horncall of buckland

[alman]

I don't have to– you're the one making the claim, so the burden of proof is on you. Them's the breaks, kid
The book says fear fire foes, so the horn went up fear fire foes. how can you argue that?

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

I do not take other talking objects - the troll's purse, Turin's sword - at face value, thinking of them as storytellers' decoration, and it is, in any case, implied to a far smaller degree that the horn talked.

Still, interesting topic.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

I do not take other talking objects - the troll's purse, Turin's sword - at face value, thinking of them as storytellers' decoration, and it is, in any case, implied to a far smaller degree that the horn talked.

Still, interesting topic.

The sword and the purse I'm willing to concede might have actually"talked" (though you can also interpret it as more of a metaphorical/poetic license thing).

This isn't even "decoration". I mean, it isn't implied at all that the horn(s) literally spoke. It's just a horn call that means "Fear, fire, foes, awake, awake!"

[Nerwen]

As for why "it's just a horn-call" is an inherently preferable explanation to "the Bucklanders for some reason had a whole lot of magical talking horns that (also) for some reason are never, ever mentioned as such, and we don't know where they came from, but maybe they were a present from Gandalf, even though this is never mentioned either,"...may I recommend a certain shaving implement belonging to a certain English friar?

Anyway, Alman, look: all these other topics-gone-bad I'm thinking of started just this way: the original poster asks a seemingly genuine question, of the "Is X true or is Y true" type, and then it turns out he or she had already made up his or her mind that it was Y, and wasn't prepared to accept anything else. So really, I wish people wouldn't ask questions they don't want answered. It gets tiring.

[Puddleglum]

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

I do not take other talking objects - the troll's purse, Turin's sword - at face value, thinking of them as storytellers' decoration, and it is, in any case, implied to a far smaller degree that the horn talked. Still, interesting topic.

The trolls purse and Turin's black sword seem to be pretty specific clear cases of objects speaking with words - just from how those incidents are described.

• "Troll's purses are mischief, and this one was no exception. 'Ere, oo are you?' it squeaked as it left (Bills) pocket." In this case, a simple set of notes or grunts would have no particular meaning to Bilbo. And the story is written from his perspective. Seems clear Tolkien intended for Bill to have a talking purse.
• Turin actually carried on a (short) conversation with his sword. Turin: "Black sword, will you drink my blood?" Sword: "Gladly, so I can forget the innocent blood YOU made me drink." (paraphrase of quotes).

In the case of the horn call of Buckland, there is never an indication in Tolkien's wording that any of the horns themselves spoke or squeaked words. It's always the horn-CALL (ie, the music) that is associated with the words.

[alman]

nerwin-
no problem. I was just looking for some insight. ( Who am I to pass judgement?Even the very wise cannot see all ends) I ended up going back to the book and hunting for all horns. What got me was Borrimer (sp) in the FoTR sounded his horn before the fellowship set out, and all that heard the "voice" of the horn stood ready/got up/something or other.

[skip spence]

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

I do not take other talking objects - the troll's purse, Turin's sword - at face value, thinking of them as storytellers' decoration, and it is, in any case, implied to a far smaller degree that the horn talked.

Still, interesting topic.

I quite like that idea, especially since I'm not too fond of the talking objects from a... ahem, canonical point of view, though the purse is fun if you see Bilbo as a stand-alone fairytale.

But yeah, I can totally see how Bilbo, when writing his story, would add certain elements to make it more captivating and remove other elements to make himself look better. Perhaps he just stepped on a twig and was caught by the trolls without much drama but that wouldn't make a good story, would it?

And there were no witnesses around to contradict him. If you accept the premiss that Tolkien was merely the translator of these stories from an ancient past you also have to take into account that, as far as I can remember, no-one was around to hear Turin's sword talking to him, so there's no telling exactly what happened before he took his own life.

And yeah, I'm also quite certain Tolkien didn't intent the Buckland Horn to carry a magically pre-recorded voice message. I don't mind if you read it that way though, alman.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by skip spence

And yeah, I'm also quite certain Tolkien didn't intent the Buckland Horn to carry a magically pre-recorded voice message. I don't mind if you read it that way though, alman.

Indeed, there's nothing to stop anyone imagining it anyway they like. That's fine. However, Alman did start this thread just to ask about it.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by skip spence

Still, interesting topic.I quite like that idea, especially since I'm not too fond of the talking objects from a... ahem, canonical point of view, though the purse is fun if you see Bilbo as a stand-alone fairytale.

On the whole I tend to agree with Puddleglum that the purse and the sword are probably meant to be actually speaking. But still, the "translator conceit" does give the reader a fair bit of leeway there.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

It's interesting. I think many readers struggle to fit the cute, talking purse from the children's story The Hobbit into Tolkien's world. I've always considered it as Bilbo having a laugh with younger hobbits, and embellishing his tale (while scurrying over his incompetence, in that case, as a burglar).

Turin's sword? Nah. I don't believe in it. I just read that as an element added to the myth by subsequent generations. I can genuinely believe in the ancient character of Turin (well, not believe in him, but you know what I mean) but suspension of disbelief only goes so far.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

Turin's sword? Nah. I don't believe in it. I just read that as an element added to the myth by subsequent generations. I can genuinely believe in the ancient character of Turin (well, not believe in him, but you know what I mean) but suspension of disbelief only goes so far.

Actually, Eomer, Tolkien borrowed that scene directly from the Finnish Kalevala. It is as it was intended, without embellishment. It's Tolkien's version of fan-fic.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Actually, Eomer, Tolkien borrowed that scene directly from the Finnish Kalevala. It is as it was intended, without embellishment. It's Tolkien's version of fan-fic.

You know, Morth, I thought I had read it somewhere, but my memory is bad and my Tolkien knowledge goes only so deep. Fascinating!

If we talk Kalevala, I can 'believe' in many of the characters and the struggles they encountered; however I wouldn't believe the talking sword scene actually happened. Same with Tolkien's myths. It might be a bit odd to divide a fiction into parts you believe and parts you don't, but there you go.

[mark12_30]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Actually, Eomer, Tolkien borrowed that scene directly from the Finnish Kalevala. It is as it was intended, without embellishment. It's Tolkien's version of fan-fic.

Morth, I'm glad that you brought that up. Sil is so heavily mythical, that seems to me to be the heart of this whole discussion; what works in the myth and what might not. LittleManPoet describes it as "what breaks the enchantment." Apparently for some on this thread, too much magic breaks the enchantment. Odd, but there it is.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by alman

The book says fear fire foes, so the horn went up fear fire foes. how can you argue that?

What do you mean, how can I argue it? Read the thread! People have explained over and over again that horn-calls often conventionally have words attached to them. A bit earlier you seemed to have accepted that.

You've got nothing, Alman. There's no Talking Horn of Buckland in this story. You just made a mistake, okay?