We all know the grand story of Frodo and the Ring , but we never seem to see it as a war story. It is instead seen as a story of a journey, or a story of man, but it does have its fair share of intense wars. The Return of the King is where we see Frodo's journey come to an end. Gandolf the White returns, Gollum leads Frodo and Sam closer to Mount Doom, there is the siege at Minas Tirith, and finally the men of the west versus the orcs at the Black Gate. There are two main wars in this film, and they both represent different things. The initial battle at Minas Tirith is to obtain land and destroy people. The Orcs are brutal, and the Gondorians are simply fighting to survive and protect their land. This suggests that war is only a loss of men (and/or Orcs) and nothing is achieved by it in the end. However, the battle at the Black Gate is for something huge. It is to destory Sauron's power, and the Ring forever-- to change Middle Earth. This suggests that war can lead to good things. Aragorn sends his men to battle telling them that they can rebuild the world, and change does occur.
However, I think that Vonnegut's goals and Tolkien/Jackson's were fairly different. While the battles in Lord of the Rings are based on large goals, they do not contribute to the larger goal of the story. However, the war stories provided in Slaughterhouse-Five, contribute to the themes that Vonnegut is trying to convey. Without the Pilgrims' war experience, there would be little for us to go off of. On the other hand, without the wars in Lord of the Rings, we would mostly just miss out on intense action and hearing the absolute best line of the film: "Throw the dwarf!"
Mary O'Hare would like this film because it's one of the most beastly, most epic stories of all time. But she may not like that war is all over the place, and makes it seem like a necessary, exciting thing. She might not dig that, but she'll for sure like Gollum.
I like how you distinguished between two different aspects of war. On one hand, war can just be senseless, petty killing of as many people as possible, and one the other hand, it can be a means to accomplish something great and noble (as is the case when Aragorn and his army fight to protect all of Middle Earth). This then begs the question: what type of war are we fighting now? Is the U.S. fighting for something worthwhile, or are we just senselessly killing more people? Who knows, I for one am certainly not qualified to answer these questions.
I like how you distinguished between two different aspects of war. On one hand, war can just be senseless, petty killing of as many people as possible, and one the other hand, it can be a means to accomplish something great and noble (as is the case when Aragorn and his army fight to protect all of Middle Earth). This then begs the question: what type of war are we fighting now? Is the U.S. fighting for something worthwhile, or are we just senselessly killing more people? Who knows, I for one am certainly not qualified to answer these questions.
ReplyDelete