Apparently, I miss writing essays.

[the_arc5]

Yesterday, amaberis, majenglish, and myself sat down for a day-long marathon of all three Lord of the Rings extended editions. It was glorious in so many different ways: the atmosphere of fangirl love, the random outbursts of singing, the jokes, the food... I love marathon days, I really do. (I may or may not be planning a Harry Potter day. Also a Star Trek TOS

Comments

[kaffy_r]

This is really well done! It's step-by-step logical, and should be read by a lot of folks; would you mind if I linked to it, once I'm free enough at work, or later tonight, to do a posting?

[the_arc5]

I'm flattered, and you can most certainly link away!

[amaberis]

THE NAAAZGUUUUL...

Ahem. I mean, this is a very well-written, intelligent essay. A+. (I'm sure Kenneth would agree but also want you to push it further, as he always does.)

[the_arc5]

ONE MOMENT WITH YOU...WOULD FEEL LIKE A WHOLE LOT OF MOMENTS!!

Thank you for grading. I'm sure Kenneth would have several more pointed things to say, because that's how Kenneth is; however, a good deal of this little analysis was taken from the class in which one girl staunchly supported the idea that there's no way the text we were reading could have anything to do with teh ghey, and Kenneth was like, "Well, actually..."

[elisi]

Here via kaffyr, and I find myself reminded of Tolkien's foreword to LotR:

[...] But I cordially dislike allegory in all its manifestations, and always have done to since I grew old and wary enough to detect its presence. I much prefer history, true or feigned, with its varied applicability to the thought and experience of readers. I think that many confuse 'applicability' with 'allegory'; but the one resides in the freedom of the reader, and the other in the purposed domination of the author.

Of course he's talking about how the book relates to the Second World War, but I think it holds true for your point as well. He wrote the story and people can take from it what they want.

Anyway, thank you for a thought provoking post!

[the_arc5]

I haven't ever seen this foreword; thank you for that! I hadn't really thought about that comparison of applicability versus allegory, but that's pretty accurate.

Thanks for reading!

[azalaisdep]

Also here via kaffyr, and just want to second the agreement and the praise; I've advanced the argument myself many times that once a work is published/made public, the author no longer has control of how the characters are perceived, imagined, interacted with by readers (what do such authors/critics think is going on in a reader's head, fercryingoutloud?). But the specific argument about homoeroticism in medieval allegory is a newer one to me, and quite convincing.

[the_arc5]

It's a topic my friends and I have often discussed, particularly in terms of contemporary authors who try to tack on extra-canonical restrictions, like J.K. Rowling and the Dumbledore-is-gay reveal. It's not that I object to the idea of Dumbledore being gay, I just object to the idea Rowling can tell me that in any forum but the book. It's a method of authorial control and I'm against it 100%. Thought control is not good, and it's especially bad in an arena that has traditionally been made to provoke thought.

Medieval texts are just rife with the man-love. I can't in good conscience say all medieval men partook of the gay sex, but the literature certainly privileges male relationships over male/female ones. Throw in some swords and lances and a person just has to wonder.