Why is Aragorn's opinion given so much weight for the composition of the Fellowship?

[Flammifer]

If Saruman hadn't turned traitor and kept Gandalf prisoner (and if Butterbur had sent the letter, of course), Merry and Pippin might not have come along and the Ents would not have been aroused and Faramir and Eowyn would have died and the Witch King would not have been killed. If Boromir had not tried to take the Ring from Frodo, Frodo and Sam would not have separated from the others at Amon Hen. Who knows what choices the others would have made. And if more of them had gone into Mordor with Frodo, would the Ring have had an ever stronger effect on them, and would one or more of them tried to take it, and perhaps succeeded? What would have happened to the Quest then? And would Gollum have been able to play his part, or come so close to being saved?

Not all intended parts of the plans of Providence are necessarily good, though the ends are. But then I don't believe in a perfect destiny, or that humans belong in paradise. I think life didn't begin until the expulsion from Eden, that the expulsion was a kind of birth.

All good questions Rachel.

However, I don't think they really explore the nub of the issue. If Providence can cope with Saurman turning traitor, (and turn this seeming disaster into useful results), then surely Providence could cope equally well with different courses of events, and have them turn out just as well?

So, what is the effect of Providence and Free Will in TLOTR? Can Providence overcome many disasterous actions, but there is a limit? Does Providence require at least some of the Children of Illuvatar to make the right decisions for the plan to play out (at least in the short to medium term)? Are good decisions by some of the Children of Illuvatar required for Eru's plan to turn out right? Or, will Providence ensure that it all turns out right (eventually) regardless? Is the free will of individuals only important for those individuals, and it will make no difference to the eventual success of Eru's plan, which will eventualise regardless, as Providence can course correct and adapt to cover all disastrous eventualities?

TLOTR stresses both the utmost importance of individual will and decisions, and the constant ability of Providence to slant and shift events towards favorable outcomes even if they seem highly improbable. How do these two factors relate? (How do they relate in TLOTR, I mean. I know they have been endlessly ruminated on by various religions and philosophers.)

 

[Odola]

If Saruman hadn't turned traitor and kept Gandalf prisoner (and if Butterbur had sent the letter, of course), Merry and Pippin might not have come along and the Ents would not have been aroused and Faramir and Eowyn would have died and the Witch King would not have been killed. If Boromir had not tried to take the Ring from Frodo, Frodo and Sam would not have separated from the others at Amon Hen. Who knows what choices the others would have made. And if more of them had gone into Mordor with Frodo, would the Ring have had an ever stronger effect on them, and would one or more of them tried to take it, and perhaps succeeded? What would have happened to the Quest then? And would Gollum have been able to play his part, or come so close to being saved?

Not all intended parts of the plans of Providence are necessarily good, though the ends are. But then I don't believe in a perfect destiny, or that humans belong in paradise. I think life didn't begin until the expulsion from Eden, that the expulsion was a kind of birth.

If Saruman hadn't turned traitor the ents would not need to have to be aroused nor Théoden to be healed and Théodred would have been fine. The story would be different, but not necessary for the worse so for the people involved in it ( I do not consider the enjoyement of the reader here).

 

[Rachel Port]

If Saruman hadn't turned traitor the ents would not need to have to be aroused nor Théoden to be healed and Théodred would have been fine. The story would be different, but not necessary for the worse so for the people involved in it ( I do not consider the enjoyement of the reader here).

It would have been a completely different story - I hadn't remembered Theodred's death as one of the changes. We wouldn't have the book we know and love. I think of Tolkien's way of finding things out as he writes - his writing is discovery rather than invention - we can't completely imagine his discoveries away, only hope to fill in some of the gaps in ways that fit what is there.

For an author, the enjoyment of the reader is the ultimate purpose, isn't it?

 

[Flammifer]

Good question Rachel,

Is the ultimate purpose of the author the enjoyment of the reader? Or is it the expression of his poetic/novelistic creativity?

Of course, it is best for the author, if the two coincide. Which happened for JRRT. Though it took a while for TLOTR to become universally loved, and voted on many forums as the best book of the 20th Century.

 

[Odola]

It would have been a completely different story - I hadn't remembered Theodred's death as one of the changes. We wouldn't have the book we know and love. I think of Tolkien's way of finding things out as he writes - his writing is discovery rather than invention - we can't completely imagine his discoveries away, only hope to fill in some of the gaps in ways that fit what is there.

For an author, the enjoyment of the reader is the ultimate purpose, isn't it?

Théodred would be the one leading the army to Gondor on his father's behalf, he would be the next king of Rohan, not his cousin and Eowyn would not be the next king's sister... Still it would have been an interesting story imho.

 

[JJ48]

Théodred would be the one leading the army to Gondor on his father's behalf, he would be the next king of Rohan, not his cousin and Eowyn would not be the next king's sister... Still it would have been an interesting story imho.

I think if Saruman hadn't turned traitor, the entire war could have turned out differently. For one thing, without having an ally who can assault his pressure his enemies from the West, Sauron would likely have played far more cautiously.

More importantly, without the treachery of Isengard, Merry and Pippin wouldn't have been taken West, so the Three Hunters wouldn't have chased them that way. Even if they went to Rohan, there would have been no reason for them to ride up to Isengard, and certainly no reason for a Palantir to be hurled at them, meaning Aragorn never would have received it. That would mean that Aragorn wouldn't have been able to look into the Palantir and challenge Sauron, and Sauron would not have hastened his assault, launching it before it was fully ready. Thus, Mordor would have still been full when the Ringbearer entered; or, if they tried to wait until the stroke came, it would have been a heavier stroke which could not have been withstood.

 

[Odola]

I think if Saruman hadn't turned traitor, the entire war could have turned out differently. For one thing, without having an ally who can assault his pressure his enemies from the West, Sauron would likely have played far more cautiously.

More importantly, without the treachery of Isengard, Merry and Pippin wouldn't have been taken West, so the Three Hunters wouldn't have chased them that way. Even if they went to Rohan, there would have been no reason for them to ride up to Isengard, and certainly no reason for a Palantir to be hurled at them, meaning Aragorn never would have received it. That would mean that Aragorn wouldn't have been able to look into the Palantir and challenge Sauron, and Sauron would not have hastened his assault, launching it before it was fully ready. Thus, Mordor would have still been full when the Ringbearer entered; or, if they tried to wait until the stroke came, it would have been a heavier stroke which could not have been withstood.

But as the felloship would not have been broken up (it was Saruman's plan to abduct the hobbits) Frodo would not have had to rely only on Gollum to get into Mordor. Gandalf would not have fallen in Moria as there would have been no reason to avoid the Gate of Rohan. And Gandalf had had a plan to enter Mordor without a visit to Shelob. As Gandalf already had great experience in intering Sauron's realms I have no reason to doubt him being succesfull at this attempt. So no reason to think the quest would have automatically failed without Saruman's betrayal. Rather Frodo would have kept his finger.

 

[Rachel Port]

I'd like to see the seduction of Saruman. Sauron has only been back in Mordor for 77 years, so he would only have had the palantir since then. But I would imagine Saruman had been using the Orthanc Stone for a long time since then. And I think he probably had become fascinated by the Rings of Power long before that so his mind was ripe for seduction once he was caught.

 

[Anthony Lawther]

How many thousands of years is it since Elrond went anywhere? Has he even gone to Lorien to visit his in-laws, as Arwen and probably his sons have? As for Arwen, there is no sign of her ever having done anything. Her presence on the Paths of the Dead would have been a light in the darkness, rather like Galadriel's glass, and in Minas Tirith both for its defense and as a healer - since her brothers are healers, we can assume she is one as well. If nothing else, I'd like to see the meeting of Arwen and Eowyn. The one time she speaks (outside of the Appendices), she shows understanding and generosity. I would have liked to see her on the Pelennor fields.

I think Elrond has more faith in Aragorn than to feel a need personally to keep the Ring from him.

What evidence do we have for Elrond not going anywhere for centuries? Elrond's movements don't appear to have been documented. He had 2400 years of potential visits to his in-laws before his wife departed to the West, so I think it just as likely that he visited as his children did. Then there are the (four) White Council meetings, only one of which was explicitly stated to have occurred in Rivendell.

Many of your statements about Arwen seem to be assumptions, or at best derivations from other story elements that may not be directly relevant. (A light in the darkness?)

It seems that Elrond had great faith in Isildur too, until that faith proved to be ill-founded. For all the respect that Elrond may have for Aragorn, Elrond is still approximately 6400 years older, so might not have complete faith in Aragorn getting things right. What isn't known is what the Music is telling Elrond about these considerations.
The whole point of the mission seems to be to not rely on the fortitude of any single individual.

Nor had Luthien when she went with Beren in his quest.

And nor had Merry and Pippin, when Gandalf argued they should join for reasons of fellowship. Gandalf said "it would be well to trust rather to friendship than to great wisdom". Arwen going would surely make more sense than Merry and Pippin...

Of course we also know that Arwen was not invented until very late in the story's writing, and it would have been impossible at that stage for Tolkien to edit her into the fellowship. But if he'd invented her and Aragorn's fate earlier I can't help but wonder if he would have given her a much more significant role, given the parallels he draws between her and Luthien.

Luthien's birth in the First Age makes her necessarily greater than Arwen, given the tendency for all things to fade and become lesser.

'Impossible' is not really the word you should use there. 'Impractical' I could accept. The parallels with Luthien can be taken too far. Tolkien himself points this out in the meeting of Aragorn and Arwen, with Arwen seeming to be a little over the comparison:

And he answered: "Because I believed you to be indeed Lúthien Tinúviel, of whom I was singing. But if you are not she, then you walk in her likeness."

"So many have said," she answered gravely. "Yet her name is not mine. ..."

As I see it, the company required a number of roles to be filled:
Leader: Ideally wise (at least wise enough to listen to the advice of the subject matter experts of the company), and probably adept in woodcraft
Spare Leader: A backup in case anything should befall the Leader (not necessarily a Balrog of Morgoth)
Muscle: To engage in any fighting, even though it is to be avoided as much as possible
Ringbearer and support: In the NASA sense, these are the mission specialists, rather than the flight crew

The final make-up is:
Leader: Gandalf (also muscle)
Spare Leader: Aragorn (also muscle and healing)
Muscle: Boromir, Legolas, and Gimli
Ringbearer and support: Frodo, Sam, Merry, and Pippin.

But why would Arwen as we see her in the text, not as we might imagine her to be nor as shown in the movies, make more sense than Merry and Pippin?
Which role does she fill?
Does she offer Frodo greater friendship than Merry and Pippin?

 

[JJ48]

And Gandalf had had a plan to enter Mordor without a visit to Shelob.

Do we know that for certain? Aragorn certainly didn't.

‘I fear that the burden is laid upon you. You are the Bearer appointed by the Council. Your own way you alone can choose. In this matter I cannot advise you. I am not Gandalf, and though I have tried to bear his part, I do not know what design or hope he had for this hour, if indeed he had any. Most likely it seems that if he were here now the choice would still wait on you. Such is your fate.’

Furthermore, even then, things don't look so well. What could the Fellowship do when the got to the Cracks of Doom and Frodo claimed the Ring for himself? Fight him themselves and take it from him by force? Throw him in as well? Or do we still have Gollum show up to handle things himself?

And yet, keep in mind that Gollum attacked on the slopes of Mount Doom, and Sam showed him pity. Would he or the others have shown mercy on the creature if they had not traveled with him and understood his wretchedness? Or even if they showed pity, would they have turned their back on him and left him unguarded had there been more companions to keep an eye on him?

I'd also add that skipping Moria would mean skipping Lorien; and Isengard not falling (and therefore no Uruk-hai raiding the Fellowship) could have terrible consequences for Boromir, whom Gandalf suggests was saved from worse fate due to his sacrifice.

It was a sore trial for such a man: a warrior, and a lord of men. Galadriel told me that he was in peril. But he escaped in the end. I am glad. It was not in vain that the young hobbits came with us, if only for Boromir’s sake.

 

[Rachel Port]

I wouldn't have Arwen be part of the fellowship, and I wouldn't keep Aragorn and Boromir out of it as has been suggested. I think the fellowship as it is presented is exactly right. I am not influenced by the movies, having spent years trying to forget that I ever saw them. I was thinking of Arwen coming south with her brothers and the Rangers bringing the standard and Elrond's message about the Paths of the Dead. What role would she play? What role do her brothers play? Are they mentioned at all in the next chapters?

I think the real question is what would happen to Eowyn's role if Arwen was there on the Pelennor. I think Eowyn's story is so powerful I would not want that lessened. But the ships don't arrive until after the killing of the Witch King, so it seems possible to keep that as it is. I see her taking part in the battle, and then helping Aragorn and her brothers with the healing from the effects of the Shadow. Her brothers go home after Aragorn is crowned so she could go with them and not spoil the procession before her marriage to Aragorn.

I was basing my thoughts about Elronds travels upon Elrond's own statement about how long it is since he was on the Western roads and how different it all seems in Frodo's story. And where would the White Councils be held if not Rivendell? I doubt that Lorien or Orthanc would be offered as alternatives, and there doesn't seem to be a centrally located Starbucks.

 

[Rachel Port]

Do we know that for certain? Aragorn certainly didn't.

‘I fear that the burden is laid upon you. You are the Bearer appointed by the Council. Your own way you alone can choose. In this matter I cannot advise you. I am not Gandalf, and though I have tried to bear his part, I do not know what design or hope he had for this hour, if indeed he had any. Most likely it seems that if he were here now the choice would still wait on you. Such is your fate.’

Thank you for this comment. You left out one thing - the importance of Gandalf falling in Moria and returning. This is central to what happens after Boromir's death.

 

[JJ48]

Thank you for this comment. You left out one thing - the importance of Gandalf falling in Moria and returning. This is central to what happens after Boromir's death.

That's true, though if we're assuming that Saruman never fell, then the position of White is still taken and Gandalf doesn't need to be moved into it. Whether an unfallen Saruman could do as well as Gandalf the White is open to discussion, but I thought it best to focus on more certain negative impacts.

 

[Anthony Lawther]

I was basing my thoughts about Elronds travels upon Elrond's own statement about how long it is since he was on the Western roads and how different it all seems in Frodo's story. And where would the White Councils be held if not Rivendell? I doubt that Lorien or Orthanc would be offered as alternatives, and there doesn't seem to be a centrally located Starbucks.

The Grey Havens would be another candidate location, as Cirdan was also a known member, but Elrond reports that it was long since he was on the western roads. This doesn't prevent him from heading in other directions to places like Lothlorien, Gondor (including Isengard and Calenardhon), Mirkwood, or Erebor. If he visited Gondor it seems unlikely to have occurred in the couple of centuries prior to the War of the Ring, as the Gondorians didn't have good ideas on where to find Imladris.
However, I think Rivendell and Lothlorien are the most likely locations, given where the various participants were travelling from.

Given that Galadriel called the first White Council, I think it most likely (not inescapably so) that the first meeting was in Lothlorien.
The second was reported to be in Rivendell.
As the main discussion, and the result, of the third meeting was the attack on Dol Guldur, it seems most likely that the meeting would have been in Rivendell or Lothlorien. However, given that Gandalf left Rivendell with Thorin and company, and then left them at the edge of Mirkwood to attend the meeting, Rivendell seems counter-indicated, suggesting Lothlorien for that meeting.
Saruman is described as retreating to Isengard after the fourth meeting, again counter-indicating Orthanc as the meeting place.

I think there is sufficient evidence to support the view that Elrond had to travel 'far' at least twice in the half millenium of the White Council's existence, and it seems unlikely that he wouldn't have visited his in-laws at least that frequently in the 2400 years before his wife departed. In Elven terms that doesn't really equate to being a moss-gatherer.

 

[Rachel Port]

I was thinking more like during the Third Age, or at least the last couple of thousand years. Maybe not much in elven terms, but substantial - maybe a third of his life? But you are right about the twice he has left for Council related matters, to Lorien and Mirkwood. But the issue was whether he would have been an appropriate leader for the fellowship instead of Gandalf, and I think Gandalf's familiarity with the territory makes him the logical choice. After all he has just come from exploring the environs of Mordor and a research trip to Minas Tirith.

 

[Odola]

Do we know that for certain? Aragorn certainly didn't.

‘I fear that the burden is laid upon you. You are the Bearer appointed by the Council. Your own way you alone can choose. In this matter I cannot advise you. I am not Gandalf, and though I have tried to bear his part, I do not know what design or hope he had for this hour, if indeed he had any. Most likely it seems that if he were here now the choice would still wait on you. Such is your fate.’

Furthermore, even then, things don't look so well. What could the Fellowship do when the got to the Cracks of Doom and Frodo claimed the Ring for himself? Fight him themselves and take it from him by force? Throw him in as well? Or do we still have Gollum show up to handle things himself?

And yet, keep in mind that Gollum attacked on the slopes of Mount Doom, and Sam showed him pity. Would he or the others have shown mercy on the creature if they had not traveled with him and understood his wretchedness? Or even if they showed pity, would they have turned their back on him and left him unguarded had there been more companions to keep an eye on him?

I'd also add that skipping Moria would mean skipping Lorien; and Isengard not falling (and therefore no Uruk-hai raiding the Fellowship) could have terrible consequences for Boromir, whom Gandalf suggests was saved from worse fate due to his sacrifice.

It was a sore trial for such a man: a warrior, and a lord of men. Galadriel told me that he was in peril. But he escaped in the end. I am glad. It was not in vain that the young hobbits came with us, if only for Boromir’s sake.

Gandalf is for sure alarmed and surprised when he hears that Frodo headed for Cirith Ungol and this indicates that he has planned another way in. Had Boromir not fallen, Faramir could have accompanied Frodo on his road - he had both the experience, as he for sure had some missions undercover in Mordor given his job in Ithilien, as well was immune to the power of the ring and his support and inspiration could have supported Frodo's will at the very end. Their characters alligned well. So still there is no prof the quest had to fail had Saruman not betrayed them.

 

[JJ48]

Gandalf is for sure alarmed and surprised when he hears that Frodo headed for Cirith Ungol and this indicates that he has planned another way in. Had Boromir not fallen, Faramir could have accompanied Frodo on his road - he had both the experience, as he for sure had some missions undercover in Mordor given his job in Ithilien, as well was immune to the power of the ring and his support and inspiration could have supported Frodo's will at the very end. Their characters alligned well. So still there is no prof the quest had to fail had Saruman not betrayed them.

What evidence do we have that Faramir, or any Man in recent history not in Sauron's service, has actually been inside Mordor itself? I actually find that quite unlikely.

You are correct that this is not absolute proof that the quest would have failed, but my point is simply that things would not necessarily have been better.

 

[Flammifer]

What evidence do we have that Faramir, or any Man in recent history not in Sauron's service, has actually been inside Mordor itself? I actually find that quite unlikely.

You are correct that this is not absolute proof that the quest would have failed, but my point is simply that things would not necessarily have been better.

Hi JJ48,

Whether or not things would be better (or worse) in different TLOTR scenarios, surely does not really depend on the details of the alternate scenarios? I would suggest that it depends mostly on our assessment of the ability of Providence to make the outcome 'work', regardless of the actions, circumstances, decisions, taken in the scenario.

We observe that Providence works pretty hard (and pretty successfully) in TLOTR scenario which we have, to produce the results that we get. Without the interventions of Providence, the outcome becomes extremely improbable.

So, if Providence is as powerful and effective as we perceive it to be, then, surely the outcome would be as good across a wide range of event scenarios (maybe across all possible event scenarios)?

If Providence is very powerful, then all plot scenarios are likely to end up with the same results, and arguing or conjecturing about how some might work better than others is pretty pointless.

Of course, this perspective makes free will pretty pointless. At least as far as altering the course of the history of Arda. It may have some point in altering the development and eventual disposition of individuals.

Where do you think JRRT lands on this question of free will vs. Providence? He seems to think both are very important. Do you think he comes down on one side or the other, or do you think he remains deliberately ambivalent?

 

[Rachel Port]

Whether or not things would be better (or worse) in different TLOTR scenarios, surely does not really depend on the details of the alternate scenarios? I would suggest that it depends mostly on our assessment of the ability of Providence to make the outcome 'work', regardless of the actions, circumstances, decisions, taken in the scenario.

If that's true, there's no reason to write the book. The tension comes from what the characters actually do and how they make their choices. If those actions and choices ultimately don't matter, what's the point?

There never was a question for Tolkien that Frodo was going to be unable to destroy the Ring, and that Gollum was going to complete the task, beginning as soon as Bilbo's ring became The Ring. Since that was the outcome, the story becomes a working out of how that happens. And that is a combination of different forces. I give Providence much less weight than what the people in the story actually do - I agree with Sam that they have some say in what kind of story they are in.

Gandalf is for sure alarmed and surprised when he hears that Frodo headed for Cirith Ungol and this indicates that he has planned another way in. Had Boromir not fallen, Faramir could have accompanied Frodo on his road - he had both the experience, as he for sure had some missions undercover in Mordor given his job in Ithilien, as well was immune to the power of the ring and his support and inspiration could have supported Frodo's will at the very end. Their characters alligned well. So still there is no prof the quest had to fail had Saruman not betrayed them.

Faramir does not know any other ways to get into Mordor, he tells Frodo, so no, it's almost impossible that he ever went into Mordor. Even his fears about Cirith Ungol are vague - it's a place of mystery and fear without any specifics for him and the people of Gondor. And I don't think Gandalf's knowledge of its dangers is any more specific. Gandalf's worries on learning that Frodo was going that way don't prove that he had any alternatives in mind any more than Faramir. It's Frodo's task to find the way, and as Elrond says, if he cannot find it, no one can.

As for Faramir going with Frodo, besides that being contrary to the author's intent, it leaves out a major variable. If Boromir hadn't fallen (or been saved, depending on your point of view), Frodo might not have been in Ithilien to meet Faramir. Does "fallen" mean tried to take the Ring from Frodo, or been killed trying to save Merry and Pippin? If he hadn't tried to take the Ring, Frodo would still have left for Mordor, but Aragorn's idea that he, Gimli, and Sam might accompany him would have changed so much. The frenzy that came after Boromir says Frodo has disappeared would not have happened, and Merry and Pippin would not have been taken prisoner, Boromir would not have died, and all the events that came from that capture would not have followed. Would Faramir even have been created? Or, if he had tried to take the Ring, but not been killed, Frodo's story would probably have been the same, but there would have been changes to the rest, especially to the story of Minas Tirith and the madness of Denethor.

Essentially these questions boil down to, what if Tolkien had written a different book. And if he had written a different book, would we be here today?

 

[JJ48]

So, if Providence is as powerful and effective as we perceive it to be, then, surely the outcome would be as good across a wide range of event scenarios (maybe across all possible event scenarios)?

If Providence is very powerful, then all plot scenarios are likely to end up with the same results, and arguing or conjecturing about how some might work better than others is pretty pointless.

You treat Providence as if it's something that has to react to or override choices. However, in the Ainulindalë, Melkor is told by Ilúvatar, "And thou, Melkor, shalt see that no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in me, nor can any alter the music in my despite. For he that attempteth this shall prove but mine instrument in the devising of things more wonderful, which he himself hath not imagined." Thus, Providence already incorporates choices, and even works itself out THROUGH people's choices!

And yet, choices clearly do matter, and people are responsible for them.

‘So shall it be! Dear-bought those songs shall be accounted, and yet shall be well-bought. For the price could be no other. Thus even as Eru spoke to us shall beauty not before conceived be brought into Eä, and evil yet be good to have been.’
But Mandos said: ‘And yet remain evil.'

-----

This, then, is how I read the riddle. Providence will ensure that the best outcome occurs, even if particular individuals do not feel that it is the best outcome for them, personally. In this context, discussion of "what ifs" is retrospective, and merely helps us to see that, "Things might have been different, but they could not have been better."

However, people are still responsible for the choices they make (which Providence will use toward achieving the final outcome). In this context, discussion of "what ifs" is useful for deciding future action, as characters are not responsible for knowing the entire Providencial plan; only for whether their own choices were right or wrong based on what information they did have. (e.g. the earlier quote, where Mandos still holds Feanor to blame, even though good would come from his actions, too.)