A Tale of Two Modes

Well, my last post on this did not turn out as brief as hoped, so in this one I will try to be more succinct. The reason I would say I would call Tolkien "writing in the Biblical Mode" and Rowling not is simply that I do not see her borrowing characteristics and plot structures directly as I see Tolkien doing. The structure/s on which she works is the alchemical one. A Timeline of Tradition: I guess what I am saying is that I see the different "modes" the 2 authors write in as simply drawing on different stages of Christian Tradition. 2 of the earliest stages of this Tradition are Scripture and Patristic Theology - the first and really only stage of it all was and is and will be the Incarnation - and it will help explain what I am talking about to briefly describe what I think are the major stages in the timeline of that Tradition. Christ came, was born, lived, preached, suffered, died, rose from the dead and ascended into Heaven. Then the Spirit descends on the Apostles at Pentecost and the Church is born. Through evangelization but also through persecution, the Church spreads and grows. The apostles begin writing. Some write their accounts of Christ in such a way to show how the tapestry of Jewish existence in the OT is fulfilled in Christ, and others write epistles exhorting the faithful living of this new, fulfilled identity in Christ. These writing are circulated among the Churches and as time goes on, by the guiding of the Spirit, certain of these Apostolic writings are standardly read in the Liturgy. Through the decisions at a network of local synods these become "semi-officially" the canon of the NT. (NOTE: The Canon of was not "officially" or universally "codified" until the Council of Trent. - it had never been necessary. The Canon had operated just fine until it was challenged in the 16th century. Meanwhile the Apostles have passed on and their successors become the Bishops of Churches. The "Apologists" of the "sub-Apostolic" age (that age just after the Apostles die), in an attempt to pick up on what truth there is in pagan culture and show how Christianity fulfills it, begin to work with "Logos Christology." This is a natural development but, unfortunately, in a fallen world there will always be misunderstandings that turn into arguments that turn into wars and so on an so forth. And so the heresies of the Patristic age arise. It is in this context that Dogmatic Theology is born. Dogma is expressed in credal statements from councils (which in turn also become part of the liturgy). These creeds are set down at Ecumenical Councils but there is also much writing by Bishops expounding or explaining the meaning of the matters defined in the creeds. In effect, these "Theological" writings are a new appropriation of THE Truth in Scripture (the Way, the Truth and the Life). They are an "unpacking" of the Meaning of Scripture for a new era of humanity. This era has been strongly influenced by the "ontological thinking" of Middle-Platonism and Neo-Platonism. This way of thinking is a new "mode" based in "discursive" thinking ("curs-" is the Latin root meaning "run" - a narrative runs in that it moves and conveys meaning through that movement. "Discursive" thinking is thus "not running" in that it is more "categorical." Narrative looks at things moving, Philosophy looks at things statically). Thus Scripture and Dogmatic Theology are two stages of the Tradition and represent two different modes of thinking and relating meaning. Then, in the middle ages, from the influence of the Liturgy of the Church on the broader realm of culture there comes different adaptations of the Truth celebrated in that Liturgy (a professor of mine is fond of saying "culture arises from cult"). The thought of Theology is also incorporated into these new forms such as Drama and morality tales. You also had cross-disciplinary phenomena such as Alchemy. There is a physical science practice, but there is a psychic-spiritual under-pinning as well as literary representations. Literary representations of Alchemical structure are probably the best example for discussing what I call "different modes." For example there is the "Resurrection stage" in the Alchemical process. When encountered in a narrative, one might think, "ah, based on the Bible." And one would be ultimately right because the truth in Alchemy is based ultimately on the truth of the Resurrection in Scripture. But the Alchemical adaptation of that truth has distinct characteristics to it from its own age. Christ is the fullness of humanity, and that means also humanity down through the ages. The Tradition is the passing on of the Deposit of Faith that is Christ, and this Tradition develops because humanity develops. Each age has its own unique characteristics that are somehow instantiations of universal human nature ... Christ is the fullness, we've just been unpacking everything He really gave us down through the ages ... or rather the Spirit has been unpacking it for us. Now, before the Incarnation you had the "tapestry" stage of Jewish history. the History of the people of Israel from the creation of the world to the call of Abraham and their birth as a nation from his line, down to exile in Babylon and occupation by foreign oppressors. Tolkien and Rowling Tolkien appeals to the tapestry stage as well as to typology and fulfillment in Christ. He also appeals to a host of pagan mythologies. In addition I believe he also builds some of his tale out of the Medieval "Grace-oriented" Romantic literature. But I think that somehow for Tolkien the Bible is THE underlying structure of his story because I think he sees it as THE myth of all myths, THE way to tell a good story (and here I mean "sees" as in "consciously" ... I think the same is true for Rowling but maybe sub-consciously.) Rowling seems to appeal more strictly to the Alchemical and medieval culture stage. In addition she incorporates other literature types into her symbolist tale, such as Jane Austen's thing of "social manners and mores." Both represent Christian Truth. And there is a richness of diversity in seeing how they each draw on the Tradition in different ways (or "modes") to build their own distinct morality tales. Just my humble attempt to understand the richness of these two authors, hope it helps.