‘Canonicity’: the Book or the Reader?

[davem]

Originally Posted by Aiwendil

I must say that I find it odd to maintain both the fundamental importance of the author and the objective existence of Middle-earth. It seems to me that you can't have it both ways. If Middle-earth has an objective, independent existence and Tolkien was merely "discovering" then you cannot see his work as essentially a manifestation of himself, any more than you can see the Pelopponesian war as a mere manifestation of Thucydides.

On the other hand, if art is really to be thought of in the modern way as a manifestation of the artist, then Middle-earth's origin, in fact its entire existence, is in Tolkien himself, as an artist.

Ok, lets take Niggle's tree - did Niggle 'invent' the tree, or did he merely 'communicate' the real tree's image to the world? The Tree may have a real existence but that doesn't invalidate Niggle's role in making the idea of it available to those who couldn't exprience it directly. What Niggle does is not unimportant, his role is in no way negligeable. Niggle is a vital part of the process of comunicating something REAL.

Its not a case of 'having it both ways'. Niggle's painting is of THE Tree, but at a particular moment in time, from a particular angle, but the Tree itself is a living thing. Niggle makes available an image of it. Whether we're speaking of a 'Platonic' reality here is another question, & I don't think it is that, exactly.

I think Tolkien was 'in touch' with something, but what its exact form & nature is, I can't say - its too abstract - Truth, Reality, Meaning. Tolkien gave it a particular form, in order to make it accessible & understandable. I'm not wishing to imply that Middle earth exists exactly as Tolkien described it. But there is 'something' there which is communicated to the reader by the stories. The stories open us up to something which cannot be expressed directly. Like parables they communicate in symbolic form something which can't be communicated any other way -not platitudes about self sacrifice & loss & good vs evil, but some other, underlying Truth about us & our nature.

The form Tolkien gives to those 'Truths' are his own, so he is vital to the comunication process. Those 'Truths' are to my mind essential things. I can't be clearer, but the alternative, that they are simply stories, with no inherent connection to that 'Truth' doesn't work for me, & I can't understand it, because for me, that 'Truth' is a fact. Whatever it is - if I ever experience it directly I am convinced that my response will be like Niggle's on seeing 'his' Tree - it will remind me of nothing so much as Middle earth.