Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Raynor
"Objectively", those are assumptions. For Tolkien, whose motives we are considering here, they represent realities.
|
But this is to imply he was writing a work driven by his intention to 'redeem' his readers. Yet in his statements about 'discovering what really happened', & given Carpenter's statement that he was 'writing blind' its almost as if, as I said he was
exploring Middle-earth, rather than inventing it. He was like Smith or Niggle in many ways. Yet what he produced has profoundly affected millions of readers. He is saying things that we all respond deeply to, introducing us to a world which is spookily real - few works of fiction have that 'inner consistency of reality'. Its as if (as a friend of mine said) Middle-earth is a real place, the characters & events seem not to be waiting for us to open the book & start reading it - its as if we are observers of another 'reality', another world which exists & goes on even when we are not observing it. Many of us, on some level, feel M-e to be a real, objectively existing place - as Tolkien himself apparently did.
Of course, that could just be his technical skill as a writer, but it may be something more.
What's interesting is that while his motivations change over the years (from 'moral regeneration', to myth creation for England, to 'mere' entertainment) the stories themselves essentially
do not change - so its as if the tales & their setting exist independently of Tolkien's intentions for them.
He wants to set something down, actualise it in words on paper, bring it into the Primary world to share it with others - & those others respond to it.
EDIT Yes, I realise I'm possibly contradicting my original point when I say that its almost like the tales remain essentially unchanged even when the author's intention for them changes. But maybe that's an even more interesting line of enquiry...