The Philosophy of Tolkien: The Worldview Behind The Lord of the Rings

There are many who have fallen into the well of wonder in J. R. R. Tolkien’s Middle-Earth and not considered why the story is so compelling. Many of those who have fallen in love with Tolkien’s world have never asked why the story is so compelling, why the world seems so unfathomably deep, and why the caricatures of Tolkien’s world as moralistically simple or black and white seem so incredibly wrong. Peter Kreeft explores Tolkien’s worldview in his book, The Philosophy of Tolkien: The Worldview Behind The Lord of the Rings. What emerges is a portrait of a rigorously Augustinian Roman Catholicism which undergirds the stories of elves, orcs, and dwarves. For the most part, explicit worship is absent from The Lord of the Rings, but there is certainly a reverence toward the supernatural. In fact, Kreeft argues, the primary religious sentiments of Middle Earth are a form of pre-Christian paganism, which, like the polytheism practiced by Abram prior to being called by YHWH, provides a pathway toward Christian theism. Much of the basis for Kreeft’s argument is found in The Silmarillion and some of Tolkien’s letters. What is clear, however, is the openness to the sublime and the supernatural in the world. Tolkien’s worldview stands in stark contrast to the materialism of the modern world. There are thirteen chapters of varying length in this middling sized book. Kreeft subdivides his topics into questions that relate to topics like Metaphysics, Philosophical Theology, Angelology, Cosmology, Epistemology, Aesthetics, and Ethics. While the book does not cover every possible topic, it does show the range of thought that went into Tolkien’s sub-creation. Kreeft is always an interesting read. He is most interesting when he is writing about C. S. Lewis and J. R. R. Tolkien. Though this book has Tolkien in the title, there is a hefty dose of Lewis in its pages. I’m sure he quotes Tolkien more, but it is surprising how much of Lewis worked his way into the book. Of course, that is because Lewis and Tolkien were friends for much of their adult lives (despite a cooling, which seemed to stem from Tolkien’s dislike of the Narnia series), and shared much of their understanding of Christianity. As well, the inclusion of Lewis makes this book stronger because Tolkien wrote much less non-fiction prose. Lewis wrote many essays that cover a wide range of topics. Therefore, since Lewis and Tolkien share so much in common with their worldview, there are many times when Lewis can be used to explain why Tolkien is illustrating with The Lord of the Rings. It may seem odd to some that there is a book by a significant, articulate, and well-studied philosopher delving into the underpinnings of a fantasy world. After all, especially since the movies have been released, there are enthusiasts of various ages that dress up in costumes and play act as the many fantastical characters of the epic novel. A better question, however, is why the imaginative world of a twentieth century Roman Catholic inspires nones, pagans, Christians, atheists, and others to invest so much of their lives. Even before the movies caught on there were many people of diverse backgrounds who found the story of Frodo’s quest to destroy the One Ring a compelling narrative. Graffiti popped up on college campuses shortly after The Lord of the Rings was published declaring that “Frodo lives.” Even SciFi legend Leonard Nimoy felt condemned to write a song honoring Bilbo Baggins. Tolkien is popular because he points to something deep and meaningful. For many years I struggled to articular why I read The Hobbit dozens of times and have read The Lord of the Rings about once a year for many years. Kreeft provides an easier path to understanding the powerful vision under the surface of The Lord of the Rings that draws thoughtful readers back again and again. It isn’t simply that Tolkien wrote with a greater detail and presented a more thoroughly consistent world than any other fantasy writer. Rather, it is that the world he created is overlaid on the greatest and truest myth there ever was—Christianity. Tolkien’s creation points toward reality as it really is and as it is described by Christianity. For the academically minded Christian who wonders what the Tolkien fandom is all about, The Philosophy of Tolkien provides a serious exploration of the value of this fantastical story that extends well beyond entertainment. For the Tolkien-lover wondering why philosophy and theology matter, Kreeft’s book opens doors to abstractions like metaphysics and epistemology through the world that The Lord of the Rings fans already know so well. There is a certain sort of homeschooler who would benefit greatly for having this book put into their hands. As for me, I found the book both delightful and instructive. It was an enjoyable way to pass the time thinking about a story I love and thinking more carefully about the real world I live in. NOTE: This is a version of a review posted at Ethics and Culture.

I wasn’t planning on reviewing this one, but had so many requests for my thoughts on it that I figured I might as well put pen to paper. I read this as part of my research for the next book I’m working on and also because I’m a Tolkienphile. With that in mind, The Philosophy of Tolkien was the most enjoyable book I’ve read in a very long time and should be required reading for anyone who loves Tolkien. Kreeft opens the wardrobe to Middle-earth. I feel like I know Tolkien and Middle-earth better after reading this. That’s a feat considering how many times I’ve read Tolkien’s stories. On the other hand, I shouldn’t be surprised because “The Lord of the Rings is a deep mine with many precious gems,” Kreeft says, “deep enough for many others to plumb to their hearts’ content” (20). The format is straightforward. Kreeft discusses the big questions of philosophy with Tolkien’s point of view in his line of site. Each assertion is backed up by quotations from The Lord of the Rings, his other writings (regularly his Letters and The Silmarillion), and usually C. S. Lewis. I would normally point you to some of my favorite sections at this point, but I have underlines, notes, marginalia, and the like on almost every page. It’s a repository of wisdom on Tolkien. I will mention I enjoyed how Kreeft shows how poorly the critics of Tolkien (who can’t stand that The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings are beloved classics and can’t stand The Lord of the Rings was voted book of the Millennium and Tolkien the most influential authors of the 20th century) understand him or his work. They cannot wrap their minds around someone who holds to a Christian worldview during a time where modernism and then postmodernism were infecting all of literature. It’s like trying to explain the intricacies of delicate and delicious coffee to someone who has no taste buds. They’re just as happy with Folgers instant coffee than a single source, shade grown, hand picked coffee bean roasted to perfection. I must give credit where credit is due. Nate Claiborne recommended this book to me. I wouldn’t have read it without his thumbs up. I’ve read a lot of Tolkien criticism and have been left disappointed with most of it. Kreeft doesn’t disappoint.

I'm not sure how often I have read "The Lord of the Rings." For sure, the first time would have been around 1958, when I was about twelve years old. This was before the book became so popular, so I spent a decade telling friends about this magnificent book. Then the hippies got "into" this book and almost entirely failed to understand it. As the years rolled by, I began to seriously wonder what I meant when I said that the hippies failed to understand it. They generally understood the story, and the beauty of the story, but what they didn't grasp was the world-view, the understanding of humanity, which gave birth to the tale. Now, thankfully, this book answers the underlying question, and does a splendid job of doing it. If you are a fan of Tolkien, you owe it to yourself to at least LOOK at this book, and find out whether you are really into dressing-up like Orcs and Elves for fantasy conventions, or interested in the philosophical and theological background which is expressed in almost every line of the book. I'll throw in an example, one of the "50 questions" which are the backbone of this book: "Which is more important, romance or sex?" You will probably not be a bit surprised to learn Tolkien's answer, which was clearly "romance." But it may lead to asking yourself the parallel question: "Which is more important TO YOU, romance or sex?" All in all, a great piece of writing and a book which belongs in your library.

Excellent guide to the philosophy and theology behind Tolkien’s work

Great book

Die Tolkien-Begeisterung des Autors Wer das Buch „Der Herr der Ringe“ öffnet, steigt in eine reale Welt ein. Wie C. S. Lewis sagt, liefert ein Mythos all die Dinge, die wir kennen, mit ihrer reichen inneren Bedeutung. Sie lüftet den „Schleier der Vertrautheit“ Kein Wunder ist „Der Herr der Ringe“ in weltweiten Umfragen zum besten Buch des 20. Jahrhunderts gewählt worden. „Gewöhnliche Leute glauben immer noch an eine wirkliche Moral, an einen realen Unterschied zwischen Gut und Böse; an eine objektive Wahrheit und die Möglichkeit diese zu erkennen; und an die Überlegenheit des Schönen über das Hässliche.“ Die fünf Kennzeichen eines grossen Werkes Kreeft nennt fünf Charakteristika: 1. Ein guter Handlungsverlauf, eine grosse Tat, ein gutes Werk, etwas das sich zu tun lohnt. 2. Grossartige Charakteren oder zumindest ein genialer Charakter, mit dem/denen sich der Leser identifizieren kann. 3. Ein interessantes Setting, eine anziehende Welt 4. Ein erhebender Stil 5. Eine Weltsicht, die Einsicht in uns selbst, unser Leben und unsere Welt bietet. Der Aufbau des Buches Die Literatur spricht, argumentiert und überzeugt durch konkrete Handlungen, während Philosophie dasselbe auf einer abstrakten Ebene tut. Gott hat sich in der Bibel grösstenteils über Erzählungen von Ereignissen offenbart. Kreefts Buch ist didaktisch aufbereitet. Der Frage folgt jeweils eine kurzgefasste Antwort aus Sicht der (neo-thomistischen) Philosophie. Dann zitiert Kreeft kurze Abschnitte aus Tolkiens Werk (Silmarillion, Hobbits, Herr der Ringe), aus seinen Briefen sowie aus dem Werk von C. S. Lewis. 50 Leitfragen für die menschliche Existenz Es lohnt sich, die 50 Fragen aufzuführen. Sie können als Wegweiser durch die wesentlichen Fragen unseres Seins dienen. 1. Metaphysik 1.1 Wie gross (umfassend) ist die Realität? 1.2 Ist das Übernatürliche real? 1.3 Sind die Platonischen Ideen real? 2. Philosophische Theologie 2.1 Existiert Gott? 2.2 Ist das Leben Gegenstand göttlicher Vorsehung? 2.3 Ist unser Leben vorbestimmt und wir trotzdem in unseren Handlungen frei? 2.4 Können wir durch Religion Beziehung zu Gott aufnehmen? 3. Engel 3.1 Gibt es Engel? 3.2 Haben wir Schutzengel? 3.3 Gibt es Wesen zwischen Engeln und Menschen wie z. B. Elfen? 4. Kosmologie 4.1 Ist die Natur wirklich schön? 4.2 Haben Dinge Persönlichkeit? 4.3 Gibt es Magie wirklich? 5. Anthropologie 5.1 Ist der Tod gut oder schlecht? 5.2 Ist Romantik aufregender als Sex? 5.3 Warum haben Menschen Identitätskrisen? 5.4 Was wünschen wir uns am tiefsten? 6. Epistemologie 6.1 Ist Erkenntnis immer gut? 6.2 Ist Intuition eine Form der Erkenntnis? 6.3 Ist Glaube (Vertrauen) Weisheit oder Ignoranz? 6.4 Was ist Wahrheit? 7. Geschichtsphilosophie 7.1 Ist Geschichte eine Geschichte (story)? 7.2 Ist die Vergangenheit (Tradition) ein Gefängnis oder eine Erleuchtung? 7.3 Ist Geschichte vorhersagbar? 7.4 Gibt es neben der Evolution auch eine Devolution? 7.5 Ist menschliches Leben eine Tragödie oder eine Komödie? 8. Ästhetik 8.1 Warum haben wir nicht länger Herrlichkeit oder Pracht? 8.2 Ist Schönheit immer gut? 9. Sprachphilosophie 9.1 Wie können Worte lebendig sein? 9.2 Metaphysik der Worte: Können Worte wirkliche Kraft sein? 9.3 Gibt es richtige und falsche Worte? 9.4 Gibt es eine universelle, ursprüngliche und natürliche Sprache? 9.5 Warum ist Musik so kraftvoll? 10. Politische Philosophie 10.1 Ist klein schön? 10.2 Kann Krieg edel (noble) sein? 11. Ethik: Der Kampf zwischen Gut und Böse 11.1 Ist Böses real? 11.2 Wie kraftvoll ist Böses? 11.3 Wie schwach ist Böses? 11.4 Wie funktioniert Böses? 12. Ethik: Die “harten” Tugenden 12.1 Machen Prinzipien oder Tugenden eine gute Handlung aus? 12.2 Warum müssen wir Helden sein? 12.3 Kann jemand ohne Hoffnung leben? 12.4 Ist Autorität unterdrückend und Gehorsam erniedrigend? 12.5 Sind Verheissungen heilig? 13. Ethik: Die “weichen” Tugenden 13.1 Worin besteht die Kraft der Freundschaft 13.2 Ist Demut demütigend? 13.3 Was solltest du weggeben? 13.4 Triumphiert Güte über Gerechtigkeit? 13.5 Ist Wohltätigkeit (charity) eine Verschwendung? Fazit Die Gruppierung um 50 philosophische Fragen lässt das Buch als Konkordanz nützen. Es steigt aus einer Vielzahl von Perspektiven in die Welt von Mittelerde ein. Es passiert mit dem Leser, was Kreeft von guter Sekundärliteratur zu Tolkien erwartet: Es erfasst ihn ein Verlangen und die Freude, zur Primärliteratur zurückzugehen.

This is a well- thought- out and well-written book. I found it fascinating and it gives an extra dimension when reading Tolkein's works. I enjoyed it immensely.

Please do not buy this book. I have no idea what has got into the other reviewers or how on God's green earth they could have rated this five stars. It gets one star from me only because Amazon require at least one. I will give you two good reasons not to buy; (i) if you love Tolkien and are looking for genuine insights into his work you will be very, very disappointed, and (ii) although it also presents itself as "an engaging introduction to philosophy" and is, apparently, by a philosopher, it is so philosophically off the wall as to be utterly bizarre and misleading, at best, and is sometimes just plain dumb (I write, for what it is worth, as someone who has taught philosophy at an established university for more than twenty years). With respect to the first, the book borrows heavily from C. S. Lewis; so heavily, in fact, as to make you think you've bought a book about Lewis's philosophical viewpoint. There is often not much Tolkien in it. My advice, if you like the sort of discussions which interested Lewis, is to go and buy Lewis - it's a lot more interesting and readable than this. Often, when Tolkien does appear, Kreeft just gets him wrong. I often wondered whether he had bothered to read Tolkien, the errors are so basic (e.g. Eowyn is 'saved' from the Nazgul by Pippin). The 'insights' are often, well, bonkers. For example; "Tom Bombadil and Goldberry are quite possibly the Valar Aule and Yavanna". The entries he cites in support of this possibility simply suggest no such thing. And how about this: the great Tolkien puzzle, according to Kreeft, is how and why Tolkien "has produced the most convincing, desirable, beautiful, believable and awesome Elves. And the answer is," Kreeft suggests, "that he must have been an Elf. Or at least he had Elf blood somewhere in his ancestry." For genuine insights into Tolkien, you are better off reading Tom Shippey, Patrick Curry, Paul Kocher, Brian Rosebury, Jane Chance or any number of other decent commentators on his work. Perhaps more worrying is the philosophy, especially if the unwary or inexperienced take this to be a guide to the ideas and issues that motivate philosophers, or (worse) as an object lesson in philosophical argument. It is hard to know where to start, or finish, a critique of the book in terms of its philosophical content, so I will give just one example. Chapter 6 concerns itself with epistemology, or the study and theory of knowledge. One of the questions he addresses is 'What sources of knowledge can we trust?' and considers whether the heart and feelings are such a source. "Does the heart know as well as feel and desire?" In order to answer this, he then turns to the episode in the Prancing Pony where Frodo first meets Aragorn. Kreeft asks, "how did Frodo know 'Strider' was trustworthy when he first met him at Bree? He 'feels fair and seems foul'-is this the 'feeling' the eye of the heart and the 'seeming' the eye of the head?" Hmm... (The actual phrases from Tolkien are "seem fairer and feel fouler" or "look foul and feel fair"; but let's leave that aside.) More importantly, this doesn't look like a passage that will support the idea that Tolkien thought the heart yields knowledge. Frodo doesn't claim that he 'knew' Strider was 'fair'; Tolkien writes that "Frodo spoke with hesitation. 'I believed that you were a friend ... or at least wished to." As any philosophy student is aware, a belief - even a true belief - doesn't amount to knowledge, and Frodo certainly seems as if he is merely expressing a belief here, and even appears uncertain that he really believed it. In an attempt at further support, Kreeft goes on to quote the passage where Gandalf says of Gollum, "My heart tells me he has some role to play yet, for good or ill, before the end" and then asks "How did Gandalf know this?" The simple answer is that he didn't and no plausible account of knowledge given by philosophers over the course of philosophy's history (none of which Kreeft discusses) would support the view that he did. But note also that Gandalf doesn't even claim to know this (just as Frodo doesn't make a claim to knowledge), nor does Tolkien ever suggest that Gandalf does knows it (something that would, anyway, run counter to the whole spirit of Tolkien's work). And even if Gandalf had claimed to know it, that by itself wouldn't mean that he did know it (the difference between claiming to know and knowing being another distinction familiar to any student of philosophy). So, to try and recruit Tolkien in the service of Kreeft's own, frankly, unsound and superficially argued epistemological view is, to say the least, extremely unfair to Tolkien. If you look at his publications (he's certainly prolific), you will see that Kreeft is, essentially, a religious writer and one, seemingly, not too comfortable with a modern worldview. He is really in the business of proselytising his beliefs and, on his website, describes this book as "The Lordship of Christ in Lord of the Rings". By noting this, I don't intend this as a criticism in itself; but readers should be aware that this is the case and that this colours his choice of philosophical topics and the stance he takes towards them. The choice is often peculiar (in both senses of that word): questions such as "Do we have guardian angels?" or "Can we relate to God by 'religion'?" are not questions that trouble many philosophers. If they interest you, fair enough, but don't expect to get a detailed or balanced treatment of them here. This and, not least, the often fallacious or superficial reasoning evident throughout, makes this book completely unsuitable as an introduction to philosophy. (There are plenty of those available that do a much better job.) Nor does the book work as an exploration of philosophical ideas in Tolkien (the collection of essays constituting the volume The Lord of the Rings and Philosophy, edited by Bassham and Bronson, though not great, is better); but that, actually, is not what this book is about. Rather, it is, apparently, an account of Tolkien's philosophical worldview. This strikes me as arrogant and impertinent. Perhaps these questions interested Tolkien, I don't know; but I can't help feeling that it is rather presumptuous of Kreeft to assume that just because Tolkien was himself religious and also a Catholic (and, in many ways, a critic of modern attitudes and trends) he would endorse the detail of Kreeft's own set of idiosyncratic views. Sure, Tolkien does occasionally express a strong view on a relevant topic, especially in his letters; but not often enough for us to attribute a detailed and worked-out worldview to him. We have to be aware of our own epistemic limitations in this respect and show some courtesy to a dead author who can no longer speak for himself. In sum: an irritating and very, very bad book. Save your money.