Talk:Themes of The Lord of the Rings/Archive 1

Can we make a definite statement?
In the current version of the article, it is states that Frodo is Christ, but this statement cannot be backed up, and it needs to be emphasized more that Tolkien did not intend this allegorically. Wouldn't it be better to say that some believe Frodo to represent Christ? --queso man 19:48, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Negative themes grossly ignored
J.R.R. used strong racial and religious ideas in his work. There are numerous parallels to Islam and Mordor, Aryanism and the Elves, and Perhaps the Most noteworthy Homoerotisms. All these things may draw from sources in his Biography as well, like his fear of spiders. None of this is discussed here.
 * 1
 * 2
 * 3

Excuse me, but I can't believe you're actually using the ChildCare Action Project as a source! I actually find it very amusing.Web wonder (talk) 02:10, 19 June 2009 (UTC)


 * You're grossly distorting and generalizing. See Tolkien and racism. Uthanc 03:13, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Excuse me, but that last link is about a book with a very positive few of the trilogy. --queso man 19:53, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Possible theme
Tolkien opposed to Pacifism through representation of the Ents. Its not until Merry and Pipin convince them with a argument that mimics Tolkien's feelings on the Christian pacifists that would not support the Allied actions of WWI.

Over-simplifying
The initial form of this article is over-simplifying things and is misleading on several points. Also, it would be courteous to the author of the book to start from themes in the book. Themes that appear only in one or more of the adaptations should not be mentioned here, but treated in a separate article. Thanks. Carcharoth 12:12, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Over-simplifications also in the part about conservatism. For also women had an important role (Theoden's niece) and "Africans" were not depicted as evil (See Faramir's comments on the southern attacers)

Suggest Move
Would anyone mind if I moved the page title to Themes in The Lord of the Rings as opposed to the current quotes? Sorry Guy 14:11, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I thought that was a bit strange as well. Not sure what the style is. Let's try looking here at pages beginning with "Themes". Right, well, it looks like "no quotes" is the style, so yeah, go ahead and move it. Carcharoth 19:12, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Done. — TKD::Talk 02:08, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Frodo's hesitation to destroy the ring
The discussion about Frodo where he decides not to destroy the ring after all, is sort of the "last tempatation". Even though he succumbs to the temptation, obviously the mission is accomplished and the ring is destroyed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 171.159.64.10 (talk) 19:21, 6 March 2007 (UTC).

Need Sources
A lot of this article seems like original research. Are there any sources to back this stuff up? Ccm043 14:32, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Is there anybody who has sources for these themes? This article has been put up for deletion before but people were okay with keeping it up if somebody cleaned it up.  Does anybody have any sources for these themes?  Ccm043 04:42, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Don't delete this page...just improve it
This page has previously been nominated for deletion, and I would like to beg that that never happen again. Yes it is lacking in sources; however, if any one person can see relevance in the material on this page then it is useful.

I think perhaps the nature of the article should be changed so that people writing essays on the books can look on this page for a vast array of different themes. I myself can think of at least another three (relationship between Rohan and Gondor, Hope, The Shire), but I have no evidence to prove that they really are themes. Therefore, with the community's agreement, I would have it that we add themes until we totally exhaust our creativity, and if there are no sources, so be it.0-Jenny-0 14:38, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Christ figures?
I suggest the section on Christ figures as a theme be drastically shortened, as it seems to violate both neutrality and original research. The section makes too many links between events in the story and specific Bible extracts, drawing conclusions that are the opinions of the editors and almost certainly not those of Tolkien, given his attitude to bare-faced allegory (even if he was Catholic). Ottery St Catchpole 20:44, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Speaking as a Christian and ardent aficionado of Tolkien's works, I concur completely. There is strong indication of Messianic qualities in the books (Tolkien wrote that Lord of the Rings was a fundamentally Catholic work) but Tolkien also disliked direct allegory. There are too many specific conclusions inferred from the work that cannot be independently backed up by Tolkien. DaveLoneRanger (talk) 06:38, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The tension builds between two positions Tolkien himself explicitly said. In the preface to the book, he stated his dislike to allegory "in all its forms". However, this follows immediately his response to some allegations about LotR being some sort of a secular political manifest. (i.e. some readers tried to find allegorical connections with WWII) I therefore think that his "dislike to allegory" doesn't mean that LotR shouldn't be tried to be analyzed. JRR also described his work to be specificly Roman Catholic, as DaveLoneAvenger already stated. The tension between these two positions can be sustained, but one must understand what "allegory" means. At least Tolkien's close friend C. S. Lewis made a clear distinction between "myth" and "allegory". Tolkien would call his creative process "myhtopoeia", or being a "sub-creator". Taking Tolkien's work allegorically does not do justice to it. However, I must stress that also entirely denying all "hidden meanings" in it would be a mistake too, since that would definitely "flatten" the story. However, just bluntly claiming that "Frodo represents Christ" or even "Frodo is Christ" is perhaps not saying 'too much', more like 'saying it wrong'. - Esko; 18 January 2008
 * I shoertened the section a bit, mostly removing book plt that made little convincing link to anything biblical. As Tolkien stated none of this was intended, shouldn't it go altogether until sources are found?Yobmod (talk) 15:20, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality and original research
I'm not sure how this page could not have original research, or be neutral. Even if you cite another work, unless it is specifically from J.R.R.Tolkien, it is simply the opinion of whoever wrote the cited work. Therefore, it would also include "biased" material. If, to some people, Frodo represents Christ, then he does, for them. No one is obligated to agree. Even if Tolkien denied that the Ring represents "the Bomb," the text still can be interpreted that way, by some people. If you feel that the page is not balanced, then add an alternative, don't try to delete a legitimate interpretation simply because you disagree. Thematic analysis is almost always opinion. That is its gift and its doom.LCExpress 15:59, 02 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I suppose the article may verge on OR but I found it very interesting and Wiki is better for it's presence in my opinion. Well done to whoever wrote it.  SmokeyTheCat    •TALK•  19:03, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree that this page's neutrality is questionable. Of which of the specified themes are the Palantiri an example? Are they magical or do they represent something else?--Fornanzo (talk) 14:46, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Let me quote LCExpress's comment above from 2007: "If you feel that the page is not balanced, then add an alternative." The Palantíri are not even mentioned in the article, probably because there are no reliable sources yet that have analysed them or because nobody cared to add something about them. You could be the first one though, Google Scholar sometimes turns up with very interesting results. And as to being one-sided, what kind of content are you missing to think that the article is not neutral? De728631 (talk) 22:46, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I've now added two paragraphs about the role of the palantíri, one about being an example of a dangerous technology that has been corrupted, and one where Saruman's palantir is used to strengthen Aragorn's position as the hope of the free world. De728631 (talk) 23:43, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Problem
This theme page references the films rather than the books and someone ought to change the title to reflect that.

Theology
Some Christian theology thoughts on LotR from Shippey (in his 'Author of the Century'): But yes, the current section on Christian themes goes far too far and needs to be rewritten. Carcharoth (talk) 02:17, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Dates: The 25th of March and the Fall of Sauron and the destruction of the Ring - Shippey makes the connection (which others had made previously, I believe) that this is the traditional date of the crucifixion. Also, the annunciation and the Fall of Adam and Eve are associated with this date. Shippey also mentions the 25th December date that the Fellowship leaves Rivendell.
 * Eagle's Song: The song beginning "Sing and rejoice, ye people of the Tower of Guard...". Shippey compares the language here to that of the psalms in the Christian Bible.
 * Shippey concludes that the LotR "contains within it hints of the Christian message, but refuses just to repeat it."

So he thought Sauron = Jesus? LoL. But at least it is sourced unlike the current Frodo+Gandalf+Aragorn+Gollum+? = Jesus.Yobmod (talk) 09:03, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Not Sauron=Jesus, but more that both dates are significant in their own, different ways. The Christ-figure, if there is one, would be Frodo, but that is not what I think Shippey is trying to say. Incidentally, the themes of fate and free will, which you removed here, are relatively easy to source. A lot has been written on that. I'll try and summarise it at some point. Carcharoth (talk) 21:45, 15 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Oki doke. No problem at all with anything sourced going in, even if it looks spurious to me (isn't every single day of the year religiously significant to Catholics? I wonder what date Tolkien could have used that people wouldn't try to link to something! :-D).Yobmod (talk) 10:38, 16 September 2008 (UTC)


 * There is certainly not one Christ-figure in the Lord of the Rings. Frodo is, as can certainly be seen, subject to sinful inclinations; neither Gandalf nor Aragorn achieves redemption on his own, which however Christ does.
 * The date of 25th March cannot possibly be overlooked by a reader who knows its significance in Catholicism (chiefly because of the Annunciation feast, where God became Man and thus somewhat already effected Redemption, though it is also held to be the Crucifixion date which, again, achieved Redemption). So, it is not an effort of "well they can try to link anything to anything". No. "25th of March", and then as future beginning of the year btw (which was a custom in England if I am correct), is a striking applicability ( :-) ) of Tolkien's own making.
 * Nevertheless Catholics do have the habit of linking all things with all things, and why shouldn't they. Indeed why not mention some of these dates. After all Tolkien gave us the 25th March as an excuse for doing so, and then there's still the possibility that Tolkien could have done so, and also the possibility that he was in reality meant to do so albeit inadvertently. (That would not, yet, mean that his work is so very special; Providence cares for the most little things just as well.)
 * The Fellowship sets out on Christmas. If anyone has wondered that there is a lot of military in the books: Bilbo and Frodo (talk about significant) are born on 22nd September, feast of St. Mauritius, general of the Theban Legion. Aragorn becomes king on 1 May, in Tolkien's time the major feast of St. Joseph who is a model for fathers and kings. And, you know, I was just beginning. There is a whole article by Michael Hagenböck on the subject, containing that Frodo awakes at the day of St. Luke, patron saint of doctors, and so on and so on.--93.135.34.116 (talk) 13:17, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Uncited sections
It seems that now the threat of deletion has passed, this article has been abondoned unsourced again (as those voting delete expected :-/ ). I moved these small sections here, as they have no cites at all. Having a plot element is not the same as exploring a theme. Without sources what is there to stop me adding sections on the important themes of "choosing clothes in a colour to suit ones personality" or "Homemade jewellery"?

War
Tolkien knew and felt strongly about war; he lost many friends in the trenches of World War I. War is necessary but terrible in The Lord of the Rings. Many characters look forward to the return of the King of Gondor and Arnor, which will herald the Fourth Age of peace.

Nature versus technology
Tolkien loved the beauty of nature. The villains in the story are often described as mechanical with Saruman having "a mind like metal and wheels". His destruction of Fangorn forest shocks Treebeard and other Ents into action. The Elves of Lothlórien live amongst enormous, ancient trees. Through the continued reference of industry and war as synonymous, especially in relation to Saruman and the production of his Uruk-hai army, Tolkien presents a very negative image of industry and technological advancement "we will drive the industry of war". This is expressed throughout the Peter Jackson trilogy. Notably, where Saruman says that "the old world will burn in the fires of industry" or when the Shire is shown enslaved and forced to work in factories as opposed to the Hobbits' craftsmanship.

Coming of age
The Hobbits are small simple creatures who don't like to go out for adventures (true) SO TRUE. The Shire is an idyllic place of peace that the Hobbits such as Frodo, Sam, Merry and Pippin journey out of into the dangers of the war and, although small, committed great deeds. This also links to growth in nature; and the regrowing of the vegetation after the Scouring of the Shire.

Frodo, Gandalf, Aragorn: Priest, prophet, king
In fact, Frodo Baggins, Gandalf, and Aragorn each in a remote way embody one of the three aspects of Christ’s ministry as priest, prophet, and king. Each also undergoes a kind of sacrificial "death" and rebirth. It should be remembered that the author disliked allegory and stated on several occasions that this was not his intention.

The priestly role belongs to Frodo, and he is the sacrificial lamb of Middle-earth who bears a burden of terrible evil on behalf of the whole world, like Christ carrying his cross. Frodo’s via dolorosa or way of sorrows is at the very heart of Tolkien’s story, just as the crucifixion narratives are at the heart of the gospels accounts. As Christ descended into the grave, Frodo journeys into Mordor, the Land of Death, and there suffers a deathlike state in the lair of the giant spider Shelob before awakening to complete his task. And, as Christ ascended into heaven,

He carries the burden of the Ring as Christ carried the burden of sin. He too is a living sacrifice. Frodo's wound on Weathertop is a figurative of Christ's spear wound on the Cross. Note that the wound on Weathertop is inflicted by the Witch-king, another Satan figure. Frodo's voyage to the west, like Gandalf's, is also symbolic of the Ascension. It doesn't take a biblical scholar to feel some similarity between Frodo's struggle to carry the Ring up Mount Doom and Christ's struggle to carry his cross to Calvary. By the time Frodo reaches Mount Doom, he is so weighed down by the power of the Ring and despair over its destruction that Sam carries him and the Ring up the path to the Crack of Doom — shades of Simon the Cyrenian bearing Jesus' cross to Golgotha. Any parallel, intentional or not, between Frodo and Christ ends when Gollum attacks Frodo on the path in their second-to-last encounter.

Samwise Gamgee is Christ the servant. He is the "friend that sticks closer than a brother". He makes himself a living sacrifice as he aids Frodo. He is the meek one who inherits the earth (in this case, the Shire).

Gandalf is the prophet, revealing hidden knowledge, working wonders, teaching others the way. Evoking the saving death and resurrection of Christ, Gandalf does battle with the powers of hell to save his friends, sacrificing himself.

The One Ring is a symbol of sin. It is the Forbidden Fruit that everyone wants; the "Precious" thing that no one who has it wants to give up, yet it enslaves and destroys anyone who has it. It is no coincidence that the Ring was made by Sauron, the main Satan figure.

The theme of addiction
I've heard addiction mentioned once or twice in discussion of The Lord of The Rings, most recently in an interview on CBC Radio which I will try to track down. But it seems obvious to me that this is a central theme of the book, in that the Ring has increasing power the more it is used, that it transforms the user generally by weakening moral impulses, and (hobbits aside) it can affect any being that encounters it. It would be appreciated if contributors to this article could pursue this theme. JustKenNoNumber (talk) 12:28, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Good idea. I've added a short section with a reference but it's not easy to find reliable online sources for this particular topic. De728631 (talk) 14:47, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Here is a comparison to the diagnosis of addiction and comparing it to the ring bearers. http://degeneratenews.com/2013/05/is-tollkiens-one-ring-addictive/#more-89298.119.195.66 (talk) 21:39, 7 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Is the suggestion that Tolkien intended the Ring as an illustration of addiction? Or just that some blogger somewhere thought it was a neat analogy?  Anybody familiar with Tolkien's theology would find the former hard to swallow without more evidence, and the latter is not a reliable source. -- Elphion (talk) 15:24, 8 May 2013 (UTC)


 * The idea is that several authors have observed the theme of "addiction to the Ring" in the novel. I've expanded a bit on that and by adding a few book sources that looked reliable to me. De728631 (talk) 18:32, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

The line "Bilbo, while holding and using the Ring for a long time, shows no signs of addiction" should be changed to "Bilbo, while holding and using the Ring for a long time, was able to live the final few years of his life without it" because he did show signs of addiction when Gandalf talked him into giving the Ring to Frodo, when he saw the Ring again at Rivendell, and when he asked about the ring after it had been destroyed. (209.179.38.187 (talk) 02:27, 11 June 2013 (UTC))
 * I agree that Bilbo seemed to be a bit addicted to the Ring, but the source I used writes that he doesn't display signs of addiction. I'm going to rephrase that line. De728631 (talk) 12:33, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Second world war
It seems extraordinary that the parallels with WWII, most particularly the backdrop of the ancient foe rising again, are not explored within this article. Tolkien may have disparaged the theme but an author is not the only judge of what has gone into the work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.213.217.221 (talk) 10:15, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I've added a short paragraph to the "Loss and farewell" section but I haven't yet found any reliable source regarding the theme of the recurring foe. Tolkien's experiences of war are however treated in J. R. R. Tolkien's influences. De728631 (talk) 12:30, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
 * If the present war had been an inspiration, then doubtlessly the Ring would have been used against the Enemy, Barad-dûr would not have been destroyed but occupied, and so on, Tolkien said (not literally). And besides, while the "foe defeated at Dol Guldur rising again in Mordor" may, for all Tolkien's disparaging it, played somewhat into the idea: if we understand with "ancient fow that has yet to rise again" primarily the defeat at the end of the Second Age, then Germany was not an ancient foe at the beginning of WWII; WWI was simply too short of a time past. (Besides, this presupposes the "National Socialism is in essence Prussianism" thesis, which can be defended [as insightful an author as G. K. Chesterton was of this opinion], but is by now means obvious nor even, as far as I see today, mainstream. And if National Socialism and Prussianism were in essence different, then the foe of 1914 was not the enemy-of-mankind of 1939.)--2001:A61:20C0:A601:C803:C1FE:37CB:14D9 (talk) 10:58, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Gaffer Gamgee's wheelbarrow?
"...from old Gaffer Gamgee's wheelbarrow to Arwen Evenstar's choice of mortality." What does that even mean? Did Gaffer Gamgee's wheelbarrow play some part in the series that I've forgotten about, because it doesn't make much sense. ( The Iron Turtle 02:16, 9 April 2013 (UTC))
 * I've found it and expanded the section - it's part of Sam's vision at the Mirror of Galadriel, it symbolizes he's choice that can affect the future of the Shire. It's further explained at Mirror of Galadriel. Diego (talk) 11:40, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

The Inheritors
On a general note, if a list is referenced by a reliable source, it is not up to us to remove single items just because we think they do not belong there. Wikipedia only reflects what has been published before by established authors. As to the Inheritors in particular, Shippey writes that in The Inheritors the Neanderthal is exterminated by our ancestors, i. e. the modern Cro-Magnon Men, who would then create "an entirely false legend of ogres and cannibals to justify their actions." So it does fit into the theme complex of power and corruption. De728631 (talk) 12:04, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for getting back to me so quickly. Your point about reflecting sources is well taken, but we still choose which details are helpful and relevant for the casual reader.  I see where Shippey was going now, but from what I remember, the POV of the Cro-Magnon men is barely present in the novel till the very end; a lot of people who read this section without knowing what Shippey was referring to (since it's not quoted here and it would be silly to quote something for each work noted) would react the same way I did.  Lord of the Flies, everyone will understand what's being referred to, the story is well known and the theme of power/corruption is self-evidently present thorughout. So while I withdraw my initial objection, I do still think including Inheritors at that point in the article is, while not technically wrong, is nevertheless redundant and distracting. I leave it to you to decide whether to restore it or keep it out on these grounds. Thanks again.
 * The following is a bit of a self-indulgent rant, so you may want to skip it. I don't intend to stick around on this article, as I have a bit of a problem with ones like it in general (having four degrees in English literature is actually a reason I usually try to steer clear of the topic on Wikipedia): "themes in X" is always extremely vague and subjective both in scope and editors' choices of what to include, as there are literally dozens if not hundreds of themes editors could choose to focus on in any long novel, so whatever gets included from the vast secondary literature on Tolkien (or Shakespeare, or Milton, etc.) inevitably boils down to what the editors are most familiar with or to which they have easy access, unless of course, several serious scholars happen to take an interest in the article and know several useful books which have already done all the work of digesting several decades of criticism for us, laying out the bulk of what's been said most often, so such an article does not rely so much on a single critic's voice as tends to happen, thus defeating the purpose of a genuinely encyclopedic article. Right, that's one more thing out of my system. Moving on... :) ZarhanFastfire (talk) 07:49, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I haven't read any of the works mentioned by Shippey, so I'm left with skimming the sources, but now that you've gone into details, I'm going to trust you when you think that The Inheritors would rather cause confusion if found in this article. And I totally agree that we shouldn't "spam" the references with quotes. Neither would adding an explanation for this particular novel be justified, so let's just leave it away. De728631 (talk) 14:55, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. In case you are curious, now, you can get a quick idea of Animal Farm from the animated film version (famous quotes: "four legs good, two legs bad" and "all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others" pretty much sums up the whole story, actually; probably available on YouTube. The first film adaptation of Lord of the Flies is supposed to be better than the later American version where the kids are military cadets or something instead of British public school boys, which I imagine makes it seem anti-militaristic rather than about power or hegemony more generally. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 03:20, 22 November 2016 (UTC)