Ask the Tolkien Fanatic: First official Thread about Tolkien

[What Exit?]

Ask anything. If I can't answer it then Malacandra will step in an answer it. (Or anyone else that wants to.)

I don't know it all or as much as QtM, but I know way too much or where to find it.

[Ensign Edison]

All right, fine. I'll ask.

Why Tolkein?

I'm not dissing you, believe me. SMBFATF*. I'm a fanboy, I can dig it. But I've read the books both as a teenager and an adult, and while they're all right, I don't share the experience of fascination and delight that many seem to get from them. What is it that speaks to you, draws you to these books? What do they mean to you, and in your life? What sparks the fire they light under you? This might be a bit personal for Cafe Guggenheim, so consider it a general inquiry as well: what patterns do you see in how your fellow Tolkein fans react to the stories?

*Some of My Best Friends Are Tolkein Fiends.

[Rube E. Tewesday]

I've read very little of the tons of stuff that's come out sinceThe Silmarillion How much of it is worth reading, and how much of it can be confidently identified as the father's work and not Christopher's?

[What Exit?]

All right, fine. I'll ask.

Why Tolkein?

I'm not dissing you, believe me. SMBFATF*. I'm a fanboy, I can dig it. But I've read the books both as a teenager and an adult, and while they're all right, I don't share the experience of fascination and delight that many seem to get from them. What is it that speaks to you, draws you to these books? What do they mean to you, and in your life? What sparks the fire they light under you? This might be a bit personal for Cafe Guggenheim, so consider it a general inquiry as well: what patterns do you see in how your fellow Tolkein fans react to the stories?

*Some of My Best Friends Are Tolkein Fiends.

Damn board ate my post, be careful of that save button.

I think this is a good question.

When I first read the books in 6th grade it sparked my love of reading. I found the books were exciting and great in scope but more than that the books had a level of detail I had never seen before and still haven't seen since. Tolkien created a world with fully realized races, languages, runes and scripts, meticulous maps and history. Every piece fits together. He described flowers and stone cities in a way rarely seen.

I loved the emotional changes that he succeeded with. The horror of the attack of the Ring Wraiths at Weathertop, the heroic high of Aragorn and Éomer holding Helms Deep, the feeling of loss at Gandalf's fall, the depression of trudging across Mordor and the thrill of the march of the Ents. The hero of the book was not a wizard or great swordsman but rather a small unsure but brave Hobbit. This hero overcame great odds and yet failed in the end. His mission was only saved as he showed mercy where few others would have.

I love the way everything fit together, I love the way the Hobbits and others fit into the framework of history. I love the way it felt like our own past somehow. The story was completely logical within its own framework and yet still had room for an enigma like Tom Bombadil.

The tragedy of the Elves in the Simarillion and the Lord of the Rings, the changing of Gimli the Dwarf in the Lord of the Rings show details I don’t recall in any other fantasy.

The books just ring true to me and speak to my soul and I never tire of them. I find fans are happy to discuss the books from the obscure to the grand.

[What Exit?]

I've read very little of the tons of stuff that's come out sinceThe Silmarillion How much of it is worth reading, and how much of it can be confidently identified as the father's work and not Christopher's?

If you enjoyed the Silmarillion, then Unfinished Tales is well worth reading but the 12 volume history is only for fanatics and scholars.

The recently released The Children of Húrin is quite good. One of my oldest friends is a light reader and he did not really enjoy the Silmarillion but he did love The Children of Húrin.

[Ensign Edison]

Thanks for that great answer, What Exit. I can definitely relate to that feeling of passion for a work. Actually, I think you've helped me figure it out. I don't get the same reaction because it sounds like fundamentally what's great about Tolkein is that, if you love fantasy, he created some of the greatest examples of it there are. I have loved some fantasy novels and stories, but just don't find myself responding the genre on that deep level, so that's probably why.

[What Exit?]

Thanks for that great answer, What Exit. I can definitely relate to that feeling of passion for a work. Actually, I think you've helped me figure it out. I don't get the same reaction because it sounds like fundamentally what's great about Tolkein is that, if you love fantasy, he created some of the greatest examples of it there are. I have loved some fantasy novels and stories, but just don't find myself responding the genre on that deep level, so that's probably why.

Like anything, what makes it great to many either won't appeal to some or will actually be the reason someone does not like it.

I know people who don't like the books for any of the following reasons:
They just don't like Fantasy.
The poetry/songs annoy them.
The languages and odd names don't work for them.
Tolkien spends too much time on descriptions.
The opening of the Silmarillion is far too boring or confusing.
The Hobbit is too much like a fairytale.
The lack of strong female characters or generally the lack of females.
They had to read it in High School and they don't feel like giving it another try.
etc.

[vison]

This is an apt thread. I am quite active on a website nominally devoted to JRRT, LOTR specifically. The site is an offshoot of TORC. But I hardly ever posted about Tolkien at TORC, I stayed in the political discussion forum. I believe the LOTR threads at TORC are still there, still active, etc., but I never enter them. I'm pretty well talked out about LOTR and JRRT, etc., not that I don't enjoy discussing them at times. But the white hot fury and intensity of the Purist vs Revisionist days are long gone. I still love the book, still read it a couple of times a year, but the movies . . . . well, we won't go there just yet. Still, I am eternally grateful to that PJ person because without him I would never have begun any internet activity at all beyond paying the electric bill.

Our "daughter site" was begun rather as this site was begun, only the disgruntlement began over some unfair bannings that took place when one of TORC's founders got very drunk and went on a rampage. That's the story I heard. I, and a few others, were so cheezed off by it all that we joined the bannees at the new joint. Well, the first new joint. There were further ructions and a half-sister came along and it turned out to be the one I love best.

I found The Dope a year or so ago, and I really liked some of the posters, their wit, their unabashed cussing when appropriate, the level of discourse, etc. I didn't post there a lot, though. Intimidated, partly. That would make my older internet friends laff their guts out, as I am not generally intimidated. On The Dope I got crushed by a nasty man in the first week of my posting and it stung, so I hung back and am still diffident.

Odd, I don't feel diffident here. :mrgreen:

I don't think I have anything new to say on the subject of LOTR, though. A friend of mine has written a book entitled "Arda Reconstructed", he is sending me a copy (signed by the author!!!") and after I've read it, I might know new stuff, or be prompted to make new observations. Anyone who really wants to know how much of the other writing is JRRT and how much was "created" by Christopher Tolkien would probably find my friend's book worth reading. It's available at Amazon. "Arda Reconstructed" by Douglas Kane.

LOTR is one of my favourite books. But I also found, somewhat to my dismay, that it was possible to overdo the discussion, at least for me. It began to feel as though the bloom was coming off the rose, if you know what I mean. I am not a literary critic, don't have a degree in literature, I am just a common reader who loves a great book. While I admire my friend's vast learning and scholarship, it doesn't add anything to the pleasure of the books, as far as I'm concerned.

To return to PJ and the movies. As I said, joining online discussions about LOTR got me hooked on the internet. It was fun, and at the time it all began, in late 1999 (for me), I was at a very bad place in my life. I would have had a very much worse time with things if I hadn't had that old original Decipher/New Line Offical Fan Club to take me away from things. I began writing Fanfic. Yes, I blush to admit it. ops: I wrote REAMS of the stuff. 2 long novels' worth, in fact. Some of it was awfully good and much admired (no slash, no Mary Sue). Writing it showed me I could write something long, maintain the narrative, create characters, manage plots, etc., and while I gave up writing fanfic a long time ago, I sure as hell did not give up writing. I was always a "writer" but now I'm a Writer, if you follow me.

I will watch this thread with interest and join in when the spirit moves me. Thanks for the invite, all.

[eleanorigby]

Ok, here's a question I stumbled onto last night, as I was channel surfing. LOTR was on some cable channel and it was the scene where Elrond is showing Arwen her future, IF she stays behind for Aragorn. He quotes that loveliest of passages re Aragorn: the one about the death of kings unto the breaking of the age* etc. Pure, Tolkien; excellent poetic phrasing, almost Biblical in its lyricism. And it suddenly occurred to me: WTH does happen to Arwen, in the end? She has her son for comfort, and then probably his offspring and theirs and their and theirs, etc, but I find it almost impossible to believe that she never gets to the Grey Havens, EVER. Is she still wandering around ME, like some possessed spirit? Whatever happens to Arwen?





*why, no, I can't be arsed to go look it up. I'm sure someone will get the quote correct and post it here for me. I'm lazy like that...

[fachverwirrt]

Arwen died (of grief), a year after Aragorn, at the tragically young age of 2901.

[eleanorigby]

Arwen died (of grief), a year after Aragorn, at the tragically young age of 2901.

No way. She didn't get to see her kids grown? Oh, wait--Aragorn had unnaturally long life, too, so they probably saw their grandkids die off, right? Once she died, did she go to GH? Or is that for living things? And when does Legolas finally go to GH? I think he wanders around ME with Gimli for a while, no?

[What Exit?]

Arwen died (of grief), a year after Aragorn, at the tragically young age of 2901.

No way. She didn't get to see her kids grown? Oh, wait--Aragorn had unnaturally long life, too, so they probably saw their grandkids die off, right? Once she died, did she go to GH? Or is that for living things? And when does Legolas finally go to GH? I think he wanders around ME with Gimli for a while, no?

Her kids were all grown and Eldarion was of a ripe age to assume the Crown. So Arwen got to see all of her kids grow up and possible some grand kids. She passed away in Lothlorien tended by her daughters (IRC). From there she would have briefly went to the Halls of Mandos and then on to the unknown away from the world where all humans went.

Legolas left in the year 120 and it is said Gimli went with him.

[fachverwirrt]

Arwen died (of grief), a year after Aragorn, at the tragically young age of 2901.

No way. She didn't get to see her kids grown? Oh, wait--Aragorn had unnaturally long life, too, so they probably saw their grandkids die off, right? Once she died, did she go to GH? Or is that for living things? And when does Legolas finally go to GH? I think he wanders around ME with Gimli for a while, no?

They were married for 120 years or so. Eldarion (their son) was about 100 when she died.

[Malacandra]

Not strictly "of grief", either. As a descendant of Elrond, Arwen could choose the fate of either Elves or Men, and appears to have been given every latitude to make that call as late as she liked, in this case when she got married. And as such she was given the Numenorean gift of being allowed to say "OK, time to die. Come and get me," and pass from health and strength into peaceful death without an intervening period of senility.

She had the assurance (though it would doubtless have called for a step in faith) that, as Aragorn said to her on his deathbed, that they were "not bound forever to the circles of the world; and beyond them is more than memory".

[Laughing Lagomorph]

It's funny but when I read the books long before the movies came out I had always pictured Arwen (on the basis of no evidence whatsoever) starting to age naturally as soon as she chose mortality.

It never occured to me that, as depicted in the movies, she would continue to appear to be the same age while Aragorn aged, albeit more slowly than lesser men.

I have a really obscure nit-picky Tolkein question of my own but it will have to wait until I get home tonight so I can refer to the books.

[What Exit?]

It's funny but when I read the books long before the movies came out I had always pictured Arwen (on the basis of no evidence whatsoever) starting to age naturally as soon as she chose mortality.

It never occured to me that, as depicted in the movies, she would continue to appear to be the same age while Aragorn aged, albeit more slowly than lesser men.

I have a really obscure nit-picky Tolkein question of my own but it will have to wait until I get home tonight so I can refer to the books.

The movie basically got it right in this part. Aragorn and Arwen did not appear to age much. Maybe a bit careworn and Aragorn was weary but they had the gift of living long and healthy and mature without much aging and choosing their time of death.

:ugeek: I am looking forward to your question.

[Laughing Lagomorph]

Don't worry, it isn't THAT hard.

Just a line of dialogue in The Two Towers that has never made much sense to me and I have always wondered if it was a mistake that was missed in editing or something.


(I have to say I like this new board except for the smileys, the ones at The Other Place are superior. This place will move ahead though if Smashie comes home.)

[vison]

:mrgreen:

I like Smileys. It is a little known fact that many Dwarf runes were, in fact, Smileys. :shock: If you examine Durin's famous doors to Moria? You will see smileys everywhere. Tolkien knew that some geeky people would pick up on it so he never put it into actual English or Elven words, but rather enjoyed his little joke.

When we come to the Silmarillion, of course, the thing is positively "infested" with Smileys, to use the terminology employed by Smiley-hating critics. But they are big fat poopyheads. :mrgreen:

[Larry Borgia]

Here's a question I asked on the SDMB, but still remain puzzled by. It's been a long time since I read the books.

What exactly does the ring do?

To make things a little more specific, let's say an alternate universe less wise Gandalf the grey decides "The heck with it. I'm taking the ring and will use it to help man, hobbit, and every other race." What sort of things could he do that he couldn't before.

[What Exit?]

Here's a question I asked on the SDMB, but still remain puzzled by. It's been a long time since I read the books.

What exactly does the ring do?

To make things a little more specific, let's say an alternate universe less wise Gandalf the Grey decides "The heck with it. I'm taking the ring and will use it to help man, hobbit, and every other race." What sort of things could he do that he couldn't before.

The ring had both specific powers and worked as a power magnifier.
Specific powers we know of:
1) Invisibility but placing wearer partial in the wraith realm.
2) Controlling and eavesdropping on the wearer of the other Rings. Working best on the 9 and least on the 7 as the Dwarves were too ornery to control.
3) Extended or more accurately the stretching of life.
4) Extended senses
5) Work to preserve Sauron life force in cases of death.
6) Grew stronger the closer to Mt. Doom it gets.
7) Sauron's invested the Ring with a significant portion of his life force and thus it have an evil influence on those that would use it.
8) It had a power of command that even Frodo was eventually able to tap.

Which takes it to the what ifs:
Gandalf was a Maia or Angelic being of considerable power and great wisdom. His powers uncloaked were great. The Witch King was no match for Gandalf the White. With the Ring Gandalf the Grey was likely able to throw off is cloak as a mere Wizard and tap his full powers as a Maia. Gandalf had never expanded his native power like Sauron had so with the Ring he would probably have grown even greater than Sauron. The corrupting influence that Gandalf was well aware of would overcome him. (Beside absolute power corrupts absolutely would have come into play in this case.)
Going by letters and essays I have read this is the future of Middle-Earth with Gandalf as the ultimate dictator.
He would have defeated Sauron and Saruman and started out doing well. He would have built a large single nation though with all power deriving from him. It would be an example of an extremely law driven state and been ordered to the point of oppression beyond Sauron's petty evil. He might well have built a society that none could break with secret police and no secrets allowed. Tolkien made it clear that Gandalf would have been corrupted.

Specifically:
His power over fire would have been greater.
His ability to read minds (look into the souls of others) would have been great.
His ability of command would be absolute.
He would have been able to command Galadriel and Elrond.
We know he would have subdued Saruman with ease and probably made him a toady like Saruman did to Wormtounge.
He had some strong skills with Lightning and they would be greater.
Of course he would have gained control over the Nazguls.


BTW: Galadriel apparently would have ended up something like the Ice Queen of Narnia.

[Larry Borgia]

Thanks, What Exit. Follow up question: What if someone more ordinary got the ring? What benefits do they get? It didn't do a lot for Gollum.

What if Boromir had taken the ring? He had a certain authority already.

[What Exit?]

Thanks, What Exit. Follow up question: What if someone more ordinary got the ring? What benefits do they get? It didn't do a lot for Gollum.

What if Boromir had taken the ring? He had a certain authority already.

All my conjecture based on mulling these issues over before and my readings. QtM or others might cite specific parts where I am wrong. They of course will have difference guesses to some degree great or small.

The Ring varied by power and knowledge. Gollum never had much ambition or strength and he retreated away. Additionally Hobbits were very resistant to the worst aspects of the Ring natively. Samwise would not have likely grown to much power but there was an inner character to Frodo and strength of will where he may have grown some power, especially of command and insights.

Aragorn if given a chance would have grown fearsome in strength but never near the power of Sauron. He would probably have been able to control the Nazgul if he had enough time he already showed a propensity for commanding the Dead. He had a great strength of will and might have been able to survive long enough to gain mastery of it. Sauron would still be there to try to lead him to disaster.

Boromir would have taken the Ring to bring to Denethor. When it came time though he would have not given it up. He would have used the Ring to help him in Battle, fight the Nazguls and command his men and others. The Ring would try to make him foolhardy and lead him to taking silly risks in battle where he could have and would have been killed. If he survived long enough, he would have declared himself King and grown paranoid of those that would unseat him. Faramir would probably have to flee or end up dead. However the Ring would have brought him down. He did not have a great enough store of power and wisdom to control the Ring enough to defeat or subdue Sauron.

[Skald the Rhymer]

[quote=What Exit?]

Thanks, What Exit. Follow up question: What if someone more ordinary got the ring? What benefits do they get? It didn't do a lot for Gollum.

What if Boromir had taken the ring? He had a certain authority already.

All my conjecture based on mulling these issues over before and my readings. QtM or others might cite specific parts where I am wrong. They of course will have difference guesses to some degree great or small.

The Ring varied by power and knowledge. Gollum never had much ambition or strength and he retreated away. Additionally Hobbits were very resistant to the worst aspects of the Ring natively. Samwise would not have likely grown to much power but there was an inner character to Frodo and strength of will where he may have grown some power, especially of command and insights.

Aragorn if given a chance would have grown fearsome in strength but never near the power of Sauron. He would probably have been able to control the Nazgul if he had enough time he already showed a propensity for commanding the Dead. He had a great strength of will and might have been able to survive long enough to gain mastery of it. Sauron would still be there to try to lead him to disaster.

Boromir would have taken the Ring to bring to Denethor. When it came time though he would have not given it up. He would have used the Ring to help him in Battle, fight the Nazguls and command his men and others. The Ring would try to make him foolhardy and lead him to taking silly risks in battle where he could have and would have been killed. If he survived long enough, he would have declared himself King and grown paranoid of those that would unseat him. Faramir would probably have to flee or end up dead. However the Ring would have brought him down. He did not have a great enough store of power and wisdom to control the Ring enough to defeat or subdue Sauron.[/quote:npjbdod7]

[What Exit?]

I think I'm missing something here Skald. What did you mean to post?

[Rube E. Tewesday]

What Exit, I have a feeling I read something about this in Tolkien's letters, but I forget. How did he rationalize the Shire basically being Georgian England, with umbrellas, nice books and the like, while the rest of Middle Earth seemed to be perpetually in the Middle Ages?

[What Exit?]

What Exit, I have a feeling I read something about this in Tolkien's letters, but I forget. How did he rationalize the Shire basically being Georgian England, with umbrellas, nice books and the like, while the rest of Middle Earth seemed to be perpetually in the Middle Ages?

Several factors, but he never went into too much detail. A minor part was that he actually mentioned Dwarves never adapting to matches, preferring tinderboxes. There were a few other things like that.

The main reasons, from memory: The Shire was a protected area blessed by a long peace, extremely fertile land and a pleasantly mild climate and little government. They had a lot of free time and a reasonably large leisure class. They were extremely imitative of others and the Shire was an amalgamation of the best technologies thought of by the Dwarves, Elves, Old Dúnedain kingdoms of the North and the Hobbits own innovation. Everywhere else life was tough. In most cases very tough. Rohan wasn’t too bad, but they were in many ways a simpler more barbaric people then the Hobbits. 1600 years of peace will do wonders for a society. Rohan was warrior oriented and feudal. The Shire was basically a mercantile democracy.

Gondor could make books and the other stuff and did in some cases, but Gondor was a dying culture on a long decline with little trade left. The Dwarves made many marvelous things and the Hobbits were happy to buy them and trade food and goods for them or hard currency of gold and silver. The men of Dale and Erebor also appeared to have some creature comforts as they benefited from being a trading nation, but no where near as safe and secure as the Shire.

[vison]

Victorian, I would say. Not Georgian.

But yes, The Shire is a 'hop out of kin' in Tolkien's world.

[Rube E. Tewesday]

Victorian, I would say. Not Georgian.

....

I wrestled with that, but the Victorian age was huge on railways and factories, and the Shire seemed free of those, at least until Sharky got to work.

[vison]

Point taken.

However, the Post Office struck me forcibly as being Victorian, and the pubs, etc.

A mixture, obviously, of the things Tolkien was nostalgic for.

[Feirefiz]

There is one thing that I wondered recently. Do we know whether the Gaffer pays Master Baggins or the other way round? In other words, is he a tenant or an employee?

[vison]

One would assume an employee, since he doesn't seem to be a farmer or pubkeeper.

It's been a source of unending amusement for me to be involved in discussions of Sam's relationship to Frodo. Manservant? Valet? Batman? Special chum?

It's hard for people nowadays to grasp the master/servant relationship, particularly in the USA.

But whatever Sam began as, he ended as a "gentlehobbit", being raised in status by his service to Frodo and Middle Earth in general, and his friendship with the King of the United Realms in particular.

I believe his descendants became "Gardener" rather than "Gamgee".

[What Exit?]

There is one thing that I wondered recently. Do we know whether the Gaffer pays Master Baggins or the other way round? In other words, is he a tenant or an employee?

Hamfast was an employee and one of the poorer residents of the Hill, living in #3 Bagshot Row just below Bag End. He apprenticed first to Holman Greenhand for nearly 20 years and was the chief gardener for 40. BTW: Hamfast means Stay at Home via Old English hámfoest.

One would assume an employee, since he doesn't seem to be a farmer or pubkeeper.

It's been a source of unending amusement for me to be involved in discussions of Sam's relationship to Frodo. Manservant? Valet? Batman? Special chum?

It's hard for people nowadays to grasp the master/servant relationship, particularly in the USA.

But whatever Sam began as, he ended as a "gentlehobbit", being raised in status by his service to Frodo and Middle Earth in general, and his friendship with the King of the United Realms in particular.

I believe his descendants became "Gardener" rather than "Gamgee".

Actually they went with “Gardner” and his kids did very well. Especially Elanor "the Fair" Fairbairn who was a maid of honor to Queen Arwen. She married Fastred of Greenholm and removed to the towerhills where they established the Undertowers and Fastred was the Warden of the Westmarch.

Sam’s daughter Goldilocks married Faramir Took who was Thain after Pippin. Frodo Gardner inherited Bag End. So Samwise had truly elevated himself and his family. The 7 terms as mayor did not hurt either.

[Laughing Lagomorph]

It's specifically stated that pre-Sharkey hobbits didn't like machines more complex than a forge-bellows, a water-mill or a hand-loom. They are pre-industrial. Georgian era is a good fit (you can't tell me there were no pubs in England then).

[What Exit?]

It's specifically stated that pre-Sharkey hobbits didn't like machines more complex than a forge-bellows, a water-mill or a hand-loom. They are pre-industrial. Georgian era is a good fit (you can't tell me there were no pubs in England then).

Bilbo and thus Frodo had a clock of course. It sat on the mantle and occasionally smoke rings would go around it and notes were stored under it. A clock is a very advanced piece of technology but it is clean and fairly quiet and my guess is that Dwarves made it.

[Laughing Lagomorph]

As promised: My obscure, nit-picky question:

Some background chronology:

February 26th 3019...Eomer hears of the descent of the orc-band from the Emyn Muil
February 27th...Eomer aginst Theoden's orders sets out from Eastfold about midnight to pursue the Orcs.
Feb. 28th...Eomer overtakes the Orcs just outside Fangorn Forest
Feb. 30th...Eomer returning to Edoras meets Aragorn.
Jan. 2nd...Gandalf heals Theoden, the Rohirrim ride west against Saruman, Erkenbrand defeated.

The orc band descended to the plains of Rohan near Rauros, well east and a little north of Edoras. Eomer, against Theoden's (really Wormtongue's) orders, goes to find them and defeats them near where Entwash comes out of Fangorn, almost due north of Edoras. Helm's Deep, the Fords of Isen, and Isengard (the stronghold of Wormtongue's true master Saruman) are all northwest of Edoras.

Eomer, when he meets Aragorn: "Indeed, in this riding north I went without the king's leave, for in my absence his house is left with little guard."

Wormtongue, when Gandalf, Aragorn et. al. arrive in Edoras : "In Eomer there is little trust. Few men would be left to guard your walls, if he had been allowed to rule."

So now, when Gandalf is talking to Theoden about Wormtongue's betrayal he says "But when I escaped and warned you then the mask was torn, for those who would see...Do you not remember how eagerly he [Wormtongue] urged that no man should be spared on a wildgoose chase northward, when the immediate peril was westward?"

What the hell is Gandalf referring to in the bolded section? When did Wormtongue ever urge Theoden to send men northward? It can't be referring to Eomer leading his men out against the orc-band, that was obviously against Wormtongue's plan. And I don't think Wormtongue would be urging Theoden to send men northwest, to attack Isengard. What is he talking about?

[Laughing Lagomorph]

Bilbo and thus Frodo had a clock of course. It sat on the mantle and occasionally smoke rings would go around it and notes were stored under it. A clock is a very advanced piece of technology but it is clean and fairly quiet and my guess is that Dwarves made it.

The clock was wizard powered. A wizard did it.

[What Exit?]

...
So now, when Gandalf is talking to Theoden about Wormtongue's betrayal he says "But when I escaped and warned you then the mask was torn, for those who would see...Do you not remember how eagerly he [Wormtongue] urged that no man should be spared on a wildgoose chase northward, when the immediate peril was westward?"

What the hell is Gandalf referring to in the bolded section? When did Wormtongue ever urge Theoden to send men northward? It can't be referring to Eomer leading his men out against the orc-band, that was obviously against Wormtongue's plan. And I don't think Wormtongue would be urging Theoden to send men northwest, to attack Isengard. What is he talking about?

In the part you quoted, Wormtounge urges that no man be spared to go North. He was trying to leave the way clear for Saruman's servants to go from the Anduin to Orthanc. He was trying to keep Éomer from going North.

'Indeed in this riding north I went without the king's leave, for in my absence his house is left with little guard. But scouts warned me of the orc-host coming down out of the East Wall three nights ago, and among them they reported that some bore the white badges of Saruman. So suspecting what I most fear, a league between Orthanc and the Dark Tower, I led forth my éored, men of my own household; and we overtook the Orcs at nightfall two days ago, near to the borders of the Entwood. There we surrounded them, and gave battle yesterday at dawn.

[Laughing Lagomorph]

Just so we're clear here...the part I'm having difficulty with is Gandalf talking about Wormtongue, not Wormtongue speaking.

If Gandalf is speaking about Eomer's pursuit of the orc-band why would he call it a "wild goose chase"? That phrase means a useless or futile search, which Eomer's pursuit of the Orcs certainly wasn't, as Gandalf well knows.

[What Exit?]

Just so we're clear here...the part I'm having difficulty with is Gandalf talking about Wormtongue, not Wormtongue speaking.

If Gandalf is speaking about Eomer's pursuit of the orc-band why would he call it a "wild goose chase"? That phrase means a useless or futile search, which Eomer's pursuit of the Orcs certainly wasn't, as Gandalf well knows.

Gandalf was referring to how Wormtounge refereed to Éomer's ride north. Wormtounge tried to stop it. Éomer was not allowed to take any troops to ride north and actually took his own house company. Oddly enough this is dealt with a bit in one of the 12 volumes histories.

Consider "urged that no man should be spared on a wildgoose chase northward" to be Gandalf quoting or at paraphrasing Wormtounge.

[Laughing Lagomorph]

If what you are saying is true then I would say it is an editing mistake. I didn't pick up that meaning in 1,000 readings.

[What Exit?]

If what you are saying is true then I would say it is an editing mistake. I didn't pick up that meaning in 1,000 readings.

You could well be right on the editing problem. My own editing skills are poor.

I'll try to find the reference to this event in the Histories tonight or tomorrow. That would at least clarify what Gandalf was talking about.

[What Exit?]

Any more questions?

[ivan astikov]

Did you like the poems, or did you tend to skip through them like me?

[What Exit?]

Did you like the poems, or did you tend to skip through them like me?

I actually liked his nonsense poems like the Dwarves cleaning up or the Man in the Moon and Tom Bombadil's but his more proper poems are probably the part I am most likely to skip through in rereading. I do really like the farewell to Boromir.

I think the poems are one of the most common complaints against the books even by those that otherwise enjoyed them. Actually Tom is another common complaint come to think of it but Tom I love.

[lilacs]

Did you like the poems, or did you tend to skip through them like me?

I like the poems. I have read the Lay of Leithian(what there is of it) many times, and I love Bilbo's poem in Rivendell, "Earendil was a mariner..."

However, I was not happy with the Adventures of Tom Bombadil. I was expecting prose, and I suppose that was my first error. I tried to read it, but I didn't make it through more than four pages.

Galadriel's song about Aman in FOTR, despite it being quite short, can bring me to tears. :geek:

[Laughing Lagomorph]

[quote=What Exit?]

Did you like the poems, or did you tend to skip through them like me?

I actually liked his nonsense poems like the Dwarves cleaning up or the Man in the Moon and Tom Bombadil's but his more proper poems are probably the part I am most likely to skip through in rereading...[/quote:1wxbwe02]

I agree on both counts, I love the dwarves cleaning up and also Sam's Troll poem. There is also a great part in The Hobbit I had forgotten about until I just re-read it, the dwarves have a poem or chant about the wind that they do in Beorn's house. It's just a great scene, it is night and they can't go outside because of the bears, and the Bilbo sees the dwarves sitting together performing this spooky poem.

I often think about that aspect of The Hobbit, about Bilbo being the outcast in an alien culture, one hobbit among 13 dwarves. Did they not speak Khuzdul the whole time? Did they only speak it when they thought Bilbo couldn't hear them?

[What Exit?]

It is worth mentioning that there will be a new Tolkien book available May 5th, 2009.

The Legend of Sigurd and Gudrún which he wrote in the 20s and 30s.

[Rube E. Tewesday]

I've got this thing in the back of my head about the dwarves, specifically the ones of Durin's line. I seem to recall that they believed that Durin had been re-incarnated several times. I also seem to recall that in the appendixes at the back of "Return of the King" there was a genealogy of Durin's people that indicated in the future there would be a final Durin. (I don't have any copies of LOTR handy to confirm this)

(a) Am I right about this?

(b) Did Tolkien, a Catholic, envisage a last Durin at the end of the world, just as the second Pope to be named Peter is the one to be around for the last days?

[What Exit?]

I've got this thing in the back of my head about the dwarves, specifically the ones of Durin's line. I seem to recall that they believed that Durin had been re-incarnated several times. I also seem to recall that in the appendixes at the back of "Return of the King" there was a genealogy of Durin's people that indicated in the future there would be a final Durin. (I don't have any copies of LOTR handy to confirm this)

(a) Am I right about this?

(b) Did Tolkien, a Catholic, envisage a last Durin at the end of the world, just as the second Pope to be named Peter is the one to be around for the last days?

a) You are correct.

b) I don't believe so. In fact it was expected that Durin VII would be the one to lead the Dwarves back to taking over Moria (Khazad-Dûm) and he may have been the son of Thorin III Stonehelm* and so born early in the fourth age, possibly before Aragorn past away in the year 120 FA. It is also possible that Durin VII was born later but everything points to him being born in the fourth age and not too many centuries after the War of the Ring.

Tolkien seemed to envision the Dwarves slowly dwindling in numbers until none were left as it became a world of men. The Elves would be largely gone or hiding and Hobbits dwindled in size and became even more shy of big-folk. The stories of Leprechauns and Brownies would be tied to the descendants of the Hobbits.

* Thorin III Stonehelm was King under the Mountain after his father Dáin II Ironfoot died defending the gates of Erebor and the body of his friend and closest ally, King Brand of Dale.

[Rube E. Tewesday]

So, that Glorfindel. How dead is he?