Quote:
|
And once again I must state that I don't think Aragorn is a paperthin character.
|
I certainly agree with you now,
Eomer; however, it took a few readings for me to come to the realization, and the first time I read the books, Aragorn DID strike me as paper-thin, but I've learned better in subsequent readings. Aragorn is a "slow burn" character for me, but he just gets better every time. As for Legolas, he isn't terribly developed, but he doesn't need to be, either. He accomplishes what he needs to do without a whole lot of personal detail. And after having read the Silmarillion and seen the Elves of the First Age at work, it resonates interestingly with the modest character of Legolas so as to work to his advantage--Son of the King of Mirkwood and yet never one mention of it. Legolas strikes me as having to some extent, a receptive and humble personality that must stand some indoctrination, but that bears it gracefully and to advantage. The good thing about characters that aren't overdrawn to the last line on the face is that we, as readers, can see within the "webwork" of the construct and draw a more personal relationship with that character. (I hope I got that across OK). Legolas is not my personally favorite character, but for those for whom he is the focus, I can sympathize and understand their POV, even if there is a dearth of direct detail.
My summarized point, I suppose, is: Tolkien adds just enough detail to draw the scene and place the characters, but does not ruin an idealized inner picture of the characters with too much detail. For many stories, this will not fly, but Tolkien makes it work because of the grand scale of the world he draws around his characters, and for other reasons I'm sure I haven't figured out yet!
Cheers,
Lyta