[HN Gopher] The Moral Economy of the Shire
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The Moral Economy of the Shire
        
       Author : thecosas
       Score  : 68 points
       Date   : 2024-06-03 18:57 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (nathangoldwag.wordpress.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (nathangoldwag.wordpress.com)
        
       | neaden wrote:
       | I feel like this article misses something obvious, which is that
       | Hobbits aren't humans and the world of LotR includes people doing
       | things that we would describe as magical. Hobbits for instance
       | have a semi-magical ability to hide by how it's described in the
       | books. If their society seems unrealistic for humans with
       | medieval technology, I think that just shows us that Hobbits are
       | fundamentally different from humans. The apparent almost total
       | lack of Hobbit on Hobbit violence in the book also shows that
       | Hobbits are just psychologically different from humans.
        
         | skybrian wrote:
         | Sure, it's fantasy and you could stop there. But the story
         | often treats them as little people in a medieval setting and I
         | think it wouldn't be enjoyable without that point of reference.
         | So it's worth making comparisons.
        
         | bee_rider wrote:
         | We also see, in the Amazon series, a group of apparently
         | hunter-gatherer hobbits with iron and textiles.
         | 
         | The conclusion I come to is that Hobbits magic up manufactured
         | goods from the idealized English countryside of Tolkien's
         | imagination. If you have some English ancestors who lost a pot,
         | it time-slipped into Middle Earth. Presumably they are where
         | the socks go. Ever notice an excess of old keys around the
         | house? Hobbits need boxes!
        
           | prerok wrote:
           | In the Amazon series are proto-Hobbits, before they settled
           | down. So, they had a different society from the ones we read
           | about in the books.
           | 
           | But, yeah, the time travelling pots and socks must be how it
           | worked :) Kind of like Skynet in the future compiling our C++
           | code :)
        
           | bigstrat2003 wrote:
           | Tolkien is hardly responsible for the Amazon writers'
           | unwillingness to think about the logic of the setting and
           | abide by it.
        
         | porknubbins wrote:
         | Hobbits are pretty clearly intended to represent a kind of
         | idealized English rural life. There would be little reason to
         | for humans or hobbits to commit violence living in small
         | villages or other kinship based settlements where everyone
         | would know everyone. Smeagol killed for the ring just after
         | discovering it so Hobbits are capable of violence but their way
         | of life does not normally call for it. Also Hobbits are in no
         | way innocent as they do pranks and commit petty theft from the
         | farmer.
        
           | bryanlarsen wrote:
           | Most violence is committed between people that know each
           | other rather than between strangers.
        
             | adamrezich wrote:
             | This aphorism does not take warfare into account.
        
               | rexpop wrote:
               | Aphorism? There is substantial evidence supporting the
               | statement that most violence is committed by people who
               | know each other rather than by strangers. Here are some
               | key findings from various sources:
               | 
               | - _Sexual Violence_ : According to RAINN (Rape, Abuse &
               | Incest National Network), the majority of sexual abuse
               | cases reported to law enforcement show that 93% of
               | juvenile victims knew the perpetrator: 59% were
               | acquaintances, 34% were family members, and only 7% were
               | strangers1.
               | 
               | - _General Violence_ : Data from the National Crime
               | Victimization Survey (NCVS) indicates that less than half
               | of all violent crimes were committed by total strangers.
               | A significant portion of violent crimes were committed by
               | acquaintances, friends, and relatives5.
               | 
               | - _Homicide_ : In 2004, only 23% of murders were
               | committed by strangers, highlighting that a larger
               | percentage of homicides occur between individuals who
               | know each other4.
               | 
               | These statistics demonstrate that violence is more likely
               | to occur within known social circles rather than between
               | strangers. It's important to note that these findings are
               | based on reported cases and surveys, which can have
               | limitations, but they provide a general understanding of
               | the patterns of violence.
               | 
               | Source: Conversation with Copilot, 6/3/2024 (1)
               | Perpetrators of Sexual Violence: Statistics | RAINN.
               | https://www.rainn.org/statistics/perpetrators-sexual-
               | violenc.... (2) Violent Crime by Strangers and
               | Nonstrangers - Bureau of Justice Statistics.
               | https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/vcsn.pdf. (3)
               | VIOLENCE BETWEEN LOVERS, STRANGERS, AND FRIENDS. https://
               | journals.library.wustl.edu/lawreview/article/6708/ga....
               | (4) Statistics In-Depth - National Sexual Violence
               | Resource Center.
               | https://www.nsvrc.org/statistics/statistics-depth. (5)
               | STRANGER AND ACQUAINTANCE RAPE: Are There ... -
               | University of Arizona.
               | https://experts.arizona.edu/en/publications/stranger-and-
               | acq....
        
               | jvanderbot wrote:
               | "Aphorism" does not imply falsehood or that it is not
               | supported by evidence. Actually, it implies a generally-
               | known _truth_.
               | 
               | Indeed those citations exclude war.
        
               | throwaway22032 wrote:
               | Does this account for the fact that violence and murder
               | committed by strangers is less likely to be solved?
        
           | neaden wrote:
           | I mean, Medieval English villages had violence, we have court
           | records of it. People got drunk and got in fights, threatened
           | to burn a neighbors house down, and all sorts of other
           | reasons why people turn to violence that Hobbits seem to do
           | only under extreme circumstances, like being under the
           | influence of The One Ring as you point out.
        
             | mistrial9 wrote:
             | it is surprising to find times of no violence, not times of
             | violence. The history of the British Isles is filled with
             | raiders and tribal conflicts, armies and their Lords.
             | Peasants lived on the lands of their masters, while traders
             | and pirates roamed.
        
         | NoMoreNicksLeft wrote:
         | I do wonder, just a little, if rather than fantasy this touches
         | on the idea that a homogeneous people in w well-ordered society
         | with a functioning economy might not commit much violence among
         | themselves. If such were the idea being espoused, then whether
         | or not the idea was valid, it would be difficult to talk about
         | openly in our current political climate. If it could be shown
         | to be invalid for whatever reason, then the idea might be
         | attacked that way, but it'd be better still if it could just be
         | dismissed as childish drivel.
        
           | throwaway22032 wrote:
           | It'a a priori obvious that this is valid, but politics,
           | propaganda etc do not run for the benefit of the common man.
        
         | jjk166 wrote:
         | Also I imagine a Hobbit's calorie requirements are
         | substantially lower than a man 3 times their size. They're no
         | less intelligent (indeed they are shown to be particularly
         | clever), they have access to draft animals and basic machines,
         | so their agricultural productivity is likely still high. This
         | should allow for substantially greater surpluses even before we
         | invoke magic.
        
           | froidpink wrote:
           | Yeah but also what about second breakfast
        
       | hprotagonist wrote:
       | The other obvious answer is that the Shire is distributist in its
       | economy.
        
         | skybrian wrote:
         | How do you mean?
        
           | 7thaccount wrote:
           | Look up distributivism. Catholics like Chesterton advocated
           | for it as something of a middle ground between the abuses of
           | capitalism and communism after the Pope write an encyclical
           | on the tragedy of workers. They recognized both capitalism
           | and communism as being abusive. Tolkien would have been aware
           | of the theory I believe and it could have influenced him.
           | 
           | Distributivist thinkers promote a more localized system of
           | government with a strong community where the ultimate goal
           | isn't milking out all value (capitalism).
           | 
           | One of my issues with distributivism is I'm not sure if we'd
           | have the technological advancements under such a system (your
           | local community isn't going to design and manufacture an Xbox
           | or advanced medical equipment). It does sound more equitable
           | on paper though.
           | 
           | https://theimaginativeconservative.org/2014/11/distributism-.
           | ..
        
             | orwin wrote:
             | That sounds a lot like anarchist communism, what are the
             | difference?
        
               | hprotagonist wrote:
               | metaphysics, for a start. _Rerum Novarum_ is fascinating
               | reading.
               | 
               | They're nonexclusive options, though: dorothy day, for
               | example, was comfortable in both camps (as much as she
               | was comfortable in a camp at all)
        
               | 7thaccount wrote:
               | There are still strong property rights and ownership of
               | the economy should be more distributed, but they don't
               | advocate for some elite government entity to come scoop
               | up everything and decide who gets what or outlaw people
               | from owning land and property.
               | 
               | Unlike capitalism, instead of a factory making some kind
               | of widget or product (example: ice cream) that makes one
               | individual very rich and provides a low salary to a
               | hundred workers, you'd have thousands of people across
               | the country doing all kinds of jobs like that and
               | hopefully making a living wage. Unlike communism, you
               | don't have a fully centralized power dictating all
               | aspects of life.
               | 
               | I'm no expert on this theory though and it isn't perfect.
               | Such a society probably doesn't build an iPhone...maybe
               | that is the point haha. Or maybe it can, but I'm guessing
               | technological advancements and discoveries would take
               | longer with less efficiency and specialization.
        
               | WalterBright wrote:
               | Under capitalism, as soon as some business owner gets
               | rich, everybody else goes into business to compete with
               | him. This drives up the demand for labor and hence wages.
        
             | JumpCrisscross wrote:
             | > _one of my issues with distributivism is I 'm not sure if
             | we'd have the technological advancements under such a
             | system_
             | 
             | What kills these systems is economies of scale.
             | 
             | You're citing one example, those in R&D, but it crops up as
             | a handicap across production. The net result is such a
             | society could really only exist if protected by a great
             | power. (As we see with the Hobbits and Rangers.) And at
             | that point, we're splitting hairs between a new economic
             | system and benevolent feudalism.
        
               | skybrian wrote:
               | Economies of scale become important when there are a lot
               | of non-farmers to feed and farm labor becomes scarce.
               | When labor is cheap and land is expensive, getting more
               | food per acre is more important.
        
               | JumpCrisscross wrote:
               | > _Economies of scale become important when there are a
               | lot of non-farmers to feed and farm labor becomes scarce_
               | 
               | Economies of scale are fundamental. If 100% of your
               | labour pool is farming, you're going to get invaded.
        
               | 7thaccount wrote:
               | I thought of the economies of scale issue, but didn't add
               | it. I definitely agree it's an issue unless Hobbits are
               | just really keen on not accepting cheap imports from
               | abroad. I'd say it's also a problem globally if your
               | country adopted such a system, but an enemy didn't and
               | overcame your country's ability to defend itself. It's
               | not that soldiers don't exist in such an economy, but
               | that I don't think you'd be able to be competitive from a
               | logistics standpoint and thus an easy target. For
               | example, they're producing tanks and planes in a factory,
               | while your country has a lot of rural blacksmiths.
        
               | hprotagonist wrote:
               | > The net result is such a society could really only
               | exist if protected by a great power.
               | 
               | reminds me a bit of Jim Corbett's "Goatwalking".
        
             | skybrian wrote:
             | I read a book review [1] that discussed how land reform,
             | specifically distributing land to small farmers, seems to
             | be a reason why some Asian countries did well. This is
             | about improving agricultural productivity. That's an
             | earlier stage before industrialization, but does help make
             | it possible.
             | 
             | The US could be seen as another example of the benefits of
             | cheap or free land being widely available to small farmers,
             | even though it didn't happen through land reform.
             | 
             | Tolkien wasn't writing about how to encourage economic
             | growth, though. Rather the opposite.
             | 
             | [1] https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/book-review-how-asia-
             | works
        
               | WalterBright wrote:
               | Colonial America set up a system whereby colonists could
               | lay claim to a piece of unused land, and if they farmed
               | it for a while then they received ownership of it.
        
             | coldtea wrote:
             | > _One of my issues with distributivism is I 'm not sure if
             | we'd have the technological advancements under such a
             | system _
             | 
             | I'd take the simpler life, social harmony, leisure,
             | equality and the rest, over the rat race with its
             | technological advancements.
        
               | WalterBright wrote:
               | You're free to start such a commune. They're not illegal.
               | People start them up all the time in the US.
               | 
               | The trouble is, they don't work. The Woodstock commune
               | lasted 3 days, and the people left after turning the
               | fields into a sewage farm. The Summer of Love in San
               | Francisco lasted 3 months or so. There are lots of
               | others.
        
               | hprotagonist wrote:
               | The Bruderhof communities, the Amish, and many of the
               | other peace churches are largely sustainable examples of
               | communities which seem quite self sustaining in this
               | vein.
               | 
               | Monastic communities have operated this way, to varying
               | degrees, for millennia.
               | 
               | To a certain extent, even the tenured academic system
               | reflects this sort of dynamic -- and came from the same
               | roots.
        
               | WalterBright wrote:
               | The Amish communities are not communes. The Bruderhof has
               | many communes, with a total of 2900 members worldwide.
               | Doesn't sound very successful. Monastic communities and
               | academic communities seem to survive on external
               | donations.
               | 
               | "The Bruderhof run a variety of businesses that provide
               | income to run their communities and provide common work
               | for the members who almost all work onsite."
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruderhof_Communities
               | 
               | Is it really a commune if they're running a capitalist
               | business? Or is it more of a cooperative?
        
           | hprotagonist wrote:
           | tolkien saw it as the person-centric economy, and advocated
           | for it. it's easy enough to see the idea reflected into the
           | Shire, itself kind of an idyll of what a good society was
           | like.
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributism
        
           | vundercind wrote:
           | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributism
           | 
           | I assume it's a reference to how _most_ hobbits seem to hold
           | and manage productive land, or at least to be attached to a
           | family that does.
           | 
           | (I'd not made the connection to distributism, but also get a
           | similar sense of how their society is structured, just from
           | reading The Hobbit and LOTR--but, this may be a biased
           | perspective because we're hanging around with some of the
           | richest Hobbits that there are)
        
             | markus_zhang wrote:
             | I guess the Shire is probably small enough to maintain such
             | a political structure. J.R.R.Tolkein does model it with an
             | ideal English countryside in mind, in which people like
             | Bilbo Barkins, who are wise, participate in the politics of
             | the community.
        
         | svieira wrote:
         | This is the right answer. The author calls it out subtly too:
         | 
         | > the gap between the lower gentry and upper yeomanry isn't
         | very large, and most families are able to support themselves
         | with only minimal assistance.
         | 
         | For those who want to fall down the rabbit hole see:
         | 
         | 1. The Servile State by Hilaire Belloc:
         | https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/64882 2.
         | https://distributistreview.com/archive/an-introduction-to-di...
        
       | hatthew wrote:
       | This article is interesting, but feels like a bit of a stretch to
       | me, particularly when making assertions as bold as "I suspect the
       | only reason it's not spelled out is because Tolkien assumed any
       | reader would understand that intuitively." I am not a master of
       | the LotR lore, but my assumption when reading the books years ago
       | was that Tolkien wanted an idyllic utopian society of rural
       | leisure, and didn't necessarily work out a _fully_ realistic plan
       | for how such a society could be sustainable long-term in the real
       | world with real humans. LotR is a fantasy world, and such worlds
       | are filled with fantasies: imaginary things that are unrealistic
       | and don 't need to be physically feasible.
        
         | jerf wrote:
         | Even in-universe the Hobbits aren't fully "realistic"; they are
         | supported by the Rangers keeping the many and sundry threats of
         | Middle Earth off of their borders. Without that protection the
         | whole system actually fell apart even in-universe. There's not
         | a lot places in the real history of the real world where a
         | society had no defense burden, and they don't tend to be long-
         | term stable either.
        
         | dylan604 wrote:
         | At some point, suspension of disbelief is the expected behavior
         | of the reader. Nobody would want to read a fantasy about
         | dwarfs, hobbits, elves, and dragons if they first had to get
         | through a complete history of the financial systems within the
         | fantasy world. Most people can't make it through all of the
         | language system within the tomes that Tolkien did include.
         | 
         | Expecting all of the details to work in a _FANTASY_ story is
         | just ludicrous. This is why a lot of people that are not fans
         | shy away from fans having these types of conversations.
        
           | hosh wrote:
           | On the other hand, Tolkien spent his time creating realistic
           | languages and lore to go with that, above and beyond many
           | fantasy writers.
           | 
           | On the gripping hand, having read through various histories,
           | it's nuts how often historians get things mixed up or wrong,
           | or obsolete with emerging evidence. Our histories, even
           | evidence-based, tells a story of our past, and no narrative
           | can fully describe what happened.
        
             | ben_w wrote:
             | > On the gripping hand, having read through various
             | histories, it's nuts how often historians get things mixed
             | up or wrong, or obsolete with emerging evidence. Our
             | histories, even evidence-based, tells a story of our past,
             | and no narrative can fully describe what happened.
             | 
             | Indeed; the similarity of "history" and "story" is no mere
             | coincidence, they share a root. And in German, both are the
             | same word: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Geschicht
        
           | jltsiren wrote:
           | Tolkien himself had a different point of view. In his
           | opinion, if suspension of disbelief becomes necessary, it's a
           | sign that the writer has failed. He preferred "secondary
           | belief" instead. The idea was that the reader should remain
           | immersed in the fictional world, confident that the world
           | works consistently according to its internal logic. That the
           | logic is there, even if the reader doesn't know it, and that
           | the writer doesn't break it for their own convenience.
        
             | WalterBright wrote:
             | I lost all interest in Harry Potter when he was hanging
             | outside a window, helpless. Then, his buddy appears with a
             | flying car to rescue him.
             | 
             | I'm not interested in such lazy writing.
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | That's like complaining that Harry was stuck but _magic_
               | happened to get him out of a situation. That 's kind of
               | like the entire point of the series
        
               | WalterBright wrote:
               | Making up random arbitrary things whenever needed to get
               | out of a fix is just bad storytelling.
               | 
               | One of the great things about LOTR is the ring is
               | ascribed various powers, and then the consequences of
               | that play out. The rules within its world are consistent.
               | 
               | HP has no consistency.
               | 
               | Probably why I also prefer hard scifi - it must follow
               | the known rules of physics, or at least have plausible
               | extensions.
               | 
               | I liked GoT a lot as it was driven by human decisions and
               | foibles. But it slowly devolved into convenient magic
               | absurdities, like resurrecting dead people, and I lost
               | interest.
        
           | WalterBright wrote:
           | In the Hobbit movie, Smaug's gold hoard was so vast that if
           | it actually went into circulation, gold would be cheaper than
           | iron. The citizens would be making roof tiles and plumbing
           | out of it.
           | 
           | (Although iron ore is plentiful, it is expensive to refine
           | and smelt.)
           | 
           | Even the relatively few Spanish gold ships hauling gold to
           | the Old World resulted in massive inflation, not wealth.
        
           | astrange wrote:
           | > Nobody would want to read a fantasy about dwarfs, hobbits,
           | elves, and dragons if they first had to get through a
           | complete history of the financial systems within the fantasy
           | world.
           | 
           | Japanese fantasy works on a system where you look at whatever
           | novel is currently popular, copy every surface/world detail
           | from it, then add exactly one thing you wanted it to be all
           | along and just talk about all the time. It's basically done
           | for SEO reasons, but it means you can save all the setup time
           | if every story is in the same medieval isekai that vaguely
           | feels like Dragon Quest.
           | 
           | So yes, there are stories that are just about forex
           | speculation with elves or whatever. Spice and Wolf is one.
        
         | entuno wrote:
         | This is something that varied a lot in Tolkien's writing
         | throughout his life.
         | 
         | When he wrote The Hobbit, he was very much writing a fairy
         | tale. So there was very little consideration for things
         | economics and agriculture because it wasn't that type of story,
         | and those types of things aren't important in fairy tales. And
         | when he started to write the early drafts of The Lord of the
         | Rings, he was still very much in that mode - it was intended to
         | be a direct sequel to The Hobbit and the opening chapters have
         | that much more light hearted feel to them.
         | 
         | But the story grew in the telling, and by the time he reached
         | the end of of The Lord of the Rings he was far more invested in
         | realism and consistency within the world - so was paying a lot
         | more attention to this type of thing (including going back and
         | editing and rewriting sections multiple times).
         | 
         | This is also very evident in his other writings. The first
         | drafts of what would become The Silmarillion were very much
         | more fantastical and mythic - we got stories of a flat world
         | and very brief and vague descriptions of the Elves awaking
         | under the stars before the Sun and Moon were made, and marching
         | across the land. The versions of that same story he wrote
         | towards the end of his life had a round world, and carefully
         | planning out of the Elvish aging and reproductive cycles
         | throughout the march, to work out how many generations would be
         | needed for there to be a suitably large host.
        
           | causality0 wrote:
           | Didn't the world start as flat and then Eru made it round to
           | keep Aman away from mortal eyes, being reachable only by
           | those who could see the "straight path" like the elves?
        
             | entuno wrote:
             | In The Lord of the Rings and the published Silmarillion
             | that's correct. But in some of the later drafts Tolkien
             | wrote he moved away from that towards a story where the
             | world had always been a sphere (often called the
             | "roundworld" versions), seemingly in an attempt to add more
             | realism to the story.
             | 
             | The "flat world made round" was recast as a somewhat
             | primitive Mannish myth (as a way to recon the earlier
             | writings).
        
               | causality0 wrote:
               | I'm pretty glad that didn't make it into the official
               | canon. The evolution of the world is one of the most
               | fascinating things about the legendarium. Imagine living
               | during the age of the lamps.
        
         | popalchemist wrote:
         | Yes, the author has made a category error.
        
         | bazoom42 wrote:
         | The Shire is idylic but not exactly utopian or paradisic.
         | Clearly most people have to work - they are farmers, gardeners,
         | millers etc. There is a clear social hierachy but nobody is
         | exploited.
        
           | hatthew wrote:
           | Perhaps the hobbits enjoy a bit of work. Perhaps a society
           | need not be perfect to count as a utopia. Perhaps I used the
           | wrong word. Hopefully my meaning was clear enough regardless.
        
         | astrange wrote:
         | I don't think it's a stretch. I think the idea that LoTR is
         | highly idealized/idyllic is an interpretation made up by people
         | who didn't notice how carefully it's written and thought he
         | left it out!
         | 
         | Similarly, a lot of later grimdarker fantasy stories try to be
         | "Tolkein but with realistic tax systems and warfare", so
         | something like ASoIaF tries to talk about those things more,
         | but then messes up the actual details and keeps them
         | inconsistent. But if you follow the analyses on
         | https://acoup.blog/author/aimedtact/, the battles in LoTR are
         | very carefully thought out and realistic (based on Tolkein's
         | personal experience) and Gondor's feudalist system is also
         | pretty realistic (based on his academic expertise). He just
         | talked about the details less.
         | 
         | (I further claim that the reason LoTR doesn't have many women
         | isn't because he forgot about them, it's because they're doing
         | household labor and Frodo doesn't encounter them due to being
         | something between a celibate priest and gay.)
        
       | bulbosaur123 wrote:
       | Real life equivalent to Shire is essentially Island of Sark:
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sark
        
         | thecosas wrote:
         | This wikipedia page is a treasure trove of rabbit holes. Thank
         | you!
        
       | rhelz wrote:
       | As an American, I had to read LOTR about 5 times before I started
       | to perceive the class-based nature of the world of Middle Earth.
       | Class here is not as in-your-face as it is in Great Briton.
       | 
       | What's fascinating to me is that this sort of world/economy/way-
       | of-life is the backdrop of virtually _every_ fairy tail, fantasy
       | novel, or even video game (e.g. World of Warcraft). For some
       | reason, this kind of world--which in actuality is on of the most
       | rigid and with the least opportunities--is nevertheless the world
       | which, in our imaginations, is the one most brimming with
       | possibilities and the most potential for adventure.
       | 
       | Why this kind of world? When I asked my father that question, he
       | pointed out that fairy tails often start with brothers "setting
       | out to seek their fortune" and invariably have the youngest
       | brother coming out on top. The reason was the laws of
       | primogeniture--the oldest son inherits everything, so in every
       | generation, all of the younger sons had to do just that--go out
       | and see if they could make something happen, because despite
       | their privileged upbringing, they were going to get dumped out
       | into the wide world to fend for themselves.
        
       | andyjohnson0 wrote:
       | I enjoyed the author's counterfactual description of the
       | "Sauronic Empire" [1] that was established following Sauron's
       | victory at the end of the third age.
       | 
       | https://nathangoldwag.wordpress.com/2024/02/10/the-sauronic-...
        
       | cess11 wrote:
       | Tolkien, the catholic anarchist, made his utopian village into
       | something feudal with a 'landed gentry'?
       | 
       | I suspect this person is reading things into these simulations of
       | folklore that are unlikely to have a foundation in the author.
       | 
       | https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/j-r-r-tolkien-from-a...
        
       | coldtea wrote:
       | > _The implication in both books and movies is that most Hobbits
       | spent their time either farming or enjoying leisure time, but
       | this makes little sense, when one considers what we know about
       | premodern agriculture and what little of life and culture in the
       | Shire._
       | 
       | That's not even wrong. Medieval peasants in certain places like
       | Italy had like half the year off as public holidays. And those of
       | us old and rural enough to have seen pre-modern life in rural
       | villages, known there was still a lot of leisure time going
       | around. As for domestic chores, those were a couple of hours at
       | max, intermingled with other work and leisure - and having the
       | grandparents living close by meant more hands for helping with
       | cooking, kids, and so on.
       | 
       | In those villages there was (and still is, a little less so, but
       | compared to modern city life orders of magnitude more) leisure
       | time, people hang in the public square and cafes for hours on
       | end, and it's not that different today. People from the city are
       | often surprised like "wtf, is anybody working here?".
        
         | WalterBright wrote:
         | I have serious doubts about such leisure time. For example,
         | cooking with a fireplace is an all-day affair as it requires
         | constant monitoring and a constant supply of wood. Next, making
         | cloth and sewing it was a major time sink. The evidence for
         | that was how valuable cloth was, such that it was recycled
         | endlessly until it was more or less dust. Third, children were
         | put to work in the fields as soon as they could walk. This does
         | not suggest a surfeit of labor. Fourth, there was the daily
         | feeding and maintenance of the animals. Fifth, have you ever
         | tried sawing a plank with a handsaw? Building a house and a
         | barn had to be a massive amount of hand work.
         | 
         | Bone evidence from American colonist farmers is that they
         | worked physically very hard, and did not live to be old.
         | Getting enough food was a constant problem. They didn't grow
         | very tall.
        
         | samth wrote:
         | This is just entirely false. As a counterpoint, I recommend
         | this passage about the washing in the Texas Hill County.
         | https://x.com/trainallday247/status/1796732464838160650
        
       | efitz wrote:
       | The reason that there is no discussion of the economics of the
       | Shire in LOTR is because it's not relevant to the story and the
       | land and the people are all fictional. It doesn't _have_ to work.
       | 
       | Tolkien was setting up a dichotomy between the idyllic, paradise-
       | like shire where everyone lives in harmony with nature and has
       | lots of leisure time and no one wants of necessities and everyone
       | gets along , etc, is to set up a counterpoint vs
       | industrialization and ugliness and capitalism etc. it's just a
       | big old trope. Just like sets in a play, it's two-dimensional.
       | It's also a backdrop setting up an "innocence lost" storyline for
       | the protagonists.
       | 
       | The bottom line is that it's a utopia and utopias only exist in
       | stories; real people are fallible and have many motivations, some
       | of which are not noble, and so such a place can't exist.
        
         | WalterBright wrote:
         | It's not that much different from the Star Trek Utopian world
         | run by a benevolent dictator and his selfless incorruptible
         | staff.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-06-03 23:02 UTC)