Archive for October, 2015

The Martian

Posted October 29, 2015 By John C Wright

Best movie all year. No science fiction fan has a valid excuse not to like this movie. I was sure they would mess it up, but it was a remarkably faithful adaptation from the book.

I will write up a longer review in days to come, time permitting. In the meantime, go see it. Take your muggle friends, and they will understand the appeal of hard SF.

90 Comments so far. Join the Conversation

A Time for Peace, a Time for War

Posted October 28, 2015 By John C Wright

Never apologize to the Morlocks, for they will only take the apology as a confession, and, sensing weakness, fall upon you, and drag you underground to their lair and feast on your living flesh.

This advice applies not merely to the enemy in the culture war attempting to get you mocked, reviled, and fired for your political incorrectness, but also to the enemy in the Jihad, attempting to get you to die, to surrender to slavery or submit to Islam.

Vox Day in his new book SJWs ALWAYS LIES includes the excellent advice that one must never apologise to a Social Justice Warrior, never attempt to ameliorate nor appease them, never appeal to their better nature. His experience (and mine) shows this is futile as well as counterproductive.

A civilized man, hearing an apology or a request for quarter, will interpret it as a request for forgiveness and a request for a return to the peace the existed before the dispute broke out: an SJW, hearing an apology, will take it as a surrender, will sense blood in the water as a shark does, and redouble the attacks.

This is because the civilized man regards other men as real people and seeks to live in peace. An SJW is a creature who regards peace as intolerable, and thinks of other people as mere shadows, mere puppets on the stage of his own internal psychodrama.

A civilized man attacks enemies in order to restore civilization, and hence attacks those who threaten it, and hence takes a proffer apology as a sign that the threat is ended. An SJW, on the other hand, is a witchhunter who attacks the witch not because he believes you (or anyone) is a witch. Your name could have been picked at random out of a hat. He attacks because he wishes to be seen by the warren, his peers, as zealous and loyal, and because whichever witchhunter hunts the most witches gains a high status.

Such is the disagreeable truth and tactical necessity of the culture war, and it has an even more disagreeable sequel: a whole cadre of so called moderates arises who, while claiming to agree with you and to abjure the foe, makes calls for peace and compromise never directed at the witchhunters, always at the witch. One such recent display was being debated over at Vox Day’s website:  http://voxday.blogspot.com/2015/10/dialogue-with-moderate.html

This led to a question we have heard debated frequently in conservative and Christian circles, which is, namely, when is it right, if ever, to fight an enemy without remorse, without quarter, without adherence to the Marquis of Queensbury Rules, savagely, and totally?

The answer to that question falls into two opposite errors: the Scylla of those who answer “always” and the Charybdis of those who answer “never.”

Read the remainder of this entry »

48 Comments so far. Join the Conversation

Anniversary of Superversive 2

Posted October 27, 2015 By John C Wright

We celebrate the first year of the superversive literary movement with the second half of last week’s essay by that brilliant essayist, Tom Simon.

This essay I think is one of his best, and since I think he is perhaps the best essayist since essayist since Montaigne, that is saying quite a bit. Of course, I happen to be particularly interested in this topic, and his essay makes clear to me a personal puzzle touching why a writer I once respected and read avidly now bores and offends me.

http://www.ljagilamplighter.com/2015/10/27/superversive-blog-life-carbon-and-the-tao-part-two/

Here is a collection of his essays:

wdtd

A collection of Mr. Simons excellent essays on Tolkien and our craft.

And here is the first part:

http://www.ljagilamplighter.com/2015/10/15/superversive-literary-movement-anniversary-essay/

Let me quote a teaser:

Life, Carbon, and the Tao – Part Two

by

Tom Simon

What’s so special about the Tao?

Here I am using the term Tao the way C. S. Lewis used it in The Abolition of Man: meaning the basic principles of morality on which all civilized peoples have generally agreed. Here are some of the perennials: Don’t murder your neighbour, don’t steal from your neighbour, don’t mess around with your neighbour’s wife, don’t perjure yourself. Men have differed on the definition of neighbour, and some  of the wide variation in human cultures is accounted for by that  difference. Some peoples apply the Tao only to members of one’s own  tribe, or one’s own nation. Some try to apply it to every human being  without exception. And of course there are differences of detail, such  as whether a man should marry one wife or four. But every culture that  survives is based on the Tao, just as every life form is based on  carbon; and the reasons, at bottom, are similar.

What the Tao does is to establish a minimum basis for safe dealings  between human beings. If, every time you went into Starbucks, you had to  seriously question whether the barrista would sell you a cup of coffee  or shoot you on sight, I fancy that Starbucks, as a business, would not  have lasted long. Fortunately, both you and the barrista subscribe to  the Tao. Even if you don’t understand the reasons for the rules, you  obey the rules, at least most of the time, because that is the only  way that you can get along and do business together. Even to live  together in a community requires the Tao. My neighbours lock their  doors when they go out, it is true. But if I did not accept the Tao,  locks would do them no good; I would smash the doors with an axe and  help myself to their belongings. And if they did not accept the Tao,  they would have no grounds to complain. No human being can live as a  solo army, at war with the whole world. We are born weak and helpless,  and most of us are weak and helpless again before we die; and we all  have to sleep in between. The Tao literally keeps us alive when we  cannot defend ourselves.

The basis of the Tao, in one word, is reciprocity. “Do unto others  as you would have them do unto you.” Or if that is too strong for you,  take the formula of Confucius: “Never do to others what you would not  like them to do to you.” Over tens of thousands of years, in the  laboratory of daily life, in tribes and villages, cities and nations, we  have boiled down the art of reciprocity; we have codified the things  that none of us (when sane and healthy) wish done to us, and we agree  not to do them to others. In almost every culture, this code is  reinforced by the prevailing religion; but it is quite possible to  accept the Tao without any religion at all. It is the common moral  currency of humanity, and with the caveat noted above, it passes  everywhere. Societies that reject the  Tao  do not hang together; and  individuals who reject the  Tao  soon find themselves without any society.

When I turn from real life to fiction, I find a curious difference. In  the stories of the past — in nearly all fiction before, say, the late  nineteenth century, and all  popular  fiction until a much later date —  the  Tao  is taken for granted; only there is a class of people who do  not observe the  Tao.  These people are called  criminals,  or   outlaws,  or  villains.  In the older kind of fiction, the villain  upsets the  Tao  to take advantage of a weaker party, and the hero  restores the  Tao  by avenging the victim.

Consider the  Odyssey.  Odysseus was a sharp operator, maybe, but still  a hero; he restored the  Tao.  Old Polyphemus, the Cyclops, violated the   Tao  in a pretty straightforward way: he ate his house guests. The  Greeks set great store by the laws of  xenia,  or hospitality; and even  we degenerate moderns, when our friends invite us to dinner, do not  expect to  be  the dinner. Later, he restored the  Tao  in the matter of  adultery, dealing with his wife’s suitors in a brusque but exemplary  manner. (No, he could not have called the police. Odysseus was the King  of Ithaca; he  was  the police.)

It is only we moderns, for the most part, who try to write fiction  without the  Tao.

 

Read the rest:

http://www.ljagilamplighter.com/2015/10/27/superversive-blog-life-carbon-and-the-tao-part-two/

 

30 Comments so far. Join the Conversation

If I have my own Meme, Am I famous?

Posted October 27, 2015 By John C Wright

Someone brought this to my wife’s attention on Facebook.

It is embarrassing that I was reading this quote, and was struck by how august and wise it was, until I looked down and saw who wrote it.  Read the remainder of this entry »

7 Comments so far. Join the Conversation

Quote of the Day

Posted October 26, 2015 By John C Wright

This is the quote of the day, if not of the decade. It is something I have thought for years, if not decades, but I never found the words to bring my misgivings into focus.

“Pragmatism in politics is like cocaine. A little bit goes a long ways. You not only win, but you feel like an all-conquering tiger. But gradually, you start needing more and more to achieve the same affect, until finally, you overdose and your heart stops.”

This gem is from the Dark Lord of the Evil Legion of Evil Authors, our own Vox Day.

http://voxday.blogspot.com/2015/10/the-impracticality-of-pragmatism.html

Read the remainder of this entry »

22 Comments so far. Join the Conversation

Impersonal Appearance

Posted October 23, 2015 By John C Wright

I have been asked to answer questions about SOMEWHITHER on the Catholic Geek podcast this Sunday, October 25th, which is the feast day of Sts. Crispin & Crispinian, patrons of shoemaker and cobblers.

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/webuiltthatnetwork/2015/10/25/the-catholic-geek-john-c-wright-discusses-somewhither

Call in! (914) 338-1458

23 Comments so far. Join the Conversation

My Elves are Different; Or, Erlkoenig and Appendix N

Posted October 23, 2015 By John C Wright

My Elves are Different.

When calculating how to portray the elves in my current writing project (tentatively titled Moths and Cobwebs) I was thinking about Erlkoenig and Appendix N, and (of course!) about GK Chesterton. There is a connected train of thought here, but it meanders through some ox-bows and digressions, so I hope the patient reader enjoys the scenic route of thought.

First, Erlkoenig. I had noticed for some time that there was many a younger reader whose mental picture of the elves (those inhabitants of the Perilous Realm, the Otherworld, whose ways are not our ways) was formed entirely by JRR Tolkien and his imitators. Tolkien elves are basically prelapsarian men: like us in stature and passions, but nobler, older, and not suffering our post-Edenic divorce from the natural world. This is not alien to the older themes and material on which Tolkien drew, but there is alongside this an older and darker version.

This darker version is one which Tolkien did not draw upon, except, perhaps, in the scene in THE HOBBIT when the starving dwarves come upon the elves of Mirkwood feasting. When they step forward, the campfirelight vanishes, the elves disappear, and the dwarves are thrown into an enchanted sleep. That is the kind of trick Puck might play on mortal fools.

But there is mischief worse than these, kidnapping and killings and cradle-robbing, which the older tales retell. Again, Boromir and Eomer mention tales of the Lady of the Golden Wood which captures that sense of elves as something fair and perilous, but their misgivings, in Tolkein’s world, are merely wrong.

Here, for example, is a song about Erlkoenig, the elfinking, who is attracted to a boy child much as Oberon in Shakespeare wishes the Indian child to be his. There are several recordings of this on YouTube, but in this one the master singer captures an expression that I hope not to see in my nightmares.

Read the remainder of this entry »

79 Comments so far. Join the Conversation

Protected: My Invasions Plans

Posted October 21, 2015 By John C Wright

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

This is a reply to a fan letter written by Forrest J Ackerman to Edgar Rice Burroughs. I reprint to emphasize the point that reading the corrosive, dreary, and hellish books assigned to my highschoolers to help them in their homework has driven me to the same conclusion. Read the remainder of this entry »

76 Comments so far. Join the Conversation

Anniversary of Superversive

Posted October 19, 2015 By John C Wright

We celebrate the first year of the superversive literary movement with an essay by that brilliant essayist, Tom Simon. It was he who first coined the term and in effect started the movement, by inspiring me and Mrs Wright with his essays on everything from the art of reading Tolkien to the art of writing.

Here is a collection of his essays:

wdtd

A collection of Mr. Simons excellent essays on Tolkien and our craft.

And here is his essay

http://www.ljagilamplighter.com/2015/10/15/superversive-literary-movement-anniversary-essay/

 I quote the beginning to give you a taste:
Life, Carbon, and the Tao

by

Tom Simon

A year has gone by since the Superversive blog officially kicked off, and during that time, as they say, life has happened. As writers, we always need to go back to that. Part of the deep malaise that afflicts our art form (and many others) is that it is too easy to be influenced. It becomes fatally easy to reuse tropes and characters and ideas from other stories, or other art forms; it takes an effort of will to go back to reality and look at it with fresh eyes. There is, I suspect, no such thing as strict realism in fiction – reality is too complex, too big, too un-story-like – but every story needs to be rooted in reality at some point. Not reality as we would like it to be – that is part of the flight of fancy on which the story takes us – but just as it is.

 

Today, as I look at reality, I find myself thinking of two questions, which, if answered badly, can lead our field up a blind alley. The first one arose in Golden Age science fiction, and led a lot of writers astray on a technical point. The second one arises in every form of fiction, and leads whole cultures astray. But there is a curious resemblance between them, and the answer to the first question, I find, sheds light on the second.

The first question:

What’s so special about carbon?

Read the rest here: http://www.ljagilamplighter.com/2015/10/15/superversive-literary-movement-anniversary-essay/

1 Comment. Join the Conversation

Reply from the Chinese Sage

Posted October 19, 2015 By John C Wright

Guest Post from Nostreculsus. Alas, I lost the answers for question 6 through 10. The words below are his:

My apologies if this post is a bit long, but after reading the comments of the patrician Roman and of the Christian, I ventured to ask a Chinese sage about Mr Lombardi’s code of life.

How does he compare with the ancient man?

PajamaBoy02vsupanga
PAJAMA BOY CHINESE SAGE
1. When the modern man buys shoes for his spouse, he doesn’t have to ask her sister for the size. And he knows which brands run big or small.1. When you are laboring for others let it be with the same zeal as if it were for yourself.
2. The modern man never lets other people know when his confidence has sunk. He acts as if everything is going swimmingly until it is.2. The superior man makes the difficulty to be overcome his first interest; success only comes later.
3. The modern man is considerate. At the movie theater, he won’t munch down a mouthful of popcorn during a quiet moment. He waits for some ruckus.3. Make no movement which is contrary to propriety.
4. The modern man doesn’t cut the fatty or charred bits off his fillet. Every bite of steak is a privilege, and it all goes down the hatch.4. Life is a series of natural and spontaneous changes. Don’t resist them – that only creates sorrow. Let reality be reality. Let things flow naturally forward in whatever way they like.
5. The modern man won’t blow 10 minutes of his life looking for the best parking spot. He finds a reasonable one and puts his car between the lines.5. Fill your bowl to the brim and it will spill. Keep sharpening your knife and it will blunt.
6. Before the modern man heads off to bed, he makes sure his spouse’s phone and his kids’ electronic devices are charging for the night.6. It is better to do one’s own duty, however defective it may be, than to follow the duty of another, however well one may perform it.
7. The modern man buys only regular colas, like Coke or Dr Pepper. If you walk into his house looking for a Mountain Dew, he’ll show you the door.  7. When you are content to be simply yourself and don’t compare or compete, everybody will respect you. 
8. The modern man uses the proper names for things. For example, he’ll say “helicopter,” not “chopper” like some gauche simpleton.8. If names be not correct, language is not in accordance with the truth of things. If language be not in accordance with the truth of things, affairs cannot be carried on to success. When affairs cannot be carried on to success, proprieties and music do not flourish. When proprieties and music do not flourish, punishments will not be properly awarded. When punishments are not properly awarded, the people do not know how to move hand or foot.
Therefore a superior man considers it necessary that the names he uses may be spoken appropriately. The correct name for this inferior man is “imperial court eunuch”.
9. Having a daughter makes the modern man more of a complete person. He learns new stuff every day. 9. In family life, be completely present.
10. The modern man makes sure the dishes on the rack have dried completely before putting them away. 10. He who does his duty as his own nature reveals it, never sins.
11. The modern man has never “pinned” a tweet, and he never will.11. Look not at what is contrary to propriety.
12. The modern man checks the status of his Irish Spring bar before jumping in for a wash. Too small, it gets swapped out.12. A scholar who cherishes the love of comfort is not fit to be deemed a scholar.
13. The modern man listens to Wu-Tang at least once a week.13. Listen not to what is contrary to propriety.
14. The modern man still jots down his grocery list on a piece of scratch paper. The market is no place for his face to be buried in the phone.14. The cautious seldom err.
15. The modern man has hardwood flooring. His children can detect his mood from the stamp of his Kenneth Cole oxfords.15. In a country badly governed, wealth is something to be ashamed of.
16. The modern man lies on the side of the bed closer to the door. If an intruder gets in, he will try to fight him off, so that his wife has a chance to get away.16. From caring comes courage.
17. Does the modern man have a melon baller? What do you think? How else would the cantaloupe, watermelon and honeydew he serves be so uniformly shaped?17. The superior man understands what is right; the inferior man understands what will sell.
18. The modern man has thought seriously about buying a shoehorn.18. He who knows that enough is enough will always have enough.
19. The modern man buys fresh flowers more to surprise his wife than to say he is sorry.19. Great acts are made up of small deeds.
20. On occasion, the modern man is the little spoon. Some nights, when he is feeling down or vulnerable, he needs an emotional and physical shield.20. He who controls others may be powerful, but he who has mastered himself is mightier still.
21. The modern man doesn’t scold his daughter when she sneezes while eating an apple doughnut, even if the pieces fly everywhere.21. When anger rises, think of the consequences
22. The modern man still ambles half-naked down his driveway each morning to scoop up a crisp newspaper.22. Make no movement which is contrary to propriety.
23. The modern man has all of Michael Mann’s films on Blu-ray (or whatever the highest quality thing is at the time).23. The wise man does not lay up his own treasures. The more he gives to others, the more he has for his own.
24. The modern man doesn’t get hung up on his phone’s battery percentage. If it needs to run flat, so be it.24. Anticipate the difficult by managing the easy.
25. The modern man has no use for a gun. He doesn’t own one, and he never will.25. He who knows when he can fight and when he cannot, will be victorious.
26. The modern man cries. He cries often.26.Respond intelligently even to unintelligent treatment.
27. People aren’t sure if the modern man is a good dancer or not. That is, until the D.J. plays his jam and he goes out there and puts on a clinic.27. Never give a sword to a man who can’t dance.

 

8 Comments so far. Join the Conversation

The Essential Chesterton Essay

Posted October 17, 2015 By John C Wright

If one had to recommend to a muggle, that is, to someone who lives outside the secret wizardly universe of GK Chesterton, which is the first and best and most essential essay of Chesterton’s to read, I would select the following, which appeared in the book HERETICS.

The reader will perhaps be disoriented to realize that this work was written over one hundred years ago, but answers certain nonsense agitating and perhaps condemning the current generation this year, this month, this hour. The mark of a great writer is that his wit and wisdom are timeless and ever green. 

On Certain Modern Writers and the Institution of the Family


by G.K. Chesterton

The family may fairly be considered, one would think, an ultimate human institution. Every one would admit that it has been the main cell and central unit of almost all societies hitherto, except, indeed, such societies as that of Lacedaemon, which went in for “efficiency,” and has, therefore, perished, and left not a trace behind.

Christianity, even enormous as was its revolution, did not alter this ancient and savage sanctity; it merely reversed it. It did not deny the trinity of father, mother, and child. It merely read it backwards, making it run child, mother, father. This it called, not the family, but the Holy Family, for many things are made holy by being turned upside down. But some sages of our own decadence have made a serious attack on the family. They have impugned it, as I think wrongly; and its defenders have defended it, and defended it wrongly. The common defence of the family is that, amid the stress and fickleness of life, it is peaceful, pleasant, and at one. But there is another defence of the family which is possible, and to me evident; this defence is that the family is not peaceful and not pleasant and not at one.

Read the remainder of this entry »

11 Comments so far. Join the Conversation

Wright Alien Megastructure Hypothesis

Posted October 15, 2015 By John C Wright

Another discovery, equally astonishing as the discovery of the God-destroying magnetic brain wave mentioned in an earlier column in his space:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/10/15/the-strange-star-that-has-serious-scientists-talking-about-an-alien-megastructure/

KIC 8462852 is a distant star 1,481 light-years away from Earth with

… a very unusual flickering habit. Something was making the star dim drastically every few years, and she [Yale University astronomer Tabetha Boyajian] wasn’t sure what.

Boyajian wrote up a paper on possible explanations for the star’s bizarre behavior, which was published recently in the Monthly Notes of the Royals Astronomical Society. But she also sent her data to fellow astronomer Jason Wright, a Penn State University researcher who helped developed a protocol for seeking signs of unearthly civilization, wondering what he would make of it.

To Wright, it looked like the kind of star he and his colleagues had been waiting for. If none of the ordinary reasons for the star’s flux quite seemed to fit, perhaps an extraordinary one was in order.

Aliens.

Read the remainder of this entry »

32 Comments so far. Join the Conversation

I cannot tell if this is supposed to be some sort of Onion Parody. These days, one never knows.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/611992/Scientists-experiment-magnets-immigrants-God-magnetic-waves

I reproduce the whole column, so that I cannot be accused of exaggeration. Read it and luxuriate in the pure quill stupidity.

A bizarre experiment claims to be able to make Christians no longer believe in God and make Britons open their arms to migrants in experiments some may find a threat to their values.

Scientists looked at how the brain resolves abstract ideological problems.

Using a technique called transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), researchers safely shut down certain groups of neurones in the brains of volunteers.

TMS, which is used to treat depression, involves placing a large electromagnetic coil against the scalp which creates electric currents that stimulate nerve cells in the region of the brain involved in mood control.

Researchers found the technique radically altered religious perceptions and prejudice.

Belief in God was reduced almost by a third, while participants became 28.5 per cent less bothered by immigration numbers.

Dr Keise Izuma, from the University of York, said: “People often turn to ideology when they are confronted by problems.

“We wanted to find out whether a brain region that is linked with solving concrete problems, like deciding how to move one’s body to overcome an obstacle, is also involved in solving abstract problems addressed by ideology.”

The scientists targeted the posterior medial frontal cortex, a brain region a few inches up from the forehead that is associated with detecting and responding to problems.

Volunteers were asked to rate their belief in God, heaven, the devil, and hell after undergoing pre-screening to ensure that they held religious convictions.

Dr Izuma said: “We decided to remind people of death because previous research has shown that people turn to religion for comfort in the face of death.

“As expected, we found that when we experimentally turned down the posterior medial frontal cortex, people were less inclined to reach for comforting religious ideas despite having been reminded of death.”

The American participants were also shown two essays written by newly arrived immigrants – one highly complimentary of the US and the other extremely critical.

Dr Izuma said: “When we disrupted the brain region that usually helps detect and respond to threats, we saw a less negative, less ideologically motivated reaction to the critical author and his opinions.”

The research, published in the journal Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, suggests our brains use the same basic mental pathways to solve practical problems such as following directions or ideological issues such as immigration and religion.

Lead author Dr Colin Holbrook, form the the University of California at Los Angeles, said: “These findings are very striking, and consistent with the idea that brain mechanisms that evolved for relatively basic threat-response functions are re-purposed to also produce ideological reactions.”

My comment:

We will discover later that the section of the brain affected deals with rational thinking, and once the magnetic flows hinder that, belief in God and worry about earthly dangers both are soothed away. I assume a similar study performed before and after a few stiff drinks will produce the same results.

Moronic.

I assume the simple basics of scientific thinking are unknown to Selina Sykes, the writer of this absurd article, or that she knows nothing about control groups, cause and effect, or basic logic.

What the articles is describing is an effect on the brain that produces a reduction of worry. When people worry less, they show less fear, even of things of which they should be afraid.

I used to tend bar: strong drink impairs judgment. Underestimating a threat is not courage, it is impaired judgment. Likewise, strong drink impaired the type of critical, rational thinking that supports belief in God, or, for that matter, belief in Special Relativity.

The column does not mention how many participants started believing that faster than light drive or time travel were possible after the transcranial magnetic stimulation.

I am reminded of the shoddy scientific experiment used to support the metaphysical claim that free will was illusion, based on a detected neural action registered before the subject claimed to have formed the decision. The experiment took no account of other brain actions not registered, nor what the meaning of that particular brain action was: as if the pounding of the gavel, since it came before the Judge made a ruling, was the cause of the Judges ruling, hence proving the Judge did not exist.

In my day, in my school, even schoolboys knew the meaning of post hoc ergo propter hoc. That newspaper hacks, a profession less honest than harlots or professional gamblers, would not know is unsurprising. That an alleged scientist would not is unforgivable.

 

128 Comments so far. Join the Conversation

The Best Introduction to the Mountains

Posted October 14, 2015 By John C Wright

For your reading pleasure, allow me to post this essay by the giant Gene Wolfe on the giant J.R.R. Tolkien. This is the second best essay on Tolkien I have ever read.

(The best was by the giantess Ursula K. Leguin, whose title my memory, cluttered with mathoms, has misplaced, but I recall the gist of the final line, and I recall the stinging tear of joy it brought to my eye: Elenor and Nembrithel no longer grow in Galadriel’s enchanted wood, but linger as the names of the happy hobbit daughters of Master Samwise in the Shire, or hidden among the roses planted in his humble garden.)

It is, however, the best title for an essay I ever read. It was not until two decades after I read this title that I got the point, for this is the last line of the short story ‘Leaf by Niggle’, where the unfinished artwork of Niggle is used by heaven as in introduction to the deeper and higher joys beyond art to which art (when done correctly) points, and Prof. Tolkien’s art more than most.

At one time, this essay had been available in whole at Andy Robertson’s ‘The Night Land’ website, but with that fine man’s passing, the essay cannot be found.

Enjoy.

The Best Introduction to the Mountains

by Gene Wolfe

 

There is one very real sense in which the Dark Ages were the brightest of times, and it is this: that they were times of defined and definite duties and freedoms. The king might rule badly, but everyone agreed as to what good rule was. Not only every earl and baron but every carl and churl knew what an ideal king would say and do. The peasant might behave badly; but the peasant did not expect praise for it, even his own praise. These assertions can be quibbled over endlessly, of course; there are always exceptional persons and exceptional circumstances. Nevertheless they represent a broad truth about Christianized barbarian society as a whole, and arguments that focus on exceptions provide a picture that is fundamentally false, even when the instances on which they are based are real and honestly presented. At a time when few others knew this, and very few others understood its implications, J. R. R. Tolkien both knew and understood, and was able to express that understanding in art, and in time in great art.

That, I believe, was what drew me to him so strongly when I first encountered The Lord of the Rings. As a child I had been taught a code of conduct: I was to be courteous and considerate, and most courteous and most considerate of those less strong than I — of girls and women, and of old people especially. Less educated men might hold inferior positions, but that did not mean that they themselves were inferior; they might be (and often would be) wiser, braver, and more honest than I was. They were entitled to respect, and were to be thanked when they befriended me, even in minor matters. Legitimate authority was to be obeyed without shirking and without question. Mere strength (the corrupt coercion Washington calls power and Chicago clout) was to be defied. It might be better to be a slave than to die, but it was better to die than to be a slave who acquiesced in his own slavery. Above all, I was to be honest with everyone. Debts were to be paid, and my word was to be as good as I could make it.

With that preparation I entered the Mills of Mordor, where courtesy is weakness, honesty is foolishness, and cruelty is entertainment.

I was living in a club for men, a place much like a YMCA. I was thoroughly wretched in half a dozen ways (much more so than I had ever been in college or the Army), but for the first time in my life I had enough money to subscribe to magazines and even buy books in hardcover. Planet Stories, Thrilling Wonder Stories, Weird Tales, and Famous Fantastic Mysteries — pulps I had read as a boy while hiding behind the candy counter in the Richmond Pharmacy — were gone; but Astounding Stories lingered as a digest-size magazine a bit less costly than most paperback books. There was also The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction, put out by the same company that had published Curtains for the Copper and other Mercury Mysteries that my mother and I had devoured. I subscribed to both, and to any other magazines dealing with science fiction or fantasy that could locate.

Here I must do someone (quite likely the late Anthony Boucher) a grave injustice. I no longer recall who wrote the review I read in Fantasy & Science Fiction. It was a glowing review, and I would quote at length from it if I could. It convinced me then and there that I must read The Lord of the Rings. In those days (the middle 1950s, if you can conceive of a period so remote) the magazine offered books for sale — one might write enclosing a cheque, and receive the book one had ordered by mail. Accustomed as you are to ordering from Amazon.com, you will deride so primitive a system; but you have never been a friendless young man in a strange city far from home. Now that you have enjoyed yourself, please keep in mind that the big-box stores we are accustomed to did not exist. There was no cavernous Barnes & Noble stocking a thousand titles under Science Fiction and Fantasy, no two-tiered Borders rejoicing in a friendly coffee shop and a dozen helpful clerks. There were (if the city was large and one was lucky) one or two old-line book shops downtown; they carried bestsellers, classics like Anna Karenina, cookbooks, and books of local interest, with a smattering of other things, mostly humour and books about dogs. The city in which I was living also boasted a glorious used-book store, five floors and a cellar, in which one might find the most amazing things; but these things did not include science fiction or much fantasy — the few who were fortunate enough to own those books kept them. There may have been speciality shops already in New York; there very probably were. But if there were, they could not have specialized in fantasy or science fiction. Or in horror, for that matter. It was a surprise, a distinct departure from the usual publishing practices, whenever any such book appeared.

An example may make the reason clear. In 1939, August Derleth and Donald Wandrei had published twelve hundred copies of H. P. Lovecraft’s The Outsider and Others, at their own expense. Fanzines had publicized their effort widely and with enthusiasm; but selling those twelve hundred books, which cost three dollars and fifty cents before publication and five dollars after, took four years.

The copy of The Fellowship of the Ring that I received from Fantasy & Science Fiction lies on my desk as I write. It is, I suppose, the first American edition; it was issued in 1956 (the year in which I bought it) by the Houghton Mifflin Company of Boston. It is gold-stamped, and is bound in cloth the colour of slightly faded denim. Its elegant dust jacket vanished long ago, though I still recall it. Its back board holds a much-folded map of Middle-earth, sixteen inches on a side, showing among other places the Shire, the Lost Realm of Arnor, Mirkwood, the Brown Lands, Rohan, and Gondor. On its half-title there is now a quotation from Thoreau that I inscribed in blue ink many years ago. I give it because its presence on that slightly yellowed page should convey to you more of what this book meant to me in those days than anything that I might write in my little essay possibly could.

Our fabled shores none ever reach,
No mariner has found our beach,
Scarcely our mirage is seen,
And Neighbouring waves of floating green,
Yet still the oldest charts contain
Some dotted outline of our main.

Read the remainder of this entry »

12 Comments so far. Join the Conversation