|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FarFromHome
Doriath
Apr 26 2009, 7:45am
Post #1 of 9
(1146 views)
Shortcut
|
|
The Siege of Gondor: Yet another anniversary post...
|
Can't Post
|
|
Happy 10th birthday to TORn! I've just been dipping into the amazing archive provided by Inferno – I wasn't lucky enough to be here back then, so it's wonderful to be able to catch up with the "box set"…
I was honoured to be asked by our trusty organizers to contribute a discussion post on the Siege of Gondor - not sure what that has to do with birthdays or anniversaries, but there's certainly a lot going on, and it ends on a high note, with the horns of Rohan!
Most of this episode focuses on two strong figures - Gandalf and Denethor, as seen through the eyes of Pippin, caught between these "two terrible old men". For me, it's the contrast between the behaviour of these two powerful figures that really stands out in these pages, and especially the way they seem to Pippin, who sees aspects of them that I think no-one else does.
The total contrast comes to a head at the end of the chapter when Pippin goes from this:
"Pippin ...turned and fled in terror from the deathly house. 'Poor Faramir!' he thought. 'I must find Gandalf. Poor Faramir! ... Oh, where can I find Gandalf? In the thick of things, I suppose..."
to this:
"There waiting, silent and still in the space before the Gate, sat Gandalf upon Shadowfax: Shadowfax who alone among the free horses of the earth endured the terror, unmoving, steadfast as a graven image in Rath Dínen."
Here's the "grey fool", as Denethor calls him, and the horse of the "primitive" Rohirrim, standing steadfast in the face of terror, reminding Pippin of the noble images on the tombs of Rath Dínen.
Meanwhile, the hyper-civilized, hyper-logical Denethor has given way to madness, and with his fiery, "heathen" death is about to desecrate and destroy those very "graven images in Rath Dínen" that symbolize civilization he is heir to.
So, (as the newspapers keep asking about the economy) should we have seen it coming? Were the weaknesses there all along, and were there clues we could have picked up on long before this?
Here's one possible clue:
Denethor: "[Sauron] uses others as his weapons. So do all great lords, if they are wise, Master Halfling."
Gandalf: "However that may be, the Captain of Despair does not press forward, yet. He rules rather according to the wisdom that you have just spoken, from the rear, driving his slaves in madness on before."
What do you think of this wisdom?
Is Denethor's decision to use others as his weapons a logical one? Is it a wise one?
What do you think of Gandalf's line, "the wisdom you have just spoken"? Does he mean it, or is he being sarcastic?
Gandalf repeatedly goes out onto the front lines, while Denethor remains in his throne room.
Do you feel that Denethor is justified in his way of directing the defence? Should he have exposed himself to danger?
Denethor reveals that he is wearing armour and a sword beneath his robes - showing that his decision not to fight is not because of weakness.
How do you respond to this revelation? Do you find it surprising? admirable? self-deluding?
Would confronting his enemy face to face, as Gandalf does, have saved Denethor's sanity? Would it have saved his soul?
Here's another possible clue to Denethor's fate:
Denethor speaking to Faramir:
Ever your desire is to appear lordly and generous as a king of old, gracious, gentle.... But in desperate hours gentleness may be repaid with death.'
'So be it,' said Faramir.
'So be it!' cried Denethor. 'But not with your death only, Lord Faramir: with the death also of your father, and of all your people, whom it is your part to protect now that Boromir is gone.'
Was Faramir wrong to act with generosity, even though his action endangers not just himself, but also his father and his people?
Does it smack of selfishness to you that Denethor reminds Faramir first of all of his duty to himself?
'You think, as is your wont, my lord, of Gondor only,' said Gandalf. 'Yet there are other men and other lives, and time still to be. And for me, I pity even his slaves.'
Is Denethor wrong to think of Gondor only? Isn't that his duty?
Here's something that struck me when I was re-reading the chapter for this discussion:
"Denethor grew old before his eyes, as if something had snapped in his proud will, and his stern mind was overthrown. Grief maybe had wrought it, and remorse. [Pippin] saw tears on that once tearless face, more unbearable than wrath."
I hadn't noticed Denethor's tears before. Maybe because I'm too hard on him?
What do you think about these tears? Do they make you pity Denethor?
Do you see real remorse there? Why does Pippin find them so unbearable?
As Gandalf says at the Grey Havens, "not all tears are an evil."
Does that apply to Denethor's tears? Who or what is he crying for? Is this Denethor "remembering" that he loves Faramir "before the end", as Gandalf predicted? If so, what do these tears say about that love?
As Pippin goes looking for Gandalf to get help for Faramir, he says to himself, "Quite likely he needs medicine more than tears."
Quite a practical lad, is Pippin! Do you think he's feeling any sympathy for Denethor?
So here we are, at the gates of the city, as Pippin finds Gandalf but shrinks back to watch the awe-inspiring moment as Gandalf stands facing his great adversary, the Witch-King.
Denethor has accused Gandalf of "folly" throughout this chapter, and tells Pippin
"Go now, and die in what way seems best to you. And with whom you will, even that friend whose folly brought you to this death."
Gandalf has not denied the charge of folly - in fact, he wryly repeats the charge to Pippin:
'Tell me,' [Pippin] said, 'is there any hope? For Frodo, I mean; or at least mostly for Frodo.'
Gandalf put his hand on Pippin's head. 'There never was much hope,' he answered. 'Just a fool's hope, as I have been told.'
And he doesn't react to Denethor's taunt about his ability to defeat the Witch-King either:
'Then, Mithrandir, you had a foe to match you,' said Denethor. 'For myself, I have long known who is the chief captain of the hosts of the Dark Tower. Is this all that you have returned to say? Or can it be that you have withdrawn because you are overmatched?'
Pippin trembled, fearing that Gandalf would be stung to sudden wrath, but his fear was needless. 'It might be so,' Gandalf answered softly.'But our trial of strength is not yet come. And if words spoken of old be true, not by the hand of man shall he fall...'
Gandalf knows that he's not going to be able to defeat the Witch-King. Yet he stands and defies him, with similar words to the ones when he defied the Balrog ('Go back to the abyss prepared for you! Go back!") At which point, even the Witch-King calls him a fool:
"Old fool! Do you not know death when you see it?"
Was Gandalf a fool to take on the Witch-King alone?
Could the Witch-King have killed Gandalf? Could this have been another Bridge of Khazad-Dum?
How great a gamble was Gandalf taking here? Couldn't everything have been lost if Gandalf had died?
Doesn't Denethor's approach of directing events from a safe distance make more sense?
But at that very moment, this particular "fool's hope" is rewarded – at that moment the cock crows, heralding the dawn, and Rohan arrives at last!
Does Gandalf know that dawn is about to break, and that holding out for those precious few minutes might make all the difference?
This reminds me of the troll episode in The Hobbit, transposed to the epic scale.
Do you have any favourite "dawn" episodes that fit this pattern?
I have to admit that to me Denethor seems to have the seeds of his destruction within him from the first time we meet him. He's urbane, civilized and rational, for sure. But rationality is not what counts in Middle-earth. Honesty, generosity, pity matter far more. Both Denethor and Faramir love ritual and courtesy, but Faramir's courtesy is tempered with a natural sympathy for others, while Denethor's courtesy seems to cover up a self-regarding hollowness. Perhaps what really makes the difference between Faramir and his father is that Faramir puts his life on the line for what he believes in. His father keeps himself safe from his enemies, justifying it as wisdom. Yet Gandalf claims that Denethor does know in his heart what his true duty is:
"Whereas your part is to go out to the battle of your City, where maybe death awaits you. This you know in your heart."
Am I judging Denethor too harshly? Does he have virtues that I've overlooked?
Why does Tolkien have the logical, safety-first approach turn out to be wrong, and the "foolish", risk-everything approach turn out to be successful? Is this just fantasy, or does it have applicability in the real world?
I've pretty much ignored the influence of the palantir and Denethor's desire for the Ring, because (as we have seen many times) these things don't really change one's underlying personality – they just amplify what's already there.
Do you agree, or do you believe that Sauron's influence via the palantir is the real cause of Denethor's downfall?
Thanks to everyone who reads and/or responds – and sorry this got so long!
Farewell, friends! I hear the call.
The ship’s beside the stony wall.
Foam is white and waves are grey;
beyond the sunset leads my way.
Bilbo's Last Song
|
|
|
Curious
Gondolin
Apr 27 2009, 5:12am
Post #2 of 9
(903 views)
Shortcut
|
Denethor: "[Sauron] uses others as his weapons. So do all great lords, if they are wise, Master Halfling."
Gandalf: "However that may be, the Captain of Despair does not press forward, yet. He rules rather according to the wisdom that you have just spoken, from the rear, driving his slaves in madness on before."
What do you think of this wisdom?
In the Primary World, it's one of the first rules of modern warfare. In heroic myths, such conduct is scorned.
Is Denethor's decision to use others as his weapons a logical one? Is it a wise one?
Not in Middle-earth, it isn't. Denethor lacks faith.
What do you think of Gandalf's line, "the wisdom you have just spoken"? Does he mean it, or is he being sarcastic?
He is being sarcastic.
Do you feel that Denethor is justified in his way of directing the defence?
No.
Should he have exposed himself to danger?
He should have done what Theoden did, and led his troops into battle. In Middle-earth, that was the right move. In the Primary World, not so much.
Denethor reveals that he is wearing armour and a sword beneath his robes - showing that his decision not to fight is not because of weakness.
How do you respond to this revelation? Do you find it surprising? admirable? self-deluding?
Yes. A bit surprising, consider what he has just said about how to lead troops from behind. Kind of admirable, although not nearly as much so as getting off the throne and going to battle. Self-deluding perhaps because he thinks wearing armor is enough.
It symbolizes the contradiction of Denethor; his strength is also his weakness. If he were a little less brilliant, or a little more feeble, perhaps he would listen to Gandalf. Perhaps Gandalf could have cured him, like he cured Theoden. But Denethor appears to be physically and mentally strong, and does not think he needs any advice.
Would confronting his enemy face to face, as Gandalf does, have saved Denethor's sanity? Would it have saved his soul?
But Denethor did confront his Enemy face to face, so to speak, in the palantir. That's what drove him insane. But I suppose you mean going to the Gate to confront the enemy like Gandalf did. That might have worked better.
Was Faramir wrong to act with generosity, even though his action endangers not just himself, but also his father and his people?
No, of course not. Again and again Tolkien returns to this theme of using judgment when enforcing the law.
Does it smack of selfishness to you that Denethor reminds Faramir first of all of his duty to himself?
No.
Is Denethor wrong to think of Gondor only? Isn't that his duty?
He's wrong in the context of a heroic fantasy governed by gods.
What do you think about these tears? Do they make you pity Denethor?
Yes, but not admire him.
Do you see real remorse there?
Yes, but no faith.
Why does Pippin find them so unbearable?
Because Denethor seemed so strong.
As Gandalf says at the Grey Havens, "not all tears are an evil."
Does that apply to Denethor's tears?
Yes and no. Crying over Faramir is not evil, and even suicidal tendencies are more a sign of sickness than evil.
Who or what is he crying for?
Faramir, himself.
Is this Denethor "remembering" that he loves Faramir "before the end", as Gandalf predicted?
Yes.
If so, what do these tears say about that love?
It's there.
Do you think [Pippin]'s feeling any sympathy for Denethor?
Sure, but more for Faramir.
Was Gandalf a fool to take on the Witch-King alone?
Not in the world of Middle-earth, he isn't. Maybe in the Primary World he would be.
Could the Witch-King have killed Gandalf?
Apparently so, although it is hard to see how. My theory is that the Witch-king is channeling Sauron himself, and is vested with Sauron's power and magic.
Could this have been another Bridge of Khazad-Dum?
Yes.
How great a gamble was Gandalf taking here?
Great, it seems.
Couldn't everything have been lost if Gandalf had died?
No, because Gandalf has faith in the Higher Powers.
Doesn't Denethor's approach of directing events from a safe distance make more sense?
Not in Tolkien's Secondary World, it doesn't.
Does Gandalf know that dawn is about to break, and that holding out for those precious few minutes might make all the difference?
No.
This reminds me of the troll episode in The Hobbit, transposed to the epic scale.
Interesting.
Do you have any favourite "dawn" episodes that fit this pattern?
Dawn drives the Black Riders away in Crickhollow and Bree.
Am I judging Denethor too harshly? Does he have virtues that I've overlooked? As you say, "rationality is not what counts in Middle-earth." I think you judge him correctly.
Why does Tolkien have the logical, safety-first approach turn out to be wrong, and the "foolish", risk-everything approach turn out to be successful? Is this just fantasy, or does it have applicability in the real world?
It has some applicability in the real world. Leading from the front does improve morale among those who follow, and also implies that no one man is indispensable. However the strategy worked better before sharpshooters could use guns to kill such leaders: it worked better for Alexander the Great or Richard the Lion-hearted than for Admiral Nelson or Stonewall Jackson, let alone Dwight D. Eisenhower. However, even as recently as the American Civil War it was considered a point of honor to ride on horseback up and down the battle lines without concern for enemy fire. That kind of honor did not survive World War II, because it was just too easy to pick off targets from a distance, and foolish to make yourself a target.
I've pretty much ignored the influence of the palantir and Denethor's desire for the Ring, because (as we have seen many times) these things don't really change one's underlying personality – they just amplify what's already there.
Do you agree, or do you believe that Sauron's influence via the palantir is the real cause of Denethor's downfall?
Denethor's use of the palantir is a symptom of his greatest weakness: hubris, or excessive pride. Using the palantir accelerates his fall, but excessive pride causes it. Denethor's desire for the Ring is similar, although since he never gets close to the Ring I don't think the Ring directly affected him.
|
|
|
simplyaven
Hithlum
Apr 27 2009, 11:21pm
Post #3 of 9
(883 views)
Shortcut
|
What do you think of this wisdom?
Cheap attempt to justify confusion, lack of vision and cowardy.
Is Denethor's decision to use others as his weapons a logical one? Is it a wise one?
Logical - yes, from Denethor's point of view and considering what kind of person he is (as developed by the author).
What do you think of Gandalf's line, "the wisdom you have just spoken"? Does he mean it, or is he being sarcastic?
I think it is both actually. He is sarcastic towards the quality of a person who would behave like that. But he means it in the sense that Denethor resembles Sauron whom Gandalf does not respect. Or denethor rather tries to resemble what he thinks would be the right behaviour of "the Ruler", of one with great power. Denethor is not the first man with power who got the lessons of history wrongly.
Do you feel that Denethor is justified in his way of directing the defence? Should he have exposed himself to danger?
Justified - no. He should have done what a noble king/stuard/ruler would do. Namely, to join his men in defeating what was his job to defeat. In difference from others, I find no excuse for such a behaviour - and it doesn't matter if it happens in real or imaginery world. Cowards are simply cowards. Or fools. or both.
How do you respond to this revelation? Do you find it surprising? admirable? self-deluding?
Another cheap attempt to show himself as something more than a coward. Armour has no place in the throne hall. It's pity what he does.
Would confronting his enemy face to face, as Gandalf does, have saved Denethor's sanity? Would it have saved his soul?
Yes, it would have saved him both ways. Before his own eyes too.
Was Faramir wrong to act with generosity, even though his action endangers not just himself, but also his father and his people?
No. I agree Tolkien created a complicated conflict here just like in real life things are rarely black and white. Still, since the bet was Middle Earth and not Gondor, Faramir did right. However, I acknowledge the extremely difficult choice in such situation - Faramir could easily feel like betraying his own people.
Does it smack of selfishness to you that Denethor reminds Faramir first of all of his duty to himself?
No. It's more of a father/son behaviour.
Is Denethor wrong to think of Gondor only? Isn't that his duty?
He is not wrong but he lacks the broader vision which should be part of his qualities. Gondor, besides his land, was also the gate to Middle Earth. He was right to think of his people but he had to try and think a little bit more. Also, it rather makes me think he was trying to work on Faramir's mind in a very nasty way leading to guilt than really thinking of Gondor and his men.
What do you think about these tears? Do they make you pity Denethor?
Yes, of course, just like I would feel sorry for any parent who has lost their child (or believes so).
Do you see real remorse there? Why does Pippin find them so unbearable?
I think it's the feeling of total loss that makes Denethor cry. The waking-up thought that all his world turns into ruins in front of his eyes.
Was Gandalf a fool to take on the Witch-King alone?
Not at all. People in real life who jumped before a car to save an old lady or challenge a group of apparently drunk men dragging a young woman are also risking a lot, possibly even death. But they are still doing it. I disagree such behaviour is saved for myths and tales. I very much hope we are not there yet. if we are, it would speak very badly of our so called "civilization".
Could the Witch-King have killed Gandalf? Could this have been another Bridge of Khazad-Dum?
I've never believed that. Gandalf just says "it might be", but it might not. He doesn't give an exact answer, he just answers a stupid comment as wisely as he could. As Wiki's strength was coming from sauron at the time, I believe Gandalf strength was coming from teh Valar or even from Eru since he was sent back.
How great a gamble was Gandalf taking here? Couldn't everything have been lost if Gandalf had died?
It was a great gamble but not greater than those regular people take in the situations I described above. I don't think everything would have been lost but I also don't think gandalf would have been allowed to die.
Doesn't Denethor's approach of directing events from a safe distance make more sense?
No, as I said it's cheap. Also, I disagree in modern warfare this is necessary the case and it is wiser. During the WW II there were generals (not to speak about colonels, captains, etc.) who fought at the front line despite the fact they were, of course, targets. I find them wiser actually. Because during all wars there have been a number of high positioned army men who were killed in their offices, on their way home, in their homes, on the way to their mistresses, etc. A war happens not only on the battle field. If one gets involved, he should be aware that death is a very possible outcome, either way.
Does Gandalf know that dawn is about to break, and that holding out for those precious few minutes might make all the difference?
I'm able to tell when dawn is coming, I don't see how Gandalf who spent much more time under the skies would have missed it. Legolas was telling what had happened in a battle reading the skies, Gandalf should have been better.
Do you have any favourite "dawn" episodes that fit this pattern?
Legolas reading the skies and their signs, it was two times as far as I remember (pardon me if I'm confusing the movie and the book as the latter is not with me to check).
Am I judging Denethor too harshly? Does he have virtues that I've overlooked?
No. However, I sometimes find myself forgetting there are no simple answers in such a situation (I'm not saying you're doing the same)!
Why does Tolkien have the logical, safety-first approach turn out to be wrong, and the "foolish", risk-everything approach turn out to be successful? Is this just fantasy, or does it have applicability in the real world?
Risk often wins more than safe behaviour, I've been there, so yes - it happens in real life too! 
Culinary journey through Middle Earth continues! Join us on April 30th on the Main board for the renewed thread!
Middle earth recipes archive
I believe
|
|
|
sador
Gondolin
Apr 28 2009, 3:02pm
Post #4 of 9
(911 views)
Shortcut
|
|
A few answers, some to the point
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
This is the first bunch. It's a lot! Between you and Curious, I'll never get through this!
I hope to answer Curious' questions up to the final showdown at the Gate next (I've actually copied both of your posts to my lap-top, so I could ponder a couple of questions in free moments), and then the rest of your questions, Tolkien Forever's, and the second part of Curious for the last - mainly because I feel he dealt the most with the theme of hope at the end of the chapter.
So here goes:
Here's the "grey fool", as Denethor calls him, and the horse of the "primitive" Rohirrim, standing steadfast in the face of terror, reminding Pippin of the noble images on the tombs of Rath Dínen.
Meanwhile, the hyper-civilized, hyper-logical Denethor has given way to madness, and with his fiery, "heathen" death is about to desecrate and destroy those very "graven images in Rath Dínen" that symbolize civilization he is heir to. Wonderful observation!
However that may be, the Captain of Despair does not press forward, yet. He rules rather according to the wisdom that you have just spoken, from the rear, driving his slaves in madness on before. What do you think of this wisdom?
Curious answered correctly about the difference between ancient and nodern warfare. With the advent of deadly weapons which might be fired from a distance, the idea of a leader winning glory by exposing himself in the front lines, lost its charm.
A few centuries ago, the general was the best-trained and heaviest-arnoured combat fighter in the army, so it made sense for him to be in the brunt of the fight. Communications were worse, and the general’s standard was necessary for the troops to know where to go, and once again, the long-range weapons were less deadly (but remember Achilles, his armour an his manner of death – quite like Smaug).
Is Denethor's decision to use others as his weapons a logical one? Is it a wise one?
As long as he has an undisputed Captain of his family, it is – even in the framework of Middle-earth.
What do you think of Gandalf's line, "the wisdom you have just spoken"? Does he mean it, or is he being sarcastic?
Oh, I am sure that Gandalf is being sarcastic – but must point out that he didn’t quite endanger himself until the final confrontation with the Witch-king. Yes, he took messages to Faramir, escorted the wounded, and confronted the lesser Nazgul when they were without any foot soldiers to hurt him accidentally – like Merry did to the Witch-king.
And in the Battle of Five Armies, Gandalf did far less than Denethor does now.
Do you feel that Denethor is justified in his way of directing the defence? Should he have exposed himself to danger?
Well, how much did Theoden do in Helm’s Deep? He also hid in the Hornburg.
But I do not think he was quite justified – especially in this siege, in which it seems those on the walls are actually quite safe, if they do not expose themselves needlessly.
Denethor reveals that he is wearing armour and a sword beneath his robes - showing that his decision not to fight is not because of weakness.
How do you respond to this revelation? Do you find it surprising? admirable? self-deluding?
I find the rationale he gives fascinating: it is a way of keeping his vigour, and not succumbing to old age.
Note that this is exactly what Gandalf tells Theoden: “Your hands will recover their strength if they grasped a sword again”.
So, following Curious’ line of reasoning, had Denethor been softer, and allowed himself to slip into the mean dotage Theoden did – Gandalf would have given him this very advice, and offered him a chance of salvation!
But no; in ‘Minas Tirith’, Gandalf himself says “when you will fall into dotage, you will die”. Denethor cannot afford salvation this way.
Would confronting his enemy face to face, as Gandalf does, have saved Denethor's sanity? Would it have saved his soul?
It might have; it worked for Thorin, and arguably for Boromir as well.
But if, as I speculated in my answers to Kimi and Saelind, Denethor fears most of all being pierced by a Morgul-blade and becoming a wraith – he fears to risk this road to salvation, too.
Was Faramir wrong to act with generosity, even though his action endangers not just himself, but also his father and his people?
Generosity? Rashness, more likely – although Denethor probably did not know exactly that Faramir felt bound by the words he dropped to Frodo, about not using the Ring if he found it by chance!
But anyway, these are exactly the decisions one can never know if they proved right or wrong. Aragorn says (in ‘The Last Debate’) that his challanging Sauron in the palantir was based on his underestimating Sauron’s possible response – so was he wrong? I assume all will say he was justified.
One can never be sure how to judge in a hard place; and as Faramir himself said (in ‘The Forbidden Pool’) he would clearly deserve death, if a wrong choice led to disaster. Well, his choice came within a hairbreadth of leading to a disaster; and he came within a hairbreadth of death.
Perhaps the narrow escape proves that he was right after all; but I’m sure Faramir himself didn’t know that, and felt an acute guilt for his choice – which is how I read Gandalf’s last words to him. That’s one thing I felt the movie captured well.
Does it smack of selfishness to you that Denethor reminds Faramir first of all of his duty to himself?
No. But it hints at the essentially clannish element among Gondorian nobility, putting one’s allegiance to his family first, rather than to an abstract ‘nation’.
Is Denethor wrong to think of Gondor only? Isn't that his duty?
Denethor is thinking as a secular ruler. Gandalf as someone responsible for all Middle-earth – as a Pope, actually.
And no, Denethor is not wrong in thinking of Gondor only; he is wrong in seeing the struggle as a personal duel between Sauron and himself, and in not subjecting himself to the broader policy of Gandalf.
What do you think about these tears? Do they make you pity Denethor?
Oh, I pitied him long before! In the first time we met him, when he mourned for Boromir.
Do you see real remorse there? Why does Pippin find them so unbearable?
Pippin is effectively a child here (or actually in the middle of a crash course of growing up). Kids always find their elders’ tears unbearable.
Gandalf says at the Grey Havens, "not all tears are an evil."
Does that apply to Denethor's tears?
I’m not sure what they will lead to – if to remorse or despair; and I think the balance hangs until the very last moment.
Who or what is he crying for?
The loss of everything he was struggling for.
Is this Denethor "remembering" that he loves Faramir "before the end", as Gandalf predicted?
Yes, of course.
If so, what do these tears say about that love?
It finally breaks him, which adversity couldn’t.
Quite a practical lad, is Pippin! Do you think he's feeling any sympathy for Denethor?
He did, when he was there; but now he realises Denethor has degenerated into more a madman than a lord (as he tells Beregond). His present concern is only for Faramir.
Thanks a lot!
"What is all this uproar in the forest tonight?" - the Lord of the Eagles
(This post was edited by Ataahua on May 3 2009, 8:24pm)
|
|
|
FarFromHome
Doriath
Apr 29 2009, 6:21pm
Post #5 of 9
(877 views)
Shortcut
|
The following quotes from your answers make me a bit uncomfortable:
Is Denethor's decision to use others as his weapons a logical one? Is it a wise one?
Not in Middle-earth, it isn't. Denethor lacks faith.
He should have done what Theoden did, and led his troops into battle. In Middle-earth, that was the right move. In the Primary World, not so much.
He's wrong in the context of a heroic fantasy governed by gods.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't like to believe that the moral of the story Tolkien tells is only valid in a make-believe world. For me, the underlying principles have to have relevance to the real world or the story becomes nothing more than wish-fulfilling entertainment. And that's just not how I see LotR.
Although it's not normally literally possible for leaders to stand at the head of their troops any more (although simplyaven mentions some 20th century examples of this kind of courage), I do think that the principle still applies. Look at the difference in the way Bush and Giuliani responded to 9/11, for example. True leadership still means stepping up and exposing yourself to danger (whether literal or figurative) at crucial times.
I think that probably you agree on the applicability of the story at this level. Perhaps the only thing I'm really trying to say is that, even by the standards of the real world, Denethor's behaviour is not that of a true, first-rate leader. Lots of people do behave like that in the real world, of course, and in the real world they can get away with it. But that doesn't make the behaviour any more defensible.
Farewell, friends! I hear the call.
The ship’s beside the stony wall.
Foam is white and waves are grey;
beyond the sunset leads my way.
Bilbo's Last Song
|
|
|
Curious
Gondolin
Apr 29 2009, 8:37pm
Post #6 of 9
(869 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Let's just say that there is debate on the subject.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I do think Tolkien was clear that what is wise in Middle-earth is not necessarily considered wise in the Primary World, and vice versa. And for the purposes of his fantasy, it was not really necessary for Middle-earth to be consistent with the Primary World. It was enough if Middle-earth was internally consistent.
But Tolkien did enjoy blurring the line between fantasy and reality, and perhaps this is one area where he wanted to question the established wisdom of real-world leadership. Certainly Tolkien was himself a devout believer, and wanted to suggest that faith is not only applicable in a fantasy, although it may take a different form in the Primary World.
|
|
|
simplyaven
Hithlum
Apr 30 2009, 3:19am
Post #7 of 9
(886 views)
Shortcut
|
|
How is the form of faith different? And courage?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I'm not sure if my own Christianity (faith) makes it difficult for me to see the difference but how is faith in LOTR different in form from the faith in real (Primary) world? Did Tolkien discuss this anywhere in his letters (sorry for not have read them yet!)? Because I don't really see differences between the moral values influenced by my faith which I believe in and practice and those of Tolkien's positive characters...
Same goes for the rest you commented - courage, for example. It may not be necessary for ME to be consistent with real life bit I don't see how Tolkien would understand Denethor's behaviour either in ME or in real life. A man is either noble or not... Coward or not. I think. What you wrote above sounded like modern warfare is wiser because leaders stay in their offices or leaders are wiser because they do so which is simply not true if we consider WWII modern warfare. Even these days there are leaders who fight together with their men (you may dislike their ideas and not read about them but for the sake of this argument, they do fight next to their men). And, even if all leaders stay in their offices and we assume, which is also untrue, they can't be killed there, ordinary people still behave like ancient heroes sometimes. By no means I can think of such people as "unwise" only because they were "foolish" enough to risk their own well being to save someone else. On the contrary, I'm proud of it and I'm sure Tolkien would be much delighted to see it hasn't disappeared yet.
Culinary journey through Middle Earth continues! Join us on April 30th on the Main board for the renewed thread!
Middle earth recipes archive
My rambling on food, cooking, wine and other life pleasures
I believe
|
|
|
Curious
Gondolin
Apr 30 2009, 6:07am
Post #8 of 9
(858 views)
Shortcut
|
|
It's not the virtue that is different, but the result, perhaps.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Or perhaps not. Perhaps I simply lack faith. But my point is that Middle-earth only needs to be internally consistent. What is wise in Middle-earth does not have to be wise in the Primary World for the fantasy to work.
|
|
|
sador
Gondolin
Apr 30 2009, 9:50am
Post #9 of 9
(941 views)
Shortcut
|
|
A few answers (second installment)
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Was Gandalf a fool to take on the Witch-King alone?
He had no choice. Remember the exchange between Gandalf and Erestor at the Council of Elrond? Erestor called the harebrained idea of sending Frodo to Mordor the way of despair, and he comes near to call it ‘folly’; Gandalf didn’t mind at all the accusation of folly, but vehemently denied despair.
Could the Witch-King have killed Gandalf?
As I’ve argued here, we must assume this is about to happen.
And if he couldn’t have – the whole scene is pointless.
Could this have been another Bridge of Khazad-Dum?
This seems to be the best Gandalf could hope for, at the moment. But note that Gandalf did raise his sword against the Balrog, but not against the Witch-king.
How great a gamble was Gandalf taking here? Couldn't everything have been lost if Gandalf had died?
Gandalf took the real gamble in sending Frodo to Mordor. All the rest is of minor importance.
And as far as Gandalf knows, he is the only one who could attempt to stop the Witch-king, and buy Frodo more time.
Doesn't Denethor's approach of directing events from a safe distance make more sense?
What events? You cannot confront the Witch-king from a safe distance!
Note that the Lord of the Nazgul himself directed events from a safe distance, until he himself was needed to break the Gate; I suppose he went to Theoden in order to preserve him from death – for a worse fate.
Does Gandalf know that dawn is about to break, and that holding out for those precious few minutes might make all the difference?
Ah, you’re giving away the whole point of this scene!
In ‘The Ride of the Rohirrim’, we here about the wind changing – first by Ghan-buri-Ghan, then by Widfara, and finally even Merry feels it.
In ‘The Last Debate’, Gimli describes feeling it, and possibly Legolas felt it first.
In ‘The Land of Shadow’ Sam feels it.
But here – there is no mention of the wind changing. Without it we would not feel Gandalf is about to fall, as we should. Such artistry!
Note that in ‘The Pyre of Denethor’, Denethor speaks of “the wind of your hope” – he does feel the wind, but assumes it is a part of Sauron’s machinations, to bring up the Black Fleet – or at least that it is a false hope, and that once Sauron has recovered the Ring he can afford to loose the breaks. So Denethor did feel it.
Did Gandalf? I’m pretty sure he did; he didn’t know what it foreboded, but it might have given him hope.
Did the Witch-king? Probably; that might have been a reason for him to intensify the attack against the gate (although Tolkien attributes it to the City’s resistance being less than he expected). But that didn’t cast any doubts on his feeling this was his hour, and that he was about to destroy Gandalf.
Do you have any favourite "dawn" episodes that fit this pattern?
Of course it is supposed to recall Peter’s betrayal.
But no, I don’t. Curious is right about the Crickhollow scene being a forerunner of this, but it is really nothing to compare to this.
And to his list I would add another dawn – the dawn at the end of ‘The Uruk-hai’, and the charge of the Rohirrim; and also in Helm’s Deep, although the beauty of the passage in ‘The Uruk-hai’ far surpasses any natural description in ‘Helm’s Deep’, which focuses on Theoden and his charge.
Am I judging Denethor too harshly?
Perhaps; but so is Tolkien, in appendix A, where he described Faramir as being as farsighted as his father, but whatever he sees moves him to pity and not to scorn.
Does he have virtues that I've overlooked?
Well, he knew Frodo was going to Cirith Ungol, and did not betray this knowledge to Sauron – whether he knew Frodo was captured or not.
Regarding the list you made above – I disagree with you about Denethor being dishonest. There is no reason to assume he is double-dealing with anyone (apart from not telling anyone about his using the palantir, but that’s nothing more than prudence!) while Gandalf clearly is scheming behind his back.
And there is no reason to assume Denethor is not generous – the scene you refered to above involves him scolding Faramir for his gentleness, not for generosity.
But Denethor is indeed pityless, and that is what ultimately damns him. In fact, he is even utterly lacking in self-pity, which normally is considered a weakness – but Denethor has no such external weaknesses. If he did indulge in self-pity, he would not have committed suicide – in fact, he might have gone down to the Gate to look for at least a glorious death, like Theoden did.
But Denethor realises the stakes are to become a wraith (see my answer above about the Witch-king going to Theoden) – and he prefers to taking his own life, and Faramir’s too.
In fact, Faramir does indulge in self-pity, unlike his father. But that is the other side of being able to pity others: to pity is to accept weakness, and see it as mitigating faults.
Denethor is incapable of pity, and therefore he scorns the weakness of others. And he is incapable of self-pity, therefore incapable of humility.
Why does Tolkien have the logical, safety-first approach turn out to be wrong, and the "foolish", risk-everything approach turn out to be successful? Is this just fantasy, or does it have applicability in the real world?
You’ve already argued this point with Curious.
I do not know, of course – but I want to believe you are right, and that faith does move mountains.
I've pretty much ignored the influence of the palantir and Denethor's desire for the Ring, because (as we have seen many times) these things don't really change one's underlying personality – they just amplify what's already there.
Do you agree, or do you believe that Sauron's influence via the palantir is the real cause of Denethor's downfall?
I tend to agree; or more correctly, I think Denethor’s faults led to his using the palantir, and his belief that he would be a safer guardian of the Ring (I disagree about his desiring it for military use – although he would have eventually fallen, just as Gandalf or Elrond would have).
Thanks to everyone who reads and/or responds – and sorry this got so long! Well, I for one enjoyed it a lot. But the sheer length might have been a reason for the dearth of responses.
Thank you, FarFromHome! May I say I’ve been waiting for this ever since this_thread?
(and by the way, on a different topic – my answer to weaver’s post in the movie board applies to your post as well)
"What is all this uproar in the forest tonight?" - the Lord of the Eagles
(This post was edited by sador on Apr 30 2009, 9:52am)
|
|
|
|
|
