Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
07-16-2004, 02:57 AM | #41 | ||
Corpus Cacophonous
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: A green and pleasant land
Posts: 8,390
|
<-- A good brew
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Do you mind? I'm busy doing the fishstick. It's a very delicate state of mind! Last edited by The Saucepan Man; 07-16-2004 at 06:59 AM. |
||
07-16-2004, 05:40 AM | #42 |
Laconic Loreman
|
Hobbits uneasy to move.
It's clear hobbits don't like to be told what to do (especially if it's some outsider/foreigner). For awhile this act of "getting rid" of the black riders works, but Hobbits were no strength for the evil that was to become. Then again, it only took a few Hobbits to challenge the ruffians, until the whole Shire went into revolt. That is one example of Hobbits not liking to be bossed around. The other two have been discussed, with the Gaffer and Farmer Maggot. I believe the reason the Hobbits are like this, would be because as discussed in earlier chapters Hobbits didn't really have any rules, and they hated rules. They hate rules, they hate being told what to do, especially if it is some stranger foreigner.
|
07-16-2004, 07:09 AM | #43 | |||
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
|
Another interesting thing in this chapter is Sam's 'oath':
Quote:
Sam has, effectively, sworn an oath to serve Frodo, even unto death. He has also, more importantly, told Frodo that he has sworn it. In part, this accounts for his statement: 'I know we are to take a long road, into darkness; but I know I can't turn back.' Among other examples of 'oath breaking he looks at is Gandalf's - Gandalf has promised Frodo he will return to accompany him, but he doesn't turn up. But is this really a case of 'oath breaking - well Gandalf seems to think it is: Quote:
So, Sam has sworn his oath to serve Frodo, to the Elves, & then declared it to Frodo. Hence his shock & horror at discovering Frodo has set out from Parth Galen without him, & later, outside Cirith Ungol, when he agonises over whether to take the Ring or stay with his master,is not simply down to love for Frodo, but also because if Frodo does go alone, & then if Sam leaves him 'all alone on top of mountains, Sam will be an oath breaker. From that moment at Woodhall Sam has bound himself to stay with Frodo till the end. Once Frodo accepts his oath: Quote:
(Makes you wonder whether that's why Sam, in the end, follows Frodo into the West.) |
|||
07-16-2004, 04:13 PM | #44 | |
Cryptic Aura
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 5,994
|
In the beginning was the word ...
davem,
A very fine post about the value of one's word and the comitatus and a point well worth making here. Quote:
However, the value of one's oath is a pervasive value in early literatures and cultures. It was one reason why divorce was unthinkable--how could one withdraw one's oath. Poor Henry. The theme of the rash oath in many early stories owes its force to the very serious regard in which a person's word was held. This I think can be related to a high degree of respect for language. Those who respect language do not use it lightly or thoughtlessly. (This does not preclude comedy of course.) Consider, for example, the story of Jephthah in Judges (from the Bible). Jephthah vows to the Lord that he willl offer as a burnt offering to the Lord what or whoever comes through his door if the Lord will grant him victory in battle. Jephthah wins the battle, he returns home, and who walks through his door first but his only child, a daughter. Abraham was not forced to keep his word, but Jephthah was. We might consider also, when we discuss the chapters which deal with Rohan, Eowyn's promise to act as protector of her people.
__________________
I’ll sing his roots off. I’ll sing a wind up and blow leaf and branch away. |
|
07-16-2004, 06:03 PM | #45 | |
Shade of Carn Dûm
|
Further evidence of such beliefs in keeping an oath shown in the Silmarillion:
Quote:
__________________
"'Eldest, that's what I am... Tom remembers the first raindrop and the first acorn... He knew the dark under the stars when it was fearless - before the Dark Lord came from Outside.'" |
|
07-17-2004, 02:19 AM | #46 | ||
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
|
Quote:
I think there was more to it for Sam, he did feel he had some task to do, involving Frodo's task, but in a sense this is why he swears the oath, just as marriage partners swear their vow because they feel that they should be 'one flesh'. The fact that Sam swears his 'oath of fealty' is confirmation that, for him, there was 'more to it'. It is difficcult for many of us today to understand the nature of oath taking - we tend to see it as simply a legally binding contract, as BB says. It wasn't. It ws a commitment to a Lord, or cause, until death, made because the individual felt that that cause was worth dying for. The theme of oaths & oath breaking runs right through the Legendarium, as you point out. All the hobbits swear an oath - Sam first, to Frodo, Merry to Theoden, Pippin to Denethor, Frodo to the Council. Sam's oath taking can be missed, because it takes place in a conversation over breakfast, but its as sacred & binding as the oaths sworn by the other three. Gollum also swears his oath - & that's perhaps the most interesting example, as, first, he won't simply break it, & second, it binds him, & brings his death when he tries to stick to the letter of it but avoid the spirit of it. When Aragorn confronts the oath breakers it interesting that he doesn't simply 'forgive' them, he calls on them to fulfil the oath they swore. I don't think that we're simply dealing with the necessity of war here, Aragorn needing allies. My interpretation is that once sworn, the oath must be fulfilled before they can be freed. It can't simply be discarded, by them or by the heir of Isildur. In this context its interesting that Elrond tries to disuade the Fellowship from swearing a binding oath: Quote:
Eowyn is an oath breaker, & she nearly dies as a consequence, but she survives, probably because she was backed into a corner, & didn't swear the oath freely. Yet a sworn oath cannot be ignored, & has consequences - even Gollum knows that. I can't help wondering if part of the reason for her desire for death was bound up with this sense of having broken her oath to her Lord & people, & also whether her subsequent loss of hope & despair (till cured by Faramir) is down to her sense of betrayal. She goes to war as 'Dernhelm' & will die in battle as Dernhelm, if it comes to that - not as Eowyn. The oath sworn by Feanor's sons is of the same kind - they may not have trully wanted to swear it, but once sworn, it binds them. Even at the end, the last two will kill & die in attempting to fulfill it, when they'd rather forget all about it. I suspect Elrond's attempt to disuade the members of the Fellowship from swearing an oath of service may be due to his personal experience - he, more than most in Middle earth, knows the power of oaths. |
||
07-17-2004, 07:18 AM | #47 |
Gibbering Gibbet
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Beyond cloud nine
Posts: 1,844
|
On Sam, oaths, and the Nazgul
This discussion of Sam's 'oath' brings out yet another echo that exists between the Nazgul and the hobbits: the Ringwraiths are bound to their Lord in a manner that would seem to be the perversion of the ideal embodied by the bond of Sam and Frodo. The Nazgul are bound to their Lord by the strongest of all 'oaths' -- the power of the Ring. In this respect I would argue that Sam's ability to break his oath to Frodo sets him apart from the Nazgul insofar as their 'oath' is not freely given at all (so far as we know -- either that or it was freely given but they subsequently lost the ability to forswear).
So, apparently, blindly following an oath, or making one that cannot be broken (like the Nazgul) is problematic at best, evil at worst. Interestingly, among the Anglo-Saxons, a Lord would give richly carved armbands of gold in return for oaths of fealty. This is why the vassal would refer to his lord as his "ring-giver", since these 'rings' would stand as a sign of both the pledge made by the vassal and the recognition and protection by the lord. Sauron is an evil ring-giver* because he does so to enslave; Sam is a good ring-acceptor because he does so for the love of his lord, even though it is in contravention of his oath (as he interprets that oath). * In at least one dictionary of Anglo-Saxon idiom, I have seen a generous lord referred to as "ringas-theoden" (ringas=rings, theoden=prince/king) which was subsequently translated as "lord of the rings"!!!!! Last edited by Fordim Hedgethistle; 07-17-2004 at 07:25 AM. |
07-17-2004, 11:00 AM | #48 |
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
|
I do wonder about the significance of finger rings, as opposed to arm rings. There is, perhaps, some 'marriage' symbolism - making the two 'one flesh', binding them forever. In the British Coronation service the Monarch is given a ring, symbolic of his/her 'marriage' to the people. Perhaps there's something of the same going on with the Rings of power. Could we think in terms of Galadriel being 'wedded' to her realm & people, Elrond in a similar position - & Gandalf? (yet Gandalf, as he tells Denethor, is a 'steward').
If the wedding ring symbolises the union of two people into one flesh, do the Rings Sauron gives symbolise the same thing, bind his servants to him in the same way? But then, what is the significance of his making & bestowing the One on himself? Marriage to himself, producing a sort of incestuous, sterile union with himself - self love pushed to the ultimate extreme? All the other rings are given out, bestowed on others, even the elven rings - Celebrimbor gives them to Gil galad, Galadriel & Cirdan, but Sauron makes the one for himself & keeps it, in a sense binding himself to himself, closing himself off from external contact. Perhaps this is why the One obsesses any who take it up, & turns them in on themselves. So, Gandalf warns Frodo never to put it on. Wild thought - the Ring turns its wearer invisible - symbolising their own self obsession, their (final) inability to be aware of anyone but themself. |
07-17-2004, 01:08 PM | #49 |
Princess of Skwerlz
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: where the Sea is eastwards (WtR: 6060 miles)
Posts: 7,500
|
Fordim, davem, what a fascinating train of thought! Thanks for your insights on the significance of oaths as found in this passage (and elsewhere) - I hadn't thought of Sam's committment as an oath! The connection to AS 'ringas-theoden' is intriguing, and the idea of the One Ring as a symbol of self-love is definitely worth pondering! There's more to be found in this chapter than one thinks at first reading, isn't there?!
__________________
'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...' |
07-17-2004, 06:04 PM | #50 |
Hungry Ghoul
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,719
|
I've posted some ring 'n rule stuff inspired by this thread's latest posts here: http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showthr...751#post336751
|
07-17-2004, 09:37 PM | #51 | |||
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
|
Davem wrote:
Quote:
It's certainly true that oaths are a major theme within the Legendarium as a whole; Feanor's oath motivates most of the Silmarillion. Tolkien's other great oath-story, I've always thought, is Beren and Luthien. The obvious oath there is Beren's to Thingol. For a passage with a great deal of bearing on the whole matter of oaths, see the debate of Beren with Luthien in the Lay of Leithien in HoMe III, where Luthien urges Beren to forget his oath and he refuses. There are other oaths here as well - Gorlim's to Barahir (which is broken), Thingol's to Luthien (which is nominally kept but twisted in spirit), and Finrod's to Beren (which is fulfilled, resulting in the death of Finrod). This probably isn't the place to enter into a discussion of those oaths, but it's an interesting story to consider in connection with the oaths of LotR. Fordim wrote: Quote:
Davem wrote: Quote:
On a far lighter note, I was flipping through Letters the other day and remembered an anecdote of Tolkien's with some connection to this chapter. In 1958 he attended a "Hobbit Dinner" in Holland, held by a Dutch bookseller. One of the items on the menu was a mushroom soup. Apparently, by way of alluding to the book and as they did not know "all the names of the English vermins", they called it "Maggot Soup". Not profound, I know, but it does make me wonder whether any squeamish hobbits preferred not to eat the mushrooms from our good farmer's fields. |
|||
07-18-2004, 12:14 AM | #52 | |||
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Where you want me to be
Posts: 1,036
|
Aiwendil wrote:
Quote:
In the case that an oath has been broken, there has usually been retribution for the oath-breaker; the examples I can think of are Gollum falling into Mount Doom, the sons of Ulfang being slain after their treachery in the Battle of Unnumbered Tears and the Dead Men of Dunharrow becoming like that because they didn't fulfill their oath to fight for Isildur. Fordim wrote: Quote:
Quote:
However, I concede that oaths made for the 'right' reasons can still lead to a bad end- consider Gorlim's betrayal of Barahir and his band. In every case of oath-breaking we see that it is always out of the desire for something- in Gorlim's case it is his desire to see his wife, for Gollum it is lust for the Ring and for the Easterlings who betrayed Caranthir it is a desire for power. We have seen that an oath-maker must either fulfill their oath, die trying to fulfill it, or break it and suffer the torment. Frodo has sworn to destroy the Ring and he must do that or else die trying. So while oaths may be a good thing, following them blindly (as Fordim said), does lead to problems and certainly in Feanor's case, estrangement and evil.
__________________
Et Eärello Endorenna utúlien. Sinome maruvan ar Hildinyar tenn' Ambar-metta. Last edited by Fingolfin II; 07-18-2004 at 12:58 AM. |
|||
07-18-2004, 01:37 AM | #53 | |||
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
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
07-18-2004, 10:13 AM | #54 |
Princess of Skwerlz
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: where the Sea is eastwards (WtR: 6060 miles)
Posts: 7,500
|
This highly interesting discussion on oaths and oath-breaking is worth its own thread! Though the examples are interesting and enlightening, we don't want to get too far ahead of the current chapter discussion or too far off-tangent in the Legendarium. Who would like to begin a new thread about it on the Books main forum?
__________________
'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...' |
04-30-2007, 12:22 PM | #55 |
Doubting Dwimmerlaik
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Heaven's basement
Posts: 2,466
|
Excellent thread! Who'd have thunk it that a fungal shortcut would have led down such an intellectual path. Anyway...
What always got me in this and the previous chapter, after multiple readings, was the lack of success that the Nazgul have in (1) finding Frodo and the Ring and (2) finding any information about the same. The Witch-King, who later will ride through the Gate at Minas Tirith, who will face Gandalf and live , fails. These same creatures are put off by the Gaffer and Farmer Maggot. Sure, there's a power in the Shire, and methinks that it's food related (note how unwraith-like the hobbits are in their girth), but really, could Maggot and hounds hold back even the least of the Nine? That got me to thinking. Why doesn't Sauron have his minions ride roughshod over the Shirefolk, having them do all kinds of nasty things to get information instead of just promising gold and spurring a horse? What's to fear, that an inhabitant of the Shire will rise up and slay the Witch-King? Something else was going on. Part of the restraint is for the story, as noted, to keep up the suspense. We get to see hints and glimpses of what these Black Riders are or may be. If the Black Rider slew the Gaffer, then there would be no doubt, and the story would change - I like when I am practically begging the characters for information, not when it's all spelled out on the first page ala Brian Herbert of the newer Dune series fame. But another reason may be assumed: Did Sauron command his servants to be as discrete and, dare I say, circumspect, as possible as not to tip off Saruman? The fallen Wizard sought the Ring as well; this Sauron must have known or at least assumed. Saruman already had dealings in the Shire and so had agents about - or as least as close as the Rangers would permit. Did Sauron, judging all others by his own lust and fear, think that with the Nazgul making a stir that they would provide Saruman with information that would make *his* finding of the Ring more possible? And, on another note, just how big were Farmer Maggot's dogs? Were they hobbit or human scale?
__________________
There is naught that you can do, other than to resist, with hope or without it.
|
02-02-2008, 09:17 AM | #56 | ||
Princess of Skwerlz
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: where the Sea is eastwards (WtR: 6060 miles)
Posts: 7,500
|
This chapter is shorter than the first three, and quite transitional. I already mentioned the safe havens in my introductory post, so I shall do my best to bring out new aspects without being repetitive.
Tolkien's humorous lines are often almost hidden; this time I took note of the exchange between Pippin and Frodo on the first page, with the former saying a question was important, and Frodo answering, "In that case I am sure Gildor would have refused to explain it." Go not to the Elves indeed! I don't remember - did we discuss the question of the significance of the sniffing Nazgul? I'm also amused over the end of that brief conversation: Quote:
The "Ho! Ho! Ho!" poem is used in the movie, in an inn scene, though the words actually do not fit that context. They seem to be custom-made for the situation in which the three Hobbits find themselves at that moment. We have two cases of misleading identification of friends as foes - Frodo's perception of Farmer Maggot, and Merry's figure as seen in the fog. That provides suspense, especially for first-time readers. The Hobbit surname 'Puddifoot' reminds me of C. S. Lewis' Marsh-wiggle in the Narnia books. By the way, the Reader's Companion mentions a comment written by Tolkien in a draft for a letter (Letters #297) concerning the relationship between Sam and Frodo: Quote:
__________________
'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...' |
||
02-02-2008, 11:05 AM | #57 | |||
A Voice That Gainsayeth
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: In that far land beyond the Sea
Posts: 7,431
|
I must say this chapter is just great and I always have the urge to go on a trip when reading this one (the same with the previous chapter - though there it has to be a nightly trip, while this time it has to be "through ").
Concerning the dialogue in this chapter, I must agree with you, Esty, that it is great and amusing from beginning to the end - in fact, this chapter is full of jokes, even the final revelation of Merry as the mysterious rider is a heart-lifting joke. The whole conversation between Pippin and Frodo at the beginning is very funny, it's one of the funniest parts of the book I remember. Another interesting quote is Farmer Maggot's Quote:
Quote:
And now the last thing that I immediately noted down "You have to ask this one when you post up there". Please follow. Quote:
__________________
"Should the story say 'he ate bread,' the dramatic producer can only show 'a piece of bread' according to his taste or fancy, but the hearer of the story will think of bread in general and picture it in some form of his own." -On Fairy-Stories |
|||
02-02-2008, 01:45 PM | #58 |
Princess of Skwerlz
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: where the Sea is eastwards (WtR: 6060 miles)
Posts: 7,500
|
You know what, Legate? I'd never noticed this passage in detail before, but this time when I read it I started counting as well!! I looked at the sentence more closely and deducted from it that the Maggots have more than two sons. After all, "his three daughters" denotes that that's all of them, while "two of Maggot's sons" implies that there are more. Depending on whether it was "one or two" other Hobbits (farmhands, I would guess) that would mean two or three more sons. Considering the size of Hobbit families, seven or eight children is not improbable. The uncertainty whether the people were farmhands or (grown-up) children could have easily come from the bewildering crowd that was there all at once.
Darn, now that we've explained the possibilities, we can't use this as a quiz question!
__________________
'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...' |
02-02-2008, 02:08 PM | #59 |
A Voice That Gainsayeth
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: In that far land beyond the Sea
Posts: 7,431
|
Ah, good spot with the sons. That would explain a lot.
But, anyway, when I read the part again it is somewhat hazy. The author must have known what he's writing. Why count up all the people so carefully when in the end the author skips the arrival of the rest? It looks like there is something missing at least. We are told what the sons did, what the daughters did, what Mrs. Maggot did, what the farmhands did, and then we are told that "all fourteen", as if their identities were something already known to us, sat down to the table. Yet we know only about eleven or twelve of them. You know what I mean? It is as if I said "In the room there was an old woman sewing, two boys fighting and then all six of them greeted me." Yes, in the Maggots' case we can at least deduce, as you did, that the missing ones could have been Maggot's sons - but anyway, it's odd at least. Surely not everyone will read this... and if necessary, I can always edit the post
__________________
"Should the story say 'he ate bread,' the dramatic producer can only show 'a piece of bread' according to his taste or fancy, but the hearer of the story will think of bread in general and picture it in some form of his own." -On Fairy-Stories |
02-02-2008, 02:20 PM | #60 |
Princess of Skwerlz
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: where the Sea is eastwards (WtR: 6060 miles)
Posts: 7,500
|
Tolkien also mentions the Maggot family in one of his other works - the poem "Tom Goes Boating", in The Adventures of Tom Bombadil. Maggot approaches Tom with his pony cart and they greet each other with the humorous contempt that only good friends can express. Tom calls Maggot "Muddy-feet", which sounds very similar to "Puddifoot". Besides reading that the two of them sat up long exchanging news of the area and the wide world, we also find that the daughters danced the Springle-ring - as far as I know, the only time aside from Bilbo's Birthday Party where that dance is mentioned.
__________________
'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...' |
02-02-2008, 02:32 PM | #61 |
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
|
The recent book Ring of Words has an entry for 'Springle-ring'. It states that the Oxford English Dictionary has no entry for Springle-ring, but it does mention an 18-19th century word 'springle' meaning ' a young man, youth or stripling'. They mention it could be a learned joke as 'springle/springald' has a meaning similar to 'halfling' - which is a Northern English/Scots word meaning 'one not fully grown; about the age of 15.'
|
02-03-2008, 02:13 PM | #62 | ||
Shady She-Penguin
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In a far land beyond the Sea
Posts: 8,093
|
Fourteen, you say? Frodo, Sam & Pippin + Mr & Mrs Maggot + three daughters + two sons + one farmhand + three dogs. Makes sense, doesn't it?
A bit more seriously though, I always liked this chapter as well. While other posters on this thread have mainly considered it a humorous chapter, I must say I think it is partly one of the scariest in the book. I mean, look at these quotes: Quote:
Quote:
Also, the episode of Merry The Black Rider is very scary. I remember when my father read LotR aloud to me and my little sister when we were about 6 and 4 years old and that passage was simply horror. I was sure the Black Riders had finally found them and I was so relieved when it turned out that the rider was Merry. The passage is very impressive - especially as when something is read aloud to you, you can't even accidentally see the next phrases that reveal the truth.
__________________
Like the stars chase the sun, over the glowing hill I will conquer Blood is running deep, some things never sleep Double Fenris
|
||
02-03-2008, 02:31 PM | #63 | ||||
A Voice That Gainsayeth
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: In that far land beyond the Sea
Posts: 7,431
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"Should the story say 'he ate bread,' the dramatic producer can only show 'a piece of bread' according to his taste or fancy, but the hearer of the story will think of bread in general and picture it in some form of his own." -On Fairy-Stories |
||||
02-03-2008, 02:50 PM | #64 | ||
Shady She-Penguin
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In a far land beyond the Sea
Posts: 8,093
|
Quote:
Quote:
I don't know, I might have seen the Bakshi movie before being introduced to the books themselves. But early memories of the Bakshi movie might explain something here. I rewatched the Bakshi movie some years ago and while I mostly thought it was ridiculous, the Black Riders in the beginning (before Weathertop) were very creepy - creepy enough to force me to joke about them in order to maintain my calm . Also, it is weird, but those quotes I posted are much more chill-causing in Finnish. When I looked them up from my English LotR they seemed somewhat... lame. Too ordinary words and phrasings, or something like that. At times the Finnish translation of the LotR succeeds in being more impressive than the original (gasp! ), and I think this is one of the few occasions.
__________________
Like the stars chase the sun, over the glowing hill I will conquer Blood is running deep, some things never sleep Double Fenris
|
||
02-03-2008, 03:05 PM | #65 | ||
A Voice That Gainsayeth
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: In that far land beyond the Sea
Posts: 7,431
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"Should the story say 'he ate bread,' the dramatic producer can only show 'a piece of bread' according to his taste or fancy, but the hearer of the story will think of bread in general and picture it in some form of his own." -On Fairy-Stories |
||
02-25-2008, 05:38 PM | #66 |
Sage & Onions
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Britain
Posts: 893
|
Landscape and mood
Hi all,
who would have though so much would come out of a Short cut to Mushrooms! I noticed that the landscape plays a part in the fear and unease felt in his chapter. The short cut rapidly leads into thickets and undergrowth and it starts raining. The journey turns arduous and frustrating (to say nothing of the regret at missing the 'Golden Perch'). At the same time the Hobbits are (though we don't fully realise it on first read) being hunted down by the Nazgul and in serious danger of thir lives. Of course the same landscape effect is more apparent later on in the Old Forest, Trollshaws and of course Mordor amongst others. The river-mist is another device that ceratinly heightens tension. On minor points, it seems that the elves use bent living branches to make sleeping bowers. This is exactly the same technique that chimpanzees use! When I first read this chapter I remember being confused as to whether Farmer Maggot was a Hobbit or one of the Big Folk for some reason. Perhaps its just difficult imagining hobbit-sized farming, surely it would be difficult for them to handle much of the livestock? I'm thinking bulls here but also pigs which can grow very big and aggressive, though we know there was bacon! Did the hobbits breed especially small varieties of animal perhaps, whereas our farmers have gnerally bred for bigger individuals. This can be effective, for example the miniature Shetland ponies etc. I guess the dogs were a reasonable size in order to terrify young Frodo so! Note that Maggot highlights an increase in the number of 'outsiders' coming north up the Brandywine, again refugees or Saruman's spies? Also, regardless of their localism (partly in jest maybe), the Maggotses seem some of the most cosmopolitan Hobbits, Maggot knows Tom of course and has to be warned by his Mrs to avoid arguing with foreigners! On the mushrooms themselves, I hope they were of a wide variety of species It's uncommon now in Britain, but on the continent many different types of wild mushroom species are gathered for food, and very delicious many of them are! I believe in rural France you can take them to the local pharmacist for identification in case you get mixed up with poisonous species.
__________________
Rumil of Coedhirion |
01-03-2014, 04:04 PM | #67 | |
Stormdancer of Doom
|
More later, but in the midst of all the Maggot-Bombadil nostalgia, here is my favorite part from Bombadil Goes Boating:
Quote:
__________________
...down to the water to see the elves dance and sing upon the midsummer's eve. |
|
09-26-2016, 05:28 AM | #68 | |
Shady She-Penguin
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In a far land beyond the Sea
Posts: 8,093
|
A Short Cut to Mushrooms! I love this chapter. I love Frodo and Pippin's banter here, and the skillful juxtaposition of further exploration of Hobbit culture and our protagonists with the increasing dread of the Black Riders.
The Black Riders are blood curdlingly creepy in this chapter. I don't have the book with me in English at the moment (Legate has my copy ) but the passage where the Hobbits hear the Nazgûl's cry ust be one of the scariest things Tolkien ever wrote. EDIT: Well I just scrolled though this thread and found my own post from 2008 where I posted the quotes, so: Quote:
Frodo is positively afraid of the Black Riders as he should be, yet with gentle humour, Tolkien introduces us with another figure Frodo dreads: the Farmer Maggot. Even with Black Riders hunting you, an angry farmer and his angry dogs can genuinely frighten you. Of course, Farmer Maggot turns out to be a firend, and later in the book we learn even more interesting things about him. I quite love the ending of this chapter too - Tolkien is toying with us a bit more here. A reader might be tricked alongside with Frodo, Pippin and Sam to think Merry is a Black Rider. I recall very vividly when my dad read this part aloud to me and my sister and how the dread I felt when I thought the Black Riders had finally caught up with them - only to learn it was Merry. Well, I'm sure my dad enjoyed making the passage sound as menacing as possible... (And of course, we soon learn the Nazgûl are indeed not far behind.) I guess I never thought of it that way, but the great thing about this chapter is the beautiful interplay between horror and humour - neither of which is usually brought up when dicussing Tolkien's merits or genres. Tolkien keeps us on the edge with constant reminders of the pursuit, bringing up creepier and creepier details about the Black Riders. Yet there are balancing moments of levity - Tolkien makes fun of his protagonists, of Hobbits in general, and ultimately of us readers. Yeah, it's a wonderful chapter.
__________________
Like the stars chase the sun, over the glowing hill I will conquer Blood is running deep, some things never sleep Double Fenris
Last edited by Thinlómien; 09-26-2016 at 05:44 AM. |
|
09-26-2016, 07:52 AM | #69 |
A Voice That Gainsayeth
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: In that far land beyond the Sea
Posts: 7,431
|
It is a nice chapter, this. The "slow change of scenery" is quite interesting; if the previous chapter was about sunny days, and autumn, but still with some green; dry trek through the hills with some wind, and ending in Elvish twilight under the stars, this chapter goes from clouds on the horizon to overcast and wet and drizzle and mud and bushes and nightfall literally choking with fog (incidentally, it is amazing how Tolkien manages to convey the feel-once again, by for example mentioning Merry's scarf). The chapter is, in fact, about as vivid in its description of the land and weather as the previous one (and that is one of the things I love about LotR the most), only it is much less pleasant setting.
What is pleasant here is the character of Farmer Maggot. His honest, welcoming attitude is heartwarming after the awful feeling of Riders all over the place. Incidentally, I have noticed that however small her role might seem, Mrs. Maggot is also quite well sketched-out here, she even has lines (!), and you can get a pretty good feel of what kind of a person she was. She is also really nice and objectively, not any less important than Mr. Maggot. Otherwise, yet again I was disturbed and reminded of the Beorn episode when I felt that Wizards and the narrator of this piece count differently than normal people. I see I had posted about this here during the last re-read only a couple of posts above. It's about the number of people sitting at the table, of course. Mr. Maggot, Mrs. Maggot, three visitors, five young Maggots and "one or two" farmhands don't make fourteen. So apparently the only missing thing in this chapter is Black Riders setting the house on fire and singing "Fifteen birds around the table". Ad Black Riders and their voices: I remembered one thing regarding the "words in that cry", I recall that I once wondered what language that was - Black Speech? Or something else? I think, personally, it is better to just leave that question open (it is much scarier that way), but just mentioning.
__________________
"Should the story say 'he ate bread,' the dramatic producer can only show 'a piece of bread' according to his taste or fancy, but the hearer of the story will think of bread in general and picture it in some form of his own." -On Fairy-Stories |
09-27-2016, 06:12 PM | #70 | ||
Laconic Loreman
|
It was more prevalent in Three is Company, but you also see in this chapter the idea of trees providing shelter and protection. Trees provide cover for the hobbits when hiding from the Nazgul. Provided a place for Frodo to sleep:
Quote:
Quote:
This is a rather fun and necessary chapter too. I think critics consider this to be slow-moving, here we are 100 pages in to the story and Frodo's still in the Shire! However, Sauron's most dangerous servants have penetrated the Shire and remain as an almost constant threat. They just missed Frodo at Bag End, and they just missed him at Maggot's. I believe it's Ursula K. LeGuin who commented about the Lord of the Rings being like a roller coaster. You have moments of high suspense, intensity and action, but you also need the moments of respite and relaxation. You need parts likes Maggot's farm in the story, where it's important for the characters (and readers) to have a respite from danger and doom. I also agree with Lommy about the "wail" of the Nazgul...the brief description is unsettling and scary. "cry of some evil and lonely creature," it's a statement about evil also being lonely. There are 9 Nazgul, bound together, but they aren't bound together in an oath of friendship, it's an oath to an object. They are bound together by the Ring. In contrast you have Sam who makes an oath to follow Frodo wherever he may go. And while the Fellowship makes no sworn oath, it is in friendship that binds good together.
__________________
Fenris Penguin
|
||
07-22-2018, 12:22 PM | #71 |
Dead Serious
|
At the end of "Three is Company," Frodo is pressed by Gildor to take companions with him; at the start of this chapter, we discover the Elves were also pressuring Sam to do the same.
What about Pippin? Pippin doesn't tell us whether or not the Elves said anything to him about continuing with Frodo, and he--still in Conspiracy As-Yet-Unmaksed mode--isn't necessarily going to, but is it possible that the Elves DID say something to him? Three things seem possible: 1. The Elves said nothing to Pippin because, somehow, being Elves, they know that Frodo is leaving the Shire and they know Sam is his companion and they know that Pippin (as yet, as we know) is not. So they only talk to Frodo's known companion, to stay his companion. OR they don't say anything to Pippin because they discern the difference in character and relationship-to-Frodo between him and Sam. 2. The Elves *do* say something similar to Pippin, but Pippin keeps it under his hat because of the Conspiracy. 3. The Elves say something to Pippin about NOT going. This is the most unlikely of the three, given that he would have ample opportunity to think back on this regretfully after his blunder with the palantír, but it would be interestingly consistent with Elrond's advice in Rivendell to have discouraged the young (not-yet-of-age) hobbit from continuing on, and it would be even more likely that Pippin WOULDN'T mention it, both because of the Conspiracy and also later when the Conspiracy is unmasked. Certainly, 1 or 2 seems more likely (I lean towards 2), but 3 makes good head-canon fanfic and fits Pippin's story.
__________________
I prefer history, true or feigned.
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|