sign in sign up
<<
Home , Eagle (Middle-earth), Elf (Middle-earth), Gandalf, Radagast, Saruman, The Hobbit (film series)

Department of English

Wise Men in Times of Woe - as representations of human interaction with the natural world in

Anton Jonsson Bachelor’s Thesis Literature Spring, 2019 Supervisor: Marinette Grimbeek

Abstract

The fictive world created by Professor J. R. R. Tolkien is intimately linked with his own views of the world. His love for the natural world shines through his works and has given rise to multiple scholars focusing on Tolkien and ecology. This study falls under that category and is an ecological interpretation of The Lord of the Rings and presents the argument that Tolkien divides his characters into three types. These types are representations of different approaches to nature: nature as a tool for human progress, nature as our ideal existence and nature as an equal part of the world. The significance of the study is the focus on the three wizards in The Lord of the Rings, the Grey, the White and the Brown, as representatives of different ecological positions. The study centres on the argument that Gandalf is a representative of nature as an equal part of the world. A balanced, holistic view of nature and humanity is put forward by J. R. R. Tolkien as the correct way for humanity to view nature. Furthermore, Gandalf as a character shows how humanity is supposed to act in terms of natural protection and preservation.

Keywords: Tolkien, ecocriticism, nature, fantasy, wizards, Lord of the Rings

Jonsson 1

So that those who live after may have clean earth to till Gandalf (Tolkien, 861)

In 1999, the French magazine Le Monde compiled a list of the 100 most influential novels of the 20th century. The list celebrated renowned authors such as Agatha Christie, Ernest Hemingway and George Orwell. One of the few fantasy authors who made the list was the Oxford Professor J. R. R. Tolkien with his trilogy – The Lord of the Rings (1954–55), comprised of The Fellowship of the Ring (1954), (1954) and The Return of the King (1955).1 Earning a place on such a list suggests that the world of Tolkien has engaged readers globally for almost half a century. The texts have even, in the words of Patrick Curry, been “an inspiration for … David McTaggart, founder of Greenpeace … [and] underground resistance (environmental as well as political) in the USSR and Central Europe” (52). With new elements being added recently, with film-productions being made, there is no sign that the influence of J. R. R. Tolkien’s world on popular culture is decreasing. It is widely accepted that nature is a prominent part of Tolkien’s writing and that the author himself had a deepfelt passion for the preservation and protection of the natural world. In his 1978 biography of J. R. R. Tolkien, quotes Tolkien speaking about a willow tree, saying that “one day they cut it down. They didn’t do anything with it: the log just lay there. I never forgot it” (30). These memories of human impact on the natural world stayed with him and in a letter from 1955 he writes that “I am (obviously) much in love with plants and above all trees, and have always

1 Throughout this study, the three volumes of The Lord of the Rings are abbreviated as follows: FTR, TT and RTK.

Jonsson 2 been; and I find human maltreatment of them as hard to bear as some find ill-treatment of animals” (Carpenter, Letters 220). Today, these topics are more relevant than ever. Ecological devastation and the extinction of animal and plant species are regular news stories; people have become more aware of what Martin Amis sums up as “the toiletization of the planet” (quoted in Deitering 196). These contemporary issues in combination with the vast interest that many people show for the world of J. R. R. Tolkien are the foundations of this study. J. R. R. Tolkien’s love of the natural world, so vividly described in his texts, is easy to dismiss or overlook as a mere setting of the story. Christine Brooke-Rose argues that the detailed way in which nature is described in Tolkien’s legendarium imposes on the readers’ understanding of the main story, saying that it is “interfering with the war- story, cheating it as it were” (83). In contrast, Curry, argues against Brooke-Rose’s interpretation, claiming that the level of attention that Tolkien has given to his descriptions of the natural world allows the reader to approach the text with “a startling sensation of primary reality” (49). I am inclined to side with Curry, because even though Brooke-Rose’s anthropocentric idea that The Lord of the Rings is a “war-story” is valid, one must not overlook that nature itself is an agent in this narrative. Agential nature appears in a multitude of passages where elements of nature interact directly with the main characters of the texts (not only in The Lord of the Rings, but in the collection of works posthumously published as (1977) too). In Tolkien’s fictive world, the natural world is by no means passive or idle; therefore, the role of nature should be considered in any interpretation of the story. The interpretation of a “war-story” needs to acknowledge the role of the (sentient tree-like beings) and their contribution to, for example, the destruction of Saruman’s stronghold, (Tolkien, TT 543). It would also need to consider the position of non-humans, such as eagles, and their contribution. For example, the -lord Gwaihir helps Gandalf on different occasions in The (1937) and The Lord of The Rings, both with physical transportation and with information. Each facet of Tolkien’s legendarium is related, implicitly or explicitly, to the natural world. Therefore, claiming that the way in which Tolkien portrays nature interferes with the occurring events is to overlook a major part of the story. However, the elements of nature’s involvement are sometimes implicit, especially its’ relation to characters. The vast legendarium that Tolkien created is immensely detailed; therefore, characters that, at first glance, seem to be insignificant or flat, may reveal a completely different side of the story when placed in the context

Jonsson 3 of the diegetic history of Tolkien’s world. This study argues that J. R. R. Tolkien, in the three volumes of The Lord of the Rings, divides characters into three types: either a representation of an ecological decline due to industrial impact, a representation of a pre-industrial, idyllic view of nature, or a representation of a balanced view where preservation of nature and industrial progress can coexist. This is exemplified in three wizards, Saruman, Radagast and Gandalf. I argue that Tolkien uses Gandalf as a metaphorical representation of the balance of the world which Tolkien admires and advocates, symbolising a desired balance between nature and modern, industrial progress. I show this by first analysing how each wizard’s origin affects the way that they are perceived and how that is relevant for understanding what type character they are. Then I discuss how each wizard’s way of life highlights their position as either good or bad and how that is linked to the ecological message of The Lord of the Rings. Finally, I conclude the analysis by discussing how each wizard can be interpreted in the light of the companions they keep. In addition, I wish to highlight that the interest of this study is with the meaning and the social significance of Tolkien’s works and not with the himself, even though these two are in some ways inseparable. In my analysis, I make use of several of Tolkien’s related works on Middle-Earth. However, it is important to highlight the distinction between the works of J. R. R. Tolkien, and the posthumously published works edited by his son, as well as his associate Humphrey Carpenter. In this study, the primary source is The Lord of the Rings written by J. R. R. Tolkien. The other works by both father and son that I make use of are The Silmarillion (1977) and (1980). Furthermore, I use The Letters of J. R. R. Tolkien (1981) edited by both Carpenter and Christopher Tolkien.2

The way in which Tolkien describes the wizards’ origins highlights their intrinsic characteristics which are relevant to understand which of the three types each wizard represents. In The Lord of the Rings, the term ‘wizard’ or ‘istari’ is the name given to the five members of an Order existing during the Third Age (circa 2000 years prior to the events in The Lord of the Rings) of Middle-Earth. The order consists of Curumo,

2 Throughout this study, the name Tolkien refers to J. R. R. Tolkien whilst Christopher Tolkien is referred to as C. Tolkien. The texts The Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales and The Letters of J. R. R. Tolkien are abbreviated as follows: Sil, UT and Letters.

Jonsson 4

Aiwendil, Olórin, Alatar and Pallando, yet only the first three of the order appear in the tales of Middle-Earth. 3 They are more commonly known as Saruman the White, Radagast the Brown and Gandalf the Grey. They are introduced as emissaries of the Lords of the West, the Valar, to contest the growing power of the dark lord . Their mission is to advise and guide people in their fight against Sauron, and not openly display their power. Therefore, they are disguised as old and fragile men (Tolkien, UT 502-504). Because of their physical stature, the focus becomes their supposed wisdom. In a letter from 1954, J. R. R. Tolkien explains that the term istari is translated into ‘wizard’ not because of the word’s semantic resemblance to the synonymous term ‘’, but because of its syntactical connection to ‘wise’ (Carpenter, Letters 207). In addition, Gandalf is described as the wisest of all the Maiar. Therefore, he possesses an abundance of the fundamental characteristic of a wizard which makes him in a sense the ideal wizard. The shift in focus from ‘magician’ to ‘wise’ denotes a more intellectual approach to the world instead of a physical. Saruman and Radagast fail in their mission as emissaries, whilst Gandalf is successful. In a way, one can argue that Saruman fails not only because he loses his wisdom, but because his lack of wisdom makes him act forcefully and use his magic to affect the physical world around him for personal gain. Radagast, on the other hand, only uses his magic as a defensive force whilst Gandalf, being the wisest, uses his magic as a protective force. The Valar themselves are angelical beings created by the Creator, Eru Ilúvatar. After his instructions, they sang the world into existence and some chose to step into the world, Arda, and rule over it. The Valar are served by a lesser angelical being, the Maiar, who each chose one specific to serve in accordance with their inherent attributes and interests. It is to this group that the wizards belong. In The Silmarillion, fourteen Valar entered Arda, and these are divided into two gendered groups of seven.4 Only three will be discussed here: Manwë, Aulë and Yavanna. The last two are also married. Gandalf is a Maiar in service to Manwë, who is the and the ruler of Arda. He is named “the Lord of the Breath of Arda” (Tolkien, Sil 16) because his chief concern is with the sky and the wind. Therefore, he is also the lord of all birds, and this

3 Alatar and Pallando, “the Blue Wizards” (Tolkien, UT 508) shall not be discussed in this study. 4 Throughout his work, Tolkien uses the term ‘Valar’ in order to refer to both the Valar and the Valier. In order to avoid excessive repetition, I too use the terms Valar (plural) and Vala (singular) collectively. Similarly, the term ‘Maiar’ is used for both genders, whilst the term is singular and Maiar is plural.

Jonsson 5 connection makes him capable of overviewing all events happening in Middle-Earth simultaneously. I argue that he is a representation of the holistic view of the world needed in order to create ecological equilibrium in contrast to a nature/human divide. Saruman is a Maiar in service to Aulë, who is describes by Tolkien as the Lord of all the material substances of Arda and he is most often called Aulë the Smith because his focus is on material creation. In the context of this study, Aulë represents an environmentalist approach to nature: Greg Garrard explains this approach as believing that nature’s value is measured in its usefulness to human-like beings (22). Radagast is a Maiar in service to Yavanna, who is the ruler of all growing plants. In The Silmarillion, she is called Kementári which means “Queen of the Earth” (Tolkien, Sil 17) because she is the chief designer of the earth’s vegetation. In contrast to her spouse, she represents a deep ecological approach to nature. Deep ecology, argues Garrard, “[i]dentifies the dualistic separation of humans from nature promoted by Western philosophy and culture as the origin of environmental crisis, and demands a return to a monistic, primal identification of humans and the ecosphere” (22). Because of the Valar’s prominent position in the creation of Arda, they can all be seen as an ideal in their own way, their commitment is to Creation and all its inhabitants which makes their world view fundamentally ecological. I argue that their way of thinking is fundamentally ecocritical thinking, which Andrew Bennett and Nicholas Royce claim “[i]nvolves a change of scale and vision: rather than an obsession with human-sized objects, it attends both to the miniature realm of a blade of grass, an ant, amoeba, or pathogen, and to the mega-scale of the ocean, the mountain, or even the earth itself (as well as everything in between)” (162). Aulë is clearly focused on the earth, its metal and stone, whilst Yavanna is focused on plants and trees. Manwë is, in turn, focused on all this simultaneously. Their respective wizard is, initially, similar to his Vala in terms of sentiment. However, as I will argue for, this changes for two of the three wizards, which leads to their demise. The wizards are not only sent as emissaries for all the Valar, they also representatives for their specific Vala. Therefore, why these three Maiar they were chosen as emissaries shows what type of representation they belong to. First, Tolkien points out that there was only one who actively chose to take the mission – Saruman. As an emissary of Aulë he is skilled in material creation and his name literally means “the Man of Crafts” (Tolkien, UT 504). The industrial connection here is clear, but it also helps in creating the idea of Saruman as a dominant character, and in extension,

Jonsson 6 making pro-industrial beings seen as powerful. In contrast to Saruman, Radagast was selected by Yavanna, portraying him as a passive character. The idea of dominant or passive characters, especially in relation to nature, has to do with the contrast between industry and wilderness. Industry is something that is supposed to have furthered human progress, whilst wilderness is something of the past. Wilderness is, in the words of Garrard, “seen as a place for the reinvigoration of those tired of the moral and material pollution of the city” (59) and wilderness holds “the promise of a renewed, authentic relation of humanity and the earth” (59). Therefore, the concept of wilderness refers to a return to a time where industrial impact on nature was less destructive or noticeable. However, in describing wilderness as a form of human retreat from our man-made industrial society, it could be argued that the value of wilderness becomes centred on its function to humans. This is problematic, and I would instead argue that the wilderness Yavanna stands for is that of an independent and powerful entity, untouched by humanity yet open to a ‘reunion’ with them on its own terms. In The Lord of the Rings, therefore, ‘the promise’ Garrard writes about is not only on human terms but equally on the terms of wilderness and its inhabitants. Later in the study, I shall discuss how the ambiguous concept of wilderness separates Radagast and Yavanna. Similarly to Radagast, Gandalf was also chosen, yet he is not portrayed as a passive character. The difference is that Gandalf, in likeness with Manwë, acts through his role as a guide of others whilst Radagast only acts on the call of others (i.e. Gandalf). Liam Campbell underlines that Gandalf is in this way an environmental activist that stirs opposition against evil forces trying to destroy the ecology of Middle-Earth (128). Gandalf shares Manwë’s holistic view of the world, as well as his lack of personal privilege, highlighting him as a representation of a balanced world. The marriage between Aulë and Yavanna begs an interesting question concerning whether Saruman and Radagast are in the same way complimentary characters. C. Tolkien writes that “Curumo [Saruman] was obliged to take Aiwendil [Radagast] to please Yavanna his wife” (Tolkien, UT 509, added emphasis). The term obliged, synonymous to being forced, connects to the deep ecologist idea of seeing nature, as being an equally dominant part instead of being submissive. It is Yavanna that forces Aulë to order Saruman to take Radagast with him, creating the idea of nature and industrial progress being able to coexist. To explain Radagast’s relationship to Saruman properly, I need to discuss the creation of the ents and the dwarves. It begins with Aulë’s creation of the dwarves because he desired to have others with whom he

Jonsson 7 could share his skills with. However, in Tolkien’s fictive world, Ilúvatar alone is permitted to create life. Yet Ilúvatar permitted this one transgression and allowed the creation of the dwarves. Tolkien also writes that Yavanna was concerned because she knew that the dwarves would share her husband’s sentiment towards growing things. Therefore, she asked Ilúvatar to give life to some of her trees in order to protect nature (Tolkien, Sil 37-41). Hence, the ents were created in order to create balance between the environmental destruction of the dwarves and natural world. Saruman is therefore linked to the dwarves through Aulë, and in the same way Radagast is linked to the ents. One can assume that Radagast was chosen by Yavanna for a similar reason to the creation of the ents: to stop the destruction of nature by the dwarves and later, Saruman. Furthermore, C. Tolkien nuances Saruman’s connection to the destruction of nature by highlighting that Sauron himself was also, originally, a Maiar in service to Aulë, the same as Saruman (Tolkien, Sil 23). I argue that as much as the ents were created to balance the environmental destruction of the dwarves, Radagast was selected to accompany Saruman because of Yavanna’s foresight and her knowledge of what would become of Sauron. The position and characteristics of each wizard’s respective Vala can clearly be seen to affect the way they represent different views towards nature. However, both Saruman and Radagast, as the story progresses, leave the path set by their Vala and becomes estranged from them, taking more extreme positions on a scale from full focus on nature to no focus on nature. In contrast to Yavanna, Radagast becomes a representative of passive nature, allowing for the desecration and exploitation of nature to continue. Furthermore, he become connected to the concept of the pastoral because of his retreat to his woodland home. Terry Gifford explains the concept of pastoral retreat by connecting it to the idea of ‘Arcadia’ which is defined as a place in the countryside that is thought to be perfect (19). It is to his own Arcadia that Radagast retreats to, effectively abandoning the outside world and its inhabitants. In addition, Radagast lacks the intrinsic power applied to wilderness through Yavanna and therefore he is unable to act as a counterweight to the pro-industrial approach of Saruman and instead he portrayed as a passive, naïve character representing a romantic, idyllic view nature as a form of retreat. Similarly, Saruman transgresses from an environmental approach where he respects nature to an approach where he abuses nature for his own gains. As shall be discussed later in the analysis, the character of Saruman is also linked to the concept of apocalypse and the ultimate destruction of nature. Gandalf, on the

Jonsson 8 other hand, stays on the path set out by Manwë and uses his wisdom to guide others in order to create and maintain balance in Middle-Earth. In other words, for Gandalf to create this ecological balance and unite humanity and nature, he must stay true to his original mission and the ideal set by Manwë.5 Throughout The Lord of the Rings, Tolkien implicitly highlights favourable characteristics in the struggle against ecological devastation. Gandalf has here proved that he possesses two of these: faith and wisdom.

In the few passages involving all three wizards, Gandalf is the focalizing character. This makes his point-of-view the dominant one, which is in line with the idea of Gandalf as the balancing force between them. In this central position, Gandalf highlights his behaviour in relation to that of Radagast and Saruman so that the reader can know what is good and what is bad. This can be seen in Gandalf’s story involving both Radagast and Saruman during the council of :

‘The Nine have come forth again’ I answered. ‘They have crossed the River. So Radagast said to me.’ ‘Radagast the Brown!’ laughed Saruman, and he no longer concealed his scorn. ‘Radagast the Bird-tamer! Radagast the Simple! Radagast the Fool! Yet he had just the wit to play the part that I set him… For I am Saruman the Wise, Saruman the Ring-maker, Saruman of Many Colours!’ I looked at them and saw that his robes, which had seemed white, were not so, but were woven of all colours, and as he moved they shimmered and changed hue so that the eye was bewildered. ‘I liked white better’ I said. ‘White!’ he sneered. ‘It serves as a beginning. White cloth may be dyed. The white page can be overwritten; and the white light can be broken.’ ‘In which case it is no longer white’ said I. ‘And he that breaks a thing to find out what it is has left the path of wisdom.’ (Tolkien, FTR 252)

In this passage, Gandalf must face the realisation that the once wise and truthful master of his order has failed his purpose and become evil. Gandalf, as the focalizing character, reveals Saruman’s contempt of Radagast the Brown, because of Radagast’s preference for the company of animals to that of other species. Saruman links being closely connected to nature to being a fool or being simple. Radagast is mocked because of his

5 This leads to the Christian ideal of imitatio Christi (Imitation of Christ), where Gandalf acts in imitation of what he believes Manwë would do. There are many such religious elements in Tolkien’s works, but they shall not be further discussed in this study.

Jonsson 9 connection to the natural world and his ability to communicate with birds. In his mockery of Radagast’s way of life, Saruman is by extension also mocking Yavanna. However, Gandalf shows another way of how he is different from Saruman by implying that Radagast might be a fool, but that being a fool can also be synonymous to being honest and innocent, as Gandalf mentions in his story of his captivity in Saruman’s fortress, Orthanc, “[i]t would be useless in any case to try and win over the honest Radagast to treachery” (Tolkien, FTR 254-255). Innocence is often connected to nature and through Gandalf’s story, Radagast is implicitly linked to his preferred element, nature. As can be seen, there are multiple views of nature at work in this passage. Saruman has a clear negative stance towards being linked to nature, his desire is not to work with nature, but to make it work for him. The leader of the ents, , tells the Merry and Pippin about Saruman’s exploitative approach to nature, saying that Saruman “does not care for growing things, except as far as they can serve him for the moment” (Tolkien, TT 462). He oppresses and perverts the natural world, or as Susan Jeffers labels it: Saruman relationship with the environment is that of “power over” nature (75). This is placed in contrast with a power with-relationship where a character and the environment are interdependent or a power from-relationship where a character has a hierarchical relationship with the environment as a source of natural resources (Jeffers 19). Saruman highlights his own extreme position in relation to the other wizards when pointing out that “the white page can be overwritten” (Tolkien, FTR 252). The colour white, which is commonly linked to untouched, innocent nature (which Radagast is a part of and Gandalf protects), is viewed by Saruman as undeveloped instead of pure. He explicitly shows that he believes that an ‘overwritten page’, or a ‘civilised’ society is better than an untouched page, or a community based on contact with nature. In claiming that white serves as a start, he is implicitly saying that what he has turned into is a more evolved version of himself – making his later, environmentally destructive actions the correct, more evolved response to the natural world. From Saruman’s extreme position, the pastoral and wilderness are pre-industrial views that would only mean that he would have to return to a submissive position under the eye of the Valar. In this way, Saruman’s contempt for nature is intertwined with his desire for power and separation from Aulë and the ecological ideals that the Valar represent. Saruman shows his contempt for the environment by implying that being close to nature is something of a past age, calling it “The Elder Days” (Tolkien, FTR 252). He believes

Jonsson 10 that it does not fit a more modern way of life and tries to convince Gandalf to join him in “The Younger Days” (Tolkien, FTR 252). The younger days symbolise, for Saruman, a step into an industrialised society under his rule. Treebeard speaks of Saruman’s industrial plans, saying that “he is plotting to become a Power. He has a mind of metal and wheels” (Tolkien, TT 462). According to Patricia Meyer Spacks, this highlights Saruman as evil. She observes that overall “it is characteristic of the Enemy to depend upon machinery rather than natural forces” (55). Hence, because of Saruman’s affiliation with industrialism and especially machinery, as well as his distancing himself from nature, the reader is made aware of his evil. He links being close to nature to being part of the past and that adopting his industrial approach is instead the right way for the new age. Thus, Saruman creates a divide between nature on one side and human-like beings under his command on the other side. This establishes him as a representation of ecological decline in favour of an industrial, anthropocentric world. Radagast’s position, diametrically opposed to Saruman, as a representation of a pre-industrial, idyllic view of nature is underlined because of his dedication to the natural world. As such, Radagast also becomes linked to the concept of wilderness: for him the natural world (in contrast to the non-natural, human world) is sacred and “a construction mobilised to protect particular habitats and species” (Garrard 59). However, as mentioned previously, even though Radagast is originally linked to wilderness, he also becomes connected to the pastoral. In The Lord of the Rings, he is absent because he is seeking what Gifford calls “pastoral escape “(21) which refers to a conservative reconstruction of history. Instead, it is the ents that provide the perspective of value and power in unordered nature. Matthew Dickerson and Jonathan Evans write that “ents [similarly to Radagast] are strongly positioned against technologies in which the natural environment is used wastefully for ostensibly civilized purposes” (123). However, Radagast shares this underlying environmental radicalism, and for that Saruman mocks him, thinking such behaviour is foolish. Gandalf, on the other hand, does not, instead he refer to him as “a worthy wizard” (Tolkien, FTR 250-251). Since Gandalf, as the focalizing character and a representative of good, speaks against Saruman and speaks for Radagast’s connection with nature, nature is also automatically portrayed as a something good. In contrast, Saruman’s mockery shapes the readers’ attitude towards him and establishes that industrial and environmental destruction is a sign of evil.

Jonsson 11

Radagast is the wizard that is closest to the natural world. Meyer Spacks underlines the relation between the goodness of characters and their connection to nature, she writes: “goodness is partly equated with understanding of nature, closeness to the natural world” (54). This would make him, according to Meyer Spacks statement, the most revered of the three wizards. However, he falls short of Gandalf in that he, in contrast with his Vala Yavanna, is a representation of a passive approach towards the protection of nature whilst Gandalf is a representation of a deep ecological approach where all members of Middle-Earth have equal, intrinsic value. Saruman, as mentioned above, is a representation of industrial advancement through the desecration and destruction of nature. One of his methods of advancement is linked to the idea of nature as silent, which, according to Jeffers, is a common notion in Western culture. Elements that are silent are easily dehumanised and thus less worthy of respect. Gandalf, as a representative of agential nature, gives nature a voice, breaking that silence. For example, he listens, asks advice from, and shows respect to Treebeard and Gwaihir. In contrast, Saruman is an example of what may befall a person who does not listen to nature. He is an example of what Bennett and Royce explain as when “[s]uccessful societies accumulate wealth through ecological destruction to the point at which their very existence is undermined as a result of that wasting of the environment” (162). Ignoring the voice of the natural world is done at one’s own peril, and in that sense, Saruman’s punishment is a cautionary tale to the reader. Saruman is the greatest wizard in terms of power. The ways in which he utilizes his powers are important in order to underline how the way he acts towards the environment separates him from his fellow wizards. Saruman craves the , an instrument of pure evil created by Sauron, and it is what makes him change from the environmentalist ways of Aulë to his later exploitative, pro-industrial ways. However, Tolkien highlights Saruman’s change: in a letter from 1956, he explains that it is impatience that causes Saruman’s fall, and that it came from a will to force others to achieve his good ends (Carpenter, Letters 237). This implies that Saruman wants the Ring and is doing evil deeds for good reasons, making his involvement in environmental destruction more nuanced. In Saruman’s own words, what he is doing does not mean “any real change in our designs, only in our means” (Tolkien, FTR 253). It is this change of method that makes Saruman evil. In contrast, Radagast is never said to use his powers in any context: his way of protecting nature is that of a helper. He helps Gandalf by speaking with his bird-friends and telling them to act as spies and

Jonsson 12 messengers. Gandalf, on the other hand, uses his powers actively, going beyond his primary mission to acts as a guide and counsellor, and in The Lord of the Rings, he takes part in and leads battle forces against Sauron. At an earlier time in Middle-Earth, Saruman was also actively using his powers to, at least initially, destroy Sauron. Only later did he change his method by mimicking Sauron’s behaviour. In that sense, Gandalf and Saruman’s relationship is not a case of the dichotomy between good and evil, instead it is a case of a good and a bad way to achieve the same goal. The imitation of another being can be seen in both Saruman and Gandalf, but not in Radagast. As previously mentioned, the wizards were all originally acting in a form of imitation of their respective Vala. This never changes for Gandalf who keeps his balanced position throughout his mission as an emissary. However, Saruman transgresses from what Jeffers labels as a power from his environment to a power over his environment. Power from his environment is where he, similarly to Aulë, is connected to his environment and uses it for his (unselfish) purposes. Power over one’s environment is based on the exploitation of natural resources for personal gain and is connected to the characteristics of the Enemy. I argue that Saruman transgresses from an imitation of Aulë, to an imitation of Sauron. Originally, they are both Maiar in service to Aulë, which makes it is easy to Saruman during the time of The Lord of the Rings as an imitation of Sauron. Furthermore, Saruman names himself “the Ring- maker” (Tolkien, FTR 252), which implicitly compares him to Sauron, revealing his own ambitions. The gravity of such a name lies in that the Ring is in a sense Sauron; he has transferred most of his power to it and thus it becomes an extension of him. The Ring and its creator are the quintessential examples of characters with power over their environment, seeking to achieve the destruction of the free world, the enslavement of all the races and the desecration of the natural world that they live in. Thus, Saruman’s reference to himself as “Ring-maker” reveals his wish to destroy the natural world and placing himself as the lord of Middle-Earth. In his desire for power, he has strayed far from his purpose and separated himself from the attributes of Aulë, who loves the creative process but does not crave possession. In contrast, Radagast is, as have been mentioned previously, separated from Yavanna because of his division between nature and human-like beings, transgressing from a key aspect of wilderness, which Garrard describes as concern for “all identifiable entities or forms in the ecosphere” (22). Gandalf is the one wizard who stays true and highlights Tolkien’s view of taking a deep ecological approach to the world.

Jonsson 13

One aspect which separates the tree wizards is the active seeking of power. Gandalf, as the focalizing character in the scene between him and Saruman, shows himself to be resilient towards Saruman’s proposal, distancing himself and also lecturing Saruman, saying “[h]e that breaks a thing to find out what it is has left the path of wisdom” (Tolkien, FTR 252). Furthermore, Saruman makes this offer to Gandalf, thus confirming that he sees Gandalf as superior to Radagast. Gandalf, when telling his story, chooses to mention this which shows that he himself is above Radagast and that he can also resist the temptations of Saruman, making him the ideal wizard of the three. Later in the text, when Gandalf has died after his battle with the (demonic spirit), he is brought back as Gandalf the White and he then refers to himself as “Saruman as he should have been” (Tolkien, TT 484), signifying his ascent to the highest order of wizards. Gandalf is in that moment the bearer of the symbolism of white and is alone out of all wizards on the path of wisdom that Saruman abandons. From this role in the order, he ascends to his true potential as an emissary of Manwë and acts as a shepherd or steward for the people of Middle-Earth. It is through this role, what Jeffers calls “power with” (19) their environment that Tolkien shows his reader how humankind is supposed to relate to the environment. Dickerson and Evans argue that this position, that of steward, is where Tolkien truly reveals how humanity should live in accordance with nature. They mention that “[i]n claiming this role [as a steward], Gandalf makes no connection between stewardship and rule; he neither claims nor wants the rule of any realm, great or small” (38). Gandalf’s reluctance to rule, but willingness to act is what sets him apart from his fellow wizards since Radagast is passive and Saruman is power hungry. Furthermore, it is also Gandalf, in this role as steward, who is the bearer of the ecological message of the texts: “it is not our part to master all the tides of the world, but to do what is in us for the succour of those years wherein we are set… so that those who live after may have clean earth to till” (Tolkien, RTK 861. Added emphasis). In this passage, Gandalf’s words echo off the page and he does not only encourage the people of Middle-Earth to act against ecological devastation, but the voice of Tolkien reverberates and calls the people of his world to action. For the purpose of this study, the concept of stewardship, which is often central in ecocriticism, serves only to underline Gandalf’s position as a balanced character in contrast to his fellow wizards’ extreme ways. Otherwise, the idea of stewardship is the foundation of many scholarly works on Tolkien, with Ents, and Eriador (2011) by Dickerson and Evans being the most prominent. They summarise Gandalf’s role as

Jonsson 14 a steward by stating that “Gandalf makes it clear that a steward exists to serve others, and not vice versa” (38). This is highly relevant in describing Gandalf’s unique position amongst the wizards who, apart from Gandalf, acts in contrast with this or does not act at all. The phrase “clean earth to till” (Tolkien, RTK 861) has an apocalyptic connotation to it, since it highlights what will happen if people do not act in defence of the natural world. This is the destruction of natural resources and by extension there will be no “clean earth to till” which would lead to the extinction of life. This message is found in Bennett and Royce’s introduction to ecology, who claim that even though ecology is concerned with today, it is fundamentally a dream of a better tomorrow. It is Gandalf who leads this ecological battle towards a brighter future against the forces of industry whilst Saruman is a cog in the industrial wheel and Radagast is nowhere to be found. Therefore, Gandalf both shows that humankind must act in defence of nature so that industrial progress does not destroy it and that he is superior to his fellow wizards. Furthermore, Gandalf is the only wizard to fulfil his purpose and accomplish his mission: Saruman fails because he has lost his connection with nature and human- like beings and his sole focus is how to control them. In contrast, Radagast fails because he has lost his connection with human-like beings and his sole focus is the wellbeing of nature. Saruman and Radagast uphold a divide between nature and human-like being, whilst Gandalf has a more holistic view of the world. For Saruman, this means that he has literally stopped listening to nature; Treebeard claims that Saruman used to walk in his woods and listen to him, but do not anymore (Tolkien, TT 462). Thus, Saruman is linked to modern Western culture and he can carry out his deeds of deforestation and destruction in the name of progress. Radagast, in contrast, is so deeply invested in nature that all other things are silent. Therefore, he loses his connection to others, because balance is required in order to understand both sides. Gandalf represents that balance: he does not divide nature and human-like beings, he considers them of equal importance for the world. Furthermore, he does not consider nature to be silent. He is the friend of ents and eagles whilst also being the guide and companion to hobbit, elves and humans. Curry argues that Gandalf, in breaking this divide, also acts as a mediator of pluralism, bringing people of different ‘races’ together, including other sentient beings of nonhuman form, such as the ents. This is contrasted with the strive for a homogenic, slave-population by Saruman.

Jonsson 15

In discovering the wizards’ different positions, it is important to not only look at them, but also look at their companions. Not only does the type of companions that the wizards keep highlight what they represent: the hierarchical positions of these companions are also important to understand the position of each wizard. Radagast has abandoned most of his links to human-like beings in favour of a more secluded way of life, focused on nature. His involvement in The Lord of the Rings is that of a helper and a passive character, therefore, his companionship is only seen through Gandalf. In Gandalf’s story, which is mentioned above, he gives Radagast instructions to help defeat Sauron: “[s]end out messages to all the beasts and birds that are your friends. Tell them to bring news of anything that bears on this matter [news of the Ring] to Saruman and Gandalf” (Tolkien, FTR 251. Added emphasis). One of the beings that Radagast send is the lord of the eagles, Gwaihir, who later becomes a companion to Gandalf. Gwaihir’s regal position is important and is also a common theme for Gandalf’s companions. The fact that Gandalf becomes close with beings of regal status that originally were close to Radagast or Saruman highlights their decline as well as Gandalf’s elevated position. I order to affect change in the world, Gandalf turns to beings from different castes, high and low. Thus, he underlines that the protection of the natural world is a key issue for all. In addition, the -lord Elrond speaks about this need for collective efforts against evil (environmental destruction) saying “[t]his quest [destroying the Ring] may be attempted by the weak with as much hope as the strong. Yet such is oft the course of deeds that move the wheels of the world: small hands do them because they must, while the eyes of the great are elsewhere” (Tolkien, FTR 262). This is ultimately what causes the destruction of the Ring: it is destroyed by a hobbit whilst Sauron is distracted by ‘the great’ kings and warriors of Middle-Earth. The destruction of Saruman’s home by the ents and the hobbits is also in some way caused by his inability to see ‘the weak’ as a threat, ents and hobbits mean little to him because he would only consider ‘the great’ worthy of his time. Furthermore, associating with beings of regal status is logistically beneficial to Gandalf since a king or queen is often followed by many subjects which spares Gandalf the effort of recruiting one person at a time. Through this, Tolkien highlights the need for governments to act as a shepherd for the people but also for the people to act independently. Another example of a royal companion is the king of the people of , Théoden, who is originally a companion of Saruman that later chooses to

Jonsson 16 support Gandalf in his endeavours. Through his relationship with Théoden, Gandalf shows his care for humans, proving his balanced view between human-like beings and the natural world. The most prominent group of beings that Gandalf is linked to are the hobbits: in The Lord of the Rings, Gandalf highlights his unique companionship with the hobbits, saying “[a]mong the Wise, I am the only one that goes in for hobbit-lore” (Tolkien, FTR 47). The hobbits’ environmental position in Middle-Earth is that of an agrarian, power with-nature type of relationship. However, before the events in The Lord of the Rings, the hobbits are passive in their dealings with the world, as Merry says: “Shire-folk have been so comfortable for so long they don’t know what to do” (Tolkien, RTK 983). Gandalf’s effect on these passive hobbits is to make them active, or more specifically, he guides and empowers the hobbits in order for them to be able to take a stance against environmental destruction. Four of the members in The Fellowship of the Ring are hobbits, and these are the subjects of Gandalf’s explicit guidance. When the hobbits return to their agricultural homeland in , they are empowered to defend their home from Saruman’s evil occupiers (Tolkien, RTK 975- 998). This final act of cleansing their idyllic, agrarian home from an enemy that is defined by its use of machinery is in itself a symbol of the success of Gandalf’s mission to guide the people of Middle-Earth. In order for Saruman to subdue the Shire, he uses misleading rhetoric and propaganda about the benefits of exploiting nature. He acts through hobbits and humans, those who are susceptible to his rhetoric, in order to destroy the agricultural, idyllic home of the hobbits. According to Dickerson and Evans, Saruman uses a “progressivist rhetoric” (208) in order to lure the hobbits of the Shire, and that he disguises his plans of environmental destruction as “benign-sounding terminology of ‘gathering’ and ‘sharing’ “(209). This underlines Saruman’s position as a representative of a malignant nature/human divide for personal gain, causing an ecological decline which in the end backlashes at the character (Saruman’s death), signifying the intrinsic power of nature. Therefore, the character of Saruman underlines how not to live and act, whilst Gandalf (through his apprentices, the four hobbits), demonstrates a life of natural interconnectedness with moderate machinal progress. Saruman, in contrast with Gandalf, goes from a position of high status, with companions matching it, to assuming the position of a tyrant and dictator without companions, only subordinates. He then becomes linked to hierarchically lower beings

Jonsson 17 such as the evil men of Dunland and .6 As previously mentioned, the dwarves and Saruman are connected through their common background with Aulë the Smith, and even though the dwarves are not considered to be companions to Saruman, it is important to highlight why the dwarves are considered good when Saruman is considered evil. Jeffers discussion on Tolkien’s characters’ power from and power over their environment helps to shed some light on the difference between Saruman and the dwarves. The dwarves take power from their environment: they are dependent on natural elements in order to thrive. The dwarves stone, metals and mining because it connects them to Aulë, whom they consider a God. Even though they are prone to greed in relation to their work, they love the natural world for what it gives them – their precious stone. In contrast, Saruman does not love the natural world, unless, as Treebeard highlight when it “can serve him for the moment” (Tolkien, TT 462). Therefore, it is not only Saruman’s connection to industrialism or machines that make him evil, it the fact that he seeks power over the natural world which sets him aside from beings such as the dwarves. Saruman has been shown to represent an industrial, progressive view of humanity’s relation to nature. In the mind of Tolkien, this clearly is a mark of evil: Tolkien even labels cars and planes as “-gadgets” in a letter from 1944 (Carpenter, Letters 88). However, Saruman transgresses deeper and is separated further from his fellow wizards due to his affiliation with the late-modern biochemical branch of genetically modified organism (GMO). Relating to the idea that only Eru Ilúvatar is permitted to create life, it is unique to the Enemy to distort and pervert Creation, with the original dark lord Melkor making the orcs and his apprentice Sauron continuing that work. In a letter from 1954, Tolkien writes on the making of evil beings (in contrast with creating), saying that “there are not some ‘tolerated’ sub-creational counterfeits” (Carpenter, Letters 191). Tolkien’s views on this is highlighted to the reader from Treebeard who tells Merry and Pippin that Saruman’s new -species, the Uruk-Hai,

6 In the context of ‘evil men’, it is relevant to highlight the criticism against Tolkien on the charge of racism. In The Lord of the Rings, evil is often linked with the colour black, ‘ of Mordor’, ‘the Black hand’ etc. In contrast, good is often linked with white, such as Gandalf the White or the White-rider. However, Curry nuances this criticism by quoting Brian Attebery, saying “this ethical division is rendered increasingly invalid as the story progresses, as evil emerges amongst the kingly Gondorians, the blond Riders of Rohan, the seemingly incorruptible wizards, and even the thoroughly English hobbit-folk of the Shire” (137). Although this critique of Tolkien is valid, it is beyond the scope of my argument.

Jonsson 18 are stronger than the normal orcs, “I wonder what he has done? Are they Men he has ruined, or has he blended the races of Orcs and Men? That would be a black evil” (Tolkien, TT 462). The Uruk-Hai and the orcs are a sort of post-natural, apocalyptic species, adapted to live under harsh conditions, not seldom leading to them resorting to cannibalism as a food source. Saruman’s subordinates, especially the uruks7 and orcs, helps to further distance him from the positions of his fellow wizards by connecting him to a new concept – the post-apocalyptic. This symbolises the worst-case scenario if humanity’s trust and love for industry and machines were to go too far, creating an irreversible divide between nature and humanity. In such a world, depicted in contemporary novels such as The Road (2006) by Cormac McCarthy, characters may be faced with a post-apocalyptic reality of a depleted earth where people have resorted to cannibalism to survive. Frodo highlights that the orcs are not originally consumers of poor foods and drinks, saying that “[f]oul waters and foul meats they’ll take, [only] if they can get no better” (Tolkien, RTK 893). The uruks themselves are open about the consummation of human flesh, underlining that it is Saruman who provides it: “[w]e are the servants of Saruman the Wise, the White Hand: the Hand that gives us man’s-flesh to eat” (Tolkien, TT 436). Furthermore, in his imitation of Sauron, Saruman strives towards an authoritarian regime with a slave-based economy. Curry places this type of rule against the municipal democracy of the hobbits, creating a comparison between the political systems of the wizard’s companions. In order to command his companions, Saruman has his voice, which is described as powerful. Thus, Saruman is linked to extremes such as the apocalypse, cannibalism, the post-natural and slavery. All of these extremes have some affiliation with the idea of a human/nature divide, against the deep ecological tendency of Gandalf.

In conclusion, through this ecocritical interpretation of The Lord of the Rings, Tolkien, whose passion for the environment is well-known, lets his deep ecological sentiment shine through his text. The ideal is presented as a holistic view of the world where “all identifiable entities or forms in the ecosphere” (Garrard 22) have intrinsic value and are worthy of respect. The three characters analysed in this study highlight different positions towards protection and preservation of nature. Through the characters

7 Abbreviated form of ’uruk-hai’.

Jonsson 19

Saruman and Radagast, Tolkien creates a dichotomous relationship between two extreme positions in relation to the natural world. Saruman’s evil is based on his inability to view the world as a web where all things are intertwined, he sees nature as subordinate and voiceless, which makes it easy to exploit. Furthermore, through Saruman, Tolkien also presents a vision of what could happen if his position would become the dominant one – the destruction of the natural world. Radagast, in contrast, is extreme in his own way due to his lack of interest and concern for anything else than nature. He too upholds a divide between nature and human-like being, failing to see them as equal parts in the world. To highlight the desired, healthy position (and possibly his own position), Tolkien adds a balanced character to the puzzle, Gandalf. From Gandalf relationship to characters of regal status, to his position as a focalizing character, the reader is made aware of Gandalf’s position as an ideal character. What makes his position favourable is his holistic view of the world, seeing all beings as equally valuable. Furthermore, he becomes the bearer of the ecological message of the novels: taking action against these extremes in order to secure a future balance “so that those who live after may have clean earth to till” (Tolkien, RTK 861). This study is limited and therefore there are naturally topics that lie outside the scope of the study. It opens up for further investigation into individual characters and their specific implications for the message of the novels. Furthermore, one topic that is briefly touched upon but could be developed further, is the importance of the Valar as an ideal and how that affects different beings in Middle-Earth. Another question is how or if the message of the novel can influence its readers and their views on nature: however, this is outside the scope of this study and better left to the field of psychology. The popularity of The Lord of the Rings can, to some extent, trace back to its contemporary relevance in society. I argue that the focus of this study, the ecological interpretation of the novels, makes them more relevant than ever before. From the wish to protect nature, on a global and local level, to the recognition in the “progressivist rhetoric” (Dickerson and Evans, 208) presented in politics today, the The Lord of the Rings continues to be relevant to its readers, more than half a century after it was first published.

Jonsson 20

Works Cited Primary Source: Tolkien, J. R. R. The Fellowship of the Ring. 1954. The Lord of the Rings. Single Volume Edition, HarperCollins, 1994, pp. 21–398. Tolkien, J. R. R. The Two Towers. 1954. The Lord of the Rings. Single Volume Edition, HarperCollins, 1994, pp. 403–725. Tolkien, J. R. R. The Return of the King. 1955. The Lord of the Rings. Single Volume Edition, HarperCollins, 1994, pp. 731–1008. Secondary Source: Bennett, Andrew & Nicholas Royce. An Introduction to Literature, Criticism and Theory. Routledge, 2016. Brooke-Rose, Christine. The Evil Ring: Realism and the Marvelous. Poetics Today 1, no. 4, 1980. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1771887. Campbell, Liam. The Ecological Augury in the Works of JRR Tolkien. Walking Tree Publishers, 2011. Carpenter, Humphrey. JRR Tolkien: A Biography. George Allen & Unwin Publishers, 1978. Curry, Patrick. Defending Middle-Earth: Tolkien, Myth, and Modernity. Houghton Mifflin Co., 2004. Curry, Patrick. Deep Roots in a time of Frost: Essays on Tolkien. Walking Tree Publishers, 2014. Deitering, Cynthia. “The Postnatal Novel: Toxic consciousness in Fiction of the 1980s.” The Ecocritical Reader, edited by C. Glotfelty and H. Fromm, The University of Georgia Press, 1996, pp.196–203. Dickerson, Matthew and Jonathan Evans. Ents, Elves and Eriador: The Environmental Vision of JRR Tolkien. Kentucky University Press, 2011. Garrard, Greg. Ecocriticism. Routledge, 2004. Jeffers, Susan. Arda Inhabited: Environmental Relationships in The Lord of the Rings. The Kent State University Press, 2014. The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, edited by Humphrey Carpenter and Christopher Tolkien, Houghton Mifflin, 2000.

Jonsson 21

Meyer Spacks, Patricia. Power and Meaning in The Lord of the Rings in Understanding The Lord of the Rings: The Best of Tolkien Criticism, ed. Zimbardo, Rose A. and Isaacs, Neil D. Houghton Mifflin Co., 2004. Tolkien, J. R. R. The Silmarillion, edited by Christopher Tolkien. HarperCollins, 1999. Tolkien, J. R. R. Unfinished Tales: Of Númenor & Middle-Earth, edited by Christopher Tolkien. HarperCollins, 2014.