The Tolkien Iceberg(s)

There is this picture where The Lord of the Rings and The Silmarillion are part of an iceberg, that I have seen quite a few times on different occasions. The Lord of the Rings represents the visible and smaller part of the iceberg while The Silmarillion represents the much larger part. People seem to agree with this metaphor since it keeps coming back. However, I do not think this gives a fair picture of The Lord of the Rings.

Of course, in terms of lore and understanding of the world in which The Lord of the Rings takes place, The Silmarillion makes a foundation. I suppose that this is exactly what the picture wants to point out but it also ignores some aspects that are as deep in The Lord of the Rings as they are in The Silmarillion, if not deeper. First off, neither of these works are simply mere stories, they are products of a man's passion for language, poetry, history, mythology and literature. We see no less of these passions in The Lord of the Rings. If you read the book and do not have these things in mind, you will probably still like it, but you will also miss what (in my opinion) makes it great. You could say you will miss the greater part of the iceberg.

Tolkien does not force his mythological influences down your throat, nor does he explain the etymology of all his names unless you want him to. This is why you could see The Lord of the Rings as an iceberg of its own. The Lord of the Rings makes references to things that are explained in The Silmarillion (take for instance the mention of Ancalagon in "The Shadow of the Past"), which makes sense as The Silmarillion is somewhat of a mythological basis in Tolkien's universe. But The Lord of the Rings also include extradiegetic references to mythology and literature. Examples of this could be the similarity between the battle on the bridge of Khazad-dûm and the battle on Bifrost in norse mythology, or Meduseld and the hall of Hrothgar in Beowulf. In 2014 art historian Nina Denney Ness published an article, in which she says that Tolkien was so influenced by the writings of Snorri Sturluson that The Lord of the Rings gives the reader indirect contact with them. She also refers to historian Nils Ivar Agøy who claims that the link between The Lord of the Rings and real historical culture is so strong that reading The Lord of the Rings teaches us something about ourselves and our origin.

My point is therefore that The Lord of the Rings should not be seen as the top of an iceberg as it has a too great depth of its own. The Silmarillion and The Lord of the Rings are two different icebergs with their own visible and hidden parts, but they are indeed in the same sea.