“Acts of
Eru” (in
Tolkien’s Legendarium) do not count as
deus ex machina. The concept of
eucastrophe is quite outside its scope: only semantics and a tendentious
argumentum ad minutiae infinitum can make it so, and then only by exasperating the opposition: and that is not victory, but opprobrium.
Deus ex machina is a literary plot device that, as
Barley observes, is generally regarded as a “tendency of bad
authors, when self-painted into a corner, to come up with some last-minute lame ploy.” The death of
Gollum was fore-ordained. In Letter 246, Tolkien remarks that had Gollum repented of
evil, he would still have stolen
the Ring, and then
‘possession’ satisfied, I think he would then have sacrificed himself for
Frodo’s sake and have voluntarily cast himself into the fiery abyss.
This is not
deus ex machina but “fate,” if you care to call it that.
The intervention of Athena in the battle between Hector and Achilles (definitely not the Brad Pitt movie version) in which Athena deceived Hector into believing that his weapons-bearer was at hand with a second spear is also not
deus ex machina; but had Aphrodite appeared and dazzled Achilles before he struck the killing blow, causing him and all the Greeks to make peace and sail home: that might count as
deus ex machina. When Castor and Pollux appear at the end of Euripides’
Electra to set everything right after Electra has committed matricide, that definitely counts as
deus ex machina, and is a classic example. For all his fame, Euripides made a habit of using this plot device and was ridiculed for it in his own lifetime.
Euripides and Socrates were friends; in fact, some Athenians accused (that is the correct word, I believe) Socrates of having written or helped write some of Euripides’ plays. Another famous Greek playwright and contemporary, Aristophanes, scorched them both in his wildly satiric (and funny) play,
The Clouds. (Click it and have a look! Hint: search for “basket” in the text.) Aristophanes portrays Socrates as an impious windbag and skewers Euripides as a bad playwright when he lowers “Socrates” onto the stage in a basket à la
deus ex machina to the approving roar of Athenian audiences. I was taught that Euripides was enraged and stormed out, but that Socrates laughed heartily: it is an example of
deus ex machina by means of satire.
Catastrophe and
Eucastrophe are the inevitable outcome of a series of
events. Both may come as a complete surprise to the participants, but in retrospect, there was no other course that could follow.
Deus ex machina, however, is “out of the blue,” and there was no way that an audience could anticipate it except by harboring a poor opinion of the author. In that sense, the destruction of the Ring and the ruin of
Sauron and all his works, propitiously timed as it was to preserve the
Host of the West and thus the Happy Ending – the
Eucastrophe – of
The Lord of the Rings is the outcome of one step after another in the plotline: it came down to Frodo’s success or failure, and he failed in that the ring overpowered him: but so did Gollum, who had dogged him for two-thirds of the tale to the same inevitable end; and so also did Sauron, though we see him only in the barest glimpses.
The
Eagles as they did twice in
The Hobbit appear twice out of nowhere in
The Lord of the Rings, to perform the same functions as in
The Hobbit:
- remove Gandalf from a sticky situation in a high spot from which he could not otherwise escape, and
- turn the final tide of a battle that would otherwise have been lost,
and so Tolkien is somtimes criticized for using
deus ex machina. But it seems so small an offense when compared to the greater tale: perhaps we should overlook it? Or perhaps it has some other meaning that we have overlooked? The Hand – or Grace – of Eru medially through
Manwë and thence by the Eagles to preserve the righteous upon the brink of destruction? Is that
deus ex machina or salvation?
