A question about class in Middle Earth

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

. (Actually, I have a sense that dwarven culture is far less class-ridden--as in having fewer social divides--than Gondorian or hobbit culture.)

Love the way that all the non-Brits are arguing about class but agreeing that we are obsessed about it . I just think that the great social mobility of the last century provided a rich seam for drama and humour which many writers and film makers have exploited. And the social mobility is reflected in LOTR particularly of Tolkien's works. Think of Faramir talking about Gondor and Rohan and Sam rising to be Mayor and his daughter marrying the Thain's son.

The Shire was changing just as England was. It is a very different place to when (at about the time of Tolkien's birth) that one of my great grandmothers was disowned by her family for marrying into trade and caused scandal by riding a bicycle. The former seems just as ludicrous as the latter now.

Another great-grandmother was an illiterate Irish immigrant so I owe my existance to a degree of social mobility! Certainly my parents had very different backgrounds - my father's feet are crumpled because his widowed mother couldn't afford shoes for him as soon as he needed them, but at least at the time it was possible for a poor boy with a good brain to get an education and a scholarship to university which had a ripple effect throughout the rest of his family.

If there are three classes in Britain now I would say they are those who don't work, those who work and those who don't need to work. The type of work people do is rather more significant these days than accent or the words you use for rooms or meals. And I have to say that I notice plenty of "class" distinction in American programmes and books - anything set in New York seems chocabloc with it for starters, let alone Desperate Housewives, Shark, The Riches, all those films where the girl from the trailer park fights it out with the rich girl to be Prom queen or whatever... And the most class conscious film I ever saw was French (Priez pour Nous) but heigh ho... you keep you national stereotypes and we'll keep ours

To get back to Tolkien, there is a clear hierachy between the kindred of the Elves, and with Men there is an even more refined hierachy - the purer Numenoreans being a cut above even within the superior realm of Gondor. With the Dwarves the line of Durin is top and even the Orcs make distinctions from the Uruk-hai down to the snufflers. It is clearly a very hierachical world from the Valar down... but that is hardly suprising for a mythology which concern generally the great and the good (and the great at being bad), the powers of the world not the "poor ****** infantry".

So having had the first version of this lost in a computer crash,I shall post and wait for the gauntlet... (fish knives at dawn no doubt)....

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

Love the way that all the non-Brits are arguing about class but agreeing that we are obsessed about it

Ah, there's that legendary British understatement we've all come to know and love.

Actually, if you look carefully I believe only one poster linked Brits exclusively to class obsession (and everyone else disagreed to such exclusivity, be they Euros or Yanks); but I think that the American version of the class divide was more racial in tenor, or due to the point of national origin. My ancestors being Italian and Irish were certainly met with scorn by those WASP's (White Anglo-Saxon Protestants) who could recall their descent in bardic cadence from the first settlers off the Mayflower or the veterans of the Revolutionary War. I have a Help Wanted sign dated to the 1850's that carries the disclaimer: No Irish Need Apply.

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

I just think that the great social mobility of the last century provided a rich seam for drama and humour which many writers and film makers have exploited. And the social mobility is reflected in LOTR particularly of Tolkien's works. Think of Faramir talking about Gondor and Rohan and Sam rising to be Mayor and his daughter marrying the Thain's son.

Yes, Samwise, the gardener who made good; of course, it didin't hurt that he was a war hero (when the Hobbits finally learned there was indeed a war and other civilizations existing beyond their borders), and that his best friends were young scions of the 'great houses' of the Shire, and who eventually became Thain Peregrin and Meriadoc, Master of Buckland (not to mention having King Elessar's ear and a daughter serving as the Queen's Maid of Honor). Just your average Joe fortunate enough not to be the apprentice to Ted Sandyman's dear ol' dad.

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

To get back to Tolkien, there is a clear hierachy between the kindred of the Elves, and with Men there is an even more refined hierachy - the purer Numenoreans being a cut above even within the superior realm of Gondor. With the Dwarves the line of Durin is top and even the Orcs make distinctions from the Uruk-hai down to the snufflers. It is clearly a very hierachical world from the Valar down... but that is hardly suprising for a mythology which concern generally the great and the good (and the great at being bad), the powers of the world not the "poor ****** infantry".

But how many epics, from Homer's Iliad to Malory's Mort d'Arthur to Tolstoy's War and Peace to Tolkien's LotR dealt with anyone but the high and mighty (or at least comfortably well off)? Grunts are wiped out at Gallipoli or the Somme or the day after Christmas in All's Quiet on the Western Front. They smell horrid, can't articulate well and come home to find disenchantment, unemployment and life on the dole. That's John Steinbeck or Hemingway, not Tolkien.

I think you're right about the Gondorion penchant to trace their lineage to Numenor (and the bluer the blood, the better), and I agree with your views on hierarchical stratification up to a point; however, the original question concerned a 'class divide' among different races, and although elements of that occurred in previous ages (as I mentioned previously, the vassalage of the Edain to the Noldor), my point was that such a divide from a racial standpoint is not readily discernible in the 3rd Age. There was far too much separation (or self-imposed segregation, if you prefer) for such a statement to be plausible.

[Mithalwen]

But Morthoron I never mentioned exclusivity And I did wonder if the Cabots were still only talking to God

I did state that mythology did tend to concern the great and the good so I am not sure why you are picking me up on that... :S

Yes it always helps to have friends in high places but in some cultures changing your station in life is just not possible. It was possible in the Shire.

However I certainly agree that there was too much separation for a racial class divide at the end of the third age. Even the men of Gondor have little contact with the Elves, the Rohirrim regard them with suspicion tinged with fear and hostility. Only the rangers have much to do with them and they are regarded as vagabonds by the "respectable" folk of Bree.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

I did state that mythology did tend to concern the great and the good so I am not sure why you are picking me up on that... :S

Actually, I wasn't picking on you, I was expanding on your comment regarding "the powers of the world not the "poor ****** infantry"; however, I sometimes sound argumentative even when being agreeable. It's that whole curmudgeon thing I've developed as I get older and more irascible.

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

It's that whole curmudgeon thing I've developed as I get older and more irascible.

Ah... I am going for paranoia myself... as you may have noticed

[William Cloud Hicklin]

American indians were hunter-gatherers.

Not by any means universally true. While *some* Indians were as 'primitive' as the Kalahari Bushmen (the Shoshone, various California groups), there were also very highly-developed agrarian and civic societies, (the Pueblo and their ancestors, and the Mississippian culture); and many gradations in between (the Eastern Iroquoian and Algonkian groups were agriculturalists and hunters both; the Northwest Indians like the Tlingit were technically hunter-gatherers in their land of plenty but had very highly evfolved societies).

And then of course there was Mesoamerica, with high civilizations on a par with Egypt's Old Kingdom!

When the Europeans started to flux to America during the 16th century, they were mainly outlaws and protestants who were persecuted for their faith

.

Not really. Sure it applies to the Separatists of Plymouth Rock, but not at all to most of the rest of the colonies, which were founded by men seeking- what else? - wealth. Virginia was started as a money-making scheme by solid Anglicans, and produced its own upper class of planter-aristocrats, from which men like Washington and Jefferson came.

Calvinism - one of the major faiths of those immigrating to the Americas - says that those who are rich are approved by God and those who are poor are abhorred by Him.

Certainly Calvin never said anything of the sort. Say rather that certain rich men tried to justify themselves in pseudo-Calvinist terms.

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hicklin

And then of course there was Mesoamerica, with high civilizations on a par with Egypt's Old Kingdom!

Actually it is quite interesting to discus the differences between the greater civilizations of America and to those of Euro-Asia, but I guess your main point was to point out that not everybody was hunters and not inviting to such a talk. . . . I shall just try to restrain my self then.

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hicklin

Not really. Sure it applies to the Separatists of Plymouth Rock, but not at all to most of the rest of the colonies, which were founded by men seeking- what else? - wealth. Virginia was started as a money-making scheme by solid Anglicans, and produced its own upper class of planter-aristocrats, from which men like Washington and Jefferson came.

This is still a subject of much debate.

Who was it that left their home lands for America. . . . Was it "the best" the inovative, the fortune seekers or was it "the worst", the outlaws and hunted?

I have heard many people argue for both points, but I am not yet won over by any of them.

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hicklin

solid Anglicans

I would point out that Anglicans are protestants albeit episcopalian protestants with an "I can't believe it's not Catholicism" High Church wing....

[Gwathagor]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

I have a Help Wanted sign dated to the 1850's that carries the disclaimer: No Irish Need Apply.

Hullo! That's uncalled for!