The Structure of The Lord of the Rings

[Fordim Hedgethistle]

I've already broached this topic once before in another thread, but I did so in a relatively restrictive way. The discussions in the Chapter by Chapter forum have been broadening my understanding of the structure of LotR and I thought it worthy of a thread of its own.

The Lord of the Rings is, as the Professor himself once admitted, "a funny old thing" (and who here could say "boo" to that? ): it's not really a novel, nor is it any of the other tags that usually get thrown at it (epic, myth, legend, etc). It is simply, and powerfully, a story. I do not want to start a discussion on the genre of LotR (since that would be an argument over which label to apply; although the topic may very well come up here) but about how it is structured. That is, what holds it together? How is it built? How has Tolkien managed to write such a vast and complicated story, really, a series of connected stories, and yet have them work and meld so seamlessly (is it seamless?) into a single narrative?

At times the story seems almost hopelessly episodic, particularly in the earlier chapters where there are a series of disconnected adventures that have nothing to do with the principle action; sure, there are thematic resonances, but these episodes are not an integral part of the overall structure and yet they make up almost 100 pages of the tale.

At other times the narrative becomes almost grippingly linear as the action rushes forward, but then the story breaks and swerves away to another story.

Sometimes, it's as though we are listening to an oral tale, being spoken to us by someone who is relating events as they occur to him; at others it reads like a legendary account transcribed by a careful monk or scholar from historical records.

There are jarring shifts in tone of voice, perspective, focus -- everything. So again, I ask, how is it that Tolkien manages to unify the whole?

As a first attempt at answering this, allow me to put forward a few possibilities. None of these is particuarly well worked out yet. . .hence the thread!

Imagery: This is probably the most significant way in which Tolkien holds things together, particularly through the central image of the Ring itself, insofar as all the action is directed toward the Ring in some way. But is it not problematic that the story would be centred upon/organised around an image of evil?

There are many many other images that recur throughout the story as well: trees, the Road, water, towers, vision, light, and on and on and on. To what extent do these images hold things together? Are they the primary means whereby this odd mishmash is united into a single tale? Does not the whole thing begin to become something of a dream-like experience inasmuch as the only things that unify the experience are the relatively non-linear, non-narrative images?

Thematic Concerns: Just as there are a number of recurring images there are a number of recurring themes and ideas that keep cropping up. Just a brief list would be friendship, time, evil and good, magic, art, nature, duty, loyalty, kingship, authority, and on and on and on. Like the images, however, these themes do not seem to be 'going anywhere' insofar as I don't see any one of them taking centre stage, nor do I see any of them really being advanced and developed in a linear way. Just like the episodic plot, themes are picked up by particular characters or particular moments (or particular images) explored for a time, developed in a particular way, and then left. It's more of a cumulative effect rather than an evolutionary one as the thematic concerns accrue and gain new views rather than being 'resovled' or 'concluded' in some absolute way.

The Circular Narrative: The story ends where it begins (the Shire), and this is just one instance of 'return' or even 'regressing'; is the story held together simply because we keep going around and around the same sorts of stories and action. One of the clearest structural devices in the story is the repeating pattern of escape-danger-refuge. This is an effective and economical way of telling a story, but does it not tend to imprison the action to some extent? How can the story be 'going' anywhere when it keeps reworking the same pattern of action, and then going back to its beginning?

Pairings and Twinnings: Again, I've already raised this topic elsewhere, but I think it deserves being readdressed as part of a larger discussion. In addition to the sense of eternal return/recurrence in the action, the characters themselves do not seem to have a wholly independent existence, in that each one of them is mirrored/reflected or repeated and completed in other characters: Merry and Pippin are a pair who reflect Frodo and Sam; Sauron and Saruman -- Aragorn and Gandalf; Galadriel -- Eowyn; Theoden -- Denethor; Boromir and Aragorn -- Aragorn and Faramir; Smeagol and Gollum; and on and on and on. Given this, how can we look at the story as one centred upon individual heroes? It seems to be the story of Aragorn and Frodo, but we cannot discuss these single heroic figures without reference to other heroes and types of heroes -- so how is the heroic narrative being structured: around individual experience or groups of people?

There are a lot of questions here, and much to consider (I think) but I would love to see what others make of all this. How is the story of LotR put together? What kind of a story is it? What holds it together? What takes its various parts and pulls them together into a single tale?