Comments on: James Bowman Denies Denying Artistic Standing to Tolkien and Lewis http://stkarnick.com/culture/2010/03/15/james-bowman-denies-denying-artistic-standing-to-tolkien-and-lewis/ News, reviews, and analysis, edited by S. T. Karnick Fri, 10 Feb 2012 17:50:23 +0000 hourly 1 By: CJ Evans http://stkarnick.com/culture/2010/03/15/james-bowman-denies-denying-artistic-standing-to-tolkien-and-lewis/comment-page-1/#comment-6126 CJ Evans Wed, 17 Mar 2010 20:04:19 +0000 http://stkarnick.com/culture/?p=6119#comment-6126 Heck, some people probably believe in faeries today. They certainly believe in spiritualism, like Conan Doyle did, and reincarnation--just ask Shirley Maclaine. Does that make Avatar art after all? That seems a pretty lame evasion on Bowman's part. The Hobbit, I believe, was published in 1936, the first Lord of the Rings book in the mid-1950s. I think it's safe to say the faerie fad was in serious decline by that time! As far as C. S. Lewis goes, Bowman does know Narnia's Christian allegory, right? I've heard tell there's allegory in Tolkien too. How does he feel about allegory? What would he say of Poe's The Masque of the Red Death or Hawthorne's Young Goodman Brown? Heck, some people probably believe in faeries today. They certainly believe in spiritualism, like Conan Doyle did, and reincarnation–just ask Shirley Maclaine. Does that make Avatar art after all? That seems a pretty lame evasion on Bowman’s part. The Hobbit, I believe, was published in 1936, the first Lord of the Rings book in the mid-1950s. I think it’s safe to say the faerie fad was in serious decline by that time! As far as C. S. Lewis goes, Bowman does know Narnia’s Christian allegory, right? I’ve heard tell there’s allegory in Tolkien too. How does he feel about allegory? What would he say of Poe’s The Masque of the Red Death or Hawthorne’s Young Goodman Brown?

]]> By: Daniel Crandall http://stkarnick.com/culture/2010/03/15/james-bowman-denies-denying-artistic-standing-to-tolkien-and-lewis/comment-page-1/#comment-6115 Daniel Crandall Wed, 17 Mar 2010 04:12:47 +0000 http://stkarnick.com/culture/?p=6119#comment-6115 The original article is quite clear in its condemnation of all fantasy going back, "more than [a] century," to MacDonald through Tolkien to the modern day. When I pointed this out, Bowman, in his "Diary" response, backed off a bit from the charge of lumping Tolkien, Lewis, and maybe a few others with those working in the genre today. But there remains a whiff of fondness, in what he writes, for the day when fantasy literature was tolerated as a pastime for children but never taken seriously and certainly not considered art by the educated class. I'm sorry, Tory, but he and I are not in agreement at all. And that's not what I'm looking for. What I'm looking for is clarity. If he doesn't believe fantasy qualifies is art, which is exactly what he wrote, than let him stand by the argument. He wouldn't be the first and he won't be the last. Colleges and universities are full of academics who believe serious literature does not include fantasy and science fiction. But his response makes him appear just a bit wobbly on the point by allowing for the possibility that Lewis and Tolkien and many more were artists in "the Western mimetic tradition" because they very likely could have believed in faeries, wizards, and talking beavers. The original article is quite clear in its condemnation of all fantasy going back, “more than [a] century,” to MacDonald through Tolkien to the modern day. When I pointed this out, Bowman, in his “Diary” response, backed off a bit from the charge of lumping Tolkien, Lewis, and maybe a few others with those working in the genre today. But there remains a whiff of fondness, in what he writes, for the day when fantasy literature was tolerated as a pastime for children but never taken seriously and certainly not considered art by the educated class.

I’m sorry, Tory, but he and I are not in agreement at all. And that’s not what I’m looking for. What I’m looking for is clarity. If he doesn’t believe fantasy qualifies is art, which is exactly what he wrote, than let him stand by the argument. He wouldn’t be the first and he won’t be the last. Colleges and universities are full of academics who believe serious literature does not include fantasy and science fiction. But his response makes him appear just a bit wobbly on the point by allowing for the possibility that Lewis and Tolkien and many more were artists in “the Western mimetic tradition” because they very likely could have believed in faeries, wizards, and talking beavers.

]]> By: Toryhere http://stkarnick.com/culture/2010/03/15/james-bowman-denies-denying-artistic-standing-to-tolkien-and-lewis/comment-page-1/#comment-6110 Toryhere Wed, 17 Mar 2010 00:44:33 +0000 http://stkarnick.com/culture/?p=6119#comment-6110 Al Bowman was saying is that modern fantasy is not as gooda as that of the classic era because it doesn't relate to our emotional experience. That is exactly what Tolkein alludes to in the quotation you so kindly provide. So you and Bowman are in agreement: a magical element in a work of fiction does not, in itself, disqualify that work from being great art, as long as that work succeeds in holding up a mirrot to life, even if it is only reflecting what a human would do in a fantastical situation. Much modern fantasy, Avatar being a classic example, does not achieve this level of mimesis. Al Bowman was saying is that modern fantasy is not as gooda as that of the classic era because it doesn’t relate to our emotional experience. That is exactly what Tolkein alludes to in the quotation you so kindly provide.

So you and Bowman are in agreement: a magical element in a work of fiction does not, in itself, disqualify that work from being great art, as long as that work succeeds in holding up a mirrot to life, even if it is only reflecting what a human would do in a fantastical situation. Much modern fantasy, Avatar being a classic example, does not achieve this level of mimesis.

]]> By: James Kabala http://stkarnick.com/culture/2010/03/15/james-bowman-denies-denying-artistic-standing-to-tolkien-and-lewis/comment-page-1/#comment-6101 James Kabala Tue, 16 Mar 2010 16:58:46 +0000 http://stkarnick.com/culture/?p=6119#comment-6101 I actually haven't even seen Avatar and am not particularly a fan of science fiction in general, but isn't a flaw in Bowman's argument, at least as it applies to science fiction (he has a better case with Tolkienesque elves-and-dwarves fantasy or comic book superheroes) that many people do believe in extraterrestial life and believe it will some day be discovered, and thus Cameron (like Roddenberry or Lucas before him) is in fact feeding this belief? Personally I believe the existence of life on other planets is very unlikely and think that even if it does exist we will never make contact, but many people believe otherwise, and how is their attitude toward Avatar distinguishable from that of an Elizabethan A Midsummer Night's Dream audience that (equally incorrectly) really did believe in fairies? I actually haven’t even seen Avatar and am not particularly a fan of science fiction in general, but isn’t a flaw in Bowman’s argument, at least as it applies to science fiction (he has a better case with Tolkienesque elves-and-dwarves fantasy or comic book superheroes) that many people do believe in extraterrestial life and believe it will some day be discovered, and thus Cameron (like Roddenberry or Lucas before him) is in fact feeding this belief? Personally I believe the existence of life on other planets is very unlikely and think that even if it does exist we will never make contact, but many people believe otherwise, and how is their attitude toward Avatar distinguishable from that of an Elizabethan A Midsummer Night’s Dream audience that (equally incorrectly) really did believe in fairies?

]]> By: Troels Forchhammer http://stkarnick.com/culture/2010/03/15/james-bowman-denies-denying-artistic-standing-to-tolkien-and-lewis/comment-page-1/#comment-6097 Troels Forchhammer Tue, 16 Mar 2010 10:59:30 +0000 http://stkarnick.com/culture/?p=6119#comment-6097 Despite John's reservations, I am tempted to bring up also the views related in Hohn Rateliff's blog today[*] that the Greeks did not actually believe their own myths (well, kinda, I guess, but not really . . .), which would -- at least according to the original article in "The New Atlantis" -- disqualify also Homer and all the Greek plays on mythical subjects. [*] http://sacnoths.blogspot.com/2010/03/did-greeks-believe-their-myths.html Despite John’s reservations, I am tempted to bring up also the views related in Hohn Rateliff’s blog today[*] that the Greeks did not actually believe their own myths (well, kinda, I guess, but not really . . .), which would — at least according to the original article in “The New Atlantis” — disqualify also Homer and all the Greek plays on mythical subjects.

[*] http://sacnoths.blogspot.com/2010/03/did-greeks-believe-their-myths.html

]]>