Thinking the unthinkable: SBOH

[HareBrain]

In my normal vacillating manner, I've had another thought about this. Tolkien's aim with his work was to create a mythology for England, but myths, to be myths, can't be bound by a single text; they have to live within the culture of a people. So maybe he would have (or should have) been pleased if people took his characters and stories and developed them, or put a new slant on them. After all, we're quite happy with the idea of different artists with widely varying visions illustrating his works, even if we don't like all of them.

Originally Posted by revelshade

Oh, and in Arkansas a brandy and lard is called a Billy Bob, usually served burning with an Oreo floating on top.

I don't know what it says about me or my perception of the US, but I had to stop myself checking this on Google.

[revelshade]

OT

Originally Posted by Teresa Edgerton

I think they're just more interested in which books end up in the school library than in what the rest of us buy for our own children.

Many of us can't afford to buy a lot of books, so "which books end up in the school library" matters quite a bit to "our own children".

That sounds very harsh, now that I read it, but I won't change it because the quote above makes it sound like what's in the library isn't a concern for "the rest of us". I'm sure you didn't mean it that way, but we could all stand to be reminded that a lot of kids, and not just the poor ones, aren't exposed to any books at all outside of what they can find in the library and what's read to them in class, either because their parents are very poor or because their parents just don't read. In a democracy restrictions on what those kids can read will affect my kids' future, even if those kids live in a red state and mine in a blue. We live in the Seattle area now, but I grew up in Arkansas, the buckle of the bible belt, and I still keep a wary eye on the southern Christian Right, especially the Texas fundamentalists, because their influence over the Texas Board of Education affects the content of textbooks used across the nation - a pretty good example of how a group of people who seem very far away, geographically and culturally, can touch "the rest of us".

*Sigh* I've been told more than once I should have been a preacher, and if preachers could get away with telling their flock they're not sure there's a God I might try it. Lucky for everyone I can't. Here endeth the sermon.

Closer to topic: yes, the YA shelves are slopping over with fantasy. (So are the Romance shelves, for that matter. Yeesh, where did all these sexy demons and werewolves and vampires and for all I know dybbuks and golems come from?) But, as someone said recently, no one reads anymore, and the kooks have bigger windmills to tilt at: Hollywood and the Librul Media. But when one of those YA series becomes a bigger target by, say, selling a zillion copies and starting a movie franchise... well, google Harry Potter satanism. And Rowling's books are so deliriously innocent! Tolkien (who has inspired a few "exposés" of his own) wrote his own creation myth! And just try telling these yahoos that Eru is an analogue of Jehovah, or that Tolkien very carefully brought mankind into his stories pre-fallen, so as not to step on the biblical account, or that there are no churches in Middle-Earth because the Third Age ended about 4000 years before the birth of Christ. Their eyes will glaze over even before you use the word analogue. Their hearts hardened before you opened your mouth. Any Christianity they detect in the Silmarillion they will read as Catholicism, which at best doesn't count and at worst is Satan's work. If books intended for children got anywhere near Eru or the Valar (sure they're angels) battle would be joined.

And so to bed.

[HareBrain]

Originally Posted by revelshade

Tolkien very carefully brought mankind into his stories pre-fallen, so as not to step on the biblical account.

A minor point, (and again OT, sorry) but did he actually say this? Because it makes no sense to me. Arda itself was marred by the interference of Melkor in its creation, and I believe Tolkien said that the elves were his idea of how men might have been if there had been no fall (being immortal and what have you) - which implies that the men in his stories are no different, in the fallen sense, to us.

[Siberian]

I've known a lot of Tolkien fans from all kinds of Christian denominations, from Catholic to Russian Orthodox. All of them agree it's a Christian book. In fact, many Christians know about it even if they haven't read Tolkien at all. I mean, even Orson Scott Card the Mormon views it favorably and he's as fundamentalist as you can get

[j. d. worthington]

Originally Posted by Siberian

I've known a lot of Tolkien fans from all kinds of Christian denominations, from Catholic to Russian Orthodox. All of them agree it's a Christian book. In fact, many Christians know about it even if they haven't read Tolkien at all. I mean, even Orson Scott Card the Mormon views it favorably and he's as fundamentalist as you can get

I've known plenty of both -- having grown up in a fundamentalist household, with a large network of fundamentalist connections; I think the difference is that it tends to be the more hardline ignorant fundamentalists who take this view of Tolkien -- you know, the type who follow the most rabid and moronic of the televangelists -- rather than those who have any sense at all. I've known my share of such, and they view even C. S. Lewis with a very jaded eye. Basically, anything which doesn't tow the most literal interpretation of the Bible (and especially the Rapture, etc.), is viewed with at least grave suspicion of being a tool of the devil. When it comes to this, at least, they take very seriously that passage in Revelation:

If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

-- Revelation 22:18-19

Only they take it to mean the entire Bible: i.e., you don't mess about with, reinterpret, or utilize any part of the Bible for anything which does not suit their very narrow view of what it really means, or you are a worshipper of the Evil One.

That sort of view does exist, and is quite prevalent... but there are fundamentalists who aren't quite that extreme, and appreciate what Tolkien was attempting to do.

As for the original topic: Yes, I'm sure that eventually we'll see sequels and/or retellings, just as we have with nearly every popular literary book at one point or another. All I can hope for is that, as with most of those in the past, they sink like a stone and are never heard from again....

[Siberian]

Well, I'm sure that there're fundamentalists that view all fiction with suspicion. Just as there're some progressive atheist who think that all fantasy is escapist and Tolkien is nothing but an elitist religious conservative. I don't think we should concern ourselves with the fringes when so many people of different backgrounds have enjoyed Tolkien's books over the years.

[j. d. worthington]

Originally Posted by Siberian

Well, I'm sure that there're fundamentalists that view all fiction with suspicion. Just as there're some progressive atheist who think that all fantasy is escapist and Tolkien is nothing but an elitist religious conservative. I don't think we should concern ourselves with the fringes when so many people of different backgrounds have enjoyed Tolkien's books over the years.

Actually, I was (at least, in part) agreeing with you; I was just drawing a distinction between the extreme fundamentalists who take this view, and the more moderate fundamentalists who are aware that there is a broader range of approaches which are valid. Not all fundamentalists -- or even fundamentalist sects -- are complete yahoos, though some are.

As for "not concerning" oneself with... from my experience, I'd strongly disagree. Just such "fringes" got about half my high school library removed and burned in the parking lot the year I graduated, and I've seen plenty of other examples of such. They are very much something to be concerned about, both as affects approaches to Tolkien and in the broader realm of their effect on literature and culture in society in general.

[Siberian]

Well, unless they interfere with your choices directly, of course. But if they simply refuse to read Tolkien, I don't care much about it (their loss, really).

[HareBrain]

Originally Posted by j. d. worthington

If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

-- Revelation 22:18-19

Now there's a man who's not happy with his editor!

[j. d. worthington]

Originally Posted by HareBrain

Now there's a man who's not happy with his editor!

Actually, I've a feeling that some variant of that has been said by more than a few writers about more than a few editors ever since....

And once again, to drag the thread back on topic.... I think the main problem with anyone else doing a "sequel" or even a parallel story, is capturing the feel of Tolkien's world and work. Just as with most writers who have a very distinctive feel, in order to do anything approaching justice to a tale set in Tolkien's world, you'd have to capture something of Tolkien's essence -- his worldview, the flavour of his style, something of that nature -- and I just don't think anyone is likely to either be able or be interested in doing so (or both).

With Lovecraft, even before his death, what became known as "The Cthulhu Mythos" was becoming the joint product of many writers, which gave some leeway in atmosphere and approach. (Writing a Lovecraftian story is quite another, and much more difficult, thing.) Even so, the successful attempts are comparatively few.

As for the later Foundation novels by writers other than Asimov... there we did have not only the estate's permission, but also (iirc) Isaac's own approval of their own work, which may give some (very slender) rationale to such a business. With Tolkien, this isn't likely to be the case, considering his dim view of others mucking about with his work. (Again and again I am reminded of Lewis' famous comment about influence: "No one ever influenced Tolkien -- you might as well attempt to influence a bandersnatch!" I'd say the response to others attempting sequels or spinoffs to his work would get much the same reception....)

[Siberian]

I heard that Guy Gavriel Kay was promised to be allowed to write Tolkien-based novels when he helped to work on Silmarillion but then CJRT changed his mind. Personally, I think it's a good thing. Kay might be a good writer, but he's not Tolkien.

[Teresa Edgerton]

Originally Posted by revelshade

As for Tolkien's heirs having plenty of money, I'm afraid both history and science have shown that happiness just doesn't work that way. When your material circumstances change your ideas about what is luxury and what is necessity change with them. There is also the "arms race" effect: it doesn't matter if you were born in a one room shack and now you own a fifty foot yacht - if your neighbor buys a sixty foot yacht, you're going to start looking for some way to afford a battleship. That's why all those investment bankers kept lowering the loan standards more and more, inflating a bubble they knew couldn't last ... Tolkien's heirs are human too.

Not all human beings are that way, however. It's just that the ones who are get most of the attention. You do sometimes hear about very successful people who prefer a modest life-style, but many more are silent, preferring to maintain their privacy. Financial security, doing a job that they love, and the ability to afford a few indulgences that most people can't is enough for them. They don't need to be wallowing in wealth. When somebody's desire for wealth keeps escalating until they have ten (or a hundred) times more money than anyone could possibly spend on themselves and their families in a lifetime, I don't believe it is simple human greed. They are trying to replace something that is missing in their lives, trying to fill a bottomless hole with money.

Since it would have to be a group decision to release the rights, all of Tolkien's heirs would a) have to share that burning desire for ever more wealth, and b) have little interest in protecting the legacy.

Not everyone is "human" in the same way.

****

As for Tolkien's desire to create a mythology for England, I believe (though I could be wrong), that he was largely thinking that his mythology might be expressed in other media, like poetry, music, and art. Or that people might use his work as a historical background for original stories of their own, rather than for direct sequels.

Also, later in life he seemed to think that idea was naïve. Whether that was because he became more protective of his ideas and his work, or because he thought creating such a mythology was too ambitious a task, I don't know.

[paranoid marvin]

One could always look at it from another perspective. Tolkein created a world - not only a physical place , but a land habitted with many races , each with it's own language , past and beliefs.

After a lifetime devoted to creating this whole and complete world , would he really wish for no-one else to write about it? Middle Earth is teeming with untold or half-told stories - and there is plenty of space for other writers to help Tolkein's creation to grow and flourish without stepping outside of the boundaries or undermining the foundations of his realm.

[Teresa Edgerton]

Originally Posted by revelshade

Many of us can't afford to buy a lot of books, so "which books end up in the school library" matters quite a bit to "our own children".

That sounds very harsh, now that I read it, but I won't change it because the quote above makes it sound like what's in the library isn't a concern for "the rest of us". I'm sure you didn't mean it that way, but we could all stand to be reminded that a lot of kids, and not just the poor ones, aren't exposed to any books at all outside of what they can find in the library and what's read to them in class, either because their parents are very poor or because their parents just don't read. In a democracy restrictions on what those kids can read will affect my kids' future, even if those kids live in a red state and mine in a blue.

Well there are two things I can say in response to that:

1) Although I disagree with parents who think that fantasy and books with any sort of magical element should not be present in the school library, I believe that as taxpayers they are paying for those books, and have just as much right as you or I have to state their opinions and try to influence how their taxes are spent and which influences their children are exposed to at a school.

2) I believe we were discussing what might happen if the rights became available and YA books based on Tolkien's books were published, and what your relatives and others like them might try to do about it. Library sales can have an effect, but as I said YA fantasy seems to be doing very well in bookstores, so I don't see any danger of it disappearing any time soon, unless there becomes such a glut that it is no longer is profitable. Even then, publishers are more likely to cut back than stop publishing the books entirely. So if the rights were released by Tolkien's heirs, it's unlikely that protests by Fundamentalists would prevent them from being published or appearing in chain bookstores.



On a side-note:

There is a website called "The Christian Guide to Fantasy." They are quite enthusiastic about a great many fantasy authors.

[revelshade]

I don't have time for a long post (oh, you could at least wait to cheer 'til I've left the room...) but I do have time for some shameless flattery: message boards are supposed to be full of boobs and cretins - so who let all these thoughtful, civil people in? Is it a British thing? Anyway, thanks.