<html><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt"><div><span><Deliberately ignoring the public snark-fest...></span></div><div><br><span></span></div><div><span>Has Wolfe ever spoken at length about Lord Dunsany? I can think of a few mentions, but nothing significant. That might be an interesting way into the question of "fairy stories."</span></div><div><br><span></span></div><div><span>(And, yes, I asked a question without searching urth.net...mainly to shift the conversation.)<br></span></div><div><br></div> <div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif; font-size: 12pt;"> <div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif; font-size: 12pt;"> <font face="Arial" size="2"> <hr size="1"> <b><span style="font-weight:bold;">From:</span></b> Lee Berman <severiansola@hotmail.com><br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">To:</span></b>
urth@urth.net <br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sent:</span></b> Thursday, December 15, 2011 9:21 PM<br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Subject:</span></b> (urth) Gummed-Up Works or Got Lives?<br> </font> <br>
<br><br>>Dan'l Danehy-oakes: tBotNS is indeed a fairy story, a once-upon-a-time whisking away of<br>>the reader to a land where miracles happen, giants..battle heroes, the dead walk, and <br><br>>monarchs live in invisible palaces. (Even the invisible palace hides an invisible<br>>palace!) <br><br> <br><br>>If it questions the assumptions of the fairy story, and especially the happy ending, well <br><br>>so too does it question the assumptions of classic science fantasy: and we cannot <br><br>>understand that questioning unless we understand "what we have learned of these things<br>>from fairy-tales."<br><br> <br><br>Wow, Dan'l. Outstanding post, both for content and eloquence.<br><br> <br><br>Also, I agree with all you say about Tolkien and Lewis and Wolfe in your earlier post. I<br><br>might only debate one issue, that being the implication that Tolkein's moral lessons are<br><br>not explicit. I would agree with you in regard to
religious morality. <br><br> <br><br>But there is a social-cultural morality Tolkien displays which I find not so very hard to<br><br>catch, including the intrinsic value of hearth and home and the unquestioned assumption<br><br>that blood (genetics) runs true and determines the worth of a man. Not a shocking moral <br><br>stance for an Englishman of the early 20th century but still, it is there.<br><br> <br><br>I think, by todays standards, Tolkien's geo-social biases might not be considered so<br><br>policially correct. I mostly mean his implication that those dark-skinned types from the <br><br>south and east are evil and not to be trusted. Conversely that north and west are the "good" <br><br>directions, not to mention those wonderful (american) eagles who always fly in at the last <br><br>crucial moment to save the day. If he'd used falcons it just wouldn't have worked the same, <br><br>I think. (not that I'm being really critical of Tolkien; I"m
sure he was a good and honorable<br><br>man but also a product of his times. And aren't we all?) <br>_______________________________________________<br>Urth Mailing List<br>To post, write <a ymailto="mailto:urth@urth.net" href="mailto:urth@urth.net">urth@urth.net</a><br>Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net<br><br><br> </div> </div> </div></body></html>