Saturday

Travelling to the Edge of Oneself (2009)




Jen Crawford, ed.: brief 38 (September 2009)

Travelling to the Edge of Oneself


Martin Edmond. The Supply Party: Ludwig Becker on the Burke and Wills Expedition. Adelaide, SA: East Street Publications, 2009. ISBN 978-1-921037-26-9. 209 pp.



Martin Edmond: The Supply Party (2009)


Outside in the rookery, an extraordinary cacophony and excitement of birds, mostly … ibis, was going on. … Ibis are elegant birds and they inevitably remind me of ancient Egypt, where the ibis-headed Thoth, inventor of writing, scribe of the gods, fount of all knowledge, recorded the confessions and affirmations of the dead on his scrolls, along with the list of who went to paradise and who was to be eaten by the gods of judgement. On the other hand, in a rookery they are scrappy, quarrelsome, raucous and somehow lacking the elegance, and often even the whiteness that they possess in their ideal form. On the wing they immediately recover their grace and splendour and then it is easy to see that they are an archaic bird, thought to have descended from that flying dinosaur, the pterodactyl. [63-64]

All that from a flock of birds!

I guess the reason this passage struck me so forcibly as I was making my way through Martin Edmond’s latest, The Supply Party, a combination travel-book, biographical-exploration of Ludwig Becker, official artist and naturalist on the ill-fated Burke and Wills expedition, was because it seems to encapsulate his method in a nutshell.

On the one hand there’s the close observation: Martin notes carefully and accurately the behaviour of the actual flock of ibis he’s observing from a nearby hide. On the other hand there’s the ever-present association of ideas: Ibis recall Thoth, the ibis-headed god, and thus we go down and interesting byway into Egyptian mythology for a short while. Finally there’s the assiduous research: Ibis, archaic birds, “thought to have descended from that flying dinosaur, the pterodactyl.”

I guess there are dangers to this approach. If you like constant mythological and historical parallels to the business in hand, this is the book for you. Martin is an elegant anecdotalist and a supremely well-informed guide. His contacts with the actual people he meets along the way tend to be significantly more truncated, though.

There’s the “sullen red-headed teenage girl” serving behind the counter of a Queensland roadhouse, who looks so incredulous at the idea of anyone wanting salad with their burger [160-61]; more poignantly, there’s the bewildered young ex-veteran in the souvenir shop who says, “with feeling, as if it were a line from a song: I’ll never wear green again” [130]; then there’s the woman in the hotel in Menindee, Noeline, who replies to his request for a room, “Sure you don’t mean the motel across the road?” [94]; there’s even that crooked-toothed drinker in the bar who dials a wrong number “very slowly, looking at his bit of paper, looking at the numbers on the phone, punching a button, looking back at his bit of paper,” as if he couldn’t read, only to hang his head in shame and shamble away when he realised “re-dialling was beyond him” [98]. Most striking of all, perhaps, there’s the well-dressed Aboriginal woman in Cunnamulla to whom Martin never succeeds in speaking at all: “We were only a metre or two apart but the space between us was vast and unknown, perhaps unknowable. I couldn’t catch her eye” [183].

Again and again Martin reveals that he’s happier sitting on the porch with a book than chatting inconsequentially with the locals: “Next door was a low, old dining room with spider-haunted mud-brick walls. I peered briefly in but it seemed better to eat outside.” [161] He even jokes about it once or twice:
It never stops, he said, humorously. It just never bloody stops, does it?
No, I agreed, without the slightest idea of what he was talking about. Walking back into the hotel compound, I realised I must have entered the Laconic Zone. [69]

His true feelings seem to me to come out more straightforwardly (laconically?) later on: “It’s a peculiarity of outback towns, that, as soon as you leave them, it is as if they have never been.” [105]

So why go there at all? What is there in this curious car-journey approximately in his tracks that succeeds in bringing Martin closer to his elusive subject, Ludwig Becker?

Again and again Martin stresses the accuracy of Becker’s observations, the fact that one can identify places, flora and fauna, people even, from his precise and elegant sketches and finished watercolours (the one exception, the tick he discovered in the arm-pit of a gecko at Minindie, remains unknown to science because, although he used a magnifying glass “to make the enlarged version .. the magnification was not sufficient to allow him to detail those features that would allow a specific identification to be made. He was working … at the limits of vision.” [177]).

And yet, there something more to Becker’s art – something hard to put one’s finger on, but nevertheless palpably there behind his apparently so-dispassionate technique: “ a vastness that is beyond mere possession by the eye” [179]. Thus his painting of a comet is hard to see except as a nativity scene, the crouching camels in the immeasurable night; his views of distant plains, too, have a tendency to play strange tricks with perception and scale. An air of the Romantic movement, of Coleridge’s “habituation to the VAST,” of the visionary landscapes of Kasper David Friedrich (his Art teacher’s teacher), seems inextricably bound up with Becker’s concept of himself as a man of science.

Might the same be said of Martin Edmond, his biographer, his shadow? Certainly. Unquestionably. There’s the lovely passage where Martin speculates that the creatures in the Australian bush, “from their long association with humans, somehow miss us when we’re not around and celebrate if we return, even if only for a night or two:”
I know this is an impossibly romantic position to take and probably untenable. I only mention it because I’ve never quite been able to shake the feeling that it is so. [134].

Novalis could hardly have expressed more succinctly his own sense of the living, breathing cosmos that we all inhabit – in mutual brotherhood or enmity.

Martin’s is a strangely melancholy book. But then, perhaps that’s not so strange. It is, after all, a funeral elegy for a man who died on a futile, mismanaged quest for something that hardly mattered in itself – Victoria’s attempt to claim as much northern territory as possible before the pushy young State of South Australia could do the same. And the gloom associated with this waste of men and materials hangs over the story more and more:
I wasn’t sure if I wanted to stand before another grave. I though perhaps I’d had enough of mortuary emotions. [148]

In the end, in fact, Martin fails even to find his ostensible subject’s final resting-place:
Having come so far, with the goal in sight, why would I turn away now? Did I not want to stand at the grave site after all? Perhaps, although I didn’t think this at the time, I was trying to align myself with all the other non-events: Burke and Wills never saw the sea at Carpentaria .. Wright never reached Cooper’s Creek with the supply party, Brahe wasn’t there when those he’d waited four months for finally came back …. Even Becker was absent from his own death. [167]

A rationalisation? Or the simple truth? Standing by Becker’s grave was never going to bring Martin the closure that he needed, the definition and the distance to evaluate his own quest. On the one hand, clearly, it was an attempt to understand Becker by emulating him. The Supply Party, then, becomes the rhetorical equivalent of Becker’s own sketchbook of the expedition: partial, unfinished, ostensibly compiled for the purposes of advancing knowledge, but actually full of mystical insights and visionary depth.

Martin’s, too, is a vision-quest, conducted under the aegis of totem animals: ibis, snakes, eagles – even the ubiquitous, omnipresent flies – and it seems designed more to tell him about himself than to provide us with a biography of Ludwig Becker. His account of Becker’s last days casts, significantly, the artist as Don Quixote, his exasperated doppelgänger Beckler as a kind of Sancho Panza, reluctantly tending to his companion’s needs whilst backbiting him under his breath:
Propping up his bloated body on some old camel bags, he [Becker] sought to make himself independent of all external influences by studying, writing and sketching [175].

Beckler’s bluntly-expressed scorn for his older countryman Becker’s scholarly preoccupations in the midst of such extreme adversity and want prompts Martin to dissent – to see, on the contrary, in this mantra, studying, writing and sketching, a kind of panacea for the woes of the world.

Which of them was right? Who can say, even at this distance in time? It would be naïve to claim that Martin doesn’t see the justice in Beckler’s workaday view of the world. He did, after all, survive to tell the tale, unlike his more spiritual companion. The Supply Party, then, might be seen as Martin’s own personal Pilgrim’s Progress – equivocal where Bunyan is most direct, but every bit as serious in the final analysis. Or, if you prefer, it might be possible to see in that splendid, luminous apotheosis of the dying Becker succeeding in making himself “independent of all external influences by studying, writing and sketching” something of the luminous yet simple practicality of Voltaire’s advice (in Candide) to “cultivate your garden.”

Either way this is an intensely thought-provoking book, one which doesn’t reveal all it’s got to say on the surface, but one which richly repays perseverance. A simple travel narrative it’s not – but then, which of the great travel books can claim to be simple?

On one level, then, it’s a kind of love-letter to the Australian landscape to match Martin’s earlier evocations of New Zealand’s central plateau in Waimarino County & Other Excursions (2007); on another, it’s a splendid addition to Burke-&-Willsiana along the lines of his contribution to the Ern Malley mythos in White City and its associated works. Finally, though, it’s its own book: an account of travelling to the edge of oneself, and a partial inventory of what can be brought back from the journey.


(4-10/6/09)

brief 38 (2009): 89-93.

[1711 wds]

brief 38 (2009)






Friday

The Tolkien Industry (2009)



Jeremy Rose, ed.: Scooop Review of Books

The Tolkien Industry




For quite some time now I've been meditating an essay on the literary estate of J. R. R. Tolkien. I don't know if I'll ever actually get round to it, though, so I thought I might just put a few of the highlights into a blog post instead.

There's a story (told by C. S. Lewis's literary executor, the egregious Rev - now Fr. - Walter Hooper) that Tolkien once remarked scoffingly to him that his friend Lewis had published almost twice as many books since his death as he'd managed to put out before it! I'm afraid that story rings a little hollow now. The dozen or so books that appeared before Tolkien's own death in 1973 have long since been dwarfed by the ones that have appeared (and continue to appear) ever since.

You don't believe me? Take a look at these two lists, then tell me if there's anything substantial that I'm missing:


Major works published during Tolkien's lifetime:

  1. Tolkien, J. R. R., & E. V. Gordon, ed. Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. 1925. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1963.

  2. Tolkien, J. R. R. The Hobbit, or There and Back Again. Illustrated by the Author. 1937. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1975.

  3. Tolkien, J. R. R. Farmer Giles of Ham. Illustrated by Pauline Baynes. 1949. London & Boston: George Allen and Unwin & Houghton and Mifflin, 1973.

  4. Tolkien, J. R. R. The Fellowship of the Ring, Being the First Part of the Lord of the Rings. 1954. London & Boston: George Allen and Unwin & Houghton Mifflin, 1961.

  5. Tolkien, J. R. R. The Two Towers, Being the Second Part of the Lord of the Rings. 1954. London & Boston: George Allen and Unwin & Houghton Mifflin, 1961.

  6. Tolkien, J. R. R. The Return of the King, Being the Third Part of the Lord of the Rings. 1955. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1957.

  7. Tolkien, J. R. R. The Lord of the Rings. 1954, 1954, 1955. Revised 2nd edition. 1966. London: HarperCollins, 2001.

  8. Tolkien, J. R. R. The Adventures of Tom Bombadil and other verses from the Red Book. Illustrated by Pauline Baynes. 1961. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1974.

  9. Tolkien, J. R. R. Tree and Leaf [incorporating the story "Leaf by Niggle" (1947) and the essay "On Fairy-stories" (1939)]. 1964. London: Unwin Books, 1973.

  10. Tolkien, J. R. R. “The Homecoming of Beorhtnoth Beorhthelm’s Son.” In The Tolkien Reader. 1949, 1953, 1962, 1964. Cover illustration by Pauline Baynes. New York: Ballantine Books, 1966.

  11. Tolkien, J. R. R. Smith of Wootton Major. Illustrated by Pauline Baynes. 1967. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1974.

  12. Tolkien, J. R. R., & Donald Swann. The Road Goes Ever On: A Song Cycle. Decorations by J. R. R. Tolkien. 1968. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1974.


[J. R. R. Tolkien (1892-1973)]

I haven't included any of his prefaces to other people's editions & translations of Old English texts, or his separate periodical publications, but otherwise that should be a reasonably comprehensive list (I've put in details of my own copy of each book after the original date of publication).


Major works published posthumously:

  1. Tolkien, J. R. R., trans. Sir Gawain and the Green Knight; Pearl; Sir Orfeo. Ed. Christopher Tolkien. 1975. London: Unwin Paperbacks, 1981.

  2. Tolkien, J. R. R. The Father Christmas Letters. Ed Baillie Tolkien. 1976. London: Unwin Paperbacks, 1978.

  3. Tolkien, J. R. R. The Silmarillion. Ed. Christopher Tolkien. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1977.

  4. Tolkien, J. R. R. Pictures. Ed. Christopher Tolkien. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1979.

  5. Tolkien, J. R. R. Unfinished Tales of Númenor and Middle-earth. Ed. Christopher Tolkien. 1980. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1981.

  6. Tolkien, J. R. R. Letters. Ed. Humphrey Carpenter & Christopher Tolkien. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1981.

  7. Tolkien, J. R. R. Finn and Hengest: The Fragment and the Episode. Ed. Alan Bliss. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1982.

  8. Tolkien, J. R. R. Mr. Bliss. London: George Allen & Unwin Paperbacks, 1982.

  9. Tolkien, J. R. R. The Monsters and the Critics and Other Essays. Ed. Christopher Tolkien. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1983.

  10. Christopher Tolkien. The History of Middle-earth. 12 vols. London & Boston, 1983-96:
    1. The Book of Lost Tales, Part One. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1983.
    2. The Book of Lost Tales, Part Two. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1984.
    3. The Lays of Beleriand. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1985.
    4. The Shaping of Middle-earth: The Quenta, the Ambarkanta and the Annals together with the earliest ‘Silmarillion’and the first Map. London: Guild Publishing, 1986.
    5. The Lost Road and Other Writings: Language and Legend before ‘The Lord of the Rings’. London: Unwin Hyman, 1987.
    6. The Return of the Shadow: The History of the Lord of the Rings, Part One. London: Unwin Hyman, 1988.
    7. The Treason of Isengard: The History of the Lord of the Rings, Part Two. London: Unwin Hyman, 1989.
    8. The War of the Ring: The History of the Lord of the Rings, Part Three. London: Unwin Hyman, 1990.
    9. Sauron Defeated: The End of the Third Age (The History of the Lord of the Rings, Part Four); The Notion Club Papers and The Drowning of Anadûnê. London: HarperCollins, 1992.
    10. Morgoth’s Ring: The Later Silmarillion, Part One, The Legends of Aman. London: HarperCollins, 1993.
    11. The War of the Jewels: The Later Silmarillion, Part One, The Legends of Beleriand. London: HarperCollins, 1994.
    12. The Peoples of Middle-earth. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1996.

  11. Tolkien, J. R. R.. The Annotated Hobbit: The Hobbit, or There and Back Again. 1937. Ed. Douglas A. Anderson. London: Unwin Hyman, 1988.

  12. Tolkien, J. R. R. Tree and Leaf. 1964. Second edition, including the poem ‘Mythopoeia’. Ed. Christopher Tolkien. London: Unwin Paperbacks, 1988.

  13. Tolkien, J. R. R. Bilbo’s Last Song. Illustrated by Pauline Baynes. London: Unwin Hyman, 1990.

  14. Tolkien, J. R. R. Roverandom. Ed. Christina Scull & Wayne G. Hammond. London: HarperCollins, 1995.

  15. Tolkien, J. R. R. Narn I Chîn Húrin: The Tale of the Children of Húrin. Ed. Christopher Tolkien. Illustrated by Alan Lee. London: HarperCollins, 2007.

  16. John D. Rateliff. The History of The Hobbit. 2 vols. London & Boston, 2007:
    1. Part One: Mr. Baggins. 2007. London: HarperCollins, 2008.
    2. Part Two: Return to Bag-End. 2007. London: HarperCollins, 2008.

  17. Tolkien, J. R. R. The Legend of Sigurd and Gudrún. Ed. Christopher Tolkien. London: HarperCollins, 2009.


[J. R. R. Tolkien: The Children of Hurin, ed. Christopher Tolkien (2007)]


Now don't get me wrong. The last thing I want is to be a wowser about what is, in essence, harmless fun. The very fact that I have first editions of most of these books should tell you that I bought them the moment they came out. What's more, I've read them all pretty attentively (with the exception of the last one listed above, which I'm working my way through right now). I am, in short, as big a Tolkienophile as you're likely to find.

That mention of "first editions" brings me to the first part of my gripe, though. By all means get Tolkien's unpublished work out into the public domain, but does it have to be done quite so slowly, and with quite such maniacal academic attention to manuscripts and warring textual traditions? He has been dead for 36 years , after all. Why don't we (yet) have accessible editions of long poems such as "The Lay of Aotrou and Itroun" (1945) or "Imram" (1955), published in periodicals during his lifetime? Why is the (fascinating) “Homecoming of Beorhtnoth Beorhthelm’s Son” relegated to old paperbacks such as the Ballantine (US) Tolkien Reader (1966), or the combined Unwin (UK) reprint of Tree and Leaf & Smith of Wootton Major together with other miscellanea (1975)?

These things take time. I quite see that. And Christopher Tolkien, the main actor in the drama of Tolkien's "posthumous productivity," was himself a teacher of Old English and Old Norse at Oxford before he retired to take on the editing of his father's archives fulltime. It's a positively Victorian tale of filial devotion and of following in one's father's footsteps. Or is it? More on that subject later.

I guess it's the plethora of "second, expanded editions" which really bugs me most. There's now a second, expanded edition [s.e.e. for short] of The Silmarillion (1977 / 1992), an s.e.e. of the Pictures by J. R. R. Tolkien (1979 / transformed into J.R.R.Tolkien: Artist and Illustrator, ed. Wayne G. Hammond & Christina Scull (1995)), an s.e.e. of the Letters (1981 / 2000), an s.e.e. of Tree and Leaf (1964 / 1988) [not to mention a special annotated reprint of all the variant versions of the essay "on Fairy-stories" edited by a couple of American academics (2008)], an s.e.e. of The Annotated Hobbit (ed. Douglas A. Anderson, 1988 / 2002), even - for the love of Mike - an s.e.e. of the infantile (but entertaining) Father Christmas Letters (1976 /2004) ! Not to mention a special facsimile edition of the children's picture book Mr. Bliss (1982 / 2007). What's a poor collector to do? A poor completist collector, that is.

But then maybe collectors don't deserve any special attention. Maybe they ought to be taunted with endless variant versions of the same basic cycle of works. That may very well be. But the trouble is that many of these s.e.e.'s contain vital extra information which greatly influences one's reading of the texts themselves.

Of course it's a traditional publisher's ploy to multiply "revised" and "definitive" editions in this way in order to renew the copyright on works which would otherwise gradually fall away from notice. And in the case of an author with as many die-hard fans as Tolkien, this is clearly a multi-million dollar undertaking. But I can't help feeling that it shows a certain lack of consideration for readers, which is part and parcel of the second section of my complaint.

I suppose I'm also a natural inhabitant of the fantasy world of absurdly complicated and circumstantial annotations and elucidations of essentially frivolous popular texts. Sherlock Holmes is , of course, the classic case. Ever since Fr. Ronald Knox invented what he referred to as the "higher criticism" - writing essays about the Holmes canon which assumed as a basic convention the actual existence of its central characters, and the subordinate role of Arthur Conan Doyle as Dr. Watson's literary agent - a great many people have found a good deal of entertainment in exploring such dilemmas as the "two (or three) Watsons" problem (originating from the fact that Watson's first name seems to shift from John H. to James Watson as the canon unfolds).

Perhaps (as someone else suggested) the latter name was Mrs Watson's pet-name version of "Hamish," one of the possible candidates for the good doctor's middle name ... But then there's the question of how many wives Dr. Watson actually had? Or the heraldry and antecedents of the name "Holmes"? Or exactly which continents are included in Watson's boast of "an experience of women which extends over many nations and three separate continents" ...? You get the general idea. The Bible of these maniacal speculators is the monumental Annotated Sherlock Holmes (arranged in an eccentric "chronological order" of his own devising) of the late lamented William S. Baring Gould (1967).

Now Holmesian (UK) - or "Sherlockian" (US) - "higher criticism" is an essentially tongue-in-cheek affair, conducted by learned, but frivolous-minded sages such as Christopher Morley, Dorothy L. Sayers and Vincent Starrett (for more, far more, see the wikipedia article on Holmesian speculation). The original impulse was, presumably, to parody the ponderous Germanic Biblical criticism of the nineteenth century, with its love of multiple authors, contaminated textual traditions, and teasing remnants of ancient solar myths behind the superficial trapperies of the Yahweh cult.

Tolkien criticism has, it seems to me, taken another, darker path. The fact that Tolkien was himself a professor of Anglo-Saxon, and loved to mix in elements (particularly linguistic ones) from his professional field, has led to a mass of learned (and pseudo-learned) commentary on the intricate relationships between the two.

So far so good. Old English scholars such as Tom Shippey, in his excellent The Road to Middle-Earth (1982) and subsequent related works, has illuminated Tolkien's practice in this respect with a certain restrained aplomb.

But when it comes to treating Tolkien's own works as a kind of holy writ, requiring endless revision and recasting to fit ever more recondite revelations about the topography and chronology of his imagined Dreamland, I fear that the same could not be claimed of compilations such as Christopher Tolkien's monumental (and monumentally frustrating) 12-volume History of Middle-earth (1983-96). Here all proportion has been lost. Speculations worthy of the fantasy-world of Sherlock Holmesian higher criticism are woven into the actual detail of the evolution of a group of revoltingly-cloying Edwardian fairy tales (The Book of Lost Tales) into the ever-vaster heroic canvas of the unfinished (and unfinishable?) Silmarillion, issued in a clipped and stilted version shortly after its author's death by Christopher himself.

Christopher's own saga, developing in his father's image from a downtrodden and disillusioned soldier in World War II (his father, a veteran of the trenches of the First World War, claimed in a letter that he might best regard himself as a "hobbit among the Uruk-hai"), to a professional scholar in his father's own discipline of Germanic philology, to an accomplished translator (the Saga of King Heidrek the Wise (1960): a work of deep erudition and poetic value in its own right), to a fierce guardian of his father's literary legacy (and an influential critic of Peter jackson's films), deserves retelling on a larger scale sometime. He is clearly a man of great talent, and considerable scholarly expertise. I would say that his work on editing the manuscript versions of The Lord of the Rings (in particular) might be thought to justify that immense 12-volume history by itself. It's certainly (by far) the most interesting section to read. But it does constitute only three and a bit volumes of the whole tottering edifice.

His most noticeable legacy, unfortunately, seems to be a ragtag and bobtail (to use a Tolkienian term) of mostly American scholars who specialise in ever more recondite and fatuous explorations of the implications of the papers and manuscripts which Tolkien himself sold them so long ago. Is a two-volume History of the Hobbit really necessary, for instance? Especially on top of Douglas A. Anderson's magnificently-illustrated (and basically light-hearted) Annotated Hobbit of 1988 [s.e.e. 2002]?

[John D. Rateliff: The History of the Hobbit (2007)]

The History of the Hobbit is fun to read, mind you. I enjoyed it greatly. But it's not as much fun as it should be. Because it's 900 pages long. Because it's immensely repetitive and overly detailed on points of no consequence. Because its author, John D. Rateliff, has no sense of proportion. Because its publishers know that anything with Tolkien's name on the spine will sell in gazillions (take the recent reprint of parts of Unfinished tales under the stand-alone title of The Tale of the Children of Húrin, for instance). Rateliff, alas, is no Christopher Tolkien.

In summary, then, I think the Tolkien industry began pretty well, with solid editions of his principal unpublished works, and handsome new reprints of the others. Right now, though, it threatens to be swallowed up by its own insane momentum, a victim of its own success. The Holmesian "higher criticism", too, had its rise and fall. There have been few worthy successors to such masterworks as Starrett's The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes (1933), or Baring Gould's Sherlock Holmes of Baker Street: A Life of the World's First Consulting Detective (1962) or even such jeux d'esprits as Nicholas Meyer's The Seven Percent Solution (1974).

Why do we no longer see works of the calibre of Barbara Strachey's delightful Journeys of Frodo: An Atlas of J. R. R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings (1981), or Karen Fonstadt's Atlas of Middle-earth (1981 / s.e.e. 2001), in the (potentially) far less circumscribed (one would have thought) field of Tolkienian "higher criticism"? There are certainly exceptions. John Garth's Tolkien and the Great War: The Threshold of Middle-earth (2003) was a valuable successor to Humphrey Carpenter's 1977 biography and its even more interesting sequel The Inklings: C. S. Lewis, J. R. R. Tolkien, Charles Williams and Their Friends (1978). For the most part, though, what we tend to see now are compendiums of essays by ghastly Academic second-raters, dictionaries and grammars of Tolkien's various made-up languages, and other ever more po-faced and dreary reponses to the simple delights of Tolkien's Hobbit and Lord of the Rings.

I remember my PhD supervisor at Edinburgh, Mr. Colin Manlove, author of a number of critical books on Modern Fantasy, remarking of the appearance of yet another volume of posthumous gleanings in the (then) seemingly-interminable History of Middle-earth, that he was beginning to wonder if they were coming through from spirit messages. At the time I suspected he was just too lazy to read any of them, but as the years go by and the works keep on mounting up, I begin to wonder if he didn't have a point.

This is, I have to say, starting to resemble more and more a publisher's production-line (the shady kind who commission obscure hacks to produce works "in the manner of" V. C. Andrews or Alistair Maclean) rather than a bona-fide attempt to do justice to J. R. R. Tolkien's admittedly impressive literary productivity.

I'm reminded of some remarks made by the young Henry James, in an 1872 review of a volume of Nathaniel Hawthorne's French and Italian Note-Books, edited by his own son (and literary executor) Julian:

Mr. Hawthorne is having a posthumous productivity almost as active as that of his lifetime. Six volumes have been compounded from his private journals, an unfinished romance is doing duty as a “serial,” and a number of his letters, with other personal memorials, have been given to the world. These liberal excisions from the privacy of so reserved and shade-seeking a genius suggest forcibly the general question of the proper limits of curiosity as to that passive personality of an artist of which the elements are scattered in portfolios and table-drawers. It is becoming very plain, however, that whatever the proper limits may be, the actual limits will be fixed only by a total exhaustion of matter.

[Henry James, Literary Criticism: Essays on Literature, American Writers, English Writers, ed. Leon Edel and Mark Wilson (New York: The Library of America, 1984) 307.]

With a few minor variations, the same passage might serve equally well to characterise the even more impressive “posthumous productivity” of the almost-comparably "reserved and shade-seeking genius" J. R. R. Tolkien.

James, characteristically, saw the issue as centring on the proper limits of curiosity about the private life of an artist - a theme treated in more depth in stories such as “The Aspern Papers” (1888) or "The Private Life" (1891). As he went on to remark, the principal result of Hawthorne's executor's filial labours has been that “critics, psychologists, and gossip-mongers” have been left free to “glean amid the stubble.” Is that what Hawthorne (or Tolkien) would really have wanted? Almost certainly not.

Many of his contemporaries were deeply shocked to read what the comparatively short-lived Hawthorne had had to say about them in what he must have regarded as the safe repository of his private journal. The revelations in Tolkien's papers are not of so scandalous an order, but there can be little doubt that many reams of indifferent verse would have been consigned to the fire if he'd known they'd eventually be coming out in immense annotated editions, with their imperfections made glaringly and cringe-makingly apparent.

What's certain is that, "whatever the proper limits may be, the actual limits will be fixed only by a total exhaustion of matter." Not even the death of Christopher can halt it now. His father's legacy has long since fallen into the burning cancerous hands of the Adversary [the professional Anglo-American Academic establishment], and from that dark Mordor there is, I fear, no escape.

All we can do (I suppose) is welcome any light that has been cast on the works written in his lifetime, and try and draw a decent veil over any that should really never have seen the light of day.







Jack Ross teaches English Literature at the Albany branch of Massey University. He is one of New Zealand’s leading literary critics, as well as a poet, novelist, short story writer and translator. Visit his blog at http://mairangibay.blogspot.com.


(24/5/09)


Scoop Review of Books (16/6/09)
[Reprinted from: The Imaginary Museum (24/5/09)]

[3661 wds]






Thursday

Is there a future for the poetry blog? (2009)



Murray Edmond, ed.: Ka Mate Ka Ora

Is There a Future for the Poetry Blog?



    Most people’s response to the term “Poetry Blog” is to think of it as an electronic notebook where you post poems as you write them. And that’s certainly a practical use of the medium. I can’t help feeling, though, that it doesn’t really fully exploit the existence of abundant, flexible, easily-accessible (and indexable) free space on the Internet.

    What’s more, there are a number of still-contentious copyright issues over whether an editor – or competition judge – might not perceive these online postings as “prior publication,” especially if your blog’s freely available. How can this not be regarded as publication (= making public), albeit self-publication, in fact?

    So what other uses can be found for the poetry blog?

    The facilities freely on offer include:
    • static images
    • hyperlinks
    • sound or video files

    With these at your disposal, you can easily illustrate your poems with appropriate images, link to other sites with analogous material, or post clips of yourself or others reading or performing. In short, the interactive electronic performance poem is now no more of an unattainable dream than home-movies in the days of Super-8.

    My own further suggestions for simple, practical uses of the of the average blog would include:

  1. The discussion forum

  2. This can be illustrated by the following post:
    http://mairangibay.blogspot.com/2006/08/coromandel.html
    on my own blog The Imaginary Museum
    http://mairangibay.blogspot.com/

    Matt Harris, a Creative Writing-teaching colleague, sent me an email outlining a class discussion he’d had of one of my poems. The students had a number of queries about it, which I tried to answer as best I could. This in its turn sparked a certain amount of comment from other readers of the blog. One (Olivia Macassey) remarked of my rather laissez-faire attitude towards warring interpretations:
    I'm reminded of how, when I was in high school, everyone liked to do their art projects on this one particular NZ artist because he always told students they could say whatever they wanted about his work and he would back them up.

    All in all, it seemed to show how comments can grow to dwarf the original blog entry.

  3. The translation workshop

  4. The Internet may be the ideal medium for poetic translation (or transformation – whichever you prefer). The existence of abundant linguistic resources online (complete foreign language texts / line-by-line cribs for classic authors) can help you flesh out your version of a poem with the aid of a few judicious hyperlinks.

    In the case of Ovid, for example, I was able to justify my rather free interpretation of some of his exile poems, “Ovid in Otherworld”:
    http://ovidius-naso.blogspot.com/2008/04/ovid-in-otherworld.html
    by providing a link (first) to a complete Latin text:
    http://www.thelatinlibrary.com/ovid.html
    then to Tony Kline’s complete, literal, freely-downloadable translation of the whole of Ovid:
    http://www.tonykline.co.uk/PITBR/Latin/Ovidexilehome.htm

    I myself found that the perils of thus encountering one of your own heroes online cannot be underestimated, when I posted a series of Paul Celan translations with a mini-essay attempting to justify some of the freer contrasts and juxtapositions I’d permitted myself:
    http://mairangibay.blogspot.com/2007/03/meeting-paul-celan.html

    It came as a bit of a surprise to receive, within days, the following comment from Pierre Joris, one of the most eminent commentators on Celan’s work:
    Maybe I have spent too much time these last 40 years thinking about Celan & translating his work, & maybe Celan's work has been too essential for my own writing for me to have a detached view on this, but the association of PC with Britney Spears makes me shudder ...

    It was even more interesting, though, to see how quickly others waded into the debate. It wasn’t vital to me (or, I’m sure, to Pierre Joris) to win the exchange – what was important was to expound the reasoning behind so apparently frivolous a montage as that of Britney Spears with Paul Celan.

  5. The reprinted editorial or review

  6. How many people actually read poetry magazines nowadays? And yet they’re still seen as the principal way of establishing a reputation in the field.

    A lot of unsung work goes into keeping this archipelago of specialised print-outlets in existence. Most poets must have worked on one at one time or another – others have gone further, developing an almost missionary zeal for helping out beginners with judicious editorial advice and encouragement.

    There doesn’t seem to me to be any harm in posting your own editorials or reviews online after they’ve appeared in a magazine. After all, if the views you were outlining were worth putting in print in the first place, why shouldn’t they reach the far larger audience accessible on the Internet? I’d venture to suggest, in fact, that far fewer volumes of reprinted essays and reviews will be required in future.

    Long-meditated, carefully-revised books such as T. S. Eliot’s The Sacred Wood (1920) or Wallace Stevens’ The Necessary Angel (1951) will always retain their value, but I doubt many would dispute that far too many volumes of tarted-up prefaces and reviews have been pumped out in the past, when the best of their contents could simply have been posted online.

    At any rate, that was the reasoning I followed when I put up the editorial for my guest issue of Landfall [214: Open House (2007], supplementing it with a Poetry NZ essay in which I’d enlarged on some of the same themes:
    http://mairangibay.blogspot.com/2007/08/landfall-214.html

    Once again, it was interesting to see how many comments this inspired. Some points were more obscure than I’d meant to make them; others, however, came across loud and clear.

    Rightly or wrongly, I felt it was a timely essay. Whether others agree is up to them. What’s best about the Poetry Blog is how it can reflect the democracy of the web. You can measure the success of a site by the number of hits it receives, but that’s a simplistic criterion. What I like about the internet is the virtually limitless number of specialised – but non-exclusive – interest groups it can accommodate.

    Surely that’s an attractive enough picture to justify this thousand words?



(10/1-6/2/09)

Colloquium: "1,000 Words or a Picture: Could Poetry be a Contemporary Art?" Ka Mate Ka Ora #7 (2009): 26-29.
[Available at: http://www.nzepc.auckland.ac.nz/kmko/07/ka_mate07_ross.asp]

[1000 wds]


Ka Mate Ka Ora 7 (2009)