Tolkien On Fairy-Stories by J.R.R. TolkienMy rating: 4 of 5 stars
If much criticism is merely a rationalisation of aesthetic preferences, then Tolkien’s attempt is not especially clear or convincing. Rationality doesn’t come into it much, as becomes clear at the beginning where he refuses to describe what he means by Faerie – it’s a feeling that can’t be captured in words, even though that’s a fundamental purpose of criticism.
Underlying the argument is a religious conviction which is itself based on a feeling. Tolkien dislikes secular understandings of fairy tales which sees them as allegories or representations of the natural world. His preferred framing is ‘subcreation’, where the storyteller imbues their divine spark of personality onto the natural world, even though this theory is circular. Why it’s more reasonable to assume this process is instantaneous rather than relational is unexplained. One has to accept Tolkien’s belief that making other worlds is a capacity we have inherited from our own Maker, and we have a natural aptitude for it.
Tolkien is on stronger ground when arguing against escapism as a pejorative. Fantasy can renew our appreciation for things in the real world, or offer consolation for modern and perennial griefs. His distain for modernity is quite interesting here – factories, cars, machine-guns and bombs are worse than the satisfaction of making things with your own hands. The benefits of anaesthetic, increased mobility, and greater leisure time are unremarked upon, although in fairness living through the Second World War may have made these less evident.
Tolkien is prone to these idiosyncratic takes. He grandly suggests that criticism in England is too obsessed with drama because of Shakespeare, and focuses too much on character rather than objects (ok, mate). Visual depictions of the fantastic are too quick to absorb, and therefore moribund (sure). He has an odd tic of talking about elves as if they were real. He seems to be oblivious about the existence of cinema, even though the medium quite directly parallels the elvish art of ‘Enchantment’ he describes.
The famous notion of eucatastrophe is the most valuable concept in the essay. Tolkien gives a name to a very real and powerful effect within stories, which his own evoke quite brilliantly. The name reflects his belief that this literary effect found in fairy tales is but a reflection of the Christian myth, which for Tolkien is true, although his reason for thinking this is once again vibes-based (no other tale has been accepted as true by so many sceptical men, apparently). I think this is the method by which Tolkien justifies to himself his fascination with pre-Christian myths and stories. Their numinous quality and timeless themes of prohibition or keeping promises are shadows of a religious truth the storytellers were not consciously aware of. Take or leave that theory, and much else in this essay, but as a description of what Tolkien was attempting to do in The Lord of the Rings, it is invaluable.
View all my reviews
