Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bęthberry
It is quite possible that Tolkien the author preferred a certain kind of reading, one which allowed, encouraged, demanded a personal responsiblity on the part of the reader. This is part of his famous rejection of allegory. His Christian message would be meaningless if forced upon readers, so he, as a sub-creator, created a readerly situation analogous to that which the Creator--in Tolkien's eyes-- allows, where the onus is on personal responsibility for how one makes sense of the world.
|
Wow. I could not have said it better.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by davem
Davem is arguing, as he always has, for reading the story with as little 'baggage' as possible, simply entering the world & allowing it to affect you, move you, & possibly even change you.
|
... as long as that change does not include any logical results of a Christian subtext?
There are layers and layers of subtext in LotR. How could there not be, considering all the linguistic, cultural, mythic, historical, and other substrata he has layered into it? What I am saying is that the deepest subtext is the Christian one, only one deeper than the theist. In that deepest of subtexts lie principles of reality and of the Spirit that are simply not perceivable by those who choose not to believe Christian teaching. It is this deepest substratum that Christians find so satisfying about LotR. This in no way denies the satisfactions to be enjoyed at the theist, mythic, linguistic, historical, cultural, story, and other strata of LotR. I appreciate that you are at least no longer denying that the Christian subtext is, or at least might be, there.