|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stanislaus B.
The Shire
Jun 23 2007, 9:58am
Post #76 of 135
(922 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I must disagree with the assumption
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I must disagree with the assumption that the fantastic story must be told in the simplest, most modern language possible. The whole merit of the fantasy is showing us something other that the everyday and comfortable world; some other way of thinking and acting. To use the everyday style defeats the purpose.
Curious "translated" some paragraphs into modernese. What is gained? - they are not easier to understand, although they are certainly more everyday and comfortable to read. But when we come to the demons and dragons, making them feel normal and familiar is not quite the intended purpose.
Of course, most of the fantasy authors try to present some action in as familiar a way as possible - that is why they use modern language and why they reuse the same tropes and motives ad infinitum.
I earlier suggested Le Guin's essay "From Elfland to Poughkeepsie" - she writes there about that tendency to make the purportedly strange and alien worlds familiar and comfortable - by, among other things, using comfortable XXI century prose.
|
|
|
dna
The Shire
Jun 23 2007, 12:22pm
Post #77 of 135
(906 views)
Shortcut
|
it is now to appreciate CT's '30 years of painstaking labour' with CoH - he had to decide how much to shrink the fold-out map for maximum reading comfort - a grand spectacle, a watershed in minimization, a revolution no less...
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jun 23 2007, 1:07pm
Post #78 of 135
(905 views)
Shortcut
|
surely had something to do with his affection for various styles of speech, even when it was all in English. As some of us have said, that variety of styles works well in LotR. But the tales from The Silmarillion are less varied in style, as far as I can tell. They are a "translation" of an ancient text that never existed.
It's an interesting experiment, and Tolkien shows incredible imagination. I just don't like it as much as LotR. But once they get used to the style, there are some who like The Sil and its various tales better than LotR. Certainly The Sil shows a greater consistency of style than LotR, which merges the world of The Hobbit with the world of The Sil (plus additions like Bombadil).
|
|
|
dna
The Shire
Jun 23 2007, 1:29pm
Post #79 of 135
(918 views)
Shortcut
|
Why does Fingolfin give lands to Hador? Wasn't he already ruler of the Third House of the Edain, a people settled in Dor-lómin for some years?
Where have you heard this?
The Grey Annals give 420 as the date both Haleth and Hador with “great companies of Men” enter Beleriand: “Hador hearing that there was room and need of folk in Hithlum, and being come of a northland people, became a vassal of Fingolfin; and he strengthened greatly the armies of the king, and he was given wide lands in Hithlum in the country of Dor-Lómin”.
(A ‘late penciled addition’ then has 423 as the date “Hador’s folk entered Dorlómin”).
Bëor was “new-come over the mountains” in 400, when he became a vassal of Felagund.
All shades of the ‘3 Saxon ships’ settling Britain…
What do "Morwen" and "Urwen" mean?
Morwen is ‘Dark Maiden’ - or some such variant.
Urwen is ‘Sun-Maiden’ - or at least the original Urwen ‘maiden of the Sun-ship’ (later Urwendi ‘Mistress of the Sun’, finally Arien the Sun Maia) was translated as this.
Lots of symbolism here, no?
and not coincidentally, to answer one of squire's questions...
B. How can Húrin be “fiery in mood” and yet have the “fire in him burn steadily”?
Because Húrin and Fire are old companions. Húrin was just a name-change (from Úrin of the ‘Lost Tales’) during the writing of the Lay, as many names were, often simply because they were a better poetic fit. Úrin was a derivative of Ûr ‘the Sun’ as listed in the Elvish lexicons: uru ‘fire’, úrin ‘blazing hot’; and in the later ‘Etymologies’, Úrin is given as the “name of the Sun”.
(This post was edited by dna on Jun 23 2007, 1:36pm)
|
|
|
Stanislaus B.
The Shire
Jun 23 2007, 2:07pm
Post #80 of 135
(928 views)
Shortcut
|
|
How can Húrin be “fiery in mood” and yet have the “fire in him burn steadily”
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
B. How can Húrin be “fiery in mood” and yet have the “fire in him burn steadily”?
The young man’s wrath is like light straw on fire;
But like red-hot steel is the old man’s ire,
The young man will brawl at the evening board;
But the old man will draw at the dawning the sword,
Walter Scott, Waverley
http://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au/s/scott/walter/waverley/chapter14.html
Goethe, Faust, Part II, Act IV
http://www.tonykline.co.uk/PITBR/German/FaustIIActIV.htm
http://www.digbib.org/Johann_Wolfgang_von_Goethe_1749/Faust_II?k=Hochgebirg
Bullyboy (Young, lightly armed, plainly clothed.)
If someone meets me face to face,
I’ll shake a fist right there in his ugly mug,
And when the yellow-belly runs away,
I’ll grasp his hair, and give a nasty tug.
Grab-quick (Mature, well-armed, richly dressed.)
Such idle brawling’s foolishness,
That’s how to ruin the day:
Don’t be slow first to possess,
Then afterwards you’ll get your way.
Hold-tight (Older, heavily armed, without a cloak.)
But that’s the path where little’s won!
Great possession’s quickly gone,
Vanishing in the stream of life.
It’s fine to take, but best to hold:
Let grey hairs command the bold,
And you’ll lose nothing in the strife.
|
|
|
Wynnie
Rohan
Jun 23 2007, 2:13pm
Post #81 of 135
(897 views)
Shortcut
|
Having so much fun with the subject lines, that is. 
I think it's better to forget the publicity nonsense -- "30 years of painstaking labour", etc. We know CT had a few other things on his plate during those 30 years.
Sorry you were so disappointed with the book.
None such shall return again.
|
|
|
a.s.
Valinor
Jun 23 2007, 2:28pm
Post #82 of 135
(910 views)
Shortcut
|
|
well....I said I didn't like it, not that it's inferior per se
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
a.s. came right out and suggested that saga style is simply inferior to novel style
I was answering why I (myself speaking for myself) didn't like the style at the beginning of the book. It was pointed out that part of what I didn't like (the "far-awayness") is implicit in saga-style. Therefore, I surmised that if that is true, I don't like saga-style.
I wasn't intending to imply which was superior to the other, just speaking of personal preference. I would have preferred a straight novelized beginning a la LOTR chapter one, in which the "begats" were introduced as part of explanatory narration and/or dialogue between characters.
a.s.
"an seileachan"
"Some say once you're gone, you're gone forever, and some say they're gonna come back.
Some say you rest in the arms of the Savior if sinful ways you lack.
Some say they're coming back in a garden, bunch of carrots and little sweet peas.
I think I'll just let the mystery be."
~~~~~Iris DeMent
|
|
|
a.s.
Valinor
Jun 23 2007, 2:31pm
Post #83 of 135
(864 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I find it rather prim, Rose. //
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
"an seileachan"
"Some say once you're gone, you're gone forever, and some say they're gonna come back.
Some say you rest in the arms of the Savior if sinful ways you lack.
Some say they're coming back in a garden, bunch of carrots and little sweet peas.
I think I'll just let the mystery be."
~~~~~Iris DeMent
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Jun 23 2007, 5:31pm
Post #84 of 135
(875 views)
Shortcut
|
I must disagree with the assumption that the fantastic story must be told in the simplest, most modern language possible.
I thought the older language of the sagas was simpler than modern language?
As for your larger point that archaic language being more fit for archaic themes --Tolkien made the same point regarding Théoden's language in a letter to Hugh Brogan-- I don't think anyone here disagrees. Some people feel that Tolkien fails in the attempt, that he strains to achieve an effect that doesn't come off: they see the effort but not the result.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Discuss The Children of Húrin in the Reading Room, June 11-October 14.
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Jun 23 2007, 5:37pm
Post #85 of 135
(895 views)
Shortcut
|
Sorry if I misrepresented you. But in criticism, a personal preference, clearly stated and supported, is as close as is possible to come to an artistic "truth". Numbers count for nothing; even if everyone here, or everyone everywhere, agreed that saga-style was weaker than novel-style, that wouldn't make it objectively true. I was just trying to make the point that it's possible (within the subjectivity we all share) for one style to deemed inferior to another, as a whole.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Discuss The Children of Húrin in the Reading Room, June 11-October 14.
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Jun 23 2007, 5:48pm
Post #86 of 135
(938 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Where are Marach, Malach, Magor and Hathol?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
The Grey Annals give 420 as the date both Haleth and Hador with “great companies of Men” enter Beleriand
Thanks for the correction -- I was working from my poor memory of "Of the Coming of Men into the West" from The Silmarillion where indeed Hador rules Dor-lómin because of his service to Fingolfin, as you indicate, but where there are also four earlier generations of the Third House in Beleriand. Is that not right?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Discuss The Children of Húrin in the Reading Room, June 11-October 14.
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Jun 23 2007, 5:56pm
Post #87 of 135
(886 views)
Shortcut
|
that the much larger hardcover Silmarillion map is more awkward to use than the new version, but wow! how much better a map it is! I grew up with a paperback edition of The Silmarillion and only bought a (UK) hardcover at a used book store a couple years ago, and have never bothered to look at the map. Still some unnaturalness as compared to The Lord of the Rings map, as I mentioned below, but a lot more pleasing detail in the topography than the new version.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Discuss The Children of Húrin in the Reading Room, June 11-October 14.
|
|
|
Modtheow
Lorien
Jun 23 2007, 5:57pm
Post #88 of 135
(883 views)
Shortcut
|
Curious’s rewriting of the first two paragraphs of CoH .
Since I’ve only read some of the best sagas and not the ones that might be considered less successful in narrative skill, it’s hard for me to imagine what bad saga style is. However, Curious’s revision will do. (Curious: I’m not out to belittle what you have done in this revision; I think you’ve engaged in an interesting exercise and that it would work well for some kinds of modern readers.) As Stanislaus points out, Curious has translated the opening of CoH into comfortable modernese; what is gained is ease of reading for modern readers who like novels, but so much is also lost that is essential to the saga as an expression of a particular kind of society and outlook on life.
Paragraph one of Curious’s rewriting:
Hador Goldenhead was a lord of the Edain and a friend of the Eldar. Fingolfin, the High King of the Eldar, gave Hador lands in the region of Hithlum called Dor-lomin. Hador's daughter Gloredhel married Haldir, the son of Halmir, lord of the people of Brethil. It was a double wedding, for Hador's son Galdor the Tall also married Hareth, the daughter of Halmir.
What is missing in the above: "friend" in modern usage is not necessarily as strong a word as "well beloved" – "leof" or "dear"/ "beloved" is what the word would probably have been in Old English. Lost in Curious’s rewriting is a mention of where Hador "dwelt" – not "lived" but "dwelt," connoting the place in which he lived – important to know because that might determine who his lord is. Lost is the fact that he dwelt there "under the lordship of Fingolfin" – essential information about his allegiances and the social structure of this place (in contrast, Curious’s "High King of the Eldar" is totally unrelated to the personal connection between Fingolfin and Hador). Lost is the phrase "while his days lasted" which emphasize the persistent northern acknowledgement of the transience of life. Lost is the description of the "wide lands" that Fingolfin has given Hador, emphasizing the extent and signficance of the gift – important information in a society in which gift-giving is the glue that binds lords and followers. Curious chooses a post-Norman word "married" instead of the older "wedded", but he also repeats the newer word twice just as Tolkien repeats "wedded." Curious also changes "Men" to "people," updating Tolkien’s use of the term "Men" for one of his races. (I do this myself in my own writing, preferring the gender-neutral term "people" instead of "Men," but the revision does obscure Tolkien's own terminology). Rather than say "At the same feast" Curious has "double wedding," a more common term in modern English, but he loses the connotative "feast" which is closer to what a medieval society would have called the occasion and more evocative about what would happen on that occasion (drinking, eating, speeches, songs).
____________________
Quote from N.E.B.:
"I applaud your tenacity, and agree with your desire for specifics. But you've gotten a good deal more than those two examples, particularly from FFH, who also noted the overuse of old-fashioned words, like "wedded" twice in one paragraph; and the regular use of time-phrases to begin sentences.
More generally, a.s. came right out and suggested that saga style is simply inferior to novel style. Certainly it's possible that something that was once all the rage is now believed, perhaps rightly, to have been a foolish fad. "
__________
Oops, I missed FFH’s point about the use of time-phrases at the beginning of sentences and will add that to my list. I thought that her point about mannered writing covered the use of old-fashioned words. In another message, a.s. has clarified that she doesn’t think saga style is inferior, just different.
My tenacity in asking questions and responding to answers might make it seem that I think that every sentence Tolkien wrote is a reflection of saga style and so must be a successful sentence. Just for the record, I’m not trying to argue that. I am interested in describing and assessing Tolkien’s style, and these points are certainly going to contribute to that understanding.
But now I have to address something in N.E.B.’s message, quoted above. I was completely floored by the statement that the sagas were possibly a "foolish fad" that has now passed. Please allow me a moment as a medievalist to say:
OMG!!!!!
The sagas are an incredible achievement of European literature. These stories, written in vernacular prose, are unlike anything that was being written at the time. Saga-writing flourished for several centuries, and they are still read today. They are neither "foolish" nor were they a "fad." N.E.B. seems to be hinting in an earlier message that perhaps the sagas gave way to the superior novel, but that’s not the case. Novels are a later development; there’s a gap of several centuries in there. I’m not absolutely sure why the great age of saga writing waned in Iceland; I think it might have had something to do with the onset of Norwegian rule, the loss of older ways of life, and the influence of late medieval romances.
Here’s a very brief overview of the sagas, if anyone is interested:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/...07_icelandsagas.html
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Jun 23 2007, 6:05pm
Post #89 of 135
(897 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Some Tolkienists like to suppose...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
that modern realistic writing (now in its what--third? century) will someday be seen as a passing fad, an unfortunate blip against a longer history of fantastic writing --I think you will remember that this was suggested at the Marquette conference-- so I hope it wasn't too outrageous for me to suggest the same could be said of other modes, like sagas.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Discuss The Children of Húrin in the Reading Room, June 11-October 14.
|
|
|
Modtheow
Lorien
Jun 23 2007, 6:07pm
Post #90 of 135
(923 views)
Shortcut
|
I can't speak for Stanislaus, but what I understood from his use of the "simplest" language is language that is the easiest for a contemporary reader to understand -- and I would think that that includes using the vocabulary, syntax, expressions, and generic conventions that a modern reader is most familiar with (assuming that this "modern reader" reads mainly contemporary prose).
|
|
|
Modtheow
Lorien
Jun 23 2007, 6:31pm
Post #91 of 135
(893 views)
Shortcut
|
N.E., you know that your memory -- and your notes -- are far superior to mine; I don't remember who said that at the Marquette conference. However, it sounds like a typical medievalist's strategy to unsettle people who automatically assume that the contemporary genres are superior to older ones and to jar them into realizing that one day what they assume is a natural way of writing will be seen by many readers as unfamiliar and "artificial" too. Looking at past literary history in this way, one could say that the epic could also be seen as a passing fad -- but calling any of these dominant modes of cultural expression -- saga, realistic novel, epic -- "fads" belittles what they are in their time. You're right that the saga is no longer the dominant mode of expression in Iceland, and one day the realistic novel will be in the same position. But I expect that if the human race is still around in several centuries, there might be people who will still enjoy the realistic novel, and possibly the sagas too, just as some of us still enjoy The Iliad or Beowulf.
Are we having fun, by the way? I hope so, because I am. 
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Jun 23 2007, 6:46pm
Post #92 of 135
(875 views)
Shortcut
|
Are we having fun, by the way? I hope so, because I am.
I am, yes. I really must pull myself out of squire's second thread, however, and have a look at the eleven above it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Discuss The Children of Húrin in the Reading Room, June 11-October 14.
|
|
|
Stanislaus B.
The Shire
Jun 23 2007, 8:06pm
Post #93 of 135
(882 views)
Shortcut
|
First - what I mean by simple. In case of the style of sagas and of Tolkien (in Hurin)- terse, dry, expressing maximum sense in the minimum of words, without complicated subordinated clauses of a Ciceronian period.
In case of modern popular prose - written and read without any effort, repetitious, imprecise, flabby, full of water, incapable of expressing any thought which is not common-place, and even those badly, using words in the scattershot manner - throwing a bunch, hoping that one will fit the intended meaning.
As for the fate of modern literature - it will be the same as that of the Hellenistic literature. People lost interest in it, and it disappeared. The older Attic literature remained.
I think Tolkien will be one of the few modern authors to survive the next hundred year.
And, by the way - I don't like very much the saga style of Children of Hurin. I prefer the style of Churchill, Dr. Johnson, or of E. R. Eddison. But the style Tolkien chose is perfect to represent that particular story.
|
|
|
Daughter of Nienna
Grey Havens
Jun 23 2007, 8:27pm
Post #94 of 135
(929 views)
Shortcut
|
|
do we have a shared subjectivity?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
But in criticism, a personal preference, clearly stated and supported, is as close as is possible to come to an artistic "truth". Numbers count for nothing; even if everyone here, or everyone everywhere, agreed that saga-style was weaker than novel-style, that wouldn't make it objectively true. I was just trying to make the point that it's possible (within the subjectivity we all share) for one style to deemed inferior to another, as a whole.
You completely had me until you said: "subjectivity we all share".
I feel that the story told in a contemporary style would loose it potency, take on a different meaning and not fit the characters, mood, tone, in general, this piece of art. Why should it be told in contemporary style just because the general public is "not used to it". Or, because it's human nature to not want to have work so hard at something, or to have to change themselves, or to experience something outside of their realm of customary experience. (People in general hate or fear change or anything unusual.)
I don't feel qualified to 'argue' whether Tolkien was successful in his attempt at an archaic style or not. I am not as educated, at least in this area, as some of you. I don't know literature, or lit history/critism, or philosophy, or history, or sagas; and I certainly don't know the world of intellectual argument very well. So, setting myself in the middle of an intellectual discussion about literature I stick out like a sore thumb. But, then I always liked hanging out with people smarter than me and usually do, so I don't mind the difference at all. I feel right at home… even though I am kind of a waif from the "wrong side of the tracks".
I appreciate very much what you said: "But in criticism, a personal preference, clearly stated and supported, is as close as is possible to come to an artistic "truth"." My 'truth' and the strengths I bring to the discussion come from my experience in life, which is widely varied, my artistic education (for what its worth), and my finely-tuned visual and kinesthetic sense, and my ability to translate what my emotional reactions tell me (most of the time).
On the other hand, I can speak to art. As an artist (modestly trained), tone means a lot. It is necessary to have the tone match the piece (of art). Style, in this case especially, is part of the tone. To change the style would change the tone. Creating a piece in a tone that doesn't match denigrates it, diminishes it and makes a mish-mosh. Though it is important to keep your audience in mind, most of the time, I don't think it helps art to try and cater to the people…the junk that is currently the majority showing up in the multiplexes proves my point.
I was just trying to make the point that it's possible (within the subjectivity we all share) for one style to deemed inferior to another, as a whole. I don't think we, here, have a shared subjectivity. I think we are split down the middle: a.s., FFH, and yourself seeming to prefer, in general terms, a more contemporary style… Stanislaus B., Modtheow and myself preferring a more archaic style and Curious somewhere in betwen (perhaps).
So, I find myself in the same camp (simply stated) with Stanislaus B. and Modtheow...if they'll have me. I feel that any story of the First Age told in a contemporary style would ruin it. I balk at the thought of it.
**Tribute: Lt. J.G. Robert Sterling, WWII Pilot MIA, by Gramma & DoN**
Art Gallery Revised, Aloha & Mahalo, Websites Directory
Nienna: “ those who hearken to her learn pity, and endurance in hope . . . All those who wait in Mandos cry to her, for she brings strength to the spirit and turns sorrow to wisdom." — Valaquenta
|
|
|
dna
The Shire
Jun 23 2007, 9:32pm
Post #95 of 135
(877 views)
Shortcut
|
hence my question. (I was too wrapped up in the House of Beor).
Checking further, yes, Tolkien was working on Marach entering Beleriand a century before, living near the sources of Teiglin, Malach spending 14yrs in Hithlum, and Magor & Hathol back at Teiglin's sources, serving no Elf-lords; having it "in mind to place Fingolfin's gift of the lordship of Dorlomin much earlier".
But he never did, thus it seems Hador remained 1st lord of Dorlomin.
|
|
|
Wynnie
Rohan
Jun 23 2007, 9:42pm
Post #96 of 135
(895 views)
Shortcut
|
May I please join your camp too? This thread has just emphasized to me what I already knew -- that Tolkien's style is one of the things I love best about his writing. Judging from Curious's attempt at a sample, I don't believe I'd bother to read this book if it were written entirely in modernese.
(I'd have chimed in sooner, but have been getting too bogged down in defending the map.)
None such shall return again.
|
|
|
dna
The Shire
Jun 23 2007, 10:17pm
Post #97 of 135
(877 views)
Shortcut
|
your tag-line of "Ignorance is bliss" in the other thread, while dismissing the "denouement of the Wanderings of Hurin", was obviously a little poke, so I responded accordingly.
I never brought up 'different versions of the Turin story' at all. I simply meant that the Map fails as anything "new" or bold, which I'll stand by. And I am not "so disappointed with the book" as you throw back. But its not being over-critical to temper lavish praise where it isn't warranted, or even entirely correct.
Peace
|
|
|
Wynnie
Rohan
Jun 23 2007, 10:48pm
Post #99 of 135
(882 views)
Shortcut
|
You do know I meant my ignorance, don't you? I remember you as the one who led a bunch of Hurin/Turin discussions on the old boards, and I was truly impressed and left in the dust. And NEB has been linking to some of your posts on another board, so I've probably been mixing up things you said here and there.
I did agree with you on the poor Intro and the lack of an Index, remember? And I better understand your problems with the Map now, though I'm sticking by CT on that one.
I didn't mean to poke or throw anything. Maybe I should use more smilies, but I've heard squire doesn't approve, and it is his thread.
None such shall return again.
|
|
|
a.s.
Valinor
Jun 23 2007, 11:51pm
Post #100 of 135
(905 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Holy Eru! What are we arguing about, again? :-)
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I believe I have lost track.
All right, I understand that simply by stating a preference for something I have ranked it in value, and providing a value judgement is criticism and therefore, I bow to your point. (Can one bow to points? Is that a mixed metaphor? I live in hopes that this subthread is too obscure to receive much attention...)
I am still not sure I truly should be arguing whether "saga-style" is inferior or superior based on my personal preference, since I am not entirely sure I know what saga-style is.
I prefer the style in which Tolkien wrote the first chapter of LOTR to the style in which he wrote the first chapter of COH. That is really all I can say, and while I understand as well your point that value isn't earned by majority vote, I truly believe I am not in the minority of Tolkien fans. Even here in the RR.
a.s.
"an seileachan"
"Some say once you're gone, you're gone forever, and some say they're gonna come back.
Some say you rest in the arms of the Savior if sinful ways you lack.
Some say they're coming back in a garden, bunch of carrots and little sweet peas.
I think I'll just let the mystery be."
~~~~~Iris DeMent
|
|
|
|
|
