Tolkien themes (1)

[MLD-Grounds-Keeper-Willie]

I think that there are some themes that Tolkien embedded into his works. Here's one: everybody must lose something in order to gain something. Now, I first though of htis in a thread called In praise of Sam's Pans. Read it if you want to read a more in depth explanation. One example is Sam losing his pans to carry on with the quest. And Orual pointed out that Arwen lost her immortality to gain love, and Pippin/Merry lost innocence to help save the world (I think to gain wisdom too).

And also, sometimes when you win, you lose. Its sort of the same as the one above, but slightly different.

Do you agree? And if so, can you think of any other examples; the more specific, the better. Try to expand on it.

[ December 26, 2002: Message edited by: MLD-Grounds-Keeper-Willie ]

[LePetitChoux]

Another one is when Pippin dropped his Elven-Brooch. It may not seem like a lot, but it was an incredibly noble thing to do. (On the scale of throwing away your set of LotR books when you needed to). I completely agree. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

[Orual]

AIGH! Throw your LotR books away? Ah, only in the last need...::shudders::

I think that another theme in LotR is the inevitability of change, which I guess is also akin to the gain-lose connection. The passing of the Elves, the rise of Men, the whole world changes after the war and there's nothing anybody can do about it. It's going to happen, whether or not people like it. Nothing stays the same. There was, I think, a huge emphasis on that in everything that happened. The book takes place at a time of great change and movement. It is the time of the rise of Men and the fading of all other "speaking-peoples" of Middle-earth. The forces of good finally triumph over Sauron. The Elves, formerly a major force in Middle-earth, are leaving. Everything is different, shifting, changing, moving, renewing. It's also true in real life: nothing ever stays the same.

Great books always show something about the human condition. The Lord of the Rings shows many things.

~*~Orual~*~

[Willow]

Frodo gave up his life to save the world. He didn't actually die, but he was willing to, and because of what he did he didn't have a "normal" life anymore. (Which I think was one of the saddest parts of the book, but Orual was right about the change thing.)

[Marsyas]

Another might be when Gandalf fell after the Balrog. He 'gave up' his life so to speak to keep the Balrog from escaping the mines. He came back after wiser and more powerful than ever.

*~Marsyas~*

[Nenya]

This is probably my favourite LotR-theme.
It still brings tears to my eyes to read that passage from "Grey Havens" where Frodo explains to Sam why he has to leave Middle Earth. (Could anyoe quote? I don't own a copy in english.) Tolkien is at his best here, showing that every great victory is somehow bittersweet.
As you have pointed out, almost all of the main chracters in LotR have to loose something in order to help save ME. And that is the real test for us too in our lives: whether we can make that sacrifice to gain something bigger, or not.

[MLD-Grounds-Keeper-Willie]

Arwen lost her mortality. Boromir...well, he lost his life. Aragorn lost Strider; he was no longer a ranger to roam as he pleases, he now is a king, to sit on a throne. Pippim and Merry obviously lost their innocence. Frodo- the ring his youth and his health. Sam- his Frodo and his pans. Gili and Legolas lost their hatred of each other and their races, but that's a good thing. And many more people lost something to gain something.

You are definately right Orual. About the change and all. It was happening no matter what, some embraced it and some were reluctant.

[ December 30, 2002: Message edited by: MLD-Grounds-Keeper-Willie ]

[doug*platypus]

Loss of innocence seems to be a pretty common one, there. In a way, I guess Treebeard lost his innocence as well, forced to take matters into his own hands and destroy living creatures - I'm sure Isengard wasn't completely empty when the Ents arrived. In contrast, Bombadil seems to be one of the few characters that retained his innocence. And as a consequence he is portrayed as childish (although both extremely wise and learned) and basically a complete laughing-stock! Is Tolkien encouraging us all to grow up and achieve great things? Or is simply showing us that eventually we all have to grow up, unless we choose to stay in our own little house between the Downs and the Forest.

No foolin'! I'mfrom North Kilt-Town!

Groundskeeper Willy

[littlemanpoet]

Could someone explain to me what is meant by Pippin and Merry losing their innocence? I'd agree that they lost their ignorance, but that's different. After the Shire is brought back to its good old ways, Pippin and Merry are admired for their knightly ways, but it seems to me that except for gaining a bunch of inches and a lot of experience, they haven't changed all that much, at least not in terms of innocence.

Another theme is the value of ALL living things, whether trees, free peoples, grass, hillside gardens, whatever; that is, they are more valuable than the physical use to which they can be put. They have essential value in an of themselves. I wish my country (USA) could learn that.

[VanimaEdhel]

Could someone explain to me what is meant by Pippin and Merry losing their innocence?

While Merry and Pippin may have heard stories of the outside world, I believe that they were fairly innocent to the concept of pain. They were forced to learn that there is horrible evil in the world and that this evil is not just to be found far away in a fairy-tale land. I did not really think that they were completely "ignorant" as you said, as the people of the Shire still told stories of heroes and bravery, although they preferred to stay at home themselves. They knew that evil existed and that it was a bad thing, making them not completely ignorant, but they were also naïve in the sense that they never really thought that people such as themselves could be affected by the darkness.

I think that it was more that they lost that naïve perception of complete security that they felt previously when in the Shire.

Also, in the Scouring of the Shire, I think that brought the knowledge that evil could even come to their beautiful, peaceful home. This quiet community was suddenly taken over by evil, causing all of the Hobbits, who knew the stories, to lose their complete trust in their community.

Ignorance I always think of as the lack of knowledge of a particular thing. Innocence, however, is more inexposure to a particular thing or inexperience in a particular situation. I think the Hobbits had some knowledge of evil, not making them completely ignorant, but they just did not have experience with this situation.

I wish my country (USA) could learn that.

I am from New York, so you have no idea how much I agree with that statement.

[ambi]

hello nibin..
Well, here are some examples i came up with.
1. Frodo gave up his mithril coat etc... so they cld travel quick.
2. Faramir (i dont know the correct word to put here)"surrendered" his kingdom to Aragorn and gained princedom and Eowyn.
3. The 9 men gave up their will and gained the rings of power.
4. Bilbo gave up the ring to Frodo and was allowed "To live happily".
5. Theoden gave Shadowfax to Gandalf. Gandalf rode the horse and saved Rohan from defeat by getting aid.

[MLD-Grounds-Keeper-Willie]

No foolin'! I'mfrom North Kilt-Town!

Wait a second, there's no such place as north kilt-town! -homer

Could someone explain to me what is meant by Pippin and Merry losing their innocence?

Well I agree with VanimaEdhel. But I also think that they were innocent in the Shire. They were just hobbits. When they left, they experienced death/war first hand and they (moreso Merry) killed others. So that's just my view, plain and simple.

[littlemanpoet]

Thanks, VanimaEdhel,
for the excel-
lent explanation.
My own education
has usually construed
innocence glued
to guilt instead of
the absence of
knowledge. But there
is that secondar-
y meaning. Sorry
for the shabby
rhyme
scheme. [img]smilies/tongue.gif[/img]

[Dancing_Hobbit]

the interesting thing about Merry and Pippin, and, i think, an important point,is that although they lost their innocence, it wasn't entirely a bad thing. they gained so many new friends and in many ways became the only way i can describe it is fuller hobbits. it seems like the closer you were to the ring, the more you lost, which shows the ultimate evil of it: that it forced good creatures to sacrifice so much.

[Wren]

I think Tolkien was a closet environmentalist. Through out his works there is a constant theme of respecting and taking care of nature, specifically the trees. The most notable passages are the ones depicting the Ents as shepherds of the trees. Not to mention the hobbits with their love of gardening, especially Sam!

The elves too and great respect for their environment and love of nature, trees, rivers, even the earth itself, where the elves of Mirkwood carved out their homes.

[Lyra Greenleaf]

I don't even think he was a closet environmentalist. It was definitely one of the principal themes of LOTR.

I think there are also the things that people were willing to give up but didn't have to. For all characters this would involve their life. Also, Gimli and Legolas certainly gave up the chance to go home to help fight for their own lands and peoples. We don't get to hear much about it but it has to have been hard. Of course in the end it all came out right, but they were willing to sacrifice the parts they could have played in helping (and certainly in giving warning).

[Arathiriel]

As requested by Nenya, here is Frodo's quote from The Grey Havens...

'So I thought too, once. But I have been hurt too deeply, Sam. I tried to save the Shire, and it has been saved, but not for me. It must often be so, Sam, when things are in danger: some one has to give them up, lose them, so that others may keep them....'

Yes even the greatest victories can sometimes be bittersweet as it was in Frodo's case as he had to leave his home in the Shire and Middle-Earth in order to find peace with the Elves in the West...

[ June 04, 2003: Message edited by: Arathiriel ]