Man-Fai Wong

Kenneth

I don't think either trilogy has a true "power corrupts" theme. As I mentioned, I think that is the theme of "The Godfather". SW approaches evil as more of a Yin/Yang element where the light side of the force and dark side live together (not necessarily in harmony but they can't exist without the other). One would associate with the light side if one favored good things (healing, learning, cooperation, love, etc). One would associate with the dark side if one favored bad things (pain, absolute power, revenge, hatred, etc). It is your actions and motive that lead you to the dark side or light side.

In LotR you choose between supporting the forces of "good" and the forces of "evil". They imply a third element between the two that one could classify as the forces of nature (eagles, Ents, Bombadil, etc). The forces of good have been weakened because of susceptibility of their members to evil, primarily through the sin of pride (it is pride that brings down Numenor, Saruman, and Denethor). In some ways you get the impression in LotR that the third force is actually the best.


You get the impression that the although not evil in and of itself, the Dark Side can only be used for evil purposes. Dark forces can only be used to destroy or cause pain, not preserve life or heal. So to embrace the Dark side is to commit oneself to a period of Evil (although one can be redeemed and returned to the light again).



If you read the appendix with the history of the second age it was pretty apparent that before the Fall of Numenor the forces of good really outclassed Sauron. However, since Sauron still had a body at that time he was able to corrupt the Numenoreans and cause their destruction. Once they fled to Middle Earth it was really close and it was only the ring that kicked Sauron over the top. With its power Sauron would have been undefeatable by any powers available at that time. In LotR it is clear that it is a battle between the divine and the arcane. I don't see that battle as clearly drawn in SW since the battle is not against the Dark Side itself but against the disciples of its power.


To a certain extent this is true but I think the temptations of the ring are more severe. Clearly Luke was tempted by the Dark Side several times but didn't take the path fully (maintaining his alignment with the Light Side). The ring is more of an Apple (of Garden of Eden type). For one with the power to use it (Gandalf, Aragorn, Saruman, Galadriel, etc) it could not be cast aside once it was accepted. Like a bite from the Apple the knowledge and will acquired could not be cast aside. Hobbits (and Smeagol's people) seemed to have a special and unique resistance to the ring.


I actually don't find Frodo to be the key hero of LotR. To me it is Samwise. I would compare Luke with Aragorn more than Frodo. Luke is the only person (like Aragorn) who can assume the mantle required to lead the forces of light to victory. Frodo actually fails in his quest and it is only by chance (or predestination) that the forces of good win. Luke has to choose between life serving the dark side or death serving the light and chooses light. It is by making that choice that he wins and turns his Father (Darth Vader) back to the light.

As I have said, lots of layers to both.

Kenneth

Man-Fai Wong

Kenneth

I guess we can agree to disagree then. Personnally I don't think power is a theme (or subtheme) of either story. The sin that ultimately leads to the downfall of both the emperor and Sauron is pride (or hubris). Pride is the dominant sin in the LotR's where people fall into destruction. I would agree that SW does have a theme of redemption where Luke redeems Vader from his sin of pride. I would also argue that LotR has that theme in Faramir and Aragorn. Faramir redeems Boromir by making the choice his brother could not and Aragorn redeems Isuldur for the same reasons.

I also disagree with Lew's assessment that power is more important in SW. The victory of Luke is when he refuses to fight and chooses a noble death rather than an ignoble life. The conclusion of LotR is actually due to elements of blind chance or predestination when Frodo succombs at the last moment and it is actually Gollum who completes the quest (if one wanted to push the redemption theme this most likely redeemed Gollum). So in LotR not even choice comes into play.

Maybe this is what I should have written my term paper on in the LotR class I took instead of Bombadil

Kenneth

Man-Fai Wong

Kenneth

The predestination comments come mainly from the class although I personnally do believe in fate or chance (guess it goes with being born in the year of the Dragon ). It is hard to escape the predestination elements in LotR though:

1. There are references to Bilbo and correspondingly Frodo being meant to have the ring. These comments are present in both the movies and books.

2. They note Frodo's and Hobbit's resistance to the effects of the ring over other races of Middle Earth (making them the only race capable of destroying it).

3. They note that sparing Gollum was important and that he might have a purpose yet to play. Although this was clearly a literary foreshadowing device also.

4. The incident with Shelob, although harsh, ends up being the only way that they could have entered Mordor safely to destroy the ring.

5. At the edge of Mount Doom Frodo fails in his quest and tries to become the dark lord himself. It is Gollum who removes the ring and in an element of pure chance (or predestination) falls to his death destroying the ring.

There is not a hard predestination approach taken (where no one has choice) but a predestination approach where if the proper choices are made then the end is assurred. The movie breaks from this approach more than the book (where Frodo makes the wrong choice with Samwise before Shelob; a choice that he did not make in the book). Also, after the discussion on redemption as a theme I began to think of the role of Gollum as his redemption (although that might be somewhat of a stretch).

Kenneth