The section that really caught my eye first was Wraiths and shadows. Tolkien never fails to intrigue with delving into etymology. I never thought the word Ringwraith could mean so much. It’s funny, though, because I always understood what a wraith was. Something insubstantial, wispy, not really existent. But then the whole topic bounces back and forth to beings that are substantial and insubstantial, which truly threw me off. If only to make matters worse, Shippey delves into a discussion on how one makes oneself a wraith by submitting psychologically, thus creating a creature who affects all those around them psychologically as well. I had to re-read it a few times to really get the gist of what he was saying. Shippey has a habit of losing me in the flow of analysis sometimes. His discussion on Saruman was intriguing. I never viewed him as a wraith by definition, just as an evil force that became too entangled within it’s own goals and designs.
And yet again, Shippey loses me. He has a very bad habit, I think, of not providing really clear transitions within his topics. One moment we’re talking about Saruman’s death/turning into a wraith, and the next I’m suddenly being pulled into a tale about Screwtape. It makes sense once Shippey explains the purpose of the example given, but I feel like he should have saved some confusion by explaining first what he wanted to say about the wraiths instead of going off on something written by C.S. Lewis. While I see how the author is connected with Tolkien, I feel as if he’s pulled into this discussion just for the sake of making an appearance.
I never thought of The Lord’s Prayer being incorporated into the scenes of the book. That’s an interesting way to view it as a Christian allegory (though I know it’s not intended to be one at all), and really does bring a deeper sense to the power struggle between the ring and it’s victim.
Devon Cozad? October 29, 2008, at 10:54 PM
