Quote:
|
Tolkien was trying to preserve a very delicate balance between his understanding of the Northern theory of courage on the one hand and his own religious views on the other
|
LotR shows little, if any, sign of ofermode. Aragorn, Gandalf & co are restraiend and wise; the hobbits, arguably the main characters, are as un-ofermode as you could get. Boromir could be an example, but he is not a main character; Theoden and Eomir could show this at Pellenor Fields, but again, this is singular of them, not necessarily descriptive of their nature.
Quote:
|
To reduce Tolkien's book to conflict on a physical plain is to misapprehend its nature entirely, and worse: to reduce it to a tired Hollywood cliché that little people with pure hearts can overturn mighty empires.
|
The boldened part contradicts statements from the book or letters, which have been quoted at least once here, which express that idea in almost identical terms. I don't know how else to refute it. I don't know if it was already a cliche during his time, but he certainly didn't give a damn.
Quote:
|
Tolkien wasn't saying that the weak can defeat the strong: he was saying that with God's help the righteous can (not will) defeat the wicked
|
Unless the strong is impossible to defeat (which is not the case in Arda - there is no supreme, invicible power, besides Eru), then the weak can defeat the strong.