Today, Explained - What the right gets wrong about Tolkien

Episode Date: September 12, 2025

Many far-right conservatives think The Lord of the Rings is about them. They may love Tolkien, but it's very possible Tolkien would not have loved them back. This episode was produced by Peter Balonon-Rosen with help from Ariana Aspuru, edited by Jolie Myers, fact-checked by Laura Bullard, engineered by Patrick Boyd, and hosted by Noel King. Ian McKellen as Gandalf with Elijah Wood as Frodo in "The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring." Photo by New Line/WireImage. Listen to Today, Explained ad-free by becoming a Vox Member: vox.com/members. Transcript at vox.com/today-explained-podcast. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Twenty-four years ago, a nation on edge after the attacks of September 11th went to the movies. One does not simply walk into Mordor. To watch the Fellowship of the Ring. Americans saw themselves in J.R.R. Tolkien's tale of good and evil and hobbits. I don't think he knows about second breakfast, pep. What about the Levensies? Luncheon, afternoon tea. Dinner? Supper. He knows about them, doesn't he?

And why not? A fellowship of good guys and good elves and good dwarves trying to restore peace to the world by destroying the one ring. Americans love and love to be the good guys. Then in the great political upheaval of the last decade or so, some people on the right claimed the mantle of the Lord of the Rings as their own. But did they misunderstand the message? Coming up on today, explained from Vox, why those books and those movies still resonate in a nation. still on edge. Support for today explained comes from Adio. Adio is an AI-native customer relationship management platform

that Adio says is built for the next era of companies. A powerful data structure adapts to your business model, sinks in all your contacts in minutes, and enriches your business with actionable data. Adio says it also allows you to create those email sequences, those real-time reports, those powerful automations. which they claim can help you build what matters most, your company. You can go to adio.com slash today explained to get 15% off your first year.

That's ATTIO.com slash today explained. AI is only as powerful as the platform it's built into. That's why it's no surprise that more than 85% of the Fortune 500 use the ServiceNow AI platform. While other platforms duct-tape tools together, Service Now seamlessly unifies people, data, workflows, and AI, connecting every corner of your business. And with AI agents working together autonomously,

anyone in any department can focus on the work that matters most. Learn how ServiceNow puts AI to work for people at servicenow.com. This is the diet's brand. My name is Constance Grady, and I'm a senior correspondent, on it on the culture team. A young Hobbit embarks on a journey through a magical but dangerous world in the Lord of the Rings,

one of six holiday movies we'll review this week. My God, middle earth does exist, eh? It's not just a story for kids. It's a story for everyone. So the Lord of the Rings comes out after September 11th. It comes out on December 10th. What makes this story so special? by appealing to generation after generation, often for different reasons.

So it reaches this audience that's really, really primed to interpret almost everything through the lens of 9-11. Talking representing the counterculture would be quite different from maybe the audience at the moment, particularly in America, at war. Here's a movie about a grand, sweeping, epic battle between good and evil. Middle Earth stands upon the brink of destruction. None can escape it. You will unite or you will fall. That fits really nicely into the narrative that the Bush administration especially

had begun building for the country about how we were going to respond to 9-11. We will rid the world of the evil doers. We will call together freedom-loving people to fight terrorism. Nearly every review makes a mention of 9-11, they say, oh, this is the moment for this kind of epic good and evil battle movie. With the world newly obsessed with the clash of good and evil, the time would seem to be ideal

for the Lord of the Rings. Tolkien's tale of good people who band together against a dark lord and his minions has never been more timely than in our troubled age. There was an enormous piece in the New York Times by the film critic Karen Durbin, sort of nailing down what she calls the accidental echoes between the Lord of the Rings and the current geopolitical climate. Evil or evildoers. Sauron or Saddam.

And how many towers? The second book and the second film are both called the Two Towers, which had some pretty unfortunate echoes. In the current climate, it's impossible not to experience Peter Jackson's two towers as war propaganda of unnerving power. The movie was very expensive, right? It was like a big risk, and what was the perception at the time of how it would do? So the savvy take about Fellowship of the Ring when it first comes out is this is probably not going to make its money back.

These movies were incredibly expensive to film. They had to develop whole new forms of CGI for the battle sequences. We ended up with upwards 350,000 characters. For the animation on Ghalem. For all the kind of optical tricks that they do to make the hobbits and the dwarfs small and the elves and the humans big.

We'll just have a look at the footage, but I think we're not going to notice. It's a really, really expensive movie, and Peter Jackson at this point in time is not really considered that dependable of a director. He has made a couple really well. regarded indie movies, but his big budget movie, they've flopped. And not to mention, Hollywood

hasn't made a successful fantasy series since at this point since the Star Wars movies in the 70s. The Smart Money kind of is saying, if there's going to be a fantasy movie franchise that does really well, it's probably going to be Harry Potter. Huh? Not me. Not Hermione. You. Lord of the Rings is much older and the mythology is so complicated and kind of baroque that it doesn't seem like it's going to lend itself to movies as well. But then, dot, dot, dot. Yeah, then it's a huge hit. It breaks all kinds of box office records and famously is nominated for Best Picture at the Oscars. This is a point in time when no genre movies are getting nominated for Best Picture. It's like a real, real big deal

when it breaks through there. Did 9-11 have anything to do with the success of the movie, do you think. You know, in a lot of ways, the Lord of the Rings are, are were movies. They're about these peaceful towns that are being menaced by this faceless, almost animalistic other. The eye of Sauron now turns to Gondor. We see Sauron as just an eye and the orcs are kind of this mass. That becomes really appealing when you're trying to psych yourself up for this idea that you were a blameless, peaceful town, and this enemy just attacked you out of nowhere and they're evil and you're good, and you are going to go and make them pay for what they've done to you. The bad guys are mostly faceless, mostly don't really talk, kind of this indistinguishable horde that you don't even have to think. about whether they're we're sympathizing with, right?

They're just the bad guys. Yeah, that all makes sense. I think, okay, so let's say that the orcs are, you know, our enemies, the attackers, and the United States, we're thinking of ourselves as the hero. But the hobbits. What about Jack and Breakfast? The hobbits were like little peaceful guys in their, what do they call them, in their little hole? The shire, the hobbit hole, yeah.

Who in the American narrative were The Hobbits? That's such a good question. Yeah, the hobbits are not necessarily the most compelling characters on screen. No, no, they are not. Yeah, yeah. They're the main characters of the books. But when you think of the movies, you think of, you know, like, Aragorn opening those two doors really dramatically and striding through.

Or like Legolas and Gimli having their bet about who can kill more orcs. Final count. 42. 42. It's really about the military characters. They're who are dynamic. They pop on screen. They're cinematic.

And that's who we were paying most attention to at the time. All right, let's go back in time. Because prior to 9-11, the world had fought wars, including two of them, quite famously. How did the post-9-11 interpretation of these books in the war context compared to earlier interpretations. Yeah, so earlier interpretations of the Lord of the Rings had really been focused on the idea that these are books about the cost of war.

They're focused so heavily on the trauma of war and how terrible it is and how it's ruined lives when everyone comes back from the battles at the end. One evening, Sam came into the study and found his master looking very strange. He was very pale and his eyes seemed to see things far away. What's the matter, Mr. Frodo, said Sam? I am wounded, he answered.

Wounded, it will never really heal. So there's this strong, strong tradition of using these books as ways to talk about the horrors of war. In the 1960s, there are hippies who are protesting the war in Vietnam, holding up signs that say like hobbits against the war. End the war! There's a tradition of reading the ring as a metaphor for the atomic bomb. The kind of allegory of the H-bomb, what is said somewhere in the book, is that the one ring is a power so enormous that even if a good man were to use it against a bad, it would corrupt the good man.

No one can be trusted to really use it responsibly. The post-9-11 moment is kind of unique for being the time when people are like actually the stories about how war is, like, kind of cool and rad and, like, a good thing to do when you're the good guys and you're fighting the evil guys. How did that time, 20, 24 years ago now, how did that set up Lord of the Rings, the movies, to have a life today? I think that 9-11 is no longer really considered part of the Lord of the Rings film. legacy. I think it's been kind of memory hold in a lot of ways. And now we just kind of think of

them as, you know, the craft, their well-crafted movies. They introduce all of these cool new film techniques and, you know, they're a good adaptation of an epic story. But I think looking back at this moment when this narrative that the Lord of the Rings was about the War on Terror was so strong and potent, can really help us see how the things we're living through now shape the stories that we are experiencing today and whether we'll still think of them the same way 24 years later. Support for today, explained, comes from Chime.

Nobody likes fees and complicated banking, says Chime. And Chime gets that, says Chime. Chime is a financial technology company that says they understand that every dollar counts. So when you set up direct deposit through Chime, they say you get access to fee-free features. such as free overdraft coverage, getting paid up to two days early with direct deposit, so much more. Chime says with qualifying direct deposits you can be eligible for free overdraft, up to $200 on debit card purchases and cash withdrawals. Plus, they say you don't need to worry about monthly fees or maintenance fees.

You can work on your financial goals through Chime today. You can open an account in two minutes at chime.com slash explained. That's chime.com slash explained. Chime feels like progress. Chime is a financial technology company, not a bank. Banking services and debit card provided by the bank or bank, or Stridebank N.A. Members FDIC. Spot me eligibility requirements and overdraft limits apply.

Timing depends on submission of payment file. Fees apply at out-of-network ATMs. Bank ranking and number of ATMs, according to U.S. News and World Report 2023. Shine checking account required. As a founder, you're moving fast towards product market fit, your next round, or your first big enterprise deal. But with AI accelerating how quickly startups build and ship, security expectations are also coming in faster. and those expectations are higher than ever. Getting security and compliance right can unlock growth

or stall it if you wait too long. Vanta is a trust management platform that helps businesses automate security and compliance across more than 35 frameworks like SOC2, ISO-27-001, HIPAA, and more. With deep integrations and automated workflows built for fast-moving teams, VANTA gets you audit-ready fast and keeps you secure with continuous monitoring as your models, infrastructure, and customers evolve. That's why fast-growing startups like Langchang, writer, and cursor have all trusted Vanta

to build a scalable compliance foundation from the start. Go to vanta.com slash Vox to save $1,000 today through the Vanta for Startups program and join over 10,000 ambitious companies already scaling with Vanta. That's V-A-N-T-A-com slash Vox to save $1,000 for a limited time. With Amex Platinum, access to exclusive Amex pre-sale tickets can score you a spot trackside.

So being a fan for life turns into the trip of a lifetime. That's the powerful backing of Amex. Pre-sale tickets for future events subject to availability and varied by race. Terms and conditions apply. Learn more at amex.ca. slash Y-Amex. One ring to rule them all. One ring to find them.

One ring to bring them all. And in the darkness, explain them. I'm David French. I'm a columnist for the New York Times. And you are a self-described nerd. Yes, yes. I own that. I own that, absolutely.

All right, so in the Lord of the Rings, which character do you most identify with? Who are you? You know, that's a really good question. And I think it evolves over time. So when I first read it, when I first read it, I wanted to be Legalis. You know, the very cool elven warrior that is almost got superhuman powers.

You know, you imagine yourself like that. And then the older I got, the more I wanted to be the Faramir character, which that is one of, we're going to get, we're going to go deep. It's going to get nerdy. The difference between Boromir, his brother and Faramir, is that both of them had the ring of power, in essence, in their grasp. And Boramir grabbed for them. this ultimate weapon to fight evil. Why not use this ring? If you would but lend me the ring.

So that you could fight strength with strength. And then Farimir rejects it. He says absolutely not. I would not take this thing if it lay by the highway. Not where Minas Tirith falling in ruin and I alone could save her. So using the weapon of the dark lord for her good in my glory. Two very different views of power and very different views on how to fight evil. That Boromir versus Faramir distinction is really central to sort of the Tolkien approach to power and the sort of the Tolkien ethos that suffuses Lord of the Ring.

So I've over time aspired to be more like Faramir as opposed to just being wowed by the superhuman capabilities of the Elven Warrior Legulus. So what you're pointing to is that there is, in these books, there is enormous depth, right? there are dynamics that are as old as humanity itself. You write that the Lord of the Rings today in 2025 has geopolitical implications. What do you mean by that? Well, it's very interesting that a number of leading figures and sort of the global new right have identified the Lord of the Rings is deeply influential on them. So when you think of the new right, I think of it as the Trump right or the post-Ragan right that, has explicitly rejected those sort of more libertarian view of government in favor of a much more

authoritarian view, a much more statist, top-down, dominating authoritarian version of the role of government in American life. Lord of the Rings shaped J.D. Vance's worldview. He even named one of his companies after an elven ring, Narya. Gandalf now wore openly on his hand, the third ring. The Great. Peter Thiel is a founder of a company called Palantir, and that's a term from Lord of the Rings. A palantia is a dangerous tool, Salaman.

Vance is also an investor in Andurial Industries, another name from Lord of the Rings. Unduly, the flame of the whist forged from the shards of Narsil. So full disclosure, unless anyone think I'm condescending about this in any way, I own a replica of the sword, Andurl. I it's it's in my house so so it's been undeniably influential and the point I was trying to make is it's been influential but they've taken the wrong lessons yeah let's talk about that what is the message and what are they getting wrong about it yeah you know there's this sort of underdog story element of it where a lot of movements that feel as if they are counted out or that the establishment is against them or large forces are against them, see themselves and kind of the

hobbits, or the fellowship of the ring and Lord of the Rings, this sort of band of brothers and sisters battling a great evil. And so it really appeals to dissident movements and insurgent movements in that way. But then when you read deeper and deeper and you really begin to understand the underlying ethos of the work, you see that, yes, it is a tale of good versus evil, but it's also a tale of how corruptible good can be. Good gets corrupted when it adopts evil's tools to defeat evil, when it yields to sort of this ends, justifies the means. And so consistent in the Tolkien work is that it's unlikely people, it's unlikely events that undo great evil. It is not that you confront power with power. And so that's the part that a lot of these

guys miss is this profound rejection of power as the means of fighting evil. What are they missing when they miss that? What are the implications of that? Oh, they're missing the heart, and they're missing the heart, and they're missing it in a dangerous way. Go back to what I was talking about earlier, about the Boromir versus Faramir contrast, that at a time of great need and a time of great danger, Boramir does the thing that would be natural for humans to do. He says to, you know, in the Council of El-Rond. Give Gondor the weapon of the enemy.

Let us use it against him. He talks and he is puzzled and stumped by this idea that you would not use this incredibly powerful weapon created by the enemy against the enemy. But it's this quest for power that is the most insidious element of it all in the Tolkien universe. And so Sauron, yes, Sauron is the big, bad guy.

But there's a more subtle evil at work that is not personified by Sauron, the more subtle evil is that will to power. So that even if good defeats evil, if good adopts evil's means to defeat evil, then good becomes evil. You get the feeling like a lot of the sort of the new riot is a lot of Boromeres. They're the ones that are questing and seeking that will to evil. of power, seeking the ring. When you're in the pursuit of power, every step you take needs to generate more power.

Everything you do needs to make further actions easier. The New Right wants to seize power. It wants to dominate. And then it says that it's just a better form of domination than the other side because it's dominating for virtue, for good, in their construct. We don't like the model of the left. We have a different model in mind and we're going to exert both power and we're going to spend resources in remand.

Fighting itself generates tremendous information, and if you win, it generates more power. You really need to be really ruthless when it comes to the exercise of power. But Tolkien says the very quest to dominate is what corrupts you. Even if you have motives to try to do justice, that quest to dominate is ultimately corrupting. The new right is essentially a movement and a very interesting. one. If we were to look throughout history, the last 100 years or so, what other movements have taken Tolkien and said, we see ourselves here? Oh, lots, lots, the old right, you know, so like what you might consider me, you know, we use different terms now, but Reagan conservatives, like I

would consider myself a Reagan conservative, any movement that I would say has seen itself as being sort of against all odds, embattled, minority underdog. So, for example, environmentalists for a very long time, especially I would say in the 70s and 80s, really latched on to Tolkien, because when you read his works, you see this big contrast between kind of the industrialization and destruction of nature by the forces of Mordor and Eisengarde. The old world will burn in the fires of industry, the forests will fall. versus the shire. Oh, toving, the finest weed in a south father.

And the elves of Rivendale who care for nature and nurture it. Welcome to Rivendale, Frodo Baggins. You see evangelical Christians take up the banner, Catholics take up the banner. Lots of different people, especially people who see themselves as underdogs, can connect with the story. And that's part of the genius of it. That's part of the beauty of it. But what's even more beautiful about it is that when you really dive into it, it doesn't just teach you about good and evil in a battle between good and evil.

It also teaches you what good should be and what good should look like. Good is compassionate. It cares for the vulnerable. It preserves and protects natural beauty. It shuns domination and the will to power. So if you look at Tolkien, it's definitely not a pacifistic tale. I mean, Aragorn is a warrior. Legolas is a warrior, Gandalf, my goodness, very powerful wizard, you know.

So you absolutely have all of this physical courage and this martial courage that you see in Tolkien. It is in this concept of the defense of what's true, the defense of what's good, the defense of what's beautiful, and not appealing to domination, will to power. to ultimately triumph over evil. So to pull back into the present day, the new right here in the United States. Let's focus on them. Is the takeaway that they may love Tolkien, but Tolkien likely would not have loved them back?

I would say that Tolkien would be frustrated and that Tolkien would urge them to read again and give it a bit of a closer read. Because this sort of, especially the way in which the will to power has manifested itself on the Trump right, with often accompanied by very vulgar displays of wealth and opulence, that is not very Tolkien-esque. That doesn't say, there's not much of that that screams the shire. For example, you know, if you're in the new right and you read the Lord of the Lord the Rings as we're taking on terrible people and we see ourselves in that role, you can see why

they embrace it. But when you dig deeper, when you dig deeper, you feel like they need to give it another read. David French is a columnist for the New York Times. Peter Ballinan-Rosen produced today's show with help from Ariana Espuru. Jolie Myers edited Patrick Boyd is our engineer and Laura Buller checks the facts. Today Explained is made by Avishai Artsy, Rebecca Ibarra, Hadi, Haldi, Miles Bryant, Hewitt, Kelly Wessinger, Denise Guerra, Devin Schwartz, Adrian Lilly, and Omina El Sadi. Sean Ramos firm thinks it's AI at 19 seconds. Miranda Kennedy is our EP. We use music by Breakmaster Cylinder. Would you like today explained without ads? Tryvox.com slash members. Would you

like more Vox Podcasts? Visit podcasts.com.com. We are distributed to public radio stations by W.NYC in NYC. I'm Noelle King. It's today explained. Thank you.