onewinternight's review against another edition
5.0
Tolkien is the master-and Norse lore is fascinating. I love all the notes, historical and contextual.
basbleu_dans_labiblioteque's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
medium-paced
4.5
raechsreads's review against another edition
3.0
Interesting to read the tales that J.R.R. Tolkien was interested in as a writer.
pidgevorg's review against another edition
informative
inspiring
fast-paced
5.0
A perfect blend of scholarship and creativity. Truly brilliant. And the mix of informative essays, translations, and original poetry is also perfectly done, so kudos to both the original writer and the editor. Honestly, after reading Tolkien's much more famous (and overrated) fiction prose, I would say this book actually contains his best work.
verydazedragon's review
challenging
slow-paced
2.0
It’s disjointed and unclear in a lot of places, many alliterations are repeated many times. I do not mean to say it is unclear in the way that most epic poetry is unclear, nor am I referring to the aged language. I just mean the translation was lacking. I am sorry to have read it without any background knowledge of this particular Norse mythology.
octobertune's review against another edition
3.0
I have read the poems, and I will probably read the rest of the text when I'm able to concentrate on it better. It's a lot easier because it's in Dutch but I'm in a bit of a reading slump (or well I just got out one) so yeah.. Maybe the rating will go up after I've finished the entire book, but I just wanted to mark it as finished because I did read the poetry!
robynrussell's review against another edition
4.0
A beautiful translation, but very fragmented. If I didn’t already know the story I probably would have been confused in a few places.
fieldofhats's review against another edition
challenging
informative
slow-paced
2.0
This is not a good introductory book if you want to get into Old Norse poetry. I want to get that out of the way immediately. If I had not read the Poetic Edda before reading this, I would be completely and utterly lost, even with the commentary.
Despite what the introduction says, this book contains a multitude of poems. Tolkien separates them into two categories, but nine poems are in the first category and one is in the second. For the most part, he models each poem after a poem in the Poetic Edda or the Saga of the Volsungs and follows the source material pretty closely (with some influences of the Prose Edda as well). The writing style tends to be very flowery and grand, which is in contrast to the writing style of the eddas and sagas themselves. In the lecture on the Elder Edda that is cited at the beginning of this book, Tolkien states that Old Norse poetry is supposed to have a sense of immediacy and that “to hit you in the eye was the deliberate intention of the Norse poet.” Tolkien’s Lays (the poems presented in this book) do not do that. There are SOME moments that hit you (like Regin and Sigurd’s conversation after Fafnir is killed in “Regin” and a lot of the dialogue in the poem “Strife”), but for the most part, Tolkien’s poems read like Shakespeare. They’re hard to follow, harder even than the Poetic Edda. And some of the language seems intentionally archaic; the singular “O” as an exclamation, the use of “thee”, “thy”, and “thou”, and the suffix “est” and “eth” as in “mockest” and “groweth.” This is in direct contrast to the spirit of Old Norse poetry. It’s not inherently bad, but it seems like Tolkien wrote the poems like that so they would appear to replicate what a Skald might actually write — when, in reality, blunt and understandable language was the norm. That’s not to say these poems were wholly bad, they weren’t — but they weren’t in the spirit of Old Norse. I am no expert in Old Norse poetry, and I have absolutely no doubts that Professor Tolkien got the meter down precisely, but I know enough about the rules and language of Old Norse poetry to know that this is too stylized and flowery. And as a side-note, he uses the f-slur randomly towards in the end in “The Lay of Gudrún.” I’m not sure if that meant something different in the early 20th century, but it would have been nice to at least have a trigger warning or explanation from Christopher on that.
What about the non-poetry sections of this book? The prose intro by Christopher Tolkien was good, and I loved how he brought in his father’s lecture in the Poetic Edda as a preface. The explanation of the nature of the poetry was amazing and very interesting, although I love learning about Old Norse poetry and I know many probably don’t, so it’s likely this part wasn’t for everyone. The commentary on each of the poems by Christopher Tolkien was nice, and usually covers everything, but could drag on for too long, and even still, if you’re new to this material it could be overwhelming regardless. The appendices (especially the first one) were too long. In fact, I didn’t read the first appendix. It seemed interesting, but not interesting enough to suffer through the inevitable boredom. To be fair, though, this is not new when it comes to Tolkien; after reading The Lord of the Rings, one can expect long, boring appendices.
I would like to note that this was never meant to be published. Tolkien didn’t write this for anyone but himself, and thus he has every right to write in whatever style helps him learn the meters best (which Christopher says was his original goal). I just wish his son had kept it like that. In short, this is not a beginner-level Norse poetry book. If you want to get into the sagas, start with Jackson Crawford’s Poetic Edda, and then come back to this. Not only will it make more sense, but you will probably be able to appreciate it more. Overall, there are just so many better retellings of the eddas and sagas that I simply can’t recommend this. Read Neil Gaiman’s Norse Mythology for an accessible, faithful, and fun adaptation of the myths.
Despite what the introduction says, this book contains a multitude of poems. Tolkien separates them into two categories, but nine poems are in the first category and one is in the second. For the most part, he models each poem after a poem in the Poetic Edda or the Saga of the Volsungs and follows the source material pretty closely (with some influences of the Prose Edda as well). The writing style tends to be very flowery and grand, which is in contrast to the writing style of the eddas and sagas themselves. In the lecture on the Elder Edda that is cited at the beginning of this book, Tolkien states that Old Norse poetry is supposed to have a sense of immediacy and that “to hit you in the eye was the deliberate intention of the Norse poet.” Tolkien’s Lays (the poems presented in this book) do not do that. There are SOME moments that hit you (like Regin and Sigurd’s conversation after Fafnir is killed in “Regin” and a lot of the dialogue in the poem “Strife”), but for the most part, Tolkien’s poems read like Shakespeare. They’re hard to follow, harder even than the Poetic Edda. And some of the language seems intentionally archaic; the singular “O” as an exclamation, the use of “thee”, “thy”, and “thou”, and the suffix “est” and “eth” as in “mockest” and “groweth.” This is in direct contrast to the spirit of Old Norse poetry. It’s not inherently bad, but it seems like Tolkien wrote the poems like that so they would appear to replicate what a Skald might actually write — when, in reality, blunt and understandable language was the norm. That’s not to say these poems were wholly bad, they weren’t — but they weren’t in the spirit of Old Norse. I am no expert in Old Norse poetry, and I have absolutely no doubts that Professor Tolkien got the meter down precisely, but I know enough about the rules and language of Old Norse poetry to know that this is too stylized and flowery. And as a side-note, he uses the f-slur randomly towards in the end in “The Lay of Gudrún.” I’m not sure if that meant something different in the early 20th century, but it would have been nice to at least have a trigger warning or explanation from Christopher on that.
What about the non-poetry sections of this book? The prose intro by Christopher Tolkien was good, and I loved how he brought in his father’s lecture in the Poetic Edda as a preface. The explanation of the nature of the poetry was amazing and very interesting, although I love learning about Old Norse poetry and I know many probably don’t, so it’s likely this part wasn’t for everyone. The commentary on each of the poems by Christopher Tolkien was nice, and usually covers everything, but could drag on for too long, and even still, if you’re new to this material it could be overwhelming regardless. The appendices (especially the first one) were too long. In fact, I didn’t read the first appendix. It seemed interesting, but not interesting enough to suffer through the inevitable boredom. To be fair, though, this is not new when it comes to Tolkien; after reading The Lord of the Rings, one can expect long, boring appendices.
I would like to note that this was never meant to be published. Tolkien didn’t write this for anyone but himself, and thus he has every right to write in whatever style helps him learn the meters best (which Christopher says was his original goal). I just wish his son had kept it like that. In short, this is not a beginner-level Norse poetry book. If you want to get into the sagas, start with Jackson Crawford’s Poetic Edda, and then come back to this. Not only will it make more sense, but you will probably be able to appreciate it more. Overall, there are just so many better retellings of the eddas and sagas that I simply can’t recommend this. Read Neil Gaiman’s Norse Mythology for an accessible, faithful, and fun adaptation of the myths.