China Mieville on Tolkien and Epic/High Fantasy

[Celtavian]

re

Cthulhu's Librarian,

Glad that China acknowledges how creative the gaming community is. I know my outlook on movies and books is utterly different because of gaming.

A good example is the recent movie Underworld. To non-gamers it probably seemed original, but to gamers it was a derivation of White Wolf games that have been around for years.

Gaming makes it hard to step out of the box sometimes and understand that though we have embraced "radical fantasy", most of the mainstream speculative fiction publishing industry is behind the curve.

The whole idea that fantasy and science fiction are still in each in separate genre seems strange. I thought they had been interlaced for years and that is why they almost always discuss them together.

 

[Mark]

...Tolkien ... the intentions of the Professor. Given his life, I cannot help but think that just like so many others who live within the confines of human society simple escapism was his goal, for himself and happily for others who have had the joy of reading his work.

It's my understanding his goal was to create a mythological equivalent for England (akin to those of the Norse, Teutons, etc.) with all of the meaning and message that goal carries and implies.

 

[Pielorinho]

I love Tolkien and Mieville, although the latter definitely moves me more than the former. Both are fantastic storytellers.

I don't think Mieville has any more of a message than Tolkien has, but it's clear they're writing from different political viewpoints. In Perdido Street Station, there's no political leader that comes across as a good guy; in Lord of the Rings, the workers never go on strike. The need to live up to one's ancestors appears prominently in Lord of the Rings; the necessity of a free press figures into Perdido Street Station.

I'd recommend both authors to readers, but I'd recommend Perdido Street Station to folks who hate fantasy before I'd recommend Tolkien.

Daniel

 

[Celtavian]

re

It's my understanding his goal was to create a mythological equivalent for England (akin to those of the Norse, Teutons, etc.) with all of the meaning and message that goal carries and implies.

His goal was to create a mythology for his country, but not as a message on how to live. Or do you currently believe that the English read Arthurian stories and attempt to live up to those ideals? His ambition was more that of an idealistic man who loved his country and wanted to give them something of their own written by one of their own countrymen.

I still recall what he said to C.S. Lewis concerning his peers negative views about fantasy and speculative fiction.

Tolkien: "What kind of person discourages escape?"
Answer: A jailor.

Escapism was very important to Tolkien. Writing tales was his method of escape.

Tolkien was writing fantasy tales and telling fantasy tales long before he decided to write Lord of the Rings. His love of mythic tales was an ongoing passion.

 

[Umbran]

Oops! Sorry! Double post.

 

[Umbran]

Or do you currently believe that the English read Arthurian stories and attempt to live up to those ideals?

Turn that around. Do you currently believe that the values and ideals addressed by Arthurian legend have gotten so much stress and repetition over time because the people don't give a whit about them? I think you'd have a hard time backing that position up. Arthurian legend doesn't persist in pupularity merely because it is entertaining. It carries on partly because of it's meanings as well.

Note also that this isn't a digital thing, where the story is either intended to have no message whatsoever, or is intended to be a literal plan for how you live your life, with no middle ground. Nor is it a thing that the author has to plan out and intend explicitly at the outset. It isn't even entirely within the author's control. The audience will see things in a work without the author's permission.

 

[Mark]

His goal was to create a mythology for his country, but not as a message on how to live. Or do you currently believe that the English read Arthurian stories and attempt to live up to those ideals?

I believe that all mythology, fables, parables, fairy tales, etc. are meant to convey a message, and often on "how to live" or conduct oneself. I believe that it is the driving force behind why they are written. Your question is one of temporal relevance which is irrelevant to the issue of their origin, IMO.

As to Tolkein's work, there's no doubt in my mind that if he strove to emulate mythologies, and give his countrymen such a work, he would have to have done so with those same intentions.

 

[nyrfherdr]

This is one of the best conversations in a long time. You've managed to drag me out of lurker mode... And because of that I'll kill the thread.

I haven't read any of Mieville's work, but I'm not sure why he feels the need to tread so heavily on Tolkien. Tolkien didn't define the genre, nor did he define what elements of his novels would become so significantly 'overdone' in the fantasy genre. The genre as it exists today didn't exist when Tolkien wrote his novels.

The genre of Fantasy and also Science Fiction are defined by the writers, the publishers and us, the reading (or more accurately buying) public.

I love to critique individual works and feel that Tolkien did some great things and not so great things in his work, but you have to look at his writing in context of the author, the time of the writing, and the reader and the time of the reading. The meaning one finds in the novel has much to do with the maturity, education and interests of the reader as much as the author.

That is the joy, isn't it?
I get much more from the novel now than I did 25 years ago when I read it the first time. That is true of almost any book I re-read. (Although sometimes I wonder why I enjoyed a book so much when I was younger... Tastes do occasionally change)

Anyway. Don't stop the discussion because a lurker piped in. I would be sorely disappointed.

 

[Mark]

You've managed to drag me out of lurker mode...

There he is! GET HIM!

I'm not familiar with Mieville's work either, but my end of the conversation hasn't been related to it, so I hope I'm on safe ground.

Another point I would like to make is in the style of the writing. Unlike most modern fantasy, we don't know what Tolkein's characters think except by what we can extrapolate through their actions. Modern fantasy has a tendancy to lay all of its cards on the table leaving the characters' motives all-too-often transparent, and perhaps shallow. Noble ideals, IMO, are best expressed without being privy to the details of the second-guessing. I'm not sure I would have appreciated Aragorn's struggle if I was aware of his actual thought processes.

 

[Pants]

I don't believe Tolkien intended to send a message, but the work had a great deal of meaning to him and because of this it will inevitably have meaning to those who read it. I know some people spend countless hours trying to figure out the intentions of the Professor. Given his life, I cannot help but think that just like so many others who live within the confines of human society simple escapism was his goal, for himself and happily for others who have had the joy of reading his work.

This is what I was trying to say, but I guess I failed. I think Tolkien has hotly denied ever having put any meaning into his books. In fact, I did a college paper on Tolkien's life and I believe that the main purpose that he wrote the LotR was to tell a story. Now maybe, subconsciously, there are some hidden meaning and messages in the story, but my belief is that he didn't consciously put them in there.