Mister
Platypus,
I must agree with you here. Tolkien clearly states that he detests allegory; he then states that applicability is just fine; and then he goes on (in Letter 320) to reveal this:
Quote:
|
I was particularly interested in your remarks about Galadriel..... I think it is true that I owe much of this character to Christian and Catholic teaching and imagination about Mary, but actually Galadriel was a penitent: in her youth a leader in the rebellion against the Valar (the angelic guardians). At the end of the First Age she proudly refused forgiveness or permission to return. She was pardoned because of her resistance to the final and overwhelming temptation to take the Ring for herself."
|
So: We see that Mary heavily influenced Galadriel; but-- Galadriel is not in fact an allegory of Mary.
--She does not bear the Son That Rescues Middle Earth (if she was the mother of Aragorn, or Frodo, or even Gandalf [img]smilies/eek.gif[/img] , it would be tempting to shout "allegory", I think.) She is not.
--Neither is she sinless (calm down, other-evangelicals-like-me, I'm talking about Tolkien's Catholic doctrine here, let's stick to the point.)
--She is wise and holy and beautiful, and as such Mary-like; but she is fallen, and in need of redeemption, and she recieves it when she shows by her actions that she wants it.
So:
Influence? Definitely;
Applicability? Perhaps/probably;
Allegory-- certainly not.