View Single Post
Old 07-07-2014, 04:10 PM   #47
Shade of Carn Dm
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Toronto
Posts: 479
jallanite is a guest of Tom Bombadil.
Originally Posted by Galadriel55 View Post
Are you implying that strength, weakness, mercy, relationships, pride, honour, misunderstanding, despair, rage, madness, and humanity do not exist?
Not in the least. I am implying only that fiction is fiction, nothing more

Ayn Rand’s novel Atlas Shrugged also shows “strength, weakness, mercy, relationships, pride, honour, misunderstanding, despair, rage, madness, and humanity”. So do many other works.

I apologize that I have apparently written so poorly that you have misunderstood me so badly. Tolkien did not attempt to set up a cult around his book, unlike Ayn Rand. Such things, especially when set up by a third party, often go badly. See, for example, . I have had very bad experiences with Tolkien fans in the past. Most Tolkien fans are fine. You I find exceptionally fine. But some are liars and thieves and very much not worth dealing with. As with any group, atheists or believers.

Originally Posted by Lotrelf View Post
I don't understand what's there to dislike in the term "spirituality".
It is used by hypocrites in bad ways and the word has been ruined for me.

Originally Posted by Lotrelf View Post
I also said how a non-believer with a glance declared the books "crap".
What does that show? A non-believer doesn’t like a book you like. *Sigh!*

In Letters of J.R. R. Tolkien, in letter 177, Tolkien writes:
I also thought [the poet W. H.] Auden rather bad – he cannot at any rate read verse, having a poor rhythmical sense; and deplored his making the book [The Lord of the Rings] ‘a test of literary taste’. You cannot do that with any work – and if you could you only infuriate.
In the Foreward to the Second Edition to The Lord of the Rings Tolkien writes:
Some who have read the book [The Lord of the Rings], or at any rate have reviewed it, have found it boring, absurd, or contemptible; and I have no cause to complain, since I have similar opinions of their works, or of the kinds of writing that they evidently prefer.
In Letters of J.R. R. Tolkien, in letter 294 Tolkien writes, unusually, about his normal reading. Tolkien mentions mainly “the S.F. of Isaac Azimov”, a mistyping for sf author Isaac Asimov, a popular atheist of Jewish birth who was also a fan of Tolkien’s work. See . Tolkien then mentions the books of Mary Renault, especially The King Must Die and The Bull From the Sea. Mary Renault was known throughout her life as an openly gay writer. See . I think she was also an atheist but am not sure. In any case Tolkien proudly relates that a couple of days ago he had unexpectedly received a card of appreciation from her which he calls “perhaps the piece of ‘Fan-mail’ that gives me most pleasure.”

Originally Posted by The Squatter of Amon Rdh View Post
The only person who has ever understood Tolkien's work the way he did was J.R.R. Tolkien, and even he changed his mind a number of times, as his letters demonstrate. Any attempt to suggest that our own experiences somehow give us a greater insight than other readers will only look like an attempt to possess Tolkien and his work and make them a part of our own agendas, which is unhelpful for criticism and tiresome to see.
Totally agreed. People usually surprise you when you get to know them.

Last edited by jallanite; 07-08-2014 at 09:05 AM.
jallanite is offline   Reply With Quote