Why, it's quite Dickensian around here. I'm reminded of Scrooge McPedant and his three ghosts of Dictionaries past, present and future.
Did I not say contemporary, not indeed 'contemporary with Tolkien's life'? Having received a British University h'education I am fully commensurate with the knowledge that 'contemporary' in Tolkien's world meant of the modern age. Thus at my own University Richardson, Fielding etc and literature post-Shakespeare was 'contemporary'.
'Not contemporary' would include Chaucer and older works. Which brings me on to the matter of keeping on saying Tolkien didn't like literature post-Chaucer. He
did. The evidence is written down for all to see if we care to actually read works about Tolkien. It's time to debunk the bunkum.
In the documentary Tolkien In Oxford he is filmed taking down a book from his shelves and quoting the following as 'key' to Lord of the Rings:
Quote:
|
There is no such thing as a natural death: nothing that happens to a man is ever natural, since his presence calls the world into question. All men must die: but for every man his death is an accident and, even if he knows it and consents to it, an unjustifiable violation.
|
That's Simone de Beauvoir, that is.
And Tolkien also loved Homer.
D'oh!