Flaws

[Lalaith]

Hope this doesn't sound too negative. I think we can take it as read that we are all fans of the Professor and enjoy his works. But, of course, nobody's perfect. I was wondering whether there were any parts of the Tolkien opus that Barrowdowners found poorly constructed, awkward in tone or just plain irritating.
While I can't think of anything I particularly dislike about the Sil or UT, there were some things about LotR which didn't float my boat. Some of the Tom Bombadil stuff, for example. And, once the Fellowship split up, I always found the Sam/Frodo episodes much less exciting than the rest of the book. Partly, I think, because I found the portrayal of their relationship a bit cloying.
What do you all think?

[HCIsland]

Oh, is this thread sure to start arguments. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

I find a couple of devices used too many times. Specifically the Eagles which ride in to turn the tide of the battle in both The Hobbit and LotR and are to convinient a taxi service in both books. As well, I count three occassions in LotR when the squabbling of orcs allow hobbits to escape.

I also find Aragorn a bit too much the stuffed shirt for my taste. One of the occasions that comes to mind is after the breaking of the Fellowship when he spends hours discussing which way to go with Gimli and Legolas, meanwhile both pairs of hobbits are getting further and further away. The other is his grumbling about the rule of no weapons in the Golden Hall. No matter who you are, it seems rather arrogant to question the law of another land.

H.C.

[One Axe to Rule them All]

yep, i agree with the weapons thing..

but i too found the Frodo/sam thing a a bit boring....

not to mention that the reason that they succeed is mainly because the enemy is too busy infighting for the most part to stop them...

[GaladrieloftheOlden]

So far, of the ones mentioned, I agree with the thing about Aragorn and the weapons, which made me want to bash his head in. The things HC mentioned, about the Eagles and the orc squabbles- well, I didn't really notice them before, but I do now, and they are vaguely annoying. I liked ole Tom no matter how much I make fun of him [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img] and though the Frodo Sam things were a bit dull, I wouldn't have them cut out for anything.

~Menelien

[MLD-Grounds-Keeper-Willie]

I have to say that some of his poems are not that great, however, I still enjoy them. And I think that the relationship between Frodo and Sam is a powerful one, but sometimes I just wonder if Sam is gay, even though he isn't. It seemed like he was torn between Rose and Frodo, and I think that he might even marry Frodo if he had the chance [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] . So, in other words, I think that Tolkien really pushed it with that relationship. Other than that, I can't think of anything.

[GaladrieloftheOlden]

I actually thought the relationship was quite nice. But the idea of Rosie and Frodo competing is an interesintg one... [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]
I loved all of the poems, so I can't say much on that. Maybe I'm a bit biased, but I thought they were all wonderful [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img] [img]smilies/tongue.gif[/img]

~Menelien

[HCIsland]

It seemed like he was torn between Rose and Frodo, and I think that he might even marry Frodo if he had the chance.

Well they did all live under the same roof for a while and who knows what goes on behind close doors.

Personally, I was always suspicious of golden hair running in Frodo's family. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

H.C.

[Cazoz]

Hmmm. It seems I shared many of these opinions, despite never having considered them. The Eagles do seem somewhat of a cop-out escape each time, but I like the Manwe connotations and the idea that he was somehow involved.

The Frodo/Sam relationship was, to me, the obvious OTT. Considering the Prof's personal beliefs, I thought it was rather homoerotic! Then again, Catholics and small boys eh? [img]smilies/evil.gif[/img]
But seriously, I think it did somewhat cross the line from pure companionship at some point, although I doubt such things entered the mind of a religious man in the 1950s.

I will be shot for this but with the exception of a few which interested me only after I'd read the Sil, I hated (and always skipped) the poems and songs! BOR-ing. I should probably leave now.

[Morima]

Then again, Catholics and small boys eh? [img]smilies/evil.gif[/img]:

*LOL!* [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img] You are EVIL!

There's oh so many discussions around concerning the relationship between Sam and Frodo (and it seems to annoy many BD'ers greatly too...). Myself I think it's a very good part of the Book. You don't see that kind of 'platonic love relation' between to men in many other books I guess!

And, even though that's the opposite of what you asked of for this thread..., that's one of the things I really LOVE about LotR. There's no describing of/talking about/referring to sex AT ALL. No sex! Think about it; not many books of this caliber has that! I respect it!

Annoying? I have to agree on what you other peeps say here; the good guys get away too easily. I reality I think Sauron woulda won the war without much trouble. But hey, it doesn't bother me, really.

[The X Phial]

The only flaw I can think of is that I would have liked to have had more history in LotR as a whole.

[Angadraug]

Yeah when I read it the Sam/Frodo relationship is a little strange but I just say to myself "Hey Tolkien wrote it, so it can't be anything weird.
Also the songs and poems weren't that bad but there were so many of them at times they were a little too much.

For me it was mainly the part with Frodo and Sam (not as interesting and exciting)and where Aragorn doesn't want to leave his sword. Right then he seems real arrogant. (I like, what I think this is the right person, Hama said, that this is the house of Theoden not Aragorn.)

-GreyWolf

[Morwen Tindomerel]

That fit of stubborness outside Meduseld is decidedly out of character - practically the only time Aragorn tries to pull rank, but I think it's explainable.

He himself says he would normally do as the master of the house, (even if it were a hovel) bid him *except* that this sword is Anduril. Later he insists on putting the sword into a corner with his own hands and solemnly warns the guards against touching it.

IMO Aragorn is genuinely worried about what might happen if somebody other than himself tries to meddle with this ancient and powerful talisman. It is very possible that Anduril is actually physically dangerous to anybody but its rightful owner.

[Yavanna Kementari]

The Frodo/Sam relationship was, to me, the obvious OTT. Considering the Prof's personal beliefs, I thought it was rather homoerotic! Then again, Catholics and small boys eh?
But seriously, I think it did somewhat cross the line from pure companionship at some point, although I doubt such things entered the mind of a religious man in the 1950s.

I will be shot for this but with the exception of a few which interested me only after I'd read the Sil, I hated (and always skipped) the poems and songs! BOR-ing. I should probably leave now.

(No I am not going to shoot you [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] )

Today that type of relationship does seem very odd. And you are right this is the 1950's we are talking about.

Let me start by making a few points:

Point 1: Today things are perverted, words like queer and gay are put into a 'new-aged', slang context that change the pure meaning of the words.

Point 2: Sam calls Frodo, Mr.Frodo.

Point 3: J.R.R.T was from Bloemfontein South Africa.

*laughs* Now this where you say "SO What?"
Now why am I saying these things?
I have often wondered, because of the Professors religion how he felt about how bantu's were treated. (Bantu is 'black' is Africaans) It seems IMHO that Sam (his character anyway) has reflection of the times before the apartide took place.

Sam was Bilbo's gardener, he took care of his fieldly matters and was treated kindly by the Bagginses at Bag End. He was also given lessons by Bilbo himself.
Also we see Sam's family doesn't have money or it seems much education, (other than the 'wisdom' of the Gaffer)and he feels 'responsible' for Frodo. I know that Gandalf set a task for Sam, but maybe because Frodo and Bilbo took such kindness to Sam and gave him an education and friendship that is why we see loyalty and commitment. Sam acts like Frodo is some sort of master over him, but Frodo is not actually and looks on him as a friend and an equal. Maybe I am the only one that sees this. Me and my analytical mind [img]smilies/rolleyes.gif[/img]

He himself says he would normally do as the master of the house, (even if it were a hovel) bid him *except* that this sword is Anduril. Later he insists on putting the sword into a corner with his own hands and solemnly warns the guards against touching it.

IMO Aragorn is genuinely worried about what might happen if somebody other than himself tries to meddle with this ancient and powerful talisman. It is very possible that Anduril is actually physically dangerous to anybody but its rightful owner.

Morwen, I have to agree with you there. Kind of an Excalibur sort of deal.
I mean it is the sword that cut the One from Saurons hand. And perhaps, he didn't want to leave it because he revered it so. And we see how the blade cut Boromir, also the blade sliced through the Dark Lord himself, mayhap there is some sort of spell on it, wether for good or evil ( I think good because all of the other swords melted or turned to ash with a Morgul spell when the Nazgul were stabbed).

Any way, maybe I'm the only one that sees things this way. Great Topic by the way.

I think that as far as flaws are concerned, I see none really, other than the ones the Professor was working on before he passed on. And they really aren't that big a deal to me. I am not picky [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img] It's LotR I LOVE it!

[The X Phial]

I have often wondered, because of the Professors religion how he felt about how bantu's were treated. (Bantu is 'black' is Africaans) It seems IMHO that Sam (his character anyway) has reflection of the times before the apartide took place.

I, unfortunately, no longer have a copy of the letters handy, but during WW2, when Christopher Tolkien was stationed in South Africa, his father wrote to him quite often. While I can't recall the actual quote now, I do know that the treatment of native peoples by European settlers was not approved of by Tolkien. I believe he expressed disgust. I doubt he would intentionally have written anything that would reflect well on aparthied.

[manaratowen]

Sam was Bilbo's gardener, he took care of his fieldly matters and was treated kindly by the Bagginses at Bag End. He was also given lessons by Bilbo himself.
Also we see Sam's family doesn't have money or it seems much education, (other than the 'wisdom' of the Gaffer)and he feels 'responsible' for Frodo. I know that Gandalf set a task for Sam, but maybe because Frodo and Bilbo took such kindness to Sam and gave him an education and friendship that is why we see loyalty and commitment. Sam acts like Frodo is some sort of master over him, but Frodo is not actually and looks on him as a friend and an equal. Maybe I am the only one that sees this. Me and my analytical mind

this is so the way i saw the relationship. it does seem odd in todays terms, but in thoses days and times, it was very much the "in thing", for lack of a better term.

[Cazoz]

You guys are right, he intended to write the relationsip that way but it does come across differently, given how modern society thinks; with innuendo everywhere and homosexual lifestyles commonplace.

On a slightly related note, but not really a flaw, more an amusement, I love the way that the antiquated language comes across today. Tolkien's use of 'gay' and 'queer', whilst proper, is out of date for today's world and makes me chuckle. Not to mention some mentions of 'black men' and so on, which would be terribly politically incorrect if written by a contemporary author. But as they stand, I just laugh at the old-fashioned English stuff and how pompous some of it sounds today, even when it probably shouldn't.

[Lalaith]

I wouldn't mind the Sam/Frodo thing as much, actually, if it *were* a bit more homoerotic. But I don't think it is. I think the relationship is an army-type one, based on the English class system. Officers in the British army at the time would have had 'batsmen' who looked after their needs. The batsmen were of lower rank, obviously, and from lower social classes to the 'posh' officers. They were often very devoted, and I think Tolkien is presenting us with a highly sentimentalised version of this kind of set-up.

I'm surprised by so many people objecting to Aragorn's Anduril issue! It's one of the few times he pulls rank, I agree, but he shows so few flaws in general that it's good to see he isn't perfect...

[HCIsland]

I love the Sam/Frodo relationship and any homosexual overtones are certainly something that is a product of the later part of the century and were not the original intent. I agree with others that talked of the platonic love between these two characters. In Tolkien's day one could present two male characters in this way without other implications drifting in. It's actually a poor reflection on the modern male that we can't read this without cracking a joke, myself included.

H.C.

[Child of the 7th Age]

I'd like to refer back to a "flaw" that was pointed out at the beginning of this thread. Several posters mentioned that they saw the beginning of the book as boring and not really essential to the later plot.

I respectfully disagree. It's obviously true that the earliest chapters have a different flavor and tone than the later parts of the book. Partially this was because Tolkien was initially unsure what direction his tale would take. At first, he saw LotR as a direct continuation of The Hobbit. However, as he wrote, it became clear that it would be a much more somber tale than that with wider implications. Also, it would tie more directly into the history of the Silmarillion.

Although I recognize a certain discontinuity between the beginning of the book and the later chapters, I still feel that the early hobbit scenes are both absolutely essential and a real personal treasure.

There is a point in the Letters where Tolkien discusses this. He comments on the later scene where Sam sits in the middle of Mordor and remembers going swimming with Rosie at the old swimming hole back in the Shire. Tolkien points out that it is absolutely essential that the reader have a sense of the life that Sam and Frodo left behind them. The whole point of what they are doing is to preserve a way of life in the Shire which is worth defending and even dying for.

You can have all the fast action and wild battle scenes that you want, but unless you understand why Frodo is willing to persevere and give up his life if needed, you really won't understand what Tolkien is trying to tell us. This is why the beginning chapters of the book are essential. They are slow, yes. But life in the Shire itself is slow and deep, like the simple rhythms of existence that guide the hobbits---family, growing things, comradeship.

We are so used to thirty-minute television programs today, and fast, short bites on the computer. For most of us, it's hard to sustain our attention too long focusing on one thing. But Tolkien grew up in a different era. Most of his life, he did not even drive a car. (He tried, but had to quit because he was a terrible driver!) So, when you read these chapers, try to stretch yourself and relish what is being described. In a sense, it underlies the whole meaning of the book.

[ May 01, 2003: Message edited by: Child of the 7th Age ]

[Rumil]

I'd like to add to Child's point that the mood and pace of the book changes to reflect the plot. In the first few chapters the mood is light and 'faerie'. As the real stakes become clear the pace becomes more serious as we realise what the company is up against. The contrast between the action-adventure battle scenes and Frodo and Sam's trip through Mordor is most striking. The pace of the Mordor chapters slows to give the impression of a long, grinding, near-impossible task.

On the question of what Tolkien got wrong, I think he became too interested in explaining the origins of the various species. I don't really need to know exactly how trolls, ors ents and their respective fea were created.

[Cazoz]

I agree with Child, the style of writing reflected to mood of the story at that point and it was insightful of his to actively adapt it.

His origin of species stuff didn't bother me, actually. Another gripe I had was with the many inconclusive tales. I do think many things should be debated over and left to our imagination, but some specific things such as the fate of Celeborn, Elladan and Elrohir or more thorough accounts of action up in Mirkwood/Erebor during the War of the Ring would have been well-received. However I can accept that some things like the Entwives or detailing the many years of wandering by Aragorn and Gandalf are best left to the imagination. But when things are mentioned or started, I would like an ending. For example, the Blue wizards we never encountered so I didn't care too much about and wasn't overly bothered about what happened to them. But Radagast we knew of from The Hobbit and also met in LoTR, so I would have liked a conclusion on his story. I was never really satisfied with him simply becoming a crazy Doctor Doolittle bird-freak and nothing more.

[Sophia the Thunder Mistress]

I agree with you on that one, 100% Cazoz... I have always been completely dissatisfied with the part that Radagast plays. Saruman and Gandalf are both major players in the WOTR, and even though I realize that Radagast was sent by Yavanna specifically to keep track of the Kelvar and Olvar, it frustrates me that we don't see any sign of him ever doing anything to actively protect them, other than indirectly, by fiddling with Gandalf. And to stack on top of that, he wanders back off into the woods like Nebuchadnezzar or someting (can't you picture him eating grass?) and we never hear anything more about him. [img]smilies/frown.gif[/img]

The eagles don't bother me too much in LOTR, but I thought they got a little old in Silm. Whenever anyone's got a problem, down swoops an eagle and drags him off to safety, or warns him, or goes and tells Turgon he's there, or what have you.

And with all those eagles swooping around rescuing people, Turin can't get a break.
Acutally, I love the story of Turin, I think it's one of the best parts of the stories, but I just get so mad about the raw deal he got sometimes. [img]smilies/frown.gif[/img]

[Belethfacwen]

Like X said earlier on, I would have liked better perhaps a bit more history. And also, man, he left so much stuff unanswered. Okay, I know, he couldn't help DYING, but you get what I mean. Hah.

I enjoy most of songs and poems, myself. And I enjoyed the beginning as well. The only thing was before the beginning. When I was pretty young, I picked up LotR and started reading it. I assumed that you were supposed to read the preface, so I began reading "Of Pipeweed." I know it's no one's fault but my own for turning away from it because of disliking that, I think perhaps some of the things like that are a bit boring.. whereas opposed to the kind of history you find in the Silmarillion is exciting. Picky, I know, and not too smart as well.

But other than my little complaints, I see pretty much no flaws.

[Morwen Tindomerel]

A discussion over on the Movie board reminded me of a *BIG* flaw: Arwen's near invisibility making her marriage seemingly come out of the blue. Irritated the heck out of me when I first read the book at thirteen. Who *is* this female who cuts out Eowyn and grabs Aragorn anyway?

And that of course is the problem. We have barely a glimpse of her in Rivendell, and a hint - that you have to have read the 'Tale' in the appendix to understand - that she and Aragorn are more than good friends in Lorien. Then *Voila* there she is Queen of Gondor.

I am not suggesting that she should have joined the Fellowship - Eru forbid! - but she could have been a little more in evidence at Rivendell, she *is* mistress of the house after all! Couldn't she have carried around the parting cup, (like Galadriel and Eowyn) and given Aragorn a significant look and tender farewell speech that lets the reader know what they mean to each other, and maybe exhibits a bit of personality on her part?

I mean talk about bland and passive! Does this woman have *anything* going for her but her looks? If so you'd never know it from the way she's written.

[The X Phial]

I agree that Arwen always seemed a weak character. This is one of the instances in which I believe more history is needed in the text. While I understand that the book is not primarily meant to be about romance, I think it would make more sense from the point of view of understanding Aragorn's motivation on a more complex level if we got to see more about this particular relationship. At the same time, however, I think the relationship with Arwen, and Arwen's character in general, are used to further the sense of mystery around Aragorn. Here is an obviously moral and noble man whose history is only glimpsed at through snatches of tales and second-hand accounts. It makes sense that his love life would be hidden. So, I think that, while I would have prefered more in text explanation for who Arwen was and what her role might be, it is fitting for the character of Aragorn to have a secret romance that the other members of the fellowship (and therefore the audience) have no part in.

[The Only Real Estel]

The Frodo/Sam trip was a bit boring, but how are you going to portray a trip like that (lots of traveling), without being boring? You can't put to much action in, or else it seems like the hobbits are un-catchable, you can't render that with a few capturings of the hobbits, because they obviously have to get loose, and that makes them look un-keepable. Too much action with the hobbits still emerging in the end makes them look invincable, something no self-respecting Tolkien-reader would've wanted. It is a bit boring, but really, what could he have done any differently? [img]smilies/cool.gif[/img]

[Morwen Tindomerel]

Okay maybe there should be a certain mystery about Aragorn and his motivations.

All right then, couldn't Arwen have shown the same interest in Frodo that her grandma and Goldberry do? After all she is very sweet to him in the one good scene she has in ROTK.

All I ask is a few lines of dialogue to establish her as a sympathetic character worthy of Aragorn's love. A heart to heart with Frodo would do very well.

[Manardariel]

What Bugged me a bit were the Sackville-Baggins. I mean, it was like we never found out WHY they hated Bilbo so much. I think it´s a pity it never says what was the story behind them. (Hmm, that would make a good FanFic... [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]) It´s like the bad stepmother and-sisters in Cinderella. All we ever hear is "they were jealous" and I personally always thought there was more to it, but there wasn´t. As for the S-Bs, I wonder if they were bad, or if Bilbo just didn´t like them and used his influence on young hobbits to make them unpopular... hey, it could happen.

Edit:About Arwen: I know what you mean. Buuuuuut there IS one indication back in Rivendell... here. Bilbo says that to Aragorn somewhere in the "Many Meetings" Chapter.

Why weren´t you at the feast? The Lady Arwen was there."
Strider looked at Bilbo gravely. "I know" he said. "But often I must put mirth aside."

That is some indication... I remember my eyebrows going up when I read it for the first time. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

[ May 03, 2003: Message edited by: Manardariel ]

[Lyra Greenleaf]

The "Sam and Frodo are gay" thing really annoys me. And I have to say I never expected it here. I think it's a shame that men aren't allowed the same sort of friendship we are without people finding it "gay". If it was two girls and they were willing to die for each other, or a man doing it for a girl everyone would think it's amazing, inspirational, etc. Why should it be different? Anyway, it's based on Tolkien's experience in the war when there were close friendships like that, between people of different classes. Adversity brings closeness, and you can't face much more adversity than Frodo and Sam- can you?

[Morwen Tindomerel]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why weren´t you at the feast? The Lady Arwen was there."
Strider looked at Bilbo gravely. "I know" he said. "But often I must put mirth aside."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"That is some indication... I remember my eyebrows going up when I read it for the first time."

A hint yes, but not much more than that. All it really tells us is that Arwen is somebody Aragorn would want to see - I mean a Man might be eager to see a favorite aunt or foster sister!

We get another hint in Lorien when Galadriel gives him the Elfstone and he makes that comment about her 'having in keeping the only treasure he seeks'. But one only realizes he's talking about Arwen after reading the 'Tale'. And of course there's that banner - but even that could have been a sisterly gift rather than a romantic one.

But you've got a point, the romance *is* hinted at. The real problem is Arwen remains a complete cipher. Like I said above, I would have liked a few lines of dialogue showing some personality behind the pretty face. Her kindness to Frodo in ROTK is to little to late.

[Cazoz]

The "Sam and Frodo are gay" thing really annoys me. And I have to say I never expected it here.

I don't think anyone thought they were explicitly gay, just that by modern standards the Professor's description of their companionship and closeness raises eyebrows. Nor do I think here people even find that, just that at some parts even the most pious fan will pick up on it. The films probably accentuate this, although the kissing, touching and devotion are all prevalent in the book. I don't take it seriously; I know it wasn't the original intention and find it funny anyway, as he'd probably he spinning in his grave!