Middle Earth’s Messianic Mythology Remixed:

Gandalf’s Death and Resurrection in Novel and Film

[See also the original PDF of this article.]

Abstract

In the mythology of the very influential The Lord of the Rings, J. R. R. Tolkien employed several Christ figures, the most obvious being the wizard Gandalf. In Tolkien’s “fundamentally religious and Catholic” novel, the symbolism of Gandalf’s “death and resurrection” scenes was implicit, but Peter Jackson’s film versions visually made Gandalf’s Christ-figure symbolism more explicit. This article will explore:

• The cultural impact of Tolkien’s mythology
• The meaning of myth to Tolkien
• The characteristics of a Christ figure
• What a Christ figure subtext may add to the psychological/mythological impact of a work of art
• How Gandalf’s death and resurrection scenes portrayed him as a Christ figure
• How these two scenes in the films diverged from the book
• The possible meaning of that divergence (of the mythology remixed)

 

Article

Cultural Impact of the Novel and Film

One of the most influential works of literature written in the twentieth century was J. R. R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings. Forty-six years after the novel’s initial publication, this appraisal appeared in The Kansas City Star: “Tolkien’s epic trilogy remains the ultimate quest, the ultimate battle between good and evil. . . . Endlessly imitated, it never has been surpassed.”[1] Tolkien’s novel, originally published in three volumes (1954 through 1955), is still in print over a half century later and has been translated into at least 38 languages.[2] It has been adapted into other media, such as graphic novels, games, calendars, movies, and even a musical,[3] and it has influenced a generation of sword-and-sorcery and other fantasy novels and games.[4]

Popular interest in Tolkien’s work was rekindled in the twenty-first century by Peter Jackson’s three film adaptations.[5] Filmed consecutively during 16 months in New Zealand with a 2,400 member crew, the combined trilogy (in terms of shooting schedule, crew size, and overall budget) was “the biggest film undertaking of all time.”[6] The three award-winning films are all in the top 11 highest grossing films in history with a combined take in the billions. The films introduced Tolkien’s world to multitudes of people who had never read the novel and provided a rich audio-visual banquet to Tolkien’s literary fans.[7] In spite of great challenges in adapting Tolkien’s text to the screen, the films remained remarkably true to Tolkien’s vision.[8] Despite some reservations, literary critic and Tolkien fan Brian Rosebury wrote: “the impressive achievement of Jackson and his team remains the only phenomena in the cultural afterlife of The Lord of the Rings that could conceivably threaten to occlude the work itself in our collective awareness. . . . [It] is conceivable that, as generations grow up who have had ready access to both versions from childhood, the film’s representations of place, character, incident and theme may be the ones normalized in popular consciousness.”[9]

 

Tolkien and Myth

Tolkien’s story has become embedded in popular consciousness, in part, because it is deeply mythical. “Myth” denotes diverse things to different people. To some, myth is only a story that “isn’t true.” To others, myth offers meaning for life. “A myth is a way of making sense in a senseless world. Myths are narrative patterns that give significance to our existence,” wrote psychiatrist Rollo May. “Myths are like the beams in a house: not exposed to outside view, they are the structure which holds the house together so people can live in it.”[10] Similarly Frank McConnell wrote, “Dreams are the stories that get us through the night, but myths are the stories that get us through the day.”[11]

The definition, validity, and usefulness of myths has been argued since at least the days of Plato. Anthropologist Wendy Doniger O’Flaherty called Plato “the first great demythologizer[, who] ‘deconstructed’ the myths of Homer and Hesiod.”[12] Plato contrasted mere “fabricated myths” with superior “true history.”[13] On the other hand, however, Plato saw value in a “noble lie.” O’Flaherty commented, “People do have to have myths, Plato concedes; if they don’t believe in the old ones, we must construct new ones for them.... For Plato admits that a myth says something that cannot be said in any other way, that cannot be translated into a logical or even a metaphysical statement. A myth says something that can only be said in a story.”[14] Not only will new myths fill a mythological vacuum, but they enhance our lives as O’Flaherty also observed: “New myths move us into new worlds where we can begin to think thoughts that not only were impossible to think within our old familiar world of ideas but that we could not even realize we had been unable to think in that world.”[15]

In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, Plato’s demythologizing descendants proliferated.[16] Various cultural groups wanting to eliminate myth from life paradoxically consisted of those “who have embraced secular modernity and those who abhor it.”[17] Secular humanists replaced myth and religion with the scientific method. Liberal theologians stripped myth from religious texts while searching for a demythologized historical Jesus. Conservative fundamentalists viewed myths as devilish lies that “constitute dangerous rivals to Christian truth and may lead the unwary astray.”[18] Running counter to these demythologizing currents, Tolkien believed myth had enormous value, and he created his own new myth of Middle Earth.

The ultimate significance of myth to Tolkien was revealed in a conversation with his friend C. S. Lewis. Before Lewis became a famous Christian writer, Lewis was for years an atheist. Part of the process that led to his conversion was a conversation with Tolkien[19] about the truth and/or falsehood of myth. In Humphrey Carpenter’s biography of Lewis, which recreated part of that conversation, Lewis loved Norse myths:

But [Lewis] still did not believe in the myths that delighted him. Beautiful and moving though such stories might be, they were (he said) ultimately untrue. As he expressed it to Tolkien, myths are ‘lies and therefore worthless, even though breathed through silver’.

No, said Tolkien. They are not lies....

[Tolkien continued,] man is not ultimately a liar. He may pervert his thoughts into lies, but he comes from God, and it is from God that he draws his ultimate ideals. . . . Therefore, . . . not merely the abstract thoughts of man but also his imaginative inventions must originate with God, and must in consequence reflect something of eternal truth. In making a myth, . . . a storyteller . . . is actually fulfilling God’s purpose, and reflecting a splintered fragment of the true light. Pagan myths are therefore never just ‘lies’: there is always something of the truth in them.[20]

Tolkien’s “new” myth of Middle Earth had components from many ancient stories. One such component adding a mythic dimension to his story was his use of several Christ figures, characters who in some way parallel the biblical story of Jesus, characters that vividly reflect “a splintered fragment of the true light.” Frodo, Aragorn, and Gandalf[21] could all be viewed as highlighting different aspects of a Christ figure. Frodo, as suffering servant, figuratively bears the sin of the world on his Via Dolorosa[22] toward Mount Doom. Aragorn, as warrior-king, echoes Revelation’s “King of Kings and Lord of Lords” who defeats evil and reigns in a new age of peace and healing of the nations.[23] Gandalf, as prophet, first understands and proclaims the danger of the one ring, helps form and lead the Fellowship, “exorcizes” Saruman (as if he were a New Testament demon) from Théoden, and crowns Aragorn as king.[24] Both Frodo and Aragorn have symbolic death and resurrection scenes. Frodo, paralyzed by Shelob’s sting and wrapped up in spider-silk grave clothes, is thought to be dead by Sam for a time. In the film, but not the book, Aragorn plunges into a canyon’s river during a battle and is presumed lost by his comrades. Eventually Frodo and Aragorn “resurrect” and return as their former selves to the journey. Gandalf, in contrast, literally dies and returns transformed. At his return in the film, Gandalf visually bears a striking resonance with popular images of the risen Christ. The strong symbolism of “death and resurrection” scenes makes Gandalf the most obvious Christ figure of the three characters.

Christ Figure Codes

Christ figures have appeared in many works of literature and film, but how exactly do we recognize one? A Christ figure is a character who symbolizes Christ in a significant way. Spiritual symbolism has a long history. One of the earliest symbolic representations or veiled iconographic references to Jesus in the early centuries of the church was the use of the ichthus (or ichthys[25]) fish symbol. With Christianity outlawed in the Roman Empire and persecutions spilling the blood of martyrs, Christian groups gathered covertly. According to tradition, Christians adopted a symbolic “secret code” to recognize one another and to guide followers to the changing meeting locations.[26] This symbol consisted of two intersecting arcs that resembled a stylized profile of a fish. The symbol was easily created and was appropriate because of several associations of fish with Jesus (from the feeding of thousands through loaf and fish multiplication[27] to miraculous catches[28] to Jesus calling his disciples to leave their nets and become “fishers of men”).[29] What became the most important coincidental connotation, however, was that the Greek word for fish, ichthus, also formed an acronym for Iesous Christos Theou Uios Soter or “Jesus Christ, God’s Son, Savior.” This correspondence ensured its popularity because it “held for Christians a meaning of the highest significance; it was a brief profession of faith in the divinity of Christ.”[30] After the fourth century, the symbolism of the fish seemed to wane,[31] but in the late twentieth century, this symbol resurged and became popularly known as the “Jesus fish” and has been used on diverse media (from jewelry to business cards to bumper stickers) and for diverse purposes (from adornment to identification to proclamation to parody).[32]

In the time of the early church, the ichthus was an icon hiding in plain sight for all to see. The ichthus was mere scratches in sand or stone for some, but the pattern of two simple interconnected curved lines held profound significance for those who understood the meaning of the sign. That interpretive dichotomy exists for Christ figures in films today. What may be only celluloid “scratches” for many moviegoers may be metaphors of profound importance for those who see and appreciate the meaning behind the pattern. The ability to “decode” the symbolism adds new dimensions to a piece of art. Partial decoding may occur on an unconscious level. For Christ figures, such themes as sacrifice, suffering, death, resurrection, and salvation are powerful on any level of understanding. Bringing the complete “decoded” message to consciousness, however, reveals fuller meaning in a story.

The ichthus symbol on a surface visual level is just two curved lines, but on another level the meaning behind the pattern forms a “holy subtext.”[33] In movies or novels, any subtext is a “covert storyline” that is a part of the overt plot (the text). Like a Russian Matryoshka nesting doll that opens up to reveal a smaller doll inside, the subtext lies within the text.[34] Opening up the text to find the subtext (whether “secular” or “holy”) brings new meaning to the film experience. In particular, a holy subtext consists of “anonymous religiousness”[35] or “overtly religious themes in a secular ‘wrapper.’”[36] With such subtexts, Anton Karl Kozlovic noted, “secular films can engage in religious storytelling about biblical characters, ideas and themes without appearing ‘religious.’ In fact, innumerable Christ-figures and other holy subtexts are hidden within the popular cinema.”[37] With various intents, holy subtexts containing increasingly complex Christ-figure “codes” have been used in art and literature across the millennia. In the twentieth century, movies became one of the world’s dominant transmitters of art and literature. (Films are currently rivaled only by television programming in this sense, but with easy access through cable, satellite dishes, and DVDs, many people see more movies on their home television sets than in theaters.) Movies with holy subtexts may provide for many people (especially those attending few if any church services) their greatest exposure to Christology.

“Christ” and “Messiah” are essentially interchangeable in the New Testament since the Greek “Christ” and Hebrew “Messiah” both mean “Anointed One” after the practice of anointing kings. Messianic concepts varied widely in biblical times, but in general, people expected the Messiah to be a king, savior, and redeemer. Today, “Christ” is more narrowly denoted than “Messiah.” A “messiah” can generally refer to any savior figure, but “Christ” refers more specifically to Jesus’ identity and mission.

Without some analysis of what a Christ figure is, some viewers may remain oblivious to all messianic movie metaphors, while other viewers with opposite proclivities may strive to see Christ figures everywhere. Anton Karl Kozlovic noted: “Christ-figures are built into many popular films . . . , but they are frequently ignored by critics, unappreciated by film fans, or resisted by anti-religionists. Conversely, believers sometimes want to see them where none credibly exist, thus religiously distorting their reading of the films. So, what can be legitimately called a cinematic Christ-figure?”[38] Kozlovic proposed 25 structural characteristics[39] of a cinematic Christ figure, although not all 25 may be found in a particular character. I offer below a different, more compressed schema relevant to the character of Gandalf.

To truly be considered a Christ figure in a film, the character’s resemblance to Jesus, as Peter Malone suggested, “needs to be significant and substantial, otherwise it is trivial.”[40] Also, the symbolism “needs to be understood from the text and texture of the work of art, be it classical or popular, and not read into the text with Christian presuppositions.”[41] To be considered a Christ figure in a film, the protagonist must show a significant number of analogies to the life and work of Jesus. In the scenes from The Lord of the Rings considered here, Gandalf has the following analogous traits:

• Comes from an extraordinary origin[42]
• Possesses a “secret identity” and dual nature[43]
• Displays a distinctive appearance[44]
• Exhibits extraordinary powers[45]
• Generates awe and wonder[46]
• Gathers and leads disciples[47]
• Saves others[48]
• Suffers a sacrificial death[49]
• Descends into “hell”[50]
• Rises from the dead[51]

These items will be discussed more in their contexts below.

Tolkien Intensified

In Tolkien’s novel, the symbolism of Gandalf’s death and resurrections scenes was implicit, but (as will be demonstrated) Peter Jackson’s films visually enhanced the Christ-figure symbolism[52] surrounding Gandalf to a more explicit level. Although the more explicit symbolism concerning Gandalf is just one example of differences in details between the novel and the films, overall the films were remarkably faithful in spirit to the novel. In adapting a thousand-page novel for film, director Peter Jackson,[53] his screenwriters, film editors, and others had to make many choices about what to condense, eliminate, rearrange, and—in some cases—add.[54] In the case of Gandalf’s death and resurrection scenes, the scenes seemed true to the spirit of the novel, but several details were visually added that enhanced the religious symbolism.

Religious symbolism permeates the novels.[55] Tolkien stated that his text was “a fundamentally religious and Catholic work; unconsciously so at first, but consciously in the revision.”[56] Matthew Dickerson commented on Tolkien’s description: “According to Tolkien himself, his trilogy is not merely peripherally Christian, but fundamentally so. Not only fundamentally so, but consciously so. Indeed, this seems so obvious to the author that he can only say ‘of course’ to the suggestion. All that he knows—and thus all that he is able to put into his stories—has been nourished by his Christian faith.”[57]

Acknowledging Tolkien’s religious themes, Jackson said: “I’m not a Catholic, so I didn’t put any of that personally into the film on my behalf, but I certainly am aware that there were certain [religious] things that Tolkien was thinking of.... We made a real decision at the beginning that we weren’t going to introduce any new themes of our own into The Lord of the Rings. We were just going to make a film based upon what clearly Tolkien was passionate about.”[58]

Although Jackson said that he is not Catholic, he seemingly has made no overt statement of what his religious beliefs are. Jackson’s films prior to The Lord of the Rings, including a blood-and-gore “splatter” film, did not give the impression that Jackson is a man who deeply treasures conventional spirituality. However, David Bruce, webmaster of HollywoodJesus.com, said Jackson’s creativeness is “tied to his spirituality. A theologian he is not. However, he knows how to intrinsically connect stories to the deep inner spiritual longings and sensibilities of people worldwide.”[59]

Why Jackson (and his production crew)[60] intensified Tolkien’s religious symbolism is unclear. Some of it (particularly Gandalf’s “glowing” scenes) may have been from a desire by Jackson and the special effects team to maximize the visual spectacle, but spectacle enhancement does not necessarily mean additional spiritual symbolism.[61] Perhaps, like Tolkien, Jackson intensified the symbolism “unconsciously so at first” since the key points of Christ’s passion are well known in our culture (whether believed or not) and have been used consciously or unconsciously by many other authors and directors. Knowing Jackson’s unidentified reasons are not essential to this analysis, however, because, as R. J. Reilly said, “The aim of the critic . . . is to show what the artist did, whether the artist meant to do it or not.”[62]

Gandalf’s Death and Resurrection

In the first movie of Jackson’s trilogy, the group known as the Fellowship of the Ring (consisting of hobbits, men, an elf, a dwarf, and a wizard) and led by Gandalf (Ian McKellen) embark on a quest to destroy Sauron’s ring of power in the fires of Mount Doom. Joseph Pearce wrote, “At its most profound level, The Lord of the Rings is a sublimely mystical passion play. The carrying of the ring—the emblem of sin—is the carrying of the cross.”[63] The ring of power borne by Frodo (Elijah Wood) is a symbol of evil, sin, temptation, and the Fall.[64]

While traveling through the Mines of Moria, the Fellowship is surrounded by orcs, but the orcs suddenly flee at the sound of an ominous, thundering growl. Boromir (Sean Bean) asks Gandalf, “What is this new devilry?” (“Devilry” is a particularly apt word choice, and it is not in the book.) Gandalf senses the still unseen threat[65] and replies, “A Balrog, a demon of the ancient world. This foe is beyond any of you. Run!” He does not say, “This foe is beyond any of us,” because Gandalf realizes that only he can stop the Balrog. The Balrog’s visual description in the novel is somewhat vague and left for the imagination to fill in, but in the film, the flaming, horned, hoofed monster clearly resembles popular depictions of Satan.

They flee across the Bridge of Khazad-dûm. Gandalf, however, who has commanded Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen) to lead the group on, deliberately begins crossing last, stops in the middle of the span, and turns to face the Balrog. In the movie’s confrontation, his staff glows brightly, producing a halo of light surrounding him. The book does not describe such a halo at that point, but through the centuries, popular art has often shown Jesus with a halo of light around his head and sometimes around his entire body.

Standing before the Balrog, Gandalf reveals hints of his true identity, saying, “I am a servant of the Secret Fire, wielder of the flame of Anor.” Bradley J. Birzer noted, “As Tolkien admitted . . . the ‘Secret Fire,’ Gandalf’s master is the Holy Spirit.”[66] The Holy Spirit, of course, is known as part of the Trinity with God the Son.

Gandalf appears as a man, but he is more than a man. He is a wizard of the race of Ainur. Tolkien said about Gandalf in a letter, “There are naturally no precise modern terms to say what he was. I [would] venture to say that he was an incarnate ‘angel’.... By ‘incarnate’ I mean [Gandalf and the other wizards] were embodied in physical bodies capable of pain, and weariness, and of afflicting the spirit with physical fear, and of being ‘killed’, though supported by the angelic spirit they might endure long, and only show slowly the wearing of care and labour.”[67] Incarnated to appear as a man, Gandalf is not quite immortal since he can—and later does—die as a result of violence.

Gandalf uses his staff to crack the bridge, the bridge crumbles under the Balrog’s feet, and the Balrog plunges into the abyss. The Balrog’s fiery whip, however, curls up and around Gandalf’s legs, pulling him over the edge of the broken bridge. In the movie, Gandalf momentarily clings to the edge. He says, “Fly, you fools.” Then he deliberately lets go and falls.[68] By contrast, in the novel, Gandalf “grasped vainly at the stone, and slid into the abyss.”[69] No clinging to the edge of the broken bridge is mentioned, and no choice is implied. He simply falls because he does not seem to have the power to overcome the demon’s actions. Gandalf’s fall as described in the book seems to be at the time only a tragic accident—certainly not deliberate. (However, in context with the rest of the book, a sacrifice is still implied, such as in a later scene when Galadriel says concerning Gandalf’s fall, “Needless were none of the deeds of Gandalf in life.”[70]) Thus, the movie version enhances Gandalf’s power during the confrontation with the Balrog and introduces an element of choice in Gandalf’s fall. Choosing what seems to be certain death in the process of saving the lives of others, moreover, recalls the willing choice Jesus made to journey to Jerusalem during Passover to be crucified for the salvation of the world.[71]

In the movie, as Gandalf falls, his legs are together, and he extends his arms into a perfect cruciform position. Again, this is not described in the novel. The symbolic representation of the cross has, for centuries, been an obvious “code” for the passion, sacrifice, and crucifixion of Christ. The cruciform position combined with the (seconds earlier) deliberate choice in the fall (and apparent death) “decodes” as a deliberately chosen crucifixion, an overt reference to Christ.

Gandalf seems lost forever, and the rest of the Fellowship emerge from the cavern grieving and discouraged. (One can imagine that Jesus’ disciples felt much the same way after his crucifixion.) This apparent catastrophe, however, will lead up to a later example of Tolkien’s “eucatastrophe”[72] (“good catastrophe” or the sudden joyous triumph of good in the face of defeat). Despite appearances, all is not lost. Good will later come out of this ostensible disaster.

Gandalf’s true fate is later revealed in The Two Towers through a flashback, and the viewers begin to understand the reasons behind his sacrificial choice. During Gandalf’s plunge into the abyss, he battles the satanic Balrog. This descent seems reminiscent of the enigmatic but popular tradition of Jesus “descending into hell.” The phrase “he descended into hell” found in the Apostles’ Creed (although not in the earliest versions) has been dropped by some denominations from liturgical use because of its problematic scriptural support.[73] Interpretation of this phrase is also troublesome, but commonly held to mean Jesus, during the interim of his death and resurrection, preached to the souls of people who had already died, proclaimed freedom to them, and/or liberated them from their infernal bondage.[74]

In the movie, although no “lost souls” are connected to Gandalf in this scene,[75] Gandalf is locked in long combat with a fire demon, and that scene visually evokes many associations with popular depictions of Satan and the underworld.[76] If Gandalf had not chosen to engage in this final battle with the Balrog, perhaps the fate of the quest would have been different. If Gandalf had climbed over the edge of the bridge, perhaps the Balrog would have later emerged from the caves and pursued the Fellowship. Gandalf made it clear that the rest of the Fellowship had no weapons that were effective against it. Perhaps a second encounter would have claimed more lives. If so, then Gandalf’s descent did save “souls.”

More than that, if the Balrog had killed them all, the quest to destroy the ring of power would have ended there. The ring presumably would have eventually made it back to Sauron. Or perhaps the Balrog would have claimed it and used it with terrible consequences. Either way, Middle Earth may then have been doomed. Thus, in just this one act, Gandalf may have saved the rest of the Fellowship as well as all of Middle Earth.

After the descent, the Balrog and Gandalf later ascend to “the highest peak” (that reaches toward heaven). There the Balrog is finally defeated and falls to the slopes far below as lightning flashes in the background sky.[77] With the religious symbolism of earlier scenes as a background, this scene seems to recall Jesus’ words, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven.”[78]

Gandalf then falls exhausted and “dies.” He later describes what happens: “Darkness took me, and I strayed out of thought and time. Stars wheeled overhead, and every day was as long as a life age of the Earth. But it was not the end. I felt life in me again. I’ve been sent back until my task is done.”[79]

Gandalf’s resurrection is atypical in one aspect compared to other Christ figures. When Christ figures rise from the dead,[80] their resurrections usually occur near the climax of their stories. Gandalf’s resurrection, however, occurs slightly before the midpoint of the entire story.[81] Many events happen after Gandalf’s appearance, and this distance removes it from a direct relationship with the “final solution” of the story and dims it in the mind of the viewer/reader. Nevertheless, it is a profound moment in the story, and had Gandalf not returned to continue his task, the quest would surely have ultimately failed.

Later, Gandalf appears to Aragorn, Legolas (Orlando Bloom), and Gimli (John Rhys-Davies). They do not recognize him at first because he is clothed and surrounded by blinding light (not in the book).[82] Like Mary Magdalene, who confuses the risen Jesus with a gardener, they initially suppose Gandalf to be someone else.[83] This scene is also reminiscent of the Transfiguration, in which Jesus’ appearance is transformed before three disciples. During the Transfiguration, Jesus’ clothing became as “bright as a flash of lightning.”[84] Christian art has often visualized Jesus in a fluorescent white robe. Although Jesus appeared as “just” a man throughout most of his life, glimpses of his true identity emerged at the Transfiguration and after his resurrection. Jesus’ post-resurrection appearance was somehow different than before his death. His transformed form was not always recognized by his followers, and he manifested different new abilities.[85] Like Jesus, Gandalf was also transformed. Sean McGrath wrote that “the transformation from a tiny seed into a stalk of golden wheat has a price: annihilation. Annihilation of our present state of existence is the condition of the possibility of transformation.... The wizard Gandalf’s death and resurrection is the supreme enactment of this drama of surrender, annihilation, and transformation.”[86]

After finally recognizing Gandalf’s transformed identity, Legolas[87] kneels (not in the book) and Gimli bows before him. Aragorn does not bow or kneel, but he looks at Gandalf with stunned wonder. These three members (disciples) of the Fellowship (that Gandalf led and helped form) look in awe at their master. Gandalf’s white hair, beard, and clothing—as well as the reactions of Legolas and Gimli—are also reminiscent of the apocalyptic vision to John of Jesus in Revelation 1:14-17: “His head and hair were white like wool, as white as snow, and his eyes were like a blazing fire.... When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead.”

Gandalf the Grey had the power to defeat the Balrog before his death, and as the resurrected Gandalf the White, his powers are shown more explicitly during the rest of the story.[88] Although most viewers of the films would likely not notice all this symbolism, Gandalf’s death and resurrection scenes are clearly messianic metaphors that add an additional spiritual dimension to the mythology of The Lord of the Rings.

After publication, Tolkien thought his book’s description of the return of Gandalf was a “defect.” He explained that Gandalf “must return at that point, and such explanations of his survival as are explicitly set out must be given there—but the narrative is urgent, and must not be held up for elaborate discussions involving the whole ‘mythological’ setting. It is a little impeded even so, though I have severely cut [Gandalf’s] account of himself. . . . I have purposely kept all allusions to the highest matters down to mere hints, perceptible only by the most attentive, or kept them under unexplained symbolic forms.”[89] The visual nature of film can often compress information into a scene equivalent to many scattered pages of text, and Jackson “encoded” more Christ figure imagery into his scenes than Tolkien’s “severely cut” account. Since Jackson’s films visually amplified Tolkien’s Christological association in Gandalf’s death and resurrection scenes, Jackson’s cinematic presentations of Gandalf as a Christ figure may have communicated more fully the vision of what Tolkien had intended all along.

Gandalf, Myth, and Meaning

Tolkien’s “thoroughly Catholic” mythology became more accessible to millions through Jackson’s movies. Concerning movies and religious myths, M. Darrol Bryant wrote:

Cinema is a form of popular “religion.” As a popular form of the religious life, movies do what we have always asked of popular religion, namely, they provide us with archetypal forms of humanity—heroic figures—and instruct us in the basic values and myths of our society. As we watch the characters and follow the drama on the screen, we are instructed in the values and myths of our culture and given models on which to pattern our lives.[90]

Our lives are influenced by memorable mythology. Karen Armstrong wrote, “Mythology...is an art form. Any powerful work of art invades our being and changes it forever.”[91] Furthermore, the “myth of the hero was not intended to provide us with icons to admire, but was designed to tap into the vein of heroism within ourselves. Myth must lead to imitation or participation, not passive contemplation.”[92]

Tolkien and Jackson both portrayed Gandalf in these scenes as a heroic, exemplary being who willingly accepts self-sacrifice, who “loses his life” for others, who brings hope in the midst of despair, and who transforms apparent catastrophe into eucatastrophe. Although Gandalf is only one strand of the complex mythology composing The Lord of the Rings, Jackson’s remixed Middle Earth messiah added to the psychological impact of the immensely popular films and helped perpetuate a timeless myth that still resonates with audiences of the twenty-first century.

---

Go to the Home page, Cinema page, Spirituality page, or Science Fiction page.