In Middle-earth, there was a wraith-world or Unseen world where creatures like Ringwraiths had a distinctly different presence than those observable in the normal world. Magic is inherent in the actions of all creatures in Middle-Earth, and it is evident that the world is usually alive and willing to protect itself. Smaller natural phenomena also hold a magical inclination, with Galadriel working through her ring and divining.
Tolkien did not like magic in Middle Earth, often viewing it as an artificial substance like Sauron and Saruman’s devices. The One Ring, also known as the Ruling Ring, Master Ring, Ring of Power, and Isildur’s Bane, was among the most powerful artifacts ever created in Middle-earth. Most of the magic used in Lord of the Rings is innate to the practitioner. Gandalf, the title character and primary antagonist, is the primary antagonist through the forging of the One Ring.
In The Lord of the Rings film trilogy, magic is made more physical, matching the medium. Examples include the fight between Gandalf and Saruman, where the deep wilderness almost always holds magic of some kind. Magic in Middle-earth was not explicitly defined by Tolkien, and the term can have various meanings depending on usage and context.
In LOTR, magic is used in various ways, such as with physical effects, such as Elrond controlling the River Briunen or Gandalf fighting the Nazgul on Amon. The world is generally alive and willing to protect itself, but magic seems to be an inherent part of the magic system.
📹 Lord of the Rings Mythology Explained
Special Thanks: Professor Verlyn Flieger http://mythus.com/ http://askmiddlearth.tumblr.com/ Soliloquy: http://goo.gl/LQEakz @icel, …
Is LOTR high or low magic?
The fantasy series Game of Thrones and the epic fantasy series The Lord of the Rings are notable for their low-magic settings, in which magic plays a significant role in the series’ sweeping conflicts. However, the presence of magic in these works is not a concept that is readily familiar to the average reader or viewer.
Is there any magic in Lord of the Rings?
The fictional world of Middle-earth is a composite of natural and supernatural elements, with a shared magical capacity among its diverse races of beings. It is replete with rivers, mountains, plains, trees, and plants. The wielding of magical power is facilitated through the use of various artifacts, including rings and impenetrable walls. The races of Middle-earth exhibit a range of powers and are distinguished by their distinctive characteristics and capabilities.
Is Game of Thrones low or high fantasy?
A Game of Thrones is the first novel in George R. R. Martin’s A Song of Ice and Fire series, a popular high fantasy series adapted by HBO. The series features a medieval world with dragons and ice zombies. His Dark Materials is a trilogy of fantasy novels by Philip Pullman, a coming-of-age story about two children wandering through parallel universes. Both novels are high fantasy literature for younger readers. Low fantasy fiction, on the other hand, is a genre that focuses on low fantasy elements, such as myths, legends, and supernatural beings.
Is magic rare in LOTR?
In the Lord of the Rings (LOTR) series, magical abilities are predominantly utilized by non-human entities and those of an evil nature, including wizards, elves, dwarves, and those of partial elven descent.
Is Lord of the Rings harder to read than Harry Potter?
The language utilized in the Harry Potter series is comparatively more basic than that employed in the Lord of the Rings series, which may be attributed to generational differences between Tolkien and Rowling. Tolkien devised the Elven language from its fundamental elements, a process that spanned twenty years.
Is Harry Potter low magic?
High fantasy is a genre of literature that features grand, epic stories set in intricate secondary worlds with complex magic systems and in-depth lore. It is characterized by grand, epic storytelling, like J. R. R. Tolkien’s Middle-earth or George R. R. Martin’s Westeros. On the other hand, low fantasy stories usually take place in familiar settings and feature a protagonist who encounters mythical or magical elements that challenge their understanding of reality. Understanding these differences is crucial to appreciating the expansive and imaginative realm of fantasy literature and determining which genre fits your storytelling style.
Does Gandalf actually have magic?
Gandalf, a wizard with magical power in light and fire, is known for his influence in Lord of the Rings. He has many allies and friends, including Bilbo Baggins, who he later meets through his association with Bilbo. Gandalf helps Dwarf King Thorin defeat Smaug, and later warns Frodo about the dangers of the Ring. He calls on Strider, also known as Aragorn, to help Frodo and his fellow Hobbits. Gandalf is rescued by Gwaihir, the chief of the eagles, and obtains his trusty steed, Shadowfax, a magical horse with speed and strength.
Gandalf rejoins the Hobbits in Rivendell, where they form the Fellowship of the Ring. However, his power is depleted in extreme instances, and he must recharge before continuing. Gandalf’s influence extends beyond the Hobbits, influencing major characters in the trilogy and other entries.
Why does Harry never use magic?
Harry Potter, a young wizard, was unfamiliar with the world of magic before receiving his Hogwarts letter at age 11. His first exposure to magic was when Voldemort used the killing curse on him at age 1. Characters like Ron and Draco, who grew up in magical families, quickly practiced spells and successfully cast them in their first year at Hogwarts. Hermione, who had muggle parents, had been studying magic and working on spells before the train ride to Hogwarts, which Harry didn’t have the chance or support to do. Harry’s introduction to magic in Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone introduced him to the importance of magic in the community’s lore.
In Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, Harry successfully cast the first spell, “Rictusempra”, which he uses when facing Draco Malfoy in Gilderoy Lockhart’s Duelling Club. The Tickling Charm, which was meant to weaken Draco with laughter, sends Draco flying back across the room. However, Harry’s charm only works to blast Draco further back in the movie, possibly due to his inexperience with hexes.
Why doesn’t Gandalf use magic?
Tolkien’s approach to magic diverges from that of subsequent fantasy writers. Rather than relying on his own power to save the day, Gandalf’s role is to provide guidance and direction to others, encouraging them to resist Sauron and pursue virtuous actions.
Can humans learn magic in LOTR?
The Lord of the Rings does not have a unique version of magic, as it is a combination of natural abilities, bloodline, and gifts from the gods. The Elves, for instance, possess traits like immortality and keen senses that make them seem magical to Men. However, these powers are not inherent but are derived from magical items they carry. The Elves could enchant items and enhance their power, such as the blue swords, which could be wielded by anyone in Middle-earth.
Men, on the other hand, do not display any obvious magics, but some do show supernatural abilities, such as Boromir and Faramir having “true dreams” about the reforging of Aragorn’s sword and the appearance of a Halfling. Telepathic communication was also a common ability, but only mastered by a few. Overall, the Lord of the Rings highlights the complexity of magical abilities and the potential for all to utilize them.
Does Lord of the Rings have a hard magic system?
A soft magic system is one where the rules of using magic are not entirely known to the reader, leaving room for imagination. Examples include Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, and Star Wars’ Force. While there are rules, the reader is left with a lot of information about the magic’s workings.
On the other hand, a hard magic system is one where the rules are understood almost entirely by the reader. Examples include Avatar: The Last Airbender and Fullmetal Alchemist. Firebenders can only bend water if they are the Avatar.
There is no right or wrong answer to which type of magic system to choose, as it all depends on the story’s purpose and the desired narrative structure.
📹 The Lord of the Rings: Magic in Moderation
Magic is a staple in the Fantasy genre these days. So why is the magic in the Lord of the Rings so confusing? *Support me on …
This isn’t true. None of the Valars are capable of creative life. Eru is the only entity in LOTR universe capable of bestowing life. So the dwarves and ents were only a vessel until Eru bestowed them life. Also Dragons weren’t created by Melkor, they were Maiars corrupted by him in similar ways as the Orcs.
Iluvatar used the Sillmarills to create everything, and so did the valar. Melkor on the other hand, could not use the Sillmarills because Illuvatar did’nt want him to, because he was evil. So instead, he corrupted other beings to create his dragons and stuff. Many believe that the orc is corrupted elves and that explains why feks. Gothmog could participate in wars hundreds of years before the triology.
Lots of people in here saying that TLOTR was written with references to the Bible stories or that Tolkien got his inspiration from the Bible. What they forget or don’t know is that the ‘Bible’ is a story that had existed long before there ever was a ‘Bible’. The mythic story of the struggle between a good deity and evil deities and their humanly subjects has existed since the beginning of time. The Bible is just another iteration of the story.
Saruman seems to get his philosophy from Plato, who says “The wise shall lead and rule, and the ignorant shall follow”, and who envisions a state with unbreakable class barriers between the producers and the rulers. Plato also was an unapologetic collectivist – “You are created for the sake of the whole, and not the whole for the sake of you.” Tolkien strikes me as an individualist (or maybe that’s because I’m an individualist, and I like Tolkien, so therefore he must agree with me.”
Do you get as aggravated as I do with the “who would win in a fight–Gandalf or Dumbledore? Gandalf or Loki? Gandalf or the Archangel Michael?” Like literally the whole point is that the super powerful in Tolkien’s world don’t have to show it all the time and magic is a servant, not a ruler. OK, I’ll get off my soapbox. Always a pleasure, Jess!
“(Magic) is a rhythm of the universe, a power that beats at the heart of all of our imaginations.” It has been many years since I’ve read the Lord of the Rings, but one thing that struck me coming from other fantasy (mostly Dragon Lance) was the lack of spells as such. In Middle Earth, magic was more the tendency of things, a reflection of a will, the music you can almost hear from just behind the world. Should someone of my age dare to say: vibes? I’m sure there is more direct action and I’m forgetting something because people more familiar with Tolkien’s world suggest otherwise, but it is gone from my memory and this will likely remain my headcanon if nothing else. Eventually, all things merge into one, and a river runs through it. The river was cut by the world’s great flood and runs over rocks from the basement of time. On some of the rocks are timeless raindrops. Under the rocks are the words, and some of the words are theirs. I am haunted by waters. — Norman Maclean
Haven’t listened yet, but since I was a kid my fellow Tolkien nerds and I knew the lack of bald-faced magic was a good thing. We knew that seeing the flashes on Weathertop was more interesting dramatically than to see Gandalf’s power, just as there was no Gandalf / Sauron battle at the end: because in the end power isn’t interesting. Of COURSE we like to think that there’s more to this world than we know, more behind the scenes, or the idea of characters who can bend the rules of reality. But at some point they just become gods, and omniscience and omnipotence and omnipresence are just… not that interesting. Listen to Alan Watts discuss ‘The God Problem,’ – it’s this very same issue. We don’t actually want power (though so many think they do)… we want struggle and achievement and the feeling of meaning that comes from those things. Magic quickly neuters the meaning of struggle, and so props to Tolkien for doing it all very beautifully (perhaps the deus ex machina eagles aside, though they’re technically not ‘magic’). Thanks for this website! Check out mine for original and cover singer songwriter stuff. Cheers!
I love that Gandalf the wizard doesn’t cast fireballs with his magics, he uses Narya, his magic is to be a beacon for people and Narya’s other effect compliments that perfectly. Keeping magic subdued and imbued in powerful magical artifacts is such a smart and approachable way to understand the setting. Edit: Like he fights the Balrog with Glamdring and his staff gets destroyed and uses Narya to diminish the Balrog’s inferno.
There are small magics in tolkiens world, usually what you see gandalf do, like start fires or open doors and there’s crafting, the making or rings and special items but he deeper magic seems to be almost unseen, unless it’s a real powerful item like the silmaril’s the the light of glaladriel it keeps a place safe. like the shire (there is a power of a sort there) imladrids or Lothlorien places where no one is runnnig aronud making with the bibbity-bobbity-bo, but where there clearly is magic at work
A very nice survey. I believe the point of Tolkien’s Faerie is that it is a metaphor for the world of the imagination, which by an everyday magic we step into in any good fantasy story (written or on screen). The metaphor, being present in the work itself, is what gives it its ” peculiar mood and power” (On Fairy Stories).
Very well done! Two comments. First, if you have not read CSL’s That Hideous Strength, you might want to consider the parts where Merlin is brought into the present and Ransom’s comments on Merlin’s magic — essentially that it’s an art which belongs in the past when the world was a bit less well defined. Ransom tells Merlin that it was morally dubious even in Merlin’s day and the practice of it had hurt him, and today is simply forbidden. Secondly, may I recommend Patricia McKillip, a most underrated and nearly forgotten writer whose fantasies are all different but which all have magics which are the antitheses of systematic, and seem to have a lot in common with JRRT’s.
The magic system in Middle Earth has always intrigued me. It would be interesting to delve into each individual moment that Gandalf casts a spell. And after perusal Corey Olsen’s exploring Middle Earth series from the moment Gandalf lights the fire on Caradhras, he seems to cast a lot of spells and i dont think i ever realised it until now . The encounter with the wolves, to the spells he tries on the doors of Moria before realising speak friend and enter. The small light he uses on top of his staff to guide through Moria. The holding spell he puts on the door that gets broken by the Balrog and almost breaks him. I think its part of Tolkiens genius to make it so subtle but if you think about it its actually quite powerful. If you think about it in a real world sense i think the spell he uses in the encounter with wolves outside of Moria might be the most striking reason why Gandalf is reluctant to use magic. If you cast a spell in order to protect yourself and your party but in doing so burns down a wide radius of the surrounding forrest. Being a Being of compassion such as Gandalf who knows that his spells can have devastating consequences to the natural environment around him I can totally understand his reluctance to use them. But if you had malevolent intent like a Sauron or Saruman casting spells might not have the same moral issue.. Its still so intriguing..
The best use of magic in all of LotR is when Gandalf shows up to Helm’s Deep and leads the Rohirrim, timed perfectly with the sunrise, to blind the Uruk-hai. It’s resourceful in its reliance on nature, efficient in its effectiveness, subtle in its application, and far too precise to be performed by a human… because a wizard arrives precisely when he means to.
Something I’ve grown to respect and find fascinating in LotR is that how very little magic actually goes on on the page, or at least very little of what we commonly might think of magic in a fantasy story. Not only that but, the world of Middle Earth in Frodo’s age is a world where “magic” is rapidly fading. As the long age of elves comes to an end and makes way for the age of men, it seems to speak to a renewed world where mankind is left free to prosper and flourish without the interference of powers beyond their reckoning.
I am pleased to hear your summary of the Inklings’ thinking on Magia, Goeteia, Science, and Religion. I’d point out that other thinkers have set the boundaries of the magical arts somewhat differently, so it’s worth not taking these definitions of Magia and Goeteia as absolute. For example, some thinkers – and here I am thinking of Jake Stratton-Kent in his work Geosophia (2 vols) and the other parts of his Encyclopaedia Goetica, though I am sure there are others who escape me at the moment – define Goetia as relational and personal, similar to Religion, with Magia as impersonal, similar to Science. Which is tangential to your discussion here, but since you do intend to look at magic more widely I thought I’d mention it.
One of my absolute favorite magic systems is from “the Malazan book of the fallen” Somewhere between magia and goeteia (sp), some have connections to elemental planes called warrens that they can train to be able to harness, travel through, and in some limited way control, but it wears at them to do so
Maybe hard to cover but the Forgotten Realms magic of Faerun and divinity of that world is it’s own rabbit hole that I found worth going down. Though… with some modern examples like BG3, that don’t quite do it perfectly but are great examples.. Along with the descriptions of magic in books like Shadowdale/The Avatar Trilogy, and supplementary books like Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting, Faiths and Pantheons, and Magic of Faerun.. It’s a lot less to read than all the titles might suggest, most of the non novels I’ve mentioned only have a handful of relevant pages.. but ultimately it was upon understanding and having digested that material, understanding the concept that a Wish/Miracle is a 9th level Spell and there are Spells Above 9th level, and how the Gods (or, as Tolken would describe them, the Ainur and Maiar) are constantly performing and comprehending Miracles every moment beyond what has managed to be comprehended by the Mortal Races. Tbh, not only did those concepts help me understand more intimately the Silmarillion when I read that, all those things were important steps for me to understand the Divinity of OUR world and to take a more critical look at Our history, and led me from being Agnostic to The God of Abraham.
Very well done and well researched look at not just magic in Middle Earth, but at Tolkien, Lewis, and the Inklings thoughts on magic. I appreciate the effort you put into this! The four circle Venn diagram was something that even now makes me rethink a lot of the esoteric concepts of these forces, and it’s fun to consider these still. I liked how, in Middle Earth, magic wasn’t intended to be the go-to toolbox for solving any problem, but instead a powerful, dangerous tool to be used only just enough when the need was greatest. My dad, who read the books to my little sister and me as bedtime stories when we were young, took the time to answer my questions about why people didn’t just use magic for everything. He told me that the Wizards were not there to save the free people from evil, but to help them to free themselves from it. Becoming reliant on the wizards for a solution to every problem would make them weaker and more ineffective, turning them into servant people if not slaves under the wizard overclass. The only way for the free people to be free was for them to pay the price of that freedom and learn to fight and overcome evil on their own. To eleven year old me that sounded mean, but at the same time I got it. I knew my parents had left me to fend for myself when I had difficult tasks to do, and had even set difficult tasks for me to do, and I felt better and more accomplished and capable once I achieved those tasks. So it made sense, even if it sounded mean. By the same token, dad also refused to allow me to use magic for my tasks (i.
I think that part of the reason some people find magic in The Lord of the Rings confusing, is because they expect it to be “FLASH BANG” and it isn’t. Magic is generally subtle, and often takes time. Magic is more likely to urge things in a direction, or enhance something, than to blow it up, or instantly turn it into something else. Magic was also tied to places, or bound to objects, the One Ring, the lesser rings, various swords, etc. through crafting. Magic is woven onto the world so it is generally present, while also not being in your face. As far as other magic systems to look at, I would be curious for you to look at the magic system, or possibly systems of Terry Pratchett’s Discworld. It has gods, and demons, though on occasion these are the same beings, just wearing different hats, and witches, who all seem to have their own individual systems, and wizards, and sorcerers, who are kind of like wizards, only much more so, and “L” space, and those shops, and the luggage. Leaving you with a few quotes that seem appropriate. “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” Arthur C. Clarke “Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.” (Gehm’s Corollary) Barry Gehm Magic is that which we think is beyond our understanding, science is that which we think we can understand if we poke it enough, and technology is that which we have become so familiar with it no longer fascinates us, even if we no longer understand it.
Thanks so much for the breakdown. Its really interesting to see different types of magic categorised. As an aspiring fantasy writer, i find magic tough. You want it to be mysterious and unknowable, but also, to avoid deus ex machina as you point out it is a bit of LoTR, it needs to be defined. Iv always enjoyed the magic system(s) in the Rivers of London series.
When the difference between magia and goeteia was described, I immediately went, “Oh, so Gandalf was magia and Saruman (especially) was goeteia.” I then was immediately humbled by the correction that both can be good. (I frankly am not sure if I agree with Tolkien here; at the very least, I feel that goeteia has more of a risk than magia.) Something I do think, though, is that most of what we see with Saruman in LotR is goeteia, with his Voice, as shown at the parley of Orthanc, being the clearest sign of magia.
THANK YOU for this! Seriously!! The timing is also quite opportune, since I’ve been thinking a lot about magic and its role in modern fantasy lately, and trying to find a way to express my frustration with the apparent fixation so many people seem to have with how various authors define their “magic systems.” I’m a huge fan of more realistic and grounded fantasy settings, so when people recommend fantasy literature to me, they often mistake that for a love of “hard fantasy,” which in fact I mostly can’t stand. To me, when you treat magic like science, it loses something. Magic is NOT science – it’s magic – which I believe means that at least some part of it will always be immaterial and undefinable. The distinctions you’ve described here between Magia, Goetia, and indeed Faërie, really drive this idea home for me, but also help to define some of the difficulty I’ve been having in categorizing slightly “harder” magic systems I actually do like (a fantastic example of which is the one created by Susanna Clarke for her novel, Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell). Anyway, once again, thank you so much for making this article, and I will certainly be keeping an eye out for more!
From someone who loves Tolkien and his works, also a Christian myself but the Bible is full of magic. The supernatural is the corner stone of it and something that I personally believe in. I’ve experienced some paranormal events in my own life and they’ve happened with witnesses with me so that helps in getting somewhat outside validation on the experience rather than just my own. Reading Lord of the Rings does feel like reading a religious book and to me, it is.
The thing I always liked about magic in LOTR is how it mostly happens off camera. You occasionally see the sausage, but without really seeing how it’s made. Gandalf tells you about spells he cast, and gives a summary of his fight with the Balrog, but the magic you actually see is a few magic objects and some minor, off the cuff tricks. And I find that preferable to story-derailing descriptions of the intricacies of a system that doesn’t move the plot forward more than a few inches.
You touched upon Shippey’s book and I noticed that paperback copy, which was displayed in your shelf in your last article, is missing. An obvious fact that you picked it up to use it for this article essay. I notice these subtle differences as I am familiar with almost any and every Tolkien book, and all those yearly editions – whether books by Tolkien or on Tolkien.
One of the most interesting magic is the Will and the Word, from the Belgariad series (although Polgara said it was more like the Wish and the Word). In brief, the sorcerer think of what he wants and says to word to make it happen. There are limitations: – doing something by sorcery takes as much energy as to make it normally, so a sorcerer may exhaust himself by doing something hard, like pushing a big mass of air; – doing something impossible, like resurrecting someone who has a sword in the chest, may drain completely a sorcerer; – using sorcery create a “noise” that other sorcerers can “hear”, which is inconvenient in enemy territory; – undoing something, erasing it from existence, is forbidden and the sorcerer himself will be erased instead (killing someone is fine, it only transform someone from alive to not alive). Sorcerers often say that using sorcery is so much trouble, they only use it if there is no alternative. About the article itself, you did not dive enough into the nature of magic in Middle-Earth. My understanding is that magic is from the inner strength of people, not an outside tool. Using magic put some of the magician into his creation. Yavanna put so much of herself into the 2 trees of Valinor that she did not have the strength to do it a second time; Fëanor put a lot of himself into the Silmarils, and of course Sauron and the One ring. Men have the least of that inner force, so the creations of the Elves and Dwarves seem magical to them.
generally in many well established fantasy worlds with magic, I was always confused why there is a lack of technology/science. or at the very least, the technology advances very slowly or even stays stagnant, and the general reason people often gave for this was that “magic is better and there is no need for technology” but even if that were true, then technology would still be very useful because the vast majority of the people in these worlds cannot use magic at all.
A good example of the shift in perspective on supernatural powers you described is Cinderella. People online sometimes asked how she lost her shoe if it fit perfectly. In the Grimm fairytale there are two clear reasons for that: The surface level explanation is that the prince covered the steps in tar. But the deeper reason why anything in the fairytale works out is divine intervention. There are no fairy godmothers in the original. The abused child just stays humble and prays and God intervenes on her behalf. Ignoring for the moment whether it is good to teach children that the correct response to abuse is to just accept it and pray, it’s telling that the Disney movie changes the entire underlying mechanism of how the story works. Even in the USA (the most religious part of the Western World back then) in 1950, the explanation “Well, God did it.” wouldn’t fly.
As someone who is trying to finish an epic fantasy novel myself at the moment, I can say that magic is quite a tricky thing today, in the era of Brandon Sanderson. I, too, try to capture that sense of magic-is-the-core-of-the-world, that Tolkien did so masterfully, but it is really hard and I’m still trying to figure out how he did it. in my world, there are multiple types of magic that you can use depending on your species. However, the highest and purest form of magic is in the heart of all things and for humans (who are non-magical beings) it is only reachable through art. As you said, I think we as authors should sometimes not view magic as a system but as a part of the world that consistently appears in the story. However, this is very hard, because since Brandon Sanderson, magic is generally looked at with a very critical eye. In that sense, I’m really looking forward to your article on magic systems. It is always a pleasure to watch you, and great article as always. btw, sorry for my English. I’m German.
By far my favourite magic system in any medium is the one portrayed in Patricia A. McKillip’s “Alphabet of Thorns”. In this fantasy, Magic is never explained, nor is it explainable. It exists, and there are wizards who utilize it, but even Master Wizards are rightly “masters” by the admission that they do not, and CANNOT, ever fully know what precisely it is that they do. It feels very much right up Tolkein’s alley.
Interesting; i learned a few new things. Thanks be to you this day. 🙂 Speaking of dangers 15:20 ish… Thinking back on various characters from Melkor’s original musical rebellion, Saruman’s original ‘cockiness’ around the time of being chosen as a “Wizard candidate”, and of course Sauron’s continued lust to regain control of everything (his fear of someone else using “his” (Ring) too). Pride. Greed. In the end it all leads back to Fear, and certainly being overly proud does seem to lead some of the “Big Bads” in these stories ‘down The Dark Path’ (to The Dark Side), or at least attempting to be separate and/or superior to the rest (of the other beings that just wish to live in some form of ‘more relatively balanced harmony’).
An study of mysticism and metaphysics would be beneficial for your approach to these matters, Jess. In the end, Mr. Tolkien was as much mystic and metaphysician as he was anything else, I will suggest. Certainly, I know of no instance when he claimed such a perspective openly, but I am suggesting that it is woven into his work in a subtle manner, which is typical in the attempt to express the ineffable through our normal material means of communication. Myth and metaphor, symbolic representation, poetic allusion … these are among the ways and manner available to us to communicate our experience of that which cannot be compassed and bounded by material manifestation. All the good fortune possible go with you in this type of study, as, and if you take it up. It is not for the faint hearted, but is rewarding and fulfilling beyond anything else which may be experience, I will humbly offer from my own life’s path. Thank you again for your interesting commentary. It is a pleasure to follow along. Onward.
I loved this article! I get really put off by a lot of fantasy that obsesses about their magic system as if it’s just another discipline of science. For me magic works best as a story telling device when it leans into experience, connection, wonder and mystery. Sometimes I wonder if it is a folly of our contemporary thinking that everything needs to be explained, rather than just experienced. I love the magic of Miyazaki’s Studio Ghibli films, where nature is bathed in magic, often simultaneously epic and simple, Elif Shafak’s magic in the ordinary, and of course Ursula Le Guinn’s Earthsea Cycle needs a mention.
I loved the outro talking about the magic of tolkien work. You probably already know it but some ” spiritual’ and other magic movement like wicca or Obod love to talk about the magic of art, especially written and talked ones. Thats why you need “spell ” ( like in spelling ) to create magic, to cast a spell is manifesting the unatural. Always loved that. Who havent feel the magic of a grrat text, a wonderfull song or a deep poem. Anyway. Love your articles and hope you the best with this website. Take care and blessed be 🙏🏻✌🏻
Just found your website, Awesome articles. Just to add to the subject, “goetia” from the “Ars goetia” a XIIth century book on Demon summoning (itself part of the bigger Lemegeton Clavicula Salomonis a treaty on summoning magic) based on Solomons supposed imprisonement of demons. Goetia is opposed to Theurgia and Magia naturalia (Demonology vs Magic vs Religion ) especially in late Middle-Ages early Renaissance. Heinrich Cornelius Agrippa discusses those 3 aspects in his Three Books of Occult Philosophy. He said : “Now the parts of ceremonial magic are goetia and theurgia. Goetia is unfortunate, by the commerces of unclean spirits made up of the rites of wicked curiosities, unlawful charms, and deprecations, and is abandoned and execrated by all laws.” As such both Theurgia and Goetia are ceremonial in essence whereas Magia Naturalia deals with natural force directly it is “nothing else but the highest power of natural sciences” and could be considered as the early sciences. This treaty Lemegeton Clavicula Salomonis was rediscovered in the early XXth century through occultist group (Samuel Mathers and Aleister Crowley ) which helped those concept gain more attention.
It’s funny. I got into a discussion on just this subject with a group of friends of mine last year. The one takeaway that I got that defined Tolkien Magic vs most others (D&D, Dresden, most every other Fantasy setting) is that magic is not supernatural. It is a part of the natural world and It is through the working of natural processes that one can “do” magic. Can Gandolf shoot fire at a Nazgul. Yes. But it is his nature to be able to do that. When Elves hammer light into an object, that is a natural function of the world that they have learned how to do through many generations of men. While often times described as “soft”, magic in Arda is just part of the world like air and gravity. It is more subtle than some, but no less potent for it.
I always hated those comments like “wow great wizard Gandalf, you shone a light.” “Gandalf’s powers suck.” Like you’re missing the whole point of the story and the subtle, deeper meaning of Tolkien’s work. There is this weird modern obsession with ‘magic systems’. I prefer soft, subtle magic systems. Like in LOTR or ASOIAF. Magic feels mysterious, dangerous, unknowable.
I really liked the magic system in The Name of the wind by Patrick Rotfuss. The idea that the magic is not just conjured out of the blue but needs a physical catalyst, like, you need to hold a candle to make a fireball out of the flame (might be an exaggeration, as candles are weak source of heat and it never happened in the book but I digress). In the absence of catalyst the magic drains one’s life force, eventually leading to death.
Loved this article, Jess! My favorite aspect of magic in Tolkien’s worldbuilding, is his restraint and his rejection of using magic to write himself out of story or character dilemmas. I like when Gandalf could perhaps solve a problem with the application of his magic powers, yet chooses to rely on non-magic characters to sort out the problem instead for their own growth and benefit. As James Bond tells Q in SKYFALL, the art is not to pull the trigger, but to know when not to pull it.
You said “He was Catholic, a religion that frowns on magic and sorcery”…but priests say certain words over wine and bread and they become the body and blood of Christ and priests say certain words in the confessional and sins are forgiven…and certain rituals grant plenary indulgence…and certain statues and paintings weep and grant miracles…lots of magic, just their preferred type of magic. I do not mean this exclusively as an attack on Catholicism, but more of a point that objectively, a lot of people who poopoo magic simply prefer a different kind of
Jess, have you by chance heard of the mapping of lord of the rings in Minecraft? It is AMAZING how they have ported the books over into Minecraft, just thought you might not have had a suggestion like this before, would probably be a great article idea for you to do a digital tour, the work they have put into it is mind boggling, you could honestly get lost in the scale of it
2:25 I don’t like reading C.S. Lewis. Not because I don’t like C.S. Lewis. I think he’s amazing. I just continually say to myself after I’ve read pretty much anything he wrote “There’s no way that could have been written any better. That was perfectly communicated.” And I know I’ll never be that good at anything, and that’s kind of depressing. 😂😜
For a fuller explanation of CS Lewis’s idea of magic, you can’t do better than the discussion in That Hideous Strength. Modern professor discusses it directly with resurrected Merlin, and says that magic/magia that was permissible before is more evil now than it was, as all good gets gooder and evil gets eviler the closer we get to judgment day.
While it seems obvious to me that Tolkien understood the history of magic on a high level, he didn’t explain it well. This topic is one of my areas of specialization so let me see if I can clarify somewhat. The Latin term “magia” was associated with a Persian sect during the Roman era whose interest in selling talismans and using astrology became famous. They entered Roman marketplaces and prophesied and sold charms, but were imitated by locals– often badly. This term is associated with the wise men (wizards) who brought gifts to the infant Jesus in the gospels. By 100AD, around the time of the writing of the gospels, they had become very controversial and it’s no longer clear what their presence means in the gospels. This lead to an ambiguity– are they supposed to be wonder-workers passing the torch to Jesus, or shady con men confessing their sins? The terms magus, magician, and wizard are interchangeable. The Greek term “goes” and “goetia” was associated with a much less reputable practice of wonder-working. The original term probably comes from professional mourners who would be hired to beef up the wailing at funerals, but it later meant to describe people who conjured up the spirits of the dead to speak with the living. By the medieval period Catholicism insisted that only deceitful demons could be conjured, that ghosts were not real, and the spirits of the dead inhabited Heaven, Hell and Limbo exclusively. This is how the term necromancy transformed from something like a gruesome spin on mediumship to unambiguous demonic conjuration.
The other thing that the great world faiths emphasize is that human beings, as is, do not deserve and cannot be trusted with that much power, and that the first thing that needs to be addressed is their own conduct and character, not reaching for more power just because. Power as such is a temptation, which requires exemplary self-control to avoid using selfishly and destructively. Most occult systems, at least that I know about, are about seeking power for the individual, perhaps in the name of “freedom”, regardless of their character or intentions. This is also true in different ways with martial arts, although some come with philosophies and spiritual cosmologies which call for self-control.
For magic systems: I have not been able to read this book yet, but at the recommendation of others I would suggest the magic in the book Tigana. It’s not so much a system as it is a central element to the plot, a magical event that goes on to define the story, but I’d be interested to hear your takes on it. And maybe by the time you’ve put out the article I’ll have had time to read the book as well lol