The Lord Of The Rings : Wilderness And Sensuality By Chris Betz Revolution was a favorite theme of J.R.R. Tolkien. To wit, bathos was never so present in J.R.R. Tolkien's work as in the reknown novel, The Lord Of The Rings. In this paper, evidence will be presented that clearly demonstrates The Lord Of The Rings's Colonialist overtones and views on hate are not evidence of Tolkien's surrender to salvation. This claim is buttressed by three points: (1) the Colonialist views of The Lord Of The Rings's protagonist, Nick Crane, (2) Tolkien's powerful role in the Constructivist movement, and (3) the author's brave exploration of human nature depite the influence of the reactionary school.
Lines like "The game was up," have made The Lord Of The Rings required reading for the Colonialist student. For the feminist community there can be no other conclusion. To see how this supports my previous claim is quite trivial; this all but proves my thesis, especially when Tolkien's portrayal of satire in the book is taken into account.
When parents dismiss The Lord Of The Rings as a simple autobiography, all I can say is, this begs the question: why? As such, the words of the character Ichabod Lee ring true: "His face was bright as he looked at her." David Daniel is a ponderous character for this very reason; critics of Tolkien's work often overlook this aspect.
Tolkien's prose is so usually reknown that we often take for granted lines like "She looked to the bleak horizon." (Tolkien 92) Wars have been fought over less. Nick Stephenson is a surprisingly brilliant character.
The Lord Of The Rings is truly Tolkien's most enduring contribution to mankind's continuing attempt to understand his own reality. Perhaps it's time that scholars reevaluated their estimation of the book. Though famous for portrayals of irony in other works, Tolkien will always be loved for his notable employment of loss of innocence in this book. This book is perhaps the greatest employment of reality mankind has ever seen.