Tolkien's 'Deus ex Machina'

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

Jackson's Army of the Dead does at least fit within the context of the film and does not suddenly appear without explanation.

You're right, but if one looks at the actual pictures in the movie, the army of the dead just does it all by themselves (see the green going through everything, not leaving the human defenders, Gondorians or Rohirrim, a chance to play a role!).

So here I will side with Boro. That is just bad film-making (and Lommy had nice points about that).

But seriously, coming up with this army of the dead in a way Tolkien does it is not so clearly a DeM as they kind of play their part but don't make it alone, without regard to others filling their places.

I would still go for the eagles as the main source of DeM solutions in Tolkien...

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

You're right, but if one looks at the actual pictures in the movie, the army of the dead just does it all by themselves (see the green going through everything, not leaving the human defenders, Gondorians or Rohirrim, a chance to play a role!).

Looked at in comparison to the books, this would be an example of how they were 'dumbed down' for the films. But the question really is was that necessary in order to make a blockbusting set of films? Is film subtle enough to get the ideas of Tolkien across as he did?

All I have to say for now is that all of the criticisms I've heard about deus ex machina seem to come from those who have not read the books. Which to me suggests that Tolkien knew what 'dangerous machines' were, but Jackson maybe did not?

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

All I have to say for now is that all of the criticisms I've heard about deus ex machina seem to come from those who have not read the books. Which to me suggests that Tolkien knew what 'dangerous machines' were, but Jackson maybe did not?

I would agree with you about this difference between Tolkien and Jackson. But would still consider at least the eagles as a kind of disturbingly "out of thin air rescuers"... even with Tolkien himself: Bilbo & Dwarves from the orcs, the battle of seven armies (maybe?), Gandalf from Orthanc, Frodo & Sam from Mount Doom... Somehow they just made the Day everytime as things were looking gloomy - but otherwise they didn't involve themselves too much in things unfolding. So being the firemen who spend their days at the station and come to help at the utmost danger? Kind of DeM in reserve?

[Lalwendë]

I agree the Eagles are a bit of a problem, but they still seem to 'fit' to me. They only appear at the most desperate of times, and sometimes not even then, and they only appear after great efforts have been made. Now I would separate The Hobbit out from this consideration as it was written as a children's story, and deus ex machina are to be expected (within reason, there's no need to resort to the 'pigwiggenry' that Tolkien so hated!), but in LotR, they may seem very jarring.

The other thing of course is that the Eagles appear when Gandalf is about, and both Gandalf and the Eagles are servants of Manwe. Though this is only something we would know by reading the Sil of course, maybe the fact that to readers of LotR there is internal consistency stems from the consistency to be found in Tolkien's greater work?

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

The other thing of course is that the Eagles appear when Gandalf is about, and both Gandalf and the Eagles are servants of Manwe. Though this is only something we would know by reading the Sil of course

As someone who holds the Silm in much higher esteem than the LotR I must still kind of respond to this. I'm not sure if the connection still makes the appearance of the Eagles at the most perilous moments the less suspectible to being DeM. And I don't want to bog down with terminology here... DeM, happenstance rescuers, hard earned friends, natural partners to be able to be there in time, whatever. Anyhow we don't have tales of the eagles in a proportion of their critical influence in the important moments. So they are kind of outside things not central to the stories but nicely in place when needed.

I'm not saying they are just cheap tricks, but they seem to be not something that integrally make a difference in to the stories as characters (even if the prof. talks something of them here and there - I have not studied HoME from A-Z), but they tend to have the role of rescuing others from tight spots just out from flash. Compare them to other critical situations in Silm or LotR and I think there is a difference between the eagles and other decisive actors...

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

So here I will side with Boro. That is just bad film-making

Bad film making does not necessarily equate to Deus Ex Machina.

Dictionary.com gives the following definition:

deus ex machina \DAY-uhs-eks-MAH-kuh-nuh; -nah; -MAK-uh-nuh\, noun:
1. In ancient Greek and Roman drama, a god introduced by means of a crane to unravel and resolve the plot.
2. Any active agent who appears unexpectedly to solve an apparently insoluble difficulty.

The arrival of the Army of the Dead is not unexpected, as the background to their involvement has already been spelled out in previous scenes. Indeed, their arrival is somewhat less unexpected in the film than it is in the book. Moreover, they arrive in consequence of the endeavours of one of the "heroes" of the story, rather than appearing out of nowehere or being "sent by the gods".

But I think that, in order for something to fully qualify as a Deus Ex Machina device, at least in the sense that such term is used critically, the turn of events comprising it must be one which comes across artificial or improbable in the context of the story. The Army of the Dead is neither of these things, in either the film or the book.

And I would say the same about the Eagles. Obviously, if one has read Tolkien's works more widely than just LotR, then one will be aware of the Eagles' as a feature of Middle-earth. But even within LotR alone, they are given sufficient credibility as denizens of the fantasy world not to come across as improbable or artificial.

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

All I have to say for now is that all of the criticisms I've heard about deus ex machina seem to come from those who have not read the books. Which to me suggests that Tolkien knew what 'dangerous machines' were, but Jackson maybe did not?

I am not sure that I follow your meaning. The Eagles feature in the film trilogy to about the same extent as they do in the book trilogy. So in terms of LotR alone, if Jackson is to be criticised for his use of the Eagles, then so should Tolkien, since Jackson used them in much the same way that Tolkien did.

But, for me, Deus Ex Machina, when applied as a criticism, should involve something which leaves the reader (or viewer) feeling rather cheated. The Eagles provoke no such feeling in me in either the book or the film. Indeed, I found their arrival at Sammath Naur to be one of the most uplifting and moving parts of the book when I first read it, and I felt much the same way about their arrival in the film (probably because it was such an emotional part of the book for me).

[Durelin]

Just as lovely information (reminding myself to get my brain stirring as much as anything else): "Deus ex machina" translates literally "god out of the machine," but is more commonly translated "god from the machine."

It is divine intervention, which is, in the literary world, I think, the author's intervention. It comes from the use of a crane-like machine that was used to literally remove actors from the stage in Greek drama (normally when the character died).

The problem with trying to determine a deus ex machina in any literary work is that most literature is structured to plant seeds along the way that simply spring up at different points in the story.

But here's a thought, which came with help from CaptainofDespair: Tom Bombadil as deus ex machina.

He resolves a small section of plot, the Hobbits' misadventures in the Old Forest, and can be said to have a lasting impact on Frodo that could be seen as an intervention. In seclusion from the evils in the outside world and even the evils inside himself (the temptations involved with the ring), he is given a chance to see the growing evil and his part in it more objectively. Now there's something anyone might wish and/or pray for: the ability to really look at things removed from them before having to make decisions.

Edit: Wow, I (finally) just realized how much that sounds like I was "telling." That little explanation thing was for my own benefit, sorry. I'm really not pretending to know what I'm talking about much less that I know better than anyone else.

And sorry if you find this whole "apology" thing just as annoying, if not more so...