Book Review: J.R.R. Tolkien, Author of the Century

One of my top ten favorite books is Tom Shippey’s J.R.R. Tolkien, Author of the Century. As I have mentioned elsewhere, Shippey followed in Tolkien’s footsteps in academia, teaching not only the same subjects, but also occupying the same positions. If you enjoy Tolkien, are a writer, are interested in storytelling, or love language, I encourage you to order this book, finish what you’re reading while it’s in the mail, and set aside an afternoon or weekend to read this book when it arrives.

Shippey is so thorough and organized that I cannot presume to review his book in anyway other than to follow the outline he himself used to plan it.

Shippey begins with a foreword. For all you impatient barbarians like myself who like to skip the foreword to get to the action, don’t. It’s good. Really. In the foreword, Shippey begins by establishing his claim that Tolkien is in fact, The Author of the Century. He examines the impact that fantasy has had on the twentieth century, particularly from the pens of what he calls “traumatized authors”, that is authors who were impacted by the World Wars and the surrounding violence of the Twentieth Century in a deeply personal way.  Speaking of Tolkien in the company of Orwell, Golding, and Vonnegut, Shippey writes

“Those authors of the twentieth century who have spoken most powerfully to and for their contemporaries have for some reason found it necessary to use the metaphoric mode of fantasy, to write about worlds and creatures which we know do not exist…”

Shippey goes on to defend fantasy as not only a valid literary genre, but as a valuable tool that Twentieth Century writers used to communicate about and come to grips with the world they saw around them.

In the first of the books six chapters, Shippey explores The Hobbit. He looks at the beginnings of Tolkien’s use of words and names as suggestions of stories, for Tolkien did not merely translate or gloss over the materials he read. He studied them, contemplated them, and tried to make sense of them. Why, for instance, is the name ‘Gandalf’ in a list of dwarf names? The second part of the name means ‘elf’, the first could mean ‘staff’. So, what was a ‘staff-elf’, and what was he doing with a bunch of dwarves?

Shippey looks at how questions like this helped to shape many of Tolkien’s inventions as he attempted to harmonize the old stories. However, Shippey points out that Tolkien was not merely intent on harmonizing the old stories with each other, but with today. Bilbo, living in a shire with grocers and butchers and regular mail, moves in a very different world than Thorin and the dwarves who live in the mountains, are never without weapons, and speak of revenge upon an ancient dragon, and Shippey shows how, though both speak different words and at times focus on different things, they are surprisingly similar.

Shippey’s second chapter focuses on the way Tolkien took inspiration from old stories and poems as he mapped out a plot for LOTR. The best section in the chapter, and the one that taught me most about writing, is fourteen pages on The Council of Elrond. Shippey breaks down the turning point of the series, when it completes its transformation from a childhood lark akin to The Hobbit to a heroic epic. “The chapter…breaks…most of the rules which might be given to an apprentice writer” Shippey writes, “…though it is fifteen thousand words long, in it nothing happens: it consists entirely of people talking…it has an unusual number of speakers present (twelve) the majority of them (seven) unknown to the reader and appearing for the first time. Just to make things more difficult, the longest speech, which takes up close on half the total, contains direct quotation from seven more speakers, or writers, all of them apart from Butterbur and Gaffer Gamgee new to the story, and some of them (Saruman, Denethor) to be extremely important to it later on.” The Council of Elrond is a committee meeting, and it could easily have become one of the most boring sections in modern literature. Shippey examines, in detail, how Tolkien uses narrative structure and linguistic trends to keep interest and show story. The jockeying between Boromir and Aragorn for example lays the groundwork for the end of the book and the end of the series, while Gloin speaks in very different ways from Gandalf, who speaks differently from Boromir.

Shippey’s explanation of how these verbal cues work and how Tolkien uses them is fascinating and demonstrates one of Shippey’s great strength: He is so knowledgeable and enthusiastic about his craft that his writing is enjoyable and instructive. Like the committee meeting it dissects, this chapter could easily devolve into a dry dissection of syntax and word order, but Shippey’s explanations of what is communicated and how that occurs makes this easily one of the most important passage in my writing development.

In chapters 3 & 4, ‘Concepts of Evil’ and ‘The Mythic Dimension’, Shippey examines how Tolkien built the themes of heroism and despair, good and evil, and wisdom and rationalism into his story. The wonderful thing about these chapters is that it is not just an exploration of Tolkien’s writing, but an exploration of what lay behind what Tolkien wrote and how it influenced him. From the pacifism of T.H. White during World War II to the conflicts between Boethian and Manichean explanations of evil and how they shaped Tolkien’s conception of the ring wraiths. The holistic approach is highly instructive and shines a light on just how much detail and study Tolkien had gathered over his life time.

In Chapter 5, Shippey seeks to provide something of a guide to reading The Silmarillion, and if you have ever attempted the Silmarillion and been lost among the names and histories, this is the section for you. Any one of the stories contained within the epic are worthy of great praise, from Turin’s battle with fate, to Gondolin’s desperate search for security, to the valiant love story of Beren and Luthien each one tells tales of the struggles and trials mankind has endured and caused since the first stories were told. The way in which Tolkien brings them together, each enlightening and building on the others, is truly astounding and worthy of greater recognition. Shippey helps clear some of the fog that the vastness creates, and explores how Tolkien used his epic work to provide narrative depth to his works.

The explanation of narrative depth was exceedingly instructive for me as I tried to develop my own writing. A story that shows only those people and places who play a main role can seem shallow, or two dimensional. Tolkien’s constant use of names, asides, and casual references serves to create in the reader the impression that they are passing through a small part of a wide, wide world rather than a narrow path lined with card board cutouts. In Middle Earth, there is always another story beyond that forest, under those mountains, or across that river.

In Chapter 6, Shippey explores Tolkien’s shorter works; Leaf by Niggle, Farmer Giles of Ham, and Smith of Wootan Major. Shippey’s commentary on these works is made all the more valuable by the shared knowledge that he has with Tolkien. Since they taught many of the same works and served in many of the same university departments, Shippey understands not only many of the ancient references but also many of the private jokes that Tolkien included in his shorter works. Farmer Giles of Ham was written shortly after Tolkien completed The Lord of the Rings, and is a light-hearted tale. In contrast, Leaf by Niggle and The Smith of Wootan Major were written towards the end of his life. Leaf is in many ways a self-critique, and an expression of Tolkien’s misgivings about how much he had accomplished through his life. The Smith is, to me, one of the saddest stories I have ever read, for given the time of its composition, it seems almost to be Tolkien’s farewell to Faerie Land and the stories in which he had spent so much of his life. Shippey’s explanation and excavation of these stories adds so much to their reading, for Tolkien filled them with asides and references to old stories, tiny translation problems with ancient texts, and private jokes that few of us have found the time or expertise to discover.

From Pinterest

The Afterward, (yes, you should read that too), is a final conclusion to many of Shippey’s arguments about Tolkien’s relevance as an author, his skill as an author, and his wisdom as a professor. In doing so he attempts to answer many of the criticisms of Tolkien from his more eloquent critics, and in the process, demonstrates that the point of contention comes less from their objection to The Lord of The Rings. Rather, much of the distaste stems from a deep disagreement about the fundamental truths that underpin Tolkien’s writings. Professors and critics who have spent their lives preaching pacifism, denying the existence of real evil, and ‘seeing through’ any reasons for hope find Tolkien’s work in violation of everything they have fought against and thus must denounce it. Shippey finishes with a brief look at the impact Professor Tolkien has had on his successors in fantasy, and imagines how the pipe wielding philologist might smile at what he started.

You can find Shippey's book here on Amazon. I hope you enjoy it as much as I did. 

If you're not following me on Facebook,  head over to my page and check it out. I'm getting ready to announce my next story series here on this blog and you don't want to miss it!

Understanding Tolkien: Conclusion

I hesitate to use the words 'Understanding Tolkien' and 'Conclusion' together in the same sentence, but the purpose of this short series wasn't to make any of us masters in Tolkien studies. Rather, my intention was to give a taste of how he communicated on important subjects using his skills as a writer. Hopefully this encourages you to study Tolkien in greater depth, with an eye to the richness that lays behind the printed words on the page.

At the end of the day,  there are two vital lessons to learn from Tolkien as a writer. We must interact with the world around us, and we must read.While interacting with the world is a post for another time, here are some of the best books I've read on Tolkien which I think would benefit every writer whether they write fiction, fantasy, history, or essays.


By Tom Shippey
J.R.R Tolkien : Author of the Century,  and The Road to Middle Earth: How J.R.R. Tolkien Created a New Mythology
Tom Shippey was one of Tolkien's successors at Leeds University, and at one point taught from the syllabus that Tolkien had constructed. What makes Shippey such an engaging read is his vast understanding of Tolkien's academic background as well as his wealth of historical knowledge. It is my humble opinion that no library is complete without a copy of these books, and any writer who has not read them is sadly missing out. Author of the Century  focuses  on Tolkien's impact in relation to the times in which he lived, and how it interacted with his professional studies, while The Road to Middle Earth is a closer look at how philology shaped Tolkien's world and how language inspired many of his best creations.
Shippey is one of the most knowledgeable writers I have read, for he possesses not only a deep understanding of philology and history, but also literary criticism both historic and modern  coupled with a keen mastery of the writer's craft. I am currently reading through several more of his works at the moment and enjoying every one of them.

The Philosophy of Tolkien by Peter Kreeft
Peter Kreeft is one of those author who I will read no matter his subject, anything he writes is worth the time it takes to read, and this one is no exception. Kreeft is perhaps the one author on this list who's knowledge surpasses Shippey's, and even then only in Christianity and Catholicism, though one might say he remains near-peer in every other area. Kreeft is an exceedingly knowledgeable and readable (why can't those two traits coincide more often) author with a deep and vast mind. I highly recommend that you look more into his writings.

J.R.R. Tolkien: A Biography by Humphrey Carpenter
The definitive biography on Professor Tolkien, this short work is valuable because it focuses as much on Tolkien's mental life as it does on his physical one.Tolkien's early life contained much of the
"action", but it was the second half of his life that saw the many threads of his earlier years woven together.
 
The Battle for Middle-earth; Tolkien's Divine Design in The Lord of the Rings by Fleming Rutledge
The thing  that I really enjoy about this book is the way it examines LOTR chronologically, exploring themes as they develop with the plot. Rutledge begins with the first chapter and works his way through the story, examining how Tolkien builds his message. I believe this is an important read, along with Philosophy of Tolkien, because as Christian authors, we need to understand what we are saying and communicating in what we write.


 The Master of Middle Earth; The fiction of J.R.R. Tolkien by Paul Kocher
I almost didn't include this book, I've only read it once, and never owned it. However, Kocher's chapter on Aragorn fundamentally changed how I looked at LOTR and how I look at heroes. I've seen this one at a few libraries, and it is well worth your time. I didn't write an article on Aragorn for this series but he remains in my mind one of the most important characters in the story for understanding Tolkien's thoughts on leadership and service. The contrasts between Denethor and Theoden, Aragorn and Boromir, Aragorn and Eomer, Gandalf and Sauroman may be something I explore in the future.

I hope this series has given a few of you a slightly better picture of Tolkien's background, and how it allowed him to become such a great writer. I was asked recently why I chose Tolkien to focus on, there are so many other great authors. I believe Tolkien understood history the way few others did, I believe he understood the modern condition better than many of his peers, and I believe that his Christianity allowed him to understand and balance both of those in a way that his peers could not. He studied and lived deeply and richly and that is what contributed to his excellence as a writer. If we too wish to be excellent writers, we must do the same.

Understanding Tolkien: Christianity

Of all the influences on Tolkien’s life and work his faith was not only the most important, but the earliest to appear.  When his mother brought him back to England from Africa after the death of his father she returned to the Catholic church, an act that resulted in her near banishment by the rest of the (mainly Baptist) Tolkien family. When his mother died only a few years later, Tolkien believed it was at least in part caused by the struggle of taking care of him and his brother in the absence of any help from her family. He thus saw his mother as a sort of martyr, who worked herself to death rather than abandon the Catholic Church. After his mother’s death, both of the Tolkien boys were raised by Father Francis Morgan, who had been a good friend to Tolkien’s mother and continued their education, having a profound impact on the rest of Tolkien’s life.

As we have seen, Tolkien was presented with two very different views of the world, the modern and the ancient, each contradicting the other in how they perceived evil, progress, fate, and much more. Tolkien believed that the men and women of both eras were making honest observations, but missing important facts and details skewed their understanding. The ancients, glorifying the epic hero, missed the human propensity to misuse power, while the modern world, blinded by atrocities and the resulting cynicism, failed to appreciate the heroism that mankind can achieve.  In Christianity, Tolkien had a timeless reference through which to view these conflicting viewpoints and see that, in many cases, they viewed opposite sides of the truth to the exclusion of the whole truth.

                In his treatment of evil Tolkien shows us a force that is powerful and real, in agreement with the ancient stories and the modern World Wars, but in contrast to many of the pacifist arguments of his age. Tolkien’s heroes face evil both from within their own ranks and from the forces of the enemy. There are two places where this can be seen most clearly, Amon Hen and Pellenor Fields. In each case, the forces of good are handicapped by actions from within their own ranks before being assaulted by overwhelming attacks. At Amon Hen, Boromir tries to take the ring from Frodo, convincing him that the Fellowship cannot be trusted and effectively breaking the Fellowship of the Ring. At Pellenor Fields, the actions of a despairing Denethor pull Gandalf away from the fighting, removing the one person capable of withstanding the Witch-King of Angmar.

Both Boromir and Denethor should be heroes according to the ancients, rising above such despair and overpowering all who stand before them. According to the moderns their fall should signal the beginning of the enemy’s victory. But neither occurs. In each case the actions another are able to stall the effects of their defeat. In contrast to Boromir’s claim that he is more worthy to bear the ring, Aragorn sacrifices himself to protect the halflings, and at Pellenor Fields, instead of cowering in the face of the Witch-King, whom he cannot hope to match, Theoden charges onward, rejecting the despair which Denethor has embraced. Aragorn and Theoden each face similar temptations as their counterparts but reject them, for Tolkien understood that the evil within is powerful, but not invincible.

Sauron himself is no easy foe, to be understood or reasoned with, but neither is he nor the evil he represents the final predetermined end of the world as in Ragnarok or as some pessimists in the modern age would have us believe. Evil is a threat to man from the inside, as those of the world war recognized, but it is not an insurmountable threat. The great error of paganism, as G.K. Chesterton pointed out, is that it puts things out of place, either making them more than they really are or disregarding them entirely. What has made Tolkien such a powerful voice about evil, and nearly every other topic, over the years is that he puts things in their proper place.

               

                Fate is one of the things Tolkien believed everyone had gotten a piece of, but lacked a whole. We speak of ‘chance’, the ancients spoke of ‘Wyrd’ and nobody seems exactly sure what is going on behind it all. Tolkien believed he did.  One of the fascinating things about Tolkien is his use of details and asides to make veiled references to one grand theme or another. One of these is Tolkien’s habit of qualifying any reference he may make to chance. As Tom Shippey points out

‘Tom Bombadil says, when he rescued the hobbits from Willow -man ‘Just chance brought me then, If chance you call it’ (my emphasis). Ruin was averted in the North-lands, Gandalf says in appendix A (III) ‘because I met Thorin Oakenshield one evening on the edge of Bree. A chance-meeting, as we say in Middle-earth’ (my emphasis again)

The resulting picture that emerges, in combination with this and other references such as Gandalf’s remark that he was ‘sent back’, is of a higher power directing the events in Middle-Earth. Further examination of Tolkien’s writing shows that these and others are references to the Valar, the heavenly beings of Tolkien’s world, who are ruled by Eru, The One.

In the ancient world, fate was an impersonal, irresistible force that could be influence only slightly by the ‘undoomed man’, while in the modern world it is either ignored or seen in a similar manner. In Christendom, however, we see Fate as the will of God misunderstood by the blind. In Midgard, fate overpowers human choice and makes it as nothing, while under Christ, the will of God enables human choice, and frees us to reap the rewards of our choices.

                The fulfillment of these two beliefs can be seen in Tolkien’s treatment of the ‘little people’. The Hobbits are referred to as little people, but this can also refer to the nameless, faceless, and seemingly unimportant characters throughout the story. A central tenant of Christianity is God’s use of those the world holds in little regard, and in Lord of the Rings the fate of Middle-Earth, of the great kings and noble elves, of the great cities and ancient dwarves all rests on the actions of two lonely hobbits.  Frodo and Sam are successful in part because they are ‘little people’ and are overlooked by Sauron who is focused on the ‘great people’ in Middle-Earth. Even until the last he cannot comprehend of the hobbits as being anything more than spies.

Lord of the Rings could not have been written by someone like T.H. White, who saw in humanity only unending evil that joyed in destruction and pain and was futile to resist. Nor could it have been written by the Norsemen, who struggled to understand how a carpenter who did not pursue martial glory could save the world. So too did the modern world struggle to understand how such selflessness and humility could avail against the evil that so overwhelmed them. Frodo is a uniquely Christian hero, at once free from the terrible oppression of omnipotent evil yet at the same time enslaved to the unyielding standard of goodness in contrasts that a pagan world cannot help but admire even as it is baffled. 

Christianity allowed Tolkien to create a balanced world, one that included both good and evil, pain and beauty, joy and sorrow in a way that resonates with the world we live in. Tolkien does not turn a blind eye to the suffering of the 20th Century, nor does he attempt wish it away with easy pleasures. Middle-Earth, in it's reflection of our world, offers hope amidst the sorrow while reminding us that we are not alone. 

And that is ultimately what makes the Lord of the Rings such a great story, it portrays the Truth of good and evil.

Understanding Tolkien: The Ancients

                Tolkien was more than just a soldier. He was a scholar as well, and this allowed him to contextualize his experiences against the backdrop of history. Today we will look at the ancient, and largely northern, legends and sagas that Tolkien read and studied for much of his professional life.

                There are three main things that Tolkien saw and wrestled with in the ancient lore he studied. First, evil in the old world, it’s pervasiveness and position was in some ways not unlike the images that came out of the Great Wars, but in some ways very different. Second, the concept of fate, or as the ancients called it, Wyrd. Thirdly, in the old stories, there is a sense of looking back and trying to make sense of information that Tolkien felt he could do better.  

 If you are not familiar with the Norse legends and sagas, it is important to understand they live against a backdrop unlike any other. The Greek Gods kept the Titans at bay, and Christians look toward the return of Christ and eternity in heaven. There was no such triumph in the North. Ragnarok, the Twilight of the Gods and the end of the world awaited them. The world ended in fire and darkness, with no visions of paradise beyond. To get a sense of what Ragnarok meant, watch this short clip from the History Channel show Vikings, where a newly arrived monk asks what Ragnarok is.

               

And of course, northern lore is filled with all sorts of monsters and dragons from Grendel to Fafnir on top of the ice giants and everyone else waiting to crash the whole world burning party. In a way, this is not too different from the omnipresent evil that Tolkien saw through the 20^th Century. There is however, a major difference.

                Whereas the Twentieth Century saw evil arising primarily out of man (an internal threat), the ancients saw it primarily as coming from beyond man, from the outside. To be sure there were outlaws and oath breakers, the ancients were under no illusions about the nature of man, but these men were not seen as world breakers the way that 20^th Century man saw himself. This is an important difference in determining how you look at and understand evil. More will be discussed on this next week when we look at how Christianity allowed Tolkien to understand and in many ways resolve the contradictions between the ancient and modern experiences.

                Before we go farther and jump into the tangled concept that is Wyrd, take ten minute and watch this short summary of Beowulf. Seriously, it’s important and I think you’ll enjoy it.  

Wyrd is an interesting concept.  It is similar to our concept of fate, but more nuanced and less understood. The best way to look at it is to examine a quote I have mentioned before, Beowulf’s remark that:

…Wyrd oft nereth

Unfaegne Eorl, thonne his ellen deah

…Fate often spares

The Undoomed warrior, When his courage holds (my translation)

A purely logical academic might point out that, strictly speaking, this is nonsense. Of course fate spares the warrior who it spares, it is axiomatic. Why then, Tolkien might have responded, does Beowulf add the qualifier “When his courage holds?”. If it is necessary for his courage to hold, what happens to an undoomed man if his courage doesn’t? Conversely, what happens to a doomed man whose courage holds.

                What emerges is a sense that an individual’s actions are important in determining, in some way, the outcome and our fate, but not completely. For a sense of how this plays out, let’s examine one of the more interesting discussions about Beowulf: Who is the better ruler, Hrothgar or Beowulf?

                Both achieve their crown through martial prowess, both keep their people safe (the sacred duty of northern kings) until they are challenged by a terrible monster, Grendel for Hrothgar and the dragon for Beowulf. Both are vitally important to the peace of their kingdoms, the poet mentions that after Hrothgar dies the peace treaty falls apart and his people are destroyed and also that with the death of Beowulf, all the surrounding nations that had been cowering from the warrior all return to destroy Beowulf’s kingdom. But here is where they differ, Hrothgar calls for aid to deal Grendel, thus surviving and securing several more years of peace and prosperity for his people, while Beowulf fights the dragon himself and is killed, dooming his people.

                Some point to this as evidence of Hrothgar knowing his limits, others point that it highlights the no-win situations many heroes are placed in. But if fate is predetermined, if the destruction of their people is inevitable, does it matter what their choices are? Many modern academics would argue that it doesn’t, and that was a prevailing view for many coming out of the Great Wars, but Tolkien believed that the poets would disagree, and that they were right to do so.

                This leads into the third point, the looking back. I believe that Tolkien felt he was looking back to the ancient poets that we still have in the same way that they looked back on their predecessors. This is characterized by two things. First a lack of “chronological snobbery”, as C.S. Lewis described it, and second a certain puzzled confusion over things that did not make sense.

                It is an interesting literary fact that ancient literature looks back quite fondly on history. Whereas the 20^th Century is characterized by a disdainful neglect of the past as it rushed on toward utopia, the old poets look nostalgically back to a time when men were stronger, women wiser, and all things better. More will be said about this also next week, but it is important because it gives the past a voice. Modern skeptics, having rejected the past, had neither the context in which to put the horrors of the 20^th Century nor the perspective to evaluate mankind as he stood among the rubble. This abbreviated vantage point allows views to swing wildly between man as a god building utopia to man as a demon, the agent of his own destruction.

The puzzled confusion will be apparent to those who have read much of the legends. Ancient authors ideas appear vague on some subjects or confused on others. Take the tale of Sigurd and Fafnir for instance. Sigurd refuses to tell Fafnir his name, lest he be cursed. Yet only a few stanzas later, Fafnir is apparently well read up on Sigurd and all his exploits, and no curse is forthcoming.  

                Yet, as a philologist, Tolkien also was able to pick out more subtle confusions. Take for instance, this excerpt of the list from the Dvergatal (Tally of the Dwarves) in the poem Voluspa.

"Orinn, Onarr, Oinn, Miothvitnir,

Vigr og Gandalfr, Vindalfr, Thorinn

Fili, Kili, Fundinn, Vali…"

                On an initial reading, one’s eyes can quickly get bored and float over them, but as Thomas Shippey points out in Author of the Century, what is Gandalfr or Vindalfr doing on this list? They contain the element alf, meaning elf which is “a creature in all tradition quite distinct from a dwarf” (16). Tolkien apparently interpreted Gand as staff or wand, leading to a staff-elf, and it is not far from there to a wizard.  

                There are countless other instances where we could walk through such oddities that gave rise to Tolkien’s creations, many of which are attempts to make sense of things like Gandalfr. But those shall be addressed another time, in another post. My point here is to try to give you a glimpse of what was working in Tolkien’s mind as he created.

                It may seem like I’m leaving a lot of loose ends floating around, and I am, they will be pulled together soon, but hopefully a picture is starting to emerge. Next week we’ll look at how Tolkien’s faith allowed him to pull together and understand the contradictions between the moderns and the ancients.  Leave a comment (or comments) and let me know if I’m missing something you’re curious about and I’ll see about plugging it in.

                Also coming up next week, I’ll hopefully be ready to introduce my project for NanoWrimo (hint, the main character is mentioned but not met in Dragon of Kveldmir). Thanks for reading, don’t forget to follow my blog, and have a wonderful weekend!

 



Here is the link to the Youtube Channel Overly Sarcastic  Productions, where I got the Beowulf summary. I think I found my new favorite channel.