Hahahaha I was just getting in the mood to rewatch your video on the philosophy of The Lord of the Rings, but I suppose I'll watch this first! Excellent video as always, Tim.
I love that the ring itself is humble in every way, no grand design or frightening spikes. Just a simple golden band. And somehow it still manages to be more threatening than an ancient giant spider and a man called “The Witch King”.
Being the nerd I am, I have to inform you that 'Witch King' was never his name, it was a nickname attributed to him by his enemies in Arnor, at which point he was already thousands of years old. It's kinda like someone giving you a nickname in your 60's and then everyone thinking that was your name all along.
Ohh boy I can't wait for Tim to come to my house :3 _“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. 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.”_
If I remember correctly, someone told me that the reason Tolkien chose a ring which made you invisible was due to a story told by one of the Greek Philosophers (Plato I think), about a man who found a ring that made you invisible. Plato used it to discuss temptation, and how humans will do whatever they like when they don’t think they will get caught.
I always wondered why Bilbo and Frodo turn invisible when wearing the Ring. It's such a random ability, feeling like plot convenience of some sort. And why don't they gain the power of Sauron the Ring is said to hold? But then it came to me... The Ring is a tool to multiply its bearers natural powers. A being of already god-like powers will get absolute power, but not so a mortal being. The most iconic ability a Hobbit has by nature is his stealth - it's mentioned a lot, on top of it it's the reason for Bilbo to be hired by the dwarfs. And the ultimate peak of stealth is... invisibility! So it does make sense! Pls no hate if I pointed out something obvious others already figured out... But I guess there may be some slow minds like myself who want to know this :)
I believe that Isildur also turned invisible when he used the Ring. I know he did in the movies, but I think that was also the case in the books. Not sure though.
Yeah the ring multiples the power of the bearer which is in fact why they couldn’t for example have the eagles take the ring or Elrond or Gandalf it’s far too much of a risk that they woudl be tempted and become an even worse dark lodd
@@moreparrotsmoredereks2275 It's been a long time since i read them, but i think the book version of Isildur became Invincible, not invisible, he couldn't be killed until they caught him in an ambush.
@@moreparrotsmoredereks2275 I think it's implied but not actually stated that the ring made Isildur invisible. The Fellowship of the Ring only says that "He leaped into the waters, but the Ring slipped from his finger as he swam, and then the Orcs saw him and killed him with arrows. "
It's because the Ring doesn't just turn you invisible, it takes you to the ethereal plane. It's why Frodo can see the faces of the Ringwraiths on Weathertop. More mortal beings like Hobbits and Men don't exist in the ethereal plane so it kind of transports them to a parallel plane but beings like Sauron and the Nazgul exist both physically and ethereally so they don't "turn invisible."
People misunderstand that quote so often. Like, guys, he's not saying that he hates emotional interpretation, he's saying that he hates it when authors don't leave room for the audience find their own, often much more profound meaning. To him, allegory seems to be more akin to a lecture rather than a narrative. Also, to me, I saw the ring as various allegories depending on the character effected by it, for example, I saw Frodo, Bilbo and Golum's relationship with the ring as one very similar to addiction, and Boromir's for lust, not necessarily in a sexual context, but rather the pathological preoccupation with obtaining something. Galadriel's seemed to be very much that she would dominate to bring peace. And Gandalf... I always had the feeling that he was just as afraid of himself as anything else. I find later in life with the gift of hindsight, that these allegories were entirely relative to my own struggles in life, and that's why the story was so powerful and utterly captivating to me. And both the books and the films had different "leasons" to teach myself. Whereas the films taught me to understand myself, the books seemed to teach me how to accept myself for who I was rather than what was out of my capacity to become. Naturally, this is what Tolkien was referring to when he talks about allegory and applicability. Narnia never changed me as a person, though it was definitely entertaining and served as great escapism. But Middle Earth is one of the things that made me who I am today; one of those things that I would make me a lesser person if it were not to be present in my childhood.
It had never occurred to me before that symbology can differ between characters. Thank you so much for pointing this out, you have taught me such a profound lesson. ☘️
”The Lord of the Rings is of course a fundamentally religious and Catholic work; unconsciously so at first, but consciously in the revision. That is why I have not put in, or have cut out, practically all references to anything like 'religion', to cults or practices, in the imaginary world. For the religious element is absorbed into the story and the symbolism.” Tolkien Sums it up pretty nicely: hidden meanings are best done unconsciously.
There’s a difference between religious themes and symbols and “religious intent.” I think LOTR is a good example of some religious narratives/themes/symbols (or “archetypes” if you happen to know JBP), and Narnia is a story with direct religious intent, bordering on propaganda. I like Tolkien’s world more because it’s not nearly as religiously aggressive as Lewis, but you can interpret it however you want. That’s why Tolkien didn’t like direct allegory, because it deprives the reader of interpretive freedom. Tolkien took inspiration not only from Christianity but tons of religions and legends. For example, you could see Eru and Melkor as allegories to the Christian God and Devil (creator and fallen angel), but Ungoliant isn’t necessarily Christian in any sense and supports a more dualistic approach to the world of Middle-Earth. And it could very be argued that Melkor is not specifically a reinvention of the Judeo-Christian Satan, but Tolkien’s version of that particular universal theme and narrative/archetype which Satan also personifies. Basically there’s the “transcendent” narratives which can be found throughout different cultures/religions/works of literature and then there’s the characters in those stories which portray those themes, and they don’t necessarily have to be directly connected. So, I think, when Tolkien writes about Melkor he isn’t drawing a direct parallel like Lewis did, he isn’t trying to push a particular worldview, he’s using the same motifs found in religions to write a new story. Satan and Melkor are basically the same character not because Tolkien wanted to write a story about Christianity, but because both characters are based on the same universal metaphor which (I believe) predates both Christianity and Tolkien. So, LOTR could be “religious” in a sense, but it’s no more religious than Harry Potter.
@@tevildo9383 I think your thought here stems from a misunderstanding. You cannot be devoutly religious like Tolkien and have that view of reality not present in your work. It effects how you interpret everything in your life and will 100% be reflected in the values reflected in a person's writing. Its like saying dostoyevsky or ts eliots religious beleifs arent present in their work, their religious beleifs structure fundamentally how they see the world and reality and of course that will influence what they write about.
You know, I actually never correlated Aslan with Jesus, until someone pointed it out to me. So, I guess allegory really only goes so far if you don't have the cultural or religious backstory to see it.
Allegory only reiterates what you know. If you didn't know the Jesus stuff, you wouldn't get the allegory, and if you get the allegory, you already know the Jesus stuff. Hmm
Oliver Kiernan the most generous take I can imagine going FOR such 1 for 1 analogy is recontextulising an old story & it’s morals for a different audience? And being able to engage & connect to them in a different way that might be more impactful? But i still don’t really see much worth in the piece of media itself beyond it being an analogy. Like Narnia, there’s not really much meaning to take from it besides the bible. It doesn’t really add anything new (in the sense of themes & Philosophy) Maybe you could say there’s themes about how childhood is more valuable & important than adulthood & “growing up” is foolish. But even that’s somewhat an analogy for religious people like the youth, not questioning their faith, unlike growing up & losing faith & becoming more attached to the material world & “pointless” things-Like Susan who stopped acting like a child, started denying her experiences in Narnia & became more interested in adult stuff & makeup & work. I guess we should just not be atheists otherwise we won’t go into Heaven like Susan 🙄
Allegory really only works when contextualized by author commentary. One of the strongest allegories, to this day, is Plato's Allegory of the Cave. It's not an independent text, though: it's a small, illustrative piece inside a much larger discussion. When divorced from context and set up as a standalone story, it collapses because its puppet joints were never designed to bear weight: it is supposed to be held up by strings, and those strings are the point of the allgory. Narnia works as an independent story precisely to the extent that it is *not* an allegory, despite Lewis' intentions, and it fails as an independent story precisely to the extent to which it expects external meaning to be self-evident to an uninformed reader.
@@oliverkiernan4997 which as a Christian s insane to me. It shows how secularised Western culture has become that people can be so totally ignorant of their own religious heritage.
Allegory as intended by the author is like a nail-gun: very efficient at one single task, but inflexible and lacking the versatility that can be gained by a clever user. While the method used by Tolkien is more like a hammer by comparison; perhaps created with directed purpose, but without constraining the reader to the one and only "intended" use.
“The Lord of the Rings is of course a fundamentally religious and Catholic work; unconsciously so at first, but consciously in the revision.” -JRR Tolkien
Yeah, one meaning of the ring he left out was the one from the Catholic perspective. It is no coincidence that the ring was destroyed on March 25, the date of Jesus' crucifixion and death (according to Catholic tradition).
@@ratiofides7713 Oh damn. If that's the case then the destruction of the ring symbolizes the destruction of evil, and if correlates to this narrative, is similar to the destruction of evil when Jesus was crucified.
One interpretation of the ring that I like (and I think it's mentioned in the Letters, but I'm not sure) is as an anti sacrament. It doesn't work as allegory since no such thing actually exists, but it's an interesting way to think of it.
Which is why it always seems so cheap to me. IRL you will not get a better world by showing mercy to criminals and giving forgivness to the evil in disquize, istead everyone will merely walk over you.
@@baltulielkungsgunarsmiezis9714 I dunno. You can rehabilitate some people or become allies with former foes. Not only geopolitically but also in terms of black hat hackers becoming white hat hackers
Tolkien and his work, though at times dark, permeate with an unavoidable sense of hope. Because if evil will always destroy itself then we need not worry, we need only live in goodness and that goodness will triumph in the end
"It's like in the great stories, Mr. Frodo. The ones that really mattered. Full of darkness and danger they were. And sometimes you didn't want to know the end. Because how could the end be happy? How could the world go back to the way it was when so much bad had happened? But in the end, it’s only a passing thing, this shadow. Even darkness must pass. A new day will come. And when the sun shines it will shine out the clearer." -Samwise Gamgee :)
Anthony Durette So what it will destroy itself. It’s like a nuclear bomb. Once exploded it no longer exists. Would you be hopeful that it exploded because it’s now gone. It destroyed itself. Or would you be concerned that another could be built later on. Just like evil will eventually re-emerge. The destruction left by evil destroying itself plus the potential of its inevitable return more than outweighs any hope that one can derive from it.
Though here at journey's end I lie in darkness buried deep, beyond all towers strong and high, beyond all mountains steep, above all shadows rides the Sun and Stars forever dwell: I will not say the Day is done, nor bid the Stars farewell. - Samwise Gamgee, singing in the Tower of Cirith Ungol, early in Book Six
Well I mean, a person can draw real world significance from elements of any well written story that appeals to them. That doesn't necessarily make it allegory.
That's exactly what Tolkien said. He doesn't like when authors push the meaning/connection to the audience, but rather prefer the audience to find their meaning from the stories.
Got to love how the ring is such a deep character. And it is just an item, but is it... no it is something more. So much more. There is a hidden dept in the story that makes it enjoyable both you and old.
The vagueness really helps. We're mde aware through external perceptions and anecdotes what the Ring wants, what it's like, but when it features as an object, it remains inanimate and voiceless. Almost like it's in hiding. The overt references to the Ring even having a personality are vague and dubious at best, but the reader never doubts for a second that it does. For all that I rag on Tolkien's writing style, the way he characterizes the One Ring is something I deeply admite & envy as a writer myself.
A friend of mine believed that the ring represented addiction In some way it makes sense The longer you have the ring the more obsessed with it you become and for some you come to both hate and love it more than anything, it causes you to try to push your friends and loved ones away when they to help you to get rid of it and Gollum even dies because of his obsession with the ring, sort of like an overdose in a way
@@nunyabizniss570 No. Ask yourself what power is. It is the ability to act or control. Power CAN be addictive, but it doesn't have to be. Unfortunately, most of us are weak and easily tempted.
Tolkien's (Sauron's) Ring, it seems likely to me, represents the pathway to evil. Sauron (in JRRT's history of how Arda was formed and evolved) forged it so that his ability to "read" and control others (especially Elves), for his own twisted reasons, would be concentrated and enhanced. He wanted to shape the world in HIS mind's eye. Most of his images involved destruction (the marring of creation). I don't particularly agree with JRRT's representation of reality, but no one can claim he lacked vision or artistic grace. Can you achieve "good" if all your methods of pursuing that, and your motivations, are evil?
"My Very Dear Sister: You must not entertain the least concern about me. You know, it wasn't the Germans who worked me up, nor the explosives; but it was living so long next to poor Cock-robin, as we used to call Second Leftenant Kroger, who lay not only nearby, but in various places around and about, if you understand." Wilfred Owen
AFAICS, the Ring is an extension of Sauron - it “is” Sauron, in the form of an artefact. Which would agree with its constant efforts to leave its other wearers, and to return to him: it “gravitates” to him, because it seeks to be re-united with (the rest of) him. Therefore, his moral character, is its moral character. It represents Sauron because that is who, or what, the Ring is.
"Friend": It would have been easier if they had just used the eagles to... Me: Be silent! Keep your forked tongue behind you teeth. I have not passed through fire and death to bandy crooked words with a witless worm!
I know it's not canon, but I really love the Celebrimbor DLC for Shadow of Mordor. It does an *excellent* job of showing the progression the ringbearer goes through: from noble intentions, to delusions of grandeur, to ultimate corruption, and finally the Ring's betrayal of the ringbearer, for the Ring only has one true master.
I seem to remember an exchange in Harry Potter, where Dumbledore tells him that the powerful despot lives in fear, knowing that the very suppression of the people over whom they rule will create people who are brave/strong enough to overthrow them.
Me too, that part made me want to compare it Hegel's master slave dynamic, he explores how when individuals interact we create hierarchy and how power works in that dynamic. With both the master and slave being both the holder of and subject to that power.
Thank you! I see so many people who misunderatand the ring. Many people actually view the eing as a sort of "horcrux" - a way for Sauron to remain alive, when in fact it's the opposite. The ring was forged to externalise Sauron's power, its creation weakened him so much so that by being parted with the ring, he lost his body. Also, I must say it's really refreshing to see a Tolkien essay using only the books. The movies, fresh and memorable, are incredible, but they reduced much of the nuance in the lore.
Aside from all the obvious great scenes in LotR, Gandalf refusing to take the Ring is one of my favorites. It shows so much of Gandalf's character. Those works are truly some of the best tales that have ever been written imo.
I'm reminded of a Hamilton Quote: "They say George Washington is yielding his power and stepping away. Is that true? I wasn't aware that was something a person could do." . The only real way to resist the corruption of power is through true humility. . This was a good video, and you've turning them out a lot quicker now. Good job. .
“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. 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."
Six years ago I wrote my final dissertation in high school about the meaning of power and the figure of the tyrant in Lotr. I have to say that this video reminds of that time and it made me feel very nostalgic, great analysis as always.
"You can see ... as an allegory *if you like*". That is key, and what makes the allegory rather an application of the story than a forced allegory that he dislikes. Then again, he did write leaf by niggle, which is so straight up an allegory for purgatory that no one can really doubt it.
You know what makes your videos better than most every other UA-camr? You use some honest critical analysis instead of “theories.” You’re honestly an excellent scholar and I kind of love you.
Great explaination. I've always thought Tolkien's writing was to allegory more like a simile than a metaphor, or like a half-rhyme; no, the dead marshes aren't the Somme, but they are *like* the Somme, and in telling it slant, a truth is more clearly revealed. It's one of the things I love about Tolkien's writing; it allows for beautiful truths to appear when you least expect them.
Tolkien also wrote of the ring forging in Eregion as being the closest the elves came to falling to magic and machinery, which I'd interpret in this case as the making of tools to shape the world to their will (Rings of Power) as opposed to living in harmony with it.
Which is what ultimately brought them to their ruin. They shaped the world they lived in and once the rings lost their power, all their work was undone, and they finally became aware that the world had changed, and even though they were immortal, they suddenly felt the passing of the years and grew weary of Middle Earth. Had they not used the rings of power, they would have lived in relative harmony (as you said) with the world, and probably would have felt the need to multiply, else they were overthrown by the men that lived around them (Rhudaur for Imladris, Balchoths and Orcs in Lothlorien). It is no wonder why the three places the elven ring resided were abandoned in the end of the Third Age, while the Silvan Realm prospered for while, before fading away, as the last bastion of elves. The forging of the rings was due to the lust of elves for power over their surrounding, even though they would not say it. It was Sauron who influenced them and even though their will was keen, the mean was not. They put magic into mechanical objects, and so magic (unknown force of mistery) became linked with mechanisms (totally understandable things), which little by little removed magic itself from Middle Earth, as it became inseparable from the rings. Even Gandalf fell in the trap when accepting Cirdan's ring : he needed it not, as a Maiar. As Elrond implied more than once, they should never have begun the forging of the rings, and would have been better off without them. Celebrimbor tried to reproduce the Silmarili of his grand father. But he put his will, and infused them with magic, when the Silmarili were mere receptacles of the light of the Trees.
Knowing Tolkien's experience in war, it's likely that Frodo is more applicable to Tolkien. He was a lieutenant and had a subordinate to accompany and look out for him. There's a technical name for that role in the British Army but I don't remember at the moment what it is. Tolkien would be too humble to apply himself as the actual hero of the story, as he saw Sam as the real hero of LOTR.
I'd been avoiding this video for a few days, because, honestly, there was a niggling fear that you'd somehow missed that incredibly famous quote in the beginning. I'm glad to say that this video has (like all your other videos I've watched) increased my understanding of writing and (specific to this video) enrished my understanding of the works of Tolkien, the author who made me want to write in the first place. Thank you, so much.
Yet another one of your lotr videos giving me goosebumps. I'm sure even Tolkien himself would be proud at the skill in which you interpret and understand his work. The level of work you put in along with your ability to explain everything in such a simplistic way (without losing out on the complexity or level of detail in Tolkiens writings) is both impressive, and inspiring.
In the old Scandinavian culture (and other cultures as well)rings were a symbol of loyalty. To a king or a cause. Thanks for interesting content and best wishes from Sweden🥰
The line between allegory and inspiration is way more nuanced than I thought Though I love allegories in that they teach, regardless of how manipulative they could be (awareness of this manipulation makes one far less susceptible to it), I also do like when the lessons are more derived by the viewer rather than enforced by the author But in the end, the deeper you go, the more inspiration looks like allegory, for authors seldom don't inject their philosophy into their writings, and once that is found out/made clear, underlying messages can be derived rather directly, thus making it an allegory with extra steps Except it still gets one thinking for themselves rather than the directness of allegory, and that's probably the main differentia Yet you can still do the same by analyzing an allegory in and of itself, denying the idea of taking it for granted/as fact So I suppose allegory is more of a direct answer to the question, and inspiration merely brings forth the question and explores it (yet often still lead to an answer, but that matters little for it's in how it's presented that matters, not the conclusion) Very interesting topic
Ok, this won't seem relevant at first, but the bit about how people wanting to use the Ring against Sauron would simply become a new Dark Lord (or Queen) kind of reminded me of it Back in the early 2000s, France decided they wanted their own anime, so they made a show called Code Lyoko, which featured a virtual world called Lyoko and an evil AI called XANA. Season 2 of the show revealed a lot of backstory: XANA and Lyoko were created by a scientist named Franz Hopper. Hopper had been involved with Project Carthage - a military program which, while not elaborated upon much in the show itself, was some sort of attempt to control enemy communications during the Cold War. Hopper created XANA as a multi-agent program with the goal of destroying Project Carthage, but through some series of events, XANA turned against its creator One episode in season 2 had the protagonists come up with a new weapon against XANA - a multi-agent program called the Marabounta, which would identify anything linked to XANA and destroy it. The only problem was, this turned out to apply to one of the main characters too - and when the others protected her, the Marabounta turned against all of them. And at the end of the episode, it turns out that the programs used to create the Marabounta had been the same ones used to create XANA So that sort of narrative echo - a multi-agent program created to destroy a threat turns against its creator and becomes a new threat, the same happens again years later with a new multi-agent program created to destroy the first one - reminds me of the whole "new Dark Lord" thing
Really appreciated the part where the arrows kept up with the passage you were narrating. It's hard to focus when you're listening and reading at the same time and the arrows were a nice touch that helped me keep up. It was a great detail and a great video.
A fine video as always, thank you. I largely get what the One Ring represents, but what about its _destruction_ specifically? If the One Ring represents the corruption by unrestrained power, the will of the corrupted to dominate the will of others (either out of evil or "for good") etc can we assume that its destruction represented Tolkien's secret hope of the end of the above in a broader sense? I don't (necessarily) mean a "back to greenery when everything was simple and man knew how to co-exist harmoniously with nature" (if that ever happened at all) thing. That ship has long sailed after 250 years of various stages of industrial revolution (though there _are_ active attempts in many cities globally to significantly increase the amount of greenery of urban spaces, not just in parks but also in building roofs and balconies) . I mean the moral, ethical, emotional, intellectual etc maturity of man as a species. To gain the wisdom of declining to gain too much power because we understand it can only generate corruption, even if we have "the best and purest intentions". To resist the bittersweet temptation of absolute power (in the case of humans power of various forms) just like Galadriel and Gandalf. And, of course, stop the "Machine" from destroying our planet and us and most other other living thing along with it. That is obviously not "fixed" with a magical ring being dissolved in lava, it would need quite a lot of time and, above all, the morality of mankind to progress, not just its science and technology. I just wonder if that was Tolkien's secret dream or hope.
@HelloFutureMe - Thanks for the video! I really liked how you brought up Tolkien's philosophy on the coercion of the will and machines, it gave more context to a quote from the Two Towers I've been thinking about recently "He that breaks a thing to find out what it is has left the path of wisdom."
superbly put. brought a tear to my eye in the end. there is beauty in your description of the terrible, and of course in what tolkien offers in how we might all face it.
Before I watch the video: Anything, the ring set the stage for the mcguffin. The one thing that the villain desires to fulfill his evil goal and the heroes must stop him from getting as well as resisting the temptation of using it. It can be the atomic bomb, it can be the poison gas of ww1 and literally anything. He created a story that resonates within anyone and anyone can give the ring their own interpretation.
Just wanted to say I really enjoy your Lord of the Rings stuff. I don't know how much content you can continue to generate from it, but I'll always appreciate it. 👍🏻
"Of course Allegory and Story converge meeting somewhere in Truth" - That last quote is so beautiful. The fact that Tolkien embodied that quote in his writing is what makes his work so endearing to me, and I have decided to do my best to also embody that quote in my own writing. Tim, I had written a lengthy comment on your In Defense of Soft Magic Systems video that I felt you hadn't properly represented what the One Ring had meant to Tolkien, but I am so thankful you made this video, because not only am I convinced that your analysis of the One Ring has done it justice, but you helped to me see how vast the meaning of the One Ring was to Tolkien. Again, thank you for your dedication to meaningful, quality content!
Excellent as always. And can I just say, thank you. With the guide arrows on those large blocks of quote really helps. It's a nice accessibility feature for people like me who have dyslexia and autism and get overwhelmed with big chunks of text with audio. 💙
Nice essay. I didnt expect this to come up but the imagery for the ring representing the Eucharist is pretty plainly clear as well (not to discredit the other readings). Tolkien was devoted Catholic, and Frodo has many times been described as a priest who takes the walk willing to sacrifice himself, and offer the sacrifice of the ring, which is a perfect sacrifice in this world. I wrote a small essay on this topic as well, but it does require some understanding of the Eucharist in Catholic teaching. Usually more understanding than someone who went through their sacraments when they were a child would understand.
Thank you for that video. Not only did you unlock a whole new layer of LotR for me, but you also gave me hope that somehow I can influence all the wrongs in this world even if I am not some powerful politician or boss of a big company and neither do I need to be one. Haven't really felt that hopeful in a while.
I've always viewed the ring as being the spiritual equivalent of a powerful narcotic, but of course that's the beauty of Tolkien's work. The ring could represent any number of things in the real world and addiction is one of them.
I’m late but I think this is exactly what people dislike about political messages in media today. Not necessarily because of the political message itself, but the fact that instead of allowing you to come to your own conclusion, the author forces you to come to theirs.
4 роки тому
Your essay is a beauty. You created beauty from beauty. Thank you.
" I cordially dislike allegory in all its manifestations... I much prefer history - true or feigned - with it's varied applicability to the thought and experience of readers. I think that many confuse applicability with allegory, but the one resides in freedom of the reader, and the other in the purposed domination of the author" - J.R.R. Tolkien -
Thank you for the thoughts about the One Ring. I spend a lot of time thinking about it, too. I know this comment is being made two years after the video was published, but for the record, and for anyone trying to look up the ones mentioned, the letter designated as Letter #121 is, in my Kindle copy, Letter #211, to Rhona Beare.
But they aren't trying to defeat power, they are trying to defeat evil. The Ring is not power, it is Sauron's power. I don't mean allegorically but literally. The one Ring contains Sauron's power and part of his soul. He literally poured himself into. It's how he survived the fall of Numenor and his death at the hands of the second alliance of men and elves.
I think it would’ve been good to bring up Plato’s ‘ring of gyges’ as it is a cautionary tale about actions without consequences and ties into that idea about the machines. It was also clearly an inspiration for Tolkien.
I am hugely for the very important distinction between "informed by" and "Are about", like the dead marshes and the Somme, he used it to create something that is similar, but doesn't mean that the marshes are the Somme, it's just what a field/marsh of dead bodies would be like. Ditto for the distinction between allegory and "You can draw the allegory of" because it's all about the freedom for the reader to find the meaning and connections by themselves
2:04 - almost like the magic lamp from "aladdin" in "the one thousand and one nights", in that when it was used the user of the lamp usually use the unlimited wishes for gaining wealth and power. When someone knew about the lamp, then that person will take it to indulge or be corrupted by it's power.
Personally, the story of the journey to destroy the ring is reminiscent to the journey to battle depression. It is something very hard to do, that you need support for an it leaves you… changed. Frodo's "I wish the ring didn't come to me" is what happens when life, in its unpredictability, forces you through events that you are not equipped to deal with.
It seems that any experience a writer has is going to influence what they write; whether it be a consious or unconcious choice. I just started re-reading the trilogy after not having read it for about 10 years and am falling in love with it over and over again.
I'll just say there's a lot more going on in Narnia than just one to one comparisons with Christianity. Though Aslan is def. a one to one symbol for Christ (bc he's literally the second person of the Trinity, incarnated in a new form in this world that is meant to be in the same universe/multiverse as ours) this doesn't work nearly as well for the white witch as satan, or Edmund as all fallen humanity in our world. Plus, stories like the silver chair, the horse and his boy and prince Caspian (etc.) can't be seen as simply Allegories of something, nor are they pert and shallow morality tales. They don't meet the modern criteria of neat and logical worldbuilding, but they aren't meant to. Their supposed to have the feel of a medieval romance, complete with the Christian symbolism and imagery. But they also have some really enjoyable down to earth realism parts that mostly involve walking though nature and being tired and hungry and discussing practical things. Though its told from a Christian worldview, that worldview is not evangelical bc it predates modern evangelicalism and it's very comfortable with "pagan" imagery and themes. [Edits: typos]
I remember seeing an interview with Sir Christopher Lee on an LOTR bonus DVD where he talked about the One Ring and its meaning or importance, and he used the line, "Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely." I think that very accurately describes what you have said about the One Ring. Absolute power, even with good intentions or whatever else you want/need/imagine, will corrupt and destroy.
"Unforeseeable acts of will, and deeds of virtue of the apparently small, ungreat, forgotten". Reminds me of a Quote from Futurama, "When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all".
I truly enjoyed this video so much! and also cried when they nailed before the 4 hobbits... men... that scene ALWAYS touches my heart... the first time I saw it in cinema back in the 2003, I started to cry in tears literal!!!! Thanks! another great video!!!
One thing I just notice on the parallel with technology is that in the end the only power strong enough to destroy the ring is nature itself (Lava), great video man congratulations
The ring is a very Catholic conception of evil. It is at once both highly appealing while also being an incredible burden. It seems to allow you to hide, while actually making you terribly visible to Sauron. As you point out, evil ultimately will defeat itself. The only way to lose is, paradoxically, to try and use evil to defeat evil. I very much appreciate your analysis of Tolkien's views on allegory as well. He disliked its direct use by authors because it lends itself to propaganda.
I love tolkien's stories so much that it reflects on my writing style in that I only notice by watching these videos. Thank you so much for all your videos, I always get inspired to write when I watch them and I always love to learn something new about writtng stories. P.S.: Sorry for any gramma mistakes, feel fre to correct me :D
This is the reason I got into this channel. Tim's understanding of Tolkien goes deeper than nerds who just read backstory in The Unfinished Tales and such. I have so much respect for someone else who quotes as many books about Tolkien as they do books by Tolkien. It kine of makes me wonder how he doesn't rank LOTR above ATLA (no offense to them, Uncle Iroh is the best)
_clears throat_ "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 Nah, I'm just kidding. Yet another fantastic and thought-provoking video, Tim! Your essays on Lord of the Rings and Tolkien's larger mythos have done so much to help me understand and appreciate the philosophy of Tolkien and the themes that run through his works. While I can't say I always agree with those themes, I've greatly enjoyed learning more about them, so thanks for that :) Hope you're doing well! Love from Canada
Thank you for the great explanation, where I agree completely, but there is more to add. I know there are people who grew up with Harry Potter novels, I grew up in the similar way with Tolkien, and I am very thankful for it. If I would like to say how to apply this lesson to the current world than it is that doing the rights (however inconsequential and useless it may be) is always The Right Thing™ especially comparing to achieve some goal by any means required (in the terms of the legal theory that the procedural justice and the rule of law is always above the material justice and utilitarianism). The lesson which I feel has been completely forgotten by absolutely everybody. Not only Nietzsche (which you mention in other video) but also Jeremy Bentham are the main villains in my understanding.
Thank you for this video. It's thought provoking and has caused me to rethink my understanding of The Lord of the Rings as well as some of the fantasy that has evolved from it. The idea that The One Ring is a construct external to yourself that allows you to wield power more effectively is not something I had ever considered but, in hindsight, it seems childish to have simply understood it as a wonderous object that granted great power.
![On Writing: Killing Characters! [ Harry Potter | Stephen King | Terabithia ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/treB4kuyMHk/mqdefault.jpg)
![On Writing: Killing Characters! [ Harry Potter | Stephen King | Terabithia ]](/img/tr.png)
![On Worldbuilding: Class, Wealth, and Power [ Stormlight | Dystopias | Witcher ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Jr18Q0Cug_w/mqdefault.jpg)
Evil will, in time, destroy itself. Cheers all 💙
~ Tim
Hahahaha I was just getting in the mood to rewatch your video on the philosophy of The Lord of the Rings, but I suppose I'll watch this first! Excellent video as always, Tim.
I know this is not a fantasy show, but have you ever seen Breaking Bad Tim?
I just hope it doesn’t take too many of us, the little, ungreat and forgotten, with it as it goes...
Would love to see you tackle some Dragon Age Games
Reminds me of
"Art dies in pusuit of itself"
Art is Evil confirmed
I love that the ring itself is humble in every way, no grand design or frightening spikes. Just a simple golden band. And somehow it still manages to be more threatening than an ancient giant spider and a man called “The Witch King”.
noice!
No no; if you're trying to make him seem scarier, you have to call him 'The Witch King Of Angmar.'
Being the nerd I am, I have to inform you that 'Witch King' was never his name, it was a nickname attributed to him by his enemies in Arnor, at which point he was already thousands of years old. It's kinda like someone giving you a nickname in your 60's and then everyone thinking that was your name all along.
@@carlbernard7615 Being the nerd I am, I have to inform you that the OP never said that was his name. He said he was called The Witch King.
Carl Bernard I know who the character is. I’m calling him the Witch King because that’s how everyone knows him.
Ohh boy I can't wait for Tim to come to my house :3
_“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. 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.”_
Foolish of Tim to give us the words to his summoning spell.
I completely agree with you. Tim if you need my address I'll happily oblige 😂
Look in the mirror and say 'Firelord Ozai.' Three times and Tim shows up to correct you, its Phoenix King Ozai.
Damnit.
~ Tim
I knew this comment would exist as soon as he said it.
If I remember correctly, someone told me that the reason Tolkien chose a ring which made you invisible was due to a story told by one of the Greek Philosophers (Plato I think), about a man who found a ring that made you invisible. Plato used it to discuss temptation, and how humans will do whatever they like when they don’t think they will get caught.
Ahh yes the Ring of Gyges the corrupted shepherd.
Yes! I remember I read Plato in college and came across that story and was like. Wtf? LOTR!?
Yeah it is in Plato's Republic. The same book which has Plato's cave allegory which forms the basis for the Matrix trilogy.
reading plato now and yeah, when I read that it definitely gave me LOTR vibes lol
I always wondered why Bilbo and Frodo turn invisible when wearing the Ring. It's such a random ability, feeling like plot convenience of some sort. And why don't they gain the power of Sauron the Ring is said to hold?
But then it came to me... The Ring is a tool to multiply its bearers natural powers. A being of already god-like powers will get absolute power, but not so a mortal being. The most iconic ability a Hobbit has by nature is his stealth - it's mentioned a lot, on top of it it's the reason for Bilbo to be hired by the dwarfs. And the ultimate peak of stealth is... invisibility! So it does make sense!
Pls no hate if I pointed out something obvious others already figured out... But I guess there may be some slow minds like myself who want to know this :)
I believe that Isildur also turned invisible when he used the Ring. I know he did in the movies, but I think that was also the case in the books. Not sure though.
Yeah the ring multiples the power of the bearer which is in fact why they couldn’t for example have the eagles take the ring or Elrond or Gandalf it’s far too much of a risk that they woudl be tempted and become an even worse dark lodd
@@moreparrotsmoredereks2275 It's been a long time since i read them, but i think the book version of Isildur became Invincible, not invisible, he couldn't be killed until they caught him in an ambush.
@@moreparrotsmoredereks2275 I think it's implied but not actually stated that the ring made Isildur invisible. The Fellowship of the Ring only says that "He leaped into the waters, but the Ring slipped from his finger as he swam, and then the Orcs saw him and killed him with arrows. "
It's because the Ring doesn't just turn you invisible, it takes you to the ethereal plane. It's why Frodo can see the faces of the Ringwraiths on Weathertop. More mortal beings like Hobbits and Men don't exist in the ethereal plane so it kind of transports them to a parallel plane but beings like Sauron and the Nazgul exist both physically and ethereally so they don't "turn invisible."
People misunderstand that quote so often. Like, guys, he's not saying that he hates emotional interpretation, he's saying that he hates it when authors don't leave room for the audience find their own, often much more profound meaning. To him, allegory seems to be more akin to a lecture rather than a narrative.
Also, to me, I saw the ring as various allegories depending on the character effected by it, for example, I saw Frodo, Bilbo and Golum's relationship with the ring as one very similar to addiction, and Boromir's for lust, not necessarily in a sexual context, but rather the pathological preoccupation with obtaining something. Galadriel's seemed to be very much that she would dominate to bring peace. And Gandalf... I always had the feeling that he was just as afraid of himself as anything else.
I find later in life with the gift of hindsight, that these allegories were entirely relative to my own struggles in life, and that's why the story was so powerful and utterly captivating to me. And both the books and the films had different "leasons" to teach myself. Whereas the films taught me to understand myself, the books seemed to teach me how to accept myself for who I was rather than what was out of my capacity to become.
Naturally, this is what Tolkien was referring to when he talks about allegory and applicability. Narnia never changed me as a person, though it was definitely entertaining and served as great escapism. But Middle Earth is one of the things that made me who I am today; one of those things that I would make me a lesser person if it were not to be present in my childhood.
It had never occurred to me before that symbology can differ between characters. Thank you so much for pointing this out, you have taught me such a profound lesson. ☘️
”The Lord of the Rings is of course a fundamentally religious and Catholic work; unconsciously so at first, but consciously in the revision. That is why I have not put in, or have cut out, practically all references to anything like 'religion', to cults or practices, in the imaginary world. For the religious element is absorbed into the story and the symbolism.”
Tolkien
Sums it up pretty nicely: hidden meanings are best done unconsciously.
I want Lord of the Rings stay as far as possible from religious intents.
There’s a difference between religious themes and symbols and “religious intent.”
I think LOTR is a good example of some religious narratives/themes/symbols (or “archetypes” if you happen to know JBP), and Narnia is a story with direct religious intent, bordering on propaganda. I like Tolkien’s world more because it’s not nearly as religiously aggressive as Lewis, but you can interpret it however you want. That’s why Tolkien didn’t like direct allegory, because it deprives the reader of interpretive freedom. Tolkien took inspiration not only from Christianity but tons of religions and legends. For example, you could see Eru and Melkor as allegories to the Christian God and Devil (creator and fallen angel), but Ungoliant isn’t necessarily Christian in any sense and supports a more dualistic approach to the world of Middle-Earth. And it could very be argued that Melkor is not specifically a reinvention of the Judeo-Christian Satan, but Tolkien’s version of that particular universal theme and narrative/archetype which Satan also personifies. Basically there’s the “transcendent” narratives which can be found throughout different cultures/religions/works of literature and then there’s the characters in those stories which portray those themes, and they don’t necessarily have to be directly connected. So, I think, when Tolkien writes about Melkor he isn’t drawing a direct parallel like Lewis did, he isn’t trying to push a particular worldview, he’s using the same motifs found in religions to write a new story. Satan and Melkor are basically the same character not because Tolkien wanted to write a story about Christianity, but because both characters are based on the same universal metaphor which (I believe) predates both Christianity and Tolkien. So, LOTR could be “religious” in a sense, but it’s no more religious than Harry Potter.
@@tevildo9383 I think your thought here stems from a misunderstanding. You cannot be devoutly religious like Tolkien and have that view of reality not present in your work. It effects how you interpret everything in your life and will 100% be reflected in the values reflected in a person's writing. Its like saying dostoyevsky or ts eliots religious beleifs arent present in their work, their religious beleifs structure fundamentally how they see the world and reality and of course that will influence what they write about.
Then I would stay away from lord of the rings because it is truly about Christianity. The ring itself represents original sin.
@@stevensullivan9020 to have the world, but then lose your soul
You know, I actually never correlated Aslan with Jesus, until someone pointed it out to me. So, I guess allegory really only goes so far if you don't have the cultural or religious backstory to see it.
Allegory only reiterates what you know.
If you didn't know the Jesus stuff, you wouldn't get the allegory, and if you get the allegory, you already know the Jesus stuff.
Hmm
Oliver Kiernan the most generous take I can imagine going FOR such 1 for 1 analogy is recontextulising an old story & it’s morals for a different audience? And being able to engage & connect to them in a different way that might be more impactful?
But i still don’t really see much worth in the piece of media itself beyond it being an analogy. Like Narnia, there’s not really much meaning to take from it besides the bible. It doesn’t really add anything new (in the sense of themes & Philosophy)
Maybe you could say there’s themes about how childhood is more valuable & important than adulthood & “growing up” is foolish. But even that’s somewhat an analogy for religious people like the youth, not questioning their faith, unlike growing up & losing faith & becoming more attached to the material world & “pointless” things-Like Susan who stopped acting like a child, started denying her experiences in Narnia & became more interested in adult stuff & makeup & work.
I guess we should just not be atheists otherwise we won’t go into Heaven like Susan 🙄
Allegory really only works when contextualized by author commentary. One of the strongest allegories, to this day, is Plato's Allegory of the Cave. It's not an independent text, though: it's a small, illustrative piece inside a much larger discussion. When divorced from context and set up as a standalone story, it collapses because its puppet joints were never designed to bear weight: it is supposed to be held up by strings, and those strings are the point of the allgory. Narnia works as an independent story precisely to the extent that it is *not* an allegory, despite Lewis' intentions, and it fails as an independent story precisely to the extent to which it expects external meaning to be self-evident to an uninformed reader.
@@oliverkiernan4997 which as a Christian s insane to me. It shows how secularised Western culture has become that people can be so totally ignorant of their own religious heritage.
True
I feel like so many people mistake themes and inspiration for allegory.
Allegory as intended by the author is like a nail-gun: very efficient at one single task, but inflexible and lacking the versatility that can be gained by a clever user. While the method used by Tolkien is more like a hammer by comparison; perhaps created with directed purpose, but without constraining the reader to the one and only "intended" use.
Stop using your hammer to open doors and windows, Jonathan >:|
@@what._._._ Never! XD
GiantFlamingRabbitMonster your explanation, you nailed it!
What an excellent allegory!
“The Lord of the Rings is of course a fundamentally religious and Catholic work; unconsciously so at first, but consciously in the revision.” -JRR Tolkien
Yeah, one meaning of the ring he left out was the one from the Catholic perspective. It is no coincidence that the ring was destroyed on March 25, the date of Jesus' crucifixion and death (according to Catholic tradition).
@@ratiofides7713 Oh damn. If that's the case then the destruction of the ring symbolizes the destruction of evil, and if correlates to this narrative, is similar to the destruction of evil when Jesus was crucified.
One interpretation of the ring that I like (and I think it's mentioned in the Letters, but I'm not sure) is as an anti sacrament. It doesn't work as allegory since no such thing actually exists, but it's an interesting way to think of it.
Which is why it always seems so cheap to me. IRL you will not get a better world by showing mercy to criminals and giving forgivness to the evil in disquize, istead everyone will merely walk over you.
@@baltulielkungsgunarsmiezis9714 I dunno. You can rehabilitate some people or become allies with former foes. Not only geopolitically but also in terms of black hat hackers becoming white hat hackers
Tolkien and his work, though at times dark, permeate with an unavoidable sense of hope. Because if evil will always destroy itself then we need not worry, we need only live in goodness and that goodness will triumph in the end
"It's like in the great stories, Mr. Frodo. The ones that really mattered. Full of darkness and danger they were. And sometimes you didn't want to know the end. Because how could the end be happy? How could the world go back to the way it was when so much bad had happened? But in the end, it’s only a passing thing, this shadow. Even darkness must pass. A new day will come. And when the sun shines it will shine out the clearer." -Samwise Gamgee
:)
It's not without effort though, yes evil will destroy itself, but it still needs to opposed when it rises
Anthony Durette
So what it will destroy itself. It’s like a nuclear bomb. Once exploded it no longer exists. Would you be hopeful that it exploded because it’s now gone. It destroyed itself.
Or would you be concerned that another could be built later on. Just like evil will eventually re-emerge. The destruction left by evil destroying itself plus the potential of its inevitable return more than outweighs any hope that one can derive from it.
Though here at journey's end I lie
in darkness buried deep,
beyond all towers strong and high,
beyond all mountains steep,
above all shadows rides the Sun
and Stars forever dwell:
I will not say the Day is done,
nor bid the Stars farewell.
- Samwise Gamgee, singing in the Tower of Cirith Ungol, early in Book Six
If Frodo has been an escapist and stayed in his home the world would be Saurons, do not stay in your huase watching YT else the sytem will prewail.
I wonder how Tolkien would feel about his modern legacy.
In what way? Tolkien has a massive legacy, so I'm sure there are parts he'd be humbled by and parts that he'd rather not discuss.
@@Nemo12417 Which would be which?
Sauron x Morgoth
I don't think he would like fanatics of his work, but he would love lovers of his work.
Just my opinion...
Both how he influenced and popularized the here of fantasy, how his work has affected people, and the the adaptations of his work.
"And so, fellow nerds, that is how you write a good Macguffin."
Terrible Writing Advice reference... I see you are a human being of culture as well
It's not even MacGuffin
It's not a macguffin
hmm i wouldn't exactly call the ring a macguffin according to how hitchcock described the concept
You said so!!!!!
Well I mean, a person can draw real world significance from elements of any well written story that appeals to them. That doesn't necessarily make it allegory.
That's exactly what Tolkien said. He doesn't like when authors push the meaning/connection to the audience, but rather prefer the audience to find their meaning from the stories.
Yep. What Don Mac said.
Got to love how the ring is such a deep character.
And it is just an item, but is it... no it is something more. So much more. There is a hidden dept in the story that makes it enjoyable both you and old.
The vagueness really helps. We're mde aware through external perceptions and anecdotes what the Ring wants, what it's like, but when it features as an object, it remains inanimate and voiceless. Almost like it's in hiding.
The overt references to the Ring even having a personality are vague and dubious at best, but the reader never doubts for a second that it does. For all that I rag on Tolkien's writing style, the way he characterizes the One Ring is something I deeply admite & envy as a writer myself.
You could say... its precious ;)
Very well done. I love how Tolkien had such subtle and nuanced views on good, evil and the nature of power. Thank you
A friend of mine believed that the ring represented addiction
In some way it makes sense
The longer you have the ring the more obsessed with it you become and for some you come to both hate and love it more than anything, it causes you to try to push your friends and loved ones away when they to help you to get rid of it and Gollum even dies because of his obsession with the ring, sort of like an overdose in a way
More in the movies than in the books
you can get addicted to the Ring, but it isn't necessarily addiction itself
Power is in itself addictive
@@nunyabizniss570 No. Ask yourself what power is. It is the ability to act or control. Power CAN be addictive, but it doesn't have to be. Unfortunately, most of us are weak and easily tempted.
Tolkien's (Sauron's) Ring, it seems likely to me, represents the pathway to evil. Sauron (in JRRT's history of how Arda was formed and evolved) forged it so that his ability to "read" and control others (especially Elves), for his own twisted reasons, would be concentrated and enhanced. He wanted to shape the world in HIS mind's eye. Most of his images involved destruction (the marring of creation).
I don't particularly agree with JRRT's representation of reality, but no one can claim he lacked vision or artistic grace.
Can you achieve "good" if all your methods of pursuing that, and your motivations, are evil?
"My Very Dear Sister:
You must not entertain the least concern about me. You know, it wasn't the Germans who worked me up, nor the explosives; but it was living so long next to poor Cock-robin, as we used to call Second Leftenant Kroger, who lay not only nearby, but in various places around and about, if you understand."
Wilfred Owen
AFAICS, the Ring is an extension of Sauron - it “is” Sauron, in the form of an artefact. Which would agree with its constant efforts to leave its other wearers, and to return to him: it “gravitates” to him, because it seeks to be re-united with (the rest of) him. Therefore, his moral character, is its moral character. It represents Sauron because that is who, or what, the Ring is.
"Friend": It would have been easier if they had just used the eagles to...
Me: Be silent! Keep your forked tongue behind you teeth. I have not passed through fire and death to bandy crooked words with a witless worm!
Me: If they had then Sauron would have won.
where’s that from?
@@ryanvance1020 The Two Towers
I love the friendship between Tolkien and Lewis, they didn't always see eye to eye but they had so much respect for one another
I know it's not canon, but I really love the Celebrimbor DLC for Shadow of Mordor. It does an *excellent* job of showing the progression the ringbearer goes through: from noble intentions, to delusions of grandeur, to ultimate corruption, and finally the Ring's betrayal of the ringbearer, for the Ring only has one true master.
I’m particularly Interested in the part where you talked about power over people comes at the cost of those people having power over you.
I seem to remember an exchange in Harry Potter, where Dumbledore tells him that the powerful despot lives in fear, knowing that the very suppression of the people over whom they rule will create people who are brave/strong enough to overthrow them.
Me too, that part made me want to compare it Hegel's master slave dynamic, he explores how when individuals interact we create hierarchy and how power works in that dynamic. With both the master and slave being both the holder of and subject to that power.
Thank you!
I see so many people who misunderatand the ring. Many people actually view the eing as a sort of "horcrux" - a way for Sauron to remain alive, when in fact it's the opposite. The ring was forged to externalise Sauron's power, its creation weakened him so much so that by being parted with the ring, he lost his body.
Also, I must say it's really refreshing to see a Tolkien essay using only the books. The movies, fresh and memorable, are incredible, but they reduced much of the nuance in the lore.
Aside from all the obvious great scenes in LotR, Gandalf refusing to take the Ring is one of my favorites. It shows so much of Gandalf's character. Those works are truly some of the best tales that have ever been written imo.
I'm reminded of a Hamilton Quote: "They say George Washington is yielding his power and stepping away. Is that true? I wasn't aware that was something a person could do."
.
The only real way to resist the corruption of power is through true humility.
.
This was a good video, and you've turning them out a lot quicker now. Good job. .
Bruh this channel is so fire and gets not close to as much recognition as it deserves.
“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. 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."
Six years ago I wrote my final dissertation in high school about the meaning of power and the figure of the tyrant in Lotr. I have to say that this video reminds of that time and it made me feel very nostalgic, great analysis as always.
"You can see ... as an allegory *if you like*". That is key, and what makes the allegory rather an application of the story than a forced allegory that he dislikes.
Then again, he did write leaf by niggle, which is so straight up an allegory for purgatory that no one can really doubt it.
Haven't spent much time philosophizing LotR, but when you mention purgatory, I think of Gollum.
@@102728 interesting, what makes you think that? The closest analogue for purgatory in the Legendarium that I can think of is the halls of Mandos.
You know what makes your videos better than most every other UA-camr? You use some honest critical analysis instead of “theories.” You’re honestly an excellent scholar and I kind of love you.
Great explaination. I've always thought Tolkien's writing was to allegory more like a simile than a metaphor, or like a half-rhyme; no, the dead marshes aren't the Somme, but they are *like* the Somme, and in telling it slant, a truth is more clearly revealed. It's one of the things I love about Tolkien's writing; it allows for beautiful truths to appear when you least expect them.
Tolkien also wrote of the ring forging in Eregion as being the closest the elves came to falling to magic and machinery, which I'd interpret in this case as the making of tools to shape the world to their will (Rings of Power) as opposed to living in harmony with it.
Which is what ultimately brought them to their ruin. They shaped the world they lived in and once the rings lost their power, all their work was undone, and they finally became aware that the world had changed, and even though they were immortal, they suddenly felt the passing of the years and grew weary of Middle Earth.
Had they not used the rings of power, they would have lived in relative harmony (as you said) with the world, and probably would have felt the need to multiply, else they were overthrown by the men that lived around them (Rhudaur for Imladris, Balchoths and Orcs in Lothlorien). It is no wonder why the three places the elven ring resided were abandoned in the end of the Third Age, while the Silvan Realm prospered for while, before fading away, as the last bastion of elves.
The forging of the rings was due to the lust of elves for power over their surrounding, even though they would not say it. It was Sauron who influenced them and even though their will was keen, the mean was not. They put magic into mechanical objects, and so magic (unknown force of mistery) became linked with mechanisms (totally understandable things), which little by little removed magic itself from Middle Earth, as it became inseparable from the rings. Even Gandalf fell in the trap when accepting Cirdan's ring : he needed it not, as a Maiar.
As Elrond implied more than once, they should never have begun the forging of the rings, and would have been better off without them.
Celebrimbor tried to reproduce the Silmarili of his grand father. But he put his will, and infused them with magic, when the Silmarili were mere receptacles of the light of the Trees.
Great video! Loved it!
"Nor is Frodo Tolkien"
Duh, everyone knows Tolkien is Samwise the Brave.
Knowing Tolkien's experience in war, it's likely that Frodo is more applicable to Tolkien. He was a lieutenant and had a subordinate to accompany and look out for him. There's a technical name for that role in the British Army but I don't remember at the moment what it is. Tolkien would be too humble to apply himself as the actual hero of the story, as he saw Sam as the real hero of LOTR.
Actually, if anyone is a stand in for Tolkien, it’s definitely Tom Bombadil
@@remyjones9146 Oh I love that. Much better than what I commented. Kudos to you!
@@remyjones9146 I mean, he does have Beren and Luthien engraved on his and his wife's gravestones.
@@captainshadow3756 "Batman"
No I'm being serious, you can look it up. "Batman military term"
5:26 Advanced technology in scifi settings is often written as a magic system.
This is one of the best, most evenhanded takes on Tolkien and his intentions I've seen. Very well done.
I'd been avoiding this video for a few days, because, honestly, there was a niggling fear that you'd somehow missed that incredibly famous quote in the beginning.
I'm glad to say that this video has (like all your other videos I've watched) increased my understanding of writing and (specific to this video) enrished my understanding of the works of Tolkien, the author who made me want to write in the first place.
Thank you, so much.
Yet another one of your lotr videos giving me goosebumps. I'm sure even Tolkien himself would be proud at the skill in which you interpret and understand his work. The level of work you put in along with your ability to explain everything in such a simplistic way (without losing out on the complexity or level of detail in Tolkiens writings) is both impressive, and inspiring.
In the old Scandinavian culture (and other cultures as well)rings were a symbol of loyalty. To a king or a cause. Thanks for interesting content and best wishes from Sweden🥰
The line between allegory and inspiration is way more nuanced than I thought
Though I love allegories in that they teach, regardless of how manipulative they could be (awareness of this manipulation makes one far less susceptible to it), I also do like when the lessons are more derived by the viewer rather than enforced by the author
But in the end, the deeper you go, the more inspiration looks like allegory, for authors seldom don't inject their philosophy into their writings, and once that is found out/made clear, underlying messages can be derived rather directly, thus making it an allegory with extra steps
Except it still gets one thinking for themselves rather than the directness of allegory, and that's probably the main differentia
Yet you can still do the same by analyzing an allegory in and of itself, denying the idea of taking it for granted/as fact
So I suppose allegory is more of a direct answer to the question, and inspiration merely brings forth the question and explores it (yet often still lead to an answer, but that matters little for it's in how it's presented that matters, not the conclusion)
Very interesting topic
Your presentations on story telling have helped me better understand them, than any course I have taken. Thank you
These LoTR theme videos are some of the most inspiring content I've seen I a long time, truly reminding me why it's the best story ever told.
Ok, this won't seem relevant at first, but the bit about how people wanting to use the Ring against Sauron would simply become a new Dark Lord (or Queen) kind of reminded me of it
Back in the early 2000s, France decided they wanted their own anime, so they made a show called Code Lyoko, which featured a virtual world called Lyoko and an evil AI called XANA.
Season 2 of the show revealed a lot of backstory: XANA and Lyoko were created by a scientist named Franz Hopper. Hopper had been involved with Project Carthage - a military program which, while not elaborated upon much in the show itself, was some sort of attempt to control enemy communications during the Cold War. Hopper created XANA as a multi-agent program with the goal of destroying Project Carthage, but through some series of events, XANA turned against its creator
One episode in season 2 had the protagonists come up with a new weapon against XANA - a multi-agent program called the Marabounta, which would identify anything linked to XANA and destroy it. The only problem was, this turned out to apply to one of the main characters too - and when the others protected her, the Marabounta turned against all of them. And at the end of the episode, it turns out that the programs used to create the Marabounta had been the same ones used to create XANA
So that sort of narrative echo - a multi-agent program created to destroy a threat turns against its creator and becomes a new threat, the same happens again years later with a new multi-agent program created to destroy the first one - reminds me of the whole "new Dark Lord" thing
I think this is the single best description/explination of the Ring I've yet seen.
This is by FAR one of thee BEST videos you have ever made.
Really appreciated the part where the arrows kept up with the passage you were narrating. It's hard to focus when you're listening and reading at the same time and the arrows were a nice touch that helped me keep up. It was a great detail and a great video.
One of the better videos I ever watched on UA-cam and, I think, the best I saw about writing and/or morality.
I really like the comedic aspect you added
A fine video as always, thank you. I largely get what the One Ring represents, but what about its _destruction_ specifically? If the One Ring represents the corruption by unrestrained power, the will of the corrupted to dominate the will of others (either out of evil or "for good") etc can we assume that its destruction represented Tolkien's secret hope of the end of the above in a broader sense?
I don't (necessarily) mean a "back to greenery when everything was simple and man knew how to co-exist harmoniously with nature" (if that ever happened at all) thing. That ship has long sailed after 250 years of various stages of industrial revolution (though there _are_ active attempts in many cities globally to significantly increase the amount of greenery of urban spaces, not just in parks but also in building roofs and balconies) .
I mean the moral, ethical, emotional, intellectual etc maturity of man as a species. To gain the wisdom of declining to gain too much power because we understand it can only generate corruption, even if we have "the best and purest intentions". To resist the bittersweet temptation of absolute power (in the case of humans power of various forms) just like Galadriel and Gandalf. And, of course, stop the "Machine" from destroying our planet and us and most other other living thing along with it.
That is obviously not "fixed" with a magical ring being dissolved in lava, it would need quite a lot of time and, above all, the morality of mankind to progress, not just its science and technology. I just wonder if that was Tolkien's secret dream or hope.
@HelloFutureMe - Thanks for the video! I really liked how you brought up Tolkien's philosophy on the coercion of the will and machines, it gave more context to a quote from the Two Towers I've been thinking about recently "He that breaks a thing to find out what it is has left the path of wisdom."
The moving arrow down the quotes really helped me concentrate on them - thanks for that little extra ^_^
superbly put. brought a tear to my eye in the end. there is beauty in your description of the terrible, and of course in what tolkien offers in how we might all face it.
Looking at how often allegory is used as a thinly veiled hand of the author, I think that quote is pretty clear and pretty valid personally.
Any time I'm feeling down I come watch Tim's videos for inner peace
Before I watch the video: Anything, the ring set the stage for the mcguffin. The one thing that the villain desires to fulfill his evil goal and the heroes must stop him from getting as well as resisting the temptation of using it. It can be the atomic bomb, it can be the poison gas of ww1 and literally anything. He created a story that resonates within anyone and anyone can give the ring their own interpretation.
Just wanted to say I really enjoy your Lord of the Rings stuff. I don't know how much content you can continue to generate from it, but I'll always appreciate it. 👍🏻
Great video! and I love the addition of the little arrows when your read something. makes it a bit easier to follow
"Of course Allegory and Story converge meeting somewhere in Truth" - That last quote is so beautiful. The fact that Tolkien embodied that quote in his writing is what makes his work so endearing to me, and I have decided to do my best to also embody that quote in my own writing.
Tim, I had written a lengthy comment on your In Defense of Soft Magic Systems video that I felt you hadn't properly represented what the One Ring had meant to Tolkien, but I am so thankful you made this video, because not only am I convinced that your analysis of the One Ring has done it justice, but you helped to me see how vast the meaning of the One Ring was to Tolkien. Again, thank you for your dedication to meaningful, quality content!
Excellent as always.
And can I just say, thank you. With the guide arrows on those large blocks of quote really helps. It's a nice accessibility feature for people like me who have dyslexia and autism and get overwhelmed with big chunks of text with audio. 💙
I miss watching your videos. They give me so much to think about. Thank you.
Beautiful beautiful video Tim. You've outdone yourself with this one. I love this channel so much, and I just bought your book!
Nice essay. I didnt expect this to come up but the imagery for the ring representing the Eucharist is pretty plainly clear as well (not to discredit the other readings). Tolkien was devoted Catholic, and Frodo has many times been described as a priest who takes the walk willing to sacrifice himself, and offer the sacrifice of the ring, which is a perfect sacrifice in this world. I wrote a small essay on this topic as well, but it does require some understanding of the Eucharist in Catholic teaching. Usually more understanding than someone who went through their sacraments when they were a child would understand.
This essay is deeply informative, inspiring and respectful. Thank you mr Hickson.
Thank you for that video. Not only did you unlock a whole new layer of LotR for me, but you also gave me hope that somehow I can influence all the wrongs in this world even if I am not some powerful politician or boss of a big company and neither do I need to be one. Haven't really felt that hopeful in a while.
I’m so happy that even all these decades after the release of the books, they still mean something and we’re talking about them today
I've always viewed the ring as being the spiritual equivalent of a powerful narcotic, but of course that's the beauty of Tolkien's work. The ring could represent any number of things in the real world and addiction is one of them.
I just want to say thank you for everything your videos and book have taught me.
I’m late but I think this is exactly what people dislike about political messages in media today. Not necessarily because of the political message itself, but the fact that instead of allowing you to come to your own conclusion, the author forces you to come to theirs.
Your essay is a beauty. You created beauty from beauty. Thank you.
If you want to read a Tolkien story with pointed allegory in it, there's "Leaf By Niggle". He actually admitted to it in his letters.
" I cordially dislike allegory in all its manifestations... I much prefer history - true or feigned - with it's varied applicability to the thought and experience of readers. I think that many confuse applicability with allegory, but the one resides in freedom of the reader, and the other in the purposed domination of the author"
- J.R.R. Tolkien -
Thanks a lot for giving this deeper meaning in the power of this ring and what it meant to Sauron.
This was very inspirational.
Thank you for the thoughts about the One Ring. I spend a lot of time thinking about it, too. I know this comment is being made two years after the video was published, but for the record, and for anyone trying to look up the ones mentioned, the letter designated as Letter #121 is, in my Kindle copy, Letter #211, to Rhona Beare.
That rain is some real ASMR, I could go to sleep to that sound
thank you, you brought up many points i had not previously considered
You can never permanently defeat power with power in the end. A lesson it would be good for more people to remember.
But they aren't trying to defeat power, they are trying to defeat evil. The Ring is not power, it is Sauron's power. I don't mean allegorically but literally. The one Ring contains Sauron's power and part of his soul. He literally poured himself into. It's how he survived the fall of Numenor and his death at the hands of the second alliance of men and elves.
I think it would’ve been good to bring up Plato’s ‘ring of gyges’ as it is a cautionary tale about actions without consequences and ties into that idea about the machines. It was also clearly an inspiration for Tolkien.
I always just took the Ring to be a stand in for... well... all of human temptation
I am hugely for the very important distinction between "informed by" and "Are about", like the dead marshes and the Somme, he used it to create something that is similar, but doesn't mean that the marshes are the Somme, it's just what a field/marsh of dead bodies would be like. Ditto for the distinction between allegory and "You can draw the allegory of" because it's all about the freedom for the reader to find the meaning and connections by themselves
2:04 - almost like the magic lamp from "aladdin" in "the one thousand and one nights", in that when it was used the user of the lamp usually use the unlimited wishes for gaining wealth and power. When someone knew about the lamp, then that person will take it to indulge or be corrupted by it's power.
Personally, the story of the journey to destroy the ring is reminiscent to the journey to battle depression. It is something very hard to do, that you need support for an it leaves you… changed.
Frodo's "I wish the ring didn't come to me" is what happens when life, in its unpredictability, forces you through events that you are not equipped to deal with.
Lord, you gave me goosebumps! Spitting some straight facts up there!
It seems that any experience a writer has is going to influence what they write; whether it be a consious or unconcious choice.
I just started re-reading the trilogy after not having read it for about 10 years and am falling in love with it over and over again.
Such a good and thought through analysis! Thank you!
I'll just say there's a lot more going on in Narnia than just one to one comparisons with Christianity. Though Aslan is def. a one to one symbol for Christ (bc he's literally the second person of the Trinity, incarnated in a new form in this world that is meant to be in the same universe/multiverse as ours) this doesn't work nearly as well for the white witch as satan, or Edmund as all fallen humanity in our world. Plus, stories like the silver chair, the horse and his boy and prince Caspian (etc.) can't be seen as simply Allegories of something, nor are they pert and shallow morality tales. They don't meet the modern criteria of neat and logical worldbuilding, but they aren't meant to. Their supposed to have the feel of a medieval romance, complete with the Christian symbolism and imagery. But they also have some really enjoyable down to earth realism parts that mostly involve walking though nature and being tired and hungry and discussing practical things. Though its told from a Christian worldview, that worldview is not evangelical bc it predates modern evangelicalism and it's very comfortable with "pagan" imagery and themes. [Edits: typos]
I remember seeing an interview with Sir Christopher Lee on an LOTR bonus DVD where he talked about the One Ring and its meaning or importance, and he used the line, "Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely." I think that very accurately describes what you have said about the One Ring. Absolute power, even with good intentions or whatever else you want/need/imagine, will corrupt and destroy.
"Unforeseeable acts of will, and deeds of virtue of the apparently small, ungreat, forgotten". Reminds me of a Quote from Futurama, "When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all".
Absolutely great analysis. Detached from bias. It really got me thinking. More please!
I truly enjoyed this video so much! and also cried when they nailed before the 4 hobbits... men... that scene ALWAYS touches my heart... the first time I saw it in cinema back in the 2003, I started to cry in tears literal!!!! Thanks! another great video!!!
One thing I just notice on the parallel with technology is that in the end the only power strong enough to destroy the ring is nature itself (Lava), great video man congratulations
The ring is a very Catholic conception of evil. It is at once both highly appealing while also being an incredible burden. It seems to allow you to hide, while actually making you terribly visible to Sauron. As you point out, evil ultimately will defeat itself. The only way to lose is, paradoxically, to try and use evil to defeat evil. I very much appreciate your analysis of Tolkien's views on allegory as well. He disliked its direct use by authors because it lends itself to propaganda.
I really loved this video and the contemplative tone. Please keep up the great Tolkien content!
I love tolkien's stories so much that it reflects on my writing style in that I only notice by watching these videos. Thank you so much for all your videos, I always get inspired to write when I watch them and I always love to learn something new about writtng stories.
P.S.: Sorry for any gramma mistakes, feel fre to correct me :D
This is the reason I got into this channel. Tim's understanding of Tolkien goes deeper than nerds who just read backstory in The Unfinished Tales and such. I have so much respect for someone else who quotes as many books about Tolkien as they do books by Tolkien. It kine of makes me wonder how he doesn't rank LOTR above ATLA (no offense to them, Uncle Iroh is the best)
_clears throat_
"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
Nah, I'm just kidding. Yet another fantastic and thought-provoking video, Tim!
Your essays on Lord of the Rings and Tolkien's larger mythos have done so much to help me understand and appreciate the philosophy of Tolkien and the themes that run through his works. While I can't say I always agree with those themes, I've greatly enjoyed learning more about them, so thanks for that :)
Hope you're doing well! Love from Canada
Thank you for the great explanation, where I agree completely, but there is more to add. I know there are people who grew up with Harry Potter novels, I grew up in the similar way with Tolkien, and I am very thankful for it. If I would like to say how to apply this lesson to the current world than it is that doing the rights (however inconsequential and useless it may be) is always The Right Thing™ especially comparing to achieve some goal by any means required (in the terms of the legal theory that the procedural justice and the rule of law is always above the material justice and utilitarianism). The lesson which I feel has been completely forgotten by absolutely everybody. Not only Nietzsche (which you mention in other video) but also Jeremy Bentham are the main villains in my understanding.
Thank you for this video. It's thought provoking and has caused me to rethink my understanding of The Lord of the Rings as well as some of the fantasy that has evolved from it. The idea that The One Ring is a construct external to yourself that allows you to wield power more effectively is not something I had ever considered but, in hindsight, it seems childish to have simply understood it as a wonderous object that granted great power.
Damn Tim I had goosebumps during this video! Once when everybody bowed to the Hobbits and then again at the very end. What a great video!