Letter to Maegraith: Difference between revisions

From Tolkien Gateway
m (Added external link)
m (Text replacement - "Letters not published in "The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien"" to "Letters not published in The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien")
 
(5 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
'''Maegraith 2 June 1945''' is a [[Letters not published in "The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien"|letter]] from [[J.R.R. Tolkien]] to his [[Oxford]] acquaintance Maegraith, written on [[2 June]] [[1945]].<ref name=C>{{CG|C}}, p. 292</ref>
On [[2 June]] [[1945]], [[J.R.R. Tolkien]] wrote '''[[Letters not published in The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien|a letter]] to Maegraith'''.<ref name=C>{{CG|C}}, p. 292</ref>


*'''Description:''' Handwritten letter.
*'''Publication:''' None.
*'''Subject:''' Comments on stories written by Maegraith, sent to Tolkien.
*'''Subject:''' Comments on stories written by Maegraith, sent to Tolkien.


Line 14: Line 16:
}}
}}


==Transciption==
==Transcription==


I ought to have acknowledged your packet at once; but
I ought to have acknowledged your packet at once; but
I thought you'd like to have it back soon, with some comment.
I thought you'd like to have it back soon, with some comment.
However, things have been pretty shaky all through May, with an
However, things have been pretty sticky all through May, with an
endless series of small extra jobs, exam work and also death.
endless series of small extra jobs, exam work and also death.
Especially the sudden death of my very dear friend [[Charles Williams]],
Especially the sudden death of my very dear friend [[Charles Williams]],
the author, which has thrown all our little circle into deep mourning[.]
the author, which has thrown all our little circle into deep mourning[.]
Professors, too, seem dying or retiring everywhere, and as I am now
Professors, too, seem dying or retiring everywhere, and as I am now
(as a survivor) an ?elector or advisor in half a dozen places, I have
(as a survivor) an elector or advisor in half a dozen places, I have
had a hell of a lot of letters to write.
had a hell of a lot of letters to write.


I don't know that I can do or say a lot that would be
I don't know that I can do or say a lot that would be
helpful, as I am not a professional critic, merely an occasional
helpful, as I am not a professional critic, merely an occasional
writer -- and that sort of man is apt simply to feel what he
writer and that sort of man is apt simply to feel what he
(with his own mode and habits) would have done in such and such a
(with his own mode and habits) would have done in such and such a
place: not always a good thing in some [sic] one else's work. And in
place: not always a good thing in some [sic] one else's work. And in
Line 36: Line 38:
On those conditions: I should say that the ideas, general and
On those conditions: I should say that the ideas, general and
particular, are good: I mean the general idea of a series of
particular, are good: I mean the general idea of a series of
incredible tales told by the old ??? ?major is an excellent link; and
incredible tales told by the old sot major is an excellent link; and
the central idea ??racts of the three stories is good for such a series.
the central idea of each of the three stories is good for such a series.
(???? the BBC ?type ?which a????? "setting" to bring it into line)
(???? the BBC ?type ?which a????? "setting" to bring it into line)


But reworking art ?in detail ?must be criticized (as ????? you ???).
But reworking art ?in detail could be criticized (as I think you feel)
I should ?no ?select "jerkiness"(your word, I think) or the salient fault.
I should not select "jerkiness" (your word, I think) as the salient fault.
I should say they seemed to me rushed and overheated, rather.
I should say that they seem to me rushed and overheated, rather.
Everything is slightly exaggerated -- and to my mind that's not
Everything is slightly exaggerated -- and to my mind that is not
desirable, than require dealing with what is incredible, ______ ______.
desirable, when you're dealing with what is incredible, ______ ______.
The major's meanness, though doubtless actually shameless, needs
The major's meanness, though doubtless actually shameless, needs
to be a little less obviously thrust in tone. Then in the actual stories
to be a little less obviously thrust at one. Then in the actual stories
the language and expressions (which is telling 'em in theory does not
the language and expressions (whoever is telling 'em in theory does not
matter: from the point of view of your reader. They're just being
matter: from the point of view of your reader, they're just being
told ?to him, by your A. J. Alan) wasn't, to my taste, to be
told to him, whether by your A. J. Alan) want, to my taste, to be
toned down.
toned down.


I'll by end exemplify all this From the President's ?Spouse, the major
I'll try and exemplify all this from the President's Spoon, the major
piece. This story is I think is overstrained in tone. It would I think
piece. This story is I think is overstrained in tone. It would I think
be more effective if the colour was laid on thinner. For instance, I
be more effective if the colour was laid on thinner. For instance, I
should myself knock out ?soulsearing (before bitterness) in p. 2; and
should myself knock out soulsearing (before bitterness) on p. 2; and
similarly ?electric before joy, and ?sim'ly elsewhere; and think of
similarly electric before joy, and ?sim'ly elsewhere; and think of
something milder and more clearly pictorial for ?thrashed out ?an
something milder and more closely pictorial for thrashed out an
epileptic miracle ?in p. 4.
epileptic miracle on p. 4.


Where you could have let yourself ?yo more, I think was at the
Where you could have let yourself go more, I think, was at the
end. Those I should have made more ?if ?the lynching, ?and
end. Those I should have made more of the lynching, and
suggested more (or more clearly) that the crowd was
suggested more (or more clearly) that the crowd was
given by some horrible sermon ra__ something beyond mere
driven by some horrible demon rage, something beyond mere
?embarqed sport. A general weakness of the story,
?embarqed sport. A general weakness of this story,
and perhaps the most difficult to surmount is this. The real
and perhaps the most difficult to surmount is this. The real
center of it is the fantastic behaviour of Chamberlain's ball,
centre of it is the fantastic behaviour of Chamberlain's ball,
after Hick's suicide. But Hick's suicide -- I am sorry, but
after Hick's suicide. But Hick's suicide -- I am sorry, but
though you may think this makes readers very dull, you must
though you may think this makes readers very dull, you must
Line 72: Line 74:
inquest -- has to be caused by an "unfair" defeat.
inquest -- has to be caused by an "unfair" defeat.


Very well: but this must not be allowed to _p_il the really exciting
Very well: but this must not be allowed to spoil the really exciting
final Open match. It does. The thing has become too repetitive.
final Open match. It does. The thing has become too repetitive.
The way out is either (a) to make Chamberlain cheat in some way,
The way out is either (a) to make Chamberlain cheat in some way,
(b) --- (better I think) to make the P.Sp??? match much less
(b) --- (better I think) to make the P.Spoon match much less
miraculous. You need one fatal "hole in one" by a fluke to bring
miraculous. You need one fatal "hole in one" by a fluke to bring
on the later terrible retribution of ?endless "holes in one". But you
on the later terrible retribution of ?endless "holes in one". But you
must limit it to one. The P.S match should be won by a ?flirting, but
must limit it to one. The P.S match should be won by a ?flirting, but
not sh???? impossible hole in one on the last hole.
not sheerly impossible hole in one on the last hole.


Two small points of detail: Don't make things incredible in detail
Two small points of detail. Don't make things incredible in detail
in an incredible tale. Hicks and Chamberlain are normal names.
in an incredible tale. Hicks and Chamberlain are normal names.
_ittersnatchy may be a real name, too, for all I know, but it does not
Withersnatchy may be a real name, too, for all I know, but it does not
sound like one (even in Scotland). Why not have one that does?
sound like one (even in Scotland). Why not have one that does?
Personally I don't believe in "British inconsistency" - For the simple
Personally, I don't believe in "British inconsistency" - for the simple
reason that "the British" don't exist, except as in political fiction, and
reason that "the British" don't exist, except as a political fiction, and
are not a psycological, social or cultural unit. In any case,
are not a psychological, social or cultural unit. In any case,
granting the situation depicted, the psycology is not "inconsistency"
granting the situation depicted, the psychology is not "inconsistency"
but the reverse. The ?tenacity of H. and C. must be supposed to
but the reverse. The ?tenacity of H. and C. must be supposed to
proceed from a worship (typical of certain limited cords
proceed from a worship (typical of certain limited circles
in their island) of Sport or Games that places them above their feelings
in this island) of Sport or Games that places them above other feelings
and/or from a consistent ?tenacity of habit.
and/or from a consistent ?tenacity of habit.


The Raft story is least to my liking, simply on account
The Raft story is least to my liking, simply on account
of its name; though it is perhaps the least incredible, except
of its name; though it is perhaps the least incredible, except
in the assumed preservation from death of both the main ?actors.
in the assumed preservation from death of both the main actors.
The Ke___l here is I suppose: I was alone for a bit with a
The ?kernel here is I suppose: I was alone for a bit with a
naked man on a raft ... What a pity he isn't a gentleman"
naked man on a raft ... What a pity he wasn't a gentleman"
[It sounds a bit old fashioned to me and I can't imagine such
[It sounds a bit old fashioned to me and I can't imagine such
a young woman as you depict ever saying it, but have it your own
a young woman as you depict ever saying it, but have it your own
Line 107: Line 109:


I am afraid little of this will be legible -- but I've had to
I am afraid little of this will be legible -- but I've had to
scribble at great speed. [illegible
scribble at great speed. And what you can read will not I expect be of much use. Anyway here's to you, and I hope you'll
sentence] Anyway here's to you, and I hope you'll
accept it as a token of friendship. Here's to our next
accept it as a token of friendship. Here's to our next
shared pints.
shared pints.
Line 117: Line 118:


{{references}}
{{references}}
[[Category:Letters]]
[[Category:Letters|Maegraith]]

Latest revision as of 08:32, 18 March 2024

On 2 June 1945, J.R.R. Tolkien wrote a letter to Maegraith.[1]

  • Description: Handwritten letter.
  • Publication: None.
  • Subject: Comments on stories written by Maegraith, sent to Tolkien.

Images[edit | edit source]

 
 
 
 

Transcription[edit | edit source]

I ought to have acknowledged your packet at once; but I thought you'd like to have it back soon, with some comment. However, things have been pretty sticky all through May, with an endless series of small extra jobs, exam work and also death. Especially the sudden death of my very dear friend Charles Williams, the author, which has thrown all our little circle into deep mourning[.] Professors, too, seem dying or retiring everywhere, and as I am now (as a survivor) an elector or advisor in half a dozen places, I have had a hell of a lot of letters to write.

I don't know that I can do or say a lot that would be helpful, as I am not a professional critic, merely an occasional writer — and that sort of man is apt simply to feel what he (with his own mode and habits) would have done in such and such a place: not always a good thing in some [sic] one else's work. And in any case, you say you don't want to publish merely to amuse yourself (and friends). Well, in order to say anything, I have to imagine these things as offered for publication and anonymous. On those conditions: I should say that the ideas, general and particular, are good: I mean the general idea of a series of incredible tales told by the old sot major is an excellent link; and the central idea of each of the three stories is good for such a series. (???? the BBC ?type ?which a????? "setting" to bring it into line)

But reworking art ?in detail could be criticized (as I think you feel) I should not select "jerkiness" (your word, I think) as the salient fault. I should say that they seem to me rushed and overheated, rather. Everything is slightly exaggerated -- and to my mind that is not desirable, when you're dealing with what is incredible, ______ ______. The major's meanness, though doubtless actually shameless, needs to be a little less obviously thrust at one. Then in the actual stories the language and expressions (whoever is telling 'em in theory does not matter: from the point of view of your reader, they're just being told to him, whether by your A. J. Alan) want, to my taste, to be toned down.

I'll try and exemplify all this from the President's Spoon, the major piece. This story is I think is overstrained in tone. It would I think be more effective if the colour was laid on thinner. For instance, I should myself knock out soulsearing (before bitterness) on p. 2; and similarly electric before joy, and ?sim'ly elsewhere; and think of something milder and more closely pictorial for thrashed out an epileptic miracle on p. 4.

Where you could have let yourself go more, I think, was at the end. Those I should have made more of the lynching, and suggested more (or more clearly) that the crowd was driven by some horrible demon rage, something beyond mere ?embarqed sport. A general weakness of this story, and perhaps the most difficult to surmount is this. The real centre of it is the fantastic behaviour of Chamberlain's ball, after Hick's suicide. But Hick's suicide -- I am sorry, but though you may think this makes readers very dull, you must make that point clearer than just dropping the casual word inquest -- has to be caused by an "unfair" defeat.

Very well: but this must not be allowed to spoil the really exciting final Open match. It does. The thing has become too repetitive. The way out is either (a) to make Chamberlain cheat in some way, (b) --- (better I think) to make the P.Spoon match much less miraculous. You need one fatal "hole in one" by a fluke to bring on the later terrible retribution of ?endless "holes in one". But you must limit it to one. The P.S match should be won by a ?flirting, but not sheerly impossible hole in one on the last hole.

Two small points of detail. Don't make things incredible in detail in an incredible tale. Hicks and Chamberlain are normal names. Withersnatchy may be a real name, too, for all I know, but it does not sound like one (even in Scotland). Why not have one that does? Personally, I don't believe in "British inconsistency" - for the simple reason that "the British" don't exist, except as a political fiction, and are not a psychological, social or cultural unit. In any case, granting the situation depicted, the psychology is not "inconsistency" but the reverse. The ?tenacity of H. and C. must be supposed to proceed from a worship (typical of certain limited circles in this island) of Sport or Games that places them above other feelings and/or from a consistent ?tenacity of habit.

The Raft story is least to my liking, simply on account of its name; though it is perhaps the least incredible, except in the assumed preservation from death of both the main actors. The ?kernel here is I suppose: I was alone for a bit with a naked man on a raft ... What a pity he wasn't a gentleman" [It sounds a bit old fashioned to me and I can't imagine such a young woman as you depict ever saying it, but have it your own way: I'm not criticising your psychology or social satire, only the way of your narration]

[[only last paragraph of page 4 included below]]

I am afraid little of this will be legible -- but I've had to scribble at great speed. And what you can read will not I expect be of much use. Anyway here's to you, and I hope you'll accept it as a token of friendship. Here's to our next shared pints.

External links[edit | edit source]

References