"Tolkien's Meaning?" Or: "What Tolkien Means?"
It seems to me, that the two sides of the debate can be summed up by one of the two above phrases. Those of the "Tolkien's Meaning" camp are those who are in the Authorial Intent camp (which includes myself, by the way). These readers are looking for Tolkien's Meaning- what did the Author intend to be read here.
Those in the "What Tolkien Means" camp are those who assert the Independence of the Reader (fools, in my opinion). They are not looking for what Tolkien means to say, but are stating what Tolkien means to them.
Now, I am well aware that the Lord of the Rings was not, in Tolkien's opinion, an allegory. Nor was it intended, apparently, to be anything for its readers other than a blessed good read. However, if one looks at the "Meaning" side of things only, it is clear that REASON the Lord of the Rings was written was not so much to give the readers insights into their OWN minds (as the Reader-Camp asserts), but rather a means to pass along the meaning that TOLKIEN intended.
It's like a telagram. The meaning of that message is determined by the sender. That is what he or she is trying to pass along to the receiver. The receiver can, according to his free will (and let's not get that debate mixed in here...) mix up the meaning of that message howsoever he or she wants. And if the message is vague enough, or unclear in parts, then this is a natural happening and should not be harshly judged if the received meaning. But if the meaning is clearing stated by the text, then that is clearly the CORRECT meaning, howsoever you distort it in your own mind for your own purposes.
Likewise, the Lord of the Rings has its intended "messages". This is the canon establised by Tolkien: all the story, innuendo, background, languages, and morals that we are MEANT to receive from his epic. At times the exact definition of this message is confused, hence we have Balrog-wing debates and such to determine what was really intended. But in places where the author is quite clear about what his message, such as the fact that the Lord of the Rings is not an allegory, then going against this is a defial of the proper meaning.
And on the subject of Balrog-wing debates...
Surely none of the Reader's Rights camp should have participated in them- at least not with great heat. After all, if Tolkien's intention as to whether or not the Balrog in the "Fellowship" has wings, then why should they participate, seeing as they believe that Readers' Insights trump Authorial Intent?
~A Very Biased Devil's Advocate -
Formendacil~
__________________
I prefer history, true or feigned.
|