|
So you're saying in a certain sense Fatty Bolger is the chosen of Ulmo
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 00:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 11:48 |
|
|
Blood Boils posted:So you're saying in a certain sense Fatty Bolger is the chosen of Ulmo Ulmo was the one Vala who was in favor of immediate intervention, so probably not.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 00:34
|
|
|
One interpretation that I did like was by someone lecturing about Tolkien on youtube (either Ted Sherman or a southern theology guy), that "Aragorn has the right to the throne because he's got the right blood and the right line" is to read it wrong. The remnants of Arthedain decided to not rebuild their kingdom after Arvedui, instead they became the Rangers and focused on protecting their people and to keep going a hope for a better future. Aragorn comes from this heritage, where doing the right thing is more important than having a crown. He deserves to be king, because he is kingly, wise and kind, not because he has the right to the crown through being the heir of Elendil. Tolkien's world is full of people with Numenorian blood who make the world worse, and blood alone won't make you a better person, even if you might live longer and be taller.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 18:50
|
|
|
Kemper Boyd posted:One interpretation that I did like was by someone lecturing about Tolkien on youtube (either Ted Sherman or a southern theology guy), that "Aragorn has the right to the throne because he's got the right blood and the right line" is to read it wrong. We've discussed this other angle before but it intersects too - there's a case to make that the Numenorians are a cold satire of eugenics and the Aryan supremecy of the 1930s, because Aragorn's kindness, wisdom, courage, and sense of justice is more or less the inverse of fascist cruelty and destruction (ie you muppets aren't any master race - if there were a master race this is what they would look like). I have no doubt that Tolkien in the most idealistic sense was a monarchist, but when I read Aragorn and the question of the return of the king of Gondor it makes me wonder if he thought that there were any proper kings left in the world.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 19:02
|
|
|
Kemper Boyd posted:One interpretation that I did like was by someone lecturing about Tolkien on youtube (either Ted Sherman or a southern theology guy), that "Aragorn has the right to the throne because he's got the right blood and the right line" is to read it wrong. I think he has the right to the throne because of his bloodline and the ability to take it because he is kingly, wise and kind. The right possess something matter's LOTR. I think Aragorn's struggle with Sauron in the Palantir would have gone differently if he didn't have the right to own and use it. Gandalf says that Frodo suffers a lot less from possessing the ring than he would have otherwise, because it's legitimately given to him so he a right to it, in a way. But the events leading up to Aragorn taking the throne require a lot of good luck which I think pretty always points to the involvement of the Valar or Iluvatar, who presumably helped him become kings because he was worthy of it. Faramir was also kingly, wise and kind but he didn't have any desire to be king because he knew he didn't have the right. So I think a good king needs to be worthy of kingship but also have the right to it. Though, to switch to a different book, Farmer Giles had no right to be king but just set himself up as one and it goes fine. So I'd be interested in how Tolkien reconciled that. Maybe it's because Giles founded a new kingdom so he was ok, but if he had got greedy and usurped someone else's kingdom it wouldn't have turned out so well.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 20:29
|
|
|
I think the major factor is Tolkien's own weird brand of politics: he could be described even as an anarcho-monarchist (his idealized societies basically run themselves, after all). I think it's not an accident Gondor's and Arnor's history are full of unfit rulers who had good claims on the crown: while Tolkien was a monarchist, he also had high standards for rulers. Someone might say unreasonably so. Tolkien did also comment somewhere in his letters that he is very aware of the Numenorian bloodline thing not being a real thing and poo poo like it doesn't exist in real life. There's also Eomer, a guy who wasn't ever supposed to be a king, never really aspired to be one, but ended up as one because all other claimants were dead, and Eowyn was a woman. And Eomer turns out to be a pretty standup guy over the course of the story, and is fit for the kingship.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 21:39
|
|
|
CommonShore posted:We've discussed this other angle before but it intersects too - there's a case to make that the Numenorians are a cold satire of eugenics and the Aryan supremecy of the 1930s, because Aragorn's kindness, wisdom, courage, and sense of justice is more or less the inverse of fascist cruelty and destruction (ie you muppets aren't any master race - if there were a master race this is what they would look like). I have no doubt that Tolkien in the most idealistic sense was a monarchist, but when I read Aragorn and the question of the return of the king of Gondor it makes me wonder if he thought that there were any proper kings left in the world. It's also informed by the novel's thematic throughline of lust for power as fundamentally destructive. It doesn't go as far as the movies and book Aragorn is very matter of fact about how he is indeed the King and will press his claim when the time is right, but it was also probably important to Tolkien that the guy who does end up assuming supreme power does so in a way as unimpeachable as he could write it while still telling a classic "rightful king returns" story.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 21:47
|
|
|
OctaviusBeaver posted:Though, to switch to a different book, Farmer Giles had no right to be king but just set himself up as one and it goes fine. So I'd be interested in how Tolkien reconciled that. Maybe it's because Giles founded a new kingdom so he was ok, but if he had got greedy and usurped someone else's kingdom it wouldn't have turned out so well. I think Giles just followed the Old English tradition of random dudes becoming king on the strength of their deeds (unwilling or not). Although he didn’t do the other common thing, declaring he descended from Woden or some other god.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 22:03
|
|
|
Kemper Boyd posted:I think the major factor is Tolkien's own weird brand of politics: he could be described even as an anarcho-monarchist (his idealized societies basically run themselves, after all). I think it's not an accident Gondor's and Arnor's history are full of unfit rulers who had good claims on the crown: while Tolkien was a monarchist, he also had high standards for rulers. Someone might say unreasonably so. Tolkien did also comment somewhere in his letters that he is very aware of the Numenorian bloodline thing not being a real thing and poo poo like it doesn't exist in real life. tolkien's politics are really weird to us today, but he really was part of one of the dominant tendencies of intellectual Conservativism; anti-modernist, skeptical of the corrosive alienating effect of unbridled technological progress, believing in social harmony and hierarchy (with some flexibility, mutually obligatory and within reason), deeply religious and sentimentally humanist. these were the people thatcher wiped out when she became leader of the Conservative party, and they've since been phased almost totally out of western politics outside of a few weird cranks (the most obvious one would be peter hitchens, but hitchens is cantankerous and egotistical in a way tolkien doesn't appear to have been) so it's no wonder it seems so bizarre to us now more than forty years after their final defeat. however, they were a prominent strain of political thinking for centuries in britain and to a lesser extent on the continent.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2023 00:44
|
|
|
Peter Hitchens is not a fan of pipeweed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2023 00:49
|
|
|
Yeah one presumes that if Aragorn had fallen Faramir would have probably also been a good and wise leader of Gondor - but he probably would have said he was the Steward, not the King.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2023 00:49
|
|
|
I really love everything about the “Stewards” of Gondor situation. It illustrates in one easy image how the kingdom has been laid low by history, they aren’t even deserving of a king, but the seat remains open for the rightful king to return. Are there any real world parallels to the empty king seat? The “steward” that is a king in all but name, but doesn’t hold the older and more prestigious title?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 17:48
|
|
|
Mike N Eich posted:I really love everything about the “Stewards” of Gondor situation. It illustrates in one easy image how the kingdom has been laid low by history, they aren’t even deserving of a king, but the seat remains open for the rightful king to return. Princeps
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 17:54
|
|
|
Mike N Eich posted:I really love everything about the “Stewards” of Gondor situation. It illustrates in one easy image how the kingdom has been laid low by history, they aren’t even deserving of a king, but the seat remains open for the rightful king to return. Prime ministers in commonwealth countries are not heads of state. Somewhat analogous
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 17:56
|
|
|
Iirc in the earlier drafts of lotr, Aragorn had 0 claim to Gondor and was going there because the Gondorians were doing an open casting call for a King.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 17:57
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Iirc in the earlier drafts of lotr, Aragorn had 0 claim to Gondor and was going there because the Gondorians were doing an open casting call for a King.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 18:10
|
|
|
I mean, he doesn't have a claim to the throne of Gondor. He has a claim to the throne of Arnor. Its roughly analogous to some descendant of Henry Tudor applying to be King of Canada.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 18:16
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Iirc in the earlier drafts of lotr, Aragorn had 0 claim to Gondor and was going there because the Gondorians were doing an open casting call for a King. Kind of true in that the “ranger” character they pick up in Bree was not always Elendil’s heir. But at that stage he wasn’t trying to go off to Gondor or anything either. Aragorn (so named) was always considered to be descended from Elendil—this is the crucial point that “defines” him if you like, and what caused Tolkien to abandon the original draft character whose role he fills, the wooden-shoed hobbit rascal Trotter. basically he gave Trotter a shot and he has a personality and everything (you can tell because a lot of the time it survives intact to the published Aragorn), but he was unable to come up with a backstory for the character that satisfied him. It’s kind of funny, Christopher keeps pointing out that he’ll write stuff like “who is Trotter???” in the margins. The idea of Gondor being ruled by a steward and wanting a king comes in a bit later than this. In the earliest notes for the character (when we still have hobbit Trotter rather than the west-man Aragorn), Boromir is “the son of the King of Ond.” At one point after Trotter becomes Aragorn, there was a clear element of dynastic change to the plot, with Aragorn telling a tale at the Council of Elrond of how some ancestor of his “Valandur” was refused re-entrance to the city by its populace and therefore broke his own sword before leaving in a royal huff! However, from the moment the character of Denethor is named, he is “Lord Denethor” not “King Denethor”, and when the political history of Gondor (by now no longer Ond) is discussed in the Faramir chapters, we already get the familiar story of the stewards ruling for the king who never came back (here named, rather appropriately, Elessar). skasion fucked around with this message at 20:27 on Feb 14, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 18:18
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:I mean, he doesn't have a claim to the throne of Gondor. He has a claim to the throne of Arnor. Its roughly analogous to some descendant of Henry Tudor applying to be King of Canada. Yeah but that is the whole point of "Isildur's heir" as he has the only remaining valid claim to either throne since the lines meet with Elendil. Far less credible claims to thrones have worked throughout history. And to elaborate on the princeps thing, it really is the only example off the top of my head wherein the fiction was maintained for an extended period. For ~300 years Rome persisted in maintaining a title for their hereditary absolute ruler that was enshrined in place by the gods as anything other than "King." Even after the term Princeps was retired in favor of Dominus, there was still a separation between that and "King" for a long time, though it was more that "Us Romans do it even better than the mere Kings of other places!"
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 18:26
|
|
|
Zopotantor posted:I think Giles just followed the Old English tradition of random dudes becoming king on the strength of their deeds (unwilling or not). Although he didn’t do the other common thing, declaring he descended from Woden or some other god. Well, he had a dragon. Divine ancestry would have been a bit superfluous.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 18:27
|
|
|
Principate is a decent analogy. There were higher titles (Rex, dictator) but weren’t used
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 18:30
|
|
|
Rex would get you killed for a long time even after the Principate was established. Dictator i think was included in the long rear end list of titles Augustus and subsequent emperors claimed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 18:37
|
|
|
Julius Caesar used it but Augustus did not
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 18:40
|
|
|
ah yeah, he just assumed every other drat one while refusing that one to be all "see im totally NOT king guys"
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 18:47
|
|
|
The dictatorship was abolished by Antonius in the same blitz of post-assassination legislation that confirmed everything Caesar did was legal but also it was ok for him to be murdered. So there was no dictatorship for the young not-yet-Augustus to assume—not that he couldn’t have changed that by force at one time or another, had he chosen to. Instead his rise to power was conducted under the newfangled/bullshit official title of one of the three “commissioners for the restoration of the republic”. At one point later in his career, once he was effectively monarch, Augustus was offered the dictatorship anyhow so he could deal with the grain shortages resulting from a couple of natural disasters. He declined the office (it was never successfully revived) but paid for the grain anyway. Which is only good politics (and he was careful to brag about the fact in his Res Gestae). If you have proconsular imperium, tribunician power, consulship whenever you feel like it, etc., you probably don’t need one more title telling everyone what a boss you are.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 19:15
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:ah yeah, he just assumed every other drat one while refusing that one to be all "see im totally NOT king guys" My favorite remains "proconsular authority" for whatever province he happened to be standing in. It's not that he was always a consul, but that he had the level of military authority that was for a consul.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 19:15
|
|
|
Runcible Cat posted:Well, he had a dragon. Divine ancestry would have been a bit superfluous. drat, now I have the image of Giles as Vimes from the Discworld stuck in my head. "I have a dragon and I’m not afraid to use it!"
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 20:30
|
|
|
I love the idea of Tolkien sitting in his cottage going Who is Trotter ???” After like the 3rd draft
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 21:13
|
|
|
My last LOTR read I was kind of surprised that there was business about Aragorn making his claim and proving to people that he should be the king and whatnot. Healing people with Athelas, then staying out of the city because he doesn't have a right to be there yet, all that. It doesn't really stick in memory and it makes total sense to cut it out of adaptations, but Tolkien was trying to think it all through rather than have a dude show up and everyone go, his great great grandad was the right guy so, yay, a king. Which, uh, the TV show kinda did?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 22:02
|
|
|
Yeah Aragorns big claim was saving Minas Tirith with the liberated prisoners of Umbar, I figured. Also I think Faramir recognized him as the claimant rather than making a play.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 23:28
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Yeah Aragorns big claim was saving Minas Tirith with the liberated prisoners of Umbar, I figured. Also I think Faramir recognized him as the claimant rather than making a play. Well there was also the whole ‘saving Faramir’s life twice, once via Gandalf and once via Athelas, along with the woman who would become his wife’s life.’ By the time he woke up he was fully on Team Aragorn.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2023 06:23
|
|
|
Personally I do enjoy that the reason why Gondor doesn't have a king, is that their last one was a gigantic bro moron.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2023 07:21
|
|
|
Oracle posted:Well there was also the whole ‘saving Faramir’s life twice, once via Gandalf and once via Athelas, along with the woman who would become his wife’s life.’ By the time he woke up he was fully on Team Aragorn.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2023 07:51
|
|
|
Gondor conspiracy theorists noticing that the son that should have inherited the Steward role supposedly died while Aragorn was with him.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2023 09:35
|
|
|
YaketySass posted:Gondor conspiracy theorists noticing that the son that should have inherited the Steward role supposedly died while Aragorn was with him. "Boromir's final words he long kept secret" 
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2023 10:22
|
|
|
euphronius posted:I love the idea of Tolkien sitting in his cottage going Who is Trotter ???” After like the 3rd draft For twelve years you've been asking "Who is Trotter?" This is Trotter speaking. I'm the man who's taken away your victims and thus destroyed your world. You've heard it said that this is an age of moral crisis and that Man's sins are destroying the world. But your chief virtue has been sacrifice, and you've demanded more sacrifices at every disaster. You've sacrificed justice to mercy and happiness to duty. So why should you be afraid of the world around you?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2023 10:23
|
|
|
Tulkas Shrugged
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2023 11:03
|
|
|
Kemper Boyd posted:Personally I do enjoy that the reason why Gondor doesn't have a king, is that their last one was a gigantic bro moron. Eh... in the book he doesn't go all the way up to Doom and then back out which makes him look a lot more chumpish, it's a quick discussion on the battlefield between him Elrond and... guy whose name I don't remember right now... because the other people had been killed by Sauron. He took the ring as weregeld, basically a trophy/payment for the death of his brother and father. So there was pride in taking the ring, but also grief influencing things. He tried to master it during the year he worked to heal his kingdom and prepare to go claim his father's kingdom, but (we're getting into Unfinished Tales here) had wisdom to know it couldn't be done and was going to seek Elrond's council again when they were ambushed, using it only as a last resort when everyone else trying to escape had been killed. The Stewards are because Isildur said "you're in charge until I get back, look after the place for me," he never came back, and they took that promise seriously.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2023 21:37
|
|
|
Nah there’s 2000 years of kings in Gondor after Isildur leaves. The last king of Gondor was a guy who got a message from the Witch King of Angmar literally saying “1v1 me bro” and thought it would be a good idea
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2023 21:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 11:48 |
|
|
skasion posted:Nah there’s 2000 years of kings in Gondor after Isildur leaves. The last king of Gondor was a guy who got a message from the Witch King of Angmar literally saying “1v1 me bro” and thought it would be a good idea Well shoot, I got all mixed up then. Sorry.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2023 22:12
|
|