Re: The other Hobbit Movie Forum is alive!

[Tinuviel]

I hope you guys didn't scare anyone off! Let our "cousins" slowly get used to the crazy banter, don't bombard them all at once!!!
Poor cousins! (Actually, for me they're subjects, but...)

[Lorient Avandi]

They need to move over here. The setup over there is terrible. And yet, it seems like the opposite is happening.

[Eldorion]

*shrugs* I'm not really a big fan of bbpress (the forum software that Taz is using over there), but it's fun and fresh. I'm still reading and posting here but we have been in a bit of a quiet period. It's cyclical though; we always pick up again. On the other hand, the other site has a steadier stream of new faces since it's attached to a reasonably popular movie blog (by Hobbit standards), same as we did before Ady let technical problems overwhelm the site. Apparently Taz has cleaned up those messes and I have to give him credit for that.

[Orwell]

I hope you guys didn't scare anyone off! Let our "cousins" slowly get used to the crazy banter, don't bombard them all at once!!!
Poor cousins! (Actually, for me they're subjects, but...)

You must not worry, Tin. They seem very accepting over there, and everyone from here is showing some restraint. We know we're visitors there, and I for one am feeling my way, I think everyone is. They seem a good humoured bunch, who give as good as they get. I even suspect I've met my female doppleganger, by name Julia. Scary. Too early to say though.

[Pettytyrant101]

Well if that's the case Orwell lay on a bit of charm and you know, invite her back here. Or is this going to be another embarressing rerun of the 'Kafria incident'. (Who seems to have run away in fact!).
No good will come of this meddling in other forums you know, its not respectble at all, it says so in the newspaper.

[Eldorion]

Well, the original "Who's in charge of this site" thread was deleted, so I can only assume that someone did e-mail Taz and he is averse to (a) his e-mail being made public or (b) us talking about the old forum.

[Pettytyrant101]

Does that mean the link to here is gone too then Eldo?

[Eldorion]

Yes, and I can't help but wonder if that's why Taz deleted it. But to delete the whole thread is so far overboard that he's probably riding a dolphin by now.

[Pettytyrant101]

I have to say I don't much like the cut of Taz's gib. Nor the sway of his sporran or the height of his kilt hem. None of which are respectable or to be trusted.

[Orwell]

I suspect that Taz is not even a Scotshobbit!

[Pettytyrant101]

Well that explains it then.

[Orwell]

Yep.

[Orwell]

My fear is, Bree may be under attack!!!

So I've grabbed - "Fresh - examples of" - for Safekeeping. (It's my favorite )


1. Glenn Maillard
Member
Strange Thread title, but bear with me. There is always something "fresh" about Tolkien, no matter how many times I read him. I have the same feeling about "Dune" (especially the first book of the series), and the works of Jack Vance. I do not have the same "feeling" when it comes to books like the Potter series, which is Quality Fantasy, but somehow rarely more than old hat.
I guess the best I can do to explain what I'm getting at is to give a few examples. (Oh and I don't mean "fresh" ideas as being necessarily "original" ideas by the way, there are few existing, if any, I feel).
Tom Bombadil: A comic character to a large extent who is not in any way "dominated" or even particularly "moved" by the Ring. The Ring is like the Atom Bomb of Midle Earth. Tom's "unmovéd-ness" about the Ring is an idea that strikes me as fresh.
Bilbo Baggins: Is knocked out very early in the huge culminating battle of The Hobbit. What fantasy author does that to his hero?
Smaug: Witty lizard, chatty even, who, I might add, has a good idea about the market value of the jools he sleeps upon, intelligent, hey? But then he throws a wobbly. Yes, a wobbly! What a fierce, awesome, mountain shaking wobbly though!
J.K. Rowling does not seem to display this freshness, or, to be fair, rarely. With her it appears to be trophe after trophe. I don't mean this to be a comparison between Potter and Middle Earth. I'm more interested in Tolkien's "fresh" seeming ideas.
What think you, guys? More examples required.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

2. Julia Mellor
Member
Tolkien is obviously my favorite Author, but I do find Harry Potter magical, I dont know how or why, I resisted reading Potter for years thinking it was all hype, and then I read them and they put a spell on me.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

3. Julia Mellor
Member
I think Gimli is fresh, he's a Romantic with a keen aesthetic sense, you dont expect a dwarf to be falling in love with beauty.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

4. Nora Johansen
Member
maybe you didn't get that feeling with HP because you're well.. not a teenager? I read the book when I was about the same age as the main characters and it all felt new and mind blowing to me.
I loved Gimli in the book and movie. particularly when he talks about the glittering caves.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

5. Jana N. Miller
Member
HP and LOTR are similar, I think, in how their plot is. They are the classic struggle between bad guy(s) and heroes. Here's the plot:
- Evil person who desires power and enslavement of everyone else (both Voldemort and Sauron share this, as well as just not dying.
- at time before the current story takes place, many people fought and died to defeat said bad guy
- bad guy eventually gets defeated, but not entirely. There still exists and object(s) which contain the essence of bad guy.
- an era of peace
- Bad guy begins to re-form, using said object(s). Sauron uses ring, Voldemort the horcruxes. This is where the current story begins (Sauron begins to re-form as the Necromancer in the Hobbit/Voldemort in Sorcerer's Stone)
- Bad guy gets seemingly defeated, but it's a false victory (White Council in Dol Guldur/all times Harry defeats Voldemort up until the Half-Blood Prince). I must note that both Gandalf and Dumbledore had an inkling of what was going on before everyone else, and each goes to find out truth of it before divulging it to Frodo/Harry.
- Good guys find out why bad guy just won't die (beginning of Fellowship/finding out about horcruxes in Half-Blood Prince)
- Frodo/Harry is given a task to do-destroy Ring/horcruxes.
- Frodo/Harry set out on perilous quest to destroy ring/horcruxes (in HP this begins in the last book)
- After many hardships, both destroy said items, and bad guy is defeated once and for all.
The difference between HP and LOTR is in how the stories are written, especially the characters. Rowling uses characters that are basically the classic hero/bad guy/minion, but just redefines them. The characters do exactly what you expect them to do, with very few exceptions. An example is Malfoy. He is a classic bully, and acts just like you'd expect a bully to act. He acts all tough, but he's really only looking out for himself. Don't get me wrong, I really like HP, and I think that the characters Rowling created are one of the best portrayals of these classic types of characters. Tolkien's characters, on the other hand, are unique. They don't act like you would expect them to. As you all have already mentioned, there is the Gimli/Legolas thing. An elf and a dwarf become friends for the first time since "the dark days". Merry and Pippin change and "grow up". Faramir does not take the ring, which you would not expect. Tolkien's characters are brand new. He invented them.
I might also point out that in the Deathly Hallows, the Slytherin locket behaves a lot like the Ring.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

6. Julia Mellor
Member
I quite like Sirius Black as a character, post stress disorder, anxiety, depression, unrequited revenge, incapacity for normal life after years of torture, oh and being a grumpy git with fits of snarkyness, I dont know how fresh it is but its interesting.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

7. Jana N. Miller
Member
Hmmm...good point. I'd forgotten about that.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

8. Lance Tracy
Member
I thought the character of denethor was quite good. The ruler of the most powerful free nation,trying very hard to do the right thing against all hope but ending up being playing right in to the enemies hands despite his genuine intentions. Thought was quite a complex character.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

9. Jason Campbell
Member
Theoden was a complex character too. A mix of grief, self pity, honour, duty, weighed down by the history of his own line. He had been tricked and drugged and betrayed. He was both kingly to his people and personable with Merry and tender with Eowyn. A lot going on there.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

10. Glenn Maillard
Member
Gollum and Shelob's friendship? How did that happen? It's not explained - which might be just as well. Did Shelob feel a bit sad for a lonesome despised creature like herself?
Sam gives Frodo the ring back. A little doubt, but Sam hands it over. A case of the Ring having less power over some than others.
Treebeard, so old, so much a Greeny without being Politically Correct. (No preaching here, but Nature is advocated in a "deep" way).
Gollum is a truly tragic figure, but so comical. Like Bombadil in a sense (in his "averageness") but without his Power. (Bombadil has Power, but doesn't ever really use it, except in a small way against Barrow-wights and Old Man Willow).
HP is a collection of old ideas bundled together - and well - but the instances of "freshness" seem few to me, which is not to say there are none. I like the development of Hermione's and Ron's love - old hat? Don't know, but the thing that interested me most in the movies at least. (I only read the first three books - mostly to my daughter. When she was old enough to read them herself, my interest waned).
Nora, I wonder if you'll love HP as much when you're old and wizened like me? My love for Tolkien - his depths - continues to grow.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

11. Julia Mellor
Member
well anyone who remembers their school days will still like HP, anyone who was bullied or a bit of a loner or a bit batty like Neville or Loona Lovegood can relate to it. I think the relationship between the two Dumbledore brothers is also interesting. One being a reluctant hero and the other with hidden demons. I like bossy boots Hermione, I mean who makes the school swot a heroine?
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

12. Jason Campbell
Member
Or anyone who has read Tom Browns Schooldays...
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

13. Glenn Maillard
Member
Characters need not be anything "new" or "cutting edge", they just need to be like all people, "stock standard" but still capable of surprising you because no one is truly a "stock standard ordinary person."
Umm... characters are always interesting (and possibly scary) when you see them poking their heads out of the box you've (ignorantly) put them in; so why not characters in stories? They're better that way, I think.
Um.... maybe in a good character "strangeness" seems "ordinary", once you've got to know them.
Anyhow, all characters of the Tolkien variety seem ordinary - "ordinary" kings, queens, elves, dwarves, Black Riders and hobbits. They're real. You might meet them in the street. Doesn't make them any less interesting - more, in fact. It's like we've met them, not just read about them.
Um.. I don't think I know what I'm talking about... or do I???
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

14. Jana N. Miller
Member
I get what you mean. Tolkien's characters are real, and they behave like real people would. There isn't anything fake about them.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

15. Tim Jones
Member
What makes Tolkien so reread for me is that his narratives are embedded in such a convincingly authentic world. Not only is the history, geography, culture, philosophy, and the inhabiting races and languages of Middle earth so thoroughly conceived, but they also exhibit a texture of reality that is utterly believable. If his stories are the boats needed to sail across his mythology, it is so enjoyable to capsize.
One of my favourite examples is the history of the Rangers of Arnor, exemplified by Aragorn. Not only is Aragorn the leader of a race descended from the Edain, through the Numenoreans, the Faithful and the Kingdom of Arnor, but is himself descended from the Edain, Noldor, Sindar and Mia. But the history of the Noldor is unbeatable for variety and tragedy.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

16. Jana N. Miller
Member
Tolkien has such a depth. Each time I read it, I get something new out of it, notice something I hadn't noticed before.
Nice analogy, Tim.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

17. Glenn Maillard
Member
Because his stories are so grounded (researched in a sense), they act on the reader like real history. And well written history always invites re-assessments. History repeats, but it is not a collection, merely, of trophes. This is how Rowling and Tolkien differ. One seems a collection of old things, cliches even, the latter a collection of things as they happened, and whenever the page is reread, life is immediately placed under the eye for re-assessment. I agree with you Jana, Tolkien begs you to look deeper. Rowling frolics in in the shallows - which is fun, of course.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

18. Jana N. Miller
Member
Good description.
That's probably why some people (who are nuts) don't like Tolkien as much, because it reads like a history.
Although I know for a fact that my neighbor doesn't like LOTR because hobbits creep her out. No joke.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

19. Glenn Maillard
Member
I think I was editing while you were replying, Jana. Hope you still agree.
Thinking on it, I have to say I get annoyed when people pooh-pooh Tolkien's writing as being not very literary. James Joyce I find almost impenetrable and self-indulgent. Indeed, who the f^*k has even read Ulysees - including those who grant it great praise? I think I'm well read, and I believe Tolkien was a great literary figure - on a par with Shakespeare and the list of greats after him.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

20. Jana N. Miller
Member
Yeah, your post looked different than it does now.
My old literature teacher didn't like the LOTR books either. I and her students through the years are still working on her.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

21. Glenn Maillard
Member
I think people need to open their minds. I bet your teacher got word that Tolkien wrote simplistic childrens' books, and there her opinion remained.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

22. Jana N. Miller
Member
No. She started reading the Fellowship, and she didn't finish. I believe her exact words were "she found them wanting" or "they were lacking" or some such thing, but as to what they were lacking I can't remember if she said or not. But every now and then I remind her that she needs to read them.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

23. Glenn Maillard
Member
I find some literature "deep and meaningful" and others "simple, wise and subtle." Tolkien inhabits the latter sphere. The literary Mafiosa can have the former, along with their tendancy toward utter self-indulgent navel-watching. The best writing "communicates" digestibly, and allows one to seek greater and deeper understandings, or at least, entices you to ask yourself questions of life whilst not disappearing up your own anal passage doing so.
Mind you, this may not apply to your teacher, who might just not care for fantasy. But being a Literature Teacher, I do judge her guilty of foul Literary Intelligentsia-ism until proven otherwise.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

24. Jana N. Miller
Member
That's why she should read it, if only because she's a literature teacher. Don't get me wrong, she's one of the best teachers I have ever had, and I've learned more from her than a lot of other teachers combined. I'm still working on her, though.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

25. Glenn Maillard
Member
Excellent, Jana, keep up the good work! Muslim extremists. Christian evangelists. Comunist manifestoeans. Das Kapalists. All of them, I just cannot stomach... But Tolkienfervorism - of the worst kind - can only be applauded, from pulpit and rooftop. Thank Eru for their good sense!
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

26. Julia Mellor
Member
I find that reading Tolkien, reaches the parts other writers rarely touch, ie it feeds the soul. Its like a nutrient or like a simple but wholesome dinner, it warms the cockles, and makes you warm inside when the wide world outside is cold and harsh. Inside those books are old friends, its comforting and heartwarming, funny and sad. The language is simple but beautiful, the characters brave and good, faithful and loyal, its a world all of us wish existed, to live in a world of chivalry and where Elves Dragons and magic creatures still roam.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

27. Jana N. Miller
Member
Just so you know, I'm a Christian.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

28. Jason Campbell
Member
Well thats ironic Jana as I comapre my view of a LotR's film as a bit like the Jewish view on the Messiah. I'm still waiting on one to come along and I'm amazed, shocked and slightly worried at all these people who seem to have taken an imposter to be the real thing!
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

29. Jana N. Miller
Member
Well, LOTR isn't the Bible. It's a novel. A very very good one, but a novel none the less.
The movies are just movies based on a novel. Of course you can't expect them to be perfect.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

30. Jason Campbell
Member
Oh I think you will find I can Jana!

31. Jana N. Miller
Member
Oh, yes, I did know that...
This sums it up quite nicely:
"...I'll cook you some taters one of these days. I will: fried fish and chips served by S. Gamgee. You couldn't say no to that."
"Yes, yes we could. Spoiling nice fish, scorching it. Give me fish NOW, and keep nassty chips!"
The analogy breaks down, after awhile, though.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

32. Penny Lunkley
Member
Sorry, I feel like I'm interupting here, I just wanted to add my two cents. I'm not exactly sure what you mean by fresh, but I found the character of Galadrial refreshing. For a while when I was first reading LOTR, I wasn't sure what to make of her, and feared we were going down the that old cliched path of the siren or the evil temptress who would try to thwart the Fellowship's mission. What a pleasant surprise that she was in fact a strong, wise woman who could be stern and menacing when she felt it necessary, but otherwise was warm and charming. I love Galadrial; she's her own person...or elf.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

33. Jason Campbell
Member
Galadriel is one in a long line of strong female characters Tolkien wrote.
Its something he does throughout his writing. In the archetypical tale of love in ME, Beren and Luthien, its the woman who risks all for love to save the man. Its him who fails at the end and dies, and its her strength and her love to choose to follow him. No wimpingness there, or indecision, she makes her own calls in defiance of the males around her (her father, Darion and even Beren himself).
I think its a view of women Tolkien doesn't get enough credit for given the general view of women in the time in which he wrote.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

34. Julia Mellor
Member
Thats why I like Eowyn in the book (not the film) because even though she was trapped by her rank and culture, she wanted the freedom and indipendance that men had. Being a Shield Maiden should have meant that she was allowed in battle, however she was told by Theoden to stay behind and keep house, disobaying a direct command from her King was a brave and reckless thing to do, and showed that although prompted by desperation, this meant she was determined to have free will. I wonder if Tolkien was influenced by tales about the Valkyrie or maybe Joan d'Orleans
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

35. Penny Lunkley
Member
Yes, Jason, you're right about Galadrial being one of many strong women, but I didn't know that at the time:) I have since read The Silmarillion, etc. and admire Tolkien's portrayal of female characters. And I definitely agree that he doesn't get enough credit. Even Lobelia (Is that right? The old Sackville Baggins woman?)who, even though she's a pain in the you-know-what at the beginning of the story, shows great courage in the face of Sharkey's men.
Julia, I was also moved by Tolkien's description of Eowyn's situation. I think he showed great insight and sympathy; not many men of the time would realize that a woman might want the same opportunity to prove herself as a man, and would feel "caged" when that opportunity was denied her. I love Eowyn's response that what she fears is a cage and that use and old age will cause her to accept them. Brilliant!
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

36. Glenn Maillard
Member
I wonder if Tolkien's knowledge of so many women doing "men's" work during two world wars, including making armaments and flying spitfires etc, would have informed his view of women acting capably and unilaterally? He certainly draws women characters very well. None of them, when examined closely, are really that stereotypical of fantasies of his time. What I like about his females is that they are mentaly strong and physically brave, but they don't do kung fu like modern writers (often ridiculously) have their heroines acting. (I know some good women fighters, but they are rare, and aren't capable of physically beating up strong men - though cunning and the right weaponry can even things up). Also, as to male female romance, he has such a discerningly fine eye for intimacy. The Beren/Luthien coupling is realistic and yet soooooo romantic.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

37. Julia Mellor
Member
Yes Glenn you are right about this modern trend for women characters to be like Mila whatshername in Resident Evil, or Buffy. I dont mind those films because they dont pretend to be deap and meaningful, but its EVERY film that has this kick ass chick nowadays, even in animation like Princess Fiona in Shrek, now Snow White with Bella. Its getting banal and tired. its not subtle and its not how many women want to be portrayed. I really disliked that Eowyn in the film one minute was swinging a sword for no particular reason and the next making soup, I mean make your mind up, either she is the White lady of Rohan or Bridget Jones.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

38. Glenn Maillard
Member
There have been some as believe PJ messed up several characters, including Eowyn. Shock horror! (Mind you, that "I am no man" bit when she despatches The Witch King is kind of cool). For me, these discussions always get back to Tolkien's realism. Merry uses an old sword from the Barrow Downs to cause the Witch King some grief, which allows Eowyn to despatch him while he is distracted. It was set out in the Prophecy that no man would do it. In the carefully created context of Tolkien's world, the Witch King's doom is brought down on him, but there is nothing particularly amazing in how Eowyn does it. Perhaps, any reasonably fit young woman could have done it in the circumstances, providing she was strong and brave enough to wield the sword. Simple realistic idea, and therefore by modern writing standards, a fresh idea. No kung fu somersault-kicks or two-handed (back handed?) sword swirling? And certainly no arm wrestle! Also, I'm confident if Eowyn ever cooked soup, she would have done it competently. She did not seem (in the books) to be some pampered poor little rich girl who spent her childhood laying about the mead hall eating grapes imported from Far Harad.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

39. Stuart Carrier
Member
Ayup Glenn...
In the extended cut, Eowyn is LOUSY at even soup... Aragorns expression tells you that !
I've said before that I think Tolkiens 'Idea' of women was over simplistic, even for his Day. I think they came down to two basic types. 'Drudge' as in the Majority of women 'Behind the scenes', to do his washing, make his Bed, cook his Meals. And 'Ladies' like his mother and wife. Perfumed, 'Airy' , refined. to be pampered and loved and put up on a Pre-Raphaelite Elven Pedestal. In the Silmarillion, Queens are relatively rare. Melian, Arethel, the 'Female' Valar, very Minorly, Galadriel. In the wastes of the North, the women are scrawming about in the Filth of Hithlum, Tragic women. Nienor Niniel, morwen,Lalaith . The only Ray of light being (his own wife, on paper) Luthien. Eowyn, comes between these two stereotypes. A rarity I think. A woman trapped in a Mans body. Pity it had to be glossed over as hers is a particularly interesting plight.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

40. Glenn Maillard
Member
Tolkien depicted women as he found them. His view is therefore based on reality. It is in his subtleties - his simplicities - that he shows his depth of understanding of women. His women were solid creations. Not like the politically correct "pretender" heroines of today's literature. Look at "Sex in the City" girls. Pathetic shallow half-women.
POSTED 1 MONTH AGO#

41. Jana N. Miller
Member
gag...never wanted to watch that. And political correctness...don't get me started...
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

42. Todd VanDelinder
Member
Political Correctness is HORSE SHIT... give me a PC nightmare like Blazing Saddles any day. people get offended and upset too easily now days, I tend to offend everyone equally and don't lose a bit of sleep over it LOL
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

43. Glenn Maillard
Member
Forgive me if I rant. (Political correctness always sends me into a rant!) Example: I don't think people should have an unfair advantage as far as me hating them. Africans, Muslims, Homosexuals, Lesbians, Jews, yada yada yadaa -bugger 'em. I'm not going to hate any of them until they do something to earn it, because I hate people on an individual basis. No Free Passes here. Earn my hate. Don't think you can just inherit it. You know, people just don't want to put in the hard yards anymore. "Ooh look at me, I'm an Ausralian Aboriginal. Ooh hate me, white guy, go on, hate me." No way. Do something worth hating you for first, laddie - then I'll hate you alright. I'm firm but fair.
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

44. Stuart Carrier
Member
Ayup Glenn...
They may be based on his reality as was then,the Stereotypes of HIS day. But we've moved on, if you hadn't noticed... The 'Sex in the City' Gals are examples of the 'real' women out there NOW. They're Predatory, don't give a hoot, don't NEED men, like Tolkiens 'did'. Eowyn is the only female in LOTR even approximating a 'Modern' Woman.
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

45. Julia Mellor
Member
Sex and the City girls are the epitome of everything I hate about how women are portrayed in todays society, they peddle the idea that predatory hard drinking women are something cool and have evolved since the Doris Day world where women put up, shut up and took industrial strength Valium prescribed by the family doctor. In reality these so called liberated glamorous women are pathetic whinging slappers.
The women in Tolkiens world had dignity, Galadriel being a Gaia figure of the mystery and plenty of Mother Nature, the grains of soil from her garden made the Shire blossom and flower. She reminds me of the goddess Venus.
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

46. Nora Johansen
Member
I don't think Tolkien's women where just two typed. Eowyn was a women who wanted to be someone and to things, but was hindered by her status and the overall opinion of women. But she did what she wanted, though it might have been a mix of luck and currage.
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

47. Julia Mellor
Member
Stu the women in Sex and the City do need men, all they whinge about is the fact that they dont have men, can't attract men, want to marry men, and men that dont want committment. Thats what they whole show is based on. Deep down they all want to get married, thats why its BS because the show is sold as if these four are some new breed of women living free spirited lives in cool glossy New York, they are just desperate trollops settling for emotionally stunted townies. Its repulsive.
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

48. Glenn Maillard
Member
Relationships have no chance of success unless there is loyalty, respect and a desire to work hard at it. After the first blossoming of love there's the rest of your life to get through together - hard yakka. Staying with someone who gives you the shits half the time is the manifestation of Deep Love. Equality? No such thing. Working out your own situation and hanging in there is what is. The only survival tool that works. Mutual respect (amid the "I hate you" days) is the Only thing close to equality. I think women are less equal (in some ways) today. They are so often brow beaten into being what Others want to be - probably by politically correct folk like you, Stu, spruiking "feminist" ideas on behalf of women.
Julia, I like you, because you are (1) physically handsome, (2) old fashioned (in some ways), (3) a right bitch when you want to be, (4) not afraid of being a woman, (5) willing to take shit from no man, and (6) quite unperturbed by middle aged men like me and Stu sleazing up to you on Hobbit Forums (including Forumshire, Mrs Figg). The perfect woman - well, reasonably close.
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

49. Nora Johansen
Member
I have been smelling a funny smell lately.. do I smell flirting xD LOL..
good point though, Glenn...
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

50. Julia Mellor
Member
Wow what can I say, thanks, Ive gone red, my palms are sweaty, my toes are twitching, yikes. you forgot the grumpy git bit tho. sniff. sniff.
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

[Orwell]

51. Glenn Maillard
Member
Is it that obvious?
Between you and me, Nora, I'm thinking of asking my Missus what she thinks about having another woman come live with us. If I get the right answer, Julia can expect a marriage proposal soon.
(Mind, I'm a bit reluctant to broach the subject with my Missus yet. She has some old fashioned ideas about monogamy, you see. Also, I'm not sure I want a certain handsome woman at my house - as she can be a bit short tempered I've found. And that would amount to having two short tempered women under my roof! Also, knowing my Missus, she'll probably suggest she invite another man to live with us - and that would be disgusting!)
EDIT: Hey! Julia! That was rude, posting like that while I was writing my post!
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

52. Julia Mellor
Member
A BIT, no a LOT, short tempered. I put Groucho into Marx. and you can tell that Scottish chap when you next see him that I tried that link one of his lady friends mentioned and it put seven shades of s... in my compuder and it took me 5 hours to wash it all out with strong carbolic soap. not happy and a bit grouchy. crabbitsville.
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

53. Glenn Maillard
Member
I may be his friend, but I'd never ever trust that Scotshobbit - he's Scottish!
Sorry to hear about your computer's malady. I'm sure even Jason would not have wanted that to happen. Though, he has been quiet lately - and maybe he is in hiding after commiting an act of computer terrorism!!! I always suspected he was a terrorist. I was never sure what he was a terrorist against, but now I think the penny has dropped. He hates women! (He is, after all, Scottish).
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

54. Jason Campbell
Member
Um, not hiding just drunk (and Sun night/Mon morning drunk-which is the worst sort). I don't remember sending you to a deadly infected site Julia, (not even for a drunken laugh) and if you have gone somewhere dodgy well, um, ooops, no idea about that- was your pc wearing protection? (always wise in these modern times). Of course if you had followed the link I provided and verified then you'd only have gone to Daily Motion, so if you have strayed from the path to your harm then its all your own fault! Women!
ps if you were looking for an apology this is as close as it gets so savour it.
pps Glenn your wife must be a saint, or unable to access the internet (you best hope it stays that way!)
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

55. Todd VanDelinder
Member
and these are the days of our lives... LMAO
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

56. Glenn Maillard
Member
Jason said: "pps Glenn your wife must be a saint, or unable to access the internet (you best hope it stays that way!)"
Well, I s'pose she thinks that I can hardly get up to any mischief on a Hobbit Movie Forum - being a forum for children and young at heart grownups - albeit, grownups that might be "children pretending to be grown-ups", a phrase I think you might very well be aware of, Jason!
Now, if, as I suspect, you will shortly be killed (violently) by a certain enraged woman, might I take this opportunity to say that I have always thought of you as a good friend (even if Scottish).
And Todd, I hardly think this is a laughing matter. (hee hee hee)
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

57. Jason Campbell
Member
Well being Scottish I had always expected a violent end anyhow (although I always assumed it would involve buckie or square sausage).
However Julia is I believe English, and they don't hve a very good track record on killing Scots or even stopping us nicking the goal posts from Wembley for that matter. So I will for now reserve the right to not sh*t myself in fear. Besides she is but a 'weak and feeble woman...' mmm can't seem to remeber how the rest of that goes.
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

58. Glenn Maillard
Member
May I say, at this stage, you have my total loyalty, Julia. Meaning, don't think I support a certain Scotshobbit, not in any fashion. I always knew he'd come to a violent end - deserved, of course.
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

59. Stuart Carrier
Member
Ayup Glenn...
You're so far off the mark about me being A: A sleaze, and B: Politically correct.
I'm the last Guy who would tell a Woman what she thinks, mainly because like us Men, and this is from bitter experience, THEY actually don't know what they want either. It's just that they're BETTER at hiding it ! So it's pointless trying to tell or help them. They now have to make the mistakes we men always have and live with it just like us ! What I do know however, is how far things have come Historically from the days of Tolkien, through the Sixties, and to the present day 'Emancipation' of Women. and the difference is so Staggering ! the early Sufferagettes can't possibly have known how much their original aims have been stretched and widened to encompass new ways of thinking and behaviour,and probably wouldn't have approve of how far women actually HAVE gone, TBH.
But then again, you're looking at this topic through your weird Antipodean eyes... That's why you use the word 'Handsome' which is as 'Old Fashioned' and as derogatory a word to describe a woman as I could think of.
So: A: Stop trying to look 'Better' than me in Julias eyes, as you're trying too hard, and acting full of it, and B: I don't care about YOUR skew on women, past, fictional or real !
Julia, I appreciate your take on SITC. I just think how sad it is that women seem to think they have to act this way Nowadays... And you're STILL 'Beautiful' no matter what Glenn says...
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

60. Glenn Maillard
Member
Stu said: "So: A: Stop trying to look 'Better' than me in Julias eyes, as you're trying too hard, and acting full of it, and..."
No. I refuse!I'll never stop until Julia comes out and chooses one of us over the other!
Stu added: "B: I don't care about YOUR skew on women, past, fictional or real!"
Shouldn't that be: you don't care "for" my skew on women? Clearly you care about my skew as you have become so annoyed and derogatory about it.
Stu said: "That's why you use the word 'Handsome' which is as 'Old Fashioned' and as derogatory a word to describe a woman as I could think of."
I think the use fun and complimentary. At least you realise it was once a perfectly respectable way to speak of an attractive woman. I still think it is, even if it has a light hearted feel about it the way I use it. Old fashioned, yes, but I've made it romantic again; freshly renewed. Julia can't help but fall for me. You know that, don't you? (Julia, when the sad day comes, you must let Stu down easily, gently; I know you will. Beneath your tough veneer you have a heart of gold, I just know it!)
Thanks for the History Lesson btw, Stu. I never knew the Ancients (including Tolkien) were so shallow.
Oh yes, what's SITC?

61. Julia Mellor
Member
cripes.
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

62. Nora Johansen
Member
Glenn, I really hope ur wife doesn't pop up here.
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

63. Jana N. Miller
Member
Hey, people, can we keep the swear words and things down? This is a forum, not a chat room. There could be kids reading on here. Use something else to express your displeasure about stuff.
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

64. Glenn Maillard
Member
(I think Julia meant "crepes", Jana!)
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

65. Jana N. Miller
Member
I was referring to the stuff written over the last day or so. Or just in general, as a reminder, because a few of you guys need one, it seems. Swearing is just repulsive, and in bad taste, especially in writing, when you can control what you type, or edit it out. I wasn't referring to Julia's post.
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

66. Jana N. Miller
Member
Besides the fact that there probably ARE a few kids reading this.
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

67. Nora Johansen
Member
lol, I'm a kid... well, underage... no not a kid. Forget it. I probably am the worst swearer here.. LOL.. xD
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

68. Glenn Maillard
Member
I don't remember any swearing on this thread. Please don't make me read it all again (Stu has been very unkind to me and my ideas, and I only come here to have fun. I suspect he is a big bully, you know).
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

69. Jana N. Miller
Member
It was Todd, I think. The political correctness part.
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

70. Nora Johansen
Member
I don't understand any of your swearing. just shit. and ... fuck, but that's about it.. you really don't have any real juicy swearing, you should be ashamed LOL! x)
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

71. Glenn Maillard
Member
Woooo-oooh! Jana, I don't think it was, Todd, but I think you just poked him with a pointy stick nonetheless. I don't actually think it was Stu, either - at least, he denies it. He might be right too, he just seems a bit that way to me. (As to the "sleaze" bit, maybe it was just me. I only hope Julia likes her men sleazy!) This thread has made me think of Mike and the troubles we had here. Exciting days, full of angst and pain and revenge - good days, yes, good days indeed!
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

72. Jana N. Miller
Member
Ah, whatever, it doesn't matter who...I was just saying it would be nice...
But on another note, I was wondering about all you guys' other favorite books. Are there any others like LOTR that you'd recommend? I'm always on a search for new books...
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

73. Glenn Maillard
Member
Nearly every fantasty since Tolkien's are like Tolkien's - just not much good, sadly. The Narnia books are good.
This is not Tolkienish, and I'm not usually into anthromorphic animal stories all that much, but Watership Down is an excellent fantasy too.
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

74. Jason Campbell
Member
Agree with Watership Down. Wind inthe Willows too if tlking animals are your thing.
The Dune series are very good, but I found them initailly difficult to get into to, but once I did I devoured them.
For Gothic Fantasy Gormenghast is worth a read, although his style puts some folk off.
Comedy fantasy I'd go with Pratchett' Discworld books or Asprin's Myth series.
Sci-fi comedy Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy and Dirk Gently (although what genre Gently is in is anyones guess).
And for something a little more classic the Hornblower series.
Should be something there to get you going.
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

75. Glenn Maillard
Member
Dancers at the end of Time Trilogy, Michael Moorcock. Offbeat but a funny romantic imaginative tale.
Most works of Jack Vance. (I owe as much to his sense of humour as I do Tolks!) May take awhile to adjust to his style and wry wit. He was much influenced by Wodehouse. His races and creatures are always fresh, and never stock standard.
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

76. Julia Mellor
Member
hhhmm! pointy sticks, what a good idea.
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

77. Todd VanDelinder
Member
it was me I admit it I called political corectness Horse SH*T... As close as its gonna get to censoring me on that subject. I HATE and Loathe(?) political correctness if someone says something that is offensive, people shouldn't take things so personally. If something I say is directed at someone then theyy have a right to get offended and if I am in the wrong I will appologize if not I never will. People need to grow thicker skin when it comes to being PC. Its not like I dropped any F-bombs or anything. I AGREE though the swearing should be kept to a minimum cause i know kids read this... But in truth being PC IS A LOAD OF HORSE SHHHH-CRAP
and NO Jana i wasn't offended by being called out but ther have been others that have dropped the F-bomb, yall know who you are LOL. i will try and keep my cursing to a minimum just dont start on political correctness LMAO
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

78. Joel Becker
Member
This thread started out strong. What happened?
Anyway, a quick answer to a post by Glenn on the first page: I believe Tolkien briefly described the beginning of Shelob and Gollum's relationship. I THINK it went something like this: when Gollum was set free from Barad-dur and was moseying around, so to speak, he wandered into Shelob's lair. She cuaght him, but he somehow made a deal with her (don't ask me how) to bring her food. Also, you're right about the Ring having less powers over some than others. In particular, it seems that the Ring has no power over Bombadil and it has much less power over hobbits than Men. Sam was a hobbit, so he was able to resist the Ring's corruption. Good ol' Sam.
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

79. Glenn Maillard
Member
This is exactly the kinds of "freshness" Tolkien brings to his works. There is subtlety and never "all encompassing powerful" evil. Shelob aparently has some kind of personality. Tolkien wisely allows us to speculate what she's like beyond being a creature of gnawing hunger. Did she and Gollum talk in the dark about their thoughts and desires?
Gollum is a brilliant creation. Neither just an old "trophe" or a "modern" villain; he is what he is, an definite individual. He will always be "current" if you know what I mean - fresh.
On the issue of his women characters, I think the way Tolkien depicts them, even though clearly influenced by his times, are not 'socially" idealized female stereotypes. There might be perceived norms in society as to thought and action, but people have never really conformed to norms all that much. Humans have never been robots of their culture. Tolkien lived in the time he lived,yes, but let's not put him and any of his contemporaries in a box, as Stu would condescendinly like to with his judgnmental over-simplifications.
Another fresh aspect. Black Riders on their hands and knees "snuffling" around. Wow! Could easily have sounded silly. In Tolkien's hands, it was terrifying! Fresh!
POSTED 4 WEEKS AGO#

80. Jana N. Miller
Member
Tolkien makes distinctions between individuals and races in his stuff. Not ALL the hobbits are home-loving and adventure-hating, not all the Gondorians are good, etc. It makes it like real life. If there's one thing that can be said of people in general it's that they never all agree on ANYTHING.
Good point about the Black Riders. I hadn't thought of that.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

81. Glenn Maillard
Member
We're all different and people don't fit a sterotypical view of them or their time. I guess that was pretty much the point I was trying to make about some of what Stu was saying. I was right, of course, but I respect Stu's right to be mistaken. We are neither of us fitting of the one stereotype, even though we exist in the time period (physically, if not always mentally).
I was thinking of Old Man Willow. An evil tree which Tom oughta really chop down, but he doesn't. Tom allows him to continue on. A lesser writer would surely have ring barked him, surely! Old Man Willow would certainly deserve it. And Old Man Willow's attack seemed so real. I could imagine branches moving and hollows closing up with a snap, or it's edges slowly crushing you, like actual tree growth sped up. I can even imagine a sleepy bank of a river, humidity, warmth, reeds, languid waters... so nice... so dreamy...natural manifestations of life and environment used by an evil force in nature to do harm to those on who go about on two feet. What jealousy! Fresh!
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

82. Julia Mellor
Member
yes I liked that vivid description of the river bank, it makes you remember all the times when sitting in the shade on a hot summer day, maybe after some wine (or beer, you feel so sleepy you cant keep your eyes open, all you hear is the buzzing insects and the breeze in the slowly creaking trees, it makes you feel the description of the gentle but deadly spell the hobbits were succumbing to. He was an evil force of nature but as you said, had a right to exist and as he had no power over Tom, the thought of chopping the Willow down would have never entered into Toms mind, his mind did not work like that, he Was, like Willow Was, and that was good in his mind, we could never hope to understand his reasoning like we cant understand why the winds blow.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

83. Joel Becker
Member
Good points from Jana and Glenn.
This may have been mentioned already, but it might be a bit "fresh" that the main bad guy isn't even corporeal! This was discussed on another thread, but I am of the opinion that Sauron doesn't have a physical form in LOTR. Even if he did, though, he's kind of a behind-the-scenes bad guy. He's there, of course; he just isn't your typical antagonist. He's always pulling the strings, so to speak, and there is never a direct, one-on-one confrontation between protagonist and antagonist (the closest perhaps being Aragorn revealing himself to Sauron in the palantir).
Then there's the fact that LOTR seems to end several times in ROTK. I found myself thinking, "Oh, there's more? Cool!" "Surely this is where it ends.... Nope, I was wrong."
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

84. Glenn Maillard
Member
The thing is, LotR never ends really - ever. There are a series of climaxes, I guess, like in life. At the end, Sam gets back and says to Rosie, "I'm back." Presumably, "back" to experience the continuation of his life with Rosie. Fatherhood, Red Book writing, tater growing. His story goes on. LotR is really a never ending story. There's no finality as suggested in "and they lived happily after." Mere pedantry to say it? I don't think so. All those climaxes AFTER a lesser writer would have finalised things is yet another mark of Tolkien's freshness. We want to know more. I feel like an account of Sam and Rosie's life would be rivetting (if Tolkien had written it, that is!) I want to know more. I'm rivetted by real lives. Maybe I'm not explaining this well. Hope so.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

85. Stuart Carrier
Member
Ayup...
'Heart of Gold', eh ? well, that's something then... He He He...
Glenn, covering a couple of points above, Stereotypes DO exist. They've been 'Invented' as a 'Catch-all' for types of persons or groups who behave in a similar fashion.If Humans were all Individual, then they wouldn't have been invented, and we as a species, would deal with each person we met Individually. But, as the saying goes, 'Birds of a Feather flock Together' Ergo, we're all Geeks 'Discussing' the comings and goings in an (arguably pleasurable) Imaginary Universe created by an Oxford Don what, 70 years ago now ? Humans DO seem to Like to band together in Like Groups. And It's not Necesarily a bad thing to belong to one from time to time. And you must also realise Glenn, that the Cult of the Individual is a relatively Modern Phenomena.
I've had my fill of 'Being on my own',ATMO, and I've found that now, for a while, I'd Like to come in and play with all the Other Children. Even if some are a Little rough. A little Rough and Tumble is fun now and again. Especially with Girls of a Certain Hair-Length... Or so I'd like to Imagine...
As to Other Stereotypes, 'Old Man Willow' isn't 'Evil'. Just doing what Willows do in Mythology, by sending a couple of Hobbits (Arguably already 'Drunk' on the effects of Entdraught) that Little bit further than asleep! after Mistaking them for Little Orcs... Just like Treebeard did.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

86. Glenn Maillard
Member
Interesting idea popped into my head, Stu, when you mentioned "Cult of the Individual". Isn't that an oxymoron?
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

87. Glenn Maillard
Member
Stu said: "As to Other Stereotypes, 'Old Man Willow' isn't 'Evil'. Just doing what Willows do in Mythology, by sending a couple of Hobbits (Arguably already 'Drunk' on the effects of Entdraught) that Little bit further than asleep! after Mistaking them for Little Orcs... Just like Treebeard did."
Specious and in nearly all aspects plain untrue. I don't know where to begin dismantling that! But, I shan't, because I think you're pulling our legs. Trickster Jokester You!
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

88. Julia Mellor
Member
Stu is right about the Willow in mythology it was always associated with Wicca and witchcraft, it is the tree of dreaming and enchantment and in celtic legends it was associated with spells of fascination and binding, also they would be planted above the grave so that the persons soul would grow into the roots and beome part of the tree and live forever.
I think Stu knows that the Entjuice came later in the story though.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

89. Jason Campbell
Member
He is right about the mythology of willows but not about the rest of that passage. I don't think Old Man Willow mistook the hobbits for orcs as Treebeard originally did, I think he knew exactly what they were, other life he wanted to devour. Tom doesn't harm him or punish him because Tom would never make himself judge and jury of anything.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

90. Julia Mellor
Member
yes you are right, the Willow didnt care what they were, they had legs, and that was enough for him to hate them.

91. Stuart Carrier
Member
Ayup Glenn..
Maybe. I'll leave you to decide...
But as to Old Man Willow In the film, offhand, I think Merry and Pippin do the 'Height' Gag due to the Entdraught before one of them is snared by OMW, and they both end up being caught. Treebeard acting as Tom to release them. Jason, You're right and I'm wrong, He didn't mistake them for Orcs. But what did he CATCH when there was no-one to trouble him in the Enchanted Forest ? was he a relic from The Elder Days who used to catch Orcs ? Hmmm Interesting that one.
Tom made OMW release them because 'He', Tom, was 'The Master' of the Withywindle... and suffered no evil there or around the Barrow-Downs. Zoiks ! We need a whole BOOK about Tom Bombadil and his Adventures !
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

92. Joel Becker
Member
"What does he catch when he can't get hobbit!?"
I assume, Stuart, that your last statement was intentionally "ignorant" (so to speak).
Bombadil is such a strange character.... I like him, though.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

93. Jason Campbell
Member
He may have been Master Stu but that's not the same as judge and jury. He allowed the wights to move in to the Barrow-Downs uncontested and was happy to let them be, even although he lives right next to them. So I don't know where you get the idea he suffered no evil, he tolerated evil it seems to me, maybe even undersood it. He could have cast open every Barrow and thrown their wights out if he had wanted to just with song, but he didn't.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

94. Stuart Carrier
Member
Ayup Joel...
OK, ANOTHER Book.
I wish I'd bought it to work today actually. It's been a Long, Long time since I read it and I need to get re-aquainted I think... Forgot to put it in my work Bag, Donchaknow. But That's ANOTHER Winters nights Entertainment at Home sorted...
I say he suffered no Evil, because A: He told the Hobbits His rhyme to call if they needed him,and B: He DID Tear that Barrow to pieces to save them when 'Evil' was perpetrated and they called. I think we're looking at this the same, but from differing directions.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

95. Jason Campbell
Member
But if he sufferd no evil he could have got rid of the wights or Old Man Willow before the hobbits even arrived, he had news from the elves they were coming and he knows if they enter the forest they will end up at Old Man Willow. And yet he lets Willow be and even after Willow has tred to eat the hobbbits and drown Frdodo he still does no more than give it the equivelent of a clip round the ear.
I don't think Tom considers he has the right to make decisions about who or what is good or bad or should exist or not. Its similar in sentiment to the view Gandalf espouses when he says "Even the very wise cannot see all ends".
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

96. Stuart Carrier
Member
Ayup Jason...
Bombadil didn't 'Do' anything about OMW, even when the Latter trapped Tom himself in his roots. so, I think he doesn't Intervene constantly because A: he thinks he's truly Omnipotent and still well above any 'Earthly' matters, and can sort 'Trivial' matters like OMW and Barrow Wights at whim, and B: seems to be of a frame of mind that unless they bother HIM, he won't bother THEM... I mean there must have been a point where he KNEW the Occupants of the Barrows BEFORE the truly 'Evil' Spirits moved in... So,
Q: So, if he was that good, why didn't HE sort Sauron out at any time ? A: Because he was still wandering around Arda in his own little Daze as it were, still following his own personal 'Music' Fron the time of the Ainulindale... And Truly above the mere piddling concerns of Elves and Men... Bit selfish I thought.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

97. Jason Campbell
Member
We appear to be agreeing Stuart which must mean your original statement that Tom suffered no evil must be false!
He did, he also equally suffered good, or at least didn't give a toss about either or saw them as not his place. As you put it yourself he is 'above the mere piddling concerns of Elves and Men'. And therefore above being concerned by good or evil.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

98. Julia Mellor
Member
Tom knew the Wights when they had lived and were men. he remembered sad tales about them, because he had no fear of them and they had no power over him he let them be. He knew they were a danger to others, but was prepared to let them be as long as they did not bother the living. I think Tom would not destroy them because it was a kind of ying and yang, there is no darkness without light, it would upset the natural balance, thats why even though he could have taken the Ring without harm to himself to hide it from Sauron, he would not, because he did not take sides, he had no particular allegiance, only to the spirits of Nature and Water. He could no more destroy the Wights out of a sense of duty than a Sunrise could.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

99. Stuart Carrier
Member
Ayup Jason...
Maybe its just a case of Phrasing? I'd like to think that actually he didn't 'Suffer' anything that rocked the Old Forests Equilibrium. Mainly, as you (and I) say, because it Intruded on his 'Trip'... But I'd also like to think that he was part of the 'Good' Team, and not the Bad...
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

[Orwell]

100. Jason Campbell
Member
I agree with what you both say!
Julia, if memory serves the people Tom knew and whose burial tombs they were (Aragorns ancestors) were not the same spirits as the wights. The wights were stirred up by Sauron and I have a half a memory that they came out of Angband and inhabited the dead in the tombs (But I'll need to check that or perhaps someone else can confirm it or not).
"He could no more destroy the Wights out of a sense of duty than a Sunrise could."- Julia
Very good way to put it.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

101. Julia Mellor
Member
Thanks Jason, I feel that Tom was ancient and distant from the affairs of men, almost like a planet going about its solitary business through the heavens, and then in the next moment he was shockingly present in the moment, just looking at your inner being with those blue eyes of his. Of all the peoples of Middle Earth, for me meeting Tom would be the most disquieting and strange, yet wonderful.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

102. Jana N. Miller
Member
Tom wasn't really affected by the Barrows. I mean, he had power over them, so he didn't bother about them unless they hurt something or someone who didn't have that power. I think that since Tom wasn't affected, there wasn't really any reason, in his mind, why he should bother with them. I mean, it's not like a lot of people passed that way anyway. And I think you're right, Jason, about the evil shadow came and inhabited them. "A shadow came out of dark places far away, and the bones were stirred in the mounds." (FOTR) Tom did know the inhabitants of the mounds-remember the brooch he took for Goldberry? He said he remembered the woman who wore it. Another reason for him to not want to disturb the mounds. And the evil was Sauron's doing.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

103. Glenn Maillard
Member
I thought this thread was dropping too far down the list. That's why I decided to make this post.
... and anyhow, surely we can come up with more "fresh" things in Tolkien. Do I have to do ALL the thinking?
I mean, what about Legolas shooting that winged black shape in the sky on the boat trip down Anduin? A lesser writer would have told us what it was he had shot! We never find out - only make educated guesses as to what it was.
Great lines too: "...There was a harsh croaking sound, as it fell out of the sky, vanishing down into the gloom of the eastern shore. The sky was clean again..."
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

104. Julia Mellor
Member
well its pretty obvious it was a Nazgul.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

105. Glenn Maillard
Member
No it's not!
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

106. Julia Mellor
Member
yes it is.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

107. Glenn Maillard
Member
Doh!
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

108. Joel Becker
Member
No, you silly person. It was the Nazgul's STEED that he shot.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

109. Glenn Maillard
Member
Where's the proof a Nazgul was on board. Not one wail, not one deep intimation of chill fear. It's only speculation to say there was a Nazgul.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

110. Julia Mellor
Member
N.A.Z.G.U.L
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

111. Nora Johansen
Member
read between the lines folks!!! it is a NAZGUL!! Tolkien just want us to find that out later!! a small introduction to the winged nazgul.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

112. Jason Campbell
Member
Two bigger questions I've always wanted answered- is the dead bloke Aragorn finds on the Paths of the Dead, scractching at the door, the Rohirrim bloke who boasted he would pass and was never heard of again (can't remember his name but he was one of the Kings of Rohan I think). And is that why Aragorn is so interested in his remains.
And what was making the tapping noise in the well in Moria? Gimli says 'that was the sound of a hammer or I'm no dwarf' or words to that effect, hard to imagine orcs or balrogs tapping with a hammer- was it a signal or something else- trapped dwarven prisoners maybe kept in some stinking evil pit?
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

113. Julia Mellor
Member
yes and yes.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

114. Jason Campbell
Member
Bit harsh not to at least try to rescue them if it was some surivors from Balain's lot was it not? There they are tapping away, thinking rescue might have come at last, and ole Gandalf just ignores it!
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

115. Julia Mellor
Member
I think it was just the orcs messages using morse code, and what were drums in the deep? probably how they sent messages in the dark.
and if it wasnt a Nazgul what was it, a high flying chicken?
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

116. Joel Becker
Member
There seems to be some confusion between the Nazgul and their steeds (and not just on this forum). The Nazgul are the kings of Men who were corrupted into the service of Sauron through their Rings of Power. Their steeds, whether horses or the flying beasts, are NOT Nazgul. So when you read something about an enormous, hideous, flying creature, that is not a Nazgul, though a Nazgul is most likely perched on the beasts back. This may just be semantics, but small issues of semantics sometimes irritate me the most. Also, that is obviously what Legolas shot. Tolkien didn't state that explicitly, but I think he left very little doubt (consider also Tolkien's description of Legolas in one of his letters, which says that Legolas was "able swiftly to draw a great war-bow and shoot down a Nazgul").
And Jason, yes, that "dead bloke" was that king you are thinking of. I am thinking he was the son of the king who built the golden hall of Meduseld. I googled his name: it's Baldor.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

117. Joel Becker
Member
Tolkien is also fresh for having such an enormous and intricate backdrop to LOTR (which Glenn may have mentioned in his original post). LOTR wasn't even in his mind when he first started writing his mythology. And then there's all of the language stuff. He invented language; he incorporated real languages and their meanings into his names (I think the Rohan names were derived from Middle or Old English). Also, Tolkien treated his writings as if they were true (at least to an extent). I think I read one time that he wrote something along the lines that he didn't invent his stories; they existed and he just wrote them down. Obviously, that's not true, but even in his letters he talked about it like it was real and he was just some kind of historian or something.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

118. Julia Mellor
Member
I quite like my high flying chicken theory, it would explain the sense of dread they all felt, chicken poop is notoriously difficult to remove from armour.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

119. Glenn Maillard
Member
I just read back through this thread and was captivated by the discussions - even Stu made some good points - and Julia some good jokes, especially about chickens. Amazing, because I rarely revisit old conversations on forums. What really struck me was how we flicked back and forth between the intricate, the interesting, the sublime, and the pure silly. So, I'm putting gold stars on my fridge for everyone - and a silver for Stu. This is a nice thread to be!
Anyhow - and before Joel (Eru Bless Him!) feels the need to get things back on track again! - I still think it fresh that, even if we GUESS a Nazgul was riding the big black winged thing, Tolkien does not feel the need to give us to describe everything in stunning dramatic detail - he always leaves something to the imagination. And that line about the sky no longer being dirty, is brilliantly evocative for all it's casual understatement!
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

120. Julia Mellor
Member
this thread is like the Withywindle River slowly meandering about, talking of which, I dont know if its fresh but i really like the description of The Old Forest when the hobbits have just met Tom and he goes on ahead to prepare a welcome for them, they cant keep up with him and they can hear his singing in the distance, then darkness surrounds them, they are in a kind of hollow with high sides, I really like the description of the trees like strange knobbly faces looking down at them in the gloom. It reminds me of walking alone in a wood at dusk and my imagination starting to kick in, getting a feeling of being watched, strange rustling noises, maybe things jumping out, things lurking, goosebumps, maybe walking quicker, then getting panicky, hearts drumming, now running, running, until phew, theres the road, and lights, cars, you silly dingbat, what was all the fuss about.

121. Jason Campbell
Member
I like that bit too Julia, the part that connects most with me is the whitewashed stones marking the path- you get that a lot in Scotland given how dark it is a lot of the year. The description of them signposting the way in the gloom is a small touch but perfect.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

122. Glenn Maillard
Member
This is a bit of a tangent, guys, but your last posts made me think of it. One night I was walking home from work - it must have been after 11pm at least, possibly the early hours of the morning. My work was on one side of a valley and home the other, a distance of about two kilometres. The valley was parkland with large grassed aresas, trees and a creek meandering through it, a floodplain in fact with no houses. As I was walking I suddenly started thinking of Aboriginal sacred sites for some reason. This then got me thinking about ghosts, not that I would normally associate sacred sites with ghosts. Anyway, I'm not a believer in ghosts, but nonetheless I kind of freaked out for a moment, even thinking that ghosts might, after all, exist.
I seriously thought of returning the way I had come and going home by main roads - which would have turned a couple of kilometre walk into about a five kilometre walk. But then I thought, "Don't be an idiot, you don't believe in ghosts." And so I plodded on, but now pondering on what it would be like to meet a ghost, and thinking what a turn up for the books that would be! But my fear drained away. I laugh to myself about it now, but at the time it really got the wind up me.
I think the experience gave me an insight into how people can trick themselves into believing in all kinds of nonsensical fantastical concepts; you know, goblins, ghosts and God/s.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

123. Julia Mellor
Member
One night I was driving home after having been at a friends house, I was feeling quite happy and relaxed after a nice evening, when a thought popped into my head, kind of sudden and fully formed. A black cat will be waiting for you at the door. I parked my car and opened the gate. A black cat was waiting by my door. I had never seen this cat before, and as soon as I opened the door it rushed into the house, it sat looking at me for a while then scratched the door to be let out. I never saw it again.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

124. Glenn Maillard
Member
Ooooh.... That's an amazing coincidence --- or maybe we have telepathic powers. I mean, we can talk to another person via satelite - that seems beyond comprehension, so mind's being able to see things somewhere else would not seem impossible. Anyhow, is there any signicance in your black cat event? Purpose? Reason? Why? (Actually, WHY existence at all?) I still don't believe in ghosts though.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

125. Julia Mellor
Member
Dunno if it had meaning, it was pretty random. I think the human mind needs meaning, we need to make sense of chaos. I do think Nature has its own rhyme and reason though, I think Nature and Life likes patterns, like whatchoocallem fraxels thingies. highly scientific lingo that.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

126. Glenn Maillard
Member
It was a pretty curious thing as happened to you, Julia. You can't help asking "how" these things occur. It's a pretty amazing coincidence if that's all it was.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

127. Julia Mellor
Member
Ive had even weirder stuff happen but its a long story. makes you wonder though. Its like when you are thinking of a song and then someone hums it next to you, how does that work? maybe thoughts can be transmitted, maybe thats what ghosts are, just thoughts that have become caught in one space.
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

128. Glenn Maillard
Member
Back a few years ago when I was writing a lot of songs, I'd often feel some of them jumped full formed into my mind - like they were already there just waiting for me. Queer though nice feeling. (I'm talking about the songs I was happy with, not the larger number of them that I thought were crap, mind!)
POSTED 3 WEEKS AGO#

129. Julia Mellor
Member
I wish that would happen to me, like it did to Tolkien, a story just jumps into my mind, I would love to write a really good yarn.
POSTED 2 WEEKS AGO#

130. Todd VanDelinder
Member
I know the feeling Glenn being a song writer myself. Its amazing though for every good one you write there are about 20 that are crap LOL Julia that is whats been happening with the book I am doing I get dry spells but when it comes to me my mind just keeps goining and its hard to shut it down. I have about 24 -25 chapters worth of material written for it but I keep coming up with more ideas all the time maybe i'll write a trilogy. Either way i still need to go back thru and reread every now and again to keep continuity so far i have been doing ok with it maybe someday i will get it edited and structured and publish it LOL one can dream i guess
POSTED 2 WEEKS AGO#

131. Glenn Maillard
Member
I spent four years writing a book (in four parts) -- and now I'm looking at going back to songwriting for awhile. Twenty poor songs takes up so LITTLE time - and if I manage a good one now and then, I'm happy. Might waste a day or two persisting with a song - but it's NEVER four years!
POSTED 2 WEEKS AGO#

132. Jason Campbell
Member
This seemed fresh to me as I reread the books again-the Black Riders- the most evil, fearful things in ME, until they run into plain old hobbit common sense.
Take this exchange between Farmer Maggot and a Rider.
Rider- "Have you seen Baggins?"
Maggot- "Be off! There are no Baggins here. You're in the wrong part of the Shire. You had better go back west to Hobbiton-but you can go by road this time."
Rider-"Baggins has left....If he passes will you tell me? I will come back with gold."
Maggot- "No you won't. You'll go back where you belong, double quick. I give you one minute before I call all my dogs."
Briliant! And I seem to recall old Gaffer Gamgee giving the one he meets pretty short shrift too. Hobbits, got to love 'em!
POSTED 2 WEEKS AGO#

133. Joel Becker
Member
Oh, man, Farmer Maggot was such a better character in the book than in the movie.
POSTED 2 WEEKS AGO#

134. Glenn Maillard
Member
Even the name is fresh, if Maggots are fresh! Does the name have another meaning other than fly larvae?
POSTED 2 WEEKS AGO#

135. Jessica Milliman
Member
In keeping with my recent posts, There is a rare folk band from the early 70's called "Fresh Maggots". But I digress. I do believe that Gollum also worshipped Shelob and brought her dead animals as offerings. Lastly, I just wanted to reverse the damage that Joel did earlier in the thread, and say that I want to see a fiercer battle of wits btw. Glenn and Stu for Julia's affections.
P.S. For the record, I find that political incorrectness and the phrase "horse shit" greatly improve dialogue on this and all discussion lists. Sorry kids.
POSTED 2 WEEKS AGO#

136. Glenn Maillard
Member
Sadly, Jessica, Stu disclaims any sordid sexual interest in Julia. He even appears to respect her intelligence and only sees her "beauty" in a detached, dare I say, "artistic" way. How on earth will he ever win the love (and lust) of a woman like Julia with such a limp wristed approach? (I smell a rat here. of course. I fear Stu has retreated in the triumphal wake of the Stronger Candidate. He just can't admit it. It would offend the skerrick of Manliness he still owns, and I sympathise - that's sympathize, not empathize).
Personally, I'd still rather have a decent battle over Julia's affections. Nothing revs up my ardour more than having to defeat a worthy opponent. I feel - and this is only a theory mind - that Julia is the kind of a girl that prefers her lover to be covered in the blood of his rival when she flings open the door of her bower dressed in appropriate flimsy feminine attire - or leather and studs, as the mood takes her.
My gawd! Just thinking of that handsome woman gets my blood boiling!!! (A Man's blood, that is).
Btw Jessica, Joel will be cross with you, as I'm not sure he sees this Thread as any kind of Flaming or Pick Up Thread. And on purely rational grounds, he may have a point. I aver though that Passion must always take precedence over mere Rules, whether spoken or unspoken.
(Hey! Maybe we should have a "Should We Have Rules Here" Thread? That might cause feathers to fly. We might even take joy in the occasional politically correct comment from good ol' Stu. Cool!)
POSTED 2 WEEKS AGO#

137. Julia Mellor
Member
Seems Fresh....erm... Glenn..leather n studs indeed thats more Tauriels style.
POSTED 2 WEEKS AGO#

138. Joel Becker
Member
Damage? Bah! I simply wanted to discuss the topic of the thread. Oh, but how young and silly I was. Welp, if a fiercer battle of wits is what the people want, I guess there's only one thing left to do.... BATTLE ROYAL!
POSTED 2 WEEKS AGO#

139. Julia Mellor
Member
cripes Joels got his crabbit on.
POSTED 2 WEEKS AGO#

140. Glenn Maillard
Member
Did you mean "cripes" or "crepes", Julia? - I'm losing track.
Anyhow --- we must take the Neville Chamberlain approach I think - make sensible compromises. Henceforth (I suggest) we talk about "Fresh" things in Tolkien, but extend the discussions (and chat) on this thread to include fierce battlings over almost anything - especially Julia - and, furthermore, make room here for idle conversations about Life, The Universe, and the Price of Fish. That way all parties are appeased. (You know, my friends, I feel that I am now the voice of reason in Bree).
POSTED 2 WEEKS AGO#

141. Stuart Carrier
Member
Ayup Glenn...
You ARE a funny Bunny Mate... It's your Antipodean POV of the World, I told you !
You'll wear yourself out professing your 'Love' you know, and Damage your Crabbits if you carry on... Which would be nasty this side of Xmas...
Factor in being on the wrong Side of the Planet, and, well, there you go. Relax Mate. *thumbs up* I'd love to pursue Julia in a Millais Landscape, and read The Iliad and Odyssey off by Heart to her...
POSTED 2 WEEKS AGO#

142. Jason Campbell
Member
You have to see love from an Aussie perspective Stuart. If they don't declare their love really quickly there's a chance the kangaroo will hop away. (This knowledge of antipodean love also puts a whole new slant on the famous song 'Tie me kangroo down mate'!)
POSTED 2 WEEKS AGO#

143. Julia Mellor
Member
Ive got a feelin youll roo the day you said that Jason.
POSTED 2 WEEKS AGO#

144. Jessica Milliman
Member
I love this thread.
POSTED 2 WEEKS AGO#

145. Glenn Maillard
Member
Jason Campbell! You are a low life. Are you really suggesting all kangaroos - our national symbol, alongside the gregarious and frisky emu - are loose in some way? or just some of them... I can't, of course, speak for all kangaroos, but I feel obliged to defend the honour of those I have had the joy of being acquainted with. As to bronzed Aussie rites of passage - well, mind your own f*#^&#g business!
"Btw: 'Tie me kangroo down mate'!'???? Try "sport!" I presume Rolf was talking of a particular game we play involving kangaroos called Boparoo. A quaint if somewhat naked game we play which is perfecably acceptable - in Australia.
POSTED 2 WEEKS AGO#

146. Julia Mellor
Member
Glenn just tell him to hop it.
POSTED 2 WEEKS AGO#

147. Glenn Maillard
Member
Btw Stu - I'm saving up for Julia's flight - if only so she can get away from this Malaise place you mentioned (and possibly inhabit). You don't need to thank me, btw, for correcting your spelling. I feel now in some ways that I am your Mentor.
POSTED 2 WEEKS AGO#

148. Glenn Maillard
Member
Hilarious, Julia, My Little Love-bucket! Hilarious! You make my heart beat soundly like any Real Man's heart must beat when cheered by the sheer pathetic silliness of his Young Lover!
POSTED 2 WEEKS AGO#

149. Jason Campbell
Member
What's the world coming to when one part of it can't look at another part of it and accuse them of unnatural acts?! There's a reason kangaroos hop!
POSTED 2 WEEKS AGO#

[Orwell]

150. Glenn Maillard
Member
What unnatural acts do you speak of, Jason? There is no such thing as an "unnatural" act with a kangaroo, not in Australia - though non-consensual err 'fellowshipping' with a roo may be deemed unnatural, I guess - in some circumstances...

151. Jason Campbell
Member
Of course there isn't Glenn- whatever you do is normal, everyone knows that, its those foreigners who do the weird things (this holds true no matter who you are or which nationality- with the possible exception of the Japanese who must surely realise their culture really is odd!!)
POSTED 2 WEEKS AGO#

152. Glenn Maillard
Member
As always, I find your words peculiarly impenetrable Jason - but you are a Scotshobbit, it's not something you even try to hide (quaint) ... Anyhow.. I'm hopping off to bed now... (The good news, Jason: nightshift is now OVER... Hurrah! Nite). (Kisses, Julia. Kisses!)
POSTED 2 WEEKS AGO#

153. Jason Campbell
Member
I don't even get 1 goodnight kiss Glenn! Well be like that then.
POSTED 2 WEEKS AGO#

154. Glenn Maillard
Member
Oh alright but first, I'll put these up {{{ }}}... Satisfied? I'm off... bye.
POSTED 2 WEEKS AGO#

155. Jason Campbell
Member
Better. Night.
POSTED 2 WEEKS AGO#

156. Julia Mellor
Member
yuck poor Glenn, Buckie smelling kisses from an impenetrable scotshobbit. Dont have nightmares my little kookaburra.
POSTED 2 WEEKS AGO#

157. Jason Campbell
Member
Smell of buckie. What a cheek Julia. My kisses don't only smell of buckie they TASTE of buckie! Its like getting a lovely kiss and a free drink. (And yes that does sound a bit unpleasant even to me!!)
POSTED 2 WEEKS AGO#

158. Julia Mellor
Member
Just dont strike a match at the same time or youll do a Smaug.
POSTED 2 WEEKS AGO#

159. Glenn Maillard
Member
I have a sudden inexplicable urge to return to the main focus of this thread, don't ask me why!
I find it fresh that Tolkien so often has a major event occur off the page. Some instances, The White Council forces Sauron to retreat from Dol Guldur; The Ents attack Isengard; Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli sail with the Black Fleet; Sauron is destroyed utterly in battle, without even really being in the middle of it, or so to speak; Gandalf fights the Nazgul on Weathertop... No one would publish Tolkien today. He does so many things wrong - by modern publishing standards. A whole chapter for the Council of Elrond! Who would do such a boring thing? Tolkien of course -- and brilliantly!
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

160. Julia Mellor
Member
He leaves it to our imagination, he doesnt spell things out, he leaves mysteries, things unexplained, characters that resonate in our subconscious like one of Toms Songs.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

161. Jason Campbell
Member
Amazing really that PJ could take a book which defies the rules of modern publishing (and talk about this fact on the extras) and yet stil reduce it to shallow film making by numbers like he did. Actually that's not amazing at all is effing shocking.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

162. Glenn Maillard
Member
PJ should have taken the risk and folllowed the book more closely... Hang on! Tolkien's book has millions of fans who love Middle Earth! How risky could have it been to pay proper respect to Tolkien, his fans and anyone who has a tendancy to like good fantasy, and make a proper adaptaion? He took a bigger risk in making LotR smaller with his silly deletions and sillier addings.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

163. Jessica Milliman
Member
I agree about the silly deletions, Glenn. But I think PJ did the best he possibly could have at that time, considering it was originally written as only 2 movies. That's why I'm so looking forward to the Hobbit. He has cred and clout that he didn't have before. He can get what he wants this time. I can't see how this movie coudn't be even better and closer to the books than LOTR. Aside from the adding the female elf, I'm pretty psyched about what I know so far. Thoughts anyone?
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

164. Glenn Maillard
Member
Well, my first thought is TAKE YOUR PJ LOVIN' SOMEWHERE ELSE, Jessica! This is (if only secretly) a Purist Thread! Remember: PJ = stale. Tolkien = fresh.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

165. Julia Mellor
Member
I like PJ too so there. I pick the noses of purists, I flick in your general direction, PAH!
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

166. Glenn Maillard
Member
I am both appalled and aroused by your attitude, young lady!
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

167. Glenn Maillard
Member
Treebeard! What a wonderful "fresh" invention. He is so tree-like. If I met a living-talking-walking tree, I bet he would be just like Tolkien's Ents. (I fear the Entwives might be more like giant vegetables, or geraniums. Maybe it's better they went away).
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

168. Joel Becker
Member
Maybe Treebeard is SO old that he's misremembering. Maybe he has confused his real memories with his wishful thinking. Maybe he WANTED Entwives - since all of the other races had wives (do Orcs marry?) - to the point of convincing himself they existed. When he couldn't find them, he invented a story about how they "got lost." Maybe there never were any Entwives.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

169. Glenn Maillard
Member
Nuh! He wasn't senile. He was old and wise and rooted (at times?) to the earth. He remembered them alright. I seem to remember something about at least one of the Entwives being quite shapely of limb (s) too.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

170. Kevin Dittmar
Member
I just finished reading this entire thread & find it to be the most interesting one I've encountered so far. I have a few points I'd like to make.
First of all, for me, the most important aspect of freshness in the trilogy is Frodo's character. There have always been reluctant heroes in literature, but Frodo is unique as a hero. When he finally gets to Mount Doom, he doesn't destroy the ring, he claims it as his own. The ring is destroyed, but he doesn't do it. He actually fails in his quest. I think he was the first protagonist to ever do that. That's pretty cool.
Another thing is the way I get something new out of it every time I read it. I just finished the trilogy again & never noticed Treebeard telling Gandalf about how a bunch of orcs came south into the Wold after being run off the borders of Lorien & the ents chased them all the way to the Anduin & most of them drowned. That's just one example from this re-reading but fresh in my mind. There's always so many things it's like reading it for the first time every time.
There was a question about the alliance between Shelob & Gollum. I always assumed that she just had no interest in eating him. She is a spider & he's just skin & bones. No interest in a meal there. And he brought her victims that were probalby plump & juicy. That was why the spiders in Mirkwood kept poking at Bombur when he was hanging around.
For some reason, there was a bunch of stuff about the women on SITC. I never thought I'd see that on a Hobbit blog! Now, you people live all over the world, but I've gotta tell you that I live in NJ. Unfortunately, a lot of the women in Manhattan really are like that. New Jersey too. Just be thankful you don't have to deal with it.
Glenn said: Henceforth (I suggest) we talk about "Fresh" things in Tolkien, but extend the discussions (and chat) on this thread to include fierce battlings over almost anything - especially Julia - and, furthermore, make room here for idle conversations about Life, The Universe, and the Price of Fish. That way all parties are appeased.
Thank you Glenn because I'm now entering into the realm of "almost anything." There was a mention of Old Man Willow being evil which led to:
Stu said: "As to Other Stereotypes, 'Old Man Willow' isn't 'Evil'. Just doing what Willows do in Mythology..." and then
Julia said: "Stu is right about the Willow in mythology it was always associated with Wicca and witchcraft, it is the tree of dreaming and enchantment and in celtic legends it was associated with spells of fascination and binding, also they would be planted above the grave so that the persons soul would grow into the roots and beome part of the tree and live forever."
I think I'll point out that I'm a Pagan. I used to consider myself Wiccan but now just call myself an eclectic Witch. I just find it interesting that people always act like Paganism is a dead religion & make the association of calling Wicca, witchcraft & Paganism evil. It's like it's politically correct with no possibility of offending anyone. I cast spells all the time. Pagan beliefs are called legend & mythology. I don't want Julia or Stu to think they offended me or that I think they were being prejudiced or anything like that, because they didn't. They just made me think about an issue Pagans are affected by all the time. I just find it funny that it's PC for people to respect the Bible as history, not mythology & everybody is always supposed to make sure that they don't say anything that might offend Christians. Not just on this blog. This is just the unwritten law of the world. It's pretty hard to be a Pagan when the general public thinks they were the ones that threw Christians to the lions & doesn't know anything at all about what Paganism is. Not here, of course. Tolkien fans are more educated than the general public.
So now that I'm out of the broom closet, the main reason I brought it up is because I thought it was pretty cool that even though Tolkien was a devout Catholic, he had a respect for Paganism. Of course Old Man Willow was not evil. He was a tree, created by Eru. Eru didn't create evil things. Even Melkor wasn't evil in the beginning. Eru was the creator, but the Gods of Arda, the Valar functioned much as Pagan Gods. Tom Bombadil is a purely Pagan character & I think that's why I've always loved him so much. He reminds me of Pan. Galadriel is often compared to a Water Goddess. There really isn't much religion in Tolkien's works. Just a unified Pagan attitude that unites pretty much everybody, The only thing I can think of that I'd call religion is the death cults of the Numenoreans that led to their downfall.
And to end my long, boring & probably offensive post, I think Joel's idea of Treebeard inventing the entwives in his mind is quite plausible. Except for the fact that Quickbeam remembered them too & he was considered to be quite young. But maybe that's the real story behind Dwarf women. The dwarves invented them to hide they're alternate lifestyle from everybody else. And I don't even want to think about orcs marrying. Can you imagine what the honeymoons would be like? Ughhh!
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

171. Jason Campbell
Member
Hi Kevin, I gave paganism/wiccan a go, I know my athame from my wand and how to do a circle and which oils to use and how to get candles just that right amount of dribbly looking. My problem with it in the end was the more I learned the more I came to understand it was even more made up than Chrisianity, and much more modern. Most of what passes for Wiccan has its roots in 17th and 18th Century Europe as seen through the filter of Victorian England.
In my part of the world, Scotland, the people who would best qualify as originally 'pagan' would be the Grooved Ware People, responsible for building the stone mounds and stone circles such as Maae's Howe, Skara Brae and Stone Henge. Early Bronze age peoples. They had no written language, their culture was superceded by that of the Druids who knew of writting but didnt like it, memory was very important to them and iniatites had to know everythnig by rote. So when they were wiped out they took their beliefs and their religion with them, all we have left are best guesses made from some scattered writings at second hand and from the stone monuments they left behind.
There really is no such religion as paganism in my view I am afraid, beyond the one created a few centuries ago.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

172. Kevin Dittmar
Member
I totally agree with you, Jason. That's exactly the reason why I don't consider myself Wiccan anymore. The White Goddess by Robert Graves is a fascinating book that I'm sure you're familiar with, but the whole concept is complete speculation that has no basis in fact. I just used this thread to vent a little because Glenn gave me permission. To me, Paganism is more a way of life than a religion. The word religion comes from the Latin & came about in the early Christian era. Ancient Pagans didn't know the word religion & didn't have the divisions & religious wars that we have today. That's what's cool about Tolkien. They just live their lives in a way that's close to nature & respect it. That's what Paganism is to me, anyway. And I have the coolest Isis Athame that I found in a thrift store for $2.00!
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

173. Jason Campbell
Member
I got mine made in a shop in an indoor market in Glasgow, place was called Paganus lol and was so stereotypically a Wiccan shop- stank of incense and oils, purple and black drapes everywhere and lace. Woman who ran it was lovely though and not just in looks, she was very helpful when I was starting out pointing me in the right direction.
I dont have a problem with it, but I do hate it when a bunch of so called Wiccans descend on places like Stone Henge every solstice claiming they have a right because its their religions holy site- when clearly their religion and stone henge have no more a realtionship than it does with the Pyramids or the Great Wall of China.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

174. Glenn Maillard
Member
I love this thread - and so thereby agree with at least one thing Jessica has said!
I gotta say, I've never met a Witch called "Kevin." I can't begin to tell you how cool that is!
Don't worry about Jason, Kev, he doesn't believe in anything! Me? I believe in everything, so long as it's interesting and/or fun. (I don't believe in Jason, actually, but that's a different story altogether!)
Feel free to discuss whatever you want. I don't say that because I have any authority here, but just because I can.
As to protecting Christians (or anyone), I don't know that we pander to them on this thread, nor mention them. The subject of Christian Evil and Stupidity hasn't even come up yet - I think. (I don't see that it won't, though!)
This thread is like a fireworks display! Everything from explosions to delicate trailing lights. Cooooool.... (Mind, I don't know how cool it is when an Old Fart like me says: "Cooool"... but never mind).
Btw I've read back through this thread twice now. I like it very much, you know.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

175. Jason Campbell
Member
I think a religion based not on supernatural beings and dieties but on actual living things and how we respond to it is not a bad idea. No Gods just Understanding. We should start one. We can charge a fee for enlighment and get to wear big hats.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

176. Kevin Dittmar
Member
I like this thread too. It's like an oliphant stampeding through Ithilien!
As far as the religion thing goes, when I saw the word evil & then Wicca & witchcraft come up, I started projecting over a "discussion" I overheard these two women having at a supermarket yesterday & vented all the stuff I wanted to say to them on here. I feel much better now, thank you. But there have been a couple times on different threads here where people did bring up what their religion was because of where the topic was going. I got a couple lectures a few months back. But I don't care. I was raised Catholic & was a cultural Anthropology major & have been studying world religions my whole life. I don't need to be told what other people beliefs are, I already know. Everybody should at least learn a little bit about all religions, I think. It would help bring understanding & world peace. Let's all sing Kumbaya!
Kevin means the beloved in Gaelic, Glenn. What better name for a witch? I'm also pretty sure that the Witch-king of Angmar's name was Kevin...
Wiccans are pretty deluded, Glenn. They think Stonehenge was built by the Druids & was where they held their religious rites. We know nothing about the Druids' religious rites & Stonehenge pre-dates them anyway. We don't even know much about the religious practices of ancient Greece or Egypt either. But there are covens devoted to them that insist they practice the authentic rites of the Mystery Schools. Nobody knows what they were. Except maybe the Compte de St. Germaine, but that's a horse of a different color.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

177. Glenn Maillard
Member
I had some doubts on some of what you said, Kev, but when you finished with a quote from the Wizard of Oz, I knew I could put complete trust in you. I'm off to study witchcraft. (Be afraid, Jason Campbell, be VERY afraid!)
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

178. Julia Mellor
Member
Hi Kevin believe me when I say that I had no intention of trying to tie Wicca with evil, and I dont think I did, I just rewrote what I had read about the willow being a sacred tree.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

179. Joel Becker
Member
Exactly! There really are no dwarf women (no, I jest)!
As for religion on Arda, Sauron had many of the Middle-earth Men worshiping him as a deity. And for that matter, I consider the belief in the Valar and Eru a religion. I mean, what is religion? Is it not one's beliefs about the nature, cause, and perhaps the purpose of existence (in a nutshell)?
As a side-note, I'm a Christian myself, but I honestly hope religious discussions don't creep into this forum. There are plenty of religious forums out there, but I come here to discuss The Hobbit, the Hobbit movie, and works of Tolkien. And you're right, Glenn. The subject of Christianity (and religion in general, for that matter) has been a mostly ambivalent and nearly nonexistent one on this forum thus far, though there have been a couple of mentions.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

180. Kevin Dittmar
Member
Julia, I never thought you had that intention & I didn't think it was what you said. It was just a trigger for me & I vented about something that had nothing to do with The Hobbit or this site. My bad.
Joel, I think that religious beliefs can be discussed on here if it's in the right context. Things like Tolkien's Catholicism affecting his writings, Gandalf's return as as an anology of the Christ figure, the nature of Tom Bombadil, the dwarves' reverence for Aule, anything that's either about Tolkien himself or the spiritual beliefs of the peoples of Middle-earth. But yeah, I don't think some witch really needs to start ranting about stuff that's just propagada for a conservative presidential campaign. But enough about that now & forever.
Nobody even noticed what I said in that post about Frodo being the first literary character in history to fail in his quest! What about that, huh? Isn't that the coolest thing ever? That was fresh!

181. Julia Mellor
Member
You are right Kevin he did fail at the last. But other heros have failed their Quest at the last moment, what about Orpheus going to the Underworld to save his beloved wife Eurydice, and then losing her by looking round before they left Hades but you are right that Frodo was probably one of the first heros to be an ordinary person not a super hero with special powers or a demi god with friends in high Olympian places, although I think Gandalf, Aragorn and the Elves are pretty good friends to have.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

182. Jason Campbell
Member
Frodo did not fail, not at all. I don't think Tolkien thought so, certainly Gandalf did not. Frodo did, that was his problem, that was why he never healed and never could be healed within the Circles of the World. Frodo did what no one else could do, he got the Ring to where it needed to be at the time it needed to be there for Prvidence to act. He never was going to throw the Ring in, no one would have, but Frodo acheieved his part in things.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

183. Julia Mellor
Member
I only meant fail in the tecnical sense that he was overcome by the power of the Ring at the last and was unable to destroy it, not that his sacrifice was not a worthy one or that he had not gone through hell to get there. he was rightly honoured by all, and no one could describe him as a failure.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

184. Joel Becker
Member
I agree with you completely, Kevin. And good point about Frodo. It is so ironic that Gollum was key to it all in the end. And all because Bilbo had pity on him.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

185. Stuart Carrier
Member
Ayup Joel...
I disagree with you about Gollum... There IS no irony. In the end, Tolkien merely Copped out Big, Big style unlike so many Authors who actually wrote a 'Proper' ending to their Magnum Opus...
In the end, Gollum was just the same as Isildur... Totally ensnared by the Ring and would NEVER have broken free of its power. He could have been Quite conveniently discarded as a Character once he'd given his Info about Frodo to Sauron, and not been missed for the rest of the book. what Tolkien Did, as I said, was cop-out by having him 'Trip' on that convenient piece of stone (or pebble even LOL ) so that he fell into the crack of Doom. Instead say, of He and Frodo properly Duking it out, or by Tolkien writing a different resolution without him.
It's the ONE thing that really ANNOYS me about the whole Ring Cycle... All the writing, History, Mythos, Academc and religious symbolism stuffed into the story, and in the end have a character 'Trip' over a convenient pebble... Cop Out. Let me feel the Flames of Indignation now...
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

186. Jason Campbell
Member
I fear you have missed the point Stuart. Gollum did not just trip. There was more going here, there was Providence.
Gandalf tells Frodo he was meant to have the Ring, Bilbo's pity of Gollum stops him killing Gollum, allowing the later events to occur, Frodo and eventually Sam do the same.
At the very last all is hope is gone. The Ring will overcome anyone who tries to destroy it, the quest is as Gandalf calls it only a 'fool's hope' from the very start. It's why Saruman and Denethor think what Gndalf has done is madness, it can't possibly work. And they should be right. But it does, because three hobbits could forgive and pity Gollum. You can even see it as gift for Gollum, his miserable, sad, overlong life is ended and he is allowed rest.
My problem with PJ's version is Frodo does not fail at all. In PJ's version he is dangling off the cliff, the Ring in the fire below him and is contemplating letting go when Sam gives him hope and persuades him not to. That Frodo 'doesn't give up' in Sam's words from the film. He takes Sam's hand. So the whole ending makes no sense, it is Frodo's belief that he failed at the last which haunts him- take that away as PJ did and the ending is out of place entirely.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

187. Stuart Carrier
Member
Gollum 'Tripped' End of. Frodo couldn't dominate him. too nice a Gentlehobbit. loved his shire too much. Gollum had seen life from the shit end since he got the ring.
Tolkien didn't have ANY answer to his own creation of 'The will of Sauron' sheesh, i guess ever HE was tired by the time he got round to writing it, of his book. It's Called a 'Literary Device'. you'll find Authors use them all the while.
Even CS Lewis resurrected Aslan to help kill his witch... Tolkien didn't have anyone to do Frodos dirty work. so 'A convenient' pebble sent Gollum to the fire. I'm not worried about 'Film endings'. they're not Important. but to end an excellent a series of books as Tolkien did smacks of desperation to get it out of the way to me.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

188. Jason Campbell
Member
Really you are missing the thing like a Stormtrooper in a fire fight Stuart.
The Gollum tripping bit is the culmination in the, for want of a better word, spiritual journey LotR's is describing. Remember Tolkien was in war, the worst war probably to be in. He knew real life, not PJ drama classes, and he knew in real life its not how strong you think you are, or what class, or how important, or intelligent, its what seems like chance makes all the difference. Its bending down to tie your shoelace just as the bullet whizzes overhead.
And Tolkien viewed such things through his own religous ideas, as the hand of Providence.
For me that is fresh writitng, the easy route is the one you describe, Frodo literally fighting in a life or death struggle against the bad guy over a pit of fire- Tolkien made that fresh. Like PJ Stuart you would have it predictable, by the numbers, cliched and devoid of its deeper meaning.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

189. Stuart Carrier
Member
Sorry Joel...
'Chance' doesn't play as THAT a convenient a part in Life as you may well think it does. Most outcomes in a Life are down to 'Choices'. Missing a Spandaus Bullet Truly IS 'Luck', one in a Gazillion. But I don't think Tolkien got that far as to need THAT much.
Tolkien Ultimately Copped out as an Author. But it was a way of ending this Massive, Massive Tome. There is no 'Spiritual Journey'.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

190. Jason Campbell
Member
Wow way to miss a huge chunk of what the book is about. So you think all those lines about "the pity of Bilbo may rule the fate of many, you not least.' and 'Bilbo was meant to find the Ring, and not by its Maker...and you also were meant to have it.' etc are just random stuff then?
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#
191. Jana N. Miller
Member
I think PJ did an okay job having Frodo fight with Gollum. Remember, at this point Frodo has given in to the Ring, and decided to take it for himself. I think it follows in the spirit of it that he would try to get it back from Gollum. It's plausible. I mean, Frodo's already left his errand. Why not carry it a bit further?
Personally, I think it's one of the only (the) only good change PJ made...
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

192. Glenn Maillard
Member
Rubbish. Tolkien left it open. Did Gollum trip by accident, or was it providence? I prefer a trip - you can have your providence, Jason. I concede it could be both - I just like the question mark.
Stu: "Most outcomes in Life are down to 'Choices'." Are they now? Mmm... I jump into my car to pop down for some milk and bread. Then a drunk driver swings over onto my side of the road and kills me." Ha! Most of life's outcomes are due to 'choices'. I chose to go out... But, if a baby was in the car, it would have had no choice, it being powerless to do anything of it's own accord. Mmm... we need a statistical answer... How many is "most" for a start?
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

193. Jason Campbell
Member
Glenn we are in agreement I believe. My point was from Tolkiens more religous background he hints at Providence. But if you don't have a religous outlook its chance- you can choose to see the hand of God in it or not depending what you bring to the table-thats Tolkien's way, applicability and all that- but to deny that its there at all is foolish.
I don't like the fight with Gollum at all at the end, for me it removes the element of chance, the question of was it chance or was it more than chance. And worse it ruins the ending of the book regards Frodo who never fails in PJ's and never completely looses hope either. A terrible cop out.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

194. Kevin Dittmar
Member
When Gollum attacks Frodo on the path up to the Sammath Naur, Frodo tells him that if he ever touches him again he will be cast himself into the fires of doom. I don't know if that was a curse or a prophecy, but a couple minutes later, Gollum touches Frodo & ends up in the fires of doom.
Frodo is overcome by the ring so he doesn't destroy it. Gollum is overcome by the ring, so he is destroyed by it. Bilbo & Sam are the only ones who ever gave it up voluntarily & Sam only had it for a couple days.
I think this is all providence. The entire history of the world was woven into the Music of the Ainur. So everything that happened was supposed to happen. Tolkien didn't cop out at the end, he wove an intricate web of plots that are supposed to make perfect sense in the end. Remember Sam talking about Beren & Luthien & realizing they were in the same tale & wondering if tales ever end? It's all one never-ending story.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

195. Jason Campbell
Member
Well put Kevin. I couldn't agree more.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

196. Stuart Carrier
Member
jason... And All..
The reason why you get all that stuff about 'You were meant to have it' is because Tolkien realised he couldn't have an elderly Bilbo doing 'the Hobbit' part 2. That's why the ring is handed down to Frodo, the next Generation... Bilbo as a character was simply too old 'And stretched like too little butter over too much Bread' to go running around Middle Earth being chased by Nazgul. His part in the story was over. No 'Special Journey' in your sense. Just a Hand-off to the young Hero of the tale who COULD go running about. (Albeit reluctantly). He knew already that Frodo was a wuss and WOULDN'T get rid of the ring, so he kept the 'Evil' Gollum around to do his Literary Dirty work... It's STILL a Cop-out by the Author as opposed to writing a 'Proper' ending. This Book even ends like so many Films which have you going for two hours plus, then end suddenly in the last ten minutes. It's Lazy writing. Get over it.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

197. Glenn Maillard
Member
Stu said: "It's STILL a Cop-out by the Author as opposed to writing a 'Proper' ending."
Okay, please explain what a "proper ending" is, as I found the ending - as far as the Ring goes - perfectly satisfying. Help me swim out of my hazy delusion.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

198. Stuart Carrier
Member
Glenn...
A proper ending is one where a character doesn't trip on a random stone to fall into an Abyss and destroy a powerful Artefact thats much stronger than two of the three protagonists who most want it. A 'Proper' Ending is something like Gandy and the Balrog slugging it out from the Lowest Dungeon to the Highest peak, then a resolution of one dying or the other.
OR, Maybe Aragorn turning up from the Gate, after showing his TRUE Valar-inspired Numenorean Stature,reaping Orcs and Baddies in his wake, TAKING the ring off Frodo, or, fuck it, Tom Bombadil even, who says,'This has no power over me, Fuck you Sauron, begone forever, I cast this ring into the Abyss as well as you, go to your Master, Melkor and suffer his Fate'. and then it's cast into the crack, whereupon EVERYONE'S saved, INCLUDING Gollum', and after sorting Saruman in the Shire, we all live happily ever after.
Kaboosh ! Ended good, eh ?
ANOTHER one is Sauron Turning up in person and having HIS Arse kicked by Aragorn or Tom, Or even Gandy the White, and being slung into the Crack of doom with his Ring...
Next !

[Orwell]

199. Jason Campbell
Member
Those are appalling cliched ideas and not fresh at all Stuart- even worse than what PJ came up with!! Thats just Hollywood piss you are describing.
Given one could argue LotR is in fact one long ending I fail to see how you can even begin to say it all ends in five minutes.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

200. Stuart Carrier
Member
Ha Ha !
Just as I thought you would...
At least they're Ideas, and a reasonable pair at that. Not 'Piss' at all, which could be good if you wanted to involve the Valar,(who broke rules at the drop of a Hat like good old Zeus and the Olympian Gods did) And then there's the scouring of the Shire to round it all off if you want it. That has some Dark and Dramatic Potential, believe you me ! You're just another whinger. No Ideas or Imagination under a Pseudo-Intellectual Hat. You like being spoon-fed just like all the others do ! Tolkien as a Master Anglo-Saxon and Mythology Scholar should have been able to do better than a trip over a Bloody stone ! Aragorn Vs Sauron, echoes Beowulf and Grendel, and sets the Stakes to an amazingly High level...
Arguably, and I would, In the Book, after the Towers of the Teeth, Apart from the Scouring of the Shire, ROTK is SUB Standard Tosh. (And the Film, come to think of it as well) Signs of Severe writers Fatigue there...
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

201. Jason Campbell
Member
Whether the ideas are reasonable or not is open to debate. The 'big boss' fight is a cliche from games to films.
Scouring should have been in the films in my view as the story, and particularly the story of the hobbits is incomplete without it and as Tolkien says in the introduction is what foreseen from the very beginning.
If you have been to Forumshire I doubt you could reliably accuse any of its members as lacking in imagination, it has a thriving creative side to it.
I find it odd that you despise how Tolkien resolved his book, find the themes unappealing to the point of denying they are there at all and believe RotK to be 'sub standard tosh' and yet you come on a Tolkien based forum ostensably as a Tolkien fan. Do you like Tolkien or not? As you seem very negative of his work.
You are of course free not to like it, just odd then to come onto a Tolkien forum to complain you don't like Tolkien.
If I thought a book was sub standard tosh I would not read it nor feel the need to go on a forum to tell people who do like it it's rubbish- what would be the point?
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

202. Julia Mellor
Member
I have to agree with Jason and Kevin on this one, if the ending was all tosh why does it feel so right? because to me it does, endings dont have to be all going out with a blaze of glory, real lfe is not like that, thats why Tolkien feels right, sometimes endings are ambiguous or sad, somethings are left unsaid some things left undone, it takes more guts to leave things with questions unanswered, like what happens to Frodo in the Grey Havens?
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

203. Jason Campbell
Member
Exactly Julia, it is fresh.
A big boss fight with Sauron is dull and predictable, so dull and predicatable even PJ realised it and dropped the idea of Sauron coming out to fight Aragorn, even though he had already begun filming it.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

204. Glenn Maillard
Member
Stu said: "A proper ending is one where a character doesn't trip on a random stone to fall into an Abyss and destroy a powerful Artefact thats much stronger than two of the three protagonists who most want it."
I'm adding my voice to the general outcry, Stu. That "trip" is exactly the kind of thing I like in a story. Not unlike Tom Bombadil treating the Ring like a powerless trinket. And I don't think for a moment that deeper ambiguities can't - not "should" but "can't" - underlie either situation, whether it's Gollum "tripping" or Tom "playing". It's in the eye of the beholder. And in my eye, that "trip" in the context of the whole book is "fresh" and "true to life", and almost "expected", but only once t's happened. That is no cop out. It's perfectly reasoned.
Maybe this is purely a question of one's "taste" Stu? And fair enough that it should be so.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

205. Julia Mellor
Member
I think that Bilbo was meant to find the Ring, I think that Sam was meant to be eavesdropping under the window at Bagend, I think that Gollum was meant to evade the arrows of Faramir, that Frodo was meant to trip, I think that Tolkien was meant to write Lord of the Rings, it was beyond his control and spontaneously flowed from his pen.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

206. Glenn Maillard
Member
I think you're right Julia. (Why, I think I'm hornswaggled! That's 'you', Julia, as who I think might be 'right'!!!!)
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

207. Julia Mellor
Member
Havent the foggiest idea what you said, what the jiggers is hornswaggled?
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

208. Glenn Maillard
Member
I always thought it was a word, but when I use it, people often ask (sometimes with a smile), what does that mean? I thought I'd read it somewhere sometime, but maybe I dreamed it! I think it means something like "confused/surprised/amazed/de-equilibriumed/did-Julia-really-say-something-sensible?-hey-blooming-heck!"
(You'll have to work out "de-equilibriumed" for yourself - I just made it up, but I'm not drawing a picture for you. Wouldn't want you to get lazy, lovely Lady!)
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

209. Julia Mellor
Member
bloomin eck indeed.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

210. Jason Campbell
Member
To go back to bring up an argument about PJ's choices the whole Frodo dangling over the fire bit gets my goat for a number of reasons.
One -its almost like there was a ledge, and a firey chasm and Pj simply could not resist the cliche of dangling someone precariously over it, and secondly and more importantly the actions of Frodo.
He is thinking of letting go when the Ring is in the fire, Sam offers him the alternative, hope and to keep on going and PJ's Frodo chooses it.
The problem with this is Frdodo's entire mental state from this point on in the book is his own sense of failure and loss.
Tolkiens Frodo never gives up the Ring, he is in as much anguish as Gollum would have been at its loss. And that sense of loss he carries with him from then on, it is also a constent reminder of his own failure, as he sees it.
It is the reason Arwen gives him the jewel and the reason he is alowed to go on the ship.
Pj ruins all that and throws it away for the sake of some faux drama hanging of a cliff.

211. Julia Mellor
Member
Frodo does say to Sam in Bagend, some wounds never heal. Or maybe I dreamt those words, cant remember, but I think he was referring to wounds other than physical.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

212. Jason Campbell
Member
Yes Frodo does say that Julia and he was referring to wounds other than the physical, but its too late by then- PJ has already ruined the thing by having his Frodo choose to take Sam's hand, to choose the hope and to go on. And done just for the sake of having a triumphant cheap cheer moment.
Tolkiens Frodo never makes that decision, its a fundemental point and a fundemental change PJ makes- the Ring goes into the fire against Frodo's will, he never rejected anything he embraced the Ring, hence his own sense of failure and loss which cannot be healed in the Circles of the World- by changing that PJ either never understood what was going on or decided to scrap it- I think the former because in scenes like the one you mention in Bag End he acts like he hasn't changed it, but he has so the ending actually no longer makes much sense, even less so devoid of the Scouring episode.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

213. Glenn Maillard
Member
Mentioning the Scouring of the Shire makes me not only regret it's omission yet again, but it reminds me of how Tolkien never allows there to be a "final" climax to his story. Middle Earth goes on. Big and little events occur, but history goes on. There are no real endings or happy ever afters, just Middle Earth going on, like in real life. Not an 'original' idea really, but the atmosphere it sets seems so fresh. Fantasy (and stories generally) seem to have "beginnings" and "middles" and "ends" but history as such (I'm not talking here about individual lives) has none of those things, not really. LotR is history.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

214. Joel Becker
Member
Okay, I skipped a bunch of the most recent posts, but I'm going to go back to Stuart's reply to me....
Stuart, you said, "In the end, Gollum was just the same as Isildur... totally ensnared by the Ring and would NEVER have broken free of its power." That right there is exactly why it WAS ironic. He had been completely consumed by the Ring, and he wished for no harm to come to it. Yet through his actions, it was "unmade." That is textbook irony.
If you think the ending was a cop-out, then there were certainly many other cop-outs in LOTR (Gandalf and Erkernbrand showing up at Helm's Deep, the Army of the Dead, etc.) as well as in every other story with a "good" ending.
You do realize that Aslan is a Messianic figure, right? The Chronicles of Narnia are heavily allusive to Christianity, and Aslan is the allegorical Christ. His resurrection was not a cop-out; it was essential to the story.
And finally, Kevin pretty much nailed it.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

215. Glenn Maillard
Member
Joel said: "If you think the ending was a cop-out, then there were certainly many other cop-outs in LOTR (Gandalf and Erkernbrand showing up at Helm's Deep, the Army of the Dead, etc.) as well as in every other story with a "good" ending."
I agree, Gandalf arriving just in time - which is very old hat - and The Army of the Dead - which was slightly less old hat - were "cop outs" if we must use that language. But I find it more than acceptable the way Tolkien did it, indeed very enjoyable and exciting and a great relief.
The Ring is in no way a cop out. It's just NOT what one does in fantasies - or any adventure story! What! The hero does not come through in the end - for all the credit he must get for getting to where he was - and a villain (sort of) whose excitement at victory causes him to dance in mad glee and trip over a cliff. That's no cop out. It's a marvellously unexpected but realistic outcome. Unless Stu thinks "any" ending that is not a total cliche is a cop-out.
POSTED 1 WEEK AGO#

[Eldorion]

What makes you think that Bree-land is under attack?

[Pettytyrant101]

What sort of an immigration policy is this Admin?! Swamped were being I say! Swamped!

(The log in no longer works so no one can post anything any more- no doubt the machinations of an evil Dark PLanet Overlord at play- say no more. )

[Eldorion]

That's weird. I tried out of curiosity and it's not working for me either. Well, as I'm sure you guys who post there remember, any of our cousins from Bree who are looking for a place to land, regroup, or just stop by are more than welcome to stop by any time.

[Porgy Bunk-Banks]

Oh if only Odo was not so busy with his girls at Our Lady's - those Extra Advanced Etiquette classes are taking up so much of his time. He's sure to know what to do in this crisis. After all, wasn't it Odo who was instrumental in saving so many lives, and taking in so many poor Hobbit Movie Refugees last time, and pretty much turning this wasteland on the edge of the world into the beautiful Forumshire we now enjoy prosperity in? He tells everyone that, so it must be true! What a hero... (And I end up with Wisey... )

Oh Odo, pleeeeeease leave those girls alone and come help us!

[Eldorion]

What'd I just say in the other Bree-refugee thread?

[Porgy Bunk-Banks]

What'd I just say in the other Bree-refugee thread?

I have absolutely no idea - I was here!