(no subject)

Monday, October 10th, 2005 07:08 pm
serai: A kiss between Casey Connor and Zeke Tyler (Reader)
[personal profile] serai
I've been reading Shippey's book, Author of the Century. Oh boy, it's such a treat to read something about Tolkien that's both highly educated and positive. You know how fucking rare that is? Not only is this guy mighty book-learned (as Sam would say), he actually knew the Professor, and did the sam job for a while. He's uniquely qualified to write about LOTR, since he's more likely than anybody to understand all the detail of how the story is constructed. He's already surprised me with a couple of things. I think he angsts too much over the whole Boethian/Manichaean dichotomy, but then, not being a Christian, the whole thing seems a bit of a tempest in a teapot to me (though interesting).

But I just loved reading about how the writing was dragging for Tolkien until he came on the Riders of Rohan, which apparently had the same effect as hitting a greased patch of sidewalk; the writing took off from there. And how they were easy to write because practically everything about them already existed, with names and songs and poems and all. And how all the Rohirrim's monarchs names translate to the same word: "king".

See, I love that kind of shit. That level of detail fascinates me. It's the thing that's always hooked me about Tolkien. His detail is by no means all-encompassing - there are whole areas of life that he doesn't talk about. (Food, for instance. We know what hobbits eat, but I'd dearly love to know what they eat in Minas Tirith or Edoras.) But the detail he does go into is so orderly and well-imagined that it implies an entire world of details that are just as intricate and wonderful as the ones you're told about. And I'm just enchanted by the minutiae of how all this occured to the man.

And again, it's wonderful to read someone so erudite being so positive about Tolkien. A book that's smart, and expects you to be smart, too. I don't always agree with his interpretations, but I can't find anything to complain about in the way he views the books. Clearly he has a great affection for them, and that helps in arguing his case.

And that leads me to the last thing that I like about the book (so far), which is Shippey's apparent attitude about LOTR fans, which appears to be a completely benign non-involvement. He's not what one would call a "fan", but he seems to see nothing wrong in being one. The mentions he makes of Tolkien's large following contain neither condescension nor derision, even in the lightest form. And oh boy, we all know what a relief that is.

A big gold star! This book is way good, and if you haven't read it yet, you should pick it up.

Date: Tuesday, October 11th, 2005 02:31 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] rabidsamfan.livejournal.com
Sounds marvelous. I'll have to take a look.

And I love love love your icon.

Date: Tuesday, October 11th, 2005 11:46 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] fantasy-fan.livejournal.com
I love the icon too. I think I'll have to put this book on the Christmas list.

Date: Wednesday, October 12th, 2005 02:25 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] goldberry-b.livejournal.com
ditto on the icon love... our first glimpse of dear Frodo

I've been meaning to read this one, and I've read two other bios one by Carpenter and the other was Architect of Middle Earth and I can't remember her name now!

Boethian/Manichaean dichotomy and I have to ask.. wha???? feels very unlearned :(

Date: Thursday, October 27th, 2005 11:13 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] serai1.livejournal.com
To put it in a nutshell, what Shippey is referring to is the tension between views of good and evil. The Boethian view is that there is no such thing as evil - when someone acts in an evil manner, he's just lacking good nature. Evil as a void rather than a thing in itself. Whereas the Manichaean view says that evil does exist as an independent entity outside the self. (Manichaeanism says a lot more things than that, but that's the aspect Shippey is discussing.) Most Christian philosophers seem to display a marked inability to deal with paradox, and claim that you can't have it both ways.

My response to that is, why the hell not? Because they like things in neat boxes, and because most Christians will go into cardiac arrest at the idea that their god could have any evil in him. That's one of the main differences between the Christians and the ancient Hebrews (and modern Jews, for that matter). Christians insist that their god can't be anything but good, and all evil is attributed to the devil. Whereas the ancient Hebrews believed that Yahweh was the source of everything, whether good or bad. (Personally, I can't imagine a god that isn't both good and evil. The Christian view seems awfully childish to me: My Daddy is NOT a mean guy!! Don't you EVER say that!! But then again, most Christian beliefs come off that way to me.)

But anyway, Shippey talks about how LOTR displays a sophisticated view of good and evil in that Tolkien does seem to understand the paradoxes involved. Sometimes he takes the Boethian view, and sometimes the Manichaean. It's an interesting point, but like I said, I don't see that it's worth going on and on about. But then again, I'm not the sort to burn at the stake anybody who says something about my gods that I don't like. (And anyone espousing the Manichaean view was for a long time indeed tortured and burned by the Church. Nice people. Very Christ-like, eh?)

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags

Profile

serai: A kiss between Casey Connor and Zeke Tyler (Default)
serai

November 2024

S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
10 111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Page generated Saturday, July 26th, 2025 01:46 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios