The Sixth International

« Tory porn | Main | Sex, manual »

05 January 2004

Ringing false

I have now seen Peter Jackson's Return of the King, and cannot complain. Extremely well done indeed. The battles in particular were astounding, and Legolas's attack on the elephant in itself worth the price of admission. That the near-final scene at the Grey Havens was all bathetic tweeness is a minor quibble. Shelob was a more serious disappointment. Everyone went on about how very realistic she was. They need to look more closely. Really now - a spider with two pairs of chelicerae? And a stinger?! And, though Frodo distinctly said her webbing was 'sticky', it sure had the look of cribellate silk to me (indeed, Shelob did have a generally amaurobiid appearance to her). Still and all, these are small defects when measured against the whole of the film.

And now, having conceded Jackson's work the praise it deserves, can we all agree that its source, Tolkien's trilogy, is really an astounding great steaming pile of shite? It's ill-written and far too long; Tolkien wanted a firm editor smacking his head every second paragraph. And it is, of course, a deeply conservative work, with all the hypocrisy and intellectual dishonesty that implies. But most fundamentally, it's a complete nonsense. Pompous warriors and insufferable elves and of course the deeply annoying hobbits themselves, all cut out of cardboard with the same dull scissors, all tremendously oppressed by Doom and Destiny, and all over a bloody magic ring. Everybody says that Gollum is the most interesting, really the only interesting character in the tale. And they're right, but they fail to recognise that this is a grave indictment.

Would only that Tolkien had kept to scholarly editions of sagas and Arthurian romances and the like, and never written the thing. It would have been vastly preferable had Jackson's film sprung, unsourced, from his own imagination. Think of it: not only would there have been no LotR books, but also none of their Ralph Bakshiisations, none of that whole puerile and contemptible genre of 'fantasy' novels, no Dungeons and Dragons. Tolkien has a lot to answer for.

UPDATE: Unlike me, Kevin Drum actually likes the swords-and-sorcerers genre, yet agrees with me that Tolkien is an old bore. Ha!

Posted by Mrs Tilton at 01:02 PM | Permalink

Comments

"it is, of course, a deeply conservative work, with all the hypocrisy and intellectual dishonesty that implies"

I really think you ought to justify statements like that.

Oh, and welcome back!

Posted by: Peter Cuthbertson at 7 Jan 2004 03:38:04

"Pompous warriors and insufferable elves and of course the deeply annoying hobbits themselves, all cut out of cardboard with the same dull scissors, all tremendously oppressed by Doom and Destiny, and all over a bloody magic ring."

Is it really weirder than going through much the same over small quantities of uranium and plutonium? And, you know, at least those "pompous warriors and insufferable elves" care about a world worth having and will fight for it, even lay down their lives for it. If we had leaders and rulers who did that, I wouldn't care if they were sometimes pompous and insufferable.

"Everybody says that Gollum is the most interesting, really the only interesting character in the tale."

But who would you rather have for friends, advisors, or on your side in a fight? Even if some of them have a way of bursting into paragraphs of alliterative verse. This may be an indictment of "realistic" literature, rather than *Lord of the Rings*.

Posted by: Randolph Fritz at 7 Jan 2004 10:40:17

*snicker* Well, I'm a huge fan of the trilogy myself, but also have to agree that a good editor might have made it a more readable work; at the same time, I find a certain charm in the flaws you point out--and I pretty much blow past the songs each time I re-read the thing.

As I read your denouncement of creatures like hobbits & elves, I find I have to strongly suggest you read Harvard Lampoon's "Bored Of The Rings", which spectacularly exposes the Hobbits as sneaky, small-minded, nasty perverts. The other races of Middle-Earth fare no better.

If you were disappointed in Shelob in the movie, I think you'll find the raging, bon-bon popping She-Blob in this book more than makes up for it. Enjoy!

Posted by: Tom Stockman at 7 Jan 2004 19:49:55

I have to admit that while I like the films, the books are among that list of books I'll read during a lengthy stay in hospital, confined to bed. As I said to a friend after LOTR won The Big Read - it's a great story, but that doesn't necessarily make it a great book.

Of course, for the true interpretation of LOTR (though you've probably seen it already): http://www.mcsweeneys.net/2003/04/22fellowship.html

Posted by: Nick at 7 Jan 2004 23:57:24

Very good review, good to see some opposing viewpoints.

Yep, ever since these books came out, whenever men are naughty, they just blame it on the ring.

Posted by: LeilaJoy at 14 Jan 2004 16:50:55