The Children of Hurin, by J. R. R. Tolkien

(Yes, I finally got around to reading this book.)



The trouble with Tolkien’s Middle Earth writing,
apart from The Lord of the Rings, is the acute lack of hobbits. It’s hard to carry off the high heroic tone for a modern audience without offering non-heroic, funny intermediaries with whom the modern reader can identify. The moment I came up with the character of Father Aillil for my Erling books, I understood that the books could work. Modern readers find purely heroic characters and situations kind of clunky. I say it to our shame, but there are few old-style heroes among us (I’m talking about a whole cultural ethic here, not people who do heroic things), and we experience culture shock when we encounter such characters.

I’m not saying The Children of Húrin fails for this reason. I read it with great enjoyment. But you should be prepared for a rather different experience than what you get from Tolkien’s masterwork. If you’ve read The Silmarillion, you know what I mean, and indeed you will have read this story already, in a different form.

The Children of Húrin has been compared to an Icelandic saga. That’s true, if you’re thinking of the high heroic sagas, like the Volsunga Saga, sagas about heroes of old who were larger than life in every way—braver, crueler, more passionate than you and I.

Húrin is not the hero of this book, but his story frames it. At the beginning we learn how he earns the enmity of Glaurung, the evil dragon, who curses him and his family, then forces him to sit watching on a mountain as the curse works itself out. At the end he reappears for a brief epilogue.

The central character is his son Túrin, who (as the Vikings would have put it) has every good quality except for luck. Mighty and brave in battle, devoted to his family and friends, he nevertheless takes every wrong turn. He makes disastrous choices, trusts the wrong people, is offended by his best friends and offends those who should be his allies. In the end the dragon’s curse works itself out in his personal relationships, in a manner worthy of Greek tragedy (something Tolkien imposes on the saga form here, like the recent movie, “Beowulf”). Pity and terror are here in full measure.

I enjoyed it a lot, but it wasn’t lighthearted reading.

Recommended for serious-minded readers. I think it would be all right even for younger teens, if they’re mature.

You’ve Got a Great Band

So, what’s it like to be a guitarist? Dan Skidmore says:

Without a doubt, the single biggest misconception people have about being a professional guitarist is that it is all about your technique on guitar . . . Unless you are Yngwie Malmsteen, being a professional guitarist is primarily about relating to and working well with other musicians. I bet even Mr. Malmsteen has had to say he’s sorry a couple times.

For example, one band I worked for was auditioning bass players. Following the auditions, we talked not only about each bassist’s skills, but also about what we termed his “potential jerk factor.” (We actually used a different word for “jerk.”) We would be spending a lot of time with anyone we hired. Is he pleasant to be around? Is he likely to show up for things on time? Will he do his share of all the work that goes into a gig? These considerations are at least as important as the musicianship. Any working musician will take a solid player with a good attitude over a virtuoso who is a pain.

De mortuis

On days like this, I should be legally barred from posting. We’ve got the deaths of not one but two pop icons from my youth, on top of the ongoing awfulness in Iran (which everybody seems to have forgotten all of a sudden), topped by the systematic transformation of our country into a European-style social democracy. Hmm, what shall the tone of tonight’s blog post be?

Speaking personally, Michael Jackson never really took up much of my mental square footage (and I do mean square). He was one of those phenomena, like the Rocky Horror Picture Show, that I observed from afar, uncomprehending.

But Farrah! The perfect face, at the perfect time of my life for emotional imprinting. She even resembled (sort of, in a distant way, in the right light) the girl who’d broken my heart about a year previously.

FARRAH FAWCETT

I forget what night of the week “Charlie’s Angels” was on. I do recall that it was opposite “Grizzly Adams,” because my roommate was a huge GA fan, while I always wanted to see CA. I don’t recall how we worked it out. Very likely we took turns. There was only the one TV. Continue reading De mortuis

In Defense of Shakespeare’s Christianity

Leland Ryken rejoices to find Christian allusions galore in Shakespeare’s writing. “[S]cholars who are attuned to the Christian element in Shakespeare’s plays correctly observe that there is sometimes a gratuitous element in Shakespeare’s Christian allusions, meaning that Shakespeare incorporates Christian references beyond what seem to be strictly required by the context.”

Does that mean the great bard was a genuine believer? No, but he had a fairly Christian mind in his writing.

“The world that Shakespeare creates in As You Like It is approximately the same as the religiously-saturated world of the farms around Pella, Iowa, on which I was raised. While a writer can create a Christian world only to mock it, Shakespeare adopts a sympathetic stance to what he portrays in As You Like It.”

“It isn’t all about his heart”

Chad “The Elder” Dowdy over at Fraters Libertas (a proud Minnesota blog) says the words I was groping for about the Mark Sanford scandal:

The other thing that bothered me about Sanford’s commitment to “get my heart right” is that this isn’t all about his heart. Sanford is a Christian (Episcopal) and I know that he talked about his faith during the press conference. However, I’m surprised that a bigger part of his contrition wasn’t focused on the sins he committed against God. It’s great that you’re going to work on getting your heart right Gov, but how about getting right with God? When you blindly follow your heart (or other parts of the anatomy) you easily can stray from God’s path.

“The Assassination of Jesse James By the Coward Robert Ford”

Just got an e-mail today from a reader (not of West Oversea, but of The Year of the Warrior) who thanked me for it somewhat ruefully. This person said that the story had given them the courage to turn down an employment opportunity which would have involved violating their conscience.

I am not a good enough man to have this effect on people.

I saw the movie, “The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford,” on DVD over the weekend. It’s one of those movies that got dynamite reviews but never received the distribution it deserved. And it must be admitted that it’s not popcorn fare.

I read the book it was based on, written by Ron Hansen, way back in the ’70s, when it first came out. As best as I can tell at this distance, the movie follows the novel pretty closely. Continue reading “The Assassination of Jesse James By the Coward Robert Ford”

Happy birthday, Sissel

Today is Sissel Kyrkjebo’s birthday.

Here’s a video of her doing a lovely Swedish hymn, “Bred Dina Vida Vingar,” (Spread Wide Thy Wings) during a concert tour in the Faeroe Islands. This was back in 1991, before she was spoiled by success and cut her hair short.

My campaign of misinformation

Ori, in a customarily generous comment on my previous post, spoke of the “Edutainment” value of my Viking novels, that people learn history from them. I like to think there’s some truth in that. But it got me thinking about the historical errors that I nevertheless do promulgate in my books. A few historical errors that come to mind follow:

1. In my books, Erling’s father Skjalg dies about the year 994, very close to the beginning of the story. In real life, according to the sagas, Skjalg was killed in a slave rebellion while Erling was still a young boy. How I got it wrong: This particular part of Erling’s story is not found in Heimskringla, my primary source. It comes from a reference in another saga, which I’d never heard of when I wrote Erling’s Word. I covered my tracks in The Year of the Warrior by referring to the slave rebellion, but having Skjalg survive it.

2. The traditional dates for King Olaf Trygvesson’s reign are 995 to 1000 A.D. But if you read The Year of the Warrior and pay close attention, you’ll see that only four years are reported, rather than five. How I got it wrong: I had no use for another year, so I ignored it. This is the sort of thing you can get away with in a novel, most of the time.

3. Erling tells Father Aillil that, although his father was a heathen, he himself was converted to Christianity after a raid in Ireland. In fact, historians believe that Jaeder (Erling’s original area of influence) was Christianized as far back as the reign of Haakon the Good. Heathen graves in the area disappear around that time, according to archaeologists. In all likelihood, the real Skjalg was a Christian. How I got it wrong: This was something else I didn’t learn until Erling’s Word had been published. I paper it over by mentioning that Christianity has become popular in Jaeder, and the heathen are feeling threatened. And frankly, it’s more dramatic to make Erling a rebel against his father’s religion. I might have chosen to do it that way even if I had known.

4. I speak of King Harald Finehair and his family as coming from eastern Norway, and of Olaf Trygvesson as being Harald’s descendent. Both those contentions are based on Heimskringla, and both are questioned by historians today. Historians from western Norway have been fighting hard in the last few years for the idea that Harald (traditionally the first king of a united Norway) came from the west, and that later saga writers, in order to legitimize the reigning dynasty, made him an easterner. (Apparently they’ve been having trouble with that, though, and a compromise is being hammered out.) It does seem clear that Olaf Trygvesson (and the later St. Olaf Haraldsson) were not descendants of Harald. How I got it wrong: Again, I didn’t know about these things when I wrote. But you know, I’m dealing with a national epic here. Trying to be too meticulous wouldn’t buy me much. And ten years down the road, historians will probably have changed their minds again anyway.

What If Broadway Challenged Liberal Ideology?

Michael Riedel writes on two politically conservative plays working the ropes to get produced in New York.

But wouldn’t it be novel if, every once in a while, a show did more than reaffirm what theater people know to be the absolute truth? . . .

“Reagan” is a one-man play that doesn’t portray the 40th president as a fascist. It’s by Lionel Chetwynd, whose scripts for television and film include “The Hanoi Hilton,” “Color of Justice,” “Kissinger and Nixon” and “DC 9/11: Time of Crisis.”

The other play is “Girls in Trouble (Formerly Three Abortions)” by Jonathan Reynolds, one of the few openly conservative members of the Dramatists Guild.

His play “Stonewall Jackson’s House,” a sharp attack on political correctness, was a Pulitzer Prize finalist in 1998.

(via ArtsJournal)

Book Reviews, Creative Culture