Welcome to the Downs, Luin. Suddenly there seem to be a lot of us (some former) MI people about...
Touche Mr. U. Actually, I was very careful to refer specifically to the allegorical intentions of Tolkien. Otherwise I contradict myself from my post earlier in this thread. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]
So long as we ignore Tolkien's intentions, the Christian influence, the influence of WWII, of being an orphan, male bonding during war (and whatever subtext you may derive), all are there whether he willed them or no.
But I feel Tolkien sought to strike a more universal chord, or why deny the immediate embrace of Christian allegorists? I believe he mentioned his dream to create a truly English epic, more suitable than Mallory's. I also I believe he succeeded. Perhaps several colonies beyond his intentions.
Why deny the Christian theorists their fun? Or the political commentators on WWII?
He wanted everyone to enjoy his books.
- To avoid the ownership of his epic by an exclusive club, (Christian or otherwise).
- Whereupon it would be further exclusively owned by a particular view. (Protestant? Catholic?)
- And thereupon, further removed from his intended audience, to a more specific corner of that spirallingly ever smaller world.
Those who territorially claim the LotR as a solely Christian work *vision of dog at fencepost* over Tolkien's own protests, is to miss the juxtapoint between his Christian views, those protests, and vision for his epic.
But blue-sky theories, that don't attempt to be exclusionary, don't violate the spirit of his works at all.