[Kin-strife]

It's like applying freudian psychoanalysis to Shakespeare (i.e Hamlet's supposed oedipus complex). It is how literature lives. Different ages breed different philosophical opinions and these colour our interpretations of writing. Without this the writing doesn't live but becomes rigid and irrelevant. By writing down and publishing his myth Tolkien gave it to everybody and it no longer belonged to him soley. This means that his own stated intention isn't the last word.

Freud doesn't suggest that Shakespeare intended to portray Hamlet with an oedipus complex but rather that he ingeniously portrayed human character as he observed it within himself and in others. The theories for the cause of this behaviour will always change. The same is true for theories on the nature of god, the cause of existence etc. Of course, the difference with Tolkien is that he created the entire universe that his stories occur in. But this universe obviously has to have been constructed from experience of the real one, so our opinions of the real world will always effect our interpretation of his. This helps to give Tolkien's work a vibrancy and also give endless room for debate in forums such as this one.