Thursday, April 03, 2008

Tolkien and the Splintered Heart

I have few splinterings of heart. Most splinters in my life involve the soul (sin vs. righteousness) or the mind (too many to name here). But my heart, usually, is unified. Where I love, I love completely, and likewise for hate, and likewise for aversion, disgust, admiration, etc.

There are two matters, however, concerning which my heart is split right down the middle. One is Spanish, and we won't go there in this post (it all has to do with one wonderful and one traumatic childhood experience, which between them have left me simultaneously attracted to and repulsed by the language). The other is Tolkien.

My relationship with Tolkien began late, which is perhaps part of the problem. My brothers, of course, being my father's sons, had all read the entire tetralogy and the Silmarillion by the time they were each thirteen or fourteen. I, being averse to reading things "just because all Christian kids are supposed to love them," and deeming them moreover "boys' books," and finally being quite content with Lewis's Chronicles of Narnia, didn't pick up Tolkien until I was sixteen.

At which point, of course, I promptly fell in love with them. How could I not? I devoured the tetralogy in two or three weeks of every-spare-minute reading, though I could never quite bring myself to read the Silmarillion. I distinctly recall sitting on the family staircase one day, crying over the end of The Return of the King. I was completely hooked. Tolkien had my whole heart. Later, when I was eighteen, I even learned the Tengwar script that my brothers had long since mastered (Nate also knows dwarvish) and modified it for my own purpose. I can still write fluently in that alphabet, given an hour or two of practice to get back in shape.

But then I went to COLLEGE. Doom. The problem was, you see, that everybody around me revered Tolkien. They didn't love him; they practically worshiped him, and it didn't help at all that the movies were coming out at the time. To me, all this was a huge turn-off. So for three or four years I turned an increasingly deaf ear to the Tolkien rhapsodies, discussions, and arguments, discovering at the same time that Tolkien's characters are... well, at the time I called them one-dimensional, though I have since learned to revise that opinion in light of the right and conventional and necessary nature of epic heroes. But at the time they seemed one-dimensional; I branded them "one-dimensional" in my mind; and, believing that I had found a reason to dislike Tolkien, I put him from my admiration.

Unfortunately, in matters such as these (though not in others), I find it difficult to completely disengage my affections once they have been truly won. Also, after more than two years of studying and writing about world literature, I am now in a much better position to understand Tolkien's goals, the magnificence of his achievement, and the proper way to understand his characters (that is, from an epic perspective). My heart has been wistful about Tolkien for some time, sternly though I have admonished it to forget, and now I find all at once that I have no good reasons any more to turn away from loving him. No college mates now din his wonders into my ears; I am better trained and therefore more alive than ever to those same wonders; and, truth have it, I never did fully disentangle him from my affections.

BUT, I have in the interim acquired a solid four-years habit, a mental wall between myself and the tetralogy, which splinters my heart right down the middle. And thus I don't know whether the half that belongs to Tolkien will ever be able to reunite with the half that has turned from him...

4 Comments:

Blogger Pinon Coffee said...

Yup.

I think the temptation to turn on the things of one's youth was alive and well at college--especially over-popular things. I made an effort not to, but I didn't discover them all till I came back.

I never quite gave up on Tolkien, but I got much quieter about him. Still am.

Do you think the movies (for Narnia and LOTR both) are doing more harm than good? I'm inclined to think so... especially 'cause they can't write a decent hero to save their lives...

6:25 PM  
Blogger Praelucor said...

Mmm... no, I dunno that they're doing more harm than good. Over the last few years of working on world literature studies I've developed a healthy respect for the importance of works being made POPULAR, even if they aren't represented as all that they really are. Without quantity, does quality really matter? Of course, I would rather have one accurate copy of the Bible than a million watered-down versions, but for merely human art I think there's a lot to be said for sheer visibility. Of course, this doesn't mean that I LIKE the Rings movies, or the Narnia movies, or the Austen spin-off novels... I just feel that they have a redeeming feature or two. :-P And yes, none of those folks can write a hero to save their lives. I have a couple theories about that, but not for here.

By the way, depending on when your wedding is, I may not be able to make it. :-( I'm afraid that June is shaping up abominably busy, and unfortunately it isn't the kind of thing where I can say "oh well, sorry, I'm taking some of my unused vacation time"... because if I do, there will be thousands of families (literally) whose curricula would be late, and that simply won't do. I still hope I can come, and I would absolutely hate to miss it, but it's not looking good right now.

7:29 PM  
Blogger V-Dawg said...

Movie Aragorn is a decent hero--not a great one, but a decent one. Of course, Faramir gets ruined, and "King" Peter gets Faramirized also. I suspect Caspian may be on his way to Faramirization.
As for overall movie quality, the Rings movies have worn a lot better than Narnia for me. The brilliant thing about the former is that they display the scope and size of the story, and the world beyond the story, perfectly. (I once had a conversation with Carver in which he said that the movies were a good example of Aristotle's idea of Spectacle.) Narnia, by contrast, has annoyed me more each time. I get tired of weak Peter, LOTR rip-off music, lack of true reconciliation with Edmund, and so forth.
If people are actually drawn to read the books, though, I'm not going to complain too much.

10:59 AM  
Blogger Pinon Coffee said...

Aragorn is certainly a better hero than Faramir, in the movie, but I don't like what they did to his character, either. I think his worst moment is that scene right before the Paths of the Dead when Elrond has to turn up with a sword and talk him into taking his birthright. That has no justification in the books or Aragorn's character...they must needs add conflict where there was none.

Poor Peter did come out rather badly in _Wardrobe_, and judging from that link on Maggie's blog, he's going to be worse in _Caspian_. They're imputing 21st-century squishiness of character onto a particularly solid 1940's boy, and it's inconsistent.

I suppose "getting people to read the books" is a worthwhile purpose for the movies. And, V, you're right. The LOTR movies _do_ get across the sheer size of Middle-Earth; and they have much to recommend them. I'll stop bashing them now. :-)

Praelucor, if you can't make it, I shall be desolate, but I understand.

11:29 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home