Protecting One's Self

[Formendacil]

Inziladun and I cross-posted in the Learning about this Website thread and we happened to respond to Pitchwife with two very similar thoughts:

Originally Posted by Inziladun

As I get older, I find myself treasuring Tolkien's works all the more, and becoming rather protective. I am fearful of not heeding Gandalf's advice to Saruman, about not breaking something to discover its workings. I really have no interest now in how the books were constructed. I don't care about real or imagined symbolism. I know what I feel when I read of Tuor seeing the Great Sea for the first time, and spreading his arms as if to embrace it; or picturing Galadriel standing with Frodo in front of her Mirror, struggling with her own longing and temptation to use the Ring.

Originally Posted by Formendacil

This is a good distinction and thinking about it, I think I'm almost the complete opposite: I love to talk lore--the worldbuilding and the factoids and the gap-filling, but I have always been protective of things around literary worth and meaning where Middle-earth is concerned, but this topic has been on my mind since I re-encountered the What Breaks the Enchantment thread while looking for a link to the great Canonicity thread, and setting aside the self-analysis of why I resist talking about the MEANING of Tolkien's literature (to me or anyone else), I think it is very much accurate to distinguish between the two.

So, here's a thread about that.

Now, threads evolve, so I can't say where this is going to go, but after reading through a couple pages of the What Breaks the Enchantment thread, I know sort of what I'm not exactly looking to talk about: this isn't thread isn't aiming to be about OUGHT; it's about IS.

In other words, I think the big back-and-forth about that thread ended up boiling down to how a reader responded to Tolkien and, since it was about where the enchantment (the willing suspension of disbelief) failed, it devolved into a question of whether it was the author or the reader's fault it had failed. And, don't get me wrong--it's a good thread and I kind of want to revisit some aspects of it, once I get through to the end of rereading it, but spurred on by the "protective coincidence," I want to look at something similar, it a bit reversed.

While the specifics may and probably do differ, Inziladun and I each seem to mean by "protective" that Tolkien's works have become dear to us: it is something we seek to protect; something--at least I would say--that is a part of who we are. (A parallel could no doubt be made to how the Ringbearers feel about the Ring, but hopefully this lacks the downsides.)

In my own case, I remember that a visceral part of my dislike for the movies and part of my hesitancy at joining any sort of fan community in the days before I opened up to the Barrow-downs, was that it impinged on and seemed to threaten what Middle-earth meant to me. It is at once home and family and part of the furniture of my mind. Thinking of the "what breaks the enchantment?" question is hard because, well, I can't see anything in Middle-earth objectively.

Obviously, I overcame the hesitancy about joining the 'Downs and I'll even say that the PJ movies didn't end up ruining anything and might even not be bad movies, but that core impulse beneath of fearing to expose Middle-earth to too much scrutiny because it would be exposing me to scrutiny hasn't necessarily gone away. Arguably, I've just become better at deflecting it.

An example of this in the wild--as opposed to in my head--would be about a year ago, when there were several memes taking Gandalf's words "...so do all who live to see such times, yet it is not for them to decide... etc." popping up across Facebook and it was not just a case of applicability, of "these words in this book seem to apply to this situation," but a case of "these words are familiar from these books and because they are a strength for those characters, they are a strength for [INSERT READER HERE]."

This isn't a unique issue to Tolkien. There's a lot be said, for example, about the Star Wars fans who were so torn over The Last Jedi being torn because the new interpretation of the movies clashed in some way with the internalised vision of the Star Wars timeline that had become a part of their selves in years before. But I do think Tolkien has inspired a greater amount of this sort of protectionism because his work is as good as it is: there are fewer reasons NOT to imbibe it into one's self if it is the sort of thing you like.

I don't know if all that counts as a topic-starter or if it's more of a single-post statement, but where better to talk about the conflation myself and Middle-earth than on the 'Downs?

[Boromir88]

Originally Posted by Formendacil

Obviously, I overcame the hesitancy about joining the 'Downs and I'll even say that the PJ movies didn't end up ruining anything and might even not be bad movies, but that core impulse beneath of fearing to expose Middle-earth to too much scrutiny because it would be exposing me to scrutiny hasn't necessarily gone away. Arguably, I've just become better at deflecting it.

This is interesting and thinking about it, I would say I'm the complete opposite, because of an experience I actually had today!

So I don't coach quiz teams anymore but sometimes when I have a Saturday free I will help read for tournaments and matches. When the season starts winding down I always try to help at the TRASH tournament, because it's fun and shenanigans and all pop culture questions. Also, guaranteed to be a few Tolkien-related or movie questions in there.

During academic events, the players have to use their school name and real names, but during TRASH events, they make up whatever aliases and team names they want. Team "A Terrible Crossover" had

Player 1: Spongebob
Player 2: George Costanza
Player 3: Rimuru (have no idea what that's from)
Player 4: Dernhelm

And here I am on Google meet, eyes lit up, grinning like a nutcase, because I hear "Who is this person? He's odd and like smiling from ear to ear" Then a "shhh, we're not on mute."

I jump in explaining: "No, it's quite alright. I am odd and I don't care because I'm just super happy. Whoever has the alias Dernhelm has made my day. I don't care what else happens the rest of the day, that is a wonderful Lord of the Rings shout out. You have made me a happy camper, because I don't think Eowyn is ever called Dernhelm in the movies, which means people are still reading the books. I'm grinning like a fool because I'm resisting the temptation to shout Death!"

[A Little Green]

Originally Posted by Form

In my own case, I remember that a visceral part of my dislike for the movies and part of my hesitancy at joining any sort of fan community in the days before I opened up to the Barrow-downs, was that it impinged on and seemed to threaten what Middle-earth meant to me. It is at once home and family and part of the furniture of my mind. Thinking of the "what breaks the enchantment?" question is hard because, well, I can't see anything in Middle-earth objectively.

Obviously, I overcame the hesitancy about joining the 'Downs and I'll even say that the PJ movies didn't end up ruining anything and might even not be bad movies, but that core impulse beneath of fearing to expose Middle-earth to too much scrutiny because it would be exposing me to scrutiny hasn't necessarily gone away. Arguably, I've just become better at deflecting it.

I like your introduction to this thread in general, but especially this part sounded very familiar. I'm very much the same - my first instinct is always to be protective, sometimes even possessive, of the stories that matter to me. I was in school when the PJ movies came out, and still remember how uncomfortable I felt watching younger kids fencing with sticks and playing Aragorn. It was like something private had suddenly been made public. I think I still have that same instinct, even if I've (hopefully) grown up a little since then. For instance, I'd still never call myself a "fan" of anything, and the idea of declaring to belong to a "fandom" sounds entirely too public and partisan to me. In a way, I've made my peace with being quite an introverted and private person; even in this culture where you're supposed to share everything, it really is okay not to.

That said, I do love Boro's example too. At the risk of sounding cheesy, the Downs has been a great lesson for me in that other people sharing the same interests is not a threat, but a chance to develop incredible friendships.

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by A Little Green

For instance, I'd still never call myself a "fan" of anything, and the idea of declaring to belong to a "fandom" sounds entirely too public and partisan to me. In a way, I've made my peace with being quite an introverted and private person; even in this culture where you're supposed to share everything, it really is okay not to.

I think there are people who would laugh at the idea that I am a Tolkien fan introvert who doesn't want to share things, since I invariably get known by about three facts anywhere I go: I'm the Catholic guy, I'm the Lord of the Rings guy, and I'm the LEGO guy--but this, yes!

Mind you, I can't really say that Middle-earth have ever been an ENTIRELY private preserve of enjoyment: I indoctrinated my next-oldest brother into the books and as we are the oldest siblings in a large family, there's a whole batch of demi-Formendacils who have always had an up-close sharing in this.

And I think you hit the nail on the head saying you don't like calling yourself a "fan." I recognise that impulse immediately, but I don't think I've ever had an articulation for why, but the connection here between "being a fan" and "being public" feels exactly right.

Originally Posted by A Little Green

That said, I do love Boro's example too. At the risk of sounding cheesy, the Downs has been a great lesson for me in that other people sharing the same interests is not a threat, but a chance to develop incredible friendships.

This is very true, and Boro's example is an excellent counterpoint: the Tolkien extrovert to our Tolkien introverts (and a reminder, maybe, that these things never come unalloyed): when I encounter mentions of Middle-earth in "the wild," I am invariably excited. That said, my first instinct on having The Lord of the Rings brought up is to dissemble and only casually reveal how much I know/love those books, but that might be a case of some budding maturity, since people generally aren't interested in me establishing my Tolkien knowledge bona fides as though everyone I met needed to discover I am the The Most Knowledgable One™.

But it's also because you don't bare your soul to complete strangers. And the Downs is both an example and a counter-example here, because, well, you AREN'T all complete strangers (and there is still a pseudo-anonymity against those of you (and the Inktomi bots) who are).

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

I do very little in that respect.

No matter how infuriating they could be, I also feel very blessed having seen the PJ Movies. I mean there are so much good stuff (and as I have said elsewhere) such good casting choices. The awesomeness of Galadriel's opening monologue has come at a price though...

I have a very hard time remembering how I used to visual Middle-earth and it's inhabitants. Every now and then I can recall a much more aged, almost wizard like, Théoden, but most other things seem lost to me.

I guess this is the reason I am very hesitant to watch adaptation of bellowed books. Obviously I almost always give in and watch the damn thing...

[Kuruharan]

Originally Posted by A Little Green

For instance, I'd still never call myself a "fan" of anything, and the idea of declaring to belong to a "fandom" sounds entirely too public and partisan to me.

-and-

Originally Posted by Formendacil

And I think you hit the nail on the head saying you don't like calling yourself a "fan." I recognise that impulse immediately, but I don't think I've ever had an articulation for why, but the connection here between "being a fan" and "being public" feels exactly right.

The word "fan" given the wide variety of things and contexts that is can be used for to me has a connotation of trivializing my interest in Tolkien (or indeed anything else).

There is also something else there that I am struggling to articulate. The word "fan" kind of hits with a note of frivolous immaturity or thoughtlessness in a way.

Of course, a sure sign of immaturity is worrying too much about it...so you can't win for losing.

I've never really thought to articulate it in this manner, but if somebody asked me to describe my attitude toward Tolkien's work, I would probably answer with a nebulous "I'm very interested in Tolkien's work." A bit vague in a way, but I think that would be the best description.

[Morsul the Dark]

With regard to being a fan of something I’d like to paraphrase a tiny bit of an article I just read. It’s behind a Patreon Paywall so I won’t post the whole thing out of respect to their work. If you want the rest look up Jeff May on patreon.

Jeff’s post is directed towards Comics fans specifically and is all about how to be a better fan.*

Do you read comics?” question.

*It usually goes one of the following ways:
“Yes, I read comics and I wish to discuss those comics with you right now and possibly in the future.” Hell yeah, new best friend!

* “No, I do not read comics, but I would like to start” with a sense of piqued curiosity.

*”No, I do not read comics” with a sense of slight shame at being called out for being some kind of nerdy imposter.

* “No, I do not read comics, ew, I am being incredibly judgy toward a stranger” with a surprising sense of derision at the idea that they would ever waste their money on something like a comic book.

So I think To put this in Tolkien Context:

Those who’ve read the books, possibly seen the movies but enjoy discussing it.

Those who’ve seen the movies and want to learn more from the books.

Those who’ve seen the movies and feel put down for not reading the books yet.

And folks that have watched the movies but think reading is too nerdy.


So while yes those in the fourth group exist and are the types of fans I feel are being talked about when talking about being protective I do think the other two types of film fans need to be considered.

I honestly don’t remember if I read the books first or joined the Downs first. I do know I saw the Fellowship first at the very least. I even remember me first introduction to LoTR it was the trailer. When Gandalf says “It wants to be Found” I was hooked, heck I just got a slight chill thinking about that line.

The point is yes there was an influx of new members from the films myself included. And while I know I’ve seen talk of “Legolas Fangirls” and strong opinions on the films I Do think this community was welcoming to those that were willing to learn about this new world opened to them.

I don’t think fans should be Protectors of their passions rather they should be Ambassadors for it.

*Jeff May’s Original Post