Christian and Jewish influences in Tolkien's work?

[The Telcontarion]

Repost: What do you think of this:

We all know Tolkien was heavily influenced by christianity. Now look at the simularities.

1. Israel was split into two kingdoms, the Kingdom of Israel and the Kingdom of Judah - So was the Dúnedain in ME

2. The north kingdom, kingdom of Israel was larger - So was Arnor

3. The Kingdom of Israel was eventually over run and scattered - So was Arnor

4. Kingdom of Judah remained - So did Gondor

5. Eldarion's birth united the royal half elvin lines - The birth of Jesus united the two royal lines of king David.

I have been meaning to bring this up but as you can see I have been busy.

[Willow Oran]

I distinctly recall Tolkien writing of an intense dislike for allegorical interpretations of Lord of the Rings. There are very christian tones in the Ainulindale and some of his writings on Eldarin culture. But I sincerely doubt he meant such a close parallel as you've presented in the plot of his primary work.

[The Telcontarion]

Originally Posted by Willow Oran

I distinctly recall Tolkien writing of an intense dislike for allegorical interpretations of Lord of the Rings. There are very christian tones in the Ainulindale and some of his writings on Eldarin culture. But I sincerely doubt he meant such a close parallel as you've presented in the plot of his primary work.

Yet, there it is...

It is widely known however that his faith did have a huge impact on his work.

[Curufin]

Originally Posted by The Telcontarion

Yet, there it is...

It is widely known however that his faith did have a huge impact on his work.

At least it's there for you. You could draw a WWII parallel just as closely. People see in a work what they want to see. Christianity is important to you - it's not surprising that you see it, whether Tolkien intended it or not.

[The Telcontarion]

Originally Posted by Curufin

At least it's there for you. You could draw a WWII parallel just as closely. People see in a work what they want to see. Christianity is important to you - it's not surprising that you see it, whether Tolkien intended it or not.

Tolkien was a devote catholic...even the DVD of LOTR movies got into that issue of the influence of JRRT's religion on his work.

There are indeed many parallels that can be drawn upon when it comes to the experiences and interests of a writer and the evolution of his/her work:

"The way in which a story-germ uses the soil of experience is a complex thing, and any attempt to characterize the process are at best guesses from inadequate and ambiguous evidence." (JRRT, Introduction to the Fellowship of The Rings)

[Gwaimir Windgem]

You might be on to something there, Tel. Of course, I feel sure that Tolkien didn't intend it, but it's quite possible that the history of the Dunadan kingdoms was influenced by his knowledge of the history of the kingdom of Israel.

[The Telcontarion]

Originally Posted by Gwaimir Windgem

You might be on to something there, Tel. Of course, I feel sure that Tolkien didn't intend it, but it's quite possible that the history of the Dunadan kingdoms was influenced by his knowledge of the history of the kingdom of Israel.

Yeah...it just seems to me to make a lot of sense and fits together nicely; a perfect circle you might say.

[Curufin]

"The way in which a story-germ uses the soil of experience is a complex thing, and any attempt to characterize the process are at best guesses from inadequate and ambiguous evidence."

Er, that supports my point, Tel, not yours.

[The Telcontarion]

Originally Posted by Curufin

Er, that supports my point, Tel, not yours.

In regards to this, of course it's just a best guess "skillful" one. I do believe however that due to the evidence provided that it was a good one.

[inked]

Originally Posted by Curufin

At least it's there for you. You could draw a WWII parallel just as closely. People see in a work what they want to see. Christianity is important to you - it's not surprising that you see it, whether Tolkien intended it or not.

Curufin, you need to read Tolkien's LETTERS. He expressly disavows the WWII parallels (other than as necessarily incidental in a world in which good and evil are opposed) and addresses the Christian influences.

It is not merely the reader seeing what is wished for; it is substantially present. Tolkien's words (paraphrasing from memory) were that Christianity was present unconsciously in the writing, consciously in the revising, and Catholic (Roman) throughout! See the BBC interview video on utube cited in the thread on that topic for THE MAN saying so. On videotape, so it must be true, eh?!

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

But Inked, literary critics (including individual readers) are entitled to draw independent conclusions. People in general, are, for that matter.

So if my spouse drops his socks in the middle of the livingroom floor, he can write as many letters, or blog posts, or give interviews as he wants saying, "My intent in dropping my socks was to create a moment of modern art in the midst of our humdrum existance" and I'm still entitled to say, "I'm offended by this behavior, you're treating me like a servant, or, worse, your mother. Cut it out."

No less is Rinke entitled to say, "The resonance of this piece for me is its criticism of moderity" and be correct, even if that isn't the aspect JRRT fancied was the important one.

The reader is not controlled by the author, still less by his "intent."

[inked]

SACA,
"I'm still entitled to say, "I'm offended by this behavior, you're treating me like a servant, or, worse, your mother. Cut it out.""

I take it then that your husband is not controlled by the intent of your words any more than a reader by the intent of the author? For the author has intent in writing (though more than consciously realised, to be sure) just as you have intent in adressing your husband's propensity for modern art. He also has intent in his art. ARe you getting his intent as well as he yours?

I fear that when an author says he has an intent or specifically denies an attributed intent by a reader or critic, I have to listen to the author. Really listen to the author, though I may yet make my case. I suspect that it is easier to attribute intent when the author cannot so make clear the purposes intended or not. For instance, when your husband attributes his reading of your intent in your words, do you find you always agree? Do you grant him the say authority with your words as he arrogates to himself?

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

Short form, I'm a behaviorist. I don't care about his motivation or intent, but I do about his behavior.

In literature, then, as in law, I tend to be fairly textualist. I think it's too bad that people intend to say things that didn't go into the final draft, but, such is life. That's why I'm utterly uninterested in a lot of ancillary materials *cough*Silmarillion*cough* when I'm looking at The Hobbit. Either it's there on the page, or it's not. And if it's not, the viewpoint of the reader is equally valid as the expressed desire of the author.

Don't get my intent. Get your socks.

[Curufin]

I have read Letters, Inked. And I know all that stuff is in there. I don't deny that Christianity had a great influence on Tolkien's work - I simply contest the fact that Lord of the Rings is a Christian allegory - like Tel is implying.

[The Telcontarion]

Originally Posted by Curufin

I have read Letters, Inked. And I know all that stuff is in there. I don't deny that Christianity had a great influence on Tolkien's work - I simply contest the fact that Lord of the Rings is a Christian allegory - like Tel is implying.

When did I say that? I was very specific if I recall. The title was "The story of the Dúnedain in middle - earth is based on the history of Israel" and:

Originally Posted by The Telcontarion

Repost: What do you think of this:

We all know Tolkien was heavily influenced by christianity. Now look at the simularities.

1. Israel was split into two kingdoms, the Kingdom of Israel and the Kingdom of Judah - So was the Dúnedain in ME

2. The north kingdom, kingdom of Israel was larger - So was Arnor

3. The Kingdom of Israel was eventually over run and scattered - So was Arnor

4. Kingdom of Judah remained - So did Gondor

5. Eldarion's birth united the royal half elvin lines - The birth of Jesus united the two royal lines of king David.

I have been meaning to bring this up but as you can see I have been busy.

The story of the Dunedain, not the entire book; though christian influences can be found throughout JRRT's work.

[The Telcontarion]

Originally Posted by inked

Curufin, you need to read Tolkien's LETTERS. He expressly disavows the WWII parallels (other than as necessarily incidental in a world in which good and evil are opposed) and addresses the Christian influences.

It is not merely the reader seeing what is wished for; it is substantially present. Tolkien's words (paraphrasing from memory) were that Christianity was present unconsciously in the writing, consciously in the revising, and Catholic (Roman) throughout! See the BBC interview video on utube cited in the thread on that topic for THE MAN saying so. On videotape, so it must be true, eh?!

That is all I am saying.

[The Telcontarion]

Originally Posted by inked

SACA,
"I'm still entitled to say, "I'm offended by this behavior, you're treating me like a servant, or, worse, your mother. Cut it out.""

I take it then that your husband is not controlled by the intent of your words any more than a reader by the intent of the author? For the author has intent in writing (though more than consciously realised, to be sure) just as you have intent in adressing your husband's propensity for modern art. He also has intent in his art. ARe you getting his intent as well as he yours?

I fear that when an author says he has an intent or specifically denies an attributed intent by a reader or critic, I have to listen to the author. Really listen to the author, though I may yet make my case. I suspect that it is easier to attribute intent when the author cannot so make clear the purposes intended or not. For instance, when your husband attributes his reading of your intent in your words, do you find you always agree? Do you grant him the say authority with your words as he arrogates to himself?

...Again, whole heartedly. For me the intent of the author is paramount as mine is the study of the human condition. To read and derive meaning from a literary work is an understanding based solely on one perspective, your own. Which does not lend to a greater understanding of the different perspectives and intents possible, which leads to greater understanding in general.

If I read JRRT's letters, his interviews and even his academic lectures I will come to comprehend much of his own perspective, i.e. the embedded biases and affections of the author. Leading to a greater and a even more profound revelation, of the meanings behind the words he actually wrote.

[inked]

Originally Posted by Curufin

I have read Letters, Inked. And I know all that stuff is in there. I don't deny that Christianity had a great influence on Tolkien's work - I simply contest the fact that Lord of the Rings is a Christian allegory - like Tel is implying.

I agree wholeheartedly that it is NOT an allegory.

[inked]

Originally Posted by sisterandcousinandaunt

Short form, I'm a behaviorist. I don't care about his motivation or intent, but I do about his behavior.

In literature, then, as in law, I tend to be fairly textualist. I think it's too bad that people intend to say things that didn't go into the final draft, but, such is life. That's why I'm utterly uninterested in a lot of ancillary materials *cough*Silmarillion*cough* when I'm looking at The Hobbit. Either it's there on the page, or it's not. And if it's not, the viewpoint of the reader is equally valid as the expressed desire of the author.

Don't get my intent. Get your socks.

Then, SACA, we agreed. We are textualists.

[Curufin]

Originally Posted by inked

I agree wholeheartedly that it is NOT an allegory.

Good, cause that's all I was saying. I was never trying to imply that it wasn't influenced by Christianity.