Hobbits, Elves, and Wizards: Exploring the Wonders and Worlds of J.R.R. Tolkien's Lord of the Rings

Rating:
Summary: A misleading, illogical book.
Review: The author claims "I wrote it to entertain and instruct myself" (i). It does not cover anything new, but is written in order to clarify. The author is an early fan from the pirated American edition, and unfortunately does not seem to have been able to get past the flaws of that edition.

He begins with a brief biographical sketch of Tolkien's life and admits the books came out of Tolkien's love of language. He calls Tolkien "flagrantly ordinary...dowdy" (6) and does not get much more complimentary as he goes on.


He points out that Hobbits came late in Middle-earth's development and that Elves were Firstborn quite literally. Ironically, the author does not support a literary criticism of the books, calling that technique "obnoxious" (10) then proceeds upon it himself. Tolkien, he claims, is "identifying Middle-earth with our Earth long ago" (10). He then does highly critical analysis of patterns he thinks he sees which have no fundimental bearing on the books at all. He claims each of the 'ages' gets better, i.e. the Third Age is better than the Second and the Second better than the First which is the direct opposite to what every reader of Tolkien knows to be true.

He then ridicules the 'conservative' aspects of teh book and quickly passes over the obvious Christian references with a brief outline of them before abruptly ending the chapter in embarassment.

Stanton then simply rewrites the books in his own words for several chapters. If we wanted that, we would have read the books or fan fiction. He continually hunts for a "basic pattern" (27) and every detail is analyzed as having deep symbolic meaning -- something Tolkien himself despised. He even calls the Black Riders "vampires" (28) which is ridiculous, considering the only thing they have in common is a tendancy to come out at night. So do burglers, owls and college students but we don't call them vampires. Stanton then ignores all prevalant theories of Tom Bombadil and sidesteps the question with a typical New Age 'nature spirit' idea.

He sees much of the book as mere "literary devices" (33). He then mistakingly traces Aragorn's lineage. He ignores Boromir's large part in the Council of Elrond and in assisting the Fellowship. He degrades the books to what the Inklings clearly despised and even claims "Tolkien again makes you feel danger in the highest degree" (41). That, in itself, is a contradiction because Lewis and Tolkien believed that writing and reading for the mere thrill of danger was not only the lowest form of literature but one to avoid like the plague.

Stanton completely misinterprets all actions as mere nature magic mother earth wicca stuff which is, frankly, nausiatingly opposed to Tolkien's view and is one of the reasons why the movies are so dasdardly. At that point, Stanton goes downhill from there. He idealizes Gandalf, and without any explantion, dismisses the profound character of Denethor as simply "madness brings him to dispair" (77). In other words -- he was a crazy old man that got depressed the more crazy he got. The more logical explanation is that he was depressed first and thus became crazy and of course the true Denethor was depressed and lost all hope which is an entirely different thing.

In Stanton's attempt to explain Aragorn's usurpation of the throne, the author uses a series of logical falacies: Appeal to Authority with a claim that it was fine because the leaders wanted it, and then the fact that the White Tree had grown when it could have grown for Faramir's kingship or Denethor's and it was merely a final ironical twist. Last time I checked, it didn't have a sign on it saying "I grew because of Aragorn".

He then examines the poems and tears them apart until they lose all meaning and beauty. Stanton then tries to spiritualize everything in the worst sense. He puts it in the same category as the wildly occult Earthsea tales which I am sure because of which, Tolkien is turning in his grave.

In conclusion, I would not only not take the time to read this book, but I would encourage others not to do so. It is especially bad to those trying to show the truth of Denethor.Just because someone put it in a book does not mean it is true. And in the case of Stanton's writings, I am not even sure how something so blatantly erroneous could have been published at all.


Rating:
Summary: There has to be a better treatment of Middle Earth
Review: This book comes across as the ultimate college English term paper on Tolkien: all the basic lit-class analysis you could possibly want. Prof. Stanton has been teaching Tolkien to undergraduates for many years, and the voice of this book is that of the competent but uninspired freshman-lit teacher, analytically keen but prone to overgeneralization, and hazier than he thinks in his grasp of the facts in a complex novel.
Normally I'd be the last person to object to intelligent scholarly analysis. But this well-meaning book shows the harm it can do. Stanton is so diligent in ferreting out the subtlest threads and connections from =LotR= and laying them out clearly that he sucks all the life out of them, leaving them drab and dead on the page, and denying readers the joy and the vividness of discovering them for themselves.
Stanton makes several good points, and has observed many obscure connections and even loose ends in =LotR=, but that doesn't keep him from stating questionable facts, often through overgeneralization, or highly doubtful interpretations, on almost every page. A good example is his statement that mellifluous languages are spoken by good people and harsh, guttural languages are spoken by bad people. This claim is usually made with the intent (which is not Stanton's) of denigrating Tolkien, and it's not true anyway (what about Dwarvish?).
This book, despite its good points, should on no account be read by anyone who's just finished =LotR= for the first or even second time, and the true newcomer shouldn't even glance in its direction. It should only be read by those with a deep experience and knowledge of =LotR=, who won't be spoiled by it but might still learn something; and, perhaps, by English lit students desperate for term paper topics the night before the deadline.

Rating:
Summary: For people who already know LOTR backwards & forwards ONLY!!
Review: This book comes across as the ultimate college English term paper on Tolkien: all the basic lit-class analysis you could possibly want. Prof. Stanton has been teaching Tolkien to undergraduates for many years, and the voice of this book is that of the competent but uninspired freshman-lit teacher, analytically keen but prone to overgeneralization, and hazier than he thinks in his grasp of the facts in a complex novel.
Normally I'd be the last person to object to intelligent scholarly analysis. But this well-meaning book shows the harm it can do. Stanton is so diligent in ferreting out the subtlest threads and connections from =LotR= and laying them out clearly that he sucks all the life out of them, leaving them drab and dead on the page, and denying readers the joy and the vividness of discovering them for themselves.
Stanton makes several good points, and has observed many obscure connections and even loose ends in =LotR=, but that doesn't keep him from stating questionable facts, often through overgeneralization, or highly doubtful interpretations, on almost every page. A good example is his statement that mellifluous languages are spoken by good people and harsh, guttural languages are spoken by bad people. This claim is usually made with the intent (which is not Stanton's) of denigrating Tolkien, and it's not true anyway (what about Dwarvish?).
This book, despite its good points, should on no account be read by anyone who's just finished =LotR= for the first or even second time, and the true newcomer shouldn't even glance in its direction. It should only be read by those with a deep experience and knowledge of =LotR=, who won't be spoiled by it but might still learn something; and, perhaps, by English lit students desperate for term paper topics the night before the deadline.