Deeper symbolism and hidden meanings in the books [Archive]

Eruantalon

01-23-2003, 12:28 AM

Well I have a strange personalty.With that said you might understand what I am about to say better.I have noticed what seems to me to be hidden symbolism.Take for instince numbers and places and time frames all with in a strange repetive theme.

When you have lived to exerince things in this life.You tend to look at things more deeply.You tend to have more to say about things.You have understood more meaningfull experices.

I think after experincing two world wars,
children,Oxford,lifes tribulations he had a lot to say.Comming from a transition time he must have seen the world change a lot.

Art is nothing without somthing to say.He had a lot to say.Is saying it lightly.

First possibal hidden meaning

There are three ages and six books.But each book could be viewed as half an age.There are 3 ages in the Lord of the Rings saga.But they should not be seen as seprate only as a whole.Since Tolkien wanted to have it all published as an entire story.We don't move through time in segments.It is a flowing constant.Think of it as a river.You can site places as sections but the river has a beggining and end.Time works in the same way.So he is experessing three ages in time.And symbolicly in the layout of the books.Making them reflect the ages and story at the same time.Three ages untill the end of Morgoths end.Three books that tell the story.Well yes I know theres 6 but like I said they seem to be broken into 3 seprate ideals.

So just as the three ages are viewed so are the books.The first age deals with Elves the most.They visit the last of the Elven havens.They deal with a lot of pain and grief.But it doesn't start off that way.It starts off with peace and beauty.

Notice how the hobbit and The Fellowship of the Ring start off with the word party.Although the party is plesant in the begging it always ends with upset and problems.But the party is a repetive aspect in the storys.Take Manwes party for the bounty.Then Morgoth comes around and destroys the beauty of the two trees.

Again it starts off with happyness and ends with problems.Although its a much bigger problem it still follows the idea.

The second age deals more with men and less with Elves.Again it is trying to follow a pattern.Kind of like the Elves are fading slowly in the books to the age of men.The books actualy do the same.The great beattel that begins everything.Just like the first world war.The men who are not ready but willing.Just like the boys who whent out in that war.So you see less and less of the Elves untill you get to the final age.

Then the final age a great war defeating the last powerfull servent of Morgoth.The king is found.The throne is restored all is well.So what do you see in that.I see a few things.One the return of what was lost.This is a powerfull theme in these books.The return of beauty that the Valar created in the west.The return of a beautifull city that the Elves longed for Gondolin.The Return of the heir to the Noldorian throne Elrond.Well I figure he would recive the throne since he is the desendent and returns to the blessed realm.

It also reflects the change of the world that Tolkien experinced.He was born in a vary differnt time than when he died.Just think about that.Amagine seeing the world change so much in 50 years.Think of when he was born and when he died.Amagine what you will see in that time.

One day it might seem like a long forgotten age to you.You could have felt like you lived many life time in that span of years.Just like Gandalf did.Remember,after he fought the Blarog.I have some thoughts on the Tolkien Gandalf connection to.

Gandalf: smokes a pipe.Lead into battels to aid.Was put one ME to inspire and bring people togther.Learned in lore and languages.Understans many writing systems.

Tolkien:Also smoks a pipe.Was a Leutenent in world war 1.Saw some vary big battels in that war.The bloodest of them all if I am not wrong.He as an office was there to inspire and bring his men togther.Loved lore and was always fasinated by languaes.Also had command over many.

The list goes on and on.You can probaly name more than I.When Gandalfs time is over he goes to the Blessed Realm.Just like I belive Tolkien did.Both helped what was worth fighting for.Both loved nature and every good thing in it.

numbers
Well I see an almost obvious connection to certin numbers.

Morgoth realed in 3 ages.Again there is a connection with that number.Three joining of men and Elves last being Arwen and Aragon.3 rings of power to the Elves.If you counted all the ring sauron would have two on each finger.But with the ring of power, on one finger there would be 3.The tree that would keep the line of the Numeon(sorry if I spelled that wrong) is the grand son of the tree that was made in the image of one of the two trees.I might be wrong about that but I think thats right.That would make it the 3rd image of that tree.

There are more but I will talk about them later.Its pretty late here.If people are intersted I will elaborate on more.I haven't even talked about the infulence of trees in the story.How they are reflected in so many ways.

So have you seen anything like what I am talking about here.Maybe you have noticed repeating themes,ideas,or numbers in the books.

Tell me what you think.Does this all seem outragious to you.I am interested to hear what anyone thinks.

[ January 23, 2003: Message edited by: Eruantalon ]

[ January 23, 2003: Message edited by: Eruantalon ]

burrahobbit

01-23-2003, 04:05 PM

No.

cannedpoatoe

01-23-2003, 05:37 PM

true, true, but there could be zillions of reasons why he wrote it. Maybe Tolkien was just bored. smilies/smile.gif

Iarwain

01-23-2003, 05:48 PM

I agree with Burrahobbit.

This is too analytical, what you wrote is like all that garbage about the "Bible Code"

Iarwain

[ January 25, 2003: Message edited by: Iarwain ]

The Saucepan Man

01-23-2003, 06:20 PM

Too analytical, Iarwain? For the Books forum? Surely not. smilies/smile.gif

I seem to recall reading that JRRT specifically disavowed any intention to portray LotR as an allegory of World War II, which interrupted his writing of it. But, since he was involved in both World Wars, it is hard to believe that he wasn't affected by his experiences of them, and this is bound to show through in his writings. I have seen comments on other threads analysing whether we might divine his attitude towards war in LotR. Certainly, war is not glorified. It is depicted as something necessary - brought upon the free peoples of ME by a seemingly overwhelmingly evil force. But, it is also shown to be brutal - horrific things happen and people die. I always thought that the listing of those who fell at Helms Deep, and especially Pelennor Fields, to be very poignant.

Did JRRT see himself as Gandalf? Well, I believe that there are some who say that he intended Tom Bombadil to represent him. I hope not. Gandalf is such a better role model! I am sure that he identified with Gandalf, because he is such a sympathetic character. But I'm sure that he identifed with many of the characters - Bilbo, Frodo, even Denethor (there is weakness in all of us). He did create them, after all.

As for the significance of numbers - I am sure that beliefs concerning the power of numbers did not escape him. I believe that 1, 3, 7 and 9 (the numbers of the Rings of Power) are all consdidered to be significant numbers - but, then, I'm no numerologist. smilies/smile.gif

Falagar

01-23-2003, 06:21 PM

Agree with Burrahobbit and Iarwain: No.

Iarwain

01-23-2003, 07:32 PM

What about Five?!?!

We see 1,3,7,9 in the rings, and perhaps I'm forgetting something else really important, but other than the five wizards, what other occurence is there of five? Five is a very solid number, I must say, and as it is prime is likely to have some symbolic meaning.

Grinning,
Iarwain

littlemanpoet

01-23-2003, 08:13 PM

I think a lot of what you're seeing has more to do with the "soup of story" and the writer's craft than symbolism per se. I've read an article that shows quite clearly instances of the influence of World War One on Tolkien's description.
- The Dead Marshes with the dead faces in the water, straight out of the Western front.
- Tolkien said, "My Sam Gamgee[...]is a reflexion of the English soldier, of the privates and batmen I knew in the 1914 war, and recognized as so far superior to myself."
(By the way, that more or less explodes the idea of Lieutenant Tolkien as a leader of men - he spent the bulk of the war in hospital recovering and relapsing with the fever.)
-The final Shadowy aspect of Sauron defeated, as a threatening cloud, has been compared to Sigfried Sassoon's description of a shell-burst at close range.
- The Hobbits' return to the Shire mirrors the war veterans' return to an England that had during their absence changed from a semi-medieval rural society to an modern industrial one.

As to the party turned problem angle, that's just the nature of good writing, perhaps especially fantasy but not exclusively. Things start out idealically, and the conflict is introduced. Otherwise you don't have a story.

As to your sequence of three's, I think there might be something to it, although we are supposed to be in the seventh age, right now. But I don't think there's as much to it as you might hope. Nevertheless, numbers were important to Norse and Celtic pagans, and since Tolkien dipped his ladle in those vats, it's no surprise that he came out with significance in numbers. More significant is his lingual treasure.

Eruantalon

01-23-2003, 09:12 PM

Come on how can you guys just say a big NO.

Come on there has to be more to your argument than that.You mean to tell me you read the entire post and thats all you came up with.

To the orthers I really appricate your reading and making an actual argument.

As for the number 5 I noticed that too.Well I don't know about that.

I do not think Tolkien based the Lord of the Rings off of world war 1 and 2.I just think he was infulnced by them.Who wouldn't be.

As for the Tolkien Gandalf connection.The same things can be said for many.It was just one of many of his personalty traits I noticed he put into the charctors.

Locations in middel earth

If you look at the maps for Middle Earth you see certin patterns in there.

Cardinal directions North East South west

Four elments Air Fire Earth Water

Now many might disagree but I have found in many celtic,Nordic,and Druidic oppenion that each elment has a direction.

Fire in the East since that is where the sun rises.

Air to the North.

West to water since it is the oppsite to fire.

South to the earth since it is heavy and oppsite to air.

Now that you understan this look at the map to Middle Earth.

Where do you see Mordore?South East where fire and earth come togther.

Where do you see the Great Sea?The West

The greatest mountian range starts strongest in the south and ends in the North.

Do you see any orther exampels?

I am shure this has some aspects that conflict.But again its just an theory.

What huh bible code what are you talking about.I never reffered to a Bible code in any post.I have talked about things I think Tolkien had insperation from.One being the Bible.He was a devout christian you know.As for too analitical its a disscussion if you think I am wrong back it up with an actual argument.I have no problem with disagreements.I like them whats your problem?If you don't have anything to say but that please don't comment.I am not intersted.

[ January 23, 2003: Message edited by: Eruantalon ]

Iarwain

01-23-2003, 09:26 PM

Clever theory. As for the argument, I don't mean to sound pompous, but I grow weary of symbolism: its only fun when you think of it yourself. Therefore, I find Topics such as this just a tad bit on the annoying side. thus the "no"
Iarwain

P.S. The "Bible code" is when people take the Bible and a computer, and tell the computer to assemble the letters, skipping every few thousand, until they find something legitamate in it, like some "prophecy" or something that is completely irrelavent to what the Bible is actually saying. Its very stupid. This is relavent, because I believe that this is very nearly what some Tolkien symbolists are doing.

P.P.S. Just a suggestion, try using spaces between your sentences. It makes them easier to read. Otherwise, it sounds like you're typing in a frantic fit of insecurity and rage. smilies/wink.gif

[ January 23, 2003: Message edited by: Iarwain ]

[ January 23, 2003: Message edited by: Iarwain ]

[ January 25, 2003: Message edited by: Iarwain ]

Eruantalon

01-23-2003, 09:37 PM

With the bible code I agree with you totaly.I have read about that too.I see what your saying about the symbolism connection now.Rember its just a theory.I am just taking advantage of the forum to discuss this with orthers.

As for my sentance spacing.It seems like a bit of a nasty personal attack that I really don't care for.I also do not choose to continue.It seems petty and childish.Don't you think.

Iarwain

01-23-2003, 09:41 PM

Great that we agree. smilies/smile.gif Again with the spaces though! smilies/smile.gif

Iarwain

doug*platypus

01-24-2003, 06:17 AM

Tolkien's experience in World War I and of World War II definitely coloured his writing of The Lord of the Rings. Although not published until the mid 1950s, it was started in 1936 and was almost completed in the first version by the end of the Second World War. While there is, as stated, no allegory controlling the work as a whole, many things pop up in direct response to Tolkien's view of the world around him. Just like many, many pieces of art, music and especially literature.

It is not entirely a response to the war or wars, however, and The Scouring of the Shire reflects Tolkien's own strong views on the commercialisation of his England, in which many fine old buildings were torn down in the name of progress and replaced with units and malls which he personally didn't care for. Frodo and co., although they may seem it, are not Tommies returning from the wars. If that were the case, I'm sure that Pippin would have been killed by the troll on Dagorlad to reflect JRRTs own experience of lost friends from World War I.

As for numerology in the books, I have often noted with interest myself occurences of particular numbers. You may notice that in the Sammath Naur, Frodo puts on the Ring for the sixth time, and then fails of his quest - six being the number of imperfection. Of course the reason I see this symbology is simply that I want to see it - I think it's cool! That does not mean that it is meant to be there, or that it is wise to go looking for it, considering the unlikelihood of any intentional numerology. You might as well add up the number of chapters, divide by the number of volumes, add the numbers all together and come up with an answer that you could interpret to mean pretty much anything.

The Bible Code is an entirely different matter. Many different scribes worked on the texts. These people were experts the like of which we probably do not even have today, people whose sole existence was for the copying of religious scrolls. They had time and skill that JRRT did not, being constrained by his obligation to hold down a real job. The scriptures were also written in Hebrew, in which every letter has an associated numerical value. This is the whole foundation of the Bible Code, and to suggest that an english book could ever hope to possess such a level of complexity is to admit a lack of understanding of the topic. Which is of course off-topic, anyway, and just an invitation for the Skwerlz to come knocking at your door with a bazooka.

Likewise, commenting on someone's spacing is an open invitation to a Skwerling, and ultimately futile anyway. It is a matter of style, and you should only bring that up if you're happy with someone finding fault with overabundance of smilies, or the use of the same icon over and over again.

There seem to be lots of cases of hidden meaning in The Lord of the Rings. So many, in fact that it's hard to talk about them all on one thread. Maybe it would be a better idea to open a new topic on one thing in particular?

Thingol1000

01-24-2003, 07:08 AM

"people confuse applicability with allagory" or something to that effect.....

Simply said, "No."

Bêthberry

01-24-2003, 08:02 AM

"Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar." -- Freud.

littlemanpoet, in terms of this particular argument, I would suggest "stone soup."

Bethberry

lindil

01-24-2003, 08:58 AM

"numbers were important to Norse and Celtic pagans, and since Tolkien dipped his ladle in those vats, it's no surprise that he came out with significance in numbers."

Numbers were [ and are] important to Christians also, and JRRT was a rather well read one!

So I find 1/2 of the original premise [deeper symbolism] of this thread a sound one, even if some of the examples thus far given tenuous.

As for the 'hidden meanings'. Well I suppose as per the Bible code example one can torture [ although a few of the Bible code extrapolations are if I recall correctly based on traditional Hebrew Gematria [a number science if you will] and rather interesting. However, one would be truly hard pressed to place at God's feet the responsibiltity for some of them.

Nonetheless I will add a bit to the already boiling pot ...

I have always found the various races to be indicitave of the various aspects of man's personality, also I have [ due to my previous taoist training seen clear evidence of the 'Five Elements' of Chinese medicine/culture, not that JRRT was in any way aware of them but that any organic creation almost always will conform to this or some other primal pattern [such as the Four 'western' Elements or Yin/Yang or the 3 essences of ayurveda]

Hobbit's - down to 'Earth' practical - shortsighted in general.

Dwarves [ and Noldor ] - Metal - concerned with creating and shaping of things from the resources at hand. Power over their enviroment.

Men [ and the teleri] - Water - changeable, unstable, able to tkae on any qualities if concious or likely to fall into inherited or prevailing qualities if not 'asleep'.Hard to purify once tainted, without resorting to extremes of heat [i.e. suffering].

Elves - Wood/Air - creative in all areas, but self-centered, master's of all things if they stick to it long enough. tendency to pride and arrogance must constantly be battled.

Fire - the Ainur [ as they are of an altogether different order of being than the free peoples I will leave aside the personality aspects, especially as the valar each exhibit very pure types of their own]

...that is just my own take on things.

I would by no means say that JRRT certainly had these things in mind when he wrote [although then again maybe he did]. I would rather guess that he sub-created from the wellsping of imagery and myth and thus drew on Archetypal and primal symbolism that is nigh on inexhaustible and full of patterns and elemental relationships.

[ January 24, 2003: Message edited by: lindil ]

Eruantalon

01-24-2003, 03:07 PM

Well as for stone soup, it could be quit possibal.

When I was 13 I had this history class with one of my favorite teachers. We where studying ancient Egypt at the time. As I looked at the text book something seemed out of place.

The text said nothing about what I was thinking but I thought it could be a possabilty. So I took my ideas to Mr. Stanuzek. My idea was as follows.

Pyrmids where on the west side of the Nile river. This made sense since the west was considered the land of the dead. But why so close to the river. The pyramids where not so close but all had a good distance. The west was the land of the dead but why so close to the river. Well the farmers that live around the Nile built the pyrmids. They had a good understaning of irragation. They used the principal to water there fields.

So you have have farmers. Building a great stone pyrmid. They have to move stones that weight tons. Close enough to the nile. They have irragation knowladge.

Final idea:They where moving the stones with water canals. It makes perfect sense. Why pull them by hand with 30 men? When you can float them with a few.

My history teacher was suprised by my idea. It wasn't in the books any where. But it all made sense. He told me I was right. But 60 years to late. An Englishman had figured it out. He proved it when he took samples from the quarys that had Nile river dirt from them.

That was the first time I had found somthing that was not in plain sight. Ever since then I have loved finding hidden things. Things that orthers haven't noticed.

Its all a big riddel. Nothing more or less. There dosen't even have to be any hidden things in Tolkiens work. I just enjoy the
posability of finding somthing hidden. So you see its all just a game. But I do enjoy hearing ideas and thoughts here.

As for the Elments and the races I have noticed that one too. But never saw it in such detail until your post. That was vary inersting.

Well Telacontar I tried to do better and put in the spaces you PMed me about.Hope this is a littel better.

[ January 24, 2003: Message edited by: Eruantalon ]

burrahobbit

01-24-2003, 03:35 PM

I stand by my first post.

Falagar

01-24-2003, 05:35 PM

Me too.

"No"

smilies/biggrin.gif

Eruantalon

01-24-2003, 09:43 PM

Listen to everyone posting No and not saying anything. Please if you have anything to say go ahead. If not do not bother posting. I don't like this. I wanted to hear actual oppenions here. Not people repeatedly posting the word no. Unless you have anything to say please don't. Thank you

Mandos

01-24-2003, 10:09 PM

Well well, people are certainly getting fussy about single word postings and sentence spacings. smilies/smile.gif However, I do belive Tolkien may have purposely left those numerical patterns to confuse us.lol. Perhaps one should also note that most of the numbers of important things, were odd. (the rings:1,3,7,9, the palantir-7)also perhaps even more that i cannot at the moment think of.

Aratlithiel

01-24-2003, 10:15 PM

OK, but you asked for it! I posted the following on another thread (Irrationalism in LotR - since relegated to pg 4 or so of the Books forum) awhile ago and since I'm too lazy to reword it, I'm just going to quote myself...

I once had a Lit professor with whom I used to argue CONSTANTLY about symbolism, allegory, etc. in great works. For instance, in Moby **** - my prof's. opinion (and apparently that of thousands of scholars) was that Melville sat down to write a symbolic work in which a giant white whale symbolized evil and that it was all the more striking because it was white, the color usually associated with good and it was juxtaposed in such a way as to point out...blah, blah, blah.

My own opinion is that...well, let me ask your opinion - do any of YOU believe that Melville actually sat down and said, "Hmmm, I'm going to make Ahab symbolize the inner-struggle of Man and show how we can desire to wipe out evil but still have evil purposes in our hearts."? I know I don't. I think Melville heard a good tale about a whale that attacked a fishing vessel some years before and decided to write a good story about it.

To paraphrase Freud, sometimes a whale is just a whale and sometimes a [story] is just a [story]. I see no parallels in the LotR trilogy to anything that's going on in the world right now except for what people with nothing better to do work very hard to extract from it. As Sam said of Lothlorien, "...folk takes their peril with them...and finds it there because they've brought it." The only allegory that's there is the one you read into it.

We don't read it or go to see the movies because we find allegory or symbolism, we do so because it is a fantasy world so well written that it makes us all wish we had the nobility and courage exemplified on each page. We admire these characters and have grown to love them - not because this one can decapitate an orc in one stroke or because that one can hit a Ringwraith at 50 paces in the dark, but because they are noble characters who fight for Good. There is no question about which side is good and which side is evil - it is all very clearly deliniated and we don't need to guess. There are no Vietnam-style gray areas or Middle East-style oil wars or lesser interests to muddy up the issues. There is only a very clear Good and a very clear Evil. Why must anyone make more of it?

More to the point, why would anyone want to? People read these books and see these movies for the same reason others have been doing so for years - escapism. We do not see the U.S. in the Dunedain nor Saddam in Sauron - not only because they aren't there, but because it is precisely these reasons among others that we have left Earth and entered Middle-earth for awhile. Who wants to drag all that baggage along on such an otherwise liberating trip? Who can imagine they're journeying beside Frodo or going into battle with Aragorn if you keep looking over your shoulder and seeing George W.?

These stories came about not because Tolkien wanted to teach us all a lesson on war, but because he had such a detailed and involved story to tell that it had to spill out somewhere. Luckily for us, we all get to see the end result and any life-lessons we may get out of them are simply an unintentional by-product. We should all say a silent prayer of thanks for Tolkien and his works and leave the symbol-seekers to pick each other to death and leave us the heck alone!

This deals somewhat with the movie(s) as well but by and large I was speaking on the books. While I agree with many on this forum who hold that Tolkien's experiences HAD to have impacted his writings, I simply refuse to buy into the emerging thesis that, "he experienced something like this in real-life, therefore it MUST be symbolic." No! I'm quite certain every fiction writer has borrowed somewhat from his/her everyday life - that does not make symbolism, just good story-telling.

On a side-note, Eruantalon, none of the angst in the above is directed at you - this was written in response to a bothersome article someone posted on the above-mentioned thread.

doug*platypus

01-24-2003, 11:01 PM

Moby ****
I'm with you there, Aratlithiel, I would've given Herman Melville's classic four stars. Or maybe three and a half. That particular whale is definitely not just a whale, though. And even if it was, I can't see how the lack of symbolism in one book (once again, I have to say that I think you've chosen a terrible example) would prove that there was no symoblism in another book.

Egyptians rock. Megalithic people rock. Thanks for that little off-topic gem, Eruantalon, I hadn't come across that gem of little-known wisdom before. Have you given any thought to my suggestion of proposing one single piece of symbolism at a time?

Aratlithiel

01-24-2003, 11:54 PM

Ah, doug, once again you make me have to clarify myself. The asteriks are not mine - believe it or not that was a result of the wonderful editing program on this forum. Apparently it thought I might be calling someone an untoward name. smilies/wink.gif

As far as my example goes, Moby **** was in fact based on the true, historical account of a whaler named Owen Chase from Nantucket. He was 1st mate on The Essex when it was attacked by a sperm whale in November of 1820. Melville took the harrowing account he received from Chase's son and turned it into a novel. So, you see, it's not an allegorical tale - it's a fictionalized account of an historical incident. Is it possible Melville peppered it with symbolism? Maybe, although he never admitted to it if he did.

And I certainly wouldn't say that the lack of symbolism in any book would prohibit its presence in another. What I'm saying is that the fact that a novel is a classic does not imply symbolism simply because some scholar or critic says it does. If Tolkien tells me he meant no symbolism or allegory, I tend to believe him.

Estelyn Telcontar

01-25-2003, 08:22 AM

One word answer posts are limited to one per person. If you post again, please explain your "no" instead of merely repeating it. This is a discussion, not a kindergarten argument! burrahobbit, Iarwain, Falagar, please delete the posts in which you repeat the "no", otherwise I will have to do so in the interest of a well-mannered discussion.

Lyra Greenleaf

01-25-2003, 08:46 AM

I think this sort of theory sounds very interesting, and yes it may seen a little odd that these coincidences arise, but one of the things i always hated with doing english lit was that the teacher would say "this represents this, and this represents this" which I dont agree with.

An example, very unrelated, is Snow Falling on Cedars, by David Guterson. In order to please my teacher and the examiners I came up with an elaborate description of the fact that the smells of the harbor represented decay and that the trees on the shore were showing how characters were trapped in their lives- "We cannot get out!". Personally I think Guterson was just describing his image of a place, but hey!

Sorry, back to lotr.

Im sure tolkien was influenced subconsciously or consciously by a lot of his experiences and knowledge, but when an author says that there is three of something, is it possible that that is all there is to it?

You can find many, many theories of what things mean or represent, they can't all be true!

Tolkien himself was always very definite that lotr did not intentionally represent either WW1 or WW2, although of course there were ways in which they were similar.

Such a huge work as lotr is bound to overflow with possible symbols, allegories, etc. I mean, if there had been 10 Nazgul and 8 palantirs, as well as 4 elven rings (for example) Im sure there would be conclusions to be drawn from that too.

I really admire people who spend time actually thinking of such complex theories, I just dont agree. Sorry!

PS: I hope that was a better answer than 'No'

[ January 25, 2003: Message edited by: Lyra Greenleaf ]

Eruantalon

01-25-2003, 01:19 PM

Wow this is great. All these smart people saying things for and aginsti it. Yes Green Leaf that was far more intersting then no.

Well Doug, I do think you came up with one of the best ideas here. We will take one topic at a time. I just wanted everyone to get a basic feel of my ideas .

As for the Wale is just a Whale argument. Again this could be fully possibal. As I have said before. But you gave one of the most intersting arguments I have read at the forums in a long time. Thank you vary much.

Lets first discuss a topic and start in a beggining. All things start in the beggining. Only fools try to climb trees from the top down.

First topic numbers

There meaning in Numerology

The number 1

This is a vary powerfull number in numerology.It represtents unity and wholeness. It is the first masculine number. One is the number of beggining, so it is also the number of gods and the beggining of the universe. It is also considered the number of binding. It colors are yellow and gold.

The number 3

Is associated with spring,and consequently with begginings, new vetures and fertile phases of growth. The triangle is the shape that represents it also colors associated with it are mauve, and amethyst.

The number 5

Is connected with freedom and movement,energy,creativity and travel. Its symbole is the pentacle. It is associated with pale colors.

The number 7

The mystic number 7 is associated with philosophy,spiritual insight,and inner contemplation.It is also thought that the number 7 has to do with with dreams and visions. It is the number of people or places that see into orther world or places.

The number 9

This number represents the universe. It is the number of visionarys. It also represents perfection. The number is associated with ideas that are never followed through on. Its colors are all shades of red.

Well I haven't given any thought to what any of these have to do with the books. I just figured I would give you all some definations of the numbers. I got all of the numbers meanings from Numerology books. I wrote the word for word defination of each number.So any one have any ideas on what they mean? Or better yet what they don't mean?

[ January 25, 2003: Message edited by: Eruantalon ]

Hilde Bracegirdle

01-25-2003, 02:27 PM

Sorry that this post isn't responding directly to the idea of numerology, but it is intriguing that the numbers we have been talking about are all prime with the exception of 9. I think it is doubtful that Tolkien had serious reasons for using these numbers in regard to the development of the story, but they do add a certain accent to it. And are fasinating. Why 9 and is that significant?

As far as Mr. Melville's writing, who on earth would pick names (Peleg, Ahab Etc.) with such Biblical connotions if they weren't trying to say something extra....
Call me Ishmael.

smilies/wink.gif

[ January 26, 2003: Message edited by: Hilde Bracegirdle ]

Aratlithiel

01-25-2003, 03:03 PM

Well, Hilde, I happen to have a friend who writes short stories and his latest features a main character named Ezekial. When I asked him if the name held any meaning, he said, "Yeah. I wanted people to call him Zeke 'cause I think it's a cool nick-name."

Sometimes a puddle is just a puddle and the more you stare into it looking for hidden depths, the more mud you get up your nose.

Hilde Bracegirdle

01-25-2003, 03:28 PM

Aratlithiel I guess we'll just have to agree that we disagree. I certainly don't believe that everybody "peppers" his or her work with symbolism, but I feel Melville in that case did.

Iarwain

01-25-2003, 06:50 PM

First, I'd like to formally appologize to Eruantalon. I'm sorry for my immature responses and lack of back up argument. I have been a poor debater in this way.

Now, I will give my reasoning, and I hope that I haven't already posted it. I find symbolism, numerology, and all the like to be extremely annoying and destructive to art in almost every case. There are, however, a few examples in which the artist/author intended their work as an allegory (Gulliver's Travels, 1984, etc.) But for the rest of the Literary world, deep, microscopic level analysis creates a disibility for the reader to enjoy the work as a whole. Numerology alone is, I believe, as ridiculous as "dream-encyclopedias" and astrology and all the rest. These things take the flavor out of reality and make things less interesting. They make the reader force definitions onto art. It turns books into massive codes that are apparently just waiting to be decoded. But then, when we apply these definitions, we discover that the author didn't quite seem to have mastered "the code" when he wrote. It doesn't quite fit, so we make sense out of nonsense, and sacrafice a good book for a mysterious choppy mess.

Iarwain

[ January 25, 2003: Message edited by: Iarwain ]

Lush

01-25-2003, 08:05 PM

sacrafice a good book for a mysterious choppy mess.

Heh. I think it would be wise here to draw a distinction between striving to interpret what a particular work of art (book, painting, film, etc.) means to you and learning from the experience, as opposed to attempting to dissect something just because you want to look smart.

I tend to prefer the former.

I do not, however, think that the LOTR is one of those books choke-full of "hidden meanings" on the same level as something by Fitzgerald, or Nabokov, to give an example. I don't think the sort of intricacy of the layering of different symbols was Tolkien's style or intention.

At the same time, there is a vast difference between the sort of tricks that Gatsby is choke-full of, and the way that an author's own ideology and inspiration find their way into his or her work.

Isilmëiel

01-25-2003, 08:17 PM

Doug:
You may notice that in the Sammath Naur, Frodo puts on the Ring for the sixth time, and then fails of his quest - six being the number of imperfection.

Odd, I've heard that Pythagoras (I believe) thought that 6 was the number of perfection, based on the fact that it is both the product of the first 3 numbers and the sum of them as well.

Iarwain

01-25-2003, 08:40 PM

I agree, Lush, but I don't think that an interpretation of numerology in LotR is exactly "interpreting what it means to you".

I like Pythagoras's idea. It makes sense. smilies/smile.gif

Iarwain

[ January 25, 2003: Message edited by: Iarwain ]

doug*platypus

01-25-2003, 10:56 PM

Trippy! I had noticed that 3+2+1=6, but never thought about the product. Now I want some of what Pythagoras was smoking!

Thanks for the definitions, Eruantalon, I'm quite interested in numerology. However, they don't really seem to fit in so well with the numerology, or significance of numbers, in Tolkien's works. Conspicuously absent is the number 12 (except for the 144 original Elves), so important in the Bible. By this omission, I think it is made clear that while Tolkien may have intended numbers to have significance, it was not the same significance as we might find in our own world.

So, we seemingly have to evaluate LOTR by the Numbers, without reference to our own world, or our own preconceptions. Incidentally, I think I got my own idea of the significance of 6 from the Fire, Water, Burn song:
well if man is 5 and the devil is 6 then that must make me 7
this honky's goin' to heaven!
Also I don't know if Pythagoras' preoccupation with machines, and what could (farfetchedly) be thought of as magic or heresy, would necessarily be in line with Tolkien's version of perfection.

1
Eru, the one god who is over all. The One Ring, made to dominate all the others. One being that is evil incarnate, controlling all the others (Morgoth, then Sauron, before the spread of evil to others such as Saruman). One white tree in Tol Eressëa and in Númenor - no copy was made of Laurelin.

In the first three cases it seems that 1 = power. The one white tree may be just a symbol of reverence to Eru, as carried by the Faithful to Middle-Earth, and rediscovered by Elessar.

2
Two Trees, later becoming the Sun and the Moon. Also two surfaces to the One Ring, which is an important part of its nature (refer to the many threads on the One Ring).

The Trees are silver and gold, and the sun and moon are likewise different forms of light. Possibly a comment on duality, in that Arda apparently needs both. But there is no darkness implied, maybe symbolising that nothing in its beginning is evil.

Frodo and Sam together accomplish the Quest of the Ring (with help from Gollum). Smeagol and Deagol find the Ring. Smeagol and Gollum likewise are two separate wills. So the idea of a couple is tied in with the Ring. Likewise, it takes two (Beren and Lúthien) to regain a Silmaril from Morgoth, and later Eärendil and Elwing to bear it to Aman and beyond. Gollum on his own never achieves anything with the Ring, neither does Bilbo.

3
Three Rings for the Elvenkings. Three Silmarils. The Rings and the Jewels are the central elements of the tales. Also representative of the elements Fire/Earth, Air, Water. This differs from the Greek four elements, the Chinese five elements, and the Egyptian five elements, but remember this is Tolkien's world we're talking about.

The elvenrings and the Silmarils seem to represent, and to form the sum of, the natural world. No wonder they are associated with the Elves, who are very concerned with nature. They may also represent art, as being associated with the Elves and because they are works of craftsmanship.

Also, "Tall ships and tall kings, three times three." Isildur, Anárion and Elendil, each with their own ship(?).

5
Five Istari. Can't think of any other examples.

Actually, if you include Fredegar Bolger, five hobbits set out on the quest. Fatty stays behind, and similarly four of the Istari abandon the quest. Apparently this number cannot sustain itself.

6
Frodo puts the Ring on six times while he has it in his possession.

7
Seven fathers of the Dwarves, also seven dwarf-rings, possibly because of this. Seven palantíri, seven stars in the Valacirca and on Elendil's banner. Seven Valar, and seven Valier. Seven Durins in the line of the Longbeards.

What does it all mean? I have no idea!

Seven circles of Minas Tirith, probably after the seven stars of Elendil.

9
Nine Nazgûl, nine members of the Fellowship. One member of each company is destroyed before the final triumph (Boromir, Witchy).

??

I think I'm on the right track here, but obviously need a lot of help with it.

greyhavener

01-25-2003, 11:00 PM

J.R.R. Tolkien couldn't have hidden meanings into his choice of numbers unless he had studied this idea and bought into it somewhat. I know that he studied fairy tales. There are lots of threes and sevens in fairy tales. I think some nines as well. Does anybody know how familiar Tolkien was with numerology? Did he mention this in his letters? I don't have his letters or I'd look myself.

Eruantalon

01-25-2003, 11:10 PM

Who now smilies/biggrin.gif smilies/biggrin.gif smilies/biggrin.gif laughing and smiling.

This is a lot you got going Doug. Woffff thats a lot. Well I see you all are enjoying the argument.

Thank you for the appology I enjoyed your arguments. I think you are to inelligent to simple say NO repeatedly

Heres an idea. Maybe he created his own mysttic ideals. Just like he made up linages,mythology,charctors ect. Maybe thats the idea create a world onto itself. Devoid of everything from this world.

As for nonsense that takes away from real life. Some people use things to put things into persptive. After living for a short time. Studying religions of the world. Mythology that covers many races. Also looking into things deeply. I have come up with this.

Everything is connected. Everything is one. He who flows with in the true path of knowledge sees this. So they know all elments, time, life flow through each orther.

Nothing is seprate. We only think it is. Some numbers are not really what we think.

Some lives we think we live. The truth is in the quest not the answer.

Some patterns repeat. We only don't see it.

Everything has its way. Everything has its course. Everything grows as to a tree spreading roots and bearing fruit. Bitter or sweet.

[ January 26, 2003: Message edited by: Eruantalon ]

[ January 26, 2003: Message edited by: Eruantalon ]

[ January 26, 2003: Message edited by: Eruantalon ]

doug*platypus

01-26-2003, 06:03 AM

Here are two links to other threads about Tolkien's numbers. I didn't find many at all using the search engine - thanks for starting the thread, Eruantalon!

5 Istari (http://forum.barrowdowns.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=001209)

The Power of Nine (http://forum.barrowdowns.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=002110)

The symbolism of 5 is better delved into on the second thread - it is seen as possibly representing the hand. 5 was definitely an important number to megalithic people for this reason, and it is safe to assume that it could have developed significance in the cultures of Arda.

~ 5 ~
The Five Istari may have been sent as the hand of the Valar, the hand being that part of the body which is most often used for action. The five hobbits who set out were similarly performing action. Five seemed to be the number (coincidentally perhaps) required to initiate the journey.

There were apparently only five passengers to the west in the last chapter of LOTR - Elrond, Galadriel, Gandalf, Frodo and Bilbo. These five were the chief instruments of the defeat of Sauron, at least in terms of LOTR. Aragorn is excluded because he needs to stay in Gondor, although he formed the fifth member of Frodo's company from Bree to Rivendell.

On the subject of hands, it is surely significant that both Frodo and Sauron lose a finger. Frodo only loses his finger because he falls (not literally) at the end and claims the Ring. Perhaps this is some kind of punishment meted out, that both he and Sauron lose a digit through possession of the One Ring. Gollum loses much more than his finger in the Sammath Naur.

This also led me to think that if Sauron put each of the Nazgûl's rings on his fingers, then before Isildur disfingered him, he would have had his hands full. This is a possible explanation for the Nine Nazgûl, although it (perhaps sensibly) doesn't allow for the rings of the elves or dwarves. This leads me to picture Sauron as some jewellery-wearing early day Don King, with Mike Tyson the evil Witch-King of Angmar.

But wait, there's more... we have so far neglected the most obvious use of significant numbers, as used by Bilbo himself. He turns 111 at the same time that Frodo turns 33. 111 is a very odd number (quite apart from being the emergency number in NZ). It's product is 1, which is the only digit that it contains. Its sum is 3, which matches the two threes in Frodo's age, 33. That makes 333, adding up to 9. And 111 added to 33 gives 144, the square of 12 (a number, while not prevalent in Tolkien's work, is very important in the Bible). I don't know what exactly can be inferred by this, but it is plain to see that Bilbo, and therefore Tolkien, thought it very significant indeed.

Lyra Greenleaf

01-26-2003, 01:11 PM

you know what, I'd never thought about the Istari as a hand but that makes a lot of sense...

I'm not sure about the five hobbits, though its possible. As for the five sailing to the West, Im very doubtful- surely other elves went with them? and when you say they were the chief instruments in the defeat, doesnt that cut out a heck of a lot of other people? for a start, to quote elijah wood, "Frodo wouldnt have got far without Sam"

I dont get your point about the nine rings

the birthday numbers are probably the most convincing thig because there was obviously a lot of thought went into it by Tolkien.

these things are possible because they seem deliberate, while other things like what (I'm sorry) Eruantalon say seem a lot more vague.

I think that with the fact that Tolkien didnt just write a book but created a world, it is inevitable that there will be a lot of these things which he intended or didnt, like the importance of these numbers.

i think i was a little hasty (believe it or not i only realised after I wrote that that it might sound like Im quoting treebeard!) dismissing numerology in the books, but on a limited scale. some of it has to be important- such as seven stars and seven stones, does anyone have a theory about seven?- but i think its possible that Tolkien was imagining his own significance, maybe a Gondorian significance, rather than one from our world. Does that make sense?

on the other hand i have to admit i still think a lot of the theories are, well, theoretical!

Lush

01-26-2003, 06:50 PM

I agree, Lush, but I don't think that an interpretation of numerology in LotR is exactly "interpreting what it means to you".

Did I write that? Nope, sure didn't. Although if one really is hung up on numerology, I don't see how it wouldn't. Everybody needs a hobby, right? Better numerology than, say, heroin.

Besides that, however, I think the point about the Istari being like the fingers on the hand of the Valar is a neat deduction. Well done there.

The Saucepan Man

01-26-2003, 07:04 PM

On the one hand (no pun intended), I'm with Artlithiel, Iarwain and Lush on this. When doing English A level, I wrote countless essays on the meaning of particular quotes or themes in works such as Wuthering Heights, A Farewell to Arms and Macbeth. At the same time, while analysing them endlessly for the purposes of my education, I came to appreciate them as the things that they were written for - jolly good novels/plays.

On the other hand, I do not think that the symbolism and allegory in these works is there solely because the teachers of literature tell us that it is. Some writers use it consciously and overtly, such as George Orwell's use of allegory in Animal Farm and 1984. For others, such as I think the Bronte sisters, it is subconscious, but it is nevertheless there. I think that it was probably a combination of both for JRRT. He drew heavily on his knowledge of mythology, for example, in his writings. At the same time, allegories of war or the symbolism of numbers were perhaps included more on a subconscious level.

As readers, we resonate with these things. Again, this is largely subconscious. Unless we are analysing it for the purposes of writing an essay to achieve some qualification (or for the purpose of posting on sites such as this smilies/smile.gif ), we simply enjoy what we are reading and our understanding of whatever deeper meaning might be there resonates with us on a subconscious level.

Clearly, from other postings here (good effort, Doug!), JRRT was influenced in his writings by numerology. I think that there is significance, for example, in the numbers of the Rings of Power. If one is the number of unity, then of course the One Ring was there to rule (unify) them all. And, as I have said, the numbers 3, 7 and 9 are all powerful numbers. But, they will not fit with every interpretation because numbers have been subject to so much interpration themselves. To take an example, Eruantalon states that the number five is associated, amongst other things, with creativity and the pentacle symbol, the symbol of earth. So, wouldn't "five Rings for the Dwarven Lords" have made more sense?

As I have said, I think that JRRT's use of numbers as symbolic is likely to have been on a more subconscious level (although I might be wrong - are there any letters on this?). That doesn't preclude a discussion on the significance of numbers in his works, but I feel pretty sure that they ain't gonna fit every theory.

MLD-Grounds-Keeper-Willie

01-26-2003, 11:43 PM

Well, I skimmed through this thread, so sorry if this was already said. But I cannot believe no one has said the Battle of the Five Armies. I mean, that one's pretty obvious. But whatever, and I always saw it as 6 armies (I counted the wargs as an army).

Well, I really don't agree with your first possible hidden meaning or your 2nd. I just don't think so. Maybe a few numbers had special meanings, but the rest really makes no sense to me.

Belladonna

01-27-2003, 08:05 PM

some quotes from some folks regarding LotR and its symbolism/allegory:

"Comparison to the Bible, on literary grounds, is not eggaterated since the aethetic that guides both is the same stark combination of mythology and morality that lends the credibility of truth."-Kenneth John Atchity

"I cordially dislike allegory in all its manefestations, and always have done so since I grew old and wary enough to detect its presence."- J.R.R. Tolkein

I agree with JRRT on his thoughts of allegory. In school, I have hated "killing", and "vivisecting" (I refrain from using the term 'dissecting', as my teacher never waits until the book is properly dead.) books. It destroys the work and its good points.
Many authors put symbolism and allegory in their works to show the masses their beleifs and views on issues. Others don't. If an author happens to be dead, and their work a masterpeice, it tends to get split open. I think that no author cannot write without absorbing and including at least a little of the happenings around him/her. They can do it either consiously, or subconsiously. I, myself, think that JRRT included this 'allegory' all subconsiously, due to his adversion to it.

Legolas

01-27-2003, 09:18 PM

I think the word 'allegory' has been misused here.

Allegory is conscious and intentional. If it's not, it's not allegory.

But since I have deliberately written a tale, which is built on or out of certain 'religious' ideas, but is not an allegory of them (or anything else), and does not mention them overtly, still less preach them, I will not now depart from that mode, and venture on theological disquisition for which I am not fitted. But I might say that if the tale is 'about' anything (other than itself), it is not as seems widely supposed about 'power'. Power-seeking is only the motive-power that sets events going, and is relatively unimportant, I think. It is mainly concerned with Death, and Immortality; and the 'escapes': serial longevity, and hoarding memory.

This quote covers the theories about numbers meaning something:

There is no 'symbolism' or conscious allegory in my story. Allegory of the sort 'five wizards = five senses' is wholly foreign to my way of thinking. There were five wizards and that is just a unique part of history.
That there is no allegory does not, of course, say there is no applicability. There always is. And since I have not made the struggle wholly unequivocal: sloth and stupidity among hobbits, pride and [illegible] among Elves, grudge and greed in Dwarf-hearts, and folly and wickedness among the 'Kings of Men', and treachery and power-lust even among the 'Wizards', there is I suppose applicability in my story to present times. But I should say, if asked, the tale is not really about Power and Dominion: that only sets the wheels going; it is about Death and the desire for deathlessness. Which is hardly more than to say it is a tale written by a Man!

So something of the teller's own reflections and 'values' will inevitably get worked in. This is not the same as allegory. We all, in groups or as individuals, exemplify general principles; but we do not represent them. The Hobbits are no more an 'allegory' than are (say) the pygmies of the African forest. Gollum is to me just a 'character' – an imagined person – who granted the situation acted so and so under opposing strains, as it appears to he probable that he would (there is always an incalculable element in any individual real or imagined: otherwise he/she would not be an individual but a 'type'.)

doug*platypus

01-28-2003, 06:45 AM

Thanks to everyone posting, for keeping what I believe is a worthwhile thread going. I can understand the tendency for many people to immediately dismiss a concept such as significant numbers in LOTR, especially given Tolkien's thoughts on true allegory. To say his work is devoid of symbolism is inaccurate, though, and not even if the man himself proclaimed it would I believe it.

Symbols such as swords are used frequently, especially the acquiring of magical swords. Even the breaking of Narsil holds a purpose, and Aragorn's reforging of it symoblises his fitness for the task ahead. I think it might be Sigurd that this is borrowed from, but I can't remember. Symbols in numbers are apparently (thank you, Quotemaster Legolas) not as frequent as some of us would like to believe, but neither will I believe that there is absolutely none. Perhaps the more farfetched symbols such as the five Istari can be discounted as coincidence, but the fact that Tolkien could have chosen any number means there was a reason he chose 5. As he said himself, there is hardly a word in its 600,000 or so that is not considered.

I am about halfway through the magnificent Letters of Tolkien at the moment, and have just been informed about the small rhyme of lore "Seven Stars and Seven Stones, and One White Tree". It was plucked out of Tolkien's head at random. A phrase that he somehow had running through his mind and decided to incorporate. Any symbolism derived from this then is purely subconscious.

I dont get your point about the nine rings
My point was that Sauron, having initially ten fingers, could wear the One Ring and each of the Nazgûl's rings, and that this may be a factor in the choice of Nine rings for mortal men doomed to die.

The main point of this post is to point out another obvious occurence of the number 3 as related to the elements:

Vanyar = air
Noldor = earth
Teleri = water

I believe this completes a very convincing case for numerology in Tolkien's work, at least as concerns the number 3.