![]() |
|
|
|
Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
|
|
#11 | |||
|
Gibbering Gibbet
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Beyond cloud nine
Posts: 1,844
![]() |
Quote:
davem has already introduced into this discussion a moment from LotR that I think is useful in thinking through the issues currently at play. When Aragorn says to Éomer: Quote:
Quote:
In this way, the question of morality is, in the context of Middle-Earth, not really a question at all – or, rather, it is a question to which the reader can respond in one of two ways: do we go along with the author in his creation of a moral system in this subcreated world, or do we not go along with him. At risk of looking like an absolutist I genuinely believe that these are really the only two options. The choice that Aragorn presents to Éomer is a stark and obvious one: me or Sauron; right or wrong; good or evil. The story presents up with the same stark choice: accept M-E morality or don’t. In this case, I do not see much room for negotiation or give and take between text and reader.At the same time, I am placed in a quandary insofar as I do not adhere to the moral vision of LotR – I am not, quite simply, a believer. I think the disturbing power that LotR has is that it makes me so want to be a believer by embodying the moral choice in the form of Aragorn. I want very badly to follow a man like him; were he to appear before me in reality I would follow him to the ends of the Earth – but he never will, so I am left in the primary world of greys and shadows, trying to make my way for myself. LotR simplifies morality in a way that’s nice to imagine, but that in no way reflects how things really are.
__________________
Scribbling scrabbling. |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|