7 ms·

I doubt this would get as much media attention if Tolkien wasn't involved.

libraryatnight 7y ago
Beowulf is required reading for many many students, when I worked in book stores students came in every new semester from all levels of schooling to buy either the Heaney or Raffel translations - so I think it's probably interesting to more people than you think.
openredbull 7y ago
I disagree. Beowulf is a staple of English literature, and a well-known poem for many.
sneakernets 7y ago
Ah, never miss an opportunity to turn a positive and engaging story into a cynical jab against society.
- rgrieselhuber 7y ago
  It’s always low karma, anonymous accounts. There seem to be a bunch of them recently.
  - ineedasername 7y ago
    I've noticed the same, unfortunately. Lot's more posts on anything that isn't coding or directly tech related that just say something like, "this shouldn't even be on HN" At least the tend to get downvoted relatively fast
    - rgrieselhuber 7y ago
      It seems like a lot of bots or sleeper accounts have been activated recently.
Mediterraneo10 7y ago
Seamus Heaney’s translation of Beowulf two decades got quite a bit of attention in mainstream magazines and newspapers. Plus, 2007 saw a film adaptation of Beowulf directed by Robert Zemeckis and written by Neil Gaiman and Roger Avary. There is public interest in this poem as a classic of English literature even when Tolkien is not involved.
- krapp 7y ago
  >Plus, 2007 saw a film adaptation of Beowulf directed by Robert Zemeckis and written by Neil Gaiman and Roger Avary. That film would likely not have happened if not for the success of the Lord of the Rings films, and most people likely never heard of Beowulf until then, unless they dimly remembered having to read it in class once. And no translation of anything, much less any book without a big media tie in, gets anything close to "quite a bit of attention" in the mainstream press. Coverage in literature sections of the newspapers or dedicated literary sites are far from mainstream. And this is an article in Ars Technica, which to HN may seem mainstream, but which is far from it for the masses. A quick Google of "Tolkein Beowulf single author" brings up little in the way of mainstream coverage, with the Ars article being on top. Don't get me wrong, I love Beowulf and Seamus Heaney's translation is one of the few books I'll reread regularly, but elfakyn is correct. If Tolkein's name weren't involved, no one would be covering this at all, and really, almost no one is now.
  - garmaine 7y ago
    Most people I know are familiar with The 13th Warrior, and know that it is a (reimagined) retelling of Beowulf by Michael Crichton. From wikipedia: > In an afterword in the novel Crichton gives a few comments on its origin. A good friend of Crichton's was giving a lecture on the "Bores of Literature". Included in his lecture was an argument on Beowulf and why it was simply uninteresting. Crichton stated his views that the story was not a bore and was, in fact, a very interesting work. The argument escalated until Crichton stated that he would prove to him that the story could be interesting if presented in the correct way.
    - 7y ago
walshemj 7y ago
Tolkien was well know as one of the leading scholars in Norse literature before he wrote the LOTR
- iguy 7y ago
  And IIRC was largely responsible for getting people to read Beowulf in particular as literature. I mean to appreciate the work of art, as opposed to dissecting it as evidence about language etc.
  - thaumasiotes 7y ago
    It was my impression (not based on a lot) that Beowulf was sort of forced into the status of "great literature" by the fact that it is the only major work of Anglic literature at all, and English elites wanted something from their own native tradition (which, again, didn't really exist) to compete with the classical epics.
- labster 7y ago
  Beowulf is English literature though.
SiVal 7y ago
I think this claim is true in its explicit sense. The Tolkien connection makes an interesting story even more interesting, which probably increases media attention by some non-zero value. But it would be an interesting story for many of us without the Tolkien connection. Beowulf is an important artifact in the history of the language many of us are deeply attached to. And better than a potsherd, this artifact literally speaks to us from the distant past (literal if you consider writing of this sort to be a form of speech, as I do.) If the claim is implying that most of the coverage is due to the Tolkien angle, and it would have little to no coverage without it, I believe that to be incorrect. But I don't know if that is what was meant, and the explicit interpretation of the claim is probably correct.

Beowulf is required reading for many many students, when I worked in book stores students came in every new semester from all levels of schooling to buy either the Heaney or Raffel translations - so I think it's probably interesting to more people than you think.

openredbull 7y ago

I disagree. Beowulf is a staple of English literature, and a well-known poem for many.

sneakernets 7y ago

Ah, never miss an opportunity to turn a positive and engaging story into a cynical jab against society.

rgrieselhuber 7y ago
It’s always low karma, anonymous accounts. There seem to be a bunch of them recently.
- ineedasername 7y ago
  I've noticed the same, unfortunately. Lot's more posts on anything that isn't coding or directly tech related that just say something like, "this shouldn't even be on HN" At least the tend to get downvoted relatively fast
  - rgrieselhuber 7y ago
    It seems like a lot of bots or sleeper accounts have been activated recently.

Mediterraneo10 7y ago

Seamus Heaney’s translation of Beowulf two decades got quite a bit of attention in mainstream magazines and newspapers. Plus, 2007 saw a film adaptation of Beowulf directed by Robert Zemeckis and written by Neil Gaiman and Roger Avary. There is public interest in this poem as a classic of English literature even when Tolkien is not involved.

krapp 7y ago
>Plus, 2007 saw a film adaptation of Beowulf directed by Robert Zemeckis and written by Neil Gaiman and Roger Avary. That film would likely not have happened if not for the success of the Lord of the Rings films, and most people likely never heard of Beowulf until then, unless they dimly remembered having to read it in class once. And no translation of anything, much less any book without a big media tie in, gets anything close to "quite a bit of attention" in the mainstream press. Coverage in literature sections of the newspapers or dedicated literary sites are far from mainstream. And this is an article in Ars Technica, which to HN may seem mainstream, but which is far from it for the masses. A quick Google of "Tolkein Beowulf single author" brings up little in the way of mainstream coverage, with the Ars article being on top. Don't get me wrong, I love Beowulf and Seamus Heaney's translation is one of the few books I'll reread regularly, but elfakyn is correct. If Tolkein's name weren't involved, no one would be covering this at all, and really, almost no one is now.
- garmaine 7y ago
  Most people I know are familiar with The 13th Warrior, and know that it is a (reimagined) retelling of Beowulf by Michael Crichton. From wikipedia: > In an afterword in the novel Crichton gives a few comments on its origin. A good friend of Crichton's was giving a lecture on the "Bores of Literature". Included in his lecture was an argument on Beowulf and why it was simply uninteresting. Crichton stated his views that the story was not a bore and was, in fact, a very interesting work. The argument escalated until Crichton stated that he would prove to him that the story could be interesting if presented in the correct way.
  - 7y ago

walshemj 7y ago

Tolkien was well know as one of the leading scholars in Norse literature before he wrote the LOTR

iguy 7y ago
And IIRC was largely responsible for getting people to read Beowulf in particular as literature. I mean to appreciate the work of art, as opposed to dissecting it as evidence about language etc.
- thaumasiotes 7y ago
  It was my impression (not based on a lot) that Beowulf was sort of forced into the status of "great literature" by the fact that it is the only major work of Anglic literature at all, and English elites wanted something from their own native tradition (which, again, didn't really exist) to compete with the classical epics.
labster 7y ago
Beowulf is English literature though.

SiVal 7y ago

I think this claim is true in its explicit sense. The Tolkien connection makes an interesting story even more interesting, which probably increases media attention by some non-zero value. But it would be an interesting story for many of us without the Tolkien connection. Beowulf is an important artifact in the history of the language many of us are deeply attached to. And better than a potsherd, this artifact literally speaks to us from the distant past (literal if you consider writing of this sort to be a form of speech, as I do.) If the claim is implying that most of the coverage is due to the Tolkien angle, and it would have little to no coverage without it, I believe that to be incorrect. But I don't know if that is what was meant, and the explicit interpretation of the claim is probably correct.