I’ve finished the LOTR trilogy for the second time (I read it a few years ago) and I must confess I enjoyed it a lot more the second time around, although I also must admit there was a lot I missed (or don’t remember) on my first reading–whole story lines and subplots, and interconnections between characters. My initial criticisms of it still stands, I still find the fantasy aspects disturbing, although I must admit that has never put me off Homer, with which Tolkien shares much in common. The character development and the language was much more appealing the second time around, and the narrative seemed to have a pacing and a coherence I missed on first reading. As literature, the Trilogy holds up quite well, I’m glad I read it again and I’m pleased with the result of my extra effort.

But (yes, there’s always a “but”, isn’t there?), something did come apparent on a second reading I had glossed over on my first pass, but which I have also encountered on reading similar works, such as MZ Bradley’s “Mists of Avalon”, and various other versions of the the Arthurian legend.

Modern man seems to be nostalgic for the Middle Ages. The Medieval Melodrama seems to have a fascination for English speakers, particularly. (Cervantes skewered the age of knight-errantry too adroitly for the Spanish mentality to ever feel comfortable there again, and the French (where the Arthurian literary tradition actually originated) abandoned it after the Revolution made Lords and Ladies terminally uncool.

But there seems to be something comforting to the Anglo Saxon mind about the Medieval myth, the wise magician, the gallant knight, the lute-playing minstrel, the sturdy yeoman, the Courtly Lovers, the godly priest and the rest of the stock characters. And of course, there’s always the King, and he’s usually a Good one. The stinkers are always usurpers who get booted out by the True King. One good thing about Feudalism is that you always know who the real king is supposed to be; he may be a drooling cretin or a a sadistic brute, but at least you don’t get a civil war every time the boss dies. There is an orderly process for replacing Kings, and they really are pretty much all the same anyway. Its only when the process breaks down, when the Old Man dies without a male heir, that you have real trouble.

Feudalism has its flaws, but it is also pretty stable, and it usually restores order when the Empire Falls. The local bullies took over after Rome fell, and Japan had its Shoguns, China its Warlords, and India its Moguls. Our reason tells us these guys were all essentially biker gangs on horseback, but history (or literature at least) fondly remembers them as philosopher-kings. The idea of a stable, stratified society where everybody knows his place and there is usually a relatively peaceful transfer of power and a hierarchical nobility seems to be very comforting to many of us, or at least, to some little world residing deep in our racial memory. Of course, we all know that feudal times everywhere have always been periods of almost constant warfare and endless misery, but somehow that’s not how literature or folklore remembers them.

At any rate, Tolkien was European, and he was English, and this is the vision of Middle Earth he presents. Sure, he paints the society as one of continental upheavals, war and evil witchcraft, but the stable condition he is really nostalgic for is one of rich happy villagers, cool and serene Elvish princes, sturdy and skilled Dwarves, noble horsemen and princely Camelot-Gondors. The bad guys and their minions only need to be scattered by a wise and noble king. Actually, I kind of got into the Orcs. The long-running debate between Gorbag and Shagrat had some of the best dialogue in the Trilogy. I love those guys, and at least they don’t have any of those jaw-breaking Elvish or Rohanish monikers, and they didn’t give their swords and horses names.

Anyway, I don’t mean any of this as criticism, I did enjoy my second walk through Middle Earth, and my recognizing some familiar themes I’ve seen elsewhere is just an observation, not a put-down. Feudalism, like Fascism, promises stability and peace. If you don’t mess with the Bosses program, he’ll leave you alone and let you keep your money. It doesn’t work out that way in practice, but it is the promise that we fall for every time. I’ll take my chances with the Evil Empire. House Corinno was cruel and corrupt, but after Paul Mua’dib took over, all hell broke loose.