Tolkien Fans: Comments and Questions

[Voboy]

The eagle thing is still an issue, because people don't understand airpower.

No, it's not an issue.

The beauty of LOTR is that it's not our world, it's Tolkien's. It wasn't possible to use the Eagles to destroy the Ring, and there are many in-canon reasons for that. Those reasons have all been done to death over the years, to the point where any readers who still think Use The Eagles is a thing are just determined not to believe in Tolkien's world.

The Eagles were not a possibility. End of story.

 

[SimonDoom]

No, it's not an issue.

The beauty of LOTR is that it's not our world, it's Tolkien's. It wasn't possible to use the Eagles to destroy the Ring, and there are many in-canon reasons for that. Those reasons have all been done to death over the years, to the point where any readers who still think Use The Eagles is a thing are just determined not to believe in Tolkien's world.

The Eagles were not a possibility. End of story.

I basically agree with this, but I don't think it's 100% quite as simple as that, because Tolkien DOES use the eagles to accomplish near miracles at times, such as rescuing the dwarves in the Hobbit, or rescuing Gandalf from Orthanc, or flying into Mordor, presumably at extreme speed, to rescue Frodo and Sam from a volcanic eruption.

I think an author has SOME obligation to make the miracles internally consistent to preserve the semblance of plausibility. At the least, Tolkien opened a door to questioning, as evidenced by the fact that so many people have raised this issue over the years.

 

[Voboy]

I basically agree with this, but I don't think it's 100% quite as simple as that, because Tolkien DOES use the eagles to accomplish near miracles at times, such as rescuing the dwarves in the Hobbit, or rescuing Gandalf from Orthanc, or flying into Mordor, presumably at extreme speed, to rescue Frodo and Sam from a volcanic eruption.

I think an author has SOME obligation to make the miracles internally consistent to preserve the semblance of plausibility. At the least, Tolkien opened a door to questioning, as evidenced by the fact that so many people have raised this issue over the years.

Yes, he uses them as deus ex machina. I tend to discount the use of the eagles in the Hobbit for the same reason I discount a lot of the Hobbit canon: it was largely retconned later. The discrepancies are at times severe enough that some of the things in The Hobbit need a sort of asterisk.

I think Tolkien delves more deeply into the nature of the Eagles in the Silmarillion, and for me, that delving is deep enough: they are the personal homies of Manwe, to fulfill tasks as directed by Manwe. I do not think it is an accident that they tend to be associated with the regulation of Maiar and Valar: they keep watch on Morgoth, they respond to the assistance of Gandalf, etc.

They are not servants of anyone but Manwe. It should be clear, then, that they don't fly the Ring to Mordor because Manwe doesn't want them to. Partly, I assume, that's because he is protective of them: he recognizes that such a flight would likely be a one-way trip, and my assumption has always been that Eagles are immortal, and few, and special. The other part of that, I think, is that he and the rest of the Valar already had a plan to deal with Sauron, and that plan was the Istari.

The Five Wizards had the responsibility to discover how to fight Sauron. Gandalf embraced that responsibility and made a plan, and my feeling is that Manwe wasn't going to tread on Gandalf's toes unless he had to. My sense is that he kept an eye on the Quest and had the Eagles in reserve as a last-ditch effort in case Gandalf's plan failed, which was why they were so close when Gandalf needed them for Frodo's rescue.

Whether they would have been able to do that final deus ex machina in the event Frodo claimed the Ring and Gollum wasn't nearby to do some chomping? That's an interesting question.

 

[Jackie.Hikaru]

reading through this thread has been a delight. Can I say how impressed I am with the PhD level of knowledge displayed here?

Really have nothing else to add to the discussion, except to say that if I ever have a daughter, naming her Éowyn is definitely not off the table lol

 

[Voboy]

reading through this thread has been a delight. Can I say how impressed I am with the PhD level of knowledge displayed here?

Really have nothing else to add to the discussion, except to say that if I ever have a daughter, naming her Éowyn is definitely not off the table lol

I've often thought it's ironic that I know so much more about the Legendarium than I know about something useful. Snowblower engines, say.

As for naming your daughter? Beware. I knew a family once who had a kid between the time GRR Martin published his books and the time HBO made their show. They named their kid "Stannis" because they liked the book character. The movie character everyone got to know? Not so much. Still, you should be fine with Eowyn.

 

[MelissaBaby]

I've often thought it's ironic that I know so much more about the Legendarium than I know about something useful. Snowblower engines, say.

As for naming your daughter? Beware. I knew a family once who had a kid between the time GRR Martin published his books and the time HBO made their show. They named their kid "Stannis" because they liked the book character. The movie character everyone got to know? Not so much. Still, you should be fine with Eowyn.

Between 20i4 and 2019, more than 5000 American families named their daughters Khaleesi. Then Daenerys Targaryen incinerated the entire population of Kings Landing.

Since then, a few hundred Khaleesis continue to be.born every year.

 

[Britva415]

The eagle thing is still an issue, because people don't understand airpower.

That airpower was unavailable, though. It isn't about whether the eagles could have done this or could have done that, as a matter of physics and warcraft.

 

[SimonDoom]

Another issue I've pondered: Tolkien's universe has something in common with the universes in Game of Thrones and Dune: no technological progress. Each of these stories has historical backstories that last thousands of years, with no progress whatsoever. The societies are stuck in medievalism. Dune sort of has an explanation for it, because the Butlerian Jihad ushered in an era that forbade certain types of technological progress. But there's no explanation in GOT or LOTR.

Should we consider this as an ideological/aesthetic preference of the authors? Merely a plot device? The concept that the universes are governed by different rules? Or is the author just throwing up his hands and saying, "This is what makes the story work."

 

[Bamagan]

Another issue I've pondered: Tolkien's universe has something in common with the universes in Game of Thrones and Dune: no technological progress. Each of these stories has historical backstories that last thousands of years, with no progress whatsoever. The societies are stuck in medievalism. Dune sort of has an explanation for it, because the Butlerian Jihad ushered in an era that forbade certain types of technological progress. But there's no explanation in GOT or LOTR.

Should we consider this as an ideological/aesthetic preference of the authors? Merely a plot device? The concept that the universes are governed by different rules? Or is the author just throwing up his hands and saying, "This is what makes the story work."

In the case of Middle Earth, there's a certain amount of 'progress' discussed, at least for some of the races, but by and large I think it's just that Tolkien was not particularly impressed with industrialization and its attendant ills, and therefore didn't want to tell a story that featured them much.

The Elves specifically are described as 'attempting nothing new' at least since the beginning of the Third Age. The Numenoreans were the pinnacle of 'technological' and cultural development for Men, and in the aftermath of its destruction they slowly waned, probably at least in part due to the loss of a substantial number of their best artisans and scholars. But they were still more advanced than the other races of Men. Rohan and similar cultures are described, by Faramir, as becoming more like the Numenorean (refugees) in terms of culture and perhaps other technical aspects like metallurgy or masonry, so they seem to have 'progressed' in a sense. Dwarven civilization may have largely collapsed after Moria was lost, and then again when Smaug smashed Erebor. Gloin tells Frodo that they can't rival their ancestors in metallurgy, but that they've surpassed them in certain aspects of masonry and building. So that's 'progress' of a sort. I suppose one might consider the Hobbits inventing smoking as progress, in the sense that no one else had done it so it was innovative. So overall, I wouldn't say their cultures are completely technologically stagnant, but I can understand if the examples seem like small potatoes and aren't especially convincing.

As an aside, the background to the first Dune isn't devoid of progress, although it's of a much different sort than we are accustomed to, since it was all focused on trying to make people more 'advanced' mentally and physically. They developed Mentats to compensate for the lack of computers, the spacing guild apparently had a near monopoly on advanced math and physics, and the Bene Gesserit had developed prana bindu for biocontrol and as a martial art of sorts. I suspect that a culture whose efforts at advancement are focused in such a way would be limited by the number of generations being born per century (or whatever unit of time), and the enhanced longevity from spice consumption probably helped impede their development.

 

[Bramblethorn]

They are not servants of anyone but Manwe. It should be clear, then, that they don't fly the Ring to Mordor because Manwe doesn't want them to. Partly, I assume, that's because he is protective of them: he recognizes that such a flight would likely be a one-way trip, and my assumption has always been that Eagles are immortal, and few, and special. The other part of that, I think, is that he and the rest of the Valar already had a plan to deal with Sauron, and that plan was the Istari.

Adding to this: one of the historical patterns in Tolkien's legendarium is the retreat of magic/divinity from the world. In the First Age the Valar walk the earth, Maiar and dragons are all over the place, Elves are making wonders like the Silmarils and one can just sail from Middle-Earth to Valinor, the home of the gods. The Big Bads are Morgoth, most powerful of the Valar, and Ungoliant.

In the Second Age Morgoth is gone and the Valar are no longer as directly involved. The new Big Bad is Morgoth's former lieutenant, Sauron, who at this point still seems to be working for his absent master (IIRC he encourages the Numenoreans to worship Morgoth). Valinor is still on the map, although Men are forbidden from sailing there, until late in the Second Age when Ar-Pharazôn tries to invade Valinor, at which point the Earth is bent into a globe with Valinor removed (I think the last direct intervention by Eru?), now only accessible by Elves.

In the Third Age, as you say, the Valar's intervention in Middle-Earth is mostly via the Istari. Morgoth seems to be pretty much forgotten; by the time Sauron re-emerges he appears to be working purely for his own tyranny (though I don't think we ever get his POV on this). There are seven? Maiar present in Middle-Earth, most of them hidden or keeping a relatively low profile. Shelob is still terrible but she's nowhere near the power of Ungoliant; Smaug is likewise a menace but he's no Ancalagon the Black.

By the end of LotR Saruman and the Balrog of Moria are dead, Sauron is broken (and with him the power of the three Elvish rings), Gandalf has returned to Valinor, the other three Istari seem to be fading into obscurity, Smaug is dead, Shelob fades out of the picture, and most of the Elves are leaving or have already left. Our own magic-less world is implied to be somewhere in Middle-Earth's Fourth Age.

We can look at that from the Doylean perspective (Tolkien is following historical myths about the world's descent from a past Golden Age) or from the Watsonian perspective (for some ineffable metaphysical reason, Eru and the Ainur are getting less and less interventionist over time). But either way, the conclusion is that Eru and the Ainur aren't going to keep showing up to fix shit deus ex machina every time it gets broken; maybe God still helps those who help themselves, but it's a much more subtle kind of help.

There's a strong contrast between Gandalf and Saruman here. Saruman seeks to become part of the power structure of Middle-Earth, taking possession of Isengard and trying to become a warlord. Gandalf's approach is much more to work through the small folk of Middle-Earth, advising and encouraging them. He holds tremendous power, both his own and via Narya, and very occasionally we glimpse that power in scenes like his confrontation with the Balrog. But more often he's doing things like rounding up a bunch of dwarves and a hobbit and pointing them at the dragon who needs to be destroyed, or speaking encouraging words to people cowed by fear. From how things turn out, it's pretty clear that Gandalf's approach is what the Valar were looking for from the Istari, and Saruman's is not.

The idea that good things have to be earned is a powerful one in storytelling but as I've commented previously, it also seems to be just how fate works in Middle-Earth. Over and over again we see how well-intentioned, expedient attempts to solve problems lead to tragic consequences - Saruman and Denethor's use of the Palantir, Boromir's desire to use the Ring against Sauron, the short-cut through Moria. Victory is won through courage and perseverance, not by inventing a new kind of trebuchet. The suffering of the Fellowship is a kind of sacrifice necessary to achieve Sauron's destruction. No pain, no gain.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Dwarven civilization may have largely collapsed after Moria was lost, and then again when Smaug smashed Erebor.

Those were both grievous losses, but "collapse" is probably taking it too far. There are still quite a few Dwarves around, they're just not very visible during LotR because they're mostly up north dealing with Sauron's forces there.

The Dwarves of the Iron Hills are strong enough to be a significant obstacle to Sauron's forces in the North; IIRC one of Gandalf's reasons for engineering the destruction of Smaug is to ensure that they can do that job without needing to face a dragon as well. When Smaug falls, Dain is able to bring more than five hundred heavy infantry for the Battle of Five Armies.

By comparison, the Rohirrim defenders at Helm's Deep have "maybe a thousand" able to fight, mostly boys and old men and probably not well equipped, until Eomer and Haldir's elves show up. Once Saruman is defeated and Theoden doesn't have to worry about protecting his own country, he's able to bring about six thousand riders to the Pelennor Fields. This post estimates Gondor's total forces at around 46,000, about 21,000 at Minas Tirith and the rest throughout the rest of the kingdom.

Against those numbers, Dain's army at BoFA is not a large one. But these are veteran soldiers, heavily armed and armoured; we know from Gimli how dangerous even a single Dwarf can be. Further, this isn't the whole of Dain's available troops; he was able to muster them quickly enough to march a distance of about 200-300 miles within a few days of Smaug's death and have them arrive still in shape to fight, while presumably leaving enough fighters behind to defend his home. That combination of experience, equipment and mobility makes them far more important than the head count alone would suggest, and it implies that they have enough of a civilisation to sustain a standing army of > 500 and provision them on zero notice.

Gloin tells Frodo that they can't rival their ancestors in metallurgy, but that they've surpassed them in certain aspects of masonry and building. So that's 'progress' of a sort. I suppose one might consider the Hobbits inventing smoking as progress, in the sense that no one else had done it so it was innovative. So overall, I wouldn't say their cultures are completely technologically stagnant, but I can understand if the examples seem like small potatoes and aren't especially convincing.

I don't think Tolkien was particularly opposed to that kind of progress, the kind that involves developing skill and making beautiful things. Even gunpowder seems to be acceptable when Gandalf's using it for fireworks. But he takes a very dim view of the kind that involves chopping down trees to fuel engines.

I agree with Simon that the societal stasis of the Third Age is weird, especially for Gondor. Aragorn shows up about a thousand years after the last King of Gondor disappeared. Lost princes returning to claim their throne after centuries are popular in fiction, but looking at RL history with things like the Jacobites I'm not convinced that anything more than about 100 years is plausible. If Franz von Bayern tried to claim the crown today people would just laugh.

 

[Bamagan]

Those were both grievous losses, but "collapse" is probably taking it too far. There are still quite a few Dwarves around, they're just not very visible during LotR because they're mostly up north dealing with Sauron's forces there.

Possibly. And while you didn't point it out, Moria was home primarily to Durin's descendants, so at least some of the other main lineages probably weren't directly impacted by its loss. Still, it was apparently regarded as the largest and most important community of Dwarves left in the world at that time, and at its height even Sauron couldn't assail it, when he was even more powerful than he was during LotR. The Dwarves are still reasonably numerous and a military force not to be trifled with, as evidenced by them nearly wiping out the orcs of the Misty Mountains while Thorin was still young. I still get the impression that Dwarves, post-Moria, had fallen dramatically far from their pinnacle, and then suffered another serious setback with the loss of Erebor. I can't necessarily defend the term collapse rigorously, since there's not really any indisputable quantifiable evidence to compare them at various points of time. It's still the impression I get, though, that they are at least in the midst of a protracted collapse and on their way to extinction or irrelevance,