No Ragnarök, No Armageddon: Pagan and Christian interpretations of The Lord of the Ring.
Critical responses to The Lord of the Rings from its publication up to 1981 (the year in which The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien was first published) often considered pagan and Christian elements in the work. To the extent that pagan and Christian views were opposed to each other, such opposition is gro...
| Publicado en: | Mythlore Vol. 43; no. 2; pp. 5 - 28 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Literary Criticism |
| Publicado: |
Mythopoeic Society
Spring/Summer2025
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=184806690&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 184806690 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 01469339 TA3 jtl: Mythlore issn: 01469339 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Spring/Summer2025 vid: 43 iid: 2 pid: 17253 pub: Mythopoeic Society artinfo: ui: 184806690 ppf: 5 ppct: 23 formats: fmt: @attributes: type: P size: 5.5MB tig: atl: No Ragnarök, No Armageddon: Pagan and Christian interpretations of The Lord of the Ring. aug: au: THOMPSON-HANDELL, MATTHEW su: Lord of the Rings book series Tolkien, J. R. R. (John Ronald Reuel), 1892-1973 Christianity Paganism Ambiguity Analogy 20th century (Literary period) sug: subj: Lord of the Rings book series Tolkien, J. R. R. (John Ronald Reuel), 1892-1973 Christianity Paganism Ambiguity Analogy 20th century (Literary period) keyword: Christian interpretations early critical response to Tolkien Pagan interpretations The Lord of the Rings ab: Critical responses to The Lord of the Rings from its publication up to 1981 (the year in which The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien was first published) often considered pagan and Christian elements in the work. To the extent that pagan and Christian views were opposed to each other, such opposition is grounded to a greater extent in the ambiguity present in The Lord of the Rings (at least in terms of its theology or world- view), than in any contradiction in the work. The distinction between ambiguity and contradiction is important, especially in the context of the significance of contradiction in Verlyn Flieger’s keystone analogy in “The Arch and the Keystone” (2019). This analogy does not therefore fit the pagan-Christian dynamic so well as her earlier view in “But What Did He Really Mean?” (2014) which highlights the ambiguity and indeterminacy in The Lord of the Rings. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Literary Criticism src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Copyright of Mythlore is the property of Mythopoeic Society and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. item: Mythlore holder: Mythopoeic Society dt: @attributes: year: 2025 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|