NP? Bond. James Bond (was "racist" Tolkien ...

[jbor]

on 26/12/02 7:12 AM, Dave Monroe at davidmmonroe at yahoo.com wrote:

(apart from more of the same ad hominem, some narky anti-Australian
innuendo, and a strange little fairy story about good hippies and evil
hippies in a place long ago and far away called Middle America .... )

> but that's not to say that there isn't a
> case.

But that's what a lot of people have been saying. That there isn't a case.
You keep harping on that because Shapiro & you have said that the book is
"racist", it must be true. And anyone who dares to disagree is an idiot or
neurotic or something. I don't even like Tolkien and I know it's not
"racist". So

> Rather than simply denouncing something,

Not "denouncing". Disagreeing. Presenting a different point of view.

> first see
> what might be of interest, of merit, of use.

Been there & done that. Zip, not much and nought.

> Point was, political quietism.

What, American college kids in the 60s?! Truly bizarre ....

> Do not confuse yr
> hippies with yr New Left with yr the rest of as likely
> as not 60s Right-thinkin' America.

I thought we were talking about "racism" in _TLOTR_. You're trying to say
that hippies/college kids in the 60s embraced the latent racism in Tolkien's
work, or were too stupid to notice it. I'd say it's more reasonable to
conclude that this alleged "racism" isn't really there in the first place.
Or to at least accept the fact that some readers "receive" the text
differently to the way you and Shapiro are, and to admit the possibility
that that's legit.

> Well, y'know, it's not like when something's in the
> news/air/whatever, it doesn't engender commentary,
> does it?  Like this guy was sitting on his thesis for
> years until the SECOND film came out?

His thesis, or the press release, did directly address 'The Two Towers'
after all, as I recall. But it's interesting that Shapiro's little Scud
missile of a Dec. 13 2002 bulletin is apparently immune from all this
personal, social, cultural and historical context of production stuff, while
Tolkien's text isn't ....

As for _Stranger in a Strange Land_, I read that as a teenager and I
remember really liking it. Don't recall it being "racist", however, quite
the reverse in fact, or so I thought at the time. But do let us know when
that billion dollar celluloid extravaganza of _Farnham's Freehold_ is set
for release ....

Anyway, I can't quite work out whether it's subterfuge or just plain
bloody-mindedness which totally neglects the one pop cultural icon/mythology
which has had a recent (and ongoing) revival(s), and which is "racist" - at
least, it is so according to the author to whom the discussion here
supposedly pertains, writing in the text (the 'Intro' to _SL_ p. 11) which
is supposedly the subject of a current group-read - and which has a distinct
and obvious bearing on "current events" and public perceptions of those
events, in favour of going in to bat for a spurious and seemingly
opportunistic attack by a seeming publicity-hound of an obscure academic on
a totally unrelated author and movie.

For whatever reason/s it's done, labelling something like _TLOTR_ "racist"
when it isn't actually distracts attention from, and makes people sceptical
of the identification of, those aspects of our various world cultures which
are racist, and which are potentially and actually destructive.

best