Mentioned in the "Year's Work in Tolkien Studies 2016"

Ah . . . . I've made my first appearance(s) in "The Year's Work in Tolkien Studies," the literature review published each year by Tolkien Studies. Personally, I love "TYW." As a grad student who knew very little about the secondary scholarship on Tolkien when he hit ABD, this bibliographic essay was a life-saver -- an exhaustive treatment of all the relevant scholarship since 2001.** (TS began in 2004, and the TYW does three years in the past.) 

 So, my mentions:

 #1
My first essay in Tolkien Studies, which argued that The Silmarillion should be read as a unified text rather than a compilation. The reviewer, John Magoun, whose work I've not previously encountered, was rather ambivalent. On one hand, he said the article is an "extended and clever brief" (206), and it "semi-plausibly" defends its viewpoint. He did, however, think my final section was "rather weak." Still, what really stings is this: "Ignoring questions of writing style and readability. . ." Doh.

Now, I grant you, it's been three years since I've re-read the essay . . . and I'm very concerned with good academic style, BUT . .. . well, even without having re-read the essay, I fear Magoun might be right on that one.  Maybe. But my academic prose has improved immensely in the last three years, especially in terms of tightness, and while I certainly remember some very finely phrased statements from my TS article, I have to admit that half the reason I haven't re-read it is all the stylistic infelicities I'm sure to find

Alas. I'm still very proud of that article, even if I'm unsure of it's ultimate importance to the field. (Next to my hiring by the University of Arizona, breaking into TS was the highlight of my academic life thus far.)

 Which brings me to . . . .

 #2
This article is "Harken Not to Wild Beats" in The Journal of Tolkien Research, which argued that Saruman falls into the classic philosophical critique of rhetoric in the Western tradition. The reviewer is David Bratman, a savvy and informed Tolkienist with some strong opinions, so I was very pleasantly gratified to read that he called my article "a remarkable essay" (236). Well, spin me around and call me Sally -- I'll take that!
----------------------------
** Beyond the primary texts, I'd only read Tom Shippey's two major monographs, the Carpenter biography, some of the Letters, and a few odd articles on Tolkien. Otherwise, I was a complete neophyte.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Genre Fantasy Bestsellers through 1990

Image
I've been studying Keith Justice's Bestseller Index , which compiles information from two separate bestseller lists -- New York Times Book Review and Publishers Weekly -- up through 1990, and the results are ridiculously fascinating. For instance, you wanna take a stab at which SFF author has the most individual books appear on a bestseller list? No, it ain't Heinlein, Clark, Herbert, or Asimov. It's not even Terry Brooks or David Eddings. No, the answer is Piers Anthony . And even if you somehow pulled that name out of thin air, I guarantee you'll never guess how truly dominate Anthony was. Up through 1990, Anthony had more than double than number of distinct bestsellers than the next most frequent bestseller, Anne McCaffrey. Whereas Anthony had an astounding  22 different books appear on a bestseller list, McCaffrey had "only" 9.** Now, caveats. These numbers need to be taken with one (or two) grains of salt. For instance, although Anthony had 22 two dis
Read more

Thoughts upon Reading Tolkien's New & Expanded LETTERS

So, I'm reading through the newly expanded version of Tolkien's Letters. One thing I hadn't properly realized is that these letters were part of Carpenter's original manuscript back in 1981, but Carpenter had to cut them due to cost. Turns out that Carpenter had a pretty keen eye on what could bear cutting -- most of this new stuff isn't terribly interesting, but I discovered a few nuggets. VINDICATED!! (Me, sorta) Naturally, whenever you read new primary material, your first instinct is to check to see if anything contradicts something you've said in print ... especially biographically. Well, I've made three big "biographical" claims, and here's my sigh of relief: Concerning my claim that, in 1954, Tolkien and colleagues contrived to create CS Lewis's academic chair at Cambridge in exchange for them nominating EM Forster for the Nobel Prize. Nothing in  Letters  supports or contradicts this. In my recent article for  Notes & Queries ,
Read more

Uncovering CS Lewis's First Religious Poem

 So, with my article's official acceptance by the journal English Text Construction , it's time to let the cat out of the bag. Using a combination of metrical analysis and biography, I've ascertained with near perfect certainty the first religious poem C. S. Lewis poem ever wrote .... a short poem, "Sweet Desire," that scholars have never previously paid any attention to. This poem is firmly datable to early 1930, probably January or February is my guess, and given the poem's subject matter, it's clearly talking about CSL's fears and intellectual trepidation about becoming a theist and abandoning atheism for good. It's basically Lewis's version of Caedmon's Hymn . The full metrical details will have to await my article, but one interesting caveat on my claims to firstness. In my peer reviewer's commentary, they recommended I contact a CSL scholar named  Charlie W. Starr, who's been working on Lewis's handwriting for quite a lon
Read more