A rare interview with Christopher Tolkien
has recently been published in English. (Originally in French.) It's a great read. If you don’t have time to read the whole thing, the last
quote sums it up well:
"Tolkien has become a monster, devoured by his own popularity and absorbed into the absurdity of our time," Christopher Tolkien observes sadly. "The chasm between the beauty and seriousness of the work, and what it has become, has overwhelmed me. The commercialization has reduced the aesthetic and philosophical impact of the creation to nothing. There is only one solution for me: to turn my head away."
On one hand, I can appreciate his dismay. The
pop culture phenomena surrounding LotR over the last decade has distorted the voice of the original. The general public knows a different Middle
Earth than what was first conceived. (Here's just one hilarious example.) I’m sure any artist would be equally
frustrated by someone franchising their legacy.
The article leads me to a slightly unrelated question, however. Is it
right for new generations reboot, remix and rewrite great works of art? The
answer that comes to mind is: as long as
the source is recognizable. Art given to the public imagination will always
be freely interpreted and misinterpreted. Provided that the bread crumbs are intact enough,
people can still follow the path back to the starting point.
But here's what really makes me wonder: if a ridiculous Denny's promotional leads someone to eventually experience the poetry of The Silmarillion, does that make it ok?
No comments:
Post a Comment