The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum - View Single Post - LotR -- Book 3 - Chapter 04

Fordim Hedgethistle · 01-11-2005, 10:26 AM

Coming in very late, I know, and I probably wouldn’t bother but I want to be sure to post to each chapter thread! (Is there a prize Esty for those of us who do so?)

The two elements of this chapter that I have always found the most interesting have already come in for some really excellent discussion here: the tale of the “split” between the Ents and the Entwives and the nature of Ent language. In reading through what’s here, I’m beginning to get a weird idea that we can actually relate these together.

The Entwives have a “possessive” view of nature insofar as they want to order it; to take what’s wild and untamed and to make it agricultural. This is what truly distinguishes them from the Ents and their more ‘accepting’ view of nature. They just like it without wanting to control it. But I’m not so sure I buy this.

Sure, the Ents are happy to let trees be trees, but they are an awful lot like the Entwives in their approach to language. As davem has already pointed out, for the Ents, the ‘ideal’ word is one that tells the complete story of a thing. For them, naming (Bob) and identifying (a man) are one and the same, whereas in our more ‘simple’ language they are different (for us Bob and ‘a man’ can refer to the same person; for Ents, presumably, there would only be one word-name for Bob that would render the general noun ‘man’ irrelevant (or at least hasty).

The Ents want to tame language in the same way that the Entwives want to tame nature. Or, rather (and rather more problematically) the Ents want to tame/contain reality with language. The list of the speaking peoples is a great example of this. All the conscious beings must have a place in their poem: poetry being, of course, the most wrought (i.e. worked upon) and even artificial form of language. When confronted with the treachery of Saruman and the hobbits, they spend their first night debating how to include hobbits in their list. They are as obsessive with their desire to control and tame life as are the Entwives, its just that their methods differ. While the Entwives are content to grow gardens, the Ents are rather doomed to try and capture all of reality in a language that will just get longer and longer as it tries to come up with words that capture the entirety of a thing.

They are in this respect a bit like the Elves, aren’t they? The Elves want/need to capture the present and to keep it static and unchanging forever. The Ents want/need to capture reality in a single word that can be the Final Word: that call tell the whole story – but of course for this to happen the story would have to stop. As long as time continues and new things happen to that hill, the name/word of it will change and grow as well. Treebeard says as much about his name: that it is always growing.

01-11-2005, 10:26 AM	#40
Fordim Hedgethistle Gibbering Gibbet Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Beyond cloud nine Posts: 1,844	Coming in very late, I know, and I probably wouldn’t bother but I want to be sure to post to each chapter thread! (Is there a prize Esty for those of us who do so?) The two elements of this chapter that I have always found the most interesting have already come in for some really excellent discussion here: the tale of the “split” between the Ents and the Entwives and the nature of Ent language. In reading through what’s here, I’m beginning to get a weird idea that we can actually relate these together. The Entwives have a “possessive” view of nature insofar as they want to order it; to take what’s wild and untamed and to make it agricultural. This is what truly distinguishes them from the Ents and their more ‘accepting’ view of nature. They just like it without wanting to control it. But I’m not so sure I buy this. Sure, the Ents are happy to let trees be trees, but they are an awful lot like the Entwives in their approach to language. As davem has already pointed out, for the Ents, the ‘ideal’ word is one that tells the complete story of a thing. For them, naming (Bob) and identifying (a man) are one and the same, whereas in our more ‘simple’ language they are different (for us Bob and ‘a man’ can refer to the same person; for Ents, presumably, there would only be one word-name for Bob that would render the general noun ‘man’ irrelevant (or at least hasty). The Ents want to tame language in the same way that the Entwives want to tame nature. Or, rather (and rather more problematically) the Ents want to tame/contain reality with language. The list of the speaking peoples is a great example of this. All the conscious beings must have a place in their poem: poetry being, of course, the most wrought (i.e. worked upon) and even artificial form of language. When confronted with the treachery of Saruman and the hobbits, they spend their first night debating how to include hobbits in their list. They are as obsessive with their desire to control and tame life as are the Entwives, its just that their methods differ. While the Entwives are content to grow gardens, the Ents are rather doomed to try and capture all of reality in a language that will just get longer and longer as it tries to come up with words that capture the entirety of a thing. They are in this respect a bit like the Elves, aren’t they? The Elves want/need to capture the present and to keep it static and unchanging forever. The Ents want/need to capture reality in a single word that can be the Final Word: that call tell the whole story – but of course for this to happen the story would have to stop. As long as time continues and new things happen to that hill, the name/word of it will change and grow as well. Treebeard says as much about his name: that it is always growing. __________________ Scribbling scrabbling.