Page 3 of 3
Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 6:02 am
by danlo
It definitely holds up now I read it for the 3rd time 2 years ago and it could see it on the modern screen--maybe not with Russel Crowe as Foyle, but...LOL
Edit:
Dunsany-The King of Elfland's Daughter
Morris-The Well at the World's End
Eddison-The Worm Orouboros
Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 6:13 am
by jacob Raver, sinTempter
I just wiki'd em...
- Tolkien didn't even make up Gandalf's name?!!! Wow. These go to show how "original" any of our ideas are...even fantasy-father himself realied heavily on his favs for story, names and structure...
I'd say Ourboros seems the most interesting...hmmm, my Dad has em...
Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 7:07 am
by Holsety
Danlo, I really, really love
The Worm Ouroboros but why do you see it as influential? People who haven't read the book should stop reading now just in case you ever do get to it.
The whole destruction and renewal thing is an important idea, and I see Ouroboros as making a really interesting contribution to it. Most stories with such an "end and a beginning" don't so strongly admit the necessity of the enemy (witchland) in the equation. The rebirth after ragnarok in the norse sagas simply tells of the rebirth of humanity, there isn't some sort of promised return of the wars between the gods to go along with it (AFAIK). But in Ouroboros the only meaningful rebirth is that of one's most dire enemies, the most insurmountable problems. I can't think of any other works which echo this sentiment which is why I feel that Ouroboros is not particularly influential: it is instead strikingly unique.
The Land wouldn't make sense without Foul. The writers and readers of epic fantasy know that villains are necessary. But only in Eddison's work are the heroes aware that they NEED villains.
I know some may bring up Covenant's refusal to destroy Foul, but this isn't quite the same thing I think. It's not that it wouldn't be good for corruption to be gone, that wish is just unrealistic. In The Worm Ouroboros the only rival IS gone forever w/out the active desire of the heroes to bring it back.
It is actually a very monstrous idea. Should the farmers and peasants of both countries really be subjected to another destructive war simply to satisfy the sentiments of the bored aristocrats? It's not like the book doesn't have some other repellent sensibilities. But it's still pretty compelling, I think.
One thing I really need to go back and look at again is Gorice's precise mindset as he enacts his ritual at the end of the book, knowing that it will not suffice to defend him and will undo him more fully than a normal loss to the men of demonland.
There are very few works already that have ever made me cry.
Ouroboros is the only one that made me laugh with relief WHILE crying during the ending.
Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 11:18 pm
by danlo
Sorry, I should have been more specific about The Worm Ouroboros. I find it influential because it created, in a roundabout way, the world and part of the land for the Zimiamvian Trilogy (Mistress of Mistresses, A Fish Dinner in Memison, and The Mezentian Gate). The Three Kingdoms of Fingiswold, Meszria and Rerek in Zimiamvia
(and Witchland)
set up an epic and varied world that predates Tolkien. Though crude, the trilogy is one of the first creations of a complex alternative fantasy world, complete with a character, Lessingham, from our world. Maybe not explained all that well it planted a seed, or a device that led to the development some very powerful fantasy characters such as, John Carter, Corwin and Thomas Covenant. Influencing, I assume, C. S. Lewis, as well.
Posted: Tue Aug 11, 2009 3:00 pm
by jacob Raver, sinTempter
E.E. Doc Smith.