Tolkien the Pagan? Reading Middle-earth through a Spiritual Lens: Peter Roe Series XIX

by Anna Milon (editor)

This volume of proceedings contains papers from the largest and, perhaps, most diverse Tolkien Society Seminar to date. Following a much-contested Call for Papers, ‘Tolkien the Pagan? Reading Middle-earth through a Spiritual Lens’ explores Tolkien’s complex use of religious ideology, the readers’ approach to their beloved fictional world via unusual spiritual and philosophical channels, and how Middle-earth almost became a faith unto itself.

98 pages, Paperback

Published March 25, 2019

Reviews

[Ron]

We have moved into the scholastic era of Tolkien studies. Now that Tolkien and his Bowell (son Christopher) are safely dead, scholars can opine on what his Middle-earth works really mean without fear of contradiction. As usual the scholars quote themselves and each other, never accepting the received wisdom as complete or even valid. Many of these works are derived from others. Something of a self-licking ice cream cone.

“It would be ‘missing the point’ to read Tolkien’s works as ‘a fairy story’, for ‘Tolkien’s work was in reality a monumental act of channeling.’” Markus Altena Davidsen

Though the title is something of a red herring, a notable addition to Middle-earth scholarship. Best read slowly, after having read at least The Silmarillion in addition to Lord of the Rings. (Nice, if misleading cover art by Becky Green.)

“This triadic pattern of the providential historicism of Middle-earth evidently mirrors the triplicity of Tolkien’s trinitarian theology.” Ryan Haecker (Did he construct this tongue-twister on purpose)
To make any sense of the first paper, the reader must understand (and agree with) Ryan Haecker’s quirky definition of historicism. I don’t. That Haecker employs a discarded image of Kant, Hegel and Marx suggests how far out a limb authors already climb looking for fresh fruit.

“The self-identified Elves argue, that they don’t really feel at home among the humans (almost muggles), but long to return to their Elven homeworld.” MAD

A further hindrance to direct enjoyment and understanding of the corpus is the Peter Jackson movies. While a minority still read original texts, the prevalent perception of Middle-earth will increasingly be mediated by the images and alternations of those movies. See Tolkien’s comparison of drama and books in “On Fairy Stories” for why that’s a problem.

The last work—Also Sprach Fëanor, Spirit of Fire: A Nietzschean Reading of Tolkien’s Mythology by Giovanni Carmine Costable—demonstrates the future of Tolkien studies: works which turn Tolkien upside down with “can be read” and “led me to question” vagueness. Rubbish. (If capitalizing Dark Lord is referring to the God, why did Costable capitalize “the Professor” referring to Tolkien?)

“Of course, to claim Tolkien’s Christianity and Catholicism as the most founded reading we have at the moment, and given the present evidence, should not constitute a reason to forbid any different reading in the applicability of a literary work, even an atheistic, Nietzschean, anti-Christian one.” GCC

[Lee Broderick]

A needlessly provocative title, papers which I don't think can have been peer-reviewed, and in need of a firmer editor. Despite that, some interesting thoughts and papers.

[Elyse Welles]

I read this book for research, ironically for a different Luna Press publication I was submitting to (although not tied to the Tolkien Society). I adore Tolkien scholarship and found this collection really enjoyable, particularly Markus A. Davidsen’s essay on Tolkien spirituality as a modern practice - that was similar to the focus for my research. I recommend this book to anyone who takes Tolkien seriously; if you enjoy podcasts or Tolkien panels that get into the scholarly views, you’ll like this collection. It’s truly unique. And one essay even ties in Terry Pratchett in an interesting way.

[Jon]

Nominated for Best Article - Tolkien Society Awards 2020

- “Tolkien’s Mandos, Pratchett’s Death” by Justin Lewis-Anthony (Tolkien the Pagan?, ed. by Anna Milon)

[Nick Polk]

For those who are engaged in theological/philosophical research regarding Tolkien Studies, this is definitely a must have. The quality and relevance of the essays are definitely unbalanced, with the the first three essays being incredibly insightful with promise for future theological/sociological inquiries into Tolkien and the last two carrying less weight.

The first two essays by Ryan Haecker and Aslt Bülbül Candas share in similar veins of inquiry, as they both look to parse out Tolkien’s difficult theological presentation of Eru and Creation’s relationship. Haecker approaches this through the lens of providential history and humanity’s relationship to it, where Candas lays out a fascinating and convincing explication of The Flame Imperishable’s inherent relationship with Arda.

Markus Altena Davidsen’s third essay lays out the intriguing history of Tolkien spirituality, criteria for the religious quality of fictional texts, and possible answers to why people may be drawn to Tolkien spirituality. Those who are interested in sociology and philosophy of religion will no doubt be drawn to this essay.

The latter two essays are comparative analyses. Justin Lewis-Anthony compares Terry Pratchett’s character of Death in Disc World and conception of death with Tolkien’s character Mandos and conception of death as well as Pratchett’s indebtedness to Tolkien. Fans of both Pratchett and Tolkien will enjoy the essay. The final essay by Giovanni Carmine Costabile compares Tolkien and Nietzsche primarily through the characters of Tolkien’s Fëanor and Nietzsche’s Zarathustra. Interesting to be sure, but I found the comparison to be rather arbitrary. However, I applaud and concur with his conclusion that “an interpretation of Tolkien’s works can be both Pagan and Christian, without having to choose on way only in spite of the other” (81). Diverse and pluralistic readings of Tolkien need to be embraced, celebrated, and advocated for.

Overall, a worthy and unique contribution to the all-too monolithic area of Tolkien and theology.