The Hobbit

plz
anyone?

The majority of the people at this site are in the United States, and you have posted during what is either the middle of the night for them, or very late at night. The folks who come here from Europe hadn't gotten up in the morning yet when you posted. I judge from your posting time that you live in Oz . . . maybe? If you're an American, you're up awfully late for an 11 year old.

The Hobbit is a classic quest story. In such stories, the protagonist (the central character, the "hero") is usually someone who is not particularly noticable, ordinarily. This is a type of story which appeals to children, and it is also often found in the ancient and primitive legends of many people.

The basic theme is that this insignificant person (in this case, Bilbo the Hobbit) has to overcome his own shortcomings and fears to accomplish his purpose. In the process, he learns many things about himself, and about other people. He becomes stronger, and he becomes wiser. One typical feature of such stories is that the main character is called upon to do things which at first seem beyond him or her. In this case, the wizard Gandalf tells the dwarves that Bilbo is an accomplished theif, which is not true. But Bilbo is embarrassed to admit it, and he wants to have a great adventure, so he goes along with the story. That is the mechanism which puts him in harm's way so that he learns those valuable lessons, so that he becomes strong and wise.

This particular story is complicated in a way that other quest stories are not, because this story also sets up the action in The Lord of the Rings, the monumental, classic modern quest story. In a way, The Hobbit is an unfinished story, and jThe Lord of the Rings resolves the issues left unfinished in The Hobbit.

I hope that helps you.

The spirit of it is that the Hero must undertake a journey (or quest) with companions to retrieve something of immense value. In the end it is NOT the item that is so important, as the changes the Hero undergoes in themselves and the deeds they perform.


Hope this helps. But, we ain't always going to be here to do your homework for you!

More often than not, a hero does not choose his quest, but is chosen by circumstances. In Bilbo's case a most unlikely, peace-loving hobbit is selected by a wizard and becomes heroic by rising to the requirments of the quest.

That was pretty darn good, Setanta

Thanks, Boss, you are very kind . . .

Dear Setanta,

It is an interesting thought. May we apply it also to «Der Ring des Nibelungen» and the «Quest of the Sangraal», I wonder.

Kind regards,

Goldmund

The Niebelungen Leid and the Holy Grail quest cycle both suffer from peculiarities not found in ordinary quest tales. In the former, the Germans are engaged in an act of literary masturbation over the glories of their putative racial superiority and war-like excellence; in the latter, all manner of disgusting religious homilies are dragged in to spoil an otherwise robust and vigorous tale of profane and realistic life.

Dear Setanta,

It is a fascinating point of view. I did not notice examples of «literary masturbation» in the Nibelungenlied. It is perhaps the case too that «the Germans» did not exist in the 13th century. But it is a long time since I have read it. It is no doubt my bad memory that is at fault.

As for Grail stories, you may read the version by Sir Thomas Malory. He is a fine writer. He does not have homilies.

May I ask you to be so kind as to direct me to «ordinary quest tales»?

Warm regards,

Goldmund

I was being facetious in my remarks about the Niebelungen and the Grail. As for Germans not existing in the 13th century, apparently someone neglected to mention this to Tacitus, when he wrote his Germania more than a thousand years earlier.

I have read Malory so many times i cannot now say how many that is. The entire false pious claptrap of the pure knight seeking the Grail, and particularly of the bastard Galahad redeeming his father's sin by his purity is an extended religious homily--it is nonsense to deny it.

My remarks were orginally in response to questions about The Hobbit, and were therefore referential to the quest in modern popular literature, and not the self-serving fairy tales which usually characterize ancient quest cycles.

My dear sir,

It is now clear that you meant, not Germans in the modern sense, but Germanic peoples. We may therefore rephrase your statement thus:

«The Germanic peoples are engaged in an act of literary masturbation over the glories of their putative racial superiority and war-like excellence».

It is now still more fascinating. It would however be tedious for you to direct me to the passages in question.

Warm regards,

Goldmund

Dear Setanta,

You raise many fascinating points. Therefore I am unable to resist a further question.

What are examples of «the quest in modern popular literature»? May I ask also, what examples might you offer of «self-serving fairy tales» in «ancient quest cycles»?

It is most amusing, where you speak of Malory. One man will enjoy «entirely false claptrap» about the Grail, and another will enjoy «entirely false claptrap» about fluffy halflings. Let us not be too censorious.

Warm regards,

Goldmund

The point of both The Hobbit and the The Lord of the Rings trilogy is that hobbits are anything but "fluffy." Whether one consider religion from an outsider's point of view and find the religious trappings overlaid on the old, old Arthurian cycle, or from within the canonical doctrine of the medieval church, the religious aspects of Malory's Morte d'Artur are false. For the irreligious, any religious content is false. From the point of view of the church of the middle ages, the stories of Parsifal, Galahad and all the other seekers after the Grail are wildly inaccurate within the context of scripture and accepted church history.

As for modern quest literature, there is a good deal of it, and there was a time twenty years ago and more when i read a fair bit of it. Most of it i do not recall well enough to give you authors and titles. I do recall Card's Ender's Game series, and there was another which ran to several volumes. Herbert's Dune series ran to several volumes, seven in the end, i believe. One might put the two books of Richard Adams "Beklan Empire" series, Shardik and Maia into the same category. A great deal of modern fantasy literature, and especially the "sword and sorcery" variety, is quest literature. By and large, the protagonists either have humble or troubled origins, and great obstacles to overcome in completing a quest which would seem at the outset beyond their powers.

Gautama Siddhartha, who became the Buddha, was the subject a great many outrageous stories which grew up after his lifetime (if he indeed did exist, which i think is likely). These stories of his surrealistic powers and martial skills constitute self-serving fairy tales because they appeal to the credulous and the humble who enjoy dreaming of those who have power over the crushing reality which is their lot in life--it is escapist. It is also a sad comment on what those who succeeded Gautama felt would be necessary to "sell" his message, which was one of humility, repose and inner peace, and not fantastic feats of arms against evil spirits. Such tales are common in ancient literature, and one of the finest collections of such tales which were preserved, with much modification, and brought down to the present can be found in Richard Francis Burton's The Thousand Nights and the One Night, commonly and incorrectly known as The Arabian Nights.

When i speak of Malory, i speak of the one piece of literature with which i am most familiar. I have read Malory many times since first i read it, nearly fifty years ago. I have read it in abridged form and in modern English, i have read the full, "official" version as published by Caxton in 1485 in the original north-country dialect, i have read the revision issued several years ago based upon the complete manuscript found at the West Riding in Winchester in the 1930's. I have read White's The Once and Future King (the title taken from the epitaph given in Malory: Hic iacet Arturus, rex quondam, rexque futurus--Here lies Arthur, once and future King); i have read the unfinished version which John Steinbeck had been writing at the time of his death, after he had been allowed to examine and copy portions of the West Riding manuscript (which runs to slightly more than one thousand sheets). You ought not to assume anything about how i view that work based upon my contempt for the larding of pseudo-religious claptrap onto one of the, if not the greatest literary cycle in European history. Steinbeck in the preface to his uncompleted work notes that he had read Malory as a child, and had loved the work ever since. That resonated with me, because of all the books i have read, and re-read, i come back to the Arthurian cycle, and Malory in particular, more than any other.

Dear Setanta,

It is kind of you to explain at such length.

You make interesting points. You will forgive me if I reply to three of them.

1) «These stories of his surrealistic powers and martial skills constitute self-serving fairy tales because they appeal to the credulous and the humble who enjoy dreaming of those who have power over the crushing reality which is their lot in life--it is escapist. ».

You do not consider that such a description may fit «modern fantasy literature», and the tales of Professor Tolkien?

2) «Whether one considers religion from an outsider's point of view and finds the religious trappings overlaid on the old, old Arthurian cycle, or from within the canonical doctrine of the medieval church, the religious aspects of Malory's Morte d'Artur are false. For the irreligious, any religious content is false.»

It is my belief that Malory's book is a work of fiction. (You will correct me if I am wrong.) In that book, there are many imaginary events. Some concern knights and maidens and castles. Some concern religious occurrences. As for me, I believe them all, when I read in Malory. When I close the book, I believe them no longer.

But you say here, I think, that you believe some of the imaginary things. Otherwise, you would not specify that you do not believe others. Is it not strange, to read that which one knows is fiction, and to disbelieve parts of it?

3) «I have read the revision issued several years ago based upon the complete manuscript found at the West Riding in Winchester in the 1930's.»

It is a long time since I have read in the edition of Caxton. For many years, I have read only in the Winchester College text. It was discovered by W.F. Oakeshott in 1934 in the Fellows' Library. It is superior, I think. I do not know if your strictures apply also to the Winchester text.

Of the French originals, I am perhaps no longer qualified to speak. It is too long since I have read them.

Warm regards,

Goldmund

I don't ? Gosh, i didn't know that.



This is a work of sheer fantasy on your part. I cannot imagine, and frankly am little interested in knowing just what it is that leads you to make such a contention. Nothing in what i wrote suggests that i find any part of Malory to be a description of the literal truth. Your inability to comprehend what i've written in plain English does not oblige me to lead you by the hand to understanding.

If you want to point out what you believe is a case of my having suggested that i believe any part of Malory to be the literal truth, i will be more than happy to point out to you just how deluded you are.

My dear Setanta,

No doubt the fault is mine. I am sorry. It is difficult for me always to comprehend the English of websites.

It is this comment to which I have referred:

«The religious aspects of Malory's Morte d'Artur are false.»

It is a sentence that has meaning only if one believes that there are parts of the book that are «true». Otherwise, one may not make such a distinction.

Kind regards,

Goldmund

Dear Setanta,

It is perhaps unclear that the sentence that you have quoted is a question, rather than a statement.

Best wishes,

Goldmund

For whatever you allege about "the English of websites," the English which i use (or more properly, my use of the American language) is not different in real life than online.

"The religious aspects of Marlory's Morte d'Artur are false."--is taken out of context.



I'll put this as clearly as i am able. Those who do not consider religion to be a valid intellectual activity will find that any religious content in anything is false--and therefore will find the Grail quest to be based upon false premises. Even among those who believed chapter and verse the theology of the fifteenth century, the religious content in the Grail quest as portrayed by Malory is false, in that it is not consonant either with accepted theology of the day, nor church history as known in that era. That religious content is very obviously religious homily created by a lay source, and it is not therefore acceptable in terms of canonical dogma.

None of which is to say that i consider any part of the Arthurian cycle to be literal truth.

Dear Setanta,

It is correct. It is how I have interpreted your words.

Let us imagine that you are reading the Iliad of Homer. We discuss the Apple of Discord. You perhaps say:

«Those who do not consider religion to be a valid intellectual activity will find that any religious content in anything is false--and therefore will find the story of the Iliad to be based upon false premises. Even among those who believed chapter and verse the theology of Homeric Greece, the religious content in the Iliad as portrayed by Homer is false, in that it is not consonant with accepted theology of the day. That religious content is very obviously religious homily created by a lay source, and it is not therefore acceptable in terms of priestly dogma.»

To which I reply: «You may enjoy the fiction of Achilles in his tent. Why then may you not enjoy the fiction of Zeus on Olympus?»

Kind regards,

Goldmund