beansandrice's reviews
109 reviews

If you thought Fellowship was racist, oh boy do you have a lot to work through on this one! 

The Bad
There are more serious criticisms I have, but the pacing is very inconsistent. Some sequences move naturally into one another, while other times action grinds to a complete halt or alternatively appears out of nowhere. Reading this made me think Tolkien really could've used a heavier-handed editor.

For the worse parts, there's obviously the racist depiction of the Uruk-hai, who even referring to the heroes as

"Whiteskins"

. Yet they don't even seem that bad compared to the treatment of Gollum, a key character in this volume. Described as "a thin black fellow," Gollum exists to be depraved and tortured only to turn on his master. He's the 17th century trope of The Unfaithful Servant, with the mind of an 18th century caricature of an insane asylum patient with the voice and body of a 19th century "African savage." All of this made palatable in the 20th century by Tolkien's fantasy setting, laying the groundwork for these bigoted tropes to continue onward in Fantasy writing well into the 21st century. 

Beyond this, the most striking thing about Gollum is how much empathy I felt for him on this read through. His terrible treatment at the hands of our protagonists made me lose much more empathy for the others, even the beloved character of Faramir who I lost all love for on this read. 

Some people reading this may think I'm just bringing values from today onto Tolkien's writings, but he really is the last gasp of such blatant misogyny in 20th century literature as many many others had moved past such bigoted ideas. Beyond that, I can't read it without these elements deeply affecting me, since Gollum and the Orcs are a key fixtures in over half of the chapters. 

The Good
Despite everything else, there are glimmers of greatness in this text. Treebeard and the ents manage to tell an incredibly compelling ecological narrative, despite being the most divorced dudes I've ever read in a book. As always, the nuance and complexity of the influence of the Ring remains a highlight. 

Beyond that, the homoerotic subtext (and oftentimes just text) is much stronger in these books than in any of the others. In Book III, we get small subtext in how Legolas and Gimli speak so fondly of one another. But that seems like small potatoes compared to Sam's deep and explicit love for Frodo. There is space for non-romantic readings of their relationship, but the power of these queer readings remains potent even out to today. I can only imagine how impactful they must've been when these books were written. 

---

All this said, the negative parts affect almost every single section of this reading. I can't view this book without those other parts, and for that I almost gave this book 1/5. But there is still good stuff in here, despite everything, earning the books an extra +1.75 stars. This book is incredibly painful to go back to, but there are still many reasons to return to it. 

-1 star for racism and sexism. Tolkien's era doesn't change that, he had many contemporaries that were way better on this stuff. Come on, dude. 

The things I like about these books became some foundational parts of the ways I relate to storytelling, and on my outlook on the world. The things I dislike about these books ended up being the most foundational influences on our media environment.

If you liked the movies, I strongly suggest reading the books. Approach them with an open mind, but don't cut Tolkien too much slack either. Also, don't skip the poems and songs! Reading them aloud is also quite rewarding

In the end, this series for me will always be about being sad while hanging out in nature. I wish there were more people out there who liked what I liked in this 

This is a classic for a reason, and is an essential read for anyone curious about the colonial and post-colonial world.  

I can't count the number of times I've seen people reference or cite this book. That said, I often see people talk about it with regards to Fanon's views on violence. While this is an essential part of the book and undeniably resonant, Fanon doesn't spend that much of the text needing to justify anti-colonial violence. His treatment of it at the start of the book is all he needs. Rather than focusing on "justifying" violence, he spends a much greater portion of the book discussing the post-colonial bourgeoisie, and the broad state of society when a colony attempts to gain freedom. He analyzes all of this from the zoomed out government and society levels, and also from the very individual and psychological levels. The case studies that the book ends with are incredibly powerful, and in my memory they will remain the centerpiece of my perspectives on this book, even as the years pass. 

I've seen this book recommended in many different places, and it had been on my list for years. But I think it really is built for a specific kind of person: someone with close ties to an organization looking to impact social change, especially those who are in leadership or management roles. If that sounds like you, I strongly recommend this. But even for myself (years of activism work, but moving to a new city means I mostly just volunteer doing housekeeping stuff for a local queer youth org), I felt like brown was often speaking to someone else, and not to me. 
 
That said, brown still does amazing work in this book. I really appreciate her use of quotes throughout this, and how much she draws on her own personal experience through this. Beyond all, I find brown shines the best when asking questions. Even when brown and I have very different answers to her questions, the asking itself is incredibly powerful since she has such a keen sense on what needs asking. Both in this book and her work elsewhere, it's always her questions that stick with me, and I've carried them with me ever since. 

That said, there were moments where brown diminishes her own work through this book that left me feeling kind of odd. This is especially true in her relationship to math and science, since she draws majorly on both throughout the whole book, yet she always makes distance between them and herself. This led to multiple moments of her drawing dichotomies between "sciences" and "spiritual" work. This might be okay for some, but I was disappointed since many of those that had recommended this book were people working on breaking down the false borders between those ideas. Working beyond this dichotomy is foundational for myself as well, especially in my work helping others. As a result, there are some sections where I had to do a lot of work to make this text useful and powerful for myself. 

At the end of the day, this book feels like the perfect book for some particular kind of people. If you think that's you, I strongly encourage you to read this. This book might not be a foundational piece of theory everyone needs, but it has sections that are resonant regardless of where you come from. 

Just didn't grab me

Audiobook came off of loan and i never picked it back up. I'd be super down to read again though.