[Child of the 7th Age]

Whoops! What have I done? I was asking about a book, and somehow I've started a discussion.

Helen I am also planning on ordering the book, if my finances will bear it. December is a notorious month for breaking the bank.

I know many people on this board have warmly endorsed Finding God in the Lord of the Rings. I got that book from the library, and it did nothing for me. Don't know if it's because I came from another belief system than the author, or simply that his approach to writing just didn't suit me. On the other hand, I enjoy Joseph Pearce's works, the biography he wrote and the other one he edited (Tolkien: Man and Myth), both of which have a strong Cartholic flavor.

So I wanted to get some sense of what the work was like before I shelled out my pennies. Pio's links were very helpful, and I learned enough that I hope to order it. Helen, let me know if you get it first.

Bird -- Yes, I do agree with much that you say. Every belief system, every religion and philosophy, every subconscious element that Jung describes---all draw from a common pool of imagination and experience that belongs to all humanity. I remember the first time I realized that the Bible was not the only place where the story of the flood appeared. I was overwhelmed with that thought.

On a gut, personal level, the existence of that common pool seems to suggest that we do come from one Creator. And I hope that those things that unite us are more important than those that divide us (although sometimes I fear the reverse!).

So, yes, it is possible to interpret all the values and themes and elements in Tolkien as coming from that common pool. This is true whether we're discussing good vrs. evil, the images of light throughout the entire Legendarium, or how Lembas nourishes hroa and fea. And it's possible to view and enjoy them on that universal level, no matter what your personal belief system is.

But I think people have a point when they say that, sharing the specific mindset of an author in religious terms, gives them an advantage in understanding his perspective. I do share certain common ground with Tolkien. I am a theist, and I see religion as central to the meaning of life. I think that makes it easier for me to understand certain things in Tolkien's mind that influenced how he wrote, as well as to be sympathetic to that mindset.

However, I am neither a Christian or a Catholic. Since I have a doctorate in medieval and early modern history, I know at least something about those belief systems. But, no matter how much I know, I can not share in the 'joy' the same way that a committed Catholic might when he discovers that Galadriel and the Virgin Mary share certain common elements.

Having said that, however, I still think we have to put the whole thing into an even wider perspective. Tolkien was not one thing. He was many. He was a philologist, a defender of England, a man who loved his wife, a protector of the green earth, and someone who knew an enormous amount about history. He was also, to a great extent, a product of his Edwardian upbringing. This list could go on and on.

What it means is that relgion is only one point of contact with Tolkien. There are many others, all the different things which gives each of us a unique perspective. For example, I lived in Britain for some time and got a real feel for the countryside, which I know ties in with my feelings about the Shire and hobbits. And, please, no one lecture me that Tolkien presents an idealised picture! Of course, I know that. By the same token, having worked for a year as a servant girl outside of London and having ancestors who worked in the Cornish mines, I find myself very sympathetic to Sam when Merry and Pippin raz him with their upper class ways!

So, as far as overall understanding goes, I think that is dependent on many things and this goes way beyond what would strictly be labelled 'belief systems'.

Gandalf

Tolkien himself was very clear about the connection between the Secret Fire and the Holy Spirit in his own Letters. This is where I learned this, and I suspect that Bizer read this too.

I remember you discussed this once in a thread about your ancestors. And certainly, many of these names are pulled directly from northern legends (including all the dwarves in The Hobbit).

You know, there is very little discussion on the boards of various critics who've written about Tolkien. We prefer to figure it out on our own, and I think that is the best. But there are times when it helps to look what others have said. The one thing that stikes me is this. I can randomly pull up five different names of recent, serous critics from my bookcase--Verlyn Flieger, T.A. Shippey, Wayne Hammond,Patrick Curry, Joseph Pearce.

If you read these critics, it's almost hard to beleve they are discussing the same author. (Well, it's true that names like Frodo and Galadriel are common to all!) They are so fantastically different in approach and interpretation. I think this is even more true of Tolkien than some other contemporary writers. And the reason for this enormous diversity is the author himself, that he simply can't be reduced to a single dimension.

sharon

[ December 09, 2002: Message edited by: Child of the 7th Age ]