Doctor Cornelius ([info]dr_c) wrote,

Tolkein on Fairy Stories

Am reading Tolkein's essay "On Fairy-Stories," from the collection The Monsters and the Critics. Not an easy read, despite the awesome title (taken from his essay on Beowulf, one of seven in the collection). But am enjoying working through it anyway.

This actually is my second attempt at reading this one; I skimmed through it once before upon purchasing the book, but didn't really get into it. Last Saturday's entry here, though, got me thinking about the nature of "fairy tales" again, however, and so I think I'm catching more of the ideas this time.

One of the points Tolkien emphasizes is that "fairy stories" need not refer to "stories about fairies." He insists, rather, that "fairy-stories are not in normal English usage stories about fairies or elves, but stories about Fairy, that is Faerie, the realm or state in which fairies have their being." He also adds that "stories that are actually concerned primarily with 'fairies,' that is creatures that might also in modern English be called 'elves,' are relatively rare, and as a rule not very interesting. Most good 'fairy-stories' are about the aventures of men in the Perilous Realm or upon its shadowy marches."

This is interesting, concerning that Tolkein's own best-selling works keep the Men (strictly speaking) a bit off to the side; the stories are primarily "concerning Hobbits," who would seem to fit the same category as his "elves and fairies" in the remark just quoted. Or are they?

Probably the best way I can make sense of it is to note that, although Hobbits are properly creatures of Tolkein's imaginary world, they function as humans within the context of the narrative, as surely as do Aragorn and Eowyn and Faramir and, for that matter, Barliman Butterbur. Bilbo in TH and Frodo in LotR fill the "everyman" role, and the Perilous Realm for them is the world outside the Shire. ("It's a dangerous business, Frodo, going out of your door," Bilbo used to say; "you step into the Road, and if you don't keep your feet there is no knowing where you might be swept off to.")

********

The essay also contains Tolkein's views on "sub-creation"; but as it's getting late and I have to work tomorrow, that topic will have to wait for another time.

Dr. C

  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Your IP address will be recorded 

  • 1 comments

[info]carissa_lynn

March 18 2003, 13:38:31 UTC 9 years ago

I've never thought of a fairy tale (or story, I'm not sure from what you've written whether or not you consider them to be different) in that way. The term usually just reminds me of the types of stories parents read to very young children. I've certainly never thought of Tolkien on this level, though I remember someone telling me that he read tales of middle earth to his son as bedtime stories. However, I'm not sure that I'd agree that the hobbits can be described as fulfilling the role of "everyman." (Though I haven't finished RotK yet and maybe that will change.) The hobbits, like the elves, seem to have something inate in them that allows them to resist the ring for longer. Sure in the end it is difficult for them to give up, but even Galadriel was tempted by the ring. I did skip ahead a little so I know Frodo was not totally immune to the hold of the ring, but he didn't seem as tempted as some of the other characters to use it, except when he felt his life was in danger. I'm not sure I am making sense, but I think it's because I'm not sure what you mean by "everyman." If it's just that someone seemingly average is able to accomplish great things, then sure, Frodo fits that, but I think that somehow Frodo, and even the other hobbits, have something within them that makes them different than the actual men in the story. To me, they seem to be characterized more like the elves, only quirkier.
Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Facebook Twitter More login options
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…