Lord of the Rings

    Hi Giktayms!

    Not even a year has passed, and here it is, a new portion of fan theories. Sorry for the long wait and thanks to everyone who asked when the new articles come out! It really helped.

    In the last vote, by a wide margin, the Lord of the Rings won. I won’t do Q&A this time, because I still have to duplicate everything in the comments.




    To begin with, despite the huge fan. community, you can find strikingly few fan theories about the Lord of the Rings. Moreover, most theories are clearly written about films for film viewers. I did not want to retype these theories, especially since I do not like many. Therefore, we will not build fan theories today, as usual. Instead, I propose to consider a complete conspiracy theory.

    Just in case, it must be said (or you never know) that all this is not serious, I am not a supporter of conspiracy theories in any way, but if I were, I would prefer this one.

    Legendarium




    There are several types of narration, in some, events are described as some kind of objective truth. We are watching everything as if through a window. But in The Lord of the Rings we are not an objective spectator at all, this story has a narrator and not one. Regardless of whether you are watching a movie or reading a book, you only follow the point of view of the character of the narrator.

    The Silmarillion describing the beginning and, partly, the end of the world, was created by elves and is a collection of legends. In fact, it is an analogue of the Old Testament. Bilbo translated the book from the language of the elves. Also the author of Bilbo Baggins owns the story "The Hobbit, or both." Both stories were later supplemented and edited by Frodo, who described all the events of The Lord of the Rings. All together is the Scarlet Book of Western Limits

    By the way, this explains the difference between the Hobbit (in fact, a children's fairy tale), and the Lord of the Rings.
    Bilbo went through an exciting adventure and composed a fairy tale based on. Frodo, who went through hell, was more like writers of a lost generation. Because the Lord of the Rings turned out to be much more detailed and darker.

    After Frodo sailed with the Elves to Aman, the book passed to Sam, who kept the record of the Shire in it. Later, the book was requested by the king of Gondor Elessar (Aragorn). He ordered his scribes to propagate the book. In the process of copying, many changes were made, and this version has survived to this day (the original has been lost).
    Since then, according to Tolkien, four epochs have changed (it’s almost impossible to calculate the exact duration of epochs. In fact, hundreds of thousands or even millions of years have passed. But not more than 100 million, since the Pleiades cluster is visible from the ground ). The version that came to us was translated by Tolkien himself.

    This story tells of very old times. Both the languages ​​and the letters were then completely different from the ones we use now. All languages ​​here are replaced by English.

    From the preface to the hobbit


    Thus, the author himself becomes a character who translated the story told by another character. In this vein, many events can be called into question. Not only does the hobbit describe them (and the hobbits are pretty narrow-minded creatures), there are also so many changes and the devil knows what happened to the book for hundreds of thousands of years.
    Given how little we know about the past of the Earth, the Lord of the Rings could happen twice, and we would not know about it.

    Hobbit lived in a hole underground


    The Silmarillion has information about the origin of humans, elves, and gnomes. But no one knows where the hobbits came from (like the orcs). Perhaps that is why it is so difficult for the ring to seduce the hobbit, because Sauron did not take them into account and knew practically nothing about them when he created the ring.

    There is a theory that the Hobits are plants created by the wives of the Ents. According to another theory, they are a mixture of gnomes and elves. Tolkien himself said that hobbits are closer to people and are a parallel branch of evolution. Against this background, certain archaeological finds of 2003 look very funny .

    The magician is never late


    At the moment when the events of the Lord of the Rings occur, magic gradually leaves the world. This is funny, because in parallel, people gain more and more power and knowledge (something reminds me of this).

    Here the character of Gandalf is very remarkable. If you approach people on the street and ask about the most famous magicians in fiction and cinema, Mitrandir will definitely be in the top three. Meanwhile, the magic of the magician Gandalf raises many questions. If you briefly recall the film, then you can name not so many places where Gandalf applied his magic skills.

    Let's start with where Gandalf's magic is “stored”. When the remnants of the fraternity arrive in Rohan, Grimm, fearing Gandalf, asks to take his staff from him. Grimma, as we recall, serves Saruman. Those. it can be assumed that he is much better aware than others of what exactly is the danger of Gandalf and he suggests that the danger comes from the staff.



    By the way, Saruman also took the staff from Gandalf in the scene in the tower. This battle, of course, was more like magic. And they waved their hands, but (!) It is important to understand that the storyteller is still Frodo, and at the time of the battle only Gandalf and Saruman were present. And only Gandalf could tell Frodo how it was. And Gandalf seems to be interested in maintaining his magical prestige.

    If Gandalf can throw people with the power of thought, wouldn’t it be wiser to do this in battles with orcs, for example? But instead, we see outstanding sword possession, and the staff is more often used as a melee weapon. Such a skill does not appear out of nowhere. It turns out that Gandalf spends a lot of time on maintaining his combat form. But with magic he has worse.



    After the prologue, in the film, Gandalf arrives in the Shire. There are many points worth paying attention to. In this scene, for example, both in the book and in the film everything is shown in such a way as if Gandalf scares Bilbo with some magic, although he could just use natural physical superiority + the play of shadows from the fire in the fireplace.

    The second point, and it is much more interesting. Gandalf arranges the show with a bunch of fireworks. The latter might seem like magical nearby hobbits, but that’s not even the point. First, why does a mage need fireworks to entertain the Hobbits? Is there really no suitable spell? After all, Gandalf doesn’t shy away from letting magical smoky ships (here it must be said that modern Vapers would also have found something to hit Bilbo with)

    Secondly, fireworks, like sparklers (like much more) in our world appeared only due to military use. The basis of fireworks is gunpowder, or something else burning and exploding. Had Gandalf really been unable to find a better use of gunpowder than entertainment for the Hobbits?
    It is funny that gunpowder (or an analogue) was also used by orcs in the siege of Helm's Pad. It was thanks to the bomb (and the fact that the wall of the Khedm’s Paddy was apparently designed by the same person as the Death Star), they broke through the defenses.



    Thus, Gandalf and Saruman know the secret of gunpowder, but not one of them uses it to arm their army. Although I can immediately come up with a bunch of moments when firearms, or bombs, could turn the tide of the war in one direction or another.

    Let's go back to the gray (for now) magician. In one scene, Sam asks Gandalf not to turn him into a frog, although there is no evidence that Gandalf can do this at all.

    On this scene and many others, one gets the impression that the inhabitants of Middle-earth have no idea what Gandalf is capable of, but they are unconditionally confident in his “magic” thanks to several skillful tricks.

    Here is the scenewith the Balrog, where Gandalf brings down the bridge. At least, it seemed to the frightened Hobbit. And what he saw - Gandalf said “you will not pass” and the Balrog fell. But subsequently does not mean in consequence. The barlog, obviously, is a hefty creature, and the bridge is narrow, built by the Dwarves and designed for the Dwarves, who for many years has not seen any scheduled repair work. Its collapse could have occurred for more natural reasons, and the wave that we see before it, if it was not only a figment of the imagination of a shocked Frodo who lost a friend, can have an explanation easier than magic.

    The laws of cinema narration are not so different from the literary ones, and the weakness of bad films is often exaggerated, and in introducing unnecessary details, which comes from a misunderstanding of the essence of the original. Ts. Introduced a “magic castle”, countless eagles, spells, blue flashes and inappropriate magic (for example, Faramir’s soaring body).
    Letter # 210 to Forest Ackerman, June 1958 (JRR
    Tolkien ) (Tolkien comments on the film version of The Lord of the Rings)



    It’s important to say, until they crucified me, I don’t think Gandalf was a “bad guy”. On the contrary, his character seems to me only more interesting from this point of view. He is not just smart, his cunning reaches brilliant proportions. He is a great strategist, which showed his attack on the orcs at Helmova Padi and the defense of Minas Tirith.

    Eagles!
    A popular subject for debate about the Lord of the Rings is the Eagles. When watching a movie, some have a logical question: why don't they just fly all the way on eagles. If you read books, you are unlikely to have a similar question. But, for everyone else - there is a theory that Gandalf initially planned to do just that.

    According to the theory, Gandalf enlisted the support of the eagles on the way to Rivendel, but he could not share the plan with the others, because he was afraid of Sauron's spies. According to Gandalf's plan, the brotherhood of the ring was to go to the valley where the Eagles lived, immediately after passing through the Misty Mountains. The troubles in Moria mixed his cards. After returning white as Gandalf, he forgot almost everything that was in his past life and therefore did not use his plan. And the brotherhood had broken up by that time and the plan was no longer suitable.
    Gendolf’s phrase before the fall is cited as evidence for this theory. He says, "Fly, you fouls!" Which, in theory, means "Run, fools," but can literally be translated as "fly fools."

    Honestly, I think that this theory does not stand up to criticism. For starters, the idea of ​​flying to Mordor in the Eagles is stupid. I mean, how it should have looked like on a council:
    “We need a plan on how to quietly get into the very heart of the enemy’s fortress without drawing attention to letting him know that we have a ring.”
    - I have an idea, let's take 9 eagles, each the size of a wagon, and fly straight to the fateful mountain. I’m sure that eye on the tower is just for sight and will not be able to detect us, even when we, having made a circle of honor and waved his wing, will not land on the fateful mountain.
    In addition, the plan to deliver the ring to Mordor was born on advice, Gandalf could not plan everything in advance without knowing the plan.
    Even if we assume that they could fly unnoticed to Mordor (although they could not). But then they had to fly over crowds of orcs and meet them at the foot of the mountain. But what about the fact that the ring, which has its own will, could well fall in flight and roll from all legs to the first orc?

    Among other things, the eagles owe nothing to Gandalf. He helped one of them, but in response, the same eagle saved Gandalf from Isengard, after the battle with Balrog, and also helped to take Frodo and Sam from the fateful mountain.



    In the end, the eagles could well be relied upon. There was a choice - to die, or perhaps die. The eagles could not cope, the Nazguls could intercept them, but this was no longer important. The task is completed.

    And by the way, here is an excerpt from Tolkien’s same letter regarding the abnormal (fortunately) film adaptation:
    Here we meet the eagles for the first time. It seems to me that the eagles are the biggest, and unjustifiable, mistake of Ts. The eagles are a dangerous weapon. I used them extremely rarely; using them more would be both implausible and impossible. And how is it possible to saddle the eagle of the Misty Mountains in the Shire? This is completely absurd, it makes the capture of Gandalf by Saruman implausible, and also deprives Gandalf of any secret.



    Lord of the Rings

    Gandalf is not the only "non-magical" magic character. Sauron is the main antagonist in the book and film, right? But he did nothing throughout history. There is an Eye and there is a ring. With the help of the palantir, you can "talk" with him, but it does not explain what Sauron is. If we assume that the Silmarillion is a collection of legends, and not a true chronology, then there is no evidence that Sauron exists at all.

    I hope to soon give you two books about which at least one criticism will be true: they are excessively long! One is a sequel to The Hobbit, which I just finished after 12 years of (irregular) work. I'm afraid this book is three times longer, not intended for children (although it is not at all necessary for them to be completely unsuitable), and in some places rather gloomy. It seems to me that it is much better (but in a different way). The second is a pure myth, legends of the past, quite distant already at the time of Bilbo

    From Tolkien’s letter to Nomi Mitchison
    on December 13, 1949
    .


    There is an interesting theory that the ring has not only will but also consciousness. And this consciousness calls itself Gollum. The name Gollum could be taken from the Old Norwegian language, in which there is the word gull (another form is goll), which means “gold, treasure, jewel”, and in the phrase fingr-gull also means “ring”.

    If you recall, three different characters (Isildur, Gollum and Bilbo) called the ring a charm, and here, at 1:54, Bilbo says "Golum." those. the influence of the ring is not just aspiration, it is conscious phrases and, even, behavior. The ring acts as a parasite on the one hand (the original appearance, a change in behavior is lost) and a symbiote on the other (increase in life expectancy, invisibility). I'm not sure about Gollum. but here, too, there is something to think about ... The main tactical decisions were made by Saruman, right up to the fall of Isengard. Also, Sauron had his own “voice”, an ordinary person, communicating the will of the dark lord and there is a king the sorcerer, the leader of the troops. Those. in a sense, Big Brother Sauron exists, but rather as a set of ideas.

    I could imagine Sauron as an alternative to SkyNet. AI, enclosed in a shell, but destroyed a long time ago. However, information about him is copied into the ring. Fortunately, there is no evidence in defense of this theory, so the theory is not about that.

    All the same Clark law

    Imagine, for a second, that Gandalf, Saruman, Sauron, Elves and many other supernatural beings are an overdeveloped civilization, terrestrial or alien. Using high-tech devices, they could impress the inhabitants of the earth.

    The film gives the impression that people in Middle-earth are quite advanced in crafts, but this is not so.

    Why do not Gandalv and Theoden go out into the open place in front of the doors, as I have said? Yes, I partially enriched the culture of “heroic” rohirrim, but it doesn’t come to glazed windows that can be opened !!! You might think we are in a hotel. (The "eastern windows" of the chamber, II 116, 119 [345], were only narrow, unglazed slots under the roof overhangs.)

    From a letter about the film adaptation of Zimmermann


    Those. in fact, metals could not have been studied in those days. Then mithril could turn out to be aluminum, and any durable alloy would seem indestructible to people. Even gold could be too hard for the people of that time, not to mention steel.



    What is especially interesting, at the end all the elves sail to Aman (read paradise), taking Frodo with them as a reward, you can get there only on an elven ship. So maybe Haman is not at all on earth?



    I have little evidence of this theory, it looks sloppy, and I haven’t thought much out yet. And yet, it seems to me that there are no particularly strong contradictions, given that the book was written by The Hobbit. Also in the process, I stumbled upon the book "The Last Ringworm"where, it seems, the events of the Lord are just being told, but without magic. Unfortunately, I did not manage to read the book, but I will be glad if those who read write in the comments.

    Tolkien himself, by the way, did not make a big difference between technology and magic. And did not like them regardless of the name.

    Technology and Magic Letters
    I can not stand Allegory - an allegory conscious and deliberate - and, however, all attempts to explain the essence of myth and fairy tales, if necessary, involve the language of allegory. (And, of course, the more “history” in history, the more easily allegorical interpretations apply to it; and the better an intentional allegory is made, the sooner it will be accepted simply as a story.) Be that as it may, in all this scribble {150} we are talking mainly about the Fall, Mortality and the Machine. The Fall is inevitable, and this motive arises in several forms. About Mortality, especially since it affects art and the craving for creativity (or rather secondary creativity), which seems to have no biological function and which is not related to the satisfaction of simple, ordinary biological needs, with which in our world she usually feuds. This desire is simultaneously combined with a passionate love for the primary, real world, and therefore full of a sense of mortality - and at the same time it is not saturated with the world. It contains all sorts of possibilities for the Fall. It can become possessive, clinging to things created “as their own”; the creator of secondary reality wants to be God and Lord of his personal work. He stubbornly rebels against the laws of the Creator - especially against mortality. Both that, and another (separately or together) without fail leads to thirst of the Power, and that the will worked faster and more efficiently, and from here to the Machine (or Magic). By the latter, I mean any use of external systems or devices (devices) instead of developing innate, internal talents and forces, or even just using these talents in the name of a distorted urge to subjugate: to plow the real world or to force someone else's will. The machine is our more obvious modern form, although it is more closely related to magic than is usually recognized
    The word "magic" I did not use quite consistently; the elven queen Galadriel is even forced to explain to the hobbits that they mistakenly use this word both to indicate the tricks of the Enemy and the actions of the elves.
    .

    From a letter to Milton Waldman



    If you could finally escape from the Royal Air Force, I would at least at least somehow calm down. And I hope that if the translation really takes place, it will actually be a translation and re-certification. I just can’t express to you the whole degree of my disgust for the third type of troops — which nevertheless can (and for me it is) be combined with admiration, appreciation, and above all pity for the young men who got into it. But the true villain is a military plane. And nothing can calm my grief over the fact that you, my most beloved man, are at least somewhat connected with him. My feelings are more or less comparable with those that Frodo would have experienced if he had discovered that some hobbits are learning to fly on Nazgul birds "in the name of liberation of the Shire."

    From a letter to Christopher Tolkien




    Heir

    If the previous theory you might not like, then this, I think, you will appreciate.



    It is known that King Elessar (Aragorn), founded his ruling house: Telkontar. It can be assumed that Telkontar House multiplied and flourished. The presence of elven blood was supposed to prolong life and make the descendants of Aragorn quite tenacious. Hundreds of thousands of years, and even millions, have changed the spelling, especially considering that the letter was forgotten and reinvented. Thus Telkontar turned into Telkon, and even later into Tolkien. Perhaps the other descendants of Aragorn were already trying to tell the parts of the book, so the Nibelungen Rings, The Story of King Arthur, Beowulf (and much more than the author was actually inspired) appeared. Why did only Tolkien tell the whole story? Simply, as a gifted philologist, he studied languages ​​for so long that he was able to translate the Scarlet book (written in several languages) and runes.

    Thus, Tolkien is one of the descendants of Aragorn and the keeper of the Scarlet Book.

    That's all. Sorry, if it turned out messy, I had to write with huge interruptions. In any case, thanks for reading. Write what you think and vote for the next topic for the article.

    Only registered users can participate in the survey. Please come in.

    Choosing a topic for the next article

    • 29.8% Blade Runner 355
    • 22.2% Separate opinion 265
    • 7.6% Destroyer 91
    • 25.8% Ghostbusters 308
    • 22.5% Robocop 268
    • 32% Mortal Kombat 382

    Also popular now: