The Catholic Book Club discussion

4) Assuming you have read Lord of the Rings, what parallels do you see between Alembert and JRR Tolkien's Sauron and Saruman?

When John meets Alembert for the second time in 1930, he thinks that the man reminds him of the Voice in the manuscript, so the author himself is pointing at the parallel with Saruman. And that comes right after Alembert has given a series of instructions to Christopher regarding people he has infiltrated in different organizations throughout the world.

Mariangel wrote: "When John meets Alembert for the second time in 1930, he thinks that the man reminds him of the Voice in the manuscript, so the author himself is pointing at the parallel with Saruman. And that com..."

Is it not curious that he calls as the Illustration philosopher? This thing Will be with intenction, or by chance?

It has been way too long since I read Tolkien, so I didn't notice the parallels. I thought Lord of the Rings was just about a fantastical universe of mythic creatures. Is it also about a superior ancient civilization?

Jill, the civilization refers to all the peoples who populate Tolkien's world. If they really existed long ago in the past, they are certainly a developed civilization; and from the point of view of their control over magic forces, a superior one (though maybe those magic forces were technological advances but the person who wrote the manuscript viewed them as 'magic').

Another hint is when Agnes refers to Alembert as having 'a long arm', like Sauron.

On the other hand, she says he does not 'see everything', so he doesn't have the Eye.

When Tolkien thought in his creatures. He thought in them as a part of the history of England. A lost history of England. It was a try to créate the mythology developed with his first Friends of TCBS. Tea Club, Barrovian Society, whose most importnat members were Christopher Wiseman (one of the godfather of one of the Tolkien`s son), Godfrey Baye Smith, and G.Q. R. Gilson the last two died in the first World War.

Jill wrote: "It has been way too long since I read Tolkien, so I didn't notice the parallels. I thought Lord of the Rings was just about a fantastical universe of mythic creatures. Is it also about a superior a..."

Just?

It seems to me that the clearest comparison is an absolutely amoral quest for power.

As the novel progresses, Alambert's evil gets more and more oppressive as well. He has his henchmen literally everywhere. How fantastically rich is he? The network is so vast, one wonders how John will ever escape it. The scene at the monastery in the second chapter only tell us that he made it to old age. The book still needs to be hidden.

But why does the book still need to be hidden, after John has published LOTR (view spoiler)[since he had destroyed the part with equations that interested Alembert (hide spoiler)]? I see no compelling reason for keeping it in hiding.

And he destroyed the pages Alembert most wanted to get his hands on. I presume they spelled out how to gain even more power, e.g. by altering DNA or some such.

Mariangel wrote: "But why does the book still need to be hidden, after John has published LOTR [spoilers removed]? I see no compelling reason for keeping it in hiding."

I thought he had skipped some parts and while (view spoiler)[he destroyed the pages that Alembert wanted, presumably there were others (hide spoiler)]. Plus the very fact that the book is history, however mythic, and the fact of the artifact, would have a tremendous and unforeseeable impact on society.

Finally, (view spoiler)[ the nature of the temptation that the Bishop underwent at the end (hide spoiler)] convinced me that the book still needed to be hidden.