25 Comments

Sir Kenaz & Yours Truly were joined by the Eminent Sir Malcom & The Grandmaster of DOOM, John Michael Greer, for a Second Council of ๐Ÿง™โ€โ™‚๏ธsโ€ฆ Enjoy, Dear Readers & Listeners! ๐Ÿ˜Š

Expand full comment

I take issue with you playing my sworn enemy, Thulsa Doom, at the beginning of every show.

Expand full comment

๐Ÿ˜Š ๐Ÿ˜† ๐Ÿ˜‚ ๐Ÿคฃ

Expand full comment

These are great conversations. All we need to add now is a Wizard Moderator (Panelmancer? Knight of the Roundtable Discussion?) to enforce the Taking of the Turns.

Expand full comment

Le Grandmaster calls in by phone, so itโ€™s a bit hard to do since he canโ€™t see the screen.

Weโ€™ve done basic โ€œhand raisingโ€ moderation previously for 4-man panels, but thatโ€™s kinda off the table if one of us canโ€™t see the ๐Ÿคšโ€ฆ ๐Ÿ˜‰

Expand full comment

Understandable! The comment was partially tongue-in-cheek, and a moderated conversation would change the informal โ€œbros after a LAN partyโ€ vibe that works so well, so thereโ€™s trade offs. That said, I want to hear from the whole Council. Maybe just bump the sessions to 5-6 hours?

Expand full comment

Sir Kenaz and myself can go for agesโ€ฆ but sir Malcom & the Grandmaster have โ€œthings to do & places to be.โ€ ๐Ÿ˜†

Agreed about the trade offs aspectโ€ฆ we keep everything informal & chill for the reason that people talk about what they wish to ๐Ÿ˜‰

There will be a third councilโ€ฆ we might even make this a monthly thing. So while I canโ€™t promise a 5-6 hour episode, we can do 2-3 hour councils per month, if all goes well ๐Ÿ˜Š

Hope that helps! ๐Ÿ˜ƒ

Expand full comment

JMG is wrong about Tolkien. He wrote a wonderful analysis of Beowulf in which it is the essence of pagan heroes to be tragic. You beat Grendel but you go out to the next monster who eats you. What is heroic is fighting when you are inevitably eventually doomed and you know it. That is the heart of pagan heroism.

Eucatastrophe is specifically Christian. Tolkien likes those kinds of endings because they are redemptive like Christianity is redemptive but he does not naively argue that is the essence of all myth. He wrote a whole thing arguing the precise opposite.

Expand full comment

Here is the relevant segment from the 1947 essay 'On Fairy Stories:'

>>And lastly there is the oldest and deepest desire, the Great Escape: the Escape from Death. Fairy-stories provide many examples and modes of thisโ€”which might be called the genuine escapist, or (I would say) fugitive spirit. But so do other stories (notably those of scientific inspiration), and so do other studies. Fairy-stories are made by men not by fairies. The Human-stories of the elves are doubtless full of the Escape from Deathlessness. But our stories cannot be expected always to rise above our common level. They often do. Few lessons are taught more clearly in them than the burden of that kind of immortality, or rather endless serial living, to which the โ€œfugitiveโ€ would fly. For the fairy-story is specially apt to teach such things, of old and still today. Death is the theme that most inspired George MacDonald.

But the โ€œconsolationโ€ of fairy-tales has another aspect than the imaginative satisfaction of ancient desires. Far more important is the Consolation of the Happy Ending. Almost I would venture to assert that all complete fairy-stories must have it. At least I would say that Tragedy is the true form of Drama, its highest function; but the opposite is true of Fairy-story. Since we do not appear to possess a word that expresses this oppositeโ€”I will call it Eucatastrophe. The eucatastrophic tale is the true form of fairy-tale, and its highest function.

The consolation of fairy-stories, the joy of the happy ending: or more correctly of the good catastrophe, the sudden joyous โ€œturnโ€ (for there is no true end to any fairy-tale): this joy, which is one of the things which fairy-stories can produce supremely well, is not essentially โ€œescapist,โ€ nor โ€œfugitive.โ€ In its fairy-taleโ€”or otherworldโ€”setting, it is a sudden and miraculous grace: never to be counted on to recur. It does not deny the existence of dyscatastrophe, of sorrow and failure: the possibility of these is necessary to the joy of deliverance; it denies (in the face of much evidence, if you will) universal final defeat and in so far is evangelium, giving a fleeting glimpse of Joy, Joy beyond the walls of the world, poignant as grief.<<

... even a very charitable reading of the above excerpt, coupled with a full reading of the 1947 essay is more than sufficient to conclude 'Tolkien was extremely naive on this issue.'

The 'good guys always win' trope is certainly more complex than what he is trying to communicate here... however, you can see its toxic seeds being sown *in real time* once you parse out the fact that he is basically saying that 'the Happy Ending' is the Highest form of the Fairy Story (A position one cannot seriously hold if they evaluate the nature of these tales, especially the older stuff from Middle High German, Old English, etc.)

Expand full comment

Do you know what โ€œgraceโ€ means?

In the sense Tolkien uses it?

Anyway go read the Beowulf essay and tell me JMG is correct on Tolkien. He isnโ€™t. I know you are a fanboy but this is just a matter of fact. JMG said Tolkien did not realize that doomed heroes are common in world literature. He knew it well and wrote a wonderful and VERY famous essay on that theme.

Expand full comment

The BeoWulf essay is irrelevant to the point being made here.

The *actual* ending of BeoWulf is DOOM.

Tolkien is free to reinterpret it through the Christian lens... that doesn't suddenly change the Raw, Actual Ending (again, which is DOOM).

'Fairy Stories' do not have Happy Endings in most instances. That comes 'later on' when Christian Philologists (like Tolkien) argued that 'They SHOULD.'

Expand full comment

He does not reinterpret it. He makes EXACTLY the point JMG says he doesnโ€™t understand. Beowulf does not end with killing Grendel. Pagan heroes have to keep going out till they are killed. That is pagan heroism.

Arguing with me about an essay thousands of English majors have read just makes you look stupid. I am correcting a basic error in your dialogue. Go fucking read it and THEN resume confident declamation

Expand full comment

Quote the exact segment from the essay in question you are touching on.

Because when I read the 1947 essay, I see him making the 'Is-Ought' error a la 'Well, these stories SHOULD have these endings.'

Addendum: Comport yourself with Proper Etiquette. No need to throw a tantrum like a petulant child. Else, you will be booted. ๐Ÿ˜‰

Expand full comment

Booted for telling you are wrong about a basic fact. Yeah that would check out.

Expand full comment

Christianity is miraculous precisely because you donโ€™t have to โ€œearn the victoryโ€. It is given to you.

JMG is at least as confused as the fat dumb Americans upon whom he heaps contempt.

The problem is not Hollywood endings. It is Hollywood endings with no sense that such an outcome is a gift which you donโ€™t deserve. It is the absence of humility that is the American problem: which JMG shares in.

Expand full comment

Christianity has that notion. Sure.

Here's the thing though: Tolkien's point re: The Fairy Story *as such* having this trait is false. You can say, 'Well, these Pagan stories SHOULD have such endings.' However, that is not what the Historical record shows re: their actual endings.

King Arthur (for instance) doesn't get the Happy Ending. Neither does lots of others.

You are free to believe in humility & whatnot; but these things don't exist in the earliest manuscripts & the earliest versions of these stories.

Tolkien is lying (at worst) & ignorant (at best) when he claims so.

Expand full comment

You donโ€™t know what you are talking about. I am not โ€œarguingโ€ with you, nor is Tolkien. You just donโ€™t know about a super famous essay he wrote and you think JMG is so amazing he could not possibly be wrong on this point. He is wrong. Tolkien knew what he says Tolkien did not know. This is just a fact.

Expand full comment

Quote the segment, & link the essay. ๐Ÿ˜‰

Tolkien makes the 'Is-Ought' error in the 1947 'On Fairy Story' essay (which I quoted above) & throughout his life, he often made similar errors.

I know very well what I am talking about... because the Western world is rife with this error, which Tolkien burdened Westerners with decades ago.

Expand full comment

No you are making a basic and stupid error and doubling down on it repeatedly.

Expand full comment

Then educate me!

All you have to do is quote the segment from the essay & briefly explain in 3-5 sentences WHY said segment says the following:

>>Fairy Stories of the Highest sort have a Eucatastrophic element to them. This trait is inherent to them. <<

Hint: You won't be able to. This is because all the 'older stuff' have DOOM-ed endings. Yes, some of the newer more polished stuff (with Christian elements & whatnot) are different, but not the majority of the older stuff... see the Brothers Grimm. ๐Ÿ˜‰

People who study ACTUAL Folklore will tell you the obvious:

"All the old stuff... is Weird & Tragic, lacking Happy Endings."

Fairy Stories are not inherently 'inclined to a Happy End' a la Tolkien fallaciously claiming in his 1947 essay.

Expand full comment