Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Storminator" data-source="post: 1292145" data-attributes="member: 305">If you look closely, Pezagent is using his terms very precisely and consistently (and to my limited knowledge, accurately). The point of the attack at the Black Gate is to draw Sauron's eye. That all the heroes will die is given. Therefore, there is no plot problem. In fact, the attack is completely successful.The eagles are not "introduced suddenly." To fit that definition, this would have to be the first scene we see eagles in, but it's not. The eagles were previously introduced, and everything they do is entirely consistent with their characters: they fly, they have sharp talons, they are large enough to carry people. Eagles as Deus ex Machina fails on two points (not suddenly introduced, not resolving plot points).While DeM is supernatural, and it is aid, it does not fill the same literary role. Supernatural aid, as a techinical term, still requires support in the context of the story. Perseus's magic sword and boots are supernatural aid, and we see them provided before they are used. As a contrast, the Holocaust Cloak in Princess Bride is a DeM, because we never even hear mention that such a thing could possibly exist until it is needed, and then it turns out our heroes already have one, and it's the perfect tool for the job.You can't use definition 1 of DeM unless you are specifically refering to Greek or Roman drama. That's right there in the definition. That leaves with definitions 2 and 3. Defintion 3 does not refer to drama at all, and is there to cover the cases in real life that mimic the DeM, such as when an unexpected buyer appears to save your nearly bankrupt company from oblivion. That leaves, in the context of fiction, definition two, which happily coincides with the classic literary definition of DeM. This is why pezagent focuses on this definition: it is correct to do so.DeM clearly has negative connotations, in all modern literary critiques. This is because it is artistically unsatisfying, almost be definition.PSP.S. Pezagant, despite your occasionally testy attitude (obviously from frustration), you have earned my respect. You clearly have the chops to break down a tale, and I find myself wishing I could go back to my college days and trade in a couple of physics courses for some of your dramatic analysis training.P.P.S. As the trilogy winds away, I foresee a time when there are no more LotR threads, at least not how we're used to seeing them. To me, that makes this thread sort of the swan song of LotR discussion on ENWorld. It's kind of sad how it's needlessly degenerated into bitterness and acrimony.</blockquote>

Verification