Quote:
|
By the time he wrote the Second Edition Foreword, then, he would have dismissed the work as 'sustenance' and chosen instead to present it to readers as merely an enjoyable tale. By describing in the Foreword what The Lord of the Rings would have been like had it been based upon World War II, he is able to express his discontent with the atomic power that 'won' WWII, and at the same time distance his work from those views for future readers.
|
Yet some of us still read it for 'sustenance'. Would he have been pleased? Did he find such 'sustenance' in the work? (did he 'love too well the work of his own hands?). I wonder what he felt about the powerful effect the book had on some readers - Carpenter mentions his response to being told of a young man who, on finishing reading LotR, simply began reading it again. Tolkien's response was 'I've ruined their lives'. Did he want to try & prevent that kind of reaction - tell people, 'Look, its entertainment, it has no 'meaning', don't look to it to sustain you in these 'darkling & ominous times'. Its just a '
story' I made up, its only there to entertain you.'
How much of that is an attempt to avoid 'ruining their lives' - did he really feel able to 'let go' of the book, did he still feel responsible for any effect it had on those who read it? The second Forword is quite 'cold' compared to the first. He's almost encouraging the critics dismissal of the work as 'meaningless' nonsense. Did he fear he'd created something too 'powerful'?