Although at first glance both Harry Potter and The Lord of the Rings may seem as only a simple, epic conflict between good and evil, J.R.R. Tolkein’s more detailed and complex work provides its reader with a history from which to draw their own conclusions rather than a moralistic epic. Like in philosophy and in real life, Tolkien asks the questions rather than beating readers over the head with answers.
Tolkien has explicitly said that The Lord of the Rings, and the extended tales of Middle Earth, are not meant to be moralistic. He did not write them to teach or imply any particular lessons; instead, they are history books of a time that never was. Thus, the analysis I will draw comes not from the intention of the author or any explicit moral lesson, but from the lessons in political philosophy that we can learn from our own history as well as the fictional history of Middle Earth. This realism is one of the greatest strengths of Tolkein’s writing. Mixing high fantasy with a realistic sense of human (and other species’) psychology and sociopolitical dealings, Lord of the Rings can teach readers much of leadership and sovereignty with far more nuance than the surface good-evil dichotomy would imply.
Rather than answering the core question of political philosophy, (who has the right to power and why,) Tolkien describes a variety of systems and their effects. Readers are welcome to draw their own conclusions from the various realms: the peaceful and bucolic democracy of the Shire with its mayor and little other authority; the proud land of Gondor, its kings lost and its Steward corrupted; Rohan, its horse lords a long and proud monarchy; the Ents with their Entmoot, a pure democracy reminiscent of Athens, complete with endless deliberation and an impossibly slow mode of speech. Most memorable of all, of course, is Sauron and the land of Mordor, an absolute dictator intent on spreading his reach through the entire continent.
Among these many groups, all possess realistic flaws as well as strengths. The Shire is peaceful, free, and happy – and enormously susceptible to invasion. Tolkien never presents the claim that such an unregulated lifestyle, with no functional police and the only government service a postal system, could work beyond the simple realities of hobbits. The Ents similarly are content and happy, yet have difficulty adapting their long deliberative process to the necessity for sudden action. Gondor prospers once its proper king is restored, but his long absence has clearly hurt the realm, and a system that allows such a situation may be suspect. Of Mordor there is no good to be said beyond its military success. There Tolkien and his readers draw the line.
Other lessons relevant to political philosophy also may be drawn out of The Lord of the Rings. The tension of race relations is explored in the traditional enmity of Dwarf and Elf, eventually reconciled by Gimli and Legolas. Humans, elves, and dwarves must cooperate to defeat a mutual enemy. However, Tolkien does make a slight caveat. Race relations are only discussed in the context of “good” species; Orcs are slaughtered by the thousand.
If there is one universal political lesson that Tolkien does impart however, it is the danger of excess power. Sauron is able to do such harm only due to the power of his One Ring, and his greatest servants are human kings corrupted by the prospect of extraordinary power into Wraiths, neither alive nor dead. Gandalf, the human incarnation of wisdom, must refuse the Ring from Frodo for fear of using it. At the resolution of the tale, there is no one with unusually large power. Sauron defeated, each king has power over one realm (perhaps an implication towards the benefits of self-determination) and the Elves and Gandalf, joined by Frodo, have departed the land, leaving all other species approximately equal in natural skill and wisdom.
Tolkien’s iconic trilogy shares with its readers the many flaws and strengths of many different types of political systems, and leaves the audience to make up their own minds while imparting a fundamental lesson about the danger of unchecked power.
Photo Credit: Playadura*
The Discussion
Check out McCain's reference to "Tea Party hobbits" in the debt ceiling talks! Apparently LOTR's political applications never end.
2 Replies
When you look at LOTR from a political perspective, it's truly fascinating to take a 2nd look at world that Tolkein created with such depth in mind..
This account has been disabled.
3 Replies
I'm not a big Tolkien reader but I can tell you did a nice job sharing what we can learn from Tolkien's vivid world. No matter the author's intentions, novels can impart important politics, because what more is fiction than an extended character study?
Also, don't forget that the woman from Rohan (forgot her name too) is able to kill the witch king, even though it was thought he was invincible due to the prophecy saying that he couldn't be killed "by the hand of man." The assumption one is supposed to leap to is that "man" stands for "human" but her killing of the witch king disproves that implicitly sexist leap. Unfortunately, I think HP is all over gender/sex discrimination stuff. I still think this example from LOTR is most powerful though, because it shows how AUTOMATICALLY we make assumptions about people.
7 Replies
This is a fun and well-written article! Yes, Tolkien vehemently denied any allegorical reading of LOtR. Many people have tried to draw a one to one relationship, for example, with the ring and the atomic bomb, but Tolkien's genius is in what he calls his applicability. This is what makes this work so timeless. Power constructs and relationships will always be around and many different outcomes are possible. Thanks for the read!
What's interesting to me is that though Sauron is clearly the most totalitarian and evil "dictator" of the series, it seems that the corrupted leader of Gondor (don't remember his name) is the most realistic portrayal of how greed can slowly corrupt. The humans most of all can't wear the ring because the power is too tempting for them. Their political organizations naturally move toward the direction of their corrupted kingdom Gondor and need the other races to purify their intentions from time to time.
1 Replies
While I agree with your article for the most part, a lot of the wisdom Tolkein instills in his readers is hard to find... To the average mind deciphering the message is almost impossible...
In response to your article, keep in mind that Rowling does not provide any solutions for the political problems she addresses in her books. Why she remedies the problems for the mere purpose of telling a story, she really intends to just draw a portrait of society... Like Tolkein, Rowling leaves it up to the reader to decide what is right and wrong.
On another point, while Tolkein addresses the consequences of excess power, Rowling does a much better job... Voldermort can be compared to many likes in history and therefore (as I mentioned before) is a better representation of how excess power leads to ones demise.
Wow, nice job drawing out the politics of LoTR. It's been a while since I read LoTR, but now that you point it out I really appreciate Tolkien's non-moralistic storytelling. I never thought about how he really put all kinds of political systems on display in his stories before. It was a rich world that he painted to begin with, but spelling out the parallels definitely makes it that much more appealing and interesting to reflect on.