Quote:
Originally Posted by Patricia
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.
|
That's plausible, but you have to remember that Tolkien said he didn't intend it as an allegory.
Quote:
|
Unfortunately, for me, the book is ultimately rather conservative and backward-looking. The women characters are either absent or poorly-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 reactionary epic?
|
The women, such as they are, are idealized, I think. It's definitely a male-oriented novel, but I wonder why it seems to have been so appealing to so many women?
I agree that it's conservative. I don't know about reactionary. They are not the same thing.
As for "feudal kingship," I live in Chicago. Don't tell me that feudal kingship is not a realistic model. In fact, step back & take a look not only the Daleys, but the Kennedys, Bushes, and all the lesser political and economic dynasties we have scattered around the US. I think that a good argument can be made that feudal kingship is the most realistic model there is, from an objective point of view.