If I were a wizard, I'd say that I was never late, and always posted exactly when I meant to. But I'm not a wizard, and this is a bit later than I'd intended. Nevertheless, tonight's post . . .
Moving from "Farmer Giles" and "Smith of Wooten Major" to the beginning of The Silmarillion is a bit jarring, I'll admit. We are clearly transitioning into faery stories that are bigger, richer, and deeper than anything encountered in the short stories we've read so far. Tolkien's intention in The Silmarillion is to provide an entire world and its history, beginning at (or, I suppose, before) the moment of creation. In order to achieve the effect of depth and seriousness he feels the material demands, Tolkien adopts a pseudo-Biblical style in his prose.
My question for you: how does this shift in style -- so different from the tone found in "Smith" or "Giles" and certainly much different than the approach he takes in The Hobbit or, to a lesser extent, in The Lord of the Rings -- actually affect our comprehension of the material? I'm not talking about whether it makes it more difficult to read or understand; rather, I want to hear from you about whether the style of The Silmarillion works. Does the pseudo-Biblical word choice, diction, vocabulary, and organization help draw us into the world Tolkien is creating? Does it get in the way? Would there be a better, more effective way to approach writing about the creation of Middle Earth? Does the Biblical tone draw attention to the "frame" of Faery in a way that Tolkien actually wanted to avoid?
Once again, you don't have to respond to every question I've raised, but you do need to respond to some aspect of the post. And don't hesitate to respond to your classmates as well.