First paperback edition. The cover image shows Tolkien with a favourite tree. [1] | |
| Author | Paul H. Kocher |
|---|---|
| Language | English |
| Subject | J. R. R. Tolkien |
| Genre | Tolkien studies |
| Publisher | Houghton Mifflin |
Publication date | 1972 |
| Publication place | United States |
| Media type | Hardcover (paperback, 1973) |
| Pages | 247 |
| ISBN | 978-0-395-14097-0 |
Master of Middle-earth: The Fiction of J. R. R. Tolkien, alternatively subtitled The Achievement of J.R.R. Tolkien, is a 1972 book of literary criticism of J. R. R. Tolkien's Middle-earth fantasy writings, written by Paul H. Kocher, and one of the few to be published in Tolkien's lifetime. It focuses especially on The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit , and also covers some of his minor works such as "Leaf by Niggle" and "Smith of Wootton Major".
At a time when scholars were largely critical of Tolkien and his prose style, it both praised his writing and, in the absence of either The Silmarillion or Christopher Tolkien's The History of Middle-earth on the process of creation of Tolkien's fiction, it correctly inferred many of his major themes. It was one of the earliest book-length analyses of Tolkien's work, winning Kocher the 1973 Mythopoeic Society's Scholarship in Inkling Studies Award.
J. R. R. Tolkien (1892–1973) was a scholar of English literature, a philologist and medievalist interested in language and poetry from the Middle Ages, especially that of Anglo-Saxon England and Northern Europe. [2] His professional knowledge of Beowulf , telling of a pagan world but with a Christian narrator, [3] helped to shape his fictional world of Middle-earth. His intention to create what has been called "a mythology for England" [4] led him to construct not only stories but a fully-formed world, Middle-earth, with invented languages, peoples, cultures, and history. Among his many influences were his own Roman Catholic faith, and medieval languages and literature. [2] He is best known as the author of the high fantasy works The Hobbit (1937), The Lord of the Rings (1954–1955), and The Silmarillion (1977), all set in Middle-earth. [5]
The early literary reception of The Lord of the Rings was divided between enthusiastic support by figures such as W. H. Auden and C. S. Lewis, and outright rejection by critics such as Edmund Wilson. [6]
Paul H. Kocher was a scholar of English literature. [7] The book was published before The Silmarillion appeared to confirm several of Kocher's inferences about the mythical history of Middle-earth. [8]
The book was first published in hardback by Houghton Mifflin in the United States in October 1972. The first British edition was brought out by Thames & Hudson in hardback in 1973, with the title Master of Middle-earth: The Achievement of J.R.R. Tolkien. Paperback editions followed: by Penguin Books in 1974, Ballantine Books in 1977, Pimlico in 2002, and Del Rey in 2003. [9] The book has been translated into Dutch, French, German, Italian, Polish, and Swedish. [10] The book was reprinted several times, such as in New York: Ballantine Books, 1977; [11] New York: Del Rey, 1982; [12] and London: Pimlico, 2002. [13]
Translations include:
The book has seven chapters, a "Bibliographical Note" on Tolkien's publications, academic notes, and a full index. The chapters cover:
Perceptions of Kocher's work have changed with the publication of The Silmarillion and of The History of Middle-earth, which appeared after the contemporary reviews were written. [14]
The scholar of English literature, Glenn Edward Sadler, reviewing the book in Christianity Today in 1973, wrote that Kocher had provided a "survey narrative", both scholarly and readable, of Tolkien's blend of reality and fantasy. The book ably described Tolkien's "theory of artistic creation (secondary world building), major philosophical and religious ideas, and moral imperatives", and evaluated his construction of myth. [15]
Veronica Kennedy, in her 1973 review for Extrapolation , praised Kocher's boldness in attempting to cover the whole of Tolkien's Middle-earth oeuvre, but thought that the origins of The Lord of the Rings in medieval "epics and romances" like The Faerie Queene and Sir Gawain should have been explored in more depth, as well as the influence of Tolkien's contemporaries like C. S. Lewis. [16]
Nicholas Tucker, writing in New Society in 1973, criticised the book, calling it "yet another undistinguished addition" to the body of literature on Tolkien. Tucker further wrote that "Nor is Master of Middle-Earth the type of book one could recommend 'for enthusiasts only'. I can't imagine many readers of Tolkien's mysterious, numinous story would want this sort of chattering commentary, ever-eager to analyse character, hand out good conduct marks for heroism, and really dig, say, the difference between a dwarf and an elf." [17]
Nancy-Lou Patterson, in Mythlore in 1975, welcomed the book, stating that "Kocher's Master of Middle-earth is just the sort of study of Tolkien's ability as a master 'sub-creator' which his admirers have often felt ought to be written and which many of them will probably wish they had had the good sense to write themselves. ... The result is a thorough, brilliant, and warmly sympathetic exploration of the several 'other worlds' of which Tolkien has become the master." [18]
Charles W. Nelson, in Journal of the Fantastic in the Arts , noting that the book was one of the first scholarly studies of Tolkien, wrote in 1994 that it contained "one of the most complete discussions of love and emotional attachments in the trilogy, including a fascinating treatment of self-love and its injurious affects on the evil characters". [19] The science fiction author Karen Haber called the book the "highest point" of academic criticism of Tolkien during his lifetime. [20]
The scholar of religion Paul Nolan Hyde wrote in Religious Educator that Kocher was one of the early scholars who took Tolkien seriously, praising rather than decrying his prose style and his "real mastery as a writer" which (he quotes Kocher) "consists in his power to establish for each individual race a personality that is unmistakably its own... Further, each race has not only its gifts but also its private tragedy, which it must try to overcome as best it can." [21]
The Tolkien scholar Richard C. West wrote in The J. R. R. Tolkien Encyclopedia that Kocher had written "the finest book from this [early] period ... [it] looks closely and deeply at the whole body of Tolkien's work to that time. Its insights have held up well for decades." [6]
The evolutionary psychiatrist and Tolkien critic Bruce Charlton wrote that the book was the "first really good piece of book length critical work" on Tolkien, noting that it came out just before Tolkien's death. It thus embodied "a lost perspective", absent all Tolkien's posthumously-published writings, including the 12-volume The History of Middle-earth which appeared in the following decades. In Charlton's view, the book therefore has permanent value. He notes that Kocher flags up or discusses in detail nearly all the key points about Tolkien, making educated inferences that were later confirmed by Christopher Tolkien's lengthy research among his father's papers. [14]
Carol Leibiger, writing in Journal of the Fantastic in the Arts , commented that "Kocher ... was unable to include The Silmarillion ... in his study, and he never revised this work to include it, which diminishes its usefulness for any audience seeking to understand Tolkien's Middle-Earth works." [22]
The Jesuit priest John L. Treloar wrote in Mythlore that Kocher notices Tolkien's tendency to move away from personifying evil towards making it an abstract entity, but ascribes this to Tolkien's familiarity as a Roman Catholic with the writings of Thomas Aquinas. Treloar argues that Aquinas derived his concepts from Saint Augustine. He explains that Augustine had argued that God is entirely good, making it awkward to explain how evil could exist; Augustine wrestled with this, concluding that everything that God had created was good in the beginning. Treloar writes that the artist in Tolkien would have been attracted by Augustine's struggle. He notes that if Kocher had had the help of The Silmarillion, he might have seen that Tolkien's Augustinian view of evil as the absence of good was "even more pervasive [in Middle-earth] than Kocher realizes". [23]
In 1973 Kocher won the Mythopoeic Society's Scholarship in Inkling Studies Award for Master of Middle-Earth. [24]
Nor is Master of Middle-Earth the type of book one could recommend 'for enthusiasts only'. I can't imagine many readers of Tolkien's mysterious, numinous story would want this sort of chattering commentary, ever-eager to analyse character, hand out good conduct marks for heroism, and really dig, say, the difference between a dwarf and an elf. [...] Tolkien himself denies any interpretations, but then story-tellers often do. He has also, of course, good reason to dislike and discourage most of the linked industry that has grown up around his books to which, I fear, Paul Kocher's book is yet another undistinguished addition.