Microphones in Middle-earth...the BBC Lord of the Rings [Archive]

davem

02-10-2008, 06:08 AM

This is by way of an introduction to the series, with some comments on Episode One. Feel free to jump in with any thoughts of your own....

(Some of this is taken from the booklet which accompanies the CD set, some is bits & pieces of trivia picked up over the years, but most from a recording I've heard of an event to launch the series at the Church House Bookshop, on March 5th 1981. Present were Brian Sibley & Michael Bakewell (the adaptors), Penny Leicester (one of the Directors), Stephen Oliver (the composer) & Peter Woodthorpe & David Collings (who played Gollum & Legolas).

The BBC adaptation of LotR was the most expensive radio production the BBC had made up to that time. It cost something around £100,000, & the cast & crew had the luxury of spending between one & a half & two days per episode.

The BBC had decided on 26 half hour episodes (ie six months worth) which would be broadcast on Sunday lunchtimes & repeated on Wednesday nights. It was later edited & re-broadcast as 13 hour long episodes, & that's the form in which its now generally available on CD. Of course, the adaptors, Brian Sibley & Michael Bakewell, soon realised this would not be enough time to encompass the whole story, & that cuts would have to be made. Bombadil went. In the main, though, the cuts were small - but Sibley notes that there were many such 'small' cuts. All the scripts were sent to Christopher Tolkien in France for approval, & he kindly provided a tape of pronunciations & was available to answer any question sent to him. One cut that Sibley was pressed to make, but refused to do, was the Scouring of the Shire - its cut down in this adaptation, but its there. Sibley felt that Tolkien had put the Battle of Bywater in for a reason - that it had to be shown that the great events of the War of the Ring had to be echoed in the Shire - blood had to be spilled there too.

They managed to attract some big name theatre actors - Michael Hordern (Gandalf), Robert Stephens (Aragorn), Ian Holm (Frodo) - because theatre actors like radio drama: they can earn money in the studio during the day, & still tread the boards at night.

Sibley & Bakewell realised fairly soon that they would need a narrator, but what kind of narrator was the question. Should it be 'Tolkien', or an 'abstract voice'? Or maybe one of the characters? They decided against the latter (among other reasons because that would give away to anyone not familiar with the story whether that particular character survived or not!) & in the end went for a narrator somewhere between Tolkien & an abstract voice, but one who would be involved, & 'feel along' with the characters, & 'be involved' in the story.

Of course, radio drama by its nature imposes a problem on adaptors - if you don't hear a character speak you don't know they're there - as Bakewell put it, you may not notice if a character in a book doesn't speak for 100 pages, but in a half hour radio episode you have to have each character say something at least once.
The other problem is that you need to have someone ask questions to move the plot along. Bakewell says he usually chose Pippin. This lead Christopher to ask Bakewell 'Why is Pippin so stupid?'

New things were added as well as cut - a whole section from Unfinished Tales was added in - as was a scene in the first episode, where Sam brings some post to Bag End to save the postman another journey. Sibley commented that Christopher would be quite critical of such changes, but that he was also very supportive of their difficulties.

Another problem they had was in finding a way in to the story. They couldn't dramatise the Prologue & make it work. Sibley originally went for something along the lines of the Bakshi movie, giving an over view of the history of the Ring, but neither he, Michael Bakewell, or the Producer, Jane Morgan, were happy with the result. Then Morgan suggested that they begin with Gollum. Sibley wassn't sure, but tried putting something together & eventually came up with the beginning we have - a brief statement about how the Ring was made & lost, & how Sauron was defeated, & then straight to Gollum's capture & torture by the Mouth of Sauron.

Another problem they had was Sauron. Bakewell decided Sauron should not appear directly in the drama & his presence only be felt through the other characters. He felt that no other character in the story is 'absolutely evil' but only instruments of evil, & that absolute evil must be kept at a remove if it was to be credible.

And battles- on radio! As Bakewell noted they tend to sound like (in his words) 'Cloink-ouch-boink!'. Their solution was to use a mixture of words, music & stylised effects to create a mood & give the production 'its own sound'.

The music was by Stephen Oliver (Morgan had originally wanted Sir Malcolm Arnold). Oliver decided that he didn't want anything that sounded 'too grand', as most of the audience would be listening to it on small radios. He chose to use almost exclusively Violas & Cellos (the only real exception being Boromir's horn). Oliver commented that he found Tolkien's lyrics 'poor' - except for the alliterative verse, which he thought brilliant. The approach he took to setting them to music was quite practical - if it was a walking song he would use a walking rhythm' dum-dum-dum.

Peter Wodthorpe's (also Bakshi's Gollum) take on Gollum is interesting, & different to the one Andy Serkis took. For Woodthorpe, by the time Gollum loses the ring he is 'half animal' (as opposed to Serkis' 'addict'). You'll also notice that Woodthorpe's Gollum is never a 'tragic' figure as he is in the movie when he is a nice little Hobbit, suddenly overwhelmed by the power of the Ring. Here, he is Tolkien's 'mean little soul' - he wants the Ring when he sees it & simply throttles Deagol for it. Woodthorpe commented that this was central to his portrayal - Gollum was 'degraded & defeated' but he was also this 'half-animal'.

One thing you may notice in this production is the way Sibley & Bakewell avoid a fault that Shippey pointed out about the movie - that the audience already knows from the start that Bilbo's ring is the One Ring, so that it is not a shock to the audience when Gandalf discovers it. In this adaptation all we are told is

Three rings they hid from him. But the others he gathered into his hands, hoping to make himself master of all things. Then was an alliance made against the Dark Lord, and Sauron was, for that time, vanquished. But at length, his dark shadow stretched forth once more, and he sought again for mastery over the Rings of Power.

One ring had come into the possession of Gollum, a slimy creature as dark as darkness, who kept it secret unto himself in the nether-most depths of the mines beneath the Misty Mountains. There it was hidden, even from the searching eye of Sauron, the Lord of the Rings.

We're told that one of the rings comes into the possession of Gollum, but not which one. We find that out when Frodo does (and for those of you who are interested, the sound effect used for the Ring in this production was made by running a wet finger around the rim of a wineglass).

So, to episode one. Your thoughts? Did it work well as an adaptation? Did it capture the spirit of the book? Did you feel you were in Middle-earth?

Lalwendë

02-10-2008, 07:27 AM

The odd thing about listening to a radio adaptation is how you get drawn in completely. At first you fidget, wondering where the pictures and/or words are, but after a few minutes you are absorbed in it. You have to concentrate. What this makes me think of is how blind readers who use reading software like Jaws remember details in books so well - all their powers of concentration are bent on one source or sense alone. In fact my old boss who is blind much prefers the radio version to the films as in his words, the films are "just a lot of noise" but the radio version is vivid and clear.

That's the first thing you notice, how clear it all is. If I say "see" when it ought to be "hear', just ignore that, I really do "see" it. The medium demands that speech is well-delivered, that characters have distinctive voices, that any extraneous nonsense is cut away. An odd thing, considering how lush and layered Tolkien's work is. In this format, it's really Northern, like a saga being read to you in front of the fire. Lovely.

Nothing is lost of the magic and grandeur though. In this episode you get to see something that was sorely missed from the films, when Saruman reveals himself as Saruman of Many Colours - it's great. Nor is a lot lost of the detail. You also find yourself listening to Sam cutting the garden in the background. And the clatter of the tobacco jar.

My only disappointment with the first episode is that there just isn't enough of the Long Expected Party. Although Frodo is much better - he isn't the permanently bewildered child he seemed to be in the films; he's clearly a bit impish, as Gandalf challenges him over not fiddling with the fireworks, but he's also the correct age and sounds it, too.

And how creepy does Gollum sound? And a little Welsh too? ;)

Macalaure

02-10-2008, 07:55 AM

I'm listening to the BBC radio adaptation for the first time now. I thought about buying the CDs some time ago, but it was simply too expensive (would have to be imported). I didn't know it's available on Youtube. I'll try to listen to it and enjoy it on its own - without making too many comparisons to the movies. It probably won't be easy.

Of course it is easier for a radio play to transport oneself to Middle-earth since you can enjoy your own images. To someone who has read the books, the fact that it's more restricted than a movie ironically makes it more effective. But I wonder how it works for people who haven't read the books: Are they able to create those images on their own only from listening? Do we have anybody here who was introduced to Middle-earth by the play? That would be interesting to hear more about.
I think it's interesting to observe that on the third, visual, dimension the movies did very well, while on the first two dimensions, acting and writing, it had its highs and lows. So far, the radio adaptation is very well-written and -acted, at least in my opinion.

The beginning was interesting. I didn't expect it to start with Gollum entering Mordor. But it was very effective in capturing the listener's attention while presenting important facts. I thought Gollum's voice was too deep, but maybe I've become too influenced by Serkis' Gollum. I don't think I like the idea of Gollum being a "half-animal". By what I've heard of him yet, I wouldn't have gotten the idea. (an aside: I didn't like the "addict" too much either - it made it too easy to pity him.) I'll reserve my judgement until I have heard more of him in the later episodes.

I, too, liked it that the dialogue between Gandalf and Saruman was closer to like it is in the book, but I would have wished for a little more suspense. It's clear from the beginning that Saruman is not on Gandalf's side and it is clear that Gandalf won't accept his offers. What is left is very nice and atmospherically dense, but regrettably unsurprising dialogue.

I also think that the Sackville-Bagginses are much nicer integrated than they were in the Jackson movies, but that's a minor thing.

davem

02-10-2008, 08:40 AM

If its easier for anybody, for quotes & help in remembering what happened, a transcript of the entire episode is here: http://www.tolkienradio.com/shadow.html.

I did like the way we were first taken into the Ivy Bush to meet the Hobbits over beer & pipes. We first encounter 'typical' Hobbits, rather than the atypical ones - Bilbo & Frodo. When we do meet them, in the next scene (which, as I noted, has been invented in part in order to introduce Sam into the story, but mainly so that Bilbo & Frodo will have a scene together at the start), things have been set up well - the atmosphere is quiet & domesticated, but the underlying mystery about Bilbo has been captured perfectly.

I think most listeners who are familiar with the book will also have noticed that John Le Mesurier get's Bilbo's 'half as well as you deserve' line wrong!

I think what i liked most about this production was the way they used so much of Tolkien's words - both dialogue & description in the narration. It roots the adaptation so much more deeply in Tolkien's world. And even a little thing - like having Gandalf & Frodo discussing the Ring on a fine, bright morning (as opposed to the movie, where it happens at night) - makes you feel you're in the right Middle-earth. Of course, this the other advantage of a production that is so dependent on words - you can convey so much more information to the listener:

Gandalf: He doesn't grow, or obtain more life, he merely continues, until at last every minute is a weariness. And if he often uses the Ring to make himself invisible, he fades: he becomes in the end permanently invisible, and walks in twilight under the eye of the dark power that rules the Rings.

Explains far better & much more clearly the effect of the Ring on a bearer than all the rushing about & histrionics we saw in the movie. All in all, its a very good effort at setting up the story, the listener will know far more about the world of Middle-earth than they would at this point in the movie - even though it takes about the same amount of time to get to the same point - & this is something else I've heard - that Jackson didn't have as much time to tell the story as the adaptors of this production did. That's simply not the case - this is a thirteen hour production, & if you take the SEE editions of the Jackson trilogy they total about the same amount of time.
Finally the climax is a perfect cliff-hanger - we get to see the capture & imprisonment of Gandalf as it happened, rather than in flashback at the Council. Once again, the advantage of an adaptation dependent on words rather than images means that we learn much more about the characters of both Gandalf & Saruman. It may not be clear as yet, but Peter Howell's Saruman is a very accomplished piece of acting - the way he flips between the charming, solicitous counsellor & the vicious, self-righteous traitor in the Voice of Saruman episode is perfect.

Mithalwen

02-10-2008, 12:23 PM

Many thanks to Davem for bringing this long held aspiration in to the world - or at least the Downs! I hope to make a proper contribution tomorrow when I have a little more time. I dont' know how many participants we will get but, at least, I hope it will bring some understanding to those who wonder what we are on about when we get misty-eyed about this production.

It isn't perfect - some of the sound effects are a bit ropey - I always think Gollumis being tortured with an empty stapler and later Legolas' bow string will have a very rubber band-like sound - but it has a great many strengths and I have listened to it often since I bought the tapes 6 years ago. I had the tape of the music from when I heard it on the radio in the 80's but wore it out!!!

Elmo

02-10-2008, 12:37 PM

Haha I've lost one, one! tape from this and I am completely gutted. It was my favourite (probably that's why I lost it) cause I used to take it out on its own. Cause it had Sam's singing that brilliant version of The Fall of Gilgalad. If anyone has a linky to that I'll be eternally grateful.:D

davem

02-10-2008, 12:48 PM

It isn't perfect - some of the sound effects are a bit ropey - I always think Gollumis being tortured with an empty stapler and later Legolas' bow string will have a very rubber band-like sound !

They are. And yet it doesn't matter. I think that you get so drawn into the drama that it hardly registers on you that the effects aren't quite convincing. In a production like this the effects aren't as 'in your face' (in your ears?) as in the movie, as long as you get the idea they've served their purpose. That said, apparently they spent a good deal of time & effort on them.

As an aside I'll just point out that one of the things I'm grateful to this series for is that I can now recall whole chunks of Tolkien's dialogue, because I've heard this so many times & they took so much straight off the page.

Rune Son of Bjarne

02-10-2008, 08:35 PM

They are. And yet it doesn't matter. I think that you get so drawn into the drama that it hardly registers on you that the effects aren't quite convincing.

Obviously it does matter and you did register, otherwise Mith would not have commented and if she did your reply would have been "really? I did not notice"
:smokin:

davem

02-11-2008, 07:27 AM

Looking through the booklet that accompanies the LotR stageshow cast recording I noticed that, while not endorsing the production, the Estate had given the official translator complete access to all Tolkien's linguistic writings to use in his work. Taken along with the great efforts CT went to in helping the adaptors of this production, its clear that they are not the over-possessive 'ogres' they are sometimes made out to be as far as the use of Tolkien's material is concerned. JRRT may only have sold the movie rights to LotR & TH, but in this series Sibley & Bakewell used a section of Unfinished Tales & Christopher approved this (well, to the extent that he approved the scripts before they started production). OK, the radio rights are different to the film rights, but CT clearly had no problem with his father's other works being used

The recording CT made (I've heard the first few minutes of it) is interesting, & shows that he had an appreciation of the difficulties of dramatisation & wanted to help out as much as he could in making this a faithful adaptation of his father's work.

BTW, this recording is the only acknowledgment I've come across that the 'infamous' mistake on the original LotR map - which has the name Hithaeglir for the Misty Mountains spelled 'Hithaeglin' - was down to Christopher: one of the words Sibley had asked him to pronounce. Christopher acknowledges it was his fault. An interesting bit of trivia about the production then - Sibley must have been using the first edition map, as the mistake was corrected for the Second Edition, where it appears correctly as Hithaeglir.

davem

02-17-2008, 09:11 AM

The transcript of the episode can be found here http://www.tolkienradio.com/blackriders.html.

We ended the first episode with Gandalf imprisoned at Orthanc & Frodo making preparations to move to Crickhollow, & this one will take us as far as Bree.

I suppose the first thing many will notice is the introduction of an entirely new scene: Gandalf coming before Theoden & requesting a horse, & being told to take one & begone. And the second thing is the introduction of an episode from The Hunt for the Ring from Unfinished Tales. I don't know whether Brian Sibley (the adaptor) asked permission from Christopher Tolkien to use this episode beforehand, or just took the chance & included it. Either way Christopher approved its use & its in there. Whether for good or ill is a matter of personal opinion - it opens up the story certainly, & introduces the Black Riders not as mysterious figures coming out of nowhere to hunt down the Hobbits, but as a group with a definite agenda. What the scene also makes clear is that Saruman does not fear them, & goes so far as to send them off with a flea in their collective ears. What this addition also does is to add to the sense of urgency - Gandalf has just escaped Orthanc & is headed north to the Shire on Shadowfax, & the Riders are just behind.

So there is new material, but there are also some omissions - Fatty Bolger is missed out, as is Gildor - though originally Sibley included him. Unfortunately, time constraints meant that either Gildor or Farmer Maggot had to go, & Sibley felt that the incident with Maggot enhanced the drama & gave more background information to the listener, so Gildor had to go. And, of course, the major omission is the whole Old Forest/Bombadil/Barrow Downs episode - again, time constraints meant it could not be included (though Sibley came back to the episode some years later & dramatised it, once again for BBC radio).

One nice thing about this adaptation, & something that makes it feel more 'authentic', is the presence of the poems & songs. Another is the extent to which the adaptors have tried to stick as far as possible to Tolkien's original storyline. Merry & Pippin are introduced into the story as they are in the book, & the Crickhollow/Conspiracy Unmasked storyline are kept.

Also kept are Gwaihir (a nice touch which brings home that the Great Eagles of Middle-earth are not just big birds - a failing in the movie), & Gandalf's letter & most of the Bree episode. This is a much more authentic Bree, pleasant, comfortable - a haven from the night: as Tolkien intended. And, as with Nighy's Sam, I think James Grout's Butterbur is the definitive portrayal of that character.

So, did Sibley & Bakewell succeed here? Did they capture the spirit of the book - did their 'opening out' of the story to include Gandalf's escape & the Rider's arrival at Orthanc draw you in, or should they have kept to Tolkien's slow revealing of the background?

William Cloud Hicklin

02-17-2008, 09:22 AM

Whoa, whoa, whoa there, Tex!

Isn't posting this material on Youtube a copyright violation? And linking to it a violation of Forum rules?

davem

02-17-2008, 09:32 AM

Whoa, whoa, whoa there, Tex!

Isn't posting this material on Youtube a copyright violation? And linking to it a violation of Forum rules?

Well, not that I was aware. I think the BBC do have a You Tube section & put stuff on there legally. However, I'm happy to remove the links till I know one way or the other.

If the transcripts are also illegal I'll remove them. If anything else is illegal I'll remove that. In fact if anyone wants to point up anything I do, have done, or am likely to do at any unspecified point up to, including & after my death, I will happily act upon it to the extent that I am able.

It would be nice to have the offences (if such they are) pointed up politely though, rather than doing the cowboy thing.....

EDIT Here we go, the BBC's OFFICIAL You tube section http://uk.youtube.com/user/bbcworldwide. Now, you see the problem - if the BBC are putting some of their stuff on YT themselves its a bit difficult to tell, if you find BBC stuff on the site, whether its there legally or illegally. If someone can confirm the LotR series is there legally I'll restore the links.

Lalwendë

02-17-2008, 02:12 PM

I loved how this episode began with some very bad sound effects for poor Gwaihir! An unintentional laugh ;) But then something struck me which I've never really thought about before. When Saruman mocks Radagast as "Radagast the bird-tamer" I'd just registered this as a dig at Radagast's Bill Oddie tendencies, but really, this is a dig at Radagast's comradeship with the Eagles! I must go back to the book now and see what else Saruman mocks him for because I can't remember the full line...

Grima here sounds much more realistic as a King's adviser or counsel. He's not so overly oily as Grima in the films (much as I enjoyed Brad Dourif's uber-Goth Grima ;)) and this seems much more realistic to me; you can imagine a King choosing this man as his closest adviser. The Nazgul also sound less animalistic; we hear the Lord of the Nazgul talk and he just sounds like a Man, not a cat yawling because someone's stood on his tail (or like a pig being slaughtered, which is what the Nazgul sound like in the films...). Butterbur is just great...check out The Box Of Delights which the same actor is in.

I was pleased with the music in this episode. It sounds so much more like genuine folk music than some of the horrid New Age stuff in the film soundtrack (most of it not by Howard Shore but by Enya - sorry, she's totally not to my taste). And like English music instead of Celtic music too.

And there was another funny moment where the Gaffer is being interrogated by one of the Nazgul and he pauses as though he's about to say "P.... Off" but then doesn't! If you listen to it you will know exactly what I mean! ;)

davem

02-17-2008, 03:02 PM

One thing you may like in a later episode is the way the adaptors get away with the fact that Merry doesn't get a Barrow sword. He has to confront the Witch King with an ordinary blade, & unlike in the movie the adaptors take this into account.

Gwathagor

02-19-2008, 11:52 AM

This is the best adaptation, to any medium, ever.

I agree that the sounds effects are weak, but fortunately the series is dependent on the dialogue, rather than the special effects. And the dialogue is VERY strong, lots of it right out of Tolkien, as has been pointed out.

Which episode are we on? 2?

I think Jack May is awesome as Theoden.

I also really appreciate the inclusion of some of Tolkien's poetry, as well as the musical settings, which become, for me, definitive.

Let's see...

Aragorn is terrific in his first episode. Robert Stephens has such a cool voice, and very distinctive, too, which works awfully well for Aragorn.

davem

02-19-2008, 01:14 PM

We are on Episode 2, & listening to an episode each Saturday or Sunday.

What I've noticed is that while we've had quite a few views for this thread we've got very few participants. I'm assuming that's because not many Downers have the recordings, or have ever heard the production.

We plan to go on listening (eleven episodes to go) & will carry on posting as long as there's interest. If nothing else we're hoping this will serve as an advert for the series, & that some who haven't listened to it yet will take the plunge & buy a copy.

zxcvbn

02-20-2008, 05:36 AM

davem

02-20-2008, 07:06 AM

A question; how many adaptations of LOTR did the BBC make? I believe there was another made in Tolkien's lifetime. It seems the good Professor didn't like it much(he was criticising it in the Letters of JRRT).

There have been two BBC adaptations. The first (which Tolkien didn't like) was in 1955 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lord_of_the_Rings_%281955_radio_series%29 ). The second, from 1981 - which we're discussing here - he obviously wouldn't have gotten to hear, but knowing his attitude to adaptations of his work he probably wouldn't have liked this one either! As I stated, Christopher approved the scripts, but whether he liked (or even heard) the adaptation I don't know. What I can say is that those who have heard it consider it to be the best adaptation of the book yet produced.

There's also another radio adaptation, made for American Public Radio in 1979 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lord_of_the_Rings_%281979_radio_series%29, which I haven't heard, but doesn't have a good rep - though it did include Bombadil/Barrow Downs. As I stated earlier, Sibley adapted the Bombadil/Barrow Downs episode seperately some years after this one as an hour long drama, using different actors (but with Michael Hordern who plays Gandalf in this adaptation) as the Narrator. What some who dislike Bombadil may find surprising is how effective the episode is when presented dramatically.

William Cloud Hicklin

02-20-2008, 08:25 AM

I have the '79 US adaptation (a present). It's pretty lame, nowhere on a par with the BBC.

The first (50's) BBC version's tapes were wiped, as was standard Beeb practice at the time, and and far as anyone knows no longer exists.

ArathornJax

02-20-2008, 11:16 PM

I listen to them going back and forth to work probably once or twice a year. I love the adaptation here. I find that the dramatizations of these bring out a more visual representation in mind, then listening to the books on audio (which I own and also listen to in the car).
My children from about age 8 up (especially my son whom I have successfully raised and a Tolkien fan) prefer the dramatizations to the movies! It is the dramatizations that got my children to read the book from beginning to end.

My one critique, and I'm sure I'll hear about this, is Ian Holm's version of Frodo. Overall, I really admire and like his representation. There are parts though, were I thought he came across almost like a spoiled teenager, and they stick out to me.

I wish that Peter Jackson had followed along with the flow of the script in the movies that the BBC presentation/script had. I felt they edited the parts that they needed to, while still retaining truer to the story than the movies. Overall, like I have said, I am very, very happy with the production.

One last note. If your looking for them to listen to, check your local library if you live in a semi-decent metro area. Most libraries have or can get a copy to check out.

In terms of knowing what you can and cannot post on a place like YouTube, I would invite anyone to understand and know the Fair Use Laws of the U.S. This site from Texas provides some basic guidelines:

http://www.utsystem.edu/OGC/intellectualProperty/copypol2.htm

Cheers,

AJ

Macalaure

02-22-2008, 12:30 PM

While it was definitely interesting to hear those parts from The Hunt for the Ring (Saruman again was great: I'm really looking forward to the end of Book Three by now), from my point of view it did more harm than good. The mystery of the Black Riders is one of the key elements of the First Book for me. This mystery is now entirely gone, and somehow this leaves me with an incomplete impression. Of course we are told the Black Riders are scary, and we hear the Hobbits are frightened, but while the reader is scared, too, the listener here is not (or at least I am not).

It has been said earlier, that the BBC adaptation proves Peter Jackson wrong in claiming that he didn't have enough time to tell the whole story. I think this is a little unfair, considering the different media. A radio adaptation is all dialogue and all plot, and I don't think a screen adaptation this dense could have worked. The screen has other benefits the radio has not. I'm not saying that Jackson didn't waste a horrible amount of time, but his argument remains valid.
However, one thing the this episode showed was, that it is possible to include the Crickhollow section into the adapted story in reasonable time, thus giving Merry and Pippin a decent introduction. I really liked this part and missed it very much in the Jackson Trilogy.

One thing that was a bit of a let down to me in this episode were some of the voices, which all seemed to be perfect in the first episode. I'm afraid, I think Gwaihir sounds involuntarily funny, the Witch-King simply fails to be scary, and the praised Aragorn absolutely doesn’t fit my mental image.
I agree that Butterbur was excellent, though.

William Cloud Hicklin

02-22-2008, 12:56 PM

One thing that does irk me about the BBC is that the Ringwraiths apparently spend all their time chanting the Ring-verse over and over and over...

davem

02-22-2008, 01:07 PM

One thing that was a bit of a let down to me in this episode were some of the voices, which all seemed to be perfect in the first episode. I'm afraid, I think Gwaihir sounds involuntarily funny, the Witch-King simply fails to be scary, and the praised Aragorn absolutely doesn’t fit my mental image.
I agree that Butterbur was excellent, though.

Well, what should a talking eagle sound like? :confused: I know what
you mean though. Perhaps its something that can only work in a book. I have to admit that I've listened to the series so many times now that I just accept the voices without thinking about whether they sound right or not...

Macalaure

02-22-2008, 02:57 PM

Well, what should a talking eagle sound like? :confused: I know what you mean though. Perhaps its something that can only work in a book. I have to admit that I've listened to the series so many times now that I just accept the voices without thinking about whether they sound right or not...
I guess that everybody has a certain voice that he hears inside his head while reading the books, just like everybody has a mental image of the characters. But Tolkien usually described the looks in a little more detail than he described the voices, so the sounds of the voices are inevitably much more subjective. Considering that, it's amazing how many voices in this adaptation seem to sound "right" to the majority.

What I can't change, though, is that when I hear a voice that doesn't fit, it makes me feel less like inside of Middle-earth. That's why I'm bringing it up (also to see whether others feel the same). It's definitely much less of a concern than out-of-character behaviour, something which I'm glad I haven't come across in here yet.

Gwathagor

02-22-2008, 03:09 PM

I guess that everybody has a certain voice that he hears inside his head while reading the books, just like everybody has a mental image of the characters. But Tolkien usually described the looks in a little more detail than he described the voices, so the sounds of the voices are inevitably much more subjective. Considering that, it's amazing how many voices in this adaptation seem to sound "right" to the majority.

What I can't change, though, is that when I hear a voice that doesn't fit, it makes me feel less like inside of Middle-earth. That's why I'm bringing it up (also to see whether others feel the same). It's definitely much less of a concern than out-of-character behaviour, something which I'm glad I haven't come across in here yet.

I, like davem, have been listening to the series for a long time. While some of the voices sounded funny at first (e.g. Aragorn, Black Riders, etc.), I don't even think about it anymore. They sound completely natural to me now.

I think that Robert Stephens, Ian Holm, and Peter Woodthorpe are especially good in their portrayals of their respective characters (Aragorn, Frodo, Gollum).

Lalaith

02-22-2008, 03:47 PM

I never heard the dramatisation, just the reading by Rob Inglis...
This is a bit off topic, but as a little girl, I used to listen to my mum's box set of Nicol Williamson reading The Hobbit. I still hear him going "smash the glasses and crack the plates" etc.....and his Gandalf was brilliant.

davem

02-22-2008, 04:21 PM

I, like davem, have been listening to the series for a long time. While some of the voices sounded funny at first (e.g. Aragorn, Black Riders, etc.), I don't even think about it anymore. They sound completely natural to me now.
.

This series is very much comfort listening to me. I heard the original broadcasts of 26 half hour episodes back in 1981, then the repeats about a year later, when they'd been re-edited into 13 hour long episodes. I've probably listened to this adaptation as many times as I've read the book, & in a way I see them as complimentary. I'd feel as lost without these cd's to hand as I would if I didn't have the book. I even hear the actors', & especially the Narrator's, voices when I read the book. I remember getting the Radio Times (that's the cover picture in my first post) & reading the article on the series. Sadly that copy has long since disappeared :( . The artist is Eric Fraser (who, btw, illustrated the Folio Society editions of LotR & TH) - one of the many individuals involved in the production who has since passed away - along with Robert Stephens (Aragorn), Michael Hordern (Gandalf), Peter Woodthorpe (Gollum), John Le Mesurier (Bilbo), Simon Cadell (Celeborn) , Jack May (Theoden) & Stephen Oliver the composer - & possibly others I don't know of....

BTW, I don't know if anyone else has spent a whole day listening to the series all the way through - I've done it twice, & I have to say its a wonderful experience, beginning the Quest in the morning, & ending with Sam's return to Bag End at night.

davem

02-23-2008, 04:58 AM

In the first post I posted some links to reviews of/articles about the series, but the best one, by Brian Sibley himself on his own Website, had been temporarily removed due to site being updated. I emailed Brian & asked when it was likely to reappear, & he's very kindly put it back up (sans pics for the moment). Anyone wanting more background on the series can find it here
http://briansibleytheworks.blogspot.com/2008/01/this-page-is-still-under-construction_23.html

MatthewM

02-23-2008, 11:55 AM

I guess that everybody has a certain voice that he hears inside his head while reading the books, just like everybody has a mental image of the characters. But Tolkien usually described the looks in a little more detail than he described the voices, so the sounds of the voices are inevitably much more subjective. Considering that, it's amazing how many voices in this adaptation seem to sound "right" to the majority.

What I can't change, though, is that when I hear a voice that doesn't fit, it makes me feel less like inside of Middle-earth. That's why I'm bringing it up (also to see whether others feel the same).

I agree with you. None of these voices match up to my image of the characters nor are they the voices I hear when I read the book (excluding perhaps the Hobbits). I haven't heard the adaption in full yet, but I do have 1979 U.S. adaption, and I will hold my opinions on it until I start a thread pertaining solely to it (which I plan to do eventually)! Although I will say that I was not too impressed with the voice selection of the '79 adaption, however I was pleased that I liked the voice actor they chose for Boromir.

Concerning the voice selection for this BBC adaption, I think they did a good job with the Hobbits. But I cannot stand the voice actor for Boromir, he is much too old and hoarse sounding. Gandalf sounds unconvincing and Legolas has no elegance to his speech. Gimli sounds like he has consumed too many drugs over the years.

Concerning the overall BBC, which I hope to contribute a little bit more in this thread, it is alright so far.

davem

02-23-2008, 01:00 PM

Concerning the voice selection for this BBC adaption, I think they did a good job with the Hobbits. But I cannot stand the voice actor for Boromir, he is much too old and hoarse sounding. Gandalf sounds unconvincing and Legolas has no elegance to his speech. Gimli sounds like he has consumed too many drugs over the years.
.

Well, thanks to Brian Sibley (see my last post) we have a bit more insight into Michael Hordern's Gandalf:

As for Gandalf, Michael Hordern - if the truth were told - never entirely understood what was going on! He was, for example, genuinely perplexed by the wizard's seeming demise in Moria during Episode 8, and asked Jane Morgan whether his agent had been wrong about the number of episodes for which he was required! When told that he would be resurrected in Episode 12, he simply grunted: "Splendid! Splendid!" and shambled away.

Nevertheless, by intuition or some other theatrical magic, he became Gandalf: by turn wise, stern and compassionate, a force for good, a constant light in an ever-darkening storm.

(Of course, 'episode 8' & 'episode 12' here refer to the original broadcast of 26 episodes)

I like the idea of him not really knowing what was going on! However, I agree totally with Mr Sibley - his Gandalf is perfect. As for Michael Graham Cox's Boromir (reprising his role in the Bakshi movie, along with Peter Woodthorpe's Gollum, & it would be interesting to know whether they were chosen for that reason) I 'liked' him , & as with Faramir, he is far truer to Tolkien's character than the more 'sympathetic' portrayal of Boromir in Jackson's movie. By coincidence Boromir makes his first appearance in this adaptation in Episode Three, which we're moving on to tomorrow. I don't see that he's too old - in the book Boromir is in his forties.

Still, this is a matter of personal taste. As I stated, I've listened to this series a good fifteen or more times over the years & I now simply accept all the voices without analysing whether or not they 'work'. When I put the CD's on I simply enter into Middle-earth again, exactly as I do with the books.

davem

02-23-2008, 04:15 PM

Bit more on the artist who painted that beautiful Radio times cover (I think I read somewhere that Brian Sibley owns the original) can be found here http://buttes-chaumont.blogspot.com/2007/07/eric-fraser-1902-1983.html

Fraser was 79 when he painted it & if you click on the picture you will see a beautiful enlargement.

Also another review http://www.squidoo.com/audiolotr

And this page has a lovely image taken during the recording, showing William Nighy (Sam) on the left, Ian Holm (Frodo) centre & (I'm almost certain) Peter Woodthorpe (Gollum) on the right.
http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/tv/2006/11/how_to_wake_up_from_the_aftern.html

And one of Michael Hordern (Gandalf) left, John Le Mesurier (Bilbo), centre & Ian Holm (Frodo again) right.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/38286000/jpg/_38286119_tolkien_radio.jpg

TheGreatElvenWarrior

02-23-2008, 06:03 PM

Merry sounds too high pitched in my opinion in the radio adaption for my tastes, but that is only me.

MatthewM

02-23-2008, 06:50 PM

As for Michael Graham Cox's Boromir (reprising his role in the Bakshi movie, along with Peter Woodthorpe's Gollum, & it would be interesting to know whether they were chosen for that reason) I 'liked' him , & as with Faramir, he is far truer to Tolkien's character than the more 'sympathetic' portrayal of Boromir in Jackson's movie. By coincidence Boromir makes his first appearance in this adaptation in Episode Three, which we're moving on to tomorrow. I don't see that he's too old - in the book Boromir is in his forties.

Well I was only talking about the voice, not the portrayal. There I would of course agree with you. But Michael Graham Cox does not fit Boromir for me. Here's the thing with him being too old sounding- to be exact, Boromir was 40 years old when The Fellowship set out from Rivendell, and unless his birthday month (which no record is given of) was January or February, he remained 40 until his death. As Boromir was of high Númenórean descent, his life span would have been much greater than normal men. His brother Faramir lived to be roughly 118 years old, as his death date is given in Appendix A as being in the year F.A. 82. Undoubtedly Boromir would have reached a similar age if he was not killed. When looked at this way, Boromir was still in the prime of his life, having lived not even half of what Faramir lived to be. In fact, upon hearing of Boromir’s death, Théoden cried out- “Alas for Boromir the brave! The young perish and the old linger, withering.”

That is why I think M.G.C. was much too old sounding for a young character like Boromir.

davem

02-24-2008, 02:37 AM

Estelyn Telcontar

02-24-2008, 08:27 AM

Just to add yet another ingredient to the mix, an excellent German version of LotR was produced as a radio play some 16 years ago: 30 episodes @ 25 minutes each. I remember hearing as many episodes then as possible, though I don't remember details anymore. I will check out the local library to see if they have a copy to refresh my memory.

I do own the BBC recordings of LotR, Hobbit, and Perilous Realm as well as the JRRT recording. I've been listening to The Hobbit to prepare for the German Tolkien Society's annual seminar in April, of which it is the topic. As the "minor works" were last year's seminar topic, I listened to Tales from the Perilous Realm a lot then. I will make an effort to re-hear the LotR in the next weeks so that I can contribute to this discussion.

davem

02-24-2008, 10:22 AM

Transcript: http://www.tolkienradio.com/knifeinthedark.html

This episode ranges over a wide territory - we begin at Bree, with Merry's reappearance after being rescued by Nob, & end with Frodo's offer to take the Ring at the end of the Council of Elrond. I wondered about the 'two men' he saw stooping over Merry - I'd always assumed them to be Black Riders, but I wonder now if they might not have been Bill Ferny & companion...

Frodo's dream in the Inn I think was handled very effectively & made brilliant use of the medium by having the Black Rider's screech turn into the crowing of a cock. Once again we can see plainly the advantages & disadvantages of the medium in this episode - by this point in the story a listener to the series knows far more about the history & background or the world & characters than a viewer of the movie. We don't simply have Aragorn pointing at a hill & saying 'This is the watchtower of Amon Sul. We rest here tonight.'. We get:

No, this path was made to serve the Watchtower of Amon Sûl, that once stood upon its top. It was burned and broken by a terrible enemy, who is now but a servant of the Enemy we face. It is told that Elendil stood there watching for the coming of Gil-galad out of the West.

Pippin: When was that?

Aragorn: Long ago, in the days of the Last Alliance between Men and Elves. Which leads nicely into Sam singing the Lay of Gil-Galad.

Of course, there are disadvantages - we don't really know what is happening at the Ford (unless we've read the book, of course) - we know something has happened, 'cos there's a lot of background noise & Frodo shouting about falling, but we have to wait till the next scene (originally the next episode) in Rivendell for an explanation of what did happen. It was nice to have Glorfindel there, & to 'see' Frodo's active defiance of the Nazgul, rather than as in the movie where he is (as usual) depicted as helpless victim.

Again, this episode contains a new scene - between Bilbo & Frodo in the Hall of Fire. I've never been sure how well this works. Clearly its there for exposition purposes, & there's not really any other way to do it. Even when you have a Narrator you can't simply hand over great chunks of exposition to him/her, & putting in the form of a conversation often makes it easier for the listener to take in.

As to the Council, I think it was handled far better than the movie, where it seemed to consist of a bunch of people bickering for ten minutes, only to be told in no uncertain terms at the end by Elrond that they only have one option & that is to throw the Ring into the Fire - he could just have sent them a postcard. The main difference here is that, as with the book, the participants have come for counsel regarding their individual concerns & it is shown by the end of the Council that all those individual concerns are part of one much greater concern - the Ring & what to do with it. Once again we see the advantage of the medium in the amount of sheer information that is communicated to the listener.

As I've stated previously, I don't claim this series is perfect - either in itself or as an adaptation of the book. What I do think is that it captures the spirit of the book, & of Middle-earth itself.

Brian Sibley

02-24-2008, 01:25 PM

I have been fascinated to follow people's reactions and responses to the BBC radio series which I co-dramatised twenty-six years ago.

Thank you for your insights.

davem

02-24-2008, 02:11 PM

I have been fascinated to follow people's reactions and responses to the BBC radio series which I co-dramatised twenty-six years ago.

Thank you for your insights.

(davem scans his posts nervously to make sure he hasn't said anything bad......)

And in case anyone is uncertain, this is the real Brian Sibley. As I noted earlier I emailed Mr Sibley the other day to ask if he could put his wonderful essay on the BBC series back on his website & I included a link to this thread so he could have a look at our discussion.

Mithalwen & I have been praising this series on various threads here over the years & I'm sure she will be as thrilled as I am about Brian's appearance here on the Downs.:D

Hookbill the Goomba

02-24-2008, 02:27 PM

Episode Three is one of mt favorites from the early parts of the book. This is where a lot of action begins to happen. We also get a good insight into Strider. I do think they chose the right voice actor for Aragorn; his account of Beren and Luthien seems quite heart felt.

Butterbur is dreadfully amusing in this episode. His voice has always stuck with me when reading the books, especially at these points, with the selling of the Pony and the discussions with Strider. But is it just me or does Strider say "We shall see" an awful lot? ;)

On the road to Weathertop we get Sam's rendition of Gilgalad's poem, me absolute favorite version. The tune fits well and the lines are rendered almost hauntingly, especially with the sound effects in the background from birds etc.

When they get to Weathertop we get a clear sense of the place from Merry's description;

And very cheerless and uninviting it looks! There is no water and no shelter. And no sign of Gandalf. Mind you, I don't blame him for not waiting, if he ever came here.

A larger description of Weathertop would probably have been out of place, but this brief description from a disapointed Hobbit says it all. Which is something I liked about this production; the descriptions didn't seem to take up too much space, we get a great sense of the area from the sound effects and the dialogue. This is a good sign of a well produced transition from book to radio. It is so easy for long and enjoyable pieces of prose to be given to a Narator, or, slightly more foolishly, to a character. This does not always work, in my opinion. The Narator is a tool best used scarecely.

The Nazgul are scary! The Lord of the Nazgul has an amusingly British voice, I noticed. As if he spends his time, when not hunting Hobbits, sat at home with a cup of tea and a pipe. :D

Glorfindel isn't great, I have to admit. Something about him in this version makes him seem constantly worried. But given the situation they are supposed to be in, I think I can forgive them this, however, because he never appears again, it's hard to know if this is supposed to be the character or simply a reaction.

When we come to the Council of Elrond I think we have a dreadfully well crafted arrangement. There is so much material in that scene it would be nigh impossible to record it all in a dramatised format without it seeming dull. With the Dwarves story we have a good idea; inter-cut with dialogue from the messenger of Mordor. This works well and gives an indication as to how they must have felt with such a messenger with seemingly kind words.
Then there is Boromir. No Sean Bean, but still a good performance, especially here. The 'Seek for the Sword' poem hurts my ears, though.

The episode ends at the right place. Frodo accepting the Ring bourdain. After all the talk and discussion, this one decision is, I think, a monumental point in the narrative. Making it a 'cliff hanger' was the right decision, I think, to make it stand out as such.

Brian Sibley

02-24-2008, 02:49 PM

(davem scans his posts nervously to make sure he hasn't said anything bad......)

And in case anyone is uncertain, this is the real Brian Sibley. As I noted earlier I emailed Mr Sibley

Yes, davem, this is about as real as it gets! ;)

What is intriguing is to read people writing about the radio series having heard it for the very first time! Anyway, here are a couple of responses/answers/amplifications...

Not surprisingly, many people commented on what they see (or hear) as being weak or ineffectual sound-effects but, of course, 27 years ago (before digital radio and THX sound) they sounded a lot better...

That is not an excuse - just a fact! It is like watching an old black and white movie and saying that it's not as good because it isn't in colour or that the back projection effects weren't very convincing... Any work of art (and I think the radio LOTR is that, wherever and however flawed) has to be viewed - or heard - with some regard to when it was created...

(But, for what it's worth, I never liked the eagle wings!!;) )

On the use of material from sources other than LOTR: these were all copyright-cleared with the Tolkien estate and included 'The Hobbit', 'Unfinished Tales' and 'Bilbo's Last Song'.

Maybe it was a mistake to include The Hunt for the Ring; I wonder whether people feel the same about the Gandalf/Saruman/Gwaihir scenes that (in the book) are not revealed until the Council of Elrond at Rivendell?

Appropriateness of voices: this is interesting - even in 1981, people wrote to me to say that actor 'X' sounded absolutely like So-and-so, whereas actor 'Y' was completely wrong! How much harder it is since the films which are now so strongly imprinted on everyone's mind that a lot of the Tolkien fan-art that I see is simply a version of the characters as seen in the Jackson movies.

On the question of whether Jackson could have told the story more fully: the answer is, surely, yes! It wasn't that Jackson had less time (he had almost as much as the radio production and many things can be shown quicker on film than in dialogue and spoken exposition); but he made choices - just as we did on radio - and his choices included long battles (over-long some might say!) and many invented scenes to develop the emotional/romantic relationships (the Arwen/Aragorn/Eowyn love-triangle) or to build suspense (like the warg attack and the faux Aragorn death); I think that some of those choices served PJ's story better than they did Tolkien's...

Anyway, thanks for all the new perspectives and apologies for whatever gaffs and errors you uncover - many of which I have lived with and longed to put right in the subsequent two-and-a-half decades!!

I hope people won't be too outraged when I say I was very surprised to discover that the radio series was on YouTube and, whilst I love the fact that people are still discovering this series, I am sorry that it is out there is a form that disregards the copyright interests of a lot of people including the Tolkien estate, the dramatists, composer, musicians and actors or their estates.

Still, thanks for a nice welcome and I'll try to comment from time to time when I've anything useful to say and if and when I can remember anything... ;)

Gwathagor

02-24-2008, 03:09 PM

Wow...Brian Sibley...:eek:

Thank you, Mr. Sibley, for making the radio series such a faithful, spirited adaptation. It's outstanding.

Gwathagor

02-24-2008, 03:11 PM

On the road to Weathertop we get Sam's rendition of Gilgalad's poem, me absolute favorite version. The tune fits well and the lines are rendered almost hauntingly, especially with the sound effects in the background from birds etc.

Probably my favorite part of the entire series.

davem

02-24-2008, 03:15 PM

Butterbur is dreadfully amusing in this episode. His voice has always stuck with me when reading the books, especially at these points, with the selling of the Pony and the discussions with Strider. But is it just me or does Strider say "We shall see" an awful lot? ;)

I've always loved James Grout's turn as Butterbur - he never seems to get much of a mention in reviews, but his performance is wonderful - especially in the final episode where Gandalf & the Hobbits return to the Pony on their way home.

On the road to Weathertop we get Sam's rendition of Gilgalad's poem, me absolute favorite version. The tune fits well and the lines are rendered almost hauntingly, especially with the sound effects in the background from birds etc.

This is something I was going to bring up too - whenever I read the book I always hear Stephen Oliver's settings for the songs.

Glorfindel isn't great, I have to admit. Something about him in this version makes him seem constantly worried. But given the situation they are supposed to be in, I think I can forgive them this, however, because he never appears again, it's hard to know if this is supposed to be the character or simply a reaction

Its obviously difficult to introduce a character, have him appear for a few minutes, & then disappear for good. I suppose its easier to omit them altogether. At this point you have to introduce a new character - Bakshi went for an early intro of Legolas, Jackson chose Arwen, the adaptors of this production went for Glorfindel, & I'm glad he got a name check in at least one adaptation! I wonder if his sounding constantly worried was the actor's choice, the director's or the adaptors'?

Not surprisingly, many people commented on what they see (or hear) as being weak or ineffectual sound-effects but, of course, 27 years ago (before digital radio and THX sound) they sounded a lot better...

That is not an excuse - just a fact! It is like watching an old black and white movie and saying that it's not as good because it isn't in colour or that the back projection effects weren't very convincing... Any work of art (and I think the radio LOTR is that, wherever and however flawed) has to be viewed - or heard - with some regard to when it was created...

I wonder if that's why I don't really have a problem with the sound effects - I heard this series back when it was first broadcast & so they sounded pretty much 'state of the art' to me. I think in a way when you listen to a radio series over & over you always kind of go back mentally to the first time you heard it.

I hope people won't be too outraged when I say I was very surprised to discover that the radio series was on YouTube and, whilst I love the fact that people are still discovering this series, I am sorry that it is out there is a form that disregards the copyright interests of a lot of people including the Tolkien estate, the dramatists, composer, musicians and actors or their estates.

As I was the one who originally posted the links to the You Tube LotR section I feel a bit guilty - though as I said I did it in all innocence & removed the links as soon as their illegality was pointed up. I can only say that I my own copies are perfectly legal, on both cassette & CD (the BBC CD set in the black & gold 'book' format is probably the nicest edition - if anyone's interested)

Gwathagor

02-24-2008, 03:24 PM

I've seen that version in processing at the Wade Center and coveted it once or twice, mainly for the 14th CD. :( I own the boxed CD version with the Grey Havens illustration, which isn't quite as nice as the gold and black.

Brian Sibley

02-24-2008, 05:18 PM

I've always loved James Grout's turn as Butterbur - he never seems to get much of a mention in reviews, but his performance is wonderful - especially in the final episode where Gandalf & the Hobbits return to the Pony on their way home.

I so agree. Of the smaller roles, my personal favourites are James Grout as Butterbur, John Bott as Farmer Maggot, Stephen Thorne as Treebeard and Peter Howell as Saruman. Obviously Saruman is not as 'developed' as in the films, but then we didn't make up quite so much stuff about him -- and we killed him off!!

As I was the one who originally posted the links to the You Tube LotR section I feel a bit guilty - though as I said I did it in all innocence & removed the links as soon as their illegality was pointed up. I can only say that I my own copies are perfectly legal, on both cassette & CD (the BBC CD set in the black & gold 'book' format is probably the nicest edition - if anyone's interested)

Nothing to feel guilty about! :) You behaved quite properly. As to the best set: I think it is the last one produced - digitally re-mastered and with the new prologues and epilogues with Ian Holm. BTW, as a trivia note for anyone with this version: the closing credits are read by --- me!

This version was also issued, for a while, in a round ring-shaped tin and had with it a bonus disc with a 70+ minute documentary entitled 'Microphones in Middle-earth' - written and presented by myself with Michael Bakewell, Jane Morgan, Bill Nighy, John McAndrew, Marion Diamond and several Rings fans.

What I wish was available is the original 26 episode version which truly reflects how I structured the series and how Michael Bakewell I dramatised it. I have it on personal cassettes, but the original masters were edited to make the 13 hour version and so no longer exist.

Hookbill the Goomba

02-24-2008, 05:32 PM

davem

02-24-2008, 05:33 PM

As to the best set: I think it is the last one produced - digitally re-mastered and with the new prologues and epilogues with Ian Holm. BTW, as a trivia note for anyone with this version: the closing credits are read by --- me!

This version was also issued, for a while, in a round ring-shaped tin and had with it a bonus disc with a 70+ minute documentary entitled 'Microphones in Middle-earth' - written and presented by myself with Michael Bakewell, Jane Morgan, Bill Nighy, John McAndrew, Marion Diamond and several Rings fans.

I didn't know about that documentary :( Actually, I'd only just bought the gold & black set (for £80!!)) when that one came out, so I swallowed my disappointment & have now convinced myself that I have the best version..... Bet its not available seperately though, is it? i do have your 'Audio Portrait' set, & a tape of the Fired by the Ring documentary (with a bit of Oz Clarke's singing missing in the middle due to having to turn the tape over.....

What I wish was available is the original 26 episode version which truly reflects how I structured the series and how Michael Bakewell I dramatised it. I have it on personal cassettes, but the original masters were edited to make the 13 hour version and so no longer exist.

That's the version I'd like to have actually - I still half hear it while listening to the re-edited versions - at the 'cliff-hangers' - if you see what I mean. I can't believe they edited the originaltapes:eek:

Brian Sibley

02-24-2008, 05:51 PM

A quick question for you, Mr Brian; were you involved in the BBC Radio adaptation of Tales from the Perilous Realm? I enjoyed those and felt that Bombadill was portrayed as well as could be expected, the voice did fit, I felt, and the performance was good. The Farmer Giles one still makes me laugh, especially Garm.

Yes, I dramatised the six episodes (2 'Farmer Giles'; 2 'Bombadil'; 1 each, 'Smith of Wootton Major' and 'Leaf by Niggle'); in fact I also played the Giant in Farmer Giles and the dragon was played by Stephen (Treebeard) Thorne. The series was narrated by Michael (Gandalf) Hordern. It is available on cassette and CD.

But, back to The Lord of the Rings...

Where the Radio version gets interesting is in the feeling of the surroundings. You apologised earlier for the sound effects, but I felt they worked perfectly. I assume it was the Radio phonix workshop or some such, but it seemed that the background noises was exquisitely executed. Although, the only criticism I ever bring is the Nazgul's horses sound a bit weird, not sure why.
The greatest achievement of the Radio production is how faithful it is. I suppose I am comparing it to the recent films (and the not so recent films), but still. I think a serial is the only way to do The Lord of the Rings justice, really. Too much material for a truly faithful film.

I do hope that the fact that I'm reading this thread won't inhibit contributors too much, because I'm genuinely interested to read people's honest - uncensored! - thoughts and comments... :)

Hookbill the Goomba

02-24-2008, 05:56 PM

Yes, I dramatised the six episodes (2 'Farmer Giles'; 2 'Bombadil'; 1 each, 'Smith of Wootton Major' and 'Leaf by Niggle'); in fact I also played the Giant in Farmer Giles and the dragon was played by Stephen (Treebeard) Thorne. The series was narrated by Michael (Gandalf) Hordern. It is available on cassette and CD.

Yes, I've just found my long lost copy. :D

I have always had a great fondness for the dramatised versions. Probably because they were the only audio version I had for many years while I was still not such a great reader. This doesn't mean there aren't bits that annoy me (the Eagle's song in Return of the King is one thing I always skip), but I think I'll have to give them another good listen if I can find my old tapes...

Brian Sibley

02-24-2008, 06:01 PM

Yes, I've just found my long lost copy. :D

I have always had a great fondness for the dramatised versions... This doesn't mean there aren't bits that annoy me (the Eagle's song in Return of the King is one thing I always skip)...

Yes...... I know what you mean!! Counter-tenor eagles... Strange! Maybe Jackson was right not to do talking birds; still, if he does have an involvement with 'The Hobbit'...

William Cloud Hicklin

02-24-2008, 06:22 PM

One reason the BBC version is so successful for me is its willingness to make use of Tolkien's original text to as great an extent as practicable. Tolkien's prose is a significant factor in the spell he weaves, and it irks me no end that the scripts for the film adaptation of The Lord of the Rings, of all books, should have been written by people with such manifestly tin ears for Language.

Hmmmm- BTW, do you think we should invite Sauron the White to this thread, just to show him there's a 'cinderblock' we Purists do like?

Gwathagor

02-24-2008, 09:09 PM

But we're having a perfectly good party without him. Maybe we can show it to him after the fact?

ArathornJax

02-24-2008, 09:16 PM

Well I am going to start listening to disc 1 tomorrow on my way to and from work. Then I'll post up what I have enjoyed, and why. I guess this thread has helped me to boost up my time table on listening to these again (though it doesn't take much prompting).

I have to agree with the singing eagle, that part I usually skip. I also enjoy listening to Treebeard on these as well as the Witch King. The part where the Nazgul are searching for the ring and news of the Shired, and come across Grima is one example of why I really like this series.

Brian Sibley

02-25-2008, 12:39 AM

The part where the Nazgul are searching for the ring and news of the Shire, and come across Grima is one example of why I really like this series.

This is another scene drawn from Tolkien's 'Unfinished Tales'.

Generally, wherever possible, I tried to dramatise events that, in the book, were only reported by someone else.

davem

02-25-2008, 01:04 AM

Yes...... I know what you mean!! Counter-tenor eagles... Strange! Maybe Jackson was right not to do talking birds; still, if he does have an involvement with 'The Hobbit'...

No! I think that scene worked perfectly - inter-cutting the Eagle's song with Eowyn & Faramir, & then going straight into the Coronation.

Of course, the problem, again, is what, exactly, would an Eagle's voice sound like? Its fine to read the words on the page - you can accept a speaking/singing Eagle as easily as you accept a talking tree, but creating a convincing voice must be a real difficulty. I wonder if this isn't exactly the kind of thing Tolkien was thinking of when he said that the book was 'unsuitable for dramatic representation' - that there are things in the book which, given auditory or visual form, will not work - well, not for everybody.

Estelyn Telcontar

02-25-2008, 03:25 AM

I spent a lot of time last year listening to the minor works dramatizations, and my favourite was definitely the Farmer Giles story - I thought the voices were absolutely perfect, enjoyed the accents very much, and still like to hear it, even after so many times. My least favourite was the Smith version - for some reason, I wasn't enthused about Smith's monologues, nor of the voice that spoke the part. I think they made the whole story seem too mundane to me.

I have heard (twice) a version of the BBC LotR dramatization that I enjoyed greatly - the Cambridge Society did parts of it (they had done the whole thing, with permission) in Birmingham at "Tolkien 2005" and at Oxonmoot last year. Both times, I was greatly moved by the performance, which used sound effects from the radio recording; the counter-tenor sang the Eagle's song live, quite effectively to my mind. Not all of the Cambridge voices were as good as the original, but quality can take an adaptation without significant loss.

Hookbill the Goomba

02-25-2008, 03:32 AM

My least favourite was the Smith version - for some reason, I wasn't enthused about Smith's monologues, nor of the voice that spoke the part. I think they made the whole story seem too mundane to me.

I think this is the problem faced by dramatising Tolkien's work. Because they are so full of prose and description it is hard to transfer that over to radio. I do get annoyed at any radio production where you have a character spending a long time describing the place they have walked into. It works better with two characters in dialogue talking about how they feel about the room, but with one character it is hard to find a way of doing it right. Farmer Giles was good (Brian 'Should be Thorin' Blessed was excellent), but Garm annoyed me at the beginning.

The episode in discussion at the moment is in a good place. You have a lot of character who can discuss the surroundings. Good Tolkien phrases can be interspursed between the appropriate characters. Sometimes when you have a good piece of description or whatever, it's tempting to give it all to one character, but I think it works better distributed. Sounds more natural.

Brian Sibley

02-25-2008, 04:19 AM

I have heard (twice) a version of the BBC LotR dramatization that I enjoyed greatly - the Cambridge Society did parts of it (they had done the whole thing, with permission) in Birmingham at "Tolkien 2005" and at Oxonmoot last year. Both times, I was greatly moved by the performance, which used sound effects from the radio recording; the counter-tenor sang the Eagle's song live, quite effectively to my mind. Not all of the Cambridge voices were as good as the original, but quality can take an adaptation without significant loss.

They did it first, I think, in Cambridge and I attended the event for part of the day and played Elrond in several scenes. I totally agree that the experience was very moving - it was like a tale-telling around the fire in a long hall... I really wish I could have attended and taken part in one of the later readings...

I had hoped that the BBC and the Tolkien Estate might one day find a way of publishing the scripts - suitably corrected, of course! There was interest at the BBC when the films came out, but none now...

Meanwhile they are, of course, on the net as transcripts - though I haven't checked their accuracy. Curiously, I know that the Cambridge folk did their OWN transcription which was, as far as I know, pretty accurate. Maybe I should try and persuade the BBC to put up a full, accurate transcription, scanned from the scripts... :)

Trouble is, they wouldn't be prepared to pay anyone involved for the use of the material either! Despite the fact that it was for many years their best-selling audio book... It's hard to even get them concerned about the fact that the series is being uploaded in various forms all over the www... One such site currently reports 5000 downloads, which for working writers and actors represents a lot of potentially lost income.

Of course, not everyone who downloads would otherwise have BOUGHT the work, but I've read many postings on forums saying thank you for saving them the cost of purchasing it... Which is a bit hard to swallow... :mad:

You see, I'd love to OWN a Van Gogh but can't AFFORD one - so would that justify my stealing one? Probably not...

End of rant! ;)

Brian Sibley

02-25-2008, 04:25 AM

The episode in discussion at the moment is in a good place. You have a lot of character who can discuss the surroundings. Good Tolkien phrases can be interspursed between the appropriate characters. Sometimes when you have a good piece of description or whatever, it's tempting to give it all to one character, but I think it works better distributed. Sounds more natural.

Well, it's never really natural - we hardly ever say things like "Look at that strange shaped hill over there with what looks like a ruined castle on top..." or whatever, but I know what you mean!

The biggest problem came later in the series when (as in the second half of the third volume, Tolkien recounts things rather than writing them in dialogue. Very difficult. Glad you liked 'Giles' (know what you mean about 'Smith' it really only works in that little book with Pauline Baynes' wonderful little pictures) and trust you enjoyed the performance of the actor playing the giant!! ;)

zxcvbn

02-25-2008, 06:29 AM

Brian Sibley, are you really THE Brian Sibley, the famous author and writer of the 1980's BBC Adaptation of LOTR as well as recent books on the making of the film trilogy?

Brian Sibley

02-25-2008, 06:44 AM

Brian Sibley, are you really THE Brian Sibley, the famous author and writer of the 1980's BBC Adaptation of LOTR as well as recent books on the making of the film trilogy?

Ha-ha! Yes, of course I am! Except I am not THAT famous!

If you don't believe me, check out my web-site, www.briansibley.com and blog-spot, www.briansibleysblog.blogspot.com. That (and this) is me! :)

davem

02-25-2008, 06:49 AM

'Giles' (know what you mean about 'Smith' it really only works in that little book with Pauline Baynes' wonderful little pictures) and trust you enjoyed the performance of the actor playing the giant!! ;)

I have to admit that Smith is the only one of the four adaptations I don't really get on with. Its not the script, & I like the actors (Paul Copley I've loved since I heard him reading reading from Pilgrim's Progress on tv many years ago, & I think James Grout was also involved as Nokes??), but somehow it just wasn't Smith for me. Of course Pauline Baynes illustrations are integral to the story & thankfully the latest edition, edited by Verlyn Flieger reinstates them. There is an edition of Tolkien's short stories, including Smith, Niggle, Giles, Roverandom & the Bombadil verses out later this year (with a new cover painting by Alan Lee apparently) which I'm hoping will also include the Baynes illustrations.

Just a quick one - the transcripts I'm linking to for the series - are they entirely legal? If not I can remove the links to them too. I'm now ever so slightly paranioid about this stuff....:eek:

Brian Sibley

02-25-2008, 06:59 AM

I have to admit that Smith is the only one of the four adaptations I don't really get on with. Its not the script, & I like the actors (Paul Copley I've loved since I heard him reading reading from Pilgrim's Progress on tv many years ago, & I think James Grout was also involved as Nokes??), but somehow it just wasn't Smith for me. Of course Pauline Baynes illustrations are integral to the story & thankfully the latest edition, edited by Verlyn Flieger reinstates them. There is an edition of Tolkien's short stories, including Smith, Niggle, Giles, Roverandom & the Bombadil verses out later this year (with a new cover painting by Alan Lee apparently) which I'm hoping will also include the Baynes illustrations.

I hope so to, there has been an increasing attempt to 'hide' the Baynes illustrations (all the paperback covers are now by other artists) which is stupid because they ARE the picture for the books - just E H Shepard's illustrations to 'Winnie-the-Pooh' are THE only likenesses of Pooh & Co that matter...

Just a quick one - the transcripts I'm linking to for the series - are they entirely legal? If not I can remove the links to them too. I'm now ever so slightly paranioid about this stuff....:eek:

They're probably not strictly legal, but it's a rather different situation to the downloads of the actual programmes, since they are not competing with any published book. I don't think anyone is likely to be too bothered - unless someone started printing them out and selling them... So I really wouldn't worry! :)

Lalwendë

02-25-2008, 10:18 AM

This one started with more of a fright than episode 2 with the Eagles that sounded a bit like the echo of a Tardis. The Nazgul really are scary in the radio version, I'd forgotten about that! That matches up with Tolkien's way of describing horror in very sparse tones, leaving plenty of gaps around the edges for the imagination to fill in the rest of the details...hearing a horror is so much more effective than seeing a horror in all it's detail.

They scared the cat too. ;)

I was very pleased to hear one of my favourite little details included in Episode 3 - Bilbo chunnering about how the Council has been going on for ages and it's getting dangerously close to his dinnertime - it reminds me of being in boring meetings (although the Council of Elrond wouldn't be boring...surely?) and clock-watching for the tea trolley and plates of sandwiches to appear ;)

Now following the films and the splendid Boromir it's very odd indeed to hear someone different portraying him when I've grown so used to the idea of Sean Bean in the role. In contrast to that, Elrond sounded better (sorry Mithalwen) on the radio. And as the lone person who didn't much care for the portrayal of Rivendell in the films (too girly) I enjoyed being able to imagine it for myself and the crackling fireplaces and Bilbo's words conjour up an idea of a quiet, scholarly place, unchanged for many centuries. After hearing that, I'm beginning to wonder if maybe Tolkien intended Rivendell to be like an alpine Oxford college? Hmmm...

I was also free to imagine Weathertop as a version of Silbury Hill.

Listening to this every Sunday has taken me back to the 80s, as that's when I first heard this, on Radio 4, Sunday afternoons after my dinner. You notice different things too, as you are having to concentrate all your thoughts just on listening rather than being distracted by pictures in a film or jumping ahead in the text when reading. That makes me remember again about how my old boss who was (is!) blind and would read by means of voiced texts had an amazing recall of tiny details - I'm sure a psychologist would be able to say what this phenomena is.

zxcvbn

02-25-2008, 11:19 AM

Ha-ha! Yes, of course I am! Except I am not THAT famous!

If you don't believe me, check out my web-site, www.briansibley.com and blog-spot, www.briansibleysblog.blogspot.com. That (and this) is me! :)
Well, then I'm pleased to make your acquantaince. I didn't think High Folk such as yourself would mingle with us common plebians.;)

I have a question; would you be writing books on the making of the Hobbit film as well? If sopleasr include details on the varous lawsuits that had to be resolved before it finally got made.

Brian Sibley

02-25-2008, 12:03 PM

Well, then I'm pleased to make your acquantaince. I didn't think High Folk such as yourself would mingle with us common plebians.;)

I have a question; would you be writing books on the making of the Hobbit film as well? If so pleas include details on the varous lawsuits that had to be resolved before it finally got made.

I may be, but I'm told there are quite a few writers who want to do the job --- if the film(s) happen. However, I rather doubt that New Line Cinema will be exactly keen on anyone writing about the lawsuits...... :D

MatthewM

02-25-2008, 05:27 PM

Michael Graham Cox (another cast member who has passed away - he died in 1995) was born in 1938, so would have been 40 when the Bakshi movie came out, & 43 when the series did.

Again, its a matter of taste & what sounds right to the individual listener. To me he didn't sound 'old', so much as gruff & haughty. As for 40 being 'young', I can only quote Indiana Jones: "Its not the years, its the mileage...."

I suspect most people would seem young to Theoden. :p

It doesn't matter much, though, that M.G.C. was 43 when the series was created, because Boromir's age cannot be measured by normal man years. Boromir was not "old" by any standards. It is a matter of indiviual opinion, like you said, and M.G.C. just does not fit the bill for me. Boromir's voice, to me, was deep, strong, and clear. M.G.C. does not come across with those qualities in my opinion.

I don't think that comment on Theoden is too fair. He called Boromir young because that was what he was!

ArathornJax

02-25-2008, 07:16 PM

Ok, did listen to the CD's today, while the first one (I started at the beginning and went from there). Here are my thoughts:

First, the opening prologue was really brief and quick. I think it gave the listener a general concept of the rings, without revealing the secret of the one ring.

Gollum's search for the ring was a nice touch, as was his capture near Mordor and his torture. Sorry, I would have to go back into the booklet that came with the CD's (and that would require a lot of effort right now as they are packed away, while they aren't unpacked yet), so is that the Mouth of Sauron who finds Gollum or the Witch King? I assume it is the Mouth of Sauron since he dispatches the nine later on the CD.

I loved the scene at the Inn with the Gaffer and all the other Hobbits gathered together. I think this scene was done extremely well.

The Last Party was also quick yet effective. I loved that the explosion of Gandalf's firework as Bilbo puts on the ring and wish that Peter Jackson had included that in the film version.
I also like after the confrontation between Bilbo and Gandalf at Bag End about Bilbo leaving Frodo the ring, how Bilbo walks out singing The Road Goes Ever On, and how that refrain continues, but fades slowly, signaling that Bilbo's role in this story has also faded out.
I have to share that when my son was younger and the movies were coming out, and he owned and played with some of the Toy Biz Black Rider toys, that he made that sound that is on the BBC tapes that the Black Riders make whenever they attacked his "good guys." I like how the Black Riders sound.
One last thing is the attention to detail like Frodo offering Gandalf the three types of pipe weed to smoke. In memory of Bilbo Gandalf take the Old Tolby. Very nice touch, and great details. The link between Gandalf and the ring, his warnings and final proof that the ring is evil, and is Sauron's ties nicely back to the prologue. Another example is the sounding of the clippers as Sam works around Bag End. Then they fade and shortly thereafter, Sam is caught! Again, nice attention to details I also have to say with the winter we've had here in Utah, it was nice to have the CD's to bring to my mind an image of a spring day with blue sky, fluffy white clouds, a promise of warmth and gardening! What a great job done in creating visual images.

Overall, I have to say that I loved the strings that represent the beginning and the end of each disc. So much here, yet not enough time to go through it all! I can't wait for my journey tomorrow to and from work!

Estelyn Telcontar

02-26-2008, 12:24 PM

I too finally got around to (re-)listening to the first CD today, and enjoyed it very much. For me, hearing Tolkien's own words so faithfully reproduced is an important aspect. So far, I liked all of the voices used.

I do have one minor dissatisfaction - the melody to the Road poem is in a minor key and sounds rather depressing to me. But then, I haven't heard a melody yet that I really thought appropriate, which resulted in my making up my own. Actually, this is one thing I did like better in PJ's movie version - the melody there is cheerful and simple, which seems right for Hobbits.

I did like the sound effect for the Ring - if I remember correctly, the same effect was used on the Hobbit recordings. Interestingly, I think it sounds similar to what the movie used for Arwen's pendent!

davem

02-26-2008, 01:19 PM

For me, hearing Tolkien's own words so faithfully reproduced is an important aspect.

As I've said, I think this is why the series captures the spirit of the book so well. And I think its easy to underestimate what was involved in adapting the work for this reason. You can get the idea that because so much was taken from the book that the adaptors didn't have to do very much. From what I've read/heard about producing this adaptation it was far from easy & there were a number of difficult choices to make. I've mentioned that Brian originally included the encounter with Gildor & omitted the Farmer Maggot scenes, but then changed his mind because he felt that that would work better & was more important.

One thing I wonder about is why the BBC originally went for 26 half-hour episodes, rather than 13 one hour episodes. After all they were pretty quick to edit it into 13 episodes for rebroadcast. I also wonder if Brian & Michael Bakewell would have taken a different approach if they'd been commissioned to do it as 13 hour long episodes in the first place - certainly they'd have needed fewer cliff-hangers ...

Brian Sibley

02-26-2008, 05:58 PM

One thing I wonder about is why the BBC originally went for 26 half-hour episodes, rather than 13 one hour episodes. After all they were pretty quick to edit it into 13 episodes for rebroadcast. I also wonder if Brian & Michael Bakewell would have taken a different approach if they'd been commissioned to do it as 13 hour long episodes in the first place - certainly they'd have needed fewer cliff-hangers ...

The series was originally commissioned for what was a regular 30-minute drama slot. The success prompted the BBC to up-grade to the other regular slot which ran for 60 minutes. I would have certainly approached the division of the material quite differently had it been for hour-long episodes and the cliff-hangers' (many of them phoney or contrived) are now I think a blemish on the 60-minute versions.

Not that it matters after all these years, but the producer found my obsessive attitude towards the material during recording an utter trial (I was almost as defensive of Tolkien's text as Tolkien would have been!) and, as a result, I was not consulted about the amalgamation of the episodes - which I assume was done by the producer with, possibly, the assistance of Michael Bakewell.

This was ironic since I was commissioned to create the original 26 episode structure and was given credit for that work in addition to that for the episodes I dramatised, but the structuring of the 13 hour repeat was carried out without my involvement! The dramatisation as it was originally intended to be heard can, in fact, no longer be heard!!

Meanwhile, my article on the series The Ring Goes Ever On (http://briansibleytheworks.blogspot.com/2008/01/this-page-is-still-under-construction_23.html) has now got its illustrations back and will be expanded as soon as I have time.

ArathornJax

02-26-2008, 08:09 PM

Well, Frodo made it to Crickhollow. I realized how the script was adapted by eliminating the scene with the Elves in Woody End and transitioning after the appearance of the Black Rider the 1st time, to the short-cut and then ending up at Farmer's Maggot. This for me made more sense and I much prefer this adaptation to the one on the movie.

In both versions I miss the running in with the Elves and the conversation that occurs since Gildor sends out messengers that have to run into Aragorn/Dunedain, Elrond at Rivendell. But one cannot have everything one wants.

One of the things that I noticed was the difference between Khamal's voice at Bag End and the Witch King's voice. The voice of Khamal is more along the lines of what I imagine the Black Riders voice to be, whereas the Witch King sounds normal to me. I'd be interested to hear if that was a conscience choice or was it just the way it came out? What do others think of this difference?

Again, I love the use of the UT with the Hunt for the Ring with the Nazgul finding Grima. I also loved in this section today the actor's voice who did Farmer Maggot. I could picture Farmer Maggot in my mind's eye as I listened to him.

Sure made the drive home go by with far more enjoyment! Not sure how my local PBS radio station will like it though as I'll be listening to the adaptation while their drive is going on (I donate at a certain point each year so it won't take away a donation).

davem

02-27-2008, 01:46 AM

Meanwhile, my article on the series The Ring Goes Ever On (http://briansibleytheworks.blogspot.com/2008/01/this-page-is-still-under-construction_23.html) has now got its illustrations back and will be expanded as soon as I have time.

Thanks so much for reinstating the pictures - I especially love the little one from RT about the first episode: seeing that instantly transports me back to March 1981.

Thanks for the link here to the Downs too :)

Estelyn Telcontar

02-27-2008, 02:55 AM

Brian Sibley

02-27-2008, 02:56 AM

Thanks so much for reinstating the pictures - I especially love the little one from RT about the first episode: seeing that instantly transports me back to March 1981.

As you probably know, Eric Fraser drew 26 little head-pieces for the 'Radio Times' billings during the run of the series, although a couple never appeared due to industrial action which meant that the magazine for those weeks appeared only in a very basic, unillustrated, 'emergency' format.

One or two these pictures (which have something in common with Fraser's LOTR decorations for the Folio Society's 'Hobbit' and 'Rings') were used on/in the cassette/cd packaging for a while, but are largely unknown; and - in the case of the ones never printed - unseen!

Thanks for the link here to the Downs too :)

My pleasure. I am really enjoying reliving that journey of so long ago... Just hope my presence on the forum doesn't inhibit free-speech! :) Believe me, after 27 years, I am beyond taking offence! :cool:

Estelyn Telcontar

02-27-2008, 02:59 AM

Just hope my presence on the forum doesn't inhibit free-speech! :)
Not at all! Actually, I think it may serve as an incentive to really dig into this discussion. After all, it gives us a wonderful "getting-to-know-an-insider" feeling... ;)

Brian Sibley

02-27-2008, 03:01 AM

I have a question on pronunciation - I noticed that Sméagol and Déagol were spoken as "Smeegol" and "Deegol". I was under the impression that the vowels are separated into two syllables, as in the movie - Sme-a-gol, De-a-gol. As I read that Christopher Tolkien had given guidelines for pronunciation, which is correct?

As to Peter Woodthorpe's Gollum voice - it's perfect! I love the way he emphasizes the "g" with a swallowing sound when it's at the beginning of a word.

Not sure which is 'correct'; certainly, we followed Christopher Tolkien's pronunciation at the time...

Yes, Woodthorpe is a marvel! I think one or two members of the cast were seriously worried about being upstaged (!), but he fully embodied Gollum and, despite Andy Serkis' remarkable film performance, Woodthorpe's voice is still the one I hear when I read the book...

davem

02-27-2008, 03:17 AM

Not sure which is 'correct'; certainly, we followed Christopher Tolkien's pronunciation at the time...
.

Back on 5th March 1981 (as Brian must remember) there was a bit of an event to launch the series at the Church House Bookshop. I've heard a recording, with Brian, Michael Bakewell, Penny Leicester, Peter Woodthorpe (who did a fantastic live performance of Gollum), David Collings, Stephen Oliver - & I think Raynor Unwin & Eric Fraser were also present....

Anyway, at the event Brian played the first few minutes of the tape Christopher recorded as a pronunciation guide, & Christopher points out there that the correct pronunciation is the one used in the series (& by Tolkien himself) - ie 'Smeegol' & 'Deegol' as opposed to 'Smay-a-gol' & 'Day-a-gol'.

Brian Sibley

02-27-2008, 03:24 AM

Back on 5th March 1981 (as Brian must remember)....

Er... just! :rolleyes:

Anyway, at the event Brian played the first few minutes of the tape Christopher recorded as a pronunciation guide, & Christopher points out there that the correct pronunciation is the one used in the series (& by Tolkien himself) - ie 'Smeegol' & 'Deegol' as opposed to 'Smay-a-gol' & 'Day-a-gol'.

Phew! That's a relief!

Essex

02-27-2008, 05:17 AM

and, despite Andy Serkis' remarkable film performance, Woodthorpe's voice is still the one I hear when I read the book...And for me as well - you wouldn't believe the trouble I had trying to copy this accent when reading the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings out to my son during bed times over the past year or so. And he loves listening to the radio adaptations in the car too.

Just a couple of questions if I may Brian? (and apologies if they've been asked before - i haven't read through all the posts fully)

I used to have the original 13 cassette version until someone 'borrowed' it! So I went out and got the updated CD version you mentioned earlier on in the thread. Did you have any concerns on having Frodo narrate the bookends to each part of the trilogy in the new version, i.e. 'giving away' the point that Frodo survived? Or do you think, becasue of the mass exposure lotr now has across all media that most people would know he survived anyway?

One silly thing, I usually have the music cd from the new collection on the car - was there a reason why 'In Western Lands beneath the Sun' is earlier on in the list when the rest are in chronological order? Sorry for such a silly question - it is a beautiful song - I was seriosuly hoping for SOMETHING like this to be in the films - Sam's hopelesness - feeling utterly defeated as he can't find Frodo - then singing this beautiful song - it brings a tear to my eye when both reading the book or listening to your adaption.

Last thing (for now!) - I think the way Robert Stephens changes his voice from 'yokel' Strider to more 'kingly' aragorn as we travel with him from weathertop to rivendell and beyond was a marvel. your idea or Robert's? PS - One of the biggest regrets of my life was not seeing Mr Stephens in King Lear before he died a few years ago- hang on I've just read his biog - he died 12 years ago. - I can't believe it!

Brian Sibley

02-27-2008, 05:35 AM

Just a couple of questions if I may, Brian...

I used to have the original 13 cassette version until someone 'borrowed' it! So I went out and got the updated CD version you mentioned earlier on in the thread. Did you have any concerns on having Frodo narrate the bookends to each part of the trilogy in the new version, i.e. 'giving away' the point that Frodo survived? Or do you think, becasue of the mass exposure lotr now has across all media that most people would know he survived anyway?

Well, the second part of your question pretty much sums it up....

We deliberately chose NOT to use Frodo as narrator when the dramatisation was written, for the very reason you mention. And, of course, he couldn't narrate to the end of the story, since he leaves BEFORE the end! :) (Which is why the 'new' version only has a prologue and no epilogue to TROTK.)

We did consider using Sam, but felt that would reduce the tension and - despite the arguments of one reviewer who said we SHOULD have used him - it would have been difficult for Sam to narrate the events in which he was not involved...

By the time we did the 'new' version, I thought - because of the films - that it no longer mattered quite as much and it enabled me to create a 'story-so-far' introduction so that TTT and TROTK could be sold and listened to as stand-alone recordings...

One silly thing, I usually have the music cd from the new collection on the car - was there a reason why 'In Western Lands beneath the Sun' is earlier on in the list when the rest are in chronological order? Sorry for such a silly question - it is a beautiful song - I was seriosuly hoping for SOMETHING like this to be in the films - Sam's hopelesness - feeling utterly defeated as he can't find Frodo - then singing this beautiful song - it brings a tear to my eye when both reading the book or listening to your adaption.

Not silly, but I honestly don't know why Stephen Oliver made that decision - unless it was dictated by the length and number of tracks that would fit on the original LP... We ought to have fixed that on the CD... :(

Last thing (for now!) - I think the way Robert Stephens changes his voice from 'yokel' Strider to more 'kingly' aragorn as we travel with him from weathertop to rivendell and beyond was a marvel. your idea or Robert's? PS - One of the biggest regrets of my life was not seeing Mr Stephens in King Lear before he died a few years ago- hang on I've just read his biog - he died 12 years ago. - I can't believe it!

I think this was down to an inspired combination of Robert's performance and Jane Morgan's direction.

Mithalwen

02-27-2008, 12:58 PM

Mithalwen & I have been praising this series on various threads here over the years & I'm sure she will be as thrilled as I am about Brian's appearance here on the Downs.:D

Thrilled? I nearly fainted when I had a quick look at lunchtime and have been in a similar state to Sam on hearing he would go to meet the elves all afternoon!

As Dave has said, we have been praising this on other threads for years so to get any discussion going was wonderful (I will be participating more, I was anticipating some time off, or at least a reduced workload which hasn't yet materialised). I still can't quite believe it.

I was quite young when it first came out - I heard the hour episodes and am afraid I made my own recordings which I listened to endlessly (I bought the true recordings as soon as I could! and are one of the few things I wouldn't lend anyone!). I did have the music cassette which I wore out.

The series had a great effect on me . It turned me into a Radio four listener younger than most ) and also a fan of Counter tenors [ on a side issue that has been raised I would point out that it is not unusual to use the countertenor voice for non-human roles - eg Oberon in Britten's Midsummer Night's Dream].

It may even have been the radio series that led me to finish reading the LOTR. I had been given it after reading the Hobbit (after the Jackanory production) but had stopped at the end of the Two Towers the second half of which had been a long bleak haul for a very young reader. Those chapters I found so difficult are perhaps my favourite parts of the Radio production - the interaction between Frodo, Sam and Gollum (and Faramir) was just perfect.

Although I listen to the series at least a couple of times a year, and know the plot I still find myself on tenterhooks. I hope you will stay around because once I have calmed down I shall have as many questions as Pippin. But don't let taht put you off!

:D

Macalaure

02-27-2008, 01:09 PM

I hope people won't be too outraged when I say I was very surprised to discover that the radio series was on YouTube and, whilst I love the fact that people are still discovering this series, I am sorry that it is out there is a form that disregards the copyright interests of a lot of people including the Tolkien estate, the dramatists, composer, musicians and actors or their estates.

It seems I am the only one posting to this thread that is using Youtube to listen to the BBC radio adaptation. I am not downloading it anywhere, however, and now that I listened to, and greatly enjoyed, the first three episodes, I definitely intend to purchase it in the near future.

Maybe it was a mistake to include The Hunt for the Ring; I wonder whether people feel the same about the Gandalf/Saruman/Gwaihir scenes that (in the book) are not revealed until the Council of Elrond at Rivendell?

It has its benefits and drawbacks, I would say, but whereas the Black Riders are a real mystery in the Book, I think the disappearance of Gandalf is a lesser one. One always has the feeling that Gandalf is going to appear again eventually (certainly after Weathertop), and it is only the circumstances under which this happens that one wonders about.

I have to say that, during the third episode, I am more and more getting used to the voice of Aragorn. Maybe it is really nothing more than “getting used”, maybe it has something to do with the more kingly voice that Essex mentioned.

I take back all my criticism of the Nazgûl not being scary. In this episode they were, especially on Weathertop. What I really liked was the way Frodo described the Ringwraiths the way he saw them when he wore the ring. That was very tense.

Handling the Council of Elrond was probably not easy, but the immense amount of information was conveyed without significant loss and, more important maybe, without a loss of dramatic fluidity. The criticisms I have about it are minor in comparison to this. One is Legolas’s role, which is very brief and, although it is hard for me to say it, almost redundant, because we already learnt of his news from Gwaihir. The other one is, that it is not clear how much courage Frodo shows in saying “I will take the ring”. In the book, there is a long meaningful silence before he speaks. This has to be very tricky to convey in an adaptation for the radio.

The sound effects have been talked about a lot. Even though I am listening to them now for the first time, and not when they were first released (only shortly after my birth!), I actually don’t think they’re that bad. The effects are in the background and do not distract from the story, which is just like effects ought to be ideally. Their quality might not be breathtaking, but because of this, it is never a problem.

Mithalwen

02-27-2008, 01:40 PM

May I ask whether you knew who was playing the major roles before you finished the script? And whethet that influenced you at all. I have to say I think most of the casting was at least equal if not superior to the films. Highly superior in regard to Frodo, Sam, Gollum and Gandalf.

The film seemed to base the character of Sam purely on Gollum's stupid, fat hobbit jibe. Bill Nighy got him just right to my mind but he surely was quite young then and certainly a lot less well known than now - I know he had done some good TV work before he achieved Hollywood fame in Love Actually et alia but I knew him because of the Radio production of LOTR - or at least wondered if William Nighy and Bill were one and the same.

I also think that David Collings was a great choice as Legolas. His voice is very distinctive and happily still heard regularly on R4, but it conveys that elvish otherness without being at all camp.

Brian Sibley

02-27-2008, 04:33 PM

Handling the Council of Elrond was probably not easy, but the immense amount of information was conveyed without significant loss and, more important maybe, without a loss of dramatic fluidity.

A good example of superb writing by my co-adaptor, Michael Bakewell. I laid out a precise of which topics had to be covered, but he was the one who crafted the whole and made sense of it.

Yes, it did need a longer pause before Frodo's declaration... And I hate the tinny dinner-bell that sounds so feeble, but there are some great performances and I particularly like the way in which Hugh Dickson as Elrond steers the event...

Brian Sibley

02-27-2008, 04:52 PM

May I ask whether you knew who was playing the major roles before you finished the script?

No, I think most of the scripts had been written before casting began, although we were talking about possible actors from the moment we started work and I suspect that everyone was in agreement that Woodthorpe would have to be Gollum!

Brian Sibley

02-27-2008, 04:54 PM

Thrilled? I nearly fainted when I had a quick look at lunchtime and have been in a similar state to Sam on hearing he would go to meet the elves all afternoon! :D

Er... thanks... :o

ArathornJax

02-27-2008, 11:55 PM

Well, today I listened to the journey from Crickhollow to the Prancing Pony to Bree, then through the Midgewater Marshes to Weathertop.

What I enjoyed:
I really enjoyed how though by-passing the Old Forest the four hobbits make it clear that they are "going off the road" and going through the Old Forest on their way to Bree. This gave me the possibility that the events on the book on the Old Forest occurred, while allowing the adaptation to move on. I enjoyed this and again, this is something I wish the movies could have done.

I love Barliman's character and the actor doing his voice nailed it. I know that Gollum may be the Gollum others hear when they read the series, this is what I hear for Barliman's voice.

I enjoyed the 'fiddle" in the Prancing Pony and felt it was a good back drop since inn's have been associated with music and "fiddles" at least here in the US. I was glad that the song was included because I think it shows Frodo in a different light than at any other time during the journey. I enjoyed the Inn scene.

I know there is a thread on Aragorn, and I still have not seen or heard someone who is Aragorn for me. Robert Stephens does a very good job with Aragorn, but I still haven't found the Aragorn in my mind. Not sure why.

The journey from Bree to Weathertop I felt is done nicely and moves the story forward. I love the Gil-Galad song by Sam, and it was this song that got my daughter to read LOTR. Before hearing this, she felt it was something for me and my son and she wanted to read her own fantasy selections/choices, for which I'm glad I've worn off on her).

Questions on this Segment:

I understand the need to cut Tom Bombadil out of the adaptation but was the hobbits conservation about going through the Old Forest to avoid the riders and the road a way to allow listeners familiar with the story the notion that the advents of the Old Forest occurred, while allow for the story to move forward?

Tolkien himself said that Tom was important or he wouldn't have kept him in the story. What do you think we lose by taking Tom out of any adaptation, and what is gained?

Perhaps this leads to another question, what was the process for deciding what to add in, what to not include to the story? Is there still anything you would want to add if you still could to the adaptation, or are you happy with the overall product now?

I look forward to listening again tomorrow.

Brian Sibley

02-28-2008, 02:06 AM

It seems I am the only one posting to this thread that is using Youtube to listen to the BBC radio adaptation. I am not downloading it anywhere, however, and now that I listened to, and greatly enjoyed, the first three episodes, I definitely intend to purchase it in the near future.

Thank you! I'm sorry to have made everyone so jumpy about this issue - I think the age we live in makes us all (myself included) take the availability of things (books, music, films and facts) via the internet for granted... I'm told that, in surveys, the current generation think that all music is FREE and I suspect they think the same about movies...

Anyway, if and when you do buy the radio LOTR, you'll find most of the still available versions (past and present) listed at the end of the article, The Ring Goes Ever On (http://briansibleytheworks.blogspot.com/2008/01/this-page-is-still-under-construction_23.html), on my web-site.

Brian Sibley

02-28-2008, 02:42 AM

I really enjoyed how though by-passing the Old Forest the four hobbits make it clear that they are "going off the road" and going through the Old Forest on their way to Bree. This gave me the possibility that the events on the book on the Old Forest occurred, while allowing the adaptation to move on. I enjoyed this and again, this is something I wish the movies could have done.

Well done! You got it!!

I don't think anyone has ever picked up on that before. That is why, when I later did the Bombadil/Barrow-Downs episodes in my radio dramatisation, Tales of the Perilous Realm, I felt that I was able to just tell listeners what had happened on that pat of the journey they didn't hear!

I was disappointed that we weren't able to get the original cast back together (it was several years later and Ian Holm was already spending quite a lot of time in Hollywood) because, sadly, this meant that it could never really work for anyone who had listened to the original LOTR broadcasts and didn't make much sense on its own to anyone who hadn't!

I love Barliman's character and the actor doing his voice nailed it. I know that Gollum may be the Gollum others hear when they read the series, this is what I hear for Barliman's voice.

Me too! James Grout: superb!

When I was shown the first sneak footage of Jackson's FOTR and I saw the scene where Barliman peers over the top of the bar at the hobbits when they enter 'The Prancing Pony', I was convinced they had lifted the voice from the radio serial! Unfortunately, as with many 'minor' characters in the film trilogy, there was so little of Mr Butterbur on the screen that he was never able to develop...

I enjoyed the 'fiddle" in the Prancing Pony and felt it was a good back drop since inn's have been associated with music and "fiddles" at least here in the US. I was glad that the song was included because I think it shows Frodo in a different light than at any other time during the journey. I enjoyed the Inn scene.

I just wish that Ian had been able to SING 'The Man in the Moon'.

I remember the agonies and frustrations (for him and composer Stephen Oliver) at the recording session... Speaking the lines didn't quite work for me and I always found myself asking: "WHO is playing the fiddle?" and "How do they KNOW what song he is going to perform?" ;)

Questions on this Segment:

I understand the need to cut Tom Bombadil out of the adaptation but was the hobbits conservation about going through the Old Forest to avoid the riders and the road a way to allow listeners familiar with the story the notion that the advents of the Old Forest occurred, while allow for the story to move forward?

As I say, above: you got it in one! :)

Tolkien himself said that Tom was important or he wouldn't have kept him in the story. What do you think we lose by taking Tom out of any adaptation, and what is gained?

I think Dave and others have already said most of what can be said about this... What is lost? A fascinating character... A episode of unexpected dangers... A indication that TREES are not always what they seem to be... An oasis of peace at Tom's house providing a moment's respite on the trail... An opportunity to know that there are those (or at least one) who is untouched by the power of the Ring...

What is gained by cutting Tom? Keeping up the momentum of Frodo's flight and the Riders' pursuit... In Tales of the Perilous Realm, these chapters took TWO half-hour episodes, so, if it had been included in the original broadcasts, these scenes would have needed to be compressed to a point of being, probably, meaningless...

Perhaps this leads to another question, what was the process for deciding what to add in, what to not include to the story? Is there still anything you would want to add if you still could to the adaptation, or are you happy with the overall product now?

Dave discussed the process in one of his first posts: it was, basically, down to me (with suggestions from Michael Bakewell, and the producers Jane Morgan and Penny Leicester); the arrangement of the material after the breaking of the Fellowship follows, as closely as possible, the dates given by Tolkien in his appendices.

Of course I would do it differently NOW... But, yes, I am happy with it as it stands - except for the mistakes, which irk me, and one or two moments where I wish we'd had more time - either for the script to escape being cut or to have been able to better perfect a scene... But, then, I've lived with it for 27 years!! :eek:

Estelyn Telcontar

02-28-2008, 03:18 AM

Since Mac lives, as I do, in Germany, I'd like to point out that there is yet another possibility for obtaining the recordings here. der hörverlag has LotR, Hobbit, Sil, and Perilous Realm available not only in German translation, but also in the original English: LotR (http://www.hoerverlag.de/Science_Fiction_Fantasy/978-3-89584-789-9/?start=30&sort=) They can be ordered in bookstores and are usually delivered within a day or two.

Brian Sibley

02-28-2008, 03:29 AM

Since Mac lives, as I do, in Germany, I'd like to point out that there is yet another possibility for obtaining the recordings here. der hörverlag has LotR, Hobbit, Sil, and Perilous Realm available not only in German traslation, but also in the original English: LotR (http://www.hoerverlag.de/Science_Fiction_Fantasy/978-3-89584-789-9/?start=30&sort=) They can be ordered in bookstores and are usually delivered within a day or two.

Cool cover art! I'll have to buy a copy!

Estelyn Telcontar

02-28-2008, 03:38 AM

The cover looks like it must be a John Howe illustration, though I haven't yet found the small print that says so. However, in the booklet I did find that the introductory words are written by: Brian Sibley! :D

edit - I found the small print. It is by John Howe.

Brian Sibley

02-28-2008, 03:46 AM

davem

02-28-2008, 07:12 AM

I was disappointed that we weren't able to get the original cast back together (it was several years later and Ian Holm was already spending quite a lot of time in Hollywood) because, sadly, this meant that it could never really work for anyone who had listened to the original LOTR broadcasts and didn't make much sense on its own to anyone who hadn't!

I've said before that I've always felt that the Old Forest/House of TB/Barrow Downs section is pretty self contained, with a beginning, middle & end, & can be done as a stand alone story. Nigel Planer as Frodo took a bit of getting used to if you know him as Neil from the Young Ones.

I was pleased that in the LotR adaptation you took into account that we hadn't been told that Merry had a sword from the Barrow & that when he stabs the Witch King his sword only serves as a 'distraction' (I think the Witch King says something like 'Halfling, you sting like a flea!').

One thing I will always be grateful to you for is in showing (as with Faramir later) that this episode, & Tom in particular, can work in a dramatisation. It annoys me when people simply dismiss the possibility as an excuse for not attempting it. The fact is that an adaptor who knows what they're doing can make the episode work well. Its the same with Faramir - the movie makers' constant refrain that they 'had to change Faramir's character because he woudln't have worked in a movie' always irked me. Tolkien's Faramir does not have to be changed into a thug (the beating of Gollum) who's only concern is getting Daddy's approval in order to be believable. In short, I think your adaptation worked so well because you clearly both loved & trusted Tolkien, whereas the movie makers always seemed afraid to just do that, & as a result a lot of stuff was changed unnecessarily or simply invented as a way of avoiding taking any 'risks'.

And I'll always be grateful for the fact that the Balrog in your adaptation didn't have wings:p

Brian Sibley

02-28-2008, 07:53 AM

And I'll always be grateful for the fact that the Balrog in your adaptation didn't have wings:p

It didn't? :D

Lalwendë

02-28-2008, 11:28 AM

I think Dave and others have already said most of what can be said about this... What is lost? A fascinating character... A episode of unexpected dangers... A indication that TREES are not always what they seem to be... An oasis of peace at Tom's house providing a moment's respite on the trail... An opportunity to know that there are those (or at least one) who is untouched by the power of the Ring...

What is gained by cutting Tom? Keeping up the momentum of Frodo's flight and the Riders' pursuit... In Tales of the Perilous Realm, these chapters took TWO half-hour episodes, so, if it had been included in the original broadcasts, these scenes would have needed to be compressed to a point of being, probably, meaningless...

Now here's a thorny question. If you had been given a whole extra hour of Auntie's time, would you still have cut out Tom? ;)

At least, speaking as an out and out Tom-nut, you did the cut coherently. What bothered me with the films was that where a change had to be made, it so often messed about with the integrity of narrative and character. It might be fun to listen to the early episodes but with the further adaptation of the three Tom chapters inserted into place. ;)

Brian Sibley

02-28-2008, 11:59 AM

Now here's a thorny question. If you had been given a whole extra hour of Auntie's time, would you still have cut out Tom? ;)

Unfair!! :p I might have done, but a lot of other good material was also cut that - had there been time - might have cried out for reinstatement...

At least, speaking as an out and out Tom-nut, you did the cut coherently. What bothered me with the films was that where a change had to be made, it so often messed about with the integrity of narrative and character. It might be fun to listen to the early episodes but with the further adaptation of the three Tom chapters inserted into place. ;)

I tried this - some years ago - but the changes in everyone's voices (and having 'Gandalf' as narrator) was just too distracting. However, content-wise, I think, it works...

Sauron the White

02-28-2008, 12:24 PM

from davem

One thing I will always be grateful to you for is in showing (as with Faramir later) that this episode, & Tom in particular, can work in a dramatisation. It annoys me when people simply dismiss the possibility as an excuse for not attempting it.

One listens to the radio with their ears and supplies the pictures in their mind. That is a huge difference compared to a film in that we get the whole thing and the mind does not do much other than process it. What you see is what you get.

Tom Bombadil was a visual train wreck as written. On the screen he would have been a total disaster and that would have started with that dreadful costume. On radio, that visual handicap is removed quite nicely.

One cannot compare two different types of medium and draw conclusions about the quality of one based on the essence and features of a different one.

davem

02-28-2008, 12:48 PM

from davem
One listens to the radio with their ears and supplies the pictures in their mind. That is a huge difference compared to a film in that we get the whole thing and the mind does not do much other than process it. What you see is what you get.

But if a listener 'supplies the pictures in their mind' then they do experience the episode 'visually'. If the episode is not a 'visual train wreck' in my head when I read it/listen to the radio adaptation then I can't see that it would inevitably be so if it was put on screen.

Now, I accept that it wouldn't have worked in Jackson's movie, but I don't think that means it couldn't have worked per se. Talking eagles would not have worked (let alone singing ones) in Jackson's movie either. If you claim that 'x' couldn't work in a movie or other visual dramatic representation you're also saying, by extension that its impossible to visualise - because if a reader/listener can picture the episode as they read it/listen to it then it can also be put on screen. Now, you may not want to see it on screen, or want anyone else to see it on screen, but that is not at all the same thing as saying its impossible to put it on screen. Certainly I've heard plenty of people say that the Bombadil/Old Forest/Barrow Downs episode is impossible to dramatise in any form, but I think Brian's adaptation disproves that completely - because it does work[/i]. Of course, you'd have to hear it to appreciate how well it works. And I think if you do hear it you'll see that it could be translated into a visual form.

Sauron the White

02-28-2008, 01:01 PM

Davem ... I have not one iota of criticsim of the radio play including Bombadil. And I take no issue with you at all that his inclusion worked in that medium. Kudos to Brian Sibley and the others responsible for that accomplishment.

I imagine if one were making a film of the LOTR as something rather surreal or an other wordly, other dimensional like Dr. Seuss then you could try to include Bombadil and it might work. But Jackson opted for a realistic world, and a more serious one which had no room for that character.

If you claim that 'x' couldn't work in a movie or other visual dramatic representation you're also saying, by extension that its impossible to visualise - because if a reader/listener can picture the episode as they read it/listen to it then it can also be put on screen.

Just because some people can see it in their minds eye does not mean it can be put on film successfully. A person can read the most disgusting description of violence but process it so that it is softened and they can accept it. The same with anything else they read. On a film screen that does not happen because it is all there for you and your only choice is to look away or reject it by laughing at its absurdity. I am afraid that when you combine the visual of TB along with his doggerel poetry, the result would have been the latter one in theaters around the world. And that does not make for a successful film.

davem

02-28-2008, 01:12 PM

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. We've argued over this point before on other threads & I want to keep this one focussed on the radio series - of course, if you want to start up a thread on different possible approaches to adapting Tolkien to film I'd be happy to jump in.:)

ArathornJax

02-28-2008, 09:53 PM

Today I listened to the period of Weathertop and the Lay of Luthien, to the attack by the five Nazgul, to the journey to Weathertop to the reunion with Bilbo.

Before I begin, I want to share one thing on Frodo and the Cow Jumped Over the Moon. I think it is ok for Ian Holm not to have 'sung' the song. I think that of the many wonderful characteristics of Frodo, he may not have been able to carry a tune. Then again, I am one of those people who can do a lot of things, but I cannot sing well (well, my wife says if I sing alone I have a wonderful voice!).

So today I had a little less time as I was on the cell with someone about a rather large presentation I have tomorrow.

I began with the four hobbits and Strider on Weathertop. The shadows of evening were falling and night had come on. The hobbits wanted to learn more of Gil-Galad and Frodo started, but when they go to the part on Mordor, Strider changed the subject and told them of Luthien and Beren. I really enjoyed here how Strider let them know of the lay without all the in depth details. I feel this is really in tune with the story in the FOTR. I could see the moon rising and meaning it was late; something as a backpacker and camper I can readily imagine!

As the Nazgul attacked, I realized today that their noise reminded me of a snake hiss, or even a cat hiss. Maybe some Cryptozoologist would love to decipher that sound, (any hints on what it is?), but I think it is very appropriate because it does remind me of a creature who is bold and treacherous, using every means to hunt it's prey. Not sure that is what you met, but it is what comes into my mind. It reminds me of a big cat hiss like a mountain lion, and since the Nazgul to this point seem to use cunning, their senses like smell to hunt, it might be a good connection. I imagine their actions to be almost cat like as well, bold and swift, strong and silent.

I felt that the actual attack on Weathertop was handled as I would want an adaptation to be. The main points were covered and it reached the image into my mind. A question I have here for anyone is we know that the daggers of the hobbits carried magic/spells on them that were hurtful to the Nazgul (or at least the Witchking). So was it the name of Elbereth that was hurtful by itself, or did the Witch King see the threat of the dagger and that was his fear? Perhaps a combination of both?

The journey to Rivendale was quick for me today. I need to re-listen because I thought that the part where the travellers discover Bilbo's trolls was missing. I could be wrong as I am really tired today but would love to hear if anyone else missed it? I like that part in the book and in adaptations because it links The Hobbit to the FOTR.

I am SO glad also in this part that Glorfindal's horse did not sound like sleigh bells, or a big cow bell, or Santa and his merry reindeer. I think that part is hard to come up with, a sound to distinguish Asfaloth from the horses of the Nazgul. The transition of the flood and Frodo fading to waking up with Gandalf was well handled.

I know some will differ with me, but I like the adaptation in the audio. I felt that the conversation between Frodo and Gandalf seemed to shine, and for the first time, Michael Hordern really seem to capture the role for me. He is able to show Gandalf in a variety of roles. I think for me, this is where he began to emerge in the adaptation.

Again we can see where mention to an event in the story is given a nod towards, but in earnest to move the story along the actual feast scene is only mentioned. Thus there is no Gloin interaction. Instead, Gloin's role is given to his son, Gimli. I'm fine with this as Jackson also did something similar in FOTR by showing several dwarfs with an older one with Gimli at the council. The conversation between Frodo and Bilbo in the Hall of Fire was a nice reunion and one that has to be done. I agree with this decision to keep the reunion in the adaptation and just giving a nod to the feast, with an emphasis on the most important part . . . Arwen's life and her and Aragorn's love.

Well, Sam came for Frodo so he could get his rest, and I have a rather large day tomorrow so it is off to bed for me. Tomorrow will be the Council I do believe!

Brian, I haven't added my two cents, but I want to thank you so much on a personal level for the adaptation. I love and enjoy listening to it once or twice a year and it makes a commute enjoyable. As a father and someone who was raised to read, this was a gift I wanted to give to my children. Your adaptation played a huge role in getting my kids when they were young to become readers, and I mean readers, people who digest a book and enjoy it.
More importantly, the adaptation got my kids using their imaginations to see things in their minds, and this carried over to their reading (into their play and thus into their lives). As a result, besides becoming critical thinkers, they are very, very creative. So thanks again for all your efforts. None of us never know when something we do will have an impact on someone so many years later!

Cheers!

Brian Sibley

02-29-2008, 02:37 AM

I want to share one thing on Frodo and the Cow Jumped Over the Moon. I think it is ok for Ian Holm not to have 'sung' the song. I think that of the many wonderful characteristics of Frodo, he may not have been able to carry a tune.

True... I think it would have been better for him to have recited the verses... Still, unlike the film, at least it is there!!!

As the Nazgul attacked, I realized today that their noise reminded me of a snake hiss, or even a cat hiss. Maybe some Cryptozoologist would love to decipher that sound, (any hints on what it is?), but I think it is very appropriate because it does remind me of a creature who is bold and treacherous, using every means to hunt it's prey. Not sure that is what you meant, but it is what comes into my mind. It reminds me of a big cat hiss like a mountain lion, and since the Nazgul to this point seem to use cunning, their senses like smell to hunt, it might be a good connection. I imagine their actions to be almost cat like as well, bold and swift, strong and silent.

An interesting interpretation of the sound. If I remember rightly and my memory may well be faulty, the actors playing the Nazgul exhaled at the microphone and this sound was then 'treated' radiophonically.

My recollection is hazy, but I think that our reasoning was that the name of 'Elbereth' was what repelled the Witch King, since the knives were not those taken from the Barrows...

Except, of course, if you follow the argument put forward on this forum that the Tom Bombadil/Barrow-Downs incidents COULD have occurred but are simply not reported, then they may, indeed, have had those blades!

The journey to Rivendale was quick for me today. I need to re-listen because I thought that the part where the travellers discover Bilbo's trolls was missing. I could be wrong as I am really tired today but would love to hear if anyone else missed it? I like that part in the book and in adaptations because it links The Hobbit to the FOTR.

No, the trolls were omitted. Sorry. I remember being envious when I first saw the Trollshaws figures created for the Jackson film and thinking that he's done something visually that we hadn't done... But in the end, I believe, we had to wait for the extended version to see them!

Brian, I haven't added my two cents, but I want to thank you so much on a personal level for the adaptation. I love and enjoy listening to it once or twice a year and it makes a commute enjoyable...

...More importantly, the adaptation got my kids using their imaginations to see things in their minds, and this carried over to their reading (into their play and thus into their lives). As a result, besides becoming critical thinkers, they are very, very creative. So thanks again for all your efforts. None of us never know when something we do will have an impact on someone so many years later!

Wow... :o You (and everyone on this forum) are terribly kind... And now I'm going to share a small confession with you all...

For several years after TLOTR, I used to get very frustrated about being described and introduced to people as "The man who did the radio Lord of the Rings..." It was especially irksome when reviewers referred to it when writing about whatever my current project was... :mad:

I was employed to write the 'narrative' on Jeff Wayne's long-forgotten concept album, Spartacus, on the strength of LOTR... I was allowed to dramatise C S Lewis' 'Chronicles of Narnia' and, later, Mervyn Peake's Titus Groan and Gormenghast for radio because of it (and won a Sony radio Award for the Peake plays) but I was still described as "The man who....." And I resented it like H***!

Nowadays, when I can't get a single project on radio and most people in the BBC have never heard of me and haven't the faintest idea what I have done, I am rather more humble!

I have learned - as well need to do - that, for the most part in life, we do not know what effect our work or deeds have in the wider world --- which is, perhaps, the best arrangement for things!

Like Tolkien's Niggle we may aim to create the most beautiful painting of a tree imaginable, but if we are remembered for even a single leaf then that is an achievement - a blessing - for which the artist should be very grateful... And, believe me, I am! :)

Essex

02-29-2008, 04:42 AM

Brian, sorry for going off the beaten track, but have you ever thought of using this leverage on being 'the guy who created the radio lord of the Rings' into perhaps touting the idea of making a TV mini series of Lord of the Rings, over three 'Seasons' if you like.

I remember touting this idea on the Downs here a while back. I worked out (after finding out how long the unabrdiged narrative of lotr recordings takes) that one could split the work to three 18 episode Seasons - (i.e. an hour long, with commercial breaks - so just over 40 mins an episode to make the 54 hours up that the narration takes)

I know this is pie in the sky - but have you ever thought of the idea of making an (almost) word for word adaptation of the books for TV? (re costs, maybe the DVD market could help the BBC pay for this, rather than adding to my licence fee of course!)

I even started a script on this for a laugh a year or so back - it's actually quite fun - my only issues were how, from a dramatic point of view, you show stuff in real time or how Tolkien wrote the book - ie Gandalf's escape from Orthanc and the Balrog - and Frodo and Sam in Mordor at the same time as other members of the fellowship etc.

anyway, perhaps you'd like to be known as the guy who created the TV mini series of LOTR as well as the radio adaptation! ;)

Brian Sibley

02-29-2008, 05:11 AM

Brian, sorry for going off the beaten track, but have you ever thought of using this leverage on being 'the guy who created the radio lord of the Rings' into perhaps touting the idea of making a TV mini series of Lord of the Rings, over three 'Seasons' if you like.

It's a cool idea, but I've no doubt that the TV rights are now well and truly sewn-up. I'm sure they were owned by Zeantz at one time and I suspect they have passed on to New Line/United Aritists/MGM or some combination thereof... For example, a few years ago the amateur rights in 'The Hobbit' were retained by the estate (and I got permission to do a production of my own adaptation) but then, a year or eighteen months ago, those rights were signed over to Zaentz...

Besides, I'm not sue I'd have the stamina for a second quest... :)

davem

02-29-2008, 06:15 AM

Lalwendë

02-29-2008, 07:05 AM

Unfair!! :p I might have done, but a lot of other good material was also cut that - had there been time - might have cried out for reinstatement...

Hmmm, does this mean there are some 'out-takes' and deleted scenes lurking in the cellars of Broadcasting House?

No, the trolls were omitted. Sorry. I remember being envious when I first saw the Trollshaws figures created for the Jackson film and thinking that he's done something visually that we hadn't done... But in the end, I believe, we had to wait for the extended version to see them!

I think that leaving them out was a sensible move myself. The stone trolls don't 'do' anything beyond prompting more tales and to try to portray them coherently in an audio format would have taken up far too much time I think. The one benefit of film/TV is that you can simply make a sculpture of something like that (or the fallen 'head' decked in flowers at the Crossroads - for another example) and have it sitting in the background while dialogue or action is happening.

Of course the listener to the radio version is always free to imagine the things the group might be passing on their way to Rivendell.

Anyway. I'm intrigued about these radio plays of the Gormenghast books now and I'm going to have to see if I can find a copy of those! I hope I can - and maybe they will become more widely known because one thing I've noticed is that Peake's work is finally getting a bit more recognition these days - he even shares double billing with Tolkien in next week's episode of The Worlds of Fantasy!

Estelyn Telcontar

02-29-2008, 07:18 AM

That's a great idea, davem! I'd buy that book for sure. "Making of.." books and documentaries are quite popular, and Tolkien fandom is large enough to make such a project financially feasible.

Now to the second CD - I'm gradually catching up. Aragorn's voice did take some getting used to for me - he's one of my most favouritest ( ;) ) characters, and though my inner voice is vague, it definitely lets me know what's not quite right. I did get used to it though, and he sounds older and more mature than FilmAragorn.

Though I missed the bath song, among other things, it's quite understandable that it should be left out. After all, I can still read the missing passages in the book. I really enjoyed the number of songs and poems that were included as well as dialogues such as the testimony to friendship in the 'conspiracy' scene. Tolkien's words there can't be topped - "You can trust us..."

"All that is gold..." is included, which I enjoyed very much, as well as the "fair/foul" lines. I liked Sam's singing of the Gil-Galad song. And that most important moment at the Ford of Bruinen, which makes the scene infinitely better than the weakness of MovieFrodo - "By Elbereth and Lúthien the Fair, you shall have neither the Ring nor me!" is triumphant!

I grew up in a family that read a lot, and family readings were a regular thing even when we children were able to read on our own. I dearly love the experience of being read to that these recordings give me!

Brian Sibley

02-29-2008, 09:10 AM

Hmmm, does this mean there are some 'out-takes' and deleted scenes lurking in the cellars of Broadcasting House?

I wish! None of that material was kept and all the music tracks were later 'wiped'... :(

I'm intrigued about these radio plays of the Gormenghast books now and I'm going to have to see if I can find a copy of those! I hope I can - and maybe they will become more widely known because one thing I've noticed is that Peake's work is finally getting a bit more recognition these days - he even shares double billing with Tolkien in next week's episode of The Worlds of Fantasy!

The BBC never issued the plays on CD, but there are still copies of the audio cassettes. You'll find details on my website (on this page - towards the bottom!) Brian's CD and Cassette recordings (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Titus-Groan-BBC-Radio-Collection/dp/0563410302). The plays starred Sting (as Steerpike) with Freddie Jones, Bernard Hepton, Sheila Hancock, Eleanor Bron, Judy Parfitt et al...

Now... BACK TO MIDDLE-EARTH, PLEASE!!:D

Brian Sibley

02-29-2008, 09:13 AM

Actually what I'd really like to see is book about the series, including the full scripts, pictures, cast interviews, transcript of Christopher's pronunciation tape, etc. I suspect there would be a lot of interest in such a project. Maybe BBC Books, or Harper Collins would bite? After the slew of books about the movies (mostly by Brian himself) it would be nice to get something about the series as well. A nice large format p/b (like the movie tie-ins) with the wonderful Eric Fraser painting on the cover ....

Maybe we should start a petition....

Yep! Good idea, Dave, except... The BBC considered the idea of a Scripts Book some years ago, but felt, in the end, that the time for TLOTR - in terms of wide-ranging, popular merchandising - was past... Sorry to keep being a wet-blanket... Who knows, maybe, if The Hobbit happens...

William Cloud Hicklin

02-29-2008, 11:32 AM

For example, a few years ago the amateur rights in 'The Hobbit' were retained by the estate (and I got permission to do a production of my own adaptation) but then, a year or eighteen months ago, those rights were signed over to Zaentz...

Interesting- so the Estate is not nearly so anti-adaptations as its detractors would have us believe.

davem

02-29-2008, 11:53 AM

ArathornJax

02-29-2008, 06:45 PM

I didn't have much listening time today (but will tomorrow driving home from the conference). Today I listen to the council of Elrond, to the departure, to the Red Horn Gate and the snowfall blocking them.

I enjoyed the Council of Elrond and especially liked Elrond's adaptation. He is more in line with what I feel Elrond is like (at least for me). No disrespect to Hugo Weaving, I just didn't like the adaptation that Elrond actively tried to stop the union of Aragorn and Arwen in the movie adaptations. In the movies Elrond reminds me much more of Thingol. In this adaptation Elrond recognizes that he cannot control who his daughter falls in love with (and isn't that so very true for those of us who have daughters!) but he is in a position to set the terms that her husband will have to fulfill.

Not sure if this is the place, and this might be a new thread to make in the book section, but I have always marveled at the contrast between Elrond and Thngol. Both had daughters who fell in love with mortal men and plodded their troths to them. Both fathers set conditions to that had to be fulfilled prior to the marriage occurring. This is where I go back and forth for Thingol gave Beren such a insurmountable task, almost a certain death sentence in his mind. Was Elrond's condition as drastic as Thingol's? Was becoming king of both Gondor and Arnor also almost a insurmountable task? Based on the book and the radio adaptation I have always felt that Elrond felt there was a hope, even if it was only a fool's hope. I still feel that Thingol was spiteful to Beren to where Elrond was securing his daughters future legacy. Also, I think Elrond might have guessed that this was the way that Luthien's line would continue on til the end of the world. Or it just could be that Elrond was a overly protective father. Guess I am just thinking aloud.

Anyway, I have to say that whenever I hear Michael Cox's speaking as Boromir I see in my mind's eye Ralph Bakshi's version of Boromir and I don't know why. Boromir to me has never looked like an Viking warrior (Viking's didn't wear horns). I imagine Boromir as a noble Norman knight from William I's era. I think that is because of his instance to use the ring for victory, not thinking of the cost, just full steam ahead and ram it down the enemy's throat. Please don't take this to mean that I don't enjoy Mr. Cox's Boromir, I do, and I think his portrayal brings to me a strong willed Boromir who is like all of us, susceptible of falling to the evil and temptations of the ring. I just have to get that image out of my head though.

One of the things that stuck out to me (and I know the pause before Frodo's acceptance of the task of ringbearer has been discussed) is that Elrond and for that matter, I think Gandalf have seen something in Frodo that is fore-ordained for taking this task. I guess the question that came to me today in listening then is what did Elrond see in Frodo that made him guess that if Frodo did not find a way, no one would? Was it Frodo's ability to withstand the evil of the ring? Did Elrond's relationship with Bilbo give Elrond insight into hobbits ability to withstand the evil of the ring? For me it goes to what Bilbo and Frodo were focused on, others and not themselves; unselfishness vs. selfishness; friendship vs animosity; hope vs. despair etc.

This nature also I think is why Gandalf convinces Elrond to allow Merry and Pippin to go. One thing I noticed and I may have to look back on the thread is the bell that rings right before Frodo accepts the task. Is that just because the bell was letting us know sometime had pass and then Frodo accepts?

The journey south is uneventful. The scene with the carrion is removed and that is easy to understand why. The debate between Gandalf and Frodo follows the book and the march up the RedHorn is one I enjoy. I love the banter between Gandalf and Legolas on the sun and the actors here nailed the dialogue I felt. I love Sam's "if this is a shelter then a house is one wall with no roof" comment also. What an interesting contrast this scene with Sam will be versus how he acts in Mordor and on Mt. Doom.
Another thing I love in this scene are the fell voices in the storm. If you listen carefully, they are there in the background and that was a very nice and subtle affect. I love how this scene shows how the power of Sauron has grown long enough to reach out 300 leagues and bring that bad of weather on the ground.

Another thing I noticed today is that Caradhras was evil in nature long before Sauron was every heard of. This for me shows much like the Matterhorn and other mountains in the Alps (and in the world for that matter), have developed a bad reputation about them.

Well, I guess I got more out of the short listening today that I thought. An observation though. I read the complete trilogy once a year and yet in listening to the adaptation it still brings many new insights and thoughts to me. Just another sign of what an excellent work it is!

davem

03-01-2008, 01:15 AM

Now you see, there's always one who has to charge ahead of everybody else...:rolleyes: :p

We're only up to Episode Three, & Frodo has just accepted the Quest. He'll be setting out with his Fellows on Sunday. At the moment he's still safely in Rivendell

I suspect, AJ, that you've been following a set of cunningly disguised decoys sent out by Elrond to distract the Servants of the Enemy...

Brian Sibley

03-01-2008, 03:12 AM

Which reminds me of something I wanted to ask Brian....

I've heard you say a couple of times that when you first suggested adapting LotR for Radio 4 you were surprised to be told that the BBC were actively negotiating the radio rights. What I was wondering was whether Christopher Tolkien required, as part of those rights, that he should approve the scripts, or was your sending them to him merely a matter of courtesy? And did he retain any right to 'veto' anything he didn't approve of - not that I'm suggesting he'd need to, just wondering whether he had that right included in the original contract. And if there had been something in the scripts that you liked but he didn't, would you have changed it?

I can't now remember - and, indeed, was probably not even told - the terms of the BBC deal with the Tolkien Estate.

Before I came onto the project, the BBC had been negotiating - for some time, I believe - with Saul Zaentz whom, it was assumed, owned the radio along with the film and theatrical rights in TLOTR. Only after the BBC had paid SZ the agreed fee did it somehow emerge that the radio rights were never part of the original deal with JRRT.

Zaentz returned the payment and fresh negotiations were entered into with the Tolkien Estate.

I doubt that the BBC would have agreed to his having a power of veto and I do remember very clearly that we were not allowed to say that the series was 'approved' or 'endorsed' by Christopher Tolkien. My understanding was that CT was shown the scripts as a courtesy and because we wanted his advice and the benefit of his knowledge.

He was shown my original 'synopsis' (the scene-by-scene breakdown of the 26 episodes) which included the page numbers of each section (one volume paperback for convenience) and similar references where material was taken from The Hobbit and Unfinished Tales, as well as indicating cuts and omissions.

He was then show each of the finished scripts which he critiqued - pointing out errors in detail or chronology, asking questions and making suggestions. I know Michael Bakewell has said that CT asked why Pippin was so stupid (Michael frequently used Pippin to ask questions so that other characters could deliver passages of essential information necessary for the audience's understanding of what was going on) but I can't recall other specific instances of his responses... Sorry! It is over 25 years ago... :)

Somewhere, someone probably has those letters... Or maybe, like the original tapes, they have been 'lost'...

Actually, I'm just interested to know the extent of his involvement beyond making the tape (oh, & do you know what actually happened to that tape? I wish you'd played more of it on that far distant day at the Church House Bookshop.....)

I have a copy of the tape -- or, I should say, a tape because I have since heard the Church House Bookshop recording in which I say that we had to ask Christopher for more tapes...

Anyway, I have the first and included, with permission, a snippet of it on the 'bonus' disc to the 'Collector's Edition' [the 'Ring' tin] -- titled, like everything else, 'Microphones in Middle-earth' -- which, as you will have seen on my website, is currently being sold by Amazon for somewhere in the region of £200!

And, now I think of it, does the BBC still own the radio rights, or did they just negotiate for this one production?

I doubt it... Not that the present-day BBC would ever embark on a re-make. In fact I doubt they will ever re-broadcast the series on Radio 4. They wanted to broadcast it on their archive channel - Radio 7 (who only give minuscule token payments for repeats) - but abandoned the idea because of the copyrights involved - which would include those of the rights-holders. It is possible that the Estate don't even control the radio rights any longer.

davem

03-01-2008, 06:08 AM

Thanks so much for that :)

I have a copy of the tape -- or, I should say, a tape because I have since heard the Church House Bookshop recording in which I say that we had to ask Christopher for more tapes...

I really wish I could have heard more of that recording - CT seemed quite self-effacing: I'm thinking of the 'Thengel/Thenjel' thing :) & the mention of the error on the map being his fault (Hithaeglin rather than Hithaeglir). Now, I note from checking my first edition copies that Hithaeglin only appears on the First edition maps, & was corrected to Hithaeglir for the Second Edition - so, were you working from the First Edition map or was that just an interesting typo on the list you sent CT?

I love that Church House recording - though I'm not sure Stephen Oliver's annecdote on the afternoon he spent teaching the Ambrosian Singers the song from the Field of Cormallen would be quite acceptable in these more PC times ('Like teaching disabled children to sing God save the Queen'!). I also had to laugh at the reaction he got from the audience when he said that he found Tolkien's verse to be 'poor' - I'm surprised he got out of there alive:eek:

I doubt it... Not that the present-day BBC would ever embark on a re-make. In fact I doubt they will ever re-broadcast the series on Radio 4. They wanted to broadcast it on their archive channel - Radio 7 (who only give minuscule token payments for repeats) - but abandoned the idea because of the copyrights involved - which would include those of the rights-holders. It is possible that the Estate don't even control the radio rights any longer.

I did read somewhere that LotR is the most requested programme for a repeat on Radio 7. I don't expect to hear the series broadcast again, sadly the BBC seems to be a lot less adventurous as regards radio drama these days. I doubt they'd commision anything like LotR again. Puts paid to my dream of a Silmarillion dramatisation - or even a Children of Hurin...

Brian Sibley

03-01-2008, 06:53 AM

Now, I note from checking my first edition copies that Hithaeglin only appears on the First edition maps, & was corrected to Hithaeglir for the Second Edition - so, were you working from the First Edition map or was that just an interesting typo on the list you sent CT?

I was working from the 2nd Impression of the Second Edition (1967) and the map in that edition shows Hithaeglir as Hithaiglin.

I did read somewhere that LotR is the most requested programme for a repeat on Radio 7. I don't expect to hear the series broadcast again, sadly the BBC seems to be a lot less adventurous as regards radio drama these days. I doubt they'd commision anything like LotR again. Puts paid to my dream of a Silmarillion dramatisation - or even a Children of Hurin...

A few years ago, I had a short-lived discussion with the BBC about The Silmarillion when they were thinking of having a Tolkien Day with sections of TS broadcast throughout the day. It came to nothing...

Brian Sibley

03-01-2008, 07:03 AM

One thing I noticed and I may have to look back on the thread is the bell that rings right before Frodo accepts the task. Is that just because the bell was letting us know sometime had pass and then Frodo accepts?

At the conclusion of the Council of Elrond (Bk II, Chap 2) the question is asked who is to take the Ring. Tolkien writes...

'No one answered. The noon-bell rang. Still no one spoke. Frodo glanced at all the faces, but they were not turned to him... ...At last with an effort he spoke and wondered to hear his own words, as if some other will was using his small voice. "I will take the Ring," said, "though I do not know the way."'

The 'ting' that you hear is supposed to be 'the noon-bell'... Oh, welll...... :)

TheGreatElvenWarrior

03-01-2008, 01:01 PM

And I'll always be grateful for the fact that the Balrog in your adaptation didn't have wings:p
How do you know that? I don't think it said...

I was thrilled when I listened to the BBC radio adaptations, my mom was gracious and bought them for me for Christmas... I think I converted my cousin... we listened to TH and FoTR! She loved it, I on the other hand, was amazed at the closeness to the book! Although I was disappointed that there was no Barrow-Downs, but that is understandable, and one of my favourite parts of the book (The journey to Crickhollow) was there too!!!!

davem

03-01-2008, 01:35 PM

How do you know that? I don't think it said...

Well, the Balrog may or may not have had wings in the original broadcast, but if so they must have been digitally removed when it was re-edited into 13 episodes - I've checked my cd's & there isn't a sign of wings on the Balrog - even when I use a large magnifying glass. Actually, I don't remember there being wings on the Balrog back in 1981 when I first heard the series - though I only had access to a small transistor radio at the time. I haven't heard the re-edited/remastered version which came out at the time of the movies, so I can't say whether wings have been added for that version to bring it in line with the Jackson films - they may have.

Apparently there were some Moria scenes in the original broadcast where the real Boromir was missing due to the actor having other commitments (apparently a passing cleaner had to be brought in to stand behind Aragorn to make up the numbers but luckily he didn't have any lines), & there was one infamous scene during Helm's Deep where Legolas is facing the wrong way & it appears he is shooting at his own side :D because the producer had inserted the audio tape in the wrong way round during a late night recording session. I've heard that these problems have been fixed for the latest version, but I can't be certain of that.

Of course, none of that may be true....

PS, to get serious again, I'll be starting the discussion on Episode Four tomorrow, so if everyone wants to get listening ASAP....

Brian Sibley

03-01-2008, 06:40 PM

Well, the Balrog may or may not have had wings in the original broadcast, but if so they must have been digitally removed when it was re-edited into 13 episodes - I've checked my cd's & there isn't a sign of wings on the Balrog - even when I use a large magnifying glass. Actually, I don't remember there being wings on the Balrog back in 1981 when I first heard the series - though I only had access to a small transistor radio at the time. I haven't heard the re-edited/remastered version which came out at the time of the movies, so I can't say whether wings have been added for that version to bring it in line with the Jackson films - they may have.

Apparently there were some Moria scenes in the original broadcast where the real Boromir was missing due to the actor having other commitments (apparently a passing cleaner had to be brought in to stand behind Aragorn to make up the numbers but luckily he didn't have any lines), & there was one infamous scene during Helm's Deep where Legolas is facing the wrong way & it appears he is shooting at his own side :D because the producer had inserted the audio tape in the wrong way round during a late night recording session. I've heard that these problems have been fixed for the latest version, but I can't be certain of that.

You DO know a lot about that series, don't you! :D

Thanks for LOL!

davem

03-02-2008, 03:46 AM

I was working from the 2nd Impression of the Second Edition (1967) and the map in that edition shows Hithaeglir as Hithaiglin.
.

Yes - my mistake. I've re-checked my copies - in my 1965 First edition (& no, for the pedants out there its not a first/first, but it is the first ed. text & map) the map shows Hithaiglin, & also in my second ed. Two Towers from 1969 its Hithaiglin (as also in my 1976 paperback set - which was the first copy of LotR I bought). Its Hithaeglir in the Alan Lee illustrated deluxe ed - which was the 2nd edition copy I checked for comparison - but I think the correction might have been made originally in the re-drawn map which CT did for Unfinished Tales in 1981.

Er....sorry everybody for that rather dull digression......

davem

03-02-2008, 06:02 AM

Transcript: http://www.tolkienradio.com/ringgoessouth.html

I love this episode. We begin in the peace & security of Rvendell & end in the darkness & horror of Moria. Along the way we pass through Hollin, suffer the attack of Wargs, struggle through the snows of Caradhras & face the long dark of Moria.

Again, so much of the power of the drama comes from the use of Tolkien's own words, both via narration & dialogue. I particularly liked the gathering of the Fellowship scene . We get the sense that Elrond is facing a truly painful decision (though as with the book we aren't told why, exactly, he feels the need to choose nine companions, rather than 5, 10, or a nice round dozen!). The scene between Frodo & Bilbo, and particularly Frodo's awkward expression of gratitude to Bilbo for everything he has done for him (clearly extending right back to his adopting him after his parents' deaths) is quite beautiful. You get the sense that he's never actually said thankyou before - well, not in words (typically English - as is Bilbo's response - telling him not to mention it), but he knows this may be the last time they get the chance to say it.

One thing I liked was the way Gandalf's determination to get the Company into Moria was constantly played up - he is clearly steering them that way, & grabbing every opportunity to get the idea into the forefront of their minds. He wants them all to go through the Mines - as if he is aware that his destiny lies that way.

Another thing: Gimli. A person rather than comic relief. He is full of old lore & the wisdom of his folk. He chants the Song of Durin - & Sam is enthralled. In fact, what I love about this adaptation is that all the characters are given the chance to reveal their characters (often via little scenes or asides & comments). Sam's little comments to Bill are nice & really bring home how much he cares about him. His grief over the death of Balin, & the state to which Moria has come is subtly done but quite heartbreaking.

Anyway, as this is by way of an introduction to our discussion of the episode I'll keep it short. The only other thing I wanted to mention was the Balrog confrontation. David Collings was amazing - the sheer terror in his cry as the Balrog appeared was heart-stopping, & communicates to the audience a whole hidden history. Even a listener who does not know what a Balrog is (we are given no explanation of what it is, & no description of what it looks like), knows that this is the ultimate manifestation of destructive evil & sheer horror - the actors' voices convey that perfectly.

So, off we go....

ArathornJax

03-03-2008, 10:22 PM

Well I listen to this section and started the next one today on the drive home. My son has confirmed Influenza Type A so I don't have a lot of time right now (want to make sure he is ok, and he is watching the Extended Two Towers so I can sit with him through that) and the post I had spent 10 minutes putting together became lost as my MacBook Pro lost connection with my wireless adapter (I need to buy a new wireless adapter to work with the one in the MacBook Pro). So I'll post on this section tomorrow.

Estelyn Telcontar

03-07-2008, 03:13 PM

I've seen that someone posted on this thread on the 'alternate universe' version of the forum - I can't get there, so hopefully this will be seen and read. It is difficult to get a coherent discussion together, so it might be wise to wait until this glitch is fixed.

davem

03-07-2008, 04:51 PM

ArathornJax

03-10-2008, 11:37 AM

Hello, I feel like the Def Leopard song "Foolin" at least this part:

"I realized that . . .
Is anybody out there, anybody there
Does anybody wonder, anybody care
Oh, I just gotta know
If youre really there and you really care"

So this is a test to see if this post sticks . . .

I'm probably not going to post on this until I know the posts are sticking. I noticed that Brian's new post has been deleted as well.

ArathornJax

03-10-2008, 01:58 PM

Ok, several observations. First, the staff:

"Gandalf held his staff aloft, and from its tip there came a faint radiance which just showed the ground before his feet. They started on their way. By the pale light, they caught glimpses of stairs and arches and of passages and tunnels, sloping up, or running steeply down, or opening blankly dark on either side."

The key word here is tip. I guess you could say that a tip is the top, like the tip of a mountain, but the word also means the end of an extremity so it could mean the bottom. Much like the tip of an old spinning top. So it does provide a new way of looking at this, something I had not considered. Perhaps Gandalf can radiate light from the top, from the whole staff or from the bottom.

A close listening also gave me further evidence in a discussion I am in on the Balrog. It is evident that Gandalf (as Tolkien stated in one of his letters) knew there was a Balrog in Moria (and Legolas was the only other party member who could recognized it). I know someone who is arguing that the Balrog controled the weather on Caradhras and thus wanted to fight Gandalf. I argue that it was Sauron, based on info from Tolkien and the text itself (his arm has grown long) that closed the pass to force them through Moria. I also do not believe that the Balrog was in league with Sauron, though the Balrog was used by Sauron (see Appendix A under Durin's Folk) for his purposes (destroying the Kingdom of Khazad-dum, confronting Gandalf etc) and to further them. I think this also shows that as we'll get to in the next disc that Celeborn knew what was in Moria as well.

I would welcome thoughts on this as well. I always imagine that there were chasms in the chamber where the orcs had light fires and the trolls were bringing stones to bridge those chasms so the orcs could attack. Then the Balrog appears and the trolls and orcs fall back giving way to this demon. Then the orcs waited to follow the fellowship because of daylight and because they had to repair the bridge that was broken even if in a hastly way. However, could trolls be bringing a piece of stone (from lets say a fallen pillar) that is long enough to make a second bridge over the chasm?

Finally, I think it is at this point that Frodo realizes or begins to, that he is alone. He has lost Gandalf and from this point to the falls, he knows in his heart what he has to do; move to Mordor on his own. I also think this is why it is replayed on the next disc (along with the sense of loss).

Brian Sibley

03-12-2008, 05:41 PM

..I'm BACK! :)

William Cloud Hicklin

03-12-2008, 07:25 PM

Yes - my mistake. I've re-checked my copies - in my 1965 First edition (& no, for the pedants out there its not a first/first, but it is the first ed. text & map) the map shows Hithaiglin, & also in my second ed. Two Towers from 1969 its Hithaiglin (as also in my 1976 paperback set - which was the first copy of LotR I bought)

Were these US or UK editions? It's my understanding that A&U made periodic corrections at the behest of JRRT and later CRT, but that the H-M 2nd ed. remained unchanged until the Doug Anderson corrections of 1987.

The Ballantines did not use CJRT's original map but rather substituted redrawings, the earlier by Barbara Remington and the later (1988 onward) by Shelly Shapiro.

ArathornJax

03-12-2008, 07:44 PM

everyone else. Hopefully we get back on track again.

davem

03-13-2008, 12:55 AM

Were these US or UK editions? It's my understanding that A&U made periodic corrections at the behest of JRRT and later CRT, but that the H-M 2nd ed. remained unchanged until the Doug Anderson corrections of 1987..

UK editions.. I'm not up on the publication history though, or what changes occurred when. I just looked at me books & that's what I found - FotR 1st ed text (14th impression 1965) has Hithaiglin - though the word is partly obscured by the illustration (which is why I originally thought it was Hithaeglin) & TT 2nd ed text (4th impression1969) also has Hithaiglin. The earliest paperback I have is from 1976 (again 2nd/4th) which has Hithaiglin. Its Hithaeglir in my 1981 1st/1st hb UT. They're all A&U btw.

William Cloud Hicklin

03-13-2008, 11:39 AM

The only version of the '54 map I have is in my H-M 2nd/12th (ca. 1974), where the name is still Hithaiglin. This was probably a mistake on CT's part in his great haste: the mountains are not labeled at all on JRRT's original, and their Elvish name does not appear anywhere in the text. Its first appearance, already Hithaeglir, is in the Annals of Aman ca. 1951. My very limited resources don't indicate that the name was changed before the 1980 redrawing.

However, the original '54 maps have on occasion been silently corrected. In my 50th Anniversary copy on the large-scale RK map it is now Cirith Ungol, as opposed to Kirith Ungol still present in the '74. Also, relatively early on, the Shire map was altered (somewhat crudely) to get Brandy Hall on the correct side of the Buckland Road.

davem

03-13-2008, 12:41 PM

Any road up..... (as we say here in God's own county:p ) back to the plot.

One thing I wanted to bring up, mainly in response to earlier attacks on the sound effects is how well most of them are done. Yes, its easy to pick up on the ones that don't qute come off, but in the main they are exceptionally good - so good that actually you don't notice them - what I mean is the natural sounds, from birdsong, to echoing corridors & halls, to the movement of furniture, are all so perfectly done that you simply accept them. I think that's why the odd bad effect sticks out like a sore thumb.

In the Church House recording Penny Leicester stressed how much effort went into creating the effects - particularly the Moria sequence, & apparently none of the Orc cries over the entire series are ever duplicated - all are unique. Peter Woodthorpe also spoke about how much effort went in to creating the effects. I doubt the BBC would ever put so much effort into a radio series now. So, I think the truth is that its because the effects in this series are generally so good that when they do occasionally fail the seem to fail big time. So, a few questions for Brian

One aspect of the production that I haven't heard very much about is the part played by the old Radiophonics workshop - I mean, how much time did they put in - & was there much experimentation - I don't suppose you can just come up with a Ringwraith voice, or the sound of a Balrog in a couple of minutes.

Oh, & one other thing - I know the Ring sound was created by running a finger around the rim of a wine glass - but who came up with that idea? It sounds so right, but would any of us have thought of doing that?

And, finally for now - what was the largest number of actors in the studio at one time - was the whole Fellowship ever in the studio together?

Brian Sibley

03-13-2008, 01:30 PM

So, a few questions for Brian

One aspect of the production that I haven't heard very much about is the part played by the old Radiophonics workshop - I mean, how much time did they put in - & was there much experimentation - I don't suppose you can just come up with a Ringwraith voice, or the sound of a Balrog in a couple of minutes.

Please remember with all these answers this was a long time ago (27 years) so memories are hazy, patchy and often unreliable...

The Radiophonic Workshop actually created relatively few effects: Eagles, the Balrog, the Crack of Doom etc. Most of the effects were created by treating natural recordings: the Ringwraith horses hooves and voices etc and usually by using the technology in the studio, rather than the workshop. The reason for this was the producers' and adapters' desire for the story to be treated as realistically as possible.

Oh, & one other thing - I know the Ring sound was created by running a finger around the rim of a wine glass - but who came up with that idea? It sounds so right, but would any of us have thought of doing that?

My memory is that the Workshop came up with several effects for the Ring and I seem to remember Stephen Oliver experimenting with sounds on the violin when we were recording all the music tracks - which were recorded before the drama sessions began. Memory tells me it was Stephen or a member of the orchestra who came up with the idea of the glass and the sound was recorded during one of those music recording sessions which we held at the BBC's studios at Maida Vale.

And, finally for now - what was the largest number of actors in the studio at one time - was the whole Fellowship ever in the studio together?

Goodness... Well, the party scene, the Council of Elrond, the battles and so forth involved a lot of actors - the principles, obviously, but also perhaps a dozen members of the RDC (Radio Drama Company) the repertory of players who (at the time but no longer) were on call for productions and who gallantly played all the 'audio extras' such as the Orcs and other gangs and crowds.

Yes, the Fellowship (prior to the 'Breaking') would have been together pretty much all the time. After the death of Boromir, the schedule was more fractured but all the cast involved in an episode would be there for the rehearsal (usually half a day) but might then come in at different times during the following day of recording so as to avoid having people sitting around for hours with nothing to do.

The recording schedule ran as follows:

Day 1: Morning - rehearse Episode 1; Afternoon - begin recording Ep 1

Day 2: Morning - complete recording Ep 1; Afternoon - rehearse Ep 2

Day 3: Morning and afternoon - record Episode 2

And so on...

A handful of particularly complex episodes were allocated a TWO full days to rehearse and record! It doesn't sound like much - and it was an exhausting schedule - but no drama production today would have the luxury of that much time!

Lalwendë

03-13-2008, 02:23 PM

Finally I can post something on here after Ye Gods conspired against it - first I couldn't listen to this episode when davem did as family were over and then the Downs went into a strange worm-hole and existed in the multiverse...

What got to me about this episode was how thoroughly scary it was. There's something satisfyingly right about listening to a story of a group of people going into a 'dark place' when you only have the 'dark place' of your own imagination to picture them in. Why are underground scenes in books so frightening? I'm thinking also of the tunnels and caves in The Weirdstone of Brisingamen, the tunnel in The Amber Spyglass, the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic. Brrrr...I think it's because your imagination is also firmly in that kind of place.

So the Balrog was 100 times more weird. It's not just another 'beast' to be conquered in the manner of a game of D&D but a real, unearthly Maia - a worthy opponent for Gandalf to be terrified of. That's partly the fact that it was unseen again, but also due to the use of sound and script at that point. Everything is happening at once! It's no 'set-piece battle' but a real, chaotic struggle. Gandalf is gone in the blink of an eye. That's how it was in the book and I was pleased to see that this sense of sudden shock came over very well.

I also got thinking about how Gandalf wants to hang about and read the Book of Mazarbul. Handy of course, for the plot, but if that was a real situation I wouldn't be hanging about while Gandalf wasted 'running for the hills time' to read a book. Would you? ;)

And I'm very pleased that the Warg encounter was included. One thing that was disappointing in the films was this sense that the journey to Caradhras was just a jolly hiking expedition, but here we see that the wilds really are wild. The bow-string sound effect was funny though - one of the creaky ones I reckon ;)

davem

03-16-2008, 10:59 AM

(Well, this seems to be one of those odd threads where we don't get many participants, but loads of readers - we're now approaching 2,000 views!! I can only assume that the reason is that most Downers haven't heard the series & hopefully this will inspire them to get hold of a set.)

Transcript: http://www.tolkienradio.com/mirrorofgaladriel.html

This episode takes us to the end of the Fellowship of the Ring. We begin with Gandalf's fall in Moria, & end with Boromir's fall at Parth Galen. In between we pass through Lorien & meet Gollum for the first time.

I have to admit that what I regret most is the omission of Mirrormere. And the inclusion of Aragorn's parody of Baby Bunting! - that has always made me groan & I suspect it is only by reason of his heritage (& his big sword) that he got away with it.....:p

Lorien must have a been challenge. How do you get across the experience of the Elvish realm in sound alone? Yet I'm not sure that a visual representation can work much better - I don't think the movie captured the magic either. What is missing in both is the subjective, psychological dimension. Jackson stated that if he had been writing the story from scratch he wouldn't have had Lorien in the story at that point, so near the end of the first movie, because it breaks the tension. In many ways the Lorien episode 'mirrors' the Old Forest/Barrow Downs episode, & I wonder whether something is lost in this adaptation by having omitted that first woodland adventure?

I did like the way Celeborn was played by Simon Cadell (& that the BBC budget stretched to employing an actor, rather than, as with the movie, having to resort to a robot...), though you do half expect him to greet the Fellowship with an awkward 'Hi de Hi!'...... No, unfair. Cadell's performance was subtle & informed. Which brings me to a question about the 'bit players' - how much background were they given as to their characters, & what was happening? And how many of them were like Michael Hordern, with no real clue about what was happening? Marian Diamond's Galadriel has always been one of my favourite performances - I love her voice.

Oh yes, were any of the actors fans of the story beforehand? I know Peter Woodthorpe said at Church House that he only read the parts of the book in which Gollum appeared & didn't really know the other events of the story.

I do love Ian Holm's performance in this episode - from his initial expression of loss, through his awkwardness first over Aragorn attempting to treat his 'wound' & later in his stumbling recitation of his poem about Gandalf. When his voice breaks at the 'old man in a battered hat' I always get a lump in my throat....

What else? No Amon Hen. I wonder why (of course, one always assumes 'time constraints' as the reason for cuts, but I do wonder whether anything got cut simply because there was no way of dramatising it effectively). However, I did think the scene between Boromir & Frodo was brialliantly done. Michael Graham Cox conveyed all the pain, confusion, & egotistic desire of Boromir perfectly, the sense of a man in a state of absolute hopelessness grasping at what he feels is his people's only chance for survival. MGC is often ignored in discussions of the series, but I think he is absolutely brilliant here.

Anyway, that's me intro - hope I haven't stolen anyone's ideas....

ArathornJax

03-16-2008, 12:05 PM

Actually so far on the Downs, this is one of my favorite threads and probably the one I post the most on. On other threads I tend to come in after they have started and being new here (on a board of many long term members) I guess I am still trying to figure out what has been discussed and what has not since it seems some are core about not wanting to get into previous posts/issues. I will say though that out of the 3 LOTR sites I post on, this is the one that approaches what I want, good solid thinking, reflection and use of the many text sources to discuss this wonderful world.

That is one reason I love this thread! It makes me think about what I am listening to. As a former executive and now an educator I enjoy escaping to Tolkien to make me reflect on life itself. Weird I know. Enough to that stuff though.

Davem hit on some of the points I would have brought up :) so I'll try some other angles. I noticed that the poems/songs by Legolas (Nimrodel) was left out and I felt that was a wonderful edit from the text. The story of Amroth and Nimrodel though important to the lore of Middle Earth, does not move the story forward.

I concur on Ian Holm's part. I love his acting/voice over here and though I don't get a lump, I feel the pit in the stomach when I hear Frodo struggle at the end of his poem/lament/memoir of Gandalf.

I enjoyed Celeborn's portrayl also and felt it was much better than the film.

The mirror scene was extremely well done and not over dramatic. I wonder for those who have heard this adaptation and only scene the movie what they thought? I liked how Galaderial is in this scene and it is not over the top.

I also think that Douglas Livingston did a great job with Gimli here. His voice over on leaving Lorien and his thoughts on his Lady made me really think of that Chivarious love of the Medieval Period.

Besides no Amon Hem, the shooting of the Nazgul was deleted and I thought that was a significant event to not included. That incident combined with the orc voices increases the tension and forces the company to move more swiftly to their decision. I was sad that in both the movie (even the extended edition) that was not included nor in the radio adapation.

Finally the last interaction of Frodo and Sam I think provides a great insight into their relationship while conveying a sense of hope in that relationship. I could hear Frodo's relief when Sam demands to go or to put hole in all the boats and Ian did a great job here, and kudos should be given to William Nighey.

A thought on the background noises. What I have realized that I really appreciate in the production is that for me, the vast majority of the sounds do not distract me from the acting that is occurring. I am more focused on the inflection, the tension, the relief, the sorrow that is conveyed by the actors and their voices. I think this is perhaps on the harder challenges in audio only, that of portraying a mood, a feeling, an emotion without having visual aide. I think it is even harder in today's world where so much is visual from gaming systems, to television, to cell phones, to the internet and computers to the ease of video conferencing or netconferencing. We are moving into a period where it is very critical to still be able listen and gather information off voice. That is one thing I love about this series. It is a medium to do this. That is why on long trips, we take this series and the many book on cd's we own with us, and have our kids listen.

Anyway, my thoughts.

Lalwendë

03-16-2008, 03:12 PM

I've remembered what the scary sound effect for the Balrog reminded me of. A blow torch! Is that what it was? Put through an echo of some kind?

Anyway...

Doesn't Gimli shine through in this episode? Why on earth Jackson chose to go with portraying him as some vertically challenged buffoon I'll never know but it doesn't half show up as a travesty after you listen to this Gimli! And I love that nice touch where there's a moment of silence after he's waxed lyrical over Galadriel after they leave in the boats, following which he's brought back to reality sharpish as the boast join the main current of the Anduin. Excellent stuff.

Other characters are better in this, too, such as Galadriel's voice is nicer (I love Cate Blanchett but my only drawback was she sounded too deep, like Margaret Thatcher, as Galadriel ;)), Haldir is less camp (I kept expecting him to launch into a rendition of an ABBA song in the film) and Celeborn is not a cipher.

I noticed that Galadriel's arms are described too - so she must be wearing a sleeveless gown then? Might not seem like much of note, but I do like to picture what characters may be wearing...

Lothlorien came across as a proper woodland glade too with the soft birdsong in the background.

Now one thing I missed in the radio version was there was not all that much of Boromir, as he seems to get lost in the general conversation, and in the books I like reading about his developing determination to go to Gondor, his developing interest in the Ring and that slight, simmering mistrust of Aragorn. Though that would be hard to portray without the aid of showing him giving glowering looks and so on ;) But finally here we get to see plenty of Boromir! I like how we get plenty of time on his scene with Frodo and how he builds up to that final step; I also like how he's a bit shady and ashamed when he gets back to the rest of them.

Brian Sibley

03-17-2008, 03:52 AM

I did like the way Celeborn was played by Simon Cadell (& that the BBC budget stretched to employing an actor, rather than, as with the movie, having to resort to a robot...), though you do half expect him to greet the Fellowship with an awkward 'Hi de Hi!'...... No, unfair. Cadell's performance was subtle & informed.

I was surprised to realise that Cadell had already been in Hi de Hi (1980) when he worked on Rings. But I agree his performance in a small role was strong - and he was at least a real presence, unlike the film.

Which brings me to a question about the 'bit players' - how much background were they given as to their characters, & what was happening? And how many of them were like Michael Hordern, with no real clue about what was happening? Marian Diamond's Galadriel has always been one of my favourite performances - I love her voice.

Yes, Marian's performance was excellent and she worked wonders in those few short scenes without any radiophonic tricksy stuff. My problem with the film is similar to the reaction I have when Gandalf becomes threatening at Bag End - it is just so unsubtle...

How much were the actors told? Not a great deal, I imagine - the time constraints in the recording sessions were pretty severe. Probably not much more than any actor in a soap opera is given about what is to happen to them. I seem to remember drawing up a list of characters and who they were and various reference books (there were fewer of them then!) were available.

But most of the actors would have been told who/what their character was and - since they didn't have all 26 scripts before the recordings began - would have learned their destiny as each new episode came to them.

Unless, of course, they had read the book...

Oh yes, were any of the actors fans of the story beforehand? I know Peter Woodthorpe said at Church House that he only read the parts of the book in which Gollum appeared & didn't really know the other events of the story.

I'm trying to remember... Ian Holm, I think, had already read the book and certainly read it in close detail while preparing for the role. David Collings (Legolas) was a devoted fan of the book and knew it well which was a great help in the Fellowship scenes. I'm sure some of the others had read it or seen the truncated Bakshi version. The time available and the fees paid would probably not have induced many who hadn't read the book to do so...

I remember reading, in John (Bilbo) Le Mesurier's posthumous biography, a letter written to a show-biz friend saying something to the effect that he was working on The Lord of the Rings for the BBC, didn't have the faintest idea what it was all about but that it was all very jolly because he was working with old friends like Hordern who also didn't seem to know what was going on...

Which is a bit like real life, I guess... :)

What else? No Amon Hen. I wonder why (of course, one always assumes 'time constraints' as the reason for cuts, but I do wonder whether anything got cut simply because there was no way of dramatising it effectively). However, I did think the scene between Boromir & Frodo was brialliantly done. Michael Graham Cox conveyed all the pain, confusion, & egotistic desire of Boromir perfectly, the sense of a man in a state of absolute hopelessness grasping at what he feels is his people's only chance for survival. MGC is often ignored in discussions of the series, but I think he is absolutely brilliant here.

Amon Hen was cut for several reasons: time (always a pressing factor); the necessity to have Frodo soliloquising on the Seat of Seeing - always a difficult thing to achieve on radio; and because the Eye imagery had featured so recently in the Mirror of Galadriel episode where it had similarly been described in a mini-Frodo-monologue...

davem

03-17-2008, 07:40 AM

Yes, Marian's performance was excellent and she worked wonders in those few short scenes without any radiophonic tricksy stuff. My problem with the film is similar to the reaction I have when Gandalf becomes threatening at Bag End - it is just so unsubtle...

I think Jackson & the writers too often fell into the old 'show, don't tell' trap - film has advantages over radio in that you can show things, but there's always the temptation to show too much - to 'shout' rather than just 'say'. Brian Rosbury described movie Galadriel as a 'screaming sea-green hell-hag' or somesuch. Once again, as with the Balrog, radio allows the listener to visualise the characters/events as they wish, & not to have a director impose an image on them. Galadriel should not go 'psycho' at that point - however good the sfx a director has may be.

I'm trying to remember... Ian Holm, I think, had already read the book and certainly read it in close detail while preparing for the role. David Collings (Legolas) was a devoted fan of the book and knew it well which was a great help in the Fellowship scenes.
I remember reading, in John (Bilbo) Le Mesurier's posthumous biography, a letter written to a show-biz friend saying something to the effect that he was working on The Lord of the Rings for the BBC, didn't have the faintest idea what it was all about but that it was all very jolly because he was working with old friends like Hordern who also didn't seem to know what was going on...

Hmm, you know, listening to the Church House recording, I got the feeling that David Collings was in the same position of not really knowing the story. I don't know why - of course, Peter Woodthorpe tended to take over the discussion a bit! Did you have Ian or David doing an 'Ian McKellan', wandering the studio with a copy of the book & making 'suggestions'?

More seriuously - how much of the recording was out of sequence - I think I heard Jane Morgan mention that the last few episodes at least we're recorded in order, but was there a lot of jumping around Bag End one day, Pelenor Fields the next, then Lothlorien the day after, etc...

I didn't realise that John Le Mesurier was in the same boat as Michael Hordern & didn't know what was going on - still, the magic of radio (or Middle-earth) worked in both cases.

Amon Hen was cut for several reasons: time (always a pressing factor); the necessity to have Frodo soliloquising on the Seat of Seeing - always a difficult thing to achieve on radio; and because the Eye imagery had featured so recently in the Mirror of Galadriel episode where it had similarly been described in a mini-Frodo-monologue...

I see what you mean - Frodo's vision on Amon Hen, with the armies massing for the coming war, is one of the scenes from the book that sticks in my mind most strongly, but I don't see that working as a soliloquy, & you can't keep using the narrator to describe what's happening. Was there a temptation to keep resorting to the narrator - I think you hit the right balance, but it must be tempting to avoid the soliloquites, (or giving poor Pippin all the obvious questions to ask!) by just having the narrator tell the listener what's happening? Were there points at which you struggled over when to use a soliloquy & when to use the narrator - in other words did you only use the narrator when you couldn't use a character, or were there points where you could have written a scenes for the characters, but chose to use the narrator instead? What I'm getting at is did you decide to have a narrator in the series because there were things you couldn't handle any other way - was he a last resort - or was he seen as another character whose role was essential to telling the story?

Brian Sibley

03-18-2008, 04:14 AM

Hmm, you know, listening to the Church House recording, I got the feeling that David Collings was in the same position of not really knowing the story. I don't know why - of course, Peter Woodthorpe tended to take over the discussion a bit! Did you have Ian or David doing an 'Ian McKellan', wandering the studio with a copy of the book & making 'suggestions'?

Maybe my memory is at fault regarding Collings, but I thought he knew the book pretty well. Woodthorpe was a lovely man and a great actor, but he never found it easy to share the spotlight!

More seriously - how much of the recording was out of sequence - I think I heard Jane Morgan mention that the last few episodes at least we're recorded in order, but was there a lot of jumping around Bag End one day, Pelenor Fields the next, then Lothlorien the day after, etc...

Not sure where or when Jane said that - or why... To teh best of my recall, with a few exceptions (to accommodate actors who would otherwise have had to come in for one day in order to deliver a couple of lines) the series was recorded episode by episode following the schedule I illustrated a few posts ago...

However, once the Fellowship had been broken and we were following three or more strands of story, it would be usual to record, say, all the Frodo and Sam scenes and then the Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas scenes and then those with Merry Pippin and the orcs.

The only other reason why scenes might be recorded significantly out of order would be because there were a couple of hours when we had access to the RDC (Radio Drama Company) and they were needed for 'crowd' scenes such as the party at Bag End and the bar of The Prancing Pony.

Otherwise, the recording schedule was pretty tightly followed - a day and a half per episode, two days for difficult sequences.

I didn't realise that John Le Mesurier was in the same boat as Michael Hordern & didn't know what was going on - still, the magic of radio (or Middle-earth) worked in both cases.

True! :)

I see what you mean - Frodo's vision on Amon Hen, with the armies massing for the coming war, is one of the scenes from the book that sticks in my mind most strongly, but I don't see that working as a soliloquy, & you can't keep using the narrator to describe what's happening. Was there a temptation to keep resorting to the narrator - I think you hit the right balance, but it must be tempting to avoid the soliloquies, (or giving poor Pippin all the obvious questions to ask!) by just having the narrator tell the listener what's happening? Were there points at which you struggled over when to use a soliloquy & when to use the narrator - in other words did you only use the narrator when you couldn't use a character, or were there points where you could have written a scenes for the characters, but chose to use the narrator instead? What I'm getting at is did you decide to have a narrator in the series because there were things you couldn't handle any other way - was he a last resort - or was he seen as another character whose role was essential to telling the story?

I think, now, that the remarks about the Narrator being another character which we made immediately after the series had been recorded, were probably something of a post-rationalisation.

The truth is that the radio style at the time was for someone to be telling the story (a character in the story or an authorial-voice-type Narrator); I don't think we ever thought of trying to do the story without a narrative voice and I'm pretty much certain that we primarily wanted to use that voice to get us as quickly as possible from A to B or to set a scene without having too many lines like "Look at those huge stone figures standing on either side of the river..."

Certainly I never consciously thought I was writing something specifically for the Narrator as a character - although Michael Bakewell has described writing a scene (the Balrog, perhaps?) for which, he said, he wrote a note in the script to the effect that even the Narrator should be astonished by this scene...

My initial choice was for Tolkien-like figure (authoritative, professorial) who would be telling you about his world. I later did something like that in my dramatisations of the Gormenghast books where the Narrator was 'The Artist' and whilst not sounding like Mervyn Peake was definitely intended to be the creative voice behind the stories...

I was, however, persuaded by that the argument (not that I actually had any choice in the matter!!) that it would be better to have a younger voice that could describe Middle-earth more in the style of a reporter describing a real place with real events.

I think it worked well, but if such a production were ever to be mounted today, the narrative device would be seen as too 'old fashioned' and it would probably be made without it. Narrator-less productions can be done: I did five of the seven Chronicles of Narnia in this way (the first two had a narrator), but it is difficult and sometimes the problems it creates and the loss to the richness of the story just aren't worth it!

By the way, we do seem to be having a very close-knit conversation on this list - considering how many people are apparently reading it!! :rolleyes:

davem

03-18-2008, 11:13 AM

I wouldn't be without Gerard Murphy's Narrator. I love his voice. In many ways he holds the whole thing together - however many storylines are running we always have Gerard's beautiful voice guiding us along. I honestly think that the narrator is vital & that the series would have been the poorer without him.

Mithalwen

03-19-2008, 03:53 PM

He really conveys a sense of immediacy - narrators can sound far too "knowing" - which would of course have been a problem if one of the fellowship had been a narrator.

I was thinking about this partly in relation to a discussion elsewhere about the films, and unless you take a radically different approach to the material and lose the perspective of going through the story basically at hobbit level of knowledge (cf the difference between "TheQuest of Erebor" in UT and the Hobbit), you need a narrator who doesn't sound too omniscient.

I am sorry I have been so lacking in my contributions sinceI have so been enjoying my more focused re listenings. I am continually amazed at how much has been kept especially given the shortness of the original episodes and the consequent need to make allowances for new listeners.

I am also impressed that although I know the story so well I am still on tenterhooks at the dramatic moments and still moved.

This episode contains perhaps my favourite piece of dialogue which is given proper treatment - the "memory is not what the heart desires" . A good example of what for me makes this adaptation superior to the films. Yes this little sequence may not move the plot on but it tells so much about these characters - as characters, as representatives of their races and also gets to the heart of so much of the essence of the story. Courage is not enough nor is sacrifice. Gimli and Boromir are so confident of their strength that this moment of weakness make Gimli seem very human - for want of a more appropriate word.

Mithalwen

03-19-2008, 04:11 PM

Other characters are better in this, too, such as Galadriel's voice is nicer (I love Cate Blanchett but my only drawback was she sounded too deep, like Margaret Thatcher, as Galadriel ;)), Haldir is less camp (I kept expecting him to launch into a rendition of an ABBA song in the film) and Celeborn is not a cipher.

I noticed that Galadriel's arms are described too - so she must be wearing a sleeveless gown then? Might not seem like much of note, but I do like to picture what characters may be wearing...

Oh but while I think Marian Diamond does very well, I dont' thinkyou can criticise Cate since Galadriel is specifically stated to have a voice deeper than usual for a woman. As for the dress, I imagined wide floaty sleeves ... surely bit nippy for sleeveless in February even for an elf.

I like that there seems to be a fairly consistent elvish style of speaking - light and soft but not weak. David Collings voice is very distinctive but Elrond, Glorfindel and Haldir all tone. I must say from the discussions I got the impression that David Collings knew the books but couldn't get many words in edgeways . I don't think you could play an elf so well without knowing what was going on. Gandalf and Bilbo "fall off the page" so much more and have so much more dialogue.

Anyway I am sorry to ramble - and if I am repeating..I am not up to speed with everything yet but now I have got going again... :D

davem

03-19-2008, 04:19 PM

Oh but while I think Marian Diamond does very well, I dont' thinkyou can criticise Cate since Galadriel is specifically stated to have a voice deeper than usual for a woman.

Well, they did use a bloke (Oz Clarke) to sing her Lament....no wonder he turned to drink:p

Mithalwen

03-19-2008, 04:26 PM

No it was the fine countertenor David James. Oz Clarke did the baritone stuff - though I think in the production Bill Nighy actually sang Gil Galad and In Western Lands which are sung on the music tape by Clarke. Of course the counter-tenor range is similar to a contralto or mezzo but has a different timbre, and is also often used for "supernatural roles". Sorry to be geeky but this is the song that hooked me onto countertenors .... The purity of sound is presumably why Oliver used a treble rather than a soprano for A Elbereth Gilthoniel and Bilbos last song.

David James is a member of the Hilliard Ensemble which produced the amazing collaboration "officium" with Jan Gabarek,

davem

03-19-2008, 04:51 PM

No - it has to be Oz Clarke for the joke to work.

Mithalwen

03-20-2008, 12:24 PM

It would take more than that ;)

Besides Clarke had already turned to drink by the time he was at Cambridge.

I'm a geek. Let me be..... :cool:

Mithalwen

03-20-2008, 12:38 PM

davem

03-20-2008, 12:52 PM

Having been listening again and I am so glad that the gift giving was included in full. It is something that could so easily have been sacrificed to some extent but having seen the threat to the Shire in the Mirror, the box of earth gives hope for healing of whatever wounds may be inflicted. It also preserves a link to the larger mythology since the lone mallorn in the shire and the renewed white tree in Gondor are images of the Two Trees of Valinor.

There are just so many 'little' things like that that a less sensitive adaptor would have thrown out. I was quite surprised to read that the BBC were negotiating the radio rights to LotR before they had an adaptor - or was that what happened? Was it the case that they were going for the rights & when they got them they would just have looked for a handy adaptor? I know Michael Bakewell was drafted in because he had adapted War & Peace for Radio 4, but was there anyone else in mind? I can't help thinking how lucky we were to have someone like Brian involved who actually loved the book & was prepared to include such little details.

Mithalwen

03-20-2008, 01:00 PM

Mithalwen

03-20-2008, 04:02 PM

By the way..did I imagine it or does Aragorn speak of Caras Galadhrim?

davem

03-20-2008, 04:06 PM

By the way..did I imagine it or does Aragorn speak of Caras Galadhrim?

Aragorn: Here is the heart of Elvendom on earth. Arwen vanimelda, namárië! Here my heart dwells ever, unless there be light beyond the dark roads that we must tread. Let us continue our journey to Caras Galadhrim, to the City of Green Towers.

All in the transcript http://www.tolkienradio.com/mirrorofgaladriel.html

Mithalwen

03-20-2008, 04:11 PM

I suspect most people would seem young to Theoden. :p

Boromir was also the same age as Theodred (who was 24 when Theodwyn died soon after her husband in 3002) and who was killed just the day before him... surely that would have been on his father's mind.

davem

03-23-2008, 11:09 AM

Transcript: http://www.tolkienradio.com/breakingfellowship.html

This episode takes us nearly half way through the adaptation. We begin with the death of Boromir & end with the reappearance of Gandalf.

The Three Hunters: the fallen Bormir is found by Aragorn, he is given to Rauros, & then they begin their pursuit of the Orcs who have taken Merry & Pippin & along the way they meet with Eomer & the Rohirrim. I particularly liked Robert Stephen's performance in this part. He starts out confused, angry with himself & at possibly one of the lowest points in his life. Slowly he finds his inner resources of strength & courage. He truly becomes a leader here, inspiring his companions,who are equally overwhelmed by grief & confusion, For the first time in the story we see the King in waiting break the surface. Up to now he has been Strider the Ranger, Now he is Aragorn, heir of Elendil. The transformation is awe-inspiring. When he confronts Eomer & tells forth his heritage:

I am Aragorn son of Arathorn and am called Elessar the Elfstone, Dúnadan, the heir of Isildur Elendil's son of Gondor.
Here is the Sword that was Broken and is forged again! Will you aid me or thwart me? Choose swiftly!

We know we are in the presence of true majesty.

The funeral of Boromir is beatifully handled, Stephen Oliver's music enhancing the sense of tragedy. This Boromir is (as in the book) not a 'sympathetic' figure, but we never doubt that he is a great warrior. Its interesting that the funeral he recieves is a Pagan one. Boromir is a warrior in the line of both Turin & Beowulf & recieves a suitably 'Viking' send off. He floats into the West, home of heroes from Scyld Sceafing onwards.

Again, we see how the medium helps. Battles on radio tend towards 'noise' & don't come across well, so the focus is on the characters. The meeting with the Rohirrim is beautifully done, Eomer is one of my favourite characters in this adaptation, & Anthony Hyde plays him beautifully.

The Merry & Pippin scenes are done beautifully too, & we begin to see their true characters now they are out from under the shadow of the rest of the Fellowship. Pippin is shown to be clever & resourceful, & Merry finds himself somewhat on the back foot! Treebeard is wonderful, wise, compassionate, complex, but never stupid or confused. The great thing about this adaptation, for me, is the time given to each scene. After watching the movie one is quite surprised at how long the scenes go on - few quick cuts, each scene allowed to play out properly, not cut short in order to get to the next 'joke' or action sequence. Character wins out over action.

The Frodo/Sam/Gollum sequence (longer than I remembered) is brilliantly done, & Ian Holm's performance is incredible. His sudden turning on Gollum ("How dare you!") is chilling. This is not the Frodo we've come to know & love & we get a glimpse of the Frodo he will become. There's a 'monster' growing in there, & here it rears its ugly head, just for a moment.

What else? Peter Woodthorpe's Gollum is a tour de force - clearly psychologically shattered, ranting, raving, spluttering over his words, gasping, shrieking, weeping struggling to speak. Its easy to unerstand Sam's desire to be rid of him & Frodo's pity for him. I don't think there's another actor who could have played him. Sorry movie fans, but Andy Serkis doesn't come close. Serkis stated that he portrayed Gollum as an addict. Woodthorpe said he played Gollum as 'half-animal'; I think that comes across here. I was also reminded of one of the lines on Gollum's song in the LotR stage show - 'Precious & me, alone we'll be, now & for always'. Gollum doesn't actually want anything but the Ring. He desires to get it back & retreat to his cave to be alone forever with it. Everything, everyone, else is simply an obstacle to his getting the Ring. I think Woodthorpe nailed that perfectly.

Finally, Gandalf returns. The White Rider. And this is the one point where it nearly didn't come off - I recognised Michael Hordern's voice straight off - yet that was inevitable I suppose. However, I suppose the adaptors simply accepted that & got the moment over as quickly as possible!

Anyway, that's me intro.... all I can say now is "Let's hunt some Or......" er "Forth the Three Hunters!"

(though hopefully we'll see more than three contributors to this one..... :p )

MatthewM

03-23-2008, 12:54 PM

Another thing that strikes me is that if Boromir wasn't going to be killed anyway, you'd have to murder him. He is a constant source of negativity yet so up himself he is in danger of turning inside out. Had he survived I don't know how many companions he woudl have got to go to Minas Tirith. The film Boromir is more sympathetic in some ways (and that is from one of the few red-blooded women who isn't keen of Sean Bean) :p

You are wrong. If Boromir had survived, he would have returned to Minas Tirith, alone if need be (as he said), and he would have saved many soliders from dying at Osgiliath, you better believe it. Turning inside out? What in the world are you talking about? Also who cares if he was negative? He was positive a good amount of times as well during the journey.

And they aren't talking about the overly sympathetic Bean portrayal here. I'm not a fan of MGC either. Book Boromir is the true Boromir, obviously.

Mithalwen

03-24-2008, 02:08 PM

Matthew M, I will assume that you have had a sense of humour failure and were not intending to be rude... :rolleyes:

It just struck me on listening to the tapes, which is what we are talking about that everything Boromir says is either pompous or negative, just what you want in a travelling companion.

Mithalwen

03-24-2008, 03:17 PM

Excellent summary Dave. I have only heard the first side of this one and amazingly nearly four chapters are covered. Assuming that the original episodes correspond nearly with the cassette sides this would have been a Frodo-free episode. Obviously that tallies with the book but quite brave I would have thought for the adaptation to omit him for a week.

While we are only at the start of "The Two Towers" but nearly half way through the adaptation, I think that the rapid acceleration mentioned above is possible becasue so much has been set up already. We have heard Saruman, Gollum and Theoden - their own voices not reported speech giving the radio an advantage even over the book. And as Dave has already said the surviving members of the fellowship are more individual - Pippin's impetuosity is seen as a positive for once. The bond between Gimli and Legolas is demonstrated by the way they face up to Eomer together in defence of Galadriel. And Aragorn makes the decision that makes eventual success possible.

And we meet Treebeard. Maybe it it the speakers in the car but I nearly jumped out of my skin at the first HOOM....

TBC

ArathornJax

03-25-2008, 10:04 PM

This is where I have a different take on Aragorn then what those who are influenced by movie or other adaptations. For me, Aragorn is either Aragorn the Hero from day one, or Aragorn the Becoming/Emerging Hero, and where the becoming is more important then the hero. I guess regardless of adaptation, I feel that Aragorn is not the emerging hero, or the becoming hero, but is the hero from the get go.

Aragorn shows that he is the hero from the beginning in many of his actions, and at times throughout the travels of the Fellowship. We see Aragorn at Bree where Gandalf has left a list of his titles, a poem about him, and his real name. In Rivendell he is seen looking kingly, if not Elven. His actions at the Council further show his nobility and his hero status. On the Journey South, Aragorn challenges Gandalf on going through Moria, which displays his leadership and his deference to Gandalf, whom he knows is a Maia. Next at the Bridge of Khazad-dum, when he is willing to stand with Gandalf and Boromir against the Balrog. We see him move the Fellowship out of danger or closer to Lorien, taking a leadership role there. Celeborn consults with him and it is Aragorn who is making the decisions after Gandalf's fall.

Thus Aragorn's lament here is that in fact a mourn of his decisions in trying to resolve two inner conflicts. I do not believe that Aragorn intended or wanted to go to Mordor with Frodo. Not out of fear, but out of his own desires. I believe that if Gandalf had survived, Aragorn would have gone with Boromir to Minis Tirith. Why? Aragorn's heart was set upon reclaiming the throne of Gondor and Arnor. He would have been recognized as royalty by his people and the mere presence of his Rangers in the North would extend his claim to all of Eriador. In Gondor, the tradition had been set with Earnil, that someone of royal blood who had been victorious in battle and thus had won victory and glory for Gondor would become king. Aragorn's greatest desire was to gain the hand of Arwen. Thus going and showing his power in arms to Minis Tirith would have advanced his own claim as the last descendant in direct lineage from Elendil, something his forefather Arevedui had failed to do and had thus failed to reunite the two realms.

Then after Gandalf's fall, I believe that Aragorn felt that his duty lay with Frodo and with the quest, to destroy the ring. Aragorn again is showing his hero status by surrendering his own will and desires, and moving forward to do the noble and right thing. I think he felt that his duty was to go to Mordor with Frodo, and the breaking of the Fellowship represented to him, a failure of his duty with Frodo. It doesn't mean that he is becoming or moving to being a hero, he is a hero at this point, and throughout the story. That makes sense to me for Aragorn's words here are: Now the Company is all in ruin. It is I that have failed. Vain was Gandalf's trust in me. Thus was Aragorn's lament here, not of an emerging King, but of a Lord of Numenor of Old, willing to do his duty, but feeling that his own choices and fate have taken him from his duty. One of the things missing here for me was Aragorn holding Boromir and weeping. I think this cements Aragorn as a hero, and shows his depth of compassion.

We can see this further in Aragorn's comments to Legolas and Gimli when he says I would have guided Frodo to Mordor and gone with him to the end; but if I seek him now in the wilderness, I must abandon the captives to torment and death. My heart speaks clearly at last: the fate of the Bearer is in my hands no longer.

Aragorn's heart here (and in the adaptations and book) show that his heart was divided between fulfilling his status as a hero by going with Frodo to Mordor and the end, or by going to Minis Tirith and fulfilling that destiny. At last Aragorn is no longer torn and he can now seek his destiny.

Thus Aragorn was not a hero becoming, but was a hero who showed glimpses of his true self when it was appropriate or when it served a purpose.

In terms of Boromir's death, his funeral may have been pagan, and I think we can discuss that, but his death was very Christian, or Catholic. Boromir gave a death bed and final confession. It is very similar to Roland's death who does against a tree with a broken horn next to him. I am very grateful that in the BBC adaptation that the song sung by Aragorn and Legolas was omitted.

I also loved the voice work of Treebeard and felt it was a wonderful job. The whole Treebeard, Merry and Pippin scene really showed how the two Hobbits are developing, while introducing Treebeard.

Finally, for me, the highlight was the scene with Frodo, Sam and Gollum where Frodo reflects on his words on pity and realizes that he has pity for Gollum. This scene was magic for me.

I also noticed an error in the text that DaveM posted on this episode. When Aragorn says:

Aragorn: Gandalf! Beyond all hope you return to us in our need! What veil was over my site?

This really should be sight.

Lots more and I may post more tomorrow. I was out of town and on the northern California coast with my wife, kids, my mother, my two sisters and there families until today. No Internet, no TV, no video games, it was heaven and a welcome break.

davem

03-26-2008, 06:16 AM

In terms of Boromir's death, his funeral may have been pagan, and I think we can discuss that, but his death was very Christian, or Catholic. Boromir gave a death bed and final confession. It is very similar to Roland's death who does against a tree with a broken horn next to him. I am very grateful that in the BBC adaptation that the song sung by Aragorn and Legolas was omitted. .

I can't see that you could argue that Boromir's funeral wasn't 'Pagan' (though probably Tolkien would have used the term 'heroic'). Boat/ship funerals - whether by burning, burial or launching the craft onto the sea, are not part of Christian tradition, & we only find Christian grave goods associated with them in societies where pre-Christian traditions have carried over. Also, the West as the place of Paradise originated in Pagan belief & played no part in Christian trradition, where the East (direction of sunrise) was seen as the 'sacred' direction - if any direction was 'sacred'.

Also, one has to take into account the 'invocation' of the four winds/four directions in the funeral song. I honestly can't see any 'Christian' element in the funeral, & the overall feel of the scene is far more reminiscent of Pagan customs. That said, I wouldn't argue that Tolkien was attempting to re-create a 'Pagan' send off, merely that if we look for resonances we will find more in Beowulf than we will in the Bible.

Boromir's death is less clearly 'Pagan', but I think the whole 'deathbed confession/absolution' thing has been pushed way too far by many commentators looking to 'prove' the 'Christian' nature of the work. Boromir does not ask for absolution. He acknowledges his fault in attempting to take the Ring - which one would expect from a warrior at his death, & he asks Aragorn to save his people. Effectively he admits he has done wrong & has paid the price - though its entirely possible to read his words as implying that his real failure in his own eyes was his failure to save his people - ie a tactical, rather than a moral, failure. The death scene may be interpretable in the way you imply, but I think that its more a case of 'applicability' - its not not Christian/Catholic, but that's a long way from saying it is Christian/Catholic. What I mean is, a reader who was only familiar with old legends & knew nothing about Catholic ritual/tradition is not going to read that scene & be left totally confused by what was happening. It makes perfect sense given what we know of the characters & the situation they have found themselves in.

But I digress....

MatthewM

03-26-2008, 08:12 AM

Boromir's death is less clearly 'Pagan', but I think the whole 'deathbed confession/absolution' thing has been pushed way too far by many commentators looking to 'prove' the 'Christian' nature of the work. Boromir does not ask for absolution. He acknowledges his fault in attempting to take the Ring - which one would expect from a warrior at his death, & he asks Aragorn to save his people. Effectively he admits he has done wrong & has paid the price - though its entirely possible to read his words as implying that his real failure in his own eyes was his failure to save his people - ie a tactical, rather than a moral, failure. The death scene may be interpretable in the way you imply, but I think that its more a case of 'applicability' - its not not Christian/Catholic, but that's a long way from saying it is Christian/Catholic. What I mean is, a reader who was only familiar with old legends & knew nothing about Catholic ritual/tradition is not going to read that scene & be left totally confused by what was happening. It makes perfect sense given what we know of the characters & the situation they have found themselves in.

Boromir's death can be seen as having Christian ties, as Boromir in his last words did give a confession. His death can also be seen as having pagan ties, like you pointed out. Neither of you are 100% correct. If you analyze something so hard looking for similarities, eventually you will find some on both ends. Boromir's funeral is just that - the funeral of Boromir. Why do you have to over analyze it?

davem

03-26-2008, 11:31 AM

Boromir's death can be seen as having Christian ties, as Boromir in his last words did give a confession. His death can also be seen as having pagan ties, like you pointed out. Neither of you are 100% correct. If you analyze something so hard looking for similarities, eventually you will find some on both ends. Boromir's funeral is just that - the funeral of Boromir. Why do you have to over analyze it?

It is the funeral of Boromir, of course. The issue is one of Tolkien's sources, & of what he is trying to evoke.

Compare Boromir's funeral

Now they laid Boromir in the middle of the boat that was to bear him away. .... His helm they set beside him, and across his lap they laid the cloven horn and the hilt and shards of his sword; beneath his feet they put the swords of his enemies. Then fastening the prow to the stern of the other boat, they drew him out into the water. .... Sorrowfully they cast loose the funeral boat: there Boromir lay, restful, peaceful, gliding upon the bosom of the flowing water. The stream took him while they held their own boat back with their paddles. He floated by them, and slowly his boat departed, waning to a dark spot against the golden light; and then suddenly it vanished. Rauros roared on unchanging. The River had taken Boromir son of Denethor, and he was not seen again in Minas Tirith, standing as he used to stand upon the White Tower in the morning. But in Gondor in after-days it long was said that the elven-boat rode the falls and the foaming pool, and bore him down through Osgiliath, and past the many mouths of Anduin, out into the Great Sea at night under the stars.

with Scyld Scefing's funeral from Beowulf:

þær æt hyðe stod hringedstefna,
In the roadstead rocked a ring-dight vessel,

isig ond utfus, æþelinges fær.
ice-flecked, outbound, atheling’s barge:

Aledon þa leofne þeoden,
there laid they down their darling lord

beaga bryttan, on bearm scipes,
on the breast of the boat, the breaker-of-rings,

mærne be mæste. þær wæs madma fela
by the mast the mighty one. Many a treasure

of feorwegum, frætwa, gelæded;
fetched from far was freighted with him.

ne hyrde ic cymlicor ceol gegyrwan
No ship have I known so nobly dight

hildewæpnum ond heaðowædum,
with weapons of war and weeds of battle,

billum ond byrnum; him on bearme læg
with breastplate and blade: on his bosom lay

madma mænigo, þa him mid scoldon
a heaped hoard that hence should go

on flodes æht feor gewitan.
far o’er the flood with him floating away.

Nalæs hi hine læssan lacum teodan,
No less these loaded the lordly gifts,

þeodgestreonum, þon þa dydon
thanes’ huge treasure, than those had done

þe hine æt frumsceafte forð onsendon
who in former time forth had sent him

ænne ofer yðe umborwesende.
sole on the seas, a suckling child.

þa gyt hie him asetton segen geldenne
High o’er his head they hoist the standard,

heah ofer heafod, leton holm beran,
a gold-wove banner; let billows take him,

geafon on garsecg; him wæs geomor sefa,
gave him to ocean. Grave were their spirits,

murnende mod. Men ne cunnon
mournful their mood. No man is able

secgan to soðe, selerædende,
to say in sooth, no son of the halls,

hæleð under heofenum, hwa þæm hlæste onfeng.
no hero ’neath heaven, — who harbored that freight!

MatthewM

03-26-2008, 03:20 PM

I still think if you are looking to compare his death to a certain mold such as a Christian death or a Pagan death, you will eventually find similarities for both.

davem

03-26-2008, 03:47 PM

I still think if you are looking to compare his death to a certain mold such as a Christian death or a Pagan death, you will eventually find similarities for both.

I agree - the danger of confusing applicability & 'allegory' is ever present. One interprets events in the book as one will. Now...I think perhaps we should redirect this discussion to another thread, before we get too far away from the topic & the admins begin to stir....

ArathornJax

03-26-2008, 06:49 PM

Another thing that I really picked up on in listening is the theme of the various roads that each party is meant to go on. Treebeard declares to Merry and Pippin that "Our roads go together - - to Isengard!"

Aragorn declared that "the fate of the bearer is not in his hands."

Gandalf tells Aragorn that Aragorn must go to Edoras as he is needed there.

Finally, the journey of Frodo and Sam become interwoven with Gollum on the road they take together.

I believe this goes back to that theme earlier found in The Black Riders:

Frodo:

The Road goes ever on and on
Down from the door where it began.
Now far ahead the Road has gone,
And I must follow, if I can,
Pursuing it with eager feet,
Until it join some larger way,
Where many paths and errands meet.
And whither then? I cannot say.

Surely we see the joining of much larger ways where many paths and errands meet. Finally, from here where will it go, we don't know.

I don't know why, but this episode really brought these points together for me. I'm not sure if that was the intent, but surely we can see how the errands of Merry and Pippin with Treebeard; Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli with Gandalf going to Edoras; and Sam and Frodo going to Mordor while meeting a new guide in Gollum.

Brian Sibley

03-28-2008, 05:21 AM

I have only heard the first side of this one and amazingly nearly four chapters are covered. Assuming that the original episodes correspond nearly with the cassette sides this would have been a Frodo-free episode. Obviously that tallies with the book but quite brave I would have thought for the adaptation to omit him for a week.

I've been off the forum for some while and have been playing catch-up. I used to get e-mails telling me when a new posting appeared, but, for some reason, they've stopped...

Anyway, on the subject of Frodo's absence: this is one of the effects of the re-editing of the series from 26 half-hours to 13 one hours. I wasn't involved in or consulted about this process, but I imagine that a couple of Frodo scenes would have been shifted from one half hour to the next so that the scenes could run longer in the hour-format.

I really wish it were possible for people to listen in the original format, but alas...

Brian Sibley

03-28-2008, 05:24 AM

"Always be careful, my boy, what you make up. Life's more full of things made up on the Spur of the Moment than most people realise. Beware of the Spur of the Moment. It may turn & rend you." Frank Baker: 'Miss Hargreaves'.

Dave - Nice to see you quoting Miss H!

davem

03-28-2008, 06:00 AM

Anyway, on the subject of Frodo's absence: this is one of the effects of the re-editing of the series from 26 half-hours to 13 one hours. I wasn't involved in or consulted about this process, but I imagine that a couple of Frodo scenes would have been shifted from one half hour to the next so that the scenes could run longer in the hour-format.

I really wish it were possible for people to listen in the original format, but alas...

My memory is so hazy regarding the original broadcasts - I only managed to tape teh last three episodes & I've long since lost the tapes :( . Considering the number of times I've listened to this version I was quite surprised how long it took before we got to Frodo & Sam - not quite as long as the book, but it started to feel that way! I did like the longer scenes with Frodo/Sam/Gollum though. I know the episodes were re-edited again when the film was released to bring them more in line with the books - we're they actually edited to match the books, with the Aragorn/Legolas/Gimli/Merry & Pippin storyline complete & then the Frodo/Sam/Gollum storyline following on? I wouldn't mind hearing it done that way.

"Always be careful, my boy, what you make up. Life's more full of things made up on the Spur of the Moment than most people realise. Beware of the Spur of the Moment. It may turn & rend you." Frank Baker: 'Miss Hargreaves'.

Dave - Nice to see you quoting Miss H!

Well, you put me onto that one (via the Church House recording). I'd love to hear your adaptation - though I bet it was never made available... don't want to risk Esty's ire by taking the thread off topic, but I'm wondering if Tolkien read Miss H. Its certainly the kind of thing that he was interested in (cf Flieger's 'A Question of Time') & the whole idea of the power of imagination changing reality has echoes in his time travel writings (Notion Club Papers especially). I think the situation as regards getting hold of the novel is about as bad as you indicated when you spoke 20 odd years ago - I got a second hand copy from the limited edition of 300 which came out a few years back & it cost me £30 :eek: - well worth the money though. I recomend the book wholeheartedly, btw.

And for anyone who wants to know more about the book, here's a nice essay by Brian http://www.frankbaker.co.uk/sibley.htm

Mithalwen

03-28-2008, 02:26 PM

Estelyn Telcontar

03-28-2008, 02:36 PM

davem

03-28-2008, 03:04 PM

OK, I would like to join in on the discussion, as I do have some time to listen to the recordings, but I'm having trouble figuring out where the episodes you number start and stop - my box has 10 CDs, but obviously episode 6 and CD 6 are not the same, as I listened to the latter and it's way ahead of what you're discussing here. Is this an idiosyncracy of the German edition I'm using, or is there some way for me to coordinate my recordings with yours?

Hmmm.. I don't know how many versions of this adaptation there are.....

The one Mith, Arathornjax, Hookbill & I are using is the 13 episode series, re-edited from the original 26 episodes (which was later re-re-edited into a slightly different form in response to the Jackson movies), so we're using the 'middle' one. Check the transcripts I've been linking to at the start of my introductions for each episode.

Mithalwen

03-28-2008, 03:26 PM

I believe they were edited to correspond more closely with the book sequence. But otherwise 26 tape sides to 10 cds would mean surely that you should look at the end of 4 and beginning of 5.

Brian Sibley

03-28-2008, 04:24 PM

That is interesting - since side ends so often correspond with a bit of a cliff hanger I assumend that only the joins were amended. One thing I meant to ask was if you always knew that the series recordings would to the public sold or if this is a happy byproduct of BBC enterprises.

It was never envisaged that the series would be sold commercially, that was a by-product of its success.

I remember coveting the music casette and my mother claiming nothing had taking her so much trouble as obtaining it for me for Christmas. I don't remember the full recording being advertised then (I heard the 13 episode version so I suppose this was 82).

It was also available as an LP. Stephen Oliver didn't want to use the actors' versions because they weren't good enough singers (a mistake in my opinion) so the disc was recorded later using professional singers (like Oz Clark) and with much of the incidental music extended, such as the Shadowfax theme. The boy soprano's voice had broken in the interim, so his brother sang those songs instead.

Much as I love the music recording, I do like the way the actors do their own songs in the actual dramatisation. Treebeard and Sam are so well cast but both actors sing their songs very well - were you looking specifically for actors who could sing or would you have dubbed in singers had it been necessary?

I agree about the actor's performances of the songs. But, yes, we were aware that some of the characters would have to sing and the fact that they could was a bonus. I doubt they would ever have been dubbed - Ian Holm couldn't sing, for example, so the 'Man in the Moon' song was spoken instead.

Mithalwen

03-28-2008, 04:35 PM

Ah so I wasn't hallucinating when I thought that the singer was sometimes listed as Jeremy Vine. Matthew Vine is now quite well known as a tenor but I assume Jeremy isn't THAT Jeremy Vine.. though I suppose he would be the right age... !

Well I suppose composers want different things from a performance but at least the actors voices were kept for the broadcasts. Although Oz Clark sings Sam's songs without too much embellishment, the fact that it is clearly Bill Nighy in the broadcast makes them so much more powerful emotionally and of course is far more natural.

Brian Sibley

03-28-2008, 04:38 PM

Hmmm.. I don't know how many versions of this adaptation there are.....

The one Mith, Arathornjax, Hookbill & I are using is the 13 episode series, re-edited from the original 26 episodes (which was later re-re-edited into a slightly different form in response to the Jackson movies), so we're using the 'middle' one. Check the transcripts I've been linking to at the start of my introductions for each episode.

Someone ought to try and work out the differences - even I don't know! The original 26 episode version was re-edited into 13 hours although this only affected the episodes following the Breaking of the Fellowship until Mount Doom.

As I've said, I wasn't involved in that process - in fact, I don't think I was even told it was going to happen. The producer had pretty much got tired of me - I was constantly picking away about things that weren't right during recording until she finally lost patience! I think that the short scenes cutting back and forth between Frodo, Sam and Gollum and the Others were lumped together into longer scenes. I have read that new linking narration was added, if so then Michael Bakewell must have written it; certainly I wasn't asked!

When the films came out, the BBC wanted to issue the series in three 'volumes' but of course this is difficult, since chronologically events in TTT overlap with events in TROTK. I think very little was changed for this new release, other than the fact that the openings and closings were dispensed with altogether - hence the difficulty people with this recording have of knowing where one episode (under the old ordering) begins and ends.

For this release I was asked to write new head- and tail-pieces for Ian Holm which I did and, on the day or recording, they realised they had forgotten to book an announcer to read the new opening and closing announcements to each of the three volumes, so I read them!

Brian Sibley

03-28-2008, 04:48 PM

Ah so I wasn't hallucinating when I thought that the singer was sometimes listed as Jeremy Vine. Matthew Vine is now quite well known as a tenor but I assume Jeremy isn't THAT Jeremy Vine.. though I suppose he would be the right age... !

Actually he was - or is - THAT Jeremy Vine!! The very same... :)

Well I suppose composers want different things from a performance but at least the actors voices were kept for the broadcasts. Although Oz Clark sings Sam's songs without too much embellishment, the fact that it is clearly Bill Nighy in the broadcast makes them so much more powerful emotionally and of course is far more natural.

Clark sang on the broadcasts - performing the extended lay of Theoden and the Ride of the Rohirrim. His recording of Sam's songs was, as I say, made later.

I think Stephen was conscious of creating a, literal, 'record' of his compositions and so wanted them to be performed 'professionally' for posterity. Bill was far more emotional and involved to my mind and I always thought people would rather have had the original cast. However, at least the recording allowed us to have longer versions of the various themes than were ever heard in the series.

Mithalwen

03-28-2008, 04:54 PM

I have been pondering that for years - he cropped up in the Diocesan newsletter
years ago for some reason - maybe involved in Christian Aid - so it didn't seem beyond the bounds of possibility that he might have been a chorister. But it was never mentioned in any bigraphical articles I read so I more or less gave up the notion.

Wow...

Mithalwen

03-29-2008, 03:42 PM

Before the discussion moves on without me tomorrow, there are a couple of things I would like to add. Firstly that while Treebeard's first song is part of the plot, his second "When spring unfolds the beechen leaf" gives a hint of an unexplored vista as far as the adaptation is concerned. Very clever to please the book devotees by acknowledging the Entwives without slowing the action by talking about them. The hobbit / treebeard scenes also give great proof of what can be done with the voice alone. I don't know whether any "magic" was worked but it is just so clear that Treebeard is vastly older and bigger than the hobbits - who sound much more boyish by comparison (whereas their voices sound merely young with the other hobbits).

To go back to the death and funeral of Boromir, I don't want to start an argument but given that Tolkien was both a devout Catholic and extremely proud of his Viking heritage (ref Donald Swann's intro to "The Road goes ever on" we should not be suprised that it is possible to identify elements of both.

Boromir has the opportunity to make a "good death", he confesses and asks for forgiveness - and is reassured by Aragorn. I believe the Catholic church prefers burial to other methods of disposal of bodies but the English are a seafaring nation and sea burial has often been a necessity and is still a choice and perfectly acceptable to the Anglican church (one of the designated sea burial grounds is off the Isle Wight and you can see them leave, robed vicar and all, from our local jetty). Many others have their ashes scattered on the water so I would contest that it is not part of the Christian tradition. However Boromir's funeral is clearly Viking.

Much of Tolkiens creation can be seen as an attempt to reconcile his Catholic beliefs with his personal and professional interest in Norse culture and mythology. Aspects of both can be found; those with a particular interest will pick up o their side more, as someone at Oxonmoot 06 said that the Catholics saw hints of the final victory, pagans the long defeat. Neither side is going to get a knockout blow and trying for a points victory can be tiresome for the disinterested (nb I use disinterested NOT uninterested).

Before I digress totally in to something that belongs in books, I do think the manner of Boromir's death and funeral is significant because we will have the later contrasts of Theoden and Denethor's. The latter is specifically described as heathen in the books, whereas the former is another semi-Viking style since the interment in a barrow is not so far from a ship burial.

Boromir is also in his own way "taking ship" and passing into the west. The sea is so important to the stories of ME and to Tolkien (I think I have a thread coming on) that this can not be without significance. Think of Aragorn's words "Boromir has taken his road" a road may be on sea as well as land (cf the Straight Road).
The elements also have significance I think - dwarves lay their dead in stone, the orcs are consigned to ashes, elves go west .. not unfitting that one of good Numenorean blood is returned to the sea.

Finally the funeral boat is a practical solution. There are several references to disposing differently of friend and foe in the books and one in this episode - the burning of the orcs. There is the strong and recognisable desire to give a comrade a "decent" if not Christian ;) ) burial. This was not possible so they commend him to the water - a routine practice til recently for those who died at sea too far from land.

Ramble over...

Brian Sibley

03-29-2008, 04:00 PM

Mithalwen

03-29-2008, 04:07 PM

How ingenious - I do hope you will reveal the secrets of the shelob squelch in due course!!!

davem

03-29-2008, 05:08 PM

A digression...

We've had other threads exploring Tolkien's sources, so its probably not worth getting side-tracked too far into it here. My own feeling is that his 'sources' were almost entirely mythological (ie 'pagan'), though his treatment of them is often influenced by his own faith. For instance, the banner Arwen weaves for Aragorn -

The raven banner was also a standard used by the Norse Jarls of Orkney. According to the Orkneyinga Saga, it was made for Sigurd the Stout by his mother, a völva or sorceress. She told him that the banner would "bring victory to the man it's carried before, but death to the one who carries it." The saga describes the flag as "a finely made banner, very cleverly embroidered with the figure of a raven, and when the banner fluttered in the breeze, the raven seemed to be flying ahead." Sigurd's mother's prediction came true when, according to the sagas, all of the bearers of the standard met untimely ends. The "curse" of the banner ultimately fell on Jarl Sigurd himself at the Battle of Clontarf:

Earl Sigurd had a hard battle against Kerthialfad, and Kerthialfad came on so fast that he laid low all who were in the front rank, and he broke the array of Earl Sigurd right up to his banner, and slew the banner-bearer. Then he got another man to bear the banner, and there was again a hard fight. Kerthialfad smote this man too his death blow at once, and so on one after the other all who stood near him. Then Earl Sigurd called on Thorstein the son of Hall of Sida, to bear the banner, and Thorstein was just about to lift the banner, but then Asmund the White said, "Don't bear the banner! For all they who bear it get their death." "Hrafn the Red!" called out Earl Sigurd, "bear thou the banner." "Bear thine own devil thyself," answered Hrafn. Then the earl said, "`Tis fittest that the beggar should bear the bag;'" and with that he took the banner from the staff and put it under his cloak. A little after Asmund the White was slain, and then the earl was pierced through with a spear.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raven_banner

A 'raven' banner which brings victory to the man its carried before but death to the one who bears it is certainly reminiscent of the banner Arwen wove for Aragorn - it brought him victory, but its bearer (Halbarad) died on the Pelennor.

So, the banner Arwen weaves is not 'cursed' in the same way (as far as we know) as the raven banner woven by Jarl Sigurd's mother is, yet, I think its clear that the one iepisode is 'influenced' by the other. In the same way, I think (just as the entry into Edoras of Gandalf, et al, which we will see in the next episode, is influenced by the arrival of Beowulf & his thegns in the poem) Scyld's funeral is behind Boromir's. This is not about starting an argument between Christians & non-Christians, but about source analysis, & the 'echoes' which Tolkien is setting up. For any reader familiar with the literature Tolkien loved its difficult not to be reminded of them when reading his fiction. As I've said, I don't see Boromir's last words as a 'Confession' in the Catholic sense :

Aragorn knelt beside him. Boromir opened his eyes and strove to speak. At last slow words came. "I tried to take the Ring from Frodo," he said. "I am sorry. I have paid." His glance strayed to his fallen enemies; twenty at least lay there. "They have gone: the Halflings: the Orcs have taken them. I think they are not dead. Orcs bound them." He paused and his eyes closed wearily. After a moment he spoke again. "Farewell, Aragorn! Go to Minas Tirith and save my people! I have failed." 'No!" said Aragorn, taking his hand and kissing his brow. 'You have conquered. Few have gained such a victory. Be at peace! Minas Tirith shall not fall!" Boromir smiled. "Which way did they go? Was Frodo there?" said Aragorn. But Boromir did not speak again.

though of course Tolkien may have done. He stated there is no overt references to 'religious' practices in the story (or something along those lines), but that the religious element has been absorbed into the story. So, those who perceive a Catholic/Christian dimension are perfectly entitled to do so as far as I'm concerned. This (for me at least) is simply about pointing up the sources Tolkien drew on, not arguing over the way individual readers interpret particular incidents. Of course, one can choose to interpret Boromir's final words as a 'confession' & request for absolution, but I'm not aware of a particular incident in a Biblical/Christian writing that could be cited as a 'source' for Boromir's death in the way that we can find clear Pagan/mythological/Saga sources for so many of the events in the story.

EDIT - its possible to argue that Tolkien's faith comes through in the way he uses some of his sources & gives the heroic 'ideal' a negative twist (Denethor's 'heathen' behaviour is a classic example, & is probably also based on accounts like those of Ibn Fadlan's about pagan Rus funeral practices

Ibn Fadlan describes the hygiene of the Rūsiyyah as disgusting (while also noting with some astonishment that they comb their hair every day) and considers them vulgar and unsophisticated. In that, his impressions contradict those of the Persian traveler Ibn Rustah. He also describes in great detail the funeral of one of their chieftains (a ship burial involving human sacrifice). Some scholars believe that it took place in the modern Balymer complex. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Fadlan[1]

Digression ends.... On to episode 7 tomorrow

ArathornJax

03-30-2008, 12:30 AM

Ok, my last point on this then on to the next section.

Why I said that Boromir's funeral could be argued not to be pagan is because of my knowledge of Viking/Norse burial customs among other things.

My point comes down to the notion of Norse paganism. Did the Norse use ships to bury their dead? Yes, usually great chieftons, members of the aristocracy or kings who had the wherewithal to afford this burial. Ships were not cheap and they were labor intensive, and more often than not were left to the heirs. Your average warrior was not buried in a ship but in a mound (and it could have a ship outline like at Lindholm Hoje in Jutland). Villagers were usually buried in mounds in a communal graveyard of their village. Local farmers were usually buried near their farms and aristocracy near their dwellings so remaining family and descendants could maintain contact with their ancestors.

Goods were provided to the dead, usually based on occupation. If you were a merchant, scales were included as well as other items you did in daily life. A warrior would also be buried with their shield (or shields), sword, ax, spear and any other weapon they used. In all cases some mode of transportation was buried with the deceased, a wagon (especially for wealthy women in Denmark), horse(s), ox(en) or cow/cattle. A method of transportation was given because the Norse believed that to get to the afterlife was a journey, and transportation would be needed. Food was also buried (based on the season on the year), and other items that the deceased would need in their journey to the afterlife, or for their stay in Hel which was rather boring.

The notion that all or many Norse were buried in ships or even in ship mounds is false. More common than not, most were simply buried in mounds. In terms of cremation and having that done in a ship that is by far more common with the Swedes (those Viking from that geographic area) then with the Danes or Norwegian Vikings. Ibn Fadhlan gives the best description of a Viking cremation with a longship. Also, it depends on the era of history on whether cremation was used. During the Roman period of history, cremation was used very frequently in all regions of Scandinavia. During the Viking period of 700 to 1100 C.E. burial methods and rituals depended on geographic area and local traditions and customs.

So based on this, what IS pagan about Boromir's death? The use of a boat is usually considered, and I can accept it (to a point). However, I do feel that there is a valid argument that in Norse/pagan culture, the boat would have been used to transport Boromir to the afterlife. In LOTR there is no mention that men needed transportation to wherever men go, beyond the Halls of Mandos, or a belief by the people of Gondor in such a practice particularly. The kings of Gondor and the Stewards were laid in tombs in Minis Tirith, and Tolkien in an interview said they are more like the Egyptians in Gondor in how they deal with their dead (grand tombs etc). When Theoden is slain, Snowmane is buried on the Field of the Pelannor and not with Theoden. Theoden himself comes the closest in my mind to a true Norse or pagan burial where he is "laid in a house of stone with his arms and many other fair things he had possessed, and a mound was raised over him." It is possible then to say that perhaps the men of Middle Earth did not have the belief of needing transportation and that is why it is missing. This though would also support my notion that this is not a pagan burial but one of necessity.

Thus though using a boat may be considered a pagan symbol, I feel it can be argued that in this case, it is not. Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli used the boat for ease, and so that Boromir's body would not be despoiled. Boromir was laid in the boat with his weapons and personal items. Is that Norse or pagan influenced? I could agree that it is. Overall though, I just feel that Boromir's funeral is one of ease/necessity for the 3 hunters who were pressed for time. They did their best to honor their companion, which is heroic. Tom Shippey has pointed out, it is that heroic nobility that linked myth with history and Christianity which Tolkien loved.

So in the end, I think any reader can determine what they want, whether there are elements of a "last rites" in Boromirs confession to Aragorn, or if there are pagan or Norse rites in his funeral. For me, it may have some pagan and some Christian elements, but it is really a funeral of necessity and done in a way that is heroic in honoring their fallen comrade. I look forward to our "new" discussion this week as we begin moving toward Isengard and Ilithien.

davem

03-30-2008, 09:49 AM

I'm not going to be able to do episode 7 today as I promised - me & the missus are too busy :(. And to be honest it will probably be 2 or 3 days before we can get round to it, as we have the in-laws turning up tomorrow for a visit.....

So, you'll have to wait for my intro ..... or, if anyone wants to volunteer themselves & start off the discussion for this one (I doubt you could do worse than me....) please go ahead & we'll jump in later.

This one should be interesting as it has the first big battle (how well does it work on radio - & could it have been done differently? Its also our introduction proper to the court of Edoras. This is one of my favourite parts of both the book & this adaptation - Eowyn is a fantastic creation, a potential Aethelflaed - but would Tolkien ever have gone so far as to have a queen of Rohan :eek:? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aethelflaed

ArathornJax

04-01-2008, 07:28 PM

Sorry I am almost done listening to this week's session and am behind because of it being end of term and I am trying to get finals and other stuff in prior to the deadline. Anyway, if no one else posts a review by tomorrow when I have more time, then I'll start it off.

ArathornJax

04-03-2008, 10:15 PM

Transcript at http://www.tolkienradio.com/goldenhall.html

davem, hope this ok and I'm sure it won't be up to your professional level but I'll give it a shot! Also, hope the time with the in-laws went well, and that you and the wife enjoyed your time with them and together.

This episode begins with the the Ent Moot and their decision to go to war. Merry and Pippin are impatient with the time the Ents are taking prior to the decision being made. The Ents decision is announced by a loud song after Treebeard announces to Merry and Pippin that this could be the last march of the Ents.
I really love Treebeard and Stephen Thorne does an excellent job in conveying an image of an Ent vocally. His voice is deep and loud, while soft and firm at other times.
I know others will disagree and that is fine, but I'm not a fan of the Ents song. I would have preferred a chant instead of a song. Not sure why, but that is just me and my impression, and I've always felt that way.

I really enjoyed the scene at the Golden Hall. I thought the scene at the gate with the laying of the weapons at the doorway really was well done. I liked the interaction of Gimli and Aragorn and Gimli's willingness to follow Aragorn's lead here. I think this contrasts nicely with the scene in the previous episode where the three chasers meet Eomer and Gimli and Legolas speak up against Eomer and his ignorance. Here Aragorn has some arragance and is admonished by Gandalf to do the right thing to which Aragorn does and Gimli follows suit. Not sure if this was on purpose in preparing the script, but it shows a side of these friends and companions that I think is nicely done.

The interplay now between Wormtongue and Gandalf is also very enjoyable. I feel that Paul Brooke does an excellent job in bringing Wormtongue to life and for me, I enjoy his interaction even more than the movie. I also like that in this scene more time is taken to show the control/influence of Wormtongue over Theoden, with Theoden not even realizing it, though apparently still in control of his facilities.

The interaction of Gandalf with Theoden now shows to me a great example of how Gandalf is able to fulfill his task by sparking hope in the people of Middle Earth, specifically here with Theoden.

There is A LOT in the episode that I enjoy, and one that I have to mention here is the transitions between various scenes. The use of the language in the script like here where Gandalf says to Theoden that he looks to Mordor for our despair, and then hints that also that way lies the hope. Then the narrator comes in and the scene switches to Frodo and Sam. The transitions are smooth and I think really help to eliminate confusion for those who may not be die hard fans.

A personal note here. I had my 14 (well, on Tuesday coming) year old son with me, and he decided that though Andy Serkis does and excellent job, he feels that Peter W. here has to be considered an equal performance. I'm sure that will generate a comment or two, but I agree with my son on this.

Ian Holm does an excellent job of bringing out Frodo's despair in the fact that if they get the job done, there won't be a need for food or anything. I think Ian just does a tremendous job with Frodo from this point (well, from the Breaking of the Fellowship on; well, ok, he does a top notch job for the entire series, but I really think we see a change in the character as brought out by Ian Holm from the Breaking of the Fellowship on in terms of his inflections, his level of his voice, and how he portrays the character from here on out) on and we can really hear the change which brings about a visual image as well. How I see Frodo at the beginning and how I am seeing him now is really quite different and I think that is due to how Ian Holm voices/acts out the character.

I also like that as we go back to Theoden, that the script takes a good chunk of time and gives it to Theoden and company, while Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli though playing significant roles, don't overwelm the new characters. Guess I am saying that I really like the balance done in the scene.

There is so much in this episode I could be writing all night, but I am literally exhausted and will just touch on a few points. I would hope others would touch on things that I have just brushed over and not discussed, or not done justice.

The interplay between Aragorn and the Orc foreshadows what is to come and I liked that. It allows the listener to anticipate what is coming, to infer and that often causes increase excitement and desire to continue to listen. I also like that it is Erkenbrand that arrives and not Eomer, and that Eomer retreating with Gimli to the caves is so important to me because it shows to me (in a listener/reader response mode) how much Gimli is able to get past slights (intended or not) and work with those he needs and eventually develops friendships. I think this is true of Legolas and is also true of Eomer. I enjoy that in this adaptation that bantering and comradeship was included as I think it is something important for the listener to understand.

Like I said, excuse my spelling errors, and the facts that my thoughts are 1. my thoughts and 2. done with about 12 hours of sleep over the last 3 days (I am done after 12:30p.m. tomorrow and get rest and recuperate prior to doing it again next term).

Cheers!

AJ

Mithalwen

04-05-2008, 03:44 PM

I constructed a faily substantial reply to this and teh computer swallowed it - honest ... I have to go now and probably won't be online tomorrow since I have a family thing so ... can we have a few days grace? I promise I will get a reconstructed and maybe improved post up on Monday?

Thank you....:)

davem

04-05-2008, 03:51 PM

We're hopefully going to get around to listening to this one tomorrow. I hope everyone is ok with leaving Ep. 8 till next week?

Thanks to Arathornjax for his brilliant intro, btw.....some very good points to start us off.

davem

04-06-2008, 09:13 AM

A few things struck me during this episode. First, the encounter with Theoden. I'm so glad we got the 'book' version rather than the histrionics of the movie. Its clear that Theoden is not 'possessed' or the victim of any kind of 'magic', but simply worn down by Grima's ill counsel. In short he has lost all hope in the face of what he has been convinced are overwhelming odds. I love how Jack May plays this. Again, I don't know whether he knew the book beforehand, but he captures the character's pshychological state. This Theoden is a warrior who has been convinced there is no point fighting but deep down is just waiting for the slightest glimmer of hope. As soon as Gandalf arrives & shows him that glint he forgets his despair & rallies not simply himself, but his whole people.

I mentioned previously that battles on radio are necessarily difficult. You can't see what's going on & you can't really have a narrator giving a blow-by-blow despription. The battles in this adaptation are very stylised - this one has character conversations intercut by choral singing - Pelennor Fields, as we'll see, uses character conversations intercut with a song which was composed after the event:
Narrator: And so King Théoden and the last of the Rohirrim came to Minas Tirith, to the Pelennor Fields. It was a great battle, afterwards told in many a song in the feast-hall of Meduseld.

This is something I like about this adaptation, because I think it brings out the 'legendary' nature of the story - as in the book we get the sense that these are events that happened a very long time ago.

Thankfully, because of these limitations the battles don't overwhelm the adaptation. Both Helm's Deep & Pelennor Fields take up about 10 pages of the book & maybe ten minutes of the production. All they need, really. LotR is a book about a war certainly, but one written by someone who had been in a war & knew that war is usually like that - a lot of slogging around, a lot of hanging around, & then a short, bloody battle.

The Frodo/Sam/Gollum scenes are again perfectly judged. Frodo's increasing resignation (Are we ever likely to need bread again?) is brought home. He has convinced himself that the end of the Quest will mean the end of his life - one way or another. I think Tolkien mentioned in one of the letters that Frodo expected to die & that he couldn't actually cope with surviving. Increasingly now we'll find Sam trying to warn Frodo of the danger they face from Gollum & Frodo merely responding with a 'don't worry, we aren't throttled yet...' etc. The scenes in the Dead Marshes again follow the book. The 'horror' is rooted in sadness & waste, in the fact that all that beauty & nobility came to nothing but rottenness, not in 'spooks' coming to get you! The danger of the marshes is that despair & hopelessness will overwhelm you, & its wonderful how this reflects back on the events at Meduseld. You get the sense that the real horror of battle is not the battle itself but the aftermath. Ian Holm nails that perfectly. And on that note - I'm not sure this adaptataion doesn't bring home the real facts of war better than the book - the stark contrast between the horrors of the old battlefield full of the corpses of the dead with the 'glorious' victory over the armies of Saruman at Helm's Deep is shocking. The Last Alliance won a victory over Sauron, but its lasting memorial is the corpse-ridden Dead Marshes. The Rohirrim defeat the forces of Saruman, but both good & evil fell. Even as we exult at the appearance of Gandalf with Erkenbrand & the annihilation of the enemy we can't help but hear Frodo's words echoing across the long leagues of Middle-earth & down the long years to us today:
I saw them: grim faces and evil, and noble faces and sad. Many faces proud and fair, with weeds in their silver hair. But all foul, all rotting, all dead.

ArathornJax

04-11-2008, 04:44 PM

Just wondering where we are on this. Haven't seen any posts etc. This topic came up over at TheOneRing.Net and I let them know we had a discussion here so perhaps we'll get some more traffic. Hope that was ok.

Are we moving forward this Sunday to the next episode?

davem

04-12-2008, 12:03 AM

Are we moving forward this Sunday to the next episode?
Hopefully - or I should say I definitely mean to. Of course, the boss (our six month old) has the final say on whether I have time.....

As to interest in the thread generally - we've had nearly 3,000 views at the time of writing this, but very few participants. I'm assuming that most people on here haven't heard the series, so they're reading what we post but not feeling able to join in. Hopefully some people will buy their own copy as a result of reading this.

That said, I know there are a fair few Downers who do have it because they've posted on here - they just don't seem to be posting anymore :( . Short answer is I don't know why this thread has so few participants but so many viewers.

I don't know whether I took the right approach - doing an episode a week. Maybe it should just have been a general discussion of the series as a whole - & if people want to change to that now that's OK with me.

All that said, if you take a look at the Chapter-by-Chapter discussion of LotR we did a few years back we often ended up (in the later chapter discussions) with only 2 or three participants.....

Brian Sibley

04-12-2008, 12:47 AM

First, the encounter with Theoden. I'm so glad we got the 'book' version rather than the histrionics of the movie. Its clear that Theoden is not 'possessed' or the victim of any kind of 'magic', but simply worn down by Grima's ill counsel. In short he has lost all hope in the face of what he has been convinced are overwhelming odds. I love how Jack May plays this. Again, I don't know whether he knew the book beforehand, but he captures the character's pshychological state. This Theoden is a warrior who has been convinced there is no point fighting but deep down is just waiting for the slightest glimmer of hope. As soon as Gandalf arrives & shows him that glint he forgets his despair & rallies not simply himself, but his whole people.

It's strange... Looking back (or listening back) at the decisions we took in making the radio series, I am more often pleased than disappointed...

The film interpretation of Théoden's mental thralldom to Saruman is so imbued with comic-book/horror-movie imagery as to be - had it not been done as well as it was - totally risible.

Like so many aspects of the story-on-film, it abandons Tolkien's characterisation in favour of OTT hokum and cinematic trickery. Maybe that was necessary for the average cinema-goer who was not familiar with Tolkien, but what is lost is the subtle, insinuating evil of Sauron's power as shown in the book and, as a result, a lessening of Théoden's humanity...

Jack May was splendid in the role and I especially love his low growling voice in those early scenes...

Estelyn Telcontar

04-12-2008, 02:14 AM

I'm sorry I haven't participated much so far - I have the recordings, but the fact that they are cut differently makes it difficult for me to find the right starting and finishing points. As preparation for the Tolkien Seminar has priority at the moment, I'm not taking the time for that complicated selection.

My research for the paper I will be presenting did lead me to a review of the radio production in Brian Rosebury's Tolkien: A Cultural Phenomenon. Here are a few excerpts for your enjoyment: The 13-hour BBC radio production is, of course, fundamentally hampered by its inability to suggest the physical and cultural presence of Middle-earth, other than through inevitably rather generalised sound-effects... That statement is less a criticism than a simple analysation of the shortcomings of the audio medium. Praise is given for the use of narration from Tolkien's text to give glimpses.

Dialogues are praised as well-delivered and skilfully abridged, with special mention of Woodthorpe's Gollum, though abridgements are said to tend to "flatten the text in the direction of an adventure story."

In summary Rosebury writes: The strength of the BBC version as an adaptation lies in its largely faithful, and nearly complete, realisation of the sequence of events (...): in that sense, if no other, the criterion that as little as possible of the original should be lost is met more closely by this than by the movie versions.

Brian Sibley

04-12-2008, 04:09 AM

I'm sorry I haven't participated much so far - I have the recordings, but the fact that they are cut differently makes it difficult for me to find the right starting and finishing points. As preparation for the Tolkien Seminar has priority at the moment, I'm not taking the time for that complicated selection.

My research for the paper I will be presenting did lead me to a review of the radio production in Brian Rosebury's Tolkien: A Cultural Phenomenon. Here are a few excerpts for your enjoyment:

"The 13-hour BBC radio production is, of course, fundamentally hampered by its inability to suggest the physical and cultural presence of Middle-earth, other than through inevitably rather generalised sound-effects..."

That statement is less a criticism than a simple analysation of the shortcomings of the audio medium.

If, of course, you accept it as a 'shortcoming' at all. In defence of radio - the closest of all dramatic forms to the oral tradition of storytelling - it might be argued that the absence of visual imagery heightens the listener's ability to create his or her own visuals within the theatre of the mind.

I hope this won't sound too reactionary and oversensitive, but in my experience, the medium of sound is limited only by the imaginative limitations of those who hear it.

Today, we are swamped with Tolkien/Middle-earth imagery: it is interesting that the first readers of Tolkien's story had none other than the Ring/Eye motif on the dust-wrappers, the accompanying maps, the words on the page --- and the pictures in their heads...

ArathornJax

04-12-2008, 10:10 AM

Today, we are swamped with Tolkien/Middle-earth imagery: it is interesting that the first readers of Tolkien's story had none other than the Ring/Eye motif on the dust-wrappers, the accompanying maps, the words on the page --- and the pictures in their heads...

I would agree that the auditory allows the listener to visualize what is going on. I read the LOTR back in the mid 1970's and I developed my own image of each character and the scenery. I am an avid hiker and in my youth I did a lot of backpacking (still do some, 1x a year or every other year depending on the back and the knee, middle age is starting to suck!), and I created many images of locations in Middle Earth. This is something I still do. For example, for me this is the Falls of Rauros, North Clear Creek in Colorado:

http://photo.net/bboard-uploads/0050JX-12486584.jpg

I was also thinking that next time I read the trilogy, I am going to read along with Bob Inglis on my MP3 or iPod. That will allow me to take in more of the text and catch items I may tend to skim.

As far as format, I like going over each episode and reviewing them. I would hope we continue along that lines. I just wanted to make sure that we were a go for the next episode so I could listen to it today (which I will do). As far as posters, I meant since we last discussed the current episode.

Cheers,

AJ

davem

04-12-2008, 10:23 AM

If, of course, you accept it as a 'shortcoming' at all. In defence of radio - the closest of all dramatic forms to the oral tradition of storytelling - it might be argued that the absence of visual imagery heightens the listener's ability to create his or her own visuals within the theatre of the mind.

I think this is another reason this adaptation feels so close to the book - not simply because it uses so much of Tolkien's text/dialogue, but also because it doesn't impose someone else's images on you. That's the unavoidable problem with any visual presentation of any story, & it doesn't matter how much love & effort the designers put into it - it will always fail to match with the mental images of anyone who knows the story & worse to my mind it will fix their vision in the mind of any one who comes to the book later.

Of course, we live in a time when there is an assumption that every popular book will automatically be adapted for the screen, & there is an expectation that a movie or tv series will follow quickly on publication. In short, I agree absolutely with Brian's point about the oral tradition. LotR comes out of the oral tradition in a very real sense, & is a work that works best when 'heard' - either when read by a skilled storyteller or in your own head as you read. JRRT can tell you that Arwen was the most beautiful of the Children of Illuvatar after Luthien, but how many of us think Liv Tyler fits that bill? Not to say she isn't attractive, but is she beautiful enough to be a convincing Arwen? Or more simply - is she your Arwen? And that could be applied to any of the characters of course - my overwhelming feeling while watching the movies was that so much of what I was seeing was just 'off', it was (to paraphrase Douglas Adams) almost, but not quite, entirely unlike Middle-earth....

Estelyn Telcontar

04-12-2008, 12:08 PM

Rosebury's comment is in the context of comparing the movie versions with the radio production (favorably for the BBC, at that!), so I suppose we shouldn't be surprised at his kind of expectation there. As far as my personal experience goes, I love both reading aloud to others and being read to, with all of the imaginative possibilities that come with it. I remember the first calendar images I saw back in the 70s - I really disliked them, as they didn't seem to fit in with my concept of LotR characters at all.

Brian Sibley

04-12-2008, 12:29 PM

Rosebury's comment is in the context of comparing the movie versions with the radio production (favorably for the BBC, at that!), so I suppose we shouldn't be surprised at his kind of expectation there.

Yes, well, it's always a tricky issue: comparing chalk and cheese!

As far as my personal experience goes, I love both reading aloud to others and being read to, with all of the imaginative possibilities that come with it. I remember the first calendar images I saw back in the 70s - I really disliked them, as they didn't seem to fit in with my concept of LotR characters at all.

I agree. Even artists whom I admire, like Alan Lee and John Howe, are often a long way off the mark as far as the pictures in my head are concerned and most fan-art leaves me feeling deeply depressed - especially since so much of it is now 'inspired' by (or derived from) Jackson.

Our response to all such things is, of course, totally subjective. You might be amused to know that someone wrote to me when the radio series was first broadcast and complained that Robert Stephens simply didn't sound like Aragorn! Funnily enough, I know what the person meant... :p

Estelyn Telcontar

04-12-2008, 12:38 PM

Very true! So the audio version even has one disadvantage over the simple reading experience - voices may not fit my mental imagination. I remember that being the case in the German radio dramatisation; I'll have to listen again to see which voice it was - Gandalf or Aragorn, IIRC.

Mithalwen

04-12-2008, 03:28 PM

Sorry for my lateness in replying - started a new work assignment at short notice which broke my chain of thought!!!

Three words sum up this episode for me transition, tension and tantilising... I am no chess player but it feels like the players are moving in to position for the endgame.

It is a very dark episode because although the Ents are roused and Theoden healed - both vital for the eventual victory - as Gandalf says they win through one
challenge to face the next... also as has been pointed out there is Frodo's resignation to his fate. The burden is getting heavier but he is still coping. For me one of the great triumphs of the adaptation is the handling of the Frodo, Sam, Gollum part of the story which is not my favourite part of the book.

The casting is perfect and I think it works very well on radio. Holm's voice conveys so well the horror of the Dead Marshes - and I liked the fact that the same music was used for the Dead Marshes as the Paths of the Dead - then there is the fine balance of the relationships between the three which reminds me at times of Sartre's "Huis clos". Gollum is teetering between the animal and the human and so fine poised is the balance that it starts to seem tragic that Gollum overhears Sam's "Dratted Creature! " but not the "poor wretch!".

Eomer and Aragorn having started the episode as beggar and "outlaw" are very much kings in waiting by the end. I do understand that it must have made sense not to have Galadriel go to Minas Tirith for the wedding but it does mean that we lose one of those fab Eomer / Gimli exchanges... but nevermind. However we do get the orc slaying contest - which does help with the battle scene but I never understand how and elf archer could possibly lose given that A first rate English archer, who, in a single minute was unable to draw and discharge his bow 12 times, with a range of 240 yards, and who in these twelve shots once missed his man, was very lightly esteemed. Legolas should have made Gimli's score within five minutes but that is not the fault of the adaptation!

It was only when I saw the musical (which combines Gondor and Rohan) that I fully appreciated the parralels between the two - both have an aging ruler under a malign influence, the heir has been lost and the "spare" is estranged to a degree - Eomer is seen in the light of a traitor as Faramir will be accused of being a wizard's pupil.

Eowyn is the only major character introduced and while she says nothing of significance we learn that she is brave and loved by her people as well as her kin.

Gah sorry about this I will try and tidy it later ...

davem

04-13-2008, 09:56 AM

Transcript: http://www.tolkienradio.com/vos.html

This episode covers a lot of ground. We start out in the aftermath of the Battle of Helm's Deep & wnd with the Fellowship once more broken - but even more fractured than previously. By the close Aragorn, Legolas & Gimli have set forth for Dunharrow & thence the Paths of the Dead, Gandalf & Pippin are approaching Minas Tirith, Merry, in the service of Theoden is also heading towards Dunharrow, & Frodo & Sam have finally met Faramir in the glades of Ithilien.

First though, there is a series of reunions - Gimli with Legolas & Aragorn after his night in the Glittering Caves with Eomer, Gandalf with the survivors of the battle & then finally all four with Merry & Pippin at Orthanc.

The highlight of this episode for me is the confrontation with Saruman. And here I must praise Peter Howell's performance. The way he switches from charming councellor to venomous monster with such alacrity actually rivals (to my mind) Woodthorpe's Gollum. Howell is another player who never seems to get the praise he is due. As with Grout's Butterbur this is a performance to be relished. As I listen to this Saruman I'm never actually certain (as with book Saruman) whether he actually believes he is the injured party. You really get the sense that he sees himself as the victim, & that he really believes that he is working for the best of all concerned & simply doesn't understand what everyone's problem is. Michael Hordern's performance as Gandalf carries just the right combination of righteous anger & sheer frustration, mixed with sadness & compassion for the loss of his fellow Maiar.

I'm still not sure about the Palantir incident - maybe its because I'm so familiar with the way it happens in the book, but to have Pippin looking into the stone while they're still in the ruins of Isengard seems a bit 'wrong'. I suppose this was done purely for reasons of time, but the events seem compressed - as if the adaptor (don't know if it was Brian or Michael) wanted to get everyone up & moving as quickly as possible. Certainly the sudden appearance of the Nazgul while the party are still in Isengard seems not to get the serious response it deserves! And I'm definitely not sure about Pippin's expressed desire to have a Palantir of his own to see what Frodo & Sam are up to at that moment - its a nice linking device, but I honestly doubt that at that point Pippin would really want anything to do with Palantiri ever again :eek:

Other things?

I'm grateful for the appearance of Halbarad & the Rangers (though sad for the absence of Elladan & Elrohir :( ) Like Imrahil they are very minor players who do very little but for some reason you miss them. Oddly I think I miss them more than I miss Bombadil.....

I'm glad we got the encounter between Aragorn & Sauron - an invention but one I think is brilliantly done. Listening to Robert Stephen's performance sent shivers down my spine. If I was Sauron I'd have been a bit nervous....

'What's taters, precious?' Perfect. Tolkien's beautiful little scene played to perfection by Bill Nighy & Peter Woodthorpe. Once again I was left wondering why the movie scriptwriters thought they could improve on Tolkien's dialogue. All the Frodo/Sam/Gollum scenes are wonderfully done, subtle & informed performances by all concerned. Ian Holm's Frodo, at once driven & resigned, Nighy's frustrated & narky Sam & Woodthorpe's cunning, infuriated, frightened Gollum in the scene before the Black Gate are wonderful.

Anyway..

Mithalwen

04-19-2008, 03:18 PM

Rather belated again... big week on the Archers... this isn't totally random, there is a link between Ambridge and Isengard. I knew that Jack May was the much missed Nelson Gabriel (I do try hard not to think of Grima as Shane ) but I didn't realise that Peter Howell was the Bishop of Felpersham!!! Now that is a little surreal. His voice is quite wonderful ... while I thought Christopher Lee gave one of the stronger performances in the films and has a wonderfully powerful voice, his Saruman had was a commander who expected to be obeyed; Howell's is a seducer, plausible and hypnotic. He is so subtle, seems so plausible portrays hismelf as the victim, that Gimli's interjection is needed to remind that Saruman is the aggressor, who had given specific orders that Theodred be slain at all costs - the son of his neighbour and friend.

I don't have a problem with Pippin and the Palantir - I think it is quite in character that even an encounter with the Dark Lord doesn't get him down for long.
That bit was wonderful - I can't work out quite if it is Jon McAndrew's voice when he is "being" Sauron - if so it is a great bit of acting.

Robert Stephens performance is for me quite uneven. When he is good he is very good, and he is far better as the king in waiting than as the Ranger ...at other times ...well lets say he brings out Aragorn's pompous, priggish side very well!!!

I love the Herbs and Stewed Rabbit scenes - presumably Tolkien was fond of it since it is one of the scenes he recorded. There is the tension underlying the bickering between Gollum and Sam but then a brief glimpse of normality while they enjoy their meal. Frodo sounds almost like the hobbit that left Bag End. But they relax ot much and we finish on the nice contrast of the hobbits with drawn swords and another wonderful voice, with the tantalising glimpse of Faramir.

I too am glad of Halbarad even though I miss Bombadil not at all. He is one of those characters one cares about even though he only has a few lines - though the courage of his words at the Door to the paths of the dead are very striking. Imrahil, I think does have a role in the book, where both in leadership in the city and in rescuing his nephew Faramir he shows how Denethor should be, however I can see how confusing he would be to include and he has little actual dialogue - though again his realisation that Eowyn is alive is very memorable. The sons of Elrond again say little and have some symbolic significance but are not vital to the plot.. so again while I love them in the books, I can't really criticise their absence.

Mithalwen

04-19-2008, 03:19 PM

Shall we hang fire on the next episode for a day or so? I had a bussy week and we might get a few more comments?

Brian Sibley

04-19-2008, 04:55 PM

Mithalwen

04-22-2008, 06:43 AM

Thank you - there was a lot of appreciation of the recent cameo by Alex Jennings on the Archer's website which roused memories of golden voices of the past. Howell was ..well virtually deified in some quarters (maybe the CofE should have appointed him to Canterbury!) but though HD was mentioned they didn't mention the role. I do remember Guy and his dreadful son but of course they never broadcast the cast and I wasn't addicted enough to scour the Radio Times in those days,

davem

04-23-2008, 12:01 PM

Yet again I haven't been able to post the intro for the next episode. Unfortunately, 'personal commitments' (mainly a six month old one) keep on intruding, so....

This is either going to have to be an occasional thread, where I post intros to each episode when I can get round to doing so, or some kind soul is going to have to take over the task of doing so. I still haven't got around to listening to the next episode & it will be at least next Sunday before I do so. If no-one takes up the gauntlet before then (i& f I can find the time to do it myself) I'll do it then.

Mithalwen

04-23-2008, 12:07 PM

This has a lot of the lovely Faramir and it is high time I took my turn ..... so I will do an intro in the next day or so....

Mithalwen

04-23-2008, 12:32 PM

I meant to say before I ran out of lunchtime yesterday that whatever sterophonic magic they did on John McAndrew it was great and certainly hasn't dated.

One of the things that struck me about this episode is just how good Michael Hordern is as Gandalf - even if he didn't understand what was going on!!! I have to say I am not a huge fan of Ian McKellen in the role and perhaps the reasons are similar to why I am not so keen on Robert Stephens ..it all seems a bit too "actorly", bit too Stratford... it just seems a little less natural. Overall though it is a wonderful ensemble cast who you can completely believe in as their characters, and though there are household names and names only the hardcore Radio 4 listener will find familiar it is usually quite seamless.

It is strange that even though I have listened ot these tapes so often, it never struck me before how close Frodo's threat to command Gollum to throw himself in to the fire was to realisation at the Cracks of Doom. Slightly chilling.

ArathornJax

04-25-2008, 07:37 AM

Sorry I haven't posted. I have had a severe case of food poisoning this week and until last night I haven't been good at all. I'll post my thoughts later today.

davem, I can't PM so if you want, I am willing to alternate weeks on the initial post if you want, or we can go every other week. That would give more people time to reply and after all, it is the quality not the quantity that matters, right? Anyway, just my thoughts on that subject.

BTW, on a side note, I found my BBC adaptation of The Hobbit (well, my daughter found it for me)! I forgot what a nice map of the wild is included in my edition, and the music CD at the end.

Mithalwen

04-26-2008, 03:57 PM

http://www.tolkienradio.com/twotowers.html

This episode I imagine may be a little different in the more recent version since Frodo and Same remain in "The Two Towers" while the others have moved on in to "The Return of the King".

Having found the length of time that the paths diverge the barrier to finishing the book the first time I tried to read it - I was only nine and remembering what had gone on hundred of pages before was an unequal struggle and gave up at the rather gloomy end of The Two Towers - I wouldn't presume to say that you improved on Tolkien but it certainly provides variety and in this case enables parralels to be drawn more easily.

We start with Faramir and Frodo & co in Ithilien. Much of the dialogue is more or less straight from the book, skilfully edited including that wonderful bit where Sam is a far from servile servant and not withstanding that he is effectively the man's prisoner, gives Faramir a piece of his mind.

Faramir is very eloquent, almost poetic, and Andrew Seear's voice suits it well, as he moves from inquisitor, to bereaved brother, to loreman and judge.

Appropriately we then switch to Eowyn and Aragorn as she attempts to dissuade him from taking the paths of the Dead or at least take her along, and her feelings for Aragorn, hinted at in her few words last episode are made much more explicit.

We follow Aragorn and the Grey Company through the haunted mountain then return to Frodo and the capture of Gollum, and another much needed moment of humour to lighten the gathering darkness "Don't want Fish!", before Frodo embarks on his journey toinas Morgul despite Faramir's forboding.

Then we go to Gandalf and Pippin being a most unquenchable hobbit and more little references to things that are not essential to the plot but gladden the hearts of the book devotee (no dumbing down for Radion 4!!! - cannot see gratuitous references to Armenelos being allowed in Holywood.) We meet the last major player - Denethor. Another great performance hear from Peter Vaughan, famous as "Grouty" from Porridge but a great character actor in many other things. Pippin offers the Steward his service.

We then rejoin Eowyn, this time with Theoden and Eomer. She has received the Red Arrow - the formal summons of Gondor for the aid of the Rohirrim.

We briefly rejoin Frodo in a nightmarish landscape as the darkness literally spreads across the land - not only in Morgul Vale but spreading out to be sighted from Rohan "eating up the stars" . Theoden is fatalistic but for Frodo there is a moment of optimism at the crossroads and the statue of the fallen king a crown of trailing flowers like white stars. They cannot conquer for ever..

The Rohirrim depart and Merry is released from his short service but accepts Dernhelm's offer to bear him to battle.

I haven't much time now but one of the things that the juxtaposition of the threads throws in to relief is this question of duty and keeping oaths, obeying orders. Theoden is fulfilling the Oath of Eorl while Aragorn leads an army of Oathbreakers - the price of breaking an oath is clearly a terrible doom. Merry and Eowyn disobey orders and abandon duty but ... well we know how that will end. Faramir speaks twice about lives being forfeit - yet he uses his discretion to allow Frodo on his way. Then there is Frodo and the oaths Gollum swears on the precious, and Frodo tricking Gollum to save his life.

Critics often say that the book is black and white, Good v Evil...but there is a lot of moral ambiguity here (which is I need to go back to on the Age of Anxiety thread!).

The other thing which crops up here again (as with the Ents) is how men have become detached from the other races of middle earth. This is really the last hurrah of the free peoples before they disappear into folklore.

Sorry it is a Mith style ramble rather than a Dave style essay but it is a start.

Bêthberry

04-26-2008, 04:32 PM

I haven't had time to follow this excellent thread but today for the first time I had a chance to look at the transcripts. Aside from the very unique study of the BBC radio show (which I do promise to catch up on, hopefully, as long as my garden allows me), I was quite surprised by something else.

What was that you ask? (Well, assuming anyone is reading/listening ;) ). Well, Wellinghall is not only the website for the radio drama, but it is also the website for the Toronto chapter of the Tolkien Society, called actually Wellinghallsmial.

It's a very small site and has had its ups and downs, but this spring it is sponsoring something which I think it kinda cool. So, for anyone within sewing or volunteering distance of the big, bad TO, here's the project: helping the Children's Aid Foundation prepare prom clothes and acessories for girls who are unable to afford the formal celebration of as they reach that milestone, graduating from high school.

Here's the link to Wellinghallsmial Tolkien Society (http://wellinghallsmial.blogspot.com/).

And here's the link to The Corsage Project. (http://www.corsageproject.ca/)

Somehow I think that somewhere there's a spirit like Rosie Cotton's at work here, or maybe it is the spirit of Rosie and Sam's daughters.

EDIT: Having said that about Rosie, I must not fail to acknowledge the prime seamstress in Middle-earth, Arwen. Of course, she devoted her skills to battle insignia and gave up her life eternal for a mere Man. And according to the Appendix she did not leave any special remembrance for her daughtes. Ah well. Perhaps I shall catch up with the BBC radio show in time to hear her words at her wedding. I don't suppose the BBC show included the Appendices?

ArathornJax

04-27-2008, 12:39 AM

A few items that I really noticed in this episode. I love the interaction of Faramir and Frodo and Frodo's reaction when Faramir informs him of the death of Boromir. Ian Holm continues to really portray Frodo here as one whose despair is growing, and who sees little hope in fulfilling his quest, but his duty, his obligation as given to him at the Council is to continue.

Andrew Seear's portrayl of Faramir here is as I imagined he would be. He is able to show Faramir's power of perception in his dealings with Frodo when they are walking with the leaves crunching under their feet. I think this is important because it shows later why Faramir is able to see the evil and corruption of the ring, and to steer a clear course. This is not something outright, but something I have interpreted based on the script the actors are using, and from their own inflection and interactions.

I also think the incident with Frodo, Sam and Faramir while sitting together talking at Henneth Annûn, shows that Faramir acts according to what he feels and knows to be right, and for doing the right thing, one should not be praised for it, for the honor is to oneself in knowing you are doing Ohat is right. I think the scene here reflects that and takes it to a higher level of where Faramir is not looking for praise because he simply acts with what he believes is right and that is enough.

Aragorn in the Paths of the Dead for me shows his kingly nature, and takes it up to do his role in defeating Sauron. I like how Aragorn shows here to Halbarad that if they control their own fear, their horses will pick up on that and go with them on the path. I also admire here, as I did in the book, Halbarad going forth knowing he was going to his own death, yet remaining loyal nevertheless.

The final comment is on the last scene between Faramir and Frodo. Faramir knows from talking with Gollum that he is up to no good. He begs Frodo not to go with him and Frodo turns the table on Faramir. Frodo informs Faramir that he cannot leave Gondor and show him a way over or under the mountains. And if he takes the ring to Minis Tirith it will destroy that city and make it like its twin city, Minus Ithil/Morgul. Faramir concludes with Frodo that the quest is hopeless and that he has not hope to reunite and they embrace and say good-bye. I really enjoyed this interaction and realized in listening to it, why for me, Ian is acting Frodo the way he is. I have to admit that in the past my own critical comment of Ian's portrayal of Frodo, is Frodo gets to cranky and to hopeless. However, I think that is the point. The ring is wearing on Frodo and using only auditory, this is how we the listener pick up on this. I've noticed it slowly increases as Frodo gets closer and closer to Mordor and Mt. Doom. Again, something subtle, but I believe it is there in the adaptation.

On a sidebar; today my son and I were traveling back and forth to a University for some recitals and other things (and it is an hour up and an hour back) and so we got to finish listening to the 1968 adaptation of The Hobbit by the BBC and then listen to the Mindseye version. I won't get into my comparison in depth just to say that in this case, though there are parts of the BBC production I liked, overall, on The Hobbit my son and I agreed that the Mindseye dramatization is the version we enjoy more than the BBC version. However, in for LOTR BBC win hands down.

I'm not sure if this has been asked, and if it has, I'll check back the the thread, but Brian, did you listen to BBC version of The Hobbit that was done I believe in 1968 before beginning work on the LOTR adaptation? Just wondering if that played a part in helping you to determine what would and would not work in your own adaptation.

Last thing on a funny note. We were listening to the BBC version of The Hobbit when Smaug is attacking Laketown and the Old Thrush appears. When the Old Thrush speaks, my 14 year old broke into laughter to the point of tears (while playing that scene over and over again). I asked him what was so funny and he said the Old Thrush had to be Alvin the Chipmunk who had grown wings. Sure enough, I listened to it and I have to admit he is kinda of right. The good thing though is the memory we created and shared on that portion of the adaptation. We'll probably always think of this day when that part comes on.

Brian Sibley

04-27-2008, 09:18 AM

I'm not sure if this has been asked, and if it has, I'll check back the the thread, but Brian, did you listen to BBC version of The Hobbit that was done I believe in 1968 before beginning work on the LOTR adaptation? Just wondering if that played a part in helping you to determine what would and would not work in your own adaptation.

Yes, I knew the BBC dramatisation of The Hobbit which featured good actors and was directed by one of the BBC's best directors, John Powell, with whom I worked on other programmes. But I never liked it: I found it too fanciful, too fussy and heavily cumbered with too many intrusive sound-effects. We asked if we could make a new version of The Hobbit to precede TLOTR, but the powers-that-be wouldn't approve that idea - way too expensive - so it never happened. However, I think it certainly influenced Michael and I in writing the scripts and Jane Morgan and Penny Leicester in establishing a directing style - on the basis of knowing what we didn't want to do!

davem

04-27-2008, 09:20 AM

I suppose the thing that stands out for me in this episode is the portrayal of Faramir. I don't know whether the adaptors went through the same kind of trauma the movie makers did (apparently) over how to make him 'believable', but you have to admire their skill in doing so - as opposed to the 'struggles' the movie writers apparently went through:p. Andrew Seear gets across the complexity of Tolkien's character (once again, I don't know whether he was familiar with the book beforehand) simply by using Tolkien's dialogue. I found this Faramir far more believable than movie Faramir. This is clearly a man who is prepared to sacrifice himself for what he believes in, but not to sacrifice his ideals - because he actually has ideals, rather than being a bit of a beardy-wierdy with a daddy complex..... anyway... You can certainly see how such a man could inspire loyalty in his troops. He's wise. He knows that in order to have any chance of victory over the Enemy one has to reject all the methods of the Enemy. As has been pointed up already, Ian Holm's performance as Frodo is spot on - his self-sacrificial journey (both inner & outer) to his own death, increasingly focussed on his goal to the exclusion of all else, doing what he knows is the morally right thing, while accepting that he himself will not get anything out of doing it, is heartbreaking - to the point that it is difficult to listen to his performance. William Nighy's Sam, clearly struggling to know how to cope with the dawning realisation of what's happening to his master, & Woodthorpe's Gollum, fighting against his inner fragmentation, because on some level he realises that he must get to that state of one-pointed meditation on his Precious to the exclusion of all else if he is ever to get it back, both bring out elements of the characters which many readers miss.

And Peter Vaughn's Denethor (shades of Olivier's Richard III - or is that just me?). I love this portrayal - subtle, driven, power-hungry, snide, but we cannot help but feel his loss. He may, as Gandalf says, be using his grief as a cloak, but we never doubt that that grief is real. And, again, its nice to be spared the scenery chewing .....

Briefly to the Grey Company. Nice to have an Aragorn who is in command - he tellls the Dead what they're going to do, & they get right down to it. This is another example of how the limitations of the medium actually work in favour of the story - radio doesn't allow you to go in for Indiana Jones style action sequences, so you don't get them, & such sequences aren't in the spirit of Tolkien. And jumping back to the scene with Eowyn - they way her voice breaks slightly when she says "Neither have those others that go with thee. They go only because they would not be parted from thee - because they love thee." is perfect.

Finally, Merry's failure to recognise that Dernhelm is a bird - very difficult to do, I suppose (bit like the voice of the resurrected Gandalf in Fangorn) - as soon as you hear the actor speaking the surprise is ruined - as readers we don't know Dernhelm is Eowyn till the confrontation with the Witch King on Pelenor Fields. Here, we know as soon as 'he' says "You wish to go whither the Lord of the Mark goes. I see it in your face." But that's a problem you'd have in any dramatisation, & at least this one attempts it, unlike the movie, where they simply don't bother.

Appendix - a couple of things that occurred to me while listening, first, the Red Arrow. This is a traditional summons to war. I've mentioned a couple of examples of it in another thread:

King Audbjorn sent around an arrow of war as a signal to call men to arms throughout his kingdom & dispatched messengers to powerful men asking them to meet him. (Egil's Saga)

The king split up a war-arrow, which he sent off in all directions, and by that token a number of men was collected in all haste. (Hakon the Good's Saga)

but I've recently come across another example in Saxo Grammaticus' Danish History:

But if any man, from a contumacious spirit, were slack in fulfilling the orders of the king, he should be punished with exile. For, on all occasion of any sudden and urgent war, an arrow of wood, looking like iron, used to be passed on everywhere from man to man as a messenger.

So, clearly another example of Tolkien drawing on traditional lore to add historicity to his stories.

Oh, & while on the subject - 'Shield-maidens'. Saxo also has a good few examples:

Alfhild

Thus Alfhild was led to despise the young Dane; whereupon she exchanged woman's for man's attire, and, no longer the most modest of maidens, began the life of a warlike rover.

Enrolling in her service many maidens who were of the same mind, she happened to come to a spot where a band of rovers were lamenting the death of their captain, who had been lost in war; they made her their rover captain for her beauty, and she did deeds beyond the valour of woman.

Wisna: a woman, filled with sternness, and a skilled warrior,

RuslaAt the same time the amazon Rusla, whose prowess in warfare exceeded the spirit of a woman, had many fights in Norway with her brother, Thrond, for the sovereignty. She could not endure that Omund rule over the Norwegians, and she had declared war against all the subjects of the Danes. Omund, when he heard of this, commissioned his most active men to suppress the rising. Rusla conquered them, and, waxing haughty on her triumph, was seized with overweening hopes, and bent her mind upon actually acquiring the sovereignty of Denmark. She began her attack on the region of Halland, but was met by Homod and Thode, whom the king had sent over. Beaten, she retreated to her fleet, of which only thirty ships managed to escape, the rest being taken by the enemy. Thrond encountered his sister as she was eluding the Danes, but was conquered by her and stripped of his entire army; he fled over the Dovrefjeld without a single companion. Thus she, who had first yielded before the Danes, soon overcame her brother, and turned her flight into a victory. When Omund heard of this, he went back to Norway with a great fleet, first sending Homod and Thole by a short and secret way to rouse the people of Tellemark against the rule of Rusla. The end was that she was driven out of her kingdom by the commons, fled to the isles for safety, and turned her back, without a blow, upon the Danes as they came up. The king pursued her hotly, caught up her fleet on the sea, and utterly destroyed it, the enemy suffered mightily, and he won a bloodless victory and splendid spoils. But Rusla escaped with a very few ships, and rowed ploughing the waves furiously; but, while she was avoiding the Danes, she met her brother and was killed.

& Ladgerda
Among them was Ladgerda, a skilled amazon, who, though a maiden, had the courage of a man, and fought in front among the bravest with her hair loose over her shoulders. All-marvelled at her matchless deeds, for her locks flying down her back betrayed that she was a woman....

Her second husband didn't fare so well

Ladgerda, who had a matchless spirit though a delicate frame, covered by her splendid bravery the inclination of the soldiers to waver. For she made a sally about, and flew round to the rear of the enemy, taking them unawares, and thus turned the panic of her friends into the camp of the enemy. At last the lines of HARALD became slack, and HARALD himself was routed with a great slaughter of his men. LADGERDA, when she had gone home after the battle, murdered her husband.... in the night with a spear-head, which she had hid in her gown. Then she usurped the whole of his name and sovereignty; for this most presumptuous dame thought it pleasanter to rule without her husband than to share the throne with him.

& this got me thinking - as the term 'Shieldmaiden' seems common in Rohan (both Eowyn & Eomer use it in this episode) could there have been others in the Rohirrim?

ArathornJax

04-27-2008, 10:58 AM

Yes, I knew the BBC dramatisation of The Hobbit which featured good actors and was directed by one of the BBC's best directors, John Powell, with whom I worked on other programmes. But I never liked it: I found it too fanciful, too fussy and heavily cumbered with too many intrusive sound-effects. We asked if we could make a new version of The Hobbit to precede TLOTR, but the powers-that-be wouldn't approve that idea - way too expensive - so it never happened. However, I think it certainly influenced Michael and I in writing the scripts and Jane Morgan and Penny Leicester in establishing a directing style - on the basis of knowing what we didn't want to do!

I would totally agree with you that it is too fussy and very cumbered with too many intrusive sound-effects. The trumpets that go off are annoying as is the sound of Bilbo putting on the rings. I would have LOVED to have heard an adaptation by your team of The Hobbit and I think the cost over time would have been made back and with profit, but sometimes in business decisions can be short term based.

I suspected that it may have shown you and your team what you did not want to do. Thanks for the response.

davem

04-27-2008, 11:09 AM

I liked parts of the BBC Hobbit - the interaction between Bilbo & the Narrator (or 'Talebearer') & some of the comments by various characters - like Gandalf's at the end on Bilbo's memoirs ("He'll never get a publisher!").

Of course, this is an adaptation that Tolkien could have heard, but I'm not sure that he did - or what his reaction was. Can't remember it being mentioned in the letters ....

Brian Sibley

04-27-2008, 11:12 AM

I would have LOVED to have heard an adaptation by your team of The Hobbit and I think the cost over time would have been made back and with profit, but sometimes in business decisions can be short term based.

I suspected that it may have shown you and your team what you did not want to do. Thanks for the response.

It was probably a short-sighted decision, but no one knew that TLOTR would be the success that it was - only when it was a hit did they decided to issue The Hobbit on audio books as a companion piece - even though they were so different.

It is worth remembering that not everyone thinks so highly of our LOTR; for instance I recently stumbled on a review of the CD set by Amanda Craig in The Independent on Sunday, Dec 15, 2002:

I have often wondered why so many intelligent people loathe Lord of the Rings (BBC Radio Collection pounds 50, boxed set) with such passion. Had my first introduction to it been through the radio, then I too would despise it. Brian Sibley has updated his classic radio version, first broadcast in 1981. He should be forced to wear prosthetic feet in atonement for the ponderous mess he's made of both story and prose. There's scarcely a single line here that belongs to Tolkien. All the humour, tension, poetry and life have been jettisoned for plonking dialogue that sounds like something left over from The Archers. Furthermore, one of the book's greatest pleasures, that of working out the mysterious past through the unfolding events of the present, has been bypassed by means of a new framing device, presumably to bring it in line with the film. The whole exercise is an embarrassment.

Of course Ms Craig is perfectly entitled not to like it, but "There's scarcely a single line here that belongs to Tolkien..." does beg the question of whether she has actually ever read the book! :mad:

Estelyn Telcontar

04-28-2008, 12:10 PM

I've concentrated on the episode of The Hobbit with the Dwarven music in these past weeks, so I did listen to the BBC Hobbit radio play. I was not enthused over the version which was played and sung there - it lacked enchantment as far as I was concerned. Interestingly, the German radio adaptation has excellent Dwarven music, following the description in the book more faithfully and sounding much more fascinating. AJ, you mention another adaptation - can you give me more information on that, please?

ArathornJax

04-28-2008, 08:54 PM

Estelyn here are some links:

http://www.sf-worlds.com/lord-of-the-rings/the-lord-of-the-rings-minds-eye-1979.html

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/The-Hobbit/J-R-R-Tolkien/e/9781565116726/?itm=20

HighBridge is what Mindseye has become.

http://www.highbridgeaudio.com/jrrtolcol.html

I think I'd mentioned this, but there are many things I do not like about the Mindseye LOTR: the elves, the voices of Sam, Merry and Pippin, the writing, some of the acting. The BBC version is much more. For The Hobbit thought I do recommend the Mindseye or Highbridge version. Though not perfect, I do enjoy it.

Edit: I tried to put this into a private message but for some reason it is not working:

I also don't usually post something from YouTube but since this is only 3:28 of a 4 hour presentation and that is less than 10% I will post it as being ok under fair use.
This is a clip from the song the dwarves sing at Bilbo's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFcnMSJdnvA

ArathornJax

05-05-2008, 07:35 PM

Transcript: http://www.tolkienradio.com/mastersamwise.html

Here are my thoughts on this episode. The interaction between Denethor, Gandalf and Faramir is well done. There are some major parts edited out, parts that I think really reflect not only the nature of the family relationships, but how they are different. Thought this is left out, I think the adaptation captures the notion of how it shows that Faramir is linked closer to Gandalf then to his father. I also like the discussion of what Denethor wished had been done with the ring. For me this is a wonderful interaction that shows Denethor's pride and vanity, that he could withstand the ring and would only use it IF it was a last choice. This reveals Denethor's hubris and how deceived he is. What was the deciding factor in putting the script together yet keeping it as true to the book as possible? Again, here I think that was done quite well.

One of the things I've noticed and again, I am not sure if it has been discussed, but I wonder how Brian and company decided on the order of events to display. I guess this episode really brought to me how the time frame of the book is not followed here. I would love to know how the decision was made to fit the various parts where they are in the adaptation.

The interaction between Frodo and the Witch King is interesting. I'm not sure if it could be done any better with the focus being on radio. It again conveys the meaning from the text while shortening the sequence. I really did miss the Phial of Galadrial that assisted Frodo in having the strength to resist the ring. For me this is important because it shows that Frodo needs the assistance of others in order to accomplish the quest. I still would like to see this brought out here in any adaptation because the Phial plays a role in what is coming, and this would show how it impacts evil when it confronts it.

Again we next see Aragorn and the army of the dead go forth to battle and take the Black Fleet over. I enjoyed the sequence here and that it shows Legolas hearing the cry of the gulls and the sea.

The highlight for me is the encounter with Shelob and the tower at Cirith Ungol. Sam and Frodo, Sir Ian Holm and William Nighy really do a great job here. I love the sound effect of Shelob, what sounds were used to make her? I also LOVE the song sung by Sam, In Western Lands . . . What tune is used there, anyone know? I also love how at the end Frodo/Sir Ian shows how the ring has corrupted him.

I really enjoyed this episode and have started the next.

Brian Sibley

05-06-2008, 01:44 AM

One of the things I've noticed and again, I am not sure if it has been discussed, but I wonder how Brian and company decided on the order of events to display. I guess this episode really brought to me how the time frame of the book is not followed here. I would love to know how the decision was made to fit the various parts where they are in the adaptation.

This may have been answered previously, I'm not sure...

Basically, I sat down with the book and Tolkien's date-by-date chronology ('The Tale of Years', LOTR Appendix B) and worked out a structure that was, as you note, different to that of the running narrative in the book.

This decision was dictated by two things: the need to be able to follow the story in, as far as possible, a chronological order and to be able to include material in each (originally 30-minute) episode featuring all the major character groups.

At that point I also took some decisions about cuts and omissions (the loss of Tom Bombadil being the biggest) and selected which story elements had to be included.

This structure was then followed by Michael Bakewell and myself when we came to write the actual episodes - though that process occasionally led to some unavoidable horse-trading so that material in over-long episodes could be accommodated elsewhere.

Further compressions and cuts were made in studio when the scripts had been read and accurately timed and more in the editing process following recording - necessitated by the fact that music and effects can add considerably to the running time.

The highlight for me is the encounter with Shelob and the tower at Cirith Ungol. Sam and Frodo, Sir Ian Holm and William Nighy really do a great job here. I love the sound effect of Shelob, what sounds were used to make her?

We wanted Shelob to sound real -- and female -- so the spider was 'played' by actress Jenny Lee, whose voice-sounds were then treated radiophonically.

I also LOVE the song sung by Sam, In Western Lands . . . What tune is used there, anyone know?

Like all the music in LOTR, the tune was composed by Stephen Oliver.

Mithalwen

05-06-2008, 06:44 AM

Of course Ms Craig is perfectly entitled not to like it, but "There's scarcely a single line here that belongs to Tolkien..." does beg the question of whether she has actually ever read the book! :mad:

I have to say I doubt it .... I am amazed continually as I compare the two for this how little dialogue has been created.

Mithalwen

05-28-2008, 02:55 PM

Sorry to have neglected this. I will try to do the next one on Friday if none objects?

In the meantime, I must comment more on this one. While I have listened to the series many times it is usually as a background to either a long drive or housework but listening seriously has provided new insights into the text and a greated appreciation of the adaptation on the whole. It is something I have loved since I first heard it, oh so many years ago and it is a great joy to find that it stands up to scrutiny ( trying to reread the Chronicles of Narnia which I loved as a child was a heartbreaking mistake).

I love the way that the script doesn't feel the need to explain everything and that in the circumstances there are very few "clunks" ie characters saying things for the benefit of the listeners (proof again that using a narrator was a wise choice), the only ones that really struck me were Gimli asking about Isengard (surely he would know?) and Legolas telling Eomer that he could string a bow quicker than sight.. and this is a very minor quibble from repeated listenings. Given that this was originally scheduled to run over half a year it is amazing that there isn't a lot more recapping and captain obvious statements. Perhaps Radio 4 is one place that assumes an intelligent audience.

So we get Frodo and Sam speaking Elvish - no explanations - beyond the seeming influence of the star glass - with Sam in particular this is incredibly moving. The most ordinary of Tolkien's main characters, an ordinary working man who has picked up a little education by chance invokes Varda to watch over him in as he walks under the shadow of the horror of death. It is one of those moments that align the story to the greater mythology, which it could have been so easy to cut out, dismiss as incomprehensible but it gives that richness and complexity which makes it so much more satisfying than Hollywood's pandering to the lowest common denominator (intellectual snob? Moi?).

I too love "In Western Lands"... it has aquired a personal significance that means it usually moves me to tears. Oz Clarke's version is a fine rendition but what a performance from Bill Nighy!!!! It can't have been easy with so much of this episode being nearly a soliloquy and the range of emotion is huge. It is very different from the type of role he has more recently become famous for on film, and the singing.... well he really is Sam.

The juxtaposition of threads means that we have Denethor's failure of hope to contrast with Sam's determination to carry on.

As for the textual insights, examining this episode and cross referencing made me link, to my own satisfaction, the "seek for the sword that was broken" dream to Gandalf. Faramir the wizard's pupil had the dream first and more frequently than the less apt Boromir. Something I intend to examine more closely when I have time.

davem

05-28-2008, 03:37 PM

Sorry to have neglected this.
.

Me too. i still haven't listened to ep 10 yet - too many other distractions - well, one 7 month old 'distraction' actually. I intend to get around to eps 10/11 this weekend. My apologies to all as I started this project & then left everyone high & dry. If Mith is ok doing Ep 11 I'll try & do 12 - but I'm not promising.....

Mithalwen

05-28-2008, 03:42 PM

Well part of me doesn't want it to finish! And Arathorn has other things to deal with alas. I will see what I can do... but the neglect isn't because of not caring rather caring so much that you want to give it more than the available time allows..

ArathornJax

05-28-2008, 05:28 PM

but I will still participate. I am halfway through ep. 10 and will finish it tomorrow.

Mithalwen

05-29-2008, 06:19 AM

In that case I won't break my neck to get the next intro done - I'll get to work and aim to post on Monday if I don't get enough online time at the weekend.

Arathorn, I don't pray but I will be keeping you in my thoughts.

ArathornJax

05-29-2008, 07:46 PM

Thanks for keeping me in your thoughts everyone. I had my last test today, a cool thing called a PillCam. It basically is a camera that is pill sized and goes through your entire GI track. I should have results back in 5 to 12 days; sooner if its bad, longer if it is a disease that will cause lifestyle changes and medication for life (guess which I am hoping for!).

Anyway, here is my recap to Episode XI:

Transcript is here: http://www.tolkienradio.com/pelennorfields.html

The Episode begins with Sam and Frodo escaping from Cirith Ungol. I found this very interesting as in listening this time, I was able to really focus on the burden that is growing on Frodo. Sir Ian Holm is wonderful as we have mentioned and one of the things I like about this portrayl is Sir Ian is able to convey not only the burden, but how Frodo has changed. I listened to an earlier broadcast (The Shadow of the Past) and found that I really liked how much Frodo has changed. At this point I don't think Frodo is really deeply reflective or forward thinking. The quest is consuming him and inspite of knowing this, he continues on.
One of the things I thought while listening and reading the transcript was how another actor would have read these lines? Not being an actor, but having done some extra work I wonder if the actors/actresses practiced with each other (rehearsing) or if they just learned their lines and then came together for the takes? But back to my point here, I do wonder if a new version was made with different actors how that would differ from the original? I just cannot see anyone but Ian Holm doing this.

The scene then moves to a meeting with Beregond, Pippin and Denethor. More on that later. From here the Lord of the Nazgul directs Grond to destroy the Main Gate of Minis Tirith, and the conflict between Gandalf and the Lord of the Nazgul I don't know why I have never made this connection but this scene really connected me with the Battle of the Balrog.

At the Bridge:
Gandalf: You cannot pass. I am a servant of the Secret Fire, wielder of the flame of Anor. You cannot pass. The dark fire will not avail you, flame of Udûn. Go back to the Shadow! You cannot pass.

[The Balrog roars fire]

Gandalf: You cannot pass, I say! Back to your darkness!

[The Balrog roars again]

Gandalf: Back from this place, or I shall plunge you into the abyss! Then fall, spawn of Melkor, fall!

[Gandalf's staff breaks the bridge. The Balrog flings its whip, catching hold of Gandalf, who cries out]

Frodo: Gandalf!

[Gandalf's voice is quickly lost]

Gandalf: Fly, you fools!

At the Gate of Minis Tirith:

Gandalf: You cannot enter here! Do you not see that Dawn is at hand? Go back to the abyss prepared for you. Go back! Fall into the nothingness that awaits you and your master. Go!

[The Lord of the Nazgûl laughs coldly]

Lord of the Nazgûl: Old fool! Old fool! This is my hour. Do you not know Death when you see it? Die now and curse in vain!

[A clear horn is blown in the distance]

Gandalf: The horns of the Rohirrim! Théoden is come at last!

[The Lord of the Nazgûl screams in anger as he retreats]

Narrator: The darkness was breaking too soon; before the date that his master had set for it. Victory was slipping from his grasp even as he stretched out his hand to sieze it. But his arm was long. King, Ringwraith, Lord of the Nazgûl, he had many weapons. He left the Gate and vanished.

Gandalf: Turn back...

[A horn cries]

Gandalf: ...lord of darkness! Flee from the Gate of the City whose gates you were never destined to enter. The Riders of Rohan are come!

I think the similarities are easy to recognize between the two meetings as Gandalf warns the subject of evil to leave and go back to its darkness. Neither creature (Balrog or Nazgul Lord) hearken to the warning and in the end, both are destroyed.

Of course the difference is that Gandalf does not destroy the Lord of the Nazgul directly as he did the Balrog (but certainly Gandalf's rousing of Theoden and Rohan has an indirect result of the slaying of the Nazgul Lord). Anyway, again, something after 27/28 years of reading LOTR, I should have picked up on that a long time ago.

I have to say that Jack May stole the show so to speak for me in this episode. I think, no, I know that for me I love his portrayal of Theoden was wonderful. A warrior lord who is coming to the 'battle of his time' and meets it head on regardless of age (and being in one's 70's would mean a loss of some energy and strength regardless of shape).

I also picked up another comparison. When the Lord of the Nazgul arrives and Theoden shouts "To me! To me! Up Eorlings! Fear no darkness!" it really reminds me of Thorin at the Battle of Five Armies where Thorin shouted "To me! To me! O Elves and men! To me! O my kinsfolk." I find it interesting that both faced a doom being either outnumbered or not capable of defeating a mighty opponent.

I think both Theoden and Eowyn (Jack May and Elin Jenkins) show that inspite of fear, they act and act with great courage and perhaps that is the definition of courage; to act inspite of fear that is wanting you not to act but to flee the situation. I've always wondered why a woman had to slay the Lord of the Nazgul and listening this time a thought occurred to me. The Lord of the Nazgul was given life by a woman, and his choices eventually made it to where he rejected normal life, and excited as a wraith. Thus since a woman gave him life, a woman would take his existence, his life so to speak from him. The other thought I had was the notion of love. I believe Eowyn at this moment acted out of love for Theoden. Merry acted out of love also. The Lord of the Nazgul acted out of evil, malice and for domination. Thus a woman (and I believe by nature they are more caring then most men) and a hobbit who as a hobbit, is focused on the greater things of life, friendship, good food, love etc., are able to defend their lord and each other from this selfishness. I thought that Elin Jenkins really showed to me the unselfishness of Eowyn in this act. I really loved this scene. My only criticism is the importance of the dagger of Westernesse that Merry used to stab the Lord fo the Nazgul. It was that dagger/sword that allowed Eowyn to destroy him but in thinking this over today, how do you convey that outside of a written text? So though I label it a criticism, perhaps it just shows how a diehard fan I am and I have to be careful with that in reviewing an adaptation that I allow leeway here as I did for Tom B. earlier.

Another insight I gained and I thought that Peter Vaughan did a great job in showing this is the pride of Denethor. It really hit me here how Denethor thinks that his house, the House of the Stewards of Anarionis greater than the House of Isildur (and Aragorn was the heir of Anarion also!), and how he only wants to rule his time, and have a son succeed him. I also thought the palantir showed here also really showed Denethor's pride in that he thought he could equal the kings whose right it was to use the stones. His house had no such right yet he thought he had the strength. What is that saying about pride, it cometh before a . . . .

An easy comparison are the deaths of Theoden and Denethor. Theoden has fulfilled his duty and obligations, and has died doing so. I loved how Jack May said the lines a "Grim Morn, a Glad day, a Golden Sunset" as a way to describe the day and the affects of it. It was a grim day at the beginning with little hope for victory. A glad day it became because oaths had been fulfilled and the battle looked to be going good. A golden sunset as Theoden would no longer live to see it, but he had fulfilled his oath and I guess, redeemed himself for his inaction under Wormtongue. Denethor though in despair, takes his own life, and attempts to take the life of his son out of selfishness, to ease his own death like the heathen kings under the control of the Dark Lord, which is what has happen. Regardless one of the things I really like here is that there is a confrontation of words between Denethor and Gandalf before Denethor takes his own life.

Another thing I was so happy that is included is the passing of the mantle of kingship between Theoden and Eomer. I think this is important for those who listen who may not have read the books. Eomer is the heir now and thus becomes King. This explains so much of his actions later.

Yet another thing I was happy to see is the role of women brought out in this episode. I have talked about Eowyn, yet the adaptation shows the importance of Ioreth. I have to say that I like Ioreth both in the book and here. She reminds me of one of my mother's sisters (yep, an aunt), yet someone with a very important role in her society and in the book/adaptation. So for all the talk that women do not play a role in the story, I say they do, and the parts they play are critical to the plot at the time they exit in the story /adaptation. So Brian, thanks for including her!

The House of Healing is wonderful scene, and one that I enjoy. The scene shows that Aragorn is the king, and begins to lay his foundation for the claim of the crown, and it does something else. I felt here the scene really shows what the relationship between Aragorn and Eowyn really is from his viewpoint, and with the fact that Eomer is the one that calls her back. I wish in some other adaptations that could have been shown because if you go into the fact that Eowyn is infatuated with Aragorn earlier, I think this scene shows the relationship as it is, and as Aragorn views it. No doubt where Aragorn loves lies here!

I also love the conversation between Merry and Pippin in the House of Healing. Pippin talks about not being able to stay on the heights for long (Tooks and Brandybucks). Merry gives an interesting reply that it is best to love that which we are fitted to love. I guess it is best to accept our position, our state. I wonder if we all did that if this would be a better world? Merry also says that we have to basically begin somewhere and have "some roots" yet there are things deeper and higher and we should be glad if we know something about them.

I've always wondered (having been to Europe 4x, India 2x among other places) how important it is to have "roots" but to also realize that in our world as in Middle Earth, there are other things that have even deeper roots and are higher? Also, it is better in life to accept what we love, regardless of what income or lifestyle that brings, if we are fitted to love it? I think this is just some great Hobbit/Tolkien wisdom coming through.

It ends with a short snippet of Frodo and Sam and the Orc Overseer scene and then the Captains of the West. I have really loved listening to this, and really getting into it. This is by far one of my favorite episodes in the series. I thought the writing and adaptations are great, and that the actors and actresses really shine here.

Let the discussion begin and remember, I'm sick so if my post makes no sense, I can always blame the medication :)