Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bb
Dearie, dearie me! Is davem arguing for a readerly interpretation here?
It is quite possible that Tolkien the author preferred a certain kind of reading, one which allowed, encouraged, demanded a personal responsiblity on the part of the reader. This is part of his famous rejection of allegory. His Christian message would be meaningless if forced upon readers, so he, as a sub-creator, created a readerly situation analogous to that which the Creator--in Tolkien's eyes-- allows, where the onus is on personal responsibility for how one makes sense of the world.
Whether this means "safely ignore" or merely "ignore" is up for grabs.
|
Davem is arguing, as he always has, for reading the story with as little 'baggage' as possible, simply entering the world & allowing it to affect you, move you, & possibly even change you.
If we must choose a certain kind of reading, or interpretation, then out of courtesy we should go with the author's. However I think any 'baggage' (whether of the author or the reader) will get in the way of the direct experience of the story. If Tolkien had wanted to write a work of Christian Apologetics I'm sure he would have done so. This is not to say we are bound to accept the author's interpretation if if causes us 'pain' of any kind, merely that we should acknowledge it as more 'correct' than our own.