M-m-meaning! Let's define, is it 'meaning' or 'Meaning', or if there's any at all... - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Azaelia of Willowbottom · 08-21-2005, 11:26 AM

I voted for the one about reader's interpretation collaborating with athor's intent. For me, that about sums it up.

About the entertainment thing, I think that if the only purpose of LOTR was merely to be entertaining, I doubt I would have read LOTR as many times as I have and here is why: There are so many layers, so many characters and themes to consider at once. If the book was written to just be entertaining would it have wound up being such a deep, powerful, and moving story? Of course, that's what I get out of it. The next reader might see it totally differently. That's just one reader's interpretation.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I find a lot of meaning in LOTR, and for me, it is more than just an entertaining story. I think Tolkien meant it to be more than just a simple novel...but who knows. He's certainly not around to ask. So we don't really know the true author's intent of what we should get out of the book. But because of the themes and style and events and characters, we can get a pretty good idea what he might have meant, what messages he wanted to convey.

So I think that "meaning" is a fairly flexible term. I walked away from LOTR with messages of hope and friendship and courage in my mind. Someone else may have left with ideas about fate and destiny. Another person might have seen it as about the dark road society is taking. Certainly Tolkien put all those elements and more in there. But the reader is free to choose which themes, which meanings to carry away with them.

Thinlómien · 08-25-2005, 06:57 AM

A glimpse of divine truth, of course...

**The Saucepan Man** · 08-25-2005, 07:24 AM

I don't really like the word "opinion", since it implies too much in the way of conscious control on the part of the reader but, for me, such "meaning" as there is can only exist within the mind of each individual reader. So that's the option that I have plumped for. An uninterpreted text is meaningless.

The reader's interpretation is, of course, influenced by authorial intent, the views of others and a multitude of other factors. But it is not a collaboration.

***Mister Underhill*** · 08-25-2005, 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SPM

But it is not a collaboration.

Says you.

Eomer of the Rohirrim · 08-25-2005, 09:53 AM

An uninterpreted text is meaningless? Scandalous, my dear Saucepan!

If no-one ever saw a particular flower before it wilted and died, it would have been just as beautiful as it would have been if someone had seen it. The viewer has nothing to do with the beauty of the flower. Now, you may argue that such a flower is of less meaning but surely not that it is of no meaning.

**The Saucepan Man** · 08-25-2005, 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

If no-one ever saw a particular flower before it wilted and died, it would have been just as beautiful as it would have been if someone had seen it.

Would it? Beauty is a subjective quality. It is, as they say, in the eye of the beholder. The flower would not have been beautiful (save in our imagining of it). It would merely have existed.

Eomer of the Rohirrim · 08-25-2005, 10:21 AM

So the Earth was not beautiful until it was inhabited by intelligent life? (I think we're still on-topic

)

the guy who be short · 08-25-2005, 01:53 PM

There was nobody to find it beautiful.

davem · 08-25-2005, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

Would it? Beauty is a subjective quality. It is, as they say, in the eye of the beholder. The flower would not have been beautiful (save in our imagining of it). It would merely have existed.

Meister Eckhart said something along the lines of 'If we could see even a flower as it has its being in God this would be a greater thing than the whole world'.

Maybe we're not the only observers or 'judges'. Where does our concept of 'beauty' arise, & why do we find some things 'beautiful' & others 'ugly'?

Doesn't seem to have much 'evolutionary' value as far as I can see. Maybe the 'beauty' we see in a flower is a pointer to, or memory of, something else......

Lalwendë · 08-25-2005, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by davem

Doesn't seem to have much 'evolutionary' value as far as I can see. Maybe the 'beauty' we see in a flower is a pointer to, or memory of, something else......

I prefer the more metaphysical explanation, but this does have a basis in science. To feel repelled by something is entirely natural and it is even displayed by babies. This has a biological basis in that we are steered away from those things which are bad for us e.g. slime, rotten meat, bodily waste. It also means that we can find certain creatures repulsive, e.g. snakes, spiders, scorpions, as we have an instinct that they are dangerous. Likewise, we have the instinct to be attracted by beauty in many forms e.g. the roundness of fruits, bright colours, and yes, flowers.

The odd thing is that in the natural world, in which we are just another creature, certain species exploit this. Some fruits smell repellant - to avoid us eating them, while others are attractive so that we may spread seeds if we pick and eat them, e.g. tomatoes (they grow in large numbers at sewage farms - sorry if anyone was having their tea

).

I suppose in my own way there, I have now reduced this discussion to something crude...

View Poll Results: The 'real meaning' of the Lord of the Rings is to be found in:
The Author's intent	2	7.14%
The Reader's individual opinion	6	21.43%
Mainstream Reader consensus	0	0%
The BarrowDowns Book Forum consensus	2	7.14%
A Glimpse of Divine Truth	1	3.57%
The Reader's collaboration with both the Author's intent and the opinions of others	4	14.29%
Divine Truth glimpsed by the individual Reader guided by the Author's intent	3	10.71%
It does not have to have a 'meaning' at all, the books are entertaining, and that's sufficient	5	17.86%
All of the above may be true up to an extent	5	17.86%
Current poll does not cover all possible options at all, we need another, refined one [if you choose this answer, please list other possible options in the thread. Thank you]	0	0%
Voters: 28. You may not vote on this poll

08-21-2005, 11:26 AM	#1
Azaelia of Willowbottom Shade of Carn Dûm Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: By the Sea Posts: 446	I voted for the one about reader's interpretation collaborating with athor's intent. For me, that about sums it up. About the entertainment thing, I think that if the only purpose of LOTR was merely to be entertaining, I doubt I would have read LOTR as many times as I have and here is why: There are so many layers, so many characters and themes to consider at once. If the book was written to just be entertaining would it have wound up being such a deep, powerful, and moving story? Of course, that's what I get out of it. The next reader might see it totally differently. That's just one reader's interpretation. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I find a lot of meaning in LOTR, and for me, it is more than just an entertaining story. I think Tolkien meant it to be more than just a simple novel...but who knows. He's certainly not around to ask. So we don't really know the true author's intent of what we should get out of the book. But because of the themes and style and events and characters, we can get a pretty good idea what he might have meant, what messages he wanted to convey. So I think that "meaning" is a fairly flexible term. I walked away from LOTR with messages of hope and friendship and courage in my mind. Someone else may have left with ideas about fate and destiny. Another person might have seen it as about the dark road society is taking. Certainly Tolkien put all those elements and more in there. But the reader is free to choose which themes, which meanings to carry away with them. __________________ "Wherever I have been, I am back."

08-25-2005, 06:57 AM	#2
Thinlómien Shady She-Penguin Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: In a far land beyond the Sea Posts: 8,093	A glimpse of divine truth, of course... __________________ Like the stars chase the sun, over the glowing hill I will conquer Blood is running deep, some things never sleep Double Fenris

08-25-2005, 07:24 AM	#3
The Saucepan Man Corpus Cacophonous Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: A green and pleasant land Posts: 8,390	I don't really like the word "opinion", since it implies too much in the way of conscious control on the part of the reader but, for me, such "meaning" as there is can only exist within the mind of each individual reader. So that's the option that I have plumped for. An uninterpreted text is meaningless. The reader's interpretation is, of course, influenced by authorial intent, the views of others and a multitude of other factors. But it is not a collaboration. __________________ Do you mind? I'm busy doing the fishstick. It's a very delicate state of mind!

08-25-2005, 09:53 AM	#5
Eomer of the Rohirrim Auspicious Wraith Join Date: May 2002 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 4,859	An uninterpreted text is meaningless? Scandalous, my dear Saucepan! If no-one ever saw a particular flower before it wilted and died, it would have been just as beautiful as it would have been if someone had seen it. The viewer has nothing to do with the beauty of the flower. Now, you may argue that such a flower is of less meaning but surely not that it is of no meaning. __________________ Los Ingobernables de Harlond

08-25-2005, 10:21 AM	#7
Eomer of the Rohirrim Auspicious Wraith Join Date: May 2002 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 4,859	So the Earth was not beautiful until it was inhabited by intelligent life? (I think we're still on-topic ) __________________ Los Ingobernables de Harlond

08-25-2005, 01:53 PM	#8
the guy who be short Shadowed Prince Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Thulcandra Posts: 2,343	There was nobody to find it beautiful.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode