Yes,  I see what you have been driving at;  I have yet to read this book...  I
was saying earlier that the asians view dragons as good and not evil...   Sorry,
I don't remember everthing I said...
You did raise some good points with LOTR, and HDM, though...
Jonathan Michael Reiter
jmr
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: jef.murray
   To: mythsoc@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Monday, August 28, 2006 7:49 AM
   Subject: [mythsoc] Re: Landscape With Dragons


   Greetings!

   I have to take exception here. O'Brien is not a
   fundamentalist, (an orthodox Catholic could never
   be so considered) and "Landscape with Dragons" is hardly
   an anti-fantasy diatribe. O'Brien is very highly
   respected as a Catholic writer and artist, and his own
   books have touched and inspired millions.

   "Landscape with Dragons" may not appeal to the
   tastes of many pro-fantasy folk, but it provides
   insightful commentary on how modernism has coopted
   images that traditionally were used to denote evil. It
   has "watered them down" for general consumption;
   thereby reducing them to a bland relativist mishmash
   that makes no sense and teaches no worthwhile truths.

   As an example of this, I offer for your
   consideration the written version of the original two
   "Jungle Books" by Kipling versus the Disney film. The
   books were ofttimes dark and dealt with many adult
   themes. Compare and contrast them with the Disney
   desecration and you have a sense of some of the issues
   O'Brien deals with in "Landscape".

   Another, perhaps more accurate, comparison would be
   to look at "The Lord of the Rings" in comparison to
   the "His Dark Materials" trilogy. The former has deep
   traditional lessons to impart to the reader, and draws
   on the wisdom of myth and northern legend for these.
   The latter is a moralistic mess whose ultimate
   conclusion, as far as I could ever tell, was that
   nothing really matters and that one achieves salvation
   through premarital sex. The former is a book that
   draws on a "premodern" mindset; the latter is, sadly,
   extremely modern.

   Jef

   P.S. Yes, there _are_ cultures that depict dragons as
   ambivalent or even good omens. But O'Brien is dealing
   with occidental, not oriental, tradition and literature.






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Lizlie

There were several nice looking Best Westerns in that part of London, we
walked by them when we were staying there last year. Yes, an Amercan
franchise, but each hotel is individually owned, so they do have
personality, the prices at several of them are reasonable, and they
seemed nicer than the one we were staying at. Also they have High Speed
Internet and more comfort features. And you want comfort when you are
not well. So if you can afford it, go there. Best Western has a website
and they will show you their London Properties from a query at the front
page.

We stayed near Queensway which was nice, it is a major shopping spot.
Although the Queensway tube station was closed for renovations and the
Bayswater was one of the stations bombed, making getting around harder
than it should have been. *sigh* So check with the London Underground
Website to verify which stations are open before you book a room
anywhere. Still there were lots of shopping and food choices right there
at Queensway. We were difinitely not starving.

Our favorite place to eat was a place called Shish (website
www.shish.com) A what one would find along the Spice Road type of
fussion restaurant. Very good, with lots of interesting flavors. There
are several of them in London. One right off of Queensway in Bayswater.

As for Museums - Don't forget the Victoria and Albert. It's got a great
collection of stuff! Costumers are particularly fond of the V&A for
their clothing exhibits. Although it is huge, the floors are easily laid
out and most exhibits reasonably sized. The British Library is also fun!
They have several modest sized exhibits if you don't want to feel
overwhelmed.

The Tower is a lot of fun, but requires a lot of walking. Wait until you
have more energy.

Always remember, the Internet is your friend. You can go to all the
museum websites and find out when they are open, costs, and who has
exhibits you like before you even go to London, making your time more
meaningful.

Hope whatever is sending you to London gets better and you can have some
fun there.
Prayers are with you.
Mythically yours,
Lisa


lezlie1@... wrote:

> Dear Friends,
> I may be traveling to London -- the Paddington area -- in October for
> medical reasons; I won't have a lot of time or energy to do much
> sight-seeing (alas!) but would like any advice on lodging, dining or easy
> to get to attractions that you are willing to send. Not the best of
> reasons for my first visit-- I will probably be alone and be there 10-14
> days. I will also have to return several times after that. Thank you,
> Lezlie
>
>
>

I've now read most of O'Brien's book, and I have to say I'm
disappointed; I found it to have all the subtly of a Jack Chick
pamphlet. Among the authors he warns against in the chapter on
"Neopagan Literature for Children" as not Christian enough are
Madeleine L'Engle (whom he considers a "Christian Neopagan"), Lloyd
Alexander, some works by Steven Lawhead, Terry Brooks (gotta agree
with him on this one), Anne McCaffrey, and especially Ursula Le Guin
(he leaves out the "K."), whom he considers a Gnostic (thus showing
that he doesn't know what gnosticism is). He also hates the Disney
movie Aladdin, but I haven't read that part yet to find out why (I
assume the genie). The only three fantasy authors he actually
recommends are Tolkien, Lewis (except for THS), and MacDonald (except
for "The Golden Key"), though CSL is the only one of these he treats
in depth; the 90-page reading list his publishers put in the back of
the book I noticed includes Carol Kendall, though some of its other
choices are a bit bizarre). Matt I think has it right when he says
that for O'Brien, no symbol ever changes its meaning. For me
personally the strangest bit was O'Brien's advice on what to do if
you found out your child had played D&D, or was "fooling around with"
an Ouija board, or had been exposed to "sinister video games" (his
own children aren't allowed to watch tv, either at their own house or
those of others, and were exposed only the "gentle stories"):

     "He [the parent] should ask God for spiritual protection for his
family (a prayer that should be made daily). He should plead for the
Blood of Jesus to cover his home and each member of his family. He
should ask for the protection of the holy angels to surround and fill
his home and family and for special graces to be given to his
children's guardian angels. He should invoke the intercession of the
saints and all holy angels, including Saint Michael the Archangel,
protector of the Church, the one who cast Satan out of heaven. He
should pray to the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God, who has been
given a special role during these times as an instrument to defeat
Satan's plans.
     "Then he should pray for the specific grace to meet this
particular crisis . . ."   --he also notes that resorting the fasting
may be required. He ends his book with a defense of intolerance,
arguing that intolerance is acceptable given "the urgency of the
crisis".

     Unfortunately (?), the book was written in 1998, so there's no
mention of Harry Potter. Rather surprisingly, he also doesn't seem to
have ever heard of Philip Pullman's THE GOLDEN COMPASS, which is a
pretty serious omission even then. So even if you were interested in
his theory, you'll find his applications sadly out of date.
     The short version: don't bother reading this book to find out
anything about Tolkien or Lewis or fantasy.
     The long version: if you want to understand the mindset that
condemns everything supernatural as Satanic, O'Brien's book is as
good a place as any, but you'd be more entertained by a Jack Chick
pamphlet, which is just as intolerant but at least has pictures.

--John R.


>   From: jef.murray
>   Sent: Monday, August 28, 2006 7:49 AM

>   I have to take exception here. O'Brien is not a
>   fundamentalist, (an orthodox Catholic could never
>   be so considered)

Afraid you've lost me here; can you explain?

John,

Thank you for the warning!

Hope everyone is having a nice Labor Day.

Cathy

In Catholic circles, O'Brien is a well-known critic (unsurprisingly)
of HP as furthering the cause of the occult, witchcraft, etc. This is,
of course, one of the several areas with which I must respectfully
disagree with him. I think the person who pointed out that there is a
tendency here to deny the fluidity of symbols was spot on. It reminds
me a bit of some of the Protestant fundamentalists who would cancel
Christmas because Dec. 21 was once a pagan winter solstice festival.
Christianity, of course, has two thousand years of history (ongoing)
involving the "baptism", as it were, of pagan symbols, customs,
notions, whole philosophies. Ultimately, I believe the
"Christianability" of HP will be proved or disproved only when book 7
appears, and I vote (after re-reading the series thus far several
times) for the probability of the former.

O'Brien is a Tolkien fan, but I tend to find that most of his
arguments against HP could be just as easily turned on Tolkien. Just
as there are examples of conversion and even religious vocations among
Christians from reading Tolkien, there are any number of pagans and
Wiccans out there who regard Tolkien and his subcreation as prime
inspiration. Abusus non tollit usum. as the old saw goes.

For more info, O'Brien's views on HP are expressed here:
http://www.lifesite.net/features/harrypotter/obrienpotter.html, and
were criticized by Sandra Miesel (sci-fi writer and co-author of "The
Da Vinci Hoax") here:
http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/arts/al0105.html.

Debra Murphy
www.debramurphy.com


   _____

From: mythsoc@yahoogroups.com [mailto:mythsoc@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of John D Rateliff

Unfortunately (?), the book was written in 1998, so there's no
mention of Harry Potter...  _,_._,___



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

"Abusus non tollit usum.  Fantasy remains a human right: we make in our
measure and in our derivative mode, because we are made: and not only
made, but made in the image and likeness of a Maker."
--JRRT, "On Fairy Stories"

Debra Murphy wrote:

>In Catholic circles, O'Brien is a well-known critic (unsurprisingly)
>of HP as furthering the cause of the occult, witchcraft, etc. This is,
>of course, one of the several areas with which I must respectfully
>disagree with him. I think the person who pointed out that there is a
>tendency here to deny the fluidity of symbols was spot on. It reminds
>me a bit of some of the Protestant fundamentalists who would cancel
>Christmas because Dec. 21 was once a pagan winter solstice festival.
>Christianity, of course, has two thousand years of history (ongoing)
>involving the "baptism", as it were, of pagan symbols, customs,
>notions, whole philosophies. Ultimately, I believe the
>"Christianability" of HP will be proved or disproved only when book 7
>appears, and I vote (after re-reading the series thus far several
>times) for the probability of the former.
>
>O'Brien is a Tolkien fan, but I tend to find that most of his
>arguments against HP could be just as easily turned on Tolkien. Just
>as there are examples of conversion and even religious vocations among
>Christians from reading Tolkien, there are any number of pagans and
>Wiccans out there who regard Tolkien and his subcreation as prime
>inspiration. Abusus non tollit usum. as the old saw goes.
>
>For more info, O'Brien's views on HP are expressed here:
>http://www.lifesite.net/features/harrypotter/obrienpotter.html, and
>were criticized by Sandra Miesel (sci-fi writer and co-author of "The
>Da Vinci Hoax") here:
>http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/arts/al0105.html.
>
>Debra Murphy
>www.debramurphy.com
>
>
>  _____
>
>From: mythsoc@yahoogroups.com [mailto:mythsoc@yahoogroups.com] On
>Behalf Of John D Rateliff
>
>Unfortunately (?), the book was written in 1998, so there's no
>mention of Harry Potter...  _,_._,___
>
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>The Mythopoeic Society website http://www.mythsoc.org
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

On Sep 4, 2006, at 10:32 AM, Mike Foster wrote:

> "Abusus non tollit usum. Fantasy remains a human right: we make in our
> measure and in our derivative mode, because we are made: and not only
> made, but made in the image and likeness of a Maker."
> --JRRT, "On Fairy Stories"

True enough, but that doesn't mean that Tolkien felt that "anything
goes" in the name of Fantasy and sub-creation: his statement rests
upon our being made, and hence our making, "_in the image and
likeness of a Maker_". Does anyone think that Tolkien would apply
this as license for, say, the "fantasies" of the Marquis de Sade, and
thus have no moral objection, or see any moral danger, in them?
Indeed, are not the lies of Morgoth a clear example within Tolkien's
own subcreation of morally dangerous fables _par excellence_? I
expect that we can agree then that Tolkien believed that there ARE
moral limitation on the "right" to Fantasy, especially as he did
believe those rights to derive ultimately from a Maker; and so,
further, that, while we may disagree on just where those limits lie
(and will, as we don't all share the same philosophical/moral/
religious systems), discussing them (politely, of course),
particularly with respect to some philosophical/moral/religious
system, is _per se_ neither unjustified nor unreasonable.

Carl

Lisa wrote:

>There were several nice looking Best Westerns in that part of London, we
>walked by them when we were staying there last year. Yes, an Amercan
>franchise, but each hotel is individually owned, so they do have
>personality, the prices at several of them are reasonable, and they
>seemed nicer than the one we were staying at. Also they have High Speed
>Internet and more comfort features. And you want comfort when you are
>not well. So if you can afford it, go there. Best Western has a website
>and they will show you their London Properties from a query at the front
>page.

A few years ago my wife and I stayed for a couple of nights at the Best
Western Paddington Court hotel. The rate was good, but the room was
uncomfortably small even by London standards (the "double" bed was more
like a slightly wider twin/single bed), the staff was surly, and the
breakfast was mediocre. We expected much better on the basis of the Best
Western website. Some of the folks posting complaints on the Tripadvisor
site had it even worse.

The best hotel in the Paddington area that I know (and the only other hotel
I've stayed in in that part of London) is the Paddington Hilton, connected
to the rail/Underground station: lovely Art Deco decor, good breakfast,
great location. It used to be one of the great railway hotels. But it's
expensive unless one can find a discount deal, as Christina and I did the
one time we stayed there.

As for London attractions, I must put in a plug for Sir John Soane's Museum
in Holborn. Soane was one of the great English architects and art
collectors. My wife was the Museum's librarian for more than twenty years,
and we had our wedding reception there.

Wayne


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

My response was prompted by the 'Abusus' quote from another on this
thread posted earlier; I had just finished re-reading 'OFS' in a clean
copy for my JRRT course at Bradley University for tonight's session so
it seemed an apt interjection.  Tolkien states his mislike of morbid
surrealism in that work, which wd. certainly apply to de Sade.  In any
event, no intention to inhibit polite discussion here.

Mike

Carl F. Hostetter wrote:

>On Sep 4, 2006, at 10:32 AM, Mike Foster wrote:
>
>
>
>>"Abusus non tollit usum. Fantasy remains a human right: we make in our
>>measure and in our derivative mode, because we are made: and not only
>>made, but made in the image and likeness of a Maker."
>>--JRRT, "On Fairy Stories"
>>
>>
>
>True enough, but that doesn't mean that Tolkien felt that "anything
>goes" in the name of Fantasy and sub-creation: his statement rests
>upon our being made, and hence our making, "_in the image and
>likeness of a Maker_". Does anyone think that Tolkien would apply
>this as license for, say, the "fantasies" of the Marquis de Sade, and
>thus have no moral objection, or see any moral danger, in them?
>Indeed, are not the lies of Morgoth a clear example within Tolkien's
>own subcreation of morally dangerous fables _par excellence_? I
>expect that we can agree then that Tolkien believed that there ARE
>moral limitation on the "right" to Fantasy, especially as he did
>believe those rights to derive ultimately from a Maker; and so,
>further, that, while we may disagree on just where those limits lie
>(and will, as we don't all share the same philosophical/moral/
>religious systems), discussing them (politely, of course),
>particularly with respect to some philosophical/moral/religious
>system, is _per se_ neither unjustified nor unreasonable.
>
>Carl
>
>
>
>
>The Mythopoeic Society website http://www.mythsoc.org
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In mythsoc@yahoogroups.com, John D Rateliff <sacnoth@...> wrote:
>

> >   From: jef.murray
> >   Sent: Monday, August 28, 2006 7:49 AM
>
> >   I have to take exception here. O'Brien is not a
> >   fundamentalist, (an orthodox Catholic could never
> >   be so considered)
>
> Afraid you've lost me here; can you explain?
>

John,

    Roman Catholics cannot, by definition, be called fundamentalist.
This is simply because Catholicism, unlike Christian fundamentalism,
does not insist that all truth is contained in scripture. In
Catholicism, there is ongoing revelation through the teachings of the
church (e.g., encyclicals and other documents approved by the church
Magesterium) and through the writings and teaching of saints
throughout the ages. The Catholic world looks for understanding of
complex situations through prayer and discernment. And its
understanding of God's revelations to man can and does change over
time, albeit generally in nuance, not in the basic tenets of the church.

    Fundamentalism, by contrast, insists that the truth of all
experience must be filtered through a fixed set of writings, and that
these writings are, in themselves, infallible. There are Christian
fundamentalists, and I believe that all of these are Protestant in
some form or fashion. There are also fundamentalist Muslims. And, for
all practical purposese, that term might be applied to any religion
that has a fixed and unchanging canon of scripture and that does not
believe in any authority outside of that scripture.

    I would agree with you that Michael O'Brien's positions might seem
somewhat like those of many fundamentalist Christians. However, to the
secular world, an orthodox Catholic can appear to be radically
conservative on some issues (e.g., abortion), while being
simulataneously radically liberal on others (e.g., being against the
war in Iraq, and being intolerant of societal poverty and inequality).
This "strange" balance is what defines Catholicism, as G.K. Chesterton
was fond of pointing out.

    I hope some of this helps....

            Jef

OK, kids, time for a definition break.

The word "fundamentalist," like any good word, can signify several different
concepts.  Typically, when one is discussing fundamentalist Christianity,
one is referring to a member of a church that subscribes to the five
fundamentals laid out by the Princeton Theological Seminary way back in
1910.  For those of you keeping score at home, these are:

1-The inerrancy of scripture
2-The virgin birth of Christ
3-Substitutionary atonement (a wonderful phrase that means that Christ's
death on the cross was meant to pay for the sins of all humanity, or at
least all Christian humanity)
4- Christ's bodily resurrection
5-The objective reality of Christ's miracles

Whether a Catholic could ever be considered a fundamentalist by this metric
really, as far as I can see, depends on how you define "inerrancy" in point
1.  Does belief in an ongoing revelation constitute a de facto admission
that scripture has erred in some points and must be corrected?  I shouldn't
think so, but I can also understand that a strict biblical literalist might
see the Catholic habit of reading certain stretches of scripture
metaphorically as just that.

In a more general sense, however, fundamentalist denotes a member of any
religion determined to reduce that religion to a few basic, easy to digest
doctrines.  In this sense, there are certainly fundamentalist Catholics (and
Protestants, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Zoroastrians...), though whether O'Brien
actually is one is beyond my ability to judge, as I have not read the book--
and even if I had, I would be wary about taking the arguments outlined in
what appears to be mostly a pastoral tool as indicative of the man's total
understanding.  There is an unfortunate, though understandable, tendency for
writing directed at a lay audience to greatly gloss over theological
complexities; this usually indicates the author's assesment of his or her
audience's intelligence far more than it does the author's own
understanding.

Alana

On 9/5/06, jef.murray <jef.murray@...> wrote:
>
>   --- In mythsoc@yahoogroups.com <mythsoc%40yahoogroups.com>, John D
> Rateliff <sacnoth@...> wrote:
> >
>
> > > From: jef.murray
> > > Sent: Monday, August 28, 2006 7:49 AM
> >
> > > I have to take exception here. O'Brien is not a
> > > fundamentalist, (an orthodox Catholic could never
> > > be so considered)
> >
> > Afraid you've lost me here; can you explain?
> >
>
> John,
>
> Roman Catholics cannot, by definition, be called fundamentalist.
> This is simply because Catholicism, unlike Christian fundamentalism,
> does not insist that all truth is contained in scripture. In
> Catholicism, there is ongoing revelation through the teachings of the
> church (e.g., encyclicals and other documents approved by the church
> Magesterium) and through the writings and teaching of saints
> throughout the ages. The Catholic world looks for understanding of
> complex situations through prayer and discernment. And its
> understanding of God's revelations to man can and does change over
> time, albeit generally in nuance, not in the basic tenets of the church.
>
> Fundamentalism, by contrast, insists that the truth of all
> experience must be filtered through a fixed set of writings, and that
> these writings are, in themselves, infallible. There are Christian
> fundamentalists, and I believe that all of these are Protestant in
> some form or fashion. There are also fundamentalist Muslims. And, for
> all practical purposese, that term might be applied to any religion
> that has a fixed and unchanging canon of scripture and that does not
> believe in any authority outside of that scripture.
>
> I would agree with you that Michael O'Brien's positions might seem
> somewhat like those of many fundamentalist Christians. However, to the
> secular world, an orthodox Catholic can appear to be radically
> conservative on some issues (e.g., abortion), while being
> simulataneously radically liberal on others (e.g., being against the
> war in Iraq, and being intolerant of societal poverty and inequality).
> This "strange" balance is what defines Catholicism, as G.K. Chesterton
> was fond of pointing out.
>
> I hope some of this helps....
>
> Jef
>
>
>



--
Alana Vincent Howard

770.419.8727


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thanks Jef; that explained the distinction very well. Appreciate your
taking the time to clarify this point for me.
    --John R.

P.S.: By the way, I shd have noted that O'Brien makes several
favorable references to Chesterton, whom he quotes respectfully,
though he doesn't discuss his fantasy. He doesn't address Charles
Williams at all, but then Williams' novels aren't targeted for young
readers so maybe he felt they were outside his scope. I'm curious
what he would make of Ruth Nichols' A WALK OUT OF THIS WORLD, but it
didn't even make the reading lists. On a closer look, I do see some
fantasy authors for children got listed: Lofting, Milne, Potter, a
little Yolen, Barrie, Lawson, McCloskey, White (E.B.).  Nesbit is
listed but only for a non-fantasy title.


On Sep 5, 2006, at 10:54 AM, jef.murray wrote:
>    Roman Catholics cannot, by definition, be called fundamentalist.
> This is simply because Catholicism, unlike Christian fundamentalism,
> does not insist that all truth is contained in scripture. In
> Catholicism, there is ongoing revelation through the teachings of the
> church (e.g., encyclicals and other documents approved by the church
> Magesterium) and through the writings and teaching of saints
> throughout the ages. The Catholic world looks for understanding of
> complex situations through prayer and discernment. And its
> understanding of God's revelations to man can and does change over
> time, albeit generally in nuance, not in the basic tenets of the
> church.
>
>    Fundamentalism, by contrast, insists that the truth of all
> experience must be filtered through a fixed set of writings, and that
> these writings are, in themselves, infallible. There are Christian
> fundamentalists, and I believe that all of these are Protestant in
> some form or fashion. There are also fundamentalist Muslims. And, for
> all practical purposes, that term might be applied to any religion
> that has a fixed and unchanging canon of scripture and that does not
> believe in any authority outside of that scripture.
>
>    I would agree with you that Michael O'Brien's positions might seem
> somewhat like those of many fundamentalist Christians. However, to the
> secular world, an orthodox Catholic can appear to be radically
> conservative on some issues (e.g., abortion), while being
> simulataneously radically liberal on others (e.g., being against the
> war in Iraq, and being intolerant of societal poverty and inequality).
> This "strange" balance is what defines Catholicism, as G.K. Chesterton
> was fond of pointing out.
>
>    I hope some of this helps....
>
>            Jef

JEF: And, for all practical purposese, that term might be applied to any
religion
that has a fixed and unchanging canon of scripture and that does not
believe in any authority outside of that scripture.


JH: I think you nailed the operative word-authority.  Even in this
fascinating discussion, some are appealing to an unspoken, *defacto*
authority that suggests that filtering all experience through an
unchangeable set of religious texts-fundamentalism-is wrong, a problem,
or not the best way to think.  Where can I find that authority?  Reason?
If the answer is reason, could there be such a thing as "fundamentalist
rationalism?"

Had Lewis or Chesterton lived longer, or later in the 20th century, I
wonder how they might have addressed that question.

The longer I live it seems to me that all of us embrace various belief
systems (or non-belief systems) for complex, competing, and often
non-rational (not irrational) reasons.  Humans are far more complicated
than the systems of belief they (including me) embrace.  That stopped
bothering me a long time ago.

Perhaps listening to others-including fundamentalists-is the best way
through all of this.  But then, I guess that I am appealing to some
authority to believe that listening to others-including
fundamentalists-is a good thing.  Life is full of irony, no?

Cheers,

Jay Hershberger
Moorhead, MN


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Folks,

I would like to pass on my new experience as a teacher of Tolkien and
Middle Earth.  I am an associate professor of piano at Concordia College
(ELCA), Moorhead, MN.  The college just revamped its Freshman first-year
liberal arts experience, and they invited faculty to propose courses
that would help introduce students to the Liberal Arts.  The key was
that each faculty teach according to their passion.  Now, in addition to
Liszt and Beethoven, my musical passions, I am also a Tolkien nerd.

I proposed a class on Lord of the Rings.  The college bit, and I am now
teaching 21 freshmen the text of The Lord of the Rings as a way of
introducing them to critical reading, thinking, and how to enter the
life of the mind.  The class is a mixture of Tolkien fanatics like
myself, as well as those who liked the movies but never read the
stories.  We have already discussed in class the Prologue, and Chaps.
1-2 of Book I.  Interestingly enough, they all wanted to talk about
Gandalf and Frodo's exchange regarding pity, mercy, and Gollum's role in
the story.  I required all of them to subscribe an email listserv for
the class, and the discussions online are flying!

I have never been so excited about classroom teaching!

Wish me luck, that I won't lose perspective, and that I won't get too
bogged down.

Cheers,

Jay Hershberger


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Sad to hear the Best Western was so crappy in London. We stayed at
several in both Great Britain and Ireland and had wonderful service at
all of them. Goes to show you how independent they all are.

And many of the hotels we stayed at in our trip last year had small
cramped rooms with impossible beds, including all three that we used in
London. It may be that you can have affordable or you can have space,
but you can't have both in London. Not too surprising since everyone
wants to go to London.

And we only had one place we stayed at in London that had a decent
breakfast (though the room was small and very filled with the double bed
and rollaway for Moose). One had a real limited, no cooking required,
breakfast (but an almost decent size room with 3 single beds in it
(after we got switched from a room with no circulation, no space, and a
very crooked floor), and one had nothing at all, even though they
claimed to have it on their website!

Needless to say, I haven't been really impressed with London hotels.

Mythically yours,
Lisa

Wayne G. Hammond wrote:

> Lisa wrote:
>
> >There were several nice looking Best Westerns in that part of London, we
> >walked by them when we were staying there last year. Yes, an Amercan
> >franchise, but each hotel is individually owned, so they do have
> >personality, the prices at several of them are reasonable, and they
> >seemed nicer than the one we were staying at. Also they have High Speed
> >Internet and more comfort features. And you want comfort when you are
> >not well. So if you can afford it, go there. Best Western has a website
> >and they will show you their London Properties from a query at the front
> >page.
>
> A few years ago my wife and I stayed for a couple of nights at the Best
> Western Paddington Court hotel. The rate was good, but the room was
> uncomfortably small even by London standards (the "double" bed was more
> like a slightly wider twin/single bed), the staff was surly, and the
> breakfast was mediocre. We expected much better on the basis of the Best
> Western website. Some of the folks posting complaints on the Tripadvisor
> site had it even worse.
>
>
>
>

Wow!  Congrats!  You're living the dream (my dream, anyway!).

This sounds like the perfect environment for teaching about what (and whom)
we all love.

It sounds like you are loving it.  Best of Luck!  You will do GREAT!




On 9/5/06, Jay Hershberger <hershjay@...> wrote:
>
>    Folks,
>
> I would like to pass on my new experience as a teacher of Tolkien and
> Middle Earth. I am an associate professor of piano at Concordia College
> (ELCA), Moorhead, MN. The college just revamped its Freshman first-year
> liberal arts experience, and they invited faculty to propose courses
> that would help introduce students to the Liberal Arts. The key was
> that each faculty teach according to their passion. Now, in addition to
> Liszt and Beethoven, my musical passions, I am also a Tolkien nerd.
>
> I proposed a class on Lord of the Rings. The college bit, and I am now
> teaching 21 freshmen the text of The Lord of the Rings as a way of
> introducing them to critical reading, thinking, and how to enter the
> life of the mind. The class is a mixture of Tolkien fanatics like
> myself, as well as those who liked the movies but never read the
> stories. We have already discussed in class the Prologue, and Chaps.
> 1-2 of Book I. Interestingly enough, they all wanted to talk about
> Gandalf and Frodo's exchange regarding pity, mercy, and Gollum's role in
> the story. I required all of them to subscribe an email listserv for
> the class, and the discussions online are flying!
>
> I have never been so excited about classroom teaching!
>
> Wish me luck, that I won't lose perspective, and that I won't get too
> bogged down.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Jay Hershberger
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I've stayed at a Best Western in central London (not the same one Wayne
Hammond stayed in), and it was equally bad: relatively inexpensive but
still overpriced room, very tiny and otherwise unappealing room, no
breakfast included, etc.

However, I've stayed in Best Westerns in England outside London and they
were both excellent.  One of them was excellent on two separate occasions.

I conclude the problem lies more with London than with Best Westerns.  A
Best Western in the middle of Florence, Italy, was kind of cramped but
decent, and the breakfast was included and good.

When traveling by myself  in England, however, I usually stay in B&B's.  I
prefer "guest houses," as they're called: houses that have been coverted to
all-guest accommodations, rather than someone's extra bedroom.  For long
stays I plan ahead; when traveling around I use the British tourist office
facilities to find me a place in the next town.

David Bratman

At 09:03 PM 9/5/2006 -0500, Jay Hershberger wrote:

>Now, in addition to
>Liszt and Beethoven, my musical passions, I am also a Tolkien nerd.

Have you ever thought of finding Liszt and Beethoven works that would go
well with Tolkien?  The more dramatic parts of "Les Preludes" would make an
arresting accompaniment to some of Tolkien's more exciting scenes, even if
it's a bit more "formal" than what passes for movie music these days.  Does
the finale of Beethoven's Seventh Symphony sound like good horse-galloping
music to you?

>I proposed a class on Lord of the Rings. The college bit, and I am now
>teaching 21 freshmen the text of The Lord of the Rings

Congratulations!

>The class is a mixture of Tolkien fanatics like
>myself, as well as those who liked the movies but never read the
>stories.

Watch out for the phenomenon that many professors have found, of students
who write papers based on the movies, and not on the book they were
supposed to have read.

- David Bratman

DB: Have you ever thought of finding Liszt and Beethoven works that
would go
well with Tolkien? The more dramatic parts of "Les Preludes" would make
an
arresting accompaniment to some of Tolkien's more exciting scenes, even
if
it's a bit more "formal" than what passes for movie music these days.
Does
the finale of Beethoven's Seventh Symphony sound like good
horse-galloping
music to you?
JH:  Good suggestions.  Les Preludes?  Why not.  The idea of the
"fantastic" is not without possibilities regarding Franz Liszt.  The
closest he ever got to the world of "Fairie" was in the concert etude
"Gnomenreigen," though to be sure, the Germanic notion of "Gnomes" was
probably different than what Tolkien wanted.  I have often thought that
his monumental B minor Piano Sonata might be a good match with the
psychology of the power of the Ring.  Beethoven 7th?  It's one of my
favorite symphonies.  My father took me to a symphony concert when I was
in the 2nd grade and that was on the program.  I fell in love with it
and subsequently wore my father's LP of Bruno Walter and the Columbia
Symphony down to the grooves.  My favorite modern performance is Carlos
Kleiber and the Vienna Philharmonic.  It is truly a spectacular
interpretation.
DB: Watch out for the phenomenon that many professors have found, of
students
who write papers based on the movies, and not on the book they were
supposed to have read.

JH:  Thanks for the warning.  Actually, that was one of the first items
I took up on the first day of class.  "If you rely on the Jackson movies
to keep up with the plot and character development, you won't pass this
course.  You MUST read every word of the text during the course of the
semester."  I've structured the discussion time in such a manner that if
they haven't done the assigned reading it will be very apparent, and
part of their semester grade is based on their participation in class.
One thing that I learned almost immediately, is that movies are the
preferred vehicles for story telling with this generation, not books.
When we discussed the idea of the "numinous" and the "wonder" of myth,
legend, and fairy tale that drew Tolkien's heart out, I asked the
students if they had ever experienced that.  Their responses were
telling, for they all cited movie examples, not books.  So for some of
these children, reading a 1000-page piece of literature is a brand new
experience.  One student has a reading disability and was quite
concerned about how he was going to manage the 1000 pages.  I suggested
Rob Inglis' book on CD.  He checked it out of the library and followed
along in the text, and was one of the main participants in our first
discussion session.  I am simply like a kid in a candy shop on this one.

Cheers,

Jay Hershberger



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi all,

Long-time lurker, first-time poster...

I'm currently working on a research proposal for my PhD thesis
(looking at the relationship between 'reality' and 'fantasy' in
popular epic fantasy). I want to give some indication of the extent
of 'Tolkien studies', something along the lines of "In 2005, there
were at least xx books and xx journal articles published on
Tolkien...". Even better would be if I could specify how much of that
was just on 'The Lord of the Ring'. Does anyone have any suggestions
as to where I could find these types of statistics?

Cheers,
Ashleigh Ward

Ashleigh--Take a look at the bibliographies in Tolkien Studies.  If your
institution gets Project Muse, it's available online. If you need to ILL
it, in v.1 (2004) it's pages 183-189 and called "Bibliography (in
English) for 2001-2002;  in v.2 (2005) "Addenda and Corrigenda" to the
v.1 list is on p. 288 and  "Bibliography (in English) for 2003" on p.
317-322, and in v. 3 (2006) "Bibliography (in English)  for 2004"  pages
267-276 with addenda to the 2003 list on 276.



I think it's as close to exhaustive as you're likely to get for
scholarly articles and books, but they do sometimes miss a few.  If you
say "at least xx articles and books" as you proposed, you should be
safe. You might add "in English" because there are thriving scholarly
journals in other countries as well - I know of at least one in Germany.



Janet Brennan Croft
Head of Access Services
University of Oklahoma Libraries
Bizzell 104NW
Norman OK 73019
405-325-1918
Fax 405-325-7618
jbcroft@...
http://faculty-staff.ou.edu/C/Janet.B.Croft-1/
http://libraries.ou.edu/
Editor of Mythlore http://www.mythsoc.org/mythlore.html

"We cannot abandon what we are fighting to defend; that would make our
self-defence indefensible." Harriet Vane in A Presumption of Death, Jill
Paton Walsh and Dorothy L. Sayers

________________________________

From: mythsoc@yahoogroups.com [mailto:mythsoc@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Ashleigh
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 10:52 PM
To: mythsoc@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [mythsoc] Tolkien Criticism



Hi all,

Long-time lurker, first-time poster...

I'm currently working on a research proposal for my PhD thesis
(looking at the relationship between 'reality' and 'fantasy' in
popular epic fantasy). I want to give some indication of the extent
of 'Tolkien studies', something along the lines of "In 2005, there
were at least xx books and xx journal articles published on
Tolkien...". Even better would be if I could specify how much of that
was just on 'The Lord of the Ring'. Does anyone have any suggestions
as to where I could find these types of statistics?

Cheers,
Ashleigh Ward





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi, Ashleigh,

Sounds like an excellent thesis! I'm not sure how helpful these
journals will be for your topic, but you might check into them, if
you haven't already.

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/tolkien_studies/
http://www.wvupress.com/journals/details.php?id=3
http://www.sayers.org.uk/seven.html

Blessings,
Tiffany Martin

--- In mythsoc@yahoogroups.com, "Ashleigh" <ashleigh.ward@...> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Long-time lurker, first-time poster...
>
> I'm currently working on a research proposal for my PhD thesis
> (looking at the relationship between 'reality' and 'fantasy' in
> popular epic fantasy). I want to give some indication of the
extent
> of 'Tolkien studies', something along the lines of "In 2005, there
> were at least xx books and xx journal articles published on
> Tolkien...". Even better would be if I could specify how much of
that
> was just on 'The Lord of the Ring'. Does anyone have any
suggestions
> as to where I could find these types of statistics?
>
> Cheers,
> Ashleigh Ward
>

Ashleigh,



I have a few other suggestions to add to the mix.  This is a good review
article of criticism after 1982 by Michael Drout and Hilary Wynne:
http://members.aol.com/JamesIMcNelis/9_2/Drout_9_2.pdf

For earlier criticism, you should consult Richard West's Tolkien
Criticism: An Annotated Checklist from Kent State UP (rev. ed. 1981).

Does your library have Proquest Dissertations (the online DAI)?  You can
use that to see how many dissertations have been done on Tolkien.

Good luck!

**************************************

David D. Oberhelman

Associate Professor

Humanities-Social Sciences Division

Oklahoma State University Library

Stillwater, OK 74078

Phone: (405) 744-9773   Fax: (405) 744-7579

Email: d.oberhelman@...

________________________________

From: mythsoc@yahoogroups.com [mailto:mythsoc@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Ashleigh
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 10:52 PM
To: mythsoc@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [mythsoc] Tolkien Criticism



Hi all,

Long-time lurker, first-time poster...

I'm currently working on a research proposal for my PhD thesis
(looking at the relationship between 'reality' and 'fantasy' in
popular epic fantasy). I want to give some indication of the extent
of 'Tolkien studies', something along the lines of "In 2005, there
were at least xx books and xx journal articles published on
Tolkien...". Even better would be if I could specify how much of that
was just on 'The Lord of the Ring'. Does anyone have any suggestions
as to where I could find these types of statistics?

Cheers,
Ashleigh Ward





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Ashleigh,

The Tolkien Studies suggestion is a good one, but if you don't have
MUSE access (or access to the physical volumes in your library), or
if you want to go further back, Michael Drout has an online
bibliography (through 2000) at:

http://acunix.wheatonma.edu/mdrout/TolkienBiblio/index.html

It's a bit older but still very useful, online, and free. :)

Jason

PS. For more, see also:

    Richard West. "Tolkien Criticism: An
       Annotated Checklist" (1970; rev. ed. 1981)
    Richard West. "A Tolkien Checklist:
       Selected Criticism 1981–2004" in Modern
       Fiction Studies 50.4 (Winter 2004)
    Judith Johnson. "J.R.R. Tolkien: Six
       Decades of Criticism" (1986)
    Åke Jönsson. "A Tolkien Bibliography
       1911–1980: Writings by and about J.R.R.
       Tolkien" (1984, rev. ed. 1986)

> I have a few other suggestions to add to the mix. This is a good review
> article of criticism after 1982 by Michael Drout and Hilary Wynne:
> http://members.aol.com/JamesIMc Nelis/9_2/ Drout_9_2. pdf

Another good suggestion! I thought about this one, too, David. :)

Looks like we were on the same wavelength in the reply I just sent Ashleigh.

Jason

good evening,

and if you're interested, I keep a record of academic works (= Master's
degrees, MPhil, PhDs) in French - about 150 so far, for :
http://pourtolkien.free.fr/recherche.html

there's also a review on books written in French in the last _Tolkien
Studies_ issue.

best wishes
Vincent


> > I have a few other suggestions to add to the mix. This is a good review
> > article of criticism after 1982 by Michael Drout and Hilary Wynne:
> > http://members.aol.com/JamesIMc Nelis/9_2/ Drout_9_2. pdf
>
> Another good suggestion! I thought about this one, too, David. :)
>
> Looks like we were on the same wavelength in the reply I just sent
Ashleigh.
>
> Jason

Have not read, but what I see doesn't impress.  Just went to John Granger's
site (www.hogwartsprofessor.com) and found a neat article on how Snape might
well (despite appearances) be a good guy.  Just finished *Looking for God in
HP* but it only goes up through *Phoenix.*  I was hoping to find some
comment from him on Book Six.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Foster" <mafoster@...>
To: <mythsoc@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, September 04, 2006 10:32 AM
Subject: Re: [mythsoc] Landscape With Dragons revisited


> "Abusus non tollit usum.  Fantasy remains a human right: we make in our
> measure and in our derivative mode, because we are made: and not only
> made, but made in the image and likeness of a Maker."
> --JRRT, "On Fairy Stories"
>
> Debra Murphy wrote:
>
> >In Catholic circles, O'Brien is a well-known critic (unsurprisingly)
> >of HP as furthering the cause of the occult, witchcraft, etc. This is,
> >of course, one of the several areas with which I must respectfully
> >disagree with him. I think the person who pointed out that there is a
> >tendency here to deny the fluidity of symbols was spot on. It reminds
> >me a bit of some of the Protestant fundamentalists who would cancel
> >Christmas because Dec. 21 was once a pagan winter solstice festival.
> >Christianity, of course, has two thousand years of history (ongoing)
> >involving the "baptism", as it were, of pagan symbols, customs,
> >notions, whole philosophies. Ultimately, I believe the
> >"Christianability" of HP will be proved or disproved only when book 7
> >appears, and I vote (after re-reading the series thus far several
> >times) for the probability of the former.
> >
> >O'Brien is a Tolkien fan, but I tend to find that most of his
> >arguments against HP could be just as easily turned on Tolkien. Just
> >as there are examples of conversion and even religious vocations among
> >Christians from reading Tolkien, there are any number of pagans and
> >Wiccans out there who regard Tolkien and his subcreation as prime
> >inspiration. Abusus non tollit usum. as the old saw goes.
> >
> >For more info, O'Brien's views on HP are expressed here:
> >http://www.lifesite.net/features/harrypotter/obrienpotter.html, and
> >were criticized by Sandra Miesel (sci-fi writer and co-author of "The
> >Da Vinci Hoax") here:
> >http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/arts/al0105.html.
> >
> >Debra Murphy
> >www.debramurphy.com
> >
> >
> >  _____
> >
> >From: mythsoc@yahoogroups.com [mailto:mythsoc@yahoogroups.com] On
> >Behalf Of John D Rateliff
> >
> >Unfortunately (?), the book was written in 1998, so there's no
> >mention of Harry Potter...  _,_._,___
> >
> >
> >
> >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> >The Mythopoeic Society website http://www.mythsoc.org
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> The Mythopoeic Society website http://www.mythsoc.org
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.11.7/437 - Release Date: 9/4/2006
>
>

I received an email from Anita Farley, who is conducting an auction of
items from the collection of the late Bernie Zuber. This includes some old
Society memorabilia as well as other items of potential interest to our
members. Here's the info she sent me--FYI.

Here is a link to one item that is up right now:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=001&item=110029077703&rd=1&sspa\
gename=STRK%3AMESE%3AIT&rd=1


It's the program from the very first Mythcon ever. And I've got tons of
stuff, including the unfinished manuscript of the Tolkien book that Bernie
received an advance to write but never cashed the check and never finished
the book. It'll take me at least a year to get it all auctioned. The best
thing that interested parties can do is go to that auction and add me to
their favorite sellers list. An alternative would be to do a seller search
for greenbuck97 or to do a "title and description" search for Bernie
Zuber. His name is in every auction I put up if it's something from his
collection.

Edith L. Crowe | (408) 808-2037 | edith.crowe@...
Interim Collection Development Coordinator
Art & Humanities Librarian & Coordinator of Graduate Instruction
San Jose State University Library (http://www.sjlibrary.org)

Corresponding Secretary of the Mythopoeic Society (http://www.mythsoc.org)

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I have already warned my Bradley University JRRT class that they should
not aspire to see my comment on any paper declaring, "This happened in
the movie you obviously saw, not in the book you were supposed to read."

By all means, latch onto the HarperCollins audio CD of the home
recordings George Sayere made of JRRT reading before -LotR- was
published, Jay.

Mike

David Bratman wrote:

>At 09:03 PM 9/5/2006 -0500, Jay Hershberger wrote:
>
>
>
>>Now, in addition to
>>Liszt and Beethoven, my musical passions, I am also a Tolkien nerd.
>>
>>
>
>Have you ever thought of finding Liszt and Beethoven works that would go
>well with Tolkien?  The more dramatic parts of "Les Preludes" would make an
>arresting accompaniment to some of Tolkien's more exciting scenes, even if
>it's a bit more "formal" than what passes for movie music these days.  Does
>the finale of Beethoven's Seventh Symphony sound like good horse-galloping
>music to you?
>
>
>
>>I proposed a class on Lord of the Rings. The college bit, and I am now
>>teaching 21 freshmen the text of The Lord of the Rings
>>
>>
>
>Congratulations!
>
>
>
>>The class is a mixture of Tolkien fanatics like
>>myself, as well as those who liked the movies but never read the
>>stories.
>>
>>
>
>Watch out for the phenomenon that many professors have found, of students
>who write papers based on the movies, and not on the book they were
>supposed to have read.
>
>- David Bratman
>
>
>
>The Mythopoeic Society website http://www.mythsoc.org
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

In a message dated 9/6/2006 3:03:24 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
dbratman@... writes:

When  traveling by myself in England, however, I usually stay in B&B's.  I
prefer "guest houses," as they're called: houses that have been coverted  to
all-guest accommodations, rather than someone's extra bedroom. For  long
stays I plan ahead; when traveling around I use the British tourist  office
facilities to find me a place in the next  town.



Yes, stay at B&B's (bed and breakfasts), not at hotels.  Most of  them that
I've stayed at are actually entire houses converted into guest  accommodations
(including living space for the owners/managers), but I've always  heard them
referred to as B&B's.  You will often get to talk to the  owner as you eat
breakfast.  You can find a number of websites for finding  bed and breakfasts in
London just by Googling on the words "bed and breakfasts"  and "London".  If
you're traveling around, go to Tourist Information in the  town you're
currently in one day before you leave and ask to book a room in  the next town. 
All
hotel and B&B rooms are comparatively small in the  U.K.  Don't expect to find
American-sized rooms.

Wendell Wagner


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]