Quote:
|
Well, for a man who hated allegories, he sure wrote a lot of good ones.
|
No! Tolkien did not write allegories! [img]smilies/mad.gif[/img] I'm sure you all are aware of the distinction between allegory and application Tolkien himself made. Tolkien wrote an exquisite (to my mind) poem about this. I quote it below, as if has a bearing on this discussion:
Quote:
"Dear Sir," I said - "Although now long estranged,
Man is not wholly lost nor wholly changed.
Dis-graced he may be, yet is not de-throned,
and keeps the rags of lordship once he owned:
Man, Sub-creator, the refracted Light
through whom is splintered from a single White
to many hues, and endlessly combined
in living shapes that move from mind to mind.
Though all the crannies of the world we filled
with Elves and Goblins, though we dared to build
Gods and their houses out of dark and light,
and sowed the seed of dragons - 'twas our right
(used or misused). That right has not decayed:
we make still by the law in which we're made."
|
Herein lies Tolkien's creative foundation. Theistic, thoroughly human, he recognizes the image of God in humanity as each person'a creativity. And that creativity sub-creates from the Creator, can only create what has been imagined by the Creator already.
The text quoted by Eruhen is truly sublime, and it bears echoes of the Revelation of St. John. It also bears resemblances, to my mind, to Ragnarok; no surprise there. I ask you, how could it NOT resemble the apocalypses? It is apocalyptic itself. What you call allegory is NOT allegory, but sub-cration within the genre of apocalypse. What I find truly beautiful about Tolkien's is that his apocalypse bears the stamp of Middle Earth through and through. Alright. I've yacked enough.
[ March 06, 2002: Message edited by: littlemanpoet ]