Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
|
06-13-2004, 10:04 PM | #1 |
Princess of Skwerlz
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: where the Sea is eastwards (WtR: 6060 miles)
Posts: 7,499
|
LotR - Prologue
Let's discuss the Prologue to LotR! Fordim Hedgethistle, the initiator of this project, will post his introduction. After that, everyone is welcome to participate. Tell us what you especially like (or don't like!) about the Prologue, what affects you personally, or what puzzles you. We look forward to reading many different contributions!
__________________
'Mercy!' cried Gandalf. 'If the giving of information is to be the cure of your inquisitiveness, I shall spend all the rest of my days in answering you. What more do you want to know?' 'The whole history of Middle-earth...' |
06-13-2004, 10:07 PM | #2 | |||
Gibbering Gibbet
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Beyond cloud nine
Posts: 1,844
|
Welcome to the discussion thread for the Prologue to The Lord of the Rings. There is so much to discuss that I will not even attempt to be comprehensive in this initial post. Instead, I will merely point out three passages that I think open the door to themes and ideas that will become extremely important in the book as it proceeds.
Quote:
At the same time, the passage hints rather darkly at a connection of some kind between Hobbits and the Ring, insofar as the magic (or ‘magic' ) of each is defined by the ability to confer invisibility. Quote:
Quote:
The important point about all three of these passages is, I think, that they are about Hobbits and not about Frodo, Sam, Merry or Pippin. They are all extraordinary people – heroes, even – but their ability to do good in the war against evil is here, I think, being set up as being the result of their Hobbit-natures. The book thus begins with a celebration not of the individuals who will be combating evil, but of the ideals and qualities that can be successfully pitted against the forces of darkness. At the same time, the Prologue seems to acknowledge that connection that exists between the forces of good and the forces of evil – perhaps even acknowledges the co-dependence of light and dark. One last point to make about the Prologue is, of course, how it works so hard to establish the fiction of the book as being a historical document retrieved and recovered by an editor from older primary works, rather than a fictional story told by an author. It is here that Tolkien makes his most apparent move, I think, into the idea that these events are ‘historical’ and therefore open to interpretation by a community of readers rather than subservient to any single interpretation, be that interpretation authorial or from a single readerly perspective. Last edited by Fordim Hedgethistle; 06-13-2004 at 10:12 PM. |
|||
06-14-2004, 01:36 AM | #3 |
Shade of Carn Dűm
|
Here we go...now the fun really begins.
From the start of the Prologue, Tolkien has the same tone that he took on with the First Foreward. The sense of having something fictional explained to you as if it was real, and in such a way that you are at once immersed in the very core of Middle-Earth, and more specifically the hobbits, which as Tolkien mentioned, the book is largely concerned with. In the first section, Concerning Hobbits, one sees a glimpse of rare hobbit history. The three original groups of Hobbits, the Harfoots, Stoors and Fallohides all have different charictaristics, but invariably they all end up in the Shire and intermingle. By the time of Bilbo and Co, the different strains are all mixed, but one can still see the vestiges of the old clans in the prominent hobbit families. The Tooks, for instance, are obviously decended from the Fallohides, given thier fondness for adventure and elves. Also, the Brandybuck clan is given as having the Fallohide traits, but they also show a few similarities to the Stoors, like thier liking for water and boats (Smeagol and Deagol come to mind here) and for consorting with men. In addition, to interesting points on hobbit history, Tolkien gives a small insight into the Dunadain and thier relationship with hobbits. Despite their previous relationships with other races, hobbits grow closer to Men than Dwarves or Elves, even though there are communities of both within easy reach of the Shire. I think this has to do with thier (much) earlier relation with Men, and the fact that they have similar qualities. Of the second section, Concerning Pipe-Weed, I feel I must quote Gandalf in saying that Hobbits could sit on the edge of ruin and discuss such trifles as pipe-weed. Tolkien mentioned that he was, in all but size, a hobbit, and here he is, proving that fact by devoting an entire section to something as trivial (when compared to the plots of the story) as the origins of this mysterious weed. In fact, the quote I mentioned above is given in relation to Merry, who spoke in earnest to the King Theoden about pipe-weed. Again, this proves my point made above that Men and hobbits are indeed related, since (as it seemed to me) that Theoden was as interested in carrying on the converstation as much as Merry was.
__________________
I drink Pan Galactic Gargle Blasters! ~ Always remember: pillage BEFORE you burn. |
06-14-2004, 03:22 AM | #4 | ||
Illustrious Ulair
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,240
|
What immediately struck me was the fact we have three 'breeds'' of Hobbits, Three houses of Men, Three branches of the High Elves. Why? Of course, Tolkien did originally set out to create a mythology for England, & England was settled by three peoples - Angles, Saxons & Jutes. Its so blatant that he must have intended something by it, but why always Three 'houses'?
Quote:
Quote:
I do think its interesting the way Tolkien wishes to deny any speculation about 'magic' as regards Hobbits. Maybe he feels that the reader may form the impression that they are supernatural creatures (HOBgoblins, HOBthrusts, HOBhounds - all supernatural creatures from folklore), so he's attempting to disabuse us of the idea, & emphasise their ordinaryness - they're 'relatives of ours'. |
||
06-14-2004, 04:19 AM | #5 |
Brightness of a Blade
|
Concerning Hobbits
It's interesting that reading the description of Hobbits one can see why 'they were meant' to be the heroes of this book.
1. 'A people of no importance' First of all, little was known about them by both Elves and Men; their origins and early history are a mystery even to themselves. Even afterwards they appear in very few records. So it is very likely that the Enemy would be unaware of their existance, of their strenghts and weaknesses, and very likely to underestimate the former, once he did learn of their existance. 2. Appearances are deceiving Although their are fat, small and appear lazy, they are nimble, swift, skilled at bow and arrow and stone-throwing, and 'curiously tough'. 3. The art of dissaapearing versus the magic of dissapearing As it has already been brought up in this thread, by Fordim and Davem, they are distinct and meant to express opposite things. Whether this is just a well-placed irony (they already can dissapear, so they don't need a Ring to do it), or an attempt to make them more familiar to the reader, it's still debatable. But it's clear that a hobbit's art of dissapearing is closer to nature, similar to an animal's becoming one with the scenery in order to avoid predators. 4. Basic needs and pleasures The simplicity of their thoughts and desires make them less likely to be usurped by the more sophisticated 'lust for power' that the Ring evoked.
__________________
And no one was ill, and everyone was pleased, except those who had to mow the grass. |
06-14-2004, 05:12 AM | #6 | |
Deadnight Chanter
|
to post #2
Quote:
It is subject of interpretation, really. All quotes you provide us with are as good when interpreted as: Hobbits healthy customs, once perverted, may become that and that cheers
__________________
Egroeg Ihkhsal - Would you believe in the love at first sight? - Yes I'm certain that it happens all the time! Last edited by HerenIstarion; 06-14-2004 at 05:18 AM. |
|
06-14-2004, 05:20 AM | #7 | |||
Illusionary Holbytla
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 7,547
|
One of my favorite things about the prologue is that it gives us insights to the "ordinary" hobbit. Frodo, Sam, Merry, and Pippin (and Bilbo) are rather "extra-ordinary" in that they go on adventures and they very much grow from what they were to who they become, and they are not the simple hobbits any more. But the prologue shows us who the average hobbits are.
Quote:
Quote:
On the topic of magic, I have only one thing to add, and that is something Galadriel said: "For this is what your folk would call magic, I believe; though I do not understand clearlywhat they mean; and they seem to use the same word of the deceits of the Enemy." Like pipe-weed, the "magic" of disappearing is also more like an Art than anything else. Quote:
|
|||
11-25-2009, 09:10 AM | #8 | ||
Wight
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Taconic Mountains
Posts: 111
|
One of the first things I noticed about the Prologue is it contains frequent references to and information about events that occur after the events of the rest of the novel. Apparently Tolkien is happy that readers will know in advance that many of the central characters who will be going into all sorts of dangerous situations during the course of the War of the Ring will survive. Interesting and unusual for a Prologue, but I think it's effective and does not detract from the rest of the book. As Fordim Hedgethistle explains above, one of the purposes of this Prologue is to treat the fiction of the book as being historical and derived from older primary works, rather than a fictional story told by an author.
The next thing I noticed was a questionable grammatical usage, and I'm unsure, because I know that Tolkien was a master the language, whether it's just a typographical error introduced during the publication, or was done on purpose. I was taught that "farther" and "farthest" should be used (instead of "further" and "furthest") when discussing purely physical, geographical distances. Yet we read on page 7 about the three Elf-towers on Tower Hills, that the "tallest was furthest away, standing alone upon a green mound." Quote:
Last edited by Mugwump; 11-25-2009 at 09:19 AM. |
||
11-25-2009, 09:22 AM | #9 |
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
|
Further/Farther
I'm actually really curious about this and need to look into when and where this rule sprung up.
The reason I say this is that countless, countless, countless British Victorian novels consistently use "further" for "farther." Which makes me inclined to say it's either an American rule, or one that wasn't created until after that era. In which latter case it might simply be Tolkien deliberately evoking an older feeling, or simply not being aware of the newer rule as he was steeped in older culture (of course, if he knew, I have the feeling he'd deliberately ignore it). Consequently when I encounter "further" for "farther" in my reading I like to think of it as a construction along the lines of "I should like" for "I would like"--something that is deliberately and delightfully British.
__________________
Got corsets? |
11-25-2009, 09:50 AM | #10 | |||
Dead Serious
|
Mnemo is perfectly right about Tolkien's attitude towards "farther" and "further"--he makes a direct reference to this in one of his Letters--let me see if I can dig up the reference in the 23 minutes before class...
Aha! Here we are: Quote:
--emphasis Tolkien's own Quote:
Quote:
__________________
I prefer history, true or feigned.
|
|||
11-25-2009, 09:55 AM | #11 |
Wight
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Taconic Mountains
Posts: 111
|
Bingo--I think you've got it! Using further in that sense must've been merely standard idiomatic British English of Tolkien's day, just as of free will meant of [his/her/my/our/your/their] own free will.
|
11-25-2009, 10:55 AM | #12 | |
Cryptic Aura
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 5,984
|
All grammars leak, although not all grammarians and teachers like to admit the fact. So maybe it's the grammarians and teachers who leak?
It is really quite interesting to read what that bible of clear thinking and precise word choice has to say: Fowler's Modern English Usage. It would appear that usage has been muddled and only relatively latterly did the prognosticators declare a preference and even then they got the usage wrong, as applying a difference to which none of the practitioners of the language adhered. Quote:
__________________
I’ll sing his roots off. I’ll sing a wind up and blow leaf and branch away. Last edited by Bęthberry; 11-25-2009 at 07:04 PM. Reason: sh! typo put to rest |
|
11-25-2009, 01:30 PM | #13 |
Illustrious Ulair
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,240
|
It still is - both meself & Lal say 'further' (she's Lancastrian & I'm from Yorkshire, so I reckon its in common usage across the north of England). Mind you, here in 'God's Own County', we still commonly say 'thee', 'thine' & 'thou' (though we pronounce it 'tha')!
|
06-14-2004, 10:10 AM | #14 | ||
Brightness of a Blade
|
Quote:
I agree that hobbits are somwhat the 'anti-heroes', (not possessing the qualities one has come to expect in a standard hero). Tolkien plays with our mind in describing them as totally plain, and simple-minded in the beginning, so that later on in the story, he may unravel their qualities. It's like he's giving us a lesson: "Wait and see!" It's a lesson good for life, too. EDIT: 'crossposted with you guys. Quote:
But seriously, I for one think that all the points in common you stated here are grounds for contrasting the hobbits with the bad guys, rather than serve to show how they resembled each other. That is, there is a qualitative difference, not only a quantitative one.
__________________
And no one was ill, and everyone was pleased, except those who had to mow the grass. Last edited by Evisse the Blue; 06-14-2004 at 10:18 AM. |
||
|
|