Quote:
|
Originally Posted by davem
No - for Tolkien Christianity was this 'One True Myth' of which all others were flawed copies.
A case of 'There's only one True religion, & blow me! it just so happens its the one I'm already following. That's lucky! Imagine what a pain it would be if I'd been following the wrong one all these years. Looks like everybody else is going to have to change their religion but I'm ok to carry on as I am!' perhaps?
|
Exactly why I think the theory is bunkum. It's
terribly convenient that believers in this theory just happen to have chosen the right one; and I mean of whatever faith, I'm not just picking on one! However, nobody has to change their religion as the theory says, ultimately, we're all Christians, and so were our ancestors who built Stonehenge and so were the builders of Mecca, hey, even Pullman is one!
It interests me though, why would someone come up with such a theory? Is it to explain away a lack of comfort with a love for distinctly bloody Pagan myth while being devoutly Catholic? To forestall critics who would be horrified at world-building and playing God in an Act Of Literature?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Fea
If we can suspend disbelief into declaring that Gandalf is Gandalf and not just a conglomeration of words on paper, surely we can suspend disbelief on religion long enough to think [openly]?
|
No, because this would require me to start thinking as though Christianity is the only acceptable Truth in this world, and I do not deal in absolutes. If I had the capacity to suspend my intellectual disbelief on any religion then I would follow it. However I strongly believe that
no one religion has got the handle on the 'Truth' so that would be entirely impossible.
Accepting Gandalf as Gandalf takes very little suspension of disbelief as he is there on the page, crafted in words for me to see and hear, and he is part of an entire, coherent and entirely self-supporting secondary world. That's how Tolkien made him, and if he wished Gandalf (or any other character) to be viewed in the light of the Primary World, he should not have set them within an entirely self-contained, non-allegorical, Secondary World context.