What a great thread
Esty, and what substantive posts from everyone so far. Reading through them I felt like I was back in Religious Studies 2201 again!
Perhaps unsurprisingly, I would like to pick up on a point first made by
davem (who is, by the by, I am now thoroughly convinced, a mind reader). I could not agree with you more,
dm when you argue that “Leaf by Niggle” is about subcreation rather than salvation. The latter is too allegorical, and we all know how Tolkien felt about that, while the former is more applicable. Just look at the ways in which the tale has already been applied to Catholic and Protestant theology. (From what I know of other theologies – Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism – I daresay I could make a good stab at including them in this discussion as well, but I shall forbear lest I demonstrate the extent of my ignorance.)
For me, the key line in the tale is one that
davem has already cited (grrr…how am I ever to get ahead of you in rep if you keep doing that?
), but which I shall give again in full:
Quote:
Before him stood the Tree, his Tree, finished. If you could say that of a Tree that was alive, its leaves opening, its branches growing and bending in the wind that Niggle had so often felt of guessed, and had so often failed to catch. He gazed at the Tree, and slowly he lifted his arms and opened them wide.
‘It’s a gift,’ he said. He was referring to his art, and also to the result; but he was using the word quite literally (emphasis mine).
|
As we all know, Tolkien was very careful in his use of words, and he rarely uses one that he has not carefully and fully considered. The use of “gift” is then extremely telling I think, and just in case you are to miss that, he even does something remarkably un-Tolkienesque and announces that “he was using the word quite literally.” Being the terrible pedant that I am, I looked it up in (of course) the OED to see what the “literal” usage might be. I came up with two uses of the word “gift” that I think are most pertinent here.
The first is the one already discussed by
Mark 12_30: the gift of the tree is a manifestation of grace. It’s something that has been freely given as a present, not earned or deserved, but simply something from one self to another to express love and companionship.
The other sense of the word at work here is the idea of one’s own “gift” – in this case, Niggle’s gift is for creating the Tree. In this sense, the Tree is
his gift to creation as much as it is a gift to him. More precisely, because he has been given the gift of creativity, he is able to then turn around and use that gift to create something that adds to creation (subcreation). I think that this is what Tolkien means by his somewhat complicated statement that “He was referring to his art, and also to the result.” In this sense, the “gift” he has received is both – or at one and the same time – the result of something given that he has had no part in, and the result of his own creativity. He is passive in his relation to the giver of gifts, but active in his use of gifts, and the result is a gift that is all at once, a gift to Niggle from the creator, a gift from the creator to creation (through Niggle), Niggle’s gift to creation, and perhaps even Niggle’s gift to the creator.
This complicated interplay within the concept of the “gift” is also at work in the idea of grace. Grace is simultaneously something that one receives and possesses. The Tree is thus a manifestation of grace, and the result of Niggle’s own grace-full art.
One Last Point: this particular line (“‘It’s a gift,’ he said”), has always affected me as deeply as Sam’s “‘Well, I’m back.’” Both are moments of utter realisation and fulfillment, and both are simple, everyday occurrences – the recognition our heart’s desire lies not at the end of the Road, but within us. This beautiful sentiment is, perhaps, Tolkien’s gift to me.