Episode 7: Monsters, Myths, and Fairy Stories

The analytic study of fairy-stories is as bad a preparation for the enjoying or the writing of them as would be the historical study of the drama of all lands and time for the enjoyment or writing of stage-plays. – J.R.R. Tolkien, quoted from On Fairy Stories (1939/1947)

Back off, John Ronald. I happen to have enjoyed many of the works I’ve read for this project while also over-analyzing them for the dubious pleasure of my tens of listeners/readers. I also feel it would be uncharitable to point out that we are about to discuss a 40-plus page essay Mr. Tolkien himself wrote on exactly this topic, but I digress.

In case it wasn't clear, in today’s episode, we’re discussing two essays by the Mount Fuji of the fantasy genre, Mr. JRR himself. If you don’t recognize the Mount Fuji reference, please stop listening to me and go obsess over Terry Pratchett for a while.

For those who merely want a bit of context, Sir Pratchett once compared Tolkien’s influence on fantasy to how Mount Fuji appears so frequently in Japanese art. Quote:

Sometimes it [Fuji] is big and up close. Sometimes it’s a shape on the horizon. Sometimes it’s not there at all, which means that the artist either has made a deliberate decision against the mountain, which is interesting in itself, or is in fact standing on Mt. Fuji. – Terry Pratchett on J.R.R. Tolkien

Mount Fuji

And he’s not wrong. Tolkien looms exceptionally large, especially after the publication of The Lord of the Rings in the 50’s and really especially after the publication of Terry Brook’s Tolkien clone Sword of Shannara, which sold enough books to make mainstream publishers sit up and take notice of the genre as a money-making possibility. While there are whole strains of fantastic fiction in the 20th century that don’t actually have much to do with Tolkien – we’ve discussed much of it: the pulps, weird fiction, even magical realism – it’s still undeniable that the genre as it existed in the latter half of the 20th century and how it exists today are largely in-dialogue with Tolkien and his followers.

Which isn’t to say that we won’t talk about many other books that largely dodge Tolkien tropes throughout the rest of this podcast. For example, next episode’s book The Virgin and the Swine by Evangeline Walton is a retelling of Welsh folklore – the Mabinogion – and it’s just…well, it’s weird as all hell from a plot standpoint. But, it’s more in the style of Eddison or Dunsany, harkening back to old “romances” or 19th century fantasies, rather than marking the trail for a new way forward.

Several other upcoming stories – The Book of Ptath, Titus Groan, even The Once and Future King – don’t show Mt. Fuji because it hasn't quite materialized yet. But after The Lord of the Rings, and especially after the Ballantine 1965 mass market paperback versions, fantasy writers consciously know that they are dodging Tolkien or deliberately taking a different path (looking at you, Michael Moorcock).

So, where do we start with so influential a figure? Next episode, we’ll read The Hobbit and talk about how it’s a master class in introducing readers to the world through an appropriate viewpoint character. We'll also discuss how Tolkien delivers the story in a style that still resonates, but today I want to begin with two essays by Tolkien. Both essays provide insight into his work and his view on fantasy literature: “Beowulf: The Monsters and the Critics” and “On Fairy Stories.”

Buckle up everyone, I’m dusting off my robes and my mortarboard. It’s time to get academic.

I want to work through these two essays of Tolkien’s differently than we’ve done in previous episodes. Obviously, these are essays, not fiction, so they require a different approach. I don’t want to work through them line by line or even thematically, but I want to highlight specific quotes from the texts. I encourage everyone to go read the originals. They are both easy to find online and not terribly difficult to read, though “On Fairy Stories” does go on for a bit. However, in both essays, it’s obvious that Tolkien is writing about things he is passionate about, which contributes to some really great lines in both essays. “A dragon is no idle fancy.” “The wages of heroism is death.” I want to pick out several quotes, use them as a jumping off place to talk about insights and themes from Tolkien that we’ll see emerge throughout our remaining tour of 20th century fantasy literature.

First, let’s dive straight into BM&TC. Quote:

“[Beowulf] was itself and not something that the scholar would have liked better.”

I don’t think this quote needs much context, but here Tolkien is making the strong claim in this essay that Beowulf – and, by extension, heroic mythic literature in general – should be read as art on its own terms. The story should be read and enjoyed as a text, not merely mined for clues about Anglo Saxon history and culture or inappropriately compared to Greek sagas. Beowulf, the epic, in its focus on a heroic individual, is as worthy of being read as a great work of art/literature as any Greek or Roman epic, even if, and perhaps especially if, it doesn’t follow the same structure. After all, Tolkien says, it’s from a completely different culture. Why should it be compared to The Iliad or Gilgamesh and found artistically wanting?

This is, in addition to being a defense of the specific story of Beowulf, a theme that we’ll see again in “On Fairy Stories” and as a theme in the criticism of the fantasy genre generally. Basically, don’t treat epics solely as something to mine for cultural insight. Similarly, don’t treat the fantasy genre merely as some literary side show. Fantasy literature, fairy stories, mythological epics should all be enjoyed – and analyzed – as the things they are, not what the reader or critic would wish them to be. Beyond the academic realm of Anglo-Saxon poetry, this applies to the “escapist” fantasy literature that will be inspired by Tolkien, Howard, Dunsany, and others. Appreciate it for what it is, and don’t criticize it for not being Hemingway.

“A dragon is no idle fancy. Whatever may be his origins…the dragon in legend is a potent creation of men’s imagination, richer in significance than his barrow is in gold.”

I originally intended this to be the episode’s opening quote, but I went with the one about over-analyzing from "On Fairy Stories" instead. This quote highlights a key aspect of Tolkien’s insight into mythological stories, as well as the modern romances and fantasy genre stories that draw on them. Monsters aren’t just cool – although they are cool – they mean something. The type of monster – hoarding dragons, seductive vampires, manipulative wizards, faceless hoards, fallen angels/Valar – they all have significance to the author, to the reader, to the culture. The. Specifics. Matter.

Tolkien calls Beowulf’s dragon, “A personification of malice, greed, destruction (the evil side of the heroic life).” Academically, it’s important to recognize that Beowulf is more than an adventure story; it’s a commentary on the danger of greed and acquisitiveness in an ancient society built on generosity to followers and the redistribution of wealth as the visible manifestation of “honor”. For our purposes, it’s an indication that fantasy stories can be – and always have been – used to grapple with larger questions of life and society. They can talk about big questions – life, death, meaning – and often with a focus on outward behavior and not just psychological interiority. There’s a separation that allows discussion of almost infinite topics.

To borrow a quote from Patrick Rothfuss’s The Wise Man’s Fear:

“I am trying to wake your sleeping mind to the subtle language the world is whispering. I am trying to seduce you into understanding. I am trying to teach you."

One of the main benefits of modern fantasy literature remains that takes its inspiration from epics like Beowulf or Arthur or El Cid. The author can use the form, the genre, to smuggle some philosophy into stories of adventure.

"Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, but a dragon always means something." Sigmund Freud, probably.

“He is a man, and that, for him and many, is sufficient tragedy.”

Tolkien – as we’ll see in The Hobbit and LOTR – is writing from a deep, if subtle, Christian worldview. He’s not making C.S. Lewis style allusions to the obvious links between Jesus and Aslan, but his writing is infused with Christian metaphysics and worldview. See: the entirety of The Silmarillion.

Beowulf – the titular hero – is subject within his epic to what Tolkien will refer to as the “gift of men” in his later writings in LOTR and The Silmarillion. Tolkien is identifying what he sees as parallels in writings from earlier cultures and time periods with his beliefs about Christianity and eucatastrophe, a word Tolkien coins in "On Fairy Stories." Though the British Isles were fairly well Christianized by the time Beowulf was written down. Anyway, there is an inevitability to how Beowulf plays out, in Tolkien’s mind, and investigating that inevitable defeat, death basically, is as worthy a subject as any Trojan War-style epic.

Existence, an individual life, has enough pathos on its own to carry a great work of art, with the obvious literary parallel being Jesus himself and the Gospels. It’s an almost Modernist idea about the value of art analyzing the individual psychological impact of existence on a single individual.

 “Their [the Norse Gods] battle is with the monsters and the outer darkness.”

“Victory but no honour.”

Two quotes together because I really enjoy them. And I think they’re interesting looks at the differences between different pantheons that end up influencing a lot of later writers. First, referring to the Norse Gods, Tolkien makes the point that they exist within Time, capital-T. They have a purpose: preparing for Ragnarök and fighting “the outer darkness”. By contrast, the Greek Gods are immortal, timeless, and do not fear death as the Norse gods do. Take a look at Kevin Hearne’s Iron Druid Chronicles, and you’ll see a writer who is wrestling with these different takes on the nature of different divine pantheons, and how our cultures determine the nature of our human expressions of the divine.

“Victory but no honor.” Here, Tolkien is discussing monsters. Within the world of Beowulf, monsters may have victory, but even victorious, they’ll receive no accolades, no honour. With a ‘u’, ‘cause he’s British. Grendel, Grendel’s mom, the dragon. All of them, to some extent, win, at least in the beginning – and the dragon does off Beowulf, after all. But, when the monsters die, that’s it. They’re gone and their works are undone and unremembered, unpraised. None of them get the sendoff, the eulogies, the words, and affection that Beowulf does. That’s how you know they’re monsters. No one writes an epic to the dragon. 

As a brief aside, what Tolkien would make of the post-modern reexamination of the genre from the monster’s point of view, I’d give almost anything to see. Or what he would think of the almost eternal dedication to potential redemption you find in modern fantasy. Compare Gandalf’s speech to the Witch King of Angmar, Lord of the Nazgul:

“Go back to the abyss prepared for you! Go back! Fall into the nothingness that awaits you and your Master. Go!”

With, say, the speech from Michael to Nicodemus in Skin Game from The Dresden Files:

“It is not too late. Don’t you see what has happened here? What has been arranged, all the pieces that have been moved to bring you to the only place where your eyes might be opened.”

The mysterious ways of Tolkien’s Eru Illuvatar tend to work as luck or circumstance that benefits the “heroes”, which definitely sets him apart from more modern discussions of villains. Frodo and Co. are trying to destroy Sauron, after all. Not redeem him. Tolkien would have left Anakin to burn in that lava pit, is what I’m saying.

It’s something to ponder. We’ll get back to it in about 25 episodes, I think.

Moving on.

“No terms borrowed from Greek or other literatures exactly fit: there is no reason why they should.”

Tolkien here is saying something we’ve come across a few times already in our survey of fantasy literature. Don’t judge the genre – whether you call it fantasy, fairy stories, or romances – by the conventions of another tradition. Or, as I’ve put it a couple times: fantasy ain’t Modernist. There are important cultural differences manifesting themselves in seemingly similar stories about gods and heroes. But, these surface similarities hide considerable differences in symbolic meaning that people attach to particular aspects of the story. Tolkien is staking out a territory somewhat removed from what we’ll find in, say, Joseph Campbell’s The Hero with a Thousand Faces. I mainly include this quote to convince myself that my fixation on this issue of Modernism vs. the fantastic isn’t entirely bonkers.

The wages of heroism is death.

There it is. This is the key. Heroism ends in death. That’s the thing you can’t forget. In the Greek pantheon, Heracles could become porter to the gods, Castor and Pollux could ascend to the heavens and become constellations. But Beowulf dies. Victorious, in battle, but he dies. We are all going to die. There is no escape. Numenoreans may live centuries, they may destroy their entire civilization in the pursuit of immortality, but They. Will. Die. Tolkien comments that Beowulf contrasts, “youth and age, first achievement and final death.” Grendel and the dragon. As he says elsewhere, “Defeat is the theme.”

You can also see how R.E. Howard is picking up on some of the same themes. “I used to be an awesome, free warrior, now I’m an old KING, with responsibilities and age,” in Kull and somewhat in Conan (mostly Phoenix on the Sword and House of the Dragon). I know we didn’t cover Kull beyond a passing mention, but you’ll see more of that there than in Conan. Conan, of course, throws off brief thoughts of knives in the back and responsibility right before commencing a multi-nation crusade to defeat an evil lich-wizard, rather than succumbing to wounds after defeating a dragon in a bittersweet coda before being eulogized for another 40,000 lines.

Ok, that may be a mild exaggeration regarding the poem, but the denouement of Beowulf does go on for a bit.

I personally find Beowulf more interesting and relatable as I age, precisely because of what Tolkien discusses in this essay. I recently turned 42, in case this little maudlin interlude wasn’t evidence enough.

"Beowulf: The Monsters and the Critics" has so many fantastic lines and quotes. It’s obvious how much this poem meant to Tolkien himself, even apart from the obvious allusions to it in the Hobbit (Smaug and the cup) and the Lord of the Rings (Eowyn, Theoden, and Merry vs. the Witch King on the Fields of Pelenor).

But for all that, why am I including it here? Well, first, it’s interesting to contrast Tolkien’s take on Beowulf:

“Disaster is foreboded. Defeat is the theme. Triumph over the foes of man’s precarious fortress is over and we approach slowly and reluctantly the inevitable Victory of Death.”

And compare that to the eucatastrophe that we find in his famous fantasy writings. The eucatastrophe is “a sudden and unexpected fortuitous event,” or, in Tolkien’s words, “the sudden happy turn in a story which pierces you with a joy that brings tears.”

I kinda prefer his definition. It’s the eagles at Mount Doom. Gollum at Mount Doom for that matter. The Riders of Rohan at the Fields of Pelenor. Spoiler Alert: Gandalf’s resurrection.

Beowulf, by contrast, is about inevitable defeat, if in no other way than by the hands of time and fate. Tolkien, at least in his personal writings, wants us to have happier endings, if always tinged with the tragedy of Beowulf. For example, we aren’t there yet, but while Theoden dies on the Pelenor fields, Merry and Eowyn are saved.

But more deeply, from a genre history standpoint, it’s mainly indirectly through Tolkien (and other authors) that a connection back to real-world epic historical tales is established. Tolkien weaves his academic interest in philology, epic poetry, and classical literature with a deeply felt but subtle Christian worldview. Stir that together with a little old fashioned tenure, and out shakes the template for modern fantasy. Quests, unlikely fellowships, eucatastrophes, sacrifice, dark lords and potential end of the world. High fantasy, here we come.

I’ll leave our discussion of "Beowulf: The Monsters and the Critics" with a final quote which I love and whose significance I’ll leave for the listener to ponder.

It is just because the main foes in Beowulf are inhuman that the story is larger and more significant than this imaginary poem of a great king’s fall.