[CLUE-Talk] Tolkien and allegory

[Joe 'Zonker' Brockmeier]

On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 14:42:33 -0700
Dennis J Perkins <djperkins at americanisp.net> wrote:

> I'm not a believer in literary analysis and avoided literature classes 
> in high school and college whenever possible.  The purpose of most 
> stories is simple... tell an entertaining story.  

Avoiding literary analysis altogether is, I believe, a mistake. The
stories that you read and the movies and television shows you watch
(and that includes the evening news, commercials and political messages)
are full of symbolism and messages that lie below the surface. 
Without an understanding of literary devices, you're really not
getting the full meaning. 

For example, consider the book "1984." In and of itself, it's a great
work of fiction and an enjoyable read. (At least I thought so...) But it
certainly has greater meaning beyond the surface story and it would be a
mistake to say that "1984" is only "about" the plot or that the reader
is getting the full experience of the book if they only take away the
plot and characters and ignore Orwell's deeper meanings. Obviously,
"1984" is a bit different than many of the books that people read in
literature classes because Orwell wasn't terribly subtle about the
deeper meaning in "1984." Other books that are part of the "canon" are
often obscure and dull to most readers, which tends to put people off of
the idea of literary criticism because they learn at an early age that
literature == dull. 

I wish schools would start teaching literary devices at an early age to
children, using popular shows and movies rather than musty books that 
most kids will find terminally dull. You could do an entire lit class on
"Buffy the Vampire Slayer" or "Star Wars" or any number of other works
that would be far more accessible to younger kids. 

> Good stories have real 
> plots to hold our attention.  They do not require analysis to understand 
> them, altho some people might enjoy analyzing them.  And trying to apply 
> analysis to stories from another era or culture is bound to produce 
> ludicrous results.

I agree with parts of this -- yes, a good story does not require
analysis to "understand" it -- that is, I shouldn't have to be a lit
professor to be able to enjoy a movie or book. I shouldn't have to be a
lit expert to "get" a particular piece -- which is why I consider works
like "The Waste Land" by T. S. Eliot to be a spectacular failure. 

However, really good works of literature have more to them than just a
good plot -- there's a reason why some works of literature and some
movies and so forth have stood the test of time, whereas others have
lost relevance with age. This is why Shakespear's plays are still
considered great works of art, while many of his contemporaries have 
been forgotten. 

My particular focus while in college was on mythological themes in
literature -- there are certain themes that continue to be expressed in
our stories, and hold some kind of satisfaction for the audience
regardless of the details. You'll find, for example, that there is a
pattern that can be found in all or almost all of the stories of our
"heroes" -- whether that be Frodo, Luke Skywalker, Superman, King
Arthur, Moses, Buddha or Jesus.  

Analyzing stories from another age is not, in and of itself, a mistake.
Judging those stories from this culture's particular bias is a mistake. 

> I remember Asimov's autobiography saying that someone once told Asimov 
> what he meant in one of his stories..  The guy justified it by saying, 
> how would Asimov know what he meant?

Heh... well, it is silly to suggest that an author would not know what he
meant, but it is entirely possible that an author may inject certain
symbolism and such into their work without really thinking about it or
being conscious of it. 

I think this may be one of the reasons many literary scholars prefer to
limit their studies to the works of dead authors -- much less chance
that they'll be contradicted. Probably bloody embarrassing to write up a
paper on the symbolism of John Irving's latest book when he writes a
letter to the editor of your journal the next month to say you're
completely off base... 

Best,
Zonker
--
"Always acknowledge a fault. This will throw those in authority off 
their guard and give you an opportunity to commit more." - Mark Twain