Denethor's plunge

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

is that you are taking the idea of a very vigorous walk which by itself would be taxing, and adding to that more than a half marathon each day. Again, for the untrained runner, just the half marathon alone - 15 miles - would be something that they could not run. The idea that an untrained person could do both is beyond reason.

But keep on trying.

So the article that I sited is wrong? What distance would you consider reasonable for a normal average human (after consulting their physician) to be able to travel in a day, and be able to get up and do the same thing the next day as well? Consider that the person has provisions (water and Snickers bars at the least), has adequate footwear - no new Nikes - and has walked everywhere his/her entire life, and so 6-10 miles is not an extreme distance for this person, as it may be for some of us today.

So far I've come up short, but I'm still searching for articles describing the average distance more primitive persons walk each day to get water, to gather food, etc. My guess is that these persons would be more apt to consider a lengthy journey than would be myself.

[Sauron the White]

Folwren and Matthew ... I was happy to give up on this a while ago... I thought we were through with it. But others keep posting their positions on it and I merely reply. Am I at fault for that?

We will agree to disagree then.

I wrote that on the 18th in the theread on Split Personality in the exact same discussion. It was my conclusion that everything that could be said already had been said. But then others keep posting their positions to me and I give them the courtesy of a reply.

I would very much like to move on to other things as long as others are willing to do the same. I will give Alatar the courtesy of an answer then hopefully, we can go on to new things like wings on balrogs.

Alatar -- your latest question

What distance would you consider reasonable for a normal average human (after consulting their physician) to be able to travel in a day, and be able to get up and do the same thing the next day as well?

What I know about is long distance running. I can talk about that with some level of confidence. I cannot discuss walking - sorry. But that is fine because WALKING is not what JRRT describes either in his tale so it is a point that does not have to be discussed. Again, walking at a normal pace DOES NOT prepare a person, or their muscles, for running or even striding. My best guess would be for the average person without training, the best they could travel in a single day would be perhaps 20 miles if they mixed running , striding and walking. After that, their glycogen and muscles would be depleted. If the dogs of hell were on their tail, perhaps they could do it again the next day. And if bones were strapped to their backs to entice the dogs, perhaps they could do it a third day.

Perhaps. That is my best guesstimate.

but this is from Answers.com in their article on GLYCOGEN

A well-nourished person will have enough glycogen in their muscle to enable them to exercise for 1-2 hours at approximately two-thirds of their maximum capacity for aerobic exercise.

Maybe I am being too generous in my estimate if this is near correct.

[Quempel]

And once again you assume that Gimli falls under the same standards as modern humans. One he was not human. Two he is not a modern human. Three your standards are real world standards and LoTR is a fantasy.


As for Frodo and Sam in the bowels of a volcano...neither Tolkien, Jackson nor Lucas got it right. Frodo and Sam would have suffocated from the fumes, ash and heat long before they could do what they needed to do. Firefighters die of carbon monoxide poisoning more often than burns.

[Sauron the White]

this has been discussed at great length in two threads - Denethors Plunge and Split Personality. Rather than rehash points which have already been answered, I simply refer you read those threads.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

I will give Alatar the courtesy of an answer then hopefully, we can go on to new things like wings on balrogs.

Thanks for playing along as I try to make my point (yes, I have one).

What I know about is long distance running. I can talk about that with some level of confidence. I cannot discuss walking - sorry. But that is fine because WALKING is not what JRRT describes either in his tale so it is a point that does not have to be discussed. Again, walking at a normal pace DOES NOT prepare a person, or their muscles, for running or even striding. My best guess would be for the average person without training, the best they could travel in a single day would be perhaps 20 miles if they mixed running , striding and walking. After that, their glycogen and muscles would be depleted. If the dogs of hell were on their tail, perhaps they could do it again the next day. And if bones were strapped to their backs to entice the dogs, perhaps they could do it a third day.

You are a long distance runner. I'd guess that the percentage LotR Movie viewers/Book readers that are long distance runners is small (for USA yr 2006, I estimate significantly less than 7.9% of all persons). Most/some people, like me, have a cursory experience with running, especially long distances. Tolkien and PJ subconsciously or consciously know this. So if you, who I assume would provide a low estimate for the number of miles a person could travel in a part of a day, can get us to 60-70 miles (for three or three+ days), then it's not hard to see how others, with less experience, can (wrongfully; yes, I know) let slide the event that three heroes could travel twice that distance. As you yourself have stated, when you first read the running scene before you became more knowledgeable about foot travel, you skipped right by it. But now...

And I know that we're both riding this horse into the ground for other reasons. You want more honest criticism of the Books, and others want (and enjoy) to continue to criticize PJ's efforts. The points made are that Tolkien is superior, at least in the medium that he uses, in providing a more internally consistent 'secondary world,' whereas PJ does not as well in doing the same.

Maybe it would be helpful (and keep me from the ever-looming boredom) for you to note other examples of where Tolkien fails in creating a SW for you in the Books section of the forum. Start a thread there and I'll happily post.

Guess we could also start yet another PJ inconsistency thread, but my SbS posts cover much of that ground, and so maybe someone else would want to get that horse out of the stable.

[Sauron the White]

alatar... I wonder if it is not the nature of the beast that those who tend to really know the ins and outs of something are the least satisfied when someone outside of that area attempts to utilize it in a book or film?

Some of the people who know the books the best find the most fault with the film.
My experience with running and the whole Gimli thing. Perhaps this is normal and to be expected to a degree.

Before I retired after 33 years of teaching, I was seriously into local union politics. We went on strike a couple of times and there were two newspapers in town - one pro union and the other anti-union. It did not matter that we were feeding both papers most of their information because almost always the stories they ran were either a) filled with errors of fact, b) stories which completely missed the serious points, or c) made up of half-truths and partial errors. And this was from writers and a paper I respected and looked to as my normal daily news source. It taught me a lesson about such things.

Probably if you asked a professional football player about football movies they would have a laundry list of complaints. I imagine lawyers could talk your ear off about errors made everyday on shows like Law & Order and courtroom dramas. I rarely saw a movie about education get the life of a teacher right. Even in the ones that were critically praised.

So maybe this should running debate just die from exhaustion and glycogen depletion of its own.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

alatar... I wonder if it is not the nature of the beast that those who tend to really know the ins and outs of something are the least satisfied when someone outside of that area attempts to utilize it in a book or film?

And maybe that's why some of those here, when you say that the 'Purists' here at the Downs cannot believe Tolkien ever made an error, find some of your posts 'peevish,' if I use that word correctly.

Anyway, while reading HoME last night (again) I saw that in one of the original versions of RotK, Denethor was to survive the Battle of the Pellenor.

Was Denethor so crazed that he was absolutely sure that his last leap would destroy him utterly, as why else immolate himself if not to avoid capture and humiliation for himself and his subsequent corpse? What if he'd been caught by a Nazgul and dunked in the Anduin, then to be brought before the Eye in Barad Dur, even if semi-charred? Quite a risk.

And another thought: In many, if not all space movies, there's always sound in space, which is physically impossible due to lack of a medium in which the sound can carry. Some persons note this (usually science nuts with little else to do), and yet is has become pretty much part of the 'language' of space movies. To have no sound when something explodes may leave the audience dumbfounded.

Like dancing around in lava fields in movies, many people just accept this physical unreality as it makes sense to us ground/earth-dwelling persons that live in air. Like in the Star Wars movies. Yet, with the exception of a few science nuts, you won't hear much about this in the reviews of these movies (which have no associated canon - at least the first flick didn't). Still, people find flaws within the movies due to the inconsistencies presented by George Lucas.

And if he can get it wrong (internally inconsistent), so can PJ. It's not the sounds in space, it's Jar-Jar Binks.

[Mister Underhill]

All this research into real-world capacities is a total red herring, IMO. If you start applying real world science to Middle-earth, you'll very soon find little you can believe in. I don't know why Gimli's run is the thing that trips you up, StW. I guess everyone has their own areas of expertise and pet hobby horses.

To me it seems that the real question here is internal consistency. Is Gimli's run believably consistent with what we know of Dwarves in Middle-earth? That's easy. Yes.

If anything, Gimli's run is far less believable in PJ's films because they're stuck with an actor who is obviously laboring under sixty or eighty pounds of costume and makeup, plus PJ uses the opportunity for comic relief -- having Gimli wheezing, always way behind the others, and making jokes about Dwarves being sprinters and the like.

In general, PJ's films are less internally consistent than Tolkien's books, and that's where a lot of book fans trip up.

[Sauron the White]

Now I have read the ultimate Purist rationalization for the books while at the same time putting down the films.

Gimli running 140 miles in three days in the books is fine. Of course and slap me silly for even thinking it is not. But Gimli running in the films - the hated Peter Jackson films - is far less believable.

There should be a prize for this type of thing.

[Sauron the White]

Mister Underhill ... I owe you more than that flip comment.

Where else in LOTR does it indicate that Dwarves have some extra-ordinary ability to run the equal of 1.6 marathons a day for three days in a row? You want to discuss internal consistency? That meets it head on.

If anything, the run is far more believable in the films. First, you are not looking at an actor laboring under make-up and costuming. You are looking at the dwarf that Tolkien described in the books. The physical depiction of was rather accurate. Second, in the books you have the very real problem of the miles or leagues being racked up each day in print. The entire distance is obvious and right in your face. No such thing in the film. Based on what you seen in the film - and only what you saw in the film - just how far did they run? You could never tell. You just knew that they ran a long way.

In fact I have just rewatched the portion of TTT - The Riders of Rohan. Very cleverly, PJ removes any mention of the distance covered and the entire conversations stays away from the topic. Instead they talk about trying to find Merry and Pippin. Eomer never has to utter his lines about their great feat being sung in halls.

Its far more believable in the film.

[Knight of Gondor]

I wonder...does anyone remember the march of Dain II Ironfoot to aid Thorin in the would-be siege of Erebor? As I recall, each dwarf bore a pack as heavy as himself, if not heavier. Has anyone gauged the required distance, given the heavy packs?

Again, no one is saying this is feasible in the "real world", I'm just bringing a similar journey of heavy-laden dwarves into the mix.

[Mister Underhill]

In Middle-earth, Dwarves are consistently portrayed as being a particularly hardy race, capable of unusual feats of endurance. Most of those references have already been cited. Dwarves do not equal real world humans. Nor do Elves. Nor do the descendants of Númenorean kings. It's not an error. In Middle-earth, it's just the way it is.

I appreciate that you posted a second time in a more reasonable tone. I have to tell you, though, that you'd be more convincing if you didn't seem to have the same knee-jerk loyalty to the movies as you sometimes claim others have for the books. I don't know why you take it so personally. If someone has a different opinion about the movies than you do, so what? You don't have to "convert" them to your way of thinking any more than you have to be converted to theirs. I haven't seen too many of these straw man Purists (with a capital P!) you've constructed around anyway.

I don't hate PJ or his movies. You can check my track record. I was really rooting for the movies to be great, while expecting and approving that there would be significant changes from the book. Does that make me a Purist? No, I guess what does is that the movies turned out to be, for me, enjoyable in many ways, but not great.

Denethor's plunge is a prime example -- it's not internally consistent for him to be able to run, engulfed in flame, the distance established in the movie.

Somewhere around here -- there seem to be about three different threads currently engaged in determining the running capacity of a partially-laden Dwarf -- I think it was littlemanpoet who said something to the effect that if he hadn't read the books, he wouldn't have had problems with the movies. That's not my experience. For me, the parts that are most frustrating are where the movies -- as movies, on their own terms -- fail logically or in terms of internal consistency.

[Sauron the White]

Since we are discussing those hardy Dwarves - a site called der-hobbitfilm.de has the following report up today

9/26/2007
Yesterday I got an interesting email, I'll just publish it here uncommented:
I have a friend who lives in New Zealand near Lake Te Anau and he said that a few people from New Line came to inspect the area and asked to go on their land. My friend asked why and they said they want to see if it would be a good place for the Lonely Mountain. They seemed really pleased with the location.

The site has been reporting - somewhat sparingly - on developments for a HOBBIT movie. This is their latest news.