16 of 21 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Thought provoking and easy to understand, December 1, 2003
By A Customer
This review is from: Understanding Middle-Earth: Essays on Tolkien's Middle-Earth (Paperback)
Understanding Middle-Earth is a nice accompliment to Tolkien's (JRR's and Christopher's) large array of literary works. The author breaks down thought provoking areas from the books into chapters and takes a look at characters and stories only sometimes touched on in LOTR. This doesn't mean the read is boring or only for those interested in elvish syntax, the author makes the reading easy to understand and doesn't mind having fun - see the last chapter!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
19 of 26 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
A great book for every Tolkien fan, May 19, 2004
This review is from: Understanding Middle-Earth: Essays on Tolkien's Middle-Earth (Paperback)
It is unbelievable what people say when they set out to bash an author and his book. So, I am supposed to be a close friend of Michael Martinez just because I like his book? What nonsense!
The truth is that I have read this book from cover to cover. More than once. I love it. There are absolutely no false claims in it whatsoever. To suggest that anything Michael Martinez has written in this book is misleading is simply outrageous. Take the Penthesilea example mentioned in a previous review.
She comes towards the end of a very long essay, "The Other Way Round", in which Martinez carefully examines many sources and influences on Tolkien. Penthesilea comes from "The Fall of Troy" by Quintus of Smyrna. "Fall of Troy". Does that sound familiar? It should. It sounds very much like "The Fall of Gondolin". But there are more than just similarities between the names of these works.
If Martinez's sin is failing to mention that Eowyn's history is not based on Penthesilea's history, then the critic is at fault, not the author. This essay attributes only a few resemblances to Eowyn. And the tragic way Prince Imrahil finds her on the battlefield is compared to how Achilles beholds Penthesilea after he sees that she is a woman. But Martinez compares similarities between Eowyn and other female characters. And he starts out the Penthesilea discussion by saying "though Tolkien had no Anglo-Saxon models for Eowyn, he would have found one in Quintus' 'The Fall of Troy'".
"Would have found" does not mean "did find" or "only found" or "must have found". Who is misleading whom I say?
Martinez cites Tolkien letters and many other sources in this fantastic essay. It opens the eyes of those who haven't closed their minds. If there are axes being ground, they seem to have the name of Michael Martinez carved on their blades. Why do people keep trying to mislead Martinez readers if his books are really so bad? Maybe because he really is showing Tolkien readers there is more to Middle-earth than "Beowulf"? For shame!
And I, for one, am tired of people telling us that Michael Martinez doesn't know that Tolkien really was an Anglo-Saxonist. Do you know who else says he was not? Tom Shippey, author of The Road To Middle-earth and J.R.R. Tolkien: Author of the Century. Shippey served in the same position Tolkien did. Shippey knew Tolkien. Does that mean that Shippey does not understand how British academia works?
But Shippey is the not the only voice in academia Martinez listens to. He quotes Jonathan Glenn who also disagreed with the Anglo-Saxon point-of-view. Martinez goes out of his way to show the traditional Anglo-Saxon arguments. He does not pretend that Tolkien's knowledge of Anglo-Saxon literature had no effect on him. Martinez does quote Tolkien often about Greek literature and history, Babylon, Egypt, and other sources. Why is it wrong or misleading to point out for the reader the things Tolkien himself wrote?
If one is to study Tolkien, is it not acceptable to learn from Tolkien? I think that is what Martinez is saying. He finds many examples where Tolkien disagreed with and criticized people who tried to argue the Anglo-Saxon point of view. Maybe there is something to what Professor Tolkien said. If we dare not believe Michael Martinez because of all this supposed axe-grinding, what should we think about Tolkien? Was he grinding swords and spears along with axes?
I conclude what I said in my review about Visualizing Middle-earth, that it is no wonder people get upset when Michael Martinez knocks their pet theories into last year with clear and numerous citations from Tolkien. Enjoy the book because it is a rare treasure in a chest full of sand. Or hate it. But don't lie about it. That is so unworthy of Professor Tolkien's memory.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
15 of 21 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
A Great Addition to My Tolkien Library!, March 7, 2004
This review is from: Understanding Middle-Earth: Essays on Tolkien's Middle-Earth (Paperback)
Michael Martinez does it again! His first book, "Visualizing Middle Earth", brought many aspects of Tolkien's Middle Earth alive for me but "Understanding Middle Earth" goes even further. Michael's friendly conversational style of writing was easy for me to understand and assimilate. His witty and clever essays answered many complicated questions that I, as a Tolkien fan, had agonized over. Michael`s writing reflects his vast knowledge of not only Tolkien's published works but also his notes and unfinished stories later published by Christopher Tolkien in the History of Middle Earth series. I found Michael's writing to be neither dry nor boring. If anything, this author has made studying Tolkien even more fun! This is a great book for the serious and as well as the not so serious Tolkien fan.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
