Tolkien in General

I started on the Carpenter biography. It's far more general than Garth's Tolkien and the Great War, and focuses less on Tolkien's writing, and I'm finding it rather less interesting for this reason. Still, Carpenter has a pleasant writing style, and I'm learning some little tidbits I did not know.

I was confused by the mention of a postcard that Carpenter claims that Tolkien picked up in 1911 while on a backpacking trip in Switzerland. It's a depiction of some kind of mountain-spirit, and Tolkien wrote on the back "The Origin of Gandalf". But apparently it was not painted until the late 20s, and not printed as a postcard until 1935. Just one of those little confusions in life where we misremember or misplace mementos I suppose.

Der Berggeist, Joseph Madlener

That looks more like Tom Bombadil.

Nah-ah, Tom has big yellow boots, a blue coat, and an old hat with a feather in it!

well this guy looks more like Tom than Gandalf.

{{ I can imagine Tom petting a fawn, look how careful and patient he is with his lillies. }}

That picture is far more Spirit of Nature than Wizard imo. The bright colours are more what Tom would wear, Gandalf wore grey, and I can imagine that Tom would like to talk to fawns.

{{ Well the painting is of a mountain spirit from German myth, so in that sense its closer to Tom than Gandalf in that it sems to depict a nature spirit of some sort.
Appearence wise I'd gues is more what Tolkien was focusing on, the beard seems shorter than I always pictured Gandlaf's, but then all the books give I think on beard length is that it was long. And how long is a piece of string? (or beard?)
Another artist called Garland did a homage to the original with Gandalf- }}

{{ Seems to harsh to me for Gandalf, not soft enough- I could envision Saruman having a piointy beard like that though}}

{{ So I was nosing through Letters and in Letter 183 Tolkien is defending his work against those critics who say its simple in terms of good v evil with no nuance. Its a very interesting Letter in general, towards the end of the letter he states that-

'In LotR's the conflict is not basically about 'freedom', though that is naturally involved. It is about God, and His sole right to divine honour.'

Tolkien goes on to argue that Sauron if he wins would 'have demanded divine honour from all rational creatures and absolute temporal power over the whole world.'

And then comes the really interestng bit to me-

'So even if in their desperation 'the West' had bred or hired hordes of orcs and cruelly ravaged the lands of other Men as allies of Sauron, or merely to prevent them from aiding him, their Cause would have remained indefeasibly right.'

Wondering if folks would agree with this asessment that pretty much any means justifies the end if the end is preventing Sauron setting himself up for worship in replacement of the True God.
It is certainly to a degree a sense of perhaps Tolkien having seen in his own experiences of war that sometimes very bad things were done but they led eventually to a good outcome, sacrifices made, even acts outwith the state of war that would clearly be deemed evil, yet all rewarded by God in victory and peace for the 'right' side in the end. }}

Sat down to read more of the Carpenter biography of Tolkien at 8:30, and find myself finishined with the book at half past twelve. It's put me into rather a melancholic frame of mind. Tolkien's life as put forth in the novel is surprisingly unhappy somehow. Or perhaps it seems so because the details of the end of it are freshest in my mind.

I must get to sleep. But one last thing is that I think in a few weeks' time I will be ready for the long-delayed re-reading of the LotR. It has been well over a decade since I last read it all the way through, which is far too long for a self-described fan. Time flies.

Happy, one day late, Birthday! 130 yesterday, would have been.

Happy Tolkien Reading Day!
Read a book already!

If "fans" of Tolkien who at a primary level are emotionally detached from the explicit perspective of the books and are most interested in re-interpretations of Middle-earth through opposing worldview's from Tolkien's own would simply paste "Anti-Tolkien Fan" on their name-badges it would make things a good deal simpler.

It would speed up the process of spotting such fans a great deal. Although sooner or later it does become obvious.

Forest Shepherd wrote:If "fans" of Tolkien who at a primary level are emotionally detached from the explicit perspective of the books and are most interested in re-interpretations of Middle-earth through opposing worldview's from Tolkien's own would simply paste "Anti-Tolkien Fan" on their name-badges it would make things a good deal simpler.

It would speed up the process of spotting such fans a great deal. Although sooner or later it does become obvious.

Does running this place for five years earn me any leeway when determining if I'm a real fan, or should I get fitted for my scarlet letter right away?

Um what, this describes you?

I didn't post a 5000-word essay arguing that Sauron and Celebrimbor were fucking just so people could pretend I'm not "most interested in re-interpretations of Middle-earth through opposing worldview's from Tolkien's own."

Ahh I see. But of course.

You can spot 'fans' who try to impose their world view on Tolkien from a mile away. That includes any theme connected to race/sexuality/gender/religion/politics and cats.