JRR Tolkien famously wrote about his dislike of allegory in the foreword to The Lord of the Rings. Here is what he had to say:

“I cordially dislike allegory in all its manifestations, and always have done so since grew old and wary enough to detect its presence. I much prefer history – true or feigned – with its varied applicability to the thought and experience of readers. I think that many confuse applicability with allegory, but the one resides in the freedom of the reader, and the other in the purposed domination of the author.”

I don’t have quite the same issue with allegory that Tolkien had, since I think part of his problem came with the insistence of readers that The Lord of the Rings was an allegory of World War II (amongst other things). I maintain that it is intellectually lazy to read allegory into any literary work unless it is the stated purpose of the author. For example, CS Lewis intended The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe to be an allegory about Christianity. George Orwell intended Animal Farm as an allegory of Soviet Russia. However, The Lord of the Rings was never intended as an allegory of anything.

Conversely, it is true that Tolkien’s experiences – particularly of encroaching industrialisation destroying the countryside, as well as World Wars I and II – informed the writing of The Lord of the Rings. His Catholicism was also a key factor, and Tolkien admitted as such in later letters, claiming that in retrospect he could see how these life experiences had influenced his work, regardless of the fact that he never intended it as an allegory.

Therefore, his remark about applicability to my mind makes perfect sense.

In my own writing, I have not written any deliberate allegories. But I know readers have made all manner of metaphorical applications, sometimes confusing them as allegory. For example, George goes to Mars has been read as a pro-feminist, anti-Islamic fundamentalist allegory. I certainly didn’t have that in mind when I wrote it. I simply wanted to write a thrilling science fiction adventure story for children and young-at-heart adults. Yet it is true that my own views are often inherent in my work, and can be detected to a greater or lesser extent. Equally they can sometimes be misconstrued, and that begs the question as to whether or not I have failed as an author. The bottom line is readers will interpret George goes to Mars (or any of my novels) any way they please, perhaps in ways I might even disapprove of.

I have almost finished an animal fiction adventure novel about wolves in Alaska, which I may well decide to fast track for release later this year. Reading back over my first draft, I suspect some may well read political allegories into it. But again, I must emphasise this is not my direct intention, and therefore it is not an allegory, however much readers may wish to label it as such. I do not wish to reduce my work to a single message or lesson, claiming it as allegory, since that would be reductive. Rather, I would prefer the reader to decide what to make of the story, and allow for multiple interpretations.