‘Canonicity’: the Book or the Reader?

[The Saucepan Man]

Davem, I think that most of us would agree that Tolkien did not intend LotR to be an allegory of WW2. Does that assist us (either individually or as an 'intepretive community') in our understanding of LotR? Well, yes. But only to the extent that we take account of authorial intention. And whether or not we do so is down to us (individually or collectively) as readers.

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

That suggests that instead of allowing meaning to lie within the experience of the reader and enabling true anarchy, the cognoscenti actually do not wish to relinquish control because said anarchy can also be risky.

Even if they wish to do so, they have no control over the reader's honest reaction to the work. They may have influence, but they have no control.

And just to go back to something that Mister U said:

And now I hear that the author's interpretation of his own post is only as valid as any other reader's?

Valid to whom? An individual's interpretation is more valid than any other to that individual because it is the one that makes sense to them as an individual. But that is not to deny that they may see value in, and ascribe relative values to, the interpretations of others, and so develop their own interpretations accordingly. And we will tend to ascribe greater value (again, as individuals or 'interpretative communities') to the interpretations put forward by particular individuals, such as the author himself, those who have read extensively around the work, those who appear to share our values etc. In this way, we are continually assessing, reassessing and developing our own interpretation. It still remains the most valid one to us, though.