What was it all for?

[Raynor]

You make two assumptions , though. First that of a 'spiritual path' & second of 'redemption'.

"Objectively", those are assumptions. For Tolkien, whose motives we are considering here, they represent realities.

Yeah - like I'm getting into that last one

Well, let's agree to disagree (if its' even the case).

[davem]

Originally Posted by Raynor

"Objectively", those are assumptions. For Tolkien, whose motives we are considering here, they represent realities.

But this is to imply he was writing a work driven by his intention to 'redeem' his readers. Yet in his statements about 'discovering what really happened', & given Carpenter's statement that he was 'writing blind' its almost as if, as I said he was exploring Middle-earth, rather than inventing it. He was like Smith or Niggle in many ways. Yet what he produced has profoundly affected millions of readers. He is saying things that we all respond deeply to, introducing us to a world which is spookily real - few works of fiction have that 'inner consistency of reality'. Its as if (as a friend of mine said) Middle-earth is a real place, the characters & events seem not to be waiting for us to open the book & start reading it - its as if we are observers of another 'reality', another world which exists & goes on even when we are not observing it. Many of us, on some level, feel M-e to be a real, objectively existing place - as Tolkien himself apparently did.

Of course, that could just be his technical skill as a writer, but it may be something more.

What's interesting is that while his motivations change over the years (from 'moral regeneration', to myth creation for England, to 'mere' entertainment) the stories themselves essentially do not change - so its as if the tales & their setting exist independently of Tolkien's intentions for them.

He wants to set something down, actualise it in words on paper, bring it into the Primary world to share it with others - & those others respond to it.

EDIT Yes, I realise I'm possibly contradicting my original point when I say that its almost like the tales remain essentially unchanged even when the author's intention for them changes. But maybe that's an even more interesting line of enquiry...

[Raynor]

But this is to imply he was writing a work driven by his intention to 'redeem' his readers

I don't think this is entirely accurate; he reffers to myth-making, not myths, as being able to bring us back to the state before the Fall.

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by davem

Of course, that could just be his technical skill as a writer, but it may be something more.

Little green men?

Originally Posted by alatar

It's all biochemical then.

Or family dynamics. Good way to avoid a nagging wife. "Not tonight, dear, I have a story to write."

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

Or family dynamics.

Or a small group of children...

Which brings up another point: Did Tolkien create for his kids? I find that, for me, this is a strong motivator. I play at making family DVDs of the kids' pictures and home movies as my children are delighted to see themselves on the TV. Not only does it keep them occupied like nothing else, it makes them smile, which goes straight to my heart, which makes me want to make another. And another.

Did the Professor stay up late to create a world that would make his children, then those of the world, smile?

[narfforc]

Why is there a desire to find such things in a story book, do these same people look for these things in Peter Pan or Tom and Jerry, I first and foremost read The Lord of the Rings because it followed on from The Hobbit, I never wished to see anything else but the story. I admit there are now things that invade my mind from other sources, but if I wanted to read the bible (which I have) it is already there, the same goes for any of the pagan mythologies, and if I really wanted to know about Pink Efelumps I would read Davems thread. I see no reason at all to go hunting for spiritual guidance or hidden meanings in anything else than the given scriptures of any religion when the original has all you need.

[davem]

Originally Posted by narfforc

Why is there a desire to find such things in a story book, do these same people look for these things in Peter Pan or Tom and Jerry, I first and foremost read The Lord of the Rings because it followed on from The Hobbit, I never wished to see anything else but the story. I admit there are now things that invade my mind from other sources, but if I wanted to read the bible (which I have) it is already there, the same goes for any of the pagan mythologies, and if I really wanted to know about Pink Efelumps I would read Davems thread. I see no reason at all to go hunting for spiritual guidance or hidden meanings in anything else than the given scriptures of any religion when the original has all you need.

I'm not looking for a 'spiritual' explanation. Just attempting to understand why he did what he did. We can take the approach of looking backward & asking where it came from or forward to where he was trying to go with it. Its really a counter to the other thread which seemed to place all the emphasis on the former approach, arguing over sources, without asking what he did with those sources that he used & what he wanted to achieve - if anything: I haven't ruled out the possibility that he was a bit of an obsessive with a storyteller complex - though as Jung said about complexes - he found the existence of complexes in themselves banal & always wanted to know not where or how they originated, but what they were for.