chapters that I found most intriguing:
Kristin Thompson, “Gollum Talks to Himself”: I love Thompson’s reading of Gandalf blowing the smoke ship through the ring. The film imagery communicates so much—references to the swan boat of Lothlorien and the Grey Havens; the need to pass through the adventure of the Ring before boarding the ship; the magical nature of Gandalf, whimsical and joyful rather than dominating; and Bilbo’s “This will be a night to remember” as an invitation to the moviegoer as much as an observation to Gandalf.
Verlyn Flieger, “Sometimes One Word Is Worth a Thousand Pictures”: Good description of the importance of Tom Bombadil. He is the spirit of the countryside. His blue eye peering through the Ring makes him the opponent of Sauron, whose red eye always looks through the Ring. Tom’s existence shows the limits of Sauron’s power—he will never truly own or dominate the entire world, because resistance is possible and real.
E. L. Risden, “Tolkien’s Resistance to Linearity”: Intriguing ideas about fractal storytelling—the stories continue expanding and becoming more detailed and complicated (like Bag End). I also like the idea of LOTR being like a Gothic cathedral. Frodo and Sam take the straightest aisle they can to the altar; other companions meet the groundskeeper and descend to the crypt, etc.
Dmitra Fimi, “Filming Folklore”: The movies made use of a Romanticized idea of “Celtic” that Tolkien himself mocked. What the movies present as “Celtic” has little to do with the actual history and culture. It’s a generalized “yearning for a lost past” that Westerners think of as Celtic. Fimi’s chapter provides a good introduction to the complexities of engaging with folklore in any artistic medium.
Yvette Kisor, “Making the Connection on Page and Screen in Tolkien’s and Jackson’s The Lord of the Rings”: By changing the intercutting in the films, Jackson sometimes portrayed the correct “dynamic equivalent” point of a scene from the book, but in a different way. “Equivalence in the meaning of the forms” (111).
Sharin Schroeder, “‘It’s Alive’”: Brilliant connections between Frankenstein and Tolkien’s/Jackson’s creation of monsters. What is our responsibility to the characters we create in stories? Tolkien himself struggled with this as he wondered if he’d created Orcs as a race with no possibility of redemption.
Judy Ann Ford & Robin Anne Reid, “Into the West”: A look at the differences in the film’s presentation of the hope beyond Middle-earth. What do characters know about Valinor? Is the Grey Havens scene changed to be more sentimental and hopeful, where the book lets it be more ambiguous?
Brian D. Walter, “The Grey Pilgrim”: Interesting discussion of how Gandalf is altered in the movies. He becomes less the obvious leader, wiser than everyone around him, so room is made for Aragorn to take charge. Changes to Gandalf’s leadership in the films often occur so that others in the Fellowship can take the lead.
Jane Brennan Croft, “Jackson’s Aragorn and the American Superhero Monomyth”: Really good chapter about how the films convert Tolkien’s original story into a more typical American monomyth, rendering Aragorn as the long outsider, misunderstood and working more impulsively than through careful discussion. In the book, Aragorn is strengthened by his relationship with Arwen and the hope that provides, but in the films, Aragorn (like a true American hero) must renounce love in order to follow his own path. Arwen would be a distraction, not a support, so he tries to convince her to leave.
Michael D. C. Drout, “The Rohirrim, the Anglo-Saxons, and the Problem of Appendix F”: Good points about how Tolkien seemed uncertain or contradictory about whether Rohan had a direct connection to Anglo-Saxon culture. This connection seems to have changed and grown through the writing and revising process. I also like Drout’s point about the ways we connect literature or film to other artworks and experiences of life. For me, this connects to what David Taylor writes about the arts opening some doors and closing others (in Glimpses of the New Creation)....more
Pure comfort food, as always. For me, listening to this read aloud brings out the larger story arcs but obscures the smaller details. Much of The SilmPure comfort food, as always. For me, listening to this read aloud brings out the larger story arcs but obscures the smaller details. Much of The Silmarillion needs to be seen on the page (and even then, and after all the times I’ve read it, I have difficulty remembering which elf is which). But I was surprised how well much of the book works as an audiobook. And really, kudos to Andy Serkis for making it all the way through “Of Beleriand and Its Realms,” surely one of the most tedious chapters of any book to read aloud.
I’ve now listened to Serkis reading five Tolkien books. Of these, his reading of The Hobbit is my favorite. The Lord of the Rings is also good. The Silmarillion is the weakest only because it’s the one that least lends itself to the audiobook format. But it’s also the book that gives Serkis the most freedom in choosing voices for characters, and I really liked his choices in this one, much more so than some of his voices in LOTR. I wouldn’t mind at all if he goes ahead with audiobooks of Beren and Lúthien, The Children of Húrin, and The Fall of Gondolin....more
Yes, that was me—the guy weeping in his car during the afternoon commute. I know it may have looked odd, my fellow drivers on I-35E, but if you’d knowYes, that was me—the guy weeping in his car during the afternoon commute. I know it may have looked odd, my fellow drivers on I-35E, but if you’d known that I was listening to Andy Serkis read the conclusion of The Return of the King, with the final parting of the Fellowship at the Grey Havens and then Sam’s return to his family . . . well, I’m sure you’d have understood. The story is always deeply emotional, and this time it represented the end of more than sixty hours of listening to the books read to me by a truly amazing performer. It has been a grand experience—and yes, as soon as it finished, I was ready to start listening or reading all over again....more
I listened to almost the entirety of Andy Serkis’s performance of The Two Towers whilst driving by myself on a long trip this weekend. Hearing the whoI listened to almost the entirety of Andy Serkis’s performance of The Two Towers whilst driving by myself on a long trip this weekend. Hearing the whole novel read aloud in more or less one sitting brought out some elements I hadn’t noticed before. In particular, I’d never realized just how often characters in this book sleep, wake up after too little sleep, talk about how weary they are, long for a comfortable bed at home, and so on. These frequent comments became uncomfortably meaningful to me as I drove long hours and most definitely yearned for sleep. The focus on sleep (or sleeplessness) makes me think that Minas Morgul (Minas Ithil, Tower of the Moon) deserves to be one of the title’s two towers.
The other thing that struck me as challenging on this reading/hearing? The Treebeard chapter. Now, hear me out: I love Treebeard. And Serkis gives his all in performing the character. But listening to someone read that chapter, very slowly, was grueling. It’s just so, so slow, and nothing actually happens in that chapter other than a whole lot of talking, much of which summarizes what we’ve already read in the previous chapters.
Listening to the unabridged books in this way also highlights the many ways that the films harmed the stories. As Serkis read, I felt joy in hearing characters speak the lines that they truly do speak, rather than hearing characters speak lines that belong to other characters and other scenes (as happens so often in the films). And of course it’s wonderful to hear full scenes unfold, especially as The Two Towers contains some of my very favorite lines of dialogue, which resonate much more when they occur in their proper context (such as the first conversation between Aragorn and Éomer, and the conversations between Frodo and Faramir).
Despite the book’s sleepiness and the endlessness of Fangorn, Serkis and Tolkien were excellent companions for the road trip. I highly recommend this audiobook edition for anyone who wants to savor the original words read by a great performer....more
It’s been a couple years since my last read-through of The Lord of the Rings, and I remember that one as being particularly grand (also, the first timIt’s been a couple years since my last read-through of The Lord of the Rings, and I remember that one as being particularly grand (also, the first time I’d read the trilogy in one volume rather than three separate books). This time, I’m listening to the audiobook read by Andy Serkis. I loved his reading of The Hobbit, and his performance of The Fellowship of the Ring is also amazing. Listening to Serkis read is like listening to a full-cast dramatization; I often forget that I’m hearing just one person. I like most of his choices for the characters’ voices, but occasionally it’s distracting when he chooses a voice that’s very similar to the movie actor. Why must Pippin sound exactly like the movie version? In Serkis’s reading, Boromir has Sean Bean’s accent, but Serkis’s Aragorn doesn’t sound like an impression of Viggo Mortensen. The unevenness—some characters just like the movie, some not—feels odd. But even with that quirk (and the unfortunate goofiness of Bombadil), the performance is impressive.
As for the book itself, what stood out to me this time through is how this story functions as much as the end of Bilbo’s story as it is the beginning of Frodo’s. In fact, for me this time, the most meaningful scene is the confrontation between Gandalf and Bilbo after the birthday party. Bilbo’s struggle to let go of what ensnares him—the difficulty he faces even when he knows that it’s for the best—and the words of counsel Gandalf offers really hit me hard. I know what it's like to want to make a wise choice for someone but instead to have to stand by and hope that they will find the strength for that choice on their own. Bilbo’s triumph in that scene—becoming the first of only four people who ever hold the Ring and willingly give it up (five, really, but Bombadil doesn’t count)—stands as one of the greatest victories in the entire story, and maybe the one that feels closest to real life. When we see Bilbo again, at Rivendell, I had the feeling this time that it’s only at that moment that the story moves away from Bilbo and becomes Frodo’s story.
At twenty-two and a half hours, the audiobook still seems to finish too quickly. Clearly, the only option is to continue right on with Serkis’s reading of The Two Towers. . ....more
One of my students read and loved this book, so I wanted to check it out, too. For me, it was fine. I think it is a good book for someone who is beginOne of my students read and loved this book, so I wanted to check it out, too. For me, it was fine. I think it is a good book for someone who is beginning to think deeply about The Lord of the Rings after a second or third re-read. Mark Eddy Smith traces character developments and actions through a series of thirty brief devotional meditations on virtues that (more or less) follow the order of the story (one “part” of the book for each of the six books in LOTR). These are the virtues:
If you’re familiar with LOTR, you can probably imagine some of the moments that Smith references for most of those virtues. This is less a book that teaches me something new about Tolkien, and more like a conversation with a friend who shares my obsession with Tolkien. So it’s fun, but not essential for a Tolkien bookshelf.
I listened to the audio version (which is also how my student primarily engaged with it), and I don’t think that’s the best way to read this one. It would be better as a guide for daily meditation, taking one short chapter each day. As I listened to it, one chapter started blending in with the next, and I sometimes zoned out because it all started sounding the same. Simon Vance, one of my favorite audiobook narrators, reads this one, but it’s a little odd to hear him this time, because I’m used to hearing him tackle much weightier material (he’s excellent with Man’s Search for Meaning and Dune, for example). But I was grateful that it’s free on Hoopla, where you too can try it out if you’d like to ponder what LOTR says about virtues we should all value and pursue....more
Andy Serkis became legend . . . Legend became myth . . . Honestly, posterity will regard Serkis as a leg[Review of the audiobook, read by Andy Serkis]
Andy Serkis became legend . . . Legend became myth . . . Honestly, posterity will regard Serkis as a legendary performer. His reading of The Hobbit is completely brilliant. Of course "Riddles in the Dark" is fantastic, as anyone would expect. But what I didn't know is that Serkis would do different voices for each of the characters, including a Smaug that is terrifying. His performance of the novel is like a one-man radio drama. When he reached the final pages, I found the conclusion more emotionally moving than ever before. I loved experiencing the story in this way, and now I look forward to listening to his readings of The Lord of the Rings and The Silmarillion. I have also listened to (and highly recommend) his reading of The Screwtape Letters....more
I’ve read quite a lot about Lewis/Tolkien/Inklings, and I found much to enjoy about A Hobbit, a Wardrobe, and a Great War. For me, the biggest surprisI’ve read quite a lot about Lewis/Tolkien/Inklings, and I found much to enjoy about A Hobbit, a Wardrobe, and a Great War. For me, the biggest surprise—and a pleasant one—is that Joseph Loconte’s book is really only tangentially about Lewis and Tolkien. Loconte presumes you’re already familiar with the full story of their friendship, the Inklings, and their publications and fame; and in my case, that’s very true. I didn’t need another retelling of the Inklings story that has become by this point much more magnificent and legendary than it probably felt to anyone there at the time. Instead of returning to that legend, Loconte tells the story of the cultural shift that happened leading up to and continuing just after the Great War. Lewis himself regarded the industrial revolution as the biggest cultural change since the Middle Ages—more significant than the shift from the medieval to the Enlightenment. So I think he would agree with Loconte’s thesis that the Great War finalized that shift, bringing us into the society that we all know now.
Loconte presents the Great War as the climax of the “Great Myth” of human progress—the idea that humanity is becoming better and better, to the point that war would surely be unthinkable. And then the Great War happened, shattering those hopes and leading to an immense disillusionment. Having traded faith in God for faith in “progress,” people after the war found themselves untethered, unable to cultivate a faith in anything. The idea of a lasting world peace, so fervently hoped for before the war, then seemed ridiculous.
Tolkien and Lewis grew up in the height of pre-war excitement about the Great Myth, they both served in the trenches and saw many friends perish there, and then they lived their careers and family lives after the war. Loconte builds a compelling case for seeing their writings not as escapism, but as a return to a mindset that predates the Great Myth and answers the post-war despair. I like this thesis as a deeper perspective than the shallower idea that “Tolkien hated mechanization and the cutting down of trees.” Tolkien was not exactly an “environmentalist” in the sense that the word is often used today. Rather, he and Lewis yearned for (and lived out) a richer, more grandiose idea of what the world is. They weren’t taking sides or advocating for specific issues; they were arguing, through their writings and their lives, for a different way of living, reclaiming something valuable from the past in response to the society in which they lived.
Loconte references specific moments in the fiction of Lewis and Tolkien that support this thesis, but really the biggest contribution of this book is not the literary analysis but the cultural insight into how the Great War changed society, and why Lewis and Tolkien continue to be a countercultural influence that we still need.
A Hobbit, a Wardrobe, and a Great War may not bring anything particularly new to the ever-expanding literature on these authors, but it presents intriguing material in a compact, straightforward, and fascinating way. I will recommend this to students who are just starting to get to know Tolkien and Lewis, in hopes that it will lead them to other works (for example, my favorite biographical book about Tolkien, John Garth’s Tolkien and the Great War), that add even more to this portrait.
I’ll also mention that I read this book at just the time that Christopher Nolan’s film Oppenheimer came out. I was struck by how the film shows the world after the Great War, in which religion continues to be out of consideration, and people again cautiously hope that scientific progress will finally yield lasting world peace. We know, of course, watching this story play out from decades later, that Oppenheimer’s hope that the possibility of such a weapon would ensure peace didn’t happen, to say the least. An early poem by Lewis (quoted in Loconte, p. 123) spoke originally to the aftermath of the Great War, but it seems just as appropriate for the conclusion of Oppenheimer’s story as well:
On upward curve and easily, for them both maid and man And beast and tree and spirit in the green earth could thrive. But now one age is ending, and God calls home the stars And looses the wheel of the ages and sends it spinning back Amid the death of nations, and points a downward track, And madness is come over us and great and little wars.
Lewis wrote this some years before returning to the Christian faith, but it aptly describes the world that he and Tolkien responded to, and the world that we, after two Great Wars and the unleashing of the possibility of nuclear annihilation, must also respond to. Oppenheimer makes Tolkien and Lewis as relevant to us as ever, and Loconte’s book makes a great prelude to understanding that film....more
For three years in a row (2017, 2018, 2019), Newsweek published special-edition magazines about Tolkien. This issue (2018) is much of the same contentFor three years in a row (2017, 2018, 2019), Newsweek published special-edition magazines about Tolkien. This issue (2018) is much of the same content that Newsweek also used in two similar special editions. The layout and design of all three magazines are really good, and I wish they would put together all of the unique content pieces they’ve created into one larger special edition. This particular issue feels a bit lighter than the others, because a number of pages present either summaries of the major Middle-earth books or lists of memorable quotes from each book. I do like the idea of explaining Tolkien’s work book by book (I’m always in favor of an approach to Tolkien that foregrounds the books rather than the films), but the concept didn’t translate into anything of depth here. I appreciated that one of this issue’s original pieces is a profile of Ted Nasmith, who has long been one of my favorite Tolkien illustrators.
Of the three Newsweek special editions, the 2017 issue ("J. R. R. Tolkien: The Mind of a Genius") has my vote for the best. Of all the Tolkien magazines I've read from the past several years, that's the one I'll buy extra copies of to give as gifts to students.
As a side note: It’s always fun to go back and read predictions that turned out to be completely wrong. This issue includes one page that confidently states that Amazon’s Middle-earth TV series will focus on a young Aragorn....more
Much of the content here is the same as what was in the previous Newsweek special edition from 2017. New articles include predictions about Rings of PMuch of the content here is the same as what was in the previous Newsweek special edition from 2017. New articles include predictions about Rings of Power; an overview of the actors in the Tolkien biopic; a profile of Stephen Colbert; a short interview with Andy Serkis; and a piece about the “Tolkien: Maker of Middle-earth” exhibit at the Bodleian Library. There are also new short pieces about authors who were influenced by Tolkien, things that happened in Tolkien’s life a hundred years ago (2019), and a small glossary of words in Quenya. I like the way the Newsweek staff designs layouts, so I wish all of their content from the Tolkien issues could be collected into a single volume. I prefer the 2017 issue (I don’t value content about Rings of Power or the biopic very highly), but this one is good, too....more
The writing is very decent throughout this issue, and the standard information about Tolkien’s life is presented well. Overall, this magazine feels leThe writing is very decent throughout this issue, and the standard information about Tolkien’s life is presented well. Overall, this magazine feels less substantial than any of the others I’ve read. It’s not even focused especially on the making of Peter Jackson’s LOTR films. Unique articles include a profile of Stephen Colbert and a guide to Tolkien’s major works. An entire article about John Lennon’s plan for the Beatles to make a LOTR film seems excessive, given how little information exists about that project (though I loved learning that the Beatles pitched the idea to Stanley Kubrick to direct).
By far the worst piece in this magazine is an article by Ruth Davis Konigsberg about the lack of women in the Hobbit films. She raises the question, as if to shock the reader into realizing that “Heeey, wait a minute—she’s right!” and then proposes no answers or actual criticism, apparently uninterested in reading the original books to learn more about women in Middle-earth. Bizarre. It’s an interesting topic, but addressed poorly.
One article answers questions about what’s true and what’s made up in the 2019 Tolkien biopic, directed by Dome Karukoski. I don’t mind the film, for what it is, but I doubt it’s going to be long remembered.
The articles in this magazine draw mostly from the Time Magazine archive, and so very little new input from Tolkien scholars appears. Fairly mediocre publication....more
Recently, I’ve been reading through special-edition magazine issues that focus on Tolkien and Middle-earth. The reason is partly curiosity for anythinRecently, I’ve been reading through special-edition magazine issues that focus on Tolkien and Middle-earth. The reason is partly curiosity for anything Tolkien-related, and also wondering whether any of these magazines rises quick, shallow projects and could instead be useful as gifts for students in a Tolkien class. My first two tries—The Ultimate Guide to Lord of the Rings and LIFE The Lord of The Rings: The Origins, the Stories, the Extraordinary Adventure—were not successes. They were okay, but for the price, they were not great. And both of them focused especially on Peter Jackson’s LOTR movies, which is not my primary interest.
But now I’ve read a Tolkien magazine that is much closer to what I hoped for. The layout throughout the magazine is very classy and stylish. There are several two-page spreads of infographics that are quite beautiful. This is definitely the best of the Tolkien/LOTR magazines I’ve read.
I also appreciate that the focus of this publication is Tolkien himself. The other magazines I’ve read seem obligated to discuss Tolkien, but only en route to talking about Jackson’s movies. This magazine relegates the LOTR movies to one brief article at the end (with no mention at all made of the Hobbit film trilogy). There are brief mentions of the BBC’s 1981 radio drama of LOTR, and even one reference to the LOTR board game, illustrated by John Howe.
There’s not a lot of new content in this magazine, which is what I would expect—I regard these as more like scrapbooks than new contributions. But the articles throughout this publication include input solicited from Tom Shippey, Verlyn Flieger, Alan Jacobs, and other notable Tolkien specialists. Yes, it’s a little silly that the cover proclaims, “Introduction by Alan Lee, renowned Tolkien illustrator,” when the introduction turns out to be five sentences, printed in large type on a half-page of the magazine. And it’s placed on a two-page spread of a photo of Tolkien, not an illustration by the renowned illustrator who wrote those five sentences. This odd choice is mitigated by a full-length article about Lee later in the issue.
Overall, this is the first Tolkien special-edition magazine that I’d be happy to gift or share with others. It provides a fun excursion through the familiar story....more
This is much better-written but not as wide-ranging as the similar Ultimate Guide to Lord of the Rings by SFX. I appreciate that the writing draws notThis is much better-written but not as wide-ranging as the similar Ultimate Guide to Lord of the Rings by SFX. I appreciate that the writing draws not just from Life Magazine articles about Tolkien and Middle-earth but from articles in all popular magazines. Having read a lot of scholarly work about Tolkien, which cites other scholarly work, it was kind of fun to see an overview of popular magazine writing on the topic. I also really like that the editors solicited comments from super-scholars Wayne Hammond and Christina Scull for the introductory articles about Tolkien. I respect Hammond and Scull very much, so I was pleasantly surprised to read new quotes from them (though of course not saying anything that they haven’t already written elsewhere; but still, their presence elevates the tone of the magazine).
Where this magazine is disappointing is that it’s really just about the LOTR film trilogy. After the standard introduction to Tolkien, it’s mostly plot summaries of each film, and one overview of the Hobbit trilogy. There’s a little bit about the animated films, and a brief mention of the Finnish Middle-earth TV series, but not about the Russian production; and nothing about the radio play. So I’m still searching for the “ultimate guide” magazine that I can recommend to students and interested readers as a good one to have. I have a few more to check out . . ....more
The title "Ultimate Guide to Lord of the Rings" is overstated even if it's only referring to the movies. But as a guide to Tolkien and Middle-earth, tThe title "Ultimate Guide to Lord of the Rings" is overstated even if it's only referring to the movies. But as a guide to Tolkien and Middle-earth, this is not the ultimate. It's the standard Tolkien information rewritten in a bland style with illustrations that are often pixelated screencaps from the movies. It concludes with six pages discussing what might or might not be in The Rings of Power (this magazine was published just before the premiere of the series). In hindsight, anyone who speculated in print about what Amazon's TV series might be is probably now feeling like they wasted their time. But of course before it was released, we all thought it could perhaps be at least entertaining, which it actually wasn't.
Plentiful typos in this publication, and occasionally they are amusing. For example, we read about "Nenya, the Ring of Adamant, Narya, the Ring of Fire, and Vilya, the Ring of Fire" (122). I guess fire seemed more exciting to write about.
Disappointing that although two pages are devoted to the Soviet TV production of The Fellowship of the Ring, nothing at all is said about the fantastic 1981 BBC radio dramatization of the whole story. Also, nothing about video games and board games based on Middle-earth. Overall, the magazine feels like haphazard filler....more
I’ve had this book on my shelf almost since it was first released, and I’ve saved it all this time with the assumption that it would be like dessert. I’ve had this book on my shelf almost since it was first released, and I’ve saved it all this time with the assumption that it would be like dessert. How could it not be, as it’s all about some of my favorite authors?
It’s not dessert.
Part of the problem with The Fellowship is that it covers all the same information I’ve already read elsewhere. Not only does it bring no new facts to the conversation, but it doesn’t present the existing information in any kind of new angle. There’s nothing here except a retread of the biographies of Lewis and Tolkien. (Oh—and the other two guys, who make brief appearances.) (And some other guys, who weren't significant enough to include on the cover.) (And Dorothy L. Sayers, who was, through no fault of her own, a woman.)
The subtitle promises a book about “the literary lives of the Inklings,” and that sounds like the start of an interesting narrative theme. But Philip Zaleski and Carol Zaleski are unfocused in their writing, giddy about including absolutely every detail they can find about the Inklings. There are a lot of details presented that, to me, do nothing to forward a look at their literary lives. Often the authors seem to almost wallow in awful details. I’m at a point where I don’t really need to read about Lewis’s relationship with Mrs. Moore again, especially given that we’re never going to know anything more about it than what we do, which isn’t much. And in what way does it help me understand Middle-Earth to learn that Tolkien had his teeth removed and was fitted for a full set of dentures. That detail is mentioned in two places! May I never be so famous that people in the next century care about my dental hygiene.
What I find more troubling about The Fellowship is that Zaleski and Zaleski bring up some rather horrific details about the relationships some of the Inklings had (Charles Williams in particular), but then decline to comment on what it means for the enduring legacy. I feel unease at some of the details of these authors’ private lives, and I don’t always know whether it’s relevant for me to know any of that information, or if it should affect my reading of any or all of their works. Zaleski and Zaleski model an attitude of reverence, even in the hard details, which feels inappropriate. Maybe the reason Tolkien was cooler toward Williams than some of the other Inklings were is that he sensed the abuse Williams was leveraging against his admirers, and he wasn’t comfortable looking the other way. If so, then the question for us is whether we should look the other way (continue reading Williams’s books for the good books they are), or whether we should turn away altogether and not give our time and interest to a man who was so deeply troubled. I don’t know the answer—and it’s a real challenge for me, because I do love Williams’s novels—but that’s certainly a worthwhile question to ponder and discuss, and it connects to our current age of “cancel culture” and all of the questions it confronts us with.
The other aspect of the book that bothered me is that Zaleski and Zaleski insert their opinions almost constantly. And since I don’t know these writers, I wonder why I should care which of the Inklings’ books they think are most and least interesting. Their opinions were always intrusive and always annoying. In addition, I don’t need pages-long summaries of The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. Who did they think was going to be reading this book that wouldn’t already know at least those two books?
By the end of this long, long book I wondered if it even makes sense to think of “The Inklings” as a distinct group that is worth studying as-a-group. We all like to imagine that the meetings of the Inklings were magical events. But I’m not sure anymore. It was a group of good friends who enjoyed each other’s company, and eventually, as people do, moved on to other phases of life. Is there much more to say than that? Books I’ve read that try to cover “The Inklings” generally end up being mini-biographies of Tolkien and Lewis, with some mention of some of the others. I wonder if future Inklings studies will benefit more from just looking at each member of the group, rather than trying to make the group into a legend that, even if true in some ways, is not helpful for our learning from their example.
What The Fellowship does well—and I wish this had been the theme selected for the book, because it would have been more intriguing and unified—is show pictures of many different ways people can be Christians. Spirituality, faith, and story creation are dominant and useful themes throughout The Fellowship, and I found it fascinating how much you get to see of different ways of navigating and integrating all of that, in one’s own life and with close friends who are following slightly different paths. Building this book around that theme would likely have produced a much stronger book.
Overall, I was very surprised at how tedious I found The Fellowship, when I was expecting something delightful. I look forward to moving on to other books about Tolkien and Lewis—and, of course, always returning to their own books, which I love more and more every time I read them....more
I have read a ton of books about Tolkien. (Literally—if you put them all on a scale, it would be really, really heavy.) And somehow, there’s always moI have read a ton of books about Tolkien. (Literally—if you put them all on a scale, it would be really, really heavy.) And somehow, there’s always more to learn—a slightly different perspective, facts put together innovatively, additional material from archives brought into the conversation. (You can learn all that there is to know about his ways in a month, and yet after a hundred years he can still surprise you at a pinch.) Even when the facts are just the story I’ve heard many times before, I still enjoy it, because I so admire Tolkien’s outlook on so many areas of life and art. (Not every area: for example, I don’t care for the way he disdained C. S. Lewis’s Anglican faith; disagreement is fine and natural, but some of what Tolkien said or wrote about his friend’s Christian tradition felt in appropriate.)
There are numerous books specifically about Tolkien and his Christian faith. I haven’t read many of them, but from skimming a few, I see that they seem to tend toward saying as much about the biographer’s faith than about Tolkien’s—which is fine, but I’m more interested in understanding Tolkien, rather than finding an immediate, direct application to my own life, in a devotional sense. Bradley Birzer’s book J. R. R. Tolkien’s Sanctifying Myth: Understanding Middle-earth fits within the category of books that explore Tolkien’s faith, but it also goes beyond, or deeper. Though not specifically a biography, it’s actually one of the best single-volume books about Tolkien that I’ve read. In clear, well-crafted prose, Birzer draws on primary sources—the usual books by Tolkien and Christopher; the Carpenter biography; Tom Shippey’s books; the Letters; but also archival documents and newspaper and magazine writing from Tolkien’s lifetime through the present—to convey an understanding of Tolkien’s life, beliefs, and what he intended in his work. Because so much of the book is extracts of original sources, rather than Birzer inserting his own opinions, the result is an excellent, concise overview of the author I love. The tone all throughout is just right, and I recommend this book to anyone who wants to know more about the man behind Middle-earth.
My only criticism of the book is that Birzer sometimes assumes the reader is familiar with The Silmarillion and other times talks about it as though the reader has never seen it. This is most true in chapter five, “The Nature of Evil,” in which Birzer devotes about five pages to summarizing The Silmarillion. That was the only chapter in the book that felt padded. Otherwise, all other chapters were good overviews of themes related to Tolkien’s life and work: a first biographical chapter, and then “Myth and Sub-creation,” “The Created Order,” “Heroism,” “The Nature of Evil,” “Middle-earth and Modernity,” and a concluding chapter, “The Nature of Grace Proclaimed.” In each chapter, Birzer draws together a wide range of great sources and sets an even, fair tone in his own writing....more
What to say about The Lord of the Rings? It is a story I know so well it seems imprinted upon my brain—less "a book I read," more "a story that's partWhat to say about The Lord of the Rings? It is a story I know so well it seems imprinted upon my brain—less "a book I read," more "a story that's part of my life." Revisiting the book regularly is like returning home, always to find both something comforting and something new. This read-through was no different. I enjoyed it more than I ever have before, seeing more details and moments of beauty than I'd noticed on previous readings. People love the overall narrative, and of course I agree. But what I saw this time are the many small moments in which Tolkien says something grand but without drawing a lot of attention to it—the friendship between Legolas and Gimli in Lothlorien, for example, or the struggles against depression that we glimpse in Denethor and others. Tolkien is exceptionally skillful at suggesting bigger issues and letting the readers contemplate them as they will. I love it.
For this read-through, I used the recent one-volume edition with illustrations by Tolkien himself. I don't think I've ever read a one-volume edition before, generally preferring separate books for each volume of the trilogy. I didn't think that would change my view of the book significantly, but I have to say, it was rather a good feeling to finish The Fellowship of the Ring and then simply turn over a couple of pages and be right back into the story with the opening of The Two Towers. I liked the experience.
However . . . it's hard not to see this particular illustrated edition as a bit of a cash-grab. After all, if you've read The Art of The Lord of the Rings by J. R. R. Tolkien (I have), you know that Tolkien didn't actually complete all that many illustrations for the book. There are the classic dust jacket concepts, the maps, and . . . well, not a lot more that reached a state of completion. So here's a book that's "Illustrated by the Author" but that has very few illustrations. Occasionally you turn the page and find a beautiful view such as this (which, technically, is more an illustration from The Hobbit):
[image]
But more often the illustrated pages look something like this:
[image]
And there aren't even very many illustrated pages at all, so overall the reading experience looks like this:
[image]
In other words, it's mostly the same experience as reading a non-illustrated version, and there's nothing particularly special about the paper or the printing. So it's kind of an odd choice for a new edition of the book. But it's the words themselves that are most important, so this is just a minor criticism of the publisher, not of the novel. My favorite reading edition of the trilogy is the Alan Lee illustrated set—not the more recent boxed set that also includes The Hobbit, but the 2002 hardcovers that are a little larger, printed on glossy white paper that is a delight to read.
But whatever the edition or format, this is a book I'll continue to read again and again....more
Loading...
