Flaws in Lord of the Rings... Yes in the book.

[Saraphim]

Holy Pi Cubed! I had no idea the poor Professor had his work picked to death! But I'd like to add some more duodecimals of cents.

Toliken was not racist with the black/white issue. He played on already cemented conceptions of color as physical representations of good/evil that existed long before some idiot on an Italian exploring vessel went to Africa and decided to make a name for race.

People were (and still are, to less of a degree) afraid of nighttime, for the obvious reason that it's dark, and it is hard for one to see properly in the dark. And when you can't see, things become difficult to do. Thus, people prefer the day, because it is light, and one can see.

This concept is portrayed in The Silmarrilion, with the Tale of Beren and Luthien. All of Beren's comrades are killed by werewolves, while they are trapped in the dark of Sauron's fortress. They cannot see, and this hightens thier fear, wich most likely pleases Sauron. But then Luthien comes and decreases that fear with hr intrinsic light.

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

Then Fëanor rose, and lifting up his hand before Manwë he cursed Melkor, naming him Morgoth...

(The Silmarillion 9)

Now, Quenya is the language in Aman. Sindarin was unheard-of yet, let alone spoken, during the time period this happened. But Morgoth is obviously Sindarin - Quenya doesn't have the "g" phoneme isolated. So, is it an oversight perhaps?

As for the Eagles; they are the minions of Manwe, and are not subject to the will or fate of any save by his will. The eagles represent the presence of Manwe in Middle-earth, and even thought He is Lord of the Valar, He is also subject to Illuvatar, essentially God. That theme permeates a lot of literature, lore, even religion. The Eagles are there to remind you that even with all things being considered, God's (Illuvatar's) will is still present in the world.

As for absolute evil; I am like you in that respect. Personally I don't believe in absolute evil, but then I did not write the story. Apparently Tolkien did believe in absolute evil or it's representation in this story. Not surprised there when one considers that JRR was in fact a Christian and Christians for the most part do believe in absolute evil incarnated in Satan.

[Aiwendil]

Now, Quenya is the language in Aman. Sindarin was unheard-of yet, let alone spoken, during the time period this happened. But Morgoth is obviously Sindarin - Quenya doesn't have the "g" phoneme isolated. So, is it an oversight perhaps?

I believe what Feanor actually said was "Moringotto", the Sindarin form of which is "Morgoth". I can't recall the source for this at the moment - perhaps "Quendi and Eldar".

[Bergil]

I'll tell you what he did. Sauron, and Saruman even more took slaves and reduced people to numbers. that (to my mind, and Tolkiens it seems to me) in absolute evil. It's also easy to mistake for, and often connected to techonological progress, explaining Tolkien's attitude towards it. This is how I see it.

Edit; I forgot my evidence. An orc says in return of the king, "Ill give your name and number to the Nazgul"(emphasis mine)

[The Squatter of Amon Rûdh]

In military parlance, name and number , along with rank, are the essential forms of identification. It could simply be that Tolkien envisaged the army of Mordor to be much like the British army in which he had himself served. Admittedly I can't imagine that Tolkien was entirely happy at being called 'Tolkien, John, Second Lieutenant, WO 339/34423'. In fact I'm inclined to see this as a criticism by association of the industrial military machine, although it's funny to think of Orcs having their very own Tommy Atkins.

[Bergil]

To my knowledge, Squatter, designating people by number is a dumb "advancement" (as opposed to a dumb tradition), and our phone numbers, insurance numbers, student numbers etc. symbolise the in-progress fall of the world more then anything else to me. There is no need to put it in a more-or less midaeval fantasy world (especially only on the side of the bad guys) save to make a point.

[The Squatter of Amon Rûdh]

I agree with you, although whether or not it's stupid is a matter of opinion rather than knowledge. The fact that the armies which opposed both Sauron and Morgoth did not designate their soldiers by number must be significant, as I believe I hinted above. Tolkien's service under arms was not a happy time for him, as indicated by some comments in his published letters and the lecture 'A Secret Vice', and his fiction constantly romanticises a style of military organisation that was already obsolete by the time of the Norman conquest. In LotR particularly, we see that the armies opposed to Sauron are based on leadership by consent, a personal relationship between a commander and his troops, and a very loose system of rank. Mordor's forces, on the other hand, use a numbering system, presumably the more easily to file information about indiscretions, and although they have no clear ranking system we can see in them the dissociation of the soldier from the cause that we see in a lot of First-World-War literature. The Commander in Chief and his lieutenants are distant figures of terror, whom the average soldier is unlikely ever to meet, and all equipment is of poor quality and a standard pattern. My point was rather that the use of the phrase 'name and number' is strikingly modern, and probably found its way into Tolkien's head during his time in the Lancashire Fusiliers.

I would guess that Tolkien was not alone in his dislike of the modern tendency for everything to have a reference number. A common feature of fantasy is a tendency to take place in a pseudo-medieval setting, in which soldiers are volunteers, kings are ring-givers and nothing has a number. What is often forgotten is that the army which fought William of Normandy at Senlac was itself largely made up of conscripts, required by law to serve in the army for a certain space of time. The first detailed survey of the English population, made solely as an aid to taxation, was completed in 1086, and if it does not assign a number to each household this is probably more due to the cumbersome nature of the Roman numerical system than any sense of the individuality of those surveyed; indeed it reduces each household to a financial unit.

In fact Tolkien's armies of light owe more to literature than history. Apart from its reliance on horses, Rohan in particular has an army such as might be portrayed in an Anglo-Saxon poem, although by the eleventh century it would probably not have been seen on any battlefield. Even Gondor seems as though it should be led by a high-medieval vision of King Arthur rather than someone so sordid as the Black Prince. What is truly arresting about that one orc's reference to 'name and number' is that it associates Mordor with the 'real world' of industry, organisation and technology. Good is associated with an idealised society from a literature that has long fallen out of the mainstream, evil with the world that the author had experienced. The message is, I think, clear: the modern world tends to dehumanise and standardise, and we would all be better off living in a medieval poem or an idealised vision of nineteenth-century rural England. The fact that this would be just as intolerable to some people as the industrial world is to others is probably the greatest flaw in the book, and accounts for a lot of the deep-seated opposition to Tolkien as a writer. However, it is a sad fact that whereas many people seem to be able to agree on what is wrong with the world, very few are able to agree on a solution.

[Thinlómien]

First off, I'm far too lazy to read through the whole thread, so my apologies if this topic has already been discussed.

Secondly, this might not be a flaw/illogic piece of writing at all, it might be only that hobbits are really stupid/trusting, but I must wonder why on earth did they follow Strider when they believed they had seen trolls and Strider said "Let's have a look"? Now, wouldn't the most logical action (if they assume there are trolls around) to rather go further away of them than to towards them? Why did they not object?

Or did their subconsciousnesses catch an edge of reassuring humour in Aragorn's voice? Or did they blindly trust Aragorn (Sam, too, huh?) or that he would not really want to go there if there was some danger? Or did they not think at all?

So, what did the hobbits think? Or Tolkien himself while writing this scene?

[Lalwendë]

Well I'd be saying 'no way' myself and leaving old Strider to meet his fate. But they would have heard Bilbo's stories and maybe felt either curious, or brave, remembering that this bunch of Hobbits aside from Frodo, were young lads. Or it could have been that Strider was simply one of those guys who you just don't say 'no' to - rather like the Geography teacher who might insist that you get down that pothole right now instead of running round at the surface shrieking in fear. You know what I mean, I think. It might have boiled down to following Strider anyway, or leaving him and taking their chances in unfamiliar country with who knew what perils to face.

[CSteefel]

Originally Posted by Lush

Furthermore, Sauron really does come off as simplistic at first (at least he did for me), but then again, if you keep in mind historical figures such as Jeffrey Dahmer, Eichmann, and Ivan the Terrible, you might begin to see that Tolkien's theories are not that far off from real life.

But of course it is somewhat simplistic character that is his fatal flaw. He does not have the subtlety of mind to see that they would try to destroy the ring rather than use it. And he is duped by their strategy of drawing out his troops...