I was thinking of writing a
short essay on Lord of the Rings -- the book. Not sure, but probably. I'll
mention now though that comparing the book with the film, one notes how much
more democratic Jackson is compared to Tolkien. Jackson's impetus with the
hobbits is to make each one of them leaders in the sense that with their
decisions, abide the fate of the world... so leaders in the most flattering and
worthy sense. Frodo decides to set off alone into Gondor, and the future King
-- Aragorn -- has to react to this decision, and decides in fact to change
course, which is what happens in the film. So all good both ways there: Frodo
sheds himself the impetus of the great council of Elrond, which willed they go
as much as possible as a team. But in the film it is Merry and Pippen who are
responsible for destroying Saruman, they sway the ent-leader to his decision to
participate and fight, when he had at first decided to play it the Tom Bombadil
way and let the whole rancid world go discombobulate -- go fuck -- itself,
whereas in the book this is a decision the ent-leader comes to only on his own.
Merry and Pippen do nothing in their stay with him other than see things they
can brag about when they return home... about how close they were to central
events, which is a kind of closet narcissism. They also grow a couple of
inches, literally, which encourages a kind of grandiose narcissism. It's the
"parents" that do the meaningful stuff.
Now of course it is one of
these two hobbits who distinctively distracts the Nazgul commander, by stabbing
him with his magical sword, and so he can be dispatched by the warrior
"who is not a man" but who is temporarily stunned and on her ass. But
could you imagine how the reading experience of the book would have been
different if somehow one of the hobbits -- being good at riddles -- had divined
that the secret lady warrior joining the Rohirim into Gondor -- which he only
seems to know about -- might be the "no man" perhaps fated to defeat
the Nazgul lord, and arranged to keep close to her through the battle to
perhaps serve as a sort of an innocuous but essential assistant to her
delivering the fateful blow? He's small, nimble and easy to overlook, and, more
essentially, one of the very few soldiers with the kind of magic sword that can
do any kind of damage at all to the Nazguls (the book makes this explicit:
without the magic sword, no painful piercing of Nazgul tendons, no meaningful
distraction, no dispatch of the Nazgul king, and more assuredly, one very much
squashed princess on the battlefield).
You can count up the number
of times where Merry and Pippen do surprisingly essential things in the
battlefield (for example, do you know that the epic fight with the tremendous
cave troll in the film is absent in the book because of one of them stabbing it
in the foot just as he was making his entrance?). But without the canniness
Jackson gives them, in the books they seem only those who do surprisingly well
for child-sized hobbits (meaning: any Gondor knight would have been better for
the Fellowship, overall; and the Elvish lord that is considered... infinitely
superior.)
Strangely, this doesn't seem as true with Jackson's
film version of The Hobbit. In the film, he does credit Bilbo with the canny
decision to distract the trolls, which in the book is all Gandalf's doing...
Bilbo is passive. But elsewhere in the book Tolkien seems to give him much more
credit. The defeat of the spiders is all Bilbo's doing: basically imagine the
whole contribution of the elves in the movie and attribute it to Biblo solo and
you're part ways close to assessing his actions properly... but not quite at
all fully there! for Bilbo lures, bates, and even seemingly triangulates the
spiders to their doom. And of course, unforgettably, Smaug's doom is all
Bilbo's doing. In conversation with Smaug, Bilbo believes he sees something
awry in the Smaug's sword-proof armor and he manipulates Smaug into exposing
his full "magnificent" body, into posing, so Bilbo can be sure about
what he saw. The fact of this flaw eventually gets transmitted to Bard so he
can direct his aim... so he can do something actually meaningful, other than
posture heroically before being fried to a crisp.
Bilbo didn't install the flaw in Smaug's otherwise perfect construction, but he is all Rogue One in that he is the one who finds out about it and gets the message on its way to "princess Leia" Bard. In the movie, of course, Bard spots the weak spot on his own, and without any cunning involved. Bilbo, on the other hand, had to endure Smaug accurately undressing Bilbo's every motive... even his being in the possession of a magic ring.
Bilbo didn't install the flaw in Smaug's otherwise perfect construction, but he is all Rogue One in that he is the one who finds out about it and gets the message on its way to "princess Leia" Bard. In the movie, of course, Bard spots the weak spot on his own, and without any cunning involved. Bilbo, on the other hand, had to endure Smaug accurately undressing Bilbo's every motive... even his being in the possession of a magic ring.
Comments
Post a Comment