The Hobbit Trolls - A Clever Parody?

[Balfrog]

Morthoron

Hallelujah! Is there actually a point you're willing to agree on with Ms. Seth – namely Tolkien's seeming disdain for Shakespeare? In an ever so roundabout way are you actually entertaining the possibility Tolkien might have poked fun at the Bard by casting him as a Troll? Well I never – may miracles never cease to occur!

Really by now – I would have thought the: 'I know more than you' thing, and the 'lack of comprehension' thing, would have been dropped. It's a little puerile – and I'm sure off-putting to readers of this thread wishing to enhance their knowledge of Tolkien's works. In all probability I know a lot more than you think and you know a lot less than I think. And by the way – I asked for evidence where your Tom, Bert & Bill knew of each other and were friends and rivals. I didn't make a big deal about your 'lack of comprehension' in providing a comedy where the three characters obviously historically didn't.

Nonetheless your parody was highly amusing. There's definitely some talent there. If only you could harness and hone it to be more objective about Ms. Seth's works.

Anyway – the bottom line is that it's probably possible to find three 'famous' cohorts possessing the names of the Trolls – but it's near impossible to find allusions (of any decent amount) to the same buried within Roast Mutton. Especially to the depth exhibited by Ms. Seth's three Elizabethan playwrights. Which makes me believe Ms. Seth's theory is quite a strong one!

As to:

By the way, they are not necessarily speaking cockney, but more like Mancunian, given that Tolkien would be more acquainted with guttural Manchester accents, having lived outside of Birmingham as a child and serving in the Lancashire Fusiliers in WWI. His brushes with London cockney would be limited.

Tolkien's knowledge of the English Language and dialects was vast. It would be wrong to belittle him. John Rateliff, probably, the most knowledgeable scholar on The Hobbit – calls the Trolls' accents 'cockney' (see The History of The Hobbit).

By the way your words sound remarkably like Eledhwen (a Special Educational Needs Teacher) from The Tolkien Forum some 12 years ago (thread: about trolls' accents). When I type in on Google search: 'trolls cockney' – the first thing that comes up is:

That particular aspect of the trolls' accent seems more Mancunian (Manchester) to me than Cockney. Tolkien will have been more familiar with the accents of the West Midlands and the North West than Cockney, as he lived just outside Birmingham as a child, and served in the Lancashire Fusiliers in WW1, where he would have encountered such speech among the enlisted men.

Tolkien wrote The Hobbit while in Oxford. Oxford to London is a mere 50 miles. It's far too presumptive to assume the Manchester connection. However I could be persuaded if, with your obviously deep acquaintance of English dialects, you could point out in a Manchester dialectal dictionary, the words:

Lumme, Blighter, Copped etc.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Balfrog

Hallelujah! Is there actually a point you're willing to agree on with Ms. Seth – namely Tolkien's seeming disdain for Shakespeare?

Seeing as you evidently sprang fully-formed from the head of Priya Seth like Athena from Zeus, I will forgive your lack of common knowledge regarding Tolkien while you sycophantically preen under the watchful gaze of your mistress. The aversion to Shakespeare has been known and discussed for decades. Known for decades -- a common theme in this discussion....

Originally Posted by Balfrog

As to:

By the way, they are not necessarily speaking cockney, but more like Mancunian, given that Tolkien would be more acquainted with guttural Manchester accents, having lived outside of Birmingham as a child and serving in the Lancashire Fusiliers in WWI. His brushes with London cockney would be limited.

Tolkien's knowledge of the English Language and dialects was vast. It would be wrong to belittle him. John Rateliff, probably, the most knowledgeable scholar on The Hobbit – calls the Trolls' accents 'cockney' (see The History of The Hobbit).

Lazy scholarship is nothing new, even on the part of Rateliff. Besides, Rateliff is from Arkansas and is not a philologist.

Originally Posted by Balfrog

By the way your words sound remarkably like Eledhwen (a Special Educational Needs Teacher) from The Tolkien Forum some 12 years ago (thread: about trolls' accents). When I type in on Google search: 'trolls cockney' – the first thing that comes up is:

That particular aspect of the trolls' accent seems more Mancunian (Manchester) to me than Cockney. Tolkien will have been more familiar with the accents of the West Midlands and the North West than Cockney, as he lived just outside Birmingham as a child, and served in the Lancashire Fusiliers in WW1, where he would have encountered such speech among the enlisted men.

You quoted a post from Eledhwen from 12 years ago. Are you aware that the Internet has been around since the 1990s and the trolls' accents have been discussed at length that entire time, and on websites and forums now unfortunately defunct? Are you also aware that Eledhwen and I were both Middle-earth fan-fiction writers, such as on the now defunct Middle-earth Fan-fiction Awards (MEFA) and fanfiction.net? Eledhwen is also a moderator over at TheOneRing.net (of which I am also a member). We have had interactions and discussions for years. We have come to the same conclusion (and previous to the post you referred to).

How interesting you should imply I borrowed from another post when you obviously haven't a single, original idea in your head, given you spend months and years quoting nothing but Priya Seth, advertising for Priya Seth and defending every written word from the Gospel of Priya Seth. We wonders if you aren't one in the same, eh? Yes we do, Precious-s-s.

Originally Posted by Balfrog

Tolkien wrote The Hobbit while in Oxford. Oxford to London is a mere 50 miles. It's far too presumptive to assume the Manchester connection. However I could be persuaded if, with your obviously deep acquaintance of English dialects, you could point out in a Manchester dialectal dictionary, the words:

Lumme, Blighter, Copped etc.

Your apparent lack of knowledge regarding the insular nature of Oxford in the early 20th century is astounding. Tolkien would have little to no relational basis with anyone speaking Cockney from a life experience standpoint, particularly since he despised big, sooty cities full of noisome and blaring automobiles with a passion. He spent WWI in the trenches with a Lancashire regiment, where he would pick up the patois of his fellow soldiers on an intimate and unfiltered basis. Where, exactly, would Tolkien garner a knowledge of Cockney? In between classes at Merton College?

He spent his childhood outside Birmingham. He went from King Edward's School in Birmingham right to Exeter College, Oxford, finished his degree, and then promptly joined the Lancashire Fusiliers in 1915. Once demobilized and recuperated from his injuries (in a cottage 25 miles north of Birmingham, and also stationed in Yorkshire), he worked as a reader at the University of Leeds (again in Yorkshire), and then back to Pembroke College at Oxford in 1925. When, precisely, did Tolkien speak at first hand with lower class Londoners for any length of time?

As for slang, the term "blimey" (as in "Mutton yesterday, mutton today, and blimey, etc.") has been used in Mancunian slang since the 19th century (and a sort of winter dress cap worn in WWI was referred to as a "Gor Blimey" by all rank of British soldiers), and "lumme" (Lord love me), was in regular use in Lancashire in the early 20th century. For instance, here is a monologue in which blimey and lumme are used by the famed British comedian Robb Wilton (1881-1957), know for his dry Lancashire accent:

http://monologues.co.uk/Robb_Wilton/...errminated.htm

As far as "blighter" and "copped", I see as many references to the terms in Lancashire or Manchester as elsewhere in Britain. They are not necessarily Cockney in derivation. In any case, Tolkien is on record as regretting using conventional English names for the trolls:

Originally Posted by The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien 153: To Peter Hastings (Draft), September 1954

I might not (if The Hobbit had been more carefully written, and my world so much thought about 20 years ago) have used the expression 'poor little blighter', just as I should not have called the troll William.

Therefore, any extravagant literary pun regarding Elizabethan playwrights, with so much jumping through hoops of allusion and allegory, seems nonsensical, given that Tolkien never mentioned such an arduous and overwrought bit of whimsy, and would rather have stricken the name(s) from the story if he had the chance.

The very tenor of the sentence emphasized in parentheses: "if The Hobbit had been more carefully written, and my world so much thought about 20 years ago", indicates he did not, in fact, give the naming conventions of the trolls much thought at all. Certainly not something as ornate as your demi-goddess of click-bait commands.

[Balfrog]

Morthoron

How I look forward to your posts – wondering what slurs will ensue and how you'll denigrate me next. Apparently there is 'click-baiting' going on, and Ms. Seth's my 'mistress'. And then supposedly – I'm Ms. Seth herself!

Well, well. Chuckle, chuckle. Please continue with the entertaining nonsense. Your nice and beautiful personality shines fully through, and I'm sure is winning over many admirers!

Back to business. Your last post is again full of self-righteous: 'I know best – and you're ignorant'. Sorry – but the stuff you spew on Tolkien's history is elementary knowledge that I first became aware of some 30 years ago. Of the factual stuff - you told me nothing I didn't already know.

Most amusingly - apparently you have more expertise than arguably the premier expert on The Hobbit: John Rateliff. And to boot – on one count – even more than Tolkien himself. You're unsubstantiated belittling of an Oxford University professor for a supposed lack of knowledge about a London dialect of the English language, is positively cringe-worthy.

Tolkien could not possibly have known any Cockney – really???
Being in all probability the most recognizable and famous dialect in all of England, I have to shake my head – but not in despair – more in pity.

How interesting you should imply I borrowed from another post

Despite the above – I was interested in how you both came to the same conclusion about the Trolls accents having a Manchester origin. I am interested in the strength of the evidence – and couldn't give a hoot whether you plagiarized or not. I asked specifically for a Manchester dialectal dictionary where such words we are debating (e.g. blimey, blighter, lumme) exist. Unsurprisingly you provided none.

Instead a Liverpudlian comedian – who no doubt had traveled over much of Britain (Southend, Yarmouth, Aberdeen as talked about in those sketches - and picked up who knows what when) is the basis of your Mancunian argument. What tosh.

Just because I've heard a Yorkshire-man shout out 'Sacre-bleu' - doesn't make him French. Seriously, the evidence presented was beyond feeble. To be honest, it was quite pathetic.

I recommend you take note of another well respected scholar's opinion. Mark Atherton states in 'There and Back Again' the following:

'Certainly, Bill Huggin's magic talking purse with its 'ere 'oo are you? ' has the unmistakable Cockney h-dropping … Tolkien's use of of the dialect of London in The Hobbit; it is more or less intelligible', and amusing, for everyone in Britain knew about Cockney as an English accent … there was a tradition of depicting Cockney speakers in novels. At the same time, Cockney would be amusing in The Hobbit because of the sheer element of surprise: readers do not expect to hear it here.'

Oxford wasn't so 'insular' as you claim (of course as usual - without any proof). And as to:

When, precisely, did Tolkien speak at first hand with lower class Londoners for any length of time?

Why would he need to? One avenue Tolkien would have picked up knowledge of Cockney – is 'books' (as Atherton suggests). Below are examples from a couple of masterpieces:

From Charles Dickens' Oliver Twist:

The Artful Dodger – a pick-pocket (very appropriately ) is named "lummy Jack" (lummy ~ lumme)

From James Joyce's Ulysses (1922):

“God blimey if she aint a clinker.”

Now of course with your philological qualifications (which we would all love to see) – you know better than both Rateliff and Atherton. And because your philological knowledge obviously exceeds Tolkien's when it comes to dialects - is it okay if I refer to you as Professor Morthoron from now on?

Take a look at Tolkien's essay: 'Chaucer as a Philologist: The Reeve's Tale', which was submitted in 1931 – in the same time period of The Hobbit's construction. One definitely comes away with the impression Tolkien knew at the very least – something of Cockney.

And by the way - have you ever listened to Tolkien's own voice recording of 'Roast Mutton'? Can you tell us how Tolkien being so well-acquainted with Mancunian accents having served with the Lancashire Fusiliers – couldn't imitate one?

Perhaps you should re-read Ms. Seth's article and pay particular attention to Note 4. It's certainly in line with Rateliff's and Atherton's assessments. And I'd take their opinions and the uses of Cockney by Dickens and Joyce – way over your opinion and the dubious offering by way of Robb Wilton. Maybe the light-bulb will finally go on. I have a funny feeling though: yer 'ed aint workin like it awt ta !

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Balfrog

Morthoron

How I look forward to your posts – wondering what slurs will ensue and how you'll denigrate me next. Apparently there is 'click-baiting' going on, and Ms. Seth's my 'mistress'. And then supposedly – I'm Ms. Seth herself!


Well, well. Chuckle, chuckle. Please continue with the entertaining nonsense. Your nice and beautiful personality shines fully through, and I'm sure is winning over many admirers!

Back to business. Your last post is again full of self-righteous: 'I know best – and you're ignorant'. Sorry – but the stuff you spew on Tolkien's history is elementary knowledge that I first became aware of some 30 years ago. Of the factual stuff - you told me nothing I didn't already know.

Who are you then but a cipher, Balfrog? You are either Seth or a Seth sycophant incapable of sentient separation from the mother's mottled teat.

In either case you neither post of your own volition, nor do you ever disagree with anything far-fetched from the specious Seth. You not only spam the Barrow-Downs with every article Seth disembogues from her faulty font, you do the exact same thing on the Lotrplaza.com site. You do not post on your own, you do not post to be a part of this forum. You spam, and then argue with anyone who happens to disagree with Priya's Preposterous Pronouncements. You are shilling for Seth, not contributing in any meaningful manner on the sites you encounter. You subvert the spam protocols of the forum. You are an advert.

If I show disdain for your posts it is because they are not your posts, or, worse, they are in fact your posts using a sham name to further your own interests as Seth.

Having seen you spammed yet another article from Seth today, I find it better to recuse myself from further dialogue with you as the surrogate-Seth, before things get truly ugly.

And for the record, Tolkien never mentioned his Trolls spoke Cockney; in fact, in perusing Tolkien's work I can't find him using the term "Cockney" in any manifestation. Never. Ever. The rest is conjecture. Perhaps learned conjecture, but conjecture nonetheless.

I will not reply further.

[Balfrog]

Morthoron


Hmm ... as to your comment below - you haven't looked hard enough:

"And for the record, Tolkien never mentioned his Trolls spoke Cockney; in fact, in perusing Tolkien's work I can't find him using the term "Cockney" in any manifestation. Never. Ever."

Obviously you are unfamiliar with one of Tolkien's works. Take a look below at an extract from Tolkien Studies 5 and my underlining and bolding.

Chaucer as a Philologist:*The Reeve’s Tale*†
J.R.R. TOLKIEN
[Read at a meeting of the Philological Society in Oxford*on Saturday,*16th May,
1931.]


" ... Plowman, where the meaning is “a small egg”. Later this word was especially
associated with London (or Londoners); but as it is never complimentary
in its application, one would naturally suppose that this use did
not develop in London, but in the East of England, which had the closest
connexion with the capital. The word can hardly be true to the dialect of
the “far North”, except as a loan, even apart from the fact that the North
used Scandinavian*egg*for English*eye,*aye.89*But Chaucer quite justly puts
it into the mouth of the Cambridge clerk. He does not wish when he gets
back to college to be called a daff, a cockney—he is, as it were, glossing
his more rustic*daff*with*cockenai, the sort of word he would easily pick up
in Cambridge; and it would be just the sort of criticism that a*testif and
lusty*north-countryman would most resent, to be called a “soft townee”."


It's a shame you're bowing out. From my part – I look forward to engaging in conversation despite your brusque demeanor.

Your seeming obsession with who I am is a little disappointing. Really it has no relevance to the debating material – namely Ms. Seth's literary articles. Whether I am a friend of Ms. Seth's or related to her shouldn't really matter. Frankly I have no interest in who you really are, but I'm kind of intrigued by the way you're fascinated with the:

'Don't you know my name' thing.

I have already stated that I proof-read her articles and also you might well guess I also engage in scholarly debate with her on the merit of her propositions. But what difference does that really make?

Anyhow – there are only c. half a dozen more articles on Ms. Seth's part to come. I had hoped that even if you didn't agree with some of her stuff – you would have understood the originality of her work. And acknowledged it too. And looked forward to the articles to come.

Can you imagine – if what she has written is mainly true – then how you, I & all the rest of Tolkien's fan base have failed to understand a large portion of the plot. How we have all failed to understand the academic foundations of some of the book's most fascinating chapters.

Those thoughts are somewhat humbling!

Perhaps an acknowledgement of how little we really know is too disconcerting and uncomfortable an admission for some of our egos to bear!