80 Years of The Hobbit
Jon Mackley reminisces on 80 years of the book that began the story of the Lord of the Rings.
In 2012 I went to see first of The Hobbit trilogy films with some trepidation. I thought: Really? A trilogy from what’s really quite a little book? I spent a long time at the beginning of the first film wondering where the story was going — and wondering if the characters were going to get out of Bag End by the end of the film. Back story was being piled upon backstory. Characters who had had only a brief mention in the Lord of the Rings novel had suddenly become major players. And how come Gandalf couldn’t remember the names of the blue wizards, but I could?[1] I got quite angry — very quickly — as an aficionado is wont to do. I could almost hear the blood raging through Christopher Tolkien’s veins. But then I started to focus on the pretty scenery and things that were happening, and realised that I would probably enjoy the film a lot more if I saw this as an opportunity to wander around Peter Jackson’s vision of Middle Earth, and accepted that it bore very little resemblance to the story I knew. And I wondered what the Prof would have made of the film and the ‘re-imagining’ of his story.
J.R.R. Tolkien’s novel The Hobbit was first published in 1937. It was a different era — Britain between the wars — and he was writing for a very different audience. The subjects that Tolkien would have studied at University would have focused more on language (Anglo-Saxon, Icelandic, Old Frisian, Old Norse) rather than literature. So, when he wrote, he concentrated on the words — their origins and their cadence — rather than having one eye on Hollywood all the way through. The novel’s first critic was Rayner Unwin (10 year old son of Stanley Unwin, one of the owners of the publishing house George Allen and Unwin. Rayner Unwin was also responsible for publishing Roald Dahl’s James and the Giant Peach and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.)
“Bilbo Baggins was a Hobbit who lived in his Hobbit hole and never went for adventures, at last Gandalf the wizard and his Dwarves persuaded him to go. He had a very exiting (sic) time fighting goblins and wargs. At last they get to the lonely mountain; Smaug, the dragon who guards it is killed and after a terrific battle with the goblins he returned home — rich!
This book, with the help of maps, does not need any illustrations it is good and should appeal to all children between the ages of 5 and 9.”
The book was accepted on the basis of the review, for which Unwin was paid a shilling, which Rayner considered to be “good money”.
Once I had taken off my “outraged fanboy” hat and watched Jackson’s Hobbit trilogy as a revisiting of Middle Earth, I felt there was a lot that improved the story. But there was also a lot that didn’t. The inclusion of any female characters with a speaking part and some kind of backstory was a bonus considering that Tolkien did not include female characters among his cast and only a brief mention to Belladona Took, Bilbo’s mother). The subplot of an “interracial love story” between an elf and one of the dwarves, I feel, distracted from the story, rather than enhanced it. Compare this with the love story of Aragorn and Arwen, which IS alluded to in the novel, but explored in more detail in the films, but at the cost of other sections, for example Tom Bombadil, fog on the Barrow Downs [fans were very worried about how Merry was going to kill the Witch King of Angmar when he didn’t have the right sword — that sword, incidentally, is lifted from Beowulf] and the Scouring of the Shire, amongst others). But what seemed remarkable was, despite the inclusion of bucketloads of new material in The Hobbit trilogy, some of the core material from the story was cut. For example, when Bombur falls into the stream. It’s one of the few occasions that one of the dwarves does something, and it was dropped from the theatrical cut, but included in the extended version. Other characters, such as Beorn, one of the coolest characters in Tolkien’s novels, are on screen for a disappointingly short time in the second film of the Hobbit trilogy, The Desolation of Smaug. There is also a fleeting glimpse of him in the Battle of the Five Armies.
Tolkien had been writing a form of mythology for England from when he had been serving as an officer in the First World War. He was influenced by the reconstruction of Finish mythology called The Kelevala, and he drew much inspiration from Scandinavia sources. Tolkien’s work, The Book of Lost Tales, contained a version of the Fall of Gondolin written when he was invalided out from active service in 1917; consequently, the realm of Middle Earth had been well established, certainly in Tolkien’s own mind, when he wrote the novel of The Hobbit in 1936. By this time, Tolkien working in Oxford as Rawlinson and Bosworth Professor of Anglo-Saxon. His inaugural lecture “Beowulf: The Monsters and the Critics” changed the way that scholars read Beowulf, and it is Tolkien’s love of Anglo-Saxon literature that resonates so strongly in his work. The riddles in the dark scene (arguably the central scene in The Hobbit when considered in relation to Lord of the Rings) draws on the Saxon tradition of riddling competitions (And given the 95 riddles in Anglo-Saxon collection known as The Exeter Book do not provide solutions to the riddles: academics can [and do] still squabble over possible interpretations). Of Gollum and Bilbo’s riddles, Gollum’s are from older and more traditional sources, such as the c. 9th century text Old English text The Dialogue of Solomon and Saturn, and the Old Norse Heiðrek’s Saga; Bilbo’s are from newer, more contemporary sources. Other types of riddles include Bilbo’s discussion with Smaug, where he gives himself a series of names made up of compound words “barrel rider” — such phrases made from a compound of a noun and a verb (or two nouns) is a particular Saxon motif called a kenning, which made the Saxon language more poetic. A “fiscesethel” (fish home) and “seolbaeth” (seal bath) are both kennings for the sea; “heofones gim” (heaven’s gem) and “woruldcandel” (world candle) are kennings for the sun. Tolkien sneaks these kinds of names into both the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings as homage to his source material.
The final film of the Hobbit trilogy, The Battle of the Five Armies — just a few of chapters in the novel and definitely not sufficient to extend to a two and a half hour film without adding copious material — is likely taken from the description of the historical Battle of Brunanburg; Smaug’s personality and conversation with Bilbo are indebted to the Old Norse Lay of Fafnir, while the challenge of defeating Smaug is a motif that we see in Beowulf; likewise the hero who cannot survive beyond the end of the story and his noble sacrifice leads to understanding for the rest of the characters and ends with a tragic lamentation at the funeral pyre as the characters consider a common theme in Saxon literature, that of transience — all things must pass away.
Tolkien drew on many sources in all of his work, not just for the motifs drawn from Scandinavian mythology that gave his characters more colour, in fact, he lifted some of his material from texts such as The Seeress’s Prophecy from the Old Norse Poetic Edda, for example the lists of the dwarvish names which included Durin, Bifur, Bofur, Bombur, Thorin, Fili, Kili, Fundin, Gloin, Dori and Ori, amongst others. Surprisingly, this list also includes Gandalf as the name of a dwarf. His name is literally translated as “staff elf” — and Gandalf is often identified in relation to his staff (actually, the image of Gandalf as “Grey pilgrim” finds its source in the depictions of the Saxon god Woden). Jackson was aware of this, and many of his mis-en-scene material has references to the culture and writings upon which Tolkien was drawing.
What REALLY didn’t work for me in the films was trying to shoehorn the added plot of the prequel so that it tied in with The Lord of the Rings, for example the inclusion of Saruman and Galadriel — some of those scenes were so dull it looked like the actors were getting bored — and Legolas, particularly telling him to go and look for the rangers in the north at the end. It was like Jackson putting something in capital letters, bold, italic, underlined, highlighted and then having someone point out that it was REALLY important. (Admittedly, in the Ralph Bakshi film version of The Lord of the Rings, it is Legolas who finds the hobbits on the road to Rivendell, and he and Aragorn greet each other like brothers). The end of the Battle of the Five Armies seemed to be trying to fit Jackson’s square peg into Tolkien’s writings. Trying too hard to draw connections that just weren’t there.
Christopher Tolkien, who has edited and made accessible much of his father’s writings, has described how the producers of Lord of the Rings “eviscerated the book by making it an action movie for young people aged 15 to 25”; he also famously disowned his own son for the best part of a decade: at the time it was reported that Simon Tolkien had been cut off from family affairs for daring to support the film version of the book. His father refused to see him, or even his grandchildren, communicating only by letter or through a solicitor.[2]
Like his son, J.R.R Tolkien, I think, would not have enjoyed the Hobbit trilogy of films as they deviated so far away from what he had written, but he acknowledged that this was a necessity. He lamented that he had to sell the film rights to avoid a tax bill and essentially pay for his retirement. He notes that he had two choices, either to sell at profitable terms, or have someone make a film that was true to his work. The choice was money or art. He chose money and consequently as an author he had no “veto on objectionable features or alterations.”[3]
The Hobbit is a marvellous adventure story, but it’s very much a product of its time. It doesn’t appear on any of the top 100 books list (although, inevitably, it loses out to its big brother, Lord of the Rings on most charts). Rayner Unwin enjoyed the story when he was ten and I was about the same age when I read it. Some years ago, I tried to read it to my son as a bedtime story, and found that the chapters were too long to read in one sitting, and sometimes there was often very little to sustain my son’s interest. Likewise, the prose style is very literary, so while it is exceptionally well written, it can also come across as dull. Many of the characters are one-dimensional, particularly the dwarves, most of whom do very little to advance the story (or even to play a part). Most of them are there simply to make up the mystical number of twelve dwarves. On the other hand, looking at the film version, Peter Jackson gives the dwarves personality and something to do; he includes a number of female characters; he includes more plot; and the visual effects gloss over the lengthy descriptions that Tolkien wrote. Still, I feel that the film and the book need to be regarded as separate entities as there are more differences that divide them than the similarities that unite them.
Modern fantasy has come a long way from the imaginative writings that Tolkien began publishing 80 years ago. Writers no longer have the luxury of Tolkien’s prose style; the characters have to earn their places and it’s definitely not acceptable to have women primarily in domestic and subservient roles.[4] Modern fantasy has moved away from the Dungeons-and-Dragons-style Tolkien imitators. It’s now refreshing and innovative, with exciting characters and twisting plots. Above all, it’s innovative. But it’s been a long road to progress towards modern fantasy and The Hobbit was amongst one of the early stones of twentieth century fantasy writing that have paved the road to the fantasy that we enjoy today.
[1] The reason is that the wizards are named in The Silmarillion and in Tolkien’s Letters, and Peter Jackson did not have copyright for them.
[2] http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/tolkien-family-steps-up-war-of-the-rings-9172358.html.
[3] Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, 261, 11 September 1957.
[4] In the Silmarillion, there are some interesting strong female characters as noted in E. Brundige’s post https://letterpile.com/books/middle-earth-female-characters-tolkien
