Quote:
|
Tolkien meant none of these things. I'm afraid both Tolkien's work and Tolkien himself simply cannot be boiled down in reductionist theories. He was a Catholic, but he was also a lot of other things, and to attempt to say that Catholicism was the source of Lord of the Rings, was the basis for its existence or is the root of its purpose or function is simply wrong.
|
Lalwende,
Although I might express it differently, there is great truth in what you say. To reduce LotR to one simple equation is misleading: that just wasn't the nature of the man. One moment Tolkien says it is preferable to omit any reference to "real" religion in a fantasy world, and some years later he writes a piece like the Athrabeth. To bring the incarnation into the Legendarium was a long way from his earlier reference in the letters when he complained about the Arthurian legends and expressed the view that "real religion" should be kept out of any subcreated faerie world. But that duality isn't surprising. On almost any topic we discuss, it's possible to bring up conflicting ideas put forward by Tolkien himself.....what Kilby labelled "contrasistency".
The quote from the Guide that I gave in the last post clearly states that Tolkien did not appreciate his work being regarded as "Christian propaganda or anything like that." But at the same time, it's hard for me to deny that the "Catholic influence" grew in importance over the years and became a major component of his work and thinking, at least towards the end.
How else can we understand or interpret Tolkien's stated belief that he was an "instrument of God"? Was that Catholic influence expressed strictly in terms of general moral standards or was it wider than that? What about the author's own admission in the Guide as recorded by Carpenter, Sayer and Kilby that his view of his work and its meaning changed somewhat over the years in terms of religious meaning? I personally feel moral standards are one part of the equation we're discussing but that more explicit references are also involved.
To me the central terms aren't "either/or". Rather they are "when" and "how much". I vacilate back and forth on this in terms of that balance, but I think Catholic influence is definitely there and it extends beyond a simple reckoning in terms of moral standards. It seems to have increased over the years. If we were to ask each person who has contributed to this thread to pinpoint "how much" and "when", we'd probably get wildly different answers, but we'd all be on some kind of continuum.
Lal and
Littlemanpoet -- Would you both feel more comfortable with that mental image of a continuum rather than "either/or"?