XPost: rec.arts.books.tolkien, alt.fan.tolkien, alt.fan.harry-potter   
   From: giles@poetic.com   
      
   On 10/18/2010 7:51 AM, Dirk Thierbach wrote:   
   > Steve Hayes  wrote:   
   >> On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 09:38:59 +0200, Dirk Thierbach   
   >>   wrote:   
   >   
   >>> Troels Forchhammer  wrote:   
   >>>> In message  richard e white   
   >>>>   spoke these staves:   
   >   
   >>>>> If a spiritual vision is the center of the idea, then JKR's books   
   >>>>> don't fit.   
   >   
   >>>> Right, I quite agree.   
   >>>   
   >>> I'm actually not so sure. Critics thought for a long time that   
   >>> the LotR was completely devoid of any reference to Christian themes.   
   >   
   >> Which critics would those be?   
   >   
   > Whichever critics the person who stated this was referring to; he   
   > didn't name any in particular. And no, at the moment can't remember   
   > where I read that. OTOH, I'm not at all surprised by it, so I consider   
   > it likely to be true.   
      
   Lin Carter's rather early book for one.   
   >   
   >>>> And Rowling's books also doesn't have the same fundamental Christian   
   >>>> basis to them that do Tolkien's books and the Narnia books -- there   
   >>>> is, in my honest opinion, no sense of providence in Rowling's work,   
   >   
   >>> Just because Tolkien worked in the "providence" theme doesn't   
   >>> mean that Rowling should, too.   
   >   
   >> No, it doesn't mean she should, it just means that she didn't, and that her   
   >> books are therefore different in that respect.   
   >   
   > Of course they are, but that doesn't mean that in order to "write in   
   > the tradition of the Inlings" one should take that approach. Especially   
   > since I'd say that this particular theme is especially emphasized by   
   > Tolkien, and a lot less by the other Inklings, as far as I know them   
   > (people who have read more from the other Inklings than I did please   
   > correct me if I'm wrong).   
      
   Just to clarify: part of the discussion hinges on the differentiation of   
   "writing in the tradition of the Inklings" and "an honorary Inkling".  I   
   would agree with the former, disagree with the latter.   
      
   >>>> none of the 'trust in God' that I get both in Lewis' Narnia books   
   >   
   >>> Well, Narnia is in many places a very thinly veiled Christian   
   >>> allegory.  If Lewis just built in the "trust of God" theme, the Narnia   
   >>> books would be a lot less annoying in this respect.   
   >   
   >> Not really an allegory.   
   >   
   > Well, I consider using a "lion" for "Christ" pretty much an allegory,   
   > for example. Whatever you like to call it.   
      
   Technically, the Narnia books aren't an allegory.  They are heavily   
   allegorical.  But Peter and Edmund and Beaver for example don't   
   represent anything other than themselves, which in a true allegory they   
   would.   
      
   >   
   > There's a very clear cut one-to-one correspondence between between   
   > very particular characters or actions in Narnia and very particular,   
   > easy to identify counterparts in Christian teachings.   
   >   
   > Or, to use Tolkien's words, there's a quite limited "applicability".   
      
   But only some particular characters or events, not to everything.  In an   
   allegory like Spenser's Faerie Queene, or the Romance of the Rose, or   
   the play Everyman to name three, the one to one correspondance isn't to   
   some particulars and events but to the whole.  Hence the need to   
   distinguish between an allegorical work and an allegory proper.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)