[Lush]

lindil,

I believe that the very idealization that you speak of disallows psychological depth.

But like I have said over and over again: Tolkien is no Tolstoy and Tolstoy is no Tolkien.

I didn't read War and Peace for some Balrog-butt-kicking action, and I didn't read the LotR for the psychology of Russian dances (these are extreme examples, naturally).

So whatever. You can take my head and bang it on a desk for all eternity while telling me that Tolkien's characters were psychologically "deep" and I'll just tell you to leave me alone for all eternity (at least I'm pretty sure of that, though it would be arrogant for me to assume that at this point in my life I understand everything that's going on with Frodo, for example).

Even at the moments that the reader feels closest to the characters, Tolkien is not out to plumb the complex motivations of the human psyche, he's out to touch a different string in our hearts.

(Though maybe, just maybe, those strings all lead to the same place in the end...But I'm not sure of that; I'll get back to you in a couple of decades on that one)

And you know, he does what he does beautifully, and leaves me satisfied, and so I'm cool with all that.

[ November 15, 2003: Message edited by: Lush ]