Actually, the “literary criticisms” referenced by you are not from “today” but many are from his contemporaries. I too have read what you quoted and see no contradiction to what his contemporaries have commented upon or what i have said. Again, the main point of his contemporaries is that it is the work of a Catholic perspective-—that perspective btw is not a matter of “guesswork” as you have posited-—indeed, it is for certain. Other than that point, your comments about “reductionism” (psychological, political party, etc) are misplaced for you are not addressing the very simple point which many have made. Again, thank you for allowing me my “license” but others obviously more qualified than i have already taken such license to understand the Catholic perspective of Tolkien.
I quoted Tolkien himself. Let me quote Tolkien again, and this comes from his preface to The Lord of the Rings:
the ways in which a story-germ uses the soil of experience are extremely complex, and attempts to define the process are at best guesses from evidence that is inadequate and ambiguous.What do you not understand about the words "inadequate" and "ambiguous"?
Tolkien makes the point specifically about the difference between allegory and myth. Again this is what Tolkien said, again in the preface to the The Lord of the Rings:
As for any inner meaning or 'message', it has in the intention of the author none. It is neither allegorical nor topical. As the story grew it put down roots and threw out unexpected branches...I cordially dislike allegory in all its manifestations, and always have done so since I 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.What is it you do not understand about the words "none", "freedon", and "domination"? Tolkien states very clearly that he is not imposing any meaning on the story, and he specifically wrote a myth, not allegory, so that the reader is free to interpret as that reader wants.
You claim to know exactly what Tolkien's meaning was. Please produce a specific quote from Tolkien.