Will The Hobbit do damage to the books?

[Zigûr]

Here's the latest bewildering "The Hobbit Official Visual Companion App" question as presented on the Facebook page for The Hobbit. Note that this Facebook page specifically labels itself in the category 'Book' and claims to be "The Hobbit fan page, managed by the publishers." Behold the question.

Originally Posted by The Hobbit Facebook page

Which Dwarve is nicknamed ‘the Apothecary’?

'Dwarve.'

"Dwarve."

Singular.

Putting aside the fact that this is a characteristic the filmmakers gave to Óin with no basis in the book, which the page fails to disclaim, they make an error which can only derive from a fundamental disregard for the very product they are supporting. Additionally, they reposted this link because (according to the comments, I of course did not click it) the first time the link didn't work, but they did not correct 'Dwarve.'

Accidentally writing 'Dwarfs' instead of 'Dwarves' is common (if tiresome): but 'Dwarve'? Seriously?

When someone corrected it as 'Dwarf' in the comments for the identical post on the corresponding page for The Lord of the Rings someone in all seriousness replied with this:

Originally Posted by Facebook replier

Its not *Dwarf, because Tolkien specifically used that spelling to highlight that he meant Dwarve not Dwarf and these two things are different in folk and Tolkien lore.

Maybe I'm overreacting, but this is exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about: the lazy, ignorant, corporate (neoliberal) exploitation of our culture which spreads misinformation that people actually believe and are willing to defend, and so erases and writes over that culture. Note that when someone asks for proof from the abover commenter, another replied "appendices of LOTR." I pray they were mocking the filmmakers' "it's all in the Appendices" attitude but somehow I doubt it.

[Morthoron]

Philologically-speaking, "apothecary" would be an incorrect term for Óin the "Dwarf", and I don't believe Tolkien would use it. The word first arose in Middle-English (see Chaucer), and derives from the Old French "apotecaire" (which would be strike one), and the Old French variant derived in turn from the Latin apothecarius, which means "shopkeeper", and that came from the Greek ἀποθήκη (apothēkē, “a repository, storehouse”).

Tolkien used his words carefully, and even a Khuzdul or Icelandic translation would not come to this ill-conceived title, for what essentially would be termed an "herbalist".

[Zigûr]

To touch upon a recurring issue of mine, once again the Facebook pages for The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings give damning evidence of how the films are bulldozing the books in the popular consciousness. Both pages, which are for the books and run by the very publishers of those books, posted in accompaniment to Professor Tolkien's illustration of Rivendell:

"There is some good in this world, and it's worth fighting for."
-J.R.R. Tolkien

Balderdash. As some right-thinking commenters have pointed out in the comments section, this line is only from the film script. I might tolerate that, barely (although it would still be frustrating to see it from the Facebook page for the books) but the fact that it is misattributed to Professor Tolkien is firstly a disservice to the man, who would not have written such a cliché or in such a trite idiom, and secondly is evidence of how incompetently handled his life's work is by its very publishers. This is not the first time they have posted this film quote and attributed it to the Professor either.

Interestingly in the comments it is mentioned that according to certain DVD special features this was a line the filmmakers deliberated over at length and included, allegedly, even though they considered it to be hackneyed and cliché, which adds insult to injury when it's misattributed to the Professor himself in my opinion. This may seem like an overreaction but I think this kind of thing is both appallingly unprofessional and genuine evidence of the adverse affect the films have had by corrupting knowledge about the books.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Big, big thumb up for Zigur.

And Morthoron not only is entirely correct on the linguistic point, but there is also the cultural issue as to whether any Dwarf would be versed in herb-lore. Dwarves on the whole were unconcerned with growing things, as befitted troglodytes, and never farmed if they could possibly buy foodstuffs via trade in manufactured goods or products of mining, or even manual labor of the sort thwey preferred, masonry and roadbuilding etc.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Zigûr

Interestingly in the comments it is mentioned that according to certain DVD special features this was a line the filmmakers deliberated over at length and included, allegedly, even though they considered it to be hackneyed and cliché, which adds insult to injury when it's misattributed to the Professor himself in my opinion. This may seem like an overreaction but I think this kind of thing is both appallingly unprofessional and genuine evidence of the adverse affect the films have had by corrupting knowledge about the books.

Hackneyed and clichéd are attributes that to me the LOTR films struggle mightily to avoid in general. Where they succeed, it is in spite of the filmmakers' best efforts otherwise.
I was always irked by that "even the smallest person can change the future", that sounded more apt for a Disney cartoon.

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hicklin

And Morthoron not only is entirely correct on the linguistic point, but there is also the cultural issue as to whether any Dwarf would be versed in herb-lore. Dwarves on the whole were unconcerned with growing things, as befitted troglodytes, and never farmed if they could possibly buy foodstuffs via trade in manufactured goods or products of mining, or even manual labor of the sort thwey preferred, masonry and roadbuilding etc.

Well, there were Mîm and his sons foraging for their "root bread", which it was claimed even the Green-Elves were unaware of. That sort of behavior does indeed seem to be lacking among Third Age Dwarves in the west of Middle-earth, though.

[littlemanpoet]

Maybe this is not harsh enough, but after viewing Hobbit 2 by PJ, my sense was "hyper Baroque". Plastered thick. So dense with extra stuff, none of it needed, that you can barely see the architectural design underneath. A pity, since the architecture is of such high quality.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

Maybe this is not harsh enough, but after viewing Hobbit 2 by PJ, my sense was "hyper Baroque". Plastered thick. So dense with extra stuff, none of it needed, that you can barely see the architectural design underneath. A pity, since the architecture is of such high quality.

Yes, if it aint Baroque, don't fix it.