Well, I suppose most of us will have seen TOR.n by now, specifically the interview with Greg Wright on the Hobbit movie. He makes some interesting points
here, but the most interesting comment was this:
Quote:
|
Complicating matters is the general perception amongst many fans—a sentimental, romanticized, and unexamined perception—that The Hobbit is a light, whimsical fantasy. It is not. It is, in fact, an allegorical bildungsroman, a coming-of-age tale, a story of loss of innocence. It’s about children no longer covering their eyes in terror and imagining giants and bogies, but rather coming to see the world with eyes wide open and finding out that the most dangerous monsters may be some of their fellow adventurers. The conventions of fantasy may dispose of Smaug quite neatly; dealing with Thorin—or Bilbo’s own complicity in a Great Wrong—is another matter entirely, but one which is at the heart of The Hobbit.
|
Now that's interesting. Is Thorin a greater (& 'truer') 'monster' than Smaug - in fact, is he the 'real' monster that Bilbo has to confront? Or rather, is the fact that Thorin can turn from a decent, kindly (if pompous) friend, to a greedy, cruel thug, to a hero who saves the day, to someone who learns from his experience & regrets his rash actions - in fact undergoes a transformation from 'sub Grimm's fairytale Dwarf' to 'human being', the heart of the story? Is the fact that Bilbo is forced to betray his friends 'for the greater good (by stealing the Arkenstone) the thing that brings about his 'coming of age' rather than going down the passage to face Smaug? Is Wright right? We don't have to face Dragons, but we do have to deal with Thorins.
The style of the Hobbit may be whimsical, typical of an 'Edwardian' children's book, but is the content? Would a more 'adult' take on the story really be out of place, or would it actually bring out the real themes of the story more effectively?