Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

W. H. Auden’s 1954 review of The Fellowship of the Ring

lithub.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 193 posts

Re: W. H. Auden’s 1954 review of The Fellowship of the Ring

#141

Post by watwut »

OfSanguineFire wrote: post #133
watwut wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Young people’s contempt for the now-elderly generation (they’re Boomers) has reached incredible heights. Citations needed, really. While young people do not look at old with awe or submissively, claim that they somehow uniquely or unusually look down at us seems wrong to me. And also, the little that exists seems to me more of reactive to hostility some in older generation seems to have quite openly.

> Citations needed, really. Here you go.[0][1] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OK_boomer [1] https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/baby-boome...

I do not think this proves that "Young people’s contempt for the now-elderly generation (they’re Boomers) has reached incredible heights." Like at all. Especially since it popularity was an actual response to members of older generation bashing younger one. As in, it was literal response to that and relatively rarely used outside of context of the older people complaining about younger ones.

I do not see younger generation rejecting everything that comes from older people, definitely not much more then what our generations or the one before seemed to do.

Re: W. H. Auden’s 1954 review of The Fellowship of the Ring

#142

Post by morelisp »

croes wrote: post #139
morelisp wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you can criticize "deus ex machina" as a plot device when it's, from go, literally "ex deus" - Gandalf is on a mission (/ missions) from god, and Eru's not gonna let him get off so easily.

Just because it's literally ex deus doesn't make it less ex deus. Ex deus is cheap

The more critical part is "from go" - deus ex machina is considered bad because it's a narrative rupture. In a story of wars openly involving divine beings, there's no such discontinuity. It is also usually associated with stories that wrap up a bit too tidily, and that's also not the case in LotR.

Gandalf dies 2/6 of the way through the story and comes back 3/6 of the way through. His death may be the climax of the first two books, but his return is merely a plot beat and many of the remaining problems have yet to even be revealed, let alone solved.

Re: W. H. Auden’s 1954 review of The Fellowship of the Ring

#143

Post by clbrmbr »

wrp wrote: post #129
wolverine876 wrote: post #98

Tolkien wrote the essential story - for our time : An evil force works not by open destruction, but through lies to cause despair and corruption. The good people of the world allow themselves to be influenced by it; they embrace despair and abandon goodness and all resistance; or they are corrupted and even help the enemy. The primary actor is a wise old man who travels around, not using great powers, but waking them…

Well...I've read some intellectual biographies of Tolkien, and a common complaint is that it's hard to pin down his views on much of anything outside of literature. He wasn't a systematic thinker, but tended to write what sounded good at the moment without much regard for consistency with what had been written before. He had to do a lot of later editing to remove logical conflicts in his stories. Remember that the im…

> positing a coherent ideological message in his story is a bit of a stretch. Also, Tolkien's wasn't one to focus much on real world social and political issues.

Maybe this is why I love LoTR so much. It’s just a story!

Re: W. H. Auden’s 1954 review of The Fellowship of the Ring

#144

Post by OfSanguineFire »

watwut wrote: post #141
OfSanguineFire wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Citations needed, really. Here you go.[0][1] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OK_boomer [1] https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/baby-boome...

I do not think this proves that "Young people’s contempt for the now-elderly generation (they’re Boomers) has reached incredible heights." Like at all. Especially since it popularity was an actual response to members of older generation bashing younger one. As in, it was literal response to that and relatively rarely used outside of context of the older people complaining about younger ones. I do not see younger gene…

Your English and your post history suggests that you are not from the Anglophone world. The generational tension I was talking about is a feature of it, I do not claim that it exists in the same way elsewhere.

Re: W. H. Auden’s 1954 review of The Fellowship of the Ring

#145

Post by RugnirViking »

wrp wrote: post #129
wolverine876 wrote: post #98

Tolkien wrote the essential story - for our time : An evil force works not by open destruction, but through lies to cause despair and corruption. The good people of the world allow themselves to be influenced by it; they embrace despair and abandon goodness and all resistance; or they are corrupted and even help the enemy. The primary actor is a wise old man who travels around, not using great powers, but waking them…

Well...I've read some intellectual biographies of Tolkien, and a common complaint is that it's hard to pin down his views on much of anything outside of literature. He wasn't a systematic thinker, but tended to write what sounded good at the moment without much regard for consistency with what had been written before. He had to do a lot of later editing to remove logical conflicts in his stories. Remember that the im…

he famously got quite annoyed by people asking him about metaphors or whatever.

"I cordially dislike allegory in all its manifestations, and always have done so since I grew old and wary enough to detect its presence."

He very much did not want to talk about it and presumably intentionally avoided writing it.

Re: W. H. Auden’s 1954 review of The Fellowship of the Ring

#146

Post by croes »

morelisp wrote: post #140
croes wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tricking the reader to think he died to let him return more powerful when he is needed. That's comic book logic. Boromir's death was far better plotwise.

He doesn't return more powerful, he returns with a different mandate. He is no more or less powerful as he was before, rather he is "licensed" by Eru to reveal more of it as Saruman has abdicated that role, and Gandalf had been the only faithful Istari of the five - dying being a critical part of that.

According to Tolkien he is more powerful

>What Gandalf did was what the Authority wished. The "wizards" were failures as they had been and needed enhancement to match the gravity of the crisis. Gandalf's sacrifice was accepted so he was returned in an enhanced state (more power and wisdom). The old Gandalf could not have dealt with Théoden or Saruman as he was able after his enhancement

https://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Letter_156

Re: W. H. Auden’s 1954 review of The Fellowship of the Ring

#147

Post by pjbster »

ajkjk wrote: post #72
pjbster wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have two different major gripes. First, the power of the ring is not put into a proper context and, second, the film's exposition ruined the role of Gandalf and undermined the otherworldliness of Galadriel. Let's put the ring into context. Imagine you were walking along and you came across an ordinary looking smartphone. Amazingly it works and you can make calls on it. Anywhere in the world. For free! That's not ba…

"Drivel" seems like a strong word. All that stuff works pretty well, despite how much it annoyed you.

Possibly. However, after further reflection, I am unable to come up with a scene with redeeming dialogue in any of the films.

Obvs. my take is offbeat because the films were a massive commercial success and the Academy showered them with awards.

Re: W. H. Auden’s 1954 review of The Fellowship of the Ring

#149

Post by jamincan »

tremon wrote: post #128
tom_ wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I was a teenager, my mum suggested I read Lord of the Rings. Or perhaps it was The Hobbit. Whatever. There were some guys on horses, and maybe a spider. That's all I remember. It was boring as fuck, and I gave up at about page 70,000 - or so it felt like. I was still young enough that I hadn't realised that you could just give up at page 2 if you wanted. Anyway, dear reader, I guess my point is: if you hate this…

I never could get past the first chapter of The Hobbit. An Unexpected Party just drones on and on. The Lord Of The Rings also had its long slow introduction, but at least it wasn't as tedious as The Hobbit's.

You might enjoy the comic version of The Hobbit by David Wenzel more than Tolkien's original. It was how I was introduced to Tolkien, and was, frankly, the high-point of Tolkien for me personally.

Re: W. H. Auden’s 1954 review of The Fellowship of the Ring

#150

Post by snowwrestler »

morelisp wrote: post #117
jl6 wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, while the great old powers were waging fruitless war, it was the little people who struck the decisive blow, so perhaps it’s a lesson for our time of how both bottom-up and top-down can collaborate.

This is a profound misreading; royal birthright, aristocracy, and the ruling class are not taken to task or shown to be "fruitless" at all in Tolkien, and while today we may read Frodo as "the common man" his contemporary presentation is firmly (pastoralist and conservative English) upper middle class. The Baggins are landed gentry, not "the little people".

Sam is presented as British working class, and is arguably the hero of that part of the story. He is the least corrupted by the ring, despite carrying it and using it. And the Mordor chapters in Return of the King are all written from Sam’s perspective.

I agree that ruling classes are not taken to task; in fact they are celebrated throughout the books. On the other hand, the wise and powerful rulers cannot win on their own. Only the secret mission of Sam and Frodo could achieve victory.

Post reply on HN