Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
06-30-2004, 02:20 PM | #41 | |
Regal Dwarven Shade
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: A Remote Dwarven Hold
Posts: 3,589
|
Maédhros
Quote:
“You can’t have any doughnuts, they're not healthy!!” “No more cookies or ice cream either!!” “…and Kuruharan, no more driving 15 MPH in excess of the posted limit!!!”
__________________
...finding a path that cannot be found, walking a road that cannot be seen, climbing a ladder that was never placed, or reading a paragraph that has no... |
|
06-30-2004, 03:27 PM | #42 |
Illustrious Ulair
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,240
|
Mark
Well, Tolkien does say the Elves 'flirted with Sauron' - in the same letter as he refers to them as 'embalmers'. Celebrimbor's intention is to create Rings which will effectively stop change - actually they are intended to give the wearer the power to 're-make the world in their own image' - make it as they feel it 'should' be - & then embalm it. And this is what the One is intended to do. This, it seems to me, is what it offers all its bearers - actually, its what all the Rings are intended, & used, to do - offer the power to change reality until it suits the bearer. So, it plays on their desires, uses them to wheedle its way into their consciousness. So in answer to Firefoot, i think if Sauron was destroyed & the ring survived, it would continue doing that - not that is possible, as they are one. Sauron & the ring are both about the manifestation of desire. If 'Sauron', as an intelligence, ceased to be, there would still exist the will to dominate - so whoever took it would be tempted by the desire to remake the world as they believed it should be. This is the temptation of the Ring to my mind - it convinces the unwary that the world is wrong - 'What you want is right, & I can help you make it the way you know it should be'. But there always has to be a surrender to it. You can choose estel - faith, trust & let go of your desires - or put them in the hands of Eru & let him weigh them & decide whether they are worthy. Its simply lack of estel that leads to the victory of the Ring over your will. So, the temptation is greater for the powerful - those who are used to wielding power & ordering things - Sam gives up the Ring with almost no struggle, because he has never had any real power, nor desired any. All the magical objects can corrupt those who wield them, but only if their bearers choose to be corrupted, by giving in to their desires. So, in effect, as all are potentially corruptible, all are in danger, & the Ring works on that. But they cannot automatically corrupt anyone, overriding their will, or there would be no real hope. The hope that runs through the whole Legendarium is simply, & only, that - you cannot be forced to surrender, you have to choose it. |
07-01-2004, 01:38 AM | #43 | |
Deadnight Chanter
|
Quote:
__________________
Egroeg Ihkhsal - Would you believe in the love at first sight? - Yes I'm certain that it happens all the time! |
|
07-01-2004, 02:37 AM | #44 | |||||
Illustrious Ulair
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,240
|
H-I
Quote:
But the other thing that interests me is that in the final version Tolkien has the Elves making the Rings. In the early versions it is Sauron himself who makes & distributes them Quote:
So, is this a case of Tolkien's attitude towards the Elves changing. They begin, in the Book of Lost Tales as a race of beautiful, perfect beings, almost incarnate Angels, & 'fall' further & further, until in the final version of LotR they are in the main, selfish, self obsessed fallen angels, unconcerned with the fate of the other races, wishing only to cut themselves off & let the rest of Middle Earth go hang. Its interesting, comparing the early drafts of the chapter, to see how Tolkien still presents an idealised race of High Elves: Quote:
Same thing happens with Gollum, who begins as much less of a 'monster': Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||
07-01-2004, 03:44 AM | #45 |
Deadnight Chanter
|
Why are all those goodies rotten on the inside...
It seems that whatever accusations made by critics, JRRT is mostly modern writer. One of the issues, now, raised in modern writing is the problem of power, and its corruption (All power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely). It would have been highly relevant issue to be addressed by the man of the last century, still more the participant of the WWI and witness of WWII, two 'wars to end all wars', started by power corrupted tyrants. That'd be the reason number one - to explore the impact of power on an individual.
Another reason, mentioned M/B confrontation - if it were Sauron who were entirely to blame, than, firstly, the hint of "Evil as Outside Force" would have been by way stronger than what Christian writer would have wished for, and another critique made by many critics of Tolkien's works - that they are black-n-white, without shades of grey, would have been true. But as it is, even the most 'good' heroes have something to repent of, it is better mirror of the things as they are. Or, for short - reasons for that may be described as political and theological at the same time. And all of the above, is of course, personal opinion.
__________________
Egroeg Ihkhsal - Would you believe in the love at first sight? - Yes I'm certain that it happens all the time! |
07-01-2004, 04:53 AM | #46 |
Illustrious Ulair
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,240
|
Hmm...
Still, what Tolkien seems to be doing is changing his presentation of evil - rather than a kind of 'demon-king' figure (as we have in Morgoth), with Sauron we seem to have something more akin to a nebulous, all pervading presence, which works by corrupting others, influencing them to its service by playing on their desires. So, we almost get the sense that rather than 'Sauron the Dark Lord' being present himself - making the Rings & distributing them, as in the first versions -'he' is like a poisonous 'idea' or motivating 'force', pushing individuals in a particular direction. Perhaps that's what makes him so successful - he doesn't confront you as an external, physical presence, but as an idea that seems to arise within, so that it can seem, to the unwary at least, that the desires they feel are their own. Does any of that make sense? |
07-01-2004, 07:39 AM | #47 | ||
Stormdancer of Doom
|
Quote:
Another favorite: Quote:
__________________
...down to the water to see the elves dance and sing upon the midsummer's eve. |
||
07-01-2004, 09:30 AM | #48 | |||
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
|
A minor point:
Davem wrote: Quote:
Mark12_30 wrote: Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
07-01-2004, 09:50 AM | #49 | |
Illustrious Ulair
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,240
|
Aiwendil
Quote:
Could the One rule the others if its nature was fundamentally different? Is there no correspondence between them? |
|
07-01-2004, 03:17 PM | #50 | ||
Banshee of Camelot
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 5,830
|
Quote:
Estelyn's excellent post #27 "Words to live by": It is these insights that you pointed out that impressed me too. Gandalf's words of timeless wisdom stay forever in my head (and heart!). I was so glad that several of these quotes made it into the movie! (Was that only thanks to Ian mcKellen, I wonder?) Quote:
I found it very interesting what Bethberry wrote in post #31 about the proverbial style in which these wisdoms are presented. (I've been collecting the "proverbs" in the books, as Esty knows, and often I couldn't tell which were real ancient sayings and which were "made up" by Tolkien. Needless to say that they don't sound so impressive and terse anymore when translated into another language.) (Hey, you added a new word to my vocabulary: pithy! very fitting indeed!))
__________________
Yes! "wish-fulfilment dreams" we spin to cheat our timid hearts, and ugly Fact defeat! |
||
07-01-2004, 06:46 PM | #51 | ||||
Corpus Cacophonous
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: A green and pleasant land
Posts: 8,390
|
Can Elves become wraiths?
Davem's points concerning the corrupting effect of the Ring reminded me of a point which occurred to me when I re-read this chapter.
Gandalf tells Frodo: Quote:
This leads me to wonder whether the Ring might affect mortal and immortal beings differently. Clearly, it has the power to corrupt both, but do its "enwraithing" properties affect mortals only? The earlier drafts which davem quoted refer to 'elf-wraiths', so Tolkien clearly contemplated the possibility of immortals becoming wraiths. But these references had been removed by the final version. Is this, perhaps, because an immortal being, by his or her very nature, cannot become eternally confined to the "Wraith-world" alone? Any thoughts? The passage quoted above also tells us that, if a mortal bears the Ring long enough, then he will inevitably become enslaved to it. Davem said: Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Do you mind? I'm busy doing the fishstick. It's a very delicate state of mind! Last edited by The Saucepan Man; 07-02-2004 at 02:33 AM. |
||||
07-01-2004, 07:29 PM | #52 |
Stormdancer of Doom
|
elves and fading
Saucie, I read (somewhere) that elves who had been to the West lived in both worlds-- the current world and the shadow world. Hence although Frodo's friends grew dimmer as the knife -point penetrated, yet Glorfindel was shining brightly. These elves at least already live in both worlds, so I do not think they would fade.
(As an aside, I think that's what the movie was trying to show when a glowing, silver-garbed Arwen approached the wounded Frodo and he was wide-eyed at her radiance. To the rest she was clad in dark colors.)
__________________
...down to the water to see the elves dance and sing upon the midsummer's eve. Last edited by mark12_30; 07-02-2004 at 07:15 AM. |
07-02-2004, 02:13 AM | #53 | ||
Deadnight Chanter
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Egroeg Ihkhsal - Would you believe in the love at first sight? - Yes I'm certain that it happens all the time! |
||
07-02-2004, 02:27 AM | #54 | |
Illustrious Ulair
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,240
|
SpM
Quote:
But is Frodo just a victim? To me he is a tragic hero, & his tragedy comes from his surrender in the end - he carries it to the Fire, weary, confused, in pain, & at the last moment I can almost hear the voice of the Ring:' I can make it stop, I can make all the pain go away, & you can rest. Just claim me.' And he does. That's what's heartbreaking. It wouldn't be so horrible if he had been so overwhelmed that he had lost control of his will & didn't know what he was doing. What makes me weep for Frodo is that in the end he just wants it to stop, so he can rest, free from the suffering he's been through. And its the fact that evil still, even at the end can't simply sweep his will & sense of identity away, but he must surrender it - & does. The cruelty of the Ring, & its master is brought into stark relief by this final moment. And Frodo's self condemnation, his feelings of failure, are much harder to read about. Mark I also wanted to pick up on your earlier point about Frodo dreaming of the mountains, & of crossing the River, because Frodo's dreams become an increasingly important element in the story, And they all seem to be prophetic dreams, or dreams about actual events which are happening to others. How is this possible - are those events somehow 'destined'? In Osanwe Kenta Tolkien states that the future is known only to Eru, & so can only be revealed by him. Are we seeing Eru's presence running throughout the story, surfacing in these dreams & visions? |
|
07-02-2004, 02:33 AM | #55 | ||
Corpus Cacophonous
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: A green and pleasant land
Posts: 8,390
|
Quote:
Quote:
Clearly there is an important debate to be had concerning whether Frodo would ever have been able to destroy the Ring. My own view is that any analysis which suggests that someone else could have done it and that Frodo was simply not strong enough seriously impairs his character. But, perhaps that debate is best left until we actually reach Mount Doom in a year or so's time ( ).
__________________
Do you mind? I'm busy doing the fishstick. It's a very delicate state of mind! Last edited by The Saucepan Man; 07-02-2004 at 02:43 AM. Reason: To address davem |
||
07-02-2004, 02:45 AM | #56 | ||||
Deadnight Chanter
|
Eru is the driving force ...
Following OK implications, there are hints of the whole event being Eru's [direct?]intervention:
Quote:
More hinted at in the Unfinished Tales: Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Egroeg Ihkhsal - Would you believe in the love at first sight? - Yes I'm certain that it happens all the time! Last edited by HerenIstarion; 07-02-2004 at 07:41 AM. Reason: cross-posting with SpM, the post is addressed at davem's |
||||
07-02-2004, 03:15 AM | #57 | |
Illustrious Ulair
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,240
|
Quote:
(yes, I know I'm opversimplifying the philosophical complexities there!)
__________________
“Everything was an object. If you killed a dwarf you could use it as a weapon – it was no different to other large heavy objects." Last edited by davem; 07-02-2004 at 03:20 AM. |
|
07-02-2004, 05:05 AM | #58 | |
Corpus Cacophonous
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: A green and pleasant land
Posts: 8,390
|
Quote:
__________________
Do you mind? I'm busy doing the fishstick. It's a very delicate state of mind! |
|
07-02-2004, 05:54 AM | #59 | ||
Illustrious Ulair
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,240
|
Quote:
Tolkien states (via Elrond) that nothing was evil in the beginning* . My understanding is that the conflict in Middle Earth is not one of 'Good' vs 'Evil' - ie two equal but opposite forces in conflict, but rather of 'Good vs corrupted/marred 'Good'. Which is why I would disagree that: Quote:
This means there is no need to bring in an objectively existing 'Evil' force or power in opposition to Eru (of course there are individuals who do 'evil' things, bwhat they serve is twisted 'Good'). ( * - of course, one could get into a deep discussion as to whether the 'nothing' which Elrond refers to here is the Void, in which Melkor went into in search of the Secret Fire, in which case we would have a kind of Manichaeanism - Eru=Good & the Void=Evil. But I don't think Tolkien intended that, & also, it would deny Evil any form of 'existence', & 'Evil' would then simply be an absence of 'Good'.) |
||
07-02-2004, 06:45 AM | #60 | |
Corpus Cacophonous
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: A green and pleasant land
Posts: 8,390
|
Quote:
__________________
Do you mind? I'm busy doing the fishstick. It's a very delicate state of mind! |
|
07-02-2004, 07:01 AM | #61 | |
Deadnight Chanter
|
Would we than agree on the following:
Quote:
For further operations on this thread, however, let us agree to have a nomenclature as follows: Good = original state of everything Evil = thing originally good, but corrupted However, to have an external Evil Force, we do not need to deny the aforementioned state of affairs. The manichaean dualism has to be merely moved one step down. So it will be not a battle of equal forces of Good and Evil, but equal creatures of Good and Evil (or formerly good, but corrupted), and Ultimately Good Eru stays above the battle (but interferes, what with the previously mentioned 'Bilbo was meant to be', and 'foresight is on me' stanzas) There is ultimate interference to happen too, but for the third age it is still in the far future.
__________________
Egroeg Ihkhsal - Would you believe in the love at first sight? - Yes I'm certain that it happens all the time! Last edited by HerenIstarion; 07-02-2004 at 07:26 AM. |
|
07-02-2004, 07:16 AM | #62 | |
Corpus Cacophonous
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: A green and pleasant land
Posts: 8,390
|
Ah, definitions, definitions ...
Quote:
So, while I think that your definition works in the context of our knowledge of Tolkien's works, it will not necessarily be applicable to all readers.
__________________
Do you mind? I'm busy doing the fishstick. It's a very delicate state of mind! Last edited by The Saucepan Man; 07-02-2004 at 07:20 AM. |
|
07-02-2004, 07:30 AM | #63 | |
Stormdancer of Doom
|
davem:
Quote:
H-I-- what's the quote from Letters again? "...that one ever-present Person who is never absent and never named..." And-- nah... welll..... oh, I can't resist. *cough* Good is good.
__________________
...down to the water to see the elves dance and sing upon the midsummer's eve. |
|
07-02-2004, 09:50 AM | #64 | |||||
Haunting Spirit
|
Just some random thoughts and comments
((Exuse my poor English.))
Reading the thread (yeah it took a while) I feel the urge to jump into some thoughts that aren't exactly chapter based... but first I want to give Tolkien a credit for being a great author (: What I really like about this chapter is how it shows the yearnings of both Frodo and Sam for something more. Frodo is almost ready to leave the "well-trodden" paths, while in Sam we only see some distant wish to meet the Fair Folk. Both seem not to find what they need in the Shire, both seem to feel surronded of people who just don't "get it" (that there's something more than just hobbits, that the world doesn't end with Bree). Both "pictures" of the unsatisfied hobbits are done almost poetically and touch us deeply. After this we expect these two to find an adventure and can forgive some long-ish explaining of the history of this little piece of metal. For a moment the mood gets really down with Frodo's understanding that the real journey won't be a jolly adventure, as Bilbo's were. At the end Tolkien again doesn't fail to reward us for the patience, with Sam's funny comments (eavesdropping, something unnatural) and at last his enthusiastic "Me go and see the Elves and all! Hooray!" After all can a journey not be jolly with hobbits in it? On the nature of effects of the Ring, I have to agree with what you all (seem to) have agreed on. The Ring uses the bearer's desires and gives power enough to fulfil them. But the Ring is an entity of its own, it lets the bearer believe he/she is in command but actually the Ring leads him/her to its own aims. We should not forget that the Ring is nothing else but Sauron. The whole idea of Tolkien's world is that you CANNOT do good with evil means and the ring is simply an embodiement of this theorie. Quote:
While on this topic, we see Sam's self-denial in this chapter already: Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Excellent post about the practical philosophy of the book... sometimes we forget what all this is about going too deep indeed (: the ancient chinese curse "May you live in interesting times" comes to mind. One more thing on why the Ring doesn't seem to affect the hobbits that much. Undisputed it's their nature of keep-to-yourself, their apparant lack of wish to dominate... but is it all? This quote made me think about it Quote:
I'll shut up now... sorry for boring you to tears if you read all this (:
__________________
"Hobbits! Well, what next? I have heard of strange doings in this land, but I have seldom heard of a hobbit sleeping out of doors under a tree. Three of them! There's something mighty queer behind this." |
|||||
07-02-2004, 10:15 AM | #65 | |
Illustrious Ulair
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,240
|
Mirkgirl
Can't argue with anything you say - except: Quote:
http://forum.barrowdowns.com/cgi-bin...&f=29&t=000057 (in fact, some of the writing is pretty flawed too, but I did my best!) |
|
07-02-2004, 10:34 AM | #66 |
Haunting Spirit
|
That's why I said "most (not all!)"... I know there are some good ones
Well what's left for me after this shameless plug *goes to read*
__________________
"Hobbits! Well, what next? I have heard of strange doings in this land, but I have seldom heard of a hobbit sleeping out of doors under a tree. Three of them! There's something mighty queer behind this." |
07-02-2004, 11:06 AM | #67 | |
Gibbering Gibbet
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Beyond cloud nine
Posts: 1,844
|
Goodness – I get distracted for a few days by an RPG and look what happens in this thread! So much to catch up on *goes back to read and read and read; returns exhausted *
Whew! OK, a lot of work but well worth it. I have my own tuppence worth on a couple point points: Desire vs pity – Durelin, you were the first to, quite wisely I think, introduce the idea that the more effective way to talk about this chapter (and the Ring?) is in terms of desire versus pity rather than good versus evil. I think that much of what this chapter turns on is the sense that Frodo and Gandalf do not know fully what is going on, what the Ring is about, and what is going to happen (“even the very wise cannot see all ends”). To that end, the chapter (and I think the book) quite carefully steers clear of the thorny and impossible issue of good and evil, choosing instead to tackle the more manageable (mortal? practical?) issues of lived experience/existence (thank you Esty for pointing out the proverbial almost folkloric wisdom of this chapter!). I think that the conversation between Frodo and Gandalf takes place against the rather certain backdrop that good and evil exist, that they are different things, but that their true nature cannot be grasped or understood by limited beings such as themselves. Gandalf has a better understanding of good and evil, but not an absolute understanding. (Whenever I hear someone claim that they know for a certainty what good is, I shiver and head the other way; ditto for someone who claims to know with absolute certainty the nature of evil.) The Ring is evil, but what that means is entirely secondary to the question of what are they to do with it (the former being unknowable, the latter being a lived-question that needs to be addressed by mortal/human action) – that is, they do not sit around debating what is Right, but attempt to arrive at an idea of what is the right thing to do. One thing they do decide is that contrary to the desires that the Ring both prompts and responds to is pity, the OED definition of which I provide here to make a point: Quote:
To go a bit further – if we ‘recover’ the sense of pity (as Professor Tolkien always liked to do) the root of pity is the Latin pietas, from which we now have “piety” and whichmeant, in part, “dutifulness; affectionate loyalty and respect.” In other words, the recovered meaning of pity stressed the obligations of the self to the other, which again is the exact opposite of what is entailed by the Ring (thinking of oneself above all others). Sam – Mark 12_30, I too have always fallen in love with Sam every time he shouts “Hooray” and then bursts into tears; but your bringing it out here has cast a fuller light on that moment, for something very much like it occurs at least twice more: first, when the bard of Gondor steps forth at the end and sings the Lay of Frodo of the Nine Fingers (Sam cries aloud with joy and then bursts into tears – that moment always gets me misty, and is doing so now); and second in the very last line of the book, when Sam provides the moment in which we as readers both smile and weep (at least I do, “Well, I’m back” – misty again). We’ve already noted the foreshadowing in the first couple of chapters in relation to Gandalf and Frodo, and the foreshadowing is almost uniformly of bad things (the pain of the journey, the price that Frodo will have to pay for his quest). But with this moment, Sam is foreshadowing the joy that will come with the fall of Sauron – he is expressing for us that joy that cuts so deep that it moves us to tears (dare I say “eucatastrophe”?) This is only fitting and right, as that joy will be most fully felt by Sam and – on his behalf – by the reader, and not Frodo or Gandalf (who will be happy, but who will leave Middle-Earth to the care and love of Sam). “The Shadow of the Past” – Last point! H-I, way back in post #25 had some wonderful thoughts on the nature of shadows, to which I would like to add just a couple more ideas. The title of this chapter is full of a rich ambiguity. Does it mean the shadow cast by the past on the present (shadow-as-absence)? Or does it mean the return of the Shadow that is from the past (shadow-as-presence)? Or does it, and I prefer this option, mean both at the same time? |
|
07-03-2004, 01:57 AM | #68 | |
Hauntress of the Havens
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: IN it, but not OF it
Posts: 2,538
|
*catches breath* Here I am, late again.
As usual, I haven't the time to read everyone's posts, as much as I desire. But I was able to pick up a little in the discussion. For some reason I have always loathed Gollum. Maybe it is basically because of how he looks, the way he speaks, to something deeper like his treachery. But reading the chapter again, I have finally felt the pity that Bilbo felt for him, the reason why he stayed his hand and did not kill him. He could be hated for killing Deagol, but the Ring is the only thing to blame, for its beauty has blinded him to murder. The following line, especially, almost brought me to tears in pity for Gollum: Quote:
I was also amazed by Frodo's intense love for the Shire and its inhabitants, allowing himself to be exiled to save it. Finally, mark12_30, I feel the same way as you do about Sam's devotion for Frodo. Although, frankly, at first I laughed out loud, thinking that Sam's initial reason for coming with Frodo is to see the Elves. But even if that is true, it wouldn't hurt, because eventually he has shown what he can do in his loyalty to Frodo. |
|
07-03-2004, 02:08 AM | #69 | |
Deadnight Chanter
|
to post #63
Mark, I would be glad to be of service
Here is the quote: Quote:
__________________
Egroeg Ihkhsal - Would you believe in the love at first sight? - Yes I'm certain that it happens all the time! |
|
07-03-2004, 02:54 AM | #70 | ||
Illustrious Ulair
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,240
|
Quote:
I think the strangest change Tolkien makes in the drafts of this chapter is how he makes Gollum more & more of a monster. In the first drafts he's not a murderer- there's only Digol, who finds the Ring, makes a nuisance of himself, & gets exiled for it. By the end he's the murderer of his best friend & a canibal (eating babies! ). Is it a case of as Frodo becomes more 'saintly' his 'shadow', Gollum, must become darker - another 'shadow' there. Or perhaps Tolkien felt that Gollum must be made as monstrous as possible in order to emphasise the necessity for, & value of, pity, by requiring us to pity a true 'monster'. We are presented with someone for whom there is absolutely no reason to feel pity. But Tolkien seems to be saying that we should feel pity. So, it doesn't matter what an individual does, its somehow 'obligatory', according to the 'Wise' to feel pity for them, & to show mercy. Why? Simply because that is the opposite of what the Enemy would do? We establish our allegiance to the 'Good' by such things - not by fighting the 'bad' guys, using force of arms to defeat them - but by our moral choices - pity, compassion, mercy, forgiveness - even if those things are not deserved? (Oh, finally, as no-one's mentioned him :'Mad Baggins' - Quote:
__________________
“Everything was an object. If you killed a dwarf you could use it as a weapon – it was no different to other large heavy objects." Last edited by davem; 07-03-2004 at 05:12 AM. |
||
07-05-2004, 02:53 AM | #71 | ||||
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Where you want me to be
Posts: 1,036
|
A trifle late, but still...
Davem wrote-
Quote:
Quote:
On a side track, I think that HerenIstarion's note on the chapter structure and content of the first three chapters of Books I and II (Post #2) is very astute and no doubt intentional, in order to create a consistency and common structure if you like, for the reader to follow- Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Et Eärello Endorenna utúlien. Sinome maruvan ar Hildinyar tenn' Ambar-metta. |
||||
07-05-2004, 01:35 PM | #72 | |
Banshee of Camelot
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 5,830
|
Very good point about the importance of pity, Fordim !
Quote:
I also agree very muchwith Davem's remarks about "Mad Baggins"! There seems nothing left for me to say, except that I'm a bit puzzled by a small detail at the end of the chapter: Sam says "Lor bless you, Mr Gandalf, sir!" and "Lor bless me, sir" . How does that expression fit into Middle-earth ? Just another anachronism like clocks, postoffices etc.? Otherwise Hobbits don't seem to have any religion at all!
__________________
Yes! "wish-fulfilment dreams" we spin to cheat our timid hearts, and ugly Fact defeat! |
|
07-05-2004, 01:56 PM | #73 | |
Brightness of a Blade
|
Quote:
The discussion on pity brought to mind an older thread I started where I was trying to argue that feeling pity for the villains made one more vulnerable to their vile deeds. I still believe that, to an extent, but I agree that in Tolkien's world it all turns out for the common good and pity is redeeming.
__________________
And no one was ill, and everyone was pleased, except those who had to mow the grass. |
|
07-06-2004, 02:24 AM | #74 | |
Illustrious Ulair
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,240
|
Quote:
Tolkien seems to be saying that we are obliged to do the 'right' thing - show pity & mercy to all, & leave the rest to the 'Authority'. Perhaps his philosophy is that if we do the right thing the Authority can work through us & bring about a good result, whereas if we don't do the right thing it can't. As to sympathising with evil characters & so becoming more vulnerable, perhaps Tolkien is simply saying that we shouldn't judge, & that we only have to follow the right path & trust that the Authority will bring things to a good end. |
|
07-06-2004, 06:21 AM | #75 |
Stormdancer of Doom
|
Lor bless you, sir
I like lmp's take on this. The Shire is modeled on Edwardian England. Clocks, umbrellas, blessings, and all. In Edwardian England, the Rules had a firmly religious base, whether it was remembered by the individual or not.
Just so the Shire; The essential Goodness comes from the moral foundation set up by Eru in the king's lands eons ago in Numenor, which oozed over intot he laws brought to Gondor and Arnor, and thence to the Shire with "The King" and "The Rules"-- even if the "Why" of the morality is forgotten. The religion is indeed (in the case of the hobbits) entirely forgotten, but evidence of its foundation apparently still lingers, just like their references to The King and The Rules. They linger like dusty mathoms.
__________________
...down to the water to see the elves dance and sing upon the midsummer's eve. |
07-06-2004, 08:53 AM | #76 | |
Haunting Spirit
|
On the matters of pitty and mercy
Being a bit more practical (or cynical) I always saw that pity/mercy repays. Whether in straightforward sense or the higher power intervene (Gollum helping them find the way and destroying the ring at the end) or simply it makes you feel good in your skin and thus less vulnerable (Bilbo and the ring). However it's just a matter of opinion I guess.
The reason for this post is a lot more trivial... I just wanted to post one quote which is from the other end of the book (exactly the second chapter from back too), but still, I believe, belongs to be discussed together with this one. Quote:
__________________
"Hobbits! Well, what next? I have heard of strange doings in this land, but I have seldom heard of a hobbit sleeping out of doors under a tree. Three of them! There's something mighty queer behind this." Last edited by Mirkgirl; 07-06-2004 at 08:58 AM. |
|
07-23-2004, 06:19 AM | #77 | ||
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Essex, England
Posts: 886
|
To go back to an earlier point raised by Squatter, regarding Sam's point about the 'Tree-men'
After a few readings of lotr, I finally picked up on this. To me, Tolkien inserts this passage and what transpires later to add yet another example of Loss in this novel. To me, Loss is a central theme to LOTR, whether it be Frodo losing the Shire, Sam losing Frodo, Elrond losing Arwen, Gollum losing the Ring, etc. But for this example, I'm talking about the Ents losing the Entwives. We hear Treebeard's story to Merry and Pippin in TT, but unfortunately the hobbits were obviously not present at the Green Dragon when Sam spoke about the Tree-men, and did not hear of the story from Sam's cousin Hal. (As to the 'sex' of the tree-men, they could well have been entwives instead of ents of course, what does Hal know....) If only they had heard this, I hoped. And I know I'm getting ahead of myself here mentioning ROTK but..... To add to Treebeard's sadness in Many Partings, as he says goodbye to the Company, Aragorn throws a spanner in the works: Quote:
And to add a twist, it seems Treebeard is only talking as an aside to Merry and Pippin as they drain their bowls: Quote:
But no, Tolkien leaves Treebeard in his sadness, and gives us another melancholic example of Loss, foreshadowed by Sam in the Green Dragon in Bywater at the begining of the story...... |
||
01-21-2008, 03:36 PM | #78 |
Princess of Skwerlz
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: where the Sea is eastwards (WtR: 6060 miles)
Posts: 7,499
|
"The Shadow of the Past" gives the story depth after the light-hearted beginning, and the sinister foreshadowings become known facts. I'm amused by "Mad Baggins", reminding us how legends grow, starting with some truth and distorting it over time. There's also an echo of the first chapter's account of the death of Frodo's parents in the opinion that Bilbo must have drowned as well.
There are many memorable lines in this chapter - the Ring poem, of course, and Gandalf's wise words on deciding what to do with the time given us, and on deserving death, and on being chosen for a task. Those phrases are of enduring worth and an important part of what makes the book such worthwhile reading - and rereading. We also get a foreshadowing of Frodo's later inability to throw the Ring into Mt. Doom - he can't even throw it into his fireplace in the comparative security of his home! I like Sam's "eavesdropping" pun - do you think it was on purpose or accidental?
__________________
'Mercy!' cried Gandalf. 'If the giving of information is to be the cure of your inquisitiveness, I shall spend all the rest of my days in answering you. What more do you want to know?' 'The whole history of Middle-earth...' |
01-22-2008, 06:33 AM | #79 |
A Voice That Gainsayeth
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: In that far land beyond the Sea
Posts: 7,431
|
Indeed, the Shadow of the Past is at first touching the dark things as themselves, though very carefully at the beginning, with good resonances of the Hobbit: Sauron is mentioned as "the Dark Power that was driven from Mirkwood", and Saruman the White is mentioned in connection with the White Council (yay! I remember when I read this for the first time, I thought something like "what silly Saruman? And White? That's going to be some boring all-good leader in the background" - something like the way many people see Manwë or so, you know: the one who sits in the back and does nothing, though he is the goodest of all good. Oh, how mistaken I was! And I'm happy for that ).
I never noticed how fast Gandalf jumps to the topic concerning the Ring. The flow of the story is slow, gentle all the time: this happens, that happens, yada yada, Sam talks with Ted Sandyman, Gandalf arrives as usual, the and Frodo greet each other, and suddenly boom, "Your Ring is dangerous, there were many rings like that in Eregion." Who? What? Why? Total shock. No one knows what Eregion is, no one knows that there were more Rings like that, Gandalf suddenly overflows us with information. The name "Sauron" is mentioned without warning. On some two pages, we learn about Sauron, Mordor, the Three/Seven/Nine, we learn about the Ringwraith - I would call the two pages that follow after the Ring-verses "intensive course of M-E arcana". Yet I never had the feeling of confusion when reading this, unlike for example the story about Fëanor and Fi(-nwë, -narfin, -ngolfin, -nrod etc.). As to Sam's eavesdropping, I always thought it was intentional "playing dumb" (as Gandalf tells him). Anyway, Sam is just wonderful and his words at the end of the chapter always make me laugh. Also one thing I did not consciously realise until now: I always had the feeling that the Ring-script is supposed to be read from right to left. Does anyone of you have the same feeling when you look at it?
__________________
"Should the story say 'he ate bread,' the dramatic producer can only show 'a piece of bread' according to his taste or fancy, but the hearer of the story will think of bread in general and picture it in some form of his own." -On Fairy-Stories Last edited by Legate of Amon Lanc; 01-22-2008 at 07:43 AM. |
02-23-2008, 07:57 AM | #80 | |
Sage & Onions
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Britain
Posts: 893
|
Transcontinental Dwarves?
Hi all,
another well-discussed chapter, and the crucial one for the plot after all. Typically I'll try and pick up a few minor points. Quote:
Another thing is that 'queer folk' were crossing the Shire and more being turned back by the Bounders. If these were refugees, then where were they coming from? Perhaps they were the first scouting parties of Saruman's spies?
__________________
Rumil of Coedhirion Last edited by Rumil; 02-23-2008 at 04:14 PM. |
|
|
|