The Hobbit - Chapter 07 - Queer Lodgings

[JennyHallu]

Some bears, such as the Panda bear, are almost exclusively herbivorous. The polar bear, however is exclusively a hunter. All bears, however, are classified as carnivores.

The average size of these bears is difficult to pinpoint, because it seems to depend greatly on the food sources available. The island grizzlies of Alaska (Kodiak and Admiralty) are considered the largest land carnivores in the world, and live on a diet of fish and other rich food. The inland animals are smaller by some 30%.

...

Brown bears are technically carnivores, but in practice most of their diet consists of plant matter such as sedges, grasses, bulbs, seeds, berries, and roots. They will also eat insects, fish, and small mammals. Some of these bears have even developed predatory practices on large animals, including moose, caribou, and elk.

There is a species of bear, the sloth bear, whose diet consists almost exclusively of termites.


I'm getting all of this information from http://www.bears.org

[Thinlómien]

I guess Anduin Vales is not such a harsh place like Alaska, more like Finland or probably nicer, so the bears there could survive as vegetarians (especially if they were sometimes humans).

[JennyHallu]

I was thinking more that the size of Beorn the bear indicated that there was probably fish in his diet, akin to Kodiac bears, especially since that is one animal he never talks to, and it's also a very common meat supplement to American bears...(we do have a lot more bears, and bigger ones) And the ultra harsh Alaskan climate is largely myth...look at a world atlas, and compare the latitude of Alaska to that of Norway, Sweden, and Finland. The climate is probably much the same. Sorry, Lommy, but compared to all the Finns here, I'm a spoiled southerner...look at Georgia (the American state, sorry HI) and see how huge the difference is.

[Thinlómien]

But there's the Golf stream in North Europe which makes Scandinavia's climate inhabitable for humans. As far as I know, there's no such stream near Alaska.

I think that Beorn was something like Kodiac bear, too, because brown bears (which live in Finland) are relatively small for bears. But the quote said he ate no animals and fish are animals too, aren't they? So maybe he ate meat in bear form. Or then Tolkien just didn't use the word 'animal' for all animals but just for birds and mammals?

EDIT: I wouldn't maybe use the term 'wild animal' for a fish, though!

[JennyHallu]

Yeah, I was only thinking he might eat fish in bear form.

Alaska's climate isn't warm, but temperatures run at about 60-80 degrees fahrenheit in summer, depending on where you are. It is a huge state, and a lot of it is fairly warm...however I'm not familiar with the climate in Finland. From some quick reading I just did on the internet they look comparable, but I'm converting the Celsius to Fahrenheit fairly roughly in my head. Here's a link to some basic info on Alaskan weather...

And then we'd better get back on topic.

[Thinlómien]

That summer temperature sounds quite like Finland. And now to the topic.

-----thinking of something meaningful to write--------------------------------------------------

When rereading the Hobbit, the end of this chapter always makes me a bit sad. There's no Gandalf anymore to help them. I think he (Gandalf) has a bad way of doing that. Leaving when he's needed. Of course you can argue that his leaving is essential for the other characters to grow up, but if we don't think of character development or anything like that outside the world of the books, he really has a bad habit on that. But on the other hand, he's always needed. So maybe I'm just babbling nonsense.

[Aiwendil]

Estelyn wrote:

Gandalf's answer on the reason for the name "Carrock" is interesting, coming from a linguist!

It seems to me that Gandalf is having a little joke here. Bilbo asks why Beorn calls it "the Carrock" and Gandalf pretends the question is why he calls it "the Carrock" instead of why he calls it "the Carrock". Reminds me a bit of Goldberry's answer to the question "Who is Tom Bombadil?": "He is", as if the question were which of the people present goes by that name.

Incidentally, I don't think Tolkien would have called himself a "linguist" . . .

Gandalf's tactic in combining a fascinating story with unpleasant facts (unwanted guests, in this case) sounds like a good example for writers, film makers, and teachers to follow. It's a fun passage to read, isn't it?!

It certainly is! Like many passages in The Hobbit (and a few in LotR), this has genuine value as humour in and of itself. I think that many people get too focused on analysing the tone of The Hobbit and concluding that passages like this make it "light", as if their only effect is to detract from the gravity of the work. Maybe they do detract from its gravity, but they also add something.

There is a much-neglected poem here, "The wind was on the withered heath..." Do you like it? Why do you think it's not as popular as many other Tolkien poems?

You know, I rather like Dwarvish poetry. At any rate, I like the few examples of it that Tolkien gives. In The Hobbit, the Dwarves always use the same form for their serious poetry (i.e. excluding "Chip the glasses, crack the plates") - four-line stanzas in what I'd call iambic tetrameter (octosyllabic, if you prefer), with a rhyme scheme aaba, and internal rhyme on "b" between the two halves of the third line. I like this form, and it seems especially suitable for the Dwarves somehow, perhaps because the internal rhyme gives it a certain rhythmic/chanting quality.

Having said that, I must also agree with much that littlemanpoet says about this particular poem. It is a bit weaker than most of Tolkien's stuff and, in particular, weaker than the Dwarvish poem in chapter 1.

JennyHallu wrote:

Some bears, such as the Panda bear, are almost exclusively herbivorous. The polar bear, however is exclusively a hunter. All bears, however, are classified as carnivores.

Well, bears are "carnivores" by taxonomic classification; i.e. they are in the order carnivora. That name for the order is unfortunate, since there are both carnivores and omnivores in it and there are also carnivores outside it. Incidentally, the classification of the giant panda as a "bear" is controversial; many believe that it is a member of the raccoon family and others place it in a family by itself (well, along with the "lesser" panda).

[Raynor]

Incidentally, I don't think Tolkien would have called himself a "linguist" . . .

He called himself so, (a "professional linguist") in letter #188 - though he indeed declined that label in other ocasions.

In Myths transformed, Tolkien confessed that he dislikes the presence of so many talking animals, but admits that they cannot be 'excised' from the story. Interestingly enough, he doesn't attribute them a 'rational soul' (neither did he to Huan, Thorondor (blasphemy!), orcs or trolls).