Sprinkler Systems Uhaul move Lawn care Roses and trees Ford Parts Chrysler Parts Lake Powell New IPod Touch Apps New IPhone Apps IPhone Apps IPad Information IPad Apps Android APPS Android Games APPS Android Systems Android Tablets APPS and Beyond Smartphone Apps Smartphone Games Apps Repair and Tools Tablet PC Car Sharing Car Leasing Tabler Pc Fly Fishing Toyota Cars Vacation Rentals Stock market NYSE SSE Stock Freight & Shipping News Gluten Lactose Gout My Coupon Life Campgrounds Check Outdoor Kitchen Design and Redoo Bath Remodeling Palm Springs Las Vegas Vacation Tipps Lake Powell Boating Homes for lease Electric and green Car Blog Pearls and diamonds Whatsapp and forget SMS Blog, What is Whatsapp App Solar Panel Solar Energie Sun Power Blog
Reader


[Suche]  [Administrator]  [Hinweise zum Reader]  [Startseite]
Fantasy » alt.fan.tolkien » Tolkienism
Tolkienism [message #121881] Mo, 29 August 2005 21:37
Alabaster  
Hello Group,

Do you think there could be such a thing as "Tolkienism?"

Did Tolkien have a social message in his books which could be distilled
into a doctrine or way of life for people?

If you think this is so or could be possible, how would you personally
define such a "Tolkienism?"


Regards,


Alabaster
Re: Tolkienism [message #121882 ] Mo, 29 August 2005 21:52
Morgan  
Too late, its already happened! Tolkiensim could be defined as loving
nature, having fellowship.
Re: Tolkienism [message #121923 ] Di, 30 August 2005 13:57
Dan Leach  
The only thing i can think of that could be classed as 'Tolkienism' is a
love of invented languages
Re: Tolkienism [message #121944 ] Di, 30 August 2005 17:49
Alabaster  
Hello Dan,

Dan Leach wrote:
> The only thing i can think of that could be classed as 'Tolkienism' is a
> love of invented languages


That sounds fair. And as Morgan said, love of nature and fellowship.

I wonder though if there isn't anything more to it.

If one looks at the way Tolkien treated by good and evil as well as
history in his worlds, what message do you think he had for people, if
any, which could be seen as a kind of way of life?


Regards,


Alabaster
Re: Tolkienism [message #121946 ] Di, 30 August 2005 19:36
Dan Leach  
"Alabaster" <alabastermushroom [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1125416966.064732.34080 [at] o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Hello Dan,
>
> Dan Leach wrote:
>> The only thing i can think of that could be classed as 'Tolkienism' is a
>> love of invented languages
>
>
> That sounds fair. And as Morgan said, love of nature and fellowship.
>
> I wonder though if there isn't anything more to it.
>
> If one looks at the way Tolkien treated by good and evil as well as
> history in his worlds, what message do you think he had for people, if
> any, which could be seen as a kind of way of life?
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
> Alabaster
Tolkiens view of good and evil is basically what his catholic faith told
him, its not really something he came up with.
I think his quote 'If people valued good food and good beer and fellowship
above horded gold the world would be a better place' ( or something) sums
his world view up best.
The 2 other things i get from his writings are 'dont cut down trees' and
'waaa waaaa im terrified of spiders /JRR runs around screaming and waving
his arms around in the air/'
Re: Tolkienism [message #121960 ] Di, 30 August 2005 22:52
donnellaf  
Alabaster wrote:
> Hello Group,
>
> Do you think there could be such a thing as "Tolkienism?"
>
> Did Tolkien have a social message in his books which could be distilled
> into a doctrine or way of life for people?
>
> If you think this is so or could be possible, how would you personally
> define such a "Tolkienism?"

Tolkienism? That's where you dress up in funny robes with pointy
and/or slightly leaf-shaped and/or your own normal ears, and run around
with swords, seeking out and freezing at the stake those heretical
balrogs that have turned from the True Path(tm) and have embraced a lie
by growing wings. Then after a long day of smiting, you turn to the
more scholarly pursuits of textual critical analyses of the early
Middle Earthan manuscripts, variously attributed to one J.R.R. or one
C.J.R. Tolkien or perhaps a pseudonymous school thereof? Then you put
your feet up by the fire with a pipe and some choklit, sing the praises
of Elbereth, then drift off with with a warm, contented, slightly smug
expression on your face.

I think.

Andy
Re: Tolkienism [message #121971 ] Mi, 31 August 2005 05:29
Sean  
Alabaster wrote:
>
> Hello Group,
>
> Do you think there could be such a thing as "Tolkienism?"
>
> Did Tolkien have a social message in his books which could be distilled
> into a doctrine or way of life for people?

The _Lord of the Rings_ is a fairy tale. More elaborate than most
fairy tales, but still set in a medieval social setting some vague time
in the distant past.

Fairy tales are morality plays. Children love to hear them because
the stories satisfy a child's sense of justice -- the Good People
get rewarded and the Bad People get their butts kicked (literally,
in Bill Ferney's case).

I don't have a sense that JRRT came up with anything new in the way
of doctrine or moral guidlines. His stories are based on an already
existing system of ethics. I suppose a religion could be founded on his
creation myth, but is essence it's the same as a few other major
religions (past and present) with just the names changed.

Sean
Re: Tolkienism [message #121979 ] Mi, 31 August 2005 15:36
donnellaf  
Sean wrote:

> I don't have a sense that JRRT came up with anything new in the way
> of doctrine or moral guidlines. His stories are based on an already
> existing system of ethics. I suppose a religion could be founded on his
> creation myth, but is essence it's the same as a few other major
> religions (past and present) with just the names changed.

I'd say that his creation myth, or any other concrete Middle Earth
detail, is one of the things that it would be impossible to found a
religion on, since it is obviously, by anyone's account, fiction.
People don't found religions on obvious falsehoods. One can argue the
truthfulness of the creation myths of other major religions, and some
adherents of those religions don't believe in that particular aspect,
but in the distinctive underlying worldview which gave rise to the
story. But still, you can't found a religion on an obvious, open,
easily verifiable falsehood. A much more likely thing upon which to
found a way of life (I would say, not a religion) from Tolkien's work
is the whole feeling and nostalgia for the simple things of an earlier
era, a value for good food, good beer, and fellowship, as somebody
mentioned earlier in this thread. A general distrust for the
conveniences of modernity and the price paid by humanity for those
conveniences. A value for a good hard day's work and simple pleasures.
Taking time to stop and smell the roses and get out of the rat race
and the keeping up with the Joneses and the cut-throat corporate
ladder. Old time values, old time lifestyle. So again, not a
religion, but the atmosphere and feeling that keeps people enamored
with Middle Earth.


Farewell,
Andy
Re: Tolkienism [message #121986 ] Mi, 31 August 2005 19:51
Morgan  
>A much more likely thing upon which to
>found a way of life (I would say, not a religion) from Tolkien's work
>is the whole feeling and nostalgia for the simple things of an earlier
>era, a value for good food, good beer, and fellowship, as somebody
>mentioned earlier in this thread. A general distrust for the
>conveniences of modernity and the price paid by humanity for those
>conveniences. A value for a good hard day's work and simple pleasures.
> Taking time to stop and smell the roses and get out of the rat race
>and the keeping up with the Joneses and the cut-throat corporate
>ladder. Old time values, old time lifestyle. So again, not a
>religion, but the atmosphere and feeling that keeps people enamored
>with Middle Earth.

Yes, but we always have a philosophy on it!
You can't believe in such things as good food, love of nature. But you
can appreicate them. I'm sure theres a philosophy like this somewhere.

*hunts about on google*
Here we are: Hedonism!
Its the best way of life ;)
Re: Tolkienism [message #121989 ] Mi, 31 August 2005 20:58
Alabaster  
Hello,


These are my impressions on what I take to be Tolkienism as such.

Firstly, I don't think of it as being particularly Christian or
Catholic as some have suggested or asserted. For me, Tolkien's world
was a refuge of authentic emotional decency in contrast to the
Christian world with which I was familiar. I don't believe it is fair
to see Tolkienism as Christian, perhaps it is even possible to see it
as anti-Christian, at least in relation to the Christianity of our
time.

I see Tolkienism as a kind of common-sensical goodness based on liberal
political and spiritual values strongly infused with a sense of
childlike wonder and spontaneity as well ideas of populist nobility and
anti-authoritarian social heroism. A belief for our time, perhaps.

I think we could surely create a world based on Tolkien's implicit
social and personal standards and we would all be infinitely better for
it. Especially if we learned Tolkien's lesson about the seriousness of
true evil.


Regards,


Alabaster
Re: Tolkienism [message #121997 ] Mi, 31 August 2005 22:21
Christopher Kreuzer  
Alabaster <alabastermushroom [at] yahoo.com> wrote:

> I think we could surely create a world based on Tolkien's implicit
> social and personal standards and we would all be infinitely better
> for it. Especially if we learned Tolkien's lesson about the
> seriousness of true evil.

I seriously doubt that Tolkien has the answer to the woes of the world.
And he himself would probably be the first to say that. Someone can
probably find something in one of his Letters.

Some lessons yes, but certainly not a way of life.
Re: Tolkienism [message #122007 ] Mi, 31 August 2005 23:56
Morgan  
Personally I wouldn't see the world as a place where their is good or
evil, just various shades of grey. While orcs obviously represent evil,
elves good, there are deviatation from this , eg: gollum, a creature
that was either good or evil until the last. Also the possiblity of
Frodo and Bilbo surrendering to the ring suggests that tolkiens world
wasn't all white and black. And from what I gather Tolkien was a
devout Catholic although I don't think this influcenced his works in
the way some think it did. The Simreallion (i can never type it right!
you know what I mean.) however in its begining shows definate links to
the creation account in the bible.
Re: Tolkienism [message #122009 ] Do, 01 September 2005 00:05
donnellaf  
Alabaster wrote:

> These are my impressions on what I take to be Tolkienism as such.
>
> Firstly, I don't think of it as being particularly Christian or
> Catholic as some have suggested or asserted. For me, Tolkien's world
> was a refuge of authentic emotional decency in contrast to the
> Christian world with which I was familiar. I don't believe it is fair
> to see Tolkienism as Christian, perhaps it is even possible to see it
> as anti-Christian, at least in relation to the Christianity of our
> time.

In what sense do you say that Tolkien's work is anti-Christian? I
would say that it reflects a world that is much more Christian than the
so-called Christian world that you are reacting against, in terms of
general outlook of course, not specific doctrine, as Tolkien
intentionally did not include any of the Christian story. But the
values are certainly in keeping with the values espoused by
Christianity.


Andy
Re: Tolkienism [message #122048 ] Do, 01 September 2005 02:34
zip  
"Andrew F. Donnell" <donnellaf [at] gmail.com> wrote...

> In what sense do you say that Tolkien's work is anti-Christian? I
> would say that it reflects a world that is much more Christian than the
> so-called Christian world that you are reacting against, in terms of
> general outlook of course, not specific doctrine, as Tolkien
> intentionally did not include any of the Christian story. But the
> values are certainly in keeping with the values espoused by
> Christianity.

and Islam... and every other popular religion you care to metion.

The fact that there is a suggestion of good and evil and that it is best to
be good is not the preserve of Christianity solely.

If tolkien seems to match up with Christian Values, you can bet he matches
up to the values of a larger number of religions than I care to bring up
here - What I think the answer is, is that Tolkien's masterwork is based on
the fundamental premise of Human Decency.

Human Decency is prevailant in ALL religions... Which is why The Lord of the
Rings and surrounding works are so popular... *everyone* of an understanding
that to be "good" is essentially a "good" thing *recognises* themselves in
the work itself.

This is truly a MASTERWORK of *Human* (not merely modern) fiction... it
encompasses all who believe in an inherent goodness in mankind... a goodness
that is fragile, must be protected and is broader than "religion" can
encompass... and that says a lot about "religion".

Any thoughts?

-Paul.
Re: Tolkienism [message #122066 ] Do, 01 September 2005 04:30
donnellaf  
Zip wrote:
> "Andrew F. Donnell" <donnellaf [at] gmail.com> wrote...
>
> > In what sense do you say that Tolkien's work is anti-Christian? I
> > would say that it reflects a world that is much more Christian than the
> > so-called Christian world that you are reacting against, in terms of
> > general outlook of course, not specific doctrine, as Tolkien
> > intentionally did not include any of the Christian story. But the
> > values are certainly in keeping with the values espoused by
> > Christianity.
>
> and Islam... and every other popular religion you care to metion.
>
> The fact that there is a suggestion of good and evil and that it is best to
> be good is not the preserve of Christianity solely.

I should note that I never claimed that such ideas are exclusive to
Christianity. I was questioning Alabaster's statement that the Lord of
the Rings is an anti-Christian work. In that context, that these
values may also be found elsewhere is immaterial.

> If tolkien seems to match up with Christian Values, you can bet he matches
> up to the values of a larger number of religions than I care to bring up
> here - What I think the answer is, is that Tolkien's masterwork is based on
> the fundamental premise of Human Decency.
>
> Human Decency is prevailant in ALL religions... Which is why The Lord of the
> Rings and surrounding works are so popular... *everyone* of an understanding
> that to be "good" is essentially a "good" thing *recognises* themselves in
> the work itself.
>
> This is truly a MASTERWORK of *Human* (not merely modern) fiction... it
> encompasses all who believe in an inherent goodness in mankind... a goodness
> that is fragile, must be protected and is broader than "religion" can
> encompass... and that says a lot about "religion".

I would say that it is broader than *people* can encompass, not than
*religion* can encompass. Religion can (and does) hold up an ideal
vision of goodness and human decency. People do not stand up to this
ideal. Most recognize it, and understand goodness, but they still
(some more so than others) cause pain, hurt people, use people for
their own ends. But after all, we're only human....


Andy
Re: Tolkienism [message #122084 ] Do, 01 September 2005 06:12
the softrat  
On 31 Aug 2005 11:58:01 -0700, "Alabaster"
<alabastermushroom [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>Firstly, I don't think of it as being particularly Christian or
>Catholic as some have suggested or asserted. For me, Tolkien's world
>was a refuge of authentic emotional decency in contrast to the
>Christian world with which I was familiar. I don't believe it is fair
>to see Tolkienism as Christian, perhaps it is even possible to see it
>as anti-Christian, at least in relation to the Christianity of our
>time.
>
That is because Western Civilization has become so overcome by the
Spirit of Morgoth (Evil, Satan, whatever) that it cannot accept the
Spirit of Christ whenever it appears and must make it Something Else.
For an example of a real Something Else, try the Spirit of Al-Qaeda
Islam, Pol-Pot's Kampuchea, or Nazi Germany.

It is perfectly true that the Spirit of Christ existed and exists in
places out of time and location with respect to Jesus of Nazareth (c.6
BC - c. 29 AD). As orthodox Christian theology would have it, Christ
is a being of God and is eternal and exists everywhere and everytime.
(Thank you, Socrates and Confucius!)

PS: I ain't gonna argue The Holy Trinity with a bunch of trolls and
orcs. It is a Holy Mystery. Either you believe it or you don't.

the softrat
Sometimes I get so tired of the taste of my own toes.
mailto:softrat [at] pobox.com
--
"I am a man of immense learning and no culture."
Re: Tolkienism [message #122087 ] Do, 01 September 2005 07:14
Sean  
"Andrew F. Donnell" wrote:
>
> Sean wrote:
>
> > I don't have a sense that JRRT came up with anything new in the way
> > of doctrine or moral guidlines. His stories are based on an already
> > existing system of ethics. I suppose a religion could be founded on his
> > creation myth, but is essence it's the same as a few other major
> > religions (past and present) with just the names changed.
>
> I'd say that his creation myth, or any other concrete Middle Earth
> detail, is one of the things that it would be impossible to found a
> religion on, since it is obviously, by anyone's account, fiction.
> People don't found religions on obvious falsehoods.

Obvious to whom? To some, the Book of Mormon is pure fiction
and an obvious falsehood; to the adherents it's a source of
inspiration.

Sean

ps. Once an ex-girlfriend of mine converted (briefly) to Mormonism.
She lived out of town, and that summer I was looking after her
little boy and she wanted him to read a chapter of the Book of Mormon
every day. Well, it got really heavy going; the kid was bored stiff
with it. He even tried hiding the book so he wouldn't have to read it,
which wasn't surprising; how many times can you expect an 8-year-old
to recite "fruit of thy loins" in one evening without wanting to hurl?

So I phoned a local branch of the Church of the Latter Day Saints and
told them the situation and they sent a couple of missionaries around
to talk to us, and they even brought a comic book version of the BoM,
which was a lot more palatable than the original -- although to me
it still seemed fictional.
Re: Tolkienism [message #122093 ] Do, 01 September 2005 13:43
Alabaster  
Hello Christopher


> Christopher Kreuzer wrote:
>
> I seriously doubt that Tolkien has the answer to the woes of the world.
>
....

> Some lessons yes, but certainly not a way of life.
>

You know, Christopher, I'm not convinced.

I think I would be willing to try to figure-out all of Tolkien's
messages or principles and try to apply them first before saying they
wouldn't do the trick. I prefer to learn things the hard way. So if a
kind of Tolkienism wouldn't change the world for the good for good, I'd
rather have that proven to me by failed experiments rather than
educated guesses.



Hello Morgan,


> Morgan wrote:
>
> Personally I wouldn't see the world as a place where their is good or evil, just various shades of grey.
>
....
> Also the possiblity of Frodo and Bilbo surrendering to the ring suggests that tolkiens world wasn't all white and black.
>
....
> The Simreallion [...] however in its begining shows definate links to the creation account in the bible.
>


Well, I really do see a reality of good and evil. Most average
individuals will fall into this shades of grey continuum, but there are
definitely real-life poles of dark and light in our world in my
experience. As to temptation, well the existence of and the resistance
of temptation doesn't really say that evil doesn't exist, it just says
that it can be resisted.

I think the Silmarillion contains a curious creation myth, but many
such myths share common points. The Tolkien myth suggests a bit of a
stronger deviation on the part of the celestial villian than
Christianity's Satan, whose sin appears to be disobedience. Melkor's
sin seems to be the willful destruction of another's private industry.


Hello Andrew,

> Andrew F. Donnell wrote:
>
> In what sense do you say that Tolkien's work is anti-Christian? I
> would say that it reflects a world that is much more Christian than the
> so-called Christian world that you are reacting against, in terms of
> general outlook of course, not specific doctrine, as Tolkien
> intentionally did not include any of the Christian story. But the
> values are certainly in keeping with the values espoused by
> Christianity.
>

Well I would say it is anti-Christian for two key reasons. One is the
one you remark upon, it is more Christian than actual Christianity in
practice, not in doctrine. Real Christianity is not a good way of life
in practice for the most part it seems to me. Would real Christians be
more like elves or orcs across history, and today? The second reason
is the instrumental intermediary of the Christian god in Christian
goodness. For Christians, being good is for the most part a commitment
to appease an angry and threatening god. For Tolkien's characters is
was more for the simple justice and pleasure of kindess as well as the
obvious necessity of working together for a common good. Goodness was
also a path to personal nobility and the highest beauty. These paths
to virtue are more or less humanist or Tolkienist, not Christian.


Hello Paul,

> Zip wrote:
>
> What I think the answer is, is that Tolkien's masterwork is based on
> the fundamental premise of Human Decency.
>
> This is truly a MASTERWORK of *Human* (not merely modern) fiction... it
> encompasses all who believe in an inherent goodness in mankind... a goodness
> that is fragile, must be protected [...]
>

Yes, I think that's very much it...Tolkien was after the reality
beneath the shroud of dishonest doctrine. He was after real-life human
decency. And to my mind it was a simple ethical doctrine of
common-sensical decency and beauty. I wonder, what would all the
principles of Tolkien's implicit ethical system be?

I think you are right about Tolkien's works being a masterwork of human
fiction. I think they are profoundly subversive counter-cultural works
of populist self-empowerment. I think Tolkien gave the peoples of the
world a picture of how life could really be if we simply presumed to
make it so.


Hello Andrew,

> Andrew F. Donnell wrote:
>
>
> Religion can (and does) hold up an ideal
> vision of goodness and human decency. People do not stand up to this
> ideal. Most recognize it, and understand goodness, but they still
> (some more so than others) cause pain, hurt people, use people for
> their own ends. But after all, we're only human....
>

I myself wouldn't be so quick to blame our humanity on the failures of
institutionalized spiritualities to offer us a consistently rewarding
emotional and spiritual quality of life. There are some views which
presume that people are natively good and if offered an uncluttered
mental and social environment they will remain self-sustainingly good
according to their natures. This would be a view of the Taoists, or
psychologists like Maslow, etc.


Hello softrat,

> the softrat wrote:
>
> That is because Western Civilization has become so overcome by the
> Spirit of Morgoth (Evil, Satan, whatever) [...]
>

I think I would agree with you that our society has indeed become
overwhelmed by the Spirit of Morgoth--that of instinctive, unthinking
defilement and destruction of the creations of others. Some Satanists
suggest we live in a Satanic Era. I think that's quite possible. But
to my own mind, I wouldn't see Christianity as an adversary of power
trends which rely upon negativity and centralized authoritarian
control, but one of such a movement's most successful flagships. Isn't
the Vatican Barad-Dur?



Taking a point to reflect on what Tolkienism could be a few thoughts
come to mind.


Making inductive judgements of Tolkien's ethical principles from the
behavior of key characters:


Gandalf

Thinking of the fact that Gandalf could be both supportive as well as
stern, I think one is already looking at a more complex view than
simple liberalism or runaway permissiveness. Perhaps it would be like
Bill Clinton's New Democrat model (summed up from one of his books as
Opportunity, Responsibility and Community). You must be afforded the
liberty necessary to maintain your dignity and perhaps even holy
self-determination, but you must also be responsible to needs which
must be met...and assuredly if you commit to them. This is to say, you
needn't bear the Ring, but if you do, there are things which you likely
ought to do to be successful.

Gandalf had a stern but warm grand-fatherly sensibility, but with more
to it than that. What was Tolkien's ethical and political message via
Gandalf?

>From what other sources of ethical truth in Tolkien's books could one
deduce principles in your view?

What principles come to mind in reviewing the hobbit subculture? What
were their ethical and behavioral norms?

Much mithril in these mines to my mind.


Regards,


Alabaster
Re: Tolkienism [message #122094 ] Do, 01 September 2005 14:31
zip  
"Andrew F. Donnell" <donnellaf [at] gmail.com> wrote...

> I should note that I never claimed that such ideas are exclusive to
> Christianity. I was questioning Alabaster's statement that the Lord of
> the Rings is an anti-Christian work. In that context, that these
> values may also be found elsewhere is immaterial.

I recognise that you never made allusion to other religions... I think
anyone reading the thread would understand that. The values being found in
other religions as well is not in any way immaterial... It is crucial in
fact.

Vital in understanding Tolkien's pervasive humanist message.

He doesn't allude to any one religion of our World. In fact Tolkien despised
allegory (This was touched on in a documentary about Tolkien, featured in
one of Jackson's DVDs)... That is probably why he created his very own
creation myth for Middle Earth and then had his characters involved in Human
internal struggles...

It seems he wanted to remove our World's devisive religions from the
equation so that he could explore humanity in a purer form.

> I would say that it is broader than *people* can encompass, not than
> *religion* can encompass. Religion can (and does) hold up an ideal
> vision of goodness and human decency. People do not stand up to this
> ideal. Most recognize it, and understand goodness, but they still
> (some more so than others) cause pain, hurt people, use people for
> their own ends. But after all, we're only human....

That is no excuse. ;o)

My point was rather that religion is almost always a devisive Thing by it's
very nature. Religion is capitalist. It needs to grow and so destroy other
religions to gain worldwide acceptance. This is inhuman... There are *very*
few religions which can be said to be capable of comfortable co-existence
with other religions.

That is why I say that the work is Human and is broader than religion can
encompass... The reason being that it addresses internal issues of good and
evil and the struggle between those forces, which *every* person undergoes
alongside and despite their chosen (and it is merely chosen) slice of faith.

-Paul.
Re: Tolkienism [message #122103 ] Do, 01 September 2005 15:04
Derek Broughton  
Andrew F. Donnell wrote:

> Alabaster wrote:
>
>> These are my impressions on what I take to be Tolkienism as such.
>>
>> Firstly, I don't think of it as being particularly Christian or
>> Catholic as some have suggested or asserted. For me, Tolkien's world
>> was a refuge of authentic emotional decency in contrast to the
>> Christian world with which I was familiar. I don't believe it is fair
>> to see Tolkienism as Christian, perhaps it is even possible to see it
>> as anti-Christian, at least in relation to the Christianity of our
>> time.
>
> In what sense do you say that Tolkien's work is anti-Christian?

In the words of the great Malcolm Muggeridge, who wrote the book "How to be
a Christian without being Religious", it's not so much anti-Christian (a
better word would have been "aChristian" - which it clearly is) as
anti-religious.

> I
> would say that it reflects a world that is much more Christian than the
> so-called Christian world

Indeed

> that you are reacting against,
--
derek
Re: Tolkienism [message #122109 ] Do, 01 September 2005 16:01
donnellaf  
Alabaster wrote:

> Well I would say it is anti-Christian for two key reasons. One is the
> one you remark upon, it is more Christian than actual Christianity in
> practice, not in doctrine. Real Christianity is not a good way of life
> in practice for the most part it seems to me. Would real Christians be
> more like elves or orcs across history, and today?

There are some, the more vocal and memorable, perhaps, who are more
orcish. And there are the multitude who are Christian in name--whose
parents were nominally Christian and have passed it on like an
ethnicity--who are not practicing, who have likely never paid more than
a passing glance at the scriptures which they say inform the deepest
and most sacred part of their identity, who think that the take-home
message of Christianity is that if your superficial good deeds outweigh
your bad on some arcane cosmic scale then you win heaven (which isn't
it at all). And then there are the rest who are still just human, who
maybe wish they weren't but are realistic enough to know there is
nothing they can do but try their best and sometimes fail. So for the
most part, neither elvish or orcish, but human.

> The second reason
> is the instrumental intermediary of the Christian god in Christian
> goodness. For Christians, being good is for the most part a commitment
> to appease an angry and threatening god.

I would put it more in terms of being good because that is the good
thing to do. From a theological point, your own goodness doesn't
really have much to do with your eternal fate. Well, it does,
ultimately, in that one can *never* appease God, which is one of the
basic points of Christianity. I think it is better to put in
relational terms--in a healthy relationship, when you love somebody,
you want to do what makes them happy. You might think twice about
doing something if you know it will hurt the other person. This is not
some selfish way to appease an angry threat, it is because you care
about the other person and do not want to make them angry.

> For Tolkien's characters is
> was more for the simple justice and pleasure of kindess as well as the
> obvious necessity of working together for a common good. Goodness was
> also a path to personal nobility and the highest beauty. These paths
> to virtue are more or less humanist or Tolkienist, not Christian.

They are humanist and Tolkienist *and* Christian.

> I myself wouldn't be so quick to blame our humanity on the failures of
> institutionalized spiritualities to offer us a consistently rewarding
> emotional and spiritual quality of life. There are some views which
> presume that people are natively good and if offered an uncluttered
> mental and social environment they will remain self-sustainingly good
> according to their natures. This would be a view of the Taoists, or
> psychologists like Maslow, etc.

Are people ever offered this uncluttered mental and social environment?
Is it a sign of the fundamental goodness of humanity that when faced
with a horrible natural disaster, for example, in New Orleans, that
many have responded by taking to the streets with looting and violence?



Andy
Re: Tolkienism [message #122125 ] Do, 01 September 2005 20:02
Morgan  
Can we keep on topic people?
Tolkienism, a possible way of life,
not debating about whether he liked religion or not.
Re: Tolkienism [message #122127 ] Do, 01 September 2005 20:24
Derek Broughton  
Morgan wrote:

> Can we keep on topic people?
> Tolkienism, a possible way of life,
> not debating about whether he liked religion or not.

Can we try quoting? You've now made it impossible for me to tell _what_
this thread was about. (OK, I never really had a clue - the very first
post made little sense).

Anyway, it's usenet. The _topic_ is JRR Tolkien. You can't force a thread
to deal with any specific subject. People will drift, and once it bears no
resemblance to anything you're interested in, you simply have to stop
reading it.
--
derek
Re: Tolkienism [message #122142 ] Do, 01 September 2005 22:21
donnellaf  
Morgan wrote:
> Can we keep on topic people?
> Tolkienism, a possible way of life,
> not debating about whether he liked religion or not.

When discussing a way of life based on Tolkien or his works (an idea
that I'm sure Tolkien himself would have been quite against), it
strikes me as entirely *on topic* to discuss Tolkien's view of
religion, as that was one of the main foundations upon which his way of
life was based. Similarly, he himself specifically said that the Lord
of the Rings is a fundamentally Christian work. The author's own view
on the underlying philosophy of his work seems highly relevant to an
attempt to understand the underlying philosophy of said work.

I imagine that if he were privy to this conversation, Tolkien would say
that those who want to create a Tolkienism cult are fools, and that he
thoroughly disapproves of such an endeavor, and that Christianity is in
fact what they are looking for. If there is a lifestyle or value
system or philosophy there it is a Christian one. I am not saying that
these values are necessarily exclusive to Christianity, but since the
author held deep Christian convictions, that is the tradition that he
framed things in. This seems fairly clear from his letters and what we
know about him; this is somebody who, for example, was instrumental in
the conversion of C.S. Lewis to the Christian faith. He didn't have an
anti-religious or live and let live philosophy--he was fully convinced
of the truth of his beliefs.

Therefore, this is not off topic in this thread. It is a point that
must necessarily come up in such a context.


Andy
Re: Tolkienism [message #122144 ] Do, 01 September 2005 22:36
donnellaf  
Zip wrote:

> He doesn't allude to any one religion of our World. In fact Tolkien despised
> allegory (This was touched on in a documentary about Tolkien, featured in
> one of Jackson's DVDs)... That is probably why he created his very own
> creation myth for Middle Earth and then had his characters involved in Human
> internal struggles...

He despised allegory, yes, but allegory is not religion, and Tolkien
did not despise religion. He held a deep respect for Christianity
(specifically the Catholic denomination), considered himself a devout
Christian, and considered LOTR to be religious (not an allegory of
Christianity, but religious nonetheless).

> It seems he wanted to remove our World's devisive religions from the
> equation so that he could explore humanity in a purer form.
>
> > I would say that it is broader than *people* can encompass, not than
> > *religion* can encompass. Religion can (and does) hold up an ideal
> > vision of goodness and human decency. People do not stand up to this
> > ideal. Most recognize it, and understand goodness, but they still
> > (some more so than others) cause pain, hurt people, use people for
> > their own ends. But after all, we're only human....
>
> That is no excuse. ;o)
>
> My point was rather that religion is almost always a devisive Thing by it's
> very nature. Religion is capitalist. It needs to grow and so destroy other
> religions to gain worldwide acceptance. This is inhuman... There are *very*
> few religions which can be said to be capable of comfortable co-existence
> with other religions.

Most philosophies are divisive. People are divisive. No matter what
beliefs people hold there will still be division. People always have
some excuse to hate everybody else. It makes us feel special, I
suppose, good for the self esteem to think that we are better than all
those other misguided fools. Unless we suddenly agree about everything
in life, the big things and the little things (religion, politics,
coworkers, neighbors) then there will be division. Religion
exacerbates the division sometimes, just as anything that people feel
so intensely about.

I feel like breaking into song--the old Tom Lehrer classic National
Brotherhood Week....


Andy
Re: Tolkienism [message #125804 ] Fr, 02 September 2005 19:58
Morgan  
Andrew F. Donnell wrote:
> Morgan wrote:
> > Can we keep on topic people?
> > Tolkienism, a possible way of life,
> > not debating about whether he liked religion or not.
>
> When discussing a way of life based on Tolkien or his works (an idea
> that I'm sure Tolkien himself would have been quite against), it
> strikes me as entirely *on topic* to discuss Tolkien's view of
> religion, as that was one of the main foundations upon which his way of
> life was based. Similarly, he himself specifically said that the Lord
> of the Rings is a fundamentally Christian work. The author's own view
> on the underlying philosophy of his work seems highly relevant to an
> attempt to understand the underlying philosophy of said work.
>
> I imagine that if he were privy to this conversation, Tolkien would say
> that those who want to create a Tolkienism cult are fools, and that he
> thoroughly disapproves of such an endeavor, and that Christianity is in
> fact what they are looking for. If there is a lifestyle or value
> system or philosophy there it is a Christian one. I am not saying that
> these values are necessarily exclusive to Christianity, but since the
> author held deep Christian convictions, that is the tradition that he
> framed things in. This seems fairly clear from his letters and what we
> know about him; this is somebody who, for example, was instrumental in
> the conversion of C.S. Lewis to the Christian faith. He didn't have an
> anti-religious or live and let live philosophy--he was fully convinced
> of the truth of his beliefs.
>
> Therefore, this is not off topic in this thread. It is a point that
> must necessarily come up in such a context.
>
>
> Andy

I don't doubt that tolkiens relgion has an impact on his work, I was
just afraid that a debate over whether tolkien was religious or
anti-religious would turn the thread into a Yes he did/ No he didn't
debate which would be fruitless and boring. It is the *principals* in
his work after all which are important, like you said the value system
in a christian society is also likely in others. The religious part of
tolkien is relevant, however I feared that it would make the thread
degenerate into name-calling. (I just came from a thread involving Ty
the republician and Morgil the liberal) ;)
Vorheriges Thema:COTW note for "On Translation"
Nächstes Thema:Re-forging Narsil
Gehe zu:
  


aktuelle Zeit: Mi Mai 23 21:52:59 CEST 2012

Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0,06179 Sekunden
.:: Startseite - Hinweise - Impressum ::.

Powered