Does LotR have cross-cultural appeal?

[Formendacil]

Culture...

That is an interesting term.

My own opinion- quite possibly a faulty one- is that while Tolkien's work heavily and deliberately draws off of his Catholic faith, seems to appeal to people of all faiths, although Christians like to claim it as their own.

However, as far as language-culture goes, I would say that you are correct in that it is limited to the speakers of the Germanic and Norse languages for its main appeal. Which would seem to be a natural extension of how it was written. it was, after all, originally a legendarium for the English- and it draws heavily off of the Norse and Germanic traditions.

I also have to wonder what role the translation plays in this... After all, the idiom and such would naturally translate more readily to another Germanic language than it would to a, for example, Latin tongue.

You mentioned that Tolkien seems to have a greater following in Spanish than in French. I wonder if this might have to do with the translators? Maybe they did a better job with Spanish...

[davem]

Originally Posted by Formendacil

I also have to wonder what role the translation plays in this... After all, the idiom and such would naturally translate more readily to another Germanic language than it would to a, for example, Latin tongue.

You mentioned that Tolkien seems to have a greater following in Spanish than in French. I wonder if this might have to do with the translators? Maybe they did a better job with Spanish...

This is an interesting point, as in the latest Mallorn (Journal of the Tolkien Society) there's an article 'Traitors & Translators: three German translations of LotR'. Apparently the latest one, by Wolfgang Krege, has taken an approach of translating the work into a contemporary German idiom, so that, for example, Sam refers to Frodo as 'Boss', rather than 'Master', &, to give some examples, Galdriel's 'Like as not,' said the Lady with a gentle laugh.' becomes something like 'Sure!' said the Lady, giggling softly.', Faramir's 'It may even help the Master you love.' becomes equivalent to 'It may even be to the advantage of the Master you're so concerned for.' & Sam's 'O wake up Frodo, me dear, me dear.' is 'translated' as 'O wake up Frodo, damn it all, wake up!'

On the wider point, Tolkien was attempting to supply a mythology for England, to replace the one we had lost. I've said this before, but I've always been slightly surprised that non-English readers even get the story, as its always seemed so very English to me. A pleasant surprise, of course, but odd, to me, nonetheless....

[Lalwendë]

For myself, I was always surprised at the strong response Tolkien's work received from committed Christians as it has aways seemed to me to resonate more with pre-Christain culture and belief. It's been said before, but there is a distinct lack of churches, priests and rituals within Middle-earth. Those rituals which we do see are simple, such as Faramir's company looking to the West as a form of 'grace', and this could also signify something to do with honouring ancestors from Numenor.

Tolkien's work also reveres the landscape; those who work with it are considered to be 'good' while those who work against it are not. Creatuires such as the Ents are often compared with older cultures' ideas such as The Green Man and tree spirits, and though carvings of The Green Man are often seen in churches, this is most defintely a pre-Christian symbol. Tolkien seems to direct us towards reverence for all living creatures, including the living landscape rather than rverence of humans.

Such beliefs are still strong in the world today. Not only the 'west' has followers of Pagan faiths, but these are present in the indigenous cultures of Australasia, Africa and the Americas. In Japan, Shinto reveres the ancestor.

I'd say that Tolkien's work does appeal to people other than European or European descent Christians, for want of a better term. The other thing is that with a forum like this, none of us can tell what colour the other person is, so how do we know if we are predominantly of White descent or not?

The question of whether good translations are available is particularly relevant, as English is a difficult language to work with, and Tolkien makes great use of both archaic and idiomatic English, so a good translation must be difficult to find (and possibly also expensive?). Bearing this in mind, there is another issue, and that is whether in certain countries English is the preferred foreign language to be taught at school.

I do knwo that there are indeed a lot of French LotR fans, but the French are as protective about their native language as the English are and so I'm not at all surprised that we don't have many French members, as they will probably prefer a french language site. Whether this holds true for French Canadians (if that's the right term) I don't know. If I had a different native language than English and there were a lot of good quality sites where my native tongue was used, then I should prefer to use those no doubt, as it would simply be easier.

As to cultural appeal, I'm lost on what to say for the moment, but if the films had a worldwide appeal then wouldn;t the books have this too?

[Novnarwen]

Davem said

On the wider point, Tolkien was attempting to supply a mythology for England, to replace the one we had lost. I've said this before, but I've always been slightly surprised that non-English readers even get the story, as its always seemed so very English to me. A pleasant surprise, of course, but odd, to me, nonetheless....

Very English? Define, please…?

To be honest, I’m surprised by your comment. If Tolkien indeed created a mythology for England, I see no reason why it should be a great surprise to see non-English ‘get the story’. I mean, look at Greek Mythology, Roman mythology, Egyptian mythology, Norse mythology etc. etc. (you name it!). I don’t speak Greek (and I probably never will), but that doesn’t keep me from ‘getting the story’. I don’t see how it should. Unless the translation is poor, or there’s no translation at all, I don’t see a reason why I shouldn’t get and make out the main points of the story.

I think the problem lies in the ‘very English’. How can anything be so ‘Very English, very Greek, very Roman, etc’ that people ‘outside’ have no chance in understanding it? Do you sincerely believe that it is, or should be, impossible for an ‘outsider’ to understand, in this case, a text that is written for a specific purpose and nation etc.? (What about people who are multi-cultural and living in England, or in any other English speaking country?)

To a certain extent, I believe that different groups of people (national, continental…) will have different ways of understanding a text, in this case Tolkien’s works. This however, doesn’t mean that people from cultures that differ greatly from the English/European/Scandinavian won’t understand the story altogether. A point I would like to bring up, even though I know it’s a bit off topic, is what lies in the expressions ‘understand’, and ‘get the story’ (as you used.)

In my opinion, to understand a story means that you’re fully able to make out the point(s) of the story and thus be able to for example reflect around it. To ‘get a story’… well… I see that as an other ‘thing’. I don’t know if you’re suggesting Tolkien’s works to be allegories, but by using this expression, I can’t avoid think that you are. Is there only one way of ‘getting the story’, and is this only possible if you, in this case, belong to a culture of which the author has been inspired, or live in the country in which the story was intended for?

This is where, again, the interpretation of each individual come in. Though a person from for example an Asian country interprets the story a little bit differently than a native British, it doesn’t mean that he/she hasn't gotten the story altogether. (In fact, he/she might interpret it the same way a Brit would do! Is a Brits’ interpretation, understanding, of a Story by an English author more ‘correct’ than an Asian’s?)

It’s perhaps natural that culture, religion etc. play a part in the process that takes place in your mind when reading a book. In other words, these factors can influence your reading. Due to this, a book can seem less appealing to some groups of people, but I honestly believe that this is not the case. As someone mentioned before, language barriers can be one of the reasons why Tolkien hasn’t reached the whole world’s population. I also think that Developing Countries, which are situated mostly in Asia and Africa, don’t have the same accessibility to books, at least not books from abroad, as Industrial Countries. I believe many, who have not discovered the magic of LoTR and find themselves belonging to cultures and countries far, far away from the origin of the book, will find it very appealing, if they had just had the chance to read it…


Edit: Cross posted with Lawendë

[davem]

Novnarwen

I meant that to me the settings - particularly the parts set in the Shire, & the Hobbits themselves seem so English that I've always been surprised that non-English readers can relate to them so deeply. When I read a book or watch a movie set in another country/culture there's always for me a feeling of 'distance' - sometimes very small, but there nonetheless.

I think you've taken from my post a kind of claim of 'ownership' on my part - that I'm saying 'Tolkien belongs to we English & you have no right to him' - I'm not saying that at all. I said it was a pleasant surprise to find that so many non English readers have taken Tolkien to their hearts. I do wonder, though, whether non English readers experien ce the work in the same way as English readers. For instance, I've grown up in an area parts of which are still reminiscent of the Shire - ''woods, fields, little rivers' - so I've been able to wander in places which strongly reminded me of the books, & I've encountered people very like the Hobbits. So I have that connection with the books that people living in a different landscape wouldn't have.

Its just me - that was/is the feeling I've always had. To be honest, if it comes to a knowledge of & insight into Tolkien, I'd have to defer to many non English people - Some on the Downs, others authors & experts like Verlyn Flieger for example.

And I'm sure that Tolkien fans living in Oxfordshire/Berkshire might feel it surprising that a Yorkshireman like myself could understand & love Tolkien's work as much as I do ...

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

I do knwo that there are indeed a lot of French LotR fans, but the French are as protective about their native language as the English are and so I'm not at all surprised that we don't have many French members, as they will probably prefer a french language site. Whether this holds true for French Canadians (if that's the right term) I don't know. If I had a different native language than English and there were a lot of good quality sites where my native tongue was used, then I should prefer to use those no doubt, as it would simply be easier.

French-Canadians...

Yes, that is the correct term.

Ontopic, I think you might be closer to the mark in attributing it to the protectiveness of the French culture than to the merits of the translator- although the translator must bear some of the burden.

After all, the translator has far-reaching powers where the works he/she translates are concerned. If done well, the original feeling of the work will be made available to readers otherwise unable to enjoy it. Done poorly, it discredits not only the translation, but likely the original work as well.

[HerenIstarion]

You may well be aware, as I've mentioned the fact in other threads and places, that I've first read Tolkien in Russian. And though the Hobbit translation (by Nina Rakhmanova) had distinctive taste of 'Englishness' about it, the case with LoTR was different - Muraviev and Kistakovsky (best, in my opinion, despite numerous blunders, Russian translation) obviously tried, and succeded in a way, to make LoTR 'russian' cultural phenomenon. The language is very 'living', for lack of better term, and at times it bears similarity to Russian 'bilina's (thing approximately correlative with Svandinavian 'saga's)

I ascribe to this very translation (it being the first as well) the popularity Tolkien has in Russia. It subsided of late, but there certainly was a phenomenon known as 'Tolkien craze', which burst out (and was mainly manned with young people - teenagers main part, but up to people in their 'late tweens') by the end of 80s, following publication of 'short version' translation of LoTR in 1982 and first full translation in 1988. There was much fuss about it in Russian media in 90's, there was even an insulting term coined (tolkienutiy - roughly, 'banged on the head with Tolkien'), but it was (and to a point, still is) wide and vast movement of RPG players and people involved in arts (poetry, music, costumes etc). Media accused participants of Tolkien movement of being anything from escapists (which they, up to a point, were - given intensity of social changes and collapse of the whole governmental system and istability in all post Soviet Union space in the 90s) to sword-armed maniacs and satanists. Orthodox Church was also divided in evaluating of the phenomenon - those priests who, presumably, only gathered some bits of media fuss accussed the movement of betraying 'orthodox values' for the sake of 'faulty' or even 'heretical' 'Western values', but there were actual priests in the movement itself.

Some occultists and 'would-be-extrasensors' and 'wizards' (number of which grew like mushrooms after the rain in aftermath of collapse of mainly materialistic state) tried to exploit Tolkien as 'visionary' giving glimpses of 'spiritual world' as well.

One of my dearest ambitions in 90s was to go to Moscow (I would not have been allowed to go alone, seeing as I was too young, and we lacked means to afford the proper trip) and participate in gatherings which took place in Neskuchny Garden every Thursday, which 'tolkienists' (the term 'tolkienutiy's' applied to themselves) termed Eglador. Several years latere there was much disquiet, as Eglador turned by and by to become what is now known (or was known in 2000-2001, I don't know if all activity hasn't diet out by now) as 'Poganishe' (Foul Place) - as majority of original members dropped out and instead of poetry-contest/musical/criticism/discussion gatherings Neskuchny showed tendency of having drunk youngsters impersonating orks and 'dark forces' on Thursdays.

Intensity of 'Tolkien Craze' during the 90s was such that there was actually a book written 'from another side's point of view' (the feat David Brin only toyed with the idea of) - somoene under the name of 'Nienna' published book named 'Dark Wings of the Wind' (if my memory is not failing me), which is supposed to be Silmarillion from Melkor's position.

Again, intensity was such that another chap, Nick Perumov, has written the whole series of so-called 'original' books, the first of which is a feeble essay in writing 'what happened next', as the hero is the hobbit and the events take place some 3 centuries after the War of the Rings. He made a real mess-up of it, though, as he tried to become more original.

There is quite a number of sites dedicated to Tolkien in Russia. One of them I know of (Arda-na-kulichkax) has a number of people who participated in original Tolkien movement, and grew up to become real good poets and writers and scholars (basing number of doctorates on Tolkien, even).

I suppose the release of the movies revived the interest, but I have no data to account for what happened over last several years. What I know for sure it there is not so much fuss in media about 'escapists' and 'satanists' of late.

As for Georgia, the Hobbit was just published some two or three years ago, the LoTR was not translated ever, and the movies where just movies. Not much of what should be called 'craze', rather number of people, mainly from what maybe called intelligentsia, with good reading Russian infested with some of Russian craze, but nothing wide-spread. Tolkien was lucky personally for me, as my examiner in University entry examination was in love too, and I was lucky we've found it out, but that's another story.


PS I promised not to evaluate, but based on my memory of once made 'Map of the Barrowdowns', there were no members from Muslim countries. But I know, based on first hand experience, that there are Tolkien lovers in Azerbaijan. But again, as in Georgia, those are mainly people with good reading Russian catching the infection from Russian craze

[Lyta_Underhill]

I meant that to me the settings - particularly the parts set in the Shire, & the Hobbits themselves seem so English that I've always been surprised that non-English readers can relate to them so deeply. When I read a book or watch a movie set in another country/culture there's always for me a feeling of 'distance' - sometimes very small, but there nonetheless.

There are some people who read books set in their own country who still feel that sense of 'distance,' though, even though the work be that of one's own countryman. I can't understand the urban culture, as I live deep in the country. City folk who visit my area get bored really quick; that's because they haven't learned to enjoy talking to trees! For the trees, this would be an urban center! And, as a result of this country slowness, I think the residents here become like Hobbits, slow to change, set in their ways, thoughts and beliefs. Of course, they speak with more of a twang than any Hobbit of the Shire ever would. And if you live in the South long enough, you can tell a Georgia twang from an Alabama twang from a Tennessee twang from a Kentucky twang, etc. etc. just like Sam could tell that another Hobbit must be from a suspicious part of the Shire (i.e., not Hobbiton!).

But none of this could have been part of Tolkien's original vision for the Shire. It is all applicability and not authorial intention. I think I would be appalled to hear Galadriel say "Sure!" or think that Sam is saying "damn it all" to awaken Frodo, as if he were having to shake him frantically out of sleep; so we lose a little more of authorial intention and the applicability is diluted due to awkward translation.

As a matter cross cultural comparison, I've recently become enamoured of a Japanese cartoon called "Keroro Gunso," translated roughly as "Sergeant Frog." The only place I can get the later episodes in English language version is from Hong Kong. So I watch this obviously hilarious anime that is fraught with bright Japanese characters across the screen that the folks in Hong Kong didn't feel worth translating and watch the horrendous translated subtitles at the bottom of the screen and wonder what I'm missing. However, I still get the main idea, and the situational comedy is still quite amusing! I get the sense I'm missing something, but I also enjoy what I do get out of it. Obviously, there are pieces that are so Japanese that I will never understand them, especially through the Hong Kong filter. But I still keep coming back for more, and it is my favorite current show of any type (albeit I don't have regular television!) But I'm sure I don't experience it in the same way as a Japanese person can, they having access to it in its original language.

As a corollary to my current obsession with things Japanese, I have been reading "the Chrysanthemum and the Sword," with its analysis of the Japanese social order, and there was something rather interesting mentioned therein--that the Japanese do not struggle with the notion of good vs. evil, that either is acceptable if it fulfills the requirements of an obligation. So, in that way, I imagine it would be difficult to translate Lord of the Rings into something that would make sense to a Japanese person who thinks in terms of 'circles of obligation,' rather than the struggle between 'good and evil.' However, this work was written just after World War II and attitudes in Japan have a way of changing very quickly, so I am sure I am not up to date in this observation. I can see how one could relate to the struggle of Frodo and of Aragorn to live up to their great obligations while not violating the smaller ones could appeal to a culture structured in this way. In fact, good and evil might not have to enter in as a concept, merely Frodo's obligation to Middle Earth and his more personal obligations also, and Aragorn's obligation to his country and to Elrond personally, etc., if you see what I mean.

So the story can be cast in different ways, according to the tenets of the culture. I'd think any story must gain and lose meanings in translation, though, for the very reason of cultural and expressive differences...

Cheers!
Lyta

[Novnarwen]

By Davem

I meant that to me the settings - particularly the parts set in the Shire, & the Hobbits themselves seem so English that I've always been surprised that non-English readers can relate to them so deeply. When I read a book or watch a movie set in another country/culture there's always for me a feeling of 'distance' - sometimes very small, but there nonetheless

Davem, settings or story? In your first post you said that you were surprised, and found it odd, that Non-English speakers ’even got the story’. Now, you’re saying that you meant the ‘settings.’

Surely, the settings of a story is not what determines whether a person will ‘understand’ (or ‘get’) a story. The setting is but a small part of a book, and to be quite frank I believe that to understand or ‘get’ a story/book the subject plays a far greater part than the settings. And even though, settings may play a great part, why should we underestimate everyone who hasn’t grown up in green surroundings and think it odd and surprising that they ‘get the story’? Do you honestly think these people can’t picture a ‘green field,’ ‘a river,’ ‘tall trees’ and ‘forests’? (Tolkien uses these words, among others, in his descriptions in LoTR.) How hard can it be? Thank God for imagination, I say, for with these words they ought not to understand, get the story, or setting…

When it comes to the ‘story,’ (as you referred to in your first post) I can’t see what brilliance in Tolkien no one outside of England aren't supposed to understand. Short, it’s a story about good vs. evil. I don’t think I’m exaggerating that all books, (at least those I’ve read ,) is about this, one way or another. Why should people have difficulties understanding, or ‘getting the story’, when probably the greatest fraction of the books they’ve read too, deals with this subject? (By this, I would also claim, again, that LoTR has a cross-cultural appeal, because I see it as VERY likely that everyone who reads has touched upon the subject of LoTR many a times when reading, and I dare say that the subject itself hasn't stopped the majority from reading similar books.)

By Davem

For instance, I've grown up in an area parts of which are still reminiscent of the Shire - ''woods, fields, little rivers' - so I've been able to wander in places which strongly reminded me of the books, & I've encountered people very like the Hobbits. So I have that connection with the books that people living in a different landscape wouldn't have.

A question I have to ask is why you think it odd that people can still relate to Tolkien’s books so deeply when the settings are so ‘very English’. Again, I emphasize the importance of the subject of the books, rather than the settings. Additionally, has it occurred to you that people that find themselves in other landscapes than the ones described in LoTR can perhaps relate to everything else in Tolkien’s books such as personalities etc.?

It’s not odd that everyone who reads LoTR can relate as deeply to the books as you do. Personal interpretations again, I say. You let the settings enchant you to grow so deeply fond of Tolkien, but there are still many other elements in LoTR that can enchant others just as well. To me, the setting plays no great part in any of it. If Tolkien had chosen the Shire to be a desert, or to be an underwater realm, I would still find myself relating to the story, characters, personalities and events etc. just as deeply as I do now.

(I’ve started repeating myself, so I’ll stop.)

By HereIstarion

PS I promised not to evaluate, but based on my memory of once made 'Map of the Barrowdowns', there were no members from Muslim countries. But I know, based on first hand experience, that there are Tolkien lovers in Azerbaijan.

From this, I draw the conclusion that you can find yourself enchanted by LoTR, enjoy the story and belong to a culture or a religion that differ from English/European/Scandinavia, but don't hang around at BD. BD could be representative; it should also be questioned. There are Muslims in Europe and America, too, (According to a site here, 2% of Europe total population are Muslims) and excluding them as a group (as well as Buddhists and Hindus etc.) due to 'cultural and religious differences' sounds too simple.

[Estelyn Telcontar]

Originally Posted by davem

This is an interesting point, as in the latest Mallorn (Journal of the Tolkien Society) there's an article 'Traitors & Translators: three German translations of LotR'. Apparently the latest one, by Wolfgang Krege, has taken an approach of translating the work into a contemporary German idiom...

I don't know of three translations in German, but I have looked briefly into both the old and new. The latter is rejected by many German fans because it doesn't do the spirit of the work justice, yet the former is a bit wooden. Quite frankly, since I read the original first, I can't get myself to settle for second or third best, so I don't read the translations.

I have often experienced a similar effect with other books, movies, TV shows, etc. - if I read or saw them in German first, they didn't always appeal to me. Only when I had the opportunity to read/see the original did the fascination get to me. Can the magic be translated? Just the words are not enough.