AskHistorians
Last sync: 1y ago
↑
1056
↓
Why did Tolkien rebel against the Shakespearean concept of elves by depicting them as tall, slender and wise instead of small and silly? (self.AskHistorians)
submitted 1d ago by William_Wisenheimer
AutoModerator 1 points 1d ago
Welcome to /r/AskHistorians. **Please Read Our Rules before you comment in this community**. Understand that rule breaking comments get removed.
#Please consider **Clicking Here for RemindMeBot** as it takes time for an answer to be written. Additionally, for weekly content summaries, **Click Here to Subscribe to our Weekly Roundup**.
We thank you for your interest in this *question*, and your patience in waiting for an in-depth and comprehensive answer to show up. In addition to RemindMeBot, consider using our Browser Extension, or getting the Weekly Roundup. In the meantime our Twitter, Facebook, and Sunday Digest feature excellent content that has already been written!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.*
#Please consider **Clicking Here for RemindMeBot** as it takes time for an answer to be written. Additionally, for weekly content summaries, **Click Here to Subscribe to our Weekly Roundup**.
We thank you for your interest in this *question*, and your patience in waiting for an in-depth and comprehensive answer to show up. In addition to RemindMeBot, consider using our Browser Extension, or getting the Weekly Roundup. In the meantime our Twitter, Facebook, and Sunday Digest feature excellent content that has already been written!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.*
ARoyaleWithCheese 1101 points 1d ago
The conception of elves in the popular imagination underwent a significant evolution from the medieval period to the Victorian era - an evolution that Tolkien was not a fan of. In his seminal 20th century fantasy works, J.R.R. Tolkien consciously rebelled against the twee, diminutive elf trope that had developed over centuries of literature and folklore. Instead, he revived the ancient mystique of elves as towering, wise beings aligned with nature.
The exact origins of "elves" are nigh impossible to pin down, but we know of numerous elve-like creatures throughout history of which Tolkien was aware and inspired by. For example, in Norse mythology, elves originated as vaguely supernatural creatures associated with light and darkness. Though these were then recast by medieval Christians as more spiritual, ethereal, beings (possibly to preserve these elements of pagan folklore). However, by the Elizabethan period, writers arguably began conflating elves from Germanic mythology with diminutive fairies (or “faeries”) from Celtic traditions. William Shakespeare epitomized this change in “A Midsummer Night's Dream”, portraying elves and fairies as diminutive, whimsical pranksters.
Victorian authors further diminished and sentimentalized elves, associating them with children’s stories and idealized fantasies of delicate fairies suited to pastoral settings (*I'd recommend Strange and Secret Peoples: Fairies and Victorian Consciousness by Carole G. Silver*). Andrew Lang’s fairy books embodied this notion for Victorian children like the young J.R.R. Tolkien, who later lamented the lack of primal mythic resonance in such twee Victorian elves.[1]
As an adult, Tolkien penned an influential essay “On Fairy-Stories” (1947) arguing that the modern concept of elves had become untethered from the mystical, mysterious roots evident in Norse and medieval folklore. In his Middle Earth legendarium, he consciously elevated elves back to beings of ancient dignity and artistic genius while rejecting what he saw as the twee Victorian elf trope.
Moreover, Tolkien’s commitment to recapturing the archaic origins of elves aligned with early 20th century scholarly interest in myth and folklore, as seen in works like Sir James Frazer’s The Golden Bough (1890). However, it's worth pointing out that Tolkien resisted aligning his elves with just one specific tradition, and he denied direct inspiration from Celtic legends in reference to nomenclature in particular.[2] In response to comments from a reader at his publishing firm for “Quenta Silmarillion”, Tolkien wrote:
> Needless to say they [the names] are not Celtic! Neither are the tales. I do know Celtic things (many in their original languages Irish and Welsh), and feel for them a certain distaste: largely for their fundamental unreason.
Beyond broadly rebelling against the prevailing Victorian elf archetype, Tolkien imbued his elves with very particular physical, cultural, and psychological attributes according to his personal vision. Tolkien saw his elves as inherently tied to nature, living in harmony with the woods and speaking with trees. However, he also endowed them with a deep melancholic sadness, a sense that their time in Middle Earth was fading as the Age of Men approached.[3] He wrote the Elves as immortal beings who could be slain in battle but did not suffer natural death from old age or sickness.
According to Tolkien's letters, these specific characteristics derived from his desire to create a mythology that evoked both the natural world and human scope for both joy and sorrow, hope and regret.[4] The Elves served as an intermediary between man and nature, imbued with human emotions and artistic gifts but bound to the natural world in a way mortal Men were not.
1. Tolkien, J.R.R. “On Fairy-Stories.” In The Tolkien Reader. Del Rey Books, 1966.
2. Christopher Vaccaro, ed., The Body in Tolkien's Legendarium: Essays on Middle-Earth Corporeality (Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company, 2013)
3. Burns, Marjorie. Perilous Realms: Celtic and Norse in Tolkien's Middle-earth. University of Toronto Press, 2005.
4. Tolkien, J.R.R. The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien. Edited by Humphrey Carpenter. Houghton Mifflin, 2000.
Edit: fixed the second reference
The exact origins of "elves" are nigh impossible to pin down, but we know of numerous elve-like creatures throughout history of which Tolkien was aware and inspired by. For example, in Norse mythology, elves originated as vaguely supernatural creatures associated with light and darkness. Though these were then recast by medieval Christians as more spiritual, ethereal, beings (possibly to preserve these elements of pagan folklore). However, by the Elizabethan period, writers arguably began conflating elves from Germanic mythology with diminutive fairies (or “faeries”) from Celtic traditions. William Shakespeare epitomized this change in “A Midsummer Night's Dream”, portraying elves and fairies as diminutive, whimsical pranksters.
Victorian authors further diminished and sentimentalized elves, associating them with children’s stories and idealized fantasies of delicate fairies suited to pastoral settings (*I'd recommend Strange and Secret Peoples: Fairies and Victorian Consciousness by Carole G. Silver*). Andrew Lang’s fairy books embodied this notion for Victorian children like the young J.R.R. Tolkien, who later lamented the lack of primal mythic resonance in such twee Victorian elves.[1]
As an adult, Tolkien penned an influential essay “On Fairy-Stories” (1947) arguing that the modern concept of elves had become untethered from the mystical, mysterious roots evident in Norse and medieval folklore. In his Middle Earth legendarium, he consciously elevated elves back to beings of ancient dignity and artistic genius while rejecting what he saw as the twee Victorian elf trope.
Moreover, Tolkien’s commitment to recapturing the archaic origins of elves aligned with early 20th century scholarly interest in myth and folklore, as seen in works like Sir James Frazer’s The Golden Bough (1890). However, it's worth pointing out that Tolkien resisted aligning his elves with just one specific tradition, and he denied direct inspiration from Celtic legends in reference to nomenclature in particular.[2] In response to comments from a reader at his publishing firm for “Quenta Silmarillion”, Tolkien wrote:
> Needless to say they [the names] are not Celtic! Neither are the tales. I do know Celtic things (many in their original languages Irish and Welsh), and feel for them a certain distaste: largely for their fundamental unreason.
Beyond broadly rebelling against the prevailing Victorian elf archetype, Tolkien imbued his elves with very particular physical, cultural, and psychological attributes according to his personal vision. Tolkien saw his elves as inherently tied to nature, living in harmony with the woods and speaking with trees. However, he also endowed them with a deep melancholic sadness, a sense that their time in Middle Earth was fading as the Age of Men approached.[3] He wrote the Elves as immortal beings who could be slain in battle but did not suffer natural death from old age or sickness.
According to Tolkien's letters, these specific characteristics derived from his desire to create a mythology that evoked both the natural world and human scope for both joy and sorrow, hope and regret.[4] The Elves served as an intermediary between man and nature, imbued with human emotions and artistic gifts but bound to the natural world in a way mortal Men were not.
1. Tolkien, J.R.R. “On Fairy-Stories.” In The Tolkien Reader. Del Rey Books, 1966.
2. Christopher Vaccaro, ed., The Body in Tolkien's Legendarium: Essays on Middle-Earth Corporeality (Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company, 2013)
3. Burns, Marjorie. Perilous Realms: Celtic and Norse in Tolkien's Middle-earth. University of Toronto Press, 2005.
4. Tolkien, J.R.R. The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien. Edited by Humphrey Carpenter. Houghton Mifflin, 2000.
Edit: fixed the second reference
CapnSupermarket 110 points 1d ago
>I do know Celtic things (many in their original languages Irish and Welsh), and feel for them a certain distaste: largely for their fundamental unreason.
Can you go into what he found unreasonable in the Celtic myths? It seems an odd turn of phrase when we're talking about these kinds of creatures.
Can you go into what he found unreasonable in the Celtic myths? It seems an odd turn of phrase when we're talking about these kinds of creatures.
ARoyaleWithCheese 100 points 20h ago
Great question! I'm no expert on this topic, but I'll try to provide some perspectives.
As far as I am aware, there is no clear consensus on what exactly Tolkien found "unreasonable" about Celtic. Some speculate it relates to preferences in linguistics, mythology, and spiritual beliefs when comparing the Celtic worldview to other cultures like Norse and Greek. Christopher Vaccaro notes Tolkien's specific critique of Celtic "nomenclature" rather than content, as well as suspected distaste for inconsistencies in Celtic tales that lacked the "sober historicity" of Anglo-Saxon works.[1] Vaccaro suggests Tolkien's 1937 comments may have been exaggerated due to anxiety about his tales being associated with the Celtic Twilight movement.
In doing some more research about this topic I also stumbled upon a Masters Thesis by Erin Kriz who examines scholarship on Tolkien's inclusion of "Celtic things" in his works at length.[2] And, indeed, she too confirms what is arguably common knowledge: the plentiful presence of Celtic elements. As Kriz notes, Tolkien's academic career reveals an avid interest in medieval Welsh language and literature, which he utilized in constructing his Elvish tongues. His respect for Welsh contrasts with dismissal of Irish, which he found unattractive (though we do not find an answer as to why).
Critically, Tolkien engaged directly with Celtic scholarship by volunteering to examine an archaeological site from philological, literary and mythological angles. This active academic investment complicates his claim that Celtic myth holds no influence. Kriz also elucidates the culture clash between rising Irish nationalism and Tolkien's desire to reinforce English identity through mythology. His defensiveness regarding Celtic influence, perhaps, betrays anxiety about validating a mythology for England alone.
Another scholar, Kenniburgh, provides substantial evidence that Tolkien's Elves, especially the Noldor, parallel the mythical Tuatha Dé Danann of Irish legend despite his stated distaste for Celtic influence.[3] She notes:
> It would be irresponsible, however, to ignore the strong parallels between the alfar, who represent the first recorded elven species, and Tolkien's Elves. These parallels are most noticeable in early Elvish history.
...
> The alfar's close relationship with Norse gods mirrors the Elves' companionship with the Valar. Both are "gifted with skills and powers appropriate to such a [divine] status" including artistic mastery
To summarize her extensive work succinctly, her analysis provides substantial evidence that Tolkien absorbed and reinvented the Tuatha Dé Danann myth more extensively than he admitted. His Elves arise from a complex blend of Norse and Celtic threads (and others), reflecting the ancient divinity within pagan lore. Overall, the scholarly discourse reveals substantive traces of Celtic influence permeating Tolkien's mythology, from the exiled Noldor to theTuatha Dé Danann echoes. While secondary to Norse impact, denied Celtic strands significantly shape the tapestry of Middle-earth.
1. Christopher Vaccaro, ed., The Body in Tolkien’s Legendarium: Essays on Middle-earth Corporeality (Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company, 2013)
2. Kriz, Erin R. “‘CELTIC THINGS’ IN TOLKIEN’S MYTHOLOGY.” Masters Theses, John Carroll University, 2022, https://collected.jcu.edu/masterstheses/56.
3. Kinniburgh, Annie (2009) "The Noldor and the Tuatha Dé Danaan: J.R.R. Tolkien's Irish Influences," Mythlore: A Journal of J.R.R. Tolkien, C.S. Lewis, Charles Williams, and Mythopoeic Literature: Vol. 28: No. 1, Article 3. Available at: https://dc.swosu.edu/mythlore/vol28/iss1/3
As far as I am aware, there is no clear consensus on what exactly Tolkien found "unreasonable" about Celtic. Some speculate it relates to preferences in linguistics, mythology, and spiritual beliefs when comparing the Celtic worldview to other cultures like Norse and Greek. Christopher Vaccaro notes Tolkien's specific critique of Celtic "nomenclature" rather than content, as well as suspected distaste for inconsistencies in Celtic tales that lacked the "sober historicity" of Anglo-Saxon works.[1] Vaccaro suggests Tolkien's 1937 comments may have been exaggerated due to anxiety about his tales being associated with the Celtic Twilight movement.
In doing some more research about this topic I also stumbled upon a Masters Thesis by Erin Kriz who examines scholarship on Tolkien's inclusion of "Celtic things" in his works at length.[2] And, indeed, she too confirms what is arguably common knowledge: the plentiful presence of Celtic elements. As Kriz notes, Tolkien's academic career reveals an avid interest in medieval Welsh language and literature, which he utilized in constructing his Elvish tongues. His respect for Welsh contrasts with dismissal of Irish, which he found unattractive (though we do not find an answer as to why).
Critically, Tolkien engaged directly with Celtic scholarship by volunteering to examine an archaeological site from philological, literary and mythological angles. This active academic investment complicates his claim that Celtic myth holds no influence. Kriz also elucidates the culture clash between rising Irish nationalism and Tolkien's desire to reinforce English identity through mythology. His defensiveness regarding Celtic influence, perhaps, betrays anxiety about validating a mythology for England alone.
Another scholar, Kenniburgh, provides substantial evidence that Tolkien's Elves, especially the Noldor, parallel the mythical Tuatha Dé Danann of Irish legend despite his stated distaste for Celtic influence.[3] She notes:
> It would be irresponsible, however, to ignore the strong parallels between the alfar, who represent the first recorded elven species, and Tolkien's Elves. These parallels are most noticeable in early Elvish history.
...
> The alfar's close relationship with Norse gods mirrors the Elves' companionship with the Valar. Both are "gifted with skills and powers appropriate to such a [divine] status" including artistic mastery
To summarize her extensive work succinctly, her analysis provides substantial evidence that Tolkien absorbed and reinvented the Tuatha Dé Danann myth more extensively than he admitted. His Elves arise from a complex blend of Norse and Celtic threads (and others), reflecting the ancient divinity within pagan lore. Overall, the scholarly discourse reveals substantive traces of Celtic influence permeating Tolkien's mythology, from the exiled Noldor to theTuatha Dé Danann echoes. While secondary to Norse impact, denied Celtic strands significantly shape the tapestry of Middle-earth.
1. Christopher Vaccaro, ed., The Body in Tolkien’s Legendarium: Essays on Middle-earth Corporeality (Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company, 2013)
2. Kriz, Erin R. “‘CELTIC THINGS’ IN TOLKIEN’S MYTHOLOGY.” Masters Theses, John Carroll University, 2022, https://collected.jcu.edu/masterstheses/56.
3. Kinniburgh, Annie (2009) "The Noldor and the Tuatha Dé Danaan: J.R.R. Tolkien's Irish Influences," Mythlore: A Journal of J.R.R. Tolkien, C.S. Lewis, Charles Williams, and Mythopoeic Literature: Vol. 28: No. 1, Article 3. Available at: https://dc.swosu.edu/mythlore/vol28/iss1/3
turmacar 13 points 16h ago
>largely for their fundamental unreason
Would it be reasonable to assume more that Tolkien didn't like the "Fae" aspects for lack of a better term? (Definitely going to have to read Kriz's thesis when I have time)
I'm thinking of things like enchanted sleep or 'fairy realms' or things like Terry Prachett's:
>"Elves are wonderful. They provoke wonder.
>
>[...]
>
>Elves are terrific. They beget terror.
>
>The thing about words is that meanings can twist just like a snake, and if you want to find snakes look for them behind words that have changed their meaning.
>
>No one ever said elves are nice."
Where Tolkien's' elves are humans, but better. Otherworldly in a "closer to god" kind of way. Not in an "alien", "orange and blue morality" kind of way.
Would it be reasonable to assume more that Tolkien didn't like the "Fae" aspects for lack of a better term? (Definitely going to have to read Kriz's thesis when I have time)
I'm thinking of things like enchanted sleep or 'fairy realms' or things like Terry Prachett's:
>"Elves are wonderful. They provoke wonder.
>
>[...]
>
>Elves are terrific. They beget terror.
>
>The thing about words is that meanings can twist just like a snake, and if you want to find snakes look for them behind words that have changed their meaning.
>
>No one ever said elves are nice."
Where Tolkien's' elves are humans, but better. Otherworldly in a "closer to god" kind of way. Not in an "alien", "orange and blue morality" kind of way.
divinesleeper 4 points 15h ago
I agree with Kenniburgh, I came here expecting posts about Tolkien taking inspiration from the Fae!
Perhaps he (Tolkien) doth protest too much!
Perhaps he (Tolkien) doth protest too much!
Many_Use9457 3 points 5h ago
>His respect for Welsh contrasts with dismissal of Irish, which he found unattractive (though we do not find an answer as to why).
Shot in the dark, but could it be as simple as it being part of the ongoing cultural backlash to Ireland establishing its own identity, pushing for the revitalization of the Irish language, and reclaiming their culture after English colonialism?
The coverage of it by English sources was largely *not* kind, and Tolkien wasn't immune to the biases of his time, human as we all are. The dismissive manner in which he rejects the Celtic mythos in the quoted letter despite taking clear inspiration from it, and the stated dislike of the language, hint towards that for me (though his preference for Welsh does seem to just boil down to the fact its from the main Isle and "I think its neat :)").
Shot in the dark, but could it be as simple as it being part of the ongoing cultural backlash to Ireland establishing its own identity, pushing for the revitalization of the Irish language, and reclaiming their culture after English colonialism?
The coverage of it by English sources was largely *not* kind, and Tolkien wasn't immune to the biases of his time, human as we all are. The dismissive manner in which he rejects the Celtic mythos in the quoted letter despite taking clear inspiration from it, and the stated dislike of the language, hint towards that for me (though his preference for Welsh does seem to just boil down to the fact its from the main Isle and "I think its neat :)").
[deleted] 11 points 19h ago
[removed]
nananananana_FARTMAN 126 points 1d ago
This is the best thing I’ve read today.
zyzzogeton 25 points 21h ago
It was a great question too. I hadn't even considered attitudes towards elves at the time and how Tolkien's take contrasted so much.
[deleted] 34 points 1d ago
[removed]
[deleted] 4 points 1d ago
[removed]
Riovem 17 points 1d ago
Really fascinating answer, do you think there's an added element of the World itself? Lots of stories of elves and fairies etc exist in our world, so to exist they need to be smaller and weaker/less prestigious (not the right term but can't articulate it better) than humans otherwise they'd be seen/they'd be a formidable opponent of humans, so the then conventional elf/fairy depictions are important for stories set in our world vs Middle Earth where the history can be shaped by other powerful creatures.
I hope what I'm asking makes sense, and I'm not saying that elves and fairies were believed by all or even most, just that suspense of disbelief is easier when they're smaller, michievious creatures vs powerful, near immortal, masters of war, and civilisation forming creatures.
I hope what I'm asking makes sense, and I'm not saying that elves and fairies were believed by all or even most, just that suspense of disbelief is easier when they're smaller, michievious creatures vs powerful, near immortal, masters of war, and civilisation forming creatures.
ARoyaleWithCheese 39 points 23h ago
I definitely understand the idea you're proposing, but unfortunately I do not have the expertise to truly answer this question. I can, however, at least share some of Tolkien's thoughts about this topic, as he too found it a rather interesting one. Your point about the size and threat level of fairies/elves in stories is a salient one - and Tolkien directly speaks to this idea as well:
> As for diminutive size: I do not deny that the notion is a leading one in modern use. I have often thought that it would be interesting to try to find out how that has come to be so; but my knowledge is not sufficient for a certain answer.
He notes that while some fairies were small in ancient tales, smallness was not a defining trait of the fae as a whole originally. The conception of tiny, delicate fairies seems to have arisen later as a "literary fancy."
Tolkien suggests this miniature size made them seem more reconcilable with humans in a rationalist worldview:
> Yet I suspect that this flower-and-butterfly minuteness was also a product of “rationalization,” which transformed the glamour of Elfland into mere finesse, and invisibility into a fragility that could hide in a cowslip or shrink behind a blade of grass.
He also points to Drayton's Nymphidia as exemplifying the new convention of "flower-fairies and fluttering sprites with antennae." Their delicacy and tininess made them less threatening and easier to imagine coexisting with humanity:
> It seems to become fashionable soon after the great voyages had begun to make the world seem too narrow to hold both men and elves; when the magic land of Hy Breasail in the West had become the mere Brazils, the land of red-dye-wood. In any case it was largely a literary business in which William Shakespeare and Michael Drayton played a part.
So Tolkien himself does appear to support your idea, at least to an extent and with plenty of caveats. While rationalization and reconciling magic with reality may be one factor, many influences likely shaped how elves and fairies were depicted over time. As Tolkien humbly admits, there are many questions and uncertainties around the mythical and literary history of these tales.
> As for diminutive size: I do not deny that the notion is a leading one in modern use. I have often thought that it would be interesting to try to find out how that has come to be so; but my knowledge is not sufficient for a certain answer.
He notes that while some fairies were small in ancient tales, smallness was not a defining trait of the fae as a whole originally. The conception of tiny, delicate fairies seems to have arisen later as a "literary fancy."
Tolkien suggests this miniature size made them seem more reconcilable with humans in a rationalist worldview:
> Yet I suspect that this flower-and-butterfly minuteness was also a product of “rationalization,” which transformed the glamour of Elfland into mere finesse, and invisibility into a fragility that could hide in a cowslip or shrink behind a blade of grass.
He also points to Drayton's Nymphidia as exemplifying the new convention of "flower-fairies and fluttering sprites with antennae." Their delicacy and tininess made them less threatening and easier to imagine coexisting with humanity:
> It seems to become fashionable soon after the great voyages had begun to make the world seem too narrow to hold both men and elves; when the magic land of Hy Breasail in the West had become the mere Brazils, the land of red-dye-wood. In any case it was largely a literary business in which William Shakespeare and Michael Drayton played a part.
So Tolkien himself does appear to support your idea, at least to an extent and with plenty of caveats. While rationalization and reconciling magic with reality may be one factor, many influences likely shaped how elves and fairies were depicted over time. As Tolkien humbly admits, there are many questions and uncertainties around the mythical and literary history of these tales.
Riovem 6 points 20h ago
Fantastic! Thank you so much for this answer, it's such an interesting topic and your answers are so thorough and detailed
Ririkkaru 9 points 20h ago
> William Shakespeare epitomized this change in “A Midsummer Night's Dream”, portraying elves and fairies as diminutive, whimsical pranksters.
Are they diminutive in his works? Titania is gifted a human child and then falls in love with a human man with a donkey head. I am almost positive she and Oberon human-sized.
Are they diminutive in his works? Titania is gifted a human child and then falls in love with a human man with a donkey head. I am almost positive she and Oberon human-sized.
ARoyaleWithCheese 11 points 16h ago
You raise an excellent point - the fairies in A Midsummer Night's Dream do at times seem human-sized. However, I believe these inconsistencies are more narrative concessions than indications that Shakespeare envisioned the fairies as truly human-sized (though, truth be told, I'm venturing quite a bit outside of my comfort zone of Tolkien lore). While Titania, Oberon and others must become human-sized to interact with human characters on stage, Shakespeare peppers the play with fanciful details that imply the fairies' true diminutive essence. For example, Fairy describes his typical fairy tasks:
> I must go seek some dewdrops here,
> And hang a pearl in every cowslip’s ear.
> ...And I serve the fairy queen,
> To dew her orbs upon the green.
Likewise, Titania describes her fairies protecting her sleeping chamber:
> Some to kill cankers in the musk-rose buds;
> Some war with rere-mice for their leathern wings
> To make my small elves coats.
Even Puck’s famous boast of encircling the massive earth “in forty minutes” implies a tiny, winged sprite, not a human runner. So while the fairies morph in scale as needed for the plot, Shakespeare repeatedly characterizes them as delicate, diminutive creatures.
Notably, Shakespeare diverged from common Elizabethan imaginations of fairies. Instead of following the typical depictions of fairies as demonic or malign entities, he crafted an entirely new perspective on these supernatural creatures for his audience - one where they were neither large nor threatening, but rather alluring and whimsical, which was something rather unheard of to Shakespeare's contemporaries.
Early criticisms of the play reflected the sheer novelty of Shakespeare's imagination of these creatures. For instance, Samuel Pepys in 1662, dismissed the play as the “most insipid ridiculous play that ever he saw,” yet conceded it had "some good dancing and some handsome women.”
This new concept of fairies as delicate, charming creatures arguably planted the seed for future interpretations, particularly in the Victorian era, when this image became deeply ingrained as an enduring motif. The popular Victorian depiction of fairies as small, delicate, and feminine figures was, in many ways, a continuation of the path that Shakespeare had forged.
> I must go seek some dewdrops here,
> And hang a pearl in every cowslip’s ear.
> ...And I serve the fairy queen,
> To dew her orbs upon the green.
Likewise, Titania describes her fairies protecting her sleeping chamber:
> Some to kill cankers in the musk-rose buds;
> Some war with rere-mice for their leathern wings
> To make my small elves coats.
Even Puck’s famous boast of encircling the massive earth “in forty minutes” implies a tiny, winged sprite, not a human runner. So while the fairies morph in scale as needed for the plot, Shakespeare repeatedly characterizes them as delicate, diminutive creatures.
Notably, Shakespeare diverged from common Elizabethan imaginations of fairies. Instead of following the typical depictions of fairies as demonic or malign entities, he crafted an entirely new perspective on these supernatural creatures for his audience - one where they were neither large nor threatening, but rather alluring and whimsical, which was something rather unheard of to Shakespeare's contemporaries.
Early criticisms of the play reflected the sheer novelty of Shakespeare's imagination of these creatures. For instance, Samuel Pepys in 1662, dismissed the play as the “most insipid ridiculous play that ever he saw,” yet conceded it had "some good dancing and some handsome women.”
This new concept of fairies as delicate, charming creatures arguably planted the seed for future interpretations, particularly in the Victorian era, when this image became deeply ingrained as an enduring motif. The popular Victorian depiction of fairies as small, delicate, and feminine figures was, in many ways, a continuation of the path that Shakespeare had forged.
imbolcnight 5 points 14h ago
> some handsome women
Would this be saying some of the male actors made for handsome woman characters or is it referring to actual woman actors in the play?
Would this be saying some of the male actors made for handsome woman characters or is it referring to actual woman actors in the play?
Anonymorph 3 points 6h ago
Just a quirk of the language. 'Handsome' has come to be applied almost exclusively to men for a good while now, but it could well be applied to women until Jane Austen's time at least. One of her novels begins:
>Emma Woodhouse, handsome, clever, and rich.
>Emma Woodhouse, handsome, clever, and rich.
Many_Use9457 2 points 5h ago
>For instance, Samuel Pepys in 1662, dismissed the play as the “most insipid ridiculous play that ever he saw,” yet conceded it had "some good dancing and some handsome women.”
Criticisms that would be echoed nearly four centuries later at the premiere of *Cats -*
Criticisms that would be echoed nearly four centuries later at the premiere of *Cats -*
chairfairy 21 points 1d ago
"primal mythic resonance" is a lovely phrase but... what does it mean?
Is that just to say he didn't think the standard Victorian elf lined up what what he though a true English mythology should produce?
Is that just to say he didn't think the standard Victorian elf lined up what what he though a true English mythology should produce?
ARoyaleWithCheese 56 points 23h ago
That's a great point and my initial answer doesn't do a great job of clarifying what is meant. The phrase "primal mythic resonance" is not one used by Tolkien directly, but rather my interpretive summary of his perspective on the inherent power and significance of fairy tales. We can find an example of Tolkien's view on the resonant quality of fairy tales in "On Fairy-Stories."
In that essay, Tolkien argues that fairy stories have become "entangled" with ancient mythology and folklore that taps into universal truths about human experience - what I interpret as their "primal mythic resonance." As Tolkien writes:
> Yet these things have in fact become entangled—or maybe they were sundered long ago and have since groped slowly, through a labyrinth of error, through confusion, back towards refusion. Even fairy-stories as a whole have three faces: the Mystical towards the Supernatural; the Magical towards Nature; and the Mirror of scorn and pity towards Man. The essential face of Faerie is the middle one, the Magical.
Tolkien asserts fairy tales have three key facets - the Mystical, Magical and Mirror. But the Magical element, which connects to nature and universal human truths, is the essential core. This Magical essence allows fairy tales to act as both a "Mirror" reflecting profound themes about human nature, and a "vehicle of Mystery" conveying glimpses of the divine.
This points to the resonant mythical quality at the heart of fairy tales for Tolkien - their ability to convey universal meanings and truths that echo our shared humanity. When he criticizes Victorian authors for diminishing and sentimentalizing fairies, stripping them of their primal mythic resonance, he is arguing they have drained the Magical element - the core that links fairy tales to greater mystical meaning.
Tolkien goes further to clarify fairy tales are not fixed artifacts, but evolving tales shaped by storytellers to either tap into or mute their inherent mythical resonance across cultures. As he explains:
> Fairy-stories are by no means rocky matrices out of which the fossils cannot be prised except by an expert geologist. The ancient elements can be knocked out, or forgotten and dropped out, or replaced by other ingredients with the greatest ease.
So while fairy tales can and do change, Tolkien suggests their primal resonance endures if storytellers preserve and amplify the Magical - allowing fairy tales to still "come true" in reflecting profound human truths, however distorted over time.
In essence, Tolkien argues for fairy tales as vehicles of universal meaning - conduits to greater truths about humanity and life itself. His notion of their "primal mythic resonance" derives from a conviction that fairy tales at their core reflect and reveal essential truths shared at a fundamental human level. To be clear, his perspective is not a supernatural one (aside from the religious aspects which I'll ignore for now for the sake of simplicity). Rather, it contextualizes fairy tales as a vehicle of meaning throughout human history and cultures.
In that essay, Tolkien argues that fairy stories have become "entangled" with ancient mythology and folklore that taps into universal truths about human experience - what I interpret as their "primal mythic resonance." As Tolkien writes:
> Yet these things have in fact become entangled—or maybe they were sundered long ago and have since groped slowly, through a labyrinth of error, through confusion, back towards refusion. Even fairy-stories as a whole have three faces: the Mystical towards the Supernatural; the Magical towards Nature; and the Mirror of scorn and pity towards Man. The essential face of Faerie is the middle one, the Magical.
Tolkien asserts fairy tales have three key facets - the Mystical, Magical and Mirror. But the Magical element, which connects to nature and universal human truths, is the essential core. This Magical essence allows fairy tales to act as both a "Mirror" reflecting profound themes about human nature, and a "vehicle of Mystery" conveying glimpses of the divine.
This points to the resonant mythical quality at the heart of fairy tales for Tolkien - their ability to convey universal meanings and truths that echo our shared humanity. When he criticizes Victorian authors for diminishing and sentimentalizing fairies, stripping them of their primal mythic resonance, he is arguing they have drained the Magical element - the core that links fairy tales to greater mystical meaning.
Tolkien goes further to clarify fairy tales are not fixed artifacts, but evolving tales shaped by storytellers to either tap into or mute their inherent mythical resonance across cultures. As he explains:
> Fairy-stories are by no means rocky matrices out of which the fossils cannot be prised except by an expert geologist. The ancient elements can be knocked out, or forgotten and dropped out, or replaced by other ingredients with the greatest ease.
So while fairy tales can and do change, Tolkien suggests their primal resonance endures if storytellers preserve and amplify the Magical - allowing fairy tales to still "come true" in reflecting profound human truths, however distorted over time.
In essence, Tolkien argues for fairy tales as vehicles of universal meaning - conduits to greater truths about humanity and life itself. His notion of their "primal mythic resonance" derives from a conviction that fairy tales at their core reflect and reveal essential truths shared at a fundamental human level. To be clear, his perspective is not a supernatural one (aside from the religious aspects which I'll ignore for now for the sake of simplicity). Rather, it contextualizes fairy tales as a vehicle of meaning throughout human history and cultures.
Anonymorph 6 points 15h ago
To add a Germanic rather than Celtic perspective (although overlaps are likely), Erlen (elves) were very much the mysterious harbingers of supernatural calamity or death even for poets like Goethe and Herder looking to folklore for (often nationalistic) inspiration. It doesn't seem correct to me to say Tolkein
>elevated elves back to beings of ancient dignity and artistic genius
given that his elves are heavily rationalised under the influence of the Enlightenment (whence the objection to the Celts' 'fundamental unreason'\*), and that 'artistic genius' is a concept that itself emerges with the various Romantic movements in European literatures (at a time when national consciousness is sweeping the continent).
It would be much more accurate to characterise Tolkein's move as the rationalisation of nature as a benign and benevolent force best managed by superhuman wisdom, but also superhuman technology. Not an antidote to industrial technology but the fantasy of absolutely nature-friendly technology in a coal and oil driven economy. The elves are to Tolkein what the Houyhnhnms are to Swift. Instead of a rebellion, it seems more like putting the powers that be on a stronger footing.
\*The Celtic myths are unreasonable to Tolkein because nature can act on its own behalf in them, beyond human comprehension, control or symbiosis.
Edit: Missed the asterisk.
Edit 2: The comparison with the Houyhnhnms is a bit weak, since they undercut human notions of superiority much more trenchantly than Tolkein's elves. Probably best to leave the comparison alone for now. Sorry about jumping the gun on that one.
>elevated elves back to beings of ancient dignity and artistic genius
given that his elves are heavily rationalised under the influence of the Enlightenment (whence the objection to the Celts' 'fundamental unreason'\*), and that 'artistic genius' is a concept that itself emerges with the various Romantic movements in European literatures (at a time when national consciousness is sweeping the continent).
It would be much more accurate to characterise Tolkein's move as the rationalisation of nature as a benign and benevolent force best managed by superhuman wisdom, but also superhuman technology. Not an antidote to industrial technology but the fantasy of absolutely nature-friendly technology in a coal and oil driven economy. The elves are to Tolkein what the Houyhnhnms are to Swift. Instead of a rebellion, it seems more like putting the powers that be on a stronger footing.
\*The Celtic myths are unreasonable to Tolkein because nature can act on its own behalf in them, beyond human comprehension, control or symbiosis.
Edit: Missed the asterisk.
Edit 2: The comparison with the Houyhnhnms is a bit weak, since they undercut human notions of superiority much more trenchantly than Tolkein's elves. Probably best to leave the comparison alone for now. Sorry about jumping the gun on that one.
LostEryops 4 points 13h ago
Sort-of-related followup question.
In *The Hobbit* the bad guys are called goblins.
In *Lord of the Rings* they're called orcs and seem to be either the same thing or very nearly the same thing. I can't remember if the word "goblin" is ever used in LotR.
As a teenager I had a theory that Tolkien was doing a retcon because Goblin was an "Irish" word and he wanted a "Germanic" word to go along with Elf or Dwarf. Putting those in quotes because I'm not any kind of expert on linguistics or folklore and I came up with this theory as a know-it-all teenager in the days before Wikipedia.
So what's the deal, really? Is it a full-on retcon and we're supposed to pretend the word has always been orc? Are they supposed to be different in-world words for the same thing? Are goblins orcs, but specifically an ethnic group from the Misty Mountains? Any idea why Tolkein would have introduced the new word in LotR?
In *The Hobbit* the bad guys are called goblins.
In *Lord of the Rings* they're called orcs and seem to be either the same thing or very nearly the same thing. I can't remember if the word "goblin" is ever used in LotR.
As a teenager I had a theory that Tolkien was doing a retcon because Goblin was an "Irish" word and he wanted a "Germanic" word to go along with Elf or Dwarf. Putting those in quotes because I'm not any kind of expert on linguistics or folklore and I came up with this theory as a know-it-all teenager in the days before Wikipedia.
So what's the deal, really? Is it a full-on retcon and we're supposed to pretend the word has always been orc? Are they supposed to be different in-world words for the same thing? Are goblins orcs, but specifically an ethnic group from the Misty Mountains? Any idea why Tolkein would have introduced the new word in LotR?
xdavidy 3 points 9h ago
Here is a thread from r/tolkienfans (which I can highly recommend) about the difference between orcs and goblins. The top reply quotes some letters from Tolkien where he talks about these words and their origins.
LostEryops 2 points 9h ago
Awesome, thanks! So different words for the same thing, and it's not a retcon.
William_Wisenheimer [OP] 3 points 23h ago
Thanks a lot.
[deleted] 2 points 1d ago
[removed]
This nonprofit website is run by volunteers.
Please contribute if you can. Thank you!
Our mission is to provide everyone with access to large-
scale community websites for the good of humanity.
Without ads, without tracking, without greed.
scale community websites for the good of humanity.
Without ads, without tracking, without greed.
©2023 HumbleCat Inc • HumbleCat is a 501(c)3 nonprofit based in Michigan, USA.