Why are Tolkien fans usually left-wing?

[The Might]

Before I explain more about why I'm starting this thread, I want to make it very clear that it's not about discussing politics and who is right or who is better.
I respect all political positions as long as they do not belong to any of the extremes and I hope the same will be done within the thread.

Anyway, this Saturday I attended a meeting of the local section of the German Tolkien Society. It was great fun to meet more Tolkien fans in real life, we played the good old "Who am I?" game (I was the Gaffer) and discussed all kinds of M-e related topics.
However, the topic of the recent elections in our state was also brought up and everyone agreed that the change in leadership (from the Christian Democratic Union to the Green Party) was a good one.
Furthermore, ever since I started posting online on Tolkien forums, even before I was a BD member, I couldn't help but notice that the large majority of fans were left-wing supporters.

So my question is - why do you think that Tolkien appeals rather to people on the left? Is it the environmental aspect of M-e or the perfectly functioning system of the Shire that contribute? Is my assumption even true?

I'm looking forward to your answers and I want to again underline that this is not about politics, nor about which side you should support.

[alatar]

Someone at the Downs surely has said, "Everyone I meet there's a Tolkien fan."

Have you considered that the 'Tolkien fans who are left wing' may just be the subset that you know/have met? Have you looked at other common demographics (age, nationality, etc) that may better explain the data?

And how do you define 'fan?'

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by The Might

So my question is - why do you think that Tolkien appeals rather to people on the left?

How does one define "left", anyway? What's "left" in one country might be considered rather conservative in another.

Originally Posted by The Might

Is it the environmental aspect of M-e or the perfectly functioning system of the Shire that contribute? Is my assumption even true?

Personally, I see the Shire as being rather a Libertarian paradise; no police or court system, with everyone just doing as they please under no central authority, and all.

[Mnemosyne]

Orly?

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Hmm, I really think Alatar has a point here. Despite certain impressions, I think it is really dependant largely upon the collective you appeared in. I think you might've fallen into the trap of "everyone here is a Tolkien fan" - when it's only a certain specific demographic group.

Similarly, on the internet, that is also already a certain selection of people (e.g. you don't have the chance to count into the "statistics" the people who don't use internet in the first place), and once again, depending on which websites you visit, that limits it once again, etc... it is possible that you might have visited a forum which is more "left-wing" by itself, but perhaps had you visited a different one... you see the point.

And last of all, yes, the definition of "left-wing".

So however much the thread idea is interesting, if we wanted to be scientifically precise (I hate statistics, personally, but for once), what you can say is not "Tolkien fans seem to be usually left-wing, both in RL and on the internet", but all you can say is "there are many people whose opinions can be considered left-wing by local standards in the local part of Tolkien society and on some selected websites". It only proves that there are some Tolkien fans who are left-wing, or that there are some communities where there are more of them.

Funnily enough, I just realised that of the RL fans I know, majority of them are actually right-wing - at least by local standards, or, say, given by whom they support in elections: but that's exactly already containing many predetermined facts, because here, in a post-communist country, "left wing" is, among certain groups of people (the sort of "young educated middle-class", and in general more in people who e.g. live in big cities), implying something negative; and especially in the last elections, if you voted for left-wing parties, you were suspected of trying to "bring the trouble of Greece" to our country. And so if e.g. around that time you'd have met some people on the internet, you'd get the impression that they are "right-wing" by how they'd be dissing the left, even if some of them in fact might not be as much.

[Folwren]

I know a lot of right-winger Tolkien fans (myself included). It probably is the circle one runs in, as the others say above. I have found that several members of the Downs are left-wing...but the majority of my Tolkien fan acquaintances are right-wings.

-- Foley

[Bêthberry]

I'll weigh in too and sorry, Might, to disavow your notion. I know many Downers who are right-wing but also many who are left-wing. And a few in the middle too. (Gasp! yes, I come from a country where there is a middle.)

I think one reason the BarrowDowns attracts people from across the political spectrum is that the Barrow Wight kept the focus of the forum on Tolkien and Tolkien-related matters (see, for instance, how Werewolf looks here), so people weren't posting on tangential things like local politics.

Tolkien wasn't an ideologue, so there's something in his work for every political point of view.

[alatar]

We don't know if Tolkien even *believed* in wings...cough...Balrogs...cough...

[Morthoron]

Seeing that Tolkien was named "Catholic Author of the Century", and is revered in Catholic circles, I fail to see the leftist interests. Catholics as a group in the U.S. are a fairly conservative lot.

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Seeing that Tolkien was named "Catholic Author of the Century", and is revered in Catholic circles, I fail to see the leftist interests. Catholics as a group in the U.S. are a fairly conservative lot.

Even that entirely depends on your definition of "left/right" and how you define Catholic. Until recently, U.S. Catholics were more prone to voting Democrat than Republican, and depending to what extent you count lapsed Catholics, there's probably a substantial percentage that still does.

All of which goes to show... well, that at the very least we need some strict definitions.

[Mithalwen]

But Tolkien wasn't an American catholic. Being a catholic put Tolkien somewhat outside of the Establishment of his day. He was possibly what we call "small c conservative" but I don 't think that corresponds to american conservatism much. I don't think that Left wing right wing designation is helpful since it is all relative to the perspective of the person labelling rather than a fairly set group of doctrines adhered to. It is not like saying Tolkien was a Catholic.

There is such a geographical factor as well. It seems to me that the majority of European non-British Tolkien fans I know tend to the left but then many are scandinavian and those countries tend to be more socialist than the UK. Similarly there seems to be a lot of American Tolkien fans who tend to the right but then American politics seems generally to be to the right of the UK. As for the Brits they seem to be both some to the left and right of the generally centrist politics. As a consequence I am sure most of the scandanavians would regard me as to the right and many americans as a lefty. It doesn't really get you anywhere. Also do you mean by right wing and left wng anything to the right or left of centre or the extremes? They always seem a more extreme term somehow and I can't imagine that Tolkien would have had any truck with the likes of the BNP.

I can't recall seeing anything that indicated much about Tolkien's politics at a party level. His letters and other writings give good clues about how he might have felt on specific issues but his world is so expansive that many people are going to see things that chime with their beliefs, interests or world view. A catholic will see things that relate to catholicism that will wash over someone raised in another culture or tradition, a scholar of norse myth will see those paralels, the conservative may applaud the restoration of the appointed order and the radical the overthrow of oppressive tyrants. Linguists revel in the languages, gardeners the herblore. Many may just enjoy the story.

Tolkien and his stories are too complex to be assigned to or claimed by any one group.

[The Might]

Well, as I said in my starting post - "is my assumption even true?".
After reading your answers, for which I am very thankful, it appears the answer is no, Tolkien fans do not support a certain type of doctrine in a higher percentage and are more or less evenly spread.

[Pitchwife]

Originally Posted by Mnemosyne

Orly?

... is a town and airport in France, as far as I know. No idea about it's political leanings.

Originally Posted by Inziladun

How does one define "left", anyway? What's "left" in one country might be considered rather conservative in another.

Yep, let alone different stages of history. Most conservative parties today would be considered pretty far left by the standards of the French Revolution (which is where "left" and "right" as political labels come from)... and conversely, the kind of social politics we've seen from our German Social Democrats in the last ten years sometimes looks like they're trying to regress beyond Bismarck.

Originally Posted by Inziladun

Personally, I see the Shire as being rather a Libertarian paradise; no police or court system, with everyone just doing as they please under no central authority, and all.

Agreed - but is that right-libertarian or left-libertarian?

OK, to get back on topic and fill the words with some meaning: I suppose from the German context you refer to in your post, Miggy, that you're using "left-wing supporters" to mean people who would describe themselves roughly as e.g. supporting individual liberty and privacy versus state surveillance, minority rights and tolerance versus racism, solidarity and social justice versus neo-liberal capitalism, to name the main issues. I think you can find support for the first two in Tolkien (think of the threats of denunciation among the Mordor Orcs, the Drúedain and the friendship between Legolas and Gimli), but it's debatable whether those are exclusively or even predominantly leftist positions. The last one, which is more of a traditionally leftist concern, doesn't seem to be much of an issue in Tolkien as far as I can see - which may have to do with the fact that he's describing a pre-industrial society.

Other matters are even less clear-cut. Environmentalism, which I think was quite important to Tolkien, cuts across the spectrum - at heart, it's a conservative concern (or should be), its association with the Left is rather accidental.
Or take localism versus centralism. Looking at Aragorn's Reunited Kingdom with its autonomous regions of The Shire and Drúadan Forest compared to Sauron's regime in Mordor, it's rather obvious where the Prof's sympathies lay - but does that make him "right" or "left"?

Finally (this is where Legate's post-communist Tolkien fans come in), what about class struggle? Conspicuously absent. Dictatorship of the proletariat? Likewise (unless you're going to kid yourself and paint the Orcs as revolutionary masses, as some leftist critics have had the unbelievable stupidity to do). Nationalizing the means of production? I suppose it could be argued that Saruman tried that in the Shire (or not), but again, Middle-earth was pre-industrial, so Marxist theory doesn't really apply here.

To get back to your question, Miggy, my own experience with other Tolkien fans is very similar to yours - but this may say more about myself and my choice of friends than about Tolkien fandom, or even German Tolkien fandom, in general; and I've met some exceptions (I'm married to one - at least she likes the books, although she'd vividly protest against being called a 'fan').

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

Tolkien wasn't an ideologue, so there's something in his work for every political point of view.

Some more, some less, but basically yes - it's the same thing that makes him appeal to people from all kinds of cultural and religious backgrounds. I think there are political lessons to be learned from Tolkien (the man and his writings), if you're inclined to look for them, but the first one is that things are rarely so simple as ideologues both left and right would like us to believe.

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by alatar

We don't know if Tolkien even *believed* in wings...cough...Balrogs...cough...

The question is finally solved! The Balrog had one fake right-wing and one fake left-wing... both of them useless...

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

Tolkien and his stories are too complex to be assigned to or claimed by any one group.

Very true, and that's what makes them so beautiful!

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Seeing that Tolkien was named "Catholic Author of the Century", and is revered in Catholic circles, I fail to see the leftist interests. Catholics as a group in the U.S. are a fairly conservative lot.

Just for the sake of it, an addendum to what Form and Mith have already said: "Catholic" and "left-wing" (or even "VERY left-wing") were and still are going pretty well synonymous in many places, for instance, in South America. Or catholicism in politics around where I live (if it plays any role in politics at all, but at least when I look at the Christian Democrat party, which is effectively Catholic) often means "center" (which, by US standards, would correspond more to the Democrats). But the main point to this, I believe, lies indeed in what Mith had said about that Tolkien wasn't an American Catholic anyway, and not a contemporary one in any case.

Originally Posted by Pitchwife

I suppose from the German context you refer to in your post, Miggy, that you're using "left-wing supporters" to mean people who would describe themselves roughly as e.g. supporting individual liberty and privacy versus state surveillance, minority rights and tolerance versus racism, solidarity and social justice versus neo-liberal capitalism, to name the main issues

I think it is worthy to remark this, since it well illustrates the problem again: "supporting individual liberty and privacy vs. state surveillance" is totally a right-wing thing around here (actually that's one of the main "boogiemen" the right-wing supporters use against the left-wing), and we are just across the border! I mean - everybody thinks: "state surveillance = communist totality", "after the end of 80's = free market (right-wing) society and individual freedom" (and when one looks at our political parties, the ones focusing on minority rights and tolerance the most are actually the "center", which technically means Greens and Christian Democrats)... stopping here, but you get the point: once again, so much for "universal" definition of "left-wing".

Anyway, as for the issues mentioned, and going on from what Pitch had said: I think that by any "political analysis", the main point of the societies in Middle-Earth is that they are utopian. In an almost platonic or aristotelic way: in all the good realms, and especially in the best ones (all the "golden era" Elven realms, Númenor, early Gondor, Elessar's rule etc.) you have a good, wise king, who rules well exactly because he is good and wise. It's a monarchy with enough personal space for everyone, it seems, even though e.g. the class borders seem to be more or less set, but everybody is content: there is never a hint of any class struggle or anything, because the good and wise king makes it so that everybody is happy, and not in any sense that the poor people would be brainwashed, but simply because it is that way and everybody is genuinely happy. Likewise, in Mordor etc. the people are brainwashed and everyone is genuinely unhappy, because the ruler is a jerk, but the inhabitants are not much better (and likewise no class struggle can happen anyway, since even Gorbag and Shagrat are so uncapable of cooperating that Engels and Marx would shed a tear over them). Any potential revolts in good realms are evil (logically), unless they come from a legitimate heir to the throne, like the resistance of the Faithful at Númenor (the most ambiguous thing that ever happens in history is the kin-strife in Gondor, if I am not mistaken). Potential revolts in Mordor etc. cannot happen - there is nobody good enough to lead them, and the Easterlings, Southrons etc., being incapable to bring freedom to themselves, have to be liberated by the Western powers.

All in all, the questions of social justice etc. therefore have the answer in "The Return of the King", and that is not defined by any "left" or "right" classification, and the reader can basically imagine the "good rule" containing everything he can think of reached, and the "goals on the way" are omitted and we are left to imagine them, but each can do so on his own (to make up an example: "will there be a need for forming labour unions once the King has returned?" Maybe not, because the King will manage to oversee it all by himself. Maybe yes, because the representatives can go to the King and tell him about the injustice they are subject to and the King will make the justice happen. Both alternatives are equally imaginable in the Legendarium, I'd say, if you imagine the first, it could be written as a summary at the end of some description of Elessar's rule, and the second could be described as a scene of some folks coming to the King, sort of illustrating it).

The ideal of the "good and wise King" leaves the society in Middle-Earth (any society in there) conservative - in the true sense of the word: unchanging, because change is not needed, at most to bring it back to the proper state from which it has fallen.* But conservative does not obviously equal "right-wing" in this case (even if we pass the ambiguity of that term, as mentioned by many above) - as we can see even by Miggy's account that there are also many left-wing supporters among his readers, and that's why I think Tolkien is a bit above these things. After all, if you ask "left or right?", you can immediately be asked "and left or right from what point?"

(*By the way, speaking of this: one thing I can recall, most interesting thing I've ever encountered in the whole legendarium, is the Lake-Town, which apparently had democracy (! which was rotten, though, with the greedy mayor) until Bard the Bowman brought the kingdom back - the mayor, however, had been using the tradition of democracy ("electing wise men") as an argument against Bard's rule.)

[Mithalwen]

Social justice was also a factor in the "one nation conservatism" proposed by Benjamin Disraeli

And if catholicism makes him conservative de facto, many in the UK would assume that his being an academic and writer would associate him with the left - since the "intelligentsia" and "literati" are often thus aligned but I doubt it was so much the case in Oxford in the first half of the last century. Anyway I don't think I can significantly improve on what I have already said.

[Thinlómien]

Funny, I was actually thinking about Tolkien and communism today. Saruman's and his minions' rule in the Shire bears a resemblance to the worst manifestations of communism (like Stalin's Russia) with all the unfair sharers and gatherers and the "secret police" etc - but on the other hand the Elves appear throughout suspiciously utopistic communist in the spirit of Marx (can you really imagine them having a market economy and people trading something inside Rivendell or Lórien for example?)

I think Legate is on the right track though with what he said about utopian societies. And surely a lot of Tolkien's world seems conservative, something that is lacking from most political fields today in the form that it still existed when Tolkien was young.

[Mithalwen]

Surely the elves are feudal rather than communist. Mirkwood and Lorien are ruled by lords who are or are the descendants of colonists of "superior" races. Imladris is Elrond's own household. The clothing and food he provides to the company seems a personal gift. He himself is not an elected figure but the heir of the High Kings of the Noldor. Cirdan may have earned his authority as lord of the residual community at Mithlond but that was surely a very small community serving a specific purpose.

We know in Mirkwood some things are reserved for the King and court, they trade. It may be benevolent but it is still feudal.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

Surely the elves are feudal rather than communist. Mirkwood and Lorien are ruled by lords who are or are the descendants of colonists of "superior" races. Imladris is Elrond's own household. The clothing and food he provides to the company seems a personal gift. He himself is not an elected figure but the heir of the High Kings of the Noldor. Cirdan may have earned his authority as lord of the residual community at Mithlond but that was surely a very small community serving a specific purpose.

We know in Mirkwood some things are reserved for the King and court, they trade. It may be benevolent but it is still feudal.

Basically all the nations in M-E are effectively "feudal" in the sense, they have a King or something like that. However, I agree with that idea that I imagine Elvish society as effectively communist - as much as it can be, in the purest sense (not even socialism, but pure communism). Human societies are more or less feudal, even as for the relationships between people, division of labor etc. But I don't imagine Elves having much of that. What do they do? They sing, wander the woods, weave cloaks and forge swords, but there is never a hint of that somebody would pay to somebody XY for a cloak or for a sword. And except for a particular few things like "Turgon's sword", "Maedhros' harp", "Galadriel's Ring" or such stuff (and the unfortunate Silmarils, but these are really a special case), I don't see very much of personal claims of private property of anything either. Yes, the form is, let's say, monarchy - you have a King and you have people with certain political status, but when it comes to property and the production relations - then I believe we are looking at something closest to communism.

I really imagine it as a "freely create, freely give" society. Some Elves bake all the delicacies for Elrond's parties. Some just sing. Others are reforging Andúril meanwhile. But there is no whatsoever concept of "I will give you two pieces of bread for one Andúril", I am imagining it the way that on a common day in Rivendell, you just come to the table and take some lembas and wine simply because there is enough of it. You, on the other hand, do something else for the Elves, let's say, make a nice statue in front of the house. But you don't have to, but even though (or maybe because) you don't have to, you still do it: and the Elves do it simply of their own good will - it's not an obligation. Once again, very utopistic, but obviously working with the Elves. I honestly cannot imagine Elves having any sort of trade relationships among themselves: at most between different cities etc., in the sense "we give you marble from Gondolin and you give us six thousand spears". But then once again, the smiths in city B just take it as their personal duty to forge six thousand spearheads, and they somehow manage it so that it can be sent to Gondolin. And, needless to note, I don't expect that the smiths are "paid" by anyone or anything - and that is the most important part, I believe.

So once again: the form may be "feudal", having a king, but the way the society of the Elves works, I really believe "communism" might be rather a close term, of all those we have.

[Galadriel55]

"Confess your crimes here" - see this post.