Vader wrote:I wrote my thesis on "Worldview and Philosophy in Tolkien's Fantasy Literature" and I found a corellation of the "Awakening of Elves" in the First Age and their journey towards the Godly West and Platon's Cave Allegory. Also I elaborated on the idea, that, Frodo, Gandalf and Aragon resembled the three aspects of Jesus Christ - the Sufferer, the one with supernatural Powers and the King in disguise. This sort of trinity makes perfect sense, considering Tolkien was a Catholic.
Wow .. that would be a very interesting read
... and yes absolutely
keep smiling
'Smoke me a kipper .. I'll be back for breakfast!'
I'm not in any sense a Tolkein scholar Vadar, but could I suggest that such metaphors might have developed almost accidentally in the works - unconscious parallels created by a mind steeped in Catholic story and doctrine. I have a recollection of a paragraph in the introduction where he tells us to 'search for no meaning' in the works ( or words to this effect) and while one cannot be sure is it likely that he would have been being disingenuous in such a declaration?
Yesterday I watched the first of Jackson's films (I'm a bit further into the second book than I planned to be when I did this but no matter) and inevitably it (alas) did not stand up well. Now I say this as a person who loved the films (and in all probability probably still does). But the problem here was simply the hard comparison forced on one by watching the movie with the reading experience still percolating through ones mind. The film (like Bilbo) just came across as sort of .....thin! You realise just how much of the detail has been stripped away simply to get the thing onto celluloid - and on so close a juxtaposition you miss it big time! What's you are getting in the films is the framework of the story - without the rich tapestry of Tolkein's descriptive skill hanging from it. With the passage of time, this problem lessens to the point where the films once again can be seen in a manner that marries what you are seeing with what the mind has retained over the intervening period. It is what has been lost (or rather what has not been) that makes the viewing of the film in the middle of a simultaneous reading of the works so difficult. My recommendation is not to do it.
One question; in the film a 'flashback' scene shows Elrond leading Iseldore to the craters of Mount Doom and beseeching him to cast in the ring that it's evil might be ended for good. I know that in the book Iseldore took up the ring and decided to keep it .....or did he even know it could be so destroyed and make such a journey - I forget....., but if he did, was it Elrond who led him? This again is unclear to me in my forgetfulness. This question is a trivial one to me however; I have no problems with such license that Jackson took with the story in order to commit it to film - to do otherwise would have taken ten films (or nine perhaps; 3 for each book. There would have been a nice symbolism there don't you think. )
A last observation about the effect of watching the films during the course of an actual reading is to what extent it lays bare the simple impossibility of recreating in film the imaginary richness of the terrain that the mind (with Tolkein's unmatched descriptive abilities to help) is able to create. Jackson's similarly unmatched abilities as a creator of visual extravaganzas notwithstanding, they cannot but be pale in comparison to what the mind had so shortly before done itself with the words of the work doing their magic - and one feels keenly the shortfall, as though presented with street-cartoonist's depiction in replacement of a lost loved one.
Finally, back now with Frodo and Sam in the land of Mordor. I find I can no longer say that terrible name without trying to add in that sort of throaty roll on the two r's and it's beginning to irritate me!
The truth is a Lion and does not need protection. Once free it will look after itself.
....and the glory of the world becomes less than it was....
'Have we not served you well'
'Of course - you know you have.'
'Then let it end.'
peter wrote:I'm not in any sense a Tolkein scholar Vadar, but could I suggest that such metaphors might have developed almost accidentally in the works - unconscious parallels created by a mind steeped in Catholic story and doctrine. I have a recollection of a paragraph in the introduction where he tells us to 'search for no meaning' in the works ( or words to this effect) and while one cannot be sure is it likely that he would have been being disingenuous in such a declaration?
If I may butt in for a mo - the introduction has something along the lines of his story "putting down roots". I'm sure this meant it had grown beyond its original intent. However, Tolkien did state that he could not be indifferant to his own experiences and, although the "Shadow of the Past" was not a carbon copy of the German war machine, his action served in WWI had to play a part.
Its interesting to note that Celeborn mentions "Noman-Land". A subtle hint to the war? Or perhaps a simple joke, being in Lothlorien at the time (which rhymes with lost the ring!), Noman may correspond with the unobtrusive garden gnome - typically a German tradition.
Got to be honest Luke - I didn't read the introduction this time round, so indeed may have misrembered the context of his comment. I didn't realize (remember) that he had served in WWI, but of course it makes sense and such an experience could not but colour ones thinking and indeed any productive output from then onwards. Indeed I wanted to move on to a consideration of the ring and it's bearers - a select few comprising of Iseldore, Smaegol, Bilbo and Frodo - and I think Vadar mentions how Tolkein's Catholicism may also be seen influencing his pen as he writes the work.
In carrying the malign ring, it seems, all of the bearers are affected differently and to greater and lesser extents. In recieving their gifts of the lesser rings, the differing abilities of the different races to withstand the power invested within them seems manifest. Men it seems, ever concerned with power and gain, are most susceptible; the nine kings to whom the nine rings of men were given became wraiths thereby and the pattern is repeated with the effect of the One on Iseldore. He, strong man as he is, is unable to do what an insignificant Hobbit can achieve (albeit with difficulty) later on in the work - cast the ring to it's undoing in the fires of Mount Doom. Indeed, though it is not I think made explicit, we cannot but assume some 'action at a distance' in the clouding of the mind of Boromir and resulting in the tragedy of his last act.
Of the susceptibility of the dwarves to the rings (and Ring) I'm not sure. Somewhat minimal it would seem. There is no mention of dwarves being turned to wraiths by their gift - but iirc the three lesser ones were (I forget how if we are actually told) removed from their hold and destroyed. Gimli seems to be pretty immune to the Ring's influence and in the film at least is the first to attempt it's destruction (I mention this in case it has a counterpart in the book I have missed or forgotten). The elves seem to be actually able to use their gifted rings to good effect if Galadriel is anything to go by and it begs the question as to whether they might not have been safer choices as bearers of the One to it's final room - but I do seem to recall Elrond having something to say on this point though what exactly it was escapes me.
Now we come to the Hobbit bearers. Not granted lesser rings, it seems that a special place was 'reserved' for them as trustees of the One ring (though not I'm sure, by Sauron's intent), three of the four being of Hobbit type (Smaegol was if I have it correctly, if not an actual Hobbit to begin with, then very closely related to one). The three seem to have somewhat different responses to the Ring. Gollum/Smaegol seems not to have been turned to a wraith by the Rings influence - he held it way longer than the other three remember - and though influenced in the most dire way, twisted and deformed as he was, he still seems to have held a shred of himself back, a measure of the essential goodness in him that Gandalph, if no other, is prepared to see. On this point, witness the pitiful wreckage of the good side of his nature, still arguing the toss with the lost side in his schizophrenic conversations with himself. Bilbo on the other hand, seems to have been talking the more conventional route to wraithdom. He complains of 'feeling thin - sort of stretched out' after sixty years of his bearership, even though he has not aged a day in the physical sense. He does seem immune to the Rings influence in terms of need to gather power or commit acts of atrocity. (Gollum also was resistant to a degree on this score, only driven to despicable behaviour once having lost the Ring and in his attempts to secure it's return and prior to this disaster being content to secrete himself away in the depths in lonely isolation and covetousness.) Of the three, Frodo seems least affected by the Ring's malign power; he alone (no doubt thanks to Gandalph) seems to both understand the need for the Ring to be destroyed and have the strength to do so. In this Frodo is not a small character; he has the power to do what the world's great ones cannot. Saruman, Gandalph, Elrond - all in their lesser and different ways are inferior to Frodo - even Saoron himself cannot refuse his own creation - for he and he alone has the strength. So yes to Vadar's suggestion of the very, very special nature of Frodo; always softly expressed, ne'er explicitly thrust into the fore, but always there in the background, in his story and eventual passing, the unarguable singularity of the One of Light vested with the power to thwart the One of Dark.
The truth is a Lion and does not need protection. Once free it will look after itself.
....and the glory of the world becomes less than it was....
'Have we not served you well'
'Of course - you know you have.'
'Then let it end.'
peter wrote:Got to be honest Luke - I didn't read the introduction this time round, so indeed may have misrembered the context of his comment. I didn't realize (remember) that he had served in WWI, but of course it makes sense and such an experience could not but colour ones thinking and indeed any productive output from then onwards. Indeed I wanted to move on to a consideration of the ring and it's bearers - a select few comprising of Iseldore, Smaegol, Bilbo and Frodo - and I think Vadar mentions how Tolkein's Catholicism may also be seen influencing his pen as he writes the work.
I just liked Vadar's idea about Platon's Cave Allegory. That's what gave me the idea about the gnomes - the realization that Frodo is home, even in Lothlorien (that rhymes with loves the rain) and the sound of Sam's shears snipping away outside in the garden.
Tolkien famously wrote: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.
He wrote this in the Forward to LOTR, which appears in FOTR.
And
Regarding 'roots', Tolkien wrote: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 (into the past) and threw out unexpected branches: but its main theme was settled from the outset by the inevitable choice of the Ring as the link between it and The Hobbit. The crucial chapter, "The Shadow of the Past', is one of the oldest parts of the tale. It was written long before the foreshadow of 1939 had yet become a threat of inevitable disaster, and from that point the story would have developed along essentially the same lines, if that disaster had been averted. Its sources are things long before in mind, or in some cases already written, and little or nothing in it was modified by the war that began in 1939 or its sequels.
The real war does not resemble the legendary war in its process or its conclusion. If it had inspired or directed the development of the legend, then certainly the Ring would have been seized and used against Sauron; he would not have been annihilated but enslaved, and Barad-dur would not have been destroyed but occupied. Saruman, failing to get possession of the Ring, would m the confusion and treacheries of the time have found in Mordor the missing links in his own researches into Ring-lore, and before long he would have made a Great Ring of his own with which to challenge the self-styled Ruler of Middle-earth. In that conflict both sides would have held hobbits in hatred and contempt: they would not long have survived even as slaves.
Indeed Wayfriend - that was what I had in mind; Many thanks for posting. Now having re-read this snippet I'm minded to read the forward once again (a combination of laziness and desire to get to the story caused me to skip it, but I confess to a {quickly smothered} twinge of guilt as I did so. ). That little foray into "the ring as allegory of WW2" is beguiling and whets my appetite for more!
The truth is a Lion and does not need protection. Once free it will look after itself.
....and the glory of the world becomes less than it was....
'Have we not served you well'
'Of course - you know you have.'
'Then let it end.'
peter: Another thread reminds me ... one of the places where I found the movie surpassed the books is the Breaking of the Fellowship. I found that Jackson's version of the story does a much better job of laying a groundwork so that Frodo's decision to hike off alone is both much more logical and also much more poignant. In the book, you only really get a sense that Frodo doesn't want his friends to be in danger, a general kind of danger. Whereas in the movie you really come to understand that Frodo fears what the Ring will do them - what he might do to them under It's influence. His last moment with Aragorn totally seals the deal from a logical perspective. The unexpected valor of Pippin and Merry seals it emotionally.
Yes Wayfriend - I think I would have to agree that this part of the story is 'tightened up' in the film. Frodo's mounting unhappiness is certainly more overtly displayed - and his fear of the power of the ring to pervert even the best of people and intentions. He even questions Aragorn on his arrival on the top of the ruins as to whether he would be able to withstand the malign influence of the thing. Aragorn responds by folding Frodo's hand back around the ring in a gesture that answers the question and simultaneously confirms Frodo's role as rightful bearer of the burden.
In addition, Jackson has Frodo's fist word's to Aragorn on his arrival to be "the ring has taken Boromir". No doubting there that the thing has the power of 'action at a distance'. I'm not sure that either of these are represented in the book (in fact the detail of the section dims in my mind already - a process that I describe above to which we are all subject, but I acknowledge is probably worse in my case than most . Already I'd need to return to the work to clarify the what in fact is and is not described - and this in itself is indicative of a lack of clarity in this section on Tolkein's part.
Good observation Wayfriend!
The truth is a Lion and does not need protection. Once free it will look after itself.
....and the glory of the world becomes less than it was....
'Have we not served you well'
'Of course - you know you have.'
'Then let it end.'
Saw a very interesting documentary on TLOTR a day or two ago in which it was explained how Tolkien's consuming interested in language was at the heart of his creation of the complete and seamless alternate reality that Middle-Earth was to become. It was simply unbelievable to hear great stretches of prose and poetry dictated in the tongue he created for the elvish people, and he apparently did the same for all the races of his world. Having so done he began to think about the history of those languages ala that of say old, middle and modern English and that having been done, began to construct a history around his languages, for it to exist in as it were - the history that grew into the complete world of Middle-Earth of which the story of Bilbo, Frodo and the ring is of course only a tiny fragment.
The documentary went on to say how Tolkien's world in which the reader could experience total Immersion as an alternate parallel reality, was the forerunner of first the board gaming worlds of dungeons and dragons and now latterly in the huge world's of World of Warcraft and our modern role playing consul games. The father and probably the greatest of all of the fantasy arenas that those so inclined could achieve total Immersion and thus escape from the mundane reality of........well...... reality.
But there was, we were told, a darker side. Tolkien was a creature of his time - a time before multicultural thinking and acceptance, and the structure of his world is undeniably hierarchical with a clear separation of races into levels of greater superiority, middle ranking and lower more base types. This along with the architypical universality of his world has allowed the work to be coopted by whatever group or ideology that sees fit, to mould it to be presented as background to it's particular agenda - and of course the far right has been the most keen to do this. In the end however we were told, his creation remained incomplete and unfinished because it simply became too big for the master to cope with. Christopher Tolkien has by all accounts done a first rate job of pulling the threads together as it were, and one cannot but feel a degree of sympathy for him that his own contribution to this unmatched body of work has been so overshadowed by his father's. Whether there exists a creative talent out there capable of, or desirous of taking up where the father and son left off who knows, but the program gave us a fascinating insight into this masterwork of human creativity and food for thought about its ongoing legacy in our word of today.
The truth is a Lion and does not need protection. Once free it will look after itself.
....and the glory of the world becomes less than it was....
'Have we not served you well'
'Of course - you know you have.'
'Then let it end.'
peter wrote:I've reached the bit in the first book where the Hobbits plus 'Strider' have reached the top of Weathertop and have encountered the black riders during the course of the night spent atop there. Up to this point I'm surprised how well the book is reading.
That's an interesting comment. When I first read LOTR as a callow 18 year old, I felt that the story had begun to drag a bit prior to the events at Weathertop. After that I thought the pace picked up nicely. I no longer feel that way about the earlier parts of THotR when re-reading, and haven't done so for years.
Well - I knew the book was good, but I hadn't remembered just how good! It's a litmus test of a book for me if during the day between my pre-sleep nightly reads, I'm itching to get back to bed to pick up with the story where I left off the night before. TLOTR did this for me (on this occasion) in spades - in fact I've saved about the last fifth of the book just to extend the pleasure (weird I know but I so rarely get taken by a read to this degree I just need to save a bit for later! ). I absolutely think that this book deserves it's place in the hall of fame as a literary classic - one of the finest examples of storytelling ever achieved.
The truth is a Lion and does not need protection. Once free it will look after itself.
....and the glory of the world becomes less than it was....
'Have we not served you well'
'Of course - you know you have.'
'Then let it end.'
That's interesting.
I just assumed that Christopher had everything.
Here's a link from the link you posted, the video describes what's happening.
I love the pic on the right in the first minute! https://www.cbs58.com/news/there-and-ba ... exhibition
That's interesting.
I just assumed that Christopher had everything.
Here's a link from the link you posted, the video describes what's happening.
I love the pic on the right in the first minute! https://www.cbs58.com/news/there-and-ba ... exhibition
Gnashing of teeth and tearing of hair! I want to see that link now! but have to get up for work (for which I'm already very late (the getting up, not work - that I'll make on time).
Oh cruel world!
The truth is a Lion and does not need protection. Once free it will look after itself.
....and the glory of the world becomes less than it was....
'Have we not served you well'
'Of course - you know you have.'
'Then let it end.'
.. that would be a very interesting read
)
). That little foray into "the ring as allegory of WW2" is beguiling and whets my appetite for more!
agree.
). I absolutely think that this book deserves it's place in the hall of fame as a literary classic - one of the finest examples of storytelling ever achieved.
