A Growing Love, Or Obsession

When I started college, I was a History major and English minor. I then switched to a double major in History and English, but I graduated with an English major and History minor. I had no concerns about English Senior Seminar when I started college because I wasn't an English major, and minors didn't have to do Senior Sem. By the time I was an English major, I was determined that no matter what I would do my Senior Sem presentation and paper on Tolkien. But before any of that even happened I was already writing papers on Tolkien.

Every English major and minor has to take Intro to English. This is where you get grammar and literary theory. Let me tell you, I hate literary theory. I just don't like it. One of the first things our professor made us do was write a paper on one of several topics so that she could get an understanding of our writing abilities at that point. One of the topics was Write About Your Favorite Author. Guess what topic I chose? And guess which author I picked? If you guessed Tolkien, you'd be right. I still have the paper and what follows is an excerpt. It's clearly not my best writing but I'm going to share some of it anyways so you can have something to compare my Senior Sem excerpt to.

"Each land has a voice of its own. The Shire is peaceful and naive. The realms of Rivendell and Lothlorien are the last havens of the Elves. Rohan is a hardworking country while Gondor is more warlike. The forests are ancient and angry, existing in a dreamlike state. And Mordor is bleak, possessed by and producing evil. The people and creatures are equally amazing. The different races each have their own personalities that clearly define them. The elves are majestic and peaceful, yet at times they can be ruthless. The orcs are pure evil, created by evil and living only to serve it. Men are proud and arrogant, but willing to try to redeem themselves. Dwarves are stubborn and competitive, always wanting to prove themselves. And hobbits are like children, innocent and pure."

Part of what bothered me about Tolkien's writings not being considered literary is that he's created this completely realistic world, full of real people and places. It's not something that he sat down one weekend and wrote. It was the product of many years of writing and study, and the end result is magnificent. How can you claim such a work does not have literary merit? 

It wasn't until after my freshman year of college that I tried reading The Hobbit again. And this time I finished it. I actually really like it. It's so easy to read that I can't fathom what my problem was when I tried to read it the first time. I've even read it a couple times since then, mainly to prepare myself before the movies came out. 

My next couple years of college passed with no real thought about Senior Sem and what I would focus my presentation on. It's an unstated rule that all English majors attend a Senior Sem presentation before they start Senior Sem. This way they have some idea what they're getting into beforehand. I had attended a couple my freshman year. The first presentation I saw was on Harry Potter. A couple people that year focused their presentations on Harry Potter and after that the series was banned from being used in Senior Sem. It's another series that I love and think has literary merit but because it's popular and written for "children", it's considered unworthy. 

The summer before my senior year, I started doing research on Tolkien and his works. I needed something that I could use to justify doing my presentation on Tolkien. That is when I discovered mythopoeia and my topic was born. Since we had to have more than one work, and at least one had to be from an upper-level class, the other works I picked were Odyssey by Homer and The Four Zoas by William Blake. I used Homer as a basis for what canon mythology was and Blake as an example of created mythology that is considered worthwhile. I needed to establish what mythology was before I could prove that Tolkien's works should be considered mythopoeic (created mythology). To further my point, I focused on The Silmarillion. First, it's a single book and therefore shorter than The Lord of the Rings. Second, it's an outline of how Middle Earth was created and where the people came from. It's one very long creation story, one of the oldest kinds of mythology. During my research on The Silmarillion I stumbled upon something very exciting: there were bands who had written songs/albums based off the book. In particular, Blind Guardian has an album called Nightfall in Middle-Earth that I bought and listened to throughout my semester of Senior Sem. I still listen to it frequently. It's wonderful and I recommend it if you don't mind power metal. 

Finding music based off The Silmarillion was easy. Finding articles on the novel, The Four Zoas, or mythopoeia was not so easy. It was really difficult to find anything on those 3 topics. Homer is popular so articles about him and his writings are abundant. Even finding articles on LOTR was easy but as I wasn't using it for my presentation those articles were pointless. Eventually though I found enough articles for all of my sources. Some of them I actually really enjoyed and still have copies of. And I found an article with one of the most interesting titles ever: "An Imitation of Oysters: C.S. Lewis and the Myth in Mythopoeia". Once I had all of my articles I was ready to start writing my paper and creating my presentation. End result: 20 page paper and 30 minute presentation. What follows is two excerpts from my final paper. The first deals with the concept of the fall in mythology and one of the places where it is found in The Silmarillion. The second deals with a couple cases were Tolkien was influenced by outside sources.

"The fall of the Elves is limited to a line of Elves, specifically the Noldor.  They are the ones who create the Silmarils and then vow to reclaim them at any cost.  The Silmarils increased the “Noldor’s pride, but also their sorrow, a Fall that took them into destruction, and with them all those that became involved in one way or another with the Silmarils” (Schweicher 168).  The Silmarils are the bane of the Noldor and almost destroy them, their allies, and all of Middle-earth.  Their fall is by far the most destructive and the farthest reaching."

"The character of Túrin Turambar mirrors the character Kullervo from the Finnish epic The Kalevala.  In his book Tolkien and the Silmarils, Randel Helms describes the relationship between the two men.  Both grow up in the home of a noble relative and both unknowingly sleep with their estranged sister.  When the two discover that they are siblings the sister throws herself over a cliff and the brother falls on his sword.  The story of Túrin also shows aspects of fate and doom, traits common to Germanic literature.  Not only does Túrin’s name “Turambar” means “master of doom” but he is frequently guided by his fate.  He slays his friend Beleg in what seems like an accident but was really the workings of fate.  Fate is also prevalent in the story of Beren and Luthien.  Thingol, Luthien’s father, tells Beren that he may marry Luthien on the condition “that Beren wrench a Silmaril out of the crown of Morgoth and bring it back” (Whitt).  Thingol’s desire for a Silmaril dooms himself and all his people, and involves them in the Doom of Mandos that is upon the Noldor for their kinslaying."

Although I loved spending four months studying Tolkien and his works, I was happy when the semester was finally over. Senior Sem is very stressful and I was so ready for it to be over by the end. It was wonderful to do a presentation on Tolkien and show people that his works are more than what they seem and that they are worth more than people think. And I've certainly gained something from the experience. I have discovered two different societies based on Tolkien and mythopoeia, both which I fully intend to join. I've discovered a CD that combines my love of Tolkien with my love of music. I've discovered the art of Ted Nasmith, who illustrated The Silmarillion, and I found a copy of the book with his art which I was forced to buy. And I've become even more of a fount of useless knowledge when it comes to Tolkien, but I enjoy it so it's ok.

Entranced by Tolkien

I cannot remember a time when I did not love to read. Most people can pick out a book that changed their outlook on reading; they can say "This book made me love reading". I can't say that. I'm absolutely certain that I was born with an innate love of reading. It's part of my DNA. It's just who I am. But, there is still a series that majorly influenced the way I look at literature and  reading.

I was 9 years old when The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring was released in theaters. I can remember going to see the movie and my mom covering my eyes when Galadriel almost takes the ring from Frodo. I'm not sure why she thought that would scare me when I had been watching Star Wars and Jurassic Park since I was 3. But I digress. Somewhere around this time is when I also began reading the books. Since I was still a little young, my parents thought I should start with The Hobbit, that it would be easier for me to read than The Lord of the Rings. It was a nice theory but it didn't work so well. I got bored about the time the dwarves started singing as they washed the dishes. So I stopped reading The Hobbit and instead spent at least the next year struggling through The Lord of the Rings. What 9 year old thinks The Hobbit is hard to read but The Lord of the Rings is easy? Clearly, I have issues.

Part of the reason I struggled with LOTR at first is because Tolkien uses a lot of detail. A lot. At the time, I had a difficult time reading just detail and only a little bit of dialogue. But I persevered and finished the series. And it became my favorite. Well, along with Harry Potter, as I devoured that series as the books came out. I probably read LOTR a couple more times between then and my senior year of high school. During high school I also read The Silmarillion and started The Unfinished Tales, which ironically enough I'm not sure I ever finished.

The big eye-opening moment came when I was a senior in high school. I was taking AP Literature and one of our projects/presentations required us to chose a book and do a report on it. Basic high school assignment. I believe we were given a list of books and told to pick one of those, or check with our teacher if we had another book in mind. When I heard about the project I immediately knew that I wanted to do it on LOTR. I approached my teacher and asked her if I could. I'll never forget her response. Basically, she said "No, because it's escapist literature". Welcome to the literary canon, where scholars you don't know decide what books are worthy of being taught. I had a whole argument planned to convince her to let me do LOTR but I was so shocked by her answer that I conceded.

"Escapist literature": basically, books that you read to escape from real life or read for fun. So anything that isn't escapist literature is boring and forced upon us? One problem: I enjoyed all except maybe 3 books that we had to read in high school. I read Pride & Prejudice, Jane Eyre, and Wuthering Heights way before anyone was ever required to read them. I read those books because I wanted to, because I enjoyed them. Does that make them escapist literature? Does that mean they shouldn't be a part of the literary canon? These are the issues I have with the literary canon. I don't agree with how it is decided that a book is worthy of joining the canon. I understand that during this time Harry Potter was huge and people still saw it mostly as young adult or children's fiction. But there is so much in those books that is more than what it seems. And LOTR is the same way, if not more so. Just because a book is popular and is made into a movie does not mean that it's unworthy of being considered canon literature.

And thus was my soapbox born. This is the issue that would bother me through my last year of high school and through my years as an English major in college. I was determined, however, to change the popular opinion somehow. And I like to think I did, at least a little.

Gone Girl

MAJOR SPOILERS!!!!! Seriously, do not keep reading if you have any intention of someday soon reading Gone Girl or seeing the movie. If spoilers don't bother you then feel free to read on. Let me start by saying that Gillian Flynn is a great writer. I'm 99% sure that Gone Girl is the first book I've read where I do not like a single character in the novel. Not one. All the characters suck and are terrible people. That being said, it was a seriously incredible, mind-boggling book. It is definitely worth reading, no matter how terrible the characters act.

The scene. It's Nick and Amy's five year wedding anniversary. Nick comes home from work (he owns a bar with his twin sister) to find Amy gone. There are signs of a struggle in the living room and there is a present in their closet for Nick from Amy. The police naturally somewhat suspect Nick, although he keeps denying that he killed his wife. It was tradition for Amy to create a treasure hunt for Nick on their anniversary, and the present is the first step. He follows the clues, hoping for some hint about what happened to Amy.

I knew going into the novel that it was one of two things: either Nick really did kill Amy, or she faked her death for some reason. The answer: she faked her death. The reason: she's bloody crazy. Ok, that's not the only reason but she is absolutely crazy. Everyone is whack. Amy discovered over a year before the novel begins that Nick was having an affair with a former student of his (he's a college professor). Amy is naturally upset by this discovery but instead of confronting her husband, she decides she's going to ruin his life. She starts meticulously planning every little detail, intent on framing Nick for her "murder".

Let me back up a little. Amy's parents are psychologists, as is Amy. Her parents wrote a series of highly successful children's books called Amazing Amy, based off their daughter but a more perfect version. Amy is very detail-oriented and creates elaborate plans. She made it look like a friend tried to kill her because she wanted to replace Amy, all because her friend was better than her at some things. She made it look like a boyfriend raped her when she discovered he was cheating on her. Amy would physically injure herself to implicate others. The cases against her boyfriend and friend were solid and there was no question that Amy was telling the truth, except she wasn't.

And now this woman has discovered her husband is having an affair. Nick talks to Amy's former boyfriend and friend for insight into Amy's past, and her friend sums it up perfectly.

"Friends see most of each other's flaws. Spouses see every awful last bit. If she punished a friend of a few months by throwing herself down a flight of stairs, what would she do to a man who was dumb enough to marry her?"

What she does is write a fake diary, pretending that she fears her husband may kill her. She leaves clues that throw Nick's innocence into question. She thinks of every minute detail and has a plan to cover it. This is a new level of crazy. And when Amy accepts help from her high school boyfriend who is obsessed with her and kidnaps her, she kills him. She literally gets away with murder, although not the murder she intended.

Nick is not much better. Amy's clues seem sweet on the surface and Nick finds himself falling for them, and by extension, for Amy. Their relationship is very twisted. They were not honest with each other when they first met and when they showed their true selves, they didn't like each other. Their marriage was more or less based on lies. Once Nick realizes that Amy is actually still alive and trying to frame him for her murder, he starts pleading with her through interviews, begging her to come home. He wants to show everyone who she truly is and have her arrested for what she's done. But when she comes home, she spins a convincing story of kidnapping, rape, and murder done in self-defense. There is no way to prove that Nick's theory is true, or that Amy's story is false. Once again, she has thought of everything.

How does the story end? Nick can't prove anything, no matter how hard he tries. And eventually he has to give up because Amy has found a way to keep him around: she gets pregnant. They will always second guess each other and never fully trust the other, but they stay together. Their marriage is completely toxic and will probably destroy them both and their child.

You can see why I don't like any of the characters. Nick and Amy are both seriously messed up. They constantly present a facade to the world and each other. Amy is willing to go so far as actually killing herself to help prove that Nick is a murderer and receive the death sentence. She throws herself down stairs, poisons herself, cuts herself. She does a whole slew of insane things throughout her life to prove that others have hurt her. Nick is terrified of becoming his father, a man who hates women. He is also a mama's boy and very close with his twin sister. Once Amy disappears, he starts having vivid daydreams of her bleeding, struggling, and begging for help. He envisions killing her when he realizes Amy is framing him. He actually tries to once she comes back, before realizing that Amy was right: they are perfect for each other and could not survive married to anyone else. Nick is also very standoffish. He doesn't always act the way a grieving husband is expected to, and he is frequently described as having a "killer" smile. Not exactly helpful in convincing people he's innocent.

You may be wondering how someone could even like a novel with such despicable characters. Well, the story's very well written. It's hard to put down; once you start it you don't want to stop. There are several twists and turns that keep you guessing. It's actually a really good book and fun to read, as you try to figure out what really happened. I'm very excited to see the movie, which comes out October 3. I'm interested to see how Rosamund Pike plays Amy and I think Ben Affleck will be good as Nick. I would definitely recommend reading the book before seeing the movie. Either way, I hope you have as much fun figuring everything out and being completely frustrated with the characters as I did.