then you got people that SWEAR Lord of the Rings was a massive anti-war / World War II analogy, and prove how Tolkien made it clear with all these little details.
Despite Tolkien himself saying it was bullshit, he hated analogy like that, he didn't put any deeper meaning in it. Got to the point actully laied out EXACTLY how the book would have worked if it HAD. Saurman would have made his own ring of power, all the :good guys" would form an allegience with him to help overthrow Sauron using it, and no matter who won, the winning side would fuck over the Hobbits and treat them like crap/ensalve them.
Build a fool proof system, and the world will create a better fool.
Yeah, that just about sums it up. I'm sure some of the symbolism is intentional, but a lot of it is just people projecting onto it. I much prefer analyzing the technical aspects, stuff like "why did this character do this?" or "why did the author use this particular wording?".
Didn't he say that if the ring was a bomb analogy it would have been used?
#179715DreniusSun, 29th Apr '12 8:45:59 PMfrom Northern Virginia
@ Ginger: While I hat to say anything toward about my area of study, perhaps literature scholars do tend to over analyze and project their own interpretations on an author's work. I don't think my classes ever got that absurd though.
Gully Foyle is my name,
and Terra is my nation.
Deep space is my dwelling place,
and death's my destination.
Lots of crossdressing.
Same here. I was Quince. The Play-within-a-play at the end was a huge Crowning Moment of Funny. Pretty much every prop self-destructed.