Tolkien and the Book

[Child of the 7th Age]

There are so many interesting ideas in this thread! A number of points ring very true: that Elves are less dependent on the physical book than those who follow them, and that Tolkien's emphasis and hence that of the Elves is more on language and stories than collections of books per se.

I'd like to point to two areas, however, where I think we need to be careful how we are using terms. At points, this thread perhaps postulates too sharp a distinction between certain categories of writing: "history" versus "not history", and oral versus the written transmission of the past.

Let's start with the latter, which is easier to deal with: the supposed distinction between the "shifting annals of oral history" and the more "rigid" history recorded in books. A slew of recent studies have shown that this distinction is not as clear-cut as one might suppose. The very nature and essence of history is change, at least if we are referencing the history of modern Western Man (the tradition with which JRRT was concerned). Although a cliche, it is nonetheless true that every generation of Western Man regularly rewrites its past. Whether the record is oral or written, new material and interpretations are put forward. In the case of oral history, the changes in the record are more often accidental and less often intentional. With written history, the equation is reversed, but change is the mode of operation for all varieties of Western History. As to why history changes, it is quite often a reflection of the fact that changes are occurring in the present: new material is found and attitudes change. Changes in modern ideologies and technology actually bring about new ways of looking at the past.

The Elves are wholly exempt from this equation. Unlike Men who are somewhat more accepting of change, the Elves desire to embalm both the past and present to ensure that no change occurs. This would be as true of their oral history accounts as it would be of those chronicles that are set down in book format. It is the intention of the Elves that is the key rather than the mode of transmission of their stories. It's interesting to note that there are certain traditional cultures (not part of the modern West) similar to the Elves in that they cling to the ideal of an unchanging past. These tribes pass along sacred stories in an oral format that never varies. The worth of the storyteller is judged by the degree to which he/she is able to replicate a story without a single change.

Judging from what Tolkien tells us, I would guess that this changeless transmission would also have appealed to the Elves. Even if a story was phrased in new words, perhaps written in prose rather than poetry, they would not have wanted to see the heart of the story alter in any meaningful respect. It would have gone against everything they stood for. Yet, at the same time, there would have to be some inherent tension between the desire to preserve and the desire to sub-create. The two could not always have been an easy fit.

Will post later about "history" versus "non-history" (fantasy, fiction, ...or whatever you prefer to call this category).

[davem]

'There is more than one history of the world'. ' Aegypt' John Crowley.

Originally Posted by Child

The Elves are wholly exempt from this equation. Unlike Men who are somewhat more accepting of change, the Elves desire to embalm both the past and present to ensure that no change occurs.

But doesn't this assume there is a single Elvish history, agreed upon by all parties? Would the 'unchangeable', fixed account of the Feanoreans match the 'unchangeable', fixed account of the Elves of the Havens of Sirion? Would there be an agreed upon version of what happened to Aredhel accepted by Eol, Maeglin & Turgon, et al? Would Feanor's account of the Rebellion be the same as Fingolfin's, or Galadriel's, or of the Teleri? Etc, etc...

There may be unchangeable accounts, but to what extent would these accounts differ from each other? It seems to me that for these accounts to become 'embalmed', those retaining them rejecting any consensus in favour of preserving inviolate what they had experienced/recieved, would actually exacerbate tribal seperations & mistrust. In order to produce an objective account - or the closest equivalent - the different accounts would have to be amalgamated, which is precisely what Elves would not naturally do. Which account would win out in the end?

Yet if they, with the best will in the world, attempted to produce a single, coherent account of 'what really happened', how much would be lost - & how could they be certain that what was discarded was actually false? I think perhaps what they ended up with was a series of versions of history, most, if not all, containing the central events, but with different biases. The version any individual (in particular any mortal) accepted would be down to chance to a great degree. Through Bilbo's Translations from the Elvish we have an acount of 'what really happened', but do we have the account? Bilbo only had access to the versions available in Rivendell.

In short, accounts of 'what really happened', whether written or oral, are from a particular point of view - whether they change over the years (or the millenia) or not. Politics comes into it, personal bias & trauma too.

So, if what we have by the end of the Third Age is an 'objective' history of the Elves in Middle earth, then we don't have 'embalming', if we have 'embalming' we don't have an 'objective' history - however well preserved it may have been.

This is not even to get into the human (or 'Sauronic') versions of 'what really happened'.......

[Lalwendë]

What kind of culture would need books and libraries? It would need to be a settled culture, one which is not about to remove itself to another part of Middle-earth in the future, or indeed another part of Arda (libraries are not easily moved....I know). It would also have to be a relatively secure culture which put the effort into producing books. Even if Middle-earth possessed the printing press, would it be a very advanced technology? I would doubt it, taking historical precedent into account; the availability of affordable books is a relatively recent development. So it must presumably have taken up a great deal of time to produce just a single volume, time which may not have been to spare if a culture was engaged in either the struggle to survive or to wage war.

A culture which placed great importance on books would also need to be a stable culture. Books would have been valuable items, tempting to invaders looking for loot (I wonder if Osgiliath had a library and if it was saved?). If the people were constantly on the move, either running from or attacking enemies, and generally engaging in strategic movements of people, then collections of books would be a burden. Emphasis would be placed upon 'portable wealth'; single books might form part of this, but libraries would be impractical.

I would hazard a guess that at the time of the War of the Ring, book production would not have been uppermost in the minds of the peoples of Middle-earth apart from Hobbits who led a relatively peaceful and settled existence, amenable to gathering books and mathoms. Such books as were produced would have been for practical purposes, e.g. the Book of Mazarbul. But this does not mean that storytelling would have come to a close. All the cultures seem to possess a keen instinct for storytelling, even if such tales are based upon history and recent events. Gondor and Rohan even seem to have pre-existing accepted forms of verse, as seen in the inpromptu verses recited at Boromir's funeral or when Eomer is on the Pelennor Fields.

What I have noticed is that one culture in particular seems to possess a very strong oral culture which appears to be on the verge of becomong written down. That is Rohan. They have minstrels, the King even has a personal minstrel, indicating how important the role of storytelling is to them as a people. Aragorn says they have:

a forgotten poet long ago in Rohan, recalling how tall and fair was Eorl the Young, who rode down out of the North; and there were wings upon the feet of his steed, Felarof, father of horses.

This suggests to me that there have been other poets too, and that this poet was writing some time in the past. Rohan places enough importance on oral literature that it has a literary heritage. When Eomer meets Aragorn he talks as a man with broad experience of stories, legends and songs:

The Rider looked at them with renewed wonder, but his eyes hardened. "Then there is a Lady in the Golden Wood, as old tales tell!" he said.

Eomer stepped back and a look of awe was in his face. He cast down his proud eyes. "These are indeed strange days," he muttered. 'Dreams and legends spring to life out of the grass.

"Halflings!" laughed the rider that stood beside Eomer. "Halflings! But they are only a little people in old songs and children's tales out of the North. Do we walk in legends or on the green earth in the daylight?"

"Wingfoot I name you. This deed of the three friends should be sung in many a hall.

This culture has been in Rohan for some hundreds of years, not long in comparison to the age of Gondor, but we would guess quite long enough to settle down to such a level that it could begin producing written literature. However the Rohirrim seem to have been engaged in war for much of their time in Rohan. The men seem to have been called off to become warriors or farmers so it seems they may have had little time for writing. The wealth of the Rohirrim is in horses, weaponry, armour, and the tapestries which decorate the walls of Meduseld; all these things are portable, suitable treasures for a people who are not wholly safe in their own realm. Even the tombs of the Kings are unmarked, wordless Barrows.

But though they do not write their stories down, their culture places such an importance upon them that it can only be a matter of time before they start to do so. Given the peace and security that Aragorn's kingship must have brought, the Rohirrim must have soon begun to do so, and to produce books. I can't help but draw conclusions comparing Gondor to the old Greek/Latin culture and Rohan to the new Anglo-Saxon culture which sprang up once they had found security and the time to actually write their stories down.