英国浪漫主义对恶的理解:j.r.r.托尔金与《指环》“一种持续的矛盾心理”

Omer Faruk Kali̇nturk
{"title":"英国浪漫主义对恶的理解:j.r.r.托尔金与《指环》“一种持续的矛盾心理”","authors":"Omer Faruk Kali̇nturk","doi":"10.17131/milel.1268272","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"J. R. R. Tolkien, like many people, is a figure that is difficult to explain in terms of the mono-disciplinary attitude of modern academia. The significance of this article lies in the attempt to understand Tolkien's work by taking it beyond the boundaries of traditional literary scholarship. Through an interdisciplinary reading method, it is argued that there is a depth in Tolkien's works, lost between the praise of his supporters and the criticism of his opponents, which exceeds what either group claims to have found. Tolkien’s attitude to Evil consists of two parts, in terms of the Ring. The first is the traditional Augustinian, later Boethian view. According to this view, evil is itself nothing. It is an absence of good. So, it is internal. The sin and weakness of men are the major cause of evil. In terms of the Ring, the desire of Men for Power leads to evil. The important things are these lust and ambition. The second ambiguous and even contradictory vision of evil is the Manichean. From this perspective, evil is the equal of good. It is an external force that is equally powerful to that of good. Evil also has its own will.","PeriodicalId":177296,"journal":{"name":"Milel ve Nihal","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Understanding of Evil in British Romanticism: J. R. R. Tolkien and the Ring “a Running Ambivalence”\",\"authors\":\"Omer Faruk Kali̇nturk\",\"doi\":\"10.17131/milel.1268272\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"J. R. R. Tolkien, like many people, is a figure that is difficult to explain in terms of the mono-disciplinary attitude of modern academia. The significance of this article lies in the attempt to understand Tolkien's work by taking it beyond the boundaries of traditional literary scholarship. Through an interdisciplinary reading method, it is argued that there is a depth in Tolkien's works, lost between the praise of his supporters and the criticism of his opponents, which exceeds what either group claims to have found. Tolkien’s attitude to Evil consists of two parts, in terms of the Ring. The first is the traditional Augustinian, later Boethian view. According to this view, evil is itself nothing. It is an absence of good. So, it is internal. The sin and weakness of men are the major cause of evil. In terms of the Ring, the desire of Men for Power leads to evil. The important things are these lust and ambition. The second ambiguous and even contradictory vision of evil is the Manichean. From this perspective, evil is the equal of good. It is an external force that is equally powerful to that of good. Evil also has its own will.\",\"PeriodicalId\":177296,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Milel ve Nihal\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Milel ve Nihal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17131/milel.1268272\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Milel ve Nihal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17131/milel.1268272","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

j.r.r.托尔金和许多人一样,是一个很难用现代学术界的单一学科态度来解释的人物。本文的意义在于试图超越传统文学研究的界限来理解托尔金的作品。通过一种跨学科的阅读方法,作者认为托尔金的作品中有一种深度,迷失在他的支持者的赞扬和反对者的批评之间,这超出了任何一派所声称的发现。托尔金对邪恶的态度包括两部分,就魔戒而言。第一种是传统的奥古斯丁观点,后来是波伊提亚观点。根据这种观点,邪恶本身什么也不是。这是善的缺失。所以,它是内部的。人的罪和软弱是罪恶的主要原因。就魔戒而言,人类对权力的渴望导致了邪恶。重要的是这些欲望和野心。第二种模棱两可甚至矛盾的恶观是摩尼教。从这个角度来看,恶与善是平等的。它是一种与善同样强大的外部力量。邪恶也有它自己的意志。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Understanding of Evil in British Romanticism: J. R. R. Tolkien and the Ring “a Running Ambivalence”
J. R. R. Tolkien, like many people, is a figure that is difficult to explain in terms of the mono-disciplinary attitude of modern academia. The significance of this article lies in the attempt to understand Tolkien's work by taking it beyond the boundaries of traditional literary scholarship. Through an interdisciplinary reading method, it is argued that there is a depth in Tolkien's works, lost between the praise of his supporters and the criticism of his opponents, which exceeds what either group claims to have found. Tolkien’s attitude to Evil consists of two parts, in terms of the Ring. The first is the traditional Augustinian, later Boethian view. According to this view, evil is itself nothing. It is an absence of good. So, it is internal. The sin and weakness of men are the major cause of evil. In terms of the Ring, the desire of Men for Power leads to evil. The important things are these lust and ambition. The second ambiguous and even contradictory vision of evil is the Manichean. From this perspective, evil is the equal of good. It is an external force that is equally powerful to that of good. Evil also has its own will.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信