What do you think?
Rate this book
Tolkien's Art: A Mythology for England
" J.R.R. Tolkien's zeal for medieval literary, religious, and cultural ideas deeply influenced his entire life and provided the seeds for his own fiction. In Tolkien's Art , Chance discusses not only such classics as The Hobbit, The Lord of the Rings , and The Silmarillion , but focuses on his minor works as well, outlining in detail the sources and influences–from pagan epic to Christian legend-that formed the foundation of Tolkien's masterpieces, his "mythology for England."
276 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1979
7 people are currently reading
117 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
November 14, 2022
‘This divided self surfaces throughout Tolkien’s fictive works and exists as a symbolic badge of fallen and imperfect human nature. Human nature is good—but also evil, as Beowulf is Germanic—but also Christian.’
Wanted to like this more. Worthwhile book; terrible writing. Multiple repetitions; some misdirection. Reads as if the author wrote multiple Tolkien analysis pieces, then concatenated the bunch without a thorough editing.
‘Kilby remarks on his perfectionism: “But if Tolkien was critical of others he was even more critical of his own writings. Few authors ever denigrated their own works more than he.”’
To start, she tells us what she’s going to tell us twice before starting to tell us. Skip both Preface and Introduction. To fit her preconceived notions Chance misrepresents or wrongly reports what Tolkien wrote, which is almost unforgivable for an author of her stature. Cost a star.
“In a larger sense, it is I suppose impossible to write any “story” that is not allegorical in proportion as it “comes to life”: since each of us is an allegory, embodying in a particular tale and clothed in the garments of time and place, universal truth and everlasting life” JRRT
Many worthwhile insights, but all must be accepted only provisionally. Tolkien followers should first read all the referenced works.
‘One should not imitate the Creator in order to aggrandize creation for selfish reasons, but instead to praise both Creator and creation, to reflect one’s love for and trust in both and one’s obedience to the will of Ilúvatar.’ JRRT
Wanted to like this more. Worthwhile book; terrible writing. Multiple repetitions; some misdirection. Reads as if the author wrote multiple Tolkien analysis pieces, then concatenated the bunch without a thorough editing.
‘Kilby remarks on his perfectionism: “But if Tolkien was critical of others he was even more critical of his own writings. Few authors ever denigrated their own works more than he.”’
To start, she tells us what she’s going to tell us twice before starting to tell us. Skip both Preface and Introduction. To fit her preconceived notions Chance misrepresents or wrongly reports what Tolkien wrote, which is almost unforgivable for an author of her stature. Cost a star.
“In a larger sense, it is I suppose impossible to write any “story” that is not allegorical in proportion as it “comes to life”: since each of us is an allegory, embodying in a particular tale and clothed in the garments of time and place, universal truth and everlasting life” JRRT
Many worthwhile insights, but all must be accepted only provisionally. Tolkien followers should first read all the referenced works.
‘One should not imitate the Creator in order to aggrandize creation for selfish reasons, but instead to praise both Creator and creation, to reflect one’s love for and trust in both and one’s obedience to the will of Ilúvatar.’ JRRT
December 9, 2008
There are some points that Chance makes that she does not fully back up. However, her discussions about Tolkien as a Medievalist and her comments on the language are very astute.
December 23, 2019
High three stars.
On one hand, this book is written engagingly, presented logically, and researched thoroughly. Some of the content, like some arguments about Germanic elements in Tolkien’s work and the chapter on LOTR, was generally compelling and thought-provoking.
However, about 60-70% of the arguments in this book were entirely unconvincing and seemed like way too much of a stretch—for example, everything on The Hobbit, nearly all of the Christian arguments, and most of the “monster as critic” analysis. The author also got some basic facts about Tolkien’s stories wrong (like who forged the Rings of Power and when the War of the Last Alliance took place), which greatly diminishes her credibility to me. Although I did get some good things from this book, I think I prefer Verlyn Flieger’s Tolkien scholarship on the whole.
On one hand, this book is written engagingly, presented logically, and researched thoroughly. Some of the content, like some arguments about Germanic elements in Tolkien’s work and the chapter on LOTR, was generally compelling and thought-provoking.
However, about 60-70% of the arguments in this book were entirely unconvincing and seemed like way too much of a stretch—for example, everything on The Hobbit, nearly all of the Christian arguments, and most of the “monster as critic” analysis. The author also got some basic facts about Tolkien’s stories wrong (like who forged the Rings of Power and when the War of the Last Alliance took place), which greatly diminishes her credibility to me. Although I did get some good things from this book, I think I prefer Verlyn Flieger’s Tolkien scholarship on the whole.
March 26, 2023
I did feel like I got something out of this, which is good. I never realized how Bilbo as “king under the hill” essentially hoarding is food kind of mirrors the king under the mountain hoarding gold. Or how Bilbo having to leave the Ring for Frodo on their birthday is the opposite of Sméagol taking it from Deagol for his own birthday.
June 13, 2016
Chapter on the LoTR was good, but the others were too anachronistically self-conscious and psychologized to be helpful. Overall project is intriguing; seeing Tolkien's work through his essay "Beowulf: The Monsters and the Critics"
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews