← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Faust

comparison of the Ring Cycle to Tolkien’s work.

Thread ID: 19609 | Posts: 1 | Started: 2005-08-13

Wayback Archive

Faust [OP]

2005-08-13 07:54 | User Profile

comparison of the Ring Cycle to Tolkien’s work.

Even those who deplore the racialism of Richard Wagner call his 18-hour Ring cycle the greatest piece of music ever written. Wagner invented the "leitmotif," or leading motive, which is the principle of directing all of one’s artistry into the service of the dramatic needs of the story. It develops a continuous theme. As a result, Wagner not only revolutionized opera - he affected every other kind of music as well.

According to Michael Polignano, "desecrating Wagner…is something of an industry in post-World War II Germany." But as Irmin Vinson writes: "There are in fact certain cultural monuments, like Wagnerian opera in Germany, that cannot be easily eradicated or dropped down the memory hole. Although Wagner is perceived by anti-national Germans as an old enemy, and hated accordingly, he is an enemy who cannot be forgotten. He occupies too prominent a position in the musical pantheon of the past. For dedicated multiracialists his most threatening art must therefore be aggressively reproduced in misshapen travesties of his original vision… Anti-national Germans are literally afraid of operas."

The story of the Ring cycle is that the Norse god Wotan requires the help of the giants to build his fortress, Valhalla. To pay the giants, he steals the treasure of the Niebelung dwarf Alberich. Alberich came to possess this treasure with the aid of the magic ring he fashioned from the stolen gold of the Rhine River. Wotan covets the ring, but he is compelled to give it to the giants. Wotan’s grandson, Siegfried, captures the ring from the giant Fafner and wins the immortal Valkyrie, Brunnhilde, for his wife. It all ends in tragedy, of course, with Siegfried stabbed in the back and Brunnhilde immolated on Siegfried’s funeral pyre. The flames burn down Valhalla, and the gods perish. The moral is that the medieval church made a deal with the devil in embracing capitalism and imperialism.

The Wagner operas are pagan, but they touch something deep and primal in the white man’s soul, and only the white man’s soul. The unprecendented outpouring of emotion when the Ring cycle premiered in 1876 is hard to put in words. The operas are illegal in Israel. Wagner argued that Jewish musicians were only capable of producing shallow and artificial music, a parroting of true music, for they had no connection to "the genuine spirit of the Folk." In the Ring cycle, Alberich, Mime, and Hagen are given stereotypically Jewish characteristics. But Wagner said something that I find to be very interesting: "Where religion becomes artificial, it is reserved for art to save the core of religion by recognizing the figurative value of the mythic symbols." I think Tolkien would have agreed.

Wagner and Tolkien drew from the same source - Norse mythology, particularly Saga of the Volsungs - but Tolkien’s Christianity obviously shines through. For both men, the Ring represents lust for power, fueled by technology (Tolkien’s orcs are the equivalent of Wagner’s Niebelungen, who themselves represent Jews, it is said). Tolkien hated comparisons of his work to Wagner’s. "Both rings are round," is all he said. But as an anonymous writer observed, the comparisons are unmistakable, and it’s hard to keep from questioning Tolkien’s intent. Alberich and Sauron each forge a Ring of Power. Wotan needs the giants to build Valhalla; the elves need Sauron to forge their rings. In both stories, the Ring gives the bearer world domination. Both rings are evil and betray their masters. Fafner kills his brother Fasolt to get the Ring; Smeagol kills his friend Deagol to get the Ring. Fafner hides in a cave for centuries; Smeagol/Gollum hides in a cave for centuries. Siegfried inherits the shards of his father’s sword; Aragorn inherits the shards of his fathers’ sword. Brunnhilde gives up immortality for Siegfried; Arwen gives up immortality for Aragorn. Wotan plays "riddles" for the life of Mime; Gollum plays "riddles" for the life of Bilbo. A dragon guards the Niebelungen hoard; a dragon guards the dwarfs’ hoard. The gods renounce the world and await the end; the elves renounce the world and prepare to depart it. Wagner’s Ring is returned to its origin, the River Rhine; Tolkien’s Ring is returned to its origin, Mount Doom. Hagen falls into the river; Gollum falls into the volcano. The immortals burn in Valhalla; the immortals leave Middle-Earth (the curse of the Noldorin elves - Galadriel was one - for refusing to obey the Valar, Tolkien’s angel-gods, is made clear in The Silmarillion). In both, a new era of the world begins, and men are left to their own devices. The difference is that Siegfried and Frodo are polar opposites. Hitler imagined himself as Siegfried, and we imagine ourselves as Frodo, sitting beneath our own vine and fig tree.

In this light, Tolkien’s accomplishment is nothing less than awe-inspiring. He took Wagner’s story, which had so much potential but was pagan, and he recast it in a Christian image without losing any of the racialism. As Spengler writes, "Wagner will still haunt the stages of opera houses, but audiences will see him through Tolkien’s eyes… Modesty, forbearance, and renunciation are the virtues that Tolkien sets against Wagner’s existential act of despair… The Holy Roman Empire of the High Middle Ages, Tolkien’s conscious model for the Kingdom of Gondor, arose in response to the incursions of Arabs in the South, Vikings in the North, and Magyars in the West. Boorish and gruff as the new American Empire might seem, it is an anti-empire populated by reluctant heroes who want nothing more than to till their fields and mind their homes, much like Tolkien’s hobbits. Under pressure, though, it will respond with a fierceness and cohesion that will surprise its adversaries. Orcs of the world: Take note and beware."

Hitler loved Wagner and tried to marry his daughter-in-law. His favorite opera was Parsifal, which is said to be based on the life of Christ, although it is actually more Buddhist. The BBC used to broadcast the Twilight of the Gods (Götterdämmerung) into Germany during the war. Perhaps the Nazis took the hint and realized that the story is not a celebration of power but of the greed that precedes destruction. They banned production of it in 1942.

"According to the present constitution of this world, the Jew in truth is already more than emancipate: he rules and will rule, so long as Money remains the power before which all our doings and our dealings lose their force." ~ Richard Wagner

That same love of money keeps the Masters of War from doing anything about Jewish spies today.

As much as I prod the Jews, I actually admire their survival skills. Consider these points from William Pierce:

* Full Israeli citizenship rights are immediately available to anyone, anywhere, born to a Jewish mother, regardless of religion and regardless of whether or not he has ever set foot in Israel—and to no one else, including native Arabs whose ancestors have lived there for 20 generations.
* The only marriages with legal status in Israel are those between two Jews.
* No non-Jew may be buried in Israel, except in especially designated “unclean” cemeteries.
* Housing, salaries, welfare, and access to many public facilities in Israel are determined on the basis of whether a person is a Jew or a goy.

It was tribalism that finished Rome, and it will finish Brussels too. "The problem Rome faced was: do we fight to keep the barbarians out, or are we prepared to make concessions? Being pragmatists, they compromised. In 382, for example, the emperor [George W.] Theodosius accepted Visigoths en masse into the empire, the first among many to be granted allied, federate status. The point is that the Romans needed manpower, particularly soldiers, and the Germans could provide it. The quid pro quo was that the Germans were accepted into the society and political structure of the Roman world, where many made their way to high office… To put the issue simply: the empire ultimately depended on there being enough revenue coming in from the provinces to pay the Roman army to suppress any provinces that removed their revenues from Rome by rebelling. That was a circle that needed constant squaring, but, as more and more tribes began to settle in the empire, Rome found it increasingly difficult to square it. As revenue was lost, so the state machine weakened; so more territories rebelled; so even less money came in—and so on. The question, then, boiled down to one of loyalty: to whom did these peoples feel they owed their allegiance? Rome, or their local tribal leader? More and more, the answer was the latter… By the end of the 5th century, Europe had reverted to a collection of individual states, and the foundations of modern Europe were being laid. And so it will be again." This is the blueprint for our independence, people!

Here’s an excellent poem from Kipling, one of my favorite kinists.

"In the sixth century, St. Bridget of Ireland wrote a poem describing heaven as a lake of beer." When we get to heaven, Chad and I are going in search of Sam Adams to shake his hand.

Did you know that Remy Wilkins, the son of Steve Wilkins, said that "We have no right to oppose homosexual marriages until we return to the church in earnest"? Steve Wilkins and Doug Wilson are close; Remy’s wife graduated from Wilson’s Logos School; and Doug Wilson urges us to "embrace the curse" of fag marriage. What on earth?

Did you know that only one person in the Bible is explicitly said to have been given a new heart? It was King Saul, who fell away. You had better make sure that your doctrine of perseverance is biblical. I agree with Steve Schlissel that theologians have tried to interpret justification solely through the lens of Romans and Galatians while pretty much ignoring the book of James. Isn’t that a strange thing? After all, James was the brother of Jesus, and he was given the honor of presiding over the first church council, which decided the great question of the first century: whether Gentiles should be admitted to the church. The apostles taught that we are justified by faith alone as opposed to being justified by becoming Jews. They did not mean to say that works are unnecessary or are not vitally joined to our faith.

I’m eager to hear the tapes from the 2005 Auburn Avenue conference, which is now in session. N.T. Wright is joining the panel, and the title is "Paul’s Perspective: The Apostle and his Theology." Schlissel is the best of the speakers, and it was very frustrating to hear RCjr’s rambling response to him two years ago. It was not that RC was wrong in what he said; it was that he didn’t explain how Schlissel is wrong. His talk boiled down to an exhortation to be nice to Joe Morecraft. It was not helpful, and I could never figure out why RC was invited if he did not intend to be specific. One thing Schlissel said that year is burned in my mind: that the ordo salutis does not apply to covenant children at all. He should be a paedocommunionist.

At the CCL conference in September, writes Candy Sandlin, "Joel Miller will be presenting a Biblical case for the de-criminalization of ‘illegal drugs,’ and his book ‘Bad Trip’ (published by Nelson) will be available." I’m glad to see Relevant Incrementalists focusing on the important matters confronting us, aren’t you? We may be going extinct, but buying weed legally will help to ease the pain. This is what’s called "creating a new kind of Christian." I just can’t believe that these clowns are serious. They’re about as useless as a pig farm in Tel Aviv.

Badonicus makes it easy to understand here.

comparison of the Ring Cycle to Tolkien’s work. [url]http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/artsentertainment/2002423093_ringheads07.html[/url]