The Trickster in LotR

[littlemanpoet]

Not having read Faust, I can't comment intelligently. I know, you'd think by now I'd have gotten around to Faust, but no. Sorry.

In general, it seems that if a taboo is broken in Tolkien's works, the consequences are never funny or ambiguous.

In general, yes. But a hobbit leaving the Shire for parts unknown is itself a taboo of sorts. So is entering the Old Forest. So is a strong desire to see Elves, or to disappear from before the eyes of 144 birthday party guests by the aid of a magic ring (or any aid, for that matter). So there are enough specifics to lead me to question your generalization.

As for the ravens, I think you may have your attribution wrong. That was in Regin's post, he quoting a Letter of Tolkien. Be that as it may, and me having never heard of the particular mythical instance you site, there is much in Norse myth that he never mentioned that had nothing to do with magic wielding Elves or Wizards. In other words, every writer is going to dip his ladle into the soup of story and come out with a different set of ingredients; that Tolkien has not used all of the elements of Trickster does not mitigate the fact that the Trickster can be discerned in LotR.

[Lalwendë]

I have to defend the comment by Lush:

In general, it seems that if a taboo is broken in Tolkien's works, the consequences are never funny or ambiguous.

I think she is right, and the examples given here prove it:

Originally Posted by lmp

But a hobbit leaving the Shire for parts unknown is itself a taboo of sorts. So is entering the Old Forest. So is a strong desire to see Elves, or to disappear from before the eyes of 144 birthday party guests by the aid of a magic ring (or any aid, for that matter). So there are enough specifics to lead me to question your generalization.

Yes, they are all breakings of taboos, but they do lead to serious consequences. Very severe consequences. If a Hobbit had not left The Shire then a certain ring would not have been found. This indeed eventually turned out fortunate for Middle Earth, but I wonder would Bilbo or Frodo have thought that way?

Originally Posted by lmp

In other words, every writer is going to dip his ladle into the soup of story and come out with a different set of ingredients; that Tolkien has not used all of the elements of Trickster does not mitigate the fact that the Trickster can be discerned in LotR.

Indeed, there is much that Tolkien could have included but did not. After all, he was creating his own myth, not merely rewriting old ones. So he would use essential elements of certain archetypes as he saw fit. He included something of the Green Man but did not include the female Sheela-na-Gig, perhaps as she was a little too crude. But the fact that he used elements of certain figures makes me realise that yes, I can accept that elements of The Trickster are discernible. But I must still be contrary and say that not to allow the Trickster full reign is not to have a true Trickster.

But Faust is well worth a read (and another read, and another...), and I think Tolkien may have read it himself, as whether at a subconscious level or not, he drew elements of Faust into the creation of Saruman and possibly Sauron.

[littlemanpoet]

because you have a built in choice between either funny or ambiguous. If it's not one, it's the other. Other taboos: Eowyn's disobedience, riding with the Rohirrim to Pelennor; Faramir not bringing the Ring to his father; I'm sure there are more.

[Rimbaud]

Aragorn palling up with the deceased. The future of ME being decided by four short crumpet-lovers. A decided twinkle in somebody's eye methinks.

[Lush]

/because you have a built in choice between either funny or ambiguous. If it's not one, it's the other./

I do?

Hm. Sorry, can't quite understand.

I think that the above broken taboos still demonstrate a departure from the Trickster. An improvement even, if you will. Because the Trickster archetype is, from my understanding, meant to make us uncomfortable by its moral ambiguity. I don't see anyone doing just that in Middle Earth, except for maybe Gollum, but only up to a point (especially when I keep his death in mind).

Eowyn disobeys and the Hobbits wander into the Old Forest for specific reasons; Eowyn is out for death and glory and ends up slaying the Witchking in the process, the Hobbits are trying carrying a Ring that will decide the fate of the world. This isn't Trickster. There are echoes of Trickster, yes, of course, but I don't really see him there in his entirety.

And it's not that I'm saying that Tolkien had no sense of humour, but that it's markedly different from the kind of humour used in the Trickster myths I'm familiar with.

P.S. "Faust" is a great read. Though nobody has yet told me if there is any information on how Tolkien felt about Goethe. Any takers?

[littlemanpoet]

What I meant, Lush, was that some of the broken taboos in LotR lead to "not funny" stuff, and others lead to "not ambiguous" stuff. Some lead to both. None lead to neither (sorry about the triple negatives there). So between the two parts of your assertion, I say "yes, that's true".

But what about The Hobbit, or doesn't that qualify as Tolkien?

Bilbo tries to swipe Bill the Troll's wallet (at least I think it was Bill), and that sure as heck was funny. More Trickstery too, don't you think?

[Lush]

Oh, it's terribly funny, I agree. But that's what I would call an echo of the Trickster, not an actual true-to-archetype representation. If Bilbo was really acting the Trickster, he would first swipe that wallet, then take a poop in it, then provide us with some joking reference on the filthy nature of monetary transactions though without really giving a hoot as to what he's done, then... Well I best not go on.

Having said that, I'm no expert on the Trickster. I'm only familiar with the Native American and Chinese versions in any depth. So please feel free not to take me seriously. It's just that my instincts tell me that Tolkien wouldn't be all that fond of this archetype (then again, my instincts also once told me that "Saw" would make for a decent movie-going experience, so by all means...)