 |
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
 |
|||||||||
|
The Man & the Myth Q&A by
Kathryn Jean Lopez |
|||||||||
|
Kathryn Jean Lopez: Literarily, Lord of the Rings has never gotten real respect, has it? Joseph Pearce:
It's never received any respect from the self-styled literati who
have sought to hijack literature for their own secular humanist
agenda. On the other hand, it has never lacked the respect it so
evidently deserves from those who appreciate a great work of literature
when they see it! Pearce:
Basically, Tolkien's moral traditionalism, i.e. his belief that
good and evil are objectively real, goes against the grain of our
philosophically relativist and morally bankrupt age. Pearce:
If it were nothing other than Christian mythology it would still
have more of real relevance to say to the modern world than any
number of pseudo-Freudian fantasy novels. The central point is that
the moral dimension in The Lord of the Rings is powerfully
applicable to our lives. Concepts such as self-sacrifice; the exaltation
of the humble; the power of humility versus the destructive and
self-negating futility of pride (theologically understood) are at
the center of everybody's lives — even if they don't realize
it! Pearce:
Perhaps the best way of answering this question would be to allow
the leading feminist writer, Germaine Greer, to answer for me. In
1997, Ms. Greer wrote the following: "Ever since I arrived
at Cambridge as a student in 1964 and encountered a tribe of full-grown
women wearing puffed sleeves, clutching teddies, and babbling excitedly
about the doings of hobbits, it has been my nightmare that Tolkien
would turn out to be the most influential writer of the twentieth
century. The bad dream has materialized." Clearly one woman's
nightmare is another woman's delight! Personally, I have spoken
about Tolkien in various parts of the country and can state unequivocally
that there are more women than men in attendance. Clearly the whole
"boy thing" is very much a "girl thing" also! Pearce:
Having quoted a leading feminist, perhaps I'll answer this question
by allowing Tolkien to answer for me: "The Lord of the Rings
is of course a fundamentally religious and Catholic work; unconsciously
so at first, but consciously in the revision." The Book, like
every other book from the Bible downwards, can be read or mis-read,
used or abused. If The Lord of the Rings is read as its author
intended it to be read, its religious dimension will shine through.
Ultimately questions of right or wrong, good and evil, are religious
questions. Pearce:
Tolkien set out with a good heart to write a good story. The goodness
of the former shines forth in the latter. Pearce:
Tolkien believed that certain truths could be more effectively conveyed
through the medium of mythology than through any other literary
medium. Consequently, he set out to create a mythological world
in which to have room to speak truthfully. Pearce:
It seemed to me that the hostile critics knew as little about the
man behind the myth as they knew about the myth itself. My desire
to learn more about Tolkien was inspired by a desire to exorcise
ignorance with the power of knowledge. Pearce:
Certainly there are similarities. At its best, Harry Potter is a
poor imitation of Tolkien. Pearce: If the films lead to more people reading the books they will have an edifying impact — even if the films themselves fail to do the books justice. God can, and does, bring good from evil. As Tolkien wrote in The Lord of the Rings, "Above all shadows rides the Sun." |
|||||||||
 |
|||||||||
oseph
Pearce is author of 
 |
||
|
|
|