A hundredth re-read of the LotR

[Nogrod]

After some discussions in the Anyone want to join me in a rerun? -thread in CbC we'll open a new one.

We'll go chapter-by-chapter but we will keep it in this very same thread all a long starting with Concerning hobbits.

The idea is to go with a pace of a chapter per week speed with no one responsible to do any groundwork or introductionary speeches. So everyone is welcomed to share their views here - and to take an inspiration of reading the LotR once again and sharing one's ideas about it.

If and when we start right now it will mean that from an exact week on from now on anyone will be able to post thoughts on the A Long Expected Party. But this week from this on we'll devote ourselves to the Concerning Hobbits.

As we (hopefully) reach the point where the previous re-read halted we will discuss whether to then join the earlier CbC-threads or whether to continue it here in this one.

Let's go then.

[Nogrod]

I don’t know what got into me but suddenly I realised that I was reading the Concerning Hobbits through something like the “lenses of social concern” and a “dangerous-romanticism-radar” on. It was not intended but I couldn’t help it. Maybe I’m just growing old?

I’d like to start with the latter as the former spills over to the first chapter as well…

The description of the Fallohides is the most telling one. They were the least numerous (the noble class which always is the minority… they must be… the majority can’t be celebrities or royalties anyway as it is conceptually impossible for all to be so) and what else?

The Fallohides were taller & slimmer, fair skinned & fair-haired, they loved the trees (like prof. himself) and were closest to the elves of all hobbits, they were the northerly branch of hobbits (nordischen erbe?), had more skill in language and song, were hunters rather than farmers, bolder and more adventurous (without the adventurous hobbits the ME would have been plunged into the darkness) and they were often the leaders of different hobbit-clans after they mixed with the others.

So they were the “heroes”, the great hobbits – like the Tooks or the masters of Buckland.

What were the others? The Harfoots were browner of skin, smaller and shorter; friends of the dwarves. The Stoors were broader and heavier in build; more friends of men.

A neat triad where no one is but nice but yet one “breed” (Tolkien’s own word) is clearly greater than the others. And the qualities they possessed were clearly meant to be understood by the reading public as superior to the other two. It’s then not a surprise that those qualities that make the Fallohides so great are those of the educated & civilised people of the early 20th century. The way the Nazis and the Stalinists exploited those ideals is just a pain to witness… but they are more or less the same. And it is with an uneasy feeling I compare Tolkien’s description of the Fallohides with the ideals of intellectuals like Heidegger and Jünger – or with the nazis or fascists of Italy during the 30’s if one drops the serenity and non-violence of Tolkien aside.

So a common ground then? That’s what I have been wrestling with Heidegger a long time (I studied his philosophy quite extensively at the University) and I must say I face the same problem with Tolkien. I love them both but I feel insecure with the possible implications…

~~~

Another thing concerns the “ordering of the Shire”. Tolkien describes it as place where there was hardly any government, families for the most part managed their own affairs and the system was unchanging (like in Plato’s Republic!). And even if they had no contacts with the Kingdom they did stick to the laws of the King as they were “The Rules”, both ancient and just.

Now think of a place where this would be reality today, 2008 AD. The Pakistani outskirts and Afganistan come to mind, or rural Somalia… Following the tradition without asking it’s justification just because it’s the “the rules” and these rules of old must be just if they are called the rules? And no government, no taxes, no welfare because the community will look after the drop-outs? But how about when the drop-out thinks differently than the community? What happened to the different hobbits? Were homosexual hobbits tolerated, not to ask accepted? Or what about if there were “Rules” of old that oppressed certain fractions of the community? Like the poor? Like women?

Bilbo just decided to take Frodo under his protective wing. Great, one says and with reason. Nice to see he was such a lovely character as to pick one person up who was going down and to bring him up to the surface again. But it could be seen as a random social inequality as well (How about the other cousins? Did anyone give them a good-life? Why weren’t Bilbo’s “non-cousins” eg. other poor justified for a good life?). How moral is a social organisation of a community that relies on a whim of eccentric millionaires?

~~~

Okay here I go to my second topic… Tolkien paints a very rosy picture of the Hobbits. As rosy as you can get I’d say. And many people tend to think the hobbit-society is something like an ideal for us all today (what Tolkien thought about it is another thing). But he also writes, that “by no means all Hobbits were lettered” revealing the fact that the Shire was not an ideal place for everyone. Also some Hobbits were exceedingly wealthy and some were poor. Why don’t we have any tales of the poor or their suffering in the Shire? The LotR and the Silm are stories about the heroes and the upper-class. And many times someone's heroism is the downfall of the meek. Just think of Robin Hood... what happened to the peasants after his raids on the rich? They suffered even more.

In A Long-Expected Party Tolkien writes in the very beginning about Bilbo having “many devoted admirers among the hobbits of poor and unimportant families”… Unimportant families? It is possible to interpret that as Tolkien just saying that some of the Bilbo-devoteés were not bold, beautiful and rich but from the class beneath those of the “hero-class”. And he might be just describing the situation in the fantasy world made by himself with no moral connotations. But somehow it feels like there’s a normative element in the text as well. That’s the way it should be? Some are born heroes others are born to mediocrity or losers (add here the things concerning the Fallohides)?

~~~

Yes, I know I’m “accusing” Tolkien of sins that were thought of as sins only after he wrote his stories (or parallel to his writing them). And I do love the stories and I do love Tolkien.

But when you love something you must be ready to challenge your love as well to see the problems. Like a parent loves his children despite the defects of the child he sees – although the parallel fails in that it’s hard to figure oneself as a “father” of Tolkien. :)



PS. I will not post like this further on. It's just that the Concerning Hobbits is a general description of a folk bringing forwards an social and political ideal and thence it requires a social-political thought to try and understand it - in my opinion.

[wispeight]

I think that was a great writing. I need to find out more on this, Heidegger. I'm not familiar with the name. Auguste Comte is still a highly revered name here in America within certain circles. Your mention of Plato's "Republic" made Comte and Positivism come to mind. I notice the names that you mention when speaking of socialism and communism. It is my opinion that Woodrow Wilson used Europe as a laboratory for his socialism experiments. I believe Germany won WWI and was willing to call and end to it. Everything simply returning to the way it was before the war started. We had no necessity at all for entering into it.

In regard to Tolkien, I'm going to suggest that he was simply providing a beautiful portrait of how agrarian life can manifest itself. In these venues, certain things like homosexuality were simply not spoken about. One simply did not speak of certain things. When society wants to exalt certain things, to make them seem proper, I don't feel the need to rise up against it, but I also don't have to make it a part of my karma by claiming it is normal and proper behavior. I get the feeling that people trying to manufacture a utopian society are kind of hive minded. Then I begin to think on the word Elemental for some odd reason. Compulsion and coercion also pop up. Immaturity is another.

[skip spence]

Yes, I know I’m “accusing” Tolkien of sins that were thought of as sins only after he wrote his stories (or parallel to his writing them). And I do love the stories and I do love Tolkien.

But when you love something you must be ready to challenge your love as well to see the problems. Like a parent loves his children despite the defects of the child he sees – although the parallel fails in that it’s hard to figure oneself as a “father” of Tolkien. :)

PS. I will not post like this further on. It's just that the Concerning Hobbits is a general description of a folk bringing forwards an social and political ideal and thence it requires a social-political thought to try and understand it - in my opinion.

Great post, Nogrod.

Obviously you are not the first to raise these concerns regarding Tolkien's works and you won't be the last either. That "The Scourge of the Dark Side"-thread immediately springs to mind, along with a few lectures I've received from friends. I suppose that the "sin" Tolkien committed (according to our modern sensibilities) is generalising about different groups of people and comparing them to each other. This, of course, is a common theme throughout his works and all peoples and races have an elite group greater than their kin-folk. The Elves have their Noldor, the Men the Dunedain or Numenorians, the Dwarves the Longbeards, the Hobbits the Fallohides, even the Goblins have a master race in the Uruk Hai.

So the Fallohides were a northern branch of Hobbits; taller, blonder, bolder and generally greater than the others. The Dunedain also share many of these characteristics and are also found in the North-west. You are intimating that there is an analogy between these fictional master-peoples of the North-west and the English or perhaps rather the people of Western Europe and I tend to agree. This analogy can't have been unintentional. Did Tolkien feel that the peoples of Western Europe were greater and more noble than the invading hoards of the far East and the dark savages of the South? Possibly. Perhaps he took a Euro-centric perspective because it would feel more authentic that way as a genuine mythology but I find it hard to believe he didn't mix up his personal feelings into it too.

More to the point: should we condemn Tolkien if he thought the tall and noble peoples of North-western Europe were "greater" than other peoples in the world. I'm not so sure of this. To express this view today (ie my people is better than other people) is not politically correct to say the very least and I'm becoming nervous just discussing it here. In light of the heinous crimes committed against humanity by Hitler and many others who were not Caucasians from North-western Europe who justified their actions with ideas of racial or cultural supremacy this is very understandable.

What pardons Tolkien in my mind is that he never wrote a single line that justifies one person's or people's right to take anything away from another person or people because of relative "greatness". Great or small, all are within the law in Tolkien's Middle Earth. Sure, the Numenorians or Gondorians fex. had colonial tendencies, but this is never condoned by the authors voice in any way, only described factually. I'm reminded of Legate's thread about power: even if a character is mighty beyond comprehension like Gandalf he has no right to use that power to take what he wants, however benign he might be. Greatness does not give one the right to dominate the lesser against their will.

Edit: A thing I'd like to add or expand on rather is that being great or mighty isn't necessarily connected to being good. Throughout the stories the one thing that determines a character's true value if you wish is the moral choices he or she makes. Although the Noldor or the Dunedain are the greatest of the Elves and Men respectively, they often do rash and unjust deeds that in no way is justified by their "greatness". While Feanor is the greatest of the Noldor he is certainly not the best. Samwise on the other hand is a common gardener and not mighty or great at all, but still he is one of the biggest heroes of the story.

I think this is a nice point actually. Although our modern enlightened society forbids us to discuss it, the truth is that some are endowed with more than others, and no amount or socialism or progressive politics can change that fact. Some are born into rich, well-educated families and grow up good looking and intelligent. Life offers these lucky individuals many opportunities and treats. Others draw a blank in the genetic lottery and grow up somewhat dim-witted and ugly. If they also lack the benefits of a supportive family or society life will often treat them hard. But I think that it's important to remember that they still can be good people. The dim-witted, ugly and poor fellow can easily be a "better" person than the beautiful, smart and rich if he/she makes better moral choices and lives a life respecting and helping others.

But maybe I'm making too much of this...

[Nogrod]

Fine post as well Skip!The dim-witted, ugly and poor fellow can easily be a "better" person than the beautiful, smart and rich if he/she makes better moral choices and lives a life respecting and helping others.

But maybe I'm making too much of this...Not at all! It's nice to see that what you just say there is in a way one of the central themes of the whole book where little hands will to do the great deeds... even if those little hands belong to the mighty of the little... :)

[Groin Redbeard]

I'm reminded of Legate's thread about power: even if a character is mighty beyond comprehension like Gandalf he has no right to use that power to take what he wants, however benign he might be. Greatness does not give one the right to dominate the lesser against their will.
Those last words, skip spence, pretty much sum up the Hobbit's themselves. When I was reading Concerning Hobbits Tolkien immediately gives you the feeling of the hobbits being different people in terms of their legal system. It starts off by telling us by explaining that Hobbits were not much different from men, in their characteristics, but when they formed the Shire all that changed. I won't preach about what you already know, and is explained in the book.

That change from being diligent to becoming lax and slothful gives rise to my opinion of Hobbits just being overgrown kids. While under the king they worked hard and were sometimes renowned for doing great things, much like a child under a parent, but that all soon faded when put under their own leadership, if you can call it leadership at all there was basically no governing ruler for the Hobbits (besides that of good old common sense) save only in name. Yet there seems to be a great deal of spirit left in the Hobbits from the good old days, as seen with the Tooks, and if they're given the opportunity (or cast into it like Bilbo was;)) they can mature and accomplish things well beyond what one would expect.

[Thinlómien]

I haven't managed to have a look at Concerning Hobbits yet, so I'll refrain from the actual discussion, but I have a practical question instead. Can we still talk about previous chapters later? Like, if it happened that I didn't have time to read Concerning Hobbits and write about it this week, should I still write about it here next week when others are discussing A Long Expected Party? Or should I just post on the CbC thread for Concerning Hobbits?

[skip spence]

Those last words, skip spence, pretty much sum up the Hobbit's themselves. When I was reading Concerning Hobbits Tolkien immediately gives you the feeling of the hobbits being different people in terms of their legal system. It starts off by telling us by explaining that Hobbits were not much different from men, in their characteristics, but when they formed the Shire all that changed. I won't preach about what you already know, and is explained in the book.

That change from being diligent to becoming lax and slothful gives rise to my opinion of Hobbits just being overgrown kids. While under the king they worked hard and were sometimes renowned for doing great things, much like a child under a parent, but that all soon faded when put under their own leadership, if you can call it leadership at all there was basically no governing ruler for the Hobbits (besides that of good old common sense) save only in name. Yet there seems to be a great deal of spirit left in the Hobbits from the good old days, as seen with the Tooks, and if they're given the opportunity (or cast into it like Bilbo was;)) they can mature and accomplish things well beyond what one would expect.

Well, it's hardly fair too call the Hobbits lax and slothful. By all accounts they worked hard with their respective trade and made the Shire into a rich and well-tended part of ME. Actually, whereas the development in other parts of ME seemed to go backwards, the Shire is the only place we read about where things seem to improve with the passing of the years. The Hobbits of old fex. lived in simple burrows while at the time of the War of the Ring most of them had nice, comfortable houses or holes. Of old they also had no written records, whereas most can read and write at the time of Bilbo and many own books and write letters.

The fact that they had no army or police is hardly something they should be blamed for either. For over one and a half millennia they'd only experienced a few minor skirmishes on the border and while many armies in time become a power serving mostly its own interests this is hardly a good thing and we should applaud the Hobbits for realising they needed none, at least for many a long years. Also, a land without cops is to many of us a utopia ;)

I agree with Nogrod though that the rosy picture painted by Tolkien isn't very realistic and had The Shire been a real place not all would be so happy living under "the rules of old".

[Groin Redbeard]

Well, it's hardly fair too call the Hobbits lax and slothful. By all accounts they worked hard with their respective trade and made the Shire into a rich and well-tended part of ME. Actually, whereas the development in other parts of ME seemed to go backwards, the Shire is the only place we read about where things seem to improve with the passing of the years. The Hobbits of old fex. lived in simple burrows while at the time of the War of the Ring most of them had nice, comfortable houses or holes. Of old they also had no written records, whereas most can read and write at the time of Bilbo and many own books and write letters.
I admit I went a too far calling Hobbits slothful, but Tolkien dosen't give the impression that Hobbits are hard workers. We can see this in Bilbo's mentioning of Pipeweed and how the Hobbits have mastered it to a fine "art" (sounds like they have a lot of time on their hands:)).

The Shire, is in my opinion, a traditionalists paradise. Bilbo says that change comes slowly in Shire, and I think that this represents Tolkien's traditionalist views. Wouldn't it be great to live in a place were things don't change! :D


The fact that they had no army or police is hardly something they should be blamed for either.
The fact that they had no army was because the Dunedein Rangers patrolled their borders and kept undfriendly things out. They might not have needed an army while they were still protected by the Rangers, but the peace that they had always experienced in the Shire was taken for granted. The scouring of the Shire might have been prevented if they did have some sort of army to prevent Saruman and his hordes from pouring in when the Dunedein when south to join Aragorn.

I'm done now, so we can move along whenever we feel like it, or we can keep on disscussing until then. :)

[Nogrod]

I admit I went a too far calling Hobbits slothful, but Tolkien dosen't give the impression that Hobbits are hard workers. We can see this in Bilbo's mentioning of Pipeweed and how the Hobbits have mastered it to a fine "art" (sounds like they have a lot of time on their hands:)).That has to do with the "natural pace" of an agricultural society which Tolkien surely has been familiar with unlike we 21st century Westerners. Unlike in cities of today in the agrarian countryside the year was quite nicely sliced between times of 24/7 work phases (like ploughing & sowing in spring and harvesting in late summer, the times when the animals gave birth, when the repairs had to be made before the winter, when the berries, fruit & mushrooms riped, when the beer / wine had to be made as the crops/grapes were ready etc.) and then the lazier times (like midwinter etc.).

So one worked like mad on certain times of the year and on others one idled - or at least didn't have it so rough. That's the time they built their furniture, all the decorations, new clothes, telling stories, playing games... maybe cultivating pipeweed as well?

The Shire, is in my opinion, a traditionalists paradise. Bilbo says that change comes slowly in Shire, and I think that this represents Tolkien's traditionalist views. Wouldn't it be great to live in a place were things don't change!I agree with you about the Shire being a "traditionalist paradise" but tend to doubt the 100% bliss of it... :)



-----
I'm done now, so we can move along whenever we feel like it, or we can keep on disscussing until then.Even if the discussion is slowish, let's wait for a few days to see if others wish to join - or we get new ideas. Also it would be nice if we'd have a clear and steady "deadline" when things change so that people would get used to it and know when we change the Chapter.

(Ha-ha, I'm just arguing for stability after saying I wouldn't like to live in a stabile society... but hey, I was calling for the stability of change! :D)

So how about changing the Chapter on Friday / Saturday as the thread was started around then?


Can we still talk about previous chapters later? Like, if it happened that I didn't have time to read Concerning Hobbits and write about it this week, should I still write about it here next week when others are discussing A Long Expected Party? Or should I just post on the CbC thread for Concerning Hobbits?I think the initial idea was to make a re-read together so it would be nice if we all could advance with about a same pace. But if the discussions are this easy and slow it should be no problem to go back to some issues when someone is coming a little behind. But I mean "a little" behind. You probably see that if we're discussing the breaking of the fellowship then a discussion on pipeweed or Bilbo's birthday party (without an interesting link to the Breaking...) would be a bit out of the context.

Finally we were thinking of joining the CbC threads when we reach the point the previous re-read halted - or then not. Depending on how this goes. This far it looks pretty nice but we could have more people around.

[Nogrod]

A bit lighter opening to chew...

Has anyone of you noticed this little curiosity?

The part 1 ends talking about the hobbits delighting themselves in things that were accurate (the family trees and all their niceties); "set fair and square" - giving the air of hobbits being nearing precisionists in things relating to their history and organisation. Now the whole account of the Prologue is just about the ordering of the hobbit-kin and telling their history and the organisation of their Shire - which they were especially keen to have "fair and square".

And what happens after that in the book ?

Chapter 2 of the Prologue is 1+ pages of detour into the separate history of the pipeweed coming totally out of the blue... only to come back to the path of telling the story of the hobbits in an ordered fashion in chapter 3 "Of the Ordering of the Shire"!

Surely this was not unintentional by Tolkien?

So was it just a joke - something he had a good laugh with? And if yes, to what kind of laughter does it point at? Was he just laughing with sympathy, Gandalf-like, to the funny little hobbits he loved so much (Frodo / Sam / Merry wishing to make a separate entry on that issue just for the importance of the subject matter) or was it a more literary / structural joke referring to Tolkien's almost obsessive relation to the "Short cuts" and "unintentional bypaths" that finally settles the fortunes of the world in his view? In circles not unknown to Tolkien called providence.

Or was it just about the importance of the weed to Tolkien himself? The professor smoked pipe, didn't he? :rolleyes:

[Nogrod]

If anyone has time, please post about the first chapter. I'm going to be more than busy up to Monday so don't you wait for me... :)

[Nogrod]

Okay. I'll start with two thoughts from just the first pages of the chapter to get this rolling again. I probably have time tomorrow to read the rest of it and to hopefully join a discussion already on its way then...


The chapter begins with the description of Bilbo's reputation and stature in Hobitton. Now some said it was unfair that someone was so rich and blessed with such an old age well-preserved.
"It will have to be paid for," they said. "It isn't natural, and trouble will come of it!" Now one might say here an author is laying grounds for what will come; kind of hinting to the future and the whole affair, setting the gloomy feeling to the background from where it would eventually come forth.

But is it also Tolkien's own world-view? Do good fortunes need to be earned? Is that the way how a rich man justifies his riches; by suffering or fulfilling a noble destiny? Or is it how things should be? Or is Tolkien just posing the question?

So, is there an eventual balance where normal life (Hobitton way) is easier or requires not the heroical sacrifices which in turn justify the more "nobler lifestyles" or opportunities?

Are there theological implications involved? The mainstream christians who just lead their lives and receive the grace with not too much effort or thought of it and then those existentially anguished romantical "burning souls" who need to take their fill which somehow makes their lives at the same time a torment but also much more rich and fulfilling?


A second thought.

Looking at Gaffer Gamgee one easily finds a servant venerating his master who in turn is "very polite" to him. Even if the relation between the two have been described as somewhat informal with a few examples (Bilbo calling Gaffer "Master Hamfast" etc.) one gets a relation of a servant and a master - however benevolent the master is towards his servant - and the servant is acknowleding his place however the master asks for advice from him.

But could you imagine a similar relationship between Frodo and Sam? In a sense, in the beginning of the journey, their relationship is something reminding one of that and Tolkien indeed keeps on reminding us of it throughout the story, oftentimes in Sam's lines and reactions.

But still in the end it's a lot different even if they never get to be kind of equals as Frodo was the Ringbearer and thence of "nobility" of sorts. But is that a same kind of difference? Sam is indeed given some bits and pieces of the nobility - through him bearing the ring for a while at least - and Frodo openly declares his worth by giving him the mastery of Bag End when he leaves.

What kind of intrigues me is that even if they journeyed along and faced all those troubles together - and Sam saved Frodo and the whole mission a few times - they didn't end up as equals even if they ended up as friends rather than just a master and a servant.

(Something which quite bugs me indeed is that Frodo treats Sam like one who is generous, loving, friendly - I'm not denying his earnest feelings of gratitude or friendship even - and Sam goes along the same route, being the one to receive the honour of being treated that way.)

Is the barrier un-breechable? And which barrier is it? Inherited noblesse as a birthright? Fate-ordered thing? Just something growing from their different socio-economic backgrounds?



A third one just to lighten things up.

Don't you think Bilbo turning 111 and Frodo 33 on a same year is just a bit... well how does one say it... "fantasy-like"? :) Like a bedtime-story or a fairy-tale where all the numbers must match (or Hegelian philosophy for that matter... :rolleyes:)? What did the story gain from that instead of Bilbo having his 114th birthday while Frodo turned 31? Is it a reminder that we're now entering the magical kingdom of myths and tales?

[Nogrod]

And btw.

Happy Birthday Bilbo and Frodo!

:)

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

I think the word you might be looking for is "coincidental" (possibly "contrived"). :) And perhaps in contriving this remarkable coincidence, Tolkien was making his first essay into the concept that there is no true coincidence in Middle-earth, that all things happen for a reason, even if that reason is never known. Frodo coming of age at this particular time -- when Bilbo was finally feeling the negative effects of keeping the Ring -- made it easier for Bilbo to pass it on to Frodo, along with Bag End and his other possessions. Frodo needed to be old enough to be totally undisputed as Bilbo's heir, and Bilbo needed to be old enough for other hobbits not to question the fact that he never returned (especially since he had gone off once before, and returned at a most inopportune moment for those who had been buying his possessions). Contrived, certainly, but one wonders whose finger within the subcreation caused it to happen in just that convenient, coincidental way.

[Nogrod]

So, from the fitting numbers we get into a world guided by providence? Or is it a world of necessity? Where everything just has to happen the way it does?

there is no true coincidence in Middle-earth, that all things happen for a reason, even if that reason is never known.
Even if I have quite a strong distaste for Matrix II and III (I liked the first one though) that was a question they brought forwards nicely: the world of the Matrix was just "cause and effect" like the character Merovingian put it (with the necessary anomalies in the form of agent Smith and Neo) but the "real world" was guided by providence; in a very fatalistic way the prophecies just came true - even if the minute details were often baffling and didn't seem to contribute to the greater fate of things.

Yes, this will come more important later in the book when Gandalf voices his concern about pity and letting Gollum live...

But looking at the way one may jump from 111th & 33rd birthday - coincidentally or contrivingly happening - to these considerations it really arouses the question whether Tolkien wished, by the selection of those "fitting" birthdays to address the reader that we are in a fantasy or mythical landscape now and there the providence rules supreme? And whether that as a myth portrays to us more what the world should be like, not what it is like?

To put it in Matrix-terms, is the Middle Earth the "real world" vs. the Matrix of the actual world of natural sciences of cause and effect?

[Tuor in Gondolin]

Posted by NogrodLooking at Gaffer Gamgee one easily finds a servant venerating his master who in turn is "very polite" to him. Even if the relation between the two have been described as somewhat informal with a few examples (Bilbo calling Gaffer "Master Hamfast" etc.) one gets a relation of a servant and a master - however benevolent the master is towards his servant - and the servant is acknowleding his place however the master asks for advice from him.

But could you imagine a similar relationship between Frodo and Sam? In a sense, in the beginning of the journey, their relationship is something reminding one of that and Tolkien indeed keeps on reminding us of it throughout the story, oftentimes in Sam's lines and reactions.

I really don't see the Shire society, and especially the Gamgees, as
socially and politically rigid as many seem to. After the quest,
Frodo virtually adopts Sam, has Sam inherit Bagend, and Sam
(if he is indeed considered lower class socially) rises to the top
political (and social?) post in the Shire. And the Gaffer seems economically
on a par with Bilbo (not counting Bilbo's Excellent Adventure gold and
silver). To me, the Shire is, by far,in "feel", closest to present times.

Of course, I must say I side with Tolkien, and against just about everybody
else-including a young Rayner Unwin, in quite liking "Hobbit talk,"
and not minding a bit more. :)

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

But looking at the way one may jump from 111th & 33rd birthday - coincidentally or contrivingly happening - to these considerations it really arouses the question whether Tolkien wished, by the selection of those "fitting" birthdays to address the reader that we are in a fantasy or mythical landscape now and there the providence rules supreme? And whether that as a myth portrays to us more what the world should be like, not what it is like?

This makes me hear Rod Serling's voice intoning, "There's a signpost up ahead. Next stop...." Middle-earth? :)

But I do think this might be a reasonable assessment, that Tolkien wished the readers to know that this was no longer what they think of as the "real world," that they had crossed over into the realm of Myth and Legend -- into Faerie. I suspect that this was why his eventual attempts to rethink his myths in terms of real science (as in the "Myths Transformed" portion of Morgoth's Ring), it ultimately failed. He himself -- his creative mind, that is -- had conceived the whole as Myth, and it was too tightly constructed to take it apart and reinterpret it in Real World, scientific terms. It is a world as it should be in terms of its own subcreational reality, not in any other way. The introduction of the hobbits and the Shire incorporates elements that feel like the world we know, but other things, like the coincidental birthdays, wizardly fireworks, and a magic ring let us know that though we have not entirely abandoned the familiar, we are moving into a world that is not our own.

[Groin Redbeard]

I've tried but I just can't come up with anything worth saying for this chapter, other than I enjoyed it!:D I love all the mentioning of the magical toys made by the dwarves and such.

Although, I did like the way that Tolkien introduces the thought of the Ring being evil with the confrontation between Bilbo and Gandalf. I remember when I read the book for the first time it through me for a spin the way Bilbo reacted.

[Nogrod]

All the playfulness lightens the mood considerably - all those presents given after Bilbo had left with their pointy choices and finding the three young hobbits digging for the treasure etc. bring us back to the innocent or "unspoiled" Hobitton - like one would be in the Hundred-acre Wood...

But the last two pages yet again change the general mood. Discussions of Bilbo's versions of the story and Gandalf's sudden urge to leave while being quite vague but clearly worried about the Ring are a perfect ending for this kind of introductory chapter yet again reminding the reader that there are bigger and more serious things bubbling under the sunny surface.

[Nogrod]

Okay, I'm beginning a new chapter as the discussion is - to put it mildly - a bit slow...

I have indeed been too busy to read all of it yet (believe it or not) but there is a classic in the beginning I'd like to make an observation on to get this running.

It's the row between Sam and Ted Sandyman of course.

It's a great example of a traditionalistic & conservative society facing news / ideas they're not too keen to take in as those things could imbalance the beliefs of the group and their basic security on their shared worldview.

I don't find it too far-fetched to compare the discussion between Sam and Ted to one that could take place in RL in some rural community today.

Think of a youngster that has gone to a big city to study and who comes on holidays back to his childhood village pub and starts to tell people of atoms or quarks - or evolution. The jokes might be quite similar indeed. "Can you see those atom-things? Like in this table? No? So there ain't no such things!" (applauds for a score made from the crowd), "You say these atom-things dance around each other... but this table is staying right where it is. You must have taken a pint too much if it looks to you this table is dancing!" (the crowd bursting to laughter with the wit of that one), or "So we're descended from apes and before that another life-forms you say... well that explains why they said my uncle was a bit fishy!" (the crowds getting wild with appreciation of "proving" these weird thoughts wrong) etc.

Okay. I know some people would interpret this scene between Ted and Sam more readily as a discussion between faith and empiricism - and it might be closer to Tolkien's personal ties as well... but the way he writes this part really seems to draw nicer parallels with the example of modern physics than with belief in God.


Second thought (and I promise my last one on social inequality in Hobitton... I mean I'm getting ashamed of bringing this forth time after another...)
the Gaffer seems economically on a par with Bilbo (not counting Bilbo's Excellent Adventure gold and silver).Now in the beginning of "the Shadow of the Past" it's made quite clear that Frodo is not doing anything for living. He just wanders around and gets anguished (like rich people with nothing to do, do). The Gaffer and his son really need to do work to pay for their living. I wouldn't call that being "economically on par".

At this point in the story a many occupations have been already introduced: there are millers, inn-keepers, gardeners (servants?), cooks, postal workers etc. but clearly Frodo needs to do nothing. He can idle himself from the early morning to the late-night. So there are classes in Hobitton. Some own property and/or treasure enough while the others need to work for their living. The Gaffer may make his living - and probably does - with his own merits aka. work and thence be self-subsistent, but the difference is that Bilbo (or Frodo) need not to.

Now one might argue that Bilbo has earned his wealth with his work (the expedition to the Lonely Mountain) and I'm not too eager to go against it right here - even if it seems he wasn't the poorest hobbit before that either (the question concerning the equality of the starting points is the crucial one for any economic liberalism). But Frodo is just chosen by Bilbo, from a whim one might say, to inherit all - well, most of - he had and so became luxuriously rich with no merit of himself but only that Bilbo happened to like him and his parents got to an accident.

I agree with Tuor in Gondolin that the relations between the classes were not hammered in stone - as the example of Frodo and Sam let us see quite clearly. That was indeed what I was pointing at: that Frodo and Sam broke a pattern there. But for that to happen Frodo had to be the "higher one" to graciously give the part to Sam. If they were equals Frodo could not be generous as they would both be at the same level and neither could "out-present" the other with grace.

Only that one who has power or position over another can indeed be gracious!


PS. Did elves have to work for their living?

[skip spence]

May remind you of this earlier statement of yours, Nogrod. ;)

(my bolding)

PS. I will not post like this further on. It's just that the Concerning Hobbits is a general description of a folk bringing forwards an social and political ideal and thence it requires a social-political thought to try and understand it - in my opinion.

I´d like to make a few comments on this before I go to bed:

I have indeed been too busy to read all of it yet (believe it or not) but there is a classic in the beginning I'd like to make an observation on to get this running.

It's the row between Sam and Ted Sandyman of course.

It's a great example of a traditionalistic & conservative society facing news / ideas they're not too keen to take in as those things could imbalance the beliefs of the group and their basic security on their shared worldview.

I don't find it too far-fetched to compare the discussion between Sam and Ted to one that could take place in RL in some rural community today.


While I agree with some of what you´re saying I don´t think the points you are making are the main points Tolkien was trying to make. Actually, I don´t think he was trying make a point at all here, no, he was trying to set up a good story and succeeding well I may add.

What Ted and Sam are discussing here is of course Elves, Dragons and Giants, things Ted deems as belonging in bed-time stories for children, not under the sun in the real world. Much like we would had someone suggested that immortal Elves were crossing the seas on the straight path. Despite being habituated by "Hobbits", The Shire feels familiar to us since it is very much like the world we know (or at the very least, the pastoral idyll we would want it to be or have been). There is nothing magical or "unnatural" in the Shire. Therefore the perspective of the Hobbits easily becomes a natural perspective for us too. The things that happens later on is just as amazing to the Hobbits as it would be for us. Although Frodo knows of the Elves he doesn´t think the trees in the old Forest would actually attack him any more than we would fear to be possessed by evil spirits after having heard stories about from it some "native people" somewhere. He also has a very hard time grasping that wraiths of the Dark Lord Sauron could come after him in the Shire. Things like this only happens in the fairy-tales.

[Nogrod]

Actually, I don´t think he was trying make a point at all here, no, he was trying to set up a good story and succeeding well I may add.
I'm indeed agreeing with you here. I'm not saying Tolkien tried to make a point or another there, but he was probably mainly just laying a nice groundwork to the situation the main characters were in - and what they needed to face in the future while not knowing it themselves as yet to be sure. I mean it was a good point you made about the "adventurous hobbits", even if they were ready or readier to see the larger possibilities of the world (and sure Bilbo and even Frodo had first hand experience of elves and so on), they were still not in the end quite ready for it when it actually came upon them.

But what I was pointing at was merely that the discussion between Ted and Sam reminds one strongly of certain debates people go through in RL and of those I think the prof was not ignorant of - none the less as the first thing coming to one's mind reading the passage is the question regarding the existence of God which Tolkien clearly had faith in.

Like the naïve atheist who says: "you say there is a God, then prove it, show it/her/him to us!" (sounds so like Ted Sandyman!). And that is an easy one, as no one can prove as non-existent anything that is claimed to be immaterial. No one can prove that ösaodjhvöwoefdbh doesn't exist if I say ösaodjhvöwoefdbh is an immaterial being who can't be perceived but manages the whole universe - no more can you prove there is no Spaghetti-Monster behind all of creation (if you've heard of that).

So here: Tolkien - Naïve atheists 1-0

But what caught my mind was that the similar situation arises within "faith-communities" which deny the existence of certain non-seen entities like atoms or quarks - or the non-plain empirical principles of evolution (things that have such a wide scope in time human memory alone can't tell us of it). And looking at the way Tolkien presents the scorn of Ted and the other hobbits supporting him just led me to try a different angle on the whole thing.

And everyone ever lived or visited a traditional community knows full well what Tolkien is at there even if we're not talking about faith or science. Anything new or odd is wrong and only the things the communities are used to are right. In that I think Tolkien might have even tried to "prove a point" but that probably wasn't anything very important - merely a scholarly joke stemming fgrom his own experiences...? Who knows?

But really it was just a trial to look at a thing from a different angle and to arouse new thoughts and not so much trying to prove a point or saying Tolkien tried to prove a point there, or anything like it.


---
Maybe this is a good place for a general declaration of principle just to avoid any future misunderstandings (and I'm not saying skip especially misunderstood me as I think he was right in his criticism by way of pointing at another very plausible intepretation indeed): I'm not writing these things as if I'm trying to uncover what Tolkien "really meant". I don't believe I - or anyone else - has access to that. But I'd love to explore different ways in which one might see things written in the books, or whether there are unexplored perspectives to them we might gain if we looked into them. So I'm only after more fruitful perspectives. If anyone - myself included - gets a new perspective from these then it is a good thing and we have succeeded.


May remind you of this earlier statement of yours, Nogrod.Yes you may indeed. And I promise to hold that social-injustice perspective down in the (near) future... maybe when we get to know the elven or dwarven societies - or the orc-ones - I might be tempted to come back to them... :rolleyes:

[skip spence]

Yes Nogrod, that dialogue/situation between Sam and Ted is very universal and one that we all can recognise in various situations and contexts. It ain't easy coming with a new idea not established and accepted by the majority, whether this idea is revolutionary and grand dealing with the existence or non-existance of God, atoms or microscopic germs or mundane like how to grow tomatoes or eat a candybar.

Another thing that popped up in my head regarding Chapter Two is that famous verse about the One Ring "One ring to find them and in the darkness bind them..." etc.

Who wrote that verse? It must've been Sauron, no? Wasn't it said that Celebrimbor first perceived that he and the Elves had been betrayed when Sauron first took up the ring and uttered those words? Is this a often forgotten, more sensitive side to the Dark Lord? He isn't all about war, terror and mental domination, he's also a talented writer and poet, isn't he? One wonders if he spent many sleepless hours alone in the top-most turret of Barad Dur, anguishing over the wordings of his poem (One ring to govern them all and in the darkness coerce them! No, it's not good! *The Orcs quiver in fear as the earth trembles with rolling thunder*).

Edit: And yeah, I've also come across the mighty Spaghetti-monster. It's kinda funny ;-)

[Groin Redbeard]

This is one of my favorite chapters in the entire book. Gandalf does an excellent job with recanting his findings to Frodo, it just keeps you on the edge of your seat for the entire time. :smokin:

I'm probably not going to say anything that hasn't already been said about the conversation between Ted and Sam. Sam is obviously the more "queer" out of the two and this sets up the belief int the readers mind that Sam isn't all that different from Frodo or Bilbo, when it comes to adventure and such. I think this kind of lessens the shock of Sam being "forced" into the journey with Frodo.

Sam I think represents the ordinary man in all of us. He fantisizes about meeting elves and going off on adventures like Mr. Bilbo and doing brave things, but when the time comes Sam finds remourse and excitement. I think we see as the book progresses that Sam's attitude changes towards one of loyalty to Frodo. Of course it was always there in the beginning, but I think that it becomes stronger their adventures become more dangerous and he forgets all the silly notions about meeting elves and trolls and becomes more about protecting his master. I hope I made sense with this. :)

We see here Gandalf's first visible doubt of Saruman's council. Gandalf talks about for years how he, and the entire White Council, trusted Saruman and his ring lore, but when Saruman basically refuses to let any helpful knowledge be given to the council Gandalf is wary of him. I think that it was even stated that he was misguided and fooled by the councils of Saruman and in the end Gandalf had to go find things himself. Perhaps if Gandalf had known a little bit more he would not be so anxious to answer Saruman's summons to Orthanc. Than again I'm just speculating.

I can't say much for Frodo in this chapter other than he's acting very Bilboish in his stalling to get out of town. Very lucky for him that there was a need to graduily dissapear instead of dissapearing all at once.

As for Sauron being a poet, I'm pretty sure that pretty flowers and lolly-pops were not what he had in mind when creating that poem. Infact it still fills me with dread of what might have happened everytime that I read it. *shudders*

[Nogrod]

Is this a often forgotten, more sensitive side to the Dark Lord? He isn't all about war, terror and mental domination, he's also a talented writer and poet, isn't he? One wonders if he spent many sleepless hours alone in the top-most turret of Barad Dur, anguishing over the wordings of his poem (One ring to govern them all and in the darkness coerce them! No, it's not good! *The Orcs quiver in fear as the earth trembles with rolling thunder*). That was indeed a hilarious idea! Kind of reminded me of the Monty Python sketch where Beethoven tries to come up with how the fifth symphony should begin... :D


Yes, I agree with Groin that Gandalf's stories are masterfully made in both that they glue the reader's eyes to the pages and kind of prepare things to come while at the same time lifting off the veil of secrecy bit by bit letting the reader into the background story. I remember that when I was younger all these parts where people told these stories that brought some pieces together (like Gandalf here, or like different people in Rivendell) were my favourites. And I enjoyed it once again...

Although I must say that Gandalf's "recitation" is a bit too literal - like a rehearsed and planned lecture which surely is something the prof. was at home with. ;) But surely it is not written in a way anyone would actually talk, not even a wizard...


One more thing before I go to sleep (I'll have a few things to say tomorrow when I have more time in my hands).

Now correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't it that the original story of Robin Hood was a story about a hooded robber ("robbing hood" :p) which the upper classes sanctified with the "right moral connotations" by changing the lower class unknown hero into Sir Robin of Locksley? Somehow that came into my mind while reading the introduction to Sméagol's family: "There was among them a family of high repute, for it was large and wealthier than most". So to be a main character in a story you have to be upper class? *running out of smilies* Like the poor young boy (yes, normally a boy indeed) has to be revealed to be the rightful prince or nobler than his assumed birth would let one to believe?

Okay. Gollum's story about how the Ring came to him uses that fact as he claims first that his wealthy matriarchical grandmother had given the Ring to him as a birthday present. Sure. But had the initial setting been otherwise Tolkien could have come up with another "lie" for Gollum.

It may be a question of intuition - or maybe Tolkien has somewhere discussed this openly - but I kind of sense it the way that Gollum had to be from a family of stature as he was to be a central character in a mythological story, because in mythological stories the central characters are "noble-born". Here Tolkien would then stick to the exact letter of myths. And so the possibility of writing the first lie about his grandma giving it to him as a present arose.

It may sure be the other way around: desperate to come up with a lie Gollum might use, Tolkien thought of Gollum being from a wealthiest family around and thence be able to say it was a gift...

Hah. Lots of words for something at least I have nothing to "prove it" the way or another...

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

Perhaps Gollum's upper-class roots (if it could even be called such, given the state of the hobbitish civilization at that point) was intended as a sort of dark reflection of Frodo. Both came from better-off families and became caught up in the history of the Ring, but because of their differences of personality were very differently affected by it. There's the saying that if you can't be a good example, you may wind up being a horrible warning, and the image of Gollum -- what Frodo himself could become if he slipped down the path of selfishness and greed -- was, I suspect, a factor in keeping Frodo true to his mission, until the very end. In this chapter, Gandalf tells Frodo of Gollum's history and the fact that Bilbo's mercy toward him may one day rule all their fates. Frodo may not take to these things readily, but the seeds are planted here, and I think it is important that they have nearly the entire length of the book to take root and grow. I believe he needs to be able to see something of himself in Gollum in order to feel real pity toward him, the kind of compassion that will allow him to forgive Gollum at the end. And that depth of feeling does not come quickly or easily when one is considering a creature they have long regarded as an enemy.

[Nogrod]

Perhaps Gollum's upper-class roots (if it could even be called such, given the state of the hobbitish civilization at that point) was intended as a sort of dark reflection of Frodo. Both came from better-off families and became caught up in the history of the Ring, but because of their differences of personality were very differently affected by it.
......
I believe he needs to be able to see something of himself in Gollum in order to feel real pity toward him, the kind of compassion that will allow him to forgive Gollum at the end. And that depth of feeling does not come quickly or easily when one is considering a creature they have long regarded as an enemy.That's a good point indeed! It's interesting to note on this that in Gandalf's story Sméagol is first described as "the most inquisitive and curious minded of that family" also "interested in roots and beginnings" and loving the nature. But on the next note of him (after requiring the Ring) he is already described as using the Ring "to find out secrets, and he put his knowledge to crooked and malicious uses... The Ring had given him power according to his stature"! So his inquisitiveness had turned into malice - but to say "according to his stature" is not to say according to his "newly found" or "changed" stature... So is his stature already crooked without the effect of the Ring even if it's first described pretty innocentishly? Or is it just the possibility rooted in the inquisitiveness or something? This I kind of wonder.

And still there is something like a general pity on his character in Gandalf's telling of the story all the time it goes on...

Interesting indeed.

[Nogrod]

So much for having more time today... but I'd like to say one thing which at the moment quite intrigues me.

For the story this really is quite an important chapter as it lays the ground for the story to take place but I'm beginning to wonder whether Tolkien also laid the basis of his metaphysical unverse here as well.

In the beginning of the chapter where Frodo asks why would Sauron wish for such slaves as Hobbits Gandalf tries to explain that terrible idea of someone just wishing harm to someone else with: "there is such a thing as malice and revenge".

So we have the evil principles of malice and revenge brought forth.

In the end of the chapter, after learning all the harm Gollum had caused and about the dire threat to himself Frodo curses why Bilbo didn't "stab the vile creature when he had a chance". And Gandalf answers with the two other basic principles of pity and mercy.

So: pity vs. malice and mercy vs. revenge.

Quite neat pairs indeed to run a universe. :)


And to top that we can find Gandalf telling Frodo how Bilbo was meant to have it and he succeeded with it, and so by that also Frodo was meant to have it and so on. So there is a benevolent whatever helping things turn out for the good - even if the living beings need to make their best effort and make the right choices if they are to succeed - "All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us".

These principles indeed form the backbone of the whole story one might say and the universe in which all our heroes (not just Frodo and Sam) have their trials and tribulations and in where they have to make their choises.

[Boromir88]

Hey, Nogrod, thanks for letting me know about this re-read. :) I've mostly gotten caught up, so I just wanted to point out several things.

If I may, start back with a Long-Expected Party. Two things that spring to mind here.

First, the idea of having to earn your wealth. Bilbo is wealthy, but Bilbo worked for that wealth. In Gandalf's opinion, killing Smaug and returning the Dwarves to Erebor, was vital in the end victory against Sauron:
"Think of what might have been. Dragon-fire and savage swords in Eriador, night in Rivendell. There might be no Queen in Gondor. We might now hope to return from the victory here only to ruin and ash. But that has been averted - because I met Thorin Oakenshield one evening on the edge of spring in Bree. A chance-meeting, as we say in Middle-earth."~Appendix A: Durin's Folk
To which Bilbo played a part, so why shouldn't he get part of the spoils? Also, you can look at it, in a way, that Bilbo was taking the treasure from Smagu (Edit: Oops, bad typo, but I'll just leave it here...because I believe that Smagu was Smaug's identical twin dragon and thus Smaug was able to escape proving Dragon's still exist in Middle-earth.), who didn't deserve the wealth. What had Smaug done, besides eating and terrifying civilians, to deserve a pleasant retirement on a horde of cash? Plus, Smaug's hording of that wealth and Bilbo's redistribution of it (which I will get to in my next point).

Frodo inherits Bilbo's wealth, and as Nogrod points out for a while sits around and does (or has) nothing to do (afterall Gandalf did tell him to stay put). But we all know that Frodo doesn't do "nothing" through the rest of the story. :rolleyes: As opposed to the Sackville-Bagginses, who believed they were entitled to Bilbo's wealth. However, what had they done to deserve Bilbo's inheritance, other than complain that they deserved it?

Secondly, along with being wealthy (also the same applied - at least for a time - noble) there was an expectation of giving back; or in some way, serving. Smaug hordes his wealth, and has no use for it other than to hold on to it, because he believes it's his. Bilbo gives back, and by gives back, it's pointed out that he doesn't "recycle" the mathoms that travel around, he always gives new presents. Despite the belief of the young treasure seekers, or the idea that Gandalf and Frodo designed a plan to run off with Bilbo's wealth, the reality is that doesn't happen.

Let's take the formation of Japan as an example. Merchants socially, and politically, were the scum of society, despite being some of the wealthiest people (at the start they were mostly small, family peddlers, but as Japan became united, we see this what you might call 'pre-capitalism' stage, and merchants began to become very wealthy). Anyway, merchants were below peasants on the social ladder in Japan. Because it was viewed that peasants provided a service to the "community." They were dirt poor, but they were the one's who providal a social need...food and labor. Merchants were viewed as the parasites of society, they lived off other people's wealth and didn't provide anything good for society. This was one big cause to the collapse of the Japanese Empire. As the merchants became wealthier, they still held no social power, and we all know you can't have your wealthiest families at the bottom of the social and political ladder.

Then I guess kind of the quick sum up is, with wealth (or royalty and nobility), comes:

1. The justification that you've earned it.
2. The expectation that you provide service/a giving back to your comminuty.

[Boromir88]

I assume this is going to be a double-post, but I just wanted to break up the two chapters. So...A Shadow of the Past:

So: pity vs. malice and mercy vs. revenge.

Quite neat pairs indeed to run a universe.~Nogrod
Ooh, me like it. :D

While, it is hard in circumstances to define "good and evil," I believe there are definite distinctions made. Tolkien writes that he doesn't believe in "absolute evil," there are several grey characters (Denethor, Saruman, Boromir, Gollum), and in writing to Christopher about WWII, making the remark that there are "orcs on both sides."

Nogrod, I really like the set up of pity vs. malice and mercy vs. revenge, and this chapter looks at the fundamental question of what is right and what is wrong?

I think what we see (and it starts in this chapter) is the reoccuring theme that is it not our place to decide someone's ultimate judgement. In Letter 181, Tolkien's straightforward, and says he does not care to inquire into Gollum's final judgement, it is not his place. He stops (and doesn't send) a letter out talking about orc redemption writing: "It seemed to be taking myself too importantly."

And that is Gandalf's message to Frodo:
"Deserves it! I daresay he does. Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement..."
As we find out it was Bilbo's pity that made him relatively unscathed by the Ring, in contrast with Gollum's belief that the Ring was his and his strong desire for revenge against the thief Baggins.

Also, to point out here, Tolkien's idea of the #1 bad motive:
The supremely bad motive is (for this tale, since it is specially about it) domination of other ’free’ wills.~Letter 155
Thus, I think we can even put it in the broader terms of control vs. humility.

The ultimate bad guys want to dominate over everyone, and everything, they want that power to "run the show." Sauron, Morgoth, and Saruman all display the need to be in control. These baddies are all eventually brought to 'justice,'...death.

The supreme good guys are rewarded for the recognition that they are not the one's calling the shots. They know it is not their place to decide who lives and who dies. For even the wisest don't know how everything will play out. Pity and Mercy are the keys, it is Gandalf's, Bilbo's, Frodo's (and so on), recognition they aren't the "deciders."

I don't know, but perhaps it would be good to make some boundaries. Obviously, if Gollum is freely running around and eating babies pity doesn't mean you're going to pretend there's nothing wrong with that. Pity doesn't mean you'll absolve Gollum, Saruman, or any of them of their own accountability. Gandalf is the first to say Gollum (and he also states it about Grima) deserve death, but Gandalf's pity is the acknowledgement that he doesn't decide whether Gollum would die or not. Wth pity, I think comes a hope that since evil is not absolute, than redemption is possible for anyone. Gandalf is the first to admit that Gollum being cured is almost impossible, but that doesn't mean it isn't impossible (it's not beyond hope at least):
"There was a little corner of his mind that was still his own, and light came through it, as through a chink in the dark: light out of the past. It was actually pleasant, I think, to hear a kindly voice again, bringing up memories of wind, and trees, and sun on the grass, and such forgotten things.

"But that of course, would only make the evil part of him angrier in the end - unless it could be conquered. Unless it could be cured." Gandalf sighed. "Alas! there is little hope of that for him. Yet not no hope..."

[Nogrod]

Nice to see you around Boro!

And this question of what is fair or justified is a most compelling one - and I just hope I can make this shortish... :)

Now after the time of Napoleon there has been this idea of meritocracy where every individual should get what they deserve. It's an idea that one earns the goods one gets and that's fair.

Bilbo is a case in point. He struggled and had dreadful adventures and thence it's only right he got what he got, as you say.

But how about Frodo's cousins? They were never given a chance to "show their qualities" as that eccentric Bilbo decided to pick Frodo as his heir. I mean isn't it in a way like Madonna adopting a baby from a third world country? Was it that youngster's merit as an individual that got him taken as an adoptee and to lift just him from poverty and suffering to the utmost luxury there is in this planet? :rolleyes:

So was Frodo something like the one who should be immediately put in the front from all his cousins? If you say, yes he had some characteristics from his birth you at the same time rip Frodo's personal merit from the choice as it is something he already has from his birth and to no merit of his own... and if you say it was random then you agree that the opportunities are given randomly and thence are not based on merit...

I mean let's take a parallel. During the eighties, in the garages of the Silicon Valley, there were hundreds if not thousands of nerds creating operating systems for computers. Then this Bill G. just happened to meet the right people at the right time and his format actually got through the competition with the financial aid of corporate level top-guns (like with the old video-cassette formats where the far superior beta-system lost to the VHS with the aid of the porn industry). Now he's one of the richest people on earth. Now should we say that like Bilbo he has earned his fortunes- and that fact that he gives away a host of his treasury is the final justification of his astonishing wealth?

With Mr. Gates and Bilbo we find a shared trait: they got into where they are with chance - and they proved to be able to stand the challenge.

But how about the equality of chances then? As well as some other nerds might have produced us with far more flexible and working operating systems it might have been that Ted Sandyman, Fredegar Bolger, or any of the Frodo's un-named cousins might have been even more succesful ringbearers? I mean in the way of making it with less casualties and with more efficiency...

So is the meritocratic way the way one should look at the justice or fairness? How about the disabled people - are they worth less? Those coming from broken families with alcohol-problems? If they take pains is it their fault? According to the newest studies - those people with less space in their working memory? Are they poor at school because of a dismerit of their own, like because they somehow have earned their position? And those with a large working-memory have earned their good results in learning? Now that is genetic, not earned... and the former case is forced and not chosen...

So can you say that it's up to you what you earn - like what you can merit - and still retain the idea that we are talking about justice or fairness?

[Nogrod]

Thank's for the appreciation Boro. That kind of assures me there's something interesting in there...

I mean yes, there are a host of speculation of things between Tolkien and C.S. Lewis and their different views on allegory and parable, on symbolic and mythic tales etc. The prof's uneasiness with things Lewis exploited in the Narnia chronicles come to mind once again.

But also it seems to me it's clear Tolkien is a catholic writer, not a protestant one.

Avoiding the pure Good vs. Evil as too Manichean thought-lines in the world of ours he goes to pity vs. malice and mercy vs. revenge (so central to the teachings of Jesus!), and adds there the benevolent "something" many Christians call providence... and with the famous line of "All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us" he then relies on the basic concept of the choice and what will come out of it so central to catholicism compared to protestant churches where according to Luther "nothing we do will make us dearer to God" (that's not a quote but a principle).

[Boromir88]

So can you say that it's up to you what you earn - like what you can merit - and still retain the idea that we are talking about justice or fairness?~Nogrod
There are other standards of merit besides wealth, or family birth. Those are two of the more noticeable ones, but I would also argue beauty, intelligence, humor, fame, public service are other standards (and probably more I haven't mentioned). Wealth is probably the easiest way to have 'merit', but depending upon how a society (and each individual) weighs each of those standards would ultimately decide one's merit.

Bilbo being wealthy certainly didn't bring him respect amongst his fellow hobbits. He was queer and a mad man. But when I read his tale and his sacrifices, I think he deserves to receive a nice retirement package. With merit comes the tremendous pressure of responsibility. As one hand giveth, the other hand taketh away. The Sackville-Baggins may begrudingly think Frodo got lucky being Bilbo's heir, but I doubt Frodo would think himself lucky, with the extreme burden he is given. Would you accept Bilbo's inheritance if you were aware of the responsibility (and pains) that lie ahead?

Some people value the simple life, the Gaffer's life, Sam's life; take Frodo's own words:
"All the same," said Frodo, "even if Bilbo could not kill Gollum, I wish he had not kept the Ring. I wish he had never found it, and that I had not got it! Why did you let me keep it? Why didn't you make me throw it away, or, or destroy it?"~The Shadow of the Past
Or maybe taking Tolkien's idea of the complimentary balance between the "high and noble" and the "simple and vulgar":
A moral of the whole is the obvious one that without the high and noble, the simple and vulgar is utterly mean; and without the simple and ordinary the noble and heroic is meaningless.~Letter 131
We need our Bill Gates' of the world just as much as we need our garbagemen. We need our Frodos' and our Sams'. Same can actually be said about "evil," a Dark Lord needs his servants, and the servants need a Dark Lord.

Edit: For some reason I think I accidentally hit "enter" and posted before I wanted to.

So, let's have a little discussion on justice and fairness. I'm glad you brought it up Nogrod, for that has been a central philisophical question since the beginning of philosophers. What is justice? What is fairness? And our un-ending search for the Truth.

I won't get into justice, simply because I really wouldn't know where to begin, but it would be great to see some ideas about justice. Anyway, I find fairness interesting.

Richard Lavoie runs a wonderful program about the learning disabled student. One of his topics is about fairness, and I absolutely love the way he puts it. There seems to be the common understanding that "fair" means everyone gets treated the same. Lavoie points out that's not the case (and since it is specifically an education workshop), he believes that fairness is giving each student what they need in order to succeed. When asking teachers if they would give an LD child an outline of notes to help them focus, he said the teacher's response most likely was "That wouldn't be fair to the other students." He quickly would come back arguing it's not about the others, if you were having a heart attack should I refuse to give you CPR, because I couldn't possibly do it for everyone in this room, thus it wouldn't be fair to them?" Of course not, his stance then is, if you're having a heart attack, you need CPR and therefor it's only fair that you receive it.

The question is then would you agree with that definition? And perhaps to apply it to the Lord of the Rings. Frodo gets an oppurtunity, he is faced with a choice. Is it fair that his cousins, because they were not chosen by Bilbo, don't get that oppurtunity? I don't know, it would depend upon your definition of what is fair. However, I would agree with Rick Lavoie's point, it would only be fair to Frodo if he received some kind of "treasure" for his sacrifices. And at the end of things, how much consolation was all that wealth to Frodo?

[Nogrod]

That was a nice example of faireness.

In the philosophy of justice it's pretty standard to point out to three different ways of looking at justice and fairness.

In a case of "equal cases" it's intuitively right to treat people in a similar way - like they should get paid the same for the same job, or if you get the proverbial apple with your friend you share it cutting it in half.

But if the cases are different then you need principles for different treatment.

One is to treat one according to merit so everyone should get what they deserve - like a better worker should be paid better, or a morally good person earns a place in Heaven while the evil one deserves Hell.

The other is to think the treatment from the point of view of needs and abilities - coming to your example. Like I'm a worker with a decent salary so I should pay taxes to help those who are in a poorer position: I'm able to give so I should. Then again someone needs financial help because of losing a job, losing a partner... and it's fair those in need are helped.


But when are we dealing with "equal cases" and when not? Which are the differences that do count? And how do we choose between the different maxims if we think the cases are not the same? :)

What I think I was saying there earlier is that we oftentimes take the merit-view for granted and forget the need-view - and that deciding on what merits this or that is a bit problematic.


Btw. anyone who has time or wishes could bring forth the next chapter! I'm not able to go forwards with this for a few days I'm afraid as I will have no time to read further until midweek...

And let the discussion flow!

[Thinlómien]

I've finally managed to get rid of the things that kept me too busy, I've finally managed to read the prologue and the two first chapters and I've finally managed to make it here. Yay! So, without further ramblings...


Prologue/Concerning Hobbits

The things that made me wonder here were two things rather loosely related to the main theme. They would probably merit threads of their own, but I will mention them briefly. First off, Tharbad. We know it was a city of men, we know where it was located and we know the year of its ruin and desertion (T.A. 2912). But what else? Who were these people who lived there? When was the city founded and by whom? What kind of political role did it play? I have never come across with any further information about the city yet the topic intrigues me...

The second thing is the Dúnedain protecting the Shire. I used to take it for granted and not to pay it any attention, but now it strikes me as rather questionable. Just why on earth did the Dúnedain devote themselves to nannying the Hobbits (and the Breelanders)? I know all this noble la-di-dah of protecting ordinary people and fighting the evil, but why? Just because it's morally right? Just because they feel they have a duty? Why would they feel so? Are they still sticking to their lost kingdom as when it still existed, the shirelings were under their protection? Just seems somehow... over-the-top. Were they there only for giving Tolkien a good excuse for making the Shire such a paradise? If someone could shed a bit more light on this issue, I would be grateful...

Then (sorry Nogrod :D) I will comment on some of the social/class stuff that were brought up earlier.

I think Nogrod has a kind of point with the Fallohides, but "goes to the forest" (sorry, a Finnish saying, couldn't resist as it sounded so cute in English :D) to a degree with his conclusions. The Fallohides were not, if you ask me, any better than the Stoors or the Harfoots. At least, to me they've always seemed like a bunch of good-for-nothings ;), while the Harfoots represent all the good Hobbit qualities. All the Hobbit heroes of LotR are Harfoots, granted some of them have Fallohide or Stoor blood in their veins.

But how about when the drop-out thinks differently than the community? What happened to the different hobbits? Were homosexual hobbits tolerated, not to ask accepted? Or what about if there were “Rules” of old that oppressed certain fractions of the community? Like the poor? Like women?Now, this is even more interesting, especially as I happened to argue about whether homosexuality exists at all in Middle-Earth with a fellow 'downer in MSN not so long ago. However, they key thing here, I think, is that no one was really oppressed or discriminated in the Hobbit society. The rich helped the poor, women were (I think) rather equal with men even though the traditional gender roles were predominant (hmm... please, let's not talk about this because otherwise I might start ranting *would add smiley if hadn't passed the limit already*) and even those considered odd (like the Bagginses) were tolerated and had some friends. I think we could rather safely assume that homosexual Hobbits would be treated similarily. Gossiped about, and not always nicely, but in principle liked and tolerated and not shunned. Even though, I find the idea of a publicly gay Hobbit very hard to imagine. On the othe other hand, why would they then stay in the closet if it was not doomed? Or okay, homosexuality has been considered in certain societes (especially in agrarian societies like that of the Hobbits) either as a ghastly crime, or illness, but it has been considered sick and perverted in any case, pretty much the same way we now look at paedophiles. (Which is of course absurd, because it's a totally different issue, but let's not get into that.) So, maybe Hobbits would have had a similar attitude to gays as we have to paedophiles? Not a very nice thought, though...

As for literacy, I have never seen it as the manifestation of injustice in the Hobbit society. Rather, I feel that the Hobbit society was not that much based on it and only those learned to read who had an interest in it, it was a kind of hobby. This theory is, I think, supported by many things in the story (I'm too lazy to find the quotes though or to analyse the origins of my conceptions) BUT Tolkien is really giving rather contradictory information about this, as many things in the Hobbit society are related to the assumption that everybody can read, for example, it's much easier to keep track of genealogy if you can read and in the Scouring of the Shire there are written rules on the walls of the "guest-house" or whatever it is. One could assume that if Saruman's ruffians new hobbits were illiterate, they would not bother with written rules. Thus, I'm inclined to believe this is something Tolkien was accidentally inconsistent with.

Lastly, I think you Nogrod take the question of importance too seriously. I think the word "important" simply means that the families had power.

Ok, this is getting horribly long... I will make separate posts for the next chapters...

[Thinlómien]

What mostly caught my attention in this chapter was the sheer materialism of it. Just how much useless stuff do Hobbits produce if there's a birthday about every day and they give lots of presents, many of which end up as mathoms? And this is certainly not the only manifestation of ghastly Hobbit materialism... Okay, I need to cut this talk, I just seem to be more and more concerned about all this stuff lately - yesterday I spent about five minutes what a horrible waste crisis all the toothbrushes people use and throw away so carelessly create... :rolleyes: I need to keep in mind that neither Hobbits nor Tolkien lived in a time in the brink of an environmental catastrophe and would not realise to be concenred about such stuff. Besides, one can always argue the Hobbits promoted local industry and economy by buying all this stuff and blah... (capitalism strikes again... eurgh. Where are you, Nogrod? :p)

Also, there are two examples of rather rude behaviour by nice Hobbits in this chapter. I wonder if it's because I don't get Brits'/Tolkien's/Hobbits' sense of humour or because it's really rather rude. First, there's this:

For DORA BAGGINS in memory of a LONG correspondance, with love from Bilbo; on a large waste-paper basket. Dora was Drogo's sister and the eldest surviving female relative of Bilbo and Frodo; she was ninety-nine, and had written reams of good advice for more than half a century. I've always wondered about that and considered it rather rude and weird, but actually now that I wrote it here, I can suddenly see two ways of interpreting it. Yay! Maybe Bilbo and Dora were so close that this passed as a good-natured joke between them, or maybe the narrator's tone is actually a little sarcastic when saying she had written reams of good advice. However, I'd be interested to hear how others understand this...

Okay, and the second rude thing: "You'll live to regret it, young fellow! Why didn't you got too? You don't belong here; you're no Baggins - you - you're a Brandybuck!"
"Did you hear that, Merry? That was an insult, if you like," said Frodo as he shut the door on her.
"It was a compliment," said Merry Brandybuck, "and so, of course, not true."And really, again, I think I realised as soon as I wrote it here. Haha. I was wondering why does Merry tease Frodo this evilly, but now I realised Frodo actually starts it. So this is just affectionate teasing between freinds, and now it even makes sense to me why it takes place. I had always thought that teasing remark of Merry's a little weird... This CbC stuff is most enlightening.

And as for the coming of age mentioned here -
wouldn't it be easier for all of the teenagers/young adults of this world if all the parents would do like Bilbo: just disappear when the kid comes of age and leave him the house and the property? :smokin:

Onto next chapter...

[Thinlómien]

First off, it intrigues me how Bilbo becomes the Mad Baggins of legends. I think the little detail of the stories of TH and LotR merging together clearly shows Tolkien's love of stories and fairytales, and his deep knowledge of them.

Also, funnily, like skip, I ended up wondering about the origin of the Ring-verse. Sauron made it, you say? Makes sense, if we take into account the fact that he wrote it on the One Ring. But how on earth did it become a part of Elvish ring-lore?? Did Sauron already write it in Eregion and told it to the Elves while laughing secretly to himself and then went and made the Ring? Or when he had made it, did he perhaps send the Elven smiths a message: "Hi I made a Ring and now I'll kill you all. Btw, here's a poem about the Rings I made. Mwahahahahaa." Weird.

Ok, on a totally different topic, I've always liked the way Tolkien talk about autumn here, how the Bagginses always yearn to travel in the autumn. I wonder if it's because of that that I and many other Tolkien fans I know feel an urge to return to Tolkien's books especially in autumn. Whatever the reason, it's very beautiful, I think.

Lastly, it's funny how it's dercibed how Frodo's longing for an adventure grows when he grows older. It got me wondering if the whole Quest only took place because Frodo had a middle-age crisis... :p;)

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

How the Ring verse got into Elven lore is no real puzzle at all, I think. During the Council of Elrond, Gandalf says of the verse,

Out of the Black Years came the words that the Smiths of Eregion heard, and knew that they had been betrayed.

The verse is not just a creepy poem; it is, I believe, the spell through which Sauron bound the lesser rings to his, including the Three which he apparently knew about, but had never touched. It's not terribly surprising that the Elves would remember it. How they heard it, or if only those who owned the Three heard it, is perhaps the only real puzzle. That and where Sauron learned how to make such nice poetry (though if he could invent the Black Speech, one might suppose that he if no one else could write poems in it :)).

The rather conspicuous consumerism of the Hobbits also doesn't surprise me overmuch. Even though they were unaware of it, their land was being protected from some of the worst hardships of the world. Unlike virtually every other corner of Middle-earth, they had no need to support a standing militia to protect their lands and their borders; the last Enemy incursion they were required to fight directly happened quite some time ago, by the time of LotR. Not that they couldn't have defended themselves, but when there is no need to do so for long periods of time, people forget, evil things become fodder for pub tales and scary bedtime stories, and the resources that might have been used to support an army or some such are turned to other, more pleasant things. If the Shire had suffered from drought or blights on a regular basis, there doubtless would have been a greater prudence and wariness about the future, but they seem (to me, at least) to have reached a state where the average Hobbit doesn't worry about being attacked or about where the next meal will come from (even if some folk have fancier meals than others). As Gandalf has said about them, you have to put a Hobbit in a pinch to see what is truly in them, and since they seem to have an uncanny knack for avoiding pinches, it's no wonder they appear bucolic, naive, and fond of pleasures and comforts.

I believe that's part of the point of Bilbo's extravagant party at the beginning. It's a kind of conspicuous consumerism at its height in the Shire -- but once the party is over, literally, reality comes in and rears its ugly head. It's time for all the Hobbits to grow up as a people, to take their place in the world as a part of it, able to both provide for themselves and defend themselves. We see this growth in the Hobbits that become part of the quest, and it is reflected back home, where we don't see it until the end. I always found this rather nicely done; the perils and trials of the four Hobbit companions reflected some of the things that were happening in the Shire, which we didn't see (in more than rumors or prescient glimpses) until they returned home, when it was no longer quite the surprise it might have been, had any of the four remained naive until the end. LotR thus has a more "happily ever after" feeling at its beginning than at its end, which is almost more "once upon a time," an end that is a new beginning.

Whoa, where did that come from? The things that creep out of my head after morning meditation... :)

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

The things that made me wonder here were two things rather loosely related to the main theme. They would probably merit threads of their own, but I will mention them briefly. First off, Tharbad. We know it was a city of men, we know where it was located and we know the year of its ruin and desertion (T.A. 2912). But what else? Who were these people who lived there? When was the city founded and by whom? What kind of political role did it play? I have never come across with any further information about the city yet the topic intrigues me...
Okay, this is not exactly on topic, but concerning this, there are some passages which at least briefly speak about Tharbad and the region around it in the Unfinished Tales, I think it's the "additions" after the tale of Aldarion and Erendis. Quite some stuff, about Númenoreans coming to Middle-Earth and making their first havens there...

However, they key thing here, I think, is that no one was really oppressed or discriminated in the Hobbit society. The rich helped the poor, women were (I think) rather equal with men even though the traditional gender roles were predominant (hmm... please, let's not talk about this because otherwise I might start ranting *would add smiley if hadn't passed the limit already*) and even those considered odd (like the Bagginses) were tolerated and had some friends. I think we could rather safely assume that homosexual Hobbits would be treated similarily. Gossiped about, and not always nicely, but in principle liked and tolerated and not shunned. Even though, I find the idea of a publicly gay Hobbit very hard to imagine.
Actually, of all the societies in Middle-Earth, I can imagine gay Hobbits probably the best. And I would rather stay with what you said at first: that homosexual Hobbits would be treated similarly. If there were any existing in there, I think except for a few Sandymans to gossip, they might be quite widely well accepted.

and in the Scouring of the Shire there are written rules on the walls of the "guest-house" or whatever it is. One could assume that if Saruman's ruffians new hobbits were illiterate, they would not bother with written rules.
Speaking of this, I might add that I wonder whether the Ruffians could read... I'd actually wonder if they did. But maybe Saruman, being the propagator of "Knowledge, Rule, Order" made all his servants as educated as possible, literacy included? Anyway, this is off-topic - let's save this for the final chapters of the re-read ;)

Also, there are two examples of rather rude behaviour by nice Hobbits in this chapter. I wonder if it's because I don't get Brits'/Tolkien's/Hobbits' sense of humour or because it's really rather rude.
You kind of answered yourself during the course of writing :) , but at least to me, it never seemed rude. Although somebody said that Czech and English people have similar sense of humour - but personally, I don't think it would be THAT different with these "regional humours". Anyway, Merry's joke is just very good, I have never noticed what Frodo says before really, but I think what Merry says is just a very nice, very clever and simply just brilliant way to make a joke like that. It's that kind of "intelligent way of saying something rude, while making it also really funny in the process".
And as for how I understood the present for Dora, I always imagined it like that when writing to Bilbo and Frodo, she may have produced also lots of "by-products" or badly written letters which she later decided to throw away. However Bilbo's intention may be interpretated otherwise, I certainly wouldn't even think of looking for any sarcasm from the author's part in it.

How the Ring verse got into Elven lore is no real puzzle at all, I think. During the Council of Elrond, Gandalf says of the verse,

The verse is not just a creepy poem; it is, I believe, the spell through which Sauron bound the lesser rings to his, including the Three which he apparently knew about, but had never touched. It's not terribly surprising that the Elves would remember it. How they heard it, or if only those who owned the Three heard it, is perhaps the only real puzzle. That and where Sauron learned how to make such nice poetry (though if he could invent the Black Speech, one might suppose that he if no one else could write poems in it :)).
Sauron sure was a great poet; remember, he was a Necromancer, or rather THE Necromancer (something like THE Ka), and remember his "battle" of songs with Finrod... in M-E, every "Wizard", resp. "Spell-caster" was also a singer and a poet, or at least one of those. Saruman was at least a rhetor, if nothing else... The power of words... hmm... that would almost do for a thread...
And yes, I agree what you say about hearing the words. It is obvious from the text that the Elves heard it, imagine whatever you wish under it, I always imagined it the way it's said, but you can think of any theories yourself, like "clairaudience" or "teleempathy" or whatever. Isn't this referred to in any Letter, by the way? Just asking.

I had some ideas also to comment on from the posts above, but I don't recall now... maybe fortunately, thinking about the length...

[Gordis]

How the Ring verse got into Elven lore is no real puzzle at all, I think. .. How they heard it, or if only those who owned the Three heard it, is perhaps the only real puzzle. That and where Sauron learned how to make such nice poetry (though if he could invent the Black Speech, one might suppose that he if no one else could write poems in it :)).
There is no puzzle indeed. The Elves of Eregion who wore the Rings at the moment when Sauron made the Ring-spell (SA 1600) heard it - and took the Rings off, never to wear again in the Second Age.
All the Rings were made for Elves: the 9 the 7 and the 3 alike. (The plan to give them to different reces was Sauron's alone). The Seven were all distributed among the Elves by the time Sauron attacked Eregion (SA 1695). The Nine not yet - they were still kept in the House of the Mirdain. The data are from UT "History of Galadriel and Celeborn"
Thus I believe in 1600, when the One Ring was made, at least 10 of the Mirdain heard Sauron's spell.

[skip spence]

And as for how I understood the present for Dora, I always imagined it like that when writing to Bilbo and Frodo, she may have produced also lots of "by-products" or badly written letters which she later decided to throw away. However Bilbo's intention may be interpretated otherwise, I certainly wouldn't even think of looking for any sarcasm from the author's part in it.


Maybe you should think again ;)

For DORA BAGGINS in memory of a LONG correspondance, with love from Bilbo; on a large waste-paper basket. Dora was Drogo's sister and the eldest surviving female relative of Bilbo and Frodo; she was ninety-nine, and had written reams of good advice for more than half a century.

To me this certainly is sarcasm both from Bilbo and the author. No doubt Bilbo was royally tired of being lectured about god knows what (likely how to be more respectable) and I imagine he also let Dora know as tactfully as he could that he had no need her "good" advice. She probably understood his wish for less junk-mail perfectly well too but ignored it completely. Thus, the large waste-basket symbolises what Bilbo thought of her advice and where her letters usually ended up. Rude? Yes I suppose so. Perhaps she deserved it.

Most of the presents Bilbo gave away (at least the mentioned ones) where attached with similar sarcastic puns and with, for the receiver, clear symbolic meaning. Lobelia gets silver spoons as a present (as opposed to the ones she had stolen earlier), Angelica gets a mirror (as she is all too fond of her reflected image) and Milo Burrows gets a golden pen and and ink bottle as he never responds to letters.

Hm. Actually there where other things I wanted to say but that will have to wait.

[alatar]

Completely unrelated, and hopelessly behind in the discussion, but if I don't note this now, I never will (which some of you may consider to have been the wiser choice):;)

The phrase 'as a rule' is used at least four to five times in the first two chapters. I think that there is a thread regarding this phrase, but not due to the number of times it is used. After this, I doubt that it will show up with as much frequency.

Such repetition!

[Nogrod]

Nice to see people discussing.. and sad to see that dying down that easily. But let's go forwards!

On Three is a Company the first thing that strikes my mind is the beauty of the way Tolkien describes the last days in Hobitton for Frodo, Sam and others. It really is something I really appreciate: the mood, the feeling, the detail; all serve to build for the more gloomier destiny that is about but it still fills the reader with the reminiscent feeling of the world there will be no more. It's plain genius.

There is another of my great favourites here in this chapter as well, meaning Bilbo's lore about paths and roads taking you where you don't know they might do. I remember when I was very young (like ten) and my father read the LotR to me as a bedtimestory that one thing made me wonder indeed. I spent hours and hours with the globe-ball (lighted inside) in my bedroom in the evenings when it was all dark around, looking for different ways the paths might bring one almost anywhere, and I was most disappointed with the seas! :rolleyes:

But that really has been a thing that has followed me from that early childhood onwards. I'm still awed by the roads and paths... I mean be careful where you step into!

To make this even more interesting one might quote Gildor in the end of the chapter: "The wide world is all about you: you can fence yourself in, but you cannot forever fence it out". Talking about multiculturalism and the ways of the world today - Tolkien was just a prophet in this matter! These roads will make us meet "the other" before we make use of them ourselves to reach the other places (not counting the organised holiday trips that are more sham than real).


Also the elven attitudes to the hobbits is an interesting thing - how they kind of scorn and play them as fools before they actually notice it's Frodo (the heir of Bilbo) and how grave their quest is... But still they don't give them more help but a promise to send their "message throught the lands".

Is it only a literary question (they shouldn't have too great a help with their journey for the storyline's sake) or are the elves so disenchanted with the ME that they just don't bother to help more?

[Nogrod]

And surely I'm not the only one to whom the appearance of the first black rider was a terrifying experience when being read that part of the story!

Such intensly written!

Funny that the second appearance of the Nazgûl now feels even more frightening!

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Is it only a literary question (they shouldn't have too great a help with their journey for the storyline's sake) or are the elves so disenchanted with the ME that they just don't bother to help more?

I now cannot find where, but I am pretty sure this has been discussed (relatively, possibly this spring at most - maybe) recently in some thread, and there were some quite good and reasonable contributions to it. If I happen to find it, I will post a link here. I think some of the basic ideas were simply that it wasn't "their job", and ... but there was more to it. A pity I don't remember. :rolleyes:

[Thinlómien]

I now cannot find where, but I am pretty sure this has been discussed (relatively, possibly this spring at most - maybe) recently in some thread, and there were some quite good and reasonable contributions to it. If I happen to find it, I will post a link here. I think some of the basic ideas were simply that it wasn't "their job", and ... but there was more to it. A pity I don't remember. :rolleyes:
I believe you mean this: The Ultimate Discourse About Gildor (http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showthread.php?t=624&). ;)

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

I also referred to this particular chapter, Gildor, and the attitude of many Elves, in the "Is Legolas Afraid to get his Nails Dirty?" thread.

Strangely, when I first read LotR, I was much less impressed by the Black Rider in this chapter than I was with the wandering company of Elves. In reflection, it amazes me how many notable quotes came out in this chapter. "Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards..."; "Go not to the Elves..."; "A star shines on the hour of our meeting" -- there may well be more, though I don't have the book on hand to check.

[Boromir88]

Nice to see people discussing.. and sad to see that dying down that easily. But let's go forwards!~Nogrod
Just waiting on your guidance sir. ;)

One quick thing to point out before I leave, than I will properly respond. The very last sentence of the chapter...
...and the Elf led him to a bower beside Pippin, and he threw himself upon a bed and fell at once into a dreamless slumber.~Three is Company
Technically there never is a "dreamless" slumber, as we have countless dreams every night, we just don't remember them. But, just that idea of a "dreamless" slumber, once that is uninterrupting, a good, straight, replenishing sleep is pleasant. And of course, once Frodo leaves the Elves how many more of these "dreamless slumbers" does he really have?

[Lalwendë]

Technically there never is a "dreamless" slumber, as we have countless dreams every night, we just don't remember them. But, just that idea of a "dreamless" slumber, once that is uninterrupting, a good, straight, replenishing sleep is pleasant. And of course, once Frodo leaves the Elves how many more of these "dreamless slumbers" does he really have?

Frodo's known for his vivid dreams, so its quite notable that he has a good night's sleep without being troubled by dreams. I know how he feels because I'm sick and fed up with having overly vivid dreams :(

But I often think it could have something to do with the 'difference' of Elves, maybe even with my old favourite topic, sanwe. It's quite possible the Elves helped him have that 'dreamless' sleep.

Very interesting though, as if I was writing about someone laying down to sleep in the company of Elves, I'd be more likely to write of someone having quite wild dreams

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

But I often think it could have something to do with the 'difference' of Elves, maybe even with my old favourite topic, sanwe. It's quite possible the Elves helped him have that 'dreamless' sleep.

Very interesting though, as if I was writing about someone laying down to sleep in the company of Elves, I'd be more likely to write of someone having quite wild dreams

Yes, and that's exactly what this speaks about - the complete rest, as it was said early. And I am quite convinced that it was because of the Elves that he had this dreamless sleep.

[Boromir88]

Is it only a literary question (they shouldn't have too great a help with their journey for the storyline's sake) or are the elves so disenchanted with the ME that they just don't bother to help more?
Well there are certainly active elves in Middle-earth. I think Elrond, Galadriel, Celeborn, Thranduil, Haldir, and the many others who defended their lands/fought against Sauron would beg to differ. Elrond and Galadriel are certainly two of the most important people, to Frodo and his quest, in the story. But, we can get to them when their time comes, this I would guess is asking about Gildor.

Is it a literary question? Probably, but I don't think it's one that says "We can't have Gildor help Frodo, nothing to see here, moving on." This short encounter, with Gildor, brings out several things...

This is Sam's first time meeting Elves, and no surprise he's giddy and speechless.

I find it interesting Gildor's refusal to tell Frodo anything more about the Black Riders other than "Stay away from them!" This is the reader's (and Frodo's) first encounter with the Black Riders. I believe this is the first chapter they are mentioned (I forget whether they're mentioned in passing in The Shadow of the Past, but I don't think there's any connection made between the Nine Rings given to Men and these "Black Riders.")

Thus the Black Riders are still an enigma to Frodo, and also perhaps that's how Tolkien wanted the readers to think of them. There are dark, creepy, sniffing guys on horses running around asking about Frodo. Pippin even raises the question of how many? Was this just one creepy guy seen twice, or two different creepy guys? Frodo is lost, confused, he doesn't have Gandalf around, he doesn't know who is after him, how many, or why. And Tolkien might be placing the reader in Frodo's shoes to capture his audience. Having Gildor spill the beans about the Black Riders at this point would ruin it. They are far more unsettlings as unnamed, creepy, dark, sniffing guys who ride large evil black horses.

Also, I believe as someone else mentioned this is the first time Frodo finds "unexpected" help along his journey. Consider these comments from another author; Ursula LeGuin:

"the peculiar rhythm of the book, its continual alternation of distress and relief, threat and reassurance, tension and relaxation: the rocking-horse gait (which is precisely what makes the huge book readable to a child of nine or ten) ...."

Frodo has just had two suspensful, somewhat threatening encounters (his interesting urge to put on the Ring when the Black Riders are close), an then the mood relaxes. Frodo is with the Elves, he has a dreamless sleep, he is refreshed. This rythm continues throughout the story, the Barrow-wight - Tom Bombadil, Moria - Lothlorien, and so on...

Although I will add with LeGuin, in that you don't have to be nine or ten to love the rythm of the story, as a close to an "over the hill" adult, the tension-relaxation, stress-relief flow of the story makes it very exciting. :D

[Peregrin Took]

Hey everybody, I'm glad to be joining this discussion! This is MatthewM, by the way. This is my new username.

To the book!

Three is Company is without a doubt one of my favorite chapters in the whole story. Three of the main hobbits, Frodo, Pippin, and Sam leaving their comfortable homes and beginning on their long journey through the Shire, and then beyond. I can picture the story extraordinarily well during this chapter, and simply put, it touches my soul.

This passage in particular always pulls at me:

"Well, now we're off at last!" said Frodo. They shouldered their packs and took up their sticks, and walked round the corner to the west side of Bag End. "Good-bye!" said Frodo, looking at the dark blank windows. He waved his hand, and then turned and (following Bilbo, if he had known it) hurried after Peregrin down the garden-path. They jumped over the low place in the hedge at the bottom and took to the fields, passing into the darkness like a rustle in the grasses.

Amazing.

I was definitely freightened when the Black Rider appears for the first time! That is another power of Tolkien's...to actually scare you. There aren't many writers that can do that. The second time he appears is equally as scary...you can relate especially if you've been in a sort of situation like that before (minus the Rider in Black)!

The meeting with the Elves is truly magical. I find it interesting, like has been noted, that the Elves treat the hobbits almost as fools. Their tune does change though when they are told of the Riders and the danger the hobbits are in. So, although the Elves seem to misunderstand hobbits (like Men), after they were informed of their crisis they did treat them with respect. I noticed the same thing as Ibrîniðilpathânezel - there are so many memorable quotes in Gildor and Frodo's speech together.

To end, this chapter will always be close to my heart and I am glad to have discovered this thread at this time!

[skip spence]

And surely I'm not the only one to whom the appearance of the first black rider was a terrifying experience when being read that part of the story!

Such intensly written!

Funny that the second appearance of the Nazgûl now feels even more frightening!

It's a shame, but I can't remember a first time when I read about the black riders, a time when I didn't already know what they were and could share the Hobbits fear of the unknown. There must have been a first time of course, but I've no recollection of it sadly, perhaps because I was so young when I first read the book. When rereading it though, I agree that it is during the first few chapters the Riders are the scariest. It's often like that. isn't it? When the danger is only suggested, it seems much more deadly. In the Shire you feel that if the riders were to catch Frodo on the road it would end in indescribable horror, there and then. Later on, when we learn more of the Nazgul, and when they fail to take the ring despite several excellent opportunities, their aura of dread also dissipates somewhat.

These first chapters of the first book are, and will always remain, my favourite part of the trilogy. Here, in familiar, very non-fantasy surroundings, the story begins and is masterfully built up. In similar fashion to why the Nazgul are most effective here in my mind, I also think the suggestion of Mordor and all the other amazing places and people that we are later taken to are most thrilling when we can only imagine them from sparse second hand information. When it is later written down plainly in detail some of the magic is lost. This, I suppose is the reason why I enjoy the Silmarillion so much (not saying I don't enjoy LotR mind you). Since the narrative is so compressed and distant, it leaves a lot of space for your imagination to fill in. A few lines in the Silm have conjured up fantastic visions in my mind. But now we're talking about LotR...

This chapter is the foremost hiking chapter too, isn't it? The Hobbits' trek across the Shire is described in great detail, and although there are many other such scenes later on in the books there are hardly any better ones. Is there anyone who can read this chapter without wishing that they were out walking in Woods End of the Shire glancing back at the lights of Hobbiton (without the pursuing black riders of course)?

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

This chapter is the foremost hiking chapter too, isn't it? The Hobbits' trek across the Shire is described in great detail, and although there are many other such scenes later on in the books there are hardly any better ones. Is there anyone who can read this chapter without wishing that they were out walking in Woods End of the Shire glancing back at the lights of Hobbiton (without the pursuing black riders of course)?

Indeed, you got it here! At least for me, no way. And I wouldn't perhaps mind even the Black Riders, when it comes to that.

[Morthoron]

Technically there never is a "dreamless" slumber, as we have countless dreams every night, we just don't remember them. But, just that idea of a "dreamless" slumber, once that is uninterrupting, a good, straight, replenishing sleep is pleasant. And of course, once Frodo leaves the Elves how many more of these "dreamless slumbers" does he really have?

Hmmm...perhaps he had Sleep Apnea and could not reach the REM stage of sleep, wherein dreams do come. Hobbits, being prone to obesity, could certainly be susceptible to that syndrome.

*Crickets*

Ummm...sorry for the awkward intro, but I've come late to the discussion, and I promise to be more topically relevant as the story progresses.

This chapter is the foremost hiking chapter too, isn't it? The Hobbits' trek across the Shire is described in great detail, and although there are many other such scenes later on in the books there are hardly any better ones. Is there anyone who can read this chapter without wishing that they were out walking in Woods End of the Shire glancing back at the lights of Hobbiton (without the pursuing black riders of course)?

I agree with your view of hiking regarding this chapter. It seems to always gets me in the mood for a camping trip. In fact, as it is Sunday, this entire discussion has given me the urge to go for a hike; therefore, I've decided to drag my daughter off on a fall color tour this afternoon.

[Groin Redbeard]

And surely I'm not the only one to whom the appearance of the first black rider was a terrifying experience when being read that part of the story! I nearly forgot that it was the first time that the reader gets a peek at the Nazgul. Although I must admit that it wasn't too scary for me when the Nazgul made his first appearance, it's when you find out that it's tracking the Hobbits that you get scared.;)

I thought that is was pretty neat the way that Tolkien sets up the atmospere around Frodo's leaving acting as if it was nothing and then WHAM, out of nowhere the adventure begins!

There is not really much to write about for this chapter, other than it's delightfully written and it's the fist step in the ladder in Frodo's long adventure. Anyway, we get a little bit of wisdom out of the chapter from Frodo: "Never go to the Elves for counsil..." Did you hear that Legate?:D;)

I'll see if I can get a post up tomorrow for the next chapter, I think we're done with Three is Company, aren't we?

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Anyway, we get a little bit of wisdom out of the chapter from Frodo: "Never go to the Elves for counsil..." Did you hear that Legate?:D;)

I wonder what was that supposed to mean...???

[alatar]

Speaking of the Nazgul, why does everyone after the hobbits' example call them 'the Black Riders' and yet know that these are 'THE' Black Riders? Hasn't any other group of humans ever ridden garbed in black? Had the Nazgul always ridden thus?

When Frodo and the hobbits meet with Gildor and the elves, everyone speaks of the Black Riders like the words have only one universal meaning. It's as if they are saying 'dragons' - a specific threat of known form. But the words black riders are too generic to carry the same specificity.

What if Frodo et al had called them the 'Saddled Snufflers?' Would Gildor have been taken aback at hearing that the snufflers rode again?

And speaking of sniffing, why does Tolkien via mostly Pippin make such a big deal that the creatures hunt by smell, and yet later on this becomes a pretty boring detail?

[Peregrin Took]

This chapter is the foremost hiking chapter too, isn't it? The Hobbits' trek across the Shire is described in great detail, and although there are many other such scenes later on in the books there are hardly any better ones. Is there anyone who can read this chapter without wishing that they were out walking in Woods End of the Shire glancing back at the lights of Hobbiton (without the pursuing black riders of course)?

I wholeheartedly agree! I wish it everytime.

[skip spence]

Speaking of the Nazgul, why does everyone after the hobbits' example call them 'the Black Riders' and yet know that these are 'THE' Black Riders? Hasn't any other group of humans ever ridden garbed in black? Had the Nazgul always ridden thus?

That's a good point. Especially since the Nazgul had not been seen west of Anduin in many centuries I'd say it's a tad hasty concluding that the black riders Frodo refers to must be the Nine. I suppose it could be argued that Gildor could read much more than what was actually said in Frodo's eyes.

'You do not ask me or tell me much that concerns yourself, Frodo', said Gildor. 'But I already know a little, and I can read more in your face and in the thought behind your questions.

But how could Gildor read in Frodo's eyes that the Nine were pursuing him, if Frodo himself knew little or nothing about who they were, or at least did not know clearly that it was they who pursued him? The only satisfying answer I can come up with it that they already knew the Nazgul were about. But did they also know about the quest, why the Nine were after Frodo? No, says Gildor and I've no reason not to believe that. After all, if he knew Frodo were carrying the One ring which, if it came into the hands of the Nine, would surely put Middle Earth firmly in Sauron's grasp for an unforeseeable future, they would surely offer more assistance then a few reluctant pointers and a lecture about how little they care about the troubles of puny Hobbits and Men.

I agree with your view of hiking regarding this chapter. It seems to always gets me in the mood for a camping trip. In fact, as it is Sunday, this entire discussion has given me the urge to go for a hike; therefore, I've decided to drag my daughter off on a fall color tour this afternoon.

Sounds like a good idea. I did the same this Sunday (minus the daughter) and even brought a camera. Here's a few samples of fall in Skåne, Sweden:

http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i207/skip_spence/DSCN1841.jpg
http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i207/skip_spence/DSCN1860b.jpg
http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i207/skip_spence/DSCN1850.jpg

[alatar]

That's a good point. Especially since the Nazgul had not been seen west of Anduin in many centuries I'd say it's a tad hasty concluding that the black riders Frodo refers must be the Nine. I suppose it could be argued that Gildor could read much more than what was actually said in Frodo's eyes.
That's what I thought, especially as we don't know their number, which, at this time, is either one or two. Maybe Mordor bred some new evil, like Mouth, that was searching the Shire. Pretty big jump to assume the Nine.

But how could Gildor read in Frodo's eyes that the Nine were pursuing him, if Frodo himself knew little or nothing about how they were, or at least did not know clearly that it was they who pursued him? The only satisfying answer I can come up with it that they already knew the Nazgul were about. But did they also know about the quest, why the Nine were after Frodo? No, says Gildor and I've no reason not to believe that. After all, if he knew Frodo were carrying the One ring which, if it came in the hands of the Nine, would surely put Middle Earth firmly in Sauron's grasp for an unforeseeable time, they would surely offer more assistance then a few reluctant pointers and a lecture about how little they care about the troubles of puny Hobbits and Men.
Odd, that. Maybe Gildor tapped into that foresight that is given at times to his people, and 'read a few chapters ahead.' And leaving the Hobbits with their burden was a deft plan to foil the enemy - nothing puts off Black Riders like random acts of stupidity ;) (i.e. getting lost, getting caught by the Willow, getting caught by the Wights, putting on the Ring in Bree, etc).

Sounds like a good idea. I did the same this Sunday (minus the daughter) and even brought a camera. Here's a few samples of fall in Skåne, Sweden:
Great pictures! That cow looks dangerous.

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

But how could Gildor read in Frodo's eyes that the Nine were pursuing him, if Frodo himself knew little or nothing about how they were, or at least did not know clearly that it was they who pursued him?

Possibly because he had never seen such terror in the eyes of a hobbit? And possibly because the last time he had seen such terror in anyone's eyes, it was the result of an encounter with a Nazgul, whose chief weapon, we are told, is fear? Well, it's a mite of a long shot, but I suspect Gildor and his company, being wanderers, hear a lot of news and rumors that others might not. That Sauron has returned to Mordor is not uncommon knowledge, and at least some of the Nazgul have been active long before it was known he had returned. The Witch King, after all, merely fled the wars in Angmar; he was not defeated, and the Elves certainly knew it would only be a matter of time before he and the others became active again. It seems that outside the Shire, just about everyone is aware that evil things are stirring, and adding "terrifying evil" to "riders in Black" might very well make any Elf who's been around a while think "Nazgul."

Then again, maybe not, but what the heck. :)

[Groin Redbeard]

I wonder what was that supposed to mean...???

Aren't you the one who people refer to as an elf?:confused: I thought I heard Nogrod talking about it somewhere in the Downs, but I might have been mistaken, sorry. :)

[Thinlómien]

I like this chapter very much. It has a wonderful atmosphere and it features two of my favourite minor characters - the fox and Gildor Inglorion. The fox - much discussed elsewhere, I think - is an intriguing little glimpse to something, and Gildor is a very charming Elf. Well, I think he's funny and he indeed seems to have his way with words and has some wise thoughts. All the talk about fencing the world out always makes a shiver go down my spine.

And speaking of sniffing, why does Tolkien via mostly Pippin make such a big deal that the creatures hunt by smell, and yet later on this becomes a pretty boring detail?Boring detail? Like, do you mean that it becomes a trivial fact and is not used anymore?

One thing I really admire in Tolkien's writing in this chapter is how the Nazgûl's visit to Hobbiton is organised. How Frodo hears the dialogue and almosts goes to talk with the Gaffer, and how Sam later expands upon this. It's what I would call masterful storytelling.

Also, I realised I like Sam less when I read about him in English than in Finnish. Weird.

And Pippin then, he gives me the impression of a young aristocrat on a nice little trip - which is what he is. But it never struck me like that. Actually, he reminds me (to an extent) of the men in the novels of Jane Austen, for example.

[alatar]

Boring detail? Like, do you mean that it becomes a trivial fact and is not used anymore?
Okay, look at from my point of view: even at an early age I was into science. We read about all of this sniffing. "Don't forget to ask about the sniffing!" It is emphasized, and so it must be important. Something completely unusual about these unearthly creatures...

And what does it all mean? That they smell our blood or something?

Does that mean that the Nazgul are going to the dogs? ;)

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Okay, look at from my point of view: even at an early age I was into science. We read about all of this sniffing. "Don't forget to ask about the sniffing!" It is emphasized, and so it must be important. Something completely unusual about these unearthly creatures...

And what does it all mean? That they smell our blood or something?

Does that mean that the Nazgul are going to the dogs? ;)

Hey, but what exactly do you lack there? It's discussed at the Weathertop, Merry or who is it asks that once again ("They seem to use more their smell than their sight" or something like that), and then there follows this explanation of the Nazgul's senses in daylight etc.

[alatar]

Hey, but what exactly do you lack there?
It just seems a bit overhyped earlier in the story. I withdraw the nitpicking observation. ;)

[Lalwendë]

A few things from this chapter...because some proper posting will do me good ;) .....



At the south end of the greensward there was an opening. There the green floor ran on into the wood, and formed a wide space like a hall, roofed by the boughs of trees. Their great trunks ran like pillars down each side. In the middle there was a wood-fire blazing, and upon the tree-pillars torches with lights of gold and silver were burning steadily. The Elves sat round the fire upon the grass or upon the sawn rings of old trunks. Some went to and fro bearing cups and pouring drink; others brought food on heaped plates and dishes.

This has always reminded me of tales of Druidic groves, sacred spaces formed by great Oaks, almost like buildings. I think from reading that for the very first time in my early teens I started thinking of Elves as these magical creatures, as if they held some 'secret'. This might be the beginning of a journey for the Hobbits, but that was also a great beginning for me. In my quest to find out this magical secret of the Elves I've spent the years since delving into history, folklore, all kinds of things. I've never found that secret yet though.

And is it an old, old place, a grove used by other Elves? It sounds like it...

Sam could never describe in words, nor picture clearly to himself, what he felt or thought that night, though it remained in his memory as one of the chief events of his life.

That chimes with my own feelings when I pick up that old copy of Fellowship and feel that intangible thrill I felt when I was first reading the book. It takes me right back, but there's no way I could describe how I felt, and how I still feel like that when I pick up that old book, which is by me now.

To tell the truth, he was very reluctant to start, now that it had come to the point. Bag End seemed a more desirable residence than it had for years, and he wanted to savour as much as he could of his last summer in the Shire. When autumn came, he knew that part at least of his heart would think more kindly of journeying, as it always did at that season. He had indeed privately made up his mind to leave on his fiftieth birthday: Bilbo's one hundred and twentyeighth. It seemed somehow the proper day on which to set out and follow him. Following Bilbo was uppermost in his mind, and the one thing that made the thought of leaving bearable.

This is why I love the early chapters of the book so much. It's the sense of loss. After having been made to feel right at home in The Shire, a familiar place enough to anyone brought up in the English countryside, you have to leave it with Frodo, and his feelings are the same as my own when I have to leave behind a place I love. There's a journey you've been itching to get started on but when it comes to it, you delay leaving.

I understand that need to 'savour' too, to get your fill of the familiar places you've loved and yet in some way also found boring - when you have to leave them they suddenly don't seem so dull any more, but precious.

Anyway, I'll leave it here for tonight with a piece of Tolkien's writing that might not be about Elves, is not about a glorious city, or a furious battle, nor even about a beautiful foreign land, but about home and probably one of my favourite descriptions of anything in Middle-earth. I've often posted about how when I hear Vaughan Williams music I think of Bilbo and Frodo having to leave The Shire behind and this is what I always think of:

For a short way they followed the lane westwards. Then leaving it they turned left and took quietly to the fields again. They went in single file along hedgerows and the borders of coppices, and night fell dark about them. In their dark cloaks they were as invisible as if they all had magic rings. ..........After some time they crossed the Water, west of Hobbiton, by a narrow plank-bridge. The stream was there no more than a winding black ribbon, bordered with leaning alder-trees. A mile or two further south they hastily crossed the great road from the Brandywine Bridge; they were now in the Tookland, and bending southeastwards they made for the Green Hill Country. As they began to climb its first slopes they looked back and saw the lamps in Hobbiton far off twinkling in the gentle valley of the Water. Soon it disappeared in the folds of the darkened land, and was followed by Bywater beside its grey pool. When the light of the last farm was far behind, peeping among the trees, Frodo turned and waved a hand in farewell. 'I wonder if I shall ever look down into that valley again,' he said quietly.

:(

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

Lalwendë, your mention of Vaughn Williams' music (are you familiar with his song "The Twilight People"? I sang it back in college, and it has always made me think of the Elves and Men of ME) made me think of something else about this chapter. Being a musician, I always paid a lot of attention to the various songs and poems (sang Donald Swann's "The Road Goes Ever On" cycle back in college, too, and wrote settings for just about every other song in the book quite some time ago). In the song "Upon the Hearth," I always found one part in particular quite curious:

But not yet weary are our feet,
Still round the corner we may meet
A sudden tree or standing stone
That none have seen but we alone.

The curious part, to me, is the "standing stone." Other than this mention in the song, the Three Farthing Stone is the only other mention of such a thing in the Shire, and that seems to be more of a mile marker than a megalith, such as those that are found in the "real" world. It just always struck me as an odd thing to find in a Hobbit walking song, since (given size and culture) they seem to me to be the least likely people to be raising such things. Then again, the reference may be to finding a surprise of something that was NOT raised by Hobbits, especially since Bilbo wrote the song. I can't imagine any proper adventure-adverse Hobbit wanting to sing about taking "the hidden paths that run toward the Moon and to the Sun." :)

[Lalwendë]

The curious part, to me, is the "standing stone." Other than this mention in the song, the Three Farthing Stone is the only other mention of such a thing in the Shire, and that seems to be more of a mile marker than a megalith, such as those that are found in the "real" world. It just always struck me as an odd thing to find in a Hobbit walking song, since (given size and culture) they seem to me to be the least likely people to be raising such things. Then again, the reference may be to finding a surprise of something that was NOT raised by Hobbits, especially since Bilbo wrote the song. I can't imagine any proper adventure-adverse Hobbit wanting to sing about taking "the hidden paths that run toward the Moon and to the Sun." :)

It's yet another layer to the text which makes The Shire resonant of the real world. They have Barrows and megaliths just as we do, and they have stories about them just as we do - and what's even better is that while they can make some decent guesses as to who might have constructed the barrows, the megaliths remain enigmatic; our archaeologists can make some good guesses about the inhabitants of barrows but our megaliths remain a mystery.

As to Hobbits singing of adventure - maybe they do this instead of going on them? In much the same way I like reading travel books but I haven't got a passport because I'm not going to go anywhere? I am growing more like a Hobbit every day ;)

I wonder if the Three Farthing Stone was put there by Hobbits or was there already? If it was already in situ then the Hobbits must have formed their administrative boundaries around it, which is pretty cool.

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

As to Hobbits singing of adventure - maybe they do this instead of going on them? In much the same way I like reading travel books but I haven't got a passport because I'm not going to go anywhere? I am growing more like a Hobbit every day ;)

I wonder if the Three Farthing Stone was put there by Hobbits or was there already? If it was already in situ then the Hobbits must have formed their administrative boundaries around it, which is pretty cool.

I suspect that Hobbits who publicly sang any song written by Bilbo (such as this one) would be looked upon rather like someone today singing off-color ditties in public: not really respectable and someone to be frowned upon. Or drunk. :D

And I suppose the origins of the Three Farthing Stone would depend on how big it is. If it's small, the Hobbits might have put it up themselves, but if it's large, I might think it was a remnant of Men or Elves who once lived in or traveled through that part of Eriador. I tend to like the latter possibility better, because it would be in keeping with the practical nature of Hobbits to make use of something they found that was unique, and would also indicate that not all Hobbits are (or perhaps Hobbits weren't always) so insular that they fear all things that have the faintest whiff of the world outside the Shire.

[Groin Redbeard]

I'll wait for Nogrod to post before I move on to the next chapter since we still have a disscussion going on about Three Is Company.
Gildor is a very charming Elf. Well, I think he's funny and he indeed seems to have his way with words and has some wise thoughts. All the talk about fencing the world out always makes a shiver go down my spine.
Is Gildor one of the Teleri? His attitude certainly doesn't strike me as being one of the more serious Noldor, he's much to silly and happy. ;)

[Thinlómien]

Is Gildor one of the Teleri? His attitude certainly doesn't strike me as being one of the more serious Noldor, he's much to silly and happy. ;)No, he's definitely one of the Noldor. If you recall, he introduces himself as Gildor Inglorion of the House of Finrod and an Exile. Also, the narrator and Frodo note a few times that Gildor's company are High Elves (mentioning the name of Elbereth and speaking Quenya and all that).

I think Gildor's merriness and even occasional silliness is rather refreshing after all the proud and serious Noldorin lords. (Don't get me wrong though, they are one of my favourites nevertheless. ;)) I think he actually illustrates rather well the two sides of how the Elves seem to mortals: the tra-lal-lal-ly side and the noble and serious side. Almost all other Elves in Tolkien's writing are just either of these types but Gildor is a healthy (and credibly written!) mixture of them both. I guess that's why I like him so much.

[Lalwendë]

And I suppose the origins of the Three Farthing Stone would depend on how big it is. If it's small, the Hobbits might have put it up themselves, but if it's large, I might think it was a remnant of Men or Elves who once lived in or traveled through that part of Eriador. I tend to like the latter possibility better, because it would be in keeping with the practical nature of Hobbits to make use of something they found that was unique, and would also indicate that not all Hobbits are (or perhaps Hobbits weren't always) so insular that they fear all things that have the faintest whiff of the world outside the Shire.

Hobbits were definitely not always so insular as they must have at one time travelled a long way to find their new lands. Though having once found such a thoroughly pleasant place, who could blame them for wanting to stay put? ;)

I'm going to have to look up some books and see what I can find about the Three Farthing Stone, if anything! It must have formed an interesting contrast with the memorial to the Battle of Bywater. Which makes me think about the real life village near Stonyhurst, Bolton-by-Bowland which is about as close to Hobbiton as you are likely to ever get and has a war memorial on the green near the remains of an ancient cross...

...I'm rambling again ;)

I think Gildor's merriness and even occasional silliness is rather refreshing after all the proud and serious Noldorin lords. (Don't get me wrong though, they are one of my favourites nevertheless. ) I think he actually illustrates rather well the two sides of how the Elves seem to mortals: the tra-lal-lal-ly side and the noble and serious side. Almost all other Elves in Tolkien's writing are just either of these types but Gildor is a healthy (and credibly written!) mixture of them both. I guess that's why I like him so much.

Yes! I always laugh at the Elves here as they seem so much more like the light-hearted Elves we meet in The Hobbit. My serious mind thinks that this was Tolkien attempting to make a 'bridge' between the silly Hobbit Elves and the serious Rings Elves. My silly side thinks maybe Gildor's party were wandering around as they couldn't have much of a laugh with Elrond ;)

[Thinlómien]

This thread is obviously in need of a new topic, and I finished reading the next chapter yesterday, so let's get this going... ;)

You won't get a detailed and thoughtful kick-off from me because I'm simply unable to make those ;), but I will say a few things about this chapter.

When this chapter was last discussed (here (http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showthread.php?t=10898)), many people seemed to talk about this as a cheerful and funny chapter. However, like I said back then, this has always been a rather scary chapter for me. Here's what I said about the topic when it was discussed in February:

I mean, look at these quotes:
Ho! Ho! Ho! they began again louder. They stopped short suddenly. Frodo sprang to his feet. A long-drawn wail came down the wind, like the cry of some evil and lonely creature. It rose and fell, and ended on a high piercing note. Even as they sat and stood, as if suddenly frozen, it was answered by another cry, fainter and further off, but no less chilling to the blood. There was then a silence, broken only by the sound of the wind in the leaves.
"It was not bird or beast," said Frodo. "It was a call, or a signal - there were words in that cry, though I could not catch them. But no hobbit has such a voice."
Every time I read them, they just make a chill run down my spine. They must be among the creepiest passages in the whole book.

Also, the episode of Merry The Black Rider is very scary. I remember when my father read LotR aloud to me and my little sister when we were about 6 and 4 years old and that passage was simply horror. I was sure the Black Riders had finally found them and I was so relieved when it turned out that the rider was Merry. The passage is very impressive - especially as when something is read aloud to you, you can't even accidentally see the next phrases that reveal the truth.

So, which one is this chapter for you? Scary or funny? Or maybe both? And why do you think so?

In this chapter, we have the memorable saying "Short cuts make long delays." I'm wondering, is that originally invented by Tolkien, or has he picked it from somewhere? (I've never heard it anywhere else, which of course doesn't mean anything since I'm not a native speaker... But I haven't heard the Finnish equivalent of it either.)

We also meet farmer Maggot in this chapter. He seems to be one of those characters everybody likes. I don't think I've ever met anyone who wouldn't like him.

Speaking of him, his land is called Bamfurlong. I've never paid it any attention to it before, but now it strikes me as weird. It doesn't sound very Hobbitish and as a word, it doesn't make any sense to me. Does anyone know where the name comes from or what does it mean? As soon as I get home, I'm going to see how it's translated in the Finnish version...

Latsly, I've always liked the beginning of this chapter and the thoughtful dialogue. This time, I was especially touched by Sam's words:
"Yes, sir. I don't know how to say it, but after last night I feel different. I seem to see ahead, in a kind of way. I know we are going to take a very long road, into darkness; but I know I can't turn back. It isn't to see Elves now, nor dragons, nor mountains, that I want - I don't rightly know what I want: but I have something to do before the end, and it lies ahead, not in the Shire. I must see it through, sir, if you understand me."
Quite beautifully said, isn't it?

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

Well, I'm severely allergic to mushrooms, so I guess I'd fall into the "scared" camp. ;)

Actually, I always found Farmer Maggot to be an interesting indication that not all hobbits are what many of the Big People think them to be. He defends his property, tells a Nazgul to get lost, and thinks that the rather more stuffy folk of Hobbiton are strange. Perhaps he is a reflection of "country" versus "town" hobbits -- and if so, he may well be an indication that the true mettle of hobbits lies not with its citified gentry, but with its common farmers, who love the land so well, they will rise up to defend it.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Only chiming in with a short comment...

Actually, I always found Farmer Maggot to be an interesting indication that not all hobbits are what many of the Big People think them to be. He defends his property, tells a Nazgul to get lost, and thinks that the rather more stuffy folk of Hobbiton are strange.

I agree with everything you say, except for the last one - that is not an indication of anything special. He is just the same as the hobbits of Bag-End in this, it is simply the "regional xenophobia", or how to call that. Sure you know that from your country, wherever you live, too - I think it must be the same all over the world: hobbits from Hobbitton say (at the beginning of the book, in the pub I think - it is Gaffer if I recall correctly) that the Bucklanders are strange, and a hobbit from the east (Maggot) says that people of Hobbitton are strange (in which I find a kind of funny resonation, at least I always took it as an intentional writer's joke). Pretty normal even in our world.

And as for this chapter being funny or scary, I gave some grounds on that in the thread quoted during the first reading - let me just say here that I do not find it that scary, since this is still the Shire, and it is friendly and... it is just like here now. (I said even about the chapter before that I would actually enjoy the night walk with the Hobbits, even with the Black Riders. It's great!)

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

I agree with everything you say, except for the last one - that is not an indication of anything special. He is just the same as the hobbits of Bag-End in this, it is simply the "regional xenophobia", or how to call that. Sure you know that from your country, wherever you live, too - I think it must be the same all over the world: hobbits from Hobbitton say (at the beginning of the book, in the pub I think - it is Gaffer if I recall correctly) that the Bucklanders are strange, and a hobbit from the east (Maggot) says that people of Hobbitton are strange (in which I find a kind of funny resonation, at least I always took it as an intentional writer's joke). Pretty normal even in our world.

Oh, certainly, you find regional prejudices, even within some cities. A very normal situation. But Maggot does seem, to me at least, a little more willing to do what Big Folk don't seem to think hobbits in general will do, that being stand up to protect himself and his land rather than run and hide and let someone else do it. Which, no doubt, is a Big People prejudice toward Hobbits, who feel a need to protect (or exploit) them because they think they're all afraid of the world. Maggot rather plainly isn't; he didn't need to be put into much of a pinch before he showed what was in him.

[alatar]

Okay, so I just want to show that I'm not crazy. Anyway, here are direct quotes from "Three is Company" that made me think that 'sniffing' was to be a big deal (and note the emphasis seen is from the original text - not added):

From inside the hood came a noise as of someone sniffing to catch an elusive scent; the head turned from side to side of the road.

'I can't say why, but I felt certain he was looking or smelling for me;

'What about the smelling, sir?' said Sam.

'Your talk of sniffing riders with invisible noses has unsettled me.'

'Very well!' said Pippin. 'But don't forget the sniffing!'

Frodo thought he heard the sound of snuffling.

We get more in 'A Short Cut to Mushrooms'. And after all of this, the explanation we learn is (to jump ahead to the chapter "A Knife in the Dark'):

And at all times they smell the blood of living things, desiring and hating it.

Almost as anticlimatic as this post.

[Boromir88]

In this chapter, we have the memorable saying "Short cuts make long delays." I'm wondering, is that originally invented by Tolkien, or has he picked it from somewhere?~Lommy

Hmm interesting, and of course this is also where we get Frodo's retort:

"That settles it!"..."Short cuts make delays, but inns make longer ones."

And we know Tolkien certainly loved spending time at the pub with his fellow Inklings. :D

[Estelyn Telcontar]

Lommy, I am a native speaker, and I'm not aware of a common saying that goes "Short cuts makes long delays", so I'm inclined to credit Tolkien with inventing that one. It's all too often true, isn't it?!

[skip spence]

In this chapter, we have the memorable saying "Short cuts make long delays." I'm wondering, is that originally invented by Tolkien, or has he picked it from somewhere? (I've never heard it anywhere else, which of course doesn't mean anything since I'm not a native speaker... But I haven't heard the Finnish equivalent of it either.)


In Swedish we have the saying genvägar är senvägar which pretty much has the same meaning as "Short cuts make long delays" with an even better ring to it - but you would know that, wouldn't you? ;)

I'm going to check how it's translated into Swedish. Yes, it's "genvägar kan bli senvägar". I don't know if the good Prof has an interest in Swedish and Swedish sayings and picked it up from there or if he just made it up.

[Mister Underhill]

"Haste makes waste," we often say here, which amounts to the same.

Okay, so I just want to show that I'm not crazy. Anyway, here are direct quotes from "Three is Company" that made me think that 'sniffing' was to be a big deal... [snip]

Almost as anticlimatic as this post.I have a feeling this might be a criticism born of over-familiarity.

Try to think back to before you knew all there was to know about the Nazgûl (admittedly not much, relatively speaking, but still). The sniffing and snuffling, I think, is definitely an effective way to signal that these Riders are not human, that there's something weird (in all senses of that word) about them. Also it provides a nice bit of suspense when Frodo realizes that although he is out of sight, he is not effectively hidden from his pursuer -- it's only luck (Providence?... deus ex machina?... here we go...) that saves him.

We're a little jaded about supernatural creatures nowadays. You can't throw a stone into popular culture without hitting one. I think all that business about them not seeing the world of light as we do, but they can see through their horses' eyes and use men and other creatures as spies is pretty nifty. Put it in the context of the mid-50's and it's even less anticlimactic.

[Groin Redbeard]

:
So, which one is this chapter for you? Scary or funny? Or maybe both? And why do you think so?Definitely a scary chapter with that signal the Nazgul sends out and let's not forget the climatic trip to the ferry with farmer Maggot.


We also meet farmer Maggot in this chapter. He seems to be one of those characters everybody likes. I don't think I've ever met anyone who wouldn't like him.
Indeed, farmer Maggot is one of those characters that anyone can relate to no matter what country he/she may live in. He reminds me of a roughneck neighbor we used to have, he to kept ferocious dogs that everyone was afraid of,:D but he was still a capitol fellow once you got to know him.

[skip spence]

I sometimes wonder whether JRRT had a passion for mushrooms matching that of the Hobbits. I would say so or else he wouldn't have dedicated a whole chapter to this culinary treat. Whereas I can't read "Three Is Company" without yearning for a cross country-walk and I can't read "A Short-Cut To Mushroms" without desiring a heap of butter-fried mushrooms and perhaps a vintage Old Vineyards to wash it down with.

Mmmmmmmmm, Mushrooms. *drools*

[Groin Redbeard]

I'm afraid that I don't have much to say for this chapter other than it was a creative way of getting Merry and Pippin back with Frodo.

Here is another point where we see that Hobbit nature come out in our four heroes. It is almost startling how loyal they are to Frodo after what Pippin and Sam had gone through with the Black Riders and all, yet still braver of them to dare plan of going into the Old Forest (I have an analysis on that but I'll save it for the next chapter;)).

Besides that I'm afraid I don't have much to say, other than Tolkien writes one of the best baths songs I've ever heard in this chapter.:D

[Lalwendë]

And we know Tolkien certainly loved spending time at the pub with his fellow Inklings.

Maybe the saying was born out of bitter (ho ho) experience, as yet another night out with Clive and the lads would turn into a late session with the Professor having to fly home on his beer scooter and the volume on the house turning up to 11 as he vainly tried to get the key in the door quietly without waking up the wife? ;)

Try to think back to before you knew all there was to know about the Nazgûl (admittedly not much, relatively speaking, but still). The sniffing and snuffling, I think, is definitely an effective way to signal that these Riders are not human, that there's something weird (in all senses of that word) about them.

Indeed. Yes, a creature which snuffles all the time might make you think of the workmate with the perennially runny nose who doesn't seem to understand the uses of Kleenex and who makes you feel sick but.....a creature which snuffles around in the dark is most definitely not human, and it's pretty scary if you think about all the possible reasons why they would want to sniff you out. If anything, it makes me think of Hannibal Lector and his "sssss-ssssss" thing and sniffing at Clarice Starling. Horrible. :eek:

Anyway, I'd better read the next chapter.....

[alatar]

In this chapter we lose Fatty Bolger, said to be a good friend of Frodo's, but never to really show up again. It's interesting that Fatty would rather play at being Frodo than to journey with his friend. Obviously he didn't know how deadly such a choice could have been (it's been said that, inside even the fattest hobbit, there exists down deep - almost buried - the legs of a sprinter).

[Thinlómien]

I thought I'd only post when I've read this and the following chapter but this discussion and my reading pace are so pitiful that I had a change of plans...

I like Merry very much in this chapter. He seems to be a natural born organizer of stuff. And he's such a lovely person too. Or what would you say of this quote?

"It all depends on what you want," put in Merry. "You can expect us to stick to you through thick and thin - to the bitter end. And you can trust us to keep any secret of yours - closer than you keep it yourself. But you cannot trust us to let you face trouble alone, and go off without a word. We are your friends, Frodo."

It never struck me like it did now, but it's so very true, and so very beautifully said. One more piece of proof that Tolkien was a wise guy with a gift for phrasing his thoughts in a touching manner.

I also find it interesting how easily Merry found out about the Ring. Makes me think that it wouldn't have been to odd if someone else had known about it too...

[CSteefel]

Probably less to say about this chapter than some, but a few things strike me.

One was the story from Merry about how he found out about the Ring, seeing Bilbo disappear off the road as the Sackville-Baggins were approaching.

And then the short poem along the model of a dwarf-song when they decide they will all set forth together, with one verse:

To Rivendell, where Elves yet dwell
In glades beneath the misty fell,
Through moor and waste we ride in haste,
And whither then we cannot tell.

And then I think we get the first of Frodo's dreams (more later in Bombadil's house), where he begins overlooking a dark forest from a high window (the Old Forest?), but then he hears a sound he takes initially as the wind coming through the trees, then realizing it is the sound of the Sea:

Then he knew that it was not leaves, but the sound of the Sea far-off; a sound he had never heard in waking life, though it had often troubled his dreams. Suddenly he found he was out in the open. There were no trees after all. He was on a dark heath, and there was a strange salt smell in the air. Looking up he saw before him a tall white tower, standing alone on a high ridge. A great desire came over him to climb the tower and see the Sea. He started to struggle up the ridge towards the tower; but suddenly a light came in the sky, and there was noise of thunder.
The tower is clearly one of those in the Tower Hills, perhaps the one that had traditionally held the Elendil Stone. Less clear is the sudden appearance of the light and thunder. Otherwise, one of the first of Frodo's premonitions of his passing in to the West...

[Tuor in Gondolin]

I'd like to jump in here and make a comment on the
last chapter, about Farmer Maggott. he seems to be
one of those interesting barely introduced figures
(like Gildor) who alludes to something thereby giving
depth to the story. Like JRRT said in Letters about
"barely glimpsed vistas", something about being needed
to give depth to a story/world, and if explored/exploited
by the storytellrt then in need of further barely cited vistas to
give a continued feeling of depth. As to Maggott's importance
beyond that of the hobbits understanding consider Tom Bombadil's observation:
...he made no secret that he owed his recent knowledge
largely to Farmer Maggott, whom he seemed to regard as a person
of more importance than they had imagined. 'There's earth under his
old feet, and clay on his fingers; wisdom in his bones, and both his
eyes are open,' said Tom.
And of course, Maggott wasn't daunted by Sharkey's gang.
(In a way, he was taking on a fallen maia)!

An interesting thread here, 'praps I'll follow along. :)

[CSteefel]

I'd like to jump in here and make a comment on the
last chapter, about Farmer Maggott. he seems to be
one of those interesting barely introduced figures
(like Gildor) who alludes to something thereby giving
depth to the story. Like JRRT said in Letters about
"barely glimpsed vistas", something about being needed
to give depth to a story/world, and if explored/exploited
by the storytellrt then in need of further barely cited vistas to
give a continued feeling of depth. As to Maggott's importance
beyond that of the hobbits understanding consider Tom Bombadil's observation:

And of course, Maggott wasn't daunted by Sharkey's gang.
(In a way, he was taking on a fallen maia)!

An interesting thread here, 'praps I'll follow along. :)
I often wondered (especially with the last reading of the Bombadil chapter) about where Bombadil met up with Farmer Maggot. I am assuming that Bombadil did not leave the confines of the Old Forest, since it is said elsewhere that he sticks with the borders he has set. So it must be Farmer Maggott crossing the river??

[Thinlómien]

I have been reading LotR slowly and occasionally on my own, continuing from what I started here, and I'm currently in the chapter Treebeard. (Wonderful progress, don't you think? :rolleyes: )

My question is, is there anybody out there who would like to continue reading from where we left (A Conspiracy Unmasked is the last chapter that has been talked about) or even start from the beginning (since we only got this far) and maybe post a post or two about the previous chapters and then continue with me from the Old Forest onwards?

I would like to continue the discussion here. :)

[Galadriel55]

I just want to add something to the discussion in general, not just this particular topic.
I think that is anythink in Tolkien's books seems insignificant to you - think again. Every single line in his works has its purpose and weight, even if you don't notice it right away. The first time I read LotR, I thought about how useless the first chapter is. After understanding it better, I realized that that chapter in really one of the most significant things in the book, because it highlights the change in Frodo, Sam, Pippin, and Merry in the end of the book. Every sentence, even the punctuation, has its purpose, useless as it seems.

[Leyrana Silumiel]

I have been reading LotR slowly and occasionally on my own, continuing from what I started here, and I'm currently in the chapter Treebeard. (Wonderful progress, don't you think? :rolleyes: )

My question is, is there anybody out there who would like to continue reading from where we left (A Conspiracy Unmasked is the last chapter that has been talked about) or even start from the beginning (since we only got this far) and maybe post a post or two about the previous chapters and then continue with me from the Old Forest onwards?

I would like to continue the discussion here. :)

I personally would LOVE it if we could go back and start over again. When the very first chapter-by-chapter was done (and the re-run that followed) in the subforums, I did not have my own computer, so it was very difficult to follow along with the discussions and participate. I've been dying to really join in on a chapter-by-chapter reread but there doesn't really seem to be any going on lately. :(