The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum - View Single Post - An Unexpected Journey, or the morning after

Zigûr · 03-14-2013, 08:27 PM

I also find it interesting that in the filmmakers' greater use of the "history" in order to pad out the story, the history itself became more dramatised, as happens with historical fiction dealing with Primary World history too. History doesn't just occur to a core group of "characters", it's a wide-ranging thing, but in drama it tends to become compressed (a sort of Forrest Gump effect, as it were). So in the story it's completely plausible, historically, that at Azanulbizar Thorin was stuck in the woods while Dáin fought and killed Azog, but that doesn't make good "drama". Hence Thorin becoming Azog's foe in the film, because he's one of the main characters of the story. However, I think Professor Tolkien could be quite canny in suggesting that the grand scheme of history often feels arbitrary and disconnected, but actually makes sense when viewed from a wider perspective.

This is something in which the Appendices really shine because the interconnectedness of events only becomes evident through the perusal of multiple sources: the rise of Angmar is evident in the history of Arnor, but we need to read the history of Gondor as well to discover its fall. Or we might look at the death of Walda of Rohan, killed by Orcs in the White Mountains fleeing from the North. The history of Gondor reveals these Orcs to be refugees from Azanulbizar, but only the history of Durin's Folk informs us of how this came to transpire. But the drama of history is different to "personal drama", hence how these kinds of situations come to be personalised in the films.

I think this is why the history of the Dwarves feels a little hollow to me in the films, not because of the changes in themselves but because the changes they did make tend to make it feel less "historical", if that makes sense. The sequences of events seem more artificially dramatic. So it's less of a backdrop, the "new unattainable vistas" Professor Tolkien thought were so important, and more of a constructed back-story, which I feel gives a drastically reduced impression of depth.

03-14-2013, 08:27 PM	#224
Zigûr Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: Aug 2012 Posts: 785	I also find it interesting that in the filmmakers' greater use of the "history" in order to pad out the story, the history itself became more dramatised, as happens with historical fiction dealing with Primary World history too. History doesn't just occur to a core group of "characters", it's a wide-ranging thing, but in drama it tends to become compressed (a sort of Forrest Gump effect, as it were). So in the story it's completely plausible, historically, that at Azanulbizar Thorin was stuck in the woods while Dáin fought and killed Azog, but that doesn't make good "drama". Hence Thorin becoming Azog's foe in the film, because he's one of the main characters of the story. However, I think Professor Tolkien could be quite canny in suggesting that the grand scheme of history often feels arbitrary and disconnected, but actually makes sense when viewed from a wider perspective. This is something in which the Appendices really shine because the interconnectedness of events only becomes evident through the perusal of multiple sources: the rise of Angmar is evident in the history of Arnor, but we need to read the history of Gondor as well to discover its fall. Or we might look at the death of Walda of Rohan, killed by Orcs in the White Mountains fleeing from the North. The history of Gondor reveals these Orcs to be refugees from Azanulbizar, but only the history of Durin's Folk informs us of how this came to transpire. But the drama of history is different to "personal drama", hence how these kinds of situations come to be personalised in the films. I think this is why the history of the Dwarves feels a little hollow to me in the films, not because of the changes in themselves but because the changes they did make tend to make it feel less "historical", if that makes sense. The sequences of events seem more artificially dramatic. So it's less of a backdrop, the "new unattainable vistas" Professor Tolkien thought were so important, and more of a constructed back-story, which I feel gives a drastically reduced impression of depth. __________________ "Since the evening of that day we have journeyed from the shadow of Tol Brandir." "On foot?" cried Éomer.