M-m-meaning! Let's define, is it 'meaning' or 'Meaning', or if there's any at all... - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Firefoot · 08-16-2005, 07:32 PM

We-ell, I think I've decided where I'm at. I voted, anyway, so here's what I think.

Note: After writing the following, I'm starting to think that there's a difference between what a book means, and what it means to an individual person. If there is, I'm definitely zig-zagging across that line all over the place. In fact, this whole thing is rather garbled and zig-zags across most of the choices - think of it what you will.

The meaning of anything, book or otherwise, is ultimately up to the person who experiences it. One of the things I dislike about literature classes is that oftentimes I am told what I am supposed to get out of it, what it is supposed to mean. No one can dictate how I feel about a certain thing. I can certainly be influenced or guided into a deeper understanding of a book, but ultimately what it means to me is very subjective. Beauty in the eye of the beholder, and all that.

It's the reason that if you ask ten different people who their favorite character is, or what their favorite chapter was, you'll probably end up with ten different answers. No one will perceive the same piece of literature in the same way, because of their worldview or personal experiences. What LotR means to me is very different than what LotR means to, say, my brother.

That isn't to say that the word of the author is to be totally ignored. If it says in the text, "Hobbits are between two and four feet tall," I can't just decide that Hobbits are six feet tall. Within the text, the author's word is final, but it comes to the reader to interpret said text, so long as it is within the bounds of being reasonable. It is not up to the reader to decide that Orcs are meant to be an allegorical reference to aliens from outer space. The reader's repsonsibility is reasonable interpretation within the author's intent.

Books are a different kind of art. Just like some people can look at a painting and say "That's beautiful!" and others will say, "Eh," people do the same things with books. You can't force a book to have meaning to someone. This is also why I don't think there can be an objective meaning, because no two people will take the same thing out of a book. A single standard is too rigid and uncompromising, whether it is dictated by the author or a group of readers. What a book says is objective; what it means is not.

Moving on, where LotR takes its meaning for me is in those glimpses of Truth, those eucatastrophic moments. It's what separates LotR from other books and keeps me coming back to read it over and over. The things that Tolkien has said in his Letters and elsewhere have certainly deepened my appreciation and understanding of the book. What LotR means to me comes from what I "get out of it," which is enjoyment and, more valued, those glimpses of Truth.

View Poll Results: The 'real meaning' of the Lord of the Rings is to be found in:
The Author's intent	2	7.14%
The Reader's individual opinion	6	21.43%
Mainstream Reader consensus	0	0%
The BarrowDowns Book Forum consensus	2	7.14%
A Glimpse of Divine Truth	1	3.57%
The Reader's collaboration with both the Author's intent and the opinions of others	4	14.29%
Divine Truth glimpsed by the individual Reader guided by the Author's intent	3	10.71%
It does not have to have a 'meaning' at all, the books are entertaining, and that's sufficient	5	17.86%
All of the above may be true up to an extent	5	17.86%
Current poll does not cover all possible options at all, we need another, refined one [if you choose this answer, please list other possible options in the thread. Thank you]	0	0%
Voters: 28. You may not vote on this poll

08-16-2005, 07:32 PM	#15
Firefoot Illusionary Holbytla Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 7,547	We-ell, I think I've decided where I'm at. I voted, anyway, so here's what I think. Note: After writing the following, I'm starting to think that there's a difference between what a book means, and what it means to an individual person. If there is, I'm definitely zig-zagging across that line all over the place. In fact, this whole thing is rather garbled and zig-zags across most of the choices - think of it what you will. The meaning of anything, book or otherwise, is ultimately up to the person who experiences it. One of the things I dislike about literature classes is that oftentimes I am told what I am supposed to get out of it, what it is supposed to mean. No one can dictate how I feel about a certain thing. I can certainly be influenced or guided into a deeper understanding of a book, but ultimately what it means to me is very subjective. Beauty in the eye of the beholder, and all that. It's the reason that if you ask ten different people who their favorite character is, or what their favorite chapter was, you'll probably end up with ten different answers. No one will perceive the same piece of literature in the same way, because of their worldview or personal experiences. What LotR means to me is very different than what LotR means to, say, my brother. That isn't to say that the word of the author is to be totally ignored. If it says in the text, "Hobbits are between two and four feet tall," I can't just decide that Hobbits are six feet tall. Within the text, the author's word is final, but it comes to the reader to interpret said text, so long as it is within the bounds of being reasonable. It is not up to the reader to decide that Orcs are meant to be an allegorical reference to aliens from outer space. The reader's repsonsibility is reasonable interpretation within the author's intent. Books are a different kind of art. Just like some people can look at a painting and say "That's beautiful!" and others will say, "Eh," people do the same things with books. You can't force a book to have meaning to someone. This is also why I don't think there can be an objective meaning, because no two people will take the same thing out of a book. A single standard is too rigid and uncompromising, whether it is dictated by the author or a group of readers. What a book says is objective; what it means is not. Moving on, where LotR takes its meaning for me is in those glimpses of Truth, those eucatastrophic moments. It's what separates LotR from other books and keeps me coming back to read it over and over. The things that Tolkien has said in his Letters and elsewhere have certainly deepened my appreciation and understanding of the book. What LotR means to me comes from what I "get out of it," which is enjoyment and, more valued, those glimpses of Truth.