Is it really about colonialism? I’d say it seems more about the dangers of ambition, really exemplifies the sort of “those who seek power are least qualified to hold it.”
I also think it’s actually remarkably morally nuanced. Sure there’s good and evil, but ironically, it seems like everyone in the Thielverse naming their companies after LOTR concepts would be the targets of criticism. Again this idea that one aspires towards honor and duty, and ultimately a peaceful life, but certainly not power.
The tipping point whether Tolkien's work was to survive occurred in the 1960s, before the emergence of most of the things that the author draws analogies with.
(1970: my high-school English teacher, inevitably asked his opinion of Tolkien, replied, "He's all right, if you like furry toes.")
Is it really about colonialism? I’d say it seems more about the dangers of ambition, really exemplifies the sort of “those who seek power are least qualified to hold it.”
I also think it’s actually remarkably morally nuanced. Sure there’s good and evil, but ironically, it seems like everyone in the Thielverse naming their companies after LOTR concepts would be the targets of criticism. Again this idea that one aspires towards honor and duty, and ultimately a peaceful life, but certainly not power.
The tipping point whether Tolkien's work was to survive occurred in the 1960s, before the emergence of most of the things that the author draws analogies with.
(1970: my high-school English teacher, inevitably asked his opinion of Tolkien, replied, "He's all right, if you like furry toes.")