# Aragorn: Ranger or King?



## LadyDernhelm (Mar 19, 2004)

Hi. For those of you who don't know me (probably the majority), I'm LadyDernhelm. I was a member here for a few months last year before my browser started rejecting vBulletin sites. Now, I'm back.

...And I have a question that's been bugging me for some time. I've never liked Aragorn all _that_ much. When I first read the books, I really, really fell in love with Strider the Ranger. Yet when I got to TTT, where he begins to become Aragorn the King, I liked him less and less. He seemed to me to be a lot less personable and friendly; a lot more condescending, proud...even arrogant. I know that he had a heritage to live up to, and a right to be commanding. But it still made me sad.

So, my question is - who do you prefer, the Ranger or the King, and why? 

(And if this has been asked before, I'm sorry.  )

~Lady Dernhelm


----------



## Elessar II (Mar 20, 2004)

Actually, that's a tough question for me. 
To me, Strider and Elessar are almost two different characters. 

Strider, as you said, seemed more personal and humble, as well as being more rugged and "rough and ready", if you know what I mean.

Then, throughout the second and third books, he slowly transformed into Elessar, a leader, someone who was willing to take command, and lead others into the face of danger. 

So, they have both their pros and cons really. And what's interesting is that sometimes you get glimpses of Elessar in Strider/Aragorn throughout the first and a little of the second books. 
And when Aragorn/Elessar is crowned king, you can still see a bit of the old Strider show through sometimes.


----------



## HLGStrider (Mar 20, 2004)

I want a man who seems rough on the outside and is rejected by society in general but is really a king so she can stand by his side when all else is against him and help him become a king and then stand next to him when all gasp in awe at who he really is. . .


to sum up why I love Aragorn and Strider. The point to Strider is that underneath he is Aragorn. Underneath the rough exterior he is regal. Underneath the humility is a reason to be proud.


----------



## HLGStrider (Mar 20, 2004)

http://www.thetolkienforum.com/showthread.php?t=9198&page=1&pp=15&highlight=Aragorn+snobA similar but different thread that might interest you, milady.


----------



## Melian_the_Maya (Mar 20, 2004)

Aragorn and Strider are not as different as some of you say. They live within each other from the very beginning to the very end of the book. Aragorn too has to leave the place where he has lived most of his life in this quest. While he is still on the left side of the Mountains and Moria, he is only the guide and the ranger, because he accepts Gandalf's lead. The Wizards were after all higher in ranking even than the King of Middle Earth. However, glimpses of Aragorn exist in Strider: his nobility, the air of a Numenorian that Frodo can feel, although he can't explain, his inner battle which we see throughout the three books and which is connected to finally beginning the thing which would either make him a king or killing him completely... All these features are completely Aragorn's and yet they appear in Strider.

After the Misty Mountains, he returns to where his kingdom is and the threat of the Ring becomes stronger. The death of Gandalf puts him in charge of the fellowship and he bears more responsibility than the others for the outcome of the journey. Shouldering such responsibility also brings an alteration to his character. The ranger is put aside, because he no longer knows the ways as he used to do and because finally they meet two kinds of Men: the Rohirrim and the Gondorians.

The scene that is often shown as a proof of his snobbish character is (as far as I can see) the scene where he refuses to lay down the sword. I actually understand that and, to reply to those who mention the passage when he says:


> "It is not clear to me that the will of Théoden, son of Thengel, even though he be lord of the Mark, should prevail over the will of Aragorn son of Arathorn, Elendil's heir of Gondor."


 Well, I only have to reply by mentioning the following:


> "Truly" said Aragorn. "And I would do as the master of the house bade me, were this only a woodman's cot, if I bore now any sword but Andúril."



Andúril was, from Aragorn's perspective, the most precious weapon they had around there, with the exception maybe of Gandalf's staff. It had to subsequently become the main object of worry and threat for Sauron, alongside the heir of Elendil. It was sort of logical that he would want to make sure nothing happened to it. Another glimpse of a proud Aragorn shows just after he had looked into the Stone of Orthanc and again that gives in to Strider in front of Legolas and Gimli. What I think happens to him is that he starts to feel Aragorn growing inside of him and the more he approaches Gondor, the stronger the King grows within him. He resists it in the beginning, but afterwards, as soon as he proclaims openly whom he is, he begins to enter the personality of the King himself.

I have nothing against Kings and I like countries which still have monarchies at their heads, therefore I like the Kingly Aragorn as much as I like Strider, but I can understand that this change is not easily accepted by others. However, in his defence, it must be said that he knows his place very well when it comes to dealing with Gandalf, the Ring Bearers, friends, enemies (remember the judgement passed on the people from Harad!) and subjects (Faramir and Beregond come to mind very strongly at this). He loves his people and is not quite as snobbish as most other kings (you only have to look at Denethor, who is not even at king and you'll see it).


----------



## Arwen48 (Mar 20, 2004)

For me Aragorn is one of the most complete characters in LOTR, because he develops throughout the course of the tale. He has a terrific conflict to resolve: he doesn't want to accept his heritage because he is afraid of being weak and failing like Isildur. On the other hand if he does not go for it, he will never win the hand of Arwen. I think his development as a character is how he resolves these two ideas. Once he accepts the idea that he has to be a leader, after the loss of Gandalf, he gradually becomes more Aragorn and less Strider, but he never loses his humility and self doubt nor do I think he ever becomes arrogant. After he has healed the wounded in the houses of healing he is content to withdraw and leave Imrahil in charge, just as when Gandalf was still with the fellowship he followed his lead. Strider and Aragorn aren't two different characters, one grows naturally out of the other, and they are 'both' loved and revered by all who know them


----------



## LadyDernhelm (Mar 20, 2004)

This is interesting. Very, very interesting.  

Melian, thank you first of all for your post. I've never really understood the thing with Aduril in Rohan; it was always one of the scenes where I liked Aragorn least. He seemed snotty and huffy, not like the Strider I had grown to love. 

I love Strider because he is...well, he is Everything Good, at least to me. He's humble, he's strong, he's wise. And yet he doesn't flout his wisdom or proclaim his importance, even though he is potentially the most important Man in Middle-Earth. He respects others and doesn't treat people as inferior or himself as superior. He is steady.

I guess I just don't see why Strider could not have been King. Oh, I know - he couldn't have been King as he was, because the whole premise behind Strider was him not wanting to accept the throne. But I felt he really alienated himself from everyone and everything as he became the King...grew aloof, proud, almost cold, bowing to no one. I use the phrase "Bowing to no one", even though I know technically he _shouldn't_ have (bowed). But I've always considered humility one of the finest traits in any kind of a leader...and Aragorn seems to lose so much of his humility as he accepts his destiny.

I didn't realize any of this until I saw the movies. I really, really, really like Aragorn in the movies. I think Viggo Mortensen plays him perfectly, and I think that even when he has begun to be more the King and less the Ranger he still retains the good traits of both (which I don't really feel he does in the book). Maybe it just transfers better on camera...?

~Lady Dernhelm


----------



## Melian_the_Maya (Mar 20, 2004)

I think it's just a lot easier to watch Viggo's face and realize his feelings than searching for it and feeling it inside of Tolkien's (quite complicated) phrases.

As for humility, it does not do good for a King to be humble to anyone except God. When he becomes humble, there is less respect for him and you get a Rohan situation, where the leader becomes practically nobody and his people are in anarchy. Because that was what happened there: Theoden submitted (it is true that magic was also at work there, but yes, moving on...) to Grima's whispers docily, which would never have happened to a proud leader like for instance Denethor. It's like riding a horse. The moment it feels that your hand has lessened its grip, the horse becomes frightened and less certain of what to do. You have to have a very firm grip for it to remain calm...

I personally loved both the Aragorn in the book and the one in the movies, possibly because (within the error marge of receiving thoughts and words in mind that weren't his and additionally giving away some which should have been his) Viggo remains most faithful to the Tolkien characters, together with Sean Astin, who portrays a perfect Sam Gamgee.


----------



## LadyDernhelm (Mar 20, 2004)

Sean Astin is incredible. Anyway.

Maybe humility isn't the right word - at least not as you interpreted it. I wouldn't call Theoden's submission to Grima's counsel "humility"...I'd call it "weakness", personally. I think that a great leader can be humble while still maintaining his honor/place. I feel that, for the most part, Moretensen's portrayal of King Elessar _is_ a more humble one than Tolkien's...not a _lot_, and part of that's because you get the expressions and stuff, but still. He seems kinder, gentler, and much less aloof. Yes, he is wise and great and the most powerful man in Middle-Earth, but he still remains grounded.

I might not be explaining myself as well as I could here. It's a difficult thing to explain, really.

~LadyDernhelm


----------



## Eledhwen (Mar 20, 2004)

I don't think the film Aragorn is very humble; you can't be humble when you do not accept your own true worth, because you have nothing to be humble with. The book Aragorn was humble because he knew his destiny and, though proud of it, set it aside for the greater good until the right time. The film Aragorn knew his destiny and rejected it. That is not humility, it is weakness.


----------



## HLGStrider (Mar 20, 2004)

I think a lot of you are mixing up arrogance with decisiveness. In the books Aragorn knows what he wants and knows basically how to get it. There is only conflict when what he wants occasionally goes opposite from what he sees as his duty (Should I go with Frodo to Mordor or go to Gondor where I want to go?).

I truly lost touch with Aragorn a bit when he was indecisive. It also helps that we don't see inside his mind much. There is only one chapter, the begining of the Two Towers, that lets one into Aragorn's point of view, and I didn't like it very much. I want him to be more mysterious than that. I don't like to see him conflicted. I want him to be as perfect as possible.

And I'm attracted to arrogant males. I watch the O'Rielly Factor, for goodness sakes!


----------



## LadyDernhelm (Mar 20, 2004)

No, I wouldn't call what I call "arrogance" "decisiveness". I've been using "arrogance" more to refer to his aloof proudness...not decision-making.

~LD


----------



## Dáin Ironfoot I (Mar 21, 2004)

AH!!! LadyDernhelm!!!

It's been so long!  Missed you without a doubt! I didnt bother to read the thread, I was just so excited to see you back! PM me on TTF or MERPG and well catch up!


----------



## HLGStrider (Mar 21, 2004)

I never really saw him as aloof, even as a king. He took the time to visit with his old buddies and such. He does become more and more task focused, but I think most of them did. It's just with Aragorn task focussing meant ruling.


----------



## Eledhwen (Mar 21, 2004)

HLGStrider said:


> And I'm attracted to arrogant males. I watch the O'Rielly Factor, for goodness sakes!


I'll pray for you!  (seriously - husband for Elgee, please, Lord! Write a list, Elgee, height, weight, disposition, vocation, etc... or maybe just lift your LotR up and say "Lord, Get me an Aragorn!")


----------



## Arwen48 (Mar 26, 2004)

But don't you think that Aragorn is such a brilliant character because he is NOT perfect? 
He is a strong character - to be a leader of any description you have to be that.
Gimli: 'I was held to the road only by the will of Aragorn'
'And by the love of him also' said Legolas, 'for all those who come to know him come to love him after his own fashion,even the cold maiden of the Rohirrim.
'Even the shades of Men are obedient to his will'

And when Aragorn is crowned, Eomer....'Since the day when you rose before me out of the green grass of the downs I have loved you'
Maybe the word is Charismatic, both in book and film, personally I think Viggo Mortensen captured this beautifully


----------



## HLGStrider (Mar 27, 2004)

I don't think Aragorn is perfect, however, but I see his faults as being more towards the area of arrogance than in the area of lack of confidance. As I said I'm attracted to arrogant males but I believe arrogance to be a fault.

However, he is a heroic character and in some ways fits the mold of a heroic character just as Arwen fits the mold of a heroic character's lady love. That doesn't lead to a lot of faults.


----------



## Arda (Mar 27, 2004)

*.*

I wouldn't call it arrogance at all. I would call it experience and knowledge beyond that of normal men. In comparing him to normal men he is far beyond what they could ever seek to become. Consider that in the story he is 87 years old and appears no more than 30. Most normal men will not live that long and if they do they will be old and weary and have lost all usefullness. He is wise in lore, he has spent at least 67 years in the wilderness that can be accounted for and 30 of those years were spent in war. He has been to more places in middle earth than any other man or elf, including the southern kingdoms of the Southrons and Easterlings. He fought with the Rohirrim before the days of Theodin and after that for a time he was renowned as a great captain of men in service of Ecthelion father of DenthorII of the ruling Stewards of Gonder. None knew at that point who he was for he had many names and guises. He had been doing great deads of honor and valor 20 - 30 years before any of the men in the story were born. Ecthelion was Borimir and Faramir's Grandfather and Aragorn served under him. He led a fleet of ships to Umbar and he himself set the port and the corsarris of Umbar ablaze. 

Along with all that which he accomplished prior to the start of the lord of the rings, he grew up in Rivendell as a Foster son of Elrond, the halfelven, who is now the wisest of lore remaing in Middle Earth. And along with that should be known that the Numenorians or Dunedian are of Elvish decent so they have perceptions, strengths, and statures greater than that of normal men.

That having been said I do not beleive he is arrogant at all. In most of the cases where he speaks down to others if that's what you would want to call it, it's more out of wisdom than anything else. Also just being who and what he is, heir to Isiadur, rightful king to the throne of Gondor there are times when some in the story become stern with him and he puts them right back in their places because of the awe he can strike into the hearts of men of lesser blood than his.


----------



## Ravenna (Mar 27, 2004)

I love both Aragorn and Strider, the two are simply reflections of their different circumstances.
The aloofness (is that a real word?)  he exhibits is surely a product of his background. He has led a long lonely life, deprived of his true parents, (although lovingly fostered), unable to reveal his true identity except to a very few trusted people. That alone is surely enought to make it somewhat hard for a man to get close to other people quickly, or indeed to make him prone to share his counsel with just anybody. And yet, for all that, he has the 'common touch', he is able to speak to anyone on their own level, able to appreciate each persons' own particular issues and aid them where he is able.

As for the couple of occasions where he appears somewhat arrogant and snappy, well he did have a hell of a lot on his plate at the time, and even Gandalf gets tetchy sometimes!

Btw, welcome back Lady Dernhelm!


----------



## Aglarband (Mar 30, 2004)

Aragorn is one of the best characters in the book, and I think he was the hero we were all looking for, so we look at him very criticaly.

We all seem to forget that it is Frodo, not Aragorn, who is the real hero in the books. We read about Strider fighting the Nazgul and go, "O yea, this is the hero!" But soon after he meets Boromir (in the books, not in real time), and hears of the troubles of the South and of Gondor. This is what ignites the fire within him to become the King of Men. He slowly realizes his potential (for lack of a better word). Aragorn was not the Strider we saw in the movies, he was much more willing to become King than how he was portrayed, yet he still had doubts.

Aragorn was NOT arogant, as he was willing to risk the lives of many so Frodo and Sam could destroy the Ring. He never tried to weild the Ring or take it from Frodo, and for this all the Company, save Boromir, is to be comended. 

He never lost his "Strider" but he never liked the name anyway.


----------

