What does the sixpence = ?

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by davem

But Tolkien can't be held responsible for the way his writings are misused by fanatics - yet that seems to be exactly what Hari is doing.

I agree that Tolkien cannot be held responsible for the unreasonable misuse of his works. But Hari goes further than that. His criticism of Tolkien seems to be, not just that they can be intepreted thus, but that he intended that they be. In my view, he is most certainly wrong in that, although I wonder whether the fact that many have misinterpreted them to reach similar conclusions (those of Hari's ilk and the Stormfront types alike - strange bedfellows indeed) would have given him pause to reconsider some things within the Legendarium.

But it is fair to say (without attributing liability to him) that Tolkien's works can be (and are) interpreted in this way. Which is to the detriment of both Tolkien and those, like us, who derive so much enjoyment and (in many cases) insight from his writings. We are at risk of being tarred with the same brush as the loonies and the white supremacists.

As you have shown, there is abundant material to rebut the points that those such as Hari seek to make, but it seems to me that there are very few people out there doing that. And the point that I was trying to make is that, rather than lampooning such critics (as Shippey does in his allegory) or simply dismissing them as childish or ignorant, surely it is better for those who support and believe in Tolkien's works to challenge them with such material and seek to engage with them in debate, possibly to the mutual benefit of both "sides".

Much as I dislike Hari, he is not utterly inflexible. I recall that a letter by Professor Richard Dawkins in response to an article in The Independent by Hari supporting the Iran war (which Dawkins opposed) prompted a correspondence between them (subsequently published) which was conducted in a most civil manner, was fascinating to read and resulted in accord between them on many issues, their central disagreement notwithstanding. Now, surely that's better than simply dismissing or abusing those with whom we disagree and consider to be wrong in their views?