The Ring Is Not What You Think

There are few better examples of post-Ground Zero clutural illiteracy than popular commentators’ and literary critics’ hamfisted interpretations of the One Ring.

Let’s get the basics out of the way first: The One Ring is not a metaphor. It is neither a stand-in for atomic weapons nor political power, nor is it a commentary on World War II. It is not an allegory for fascism, communism, capitalism, imperialism, or any other –ism.

Tolkien stated the above points explicitly, repeatedly, and with the weariness of a man who knew exactly what he was up against. His tragedy was that of the linguist trying to speak to a civilization that had lost the ability to hear.

Because our society no longer reads; it scans. All day online, we listen to commentary from people who have not read The Lord of the Rings—never mind The Silmarrillion or Tolkien’s letters—and would not understand the material if they had.

Too many people only engage with Tolkien to the extent that they can bend and warp his work to serve as a vessel for their ideology. And so the One Ring, which was written with a precise and non-allegorical meaning, has become a kind of literary Rorschach test; another mirror in the Pop Cult funhouse. Readers; let’s be real here, movie-watchers, see in the Ring whatever they already believe about power, war, or politics.

That’s not just a misreading. It’s a desecration.

Why?

Read the full post on Substack.