What's "real," anyway?

[Imladris]

Originally Posted by Fordim Hedthistle

Sounds good, until I get to the example you cite. I do not share your reservations with The Sting, since I have no problem whatsoever with accepting the 'bad guy' as the 'good guy' in the context of the story. So here we get into the messy part -- is this movie real for me (because it and I share a truth: bad guys can be good guys) and not real for you (because you and it do not share that truth with us)? In this case, aren't we moving into some kind of acknowledgement that the reality of the art (in this case LotR) is entirely dependent upon the reader?

Heh, I probably used a rotten example..but oh well..

But I believe you yourself hit it on the head. That the reality of art is based upon the reader is entirely logical. Why? Because everybody has their own world views, has their own sense of "truth." That's why there are people who love LotR (it speaks truth to them), people who are indifferent to it (it doesn't speak their idea of truth but it doesn't contradict it either) and then there are people who hate it (because it is opposite of their truth -- it is against that which they think is true -- it conflicts with their world view).

This conclusion leads me to Oscar Wilde's quote: "There is no such thing as a moral or an immoral book. Books are well written, or badly written."

And then this is what you said:

If I am willing to accept the art as true, then I make it real. And then this, ironically, leads us right back to the Wilde quote you dispute, insofar as the only way for the book to get me to accept it as true, is by being well-written!?!?

If we accept that truth is relative according to each person's world view, then we must accept they have their own sense morality/immorality. Thus, LotR could be as brilliant as Shakespeare or it could be as poor as [insert example here] but that wouldn't really make a difference in the long run, would it? Naturally books that are well written are more convincing and real, but in the end, their story -- their point-- is still the same. And if that story/point contradicts a person's truth that stems from their world view, then it doesn't matter how well or poorly it is written.

Just to clarify, I do believe that how well a book is written matters tremendously. It is just not the deciding factor.