 First paperback edition. The cover image showsTolkien with a favourite tree.[1] | |
| Author | Paul H. Kocher |
|---|---|
| Language | English |
| Subject | J. R. R. Tolkien |
| Genre | Tolkien studies |
| Publisher | Houghton Mifflin |
Publication date | 1972 |
| Publication place | United States |
| Media type | Hardcover (paperback, 1973) |
| Pages | 247 |
| ISBN | 978-0-395-14097-0 |
Master of Middle-earth: The Fiction of J. R. R. Tolkien, alternatively subtitledThe Achievement of J.R.R. Tolkien, is a 1972 book of literary criticism ofJ. R. R. Tolkien'sMiddle-earth fantasy writings, written byPaul H. Kocher, and one of the few to be published in Tolkien's lifetime. It focuses especially onThe Lord of the Rings andThe Hobbit, and also covers some of his minor works such as "Leaf by Niggle" and "Smith of Wootton Major".
At a time whenscholars were largely critical of Tolkien andhis prose style, it both praised his writing and, in the absence of eitherThe Silmarillion orChristopher Tolkien'sThe History of Middle-earth on the process of creation of Tolkien's fiction, it correctly inferred many of hismajor themes. It was one of the earliest book-lengthanalyses of Tolkien's work, winning Kocher the 1973Mythopoeic Society's Scholarship inInkling Studies Award.
J. R. R. Tolkien (1892–1973) was a scholar of English literature, aphilologist andmedievalist interested in language and poetry from theMiddle Ages, especially that ofAnglo-Saxon England and Northern Europe.[2] His professional knowledge ofBeowulf, telling of a pagan world but with a Christian narrator,[3]helped to shape his fictional world of Middle-earth. His intention to create what has been called "a mythology for England"[4] led him to construct not only stories but a fully-formed world,Middle-earth, withinvented languages,peoples, cultures, andhistory. Amonghis many influences were his ownRoman Catholic faith, andmedieval languages and literature.[2] He is best known as the author of thehigh fantasy worksThe Hobbit (1937),The Lord of the Rings (1954–1955), andThe Silmarillion (1977), all set in Middle-earth.[5]
The earlyliterary reception ofThe Lord of the Rings was divided between enthusiastic support by figures such asW. H. Auden andC. S. Lewis, and outright rejection by critics such asEdmund Wilson.[6]
Paul H. Kocher was a scholar of English literature.[7] The book was published beforeThe Silmarillion appeared to confirm several of Kocher's inferences about the mythical history of Middle-earth.[8]
The book was first published in hardback byHoughton Mifflin in the United States in October 1972. The first British edition was brought out byThames & Hudson in hardback in 1973, with the titleMaster of Middle-earth: The Achievement of J.R.R. Tolkien. Paperback editions followed: byPenguin Books in 1974,Ballantine Books in 1977,Pimlico in 2002, andDel Rey in 2003.[9] The book has been translated into Dutch, French, German, Italian, Polish, and Swedish.[10] The book was reprinted several times, such as in New York:Ballantine Books, 1977;[11] New York:Del Rey, 1982;[12] and London:Pimlico, 2002.[13]
Translations include:
The book has seven chapters, a "Bibliographical Note" onTolkien's publications, academic notes, and a full index. The chapters cover:
Perceptions of Kocher's work have changed with the publication ofThe Silmarillion and ofThe History of Middle-earth, which appeared after the contemporary reviews were written.[14]
The scholar of English literature, Glenn Edward Sadler, reviewing the book inChristianity Today in 1973, wrote that Kocher had provided a "survey narrative", both scholarly and readable, of Tolkien's blend of reality and fantasy. The book ably described Tolkien's "theory of artistic creation (secondary world building), major philosophical and religious ideas, and moral imperatives", and evaluated hisconstruction of myth.[15]
Veronica Kennedy, in her 1973 review forExtrapolation, praised Kocher's boldness in attempting to cover the whole of Tolkien's Middle-earth oeuvre, but thought that the origins ofThe Lord of the Rings in medieval "epics and romances" likeThe Faerie Queene andSir Gawain should have been explored in more depth, as well as the influence of Tolkien's contemporaries likeC. S. Lewis.[16]
Nicholas Tucker, writing inNew Society in 1973, criticised the book, calling it "yet another undistinguished addition" to the body of literature on Tolkien. Tucker further wrote that "Nor isMaster of Middle-Earth the type of book one could recommend 'for enthusiasts only'. I can't imagine many readers of Tolkien's mysterious, numinous story would want this sort of chattering commentary, ever-eager to analyse character, hand out good conduct marks for heroism, and really dig, say, the difference between a dwarf and an elf."[17]
Nancy-Lou Patterson, inMythlore in 1975, welcomed the book, stating that "Kocher'sMaster of Middle-earth is just the sort of study of Tolkien's ability as a master 'sub-creator' which his admirers have often felt ought to be written and which many of them will probably wish they had had the good sense to write themselves. ... The result is a thorough, brilliant, and warmly sympathetic exploration of the several 'other worlds' of which Tolkien has become the master."[18]
Charles W. Nelson, inJournal of the Fantastic in the Arts, noting that the book was one of the first scholarly studies of Tolkien, wrote in 1994 that it contained "one of the most complete discussions of love andemotional attachments in the trilogy, including a fascinating treatment of self-love and its injurious affects on the evil characters".[19] The science fiction authorKaren Haber called the book the "highest point" of academic criticism of Tolkien during his lifetime.[20]
The scholar of religion Paul Nolan Hyde wrote inReligious Educator that Kocher was one of the earlyscholars who took Tolkien seriously, praising rather than decryinghis prose style and his "real mastery as a writer" which (he quotes Kocher) "consists in his power to establish for each individual race a personality that is unmistakably its own... Further, each race has not only its gifts but also its private tragedy, which it must try to overcome as best it can."[21]
The Tolkien scholarRichard C. West wrote inThe J. R. R. Tolkien Encyclopedia that Kocher had written "the finest book from this [early] period ... [it] looks closely and deeply at the whole body of Tolkien's work to that time. Its insights have held up well for decades."[6]
The evolutionary psychiatrist and Tolkien criticBruce Charlton wrote that the book was the "first really good piece of book length critical work" on Tolkien, noting that it came out just before Tolkien's death. It thus embodied "a lost perspective", absent all Tolkien's posthumously-published writings, including the 12-volumeThe History of Middle-earth which appeared in the following decades. In Charlton's view, the book therefore has permanent value. He notes that Kocher flags up or discusses in detail nearly all the key points about Tolkien, making educated inferences that were later confirmed byChristopher Tolkien's lengthy research among his father's papers.[14]
Carol Leibiger, writing inJournal of the Fantastic in the Arts, commented that "Kocher ... was unable to includeThe Silmarillion ... in his study, and he never revised this work to include it, which diminishes its usefulness for any audience seeking to understand Tolkien's Middle-Earth works."[22]
TheJesuit priest John L. Treloar wrote inMythlore that Kocher notices Tolkien's tendency to move away from personifying evil towards making it an abstract entity, but ascribes this to Tolkien's familiarity as aRoman Catholic with the writings ofThomas Aquinas. Treloar argues that Aquinas derived his concepts fromSaint Augustine. He explains that Augustine had argued that God is entirely good, making it awkward to explain how evil could exist; Augustine wrestled with this, concluding that everything that God had created was good in the beginning. Treloar writes that the artist in Tolkien would have been attracted by Augustine's struggle. He notes that if Kocher had had the help ofThe Silmarillion, he might have seen thatTolkien's Augustinian view of evil as the absence of good was "even more pervasive [in Middle-earth] than Kocher realizes".[23]
In 1973 Kocher won theMythopoeic Society's Scholarship inInkling Studies Award forMaster of Middle-Earth.[24]
Nor isMaster of Middle-Earth the type of book one could recommend 'for enthusiasts only'. I can't imagine many readers of Tolkien's mysterious, numinous story would want this sort of chattering commentary, ever-eager to analyse character, hand out good conduct marks for heroism, and really dig, say, the difference between a dwarf and an elf. [...] Tolkien himself denies any interpretations, but then story-tellers often do. He has also, of course, good reason to dislike and discourage most of the linked industry that has grown up around his books to which, I fear, Paul Kocher's book is yet another undistinguished addition.
