Tuesday, April 10, 2007

Why Strange and Norrell dominates Lord of the Rings

Ok, I thought it was interesting when we were talking about Tolkien creating a strictly British mythology (no Frenchman allowed!). But then I thought about it, and last time I checked Middle Earth is not England, and I'm sure I'm missing something huge like what each part of Middle Earth is supposed to represent, but Clarke's representation of magic in England seems much more tangible than Tolkien's attempt at mythology for the nation. Don't get me wrong, I love Lord of the Rings, but while Tolkien spent his life trying to create an entire world in which fantastical things happen, Clarke did just fine using a setting that already existed.

2 Comments:

Blogger Tara said...

Well, and also, Tolkein "borrowed" quite heavily from Norse mythology.

As far as Clarke's goes, I wish her mythology wasn't so impersonal. Most of the references are in the footnotes to books supposedly written by these people. Given that this is the characters' world, I wish they would live a little more in it. I get that that's part of the "bringing English magic back" thing, but there are few to no stories in the actual narration about the actions of mythological figures, just vague references.

That being said, I think it takes a lot of commitment to create an entire new world mythology (though I usually prefer when the world itself is created too) and keep everything straight.

And, as far as mythology creation goes, I have to say the Eddings' Belgariad was one of the best examples I've come across. Their histories were so complicated/fascinating, they had to go back and write two precursors from the perspective of characters 3000 and 7000 yrs old.

12:02 AM  
Blogger Unknown said...

i'd take Tolkien over Clarke anyday... i agree with Tara, the whole bringing back magic had no bounds. why did it really leave? are there other examples besides the Raven King? on the other hand, Tolkien hand crafted his entire world, including language and species and mythology. Clarke, just kinda threw something she made up into a real setting. plus, there's also the difference between the Tolkien-esq 'high-fantasy' and the kind of fantasy Clarke has written, which is nowhere near comparable to high-fantasy because of the modern realistic setting.
don't get me wrong, i respect Clarke and enjoy this book, but there's tanglible difference between Tolkien and Clarke.

10:52 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home