So I realized something this morning that I am going to log relative to Chip Monk Theodore. I don't think this changes my guess relative to Prince Imrahil representing Theodore-Moses during events of the LOTR, but it was interesting to note. Maybe it will change things in the future, or might influence someone else's thinking or ideas. Or even spur some new thoughts of my own. We'll see.
The thing I realized is the the same actor who portrays Eomer - Eowyn's brother - also portrays Dr. McCoy in J.J Abrams' modern remake of Star Trek. That actor is Karl Urban. Here he is below as Eomer and Dr. McCoy:
Now, Karl Urban's name itself is also pretty interesting as we get another reference to "Free Man" and thus France. Karl is the German variant of Charles, which means Free Man. Urban literally means "of the city". So, Free Man of the City. Could be interesting. Urban can also be Elvish for "Sun God".
At some point, of course, we have to find Eomer's role in this whole thing. He is Eowyn's brother during the critical events of the 3rd Age, and played an important role in not only Rohan's defense, but also with that of Gondor. He loved Eowyn, being driven to near madness and rage when he saw her lying as if dead on the battlefield. Further, he had a special connection, affinity, and allegiance to Aragorn-John, recognizing him for who he was. He would also see Wormtongue (Brigham) for what he was, and Wormtongue would recognize in Eomer his foe, turning Theoden against him and ultimately arresting and imprisoning him.
Eomer also did come up yesterday in the same breath as Imrahil, as it was Eomer, Imrahil and Aragorn who were said to ride back to the gates of Minas Tirith together unharmed following the Battle of the Pelennor Fields.
I said in my Imrahil post that of all the potential incarnations of Moses I am thinking through, that one has the least 'evidence' going for it. I did, however, like how the name Imrahil turned out, honestly, and I did like the symbolism of him and Faramir becoming Aragorn's chief advisors and commanders. So, it seemed to fit in a general way.
Now, J.J. Abrams has ruined many a good story. I actually don't think I have watched one of his Star Trek re-makes. I may have started one but wasn't able to finish it. I have watched the tragedies that were the new Star Wars movies, however (let's have a quick moment of silence...). My understanding is that in the new Star Trek movies he actually created an alternative timeline, meaning the characters are not really the same characters as they were - sure, they share the same names, but their stories are altered. It is an alternative universe, or multi-verse, or something like this.
But, for some odd reason, this alternative universe still can be accessed by the old universe and characters. Again, in my opinion, cue the bad storytelling. In fact, remember how in my Oliver Cowdery post I mentioned how if D&C 110 was true then I would need to rule out Oliver as a candidate for being Moses because then we would have Moses appearing to himself as Oliver? Well, J.J. Abrams concocted this kind of scenario in his Star Trek storyline with Spock. The old Spock, still played by Leonard Nimoy, and living in another universe or timeline, appears to the new Spock. I've never actually seen the scene that produces the screenshot below but here we have them meeting each other. Huh?
Further in Abrams' remake of the Wrath of Khan, I guess we now have not Spock sacrificing himself to save the ship from Khan, but rather Kirk does so in this new alternative universe. So, the storylines get mixed up and characters do different things, while everyone pretends that this new storyline exists in some kind of connection with the old one. Again, I haven't watched these movies, but I am just left to ask what kind of dark magic is at work here.
So, we could look at Karl Urban playing both Eomer and Dr. McCoy and conclude that maybe it is Eomer who is our third Chip Monk. It is possible, I think. However, we could also conclude that this is alternative universe Chip Monk Theodore, and we have swapped in the wrong guy to play Dr. McCoy here. That is the theory I am going to go with currently.
You can see how little support we are working with here on the Imrahil piece (and how ridiculous the thinking is here sometimes) if we are talking about a common actor bridging characters as evidence we should seriously consider.
But my current guess still stands - Imrahil as Moses. But this did serve to remind me that at some point Eomer's story will need to come out, along with so many others. I mentioned that James was a mysterious character said to be present at the Mount of Transfiguration. I wonder if there is any chance that could be Eomer, if that story is accurate and we need to account for another person there?
Lastly, it shouldn't be surprising, I guess, to see a close connection between Eomer and Imrahil. They became great friends, and ultimately would even become family. Eomer would marry Imrahil's daughter Lothiriel.
I really hate multiverse storytellings. It's a really lazy way to cover up for bad storytelling. Way beyond sloppy imo. Seems like James fits in there as one of those two. So it's Peter/Faramir/Gim Guru; John/Thingol/Aragorn/Gim Githil; James/Moses/Imrahil/Gim Rahil. Is that the idea?
ReplyDeleteWell, no, because I have James and Moses as different people. I guess I don't have to use the traditional list of names present at the Mount of Transfiguration, but that is what I've been using as a template.
ReplyDeleteIn that case, Moses and James have to be different people, since they are both listed as present. So I would have Moses/ Imrahil for sure, but James as somebody else. I was wondering in the post whether Eomer might come in to play as James.
But, at the same time, the list of names there doesn't necessarily have to be accurate, and if that is the case, I suppose you could have James double up as Moses. They would be accidentally split apart in tradition, much like I claim John the Baptist and John the Apostle were.
That could be another angle. In summary - I have no idea!
But, thinking about it really quickly, Imrahil and Eomer were definitely two different people, so that would be one argument for potentially finding a way to have him be James (if that is even remotely a possibility) and keeping James separate from Moses.
ReplyDeleteAs of right now, I consider Moses to not be represented by James.