# Was Lord of the Rings really a social commentary?  Ideas needed...



## Arctic Sun (Jan 11, 2004)

So there's this extra credit assignment in my English class, and I could really use the points. Anyway, the prompt for the essay is as follows:

"The Lord of the Rings (specifically _The Return of the King_) was a social commentary on the issues of today. Agree, dissagree, or qualify."

I saw Return of the King (and enjoyed it), but I don't know a lot about the series (I only saw half of the first and none of the second). Anyway, the only themes that I had in mind that could relate to today are greed/drug abuse (as seen with a handful of characters involved with the ring), and possibly something regarding how the Hobits were able to overcome their social standing and make an impact on the world. 

Any other ideas will be greatly appreciated. Thanks


----------



## Elbereth (Jan 11, 2004)

My suggestion to you is....*read the book.*


You don't need us to tell you what to put in your report. All of the answers to your question lie within those pages. And believe me, the book may seem long but once you start reading...I'm sure you will not be able to put the book down...it should be easy  .


----------



## Gothmog (Jan 11, 2004)

A question about this. Is your assignment in relation to the Film or to the book. An important point as there is some difference between the two.


----------



## Arctic Sun (Jan 11, 2004)

It's in relation to the movie.


----------



## Ancalagon (Jan 11, 2004)

Lord of the Rings was (in my own humble opinion) most certainly not a social commentary; rather a generalised portrayal of human charateristics, the dynamics of good opposing evil and the human/Demigod elements involved in his mytholgical creation. 
Tolkien does not attempt reflect our own society in the sense that Dickens would have displayed the sexual clashes, politics, malice and corruption of Victorian England. I think your best approach would be to identify why other authors such as Dickens, Shakespeare, Collins, Gaskell et al would have been more inclined to use their works as a vehicle for discreet attacks on society, whereas Tolkien undertook an altogether more grand yet simplistic view of humanity with its greatest attributes and most desperate failings.

I am however sure that others would disagree with my views on the matter


----------



## Arctic Sun (Jan 11, 2004)

Thanks for your thoughts


----------



## HLGStrider (Jan 12, 2004)

Well, it is impossible for the book to be a current social commentary because it was written around WWII. . .To prove the movie was you'd have to show where Jackson changed it or exaggerated or somehow manipulated it to fit the time. Some people could show you somethings like this, in the movie section.

If I were you and still wanted input, I would go to the Return of the King movie section and start a thread entitled something like "Where did Jackson manipulate to make a point?"

Inside, ask whether they think the world view, points, or action of the movie was changed to make a point, fit today's ideas, or socially motivate people.

I think you might find some people who say that the environmental message, which does exist in the books, was exaggerated. That certain changes were made to fit a more relativistic world view as far as the Gollum thing went. . .other than that, I don't have any ideas. . .but they might.


----------



## Flammifer (Jan 12, 2004)

Arctic Sun said:


> So there's this extra credit assignment in my English class, and I could really use the points. Anyway, the prompt for the essay is as follows:
> 
> "The Lord of the Rings (specifically The Return of the King) was a social commentary on the issues of today. Agree, dissagree, or qualify."
> 
> ...



I am one of only a few who love both the book (I say book because LotR is one book, but was released in three parts) and movies. I don't claim to be an expert on the book, but it is considerably easier to become an expert on the movies than the book, and I think I've achieved it! 

The movies are not a shade on the book, and as such, contain none of the depth that the text does. Indeed, though in many ways the movies fail to be a faithful interpretation of the book (in terms of plotlines and characterisation), they cannot be said to contain any themes that the book does itself contain.

As such, if you really want to clarify this, Arctic Sun, you should obtain at the very least the Fellowship of the Ring book, and there read the "Foreword to the Second Edition". Read the whole thing, but focus on the part that deals with allegory. I will say no more (I don't want to do your assignment for you!). Hope this helps! Good luck!


----------



## Greenwood (Jan 13, 2004)

Flammifer said:


> I am one of only a few who love both the book (I say book because LotR is one book, but was released in three parts) and movies.



I think there are far more of us in that category than you might think.


----------



## Ancalagon (Jan 13, 2004)

Oh Dear, it seems I may have misinterpreted your request Artic Sun! I missed the fact you were discussing the movies, rather than Tolkiens original work and I furnished you with an answer irrelevant to the question. With reference to your actual question on whether the Rings movies were a social commentary on todays society, then I regret to say I am stunned any English teacher worth their salary would ask such a ridiculous question of a student. Surely in order to promote an understanding of literature, then the question should have been specifically related to the author, not the loose, poorly adapted representation of the original work by a dispassionate team of scriptwriters and tainted with that special touch of 'ole Hollywood'. Hooray for Hollywood.....! 

PS. However, as I do not know your age, I may appear rather harsh, especially if you are 14 or younger! If not, shame on your English teacher


----------



## Mrs. Maggott (Jan 14, 2004)

Social commentary: let's see.... Well, it certainly could not be considered "anti-war" (a very important ongoing social issue) since _everybody_ is "pro-war". Sauron (the bad guy) has initiated open war although the war has been ongoing for some time at least in a sort of guerilla sense. On the other hand, all the good guys are also gung ho to thwart the Dark Lord and his minions except Theoden and his problem is that he thinks he'll get slaughtered if he tries! So he certainly isn't being motivated by a desire for "peace"!

Not much is said about economic issues - welfare, etc. - but that's understandable. However, there is certainly lots of "community" going on as each group rallies around its own. So that can be considered a sort of "social commentary. There are no "one worlders" in Middle-earth except perhaps Gandalf the good Wizard who doesn't belong to any group and wishes only to make Middle-earth safe for the good guys. On the other hand, both Sauron and Saruman are "one worlders", but in their case it's more like the "one world" vision of Hitler or Stalin than our present day UN utopians!

There is a certain amount of "feminism" in the films with both Arwen and then later Eowyn being allowed to play with the boys with their knives and swords. However, on the whole, the ladies (bless 'em) are few and far between. Most of the action of the films is carried by the males be they men or dwarves or elves or hobbits or ents (who don't even _have_ any women!). 

The films are certainly not filled with "social comment", but there is a certain amount of it in the story, especially in the obvious point that wars are not always a bad thing depending upon the circumstances nor does it always take two to make one! In the story - films or book - many folk who never raised a hand against anyone were the victims of an attack by evil forces and were forced to defend themselves. I would say if one is going to find _any_ "social comment" in LOTR, this is where you are going to find it.


----------

