|
Feanor makes an excellent point; if this book is based on 'historical' accounts that have been written and compiled by 'others', what sorts of biases, limitations, prejudices, blindspots, missing information and outright fabrications do we need to worry about? The issue of the hobbit archers at Fornost has already moved into this territory, but not really resolved it.
I don't think there's any doubt that LotR is hobbit-centric (that's going to get me in trouble with the posters): does this not mean that its narrative will be as parochial and limited as the hobbits themselves?
We've already discovered that the Shire is not the idyllic and faultless land that it first appears to be -- is it possible that the same standards that lead the hobbits to aggrandize and idealise themselves will work later in the book to devalue or misrepresent other peoples or ways of living that are not 'up' to their standards?
|