Quote:
Originally Posted by littlemanpoet
What might have happened if Gandalf had fled instead?
|
They would not have made it, because it is Gandalf who breaks the bridge. Had he fled, the Balrog would have crossed the bridge and destroyed all nine of them before they could get near the exit.
Here are Tolkien's words about Beorhtnoth, from his commentary on
Homecoming:
Quote:
|
[The] element of pride, in the form of the desire for honour and glory, in life and after death, tends to grow, to become a chief motive, driving a man beyond the bleak heroic necessity to excess --- to chivalry [italics mine]. "Excess" certainly, even if it be approved by contemporary opinion, when it not only goes beyond need and duty, but interferes with it. .... Beorhthnoth was chivalrous rather than strictly heroic. Honour was in itself a motive, and he sought it at the risk of placing his heorðwerod, all the men most dear to him, in a truly heroic situation, which they could redeem only by death. Mangnificent perhaps, but certainly wrong. Too foolish to be heroic. And the folly Beorhthnoth at any rate could not wholly be redeemed by death.
|
So Tolkien has distinguished between heroism and chivalry, such that heroism is the good of loyalty to the death whereas chivalry is the good of loyalty to the death married to foolish pride; for chivalry places honour above wisdom.
Agree? Disagree?
Is there any character in Tolkien's writings who opts for chivarly instead of heroism? If so, what does it tell the reader?