|
It's a well-known fact
that certain books, for example The Chronicles of Narnia, rely heavily on
allegory and are enriched by its presence. Other books such as The Lord of
the Rings are purposely and almost completely devoid of allegory. It is
clear that authors of fiction see the usage of allegory in their work
differently. There is debate as to whether allegory is beneficial when used in
fiction and fantasy literature, and considerable misunderstanding in society of
what it is. So first of all, what is allegory?
An allegory (in terms of literature) is an idea or image from the real world which
is written purposely by the author into his/her work, with the intention that the
reader should discover and accept its presence. An allegory can take on many forms
and be taken to many levels. An allegory can be a person, place, thing, situation
or an intangible idea, worked seamlessly into the plot and changed (though not
unrecognisably) in order to fit the context of the story.
One particularly famous allegory in fantasy literature is C. S. Lewis' character
Aslan from The Chronicles of Narnia series. Aslan is widely understood as an
allegory for Jesus Christ - the books tell us he is all-powerful and all-knowing, and
yet he chose to die (on a stone table, itself an allegory for the cross) in order to
alleviate the punishment for man's sin (death). Of course, there are many other
examples. Allegories are useful literary tools for the expression of personal
interests and concerns in fictional writing, and are fascinating to discover and
discuss.
However, there is one problem that arises when judging the existence of allegory in
literature, and that is the effect the reader's opinion and experiences has upon their
interpretation - causing them to see an allegory which isn't there. In the foreword to
the second edition of The Lord of the Rings, J. R. R. Tolkien made clear his
opinion of allegory;
|
"I cordially dislike allegory in all its manifestations, and
always have done so 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
its 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."
|
So, it is made clear that Tolkien
did not use allegory in his works. However, here he introduces a new term into the discussion:
'applicability', as he calls it. So, what exactly is 'applicability', and how does it differ
from allegory?
Applicability, according to Tolkien, "resides in the freedom of the reader".
In other words, it is a right of the reader to find their own extended meaning in what they are
reading, regardless of the existence of allegory. For example, if one was to read The Lord of
the Rings and the thought arise that the Ring was a fictional parallel for modern technology,
applicability means that it can and does mean that, to them. However, as Tolkien said, applicability
is often confused with allegory. All too often, readers find inner meaning in what they have read
and become so convinced of its universal existence that they claim it as allegory, i.e. fully intended
by the author. This is a mistake.
One of the most quoted 'false allegories' of Tolkien's work is that of the War of the Ring
equalling the Second World War, which Tolkien himself lived and wrote during. This particular
sentiment became so widely held that Tolkien mentioned (and denounced) it in the foreword to the
second edition of The Lord of the Rings. There is even evidence (beyond the testimony of
the author) to support this rejection;
|
"As the story grew it put down roots (into the past) and threw out
unexpected branches: but its main theme was settled from the outset by the inevitable choice
of the Ring as the link between it and The Hobbit. The
crucial chapter, 'The Shadow of the Past', is one of the
oldest parts of the tale. It was written long before the foreshadow of 1939 had yet become
a threat of inevitable disaster, and from that point the story would have developed
essentially along the same lines, if that disaster had been averted. Its sources are things
long before in mind, or in some cases already written, and little or nothing in it was modified
by the war that began in 1939 or its sequels."
|
Thus, we are quite clearly called
to accept this particular 'allegory' as false. In the same way we are called to be
discerning in the discovery of inner meaning in what we read, for as many authors (Tolkien
included) are deceased they are unable to set the record straight about the allegorical content
in their books. Even in cases when the author is still alive, the struggle against this sort of
ignorance in their readership can be thankless and even hurtful.
In an interview on the Today programme, J. K. Rowling (author of the Harry Potter series)
responded to suggestions that she was leading children into Satanism with the simple rebuttal;
|
"People tend to find in books what they look to find."
|
Here, Rowling is flatly accusing
those who would take an ulterior motive (i.e. proving that Harry Potter is encouraging children
to take part in the occult) as a reason to read her books, and simultaneously agreeing with
Tolkien that false allegories discovered in this way are brainless and pointless.
In conclusion, I think there are several points that we as readers should note in order to
fully enjoy the written works of fiction and fantasy authors. First of all, we should learn
the difference between allegory and applicability. Secondly, we should look for 'true allegories'
and consider the rest as personal meaning; and thirdly, we should approach these stories with an
open mind and learn to appreciate and enjoy the creation of the human imagination as it is.
|
