MovieChat Forums > The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power (2022) Discussion > JRR Tolkien would approve of having more...

JRR Tolkien would approve of having more diversity in this series. He was pretty "woke" himself back in the day.

posted 3 years ago by hitfan (220)
44 replies | jump to latest

From JRR's own words:

"I must say that the enclosed letter from Rutten & Loening is a bit stiff. Do I suffer this impertinence because of the possession of a German name, or do their lunatic laws require a certificate of arisch origin from all persons of all countries? ... Personally I should be inclined to refuse to give any Bestätigung (although it happens that I can), and let a German translation go hang. In any case I should object strongly to any such declaration appearing in print. I do not regard the (probable) absence of all Jewish blood as necessarily honourable; and I have many Jewish friends, and should regret giving any colour to the notion that I subscribed to the wholly pernicious and unscientific race-doctrine."

― Letter 29 — Tolkien's German publishers had asked whether he was of Aryan origin

"I have the hatred of apartheid in my bones; and most of all I detest the segregation or separation of Language and Literature. I do not care which of them you think White."

― From a Valedictory Address to the University of Oxford in 1959

http://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Racism_in_Tolkien's_Works

Take that, you anti-woke fanboys!

[–] Oskar (302) 3 years ago

He wouldn't approve of his works being changed in order to do so, or he'd have written it that way.

[–] Otter (24464) 3 years ago

Not all of Tolkien's ideas about race, sex, or social class were what modern people call enlightened, but he had a basic decency that is all too rare in the modern world. Aside from what he saw in his mind's eye, he knew evil in the real world when it reared its ugly head!

But one of the odd things about the Tolkien fandom is that it's full of both liberals and conservatives (both on the saner end of their spectrums). The liberals love Tolkien's deep love of nature and early-environmentalist viewpoint, the social conservatives like his emphasis on morality. And maybe his odder ideas about race, sex, or class.

[–] Owlwise (1536) 3 years ago

I'm on the progressive side, and I like Tolkien's emphasis on morality, on doing what's right for the greater good of all, just as much as I like his deep love of nature & his concerns about the hunger for power & control over others.

[–] Ace_Spade (9608) 3 years ago

Decency, respect, and championing against harm caused to others is not what people are criticizing about the "woke" movement, and they are not what people are objecting to - or worried about - regarding the Amazon series. The worry is that the show will not respect Tolkien's lore and the world he built.

There are as many people queasy about the notion of the LOTR series being filled up with Game of Thrones-esque sex as there are people worried about whether or not the show will reflect Tolkien's world's British roots. True diversity is neither feared nor the problem. Sacrificing story and character (good writing, in other words) on the altar of a political soapbox is the problem. This is especially a problem when it is not simply the creation of a new lecture masquerading as entertainment, but when it takes somebody else's story - and wrings it into a new megaphone.

[–] Owlwise (1536) 3 years ago

Well said. Any series adapting Tolkien's work should reflect his ideas & his ideals. I'd personally love to see more diverse fantasies, and in fact many good ones have been written, just waiting to be filmed ... but Tolkien specifically stated that his wish was to create a mythology for England, one that honored all the things he felt were part of that particular culture & history. And interestingly enough, readers from any other cultures, with their own histories, have found it just as meaningful & applicable to their own lives as its originally intended audience. Great writing tends to be universal in the end. It's why I can be just as moved by James Baldwin as by Jane Austen, or the Japanese court poets of 1000 years ago as by the English Romantics, for example.

[–] Ace_Spade (9608) 3 years ago

There is a tremendous potential for diverse fantasy worlds. I'd love to see the genre tackled from another culture's lenses, too; we could see something other than a European-Dark Ages world. So, I absolutely agree there.

A very fine point regarding specificity leading to universality. The more specific a story gets, the more it becomes relatable by the humanity inside it.

It's telling, I think, that as you point out, plenty of people are moved by Baldwin and Austen both, but these days it seems like relatability depends on matching personalities with the author like a literary dating app.

[–] Otter (24464) 3 years ago

"Decency, respect, and championing against harm caused to others is not what people are criticizing about the "woke" movement, and they are not what people are objecting to - or worried about - regarding the Amazon series. The worry is that the show will not respect Tolkien's lore and the world he built."

You're conflating two separate issues here, the issue of putting "woke-ness" into Numenor, and the issue of respecting Tolkien's work or not.

The issues are separate because some of Tolkien's ideas are now considered left-ish, and because it's also possible to run roughshod over Tolkien's work without any reference to modern politics. Plus, some people are complaining about the idea of diverse casting in the new series and calling it "woke", when Numenor should be as racially diverse as any empire that has its origin with a bunch of mixed tribes, and which has colonies all over the known world. Ancient Rome was racially diverse, did you know that? Because they had encompassed most of Europe, north Africa, and the Middle East into their empire, people from all those places came to Rome, and Numenor is at least partly inspired by Rome.

[–] Ace_Spade (9608) 3 years ago

I don't think I am conflating two issues, although I do take your point that they are not necessarily the same thing.

In this case, what I am speaking of is the co-opting of another writer's work to make one's own political points. If they were to make soapboxing paramount instead of focusing on Tolkien's lore, that would hurt the show.

Frankly, overall, I think they'll bunk up the show, but not primarily because of the woke thing. I think it will be a variety of factors that will make it just a disappointing, committee-built jumble with no respect, regard, or resemblance to Arda.

Yes, I know ancient civilizations, like Rome, were more diverse than many people tend to think of them. Diverse casting in-and-of-itself is not a problem for me, and it could be done well. It would be a problem, however, if they used it to make points and introduce long-winded lectures about "issues" instead of focusing on story, character, and myth.

My best example would be that there was one actor who was talking about how the show could/should cast a female Gandalf. Stuff like that is what I'm worried about here, and it would make Tolkien whirl about in his grave.

In short, I'm not worried about diversity being present in the show, but rather the showrunners ignoring Tolkien's vision for their own, and that their own be eye-rolling political commercials.

[–] Otter (24464) 3 years ago

One of the things I liked about PJ'S LOTR movies was that they were all about the Tolkien, no reference at all to modern issues. That makes the films feel very authentic, and it will really help them appeal to future generations. Nothing ages faster than topical references!

That said, I'd still like to slap a lot of the anti-woke dickheads who've been commenting on this issue, because most of them start by whining about diversity and as noted, Numenor *should* be diverse.

[–] Ace_Spade (9608) 3 years ago

I think we're pretty much in agreement. We might quibble over details, but that's pretty much it for me. Tolkien's vision is paramount, I don't want to see any political/socially-correct B.S., but I'm not against casting people of non-European heritage in the show. It has to be done with respect to the lore, though, and I do think it's important to remember that Tolkien was building a specifically English myth.

And, I also agree that there are a lot of morons who masquerade as being sensible, but are really just clearly ticked-off by any diversity on TV or in film.

[–] Otter (24464) 3 years ago

I agree that we're pretty much in agreement!

So I hope that Amazon hires someone who genuinely loves Tolkien and not someone who's trying to push a political agenda or who'll cater to the lowest common denominator, but it's Amazon so what are the odds. The filmmakers are probably being told to make "Lord of the Rings meets Game of Thrones so sex it up! Sex sells and this thing needs to make a profit, because now Bezos thinks he can make up for losing the billionaire space race by building his a floating Amazon city in international waters, where his word is law".

- - -

PS: The dirtbags who are whining about diversity in advance are the same dirtbags who whined about the very existence of "Wonder Woman" and "Black Panther" movies. Because

[–] Ace_Spade (9608) 3 years ago

Unfortunately, I think you're right and they're going to do some kind of Game of Thrones knockoff spiced with political messaging and Tolkien dressing on the side. I do think Amazon will go full-committee and try to check every box (is there enough nudity!?)

I await a trailer, however, to see if it looks awesome.

Yeah, there are some people who are just already twitchy, getting huffy, red-faced, and short-of-breath over diversity - often before anybody's said anything. I might be wrong, but I can't recall any announcements from Amazon about how "diverse" this show will be, but people are already cheesed about it. On the flip side, some of that is fuelled by people already talking about how "this show/movie better be diverse!" before it even comes out. Not so much with Lord of the Rings, but with people who insist the next James Bond has to be black (or a woman...?); so at least there's outrage counterbalance...?

[–] Otter (24464) 3 years ago

I haven't seen a trailer, I haven't seen any pictures, I have heard the fucking idiots who have no more information than I do whining about "woke" stuff because they love to whine about woke stuff.

The thing is, the story of the fall of Numenor could make the most awesome film series or miniseries EVER, so much so that I've even planned out a series of three movies (easily adapted to miniseries format). I mean that's all written out in the Silmarillion and it's a hell of a story even if it's written in deliberately non-exciting King James-ish language, but they're not even planning to use it, last I heard they were planning to film the foundation and early years of Numenor, which is barely touched upon in anything I've read. Which totally leaved them free to try to do something horrible like make a "Game of Thrones" ripoff*, and it's not like I have any faith in Amazon.

- - -

* I love "Game of Thrones" as much as anyone does.

[–] Ace_Spade (9608) 3 years ago

Yup. I think they're thinking with their wallets on this one, and I doubt anybody is in Tolkien's corner. More troubling is the fact that Christopher passed away recently, and as little clout as he had with movie studios, at least he was somebody who would go to bat for his father's legacy.

[–] Otter (24464) 3 years ago

Christopher Lee is gone as well, he was a huge Tolkien geek, and felt it was hit duty to represent the fandom on the set.

I do hope they'll put some Tolkien geek in the mix somewhere, but really... it's a flawed world we live in, and gifts like the LOTR movies are rare things indeed. And those movies were a gift - PJ'S gift to the fandom and NZ's gift to the world, those movies were made with a magic that couldn't be recaptured when they tried to make prequels. So while I hope something like that will happen again, I know the odds are massively against it.

[–] Ace_Spade (9608) 3 years ago

Christopher Lee was an awesome presence in any film and a really cool guy (from what I've seen in interviews) - perennially classy, sophisticated, a bit cheeky, and charming.

Fingers-crossed for the show; I await the first trailer.

[–] Bateman (604) 3 years ago

Plus, some people are complaining about the idea of diverse casting in the new series and calling it "woke", when Numenor should be as racially diverse as any empire that has its origin with a bunch of mixed tribes, and which has colonies all over the known world.

Not really.

Tolkien specifically mentions that while the Númenoreans traded with and ocasionally ruled over the peoples of western Middle-earth (who were mostly descended from the same Three Houses of Men as Númenoreans themselves), they did not really mingle or marry with them, and even attributes the decline of Númenor's heirs in exile, Gondor and Arnor, to their willingness to mingle with "lesser men".

If they want to portray places like Umbar, Harad or Rhûn in the series that's fine, but there is zero indication, anywhere in Tolkien's writings, that the racial makeup of Númenor consisted of anything but the descendants of the Houses of Bëor, Haleth and Marach.

[–] Otter (24464) 3 years ago

In ancient Rome, which is to some degree the inspiration for Numenor, and it should have been like sprawling empire - people came to the capitol from all over the empire. Even if it wasn't fashionable to marry those of "lesser blood", people who'd been out to Arnor or Harad would bring back native servants, employees, or slaves, who would become part of the general population, rich bastards from all nations would go to Armenelos because that was THE place to be, and merchants would come there to sell stuff and make money.

Now that would have naturally made for a diverse population, but also for intense social class/racial divisions. I mean racism and class prejudice are bad enough as it is, with all humans being naturally the same as each other, but imagine if one group of human had genuine genetic advantages and considered themselves superior! So there would be serious divisions in Numenorian society, and I just hope the writers do what the "Game of Thrones" people did and invent a society with its own divisions and problems, without shoehorning in modern politics. Because nothing pisses off viewers more than disagreeing with their politics, or makes something age worse.

[–] [deleted] 3 years ago

He wasn't "woke" at all. Just because he never had a problem with race or gender, that doesn't mean he was woke. However, since he was a Christian, he definitely never would've approved of homosexuality or bisexuality in his stories.

Being "woke" means being anti-white, anti-straight, and misandrist, none of which applies to Tolkien.

[–] Threadkiller (3088) 3 years ago

According to white supremacists, being "woke" means being anti-white, anti-straight, and misandrist, none of which applies to Tolkien.

Fixed

[–] [deleted] 3 years ago

According to sane normal people, regardless of race or gender, being "woke" means being anti-white, anti-straight, and misandrist, none of which applies to Tolkien.

Fixed 😜

[–] Threadkiller (3088) 3 years ago

The only people who think that white supremacists & their views are "normal" are other white supremacists so thanks for identifying yourself 👍

[–] [deleted] 3 years ago

Who said anything about white supremacy?

[–] Threadkiller (3088) 3 years ago

"White supremacy? What's that?" ~ Anonymous white supremacist playing dumb

[–] PrimeMinisterX (8814) 3 years ago

He's right, though. The only person who said anything about white supremacy is you.

[–] Threadkiller (3088) 3 years ago

According to white supremacists, being "woke" means being anti-white, anti-straight, and misandrist

(Open question) If you're arguing the same thing that a white supremacist would argue then what does that make you?

[–] [deleted] 3 years ago

That’s not even the original quote.

And by that logic, any black person, or anyone for that matter, who is against anti-black racism is a black supremacist. Is that what you’re saying?

[–] Threadkiller (3088) 3 years ago

"We're not racists we're just sticking up for whites who are the real victims of racism" ~Said every lying white supremacist coward

Fun Fact: White supremacists often project their racism onto the non existent false equivalency of the "black supremacy" straw man.

[–] [deleted] 3 years ago

Like how you’re projecting right now with the “white supremacy” straw man?

[–] Threadkiller (3088) 3 years ago

White supremacy is an ideology & practice created by white supremacists themselves while concepts such as "black supremacy" is a made up straw man false equivalency, also created by white supremacists themselves to deflect & project onto. Basically it's the white supremacist equivalent of "I know you are but what am I"

[–] chilone (18058) 3 years ago

So if a white supremacist said theft is wrong and you agreed with him, that would make you a white supremacist?

[–] Wesley93 (164) 3 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Wesley93 (164) 3 years ago

[deleted]

[–] LetoAtreides (573) 3 years ago

Which part of that says Tolkien would want black elves, muslim hobbits and gay numenoreans?

[–] Corbell (10995) 3 years ago

None. It's total nonsense to consider him "woke".

[–] trevorh321 (5495) 3 years ago

I see the word 'diversity' used to describe something and I automatically do not want to watch it. Because that's the focal point and everything else is secondary. Who cares about story? We have diversity! Who cares about characters? We have diversity!

And isn't it ironic it is liberals today who are pushing for segregation, starting in schools.

[–] LoveCatsHateDogs (1989) 3 years ago

[deleted]

[–] LoveCatsHateDogs (1989) 3 years ago

That is exactly what I have been saying for the past year or so. Anything "woke" is "woke" first and everything else last. So you see it in the trailer, and just skip it.

If they made things "good" first, everything else last (i.e "money maker", "woke" etc.) we might actually go back to having something we might watch more than once, or never in this case.