Alright, well, here goes, trying to phrase this very carefully (a little nervously)...
I'm not a Christian; I'm a Pagan. I'm curious to attempt more Lewis someday, but even as a child the ending of the Narnia series I felt essentially said to me, "This story is not for you. There's a clear line drawn here and you're on the other side." So when one encounters that feeling, what can one do but say "I'm sorry you feel that way," and walk away. There is nothing in Tolkien that gives me this feeling, however. To me, it's a mark of Tolkien's great generosity of spirit that he can work the _spirit_ of his faith into his work so thoroughly that the _letter_ of the writing does not exclude or insult those who are also of good will but of a different faith. The themes of struggle, sacrifice, humility, and wonder are Christian, but not EXCLUSIVELY Christian; they are universal no matter what name one calls the Inner Light by. A true moral code is one that comes from within and certainly can exist independent of faith (my atheist father is one of the most ethical and moral people I know).
Superficial speaking, Tolkien's Elven cosmology, with the sub-creative Valar under the One and the Maia beneath them who act as helpers and adversaries to the children of Arda, is as applicable to Pagan theology as to Christian, and yet dismissive to neither. Every artist, regardless of religion, can relate to the moral vicissitudes of those under Aule, and identify with Yavanna's love for all green and growing things, and the compassion and sorrow of Nienna (and her pupil Olorin). And I think it's very wise of Tolkien to leave the ultimate beyond-the-world fate of Man rather vague - as a writer and a Christian he understood humility well enough not to pretend to know.
Tolkien was well aware of the dangerous potential of remaining too attached to one's sub-creations, wasn't he? Once a work of art is released into the world, the artist must give up total control of how that work is received, and I think that knowledge enabled him to free his own work from the constraints of allegory (which suffers as art a lot of times because it has one explicit correct interpretation). The artwork that sustains multiple, possibly contradictory interpretations over time seems the greater to me.
|