Putting Applicability to the ultimate test

[IronParrot]

Although LOTR was not allegorical in the sense that it was not intentionally modeled as a manifestation of something else, Tolkien admitted that it was certainly a very applicable work... i.e. readers can interpret it any way they want.

Now, we've all heard the wild ones about the One Ring representing nuclear weapons, and Saruman being the Emperor Hirohito or whatever, and Rohan riding to Gondor's aid like America and Britain or something. But World War II is old hat when it comes to interpreting LOTR.

So I want to see you do better. Let's see how ridiculous you can be - but don't be ridiculous for the sake of being silly; the trick is to be able to seriously defend your position using evidence from the novel.

I'll offer a brief example:

Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings is, in fact, a subliminal defense of the Emperor Napoleon. Recurrent throughout the entire work is the theme that even the physically diminuitive are capable of greatness; it can be demonstrated that the tale's focus on hobbits is a microcosm for this very point. Also prevalent is the notion that greatness as a statesman lies not only in wartime command, but in the wisdom of domestic policy, as can be demonstrated by comparing and contrasting the successes and failures of Theoden King and the Steward Denethor. From a more militaristic perspective, Tolkien also takes the tactical and strategic genius of Napoleon I and applies them to the exuberant detailing of the Battle of the Pelennor Fields. Finally, the fading of a once-great empire into the western seas is posited as a parallel occurrence between the domain of the Elves and Napoleonic France...

(This would obviously only be a brief thesis introduction to what could be a ten-page essay, but I'm too tired to do the whole thing right now. You can do me one better, right?)

[Wayfarer]

Ooh! Fun!

A few excerpts before I, too, go to bed.

It is quite appearant from the work that tolkien intended The Lord of The Rings as a manifesto for ecoterrorism and the return to a primitive, idyllic lifestyle...

Foremost among the evidences is the fixation of the plotline upon hobbits. It is obvious that the hobbit, the 'little people', represent the minority environmentalist, who live in peace and harmony with nature, as opposed to the 'big people', which is to say, the monopolistic industrialized business complex, which hobbits believe are 'noisy and clumsy'...

It is important to note that that hobbits have no shoes. This is an obvious reference to the use of force in reaction to industrialization. During the Industiral revolution, factory workers in the netherlands removed their heavy wooden shoes and dropped them into the machinery, thus causing malfunction. The hobbits have no shoes, and it is only reasonable to deduce that this is because they have likewise removed them in revolt against industrialization. The fact that they have grown hair and thick soles is obvious symbolism that, though they have given up something in order to live a natural lifestyle, they have learned to live with it, and suffered no ill effects...

[Erawyn]

Wayfarer, at least the first part of that was not totally off the ball imo. I saw a bio of Tolkien on the telly and it talked about how he used to live in the countryside and it was slowly absorbed into suburbs and city, which really made him angry. . . There were even quotes of him talking about it!

[IronParrot]

On the heels of his fellow countryman George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four, J.R.R. Tolkien completed The Lord of the Rings from the perspective of an ardent anti-Communist, portraying Soviet socio-economic policy as a great corrupting evil. Along those same lines, Tolkien used his work to defend the legitimacy of a monarchic British Empire.

This can be demonstrated on many levels of subtext throughout Tolkien's work, but is clearest in the chapter "The Scouring of the Shire", where rule by ruffians not of nobility involves socialistic reforms redistributing goods under the direct jurisdiction of the state. Tolkien portrays state ownership of collective agricultural functions as an evil that has to be defeated by way of a reactionary coup, just one of many cases where the restoration of a rightful monarchy is expressed as a positive force.

Also of note is Tolkien's promotion of a unifying imperial kingdom under the leadership of a monarch with a claim of birthright. Among examples are the corruptibility of the Steward of Gondor, and the fall of the reigns of Sauron, Saruman and even the Elves, none of whom ruled by claim of noble descent. Once again, Tolkien uses the Numenorean line as a microcosm for the dominance of Imperial Britain...

[cassiopeia]

The dwarves clearly represent scientists who are ever delving deeper into nature, unlocking her secrets, which perhaps should not be laid bare. The dwarves, digging deeper into the dark depths of Moria, unlocked a terrible demon of evil: a balrog. The balrog is a metaphor of the discoveries science may make: terrifying, yet great. The balrog slain some dwarves and the others fled. This is clearly a reference to scientists fleeing from the technology that will be unleashed from their discoveries.
The dwarves fled from Moria, leaving orcs to take up residence. These orcs are meant to represent the money-grabbing business people who will sell this technology to the rich, while the poor suffer greatly and are in more desperate need. Yet the orcs are terrified of Durin's Bane and thus this represents the business people being uncertain as to how this technology will affect the world at large. In the end, the balrog is slain, this being a metaphor of mans harnessing and controlling the technology and science he has created.

[Agburanar]

Heres one:

The map of Middle Earth is drawn with North at the top, as are modern maps, however the map in the Hobbit is not. If you apply the directions on the Hobbit map to the Middle Earth map without rotating it you find that the war between the East and the West is really between the North and the South. From this you can clearly deduce that the subject covered in Lord of the Rings is a battle between the small Penguins and the brutal Polar bears. Along the way towards Polar bear domain the penguins meet Father Christmas Bombadill and have to escape an eruption which is obviously too hot for the penguins.

[katya]

Brithish writer J.R.R. Tolkien's work The Lord of The Rings is quite obviously an allegory denouncing the use of Play Dough. The evil lord Sauron, upon forging the "ring", or what is clearly symbolic of Play Dough, releases unspeakeble evil into the world. We can get some clues as to the precise nature of the metaphor from the fact that Sauron "forges", or molds the ring. This "forging" is uncannily similar to the "forging" of Play Dough. This hint is made more clear when we see that rings are "gifted" * to other races, thereby ensnaring them. It is common practice more the small child to give a "gift" of a Play Dough creation to a parent, for example. The throwing of the ring into a fireplace near the beginning of the novel symbolizes the "cooking" of various kinds of clay to reveal their full potential. Only then do the words on the "ring" appear. The choice of a hobbit to ultimately destroy the ring seems to mean that the little people, or the children of the world, are the only ones who can rid the world of the evil Play Dough. They must resist, and play with it no more.

[Draken]

In Tolkien’s magnum opus, “Lord of the Rings”, we see what is evidently a description of the author’s views on the position of the British academic in the middle part of the 20th century. Minas Tirith is quite plainly Tolkien’s own beloved Oxford. Just as Gondor’s capital is the guardian of a long and noble heritage of all that is good in Mankind, so Oxford was the repository of centuries of learning. Tolkien plainly identifies with the men of Gondor, investing in them his own sense of standing against a rising tide of barbarians at the gate. For Mordor one can read Birmingham, the descriptions of Sauron’s land of volcanoes and black towers fitting perfectly with the foundries and factory chimneys of what was then an increasingly industrial city. The orcs, it can then be seen, are the poorly educated masses working in those factories. Just as Sauron’s rise threatens to engulf Middle Earth, so Birmingham’s burgeoning working class are making the city grow apace, eating up the countryside that Tolkien held so dear. When Tolkien writes of orcs swarming from their lairs aback wargs, one can well imagine him shuddering at a vision of the great unwashed driving down from Birmingham for a day trip to Oxford in their Austin 7s. Many people have seen Middle Earth as being culled from Saxon mythology, but a plausible synonym for Middle Earth might be Mid-Land – Tolkien was writing about a battle for his own English midlands. The forces of the dark are identified as the captains of industry and their workforce; against them is ranged the traditional bucolic lifestyle with its deference to the existing social order.

Of course Tolkien knew better than to make an aloof Gondorean his hero; instead he invents the hobbits, in every sense the little people whose rural idyll needs defending from the encroaching urbanisation, and makes one of their number a hero we can all sympathise with. And let us also consider the elves – what are they if not a personification of the ancient Classical learning so esteemed by the British intelligentsia of the time? Their diminishment and departure from Middle Earth can be seen as resignation to the fact that the genteel world of privileged academia was about to be swept away by the tide of progress.

[IronParrot]

Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings clearly demonstrates the evils of the institution of marriage, by symbolizing it using the One Ring, analogous to a wedding ring. His thesis concerning the subject can be broken down into several parts. First, Tolkien appears very strongly opposed to the concept of polygamy, and expresses that it cannot possibly function with any stability, just as the Ring can only have one bearer at a time. Secondly, Tolkien describes marriage as "of all the works of Sauron the only fair" - something that is attractive on the surface, and is often used out of good will, but eventually turns all to evil. (Well, maybe this doesn't apply to Aragorn and Arwen, but they died, didn't they?) Thirdly, Tolkien looks at divorces as rather messy, as nobody seems to be willing to part with the Ring once it is in possession. It should be noted that heroes such as Bilbo and Frodo are strictly bachelors.