Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man
IInteresting points. But, despite Tolkien's reference to Faerie as the "perilous realm", Tolkien's Faerie (the Faerie of Smith of Wootton Major, for example) appears to me to be a rather different place to the Faerie of the original (pre-disney  ) Faerie-Tales. The latter, it seems to me, is more accurately portrayed in the novel, Mr Norrell and Jonathan Strange - a truly perilous realm. Did Tolkien compromise the original concept of Faerie in order to bring it in line with his faith? If so, might it be said that, as far as Tolkien was concerned, the Christian themes within the book trumped its mythological roots? |
Quite an interesting idea, eh, especially in light of Tolkien's own frustrations over what he perceived were Shakespeare's diminishing of the seriousness of Fairie.
Are you asking if Tolkien intended this? Or are you asking if the work itself can suggest this?
Certainly his depiction of evil and of horror is fascinating for their specific absence. That is, they are knowable not by their presence per se but by struggles of, in particular, Frodo and Sam, by the fear instilled in the characters. Was this a deliberate decision to avoid glamourising evil, as happened with Milton?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The Only Real Estel
I am certainly for reading books in a literary sense also. Take in all you can, feel free to interpret, whatever you like. But I am quite sure Tolkien had his own meaning behind his works, despite his decision to leave much of the thinking up the reader.
And that is what "literary reading" does not change.
|
Sauce's post previous to this one of mine supplies a good many reasons why it is difficult to determine from outside sources and after the fact just what an author's intent was, so I won't needlessly repeat them here. Plus of course even an author's intention can change over time, so initial statements of intention may or may not line up with final decisions. And sometimes, even, authors may not consciously be aware of how the story will affect readers.
Much depends upon how one understands the act of reading. It is not merely an activity of mining, of digging for and dredging up gems of meaning. This is not what actually goes on when people comprehend written language. Every word is mediated by the reader's previous experience of the words and by how the reader responds to the words, the characters. Reading is as performative as any other art. Some readings can be modified by pointing out errors of fact or of omission, some by pointing out where the reader has filled in 'gaps' which aren't there, but none of that really changes the fact that reading is an active process, not a passive one of simply receiving meaning.