Are we having fun?

[Geoff Bannister]

No: HPFGUIDX 80678

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> > I also think of one of my other great favourites - LOTR. The 
> > darkest moment is perhaps in Volume 3 when Sam discovers that 
Frodo 
> > is alive and in the hands of the Orcs of Cirith Ungol. At that 
> > moment, Sam hits bottom. "His fear of the orcs, forgotten for a 
> > while in his wrath an depression, now returned. As far as he 
could 
> > see, there was only one course for him to take: he must go on 
<snip>
> 



Sandy:
> Another parallel with J.R.R. Tolkien has occurred to me that has 
made 
> me a bit more hopeful (that and the part of the interview--thanks 
to 
> those who pointed out where I saw the "writer's block" comment--
where 
> JKR says that after OoP *at least* one thing lightens Harry's 
load:  
> he's believed by the WW).
> 
> Tolkien started out with The Hobbit, which was a light-hearted romp 
> with some darker moments.  I have read that he knew when he wrote 
> LOTR much later that some fans of The Hobbit were likely going to 
> recoil at the serious grittiness of the later, greater saga.  I am 
> hoping you're right and that a large part of what makes OoP seem so 
> unrelievedly bleak *now* is that the story cannot be seen in 
> perspective within the larger whole.
> 


Geoff:
There is also here a "non-parallel" with Tolkien. I first read LOTR 
shortly after publication and when I finally got round to 
reading "The Hobbit", I really didn't like it and frankly I never 
have.

It probably arises from the long gestation periods of Tolkien's 
books. "The Hobbit" arose from reading to his sons, particularly 
Christopher, and JRRT himself has said that he started it somehwere 
bewtween 1930-1935 (probably towards the end of that era) and it hit 
the bookshops in 1937. He started the "New Hobbit" which 
transmogrified into LOTR in 1937 and finished it in 1950 with 
publication not occurring until 1954. The earlier book was intended 
as a children's book and as a stand-alone. When he got into LOTR, he 
began to link it to the themes of "the Silmarillion" which existed in 
sections for twenty tears by then. As a result, the book swung 
completely away form its children's sequel status to what it became. 
This explains why the first chapter of FOTR is such an odd one - 
written in the same jokey sort of style as its predecessor. It nearly 
put me off the book originally. I just feel that the ambience is 
totally different. 

JKR, on the other hand, has written to a relatively tight time frame. 
The increasing darkness mirrors Harry's progression from a sheltered 
(in the wrong sense!) pre-teen to a mid-teenager who has a lot of 
experience under his belt which is unknown to the average youth of 
that age - whether this is due to heroics or foolishness is not 
relevant. He has had a steep learning curve (Frodo and Sam's has been 
steeper in time terms) but obviously the sun is not going to shine 
for him all the time. Look at our own experiences. Do many of us not 
see our childhood days in pleasant, sunny places? Bet they weren't 
all of the time! I think in the real world, Harry would then put 
these events into a broader perspective as he got through them and 
through his teens.

Just as an aside, did anyone notice that the 30th anniversary of 
Tolkien's death occurred 11 days ago?