What do you think?
Rate this book
The Philosophy of Tolkien: The Worldview Behind The Lord of the Rings
To learn more about J.R.R. Tolkien visit Wh ile nothing can equal or replace the adventure in reading Tolkien’s masterwork, The Lord of the Rings , Peter Kreeft says that the journey into its underlying philosophy can be another exhilarating adventure.
Thus, Kreeft takes the reader on a voyage of discovery into the philosophical bones of Middle earth. He organizes the philosophical themes in The Lord of the Rings into 50 categories, accompanied by over 1,000 references to the text of Lord.Since many of the great questions of philosophy are included in the 50-theme outline, this book can also be read as an engaging introduction to philosophy. For each of the philosophical topics in Lord, Kreeft presents tools by which they can be understood. Illustrated.
Thus, Kreeft takes the reader on a voyage of discovery into the philosophical bones of Middle earth. He organizes the philosophical themes in The Lord of the Rings into 50 categories, accompanied by over 1,000 references to the text of Lord.Since many of the great questions of philosophy are included in the 50-theme outline, this book can also be read as an engaging introduction to philosophy. For each of the philosophical topics in Lord, Kreeft presents tools by which they can be understood. Illustrated.
237 pages, Paperback
First published October 1, 2005
165 people are currently reading
3734 people want to read
About the author
Peter Kreeft
197 books1,070 followersPeter Kreeft is an American philosopher and prolific author of over eighty books on Christian theology, philosophy, and apologetics. A convert from Protestantism to Catholicism, his journey was shaped by his study of Church history, Gothic architecture, and Thomistic thought. He earned his BA from Calvin College, an MA and PhD from Fordham University, and pursued further studies at Yale. Since 1965, he has taught philosophy at Boston College and also at The King’s College. Kreeft is known for formulating “Twenty Arguments for the Existence of God” with Ronald K. Tacelli, featured in their Handbook of Christian Apologetics. A strong advocate for unity among Christians, he emphasizes shared belief in Christ over denominational differences.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 125 reviews
June 19, 2011
This book has been on my reading "wish list" since it came out a few years ago. I finally made time to read it, and I'm so glad I did!
As Kreeft — a Roman Catholic theologian and a professor of philosophy at Boston University — points out in the introduction, The Lord of the Rings is widely considered the greatest book of the twentieth century, though not all literary critics agree. Of course, I would certainly have to join the ranks of those showering accolades upon Tolkien's masterpiece!
This book is exactly what you might expect from its title: a study of the philosophical themes and underlying worldview behind the story of LOTR. Many authors have attempted similar books seeking to cash in on the story's popularity, but few have done it well. Thankfully, Kreeft has given us an outstanding work that is both educational and enjoyable; academically substantial yet easily accessible. At times, his wit and humor even had me laughing out loud!
The format of the book is simple: Fifty philosophical questions are separated into 13 categories. Kreeft explains the meaning and importance of each question, and then shows how the question is answered using quotes from LOTR, The Hobbit, and The Silmarillion. Tolkien's thoughts on the matter are further explored, making use of his other writings — most notably letters he had written, as well as an essay entitled On Fairy-Stories. Each question's section ends with a quote from the writings of C.S. Lewis — Tolkien's closest friend and fellow Oxford professor — which directly states the same philosophy. The two had great influence on one another, and throughout this book we see how closely they paralleled one another due to what Kreeft calls their "common familiarity with and respect for the same sources in the great tradition, that is, pre-modern Western literature, philosophy, and religion."
As someone not particularly well-versed in the academic field of philosophy, I enjoyed very much this foray into the method of investigating philosophical issues. Indeed, "an introduction to philosophy" is one of the four uses of this book suggested by its author, though that is not the reason I initially chose to read it. Still, while some of the questions asked in this book are particular to LOTR, most are broad in scope, and could be applied to any religion, cultural artifact, or work of literature. At many points in the book, Tolkien's views are compared and contrasted with those of history's great philosophers, from Plato to Satre to Nietzsche.
Kreeft's logic is impeccable, and the systematic progression of thought in this book presents a very strong case for his conclusions. Though I do not wish to spoil for you the joy of discovering these conclusions for yourself as you read through this book, I feel it won't be giving too much away to say that Kreeft concludes that Tolkien's philosophy is unabashedly Christian, and specifically Catholic — something Tolkien himself has claimed in so many words. While Christ (or religion itself, for that matter) is nowhere explicit in the text of LOTR, Christianity is implicit throughout the story in the philosophical worldview which undergirds it.
I nearly wore out the pen I was using to underline memorable and thought-provoking lines from the book. Time does not allow me to share all of the truly great insights Kreeft provides, but there was one thing that especially caught my interest. This was where Kreeft pointed out Tolkien's portrayal of the Old Testament pre-figuring of the Messiah as prophet, priest, and king, represented by Gandalf, Frodo, and Aragorn, respectively. Not allegorically, of course, but in the sense that each of those characters was something of a "Christ figure" (down to the fact that all three had apparent deaths and resurrections in LOTR), exemplifying lives of self-sacrifice and virtue, albeit in very different manners.
If you are a fan of The Lord of the Rings, you will greatly enjoy and benefit from this book. It will give you a brand new understanding of what may well be your favorite story... not to mention an itch to read the trilogy again! Now where did I put my copy of The Fellowship of the Ring?
As Kreeft — a Roman Catholic theologian and a professor of philosophy at Boston University — points out in the introduction, The Lord of the Rings is widely considered the greatest book of the twentieth century, though not all literary critics agree. Of course, I would certainly have to join the ranks of those showering accolades upon Tolkien's masterpiece!
This book is exactly what you might expect from its title: a study of the philosophical themes and underlying worldview behind the story of LOTR. Many authors have attempted similar books seeking to cash in on the story's popularity, but few have done it well. Thankfully, Kreeft has given us an outstanding work that is both educational and enjoyable; academically substantial yet easily accessible. At times, his wit and humor even had me laughing out loud!
The format of the book is simple: Fifty philosophical questions are separated into 13 categories. Kreeft explains the meaning and importance of each question, and then shows how the question is answered using quotes from LOTR, The Hobbit, and The Silmarillion. Tolkien's thoughts on the matter are further explored, making use of his other writings — most notably letters he had written, as well as an essay entitled On Fairy-Stories. Each question's section ends with a quote from the writings of C.S. Lewis — Tolkien's closest friend and fellow Oxford professor — which directly states the same philosophy. The two had great influence on one another, and throughout this book we see how closely they paralleled one another due to what Kreeft calls their "common familiarity with and respect for the same sources in the great tradition, that is, pre-modern Western literature, philosophy, and religion."
As someone not particularly well-versed in the academic field of philosophy, I enjoyed very much this foray into the method of investigating philosophical issues. Indeed, "an introduction to philosophy" is one of the four uses of this book suggested by its author, though that is not the reason I initially chose to read it. Still, while some of the questions asked in this book are particular to LOTR, most are broad in scope, and could be applied to any religion, cultural artifact, or work of literature. At many points in the book, Tolkien's views are compared and contrasted with those of history's great philosophers, from Plato to Satre to Nietzsche.
Kreeft's logic is impeccable, and the systematic progression of thought in this book presents a very strong case for his conclusions. Though I do not wish to spoil for you the joy of discovering these conclusions for yourself as you read through this book, I feel it won't be giving too much away to say that Kreeft concludes that Tolkien's philosophy is unabashedly Christian, and specifically Catholic — something Tolkien himself has claimed in so many words. While Christ (or religion itself, for that matter) is nowhere explicit in the text of LOTR, Christianity is implicit throughout the story in the philosophical worldview which undergirds it.
I nearly wore out the pen I was using to underline memorable and thought-provoking lines from the book. Time does not allow me to share all of the truly great insights Kreeft provides, but there was one thing that especially caught my interest. This was where Kreeft pointed out Tolkien's portrayal of the Old Testament pre-figuring of the Messiah as prophet, priest, and king, represented by Gandalf, Frodo, and Aragorn, respectively. Not allegorically, of course, but in the sense that each of those characters was something of a "Christ figure" (down to the fact that all three had apparent deaths and resurrections in LOTR), exemplifying lives of self-sacrifice and virtue, albeit in very different manners.
If you are a fan of The Lord of the Rings, you will greatly enjoy and benefit from this book. It will give you a brand new understanding of what may well be your favorite story... not to mention an itch to read the trilogy again! Now where did I put my copy of The Fellowship of the Ring?
August 1, 2019
Where do I start. In writing this book, Kreeft is intellectually dishonest, dismissive, and condescending, and he demonstrates exceedingly poor scholarship.
Normally I'd keep a negative review like this to myself, but because Kreeft is a public figure and this is a book that people are likely to read and be influenced by (in part because of Kreeft's position as a professor of philosophy at a notable college), I feel like it's important to add this review to the list.
Strap in...
My criticisms. First, the premise of the book is intellectually dishonest. This is not a philosophy of Tokien. It is the theology of Kreeft. He does not present things as "what Tokien believed", but rather presents certain claims as true and uses LOTR to "prove" the truth of those claims. It's ludicrous. Fiction doesn't demonstrate -- it illustrates. And it doesn't illustrate truths but beliefs. While there is certainly a worldview of LOTR, and while Kreeft does make assumptions that Tokien certainly shared (the assumptions of Christianity, mostly), LOTR is not a Christian world. Christianity was an influence, but Kreeft uses LOTR to demonstrate his own beliefs. If he were honestly trying to demonstrate the worldview of LOTR, he would have analyzed LOTR much, much more deeply and intricately. We get far more of Kreeft's opinion than of an LOTR analysis.
Secondly, the use of the word "philosophy" in the title drives me bonkers. This is a theology. Kreeft uses philosophical fields and themes to examine Tokien's theology -- philosophy is a tool he uses to make theological arguments.
Thirdly, the tone. DEAR HEAVENS, THE TONE. Kreeft dismisses every philosophical position that conflicts with his own. There is no room in his presentation for the validity of other interpretations of things that we cannot know for certain. I am all for holding opinions, even of opinions that can't be proven (such is life), but this was incredibly off-putting and egregious, especially for a professor of philosophy.
Finally, Kreeft relies very heavily on C.S. Lewis's theology to argue for Tokien's. In some ways, this makes sense. Lewis wrote far more theological/apologetic works than Tokien, and the two were good friends and fellow Christians -- surely they shared some big, overarching beliefs. But Lewis featured so prominently, and primarily in defense of Kreeft's stated opinions, that Tokien was lost far more than he was found in those passages.
Ok, after all that negative, I do have a positive. It will sound passive-aggressive, but I mean it sincerely. Encountering different arguments, even poor ones, for claims to truth is helpful and good. It sparks new ways of arguing for what is real, true, and logical. It forces us to clarify arguments in new and slightly different ways, which leads us to make better arguments or to modify our beliefs if we come up with something we can't explain or argue well for. It also makes us better at communicating with people we disagree with. Kreeft's rhetorical style is not one that honestly engages with truth, but only with established, personal, and biased opinions. That in itself is an important style to learn to identify.
I am absolutely shocked that Kreeft is a professor of philosophy at such a reputable college. His utter disdain for the field should be disqualifying. I would be interested in hearing his actual philosophical arguments and engaging with them on an intellectually honest level, but Kreeft does not provide that opportunity in this book. This book offered so much on the title and delivered almost nothing substantive. Such a disappointment.
Normally I'd keep a negative review like this to myself, but because Kreeft is a public figure and this is a book that people are likely to read and be influenced by (in part because of Kreeft's position as a professor of philosophy at a notable college), I feel like it's important to add this review to the list.
Strap in...
My criticisms. First, the premise of the book is intellectually dishonest. This is not a philosophy of Tokien. It is the theology of Kreeft. He does not present things as "what Tokien believed", but rather presents certain claims as true and uses LOTR to "prove" the truth of those claims. It's ludicrous. Fiction doesn't demonstrate -- it illustrates. And it doesn't illustrate truths but beliefs. While there is certainly a worldview of LOTR, and while Kreeft does make assumptions that Tokien certainly shared (the assumptions of Christianity, mostly), LOTR is not a Christian world. Christianity was an influence, but Kreeft uses LOTR to demonstrate his own beliefs. If he were honestly trying to demonstrate the worldview of LOTR, he would have analyzed LOTR much, much more deeply and intricately. We get far more of Kreeft's opinion than of an LOTR analysis.
Secondly, the use of the word "philosophy" in the title drives me bonkers. This is a theology. Kreeft uses philosophical fields and themes to examine Tokien's theology -- philosophy is a tool he uses to make theological arguments.
Thirdly, the tone. DEAR HEAVENS, THE TONE. Kreeft dismisses every philosophical position that conflicts with his own. There is no room in his presentation for the validity of other interpretations of things that we cannot know for certain. I am all for holding opinions, even of opinions that can't be proven (such is life), but this was incredibly off-putting and egregious, especially for a professor of philosophy.
Finally, Kreeft relies very heavily on C.S. Lewis's theology to argue for Tokien's. In some ways, this makes sense. Lewis wrote far more theological/apologetic works than Tokien, and the two were good friends and fellow Christians -- surely they shared some big, overarching beliefs. But Lewis featured so prominently, and primarily in defense of Kreeft's stated opinions, that Tokien was lost far more than he was found in those passages.
Ok, after all that negative, I do have a positive. It will sound passive-aggressive, but I mean it sincerely. Encountering different arguments, even poor ones, for claims to truth is helpful and good. It sparks new ways of arguing for what is real, true, and logical. It forces us to clarify arguments in new and slightly different ways, which leads us to make better arguments or to modify our beliefs if we come up with something we can't explain or argue well for. It also makes us better at communicating with people we disagree with. Kreeft's rhetorical style is not one that honestly engages with truth, but only with established, personal, and biased opinions. That in itself is an important style to learn to identify.
I am absolutely shocked that Kreeft is a professor of philosophy at such a reputable college. His utter disdain for the field should be disqualifying. I would be interested in hearing his actual philosophical arguments and engaging with them on an intellectually honest level, but Kreeft does not provide that opportunity in this book. This book offered so much on the title and delivered almost nothing substantive. Such a disappointment.
December 9, 2015
Peter J. Kreeft’s The Philosophy of Tolkien is a really good book. While he uses this text to reaffirm his own belief in a Christian god, and these elves are not really Christian, we feel certain that his conclusions are an accurate reflection of Tolkien’s own beliefs, for he was a Catholic. Often, it seems to these elves that Mr. Kreeft while appearing to use logic and reason for his affirmation of his Christian beliefs actually, at the last moment, does a sort of intellectual slight of hand and ends up with faith rather than fact for his final assertions. However, that doesn’t bother us at all. Being lovers of Tolkien’s works and having an undergraduate degree in Philosophy and Religion we find this book quite well written and intriguing, even if it is not always logical. But then, we are elves and Mr. Kreeft is clearly, like Tolkien, a hobbit and our worldviews tend to be different. Still, we know that in sharing Middle Earth with these hobbits we are dealing with good, decent folk, and really what more can one ask for?
The Silver Elves authors of Faerie Unfolding: The Cosmic Expression of the Divine.
The Silver Elves authors of Faerie Unfolding: The Cosmic Expression of the Divine.
December 20, 2021
This was like a class in applied philosophy. Peter Kreeft looks at the philosophies embodied in The Lord of the Rings and also explains basic philosophical concepts along the way. This is a book that examines The Lord of the Rings in a different way than other books I've read about it and I enjoyed it a lot.
February 11, 2023
"Exploring Tolkien's world was not just interesting (that all-purpose meaningless euphemism). It was not even just fascinating. It was sheer joy. For we knew that here we had touched truth. This book was a homecoming. This book broke our hearts..."
The author delves into the rich and complex mythology of Middle-earth, examining the powerful symbols and archetypes that pervade throughout the story. He explores the concept of evil and its manifestation in the form of Sauron and the Ring, as well as the struggle between good and evil that is a central theme of the story. He also looks at the idea of sacrifice, the power of friendship, and the role of fate and destiny in the lives of the characters.
The book also sheds light on the Catholic beliefs and values that were a fundamental part of Tolkien's worldview, and how they influenced his writing. The author examines the themes of sin, grace, and redemption, as well as the idea of providence and the guidance of a higher power. He shows how these themes are reflected in the story, from the journey of Frodo and the other hobbits to the ultimate victory of good over evil...
The author delves into the rich and complex mythology of Middle-earth, examining the powerful symbols and archetypes that pervade throughout the story. He explores the concept of evil and its manifestation in the form of Sauron and the Ring, as well as the struggle between good and evil that is a central theme of the story. He also looks at the idea of sacrifice, the power of friendship, and the role of fate and destiny in the lives of the characters.
The book also sheds light on the Catholic beliefs and values that were a fundamental part of Tolkien's worldview, and how they influenced his writing. The author examines the themes of sin, grace, and redemption, as well as the idea of providence and the guidance of a higher power. He shows how these themes are reflected in the story, from the journey of Frodo and the other hobbits to the ultimate victory of good over evil...
March 25, 2023
Peter Kreeft has blown my mind with his book on Philosophy within Tolkien's works and personal letters. For someone who is not well versed in the terminology of philosophy, this book served to be both a fabulous (and understandable) explanation of what philosophy is, and a deep dwelling on how philosophy impacts the world.
The way that Kreeft highlights certain aspects of the Lord of the Rings, The Hobbit, and The Similarion, blew me away. I could not put my finger on what drew me deeper into those books until the deeper meanings were laid out for me. The book has inspired me to delve deeper into Tolkien's works, and also the film adaptations of those works.
I would recommend this book to anybody who would like to know about philosophy OR would like to know more about Tolkien's world. I also recommend this book as an academic meditation on the Life of Christ.
Spoiler alert: Tolkien was a Catholic and the Lord of the Rings is a Catholic book (even though it is not an allegory).
This review may be found at OurLadyandSheen.wordpress.com
The way that Kreeft highlights certain aspects of the Lord of the Rings, The Hobbit, and The Similarion, blew me away. I could not put my finger on what drew me deeper into those books until the deeper meanings were laid out for me. The book has inspired me to delve deeper into Tolkien's works, and also the film adaptations of those works.
I would recommend this book to anybody who would like to know about philosophy OR would like to know more about Tolkien's world. I also recommend this book as an academic meditation on the Life of Christ.
Spoiler alert: Tolkien was a Catholic and the Lord of the Rings is a Catholic book (even though it is not an allegory).
This review may be found at OurLadyandSheen.wordpress.com
August 5, 2016
The book started with a great promise to me: A discussion about Tolkien's philosophy, which is certainly not in line with today's popular worldview and values. But the book quickly descended into a Christian and Catholic empty propaganda. The writer apparently wrote this book not in order to discuss and think about Tolkien and his worldview, but rather to proselytize his own Catholic faith. I would have expected a philosophy book to raise more questions than answers; here the exclamation marks rule.
Mid-way the book gets really repetitive with the same themes repeating over and over. In some instances, even the same quotes were quoted again. But yet again, when your goal is to preach, repetition is necessary.
Mid-way the book gets really repetitive with the same themes repeating over and over. In some instances, even the same quotes were quoted again. But yet again, when your goal is to preach, repetition is necessary.
July 3, 2024
Kreeft does a great job of applying Tolkien’s thoughts, found in LOTR as well as published letters, to discuss dozens of questions. Some are abstract (What is truth?) and others are much more down to earth (What is the power of friendship?). The more abstract questions made my head spin, but everything else was thoughtful and referenced many other sources. I enjoyed this book more than the last one I read from Kreeft, perhaps because it is longer and has more room to fully expound his ideas. 4.5 stars
October 6, 2022
Just great
March 21, 2022
I had never read anything by Kreeft before, and the terseness caught me off guard and felt a bit abrupt at times. The book felt disjointed in places, because he moves so quickly through so many huge topics. When I finished, I felt that I had garnered a lot of nice tidbits.
December 31, 2022
Another great book to understand the author.
Agreeing or not, liking it or not, this and Sanctifying Myth are great material to comprehend Middle-Earth, better than a whole book of appendices.
Agreeing or not, liking it or not, this and Sanctifying Myth are great material to comprehend Middle-Earth, better than a whole book of appendices.
May 3, 2021
In the beginning of this book, the author goes through great lengths to argue that stories are a way to do philosophy by making it concrete and convincing not through reason, but through "the back door of the heart." In this vein he equates LOTR with books like Sartre's 'No Exit' and Camus's 'The Plague'. However, these latter two books served to illustrate an already existing philosophy supported by actual arguments in other works. They did not contain arguments in themselves. Tolkien had no explicit philosophy he meant to illustrate by writing LOTR, at least not philosophy in the formal sense of the word. What did bleed through LOTR and what this books uncovers is his philosophy in the conventional sense, meaning his outlook on life, which above all is his Christian faith. Nevertheless, this book (written by a philosophy professor no less) presents itself as an account of Tolkien's philosophy. Tolkien was many things, but he was not a philosopher. The title of this book is therefore deceptive. 'The theology of Tolkien' or 'The themes of Tolkien' would be much more accurate.
Throughout the book the author discusses Tolkien's "philosophy" by answering several often heavily biased questions. Most of the time, the answers are not derived directly from Tolkien's works, but from other authors, notably C.S. Lewis (at times I wondered if I was reading a book about Lewis instead of Tolkien). Tolkien's agreement with the views of Lewis and others is deemed implicit in his work, but this is often merely assumed rather than demonstrated. The "arguments" the author thusly uncovers are then contrasted to other philosophical views (e.g. free will vs. determinism, pacifism vs. Just War theory, etc.), but these contrasting views are quickly discarded, because they are presumed to be defeated by "arguments" heavy with unprovable Christian assumptions. Look, I'm a Christian myself and I believe in things like free will on a Biblical basis, but one can't argue against an atheist determinist by arguing that free will exists because God created it. Despite being a philosophy professor, the author engages in theology more than actual philosophy.
The reason I go on about this point, is because most reviews I read singularly praise this book while ignoring this major flaw. As much as I agree with the conclusions put forth in this book (though not all of them), the arguments leading to them I can't call philosophy, because they rely on faith rather than solid argumentation most of the time. Despite all this, I did enjoy this book for what it actually was, namely a thorough exploration of the themes and ideas implicit in the masterpiece that is LOTR. Not all of it was new to me, but what was new gave me new insight and a renewed appreciation for this great story and for that I'll give it four stars.
Throughout the book the author discusses Tolkien's "philosophy" by answering several often heavily biased questions. Most of the time, the answers are not derived directly from Tolkien's works, but from other authors, notably C.S. Lewis (at times I wondered if I was reading a book about Lewis instead of Tolkien). Tolkien's agreement with the views of Lewis and others is deemed implicit in his work, but this is often merely assumed rather than demonstrated. The "arguments" the author thusly uncovers are then contrasted to other philosophical views (e.g. free will vs. determinism, pacifism vs. Just War theory, etc.), but these contrasting views are quickly discarded, because they are presumed to be defeated by "arguments" heavy with unprovable Christian assumptions. Look, I'm a Christian myself and I believe in things like free will on a Biblical basis, but one can't argue against an atheist determinist by arguing that free will exists because God created it. Despite being a philosophy professor, the author engages in theology more than actual philosophy.
The reason I go on about this point, is because most reviews I read singularly praise this book while ignoring this major flaw. As much as I agree with the conclusions put forth in this book (though not all of them), the arguments leading to them I can't call philosophy, because they rely on faith rather than solid argumentation most of the time. Despite all this, I did enjoy this book for what it actually was, namely a thorough exploration of the themes and ideas implicit in the masterpiece that is LOTR. Not all of it was new to me, but what was new gave me new insight and a renewed appreciation for this great story and for that I'll give it four stars.
January 23, 2015
"Like Socrates, Buddha, and Lao Tzu, Frodo did not see Christ, yet somehow beloved."
"In the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing, there was light and beauty for ever beyond its reach."
-J. R. R. Tolkien, Lord of the Rings as quoted in. "The Philosophy of Tolkien"
I thought this book would examine Tolkien's work through a philosophical lens, but instead it was a device for the author to espouse his philosophical, political, and religious (old-school conservative catholic bemoaning big government for ignoring family, traditions, and the sanctity of life) views through the use of a fantasy book which the author purports represents the truth. The book is supported by ample evidence supporting this conceit as Tolkein believed fairy tails served this function and thought LOTR did as well.
Throughout the book the author spoke definitively about Christian tenets as if they are verified facts and denounces rationalism and the scientific method. This is not a fair criticism as the Peter J. Kreeft is a heralded Christian author. Anyway, this is not exactly what I signed up for. This book was actually given to me by my conservative, traditional, and devoutly Catholic friend, and I can see why he enjoyed it. However, the author makes a convincing argument that LOTR is a fantasy novel doused in Christian values and ideals. A lot of people would find this idea preposterous, but Tolkein was a devout Catholic and although he is not as religiously explicit as his contemporary, C.S. Lewis, I'm certain his faith influenced his writing to a great degree. I mean he did refer to LOTR as a Catholic book.
"In the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing, there was light and beauty for ever beyond its reach."
-J. R. R. Tolkien, Lord of the Rings as quoted in. "The Philosophy of Tolkien"
I thought this book would examine Tolkien's work through a philosophical lens, but instead it was a device for the author to espouse his philosophical, political, and religious (old-school conservative catholic bemoaning big government for ignoring family, traditions, and the sanctity of life) views through the use of a fantasy book which the author purports represents the truth. The book is supported by ample evidence supporting this conceit as Tolkein believed fairy tails served this function and thought LOTR did as well.
Throughout the book the author spoke definitively about Christian tenets as if they are verified facts and denounces rationalism and the scientific method. This is not a fair criticism as the Peter J. Kreeft is a heralded Christian author. Anyway, this is not exactly what I signed up for. This book was actually given to me by my conservative, traditional, and devoutly Catholic friend, and I can see why he enjoyed it. However, the author makes a convincing argument that LOTR is a fantasy novel doused in Christian values and ideals. A lot of people would find this idea preposterous, but Tolkein was a devout Catholic and although he is not as religiously explicit as his contemporary, C.S. Lewis, I'm certain his faith influenced his writing to a great degree. I mean he did refer to LOTR as a Catholic book.
May 16, 2016
I had to read it throughout the school semester. Whatever redeeming qualities the novel had, presenting accurately Tolkien's philosophy, was ruined by the author providing his own religious opinion. I would have preferred an objective view of Tolkien instead of one-sided, believe-this-or-you-are-wrong, religious propaganda in school.
June 21, 2017
A very engaging peek into the themes strewn throughout Tolkien's trilogy. Insightful and very well organized.
September 11, 2020
This is the best book I’ve ever read on Tolkien. Read Tolkien first. But if you want to read ABOUT Tolkien, and his thoroughly Christian vision of things, I can’t recommend this book by Peter Kreeft enough.
Kreeft is a familiar name among Christian philosophers and apologists. He is a very committed Roman Catholic and often points out these aspects of Tolkien’s work. But he also presents a fairly sympathetically broad Christian view as well.
The book also serves as a broad introduction to the subject of philosophy and Kreeft often quotes from C. S. Lewis in making his points from Tolkien. So any Lewis fan should enjoy this work as well.
Highly, highly recommended for those interested in the philosophical and worldview aspects of Tolkien’s works.
Kreeft is a familiar name among Christian philosophers and apologists. He is a very committed Roman Catholic and often points out these aspects of Tolkien’s work. But he also presents a fairly sympathetically broad Christian view as well.
The book also serves as a broad introduction to the subject of philosophy and Kreeft often quotes from C. S. Lewis in making his points from Tolkien. So any Lewis fan should enjoy this work as well.
Highly, highly recommended for those interested in the philosophical and worldview aspects of Tolkien’s works.
February 17, 2020
My husband has been trying to get me to read this book for years. For good reason, it seems. The author makes a convincing case for Tolkien’s philosophy of life using quotes from The Lord of the Rings series as well as his letters and his essay, “On Fairy Stories.” He goes through 50 philosophical questions on various topics and gives Tolkien’s answer. He also briefly touches on opposing answers, so this is good just to learn some basic philosophy.
I found this to be thoroughly interesting and thought provoking. It has made me want to read The Lord of the Rings again. There were one or two instances where I was having a hard time deciphering his point. I also felt like he contradicted himself a couple times. There was one fact from The Hobbit that he got noticeably wrong. And I was none to happy to see him diss on George MacDonald, which I think is just bad form when your writing a book about a guy who admired the man’s work. Despite those minor irritants, this has a lot of good and is definitely worth a read if you’re a Lord of the Rings fan.
I found this to be thoroughly interesting and thought provoking. It has made me want to read The Lord of the Rings again. There were one or two instances where I was having a hard time deciphering his point. I also felt like he contradicted himself a couple times. There was one fact from The Hobbit that he got noticeably wrong. And I was none to happy to see him diss on George MacDonald, which I think is just bad form when your writing a book about a guy who admired the man’s work. Despite those minor irritants, this has a lot of good and is definitely worth a read if you’re a Lord of the Rings fan.
October 8, 2022
A good guide of dissecting the symbolisms and abstracting underlying principles from LoR book series, especially for someone who has no philosophical background and/or is not very familiar with the general storyline. For an incorrigible Romanist & Romanticist, however, the contents are rather basic. Also, for a book on the worldview of Tolkien, perhaps there are a little too many C. S. Lewis quotes (not that I would complain about it though).
December 21, 2023
An informative and fun-to-read introduction to Tolkien's philosophy. Categorized by different philosophical topics and questions and heavily informed by Tolkien's own letters and the writings of C.S. Lewis, G.K. Chesterton, and all the homies. This book actually makes me want to finish the Silmarillion (it's been eight years💀)!!
July 23, 2021
I'm disappointed to rate this as I did: I was excited to read this book. Of course I love Tolkien... and I also love Peter Kreeft, regularly recommending his lectures (on a podcast under the channel www.peterkreeft.com) to anyone who might be interested. His apple argument against abortion is incredibly compelling, and everyone, whether pro-life or pro-abortion, should engage with it.
This book, however... For the few friends who are interested or the (possibly slightly) more who are interested in reading me when I'm annoyed...
First of all, as other reviewers rightly note, the title is misleading. In most sections, what is on display in this book is not the philosophy of Tolkien, but rather a philosophy 101 course by Peter Kreeft, in which he shares what HE thinks about various philosophical subjects and then uses one or at most two Tolkien quotes (mostly picked from the Letters) as a finale to the section. The Tolkien quotes were the best parts of each section, but I could have just as easily gotten to all of them by just reading Letters again myself. Thus, I often felt I was not picking up anything new.
The fact that Kreeft also used Lewis quotes to end each section adds to the growing feeling that this book is not very interested in a robust treatment of Tolkien's philosophy at all. If, in your book about Tolkien, you have as many Lewis quotes as Tolkien quotes in many subsections, sometimes MORE Lewis quotes than Tolkien quotes... something is off with the presentation.
Added to this is the fact that some major claims lack support; he assumes agreement where there is none. Poetry is fallen music, he says, and prose is fallen poetry. Ehhh? First of all, are we talking about Tolkien still? Secondly, from where did you pick up that idea? Is it biblical or from Tolkien maybe or Lewis or... oh, you're not going to talk any more about it at all? This sort of claim-dropping happened so many times that I began to have frustrated visions of a smart philosophy professor who can rattle off this sort of thing in lectures because his intimidated/overawed freshmen are being carried along by his style and force of personality alone. "Well, I AIN'T A FRESHMAN," was my increasingly cynical response.
This tendency was even more frustrating because sometimes he was just plain wrong. At one point he says Bilbo defeats Smaug. (???) At two points he makes the gigantic claim (without one word of support) that Tom Bombadil and Goldberry are actually the Valar Aule and Yavanna. As a lay-Tolkien scholar myself, I can NOT think of any evidence for this claim, but I CAN very easily think of many strokes against it. This is sloppy. If you have a claim, don't just lob it out there and dance away before any of your freshmen have a chance to disagree with it. It's irresponsible and smacks more of bluster than truth.
The reason this book got taken up to two stars is that when Kreeft actually does literary analysis, he is very good at it. I would even call some sections "soaring." Among those are the Anthropology chapter, the section in which he analyzes the use of promises in Lord of the Rings, and the very convincing section in which he links the symbolism of the Ring to Nietzschean philosophy. I read these with delight and a rather blown mind... and I made copies of them to keep, because, with my disappointment at the rest of the book, it will not be staying on my shelf.
This book, however... For the few friends who are interested or the (possibly slightly) more who are interested in reading me when I'm annoyed...
First of all, as other reviewers rightly note, the title is misleading. In most sections, what is on display in this book is not the philosophy of Tolkien, but rather a philosophy 101 course by Peter Kreeft, in which he shares what HE thinks about various philosophical subjects and then uses one or at most two Tolkien quotes (mostly picked from the Letters) as a finale to the section. The Tolkien quotes were the best parts of each section, but I could have just as easily gotten to all of them by just reading Letters again myself. Thus, I often felt I was not picking up anything new.
The fact that Kreeft also used Lewis quotes to end each section adds to the growing feeling that this book is not very interested in a robust treatment of Tolkien's philosophy at all. If, in your book about Tolkien, you have as many Lewis quotes as Tolkien quotes in many subsections, sometimes MORE Lewis quotes than Tolkien quotes... something is off with the presentation.
Added to this is the fact that some major claims lack support; he assumes agreement where there is none. Poetry is fallen music, he says, and prose is fallen poetry. Ehhh? First of all, are we talking about Tolkien still? Secondly, from where did you pick up that idea? Is it biblical or from Tolkien maybe or Lewis or... oh, you're not going to talk any more about it at all? This sort of claim-dropping happened so many times that I began to have frustrated visions of a smart philosophy professor who can rattle off this sort of thing in lectures because his intimidated/overawed freshmen are being carried along by his style and force of personality alone. "Well, I AIN'T A FRESHMAN," was my increasingly cynical response.
This tendency was even more frustrating because sometimes he was just plain wrong. At one point he says Bilbo defeats Smaug. (???) At two points he makes the gigantic claim (without one word of support) that Tom Bombadil and Goldberry are actually the Valar Aule and Yavanna. As a lay-Tolkien scholar myself, I can NOT think of any evidence for this claim, but I CAN very easily think of many strokes against it. This is sloppy. If you have a claim, don't just lob it out there and dance away before any of your freshmen have a chance to disagree with it. It's irresponsible and smacks more of bluster than truth.
The reason this book got taken up to two stars is that when Kreeft actually does literary analysis, he is very good at it. I would even call some sections "soaring." Among those are the Anthropology chapter, the section in which he analyzes the use of promises in Lord of the Rings, and the very convincing section in which he links the symbolism of the Ring to Nietzschean philosophy. I read these with delight and a rather blown mind... and I made copies of them to keep, because, with my disappointment at the rest of the book, it will not be staying on my shelf.
January 16, 2012
A nice little book that could serve as an introduction to philosophy. On the whole, I think that reading this prior to rereading Tolkien's works will greatly enhance my understanding of the depth of the author's work. If nothing else, it has increased my motivation to revisit Tolkien's works.
If I have one criticism of the book it is that Kreeft leans a little too heavily on his citations of C.S. Lewis. In the introduction to the book he references the fact that "G.K. Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc were so close, in personal friendship, in philosophical and religious belief...that they were called 'the Chesterbelloc monster'. We could with equal reason speak of "the Tolkienlewis monster'."
Don't get me wrong, I think that Kreeft's premise is not without merit, but I still think that he pushed this a bit too far by citing Lewis so frequently. The citations are wonderful and I feel greatly aided by Kreeft's commentary on them, but there is something about this approach that still irks me a little.
Still, I recommend this book, especially if you are preparing for a philosophy or literature course or if you want a better understanding of the masterpiece that is The Lord of the Rings.
If I have one criticism of the book it is that Kreeft leans a little too heavily on his citations of C.S. Lewis. In the introduction to the book he references the fact that "G.K. Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc were so close, in personal friendship, in philosophical and religious belief...that they were called 'the Chesterbelloc monster'. We could with equal reason speak of "the Tolkienlewis monster'."
Don't get me wrong, I think that Kreeft's premise is not without merit, but I still think that he pushed this a bit too far by citing Lewis so frequently. The citations are wonderful and I feel greatly aided by Kreeft's commentary on them, but there is something about this approach that still irks me a little.
Still, I recommend this book, especially if you are preparing for a philosophy or literature course or if you want a better understanding of the masterpiece that is The Lord of the Rings.
July 24, 2017
Wow. I decided to read this in anticipation of a re-reading after many years of Lord of the Rings and I am delighted that I did. Kreeft outlines Tolkien's philosophy and the ways in which this philosophy permeates LOTR, the Hobbit and indeed all of Middle Earth, not by allegory, but by application. Tolkien was adamant that LOTR was not allegory, which he saw as an author forcing his world view on his reader, but application, in which the view is there in the background, available to the reader if he is willing and able. Kreeft's approach also makes this a reasonable survey of the key issues in philosophy.
I am now very excited for my re-read and have decided to preface it with a re-read of the Hobbit first.
I am now very excited for my re-read and have decided to preface it with a re-read of the Hobbit first.
September 21, 2015
An interesting book which offers a different lense to Tolkien's view. This book doesn't specifically talk about LOTR per se (meaning it's not a direct complimentary book to LOTR), but it does offer nuggets of novel insights to approaching the characters of Tolkien and the world and environment in which he created and how these 2 components tie back to theology and philosophy.
5 stars for me as I have always been a big fan of Kreeft and I love how he writes with utter clarity without sacrificing the beautifully woven prose into the pages. LOTR also has a deep place in my heart and as such, its no surprise I actually enjoyed this book!
5 stars for me as I have always been a big fan of Kreeft and I love how he writes with utter clarity without sacrificing the beautifully woven prose into the pages. LOTR also has a deep place in my heart and as such, its no surprise I actually enjoyed this book!
February 4, 2013
Kreeft offers a guided tour of basic questions of philosophy and backs up his conjecture of where Tolkien stood on these with passages from his works. As a self-confessed novice (if that) in the realms of philosophy, I appreciated the simplicity of his discussions.
I might add that the reader can easily use the approach the author used in application to any writer or film-maker.
I borrowed this through my library's inter-library loan service and am now compelled to chase down a copy to own. I made many notes on bookmarks to high-light and discuss. Can't wait!
I might add that the reader can easily use the approach the author used in application to any writer or film-maker.
I borrowed this through my library's inter-library loan service and am now compelled to chase down a copy to own. I made many notes on bookmarks to high-light and discuss. Can't wait!
April 25, 2013
This is the kind of book that changes how you think and who you are. It's philosophy written brilliantly and illustrated by Tolkien's masterpieces.
Every page will set of a new train of thought and by far the most of those will be highly profitable as well as stimulating. There are, however, a few odd things taught. Some of these are due to Lewis's influence on the writer; but then most of the best thoughts in the book are due to Lewis as much as Tolkien. Others are due to the fact that the author is a Roman Catholic.
Absolutely loved it.
Every page will set of a new train of thought and by far the most of those will be highly profitable as well as stimulating. There are, however, a few odd things taught. Some of these are due to Lewis's influence on the writer; but then most of the best thoughts in the book are due to Lewis as much as Tolkien. Others are due to the fact that the author is a Roman Catholic.
Absolutely loved it.
June 23, 2014
Oh, such a fun and beautiful book! It's almost as good as reading the Lord of the Rings over again. The author really captures the essence of Tolkien's work and brings in fascinating aspects of philosophy, including many CS Lewis quotes. The book looks at the Christian views in Tolkien's work a lot, but there are many other elements of philosophy as well.
October 17, 2014
Peter Kreeft, a prolific Catholic Christian author and professor of philosophy guides us through J.R.R Tolkien's world view as made evident to us in his richly Christian, Catholic even, works. The Lord of the Rings, The Hobbit, The Silmarillion and his essays and other works show us how Tolkien wove his beliefs and philosophy thru ought his sub-creation of Middle Earth.
October 20, 2015
Overall a good book; it is brilliant as literary criticism of J.R.R. Tolkien's Fellowship of the Ring trilogy and The Hobbit. It is a reasonably good philosophical work too, though it is written at an elementary level with no assumption that the reader is yet heavily into philosophy. Kreeft seems to intend his book mainly to be read in an introductory philosophy class, along with other works, owing to his use of formal structure and elementary use of philosophical terms and ideas. However, the book reads fine on its own and is not otherwise like a textbook. Kreeft organizes most of the book into a series of questions, many of which are obvious philosophical questions (i.e., Does God exist?, Is knowledge always good?, Is evil real?, etc.), though some of his questions are rather unusual or even themselves begging the question (Why do humans have identity crises?, Why do we no longer love glory or splendor?). I would think some questions, like that last example, would be better left more open-ended (i.e., Do we love glory or splendor?), which would enable Kreeft to say he thinks not, and why, rather than turning off a critical reader with such assumptions built into the work unexamined. Unfortunately, for some of Kreeft's questions, his "answers" seem more like a politician "answering" a hard question by talking around it, but never actually addressing it. That said, Kreeft does take on the majority of his questions handily, using examples from Tolkien's works and private letters, and from other sources, especially C.S. Lewis.
Kreeft's greatest strengths seem to be addressing ethics and ethical questions. However, he makes several assumptions that he does not defend, particularly about God and good. If one shares his assumptions, all is well. He will not, though, be converting any from a hostile camp (such as atheists) with his arguments as stated, unlike, say, Mere Christianity, which takes nothing for granted and builds everything from the ground up. Still, Kreeft's analysis of Lord of the Rings as literature is penetrating enough that if someone who did not overtly share Christian beliefs and values enjoyed the books and then read Kreeft's analysis, he must be left asking himself some hard questions.
In short, people like fantasy because "Fantasy is a flight to reality." (location 980 and elsewhere) Kreeft notes the enduring popularity of Tolkien's works among the masses, even while they are sneered at by the self-anointed elites:
Ordinary people still believe in a real morality, a real difference between good and evil; and in objective truth and the possibility of knowing it; and in the superiority of beauty over ugliness. But our educators, or "experts" (Fr. Richard John Neuhaus calls them "the chattering classes"), feel toward these three traditional values the way people think medieval inquisitors felt toward witches. Our artists deliberately prefer ugliness to beauty, our moralists fear goodness more than evil, and our philosophers embrace various forms of post-modernism that reduce truth to ideology or power. (location 126)
In short, "humanity isn't found in that arrogant oligarchy of utterly out-of-touch elitists." (location 121) Kreeft's sense of this works throughout the book to make it a brilliant literary criticism, and resoundingly answers the one question Kreeft doesn't formally pose: "Why do we like these books?" The answer, "The deepest need is the need for meaning, purpose, and hope." (location 163) Tolkien does this through literature and not mere allegory, "Philosophy says truth, literature shows truth." (location 213) "All literature incarnates some philosophy," (location 236) but, "a philosophy that cannot be translated into a good story cannot be a good philosophy." (location 242) Kreeft rightly observes that fiction is not neutral, "Literature is judgmental." (location 256) And how do we judge? "Human minds seem to be in touch with Platonic Ideas when we make value judgments." (location 492) Don't worry, Kreeft explains Platonic Ideas for the uninitiated.
As he moves through his philosophical questions, Kreeft hits upon some fundamental ones, both in terms of how they feature in Tolkien, and also as they impact our daily lives. Perhaps one of the biggest among these is whether reality is bigger than our understanding, "the philosophy of the poet and of the happy man, for whom nature is a fullness a moreness, and therefore wonderful. It is the philosophy of all the pre-modern cultures...[or] that there are fewer things in reality than in thought; that most of our thought is mere myth, error, convention, projection, fantasy, fallacy, folly, dream, etc. This is the philosophy of the unhappy man, the cynic, the pessimist...The third possibility is that there are exactly the same number of things in reality and in thought, that is, that we 'know it all'." (location 351) Speaking of reality, Kreeft goes further to note, "We should never ask of anything 'Is it real?' For everything is real. The proper question is, 'A real what?'" (location 392)
As Kreeft examines the relationship of science and art within reality, Kreeft notes, "Art is very different from science in that it creates worlds; it creates meaning and beauty and forms and structures and natures, while science discovers them." (location 478)
Another major theme of the Tolkien books is Providence, which Kreeft also thoughtfully considers: "It is easy to identify miracles when we see them, whether worked by God or by evil spirits. But how do we identify divine providence? Where do we find it? Not in a part but in the whole, in the ordering of the whole, in the relationships among the parts." (location 617) As an extension, when considering free will versus fate, Kreeft explores it thus: "'free causality' is not a self-contradiction but a uniquely human kind of causality." (location 716) Further, "divine grace, in dealing with anything in nature, does not suppress or bypass its nature but perfects it and works through it...Therefore, divine predestination preserves human free will, because God invented it." (location 736) Humans are unique from other animals, as, "Our nature is a task to achieve, not a fact to receive." (location 1285)
Kreeft takes on the fact that religious themes pervade the books while religion, as such, is absent: "The main way The Lord of the Rings is religious is in its form, its structure: (a) of its worldview and thus of its world, its setting, the world of Middle-earth; (b) of the plot, full of providential design and cosmic justice; and (c) of the characters as manifesting themes like providence, grace, heroism, hierarchy, glory, resurrection, piety, duty, authority, obedience, tradition, humility, and 'eucatastrophe'." (location 793) Interestingly, one (unnecessary) way Kreeft rationalizes the overt absence of churches and religion is claiming they would be "anachronistic," yet he sees no trouble in the characters using stirrups. Clearly, time was not the problem for Tolkien, it was (as his letters, cited by Kreeft, clearly indicate) that he made a conscious choice to imbue his story with Christianity, rather than describe it as a Christian world.
Kreeft observes a hostility toward industry and technology in Tolkien that would make Jacques Ellul and Gabriel Marcel proud:
The magic of Enchantment means entering the holy city of beauty, truth, and goodness and letting it conquer you. Ultimately, it means letting God conquer you, since beauty, truth, and goodness are divine attributes; they are what God is. But the magic of the "laborious, scientific magician" (that is, technology or, rather, the philosophy that makes "Man's conquest of Nature" by technology the summum bonum) means playing God, like Sauron. (location 1046)
Further, "Enchantment's end is the surrender, or submission, of the soul to the beauty of nature and art. Technology's end is the conquest of nature by power." (location 1077) Still further, "knowledge (as distinct from wisdom) cannot be the supreme good, for it is compatible with evil, just as power is." (location 1431) Despite his arguments against knowledge (or at least its inherent goodness), Kreeft insists, "Truth is objective, and discovered." (location 1532) One is, unfortunately, left with the question unanswered whether we must be artistic cavemen to be happy, or if we may be permitted technology, industry, and other means of efficiently harnessing nature in any form.
Kreeft's critique of the industrial continues, "When beauty is sacrificed for efficiency, the result is inefficiency. When men worship machines, the proper good not only of man but also of machines is sacrificed." (location 1675) The ultimate conquest of nature is conquest of fellow men, as quoted from Tolkien's own letters, "the most improper job of any man...is bossing other men. Not one in a million is fit for it, and least of all those who seek the opportunity." (location 1995)
As Kreeft delves into the very heart of the story, the Ring and what it stands for, the nature of Frodo's quest, the epic battle between good and evil, he notes, "The false immortality requires the death of conscience. The real immortality requires the death of egotism." (location 1147) This is seen, "When the object we desire is God, or that which God is (truth, goodness, and beauty), the object is not possessable. And paradoxically, only then are we fulfilled, when we do not possess the object we desire but it possesses us." (location 1304) So what is good? "Wanting what you should is better than getting what you want." (location 2201)
Kreeft quotes one of Tolkien's letters that notes, with many other philosophers and theologians, evil is a distortion of good, but not something with an existence of its own, "evil labors with vast power and perpetual success--in vain: preparing always only the soil for unexpected good to sprout in." (location 1701) Kreeft concludes, "The self-destruction of evil is not just something to believe in and hope for, but to be certain of. It is metaphysically necessary, necessary because of the very kind of being evil has by its unchangeable essence. For evil can only be a parasite on good." (location 2113) Frédéric Bastiat would be proud! For instance, evil's parasitical nature is revealed, "Evil is limited to power; it cannot use weakness." (location 2222)
Kreeft correctly notes the traditionalist bent of Tolkien's works, this being the part of Tolkien's books I found least likable: the good old days are over, magic is disappearing, elves and hobbits and great men are disappearing, it has all the pessimism of Norse mythology and none of Billy Joel's wisdom ("The good ole days weren't always good"). Nonetheless, Kreeft makes a valid point when he notes, "The basic argument for tradition is simply that it works." (location 1610) This, however, does not negate change or the value of positive new methods, developments, etc. He does note, "All our victories against evil in this world are only temporary. The idea of progress, central to modernity, is simply false. We have not progressed in virtue or wisdom, only in power and cleverness." (location 2160) Kreeft seems to be more on the side of the happy cavemen, "in gaining the world we have lost our selves." (location 2267) Yet, whether it is Tolkien's hobbits or the Amish, traditionalism (short of man living like animals or cavemen) always assumes a certain level of material and cultural progress as the ideal and virtuous, beyond which any and all "progress" is either evil or illusory, and whatever assumption is made, it is always arbitrary.
Kreeft observes Tolkien taking a position for absolutism and against utilitarianism (just as Friedrich Hayek takes a position for liberty and against central planning): "It is the simple fact that we do not know the future. We are not God. For these things change. But our marching orders, our principles, do not. They are unchanging and universal, not dependent on time or place. And they are what we do know." (location 2325) Kreeft cautions against the reasoning of moral relativism, "What passes for reasoning is often rationalizing." (location 2340)
So what are we left with in the end? Like Frodo and Sam trudging wearily toward Mount Doom against all odds, hope. "Hope is like the sky, unconquerable and spread over everything." (location 2442) Hope in what? "Since (1) hope's object is always in the last analysis a person, not an abstraction, and since (2) that object is also in the last analysis universal and not particular, it follows that (3) that object must always, at least implicitly and anonymously, be God, the only concrete universal, the only Person ('I') who is also Being ('am')." (location 2442)
In short, not a long, technical, or difficult book and one well worth reading. It makes a good work of philosophy as tied to Tolkien, and an even better exploration of why Tolkien's fans like the books. In that regard, it is not unlike Edmund Burke defining what is sublime and beautiful in A Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful, except I think Kreeft has been even more successful in this endeavor. So while not without its flaws, on the whole a very good work and one that ought to be on your to-read list!
Kreeft's greatest strengths seem to be addressing ethics and ethical questions. However, he makes several assumptions that he does not defend, particularly about God and good. If one shares his assumptions, all is well. He will not, though, be converting any from a hostile camp (such as atheists) with his arguments as stated, unlike, say, Mere Christianity, which takes nothing for granted and builds everything from the ground up. Still, Kreeft's analysis of Lord of the Rings as literature is penetrating enough that if someone who did not overtly share Christian beliefs and values enjoyed the books and then read Kreeft's analysis, he must be left asking himself some hard questions.
In short, people like fantasy because "Fantasy is a flight to reality." (location 980 and elsewhere) Kreeft notes the enduring popularity of Tolkien's works among the masses, even while they are sneered at by the self-anointed elites:
Ordinary people still believe in a real morality, a real difference between good and evil; and in objective truth and the possibility of knowing it; and in the superiority of beauty over ugliness. But our educators, or "experts" (Fr. Richard John Neuhaus calls them "the chattering classes"), feel toward these three traditional values the way people think medieval inquisitors felt toward witches. Our artists deliberately prefer ugliness to beauty, our moralists fear goodness more than evil, and our philosophers embrace various forms of post-modernism that reduce truth to ideology or power. (location 126)
In short, "humanity isn't found in that arrogant oligarchy of utterly out-of-touch elitists." (location 121) Kreeft's sense of this works throughout the book to make it a brilliant literary criticism, and resoundingly answers the one question Kreeft doesn't formally pose: "Why do we like these books?" The answer, "The deepest need is the need for meaning, purpose, and hope." (location 163) Tolkien does this through literature and not mere allegory, "Philosophy says truth, literature shows truth." (location 213) "All literature incarnates some philosophy," (location 236) but, "a philosophy that cannot be translated into a good story cannot be a good philosophy." (location 242) Kreeft rightly observes that fiction is not neutral, "Literature is judgmental." (location 256) And how do we judge? "Human minds seem to be in touch with Platonic Ideas when we make value judgments." (location 492) Don't worry, Kreeft explains Platonic Ideas for the uninitiated.
As he moves through his philosophical questions, Kreeft hits upon some fundamental ones, both in terms of how they feature in Tolkien, and also as they impact our daily lives. Perhaps one of the biggest among these is whether reality is bigger than our understanding, "the philosophy of the poet and of the happy man, for whom nature is a fullness a moreness, and therefore wonderful. It is the philosophy of all the pre-modern cultures...[or] that there are fewer things in reality than in thought; that most of our thought is mere myth, error, convention, projection, fantasy, fallacy, folly, dream, etc. This is the philosophy of the unhappy man, the cynic, the pessimist...The third possibility is that there are exactly the same number of things in reality and in thought, that is, that we 'know it all'." (location 351) Speaking of reality, Kreeft goes further to note, "We should never ask of anything 'Is it real?' For everything is real. The proper question is, 'A real what?'" (location 392)
As Kreeft examines the relationship of science and art within reality, Kreeft notes, "Art is very different from science in that it creates worlds; it creates meaning and beauty and forms and structures and natures, while science discovers them." (location 478)
Another major theme of the Tolkien books is Providence, which Kreeft also thoughtfully considers: "It is easy to identify miracles when we see them, whether worked by God or by evil spirits. But how do we identify divine providence? Where do we find it? Not in a part but in the whole, in the ordering of the whole, in the relationships among the parts." (location 617) As an extension, when considering free will versus fate, Kreeft explores it thus: "'free causality' is not a self-contradiction but a uniquely human kind of causality." (location 716) Further, "divine grace, in dealing with anything in nature, does not suppress or bypass its nature but perfects it and works through it...Therefore, divine predestination preserves human free will, because God invented it." (location 736) Humans are unique from other animals, as, "Our nature is a task to achieve, not a fact to receive." (location 1285)
Kreeft takes on the fact that religious themes pervade the books while religion, as such, is absent: "The main way The Lord of the Rings is religious is in its form, its structure: (a) of its worldview and thus of its world, its setting, the world of Middle-earth; (b) of the plot, full of providential design and cosmic justice; and (c) of the characters as manifesting themes like providence, grace, heroism, hierarchy, glory, resurrection, piety, duty, authority, obedience, tradition, humility, and 'eucatastrophe'." (location 793) Interestingly, one (unnecessary) way Kreeft rationalizes the overt absence of churches and religion is claiming they would be "anachronistic," yet he sees no trouble in the characters using stirrups. Clearly, time was not the problem for Tolkien, it was (as his letters, cited by Kreeft, clearly indicate) that he made a conscious choice to imbue his story with Christianity, rather than describe it as a Christian world.
Kreeft observes a hostility toward industry and technology in Tolkien that would make Jacques Ellul and Gabriel Marcel proud:
The magic of Enchantment means entering the holy city of beauty, truth, and goodness and letting it conquer you. Ultimately, it means letting God conquer you, since beauty, truth, and goodness are divine attributes; they are what God is. But the magic of the "laborious, scientific magician" (that is, technology or, rather, the philosophy that makes "Man's conquest of Nature" by technology the summum bonum) means playing God, like Sauron. (location 1046)
Further, "Enchantment's end is the surrender, or submission, of the soul to the beauty of nature and art. Technology's end is the conquest of nature by power." (location 1077) Still further, "knowledge (as distinct from wisdom) cannot be the supreme good, for it is compatible with evil, just as power is." (location 1431) Despite his arguments against knowledge (or at least its inherent goodness), Kreeft insists, "Truth is objective, and discovered." (location 1532) One is, unfortunately, left with the question unanswered whether we must be artistic cavemen to be happy, or if we may be permitted technology, industry, and other means of efficiently harnessing nature in any form.
Kreeft's critique of the industrial continues, "When beauty is sacrificed for efficiency, the result is inefficiency. When men worship machines, the proper good not only of man but also of machines is sacrificed." (location 1675) The ultimate conquest of nature is conquest of fellow men, as quoted from Tolkien's own letters, "the most improper job of any man...is bossing other men. Not one in a million is fit for it, and least of all those who seek the opportunity." (location 1995)
As Kreeft delves into the very heart of the story, the Ring and what it stands for, the nature of Frodo's quest, the epic battle between good and evil, he notes, "The false immortality requires the death of conscience. The real immortality requires the death of egotism." (location 1147) This is seen, "When the object we desire is God, or that which God is (truth, goodness, and beauty), the object is not possessable. And paradoxically, only then are we fulfilled, when we do not possess the object we desire but it possesses us." (location 1304) So what is good? "Wanting what you should is better than getting what you want." (location 2201)
Kreeft quotes one of Tolkien's letters that notes, with many other philosophers and theologians, evil is a distortion of good, but not something with an existence of its own, "evil labors with vast power and perpetual success--in vain: preparing always only the soil for unexpected good to sprout in." (location 1701) Kreeft concludes, "The self-destruction of evil is not just something to believe in and hope for, but to be certain of. It is metaphysically necessary, necessary because of the very kind of being evil has by its unchangeable essence. For evil can only be a parasite on good." (location 2113) Frédéric Bastiat would be proud! For instance, evil's parasitical nature is revealed, "Evil is limited to power; it cannot use weakness." (location 2222)
Kreeft correctly notes the traditionalist bent of Tolkien's works, this being the part of Tolkien's books I found least likable: the good old days are over, magic is disappearing, elves and hobbits and great men are disappearing, it has all the pessimism of Norse mythology and none of Billy Joel's wisdom ("The good ole days weren't always good"). Nonetheless, Kreeft makes a valid point when he notes, "The basic argument for tradition is simply that it works." (location 1610) This, however, does not negate change or the value of positive new methods, developments, etc. He does note, "All our victories against evil in this world are only temporary. The idea of progress, central to modernity, is simply false. We have not progressed in virtue or wisdom, only in power and cleverness." (location 2160) Kreeft seems to be more on the side of the happy cavemen, "in gaining the world we have lost our selves." (location 2267) Yet, whether it is Tolkien's hobbits or the Amish, traditionalism (short of man living like animals or cavemen) always assumes a certain level of material and cultural progress as the ideal and virtuous, beyond which any and all "progress" is either evil or illusory, and whatever assumption is made, it is always arbitrary.
Kreeft observes Tolkien taking a position for absolutism and against utilitarianism (just as Friedrich Hayek takes a position for liberty and against central planning): "It is the simple fact that we do not know the future. We are not God. For these things change. But our marching orders, our principles, do not. They are unchanging and universal, not dependent on time or place. And they are what we do know." (location 2325) Kreeft cautions against the reasoning of moral relativism, "What passes for reasoning is often rationalizing." (location 2340)
So what are we left with in the end? Like Frodo and Sam trudging wearily toward Mount Doom against all odds, hope. "Hope is like the sky, unconquerable and spread over everything." (location 2442) Hope in what? "Since (1) hope's object is always in the last analysis a person, not an abstraction, and since (2) that object is also in the last analysis universal and not particular, it follows that (3) that object must always, at least implicitly and anonymously, be God, the only concrete universal, the only Person ('I') who is also Being ('am')." (location 2442)
In short, not a long, technical, or difficult book and one well worth reading. It makes a good work of philosophy as tied to Tolkien, and an even better exploration of why Tolkien's fans like the books. In that regard, it is not unlike Edmund Burke defining what is sublime and beautiful in A Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful, except I think Kreeft has been even more successful in this endeavor. So while not without its flaws, on the whole a very good work and one that ought to be on your to-read list!
March 30, 2020
Good stuff—that's such an understatement, but it will take many readings for it all to permeate me. I liked the clear organization although I feel like he should retitle it to "The Philosophy of Tolkien As Supported By Lewis Quotes." Not that I at all object to the wealth of Lewis quotes but the title feels a little misleading without it.
Tolkien’s heroes are crypto-Christians. They do not know, believe, mention, wonder about, or allegorize Christian doctrine. But they exemplify exactly what life would be like if the Christian claims were true, especially its central paradox about immortality through death and resurrection of the self, self-realization through self-sacrifice.
~
Myth and fantasy show us the significance of our lives, and, when done on a large and epic scale, of our history. By not showing us particular historical facts that we all know, a fantasy like Lord of the Rings shows us more clearly the grander universal truth that we have forgotten: the truth that these particulars form a meaningful pattern, like threads on the back of the tapestry, deliberately, not randomly, arranged. What greater service could literature perform for us than that? What mythic search is greater than “man's search for meaning”? What issue is more momentous than whether history is “chance or the dance”?
Tolkien’s heroes are crypto-Christians. They do not know, believe, mention, wonder about, or allegorize Christian doctrine. But they exemplify exactly what life would be like if the Christian claims were true, especially its central paradox about immortality through death and resurrection of the self, self-realization through self-sacrifice.
~
Myth and fantasy show us the significance of our lives, and, when done on a large and epic scale, of our history. By not showing us particular historical facts that we all know, a fantasy like Lord of the Rings shows us more clearly the grander universal truth that we have forgotten: the truth that these particulars form a meaningful pattern, like threads on the back of the tapestry, deliberately, not randomly, arranged. What greater service could literature perform for us than that? What mythic search is greater than “man's search for meaning”? What issue is more momentous than whether history is “chance or the dance”?
May 14, 2021
Man, I was so excited to read this, but I wasn't even able to finish it. Other reviews have pointed this out as well, but the premise of this book is misleading in my opinion - it's not really a philosophy of Tolkien, let alone a philosophy of LOTR (which is what I really wanted from it), but more so a theology of the author himself. Listen. I am well aware that Tolkien himself is a Catholic and I don't have a problem with that. But this book makes leaps in logic that are not based in the textual evidence I was hoping for and that are only compatible with a fundamentally Christian worldview.
It still has its moments, especially in the early chapters, but overall it's trying to do way too much and in a really weird tone to boot. I tried to grit my teeth and finish it but when Kreeft presented all liberals as amoral and disrespectful towards the "sanctity of individual human life" I said 'nope' out loud and closed it. Would not recommend unless you're part of an extremely niche audience.
It still has its moments, especially in the early chapters, but overall it's trying to do way too much and in a really weird tone to boot. I tried to grit my teeth and finish it but when Kreeft presented all liberals as amoral and disrespectful towards the "sanctity of individual human life" I said 'nope' out loud and closed it. Would not recommend unless you're part of an extremely niche audience.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 125 reviews