XPost: rec.arts.books.tolkien, alt.fan.tolkien
From: Troels@ThisIsFake.invalid
In message
Dirk Thierbach spoke these staves:
>
> Troels Forchhammer wrote:
>>
This is, I am afraid, going to be mostly of the 'yes, and . . .' kind
of agreeing with the former poster. Hopefully the 'and . . .'
additions will at least justify posting ;-)
> It's like he had all these little "emblematic" motifs somewhere in
> the back of his head, and then repeatedly tried to attach them to
> different texts until everything fits (or sometimes not).
I'm not entirely sure if you mean to suggest that Tolkien was doing
this consciously and deliberately, or if you think it was more a
subconscious process?
As I read Tolkien's descriptions in 'On Fairy-Stories' (OFS) about
the Cauldron of Story the author cannot control what will come up
when he draws from the cauldron (or at least only very imperfectly --
he may go for a specific piece and be surprised at what comes out
together with that piece).
> Like leaves looking for a tree, if you want :-)
I like that figure :-)
It suggests to me some bits of the Soup of Story that has, for some
reason or other, attracted the author and floats around in his sub-
conscious mind waiting for an outlet.
>> but I don't think we should forget the readerly view-point, which
>> deals largely with how things are intended to be perceived when
>> reading the story.
>
> I don't think one should call this the main POV of the reader, or
> something.
Indeed -- it was an unfortunate choice of words.
I do, however, think that the main PoV of the normal reader is mainly
story-internal: it is the view-point you have while under the
influence of secondary belief. That is, both according to Tolkien in
OFS and to my personal experience, the state in which the reader will
be put by successful sub-creation -- at least while reading.
> These are stories. There are there to be enjoyed as stories.
That rather begs the question, doesn't it ;-)
How _are_ stories to be enjoyed?
Personally I distinguish between the 'while reading' enjoyment (where
I find that my own experience is so close to Tolkien's description of
secondary belief in OFS that I can't help but agree wholeheartedly
with his claim that this is the way successful sub-creative Art is to
be enjoyed), and then there's the enjoyment I can get from analysis,
which is far more complex with respect to viewpoints.
> And it's important to recogize how everything hangs together. The
> "Zusammenhang", as Shippey calls it (I wonder where he got that
> word from :-)
I agree that it's important, and I also think that it is a phase
three (or whatever) interest -- something that comes after the
interests spurred by the secondary belief (first the story itself and
then the wider context of the story). Unfortunately it seems that
many readers never get beyond the secondary belief viewpoint.
> The "yes, but what is the subcreated world *really* like?" game
> that especially SF&F readers like to play with the authors is, at
> least IMHO, an *additional* aspect, and not the main one (or the
> only one).
For myself, I agree wholeheartedly -- I even think that this is true
for most or all the regular posters here, but when I see the comments
and discussions elsewhere (other fora, other authors), I believe that
it is, sadly, the main aspect for the majority of readers.
[...]
> Sure, one can ask all kinds of questions. [...]
> But this POV misses so much interesting stuff.
I think that you miss a lot of interesting stuff if you restrict
yourself to a single viewpoint regardless of what viewpoint that is.
On the other hand you probably miss out different amounts of
interesting stuff depending on the viewpoint ;-)
--
Troels Forchhammer
Valid e-mail is
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.
Do not meddle in the affairs of Wizards, for they are
subtle and quick to anger.
- Gildor Inglorion, /The Lord of the Rings/ (J.R.R. Tolkien)
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
