{"id":94865,"date":"2014-11-22T02:00:02","date_gmt":"2014-11-22T07:00:02","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.theonering.net\/torwp\/?p=94865"},"modified":"2014-11-22T02:00:02","modified_gmt":"2014-11-22T07:00:02","slug":"majesty-and-simplicity-on-tolkien-and-allegory","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.theonering.net\/torwp\/2014\/11\/22\/94865-majesty-and-simplicity-on-tolkien-and-allegory\/","title":{"rendered":"Majesty and simplicity: on Tolkien and allegory"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"JIn our latest Library feature, Tedoras takes up the vexed issue of Tolkien and allegory. <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n

Majesty and simplicity: on Tolkien and allegory<\/h3>\n

by Tedoras<\/b><\/p>\n

Tolkien\u2019s disdain, and avowed desuetude, of allegory is widely known by most familiar with his writings. Snippets from essays, letters, and remarks all show the Professor rejecting the notion that allegory is employed in his mythology; instead, Tolkien directs readers to the difference between allegory and applicability. <\/p>\n

The \u201callegory-applicability\u201d debate has been a steady focus of scholars for years. However, by and large, the scholarly community has deferred to Tolkien\u2019s own rejection of allegory on simple fidelity. <\/p>\n

A close reading of The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien<\/i> reveals that such deference is perhaps fallacious. In the context of the letters I will discuss below, Tolkien himself explain how the text may be \u201capplied.\u201d With the Professor\u2019s own \u201cinterpretation\u201d (though it is hard to call the very author an \u201cinterpreter\u201d) in hand, we may put aside all other conjectures, serious and ridiculous, which have plagued all interested minds. <\/p>\n

\"Letters Yes, you have inferred correctly: I do not believe that we can make the distinction between allegory and applicability as Tolkien does. The truth is, Tolkien\u2019s \u201capplication\u201d further reveals his conscious intent, and most definite understanding, of the allegory in the mythology, particularly as manifested in The Lord of the Rings<\/i>. As you will see, this debate can be confounded by how one defines \u201callegory\u201d and \u201capplicability,\u201d and moreover by the notion of intent. <\/p>\n

I will, thus, be examining what happens when the freedom of the reader and the mind of the author converge. That is, what happens when the reader is the author? At that point, we must tread carefully, and seek to take most seriously what is said; for at that junction the truth is revealed. The big question is: how do we define Tolkien\u2019s \u201cinterpretation\u201d of his own texts? <\/p>\n

Tolkien\u2019s allegory, like fellow Inkling C.S. Lewis\u2019, is religious in nature. But unlike the realm of Narnia, Tolkien\u2019s is devised subtly; so much so, in fact, that Tolkien did not notice it slipping into his world at first (though many, including this author, would argue that subtlety is characteristic of allegory, or a well-executed one, at any rate). <\/p>\n

At a certain point, however, he did notice it, he admits; and thence developed the complexity described in his many letters. The greatest problems of this debate arise when discussing intent or motive. While Tolkien may not have set out to write a religious work and ended up with his mythology or The Lord of the Rings<\/i>, specifically, he did write with an incipient, deeply-developing religious allegory in mind, which clearly evinced itself to him in writing The Silmarillion<\/i>. <\/p>\n

Thus, his original intent was not allegorical in nature\u2014it did not precede the story. Yet a story from which allegory then emanates remains an allegory, if not of a different type.<\/p>\n

Tolkien states most frankly that \u201cany attempt to explain the purport of myth or fairytale must use allegorical language\u201d (Tolkien, Letters<\/i>, 145). This statement is easy enough to accept as true, and, for most people, it is enough to forgo the effort to understand Tolkien\u2019s allegory. <\/p>\n

\"the I ask everyone to bear in mind this line; for Tolkien throughout never does explain, or even frame his answers, as the purport<\/i> of his myth; rather, he defaults to an explanation of allegory itself. This explanation he would most likely characterize as \u201capplicability,\u201d as he does in letter #203. But this is the essence of my argument: the \u201capplicability\u201d of the story to its own author is, and can only be, the true identity of the tale, the allegory. <\/p>\n

The allegory of his myth, and thus not the purport thereof, constitutes three main parts: \u201cFall, Mortality, and the Machine\u201d (Tolkien 145). The first two parts are readily understandable, but the Machine aspect Tolkien defines as \u201call use of external plans or devices…instead of development of the inherent inner powers or talents\u201d (Tolkien 145-46). The explicit employ of the allegory, developing from this three-part definition, is further explained by Tolkien.<\/p>\n

The notion of the Fall is perhaps the most overtly religious, and it is a main driver of the mythology and story. Conflicts arise from falls, which the \u201cChildren of God\u201d mainly experience, and which Tolkien says mostly concerns The Silmarillion<\/i>, in which the repeated falls of the Elves drive the story (Tolkien 147). The first fall, however, is a \u201cfall of Angels\u201d to Tolkien\u2019s mind, involving the \u201cgods\u201d during Creation (Tolkien 147). This first fall is that of Morgoth, and in his explanation thereof, Tolkien not only equates the Valar with angelic spirits, but also the fall itself with that of Satan (Tolkien 243). Valinor is \u201ca kind of Paradise,\u201d and it is there that the first fall of Elves, \u201cwar in Paradise, the slaying of Elves by Elves,\u201d takes place (Tolkien 148). <\/p>\n

Interestingly, to a mortal such as Frodo, Valinor represents \u201ca purgatory and a reward,\u201d for there he is granted temporary abidance for his virtuous deeds \u201cin littleness and in greatness\u201d before passing on, as it were (Tolkien 328). From this (and I will refer those seeking more detail to the text of letter #131), Tolkien admits that The Lord of the Rings<\/i>, built on this foundation, \u201cis a fundamentally religious and Catholic work; unconsciously so at first, but consciously in the revision\u201d (Tolkien 172). <\/p>\n

The subtlety of this allegory, including the conscious excising of overtly religious diction and practice in the text, is because the \u201creligious element is absorbed into the story and the symbolism,\u201d the underlying myth being the allegorical foundation, rooted so deeply and so well that the works thence derived have no apparent hint of it (Tolkien 172). <\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

The depth of the allegory is key, for it is primarily a fundamental element; The Lord of the Rings<\/i>, which is directly related to The Silmarillion<\/i>, thus has less an appearance of allegory because it takes place on a different textual level. This case, however, renders the allegory all the more explicit, for it is ever cunningly developed.<\/p>\n

\"fr-1973\" Even so, Tolkien knew there was allegory in The Lord of the Rings<\/i> that came across clearly. One reader, the author of letter #142, referenced above, wrote to him with some questions, one of which was the relation of Galadriel to the Virgin Mary. Tolkien\u2019s response is twofold. First, he replies that the reader was \u201cmore perceptive, especially in some directions, than anyone else, and have even revealed to [him] more clearly some things about [his] work\u201d (Tolkien 172).<\/p>\n

One of these \u201cthings\u201d so revealed is the association of Galadriel and Mary, the latter \u201cupon which [Tolkien\u2019s] own small perception of beauty both in majesty and simplicity is founded\u201d (Tolkien 172). It is a grand statement indeed that Tolkien\u2019s idea of beauty, a fundamental element of his works, is so admittedly tied to this religious figure; yet it is a controversy that cannot be refuted, for the Professor himself so makes the claim. Another example is his explanation of the role of \u201cgrace\u201d in the trials of Frodo. <\/p>\n

Tolkien defines \u201cgrace\u201d as the \u201cenhancement of our powers as instruments of Providence;\u201d and to him, Frodo is given grace on a few occasions: first, in answering the Council of Elrond\u2019s call, then in resisting the Ring\u2019s temptation, and also in enduring the burden of carrying it (Tolkien 326). While these aspects may have slipped in unconsciously in the beginning, their development in the text, along with the allegory, became a conscious one, and in that conscious assembly is to be found the reason for such excellent subtlety.<\/p>\n

Tolkien cedes further that \u201c\u2018allegory\u2019 is the only mode of exhibiting certain functions,\u201d which, in the context of the most bemusing and vexatious Tom Bombadil, and other instances where allegory may seem more explicit, Tolkien finds applicable (Tolkien 192). The mystery of Tom, long confounding readers, is readily described by Tolkien and cogently unraveled: he is \u201cembodying…pure (real) natural science,\u201d to be thought of as \u201czoology and biology not cattle-breeding or agriculture\u201d (Tolkien 192). The nature of Tom Bombadil in the author\u2019s eyes, wherein we may find some semblance of the character\u2019s true raison d\u2019\u00eatre<\/i>, is exemplary of the hidden allegory within the author\u2019s application. <\/p>\n

The Valar embody another level of entextualized allegory. They are the \u201cgods,\u201d but as yet beneath the God, Eru, the One, and they remain his agents. Appropriately so, the inhabitants of the living world may \u201ccall on a Vala<\/i>…as a Catholic might on a Saint\u201d (Tolkien 193). <\/p>\n

\"JRR This is a most direct comparison, and not employed solely for illustrative benefit. What is clear from the mythology is that the relationship between those \u201cbelow\u201d and those \u201cabove\u201d is one of invocation for aid; Tolkien himself cites the calls to Elbereth throughout the text. We must also examine the relationships of the \u201cgods\u201d to each other, and theirs with the God, Eru. The nature of power dynamics, coupled with the notion of the Fall above, reveals that conflict amongst the prevailing powers drives the story and remains a constant factor across time (with Morgoth as Satan fallen from grace, this eternal conflict is all the more lucidly imagined). <\/p>\n

Yet Tolkien goes so far as to say that the conflict in The Lord of the Rings<\/i> is really \u201cabout God, and His sole right to divine honour\u201d (Tolkien 243). The conflict began with Morgoth, whom Sauron followed to the \u201cdepths of evil,\u201d and quickly became his agent; and it appears to first climax when Sauron attempts to inveigle the Numenoreans into making him a \u201cGod-King,\u201d all of which poses a challenge to God and the carrying out of his will (Tolkien 243). The chief crime is, however, not in his direct challenge to God, but rather in how he would sway the true, monotheistic hearts of the children of God into believing that he was the One.<\/p>\n

Ultimately, God\u2019s will prevails, and the War of the Ring brings down Sauron. However, had he won, Sauron would have \u201cdemanded divine honour from all rational creatures and temporal power over the whole world;\u201d that is, Sauron, in an act of near-absolute evil, would have decreed himself God (Tolkien 244).<\/p>\n

Tolkien assures critics that this is \u201cnot any kind of new religion;\u201d rather, it is \u201cto express\u2026some of [his] (dim) apprehensions of the world\u201d (Tolkien 283). Indeed, it is not a new religion and it most certainly expresses a part of Tolkien\u2019s world: his religion. <\/p>\n

The theme of power, especially in a religious context (struggles between the children of God for power, between them and God, and between God and his servants), is present. The theme of death and immortality\u2014that is, life\u2014is also present in a religious context, as the children of God struggle to understand their situation. Men wish to know why they must die, and Elves why they find no rest in permanence. Yet as the races, the children of God, question each other and themselves, they also question God, and on occasion (not Beren and Luthien), they pose a direct challenge to him. <\/p>\n

Tolkien, with this in mind, admits his tale \u201cis built on or out of certain \u2018religious\u2019 ideas,\u201d yet still hesitates to call it allegory because it \u201cdoes not mention them overtly, still less preach them\u201d (Tolkien 284-84). I believe the problem lies in his definition of and ostensible scorn for allegory, as it is plain that some aspect of this tale must be allegorical. For one, I hope to shown that subtlety\u2014as he says, not being overt\u2014does not rule out the presence of allegory. His tales may not be preachy, as most bad allegories are, and thus he is more than pleased to write off the possibility. <\/p>\n

But if we look at allegory as a finely developed, deeply-entrenched craft, as Tolkien so cunningly renders by rooting his tales in the context of The Silmarillion, he would perhaps not so disdain the notion, where it is now one of avowed and clear skill in his art, and not some cheap trick to get off a novel. It is clear that Tolkien\u2019s is a type of allegory, and that there is a place for it on the continuum, far, far away from the works that account for his abhorrence of the notion. <\/p>\n

\"JRR A deeply religious sense permeates Tolkien, and a clear picture of the theologian he was can be found in Letters<\/i>. But his religious identity is often seen as secondary to Lewis\u2019, though much of Tolkien\u2019s corpus could have been compiled into a theological tome had he, or his publishers, so desired. By this I mean that his reputation is wrongfully diminished, and this misrepresentation adds to the mess of opposing ideas in the \u201callegory-applicability\u201d debate. <\/p>\n

If we can begin to acknowledge and internalize how religious Tolkien was\u2014on an academic and personal level\u2014something which seems so antithetical to a scholar of the man, we will be shown a much more faithful portrait and accurate representation of his life and works; at which point, the presence of allegory may not be wholly unlikely. <\/p>\n

I am not advocating for a religious reading of all Tolkien\u2019s works; indeed, I am not advocating for a religious reading of any of them. I am content to enjoy them simply as they are. But it is clear that the mess of confusion and doubt about allegory and Tolkien is a quagmire in which scholarship has been either bogged down for too long, or stopped on the edge, afraid to enter the fray. It is, however, wrong to refuse to accept that allegory may be present in the texts simply because Tolkien may have disliked that notion, rather, his notion thereof. <\/p>\n

Yet it is lunacy to continue refusing that allegory may be present when the author himself outlines his own intended, or understood, allegory as completely and deeply as Tolkien. In his words, \u201ceach of us is an allegory, embodying in a particular tale and clothed in the garments of time and place, universal truth and everlasting life\u201d (Tolkien 212).<\/p>\n

Works cited:<\/b>
\nJ.R.R. Tolkien, The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien<\/i>, ed. Humphrey Carpenter with the assistance of Christopher Tolkien (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2000)<\/p>\n

Tedoras is a bibliophile, linguist, and regular attendee at TORn\u2019s live weekly webcast. He splits his time between scouring the web for Tolkien books to add to his collection and the study of Chinese politics and public policy.<\/b><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In our latest Library feature, Tedoras takes up the vexed issue of Tolkien and allegory.   Majesty and…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":14,"featured_media":80096,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"inline_featured_image":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[36,331,153,35,6,38,98,149,37,152],"tags":[2699,2700,2639,1788],"class_list":["post-94865","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-fotr-book","category-greenbooks","category-tolkien-life","category-lotr-books","category-tolkbooks","category-rotk-book","category-silmarillion","category-lotr","category-ttt-book","category-tolkien","tag-allegory","tag-applicability","tag-letters-of-j-r-r-tolkien","tag-library"],"aioseo_notices":[],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.theonering.net\/torwp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/10\/Tolkien_2692769b.jpg","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p1tLoH-oG5","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.theonering.net\/torwp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/94865","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.theonering.net\/torwp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.theonering.net\/torwp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.theonering.net\/torwp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/14"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.theonering.net\/torwp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=94865"}],"version-history":[{"count":11,"href":"https:\/\/www.theonering.net\/torwp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/94865\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":94889,"href":"https:\/\/www.theonering.net\/torwp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/94865\/revisions\/94889"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.theonering.net\/torwp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/80096"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.theonering.net\/torwp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=94865"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.theonering.net\/torwp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=94865"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.theonering.net\/torwp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=94865"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}