|
Seems Lal said a lot of this while I was writing this post, but I'll add it anyway.
Sorry, but JRRT didn't create a myth – for all the reasons Lal gave. One man cannot create a mythology. A mythology is the remnant of a religious system, not simply a set of stories.
What Tolkien did was create a pseudo-mythology, & did it so well that he fooled a lot of his readers into thinking it genuine – or at least that it has the potential to become genuine. And that's an interesting angle.
You could treat Tolkien's creation as a mythology, & open it up to other contributors. Yet at that point it would cease to be what it is & begin to become something wholly other. Tolkien's original would become no more than a starting point, & ultimately his writings would have no more 'authority' than those of any other writer – that's the central point about a true myth – no version has authority – some may be seen as more 'authentic' – but even that is a value judgement. No. As soon as you declare Tolkien's writings to be a 'myth' you turn Tolkien himself into one among many creators of M-e.
IF you're not prepared to relegate Tolkien to that position you're already denying that the Legendarium is a true mythology. If it’s a myth then its up for grabs for anyone to do anything with it. If its not up for grabs in that way then its not a true myth –which is a possession of mankind to do with as it will.
The idea of 'authorising' certain individuals to continue the story is a clear denial of the idea that we are dealing with a 'myth' in the true sense. And if its not a 'myth' then it’s the creation of one individual – a work of Art rather than a myth, & from that point of view the artist is the only true source.
Sorry, but the Legendarium is no more a 'mythology' than the work of an artist who produced a new 'medieval' manuscript by using authentic materials & bindings & cleverly aging the product so as to make it look like it was centuries old. That's effectively what Tolkien did.
|