Quote:
|
Originally Posted by alatar
You state that the "magic" resides not only in the Professor's works but also in our fellow Downers' writings. To me that means that some percentage of your desire is external, meaning that if not for this site, you would read/have read less etc. If I were to have access only to the books and no other materials, I would still read them at least once per year. Surely this site keeps me 'thinking Tolkien' a bit more of my day than if it weren't available, but it doesn't effect my desire that much more.
Hopefully I've painted a better picture this time.
|
Ah, I see-- Primary versus Secondary Bibliography! Is our reading canonical or not?
Actually, I'm not sure I would accept that statement I would have read less. After all, for quite some time, all readers had were just TH and LotR. I half suspect that it is the rise of all the secondary material that stimulates much rereading. I mean, once one knows The Silm, does one go back to LotR to catch all the references to the Legendarium? Does Aragorn the character make more sense after reading The Silm?
Then again, I suppose it all depends on what one does when one reads, how one reads Tolkien. It's like there are different ways of reading The Bible. I don't mean different interpretations, but differing attitudes towards the activity.
Do Tolkien's books turn one inward, so that one ritually rereads Tolkien, as a kind of mantra? (I could certainly see Entish easily substituting for a focus word enabling concentration. Hooommm. Hoooommmm.) Or do his books turn one to reading other books? His OFS, for example, makes a fascinating template against which to consider other writers of fantasy and earlier fantasy/mythology. His hints of other mythologies lead out to a variety of myths, legends and folklore while his rhythms turn towards other writers-- W.H. Auden, for instance -- who sought to recover the old forms of Old English for modern times. To say nothing of the utterly fascinating way that Tolkien has influenced SF writers who have come after him.
Perhaps it all depends on what one means by "more" -- more of the same or more sub-creation.