A Close Reading of LotR – Episode 10 – Two Beardy Bois

Only two chapters today, IV – Treebeard and V – The White Rider, but still plenty to mull over (harum barum), so we shouldn’t be hasty.

Joking aside, while Chapter IV at least is pretty sizeable, for me at least, these weren’t particularly substantial parts of the text. They are mostly enjoyable ones – Merry and Pippin wander into Fangorn, meet Treebeard, then go off with him to the Entmoot and the decision to go to war, and then Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli follow them into the woods, only to be met by a rather chatty Gandalf willing to give some explanations – but that enjoyment tended more to be experiential for me, rather than one of digging into deeper things. Sometimes it’s just nice to tramp about in a wood for a bit, you know?

It helps that, for Chapter IV, the text follows the perspective of Merry and Pippin again. They managed to bring a surprisingly light tone to a fairly awful chapter about their kidnap, so it’s not a shock they do so again to a much less dark one. But they do. They reach accord with Treebeard fairly quickly, and he then takes them with him, first to his home, and then to a meeting he calls of the Ents, in response to the hobbits’ tidings about goings on in the outside world. But alongside the generally light, what ho chaps type vibe that Merry and Pippin have tended to bring with them, Treebeard himself is mildly comedic. The slow, ponderous talking, the insertions of harooms and barooms, and tumbling phrases in Ent-syntaxed-Elven1, the relationship he has with time, and with the people he considers young (which includes even Saruman). But for all that (sorry, film comparison incoming), he is not the same comedic figure Jackson makes him. There’s a lightness here, but it is not laugh out loud funny, just a diversion away from the full realities of the current situation, and one that (foreshadowing klaxon, of which there are plenty in these two chapters) simply will not last.

Treebeard is also weirdly… ambiguous, in his book description. Not the sentient tree, exactly, that the film renders him, but something oddly difficult to grasp. I’ll admit, the most obvious way I took the physical description we get (where we see his toes, the skin of his arms contrasted to his craggy maybe-body-or-maybe-clothing), is something akin to the sort of old fashioned cartoons where the body gets detail, and the arms and legs are simple, monochrome and unplaceable as to their substance and covering. I’m envisioning a tree trunk with those appendages tacked on. It’s not Tolkien’s best descriptive work, and it leans frankly towards the silly if I think on it too long. Outside of appearance, the ambiguity remains, but is much more clearly directed. We are, ultimately, told that Treebeard is the oldest living thing that yet walks under the sun on Middle Earth. So he predates wizards, he predates elves and their kin strife… but wait a second, haven’t we already heard of someone else being eldest? What does this status of Treebeard mean for Tom Bombadil? I have no idea! Several options present themselves. But whatever he is, however he relates to the other quasi mythical beings, Treebeard is old as fuck, and himself complicates exactly what his nature is by comparing first to elves, then to men, before concluding he is like neither and both, or perhaps simply the best of both.

But outside of his words, what comes through very clearly for me is how much Tolkien wants us to see him, and the Ents as a whole, as nature embodied. Their actions are often described in terms of natural forces, and their surprising strength as the strength of trees to break rock… just maybe not on a tree timescale. Their interests are bounded by their forest, and many of them are even becoming more tree-like over time. Where this becomes particularly evident is in the explicit parallels being drawn between Fangorn (and the Ents) and Lothlórien (and the elves).

The two areas mirror each other quite closely. Both are woodland, obviously, but both are closed off in some regard, believed by outsiders to be dangerous places which are hard to enter and harder to leave. Indeed, Celeborn warns the Fellowship of the dangers of Fangorn, and Treebeard throws that warning right back as applicabel to Lothlórien, just as Boromir feared to enter there. But it goes deeper. Lothlórien was a place outside of time, where the power of Nenya holds back the forces of time and change from this last, perfect place of Elfdom. As they enter Fangorn, Merry and Pippin remark upon the stifling atmosphere there, too, comparing it to a storage room of an old Brandybuck, preserved unchanged for hundreds of years, in spite of custom and the natural way of things. The atmosphere of unchanged and unchanging Fangorn is oppressive, because change is inevitable. Both magical forests we have thus far encountered are closed off from the world, closed off from time, and this is against the natural order of things.

But this comparison is important because it presents a key difference between the two. The problem of Tolkien’s elves2 is this resistance to the inevitable change of the long defeat. Time marches on and does eventually conquer them, but they are backwards looking – Treebeard remarks on their singing songs of times that will never return – and where they are able, they resist change brought, naturally, by time. Fangorn seems stagnant, but the Ents do not, when called upon, resist these changes. They lament what is lost (more on that in a second), but remain, for the most part, settled in the present. And even when they go to war, fearing it to be their last march and their doom, they think on the fact that change may, even as it erases everything they hold close, bring them back to the Entwives. The forest may burn, but from the ashes grow new saplings. Even in the ultimate destruction, there remains hope of something in the future.

Which brings us to one of the weirdest things in this section – the Entwives. Lost long ago, they were the partners of the nature-focussed Ents, whose bent turned more to cultivated things, to mastery of nature rather than shephering and existence within. A split of the cultivated vs the wild. Now where have we heard that before…

Yep, it’s the Tom Bombadil/Goldberry cultivated/wild duality I talked about back in Episode 3. Except this time it’s reversed, and I have some Thoughts on the Gender of it all. See, when we met Tom, who seemed to me to stand for the natural world, tamed, his mastery of it is presented as pretty natural and straightforward. He commands things when they need commanding, and uses this to save the hobbits from various dangers. His mastery is a Good, and also pretty powerful and serious, even when nothing else about him is serious. Meanwhile, the Ents, the men, stand for nature untamed, and are the perspective we see (mirroring Goldberry), and they tell us about the Entwives. And their narration of them, and their mastery over things cultivated, seems to imply nothing more than “bossy, nagging wife”. Like so:

The Entwives ordered them to grow according to their wishes, and bear leaf and fruit to their liking; for the Entwives desired order, and plenty, and peace (by which they meant that things should remain where they had set them).

It’s giving old married couple domestic. It’s giving “the ol’ ball and chain”. There’s no malice in it, but that slightly dismissive parenthetical does give “bedrock of unquestioned misogyny” when held in contrast to the previous weird magical being who likes cultivated things. Of course, because we only get the Entwives in narration from an Ent, we see only half of the picture, but I sincerely doubt having an omniscient third person section of Ent/wife interaction would change that… and even if it did well, we don’t. We have the text we have, and I’m side-eyeing it a little bit.

The other thing we get from the weird aside that is the Entwife section is a song composed by the Elves but remembered by the Ents about the hunt for them, which ends with:

Ent: When Winter comes, the winter wild that hill and wood shall slay;
When trees shall fall and starless night devour the sunless day;
When wind is in the deadly East, then in the bitter rain
I’ll look for thee, and call to thee; I’ll come to thee again
Entwife: When Winter comes, and singing ends; when darkness falls at last;
When broken is the barren bough, and light and labour past;
I’ll look for thee, and wait for thee, until we meet again:
Together we will take the road beneath the bitter rain!
Both: Together we will take the road that leads into the West,
And far away will find a land where both our hearts may rest.

So I read this as implying that Ents and Entwives could/would sail off to Valinor, which closes the loop on the mirroring between Fangorn and Lothlórien in a fascinating way, given the generally tightly constrained types of people who are permitted to enter Valinor. Ed, however, pointed out that the song is one composed by Elves, and suggested that maybe this is the only “land where [they] can live together and both be content” that the Elves could envision for the Ent/wives, because Elves are a bit single-minded that way. It’s not important, in the grand scheme of things, but I quite like both readings, in very different ways.

Before I get too bogged down in it, moving away from the Entwives, who are really something of a diversion from most of what’s going on here. Merry and Pippin may not seem to be all that active in their participation in this chapter, generally being carried about places and listening to conversations, but the news they bring to Treebeard (which includes the startlingly accurate description of Gandalf as having “fallen out of the story”, more on that later) has precipitated change that was already brewing but not ready to boil over. The threat posed by the Enemy to the wood, to the trees for whom the Ents care, is now sufficiently proximate that the Ents decide that it is time to rouse themselves, and to march to war. The whole chapter points this way – Tolkien isn’t interested in the kind of narrative tension that would keep this secret – and contains little foreshadows of what they will do there, using a lot of broken dams, smote rocks and flooding water metaphors. The tension he is interested in, however, is both the fate the Ents themselves will meet there, and their attitude towards it. Like so many other points in the story, the key here is that the Ents choose to resist. Because Treebeard, when speaking to the Hobbits, makes it clear he thinks the end of the Ents is a very real possibility of this action:

‘Of course, it is likely enough, my friends,’ he said slowly, ‘likely enough that we are going to our doom: the last march of the Ents. But if we stayed at home and did nothing, doom would find us anyway, sooner or later. That thought has long been growing in our hearts; and that is why we are marching now. It was not a hasty resolve. Now at least the last march of the Ents may be worth a song.’

Resistance matters. Tolkien is very interested in how people face up to impossible odds or horrible situations, more than in whether they are able to overcome them. The choice of the Ents here to make a stand of it, to choose to act even though they may die, epitomises both that, and their difference from the Elves. Change is inevitable, and their action is not to resist it, but to do what is right while marching ever on into whatever future it brings.

This, the swinging of the story’s pendulum from present action to a determined future, is one half of the “turning of the tide”. The other comes, in much like fashion, in Chapter V – The White Rider.

By contrast to the above, this is one of the rare times Tolkien does want to spin out tension by keeping information from the reader. But as Ed has read this book more times than he can count, and I have done so a couple of times and seen the films approximately a bajillion, there is absolutely no tension here. Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli track into the forest looking for the hobbits, as Gimli frets about the threat of the white wizard he saw in the night. Eventually, an old man figure emerges from the trees (whom Gimli would like to shoot on sight, being by far the most discomfited by their current surroundings), who reveals himself to be Gandalf. And not just any Gandalf, but a Gandalf who comes bearing Exposition. Yes it’s another talky chapter.

But! This is a talky chapter with a couple of key differences (also honestly most of the talky chapters are great anyway, it’s just the last one that didn’t work for me).

First up, Gandalf, with a little prodding, speaks more plainly here than he has done… pretty much at any other point in the story. Some of his statements may not be totally obvious to a first time reader, but he shifts into pretty consistent declaratives, stating facts and actions that absolutely will come to pass. As his dialogue goes on, this gives the chapter a very weighty feel, laden with certainty about the events to come, and more importantly, about people as they are. He is pretty free with a bunch of key points about himself, his power, the relative power of other players, and how that will work out – the three hunters have among them no weapon that can harm him, he says. Given that Aragorn carries Andúril, reforged from a sword that harmed Sauron, this is pretty strong statement. He also declares himself “more dangerous than anything you will ever meet, unless you are brought alive before the seat of the Dark Lord”. He is absolutely unequivocal here about what he is, now he’s been sent back. As these statements build up, so too does the realisation that the stakes are just that high.

However, he has to complicate things a little, being Gandalf. He says “I am Gandalf, Gandalf the White, but Black is mightier still”, followed by a short section in which he looks eastward, before muttering to himself, glad that the ring has passed out of reach of their temptation for it. Is this a declaration that Sauron is stronger than he is (which he has already made plain) followed by a yearning for a weapon to fight back against that? Or is this a suggestion that a version of Gandalf, a Black iteration bearing the Ring, would be mightier than the one that stands before us now? Unclear. And both readings, as in many cases in the book, are interesting. I like the latter, myself, for the echo it gives of Galadriel’s temptation and resistance.

But as well as offering deep pronouncements about the nature of things, Gandalf’s dialogue points also forward. Treebeard already has told us that wizards are interested in the future (just as we know Elves are in the past, and I am inclined to think Ents are in the present), and Gandalf only reinforces that point. He sets them on their path to Edoras, as well as noting the path the Ents themselves are taking to war, and to rediscovery of their own strength. But before he is allowed to stride off into Rohan, the hunters ask one last thing of him – what happened under Moria?

And this, in my opinion, gives us one of the best moments in both books so far, wherein he narrates the fight with the Balrog. Pippin earlier described Gandalf as having fallen out of the tale: here, he does so twice over. Firstly, linguistically, the dialogue in this whole section takes a sudden shift into the archaic. We’ve got suddenly a load of thees and thous, and the syntax shifts into that of a mythic narrative. As it should – this tale is bigger, more epic, more dramatic than anything that has happened in the story so far. It operates on a wholly different scale, even. The relatively straightforward language we’ve been used to simply cannot accommodate it. What then results is some of Tolkien’s best prose work, including bangers like:

Thither I came at last, to the uttermost foundations of stone.

Or:

We fought far under living earth, where time is not counted. Ever he clutched me, and ever I hewed him, till at last he fled into dark tunnels.

Or, with bonus alliteration fun:

Far, far below the deepest delvings of the Dwarves, the world is gnawed by nameless things. Even Sauron knows them not.

Or:

There upon Celebdil was a lonely window in the snow, and before it lay a narrow space, a dizzy eyrie above the mists of the world.

Or probably my favourite:

I threw down my enemy, and he fell from the high place and broke the mountain-side where he smote it in his ruin.

It’s all just gorgeous. It’s no wonder so many of these lines made it into the film unedited – they are all brilliant. And it feels instantly out of step with the dialogue before it, and is stylistically left behind as soon as Gandalf finishes this tale. It functions as acceptance that what happened to him there is from a different story altogether, on a different scale, and that needs to be marked.

Secondly, there’s the rather more literal version. As Gandalf himself says:

Then darkness took me, and I strayed out of thought and time, and I wandered far on roads that I will not tell

Shortly followed by:

There I lay staring upward, while the stars wheeled over, and each day was as long as a life-age of the earth.

For a little while, following the Balrog’s defeat, he existed outside of the story, and of the world, altogether. Indeed, he has been “sent back”, because he is needed still within this story, even as he had passed beyond it. And this brief/long existence outside of the narrative has returned to him the macro view of events whose absence he bemoaned in Fellowship. He knows now what’s to come, what must be done, and is in a position to make those bold, declarative statements because he has the absolute knowledge upon which they must be based. But the price for that knowledge is a loss of the smaller scale, the things he has to rely on Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli to return to him – names, people, places. There is an interesting illustrative contrast for this: when Aragorn understands why Boromir has died, what he has done, he keeps it to himself to preserve his dead comrade’s honour. What Boromir did in defending Merry and Pippin was penance enough. However, when the story is narrated to Gandalf, he has no such qualms – he discerns the gap immediately and declares what is missing. The niceties of human interaction have now been lost to him. There was a cost.

But! So many of the lines that result from newly en-knowledged Gandalf give me the absolute shivers… so in my opinion the trade is well worth it. Sorry Boromir, but you are less critical than lines like:

A thing is about to happen which has not happened since the Elder Days: the Ents are going to wake up and find that they are strong.

It’s just banger, ok?

The other benefit of that external knowledge comes in further illustration of the plans of both Sauron and Saruman. Gandalf reiterates that Sauron is incapable of seeing anyone’s motives if they are not what he himself would do – he would use the Ring, and so he assumes it travels to a place that will do likewise. Saruman in Isengard is both exactly one such – he seeks the Ring, and, as Gandalf says, cannot pit himself against Sauron to usurp him without it – but is caught in exactly the same trap of understanding. He fears the Ring will fall to Rohan, to be wielded against him. And so, we now know, two enemies exist, and both have turned to pre-emptive war, because they deem the risk of the Ring being used against them too great. This, too, is the turning of the tide. We know what the shape of the story is to be for some while, and the narrative gaze again snaps away from a close present to a wider future.

And so, the hunters ride to Edoras, and ultimately to battle.

So far, I’ve been pretty positive about this section, but I must finish on a couple of sour notes. The first is merely aesthetic: I am in general a Tolkien poetry enjoyer but the ones in this section are simply not it. Some are just odd, unlyrical, unshapely things, and others (like the portentous missive from Galadriel that reads like lightest doggerel) are just wildly out of tone with their contents and context. In the grand scheme of things, it’s not putting me off, but I was disappointed.

The second, however, is rather more serious, despite taking up dramatically less page space. In Chapter IV, we get two pronouncements about the nature of the orcs, and both of them are, frankly, rancid. The first wonders on if the Uruk-hai (being different from the Mordor orcs previously encountered) are “ruined Men”, which carries a whole bunch of hierarchical assumptions in it, or whether they are “blended Orc and Man”. The latter… carries the implication that such a blend is intrinsically wrong, and that in doing so, none of the inherent potential goodness of Men is retained, only the evil of the Orc. Which is just blood quantum, when you get down to it. It’s only a couple of lines and isn’t dug into further, but it speaks volumes about the underlying assumptions necessary for the orcs to operate as they do in the story. It is followed, some pages later, by the seemingly offhand remark that the Trolls are “counterfeit” versions of the Ents, just as the Orcs are of the Elves. Which again, contains huge implications for what the Orcs are, and how they relate to the rest of the races of Middle Earth. When you put these two alongside Chapter III, where we get the Orcs speaking amongst themselves, and the way their speech can be read is mirroring working class British dialects? Yeah.

This is, in total, two sentences, but whose weight is such that it pulls down the whole of the chapter with it. Two sentences, but a whole swathe of worldbuilding fundamentals about what Orcs are, problems in their entire design that Tolkien never does solve. How can they be, as depicted, thinking, independent people capable of bargain and discourse, while also so inherently evil that they are never treated as equal combatants in a war amongst people? It is not, with the setup Tolkien gives himself, reconcilable. They are dehumanised and humanised, back and forth, at the necessity of the plot, leaving only the awful implications of their construction for us to deal with. As ever, I have no conclusion on this, just observation of the grossness of it all.

On the whole, then, these are mostly experience and exposition chapters. They show us a new portion of Middle Earth, a new people, and prepare us with the knowledge of who they are before we follow them onwards back into the plot. And they fill in the gaps of what’s been happening around the story we see, and in the background, as well as bringing some more overarching understanding of the world, for good and for very much ill. But, by the end, all signs have swung forward, leaving behind the past we’ve been resolving and the present we’ve been experiencing, in preparation for the war that is brewing on multiple fronts.

Next time VI – The King of the Golden Hall, VII – Helm’s Deep and VIII – The Road to Isengard. I have continued to follow the other Tolkien reread projects as well, and I suspect this post marks the last time Ed and I will be furthest ahead in the texts, as at current rate, Jared Pechaček will overtake us. Jared, how are you doing this so quickly???

  1. Which you do need to check an appendix to understand, because Tolkien gonna Tolkien, but is imo quite a cool linguistic thing to put in when you know what it’s doing. ↩︎
  2. Ok, one of them. The kin strife is also pretty bad. ↩︎
Posted in All, Fantasy, Not A Review | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

On the Calculation of Volume II – Solvej Balle (tr. Barbara J. Haveland)

I didn’t review the first book of On the Calculation of Volume, and that was a mistake. It was exceptionally good, following an antiquarian bookseller called Tara Selter as she finds herself trapped in a timeloop, reliving one November day over and over again. Its key feature, for me, is how it does this while deeply embedded within her perspective: the story is told through notes she writes herself, diary entries charting the unpassing days through the course of an unchanging year, detailing the effects of her situation on her psyche at a granular, intimate level.

For a single volume, that sounds fantastic, right? But how can the author sustain that kind of premise over into a sequel, let alone into a whole seven book series as is planned? Given how fresh, how new, Balle had made the timeloop feel in the first volume, I’d have been so disappointed if the second grew stale on repetition. But there was no cause for concern. While the second “year” of her predicament starts as the first ended for Tara, the story soon goes off in another direction, one so interesting that I ended up finding the second book even more stunning than the first.

As her hopes of resetting the year when 365 days have passed by going back to where it all began shatter, after going back to find her family and experience a Christmas out of time, Tara decides the thing she needs is to create her own version of a real year, chasing down the seasons to do so. This section is, for reasons I can’t quite pin down, by far the most moving thing in a pair of already deeply emotionally affecting books1.

On the face of it, it’s a great way to keep movement in a story that could so easily remain tied to a single place, closing in even further on a character whose emotional landscape is already claustrophobic. But it’s more than that – it directs the narrative out of Tara’s immediate distress, and opens things up into the deeper question of what the passage of time means. What is a year, experientially? What moors us to the movement of days? Tara reaches the conclusion of “the experience of seasons”, following a conversation with a meteorologist, and some musing for herself, on the idea that seasons are not just products of weather, but a state of mind, a product of psychology, and so open to wilful manipulation should the need arise. One thing that really struck me, in the conversation they have, is the idea that people take photos of things that are emblematic of the seasons as they expect and wish them to be. The summeriest summer, the wintriest, snowiest winter. And so, she sets out to find places, foods and experiences that embody those seasons for her own mental map of them, and to chart them as she goes. This is both an intuitively satisfying conclusion for what makes a year feel a year, and also one that feels particularly alluring in a world where the seasons feel increasingly distant from my life.

Tara and her husband live in a small town called Clairon-sous-Bois, where they grow vegetables and eat the things available from their garden and the shops. In her quest for that feeling of a year, after heading north for winter, Tara travels to England for spring, and she finds herself surprised at the unseasonality of the produce on offer in our shops. This isn’t exactly a shock to me – I know we have strawberries in November here – but what was surprising is… well… Tara’s surprise. Apparently England is worse for this detachment from the natural cycles of produce than I thought, at least compared to mainland European neighbours. But that familiarity and that surprise worked really well together to highlight what it is this quest brings for Tara, and how that might align with things missing in our own lives, on how we too might be detached from time in some way.

The quest for the seasons is not, ultimately, fruitful for Tara, and she must move on to something else. This constant shifting is a continuing characteristic throughout both books. In a fixed world, Tara never settles. Her emotional state is in constant flux, progressing through different reactions to her situation, seeking meaning and discarding it when it no longer suits. The driving dynamic force of the narrative, when the environment cannot be the variable, is simply her. And it’s brilliant. Every single reaction she has, every moment of despair and brief window of relief or joy, feels deeply, staggeringly human. Much of this comes from how deeply Balle is willing to embed in perspective. Tara writes her diary entries not for external consumption, but in the manner of the thoughts a person has that they never expect to escape the confines of their own mind. Sometimes they’re banal, sometimes deep, sometimes thoughtful, but the granularity of them, the moment-by-moment smallness, renders them intimate in a way I’m not used to reading, even in very character-driven prose. It makes it clear how alone she is in this situation. She has stepped beyond a place where any other person might ever experience her feelings, and so has taken down all the trappings and performance that a person would erect before allowing their words to be witnessed. As the story goes on, it is simply unfiltered humanity.

 But that unfiltered humanity is directed into something approximating a plot. In the first book, the first iteration of the day that repeats, Tara buys a Roman coin from a friend in Paris. In the second volume, when the season-quest has failed and she has settled in a town for a little while, she finds it starting to weigh on her mind. An object that represents the cycle of stagnation in which she is trapped becomes another spur to change – she finds herself drawn to learning more about the Romans, buying books, a laptop, hunting out articles and information on something she’d never found herself interested in before. Like the hunt for the seasons, Balle has Tara yearning for what she cannot have, and gives her a love for the past, for difference and change, in her new, fixed present in a single place.

And yet in this new passion, Tara finds herself turning inexorably back to her own situation, coming to a new conclusion about her experience of time. Not cycles, but a container, a fixed box in which her experiences happen, and one in which she finds parallels to the Romans she has been studying. And so the story comes full circle, back to the claustrophobia of its beginnings, but with a newfound acceptance born of her experiences to get there.

On the Calculation of Volume II is a book about stagnation and about change and movement, and how those things fit into and shape the human experience, and are shaped by them in turn. When faced with stagnation, with exaggerated fixity, Tara responds with flux. The only constant in her frozen world is that she herself will keep on changing. The delight of the narrative is experiencing those shifts day by day, intimately entangled in a portrayal of a person’s most unfiltered, vulnerable thoughts. Balle takes a familiar staple of the SFnal roster of ideas, and by approaching it with an eye on the emotional and experiential, gives it a ninety degree shift into something unexpected and rewarding. Whatever doubts I might have had about sustaining this for a series are gone – Balle has demonstrated, in raw, uncompromising prose skilfully translated by Barbara J. Haveland – that she can keep on shifting our perspective on the same problem.

  1. Eclipsing the loveliest moment of book one, in which Tara sits wrapped in a duvet in a dark garden, staring up at the universe to find some sense of meaning in her predicament. ↩︎
Posted in Science Fiction, Else, Awesome, Literary | Tagged , , , , , | 2 Comments

A Close Reading of LotR – Episode 9 – People and Peoples

After a little yuletide gap of mulling things over (or loafing about eating cheese, delete as appropriate), Ed and I have come back to our The Lord of the Rings reread, picking up now with The Two Towers.

In the time since we’ve started, I have seen a whole heap of additional people doing their own rereads, and it’s been so fun reading along with everyone else, getting not just Ed’s perspective but a whole host of them. This is especially true because there are so many different approaches. Abigail Nussbaum (start here), Nick Hubble (start here) and Jared Pechaček (paywalled on his Patreon but well worth the spend to access) particularly are all giving me angles on the text I wasn’t considering before, and their own relationships with the text before the reread, which add their own flavour. Nick’s feelings about the orcs as a child and now particularly stick out to me, or Jared’s dislike of the films, and particularly the casting choice of Viggo Mortensen. The latter especially because it is a very against-the-grain take – most of the people I know who love the books have pretty fond feelings (albeit with gripes) for Jackson’s attempt at it, so it’s really refreshing to see someone analysis the different portrayals of Aragorn on page and screen and go “actually no”. Whether it’s just the anniversary of the first film’s release or the US publication of the books, or just something in the water, I’m loving having all of these different pieces to keep reading and contrasting with my own experiences1.

However, before the risk of excessive meta2 creeps in, back to the book.

Our first section of The Two Towers gives us3 the chapters I – The Departure of Boromir, II – The Riders of Rohan and III – The Uruk-hai. All three are very different pieces, taking us from moving treatment of the dead, through hunting across grasslands, a long info-dump discussion between warriors and a cut back to the doings of the orcs being hunted, and are rich in themes and angles to pick at, so I alas beg your forgiveness that this is going to be another long one4. I think what there is to cover is really worth the time though – things that hark back to the first book, forward to what’s coming, and out into the legacy of Tolkien’s work into later literature.

The first thing that strikes me about the start of The Two Towers though is once again the difference in structure between the films and the books. I knew this was coming – Fellowship ends not where its film does, and I can do some basic deduction – but what felt more noticeable was how this different structure shows different ways of building both payoff and opening in a narrative. In the film, Jackson uses the death of Boromir as a dramatic end point – it’s a big scene that closes off the first part of the story with something that feels like a type of conclusion. Meanwhile, that conclusion in the book comes from the forced resolution of the unmade decision from the previous several chapters of what route and in what manner the Fellowship is going to take from that point onwards. The story ends in turmoil, with the threads splitting apart, and uncertainty about exactly what will come, who will go where, but with a closure on the thing we’ve been building to for some time. And so, opening the book of The Two Towers, the drama of Boromir’s death has been saved, and his heroic action against the orcs is never seen on page – instead, it’s opening with Aragorn resuming his doubts about his leadership and choices, and then an extremely visual set of scenes of Boromir, dying, amidst the many corpses of his fallen foes.

It is, as a chapter, intensely beautiful and sad, even as it is short. There are several lingering moments on frozen scenes, and a sense of stasis as the three remaining members of the Fellowship must decide what to do not only with their journey onward, but with their fallen comrade.

Boromir, ultimately, gets the trappings of a hero’s death. Tolkien has him die with reassurance from Aragorn that he has not failed, he has conquered, and that Minas Tirith shall not fall. He is loaded into a boat with his weapons and the weapons of the enemies he felled, sent out to the Falls of Rauros so “that no evil creature dishonours his bones”, with lamenting song from his surviving comrades, and the third person narrative letting us know that long into the future a story of his boat making its way out into “the Great Sea at night under the stars” lives on. But we – and Aragorn – know that he tried to take the Ring from Frodo. This is the failure he lays at his own feet in his final moments, for which he claims his death as payment. This is the failure that Aragorn does not share with Legolas and Gimli. Why? My first reading of this is the straightforward one – yes, he erred, he was weak and tempted, but in fighting the orcs and dying in his bravery, he has redeemed himself and Aragorn grants him forgiveness. The hero’s death and burial are the narrative showing us that he has earnt his redemption.

But Ed had a different angle on this, and one I think plays well with other moments in the story so far. Death is not the required payment for transgression. Instead, Boromir has yes, been weak and tempted, but then he has resisted, and it is that resistance that is the heroic act for which he earns his lordly send-off. And he makes a fair point. Resistance is such a key theme across the narrative, and not just resistance to the Ring itself, but fighting back when there is no hope, when only death awaits, but doing the impossible task anyway because it is good and right to do so, however great or small the task or person, so it makes sense that it would come out here. I don’t have a conclusion about whether Ed or I is right in this, or perhaps both, but I like once more that the narrative has the depth and space to support both readings.

The other interesting thing about Boromir’s death and burial is a more meta one. Despite Tolkien’s own faith, and the sometimes-really-quite-Catholic things that sometimes crop up in the story, The Lord of the Rings is a book oddly devoid of overt religious practice. Mostly, this isn’t something that feels odd, moment by moment, but there are occasional points in the narrative when I feel the lack, and this is one of them. What does a hero’s death and burial, the protection of his corpse, the continuance of his legacy, mean in a world without a clear sense of afterlife belief to go with it? Especially when that treatment obviously echoes real-world cultures with similar practices but who did have spiritual and religious components to it. Everyone lauds Tolkien for his worldbuilding, but here, there is something of a gap.

I often find myself caring about religion and spirituality in SFF works5, so it nags at me particularly here, that absence. And it’s the problem with drawing inspiration from the real world – when you don’t capture all the fullness of reality’s depth, there are bound to be spots where the absence makes itself known, and all the more so because Tolkien is Tolkien, those Catholic things come through, and I am here thinking about redemption and forgiveness and so on. But, ultimately, it is a relatively small gap, and one that won’t come up all that often. It just weighs on me.

Not as much as Aragorn’s doubts weigh on him, though6.

The end of Fellowship is full of him delaying the inevitable decision, the one he cannot or does not want to make, about the direction of the group when geography forces them to split their path between Minas Tirith and the Ring’s journey to Mordor. While that has been taken out of his hands, a new decision comes in its place: to follow Frodo and Sam, or to go after the hopefully-still-alive Merry and Pippin, to rescue them from captivity. Here – and later in the story when deciding whether to pause for rest or not – we get a sense of Aragorn the leader, and he is one who is willing to take counsel, not just because of his doubts but because of the value of the person giving it (in both cases here, predominantly Gimli). He may be set on his course to become the king his destiny asks him to be, but in the process of getting there, he has plenty moments where he brings his fitness to lead into question. Contrast this with film-Aragorn whose moment-by-moment leadership is generally quietly confident and self-assured, but whose doubts are all reserved for the looming prospect of the throne of Gondor. Jackson has taken something that exists in the text, and simplified it into a single point, rather than an ongoing conversation Aragorn is having with himself, and his leadership.

Which is interesting because we get so much of him in this section as a rather good leader. Yes, there’s him taking counsel – and changing his decisions upon it – from his companions, but also him acting as peacemaker when they meet the Rohirrim, as the one with knowledge to prevent them risking the wrath of the forest, the one who can track their enemy, the one who can unveil himself at the right time, to engender awe in someone they meet and ensure they are treated with proper courtesy.

Because when they reach Rohan, we suddenly have an abundance of drama queen behaviour. Whether it’s Éomer having his horsemen do overkill circling round these three new people, or Gimli taking umbrage at discourteous reference to Galadriel, or Legolas hotheadedly defending Gimli, everyone is escalating, all the time. Even Aragorn – after making sure no one did any headchopping – gets in on the action. Flinging back his cloak to reveal his sword, he declares himself as the heir of Elendil, and imposes upon the perception of those around him an impression of himself in all his kingly might. Legolas – perhaps with an elf’s access to the unseen world – even sees a flame upon his brow like the crown of a king.

But Aragorn’s dramatic flourish does achieve things, where the others did not. Éomer’s behaviour changes dramatically, and things can start moving again. Ed had a particularly amusing line on this change, suggesting that the appearance of these three men, one of whom suddenly pulls out a sword that comes from legends a thousand years old and more, is like being an officer doing reconnaissance at Ypres, only to have Lancelot emerge from the trees for a quick chat. He’s right, too – the narrative makes plain that Éomer realises that he’s in a story, that events are unfolding now that are on a bigger scale than he had previously expected or understood, so his reaction changes accordingly.

What is also interesting about this is that Tolkien, through Éomer, has made pains to emphasise that Rohan is already in its own situation. War is afoot, and the people are withdrawn and scared. He highlights this by saying that where usually visitors would be met with more friendship and trust, the law now is to be less hospitable to them – guest friendship and guest right have effectively been suspended. In the context of the ancient world, and the cultures from which Tolkien is drawing, this is a big fucking deal. And yet, when faced then with this figure from a story, Éomer chooses to go against the law, to offer the sort of friendship, hospitality and trust which is the foundation of good behaviour within his more usual cultural behaviour7.

This, in turn, validates Aragorn’s description of the Men of the Mark, when asked about them earlier by his companions. He describes them thus:

‘I have been among them,’ answered Aragorn. ‘They are proud and wilful, but they are true-hearted, generous in thought and deed; bold but not cruel; wise but unlearned, writing no books but singing many songs, after the manner of the children of Men before Dark Years.’

Which brings me onto one of my big thoughts for this section: people and peoples, and how Tolkien crafts character in relationship to culture.

Throughout the story, he has painted pictures of the different groups of people who inhabit the world of Middle Earth. In doing so, he often does something like the above, characterising in broad strokes the whole of a culture, group or race, in a way that is mostly borne out by the text as we see more of them. This doesn’t mean there’s no space for individuals to behave otherwise, but that otherwise, at least in the text as I have read it so far, remains always in dialogue with the norm. The descriptive unit is at the macro level of culture, rather than the individual, for the most part. Bilbo is weird in relation to the norms of hobbits. This is present even in the people he seems to me to care the most about, the elves, who take it to another level with all their fairy shit.

In this section, Legolas gives us plenty of that – he seems to be able to fortify himself with just a deep breath of the green air of a grassy land, he does not sleep, he can see in greater detail than his comrades, all of which is a part of his elven nature. For Tolkien, the elves are a step apart from everyone else. Which provides an interesting dissonance with later portrayals, especially thinking about the idea of elves as unsleeping. This is a piece of D&D elf lore, right? It’s part of the difference in characters that comes when you choose your D&D race8. But in D&D, while elves are clearly different, they are also equal. It’s a game, and being a game it comes with some requirement of something like “fairness” – there has to be a balance or it’s just not fun to play. Tolkien, meanwhile, has no interest in this sort of balance. To quote Ed again, because he kept having bangers today, “Tolkien’s elves are literally better than you, but that doesn’t mean they’re better than you” – they operate on a wholly different scale of action, time and inherent abilities within the world than the mortal characters, with Galadriel engaged in some sort of battle of wills against Sauron himself while the hobbits are pootling about taking walks. But that doesn’t mean that the hobbits are incapable of action, incapable of taking choices which have similarly critical effect on the world. That’s kind of the whole point. Tolkien doesn’t need balance to make his point about the worth of the individual. I’m not sure that skill is present in a lot of later works that do level the playing field.

But that’s a digression. Even for the people he likes, the ones he holds in highest regard, Tolkien thinks along generalising lines. He likes to be able to capture some idea of the essence of a group, and have that hold true. And so, this becomes particularly noticeable (and deeply uncomfortable) when we get to the peoples who fight on the side of the enemy.

Which brings us to the orcs, and chapter III – Uruk-hai.

In this chapter, time skips backwards a little and the narrative shows us the truth of the journey which Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli have been piecing together from signs and clues. In Pippin’s perspective, the two hobbits are captured by the orcs and taken on a hasty march, intending to deliver them to Saruman in Isengard. This is the first chapter in which the orcs speak, and are visible in any way other than as a looming threat, a shadow on the other side of a river, the bow behind and arrow, the hand on a sword, or other faceless operators in the dark. The have conversations, with both the hobbits and each other. And Tolkien’s tendencies to characterise at a group level hit a brick wall of “oh no, oh fucking no”.

Fundamentally, this whole chapter is an unsquared circle of the conflict between “this group, their language, their very being, is evil”, dehumanising them, drawing parallels to animals, to inanimate objects, writing them off as something which can be killed without remorse, and without the need to treat the dead as one would an enemy in normal times – the text highlights that the corpses of the fallen orcs have been despoiled by the Riders of Rohan, for instance. But at the same time, as we witness conversations between them, it becomes clear that they are not a monolith, and are people with wants, motivations, rationality, strengths and weaknesses. There is a division between the Uruk-hai and the Mordor orcs, which comes out predominantly in the quarrelling of their two leaders, Grishnákh and Uglúk. There’s factional rivalry, mockery, division of approach to problems. At one point, Pippin attempts to bargain with Grishnákh, exploiting that factional division. They are not a faceless monolith, even as Tolkien writes them off as such, declaring even their language as “full of hate and anger”.

This is underscored by the wildly racialised language in use in this section. The orcs are repeatedly referred to as “swart and slant eyed”, and their weapons are scimitars, and they refer to the Men of the Mark hunting them as “whiteskins”, emphasising the difference between them.

It’s uncomfortable, difficult reading, and the conflict of characterisation does not go away. There’s a hole in the story for one to read orcs in either direction, to assume they exist only as the enemy Tolkien shows us, or to take the implication from what is visible here that there exists a possibility for an orc at peace, something we are never shown, but which is never entirely disproven either. I haven’t really any conclusions on this, beyond what has often and already been said better on Tolkien, race and orcs. The problem just sits there in the text.

As well as/beside that, the thing this section really hit me with was an impression of a certain sort of English person and their view of the Germans in WW1 – a group only visible to that person as enemy combatants, and wildly propagandised as evil to those at home in England with stories of behaviours outside of the acceptable norm for “civilised” peoples, stabbing babies and murdering nuns and so on. But I know, from the perspective of being outside of that time, that the Germans were a people just like the English, and that war is war, that an enemy combatant can go home and still be a person. I want to read the gap in the text this way, to find in it the possibility of personhood that is overtly denied and rejected in the descriptions of the orcs.

Whatever approach one takes, it is, at least on an intellectual level, interesting that we get this insight into them that offers a possibility of more than what they’re written off as, when so many of the immediate generation of Tolkien follow-ups took up the literal description of their enemy as a mindless horde.

Unfortunately, I also did not get on with this chapter aesthetically. It is interesting to get Pippin as viewpoint character, and to see him being competent, making decisions and keeping his head in a dangerous situation. It’s a nice piece of character work that, along with his interaction with the elves the hobbits meet on their way out of the Shire, complexifies him beyond the useless piece of luggage he writes himself off as, and the comedy character he becomes in the simplified portrayal of the films. It is also slightly ironic that the language he (and Merry, briefly) use in this chapter when they do get to speak is very WW1 British officer, top ho, what what, bally good show chaps type stuff. They come across as two British chaps stiff-upper-lipping their way through a sticky situation, and that’s… odd, in the fantasy narrative.

But aside from this, a lot of what happens in the chapter is pretty repetitive. Disagreements between orcs, threats, running, repeat as needed, until the Riders of Rohan catch up with them. We did not, in our discussion, agree on this point, but aside from all the other problems on show in the text, I also just found this chapter… quite boring.

And so, a disappointing end to our first section of The Two Towers. On the whole, this was a quite mixed section – extremely tonally varied, covering a lot of ground (thematically and literally9) – and mixing dynamic sections of action with extended dialogue (JRRT clearly loves a chapter 2 exposition drop; this is the second time he’s done it) and brief segues into particularly beautiful descriptions of the changing landscape through which the story travels. The orc section is a problem, for its racism resurfacing from parts of the previous book, its generalisations, and for the unresolvable tension between dehumanisation and humanisation of these enemy fighters in how they are portrayed in the text. And, once again, this is a problem that I will have no good answer for as I continue to read. A disappointing end to our first session of the book.

Next up IV – Treebeard and V – The White Rider.

  1. I am also slightly glad we’re currently ahead of them all in the text, because I’d either have to not read anyone’s posts until we caught up (sad) or be worried that their thoughts were influencing mine as I actually read the book. Given that Jared at least is rattling through at a heck of a pace, this is going to be a dilemma we’ll need to face, but not yet. ↩︎
  2. My read on someone else’s reread of Tolkien would probably be a step too far. Probably. ↩︎
  3. This is very tangential, but writing for ARB has inculcated an instinctive pause and check before using first person plurals when talking about works (thanks ARB editors, genuinely, you are right this does need to get used a lot less). However, now when I talk about Ed and I reading LotR, and use a genuine plural, my brain has a brief horror of it whenever it comes up. They succeeded too hard. ↩︎
  4. It is possible we might have been better off doing this read a chapter at a time, given how much it turns out we have to say about it all. But we are where we are, and I’m sure I’d find a way to spin 3k words even out of a single chapter if left to do so. ↩︎
  5. If we could have a moratorium on “it’s like the Greek gods but they are literally there, no you actually meet them, in the world” as an approach without any reflection on what this would mean for the social and cultural practice of religion in the world, I would be a happy person indeed. ↩︎
  6. I am the master of the seamless segue. ↩︎
  7. Which Ed has as a version of Éomer as Antigone. Which I rather like. ↩︎
  8. I assume this is still true in most recent D&D but unlike Ed I don’t read RPG manuals for fun. ↩︎
  9. I did do the tragic thing of working out how far Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas had travelled and then boggled at it. I was quite pleased when Éomer boggled too a few paragraphs later. I didn’t get into it here, but there is also a whole other piece in this chapter about the ridiculous stamina of these three hunters, and what it says about them as people and what Tolkien wants to take from their behaviour in respect to their position compared to the more “normal” people in the world. ↩︎
Posted in All, Fantasy, Not A Review | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

Hav – Jan Morris

Did I write a whole ass essay on genre for Strange Horizons? Perhaps. But that hasn’t stopped me thinking about it. And only more so since I read Hav by Jan Morris, for which any decisions I make about genre are entirely meaningless – it’s years old, no awards to nominate for, no sections to file it in – and thus, somehow, the thought of them becomes even more intrusive.

Hav is a travelogue. Hav is literary fiction. Hav is autofiction. Hav is speculative. All are true. It is realist and fantastical all at the same time. Its connections are branching, its interlocutors many, its ideas broad. And so it feels, at least to my experience of fiction, singular… which makes me want to fuss at it, worry away at it until I settle on how it fits into my picture of literature1. Especially because it was, not to put too fine a point on it, brilliant.

In Hav – a combined text of her 1985 work Last Letters from Hav and the 2006 follow up Hav of the Myrmidons – Jan Morris writes up her experiences travelling to the so-named peninsula and city in the eastern Mediterranean, spending six months exploring its history, geography, people and culture, and then a few days twenty years later. It’s full of swift character portraits, deft outlines of place and a much deeper sense of the city’s connection to its own past, and the past of the wider areas to which it is connected. In case it wasn’t obvious, Hav is also not real. It is an invented place, whose existence within the text served many purposes, and is used by Morris as an allegory for currents of change in the real world as she was experiencing them, in both time periods, as well as a way to reflect on the act of writing about such a place, and the relationship between her perspective and her subject.

And this juncture is where comes both the absolute delight of it as a story, and the source of the fussing. It’s a perfect test case for “what is genre” – is it the form, the style, the content? Does a travelogue cease to be a travelogue when its subject doesn’t exist? Although I don’t read them myself, my cynicism encourages me to suspect they are not all 100% truthful and unembellished – surely someone out there invents a neat little encounter just because it better makes the point they want to make than the unpredictable mundanity of their real experience – so where’s the line? How much embellishment is needed before it slips out of travel and into the realm of the speculative? Or, conversely, does being in the form of travel writing suffice (and does that preclude being speculative, or can it be both simultaneously)? I don’t have anything so boring as answers to these. But the process of reading was one of productive questioning, on generic and functional lines. What is this? What is it for? What is it doing? Why? The books that inspire that sort of dialogue are, in my opinion, the best ones.

But, before I use up my monthly supply of question marks, I’ll do some declarative statements too.

At the first layer, Hav is a beautifully written, realist exploration of an imaginary space. Morris doesn’t linger on descriptive prose, but she has a good knack of using comparison and allusion to get the point across plenty vividly enough for a visual imagination to kick in. I had, from the very start, a picture in my head of the places she went throughout her travel in the city, one that lingers with me still. In my notes while reading, one of the first things I write is how weird it is to read something that so pointedly makes me want to visit a place, even though I know as I do so that I cannot. The intuitive sense that Morris crafts of this city as a part of the world keeps trying to override my logical understanding that it does not exist. The majority of the first section settles into this exploration, touching on the different aspects of the city – history and modernity, culture and food, city and countryside, casino and caves – before being interrupted by the changing atmosphere that ultimately drives Morris out on the cusp of significant political change, only to return 20 years later to see its results. At this level, the story is playful, almost smug, in how Morris pulls in so many connections to so many pieces of the world in an effort to ground it in reality, while yet emphasising with each one how unique of a place it is.

But this multiplicity of reference starts to suggest a layer beneath. Yes, it reveals Morris as someone wildly cultured and knowledgeable, full of facts and references for every possible moment. But the sheer proliferation of them, from the Bible to Hitler and everyone in between, begins to test the boundaries of suspension of disbelief. And Morris nods to this, she draws the eye to the implausibility of it all, like so:

They used to say of Beirut that, just as aerodynamically a bumble-bee has no right to fly, so Beirut had no logical claim to survival. Even more is it true of contemporary Hav, which has no visible resources but the salt and the fish, which makes virtually nothing, which offers no flag of convenience, but yet manages to stagger on if not richly, at least without destitution.

Instead of trying to make this imagined place less extravagant, to keep it within realistic bounds, she instead goes the bombastic route, daring the reader to disbelieve it with each extra layer. 

And so, the text starts to invite you to question it. Why – why is it making a caricature of a travelogue in this way? Is this a commentary on travel writing as a whole? A commentary on tourism itself, and on the superficial way in which other cultures are dissected in popular media for consumption.

One particular example of this stands out, in a small but repeated refrain about cultural connection. Morris highlights several key ideas or motifs that she suggests are core to Havian sensibilities or art or language, and attempts to form a connection to an idea of the Celts, and ultimately to her own Wales. The idea is simultaneously preposterous and just about plausible – the ancient world was a more connected place than many think, but at the same time, in this cultural crossing place in the Mediterranean, Wales? But it seemed to me not to be about Wales at all, but about personal connection and relational dynamics, between the viewer and the thing viewed, the need to personalise the thing which is being consumed into something that speaks about the person doing the consuming. The act of finding meaning in the history and present of this other city is not, Morris seems to be saying, about seeking new things and new experiences, but finding yet another mirror to reflect some aspect of the familiar back.

As someone who spends too much time on Tiktok, this take has some tragic appeal – forty years on, how we approach other cultures and places hasn’t exactly got a lot better (or worse, despite what people might say, it’s just that there’s more access to unfiltered ramblings now).

And once I take up this idea that she’s critiquing the whole edifice of consumption of other cultures in this way, the text becomes richer still. But that’s not the limit to what’s on offer.

The change that infects the air in the latter sections of Last Letters is the key to the next piece – Morris witnesses something secret, and then, as battleships arrive on the horizon, flees Hav for the safety of home just as dramatic, unexplained events change the city forever. While I was technically alive in the eighties2, I was not what you’d call conscious, so my grasp on the political situation comes at a remove. However, even without an intuitive sense of what was going on back then, it’s easy to see the shape of something moving under the surface of the story, even before the back matter in which Morris makes clear there’s allegory at play. Something is being said about the state of the world as a whole here, the changes she feels in the air around her.

This crystallises into something I can grasp a little more in the second section, Hav of the Myrmidons, published in 2006. In 2006, I was 16/17, and at least a little bit aware of what was going on in the world around me3. The narrative shows us a changed Hav, the historical features erased and a new, religious leadership in place. That’s familiar, even if the precise nature of the religion in question isn’t the same. There’s a new focus on ideology, on the project of statehood and the performance of the sort of place Hav wants to be to the outside world, the sort of superficial tourism it wishes to profit off, and the stories it wants to tell about itself to endure into the future. This section is less subtle than the first part, but it doesn’t need subtlety – it’s reacting to a text we’ve already taken a foundation from and turning it in the light so we can see a new angle on it. But it’s not didactic, just bluntly observational.

The Hav of the conclusion, with its destroyed markets and ideological strictures, is a sad one, but not a simple one. Morris takes care to demonstrate that while much has been lost, the residents of the city are not uncomplicated in their feelings about it, and that progress happens because it brings something with it alongside the loss. Strangely, after all the careful descriptions, over far more pages, of a city tied to the world around it, it is this strange, new and slightly outlandish, carefully isolated Hav that has the greater sense of realism to it. The people, especially the ones with whom we are familiar from the first section, with their ambivalent responses to the change they’ve lived through, are the most vividly human, and the least like cutouts designed to fill a role in the picturesque idyll of the old Hav. Morris has let the warped mirror on a straightforward travel narrative crack, and so the tools she uses must change to suit the new narrative, with its new world with new problems to put under scrutiny.

It is, all in all, a complex story, and one I’m sure I’ve missed much of from my lack of knowledge. But I can see the shape of some of what’s being done under the surface, and even that is enough to dazzle.

There is a novel referenced within the story – one where I don’t know if it’s real in the world and co-opted for Morris’ purposes, or wholly invented – that tells the story of “a woman whose life, very gently and allusively described, is a perpetual search not for clarity but for complexity”. This is metonymous Hav. This is the story as I experienced it. An expert hand, adding layer after layer to something that, at first glance, seems simple: layers of meaning, layers of cynicism, layers of reference and theme, and indeed, layers of genre. I am no closer to a conclusion on what its generic placement might be, where it fits within the megatext4. But that’s ok. It can continue to be all of it genres simultaneously, building layer after layer just as Morris has embellished this picture of a city. Real but not real, plausible but so wildly played up that it tests the boundaries of belief. Hav is multiple, sometimes contradictory, things all at once, and it is in the careful interplay of all of them and the tension between what is crafted and what can be intuited about its context within the world and its literary environment, that the beauty arises.

  1. ”the megatext” she says, like a sneeze. ↩︎
  2. A whole 120 days, well done me. ↩︎
  3. I won’t flatter myself that it’s more than that, mind. ↩︎
  4. Gesundheit ↩︎
Posted in All, Awesome, Else, Fantasy, Literary, Science Fiction | Tagged , , , , , | 2 Comments

What I Read On My Holiday – 2026

It was quite spooky out there

Reading holiday has once again been and gone in triumph. This year, we booked a cottage in the middle of nowhere in Wales and it was more precipitously in the middle of nowhere than we necessarily bargained for. However, after an alarming twilight drive up the steepest, narrowest, twistiest and bumpiest possible single lane track through the woods, we were in and settled and ready to read.

This time we were in a National Trust cottage on some managed farm/woodland, so there really was no one else around for miles. At night, it was so silent it was eerie to my ears attuned to the noise of a city, and even in the day the soundscape was just birds, wind, the stream down the hill (whose noise carried remarkably far) and the occasional chomp and moo of the local cows. The cottage itself was exactly the sort of thing you’d expect from an organisation like the National Trust, that knows exactly the middle class sensibilities it’s appealing to. Rustic-seeming… but with really good hot water, insulation and facilities, comfy beds and a semblance of cleanliness, modernity and being furnished not-entirely-cheaply. Managed wilderness outside for a stroll, but a central-heated cottage to come straight back to and eat our prodigious quantities of cheese and biscuits. I roll my eyes at myself, even as I fully embrace it and will do it all again next year. It’s nice to be comfortable.

All of this gave me the nice opportunity to go read outside in the woods or by the stream for little stretches (it was pleasant sitting still out there for about an hour while fully be-coated and scarfed before the chill started to set in), as well as extreme dark and silence once the night set in next to the log fire, doubly so into the late hours, when my friend went to bed1. It was, even compared to our previous reading holidays, a distinctly well-suited location to the endeavour once we got ourselves there.

Woodland reading

And so, one of the things that stood out particularly to me this time was how my being in that place at that time was coming through in my responses to me reading, so for this year’s holiday round up, I’m going to be reflecting on that specifically where relevant, along with my thoughts on the books themselves.


First up, Whose Body? by Dorothy L. Sayers (which we listened to on the car journey to the cottage).

I think this is a reread for me, though so long ago I had no memory of the solution to the mystery (but probably enough to nudge my thoughts at the answers in the right directions so I can claim no smugness for correct guesses along the way). In terms of my enjoyment of it as a story, there were however no surprises. Even without holding onto the details, I remembered what I tended to like about these books and lo, there it was. Peter is still a delightfully nonsense character to follow along on his seemingly-chaotic crime solving process, and Bunter an equally delightful foil. The mystery is, in the way of this style of books, slightly outlandish but not so much as to fully crack the foundations of my suspension of disbelief. It’s silly, but the silly remains reigned into the realm of the deliberate, and that’s just great fun.

However, it was a book I had previously read with eyes rather than ears, and doing it as audio in company really did add something extra – especially as the production was one with multiple voice actors involved. Peter’s voice was plummy and over the top, leaning into the ridiculousness of the character where needed, Bunter’s with a slight exasperation breaking through the cool, and everyone else clear and distinct against them. It was, at times, absolutely laugh out loud funny, and made even more so by the ability to make eye contact with someone after a particularly good bit to share the joke.

Brilliant journey listening, great start to the holiday.

Second was Isabella Nagg and the Pot of Basil by Oliver Darkshire.

Part of the point of reading holiday is reading without obligations. So much of my reading now is (entirely self-imposedly) tied to deadlines or contexts and conversations outside of just “what do I fancy now” that having the opportunity to be led by whim is a lovely thing. Isabella Nagg is exactly what I wanted from that kind of whim. It’s a light, low-fantasy adventure in a world that exists at least 50% as a humour generation machine rather than a genuine setting for a story, with distinctively-voiced characters experiencing and perpetrating nonsense that roughly forms up into a coherent story by the end. And it’s just fun.

Could I get a full review out of talking about it? I mean, I’m sure I could scrape one together if needed. But it’s just not that sort of book. It’s a book that rejects deep engagement as much as it can, constantly pushing back towards the lightness that infects every part of it. And that’s great, because Darkshire is funny. The jokes work, the setting is the right amount of absurd, and the poor farmer’s wife forced to pick up where the wizard left off and having to deal with increasingly deadly shenanigans strikes the right balance between fish out of water and plausible in her context. She’s sympathetic, up to a point, but not so much so that it feels wrong to laugh at her.

Where it goes wrong is, I think unsurprisingly, where the author lets himself get a little too carried away. There are moments where it feels very consciously Pratchettian in its humour, and perhaps a little too much so, nudging you with its literary elbow in case you might have missed quite what it was doing. But for the most part… he’s actually pretty successfully in that mode, so I’m willing to forgive the slip ups. It lacks Pratchett’s substance underneath the humour – which I think means it would suffer under a reread, or more penetrating gaze – but for a quick, pleasant, distracting time where I cackled out loud? Wonderful.

Speaking of books that feel in the mode of previous beloveds… third was Slow Gods by Claire North.

This one is intensely Banksian. It’s a space opera story of a universe filled with civilisations, future tech, fully sentient machines and social/political problems, but it’s not just that. There’s a fully serious plot that engages with a wide scope of what this universe is, on several layers, and one that needs the reader to understand the wide scope and danger of the problems involved (that involve the risk of millions of sentient lives), but throughout, and entirely without compromising the emotional efficacy of that plot, there’s a wry humour that runs through North’s prose. It’s not the only link, but it’s the thing that most screamed IAIN M. BANKS to me.

Where Isabella Nagg feels like an incomplete homage though, Slow Gods goes all the way. And part of that is because it is also its own self, as well as in the tradition of a certain kind of space opera. Darkshire hasn’t quite escaped the gravity of his influences in the way that North has, and the contrast in the books and their respective places in their subgeneric traditions is really interesting when I read them side by side.

I’m not sure North has fully broken out of just the British sphere of SF writing, which is a real shame because I do think this one deserves plaudits when we’re into awards time. There’s a specific scene towards the end, where it seems like they are about to commit one of worst plot culminations possible (as far as my preferences go), only to turn it so completely around, to add a sufficiently new angle to it, that I experienced emotional whiplash. They managed to make this thing I often hate into something genuinely fantastic, and the culmination of the themes the book has been gently teasing out through the whole plot. Much deserving of praise, in my opinion.

One of the distinctive parts of their worldbuilding was the incorporation of nature into this wide, space-going world. The main character is himself a gardener, and he thinks a lot in terms of plants and cycles, but that’s not the limit of it. One of the major space ships we encounter is a grown thing, rock and soil and plant, and he revels in travelling in it, and seeing its changes through its season and the long cycle of its life. A lovely thing to read while sat in a wood so covered in moss that it, too, felt ancient. I wouldn’t normally expect space opera to be enhanced by being in nature with it, but this one really was, and I think it’s that that I’ll remember when I look back on it as a book.

Fourth, Avidyā by Vidyan Ravinthiran.

This is a poetry collection that stretches across continents and journeys, but lingers too on very intimate, personal moments. It runs the wide contrast between talking about the violent, politically motivated killing of a journalist in Sri Lanka to the wonder at a newborn son, and Ravinthiran has the deftness to weave a continuing thread between them, tying such disparate pieces and tones together seamlessly into a single collection.

One of the things I often struggle with with poetry collections is where they tackle sufficiently big themes or emotive topics that they seem to rely on the audience’s pre-existing emotional reactions to the topics rather than doing the work to generate their own. I suspect this is why I tend to gravitate to nature poetry, for its quietness on that front and the tendency to go descriptive, and to craft meaning and feeling at a layer removed. But Ravinthiran is going for the big topics, and no such struggle do I have here. Whether or not I have pre-existing feelings about the matter, he’s put enough of his own in that it hardly matters – several of the poems are choked with their own emotive weight, heavy and rich, angry and sad and heartfelt.

He lingers a lot on family, and especially fathers and sons, legacies and distances and connections spelled out in relatively sparse but nonetheless weighty language. These are poems to linger over, to sit with word choices of, to reread a second time and hold each image in the mind. All good poetry is that, of course, but this more than most.

Unsurprisingly, then, this benefited from being read alone in the quiet of night. Poetry without distraction, but also those lingering thoughts on connection, the capturing of real and mundane moments with other people, felt all the more important when experienced alone.

Fifth, Hexwood by Diana Wynne Jones.

This is probably my second favourite Diana Wynne Jones book (after Fire and Hemlock). It’s been a beloved since the depths of childhood, but I haven’t picked it up again in quite some time, in part because in however many movings of house since uni, my copy didn’t seem to be with me or at mum’s. But I recently rebought a copy, in no small part because I knew Eight Days of Diana Wynne Jones would be covering it at some point and I wanted to have come back to it before listening. As it happens, the Hexwood episode dropped shortly before we left for holiday, and so I had a chance to see that it was a bumper, nearly three hour behemoth that I’d be tackling once I had the book fresh in my mind again2. All the more reason to hop to it.

I’m very glad I did, though not exactly in the way I might have expected. Yes it was wonderful reading a book set extremely in the woods while in some woods, myself hopping over streams just as Ann does. yes being outside of the world in the way that the silence and often-lack-of-internet-signal felt very apropos to reading about the characters trapped in the field of the Bannus3. But what struck me most was how different my experience was to my memories.

Hexwood was, I think, the first book I ever read that wasn’t strictly linear in its chronology. I remember finding it puzzling and a little challenging, way back when. And so it’s odd to come back to as an adult, as someone who mostly remembers the story, as someone who’s read a bunch of non-linear books, and to find it simple. The child memories overlay on the adult ones and that, too, adds something to a story that is much about memory and change.

In terms of the book, I’m still awfully fond of it. I see more connections that I remember between it and Fire and Hemlock, and in the things I like about both. There are problems in it, or things that trouble the waters, things to pick at, but I love it nonetheless. Not ignoring them or in spite of them, but alongside them. Even if the non-linearity doesn’t challenge me anymore, there’s still plenty to dig at, just in other ways, and I’m looking forward to listening to three hours of Emily Tesh and Rebecca Fraimow doing just that.

Sixth, Hav by Jan Morris.

I don’t really read travel writing. I don’t know that I’ve read anything that counts as such that wasn’t written by a dead Roman or Greek dude from a couple of thousand years ago (and I’m not sure they’re useful for the purposes of comparison here), so this was always going to be a slightly singular read, but ended up being far more so than expected.

Jan Morris is an author of a number of traditional travelogues, but Hav is… not that. Hav presents itself as straightforward, a journey in 1985 to a city on a peninsula in the Mediterranean, detailing places stayed and visited, people encountered, food eaten, histories discovered, connections to famous names and events drawn out. But Hav isn’t a real city. Morris has given this detailed, thoughtful imagining of a stay in a place that doesn’t exist, leading up to a dramatic change in the city that didn’t happen, followed by a return twenty years later, after a regime change and rebuilding that never occurred.

And yet…

None of it is real, but somehow all of it is, twofold. First, the way Morris embeds it so much in the reality and history of the world, of that segment of the world, makes this imagined space a way of talking about so much of the contemporary (as she herself makes clear in the epilogue where she talks about the function of allegory). There are threads to be pulled of all sorts of wider world themes, about wealth and power, religion, history, the intersections of places and times in single spaces… it goes on.

Second, what does it matter whether Magda exists, whether the Caliph is real? If it were set in any real place, I would be taking on trust that the people and places described were as she described them. A cynical part of me assumes that the straightforward travel writer takes plenty liberties themself to make their writing smoother, their point clearer, the narrative more enjoyable. What is this but the furthest end of the spectrum, the apotheosis of that? I don’t read the genre, but it’s clear the book is about the meta I’m only getting parts of, as well as the story placed before us and the allegory of time and place in 1985 and 2006.

It was beautifully written, and one of the most image-rich novels I’ve read in a while – she has a knack for describing place vividly in short, and I felt utterly drawn into it as a visual experience. I could go on, but since I suspect I shall be writing a full review of this one, suffice to say just: it was fantastic. Deep and thoughtful and gorgeous and sad.

Seventh, The Tombs of Atuan by Ursula Le Guin.

This was, technically, a reread but it’s been so long I don’t remember it. We did A Wizard of Earthsea a few months back and I was, I’m sorry to say, somewhat unmoved by it, and particularly annoyed by the way gender was handled (especially in contrast to some of her later work that is VERY gender). But Ed encouraged me to continue onto The Tombs of Atuan, because it might shift that a little, and he was right. It’s not a perfect fix for my irritations (it does feel a little like the relatively competent female character goes to pieces once Ged takes charge), but the way that Le Guin embeds the narrative into Arha’s perspective and experiences of the world felt like such a balm to the offhand way the female characters in A Wizard of Earthsea were treated.

The main thing for this one was how it sat with being at the cottage, though. I suspect wherever I had read it, I was going to find the descriptions of the dark underground labyrinth and the cave beneath the monoliths creepy. I’m a big ol’ wuss! I am very easily creeped out. But I read this entirely at night, when my friend had gone to sleep, in the silent darkness and my god that ramped it up. I couldn’t quite bring myself to go and stand outside unlit, hand only on the wall to tell me where I was, for the full experience4, but even with just a partial one… oof.

It feels such a wild contrast to the first book. She’s swapped an epic distance in the narrative for intimate closeness, and the latter works so much better for me than the former. But the juxtaposition of the two reminds me why I like her other works, how clearly she has mastery of what she’s doing. It doesn’t make me love A Wizard of Earthsea, but it does put it back into a context that is more accepting than it might have been had I stopped, and has probably meant I will push on through The Farthest Shore and Tehanu at some point.

Do I still prefer her in SF mode? Yes. But I really appreciated this, and more than I expected to.

Eighth, All That is in the Earth by Andrew Knighton.

Finishing The Tombs of Atuan, I thought I’d pick something totally contrasting – a story of space travel and alien planets. And yet somehow, it ended up being extremely similar. Like Tombs, it was creepy, and more so for the context (I ended up finishing it in daylight because I wanted to sleep some time), and this similarity felt far more important than the wide, wild difference in genre5.

The other thing that is going to stick with me about this book in particular, is that it extremely, insistently feels like an action film from about 2003. The sort of thing Vin Diesel might have starred in (though not as the protagonist, who is a relatively nervy scientist). Set on an alien planet where much of the animal life is infected with a virus that… ok I could talk around it but it’s giving zombies, ok? That’s what it functions as. The protagonist crash lands, and is found by a doctor whom he accompanies, and then experiences a sequence of intensely visual scenes that change how he thinks about the world he’s landed on and his own approach to life and death.

But it’s so utterly visual, so constantly filmic. It really would fit on screen so perfectly. And that made for an entirely bizarre reading experience, like my brain was being forced to approach it as two different things simultaneously.

Nonetheless, I had fun (probably in no small part because the zombie parts were not hugely foregrounded), and very much the kind of fun I would have had were I watching it as that sort of film. What will stick with me will be, more than anything, the images in my head, the light and shadow and motion that kept it moving forward at pace.

Ninth, and actually really very different, On the Calculation of Volume II by Solvej Balle, translated by Barbara J. Haveland.

I am stunned by this book. I loved the first one, about a woman stuck in a time loop, experiencing the same November day over and over again, for a whole year’s worth of iterations. But I couldn’t quite see how the author was going to get a second (or indeed, the following expected five further) book out of it. And yet, she did. Not only that, but one that feels simultaneously of a piece with the first one, and yet wholly fresh and different. I genuinely think it might be better than the first. Phenomenal.

The thing that really pulls me in in this one is the decision the character makes to chase down the seasons, to construct herself a natural year in the feeling she would get of that year’s progression in weather, food, landscape, atmosphere and her own self and expression in the world. She heads steadily north hunting winter through Scandinavia and Finland, before returning south and then heading west to England for a feeling of spring and easter, then further south yet hunting the sun of summer, and finding herself living it, embodying the changing “seasons” in her own outward life.

Her spring in the UK particular felt alive to me, sitting in a damp Welsh countryside full of birdsong, the breath of spring feeling just around the corner in the freshness of the air I wanted to sit outside in. The book lingers a lot on seasons as psychological, and I couldn’t help but agree – my approach to it made the temperature outside feel spring, not autumn or winter. The damp, the weather, the grey skys could be all manner of things, but the meaning I brought to it was what made it what it was. It’s all about feeling, and I felt.

It doesn’t matter that it doesn’t, ultimately, work out for Tara. The urge to make a year, to try to figure out what time passing feels like and how to construct that, was such a compelling choice to follow on from the closed-in-ness of the first book, where all her travel feels reactive and claustrophobic, hemmed in by the shape of the time loop she can’t escape.

But even that comes around again – after her seasonal experiment, she finds herself settling again, for a time, and coming to new conclusions about what time itself is – a container, not a progression at all. And this too, her changing relationship with the problem she faces and does not understand – is the heart of why this book, why both books, are so good. Time loops aren’t new, but this exploration of the psychological impact it would have on someone at such a granular, intimate level feels fresh. Like several of the tentatively SFnal books I’ve loved in the last few years6, its newness isn’t in the ideas about its novum, but in its approach to their human effects. Love it. More please. I will be devouring the next in the series shortly.

Tenth, and the final physical book in the cottage, was Vanishing World by Sayaka Murata translated by Ginny Tapley Takemori.

This was the only book I read while away that I didn’t like, but it is nonetheless one that is sticking with me. Some books I finish and feel confident in my displeasure, certain that I know what didn’t work and why, but this isn’t one of those. It feels like there’s something just round the corner of my understanding, which if I could just grasp it would make the novel click into place. I might not like it still, but I might at least understand it. But I don’t.

The novel follows a woman called Amane in an alternative version of our world where artificial insemination tech really took off in the aftermath of the second world war, and changed the whole of humanity’s approach to childbirth, sex, relationships and sexuality. In Amane’s world, conceiving a child via “copulation” (as the translation insists on putting and which I aesthetically hate) is deeply strange and increasingly taboo. Amane herself was conceived that way, and her mother clings to the old ways, trying to inculcate them in her daughter, but to little avail. The rest of the novel is a following on from this, a view into a changing landscape of desire, identity and family which spirals outward into more and more difference from the real world, casting a warped mirror onto our notions of what is and is not acceptable and why.

It’s not at all a realist novel – some of the societal changes feel quite weird and the way people react to them, as well as their universality across the world, stretches my suspension of disbelief a little – but that’s not the problem. It’s not presented as intended to craft a perfect version of a world in which this occurs, but instead an exploration of ideas. That’s not my favourite mode of storytelling, but I understand it. What I struggle more with is how cold it often seems, how it focuses so much on such intimate details of life – the growth of sexuality as Amane becomes an adult, her relationships and friendships and discussions of love and family – and yet gives none of this any human warmth. There’s no sense of proximity in these conversations or in Amane’s interiority. Instead it’s a clinical dissection of ideas, all the way down, constantly, with no space for any characters to develop as more than vectors for the idea under exploration.

And then, as the story progresses, the dark mirror it holds up warps further and further. Amane and her husband-but-no-longer-husband move to a town where childbirth is assigned via lottery, regardless of gender, and children are raised in common to refer to all adults as “mother”. It is simultaneously fascinating and unsettling, and becomes more and more so as Amane struggles with/accepts the new normality, culminating in a deeply unpleasant and disturbing scene that engages with one last taboo7.

It’s definitely a novel with things to say, about normality, our acceptance of what that looks like, taboos and the influence of consensus on our understanding of them. It’s all extremely deliberate. But I found, in that culmination, just confusion. I’m not quite sure what it all pulls together to mean. What was that horribleness for? Was it for anything at all? I just don’t know.

I also really struggled with it as a book full of shifting technology and attitudes to birth, the shape of a family and so on, but one which by contrast retained some really regressive gender politics. There’s a constant refrain around the fundamental differences between men and women – as what a family can be shifts, as sex becomes no longer part of marriage, multiple characters insist it would be better if marriage could be no longer just between a man and a woman, because women only understand women, men only understand men, and wouldn’t it be better to marry a friend you understand? For a book that has an extended sequence about male pregnancy, and had seemingly entirely casual acceptance of asexuality, this was bizarre.

And so here I am, writing more about it than all the books I actually enjoyed because it feels like an unsolved problem. I don’t recommend it, but I will keep thinking on it, at least until I come to conclusions I am somewhat settled with. I am, perversely, glad I read it while on holiday. I don’t think I’d have finished it at home, and I am better off for having the whole of it to pick at, whatever my feelings on it.

Eleventh, Clouds of Witness by Dorothy L. Sayers, as another audiobook on the long drive home.

I haven’t a great deal to say about this different from Whose Body?, to be honest. The production was by the same people, the voices remained fantastic, and it felt like it captured well what I enjoy about the tone of Sayers’ work.

The fun part, however, came back to experiencing it in the landscape and space. It’s a novel with a fair amount of travel, up and down between Yorkshire and London, over to Paris and indeed to America and back, and so there was a pleasing sympathy to listening to it on a drive.

But also, while Wales and Yorkshire are rather different places, the fog and the empty spaces, the moors and the wide open hills of the story were there in the Snowdonia we drove through. We followed the coast up to Harlech (with a little pitstop at a neolithic burial site and at Harlech castle on the way). We then went through the national park, and google maps, in its infinite wisdom, kept sending us through the windiest, narrowest, most precarious roads, through the emptiest countryside. There were stretches of it empty of all other cars save us, with only the rising mists for company as our ears popped and we bumped along, listening to Peter tramping through the fog looking for clues.

The sympathy decreased by the time we were stuck in traffic outside Manchester. But still.

We finished the story only shortly before getting back to my friend’s house, and it felt like a perfect ending to the trip. A mystery solved just as everything came to a close.

It was very pretty, and I could only imagine it being more so on a dim, autumnal evening.

All in all, an excellent iteration of the tradition. We extended it by a day compared to previously and that was a GREAT decision, the remoteness was a massive benefit, we got tonnes of reading done, and having the car meant we could bring food comfortably without having to worry about packing as lightly as possible. We were rich in snacks and nice things, did some comforting cooking (I had a meat and potato pie for the first time in ages and my god I had missed them), and just all round had a nice, quiet, companionable time. The only things that weren’t ideal were a) I got zero crafting done, which would have been nice and b) some of the books were crying out to be written about but I had no means of doing so at the time. I’ve taken notes, so will likely do some more later, but it’s not the same as being able to when the moment of “write, write now” strikes. Long term, I think I might need to get myself a small refurbished laptop, because I keep yearning to be able to type things up in awkward places.

But those are minor quibbles. All in all, a great time had, long live reading holidays. Now just to plan the next one…

The final count of physical books read in the cottage, with the lovely woodburning stove in the background
  1. One of the nice things about going on these with this particular friend is that we keep quite different hours. I’ll get up in the morning to find she’s done a substantial walk about the hills and has pictures to show me of bogs, streams and wildlife, and had a sit in peaceful silence without me, and then she’ll go to bed around 10, leaving me with 4-5 hours of perfect stillness in the night to read undistracted. ↩︎
  2. I hadn’t actually planned to take it, but I asked Ed to weigh in on me cutting down my list of possible books to pack, and he entirely “helpfully” decided to add a book to the pile instead. Just because he was right doesn’t give him an excuse. ↩︎
  3. I am skimming past these a little, but that was genuinely great. I absolutely burned through the book partly because of how apropos it was. ↩︎
  4. Mainly because I judged this would give me nightmares. I then went on to have mildly creepy dreams about caves anyway so I was probably correct. ↩︎
  5. There’s a sort of essay or something percolating in the back of my brain that I will eventually write about the different ways people think about similarities/differences between texts. Predominantly I think it’ll be about “tropes” as useful/not useful signifiers of what a book will be and feel like, but I think there’s a thread in there about genre too, about what connects and does not connect things, especially for me. Genre here just wasn’t what felt important. ↩︎
  6. The Ministry of Time by Kaliane Bradley comes particularly to mind. I saw a lot of critique of it from SF folks as being boring/simple/not new on a time travel front, which I absolutely refute. It is new because it takes that different approach – time travel not just as a science problem, but as a deeply personal one. Felt pretty good to me. ↩︎
  7. Very serious content warning for this book, if you choose to read it, about sexual activity and children. ↩︎
Posted in All, Detective/Mystery, Else, Fantasy, Literary, Poetry, Science Fiction | Tagged , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Eligibility Post – 2025 Edition

‘Tis the season once again, back on the awards rollercoaster, and back offering up my work from 2025 for your nomination consideration.

In 2025 I wrote 43 reviews and 25 review-adjacent objects, totalling 153,540 words because I know neither shame nor brevity. But I will not inflict all that on you. Instead, please find below a curated selection which I think gives a sense of the kind of thing I put out. All of these fall under the Fan Writer label for the Hugo Awards, as well as any other review/criticism or short form non-fiction categories in other awards.


Reviews


Other Writing

  • My roundup of 2024 speculative poetry in advance of the special category in the 2025 Hugos. This was the culmination of a deep dive and a lot of reading, as I was not hugely familiar with speculative poetry (though I read a fair amount of poetry otherwise).
  • A discussion post of the Clarke Award shortlist with Emily Tesh. I love reading and discussing the Clarkes, and Emily was an amazing collaborator in this endeavour – she definitely added angles I would not have thought of, and it was just such a joy to dig deep into the shortlist with her.
  • The first post in a project of rereading The Lord of the Rings and discussing it with Ed. I’ve had a changing relationship with Tolkien’s work over my life, and so it’s been really interesting to dig into it in detail with someone for whom the love of it has been a constant. Doubly interesting as there seems to be something in the water, and everyone else is rereading Tolkien too. We finished The Fellowship of the Ring in December (eighth post in the series here), but this project is ongoing and we’ll be moving onto The Two Towers in February.

Best Fanzine

I also want to highlight that Nerds of a Feather, at which I am an editor, is eligible for Best Fanzine.


I’ve chosen reviews and posts that run a variety of lengths, approaches and forms, including both very positive and very negative. Hopefully this gives a pretty good sense of what I write.

If you are so inclined to include me in your consideration for 2026 awards – my thanks.

Posted in All, Else, Not A Review | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

2025 in Books

2025 book crafts!

I’m writing this a day early, because I have plans for the last day of the year that aren’t sit and home under a blanket thinking about books and stats. Madness.

Despite setting myself the slightly more achievable goal of 100 books to read this year, I have not quite achieved it. There were some very very stagnant months, not least of which the one where I had back to back, really quite horrible colds which prevented me from getting through all of the Le Guin shortlist books in time for the winner to be announced (particularly gutting as they were all super interesting, if only I had had the brain space to accommodate the last of them).

It’s also been a year that felt very mixed, when it comes to reading. On the one hand, there are some stone cold bangers that I picked up this year, including things that feel like they may have lasting legacies on me, and ones that have bumped new authors into my buying-awareness. I’ve felt stretched at times, in the best way, and picked up books I might never have considered but for the championing of critics and reviewers whose opinions I value and vibe with (this will become a theme). But at the same time, there felt like there was a more general slide toward mediocrity, that these excellent reads were the exception to. What few there were were really good, but that doesn’t entirely balance out that there were fewer. And I have some theories about that.

I am, I think, increasingly reading books based off recommendations of other reviewers; these tend to be the bangers, and particularly the bangers that stretch me, my reading, my criticism and my understanding. And these are skewing, naturally, what I read and how I read it. When I look back at my best reads of the year, the majority are ones I can pinpoint not why I read them, but who caused it. And there’s a shape of the things I want right now clearly forming, that I think is increasingly at odds with some of the other spaces within which I read, including but not limited to the Hugos. I want things that are… messier, more human, wilder and less rigid, I think. Books less constrained into specific genre brackets1, and especially books that straddle across the SFF/litfic borderline, or books that, when someone asks what genre they are, the answer is hard to form. “It depends” books. Not exclusively, I want to stress. There are still plenty of other types of books I love, because no one is ever only one thing, but I find these particular books are the ones that are leaving the most lasting impression on me, the ones I want to hunt down and hold close.

And so, those few, those are the fondly remembered books. The five stars, the life-changers, the proselytise-to-all-your-friendsers. Also the didn’t-love-but-very-much-respecters, the interestings, the discussion-worthies, the I-have-to-pick-at-this-until-I’ve-settled-on-its. The books that, for one reason or another, last

But amid and among those are books that represent where genre spaces and I are diverging, and that is both a little sad, and also satisfying, because self-understanding is always a boon, in the long run.

However, this then drives a question – do I want to change my reading to more fully drive towards only those things that do bring that joy? Or does “staying in touch” matter to me, even if the books that form a part of that are not the thing for which I yearn most deeply? The answer is, of course, a bit of both. There are some changes in my reading goals for the year ahead that reflect this, and some things that stay the same. I still value that wider, broader Conversation. I just might nudge myself a little more in the direction of some of the specific pools of it, as well as paddling out in the wider ocean.

Outside of that, the other trend I have felt is that I have simply not had the time for all the things I want to get to (which feels contradictory? I don’t know). I find myself increasingly signing up to review something just so I have external impetus to get the damn thing read. This is a totally normal, sensible thing to be doing. Mmhmm. Yup.


But never mind that. Now, it is the time of Stats. The greatest time of the year. By not reading 100 books precisely, I have unfortunately condemned us to Untidy Stats, for which I am truly sorry, but I think there’s some interesting stuff in there regardless to make up for it.

Basics first, the what: I read 96 books in 2025, across nine genres2.

Google sheets for some reason refuses to display the label for the romance slice of the pie, but that’s what that one is

The main takeaway here for me is that SF has gone up by 10% compared to last year, almost exclusively at the expense of Fantasy (down by 9%). This runs counter to my gut feel of the SFF trend where Fantasy is the dominant part of the equation, and again speaks to who I’m listening to in book recs (you all know who you are).

Litfic has gone up a little, poetry and non-fiction have gone down a little, and some of my rarely-read genres have changed (no horror last year, for instance). Both of those downs are ones I think I would like to address in the year ahead, not least by finishing all the half-read non-fiction on the shelf next to my desk (currently six separate books; I am terrible at this). I am however fine with this shift away from wild Fantasy dominance, and would be ok with this continuing at least a little.

As ever, single-genre labelling has a lot of downsides, so this isn’t a perfect picture, but I’ve not really found a solution to that that gives a better sense of what I’m after, so it is what it is. No one wants to look at the horror show that is my subgenre graph.

My general tendency to read women has persisted, but at 55.21% I am at my lowest percentage women authors since records began (2017). Since NB authors are also down, this means I’ve read more men this year. Not, I think, for any particular reason, but interesting to see it happening. Correlation with increase in SF, maybe?

PoC and queer authors hold steady at around 30%, which is about normal for me.

In general, I treat my reading stats as a descriptive exercise, rather than anything I want to strive towards or against (at least in the demographics categories), so I don’t have a tonne to say about it other than observing its relative stability. Where I set myself goals about this sort of thing, they tend to be more granular (like my previous aim to read more queer works by queer men, which turned out to be an absolute banger choice and introduced me to some new favourite authors). Outside of that, there’s no goals, because there’s no such thing as “enough” queer etc. work to be reading. I just like to keep a finger on the pulse of what I’m picking up.

Translated fiction up ever so slightly from last year, and that number feels much lower than my vibe on what I was reading, but is again a victim of my pile of half-read books that need completing. I have at least three where I am really quite close to done, if I just actually got on with it. It has been, I think, that sort of year in a lot of things.

Rereads are up distinctly, which is a little surprising, as it didn’t feel that way. I suspect the majority of that is audiobooks, which tend to slip my attention and memory much more easily than eyes-books.

I remain commitedly a reader of current things, with over 75% being published within the last 2 years of my reading date. I’m very happy with this, long may it continue. I like being up to date.

Unsurprisingly also, my proportion of reads that are novellas remains pretty chunky, as do novels, because I am not an exciting person when it comes to formats. I might like to get a bit more poetry and graphic novels in again in the coming year though, as well as my intent to finish my goddamn non-fiction current reads. They haunt me.

In terms of the how good, the story, and specifically looking in comparison to previous years in star ratings, the “fewer bangers, more middle” vibe is clearly borne out:

That red block really stands out. 4 stars for me encompasses most of “good but not great”, and 3 stars is my “mixed, fine, complicated, true meh” category, if you need a sense of calibration. A lot of 4s isn’t bad per se, but just speaks to me not loving a lot of things.

My mean book rating is also lower than it has been since 2018 (3.75), and the numbers show that 5 star and 3 star are down in favour of 4 and 1 star respectively, though much more noticeably in the 5 to 4 shift.

2025 is my only year of sub-20% 5 star books so far, in fact. Which would be depressing if some of that 18.75% weren’t fucking amazing.

As ever, my ratings’ relationship with Goodreads’ is negligible. I considered taking this stat out, but I do find it useful to have something to compare to, even if it’s a very rough vibe rather than anything particularly useful.

As a new measure though, and one I did find interesting, I broke my star ratings down by genre, and the results were fairly divided:

For everything from Poetry down, the numbers are small enough to be worth ignoring. But thinking about the genres with genuinely reasonable numbers, the obvious immediate point is that both of my 1 star reads this year were Fantasy books. Even aside from that, for SF books, 4 and 5 stars together make up 68% of my reads, whereas for Fantasy, only 58%. This I think I think bears out the “reading things because of other reviewers” trend, because a lot of them are recommending me good SF. I need to find the equivalent conversations for Fantasy, and specifically Fantasy that occupies a similar vibe… space… whatever as the Clarke Award does for SF. I have read some good books in that tone this year, but I want more, and it seems they are harder to find.

And finally, my reading across the year:

Generally worse than last year (which, given the lower reading goal, no surprise), but no particularly horrendous months, and ending strong in December because it turns out having two weeks off at the end of the year is good for the soul. Who knew. As ever, the August 2020 monolith remains unassailably nonsense.

I’m not totally happy with my reading this year, and it would have been nice to make it to that 100 books goal, but all in all it could be a lot worse.


Next up, my traditional, annual, totally meaningful awards, looking at the best, worst, most notable and discussion worthy of the things I read in 2025. I will confess, it feels a little weirder doing this now slightly more people read this blog than the handful when I started. But it is traditional, and I enjoy it, so we persist:

Best Novel

While I had some reread, rediscover and old favourites in the year, the top new to me novels of 2025 were Kalyna the Cutthroat by Elijah Kinch Spector, Remember You Will Die by Eden Robins, Sour Cherry by Natalia Theodoridou, Red Sword by Bora Chung (translated by Anton Hur), Notes from a Regicide by Isaac Fellman, On the Calculation of Volume by Solvej Balle (translated by Barbara J. Haveland), A Granite Silence by Nina Allan, When There Are Wolves Again by E. J. Swift, The Place of Shells by Mai Ishizawa (translated by Polly Barton), Sea Now by Eva Meijer (translated by Anne Thompson Melo).

But realistically, this was always going to be Notes from a Regicide by Isaac Fellman. I have yelled about it so much this year, and I shall continue to do so into the darkness of its close. It’s just fucking good, read it.

Potentialest Clarke Bait

As is traditional, there’s at least one novel in the best novel run that, while not taking the win, I nonetheless want to honour in its own particular sphere. In 2025, that’s When There Are Wolves Again by E. J Swift, because it’s the book which, if it’s not on the Clarke Award shortlist, I am most likely to foment a riot about. It’s very good, very nearly made me cry, and just feels exactly perfectly within the zone of what I feel like the Clarke Award looks for. If you want British SF, I would extremely recommend picking it up.

Best Novella

Unsurprisingly given the whole “column about novellas” thing, I have read quite a few really rather good ones this year. The abridged list of absolute bests, if I must cut them down to reasonableness, runs thus: Aerth by Deborah Tomkins, The Death of Mountains by Jordan Kurella, No Such Thing As Duty by Lara Elena Donnelly, The Iron Below Remembers by Sharang Biswas, What a Fish Looks Like by Syr Hayati Beker, One Hundred Shadows by Hwang Jungeun, translated by Jung Yewon.

It’s an extremely varied bag, which is one of the things I most enjoy about doing my small press novella reading – you never quite know what you’re going to find, and it can take you really all over the place, from alternate future superhero India to the vampiric adventures of Somerset Maugham, right through mythological lit-fic domesticity. But, out of all of them, the place I most loved being taken was to what felt like the end of all things, in Syr Hayati Beker’s What A Fish Looks Like, which blends fairytale retellings with a distant future of climate destruction and a possible space ark out to a distant star to tell stories of the deepest community and humanity in gorgeous, lingering prose. An absolute stunner.

Worst Book

This year had a few more potential clangers than last year’s solo 1 star. Not all of these were books I gave 1 star in the moment of rating, but some have lived on in my continued disgruntlement through the rest of the year enough that they still feel worthy of consideration. And, for once, this is not a year dominated by one thing – book club, the Hugos and the Clarke have each provided one contender, as has “the general buzz” (for which I have only myself to blame for reading). And so, this year’s least favourites were: Dragon Rider by Taran Matharu (book club), Service Model by Adrian Tchaikovsky (Clarke Award), Someone You Can Build A Nest In by John Wiswell (Hugos), Katabasis by R. F. Kuang (general buzz).

This year’s most enduring disgruntler, however, must remain Someone You Can Build a Nest In. Full explanation in my review here, if you want to know more.

Comeback Classic

I read two particularly banner novels from the past this year. The first, The Secret History by Donna Tartt, was for A Meal of Thorns yes, but also for contextualising a lot of the discussion around what constitutes Dark Academia. It was so interesting to come back to a book I had loved, but now with a whole swathe of discourse and canon that has accreted around it to hold it in conversation with, and see how all held up. Personally, I don’t know that I will ever myself consider it exactly dark academia, but I do think the way it looks at, understands and criticises class and social in-group dynamics are a useful yardstick of what the genre could be using its powers for.

In an entirely different direction, Ed and I decided to do a close reading of The Fellowship of the Ring by J. R. R. Tolkien (see first discussion here). I’ve had an evolving relationship with the LOTR trilogy as I’ve got older, going from bored uncomprehension at their popularity when I first picked them up aged 11, right through understanding and a good deal of fondness as the way I looked at books expanded to encompass what they were trying to achieve. This year’s close read, with someone who truly loves them, and with the time and space to appreciate exactly how they worked even on a granular level, marked the first time I gave Fellowship five stars. And for that, it is my comeback classic of the year, for the joy of a changing relationship that will, I’m sure, continue to grow on into the future.

Translation Slate (see what I did there?)

This year has also been pretty banger for translated fiction, which is having a moment driven from a number of quarters within SFF fandom and criticism. While I’ve read translated work across my life, this year marked a definite uptick in numbers for me personally as well, driven in turn by that moment its having, and the people enthusing about the greats they’ve been reading. My own top list from 2025 includes: Perspectives by Laurent Binet (translated by Sam Taylor), Red Sword by Bora Chung (translated by Anton Hur), On The Calculation of Volume by Solvej Balle (translated by Barbara J. Haveland), The Place of Shells by Mai Ishizawa (translated by Polly Barton), Sea Now by Eva Meijer (translated by Anne Thompson Melo) and Enheduana: The Complete Poems of the World’s First Author by Sophus Helle.

A good number of these are incredible, and absolutely worthy of a top spot, but the one I think that has stuck with me the most and best, the one I think I will most likely go back to, is The Place of Shells by Mai Ishizawa, translated into absolutely gorgeous, fluid prose by Polly Barton.

Time Traveller

The problem with reading arcs (I know I know, woe is me for my access to free books), is that sometimes you read something a little out of sequence, and it throws off all your lists.

This year, there’s one that really ought to be here, except I actually snuck it in all the way back in October 2024 (Jesus God the passage of time). And so, marked with its own space, The Incandescent by Emily Tesh. It did everything I wanted from class and education in the UK alongside a wrong-footing plot that catches you out at exactly the right moment. It’s a book that feels very true to a lot of things, and that truth underpins the exceptional relationship dynamics and character portrayals that really make it worth the read, and its spot on this here list.

Best Chats

Another blatant excuse to squeeze in one particular book, in this case Colourfields: Writing About Writing About Science Fiction by Paul Kincaid, which is a collection of his various pieces about the meta of SF, about SF non-fiction and about authors across the span of their careers. This is, without doubt, the book I read this year that generated and sustained the most and best conversations I had through the year on matters of genre. Post and response post, like I’m told happened the halcyon days of ye olde blogosphere. For my own part, I got a review and two follow up pieces about it (here and here), and was delighted that one of those generated a follow up follow up from Paul himself (here).

Guiltiest Pleasures Yet To Come

This has been a big year for books I really wanted to make time for but never quite managed, and I have slowly accumulated what I have come to think of as my “guilt pile” on the shelf next to my desk. Of these, the ones that sit most prominent in my thinking, the ones I truly most want to carve out a gap for, are: The Midnight Shift by Cheon Seon Ran (translated by Gene Png), Under the Eye of the Big Bird by Hiromi Kawakami (translated by Asa Yoneda), Helm by Sarah Hall, Wrong Norma by Anne Carson, Herculine by Grace Byron, The Stone Boatmen by Sarah Tolmie, Vanishing World by Sayaka Murata (translated by Ginny Tapley Takemori), Call and Response by Christopher Caldwell and most of all Luminous by Silvia Park. Every single one of these, I can tell you exactly which person (or people, in several cases) made me want to read it.

And that’s probably the best summary of 2025 for me. Books, once again, as community and conversation. I read the things the people I know read, and my world is all the better for the conversations they allow. More of that in 2026, I think. And I hope.


And so, to the resolutions. Last year’s were:

  1. Smaller reading goal – I said 120 felt too much and I meant it. I don’t want to be scrambling. We’re going back to 100 and the perfectly tidy stats. – Close but a miss
  2. Awards – we’re sticking with the Hugos, as always. – Achieved, standard
  3. Awards – and the Clarke, though I need to find someone who’ll do a discussion post of them with me, because that was excellent fun this year. – ACHIEVED WITH BELLS ON – Emily was the absolute best to read and discuss with
  4. Awards – and I’ll do one other, though what it will be? Yet to decide. Current frontrunner is the Ignyte novels, but I’m open to being swayed elsewhere. – Missed due to circumstances – it was going to be the Le Guin but I spent a month knocked flat with back to back colds
  5. Reviewing – I’m not sure I can exceed 2024 in terms of volume (nor would I want to), but I will renew the goal of putting myself out there more, both in terms of writing for different places, but also pushing myself to write better, do different things with it, try to really expand my skillset. Which leads nicely into… – Achieve. I’ve written some stuff this year I’m genuinely proud of, for a range of places, and pitched somewhere new (didn’t get accepted but I tried, which was the goal)
  6. Non-fiction – to combat the eternal non-fiction tbr pileup, and the feeling that there’s a lack of good grounding underneath a bunch of my opinions, I’m setting myself a little reading project to get some theory and SFF non-fiction in me, and try to get a better theoretical framework for my wittering about books to live in. I’ll be posting about it as I go, and hoping to do maybe one book per month. – Let’s… not look at the pile of half complete non-fiction books, shall we?

So what do I want to take from that into 2026, and what to change?

  1. Reading goal. I’ll be sticking at a nice round 100, even if I didn’t quite make it this year. Tidy stats is best stats.
  2. Awards – the controversial one – WE’RE DITCHING THE HUGOS LADS3. This is a bold move, so hear me out. I may end up reading some of the Hugo shortlists depending how well they align with my already previous reading (I’ve read a lot of current 2025 books after all), but I am not holding myself to that. And there’s a reason…
  3. Awards – the exciting one – I’m gonna read the Le Guin shortlist instead. Their shortlist tends to be on the longer side, but full of genuinely interesting things, and if I want to make space and time for it, something had to give.
  4. Awards – the unchanging one – of course I’m coming back for the Clarke. You could not stop me. I will be doing another discussion post again for that (with whom? No idea as yet, that’s 2026 Roseanna’s problem) and it has become a highlight of my reading/reviewing year. And, more importantly, I love the general chitchat on social media that happens around Clarke time so obviously I want to be able to be involved.
  5. Reviewing – I want to push myself to write some more experimental reviews. I really liked a couple I’ve done in 2024 and 2025 and I want to aim to do that more, when inspiration strikes.
  6. Non-fiction – one year, one year this will stick. And until then, on the resolutions it remains. I shall make time and space for more non-fiction this year. I will.
  7. Craft – I was tempted to do another tote bag (that was such a great project in 2024) but I just don’t think I have the time, or the need for more totes. Instead, I think I will use that craft bookish impetus to keep making book themed bookmarks through 2026.

Fingers crossed the awards goals particularly help facilitate that continued dedication to book chat. Happy New Year, and I look forward to reading, reviewing and discussing with you in 2026.

  1. And increasingly having thoughts about what those genre brackets even mean, or don’t, but that is a matter for a forthcoming time TBD. ↩︎
  2. Sorry pie-chart objectors, I like them. ↩︎
  3. Well. Letting go of the expectation that I will read the whole of the majority of the shortlists. I’ll still be nominating, voting and engaging, and I suspect my unplanned reading will give me a fair overlap with what makes the shortlists anyway. ↩︎
Posted in All, Else, Not A Review, Off-Topic | Tagged , | 1 Comment

A Close Reading of LotR – Episode 8 – Echoing Eyes

Our hobbity feast

And now, it ends. We finish our close reading of The Fellowship of the Ring with chapters VIII – Farewell to Lórien, IX – The Great River and X – The Breaking of the Fellowship, moving from a last little bit of elven sorrow into the next part of the quest.

For this part, as a little celebration, we had our own hobbity snack feast while discussing the chapters, enjoying potato and rosemary sourdough with a variety of cheeses, chutneys, meats and cake, and a large pot of tea. It felt appropriate, and more importantly an entirely delightful way to spend an afternoon. I would highly recommend.

The content of these chapters was somewhat less cheery than our snacking, though.

I don’t want to linger too much on elven sadness here, because I covered that plentifully previously, but there is a reprise of it, and there are some proper banger lines that come with it. I noted before about the uncomfortable conclusions I draw from all the elven sadness and Tolkien’s conservatism. Even knowing that, even having those thoughts so recently in my mind, I could not escape in the moment of reading nonetheless being pulled into feeling the sorrow of the passing of the elves from the world by the power of Tolkien’s prose. When it comes to the things he cares deeply about – and I think at this point it’s obvious that the elves being lost to the world is very much one of them – he’s good at mashing the emotions button with how he chooses to put it down on the page. We get a number of examples here, but I think the one that worked best on me was this, on Galadriel herself:

She seemed no longer perilous or terrible, nor filled with hidden power. Already she seemed to him, as by men of later days Elves still at times are seen: present and yet remote, a living vision of that which has already been left far behind by the flowing streams of Time.

What also hit me about this, and the other pieces in this chapter on the passing out of the world of beautiful things, was a connection I had never explicitly drawn before in my mind – how clear this line is between Tolkien and Guy Gavriel Kay’s return in his work to the passage of time and the loss of beauty. I was struck, reading that quote above, with a thought of the mosaic in a chapel we see in two of his books. The first when new, and the second, many years later, of that same mosaic left untended to crumble into ruin, but still with its faded beauty there for someone to see, and to wonder at what once was. This is hardly a stunning or new revelation, by any means, but I am interested that I never quite connected these two particular dots before, especially given that that theme of Kay’s is one of the things I find most effective and evocative in his work. Sometimes things need to be held up to the light in just the right way to catch the brain, I suppose, and this was that particular illumination for me.

The other key thing this chapter highlighted – as Galadriel gives her gifts to the fellowship – is something that has been cropping up in places throughout the book so far, but which is emphasised particularly here and in the next two chapters: the extent to which Aragorn has been picking up kingship by slow degrees through the story.

Galadriel gives him first the gift of a scabbard, but asks if he wants anything more, knowing that they will not meet again in the living world. Though she cannot give him his earnest desire – unnamed, but unsubtly Arwen – what she does do is pass him a a set gem which was left here for Aragorn should he ever pass. Along with it, and more crucially, she says:

‘This stone I gave to Celebrian my daughter, and she to hers; and now it comes to you as a token of hope. In this hour take the name that was foretold for you, Elessar, the Elfstone of the House of Elendil!’

Following which:

Then Aragorn took the stone and pinned the brooch upon his breast, and those who saw him wondered; for they had not marked before how tall and kingly he stood, and it seemed to them that many years of toil had fallen from his shoulders.

With brooch and name, he has shown himself a little more the thing he is fated to be. Just as when he took Andúril, the acquisition of a signifier of his future role makes plain to those around him that he is becoming something else than he has been accustomed to be, and to be seen as. This is kingship as performance – he takes on the mantle and stands, decides, speaks as one who has come into his power – but also as a status that requires physical manifestations, tokens that show his power in the world, but also demonstrate that he has taken the steps and been legitimised in that role by the right powers. In a section rich in nods to Anglo-Saxon historical practices (there’s mead, weaving, cups being shared and the act of gift giving here), it does not seem particularly out of kilter to think that Aragorn’s progression into the role of king also echoes history somewhat.

Which is particularly interesting in a book so clearly fixated on blood and identity1. Aragorn is king by right because of his unbroken lineage to Elendil. He is of the men of Númenor. These are both incredibly important, and often mark him out as special, even aside from his claim to the throne of Gondor. But, these moments of ritual seem to say, that bloodright alone is insufficient. That bloodright has sat with every ancestor before him back through the line. Aragorn, however, is the one who is doing all these steps and actively taking up the mantle of the kingship – because king is a thing you do, not just a thing you are. So Galadriel’s gift to him – this bestowing of a name that marks him as having reached a step in his fated journey – is part of that performance, a part of collecting about himself the signifiers that mark him, outwardly, as the king he both is and will be.

A little later, having made their way down the river, the Fellowship find themselves at the Argonath, and this comes to the fore as Aragorn marks the connection, and that this is the first time he goes into the land of his birthright under his own, true name:

Frodo turned and saw Strider, and yet not Strider; for the weatherworn Ranger was no longer there. In the stern sat Aragorn son of Arathorn, proud and erect, guiding the boat with skilful strokes; his hood was cast back, and his dark hair was blowing in the wind, a light was in his eyes: a king returning from exile to his own land.

‘Fear not!’ he said. ‘Long have I desired to look upon the likenesses of Isildur and Anárion, my sires of old. Under their shadow Elessar, the Elfstone son of Arathorn of the House of Valandil Isildur’s son, heir of Elendil, has naught to dread!’

And so he has taken up not just the physical tokens of kingship and his name, but his lineage too. Here, in his land, he names his connection and his role, and takes up the pieces of his identity that are past, as well as future.

I had the perhaps fanciful notion – with which Ed was not entirely on board, I will admit – that this progression through the book of his collection of unique, valuable and symbolic items, and now the bestowal of a name and declaration of heritage as he comes into his kingdom, perhaps represents a slow coronation ritual that he undergoes all the way from Rivendell to Minas Tirith. Are the sword and the stone truly so different from the sceptre and the orb? I like this reading, so I shall keep it, even if it might be a little silly.

Regardless of what quite it signifies, it threads through this last piece of the book that the character we met as Strider is Strider no more. Or not only. Frodo is not the only one who has undergone change through this journey.

The other character who stands out in the gift-giving, for rather different reasons, is Gimli. While the others have gifts prepared for them, Galadriel is unsure what a dwarf could possibly want of her. What proceeds comes straight out of Arthurian romance – the request for a strand of her hair to treasure, and to pass down as an heirloom, and a “pledge of good will between the Mountain and the Wood until the end of days”. This hair he describes as surpassing “the gold of the earth as the stars surpass the gems of the mine” – twice over highlighting the signifiers of both dwarves and elves. This whole section – several paragraphs of dialogue – is particularly formal in tone, rich in symbol, and seemingly out of keeping with much of the text. And that is its strength. Tolkien is consciously harking back to a certain type of story, a certain type of request, and his language slips a little into the mode of the thing to better evoke it.

While it does not escape the unpleasant characterisation of the dwarves entirely – Galadriel’s hope for Gimli’s future is “your hands shall flow with gold, and yet over you gold shall have no dominion” – it is an interesting contrast to their portrayal in The Hobbit, where the gold sickness is far more prominent a characteristic. Gimli acting as the romantic hero, the knight errant with his formal courtesy and careful flattery of the high lady, offers another angle on his character, and on the people he represents. Does this assuage the previous racism? Of course not. But it suggests perhaps that Tolkien’s approach in the intervening years may have gained a modicum of nuance.

This connects, unfortunately, to Celeborn’s speech here. As they ready to leave, he offers them boats to take, and indicates that there are those among them who can handle them. He does this by linking them to their people – Legolas can boat because the elves of Mirkwood know their river, Boromir because he is of Gondor, Aragorn because he is of the Rangers. Alone, this feels neither here nor there (and perhaps can be taken as a way of giving the reader some insight into their peoples through them, rather than purely their own skillsets, a little hand gesture of wider worldbuilding), but it is not alone throughout the book, and exists within a lingering tradition (looking at you D&D) of fantasy racial essentialism, where one’s skills, abilities and preferences are determined by one’s race or one’s people. It suggests that, if Legolas can handle boats because he is and elf of Mirkwood, that being an elf of Mirkwood has a homogeneity to its legacy and imprint on its people that seems out of keeping with my experience of the world.

And yet, as Tolkien often does, he goes on to undercut this immediately. After Celeborn speaks, Merry pipes up immediately to say that he, too, knows how to handle boats. Which we, the readers, already know – not all hobbits are wary of water, as we learned before we left the Shire. As above, does this entirely resolve the sense that often comes through in the story that heritage is destiny? No. But it goes some little way to saying that Tolkien allows complexity to exist within it. A complexity that a lot of the works that exist in the fantasy lineage after him entirely fail to incorporate.

So far I’ve been quite heavily focussed on the first of the three chapters, and indeed I think there is a lot in that one worth lingering on. The following two are a return to travelling through the landscape, about which I’ve talked plenty. It is possibly interesting to note that this may be the first truly unpeopled land they go through – even the empty places previously bear witness to those who have lived there before – and also a land they travel past rather than through. They float along the river seeing this wild place, but do not interact with it directly until they reach the borders of Gondor’s hold, and the ruins of a place that once was worked by human hands. The true wilderness, the one that has never borne the touch of people, is a place not worth daring the visit, perhaps.

But while there’s less to discuss, there’s not nothing. One of the key things that crops up again and again through this chapters is the idea that the fellowship are avoiding making a critical decision, and that they are taking an easier way out for as long as possible, and may choose to continue to do so. The decision to go east or west, to journey to Mordor or Minas Tirith, has been and is posed repeatedly. Boromir makes clear his position. But Aragorn and Frodo seem undecided, and reluctant to make the choice at all.

That Tolkien characterises Minas Tirith as the easy path – and he lingers on the idea that they could find respite there for a time to emphasise this – feels like an interesting choice. We’ve been with these people long enough now to start thinking of at least some of them as heroes. But that does not mean they are infallible, and cannot be tempted into avoiding the harder and more dangerous things before them. There’s no sense of blame in it, and Minas Tirith has been proferred as a legitimate and reasonable option throughout. But it now starts to build that this isn’t the right path, foreshadowing a choice to come.

And, of course, foreshadowing Boromir’s part in Frodo’s choice. His determination to go to Minas Tirith has been peppered through the last few chapters, and arises more and more here. But what now builds with it is his belief that the Ring, and its bearer perhaps, ought to be going with him. This culminates in a slow and, to my mind very well crafted, scene in which he first attempts to persuade Frodo and then eventually snaps, and tries to take the Ring from him, before awakening from his madness to regret.

That he will be overtaken by his wanting in spite of reason or wisdom has been well foreshadowed, and his arguments become sinister as he makes them. But one line stands out to me against the backdrop of these:

‘And they tell us to throw it away!’ he cried. ‘I do not say destroy it. That might be well, if reason could show any hope of doing so. It does not. The only plan that is proposed to us is that a halfling should walk blindly into Mordor and offer the Enemy every chance of recapturing it for himself. Folly!’

And… well… is he wrong? What has he seen so far of Frodo that would lead him to believe that he could undertake this monumentally dangerous journey? It is absolutely clear that he has been overcome by desire for the power of the Ring, it’s true. But there is a seed of reason at the heart of it, just as there is a seed of good aims, a drive to do the right thing, that has been twisted into this rapacious wanting.

There are two mirrored scenes that this connects to. The first is Galadriel a few chapters back, when Frodo offers the Ring up to her. Like Boromir, she is motivated by pure desires, wanting to take down their enemy, drive him and his power from the land. But unlike Boromir, she knows that the Ring will take this desire and twist it, and that if she used its power, it will end with her twisted too, a dark queen, rotted out by the use of a power that cannot be trusted. And so she refuses and passes the test. Boromir, who has repeatedly been shown to be very set in his beliefs about how the world works, how the Enemy can be defeated, what is worth doing and by whom, cannot see himself out of those trammelled views and so is captured in the Ring’s siren song, and seeing Aragorn, or himself, as the wielder it needs to call up the Men of Gondor to ride against Sauron.

Which brings us to the other mirror – Aragorn. When the rest of the party realise Frodo is missing, they determine that they must stop him leaving, they must find him, they musn’t let him go. But Aragorn alone pauses to wonder, maybe the decision should be left to Frodo, maybe they should just let him make it and go.

On the face of it, this seems slightly mad. To let a hobbit, someone who doesn’t have particular training or experience alone in the wilds, make such a vital and dangerous journey alone seems bonkers. But it sits in opposition to Boromir’s rational concern that turns to trying to exert his own will on the situation. His concern may be a reasoned one, but his actions are ill. Aragorn’s willingness to let Frodo go alone seems out of kilter with the facts as we know them, but demonstrates a quality he shares with the others we have been shown are wise so far in the story: openness to possibility. Maybe this situation isn’t one for big armies and men with swords. Maybe a hobbit can be the thing they need. Maybe something else, something different, something new.

And we have seen in previous chapters that, like Frodo and Gandalf, Aragorn too sometimes can connect to the knowledge of the world outside of himself, gain wisdom and feelings of the shape of the narrative that are beyond him. He was the one, when they went into Moria, who felt something about Gandalf’s impending fate. Perhaps his connection to that sense of fate drives him here.

Boromir is not open – not to possibilities outside of his experience, nor to the touch of that Unseen World and its knowledge. His is constrained by his worldview, and that is his undoing. He progresses from gentle persuasion, to bullying, to physical threat, and fails in the ideal of himself he holds to be true. The Ring has driven him to it, yes, but as we see through the story up to this point, it works on what was already there at least in part. And so the conversation between them feels all the more real because it draws so heavily on character work done on Boromir throughout the story so far.

It also makes plain that, as has been hinted before, Frodo already had made the decision to head to Mordor. Looping back to that theme of avoidance, he knew his desire to go to Minas Tirith was “the way that seems easier” and “refusal of the burden that is laid on [him]”. The conversation with Boromir serves then not only as his character journey, but an externalising of Frodo’s decision-making, where the decision is not go or stay, but to bring himself to actually do the thing he knows he needs to do. The threat Boromir suddenly presents forces him to make the decision he had fully made, to act on his instinct to do the right thing.

Which brings him, in his flight while wearing the ring, up the hill of Amon Hen, the Hill of the Eye of the Men of Númenor. Whether because of some innate power of the hill or his access to the Unseen World as ringbearer, this position gives Frodo a sudden escape from his singular viewpoint and a grasp of the wider scope of the story – out to many of the other players in the game like Isengard, Rohan, and Minas Tirith, and out further to Mirkwood and the land of the Beornings and Harad. Right here, at the end of the story, he grasps the full scale of what’s at stake and what turns towards this great problem. And as he does so, as he stands on the Hill of the Eye, his is matched and mirrored himself by the Eye of Sauron, who becomes aware of his gaze looking out across the world, and reaches out power and focus to find him. At this point, he feels conflicting voices within himself, whether the seduction of the Ring and his own wisdom and will, or perhaps the influence of Sauron and some other, more kindly force (my read on this is that perhaps it is Gandalf), and chooses to take off the Ring and step out of sight just in time. And then, finally, he is resolved to do what he must.

This ending, with two powers looking out from their respective high places, I can’t help but think of as a little foreshadow of what’s to come in the next book, as well as an effective (if not awfully subtle) demonstration of the good and evil working in the world and in the story. All that is left is for Sam to find him and resolve to accompany him, and the story is ended.


But because this is the last session for the book, this is not where my thoughts end – I have some general wrap ups to do as well2.

In no particular order, the things that linger with me from rereading The Fellowship of the Ring with such a close focus are:

How much the fandom conception of it, the way it is generally talked about in discussions I see, differs from the reality of my experience of it as a text, in many ways. The one that stands out most strongly is the criticism often thrown that there is SO MUCH poetry to be skipping, for the people who don’t like it. Now that I’ve finished, I’m struck by the opposite – how little there seems to be in comparison to all the grumbling. Like many big touchstones, the version of the text that lives in the popular imagination does not always resemble the thing itself. I’ve been watching some Star Trek recently, and the comparison that seems apt is how fandom’s view of Captain Kirk, iterated over and over into a caricatured version of whatever consensus was once reached, no longer seems to map to the character as one experiences him in his context. Likewise, this text, especially in light of the effect of the films, does not entirely map onto the thing I see discussed frequently, and I think I need to hold that thought in mind, to remember the text as the complex, textured, often beautiful thing it is to my mind.

This is especially true for how open, fluid and slippery the story is willing to be, and how open to metaphorical readings rather than literal. These are both things I deeply appreciate in texts, and both things that are often missing from Tolkien’s subsequent imitators. I must not judge the book by what came after it, and must remember that not all those later works took the same key things I found in the books away with them. Where I value that complexity, fluidity and abstractness, they may have lingered on perhaps the arc of the epic, or the worldbuilding.

Which is another big thing I hold onto now I’ve finished. There is the common view that Tolkien is a worldbuilder before all else, that he wrote a story to give people to speak his made up languages and live in his made up world. That… is not my experience of him reading now. As I said in one of the previous sessions, I think instead the heart of his work is the recreation of something in the region of… not quite theme. Perhaps the sense, the feeling of a certain type of ancient story, evocation of the spirit of a type of myth. The worldbuilding, the language, the maps, all of those concrete pieces feel to me as tools that bend to this ultimate goal, rather than ends unto themselves, and I think that is what makes the story what it is. The worldbuilding is indeed rich and dense and beautiful, but it is purposeful, and it needs that purpose to be as good as it is. This is my belief now, and one I shall hold close, and fight for.

My last thought, the one that stuck out to me today as we were discussing our final thoughts, is a wider one. Reading Tolkien of course prompts wider thoughts about Fantasy as a genre, because of its position within the canon and the megatext. One of the things I’ve been thinking about recently is the idea of SFF as being defined as a genre in conversation with itself – the texts that draw upon one another to form a corpus. Reading The Fellowship of the Ring now, seventy years after its original publication, makes clear to me how little of that genre is in direct conversation with this specific text anymore. Maybe in dialogue with the works several iterations down the chain of conversation. Maybe in conversation with Tolkien and his work as a set of ideas. But the work on the page, here, feels no longer close to the fantasy I read published now. And if that’s so, if that gap has widened out, how much does that definition of SFF hold true? We’ve marched on, into new places. The lens of the now has shifted away from the things this one guy cared about, his love of walking, his obsession with landscape, the way he thinks about good and evil, the way he uses language. The legacies are still there, of course, but this text and its legacies no longer feel so close as they once might.

That definition of genre is one that doesn’t quite work for me. Finishing this close reading is just giving me another angle to pick at it from, another way it does not fit the nebulous shape of how I want to think about genre that is, slowly, forming. It’s not there yet. Maybe it never will be fully. But the process of thinking about it is a productive one, just as the process of coming back to this text, this strange, beautiful, uncomfortable, difficult, fascinating text, is.

There is an awful lot here to linger on, to pick at, word by word, between two people who want to dig into the depths of it. Reading a text like this, one that has the richness and complexity to support that unpicking, is a joy, even when not all to be found is good. I think the process is making me a better reader, and it has brought me closer to a text I once found impenetrable. I have finally, with help, in wonderful ongoing conversation, got under its skin. Even if I’m not sure about SFF as a genre in conversation with itself, it is within conversation about and within it that I find myself most enriched by its works and its ideas. That conversation is, for me, the best of reading.

  1. Discussed previously, still uncomfortable. ↩︎
  2. This is turning into a long one, and I apologise, but I think it was clearly inevitable that this was going to happen. ↩︎
Posted in All, Fantasy, Not A Review | Tagged , , , , , | 8 Comments

A Close Reading of LotR – Episode 7 – Mirrors and Islands

The penultimate episode of our close reading brings us out of Moria, and into Lothlórien, with Chapter VI – Lothlórien and Chapter VII – The Mirror of Galadriel, with a sharp contrast against the preceding Dwarf TimeTM, with Tolkien going two-footed into elves elves elves.

These two chapters are full of some really quite beautiful, evocative descriptive prose, and also not really a whole lot of goings on, when compared with the previous section. Starting with a brief detour for Gimli and Frodo to look into the Mirrormere outside Moria, the events of the chapter are just the journey into Lothlórien, some chats with elves, hiding from some orcs, meeting the Lord and Lady of the wood, and then looking into Galadriel’s mirror. But what it may lack in Happenings, this section more than makes up for in things to think about. Especially if you want to be sad about elves1.

I, it turns out, do want to be sad about elves. Call me a basic bitch all you want, but elves are just cool! They look good, they lean all the way into their ridiculous aesthetic, they get to mope about lamenting their immortality and dispensing wisdom, drop banger poems and, if we’re lucky, turn up to save the day on their jingle jangle horse2. And, beating the same drum again as I have all book, they’re kind of fairies. And I fucking love fairies in literature. So two chapters of pretty elven tree houses and Portentous Bangers are kind of my happy place.

It’s nice that we got All Dwarf All the Time and then immediately got our elfy chaser. Nice little bit of balance. But Tolkien does a lot of mirroring between those sections, beyond the obvious (though the Mirrormere and the Mirror of Galadriel are right there as a pair). There are a lot of small, paired moments throughout, where Legolas’ romanticism and love for his people and this, the heart of their culture in Middle Earth, echoes Gimli’s sadness at the remnant’s of a once-great dwarven stronghold. Both of them come from a people diminished by time, for whom the great deeds of the past hang heavy over the present. There’s a ramping up, though, from Moria to Lothlórien – Gandalf hints that the time for the dwarves to reclaim their mines was not yet, but every single moment of speech with the elves in these chapters make clear just how inevitable their decline is.

But it is equally clear that Tolkien just… really loves his elves. There’s so much dwelling in these two chapters, so much lingering description of place and nature and the magic of a location that has been deeply infused with elven magic and just the very feeling of it3.

Which unfortunately brings me to my first less-than-ideal moment in these two chapters: the interweaving between people and places. On the surface, it feels easy to embrace Tolkien’s love of connecting his particular peoples with the lands they have been shaped by and shaped in turn. But there’s a specific phrase used in The Mirror of Galadriel:

“Now these folk aren’t wanderers or homeless, and seem a bit nearer to the likes of us: they seem to belong here, more even than Hobbits do in the Shire.”

I find it hard to read this and not read a little into that sense of “belonging” in opposition to those who are wanderers. For all that Tolkien has a relatively complex view of displaced peoples, and definitely not a universally negative one, he also very clearly does value and hold up as some of the most emotively charged pieces of the narrative those who are so thoroughly settled in their homeland that their relationship develops something magical. And it just… does not sit quite as happily for me.

That being said, that magical relationship gets a little lost in the sea of quite a lot of other magical and fey-adjacent content, as happens when you have the concentrated force of sheer elven bullshit going on on the page. When turned up to eleven, the elves really do let show their fairy roots – what is Lothlórien but the fairy lands? The river sings in the voice of a lady long lost, the denizens move silently amid the trees, and the laws of nature are suspended, the seasons upended. Time passes strangely and without measure for the fellowship. The trees remain in leaf through the winter, and a carpet of grass and flowers remains despite being in the full dark of the year. Where, in the rest of the book, the elves seem to be in tune with nature, enhancing it and being enhanced by it, here instead their relationship with it stretches it beyond its natural bounds into something deeply strange. No wonder Boromir is discomfited by being in the woods, even if the rest of the company aren’t.

And this is intensified yet more by the portrayal of Lothlórien – quite explicitly on the page – as an island amid the darkness and power of the enemy (and, less explicitly but I think still fairly obviously, that island in time, a land where the power of the elves has not diminished as it has in the rest of Middle Earth). Now where have we had a description like that before? Yep, it’s Rivendell; Elrond likewise casts it as an island in the darkness of the enemy’s power. Which brings us another of those echoes that seem to be everywhere in these two chapters – Rivendell, the most elvenly elven place we have encountered so far in the story, is being held up in conversation with Lothlórien and being shown as the pale shadow of this, the fiery heart of elvendom.

And again, Tolkien is pretty clear putting this on the page. Throughout the story, elven things have been described with moonlight and starlight, soft, gentle, and welcoming descriptions, pretty, aloof and distantly chill. Even when they are powerful, they feel safe. But those descriptions are upended in the woods, and this is a land described in gold and in sunlight. The leaves, the hair of the lady Galadriel, the warmth and the brightness, they all exceed the gentle descriptors we’ve had up until this point. Is this just an intensifier of those, proving that they are pale shadows of what they once were? I think not. Or not just. I think the key comes back to those aesthetics of good and evil I’ve talked about before, where the cold, pale, white lights sit wholly on the side of goodness. Because the crescendo of these two chapters is the testing of Galadriel, as Frodo freely offers her the One Ring, and she grapples with her desire to wield it, and the knowledge that no matter what good she may start and may intend with it, that good would ultimately be turned to evil. By switching up his aesthetics of goodness here, and centring that switch on Galadriel herself, Tolkien is foreshadowing and intensifying her potential to wield this great and terrible power and to be a force to reckon with upon Middle Earth. She is not, herself, evil. And so her aesthetics remain tied to white, to light and to much of those trappings of good we’ve seen so far. But some of it and her realm turns a little, just a little, to the others side of his duality, reflecting her capacity to do the same.

And Galadriel herself is a great centre of another duality – that of the nature of elves themselves. Throughout the story, they have shown the capacity to be both the merry fey of myth, and beings of great power and import (though mostly each elf as portrayed sticks to one or the other). Galadriel then gives us both. She is the fey queen, the mistress of a land outside time, the embodiment of its sunlight and beauty, one who likes to test travellers in her realm. But she is also the wielder of Nenya, the ring of Adamant, and we get a glimpse – one she tells us she is showing us directly – that the power she wields is something fiercer and harder4. As she says to Frodo:

“But do not think that only by singing amid the trees, nor even by the slender arrows of elven-bows, is this land of Lothlórien maintained and defended against its Enemy.”

But just as her chapter ends on her own lessening – physically seeming smaller, as well as her declaration that she will diminish and go into the west – the whole chapter has been here to tell us that the elves as a whole are doing likewise. Have been doing likewise – the “long defeat”, as she calls it.

It’s hard to distance myself as a reader from my knowledge of these stories in a context that includes the films, and also in a context where I just know what’s coming, but I wish I could remember what reading this was like for the first time, and how I would have felt on grasping this idea of the extended but inevitable doom of elf-kind. It’s too laden down with other things for me now, and beyond reach, but I wonder perhaps that I might have come to it differently without a soundtrack and a knowledge of the ending.

In any case, with all these elves and elfy places, we are wholeheartedly back to one of my favourite Tolkien modes – descriptions of place and nature. It’s just a good fucking time, especially when so intense as it is here. And here again, as with both Caradhras and, way back early on, Old Man Willow, he’s dipping into ensouling that place, giving it a sense of… if not quite personhood then at least will. Lothlórien quiets when the orcs move through it, and responds to the presence of those it welcomes. It is deeply imbued with power, and with the stories of the elves who have lived there. There’s a sense of almost apotheosis of place, where something about it becomes so intense that it begins to enact back on the world that shapes it. I can’t quite form that into any kind of meaning, but it’s something I very much enjoy reading, and there’s just something kind of appealing in the idea of a land that can take on a character of its own after a while (even if that character is just “mountain mad at you”).

Unfortunately, there’s another thing that comes to the fore in these two chapters (though it has been laced throughout the book so far) and that is the comedy stylings of Master Samwise Gamgee. They’ve always been there as sort of… tonal punctuation (and I have commented positively previously about how Tolkien uses tonal variation to good effect). But here… I don’t know if I’ve got a little worn out on them through the course of the book, or if there were just a few too many in one place, or if the whole class aspect of who is the joker/butt of the joke is getting a little tired, but I was somewhat impatient with his lines at several points here. I should probably add that the films have never left me particularly sympathetic to Sam5, so I’m coming in with some bias, but I tried to keep an open mind while reading because I knew that over-simplicity of character is something the films do suffer from. And equally, I know – I can see very clearly – that a lot of what’s gone into Sam is a bunch of class feelings and background assumptions baked into Tolkien and the time he lived and wrote. But the character that is the output of all of that… I just don’t like him very much. And 366 pages in, I think I can say I did my best to try to be a bit more generous with him but it’s not really bearing fruit.

The moment we dwelled on in discussion was Sam’s own vision of the Shire in the mirror, before Frodo looks. Where Frodo’s visions are more abstract, metaphorical and wide-reaching, Sam’s are very grounded in the material realities of the Shire, and accordingly are very clear and literal in how they come across. He’s seeing events that may be happening at the time he looks, or are in the close future6, but this is foreshadowing on Tolkien’s part of story we have yet to see. And that’s fine, I get that part. But I think the differentiation between him and Frodo here is interesting and telling. Tolkien is highlighting that Sam’s concerns turn inward and homeward, and concern events on a personally-applicable level – the felling of a tree, the building of a factory, the ousting of the Gaffer. His concerns are small. Frodo, meanwhile, gets the wide view.

We talked a little about why this might be. Ed offered that, perhaps any of the non-Frodo hobbits might have been portrayed likewise, and that it is Frodo’s distinction of being the ring-bearer that is being made plain here. Or that Tolkien is highlighting how tied Sam is to home, and that his test forces him to grapple with this thing he holds very dear being under threat, but chooses nonetheless to remain with Frodo, in spite of what he has been shown. But I can’t help but linger on the fact that to illustrate this distinction, this focus back and in, away from the grand narrative, it was Sam specifically that Tolkien chose. Why not Merry, whom Elrond threatened to send home in a sack? Why not linger on that connection? Is it class shit again? I am inclined towards this reading of it, because, if in doubt, I am always inclined towards class readings. Tolkien then gives us the respective reactions of the two characters to their visions, with Sam somewhat overcome and Frodo responding stoically and… c’mon, surely you can see a class reading in that too?

Anyway, between that and the jokes, I do find I struggle with the portrayal of Sam, and consequently with my enjoyment of time spent with him as a character. The Return of the King will, I expect, be a struggle in this regard7.

And yet again in contrast to all this, these are some chapters where Tolkien gives us some of the most metal lines we’ve had in the whole book so far. My particular favourite is, of course, a portentous Galadriel banger, which runs thus:

“The love of the elves for their land and their works is deeper than the deeps of the Sea, and their regret is undying and cannot ever wholly be assuaged.8

Just… fuuuuck. He knows how to drop lines when he needs to.

This is, then, a pair of chapters full of contrasts and dualities, between elves and dwarves, elves and other elves, good and evil, Frodo and Sam, and plenty else besides. It is a section that gives absolutely gorgeous descriptive prose, and the deep love Tolkien has for living places, and very clearly has for the elves and their sorrows as he has drawn them. But the intertwining of people and place, and indeed a lot about the elves themselves reveals a deep conservatism about the work, embodied in the elves as the last vestiges of a glorious past that dips below the horizon, falling ever further beyond reach of the lesser beings of the present. He sells his vision of them as inherently romantic and sad, and he sells it hard, and it is so, so easy to buy into that (god knows I find myself doing it) by the power of his writing. But I cannot ever quite forget (nor should I) what it all implies when put together and thought through to its end point. Especially when taken in conversation with the characters he gives us and how he chooses to portray them, this section has that biggest duality of all, twinning the best and most compelling of what he can do with language, description and the crafting of atmosphere – there’s a reason so much of Galadriel’s scenes are lifted wholesale into the films – with some of the worst that underlies it, when thought through.

Up next… the closing chapters of the book! Heading out of Lothlórien, to the river and the breaking of the fellowship. As it’ll be our last session, we’re planning to have some hobbity snacks to eat with the session, hopefully with some home baked bread, and then we’ll be done with Tolkien close reading until at the very least after Christmas.

  1. If you don’t want to be sad about elves, why are you even reading Tolkien, bro? ↩︎
  2. Not today though. I think we’ve seen the last of Glorfindel and I’m kinda sad about it. Haldir, who is here, is MA BOI in the films, but book-Haldir lacks the panache of his horse-riding kindred. ↩︎
  3. And flets. He got a lot of use out of that word in a very short time. ↩︎
  4. Being slightly fanciful, the thing I wrote in my notes was “adamant wrapped in silk”. ↩︎
  5. I have a long-held “Sam would have voted for Brexit” take that I do not recant. ↩︎
  6. I’m sure chronology for this exists, I can’t be bothered to look it up. ↩︎
  7. Certainly that was the one I struggled with when first reading the trilogy before the films came out, and I have hazy memories of being about 2/3 in and just glazing over as I turned the pages. I would like to hope I’ve grown a little past that but we’ll have to see. ↩︎
  8. I haven’t even gone into my half formed thoughts about how absolutely Catholic this section is, and all this stuff about guilt and grief. There is only so much time in the world. ↩︎
Posted in All, Fantasy, Not A Review | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

A Close Reading of LotR – Episode 6 – The Limits of Foresight

Episode six of our close reading takes us through chapters III – The Ring Goes South, IV – A Journey in the Dark and V – The Bridge of Khazad-dûm. In contrast to the last section, a whole lot of doing gets done, and we cover a lot of ground both in geography and plot. We’re also straight back into a number of the themes remarked upon in previous chapters, sometimes with the subtlety of a thrown brick.

As alluded to in the title of this post, the main thing which stood out to me in this section is foresight and an awareness of the world that extends beyond the boundaries of the senses. At various points, all of Elrond, Gandalf, Frodo and Aragorn have a feeling about what is to come, or powers in the world, and voice or act upon it, or in spite of it. More critically, at several points, this foresight is forestalled, and that feels like a bigger insight into its function for Tolkien within the text than its presence ever does.

There are two key pieces for this. The first, from Elrond as they are readying to leave Rivendell:

‘Then I cannot help you much, not even with counsel,’ said Elrond. ‘I can foresee very little of your road; and how your task is to be achieved I do not know. The Shadow has crept now to the feet of the Mountains, and draws nigh even to the borders of the Greyflood; and under the Shadow all is dark to me.’

And the second from Gandalf, as they come to the mountains:

‘We must go down the Silverlode into the secret woods, and so to the Great River, and then —-‘
He paused.
‘Yes, and where then?’ asked Merry.
‘To the end of the journey – in the end,’ said Gandalf. ‘We cannot look too far ahead.’

Both come from characters whom we have seen access knowledge about the world and its nature – and the future, in some ways – beyond the reaches of themself. But it is in the edges of that knowledge that we see what bounds it. For Elrond, it is the power of the enemy, the rise of a force that challenges the dying light of the elves. Rivendell has been described as an island in a sea of rising evil, and this is the evidence of that tide coming in. Where once there might have been certainty, the encroachment of the power of Sauron robs Elrond of that, leaving the errand of the ringbearer up to chance he cannot know. For Gandalf, meanwhile, the boundary is a far more personal one. Whether he knows it or not (I am not certain my belief on this either way1), his knowledge does not reach beyond the borders of his imminent fall in conflict with the Balrog. Unlike Elrond, his knowledge of the world isn’t in conflict with a specific power that actively obscures, but with his own experience of the upcoming future. I think this says some interesting things about how we are supposed to envisage both of them as pieces of the wider Middle Earth, and their connections to the Unseen World.

But as the two with the greater access to knowledge of the world in this way suffer its limitation, we also see a continued growth of Frodo’s awareness. En route to Moria, he senses the evil of the Watcher in the Water, though cannot quite name what he fears. And then within the mine, he begins to sense the greater evil, both behind them and ahead, as well as having sharper sight within the darkness. As he bears the Ring – whose weight he likewise is beginning to feel with a sense beyond senses – he is being pulled into this realm of awareness that is usually the province of those far more magical than he is.

What seemed clear to me, across all of these, as well as the more third person description of the Balrog as we first encounter it:

What it was could not be seen: it was like a great shadow, in the middle of which was a dark form, of a man-shape maybe, yet greater; and a power and terror seemed to be in it and to go before it.

Is that Tolkien has given some key characters access to a sense of the essence of things, people and the world, as well as their influence upon the world and moral valence. Watsonian-ly, this feels apiece with what we’ve already been told of the Unseen world. But in a more Doylist sense, I really like this as a way to give the reader a very ready shorthand to understand how key conflicts and entities fit into the wider shape of Middle Earth. He does not need to break out of the flow of text to turn to the reader and tell us – instead we can experience the exposition with the characters, through their access to the fundamental nature of the world. It just feels a very neat way of handling context. It also means this section was absolutely rampant with foreshadowing which, given it’s a pretty ominous couple of chapters that ends with a dramatic(ally bad) moment, seems pretty apt.

Hand in hand with that limitation of power, we’re back with a vengeance into the sense of a world fallen from past glory. Not only are the great powers faltering – and indeed Gandalf himself is just as prone to this, having forgotten some of the words of power – but the story takes us across lands abandoned, whose very stones lament for the elves that passed out of them. Likewise, the inscriptions on the doors of Durin make clear (as does Gandalf) that they were made in a time of openness, trade and movement, in contrast to the darkness, empty landscape and paranoia of the story’s present. We know already about the time of the elves passing, but this is the first sense of a wider idea that events and people have a time. Specifically, Gandalf remarks on the folly of Balin attempting to reclaim Moria, for it is not yet time for that. There is a schedule to these things, and his foolishness was not in his aims, but in contravening the march of fate across the world. Whatever happens in the smaller moments in the story, Tolkien is telling us clear that some things are built into the fundamentals of the system.

But, while the old powers of good seem to be waning, by contrast this section introduces a number of older powers from deep places or past times who are somewhere from malevolent to evil and seem entirely full of the strength to impede the Fellowship. First of these is Caradhras, the mountain, which is determined not to let them pass. There’s a little ambiguity in the text just quite how much this is the actual intent of the mountain, but I quite enjoy reading it as literal – it’s a natural world already plenty embodied, so what’s one more?

This is closely followed by the rather more direct onslaughts of the Watcher in the Water – which is far creepier than the films, if only for the description of one of the tentacles as “fingered”, a deeply cursed adjective in context which I hope never to encounter like that again – and the Balrog at the crescendo of the section. The Balrog scene is obviously a big culmination; I’d forgotten quite how directly the film lifts this section almost word for word and beat for beat. But it’s not hard to see why. Through the encounters with Caradhras, the wargs and then the Watcher, as well as the looming threat inside Moria, Tolkien has steadily been ramping up the tension. When that tension finally crests, and the Balrog in its shadowy, fiery, possibly-wingèd2 ferocity looms over the party, we’ve been primed to react to the drama of it, and Tolkien delivers some of his sexiest prose in the shadow, the fire, and Gandalf’s stand against it. He’s allowed himself to go full epic, and he is just good at that.

What also helps to sell this is something that, again, has been running throughout the whole of the book but which has really come to the fore in this section: the aesthetics of evil. This time, it’s laser focused in on a couple of particular aspects of it – light and shadow, hot and cold and colour. Whether it’s the blood-red slopes of Caradhras, the shadow and flame of the Balrog, the exhale of smoke from the door of Moria behind them, or the fiery cleft in the very floor of Durin’s halls, Tolkien has a coherent picture of evil here, a touchstone of darkness and flame to which he keeps returning. And, in opposition to it, an equally coherent view of the power that resists it – light, white and consistently cold. Glamdring, Gandalf’s sword, is described in its cold light multiple times in this chapter, and it is that cold light that opposes the Balrog. Tolkien has, not even particularly subtly, been priming us for this elemental opposition for several chapters. Goodness comes from the cold light of the moon and stars (the stars which the elves love), and it’s a visual he just cannot help but come back to. This is simply the payoff of that obsession.

It is also a moment when those aesthetics most lend themselves to a Christian picture of the world. A creature of evil and flame from the depths you say? It’s giving devil, and is more than helped by the vision of a red star in the sky that made Ed think of Pern, but nudged me somewhat more towards Lucifer. There’s a heaven and hell vibe and a half to the conflict between Gandalf and Balrog, after all. But at the same time, this is a somehow deeply pagan section too – fuller than many with the embodiment and personhood of the natural world. Why choose when you can do both at full throttle, eh JRRT?

But as he’s been doing all along, this isn’t a section that commits to that full throttle in a single tone all the way. Part of why the build up to a dramatic fight works is that he keeps up the tonal variation with some excellent comedy moments: Boromir3 swimming to create a path through the snow, Gandalf and Legolas having a sassy little bitch off, hobbits being hobbits and yearning for a dining room and indeed the habitual class-laden comedy stylings of master Gamgee. But it is also here that it becomes clear how else Tolkien manages tone in dramatic conflict moments: by choosing how much of them to actually write. There are three critical fight scenes in these chapters, and in all three he follows a similar pattern of writing a dramatic opener, which possibly includes the first foray into the fight, and then summarising the rest of the conflict in a shorter piece of text. In the initial fight with the orcs in Moria, this shorter piece is essentially a single paragraph. It means that he manages the tone of the engagement through the opening piece and dictates how we want to view its focus, but never lets the text wallow in a blow by blow account in a way that might let the emotional throughline trail off. As someone who never likes reading fight scenes, I’m extremely here for it, but it’s an interesting contrast to his approach to e.g. walking, where he piles it on and on. But he clearly loves the walking. Maybe he just isn’t interested in writing fights. But if so, his focusing on only what he actually cares about still leaves us with a good pacy text where it could so easily have been bogged down.

And of course, while we’re on walking – we missed out on it in the last two chapters while loafing about in Rivendell, but now we’re back out in the world JRRT is chucking it in in spades. But as per usual, I don’t hate it. Even more than usual, the walking here (and the preparation for walking) are a lingering on the practicalities of traversing an open world. Months are spent in Rivendell as scouts go out and return, which all passes in a couple of passages, and then many miles and days on the road to get to the mountains and the mine. Where it was pleasant before, however, the changing of the season has made a significant impact on the hostility of the environment, and as we’ve headed out into the epic, so too have we headed out into a journey that is more characterised by struggle.

Though not unrelentingly. There are still the usual plentiful bits of gorgeous descriptive prose, of lights and fires and landscapes, interspersed with the increasingly creepy emptiness of Hollin that walks us up the path into the right emotive state for Moria. The two alternate fantastically, and he never lets us linger too long in one feeling before bringing up the seesaw with the other. Whatever evil there is, in the world and in this place particularly, it cannot erase the beauty fully. I lingered for a little while on the image of the two enormous holly trees that flank Durin’s doors, dwarfed by the enormity of the cliff behind them but imposing once approached.

My favourite visual moment, though, comes inside Moria, when Gandalf briefly illuminates a hall in the darkness thus:

He raised his staff, and for a brief instant there was a blaze like a flash of lightning. Great shadows sprang up and fled, and for a second they saw a vast roof far above their heads upheld by many mighty pillars hewn of stone. Before them and on either side stretched a huge empty hall; its black walls, polished and smooth as glass, flashed and glittered. Three other entrances they saw, dark black arches: one straight before them eastwards, and one on either side. Then the light went out.

It’s not just the capture of a moment of visual – though that’s great too – but the sense of it as fleeting, as the light drives away the shadows, and then they rush to return, that makes this wonderful.

This is, of course, all part of showing the first bit of the dwarven world in the book (the “vastness of the dolven4 halls”), and it is by turns beautiful and deeply sad. While the light of the elves may be fading, this is a place not only lost, but recovered, and then lost again to an evil risen from the depths. The brevity of Balin’s time there, as attested in the patchy journal discovered and read, makes it all the sadder likewise, and is crowned by the stunning visual of his tomb illuminated by a single shaft of light from a high window.

The last thought I want to linger on from this section is the one I think was the most moving for me, but also the one I am still most unsure about my thoughts on.

At the start of the section, as they ready to leave Rivendell, Pippin puts himself and Merry forward to accompany Frodo (indeed, insists upon it). Elrond is doubtful of his use in the quest, but is talked round by Gandalf, who muses on the value of loyalty. Yes, he admits, Pippin probably is ignorant of the danger he faces. But so too, he argues, are most of the rest of the Fellowship really, and indeed, perhaps their loyalty and friendship in spite of (or because of) that ignorance are of greater worth than the aid of a great elf-lord like Glorfindel. The mention of Glorfindel particularly, who has in fact already defeated a Balrog in times past, is an interesting one. When discussing it, we had two thoughts. The first, that Gandalf knows this task cannot be achieved by direct means. They will be overwhelmed if they just try to have it out with Sauron. And so someone like Glorfindel, despite his greatness, “could not storm the Dark Tower, nor open the road to the Fire by the power that is in him”. That’s not how they are going to achieve it, and he’s taking unexpected tools for an unexpected job. But equally, I wonder if this is some War ShitTM coming through as well. Tolkien has seen the bravery of the ordinary. It’s a theme being picked up again and again. Is Gandalf’s certainty in the value of the hobbits not just another evocation of this?

It’s interesting to have this alongside the confrontation with the Balrog too. Gandalf tells the party to flee, and the hobbits do, as do Legolas – who has recognised immediately what the Balrog is – and Gimli – who immediately know it for Durin’s bane. Only the two men, the ones who don’t have a cultural link into knowledge of what this monstrous thing is, that it is beyond them, stay to fight with Gandalf. Bravery born out of ignorance then? But laudable for that.

And then, feeding into this even more, the parting words of Elrond as they leave Rivendell, in which he lays a charge on Frodo as the Ringbearer, but demurs from doing so for the rest of the party. Yes, there is already an intention laid that they should split up, so of course they won’t be bound to follow all the way to Mordor. But no oath at all? Again, I am in two minds about this. My initial thought was again, back to War ShitTM, and to wonder if this is a kindness embodied in Elrond by a man who has seen people’s bravery in safety come up to face an enemy beyond it and falter. Is this grace being given in the knowledge that even someone with the best intentions may stumble when faced with something monstrous? Or, as Ed suggested, is this a callback to Elrond’s knowledge of the sons of Fëanor, and calamity those oaths wrought? Or both. I’m always willing to buy an argument of both. Although it is becoming clear that Ed likes Watsonian arguments and I prefer Doylist ones. I wonder what that says about us5.

Either way, I found it a very touching moment, but one that does feed into the sense in this section that Tolkien has a lot of thoughts about what bravery is, and its limitations. Which feels like quite the thing to admit in an epic fantasy, and one I think is not always handled so well in the stories which have followed on.

Which brings us to the end of this section. And hey look – I managed to do a whole one of these without getting bogged down in the verse6. It… probably won’t happen again.

Up next, we were planning to tackle the rest of the book in one big chunk (of around 100 pages in my edition). However, since a) this section took us over two hours of discussion and b) these posts have been running LONG, we decided to split it up into two. As such, our next section will take us two chapters into Lothlórien, shifting back to a less haps happening pace, and leaving us with a final three chapters to finish up hopefully before the end of December.

  1. Though Aragorn does give us, in his own piece of foresight, this clue: He will not go astray – if there is any path to find. He has led us in here against our fears, but he will lead us out again, at whatever cost to himself. ↩︎
  2. I only learnt today about the Balrog wing discourse. ↩︎
  3. Probably not worth spending the time for a whole section on it here, but I do enjoy how much in these chapters Boromir comes off as a himbo. ↩︎
  4. This sent me, rather. I think this is a step too far even for Tolkien. ↩︎
  5. Ok in part what it says is that Ed knows the wider corpus of Tolkien better than I do. But it might be other things too. ↩︎
  6. There are a few pieces in this section. All are fairly standardly iambic, and closer to doggerel than Tolkien normally goes. One of them has the feel of a poem for children to memorise to learn things (which is apt in context). Is it because iambic tetrameter? I can think of a lot of kids’ poems in iambic tetrameter. That being said, the two major ones are still extremely sad. ↩︎
Posted in All, Fantasy, Not A Review | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment