Tolkien said the Lord of the Rings was not an allegory. In his foreword to the second edition, he asserted, "As for any inner meaning or 'message,' it has in the intention of the author none." This was said in opposition to interpretations of Lord of the Rings as representing World War II, and the One Ring being nuclear weapons. On the other hand, Tolkien did say that "his Catholic faith was the most important or most ‘significant’ influence on the writing of the work.”

Tolkien’s Sanctifying Myth examines many elements which Tolkien drew on, namely his Catholic faith; his view of the role of myth, that “myths express far greater truths than do historical facts or events”; his love of languages, especially Anglo-Saxon, Old Norse, Gothic, and Welsh; medieval literature and studies, such as Beowulf; and Christian humanist philosophy.

God is never directly mentioned in Lord of the Rings, but Christian themes and symbols pervade. As Tolkien was mentally immersed in the ideas of sin, redemption, kings, prophets, priests, sacraments, Creators, angels, fallen angels, and so on; he made those things intrinsically part of the story. The story does not repeat the gospel in code as an allegory would, but it is a re-expression of the true concepts of redemption, heroism, overcoming evil, the continual return of evil, and so on.

To me, Birzer’s most fascinating explanation is how Frodo is a priest “who carries the Ring—the cross of Christ, the sins of the world—into the heart of hell (Mordor).” This representation complements my own Christian belief that sin is the power by which Satan strives to enslave humanity. Sam Gamgee is the story’s protagonist—the saint, his character sanctified and defined by loyalty. The story ends with Sam’s return to life as it should be, becoming a husband and father in the Shire.

Birzer’s book explains a great deal in a short space, just 138 pages of commentary plus notes/index. I will want to refer to it again, and recommend it as “what to read next” when Lord of the Rings has been enjoyed.

Enjoyed this retrospective of J.R.R. Tolkien’s works and life. In particular found the explanations and details of non-LOTR books such as the Silmarillion or Smith of Wootton Major. Understanding the Anglo Saxon Mythological roots and Catholic reasoning of the author does make me want to pick some of the lesser read and/or posthumous books.

Birzer wrote a helpful, well-documented study that illuminates and connects key themes in the famous Lord of the Rings trilogy. I appreciated Birzer's insights into how Tolkien's vision differed from C.S. Lewis's on certain matters, and how Tolkien's writing--far from being "escapist," as some have claimed--has much to say about the errors of the modern world. I would have appreciated the references as footnotes rather than endnotes (as much as I had to keep flipping to the back to find sources), but I am now motivated to read more of Tolkien's work, starting with The Silmarillion.

Very helpful understanding of Tolkien's work. Does a good job integrating Tolkien's faith and work. Any reader will probably want reread LOTR.

None

Birzer, Bradley J. J. R. R. Tolkien’s Sanctifying Myth: Understanding Middle Earth. Foreword by Joseph Pearce. Intercollegiate Studies Institute, 2003.
Bradley Birzer argues that the mythology in Tolkien’s fiction is an elaborate, consistent expression of a conservative Catholic theology. He makes his case, but his analysis seems reductively polemic. He says little about the influences of Celtic, Anglo Saxon, Nordic, and Teutonic mythology in Tolkien’s work. Of more interest than the religious allegory is Birzer’s discussion of Tolkien’s competitive friendship with C. S. Lewis, applauding Lewis’s conversion to Christianity but deploring his Protestant theology. Tolkien was traumatized by his experiences in World War I, and he developed an antipathy to mechanization on any scale, avoiding everything from automobiles to tape recorders. Birzer details the difficulty that Tolkien had finishing Silmarillion, a work finally cobbled together and published after his death by his son. Birzer suggests that Silmarillion is the most complete expression of Tolkien’s mythology. Maybe so. I haven’t had the strength to read it, nor have I dug into the twelve-volume History of Middle Earth his son constructed from his father’s notes. Tolkien seems to have been an erudite, kindly professor who was popular with his students, even though he mumbled. He was not a good fit for his times, and though it may not be what Birzer wants me to conclude, Tolkien reminds me of William Blake, a man who retreated from the “Satanic mills” of his age into a mythology all his own. 3.5 stars.

Obviously, this guy likes LOTR. But what I really liked about his book was his way of understanding the "mythic" warp and woof fiction. That way of looking at stories is very helpful for understanding the world we live in today, and the world that venerable authors past have understood the world. Birzer's book has made my experience of literature richer. Thank you.

Shows totally different side of Tolkien.

Tortuous writing. In the end, said very little. Assumed much.

If you thought you loved The Lord of the Rings before, you will love it even more after reading this book! This book adds a whole new dimension to Middle Earth by showing Tolkien's method and inspiration as he was creating the stories and mythology of Middle Earth. A must read for any fans of Tolkien and the stories of Middle Earth!

Every page was a delight.

It was good for me to read this book and humanize Tolkien. He was a man that made mistakes—that is just a man. The Inklings were not the kumbaya group of friends I though they were. They were friends of high caliber but they had the visceral disagreements, spats, falling outs and reconciliations as is normal of honest friendships. Interesting to see how much Lewis took from Tolkien and how this affected their friendship. Their friendship was one of the interesting threads throughout the book.
Not sure if I’m totally on board with Tolkien’s views on politics (i also don’t really know anything about politics ha). It’s always interesting seeing what people think of America—Tolkien, Chesterton and the likes have interesting takes on the US, some I really enjoy. It was made clear that American Catholicism has a lot to learn from non-American Catholicism. My favorite chapters were chapter 5 (The Nature of Evil), Chapter 6 (Middle-earth and Modernity), and the conclusion. Man’s need for myth is made clear after chapters 1-3, and man’s ultimate need for the true myth Christianity (read the book if that language bothers you and you’ll see that myth does just mean “fake”). The whole book was interesting though. While I still generally disagree with Tolkien critics, I can better see where they’re coming from.