Davem
Quote:
|
In other words, did he feel during the 50's that it did have some inner meaning - at least to the extent of being able to sustain readers during what he felt to be a world on the brink of destruction? Perhaps by the 60's, optimistic & wealthy, he could dismiss such fears, & felt able to present it as simple entertainment?
|
I think it may well be the case that Tolkien ascribed to
The Lord of the Rings some special 'meaning' when reflecting upon it in the 1950's. In a letter to Rayner Unwin dated October 24, 1952, Tolkien refers to the impact of the atomic bomb:
Quote:
|
Mordor [is] in our midst. And I regret to note that the billowing cloud recently pictured did not mark the fall of Barad-dûr, but was produced by its allies - or at least by persons who have decided to use the Ring for their own (of course most excellent) purposes (Letters - #135, 165).
|
This is the second time that I note his use of comparison between World War II and
The Lord of the Rings - or, more specifically, the effect that the insertion of a 'Ring=atomic power' allegory would have on the work. The first, of course, would be the reference to Saruman filling in the missing gaps of Ring-lore in Mordor after Sauron's enslavement. Tolkien's intent in the juxtaposing of his
Lord of the Rings with the
Lord of the Rings that could have been if it had been an allegory for World War II may well indicate Tolkien's desire for
The Lord of the Rings to be, as you said Davem, sustenance for readers whose world felt threatened by the prospect of near-future nuclear war. By the time he wrote the Second Edition Foreword, then, he would have dismissed the work as 'sustenance' and chosen instead to present it to readers as merely an enjoyable tale. By describing in the Foreword what
The Lord of the Rings would have been like had it been based upon World War II, he is able to express his discontent with the atomic power that 'won' WWII, and at the same time distance his work from those views for future readers.