Deeper symbolism and hidden meanings in the books

[The Saucepan Man]

On the one hand (no pun intended), I'm with Artlithiel, Iarwain and Lush on this. When doing English A level, I wrote countless essays on the meaning of particular quotes or themes in works such as Wuthering Heights, A Farewell to Arms and Macbeth. At the same time, while analysing them endlessly for the purposes of my education, I came to appreciate them as the things that they were written for - jolly good novels/plays.

On the other hand, I do not think that the symbolism and allegory in these works is there solely because the teachers of literature tell us that it is. Some writers use it consciously and overtly, such as George Orwell's use of allegory in Animal Farm and 1984. For others, such as I think the Bronte sisters, it is subconscious, but it is nevertheless there. I think that it was probably a combination of both for JRRT. He drew heavily on his knowledge of mythology, for example, in his writings. At the same time, allegories of war or the symbolism of numbers were perhaps included more on a subconscious level.

As readers, we resonate with these things. Again, this is largely subconscious. Unless we are analysing it for the purposes of writing an essay to achieve some qualification (or for the purpose of posting on sites such as this [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img] ), we simply enjoy what we are reading and our understanding of whatever deeper meaning might be there resonates with us on a subconscious level.

Clearly, from other postings here (good effort, Doug!), JRRT was influenced in his writings by numerology. I think that there is significance, for example, in the numbers of the Rings of Power. If one is the number of unity, then of course the One Ring was there to rule (unify) them all. And, as I have said, the numbers 3, 7 and 9 are all powerful numbers. But, they will not fit with every interpretation because numbers have been subject to so much interpration themselves. To take an example, Eruantalon states that the number five is associated, amongst other things, with creativity and the pentacle symbol, the symbol of earth. So, wouldn't "five Rings for the Dwarven Lords" have made more sense?

As I have said, I think that JRRT's use of numbers as symbolic is likely to have been on a more subconscious level (although I might be wrong - are there any letters on this?). That doesn't preclude a discussion on the significance of numbers in his works, but I feel pretty sure that they ain't gonna fit every theory.

[MLD-Grounds-Keeper-Willie]

Well, I skimmed through this thread, so sorry if this was already said. But I cannot believe no one has said the Battle of the Five Armies. I mean, that one's pretty obvious. But whatever, and I always saw it as 6 armies (I counted the wargs as an army).

Well, I really don't agree with your first possible hidden meaning or your 2nd. I just don't think so. Maybe a few numbers had special meanings, but the rest really makes no sense to me.

some quotes from some folks regarding LotR and its symbolism/allegory:

"Comparison to the Bible, on literary grounds, is not eggaterated since the aethetic that guides both is the same stark combination of mythology and morality that lends the credibility of truth."-Kenneth John Atchity

"I cordially dislike allegory in all its manefestations, and always have done so since I grew old and wary enough to detect its presence."- J.R.R. Tolkein

I agree with JRRT on his thoughts of allegory. In school, I have hated "killing", and "vivisecting" (I refrain from using the term 'dissecting', as my teacher never waits until the book is properly dead.) books. It destroys the work and its good points.
Many authors put symbolism and allegory in their works to show the masses their beleifs and views on issues. Others don't. If an author happens to be dead, and their work a masterpeice, it tends to get split open. I think that no author cannot write without absorbing and including at least a little of the happenings around him/her. They can do it either consiously, or subconsiously. I, myself, think that JRRT included this 'allegory' all subconsiously, due to his adversion to it.

[Legolas]

I think the word 'allegory' has been misused here.

Allegory is conscious and intentional. If it's not, it's not allegory.

But since I have deliberately written a tale, which is built on or out of certain 'religious' ideas, but is not an allegory of them (or anything else), and does not mention them overtly, still less preach them, I will not now depart from that mode, and venture on theological disquisition for which I am not fitted. But I might say that if the tale is 'about' anything (other than itself), it is not as seems widely supposed about 'power'. Power-seeking is only the motive-power that sets events going, and is relatively unimportant, I think. It is mainly concerned with Death, and Immortality; and the 'escapes': serial longevity, and hoarding memory.

This quote covers the theories about numbers meaning something:

There is no 'symbolism' or conscious allegory in my story. Allegory of the sort 'five wizards = five senses' is wholly foreign to my way of thinking. There were five wizards and that is just a unique part of history.
That there is no allegory does not, of course, say there is no applicability. There always is. And since I have not made the struggle wholly unequivocal: sloth and stupidity among hobbits, pride and [illegible] among Elves, grudge and greed in Dwarf-hearts, and folly and wickedness among the 'Kings of Men', and treachery and power-lust even among the 'Wizards', there is I suppose applicability in my story to present times. But I should say, if asked, the tale is not really about Power and Dominion: that only sets the wheels going; it is about Death and the desire for deathlessness. Which is hardly more than to say it is a tale written by a Man!

So something of the teller's own reflections and 'values' will inevitably get worked in. This is not the same as allegory. We all, in groups or as individuals, exemplify general principles; but we do not represent them. The Hobbits are no more an 'allegory' than are (say) the pygmies of the African forest. Gollum is to me just a 'character' – an imagined person – who granted the situation acted so and so under opposing strains, as it appears to he probable that he would (there is always an incalculable element in any individual real or imagined: otherwise he/she would not be an individual but a 'type'.)

[doug*platypus]

Thanks to everyone posting, for keeping what I believe is a worthwhile thread going. I can understand the tendency for many people to immediately dismiss a concept such as significant numbers in LOTR, especially given Tolkien's thoughts on true allegory. To say his work is devoid of symbolism is inaccurate, though, and not even if the man himself proclaimed it would I believe it.

Symbols such as swords are used frequently, especially the acquiring of magical swords. Even the breaking of Narsil holds a purpose, and Aragorn's reforging of it symoblises his fitness for the task ahead. I think it might be Sigurd that this is borrowed from, but I can't remember. Symbols in numbers are apparently (thank you, Quotemaster Legolas) not as frequent as some of us would like to believe, but neither will I believe that there is absolutely none. Perhaps the more farfetched symbols such as the five Istari can be discounted as coincidence, but the fact that Tolkien could have chosen any number means there was a reason he chose 5. As he said himself, there is hardly a word in its 600,000 or so that is not considered.

I am about halfway through the magnificent Letters of Tolkien at the moment, and have just been informed about the small rhyme of lore "Seven Stars and Seven Stones, and One White Tree". It was plucked out of Tolkien's head at random. A phrase that he somehow had running through his mind and decided to incorporate. Any symbolism derived from this then is purely subconscious.

I dont get your point about the nine rings

My point was that Sauron, having initially ten fingers, could wear the One Ring and each of the Nazgûl's rings, and that this may be a factor in the choice of Nine rings for mortal men doomed to die.

The main point of this post is to point out another obvious occurence of the number 3 as related to the elements:

Vanyar = air
Noldor = earth
Teleri = water

I believe this completes a very convincing case for numerology in Tolkien's work, at least as concerns the number 3.

[The Saucepan Man]

Thank you Legolas for reminding me that allegory is a conscious and intentional device. It is amazing how quickly these concepts that are drummed into us during the educational process depart the mind when no longer required on a regular basis. [img]smilies/rolleyes.gif[/img]

The evidence appears pretty conclusive that JRRT intended no allegory in his works.

The use of symbolism can be both conscious and un(sub)conscious. JRRT states that there is no symbolism in his story, presumably meaning no conscious use of it. Nevertheless that surprises me. I would imagine that someone with his depth of knowledge would draw on that knowledge in creating his works.

[Iarwain]

To good 'ole Lush. My friend you did say :

interpret what a particular work of art ... means to you

I do agree that numerology is in most cases a "better" hobby than heroin, but sometimes its hurtful to the book that you project it on. Does it understandsss usss precioussss?? Does it? We wantsses it to agree, we does. Perhapss we will teaches it something, precious? [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] [img]smilies/tongue.gif[/img] [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]


Iarwain

[ January 31, 2003: Message edited by: Iarwain ]

[GaladrieloftheOlden]

I saw a program about Tokien a while ago, and I don't remember much about it. All I remember is one point everyone (Tolkien, his kids, everyone else) semed very anxious to make: the Lord of the Rings does not have allegory init. However, Tolkien my have unconsiously mixed some in. I don't think anything that "deep down" though. [img]smilies/evil.gif[/img]

[Lush]

I do agree that numerology is in most cases a "better" hobby than heroin, but sometimes its hurtful to the book that you project it on.

You can't "hurt" a book. You can make yourself look like an a$$ while digging for stuff that simply isn't there. That's on one hand. On the other hand, I think most of us in today's society (with the possible exlcusions of totalitarian regimes) have every right to make an a$$ out of ourselves any time we wish. I don't believe it's anyone's place to tell anyone else to stop theorizing; disagreeing with someone's theory is one thing, effectively trying to make them shut up is a whole other thing entirely.

[Iarwain]

Who, please tell me, wants to make themselves an @$$? I'd really like to know this. Perhaps I'll become a totalitarian dictator some day...

Iarwain

[Lush]

Who, please tell me, wants to make themselves an @$$? I'd really like to know this.

Since you have obviously missed the joke (thus breaking my heart [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img] ), I will not respond to your question.

Perhaps I'll become a totalitarian dictator some day...

Just for the sake of preventing people from digging for "hidden meaning" in Tolkien's work? Surely you jest! [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

[Iarwain]

Why not? at the same time, I could purge the world of flauntuous Orlie lovers. I could change my name to Iarwain and make the international anthem "Ho! Tom Bombadil, Tom Bombadillo!" How amazing would that be?

Iarwain

[Lush]

Why not? at the same time, I could purge the world of flauntuous Orlie lovers. I could change my name to Iarwain and make the international anthem "Ho! Tom Bombadil, Tom Bombadillo!" How amazing would that be?

Touché, my friend. Much more amazing than what the Saddams of the world have had to offer us.

But while I am not a liberal per se (I'm Russian, I don't care), I do stand by the old "I may disagree with what you have to say, but will defend to the death your right to say it..." That goes for interpretations of Tolkien's work as well.

Alright, and now that I have butchered that expression (does anyone remember how it goes exactly?), does anyone else (Iarwain included) have anything actually insightful to post on this subject?

[Iarwain]

Nothing useful to contribute here...
However, I would like to say that, as your dictator I would give all Tolkienites the benefits of my global domination. Frodo lives, vote Iarwain!

Iarwain

[Nevvasaiel]

For those of you who are interested, there's an article here A parable of power
on various associations with Tolkien's work.