Minor Works -- 2 - Leaf by Niggle

[Formendacil]

Because of its anomalous nature as the sole allegory in Tolkien's corpus (to say nothing of the scorn visited on allegories by him) Leaf by Niggle always stands out as somehow the easiest and the hardest of his works to talk about.

Easiest, because if Tolkien is going to write an allegory, by the beard of Aulë, he writes a pure allegory! Insofar as it IS an allegory and is very easy to map onto his own experience (up to the point where he has the Driver arrive, obviously), it feels like the most truthful thing Tolkien ever wrote. Given that Tolkien is a bit prone to forgetfulness when looking back at things years later as well as being as likely as any of us to tailor his reflections for the audience, he's acquired the reputation of being something of an unreliable narrator his own motivations. I think that's a bit untrue, but if you were to present a contradiction about his feelings in writing the The Lord of the Rings between a statement in the Letters and something in Leaf, I would instinctively side with Leaf as the truer of the two, ten times out of ten.

But, on the other hand, I find Leaf quite HARD to talk about, because... what is there to say other than what the text on the page itself says? This may be the only thing Tolkien ever wrote where I can't recall a single nugget of interest ever being referred from an earlier draft or background materials.

[Findegil]

I fully agree that the work-house is in a way similar or a representation of the traditional christian believe in prugatory. And I as well can agree that "Niggle's Parish" has a big similarity to Arda-heald or Arda-remade.

But is that equal to heaven? The quote from the Letter does suggest that in a way (and some passages from the Athrabeth as well), but would Niggle search beyond, once heaven in the christain sense is reached?

Thinking farther in that direction we might have stages of prugatory here: First the work-house which seems to be a kind of punishment and than the sanatory. In both cases the means of 'correction' are pushed upon Niggle from the outside. This goes so fare that at the end of that process we do not even hear Niggles own voice any longer. It is the judges that speak about Niggle that we hear at the end of that stage.
But than comes "Niggle's Parish": I think what is descript in that part is a kind of self-refelction. And in the end it leads Niggle to let go of his obsession and to leave his creation behind by his own choice. And we hear that the same fate does await Parish one day, but that he is not jet ready for it (and therefore can not understand Niggle going away).

In that sense the judges voice that at the dabate claimed that Niggle is not jet ready was right: As soon as he got the chance Niggle starts working on his obsession again. But probably only selfrefelction could bring him to the point of going on willingly and the third judges voice does allow him that way.

At first I thought that here I would now quote some descriptions of the Halls of Mandos and the stage of self refelction that the inhabitans would expirence there, as another description of prugatory by Tolkien. But searching for the quotes, I observed that they speak mainly about Elves and therfore would not fit fully here. So I will leave it at that and only mention it as stimulus for thought.

One additional thought in the end: If Leaf by Niggle is a biographical allegory, than the end of the story is a kind of confession: Yes, it would be very fullfilling to see the own sub-creation become 'true', but we have to free ourself from that wish or desire, because it is narcissitic to a certain point.

Respectfully
Findegil

[Pitchwife]

Originally Posted by Formendacil

I think that's a bit untrue, but if you were to present a contradiction about his feelings in writing the The Lord of the Rings between a statement in the Letters and something in Leaf, I would instinctively side with Leaf as the truer of the two, ten times out of ten.

Agreed. It reads very much like a long, honest look in the mirror, and maybe also a bit of a plea to the Second Voice.

Like I said above, I first read Leaf as a young man near twenty, in the first rush of discovering Tolkien and wanting to read everything he'd ever written (or at least everything translated into German, which wasn't a lot back then - the Silmarillion had only come out a few years before, UT and HoME were still unheard of). I kind of got what it was about (like Form said, it's hard not to), but I didn't really feel it - I loved the tree, but I cared little for Parish and his potatoes. It reads differently now, at a time in my life when the journey to be undertaken is morphing from a distant possibility to a fact of life that has to be reckoned with sooner or later, and I find myself thinking more and more about what matters in life, what I want to get done in the time I've got left and how much of it I'm likely to accomplish. There's very much a feeling of Tua res agitur in the story, and the reminder that what writers and painters tend to experience as annoying interruptions constitute what other people call living their lives is well taken.

I concur with Findegil that Niggle's Parish, paradisiac though it seems, is not heaven but another, gentler stage of purgatory where both Niggle and Parish learn to appreciate each other fully as a necessary step in their development/improvement/purification before they are ready to move on towards the mountains (which both of them seem to have attained at the end).

Does anybody else see the passage of dialogue between Tompkins and Atkins on the penultimate pages as an intrusion that might as well have been left out? Maybe if either of them had been introduced earlier it wouldn't so much stick out like a sore thumb. The point that utilitaristic folk don't appreciate art has already been made when Niggle's painting was used to patch Parish's roof, there's no need to belabour it. I find Tompkins an overdone caricature, and ascribing an ulterior motive to him ('you had your eye on his house') feels too much like Tolkien may have taken the opportunity to grind a personal axe.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Although Tompkins and Atkins are not bad representations of Oxford faculty today, in terms of regard for Tolkien's legacy. While there are a handful who value his fiction, the Consensus Position is that Tolkien frittered away what should have been a brilliant career on his fairy nonsense, instead of publishing proper papers and books on English philology: the promise of his young adulthood squandered.

(NB: why those names? Derived from Tommy Atkins? Some drollery regarding the diminutive suffix?)
----------------------------------------

It's perhaps noteworthy that Tolkien wrote Leaf in 1943- in other words when The Lord of the Rings had been stalled for at least a year and he at the time didn't see it getting on. Both the LR and his Legendarium can vbe seen as the Tree, and so it's interesting how slighting the author's voice is in regard to the Tree's quality and importance. Not really very good, but unusual and thus not entirely devoid of interest. And then Niggle's fantasy, of someone coming in and giving him a public pension so he wouldn't have to worry about anything but painting- how the overworked wartime Professor must have longed for that!

[Estelyn Telcontar]

I would like to add a few thoughts gleaned from Scull and Hammond's "Reader's Guide" on this story before the thread goes "treeish" (appropriately?):

Tolkien himself confirms the allegorical nature of the tale, though he writes (in a Letter to Jane Neave in 1962) that is more "mythological". His Tree is indeed the LotR.

Some commentators consider the religious nature of the allegory, others explore the connection to his views on sub-creation and eucatastrophe, to which this story gives literary form. Another (Ellison, quoted by S and H), examines it as

...concerned with the processes involved in the translation of artistic inspiration into physical reality. Its subjects are skill, craftsmanship, technique; the essentials of bringing any large artwork to completion...

That thought is sure to resonate with those of us who are involved in creative work in any form!

Further posts are not only allowed, but welcome; however, I am ending the "official" discussion for now.

[Huinesoron]

I actually have no idea which branch of Christianity I picked up the following idea from, but: there is a belief that God the Father has created a system of perfect justice, under which any sin or transgression deserves punishment; and since God's authority is absolute, the punishment is also absolute. In other words, in strict justice, everyone should go directly to Hell, neither passing Go nor collecting 200 currency units.

That's where God the Son comes in. Christ's sacrifice, through complex theological reasons, let him take responsibility for all those sins; but because he didn't actually do them himself, he can plead for mercy on behalf of the people who did. Thus, through Christianity, sinful humans can neverthless have a hope of Heaven.

This is the viewpoint on which my firm identification of the First and Second Voices as the Father and Son rests. Their talk of Justice and Mercy is that intercession. I've kind of always treated that as a certain fact, but it occurs to me - rather late - that there probably could be other interpretations. ^_^ (I think Catholicism talks about Mary interceding with Christ on behalf of the faithful, for example.)

~

I also realised a couple of days ago, that the Voices have an echo in the Legendarium. There are two Valar with authority over the dead - Mandos, the Doomsman of the Valar, who stands in judgement; and Nienna, the incarnation of Pity, who pled for mercy for Melkor, and alleviates the sorrow of the dead. Justice and Mercy, Voices One and Two.

What's interesting is that this isn't how they were originally. Fui Nienna of the Lost Tales is a full on dark goddess; her roof is made of bat's wings! It's only later that she became Mercy; and if that change came in the 1930s Silmarillion, then it's just about the same time he was writing the Two Voices in Leaf by Niggle.

hS