Quote:
Originally Posted by Aiwendil
See, no one ever claimed it was the only possible style of discussion.
|
For that matter, nobody (except
Dak, possibly) ever claimed that his or hers were (to quote you again,
blantyr) "the only possible interpretations". Where exactly did you get that idea?
Now, I want you to understand this: I am a great believer in, and defender of, the right of readers to like what they like, dislike what they don't like, and generally approach books in any way they please, rather than having to interpret them in any one "official" manner.
However, once you move out of the realm of personal preference, I think it fair enough that you should be asked to support your statements.
Now, there are many things in Tolkien's work (as in many other writers' work, for that matter), that don't have a final, definitive answer. In fact, I believe most of us hold this as a basic assumption. But the thing is, often the value of a discussion lies not so much in its ultimate goal but in the interesting things that happen along the way. I really think this is something that people who disapprove of argument miss, just as much as those who are only interested in winning or losing.
Please don't think me hard line about this– I'm not saying every stray remark should be debated into the ground or that every statement must be proven from first principles. However,
blantyr, the fact is that you have certainly not been shy about giving us your views, at length, on a considerable number of topics– have you? I ask you to consider how much
practical difference there is, then, between saying your opinions should be above question, and maintaining you're always right?