Kobe University Repository : Thesis

Transcription

1 Kobe University Repository : Thesis 学位論文題目 Title 氏名 Author 専攻分野 Degree 学位授与の日付 Date of Degree 公開日 Date of Publication 資源タイプ Resource Type 報告番号 Report Number 権利 Rights JaLCDOI URL A Study of J.R.R. Tolkien's Works : Blindness Caused by Obsessiveness(J.R.R. トールキンの作品研究 - 執着が引き起こす盲目性 ) Fujiwara, Noriko 博士 ( 学術 ) Thesis or Dissertation / 学位論文 甲第 6035 号 当コンテンツは神戸大学の学術成果です 無断複製 不正使用等を禁じます 著作権法で認められている範囲内で 適切にご利用ください PDF issue:

2 博士論文 平成 25 年 12 月 10 日 A St u dy of J. R. R. Tol ki en s Wo rks: Blindnes s Caused by Obs essiveness ( J. R. R. トールキンの作品研究 執着が引き起こす盲目性 ) 神戸大学大学院人文学研究科博士課程後期課程 文化構造専攻 藤原典子

3 A St u dy of J. R. R. Tol ki en s Wo rks: Blindness Caused by O bs es sivenes s B y No riko Fuj iwara A Dissertation s ubmi tted t o the Gr aduat e Sc h ool of Hu manities Kobe Uni versity in pa rtial ful fillme nt of t he r equireme nts for the de gr ee of Do ct or of Phi losophy De cemb er 2013

4 Ta ble of C o ntent s Ab br e vi ations In troduc tion The o bj ective o f thi s pa per 1 Tol kien s l ife a n d works 3 St udies on Tol kien s wo r ks 4 T he scope of t hi s pa p er 5 T he struct ur e of t his pa per 6 Ch apter 1 Blindne ss Ca used by On e -d i me nsional Vi sion and the Li ber ation of Fa nt asy I T he e ssential qua lity missed by selfish i nt erpret ation I-1 Gollum s c o nceal me nt of t he t rut h 7 I-2 So cially aff ect e d fairy tales 8 I-3 Lo si n g s i ght o f the whol e thing 11 I-4 Tol kien s allerg y to al legor y 13 II T he usage of fantasy II-1 What is f ant asy? 14 II-2 To l ki en s a rt o f wr iting 16 In S u mma r y 18 Ch apter 2 A Need t o Have Willingne ss t o Lo o k a t T hings: S mi th of Wo otton Maj or

5 (1967) I Backgr o und of S mith of Wo otton M aj or 20 II Nokes s pe rsi stence in hi s i de as and his bl urred vi sion 21 III S mith s j our ne y to Fai r y and the renunciat ion of fixe d ideas III-1 S mi th s s elflessnes s and t he r ecove r y o f hi s vi sion 24 III-2 Ta ki n g a s econd look a t Fai r y 26 III-3 Ret ur ning the fay-s tar 27 IV Is S mith of Wo ot ton Maj or an autobiographical fiction? 28 In S u mma r y 30 Ch apter 3 Ex cessi ve De sire f or Treas ure and a n Ima g e of Dragon: Th e Ho bbi t, or T here and Back A gai n (1937) I T he Ho b bit 31 II How gr eed a ffects t he dragon S ma u g 33 III Is Go llum a n e vil cr eat ur e? 37 IV T h e c har act er of the dragon i n T horin IV-1 Bl indness caused b y de sire for dragon-gold 4 0 IV-2 Re nunci ation of the treas ur e 43 In S u mma r y 45 Ch apter 4 Tol kien s Criticism a gai nst E xc es si ve Ac t s o f Her oe s: F ar me r Giles of Ham (1949) I T h e Heroes Ove r mast ering Pride

6 I-1 Tol kien s di ssatisfaction with the h er oes 46 I-2 The Homecomi n g o f Beorht noth Be o rht hel m s S on 47 II T h e loss of t he nat ure of knight hood II-1 A pa rody of dr a gon -s layi n g: F ar me r Gi les of Ham 51 II-2 T he kni ght s p reoccupation with tradition 52 III R est or ation of kni ghthood III-1 F ar me r Giles as a true kni ght 54 III-2 De vel opme n t of Giles a nd the r est orat ion of t he new k ni g ht hood 57 In S u mma r y 60 Ch apter 5 T he Es sential Qua lities of t he Her o: T he L ord of the Rings ( ) I T h e i de al figure of t he h ero 61 II M isunder standing her oic deeds, and des ire f or fame 63 III T he mo s t i mp o rtant e ssence of the h ero 68 In S u mma r y 71 Ch apter 6 A J o urney in Whi ch Sel fish De sire Is Aba ndoned: T he L ord of t he Ri ngs ( ) I Se nselessness of o bs es sion 72 II Blindness ha ppens t o e ver yone II-1 S elfish d esire blurs o ne s p ur pose 75 II-2 T he h obbit s c ling to t heir d aily l ife 76

7 III Fr o do s j our ne y to de stroy t he One Ri n g 80 In S u mma r y 84 Co nc lusion 86 No tes 90 Bi bliogr aphy 98

8 Abbrevi ations Ho b bit L OT R 1 L OT R 2 L OT R 3 SO WM F GOH Let ter s Th e Hobbi t, or T here and Bac k A gai n T he Fel lows hip of the Ri ng T he Two To we rs T he Ret ur n of the Ki ng S mi th of Wo otton Major F ar mer Giles of Ham Th e Let ters of J. R. R. Tol kien

9 Int roduction The obj ective of this pa pe r In readi n g J. R. R. Tol kien ( J ohn Rona l d Re uel Tol kien, ), 1 we n otice that he de a l s with t he issue of o bsessi ve b ehavi or ma n y time s. F or exa mp l e, Tol ki en s mo st p opular wor k T he L ord of the Ri ngs is known as a n epi c adve nt ure st or y o f the st ruggl e b et we en good and e vil: h o bbi ts, al ong with some good c o mpa nions, j oi n for ces and def eat the forces o f t he Dar k Lo rd, Sa ur on. Yet, whe n we view the various c ha racter s react i ons t o t he On e Ri n g, whi ch h as a p o we r t o d o minat e t he wh ol e world, we not i ce that To l ki en de pict s sever al character s who be come obses sed with the On e Ri n g a nd lose si ght of their or i gi na l p ur pose to de stroy the ring for world pe ace in detail. In thi s nove l, e ve n good characters can b e s educ ed by the power of the ring, cling t o h a ve it, a n d take mi stake n a ct ion in a d esire t o possess i t. In addition t o that, i n h is ot he r n o ve ls, we f ind characters wh o ar e al so confront ed with such o bsessi o ns as fixe d ide as or s elfish d esi r e s. T h erefor e, it c an be said t hat o b sessi venes s i s a ki nd of u nderlying theme i n his wo r k. I t will b e hel pf ul t o consi der the de scriptions of va rious o bs ess i ons i n o rder t o better understand Tol kien s novel s. Tol kien thi n ks that o bsessi on blurs o ur vi ew of thi n gs. For examp le, he explai ns that f a miliarity o r tritenes s c o me s from a o ne -d i mens ional vi ew for me d b y an obsession. T h at i s, whe n we recogni ze some th ing as a trite, familiar, or ordinar y thi n g, we me rely cl ing t o a o ne -s i de d visi on a nd st o p t o look a t them. We a re f requently obses sed with our ha bitua l vi e w s tamp e d o n us b y r epeat ed c o nt acts with fami liar t hings a nd f orge t t o see di fferent 1

10 aspect s of t h e m. Tol kien expl ains thi s i n his essay On F ai r y -St ories as follows: T his triteness i s really the pe nalty of appropriation : the thi n gs that ar e trite, or (in a bad sens e) fami liar, are the thi n gs that we ha ve appr opriat ed, l e ga lly o r me nt ally. We s a y we know them. T he y h a ve be come l i ke t he things whi c h once at tracted us b y thei r glitter, or their col our, o r t hei r s ha p e, and we l aid h ands on the m, a nd t he n l oc k ed t he m i n o ur h oa r d, acqui red them, a nd acquiring ceased to l ook at them. ( On Fa iry-st or ies, 67) T hus, Tol ki en i ns ist s t hat our visi o n i s bl urred wh en we are obsessed with a one-d i me nsi onal vi e w of t hi n gs. Be cause o bs ession o bscur es e ver ythi n g e lse t ha t i s wo rth looki n g at, Tol kien t a kes t hi s matter o f o bs es sion s e riousl y a n d a sserts, We need, i n any c ase, t o c lean our windows; s o t hat the things seen clearly ma y be freed from t he dr ab blur of tritenes s or fami l iarity f rom p o ssessive ne ss ( On Fai r y-st or ies, 6 7). T hus, he cl ai ms that it is n ecessar y f or us to escape f rom suc h one-si de d visi o n. H e st res ses t hat i f we want t o know o u r world mo re deepl y a nd desire to find the es sential nat ure of t hings, we ha v e to aba ndon our various obsessi o ns a nd recove r a f lexible visi on of life t o reconne ct our fascination with t he wo rld ar ound us. T h en, through hi s n o ve ls, he r e veal s the risks of various obses sions and t he n ecessity to be freed f rom them. In this pa pe r, we wi ll examine s e veral o f Tol kien s writings, a nd see how he de picts t he ma tter of o bs ession i n t he m. In e ach o f hi s n o vels, Tol kien shows us o b sessi venes s i n var ious situat ions, and he indicates how preconc ept ions, cus t o ms and traditions, pride, sel fish de sires, a nd ma n y 2

11 other e leme nt s caus e adhe rence to a o n e -di me n si onal p erspective. We are goi n g to s ee how Tol kien de pict s obsessi ve b ehavi or, a n d a nal yze t he processes wh er eby t he character s, wh o a re o bs es sed with s o me thi n g, ha ve unus ual expe rienc es, the reby we will find some thing me aningf ul wh ich the y ha ve lost si ght of. Our a nal yses will cl ar ify the risks of o bs e ssi on a nd t he i mportanc e of gaining a ne w visi on. Tol ki en s l ife and w or ks Let u s t a ke a brief l o o k at the l ife of Tol ki en. He wa s bor n on J anuar y 3, 1892 in Bl oe mf o ntei n, in So ut h Africa. T his was be cause hi s father wor ked as a branc h ma n a ger of the Bloemf ont ei n off ice of an English b a n k. Tol kien returned t o En gl and with hi s mo ther a nd his little br ot her a t t he a ge of t hree. Hi s fathe r d ied in , a nd hi s mo ther i n 1 904, a nd he was t he n raised b y Fat he r Fr ancis M org an, a Roma n Catholic priest, from t he a g e of t wel ve. He s tudied p hil ol o gy at Ex eter College, Oxford a nd be came a s cholar of Ol d and M iddle En gl ish langua ge. He be c a me Pr of essor of En g lish La n gua ge at L eeds Uni ve rsity in 1924, Ra wlinson and Bo sworth Profes sor of An gl o -S a xon at Ox ford i n 1925, and M erton Pr of essor of E n gl ish L anguage and Literat ur e at Oxfor d i n He retired his pr of essor shi p i n 1959 and died on Se ptemb e r 2nd, 1973, a t t he a ge of ei ght y -o n e. While To l ki en was t eachi n g En glish a s a pr ofessor, h e wrote sever al liter ar y wor ks f or f u n. Hi s writings came o ut of hi s inter est s. In hi s yout h, he ha d e nj o ye d various st ories of t he o ld lege nds wh ich h a d fai ries a nd dragons : s uc h a s t he legends of Arthur, t h e s a ga o f Be o wul f, a nd the tales o f Si gur d who slew F af nir t he dr a gon, 2 al l o f which i nflue nc ed hi s wr iting. Yet, 3

12 his literar y wor ks a r e not only affected by t hes e old tal es but also ar e ba sed on the m a s well as h is linguistic int erest. He h ad a hi gh l e vel of i nteres t i n wo rds, and hi s a ffection for langua ge l e d hi m t o cr eat e a whol l y ne w a nd original l anguage, h e c a lled El vish, of t he langua ge of elf tongue. T he n, he cr eated hi s o wn i ma gi nar y world and i ts hi story, wh ere El v ish wa s s poke n. T his i s now known a s t he hi story of Mi ddle -e arth, a nd The Ho bbi t, T he L ord of the Rings, a nd Si lmarillion a re written as pa rt o f thi s h istor y. He al so wr ote ot her stories s eparate from t h e Middle -e arth series: suc h a s Ro verandom, Fa r mer Giles of Ha m, Le af b y Ni ggle, and S mith of Woot ton Major. He was the first t o create a ne w world ba sed s olel y on h is i ma gi na tion. All of his i ma ginat i ve stories wer e wr itten for hi s o wn pleas ure, some time s for his o wn chi ldr en, s o that he n e ver e xpect ed t o p ublish them. Yet, a me mb er of publishi n g firms f ound the ma nuscript o f T he Hobbit b y cha nc e a nd aske d hi m if he would allow its p ublication. H e di d, and it became popul ar a nd his novels are now known t hr oughout the wo rld. Studi es on Tol kien s w orks Various st udies have be en ma de o n Tol ki en s novel s, especi al l y on The Lord of the Ri n gs. Fo r examp le, Pa ul H. Koc her exami nes To l ki en s i deas of her oism, the n at ure of e vil, a nd mor a lity. 3 Ni gel Wal ms ley d iscus ses Tol kien s s ub -c ultur al i mp a ct in t he 1 960s. 4 C. Fr ederick a n d S. M c Bride read T he Lord of t h e Ri ngs as an a ttitude o f cont e mpt for wo men. 5 To m Shi p pe y e xplicates Tol kien s wor ks from the li n guistic p e rspective a nd explai ne d s e ve ral of t he text s in det ail. Re ga rdi n g t he l iter a r y s our ces of 4

13 Tol kien s writing which inspired hi s i magi nat ion, t he re a re ma n y st udi es: suc h as Da vid Da y s Th e Wo rl d of Tol kien: Myt h ologi cal S ourc es of T he Lord of t he Rings, and L ee, Stuart D. a nd E liza bet h Sol o pova s Th e Keys o f Middle-earth: Discoveri ng M edi eval Literature thro ugh the Fiction of J.R.R. Tolkien. F or Tol ki en s biogr aphical aspect s, we refer to Hu mp h rey Ca rpent er s J. R. R. Tol kien: A Bi ography, the a ut hor itat i ve biogr aphy of Tol kien. Tol kien s n o vels wer e r ecei ved col dl y b y critics at f irst, 6 but t he y ha ve gr adua lly me t with ge ne ral r ecogni tion. As f or the matter o f obses sion, Al ison Mi lba n k discus ses the f etishis m of t he On e Ri n g. Alison cl ai ms that The L ord of the Ri ngs is n ot an es capist fant as y but a c hallenging wor k t hat reads u s as f etishi sts ( My Pr eci ous: Tol kien s F etishi zed Ri n g, 3 3) and says that this n o vel i s a n e thi cal text that teaches us t o gi ve u p d o mi nat o r y a nd fixed per ceptions ( My Preci ous: Tol kien s Fet ishize d Ring, 4 4 ). 7 Gregor y Bas sham explores t he secr ets of true ha ppines s a nd fulfill ment from T he L ord of t he Ri ngs, and me ntions that it i s i mp or tant for us t o a v oid des ire of p os ses s ion. 8 Ral ph C. Wood also r e veal s t he d a n ger o f possessi veness s een i n the Middl e -e arth series. For e xa mp le, Ral p h s hows t hat Gollum i s c ut off f rom all c o mmu ni t y because of his s trong obs ession wi th t he On e Ring. T he scope of t hi s pape r To discuss obsessi on, we wi ll t a ke u p f ol lowing wor ks: T he Hobbi t, o r Th ere and B ac k A gai n (1937), F ar mer Giles of Ham (1949), Th e L ord of the Rings ( ), and S mith of Wootton M ajor ( 1 967). Previ ous st u dies ha ve ma inl y f oc us ed o n T he Lord of t he Ri ngs and T he Ho bbi t, and little attention 5

14 has been gi ven t o t he s hor ter wor ks, F ar me r Giles of Ha m a nd Smith of Wo otton Major. T h ese wo r ks a re often treated me rel y as an af t erthought and ha ve not b een st udied thor oughly. Howe v er, a s we find t he si milar t he me of obses sion in these shorter novels, we are goi n g to gi ve t he m mo re emp ha sis in or der t o mor e ful l y unde rst and Tol ki en s wor ks. T he struct u re of t hi s pa pe r T his p aper consi sts of 6 chapter s. Cha pt er 1 wi ll s ee some concr ete exa mp l es wh ere t he intrins ic n ature o f t hings i s l os t due to obses si veness, and we wi l l cl arify t he use of fantasy for recovering our visi o n. Cha pter 2 is a readi n g of S mi th of Wo otton M ajor, the l ast wo r k publishe d i n hi s lifetime, and will discuss the i mp o rtanc e o f a ba n doning t he fixed ideas a nd h a vi n g willingness t o see t hi n gs c ar efully. Cha pter 3 will read Th e Hobbit, which i s his first published n o vel, a nd e xa mi ne t he i ma ges o f dragon whi ch shows greedy featur es o f o bsessi on with the t reasure. Cha pter 4 will read Fa r mer Giles of Ha m, a dr a gon -s layi n g tale, a nd e xa mi ne e xc essive acts of t he kni ghts c aused b y t h eir inability to o vercome t he tradi tions a nd c ust o ms of kni ghthood. Cha pter 5 a nd c ha pt er 6 wi ll f oc us o n T he Lord of the Ri n gs wh ich i s a s equel o f T he Hobbit. Cha pter 5 will look at p eople s o bs ession with pride or f a me, a nd exam ine the essential qualities of a h e ro. Cha pt er 6 will e xa mi n e t he c h aracter s o bs ession with o ne thi n g and the j our ne y of aba n doning the One Ri n g. T hrough t he se e xpl o rations, we wil l clarify h o w Tol kien vi ews and de pict s blindne s s c aus ed b y o bsessi o n and hi s unde rst anding of the i mportanc e of freei n g oneself from thi s restraint. 6

15 Cha pt er 1 Blindness Caused by O ne - d imensi o nal Visi o n and t he Liberation of Fantasy As outlined in t he In troduction, one s vi s ion i s bl ur red by the tritene ss or f a miliarity of t he thi n gs we view, and t his triteness c o me s a s a pe nal t y of appr opriat ion ( On Fa iry -Stories, 6 7). Tol ki en p oi nts out that we often comp rehe nd t hings f rom a o ne -d i me ns ional poi nt o f view a nd st op viewi n g the m f urther with mo re car eful attention. T his leads t o a dist or t ion of vi sion towar ds t he na tur e o f t hi n gs a nd poses a risk t o us whe n we l os e si ght of their i ntrinsic val ue. T his c ha pter will e x a mine h o w thi s a ppropriat ion h appe ns, and h ow thi n gs o f t he wo rld ar e dist orted o r f o rgotten a nd ar e r eplaced b y o ther eleme nt s. We are going to s ee some concret e des criptions f r o m Tol kien s writings a nd s tat e ment s wher e t he visi on of t he n at ure o f things is lost thr ough obsessi on, a nd we will posit that it is a s elf -cent ered mind t ha t is invol ve d wi th t his distor tion of t hi n gs. T his c ha pter will a lso exami ne t he usage of f ant as y. In On Fai r y-st or ies, To l ki en s tresses t hat f antas y can recove r o ne s clear visi o n, and he d eal s with t h e ma tter of a ppr o priation in his o wn wor ks through the use of f ant asy. We wi ll then s ee how f antasy c an hel p u s free o ursel ves f rom tritene ss a nd a ppropr iation. I The essential qual ity missed by s el f ish i nt erpret ation I-1 Go llum s concealment of t he trut h 7

16 Whe n o ne sticks to one s o wn sel fish ideas, the vision be come s di m. T he d ist o rtion of truth ha p pe ns e as ily wh en o ne adher es t o o ne s s elfish interpr etation. L et u s take a look at Gol lum, o ne of t he char acters i n Th e Lord of t he Rings. In thi s st or y, Gol lum di st orts t he trut h t o hide h is sin. When a friend o f his f ound a b eautiful gol de n r ing, 9 Go llum, de siring t o obtai n i t, kills h is friend and st eal s t he ring. Ho we ve r, he i s filled with guilt after c o mmitting the mu r der. To assuage hi s gui lt, h e p rovides hi ms elf with a pl ausible explanat ion and to j u stify his c rime : T he mu rder o f Déagol h aunted Go llum, a nd he ha d ma de up a def ence, r epeating it to his precious ove r and over again, as he gnawed bone s in the dar k, unt il he al mo st b elieve d it. It was h is birthday. Dé a gol o u ght t o h a ve gi ve n t he ring t o h i m. It h ad obvious l y turned u p j ust so a s t o be a p resent. It wa s h is birthday-pr esent, a n d so on, and on. ( L OTR1, ) Re pe ating t he l ie t o j ustify his error, Gollum a ccept s hi s o wn j ustification and b ecome s firml y convi nc ed that t he ring i s his rightful birthday pr esent from h is f riend. He i s d elude d b y his o wn i nt erpret ation a n d b ecomes confused a bout the truth and his l yi n g. T h us, facts can some t i mes be change d b y a l ittle lie. Gol lum abus es the i ma gi n ation and i nterpret s t he ma tter i n a wa y pleasant to hims elf. T h at i s, he i gnor es and s tret ches the t rut h with his selfish conveni ent e xpl anation, a nd l oses s i ght o f t he t rut h in the end. In Tol kien s words, it i s me rel y M or bid De lusi on. ( On Fai r y -St ories, 65) I-2 So cial ly af f ected f airy tal es 8

17 As h as b een seen in Go llum, truth i s sometime s change d i nt entionally b y one s o wn selfish ma ki n g. Yet e ven if we d o n ot i ntend to t wi st mat ter s t o our o wn e n ds, we of ten c ling to a o ne -s i de d idea a nd i gnor e t he i ntrinsi c plural nat ur e o f them u n cons ciousl y. To i mp o se social ideas and p rinci p les also s poi ls t h e c har m of t hi n gs a nd caus es tritene ss. For e xa mp le, t he idea that f airy t ales are onl y for childr en is e mb r a ced i n the manner s of the soc iet y of t he per iod. Now ma n y p eople t hink that c hildr en ar e the mo st appropriate r eader s of fai r y s t ories, but as Tol kien claims, Act ually, t he associ ation of c hildren and fairy -s tories is a n a cci de nt of our d o me stic hist or y and C hildr en [...] neither like f airy -s tor ies mor e, nor u nderst and the m better than a dul ts do ( On Fai r y -St ories, 50), t his i de a c o mes from a wr ong pe rcept ion on the part of adults. T he conc ept that fai r y tal es ar e o nl y f or c hildren is a r ecent i d ea. Le t us follow the brief hi st or y of t he reception of fairy st ories. 10 As Phi llip Arie s has i llustrated in Cent uri es of Childhood ( 1962), i n t he me di e val a ges, pe opl e di d not ha v e a not ion of c hildhood, f or children ha d a low s ur vi val rate due t o illne ss a nd e ven i f t he y s ur vi ve d they were soon f orced t o wor k alongside adults. E d ucation for c hildren wa s l acki n g, t he ref or e, the r eadi n g books b y children itself s eldom e xist ed. Yet, whe n William Caxton s p rinting press a p pea red in and ma n y books came i nt o p rint, t he guardians o f education clai me d t hat i mpr o ving childr en s literacy wo uld de vel op them int o t he respect abl e grown -u p s. Then, t he idea of c hildren s e ducation drew attention a nd e d ucational o pportunities s pread. T he e ducat ors, h owever, consi der ed that readi n g fai r y st ories we re vai n and us eless act i vities whi ch wo ul d i nter fer e with childr en s e ducat ion at school, s o t he y c o nd e mn ed such 9

18 books a s readi n g matter for little children at be dtime. T h a t i s, a whole soc iet y was to excoriate s uch readi n g f or c hildren and to p us h as ide a n y book t hat c ontai ne d the mat ter of fantasy (Egoff, Worl ds Wi thi n, 24). In t he seve nteent h c ent u r y, thi s e ducat ional policy wa s c ha n ged a gain. Whe n the En glish phi los o pher J o hn L oc ke pr eached in S ome T hought s Co nc er ni ng Ed uc ation ( 1693) that it woul d b e e ffective t o learn i n a n enj o yabl e way, adults b e gan to u se fai r y st ories f or c hildren s e d ucation. T he y revised the fairy t ales with a lot of mo rals and ga ve them t o t he childr en a s t he i nst r uctive books. T hus, t he gua rdi ans o f educ ation f orced their i deas a nd t he principl es of the a ge onto t he fai r y s tor ies ; he nc e t he r eception o f f airy tal e s h as changed o ver time. A dul ts t o o were affected by such s oci al conventions, and come t o recogni ze that the f a iry st ories wer e appr opr iat e only for children, not f or adults. On ce t he y pe rcei ve d them as s uc h, they st uc k t o t hi s i dea and coul d not see t he e nc ha nt me nts as wor ks of art. Tol kien states t his as follows: Fai r y-s t ories ha ve in the mo de rn lettered wo rld b een r elegat ed to the nur ser y, as s ha bby or ol d -fashione d fur nitur e i s r elegat e d to the p lay -r oom, p rima rily b ecaus e the a dul ts d o not want i t, and do n ot mi nd if it is mi sused. ( On Fai r y -St or ies, 50) Tol kien bl a me s sel f -conceited ideas for t wi sting t he value o f fairy tal es, and those tales ha ve b een r e lega ted t o b eing trivial t hi n gs. T ha t is, the per ceptions of t he fairy tales ha ve b een b lurred, a nd p eopl e h a ve l ost si ght of t heir int rinsic charm. Agai n, we see how p eopl e u nc onsci ousl y stick t o a one-si de d vi sion of t hings a nd forge t the intrins ic value. 10

19 1-3 Lo si ng s ight of t he w hol e t hi n g Tol kien al so i n dicat es t hat e ve n if we ha ve a wi llingnes s t o look at thi n gs caref ully, we mi ght miss t he es s enc e of t hings : f or, wh en we onl y foc us on the ma tters of int erest, we los e s i gh t of ot he r eleme nt s. Fo r e xa mp l e, Tol ki e n t a kes George Webbe Das ent s me taphor o f s oup and says; [ w]e mu st b e satisfied wi th t h e s oup that is set b ef o re us, a nd not des ire t o see t he bones of the ox out o f wh ich i t ha s be en b oiled ( On Fai r y-st or ies, 3 9). 11 H e e x plai ns that it is us eful t o investigat e t he ingredients in or de r t o taste the s o up, but if o ne de sires t o see the sour c es or ma terial and is entirel y focused on them, o ne will forget to e nj o y t he s oup itsel f, wh ich ma ke s no s ense at al l. T hen, Tol kien clai ms t ha t we ha ve t o s e e t hi n gs from va riou s angles. Although t he p e rception of t hi n gs varies with time a nd t his change is ine vitabl e, it is imp o rtant to see how thi n gs c ha n ge o ve r time. Tol kien says as fol lows: [ I]t i s mo re inter est ing, and a lso i n its wa y mo re di ff icult, to consi der wh at t he y a re, wh at t he y ha ve b ecome f or u s, a nd what val ue s the l ong al c he mi c pr oc es s es of time h a ve p roduce d i n the m. ( On Fa iry-stories, 39 ) Tol kien st resses he re t hat i t is n ot e n ough t o see things from o ne si de. If we wa nt to know thi n gs we ll, we should e xpand our vision t o s ee t he whole and find a ne w va lue i n the m whi ch h as b een produc e d o ver time. We ha ve t o escape from the o ne -d i me ns io nal vision and see t hings f rom var ious per spective s in order t o under stand t hi n gs cl ear l y. He al so e xpresses t h is i de a t hr ough a nother e xa mp le o f i n ve stigat ors 11

20 wh o look o nl y at o n e s ide of thi n gs. In his e ssay, Beowulf: T he M onster s and t he Critics ( 1936), whi ch wa s or i gi nally a lect ure gi ven to t he British Ac ademy i n t he s a me ye ar, h e s hows that t he i n ves tigators a r e apt to f oc us onl y o n the ma tters wh ich the y ar e int erested in, and fai l t o look at t he o ther surrounding el e me nt s. Although they s ee thi n gs car ef ully and try t o find t h e origin or the hi st or y of t hings, t he y t end t o focus t oo mu c h on the det ails o r fragments and ne glect to see t hings from a macr os copic p erspe c tive. Tol kien admits that i n vestigating t hings i n d etail i s u sef ul i n u nderstand ing thi s wo r k, for h e hi ms el f h as st udi ed B eowulf in de tail a nd h a s a thor ough knowledge of i t. Yet, h e thi n ks t hat it i s insufficient to l ook at t he p arts of it. He l a me nts t hat Be owulf has been u sed as a quarry of fact and f ancy f ar mo re a ssi duousl y than i t ha s be en st u died as a wor k of art ( Be o wul f : T he Monsters and t he Critics, 5) a nd cl ai ms that the t ext o f Be o wulf should be appreciat ed not j ust as a hi storical doc u ment but a s a poem. In t he f ollowi n g story a bout a tower, Tol kien blame s the critics who d o not consi der Be o wulf as a poem: A ma n i n herited a field in which wa s a n accumu lation of ol d stone, pa rt of a n ol d er hal l. Of the ol d s tone some ha d already been u sed i n b uilding t he house i n whi ch h e act ual l y live d, n ot far from t he o ld house o f hi s fat he rs. Of t he r est he t ook s o me and b uilt a tower. Bu t hi s friends coming pe rceived at o n ce (wi thout troubling t o cl i mb the st eps) that thes e st ones h ad for me rly bel o n ge d t o a mo re a nci ent building. S o they pushed t he tower o ve r, with no little l abour, i n or der to look f or hi dden car vings and inscr i ptions, or to discover whe nce t he ma n 's 12

21 dist ant f orefat he rs h ad o btai ne d t he ir buildi n g mat erial. So me sus pe cting a d eposi t of c oal under t he s oil be ga n to d i g for it, and f orgot e ven the stone s. T he y all said: T his t o wer is most interesting. But they a lso s ai d ( after pushi n g it o ver ): What a mu d dle it i s in! An d e ve n the ma n s own d escenda nts, wh o mi ght ha ve be en e xpect ed to consi der wh at he ha d be e n a bout, we re heard to mu r mu r: He is such an o dd fellow! Ima gi ne hi s u si n g the se o ld stone s j ust t o b uild a nonsens i cal t o wer! Why d id not he r est or e the o ld h ouse? H e h ad n o s e nse of pr oportion. Bu t from t he top o f that t ower t he ma n h ad b een abl e to l ook o ut u p on the s ea. ( Be o wulf : T he Mons ter s and the Critics, 7-8) A tower indicates the text o f Be owulf, a ma n wh o b uilt the tower i s t he poet of Be o wu lf, and hi s friends are the critics of the p oe m. 12 In this s tor y, Tol kien cr iticize s the friends wh o b r e a k t he t o wer. T he se friends, t he critics, d o n ot s ee Be o wul f as a literat ure but consi de r it me rel y a s an i mportant hist orical docume nt. Although the ma n uses things fro m the p ast and bui lds a t o we r t o l ook o ut u pon the sea, whi ch me ans he u ses t he ol d items a n d gi ves a ne w value to t he m, t he critics o nl y focus on the fragme n ts of the ol d thi n gs a nd never try to see the tower or from the towe r, the poem itsel f a nd its meani n g ; T h us, whe n we f oc us o n t he s e things i n wh ich we ar e interes ted too mu c h, we f o rget t o s ee t he wh ol e thing, whi ch Tol kien cl ai ms in hi s t ale of the tower. I-4 Tol ki en s allergy t o al legory We can s ee Tol kien s c riticism o f t he one -d i me ns ional vision from h is 13

22 allergy t o allegor y, t oo. In t he f or e word t o t he second e dition of Th e Lord of the Rings, he rema r k s: [... ] I cor di ally dislike a llegory i n all i ts ma ni fes tations, and al wa ys ha ve d o ne s o since I gr ew old and wa r y e nough to detect its pr esenc e. I mu c h prefer hist or y, true or fei gned, with i ts varied applicability to t he t hou ght and e xperienc e o f readers. I thi n k t hat many c o nf use appl icability with allegory ; b ut t he one r esi de s i n t he f reedom of t he reade r, a nd the other in t he pur posed domination of t he a ut hor. ( L OT R, xxi v) He re, To l ki en c larifies t hat he di slike s al lego r y b ecaus e it is a for m o f control, b y t he p ur p osed d o mi nat ion of t he a ut hor. 13 T h us, h e t hinks tha t to be controlled b y a one-si de d i de a is n ot sufficient t o u n der stand the n ature of thi n gs ver y deepl y. As we ha ve s een i n sever al e xa mp l es, we of t en d eci d e the val ue of thi n gs ba sed o n our own s elf -c e ntered point o f view and forget to s e e t he m from ot her si des. Yet, si nc e Tol kien clai ms to b e freed from such r est riction s, he i s abl e t o s ee how obsessi on with a one-dimensional i de a blurs our si ght. In addition, s uc h obs essi ve ne ss occurs i n various situa tions. II The usage of f antas y II-1 W ha t i s f a nt as y? As it is n ot sufficient to s ee things from one s ide i n or der to per cei ve thi n gs well, we ha v e t o b e freed from one -d i me nsi onal vi si on t o regai n a mo re clear p er ception. Tol kien, then, a sserts t hat a fantasy wor ld is us eful to escape from the triteness and appr opr iation of t he s ingle vision, f or fant asy 14

23 gi ves us wo nder, tells us t hat t hi n gs ar e n ot al ways as t he y s e e m, and ma ke s us f ree from o bs er ve d fact s. He says, cr eative Fa nt as y is founded upon the har d r ecognition t hat thi n gs are so i n t he wo rld as it appears u nder t he s un; on a recognition of fact, but not a slave r y to it ( On Fa iry -St ories, 65). Ac cordi n g t o a dict i onar y d efinition, fantas y i s t he faculty o r a ctivity of i ma ging what is u nlikel y t o ha p pe n. In T he Old E n glish Di ctionary, fantasy indicates i ma gination; the p roc ess or t he f aculty of f or mi n g me nt al r epresentations of t hi n gs not actually present. T he origin of the wo rd c o mes from t h e Greek p hant azein, which me a ns t o make vi si bl e. T hus, cr eat i ve fantasy ha s t he p o we r to c lear our vi sion t hrough t he use of i ma gi na tion. Sh eila A. E goff s tat e s t hat the r o ots of f antas y are d eepe r t ha n thos e of any other literar y ge nre, for t he y lie i n t he ol de st l iter at ure of all myt h, legend, a nd f ol klore ( S heila A. E goff, Wo rlds wi thi n, 3), b ut it i s act ua lly qui te r ecent ly t hat fant asy ha s be gun to be u sed as a genre of literar y comp o sition. T h e first recognize d e xa mp l e of fantasy as a genr e is sai d t o b e found i n the American ma ga zi ne, T he Magazi ne of F antasy and S cienc e Fiction, p ublished i n When t his wo rd i s u sed for literat ur e, i t indicates a ge nre o f i ma gi native fiction i n vol ving ma gi c a nd adve nt ure, especi ally in a set ting ot her t ha n t he real wo rld ( Th e New Oxf ord A me rican Di ctionary ). M any s cholar s s a y t hat it i s di fficul t to def ine f ant as y, b ut nowa da ys, t he s tor i es d ealing with t he s uper nat ural el e me nts a fter the ei ghteenth c ent ur y ar e r e gar ded as fantasy novels i n ge ne ral. As f ant asy de als with s upernat ural e leme n ts and shows u s wonder, some pe opl e c ritici ze t hat fant asy is j ust e scapist f iction. Yet, a ct ually, fanta s y 15

24 hel ps p eople who a r e blind t o t he i ntrinsic n ature o f t hi n gs. F o r, we leave our world f or a while b y readi n g fantasy novel s, and h a ve va rious unus ual experiences i n the Other world. T h ro u gh t his e xperienc e, we g ain a n abi lity to take a l a ger view of t hings. As a r es ul t, wh en we return to our world, we can see o ur wo rld with brand -n ew e yes and find enc ha nt me n t once a gain. T hat i s, fantasy e na bles u s t o be f reed from the one -si de d ide a a n d t o redi scover the int rinsic value of t hings which we ha ve l ost s i ght of. II-2 Tol kie n s art of w riting T hrough fant asy n o vels, writers show us d iffer ent as pects of f a miliar thi n gs. Yet, if writer s ma ke fantasy t oo f reel y, t hei r f ant as y wo rld will b e inc oherent. T her ef or e, wh en t he s ub -cr eat ors e stablish a n i ma g inar y wor ld, 15 the y should use ma terials i n t he real wor l d and rearrange t he m a little, whi ch wo ul d pr o vide us with ma n y possibilities to see t hi n gs from o t her si de s. Tol kien also def a miliarizes e ver yday aff a irs of thi s world to s he d light on t he true nat ure o f f a miliar things a nd t o recover t hei r val ues which we ha ve l ost si ght of. He i ntroduces a ne w word mo oreeffoc a s an e xa mp le. It is a very strange wor d whi ch we ha ve ne v er s een b ef ore, but Tol kien d oe s n ot ma ke t his wor d arbitrar ily. In f act, mo or eeffoc is the wo rd coffee -r oom read from b ackwards. T hat is, wh en we s ee coffee -r oom f rom the inside thr ough a gl ass d oor, we suddenly s ee i t i n a c o mp let el y ne w way. He t ells us that we can f ind s o methi n g n e w i n f a miliar th ings whe n we l ook a t t he m from differ ent a n gles. T h us, Tol kien finds ways t o de pict d iffer ent as pe ct s o f thi n gs t hr ough his i ma gi nat i ve power, which he lp us to recover ou r vision. In t he same way, Tol kien s u b -cr eates hi s fant as y writings b y usi n g the 16

25 ma terial s of t he r eal wo rld. Let us t a ke a look at M iddle -earth for e xa mp le, wh ich is h is fictional set ting f or T he Hobbit, and The L ord o f the Ri ngs. Middle -e ar th seems l i ke a c o mp let el y di ff erent wo rld from our s, but in fact, it i s l oc ated on t his earth. Tol kien repeats ma n y time s t hat M iddle -e arth is our world, a nd i n one of hi s l etter s he e x plai ns a s fol lows: Mi d dl e -earth, b y t he way, is n ot a n a me of a ne ve r -n e ver land without rel ation to t he world we live in [...]. It is j ust a use of Mi ddle En glish middle -erde ( or e r the), a lter ed from Old En glish M iddangeard : t he na me for the inhabi ted lands o f M en bet ween t he seas. ( Tol kien, To the Hought o n Mi fflin Co., J une 1955[sic], Letter 165 of L etters, 220 ) In addition, Tol kien further e x plai ns t he loc ation of Mi d dle -e arth. He says that t he hi story of Middle -e ar th is d escribe d as a n i ma gi na r y period, 16 b ut that t he l oc ation o f it is put at the latitude of n orthwes ter n E ur o pe. He shows the p os itional rel ationshi p b et ween t he Prima r y World and t he S econda r y World: T he a ction of the story takes pl ace in t he Nor th -West of Middle -earth, equival ent i n latitude to t he coastl ands o f Eu rope a nd t he n orth s hor e s o f the M editerranean. But thi s is n ot a purel y Nordic ar ea i n any s ense. If Ho b biton a n d Rivendel l are t a ken (as i ntended) t o b e a t a bout the l atitude o f Oxf or d, then Mina s Tirith, 600 miles s out h, i s at about the latitude of Florenc e. 17 ( To Char l otte and De ni s Pl i mme r, 8 F ebruar y 1 967, Let ter 294 of L etters, 376) Be sides, Tol kien also de pict s t he r aces of Mi ddl e -e arth in relation to that of 17

26 our Prima r y Wor ld. Fo r e xa mp l e, the h obbits are de pi cted as huma n s e xc ept for their s i ze. 18 T hus, Tol kien e stablishe s h is s u b -c reated wo rld b ased on our r eal world. It i s difficult t o c reate an i ma gi nar y world without falling into del usi o n, b ut in sub-c reating a world b y which p eopl e can recover t hei r si ght di splays Tol kien s ar t o f i ma gination. He rearranges the f a miliar and shows us them thr ough e yes o f wonder, a n d i n doi n g t his shows us that we ha v e l ost si ght o f the enchantme nt of thi n gs be cause of our one -d i me nsi onal visi on. Hi s sub-cr eat ed world s hows us t hings f rom ot he r si des and we find a l ot o f possi bilities t o see n ew a spect s in t he m. In Summar y As we ha ve seen s e veral examp les, whe n we lose si ght of t he nat ure of thi n gs, we c oncentrate o n our s elf -c e ntered point of vi e w a n d st o p s eeing thi n gs i n t hei r e ntiret y. T hat is, blindness is caus ed b y obses si venes s of one s own i deas. Act ually, there are ver y few thi n gs that w e r eally know i n this wo rld, a nd we o f ten o nl y bel ieve wh at we see with our e ye s yet forget to pa y attent ion to ot her aspect s. In his writings, Tol kien shows u s that obses sion with a one-di me n si onal id ea blurs o ur si ght, a nd indi cat es that suc h obs essive ne ss occurs in various situations. To arous e one s inter est in the world a ga i n, we ha ve to gain a flexi ble per spective and see the other as pects of t hings. Su b -c reators t he n s he d light on t he true n at ure of fami liar thi n gs b y d efamiliar i zi n g e ve r yda y affairs of this wo rld and show u s t he m a ne w with wo n der. T hr ough t hi s s u b -cr eat ed wo rld, we, freed from o ne -d i me n siona l vision, can r ecover unclouded e ye s. 18

27 Cha pt er 2 A Need to H ave Willing n ess t o Look at Thin gs : Sm ith of Wo otton M ajor (1967) Smith o f Wo otton Major (1967) is the l as t wor k Tol kien wr ot e, and i s also t he l ast one published i n hi s l ifetime. T his st or y is n ot c o nnect ed with Middle -e ar th, but it de als with t he fant as y wor ld, t he land of the f airy. Tol kien says in On Fai r y -St or ies that t he stories about t he realm o r st ate in which fairies ha v e t hei r bei n g ( On F airy -St ories, 3 2) free us from one s slaver y t o a n ar row, di storted visi on about the wor ld, t o r e cover a cl ear per spective o n f a miliar t hi n gs, and bring u s a c ons ol ation and j o y. 19 Ye t Fai r y 20 d oe s not wor k o ut fully, u nless p e opl e ha ve a willingness t o t hi n k positivel y a b out the Ot her world. In fact, some p eople ar e o bs e ssed with t hei r own thoughts and de nounce anyone goi n g to F airy, sayi n g that such b ehavi or is not f aci n g r eal ity. In this c ha pter, we will discuss t he i mp ortanc e of abandoni n g fixe d ide as on F airy i n or der to recove r o ne s clear visi on. We will focus o n the two c har act er s in S mith of Wo otton M aj or : Nokes and S mith. W hile Noke s adher es t o ha bitual t hings and ne ver b elieves in the e xistence o f F airy, S mi th, mo re s elfless i n di sposition, finds a fay( F airy) -s tar a nd goe s to the fairyl and. T heir differ ent react ions to Fa iry clarify t he i de a that to be rest rai ne d b y fixe d i deas pr e v ents u s from seeing t he real a spect of t hings. T hr ough our exa mi n ation, we will see t hat it is n ecessary t o attempt t o t hi n k about t he b i g pict ur e i n or de r t o rediscover t he i ntrinsi c val ue of t he world. 19

28 I Bac k gro und of Sm ith of Wo otton M ajor Be for e we discuss the st or y itself, l et u s l ook at the b ackgr o und of this wo r k. Tol kien began to write S mith of Wo otton M aj or i n 1965, but this story wa s made p urely b y cha nc e, f o r, it a rose from a pref ace, which he wa s as ke d to write f or a ne w edi tion of George M a c Donald s Th e Gol de n Key. 21 Tol kie n ha d b een amu sed as a child b y MacDo nal d s Cur die books, 22 but whe n h e reread t hose books to write t he pref ace, he f ound t hat mu c h of M acdonald s writing did n ot ma tch hi s taste. 23 He s howe d a n e gative r eact ion t o MacDonald s wor k, saying t hat there was a n allegorical a nd mo r alistic eleme nt a bout it a nd it wa s illwr itten (si c), i nc oherent, and bad, i n spite o f a f e w me mo rable passages ( Car pe nter, B iography, 244). He, t hen, b e gan t o e xpl ain t he me a ning of the ter m F airy thr ough a short st or y i n the pr e face. H e wrote a s f ol lows: Fai r y is ve r y p o werful. E ve n t he b ad a ut hor c annot e scape it. He pr obabl y ma ke s up his t ale out of b its o f ol der t ales, 24 o r thi n gs h e hal f reme mber s, and they ma y be too strong for hi m to spoil or disenchant. So me o ne ma y me et t he m f or the first time in his [ MacDonal d s ] si lly t ale, a nd cat ch a glimps e o f F airy, a nd go on t o better t hi n gs. T his coul d b e p ut i nt o a short st or y like t hi s. T here wa s once a cook, and he thought of ma ki n g a c a ke for a children s p arty. Hi s c hief notion wa s that it mu s t be ve r y sweet [...]. ( Carpenter, Bi ography, 244) T his wa s t he bi rth o f S mith of Wo otton Major. In t his st or y, Tol ki en shows h o w sever al p eople react t o a gl i mpse of F airy. T hi s tal e wa s meant t o be f ini sh ed in only a few par a graphs, b ut b e yond his expe c tation, it gr e w 20

29 int o a n inde pe ndent stor y s eparate f rom t he pref ace. It a ppeared a s h is ne w stor y, S mith of Wo otton Major. 25 In thi s nove l, Tol kien expressed hi s idea that glimp ses of F airy can be seen i n o u r world a lthough ma n y pe opl e o ver look them. He stres ses that thi n gs b rought from Fai r y ar e o ften dist o rted o r c ha n ged b y o ne s p ersonal thought s a nd i de as, but, if we are wi lling and ope n to see them, we c an find the m. II Nokes s persistence i n hi s ide a s and his bl ur re d vi sion A fragme n t of Fa iry i n the st or y of S mith o f Wo otton Maj or e me rges a s a for m of a silver -looking fay-s tar whi ch h as been put i n a s pe cial cake. T he village n a me d Wo otton Maj or ha s o ne bi g fest i val c alled The Fe ast of Good Ch ildre n to b e he l d once e ver y twenty -f o ur ye ars, a nd o nl y t went y -f o ur childr en in t he vi llage ar e i n vited. As is the custom o f t his f estival, some pret t y l ittle things l i ke t rinke ts a n d c oi ns a re put int o t his Gr eat Cake to a mus e c hildren. And t he st ar f rom F ai r y is p ut into t he c a ke, too. T hi s st ar functions as a connection the l and of the f airy, b ut if pe ople d o n ot ha ve willingness t o see it, the star only l ooks a trinket. Tol kien i ntroduc es two c har act er s, Nokes a nd S mi th, who see the fay-s tar and s h ow o ppos ite reactions t o it. Nokes, t he Mast e r c ook i n t he village of Wo otton Maj or clings t o hi s fixe d i de as a nd f a ils to c atch a glimp se of F airy. He is a self -c onf ident and a rroga nt ma n, and d oe s not believe i n t he least bit i n t he e xist ence of t he Other wo rld. T hroughout the wh ol e story, h e obstinately cl ings to hi s fixed i de as : he thinks that fai r ylike thi n gs ar e onl y for t he c hildren, a nd t hat t heir i nterest i n Fai ries 21

30 will f ade awa y as t he y gr o w up. No ke s al so bel ieves t hat t hi n gs in Fai r y a r e s mal l and p r etty t hi n gs. Hi s fixe d i de a o f F airy appears pro minent l y i n his cake de cor ation. Fol lowi n g the tradition of T he Fe ast of Go od Children, the Master Cook, r e gar ded as the mo s t i mp or tant p erson in the village, is e xpect ed to ma ke a Great Ca ke for t his par t y. As t h is cake i s e xpect ed to h a ve some t hing s pecial, No ke s decides t o ma ke a p retty a nd f airylike c a ke with a s mall white mo u ntain on the t op and up t he si des of wh ich gr e w little trees glittering as if wi th f rost (SOWM, 252). In a d d ition, he p uts a li ttle dol l on a pi nna cl e in the mi d dle of the Ca ke, dr essed all i n white, with a l ittle wa nd in her h and e n ding in a tins el s tar, and Fai r y Que en written i n p ink ici n g round h er feet ( SO WM, 250). As these d escriptions i ndi cat e, No ke s is o bs essed with t h e i dea that the fairylike things ar e a ll little or s ma ll. Yet, this n otion t hat t hings from F airy ar e all s ma ll is wr ong. Accordi n g to Tol kien, they are not or i gi nal l y di mi nut i ve in si ze. In h is e ssay On Fai r y-st or ies, he says, Of old there we r e indee d s o me inha bi tant s o f F a ërie [Fa iry] that we re s mall (though har dl y d i mi n utive), b ut s mal lne ss wa s n ot cha racter istic o f t hat pe opl e a s a whole ( On Fa iry-stories, 29, e mp h asis adde d). He point s out that t he c oncept of di mi nutive si ze is pr oduc ed by t he wr ong i nterpret ation of t h ose p eople who o nl y b elieve i n what they can act ually s ee, a nd do n ot t r y t o know or per cei ve other t hi n gs. W he n they enc o unt er s o me thi n g t hat they ha ve ne ve r seen or e x perienced b efore, t he y try to ma ke a reasonabl e and convi nc i n g e xpl anation f or it. In stead o f accept ing t he ma tter a s it is; they dist ort the f act s b y t heir o wn interpr etation, and try t o minimi ze t he ir s ubstanc e. 22

31 Pe opl e often inter pr e t things in t heir o wn way, and stretch the facts to fit a conveni ent expl ana tion. Tol kien us e s No ke s as a n examp le of s o me one wh o ha s d ist orted a f act. Actually, No kes wa s not a good c ook, but wh en the last Co o k suddenl y left the vi llage, he wa s lucki l y a ppoi nt ed as t he ne w Mast er Cook who c o uld c o o k well enough in a s mall wa y ( S OWM, 2 48). To put it a nother wa y, he became the Mast er Co o k, e ve n t hough h e was n ot qualified for the p os i tion. T he r eason wh y he c o uld ma ke t he special c a ke for the f est i val d espite his l ack o f hi s c ulinar y t alent s is that Alf, a pr entice, hel pe d hi m mu ch. In fact, t he Ca ke was ma de mo stly b y t he prentice, but, No ke s in his a rroga n t c ould n e ver a d mit the f act; he o nl y be l ieves that Alf mi ght be cleaver wi th ici n g but he had a lot to lear n ye t ( SOWM, 251). To ma ke matters wor se, ma n y ye ar s later, he wa s f irml y c onvi nced t hat he ha d ma de t he Cake o n hi s o wn, sayi n g t hat It wa s the b est cake I e ver ma d e, a n d that s s a ying s o met h ing ( SO WM, 275). T hus, No ke s is del u de d b y hi s o wn interpr etation a nd has t wi sted the truth unknowi n gl y. 26 T hus Nokes i s a s elf -confident a nd arroga nt ma n wh o cl ings t o his own selfish i de as. His o bstina c y r e garding his o wn vi e ws p os e s a supreme cha llenge wh en it c o mes to a glimp se of Fai r y. E ven though he ha s t he oppor tunity t o see t h e fay -st ar, he ne ver believes i t is a real f ragme nt f r o m Fai r y. W he n he i s t ol d the t rut h t hat the little silver fay -st ar h as c o me from fairyland, he d oe s n ot accept t he fact and r e gards the s tar as a little f a ke trinket. Fu rther mo re, eve n whe n the Pr ent ice Al f reveal s that h e is the King o f Fai r y, di s guised a s a young prentice of t he Master Cook, No kes a ve rts h is e ye s from the fact again. He says, King o F airy! Why, h e ha dn t no wa nd 23

32 (SOWM, 2 79). It i s o b vi ous t hat No ke s st ill cl ings to his o wn ide a t hat the fairies a re s ma ll a n d pr etty and h a ve ma gi ca l wa n ds. Act ually, To l ki en na me s t he King Alf be caus e it i s a n ol d Norse form of elf. He hi nts tha t Alf is a guy from Fai r y. 27 Yet, a s Nokes i s obses sed with t he i de a of hi s o w n self -i mp ortance, h e ne ver ma n a ges t o glimp se F airy a nd s p oils all hi s cha nc es to see it. T h us, Fai r y d oe s not wor k o ut fully, be caus e No ke s ne ver tries to see it. Hi s o bsessi on with h is o wn i deas preve nts hi m to see things clearly. III Smith s jour n ey to Fairy and t he re n unciation of f i xe d ideas III-1 Sm ith s selflessness and t he recovery of hi s vi sion While Nokes cannot aba n don f ixed ideas, S mi th succeeds i n c atching a glimp se of Fairy. Smith i s selfles s and humb le in di sposi tion, does not cl ing to h is own conc epts, and h as a willingness to try unfami liar thi n gs, which i s a significant d iff er e nce from No ke s. We can see that wi th his selfless disposition and willingness t o a ccept u nf a miliar t hings he is e ndowed with a cha nc e to recove r his cl ear vi si on. Hi s selflessne ss wa s a p par ent at t he Fe ast of Go od Childr e n in hi s boyhood. W he n S mith was e ating the special cake a t t h e f estiv a l, h e ha ppene d t o notice that t he girl ne xt to h i m was d isappoi nt ed at f inding not hi n g in her cake. He then ga ve he r t he silver coi n which he ha d f ound in his slice of cake, expecting nothi n g i n r etur n. T h us, he s hows hi s selfless disposition, whi ch al lows hi m to c atch a g limps e of F airy. After this incident, he finds t he fay-s tar wh ich was also p ut int o the cake. J ane Ch ance, i n he r study of Tol kien, also me n tions S mith s selflessne s s leading t o 24

33 transf or ma tion: Be cause free of vi ce and filled with char ity, S mith is graced with the gi ft of t he st ar, hi s p assport i nto t he other wor ld o f Fa er y ( wh at To l ki e n usually calls Fa ërie), b ut one whi ch si mul tane ous l y endows hi m with a recover y of i nsi ght a nd per ception be caus e of his vi sits t o t he ot her world. ( Cha n ce, Tolkien s A rt, 100) Whe n S mith r ecei ve s t he fay-s tar, h e also recei ves s o me s pe cial abilities, such as s i n gi n g and talki n g in a be aut iful voice. In addition, he finds fasci nating var ious t hi n gs wh ic h he ha s not n oticed bef ore. H e gai ns the s kill to ma ke a ll kinds o f t hi n gs of iron which bring o ut the vi rtue s of t he ingredient. Hi s iron wo r k ha s a uni que char m, wh ich is shown as fol lows: [...] he c o uld ma k e all kinds of t hings o f iron i n hi s s mi thy. Most o f t he m, of course, wer e plai n and us ef ul, me ant for da ily needs [...]. T he y w ere st rong and lasting, but t he y al so ha d a grace a bout them, b eing shapel y i n t he ir ki nds, good t o ha ndle and t o look at. Bu t some things, when h e ha d time, he ma de f or delight; a n d the y we re be aut iful, for he c oul d wor k iron i nto wo nderful f or ms that l ooke d as light a nd d elicate a s a spr a y of leave s and bl ossom, but ke pt t he st er n s trengt h of iron, or seeme d e ven s tronger. (SOWM, ) T hus, h a vi n g gai ne d n e w i ns i ght int o the t hi n gs of the h u ma n world, he is abl e t o rei ntroduce the c har m o f thi n gs which ha d been l ost f r o m s i ght. 25