Oh yes Pullman... sigh
"real wrestle with real things.."
To me, it's all about what writers want to right, and what readers want to read. The spectrum of fiction is so broad, it's pointless to rank one variety over the other. I suspect Pullman is aggrevated by the fact the JRRT was and is more popular \ successfull than Lewis, his obvious favorite between the two. But to take a literary stance on the argument to forward the validity of the position is silly.
When comparing both works, I would say that LOTR is a purer form of fiction. One can easily see that both authors collaborated and conversed on the subject, on the macro and smaller themes. I see two approaches on the same strategy. Not in the "lesson of the story", or the "wrestle", rather the basic ingredients of the structure. Past that, we see 2 different authors with vastly different goals in mind. LOTR, by not having a wardrobe, elevates the reader (or, to put it another way, with LOTR - the reader is the wardrobe). Much more elegant and subtle. Finer craftsmanship. Many out there are like Pullman - themes in fiction need to have a point, and that point needs to be backed up via the story. The author needs to tell the reader the message, and then prove that the point of the message is valid and correct. And of course it's correct, why else would the author write the story about the grand point in the first place... ugh
Its apples vs oranges, rather than steak vs candy...
Originally Posted by Bęthberry
And Tolkien never had any axes of his own to grind. *cough*Shakespeare*cough*
dont forget to add all things French to the grinding
