ParanetOnline
The Dresden Files => DF Spoilers => Topic started by: Yuillegan on June 10, 2020, 05:54:58 AM
-
I am not sure how many of you have read any Gutenberg (it can be a bit much as the language is often written phonetically rather than correctly, not to mention using archaic words and phrases) but it does provide a few interesting bits.
The Faeries are considered to be former Angels but chose not to pick a side in the War in Heaven and so were not banished to Hell, but were expelled from Heaven.
There are also these curious tall round towers, like Lighthouses, always near Churches. They seem to have been used and made by the Druids and have associations with fire. Also, in some cases Angels built them overnight on the command of Saints. Reminds me a lot of the Tower on Demonreach.
Lastly, a funny thing is that David MacAnally Jr is the translator/curator. Not sure how relevant it is but I found it an amusing coincidence nonetheless.
-
I spent a few hours one night trying to figure out where the association of wizards with towers came from. It was mostly theories about why a wizard would want or end up in a tower. Some people concluded it was just another thing that was in D&D and became widespread that way.
Though neither saints or druids are precisely the same thing as a wizard, this could be a big source for "magic guy" has a tower.
-
I spent a few hours one night trying to figure out where the association of wizards with towers came from. It was mostly theories about why a wizard would want or end up in a tower. Some people concluded it was just another thing that was in D&D and became widespread that way.
There's the scholastic aspect, long study. There's the "study the skies" element... and just getting CLOSER to the skies. Towers are great for all sorts of isolation. Also being "above" everyone else: symbolic superiority.
Before D&D there was Orthanc (and Barad-dur, though we don't see much detail); and various "Minas this" and "Minas that" ("minas" being "tower") -- e.g. Minas Morgul where the Witch King dwelt. I'm pretty sure Jack Vance wrote some wizard-in-a-tower tropes, and that's another of D&D's sourcematter. REH/Conan put some wizards in towers.
The "ivory tower" imagery (going back to "scholasticism") is I think over a century old.
But going back even further, I think there's a classic "wizard in tower" in Spenser's Faerie Queene.
It's also worth noting that "tower" in many of the older sources wouldn't refer to a singular standalone structure, e.g. "the Tower of London" is an entire castle, really -- Her Majesty's Royal Palace and Fortress of the Tower of London. Certainly many of Tolkien's "Minas" sites were entire castles, or even cities!
In the end, yeah: in fantasy literature & RPG'ish use, I think Tolkien and D&D are our proximate culprits. I don't think Spenser and the evolutionary use of language enter much into it... ;)
-
... The Faeries are considered to be former Angels but chose not to pick a side in the War in Heaven and so were not banished to Hell, but were expelled from Heaven ...
I think Jim has cast other entities in this role.
His faeries seem to be mortal-origin, at least in part. I guess that doesn't preclude being mortal/angel hybrids, though...
... Also, in some cases Angels built them overnight on the command of Saints. Reminds me a lot of the Tower on Demonreach ...
That's a fascinating discovery in lore!
... Lastly, a funny thing is that David MacAnally Jr is the translator/curator. Not sure how relevant it is but I found it an amusing coincidence nonetheless.
I think it's just an amusing coincidence, as you say. I'm almost certain I recall a WoJ saying MacAnally was named for a good friend of Jim's, going back to his high-school days, who "liked his drink."
-
There's the scholastic aspect, long study. There's the "study the skies" element... and just getting CLOSER to the skies. Towers are great for all sorts of isolation. Also being "above" everyone else: symbolic superiority.
Before D&D there was Orthanc (and Barad-dur, though we don't see much detail); and various "Minas this" and "Minas that" ("minas" being "tower") -- e.g. Minas Morgul where the Witch King dwelt. I'm pretty sure Jack Vance wrote some wizard-in-a-tower tropes, and that's another of D&D's sourcematter. REH/Conan put some wizards in towers.
The "ivory tower" imagery (going back to "scholasticism") is I think over a century old.
But going back even further, I think there's a classic "wizard in tower" in Spenser's Faerie Queene.
It's also worth noting that "tower" in many of the older sources wouldn't refer to a singular standalone structure, e.g. "the Tower of London" is an entire castle, really -- Her Majesty's Royal Palace and Fortress of the Tower of London. Certainly many of Tolkien's "Minas" sites were entire castles, or even cities!
In the end, yeah: in fantasy literature & RPG'ish use, I think Tolkien and D&D are our proximate culprits. I don't think Spenser and the evolutionary use of language enter much into it... ;)
Except for the paragraph about towers not necessarily being a tower, the possible Spenser reference, and practical considerations of why basically anyone would live in a tower, that's pretty much what I got after a few hours of looking. That surprised me because I can usually find a real authoritative answer when I have a "where did x come from" question. Sometimes the authoritative answer is "no one knows," "it's either this or that," or "no one knows, but it's largely believed/said/etc. it comes from y."
I think my specific question was actually what's the literary reason for the wizard's tower. Then I found out it wasn't really a trope until D&D popularized the idea, probably because Tolkien had some of his wizards associated with some of his towers. As the trope was new, and many professional literary analysis types think fantasy is beneath contempt, there isn't enough out there for me to dig it up without serious effort.
@Yuillegan: I have heard various things like faeries being demon-like or associated with hell. I've always heard, "the monks changed it because if it's supernatural and not in the Bible, then it's of the Devil" as the reason for categorizing faeries as demonic/servants of hell. I'm not sure if I've come across the specific one about them being "in between" demons and angels. Fallen but not condemned angels, if you will. That one thing could be a very interesting idea to build a fantasy setting around.
-
I think Jim has cast other entities in this role.
His faeries seem to be mortal-origin, at least in part. I guess that doesn't preclude being mortal/angel hybrids, though...
That's a fascinating discovery in lore!
I think it's just an amusing coincidence, as you say. I'm almost certain I recall a WoJ saying MacAnally was named for a good friend of Jim's, going back to his high-school days, who "liked his drink."
1. Do you mean the Denarians? And some of the Fae have mortal origins and some of the Fae are like Toot-toot (dewdrop faeries). It's a inconsistency that Jim is unwilling to address (a classic "I'm not gonna tell you"). I wouldn't be surprised if their are elements of both.
2. Thank you, I thought so. I also think the Banefire isn't a coincidence as is connected to the Tower.
3. I mostly agree but you never know eh?
Bad Alias - There are many possible reasons a Wizard might have a tower, but far less probabilities about why there might be one on Demonreach. Just my thinking though.
Literary experts who believe fantasy is beneath contempt are idiots. Fact. They just hate it because it is so popular.
Indeed, that was my understanding of Faeries too. But it seems Gutenberg had other ideas...I wonder how true they are? I wouldn't be surprised if Jim has made a connection. There certainly seems to be more than normal connections between the Faeries, the Greeks, the Norse and the Angels.
-
Literary experts who believe fantasy is beneath contempt are idiots. Fact.
Truth.
-
One relevant biblical-like inference: in the bible magic-doers who go out to do things (the Gandalf trope) are good guys (e.g. the 3 wise men), while magic-doers who dig in, do their thing, stay put, those amass wealth and followers but are not so good (e.g. Simon the magician, the root of the word simony, though he gets the chance to be uprooted and start doing good).
So a wizard staying put in his tower is essentially announcing that he's evil.
Or alternatively, tvtropes says it's likely astronomy/astrology https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MageTower
-
From the TV Tropes link provided by Avernite:
May originate from the fact that many traditions link magic with astronomy or astrology, making the top of a tower a commonsense place for a mage to hang out. A high tower also conveys a sense of isolation from "normal" people, which the magician can use to study in peace, much the same way that monasteries are often on mountaintops. In another sense, high towers are ancient symbols of arrogance and hubris.
Yeah. The magi from the Bible were astrologers/astronomers. A lot of early science is largely indistinguishable from what we would call sorcery or superstition, so anything associated with early science, most specifically astronomy, would make sense to be associated with wizards. The isolated scholar or holy man could be closely associated with wizards and magi as those words originally just meant wise man.
Some of the practical reasons for wizards (or anyone really) having towers were astronomy, defense (or a bunch of stuff that are elements of defense like being able to see far away), full castles are too big for the solitary/small household wizard, airflow, and demonstration of wealth, power, and skill.
-
... Literary experts who believe fantasy is beneath contempt are idiots. Fact. They just hate it because it is so popular.
So far as I can tell, the "literary snob" sorts lump all of "genre fiction" as... well... a lump. One does not take genre fiction seriously; it is -- at best -- something that a real writer can churn out by the ream, mechanically following the genre formulas, to pay the bills so they can do real writing.
Plus, fantasy (in particular) is really just children's fairytales. And nobody writes anything complex or meaningful for children, because they cannot grasp the complexity, understand the meaning, or appreciate the deeper elements.
We should all grow up, I suppose, and move beyond the K-3 curriculum.
::)
-
Indeed, perhaps all of us are just can't accept reality and hide in fiction. Or perhaps we recognise fiction for the genius that it is: truth. You can get to the heart of things much more deeply in fiction than in non-fiction because it captures people and moves them beyond the simple and limited restraints of language. People feel their reality much more than they think about it and certainly more than they can discuss it.
It's no wonder fantasy and fiction is so popular. It speaks in the language that we experience, not the one that is - story. Stories are much more like life than historical retellings because so much of the human experience is subjective. Yet despite it all we find these points of connection and meaning that exist in every story and so even our subejective experiences start to feel objective. There are deeper truths than any known science can explain.
I for one am grateful for it. If we all just lived for non-fiction we would likely live in a very dull world. And probably humanity wouldn't have made it out of the mud as we wouldn't have had the imagination required to build civilisation, so perhaps we wouldn't be here at all.
-
And it's not like Dickens and Shakespeare weren't produced with the intent of commercial success. I wouldn't be surprised if 99% of the stuff professional literary types appreciate is forgotten when those professional literary types pass on and some random work that nobody saw coming is what gets studied in a few hundred years.
-
Exactly, in fact it has many times been the case that an artist now revered was ridiculed during his lifetime. Which is why I am perfectly comfortable reading the books I like or watching the films I like etc. I can still appreciate classical brilliance but I don't feel that their success or acclaim lessens the brilliance and certainly my enjoyment of genre's like fantasy.
I also feel like it is tied into the whole "it isn't cool to like *example* because it's so mainstream" thing. Like Martin Scorsese ripping into Marvel. Look, I very much enjoy his films. But that doesn't mean I don't like a lot of the Marvel entertainment. I have been reading the comics for years and was really excited seeing it come to life. Doesn't mean there wasn't things I didn't like either, but Scorsese is far from perfect too. It's apples and oranges to me, and I don't see why some people feel the need to tear down other people's "thing" because they themselves don't enjoy it. Just let people be.
-
And it's not like Dickens and Shakespeare weren't produced with the intent of commercial success.
Heck, it's not like Dickens and Shakespeare didn't write Fantasy...
A Christmas Carol, Macbeth, Midsummer Night's Dream...
-
@Yuillegan: I have heard various things like faeries being demon-like or associated with hell. I've always heard, "the monks changed it because if it's supernatural and not in the Bible, then it's of the Devil" as the reason for categorizing faeries as demonic/servants of hell. I'm not sure if I've come across the specific one about them being "in between" demons and angels. Fallen but not condemned angels, if you will. That one thing could be a very interesting idea to build a fantasy setting around.
The concept of 'half-fallen' angels was pretty widespread at one time. St. Brendan the Navigator is said to have encountered them in the form of birds on a mysterious island. Dante places them in the Vestibule of Hell, unlike the true demons/fallen angels, who are in Hell proper. They were one of many explanations for the faeries.
There were lots of explanations. Sometimes they were presented as demonic, yes -- Scottish witch trials accused people of dealings with the 'Queen of Elphame' (Elf-home = Fairyland or Faerie).
There's an Icelandic story that their version of elves (huldufolk) originated from other children of Adam and Eve, beyond those that are the ancestors of "our version" of humanity.