Patrick Curry
Tolkien and Enchantment
My notes for this talk are very poor, I'm afraid! I'm hoping Merry or bat'leth can add enough to make sense of it. The theme of Patrick Curry’s talk was Tolkien’s understanding of enchantment. He posed the question ‘What is enchantment?’ then went on to argue that Tolkien’s idea of it was quite unusual. What I haven't quite grasped in my notes is
why it is unusual

. I enjoyed this talk a lot at the time but from my notes it comes accross as very disjointed and apparently with little specific Tolkien substance. Blame me not Curry!
21 Merton Street, Tolkien's College lodgings after Edith's death
© Iolanthe
Here goes:
Enchantment in Tolkien is a secondary world “artistic in desire and purpose” and enchantment is the primal desire in the land of Faerie, the conceiving of imagined wonder. Curry defined enchantment as being so ‘in the moment’ that you are under a spell, focussed to the exclusion of all else. Enchantment can be found in nature, love, ritual, art, sport, even in food. He cited two examples of Tolkien’s experience of enchantment. The first was reading Cynewulf’s
Crist when he came across the words
Eala Earendil engla beorhtast! (Hail Earendel brightest of angels). This was a seminal moment for Tolkien. He was stirred by something he couldn’t grasp and his fascination with the line was the start of his whole mythology. The second moment was the sight of Edith singing and dancing in the wood which later found its way into the tale of
Beren and Luthien.
In
The Lord of the Rings wonder and enchantment is most fully realised when Frodo and Sam first see Lorien. Sam feels that he is ‘inside a song’. Curry made the point that Lorien is a perilous land,
but the danger lies in our reaction to it, not in Lorien itself.
Leaving enchantment for the grey real world is painful. Enchantment slips away from us, rather than us leaving it. We are attached to it, dependent on it, unwilling to let it go. But humans cannot live in a state of permanent enchantment. There is ultimate beauty but the test is – can we let it go? It is the love of ‘other’, something perfect that is not ours to keep. When the One Ring is destroyed the other three Elven rings which Sauron never touched also wane [there is a connecting point here but I seem to have missed it....].
Enchantment is both concrete and magic. It is grounded in the real, but is perfect and transforming. We can’t live without enchantment, the desire for perfection and wonder attempts to fill a gap in our lives but it can never be totally filled. If we attempt to live in Lorien it becomes escapism. We cannot live totally in our fundamental desire, we have to accept the absence of it. Poignancy for what is beyond us is part of the human condition.
Outside the Eagle and Child
© Iolanthe
Comments from the floor:
Curry sees enchantment and faerie as the same: enchantment/disenchantment = Faerie/mortal.
Domestic life is the way we cope with the absence of enchantment. We live in the domestic but yearn for the lyric. The hobbits are a good example of domestic life in LOTR.
Someone from the floor mentioned that Tom Bombadil combines the lyric and domestic. Enchantment is the love of the other
as the other, not as something we can master. Although Tom Bombadil is described as Master, it is only of his own world. Goldberry is very clear on what he is master of.
We glimpse visions of the whole but these are fragments. If we try to possess the whole we become like Gollum, trying to possess the other, addicted to it and the feeling it gives us.
Father Guiglielmo, interestingly for a deeply spiritual man, made the point that Pippin is the best philosopher (?) in LOTR because of his materialistic grounding, his connection with the material world: the love of it and the living of it.
Banquet in Exeter College Dining Hall
© Iolanthe