Tolkien's 'Deus ex Machina'

[Boromir88]

There are certain situations when we see Tolkien use the authorial device of 'deus es machina' to help out our heroes from problems. It translates to 'God of the Machines' which means that some supernatural power/being/creature comes into the story to help our heroes out of a sticky situation, or solve the plot entirely. And Tolkien does use 'supernatural forces' on several occasions in his story.

For example, he admits the Eagles are 'machines.':

The Eagles are a dangerous 'machine'. I have used them sparingly, and that is the absolute limit of their credibility or usefulness.~Letter 210

Also, there are times when Eru sticks his hand into things and gets involved. For instance sending Gandalf back:

He was sent by a mere prudent plan of the angelic Valar or governors; but Authority had taken up this plan and enlarged it, at the moment of its failure. ’Naked I was sent back -- for a brief time, until my task is done.’ Sent back by whom, and whence? Not by the ’gods’, whose business is only with this world, for he passed ’out of thought and time’~Letter 156

And indirectly destroying the Ring:

Frodo deserved all honour because he spent every drop of his power and will, and that was just sufficient to bring him to the destined point, and no further. Few others, possibly no others of his time, would have got so far. The Other Power then took over: the Writer of the Story (by which I do not mean myself) 'that one ever present person who is never absent and never named' (as one critic has said)~Letter 192

So there are a few occasions that we see Tolkien using 'deus es machina' in his story. Now the question of debate is this has often been a cause for criticism against the books. It seems rather 'cheap' to solve situations with supernatural powers. Is it a quick and easy way out? Does it drag down the story and actually make it a weakness? Does it make Frodo's journey seem almost completely useless since all Eru had to do was take control and have the ring destroyed?

Or does Tolkien actually use 'deus es machina' to a great effect and able to serve a purpose in the story? What I mean here, is to examine the why. Why is there a special significance in using 'deus es machina' at certain key points throughout the story? Is there even an importance? We know he uses it, but the bigger question is why does he use it? And if there is an importance what is it?

I have some ideas that I've kind of put together, but I want to wait and here some responses to get the discussion going. So...umm...have at it.

[The Might]

Sorry for disturbing without contributing a lot to the topic, though I might join in later after I see some other opinions.
Just wanted to say that the name is "Deus ex machina". Just wanting to be helpful

[Aiwendil]

This is an interesting topic. Certain aspects of it were touched on in this thread. Also, the relation between the deus ex machina and the 'eucatastrophe' was briefly considered in this one.

[Kuruharan]

But is Eru's presence really a classic case of deus ex machina? If he is never named in the story, is he really being used as a literary tool at all?

Gandalf's very presence is divine intervention; he was sent by the gods to aid in an otherwise hopeless battle. I don't think the device really applies when we're discussing a story in which angelic and miraculous beings are known to be present from the start.

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

A very interesting topic indeed and I am not sure where I stand.

The first many times I read the books I don't remember that I thought he over used it, but especially when I read them this town around I really noticed.

It made me thing "that was a pretty easy solution" I did not think it overly annoying, but it did make me think.

I think that Tolkien do use it a bit to much, but his story captivates one so much that it does not matter. It is not extreme, probably because he him self was aware of this.

I am very pleased about how he solves problems in the Hobbit and I especially like Gandalf's solutions. . .(Am I the only one who thinks Gandalf changes from The Hobbit to LotR) Sure the eagles come to their rescue a few times, but it really works. Where as Gollum falling down into the chasm might seem a bit to convinient. . .


Yeah as you can see I haven't really made up my mind, but I will sertainly follow this discution and tip in when I have made my mind up or have something to add in genneral.

[Lalwendë]

I suppose to me whether something is a deus ex machina or not is whether it fits into the context of the story and whether it is jarring or not - closely linked to whether something breaks my suspension of belief.

The way Gollum falls with the Ring does not break the spell one little bit for me, and what's more it fits almost perfectly with the context of the story; isn't it surprising enough that a pair (a trio) of seemingly insignificant Hobbits bring about the downfall of Sauron? Well, what happens on Mount Doom is just an extension of that. What's more, it's the perfect ending for Gollum (what could Tolkien have done with him when the Ring had gone? And does it not provide a way for Gollum to be 'redeemed' too?), and for Frodo too, as he does not end up a sickening all-conquering hero (the kind who's brandish a sword, grab the fair maiden roughly about the waist and yell "Yargh! I am your Victor!") but a very human kind of hero, one who is broken and yet in some way made transcendent by his efforts.

Gandalf coming back fits too, even if we have no knowledge of Eru. Why, he's just had a fight with the Balrog! Of course he will be broken by the encounter. Again, like Frodo he is no sickening hero, so we might expect he would be broken and then transformed by 'winning' the fight. I say 'winning' as it seems there are few 'winners' in the sense of someone who is triumphant and can crow about it; all 'winners' are broken and changed in some way. Which is very real. And very modern.

Anyway, Eagles. I'm less sure of these, so I understand what Tolkien means when he says they are 'dangerous machines'. As a storyteller he must have had in mind that his tale needed to be consistent, enjoyable, believable. He will have encountered real fixes and sticky plot situations along the way and for the writer it would be all too tempting to just chuck in a bit of magic or a mythic beast or something to effect a rescue or a change in fortunes. But do this one time too often and you can ruin your story. Some people I know already feel this about the Eagles in LotR, that their appearance at Mount Doom ruined the story for them, and they could not get out of their minds why these Eagles had not just flown the Hobbits/Ring to Mount Doom. But for me they do work. The whole idea of having 'insignificant' Hobbits take the Ring to Mordor was one of 'flying under the radar' whereas having a huge great Eagle do it would be suicide, no matter how powerful said bird was!

[Thinlómien]

This might not be very related, since the thread is called Tolkien's Deus ex Machina, and I'm going to speak about the movies. They, for one, are deus ex machinism at its highest height. (To overestimate a bit... )

Movie deus ex machinas

1) The earthquake and crack caused by the fall of Barad-Dûr
Just consider the scene of the battle of Morannon. Somehow the land cracks just between the heroes and the baddies, even circling the heroes who are surrounded by enemies, to safety. In my opinion that is one of the most ridiculous scenes in the whole movies. I understand it must have been difficult to show the sudden fall of Sauron's army, but that wasn't a very good way of doing it.

2) Elves in Helm's Deep
And that was a totally unnecessary one!
I admit it can be debated whether it's a deus ex machina at all, since the Elves don't provide a very easy victory, just victory.

3) Arwen
Arwen who saves Aragorn from drowning. Admitted, this is not a proper deus ex machina, because Arwen is not there to save Aragorn from drowning, but Aragorn is drowning for Arwen to save him.

Actually it seems I came up with one real movie deus ex machinba and two movie false deus ex machinas... Anyway, I'll leave them be there on the list. I'm sure there is more, but my brain doesn't work well enough to bring them up atm.

[Boromir88]

Yes, of course TM I knew that...umm definitely. Welcome to the 'downs I hope you enjoy it and find some things you like.

Lal, great stuff...and I think you put it better than I ever could than where I was trying to get out in the other forum.

I think the great use of Tolkien's deus ex machina comes in the sense that he is able to make it fit within the story. Just throwing in any DeM anywhere in any situation would indeed be dangerous to the story! As this would make the story go to a point where it's simply unbelievable and we lose touch with the characters accomplishments...simply because they were 'bailed out' by higher powers.

Tolkien's use of it seems much more complex and thought out than using a DeM to move on and get our heroes out of a sticky situation. It does get our heroes out of some sticky situations, but by no means do I feel it burdens the story; or is 'dangerous' to the story. It actually enhances the story (in my view).

You bring up the Gollum-Frodo-Sam in the Sammath Naur scene, where I think we can conclude that Eru did get his hands involved and helped Frodo out. However, this isn't simply Tolkien trying to figure out how to destroy the Ring so he has Eru come in to make it happen. It all ties in with the rest of the story...the motifs of Pity and Mercy.

Frodo had done what he could and spent himself completely (as an instrument of Providence) and had produced a situation in which the object of his quest could be achieved. His humility (with which he began) and his sufferings were justly rewarded by the highest hounour; and his exercise of patience and mercy towards Gollum gained him Mercy: his failure was redressed.'~Letter 246

Eru didn't do it because he could, but because Frodo had shown the capability of Pity and Mercy. Frodo's pity of Gollum and sparing his life, won Frodo his own Pity to the highest point...grace.

The two key morals stressed throughout the entire book are Pity and Mercy. Gandalf instructs Frodo first about Bilbo's Pity towards Gollum and its this Pity that me 'rule the fate of many.' Aragorn, Theoden, and company offer Grima and Saruman Pity at several points throughout the story. Frodo's Pity towards Gollum, then here at the end Eru rewards Frodo by relieving him from the burden of the Ring.

I think it's much deeper than 'I need to find a way to solve this...umm Eagles come on.' It runs much more complex than simply a way to move our heroes on in the Story, but as you so eloquently put...I suppose to me whether something is a deus ex machina or not is whether it fits into the context of the story and whether it is jarring or not

Thinlo, I wonder if there would be DeM in the movies...well of course the Eagles. Even if a non-reader didn't know that Eagles were creatures of Manwe, they could surmise that they are some sort of powerful force. Hence why there were so many threads after the movies 'Why doesn't an Eagle fly Frodo to Mount Doom'. Also, I think you may be able to view the Dead Army as a DeM, and this was a rather cheap one (the way Jackson does it) in my opinion. Since:

1) The Dead Army just looks flat out awful on screen, just a blob of slime.
2) They pretty much just come in and wipe out everything in their path to win the battle. It makes the Rohirrim's arrival look pretty much useless as the Dead Army just comes in to save the day anyway. A very poor way to end the battle of Pelennor Fields in my view, and a very cheap way to end it.

Tolkien uses the Dead Army, but not to the extent where they completely save the day. They are important to the story and he makes it work as these were cursed spirits who needed to fulfill their oath to lift the curse. They do help out, but like the Eagles were used sparingly and the only effect they play is scaring away the corsairs.

Yeah as you can see I haven't really made up my mind~Rune

That's perfectly fine. It's good sometimes to just throw everything out there and at the fan. At one time a fellow downer complimented me that I wasn't afraid to simply just speculate and throw things out there...hopefully I still have this . Anyway, no need to fear, just kind of spill everything out...or should I say type?

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Boro

Also, I think you may be able to view the Dead Army as a DeM, and this was a rather cheap one (the way Jackson does it) in my opinion.

To be fair, for all its poorly conceived green blobbiness and decisive though its appearance undoubtedly is, Jackson's Army of the Dead does at least fit within the context of the film and does not suddenly appear without explanation.

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

Jackson's Army of the Dead does at least fit within the context of the film and does not suddenly appear without explanation.

You're right, but if one looks at the actual pictures in the movie, the army of the dead just does it all by themselves (see the green going through everything, not leaving the human defenders, Gondorians or Rohirrim, a chance to play a role!).

So here I will side with Boro. That is just bad film-making (and Lommy had nice points about that).

But seriously, coming up with this army of the dead in a way Tolkien does it is not so clearly a DeM as they kind of play their part but don't make it alone, without regard to others filling their places.

I would still go for the eagles as the main source of DeM solutions in Tolkien...

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

You're right, but if one looks at the actual pictures in the movie, the army of the dead just does it all by themselves (see the green going through everything, not leaving the human defenders, Gondorians or Rohirrim, a chance to play a role!).

Looked at in comparison to the books, this would be an example of how they were 'dumbed down' for the films. But the question really is was that necessary in order to make a blockbusting set of films? Is film subtle enough to get the ideas of Tolkien across as he did?

All I have to say for now is that all of the criticisms I've heard about deus ex machina seem to come from those who have not read the books. Which to me suggests that Tolkien knew what 'dangerous machines' were, but Jackson maybe did not?

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

All I have to say for now is that all of the criticisms I've heard about deus ex machina seem to come from those who have not read the books. Which to me suggests that Tolkien knew what 'dangerous machines' were, but Jackson maybe did not?

I would agree with you about this difference between Tolkien and Jackson. But would still consider at least the eagles as a kind of disturbingly "out of thin air rescuers"... even with Tolkien himself: Bilbo & Dwarves from the orcs, the battle of seven armies (maybe?), Gandalf from Orthanc, Frodo & Sam from Mount Doom... Somehow they just made the Day everytime as things were looking gloomy - but otherwise they didn't involve themselves too much in things unfolding. So being the firemen who spend their days at the station and come to help at the utmost danger? Kind of DeM in reserve?

[Lalwendë]

I agree the Eagles are a bit of a problem, but they still seem to 'fit' to me. They only appear at the most desperate of times, and sometimes not even then, and they only appear after great efforts have been made. Now I would separate The Hobbit out from this consideration as it was written as a children's story, and deus ex machina are to be expected (within reason, there's no need to resort to the 'pigwiggenry' that Tolkien so hated!), but in LotR, they may seem very jarring.

The other thing of course is that the Eagles appear when Gandalf is about, and both Gandalf and the Eagles are servants of Manwe. Though this is only something we would know by reading the Sil of course, maybe the fact that to readers of LotR there is internal consistency stems from the consistency to be found in Tolkien's greater work?

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

The other thing of course is that the Eagles appear when Gandalf is about, and both Gandalf and the Eagles are servants of Manwe. Though this is only something we would know by reading the Sil of course

As someone who holds the Silm in much higher esteem than the LotR I must still kind of respond to this. I'm not sure if the connection still makes the appearance of the Eagles at the most perilous moments the less suspectible to being DeM. And I don't want to bog down with terminology here... DeM, happenstance rescuers, hard earned friends, natural partners to be able to be there in time, whatever. Anyhow we don't have tales of the eagles in a proportion of their critical influence in the important moments. So they are kind of outside things not central to the stories but nicely in place when needed.

I'm not saying they are just cheap tricks, but they seem to be not something that integrally make a difference in to the stories as characters (even if the prof. talks something of them here and there - I have not studied HoME from A-Z), but they tend to have the role of rescuing others from tight spots just out from flash. Compare them to other critical situations in Silm or LotR and I think there is a difference between the eagles and other decisive actors...

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

So here I will side with Boro. That is just bad film-making

Bad film making does not necessarily equate to Deus Ex Machina.

Dictionary.com gives the following definition:

deus ex machina \DAY-uhs-eks-MAH-kuh-nuh; -nah; -MAK-uh-nuh\, noun:
1. In ancient Greek and Roman drama, a god introduced by means of a crane to unravel and resolve the plot.
2. Any active agent who appears unexpectedly to solve an apparently insoluble difficulty.

The arrival of the Army of the Dead is not unexpected, as the background to their involvement has already been spelled out in previous scenes. Indeed, their arrival is somewhat less unexpected in the film than it is in the book. Moreover, they arrive in consequence of the endeavours of one of the "heroes" of the story, rather than appearing out of nowehere or being "sent by the gods".

But I think that, in order for something to fully qualify as a Deus Ex Machina device, at least in the sense that such term is used critically, the turn of events comprising it must be one which comes across artificial or improbable in the context of the story. The Army of the Dead is neither of these things, in either the film or the book.

And I would say the same about the Eagles. Obviously, if one has read Tolkien's works more widely than just LotR, then one will be aware of the Eagles' as a feature of Middle-earth. But even within LotR alone, they are given sufficient credibility as denizens of the fantasy world not to come across as improbable or artificial.

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

All I have to say for now is that all of the criticisms I've heard about deus ex machina seem to come from those who have not read the books. Which to me suggests that Tolkien knew what 'dangerous machines' were, but Jackson maybe did not?

I am not sure that I follow your meaning. The Eagles feature in the film trilogy to about the same extent as they do in the book trilogy. So in terms of LotR alone, if Jackson is to be criticised for his use of the Eagles, then so should Tolkien, since Jackson used them in much the same way that Tolkien did.

But, for me, Deus Ex Machina, when applied as a criticism, should involve something which leaves the reader (or viewer) feeling rather cheated. The Eagles provoke no such feeling in me in either the book or the film. Indeed, I found their arrival at Sammath Naur to be one of the most uplifting and moving parts of the book when I first read it, and I felt much the same way about their arrival in the film (probably because it was such an emotional part of the book for me).

[Durelin]

Just as lovely information (reminding myself to get my brain stirring as much as anything else): "Deus ex machina" translates literally "god out of the machine," but is more commonly translated "god from the machine."

It is divine intervention, which is, in the literary world, I think, the author's intervention. It comes from the use of a crane-like machine that was used to literally remove actors from the stage in Greek drama (normally when the character died).

The problem with trying to determine a deus ex machina in any literary work is that most literature is structured to plant seeds along the way that simply spring up at different points in the story.

But here's a thought, which came with help from CaptainofDespair: Tom Bombadil as deus ex machina.

He resolves a small section of plot, the Hobbits' misadventures in the Old Forest, and can be said to have a lasting impact on Frodo that could be seen as an intervention. In seclusion from the evils in the outside world and even the evils inside himself (the temptations involved with the ring), he is given a chance to see the growing evil and his part in it more objectively. Now there's something anyone might wish and/or pray for: the ability to really look at things removed from them before having to make decisions.

Edit: Wow, I (finally) just realized how much that sounds like I was "telling." That little explanation thing was for my own benefit, sorry. I'm really not pretending to know what I'm talking about much less that I know better than anyone else.

And sorry if you find this whole "apology" thing just as annoying, if not more so...