Sir Kenaz & Yours Truly were joined by the Eminent Sir Malcom & The Grandmaster of DOOM, John Michael Greer, for a Second Council of 🧙♂️s… Enjoy, Dear Readers & Listeners! 😊
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.
Understandable! The comment was partially tongue-in-cheek, and a moderated conversation would change the informal “bros after a LAN party” vibe that works so well, so there’s trade offs. That said, I want to hear from the whole Council. Maybe just bump the sessions to 5-6 hours?
Sir Kenaz and myself can go for ages… but sir Malcom & the Grandmaster have “things to do & places to be.” 😆
Agreed about the trade offs aspect… we keep everything informal & chill for the reason that people talk about what they wish to 😉
There will be a third council… we might even make this a monthly thing. So while I can’t promise a 5-6 hour episode, we can do 2-3 hour councils per month, if all goes well 😊
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.
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 this—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 “fugitive” 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 “consolation” 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 opposite—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 “turn” (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 “escapist,” nor “fugitive.” In its fairy-tale—or otherworld—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.)
Anyway go read the Beowulf essay and tell me JMG is correct on Tolkien. He isn’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.
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.'
He does not reinterpret it. He makes EXACTLY the point JMG says he doesn’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
Christianity is miraculous precisely because you don’t have to “earn the victory”. 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 don’t deserve. It is the absence of humility that is the American problem: which JMG shares in.
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.
You don’t know what you are talking about. I am not “arguing” with you, nor is Tolkien. You just don’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.
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. 😉
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.
Sir Kenaz & Yours Truly were joined by the Eminent Sir Malcom & The Grandmaster of DOOM, John Michael Greer, for a Second Council of 🧙♂️s… Enjoy, Dear Readers & Listeners! 😊
I take issue with you playing my sworn enemy, Thulsa Doom, at the beginning of every show.
😊 😆 😂 🤣
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.
Le Grandmaster calls in by phone, so it’s a bit hard to do since he can’t see the screen.
We’ve done basic “hand raising” moderation previously for 4-man panels, but that’s kinda off the table if one of us can’t see the 🤚… 😉
Understandable! The comment was partially tongue-in-cheek, and a moderated conversation would change the informal “bros after a LAN party” vibe that works so well, so there’s trade offs. That said, I want to hear from the whole Council. Maybe just bump the sessions to 5-6 hours?
Sir Kenaz and myself can go for ages… but sir Malcom & the Grandmaster have “things to do & places to be.” 😆
Agreed about the trade offs aspect… we keep everything informal & chill for the reason that people talk about what they wish to 😉
There will be a third council… we might even make this a monthly thing. So while I can’t promise a 5-6 hour episode, we can do 2-3 hour councils per month, if all goes well 😊
Hope that helps! 😃
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.
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 this—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 “fugitive” 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 “consolation” 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 opposite—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 “turn” (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 “escapist,” nor “fugitive.” In its fairy-tale—or otherworld—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.)
Do you know what “grace” means?
In the sense Tolkien uses it?
Anyway go read the Beowulf essay and tell me JMG is correct on Tolkien. He isn’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.
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.'
He does not reinterpret it. He makes EXACTLY the point JMG says he doesn’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
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. 😉
Booted for telling you are wrong about a basic fact. Yeah that would check out.
Christianity is miraculous precisely because you don’t have to “earn the victory”. 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 don’t deserve. It is the absence of humility that is the American problem: which JMG shares in.
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.
You don’t know what you are talking about. I am not “arguing” with you, nor is Tolkien. You just don’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.
Quote the segment, & link the essay. 😉
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.
No you are making a basic and stupid error and doubling down on it repeatedly.
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. 😉
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.