Read LotR before you die!

[davem]

Child

I accept what you say about Librarians not being part of the literary establishment, but this isn't a poll of what's most popular among those who frequent their libraries (I accept that LotR would come near the top of that), but of what books they think people must read. After all, I don't see any books by Terry Pratchet, Catherine Cookson, Jeffrey Archer, Jackie Collins, et al.

So, if I went into my local library & asked for a recommendation, I can assume I would be told LotR after TKaM & the Bible (I'm assuming, maybe wrongly, that they're referring to the Authorised Version for the language as opposed to the message, as this is a literary poll not a religious one). I wonder what the reason is for this recommendation, & whether it is the same in all cases - are there different reasons, different 'messages' perceived by different librarians?

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by davem

Its certainly high praise. I'm ashamed to say I haven't read either of the two above it (& only five of the others on the list) - ok, I've read most of number two in various translations, but not the whole thing.

Well you can get reading because most of those on the list are on the bookshelves in the house right now...

I think Librarians are a pretty eclectic bunch of people, ranging from the academic (of which Philip Larkin was one) to the librarian in charge of the tiny local village library who might sometimes drive the mobile library and bring the old folks their favourite Cookson novels. And the librarians you might find in our own central library might look at you with a look of distrust if you asked them anything, as they are so used to having to shift drunks out who've merely come into the library for a sleep.

As such, the list is itself quite eclectic which I'm pleased to see; it includes both classics and modern fiction and the serious and the light-hearted.

Originally Posted by Child

P.S. It's interesting to note that a number of Tolkien scholars are librarians. The first names that come to mind are Hammond and his wife who are just coming out with all the new companions and guides.

I wonder if it is the wealth of detail which attracts librarians to Tolkien? Much of their working days must be given over to arranging, classifying and searching for items so I can well imagine the attraction to a writer who has filled his work with detail waiting to be 'arranged'.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

All these polls are for is to stimulate discussion on books, and that's fine. It makes me yell to my mother about how To kill a mockingbird shouldn't be anywhere near the top.

I just can't see what it could possibly tell us. It's just a collection of popular books, sorted randomly (at least it might as well have been).

[littlemanpoet]

All Quite on the Western Front? I'll have to check that one out. Seems like it might be a rip-off of All Quiet on the Western Front, don't you think?

"Ja, Helmut, ve're on die Vestern Front hier."

"Quite, Heinz. Pass the ketchup."

But seriously folks.....

1. race and prejudice and coming of age
2. bedrock of western civilization
3. a revival of Germanic roots, as well as a good ripping yarn
4. a cautionary tale about power (which one could say about the 3 above it)
5. community versus isolation
6. gender relations in western society? (saw the film but never read the book)
7. class consciousness and breaking free of same
8. Quite. horrors of war. quite.
9. fodder for discussion of atheism versus theism? why the church is evil? :shrug:

I tried to be serious, honest. Each minor point above could be extended, of course, into its own treatise. Just my attempt at exposing what "they tell us".

[Child of the 7th Age]

I wonder if it is the wealth of detail which attracts librarians to Tolkien? Much of their working days must be given over to arranging, classifying and searching for items so I can well imagine the attraction to a writer who has filled his work with detail waiting to be 'arranged'.

Lalwende,

I have to smile.

My gut feeling is that the key must lie elsewhere rather than an "attraction to detail". I would respectfully demur on this image of our poor profession. Librarians spend no more and no less time on "detail" than folk in other walks of life. My lawyering husband devotes endless hours to learning precedents and, in the particular area in which he practices, scrutinizes mounds of federal regulations. (Truthfully, I don't know anyone worse about detail than lawyers, and there aren't a large number of them who qualify as Tolkien scholars, SpM and Mithadan excepted, of course.) Similarly, my MD friend endlessly pours over new studies to find tiny clues to help treat her patients.

Just remember that most of the people you meet in a library are not (technically) "librarians". Librarians are not so good (or perhaps less hung up?) on drawing a sharp line between themselves and their support staff than is generally true in other professions. (Certainly, professors are very careful to make sure that you don't mix up a TA and a prof.) Most of the people behind the desks are not librarians. In fact in most larger systems, librarians spend more time managing staff issues and less time on arranging, classifying or searching for items. That was certainly true in every job I held except for my very first one. Remember, too, that those librarians who tend to be professionally active and serve on this type of body are less likely to be the person in charge of a small local branch and more likely to be someone further up the food chain. (It's easier for the latter to get travel money, permission to take off, etc.)

So, if I went into my local library & asked for a recommendation, I can assume I would be told LotR after TKaM & the Bible

Davem

Oh, my goodness! I hope not. If so, they are lousy librarians. They will hopefully speak with you first to get some good idea of what you are looking for.

I can tell you though what will likely happen to these recommendations, from a purely practical point of view. The local system will probably put them out in some kind of flyer with a little blurb on each telling you what it's about, along with the call number so you can quickly find it. Then when you go to the shelf, it will not be there because everyone else has picked up the flyer and searched out the same books! I would strongly recommend you follow Lalwende's good advice and dig the copies out of your own personal bookshelves.


Littlemanpoet

I think you're definitely on to something! Since our profession has such fuzzy edges, we need some way to distinguish ourselves. We can't assume the public recognizes our credentials in the same way they might clearly acknowledge a lawyer, doctor, teacher, or social worker! Librarians are very big on lists, and we tend to be a socially active bunch. We want people to think about big social questions, and we think it's our job to urge them to go forward in that direction. Therefore, you will often see books about war, gender issues, race, class realities on such lists.

Lord of the Rings does look a bit out of place in this company. That doesn't surprise me. Often on such committee picks, snuck in among the various titles, you can identify books that are there for a totally different reason. Simply put, the people who made the list had read the book and dearly loved it. It made a personal impact on their life.

I have served on TLA/ALA committees that drew up book recommendations and have seen this kind of thing happening (though none of my committees were ever this exalted). My gut feeling is that the Lord of the Rings is there because it was a personal favorite of a substantial chunk of the committee. It's not there to teach anybody anything (despite how we love to argue moral/philosophical/relgious underpinings on this board). Rather it's a good story that the recommenders were personally fond of.

Then again, it may be there because they had the good sense to include a children's librarian on the committee, and children's librarians are notoriously fond of real stories. I really do mean this. In a world that devalues stories, children's librarians are a hidden gem.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Child

I would strongly recommend you follow Lalwende's good advice and dig the copies out of your own personal bookshelves.

Lalwende prefers short books - I've tried to get her to tackle War & Peace & Don Quixote, Burton's Anatomy of Melancholy is out of the question, & even John Crowley's Little, Big isn't on her reading list! (none of which are on the librarians list btw), so its not all one sided!

Lord of the Rings does look a bit out of place in this company. That doesn't surprise me. Often on such committee picks, snuck in among the various titles, you can identify books that are there for a totally different reason. Simply put, the people who made the list had read the book and dearly loved it. It made a personal impact on their life.

I'm not sure why you think LotR is 'out of place' on the list. Even the ones I haven't read I'm familiar with the themes of, having seen adaptations, or read synopses of, & I'd say LotR deals with many of the same issues/questions. Does it really not 'belong', & how do we know that all the others are there for different reasons?

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by Child of the 7th Age

I think you're definitely on to something! Since our profession has such fuzzy edges, we need some way to distinguish ourselves. We can't assume the public recognizes our credentials in the same way they might clearly acknowledge a lawyer, doctor, teacher, or social worker! Librarians are very big on lists, and we tend to be a socially active bunch. We want people to think about big social questions, and we think it's our job to urge them to go forward in that direction. Therefore, you will often see books about war, gender issues, race, class realities on such lists.

Hah. Proof in the pudding. In 1989 I seriously thought about becoming a librarian but was strongly discouraged on the grounds that the internet was going to do away with libraries. Talk about a prediction being off!

Originally Posted by davem

I'm not sure why you think LotR is 'out of place' on the list. Even the ones I haven't read I'm familiar with the themes of, having seen adaptations, or read synopses of, & I'd say LotR deals with many of the same issues/questions. Does it really not 'belong', & how do we know that all the others are there for different reasons?

I'm with davem on this. I hold that, along with dealing with big issues/questions in a subtle way, Tolkien has 'bedrocked' them in a resuscitation of the Germanic roots of western civilization. He made it okay to be descended culturally from Nordic/Germanic stock, regardless of how embarrassed the literati are by such roots (preferring Greek/Latin culture by comparison). I'm not sure librarians are likely to word it the way I have, but I bet they are in favor of the "good ripping yarn" (as you say, Child), but also how LotR is rooted in fairy tale, not unlike the Grimm stories.

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by davem

Lalwende prefers short books - I've tried to get her to tackle War & Peace & Don Quixote, Burton's Anatomy of Melancholy is out of the question, & even John Crowley's Little, Big isn't on her reading list! (none of which are on the librarians list btw), so its not all one sided!

Tch! So Lord of the Rings is short eh? Now, why do I need to invest time on Don Quixote when you can tell me all about it? I don't tend to 'do' reading lists as I have a memory of many years of long reading lists and enjoy what I call 'random reading'.

I always wonder how people put together such lists. Do they go on choosing 'what is good for you to read', or do they simply pick what they like? Or in some cases, do they simply go for what will impress? I suspect the latter is often the case when broadsheet newspapers such as The Observer create lists like this. It surprises me how often Ulysses turns up on these lists as I suspect most people wouldn't exactly enjoy it - I found it was more about the language rather than the story, and I often think it's a case of 'look at me, I've read Ulysses! Or I want you to think I have!'.

If I had to pick a top twenty of my favourite books it would be exactly that - my favourites. Those books that stayed in my mind and those that I can return to and enjoy reading again, and those which affected me and I was very sorry to finish.