Do Balrogs Have Wings?

[the guy who be short]

The text notwithstanding, how come so may people (including those who have since become non-wingers) imagine the Balrog to have wings when they first read this passage?

Where are the statistics to prove this? I imagined a wingless, very dark and almost manlike being nothing like the odd demon-beast creature of the films. Looks like we need yet another poll to determine this mystery.

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by TGWBS

Where are the statistics to prove this?

Anecdotal evidence from a perusal of the various Balrog-wing debates, my dear fellow.

Although I defer to no one's imagination but my own on the issue.

[Folwren]

Asked by The Saucepan Man:
The text notwithstanding, how come so may people (including those who have since become non-wingers) imagine the Balrog to have wings when they first read this passage?

The only reason I did (yeees, I did picture him first with wings) was because a year or two before I'd read the book, I saw an awesomely painted picture by John Howe of the Balrog and Gandalf on the Bridge. His Balrog had wings. The image stuck in my head, though I only saw it once, I think, and when I read it, that's what I pictured.

Even if I am one of those who pictured him first with wings, I still think that Balrogs don't have them.

- Folwren

[Morsul the Dark]

The shadow about it reached out like two vast wings.

like two vast wings
you use like to support your argument why would tolkien say like

but heres the other half of the sentence:

like two vast wings

why use the word two...this implies that the shadow spread out from him in two directions. not in all directions why would they only go in two directions unless they were wings?

[Kuruharan]

…a Balrog with three bottoms.

More speculation. You can't say with certainty based on the text how the wings "must" function.

We can speculate on where the wings would need to be in comparison to the weapons that the Balrog used, specifically the whip. Using a whip well is not as easy as it looks and if the Balrog was lashing back over its shoulder it would necessarily be beating its own wings to shreds (please argue with me on this point). To avoid this it would need to be lashing to the side and down. I don’t have a problem with this. I think this would be the most effective way for the Balrog to use its whip because it was taller than its enemies. Slashing around in large circular motions would whack the largest area and the most enemies as possible. However, this means that the wings would need to be up and out of the way of these motions (unless, of course, the new argument is that the Balrog could not hurt itself with its own weapons). We are back to how this 80-100 foot wingspan could be folded and pass through doors that can be described as “the narrow opening of the door,” can be wedged by broken swords and splinters of wood, and only allows one orc through at a time.

The bottom line is that we can't draw any definitive conclusions about the sizes of various rooms, doorways, chambers, or wingspans, so arguments which claim that "the Balrog couldn't fit in there if it had wings" just don't hold water.

But we can (and have) made reasonable assumptions that tend to weigh heavily against massive wings.

I tend to place the greater value on instinctive reader reaction (my own in particular) than I do on cold logical analysis after the event.

Killjoy.

why use the word two...this implies that the shadow spread out from him in two directions. not in all directions why would they only go in two directions unless they were wings?

Because the expression “like one vast wing” would be exceedingly odd.

[Morsul the Dark]

yes well like i estimated withn the help of Keeper ofDolGuldur's statement we can assume a balrog at 15 feet tall so the balrogs wingspan is about half of your 80-100ft span.

yes but couldn't tolkien have easily said "like wings" which would allow more argument that the smoke loomed about him...in fact why use the wing analogy at all why not say "The smoke loomed about the greats beast"

and as we see the bal rog even with wings could use a whip in FOTR....in not saying the movie should be a basis of argument but it is kind of like a demonstration to show it is possible.

through doors that can be described as “the narrow opening of the door,” can be wedged by broken swords and splinters of wood, and only allows one orc through at a time.

but then we are saying a balrog is not nearly as big as we originally thought even without wings balrog isnt the smallest guy around remember he basicly tore the door to bits with a counterspell.(I believe gandalf calls it that) so who's to say he didn't blow a huge hole in the wall he could fit through

Edit:Touche davem however I was more drawing from the point that "two" wings implies the smoke went only in two directions have you ever seen smoke go only in two direction no it swirls around everywhere

[Kuruharan]

...a Balrog with three bottoms.

and as we see the bal rog even with wings could use a whip in FOTR....in not saying the movie should be a basis of argument but it is kind of like a demonstration to show it is possible.

I am going to attempt to put this as mildly as I can. Reality goes out the window when you move into the realm of digital graphics. (On the other hand, what are we talking about here...)

That was not a demonstration of anything except the skill of the digital artists.

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

I tend to place the greater value on instinctive reader reaction (my own in particular) than I do on cold logical analysis after the event.

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

Killjoy.

Au contraire. It is the application of cold logic which risks killing the joy of enchantment.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Morsul

but heres the other half of the sentence:

like two vast wings

why use the word two...this implies that the shadow spread out from him in two directions. not in all directions why would they only go in two directions unless they were wings?

What has it got in its pocketses? he cried. The light in his eyes was like a green flame as he sped back to murder the hobbit and recover his 'precious'.

Why would Tolkien say the light in Gollum's eyes was like 'green flame' unless Gollum's eyes really were on fire?

Frodo sat silent and motionless. Fear seemed to stretch out a vast hand, like a dark cloud rising in the East and looming up to engulf him. 'This ring!' he stammered. 'How, how on earth did it come to me?'

Why would Tolkien say that 'Fear' was 'like a dark cloud rising in the east' unless Frodo's fear actually caused a dark cloud to form?

'So he journeyed by night up into the highlands, and he found a little cave out of which the dark stream ran; and he wormed his way like a maggot into the heart of the hills, and vanished out of all knowledge.

Why would Tolkien say Gollum was 'like a maggot' at that point unless he really had turned into a maggot?

'Me, sir!' cried Sam, springing up like a dog invited for a walk. 'Me go and see Elves and all! Hooray!' he shouted, and then burst into tears.

Why would Tolkien say Sam sprang up 'like a dog' unless Sam actually became a canine at that point & started barking & wagging his tail?

Presently Sam appeared, trotting quickly and breathing hard; his heavy pack was hoisted high on his shoulders, and he had put on his head a tall shapeless felt bag, which he called a hat. In the gloom he looked very much like a dwarf.

Why would Tolkien say Sam looked like a dwarf if...

Can you see where I'm going with this, 'cos I could go on all night?

The road wound away before them like a piece of string.

Which may answer the old question - How long is a piece of string? It goes ever on....

[the guy who be short]

To further capitalise on the use of the word "like" for the Anti-Wing camp...

The sentence includes a simile. A simile compares one thing to a different thing.

For example, one can say "Tom leapt like a fox." That is okay. Tom's leap is compared to that of a fox.

One cannot say "Tom leapt like a Tom." It doesn't make sense. You can't compare something to itself, or it's just a description and the word "like" becomes redundant.