Gnomes and Fairies

[jallanite]

Any author may use any word to describe any fantasy race. Tolkien dropped fairy as a synonym for elf because he felt that its use by Victorian fantasy writers, principally children’s writers, had somewhat spoiled the word.

Tolkien also refers to the use of fairies by Shakespeare and Michael Drayton in particular.

I remember as a child not distinguishing clearly fairy and angel, not noticing in particular that angels in pictures had bird wings while fairies had insect wings. But fairies might be diminutive or human-sized while elves were always diminutive in the books I read. Also fairies were generally female while elves were male. The word gnome was usually usually not clearly distinguished from elf. Santa Claus had as assistants elves and gnomes.

I of course gradually learned better.

So I don’t recall when I first read The Hobbit as a child being particularly surprised by Tolkien’s human-sized, wingless elves. I may have then imagined Tolkien’s elves as being taller than Tolkien’s hobbits but shorter than human beings. I don’t remember exactly.

Later I recall a talk with my father who knew of my enthusiasm for The Lord of the Rings and read Fellowship to understand it. He did not like the book at all, being put off by the constant appearance of little folk: hobbits and elves. I remember explaining to him that Tolkien’s Elves were human-sized, not small.

That Tolkien dropped the word fairy and the word fay after The Book of Lost Tales makes full sense to me. Tolkien knew that fairy was a corruption of French Faërie, meaning the realm of the fées. And the French feminine noun fée came from the Latin word fata, taken as a feminine noun although it was in fact the neuter plural of the Latin word fatum, past participle of the infinitive fari ‘to speak’ meaning ‘thing spoken, decision, decree’ and used to mean ‘prophetic declaration, prediction’, hence ‘destiny, fate’. Better to use the Germanic word elf which is not known to be a corruption of a corruption.

Still, Tolkien’s word quendi for the original name of the Elves was said by him to mean ‘speakers’ which may reflect the genuine etymology of fée.

Gnome is even better dropped, in my opinion, as gnome is a known invented word of Paracelsus and is used in fairy tales and common use mostly for beings of the Dwarf type, hence the use of gnom for Dwarf in the Russian translations. See https://www.google.cca/search?q=gnom...w=1200&bih=740 .

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by jallanite

Still, Tolkien’s word quendi for the original name of the Elves was said by him to mean ‘speakers’ which may reflect the genuine etymology of [I]fée.

Possibly, but it's a pretty logical thing to have a name that reflects the ability to speak. If you are the first species that can speak and understand that it's the first species that can speak, I see no reason for them not to boast the fact. As a real-life example, one of the two main theories for the origins of the root slav, slavyane is slovo: word, so slavyane are people who speak with words (Wikipedia has a nice page about it, but sadly I don't think this one has an English version). Surely Quendi are no worse.

[jallanite]

I agree with you. I posted only that quendi “may reflect the genuine etymology of fée.” The word may was very intentional.

A somewhat imperfect English translation of your link is available at http://translate.google.ca/translate...BD&prev=search . Thanks for providing the link. It has more information than the English version of Wikipedia at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavs#D...he_early_Slavs .

[Mister Underhill]

Interesting thread!

So I have this theory that names and words in fiction -- especially fantasy and sci-fi -- are far more important to the overall effect of the fiction than is generally recognized. Take J.K. Rowling. My theory is that her most prodigious gift, and her most important talent in terms of accounting for her outrageous success, is her Dickensian flair for names. Muggle. Hogwarts. Dumbledore. Severus Snape. The list goes on and on (and on). Names have power. There is nothing quite like the perfect name for a thing. A Christmas Carol is a great story, but I wonder if it would be as enduring without those names. Ebenezer Scrooge. Likewise Sherlock Holmes.

I think the most important word in Tolkien is probably hobbit. In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit. Great word. It's most readers' introduction to the professor and Middle-earth. If it were The Gnome ("In a hole in the ground there lived a gnome."), I don't know, man. There is strong magic in the exact right word.

"Gnome" to me conjures a much different set of associations than "elf". Garden gnomes have been with us for quite some time apparently, per Wikipedia. That's probably the primary association there. "Elf" on the other hand has a more variable feel. Of course I grew up in the 70s so it's hard to say how much the Professor's elves had already impacted the associations connected with that word. Nowadays it's inextricably bound up with Tolkien-influence.

But for me, aesthetically, even "elf" I'm not wild about. I've always had a bit of a standoffish relationship with elves, but it never occurred to me to wonder if maybe it was simply because they were called elves.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Mister Underhill

So I have this theory that names and words in fiction -- especially fantasy and sci-fi -- are far more important to the overall effect of the fiction than is generally recognized. Take J.K. Rowling. My theory is that her most prodigious gift, and her most important talent in terms of accounting for her outrageous success, is her Dickensian flair for names. Muggle. Hogwarts. Dumbledore. Severus Snape.

I agree, though I think Rowling has a tendency toward spoilers with the names (d'ya think a guy named Lupin might have something to do with wolves, or Sirius could be connected with dogs? ).

Originally Posted by Mister Underhill

I think the most important word in Tolkien is probably hobbit. In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit. Great word. It's most readers' introduction to the professor and Middle-earth. If it were The Gnome ("In a hole in the ground there lived a gnome."), I don't know, man. There is strong magic in the exact right word.

When I think on it, hobbit has been known to be for so long that it's merely another word. I can't conceive of how those reading about Bilbo when that book was first released might have taken it. I've read ideas that it conjures in a child's mind rabbit, reinforced by the fact that Bilbo lives in a hole, but I don't recall ever thinking that.

Originally Posted by Mister Underhill

"Gnome" to me conjures a much different set of associations than "elf". Garden gnomes have been with us for quite some time apparently, per Wikipedia. That's probably the primary association there. "Elf" on the other hand has a more variable feel. Of course I grew up in the 70s so it's hard to say how much the Professor's elves had already impacted the associations connected with that word. Nowadays it's inextricably bound up with Tolkien-influence.

Gnome I will admit, now is even more tainted than before thanks to advertising. However, I can see Gil-galad handing out brochures with coupons to Aldarion to give to his countrymen.

[Alfirin]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

I agree, though I think Rowling has a tendency toward spoilers with the names (d'ya think a guy named Lupin might have something to do with wolves, or Sirius could be connected with dogs? ).

Not to mention Fenrir Greyback (with a first name like Fenrir, he more or less HAS to be the chief werewolf) Or Xenophilias Lovegood, he had to be a collector of curiosities (Xenophilias, "Love of the Strange/Foreign")

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Alfirin

Not to mention Fenrir Greyback (with a first name like Fenrir, he more or less HAS to be the chief werewolf) Or Xenophilias Lovegood, he had to be a collector of curiosities (Xenophilias, "Love of the Strange/Foreign")

Not to mention Professor Sprout.

[Mister Underhill]

I have always been a no-spoilers kinda guy, but I must say over the years I've seen the commonly understood definition of a spoiler creep to almost absurd lengths. The color of the new Batman costume, for an example I've seen debated, is decidedly not what I'd consider a spoiler.

To the matter at hand, Rowling, after all, wants you to connect Sirius to the black dog that seems to be haunting Harry. I don't think Lupin's lycanthropy is a huge twist or anything -- it's more like: What is Snape up to and is he responsible somehow? Besides, she probably made a reasonable assumption that a fair portion of her audience would lack the grounding to make the connections in many of those cases. In the parlance of our times, they're more easter eggs than spoilers, methinks. But, you know, your mileage may vary.

I didn't really mean to spark a debate on the finer points of Rowling, but those points do speak to this question of the names of things, the vocabulary employed. Raiding and tweaking ancient or unfamiliar (to the presumed audience) languages and traditions is a time-honored method for inventing names, one that is often preferable to pure invention. We've all suffered through the apostrophe-laden creations of lesser sci-fi and fantasy writers. Sometimes a familiar word or name that's employed in a new context is spot on -- when Lucas made force into The Force, he tapped a deep vein.

Tolkien obviously borrowed names liberally. For me one of the things that makes it work is that we are given to understand that elf or dwarf are rough English translations for the real word. The old translator conceit, cover for many sins. Still, I think if Tolkien could have had it back, he would've renamed the old trio of Bert, Tom, and William, arguably the most discordant naming element in the Legendarium.

EDIT: Whoops, cross-posted with Inzila.

[Tar-Jêx]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

Gnome I will admit, now is even more tainted than before thanks to advertising. However, I can see Gil-galad handing out brochures with coupons to Aldarion to give to his countrymen.

Sounds like the next Air New-Zealand commercial.