Numenorean Blood

[Gimli's Rage]

Numenorean Blood


A central theme in Tolkien’s trilogy is one that Jackson’s films go out of their way to downplay, if not completely ignore. According to Tolkien’s detailed mythology (see The Silmarillion as well as the trilogy), the Numenorean descendants of Aragorn’s time have become weaker of mind, body and spirit because their ancestors’ blood “mingled with the blood of lesser men”.
Essentially, Tolkien’s Numenorean humans were a race of beings blessed with gifts from the Valar (God), and were genetically superior (a genetically superior race) to the men roaming Middle Earth in Aragorn’s day.
Tolkien’s in-depth characterization of them suggests a people similar to the mythical Aryan race that Hitler was so fond of harkening back to.

What is that you’re thinking right now?

Yes, well you can be sure that Mr. Jackson didn’t intend for his viewers to be thinking about any such thing. These are taboo ideas. Concepts that conjure up images of fascism, Nazi propaganda and any number of other fanatical lunacies one can imagine.
Filmmakers who have “examined” the vagaries of genetic influence on society have invariably supported the “American Dream” that we all have within us the potential for greatness – that bloodlines are irrelevant.
One excellent example is Gattaca, in which genetic tampering improves physical and mental attributes but cannot, in the end, compete with willpower, drive, ingenuity and a healthy impulse to cheat the establishment. Another film that overtly ridicules the concept of royal bloodlines is Unforgiven. Richard Harris’s bounty hunting character delivers a maniacal thesis on the power of genetic inheritance just prior to having the English crumpets kicked out of him. He and his somewhat bloodied superiority are hauled away in a cage.
I suspect that Tolkien would have agreed in principle to most of what the Harris character was espousing. Sitting in his Oxford office in the mid-1950’s, with a beautiful young queen just ascended to the throne of England, Tolkien was very much a royalist. I think he firmly believed in the importance of genetic lineage, particularly with regard to leaders.
It seems clear from the canon of Tolkien’s works that he intended for Aragorn and Faramir to represent the nobler aspects of their race. Tolkien endowed these two heroes of Gondor with a “biding nobility” inherited from their ancestors, a strength of character that distinguishes each from the men around him, a presence of mind and body that comes not only from character and experience, but from the very blood that flows in their veins. While the Numenoreans were susceptible to temptation, as their eventual downfall shows, Tolkien intended for Aragorn and Faramir to represent the lost seed of Numenorean greatness.
So where does this leave Peter Jackson in his bid to translate the two characters onto the big screen?
Jackson himself has said that he chose to characterize them as fallible because all the other characters were tempted by the ring’s power and it would have been illogical for them to be immune. What he didn’t say is that it would have been illogical unless he wrote the reason for their immunity into the screenplay. He couldn’t do this because the rules of politically correct filmmaking forbid it.
Our modern mythmaking shuns the very idea of nobility being associated with blood. We like our heroes fallible. We want them to succeed despite their shortcomings, not because of the blood in their veins. After all, who in the audience has such blood, and how then can anyone identify with such a character?
Peter Jackson knows this about his audience and so he wrote a screenplay that gives them what they want.
Unfortunately for those of us who respect Tolkien’s vision, the director has filled these visually stunning films with all kinds of blood, but he has chosen to ignore the blood of Numenor.

[markedel]

I agree that Jackson has ignored the importance of the Numenorian inheritance. LOTR goal is not to support any type of racial views, but the importance of numenor as "rehabilitated man" (they're not genetically superior-they're restored to what should have been before the morgoth induced fall) should not be ignored.

Jackson may simply not grasp that theme of Middle Earth, though that would make his claim of being a dedicated fan of the books doubtful.

[LuthienTinuviel]

Wow, that was really in depth. I never really looked at it that way before, but now that you mention it.... hmm.
very well done and welcome to the moot.

[Gerbil]

I doubt it was political, I just don't think PJ appreciated what the blood of Numenor stands for.

Aragorn's 'fallibility' is not only innaccurate, it's so overly played (rejecting his lineage etc) it's excruciating.

Let's not forget Denethor either - Gandalf says that the blood of Numenor very nearly runs true in both Denethor and Faramir. They simply take different abilities from this 'bonus'.
Denethor is actually a very strong and wise character, and very powerful in his own right. Sauron defeated him by making him think defeat was inevitable. Denethor nonetheless was still opposed to Sauron's every action, both historically and politically.

Denethor is, to me, the example of Numenorean blood 'failing', his pride is comparable to that of the later Numenoreans before the downfall.
For some reason, pride definately became the weak point of them as they blindly progressed to their own destruction.

Faramir was 'lucky', his blood gave him wiseness and understanding (similar to Aragorn methinks, although smaller in stature and inherent ability).

All in all, whether you think of Aragorn's etc 'nobility' and strength to come from the bloodline or elsewhere, I wish they'd simply kept in Aragorn's actual motivations somehow - this doubting Thomas deserves to get his arse kicked quite frankly.

[squinteyedsoutherner]

Denethor's failure is most importantly his inability to see the central theme of the story,(that great strength and courage can reside in what seems, at first, to be small and weak) and his foil in this is Aragorn who does. I think blood is important in this story but it always takes a backseat to the motivations of the characters. Both Denethor and Boromir oppose Sauron, but that is not enough. Tolkien is most interested in the character's ability to see his theme,(as expressed through the quest, who supports the decision to send Frodo to Mount Doom and who does not) and it is along these lines that they succeed or fail regardless of their bloodlines. There are many characters of "royal blood" who are on the wrong side of the theme and as a result end in ruin, Isildur being the most obvious. Not all of the following characters are of royal blood, but when you start to look at the motivations of characters in this book as they relate to it's theme you begin to see why Tolkien was such a great writer (far beyond just the creation of his mythology)

Saruman vs Gandalf
Isildur vs Elrond
Denethor vs Aragorn
Boromir vs Faramir
Gollum vs Frodo
Smeagol vs Sam (the split foil here is my single favorite device in the book)


Also, one has to remember that Numenor was destroyed because of the actions of it's people, and those that escaped did so because they had not "fallen" not because of their blood. And no, I don't think Jackson is aware of any of this whatsoever.

[Gerbil]

The point is that Numenor blood is not 'perfect' - it brings rise to things like pride etc. which come out in varying degrees.
Denethor was ruled by his pride, others were not.

Numenor fell because the ruling party became too prideful.
The Faithful escaped because they wanted no part in the actions of the majority.

But pride, intelligence, strength, long lifespans etc. all these and more are attributes to Numenorean blood. But the relative strengths of these attributes changes from person to person.

Hence, Denethor and Faramir have almost pure blood through some quirk. Unfortunately, in Denethor he also got a fair helping of the negative sides of his 'inheritence'. Faramir did a lot better out of it.

This 'theme' is something you yourself see in LotR - I haven't seen it in your way, and to compare 1 person directly to another is a device you've come up with - I don't believe it's inherent on the story.

Each to his own, after all.

[squinteyedsoutherner]

Literary foil

"One character that serves as a contrast to another" "A literary device used to enhance a character by contrast"

With all due respect Gebil, the theme I wrote above with respect to "unexpected strength of the weak" is something Tolkien discussed often in relation to this book's central theme. Literary "foil" (balancing characters against each other) is present in just about every great work of fiction, and taught at every level of English from high school to graduate school, and it is clearly present throughout Tolkien's work. I wish I could say I thought it up, but Shakespeare beat me to it. If you want to argue what I have outlined above is accidental, be my guest. I would argue it is no more accidental than it is in the work of Shakespeare or Dickens.(Please don't try to argue these guys didn't use literary foil in their writing) Pride is an important element in Tolkien's work, but the central theme of this book is more than "pride will bring you ruin" and the cast of characters and their relation to each other is part of a well thought out structure in this book.

[Artanis]

I believe Tolkien did not only balance characters against each other, also the qualities of the different races in Middle-Earth are balanced and seem to represent different aspects of human nature.

[Gerbil]

]Pride is an important element in Tolkien's work, but the central theme of this book is more than "pride will bring you ruin" and the cast of characters and their relation to each other is part of a well thought out structure in this book.

I'll thank you not to invent quotes that you then attribute to me in future.

I'm not arguing against Tolkien's general theme.
As far as I'm aware though, this thread was about the blood of Numenor and how it (or, in the films, doesn't) affect people and their motivations.

I don't give a rat's arse about who else has used literary foil, nor how it works or it's supposed to.

Obviously LotR is a book of opposites, but as far as I'm concerned, it's 'simply' good against evil - within this setting everyone is able to go about attempting whatever they wish as their character sees fit. I do not, for example, think that Aragorn is Denethor's 'literary foil', nor do I see where you get Isildur vs Elrond.
And, asking another person who believes in similar things to you, I am sure they'd come back with different pairs. It's this part that you are reading into it yourself.

Obviously characters must be different, and opposed to each other, or there'd be no story. Directly correlating people as you have done seems overly simplistic, and doesn't add anything to someone's (eg my) enjoyment of the book / film.

That you wish to see these things and it helps you get more from the book, so be it - I'm very happy for you. But it's like arguing about what two towers are referred to in part 2 of LotR - everyone has their own ideas and swears blind they are right.
Everyone is free to believe what they wish, and good luck to 'em. Doesn't necessarily mean they are right though.

[markedel]

Actual the flaw of numenor is inherant. Men fell from the start, numenor was a rehabilitation from the fall. However it is impossible for the Valar to fully rehabilitate the fall. The sins of numenor were arguably that of all men, it's just that unlike the other men (who merely were conquered by Sauron) Numenor died spectacularly.

[squinteyedsoutherner]

"I don't give a rat's arse about who else has used literary foil, nor how it works or is supposed to"

"as far as I'm concerned it's (LoTR) simply good against evil-within this setting everyone is able to go about attempting whatever they wish as their character sees fit

Nevermind then.

[Gerbil]

Blimey

[Gimli's Rage]

Hi all,

I just want to say I've found this thread very thought provoking. In hindsight I think that Jackson altered the characters of Aragorn and Faramir mostly for the purpose of creating more dramatic tension in a formulaic "Hollywood" way. I'll be interested to see in ROTK how the two characters are portrayed. I'm expecting Aragorn to suddenly leap into his fully realized potential.

Nonetheless, the films have inevitably downplayed the underlying theme of bloodlines. Another example of this is where Arwen gives Aragorn the little pep talk about how he is not Isildur and mustn't fear succumbing to Isildur's weakness. This is in fact a direct challenge to the idea of inherited strength or weakness and it doesn't exist in the book.

Anyway, gotta go.

Very impressive site -- Gimli will return!!! (and not just for comic relief)