Tolkien and Parody

[Bêthberry]

Quoted by davem

One almost gets the feeling that he would have preferred it if none of his readers got the joke, if it remained private, & he himself was the only one who laughed.

Which makes me wonder how many other 'hidden jokes' run through the rest of his books - something Fordim touched on earlier in reference to the 'hidden' meaning of various names in the books.

I quite like the idea that there may be other books out there, which are blatant parodies of Tolkien's works, but where the author doesn't draw attention to it. Wouldn't that be wonderful - to be reading a book, & have it suddenly 'click' that you were reading a parody of something you know so well?

One of the most astounding 'coup de tonnerre' that I have ever received is to recognise suddenly correspondences and similarities where I have not previously seen them. This 'click' as you name it (do you know a book called Click which Lynn Crosbie edited?) is an incredible feeling--it mixes insight and blindness, both sides of the coin, at once. Often once I see the relationship I marvel that I had not first seen it, but all the more interesting and rewarding is to follow all the clues that I had first missed and to consider what it was that brought this new 'vision' or sound wave my way. This experience is a never ending revelation and marvel to me, the more so because of its subtlety (or what at first appears subtlety. Often afterwards, it is more like 'how could I have missed that').

I can understand this thoroughly as part of a writer's true enjoyment in playing with his audience, that ultimately there is some shared recognition. What I don't understand so well is a writer who would wish this to remain private, and not want anyone else to share it. What might prompt a writer to want to keep such things a private joke at the reader's expense? Would Tolkien have been such a writer?

I suppose part of me wants to think that every writer ultimately wishes for someone somewhere to share the communication with him--or her. "Only connect" Auden said. Perhaps this is an idealistic expectation of authors and I should consider other stances towards audience. Certainly to me this secrecy might fit the great satirists or cynicists. Perhaps I should read Les Liaisons Dangereuse. Or is there something comic in the discrepancy between an author's intention and an audience's understanding?

On the other hand, there might also be writers who wish to engage their readers actively rather than passively and who wish to help readers understand how reading literature, at its best, opens minds to new possibilities and teaches readers how to question basic, unexamined assumptions.