THE BITTER RIVALRY OVER TOLKIEN’S LEGACY GOES ON UNTIL THIS DAY
Finding, assigning, and debating an essential value in Tolkien literature can be completely meaningless as critics and scholars attempt to assert Tolkien style with their own perception. Tolkien left behind a complex system of content and ideas, making attempts to simplify him inaccurate and one-sided.
“In a hollow in the ground, there lived a Hobbit” — It’s been more than 90 years since JRR Tolkien, a medieval English literature professor, scribbled the opening line of “The Hobbit” on a blank page in a student’s test. What happened next became history. “The Hobbit” has sold over 140 million copies, and the “Lord of the Rings” trilogy has sold nearly 440 million copies worldwide [1]. Tolkien is one of the most successful writers of all time, thanks to these figures and translations into nearly 30 languages. Tolkien, along with his close friend CS Lewis (author of “The Chronicles of Narnia”), is regarded as the father of “modern fantasy,” one of the most profitable and commercially successful genres of contemporary literature.
Tolkien’s influence on modern literature is undeniable, particularly in light of major media phenomena such as “Harry Potter,” “Game of Thrones,” and “The Witcher,” all of which are said to have been influenced by Tolkien’s legacy. From the first domino piece pulled by Tolkien, the genre of “modern fantasy” became a popular literary trend in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. Along with franchised publications such as paper books, electronic versions of board games, video games, toys, swords, souvenirs, about the fantasy world have established a strong cultural presence. In his book “Strategies of Fantasy” (1992), American scholar Brian Attebery identified Tolkien’s “Middle Earth” world as the mental model for all later works of fiction [2]. Elves, Orcs, humans, dragons, magic, castles, and sword-wielding heroes will become popular literary materials as well as contemporary cultural icons from there on.
Despite such popularity, literary critics have tended to regard Tolkien’s works as fairy story, similar to fables, Marxism, fascism, or even foreign religion and sexism. This creates an interesting epochal situation in which fandoms on the one hand regard Tolkien’s works as century masterpieces, whilst others are more critical, even if it means to refute and deny all those legacies. In the presence of scholars, the “fights” between the two factions grew more intense (and also more serious), with Tolkien becoming the subject of scholarly research became so impactful on modern literature. In the presence of academics, the author has been labeled a modernist, a Victorian, a Christian, and a Romantic. Different interpretations of Tolkien and historical contexts have since fragmented his legacies, throwing them into the endless debates among literary critics, fans, theologians, and medieval scholars. What, they wonder, is the ultimate literary thought in Tolkien’s works — modern, post-modern, or anti-modern? The question they should ask, nonetheless, should be: is defining his literary style needed, knowing the author gave birth to an essential part of modern literature?
1. Critics and ‘fan fights’
After the publication of “The Hobbit” and “The Lord of the Rings,” Tolkien’s reputation as a brilliant fantasy writer quickly spread around the world, and the author gained a large number of ardent supporters. “The Tolkien Society” (UK), “Tolkien Gateway” (USA), and “The One Ring” (the world) fandom communities have grown and contributed significantly to the development of Tolkien’s popular culture. The same year that director Peter Jackson’s three-part “Lord of the Rings” series won a total of 17 Oscars, the publisher announced a 1,000% increase in book sales [3]. Tolkien’s reputation quickly “became a battlefield”, wrote literary historian Brian Rosebury, with one side being fierce criticisms from literary critics, and the other fans ‘bigotting’ and defending the author.
Although the writer is implicitly acknowledged as the father of modern fantasy, fans tend to exaggerate this fact by imbuing him with the identity of a literary god who gave birth to a completely new literary genre. While the truth is more simple, fantasy has long appeared in many mythological epics, medieval romances, fairy tales, and some Victorian “early fantasy” works [4]. Tolkien’s “legendarium” world inherited these traditions, and it became uniquely brilliant when it gave birth to the literary “modern fantasy” genre itself. One of the most common mistakes on the fandom side is the separation of idols from their historical context and the work as a singularity in the midst of the literary universe. Each member of the fandom can be described as someone who is willing to dismiss all forms of criticism directed at their idol; this blindness undermines the honesty in analyzing and criticizing the work.
On the other side are literary critics, who have never been Tolkien’s friends, and most likely will be. Tolkien’s work initially elicited only a modest academic response, but over time it became the subject of widespread criticism and serious academic research. “Dr. Tolkien has little skill at narrative and no instinct for literary form,” wrote critic Edmund Wilson in 1956. (…) Now, how is it that these long-winded volumes of what looks to this reviewer like balderdash have elicited such tributes as those above?” [5]. More critical reviews of “Lord of the Rings” followed, with Philip Toynbee writing in 1961, “It seemed to me that these books were dull, ill-written, whimsical and childish. And for me this had a reassuring outcome, for most of his more ardent supporters were soon beginning to sell out their shares in Professor Tolkien, and today those books have passed into a merciful oblivion” [6]. Similar criticisms and predictions have been proven horribly incorrect over time as Tolkien’s modern fantasy literature has grown in popularity decades later (and still today). But even when hHis book sales are increasing, not decreasing , the scornful criticism has yet to end.
Tolkien himself stated that one of the reasons his works have elicited such mixed reactions is that they are based on manuscripts of documents about the “legendarium” world he created, which were never published for commercial reasons. This creates a sense of incoherence for new readers who approach the genre in such a way that it appears out of nowhere. To critics, Tolkien’s literature is frequently associated with nationalism, Marxism, fascism, racism, and sexism. When explaining the “Lord of the Rings” based on World War II, the dark lord Sauron as the dictator Hitler, the power of the master ring as the atomic bomb, the aftermath of the devastated Shire akin to Soviet Communism, historical critics easily see Tolkien’s work to be a fable. Others argue that Tolkien metaphorized Catholic teachings in the form of stories, explaining that Jesus died for his followers and then rose again as a savior to complete the mission as reflected in the scene of Gandalf dying after falling into the depths of Khazad-Dum to destroy the fiery demon Balrog. Moorcock is among other critics who associate Tolkien’s world with escapism, claiming it is all an attempt to escape reality and that Tolkien’s fans come to his works to run away from traumas the endings are very happy. However, those accusations are more than often unfounded. Though King Aragorn has returned and Sauron has been destroyed, Middle-earth remains a ruin, with the Elves eventually returning to Valinor, and Arwen giving up. Frodo, who has received the gift of immortality and is about to die, is unable to recover from his journey to destroy the master ring. The ending is not always happy, as each variety suffers severe and irreversible damage.
Thomas Shippey, a professor of English and medieval literature and one of the world’s foremost academic scholars of Tolkien’s works, has suggested that Tolkien’s success has a lot to do with his harsh criticism. Rather than conducting thorough research, most critics began with the question “why is he famous?” As a result, legitimate intellectual analysis has been suppressed and replaced by questions of popular sociology. Furthermore, whilst Tolkien was extremely skilled at the “divine, elves, orcs, magic, swords, and shields” his fantasy world, which created a territory in which the reviewer is subject to judgment due to a lack of expertise. Most critics approached Tolkien in the same way they approached traditional literary forms, with false expectations, leading to accusations of being illusionary and impractical . After all, problems arise from literary critics who base their subjective opinions on unsatisfactory assumptions. Tolkien created a mythical world, and his novels should be approached in the same way that the Odyssey or Gilgamesh would. That’s why it’s so easy for general readers to fall into the “legendarium” world of fervent romance, while most critics have panned it for underestimating a contemporary fantasy world.
2. Scholars slugging it out, and modernism
Tolkien writes in the preface to “Lord of the Rings”: “As for any inner meaning or ‘message’, it has in the intention of the author none. It is neither allegorical nor topical “ [7]. He is seen denying that his work is about anything other than the story itself. Scholars have attempted to understand Tolkien’s literature by categorizing his style according to different and mutually exclusive values. To summarize, fragmented analyses on Tolkien and his works have derived from scholars attributing his work to modernism, medievalism, romanticism, Victorianism, and Christian discourse .
[It will take more analyses to be able to clarify each value assigned to Tolkien, but due to the limited length of the article and the fact that we are also in the Modern World topic week, the writer will only focus on whether modernity exists in Tolkien literature, and if so, in what aspects].
Modernist literature, which emerged in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, primarily in Europe and North America, is distinguished by a departure from traditional writing frames, in search for an authentic response to the changed world brought about by industrialization and urbanization [8]. The catastrophic consequences of the two World Wars, as well as scientific and technological progress, have led many authors to doubt the future as well as humanity’s good nature; they appear to be decayed by the rise of capitalism and civilization’s violence. In recent years, a modernist interpretation of Tolkien’s mythological world has gained popularity. Tolkien scholar Tom Shippey examined the influences of Medievalism on Tolkien literature in his 1982 book “The Road to Middle-Earth”. Later , in the book “J.R.R. Tolkien: Author of the Century,” published in 2000, Shippey focused on highlighting how elements of modernism influenced Tolkien’s work, and the book was well received by the public. Shippey specifically claims that one of the characteristics of modern literature is that it allows the reader to know the inner thoughts of the characters [9]. Tolkien’s favorite medieval legends, “Beowulf” and “Sir Gawain and the Green Knight,” made no use of introspection at all. It is, however, possible that the professor found it difficult to tell a story in which the characters’ thoughts aren’t shown.
Shippey asserts that criticism of Tolkien’s authority in “Lord of the Rings” is also a feature of modernist literature. Accordingly, there was a widespread belief in pre-19th-century literature that power rests in benevolent characters, which is in stark contrast to Middle-Earth where good people, even a hero or a venerable fairy, can be tempted by the power that comes from the master ring. Gandalf, Elrond, and Galadriel, the most powerful characters in Tolkien’s world, declined the opportunity to own the master ring out of fear of its power, whereas miserable characters like Boromir and Gollum accepted it. Even Bilbo and Frodo were tempted at the last moment, resulting in a tragic ending. Because power is associated with both good and evil, modernist interpretations of Tolkien’s work agree that he was influenced by the horrors of his time.
Understanding his approach to war and modern life issues is the first step toward a more complete understanding of his works. Much of Tolkien’s work has been compared to and discursively corresponded to tragic historical events of the twentieth century. “World War I casts its enormous shadow on his fiction”, claimed scholar Garbowski. Coming to a similar conclusion, Brian Rosebury claimed that Tolkien and his friends (C.S. Lewis, Charles Williams) were parts of a generation of “lost” writers [10]. “Lord of the Rings” demonstrates the flaws in human morality, with all characters (even the wisest) understanding only a small fraction of their about-to-collapse world. Things gradually deteriorate in Middle-earth, while the forces of darkness rise. To build an army for the dark lord Sauronm, Saruma the Mage engulfed ancient forests with fire and steel in order. Countless trees were felled and burned, while the Elves, graceful, pure, and immortal beings associated with natural forces, chose to depart from that world. The villains are the Sauron and Saruman gangs, which ravage Middle-earth with legions of Orcs, Uruks, catapults, and flamethrowers. These details may reflect Tolkien’s hardline view of modern society and industrialization, with the main culprit being the Industrial Revolution in England from the 1750s to the 1840s, which resulted in a generation of workers dying in factories, transportation systems, and bustling cities. Humans brought environmental pollution, labor and traffic accidents with them during that revolution.
Tolkien lived in the right time to see the rapid changes brought about by industrialization and urbanization, while remaining steadfast in his love of nature in the countryside. It is easy to see how intense Tolkien’s love of nature was. In his writings, he frequently spent a great deal of time detailing epics of trees, hills, lakes, and rivers. The Shire of Bilbo and Frodo is a green and peaceful land inhabited by cheerful, genuine Hobbits for generations. It is distinct from the rest of Middle-earth, representing the idyllic countryside envisioned by Tolkien in the real world. However, the Shire is not forever safe, as Frodo’s companions return to their homeland devastated by the Saruman army. The blue color fades away, replaced by the black of smoke and red of fire. Tolkien openly opposed modernization, writing to his son Christopher in 1943 that if this were the outcome of the Allied victory in World War II, he is not sure it would be better than a Nazi victory, because at least Germany values tradition and cohesion with its past [11]. For Tolkien, nature belonged to a sacred category, one that was both sacred and worthy of refuge. The world of land, water, and forests was unquestionably superior to the world of cities in his opinion. And the great wars in his Middle-earth world are eerily similar to the two world wars that have deeply traumatized both him and his family. According to the award-winning author of literary war theory Jon Garth, what fueled Tolkien’s literary endeavours were his experiences during World War I and the longings for his children’s return after World War II. The war’s aftermath left Frodo, at the end of “Lord of the Rings,” never healed from both physical and mental wounds, which is exactly what happened to Tolkien when his friends in TCBS all died in the war, and the author nearly succumbed in the trenches. Wounded by illness and grief during the war, Tolkien created desperate heroes in “The Fall of Gondolin,” which would later serve as the archetypal basis for “The Silmarillion” and “The Lord of the Rings”.
It is clear that Tolkien was an opponent of modernity, and such a spirit was incorporated into his writings. “In form, content, and everything else, The Lord of the Rings is the most anti-Modernist of novels”, noted critic Jenny Turner. Most scholars acknowledge the influence of anti-modernism on Tolkien’s literary style, but they also emphasize that he belongs to a specific frame of reference, the twentieth century, and that this has influenced the way he thought and wrote. In the early 2000s, Peter Jackson’s film adaptations of Tolkien’s works helped raise awareness of Tolkien’s influence in modern society’s pop culture. Movies, as a product of the twenty-first century industry, exaggerated modernist values — pluralism, democratic values, and the role of women (Princess Eowyn enters battle and defeats the Witch-King) — more than books did. Since the ecological depth of Middle-earth and its solid connotation in the proposed “legendarium” world covers a wide range of topics relevant to today’s society, recent publications explaining Tolkien’s modernism have been well received by scholars and the general public.
3. What is the purpose of further analyses?
J.R.R. Tolkien probably did not anticipate that his works would be frequently associated with life values. The professor was a lover of simplicity who spent the majority of his life teaching at Oxford University and immersed himself in his fantasy world. His impact on the literary genre of modern fantasy is undeniably present, owing to both the series and the training of subsequent generations of fantasy writers. Few people know that, in 1931, Tolkien and Lewis painstakingly designed and implemented a curriculum at Oxford’s Developing English School, which has since spawned a new generation of medieval fantasy authors. Readers who devoured “The Hobbit,” “The Lord of the Rings,” and “The Chronicles of Narnia” have unknowingly come across fantasy series written by Tolkien and Lewis’s students like Diana Wynne Jones, Susan Cooper, Kevin Crossley-Holland, and Philip Pullman. [13]. It has been all too common for writers to find inspiration in Tolkien’s writings in the decades that followed. It is clear that Tolkien influenced J.K. Rowling’s “Harry Potter” series, particularly Headmaster Dumbledore, who was inspired in part by Tolkien’s wizard Gandalf the Gray. Similarly, famed horror writer Stephen King has acknowledged Tolkien’s influence on his novels ‘The Stand’ as well as the fantasy series ‘The Dark Tower’. Recently, the author George RR Martin has publicly claimed to be inspired by Tolkien in the series of novels “A Song of Ice and Fire” — the very base of the blockbuster TV series “Game of Thrones” [14].
The widespread popularity of modern fantasy literature in today’s popular culture is undeniable. Is it then necessary to try to comprehend the materialistic values of the sociological category that the late writer never acknowledged? Tolkien’s literature has been a part of the lives of millions of people for nearly nine decades, a testament to the adaptability and vitality of his works. Even if they haven’t read them, everyone knows about Tolkien’s world, and so these modern fantasy works have become the beauty of human culture. Finding, assigning, and debating an essential value in Tolkien literature can be completely meaningless as critics and scholars attempt to assert Tolkien style with their own perception. Tolkien left behind a complex system of content and ideas, making attempts to simplify him inaccurate and one-sided.
Tolkien’s intellectual legacy has long extended beyond the boundaries of the so-called materialistic categories. As scholar Curry argues in “J.R.R. Tolkien — The Legacy of Middle-Earth”, it is the great achievement of a true work of art when it can withstand the passage of time, along with changes in opinion, culture, and history; and that’s why each generation of readers can find and extract the meanings in those works themselves.
On their side, the people involved in the controversy may win back certain values for themselves, but none is necessarily related to Tolkien or his writings.
___________
Empire of fantasy, by Sam Haselby
Isengard represented the Industrial Revolution: Because Tolkien hated technology, by Alexander Chavers
Beyond Essentialism Thesis J.R.R Tolkien, by BMJ Van Laarhoven
References:
[1] S. Brain, “Lord of the Rings Total Franchise Revenue — Statistic Brain,” Statistic Brain, 02-Jan-2018. [Online]. Available: https://www.statisticbrain.com/lord-of-the-rings-total.../. [Accessed: 22-Oct-2021]
[2] B. Attebery, Strategies of fantasy. Bloomington ; Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1992 [Online]. Available: https://www.goodreads.com/.../1366546.Strategies_of_Fantasy. [Accessed: 22-Oct-2021]
[3] K. Thompson, “Film Adaptations: Theatrical and Television Versions,” ResearchGate, 18-Apr-2014. [Online]. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/.../278322448_Film.... [Accessed: 22-Oct-2021]
[4] R. Falconer, “Earlier Fantasy Fiction: Morris, Dunsany, and Lindsay,” ResearchGate, 18-Apr-2014. [Online]. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/.../278319581_Earlier.... [Accessed: 22-Oct-2021]
[5] “C. S. Lewis, W. H. Auden, & Edmund Wilson on The Lord of the Rings,” Book Marks, 11-Jun-2018. [Online]. Available: https://bookmarks.reviews/c-s-lewis-w-h-auden-and-edmund.../. [Accessed: 22-Oct-2021]
[6] W. Hammond, “The Critical Response to Tolkien’s Fiction,” Mythlore: A Journal of J.R, vol. 21, no. 2, p. 34, 1996 [Online]. Available: https://dc.swosu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2151...
[7] “Tolkien’s Foreword to the Second Edition — Lord of the Rings,” Scribd, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://fr.scribd.com/.../Tolkien-s-Foreword-to-the.... [Accessed: 22-Oct-2021]
[8] “Modernism | Definition, Characteristics, History, Art, Literature, Time Period, Postmodernism, & Examples | Britannica,” Encyclopædia Britannica. 2021 [Online]. Available: https://www.britannica.com/art/Modernism-art. [Accessed: 22-Oct-2021]
[9] T. A. Shippey, J.R.R. Tolkien : author of the century. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2002 [Online]. Available: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/23606.J_R_R_Tolkien. [Accessed: 22-Oct-2021]
[10] Humphrey Carpenter, The Inklings : C.S. Lewis, J.R.R. Tolkien, Charles Williams, and their friends. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co, 1979 [Online]. Available: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/76834.The_Inklings. [Accessed: 22-Oct-2021]
[11] “Re-Enchanted,” University of Minnesota Press, 2019. [Online]. Available: https://www.upress.umn.edu/book-division/books/re-enchanted. [Accessed: 22-Oct-2021]
[12] J. Turner, “London Review of Books,” London Review of Books, 15-Nov-2001. [Online]. Available: https://lrb.co.uk/.../jenny.../reasons-for-liking-tolkien. [Accessed: 22-Oct-2021]
[13] “The rise and fall of the Oxford School of fantasy literature | Aeon Essays,” Aeon, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://aeon.co/.../the-rise-and-fall-of-the-oxford.... [Accessed: 22-Oct-2021]
[14] M. Drout, “Michael D. C. Drout — J.R.R. Tolkien’s Medieval Scholarship and its Significance — Tolkien Studies 4,” ResearchGate, 2007. [Online]. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/.../236770900_Michael_D_C...’s_Medieval_Scholarship_and_its_Significance_-_Tolkien_Studies_4. [Accessed: 22-Oct-2021]
[15] M. Pellerin, “J.R.R. Tolkien: The Legacy of Middle-Earth,” IMDb, 14-Dec-2004. [Online]. Available: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0487916/. [Accessed: 22-Oct-2021]
