I know, I know. I’m sorry. Andy Serkis reads LoTR: • Andy Serkis reads from... All these clips are from LoTR which is owned by WB: www.warnerbros... Link to Patreon: / acollierastro
“J.R.R. Tolkien has become a sort of mountain, appearing in all subsequent fantasy in the way that Mt. Fuji appears so often in Japanese prints. Sometimes it’s big and up close. Sometimes it’s a shape on the horizon. Sometimes it’s not there at all, which means that the artist either has made a deliberate decision against the mountain, which is interesting in itself, or is in fact standing on Mt. Fuji.” ― Terry Pratchett
I recently saw Mt. Fuji and it's like an incredibly huge hand of nature to remind us importance of environment we all live in. No picture can describe how petty are all battles and arguments between people against this definition of epicness. If you wanna feel really small like a hobbit I cannot recommend anything else.
@@acollierastro Didn't you mention once that you were working on a video about Pratchett? I've been re-re-re-reading the Watch series, and my wife has a framed painting of the Witches in our hallway. I hope you do get around to rambling about Discworld.
The impression I got from the whole business of the Elves withdrawing from Middle Earth and returning to their mysterious home was that the Elves themselves were dying, or at least fading away. And with Gandalf leaving, and the Ents losing their wives, and so forth, the general theme is of magic disappearing from our world. Which kind of has to happen somehow if there is to be continuity between a mythical past and our present reality, but it's still a sad thing.
I learned (from another LoTR's video) that the story is about a world that's dying. The magic is fading away, and the Elves couldn't stand to watch all of their works die. "The Age of Men" and all that. The real reason is Tolkien wanted to imply that the story was in some way historical, or prehistorical.
I always felt that was one of the main themes in the entire work. The first age was pretty much biblical and subsequent ages became more mundane until the point where the lord of the rings ends with the age of men. I'm never sure how literal we are to take the history of the world. Was there a time before the sun and moon, or is it just a myth living in the songs of elves? With the framing devices we can even doubt how literal the Red Book is to be taken, let alone the songs that appear in it. I'd even argue that some scenes make a lot more sense when you read it as an embellished history rather than a factual telling. Like how when gandalf and boromir die they collectively improv songs praising them without any flaws or hiccoughs. I feel like the lord of the rings, drawing so much inspiration from things like the sagas / edda might as well be read like them.
this is the whole theme. rural England vs industrial England. Rural is Hobbiton, peaceful, green, and happy. Industrial is Isengard, cutting the trees out, destroying the nature etc. The elves leaving means something will change forever, in some way the soul of nature is dying or yes, fading away.
I moved to the isle of harris (in the western isles of Scotland) when i got there the roads were new, people believed in water horse's and the blue men. people might have believed in the sheaira (but you don't talk about the little people). Now that world is all changed no one believes in that old magic and everyone has central heating. Is was amazing to see a place still like that. He lived though a time like that in Oxfordshire.
The Shire was industrialized to Saruman's war machine. Merry and Pippin find stores from the Shire after Isengard is flooded and Sharky is Saruman. So while the Shire is left with waste and pollution, the product went elsewhere; the destruction in the Shire was not for no reason at all.
I just always assumed that's what happened. Dude sailed off to paradise with an angel and a bunch of creatures that weren't supposed to be in the world anymore.
The Lord of the Rings was published in 1954. JRR Tolkien died in 1973. Reverse those numbers: 3791 Three Rings for the Elven-kings under the sky, Seven for the Dwarf-lords in their halls of stone, Nine for Mortal Men doomed to die, One for the Dark Lord on his dark throne...
Hi Angela, I Am a researcher, and as you may know that research is not fertile soil for mental well-being. So today I had to take a mental health day off. And I found your channel. After binge-watching all your videos (Sorry not a creep, just a researcher with depression), I must say that I find your point of view so refreshing and original and sincere. I think I feel a tiny ounce of what Bilbo feels like butter scraped over too much bread! Thank you for sharing your take, I hope Bilbo was wrong, and that there is hope. I hope (or at least try to) that things do get better. Anyway hope (sincerely this time) you are well as well, I have noticed that people with our point of view do not fare very well in the world. I wish to understand why and find a way out without completely overwriting our identity.
Such a great discussion and consideration of so much in the Lord of the Rings! You've got me thinking a lot and rethinking my understanding, and re-enjoying it. I first "ate up" the books back in my teen years in the 60's/70's, but of course watch the movies when they're on pretty much every year also. You have such a wonderful way of expressing so much, and really enjoyed this in addition to your physics videos!
Every time someone who can actually think (such as yourself) talks about LotR it deepens my appreciation for it so much more. I can't get myself to read much anymore so my re-read has failed, but I'm super stoked about the Serkis audiobook and appreciate you mentioning it. As others said, also hope you are in/have done therapy, but as a thoroughly therapized person myself sometimes "I get sad sometimes for a while, it's okay" is a perfectly valid and healthy way to cope
I honestly think the main reason why Tolkin wrote he didn't like allegory is because people abused the cloak of metaphorical interpretation to put words in his mouth that he never intended to say. Calling your own interpretation of a story an allegory by the author basically allows you to assign opinions to an author even if that wasn't at all the intent. So by distancing himself from this he takes the wind out of the sails of these people.
yeah it wan always be twisted. as soon as you allow one interpretation then everyone's like "oh it's open bar, is it?" and then the Neo Nazis come in and are like "well clearly in this paragraph Tolkien was saying 'purge the jews' "
Also, it refers to the very thing the that the vid creator did, and tie the book to WW2. The book began, and much of it written or conceived, before that war. Yes, the man drew on his own experiences in war, but not THAT war. And for him, the "scouring" happened even before that, in his childhood, at least in part.
I think calling it allegory kind of weakens the depth of the fantasy world he was trying to create, but obviously it's impossible to write anything that good that doesn't draw on your personal experience.
@@losthor1zon "Death of the author" was and is still supposed to mean that no matter what an author intends to write, its text will resonate differently for their readers and be appropriated in a way they may not have intended by a society. It's a balance between the author's words and the reader's eye, that's pretty useful in analysis, however it's often used to make crass misinterpretations of books on the pretense that "it's their subconscious at work". ... it's the death of "Death of the author" *boom*
One of the best parts in the early parts of The Fellowship (and the first defining moment for Frodo and the other hobbits) unfortunately get tossed out when we throw away Bombadil. The whole Barrow-wight chapter is intense and tremendously scary. I don't even want to think about what would have happened if the Ring were to fall into the hands of the Barrow-wights. And while the hobbits may not have been able to escape on their own, Frodo kept his wits at least a little bit and started to sing the song that Tom taught them the previous day. Tom saves them, brings them out into the light again, and they get their awesome historic little swords, one of which opens the way for the death of the head of the Nazgul by Eowyn. The whole narrative of the story changes after this "We aren't in The Shire anymore, Toto" moment, and it continues to change throughout, but I think this was the first wake up call for the hobbits, it adds to their character arcs, particularly Frodo's, and it would not have been there if not for Bombadil. I will be the first to acknowledge that there are parts in The Lord of the Rings that are dry and hard to get through. When I was younger, the hardest chapter for me was The Council of Elrond. There are bits in the trilogy that make us wonder "Why are these here," or at least why he wrote them like he did. Ultimately, I think all high art is like this. First, we have no idea of the mindset of the artist when creating their art, so we have to guess and account for things. But at the end of the day, we have to look at the piece of art, and just trust that there were reasons for everything that they did - the color they chose, a chord progression, or, the in case of Tolkien, what stories needed to be included. He is the master - his death and the widening gap of time between his life and now doesn't diminish the fact that there are reasons for everything that he included in his stories, and it's up to us to appreciate them or not.
I always like to think of Tom as being the guy who showed the kids (hobbits) that they're in grown up territory (literally anywhere other than the Shire). Tom gave them one last chance to save them, then told them it was the last. It was a sobering moment when the heroes realized they HAD to take this more seriously than they previously were.
@@chrissmith7669 I thought the Ring wraiths were kings from much further afield, but I may be wrong, I haven't read all of the supplementary material.
@@DavidSmith-vr1nb I had thought that was why the knife Merry carried was able to wound the ring wraith. I need to go back and read the backstory again.
My dad would read "Lord of the Rings" for me before I went to bed when I was child. He would also do different voices and sing the songs like children's song, making me sing along. Maybe it is a Red Flag, but Tom Bombadil will always be in my heart because of the pure joy and freedom my father would channel when doing is voice. I read the books almost every year and I still hear the characters with my father's voices in my head. He passed last year. This year's reading was difficult and more sad then bittersweet. I think listening to an audiobook version would ruin it for me.
Regarding Tolkien's feelings toward allegory, he says "I think that many confuse applicability with allegory, but the one resides in the freedom of the reader, and the other in the purposed domination of the author." I read this quote as meaning, loosely, "I invite readers to draw parallels between my story and events from their own lives or from history, I simply don't want others to claim that I meant any particular one of those parallels to be the 'correct' one." As such I think he would not at all object to the discussion in this (very excellent!) video.
I obviously can't read his mind but there's so many things that clearly seem to be intended by Tolkien himself as allegory. Also "The Lord of the Rings is of course a fundamentally religious and Catholic work, unconsciously so at first, but consciously in the revision." Can't help but feel like the "this is not allegory" quote is a bit disingenious.
People write what they know. There are always allegorical content, even if it’s not done on purpose by the author. I think Tolkien tried to distance himself to stop a deluge of questions from people who wanted to use his works for their own agendas.
I think what's important to note here is that while a story can and will be influenced by one's life and real world events, this can be true of a story without it being an allegory. I think an allegory is more specific, eg Animal Farm is specifically meant to symbolize the development of the Soviet Union. Hobbit police states can be equated to many examples of authoritarianism and occupation and is much more general. And, as you say, the generality of it makes the point of the [non-allegory] more widely applicable. The role of Christianity in his storytelling is an example: those stories influenced his stories (and many others, since Christianity is so thoroughly soaked into western culture that it's basically inevitable), but his stories are not meant to merely echo the Bible.
@@a_8764 when he says allegory, he means something that he disagrees with the following: "sauron is represents napoleon" or "the ring is a stand in for nuclear weapons" so there is no lack of genuineness when he says that. sauron represents sauron, and the ring represents the ring, if you can find parallels with other things that's because they do have things in common, but you wouldn't say that WWII is an allegory for the persian wars, would you?
The map of Middle Earth is a tell for pre-existing concepts of how good and bad places and nice and nasty ones are geographically distributed - not precisely but substantially. Imagine rearranging it with The Shire and Mordor swapped round - would it work?
Goldberry 's washing day was her singing to make the rain. she was watering and refreshing the area just not doing laundry . Also she was a water -fairy. Although it is never fully explained , she is magical and doesn't care about the ring. She exudes joy and helps soothe the hobbit fears. And Tom loves her with all his heart. She is important in her own way.
This is something that makes me sad as well - feminism throws women into the world of men rather than exploring the wonderful, magical world of women.@@interstellardave
When she called Tom Bombadil a dirty old man!? What!? Tom and Goldberry are both immortal entities existing since the beginning of Middle Earth. Other people have said that Tom is Tolkiens way of writing himself into the story as an outside observer completely unaffected by the events in the book. This lady needs to research Tolkiens background.
In a sense, I think reading Frodo’s journey to Valinor merely as death has a kind of…viciousness I don’t think the book really feels. His journey to the Undying Lands is an admission - he will never be the same man. He has the scars of the trenches, he’s seen the horrors of war worse than anybody, the sheer depths of depravity and evil. He can’t be the old Frodo, and while in the Shire, he has to be the old Frodo. You’re right in saying it isn’t his home, because it demands he be Frodo, and he’s not. Valinor is not heaven - it’s not him being freed from the chains of life. But it’s a place where he can just *be*. Where he’s free of expectations, where he need only be what brings him peace. To me, it feels like Tolkien looking at the boys he sees coming home with the same shadow in their eyes as he had at their age, and saying, “It won’t be the same. The old you is dead, and I would be lying if I said otherwise. But there is hope. There is a possibility of finding a salve for the wounds of war, even if those wounds will never mend.” It, to me, is a monumental piece of empathy. Excellent video.
Despite Tolkien's distaste for explicit allegory it's fair to read LOTR as springing in part from Tolkien's own experiences of war and, though claiming any character is a 1-to-1 "Author Insert" is perhaps too bold, I would say it's quite clear that it's Sam into whom the author's personality was most directly infused, even more so than Frodo (he survived the war, lived a long and prosperous life with several children, wrote stories and "cultivated" an entire world). It's not hard then to imagine Frodo being (intentionally or not) a gentle fantasy imagining peaceful rest for those friends of Tolkien who didn't make it back from the war or, worse, those who did make it back in body but not without deeper nonphysical scars than they could survive.
He does die (eventually) in the sense that (unlike what the men of Numenor wrongly believed in the Second Age) the Undying Lands are called the Undying Lands because the elves are meant to live there and do not die. Frodo lives out the rest of his mortal life in Valinor, somewhere where he can be at something resembling peace for the rest of his living days, and then he dies, and like Tolkien's humans, experiences the *real* Heaven, with Eru Iluvatar. Valinor is like an earthly heaven because it's what the elves get *instead* of the real heaven (because they don't have to die). There are some theories that at the end of the world when it's unmade all the elves will also get to go to heaven like men did, but that's a theory and a hope they hold onto, not a promise like Eru made to Men.
@@bumfricker2487Tolkien served as an officer in WWI, and gained a lifelong respect for the working-class from the enlisted men he served with. Frodo and Bilbo are the self-inserts (bookish scholarly types), Sam is almost certainly an insert of one or more dear friends.
I don't think reading it as death is vicious, so much than seeing death itself as vicious. Afterlife isn't a bad thing in Tolkien's universe. Death is even the gift that the god Eru gave to Men/Hobbits, because they're free to leave Eru's world. Valinor is where the souls of humans, elves and dwarves go after death... even though it's not *technically* heaven. You don't have die to be there, but it is hard not to read it as somewhat a mirror of heaven when it is also the destination for the good dead souls. Plus, Valinor shortens the lifespan of mortals even quicker. Again, it is hard not to see Valinor, a home for dead souls & immortals (elves and Maiar angels), the only place that'll heal Frodo from his trauma, as well as the place that'll burn his life even faster like light... is not somewhat metaphorical for finding peace in heaven.
I am glad that I read Camus rather then Sartre. In the Legend of Sisyphus, Camus certainly does not candy coat existentialism but he says that you have to find a flower in the desert and make it your center, all the while knowing that it is you who is giving it meaning and significance. After 30 years together, my flower passed away 2 years ago and I am now busying myself with the maintenance of the little flowers she left behind and the garden we created together.
Here I find myself, a stranger hidden through a labyrinth of cables and cold calculations, captivated and moved by the significance of your words. I need your beauty too, as does the world. I'm regretful that all I can transmit is kind words and condolences, when I yern to give a smile and warm embrace. Thank you. I'm so sorry for the troubling things you've been through, yet I'm so glad for the light with which you've lived and blossomed, the light that you now radiate. I hope this comment finds you and your garden well, you've watered just a few more souls in this desert of the internet.
@@PeterStinklage The Little Prince is a jewel, but... I find his aristocratic ideas more than a little disturbing. He was a count, and there's a thread in his thinking that says, in rude sum, "I was born with the duty to rule. You who were not born thus do not have this sense of duty."
@@Christian___ I'd like to say that Camus was the better of the two, too... But I tried reading Sartre and gave up. Half the time it's like the words are more important to him than the meaning they convey. Camus is way more clear, especially in the short story "The Wet Man".
'The Scouring of the Shire' was one of the first sections of LOTR that Tolkien wrote. There have been recent suggestions that he was inspired to write this chapter because of the disillusion he felt on returning to England after the First World War [Tolkien had been an officer on the Front Line]. What he felt disillusioned about was that many of the rural English Midlands villages that he remembered affectionately from his childhood had been turned into industrial towns by the demands for materiel during the war. The idyllic countryside that he fought for had been debased and lost in the conflict and he did wonder whether the price of victory was too high; if you lose what you are fighting for because of the fight, was the pain and suffering worth it ? The way Saruman gloats about the damage he has caused before his death (yes LOTR film fans, Saruman dies in the Shire in the book) says openly how Tolkien felt about what the War profiteers had done. In many ways it is the most heartfelt piece of writing in the book.
@derekfancett8218 The Histories of Middle-earth. His son painstakingly compiled his papers and put them together in order chronologically as best as possible. I haven't listened to many of Tolkien's interviews, or gone through all his letters, but Christopher noted a few instances of his father misremembering things. So it's possible that's what happened in this instance as well.
The bit about the return to England after the First World War may be true, but it is also a recurring theme in ancient travelling adventures. The heroes of the story return home after a long journey and find the place they knew and loved changed and find that they have changed as well and have to set things right before the tale can end... It is a way to complete a story arc where it started and show how the experiences of the long adventure has changed the characters, which is more evident when one returns to a familiar place. In LotR we see that Merry, Pippin and Sam have become confident and strong, exuding natural authority, but Frodo (the main protagonist of the story) on the other hand hangs back and lets them take the lead, which foreshadows his leaving at the very end...
Small item: It's "Scouring" of the Shire. The "Scourge of the Shire" would presumably refer to Sharkey's cruel treatment of it, whereas "Scouring" refers to the Hobbits forcefully rubbing it clean of Sharkey's influence. Also, Cirdan the Shipwright, the elf, and many other elves do not leave Middle Earth until after Aragorn's death (about 120 years after the Ring is destroyed). 1482 Shire Reckining was about 60 years *before* Aragorn's death. So there were elves and ships in the Grey Havens for at least six more decades when Sam told Elanor he was going into the West. I gather you think Sam lied, walked off into the woods, sat down, and died. And that's fine, but Valinor is a "place" in Tolkien's books and it is a different place than "heaven," as the souls of men and elves all do go to Valinor, but the elves are just given new bodies there and the souls of men depart Valinor and not even the Valar know what happens to thgem after that. Saying Frodo went to Valinor could be "a farm upstate" but it's not clear. Hence all the old "Frodo lives!" memes from the 1960s.
I thought all the "Frodo lives" stuff was more about during the quest; the things the rest of the Fellowship do in Gondor and Rohan only make sense if they have faith that Frodo is alive and continuing the quest. Especially when Aragorn marches on the Black Gate. If Frodo is dead or corrupted at that point, it's suicidal folly. "Frodo lives" is about faith.
I noticed this too. The Scouring of the Shire was my favorite part of the books and I re-read it several times. Even decades after the last re-read, I recall that my takeaway was that due to the experience they gained on their adventures while away, the returning fellowship members had no trouble dispatching the tinpot despots who had ruined the Shire. Their attitude was, "We just saved the world, we can easily fix the Shire."
As I recall, there was an island off the coast of the undying lands where the few mortals allowed to travel west lived out their remaining days in peace. They didn't live in Valinor with the elves, but the elves would visit. The souls of mortals can go to heaven when they die, but not elves.
I need a sequel where sam is travelling to find frodo, and he is a new gollum and has to old yeller him. takes place on a farm, a one set movie kind of like maggie. I'd be so happy.
At least in legendarium terms, Valinor is not the land of the dead as in there not being any dead people there. Dead elves have a place they go to (the "Halls of Mandos") and dead mortals just go, somewhere, no one knows. So because of this, I take it literally that Frodo goes to Valinor, where he will live for a while among undying beauty and have some reprieve from his hurt. And then, because he is mortal and because, tainted and subject to change as he is, he really does not belong in Valinor, he dies. Valinor, for Frodo is a hospice where he recieves palliative care. And I tend to think the same about Sam, though his hurt was the lesser for the life he was able to make, he must have felt also the whispered touch of evil and when that life finally was not enough to tide over his hurt, he too was allowed, for a little while, to dwell in the hospice of the Valar before succumbing to the doom of mortals. Why is this granted to the ring bearers? Because the ring is of the same spring of power that gave birth to Valinor, it was made by an Ainur and hence its evil is of the Ainur. That is why there is no cure, no balm or healing for it in middle-earth and all that Valinor can do is arrest it, give it a counterweight in immortal beauty to lighten the mortal span of years that remained to the ring bearers. Why then was Gimli allowed into Valinor? Must be the magic of friendship.
I always felt that Valinor at that point is already fading hard... it's not a place of eternal beauty but a place where elves slowly wither away. Frodo and Sam get to slowly wither away. At least Gimli sees Galadriel (who also claims she will diminish).
Agreed. It’s reasonable to think of it as a metaphorical death, but the text is pretty clear that Valinor is meant to be a real physical place you can go to.
The god Mandos keeps the spirits of all the children of Illuvatar, not just the first children. It is after the End comes and Eru remakes everything, that human (spirits) have some secret future, while the spirits of Elves reincarnate (see Glorfindel as the first of the type.)
Dear @TexasFriedCriminal, I'm more of an Arthur C. Clarke head than a Tolkien head (love the trebuchets in The Two Towers, slightly miffed about the lack of space /time travel overall)! but I do love reading Tolkien as a non-fantasy expert, and I love your comment. Works of fiction, as that hard scientist Charles Darwin observed, take us both out of our suffering and into realms where even the most hard bitten realists among us can find respite.
Eowyn is an amazing female character. Her story is one of a woman constantly underestimated and belittled for being a woman, showing everyone that she, a woman, is braver and has more resolve than any man. Her getting together with Faramir isn’t about her having to get married and cool tf down, it’s about her deserving someone who actually sees and respects her. He helps her come back from a place even the toughest people can’t come back from alone. He helps the grizzled warrior come back from their trauma. In a very real way Faramir takes on the role traditionally filled by women. It’s everything but misogynistic.
Meanwhile the best characters are all women. Lúthien, Galadriel, Idril and more. Many women fought alongside their men in Rohan and often did so! And it was connected to Glorfindel's prophesy that tied to this meaning the otherworldly circumstances thst make her the ONLY female fighting that day is what made it more auspicious to line up with the prophecy
I always objected to Peter Jackson turning Arwen into a warrior princess; it's as if he didn't realize he already had a warrior princess in Eowyn, why make Arwen someone she wasn't? Also, note that Eowyn's empathy made her a better warrior. It was her recognition of Merry's need to fight that led her to help him come with the army, and without Merry she would have been unable to defeat the Witch-King of Angmar.
@@margretrosenberg420P. Jackson's operating philosophy seemed to have been, If it was in the book, it should be doubled. Mighty hero dies fighting evil being and is raised from the dead (Gandalf) should be doubled by having Aragorn do the same. Gollum not sneaky and tricksey enough for movie audiences? Have Sam be worse than Gollum. Etc., ad nauseum. This explains Eowyn AND Arwen.
@@warnerchandler9826 Yes, it does. What it doesn't explain is turning _The Hobbit_ into a trilogy and adding a superfluous love affair between an elf and a dwarf, but I guess that's easily explained by the additional box office receipts.
Glad someone sees it. I cried seeing Eowyn get peace and someone she deserves :') And Faramir being the upstanding, well mannered, and intelligent man he is getting a woman who's so incredible as well. :')
Because of this video I finally got a library card, and I dragged my two kids along with me and got them cards too. I’m 43 and I haven’t been in a library since I was in high school. I was blown away at the wealth of access to not just books, but ebooks, movies, video games, other digital media and all for free! So thanks for the inspiration. My kids didn’t get any books, but they want to go back to play with the toys so it’s a start. Get ‘em hooked while they’re young, it works for the tobacco companies!
Yes! Also, check to see if your library has a calendar of events! My little library has not a day without some sort of special program almost every day it's open. Free lectures on special topics, kids activities, movie showings, a book club, etc, etc, etc. OMG it's amazing. Oh, I forgot, they also have bands, singers, and musical acts! My library isn't necessarily adverse to it getting loud for an hour or so. I saw a GREAT Elvis...impersonator sounds disrespectful but it's the only word I can think of right now. There was a salsa band one night and a young couple who were just attendees put on choreography they were working on. Turns out they were professional dancers and they wanted feedback from us on the competition dance they were developing. All impromptu! There's just so much that I can't recall it all. Bring your kids with you, even if the lecture is mostly for you or whatever. They'll appreciate it eventually, even if they think it's boring at the moment.
I have always felt that the hero of Lord of the Rings was Sam. He wears the ring in both the books and the movie, but the movie shows him struggle to give the ring back to Frodo, where as there is NO struggle in the books. Sam returns the ring to Frodo with an almost "This belongs to you" attitude. Essentially, Sam carried both the ring and the ring bearer. As for Tom Bombadil, I always read his character as an example of there being persons unaffected by the allure of the ring. People in touch with the earth and nature had no need for supernatural power. So to me, Tom Bombadil was the literary answer to the question "Why isn't Sam drawn to the ring?" the answer being "He a simple gardner and has no use for such things".
Tom also has no ambition for the ring to work on. He's completely satisfied where he is, living his life and activities the way they are, no fuss. Sam is pretty close to Bombadil in that regard, although the ring does manage a weak attempt, conjuring Middle Earth covered in flowers well-tended by his hand. But that was basically the best it can do. Gandalf can't whip fire out of nowhere, he has to have material to burn. The ring can't warp people with virtually none of the personality traits and behaviors it was forged to embolden and maximize. Faramir is a unique exception, indicating there are a few rare people functionally immune to the ring despite their personalities. Context and perception greatly magnify the ring's sway as well. Frodo left it in an envelope for 17 years, untouched. Why? He only thought it was Bilbo's old magic ring. It's default life-stretching effect was at play as Frodo was the new (rightful) ringbearer, after Bilbo WILLINGLY surrendered it, without Frodo wanting it himself beforehand. That, in my head, prevents the ring from working almost at all. It stretches Frodo's life, but who knows how many years beyond the first 17 it would take for any symptoms to show?
@@Duiker36I don’t see any reason there has to be just ONE hero in this story, but people like to debate who the “main” hero or character is. Coincidentally, I recently saw a video arguing that Pippin is the “real” hero (of the movies, at least) because so many plot points are triggered by him being unable to keep his hands to himself. 😂 I like to include the whole Fellowship because none of them would have succeeded if ANY of them had abandoned the quest.
14:36 Faramir is the steward, he must return the crown. Frodo made this thing even possible by destroying Sauron, and Gandalf is of the Maiar thus he validates the crowning of the king by the Valar, so that Aragorn is sort of crowned by the gods themselves (sorry for my english)
I've been watching a lot more LoTR content lately, so seeing a video like this wasn't a particularly noteworthy thing for my recommendations on RU-vid. But the fact it was uploaded to THIS channel at around the same time really seems like too much of a coincidence. I don't know how you got my login, Angela, but I'll be watching your uploads really carefully now. Next thing you tell me is that you're doing videos about everything else I watch, like science communication or something...
You are bloody awesome. I'm a mere Physics and Computer Science dropout and failing IT consultant because I let my depression and anxiety get a hold of me. After my parents died, I just moved into their house, and now I'm just sitting here most of the time, not knowing what to do. You're got a YT channel talking about science. Consider yourself virtually hugged if you need a hug.
When you said that you feel bad every few years, for a few years, I completely understand what that is like. Depression sucks, I hope the good years show up for all of us sooner than later!
I just want to add to this thought, see someone about it. Unfortunately, we are still years away from accessible treatment with hallucinogens. They do work.
Same here, depression sucks. But thanks to various learned tools & habits, I get through the tougher times easier now. Forcing myself to do the things I love, like listening to music, re-reading favourite books and comics, and last but not least: going out into nature for even small trips - that helps me.
@@thomasr7129 Just getting out, alone, and walking. I don't know if it's the low-end cardio, or the rhythm of my steps, something about it just soothes me. 😅
Regarding the process - yes. Regarding "perfect sense" - depends on your definition. If you want it to be revealed to you as terribly written sophomoric trash - oh yes indeed. Glimmeringly. Shimmeringly. And that's without the fact that it is all just a rather clunky patchwork of fan fiction and fairy tales. Tone of the book is VERY uneven and contradictory - but it is nothing compared to the tones of the language jammed in there. Listening to it is like being tied to a chair and forced to sit through a reading of fan fiction written by someone who has just discovered alliteration, onomatopoeia and phonesthemes and who's really, REALLY into letting you know how awesome and mind-bending they are. BTW, I sure hope you like Norse mythology. Glimmering. Shimmering. And while reading you can skim through all those garbage poems and songs, treating them as world-building and "colour" - you can't skip that while listening to the audio. Because every fucker in that book keeps singing and reciting whenever they stop to catch a breath. You can't fast forward without missing some other part of story or dialogue. Shimmering. I adored the books as a kid, hated the movies when they came out for utter debilitation of the original material, now can't stand either. Glimmering. But hey, at least they're a pretty good red flag for spotting a fascist, who are really into that whole blood and magic and ancient kingdoms of tall, white blonds, exterminating deformed lower races thing. Giorgia Meloni being just the glimmering tip of the iceberg. Shimmering.
"My favorite Rugrat was Angelica, my favorite Pokemon was Tangela and my favorite Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle was Michaelangela," has put me in such a good mood this morning and due to some mental health issues I'm having lately the first ten minutes of my day are crucial to how I feel for the rest of it so I'm genuinely so thankful for this!
I think everyone struggles with mental health, most are either just unaware that they do or good at hiding it. Our minds are the most complex physical structure in the known universe, and a construct of our DNA no different than the rest of us, so we are all running on a unique mess of wiring and hasilty assembled hardware that is different from every other human being. 99% of us don't have the swimsuit model equivalent of a brain, just as 99% of us don't have that equivalent of a body. The only thing that is normal, is to be abnormal and unique. I hope that gives you some resolve. You have the power and flexibility to fix the things you can change, and to not worry about the things you cannot change. One thing I've learned, is that no matter how dire the circumstance, we always pull through, whether we fight to steer the ship through the storm, or just let it be tossed about by the waves. Tomorrow, the sun will rise again, just like it has and will every day. The difference in tomorrow's sunrise is how you perceive it. Let the sunrise be the glorious resurrection of life and opportunity which it was when you were an unburdened child, rather than the tick of a countdown clock. Whatever you are struggling with, I'm in your corner and wishing to send you whatever help or tools you need to succeed. But, I know you will succeed, I know you have the strength, will, and clarity to make it to the freedom of tomorrow's sunrise.
I always viewed Frodo and Sam going to the Undying Lands as the elves taking them to hospice, so they could spend their last days in magically-assisted comfort. It's the least the elves could do, considering.
They were welcomed to Tol Eressëa, the island inhabited by the people of Legolas: the seafaring Sindarin Elves. They did not live on the mainland; neither did Galadriel, whose ban was lifted.
@@DanielByers-qf9qi Tol Eressëa was created by the Teleri that did make it to Aman, the Sindar are the Teleri that didn't make it to Aman and instead waited for their lord Thingol, thus remaining in Beleriand, Middle Earth. The Sindar are called Sindar exactly for this, "Gray-elves", those that followed Thingol, who saw the light of the Trees, but never made it to Aman.
One of my favourite things about Tolkien is how the evil never goes away, and always comes back. Melkor/Morgoth keeps coming back, and then so does Sauron and so does Sauraman, but now the Hobbits are equipped to deal with the badness. There is always going to be bad, a shadow, but when the time comes no one asks if you're capable of dealing with it, you just have to. I found it oddly comforting and just bittersweet. I think Tom Bombadil stands out so much is simply because he is so unaffected by the evil, whereas we know that's not how the rest of the world works. If we're doing fantasy recommendations that are really tough reads then I recommend the Memory, Sorrow and Thorn trilogy.
Ah, damn... I remember slogging through "Memory, Sorrow and Thorn", wondering when anything would happen, only to see characters that had been carefully developed over the course of multiple chapters meet an unceremonious end (a characteristic feature of Tad Williams' stories). Williams has a habit of creating those really detailed characters that you get to know well, you learn about their families and love interests, hobbies, dislikes, strengths and flaws, their facourite breakfast... only for them to be hit by a bullet without having any kind of meaningful impact on the story. Another thing about his stories is that you tend to figure out the villains' schemes long before the protagonists do, resulting in even more frustration. He's not a bad author by any means, I just wish he'd use less books to tell his tales.
Literally been trying to remember the name "Tad Williams" for seven years after reading (and then promptly losing) my copy of the Dragonbone chair and not knowing the trilogy name to look up the other books with. Cheers for that, off to get them now.
Sauron is indeed not destroyed at the end of the story. All the Ainur, including Sauron, will exist as long as the universe does (possibly even after that; Eru Iluvatar created the Ainur before the world, after all). What happened is that Sauron poured ALL of his "power" into the ring to achieve his goals, and then the ring was destroyed. The meaning of "power" in this context is the ability to affect the world. Every single being has some power, in this sense. With no power at all to speak of, Sauron still existed, but he was unable to affect anything in the world at all, to move anything, to make anything happen, or to communicate in any way, with anyone. He had no power at all but to watch the world move on.
I've been relistening to blueprint for armageddon by dan carlin and there's this part where he talks about how the horrors of trench warfare in ypres and verdon affected that entire generation of writers and how they brought that aversion to war and suffering back with them and this is exactly what I was thinking about when she got to that part
Yeah and it also make sense from a Christian perspective. Frodo felt he didn't have any right to kill anyone even for a good cause since he had succumbed to the power of One Ring. One Ring and the terrible memory of evil being inside him, Frodo felt he couldn't pretend how he's "a good guy". This is a lesson Tolkien gave to us all - you can't learn any mercy and pity unless you first learned true humility, unless you now feel you'd been "a bad person from the start".
Excellent analysis, but Frodo died. Frodo took permanent soul damage from the Morgul knife wound. And the strain of carrying the ring made it worse (like an endless drip of his life energy). He was basically walking wounded by the end of the books and for years after he was in agonizing pain. He really couldn't take any more strain. Tolkien fought in the Battle of the Somme, the worst battle of WW1 (more than 1 million casualties). Two of his closest friends died in that battle. Tolkien caught typhus and suffered the after effects of this for years (no antibiotics in those days). I am certain that Frodo based on Tolkien at the end of WWI.
I know this comment is VERY late ... but hey, you aren't alone. This has been a crazy last few years and we are all feeling it to different degrees. I hope you are feeling at least a bit better but seriously, keep working through and hopefully we can keep our own need for a scouring from happening. and if you need to talk to someone, talk to someone. Friends, therapists, the dog you met on your walk, your followers at the very last few seconds of your hour long video.... =]. we are here.
Tolkien was a professor of English literature for his day job, and used the word "allegory" in a much more narrow and technical sense than most people do. I think that's where the confusion comes from with his statement that his writing wasn't "allegorical". Of course it's inspired by events in his life, his beliefs, and his reading that he found meaningful; but it's not something like John Bunyan's _The Pilgrim's Progress_ where everything in the story stands for something in Christian theology in a systematic, one-to-one fashion.
@@iamstan5251 Lewis was much more comfortable with allegory than Tolkien was; he wrote scholarly books about it and did, at least once, dip into it himself. But if you're referring to the _Narnia_ books, then no, they were not allegories in that sense -- as Lewis himself, being an expert on the subject, pointed out many times. They're what-if stories: "Suppose a fantasy world with talking animals needed Jesus..." Aslan is an alternate-universe Jesus, not a picture of the real-world one. Jadis is both Eve and the Serpent. The other characters don't have real-world counterparts at all.
Maybe Tolken meant what he said and LOTR is just a fantasy world for fantasy sake. I general would take someone as well spoken and knowledgeable as JJR at his word and not try to read more into then he stated.
Your videos are always a joy. Hope things start feeling better. I wanna hear your take on both the aliens thing being back in the news, and the maybe room temp superconductor maybe thing. Maybe the aliens one would be a nothing burger, but I'm sure you'd make it fun!
Dropped in as a consequence of a random, but interesting, suggestion from youtube. But since you are sponsored by my local library i will follow you, whatever it is you do.... Represent!
Frodo both succeeds and fails in his quest, despite that he was not personally able to destroy the wing under his own volition. Gollum doesn't just happen to bite his finger -- he plays out quite a specific (and subtly magically empowered) curse spelled out by Frodo: "If you touch me ever again, you shall be cast yourself into the Fire of Doom." That's a command on Gollum (long bearer of the ring) whom we've already seen explicitly subject to the power of the ring and promises (or curses) cast by it, cursed by someone currently holding the ring. This is only able to work because Frodo has decided more than once (this time included) to spare Gollum's life when it would otherwise make sense simply to kill him. Gandalf had enough foresight to see that Gollum would be key to the success of the mission, and here Frodo places him into the position of completing it on their behalf. The best part is that this is basically a win-win for everyone, Gollum included (excepting maybe Frodo's finger) -- the ring is destroyed, Sam isn't stuck in Elrond's position of having to decide whether to kill his brother to destroy the ring, Frodo survives, and Gollum even gets the one thing he wants: the ring (I genuinely don't think survival rates as highly for him). It's a very tight conclusion that rests again on the themes of mercy that will define Frodo's final actions in the Scouring chapter.
I am glad you pulled the punch on Rob Inglis. Thank you. The way he sings the songs and tells the story made me relive the books like I was a teen again. Serkis is nice and he has the perfect audiobook voice, but Inglis will be my fav forever and Serkis' singing is not even close. I think the different preferances in audiobook voices relates to the way one grew up with the story. The books are way more whimsical, while also having way deeper meaning that does not rely on huge armies and grand speeches. The Bombadil-Goldberry story for example never really struck me as odd, it was kinda like a fairy tale within the larger story. A reminder, that real things are fleeting and that unchanging and everlasting peace and happiness are unnatural or so out of place it might be another world. Primed like that the seriousness of Serkis version strikes me as odd. This is a Game of Thrones voice is what my gut is telling me. But with the movies it's maybe the other way around. Its more about grand battles against evil, whereas the books are more about personal challenges and overcoming your own temptations in a world that breathes lore and magic. The ending is obviously about dying. It's just coated in lore. Being a ringbearer is a very catholic idea. The world is doomed and destined to fail and you mortals have the choice to be the best within that world and your abilities or be evil. Living a life like that is pain and suffering. But there is salvation at the end. In the movies the ending seems like a happily ever after in the books it's very clear, that this is like a temporary golden age that will end with the death of everything you love. Elves and their lore. Blown away like leaves. Numenorians and their grand civilization ruins and myths. Dwarves and their cities crumbled to dust. The shire was always my favorite part about the books. Learning later that Tolkien imagined his killed war buddies returning home safely with the Hobbits really clicked. It's not just Frodo that didn't really return in my opinion. Sam, Pippin and Merry are so far removed from their fellow hobbits by the experiences they made, that they seem kinda lonely at times. It's a badass moment when they get into action with their no nonsense attitude but also shows that they have outgrown the peacefulness that made their home home. There was a restauration of the shire but not a restauration of the young boys they have been. For better and for worse. It's very Remarque-ian. Remarque wrote a lot of shorter stories about life after the war and it reminded me a lot of the last chapters.
Bombadill is often seen as Tolkien inserting himself for a chapter or two. Explains him not being affected bu the Ring as well as seeing himself as a nature loving weirdo with an absolute stunner of a wife. He did model Luthien Tinuvel after his love of her after all.
@@rangda_prime I don't think it's interesting talking about why Tolkien put Bombadil in there. There is already so much stories about it when they really don't need to be. The Book of Lost Tales is a very interesting perspective into the writing process and Bombadil isn't really discussed there, so I would say it wasn't all that important anyway.
Completely agree with you about Inglis, there's something about his voice that just feels perfectly suited to the material, and I actually feel the same way about Serkis as she feels about Inglis; there's nothing wrong with it but it's just not my preference. Still glad it exists though, since it gives more people a chance to have a version they love.
Thank you for getting the ending. As a veteran with PTSD, I have taken the end as akin to Frodo committing a suicide of sorts as he can’t deal with the pain anymore. I cry every time I read the last chapter, having so much sympathy for Frodo.
"The Ultimate Sacrifice" in the trenches was when someone was freaking out, couldn't take it anymore, he ended his own life (or with assistance) so as not to demoralize everyone else. Post-war it is/was similarly done when they just can't get their heads straight and bring down all around them, friends and family, that years of therapy hasn't touched. There is a sad beauty to it.
Tolkien was a WWI veteran when he wrote these books, this may well be the original interpretation. I never thought of it this way, but I'm lucky enough to never have been even close to such things.
I can't agree with that view. For a few reasons. I do agree that Frodos "wounds" were mostly mental and the feeling of guilt. Because the same who wounded him physically also wounded Eowyn and Merry, and both had no problem after being healed. And that despite them "only" being healed by the king and not by the mor mighty elves like Frodo was. But The ring made a villain out of Frodo in Mount doom. And that's where his guilt is from. (And wth Frodo, only the shoulder wound is what gives him problems in the books. Not his finger and not where Shelob stung him. It's his reminder of someone being turned into a villain, like he was for a short moment) And as she showed in the videos, Tolkien mentioned in letters that mortals would not live forever in valinor. Tolkien mentioned several times in what got collected into the Silmarillion that "it was unknown where the souls of men went ofter their death, but not to valinor." (no matter if they were good or bad) Neither the Elves nor the Valar knew. So valinor is not heaven. And going there is not commiting suicide in my view. Tolkien is said to have been a devout catholic. In the catholic faith you live forever in heaven. (If you regret your sins. Btw.: commiting suicide is seen as a sin). So he would not make heaven a "for elves only" place. Everyone being a good person and/or regretting their sins before dying, no matter what sort of being they were would go to heaven if valinor would be that place. I see Frodo going to Valinor as someone trying "the best possible therapy there is" in hope their mental problem can be solved by the highest experts possible. And getting this chance as a reward for free. As an comparisson, to me it's like you would be offered a PTSD treatment with a way way higher chance of success than you can get where you are. It's on a different continent, but you get it, the ride there and the whole stay for free as a reward for your service/sacrifice under the caveat that you would need to stay very close to the facility for daily treatment for the rest of your life. (and no video conference systems would exist...)
@@jaspermooren5883 He started LOTR 1937 and finish in 1949, but your point is still valid. A lot of the background (some would end up in The Silmarillion) was written while he was serving in WW1 (1914-1918). He did pull from his time in the trench in writing, but like everyone knows, didn't write the book as allegory itself. His son, Christopher, who was stationed in S Africa during WW2 helped his father a lot with continuity and advice. Christopher also drew all the maps in LOTR.
I always thought the movies robbed Legolas of his character by making him action guy. Him setting foot in Fangorn for the first time and him waxing about how even in that forest he could feel young and refers to Aragorn and Gimli as children. It was really something else. The other being Bilbo being invited to the Council of Elrond and being the first to volunteer and everyone just looking at him with reverence and respect was really moving. But I get the later change since they wanted to focus wholly on Frodo that film. Edit: I just wanted to add that I do agree with you that the book is a whole lot more sad. It's super apparent even back in Fellowship. You nailed it that the medium is vastly different. The first time I thought something was so profoundly sad was when the Fellowship arrives just before Lothlorien and Aragorn is standing on top of a hill and after he leaves Tolkein added that he never set foot there again. It's like, wow, you're not pulling any punches there, huh. They destroy the ring and win but the elder races are still fading and elves are all but gone from the world.
Really both Legolas and Gimli got robbed of all characterization. Legolas is action man, and Gimli is nothing but comedy. The two of them basically get zero serious character moments in the films.
In regards to what you shared at the end, please remember what Gandalf told Frodo; we don’t get to decide the the times we live in, we only get to decide what to do with the time that is given to us. LOTR is ultimately a story of hope in the face of seemingly impossible odds. Nothing goes as planned and characters make mistakes, but the Shire and the world is saved in the end. Hang in there. You’re not alone in your feelings, and you’re also not alone in your desire for a better world.
Bombadil and the Scouring of The Shire are actually two bookends encompassing the theme of the book, which is that ordinary people can be transformed by extreme circumstances and will achieve things beyond their expectations, dreams and nightmares. As a veteran of WWI, Tolkien knew that some survivors would still thrive but that some would be permanently damaged, without and within. I realized that he also characterizes the elves in a similar way (they are veterans of a war lasting thousands of years) when watching a documentary about the Battle of Britain. A group of RAF pilots were gathered in the control tower of their old airfield discussing their memories of the fight. Hearing their laughter and seeing their faces and their rapid changes of mood as they spoke and reflected I remembered Sam giving his reaction to the elves of Rivendell: "Some like kings, terrible and splendid; and some as merry as children." A pilot might be laughing one moment, then in a flash, silent and grimly sad, remembering their dead friends. Bombadil and Goldberry aren't people, they are both immortal nature spirits, so there's no point in worrying about them in relation to human gender roles. The hobbits have to be rescued by Bombadil because, unguided they have naively wandered about doing all the wrong things. They are like green troops; casualties waiting to happen. Bombadil rescues them, gets them fed and rested and kits them out to continue on and then they still blunder into the Wight on the Barrow Downs and have to be rescued again. In The Scouring of the Shire Pippin and Merry (now veterans of terrible conflict) review the situation, gather their forces, lay an ambush and win the skirmish in short order. They are now fully autonomous. Two book ends illuminating the theme: The transformative power of war. Of course it should have been in the movie; it's what the story is about. The Ring is just the MacGuffin. [Oh and the French soldier executing German prisoners out of hand is not 'a cool guy' from a story. War turns ordinary people into monsters too. A glance at current events in Europe would show you that, if you can bear to watch.]
I agree with your insights. "Bookends" are a good way to describe them. They are also geographically almost in the same place, so perhaps also represent the beginning and end of the journey/adventure in that way. To add to what you say, I think "change/transformation" is a definite theme. Though also an over-arching one. Change/transformation by war, by the march of time, and by events marking the beginning and end of new eras. I think Tom Bombadil, his wife, and the Old Forest, represent (in the story and for Tolkien on a deep personal level) a small bubble of the ancient magical world of Middle Earth that remains impervious to time and change. The Shire and its hobbits, I think, were also seen by Tolkien as a sort of "last bastion" of the "old" Middle Earth (along with other places, eg. Rivendell, Fangorn forest, Lothlorien, etc). However, unlike Bombadil and the Old Forest, their protection/isolation from change and the outside world was limited, and for the hobbits, it eventually came to an end in the Scouring of the Shire. And I think this was meant to be both tragic and symbolic of the inevitability of change as the hobbits joined the rest of Middle Earth in entering the 4th age.
My favorite Gandalf quote, "Many that live deserve death. Some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them, Frodo? Do not be too eager to deal out death in judgment. " It really made me think about my feelings on the death penalty. Surprisingly I think I've become more liberal as I've gotten older instead of more conservative.
As long as it worked, but looking at the death penalty logically what with how many people has been found innocent while on death row should be enough to rethink it. War criminals is another matter.
yeah it's incredible what power words can sometimes have in opening up your soul when put just right. In this particular example these words are just perfect at painting a very common human weakness: We fantasize about being judge jury and executioner until we realize the utter depth and gravity of that implication and how much of a monster that makes us from the judged point of view.
They are also my favorites, but with the next about Gollum. Because it has more meaning with the end of the story. If Gollum would be death by anyone before, all would be lost. So when Saruman at Shire, Frodo's words are in Gandalfs ones.
I love this. I read the Lord of the Rings first when I was 10, straight after the Hobbit, in a huge single volume version (with only a tiny part of the appendices), mostly in bed by the light of the landing reflected off the wall. No wonder I became shortsighted. I was given the three volume hardback set, with CJRT’s fold-out map in my mid-teens, which I re-read, with appendices in full, and had Pauline Baynes’ illustrated map poster on my wall. I love your telling of the Scourge of the Shire. I feel that JRRT realised how fascism/authoritarianism can creep up on you naturally, probably more by processing what he knew of wars and humanity and seeing how it could happen. He didn’t just see the French WWII experience (which my mother witnessed as a child - with German soldiers occupying half of her house), but also what happened perhaps in Spain’s civil war and even during the rise of Hitler in Germany. Britain had its own fascist faction (Oswald Mosley) too, so he might have had a more direct experience of how that fake normality can sneak up on you. I also think a lot of what Frodo goes through is lifted from what he witnessed - and maybe felt himself - of the experiences of wounds, particularly shell shock (PTSD), wounds that you can never really recover from. Yes, Frodo dies. Its telling is beautiful but that’s how it is to go to heaven. Love it. Great episode, thank you.
Eowyn is everything but a "tone it down and marry already"-written character, it's just that she's born into this society that tells her that. But Tolkien gives her a story where she proves herself. And in the book where no magic ghost army came to save the day at Minas Tirith, she did probably the single most significant feat in the battle by killing the Witch King! As for Galadriel: She's probably my favorite character in the entire franchise: Born as a high elf that wants to rule over her own realm, she's very ambitious in her pursuit. You might call her "boss lady" nowadays, but it's not painted in a negative light by Tolkien. She proves herself over thousands of years again and again. If anything, I like how Tolkien incorporates prejudice against women like Galadriel and Eowyn into his stories while still making them succeed. What's most beautiful about Galadriel's story in particular is that she was always very ambitious and wanted power, but over the years came to peace with herself, very much trying to become a serene being and a good ruler because she no longer felt the need to prove herself. Her not taking the ring ("I have passed the test") despite Sauron literally having killed her brother is the culmination of wisdom from having lived thousands of years in the face of the ultimate temptation. Of all the non-godlike beings on Middle Earth like the Maia (Wizards, Sauron, etc.), her and Elrond are by far the wisest. Yes, Tolkien was a conservative Christian. But he certainly didn't think women belonged in the kitchen if they didn't want to.
I think Galadriel not taking the ring is an even greater triumph than you make it out to be. Galadriel's time is over. The elves are fading and she will lose her kingdom. Everything she has fought for and gained, her dream, will be lost and she is bound for Valinor which she left to accomplish what she did. The Ring is her one chance to overcome this fate, but she chooses to let the curtain fall on the age of the Elves, and let the age of men begin.
Tolkein generally treats Eowyn respectfully, but... she's not happy until she decides to get married. As an author that's how you show what you think the good ending is.
@@hienvinh4680 It is when you suddenly apply modern standards to a story written in the early to mid 20th century about an ancient fantasy world. It doesn't make sense, but some people think "being a strong woman" automatically implies "hating men".
@@unstablepc5913 Yes, for sure. Though unlike Boromir, she's smart enough to realize that it'll backfire eventually and make her corrupt. Like Gandalf, she realizes that "wanting to do good" is not enough when it comes to the one ring, even when the wielder has good intentions and is powerful enough to make the ring submit at first. Partially because as long as the ring exists, Sauron will continue existing. Her hatred for him, knowing that there's a chance to kill him for good, might have helped rejecting the ring as well.
38:48 "When Sam is walking up that hill" my brain went "to make a deal with god.." I hope you are feeling better now, you are too precious for us to Vallinor yourself away. ❤
I LOVE that you promoted local libraries. And actually, it works the same way in Canada too, so your promotion is not just relevant to the US. I love the library, and would go there more often if I had the time (I'm a student working on getting qualified for a second career in my early 40s...it's hard enough to find time to study between exhausting 40-hour weeks working - unpaid - at my clinical practicum site). As it is, I do download e-books to read though, and you can still do that from the library...for free! So yeah, libraries are great.
If the US becomes any more right-wing then local libraries will soon become illegal or paid services because capitalists consider that the readers should pay for the reading of copyrighted works. Let's hope that it will not come that far.
Frodo really took Gandalf's lesson to heart that some may deserve death, but we're not in a position to give it to them. Being merciful no matter what is the ultimate act of wisdom and goodness in LotR, in a way.
I love his quote about many deserving life and if he’s not in a position to give that don’t be so quick to give death. Powerful words from a guy who lost most of his class in the trenches of WW II only surviving himself due to illness taking him off the front
This has been one of my favorite channels for the past year. I don’t remember how I stumbled across it, but I’m glad I did. I just signed up for your Patreon, but I felt like I owed you a “catch up” payment for your previous videos. Keep doing what you do, on your own terms, until it stops being fun.
One thing worth knowing on the sam point: unlike in the films, the elves don’t just split middle-earth immediately like they do in the books. There are elven communities continuing on for centuries after the end of the book, including at the Grey Havens. So yes, there are plenty of elven mariners still floating about to ferry Sam to Tol Eressea.
Have you guys read the extra super secret unpublished epilogue to the epilogue? You can find the pdf scan from "The History of Middle Earth - Sauron Defeated" online. Its a flash forward to Sam many years later where he is the Mayor of the Shire. He gets a letter from King Aragorn ( who is planning a state visit to Brandy hall - he won't break his own rule about banning humans from entering the Shire) and goes through a kind of FAQ about what the characters are up to with Elanor. In the end he's sitting outside Bag End with Rosie and they talk about how everything worked out and he's exactly where he wants to be with his kids and his wife and his job. She goes inside and he's looking at the stars, then he looks West and hears ... the sea waiting for him. Its heartbreaking.
There's also an unpublished attempt at a sequel that Tolkien gave up on because he decided that the Age of Men was not that interesting or worth writing about. It would have taken place 100 years after Aragon's death and involved Gondorian cultists who worship Sauron.
Tolkien struggled for a while with how to end LotR - the epilogue was one idea, but, as I recall, there were other ideas that didn't get as much development.
The movies do a good job of clearly making the opening showing us Frodo and Gandalf, then ending with Frodo and Gandalf on the ships (barring one line from Sam), but that focus is born out of 50 years of hindsight to work with
0:21 True story: I decided I wanted to watch the extended trilogy one day. I gave up during The Two Towers because there was too much fighting and I got bored.
A thought about Frodo's reluctance to kill Saruman: I don't think it was entirely a matter of compassion. By pointing out that their mission would have failed if they had killed Gollum, he's saying that we can't foresee all the consequences of our actions, and so we shouldn't be too hasty about closing off possibilities.
Also, I believe Frodo had developed a genuine pity for all persons that had fallen to Evil. He himself had become dominated against his will by Evil and only through friendship and eucatastrophe did he survive it. He could never bring harm to someone that he believed was no worse than himself. And with regards to Saruman specifically, Frodo knows what Saruman had to contend against, and I believe he hoped, as a survivor of the same, that Saruman would repent.
My recollection is that Frodo's refusal to countenance Saruman's execution was a mixture of pity for what Saruman had become, and a wise concern for the potential consequences of slaying one of the Maiar. Certainly, Saruman complains that Frodo's mercy robbed him of the opportunity to unleash his final petty vengeance in the form of a death curse.
I think Tolkien's warning against reading LotR as allegory was simply him telling us that he didn't write one-to-one metaphors to real life events. I agree completely with your analysis of the book here, it's so applicable. Applicability is not allegory. Beautiful video, thank you.
He "dies, dies, dies in the book". It's not so simple: Tolkien was a devout Catholic and this is fantasy. Yes, his leaving everyone (together with Bilbo) is a metaphor for dying, but he goes to the _Undying Lands_ or in other words he retires "from life" in the best place on "earth" or the next best thing to paradise (and the only place he can receive some sort of healing, even without being able to return). And he probably lives quite a few years, perhaps more than average. Even as a metaphor of dying, Tolkien makes it ultimately a metaphor of hope as well, at least in the context of fantasy. And to others he is like leaving life itself. Edit: Okay, you get upset about this, with some bad, incompetent terminology of "allegory" and "euphemism", I've had enough of this. Maybe you also don't realize that Frodo being unable to live a normal life again can happen and is not itself the same as literally "dying", no matter how much how you want to dance around with terminology. It may be "like" dying, but not simply ""dying". This is very similar to that, or it is similar to an afterlife. But he is experiencing it before he actually leaves the earth (Tolkien makes sure there is a difference, reserved for humans), as some kind of extension of whatever may be the ultimate (fantasy) afterlife. It is all "like", and let's just keep it simple he walks and talks around for more years. The imagery, themes etc. are obviously supposed to be reminiscent of dying, one can't talk oneself out of it by talking of Tolkien's dislike of "allegory". He wouldn't have been that stupid to deny himself any sort of meaning-creating like that (which after all is not allegory) and to avoid it to create some impossible physical self-contradition... (And he goes there _because_ it is special to be there, in his condition, not just to get a special grave there. In simple physical reality one has to acknowledge the difference, even while acknowledging the meaning or "similarity".) Tolkien even acknowledged an influence of the imagination about the Virgin Mary on Galadriel...
I kind of agree that Frodo fails, but I could see an argument that by constantly sparing Gollum's life, when he had so many opportunities to have Gollum killed or captured, he was actually allowing for his successful completion of the quest.
Frodo dose not fail, if you read the text of the book all that he is asked to do is get the ring to Mt Doom, noboady actualy says that Frodo himself must to destroy it.
@@richardsalsbury1531 That is my take as well. He was successful in that he did what was required. Lots of parallels here with the story of Beren. Did he hand the jewel over to Thingol in person immediately after recovering it? No, an enemy bit off his hand with the silmaril still in his grasp, and it was the maddened enemy who finished the journey to Doriath. Was that a failure? I note that he still won the hand of Luthien when the silmaril's recovery was Thingol's demand for his consent.
The impression I got from Tom and Goldberry was that they're sort ofnprimordial gods/forces... I actually felt Goldberry was more of a personification of the river/that natural area, which Tom was bound to. The whole thing was very other-wordly and of course all of the setting is, but there seemed to be some implication that Tom's part of the Old Forest is like a different world or dimension, something like how the elven areas are described, not necessarily 100% "real."
He an observer, adjacent to the events. He is the writer, telling stories to his children. The events and fatalistic prophesies of the setting are one kind of story, a legend of sorts. But the Hobbits represent a future, children of a new generation who are not bound by strings that tie the elves and spirits to their primordial fate.
Tolkien created Bombadil long before LOTR as a character in bedtime stories for his children, so he was a fairy tale character or Nature spirit that he reused later. His contribution to the story was giving the Hobbits their swords, one of which broke the Witch King's hold on life and allowed Eowin to kill him. Chains and coincidences are a major theme in the book, that people are fallible and weak but that good will out in the end if people show mercy. Frodo failed, plane and simple, yet he was honored as a hero and suffered the consequences of heroism. But that only shows that it was Frodo's mercy toward Gollum that prevailed.
The ring did not want to be destroyed in Mt Doom and was only forced to by Gollum. So instead of just being a nuisance, if not a downright danger to Frodo and Sam, he had a purpose, he was the ultimate ringbearer. The moral lesson here is that Frodo's kindness and patience (Sam was willing to kill Gollum at one point) and perhaps seeing some good in Gollum was a virtue that paradoxically ended up saving the mission. This has precedence in Welsh mythology, the myth of twins, one good, one bad, where the latter ultimately does one great deed. Much of Tolkien's story telling is hinting at other stories told at a distance, Tom Bombadil suggests traces of some previous Edenic world, while the scourge of the Shire shows that narrative doesn't end with the king getting crowned. Likewise Sam going to the Grey Havens is told in some Appendix by some less capable scribe, we see echos, and reflections as the tale fades into the future.
People often miss the second part of that Tolkien quote about allegory. > I cordially dislike allegory in all its manifestations, and always have done so since I grew old and wary enough to detect its presence. I much prefer history, true or feigned, with its varied applicability to the thought and experience of readers. What he calls "applicability to the thought and experience of readers" is basically just death of the author by another name. Tolkien is pretty explicit here. He supports the ability of different readers to come to different interpretations of his work based on their own life experience and knowledge. I don't think he would have any problem with admitting that his own experiences with war and the industrialisation of his homeland have been reflected in his writing. And I think it's hard to deny that Valinor is, in a way, analogous to Heaven. But like any analogy, it's not perfect. In his other writings, Tolkien makes it clear that Valinor is (at least prior to the Fall of Númenor) a literal place. And he has another place which is a more literal analogy for Heaven: the Halls of Mandos (which my autocorrect wanted to correct to the Halls of Nando's, which I think is hilarious). But that doesn't, in my opinion, detract at all from the fact that within the more limited context of the Lord of the Rings, Valinor does serve as a sort of Heaven stand in, and your conclusions here are absolutely valid in that context. It's very hard _not_ to read it as dying. Or at least, being "dead to the world/Middle Earth". But there is one thing you said that's definitely wrong. The Lord of the Rings is not, in fact, a trilogy (or "three books"). "It is in fact a single novel, consisting of six books plus appendices, sometimes published in three volumes" (to quote the "Note on the Text" before the Foreward to my one-volume copy of the novel-and maybe yours as well).
Exactly Tolkien wanted it as one book, but the publishers said no, its too big. And while we all love to hate publishers on Andys comments about handling the one book, they got a point.. (but to be fair again, it wasnt that, they were to timid, as printing such a big book was seen as too much risk for the down payment they needed)
I think it's important to add what follows this statement, that ends the paragraph in the preface. "I think that many confuse 'applicability" with 'allegory'; but the one resides in the freedom of the reader, and the other in the purposed domination of the author" He states that the distinction lies within the intentions of the autor here, not the interpretation.
The important thing from a narrative perspective is that Frodo is, as far as his friends are concerned, *functionally* dead at the end of the story. It's quite clear from the lore that he's not actually dead (yet), but it's a one-way trip.
I think Sam didn't have to build his own ship (or wait 60 years to catch a ride with Legolas and Gimli). The remaining population of elves in Middle-earth at this time was feeling the call of the sea, and Cirdan The Shipwright was on the coast continuing to build boats so elves could make the passage to their true home. Sam would have been an honored passenger on any ship he chose. (I think the movie called Frodo's ship "the last ship" which is not in the book.)
It’s also worth noting that Tolkien was writing the Legendarium/Silmarillion/History of Middle Earth for decades before LOTR. And LOTR kind of serves as an ending for that entire body of work.
Hey regarding the last part about being depressed: Seek medical help. Go to therapy. You're not supposed to feel bad for a few years at a time. I get depressions often as well, and I was pretty surprised to learn in therapy that I absolutely hate and constantly degrade myself. Maybe that's not what you're dealing with, but the point is that I also thought I was just genetically disposed to often get depressions. That thinking had a huge impact on my life and while I am very grateful that I got help at all, I would have loved to get it even sooner. Whatever you decide, I hope you figure something out that works for you and that you get better soon
Yes! I want her to seek professional help, I'm also predisposed to get depressed and just shrugged off as if it was nothing because "ohh, now I feel better!, I guess it doesn't matter! 🥴" But then it hit me like a wall of bricks and couldn't get out of that state, luckily went with a psychiatrist who help me get my life back and became a functional/not-crying-all-the-time person (ﾉ◕ヮ◕)ﾉ*.✧ Now I have a normal range of emotion and not just form kinda happy to extremely sad/I can't do anything. I really hope she gets the help that she needs so she can identify what could possibly be wrong and get the right treatment
Yes, all of this. I thought I was a failure for needing medication to help bring me out of constant cycles of depression, but once you're finally out and level, it's like, 'wow... how much easier and happier life is.' I am smiling so often and little setbacks don't build up in my mind like ticking b-mbs* anymore. It's not worth it to live life on hard mode just because medication is so stigmatized and mental health support can be difficult to come by (depending on where you live).
@@music_YT2023 yes I agree! I've also come to terms with medication being a permanent and necessary part of my life and that's absolutely ok . Luckily my family finally understood this and supports whatever I need to do to be ok
The symbolism of Frodo (and later Sam) going to Valenor is better understood comparing to Biblical stories. The deaths of Moses or Elijah. Especially Elijah going away on the chariot and dropping the mantle for Elisha -- this is the story to compare it to. In Mormon/Latter-day Saint doctrine, Moses and Elijah didn't actually die but instead are "transfigured", becoming almost like an angel that doesn't die (not yet anyway) almost like an Elf in LOTR.
The whole, "never does an allegory," thing; he clearly wrote inspiration from his life - for sure. The Dead Marshes are a direct image from bodies in craters in WWI. But Jolkien Rolkien² Tolkien considered stories to be a better carrier of meaning than simple allegory, and both his and Lewis' perspective on Myth really helped me wrap my head around this.
And he rips basically all of Rohan from Beowulf! Not even symbolism or allegory, it's copy-paste. Meduseld, etc. Names, plot beats and characters like the door guard guy + scene. Tolkien had zero qualms sticking what he liked and found interesting into LotR. But he did have a fantastic sense of taste and restraint, making sure that stuff was evenly distributed and unobtrusive to the story, specifically readers unfamiliar with his understanding of linguistics/Beowulf. So unobtrusive that the overwhelming majority of readers didn't catch it.
@@cookechris28 wow, well there that goes to show you how the inspiration + re-invention theory in creativity always holds up. I hold that it never makes a work any worse, on the contrary.
10:25 Disclaimer, I'm Australian, but apparently the library budget in Milwaukee is $26 million and the police budget is $314 million which I frankly think is a disgusting example of how undervalued libraries are
Not saying you're wrong, but a library is likely *much* cheaper to run than a police station. Given the same funding, the police station would do worse, would be my guess.
I was the #1 fan of libraries back when they were the only place where one could learn about almost everything. But I no longer understand the point of them. Now, RU-vid alone is orders of magnitude more useful than a physical library.
Yeah but look what happens when the Powers That Be in the USA start to pay attention to libraries. If libraries got as much money as cops, librarians would be armed and certain readers of certain books would get messed up bad...
Came to the vid because the raising of The Shire is my favorite part as well! But you really got me thinking before even getting to that. The general criticisms of the portrayal of Goldberry kind of ignore the fact that she's like a god or even a personification of water itself. Equally as foreign, mysterious, and aloof as Tom. Not to mention, they are both clearly not humans even if that is the form in which they present themselves to the hobbits. Along with most of the other feminine characters, I don't think it's fair to cast them as portrayals of real human women. I hadn't really even considered it until now, as I've only just recently read the book for the first time, but thinking on it now, my perception is that the breadth of both femininity AND masculinity displayed in the novel is really quite wide. So thank you for provoking some thoughts. Lastly, I have that same omni-version of the book that you have, I would highly recommend reading the forwords.
lmao at the 27 endings edit 😭 i actually unironically love how long the ending of the movie is, it feels appropriate for how epic the story is and there's nothing more disappointing than a rushed ending. but to a lot of people it seems like the endings have the same vibe as when you're trying to end a conversation with a friend but they keep adding stuff and you've already said good night like 3 times but they just don't get the hint to shut up. and i love that
This would probably be hard to change, but the chapter is the scouring of the shire, not scourging. It refers to our brave Hobbits "cleaning up" the Shire from Sharkeys influence.
@@davidadams2395 Sharkey is what Saruman was called in the Shire after fleeing Isengard. Sharkey didn't appear in the movies. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Scouring_of_the_Shire
Ayo, whats wrong with Tom Bombadil?!? Whats truly special about tom is that he was a doll that Tolkien would tell his kids whimsical stories with. So when you see bombadil in the books that is tolkien incorperating a personal touch for his children. The songs are a part of that whimsical childish touch and what he did was actually quite clever, that tom has always been there. Its because Tom bombadil truly did exist before the shire 😁 in stories we never got to hear.
It's like watching the Seven Samurai. It's long and filled with ideas that we saw in the A-Team. Sorry that you're feeling sad. If it's any consolation, from a career perspective, you're absolutely crushing it.
Hope you get through these tough times. It really is interesting how we percieve media and experiences through the lens of our emotions. Love these videos, learned a lot from several of them.
To be honest, I think her bad place is probably due to the pending election and the current political environment in the US. I guess either side is hoping for a good outcome.
@@Tekenduis98 in my experience, at least, depression doesn't really work that way. Of course, bad things happening in the world can make things worse, but you can't point to a news headline and say "this is the reason, and if it goes away I'll be fine". Depression lies to you about yourself, and that continues regardless of politics.
Watch ''TOLKIEN'' movie it gives a reasonable background into LoTR how.s and why.s but from my POV the critical failure by Tolkien is the reducing all the fighting in the war into ''hacking and hewing'' and one knight slaughtering dozens and dozen of orcs....i realized i'd seen this movie B4 its the british ''thin blue line'' doing the natives in.....ie colonial power methodology. no humans die just bloody orcs ! Who cares nothing knew to see here. Clearly the price of PTSD for Tolkien from WW-I
I only found your channel yesterday and I just wanna say I’m super impressed by you, and I immediately subscribed! I also hope you feel better, I have long moments of sadness/depression for no good reason so I understand. I know your channel is formed around science but I really appreciated this dive into a fantasy that I too have watched annually since I was a child 😅 (my mom got us into LOTR). I hope you continue to make the videos you want, even if it’s different than the others. I really loved this one! Thank you ❤
It's very interesting that Goldberry turned you off. Maybe it's translation difference as I have not read the original version but to me the daughter of the river who sings the rain down from the sky to feed the river flows on her "washing day" always seemed like a very cool character.
@@SheeplessNW6 it is unclear what Tom did before the hobbits get up so maybe he did or didn't help, but after they do Tom takes care of their guests while Goldberry has more important duties. Which she is quite capable of attending to without "weird old men" helping her. On dinner I believe it is described how the hosts serve the guests together in a well coordinated "dance" which implies that's a shared regularly shared duty. Maybe it's just the translation and the original depicts a disparity in the relationship but the version in the book I have paints a pretty balanced picture.
@@kvahlman 📜 Your translation is a good one and seems to have caught Tolkiens meaning exactly. Tom and Goldberry are 'Elemental' beings as is made explicet in the text.The forms they take are those most suitable for the time and place and those beings they interact with.They protect the land and all the living things it contains, that they have chosen to retreat to by what Sam would call 'magic', a concept that would be meaningless to them. Why? because they have Power that comes from an elder time before even the Rings were forged.....
The Tom Bombadil chapters were my favorite in Lord of the Rings, for being an interlude of Sanctuary as are Rivendell and Lothlorien, referred to at the very end of the Trilogy. Goldberry was no Luthien or Eowyn, in case the latter two are your heroes, but I kind of liked her character, so rage at me for a patriarch.....
Angela, your videos bring me so much pleasure! Your intelligence and humor are remarkable. I was shocked to hear that you are unhappy. I hope that you find your way out of the funk, you deserve to be happy, you shouldn’t have to shrug and say “it’s fine” when it’s really not. I send you sincere good vibes and wish you nothing but the best. Love, Moby
I have always heard "allegory" applied to works that are entirely about one thing (in veiled form) from beginning to end. Allegories, as I've heard the term, are very coherent. Lord of the Rings certainly has elements that should remind us of things in the real world. It's a deep work influenced by all sorts of mythological strains that connect to real and timeless aspects of human societies. So I have no problem agreeing that Frodo's mood in the Scouring of the Shire is indeed about soldiers returning from war fundamentally changed. To say it's explicitly or exclusively about his WWI experiences would be incorrect, but to say that it's about the timeless theme of wars changing people throughout history is indeed true. Likewise, his passage to Valinor is indeed a metaphor for the ending of life. His life in Middle Earth cannot continue after what he's been through. To read it as literal death is questionable, but to read it as his experience and loss being a metaphor for death is entirely reasonable.
I am firmly in the "read the damn books" camp, but eventually I realized that attitiude was a personal issue with me. Owing to my brain (mis-)wiring, and to my zealous re-reading of the trilogy, I acquired a "Fahrenheit 451" level of knowledge of them. And any deviation in the movies from the canon was intensely startling and unsettling. And I still believe that if challenged, I can discern actual text from clever substitutes. And can detect misapprehensions of the story, like the belief that Eowyn killed the chief of the nine. (Who wasn't referred to as the witch king in the books.) Merry it was who killed the "witch king" by severing a vital connection in his leg. Eowyn's stroke was superfluous, and had nothing to do with the prophecy that the "witch king" wouldn't be slain by a man. Because, of course, Merry was a hobbit. Giving too much credit was a sop to feminists. One last bit of trivia, there are 6 books in the so-called trilogy. They are labeled as such, with Books I & II comprising the Fellowship of the Ring, etc. I always thought that Bombadil's story was out of place, a fragment that Tolkien felt he had to use even though it more properly belonged in ancillary materials like The Simarillion. Finally, in contrast to any of your other videos (that I've seen), your shirt was not androgenous, but rather feminine. An interesting choice for someone who announced that feminist concerns were overblown. But I understand your perspective. After reading Pride and Prejudice, I strongly identified with the female protagonist. Oh, and the Shire was scoured, not scourged.
The repeated motif of "Nobody told me Frodo dies at the end of Lord of The Rings" gives this video an artsy vibe I really like. One thing I want to say about Eowyn's character arc. it was written by a man who saw the horrors of the First World War first hand. For Tolkien there was nothing aspirational about battle. Eowyn was young (she's like 18 or something) and believed that she had to go to war to do something worthwhile with her life. She did go to war, and she did do something incredibly important. But she's not happy, even after that. She's really only happy when she finally realises war is not a path to a worthwhile life. Now Tolkien is a catholic conservative who was born in 1892 so the worthwhile thing she does is marry a man and settle down and tend to a garden and I think there's definitely a conversation to be had about that. But the gist of her character arc is "going to war isn't going to make you happy, its not something anyone should WANT to do". Also Eomer gets to be king because he's older. Y'know, monarchies. :p
What's wrong with getting married, settling down, and tending a garden? Are progressive women not allowed to be happy like that? Tolkien literally gave her the same ending he gave Samwise. If it's good enough for him, it's good enough for her.
@@davidpo5517 If the joys and rewards of womanhood are minimized and denied to "intelligent, aware" women, it is by the efforts of "progressive women". And it's sad and awful.
@@davidpo5517 I suspect that the attitude is predicated on two factors: the first is an expression of rebellion, which is a reflection of a sort of infantile attitude, based on still being incapable of moving out of the shadow of their parents, and a large part of this is predicated on the fact that the people who harbor this attitude generally are college/university students who are without many of the responsibilities that the worker has on their shoulders, as well as the hardships that follow thereof; the second factor is predicated on an inability, bad luck, poor environment, culture, etc., which all affect the individuals relationship with the opposite sex, often contributing to poor long term success; therefore, the prospect of motherhood, or fatherhood, are immensely bleak, and people cope by adopting a negative and dismissive attitude towards that idea. These attitudes are interpolated in politics with liberal values to produce a strange mixture that conflates childrearing, marriage and parenthood with traditional values, thus adding fuel to the fire, so to speak. I do generally find liberal values, at least in principle, to be noble, but, as with most things, people in our hyper-individual western societal environment tend to conflate the individual with the group, because of the fact that the group is to a great extent absent, at least in the immediate communal sense, from our day to to day lives; it is because of this that most societal issues are generally misinterpreted from the pure subject-orientation in the world, which issues, to a great extent, hinges on personal responsibility. Not to deny societal factors, by any means, but with personal responsibility you at least have some semblance of immediate influence; it is through that influence - assuming that you are part of a community that interacts with you as a whole person - that you have the biggest effect on the world by means of your fellow man within that community - we have to remember that the world does not exist outside of individual experience of that world (as far as we can prove, as every experiment implies a subject behind that experiment), and that that is why there is no deeper influence than that of individual influence. Anyway, I digress.
This is great, but the guy who said the scouring is the best part was wrong. The best part(s) of the books, sadly left out of the movies, is Sam and Frodo on multiple occasions holding hands when they are scared. THEY HOLD HANDS, AND IT COMFORTS THEM. I'll take that over battle scenes any day. I hope someone holds your hand while you're feeling low and it comforts you.
I read " goldberry's washing day" as she was a weather goddess and she was raining. And I get the impression that Tom was only going to save the hobbits from the willow if it wouldn't hinder him bringing flowers to his wife.
I love you choose to not edit your content to 10-15 min and actually share all your thoughts. It's immeasurably refreshing. Regardless of what it is you leave me thinking and not fed click bait content. I hope everyone takes your advice and explores the audiobook you suggested as I will tomorrow. I've shared your experience of a well narrated story being amazing. If you ever need a suggestion I have some to repay you. Hope you have a wonderful day and as always thank you for sharing your thoughts and amazing content!
I think you're not at odds with the text... Tolkien says it's purgatory for the mortals,, purgatory is also something that typically happens after death. Leaving aside that Tolkien would admit to allegorical allusions (the Shire is rural England, Drawves are Jews... yeah) , going back to the mythology that inspired him, going to the underworld even under your own power is considered equivalent to death, even if you return. And Frodo doesn't return, so I think Sam does go to Valinor but that is "dying" even if the actual physical death is delayed.
Another really cool difference between the books and the films is that in the films the battle of helms deep and sam and frodo going to mount doom are portrayed roughly simultaneously so you can get a big triumphant victory, but in the books all of the helms deep stuff happens and you havn't heard from sam and frodo since the shelob stuff at the end of two towers. So you get this big triumphant fantasy battle that feels like it came straight out of an anglo saxon saga, and then they march on the black gate only to be shown frodo's mithril coat and you get an "all is lost" moment. Then we cut to sam and frodo having a shit time in the somme. How i read that is that, helms deep is the war that they were promised, big heroic fantasy battles and heroism, and that stuff all turns out to be ultimately pointless and irrelevant. The fate of the world is actually decided by two normal english lads from the home counties marching through a blasted swamp and coming to terms with the fact they're almost certainly going to die.
I've often wondered, and this is completely irrelevant, but was Tolkien delusional, like did he really believe he hadn't written an allegory? Or (I like this better) was he trying to forestall people from a too-narrow reading. Like I think it is a mistake to read the scourge of the shire are specifically about the British experience of the blitz (which is a common allegory people make) or even about Vichy France. It's about the horrors of war on civilian life more broadly, and by so virulently insisting it wasn't an allegory, Tolkien was hoping people would make the broader reading.
Okay sorry, I gotta ask. I'm fairly certain I've seen multiple Malazan books in the backgrounds of some of your videos. You being somebody who doesn't like books with maps or battles, I have to ask, how did you manage to make it through those monsters? (also which one is your favorite, I don't know anybody who's read Malazan)
The washing day thing... Goldberry left when the rain started and was heard singing a rain song, and only returned when the rain ended. I assumed she was doing like a rain dance thingy and that washing day was a metaphor for whatever a river spirit does to make the rain come. I just listened to that section of the audiobook and the only thing she carried when returning to the house was a candle. I totally bought a new copy of the audiobook with the new narrator even though I already own them all just because of this video.
Feminists can't help themselves. They always project their own petty resentments and insecurities onto the world. The fact that this RU-vidr fabricated a section of the Bombadil section just to have something to complain about is perfectly predictable.
thank you for this. Exactly. Goldberry and Tom...they're off grid. They do what they want. She's not "doing chores." She's off doing what matters to her. People need to stop interpreting everything from their own perspective.
@@sarahbreisch4750This is my impression whenever I read Lord of the Rings. Goldberry is not a little docile woman who does chores. And this is just my own personal way of thinking about her, but I sort of see her as a minor demi-god or force of nature. So far above the lives of the hobbits and men and other creatures of Middle Earth. Tom Bombadil is a more major demigod enforce of nature. But they work together in harmony, so far outside of our ways of thinking about authority and gender roles that it's ridiculous to even apply them in this situation. So yeah, it's interesting to watch this video. I've never read this section of the book thinking anything other than how those two are forces of nature, beyond Hobbit comprehension, and beyond any of our judgments or stereotypes. Basically the exact opposite of this video. But that's fine. We should all be able to respect people and opinions different than the ones we have!
I dont think Valinor is heaven. Elves dont go to the Heaven. Death is the Gift given to by Ea to humans and Dwarves. When Gandalph is reborn to heaven he's not in Valinor. Elves dont die in Valinor. its a Mythical place like "halfway to heaven" , its the realm of the Fae Folk. Elves know the path or have the magic otherwise youd travel around the world instead of going straight. Frodo was offerred an honor as a ringbearer. The other ringbearers ( not the wraiths ) also go. I dont think Frodo is going to live forever. I think he will live longer than if he stays. maybe he will be cured. Think how long Bilbo lived with the ring. it sustained him. I think they undying lands will arrest the rapid aging syndrome. I think a way was prepared for Frodo, to be ready when he was.
I think that going to Valinor makes for a much more powerful ending to Frodo's arc than "he dies, the end." It's about him accepting that he isn't the man he once was, that he doesn't have a place in the Shire, but he's still choosing to carry on and focus himself, on finding his own peace with the help of those who understand him (his fellow ring-bearer Bilbo, Gandalf, and the elves), while leaving behind what's familiar to him. Before that, while Frodo was in the Shire, he was just living for other people, thinking about the well-being of others and trying to meet their expectations; even right up his departure he's hiding his pains from Sam and can't even bring himself to tell him that he's leaving because he doesn't want to hurt him. In the end, he goes to Vainor and is just trying to carve out some peace in his life despite everything that's happened to him. And, I think that Tolkien (just an unnecessarily low-blow comparing him to Rowling btw) addressing in his letters that Frodo is going to die one day and that this is just the last step of his journey really drives home the point.
@@Makkaru112 Thats's why what Sauron did to Ar Pharazon and the Numenoreans was genius, he couldn't lose. He knew that even if they did win and won in his attack on Valinor, that men were still subject to the Music of the Ainulindale. Their spirts would depart the world and their bodies would be empty houses. Zombies in effect and beyond easy to inhabit.
