ot-my mini review of Children of Hurin

Jesper Svedberg · 16 Apr 2007, 21:57 · from 2007-April.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: jsvedberg at gmail.com (Jesper Svedberg)
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 23:57:08 +0200
Subject: (urth) ot-my mini review of Children of Hurin
In-Reply-To: <603890.47880.qm at web54404.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <603890.47880.qm at web54404.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4623F134.7040306 at gmail.com>

Nathan Spears skrev:

> I think the distinction is a matter of foundation - the bedrock for Tolkien's creation was the ancient Finnish myth, Arthur, etc.  The bedrock for much of what is being referred to as "the modern fantasy genre," especially "high fantasy," is Tolkien.  Even those writers who don't claim him as a primary influence would not have had the same atmosphere in which to peddle their trade without Tolkien having changed the publishing landscape.  The use of the phrase "modern epic fantasy of quality" is also dubious.

So what? The fantasy tradition existed before Tolkien. It is undeniable 
that he has made a bigger impression on it than any other writer, but 
the types of stories he wrote are very similar in structure to what 
William Morris wrote before him and very similar to what Le Guin or Guy 
Gavriel Kay wrote after him.

> Legions of Tolkien fans cry foul!  Tolkien spent decades working on the source material which LotR sprang from, and he was much more intimately acquainted with the aforementioned myths and epics than many of his followers.  On the whole I think that this resulting in a work which approaches the quality and power of his sources better than most (all) subsequent work in the "modern fantasy genre."  So the difference is not necessarily in the individual elements of quests, elves, wizards, strange creatures, but in the overall quality of the work which requires acknowledgment as a thing apart.

Never. He may be better, but that makes his stories GOOD fantasy, not a 
completely different genre. I can't believe that I have to defend the 
quality of modern fantasy on a Gene Wolfe mailing list of all places, 
since Wolfe more than anyone has proved that Tolkien is far from the 
end-all of fantasy literature. This is snobbism at its worst.

   // Jesper

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net