by Bryan & Francis
This coming Sunday, September 22, is Hobbit Day, and with it comes the return of our series exploring historical connections to J.R.R. Tolkien’s seminal works of literature. Rather than discussing history through the lens of Middle Earth, however, this year we decided to look at Tolkien’s works themselves as historical documents that have been used and remembered in different ways by different people in our present day.
White Christian Nationalism and Tolkien as a Muse for a renewed Moral Order
Christian nationalism is a political ideology that posits a nation-state should explicitly work to promote exclusively Christian social, political, and moral endeavors in its use of the law. Christian nationalists want the state to enforce a moral and legal order based on Judeo-Christian tradition. Some Christian nationalists have interpreted Tolkien’s work as a political blueprint for a Christian nationalist state. They interpret Gandalf and Aragorn as paragons of a moral order opposed to the supposed supernatural and political evil of their opponents. Since Gandalf and Aragorn represent hierarchy (as a monarch) and divine law (Gandalf is like an embodied angel), they see in Tolkien’s work a moral order that countervails against globalization, secularism, and relativism. Sauron, in this interpretation, represents both totalitarianism and cultural forces that do not embrace a Christian worldview, that supplant God or moral truth with something else, like personal will. Thus, a state that embraces “Tolkienist” values, like that of an Aragorn restoring order to a broken world, serves as a source of inspiration. Both J.D. Vance and Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni have mentioned The Lord of the Rings as inspirational to their cultural conservatism and desire to use politics to promote their visions. It also doesn’t hurt that Tolkein’s (mostly pale-skinned) forces of good are of “the West,” arrayed against the (darker skinned) forces of the “Shadow in the East.”
Now, it is fair to say that one of Tolkien’s major arguments in his work is that using power to impose one’s will on others is unethical. That is what Sauron seeks to do through the One Ring and why the One Ring is so tempting. Boromir, who is fundamentally good, falls to the temptation of the Ring because the Ring offers itself as a means by which Boromir can will himself into victory. In fact, Tolkien’s larger point is that the Hobbits possess more virtue than other people in Middle Earth precisely because they do not have an innate desire to preside over, rule, or dominate other living things (which is why they can better resist the Ring). So while both more liberal (like Jamelle Bouie) and more conservative commentators have pointed out that a Christian nationalist application of The Lord of the Rings misses its central theme (and conflates the Medievalist, hierarchical roots of Aragorn’s accession for modern, more authoritarian ones), the clear virtue and good of Tolkien’s heroes inspires some readers to imagine a world in which they, and their political causes, were Gandalf and Aragorn. Human nature being what it is, I think humans to a person are a great deal more like Saruman — before and after his fall — than Gandalf in the way we seek to resolve political problems.
Gender and Equality in Middle Earth
Middle Earth is, by and large, a realm of men. There are women, of course, some very powerful queens or characters pivotal to Tolkien’s stories, but it should come as no surprise that a white man writing a medievalist saga in the 1940s and 50s focused overwhelmingly on male characters. Only seven living women characters are mentioned by name in The Lord of the Rings, and none ever interact with each other on the page. None at all are mentioned in The Hobbit, and while The Silmarillion at least includes so many it is not so easily quantified, that volume is also composed of reams of unpublished material later edited by Tolkien’s son Christopher. Understandably, then, the legendarium has been known to come under fire for not being the most feminist of fantasy worlds (leading of course to fan defenses that seem to think the presence of a handful of uber-powerful women balance out such a dearth of other representation). This has led to modern adaptations like Peter Jackson’s films making some changes in pursuit of more equal storytelling; Aragorn’s future wife Arwen, for example, takes the place of other book characters in certain scenes and is given her own arc throughout the movies, transforming from a prize to reward Aragorn into her own character at the center of the story It should be noted that Tolkien’s writings do not seem to be misogynist, and in some ways his celebration of the power of femininity—as opposed to only portraying women as empowered when they take on traditionally male roles—was ahead of his time.
Surprisingly, however, it is the Professor’s portrayal of masculinity that has received more attention in recent years for its remarkably healthy models. While some men in Middle Earth do hold themselves to classic, martially masculine standards—Theoden King of Rohan fears he will be ashamed to answer to his forefathers for his cowardice and lack of great deeds, Boromir of Gondor thinks he must be strong at all times to defend his people, Saruman and Denethor of Gondor value strength over compassion–the real heroes of the story offer alternatives. Aragorn, the perfect king, is not only a peerless warrior but a skilled tracker, master of lore, healer, and poet who is not afraid to show tender emotion. Faramir, the brother of Boromir, is a scholar as much as a ranger and recognizes that in fighting the servants of Sauron, he is fighting fellow beings with their own humanity. And of course, Gandalf counsels Frodo in favor of mercy over judgment, having faith that love, compassion, and kindness will win the day more than strength of arms—which indeed they do.
Treebeard’s Disciples
As Francis discussed at length in a previous Hobbit Day post, one persistent motif in The Lord of the Rings is Tolkien’s detailed descriptions of the landscape of Middle Earth and, especially, its natural beauty or the devastation that war and industrialization can have on the land and natural environment. For instance, Tolkien describes the blighted landscape surrounding Isengard where the fallen wizard Saruman had deforested his once-verdant fortress to manufacture weapons of war. Similarly, hills of slag, the refuse of industrial sorcery within Mordor, surrounds the Black Gate. Indeed, Tolkien even casts the land of the Shire as a victim of Saruman’s cruelty itself as he narrated the Hobbits’ dismay at seeing trees felled and burrows unearthed to be replaced by mills and smokestacks.
Tolkien’s bleak vision of the way war and industrialization mutually harmed the environment stemmed from what he witnessed as an officer in the First World War. Present scholars have taken these motifs and analyzed them to create a Tolkienist environmental ethic as well. In their work, Ents, Elves, and Eriador scholars Matthew Dickerson and Jonathan Evans posit a “Gandalfian” or Tolkienist view of environmental stewardship that suggests rejecting exploitative use of natural resources. Tolkien’s work has inspired both academic exploration of his environmental ethic as well as environmental organizations using his works, or adaptations of his works, to call for environmental regulation and an end to corporate actions that promote fossil fuels or polluting forms of energy production.
The Allegory of it All
While Tolkien never intended his work to be an allegory at all — he, in fact, despised allegory as a literary form — Tolkien’s work has inspired both academic exploration of everything from his environmental ethic mentioned above to the impact of his own personal lived history on his works. Despite the Professor’s protestations that The Lord of the Rings is in no way an allegory, it is common to find everything from online message boards to academic papers alleging exactly that, tying specific factions and events to real world counterparts, especially related to the Second World War. While these are mostly misguided, or at least so broad that many things could fit, it would also beggar belief to argue that Tolkien’s experiences fighting in the First World War or living through the Second and the start of the Cold War did not impact his writing in any way. The horrors of war and the marred homecoming of soldiers who no longer feel they belong in the homeland they fought to protect is certainly no coincidence, and Tolkien’s fear and condemnation of nuclear weaponry aligns very well with his portrayal of the One Ring and the corrupting influence of absolute destructive power. Direct allegory they may not be, but as with every text historical or waiting-to-become historical, the writings of J.R.R Tolkien were certainly shaped by the times in which he lived, and offer insight into how such a man processed them into something for posterity.