|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FarFromHome
Valinor
Apr 12 2007, 8:20pm
Post #101 of 147
(1035 views)
Shortcut
|
And Gandalf as Dr. Pangloss? I have sometimes wondered if maybe LotR fell through a time warp, and Voltaire was writing the ultimate LotR spoof...
...and the sails were drawn up, and the wind blew,
and slowly the ship slipped away down the long grey firth;
and the light of the glass of Galadriel that Frodo bore
glimmered and was lost.
|
|
|
mae govannen
Tol Eressea
Apr 13 2007, 4:32am
Post #102 of 147
(1066 views)
Shortcut
|
|
But WHY do they govern the Shire in the end?... Not just because
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
of any Fallowhide or whatever strain by itself, but because of what they accomplished effectively before they returned, which other Fallowhides never accomplished, although with the same strain in them. It is not the coming of the King to the throne, nor his authority, that puts those Hobbits where they end up being, but the recognition given by the other Hobbits to what they have obviously grown into; and again, don't forget that Frodo, although actually the best of them all, is the one who gets the least recognition. If it was all by King Elessar's authority and the reestablishment of Order everywhere, such would certainly not have been the case, and for sure Frodo would have been honored as greatly as he had been, along with Sam, on the Field of Cormallen.
As for WWII, what Tolkien said in his Foreword is that he never wrote LOTR as a kind of allegory of WWII, which was what many people supposed, given the fact that the book was published only after the war. Please read again that Foreword, and you will see that Tolkien simply defends himself from any allegorical intention, pointing out particularly that the crucial parts of the story had been already written long before 1939, and that the real war had NOT 'inspired nor directed the development of the legend'.
The book wasn't completely finished before the end of October 1948, but, as Tolkien said, 'little or nothing in it was modified by the war that began in 1939 or its sequels.'
None of this contradicts what you call 'my' claim, which apparently you have misunderstood:
What I have said, because Tolkien and Lewis said it themselves, was that the very opposite seemed to happen: the war itself seemed to develop with a deep, horrifying similarity with the legend - not in its outer circumstances, of course, but in its demonic inspiration and intention.
And yes, you are quite right, those same Dark Forces were of course at work to try and influence the behaviour of people on all sides, and Tolkien, who was no fool, was very aware of that; this is exactly what I myself pointed out yesterday in one of my other posts; if I find out again which one, I'll make a note of it below this post for you.
I personally would not call him cynical because of the kind of remarks he could make about his own Government etc; to my eyes, he was just lucid, and had enough clarity of mind to see what was wrong also on the side of the Allies.
'Is everything sad going to come untrue?'
(Sam, 'The Field of Cormallen', in 'The Return of the King'.)
|
|
|
mae govannen
Tol Eressea
Apr 13 2007, 5:41am
Post #103 of 147
(1017 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Well, my other post about WWII & LOTR was actually
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
the whole first part of 'Middle-earth is as complicated as the Primary World'... that is, the very post to which you were yourself supposedly replying in the post of yours I replied to in turn just now, above this 'additional note'!!!
Do I have to conclude you hadn't read that first post of mine carefully enough to start with?! 
Please do read again then not only the second part of it (about the Great Hobbits etc), but the first part too: the point I was trying to make was already quite clear, it seems to me. 
'Is everything sad going to come untrue?'
(Sam, 'The Field of Cormallen', in 'The Return of the King'.)
|
|
|
mae govannen
Tol Eressea
Apr 13 2007, 8:24am
Post #104 of 147
(1044 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Sorry, I do apologise for getting all worked up...!
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
All the points you make now in your answer to me are right, of course... but you know, what got me actually was not at all that we were disagreeing, it was on the contrary that you were yourself saying that 'the Wise are right' (and you repeat it again this time!...), just as I would say too... but then apparently you disagreed with yourself in your very next sentence, where you seemed to say that it is Saruman who is right!!!
It seemed to me that this self-contradiction was mental dishonesty, and this made me angry at you: with someone mentally dishonest, what is the point of discussing?...
But now from your own strong reaction to what I said, it is obvious that you genuinely don't quite see in the same way as I do the implications of those words you had said before, which made me think we were agreeing; so, I am more puzzled than ever, but at least not angry at you any more...!
In order for us to go further then, would you mind explaining to me
why you say that 'the Wise are right'? What makes you say that? In which way are they right in your eyes? What do you mean exactly by that?
I have to try to see things really through your eyes to understand better what the difference is between your way and my way of seeing things on that crucial point.
It already helps me a lot that in your first answer here you started elaborating a bit:
'What it boils down to is what I think is one of the main questions Tolkien was asking when he wrote LOTR. Why is there evil? Given that God is all-wise and merciful why does He allow babies to disappear from their cribs, harmless peaceful people be invaded and enslaved, and a land of wondrous beauty be despoiled?'
This is a very central question indeed, and one Tolkien must have struggled with as well; but it seems to me that he touched upon the answer already at the time of The Silmarillion - I mean, when writing the Ainulindalė - and later went deeper into it at the time when he wrote 'Athrabeth Finrod ah Andreth' (HoMe, 'Morgoth's Ring').
I'll try to express in my own words what I understood of it all, that really made sense for me as answering that central question you ask, but I think I must first post this little message of apology; after that, I can take the time of working on the formulation of my answer to your question, and post that later.
'Is everything sad going to come untrue?'
(Sam, 'The Field of Cormallen', in 'The Return of the King'.)
|
|
|
mae govannen
Tol Eressea
Apr 13 2007, 8:47am
Post #105 of 147
(1021 views)
Shortcut
|
|
That's exactly it, I would say!...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
'Is everything sad going to come untrue?'
(Sam, 'The Field of Cormallen', in 'The Return of the King'.)
|
|
|
grammaboodawg
Immortal
Apr 13 2007, 8:51am
Post #106 of 147
(1032 views)
Shortcut
|
|
The film shows the transition so well
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
When Frodo offers his lembas to Smeagol, he's disgusted when Smeagol approaches him. But when they're sitting in the dark nose-to-nose and Frodo reveals he knows who Smeagol is... Frodo is visibly moved when he sees Smeagol's reaction to the memory of who he is. Can you imagine the questions and thoughts running through Frodo's mind as he realizes the power of the Ring and the life it's driven Smeagol to?
 
Trust him... The Hobbit is coming!
"Barney Snow was here." ~Hug like a hobbit!~ "In my heaven..."
TORn's Observations Lists
|
|
|
mae govannen
Tol Eressea
Apr 13 2007, 8:56am
Post #107 of 147
(1024 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I quite agree with you here...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
but please see also the answer to FFH that I'm going to post next!
'Is everything sad going to come untrue?'
(Sam, 'The Field of Cormallen', in 'The Return of the King'.)
|
|
|
dernwyn
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Apr 13 2007, 10:54am
Post #108 of 147
(1034 views)
Shortcut
|
|
{{hugs Darkstone}} Proof! LotR is great literature!!!
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
"Indeed I think one aspect of great literature is how it can spur unlimited discussion about the human condition. And this discussion proves to my satisfaction that LOTR is great literature. "
YES!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"And when Sam heard that he laughed aloud for shear delight, and he stood up and cried: 'O great glory and splendour! And all my wishes have come true!'"
|
|
|
mae govannen
Tol Eressea
Apr 13 2007, 11:12am
Post #109 of 147
(1014 views)
Shortcut
|
|
When the person's problem is primarily pride,
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
however compassionate you might want to be towards them, they will always feel humiliated by it and just throw your compassion to your face. Or they will see your compassion as a weakness, and you as a fool to be abused even more than before, whenever the possibility may arise again... *sigh* What to do?...
Also, the problem not to be forgotten is that showing mercy is not the only thing that matters; what matters most is that something should genuinely change in the person concerned; Gandalf knows that very well, and knows that unless Saruman is able to humble himself at least to the extent of acknowledging and regretting publically the terrible wrongs he has done to others, nothing will have changed truly in him, his pride will still have the better of him and his problem will be just the same as before.
Only when Saruman would make the genuine inner progress that he absolutely needs to make FOR HIS OWN SAKE first of all, would the true result be obtained, that is the most important one.
For behind all the mutual wrongs (and also good things) that we may find ourselves doing to each other in this immense Story of Life, behind the surface events that we label positive or negative, at each moment is given to each of us the opportunity to grow closer to the true, divine nature that is our potential. Every time, whether we chose to seize that opportunity for inner growth, or on the contrary to debase ourselves ever further, is left to our individual choice; no one can make that choice for us. This is each person's inner freedom, our most fundamental and inalienable right, whether we use it wisely or not.
'Is everything sad going to come untrue?'
(Sam, 'The Field of Cormallen', in 'The Return of the King'.)
|
|
|
mae govannen
Tol Eressea
Apr 13 2007, 11:24am
Post #110 of 147
(1048 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Ooops! Forgot to do and say that to Darkstone myself!...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
For I did appreciate that very much too, obviously... That was a particularly great thing he said there.
'Is everything sad going to come untrue?'
(Sam, 'The Field of Cormallen', in 'The Return of the King'.)
|
|
|
mae govannen
Tol Eressea
Apr 13 2007, 11:33am
Post #111 of 147
(1034 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Quite right; said something similar just now myself,
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
but had already before appreciated what you had said, although at that moment someone came, I had to do something else and so I couldn't reply to express that appreciation. I do so at least now!
'Is everything sad going to come untrue?'
(Sam, 'The Field of Cormallen', in 'The Return of the King'.)
|
|
|
mae govannen
Tol Eressea
Apr 13 2007, 11:45am
Post #112 of 147
(996 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Sorry if I did, and thank you for the clarification! :-) /
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
'Is everything sad going to come untrue?'
(Sam, 'The Field of Cormallen', in 'The Return of the King'.)
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Apr 13 2007, 11:58am
Post #113 of 147
(1026 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Thank you for this continuing series, by the way.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I hope my posts questioning the applicability of Gandalf's wisdom don't cause any offense. When reading LotR I tend to take Gandalf's wisdom for granted, but your posts cause me to consider their applicability to the Primary World, and raise some fascinating questions.
Darkstone has also raised the question of whether Gandalf is always wise even within the context of Middle-earth, and I think that is a legitimate question too, even though I have argued that he is, or at least that Tolkien intends him to be so. Gandalf is not himself omniscient, but his intuition seems to come from a Higher Power.
(This post was edited by Curious on Apr 13 2007, 12:03pm)
|
|
|
Darkstone
Immortal
Apr 13 2007, 2:58pm
Post #114 of 147
(1049 views)
Shortcut
|
No need for an apology. You remained articulate and stuck to the argument instead of getting personal. I respect and admire that.
why you say that 'the Wise are right'? What makes you say that? In which way are they right in your eyes? What do you mean exactly by that?
The Wise are right because they are wise. It's like the message of the Book of Job. God is right because he is God. To even consider otherwise freezes the heart and soul with unimaginable horror.
Can Saruman be right too? Well, as Satan knows, the best lies are those with a kernal of truth. The hobbits, especially Frodo and Sam after seeing the vision in Galadriel's Mirror, might indeed be foolish for not rushing home to ensure the safety of what they had fought to protect. But Saruman is definitely the fool, for as the Wise foresaw, he is the one who will suffer the most, and Saruman ultimately realizes the extent of his foolishness at the very last moment:
"To the dismay of those that stood by, about the body of Saruman a grey mist gathered, and rising slowly to a great height like smoke from a fire, as a pale shrouded figure it loomed over the Hill. For a moment it wavered, looking to the West; but out of the West came a cold wind, and it bent away, and with a sigh dissolved into nothing."
In the end I turn to Saruman's last words to Frodo:
"Saruman rose to his feet, and stared at Frodo. There was a strange look in his eyes of mingled wonder and respect and hatred. 'You have grown, Halfling,' he said. 'Yes, you have grown very much. You are wise, and cruel.'"
Is to be wise also to be cruel? Omelets and eggs.
I met a Balrog on the stair
He had some wings that weren't there.
They weren't there again today.
I wish he would just fly away.
|
|
|
mae govannen
Tol Eressea
Apr 13 2007, 3:17pm
Post #115 of 147
(992 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Thanks for this; but, re. your last question... what say YOU? /
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
'Is everything sad going to come untrue?'
(Sam, 'The Field of Cormallen', in 'The Return of the King'.)
|
|
|
Darkstone
Immortal
Apr 13 2007, 4:06pm
Post #116 of 147
(1009 views)
Shortcut
|
...Gandalf is wise enough to know that Frodo is meant to have the ring. And he's cruel enough to give it to him.
I met a Balrog on the stair
He had some wings that weren't there.
They weren't there again today.
I wish he would just fly away.
|
|
|
FarFromHome
Valinor
Apr 13 2007, 4:19pm
Post #117 of 147
(1016 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Movie-Frodo's attitude to Gollum is quite different from the book, I think.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Movie-Frodo relates to Gollum as an equal and a fellow-sufferer, and opens up his heart to him. In contrast, book-Frodo relates to Gollum more as an authority-figure, like a strict parent or teacher. He's kind, but he doesn't become emotionally involved. He never gets right down to interact with Gollum at his own level - not even metaphorically, I don't think. But when movie-Frodo gets eye-to-eye with Gollum in the Dead Marshes and realizes everything they have in common, he makes an emotional connection, and from then on he's committed to helping him and trusting him. Book-Frodo, on the other hand, never really trusts Gollum, he just accepts that he has to risk the danger of having him around. That's a different kind of bravery - knowingly risking his own safety out of pity for Gollum. Movie-Frodo's bravery is emotional bravery, as he allows Gollum into his own heart.
...and the sails were drawn up, and the wind blew,
and slowly the ship slipped away down the long grey firth;
and the light of the glass of Galadriel that Frodo bore
glimmered and was lost.
|
|
|
Darkstone
Immortal
Apr 13 2007, 5:58pm
Post #118 of 147
(1003 views)
Shortcut
|
...I'm saying mercy isn't any use unless one is willing to offer redemption as well. That is one reason I find Jackson's Frodo so much morally stronger than book Frodo. He offers Smeagol not only pity and mercy, but redemption as well.
I met a Balrog on the stair
He had some wings that weren't there.
They weren't there again today.
I wish he would just fly away.
|
|
|
Adanedhel
Bree
Apr 13 2007, 7:24pm
Post #119 of 147
(1027 views)
Shortcut
|
"The counsel of Gandalf was not founded on foreknowledge of safety, for himself or for others," sad Aragorn. "There are some things that it is better to begin than to refuse, even though the end may be dark."
"But I will say this: the rule of no realm is mine, neither of Gondor nor any other, great or small. But all worth things that are in Peril as the world now stands, those are my care. And for my part, I shall not wholly fail of my task, though Gondor should perish, if anything passes through this night that can still grow fair or bear fruit and flower again in days to come."
"It must often be so, Sam, when things are in danger: some one has to give them up. lose them, so that others may keep them."
This is a constant theme in LOTR of self sacrifice at need to bring about a greater good. However Gandalf never forced Frodo to keep the ring though he believed it was the right choice. It goes back to the same freedom of will issue.
|
|
|
Advising Elf
Rohan
Apr 13 2007, 8:09pm
Post #120 of 147
(1018 views)
Shortcut
|
|
To be wise is not to be cruel.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Saruman is only calling it cruel because he refuses to accept the forgiveness or mercy offered. He'd rather be dead than humble. To his pride-twisted mind, mercy is cruelty, because it keeps shaming him, but he won't let the shame be restorative. The ultimate cruelty to him, is that a "small ragtag" is wiser than he is, and keeps proving it to his own embarasment.
Yahoo!Group with good stuff to download:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LOTRgoodies/
(This post was edited by Advising Elf on Apr 13 2007, 8:12pm)
|
|
|
FarFromHome
Valinor
Apr 13 2007, 8:12pm
Post #121 of 147
(1004 views)
Shortcut
|
However Gandalf never forced Frodo to keep the ring though he believed it was the right choice. It goes back to the same freedom of will issue.
Gandalf did allow Frodo to make his own choice about taking the Ring - but if you think about it, the story gives Frodo very little option. First of all, Gandalf says nothing about his suspicions about the Ring after Bilbo's Party, but goes away for 17 years and comes back when Frodo has already become too attached to the Ring to give it up easily. And at the Council, too, everyone waits in silence until Frodo finds himself offering to take the Ring. Tolkien could have written a story in which Frodo volunteers completely freely, but in fact he doesn't - he writes about Frodo finding himself volunteering almost against his will, because he feels he must. Tolkien must have had a reason for making Frodo's decision play out this way. I think he's asking us to consider what exactly free will is, and how it relates to a sense of duty, and the willingness to have faith in Authority.
I think LotR in a way is about having Faith in the Wisdom of Authority - in other words, if you are virtuous you will freely choose to do your duty (i.e., you will willingly do what you have been given to do by a greater Authority). Frodo doesn't have full freedom of choice - he has the choice to accept the duty that is laid before him, or to refuse it. He chooses to accept his duty willingly, thereby exercising his free will. If he had refused, he would have become another Saruman or Denethor - trying to fight against the legitimate Authority that ultimately flows from the Higher Powers and cannot in the end be denied.
I think this is an important element of Tolkien's Catholic faith - the idea of "resignation" - the humble acceptance of whatever God asks of the individual. It's a very liberating concept in some ways, because no matter how bad things are you accept them freely out of love for God. I think that's how the heroes of LotR feel, although God as such isn't in the story - their love and duty is for others, but the important thing is that they fulfill their duty willingly, accepting the word of Authority and the will of Providence.
...and the sails were drawn up, and the wind blew,
and slowly the ship slipped away down the long grey firth;
and the light of the glass of Galadriel that Frodo bore
glimmered and was lost.
|
|
|
Advising Elf
Rohan
Apr 13 2007, 8:20pm
Post #122 of 147
(991 views)
Shortcut
|
|
You're getting way of ahead of me! // ;o)
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Yahoo!Group with good stuff to download:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LOTRgoodies/
|
|
|
Advising Elf
Rohan
Apr 13 2007, 8:40pm
Post #123 of 147
(997 views)
Shortcut
|
|
"Lack of alternatives clears the mind."
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Frodo doesn't have full freedom of choice - he has the choice to accept the duty that is laid before him, or to refuse it.
That is full freedom of choice. Circumstances always limit our choices.
To coin a paraphrase: "That is not for us to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the choices that are given us."
Yahoo!Group with good stuff to download:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LOTRgoodies/
|
|
|
FarFromHome
Valinor
Apr 13 2007, 8:50pm
Post #124 of 147
(1013 views)
Shortcut
|
Frodo's choice is completely limited by circumstance. This is indeed what often happens in life - Tolkien for example had the choice of volunteering to fight in WWI or shirking his duty. At that time, the Authority of his patriotic duty gave him no other option. But there probably should have been another option - that war wasn't worth fighting, and if young men had not followed authority so willingly, perhaps things could have been different (as Vietnam was different). Full freedom of choice should allow us to consider all the options, not just whether or not to do some "duty" that has been imposed on us by others. That's what I call freedom of choice, anyway.
...and the sails were drawn up, and the wind blew,
and slowly the ship slipped away down the long grey firth;
and the light of the glass of Galadriel that Frodo bore
glimmered and was lost.
|
|
|
Darkstone
Immortal
Apr 13 2007, 9:17pm
Post #125 of 147
(1009 views)
Shortcut
|
I think that ironically, after proudly rejecting the mercy of the powerful, Saruman is deeply affected in spite of himself by the offer of mercy from this humble ragtag hobbit. Saruman is described as being struck by "wonder and respect" at Frodo's mercy. And indeed, just after he dies he seems to finally relent and offer repentance to the West Wind. But alas, it's too late. Redemption barely missed, just like with Gollum and Wormtongue. How thin is the border between grace and damnation.
I met a Balrog on the stair
He had some wings that weren't there.
They weren't there again today.
I wish he would just fly away.
(This post was edited by Darkstone on Apr 13 2007, 9:21pm)
|
|
|
|
|
