Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nogrod II
He therefore argues for a new approach to Tolkien that "problematizes", to use that hideous piece of Po-Mo jargon, the novel's claim to authenticity. Furthermore, he argues that the prevalence of novelistic technique argues against the status of the work as a straightforward translation of 'Frodo's memoir' - instead we should see it as a 'history' that has been 'novelised' by successive generations of scholars.
|
I feel this argument is quite, er, problematized itself. As it is, the “Translator Conceit” can be readily– a bit
too readily, perhaps– used to explain just about any inconsistency or error in the text. Taking it a step further, arguing (as it seems) that such inconsistencies are deliberate, all part of some complex authorial meta-strategy... well, it just seems like that's giving Tolkien the ultimate get-out-of-jail free card.
Mistakes? No, no, he meant to do that...