I'm not a Tolkien scholar, so this post will reflect my limitations in that regard. I read LOTR once, as a teenager, to find out what all the hoopla was about. Once was enough. It's not a bad novel. It has a travelogue quality that appeals to a boyish sense of adventure, common to many men–myself included. It has a few memorable scenes and characters. But in general it's overrated. He's not a great storyteller like Homer (esp. The Odyssey)–much less the incomparable Dante. It lacks the primitive appeal and elemental simplicity of the Epic of Gilgamesh. In the past I have suggested that it reflects the medieval chivalric tradition. I found the movies enjoyable. Not the highest art, but they work at the level of the material.
One of the interpretive issues regarding LOTR is the relationship between the story and Tolkien's Catholicism. If it has a Catholic Christian subtext, that's very muted. Not only are the characters not Christian, but they don't seem to be very pious. There's no worship or prayer, that I recall, either individually or institutionally.
Tolkien wrote a seminary essay on Beowulf:
And one question is whether LOTR was partly moldeled on Beowulf. There's an interesting tension between the worldview of the narrator and the worldview of the characters. The basic story is Viking legend. The product of a warrior culture with pagan values. The Protagonist is something of a demigod, doing battle with monsters.
The outlook of the protagonist is essentially heathen. Similar to the honor-code of Homeric heroes. Mortality is inevitable, so what matters is to die a glorious death.
However, the narrator is a medieval Christian. So he's retelling the legend from the retrospective standpoint of a medieval Christian. The generates an interesting tension between the pagan, polytheistic viewpoint of the main character and the providential, monotheistic viewpoint of the narrator. The narrator attributes the hidden hand of providence to certain outcomes. There's nothing overtly Christian about the setting, plot, dialogue, or characters. Christian insight is supplied by the editorial asides of the narrator.
This is nicely explicated in a two-part lecture by Scott Masson:
So Beowulf reflects a transitional period from Norse paganism to Norse Christianity. Both forward-looking and backward looking.
There may be an residual element of that same unresolved tension in LOTR, between the Catholic viewpoint of the narrator (Tolkien) and the pre-Christian (?) viewpoint of the characters.
Of course, Middle Earth has a different history than our world, so there's a sense in which it couldn't be Christian in any direct respect. The Christian faith is the product of a particular world history. That can't be transferred or duplicated as is to a planet with a different world history. At best, Tolkien could create a variation on Christianity. Something analogous to Christianity, but with a different backstory.
It is striking, though, that Tolkien feels no duty to integrate LOTR into Catholicism. Perhaps that reflects a lay/clerical dichotomy, where he thinks it's the role of the clergy rather than laity to promote the Catholic faith–whereas the Anglican Lewis felt no such inhibition. Cf. A. Jacobs, The Narnian (HarperOne 2006), 199.
It may also go to the stereotypical difference between a cradle Catholic and an adult convert. Lewis had the evangelistic and apologetic zeal of a convert. The need to justify his conversion as well as the enthusiasm to share his discovery with the lost. What they are now, he used to be. He reaches back to bring others into the light.
I find Beowulf of some personal, autobiographical interest due to my own Viking ancestry (on my father's side). Of course, the Christianity of the medieval narrator is far removed from my Protestant theology. I'm stand at the end of that trajectory.
An insightful analysis!
ReplyDeleteInterestingly, some may know Tolkien did his own translation of Beowulf, along with commentary. And I think Tolkien himself has said he drew on Beowulf for The Hobbit (e.g. the quest, the dragon, the sword Sting).
In addition, Tom Shippey is a Tolkien scholar. As I recall, Shippey likewise sees significant parallels between Beowulf and Tolkien's literary works including LOTR. I think Shippey writes about this in his J. R. R. Tolkien: Author of the Century as well as The Road to Middle-earth.
For instance, I recall Shippey pointing out that the name Beowulf is related to a bear (as in "bee-wolf" or a large "wolf"-like creature which feeds on honey). Of course, Beowulf is human, but he's a "bear" in battle. I suppose it's like how Native Americans might name one of their warriors Blood Wolf or Snow Fox or Rock Hawk. As LOTR fans know, Tolkien created a character named Beorn (related to "bear") who is a were-bear. A human who can warg into a bear. Presumably as an homage to Beowulf. That's just one minor example, but I recall Shippey seeing more significant parallels. Not only with Beowulf but with other Norse and related literature as well.
At least to my limited knowledge, I think the main argument Tolkien ever made for Christianity was his idea that Christ is myth made fact. Something along those lines. I recall this in the context of Tolkien persuading Lewis that Christianity could be a myth but true. Likewise, I seem to recall Tolkien thinking the historical narratives in the OT were not truly historical but proto-historical. Heathen mythology which has seeds of truth. These myths were to prepare the way for Christianity to come.
DeleteAs such, I wonder if Tolkien was attempting to make preparatory work in his LOTR tales, connecting heathen myth with true myth, as it were? That's the best spin I can put on LOTR anyway, but maybe I'm way off, because I don't really know as much about Tolkien as I do Lewis.
Shippey on Tolkien here:
Deletehttps://triablogue.blogspot.com/2020/02/shippey-on-tolkien.html
Guess I'll be listening to Dr Scott Masson for another couple hours today. Finally got around to his other videos linked to from here on C.S. Lewis yesterday.
ReplyDelete