I've engaged in a mini-debate with a professor over whether Tolkien or C.S. Lewis is better. I've not read much of Tolkien but I've read a fair amount of Lewis and from what I understand they take opposite views on the use of allegory.
If you have read the Chronicles of Narnia or The Great Divorce, you know that Lewis likes allegory. Aslan is clearly the Jesus figure and The LW&W is the story of Christ's death and resurrection. Tolkien, on the other hand, shied away from allegory nearly completely. He preferred to "sub-create" a new reality to which we could escape. This reality had the same values as earthly reality but it was a different story that did not directly relate to the Christian story. Tolkien liked certain elements of the Christian narrative, such as eucatastrophe (i.e. the happy ending after a catastrophe) and escaping into an alternate reality (Christians create a reality where an invisible God is more clearly visible). But Tolkien does not create an allegorical story.
There are two realities that are being "created." For Lewis it is the reality of the Kingdom of God. His stories clearly describe how God interacts with the world. For Tolkien it is a fairy story (and he readily describes his story as this) which is not merely for children but which describes a land where we can go to experience life.
So here is my opinion on the matter. What good is it to create an alternate reality that is not actually based on reality? Why not do as Lewis does and shed light on the Kingdom of God through the use of story. Is this not what Jesus does when he shares stories, or parables, with his followers. Perhaps Lewis is a bit didactic at times in that he tries to take some of the mystery of the experience away. But I think Lewis actually evangelizes through his stories, and not in some confrontational manner, by simply presenting the story of Christ in a manner which we can relate.
Tolkien, on the other hand, writes incredible stories (and he is clearly a better storyteller than Lewis) but the stories simply are made for enjoyment. The ethics may be the same as Christian ethics but since when is Christianity about ethics alone? I believe that books that share the story of Christ are greater books than books of fantasy and lore because they allow us to gain a greater understanding of who God is and who we are.
In the same way, therapy can be a means of simply allowing the client to escape into another world. And that is important for some. In fact, for those who do not want to discuss faith issues that may be where I get stuck. But I prefer to help the client see that God really exists and that God is a part of their life story.
Perhaps literature should be appreciated apart from its function. And perhaps we should consider how therapy tickles the client and makes them feel good. But to me that is far less potent than imagining therapy that brings clients into the love and grace and glory of God.
5 comments:
have you seen the lord of the rings films? they aren't based on that different a reality. the symbology is not as clear as lewis but i still recognise atonement and substitution. rob
I based what I said about Tolkien on his essay "On Fairy Stories" which he wrote before writing the LotR trilogy. There he strongly argued that fairy stories were meant to create a reality different from ours, but with the same ethics and values. I agree that there is certainly some atonement but that the atonement was underplayed. Tolkien seemed to try too hard not to make the story allegorical. Tolkien included the dark lord but not the good lord, I have to ask why? And Aragorn hardly fit the role of the Messiah by sacrificing himself in some way, which could have been done and, IMHO, would have made the books better.
Interesting analysis. I would point out however that Illuvitar, the All-Powerful Creator, does stand in the stead of the Good Lord. His role, however, is rather indistinct compared with Aslan. Yet, in parallel, Aslan is not The Good Lord of Narnia, as apparently that role is held by The Emperor Across the Sea, I think, who also corresponds to Tolkiens Illuvitar and assumes the same kind of distance in the story. Of course I have only limited knowledge of the Chronicles of Narnia as I have not quite finished reading them all yet. I am just in the middle of The Silver Chair.
Also I would like to link your blog to our yahoo group:
http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/LRPGSW/
if that's ok with you. Please let me know. Thanks.
It's more than fine to link to this. And yes Aslan isn't precisely God in the stories but I think he represents God incarnate (Jesus). And I have not read Tolkien so thanks for letting me know about Illuvitar.
Interesting. By the way, it's Ilúvatar. (Do a Google search for the Encyclopedia of Arda, and look under the I's in the alphabetical list to the lower left.)
Post a Comment