Skip to comments.The Battle For Middle Earth
Posted on 09/12/2011 4:17:08 PM PDT by HMS Surprise
Evidently John McCain couldnt stay awake for the entire movie. If he had he would have discovered that the real heros in the battle for Middle Earth were not the kings, or queens, or any other establishment type. The real heros were the lowly hobbits of the shire, led by Frodo, a reluctant but lion-hearted and trustworthy warrior-poet who was capable of denying himself the corrupting influence of the ring of power.
John McCain, you are no Frodo.
(Excerpt) Read more at teapartytribune.com ...
McCain seems more like Wormtongue.
The corruption of the ring was that it was a forgery (pun intended). It was meant as a lock upon, and thereby a stand-in for, the true "ring of power" of divine Grace, which is alive and ever-free, and chooses it's own to work through.
From time immmorial, the fundamental sin has been to try to seize that power through force and will, rather than be chosen by it and serve it with humility.
That's why I laugh at people who look at Jesus as weak. Jesus stood on the banks of infinity, reaching out his hands to those going over a cliff, on fire, into hell, and as they passed by, in agony, they spit at his hands and called him weak and cursed him as they went over the cliff.
So who "won"?
You know more than I do, obviously. I love the LOTR movie trilogy, but in truth I seldom have time to watch anything from start to finish, and they are rather longish. I’m not sure if I have seen any single one in it’s entirety, but one or the other always seems to be on somewhere in the house.
It’s amazing how many times the narrative of the Christian Story finds its way into popular culture, despite the constant attempts by leftists in Hollywood and the MSM to keep it out. Agree?
Of course Gollum started out as a man, then metastasized slowly. I would say that McCain appears to be about 80% there.
Frodo succumbed to the Ring of Power. If Gollum hadn’t bitten his finger off (and taken the Ring with it), and then lost his footing and fell with the Ring into the lava of Mt. Doom, the Ring wouldn’t have been destroyed.
Yes, Frodo resisted for a long time, but Frodo wasn’t immune to its powers. Therein lies the moral of the story. No one (not even Hobbits) can resist the allure of Absolute Power, and all that it entails.
To follow up, in truth, Frodo failed. He was the Ring Bearer, but he didn’t destroy the One Ring, as he was tasked to do.....he was seduced by its power.
It was Gollum who destroyed the One Ring, though unintentionally.
I’ve always loved how Lord Of The Rings is quite likely the only work of literature named for it’s primary antagonist (Sauron); an unusual literary choice, but absolutely brilliant.
Of course, one could also say that he is casting himself as Saruman...
Jesus taught the Truth.
He didn't teach his opinion of the truth.
Therefore no matter how attacked, twisted, and even perverted His story has become across the millenia, it goes beyond mere words, and even human life itself. It is the Truth, and therefore it never changes - that's WHY it's the Truth.
I believe the actual story of Jesus's life is far richer and more amazing than what the Bible contains. As John 21:25 says," Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written."
But the Bible is a combat manual, something designed to go into battle, to survive down through the millenia, and to carry the power of Christ through it to reach the hearts of millions. It's literally a spiritual battle weapon, stripped of a lot unnecessary parts and dented by a million attacks. But it still works. It goes beyond its words, and carries the Light of God for those who are sincerely seeking that Light.
That's why, to me, the bickering of Christian sects is quite tedious. The point of the Bible is accepting the Christ shining through it and into our hearts, and living the life Jesus taught us to live. That's MORE than enough of a challenge for anyone I've ever seen - at least on this planet.
Frodo resisted mostly. I understand your point, but dang... Were you the hall monitor in school?
Hardly. Frodo WAS corrupted by the One Ring. It nearly destroyed him, and led him to attack Sam, forsake his quest, and ultimately even fight Gollum at Mount Doom. He was desperate to keep the Ring.
The only Ringbearer to escape the corruption of Sauron was lowly Samwise Gamgee, whose heart was so simple and pure that he actually held the Ring for a while, then, in an act even Gandalf could not match, willingly gave it up.
The hero of "Lord of the Rings" is not Frodo Baggins. It's Sam.
Yes, Frodo resisted for a long time, but Frodo wasnt immune to its powers. Therein lies the moral of the story. No one (not even Hobbits) can resist the allure of Absolute Power, and all that it entails.
That's a good point, but there's a deeper moral there as well, which is that if one puts one's faith in doing what is right, the rest will be given by Grace as needed. For example, Sam wanted to kill Gollum, but Frodo knew in his heart that he'd contacted the shred of humity still in Gollum, and that that shred was (pun intended) precious. So he honored that small spark of light, and worked with Gollum out of compassion, to try to help him get his humanity back.
Result? When Frodo finally collapsed, when the power of the one ring overwhelmed him at last, despite all of his efforts to deny it, and he reached for the power, Gollum was there to fight him for it, and to seize it from him, and thereby protect him and destroy the ring at the same time, thereby fulfilling the quest and defeating the evil.
You could say that Gollum was just being Gollum, that all the touchy-feelly crap failed and that, in the end, he did exactly what Sam predicted he would do - he'd jump for the ring. But you could also say that God works in mysterious ways. That Gollum was rewarded for the fact that he, in his own way, tried to do good, and so was helpd by Frodo. And that by everyone doing their best, even though everyone lacked what was necessary, God made use of their efforts to bring them success (and even Gollum reached a release of sorts with his "precious").
Perspective is everything.
That's why the Powers That Be fight for people's perspective - because when they have that, they own them.
OK, it’s on. Frodo did not fail, if we use the generally accepted model for success. Let’s assume that in next year’s Super Bowl the winning quarterback throws an interception in the final seconds as he is driving his team down the field for the winning touchdown. He is a failure, correct? But, suppose that the cornerback who intercepted the ball immediately fumbled it, and an opponent picked it up cleanly and raced for a touchdown just as the last seconds tick away? The quarterback will still be a champion, will he not? He did all he could, and only succumbed for a moment when he was tired and beaten up. I recall that Frodo was in a similar state when he fumbled. Hardly a true measure of his purity I would think. The failure of the body is not synonymous with the failure of will... I opine in your general direction.
Regardless, the real hero is understood to be the one who resists power. I seem to recall a few such in the movie. I am going to go out on a limb and say that Frodo was the ringbearer for a reason. Call me crazy.
The hero of "Lord of the Rings" is not Frodo Baggins. It's Sam.
Sam was a hero. But he was only one of them. Sam's strength came from serving Frodo. Sam couldn't do it on his own, and he couldn't be the ringbearer. The only reason that Sam could give the ring up was because he was giving it back to Frodo - otherwise it would have destroyed him, too. That's why he had to give it back - he couldn't handle it.
Frodo collapsed, yes - but Frodo was the only one to allow himself to be slowly destroyed in order to get the ring to Mt. Doom. No one else would make that sacrifice. We say that everyone else was consumed by the ring's power, but what does it mean? It means that everyone else felt unable to allow the ring to destroy them, rather than comply with it's demands. Frodo alone was able to look at the ring and refuse it while simultaneously paying the price of allowing himself to be slowly destroyed by it. That is a sacrifice no one else was willing to do - not even Sam.
Plus Frodo is a much cooler name then Samwise Gamgee... “Samwise lives!” Umm, no.
Um... Actually Tolkien lifted the LOTR concept from Wagner's Ring Cycle.
So, you are arguing that there is zero, zilch, nada Christian narrative interloping within LOTR? My first instinct is to naysay, but I shall google first, then naysay.
Google results for: Lord of the Rings christian symbolism: 88 million results. The first few seem compelling to me. I’m going to go ahead and declare victory and await your official protest.
Maybe but there is MOST DEFINITELY a STRONG similarity between LOTR and Wagner's Ring Cycle. Tolkien denied it but his denial was lame. Very lame.
All artists steal, and especially fantasists. Tolkien didn’t invent trolls, he reimagined them. I am sure that McCain probably had trolls in mind when he called the Tea Party hobbits by the way.
Similarities between the works are superficial. The motivations of the authors are very different and therefore the motivations of the characters is too. While there are certain parallels, Wagner celebrated power and eros while Tolkien warned of the dangers of power and celebrated the value of true and loving service to others. The Ring Cycle ends dreadful and dark for most of the characters while most of the protagonists of LOTR mostly come to good ends.
LMAO!!! Funny, and a little bit scary..
That is too funny!
Wow, man. I´m havin´ a flashback.
Tolkien=Bible=Wagner????? Lighten up. Ya’ll could take the fun outta ice cream. Or is it sherbet,or sorbet, or frozen yogurt,or Heaven forbid ice milk???/s
Two things are wrong with your thesis. One, Sam took the Ring because it was too great a burden to Frodo. Everyone else coveted the Ring for the power it gave them. But not Sam. He took it simply to relieve a friend of his load. So Sam knew the corrupting power of the Ring, but took it anyway.
“So what,” you say. “Many others knew the Ring corrupted but coveted it and would gladly have taken it.” True. But they would have taken it for their own ends (even if those ends were ostensibly good). Sam, the selfless servant, had no such designs.
The second flaw in your argument comes from the fact that Sam WILLINGLY gave the Ring back to Frodo — even when he knew what it would do to him. Sam knew that the battle Frodo was fighting was one he had to win on his own. Sam himself had no such struggle to overcome. He could as easily tossed the Ring into the river of fire as he threw away a potato peel. It meant nothing to him. He was incorruptible.
I agree thsat it is simplistic to say Sam is THE hero of LOTR; there are many, including the valiant Frodo. But none — not even Galadriel, Elrond, or Gandalf dared to bear the Ring for fear of its taint. Sam did and survived intact.
Before he was sacked by Gollum, Frodo claimed the Ring for his own aloud. He was going to walk out of Mount Doom wearing the Ring of Power. As soon as he slipped on the Ring, Gollum hit him and then it was really on. Frodo lost the Ring to Gollum in the struggle and, exulting, Gollum danced over the ledge and into the Fires of Orodruin. Frodo warned Gollum that if he tried to take back the Ring, he would command him to be cast into the fire. As it happened, Gollum did fall in.
Sam held the Ring out before Frodo in Cirith Ungol and said he would be willing to share the burden with Frodo, if he'd let him. Instead, in a fit, Frodo snatched it from him. He took it before Sam could quite give it to him. Sam would have resisted the Ring for a long time. But even he, after wearing it, was not immune from the desire of possessing it. Frodo did give up the Ring willingly to Tom Bombadil. Who, after examining it and toying with it, returned it.
Actually, it’s arguable that even Bilbo gave up the Ring when he departed the Shire. But it had laid its claim on him, even though he seldom wore it and had no real notion of its power.
I still think that Sam was the spiritual force behind Frodo’s success in destroying the Ring. He was the unflinching, eternally loyal, none-too-bright but incorruptible conscience that kept Frodo from succumbing entirely to the lure of power. Maybe I give him too much credit but I’ve always thought of him as the salt-of-the-earth Everyman, whose sheer goodness is born of naivete as much as an almost Buddhist lack of Desire.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.