[Marileangorifurnimaluim]

Thank you, Kelessin, oh Wizard of Earthsea. Welcome to the Downs.

That is an excellent question. I find many automatically recast the LotR into their own background. Mithadan earlier brought up the point that this is the real cause of the seeming 'biblical themes' in the Lord of the Rings. The context for the LotR has faded in many respects, and younger readers in particular have trouble grasping for example the master/manservant relationship between Frodo/Sam.

I think all of us at the Downs are guilty of artifically inflating the importance of Tolkien's work to a scale of its importance to us. I think it's a vain attempt to explain our own fascination with the story.

On the other hand, what is the measure of literary impact? In the short term it's the uniqueness and quality of the work. But over the long term I've noticed many of those Greats turn out to simply be markers of a new or 'the best of' a current fashion, and they fade, while the real cultural impact is made by 'lesser artists.' We assume we know what the Greats of our era will be, when we don't even know what they will be measured by. Who of Elizabethan times could have predicted that Shakespeare's plays, blatant commercialism held in as little esteem as sitcoms, would be heralded today?

Mr. Underhill, my respected friend, the free exchange of ideas includes room for disagreement, and if one is proven wrong (as I have been on occasion) then that's that. But that doesn't preclude enjoying ones theory for its own sake. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] Go right ahead. Of course, the last time I tried to do that, some Christian extremists trampled the thread, wouldn't leave well enough alone, and didn't seem to comprehend the word "subtext." So I doubt you're going to find much more consideration (or intelligence).

-Maril

[ February 20, 2002: Message edited by: Marileangorifurnimaluim ]