Quote:
|
I don't think there's any doubt that LotR is hobbit-centric (that's going to get me in trouble with the posters): does this not mean that its narrative will be as parochial and limited as the hobbits themselves?
|
Fordim,
Yes, the Red Book of Westmarch is definitely hobbit-centric. Yet the Hobbits of the Shire were not collectively responsible for the Red Book, rather it is the three individuals who were most closely associated with the matter of the Ring.
In judging the Red Book's narrative and determining whether it is "parochial" and "limited", we have to focus not on the Hobbit community as a whole but on those three individuals who were the primary compilers/editors/writers of this unique document: Bilbo, Frodo, and Samwise. The earliest chapters concerning matters of Hobbit culture and history, to which you refer, would indeed have been the responsibility of Bilbo.
Bilbo was cetainly capable of "altering the record" as we see in the chapter Riddles in the Dark that appears in the Hobbit. It is also true that he was "under the influence of the Ring" directly or indirectly when he wrote his portion of the Red Book. Yet, the one thing I would not accuse him of is being "parochial" and "limited". He is the compiler not only of the Red Book, but also of the Silmarillion. His knowledge of Elves, of Elvish culture and language, and hence his exposure to other cultures was second to none in the Shire. In Gandalf's words from UT, it was Bilbo whom the
istar chose to break through the parochialism of the Shire and teach them about the wide world that surrounded them. In Gandalf's words....
Quote:
|
....you cannot teach that sort of thing to a whole people quickly. There was not time. And anyway you must begin at some point, with some one person. I dare say he was "chosen" and I was only chosen to choose him; but I picked out Bilbo.
|
I do not think Gandalf was mistaken in his choice of Bilbo to break through the parochialism of the Shire. And as an experienced historian, Bilbo would have been capable of dealing with any bias in the local sources he encountered. That said, we can not expect an Elvish or Mannish viewpoint from either of our three Hobbit narrators. Any more than we could expect a Hobbit viewpoint from an Elf or a Man.
In the writing of history, we are all limited by who we are. Yet that is a different thing than saying that the Redbook may "devalue or misrepresent other peoples or ways of living that are not 'up' to their (i.e. Hobbit) standards." I don't see a consistent pattern of such negative judgements in the latter pages of the book.
In my opinion, the three Hobbits responsible for the Redbook -- Bilbo, Frodo, and Samwise -- as well as their two companions from Buckland and Tukborough--show a refreshing attitude towards many of the new cultures that they encounter in their journeys. I would not accuse them of parochialism, although their understanding on many points is necessarily limited by the bounds of their expeience.
Strange to say....the same thing that seems to bother you about the book, its Hobbit-centric narration, is one of the principal things that brings delight to me.
Are we straying too far from the prologue itself?