Just wanted to put my support in with this.

There are some great points on here, however, I have to weigh-in on the side of Eluadin - I especially like your analogy concerning Aragorn.

IMHO, I feel that TOR brilliantly captures the flavor of Middle-earth. In particular, the concept of Body, Heart, & Wits balances the game.

One aspect that intrigues me - the emphasis on skills/groups that reflect personalities & values, such as Awe, Inspire, & so forth, while lumping (if you will) other attributes into simpler combinations.

For example, a certain other game may reflect Climb, Jump, Ride, & Swim, whereas, here you have Athletics.

In the end it boils down to individual preferences .

"...but he's know round here as Strider. Goes about at a great pace on his long shanks;..."

I'll have to look more later, but basically his very first description concerns his body; the guy is long-legged and moves fast.

"He seemed to have grown in stature, while Eomer had shrunk."

This can be interpreted in two different ways. In one sense, it's a purely physical image; Aragorn is showing off his height vis-a-vis Eormer. This is a Numenorean of pure descent vs a common man. This sense is aided by him throwing off his cloak - it's an actor's move to enhance the effect.

In another sense of the word stature, his words and pose and equipment enhance his legacy, as you say. He seems a high king briefly, while Eomer is some backwoods princeling.


I do believe Tolkien was showing us Aragorn's physical height here, and telling us that he did move fast due to his long stride as a physical thing, not just his experience as a traveller. That's why Aragorn kept the name strider, that's why it was given to him. His body is the thing you see first in the story.

-Jeff

Wonderful points Jeff!

While I won't dispute the initial description of .strider focuses on a physical feature, Tolkien mentions in his letters that it was a narrative device to belittle Strider in the eyes of the reader, and create a feeling of doubt about his character (in terms of moral quality). This remains fairly consistent throughout the narrative. Physical descriptions becomes narrative devices that point to something other, Tolkien referred to these devices as "symbols" that provided something tangible and substantial but pointed to another reality. The symbol in the narrative makes present and real a reality that otherwise transcends the phenomenal. (This can be an entirely new discussion unto itself rich with meaning from the explicitly Catholic context Tolkien wrote from with it's Sacramental Theology.)

For the most part, Numenoreans heritage works the same throughout the narrative. By the Third Age intermingling of bloodlines has obfuscated purity of descent to the un-initiated. By "un-initiated" I refer to the common folk who the Kings from across the Sea are legend and tale. Given this context, Tolkien constantly uses narrative devices (symbolically) to convey the Numenoreans heritage of certain characters. Faramir, Denethor, and the Grey Company all work in this literary fashion. Each has something distinctive about them that sets them apart from the common folk. This setting apart deals less with a special "character" as an individual, but more with the character's nobility of lineage. Tolkien slowly unveils for the reader that Aragorn's purity of descent is unique in its royal character, the towering over of Eomer (that is, the greatness of the Line of Elros when compared to the common folk), while definitely allowing a physical interpretation (and rightly so in my opinion) first and foremost is symbolic of his royal Numenorean blood. If we discussed life-span of the Dunedain, it would be a very similar conversation.

All in all, multiple layers of interpretation and meaning are possible. And, Tolien usually has a primary concern that positions one very specific level of meaning central to his narrative. When dealing with the Dunedain, that central theme (what Tolkien uses the symbol for) is Numenorean descent.

Regards,
E