|
I believe that great literature ought both to reveal the concerns of its time, and to transcend them, so as to reveal something timeless about the human situation.
The Lord of the Rings arguably does the first, but (to my mind) is less strong on the second.
I read it as a nuclear drama. The ring is too dangerous to use, but nearly impossible to destroy. That perhaps says something about the cold war period and the CND movement.
Unfortunately, for me, the book is ultimately rather conservative and backward-looking. The women characters are either absent or pooly-developed. And feudal kingship is not a realistic model for the twentieth century. But perhaps that is meant to reflect the author's uneasiness with the post-war situation? Maybe he can't see a satisfactory way ahead, so plunges into a reactonary epic?
|