|
Was a bit brusque in my earlier post. To Clarify....I think its clear there's no coherent philosophical 'system' behind LotR -it is not a 'philosophical' novel, let alone a work of philosophy in novel form (a la Nietszche's Zarathustra). Hence, I wonder what philosophy has to do with LotR, or what a philosophical analysis is likely to gain.
It seems to me that the motivation behind this approach is to treat the work 'seriously', to analyse it for hidden meanings & subtexts. This, of course, is something Tolkien opposed, breaking a thing to find out what it is made of, telling the reader 'what it all means'.
Of all the possible approaches to LotR I think the 'philosophical' approach is likely to achieve least - a linguistic or mythological analysis will shine much more light on Tolkien's creation - in my opinion
"Dead Marshes: Melancholy-", "Mordor: Personification of hate and rage, a sense of defiance, personification of industrization, seems empty, loud, harsh, ", "Gray Havens: peaceful, change from time to eternity, preparation for a place of rest and healing, poignancy of loss, the experience of death, acceptance of loss,"
This reads to me like the kind of thing you find in beginners books on Tarot: The Fool - innocence, foolishness, Death - a new beginning, The High Priest - wisdom, etc. It all seems too simplistic & most likely to elicit the response 'Well, duh! really! The Dead Marshes is a melancholy place! Who'd have thought it!'
Of course, if you enjoy that kind of thing its probably very cool. Not for me, I'm afraid...
|