LotR -- Book 5 - Chapter 04 - The Siege of Gondor

[davem]

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

This may be deserving of its own topic, but...

I'm not sure that Middle-earth would have been left in chaos. Gondor would have been left under the rule of Faramir (and I can think of far worse people to be ruled by). Rohan might have ended up being ruled by Eowyn. That opens up the possibility of a Gondor/Rohan merger...

I guess the real difference is that there would have been no king over the wide empty spaces of Eriador.

Ok, but there would have been no Aragorn-Arwen marriage, with the loss of that bloodline stretching back to Melian & beyond. I certainly can't imagine either of them marrying anyone else...

I think you have a point about another thread on this subject - was Aragorn's succeeding to the throne of Gondor necessary, & if so for what reasons? Faramir would not have assumed the Kingship of Gondor, so the realm would have remained ruled by a steward 'until the King come again'.

[Encaitare]

Maybe the people of Gondor would have adopted a new system. If Aragorn had died, leaving no heir, then there would have been no one else to rule. Faramir was a beloved leader in Minas Tirith, and perhaps knowing that there was no "rightful" king anymore, the people there would have decided to crown Faramir instead. Kind of like how in the youth of the US, people wanted Washington to be king.

Mere speculation, of course.

[Kuruharan]

Ok, but there would have been no Aragorn-Arwen marriage, with the loss of that bloodline stretching back to Melian & beyond.

Well, yes this is true. This is an almost "elvish" point in not wanting this last little bit of "magic" to pass from Middle-earth.

If the king had not returned it would not have made such a grand ending (in such case some "modernist" critics might have found it more appealing). However, Gandalf as a character could not concern himself with such things. On the other hand, he was rather "elvish" in disposition.

Maybe the people of Gondor would have adopted a new system. If Aragorn had died, leaving no heir, then there would have been no one else to rule. Faramir was a beloved leader in Minas Tirith, and perhaps knowing that there was no "rightful" king anymore, the people there would have decided to Faramir instead. Kind of like how in the youth of the US, people wanted Washington to be king.

I think Faramir would have had a reaction similar to that of Washington.

[Encaitare]

I think Faramir would have had a reaction similar to that of Washington.

Aye, and I think ye speak truth.

[davem]

Who made the fireworks?

The bells of day had scarcely rung out again, a mockery in the unlightened dark, when far away he saw fires spring up, across in the dim spaces where the walls of the Pelennor stood. The watchman cried aloud, and all men in the City stood to arms. Now ever and anon there was a red flash, and slowly through the heavy air dull rumbles could be heard.
'They have taken the wall!' men cried. 'They are blasting breaches in it. They are coming!'

This is the 'blasting fire' of Orthanc which breached the wall of Helm's Deep:

"But the Orcs have brought a devilry from Orthanc," said Aragorn. "They have a blasting fire, and with it they took the Wall. If they cannot come in the caves, they may seal up those that are inside. But now we must turn all our thought to our own defence."

So, was Aragorn right? Was it Saruman who invented 'gunpowder', or did he learn it from Sauron?

Or did Gandalf start the whole nasty business off - he's the one who's famous for fireworks after all?

Gandalf seems, on the face of it, the most likely candidate - he was the bearer of Narya, the Ring of Fire. Is it possible that Gandalf's little toys inspired his fellow Istari to come up with the explosives used at Helm's Deep, & that Sauron then obtained the knowledge from him via the Palantir?

Whatever the answer it seems that this 'blasting fire' was less of a shock to the Gondorians than it was to the Rohirrim. Its appearance at Helm's Deep certainly seems to have thrown the defenders into confusion, whereas the men of Minas Tirith appear to see it almost as a 'standard tactic' of Sauron's forces - they are not stunned into silence by something totally unexpected, but know that a 'flash' & a 'dull rumble' in the distance means explosives.

A more interesting question is how far away they were from creating cannons? Probably not far. It seems that the defeat of Sauron put an end to the development of firearms. That technology dies with the defeat of Sauron. The West does not take it up & make use of it later - even for self-defence. I don't know whether that was Tolkien's comment on the use made of Nazi rocket technology by the allies in the post war period, but it certainly points up a difference between the victors in the War of the Ring & the victors of WW2.

Another interesting weapon is the incendiary 'bombs'. As Lalwende says:

And what about the secret art that caused the missiles to burst into flame as they landed? Could they have been incendiary devices, filled with unstable compounds?

Tolkien seems to be referring to something like Greek Fire. Again, 'high-technology' weaponry is being employed against a civilisation armed only with swords, arrows & spears. Clearly, the West would stand little chance of survival if the Ring had not been destroyed, but I think there is perhaps a deeper theme underlying the West's refusal to use this kind of weaponry. It is like the Ring in one way - use of it will corrupt the user. Just as one cannot use the Ring without becoming like Sauron so one cannot use the 'lesser' weapons of the Enemy without risking a similar fate. To behave like the enemy requires one to think like him, to think like him is to risk becoming like him. The promise of easy victory is what lures one to the edge of the abyss. Just as the West must reject the Ring, so it must reject the use of 'blasting fire' & incendiary devices.

Of course, that's fine for a fantasy world - things are different in the 'real world' aren't they?

[Lhunardawen]

Reading Lalwendë's 'defense' of Denethor made me feel a bit remorseful of the way I have viewed him the first time I read this chapter, and even until now. I had the spectator's perspective that made me know more things concerning the Ring than Denethor did, plus I had the privilege of 'being in the Council of Elrond' while he never even saw his 'emissary' to the Council again.

With these in mind, I'm beginning to entertain notions that maybe it was Gandalf who erred all along. He was too harsh in dealing with Denethor's misconceptions about the Ring, and he did not even think of correcting him gently - not that Denethor would listen to him. But at the very least he could have done his part in lovingly trying to rebuke Denethor, even though him being scorned upon in return by the Steward is almost a given. Giving Gandalf the benefit of the doubt, though, maybe he had been too caught up with the events that he did not think of doing so.

But on the other hand, probably it was Denethor's 'responsibility' as Steward to do his research on the Ring, to (sort of) get to know his Enemy better. And at this critical point in time, Gandalf had no room for irresponsible Stewards.

[Bêthberry]

As always, late to this debate, but what garden is ever complete and never in need of more tending, eh?

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Looking objectively at Denethor and forgetting for a moment how much we all love Faramir, his behaviour shows him to have been a great leader who has slowly been worn down by the threat of war.

I'm not so sure it is our love for Faramir which colours our reading of Denethor, but the cumulative effects of our reading the story. I think Lhunardawen's initial stance as a reader is closer to what the narrative offers.

As I reread this chapter, I was struck by how much our interpretation of the Steward depends upon our remembering the fall and passing of Boromir and the Council of Elrond. And of how well we have attended to Sam and Frodo's story and the effect of the Ring there.

There is, first of all, Pippin's rather bizarre image of Denethor:

There Denethor sat in a grey gloom, like an old patient spider, Pippin thought; he did not seem to have moved since the day before.

Is it simply happenstance that Tolkien gives to Pippin the spider image or are we to recall the malevolent creature whose personal self-indulgences have led to so terrible a state for Sam and Frodo? Shelob of course left others immobile in her webs, but this spider-Denethor seems to be trapped within a web of his own making. However we recall--or not--Shelob, Pippin's image is hardly one of grandeur and, indeed, implies a self-imposed imprisonment. The suggestion is that Denethor is trapped by his own making and is not a leader who is reacting to events, but is frozen. At least, this would appear to be Pippin's interpretation.

Then there is the meeting in Denethor's private chambers, where Faramir is to report to his Lord upon his ten days' errand. How Tolkien handles this scene is interesting, for we have not one word from Denethor to Faramir about strategic details. Yes, he bows his head as if he knows all, and we come to understand why he should be so unquestioning about events, but Tolkien gives to Gandalf the role of military strategist, having the wizard ask pointedly about time, days, distances travelled. Denethor is moved to involvement, to reply, only when he is displeased by the personality of his younger son. Despite his criticism that Faramir fails to demonstrate the appropriate miliatary judgement, Denethor himself does not display such judgement and instead reacts not to the military questions at hand, but to something personal and intimate between him and his son; Denethor also allows himself the luxury of jealousy with Gandalf rather than remaining above questions of personality.

Then too, we have Denethor discussing the use of the Ring in terms which recall those Boromir used at the Council of Elrond, the pride and arrogance of an old family who believes itself personally entitled to rule (and, within Tolkien's values of Middle-earth, without the blood of kings to vouchsafe that belief). Denethor never once asks Gandalf to report on the Council of Elrond; he never inquires about Elrond's reasoning. It is true that Gandalf does not offer it, but once again, Denthor fails to ask a military strategist's questions.

How ironic are his words: "He would have brought me a mighty gift." At this point in the story, readers have enough knowledge to understand that Gandalf here is in the right when he says,

"He [Boromir] would have stretched out his hand to this thing, and taking it he would have fallen. He would have kept it for his own, and when he returned you would not have known your son. . . . And now hearing you speak I trust you less, no more than Boromir. Nay, stay your wrath. I do not trust myself with this, and I refused this thing, even as a freely given gift."

Surely also as Denethor speaks of what he would do with the Ring readers remember Galadriel's refusing of it.

My point is less to attack Denethor than to consider how the chapter leads readers to make certain interpretations about its events. The chapter is slippery as befits a depiction of a man who is in the final stages of madness. How much so, readers will learn in the next chapter when Denethor decides to place the still living Faramir on a burning pyre with himself. But for now, we have a complex character who has many sympathetic and positive traits but who has fallen by a technology as powerful as the Ring. Denethor is unknowingly the traitor within and this chapter gives readers the chance to balance the Steward's point of view with that of Gandalf. We might wish that Gandald had been more patient and persuasive with Denethor, but all of the wizard's statements are points which we as readers have already seen are the 'right' interpretation.

In other words, Denethor is fated to not understand because the author wished his character not to understand, and provided evidence in the text for readers to see how his understanding failed.