“Tolkien”: On the Ring of Fellowship

Last updated on: May 11, 2019 at 5:57 pm by Paul Louis Metzger

“Tolkien”: On the Ring of Fellowship 2019-05-11T17:57:06-07:00 Paul Louis Metzger

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

2014, Creative Commons

The film Tolkien is about fellowship—between Tolkien and his close friends from youth—and his teenage sweetheart who later became his wife. Regardless of what one makes of the connections the film develops between Tolkien’s life and The Lord of the Rings book trilogy, the film does highlight the importance of fellowship for Tolkien, who with his younger brother was orphaned in his youth. It is a rare person who has the literary gifting that Tolkien had. Perhaps even more rare, or at least even more valuable, are the relationships the movie depicts Tolkien having.

I will return to this theme later. For now, I will consider what the film does not convey before proceeding to discuss what the film does capture.

Interestingly, the film does not draw attention to The Inklings, the literary group made up of Tolkien, C.S. Lewis, and others at Oxford. This point is not a criticism, as the film primarily focused on Tolkien’s younger years and early development up through his university studies and participation in WWI. Still, the lack of attention to The Inklings made me hope for a sequel focusing on this particular ring of fellowship.

While the acting is very good, the film did not capture Tolkien’s genius or creativity either. For example, the World War I battle field allusions to his literary masterpiece did not do justice to Tolkien’s literary creativity and imagination. No doubt, this would be hard to do no matter the biographical sketch. What was perhaps most interesting was the scene of a young Tolkien dancing with Edith Bratt (his future wife) during the performance of Wagner’s “Ring of the Nibelung,” which has often been claimed as an inspiration for Tolkien’s own “Ring” epic, to Tolkien’s chagrin. According to a New Yorker analysis of the two epics, Tolkien said this of any comparison between his “Ring” and Wagner’s “Ring”: “Both rings were round, and there the resemblance ceased.” No doubt, Tolkien would have rejected the film’s direct connections between life circumstances (such as his Oxford circle of friends and WWI) and his literary work, just as he rejected any developed association with Wagner’s masterpiece. Based on what I read in various reviews of the film, Tolkien’s estate has also disavowed the film (even prior to watching it). More generally, readers may find instructive the reviews of Tolkien by The Washington Post, National Review, and Los Angeles Times.

What the film does capture, I believe, was Tolkien’s longing for fellowship and friendship. We marvel at his genius. May we also marvel at the film’s depiction of how much he is portrayed as cherishing his wife and friends. Perhaps it was due to losing his father and mother at a young age. Who knows? But whether in real life or in his Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings trilogy, Tolkien had a very keen sense of the importance of friendship and companionship. The film portrays Tolkien as willing to risk his life to find one of his old friends (Geoffrey Bache Smith) on the battlefield and hold out for the woman he loved (Edith) from whom he was separated during his university studies. In reflecting on the movie Tolkien’s emphasis on friendship and fellowship, I was reminded of what Aristotle wrote in the Nichomachean Ethics: “without friends, no one would choose to live, even if he possessed all other goods.”[1]

Here I depart from the Tolkien film to reflect on Tolkien’s literary works in comparison with Aristotle. Where Tolkien’s emphasis on friendship in The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit volumes as well as films differ from Aristotle’s own corpus is that Tolkien did not give primacy of place to noble, virtuous friends, but to the virtue of the simple and unassuming creatures of the Shire—hobbits. Yes, there is a sense in which the hobbits like Bilbo, Frodo and Sam, for example, were virtuous, but they were not made of the sophisticated substance of the elves or warriors like Aragorn, or the wizard Gandalf. The hobbits were hardly the stuff of Tolkien’s Oxford. Moreover, unlike Aristotle, Tolkien makes room even for Gollum. I still remember the line in the film trilogy where Gandalf exhorts Frodo to have compassion on Gollum rather than write him off. Perhaps such gracious intervention on the part of Gandalf is reflective of Tolkien’s Catholic upbringing, which the film Tolkien highlights.

Here I contrast what Aristotle writes with what commentators note in comparing Aristotle with the New Testament on virtue and friendship. First, let’s consider Aristotle:

But complete friendship is the friendship of those who are good and alike in point of virtue. For such people wish in similar fashion for the good things for each other insofar as they are good, and they are good in themselves. But those who wish for the good things for their friends, for their friends’ sake, are friends most of all, since they are disposed in this way in themselves and not incidentally. Their friendship continues, then, while they are good, and virtue is a stable thing. Each person involved is good simply and for the friend, since good people are good simply and beneficial to one another. So too are they pleasant, for the good are both pleasant simply and pleasant to one another. To each person, his own actions and those like them accord with his pleasure, and the actions of those who are good are the same or similar.[2]

Now let’s consider the comparison of Aristotle and the New Testament:

Aristotle is far from ignorant of the importance of human love; indeed, he devotes two whole books (NE VIII and IX) to the topic of friendship…And he notes that there is a sense in which one should love oneself, namely wishing for the very best for oneself (1168b30). But friendship (philia) is, on Aristotle’s conception, only possible with a few people; moreover, it can really exist only between good people. In contrast, the New Testament conception of love (agape, formerly translated as “charity”) is supposed to be universal and unconditional. It involves more, I take it, than Aristotle’s “good will” (NE1166b30). The ideal it puts before us is first that we should be loving or compassionate to all our fellow human beings, regardless of sex, race, class, ethnicity, or nationality. And, second, that our love or compassion should not depend on good behavior or individual talents, so that a change of heart and forgiveness should always be seen as possible. This twin ideal is almost impossibly demanding on our frail human nature. But we may feel that there is something missing from an ethic that does not even set it before us.[3]

In our day, where market forces rather than virtue or grace drive value, Aristotle and even more importantly, the New Testament help us reconsider where we should look to find worth and significance. Friendship and fellowship are rare qualities, especially involving those whose character reflects Tolkien’s hobbits. Those hobbits like Frodo and Sam were loyal to a fault and had no lust for power. When coupled with Gandalf’s exhortation to Frodo to have compassion on the creature Gollum, which Frodo in turn did, we find qualities bound up with friendship that are more important than any ring of power or pleasure this world can offer. Regardless of what the critics make of the film Tolkien, I am grateful for how the various actors and plot caused me to reflect upon the priceless quality we find in the ring of noble and gracious fellowship and friendship.

_______________

[1]Aristotle, Nichomachean Ethics, translated by Robert C. Bartlett and Susan D. Collins (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2011), Book VIII, chapter 3, page 163.

[2]Aristotle, Nichomachean Ethics, page 168.

[3]Leslie Stevenson, David L. Haberman and Peter Matthews Wright, Twelve Theories of Human Nature, sixth edition (New York: Oxford University Press, 2013), Theories of Human Nature, pages 113-114.

Uncategorized

Previous Post

May 5, 2019

We See the Resurrected Jesus When We Break Bread Together

Next Post

May 12, 2019 Jesus’ Resurrection Does Not Depend on Faith, But Should Deepen It.

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Uncategorized

Select a Month June 2025 April 2025 March 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz