Lord of the Rings question

Why didn't Frodo just fly the ring to Mordor on the backs of the eagles that ended up flying him out of Morder later on anyway? This seems like a gaping plot hole.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=meOCdyS7ORE
youtube.com/watch?v=spHEw2n9LwE
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

...

I think I once read someone on here say that it's because the Eagles aren't tame and they basically do whatever they want but you can ask them for help and if they feel like it they will

or something

Why didn't Eru just not be a dick a remove all evil in the world?

>ayo eagle, can you help us save the world?
>nah
>aiight lol

Isn't the fact that Aragon raises an unkillable ghost army pretty stupid? He could have just hired one spooky and he would've beaten the forces of Mormon EVENTUALLY. That's just a bad cop-out.

Tell me that's not how it goes down in the book pls.

I met David Day last night. I didn't know about his controversial status in the Tolkien community until after I got home but he was telling me that he's been hounded by a group he calls the 'Tolkien Taliban' who boycott his books and are mean to him. He seemed like a nice guy except that when I asked him questions he told me to buy his books because they contained the answers I was looking for.

They'd be obliterated by mechanical weapons, arrows, the flying Nazgul and Sauron himself. Besides, Sauron would see them coming miles away, if not distracted by an army of hummies standing at his gates. Then all he would have to do is guard the entrance to mount doom, and he'd be golden.

You would basically fly the dark lord ring straight to the dark lord

It turned out to be unsafe. The scene was too gruesome for the movie.

In the Hobbit its pretty well outlined that the Eagles are very apathetic and dont really care about anybody. Theyre down to help Gandalf out occasionally but thats about it.

Also it would have been dangerous for them because Nazgul

The Eagles are also either Maiar-spirits or at least a higher-level being. They are the messengers of Manwe and so would probably just go to Valinor if the ring quest failed.

Yeah its understandable that people who have just seen the movies would think the eagles were just animals that Gandalf could summon, but they were introduced early on as their own race and were seriously next level

/tv/ get out

EXCUSESSSSS fuck off

Explanations

It all comes down to Tolkien's principle of eucatastrophe

More like me-catastrophe.

For the same reason God doesn't remove evil from our world, he has overriding goals for mankind such as free will. A world where god didn't allow evil to exist would be incompatible with a world that has free will. If we didn't have free will we would just be robots and we couldn't freely choose to love God.

Because what you said doesn't follow the hero's story plotline. Its fantasy.

The problem I have with this explanation is that because God is a broken character, he is described as omnipotent, meaning he can do literally anything, even things that contradict themselves and things that don't make any logical or causal sense because he made logic and causality. This means that by his own lack of limits in any fashion, he is absolutely capable of destroying all evil without violating free will, human life, or anything else, because that's what omnipotence means. To imply anything else would imply that God is limited in some way by something more powerful than he is.

>meaning he can do literally anything, even things that contradict themselves and things

I don't know where you get that but this isn't true at all. God can't do things that go against his own nature and I don't know any Christian that would say otherwise. The idea of an omnipotent God is that he can do anything that is possible, not anything at all. He can't do things like create a squared circle.

The Eagles are the servants of Manwe, the king of the Valar. A literal god (one of the other Valar) could go and try to coerce them into doing something and they would be perfectly in their rights to tell him to fuck off and go back to stealing cattle. They probably only bother helping Gandalf because Gandalf is one of Manwe's subordinate spirits himself

>Can Jesus microwave a burrito so hot he himself could not eat it?

Further, and the actual answer, the eagles are only ever used as a plot device. That's their entire role, all they're even supposed to be. They show up to help Fingon get into Angband to rescue Maedhros, and later to recover Fingolfin's remains after Morgoth kills him. They serve as instruments for the plot's/the Music of the Ainur's/fate's convenience and don't ever act otherwise

Does this not imply that God's nature and the nature of the universe (which it is purported to have been created by him) is something beyond his control? Seeing as he bootstrapped himself from nothing, I find it difficult to believe that he can't change it.

The ring corrupts, that is its power. Hobbits are simple creatures so the corruption takes a minor form of making them greedy, angry, selfish etc. For more powerful creatures it would have more devastating effects, Gandalf would become an evil overlord in his attempts to do good and it is likely to corrupt the eagles too.

We only see the effect of the ring on hobbits, it gives them what they want, the ability to hide from their problems, it gives Sam visions of a giant perfect garden as a lure for him to do its bidding. The effect on eagles might be completely different. The ring could make them instantly want to help its maker, it could burn them, it could be literally too heavy and impossible for them to carry.

God is bound by his own nature but this "bootstrapping himself from nothing" thing doesn't make any sense to me. Can you explain?

Underrated kek

Are you seriously sitting here telling us what God can and cannot do? Is this what Christians actually believe?

Why couldn't God create a squared circle? Because you can't conceive of it? What is your logic here?

God's up in heaven laughing at your sorry ass because you think he can't do things your tiny mind can't imagine. Unbelievable.

>This "god" thing doesnt make any sense to me. Can you explain?
Ftfy
There is no compelling argument for God's existence, prove me wrong.
>inb4 read aquinas

Well it was interesting for a minute but it looks like the soldiers of Reddit have arrived.

>plot

The eagles are Maiar, kind of Semi-Gods. Just like Sauron, Saruman and Gandald. And you don't ride on Gandalf's back through Middle-earth.

>Responding in memes
>Responding at all

>And you don't ride on Gandalf's back through Middle-earth.
Bitch I might.

This is something not enough people discus in these troll threads.

>There is no compelling argument for God's existence

Do you exist?

>There is no compelling argument for God's existence, prove me wrong.

Things only exist in relation to other things. Since God is not a thing (or is all things), He can't properly be said to exist.

This is why fantasy isn't real literature.

"Because spirits" is a cop-out of an answer. It's like the fantasy equivalent of "lol nanomachines"

Fantasy isn't literature but Tolkien isn't fantasy.
Plot holes don't preclude something from being literature.

Everyone else has engaged with the text and discovered powerful human truths at its core. Sorry you're missing out.

Aren't the eagles stronger and at very least have better numbers?

Well, they did help them in the end, so there is no reason not to do it earlier. Wouldn't they risk Sauron going HAM on their ass if the "free people" lost?

There was a solid explanation for that shit.

This seems like a decent explanation, though couldn't they roll with "distract Sauron" and fly in the eagles right away?

>but Tolkien isn't fantasy.
Kek

The eagles rescued Frodo and Sam an indeterminate amount of time after the ring had been cast into the fire. So Sauron was already broken and his servants fled before the eagles came, and I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that the eagles would have been incapable of penetrating Sauron's defenses before that stage.

couldn't they just 've sent metallica in though?

To a point yes but it wouldn't be too unreasonable to expect that kamikaze tactics should've give them a good chance to fly the ring in; and it hardly sounds more risky than send out couple people through half the world when war is imminent.

Most of the weapons and arrows would be useless if they fly high enough, so flying Nazgul and to a point Sauron would be the only real danger.

The eagles aren't a part of middle-earth and aren't interested in this petty squabble. To ask why the eagles don't fly the ring to mordor is akin to asking why the Valar don't just show up and kick Saurons shit in.

Additionally, the eagles aren't above the temptation to steal the ring. They probably wouldn't care to bear that evil burden.

>akin to asking why the Valar don't just show up and kick Saurons shit in
Exactly.
Why don't they

Nigga don't give a damn

To mind, the strongest argument that there is nothing to rule out the "eagles" plan, and that this is simply a hole in the plot, is that the matter is not discussed at the Council of Elrond. Every possible plan is discussed: sending the Ring to Tom Bombadil to keep, guarding it in Imladris or Lórien or the Havens, sending it across the ocean, dropping it into the ocean, using it, etc. In each instance, there is a good explanation given to rule out the plan; this is the literary device by which Tolkien sets up the quest to Mt. Doom as the direction which the story must take.

In all of this discussion, no mention is made of the possibility that the eagles could help in taking the Ring to Mt. Doom. If Tolkien wanted to rule out the possibility, this would be the perfect opportunity to do it, by inserting dialog such as the following around pages I 348-9:

"Then," said Glorfindel, "let us send messages to the eagles, and then pass by foot and boat to the Brown Lands, and meet there with the eagles, who shall fly with the Ringbearer to Orodruin."

"Nay," said Gandalf. "For the Valar have prohibited the eagles from participating so directly in the downfall of the Dark Lord."

OR: "Nay," said Gandalf. "For I feel in my heart that the creature Gollum has yet some role to play, and he will not be able to do so if we fly with the eagles into the Dark Land."

OR: "Nay," said Gandalf. "For the Dark Lord is capable of throwing fire over many miles, and he would be able to stop the eagles from their flight."

Since Gandalf had just related his rescue from Orthanc just prior to the discussion of the various possible plans, the eagles would have been in the thought of everybody at the Council of Elrond, and it is very likely that somebody would have brought the possibility up. But they do not, and I think there are two possible explanations: 1) the possibility never occurred to Tolkien, or 2) Tolkien realized he had a problem and opted not to draw attention to it. In either case, the matter should be counted as a hole in the plot.

In connection with the Council of Elrond, it should be noted that nobody present knew that the Nazgûl would be remounted on flying steeds. Knowing what they knew then, it is very likely that they would have attempted an eagle flight into Mordor, not knowing that they would encounter the flying Nazgûl. In this case, the quest might have failed, but this would simply be the outcome of the characters acting on what they knew at the time. Once again, the fact that this would make a poor story does not solve the story-internal problem.

Some of the risks brought up in objection to the "eagles" plan are legitimate concerns. However, the path into Mordor on foot was also extremely risky, and from the perspective of those sitting at the Council of Elrond, the "eagles" plan was not obviously much more risky.

In creating a world, it is extremely difficult to get everything to harmonize just right, and even Tolkien doesn't do it perfectly. There are at least a few other instances which I'm aware of: there is a footnote in Unfinished Tales where Christopher Tolkien points out the hole in the plot where the water-fearing Nazgûl could not have gotten to the Shire without crossing the bridgeless Greyflood; and Tolkien himself admits that the idea of the Nazgûl fearing water was "difficult to sustain". There is also the case where Saruman imprisons Gandalf, but inexplicably does not attempt to take the Ring of Fire from Gandalf, even tho Saruman coveted the Ring and begrudged the fact that Cirdan had given it to Gandalf (Unfinished Tales, 389-90). Even Tolkien, arguably the best fantasy writer to have ever lived, doesn't get it right 100% of the time.

I wonder if Exodus 19:4 was an inspiration to Tolkien.

The answer is that a giant eagle flying up to the mountain would be more obvious than fuck

they can fly really high, so high that aragorn cant see them when legolas can

except for that magic seeing eye that pierces land flesh and soul.

on the ground their essence blends in with that of the slaves

They'd be massacred by Felbeasts, but putting that aside why would they even want to?
The great eagles have been around for millennium, they care little for the troubles of man.

>There are people who believe there is a giant flaming eye mounted on top of barad dur
>laughing_uruks.jpg

What he means is that if God created the universe how can he possibly be constrained by the nature of the universe. If he created the universe and defined the laws which govern it, how can he not create a squared circle?

There's the fact that the Council of Elrond considered plans based on who had offered to help. Elrond invited more than attended so at the council they had to plan for who was willing to aid them. Plenty of factions offered Elrond no aid, the Eagles included.

They are not allowed to. The Valar lost their actual "godly" authority at the very end of the Age of the Lamps, when they created the Pelori mountains to protect Valinor. After the Children of Iluvatar came every single attempt they made at divine intervention just sent the world further into ruin

This shit again. The eagles don't care about the affairs of men. They just hate goblins and think gandalf is cool.

>Why didn't Frodo just fly the ring to Mordor on the backs of the eagles that ended up flying him out of Morder later on anyway?
because he was too much of a retard to get it when gandalf said
>fly, you fools!
when the balrog pulled him off the bridge at khazad-dum

what do you think big G meant when he fell off the ledge?

youtube.com/watch?v=meOCdyS7ORE

Why would you want such a retarded deus ex machina OP?

The point is to tell a story and a narrative over a length of time, not write 1 sentence.

>eagles
>stronger than ringwraiths

Just stop. This is ridiculous.

>Are you seriously sitting here telling us what God can and cannot do? Is this what Christians actually believe?
Yes, this is the classical Christian doctrine, Aquinas wrote extensively about it. The idea that God doesn't have a fixed essence which is his being is a Muslim one. They hold that good is not what God is, but what God wants it to be.
>Why couldn't God create a squared circle? Because you can't conceive of it? What is your logic here?
Because logic is bound to God as a part of his being. It is greater than what we can convince, aka Trinity, but cannot create a metaphysics impossibility. He cannot make an evil good or a square circle.
>God's up in heaven laughing at your sorry ass because you think he can't do things your tiny mind can't imagine. Unbelievable.
He's laughing at how plebiean you are and how little you know about theology and how your knowledge comes directly from reddit.
Go back to your containment and leave quality fantasy to people who aren't retarded.

He's clearly saying run.

Why didn't they just fly the Balrog to Mordor?

Why did not they go with
youtube.com/watch?v=spHEw2n9LwE
sounds like a good deal

>For the same reason God doesn't remove evil from our world
except god is not real. also you don't have to remove all evil, maybe just the supernatural corruption that subverted free will, also the mind controlling magics

>The idea of an omnipotent God is that he can do anything that is possible
wut? What omnipotent God can't make the impossible possible or change his own nature. God was picked because he was ultimate, if people wanted power limited gods they would have stuck with pagan gods

I hate this kind of humor.

>except god is not real
God is the only thing that is real.

Her speech is terribly foreshortened in the film. Same with Eowyn. Bad ass bitches delivering hella monologue but Jackson's cutting them off.

God is a perfect being that is all good. An all good god can't commit evil acts, because a perfect being can't contradict himself. This means that god can't create a creature with free will that is incapable of choosing to commit evil. Limiting the ability to do evil even a little bit is a contradiction of what free will is.

I reckoned it had to do with the fact that Mordor is a massive military state with fucking Drazgul riders or whatever the fuck they are called.

Did the eagles thing really happen in the Trilogy? I read all the books 10 years ago now, I aught to get around to reading them again.

Movies are very limited means of entertainment.

>humor
If you can call it that

The eagles showed up at the battle at the black gate and fucked the Nazguls up before they went to go pick up Sam and Frodo. I'm not buying this theory that they couldn't just fly into Mordor because they were afraid of some knockoff dragons.

Holy shit not that user but stop posting about God in a fucking Lord of the Rings thread on Veeky Forums you literal autist.

>aught

No, the line, both in the book and movie, is "Fly, you fools"

t. triggered atheist

LOTR is a Christian work and the discussions stems from Eru. Get over it.

If he is perfect he would be aware that evil was coming when he created the universe. Why get all pissy about it later?

White people = Elves
Non-White people = Orcs

>though couldn't they roll with "distract Sauron" and fly in the eagles right away?
The distraction only works because Sauron doesn't know that two hobbit faggits are roaming Mordor. He therefore doesn't try to defend mount doom.

If you distracted him like they did at the end of ROTK, but use the eagles instead of hobbits, he'll know about it and seal off mount doom. The distraction only works because he doesn't know he's already been infiltrated. Good luck sneaking the eagles in

He is conveying the idea that they should run with such haste that it could be mistaken for flight.


I know you're being willfully ignorant, but your shitposting is at an end, fiend

Yes, god allows evil to exist. That isn't a controversial statement. Just because he allows it to exist doesn't mean that's what he desires people to do.

The idea is that god creates simply because he enjoys creating and he wants to creatures to truly love him. In order for his creatures to truly come to love him he needs to give them free will, and with that naturally comes the ability for those creatures to choose not to love god. This is what evil is, the rejection of god. Because god loves us he allows us to reject him. He knows what's good for us but because of that love he lets us go.

Yeah shut the fuck up you desperate faggot. Melodramatic 'd-debates' about gods' will and omnipotence doesn't sound like religious-subtext-in-LotR-discussion to me. Kys.

They explained it the hobbit

The problem of evil is inherent in the LOTR. It's important to understand if you're going to ask why Eru allows Morgoth and Sauron to exist.

Good thing that this ages old book, written by countless anonymous men, in a disjointed effort to convince people of the most insane ideas, tells you all about how much god loves you

I would feel embarrassed if I ever said something like that.

As if what you feel matters to me.

Believing in things, simply because a book and preachers of said book tells you to, makes you a fool

stay in /sffg/

You don't have to believe in god to understand the principles and doctrines of Christianity and how it informed Tolkiens work. You're like the stereotypical atheist that sued the NASA astronaut for reading the bible in space. Merely discussing theology is an offense to you because you're ignorant.

I can't believe people are discussing it again.

You're right, I came off as very hostile, I apologize.

I just don't understand how people can believe in such things, though I very much acknowledge their right to do so

someone's been listening to michael drout

Well have you read any apologetics? Things like Mere Christianity by CS Lewis or Answering Atheism by Trent Horn. I would describe them both as entry level and easy to understand. If you can follow a basic if/then statement then you shouldn't have any trouble understanding why rational people believe in what you believe to be irrational things even if you don't fully agree with what the authors are saying.

I don't blame you at all for thinking the things I believe are silly because many Christians have silly reasons for believing the things they do. I cringe every time I hear somebody say that god visited them one night while they were drunk so they became Christian. I have perfectly valid reasons for believing even if you don't agree, I think god is the best explanation for the existence of the universe, the fine-tuning of the universe, and for the existence of moral truths.

in the hobbit it explicitly says the eagles couldn't take the group further than it did because the eagles would be shot down with bows made from yew.

the eagles were notorious for stealing sheep and other livestock for food so yeah, many men didn't like them.

should i read the Silmarillion before the Lord of The Rings Trilogy?

Should i read The Children of Húrin at what point?

Hobbit > LOTR >Silmarillion > Then the other books