The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum - View Single Post

Bêthberry · 03-23-2007, 06:21 AM

Perhaps we are looking at this question from an inappropriate perspective, one derived more from attitudes in the Primary World than from those in the sub-created world. In Middle-earth, death is the gift of Eru. Therefore, it should not be used or seen as a form of punishment. All Men deserve death.

Gollem is a hobbit, and hobbits belong to the race of Men. They share this gift. Thus, Gollem does 'deserve' death, as it is his birthright.

Even more, his fate is one of the strongest aesthetic elements in the story. To imagine any other ending for him would, I think, rob the story of one of its most poignant moments. Its irony and the unexpected climax represents poetic justice, of the kind we often see in stories and rarely in history. (Well, I suppose we could, along with Batman's The Penguin, debate whether this is simply tragic irony.) This is one of the traditional markers used to suggest the priority of story over history.

We could perhaps debate if this attitude towards death is sufficiently developed in LotR for readers to recognise it as very different from the usual western attitude towards death as something to be feared and a punishment. We could also consider if this gift to Man represents Eru's form of revision of his creation. Is it possible to say that he recognised how morose and melancoly the Elves became because of their longevity and 'corrected' this by granting death to Men? This, however, would be a Legendarium topic rather than one simply related to LotR.

"The story's the thing wherein to catch the conscience of the Ring."

03-23-2007, 06:21 AM	#69
Bêthberry Cryptic Aura Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 6,003	Perhaps we are looking at this question from an inappropriate perspective, one derived more from attitudes in the Primary World than from those in the sub-created world. In Middle-earth, death is the gift of Eru. Therefore, it should not be used or seen as a form of punishment. All Men deserve death. Gollem is a hobbit, and hobbits belong to the race of Men. They share this gift. Thus, Gollem does 'deserve' death, as it is his birthright. Even more, his fate is one of the strongest aesthetic elements in the story. To imagine any other ending for him would, I think, rob the story of one of its most poignant moments. Its irony and the unexpected climax represents poetic justice, of the kind we often see in stories and rarely in history. (Well, I suppose we could, along with Batman's The Penguin, debate whether this is simply tragic irony.) This is one of the traditional markers used to suggest the priority of story over history. We could perhaps debate if this attitude towards death is sufficiently developed in LotR for readers to recognise it as very different from the usual western attitude towards death as something to be feared and a punishment. We could also consider if this gift to Man represents Eru's form of revision of his creation. Is it possible to say that he recognised how morose and melancoly the Elves became because of their longevity and 'corrected' this by granting death to Men? This, however, would be a Legendarium topic rather than one simply related to LotR. "The story's the thing wherein to catch the conscience of the Ring." __________________ I’ll sing his roots off. I’ll sing a wind up and blow leaf and branch away.