|
t to hear other opinions on the matter. I have been a reader, fan, and general aficionado of Tolkien for years, and above all that I have noticed of the Trilogy, the prequel (Hobbit), the Silmarillon, Lays of Beliarand, etc., the only way a problem can be solved is by confronting it head on, in a particularly personal manner. To some, this may seem obvious. I expect responses such as "Of course, all problems must be confronted head on." This in itself is quite an oblique statement. In many examples of literature, of fantasy and others, the approach to solving a problem is far from direct. In the One Ring Trilogy, the most important quest is, of course, Frodo's. Frodo takes a direct route (being besieged along the way, but still direct) to Mount Doom, housed within the very lands of Sauron himself. In essence, this quest would normally be self-defeating. Is such a direct, dangerous path worth the risk? Gandalf: "Frodo, this ring must not fall into the hands of Sauron, or else Middle Earth will be plunged into darkness forever! (Or something to that nature) He must not get the ring; take it to his land and destroy it." In other works, the collection of objects to defeat a great evil, or "hit and run tactics", are employed to solve the problem.
Approximate Word count = 738
Approximate Pages = 3
(250 words per page double spaced)
|
|
