Unheard-of Themes

[Bombadillo]

Did anything in LotR ever strike you as a possible theme, but you'd never heard it before? I'm making this thread so you can post your unique ideas about what was conveyed in the books.

I was thinking about LotR yesterday and one thing that made a connection in my mind was how the Shire, Barliman Butterbur, and Tom Bombadil were all so clueless about the outside world. I don't think there's need to go into detail why, but I thought that they demonstrated a new theme for the story, that ignorance makes happiness, but also allows danger to grow around.

I never heard anyone else mention that as a theme at all, whether intended or not by Tolkien. So I thought I'd share it and ask if anyone else has noticed possible themes also.

[Beren3000]

I wouldn't term it as "ignorance makes happiness". I'd rather say that simplicity and peace of mind create an immunity to evil. This is why IMO hobbits are quite immune to the Ring's powers. (BTW, have you noticed that Merry and Pippin were never tempted by the Ring. It just came to my mind now and I can't figure out its significance.)

Anyway, here's another "theme" or rather literary device I find quite interesting. Throughout LOTR, Sauron is never mentioned as an active character. People just say "Sauron did such and such..." but we never see Sauron actually thinking or plotting, etc... I think this is a play on the fact that people fear the unknown. Thus by making Sauron's portrait as vague as possible, Tolkien could create a plausible incarnation of evil as a concept not a person.

Hope any of this made sense

[Valandil]

Originally posted by Beren3000
Anyway, here's another "theme" or rather literary device I find quite interesting. Throughout LOTR, Sauron is never mentioned as an active character. People just say "Sauron did such and such..." but we never see Sauron actually thinking or plotting, etc... I think this is a play on the fact that people fear the unknown. Thus by making Sauron's portrait as vague as possible, Tolkien could create a plausible incarnation of evil as a concept not a person.

In a similar (??) vein, I don't think we EVER *thinking to make sure* actually have direct insights into what the various baddies are thinking or planning or doing. We ONLY see them as they interact, directly or indirectly (through the orcs or black riders they send, etc) with the main (good) characters. The point-of-view of the books is entirely that of the main characters.

(and not to slam the movies for doing otherwise... cinematically it makes sense to do what the books didn't here, because you don't have the benefit of exhaustive narration and conversation for the characters to make some reasonable conclusions about what their enemies are up to... it saves a lot of time for a movie to just show it. But I appreciate that the books don't)

[Beren3000]

But, Val, you see Morgoth walking the Earth with Ungoliant and (would you believe it) screaming with anguish when she attacks him. And we even see Sauron in human form in Eregion and Numenor and see him face hatred and suspicion, etc... But my point (which maybe I have poorly phrased) is that in LOTR, Sauron is not shown as a "normal" entity and this vagueness makes him all the more fearful; more so than Morgoth for example. At least the latter had a definite corporal form...

[The Gaffer]

Not quite accurate: there are two insights we to into life as a baddy: the Uruk-hai and Shagrat (just love that name), Gorbag and co.

However, the baddies are pretty much portrayed in the way you describe. You could argue that the goodies are as well, as they all have static characters which don't really develop over time.

The idea of not taking interest in the outside world is an interesting one. It is brushed upon in some respects when people like Gandalf refer to Sauron "not building his power by sitting back and waiting until his enemies recover, as we have done" or something.

I think it's quite a strong theme of the book that if you just sit back and ignore the outside world it will come and get you sooner or later ("last as he was First" in the case of Mr Bombadil).

[Valandil]

Beren: Your examples are from Silmarillion, not LOTR... so wrong forum, dude!

And yes, I know what I said wasn't exactly what you were saying, but what you said triggered a thought I've had over this.

Gaffer: In your cases, we have a hobbit overhearing the orcs speak... so again, the knowledge comes from someone who could have contributed to what was written down by hobbits in the story. So it was from main character interaction with baddies... not from an omniscient narrator.

One case I CAN think of is the narrative describing Shelob... but there I think JRRT is setting the stage nicely for us... rather than just have Frodo (was Sam along? I forget... ) crawling through the tunnel and *eek* out jumps a big spider! Even that can be explained though. Frodo could have been filled in on all this on the voyage home - either by Gandalf or Elrond... so that he could have given the prevailing theories on Shelob's past and nature prior to describing his encounter with her.

[Elanor the Fair]

Originally Posted by Beren3000

I (BTW, have you noticed that Merry and Pippin were never tempted by the Ring. It just came to my mind now and I can't figure out its significance.)

Neither did Sam or Frodo until they actually had the ring in their possession. Frodo knew of the ring for many years while Bilbo had it - yet he never coveted it. It seems that, with Hobbits at least, that the ring had a dormant effect until they hold or own it.

The other way of looking at is is this - if the ring is somewhat sentient, then we can say that it attempts to serve its own destiny. There are many references to this in Tolkien's works. If a person is perceived as being capable of serving the rings needs, then the pull will be stronger. This, for example, is evident in Boromir. The ring knew that Boromir would be able to serve its needs - bringing the ring close to Mordor and announcing this to the world!!

The hobbits were unlikely to help the ring get back to its master in their quiet, backwater locality, so the ring does not "call" to them strongly. Nor does it have this effect upon the elves at the council of Elrond - or indeed upon Elrond himself. It does not have this effect upon Legolas, Gimli or Aragorn either.

[Beren3000]

Good points there, Elanor! This would also explain why the pull of the Ring increased when Frodo entered Mordor

[Attalus]

I have always thought that Sauron is not further described to keep him more menacing then it would have done to describe him as he was in the Sil. After all, the Free Folk do not even recognize, at first, that it is indeed Sauron retuned, attributing all kinds of ill-chance to different entieties, such as a Ringwraith.