- Saramago and Tolkien: The New Mythologies
- by Keith Jason Wikle
As usual with all
books, I look for comparisons. Metaphor being the tool of poetry,
the connection between one idea and another throwing the mind into
a state of uncertainty where it is forced to draw links between
word and world that did not previously exist. I have made infamous
comparisons that some think either silly, or downright wrong. The
connection between O.J. Simpson and Faulkner’s book Light
in August
being one of my best examples. Replace O. J. for Joe Christmas in
that book and reread it, I think you’ll find I’m not a complete
nut. Or how about comparing Timothy McVeigh to Herman Melville’s
Captain Ahab, more obtuse, but it works.
I struggled for some plausible
allegory between Jose Saramago’s Blindness
and the world we live in. Certainly a number of cheap and easy solutions
provided themselves. Blindness
is a novel about an epidemic white blindness that sweeps through
an unnamed city in an unnamed country, where unnamed characters
are quarantined indefinitely against their will. This blindness
could be compared to the AIDS issue, or any number of the violent,
ethnically driven conflicts of either the early twentieth century
or the early 90’s in the Balkans, Africa, or Asia. I say that these
allegories are cheap and easy, not because they are unworthy of
commentary, but because they are specific events caused by larger
issues. This is not meant in any way to belittle the suffering due
to any of these serious social problems: war, ethnic intolerance,
or the discrimination endured by those infected with HIV. These
larger issues are not specific to place, ethnic group, language,
religion, or sexual preference, but are part and parcel, a unilateral
piece, of the human experience. I wondered if this book defied allegory
in the way that J. R. R. Tolkien insisted his epic, The
Lord of the Rings, sat apart from the conflicts he witnessed
first hand in World War I, or World War II. Endless speculation
ran for years as to whether or not Tolkien intended the One Ring
to symbolize the atomic bomb or some other force of mass destruction
made by humans. For Tolkien’s side of the argument, I see his problem
with readers, critics, and scholars purporting that The
Lord of the Rings had anything to do with those specific
instances of human evil, mainly because it detracts from the larger
ideas that seem to comprise the essence and spirit of Tolkien’s
chimerical world: myth and fantasy. Tolkien quickly witnessed the
pastoral England he grew up in changing, growing into an industrialized
world. This post-industrial world is one without magic, fantasy,
or myth.
Joseph Campbell, noted scholar
and author of The
Power of Myth and Hero
with a Thousand Faces, describes contemporary society as
being bereft of rituals and symbols. Rituals and symbols, according
to Campbell, stem from myth and give structure to our daily lives.
He depicts our culture in the throngs of chaos and anarchy because
we are without myth. Both Campbell and Roland Barthes credit popular,
or mass culture (namely popular film), with the ability to create
myths and heroes. Myth as defined by these two possesses vague boundaries
and little specific rules. Campbell defines myth as, “the search
for meaning, or the search for experiencing life and meaning.” Myth
is more carefully outlined and described through the terms of stories
or narratives. Stories, which we all tell, narrate some part of
cultural experience that moves from disparate stories into a structured
symbology. These symbols serve as narrative units in our everyday
life - defining how we interact with one another within the same
culture and also part of what we share with foreign cultures that
define us as unique. Campbell’s lofty description of the far reaching
capability of myth touches on this phenomenon, “It would not be
too much to say that myth is the secret opening, through which the
inexhaustible energies of the cosmos pour into human cultural manifestation.”
Tolkien gifted his readers with a world rife with symbology and
structure, rules and order, and an easily identifiable foe to vanquish.
His books, whether defying contemporary allegory or defining it,
are the very foundation of myth. The
Lord of the Rings, for better or worse, can be used as a
cultural common ground of communication and understanding, where
its symbols are readily understood and relayed among the readers,
giving meaning to current issues problems through its worldview.
|