Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Fordim
Not so with Middle-earth: the magic of that world can only be experienced by us, in our non-magical reality, in a distant and secondary way metaphor becomes a poor substitute for the magical reality we are reading about.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Aiwendil
Now I could be wrong - maybe the sword really is on fire. But clearly it is at least possible (and, I think, probable) that the statement is not literally true.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by davem
We have to remember that Anduril's 'fire' is clearly seen in battle at close quarters, from a distance & is easily recognised by all observers. I don't think we can simply dismiss the possibility that it did produce some form of light...
|
Even here we cannot say if the image of Anduril flaming is a metaphor or not. It could be metaphor within the story, within that world but presented to us as real magic, or it could be the other way around, real magic in Middle Earth which we cannot comprehend so is presented to us as metaphor! This is one of the reasons I like Tolkien's writing so much; it is befuddling and even a few words can be turned about until we can find a meaning. We have read so far into this tale and have seen so many unbelievable things that the idea of a sword which flames is not one we are able to entirely disbelieve. If this had happened in The Shire, in the first few chapters, then we would say "that is definitely a metaphor", but now we've gone far beyond that, and are deep into the realms of myth so we can't just dismiss it.
I think this is why the Balrog wings debate is so strong; at that point we are in the changeover from the comfortable into the unfamiliar. At Helm's Deep we are quite out of our comfort zone so the image of a flaming sword is one we can't quite grasp. I like this, as it means we can read the text in many ways, just as we can read mythology in many ways. Interpretation comes into play, and I find that fascinating and rewarding. I like to think that the image could be both real
and metaphor, both at once, depending on how we see it, just as it might appear in different ways to those actually involved in the battle itself.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Fordim
Ah, Derrida would be happy. . .the more you try to make sense of it, the more the text deconstructs on you.
|
Isn't that the whole reason for the 'Downs? To drive us all deeper into madness as we chew over every last morsel?
