The Voice of Saruman / The Voice of Hitler

[MatthewM]

As Tolkien has stated that his story does not relate to WWII, this is but an idea that popped into my head and made a connection during my Western Civilization class as we discussed World War II.

The power of Hitler's voice is undoubtedly known as harsh, fierce, influential, and captivating. The voice of Saruman in his magic was not fierce or harsh, but certainly influential and captivating. It influenced people to do the speaker's bidding, like Hitler did as he brainwashed thousands of Germans to conform to Nazism.

It's unfair to compare a real madman such as Hitler to the treachery of Saruman, but I am talking strictly voice here, and not in actions.

Has anybody else made this kind of connection?

[Boromir88]

Well of course both were known for their ability to do exactly as you put it...'influence and captivate' the crowd. In many ways manipulate them. Other than those loose similarities, I don't see much of a resemblance as they both did so in different ways.

Saruman was a skilled orator. He had a great ability of argumentation and skill of speech. As was observed he had a certain 'charm' about his voice and as remarked in the Voice of Saruman, he began to lose this charm:
'Turn elsewhither. But I fear your voice has lost its charm.' (Theoden)

'First Saruman was shown that the power of his voice was waning.' (Gandalf)
Eventhough if this remarks about Saruman losing the 'power' and 'charm' of his voice, this certainly does show that at one time he did have a certain charm in his voice.

In Letter 210:
Saruman's voice was not hypnotic but persuasive. Those who listened to him were not in danger of falling into a trance, but of agreeing with his arguments, while fully awake. It was always open to one to reject, by free will and reason, both his voice while speaking and its after-impressions. Saruman corrupted the reasoning powers.
Says it all right there, Saruman had a great ability at being persuasive. And if you are using persuasiveness with an 'evil intent,' you can definitely corrupt people's reasoning abilities.

I had a discussion with somebody who had heard the English politician Oswald Mosley speak and a description of him by Professor AJ Tayler said:
"The greatest comet of British politics in the twentieth century . . . an orator of the highest rank"
Ever since hearing the description of politician Mosley I got a stronger connection with him (compared to Saruman) than I ever did with Hitler (I'll get to that more in a bit).

Mosley was once a gifted politician, known for a great voice, but he fell from grace in the 1930's when he wanted to take the Labour Party and turn it into the British Fascist Party and he was exiled. He came back to England in the later 1950's to speak at rallies of the British National Party. The person I talked to described his voice as such:
But his voice was like the lute of Orpheus- beautiful, mellifluous, and the words - when he spoke them- seemed so reasonable- though they were tainted words.
Ever since that moment I've always connected Saruman to Mosley more than Hitler. Mosley seems much more Saruman-like than Hitler, and as this man went onto say...'it would be interesting if Tolkien heard him speak at one point.'

Anyway, Mosley had a definite gifted charm in his voice. Which I think is most similar to what Saruman had...as well as several other politicians. There's people that just have the natural ability of speech to 'bring you in' and to 'captivate' you just like Saruman.

The reason I don't really connect Saruman to Hitler is this. As far as an orator, Hitler really wasn't all that good. Most people only see parts of his speeches where he gets 'fired' up. The majority of the time his speech was rather dull and boring, and then he would slowly build up to the end to this furious rage of anti-semitism and anti-democracy.

Hitler wasn't gifted like Saruman in the sense that he had a charm to drag people in. Hitler dragged people in because he told the people of Germany exactly what they wanted to hear...which means he was a smart politician; not necessarily a gifted speaker.

After WW1 the German people were greatly angered at the ridiculous treaty the Weimar Republic (the democratic government of Germany) signed...which in time devestated Germany and sent them into a spiralling economic depression. Whenever a people are hurt and aggrieved they never want to hear they are the cause of their own problems...they want scapegoats; and Hitler gave them scape goats.

Hitler would go on to blame democracy (The Weimar Republic) for Germany's problem and use already anti-semetic feelings of the German People to fuel them into more hatred against what he called 'the inferior races.' What Hitler did was play smart politics. He took an injured and troubling people...he took what the believed (The Weimar Republic was weak and useless, these 'inferior races are holding us back') and used that to 'bring the people to his side.' Nobody wants to hear they are the cause of their own problems. Hitler took the beliefs already within the German people and propelled them to get them to do what he wanted to do (which was overthrow democracy...establish himself as the dictator and annihilate the deemed inferior races).

So, overall, besides the fact that both Hitler and Saruman were good at 'captivating' people, their styles were completely different. Saruman had a skilled and certain charm about his voice, much like Mosley. He had the gifted voice that some people just have. Hitler played smart politics, he told the German people what they wanted to hear, so he could get what he wanted.

[the.landlord]

Has anybody else made this kind of connection?

i think peter jackson has made the same sort of connection.
i remember one scne of saruman standing on his tower, holding a speech. the masses cheering at him... that looks just like hitler.

have you ever seen hitler holding a speech? in history lesson we saw him (on a tape of course), he had an unpleasnat voice very very unpleasant and shrill. i really wonder, how he could charm people with a voice like that.

[Aaron]

Saruman = Mussolini.
A great talker reduced to a pathetic figure once his true intentions ha dbeen revealed.
Of course, LOTR isn't an allegory but in my view Saruman is definently more like Benito Mussolini than Hitler.

[The Saucepan Man]

Nobody wants to hear they are the cause of their own problems. Hitler took the beliefs already within the German people and propelled them to get them to do what he wanted to do ...I take your point about the difference in oratory style between Saruman and Hitler, Boro, but this comment does rather put me in mind of Saruman's treatment of the Dunlendings.

[Boromir88]

What a shame...I remember when threads like this one would get reply after replay after reply...Anywho:

I take your point about the difference in oratory style between Saruman and Hitler, Boro, but this comment does rather put me in mind of Saruman's treatment of the Dunlendings.~SpM
I see what you're saying. That would fit with Saruman and the Dunlendings. But, I think you can generically apply this to all politicians (or leaders for that matter). They flock to public opinion. Which is why here in the U.S. the two parties really aren't so radically different (when compared to the rest of the world)...because the majority of the polutation has a 'moderatistic' approach...therefor both parties will go to the 'middle' to win the support from the majority of the public. And the two parties, though having their obvious differences, aren't so different on the 'spectrum' when compared to the rest of the world. :D

So, kind of getting things back to Saruman here. I agree, I think he did use what the Dunlanders believed to fuel them into attacking Rohan. (Therefor he was not only a sweet-talker, but a smart persuader/politician). However, I would like to point out that Saruman possessed a charm that Hitler did not have (allbeit Saruman is a fictional character; but just bare with me here :rolleyes: ).

As thebastardlandlord said, which if you go on and listen and watch some of Hitler speeches you wonder what was so 'captivating' about this guy. Perhaps it was the fiery rage he built up to in the end, but other than that, his voice was probably just as bad as Neville Chamberlain's ( :p ). In fact, when Hitler was put in jail for treason, the reason he was treated rather pleasantly (since treason is a crime punishable by death) was the German court really didn't think he was a great 'leader' and he wouldn't be able to get people to follow him. They doubted his ability as a speaker and as a leader to get people behind him and support him. So, they went soft on him believing he wouldn't be much of a problem and he would simply just 'go away' after he was punished.

Saruman on the other hand did possess that charm...which I think is only apparent when Theoden said that Saruman had 'lost his charm,' meaning at one time Saruman did have a 'charming voice.' Even at this point when Theoden seems to be one of the most steadfast people against Saruman's 'awesome' voice, we see the charm of Saruman coming in to play an affect on him:
So great was the power that Saruman exerted in his laste effort that none that stood withing hearing were unmoved. But now the spell was wholly different. They heard the gentle remonstrance of a kindly king with an erring but much-loved minister. But they were shut out, listening at a door to words not meant for them: ill-mannered children or stupid servants overhearing the elusive discourse of their elders, and wondering houw it would affect their lot...Even in the mind of Theoden the thought took shape, like a shadow of doubt: 'He wil betray us; he will go - we shall be lost.'~The Voice of Saruman
Saruman just not only possesses the smart 'wits' to use what people believe to his advantage. But he also just has that natural ability to charm you and certainly as Tolkien put it 'corrupt your reasoning abilities.' From the description I got of Mosley's voice, that's how he came off as too. His voice had the same quality and beauty (yet dangerous) as the way Saruman's was described.

[Aaron]

Again. Mussolini. He fooled the West into beleiving he was a peacemaker. hell, even Churchill said that were he Italian he would join the fascist party!

[Boromir88]

I don't think this is really a topic where one answer is 'better' or 'more right' than the other. Personally I don't know a lot about Mussolini, I just know he was smart in legally siezing control and solidifying his power in Italy...as far as a speaker never heard him. :)

Anyway, I don't think this is something where there is only one 'right answer' to. There are many skilled speakers out there (politicians, leaders, sports broadcasters, and just your everyday civilian). There are tons of people out there where if you listen to them talk you are just like 'wow' simply an amazing voice. I don't know if they would all have the same charm as say Saruman, Mosley, or I'm assuming...Mussolini. But, there are several people somebody can come up with to just come out and say 'This person's voice is simply magical.'

The state representative in my area (Mr. Carano), former teacher turned politician. I had the pleasure of working a long with him in several programs and events and this guy is another one of those vocal talents. He's got a powerful booming voice (though not to the point of annoyance) that really gets you sparked up. He's one of those men that can 'stir the fire in the soul' so to say, and get people behind a particular issue. Where unlike Mosley, this man's words were true and he truly is a class act, coming from the simple life of an educator and rising up in the world of politics.

Point being, is we can sit here and apply several names from the past and present that remind us of Saruman's voice, and not one I would say is more right than any other (provided that somebody can explain their reasoning/belief). I think it's more like Graham Greene's book The Power and the Glory, where his main characters (The Whiskey Priest, The Lieutenant...and some others that escape me at the moment) are named exactly that. As it's set in Mexico during the revolution to kick out Spain and get rid of any Spanish influence (the main one being Catholicism). So during this time Priests were hunted down and punished as anything at all that had to do with Spain was trying to be annihilate from society. Anywho, Graham Greene purposefully leaves his characters without a name because any priest, any police lieutenant...etc of that time can go to describe and fit his characters. There wasn't one particular priest or Lieutenant that faced the situation the characters in Greene's book were in. But the readers can place all the priests and lieutenants of this particular time period and fit them in with Graham Greene's characters.

I think the same situation is done here with Saruman. Although Saruman is given a name, we can connect any corrupted leader/politician that enchanted people with the power of their voices to Saruman...and each one would be just as 'correct' as the next one. :)