THE JOURNAL OF INKLINGS STUDIES

Stratford Caldecott and Thomas Honegger (eds), Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings: Sources of Inspiration Review by Faith Liu The Journal of Inklings Studies Vol. 5, No. 1, April 2015 Stratford Caldecott and Thomas Honegger (eds), Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings: Sources of Inspiration. Zollikofen: Walking Tree Publishers, 2008. 237 pp. ISBN 978-3905703122.

The contents of Stratford Caldecott and those, rather than analyzing text for Thomas Honegger’s collection have Tolkien’s own ‘sources of inspiration’, less to do with the actual inspiration utilize passages only as illustrations behind Tolkien’s composition than with for broader theses or comparative study the recent critical effort to consider his with another work or author. The works as a source of inspiration for search for a genuine unifying principle scholarship across and beyond in lieu of such a title proves Tolkein’s oeuvre. This at least was the unrewarding, and yet perhaps this is to intent behind the 2006 International be expected for a volume as varied and Tolkien Studies Conference, held by interdisciplinary in character as this Tolkien’s own alma mater at Exeter one is. College, Oxford, whose proceedings After a short foreword by Frances this book comprises. Keeping with the Cairncross, current rector of Exeter goals of the conference – establishing College, on Tolkien’s undergraduate the legitimacy and encouraging the life, Caldecott expands upon the goal growth of Tolkien scholarship through of the conference itself, an event he international and interdisciplinary deems to have ‘marked the “coming of collaboration – this volume’s selection age” of Tolkien Studies’ (6). of ten papers seeks to demonstrate the Caldecott’s defense of the academic successful emergence of Tolkien worthiness of this discipline appears Studies through its broadness of scope. unnecessarily aggressive, and is The collection discusses Tolkien and matched by a heartfelt if perhaps his legendarium through a wide variety unnecessary defense of the value of of lenses; however, within the spectrum fantasy from a layman’s perspective, of subjects covered, there is little to connecting Tolkien with such modern justify the volume’s title: only half of popular fantasists as J.K. Rowling. its contributors deal directly with The Ultimately, Caldecott brings both Lord of the Rings, and the majority of perspectives together, reminding the

1 reader that the rise of Tolkien Studies paint an often amusing and sometimes as an academic endeavour should not elegiac picture of Tolkien’s leave Tolkien stuffed and mounted on undergraduate life, ranging from his the dusty pedestal of ‘the greats’, nor many pranks and parties to the War’s should Tolkien’s popular appeal, impact on the College and on Tolkien including the spawn of numerous as a student. Garth’s essay focuses imitators, exclude his works from mainly on Tolkien’s non-academic serious study. Indeed, the collection’s endeavours, making only a cursory various authors, while not unified in attempt at connecting them with his subject matter or style, all demonstrate writings; however, his discussion of a refreshing degree of enthusiasm to Tolkien’s academic interests and match the academic vigour of their involvement in the Apolausticks and topic. While the level of prior the Stapeldon Society – particularly knowledge demanded may put this Tolkien’s highly dramatic secretarial volume beyond the reach of the general accounts – reveal roots and early reader, its diverse offerings contain offshoots of Tolkien’s more mature many unique insights, and invite the work. Gilliver, Weiner and Marshall, as reader to explore further the many editors in the Oxford English directions and disciplines in which Dictionary Revision Programme, each Tolkien Studies has expanded. discuss a particular aspect of Tolkien’s work with the OED in their essay ‘The The papers are organized into three Word as Leaf: Perspectives on Tolkien parts, beginning with the as Lexicographer and Philologist’. ‘biographical’. Of its three essays, the Gilliver describes, with frequent first two are primarily supplements or tangents into the obscurities of expansions upon books written by the dictionary editing, Tolkien’s personal authors themselves: John Garth’s relationships with two of the OED’s Tolkien and the Great War (2003), and chief editors, William Craigie and Peter Gilliver, Jeremy Marshall and Henry Bradley, as well as his work on Edmund Weiner’s The Ring of Words Middle English texts with Kenneth (2006). Both papers burst with Sisam. Weiner’s contribution is a information and insight, but also speculative appraisal of the often-dry exhibit the shortcomings of their form: linguistic origins of Tolkien’s words – rushed summaries, leaps in logic, and some of which are fascinating, others fragmentary glimpses in place of of which seem unnecessarily complex detailed analysis. John Garth’s essay, for words as straightforward as ‘Tolkien, Exeter College and the Great ‘Treebeard’ and ‘wolf-rider’. In War’, utilizes an impressive array of contrast, Marshall’s note on Tolkien’s memoirs and unpublished documents to ‘incorrect’ use of the plural dwarves

2 provides a satisfyingly detailed, well- personal experiences as well as from supported argument for Tolkien’s right his fiction fail to reveal a clear line of to adopt a minority spelling. Finally, reasoning, leading many of his Verlyn Flieger’s essay, ‘Gilson, Smith, statements to appear as opinion rather and Baggins,’ addresses The Lord of than extensions or explanations of the Rings itself, reading Sam Gamgee’s Tolkien’s philosophy. Mark Oziewicz’s last line ‘Well, I’m back’ in the light ‘The Affirmation of Myth against the of those who were not – namely, Tyranny of Reason’ notes parallels Tolkien’s close friends Rob Gilson and between the philological work of Geoffrey Smith, two of the ‘immortal eighteenth-century philosopher four’ of the TCBS, both killed in Giovanni Battista Vico and that of France. Flieger at times reaches too far Tolkien. Both men affirmed myth and in demonstrating how Gilson and Smith philology, decried the rationalism and are represented in Frodo and those modernism of their day, and devoted characters who cannot, or cannot fully, themselves to the development of vast return to earthly life; however, she mythopoeic projects. Interesting as does make strong connections between these similarities are, Oziewicz admits Tolkien’s struggles to reconcile the in his opening paragraph that there is senselessness of his friends’ deaths and as yet no proof that Tolkien ever the themes of death and immortality, encountered Vico’s treatises; thus, the divine purpose and self-doubt, within identification of Vico as a source of his work. inspiration ‘may…be legitimate only in its broadest sense of “intellectual The second section, ‘Mythos and tradition”‘ (113). Peter M. Candler’s Modernity,’ seeks to relate Tolkien to essay comparing Tolkien and Nietzsche contemporary trends in philosophy, a likewise must draw intellectual subject in which readers unfamiliar connections where no evidence of with Enlightenment and Modernist personal familiarity exists. Candler thinkers may easily become lost. ably discusses both authors’ disdain Patrick Curry’s essay on enchantment, toward modernity, but the similarity though written in his trademark ends there: their proposed solutions for conversational tone and clarified with the problem of modernity take the bullet-pointed lists, is somewhat concepts of myth and philology in difficult to follow. The connections opposite directions, Tolkien turning to drawn between Max Weber’s ideas of ‘sub-creation’ and Nietzsche to the disenchantment, Tolkien’s ‘On Fairy- eternal recurrence wherein nothing can Stories’, and the writings of Jan be truly created. Candler also examines Zwicky stand well-supported, but the the One Ring as an image of arguments Curry draws from Tolkien’s Zarathustrian eternal recurrence,

3 reading The Lord of the Rings as the also reveals several moments in The triumph of Christianity and of joy, a Lord of the Rings where Chesterton’s joy found even in pagan myth, over work provides a possible verbal nihilism and modernity. parallel. Guglielmo Spirito, O.F.M. Conv., in his essay entitled ‘The Candler’s essay transitions the book Influence of Holiness: The Healing into its final section, concerning Power of Tolkien’s Narrative,’ utilizes Christian aspects of Tolkien’s work. only two primary texts: a letter from Leon Pereira, O.P., discusses the Tolkien in reply to a reader who wrote influence of Tolkien’s Catholicism on of a ‘sanity and sanctity’ in The Lord his mythology. In addition to drawing of the Rings, and a passage from The heavily on Tolkien’s own statements Two Towers, when Frodo and Sam are about his work in the Letters, Pereira’s shown the Window on the West. essay carefully walks the reader Guglielmo’s essay does not exude through Tolkien’s moral system as academic erudition so much as effusive made apparent in the acts of pity and joy and wonder at Tolkien’s love by Bilbo, Frodo, and especially presentation of transcendent glory, Sam depicted within The Hobbit and beauty, and truth in myth. And in the The Lord of the Rings. Pereira singles last essay, Stratford Caldecott brings out Sam as the true hero of the story: together John Garth’s biographical the simple, rustic man, deeply religious work, Tolkien’s Catholicism, Charles in his love, made heroic by his Kingsley’s Hereward the Wake, and experience, and ultimately returning to various events in the history of Anglo- home and family. Alison Milbank Saxon, Celtic, and even early city- contributes an essay on ‘Tolkien, based civilization in connection with Chesterton, and Thomism’, in which Tolkien’s mission of preserving, or she argues for Tolkien’s complex perhaps rescuing, the essence of fictional world as a reflection of England. Thomas Aquinas’s metaphysics and theology, saying that G.K. Chesterton’s Certain aspects of this volume philosophy, in its presentation of challenge its introduction’s claim that Thomistic ideas, ‘undergirds Tolkien’s Tolkien Studies have in fact ‘come of Middle-earth, and contributes towards age’. The book could benefit from an its credibility and overall tone and index, several footnote and citation effect’ (187). At first, it might seem corrections, a more professional cover unnecessary for Milbank to approach art and typeface, and a title more Aquinas through Chesterton’s lens; representative of its content. At times, however, in doing so, she not only its contributors are enthusiastic to the creates a more accessible essay, but point of incoherence, but their

4 enthusiasm itself, and the level of care Conclusion concerning the future of the and skill they put into their work, discipline is altogether hopeful, and, stands as an encouraging proof of with a little work, he may not be Tolkien Studies’ burgeoning growth. wrong. Thomas Honegger’s speculations in his Faith Liu Hillsdale College

5