Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What's the appeal? Reconsidering "The Lord of the Rings"
Saint Louis Dispatch ^ | 12/13/2003 | Sarah Bryan Miller

Posted on 12/13/2003 12:49:52 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last
OK, LOTR FReeper fans - LET 'ER RIP!!
1 posted on 12/13/2003 12:49:53 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
Ms. Miller would be better off criticising Mona Lisa Smile starring the vapid and GOP bashing Julia "Big Mouth" (literally) Roberts.
2 posted on 12/13/2003 12:53:11 PM PST by Chris Tucker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
Whoo-boy, another 1,000+ thread.
3 posted on 12/13/2003 12:54:40 PM PST by ServesURight (FReecerely Yours,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
I'll be the first Freeper to go out on a limb and admit I don't like the LOTR movies. Perhaps I'd enjoy the books, but to me, the movies are a great example of over dramatic nonsense.
4 posted on 12/13/2003 12:57:12 PM PST by LanPB01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
Gollum is Carville!

"Trixey . . they took the election, my precious"

5 posted on 12/13/2003 12:57:39 PM PST by ChadGore (No blood for ratings! This means YOU AOL-Time-Warner-Turner-CNN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChadGore
BUMP!
6 posted on 12/13/2003 1:02:42 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: LanPB01
The books are definitely better... That goes for any great book made into a movie...

But the movies are good too. They are epics... the visual imagery is incredible... You got to give them credit for that at least. Sure the stories aren't 100% matched but take it for what its worth... a good show.
7 posted on 12/13/2003 1:05:14 PM PST by nuffsenuff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
There is even a theology for Middle Earth; it seems to be basically Zoroastrian in nature

*Pseudo-Intellectual Who's Heard A New Word But Doesn't Know What It Means Alert*

First of all, the proper word for the faith is "Zarathustra".  "Zoroaster" is a Greek corruption.  Secondly, Zarathustrianism is a dualistic theology.  Tolkien's theological myth structure is monotheistic - very Catholic, in fact.

8 posted on 12/13/2003 1:05:29 PM PST by Psycho_Bunny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ecurbh; HairOfTheDog
Wanna ping the ringers?
9 posted on 12/13/2003 1:05:45 PM PST by Texas2step
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 2Jedismom; 300winmag; Alkhin; Alouette; ambrose; Anitius Severinus Boethius; artios; AUsome Joy; ...

Ring Ping!!
There and Back Again: The Journeys of Flat Frodo

Anyone wishing to be added to or removed from the Ring-Ping list, please don't hesitate to let me know.

10 posted on 12/13/2003 1:10:05 PM PST by ecurbh (Fire futon torpedo!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
OK, LOTR FReeper fans - LET 'ER RIP!!

I would, if I knew what he ~said~!

11 posted on 12/13/2003 1:13:36 PM PST by HairOfTheDog (Please don't break the plates!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Psycho_Bunny
...Zarathustrianism is a dualistic theology. Tolkien's theological myth structure is monotheistic...

Not that I have any good reason to defend these misguided pagans, but having met a few "(east) Indian-American" Zoroastrians recently, I read this about them:

"Zoroastrianism is the ancient religion of Persia. It was founded about 3500 years ago by the prophet Zarathushtra. Arising out of the polytheistic traditions of ancient India and Iran, he was one of the first monotheists in human history. Zarathushtra preached that there was one God, whom he called Ahura Mazda. Ahura means 'Lord,' and Mazda means 'Wise,' so Zoroastrians call God the 'Wise Lord.' "

Of course, Tolkien's Catholic theological myth structure is "True Myth".

12 posted on 12/13/2003 2:02:23 PM PST by condi2008 (Pro Libertate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: condi2008
The idea of Zarathustrian thought being Monotheistic is actually a very common error.

There are two gods.  The "Good Spirit" is Ahura Mazda and the "Evil Spirit" is Angra Mainyu.  Their relationship to one another is very similar to Yin and Yang.

The portions of the Avesta of Zarathustra which survived Islam's attempt to wipe from the face of the Earth are quite interesting reading.  Also - though often considered apocrypha - the Desatir is very beautiful.  I suggest them both.

13 posted on 12/13/2003 2:33:06 PM PST by Psycho_Bunny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
Tolkien's high elves are above human nature

Presumably the author means elves are incapable of evil. If so, she really ought to reread the Silmarillion. Lots of elves do evil things in it.

14 posted on 12/13/2003 8:41:48 PM PST by Restorer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
It seems like she almost answered her own question. Then didn't.

Much of the appeal of LOTR is as the author states: Tolkien's backdrop is so rich in detail and told so beautifully, that its almost as much fun to read as the story itself. In fact, the story grows richer in the telling when you finally mesh the bits and details that Tolkien offers when the trilogy is re-read.

Imagine, for example, a modern story where the principals must travel through Rome to perform a duty. Though the Colesium and other ruins are not in themselves a part of the story being told, the antecedents of the people that built them are now playing out their story among them. And the things that those people who built Rome did in the past DO have an impact on the decisions that our principals must make in the present.

I marvel that all the wonderful tales that Tolkien wanted to share in his own Silmarillion still make their way into becoming a part of the fabric that make Lord of the Rings so captivating.

15 posted on 12/13/2003 10:11:17 PM PST by BradyLS (DO NOT FEED THE BEARS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Restorer
"Tolkien's high elves are above human nature..."

Presumably the author means elves are incapable of evil. If so, she really ought to reread the Silmarillion. Lots of elves do evil things in it.

Probably one of the most unfortunate things about the current Rings phenomenon is the multiude of ignorant critics who first rushed to bash it (prior to and during the early run of the first film) and are now falling all over themselves to praise it (now that two wildly successful films ahve been released). It seems that most have read them primarily to check off the plot points as they appear-- or don't-- in the movies. I've yet to read a critique of the series that begins, "I enjoyed (or hated) the movies, but when I finally read the books..."

16 posted on 12/13/2003 10:26:48 PM PST by BradyLS (DO NOT FEED THE BEARS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ChadGore
Perfect!
17 posted on 12/15/2003 5:46:39 PM PST by BenLurkin (Socialism is Slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Psycho_Bunny
The idea of Zarathustrian thought being Monotheistic is actually a very common error.

There are two gods. The "Good Spirit" is Ahura Mazda and the "Evil Spirit" is Angra Mainyu. Their relationship to one another is very similar to Yin and Yang.

You are simply playing word games.

The point is Zarathustrians only worship one god, so they are monotheists.

You could just as easily say that there are two "gods" in Christianity: "God" and the Devil. Or three "good gods": Father, Son and Holy Ghost. Or many, many gods if you define angels and saints as "gods", and why not, since they manifest most of the attributes of gods?

All monotheists did (immitating Zoroaster/Zarathustra) was to condemn all the old gods as "devils" and to devote all their devotion to a new "good" god supposedly in charge of everything.

But even the strictest monotheism is dualist in admitting a power of evil, either equal or inferior in power to that of good, but god-like none the less. And the good and evil gods have lots of helpers, angels and demons, so what we have here is still the same old polytheism under a new name, with all the credit going to the "good god" who is supposed to be running the show.

Conversely, all polytheists admit to a greater unifying power that could be called "god" and is therefore partly monotheistic in nature. Polytheists tend not to worship "jealous" gods, naturally. Worship a jealous god, and you end up being a monotheist.

Christianity itself is simply a renamed/repurposed Zoroastrianism, by way of Mithraism and messianic Judaism (such as the Essenes and other no longer extant Jewish groups). Much of Christian ritual and belief is virtually identical to much older Mithraism and Zoroastrianism, and its eschatology and implicit dualism, though coming to Christianity through the half-way house of messianic Judaism, is straight from Persia, and is unadulterated Zorastrianism in its core assumptions.

18 posted on 12/17/2003 10:01:00 PM PST by Vast Buffalo Wing Conspiracy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Vast Buffalo Wing Conspiracy
You are correct to the extent that Zarathustrians worship only one of the two gods but the exclusion of the one does not negate its equality to the other in the faith structure.  I would consider Judaism and Christianity the only living monotheistic religions: the power of the One God is supreme to all.  Zarathustians are dualists: the power of the two gods are equal.  There is no higher form than the two of them.
19 posted on 12/17/2003 10:55:11 PM PST by Psycho_Bunny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Psycho_Bunny
blah blah blah blah

Zoro worshippers?? I thought we were talking about the movies..er books? =o)

20 posted on 12/17/2003 11:04:04 PM PST by GeronL (Saddam is out of the hole and into the quagmire!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson