Quote:
|
that Tolkien's work is actually an analysis/exploration of that very conflict within the human psyche
|
It seems to me that even in that conflict,
ultimate hope of both Elves and Men and even Dwarves is to the future - the making of Last Music and singing in the Last Choir. As seen from the perspective of those placed
inside the circles of the world, it is future affair. Incarnation hinted at as an ultimate relief is also
future affair for the ME of both Silmarillion and LoTR.
So it seems to me that conflict here lies in a bit different plane - as both P and M believe (mark wording) that the ‘paradise’ is achievable on earth/within solar system/galaxy/whatever trough our own efforts, and even more so - that such a paradise is not only achievable, but inevitable (unless we fail ultimately through folly such as religion in Pullman’s case) as the general trend of the world is evolution from simpler to more complex and from worse to better, and Tolkien believes just the opposite (at least about own efforts. Of course own efforst are of vast importance with Tolkien, but something extra is to be there always - it is joint effort, to put it crudely, that counts). Hence conflict inevitably shifts to become issue of religion (not necessarily organized religion, but in the sense of
faith for sure).
Edit: davem, I'm just halfway through the lecture you link to in your signature: (
http://www.sofn.org.uk/Conferences/pullman2002.htm). Interesting key-phrase, said in unobtrusive way, almost like a slip of the tongue:
Like God, they [characters in any story] are nonreal. Thanks for interesting read, too. But deary me, why can't these people just live and let others live, I can't help thinking - why pull out some kind of yardstick and aggressively
compare things at all? 'This is better than that, and that is worse than this' seems to be the motto, but most annoying is an addedum running like '...and therefore
you too should like this more than that...'