Posted on 04/13/2005 12:20:59 PM PDT by propertius
Watching the first episode of the Lord of the Rings with some friends in Baghdad the other night, I was struck by its uncanny resemblance to the situation in Iraq.
It is deeply unfortunate that the New York Slimes and the Lame Stream Media had no presence in Middle Earth, for if their reporters had been embedded with Orks we would have a much more realistic picture of the neo-imperialist offensive against Mordor than that presented to us by Tolkien.
Is it not clear that Gandalf was something of a cowboy who was looking for any excuse to attack Mordor and topple Sauron Hussein? But I hardly think he made a credible case for war. Instead he relied on the dubious claim of Bilbo Chalabi about a ring that was purported to be a weapon of mass destruction. Yet there is no evidence to show that this ring was anything other than a plain piece of jewelry.
So he assembled a force of simple hobbits and set about creating a “Coalition of the Willing” from a motley collection of dwarves, elves and men ignoring plenty of warnings from many of the folks of Middle Earth.
He then set about trying to convince everyone that this was a battle of good against evil. Dubya Gandalf was clearly incapable of seeing things in Middle Earth in shades of grey.
Yet is the motivation that drove Gandalf not plain? All that volcanic activity in Mordor clearly suggests the country has vast quantities of OIL.
There is no doubt that Sauron was an unpleasant dictator and that his people suffered grievously. But that does not justify using violence to force regime change. It is clear that a joint policy of sanctions and negotiation should have been applied on Mordor and that Ring Inspectors should have be sent in to examine this piece of jewelry and see if Sauron had any more.
And even if Gandalf’s coalition succeeds in defeating Sauron and taking Mordor (don’t tell me – I haven’t seen the third episode) does he have a postwar reconstruction PLAN? Will he install a puppet regime of men and hobbits? Will he disband the orks – who would probably flock to an insurgency that will turn the Mordor adventure of Gandalf and his neocon Hobbit advisors into a Quagmire?
Mark my words the War in Mordor will be a new Vietnam. You read it first here, folks.
Oh good, glad you pointed that out. Otherwise I'd have to mention that this may have been funny 16 months ago when the topic was actually relevant. Now, it sounds about as dated as telling Watergate jokes.
There's a tough audience around here, but I found your piece amusing.
This is funny too:
http://mcsweeneys.net/links/ringcommentary/
Note it's part 4/4; links to first 3 are indicated on the site.
Very creative piece.
Hollywood could use you.
The LOR movie and books are great entertainment, but can somebody explain this. Why didn't the fellowship just mount the eagles and fly in over Mount Doom and drop the ring in without all the melodrama? Surely they could have got there before the Nazgul assembled and even if the Nazgul had somehow timely showed up couldn't the eagles, gandalf, aragorn et al kicked their ass?
Was this meant to be sarcasm about that comment Jimmy Carter made? Or was that Jimmy Carter comment just a parody?
The Carter comment about LOTR seemed like a joke... I wasn't sure if it was true or not. Can't seem to find it on FR now.
Ping
The brothers have to deliver the money (ring) to the county clerk to pay the taxes (Mount Doom) before the orphanage (Middle Earth) is destroyed. Along the way they meet a lot of resistance from the Orcs of Saruman (Nazis & Country/Western singers) and the Orcs of Mordor (all the LE agencies in Illinois). Not to mention Princess Leiea with a rocket launcher. (Gollum?)
Because Gandalf couldn't get the eagles to help out except to save Frodo. Besides, you have to go into a tunnel to get to Mount Doom, I don't think you can just drop it from the sky.
Good post. I agree - but don't tell Viggo or Ian (it may ruin their left-wing illusions.)
By the way, LOTR was great, but ROTK is even better. IMHO
I give up. What was the word? Motley?
LOTR is an allegory for the first two world wars. The coming utility of air power was not obvious in the 1930's when the series was started. Could he have changed it before publication? sure, but why? It was not in the script. It is inappropriate for the lead character to take a short cut. Where is the drama in that. LOTR the condensed version. Every thing is the same up until Gandalf positively identifies the Ring. Enter Eagles, end story.
Any chance of one of Liv Tyler?
...and their painting of Osama Bin Gollum as some sort of "boogey man" was just a ruse, everyone knows the GFEE was behind the terror attacks on the Shire.
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.