You say 'Faeries' & I say 'Fairies'

[davem]

Firstly, I want to apologise for including two long quotes - though the second may be of interest to Downers, as it is from an essay by Tolkien on Smith of Wooton Major, which has just been published for the first time in a new edition of Smith edited by Verlyn Flieger.

The first quote is from ‘Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell’ by Susanna Clarke:

The camp was a dreary, silent place. A thick snow was falling and the strange soldiers lay, wrapped in their black cloaks, upon the snowy ground. At first the young women thought the soldiers must be dead - an impression which was strengthened by the great multitude of ravens and other black birds which had settled over the camp, and indeed upon the prostrate forms of the soldiers themselves - yet the soldiers were not dead; from time to time one would stir himself and go attend to his horse, or brush a bird away if it tried to peck at his face.
At the approach of the young women a soldier got to his feet. One of the women shook off her fears and went up to him and kissed him on the mouth.
His skin was very pale (it shone like moonlight) and entirely without blemish. His hair was long and straight like a fall of dark brown water. The bones of his face were unnaturally fine and strong. The expression of the face was solemn. His blue eyes were long and slanting and his brows were as fine and dark as pen strokes with a curious flourish at the end. None of this worried the girl in the least. For all she knew every Dane, Scot and Frenchman ever born is eerily beautiful.
He took well enough to the kiss and allowed her to kiss him again. Then he paid her back in kind. Another soldier rose from the ground and opened his mouth. Out of it came a sad, wailing sort ofrnusic. The first soldier- the one the girl had kissed - began to coax her to dance with him, pushing her this way and that with his long white fingers until she was dancing in a fashion to suit him.
This went on for some time until she became heated with the dance and paused for a moment to take off her cloak. Then her companions saw that drops of blood, like beads of sweat, were forming on her arms, face and legs, and falling on to the snow. This sight terrified them and so they ran away. The strange army never entered Allendale. It rode on in the night towards Carlisle. The next day the townspeople went cautiously up to the fields where the army had camped. There they found the girl, her body entirely white and drained of blood while the snow around her was stained bright red.
By these signs they recognised the Daoine Sidhe - the Fairy Host.

These are the Fairies of ‘British’ Tradition - English, Welsh, Scottish & Irish. These Fairies are dangerous, contemptuous of Man. They are called the ‘Good People’ in Ireland, not because they are good, but in order to placate them.

In ballads like Tam Lin a human is captured by the Fairies & made to serve them. Tam Lin is rescued by his love, the Fair Janet, & when the Fairy Queen discovers this she spits out angrily that if she had known of the lovers’ plan she would have removed Tam Lin’s eyes & heart & replaced them with stones.

In another Ballad, Thomas the Rhymer, Thomas is taken to Elfland by the Queen, where he serves her for seven years & is rewarded with a coat of velvet green & the gift of the ‘Tongue that cannot lie’ (ie prophecy). Interestingly this ballad is based on an actual Scottish prophet, Thomas of Erceldoune, who lived at the time of Robert the Bruce & William Wallace, & to whom are attributed many genuine prophecies. Thomas comes off well in comparison to Tam Lin, retaining access to Faerie - indeed it is said that he didn’t die, but passed into Faerie & dwells there still. Another example of such a real person who passed into Faerie rather than dying & still dwells there is the 17th century Reverend Robert Kirk, author of ‘The Secret Commonwealth of Elves, Fauns & Fairies’, a major work of fairy lore. Celtic myth & English folklore is replete with tales of dangerous Fairies, who threaten humans - even killing them with ‘elf-shot’. A few people are taken in by Fairies, but the majority of ordinary people kept a safe distance - if they could.

Now to Tolkien. As I said, this quote is from the Smith Essay:

It is plainly shown that Faery is a vast world in its own right, that does not depend for its existence upon Men, and which is not primarily nor indeed principally concerned with Men. The relationship must therefore be one of love: the Elven Folk, the chief and ruling inhabitants of Faery, have an ultimate kinship with Men and have a permanent love for them in general. Though they are not bound by any moral obligation to assist Men, and do not need their help (except in human affairs), they do from time to time try to assist them. avert evil from them and have relations with them, especially through certain men and women whom they find suitable. They, the Elvenfolk, are thus 'beneficent' with regard to Men, and are not wholly alien, though many things and creatures in Faery itself are alien to Men and even actively hostile. Their good will is seen mainly in attempting to keep or restore relationships betWeen the two worlds, since the Elves (and still some Men) realize that this love of Faery is essential to the full and proper human development. The love of Faery is the love of love: a relationship towards all things. animate and inanimate, which includes love and respect, and removes or modifies e spirit of possession and domination. Without it even plain 'Utility' will in fact become less useful; or will turn to ruthlessness and lead only to mere power, ultimately destructive. The Apprentice relation in the tale is thus interesting. Men in a large part of their activities are or should be in an apprentice status as regards the Elven folk. In an attempt to rescue Wootton from its decline, the Elves reverse the situation, and the King of faery himself COmes and serves as an apprentice in the village...

BUT Faery is not religious. It is fairly evident that it is not Heaven or Paradise. Certainly its inhabitants, Elves, are not angels or emlssares of God (direct). The tale does not deal with religion itself. The Elves are not busy with a plan to reawake religious devotion in Wootton. The Cooking allegory would not be suitable to any such import. Faery represents at its weakest a breaking out (at least in mind) from the iron ring of the familiar, stilI more from the adamantine ring of belief that it is known, possessed, controlled, and so (ultimately) all that is worth being considered - a constant awareness of a world beyond these rings. More strongly it represents love: that is, a love and respect for all things, 'inanimate' and 'animate', an unposessing love of them as 'other'. This 'love' will produce both ruth and delight. Things seen in its light will be respected, and they will also appear delightful, beautiful, wonderful - even glorious.

Of course, Tolkien stated (in ‘On Fairy Stories’) that Faerie is a perilous realm, with ‘dungeons for the overbold’. Yet, even in Smith, which the story of his most concerned with traditional Faerie & its inhabitants, there is none of the Fairy cruelty & malice which we see in the traditional tales (or in Clarke’s story). Tolkien’s Faeries in SoWM are compassionate beings concerned with human welfare, & who are willing to make sacrifices to aid humans. They are motivated by love & desire to liberate Men from ‘the adamantine ring of belief that it is known, possessed, controlled, and so (ultimately) all that is worth being considered ’. In short, Tolkien’s faeries are (just as his Elves) a unique creation. Of course, the Legendarium Elves are dangerous, but not in the traditional way. Tolkien stated in one of the Letters that they area an aspect of the ‘human’. They are dangerous in the way that human beings may be dangerous - proud, violent, conceited - but in a human way, not a traditional fairy way. They are human beings depicted in sharp relief, with human failings writ large. None of the Legendarium Elves would (or could) do what Clarke’s Fairies did.

That is not to say that the Faeries Smith meets are all ‘sweetness & light’ - the Elven mariners are terrifying figures who leave Smith cowering - but they are not malicious - malice is not part of their nature. They are either unconcerned with humanity or they are on the side of Man. In short, traditional Fairies are incapable of human emotions like love while Tolkien’s faeries are motivated by that emotion than any other.

Tolkien’s Faeries desire to awaken Men to the beauty & strangeness of the natural world (without, as Tolkien says, having any ‘religious’ motives - ‘The Elves are not busy with a plan to reawake religious devotion in Wootton.’ they are not ‘angels or emissaries of God’.

So, while Tolkien’s Faeries wish to re-awaken a love of, & sense of oneness with, the natural world, traditional Fairies are a manifestation of its wildness, terror & fearsomeness - they make the natural world a place of fear & are a constant threat to humans who stray there, & a terror to humans who go in fear of their intrusion. We may dream of meeting one of Tolkien’s Faeries in the woods, but meeting one of Clarke’s traditional Fairies is more the stuff of nightmare.

So, what was behind Tolkien’s changing of these traditional creatures from malicious to beneficent beings? SoWM was the last story Tolkien published, & I can’t help wondering about the evolution of Galadriel here - she became increasingly ‘sanctified’, increasingly ‘purged of the gross’ in the post LotR writings. Why? Why take traditional beings & alter them so radically? In Appendix F to LotR Tolkien states that he chose the traditional word ‘Elves’ to refer to his Eldar, as that was the closest word he could find in modern usage. He could not really claim this about his use of ‘Faeries’ in SoWM. Here he takes figures from legend & changes them totally.

Was he simply playing fast & loose with tradition, or was there more to it?

[Estelyn Telcontar]

Excellent topic for discussion, davem! Tolkien did change the Elves from what they were in folk tradition, but I think that is something that frequently happens in literature. Literature is the product of its author, so s/he is entitled to make changes to influences that have been adapted, in order to fulfil the author's purpose in the story.

There are numerous examples of that in connection with fairies: the Grimm brothers did not only collect fairy tales, they changed them in the process, doing more than simply recording their findings. Whether that resulted in enrichment or loss (probably some of both) is a matter of opinion, of course.

Worse in my eyes is the popular transformation of fairies to diminutive flower spirits, with no power and little or no influence on humans. I cringe when I see those little winged sprites in decoration shops - cute, but stripped of all meaning. However, like Nokes' Fairy Queen on the Great Cake,

Better a little doll, maybe, than no memory of Faery at all. For some the only glimpse. For some the awaking.

Another literary version occurs to me, written by another Oxford professor many years earlier - Sylvie and Bruno. Tolkien read and admired Lewis Carroll's story of fairy children (though I must admit I much prefer the Alice stories, which Tolkien didn't like much). These fairies are benevolent - Bruno may be mischievous, but never malicious, and it's all in a spirit of childlike innocence. Sylvie is positively angelic, though not in a lofty sense, but also with innocence. If Tolkien used the Elves to illustrate a side of humanity, Carroll showed the childlike side that exists even in grownup humans. (By the way, his comments in the preface to Sylvie and Bruno show how strong the Christian influence was for him as well.)

It's all in the leafmould, as Tolkien himself once suggested. The influences are seen and felt, fertilizing and enriching the author's work. But that does not mean that the ensuing plant must be the same kind of leaf - it will grow to be something completely new.

Whether the changes Tolkien made to the Elves, especially Galadriel, would be considered "sanctified" to a Christian or spoiled to a fan of the folk tales is a matter of interpretation - unless, of course, we want to start arguing about the canonicity of traditional fairy stories!

[HerenIstarion]

The change in perception of 'fairies' must have something to do with the change in general outlook [of Western society] - whatever his tastes, Tolkien was the son of his time, and general 'fear of the unknown' of the previous centuries was largely replaced by 'curiosity of the unknown' in XIX and XX centuries (we are talking Europe and the West in general here, and especially as a hangover of WWI and WWII in the intelligentsia, not politicians). I don't intend to say the phenomenon of 'fear' is eliminated - War of the Worlds type of stories and general mode of depicting 'aliens' since Wells say otherwise, but it is undeniable that 'scientific' interest as a phenomenon of two previous centuries must have played its role too.

What do I ramble about is not yet finally clear to myself, but vaguely, some idea of 'broadened horizons' and 'embracing diversity' (In spite and even 'thanks to' two world wars Tolkien was a witness of) hovers by the back of my head. 'See a stranger - fear a stranger - hate a stranger' sequence is a natural human reaction, but in last two centuries it was paralleled by the uprise of 'see a stranger - are curious about a stranger - start to learn stranger - know stranger - love stranger' sequence.

During much of 20th century, and much of Tolkien's lifetime (especially during the period of his 'late writings') the main characteristic of the whole world's life was opposition of two 'superpowers', divided mainly by ideological, but economically so, considerations. It was perceivable (and was thus perceived) that 'morally' liberalism and marxsism are not far apart (indeed, being products of the same culture).

With the break up of Soviet Union, new division of the world by 'cultural characteristics' is bound to strengthen 'fear the stranger' sequence (Indeed, it has already done so)

What follows is my assumption that likelihood of [Western] writers taking hostile creatures of the folklore and making them friendly is less likely now than it was in the period after WWII, when differences in culture were not counted as much as differences in [largely economic] ideologies were. [but are now to far greater extent]

I know the whole issue is round-about way to come to the haven, but it seems to me every aspect of our life affects us and how we perceive things.

I consciously abstain from mentioning Tolkien's faith here - indeed, people who in previous centuries depicted 'fairies' as malicious beings were, presumably, no less devout Christians than Tolkien was.

[davem]

I think what partiularly interests me is that Tolkien set SoWM in a very 'medieval' world, & in that period of our history Faeries/Fairies were generally feared & seen as malicious & dangerous - they stole humans to serve as slaves - yet they would also bestow 'powers' on chosen humans. There is a whole tradition of human-Fairy marriages & of human magicians taking fairy 'allies' (see Kirk).

The point is that Tolkien's Fairies/Elves are totally unlike traditional Fairies/Elves - there is no traditional 'backing' for his representation. Yet in the Smith essay he writes as though his depiction is correct & traditional. The essay reads oddly - at some points he is clearly speaking only of the 'Faerie' of his invented world, at other points it seems like he is speaking of the Faerie of tradition & legend while at other points still it is as if (as in the last part of the quote I gave) he is using 'Faerie'/Faeries' as a 'philosophical' metaphor.

Sorry -too rushed & I don't have the essay with me. Will come back to this later.

[Lalwendë]

I think where the difference lies as a whole is that Tolkien's Elves are not fairies, faeries, elves or pixies. They are Elves and are drawn from Scandinavian myth. As such, they are similar to humans, but are somehow superhuman, almost a representation of perfection. They are drawn from an idea that Elves are noble beings, beautiful and even take an interest in humans.

Faeries are different. The idea of a Faery/Fairy as a sinister and untrustworthy being comes from a different root; they are linked to the idea of boggarts, leprechauns and sprites and are a staple of British folklore.

At some point, perceptions of the two (drawn from different cultures) became combined, possibly when Shakespeare created his Fairies which seem to have characteristics of both ideas - and this was further embedded with the Victorian interchangeability between Elf and Fairy (and Pixie and Sprite...). When Tolkien (and I have to note he was not alone in doing this) 'reclaimed' Elves and made them noble beings once again he made them different to Fairies once again. And they've remained much that way ever since, with Tolkien style Elves seemingly a 'staple' in fantasy literature. I see that what Susanna Clarke has done is a similar thing for Fairies, 'restoring' them back to their more sinister origins.

Where Tolkien uses Faeries in SOWM he is using figures very like his own Elves, but the tale is written as though it is a remnant from our own world - maybe this is why he uses the word 'Faeries'? To try to link the tale to our own world? Or is he trying to distance the story of SOWM from the stories of Arda?

His Elves are clearly his own interpretation of what beings from the Otherworld might be like, developed from his own ideals of Faerie and his readings of Scandinavian and Anglo-Saxon mythology and literature. His creations are so powerful that many readers will now also perceive Faerie to be similar to his vision. Others may not share this however; I know that I perceive Faerie/The Otherworld to be quite distinct from Tolkien’s creations.

What interests me is why Fairies were ever perceived as dangerous. The natural world at one time presented greater dangers than it does today; it still does present great dangers but we have distanced ourselves from it. In order to keep children from the very real dangers of Wolves, Boars and strangers in the woods, it would be wise to prevent them from wanting to go there. With the coming of organised religion it would also be in the interests of those in power to make people even more afraid of The Otherworld. Coupled with a close relationship with the capricious natural world stories of sinister Fairies might be entirely natural to us as humans.

Yet Fairies are also enticing creatures. I think this might be due to the need to believe that as humans we are not alone. We also have Angels who fulfil this need, and in the modern age, Aliens, who are sometimes kindly, sometimes sinister. All these creatures, including Tolkien’s Elves share characteristics. They are all either unnaturally tall or diminutive, they are depicted with large, luminous eyes, either great beauty or ugliness, and they have either qualities of light or darkness.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Lalwende

I think where the difference lies as a whole is that Tolkien's Elves are not fairies, faeries, elves or pixies. They are Elves and are drawn from Scandinavian myth. As such, they are similar to humans, but are somehow superhuman, almost a representation of perfection. They are drawn from an idea that Elves are noble beings, beautiful and even take an interest in humans.

I'm not sure that the Norse Alfar were percieved as 'noble' - any more than the Celtic Sidhe. They were (or could appear) beautiful, but they were indifferent, at best, to human moral codes & values - which is not to say they didn't have a moral value system of their own.

Where Tolkien uses Faeries in SOWM he is using figures very like his own Elves, but the tale is written as though it is a remnant from our own world - maybe this is why he uses the word 'Faeries'? To try to link the tale to our own world? Or is he trying to distance the story of SOWM from the stories of Arda?

This is waht puzzled me - if he was trying to tie the world of SoWM into our own world - which I think he was, but in a particular way - then why present us with such non-traditional creatures? Its possible that he was using Faerie/Faeries as metaphors for nature, for Art, for natural religion, or some such- yet that would make them exactly the kind of 'allegory' which Tolkien denies them to be: he will allow an 'allegorical' interpretation of the human world of SoWM, but not of the Faerie world. In this context there is the very interesting statement:

The Apprentice relation in the tale is thus interesting. Men in a large part of their activities are or should be in an apprentice status as regards the Elven folk. In an attempt to rescue Wootton from its decline, the Elves reverse the situation, and the King of faery himself COmes and serves as an apprentice in the village...

In other words, Tolkien seems to be saying that Men should be in the subservient position with regard to Elves/Faeries - they should be the 'apprentices'. This implies a kin of 'hierarchy' where Men come below Elves/Faeries. Not only does this go against the traditional ideas of the Faerie's lack of human emotions like love, compassion & empathy it also sits ill with the Christian belief that (redeemed) Men stand even above the angels.

BUT Faery is not religious. It is fairly evident that it is not Heaven or Paradise. Certainly its inhabitants, Elves, are not angels or emlssares of God (direct).... Men in a large part of their activities are or should be in an apprentice status as regards the Elven folk.

This relationship of Men & Faeries is odd. In the Ballad of Thomas the Rhymer Thomas is brought by the fFairy Queen to Three Roads - one leads to Heaven, one to Hell & one to 'Fair Elfland'. In other words, Faerie is neither Heaven, hell nor earth, but a fourth place/state. Faeries are not (as Tolkien states in the essay) neither angels nor emissaries of God. They are not demons (their motivation is love - of Men & of the natural, God- created, world. Obviously, they are not humans, either - yet humans should be subject to them, be their 'apprentices'. This may be similar to the situation in the Legendarium, where Men, the 'Followers' are in a similar position as regards the Eldar, who they will eventually replace, but it is odd that Tolkien seeks to bring this idea into the world of SoWM - a world, as Lalwende states, is so very similar to our own world of the medieval period.

Their good will is seen mainly in attempting to keep or restore relationships betWeen the two worlds, since the Elves (and still some Men) realize that this love of Faery is essential to the full and proper human development. The love of Faery is the love of love: a relationship towards all things. animate and inanimate, which includes love and respect, and removes or modifies the spirit of possession and domination......Faery represents at its weakest a breaking out (at least in mind) from the iron ring of the familiar, stilI more from the adamantine ring of belief that it is known, possessed, controlled, and so (ultimately) all that is worth being considered - a constant awareness of a world beyond these rings. More strongly it represents love: that is, a love and respect for all things, 'inanimate' and 'animate', an unposessing love of them as 'other'. This 'love' will produce both ruth and delight. Things seen in its light will be respected, and they will also appear delightful, beautiful, wonderful - even glorious.

These beings are not part of Christian doctrine, & fit nowhere into the Christian cosmology/cosmography. The role they seem to play is not that attributed to either angels or saints in Christianity. Their role seems to be to teach (or rea-awaken) a love for & sense of kinship with the natural world, but at the same time to liberate us from any feelings of 'familiarity' (breeder of contempt) as regards nature. Their task is to awaken us to the otherness of nature, to its beauty & peril & most importantly to its strangeness. It is a place of mystery, yet it is on the doorstep - Wooton Major stands at the edge of the forest & Tolkien suggests that Smith's wife & daughter were both elf-friends & wanderers in 'outer-Faerie'.

All those things the Fairies of tradition may have done - but along with them they did something else - they made the natural world a place of terror, a place to be avoided. It was their realm & humans entered at their peril. There is an echo of that in Doriath & Lorien, but the 'Elven inhabitants of those realms were effectively beautiful, noble, immortal humans, not beings who were wholly 'other' as were the Fairies of tradition.

Don't know where I'm going with this, but the more I consider it the more interesting Tolkien's 'Faeries' become...