Customer Reviews

Understanding Middle-Earth: Essays on Tolkien's Middle-Earth

5 star:		(14)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

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!

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.

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.

I read this book based on the apparent "love it or hate it" theme that crops up in the other reviews. What I found, as a long time Tolkien reader, was a competant work that emphasised some lesser known influences on Tolkien. It is an engaging enough read to be recommended for that reason alone. Middle-Earth is such a vast subject, that for the serious, I think this is a worthwhile addition to your bookshelves, but it is just one of many works that we will collect!

I can't believe anyone would say there is misleading information in this book. THERE IS NOTHING MISLEADING ABOUT IT. NOTHING. It takes a lot of integrity for someone like Michael Martinez to keep writing about Tolkien the way readers deserve to see this kind of work. He is honest, direct, and to the point. That just offends some people.

For example, where did Michael claim to have "delved into unpublished material"? That is ridiculous! Michael refers to "previously unpublished" essays and stories throughout Understanding Middle-earth, but he doesn't claim to have any secret knowledge no one else possesses.

As for the Greek and Roman influences on Tolkien, I have read many of the books and articles on Tolkien, and there is virtually no mention of the story of Penthesilea and its connections to Eowyn. Nor do Shippey, Carpenter, et. al. have much of anything to say at all about Tolkien's love of the aesthetic he found in Greek language and mythology. Martinez sets aside all the traditional hype about Tolkien being an Anglo-Saxon professor and he looks at Tolkien's other material.

The humor in the book is special. After a long session of reading essays on Numenor, Gil-Galad, Legolas, it is a nice break to see how Frodo and the Baggins family could be Mafioso. And the final essay, Snoopy versus the Lord of the Nazgul, is a great tribute to both Tolkien and Charles Shultz.

Understanding Middle-earth will sure take a beating from those who don't want you to read it. They tried to drag down Visualizing Middle-earth with their negative reviews too. All I can say is, most people will love this great book. It is filled with the kind of information we Tolkien fans hunger for. There are some really great extrapolations here, but the most valuable property of this book is the fact that Michael Martinez has taken the time to bring together so many little-known facts.

Careful readers won't feel the need to deride this book. They will appreciate the hard work it represents. Understanding Middle-earth is a great resource for anyone who has read The Lord of the Rings and wants to know more about Middle-earth. It is miles above anything by David Day, J.E.A. Tyler, Robert Foster, Karen Fonstad, and all those other so-called "experts" who publish books that just gloss over Middle-earth.

While I have ignored the negative reviews posted about my books in the past, Conrad Dunkerson's misleading assertions need to be directly addressed. So, this seems to be the only appropriate way I can set the record straight. It should be noted that his true motive is to discredit statements made about a single paragraph which he and others have attempted to use to "prove" that all of J.R.R. Tolkien's Balrogs were wingless.

Ultimately, it is not my work that Conrad is hoping to discredit -- but Christopher Tolkien's work. This is all about Balrogs and wings.

Conrad Dunkerson's argument is based on his refusal to accept Christopher Tolkien's explanation of the manuscript histories. While it may bore some people to read about all these texts, it is important that anyone reading these reviews understand that the research of the reviewers needs to be questioned at least as much as the research of the author.

The "Quenta Silmarillion" text in the published SILMARILLION is based mostly on a mid-1930s manuscript referred to throughout THE HISTORY OF MIDDLE-EARTH as QS. Christopher stipulated in THE LOST ROAD AND OTHER WRITINGS (Vol. V of THE HISTORY OF MIDDLE-EARTH, pp.199-201) that QS actually consists of two texts: one typed, one hand-written. JRRT made corrections to the typed QS text in two phases: first in late 1937, and then about 14 years later in 1951. QS ends just before the tale of Beren and Luthien.

There are also supplemental texts, which Christopher refers to as QS(A)-QS(E), which were composed in the 1930s. QS(E) was the last pre-LoTR addendum that JRRT made to QS. (LOST ROAD, pp. 292-5,323). Christopher says his father abandoned work on the QS manuscripts when he began working on THE LORD OF THE RINGS.

On page 173 of THE WAR OF THE JEWELS Christopher says he based the second half of the published "Quenta Silmarillion" on three texts: QS, LQ 1, and LQ 2. In the Foreword to MORGOTH'S RING (Vol. X of THE HISTORY OF MIDDLE-EARTH), Christopher says "it seems not to have been until the end of the 1950s that [JRRT] turned again seriously to the SILMARILLION narrative..." (p. viii). The Foreword continues to say that "much had changed since...the publication of THE LORD OF THE RINGS" and "before [JRRT] could prepare a new and final SILMARILLION he must satisfy the requirements of a coherent theological and metaphysical system, rendered now more complex in its presentation by the supposition of obscure and conflicting elements in its roots and its tradition." (Ibid.)

On 141, Christopher explains that, in the first phase of the 1950s work on THE SILMARILLION, JRRT merely wrote some corrections on the 1930s texts and then had them typed. This period (1951-2) produced the LQ 1 text. Christopher uses a letter his father wrote in 1957 to argue that LQ 2 was probably begun in 1958. He suggests that "Annals of Aman" may also date to 1958. The second phase of work on THE SILMARILLION commenced after these texts were finished (MR, p. 142-3). The Grey Annals text GA 2 is part of phase two. In the Foreword to THE WAR OF THE JEWELS (Vol. XI of THE HISTORY OF MIDDLE-EARTH), Christopher writes "there is some evidence that the GREY ANNALS followed the ANNALS OF AMAN (in its primary form), but the two works were, I feel certain, closely associated in time of composition. For the structure of the history of Beleriand the GREY ANNALS constitutes the primary text, and although much of the latter part of the work was used in the published SILMARILLION with little change I give it in full. This is really essential on practical grounds, but is also in keeping with my intention in this 'History', in which I have traced the development of the Matter of the Elder Days from its beginning to its end within the compass of my father's actual writings: from this point of view the published work is not its end, and [he excluded his father's later writing]".

Hence, the Grey Annals proved to be JRRT's last word on the history of Beleriand. There are no later texts. But the specific passage in question, published in THE SILMARILLION, was not written by J.R.R. Tolkien at all. On page 238 of THE WAR OF THE JEWELS, Christopher wrote: "We now come to Chapter 11 in QS, given in V.279-89. The text was not much emended on the manuscript, and I give such changes as were made in the form of notes referenced to the numbered paragraphs in Vol. V."

He notes a change of name for Glaurung from Glomund, a name also noted as changed in the "Annals" text on page 180. If the reader looks no further than this, it would seem that the QS text from the 1930s served as the basis for the published SILMARILLION. But this text was not used by Christopher Tolkien. The published SILMARILLION text is most likely Christopher's own composition. He offers no explanation of where it came from. It differs substantially from the QS text, which has several variant names and is longer than the published text. The published paragraph also differs from the much later Grey Annals text.

Therefore, since there is no authority for the paragraph Christopher chose to publish in THE SILMARILLION, and since the QS manuscript was not substantively revised for the chapter concerning the ruin of Beleriand, there is no basis for assuming that the 1930s text represents the latest thoughts JRRT had on the much-disputed Balrogs passage. And I stand by what I have written in both VISUALIZING MIDDLE-EARTH and UNDERSTANDING MIDDLE-EARTH.

This is a fantastic resource for anyone who wants to study the works of Tolkien. Michael Martinez digs deep into the letters and unpublished works of J.R.R. Tolkien to show the reader exactly how Middle-earth is supposed to work. The depth of the research is unparalleled. The arguments are well-constructed and supported by numerous citations from many sources. To call this book unscholarly is an insult to the intelligence of every Tolkien reader.

Middle-earth is a very complex model of human fictive thought. Martinez understands exactly what the reader needs to know about Tolkien's intentions and he goes straight for the meat without getting lost in the salad. He introduces new and wonderful ideas (new to me) that are so natural and well-founded that I am amazed people never saw these things before.

I had always thought Tolkien must have used the Bible as a great source of inspiration for his Silmarillion. I never realized until I read these essays just how important Greek language and mythology were to Tolkien. What a sad statement about modern Tolkien research that so few of the so-called experts pay more than lip service to Tolkien's obvious heavy involvement in the literatures of many lands.

Middle-earth doesn't just belong to the Michael Martinez bashers. It belongs to all of us. If you want to understand Middle-earth, you have to read this book. It goes where no book has gone before.

Michael Martinez has been enchanting me and other readers for years. He has a gift for uncovering so many wonderful details about Middle-earth. He follows my heart into Middle-earth itself and wanders joyfully through the imagination of J.R.R. Tolkien.

Mr. Martinez has shamefully been cast in the role of villain by many people who favor the medieval interpretation of The Lord of the Rings. I found his essay, "Of thegns and kings and rangers and things", to be enlightening and a very gracious argument in favor of the medieval point of view. The case for feudalism is Eriador is made so plain and clear, I do not think it will ever be refuted.

The introduction, like so many of the essays in this book, is a joyous revision of an essay Mr. Martinez had published on the Web. Expanded and embroidered with wonderful detail and commentary not provided on the Web site, Mr. Martinez' browse of the COMPLEAT Middle-earth library is a mesmerizing review of the sources. And as he is wont to do, he drops a bread crumb which leaves the reader wanting more: he mentions an unpublished history of The Hobbit. Where oh where is this book?

About the Elves of Middle-earth, Mr. Martinez has a great deal to say. He says it so eloquently, too. The "Shhh! It's a secret Ring" essay is very moving. Mr. Martinez underscores just how conflicted the Elves must have been after creating the terrible Rings of Power. And he concludes his essay, "How the Elves have changed", with a remarkable observation: that the Elves were overtaken by the very changefulness they had hoped to avoid.

The humor in the book is light and wistful, but it does not distract one from the subject matter. The Mafia essay addresses how the gaming people have changed Tolkien's Middle-earth. Mr. Martinez uses the Mafia mystique to poke gentle fun at an industry he obviously knows very well. And in the process, he teaches the curious reader a great deal about real history and Tolkien's imaginary history. Learning should ALWAYS be this enjoyable!

Dragon-lovers will not be disappointed, as there are two very informative essays on the subject of dragons. Their relationship to gold is thoughtfully explored by Mr. Martinez.

The essays on the Numenoreans and their changing relationship with the peoples of Middle-earth draw one into the Second Age. Mr. Martinez leaves no stone unturned in his quest for the fuller story of the Second Age.

I was very pleased with Visualizing Middle-earth. Understanding Middle-earth simply thrills me. I turn page after page and find it hard to put down. I wish there were more books like this one. They are so very needed in our literature today.

This book is a great read for those who have read Tolkien's main works (rather than just seen the movies) and want to learn and puzzle over the tantalizing loose end that Tolkien leaves throughout his works. This is definately a book for the fans!
What happened to the other reviews though???

It is with some little concern that I write a review here, it seems that for every unenthusiastic review posted, there follows a host of the author's friends not just defending the books, but acting as if some conspiracy is out to get the author. Well, I'm no conspiracist, just a Tolkien fan.

The book is interesting. It could have used some better editing, but Martinez' style is engaging. And he certainly knows his Tolkien material well. But that also seems to give him license to speculate. Some of these speculations are fun and are makred as speculations on the part of the author. There are others however that are not so marked, but are equally speculative in nature, but are stated as truth.

To take a case, the author claims to have discovered cases of influence on Tolkien that other critics have overlooked or ignored in favor of Tolkien's preferemce for Northerness. One of these overlooked cases according to Martinez is Penthesilea, an Amazon queen who fought for Troy in the Trojan war in order to atone for the accidental murder of her sister. She fought Achilles and Achilles fell in love with her in spite of killing her on the battlefield. Now Martinez declares that this is an influence on Tolkien's depiction of Eowyn. But Eowyn wasn't an Amazon. She didn't commit a sin that needed to be atoned for. She didn't fight on the losing side. She didn't lead forces into battle. She didn't face a "champion" who fell in love with her beauty. The only parallels between the two is that they are both women and both beautiful. But when it comes down to it, there are a number of warrior women in all of Western literature who fit that description, Martinez' argument for a unique connection between the two figures really just does not work. There are other parallels that are as close and in some cases much closer than Penthesilea. This is just one of many such items in the book.

Having read both this author's books, it seems that he has an axe to grind against Tolkien scholarship, and the books fairly foment at the idea of calling Tolkien an Anglo-Saxonist or medievalist because he was a philologist as if those were somehow mutually exclusive disciplines. It demonstrates that in spite of his grinding axes against Tolkien academics that the author, and so the books, do not understand the way the university works, certainly not the university system in Britain in Tolkien's youth. The book seems to actively desire to downplay the influence of Germanic and Norse languages and mythologies on Tolkien in favor of other mythologies such as Babylonian, Egyptian, or Greco-Roman. These competing views are presented in a "not this, but this" fashion rather than emphasizing "a lot of this and some of that" kind of way. ANd many of these influences are questionable.

There are some chapters that border on the silly. The Baggins as mafioso or Snoopy vs. Sauron are fun reads but in my view don't really belong in a serious discussion of an author's work. The book should either be full of fun, fan sorts of silliness that is enjoyable to read, or advertise itself as a commentary on Tolkien's works, whatever form that commentary takes. It detracts from the book in my view to try and be both.

Still, having said all that, Martinez has still written a decent book, and if the reader is aware of the problems with it going in, I'm confident that the reader will finish the book with some profit and desire to continue Tolkien studies. And that's a good thing. But I suppose now Martinez fans will trash my review as they have to others.....one almost wonders if it isn't the author himself defending his book in this forum since it seems a negative review of the book is equated with a negative view of the author. But read the book anyway.