Do Elves ever get fat?

[MatthewM]

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

many of the Elves we meet are warriors of some kind, and warriors can't be fat.

I'm going to have to take you up on that - who says warriors can't be fat? It might slow them down, but a lot of heavier people are quite strong and I am sure that not all of the best warriors were thin. However, I guess it also depends on what you call "fat". If we are talking extremely obese, then I concur with your statement. But if you mean some belly fat, I stand by my point.

After all, not that many Humans are described as fat either in Tolkien's works.

True, although I can think of one off the top of my head - Butterbur.

[Thinlómien]

Originally Posted by MatthewM

I'm going to have to take you up on that - who says warriors can't be fat? It might slow them down, but a lot of heavier people are quite strong and I am sure that not all of the best warriors were thin. However, I guess it also depends on what you call "fat". If we are talking extremely obese, then I concur with your statement. But if you mean some belly fat, I stand by my point.

Fat people are often in bad physical condition, so that's why. But I agree a warrior could be belly fat. And I'm by no means saying warriors should be thin. Let's not confuse being sturdy/heavily built and being fat.

True, although I can think of one off the top of my head - Butterbur.

Of course - I never said there weren't any.

[MatthewM]

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

And I'm by no means saying warriors should be thin. Let's not confuse being sturdy/heavily built and being fat.

That's exactly why I wasn't too sure how you meant the word "fat" to come across. And by thin, I didn't mean pencil thin. I meant all muscle, built, thin. You could be thin and be built. You could also be considered "fat" by some and still be sturdy/built. See how a computer can come between meanings? Haha

[Thinlómien]

Originally Posted by MatthewM

You could also be considered "fat" by some and still be sturdy/built. See how a computer can come between meanings? Haha

Yes, I agree. And I think it's not only the computer, but language as well, since I'm not a native English speaker, as you might know.

Thanks Legate, that's exactly the thread I was talking about: your searching skills seem to be superior to mine.

[Aganzir]

I had completely forgot about Salgant. But I remember Lommy has started a thread once about the correspondence of height and power, and I wonder if the same logic could be applied here as well. One can understand if an innkeeper is fat, but a fat elven warrior leaves admittedly a slightly repulsive and weak feeling, which sits quite well with Salgant's later deeds.

Thanks for the link, Legate. I tried search as well but gave up maybe a bit too quickly.

[Lalwendë]

Boromir was described as being a sturdy bloke wasn't he? And Hobbits are fat by nature and preference - Fatty Bolger must have been a really big lad then. Dwarves are also stocky, so I don't think Tolkien built anything into his works about people being fat or thin having any consequence much. Maybe if we imagine Elves as thin that's us as readers projecting ideas about 'perfection' onto them?

[Laurinquë]

I for one always thought of the Elves as being perfect, even more perfect then they were portrayed in the books.

[THE Ka]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Boromir was described as being a sturdy bloke wasn't he? And Hobbits are fat by nature and preference - Fatty Bolger must have been a really big lad then. Dwarves are also stocky, so I don't think Tolkien built anything into his works about people being fat or thin having any consequence much. Maybe if we imagine Elves as thin that's us as readers projecting ideas about 'perfection' onto them?

I like that idea quite a bit.

As for hobbits, I think Tolkien allowed more of a breadth size wise for them, especially when you come upon their actual names they give to one another, like 'fatty'. Then again, what is considered 'overweight' by our standards might mean something quite different to a hobbit of 'good standing'. Thankfully, Tolkien tended to go into more detail with hobbits than some other races, but I don't think he was convicted with a twinge of malice against certain characters based on their physical predicament.

Somewhat facial/eye and mostly mentally wise he certainly does in a way that we know he's talking about someone like Saruman and not Gandalf for example.

As for other forms of 'large', there is the such form of a larger frame, which he uses in Boromir's case. Though, I am not sure, but that is probably more an eludement to his character/mental state and birth, especially how Tolkien compares his height, etc, right next to that of Aragorn via Frodo's observation.

So again, it seems more based upon such as what is used in art history often, the 'psychological portrait' (where the 'inner state' is reflected in the eyes and especially facial form of a person. Done mostly by northern Renaissance artists and later Baroque artists, good example: Rembrandt).

I think it is more of that case, and with that I think Tolkien does an amazing job at, because I don't see him spending too much time on the physical than he has to. Except in certain cases, and it is either to increase the sheer 'light and beauty' or 'darkness/malice' of a being or act.
Which makes sense getting a strong point across.

So yep, there's my little cents on the matter.

~ Ka

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Here is the thread, maybe the one you were looking for, Lommy. If nothing else, it touches the matter.

And to quickly add my two cents to the discussion about fat people: don't forget Forlong, and for the Elves we have maybe Galion (I believe there is something about it in the quoted thread, that an elf like him could have been likely fat). Yup, so these were the two cents