Review: Bored of the Rings (1969)

Harvard Lampoon’s Bored of the Rings is an interesting beastie. For a good half a century, it has filled the role of the pre-eminent Tolkien parody in popular culture, while at the same time being more dated than a pair of flared trousers. Some parodies outlive their source material, and take on a life of their own. Bored of the Rings is not one of these. The Lord of the Rings might feel fresh and timeless, appealing to each successive generation of Tolkien readers, but Bored of the Rings is a creaking time-capsule of a work, one where the jokes sometimes sit like preserved insects in amber. Or a fossilised section of stratum from the Nixon Sixties. Bored of the Rings only remains in print half a century later because of the perennial nature of its source material.

And yet, its role as a time-capsule makes it interesting in itself. This is not simply a collection of old advertising references inserted as joke names into a Tolkienian setting – though much of it is, and speaking as someone who is neither North American nor was alive during the 1960s, much of the book’s humour is lost on me. Bored of the Rings is also a fandom relic from the first great era of Tolkien’s literary popularity. The back-cover, alluding to “courtesy to authors”, is a reference to the Ace Paperback Controversy that catapulted Tolkien into prominence in the mid-1960s. This is a book that sought to have a laugh (however weakly) at what was then a pop-culture phenomenon, and it is worth remembering that Tolkien was still alive when it came out.

Anyway, for the first time in many years, I thought I’d dust off the book and give it a read. Appropriately enough, it’s not even my copy – the copy of Bored of the Rings I first bought twenty years ago (after sitting a mathematics exam, oddly enough), has gone missing. So I’ve wound up using the Public Library’s copy instead, and it’s been at least a partly worthwhile exercise. Age has allowed me to look at a text I recall finding so disappointing, and which I still find disappointing. But I can at least analyse reasons for the disappointment.

I still lack the cultural memory and experiences to truly “get” many of the references. That is as true now as it was when I first read the book, though perhaps the notion of calling Bilbo Baggins ‘Dildo Bugger’ also feels less socially risqué today. But I would go further:

(1) Bored of the Rings has truly godawful pacing, as it becomes abundantly clear that the writers were running out of ideas as the story progressed. Imagining Middle-earth as being a shitty, corrupt, and unpleasant place, full of stupid and crooked people, is one thing… but that concept alone wears thin after a while. There is only so many laughs to be milked from the characters hating each other, or Legolas being called ‘Legolam.’ The book does not have enough self-contained drive to sustain itself, and apart from the odd nugget of cleverness – I love the idea that the Mount Doom smoke-cloud is the sooty remnant of countless burning National Geographics – the story winds up racing to the exit.

(2) The earlier sections, when the writers take their time, and go so far as to reference Tolkien’s own recognisable words and phrases, are much stronger. We’ve got comic parodies of the Foreword and the ‘Concerning Hobbits’ Prologue (no such effort is made for the Appendices). We’ve got allusions to Gaffer Gamgee and his audience, and so on, lifted closely from Tolkien’s original scene. Even the notion of Dildo being addicted to Dirty Scrabble is a clever reference to Bilbo’s fondness for Poetry. Word-smithing, and all that, and there are copious inserted poems and songs, after the manner of Tolkien. But there’s something curious in the Birthday Party Farewell Speech – Tolkien’s version is actually funnier than the parody.

(3) The high point of Bored of the Rings is probably its treatment of Tom Bombadil and Goldberry – transformed into Tim Benzedrine and Hashberry, these are now a pair of drug-addled hippies. For a book otherwise stuck in the North American popular zeitgeist of half a century ago, this bit at least still resonates. Bonus points for Tom and Goldberry not featuring in the Jackson movies, so the section feels weirdly faithful in laughing at the ‘book’ version of Middle-earth. Alas, the later book is so rushed, it can’t even deal with the Grey Havens.

Really, my biggest take-away from this re-read of Bored of the Rings was that the book could have been so much better, both in terms of creative humour and in its relationship with its source. There are some fun ideas in there, and it’s the sort of book I’d be inclined to rate a 2/5, rather than a 1/5… but the writers needed a ‘hook’ other than messing around with long-forgotten brand-names and just making everyone incompetent crooks. There is no attempt to satirise the deeper themes of The Lord of the Rings, and once past the surface sniggers (the ‘queer river’ that laps at thighs), there’s not a lot there.

• July 12, 2023
• Reading, Reviews, Tolkien essays
• 4 Comments