📖👀 Concluding thoughts on the Return of the King and the whole story

[Rivendell_librarian]

Well I didn't think it would take longer than the main part of the story to read the book but I dillied and dallied in the spring and summer. Having been a member of this forum for a while now has enhanced my experience of reading the book. I hope more people will contribute to the reading project - isn't reading the book and sharing our thoughts on its deeper meanings the core of the forum? Hammond and Scull's reader's companion is a useful aid but I did find it too obsessed with the minutiae - e.g. minor differences in various editions of the book. I will now list a few thoughts which I may add to.

1. What can be considered the main action from the death of Boromir and the breaking of the fellowship to the destruction of the Ring lasts only about one month in a story whose main strand lasts over a year.
2. The rhythm of movement and action followed by food and hospitality. I think this sets Tolkien apart from other writers but I may well be wrong on that.
3. The disappointment with Arwen. She's only eye candy when we see her first at Rivendell and it doesn't get much better!
4. The many themes of the book which I've touched on in the individual chapters: mercy, friendship, environmental degradation and industrialisation, the temptation of power, avoidance of killing, cooperation between different peoples and races. These are touched on through the telling of the story.
5. And it's a rattling good read. I'm trying to avoid reading introductions when I read fiction now - so much better to work it out as you read the book.

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

I've been reading and enjoying your Reading Project posts very much, and intend to make comments on more of the threads.

I'm just very, very slow. 😄

For the moment, on your third point, I can agree, but Arwen was a late addition, and giving her more "screentime" would have required much rewriting.

 

[Halasían]

I had recently re-read the books for the umpteenth time since that magical summer and autumn 1975 when I was first introduced to the books. It was great following along with your journey and commenting here and there.

To be fair to Arwen, it is worth a read of Aragorn and Arwen's story (in part) in Appendix A.

 

[Rivendell_librarian]

I'm kind of regretting the Arwen comment because I thought it the least important.

 

[Halasían]

I'm kind of regretting the Arwen comment because I thought it the least important.

Well, Arwen was 'eye-candy' (something PJ totally missed with casting Liv) especially to young Aragorn.
Your earlier post had me read the Story of Aragorn and Arwen in Appendix A. Even there Arwen was presented as a secondary character as much of the writing is about Aragorn and Elrond.

 

[Ent]

I see Arwen as an interesting character.
As noted elsewhere, many gravitate toward an Aragorn and Eowyn relationship.
But given the essentially feudal (and English) background from which Tolkien proceeds, what do we really see there?

1. Eowyn - a person with a strong, worldly desire to be a 'shield-maiden' involved in personal heroics and self-fulfillment. Not exactly fodder for a throne.
2. Aragorn, destined to essentially be 'king of all the free peoples' in a way, with a mind-set and upbringing well beyond the simple aspirations of a woman in the thrall of the Rohirrim.
3. Arwen - an Elf-human, fitted out to be 'in court'. And of an ability to 'unite the much more sundered relationship of the Elves and Men, whose cooperation has waned through the countless years."
4. A rather feudal environment where most 'matches' were done as much for political reason and gain as for love.

That said:
5. A couple people who had known each other for a very long time, and were well acquainted on several levels (Aragorn/Arwen) vs. a couple people 'briefly tossed into the mix together,' one of whom has what might be called a very self-oriented mindset, while the other has a much broader worldview. (Aragorn/Eowyn.)

There NEEDED to be an Arwen - for multiple reasons. I believe Tolkien realized this.

 

[Glorfindel Goldtress]

I would also add there needed to be an Arwen for more reasons.

Arwen represents those who remain behind "at home" while others fight for them-- the importance of having a "reason" to fight for what is right; i.e., what good is fighting in a world when you have no one to propel you onward, no one to save/protect, if you will?

She gives purpose to Aragorn and is one of the strongest reasons why Aragorn was able to do what he did all the years in between their first encounter and to the end of the War of the Ring.

When Sam says to Frodo, "There's some good left in this world, Mr. Frodo. And it's worth fighting for...", it is the same concept. The Shire is the keystone keeping the Hobbits going. Arwen is a keystone, likewise, for Aragorn.

Having defined things of import "worth fighting for" heightens the profundity of the quest's undertaking in a very much needed manner.

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

And from a structural view, Arwen is a kind of Solveig figure, introduced at the beginning, who then watches over the hero's adventures from a distance, and brought in at the story's culmination.

Galadiel occupies the same sort of position, though of course with greater power and influence; her character points to "higher" things, as indicated for instance through the clusters of images that associate her with Elbereth.

At the "lower" level, Bag End fulfills the same function in The Hobbit.

 

[Rivendell_librarian]

Hmm still don't see why Arwen couldn't have been given some words to speak at Rivendell in TFOTR.

 

[Ugluk]

I too wondered about the significance of Arwen when I first read the book. Then I read Appendix A and wept. It was so beautiful, sad, hopeful, and right. I can't think of any other writing that has touched me as deeply in over 50 years since, except the final episode of Babylon 5 "Sleeping in Light", and in much the same way.