![]() |
![]() |
Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
![]() |
#11 | |
A Mere Boggart
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: under the bed
Posts: 4,737
![]() ![]() |
Quote:
But yes, it is also not real, because as anyone with a rural background will know, it's a harsh environment. In my childhood I saw an elderly couple living in abject poverty, sharing a room in a beautiful, yet almost derelict, farmhouse with the chickens; today the poverty might be exemplified by the fact that vegetables are harvested by asylum seekers who live in mobile homes because nobody else will do the work for such poor wages. Yet what is the real countryside to me? As did Tolkien, I left the rural community for an urban life and like him I yearn for the past, but it is always the idyllic past. It could only be that, as why would I yearn for a life that promised me no work and endless isolation? In The Shire, Tolkien used his own yearning and nostalgia to create a place that was vividly real, that readers could recognise, yet a place that was real in terms of nostalgia, of something 'lost'. The Shire is like a 'myth' of the English village. Compared to the rural existence lived out in Thomas Hardy's works, which are often mistakenly seen as representing some rural ideal (when they are in fact unremittingly bleak in places) the Hobbits live in relative luxury. It was essential, too, to have this perfect place which the Hobbits would return to, and which they could work to 'save'. Not only was it Tolkien's own perfect place, but it needed to be the perfect place on Middle earth we could both dream of and believe we too could live in. Tolkien also created mythical Elven realms which stun us and we yearn to see, but it is The Shire which in the end is protected and saved, while the Elven realms decline. It was The Shire which was Tolkien's own idyll, and the only idyll we could hope to aspire to, and that's why it is both real and unreal.
__________________
Gordon's alive!
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |