“Afraid of dragons”

[Estelyn Telcontar]

Elves and Dragons! Cabbages and potatoes are better for me and you.

I wonder, did Tolkien let the Gaffer speak those words for the modern-day world? 'Usefulness' seems to be the key word here, and it is certainly the key to our materialistic society. Does it pay? What use would dragons be? Is there any profit in them? If not, we don't need them - and davem mentioned the inherent danger in something that we cannot control.

Tolkien himself did not write with the idea of profit in mind - he wrote for the beauty and joy of subcreation.

Interestingly, he did write one story which used a dragon very subversively - and it was not set in Middle-earth! Farmer Giles of Ham, who would seem at first to be a very unlikely and prosaic hero, does something quite unconventional - he does not kill the dragon, but makes it his ally. (Shades of Shrek there - a very subversive version of fairytales!) By doing so, Giles overthrows the king and becomes the ruler himself - with no royal lineage, no noble blood, and no experience - just common sense. Now there's a political statement if I ever read one, and it feels very close to the Hobbit society. After all, Tolkien did say of himself that he was something of an anarchist.

If we try to apply that to ourselves, how can we make the dragon our ally instead of killing it as our foe?

An excellent topic, Fordim, and very worthwhile contributions from all - I'm enjoying this discussion!

[Lalwendë]

I also have to add, this is a great discussion.

Tolkien is subversive. As is fantasy in general. It speaks of worlds which are different to our own, it is escapist, it is populated by strange creatures and characters who do all the things which we are not allowed to do. All day, everyday, I hear people questioning things and asking 'is this fit for purpose?', 'does this offer value for money?', 'has this been planned?'. Estelyn says:

'Usefulness' seems to be the key word here, and it is certainly the key to our materialistic society. Does it pay? What use would dragons be? Is there any profit in them? If not, we don't need them - and davem mentioned the inherent danger in something that we cannot control.

This is why dragons are scary, because they symbolise something wild, and something which ostensibly has no usefulness. And to idolise something 'useless' seems to be tantamount to heresy in our day and age! It was a very wise use of symbolism that Ursula Le Guin chose.

Following on from what Child says, I think the environmental factor in Tolkien is still very subversive today - suggest that urban people give up their 4x4s and you almost start a war in the UK. Woodland is usually saved where it proves to be useful - e.g. shielding houses from a road, or where it can be used as a leisure area, rarely just for its own sake. Tolkien shows us a fine example of mankind destroying his own world in the shape of Saruman - as clear an environmental message as you could hope to find.

Also, what Caroreiel picks up on shows that Tolkien is subversive. Our world is driven by materialism and money, while in Tolkien's world, these are very bad things. The Hobbits are a gentle and kind race, they do not rush about, they do not crave power, and those who desire to show off their wealth, like the Sackville-Bagginses, are shown to be against the norm. Men who crave rings of power are corrupted, and even the innocent, Bilbo and Frodo, can be harmed by possession of such powerful 'bling' as we'd call it.

I'd say I can't wait to read more, but as that fine example of a chilled-out environmentalist, Treebeard, says: don't be hasty. And that really is a subversive message for today's society!