Department of English

Wise Men in Times of Woe - Wizards as representations of

human interaction with the natural world in

The Lord of the Rings

Anton Jonsson

Bachelor’s Thesis

Literature

Spring, 2019

Supervisor: Marinette Grimbeek

Abstract

The fictive world created by Oxford Professor J. R. R. Tolkien is intimately linked with

his own views of the world. His love for the natural world shines through his works and

has given rise to multiple scholars focusing on Tolkien and ecology. This study falls

under that category and is an ecological interpretation of The Lord of the Rings and

presents the argument that Tolkien divides his characters into three types. These types

are representations of different approaches to nature: nature as a tool for human

progress, nature as our ideal existence and nature as an equal part of the world. The

significance of the study is the focus on the three wizards in The Lord of the Rings,

Gandalf the Grey, Saruman the White and Radagast the Brown, as representatives of

different ecological positions. The study centres on the argument that Gandalf is a

representative of nature as an equal part of the world. A balanced, holistic view of

nature and humanity is put forward by J. R. R. Tolkien as the correct way for humanity

to view nature. Furthermore, Gandalf as a character shows how humanity is supposed

to act in terms of natural protection and preservation.

Keywords: Tolkien, ecocriticism, nature, fantasy, wizards, Lord of the Rings

Jonsson 1

So that those who live after may have clean earth to till

Gandalf (Tolkien, The Return of the King 861)

In 1999, the French magazine Le Monde compiled a list of the 100 most influential

novels of the 20th century. The list celebrated renowned authors such as Agatha

Christie, Ernest Hemingway and George Orwell. One of the few fantasy authors who

made the list was the Oxford Professor J. R. R. Tolkien with his trilogy – The Lord of

the Rings (1954–55), comprised of The Fellowship of the Ring (1954), The Two Towers

(1954) and The Return of the King (1955).1 Earning a place on such a list suggests that

the world of Tolkien has engaged readers globally for almost half a century. The texts

have even, in the words of Patrick Curry, been “an inspiration for … David McTaggart,

founder of Greenpeace … [and] underground resistance (environmental as well as

political) in the USSR and Central Europe” (52). With new elements being added

recently, with film-productions being made, there is no sign that the influence of J. R.

R. Tolkien’s world on popular culture is decreasing.

It is widely accepted that nature is a prominent part of Tolkien’s writing and

that the author himself had a deepfelt passion for the preservation and protection of the

natural world. In his 1978 biography of J. R. R. Tolkien, Humphrey Carpenter quotes

Tolkien speaking about a willow tree, saying that “one day they cut it down. They didn’t

do anything with it: the log just lay there. I never forgot it” (30). These memories of

human impact on the natural world stayed with him and in a letter from 1955 he writes

that “I am (obviously) much in love with plants and above all trees, and have always

1 Throughout this study, the three volumes of The Lord of the Rings are abbreviated as follows: FTR,

TT and RTK.

Jonsson 2

been; and I find human maltreatment of them as hard to bear as some find ill-treatment

of animals” (Carpenter, Letters 220). Today, these topics are more relevant than ever.

Ecological devastation and the extinction of animal and plant species are regular news

stories; people have become more aware of what Martin Amis sums up as “the

toiletization of the planet” (quoted in Deitering 196). These contemporary issues in

combination with the vast interest that many people show for the world of J. R. R.

Tolkien are the foundations of this study.

J. R. R. Tolkien’s love of the natural world, so vividly described in his texts, is

easy to dismiss or overlook as a mere setting of the story. Christine Brooke-Rose argues

that the detailed way in which nature is described in Tolkien’s legendarium imposes on

the readers’ understanding of the main story, saying that it is “interfering with the war-

story, cheating it as it were” (83). In contrast, Curry, argues against Brooke-Rose’s

interpretation, claiming that the level of attention that Tolkien has given to his

descriptions of the natural world allows the reader to approach the text with “a startling

sensation of primary reality” (49). I am inclined to side with Curry, because even

though Brooke-Rose’s anthropocentric idea that The Lord of the Rings is a “war-story”

is valid, one must not overlook that nature itself is an agent in this narrative. Agential

nature appears in a multitude of passages where elements of nature interact directly

with the main characters of the texts (not only in The Lord of the Rings, but in the

collection of works posthumously published as The Silmarillion (1977) too). In

Tolkien’s fictive world, the natural world is by no means passive or idle; therefore, the

role of nature should be considered in any interpretation of the story. The interpretation

of a “war-story” needs to acknowledge the role of the Ents (sentient tree-like beings)

and their contribution to, for example, the destruction of Saruman’s stronghold,

Isengard (Tolkien, TT 543). It would also need to consider the position of non-humans,

such as eagles, and their contribution. For example, the eagle-lord Gwaihir helps

Gandalf on different occasions in The Hobbit (1937) and The Lord of The Rings, both

with physical transportation and with information. Each facet of Tolkien’s legendarium

is related, implicitly or explicitly, to the natural world. Therefore, claiming that the way

in which Tolkien portrays nature interferes with the occurring events is to overlook a

major part of the story. However, the elements of nature’s involvement are sometimes

implicit, especially its’ relation to characters. The vast legendarium that Tolkien created

is immensely detailed; therefore, characters that, at first glance, seem to be insignificant

or flat, may reveal a completely different side of the story when placed in the context

Jonsson 3

of the diegetic history of Tolkien’s world. This study argues that J. R. R. Tolkien, in

the three volumes of The Lord of the Rings, divides characters into three types: either a

representation of an ecological decline due to industrial impact, a representation of a

pre-industrial, idyllic view of nature, or a representation of a balanced view where

preservation of nature and industrial progress can coexist. This is exemplified in three

wizards, Saruman, Radagast and Gandalf. I argue that Tolkien uses Gandalf as a

metaphorical representation of the balance of the world which Tolkien admires and

advocates, symbolising a desired balance between nature and modern, industrial

progress.

I show this by first analysing how each wizard’s origin affects the way that they

are perceived and how that is relevant for understanding what type character they are.

Then I discuss how each wizard’s way of life highlights their position as either good or

bad and how that is linked to the ecological message of The Lord of the Rings. Finally,

I conclude the analysis by discussing how each wizard can be interpreted in the light of

the companions they keep. In addition, I wish to highlight that the interest of this study

is with the meaning and the social significance of Tolkien’s works and not with the man

himself, even though these two are in some ways inseparable. In my analysis, I make

use of several of Tolkien’s related works on Middle-Earth. However, it is important to

highlight the distinction between the works of J. R. R. Tolkien, and the posthumously

published works edited by his son, Christopher Tolkien as well as his associate

Humphrey Carpenter. In this study, the primary source is The Lord of the Rings written

by J. R. R. Tolkien. The other works by both father and son that I make use of are The

Silmarillion (1977) and Unfinished Tales (1980). Furthermore, I use The Letters of J.

R. R. Tolkien (1981) edited by both Carpenter and Christopher Tolkien.2

The way in which Tolkien describes the wizards’ origins highlights their intrinsic

characteristics which are relevant to understand which of the three types each wizard

represents. In The Lord of the Rings, the term ‘wizard’ or ‘istari’ is the name given to

the five members of an Order existing during the Third Age (circa 2000 years prior to

the events in The Lord of the Rings) of Middle-Earth. The order consists of Curumo,

2 Throughout this study, the name Tolkien refers to J. R. R. Tolkien whilst Christopher Tolkien is

referred to as C. Tolkien. The texts The Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales and The Letters of J. R. R.

Tolkien are abbreviated as follows: Sil, UT and Letters.

Jonsson 4

Aiwendil, Olórin, Alatar and Pallando, yet only the first three of the order appear in the

tales of Middle-Earth. 3 They are more commonly known as Saruman the White,

Radagast the Brown and Gandalf the Grey. They are introduced as emissaries of the

Lords of the West, the Valar, to contest the growing power of the dark lord Sauron.

Their mission is to advise and guide people in their fight against Sauron, and not openly

display their power. Therefore, they are disguised as old and fragile men (Tolkien, UT

502-504). Because of their physical stature, the focus becomes their supposed wisdom.

In a letter from 1954, J. R. R. Tolkien explains that the term istari is translated into

‘wizard’ not because of the word’s semantic resemblance to the synonymous term

‘magician’, but because of its syntactical connection to ‘wise’ (Carpenter, Letters 207).

In addition, Gandalf is described as the wisest of all the Maiar. Therefore, he possesses

an abundance of the fundamental characteristic of a wizard which makes him in a sense

the ideal wizard. The shift in focus from ‘magician’ to ‘wise’ denotes a more

intellectual approach to the world instead of a physical. Saruman and Radagast fail in

their mission as emissaries, whilst Gandalf is successful. In a way, one can argue that

Saruman fails not only because he loses his wisdom, but because his lack of wisdom

makes him act forcefully and use his magic to affect the physical world around him for

personal gain. Radagast, on the other hand, only uses his magic as a defensive force

whilst Gandalf, being the wisest, uses his magic as a protective force.

The Valar themselves are angelical beings created by the Creator, Eru Ilúvatar.

After his instructions, they sang the world into existence and some chose to step into

the world, Arda, and rule over it. The Valar are served by a lesser angelical being, the

Maiar, who each chose one specific Vala to serve in accordance with their inherent

attributes and interests. It is to this group that the wizards belong. In The Silmarillion,

fourteen Valar entered Arda, and these are divided into two gendered groups of seven.4

Only three will be discussed here: Manwë, Aulë and Yavanna. The last two are also

married.

Gandalf is a Maiar in service to Manwë, who is the High King and the ruler of

Arda. He is named “the Lord of the Breath of Arda” (Tolkien, Sil 16) because his chief

concern is with the sky and the wind. Therefore, he is also the lord of all birds, and this

3 Alatar and Pallando, “the Blue Wizards” (Tolkien, UT 508) shall not be discussed in this study. 4 Throughout his work, Tolkien uses the term ‘Valar’ in order to refer to both the Valar and the Valier.

In order to avoid excessive repetition, I too use the terms Valar (plural) and Vala (singular)

collectively. Similarly, the term ‘Maiar’ is used for both genders, whilst the term Maia is singular and

Maiar is plural.

Jonsson 5

connection makes him capable of overviewing all events happening in Middle-Earth

simultaneously. I argue that he is a representation of the holistic view of the world

needed in order to create ecological equilibrium in contrast to a nature/human divide.

Saruman is a Maiar in service to Aulë, who is describes by Tolkien as the Lord of all

the material substances of Arda and he is most often called Aulë the Smith because his

focus is on material creation. In the context of this study, Aulë represents an

environmentalist approach to nature: Greg Garrard explains this approach as believing

that nature’s value is measured in its usefulness to human-like beings (22). Radagast is

a Maiar in service to Yavanna, who is the ruler of all growing plants. In The

Silmarillion, she is called Kementári which means “Queen of the Earth” (Tolkien, Sil

17) because she is the chief designer of the earth’s vegetation. In contrast to her spouse,

she represents a deep ecological approach to nature. Deep ecology, argues Garrard,

“[i]dentifies the dualistic separation of humans from nature promoted by Western

philosophy and culture as the origin of environmental crisis, and demands a return to a

monistic, primal identification of humans and the ecosphere” (22).

Because of the Valar’s prominent position in the creation of Arda, they can all

be seen as an ideal in their own way, their commitment is to Creation and all its

inhabitants which makes their world view fundamentally ecological. I argue that their

way of thinking is fundamentally ecocritical thinking, which Andrew Bennett and

Nicholas Royce claim “[i]nvolves a change of scale and vision: rather than an obsession

with human-sized objects, it attends both to the miniature realm of a blade of grass, an

ant, amoeba, or pathogen, and to the mega-scale of the ocean, the mountain, or even

the earth itself (as well as everything in between)” (162). Aulë is clearly focused on the

earth, its metal and stone, whilst Yavanna is focused on plants and trees. Manwë is, in

turn, focused on all this simultaneously. Their respective wizard is, initially, similar to

his Vala in terms of sentiment. However, as I will argue for, this changes for two of the

three wizards, which leads to their demise.

The wizards are not only sent as emissaries for all the Valar, they also

representatives for their specific Vala. Therefore, why these three Maiar they were

chosen as emissaries shows what type of representation they belong to. First, Tolkien

points out that there was only one who actively chose to take the mission – Saruman.

As an emissary of Aulë he is skilled in material creation and his name literally means

“the Man of Crafts” (Tolkien, UT 504). The industrial connection here is clear, but it

also helps in creating the idea of Saruman as a dominant character, and in extension,

Jonsson 6

making pro-industrial beings seen as powerful. In contrast to Saruman, Radagast was

selected by Yavanna, portraying him as a passive character. The idea of dominant or

passive characters, especially in relation to nature, has to do with the contrast between

industry and wilderness. Industry is something that is supposed to have furthered

human progress, whilst wilderness is something of the past. Wilderness is, in the words

of Garrard, “seen as a place for the reinvigoration of those tired of the moral and

material pollution of the city” (59) and wilderness holds “the promise of a renewed,

authentic relation of humanity and the earth” (59). Therefore, the concept of wilderness

refers to a return to a time where industrial impact on nature was less destructive or

noticeable. However, in describing wilderness as a form of human retreat from our

man-made industrial society, it could be argued that the value of wilderness becomes

centred on its function to humans. This is problematic, and I would instead argue that

the wilderness Yavanna stands for is that of an independent and powerful entity,

untouched by humanity yet open to a ‘reunion’ with them on its own terms. In The Lord

of the Rings, therefore, ‘the promise’ Garrard writes about is not only on human terms

but equally on the terms of wilderness and its inhabitants. Later in the study, I shall

discuss how the ambiguous concept of wilderness separates Radagast and Yavanna.

Similarly to Radagast, Gandalf was also chosen, yet he is not portrayed as a passive

character. The difference is that Gandalf, in likeness with Manwë, acts through his role

as a guide of others whilst Radagast only acts on the call of others (i.e. Gandalf). Liam

Campbell underlines that Gandalf is in this way an environmental activist that stirs

opposition against evil forces trying to destroy the ecology of Middle-Earth (128).

Gandalf shares Manwë’s holistic view of the world, as well as his lack of personal

privilege, highlighting him as a representation of a balanced world.

The marriage between Aulë and Yavanna begs an interesting question

concerning whether Saruman and Radagast are in the same way complimentary

characters. C. Tolkien writes that “Curumo [Saruman] was obliged to take Aiwendil

[Radagast] to please Yavanna his wife” (Tolkien, UT 509, added emphasis). The term

obliged, synonymous to being forced, connects to the deep ecologist idea of seeing

nature, as being an equally dominant part instead of being submissive. It is Yavanna

that forces Aulë to order Saruman to take Radagast with him, creating the idea of nature

and industrial progress being able to coexist. To explain Radagast’s relationship to

Saruman properly, I need to discuss the creation of the ents and the dwarves. It begins

with Aulë’s creation of the dwarves because he desired to have others with whom he

Jonsson 7

could share his skills with. However, in Tolkien’s fictive world, Ilúvatar alone is

permitted to create life. Yet Ilúvatar permitted this one transgression and allowed the

creation of the dwarves. Tolkien also writes that Yavanna was concerned because she

knew that the dwarves would share her husband’s sentiment towards growing things.

Therefore, she asked Ilúvatar to give life to some of her trees in order to protect nature

(Tolkien, Sil 37-41). Hence, the ents were created in order to create balance between

the environmental destruction of the dwarves and natural world. Saruman is therefore

linked to the dwarves through Aulë, and in the same way Radagast is linked to the ents.

One can assume that Radagast was chosen by Yavanna for a similar reason to the

creation of the ents: to stop the destruction of nature by the dwarves and later, Saruman.

Furthermore, C. Tolkien nuances Saruman’s connection to the destruction of nature by

highlighting that Sauron himself was also, originally, a Maiar in service to Aulë, the

same as Saruman (Tolkien, Sil 23). I argue that as much as the ents were created to

balance the environmental destruction of the dwarves, Radagast was selected to

accompany Saruman because of Yavanna’s foresight and her knowledge of what would

become of Sauron.

The position and characteristics of each wizard’s respective Vala can clearly be

seen to affect the way they represent different views towards nature. However, both

Saruman and Radagast, as the story progresses, leave the path set by their Vala and

becomes estranged from them, taking more extreme positions on a scale from full focus

on nature to no focus on nature. In contrast to Yavanna, Radagast becomes a

representative of passive nature, allowing for the desecration and exploitation of nature

to continue. Furthermore, he become connected to the concept of the pastoral because

of his retreat to his woodland home. Terry Gifford explains the concept of pastoral

retreat by connecting it to the idea of ‘Arcadia’ which is defined as a place in the

countryside that is thought to be perfect (19). It is to his own Arcadia that Radagast

retreats to, effectively abandoning the outside world and its inhabitants. In addition,

Radagast lacks the intrinsic power applied to wilderness through Yavanna and therefore

he is unable to act as a counterweight to the pro-industrial approach of Saruman and

instead he portrayed as a passive, naïve character representing a romantic, idyllic view

nature as a form of retreat. Similarly, Saruman transgresses from an environmental

approach where he respects nature to an approach where he abuses nature for his own

gains. As shall be discussed later in the analysis, the character of Saruman is also linked

to the concept of apocalypse and the ultimate destruction of nature. Gandalf, on the

Jonsson 8

other hand, stays on the path set out by Manwë and uses his wisdom to guide others in

order to create and maintain balance in Middle-Earth. In other words, for Gandalf to

create this ecological balance and unite humanity and nature, he must stay true to his

original mission and the ideal set by Manwë.5 Throughout The Lord of the Rings,

Tolkien implicitly highlights favourable characteristics in the struggle against

ecological devastation. Gandalf has here proved that he possesses two of these: faith

and wisdom.

In the few passages involving all three wizards, Gandalf is the focalizing character. This

makes his point-of-view the dominant one, which is in line with the idea of Gandalf as

the balancing force between them. In this central position, Gandalf highlights his

behaviour in relation to that of Radagast and Saruman so that the reader can know what

is good and what is bad. This can be seen in Gandalf’s story involving both Radagast

and Saruman during the council of Elrond:

‘The Nine have come forth again’ I answered. ‘They have crossed the River. So

Radagast said to me.’ ‘Radagast the Brown!’ laughed Saruman, and he no longer

concealed his scorn. ‘Radagast the Bird-tamer! Radagast the Simple! Radagast the

Fool! Yet he had just the wit to play the part that I set him… For I am Saruman the

Wise, Saruman the Ring-maker, Saruman of Many Colours!’ I looked at them and saw

that his robes, which had seemed white, were not so, but were woven of all colours,

and as he moved they shimmered and changed hue so that the eye was bewildered. ‘I

liked white better’ I said. ‘White!’ he sneered. ‘It serves as a beginning. White cloth

may be dyed. The white page can be overwritten; and the white light can be broken.’

‘In which case it is no longer white’ said I. ‘And he that breaks a thing to find out what

it is has left the path of wisdom.’ (Tolkien, FTR 252)

In this passage, Gandalf must face the realisation that the once wise and truthful master

of his order has failed his purpose and become evil. Gandalf, as the focalizing character,

reveals Saruman’s contempt of Radagast the Brown, because of Radagast’s preference

for the company of animals to that of other species. Saruman links being closely

connected to nature to being a fool or being simple. Radagast is mocked because of his

5 This leads to the Christian ideal of imitatio Christi (Imitation of Christ), where Gandalf acts in

imitation of what he believes Manwë would do. There are many such religious elements in Tolkien’s

works, but they shall not be further discussed in this study.

Jonsson 9

connection to the natural world and his ability to communicate with birds. In his

mockery of Radagast’s way of life, Saruman is by extension also mocking Yavanna.

However, Gandalf shows another way of how he is different from Saruman by implying

that Radagast might be a fool, but that being a fool can also be synonymous to being

honest and innocent, as Gandalf mentions in his story of his captivity in Saruman’s

fortress, Orthanc, “[i]t would be useless in any case to try and win over the honest

Radagast to treachery” (Tolkien, FTR 254-255). Innocence is often connected to nature

and through Gandalf’s story, Radagast is implicitly linked to his preferred element,

nature. As can be seen, there are multiple views of nature at work in this passage.

Saruman has a clear negative stance towards being linked to nature, his desire is not to

work with nature, but to make it work for him. The leader of the ents, Treebeard, tells

the hobbits Merry and Pippin about Saruman’s exploitative approach to nature, saying

that Saruman “does not care for growing things, except as far as they can serve him for

the moment” (Tolkien, TT 462). He oppresses and perverts the natural world, or as

Susan Jeffers labels it: Saruman relationship with the environment is that of “power

over” nature (75). This is placed in contrast with a power with-relationship where a

character and the environment are interdependent or a power from-relationship where

a character has a hierarchical relationship with the environment as a source of natural

resources (Jeffers 19).

Saruman highlights his own extreme position in relation to the other wizards

when pointing out that “the white page can be overwritten” (Tolkien, FTR 252). The

colour white, which is commonly linked to untouched, innocent nature (which Radagast

is a part of and Gandalf protects), is viewed by Saruman as undeveloped instead of

pure. He explicitly shows that he believes that an ‘overwritten page’, or a ‘civilised’

society is better than an untouched page, or a community based on contact with nature.

In claiming that white serves as a start, he is implicitly saying that what he has turned

into is a more evolved version of himself – making his later, environmentally

destructive actions the correct, more evolved response to the natural world. From

Saruman’s extreme position, the pastoral and wilderness are pre-industrial views that

would only mean that he would have to return to a submissive position under the eye

of the Valar. In this way, Saruman’s contempt for nature is intertwined with his desire

for power and separation from Aulë and the ecological ideals that the Valar represent.

Saruman shows his contempt for the environment by implying that being close to nature

is something of a past age, calling it “The Elder Days” (Tolkien, FTR 252). He believes

Jonsson 10

that it does not fit a more modern way of life and tries to convince Gandalf to join him

in “The Younger Days” (Tolkien, FTR 252). The younger days symbolise, for Saruman,

a step into an industrialised society under his rule. Treebeard speaks of Saruman’s

industrial plans, saying that “he is plotting to become a Power. He has a mind of metal

and wheels” (Tolkien, TT 462). According to Patricia Meyer Spacks, this highlights

Saruman as evil. She observes that overall “it is characteristic of the Enemy to depend

upon machinery rather than natural forces” (55). Hence, because of Saruman’s

affiliation with industrialism and especially machinery, as well as his distancing himself

from nature, the reader is made aware of his evil. He links being close to nature to being

part of the past and that adopting his industrial approach is instead the right way for the

new age. Thus, Saruman creates a divide between nature on one side and human-like

beings under his command on the other side. This establishes him as a representation

of ecological decline in favour of an industrial, anthropocentric world.

Radagast’s position, diametrically opposed to Saruman, as a representation of a

pre-industrial, idyllic view of nature is underlined because of his dedication to the

natural world. As such, Radagast also becomes linked to the concept of wilderness: for

him the natural world (in contrast to the non-natural, human world) is sacred and “a

construction mobilised to protect particular habitats and species” (Garrard 59).

However, as mentioned previously, even though Radagast is originally linked to

wilderness, he also becomes connected to the pastoral. In The Lord of the Rings, he is

absent because he is seeking what Gifford calls “pastoral escape “(21) which refers to

a conservative reconstruction of history. Instead, it is the ents that provide the

perspective of value and power in unordered nature. Matthew Dickerson and Jonathan

Evans write that “ents [similarly to Radagast] are strongly positioned against

technologies in which the natural environment is used wastefully for ostensibly

civilized purposes” (123). However, Radagast shares this underlying environmental

radicalism, and for that Saruman mocks him, thinking such behaviour is foolish.

Gandalf, on the other hand, does not, instead he refer to him as “a worthy wizard”

(Tolkien, FTR 250-251). Since Gandalf, as the focalizing character and a representative

of good, speaks against Saruman and speaks for Radagast’s connection with nature,

nature is also automatically portrayed as a something good. In contrast, Saruman’s

mockery shapes the readers’ attitude towards him and establishes that industrial greed

and environmental destruction is a sign of evil.

Jonsson 11

Radagast is the wizard that is closest to the natural world. Meyer Spacks

underlines the relation between the goodness of characters and their connection to

nature, she writes: “goodness is partly equated with understanding of nature, closeness

to the natural world” (54). This would make him, according to Meyer Spacks statement,

the most revered of the three wizards. However, he falls short of Gandalf in that he, in

contrast with his Vala Yavanna, is a representation of a passive approach towards the

protection of nature whilst Gandalf is a representation of a deep ecological approach

where all members of Middle-Earth have equal, intrinsic value.

Saruman, as mentioned above, is a representation of industrial advancement

through the desecration and destruction of nature. One of his methods of advancement

is linked to the idea of nature as silent, which, according to Jeffers, is a common notion

in Western culture. Elements that are silent are easily dehumanised and thus less worthy

of respect. Gandalf, as a representative of agential nature, gives nature a voice, breaking

that silence. For example, he listens, asks advice from, and shows respect to Treebeard

and Gwaihir. In contrast, Saruman is an example of what may befall a person who does

not listen to nature. He is an example of what Bennett and Royce explain as when

“[s]uccessful societies accumulate wealth through ecological destruction to the point at

which their very existence is undermined as a result of that wasting of the environment”

(162). Ignoring the voice of the natural world is done at one’s own peril, and in that

sense, Saruman’s punishment is a cautionary tale to the reader.

Saruman is the greatest wizard in terms of power. The ways in which he utilizes

his powers are important in order to underline how the way he acts towards the

environment separates him from his fellow wizards. Saruman craves the One Ring, an

instrument of pure evil created by Sauron, and it is what makes him change from the

environmentalist ways of Aulë to his later exploitative, pro-industrial ways. However,

Tolkien highlights Saruman’s change: in a letter from 1956, he explains that it is

impatience that causes Saruman’s fall, and that it came from a will to force others to

achieve his good ends (Carpenter, Letters 237). This implies that Saruman wants the

Ring and is doing evil deeds for good reasons, making his involvement in

environmental destruction more nuanced. In Saruman’s own words, what he is doing

does not mean “any real change in our designs, only in our means” (Tolkien, FTR 253).

It is this change of method that makes Saruman evil. In contrast, Radagast is never said

to use his powers in any context: his way of protecting nature is that of a helper. He

helps Gandalf by speaking with his bird-friends and telling them to act as spies and

Jonsson 12

messengers. Gandalf, on the other hand, uses his powers actively, going beyond his

primary mission to acts as a guide and counsellor, and in The Lord of the Rings, he

takes part in and leads battle forces against Sauron. At an earlier time in Middle-Earth,

Saruman was also actively using his powers to, at least initially, destroy Sauron. Only

later did he change his method by mimicking Sauron’s behaviour. In that sense, Gandalf

and Saruman’s relationship is not a case of the dichotomy between good and evil,

instead it is a case of a good and a bad way to achieve the same goal.

The imitation of another being can be seen in both Saruman and Gandalf, but

not in Radagast. As previously mentioned, the wizards were all originally acting in a

form of imitation of their respective Vala. This never changes for Gandalf who keeps

his balanced position throughout his mission as an emissary. However, Saruman

transgresses from what Jeffers labels as a power from his environment to a power over

his environment. Power from his environment is where he, similarly to Aulë, is

connected to his environment and uses it for his (unselfish) purposes. Power over one’s

environment is based on the exploitation of natural resources for personal gain and is

connected to the characteristics of the Enemy. I argue that Saruman transgresses from

an imitation of Aulë, to an imitation of Sauron. Originally, they are both Maiar in

service to Aulë, which makes it is easy to see Saruman during the time of The Lord of

the Rings as an imitation of Sauron. Furthermore, Saruman names himself “the Ring-

maker” (Tolkien, FTR 252), which implicitly compares him to Sauron, revealing his

own ambitions. The gravity of such a name lies in that the Ring is in a sense Sauron;

he has transferred most of his power to it and thus it becomes an extension of him. The

Ring and its creator are the quintessential examples of characters with power over their

environment, seeking to achieve the destruction of the free world, the enslavement of

all the races and the desecration of the natural world that they live in. Thus, Saruman’s

reference to himself as “Ring-maker” reveals his wish to destroy the natural world and

placing himself as the lord of Middle-Earth. In his desire for power, he has strayed far

from his purpose and separated himself from the attributes of Aulë, who loves the

creative process but does not crave possession. In contrast, Radagast is, as have been

mentioned previously, separated from Yavanna because of his division between nature

and human-like beings, transgressing from a key aspect of wilderness, which Garrard

describes as concern for “all identifiable entities or forms in the ecosphere” (22).

Gandalf is the one wizard who stays true and highlights Tolkien’s view of taking a deep

ecological approach to the world.

Jonsson 13

One aspect which separates the tree wizards is the active seeking of power.

Gandalf, as the focalizing character in the scene between him and Saruman, shows

himself to be resilient towards Saruman’s proposal, distancing himself and also

lecturing Saruman, saying “[h]e that breaks a thing to find out what it is has left the

path of wisdom” (Tolkien, FTR 252). Furthermore, Saruman makes this offer to

Gandalf, thus confirming that he sees Gandalf as superior to Radagast. Gandalf, when

telling his story, chooses to mention this which shows that he himself is above Radagast

and that he can also resist the temptations of Saruman, making him the ideal wizard of

the three. Later in the text, when Gandalf has died after his battle with the Balrog

(demonic spirit), he is brought back as Gandalf the White and he then refers to himself

as “Saruman as he should have been” (Tolkien, TT 484), signifying his ascent to the

highest order of wizards. Gandalf is in that moment the bearer of the symbolism of

white and is alone out of all wizards on the path of wisdom that Saruman abandons.

From this role in the order, he ascends to his true potential as an emissary of Manwë

and acts as a shepherd or steward for the people of Middle-Earth. It is through this role,

what Jeffers calls “power with” (19) their environment that Tolkien shows his reader

how humankind is supposed to relate to the environment. Dickerson and Evans argue

that this position, that of steward, is where Tolkien truly reveals how humanity should

live in accordance with nature. They mention that “[i]n claiming this role [as a steward],

Gandalf makes no connection between stewardship and rule; he neither claims nor

wants the rule of any realm, great or small” (38). Gandalf’s reluctance to rule, but

willingness to act is what sets him apart from his fellow wizards since Radagast is

passive and Saruman is power hungry. Furthermore, it is also Gandalf, in this role as

steward, who is the bearer of the ecological message of the texts: “it is not our part to

master all the tides of the world, but to do what is in us for the succour of those years

wherein we are set… so that those who live after may have clean earth to till” (Tolkien,

RTK 861. Added emphasis). In this passage, Gandalf’s words echo off the page and he

does not only encourage the people of Middle-Earth to act against ecological

devastation, but the voice of Tolkien reverberates and calls the people of his world to

action. For the purpose of this study, the concept of stewardship, which is often central

in ecocriticism, serves only to underline Gandalf’s position as a balanced character in

contrast to his fellow wizards’ extreme ways. Otherwise, the idea of stewardship is the

foundation of many scholarly works on Tolkien, with Ents, Elves and Eriador (2011)

by Dickerson and Evans being the most prominent. They summarise Gandalf’s role as

Jonsson 14

a steward by stating that “Gandalf makes it clear that a steward exists to serve others,

and not vice versa” (38). This is highly relevant in describing Gandalf’s unique position

amongst the wizards who, apart from Gandalf, acts in contrast with this or does not act

at all.

The phrase “clean earth to till” (Tolkien, RTK 861) has an apocalyptic

connotation to it, since it highlights what will happen if people do not act in defence of

the natural world. This is the destruction of natural resources and by extension there

will be no “clean earth to till” which would lead to the extinction of life. This message

is found in Bennett and Royce’s introduction to ecology, who claim that even though

ecology is concerned with today, it is fundamentally a dream of a better tomorrow. It

is Gandalf who leads this ecological battle towards a brighter future against the forces

of industry whilst Saruman is a cog in the industrial wheel and Radagast is nowhere to

be found. Therefore, Gandalf both shows that humankind must act in defence of nature

so that industrial progress does not destroy it and that he is superior to his fellow

wizards. Furthermore, Gandalf is the only wizard to fulfil his purpose and accomplish

his mission: Saruman fails because he has lost his connection with nature and human-

like beings and his sole focus is how to control them. In contrast, Radagast fails because

he has lost his connection with human-like beings and his sole focus is the wellbeing

of nature.

Saruman and Radagast uphold a divide between nature and human-like being,

whilst Gandalf has a more holistic view of the world. For Saruman, this means that he

has literally stopped listening to nature; Treebeard claims that Saruman used to walk in

his woods and listen to him, but do not anymore (Tolkien, TT 462). Thus, Saruman is

linked to modern Western culture and he can carry out his deeds of deforestation and

destruction in the name of progress. Radagast, in contrast, is so deeply invested in

nature that all other things are silent. Therefore, he loses his connection to others,

because balance is required in order to understand both sides. Gandalf represents that

balance: he does not divide nature and human-like beings, he considers them of equal

importance for the world. Furthermore, he does not consider nature to be silent. He is

the friend of ents and eagles whilst also being the guide and companion to hobbit, elves

and humans. Curry argues that Gandalf, in breaking this divide, also acts as a mediator

of pluralism, bringing people of different ‘races’ together, including other sentient

beings of nonhuman form, such as the ents. This is contrasted with the strive for a

homogenic, slave-population by Saruman.

Jonsson 15

In discovering the wizards’ different positions, it is important to not only look at them,

but also look at their companions. Not only does the type of companions that the

wizards keep highlight what they represent: the hierarchical positions of these

companions are also important to understand the position of each wizard.

Radagast has abandoned most of his links to human-like beings in favour of a

more secluded way of life, focused on nature. His involvement in The Lord of the Rings

is that of a helper and a passive character, therefore, his companionship is only seen

through Gandalf. In Gandalf’s story, which is mentioned above, he gives Radagast

instructions to help defeat Sauron: “[s]end out messages to all the beasts and birds that

are your friends. Tell them to bring news of anything that bears on this matter [news of

the Ring] to Saruman and Gandalf” (Tolkien, FTR 251. Added emphasis). One of the

beings that Radagast send is the lord of the eagles, Gwaihir, who later becomes a

companion to Gandalf. Gwaihir’s regal position is important and is also a common

theme for Gandalf’s companions. The fact that Gandalf becomes close with beings of

regal status that originally were close to Radagast or Saruman highlights their decline

as well as Gandalf’s elevated position. I order to affect change in the world, Gandalf

turns to beings from different castes, high and low. Thus, he underlines that the

protection of the natural world is a key issue for all. In addition, the elf-lord Elrond

speaks about this need for collective efforts against evil (environmental destruction)

saying “[t]his quest [destroying the Ring] may be attempted by the weak with as much

hope as the strong. Yet such is oft the course of deeds that move the wheels of the

world: small hands do them because they must, while the eyes of the great are

elsewhere” (Tolkien, FTR 262). This is ultimately what causes the destruction of the

Ring: it is destroyed by a hobbit whilst Sauron is distracted by ‘the great’ kings and

warriors of Middle-Earth. The destruction of Saruman’s home by the ents and the

hobbits is also in some way caused by his inability to see ‘the weak’ as a threat, ents

and hobbits mean little to him because he would only consider ‘the great’ worthy of his

time. Furthermore, associating with beings of regal status is logistically beneficial to

Gandalf since a king or queen is often followed by many subjects which spares Gandalf

the effort of recruiting one person at a time. Through this, Tolkien highlights the need

for governments to act as a shepherd for the people but also for the people to act

independently. Another example of a royal companion is the king of the people of

Rohan, Théoden, who is originally a companion of Saruman that later chooses to

Jonsson 16

support Gandalf in his endeavours. Through his relationship with Théoden, Gandalf

shows his care for humans, proving his balanced view between human-like beings and

the natural world. The most prominent group of beings that Gandalf is linked to are the

hobbits: in The Lord of the Rings, Gandalf highlights his unique companionship with

the hobbits, saying “[a]mong the Wise, I am the only one that goes in for hobbit-lore”

(Tolkien, FTR 47). The hobbits’ environmental position in Middle-Earth is that of an

agrarian, power with-nature type of relationship. However, before the events in The

Lord of the Rings, the hobbits are passive in their dealings with the world, as Merry

says: “Shire-folk have been so comfortable for so long they don’t know what to do”

(Tolkien, RTK 983). Gandalf’s effect on these passive hobbits is to make them active,

or more specifically, he guides and empowers the hobbits in order for them to be able

to take a stance against environmental destruction. Four of the members in The

Fellowship of the Ring are hobbits, and these are the subjects of Gandalf’s explicit

guidance. When the hobbits return to their agricultural homeland in the Shire, they are

empowered to defend their home from Saruman’s evil occupiers (Tolkien, RTK 975-

998). This final act of cleansing their idyllic, agrarian home from an enemy that is

defined by its use of machinery is in itself a symbol of the success of Gandalf’s mission

to guide the people of Middle-Earth.

In order for Saruman to subdue the Shire, he uses misleading rhetoric and

propaganda about the benefits of exploiting nature. He acts through hobbits and

humans, those who are susceptible to his rhetoric, in order to destroy the agricultural,

idyllic home of the hobbits. According to Dickerson and Evans, Saruman uses a

“progressivist rhetoric” (208) in order to lure the hobbits of the Shire, and that he

disguises his plans of environmental destruction as “benign-sounding terminology of

‘gathering’ and ‘sharing’ “(209). This underlines Saruman’s position as a representative

of a malignant nature/human divide for personal gain, causing an ecological decline

which in the end backlashes at the character (Saruman’s death), signifying the intrinsic

power of nature. Therefore, the character of Saruman underlines how not to live and

act, whilst Gandalf (through his apprentices, the four hobbits), demonstrates a life of

natural interconnectedness with moderate machinal progress.

Saruman, in contrast with Gandalf, goes from a position of high status, with

companions matching it, to assuming the position of a tyrant and dictator without

companions, only subordinates. He then becomes linked to hierarchically lower beings

Jonsson 17

such as the evil men of Dunland and orcs.6 As previously mentioned, the dwarves and

Saruman are connected through their common background with Aulë the Smith, and

even though the dwarves are not considered to be companions to Saruman, it is

important to highlight why the dwarves are considered good when Saruman is

considered evil. Jeffers discussion on Tolkien’s characters’ power from and power over

their environment helps to shed some light on the difference between Saruman and the

dwarves. The dwarves take power from their environment: they are dependent on

natural elements in order to thrive. The dwarves worship stone, metals and mining

because it connects them to Aulë, whom they consider a God. Even though they are

prone to greed in relation to their work, they love the natural world for what it gives

them – their precious stone. In contrast, Saruman does not love the natural world,

unless, as Treebeard highlight when it “can serve him for the moment” (Tolkien, TT

462). Therefore, it is not only Saruman’s connection to industrialism or machines that

make him evil, it the fact that he seeks power over the natural world which sets him

aside from beings such as the dwarves.

Saruman has been shown to represent an industrial, progressive view of

humanity’s relation to nature. In the mind of Tolkien, this clearly is a mark of evil:

Tolkien even labels cars and planes as “Mordor-gadgets” in a letter from 1944

(Carpenter, Letters 88). However, Saruman transgresses deeper and is separated further

from his fellow wizards due to his affiliation with the late-modern biochemical branch

of genetically modified organism (GMO). Relating to the idea that only Eru Ilúvatar is

permitted to create life, it is unique to the Enemy to distort and pervert Creation, with

the original dark lord Melkor making the orcs and his apprentice Sauron continuing that

work. In a letter from 1954, Tolkien writes on the making of evil beings (in contrast

with creating), saying that “there are not some ‘tolerated’ sub-creational counterfeits”

(Carpenter, Letters 191). Tolkien’s views on this is highlighted to the reader from

Treebeard who tells Merry and Pippin that Saruman’s new orc-species, the Uruk-Hai,

6 In the context of ‘evil men’, it is relevant to highlight the criticism against Tolkien on the charge of

racism. In The Lord of the Rings, evil is often linked with the colour black, ‘Black speech of Mordor’,

‘the Black hand’ etc. In contrast, good is often linked with white, such as Gandalf the White or the

White-rider. However, Curry nuances this criticism by quoting Brian Attebery, saying “this ethical

division is rendered increasingly invalid as the story progresses, as evil emerges amongst the kingly

Gondorians, the blond Riders of Rohan, the seemingly incorruptible wizards, and even the thoroughly

English hobbit-folk of the Shire” (137). Although this critique of Tolkien is valid, it is beyond the

scope of my argument.

Jonsson 18

are stronger than the normal orcs, “I wonder what he has done? Are they Men he has

ruined, or has he blended the races of Orcs and Men? That would be a black evil”

(Tolkien, TT 462). The Uruk-Hai and the orcs are a sort of post-natural, apocalyptic

species, adapted to live under harsh conditions, not seldom leading to them resorting to

cannibalism as a food source.

Saruman’s subordinates, especially the uruks7 and orcs, helps to further distance

him from the positions of his fellow wizards by connecting him to a new concept – the

post-apocalyptic. This symbolises the worst-case scenario if humanity’s trust and love

for industry and machines were to go too far, creating an irreversible divide between

nature and humanity. In such a world, depicted in contemporary novels such as The

Road (2006) by Cormac McCarthy, characters may be faced with a post-apocalyptic

reality of a depleted earth where people have resorted to cannibalism to survive. The

hobbit Frodo highlights that the orcs are not originally consumers of poor foods and

drinks, saying that “[f]oul waters and foul meats they’ll take, [only] if they can get no

better” (Tolkien, RTK 893). The uruks themselves are open about the consummation of

human flesh, underlining that it is Saruman who provides it: “[w]e are the servants of

Saruman the Wise, the White Hand: the Hand that gives us man’s-flesh to eat” (Tolkien,

TT 436). Furthermore, in his imitation of Sauron, Saruman strives towards an

authoritarian regime with a slave-based economy. Curry places this type of rule against

the municipal democracy of the hobbits, creating a comparison between the political

systems of the wizard’s companions. In order to command his companions, Saruman

has his voice, which is described as powerful. Thus, Saruman is linked to extremes such

as the apocalypse, cannibalism, the post-natural and slavery. All of these extremes have

some affiliation with the idea of a human/nature divide, against the deep ecological

tendency of Gandalf.

In conclusion, through this ecocritical interpretation of The Lord of the Rings, Tolkien,

whose passion for the environment is well-known, lets his deep ecological sentiment

shine through his text. The ideal is presented as a holistic view of the world where “all

identifiable entities or forms in the ecosphere” (Garrard 22) have intrinsic value and are

worthy of respect. The three characters analysed in this study highlight different

positions towards protection and preservation of nature. Through the characters

7 Abbreviated form of ’uruk-hai’.

Jonsson 19

Saruman and Radagast, Tolkien creates a dichotomous relationship between two

extreme positions in relation to the natural world. Saruman’s evil is based on his

inability to view the world as a web where all things are intertwined, he sees nature as

subordinate and voiceless, which makes it easy to exploit. Furthermore, through

Saruman, Tolkien also presents a vision of what could happen if his position would

become the dominant one – the destruction of the natural world. Radagast, in contrast,

is extreme in his own way due to his lack of interest and concern for anything else than

nature. He too upholds a divide between nature and human-like being, failing to see

them as equal parts in the world.

To highlight the desired, healthy position (and possibly his own position),

Tolkien adds a balanced character to the puzzle, Gandalf. From Gandalf relationship to

characters of regal status, to his position as a focalizing character, the reader is made

aware of Gandalf’s position as an ideal character. What makes his position favourable

is his holistic view of the world, seeing all beings as equally valuable. Furthermore, he

becomes the bearer of the ecological message of the novels: taking action against these

extremes in order to secure a future balance “so that those who live after may have

clean earth to till” (Tolkien, RTK 861).

This study is limited and therefore there are naturally topics that lie outside the

scope of the study. It opens up for further investigation into individual characters and

their specific implications for the message of the novels. Furthermore, one topic that is

briefly touched upon but could be developed further, is the importance of the Valar as

an ideal and how that affects different beings in Middle-Earth. Another question is how

or if the message of the novel can influence its readers and their views on nature:

however, this is outside the scope of this study and better left to the field of psychology.

The popularity of The Lord of the Rings can, to some extent, trace back to its

contemporary relevance in society. I argue that the focus of this study, the ecological

interpretation of the novels, makes them more relevant than ever before. From the wish

to protect nature, on a global and local level, to the recognition in the “progressivist

rhetoric” (Dickerson and Evans, 208) presented in politics today, the The Lord of the

Rings continues to be relevant to its readers, more than half a century after it was first

published.

Jonsson 20

Works Cited

Primary Source:

Tolkien, J. R. R. The Fellowship of the Ring. 1954. The Lord of the Rings. Single

Volume Edition, HarperCollins, 1994, pp. 21–398.

Tolkien, J. R. R. The Two Towers. 1954. The Lord of the Rings. Single Volume Edition,

HarperCollins, 1994, pp. 403–725.

Tolkien, J. R. R. The Return of the King. 1955. The Lord of the Rings. Single Volume

Edition, HarperCollins, 1994, pp. 731–1008.

Secondary Source:

Bennett, Andrew & Nicholas Royce. An Introduction to Literature, Criticism and

Theory. Routledge, 2016.

Brooke-Rose, Christine. The Evil Ring: Realism and the Marvelous. Poetics Today 1,

no. 4, 1980. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1771887.

Campbell, Liam. The Ecological Augury in the Works of JRR Tolkien. Walking Tree

Publishers, 2011.

Carpenter, Humphrey. JRR Tolkien: A Biography. George Allen & Unwin Publishers,

1978.

Curry, Patrick. Defending Middle-Earth: Tolkien, Myth, and Modernity. Houghton

Mifflin Co., 2004.

Curry, Patrick. Deep Roots in a time of Frost: Essays on Tolkien. Walking Tree

Publishers, 2014.

Deitering, Cynthia. “The Postnatal Novel: Toxic consciousness in Fiction of the

1980s.” The Ecocritical Reader, edited by C. Glotfelty and H. Fromm, The

University of Georgia Press, 1996, pp.196–203.

Dickerson, Matthew and Jonathan Evans. Ents, Elves and Eriador: The Environmental

Vision of JRR Tolkien. Kentucky University Press, 2011.

Garrard, Greg. Ecocriticism. Routledge, 2004.

Jeffers, Susan. Arda Inhabited: Environmental Relationships in The Lord of the Rings.

The Kent State University Press, 2014.

The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, edited by Humphrey Carpenter and Christopher Tolkien,

Houghton Mifflin, 2000.

Jonsson 21

Meyer Spacks, Patricia. Power and Meaning in The Lord of the Rings in

Understanding The Lord of the Rings: The Best of Tolkien Criticism, ed.

Zimbardo, Rose A. and Isaacs, Neil D. Houghton Mifflin Co., 2004.

Tolkien, J. R. R. The Silmarillion, edited by Christopher Tolkien. HarperCollins,

1999.

Tolkien, J. R. R. Unfinished Tales: Of Númenor & Middle-Earth, edited by

Christopher Tolkien. HarperCollins, 2014.