Beorn

[William Cloud Hicklin]

When in Middle Earth do men turn into bears? If it's some sort of magic, wouldn't the men of Numenor, the most advanced men, be able to do it? Wouldn't Gondor have an army of giant bear-men? Or more likely, wouldn't Sauron?

Beorn doesn't make sense as a man within the legendarium. No way. The only way I can fit him into the legendarium is to theorize that he is descended from a human who wedded an Ainu who specialized in all things bear related.

Why does he have to fit? Why this obsessive need to systematize everything? Tolkien was creating a world with mysteries and enigmas and unexplained phenomena (just like the real world), not an RPG system.

[davem]

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hickli

Why does he have to fit? Why this obsessive need to systematize everything? Tolkien was creating a world with mysteries and enigmas and unexplained phenomena (just like the real world), not an RPG system.

I think you'd really need to address that question to Tolkien himself. It seems to me that was his problem, & the reason we didn't get a completed Silmarillion (but see Rateliff: http://sacnoths.blogspot.com/2007/06...marillion.html) - he was too concerned with explaining everything & providing a logical explanation - the whole 'Myths Transformed' farrago is confirmation of that. I think your point stands as far as TH is concerned. Beorn doesn't require explanation in the world of TH (Rateliff suggests he was in there as much because the young Tolkien's all loved bears as much as because Tolkien himself wanted to introduce an 'echo' of the Berserkers into his tale) but he does require an explanation in terms of the greater world of LotR & The Sil - simply because in that world things are explained - or Tolkien drives himself crazy trying to explain them: look at the knots he tied himself (& his readers) in in his attempts to account for Orcs.

In TH things pop up, whether cockerney Trolls, tra-la-la-lallying Elves, skin changers, 'gollums' with magic rings or maiden eating dragons. Its a fairy tale world & pretty much anything is thrown in without need of explanation - & we accept it all without question. LotR/The Sil doesn't work that way, & we approach it differently. Personally, I tend to exclude TH from the Legendarium & read it as a stand alone work, & I find I only have any difficulties when I try & make it fit with the the other works.

[the phantom]

Why does he have to fit?

Davem gave a great answer to this, but I'd like to say a bit more.

It is human nature to try and make sense of things. When you are presented with something new, you examine all the facts surrounding it and attempt to give it a place in your mind.

Don't you? (if not, then I'm worried about you)

When you try a new pie, you ask what is in it and how it was baked. And if the person tells you that they don't know, and that they merely placed the pan in the oven and the pie magically appeared, would you honestly be satisfied with that answer? Would you just stupidly say, "Oh, okay, I guess it's an enigma", or would you insist on a better explanation?

Tolkien was creating a world with mysteries and enigmas and unexplained phenomena (just like the real world)

Well, as D already detailed, Tolkien wasn't creating that kind of world. He liked to explain everything. And with good reason! Humans prefer things to be known. You are right that there exist mysteries and enigmas in this world, but surely you understand that existence does not equal acceptance. Mysteries and enigmas are not accepted in this world. When something unexplainable happens, teams of scientists are assigned to reveal the mystery, and experts everywhere come up with logic based theories to explain the mystery.

It is the same with Beorn. He doesn't make sense in Middle Earth with what we know about Middle Earth, and so he is a mystery. And so now we, the experts, need to come up with logic based theories to explain Beorn.

As I've said on other threads, just because a book can be found in the fantasy section does not mean any old silly thing can happen in it and that we must accept it.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Well, as D already detailed, Tolkien wasn't creating that kind of world. He liked to explain everything.

Not at all. Vide his comments on Bombadil: he's an Enigma, and deliberately so. Tolkien never bothered to explain, even in a note-to-self, in what the One Ring's power actually consisted. He was unconcerned with the mechanics of Sauron bringing It back from Numenor, or Orome carrying weapons for the entire Elvenhost on Nahar. Nowhere did he explain the Great Eagles, except in Manwe's words to Yavanna which confuse as much as they illumine. He never explained (and perhaps didn't know) whether it was Sauron or Caradhras itself which defeated the attempt on the Redhorn Gate. Are the Ents in origin trees with spirits indwelling, or tree-like beings of independent creation? The origin and story of the old man Brego encountered at the Dark Door is a permanent mystery. As he once commented, compared to real-world (medieval) history, the one he produced was somewhat too consistent and thorough.

[davem]

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hickli

Not at all. Vide his comments on Bombadil: he's an Enigma, and deliberately so. Tolkien never bothered to explain, even in a note-to-self, in what the One Ring's power actually consisted. He was unconcerned with the mechanics of Sauron bringing It back from Numenor, or Orome carrying weapons for the entire Elvenhost on Nahar. Nowhere did he explain the Great Eagles, except in Manwe's words to Yavanna which confuse as much as they illumine. He never explained (and perhaps didn't know) whether it was Sauron or Caradhras itself which defeated the attempt on the Redhorn Gate. Are the Ents in origin trees with spirits indwelling, or tree-like beings of independent creation? The origin and story of the old man Brego encountered at the Dark Door is a permanent mystery. As he once commented, compared to real-world (medieval) history, the one he produced was somewhat too consistent and thorough.

\

Well, Bombadil is an enigma because he was dragged in from outside M-e & already existed - ie he wasn't invented for LotR. He can't be explained in terms of M-e rules. Its not simply that Tolkien didn't account for Tom - he couldn't. I'm not sure that the other 'mysteries' you cite are the same - they were always part of the Legendarium - Tolkien just didn't get around to explaining them. They don't feel 'out of place', they simply aren't accounted for.

Now, Beorn, the Trolls & the rest in TH are simply 'there' in the world of TH - Bilbo wanders along with Gandalf & the Dwarves & bumps into these beings & we (because of the kind of story TH is) simply accept them without requiring an explanation.

The examples you cite are only mysteries because Tolkien didn't explain them, but I don't think he would have had a problem doing so if challenged - reading the letters he seemed perfectly happy, & more than capable, to account for origins of characters & objects. Only Tom seems to defeat him. Tolkien can't (rather than won't - it seems to me at least) account for Tom. I suspect Beorn would have left him just as stumped. Beorn appears out of Northern legend & there is nothing like him in Arda.

[the phantom]

I never said he did answer everything- I just said he liked to give answers.

There was no way he was going to produce a flawless world and story. There's too much of it. So he explored further the things that bothered him, the things that he thought were important, and left the rest alone. Who knows? If we lived as long as Elves, maybe Tolkien would have answered all those questions. But as our span of years is limited, and he was obviously aware of that, he couldn't and would certainly not set out to find a solution to every problem.

In addition, all of those examples you gave, besides Tom, are not at all like our Beorn dilemma. None of those things are out of place, or utterly baffling. Beorn is a problem because Tolkien's words conflict with themselves so violently. According to Tolkien's writing, Beorn could not be just a man. And yet, according to Tolkien, Beorn was a man.

Say what?

This has nothing in common with your examples. For instance, let's look at your Caradhras/Sauron situation. That is simply a mystery within the story where multiple sensible explanations could be given, and thus there is no certain right answer. Nothing about the event conflicts directly with Tolkien's world as defined by his words. He never said "Sauron can't make it snow" or "A spirit cannot take up residence in a mountain and have some sway over the local weather". Either would work. So naturally I have no problem with it.

But I do have a problem with Beorn, because he does not make sense within Middle Earth. By trying to find an explanation for him, I am essentially trying to stave off another Tom Bombadil, who is in an annoying league of his own. I can put up with one Tom Bombadil, but a book full of TBs....