Discussion:
Humphrey Carpenter reviews "Tolkien and the Great War"
(too old to reply)
Speaking Clock
2003-11-23 17:24:10 UTC
Permalink
This is from today's Sunday Times (UK) - available online at
www.sunday-times.co.uk but only for UK readers.

Speaking Clock

*****************************

Review: Cover book: Tolkien and the Great War by John Garth

HUMPHREY CARPENTER

TOLKIEN AND THE GREAT WAR: The Threshold of Middle-earth
by John Garth
HarperCollins £20 pp398

In a hole in 20th-century literature there lives a Tolkien. He lurks
there disconcertingly, disrupting lazy assumptions, confounding academic
clichés. Were it not for him, we could declare without fear of
contradiction that the century that has just ended saw the unchallenged
triumph of the literature of modernism, and that T S Eliot and James
Joyce ushered in an era that had no room for fairy stories. But there he
dwells, puffing on his pipe, muttering about dragons and goblins,
mocking all those English-faculty Marxists, feminists and
post-structuralists with his maps of Middle-earth, and - for which they
will never forgive him - pulling in the crowds.

Who doubts that when BBC2's Big Read reaches its climax on December 13,
with the long-awaited party at which the poll results will be announced,
the book that has been voted the nation's favourite will turn out, yet
again, to be his? Time and again, The Lord of the Rings has proved
unbeatable in such polls. (All right, there is a loyal Tolkien claque
doing its best to ensure that he wins again, but I doubt that you can
really rig the vote to that extent.) Once more, Dickens, Jane Austen and
the rest will have to concede victory to the tweed-clad Oxford professor
who wrote his stories on the backs of old exam papers. And no prizes for
prophesying what will be the most popular film this Christmas.

"In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit," is one of the most
memorable, charmingly diffident debut lines in the history of
literature, and the book that begins with this line can scarcely be
bettered as a work of children's fiction. It is regrettable that the
success of the film of The Lord of the Rings has tended to push The
Hobbit out of the limelight. Peter Jackson, the film's director, should
have made four Tolkien films rather than three, beginning with the
adventures of Bilbo Baggins, the burglar-hobbit who helps a wandering
band of dwarves to regain their ancestral treasure from a wily old
dragon.

The Hobbit is beguilingly unpretentious, delightfully funny, and
splendidly restrained in its use of magic - compare J K Rowling's
spell-on-every-page approach, and judge for yourself which is the more
effective. Bilbo's journey from his cosy village across risky territory
to the Misty Mountains with their goblin-infested caverns, and to the
dragon-haunted Lonely Mountain beyond, provides the geographical and
narrative matrix for Frodo's quest in the sequel.

Moreover (as an academic friend once pointed out to me), The Hobbit is a
neat little parable about the first world war. Plucked from his rural
idyll and catapulted into a brutal and totally unnecessary conflict,
Bilbo soon discovers the futility of old-style heroism, and learns that
the best place for him is out of it all. He manages to get walloped on
the head, and spends most of the battle unconscious - just as his
creator Tolkien caught trench fever on the Somme, and was safely
invalided out of the carnage.

The importance of the first world war as a catalyst for Tolkien is now
the subject of an entire book. My own authorised biography of Tolkien,
published in 1977, was based on unlimited access to his papers, which
were then in the hands of his family. Not long after the book came out,
however, these papers were deposited in the Bodleian Library at Oxford,
without (for the time being) any provision for other would-be writers
about Tolkien to be allowed to see them. Consequently, any new accounts
of Tolkien's life tended to lack fresh source material, and to depend
heavily on my biography and the selection of Tolkien's letters that I
had edited with his son and literary executor, Christopher.

John Garth is the first writer to have been permitted to inspect certain
parts of the Tolkien papers in the Bodleian. (Aspiring Tolkien scribes
should not, however, rush to that library; no further giving of
permission is currently planned.) Garth has chosen to hold a magnifying
glass to the part of Tolkien's life that leads up to the outbreak of war
in 1914, and to follow Tolkien's war experiences in detail, together
with those of his close friends Robert Gilson, Geoffrey Smith, and
Christopher Wiseman. These three, along with Tolkien, were all old boys
of King Edward's School, Birmingham, where they had formed a group
called the TCBS (meaning "Tea Club and Barrovian Society", because they
made tea illicitly in the school library, and also feasted at Barrow's
department store).

Gilson and Smith died in Flanders. Wiseman survived to tell me about the
TCBS, and now Garth has considerably enlarged my account from he
letters of the TCBS members. He is absolutely right that this was a
crucial period for Tolkien, and it is also a moving story - I dedicated
my biography "To the memory of the TCBS". When Tolkien first teamed up
with the others, his study of ancient Germanic languages was still in
its apprentice stage, and he was only just beginning to invent his own
"Elvish" languages - a crucial part of his imaginative process, which
bore fruit not just in the numinous names in The Lord of the Rings, but
also in the sense of a vast history and culture lying behind that story.

Having an audience in his fellow-TCBS members, Tolkien was encouraged to
write abundantly (he would never have such an audience again until C S
Lewis convened the Inklings many years later). Garth quotes liberally
from the fairy poetry that Tolkien was pouring out just before he began
his spell as a signaller on the Somme - "fairy" in the modern as well as
the 16th-century sense, for some of it is influenced by J M Barrie
(Peter Pan as an influence on The Lord of the Rings - now there's a
thesis topic for you).

A little of this poetry goes a very long way, and Garth gives us an
awful lot of it. His book, I'm afraid, is often quite literally
plodding, since he follows relentlessly in the steps of Tolkien and the
TCBS as they converge on the Western Front. A few fresh ideas are
scattered here and there, but these tend to be swamped by the Rupert
Brooke-like correspondence of the protagonists as they vow to do great
things for their country.

This is some of the soil from which The Lord of the Rings grew - but
only some. My biography of Tolkien was an apprentice work, portraying
him very much as he saw himself, and leaving out several difficult
issues (Margaret Drabble, reviewing it, rightly castigated it as
"polite"). If the Bodleian is ever able to open its Tolkien coffers
fully, a magnificent new biography could be written. Meanwhile Garth's
book will please a few hardcore Tolkienites, with its excerpts from his
early poetry and prose; but it leaves the cunning old professor
unscathed in his hobbit-hole.
Jamie Andrews; real address @ bottom of message
2003-11-24 20:11:00 UTC
Permalink
In rec.arts.books.tolkien Speaking Clock <ext2350(cut-this-out-)@yahoo.com> wrote (quoting Carpenter):
> In a hole in 20th-century literature there lives a Tolkien. He lurks
> there disconcertingly, disrupting lazy assumptions, confounding academic
> cliches. Were it not for him, we could declare without fear of
> contradiction that the century that has just ended saw the unchallenged
> triumph of the literature of modernism, and that T S Eliot and James
> Joyce ushered in an era that had no room for fairy stories.

Hmh. "A very practised turncoat", as Lady Mevrian said of
Lord Gro. Didn't Carpenter a few years ago recant his earlier
approval of Tolkien and publish an essay saying "oh, he wasn't
that great after all"? Now, with the polls and the movies
forcing even the academics to take a second look, he comes out
with this. Hmh.

--Jamie. (nel mezzo del cammin di nostra vita)
andrews .uwo } Merge these two lines to obtain my e-mail address.
@csd .ca } (Unsolicited "bulk" e-mail costs everyone.)
Öjevind Lång
2003-11-24 22:33:20 UTC
Permalink
"Jamie Andrews; real address @wrote:

[snip]

> Hmh. "A very practised turncoat", as Lady Mevrian said of
> Lord Gro. Didn't Carpenter a few years ago recant his earlier
> approval of Tolkien and publish an essay saying "oh, he wasn't
> that great after all"? Now, with the polls and the movies
> forcing even the academics to take a second look, he comes out
> with this. Hmh.

That was my reaction too, but nevertheless, his review is an excellent,
balanced one.

Öjevind
Carl F. Hostetter
2003-11-24 20:55:46 UTC
Permalink
I must say, I find this a remarkably obtuse review by Mr. Carpenter, of
what is in fact an thoughtful, engaging, and above-all engaged study of
what lies at the roots of Tolkien's power as an author, which power Mr.
Carpenter himself rightly recognizes and defends.

If as Mr. Carpenter notes the political cabal that passes for the elite
of literary criticism don't "get" Tolkien -- as indeed they don't --
still Mr. Carpenter seems not to "get" him, either.

It is certainly neither biographical dirt nor hagiography that attracts
readers to Tolkien, but the power of his story and the mode and manner
of his storytelling. It is the basis of this power, the melding of the
Northern heroic with the commonplace sort, and of both with a humble yet
steadfast morality, which Tolkien began to give expression to with a
skill and conviction wakened by war, that John Garth -- who very clearly _
does_ "get" Tolkien -- explores in his study of Tolkien's war
experiences.

Personally, I couldn't put it down.

Carl F. Hostetter
Öjevind Lång
2003-11-24 22:38:25 UTC
Permalink
"Carl F. Hostetter" <***@elvish.org> wrote:

[snip]

> It is certainly neither biographical dirt nor hagiography that attracts
> readers to Tolkien, but the power of his story and the mode and manner
> of his storytelling. It is the basis of this power, the melding of the
> Northern heroic with the commonplace sort, and of both with a humble yet
> steadfast morality, which Tolkien began to give expression to with a
> skill and conviction wakened by war, that John Garth -- who very clearly _
> does_ "get" Tolkien -- explores in his study of Tolkien's war
> experiences.

I can't speak on the matter of John Garth's book, but I think Carpenter is
quite right when he says that we need a biography of Tolkien that is not
"polite" - not a muckraking book, but one that simply admits that even the
sun has spots; that investigates Tolkien the man and Tolkien the writer from
all angles and is not content to simply depict him the way his family wants
him to be depicted. There are so many interesting things that we simply do
not know because of the fanatical secretiveness of the Tolkien family and
their allies.

Öjevind Lång
Carl F. Hostetter
2003-11-25 00:57:26 UTC
Permalink
In <2Pvwb.5004$***@nntpserver.swip.net> Öjevind Lång wrote:
>
> I can't speak on the matter of John Garth's book, but I think
> Carpenter is quite right when he says that we need a biography of
> Tolkien that is not "polite" - not a muckraking book, but one that
> simply admits that even the sun has spots;

I'm not aware that anyone claims Tolkien was without flaws -- not even
Carpenter's authorized biography portrays such a man -- and Tolkien
himself would have been the last to do so. The question is whether those
flaws are anyone else's business, or in any way inform his work -- which,
after all, is the reason we care about Tolkien at all.

And beyond this question, I quite disagree that anyone "needs" such a
biography: some may want it, but the Tolkien family is not obliged to
satisfy desires simply because they exist, nor is anyone entitled to
have their whims fulfilled.
AC
2003-11-25 03:13:39 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 18:57:26 -0600,
Carl F Hostetter <***@elvish.org> wrote:
> In <2Pvwb.5004$***@nntpserver.swip.net> Öjevind Lång wrote:
>>
>> I can't speak on the matter of John Garth's book, but I think
>> Carpenter is quite right when he says that we need a biography of
>> Tolkien that is not "polite" - not a muckraking book, but one that
>> simply admits that even the sun has spots;
>
> I'm not aware that anyone claims Tolkien was without flaws -- not even
> Carpenter's authorized biography portrays such a man -- and Tolkien
> himself would have been the last to do so. The question is whether those
> flaws are anyone else's business, or in any way inform his work -- which,
> after all, is the reason we care about Tolkien at all.
>
> And beyond this question, I quite disagree that anyone "needs" such a
> biography: some may want it, but the Tolkien family is not obliged to
> satisfy desires simply because they exist, nor is anyone entitled to
> have their whims fulfilled.

I quite agree. This ridiculous addiction to ruffling about in a celebrity's
proverbial undergarments drawer is pathetic.

--
Aaron Clausen

tao_of_cow/\alberni.net (replace /\ with @) or ***@yahoo.ca
Öjevind Lång
2003-11-28 23:33:26 UTC
Permalink
"Carl F. Hostetter" <***@elvish.org>

[snip]

> Since you surely read my post -- given that you lecture another about
> doing so -- I wonder how it is that you arrived at the conclusion that I
> am bothered by "the thought of a biography of Tolkien that does not
> idolize him"? Which is absurd, as I liked Carpenter's _Biogrpaphy_ just
> fine, even though as I said right at the front of my post that even it
> does not "idolize" Tolkien. As has already been pointed out in this
> thread, Carpenter makes it quite clear that Tolkien was not a perfect
> human being (as surprises no one and as Tolkien himself would be the >
first to admit).

You seem to be in disagreement with Carpenter, who now deplores that he was
too "polite" when he wrote his biography; that is to say, that he
spoft-pedalled anything that was less than flattering to Tolkien.

Öjevind
Carl F. Hostetter
2003-11-29 00:41:42 UTC
Permalink
In <yWQxb.6035$***@nntpserver.swip.net> Öjevind Lång wrote:

> You seem to be in disagreement with Carpenter, who now deplores that
> he was too "polite" when he wrote his biography; that is to say, that
> he spoft-pedalled anything that was less than flattering to Tolkien.

Even if we accept Carpenter's about-face on Tolkien in general (on which
he now seems to have once again executed a turn of some considerable
degrees, coincidentally with the popularity of the films and his
marketability as an expert), and his own work in particular, at face
value -- which I don't -- his claim of "soft-pedaling" is _not_ the same
as your "idolizing".
Öjevind Lång
2003-11-29 23:57:30 UTC
Permalink
"Carl F. Hostetter" <***@elvish.org> only:

[snip]

> Even if we accept Carpenter's about-face on Tolkien in general (on which
> he now seems to have once again executed a turn of some considerable
> degrees, coincidentally with the popularity of the films and his
> marketability as an expert), and his own work in particular, at face
> value -- which I don't -- his claim of "soft-pedaling" is _not_ the same
> as your "idolizing".

Ah, so now we are reduced to quibbling over words! I can only repeat what I
have already said: I'd enjoy a biography of Tolkien that gives a full
picture of the man, warts and all, without any "soft-pedalling" or family
censorship. However, I suspect you and some others will once again twist it
into a demand for juicy scandal-mongering or the like.
I am less than charmed by Carpenter's position changes over Tolkien, and
over fantasy in general, but I still mainatin that that book review of his
was good and made some pertinent points.

Öjevind
Carl F. Hostetter
2003-11-30 01:49:29 UTC
Permalink
In <6nayb.6307$***@nntpserver.swip.net> Öjevind Lång wrote:
> "Carl F. Hostetter" <***@elvish.org> only:
>
>> his claim of "soft-pedaling" is _not_ the same as your "idolizing".
>
> Ah, so now we are reduced to quibbling over words!

Since words are all that join this "community" together, I don't see
what else we can possibly discuss, other than what we have each written.
If you mean something other than what you wrote, that is your failure,
not ours, nor is it quibbling to disagree with your characterizations
and to question their accuracy or your intention in making them.

> I can only repeat what I have already said: I'd enjoy a biography of
> Tolkien that
> gives a full picture of the man, warts and all, without any "soft-
> pedalling"
> or family censorship.

But that is not, in fact, what you said before.

> However, I suspect you and some others will once again twist it into a
> demand
> for juicy scandal-mongering or the like.

Nor is this, in fact, what I did.

> I am less than charmed by Carpenter's position changes over Tolkien,
> and over fantasy in general, but I still mainatin that that book
> review of his was good and made some pertinent points.

Perhaps; but not, alas, regarding John Garth's book, which he was unduly
dismissive of. Indeed, he seems barely to have been interested in
reviewing John's book, far more so in revisiting his own work.
Öjevind Lång
2003-11-30 15:41:57 UTC
Permalink
"Carl F. Hostetter" <***@elvish.org> wrote:

> In <6nayb.6307$***@nntpserver.swip.net> Öjevind Lång wrote:

> > "Carl F. Hostetter" <***@elvish.org> only:
> >
> >> his claim of "soft-pedaling" is _not_ the same as your "idolizing".
> >
> > Ah, so now we are reduced to quibbling over words!
>
> Since words are all that join this "community" together, I don't see
> what else we can possibly discuss, other than what we have each written.
> If you mean something other than what you wrote, that is your failure,
> not ours, nor is it quibbling to disagree with your characterizations
> and to question their accuracy or your intention in making them.

More quibbling.

> > I can only repeat what I have already said: I'd enjoy a biography of
> > Tolkien that
> > gives a full picture of the man, warts and all, without any "soft-
> > pedalling"
> > or family censorship.
>
> But that is not, in fact, what you said before.

It is, you know. Let me repeat what I said: "I can't speak on the matter of
John Garth's book, but I think Carpenter is quite right when he says that we
need a biography of Tolkien that is not 'polite' - not a muckraking book,
but one that simply admits that even the sun has spots; that investigates
Tolkien the man and Tolkien the writer from all angles and is not content to
simply depict him the way his family wants him to be depicted. There are so
many interesting things that we simply do
not know because of the fanatical secretiveness of the Tolkien family and
their allies."

> > However, I suspect you and some others will once again twist it into a
> > demand
> > for juicy scandal-mongering or the like.
>
> Nor is this, in fact, what I did.

It is, in fact, what you did.

Öjevind
CarlF.Hostetter
2003-11-30 16:47:14 UTC
Permalink
In article <wcoyb.6393$***@nntpserver.swip.net>, Öjevind Lång
<***@swipnet.se> wrote:

> "Carl F. Hostetter" <***@elvish.org> wrote:

> > But that is not, in fact, what you said before.
>
> It is, you know.

No, it's not. This time you say you'd "enjoy" such a biography. Before,
you said we "need" one. You'll recall that that was what I took issue
with, together with the implied sense of entitlement to such a
biography, which is just false. The Tolkien family has every right not
to assist in the making of a biography that they don't feel is relevant
to undertanding Tolkien's work.

--

|======================================================================|
| Carl F. Hostetter ***@elvish.org http://www.elvish.org |
| |
| ho bios brachys, he de techne makre. |
| Ars longa, vita brevis. |
| The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne. |
| "I wish life was not so short," he thought. "Languages take |
| such a time, and so do all the things one wants to know about." |
|======================================================================|
CarlF.Hostetter
2003-11-30 16:56:08 UTC
Permalink
In article <wcoyb.6393$***@nntpserver.swip.net>, Öjevind Lång
<***@swipnet.se> wrote:

> "Carl F. Hostetter" <***@elvish.org> wrote:

> > But that is not, in fact, what you said before.
>
> It is, you know.

No, it's not. This time you say you'd "enjoy" such a biography. Before,
you said we "need" one. You'll recall that that was what I took issue
with, together with the implied sense of entitlement to such a
biography, which is just false. The Tolkien family has every right not
to assist in the making of a biography that they don't feel is relevant
to undertanding Tolkien's work.

--

|======================================================================|
| Carl F. Hostetter ***@elvish.org http://www.elvish.org |
| |
| ho bios brachys, he de techne makre. |
| Ars longa, vita brevis. |
| The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne. |
| "I wish life was not so short," he thought. "Languages take |
| such a time, and so do all the things one wants to know about." |
|======================================================================|
Öjevind Lång
2003-11-30 20:51:15 UTC
Permalink
"CarlF.Hostetter" <***@elvish.org>wrote:

> In article <wcoyb.6393$***@nntpserver.swip.net>, Öjevind Lång
> <***@swipnet.se> wrote:
>
> > "Carl F. Hostetter" <***@elvish.org> wrote:
>
> > > But that is not, in fact, what you said before.
> >
> > It is, you know.
>
> No, it's not. This time you say you'd "enjoy" such a biography. Before,
> you said we "need" one. You'll recall that that was what I took issue
> with, together with the implied sense of entitlement to such a
> biography, which is just false. The Tolkien family has every right not
> to assist in the making of a biography that they don't feel is relevant
> to undertanding Tolkien's work.

Oh, give me a Ceylon-sized break! Your are now reduced to quibbling over the
fact that I used the word "need" in one post and "enjoy" in another. Of
course, I didn't mean "need" in the sense that we all need food in order not
to starve to death. Furthermore, I don't base my opinion of which books I
should like to see printed on the wishes of the Tolkien family... Oh, well.
The discussion is clearly over.

Öjevind
Stan Brown
2003-11-30 03:52:00 UTC
Permalink
In article <6nayb.6307$***@nntpserver.swip.net> in
rec.arts.books.tolkien, Öjevind Lång <***@swipnet.se>
wrote:
> I can only repeat what I
>have already said: I'd enjoy a biography of Tolkien that gives a full
>picture of the man, warts and all, without any "soft-pedalling" or family
>censorship.

The fact that you think that's what you said before speaks volumes.

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com
Tolkien FAQs: http://Tolkien.slimy.com (Steuard Jensen's site)
Tolkien letters FAQ:
http://users.telerama.com/~taliesen/tolkien/lettersfaq.html
FAQ of the Rings: http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/ringfaq.htm
Encyclopedia of Arda: http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/default.htm
more FAQs: http://oakroadsystems.com/tech/faqget.htm
s***@nomail.com
2003-11-30 04:36:04 UTC
Permalink
In rec.arts.books.tolkien Stan Brown <***@fastmail.fm> wrote:
: In article <6nayb.6307$***@nntpserver.swip.net> in
: rec.arts.books.tolkien, Öjevind Lång <***@swipnet.se>
: wrote:
:> I can only repeat what I
:>have already said: I'd enjoy a biography of Tolkien that gives a full
:>picture of the man, warts and all, without any "soft-pedalling" or family
:>censorship.

: The fact that you think that's what you said before speaks volumes.

That is what he said:
I can't speak on the matter of John Garth's book, but I think Carpenter is
quite right when he says that we need a biography of Tolkien that is not
"polite" - not a muckraking book, but one that simply admits that even the
sun has spots; that investigates Tolkien the man and Tolkien the writer from
all angles and is not content to simply depict him the way his family wants
him to be depicted. There are so many interesting things that we simply do
not know because of the fanatical secretiveness of the Tolkien family and
their allies.
Why are you all so convinced something else was said? What do you think
the above paragraph says?

Stephen
Stan Brown
2003-11-29 15:42:28 UTC
Permalink
In article <yWQxb.6035$***@nntpserver.swip.net> in
rec.arts.books.tolkien, Öjevind Lång <***@swipnet.se>
wrote:
>You seem to be in disagreement with Carpenter, who now deplores that he was
>too "polite" when he wrote his biography; that is to say, that he
>spoft-pedalled anything that was less than flattering to Tolkien.

You seem to be a victim of black-and-white thinking. Soft-pedaling
unflattering information is not the same as omitting or suppressing
it.

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com
Tolkien FAQs: http://Tolkien.slimy.com (Steuard Jensen's site)
Tolkien letters FAQ:
http://users.telerama.com/~taliesen/tolkien/lettersfaq.html
FAQ of the Rings: http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/ringfaq.htm
Encyclopedia of Arda: http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/default.htm
more FAQs: http://oakroadsystems.com/tech/faqget.htm
Carl F. Hostetter
2003-11-29 20:03:13 UTC
Permalink
_Vinyar Tengwar_ 45 has been published. This 40-page issue features the
first part (of two) of a complete "Addenda and Corrigenda to the _
Etymologies_" by Carl F. Hostetter and Patrick H. Wynne, detailing
additions and corrections to the published work derived from an
examination of the original manuscript and comparison with the published
text.

_Vinyar Tengwar_ (ISSN 1054-7606) is a not-for-profit refereed journal
of the Elvish Linguistic Fellowship, devoted to the scholarly study of
the invented languages of J.R.R. Tolkien. _VT_ is indexed by the Modern
Language Association.

For more information about _VT_, including a downloadable sample issue
and subscription and back-issue ordering information, see:

http://www.elvish.org/VT/


--
=============================================
Carl F. Hostetter ***@elvish.org http://www.elvish.org

ho bios brachys, he de techne makre.
Ars longa, vita brevis.
The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.
"I wish life was not so short," he thought. "Languages take such
a time, and so do all the things one wants to know about."
Steuard Jensen
2003-12-07 00:38:35 UTC
Permalink
Quoth Carl F. Hostetter <***@elvish.org> in article
<20031129150313166-***@news.md.comcast.giganews.com>:
> _Vinyar Tengwar_ 45 has been published. This 40-page issue features
> the first part (of two) of a complete "Addenda and Corrigenda to the
> _ Etymologies_" by Carl F. Hostetter and Patrick H. Wynne, detailing
> additions and corrections to the published work derived from an
> examination of the original manuscript and comparison with the
> published text.

I just can't help myself, I have to share one little tidbit: :)


LAS^1- [for:] [?human] [read:] Human


Thus, the final sentence of that entry properly reads,

"The Quendian ears were more pointed and leaf-shaped than Human."

I know there are still objections out there, but one of the big ones
is now "officially" gone. Go VT! :)

Steuard Jensen
Tar-Elenion
2003-12-07 00:59:10 UTC
Permalink
In article <fEuAb.48$***@news.uchicago.edu>,
***@midway.uchicago.edu says...
<snip>
>
> LAS^1- [for:] [?human] [read:] Human
>
>
> Thus, the final sentence of that entry properly reads,
>
> "The Quendian ears were more pointed and leaf-shaped than Human."
>
> I know there are still objections out there, but one of the big ones
> is now "officially" gone. Go VT! :)
>
> Steuard Jensen

That was the first thing I looked up when I opened my copy.
:)

--
Tar-Elenion

Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice.
Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue.
zett
2003-11-29 02:34:54 UTC
Permalink
"Öjevind Lång" <***@swipnet.se> wrote in message news:<2Pvwb.5004$***@nntpserver.swip.net>...
[snip]

> I can't speak on the matter of John Garth's book, but I think Carpenter is
> quite right when he says that we need a biography of Tolkien that is not
> "polite" - not a muckraking book, but one that simply admits that even the
> sun has spots; that investigates Tolkien the man and Tolkien the writer from
> all angles and is not content to simply depict him the way his family wants
> him to be depicted. There are so many interesting things that we simply do
> not know because of the fanatical secretiveness of the Tolkien family and
> their allies.
[sig snipped]

I am curious. What sorts of things do you think Carpenter's biog.
left out? I don't think it is the "deepest" biog. I ever read, but,
for me, any shortcomings I might feel present in the biog. are offset
by reading Letters. After reading those 2 books, I felt I had a good
grip on the processes behind the writing of LoTR/Sil. I am curious
about Garth's book, though. I sense that war experiences permeate
LoTR, and I am interested to see how and if Garth ties JRRT's RL
experiences to it's narrative.
Öjevind Lång
2003-11-30 00:04:49 UTC
Permalink
"zett" <***@yahoo.com> wrote:

[snip]

> I am curious. What sorts of things do you think Carpenter's biog.
> left out? I don't think it is the "deepest" biog. I ever read, but,
> for me, any shortcomings I might feel present in the biog. are offset
> by reading Letters. After reading those 2 books, I felt I had a good
> grip on the processes behind the writing of LoTR/Sil. I am curious
> about Garth's book, though. I sense that war experiences permeate
> LoTR, and I am interested to see how and if Garth ties JRRT's RL
> experiences to it's narrative.

Carpenter himself has admitted that he "soft-pedalled" less positive aspects
of Tolkien's life. He showed the utmost consideration, not to say deference,
to the Tolkien family's ideas about what information he should give. One
does not have to be a scandal-monger to feel that a book written with such
considerations always in mind gives a less than satisfactory account of a
person's life.
Of course, Carpenter's biography is the best one we have, but by now that
is mostly because of the extreme secretiveness of the Tolkien family and the
éored surrounding them, and their willignness to prosecute at the drop of a
hat.
I'm interested in Gart's book too.

Öjevind
s***@remove-yahoo.com
2003-11-30 01:03:40 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 01:04:49 +0100, "Öjevind Lång"
<***@swipnet.se> wrote:

>"zett" <***@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>> I am curious. What sorts of things do you think Carpenter's biog.
>> left out? I don't think it is the "deepest" biog. I ever read, but,
>> for me, any shortcomings I might feel present in the biog. are offset
>> by reading Letters. After reading those 2 books, I felt I had a good
>> grip on the processes behind the writing of LoTR/Sil. I am curious
>> about Garth's book, though. I sense that war experiences permeate
>> LoTR, and I am interested to see how and if Garth ties JRRT's RL
>> experiences to it's narrative.
>
>Carpenter himself has admitted that he "soft-pedalled" less positive aspects
>of Tolkien's life. He showed the utmost consideration, not to say deference,
>to the Tolkien family's ideas about what information he should give. One
>does not have to be a scandal-monger to feel that a book written with such
>considerations always in mind gives a less than satisfactory account of a
>person's life.
> Of course, Carpenter's biography is the best one we have, but by now that
>is mostly because of the extreme secretiveness of the Tolkien family and the
>éored surrounding them, and their willignness to prosecute at the drop of a
>hat.
> I'm interested in Gart's book too.
>
>Öjevind
>
Ditto. The WWI aspect is one that is largely missing from Tolkien's
letters in the published edition and the great war and its influence
on Tolkien is a topic that I am interested in. I have not read the
biographies but when I asked about a bio that was between hagiography
and gutter raking but received no answer except that Carpenter raked
no gutters because he wrote it with the permission of CJRT.

Just judging from the letters I've read, Tolkien was no saint, he had
some rather dubious moments in the negotiations over LOTR and his
repetative sneering at American and culture (or, rather, lake of it)
does make one wish for a biography that places those things in
context, either by way of explanation, exculpation or simply
exclusion.

And does it make a difference? Well yes, when you read that Tolkien
said such and such in a letter to so and so, if Tolkien was in the
habit of editing his beliefs according to his correspondent that makes
a difference on how much weight to put on those comments.

Look on the bright side, he can't be any worse than Laurens Van der
Post. ;-)

--
Sindamor Pandaturion
[remove -remove- to reply]
Carl F. Hostetter
2003-11-30 01:53:26 UTC
Permalink
In <***@4ax.com> ***@remove-
yahoo.com wrote:

> when you read that Tolkien said such and such in a letter to so and so,
> if
> Tolkien was in the habit of editing his beliefs according to his
> correspondent
> that makes a difference on how much weight to put on those comments.

But if this is already evident from Tolkien's own letters, what more
does a putative biography need to add in this regard?
s***@remove-yahoo.com
2003-11-30 04:53:47 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 29 Nov 2003 19:53:26 -0600, Carl F. Hostetter
<***@elvish.org> wrote:

>In <***@4ax.com> ***@remove-
>yahoo.com wrote:
>
>> when you read that Tolkien said such and such in a letter to so and so,
>> if
>> Tolkien was in the habit of editing his beliefs according to his
>> correspondent
>> that makes a difference on how much weight to put on those comments.
>
>But if this is already evident from Tolkien's own letters, what more
>does a putative biography need to add in this regard?

My word, but this is too easy an example.

You snipped from my post

>make one wish for a biography that places those things in context, either by way of explanation, exculpation or simply exclusion.

Which is, of course the point.

I find it a trifle troubling that you would snip this from my post,
without even indicating that you were elliding some text. Heaven
forfend that you would be doing it to merely try to score a rhetorical
point.

Your reference to a "putative biography" is a trifle odd too. A
biography can be done well or poorly, but in either case it is a
biography. The only way it can be a putative biography is if in fact
it is some other species of writing. But perhaps this is merely
quibbling over a mistaken use of English on your part.

So to spell it out a bit more,a biography, by providing detail and the
history behind the points of views expressed in the letter can give us
a clue as to whether an expressed point of view in a letter was a
result of a deep seated oedipal anxiety, a hatred of things modern
(with the Americans as examplars) or the result of an ill-digested,
underdone potato before writing the letter.

On the other hand, perhaps you consider Tolkien not to be worthy of
such common scholarly practices. There we must differ, I prefer to
put some thought into my reading, when the reading is of sufficient
richness.

--
Sindamor Pandaturion
[remove -remove- to reply]
Carl F. Hostetter
2003-11-30 13:53:01 UTC
Permalink
In <***@4ax.com> ***@remove-
yahoo.com wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Nov 2003 19:53:26 -0600, Carl F. Hostetter
> <***@elvish.org> wrote:
>
>>But if this is already evident from Tolkien's own letters, what more
>>does a putative biography need to add in this regard?
>
> My word, but this is too easy an example.
>
> You snipped from my post
>
>>make one wish for a biography that places those things in context,
>>either by way of explanation, exculpation or simply exclusion.
>
> Which is, of course the point.

Sorry, but I don't see this as much of a point. Don't you think _
everyone_ modifies their tone and level of detail when discussing
matters depending on the audience addressed and the occasion? What about
this requires "exculpation"? It doesn't even really need any explanation,
so far as I can see.

> Your reference to a "putative biography" is a trifle odd too.

Why? I meant, the imagined biography that is being called for by some in
this thread. Isn't that clear enough from the context? (And I do in fact
have doubts as to the biographical value of such, see below.)

> So to spell it out a bit more,a biography, by providing detail and the
> history behind the points of views expressed in the letter can give us
> a clue as to whether an expressed point of view in a letter was a
> result of a deep seated oedipal anxiety, a hatred of things modern
> (with the Americans as examplars) or the result of an ill-digested,
> underdone potato before writing the letter.

Actually, I don't think it can do any of those things. It can _purport_
to do so, by pretending that the biographer has some sort of
supernatural insight into Tolkien's mind, mood, and health at every
moment he was writing, but obviously that is absurd. What we have is the
evidence of Tolkien's own words. I don't need a biographer to tell me
how I should interpret them.

> On the other hand, perhaps you consider Tolkien not to be worthy of
> such common scholarly practices.

As a matter of fact, I don't consider _any_ serious author to _deserve_
the pseudo-scientific, pseudo-scholarly manhandling practiced by most
literary biographers on their subjects. The modern psycho-biography
always ends up telling us far more about the biographer than it does
about the supposed subject of the biography.

> I prefer to put some thought into my reading, when the reading is of
> sufficient
> richness.

As do I. But I don't need anyone else to do my thinking for me.
s***@remove-yahoo.com
2003-11-30 14:38:29 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 07:53:01 -0600, Carl F. Hostetter
<***@elvish.org> wrote:
snip

from one reference to oedipal conflict you turn the concept of
literary biography into only that of a psychological biography.

I probably shall not be talking to you again I think, but there is one
thing you might want to consider, by a person who has had any number
of decent literary biographies written about him, St. Exupery (from
his "Wartime Writings"):

"You always have the right in any discussion to insist that I clarify
my views, to point out my contradictions, and to demand that I resolve
them. In the same way I have the right to demand that you define
democracy. Strict as those demands are and serious as their possible
rejection may be, there is no question of polemics here. Polemics
begin when you no longer demand clarity on my part but instead use my
lack of it to triumph over me; where you no longer wish me to specify,
being only too happy to exploit my erroneous choice of words in order
to show me up as being in the wrong; where you no longer wish to know
what I wanted to express but only use what I said. If I despair every
time that I see polemics ahead, it is because I know only too well
that words in conversation, when no carefully weighed and qualified,
only achieve their objects if they meet with a receptive
understanding. One can always get the better of all verbal
statements. -

But these tripping-up tactics have nothing to do with the search for
truth.

You rarely refuse me the receptive understanding that chooses for
itself, among many possible meanings, the one that was intended. I
can only make my meaning clear in a conversation on condition that you
wish me to be clear."
ENDQUOTE




--
Sindamor Pandaturion
[remove -remove- to reply]
zett
2003-11-30 18:39:38 UTC
Permalink
"Öjevind Lång" <***@swipnet.se> wrote in message news:<Ytayb.6308$***@nntpserver.swip.net>...
> "zett" <***@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > I am curious. What sorts of things do you think Carpenter's biog.
> > left out? I don't think it is the "deepest" biog. I ever read, but,
> > for me, any shortcomings I might feel present in the biog. are offset
> > by reading Letters. After reading those 2 books, I felt I had a good
> > grip on the processes behind the writing of LoTR/Sil. I am curious
> > about Garth's book, though. I sense that war experiences permeate
> > LoTR, and I am interested to see how and if Garth ties JRRT's RL
> > experiences to it's narrative.
>
> Carpenter himself has admitted that he "soft-pedalled" less positive aspects
> of Tolkien's life. He showed the utmost consideration, not to say deference,
> to the Tolkien family's ideas about what information he should give. One
> does not have to be a scandal-monger to feel that a book written with such
> considerations always in mind gives a less than satisfactory account of a
> person's life.
> Of course, Carpenter's biography is the best one we have, but by now that
> is mostly because of the extreme secretiveness of the Tolkien family and the
> éored surrounding them, and their willignness to prosecute at the drop of a
> hat.
> I'm interested in Gart's book too.
>
> Öjevind

Well, I haven't followed the Tolkien family "politics" or whatever one
might call it. However, I tend to have sympathy for people wanting to
protect their father-and their own privacy. And, right now, with all
the movie hype and dollar signs in everybody's eyes, I wouldn't trust
anyone to not write a muckraking bio. in order to cash in. A full
birth to death biog. is going to have to wait until Christopher and
Priscilla are dead. Which I think is as it should be.
the softrat
2003-11-30 00:42:41 UTC
Permalink
On 28 Nov 2003 18:34:54 -0800, ***@yahoo.com (zett) wrote:

>"Öjevind Lång" <***@swipnet.se> wrote in message news:<2Pvwb.5004$***@nntpserver.swip.net>...
>[snip]
>
>> I can't speak on the matter of John Garth's book, but I think Carpenter is
>> quite right when he says that we need a biography of Tolkien that is not
>> "polite" - not a muckraking book, but one that simply admits that even the
>> sun has spots; that investigates Tolkien the man and Tolkien the writer from
>> all angles and is not content to simply depict him the way his family wants
>> him to be depicted. There are so many interesting things that we simply do
>> not know because of the fanatical secretiveness of the Tolkien family and
>> their allies.
>[sig snipped]
>
>I am curious. What sorts of things do you think Carpenter's biog.
>left out? I don't think it is the "deepest" biog. I ever read, but,
>for me, any shortcomings I might feel present in the biog. are offset
>by reading Letters.

Carpenter's biography covers Tolkien's artistic life fairly well and
discusses his academic life. It almost totally omits his personal and
family life other than his relationship with C. S. Lewis. He did have
a brother, a wife, and four children. They deserve more than a
glancing mention in a complete biography, especially as he and Edith
apparently had some rather profound differences and disagreements.

the softrat
Curmudgeon-at-Large
mailto:***@pobox.com
--
"I have the heart of a small boy. I keep it in a jar on my desk"
-- Robert Bloch, the author of Psycho.
zett
2003-11-30 18:52:46 UTC
Permalink
the softrat <***@pobox.com> wrote in message news:<***@4ax.com>...
> On 28 Nov 2003 18:34:54 -0800, ***@yahoo.com (zett) wrote:
>
> >"Öjevind Lång" <***@swipnet.se> wrote in message news:<2Pvwb.5004$***@nntpserver.swip.net>...
> >[snip]
> >
> >> I can't speak on the matter of John Garth's book, but I think Carpenter is
> >> quite right when he says that we need a biography of Tolkien that is not
> >> "polite" - not a muckraking book, but one that simply admits that even the
> >> sun has spots; that investigates Tolkien the man and Tolkien the writer from
> >> all angles and is not content to simply depict him the way his family wants
> >> him to be depicted. There are so many interesting things that we simply do
> >> not know because of the fanatical secretiveness of the Tolkien family and
> >> their allies.
> >[sig snipped]
> >
> >I am curious. What sorts of things do you think Carpenter's biog.
> >left out? I don't think it is the "deepest" biog. I ever read, but,
> >for me, any shortcomings I might feel present in the biog. are offset
> >by reading Letters.
>
> Carpenter's biography covers Tolkien's artistic life fairly well and
> discusses his academic life. It almost totally omits his personal and
> family life other than his relationship with C. S. Lewis. He did have
> a brother, a wife, and four children. They deserve more than a
> glancing mention in a complete biography, especially as he and Edith
> apparently had some rather profound differences and disagreements.
>
They deserve more than a glancing mention?...hm, ok, I grant that
Hilary and Edith got shortchanged, maybe, but they are dead so we
can't ask them if they feel left out. However, it seems that the kids
didn't want more of a mention, so what is this talk of them deserving
anything? You admit that Carpenter's biography covers his artistic and
academic life...I thought those would be the things that have the most
to do with his writing, which is the reason why most people care
anything about JRRT at all.
Öjevind Lång
2003-11-24 22:32:21 UTC
Permalink
"Speaking Clock" <ext2350(cut-this-out-)@yahoo.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:bpqqe4$1qscs7$***@ID-93488.news.uni-berlin.de...
> This is from today's Sunday Times (UK) - available online at
> www.sunday-times.co.uk but only for UK readers.

[snip]

> This is some of the soil from which The Lord of the Rings grew - but
> only some. My biography of Tolkien was an apprentice work, portraying
> him very much as he saw himself, and leaving out several difficult
> issues (Margaret Drabble, reviewing it, rightly castigated it as
> "polite"). If the Bodleian is ever able to open its Tolkien coffers
> fully, a magnificent new biography could be written. Meanwhile Garth's
> book will please a few hardcore Tolkienites, with its excerpts from his
> early poetry and prose; but it leaves the cunning old professor
> unscathed in his hobbit-hole.

I think Carpenter makes a fair assessment of his own biography here. We are
still waiting for a full figure portrait of the Professor.

Öjevind
A Tsar Is Born
2003-11-25 04:40:24 UTC
Permalink
This post might be inappropriate. Click to display it.
AC
2003-11-25 06:22:32 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 04:40:24 GMT,
A Tsar Is Born <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> "Öjevind Lång" <***@swipnet.se> wrote in message
> news:kFvwb.5001$***@nntpserver.swip.net...
>> I think Carpenter makes a fair assessment of his own biography here. We
> are
>> still waiting for a full figure portrait of the Professor.
>
> What on earth do you think he left out?
> His relations with his wife: imperfect.
> His relations with his children: imperfect.
> His relations with his colleagues: imperfect.
> His relations with his students: imperfect.
> His relations with his readers: imperfect.
> His relations with his creditors: reasonable.
> His relations with his scholarly specialty: close to perfect.
> (These are pretty good ratings for creators of art. Most do far worse.)
>
> He got a lot of admirable things done without doing anything criminal or
> unethical, and remained faithful to his personal morality and religion
> without being nasty to those of alternative moralities and religions.
> He minded his manners like a gentleman and a scholar, both of which he was.
> He even served his country dutifully in a particularly ridiculous war.
>
> Can't poke too many holes in all that.
>
> What have I missed?
> What (do you imagine) have WE missed?
>
> The work interests me more than the man.
> (I imagine that would please him.)

Obviously he must be a cross-dresser. :-)

--
Aaron Clausen

tao_of_cow/\alberni.net (replace /\ with @) or ***@yahoo.ca
Loading...