The Lord of the Rings - A General Discussion Thread

[librislove]

I will not disagree that in many ways Denethor is deserving of pity, particularly in the way he is manipulated by Sauron and his grief over Boromir exploited. But I have to admit I have never found Denethor to be particularly sympathetic--his besetting sins are jealousy and hubris, and he nearly brings down Gondor in their pursuit. .His single-minded devotion to his way or no way blinds him to what needs to be done to save his land. I would have to agree with Tolkien in his ultimate assesment of Denethor, given when he discusses what will happen to the Kingdom in the Fourth Age after Aragorn. He is sure it will decline, allbeit gradually perhaps, and its leaders become no more than self-serving politicians and bureaucrats, "like Denethor, or worse." (I know this is in the Letters,, but I can't get to the citation now) Add to this his glaring failure as a father, and Denethor
inspires as much or more pity for his victims as for himself. I guess I just cannot forgive him for "That depends upon the manner of your return."

[Merry]

I have always enjoyed this discussion--it has come up several times, hasn't it? One certainly must pity Faramir more than Denethor, if only for the cruel things that his father said to him, as librislove reminds us. But I keep coming back to how much both Faramir and Boromir loved their father. If he had not been a good father and steward at some point, they would not have held him in such high regard and his comments would not have been so devastating. Tolkien does not show us these times. But even Gandalf arrives in Minas Tirith hoping for Denethor to be his old self.

Denethor's whole life was spent in the shadow of Mordor. That would have been enough to suck the hope out of anyone.

[marbretherese]

If he had not been a good father and steward at some point, they would not have held him in such high regard and his comments would not have been so devastating.

This is a good point, Merry. As Lindariel suggested earlier, Denethor has been corrupted by his use of the palantir, through which Sauron presumably works in a similar way as he does through the Ring - taking advantage of his victim's weaknesses. There's a huge difference between having character flaws and being driven by them.

There is an interesting parellel here between Denethor - 'taken over' by Sauron - and Theoden, who is 'taken over' by Saruman. It is tragic that Denethor is "too far gone" to be rescued in the way that Theoden is.

[Merry]

I think it was Shippey who wrote about the 'pairs' of characters in LOTR who have similarities, but act differently: Denethor/Theoden even have similar-sounding names!

[librislove]

I suspect that sons try to love fathers no matter whether the latter deserve it or not--I am not sure that the brothers Hurin were the best judges of their father's attributes as a leader, or a father, especially in the days of the Ring War. Certainly Faramir wanted to earn his love, a patently impossible endeavor. And it is this hardness that both makes Denethor unsympathetic, and that makes it so easy for Sauron to take him over. The Dark Lord preys on and exploits the ugly traits already there to corrupt the hearts of men--he always has. That was, after all, the purpose of the Rings. Denethor's overweening pride and crabbed jealousy--of his sons, of Gandalf, of Aragorn, open the door for the ruin the Dark Lord makes of him through the despair the palantir brings when the over confident steward finds he cannot control it. Despite his wish to be so, he is not Aragorn's equal.


Gandalf was a better judge of Denethor--I think he knew he would not find any help from him in Gondor--after all he says several times in the book that Denethor barely tolerates him before our story even starts. He goes to Minas Tirith to assess the situation, and to give Denethor a last chance, and perhaps to confirm what he suspects--that Denethor is using a palantir he cannot control. Gandalf goes full ready to take over the defense of the city if he must, and he fairly quickly stops worrying overmuch about Denethor and his wishes in the matter.

Although I agree there are obvious and deliberate parallels between Theoden and Denethor, the power Saruman uses to overthrow Theoden's mind has more to do with outright possession and/or a kind of mental clouding than with the exploitation of character flaws. Thus a stronger wizard like Gandalf can reverse the "spell." in Theoden, whereas he can't change Denethor's basic personality.

[Merry]

Oh, I have to disagree with a lot of this, librislove!

Children may try to love their parents, even if they are cruel or crazy, but adult men of the stature of Boromir and Faramir, to be healthy, have to shed this eventually. The sons could never have been the fine men they were if the Denethor we see in his last days was the Denethor who had raised them. I don't think Faramir's attempt to defend Cair Andros was nearly as suicidal as the charge on Osgiliath was portrayed in the movie, and it cannot be explained totally by desiring to earn his father's love: that would be pathological, and I see Faramir as possibly the best person in the book! I think Faramir also thought that the destruction of Gondor was immanent, his brother was dead, and that something desperate was called for. There is a difference between self-sacrifice and pathology. In the book, Gandalf does not warn Faramir not to go to Cair Andros, but rather to remind him that he will be needed for other things than war and that his father loves him--with his brother dead, he can't afford to be as daring as he might otherwise have been.

I'm not suggesting that Faramir was not devastated by his father's cruel words--who wouldn't be?--but I do think much of what went on in those days can be explained by the fact that it appeared that, after a long and apparently fruitless struggle, they would all die soon with no help from anyone, something that it was reasonable for them to think. Desperate times and desperate measures: if this can be used to defend Boromir for his attack on Frodo when Boromir didn't even know that Minas Tirith was under attack, it can also be used to defend Denethor in his last days under siege. They both sought a technology that was beyond them in their pride and desperation. And it was not just the palantir that deceived Denthor into hopelessness. Really, who could reasonably have foretold that an army led by the true King (a possibility that most thought was buried in legend) would lead a fleet of DEAD PEOPLE up the river to save them?!? Most people had given up on even the ever more likely occurence that Rohan would show up. To sum up, I think it was reasonable for Denethor to think they would all be dead. Yes, he gives up hope and, finally, his sanity, when others didn't, but for this, I think he is a tragic figure and not an evil one.

I've just reread the beginning of the chapter entitled 'Minas Tirith', and there is nothing there to suggest what Gandalf expected when he met Denethor.

'He is not as other men of this time, Pippin, and whatever be his descent from father to son, by some chance the blood of Westernesse runs nearly true in him; as it does in his other son, Faramir, and yet did not in Boromir whom he loved best.'

(And by the way, don't parents sometimes love their weaker children better, just because they need it?)

This shows, I think, that Gandalf does not think there is anything evil in Denethor's 'basic personality'; in fact, rather the reverse. Gandalf does say to Denethor that he did not send the Ring to Minas Tirith because he did not trust him, but he immediately follows this up with that he didn't trust anyone, even himself, with the Ring. And even as Denethor is standing on his death pyre, Gandalf attempts to reason with him, which shows hope in his personality. Even after he goes up in flames, Gandalf speaks words of respect and not ridicule or condemnation. There is also a lot of evidence to show that his people admired him and trusted his rule, even in those terrible times.

(I also think the 'possession' of Theoden was more of a movie explanation than there is evidence for in the book, and thus his 'release' was more a matter of his own will and other factors than Gandalf's 'magic'.)

I'd like to stress again that we see Denethor in the book only at the end of his rather desperate days. The other evidence suggests that he was an admired father and steward who spent his life fighting the long defeat against an impossible enemy. Yes, he did not have the hope that Gandalf had, but even Gandalf calls this a 'fool's hope'. I see Denethor as a victim of the war of the Ring, and thus a tragic figure.

(Sorry for this rather long diatribe: I am trapped in my house by an inch of ice, and this is a welcome distraction!)

[librislove]

This is fun, Merry--there is much in your arguments for deep consideration, and I will go and consider! I may be too hard on Denethor--the truth is that pre-movie I never liked him for the reasons I offer--and you have made me think a bit about him. Yet still I see the line you quote from Gandalf to indicate Denethor is not his father's son, and that though there may be hope yet in him, we must see. I did say one of his reasons for going to Minas Tirith was to give Denethor a last chance, and he does. Unlike Galadriel and Aragorn and his own son Faramir, he does not pass the test. Gandalf's nature is to pity, not to judge, and he is truly sorry for what happened to the Steward, but that does not stop him from repeatedly reminding Denethor what his true duty is--to be ready for the King who comes. And Denethor's response is naught but disparagement of the "last of a ragged house, long bereft of honor." Between his own failings and Sauron's influence, it is too late to redeem him. Gandalf effectively leaves him behind, first to seek Faramir to lead, and when that fails after his ill-fated charge, to lead himself.


The brothers Hurin are indeed fine men--Faramir by nature, and Boromir, in the end, by strength of will. (After all, despite his lapse, he walks away from the Ring, which his father could not have done.) But it does not necessarily follow that because they are good men and admire their father and want his love, that he therefore is a good man as well. For me, Denethor has always been gifted with sons too good for him. The appendices indicate he favored Boromir almost from the start, and it was Boromir's own nature and inclination to love his brother that redeemed them from this favoritism. This was no doing of their father's, and yet it is a hard thing, I think, even for adult children, to admit the failings in a parent. Not to mention a parent who is not only your father but your sovereign in all but name. Remember--for whom does Faramir truly blossom in the end--Aragorn, who is what Denethor should have been to both the realm and to the brothers.

With regard to Theoden--my choice of the word possession was unfortunate--the image of mental confusion and cloudiness was what I really meant, and this is still, I maintain, something very different from the way Sauron worked. No--Gandalf did not exorcise Theoden, as he did in the films, but his special gift for giving hope and strength counteracted what Saruman had done, and restored Theoden to himself. That could not be repeated with Denethor.

Thoughts? Arguments? I will now climb off the lectern and let folks have at me.

[bruce rerek]

I would like to suggest that any one of us that had suffered such sustained loss and exposure to despair would not crack under the sheer weight. As we have seen in extreme situations where people have been put under unspeakable torture or brain washing, a humans threshold is not infinite, we are not wizards. True, Gandalf did try to intervene, but once a mind is bent, how can it be undone?
The chilling self destruction of Denethor leaves one with the same unsettling effect as one feels after a production of King Lear. When one looks directly at tragedy, it isn't just a sad tale, it is the witness to our most profound fears articulated and done so unflinchingly. Although we might be tempted to say that we would fare better than Lear or Denethor, we must be honest to admit that we too are flawed, and truly do not know how we would fare.
Although we look to heroes for inspiration, did it not take Aragorn over eighty years to find his courage and claim his responsibility? Was not Frodo, despite his failure to cast away the One Ring was redeemed by a capering of gleeful greed? Do we not have stories in our own lives where despite ourselves, someone or happenstance mitigated the dark night of our souls? "Do not be too quick to hand out death and judgment."

[Merry]

Your post literally gave me chills, bruce.

I've been thinking today that maybe I ought to explain what I mean by a tragic figure, although you have done a much better job than I could. But I'll say a couple more things anyway.

I'm taking this idea from Aristotle, but I think that Shakespeare also used Aristotle's ideas on this. Aristotle thought that the purpose of a tragedy is to purge excess amounts of pity and fear from us, an emotional catharsis. So he asked what kind of plot does that the best: a good man who comes to a good end just makes us happy, a bad man that comes to a good end makes us angry at the injustice, as is the good man that comes to a bad end. A bad man that comes to a bad end might give us grim satisfaction. So the true tragic plot has to be more subtle: a mostly good man who has one tragic character flaw comes to a bad end. We can't debate the justice of it, but we still feel pity for him, and we feel fear because, as bruce pointed out so well, this could easily be any of us. We can see this formula in Hamlet, Macbeth, and Othello.

So when I say that Denethor is a tragic hero, I'm not saying he's perfect, as you argue so effectively, librislove. But I do think he evokes pity.

[librislove]

I do not think I ever said that Denethor did not deserve pity, and considering that Gandalf's quote about not dealing death in judgment are for me the most important and meaningful words in the work, I would hardly have condemned him gleefully to his fate. Nor do I think I would have done better in his admittedly awful circumstances as he lived his life in the shadow of Mordor. But his choice to live his life in suspicion, jealousy, and bitterness was his decision alone in the beginning, and his sense of pride injured was disastrous for the realm and for his family. It gave Sauron the foothold in his soul that brought him down. Would I have done better? Who knows? But if I had not, that would make me as worthy of pity as Denethor, and neither of us would have been very admirable. Perhaps in the end, Denethor is simply a character who does not resonate well with me, and I will never find him sympathetic or particularly admirable. That does not mean he deserved what happened to him, nor does it absolve him of all responsibility. As you both so aptly point out, that is the essence of the tragic character.

For the record, Denethor and Aragorn were of an age, and had known each other as young men. It has even been suggested that Ecthelion's preference for "Thorongil" began Denethor's descent into bitterness, and set off the fraught dymanics of the steward's family. The blood of Numenor ran strong in both, though, and Denethor had had ample time to find his courage and faith, but they eluded him. For all the comparisons, and they are valid, between Denethor and Theoden, I have always felt that Denethor was meant to serve as Aragorn's foil. Aragorn was all that Denethor should have been.Tolkien points out that Denethor looked like Aragorn several times--a device I am sure was significant. They were Sons of Numenor, and Theoden, although a great and honorable King, was never in their league.

[bruce rerek]

What I would like to next to discuss is the palantir as a devise for those who could monopolize how the world is seen via media. Contrast Gandalf who actually goes to the various kingdoms and has real discussions with people rather than images seen in the seeing stone, or even Galadriel's mirror. I think this holds true for our time when so much of the world is delivered to us through news agencies and so little is really known as to how others live in countries both friendly and unreceptive to outsiders.

[Merry]

I don't know if this extends your metaphor or not, Bruce, but I think it was Shippey who wrote about depending on news from a palantir as a dangerous guide for action. The scattered Fellowship all proceeded on doggedly in hope, not knowing what was going on with the rest of them or in the whole wide world, but just knowing that they had to take the next step. If they had known, they might have given up. Yet those who thought they knew what was going on seriously misjudged the situations and screwed up.

Is Tolkien trying to tell us that knowledge is a bad thing? I don't think so. But too little knowledge might be worse than none. Does this make sense?

[Iolanthe]

It makes sense to me. Sometimes knowing too much is overwhelming - it overwhelmed Denethor - and the only way to succeed is to concentrate on getting your own piece of life's puzzle right. If you know everything, small contributions can quickly seem pointless. This isn't an argument for ignorance but for focus. It takes a Gandalf (a maiar) to be able to take in the whole picture and not despair.

Denethor, without Gandalf's ability to roam Middle-earth at will, was stuck with the Palantir as his main source of information. Seeing without experiencing - a very dangerous thing and something we do every day when we swtich on the TV...

This is a fabulous discussion . I've had such pleasure reading it all. It's so hard to visualise Aragorn and Denethor as contemporaries but the comparisons have been very enlightening. And your comments about Denethor, tragedy and Lear and given me a lot to think about, Bruce.

[Lindariel]

In Denethor's situation, I don't think his problem was that he knew too much. The problem is that he had only been given the bad news through the palantir. Sauron controlled what Denethor was able to see, and he made sure that the Steward was only given information that would enhance his suspicion and despair. Perhaps if Denethor had been able to "see and experience," as Iolanthe so perceptively stated, he would have been able to comprehend the bigger picture, as Gandalf did. Whether this would have been enough to help Denethor get beyond his pride is a different question, but I do think it is important to remember that Denethor's view of the world through the palantir was a horribly skewed one.

[Merry]

I agree that what Denethor saw was skewed, both by Sauron's control and his own mounting insanity, but in some ways, he knew more than any of the Fellowship. I think Shippey's point is that what one chooses to do with whatever knowledge one has is as important as the knowledge itself. The members of the scattered Fellowship trudged on in hope; had they known what was going on, they might have despaired.

When I think about it, splitting off the Fellowship into small groups was brilliant on Tolkien's part. Shippey talks about the 'interlacing' plot and how it allows each member enough ignorance of the big picture to do his share.