Lord of the Rings- what a crappy title!

[Sauron the deciever]

Hmmmm i think its an excellent title! i mean in the end its all about the rings isnt it? and the lord (obviosuly sauron) [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

[Eönwë]

I think people 5 years later might have some different ideas.

But it is an amazing title. It just fits really welll, and the words ring (no pun intended) nicely. It might refer to the struggle of who is the lord of the ring, or who wants it, and tries to get, which is what I thought until I read this.

BUT

I like ElanorGamgee's idea, as this could also refer to "Morgoth's Ring" and maybe even, far more obscurely, "the circles of the world". Obviously it has endless suggestios if you look at it as referring to Eru.

[Nerwen]

Yes, but... what can I say? It is very obvious indeed from the text that the "Lord of the Rings" is not Eru. Remember, the "full" title is The Downfall of the Lord of the Rings and the Return of the King.

Would Eru like to be referred to as the "The master of the Dark Tower of Mordor"? Are the Ringwraiths on his payroll?:

"...for the Black Riders are the Ringwraiths, the Nine Servants of the Lord of the Rings."

–Gandalf in Many Meetings.

If the Ring were sent into Tom Bombadil's keeping, would Eru react thus?:

"...soon or late the Lord of the Rings would learn of its hiding place and would bend all his power towards it? I think not. I think that in the end, if all else is conquered, Bombadil will fall, Last as he was First; and then Night will come."

–Glorfindel in The Council of Elrond.

I mean, the idea cited by ElanorGamgee is all very pretty and ingenious– until you look for evidence. Then your only way out is to decide that Tolkien was secretly writing a "God is Evil" story.

Or you could decide to shave with Occam's Razor, in which case:

–The title refers to the main villain, who despite never making a direct appearance, is absolutely vital to the plot; it's very much a bad guy-driven story. I mean, think about it: without Sauron, nothing in the story would have happened!

–It may, as you (Eönwë) say, also have the secondary meaning of "the struggle of who is the lord of the ring, or who wants it".

I think the confusion about the meaning of the title– of which there seemed to be a great deal when the movies first came out– arose because some of the new fans were perhaps fairly unsophisticated. Note the initial poster's shock at the idea of naming a story after the villain, which is actually not that unusual.

[Alfirin]

The problem with a lot of the alternate titles posed is that they almost lead to confusion with existing titles. The Ringbearer sound a bit too much like it shold be a volume of the Neibelung cycle. The War of the Rings does sound a bit too much like a history lesson (maybe becuse it is so like the War of the Roses) The Quest of the Ring (mine)or The Journey of of the Ring (mine again) don't sound terrible but seem to suggest that the jorny was to obtain the Ring not destroy it. The Ring of Doom or The Ring of Darkness ((another one of mine) sound a bit to much like a trashy novel or B-movie. Tolkein own The Red Book of Westmarch just sounds dull. Maybe LOTR is a story so epic that no imaginalbe title is adequate.

[skip spence]

Originally Posted by Alfirin

TThe Ring of Darkness [/I]((another one of mine) sound a bit to much like a trashy novel or B-movie.

How about Crack of Doom?

[Eönwë]

Originally Posted by skip spence

How about Crack of Doom?

What can anyone say to that

[Boromir88]

Or maybe...

The Life and Times of Frodo Baggins: The epic tale that chronicles the journey of pain, torture, and suffering of a tiny hobbit in pursuit of destroying Sauron; the Dark Lord who represents all that is soul-less and wrong.

[Eönwë]

Or maybe just write the whole book as the title.

edit: Kind of fits in with Alfirin's:

Originally Posted by Alfirin

Maybe LOTR is a story so epic that no imaginalbe title is adequate.