Quote:
Originally Posted by PrinceOfTheHalflings
Her argument that Tolkien "must" have left a coded message about the Balrog is based on Tolkien being familiar with codes - both through his work in the First World War and also because he sent coded messages to Edith during that war to tell her where he was (something that was forbidden). He must have been pretty good because the military censors never noticed. However, just because Tolkien could encode a "secret message" in a text proves nothing whether there is one or more "messages" about the Balrog hidden in the text, and frankly it is quite easy to find all sorts of unintentional anagrams in a given piece of text.
|
People who expect to see secret signs and codes tend to find them, whether they really exist, or not.
Honestly, I've never gotten why the wings question merited the apparent controversy around it. To me it's just an interesting side issue. And they did not have wings, of course.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrinceOfTheHalflings
I thought her Tom Bombadil essay showed more promise. The idea of the theatre/audience was interesting. However, before Part IV I thought to myself "I bet there's going to be another bloody anagram!" and, of course, there was. The anagram itself only reveals what most people assume about Tom - that he is a Maia. So hardly an "intriguing answer" is it?
|
Yeah, the Maia argument is pretty shopworn. That's the go-to answer it seems, for any seeming immortals in Arda who can't be otherwise classified.