Books, Films, Adaptations & Reader Responses 4/8

These are a few of my favorite things!

Welcome to the fourth post in this series!

Part 1 of this series links to two great posts on adaptation and Tolkien (one on the Jackson film, one on the Rings of Power series) which inspired this series and that I highly recommend reading.

Part 2 of this series describes my journey (completely unplanned until Peter Jackson, Fran Walsh, and Philippa Boyen kicked me out the door of Bag End) of falling in love with the film, which brought me back to my earlier adoration of Tolkien’s legendarium, all in a fannish mode (seeing it 45 times before it left the theatres definitely counts) and then switching my academic specialization and “research agenda” to ALL Tolkien, Jackson, and related topics (including reception and fan studies).

Part 3 of this series does a quick’n’dirty overview of how reception of “Shakespeare’s” plays over the centuries (and the historical and ongoing critical cage matches over them regarding canonization and the state of “Western Civilization”) map fairly closely to how the critical, fan, and academic reception of “Tolkien” (both his works and his “authorial self”) have unfolded.¹

Part 3.5 of this series builds on Part 3 but covers my current scholarship on the far-right extremists’ backlash against academics, fans, and (sigh) Amazon’s new series (which, irony of ironies, I don’t really like). Turns out the FRE’s want to protect “White (AKA Western) Civilization” as exemplified by their racist, misogynistic, christo-fascist interpretations of Shakespeare . . .and Tolkien!.

Jokien with Tolkien’s post (linked above as well as here) ends with three questions: when I first read the post, I started typing an answer in comments, but it got long, and then I somehow glitched something and lost it. So I decided to come over here where I have slightly more control over the text.

Feel free to share your answers to the questions in comments — I am always interested to hear people’s responses to the film either in the context of Tolkien’s legendarium, or as a a stand-alone work (that is from people seeing and loving the film who had not read Tolkien!).

1. Which of the three movies is your favorite? Why?

2. Are there changes that these movies made where you disagree with my assessment? Which ones are they and why do you either like them or dislike them?

3. During the course of writing this essay I changed my mind on a change in the movies that I’ve always disliked! I used to really dislike the elves showing up at Helm’s Deep. But as I thought about it for this essay, I found I’d moved from being against the change to being accepting of it (though I still don’t like it per se). Have you ever had a similar change of heart about a detail of these movies like that?

Question #1: I cannot answer this one any more than I can answer which of the three books are my favorite! Neither text is a trilogy in the sense that many people define it today. Both were created as one text (Jackson filmed the whole thing, and not in chronological order!, then released it in three films, true, but as far as I know, very few, if any, film directors had ever done that before!).

Tolkien never intended his novel to become the basis for genre fantasy’s reliance on trilogies! It was published in three installments not because that was how they were planned or written but because of commercial and practical reasons after World War II which included paper shortages plus concerns over whether people would buy a 1200-page novel cold by a still (relatively) unknown author.

Tolkien’s own structure was a narrative presented in six books (plus the Preface and Appendices — additional paratextual material was added to the later editions), each book with its own internal structure. One of the biggest differences between book and film is the choice Jackson (but I assume his scipt co-authors, Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens participated in!) made to break down that six-book interlaced structure (Shippey) which is an interlace structure, a medieval form according to Stephen Yandell.² The film’s structure is a more (comparatively!) straightforward chronological one, cutting back and forth after “The Breaking of the Fellowship” to show what’s happening to the characters at more or less the same time.

I can certainly think of parts of the film I enjoy more than others, but the same can be said of parts of the book, and it’s not always the same parts, nor is it an entire book/film.

My favorite parts of the book are the most hobbit-centric ones, especially Frodo and Sam’s journey to Mordor. I am less involved in the parts set in Rohan and Isengard.

But when it comes to the film, I find it hard to get as involved with what happens to Frodo and Sam and Gollum after the Ithilien interlude—part of it is seeing the desolation of the land and their suffering, so very much tied to the visual impact of film. I don’t think the directorial choices are bad, as such, just more graphic and depressing than I can easily watch.

There are also some changes in the story during those parts that I find irritating or distracting: Frodo sending Sam away, good grief, what does that even do? I don’t like horror as a genre, so the ICK factor of the spider sequence (Peter Jackson’s earlier work in horror shows through here with the gross webs, dangling corpses, and (SHUDDER) Shelob) which tends to gross me out . It’s effective, certainly, but it has a completely different emotional charge/focus than the equivalent sequence in Tolkien where Frodo and Sam go through the tunnel together.

Here’s where I get onto one of my favorite hobby-horses: point of view! The reason I generally like books more than the films made from them (The Lord of the Rings being pretty much the only exception) is how much more engaging and immersive written texts, and narrative points of view (when done well!) are for me than visual storytelling.

The power of experiencing what happens from Frodo’s perspective, and then shifting to Sam’s point of view, and then to the in “Shelob’s Lair” is so brilliantly done (read it aloud if you don’t believe me!):

It seemed light in that dark land to his eyes that had passed through the den of night. The great smokes had risen and grown thinner, and the last hours of a sombre day were passing; the red glare of Mordor had died away in sullen gloom. Yet it seemed to Frodo that he looked up on a morning of sudden hope. Almost he had reached the summit of the wall. Only a little higher now. The Cleft, Cirith Ungol, was before him, a dim notch in the black ridge, and the horns of rock darkling in the sky on either side. A short race, a sprinter’s course, and he would be through!

“The pass, Sam!” he cried, not heeding the shrillness of his voice, that released from the choking airs of the tunnel rang out now high and wild. “The pass! Run, run, and we’ll be through—through before anyone can stop us!”

Sam came up behind as fast as he could urge his legs; but glad as he was to be free, he was uneasy, and as he ran, he kept on glancing back at the dark arch of the tunnel, fearing to see eyes, or some shape beyond his imagination. Too little did he or his master know of the craft of Shelob. She had many exits from her lair (LotR.4.X.273).

After this passage, there is a break in the text, and the narrative picks up with the third-person narrative persona filling the reader (but not the characters!) in on the evil that is Shelob. This narrative persona occurs at times throughout LotR to provide historical background that none of the POV characters could know.³

So while I think that the film adaptation of that sequence falls greatly short of the book, I’m not sure that *any* filmic version of it could have adequately translated the written scene (for me at least)! But of course, different readers have very different things in the book that they love!

What makes me happiest is having both the film and the book (and a lot of my fanfic blends elements from both for that very reason).

There’s another difference in my responses to book and film (relating to character): my OTP for the Book!characters has always been Frodo/Sam. My OTP for the Film!characters is Frodo/Faramir (although through the magic of AU I often manage to give Frodo both — over time, through an earlier relationship with Sam, and a later one with Faramir!).⁴ I haven’t ever tried to analyze why that is, but I strongly suspect it has a great deal to do with the narrative POV in the book (and although the film shows how much Frodo and Sam care about each other, it isn’t the same) and probably to do with David Wenham’s Faramir!

---

Question 2: I mostly agree with JwT’s assessment of what works, what doesn’t, what are the minor and major changes and think he makes a good case for why he likes the first of the three films:

While changes are necessary when adapting a story from one medium to another, not all changes are equal or work equally well. The changes to Fellowship are mostly changes I agree with or understand (e.g. time compression, Tom Bombadil, Aragorn). The changes in The Two Towers and The Return of the King are ones I generally don’t care for compared to the book (e.g. Army of the Dead, Faramir, Denethor). All this helps to cement Fellowship as my favorite of the three Peter Jackson films.

But there is one exception: Faramir! My feelings about Film!Faramir are very different than about Book!Faramir although the Ithilien interlude is one of my favorite parts of the book and includes the passage which I always choose to read when there’s a “read your favorite passage from LotR event!)⁵ My issues with Book!Faramir go back to when I was ten, in love with Éowyn and resenting like made her marriage to Faramir (there is a planned post in which I focus entirely on Éowyn in book and film!). Most of the reason for my change of heart, snicker, was my absolute adoration of David Wenham’s portrayal of Faramir, but, the changed narrative arc which so many people so dislike, was another reason. Book!Faramir just seemed too good to be true.

And while I’m not that fond of Film!Denethor (though I think John Noble did a fantastic job, and the scene between him and Pippin when he makes Pippin sing is so. incredibly. beautifully. brilliantly. sad. I fall apart every time), I think that the the changed characterizations of these characters are completely connected: that a large part of the reason Faramir nearly succumbs to the temptation of the Ring is because of the extreme favoritism of Denethor toward Boromir and his abuse of Faramir.

But, in fact, I don’t see Book!Denethor as all that complex or even noble a character although I agree the Jackson adaptation makes him into a shallow (mad?) villain. But there is one way in which the film reproduces quite accurately one of the major interactions between father and son: Denethor sending Faramir out to lead a force against Osgiliath. There’s one major difference (in the book, it’s set in a Council; in the film, it’s just the two of them, Pippin, and a servant or two in the echoing Great Hall), but the heart of it is the same — a number of lines of dialogue were the same (pared down from the longer speeches of course). Denethor admits he wishes Faramir was dead instead of Boromir (although of course Denethor was the one who insisted Boromir take the journey!) and insists on what seems to me to be a really crappy tactical decision that puts his son (and, with Boromir dead, only heir) into danger along with all the men sent with him (when, as Faramir points out in the book, “we can make the Enemy pay ten times our loss at the passage and yet rue the exchange. For he can afford to lose a host at the passage better than we to lose a company. And the retreat of those that we put far afield will be perilous, if he wins across in force” (RotK.5.IV.816).

And by golly, Faramir was *right*!

I think it’s hard to justify Denethor’s action of sending a force against Osgiliath — other than it shows how badly he has degenerated as the Steward. And I think a lot of the scenes with Denethor are more heightened than changed (though yeah, I roill my eyes at the running so far in flames — still, the way the camera pulls back when he falls or jumps off the cliff reducing his dramatic suicide to a speck against the destruction of the City is a fascinating shot).

---

The third question, whether I’ve changed my mind about a scene I previously disliked— I cannot think of any. Even now, after seeing the films so many times I’ve lost count, I can still “see” things I didn’t notice earlier, and appreciate some things more, but I wouldn’t describe it as that sort of change.⁶

I’ve never been that fond of the Big Battle Scenes (and Legolas’s increasing feats of derring-do became ridiculous [although not as ridiculous as they did in The Hobbit], so I occasionally zone out during those. But there were two choices that I found disappointing, having to do with the settings, the landscape: Ithilien and Lothlórien (I specify the landscape because what happens in both places was fine). These stand out because so much of the scenery, land, and places in the film were incredible (and fit very well with my own vision of them).⁷

But Ithilien is my favorite place in Middle-earth which is my favorite place in all of Middle-earth wasn’t as I imagined/envisioned it as opposed to many of the other location, and the pacing moves so quickly from entering Ithilien to seeing the battle and being captured by Faramir. But, as with journey through Shelob’s tunnel, I realize there’s no way that a film could ever show how Frodo and Sam perceived Ithilien, especially given what it felt like to enter after the Dead Marshes and the Black Gate.

I was also disappointed in Lothlórien which, as Sam notes on the way in, is sunlit and bright, unlike his earlier sense of the Elves. Another of my favorite scenes (embedding some of Tolkien’s theory in “Of Fairy Stories” in Frodo’s experience) is at Cerin Amroth (which was cut entirely, and I understand why, because they could never have conveyed that experience). The vividness of that scene is so strong that the film imagery seems pale and weak in comparison.⁸

The others cast themselves down upon the fragrant grass, but Frodo stood awhile still lost in wonder. It seemed to him that he had stepped through a high window that looked on a vanished world. A light was upon it for which his language had no name. All that he saw was shapely, but the shapes seemed at once clear cut, as if they had been first conceived and drawn at the uncovering of his eyes, and ancient as if they had endured for ever. He saw no colour but those he knew, gold and white and blue and green, but they were fresh and poignant, as if he had at that moment first perceived them and made for them names new and wonderful. In winter here no heart could mourn for summer or for spring. No blemish or sickness could be seen in anything that grew upon the earth. On the land of Lórien there was no stain.

He turned and saw that Sam was now standing beside him, looking around with a puzzled expression, and rubbing his eyes as if he was not aware that he was awake. 'It's sunlight and bright day, right enough,' he said. 'I thought that Elves were all for moon and stars: but this is more Elvish than anything I ever heard tell of. I feel as if I was inside a song, if you take my meaning.'

Haldir looked at them, and he seemed indeed to take the meaning of both thought and word. He smiled. 'You feel the power of the Lady of the Galadhrim,' he said. 'Would it please you to climb with me up Cerin Amroth?'

They followed him as he stepped lightly up the grass-clad slopes. Though he walked and breathed, and about him living leaves and flowers were stirred by the same cool wind as fanned his face, Frodo felt that he was in a timeless land that did not fade or change or fall into forgetfulness. When he had gone and passed again into the outer world, still Frodo the wanderer from the Shire would walk there, upon the grass among elanor and niphredil in fair Lothlórien.

They entered the circle of white trees. As they did so the South Wind blew upon Cerin Amroth and sighed among the branches. Frodo stood still, hearing far off great seas upon beaches that had ago been washed away, and sea-birds crying whose race had perished from the earth.

Haldir had gone on and was now climbing to the high flet. As Frodo prepared to follow him, he laid his hand upon the tree beside the ladder: never before had he been so suddenly and so keenly aware feel and texture of a tree's skin and of the life within it. He delighted in wood and the touch of it, neither as forester nor as carpenter; it was the delight of the living tree itself.

As he stepped out at last upon the lofty platform, Haldir took his hand and turned him towards the South. 'Look this way first!' he said.

Frodo looked and saw, still at some distance, a hill of many mighty trees or a city of green towers: which it was he could not tell. Out it seemed to him that the power and light came that held all land in sway. He longed suddenly to fly like a bird to rest in the city. Then he looked eastward and saw all the land of Lórien down to the pale gleam of Anduin, the Great River. He lifted eyes across the river and all the light went out, and he was back in the world he knew. Beyond the river the land appeared flat and empty, formless and vague, until far away it rose again like a wall, dark and drear. The sun that lay on Lothlórien had no power to enlighten the shadow of that distant height.

'There lies the fastness of Southern Mirkwood,' said Haldir. 'It is clad in a forest of dark fir, where the trees strive one against another and their branches rot and wither. In the midst upon a stony height stands Dol Guldur, where long the hidden Enemy had his dwelling. We fear that now it is inhabited again, and with power sevenfold. A black cloud lies often over it of late. In this high place you may see the two powers that are opposed one to another; and ever they strive now in thought, but whereas the light perceives the very heart of the darkness, its own secret has not been discovered. Not yet.' He turned and climbed swiftly down, and they followed him.

At the hill's foot Frodo found Aragorn, standing still and silent as a tree; but in his hand was a small golden bloom of elanor, and a light was in his eyes. He was wrapped in some fair memory: and as Frodo looked at him he knew that he beheld things as they once had been in this same place. For the grim years were removed from the face of Aragorn, and he seemed clothed in white, a young lord tall and fair; and he spoke words in the Elvish tongue to one whom Frodo could not see. Arwen vanimelda, namarie! he said, and then he drew a breath, and returning out of his thought he looked at Frodo and smiled.

'Here is the heart of Elvendom on earth,' he said, 'and here my heart dwells ever, unless there be a light beyond the dark roads that we still must tread, you and I. Come with me!' And taking Frodo's hand in his, he left the hill of Cerin Amroth and came there never again as living man.

*happy sigh*

---

So, I have at least two more pieces planned for this series: one about the characterization of Éowyn and another about the Ents: these are both parts of the film I mostly love unreservedly, but there is one small part of each that I *really* dislike.

There might be a third — on a question JwT did not ask: whether people prefer the theatrical releases (which my film colleague informed me were “canon” in film studies) or the extended editions! I do think that the EE of The Two Towers is signficantly stronger (though I’d be hard to list specific reasons because I’ve been watching the EEs ever since they came out over the theatrical ones).

Click here for part 5 of the series—the Ents!

1. I was an undergraduate in the early 1970s, an English major, in a department mostly staffed by faculty trained in New Criticism whichwas a theory that emphasized the only way to approach Works of Literature (had to be capital-L to emphasize canonicity and greatness) were best understood as isolated objects (“universal,” unmoored from any biographical or historical context) using the methodologies of close reading and lots of specialized strutural or formal terminology as a method. The methods are still hanging around out there, but New Criticism is way old these days. I enjoyed my classes immensely, but it’s also true that they were almost entirely focused on Dead White Men, almost entirely focused on poetry and drama with only a few novels allowed into some classes (and NO “popular” literature, meaning no genre especially that icky science fiction and fantasy). The Shakespeare dudes back in the day did in fact diss Tolkien (I was there, Gandalf!) although my mentor/favorite teacher (one of the two women in a department of over twenty) let me babble about the stuff because her youngest son was an sff fan!

2. See: Tom Shippey, Author of the Century, Harper Collins, 2001, and Stephen Yandell, (1996) ""A Pattern Which Our Nature Cries Out For": The Medieval Tradition of the Ordered Four in the Fiction of J.R.R. Tolkien," Mythlore, vol. 21, no. 2, article 57, Link.

3. I first explore the complex mix of narrative perspectives (using applied stylistics) in a a 2009 essay, "Mythology and History: A Stylistic Analysis of The Lord of the Rings," Style, vol. 43, no. 4, Winter 2009, pp. 517-538, but expand the concept for a forthcoming essay in Cami Agan’s edited volume, Cities and Strongholds (Mythopoeic Press) which should be out sometime in 2025.

4. And yes, I have one or two WIPs with Sam/Frodo/Faramir, otherwise known as an OT3.

5. The passage into Ithilien at the start of “Of Herbs and Stewed Rabbit,” from “The dusk was deep when at length they set out,” to “They look about for a hiding-place where they could shelter from evil eyes while the light lasted.” My retirement present for myself was commissioning a painting of Frodo and Sam in Ithilien from Ted Nasmith (which you can see here on his website!).

6. After seeing the remastered/extended versions in the theatre earlier this month, we rewatched Return of the King (will probably do a full rewatch later this year!), and this time around I realized something I had not before: the amazing contrast between Pippin swearing fealty to Denethor and Merry to Théodon! As scholars have noted (cannot for the life of me remember which, sorry!), there are lots of parallels or pairing of characters in the novel, with both similarities and differences, Denethor and Théoden being only one of the examples. The difference between the setting and how each ruler accepts the hobbits’ oath is incredibly striking (as is the language used!). Théoden comes off by far the best IMHO!

7. I recognized Moria the moment I saw the first trailer in the theatre; Rivendell is fantastic; Edoras even more so; Fangorn, definitely; Isengard, yep. The Shire (which also reminds me in all sorts of ways of the Palouse where I grew up) is perfect. (The picture in the Wikipedia article on the Palouse is a good example of the landscape in which I spent my childhood and adolescence.) And I think the lighting of the beacons in the film is light-years more beautiful and effective and fantastic than how Tolkien describes it in the book.

8. A friend and I wrote an essay exploring the ways in which Jackson’s film takes an historical, materialist approach, downplaying the spiritual elements, and how that makes sense for the visual medium. But we also analyze how the final song of RotK, “Into the West,” sung by Annie Lennox, brings back much of the ambiguous tone of the last chapter of the novel. See: Judy Ann Ford and Robin Anne Reid, "Into the West: Far Green Country or Shadow on the Waters?" Picturing Tolkien: Essays on Peter Jackson's The Lord of the Rings Film Trilogy, eds. Janice Bogstad and Philip Kaveny. McFarland, 2011, pp. 169-182. I am willing to share a PDF of the chapter with those who do not own the book: email me at robinareid AT fastmail.com.