The Hobbit and Childrens Literature - Essay Example

Hyun Joo Lee Fantasy and Its Discontent: Tolkien’s Middle-earth Narratives: November 20th, 2007 The Hobbit and Children’s Literature The fuss about children’s literature only begins with its broadly unhelpful definition as literature written especially for children. This definition leaves much to be desired since it doesn’t address the question of children’s age, maturity or developmental levels, is not limited to subject matter and provides no information about the essential literary elements of ‘literature written especially for children.’ As a result, this definition is no longer adequate for today’s modern applications, but widespread debate continues regarding how to amend the qualifications. This is partly thanks to changing times as children are more exposed to ‘real-world’ issues through the TV and movies, increased understanding of what children can understand and with adults sharing their favorite stories with their children. Now, books that were intended to entertain an adult population have become classified as children’s stories and texts once written as children’s stories have become the focus of adult attention. J.R.R. Tolkien’s book The Hobbit is an example of such a case. In the 20th century, it was considered a simple fantasy novel for children primarily because of a widespread opinion that it lacked allegory and the themes were too simplistic for an adult audience. However, there remained some critics who claimed that the novel must have been intended for an adult audience because of the complexity of the language used and the level of violence that appears in some scenes. The fight with the dragon was considered particularly distressing for a young audience. Although The Hobbit has some sophisticated elements that could justify its placement with adult literature, it remains clearly a novel intended for a younger audience as is demonstrated through its structure, content and the ideas contained within the story. One of the main arguments that the novel is intended for children can be found in its structure. The book is written with a simple linear pattern, progressing from the beginning of the story to the end with no flashbacks and very little foreshadowing. There also isn’t much in the way of concurrent time sequences, such as one character doing one thing for a chapter and then another character doing another thing in the same time period in another chapter. Assumptions are made occasionally regarding what the other characters must have been doing during times of separation, but their actual story is not told. Tolkien tells the story straightforwardly and quickly, which helps children understand it on their first reading (Isaacs, 1981). Although they are capable of delight in the suspense of what is about to happen and the manifestation of the unexpected, they cannot patiently sustain a sense of incompleteness for any great length of time. Simplicity is absolutely needed for young readers. This type of straightforward timeline is a basic element of all fairy tales for exactly this reason. Complicated time patterns only serve to confuse them and can often have the effect of driving them away from the book (Isaacs, 1981). Another structural element that identifies the novel as a children’s story is its patterned conflict of good versus evil. There are clearly marked distinctions between those characters that are on the side of good as opposed to those characters that are on the side of evil. As Katharyn Crabbe (1988) points out, all of the characters tend to be easily classified into one of these two groups. In addition, the central issue of the story, the epic battle that always occurs between good and bad, is made very obvious on relatively simplistic levels and is clearly resolved with, of course, good winning over evil. This type of simplicity in timeline, structural design and execution provides children with an easy to follow narrative that still manages to captivate and entertain. Another clue that The Hobbit was intended for children can be found in its heroic content. This is not the complicated and philosophic exploration of heroic ideals, classical representation or complex characters of adult literature, but is instead a simple story about an average little guy who has to overcome his own fears and a great many external obstacles in order to save the world from evil. He is heroic because he continues forward rather than giving up and going to hide in his burrow. By illustrating Bilbo’s growth in this way, Tolkien shows children how the process of growing up works and how they can begin to learn for themselves how to distinguish between right and wrong. In the beginning of the story, Bilbo is carefree, relaxed and doesn’t care much for the outside world. If it isn’t happening in the Shire, he isn’t interested in the slightest. However, later on the journey he finds out that he is interested in the welfare of others and can be brave enough to help them when they’re in trouble even though this means placing himself in danger. At least once in every section of the story, Bilbo can be found facing some kind of danger by himself. In presenting this, Tolkien acknowledges a basic childhood fear of sudden abandonment, but also illustrates how a child can begin to overcome this fear through self-reliance. Bilbo’s encounter with Gollum in the cave helps to illustrate both the sudden fear as well as the means to escape it. When addressing Gollum with his final question, Bilbo “tried to sound bold and cheerful, but he did not feel at all sure how the game was going to end, whether Gollum guessed right or not” (74). While he was terrified, he kept his wits about him and attempted to act through his fear. In his book about The Hobbit, William Green (1994) points out the many similarities that exist between the Gollum and Bilbo Baggins. To begin with, they are both hobbits, although Gollum has been horribly deformed and changed by his association with the One Ring. Much of this information is found out later, but the fact remains that these are both creatures of the same race and their differences are differences in lifestyles and life choices rather than differences they were born with. In addition, both Gollum and Bilbo prefer living spaces that are underground. Although Bilbo lives in a richly furnished burrow and Gollum lives in a deep, dank cave, the fact that both places are underground and away from the light begins to hint at their close relationship. For both characters, it is important that they live on a dead end, isolating themselves from society and preferring to keep their own thoughts. Water plays a large role in both characters’ lives, with each living next to some sort of water body and both considering it a part of their personal holdings. Both characters are seen to be resourceful in obtaining what they need to survive and both are more inclined to fall on deception and their wits rather than physical violence as a means of dealing with dangerous situations. These similarities take on significance when it is realized that young readers easily associate themselves with the smaller sized characters of the novel. Bilbo himself is considered tall for a hobbit and he’s less than four feet high. This is about the size of the average child who would be educated enough and interested enough to attempt reading Tolkien’s novel, making it easy for them to see him or herself playing out the role. When confronted with such a distorted mirror image such as the character Gollum, children are quick to want to emulate Bilbo and his ways rather than Gollum. They conclude that good equals Bilbo equals self-reliance, quick thinking and, above all, socialization with friends. Evil is associated with isolation, association with dark things and deformation. Some critical interpretations of The Hobbit have suggested that the book is intended to be read by adults because of the psychological and literary underpinnings of the work. This is specifically addressed toward the complex language use of the narrator. Speaking about the book, Tolkien himself has admitted that his own children disliked the tone and style in which it was written. While he didn’t dumb down the language itself, using language perhaps more adults would be familiar with than children, he acknowledges the tone of the book is in the style of an adult talking to the child, unable to completely switch into childish language but also unable to avoid the lecturing quality as a result. In addition, Tolkien mentioned in response to the criticisms about his story being overly simplistic in addressing the traditional concepts of children’s literature that there should be enough significance and complexity included in the story to reward the attentive adult. “Like other fairy tales, The Hobbit is thematically concerned with the human situation, not simply with childish ones” (Crabbe). However, Tolkien’s discussion of the book does not seem to agree with the critics assertions that the book was written with language only accessible to adults. “The Hobbit was written in what I should now regard as bad style, as if one were talking to children. There’s nothing my children loathed more. They taught me a lesson. Anything that was in any way marked out in The Hobbit as for children, instead of just for people, they disliked – instinctively. I did too, now that I think about it.” It would seem Tolkien intended The Hobbit as a book that adults could share with their children, perhaps introducing it in chapters as part of a bedtime story. As a result, he attempted to provide children with the themes and details that would entice them without being overwhelming, but still to provide the adult with some element of entertainment as well. A difficult argument to make in recent years with the increases in violence on television, films and on video games, critics have often argued that The Hobbit contains too much violence to be considered a children’s book. This argument is largely founded upon a study conducted by Mikkelsen (reported in Mirtz, 2005). This particular study revealed how children respond to the ideas and situations presented in fantasy readings. Unfortunately, the study is somewhat skewed as it is focused upon the reactions of Mikkelsen’s own sons, the children of her relatives and friends and those students who attended a second grade classroom to which she was given access. This suggests that the study was less than completely scientific and brings the results into serious question. According to Mikkelsen, children apply cultural knowledge to what they have experienced; they fill in gaps in their understanding with whatever seems to come easily to mind; they identify strongly with some characters and not others; and they resist where they know the narrative is going to take them. As a result of her findings, Mikkelsen concludes that it may be much better for children to read only books without violence or frightful images because fantasy affects them too directly. According to her results, reading about violence has a direct effect upon the level of violence children participate in because they directly accept what they have interpreted through the story. Additionally, in her concluding chapter, Mikkelsen argues that children read differently than do adults (180). Children do not construct ‘readings’ of fantasy stories in the same sense that adults do. Instead, they are taking what they understand, questioning what they don’t, connecting everything to something, and building layers of lifelong meaning that may or may not coincide with accepted definitions, intentions, reality or logic. Through reading fantasy stories, children constructed an experience more completely and seamlessly in their lives. (Mirtz) Although critics have claimed that The Hobbit must have been intended for an adult audience because of its complex use of language, others have provided evidence to indicate that Tolkien, as a professional linguist, was simply not willing to ‘talk down’ to his audience. Katharyn Crabbe (1988) explains that even though the language seems complicated in certain areas of the text, there are always numerous contextual clues that help explain the situations in more basic ways. For example, the passage, “Going on from there was the bravest thing he ever did. The tremendous things that happened afterward were as nothing compared to it. He fought the real battle in the tunnel, alone, before he saw the danger that lay in wait,” indicates that what Bilbo has been doing was something very great and very brave. While the child might not be too familiar with the action that has just occurred or with all of the words they have encountered, they have a good idea of what it has meant and are more inclined to seek out more information about those elements of the text they didn’t understand. This education through self-driven entertainment was a part of Tolkien’s goal. While Tolkien admitted that the language used might prove challenging for some children, he wrote in The Silmarillion, an auxiliary novel to the Lord of the Rings trilogy and its prequel, The Hobbit, “Many children make up, or begin to make up, imaginary languages. I have been at it since I could write.” His inclusion of the entirely invented Elvish and other languages of Middle Earth illustrate his expertise in linguistics and encouraged many children to explore language to a greater degree than they’d thought possible. Another reason critics have offered for categorizing The Hobbit as adult literature is because of the violence contained within the story. A closer examination of the actual situations presented illustrates that Tolkien’s novel was not really violent at all. Bilbo is never directly associated with violence throughout the story. He is portrayed at the beginning as a very timid character, almost afraid of his own shadow, and certainly unwilling to explore new and terrifying places outside of his comfortable Hobbiton Shire province. Rather than resorting to physical violence to overcome his enemies, Bilbo uses his wits. For example, his confrontation with Gollum is a battle of the mind rather than the body. Bilbo stumps Gollum in their game of riddles by asking what he had in his pocket. When Gollum can’t answer, Bilbo escapes. In his review of the story, James Sedium admits that the violence in the story is probably appropriate for a child of seven, which translates to indicate that the story is appropriate for any child old enough to read it. In the end, it is concluded that The Hobbit is a children’s classic fairy tale rather than a piece of adult literature. Although the author himself characterized it as children’s literature, this conclusion is based on issues of style in general as well as through choice of character, characterization, and manipulation of time and space. Comparing The Hobbit to general selections of children’s literature, one can easily identify how story has a similar concept and approach. The classic rhetoric of childhood combines the following characteristics: an obtrusive narrator, easily identified characters, an emphasis on the relationship between time and development, a concern with the security or danger in the setting, and heroic sources. These are all contained in The Hobbit. Highlighting the issue about the character of the hero, the difficulties that Bilbo encounters correspond to the elementary school period of children’s lives, again illustrating its appropriateness for children. During this stage of life, children learn the fundamentals of technology and how to handle the utensils, the tools and weapons like Bilbo learns through his adventure such as seeing clearly, moving quietly, throwing stones, as well as developing power to wield the sword. They also begin formulating their own identities and approaches to whether they wish to associate themselves with the heroic code of the good Bilbo Baggins or with the self-indulgent code of the deformed and frightening Gollum. As smart as children can be, though, this work would be better comprehended by children seeking for entertainment with a small challenge in literature: serious, playful, compelling. There is no need for parental advisory labels, but children may appreciate having a parent handy for guidance or to answer questions. Bibliography Chance, Jane. Tolkiens Art: a Mythology for England. Kentucky: University P of Kentucky, 2001. 262. Crabbe, Katharyn W. J.R.R. Tolkien: Revised and Expanded Edition. New York: Continuum, 1988. 29-47. Green, William H. The Hobbit: a Jorney Into Maturity. New York: Twayne, 1994. 73-77. Isaacs, Neil D., and Rose A. Zimbardo. Tolkien: New Critical Perspectives. Lexington, Kentucky: The UP of Kentucky, 1981. 151-162. Mirtz, Ruth, ed. Powerful Magic: Learning From Childrens Responses to Literature. Ferris State University. 2005 . Read More