bretwalda-lamnguin - Tumblr blog

bretwalda-lamnguin · 2 days ago

Text

The claim that Denethor is not trying to protect anyone is very strange. Why else would he evacuate civilians, institute rationing (which he himself follows), call for aid from Rohan (which he himself does, lighting the beacons and sending the red arrow), make use of guerilla warfare in Ithilien and have the Rammas Echor rebuilt? Why would he all do this if he just wants pointless slaughter? To me it seems quite a heavy-handed contrast with how underprepared Théoden was.

It also seems pretty clear that Denethor is using the Palantir to gather information to support the military effort, I don’t know where you’re getting Denethor thinking he can win outright through this. Tolkien says in the Palantiri essay he was doing it for information and knew the risks, but was not seeking out direct confrontation with Sauron.

The action at the crossing is a delaying action. Denethor is waiting for reinforcements (which he has summoned), buying time for them to get there is absolutely necessary. Faramir loses a third of the force, significant but absolutely not most. Imrahil never says they should retreat, he questions why they aren’t also reinforcing Cair Andros as well, Denethor says they don’t have the force for that. Gandalf never argues against the plan. In the earlier drafts of this Faramir and Gandalf are all for holding the river. Was that suicidal?

Why retreat from two perfectly good defensible lines? Where is the sense in that? You lose any opportunity to inflict friction and delay the enemy to allow friendly reinforcements to arrive. You also lose the chance to shatter the vanguard of the enemy, and get besieged more quickly. The longer you delay your foe the more their supply lines will scream. All the better if you have friendly reinforcements on the way. Playing for time is absolutely a sound strategy in this situation. They don’t gain much time, but the day or so they do buy means that when Rohan arrives the gate has only just been broken. Denethor’s plan worked!

I also don’t know what you mean about the sortie-Denethor himself says he has prepared it, and they go at his order and return at his order. It’s quite clear that this is happening at his command. As for sending them out earlier, sending unsupported cavalry off into the distance is a really, really bad idea. It would be very easy for them to be surrounded, cut off and destroyed. Denethor leaves it late, but this maximises their striking power and minimises the enemies cohesion, ensuring the charge will successfully shatter the enemy and not get bogged down. He recalls the cavalry before they are in danger themself.

I don't understand your Haig parallel. Denethor is acting based on his experience and knowledge of past battles? Good. He should. That’s good generalship. Look at what works and what doesn’t. What should he base his plan on?

Also Denethor is an aristocrat, he’s not anything like Haig in social background. Gandalf says he is of far greater lineage and power than Théoden. His family have ruled Gondor for nearly a thousand years, been associated with the Stewardship for another five hundred before that, and trace their ancestry back to ancient Kings of Númenor. He’s very high aristocracy already, there is no social climbing whatsoever here. His rejection of Aragorn comes from a thousand year old legal precedent set by his ancestor Pelendur. Denethor is jealous of his position, but he bases his claim to rule on precedent and tradition. He never tries to make himself King.

I don’t understand what you mean by “will alone”. Morale is massive in all warfare, especially pre-modern. But Denethor has prepared to fight on good terrain, with a fallback position that prevents flanking by the enemy, and a cavalry sortie to cover their retreat. He absolutely knows what he is doing here and isn’t just relying on “will alone”. He snaps in the end because he thinks Sauron has the ring and his son is likely mortally wounded. Tolkien himself says that Denethor rejected Sauron and always opposed his victory, and maintained the integrity of his personality until Faramir was brought back apparently mortally wounded. It’s clear that here he has gone mad, but he wasn’t before that happened. The pyre is because he has finally been crushed under the weight of despair, not just disregard for Gondor or tradition. His will has finally snapped after decades of soul crushing circumstances.

Also I really don’t understand your point about Éowyn. Did Théoden and Éomer ignore the threat of sexual violence to her and her depression (that almost everyone notices straight away but them) out of love as well? It’s quite clear that she has faced a lot of sexism in Rohan, and Théoden’s attitude towards her for the most part seems dismissive. When Éomer finally does notice, he tries to blame Aragorn, rather than think about his own part in this. Théoden never acknowledges it at all.

Look, I could go on. I could talk more about the Palantiri essay. I could talk about how Denethor is referred to in the appendices. I could mention Tolkien's defence and criticism of Denethor centring on him genuinely loving Gondor and its people.

Quite frankly I just don’t think this is a different point of view, I think your arguments are completely indefensible and incompatible with canon. You’re forcing Denethor to fit your idea of him, with little regard for what the text actually says. The Haig comparison seals it for me. This might work for film Denethor, but for book Denethor it just isn’t relevant. They’re high ranking military commanders in high casualty wars, and there the similarity stops.

thinking about the parallels between théoden and denethor, and i have a LOT of thoughts about them. about how they are the same and how they differ, and why this reflects the redemption of one and the final destruction of the other. and how that reflects the wider themes of the story. and why i feel it is deeply unfair to accuse théoden of being a bad parent on a remotely comparable level to denethor. and duty and power and love and and and

but i think the biggest thing for me is. swords.

both characters' arcs are explicitly connected to their relationships with swords, but in opposite ways.

théoden's is unarmed for the majority of his illness/corruption. his redemption is symbolised by him standing and calling for his sword. his sword has been lacking from him in the depth of his corruption, and he has accordingly separated himself from the responsibility it represents. he ceases to be warrior or king or father, and becomes an invalid; and when he is cured he can have his sword back.

denethor, on the other hand, carries a sword constantly. he dresses in mail he will not use with a weapon he will not raise, explicitly to show his readiness for an attack that he absolutely proves he is not ready for. he adopts the appearance of duty without its meaning. he thinks he is a warrior, a king, and a father because he performs the actions of those roles, but he does so without understanding them or having the motivating force behind them. he cannot be redeemed because he thinks he already has been, that he has no need to restore anything because he is already everything he should be.

compare and contrast their children's lines: éowyn's "those without swords can still die upon them" and faramir's "i do not love the sword for its brightness [...] i love only that which [it] defends." these lines, and the relationships between the child and the father(-figure), are microcosms of the relationship between people and lord.

éowyn, who is kept from taking up the sword - who wants to take up the sword, to assert agency and because she understands that the war is coming whether she is in it or not - understands that théoden is not protecting anyone by denying the presence of the threat. under wormtongue's influence, théoden denies that there is a threat, believes that anyone sounding the alarm is doing so maliciously and that the best thing to do is to maintain the status quo, close the doors, and avoid the inevitable. his redemption is in taking up the sword - and as king, as the representative of rohan, the whole of rohan takes up the sword when he does - and meeting the truth. those without swords can still die upon them.

théoden does not, in my estimation, prevent éowyn from taking up arms because he disregards her, underestimates her, or doesn't care about her. i would argue that both he and éomer want her to remain out of it because they love her - because they want to protect her, but fail to recognise as she does that it is not protecting her to remove her agency and ability to contribute actively to the war. the war must be fought, and won, for her as much as for anyone: éowyn's arc, rohan's arc, and théoden's arc is all in "those without swords can still die upon them." you cannot protect people by refusing to acknowledge the threat, no matter how lovingly it is done: you have to let them take up the sword.

faramir, on the other hand, is faced with the exact counterpoint of that. denethor is not trying to protect anyone. denethor is entirely about political image: his own self-image, and how others perceive him. denethor knows that there is an existential threat, and where he denies anything, it's the hope of peace or victory. but he is also entirely concerned with the act of defence. he will continue to throw troops into the meat-grinder while still holding out, inherently, for his own heroism and the belief that only he can save Gondor, that the deaths of thousands are just a way to buy time for his personal psychic battle with sauron. the palantír is not what corrupts him, it is the tool that justifies his corruption. denethor does not value the running of his city or his country, he will not help rohan or call rohan for help without outside intervention, he demands to be the main character of this war. in the end, he is prepared to desecrate everything that gondor holds dear - the tombs of the stewards, the continuation of his line, the idea of the king - and to abandon his defence of the walls to follow his own grief and anger. because it was never about defence. it was about being sharp and pragmatic and cold and steely. he never cared about people, because the people in his life have only ever been tools to him.

and so he ignores the advice of his people - in this case represented by faramir and imrahil - and the knowledge that he is throwing lives away for no real tactical advantage. he sends faramir out, and faramir goes - not because faramir believes it, or because faramir is spineless, but because everyone is aware that if faramir doesn't go then someone else will - and everything goes terribly wrong. and now denethor decides that he should spare some lives, and not let imrahil lead a sortie outside the walls to rescue them. why? because it doesn't matter to him. it matters to him only when he realises that losing faramir means that he has lost his legacy. and he is now ready to despair, because there is no more battle, there is no more mind war with sauron, there is no more sword to raise, there is only "that which they defend". and denethor doesn't give a shit about what he's defending. he cares about the idea of defending. in the end, he abandons his sword in favour of a knife and a torch - tools without glory - because the sword without the values behind it is meaningless.

and that's why théoden can be redeemed, and denethor can't. because théoden maintains the driving principles, but loses the strength. denethor has the strength, but he has never truly had the principle. and principle without strength is weakness, but strength without principle is death.

ALSO DENETHOR IS A 1:1 SYMBOLIC REPRESENTATION OF BUTCHER OF THE SOMME FIELD COMMANDER SIR DOUGLAS HAIG IN THIS ESSAY I WILL....

#denethor ii #théoden #húrinionath #lotr

41 notes · View notes