06-08-2004, 07:37 AM | #1 |
Lady of Letters
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Either Oxford or Kent, England
Posts: 2,476
|
Why "The Lord of the Rings"?
I'm sure this is an incredibly stupid question, but it's always puzzled me...
Why is LOTR named after the "Lord of the Rings"? Titles often have significance in defining the priorities and themes of a novel, so doesn't it seem a bit odd to choose to call LOTR after the "villain" of the story? There must have been hundreds of titles Tolkien could have chosen - why pick that one? Come on, crack open your Letters of Tolkien. There's got to be an answer there
__________________
And all the time the waves, the waves, the waves Chase, intersect and flatten on the sand As they have done for centuries, as they will For centuries to come, when not a soul Is left to picnic on the blazing rocks, When England is not England, when mankind Has blown himself to pieces. Still the sea, Consolingly disastrous, will return While the strange starfish, hugely magnified, Waits in the jewelled basin of a pool. |
06-08-2004, 08:06 AM | #2 |
Fëanorophobic
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the pages of a book
Posts: 1,417
|
The other day one of my friends (who is not that big a Tolkien fan) asked me the same question. (In fact at first he didn't believe me when I told him that Sauron was the Lord of the Rings)
So here's what I answered: I think that the major theme in the story is the power to fight evil and corruption. So it would only be fitting to name the story about Sauron whom the heroes fight. But, thinking now, I don't find this answer to be good enough. I think I might have another one; I think it would sound even more stupid, but here goes: I think that the title doesn't refer to Sauron. Rather, it refers to Frodo. Frodo, being able to resist and overcome the call of the Ring has become the real LOTR as he could rise above them. (I would also go on to add that Sauron was the Slave of the Rings because he was bound to the Ring and could never do without its evil powers to feed his greed) Well, I know how all this sounds, but I have only one defense: I didn't read the Tolkien letters so I'm just speculating here. Last edited by Beren3000 : 06-08-2004 at 11:54 AM. |
06-08-2004, 08:58 AM | #3 |
Elven Warrior
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Birmingham, UK
Posts: 221
|
If I remember correctly, Tolkien himself stated that the reason why the book is called The Lord of the Rings is because he wanted to point out that there could be no other "Lord of the Rings" than Sauron himself. He was undeniably putting across to the reader that it wasn't just the quest to destroy the One Ring that was integral to the main plot; but also that the effects of the other Rings would also diminish - as Sauron had control over them through the One.
__________________
Durin the Sleepless! |
06-11-2004, 03:02 PM | #4 | |
Lady of Letters
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Either Oxford or Kent, England
Posts: 2,476
|
Quote:
I'm still confused though
__________________
And all the time the waves, the waves, the waves Chase, intersect and flatten on the sand As they have done for centuries, as they will For centuries to come, when not a soul Is left to picnic on the blazing rocks, When England is not England, when mankind Has blown himself to pieces. Still the sea, Consolingly disastrous, will return While the strange starfish, hugely magnified, Waits in the jewelled basin of a pool. |
|
06-11-2004, 03:08 PM | #5 | |
Fëanorophobic
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the pages of a book
Posts: 1,417
|
Quote:
|
|
06-12-2004, 05:18 AM | #6 |
Lady of Letters
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Either Oxford or Kent, England
Posts: 2,476
|
True, indeed.
__________________
And all the time the waves, the waves, the waves Chase, intersect and flatten on the sand As they have done for centuries, as they will For centuries to come, when not a soul Is left to picnic on the blazing rocks, When England is not England, when mankind Has blown himself to pieces. Still the sea, Consolingly disastrous, will return While the strange starfish, hugely magnified, Waits in the jewelled basin of a pool. |
06-12-2004, 11:11 PM | #7 |
Hobbit
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: San Juan, Puerto Rico
Posts: 27
|
i agree that frodo resisted the call of the ring for a very long time but i think that frodo never controlled the ring or could bend it to hs will thats why i think that the title refers to sauron , a constant throughout the series
but i am still very confused
__________________
``Here at the end of all things, Sam´´ - Frodo |
06-13-2004, 02:52 AM | #8 |
Fëanorophobic
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the pages of a book
Posts: 1,417
|
I am not saying that Frodo could control the Ring as in bend it to his will. I'm just saying that he could bring himself not to use it; which, IMO, is harder
|
08-13-2004, 02:40 AM | #9 |
Warrior of the House of Hador
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,651
|
Yet there were still flashes that showed the Ring was taking control. eg. When Sam found him in the tower or Cirith Ungol where for a moment he became stronger and angry, snatching it off Sam. I think he did well to resist it that long bu Bilbo managed to resist it for 60 years and then give it away!
|
08-13-2004, 04:15 AM | #10 |
Fëanorophobic
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the pages of a book
Posts: 1,417
|
I think these moments where the Ring takes control are shown in the movie more than in the books (but then again, I don't have the strongest of memories ).
|
08-14-2004, 01:52 PM | #11 | |
Enting
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Valinor
Posts: 76
|
Frodo is definitely not the Lord of the Rings...that's a point made in the story. Gandalf points it out to Pippin:
Quote:
__________________
'Legolas' on The Barrow-Downs ...take counsel with thyself, and remember who and what thou art. |
|
08-14-2004, 02:49 PM | #12 |
Swan-Knight of Dol Amroth
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: On the Bay of Belfalas
Posts: 1,125
|
Beat me to it, Ulmo. Yep, Sauron is called the Lord of the Rings, not because he has dominion over all of them, especially without the Ruling Ring, but because he was the proximate cause of them all being made, and if he regained the Ruling Ring, he would have indeed have dominion over all of them that remained.
__________________
"What song the Sirens sang, or what name Achilles assumed when he hid himself among women, though puzzling questions are not beyond conjecture." - Sir Thomas Browne, Urn Burial. |
08-15-2004, 06:25 AM | #13 |
Lady of Letters
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Either Oxford or Kent, England
Posts: 2,476
|
So... why name the whole book after him?
__________________
And all the time the waves, the waves, the waves Chase, intersect and flatten on the sand As they have done for centuries, as they will For centuries to come, when not a soul Is left to picnic on the blazing rocks, When England is not England, when mankind Has blown himself to pieces. Still the sea, Consolingly disastrous, will return While the strange starfish, hugely magnified, Waits in the jewelled basin of a pool. |
08-15-2004, 07:25 AM | #14 |
Fëanorophobic
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the pages of a book
Posts: 1,417
|
I don't see what's wrong with naming a book after the bad guy. After all, Sauron was one of the prime movers and shakers in ME, wasn't he?
|
08-15-2004, 11:27 AM | #15 |
Swan-Knight of Dol Amroth
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: On the Bay of Belfalas
Posts: 1,125
|
Why name the book after the bad guy?
Well, there are precedents, most famously Moby-Dick. Horror stories and novels are often named for their evil protagonists, such as "The Dunwich Horror" by H.P. Lovecraft and Jaws by Peter Benchley. The movies are too full of examples to even cause a second of reflection. Alien, Godzilla,, and Mothra. Don't forget that the full title of Frodo's book was The Downfall of the Lord of the Rings and the Return of the King. Tolkien just took the part that was most euphonious (think of the alliteration of those R's! - Tolkien was very fond of alliteration) and used it as an arresting title, like The Great Gatsby. Fitzgerald sweated blood over that title; one of his alternatives was Among the Flappers and Millionaires. That doesn't sing, does it?
BTW, I read somewhere that Tolkien wanted to issure the LotR as six volumes, for the six books. Among the projected titles: Vol. 1, The Return of the Shadow, vol. 2, The Fellowship of the Ring, vol. 3, The Treason of Isengard, vol 4, The Two Towers, vol 5, The War of the Ring and vol. 6, The Return of the King. Much more logical, but the publishers put the kibosh on it.
__________________
"What song the Sirens sang, or what name Achilles assumed when he hid himself among women, though puzzling questions are not beyond conjecture." - Sir Thomas Browne, Urn Burial. Last edited by Attalus : 08-15-2004 at 11:28 AM. |
08-15-2004, 12:26 PM | #16 |
Fëanorophobic
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the pages of a book
Posts: 1,417
|
I read that "The Two Towers" title was suggested to him (or maybe forced on him) by his publishers. In fact, in one of his letters he mentions how "misleading" it sounds.
|
08-15-2004, 04:32 PM | #17 |
Swan-Knight of Dol Amroth
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: On the Bay of Belfalas
Posts: 1,125
|
I agree that The Two Towers as a title is misleading, as there are, indeed, four towers mentioned in that work (Minas Morgul, Minas Tirith, Barad-dûr, and, of course, Orthanc). I further recall in the Letters that he objected to The Return of the King as it gave the ending away.
__________________
"What song the Sirens sang, or what name Achilles assumed when he hid himself among women, though puzzling questions are not beyond conjecture." - Sir Thomas Browne, Urn Burial. |
08-20-2004, 06:56 AM | #18 |
The Official Court Jester of the Entmoot
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Far Harad
Posts: 1,006
|
Did anyone really doubt that everyon would win. I mean when I got really into reading it sometimes I worried but when I wasnt reading I knew what would happen. Also I think its call LOTR because never wanted us to forget what everyone was fighting what the name of all the evil was. I mean I think the book was about 9 people who had their own stories about their struggles with the Lord of the Rings.
__________________
A Bit More Grown Up This Time... |
08-20-2004, 12:01 PM | #19 |
Fëanorophobic
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the pages of a book
Posts: 1,417
|
It's true that we know that Good will eventually triumph, but one of the strongest things about LOTR is how Good's victory is not complete. At the end, the Elves are forced to leave Middle-earth and it becomes a gloomier place without them. The ending is a bit gloomy after the amazing victory they scored. So while Good had to triumph, Tolkien managed to free the story from the weakness of a total triumph that many authors would have fallen into.
Last edited by Beren3000 : 08-20-2004 at 12:02 PM. |
08-20-2004, 03:42 PM | #20 |
The Official Court Jester of the Entmoot
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Far Harad
Posts: 1,006
|
But still we knew very early on that the elves were leaving. The only thing that may have come as a surprise is when Frodo and Gandalf leaves. Maybe Im just being too pragmatic (hope thats the word) but I never really saw as a gloomy ending. IT was sad yes bu tnot gloomy and I think there is a big difference
__________________
A Bit More Grown Up This Time... |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Theological Opinions , PART II | jerseydevil | General Messages | 993 | 03-22-2007 05:19 AM |
Calling All Nazgul : Formal Info Thread | The last sane person | RPG Forum | 37 | 07-20-2006 06:50 PM |
Why "Lord of the Rings"? | Gordis | Lord of the Rings Books | 3 | 06-21-2006 10:30 PM |
Theological Opinions | Nurvingiel | General Messages | 992 | 02-10-2006 04:15 PM |