Mieville on Tolkien

Mieville on Tolkien

Like Clancy detractors who are busy telling me every detail of what is wrong--much of this seems to be misplaced and misdirected.  It isn't that we don't know it is wrong--we don't care.  And given that that world exists only in my head, we needn't care.


  1. Steven,

    Agreed. I enjoy reading his novels, though.

    I think he should stop taking himself so seriously and stop being such a grump.

  2. Hi Steven, I agree, and I'll take it one step furhter.

    Mieville and Michael Moorcock (whose essay "Epic Pooh" Mieville frequently cites approvingly) really are missing the boat and their arguments are the result of minds that view the world purely through a political lens. Just because Tolkien has a distant, far-off figurehead of a king restored to the throne of Gondor at the end of the Lord of the Rings, does that necessarily mean that the book is endorsing inherited monarchy as our ideal form of government? The answer of course is no. LOTR is about so much more than that, including heroism and bravery by the little people, the costs of war, the need for pity and mercy, the problem of unequivocal power, and much more. Mieville's argument really is small and petty and does nothing but reduce a great work. That's why Tolkien kept citing at every turn that LOTR was not meant to be an allegory. It's a shame Mieville has refused to listen.


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Structures--Ulysses and Mrs. Dalloway

Lewis Carroll and James Joyce

Another Queen of Night