Christian Virtues Tolkien

[Mercutio]

Most people would agree that Tolkien's works involved in at least some way Christianity (or Catholicism).

One of these was in its virtues: faithfulness, courage, justice, courtesy, kindness, self-control, long-suffereing, costly repentance, ture humility--in short, righteousness, agape.

Especially in the Lord of the Rings, Tolkien portrays what righteousness looks like, and gives the reader a desire to be righteous. It is a vision of truth and virtue that is completely countercultural.

However, this spirit of the book is not faitfully represnted in the Lord of the Rings movies:

Strength, Goodness, Simplicity

Elrond--powerful, but nothing if not courteous. He may be stern, but should always be kind. The movie only portrays that strength with a scowl--he has "chip on his shoulder", a grievance with Isildur who did not destroy the Ring when he had the chance. The elves are suppsoedly renowned for merriment and singing, but he never smiles and is alwasys acerbic and irascible.

The hobbits suffer the worst, though. Tolkien's hobbits are simple but virturous. We laugh at them with the warm laughter of finding a friend in an unexpected place; they also win small battles of friendship and loyalty that finally add up to great victories over evil. Merry and Pippin are reduced to mere buffoonery and comic relief. Insteda of laughing in sympathy with them over their desire for more meals in the day, we laugh at their slapstick antics as Pippin gets hit in the head with an apple. Loveable, yes, but not to be taken seriously.

Frodo is undercut in two scenes:
1. Council of Elrond--in the books and the movies Frodo's offer is with the same words: "I will take the Ring, though I do not know the way." In Tolkien's presentation, this sacrifice is made in the midst of silence. The wise have come to an impasse in their deliberations. Because they are wise, they are not willing to impose such a heavy burden on anyone. They all sit with downcast eyes until Frodo the halfing offers himself on the altar of necessity. The movies turns this willing self-sacrifice into a brawl, where the hatreds and prejudices of the Elves, Dwarves, and Men devolve almost into a melee. Frodo makes his offer in this pathetic wasteland of virtue as a way of breaking up the fight. The other characters at the Council are reduced to fueding adolescents, not the wise and noble of Middle-earth. One wonders how they can possibly form a cohesive and supportive Fellowship of the Ring to support the halfing Ring-bearer, since he seems to be only a compromise candidate among the other races.

2. His decision to leave the Fellowship and go to Mordor alone. This is a complex decision: In the book, the chief reason is the protection of the rest of the Company. He knows they will follow him faithfully anywhere, and he does not want them to succumb to the power of the Ring. He leaves them, trying to save them from their own virtue. This too is lost in the movie. Sam insists on accompanying him (also in the book), yet Frodo recieves permission and assistance from his other friends to go to Mordor without them. His decision is based solely on the fear of the Ring's power over the Company (and perhaps its effect on his own safety), and the other members are deprived of their opportunity to be righteous. They have abandoned their responsiblity.

Evil & Temptation

In Tolkien's Middle Earth, evil is simply the rejection and the absence of goodness and virtue. In the book, Elrond speaks "For nothing is evil in the beginning. Even Sauron was not so."

If nothing s evil in the beginning, then the twisting of the character to evil is the long process of the soul's rejection of goodness and virtue. In some one powerful, this leads to Sauron. In some one not powerful, it leads to Gollum.

One cannot expect the movie to portray this entire process of decline into evil, but one can expect it to capture the essence of temptation in the scenes in which it is addressed. In two parallel scenes, Galadriel and Bilbo are tempted by the evil power of the ring. In the book, both temptation scenses are masterful renditions of the seduction of evil. The two characters musst master themselves, their own desire for power, not some external force that seeks to dominate over them. Jackson, however, imposes animated special effects over both characters in their moments of temptation. It is a visual imposition that seems to imply they are "not themselves", that they are "overwhelmed" by somtheing from without.

And (very briefly) the Orcs. In Tolkien's depiction, they are Men and Elves,twisted and broken over centuries. Hordes. Individually faceless, but not particularly threatening. Not individual personalities. Jackson misses this point. He spends huge amounts of time on individual orcs. They have become persons to be reckoned with. Their lack of virtue made them personalities, individually important. They only place they are really frightening as a horde is in the mines of Moria.

Finally...Saruman. He is a noble character in the process of being corrupted by his own desire for mastery. He only plays at submission to Sauron, all the while plotting his own mastery. Jackson's Saruman seems to be a willing pawn of Sauron, however. Gone is the working of evil upon a noble mind and heart. Instead we are given a "faithful" servant of the Dark Lord.

to be continued

[Mercutio]

con't

Masculinity & Femininity

Our current culture does not see these as virtues at all, so it could not be expected to be seen through Hollywood.

The sex of the Elves is ambiguous. Some might be male or female, while the only one with a speaking part (this is when the Company enters Lothlorien), although male, is strikingly effeminate. Perhaps Jackson was attempting to make his Elves beautiful. It is a sad commentary on our cultural understanding of beauty that the only way for him to accomplish this was to make them androgynous.

Tolkien's vision of these virtues is perhaps most clearly viewed in his portrayal of Aragorn and Arwen. Aragorn is strong, with 77 years of self-sacrificial labor and growth in wisdom behind him. The willing service of others in combat and hardship is the focus of Aragorn's ideal masculinity. Arwen, is an Elf-lady of high lineage who lays down her elven immortality to betroth herself to Aragorn. Because her father has made their marriage contingent on Aragorn's winning his crown, Arwen sets herself the arduous task of faithfully waiting and encouraging her beloved. One thing is obvious, despite her less screen time (than Aragorn). She does not go to war. One of her activities is the creation of the standard Aragorn displays in the battle before Minas Tirith. This is a traditional feminine idiom, but Arwen is not the feminist's vision of the weak, passive, traditional woman. She is far older than Aragorn, and those long years have brought her wisdom at least the match of his. Her patience and encouragement and faithfulness, both to Aragorn and her father's conditions on her betrothal, are her own form of self-sacrifice, in the context of her submission to her own creation as a female. She has no need to seek martial adventure--her feminine task requires strength and courage enough.

In the movie, you notice something wrong in this relationship the moment Arwen is introduced. We first see her sword, at the throat of kneeling Aragorn. And her first words are a taunt: "What's this, a Ranger caught off his guard?" She convinces Aragorn that it is she would should take the wounded Frodo to her father in Rivendell, putting her body rather than Aragorn's between the Ringbearer and the enemy. The sequence continues with a long equestrian chase scene, in which Arwen and Frodo are driven before the Black Riders, and finishes in a flourish with Arwen brandishing her sword at the enemy, and then raising with an incantation the flood that destroys them.

Aragorn fares no better. Instead of a man gentle and strong because he knows himself, he is a conflicted and tortured victim of self-doubt. "The same blood flows in my veins as did in Isildur's. How do I know I won't make his mistake?" Thus Jackson ahs transformed the story of a king ready to claim his crown into an adolescent "coming of age" story in which a "strong" woman keeps him from falling under the strain of the conflict within his soul. Thus, in a later scene, Arwen appears, having doffed her leather and steel, in a gown more appropriate to her now maternal advice. She chides him for his doubt. She knows he will grow up to be a wonderful man.

Thus are both masculinity and femininity cheapened by Jackson's portrayal. Yet the true nature of masculinity and femininity is one of the things at the very heart of Tolkien's vision of virtue. To truly value and live out the masculine and feminine idioms in sacrificial love is, to Tolkien, to submit to the created order, whereas the refusal to honor masculinity and femininity is tantamount to rebellion.

Any thoughts? Agree...or disagree?

Most of this was taken from "The Subversion of Middle-Earth: Tolkien's Symphony of Virtue Meets Hollywood," an article by Garrin W. Dickinson published in the Oct. 2002 issue of "Touchstone."

[Ultimatejoe]

I'd just like to add that despite their origins (for Tolkien) in Christianity, these qualities are not inherently Christian.

[Lizra]

Originally posted by Ultimatejoe
I'd just like to add that despite their origins (for Tolkien) in Christianity, these qualities are not inherently Christian.

Heh!

[Nerdanel]

Originally posted by Ultimatejoe
I'd just like to add that despite their origins (for Tolkien) in Christianity, these qualities are not inherently Christian.

Thanks. That was what I thought, but you said it.

[Mercutio]

Hmm...what did I miss when I read the article? I suppose I'll have to look at it again.

[Anglorfin]

But if we are talking about general mythology or religion, often the same virtues are stressed. And to make his mythos more tangible and real, of course the same values would be emphasized. If you look at it, it's really just a cookie-cutter system of core beliefs.

[Valandil]

Originally posted by Ultimatejoe
I'd just like to add that despite their origins (for Tolkien) in Christianity, these qualities are not inherently Christian.

If I may correct you: those values ARE inherently Christian... I think what you're trying to say is that they're not uniquely Christian. Is that what you meant?

[Ultimatejoe]

Not really, but I don't want to get into a big debate about it. What you said is true as well.

[Valandil]

Originally posted by Ultimatejoe
Not really, but I don't want to get into a big debate about it. What you said is true as well.

Not trying to debate you. Maybe I need to look up inherently myself to make sure I have the definition right. I'm thinking it means that those traits / qualities are an integral part of Christianity, which they are. However, they are not necessarily exclusively Christian traits / qualities... which was what I thought you probably meant. If you meant otherwise, say so... I'm more inclined to just 'listen' to what you have to say - and am interested in finding out what you do mean.

[Tessar]

Christianity, since it was founded by Christ, is based on good morals and methods. It IS inherently Christian.

However, that doesn't mean that it's ONLY Christian values.

I'll sum it up this way:

Just because you're good, it doesn't make you Christian, and just because you're Christian, that doesn't make you good.

Fair enough? Or not what you meant either?

[Valandil]

Originally posted by Tessar
Christianity, since it was founded by Christ, is based on good morals and methods. It IS inherently Christian.

However, that doesn't mean that it's ONLY Christian values.

I'll sum it up this way:

Just because you're good, it doesn't make you Christian, and just because you're Christian, that doesn't make you good.

Fair enough? Or not what you meant either?

Whoa Tessar! Now you've got ME twisted all around! OF COURSE Christianity is inherently Christian... that's a moot point (ooo... I've always wanted to say that around here! ). What we're discussing is whether these traits Mercutio refers to are inherently Christian or not... and I really think it comes down to just making sure we correctly define 'inherently'.

And yes, I'm referring to 'Christianity' as it is properly taught - not as it is (sometimes) improperly practiced. As taught - it should include all those things mentioned.

[Tessar]

I was referring to the traits, as they were inherently GOOD traits and the traits of Christianity are good traits, therefore making them one and the same.

[brownjenkins]

saying the values are inherently christian is kind of like saying something is inseparably christian... so it could be taken to mean that christianity cannot exist without these values and these values cannot exist without christianity

a better way to put it might be "the values are inherent to christianity"... so that you do not give the impression of co-dependence

[Valandil]

Now I'm REALLY getting dizzy!

[Earniel]

Moved to movie forum.

[Valandil]

Originally posted by Eärniel
Moved to movie forum.

Oooo... takin' a man who's already dizzy and spinning him some more, eh?

[Earniel]

*whistles innocently*

Who? Me? Never!





Dizzy enough yet?

[hectorberlioz]

hmm...UJoe, are you trying to imply that Tolkien didnt put those morals in there because of his faith, but because of the morals bieng standard...hmmm....whats the word...
eesh! I cant think tonight....*is getting dizzy* Val, I have the same symptoms you have

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by Eärniel
Moved to movie forum.

When Mercutio asked me in PM if she could make this thread, I told her yes, but to post it in the ME forum, but now that I've read that much of this discussion is based around the movie, then the movie forum is where it belongs. I thought it was going to be a thread about Christianity in Tolkien. That would cover all his stuff.

Since Valandil is so dizzy, I should move it back to the ME forum, just for a goof. But I won't.