Lord Of The Rings - ...

[Angie]

I'm hoping this wasn't brought up on another thread, but I felt too lazy to check, it's late so sue me...

I was watching the LOTR DVD last night, and also took some time out to watch some of the extras, including extensive interviews with the crew, especially the Director.

Something that stood out was the descriptions that the Director gave of the different races: They were all so very different from each other. Some being strongly aligned with nature (Elves), others digging into Middle Earth creating magnificent chambers in honour of their race (Dwarves), others interested in just living their lives as they have done so for centuries with the intent of harming none and just enjoying their lives (Hobbits), etc., etc.

The Director, as I saw him, was essentially pointing to the correlation between Middle Earth and our Earth. Our different races... we're the Elves, the Dwarves, the Hobbits, the Mankind. The impression that I got from him was that it's alright to be who you are, so long as you don't destroy someone else's view of themselves in the process.

Imperialism and "Americanism" is sweeping this globe like Sauron's Army. Completely and heartlessly destroying what makes each of our cultures what it essentially is - taking away what is unique to us, leaving the Coca Cola and McDonalds signs in their wake. Leaving the landscape in ruins, much like the Army does within the story - it has a complete disregard for everything that is not in and of itself. [The question that poses to me is that what is the Ring a symbol of?]

Anyhow, so I thought I would just post this here to remind us all that we have a place on this planet just as everyone else does, and it is our RIGHT to stand up to the Army that's constantly approaching. It's our right to have and retain what is ours, and not have it buried under something that is from (and speaks of) somewhere else.

It's also our right to protect those around us. When the Army approaches, we're not to be standing alone, but banding together against it. Cait Blanchett made a very poignant comment in an interview about how the Elves were basically telling the other races of the Fellowship: "This is what we've done. Our time is almost up, so we pass what we have on to you. What will you do with it?"

So I leave these two comments with you:

1. Be proud of who you are. There's nothing wrong with you, you're right to be different, to not want to conform.

2. What will you do with the Earth when those 'guarding' her can no longer fight in her name? Will you take up the fight?

(Edited by Angie at 11:07 pm on Sep. 1, 2002)

[Marxman]

Hmm, interesting. LOTR is an interesting movie and can be interpreted from a leftist point of view. Sauron is definitely some sort of an imperialist who made this ring, and in that ring the Sauron's cruelty, malice and chaos are implemented. So, this ring represents some value that can be used for evil. In the intro, I see that there are many other rings who don't have that kind of power and only represent the magnificence of each race, like a reflection to every race. But the ring of Sauron is definitely something different, a tool for expansion of imperialism. But as we see, ring corrupts like capitalism. So the main slogan of this movie should be:"Can you resist the temptation of imperialism?" Frodo Baggins definitely resisted and now it is his duty to overthrow the imperialism with the destruction of its main tool - the ring. Ring seeks and seeks and it is a reflection of what imperialism is. We see in this movie the combined forces of every race to destroy imperialism and that's very good. But the question is:"Will the races learn from this ordeal?" Will they learn that imperialism is only evil? Because if they do, they can build a fruitful communist society.

[deadpool 52]

Never a big fan of fantasy, however the doors of perception are open.

[deimos]

really intersting.but what is with this monsters?like the one who had the ring before frodo's uncle?they aren't with saron,they're just the EVIL.aren't they?whats the EVIL on earth?money?greed?

[Fires of History]

Angie,

Great thoughts, Tolkien is one of my all time favs. I enjoyed your interpretations, there are indeed many ways to give meaning to such a simple yet profound tale.

Instead of regurgitate other interpretions or your own, I'll focus on your question. What is the Ring a symbol of?

Tolkien is fairly transparent on this question: Power. But more specifically power over others. The power to bend all the peoples of Middle Earth to your will. In the hands of Sauron, Saruman, even Galadriel or Gandalf- that power would be unstoppable.

And who is 'good' in this story? Gandalf certainly, as he resisted the temptation to take the ring. And, of course, our heroes the Hobbits, namely Frodo and Sam. Those who are 'good' are those who do not seek power over others- and hate the Ring and all it represents. And obviously by contrast 'evil' is portrayed as those willfully and lustfully seeking that power over others, hoping to enforce their 'will' through all of society.

Very much like the forces at work in our society trying to enforce their will over everyone. Religion, State, Business- all giving people very personal incentives to serve, support and swear to their agenda.

I like to think of the Ring as the State personally. Something so obtrussive, powerful, and all too often abused is a fit description of the Ring as well. If you wield the power of the Ring or the State are you using a different kind of power? I don't think so myself. Although corporate power over media and government is starting to rival that as well, so who can say.

War, violence, domination- all the symptoms of both state expansion and/or one using the power of the Ring.

I also love the theme that Gandalf/Galadriel- those deemed 'good'- would attempt to use the Ring to do good, but their efforts would prove just as dominating and destructive as Sauron's.

Is this power of the Ring so great that it simply should not be used? The power of the State?

But then it's all up to how you interpret the Ring. God? The State? What?

(Edited by Fires of History at 9:44 pm on Sep. 1, 2002)

[Dhul Fiqar]

IMHO, the ring is about hope, the hope that the tide can be stemmed and wrongdoers can be undone by their own creation.

--- G. Raven

[sypher]

I think all these interpratations(sp) are great and well tought out but I'd like to hear what the author ment by it. does anyone know of an interview where he explains his metaphores?

[Pinko]

[deimos]
"really intersting.but what is with this monsters?like the one who had the ring before frodo's uncle?they aren't with saron,they're just the EVIL.aren't they?whats the EVIL on earth?money?greed?"

Gollum, the previous owner, before Bilbo, was I belive one of the normal races (I think he was a hobbit) that was corrupted and twisted by the ring's power.
It has been many many years since I read it.


(Edited by Pinko at 1:56 am on Sep. 3, 2002)

[MJM]

Don't forget who ultimately destroys the ring everyone. The last 50 pages are the most important to me. I won't spoil it for you movie watchers but.

[Dhul Fiqar]

In the movie it is stated that Golum (sp?) was a "creature" and he looked pretty damn creepy before he found the ring...

--- G. Raven

[Pinko]

Just checked the book (page 66-67) and Gollum was definately some sort of Hobbit-kind. Original name: Sméagol, named Gollum by his people after his habit of gurgling deep in his throat. His friend Déagol found the ring, but instantly subverted by its power just by seeing it, Sméagol killed him.

[munkey soup]

Tolkien refused any interpretation of his book/s as a correlation to the real world. In the late forties/ early fifties, as anti-communist sentiment was running rampant through the U.S., a few people began linking the orcs to communism, Tolkien laughed at any and all statements like this. He said he wrote the book because he wanted to tell a tale, not make any kind of social commentary.

Of course, Tolkiens life shaped the book/s (fighting in WWI, enduring the ravages of WWII) but trying to link the book/s to one way of thinking or another is pure bunk. Go ahead and interpret, but don't take it too seriously.

[Pinko]

Aren't the books compiled letters he wrote to his son as a serialised bed time story?

[munkey soup]

That was the Hobbit. The LOTR trilogy (and the Hobbit as well) was something that sprung up from the mythology and the language he created. He was originally attempting to create a sort of mythology for Britian; he saw the rich oral mythology of the Fins and others and decided Britian needed one as well. But he eventually just created his own world outta all the stuff he was coming up with.

[antieverything]

I think that you are all nerds...no seriously, I love LOTR, I've read them twice...fuck, I could even tell you the evil counterparts of each race (evil can't create, only corrupt so trolls are corrupted ents, orcs are corrupted elves...) Which brings me to another point, Tolkien didn't mean for the books to be a social critique but they did show a lot of his anti-technological views.

[Angie]

I'll openly admit to being a nerd, though a surprisingly volatile, violent one occasionally... As they say, "it's always the quiet ones". :biggrin:

Thanks for the comments, everyone. My own reasons for putting the post here was not so much to point out anything that Tolkien himself felt about it, socially, but rather how it could be openly interpreted (in this respect, by myself, based upon interviews Director Peter Jackson had given), and I acknowledge and accept Munkey Soup's comments relating to Tolkien's own view on the subject.

Sometimes I think it's helpful to see influences of life away from the immediate "reality". What I mean by that is that if a medium can be interpreted to tell a person that they shouldn't craw under the bed every time a plane flies overhead, then they've learnt a good lesson - regardless of where that lesson came from, and whether or not it was originally intended to be that way.

Interpreting the movie as I did renewed my belief that we're right to fight back where necessary. That we shouldn't "sell ourselves into slavery", by buying into someone's plans over our own. Tolkien might not have meant that to happen, but I'm sure he wouldn't have brushed it off, considering how optimistic it is.

(Edited by Angie at 10:32 pm on Sep. 5, 2002)

[munkey soup]

Absolutely true. Tolkien did write it to kinda show the corrupting affect effect of power. And I think it's fine to interpret all art (books, movies, paintings etc).

And I'm glad you started this thread, because, as I'm sure you all can tell, I'm a Tokien dork. *laughs nervously, snorts, pushes up glasses that are taped in middle*

[Frosty]

Ah, Lord of the Rings... :)


Another victim of capitalism.

[munkey soup]

Que?

[Frosty]

The army of commercialists conquered it, changed it, packed it and launched it for teenie morons to enjoy (or was it the Bloom guy?), while making huge money. All 'cause of the movie.

[antieverything]

Oh, well. You have to admit that the movie was pretty cool!

[Frosty]

Yes, i loved it, and if it wasn't for the movie i would probably not discovered Tolkien for many years still

[munkey soup]

Peter Jackson is a true Tolkien fan, yes it's true that they've gone overboard in marketing and such, but I think his intentions were good.