![]() |
![]() |
Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
![]() |
#23 | |
Corpus Cacophonous
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: A green and pleasant land
Posts: 8,390
![]() |
![]()
I have, as with most threads these days, been observing this one in the background with interest.
Generally, I ascribe to the view that Tolkien did not include overt emblems of his (or any other) religion since that would have risked prejudicing the credibility of the fantasy world that he had created, by jolting the reader back into the real world. Additionally, given his interest in the motifs of mythology and legend, he could not include these alongside overt Catholic symbolism without compromising both. But something that Bęthberry said got me thinking: Quote:
But Bęthberry questions whether those who do not ascribe to this concept are able to accept its presence in a work of fantasy literature such as LotR without it destroying (or at least affecting) the fictional world's "reality" for them. Now, while I am by no means an atheist, I do not have strong religious beliefs and religion does not take a central role in my life. And I certainly do not ascribe to the view that, in "real life", people or objects can be inherently evil. Yet I have no difficulty in accepting this concept in LotR. To me, it is consistent with the world that Tolkien has created and made credible. Yet I wonder whether I would have the same reaction if I was to read the book for the first time now, rather than when I was young (and impressionable ![]() Certainly, had Tolkien's works included overt Christian symbolism and been evangelical in nature, this would have put me off them (certainly now, if not when I first read them).
__________________
Do you mind? I'm busy doing the fishstick. It's a very delicate state of mind! |
|
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |