# Human Traits in Middle Earth Races



## Lady_of_Gondor (May 23, 2002)

I was recently thinking about Tolkien's characters (mainly the different races). I believe that in a way each race has something uniquely human about it, and collectively their traits make up the many traits that humans posess. I realize I may have lost you here, so allow me to explain.
Elves are Wise, and Dwarves are greedy. Hobbits are humble, and Men seek glory. If you put these main character traits together, you get something uniquely human. I realize that Tolkien probably had no intention of this and I am probably grabbing a straws here, but it was something that just occured to me and I needed all of your opinions on the matter. Do you think that in creating a fantasy novel to escape everyday human life, that Tolkien actually created something strikingly human? 
I don't believe that I have expressed my point as well as I would like, but Im sure many of you will understand the jist of what I am trying to say.
Pleas give me feedback


----------



## Elu Thingol (May 23, 2002)

Of course Tolkien's characters are based on human traits! That is all he knows he can't base them on alien triats there aren't any. He can't create a characters that have personalities different from a human because all he knows are human personality characteristics. Do you understand what I mean?


----------



## Legolam (May 24, 2002)

I think human traits in an alien world are what makes fantasy so compelling to read. People read fantasy mainly to escape, and making the characters easy to identify with lets you feel in your head what they are feeling, letting you escape more easily. I agree with Lady_of_Gondor that Tolkien has done this with the different races, but I think it was a deliberate ploy by a master storyteller.


----------



## Anarchist (May 24, 2002)

I haven't met any aliens so far, but I believe that these characteristics belong to any "intellectual" being. They are not strictly human.


----------



## Lantarion (May 24, 2002)

Just to make sure; 'alien' can mean both an extraterrestrial life-form or it can be an adjective meaning 'different, outside-'. 
I think Tlkien didn't do this deliberately, but as was said he had no idea what any *intelligent* animal was like except humans. Perhaps (in fact, definately) there are life-forms in this universe or a parallel one that are a lot like us human beings (a term which can be related to any being which has the same traits as 'Men'). 
Wow, not much off topic but a bit.


----------



## Elu Thingol (May 24, 2002)

I'm only saying that the only thing that could be traits of all races are human triats because those are the only ones Tolkien knows.


----------



## DRavisher (May 24, 2002)

And perhaps the only ones that exist. Anyway it is clear that the reason for the races having human like traits is because no other traits are imaginable.


----------



## Tyaronumen (May 24, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Anarchist _
> *I haven't met any aliens so far, but I believe that these characteristics belong to any "intellectual" being. They are not strictly human. *



Hmmm -- upon what do you base this belief, given that your breadth of experience with aliens is just as deep as the rest of ours...?


----------



## Tyaronumen (May 24, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Mithrandir2003 _
> *I'm only saying that the only thing that could be traits of all races are human triats because those are the only ones Tolkien knows. *



Tolkien acknowledges himself that there could never be stories written about the Elves, Dwarves, Orcs, etc. from a personal perspective because there was no way for Tolkien, as a human, to understand and relate to us what these alien beings are feeling, thinking, etc. Their motivations and primal drives are different...

This is in letter 200-something... before 220 I think.


----------



## Tyaronumen (May 24, 2002)

> _Originally posted by DRavisher _
> *And perhaps the only ones that exist. Anyway it is clear that the reason for the races having human like traits is because no other traits are imaginable. *



Yes, it is certainly possible that these traits are the only ones that exist -- but it does remind me rather strongly of an image of a fish swimming 'round and 'round a small pond and thinking to itself, "This is the entire universe -- there is nothing beyond this pond."


----------



## Elu Thingol (May 24, 2002)

Posted by Tyaronumen


> Yes, it is certainly possible that these traits are the only ones that exist -- but it does remind me rather strongly of an image of a fish swimming 'round and 'round a small pond and thinking to itself, "This is the entire universe -- there is nothing beyond this pond."



And the ones that do not think this are the ones who spend their entire lives searching for life in outer space and come up with nothing. Kind of sad isn't it.


----------



## Lady_of_Gondor (May 26, 2002)

I think that my point here has been somewhat misinterpreted. I was not questioning the existance of aliens, or even raising a question about it. My point originally was that Tolkien's characters all encompass some trait that is very human,and if you look at these characters you can see that maybe he was trying to say something about humans in general. Or perhaps he was using these characters to show the complexity of human emotion. I hope that clears things up a bit.


----------



## Elu Thingol (May 27, 2002)

What other emotion is there besides human emotion?


----------



## Wood Elf (May 31, 2002)

I think I know what you mean, like the different races represent different aspects of humans. I see it this way: the elves represent the higher spiritual side of humans, the part of us that wants spiritual fufillment, and they are what we would like to be. Hobbits represent our more childlike innocent side, the humble side, the side that just wants to be left in peace and quiet and not mess with the big affairs of the world. Wizards are the wise side of us, the insightful side I think. Men are the greedy, prideful sides of us, the side that wants to acheive glory. Dwarves are greedy earth diggers, the side of us that likes material posessions, the opposite of the elves. Know what I am getting at? So, yes, I think these certain traits that stand out in the different races make up the complexity of a human, they represent what we are (men, dwarves), and what we strive to be like (elves, wizards, hobbits). We all have varying degrees of Elf, Wizard, Hobbit, Dwarf, and men traits in us, some much stronger than others. For example, someone who sees something and must buy it has more dwarf traits in them, know what I mean? I think you are very right Lady_of_Gondor.


----------



## Hawkblaze (May 31, 2002)

Don't start trouncing the dwarves. They have some good qualities. In almost every instance, Dwarves are portrayed as being intensly loyal and brave. I think those are some traits that can be valued in humans.


----------



## Lantarion (Jun 1, 2002)

> And the ones that do not think this are the ones who spend their entire lives searching for life in outer space and come up with nothing. Kind of sad isn't it.


What do you mean, "Come up with nothing"? Not yet, obviously, but it is very likely that there will be alien algae or other simple life forms on Mars, under the ice. And it is only a matter of time before we find life elsewhere; we just don't have the technology to reach out into the universe yet. There are trillions and trillions of planets with life on them, and if even one out of a million has intelligent life, then we can safely say that we are not alone.


----------



## Wood Elf (Jun 1, 2002)

Very true Hawkblaze, dwarves do have a very loyal and brave side to them, and this is a very human trait as well. Thank you for pointing that out to me. No hard feelings.


----------



## Theoden (Jun 1, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Pontifex _
> *
> ...And it is only a matter of time before we find life elsewhere; we just don't have the technology to reach out into the universe yet. There are trillions and trillions of planets with life on them, and if even one out of a million has intelligent life, then we can safely say that we are not alone.  *



I don't think it is safe to say that. No one has ever documented a logical sighting of alien life forms... and most of the "sightings" do not even line up with the basic laws of science. Since we exist within those basic laws, I think it is safe to say that so far, the scientific conclusion is that earth is the only planet that was created to have life on it. But I would love to hear your side of the story.


----------



## Lady_of_Gondor (Jun 4, 2002)

Wood Elf hit my point right on the head. Thank you for explaining it in a way that I couldn't. I didn't know exactly how to put it, but you have done very well with what I was trying to say. Hopefully the explanation of this will provoke more responses from members of this forum. Go ahead throw your ideas out there.


----------



## Tyaronumen (Jun 5, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Mithrandir2003 _
> *Posted by Tyaronumen
> 
> 
> And the ones that do not think this are the ones who spend their entire lives searching for life in outer space and come up with nothing. Kind of sad isn't it. *



*laugh* Uh -- no. The ones who don't think this are *scientists* and develop new tools for observing and understanding the universe around them, and thus increase the breadth of human knowledge. Much better alternative to just swimming 'round and 'round that pond with a closed mind.


----------



## Tyaronumen (Jun 5, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Pontifex _
> *
> What do you mean, "Come up with nothing"? Not yet, obviously, but it is very likely that there will be alien algae or other simple life forms on Mars, under the ice. And it is only a matter of time before we find life elsewhere; we just don't have the technology to reach out into the universe yet. There are trillions and trillions of planets with life on them, and if even one out of a million has intelligent life, then we can safely say that we are not alone.  *



Well, it rather seems like many people would rather just go around in the same old circles of doing and thinking without ever exploring that which is new and wonderous. Because of their preferences for the same well-trodden thoughts, they cannot easily comprehend that the universe beyond what they choose to know is fantastical and strange (this according to all scientific observations to the date), choosing instead to draw comfort from stale ideologies and psuedo-scientific rationale.


----------



## Tyaronumen (Jun 5, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Theoden _
> *
> 
> I don't think it is safe to say that. No one has ever documented a logical sighting of alien life forms... and most of the "sightings" do not even line up with the basic laws of science. Since we exist within those basic laws, I think it is safe to say that so far, the scientific conclusion is that earth is the only planet that was created to have life on it. But I would love to hear your side of the story. *



Hmmm -- there is no such thing as a "scientific" conclusion... Only evolving theories and hypotheses. Conclusions are by definition unscientific.

Actually, the latest discoveries indicate that amino acids form in space given certain elements and conditions. This discovery basically insinuates that the 'building blocks' of life as we know it on Earth are probably distributed to varying degrees throughout all of space that conforms to natural laws as we understand them (basically all observed space within 15 billion or so lightyears). 

This means that the basic pre-condition for life can be met anywhere in the universe. Obviously, as scientific tools become ever more exact, it will be possible to discover further elements that indicate strong possibilities for life elsewhere in the universe -- or not.

However, I should also bring up at this point that NASA scientists are building a proponderance of data indicating that life existed on at least one other planet -- Mars (granted, in the form of microbes, but it is life, nonetheless).

Anyhow, one last point. The "basic laws of science" are always in flux, and are always being re-evaluated and refined. Only the OBSERVATIONS themselves are definite. The laws themselves are simply tools that are used to describe that which we see until we find better, more exact (but still not complete) explanations for what we see.


----------



## Lantarion (Jun 5, 2002)

I know I shouldn't continue with this off-topic subject, but I just want to comment on Theoden's post. 
Yes, *we* live within those laws, such as gravity, but perhaps other life forms bilions of lightyears away do not. They might not even have physical shapes that we could comprehend or understand, and thus we might hold them to be meaningless. We really know so little about life in space that it might not be a good idea to shout out certainties when they might not be. 
But then there is another theory, which slightly concerns multiple, parallel universes. Perhaps some, if not all planets have a similar or even identical ecosystem and/or series of lifeforms and species. Perhaps what we call 'humans' are living on other planets, but we call them 'aliens' because we know nothing about them. Maybe all intelligent forms of life are human-like, but with slightly different 'shells' or forms. And another thing: grass. It has been suggested that a long time ago Mars had a thriving natural environment. This might quite possibly contain grass, and other green plantlife. So are plants on other planets the same as the ones on Earth? Ofcourse, it must depend on the habitat of the planet, and the average temperatres etc. 
These are only theories (one contradicting the other), but what do you think?


----------

