Reading Day

In lieu of our Reading Day meeting, here are a few thoughts about the official topic: Nature and Industrialisation. Please comment if you find anything that interests you. We can then all read the comments and respond. It’s a bit longwinded but at least we can share our thoughts.

It has been suggested that we should finish our reading of The Hobbit in a similar way for our next meeting. I will try to post some thoughts of my own for that meeting which would be the first in April. Meanwhile, here are some ideas about the Reading Day topic:

Reading Day 2020

 Nature and Industrialisation

 A few ideas gleaned from The Return of the Rings Proceedings.

Larissa Budde argues in her essay that rather than a complete dislike of Industrialisation Tolkien actually takes a nuanced view it. At its worst it is equated with ‘domination and infertile uniformity’ and with actions that cannot be healed.

He doesn’t object to ‘moderate, useful technology’.

I would ask – is technology the same as Industrialisation, and don’t we need to define ‘Industrialisation’ when discussing its evocation in Tolkien’s work?

Can we say why exactly Tolkien objects to Industrialisation, because nature always takes things back, as he obviously knew. Is it just that the romanticised view of nature and the bucolic environment was part of his own cultural environment that became enhanced by personal experience?

If we look carefully at his work, isn’t nature shown to be just as difficult to live with, and dangerous because of its objective relationship to mortal-type life forms, as industrialisation, only in different ways?

And how do things like the dragons and the trolls fit into the topic?

Jim Clarke took a radical view of Tolkien and Industrialisation by looking at Russian plagiarised versions of Tolkien’s works. By doing so he opens up other questions:

Clarke asks ‘are the Elves frightened by enlightened scientific progress so that the frighten Men into destroying it?’

Clarke draws on Kirill Yeskov’s work to consider the extent to which Industrialisation is aligned with the vexed question of racial stereotyping in Tolkien’s work, so that it becomes linked to orcs because they are the slaves of Saruman and Sauron.

Does Tolkien wilfully ignore the view of nature that Tennyson described as ‘red in tooth and claw’, and the reality of rural life which had always been blighted by poverty, although mid-19^th century depictions had largely glamorised it?

Do we learn something about ourselves if we examine our own willingness to go along with Tolkien’s investment in nostalgia and his opposition of the natural world to Industrialisation and ‘progress’?

 

First in March

14.3.20

I began this report by saying that ‘It is worth noting that this was our first meeting during the coronavirus outbreak and although this had no effect on us at this time, it may well do as time goes on. Ian made the sensible recommendation that we should all check for Library closures and other problems during the week before our meetings.’

Picking up the report now, everyone is now advised to practice ‘social distancing’, and those of us in vulnerable categories are urged not to go out. This means that there will not be anymore blog reports for the duration of the virus emergency.

Back to the discussion:

Our first concern as we began our meeting was to decide finally which text we will read next, once we finish The Hobbit. We confirmed that it will be C.S. Lewis’s Out of the Silent Planet.

Our next task was to decide what, if anything, we should do for Reading Day. We agreed that we would not have a Reading Day meal at this time, but later in the year, once the virus emergency is past, we will consider arranging a meal. We might, however, have a coffee of glass of something after the meeting on 28^th.

The Reading Day meeting itself will consist of a paper from Ian and then the final discussion of The Hobbit.

As we turned to our final chapters, ‘A Thief in the Night’ and ‘The Clouds Burst’, Chris observed that in the first of these Bilbo now becomes quite assertive.

Laura suggested he becomes forceful out of desperation.

Eileen proposed that he was scared and forcing himself to be forceful.

Chris remarked that Bilbo is trying to find a solution to the problem of the stand-off.

Laura noted that Thorin has a very intense focus on his lineage, and like all dwarves is proud of their founding fathers.

Chris reiterated his opinion that when Bilbo took the Arkenstone, it was the influence of the Ring that made him keep it.

Laura wondered whether, when Gandalf names Bilbo the ‘burglar’, did this foresee Bilbo taking the Arkenstone to resolve the dispute.

Eileen noted that Bilbo commits sin by stealing. Chris and Laura commented that good comes of it, and it was done in a good cause.

Changing tack, Laura remarked that Bilbo has a nice chat with Bombur, and Eileen observed that this has its own agenda.

Chris moved the discussion on with his comment Beorn seems able to wipe out huge numbers of enemies.

Eileen and Angela both remarked that the common enemy brings about and alliance between Elves and Dain’s dwarves, as well as Men. Angela noted the reference that ‘goblins are common foes of all.’

Chris noted that Dain’s messengers are described as using ‘old fashioned language’.

I brought up the matter of the strange statement concerning the arrival of the goblins ‘How much Gandalf knew cannot be said, but it is plain that he had not expected this sudden assault,’ and the following comment on the ‘plan in council’ with the other allies against them. I compared this to what we learn subsequently of his participation in the White Council.

Angela remarked that Sauron actually wanted to be driven out of Mirkwood, while Gandalf says of himself that he leaves folk to sort things out for themselves.

Chris observed that Saruman has been deceiving the White Council.

Ian noted that in The Hobbit it’s actually the Great Council of White Wizards, the ‘White Council’ is a later narrative development.

Laura commented that early on the other ‘Powers’ knew something was not right with Saruman.

Chris remarked that in the battle Thorin’s dwarves held back, and he wondered if there was some prior discussion, as it is in the film, because in the story it is a sudden emergence.

Laura commented that Thorin doesn’t govern by committee consensus. She also compared the force of the chapter title ‘The Clouds Burst’ with the moment in Beowulf when ‘banlocan brustan’ (the bone-locks [joints] burst), commenting on the violence and savagery it conveys.

Eileen observed that from the planning stage the reader is hurtled into battle.

Laura remarked that the film focuses on individuals while the story focuses on armies.

Ian compared the subsequent story narrative with World War One slaughter, but proposed that the violence was played down linguistically.

Eileen remarked that things happen very quickly.

Laura picked up significant echoes of Anglo-Saxon warriors dying with their lord, and compared Bilbo’s choice to fight and die (if necessary) alongside the Elvenking with that of the hostage who chooses to fight with earl Byrhtnoth at the battle of Maldon.

With that our meeting came to an end, and although we didn’t know it at the time, it was our last meeting for the duration of the virus emergency. All libraries are now closed, but once things return to normal this blog will continue to record our discussions.

 

It can also be a facility in the meantime for the exchange of comments relating to our current and future reading if we all get withdrawal symptoms!