‘Canonicity’: the Book or the Reader?

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Thenamir

I haven't had a good rant in some time, and I find here an opportunity.
. . .
In my opinion, which I'm sure will be debated hereafter , this is a thread which should have been closed a year ago.

But then again, I got a really good rant out of it, so maybe it *does* serve a purpose. Flame away! And have fun with it!

Well, Thena, , I'm not sure this will go down in the annals like Kalessin's Rant, but it's no bad post all things considered.

That you feel you must rant demonstrates in part my point. When interpretive communities get closely contained and almost inbred, they tend to generate a limited number of answers/ responses/ opinions. This produces anger, mayhem, anarchy in those who want a means to state their interpretations but who feel either that the limited answers don't address points which interest them or that they are excluded from the debate, for whatever reason, be it time, knowledge, expertise, or other forms of cachet. I completely understand your anger, man, seeing as you are coming late to the debate.

This is why Fordim's new thread, the Canonicity Slapdown thread, is quite appropo and significant. Look at how many Downers have responded to the poll, at least voting if not posting their opinion. The poll invites people to participate whereas this thread, maybe because it tends towards long windedness and, now, a certain amount of incestuous reproduction of ideas, tends to drive people away. I don't see that as requiring thread closure--I mean, after all, what is the point of debate when it is foreclosed, and, any way, how many successful threads other than RPG threads are closed?

And please to remind all who claim that this thread is merely a rhapsody in reproduction, let me point out that last summer's posts did not consider the issue of allegory. This is actually a new application.

Originally Posted by Formendacil

It's like a telagram.

Well, no, it isn't. A telegram has no artistic purpose or merit. It is designed for other purposes of communication. Any understanding of LotR has to consider the special nature of literature as Art. To the best of my knowledge, LotR has not yet been performed in Morse Code, although I have seen Wuthering Heights attempted in Morse Code.

Originally Posted by Formendacil

They are not looking for what Tolkien means to say, but are stating what Tolkien means to them.

Now, I am well aware that the Lord of the Rings was not, in Tolkien's opinion, an allegory. Nor was it intended, apparently, to be anything for its readers other than a blessed good read. However, if one looks at the "Meaning" side of things only, it is clear that REASON the Lord of the Rings was written was not so much to give the readers insights into their OWN minds (as the Reader-Camp asserts)...

Um, actually, no. Not that I am exclusively in this Reader-Camp (having horrific memories of my summer camps, I tend to steer clear of anything camp, although you might not expect that of me), mind you. Those who acknowledge and respect the role of the reader in interpreting art (davem's Art) don't describe the point as insight into their own minds--which after all can happen even with those who fall exclusively into the Authorial Camp-- but as insight into aesthetic experience, which filters or reflects back into their historical/cultural/ social contexts as much as into their psyche. It is true that my experience of the Edith Cavell memorial in London was intensely personal, but it reflected vast reams of social and cultural context. It could not have happened, I believe, to Esty, nor even to Squatter. It is a post-colonialist act, not a post-modern act. Thus, the readerly approach (with which I march with but one foot, awkwardly) is not exclusively solipcistic, as some of you would expound. The readerly approach is as grounded in the social/political/cultural locus of interpretation as is the historical approach.

Which is why I see Tolkien's analysis of the allegorical reading so interesting. He is responding to a 'meaning' made apparent by the historical condition post-publication.