Tolkien's Reception, popular, and critical.

[Andorinha]

I should like to open a new thread devoted to notices of, and discussions about J.R.R. Tolkien's Middle-earth mythos. How were his writings received at the time of their composition/ publication, and how has opinion on his work (popular, scholarly, and professional-critical) altered over time?

[Andorinha]

A Blast From the Past -- Tolkien cannot last!

From British critic Philip Toynbee, “Dissension among the Judges.” Observer 6 Aug. 1961.

"There was a time when the Hobbit fantasies of Professor Tolkien were being taken very seriously indeed by a great many distinguished literary figures… I had the sense that one side or other must be mad, for it seemed to me that these books were dull, ill-written, whimsical and childish. And for me this had a reassuring outcome, for … today (1961) those books have passed into a merciful oblivion.”

________________________

Philip Toynbee was writing this missive just four years before the paperback publications in the USA that launched the Tolkien phenomenon, and put the Middle-earth trilogy well on its way to becoming one of the most successful (if not the most successful) of all publishing ventures. How could Toynbee have gotten it so glaringly wrong? He simply could not understand the work, and felt that it would appeal to no more than a handful of readers. We know now that he was wildly mistaken, but why, and how? And, just what does it mean that Tolkien's weird, whimsical writings could so quickly establish so huge an audience. Obviously, the kind of writing Toynbee might prefer, was not what the public wanted in the 1960s. What historical/ social/ cultural events combined "back then" to alter the type of reading material that "western civilization" considered acceptable? Who were, and are these readers of Tolkien?

I'm hoping we can handle some of these questions as we move further into the "Tolkien Era" of modern literature.

[Stormrider]

My first reaction was...Did Philip Toynbee actually read The Hobbit and LOTR and The Silmarillion or just skim through them? But then I thought "Perhaps he just isn't in to fantasy fiction."

My dad gave me FOTR because he thought I might like it and he just couldn't get into it himself. I don't know how far into the book my dad tried to go in his reading (I'll have to ask him next time I talk to him or see him). Maybe my dad didn't give it a good try. The first chapter is light, gossipy, and fun, and once Bilbo put the Ring on and vanished...how could he not like it? After that, the mystery of The Ring and the chase by the Black Riders...How couldn't he get hooked? That has always puzzled me.

But back to Philip Toynbee...Didn't he read The Hobbit and LOTR and The Silmarillion closely? (or are we just talking about LOTR?) I mean, come on, what about all the themes in the story? Just to name a few:
.pity and compassion
.good vs evil
.binding friendship and love
.getting hooked on something and not being able to stop
.mental suffering
.the drive to succeed
.suspicion
.the growth of the characters--strength, character, fortitude, bravery, leadership
.decline or diminishing of cultures and races
.humility
.free will
.power corrupts

How could he have read the story and not been affected by these themes? How could he say "that these books were dull, ill-written, whimsical and childish" and that they would pass into a "merciful oblivion"? He should be ashamed of himself for making these statements.

[Stormrider]

It also seems to me that in the 1960's people would have been more into fantasy because of the drugs, rock-and-roll, peace movement, freedom to find yourself, etc. The younger people (baby boomers) were more open minded and seemed to be searching for themselves. LOTR was a good book to get people thinking, feeling, and believing in something.

From this link: www.enotes.com/twentieth-century-criticism/lord-rings-j-r-r-tolkien

Largely because of its fantasy elements and its seemingly anti-war themes, the trilogy was absorbed into popular culture in the 1960s and 1970s, and references to it appeared in music and materials related to the psychedelic drug scene.

Yes, Led Zeppelin used LOTR terminology in some of their songs. "In the darkest depths of Mordor I met a girl so fair but Gollum, the evil one, crept up and slipped away with her."

What about Communisim, racisim, the threat of nuclear war, Vietnam? Those were big events and concerns back then. LOTR would have been a book to give hope, courage, and determination to people.

I would say the 1960's were the real beginning to the popularity of JRRT's life work...not "merciful oblivion".

[Andorinha]

RE Stormrider: "My first reaction was...Did Philip Toynbee actually read The Hobbit and LOTR and The Silmarillion or just skim through them?"

LOL, precisely my thought too!

There is an interesting over-view of this problem, says its 73 pages long, but there are so few words on each page that 20 might be closer to a real count:

I FIXED IT!
On the tool bar, there is a globe button. Click on it and it will give you these codes: [ url ] [ / url] Stick the entire long http link in between the two bracketed urls.
webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:rmxMXfHil8wJ:ils.unc.edu/
MSpapers/2908.pdf+%22
Wacky+World+of+Tolkien+Catching+On+With+Youth.%22&hl=en&gl=us

Sorry, can't get the hang of the editing here to make the url active and small...

I get the feeling that generational conflict was very important in determining who would like LOTR and who would hate it. Seems some of the establishment type literary critics were at first willing to accept JRRT's world as mildly absurd and harmless, but really became alarmed and reactive once it became a cult classic for the High School and College age part of society. Then the older critics seem almost to regard Middle-earth as a "threat" to the established order. Now, I suppose, Middle-earth has itself become the established order, or at least a big part of it!

[Stormrider]

This is indeed a long essay. I started reading it, but will probably do it in a couple of sittings. I noticed in the essay the mention of the languages and maps.

I have to admit, these were a couple of the big attractions to me the first time I read the story. I liked having a very detailed map of the world I was in and enjoyed looking at it and tracing everyone's movements. When I was about 11 or so, I wrote a fictional story about an imaginary land and I drew a map, too. (I don't know what ever happened to that story. I don't really even remember what it was about. ) So Tolkien's map and story really grabbed my attention.

I really liked the languages. I thought they were pretty unique and creative. However, at the time of my first reading, I had no idea that JRRT had developed Quenya and Sindarin so well not to mention some of the lesser languages having pretty good base of development, too.

As far as Tolkien's Publishers, Allen & Unwin, I have always wondered how they could have been so patient with our dear professor! 14 years to get the LOTR in print. Today, Publishers have distinctive timelines that must be met. JRRT would never have been published today. Perhaps the personal friendship that developed between the Publisher and Author helped there.

And another reason it may not have gone over. Here is an interesting quote from the essay:

After the success of The Hobbit, Allen & Unwin was “longing for a sequel, but when[the publisher] learnt that it was a work of enormous length, primarily intended for adults, upon which Tolkien had been engaged for over twenty years, [some staff were] rather aghast”. Instead of receiving a long-anticipated continuation of The Hobbit, written in similar style and clearly targeted at children, it was immediately apparent that something else altogether had arrived at the Allen & Unwin offices in Ruskin House, Museum St. Describing his new work in a letter to Stanley Unwin,Tolkien admitted that in response to requests for a “sequel” he had produced a book that could “not be regarded as such in any practical sense, or in the matter of atmosphere,tone, or audience addressed” (Letters 138). Rather than another Hobbit, it was a typescript spectacularly totaling something like half a million words in length, unabashedly, willfully archaic in style, and thematically fixated on sacrifice and loss.

And that is where I have left off in my reading of the essay! Whew! Can't wait to read more of this publishing history but I am tired of sitting at the computer and I certainly am not going to print this whole thing out so I can plop down and read it on my couch!

[Stormrider]

Andorinha said: "the establishment type literary critics were at first willing to accept JRRT's world as mildly absurd and harmless, but really became alarmed and reactive once it became a cult classic for the High School and College age part of society. Then the older critics seem almost to regard Middle-earth as a "threat" to the established order."

When we were really heavy into our TR forum at MSN and I was online all the time typing madly at my computer with all the threads we were posting and discussing, my mother-in-law thought I was in a cult worshipping group.

[Andorinha]

RE Stormrider's -- "When I was about 11 or so, I wrote a fictional story about an imaginary land and I drew a map, too. (I don't know what ever happened to that story. I don't really even remember what it was about. ) So Tolkien's map and story really grabbed my attention."

YES! When I first peeled back the pages of FotR, the maps immediately got my favourable attention. LOL, just the sort of stuff panned by many of the first critics: maps, charts, genealogies, chronologies, different languages with note on pronunciation. But I sure went for it, all these additions made the LOTR even more believable, it was a "real" world of its own, with its own historical depths -- I loved it!

Sorry you lost you early tale, I've still got some of mine from 7th grade, maps included!

[Stormrider]

You have those too! Glad you still have them because I wish I had mine.

I am now re-reading LOTR and I am into book 2 of TTT. I have Karen Wynn Fonstad's The Atlas of Middle-Earth and I am using it to follow all the characters' steps. She has dates by the routes so you can see who is where on which dates and a lot of detail. I purchased this book at the Tolkien Convension I went to at Marquette University in Wisconsin in Oct. 2004. She even signed the inside cover for me.

[Fredeghar Wayfarer]

I think a lot of people, including literary critics, are just disinclined to like the fantasy genre. Or genre fiction in general. Even those of us who love it have to admit that from an outside perspective, it can sound pretty ludicrous at times.

When some people hear about about elves and trolls and wizards, their eyes glaze over and they don't or can't see any worthy themes under that surface level of weirdness or what they perceive as childishness. And they dismiss Tolkien because he not only embraces those weird or childish elements, he revels in them and builds entire histories, languages, and cultures out of them.

I don't recall where I saw this quote but I remember one critic who accused Tolkien and his followers of "burrowing in an imaginary world." To us, that's the whole point. We see fantasy as the ultimate expression of imagination, the human mind allowed to run free and create whole worlds while subtly commenting on our own. But those who can't make that imaginative leap or don't roll with the sillier/weirder aspects find the whole thing far removed from their own experience. And thus, they dismiss it or think it juvenile.

That's my take on the "love it or hate it" reaction that Tolkien's work seems to receive. That just seems to be the lot of genre fiction, whether it be fantasy, sci-fi, horror, comic books, or what have you. One needs to have a good imagination and/or an open mind to appreciate it.

I think it's become a bit more accepted today, partly because of Tolkien and similar writers paving the way, elevating the form, and proving it to be a money maker for publishers and movie studios. But that bias is always going to exist to an extent.

[Stormrider]

Hi Fredegar. Good points.

I don't care to read every kind of reading genre myself and to many people (as you said) "Even those of us who love it have to admit that from an outside perspective, it can sound pretty ludicrous at times." I can read many fantasy stories and really like them but if they become movies, many times they don't come out in film as well as they did in my imagination and they do look ludicrous on film. They kind of remind me of some of the super hero cartoons like HeMan only with real people.

But Tolkien's middle-earth is so different. It is more life-like and he has taken so much care to develop the story and its themes that I don't see how anyone (even if they are not fantasy genre lovers) couldn't get involved in the story if they would only give it half a chance. So my Dad really baffles me.

You also said "When some people hear about about elves and trolls and wizards, their eyes glaze over and they don't or can't see any worthy themes under that surface level of weirdness or what they perceive as childishness."

I think this is why Tolkien made his races more human and decided that the small elves and fairies of the old tales were not for his story. He wanted people to believe his story rather than roll their eyes and not give it a chance.

[Andorinha]

A rather ancient review article on Tolkien's LOTR newly republished:

newrepublic.com/article/136543/fantastic-world-professor-tolkien

[fanuidhol]

The author of this review, Michael Straight, wrote to Tolkien prior to the review.
Letter 181, often read and quoted by me, was written in response. However, in all these years, I hardly ever paid attention to the people receiving the letters. And I never thought to "google" the recipients of some of the letters. My intent this morning was to see if there was anything else written by Straight about Tolkien, but, found this gem of a connection instead.

The last couple of paragraphs of the review were outstanding in my opinion, and now I know why!

Thanks Andy!

[Stormrider]

I missed seeing these last posts since I did not have the laptop with me at the wedding on Labor Day weekend. I just came across these today. I don't believe there has been any author who took so much care in writing a story as did Tolkien. Sure there are many of good stories but the detail and messages, themes, and descriptions of Tolkien's work are so carefully and lovingly written with much attention to even the minor details.