For J.R.R. Tolkien, the true fairy tale was rooted in a mystical, magical paradigm he called “Faerie.”  As both an essence and a place, Faerie is the wellspring for tales of fairies, elves and other magical folk.  It is the “realm or state in which fairies have their being” (Tolkien, 2004), but it is a place – a setting – in which a “beast fable” such as Hans Christian Andersen’s “The Toad,” does not truly belong.  Thus, Tolkien’s analysis does not apply to Andersen’s tale.

Faerie, for Tolkien, is a place of epic stories, containing not only elements of fantasy but trees, birds, stones, wind and water.  As such, it is a place where fantasy stories have at least the ring of truth, where it’s almost possible to believe that such things could happen.  Yet it is not a place that lends itself to physical description.  “Faerie cannot be caught in a net of words: for it is one of its qualities to be indescribable, though not imperceptible” (Tolkien, 2004).  Tolkien tells us that many stories which purport to be fairy tales do not possess elements found in Faerie and, as such, have no business being included in the category of fairy tale.  To Tolkien, the beast fable has many of the characteristics of a fairy tale.  For instance, animals speak with human voices, though not in the sense that a human protagonist may commune with them.  Tolkien tells us that this phenomenon derives from one of the “primal ‘desires’ that lie near the heart of Faerie; the desire of men to hold communion with other living things” (Tolkien, 2004).  But the speech of animals in a beast fable has little or nothing to do with this desire because in most cases, as in “The Toad,” communication with a human agent is matter-of-fact, lacking in wonder.  “The magical understanding by men of the proper language of birds and beasts and trees, that is much nearer to the true purposes of Faerie” (Tolkien, 2004).

In stories such as “The Toad,” the animals are the “heroes” (as were Peter Cottontail, and the Three Little Pigs).  To Tolkien, such stories “lie near the borders of Faerie,” but do not properly belong there (Tolkien, 2004).  Andrew Lang’s 1889 volume of fairy tales, which Tolkien praises, included a story called “The Monkey’s Heart.”  Tolkien tells us that this story’s inclusion in Lang’s books, no doubt owing to its use of an old folkloric tradition, is not proper given the loftier precepts of the true fairy tale.  For Tolkien, “The Monkey’s Heart” has no tie to Faerie in its characters, setting or essence.  And so it is with “The Toad.”  It comes near to Tolkien’s notion of Faerie but, as in other beast fables, not quite near enough.  “Their nearness is due largely to their strong moral element: by which I mean their inherent morality, not any allegorical signification.  But Peter Rabbit, though it contains a prohibition, and though there are prohibitions in fairyland…(it) remains a beast fable” (Tolkien, 2004).

As well, there is a spirit of satire in many beast fables, which are imbued with a gentle, almost self-mocking tone.  This, too, runs counter to the true nature of Tolkien’s true fairy tale.  “If there is any satire present in the tale, one thing must not be made fun of: the magic itself” (Tolkien, 2004).  As in his great works, Tolkien’s fairy tale possesses a sense of legacy and history, which imparts the gravitas of saga and, above all, takes seriously even its most fantastic elements.  Tolkien would have us understand that beast fables, charming and purposeful though they are, come from quite a different place.  In this sense, Tolkien’s interpretation does not apply to “The Toad.”