30 Days of Fellowship

Top
Movies

Photo
Galleries

Video/DVD

Browse
IMDb

Independent
Film

Search the database for

More searches | Tips

Board: Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, The (2002)

View: thread | flat | inline | nest

Prev Topic | Next Topic

30 Days of Fellowship

by - sinaes (Sun Jul 27 01:01:03)

UPDATED Tue Aug 19 01:51:31

Day 1 - 'Fellowship of the Ring' and LOTR Titles

by - sinaes (Sun Jul 27 01:03:52)

UPDATED Sun Jul 27 01:18:10

As we know, the entire story for LOTR was written as a single work, intended to be read as one whole. However, it was subdivide into three parts for publishing reasons. Thus, out of the 'Lord of the Rings' sprang 'The Fellowship of the Ring', 'The Two Towers', and 'The Return of the King'.

So my question is this, how do you feel the story was changed by these titles? Do you think that you interpret each of the three works differently because they have the attached title? If you can imagine, how would your perception of the story change if FOTR had simply been named LOTR part 1, TTT named LOTR part 2, and ROTK named LOTR part 3?

On a related question, what meaning if any do you currently attribute to the different books/section of the story because of their publishing name?

As for me, the title 'Lord of the Rings' conjures up 1) Sauron 2) The Ring 3) everything that the Ring has enabled to exist (the Fellowship, the War of the Ring ... in short, the entire story)

I find that the title 'Lord of the Rings' is good for attaching to the entire story as a whole after having read it. The title 'Lord of the Rings' becomes a great mental marker for the sum of a fantastic story, indeed a whole world. In this way 'Lord of the Rings' doesn't represent a single thing, but a whole intertwined web of characters, places, events, quotes, themes.

However, it's a title that would have very little meaning beforehand. That is, armed with solely the title, I would not go into the story the first time with a big filter of preconceptions expecting the story to be about this or that (aside from having to do with rings and a lord). Nor having read the story, would my perceptions of it change upon reflection because of the title. Instead, it would be the title that would have grown in meaning ... beacuse of the story.

However, with the title 'Fellowship of the Ring' ... I was clearly expecting LOTR part 1 to be about a 'fellowship' and not just about an epic struggle against evil (which is what the 'lord' and 'rings' are quickly explained to mean). While this is a slight change, it is a change.

Instead of focusing on the struggle, my attention is directed to the protagonists specifically. Now, that happens anyway when reading a story ... so this change is rather harmless. But would I have paid more attention to Sauron and his point of view if it weren't for the title? Instead of simply being the 'bad guy' of the story, would I have tried more fervently to understand how Sauron, Saruman, and others choose the 'dark path' over that of good?

Furthermore, after having read 'LOTR part 1' ... it's clear to me that because of the title 'Fellowship of the Ring', I go away from that section of the story, feeling it was all primarily about overcoming the things that drive us against one another to instead forge a better world. In addition to being about how each can contribute in their own unique and special way. Thus reaffirming that even the seemingly insignificant, the 'smallest', has tremendous inherent worth.

All fine and well :) ... but those themes would have been there otherwise even if the book wasn't named 'Fellowship of the Ring'. So how fair is it that these specific two themes are highlighted because of the publisher's title? Would it just be better to let the reader decide, from among the many themes, which ones to highlight? Or are the two that I mentioned the most important ones anyway in this section of LOTR, and thus, deserving of the extra focus?

How are LOTR part 2 (The Two Towers) and LOTR part 3 (Return of the King) similarly affected due to their publishing titles?

I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless [bounce]

Day 2 - The Council of Elrond and the Composition of the Fellowship

by - sinaes (Mon Jul 28 04:58:48)

At the Council of Elrond, the characters join the Fellowship in the following order:

1) Frodo
2) Gandalf
3) Aragorn
4) Legolas
5) Gimli
6) Boromir
7) Sam
8) Pippin & Merry

I will attempt to explain why I believe it was important for all these characters to join the quest, and for them to join in this perticular order.

The Council of Elrond

The Council of Elrond was of course a meeting to decide what should be done with the Ring now that it had been discovered.

The three main races of Middle Earth were gathered, as well as Gandalf, their chief Ainu guide. Frodo wasn't there so much as a representative of the Hobbits, but as the ring-bearer, the one who had brought the Ring to Rivendell.

In the books, four main proposals as to what to do with the Ring were presented. Two involved hiding the Ring, but wouldn't actually solve the problem. The Ring would still exist, and Sauron might have been tempted to simply bide his time, build his armies, and grow more powerful before going out to reclaim it.

The other two proposals from the book, are also presented in the film. The first, Boromir's propopal, was to use the Ring as a weapon against Sauron.

It is a gift. A gift to the foes of Mordor! Why not use this ring?

Long has my father, the Steward of Gondor, kept the forces of Mordor at bay. By the blood of our people are your lands kept safe. Give Gondor the weapon of the Enemy. Let us use it against him!

This is quickly explained away as not being a valid plan by Aragorn.

You cannot wield it! None of us can. The One Ring answers to Sauron alone. It has no other master.

It's interesting to note that it is two men who debate this point of action. Men being the ones who allowed the Ring to endure in the first place.

Specifically, the responsibility of Isildur for the Ring's fate is acknowledged by the next exchange of dialogue.

Boromir: And what would a Ranger know of this matter?

Legolas: This is no mere Ranger. He is Aragorn, son of Arathorn.
You owe him your allegiance.

Boromir: Aragorn? This is Isildur's heir?

By ensuring that the only proposal left was the Ring's destruction, Aragorn had begun to redeem the fault's of his ancestors.

The last proposal presented was the destruction of the Ring, put forward by Elrond himself. All recognize that this is what must be done (save for Boromir). Gimli is all to eager to take credit for putting a swift end to all this [biggrin]

Which he fails spectacularly at [wink]

Out of this arises a new dilemma.

As Elrond says:

The Ring cannot be destroyed, Gimli son of Gloin, by any craft that we here possess. The Ring was made in the fires of Mount Doom. Only there can it be unmade. It must be taken deep into Mordor and cast back into the fiery chasm from whence it came. One of you must do this.

So the problem is which one, and how?

Boromir is quick to voice the counter-argument to Elrond's plan:

One does not simply walk into Mordor. It's black gates are guarded by more than just Orcs. There is evil there that does not sleep, and the Great Eye is ever-watchful. It is a barren wasteland, riddled with fire and ash and dust. The very air you breathe is a poisonous fume. Not with ten thousand men could you do this. It is folly!

And from here the Council quickly degrades into a shouting match ...

Legolas: Have you heard nothing Lord Elrond has said.
The Ring must be destroyed.

Gimli: And I suppose you think you're the one to do it.

Boromir: And what if we fail, what then? What happens when Sauron takes back what is his?

Gimli: I will be dead before I see the Ring in the hands of an Elf.
... Never trust an elf!

This all perfectly illustrates why the quest to destroy the Ring would have failed without Frodo.

1) The three main races don't trust one another, and thus could hardly be expected to co-operate over the length of the extended journey.

2) Men, who feel responsible for the Ring and are directly adjacent to Mordor, are not naturally inclined to seek the Ring's destruction as they consider it "folly". This is important, because even if the 3 races were to miraculously start working together, it will still be Men who will be expected to march into Mordor. And it is Men who will be in the final position to either allow the Ring to continue into Mordor, or be held back in an attempt to use it as a weapon.

3) All this happening even before the Ring starts chanting Ash nazg durbatul�k, ash nazg gimbatul. Ash nazg thrakatul�k, agh burzum-ishi krimpatul!

It's made all too clear that playing off their natural tendencies, the Ring will have no problem dealing with a bunch of men, elves, and dwarves.

Even Gandalf can be seen shaking his head, and fruitlessly trying to stop the bickering.

Frodo

Strangers from distant lands, friends of old...

You've been summoned here to answer the threat of Mordor. Middle-earth stands upon the brink of destruction. None can escape it.
You will unite or you will fall.

Each race is bound to this one fate, this one doom.
Bring forth the Ring, Frodo.

Frodo's only part in the entire Council of Elrond was to have been his handing over of the Ring. That's all anyone was expecting of him. 'The Hobbits' as a race, weren't represented in the discussions. In fact, at no time does Frodo ever involve himself in the arguments, nor does he imply by his demeanor that he is actually there to present his thoughts on equal footing with the others.

It's only in that moment when Frodo sees all Middle Earth arguing and notices that the Ring's work is indeed already being done ... that Frodo releazes that he must take the Ring. What exactly possessed Frodo to do this, is a question I leave to you.

But what is clear is that Frodo saves the quest from almost certain failure. 1) Not only is he more resistant to its effects (a trait perhaps attributable to the fact that Sauron never forged Rings specifically aimed at controlling hobbits) ... but 2) Frodo has shown himself to have a clear disposition set on disposing of the Ring, despite being the rightful owner.

Frodo therefore, is someone all the races trust to physically handle the Ring. His diminutive stature and lack of noble birth also perhaps, make it less intimidating to others to a) let Frodo take credit for bearing the Ring and b) risk having him use it, if by chance his will is eventually overcome by the Ring.

Frodo had to be the first to accept the quest. He is the only one at the Council who could get all the other races to agree to co-operate with one another. In retrospect, Frodo is such an obvious choice for ring-bearer, that all of the others present are shown to be in shall we say 'surprised agreement' with Frodo's decision.

Without Frodo, everything falls apart. No one left to resist the Ring long enough to finish the quest. No Gollum to show the way into Mordor. No uniting of the races.

Gandalf

Gandalf, being close friends of Frodo, certainly would not allow him to go on alone. But it is important that Gandalf be second. 1) He is the wisest of all those present. His decision to personally join the quest with Frodo as ring-bearer, really eliminates any doubt that Frodo's decision is the correct one. 2) Gandalf is the most powerful of all those present, this works to reassure all the dissenters that this quest may not be "folly" afterall.

Aragorn

If Aragorn is to be king, then he must do this. Why did he need to be third? Because men are responsible for letting the Ring endure. Therefore, they must be the first of the three main races to seek it's destruction if all is to be set right again. Also, as the future king of Men, and indeed since the elves are leaving, as the future leader of Middle Earth ... it simply makes sense to have Aragorn be the first to join the quest out of everyone left.

Legolas

The elves were always going to go, and it's no surprise that after allowing room for Men to take the lead, an elf is there eager to join the quest.

Gimli

If he hadn't been in shock of losing his favorite axe, Gimli certainly would have beat Legolas to the punch. But seriously, you don't think the dwarves were going to tolerate being left out do you? [biggrin]

Especially not with an elf agreeing to go.

Boromir

At this point, Boromir is the offical representative of Men. Aragorn's involvement would in no way deter another man from taking part in the quest. This in direct contrast to the elves and dwarves apparant view, that one of their kind is enough.

Boromir has also been the main dissenter, so he naturally would be the last to agree to go. But agree he must, else compromise Gondor's reputation and standing in Middle Earth.

Sam

Friend to Frodo. Would seem to have been the natural choice to be second to accept the quest. But of course he wasn't technically invited.

I can almost picture Sam intently 'eeves-dropping,' only to be surprised at hearing Frodo agree to go on the quest. Afterall, it wasn't that long ago that Frodo had agreed that his work was done, and that it was time to go home.

But now that it's clear that there will be a quest, and that Frodo is going, Sam would not never think of abandoning his friend. So he rushes off to be included.

Pippin and Merry

"Hey another hobbit gets to go on this adventure!? Why can't we?!" Or so they must have thought :) I see them going mostly for the 'thrill' rather than any sense of obligation.

Which brings me to my question, how do you feel the composition of the Fellowship would have changed, if for some reason a member of the Fellowship had not been at the council of Elrond? (Frodo not including) But for example, what if Boromir had been tied up and not been there ... would another man have taken his place? How would that have affected the quest? What if Legolas wasn't there, would Glorfindel have gone instead? Personally, I hold the view that if Gloin had been at the Council in the films, he might have gone instead of or perhaps in addition to Gimli [winkgrin]

I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless [bounce]

Day 3 - Heaven and Hell

by - sinaes (Tue Jul 29 03:05:35)

UPDATED Tue Jul 29 03:23:08

One does not simply walk into Mordor. It's black gates are guarded by more than just Orcs. There is evil there that does not sleep, and the Great Eye is ever-watchful. It is a barren wasteland, riddled with fire and ash and dust. The very air you breathe is a poisonous fume. Not with ten thousand men could you do this. It is folly!

Have you ever seen it, Aragorn? The White Tower of Ecthelion, glimmering like a spike of pearl and silver, it's banners caught high in the morning breeze. Have you ever been called home by the clear ringing of silver trumpets?

Both of these are spoken by Boromir. The former, at the Council of Elrond ... where Boromir talks in relation to a place he specifically does not wish to go. The latter, in Lothl�rien ... where Boromir speaks of a place he is longing to get to.

What is clear is that these are Boromir's visions of what heaven and hell is. What is not so clear is whether they are Tolkien's visions as well.

Are these two passages voicing the author's own views?

The description of Mordor would seem to aptly fit a place, not only of great evil, but of terrible war. Boromir speaks about marching 'ten thousand men' inside Mordor's borders, and goes on to imply their subsequent death. 'Ten thousand men' in Middle Earth, can almost certainly be taken to mean 'millions of men' in real Earth, if one were so inclined to make that comparison.

The description of Minas Tirith speaks not just about a majestic sight, but about music, and indeed home. The passage describes a place of great beauty, and more importantly, a place of peace. When shown in the film as Gandalf rides there to research the Ring, the place is indeed portrayed as the height of Middle Earth civilization.

The only other place presented to rival it is Rivendell. But Rivendell is not just a place of civilization, but a place of great natural beauty. From a human perspective, one would not say that Rivendell is a great place solely because of what the Elves have done, but really, it's a place that is equally as great because of what the Elves haven't done.

That's not the case with Minas Tirith. The White City is clearly a magnificent place solely because of man's efforts. Standing there against the plain natural background, it can scarcely not be taken as a symbol of man's creative potential.

Contrast this with Mordor, which can scarcely be taken not to represent man's destructive potential. Afterall, the main reason why it is a place of great evil, is because men refused to destroy the Ring. If not for that, Barad-D�r would never have been rebuilt, the orcs would not be multiplied, and Sauron would not have returned to threaten the world.

Is there an even more apt description of hell anywhere in Tolkien's works than that given to Mordor? Is there an even more apt description of heaven than that given to Minas Tirith?

How significant is it that these two are geographically adjacent to one another, and that the main struggle for the future state of the world is fought here, between the two?

I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless [bounce]

Day 4 - Tolkien Ethics and the Pity of Bilbo

by - sinaes (Wed Jul 30 00:09:53)

UPDATED Wed Jul 30 01:30:41

There's another scene that's always stuck in my mind as relating the author's direct views, rather than simply being dialogue between the characters.

Frodo: There's something down there!

Gandalf: It's Gollum...

Frodo: Gollum!?

Gandalf: He's been following us for three days...

Frodo: He escaped the dungeons of Barad-D�r?

Gandalf: Escaped, or was set loose.

He hates and loves the Ring, just as he hates and loves himself. He will never be rid of his need for it...

Frodo: Pity Bilbo didn't kill him when he had the chance!

Gandalf: Pity? It was pity that stayed Bilbo's hand. Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them, Frodo? Do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends. My heart tells me that Gollum has some part to play yet, for good or evil, before this is over. The pity of Bilbo may rule the fate of many.

Frodo and Gandalf both mention 'pity', but they are not talking about the same thing. While one can hardly question Frodo's sincerity, Gandalf seems quite surprised at Frodo's usage of that word.

When Frodo talks about pity, he is talking about how he thinks it would have been better if Gollum had simply died. Afterall, obsessing about the Ring, being tortured in Barad-Dur, then being condemned for the rest of his days to long after the 'precious' is hardly Frodo's idea of an ideal life.

However, Gandalf is quick to correct Frodo, saying that 'pity' is in fact the reason why Gollum is alive. Well, what is Gandalf in fact talking about when he uses the word 'pity' and why is that different than what Frodo said?

I believe that Gandalf is talking about true compassion, that is, to treat others as you would have them treat you ie. the golden rule. It's interesting that Gandalf specifically mentions the word 'rule' along with 'pity': The pity of Bilbo may rule the fate of many.

Now the golden rule is nothing new, in fact a version of it can be found in all the world's major religions. But it is often presented as an 'ideal', as simply a rule to be followed. How many who say they adhere to a religion, truly live their life according to the golden rule, which is perhaps the greatest moral guideline of all?

It can in fact be argued, that people generally live their life by what is known as the 'iron rule', that is "do unto others as they do unto you". Which is along the lines of "an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth."

What is different about Tolkien is that he not only presents the golden rule, but takes time to explain why one should follow it.

In many ways, when Frodo says "Pity Bilbo didn't kill him when he had the chance!" ... he is advocating the 'iron rule'. Gollum killed to get the Ring, thus it would seem only natural that he get that in return. Gollum would kill to get the Ring again, thus he should be killed.

Yet, Gandalf argues for the golden rule, "Do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement." Then goes on to explain why, "Even the very wise cannot see all ends."

Gandalf makes it fairly clear that the 'iron rule' is absolute. Afterall, Gollum can't very well redeem himself if he is dead. Gandalf also makes it quite clear in not making conclusions about a being, before said being has in fact concluded determining who he is. Gandalf essentially says, that no one, not even himself, knows what a person will do in the future ... thus how good or bad they will ultimately be.

To simply resort to the 'iron rule' is to judge that Gollum will not make any meaningful contributions in the future, and thus should just die. Of course, this doesn't allow any possibility of Gollum ever being good again.

Well, "Gollum is a murdering, hideous orc or whanot" some might say ... "so who cares if he does die?"

It's important to remember that Gandalf never says Gollum will do anything good. He only says that he may. My heart tells me that Gollum has some part to play yet, for good or evil, before this is over. What Gandalf says to Frodo is that Gollum should be given the opportunity, even though there is a possibility he will resort to ill.

Well this all sounds rather idealistic on Gandalf's part, but Tolkien goes on to make his point. The pity of Bilbo may rule the fate of many

In fact, in all of LOTR, perhaps the wisest decision made was that by Bilbo to let Gollum live. Were it not for Gollum, it becomes almost inconceivable how the Ring would have been destroyed. Thus Tolkien makes a bold statement, that yes, allowing Gollum the opportunity to do good was the best course of action.

And yet some may protest, that if Tolkien hadn't written the story that way, it's entirely conceivable that Gollum might have done more ill than good. Afterall, doesn't Gollum try to get the hobbits killed later on?

Which brings us back to the dilemma of the golden and iron rules. Yes, the golden rule as an ideal would seem the right thing to do, and thus its inclusion in all the world's major religions ... yet, as a pratical matter, the iron rule would seem to make more sense, and thus the reason why most people live according to that instead.

Frodo faced similar thoughts. Though Frodo does know better than to question Gandalf ... he nevertheless realizes by the exchange, that being ring-bearer includes a terrible responsibility. He realizes that his decisions will affect the final outcome of the quest, and that as ring-bearer, ultimately he is responsible for that outcome. Frodo finds himself quite ill-prepared to accept this responsibility.

I wish the Ring had never come to me.
I wish none of this had happened.

Yet, undeterred, Gandalf continues: So do all who live to see such times, but that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us. Thus, Gandalf brings the main ethical question into the fore. And what is his advice?

There are other forces at work in this world, Frodo, besides the will of evil. Bilbo was meant to find the Ring, in which case you were also meant to have it. And that is an encouraging thought

Which is the main reason why the 'iron rule' is flawed. So long as everyone does what they're supposed to do, it acts exactly like the golden rule. But ... as soon as the will of evil presents itself, it tends to cloud one's judgement so that it's all one sees. Yes, Gollum has done ill in the past ... but why should that prevent anyone from seing the good that could come of him yet?

And even more importantly, Gandalf tells Frodo that he has a choice about what to do when evil presents itself. He can either do the will of good, or allow himself to be influenced by the will of evil. That is, Frodo can let Gollum's past misdeeds, become an excuse for Frodo's doing of something he otherwise would not do ... in this specific case, wish death upon someone else.

Which brings us back to 'pity' as Gandalf uses it, and as Bilbo felt it. Compassion. That realization that the person opposite you is more or less yourself, and thus deserving of the same as yourself. And 'pity', that realization that 'cept by the grace of the Illuvatar, there go I' :)

A lesson which Frodo later learns firsthand, and only further reinforces Tolkien's support of the golden rule.

I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless [bounce]

Day 5 - Gollum and the Ring

by - sinaes (Thu Jul 31 04:09:09)

He hates and loves the Ring, just as he hates and loves himself. He will never be rid of his need for it

Here, Gandalf alludes to the later conflict between Smeagol and Gollum that will be presented to us. Now, that mostly takes place in TTT, so I will not discuss it here. But what I would like to discuss is why there is a Smeagol and Gollum.

The ring came to the creature Gollum, who took it
deep into the tunnels of the Misty mountains.

And there, it consumed him.

(It came to me, my own, my precious...)

The ring brought to Gollum unnatural long life.
For five hundred years, it poisoned his mind.
And in the gloom of Gollum's cave, it waited.

Darkness crept back into the forests of the world.
Rumor grew of a shadow in the East,
whispers of a nameless fear.
And the Ring of power perceived:
its time had now come.

Ulike the effect on everyone else, whom the Ring simply makes succumb to the path of darkness, it seems intentional that the Ring didn't fully envelop Gollum. Yes it poisoned his mind, but not enough to get rid of Smeagol.

I can hardly see anyone else under the contol of Sauron, being able to return to the side of good. Afterall, the ringwraiths, who were under the influence of far less powerful rings, are so completely covered in evil that they live only to do Sauron's biding.

So why not Gollum? I mean, he did spend enough time alone with the One Ring for it to have completely consumed him.

What I think is that the Ring saw it couldn't control Gollum. Couldn't, because Sauron hadn't in fact designed the Ring to control hobbits. Yes, it could influence his mind, fill it with dark thoughts, yet still not turn him to the path of Sauron. This is made all too clear by the fact that Gollum had to be tortured before giving up the name of Baggins.

Thus Gollum is a choatic element, very much like Bilbo and Frodo. They can't be expected to fall in line with Sauron's plan. Afterall, the only evil Gollum seems bent on doing, is recovering his 'precious' and taking it back to his cave. If the Ring had tried to completely consume Gollum, it's quite possible Sauron may never have recovered it.

So the Ring did the next best thing. It knew that by poisoning Smeagol, he would in fact keep it safe. Safe until Sauron returned. However, the Ring also knew that if it poisened Smeagol too much, he might never let it go. In fact, the Ring would be risking that Smeagol would be so afraid of losing it, that he might take it where none could find it.

So the Ring allowed Smeagol to survive. The Ring made it so that he both hated and loved it. Thus, the Ring averted Gollum from going deeper into his cave, while at the same time remaining safe till it could rejoin Sauron.

Did the Ring really allow Smeagol to survive, or was that just his own doing?

I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless [bounce]

Day 6 - Fool of a Took!

by - sinaes (Fri Aug 1 15:00:57)

UPDATED Fri Aug 1 15:08:06

Gandalf: (reading from the book)

They have taken the bridge and the second hall.
We have barred the gates, but cannot hold them for long.
The ground shakes. Drums, drums in the deep.
We cannot get out. A shadow moves in the dark.
We cannot get out...
They are coming...

(Pippin accidentally topples a skeleton into the well.
It makes a huge, echoing noise that goes on and on)

Fool of a Took!
Throw yourself in next time and rid us of your stupidity!

Trickster*

The trickster archetype embodies the energies of mischief and desire for change.

Psychological Function

Tricksters serve several important psychological functions. They cut big egos down to size, and bring heroes and audiences back to Earth. By provoking healthy laughter they help us realize our common bonds, and they point out folly and hypocrisy. Above all, they bring about healthy change and transformation, often by drawing attention to the imbalance or absurdity of a stagnant psychological situation.

* From 'The Writer's Journey' by Cristopher Vogler.

Any questions?

(Ok, I realize the customary day of rest is the 7th, but I have something I'm working on [wink]

And besides, this just seemed a more appropriate topic of discussion for the moment :)

I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless [bounce]

Wow

by - Amarantha_03 (Fri Aug 1 15:09:59)

Ignore this User | Report Abuse

I haven't read it yet (I saved it to my computer to read later), but it looks like you put a lot of time and effort into it, sinaes! Very well done! I can't wait to read it!

"Let us always meet each other with a smile, for the smile is the beginning of love" [biggrin]

Re: Wow

by - sinaes (Sat Aug 2 21:52:12)

Thanks Amarantha :)
Wohoo, only 3 more weeks till the TTT DVD!

I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless [bounce]

Day 7 - Bilbo Baggins and the Ring

by - sinaes (Sat Aug 2 21:49:19)

Gandalf: Good to see you - one hundred and eleven years old, I wouldn't believe it. You haven't aged a day.

Bilbo: Come on, come in. Welcome, welcome. Tea? Or maybe something a little stronger? I've got a few bottles of the Old Winyards left. 1296 - very good year. Almost as old as I am, it was laid down by my father. What say we open one, eh?

Bilbo: I know, he'd probably come with me if I asked him. I think in his heart, Frodo's still in love with the Shire, the woods, the fields, little rivers...

I'm old Gandalf. I know don't look it, but I'm beginning to feel it in my heart. I feel...thin, sort of...stretched, like butter scraped over too much bread.

I need a holiday, a very long holiday, and I don't expect
I shall return. In fact, I mean not to.

As with Gollum, the Ring prolonged Bilbo's life, but unlike Gollum, the Ring seems to have had little effect. In fact, there are only two places where Bilbo is shown under the influence of the Ring 1) when Gandalf asks him to leave it behind and 2) when Frodo arrives in Rivendell and meets with Bilbo again.

I've yet to read the Hobbit, so it's possible that more may be explained there, by why didn't the Ring have more of a negative influence on Bilbo?

It's obvious that Bilbo was under its influence all along, thus the long life without aging. Also implied in the films, is that the Ring will corrupt its bearer in a relatively short period of time. So why is that Bilbo, who had the Ring for so long, was pretty much unaffected?

Is this just a trait of Hobbits in general, that they should be resilient to the power of the Ring? Or did the Ring purposefully take a passive stance towards Bilbo?

The first seems likely, but the Ring had already spent hundreds of years successfully corrupting Gollum, why would Bilbo pose such a greater challenge? The second also seems somewhat likely, maybe the Ring decided that if it simply laid quite in the Shire, Sauron would eventually be able to find it.

Afterall, as long as no one knew its true identity, it wasn't at any risk of being destroyed. Plus, unlike Gollum, Bilbo had no natural tenedency to go hoard the Ring in some far off place. Thus it's possible that the Ring might not have wanted to change that tendency, not to mention that doing so, would probably attract unwanted attention. So did the Ring simply go into 'sleep' mode while Bilbo owned it? Was the Ring in fact hoping that by doing so, the Dark Lord and his minions would be able to discover its whereabouts before anyone else?

I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless [bounce]

Day 8 - Fate

by - sinaes (Sun Aug 3 23:56:38)

UPDATED Mon Aug 4 00:10:19

Frodo: Bilbo!

Bilbo: Hello, Frodo, my lad!

Frodo: Bilbo!

(Frodo and Bilbo in Bilbo's room, looking at his Book)

Frodo: There and Back Again - A Hobbit's Tale, by Bilbo Baggins
This is wonderful...

Bilbo: I meant to go back, wander the paths of Mirkwood, visit Laketown, see the Lonely Mountain again. But age, it seems, has finally caught up with me.

Frodo: (Stopping at a page with a map of the Shire and a closeup of the area around Hobbiton and Bag End)

I miss the Shire. I spent all my childhood pretending I was off somewhere else. Off with you, on one of your adventures. My own adventure turned out to be quite different. I'm not like you Bilbo ...

Bilbo: My dear boy.

Deep within the Misty Mountains, that's where the Ring was. How likely was it that a hobbit, a creature from the Shire and not at all adventurous by nature, would come across it there? Not very, but I suppose we can dismiss this as pure coincidence. Sauron must shake his head from limbo, at how his perfect plan was foiled by the continually bad luck of having a hobbit always find the Ring [no]

Even the smallest person can change the course of the future

Perhaps it's a lesson even the Dark Lord needed to learn. [winkgrin]

Then, once having recovered the Ring, Bilbo brings it back to the Shire. The Ring recognizes that no one here will be aware of what Bilbo truly has. So long as it doesn't draw any attention, people should assume it's just another gold ring, or perhaps a regular invisibility ring, if Bilbo ever happens to show it off. So the Ring goes to 'sleep', and just waits for Sauron's agents to discreetly follow the scent of power. A plan that would have worked brilliantly ...

Unfortunately, it came to the time of Bilbo's 111th Birthday.

Why this should attract the attention of anyone other than hobbits, is beyond the Ring's comprehension ;) I mean it's not like Bilbo didn't have a 110th, a 109th, a 108th, and so on birthday. No one but hobbits ever showed up to any of those :) So why does Gandalf appear now all of the sudden? (*curse* that second-rate Maia, grumble grumble)

Well, yes, it's because Bilbo was leaving [eek]

A hobbit who doesn't want to die in the Shire?! (You never can tell with these hobbits can you?) Ok, fine, just head off to the Misty Mountains, get Bilbo to use it, draw Sauron's attention, ok fine.

Oh [upset]

But why did Gandalf have to be there!? Yes, yes, he's wise or whatnot, he likes the hobbits (and their weed) but why is he such close friends with this hobbit?

Hmmm. Maybe it wasn't such a coincidence afterall.

So now, for the same reason Bilbo found the Ring, Gandalf has now uncovered it. Ok, he still doesn't know for sure, so for now it'll pass on to Frodo. Ok, same plan for the Ring as with Bilbo, but Frodo never puts it on!? (because of Gandalf!)

So at this point the Ring can't help Sauron find it, and Sauron has to look hard to unearth any sign of where it might be.

Well, there's Gandalf riding off to Gondor, but he does that all the time. Saruman? still in his tower. The elves, safe and unknowing in Rivendell and Lorien, ha, they even look like they're planning to leave. Rohan and Gondor, it should be there somewhere!? Oh, the dwarves, nah, they're all dead. A Balrog?! ;) Orcs, orcs, more orcs.

How much of a coincidence is it that it took Sauron as long to find Gollum and discover the whereabouts of the Ring, as it took Gandalf to verify the Ring's identity?

And perhaps the biggest twist of all, had it not been for the events surrounding Bilbo's 111th birthday, it would have been Bilbo carrying the Ring on any future quest. How would that have affected any chance of the Fellowhip's success if in fact, Bilbo had taken the place of the other four hobbits?

But of course, that was impossible. The same reason Bilbo found the Ring, is the same reason Gandalf discovers it, and thus the Ring had to pass on to Frodo.

Aside from storytelling reasons, can the will of a higher force, a greater good, be supported as a cause for all these seeming coincidences?

I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless [bounce]

Day 9 - Eat, Drink, and Be Merry

by - sinaes (Mon Aug 4 23:59:34)

UPDATED Tue Aug 5 00:04:40

""A man hath no better thing under the sun, than to eat, and to drink, and to be merry." Ecclesiastes 8:15

In the LOTR, the main protaganists are of course the hobbits. Was Tolkien making a statement with regard to how one should live, simply by giving so much emphasis to certain hobbit traits?

After the prologue narrated by Galadriel, the 'Fellowship of the Ring' title is shown, and the main narrative revolving around the hobbits begins. It's not long before we have old friends meeting together, and the audience is told about the 'long expected party'. Yes, hobbits seem to live a life full of merriment right from the start.

Gandalf's quick comments: Life in the wide world goes on much as it has this past age, full of it's own comings and goings. Scarcely aware of the existence of hobbits, for which I am very thankful. ... are enough to assure us that, this is how it always is in Hobbiton.

Further evidence is supplied by our first meeting with Bilbo.

Bilbo: Come on, come in. Welcome, welcome. Tea? Or maybe something a little stronger? I've got a few bottles of the Old Winyards left. 1296 - very good year. Almost as old as I am, it was laid down by my father. What say we open one, eh?

Gandalf: Just tea, thank you.

Bilbo: ...expecting you last week...not that it matters, you come and go as you please.

You've caught me a bit unprepared, I'm afraid... We've only got cold chicken and a bit of pickle.

There's some cheese here. No that won't do.

We've got raspberry jam, an apple tart ...

I just found some sponge cake.

I could make you some eggs if you'd like.

Gandalf: Just tea, thank you.

Bilbo: Ah, right. You don't mind if I do?

Drink, food, good friends ... all there :)
This all before the official party [party]

Do hobbits really drink that much you say?

At Bree ...

Pippin: What's that?!

Merry: This, my friend, is a pint!

Pippin: It comes in pints?!

Merry: Mmm... (agreeing, while taking a large sip)

Pippin: I'm getting one!

Sam: You've had a whole half already!

(Pippin heads off to the bar to get himself a pint)

Anything else to make life more enjoyable?

Before Bilbo's party ...

Old Toby, the finest weed in the Southfarthing.

Gandalf, my old friend, this will be a night to remember!

Yes, hobbits sample the full spectrum of life's comforts. [yes]

But, not only are the Hobbits portrayed as living according to Ecclesiastes 8:15, but so much so, that they are frequently shown getting into trouble after they leave home because of it.

While leaving the Shire ...

Pippin: Frodo! Merry, it's Frodo Baggins!

Merry: Hullo, Frodo!

Sam: Get off him...

What's the meaning of this?

Pippin: Hold these (He loads Sam up with stolen veggies)

Sam: You've been into Farmer Maggot's crops.

Farmer Maggot: Hey you, stay off my fields.

Merry: I don't know why he's so upset,
it was only a couple of carrots.

Pippin: ...and some cabbages ...and those three bags of potatoes that we lifted last week ...and then the mushrooms the week before.

Merry: Yes, Pippin, my point is, he's clearly over-reacting.

(they get to the edge of the cliff and stop, until Sam bumps into them, then they all tumble down the slope)

Pippin: Ooh, that was close.

Merry: I think I've broken something

Sam: Trust a Brandybuck and a Took

Merry: What? That was just a detour, a shortcut.

Sam: A shortcut to what?

Pippin: Mushrooms!

In fact, they almost get into trouble again just there for picking up those mushrooms.

While leaving Bree ...

Strider: Gentlemen, we do not stop till nightfall.

Pippin: What about breakfast?

Strider: You've already had it!

Pippin: We've had one, yes. What about second breakfast?

Merry: I don't think he knows about second breakfast, Pip.

Pippin: But what about elevensies? Luncheon, afternoon tea,
dinner, supper? He knows about them, doesn't he?

Merry: I wouldn't count on it...

(Aragorn throws them some apples)

Talk about appetite. Which leads to the following, at the Watchtower of Amon S�l ...

Merry: Want a tomato, Sam?

Frodo: What are you doing?!

Merry: Tomatoes, sausages, nice crispy bacon...

Sam: We saved some for you, Mr. Frodo.

Frodo: Put it out, you fools! Put it out!!

Pippin: Well, that's nice - you got ash in my tomatoes!

The Nazgul then discover the group, and Frodo is stabbed because of it. Clearly the hobbits were initially unprepared to deal with what the outside world had to deal.

So was Tolkien advocating the message of Ecclesiastes 8:15? Or did he in fact question its validity by having the hobbits encounter hardship because of it? Or perhaps, this was in fact a judgement against the world, that hobbits could not simply be hobbits outside the Shire?

Yes, the hobbits leave the Shire, but only to protect the life they had, and only with full hope that they'll be able to return to it. So by making the protagonists hobbits, has Tolkien in fact made a strong case for how one should live?

I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless [bounce]

archive bump

by - sinaes (Tue Aug 5 01:45:27)

I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless [bounce]

Day 10 - Rest (part 1)

by - sinaes (Tue Aug 5 23:59:37)

UPDATED Wed Aug 6 22:12:09

, so here goes ...

Frodo: Where am I?

Gandalf: You are in the House of Elrond and it is ten o'clock in the morning... on October the 24th, if you want to know...

Frodo: Gandalf!

Gandalf: Yes, I'm here. And you're lucky to be here. A few more hours and you would have been beyond our aid. But you have some strength in you, my dear Hobbit...

Frodo: What happened, Gandalf? Why didn't you meet us?

Gandalf: Oh, I am sorry Frodo. I was delayed...

Gandalf of course, was 'delayed' because he left Frodo to go seek Saruman's guidance. Now imagine Gandalf, sitting there, looking over a bed-ridden Frodo. How much time did Gandalf have to reflect on what had happened.

It's not entirely inconceivable, that laying there, with his Morgul wound ... Frodo wasn't a constant reminder to Gandalf, of how close Sauron had come to having the Ring, and at the very least, how close he'd come to ending Frodo's life.

Did Gandalf feel guilt about this? He must have felt some. Is this the reason why Gandalf choses to be part of the Fellowship? True, Frodo was his friend, but Gandalf seemed to me that he was always going to go. I don't know if Gandalf has a history of getting involved in such quests, but if it hadn't been for some sense of guilt, wouldn't Gandalf probably have stayed behind and tried to convince the elves to fight one last time, instead of just leaving Middle Earth when they were needed?

Also with rest #6 ...

Boromir: The Shards of Narsil!
The blade that cut the Ring from Sauron's hand!
(It cuts his finger)
...still sharp...
(He sees Aragorn watching him)
But no more than a broken heirloom.

(He goes to put it back, but it falls to the floor. Aragorn gets up and replaces it. Arwen comes in.)

Arwen: Why do you fear the past? You are Isildur's heir, not Isildur himself. You are not bound to his fate.

Aragorn: The same blood flows in my veins; the same weakness!

Arwen: Your time will come. You will face the same evil
and you will defeat it.

(Shot of Rivendell at night, then Arwen and Aragorn on a bridge)

Arwen: A si i-dh�ath �-orthor, Aragorn.
(The Shadow does not hold sway yet, Aragorn.)

� or le a � or nin.
(Not over you and not over me.)

Renech i lu i erui govannem?
(Do you remember when we first met?)

Aragorn: Nauthannem i ned ol reniannen.
(I thought I had strayed into a dream.)

Arwen: Gwennin in enninath...
(Long years have passed...)

�-'arnech in naeth i si celich.
(You did not have the cares you carry now.)

Renich i beth i pennen?
(Do you remember what I told you?)

Aragorn: You said you'd bind yourself to me, forsaking the immortal life of your people.

Arwen: And to that I hold. I would rather share one lifetime with you than face all the ages of this world alone.

(Aragorn looks down to find that Arwen has given him Evenstar)

I chose a mortal life.

Aragorn: You cannot give me this!

Arwen: It is mine to give to whom I will... like my heart

(They kiss)

Aragorn [wink]

, was there ever a more reluctant king. Would he eventually have tried to claim the throne anyway, perhaps. Though he seemed to have travelled long enough as a Ranger to have acquired a reputation as 'Strider', even though apparantly, he goes to great lengths not to be seen [winkgrin]

Yeah, I don't know, he seems pretty happy with just the part of the world he has.

But there, looking at the shards of Narzil, facing the shadows of his past, there Aragorn is being made keenly aware of the responsibility he faces ... as Isildur's heir. Now that the Ring has resurfaced, Men have a chance to set things right, but will they?

It's clear that Boromir, the current Steward of Gondor, has little respect for the events that transpired in the distant past. His almost careless and whimsical handling of Narsil, probably just served to remind Aragorn of all the faults he seems to associate with Men. Boromir certainly seems the type that would keep the Ring as an heirloom, a price, and I don't think Aragorn is all that convinced that that's anything different than the attitudes he attributes to Isildur.

Aragorn, then goes on to meet with Arwen. They discuss among other things, the past, and the future. I see it entirely as reasonable, that Aragorn's relationship to Arwen only helped to further remind Aragorn of Man's enduring legacy. Afterall, Men and Elves once were close allies, before the faults of Isildur. Now there, facing Arwen, and the possibility of a marraige of Men and Elves, it seems likely that Aragorn would only be reminded that he has a chance to set things back the way they always should have been.

So faced with Boromir's (indeed man's) lingering cavalier attitudes on the one hand, and the promise of Arwen on the other, had this in fact determined Aragorn to a course of becoming King, from which he would not stray. Would this have happened if Aragorn had not spent that time in Rivendell, during this chapter of rest?

I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless [bounce]

bump

by - lkalliance (Wed Aug 6 21:16:51)

Ignore this User | Report Abuse

Oog make mission statement.

Day 11 - Rest (part 2)

by - sinaes (Wed Aug 6 23:55:20)

UPDATED Wed Aug 6 23:56:11

Main Entry: [1]rest
Pronunciation: 'rest
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English; akin to Old High German rasta rest and perhaps to Old High German ruowa calm
Date: before 12th century

1 : REPOSE, SLEEP; specifically : a bodily state characterized by minimal functional and metabolic activities

2 a : freedom from activity or labor b : a state of motionlessness or inactivity c : the repose of death

3 : a place for resting or lodging

4 : peace of mind or spirit

5 a (1) : a rhythmic silence in music (2) : a character representing such a silence b : a brief pause in reading

6 : something used for support

Ok, I will now adress definitions #2 and #4.

Rest #2 (b) Now the book is named LOTR. The running plot, the main activity, is the destruction of the One Ring and the defeat of Sauron. From what we've seen of Fellowship and the Two Towers ... this is the only time where no one is actively trying to do either since Frodo decided to leave the Shire. Sure there is talk of Sauron, mostly between Gandalf and Elrond. But neither is really doing anything else, not even deciding a course of action. That won't take place till the next chapter, The Council of Elrond.

Rest #2 (c) The repose of death, is touched on three times.

Gandalf: Oh, I am sorry Frodo. I was delayed...

(Saruman is ready to kill Gandalf, the moth flys over, then we see Gwaihir approaching)

Saruman: The friendship of Saruman is not lightly thrown aside. One ill turn deserves another. Embrace the power of the Ring, or embrace your own destruction.

Gandalf: There is only one Lord of the Ring, only one who bends it to his will, and he does not share power!

(Gandalf throws himself off the side of Orthanc and flies away on Gwaihir's back)

Saruman: So, you have chosen death.

Indeed, Gandalf is the first main character to die.

Elrond: His strength returns...

Gandalf: That wound will never fully heal - he will carry it for the rest of his life.

Elrond: And yet, to have come this far still bearing the Ring, the Hobbit has shown extraordinary resilience to it's evil.

Gandalf: It is a burden he should never have had to bear.
We can ask no more of Frodo...

Though Frodo does not know it, he has already sacrificed his life as a Hobbit. He'll never be able to return to the Shire and live the life he once did.

Isildur took the Ring. I was there the day the strength of men failed...

(We see Elrond watch Sauron being defeated by Isildur)

Isildur! Hurry! Come with me!

I led Isildur into the heart of Mount Doom, where the Ring was forged, the one place it could be destroyed.

Cast it into the fire! Destroy it!

Isildur: No!

Elrond: Isildur!

It should have ended that day,
(but) Evil was allowed to endure...

The only other place in the film where Isildur makes an appearance is in the prologue. As with Elrond's flashback, Sauron is shown dying, and Isildur keeps the Ring. But in the prologue, we are quickly told what happens after Isildur returned to Gondor...

The ring passed to Isildur,
who had this one chance to destroy evil forever.

But the hearts of men are easily corrupted,
And the ring of power has a will of its own.
It betrayed Isildur to his death

The prologue is interesting in that it is also spoken by an elf with a Ring of Power, Galadriel. In fact, her words on the subject of Isildur mirror Elrond's. That Elrond's flashback is meant to remind the audience of the Death associated with the Ring, is all to clear.

Now, as to the 'repose of death' offered by rest ... three instances have been presented where death is portrayed as positive.

1) Gandalf ... is there any doubt that he is better after becoming the White?

2) Frodo ... would death offer solace to Frodo?

3) Isildur ... he should have destroyed the Ring. But not having done so, should Elrond have nevertheless fought him and thus destroyed it himself? True, Isildur was an ally, but Elrond wasn't the king of elves, he easily could have taken the Ring and thrown himself into the cracks of doom along with it. He wouldn't even have had to kill Isildur. Yet, the Ring and Sauron would be destroyed.

Isildur would have been angry, but with a dead offender to contend with, and the Ring easily blameable, is it not conceivable that Elrond could have ended everything right there? Is Elrond's disgust of men, partly, a disgust of his own actions? And more to the topic at hand, would Elrond's sacrifice .. death, have thus been something positive?

Rest #2(a) and Rest #4 are really tied together.

They are both enjoyed by all in Rivendell except for Gandalf, Elrond, and Aragorn.

In fact, Bilbo specifically came to this place to find just that ...

Frodo: Bilbo!

Bilbo: Hello, Frodo, my lad!

Frodo: Bilbo!

(Frodo and Bilbo in Bilbo's room, looking at his Book)

Frodo: There and Back Again - A Hobbit's Tale, by Bilbo Baggins
This is wonderful.

Bilbo: I meant to go back, wander the paths of Mirkwood, visit Laketown, see the Lonely Mountain again. But age, it seems, has finally caught up with me.

Rivendell is so much a place of peace of mind, that at no time during their stay is anyone actually in any danger here. There is almost no other place where that is the case, even in Lorien Frodo has to contend with Galadriel possibly taking the Ring.

Yes, Rivendell seems to be the ultimate symbol of Rest during this chapter.

But the deeper question I would like to ask is about rest as the ultimate goal.

It seems to me that Rest # 2(a) : freedom from activity or labor and Rest # 4 : peace of mind or spirit ... are what we all strive for.

The fact that Rivendell is the setting for all this is perticularly striking. The elves are set to leave Middle Earth, just as it seems, they are needed the most. Do elves need rest too? Is there a time when that is the most desirable of goals?

Some may say that rest is not the goal, but there are several things countering that within this chapter.

Frodo: (Stopping at a page with a map of the Shire and a closeup of the area around Hobbiton and Bag End)

I miss the Shire. I spent all my childhood pretending I was off somewhere else. Off with you, on one of your adventures. My own adventure turned out to be quite different. I'm not like you Bilbo.

Bilbo: My dear boy.

Yes, Frodo longed for adventure, for excitement, and thrills ... that was a great goal ... but that was before.

Frodo: Packed already?

Sam: No 'arm in bein' prepared...

Frodo: I thought you wanted to see the Elves, Sam?

Sam: I do!

Frodo: More than anything?

Sam: I did. It's just... We did what Gandalf wanted us to do... We got the Ring this far to Rivendell, and I thought, seein' as 'ow you're on the mend, we'd be off soon, off 'ome.

Sam too, craved for more than the Shire offered, but again, no more.

Furthermore, what is LOTR about, why does the Ring present such a huge dilemma? What is there to be gained most by the Ring's destruction? Is Tolkien advocating Rest as the ultimate goal in life?

In addition, how important is it, that the decision to destroy the Ring takes place in Rivendell? Is Tolkien saying something about how the fourth age should be, how Men should rule in the future, once the Elves are gone?

I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless [bounce]

Day 12 - "It is a strange fate ..."

by - sinaes (Thu Aug 7 23:57:59)

UPDATED Mon Aug 18 01:53:37

(The Fellowship is making it's way up the mountain when Frodo slips and falls. When he gets up, he realizes that he is no longer wearing the Ring. We see Boromir picking it up on it's chain)

Aragorn: Boromir!

Boromir: It is a strange fate that we should suffer so much fear and doubt over so small a thing. Such a little thing...

Now the Ring is small, in terms of actual physical size ... but so is Frodo. Thus, even though Boromir was referring to the size of the Ring, I've never felt that that's what the writer was really commenting on.

Now analyzing the situation, we see Frodo, a hobbit, who by nature leads nothing but a happy life, going on a quest that will only bring him suffering. The Elf, the Dwarf, the Ranger, the Wizard, the other Hobbits, all would be leading happy lives where it not for the Ring. Ok, for all of them it is a burden.

But I don't sense that's what Boromir is talking about either. I mean, if it were up to Boromir, none of the others would be on the quest. So when Boromir says that we should suffer, he is not talking about the others, who in his mind "suffer needlessly". Mostly, Boromir is referring to the suffering of himself and of his people, indeed he is speaking of Mankind.

Now the 'little' part, if not actually referring to the size of the Ring, then what? I mean, the Ring is important right?

Well, the Ring certainly seems important. It even has a whole story revolving around it ;) And yet, here it's referred to as "so small a thing. Such a little thing ..."

Of course, illusion vs. reality is a main theme of LOTR, and the Ring as an extension of Sauron the Deceiver is a potent symbol of that theme.

And yet, the Ring is also a symbol of many things that men desire. It was Isildur that kept it. It's the Nine that are sent to retrieve it. It's Boromir who longs to have it. Yes, the Ring is a potent symbol of man's desires as well.

Indeed, the fact that it's a golden Ring only reinforces that, gold being the long recognized standard of wealth/success among mankind.

Now there, on the mountain, the Ring perfectly contrasting against the purity of the snow, this almost tiny thing being bound by a much larger chain which it's owner must bear ... was Tolkien thus making a poignant statement about mankind? Not only about who he is, but of who he is, because of who he has chosen to be?

I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless [bounce]

Re: Day 12 - "It is a strange fate ..."

by - jac_wats 3 days ago (Sat Aug 16 13:41:40)

Ignore this User | Report Abuse

This is not true. Boromir talks of the quest about fear and doubt. The ring is what he is reffering to is the size f the ring in contrast to its power. He talks of it as an object and yet it is greater than the jewels of feanor. In both this quote and with the kin-slaying of valinor Tolkein is illustrating that both men and elves suffer a weakness which is to wish to preserve their world.

Were boromir to be talking about the fear and doubt of anyone other than the fellowship then the small thing would not be the ring but Sauron.

Ps - its only a book/film

Re: Day 12 - "It is a strange fate ..."

by - sinaes 3 days ago (Sat Aug 16 17:31:14)

UPDATED Mon Aug 18 01:29:10

I'm not exactly sure what your objection here is.

Boromir talks of the quest about fear and doubt.

That part is obvious.

The ring is what he is reffering to is the size of the ring in contrast to its power.

I adressed both aspects, the size of the Ring and it's embodiment of power, the contrast between the two is also obvious.

He talks of it as an object and yet it is greater than the jewels of feanor.

Ok. If you mean the Ring had great power, yes it did.

In both this quote and with the kin-slaying of valinor Tolkein is illustrating that both men and elves suffer a weakness which is to wish to preserve their world.

You're introducing an element here which takes the quote far out of its proper context. There was the Ring, fear and doubt (the Ring's effects), the size and physical characteristics of the Ring, the Fellowship, the quest, the struggle versus Sauron, the history of the Ring with regards to Men, Boromir, and his perceptions on power and the importance of things. I'm sure you can think of a few more things that may have been on Boromir's mind. However, within the context of that scene, the context of that moment, I think we can reasonably rule out certain things.

Were boromir to be talking about the fear and doubt of anyone other than the fellowship then the small thing would not be the ring but Sauron.

It's doubtful Boromir would ever refer to the statuesque Sauron as "little". Indeed, Boromir already expressed his dread respect for Sauron earlier at the council of Elrond,

"One does not simply walk into Mordor. It's black gates are guarded by more than just Orcs. There is evil there that does not sleep, and the Great Eye is ever-watchful. It is a barren wasteland, riddled with fire and ash and dust. The very air you breathe is a poisonous fume. Not with ten thousand men could you do this. It is folly!"

No, Boromir wasn't talking about Sauron.

That Boromir was at least partly talking about the Ring, that is obvious. What may not be so clear, is that Boromir was talking about more than just the Ring. He doesn't afterall say, "This Ring is a little thing, such a little thing." No, he begins by stating "That we should suffer ..."

You may be inclined to argue that this is in fact for rhetorical effect. Well, if you can find me another instance where a character uses a personal pronoun for rhetorical effect (as opposed to a direct and honest reference to a person/persons) ... then I'll reconsider revising my analysis.

Ps - its only a book/film

[smile]

Yeah, and a smile is only a smile.

I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless [bounce]

Day 13 - Gandalf and the Ring

by - sinaes (Fri Aug 8 23:58:54)

UPDATED Sat Aug 9 00:09:48

I had to research this fact to be sure :) ...
but it seems that in all of Gandalf's years of dwelling in Middle-Earth, he handled the Ring but once.

Gandalf: Is it secret? Is it safe?
(his hand reaches out of the dark to grab Frodo's shoulder)

Frodo: Ahh... (when he finds it, after rifling through an old trunk)

What are you doing?
(as Gandalf throws the envelope into the fire)

That brief moment when he actually holds the envelope, right before throwing it into the fire, is the only time attributed to him actually bearing the Ring.

I've always wondered why it is that Gandalf never chose to carry it.
Gandalf offers somewhat of an explanation.

Frodo: Take it Gandalf, take it! You must take it!

Gandalf: You cannot offer me this Ring.

Frodo: I am giving it to you!

Gandalf: Don't tempt me, Frodo!

I dare not take it. Not even to keep it safe.
Understand, Frodo, I would use this ring from a desire to do good, but through me, it would wield a power too great and terrible to imagine.

Now understandably, if the Ring where to take possession of Gandalf, it would gaurantee Sauron's recovery of it, as well as the loss of Gandalf's own powers as a possible aid to the side of good. Indeed, with both Gandalf and Saruman at his command, would Sauron have been stopped? All this equating to a tremendous risk, no doubt.

However, it's always been my understanding that the Ring won't immediately take control of it's owner, and that the process takes longer for those strong of will. Gandalf would certainly qualify as one of such a strong will.

Now, I wouldn't expect Gandalf to take the Ring to Mordor, that would be a huge risk along the lines Gandalf is alluding to. But, could he have not taken the Ring to Rivendell? Was his will not strong enough that he could have made that relatively short and unobstructed journey, without falling prey to the Ring?

I ask, because leaving the Ring in Hobbiton was also a risk. Now, yes, it had survived there quiet well and safely for some time. So, Gandalf certainly would have thought Bag End was just as good a place as any. And yet, Gandalf knew that Sauron would track the Ring to the Shire.

Was it not, a great risk as well to let Frodo wander out alone? He certainly wouldn't be able to contend with anything Sauron likely would have sent after him. So why didn't Gandalf just take the Ring himself for the short period it would take to reach Rivendell? Here, I feel I must also reiterate, that Gandalf didn't just show an adversion to it, he downright refused to take any direct responsibility for the Ring.

I can only come up with two reasons. One, Gandalf carried Narya, and thus was afraid Sauron's Ring would contaminate it. Now, that's speculation on my part, but it's a possible explaination.

The second possible reason is that Gandalf is a Maiar. Elsewhere I've discussed my belief that one main reason the hobbits were so resilient to the Ring, is that Sauron himself was quite unfarmiliar with that race. And so, his Ring would not be as efficient at manipulating their will, as with the races Sauron was well acquinted with. Since Gandalf is of the same race as Sauron, it's quite possible that this may have made him one of the easiest for the Ring to manipulate. Now again, this is speculation, no other Maia ever wears the Ring so we can't know.

But I don't see any other reasons for Gandalf's almost unatural fear of the Ring. I mean, he had no problem letting Frodo carry it around. Why would he think that he was any less resilient to it than Frodo would be?

I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless [bounce]

Day 14 - Rings of Power *spoilers*

by - sinaes (Sat Aug 9 23:29:10)

UPDATED Mon Aug 18 23:58:38

This is a product of my research/reading in attempt to discover facts about the Rings of Power.

19 Great Rings of Power were created by the Elves with Sauron's help. It seems that the only powers the rings were meant to have, was to amplify the natural abilities of their wearer. The elves, thus sought to use the rings to help preserve Middle Earth.

Sauron of course had other plans. By forging a "master ring" to control all the others, Sauron intended to turn the elves, the greatest race in Middle Earth, into slaves. With that, Sauron would be in a position to control all Middle-Earth.

However, the elves discovered what Sauron intended to do, and his plot was undone. He took possession of 16 of the Great Rings, and corrupted them, which he then handed out to the leaders of dwarves and men instead. 3 of the Great Rings were sent away before Sauron could take hold of them, the three that are known as the "Elven Rings" of Power.

Now Sauron's new plan unfolded. The seven which he gave to dwarves, helped amplify their natural greed. By this action alone, even without directly controlling the dwarves, Sauron would ensure that the dwarf lords remained divided (arguing over treasure no doubt [biggrin]

) and that their greed would keep them within their mines, tunneling away, and out of Sauron's way.

The nine rings which Sauron gave to men, amplified their natural lust for power. It's clear that Sauron wanted to use the kings of men as puppets to rule everyone else (the way Theoden is used as such by Saruman in the TTT film). With the dwarves busily out of the way and his new human "allies", Sauron could thus take Middle Earth that way.

Of course, that plan too failed.

About invisibility ...

Apparantly the Great Rings were not imbued originally with the power to make people invisible. This aspect of the rings was added after Sauron took possession of and corrupted them. Furthermore, invisibility is actually the product of its wearer shifting into the spirit world. If a ring were worn enough, the shift would be permanent, as is the case with the Nazgul.

Why Sauron would want the rings to have this aspect is never discussed. But I have several suggestions.

1) Because it would turn the bearer invisible, any ring-bearer would not initially put his ring on very much. Afterall, it's hard for an invisible king to govern his people ;)

This benefits Sauron, because the rate at which a ring takes hold, is dependent on how much it is worn. While one might argue that a swift transformation would help Sauron the most, this is not the case. I have stated that Sauron intended to use the ring-bearers as puppets to control others. Well, if a swift transformation were to occur, people might be inclined to revolt against their 'obviously' manipulated king instead. Though that too would help Sauron, it's better for the changes to happen gradually. In this way, any changes within the bearers of the rings would be percieved as a natural change, and thus their subordinates would be inclined to continue to follow them.

2) Granting a mortal wearer invisibility would help protect them in dire straits, much the same way the hobbits are able to escape capture on several ocassions by wearing the Ring. Seems rather benevolent of Sauron [biggrin]

, but then he does have an investment to protect ;)

3) Invisibility gives the wearer a magical trait, which can be used further to awe (influence) others.

4) Being invisible is accomplished by partially transporting a being into the spirit world. The spirit world is Sauron's natural domain, and thus it's of benefit to have bearers go there. This is especially applicable to the One Ring, where Sauron is able to perceive Frodo's location because he puts it on and is transported to Sauron's domain. It's also possible that this may aid Sauron is using his will to influence others.

5) This is applicable specifically to the One Ring, as with (1) by conferring invisibility the bearer would be less inclined to wear it. Except with regard to the One Ring, this was to prevent anyone from gaining mastery of it. Sauron's biggest fear with regard to the One Ring is that someone like Saruman would get a hold of it, put it on permanently, and go hide in a corner until they'd learned to fully use it. By conferring invisibility, any but the most knowledgeable beings would be inclined not to constantly wear it. Which in turn provides room for the Ring to 'lose' itself if necessary ;)

An objection might be raised here that Sauron wouldn't have added invisibility as a defense mechanism to the Ring, because he would never have expected to have to retrieve it. Well, the story external reason for the invisibility is clear, Tolkien knew Sauron would have to retrieve it ;) However, it's not hard to reconcile this story-internally. Melkor, much more powerful than Sauron, had been defeated. Indeed, for a time Sauron himself had to acquiesce to the will of Numenor simply because of his attempts to acquire power.

I believe Sauron is far too cunning to discount losing the Ring as an impossibility. Indeed, one of the key benefits of the Ring is that it gives Sauron a type of immortality that he wouldn't otherwise have. Sauron would have known that too. And in the decade that it took for him to forge the Ring, he wouldn't have hesitated to maximize that potential benefit. I give Sauron the benefit of the doubt here. Considering this was arguably the most important decision of his life, he probably took the time to exhaustively think things through; nearly as through as Tolkien himself ;)

6) Since a) the One Ring helped control the others b) its powers are a result of being imbued with Sauron's essence c) Sauron dwells in the spirit world ... it seems that the spirit world was the mechanism by which Sauron and the Ring controlled all the others. Thus, Sauron may have had to allow the rings to transport their wearers into the spirit realm, in order for him to be better able to control them (perhaps control them at all). So in this way, invisibility is a necessary element regardless of any benefit to Sauron.

As to the Nazgul ...

I found no explanation of why in the course of wearing their rings, Men turned into wraiths yet others, notably dwarves, did not.

However, it's my belief that since the rings amplified their bearer's natural attibutes, men were bound to turn into wraiths.

Men are by nature lusting for power. Now, what real benefit living in the spirit world would give a man is arguable. But what is certain is that being a spirit instead of a man, would be perceived as an attainment of power by the men who wore the rings.

This is not the case with the dwarves. They did not wish to be anything other than dwarves (be more powerful), they just lusted for physical gain due to their greed. Thus by amplifying the dwarves natural attributes, the rings would cause their dwarven bearer's to want to remain visible, so that they could keep looking for rich deposits. This would negate the properties of invisibility that the rings conferred on the dwarves, though they would still be (unnoticeably) under Sauron's influence ;)

All the above is premised on the idea, that there's a certain degree of consent on the part of the ring-bearers. Afterall, no one had to wear the rings in the first place; they were more or less voluntarily worn. So in the case of Men, they turn into wraiths because they want to be more powerful. Dwarves have no such desire, thus they do not tap into that aspect of their rings power.

Briefly on immortality (prolonged life) ...

I'm not sure that it was a natural power of the ring's before Sauron corrupted them. Elves afterall, are already immortal. But since the rings where intended to preserve, they may have had this power from the start.

However if they did not, I can see why Sauron would want to give their bearers immortality.

1) This would ensure Sauron's 'investment' :)

2) More importantly, this would make the rings the object of great desire amognst the mortals, where Sauron hoped to cause the most dissention if all things failed. But more likely, he was hoping it would provide a reason for the Kings of Men to accept and keep them.

And finally the One Ring ...

Why Sauron created it ... simply it was always a part of his plan to control the other rings. Having in effect designed the other rings, Sauron easily would have known how to give his Ring control over them. To achieve this task, the One Ring had to be more powerful than the others, and thus necessarily, Sauron had to transfer some of his own essence into the One Ring.

There are several special properties that the One Ring has in addition to the properties of all the Great Rings of Power.

1) As discussed earlier, the One Ring is the "master ring", giving Sauron control over the others.

2) Sauron saved the best for himself [devil]

Thus, the One Ring was near indestructable, save for the fires of Mt. Doom.

3) If Sauron was ever defeated, if ... he would endure because of the Ring, because it would still contain a part of Sauron in physical form. Thus, even Sauron was given an immortality that he would not otherwise have.

4) Because of the power it contained, the Ring naturally would be an object of supreme desire among mortals. So it's unlikely anyone would want to destroy it. Boromir embodies this desire in LOTR, the inate appeal of the Ring.

5) The Ring was imbued with the essence of Sauron. While I won't go as far as to call it sentient [smile]

, the Ring arguably had the equivalent of Sauron's subconscious. This enabled it to enately sense what it generally should be doing at any given moment. Furthermore, this gave the Ring a strong type of will, which allowed it to better influence its bearer to the end of reuniting with the rest of Sauron.

6) The Ring could confer some of Sauron's powers on the bearer. The ones that I know of are the ability to control others, and the ability to understand the black speech.

7) The Ring had a signature, a verse that glowed in fire.

A further question which is sometimes raised is, why would Sauron risk putting his power into the Ring? Well, considering the special properties of the One Ring, it really wasn't that much of a risk ... indeed it was of benefit to him. But let's consider why Sauron would not choose to create the One Ring. The only reason I can think of, is that he might lose it. I don't really see how the Ring would leave Sauron's hand while he was still alive.

In his letters, Tolkien comments on this, "In his actual presence none but very few of equal stature could have hoped to withhold it from him." Now Tolkien talked about the difficulty of someone trying to keep the Ring from Sauron, someone witholding it. I think it's fair to say, that to actually get it off in the first place would be near impossible. In any case, any force powerful enough to take the Ring from Sauron, would surely be powerful enough to destroy him anyway regardless of the Ring.

Now, I'd love to be able to go into detail with regards to what Tolkien is saying about power, men, and knowledge with this intricate ring mythology ... but the subtext escapes me for now, so I leave that question up to you [smile]

I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless [bounce]

Re: Day 14 - Rings of Powers *spoilers*

by - Lord_Natrone (Tue Aug 12 09:22:21)

Ignore this User | Report Abuse

No comments, but a great summary, sineas. You really did your homework and made me look at the Rings in a new light! [aura]

I say we flat-tax the Kyoto Treaty all the way back to the Security Council.
-Dogbert

Re: Day 14 - Rings of Powers *spoilers*

by - sinaes 3 days ago (Sat Aug 16 17:32:47)

UPDATED Sat Aug 16 17:52:28

Thanks Natrone, it means a lot.

[aura]

I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless [bounce]

Day 15 - Elves - Heralds of a New Age

by - sinaes (Sun Aug 10 23:56:04)

UPDATED Sat Aug 16 09:05:23

Arwen: A si i-dh�ath �-orthor, Aragorn.
(The Shadow does not hold sway yet, Aragorn.)

� or le a � or nin.
(Not over you and not over me.)

Renech i lu i erui govannem?
(Do you remember when we first met?)

Aragorn: Nauthannem i ned ol reniannen.
(I thought I had strayed into a dream.)

Arwen: Gwennin in enninath...
(Long years have passed...)

�-'arnech in naeth i si celich.
(You did not have the cares you carry now.)

Renich i beth i pennen?
(Do you remember what I told you?)

Aragorn: You said you'd bind yourself to me, forsaking the immortal life of your people.

Arwen: And to that I hold. I would rather share one lifetime with you than face all the ages of this world alone.

(Aragorn looks down to find that Arwen has given him Evenstar)

I chose a mortal life.

Aragorn: You cannot give me this!

Arwen: It is mine to give to whom I will... like my heart

(They kiss)

Though the giving of "Evenstar" is not an event from the book, within the context of the film, it works to reminds us that the elves are indeed leaving Middle-Earth and thus handing responsibility for its care over to Men. Afterall, who will take responsibility for keeping the Shire, Rivendell, and Lorien green once the elves are gone? Prepared or not, it's a burden Aragorn and his people will have to bear.

A similar event takes place later on.

Galadriel: Farewell, Frodo Baggins.

I give you the light of E�rendil,
our most beloved star.

Namari�

May it be a light for you in dark places,
when all other lights go out.

Now Frodo isn't exactly a Man, but for purposes of symbolism he might as well be.

So here we have two instances, where the current gaurdians of Middle-Earth hand over possession of a beacon of light. Indeed, the locations themselves where the events take place, Rivendell and Lorien, would also seem to be highly symbolic. Two main domains of the Elves, each florishing with the help of a Great Ring.

The elves appear to be acting as heralds of mankind. A herald's primary psychological function is to announce the need for change. The elves' giving of their most valued heirlooms, is a clear symbol that it's time for someone else to care for their valued treasures.

The herald's primary dramatic function is to provide motivation. With the elves leaving, Men really have to rely on themselves and take command of their place in history. They may thrive or fail, but at least it will be by their own choices.

My question, is Tolkien saying something about the need for others to step back, to assume a more passive role, in order to give yet others the room to shine?

I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless [bounce]

Day 16 - Light and Dark

by - sinaes (Tue Aug 12 00:18:00)

UPDATED Mon Aug 18 11:28:56

I would like to discuss the use of light and dark as symbols of good and evil.

Long before literature, writers, professional story-tellers, civilization even ... man lived in tune with nature. He'd wake with the rising sun, do what work he needed to do during the day, then fall asleep not long after the setting sun. Among almost all cultures, this eventually lead to the general association of light with good and dark with bad.

Among the few other cultures, in addition to nature, the association of light/dark with good/evil is often attributed to the influence of a deity. "Pagans" for example, often associated the sun as chief god in their respective cosmologies. Indeed, without the warmth and energy of the sun, the Earth would likely be a lifeless rock. Something many ancient peoples would intuitively have been aware of. In that context, light easily becomes a symbol of good, and dark a symbol of ill.

Yet others didn't simply have a pantheon of gods, they also had stories about creation itself. The ancient Greeks for instance, believed that the universe originally was an empty void full of darkness. That out of this darkness, sprang the Earth, the gods, and the rest. This view of creation is echoed throughout many different cultures of the world.

Adding a local influence, the Egyptians believed that the early universe was an endless space of dark, shapeless water ... from which sprang the land and the sun. In Norse mythology too, the early universe was nothing but dark emptiness. The association of light and dark with respect to good and bad, is thus a long established view. Dark is the way the universe was without light: formless and devoid of life.

Furthermore, there are psychological reasons for this association as well. One, it's not possible to see without light. Thus, darkness is inherently associated with the unknown, or at least the hidden. Indeed, considering that the unknown is one of man's greatest fears, darkness easily becomes symbolic of evil.

In sharp contrast, where there's an abundance of light it's easy for man to see everything. Since this dispels his innate fears, it in turn further reinforces the association of light with good. Furthermore, there's the fact that humans are mostly only conscious in the light. When we sleep, it's either full darkness or a subdued light we experience. This further carries over into our views on death, which for the non-religious, either translates into a type of sleep or an outright return to darkness.

As for religion (in the western monotheistic sense), "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the spirit of God swept over the face of the waters. Then God said, let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, and it was good"

In addition to the non-religious reasons discussed earlier, in Western monotheism light becomes a symbol of good not only because it's specifically referred to as such, but more importantly, because it's a creation of God himself. Darkness is what was there before God did anything, and consequently, what would exist without God's influence.

Each and every of these provides the foundations for the symbolic use of light and dark within LOTR.

Specifically with regards to LOTR ...

Sauron is identified and referred to as the Dark Lord. His dark fortress of Barad-Dur resides in the darkened, ash filled land of Mordor. His most trusted servants, the Nazgul, are specifically referred to as Dark Riders. Furthermore, the Balrog of Moria is abundantly referenced to as a 'shadow' [monster]

This in sharp contrast to the use of light. As discussed elsewhere, the elves are associated with the "Evenstar" and "The Light of Earendil" ... two symbols of light. In the film, when Arwen is introduced, Frodo sees her as a being surrounded in light. During the Council of Elrond where and when the forces of good gather, the use of backlight is extensive perhaps even conspicuous.

In addition, there are numerous instances of the use of the word "light" to refer to good things, and "dark" or "shadow" to refer to bad things. Too many to go into every occurence, but a few examples should suffice.

When Arwen arrives to rescue Frodo, after he's been stabbed by the Morgul blade ...

Frodo, Im Arwen. Telin le thaed.
(Frodo, I am Arwen. I come to help you.)
Lasto beth n�n, tolo dan na ngalad.
(Hear my voice, come back to the light.)

Elrond when Frodo arrives in Rivendell ...

Lasto beth n�n, tolo dan na ngalad.
(Hear my voice, come back to the light)

While Arwen and Aragorn meet in Rivendell ...

Arwen: Why do you fear the past? You are Isildur's heir, not Isildur himself. You are not bound to his fate.

Aragorn: The same blood flows in my veins; the same weakness!

Arwen: Your time will come. You will face the same evil
and you will defeat it.

(Shot of Rivendell at night, then Arwen and Aragorn on a bridge)

Arwen: A si i-dh�ath �-orthor, Aragorn.
(The Shadow does not hold sway yet, Aragorn.)
� or le a � or nin.
(Not over you and not over me.)

And perhaps the most famous contrast of shadow and light in FOTR ...

Gandalf: You cannot pass!

I am a servant of the Secret Fire,
Wielder of the flame of Anor.
Dark fire will not avail you, Flame of Ud�n.
Go back to the shadow!

You shall not pass!!

Of course, the aim of all this use of light and dark is to reinforce a major theme of the struggle between life and death, good and evil. There are a few scenes that I found perticularly illustrative.

One, Gandalf and Saruman on top of Orthanc in Isengard, when Gandalf escapes.

Saruman: The friendship of Saruman is not lightly thrown aside. One ill turn deserves another. Embrace the power of the Ring, or embrace your own destruction.

Gandalf: There is only one Lord of the Ring, only one who bends it to his will, and he does not share power!

(Gandalf throws himself off the side of Orthanc and flies away on Gwaihir's back)

Saruman: So, you have chosen death...

The tranquil light of the Moon and Gandalf as a reflection of the celestial, starkly constrasts with the death and destruction that Saruman and his dark tower are prepared to unleash. Indeed, in escaping Isengard, Gandalf is shown flying over Caradharas which foreshadows his eventual death.

A second scene where the struggle between good/evil, life/death is illustrated is in Rivendell ... as Boromir examines the painting of Isildur battling Sauron.

Finally, this brings up what might be perceived as a contradictory use of light. In the painting, Sauron is shown as light hiding inside his armor. Indeed, when Sauron is defeated his spirit dissipates into a flash of light. The Nazgul too, are portayed as beings of light, at least when Frodo sees their true selves using the Ring.

Which I think, is really the point of showing them all as beings of light. That is to say, even though Sauron and company represent death ... they themselves are alive (at least undead). The film/book may be saying something about the true nature of evil here, but I won't go that far [smile]

I suppose my main question here is, that given the pervasiveness of the symbolism, is the contrast betwen good/evil-life/death the main theme for LOTR?

I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless [bounce]

Re: 30 Days of Fellowship

by - Lady-of-Rohan (Tue Aug 12 11:51:26)

Ignore this User | Report Abuse

Sinaes, this is wonderful. This SO belongs in the ringnut archive.

"Hinder me? Thou fool. No living man may hinder me!"

Re: 30 Days of Fellowship

by - sinaes (Tue Aug 12 13:02:42)

UPDATED Tue Aug 12 13:03:09

Thanks lady :)

I was beginning to wonder who else may be watching [uhoh]

But with renewed hope [aura]

I think I can endure till the DVD comes out.

As to the archives, it's already there [yes]

It's listed under 'useful guides.' [smile]

Speaking of which, this is probably as good a time as any, be sure to nominate threads for new additions by sending a PM to Athene.

Thanks again for the reply.

I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless [bounce]

Day 17 - Elements (part 1) ... Fire as False Light

by - sinaes 6 days ago (Tue Aug 12 23:51:40)

UPDATED Mon Aug 18 11:14:05

Earlier I discussed the use of Light and Dark within LOTR.
Now, I would like to move on to the use of the elements.

In the Western classical sense, there are four such elements: air, earth, water, and fire. All of which are considered equal and complemetary parts of our world. Now that is a metaphysical concept, which I will not brace any further here.

Tolkien has instead chosen to use the elements as symbols. Air, earth, and water he has chosen to associate with the powers of Light (more on that in part 2). Fire he has chosen to associate with the powers of Darkness.

The first association with fire in the film is when the Great Rings are forged. It's clear from the beginning that within the LOTR story, fire is meant to be associated as a general symbol of Darkness.

But they were, all of them, deceived;
for another ring was made.
In the land of Mordor, in the fires of Mount Doom,
the Dark Lord Sauron forged, in secret, a master ring.
And into this ring he poured his cruelty, his malice
and his will to dominate all life.
One ring to rule them all.

Here, the Dark Lord Sauron and his Ring are quickly associated with Mt. Doom, a place of elemental fire in Middle-Earth. Indeed, Mt. Doom itself is a potent symbol of Darkness. In the film, the association of fire with Darkness is further reinforced by its abundant use during these scenes.

One by one, the free lands of Middle-earth fell
to the power of the ring.

Here too, villages are shown burning while the ill effects of Sauron and the Ring are stated.

Furthermore, the three main symbols of Sauron (and thus Darkness) are clearly associated with fire.

1) Sauron's home, his fortress of Barad-Dur.

When it's introduced in the film, the lava flows leading to this bastion of Darkness are prominently visible.

2) The One Ring.

Gandalf, reading from Isildur's acoount ...

The year 3434 of the Second Age,
Here follows the account of Isildur, High King of Gondor,
and the finding of the Ring of Power.

It has come to me, the one Ring.
It shall be an heirloom of my kingdom.
All those who follow in my bloodline shall be bound to it's fate, For I will risk no hurt to the Ring...
It is... precious to me, though I buy it with great pain

The markings upon the band begin to fade.
The writing, which at first was as clear as red flame, has all but disappeared. A secret now that only fire can tell.

The last verse intertwines the Ring's association with fire. The fact that only fire can reveal the markings on the Ring, is further meant to illustrate that the Ring is not an instrument of Light. It only reveals its true self when either worn by Sauron (Lord of Darkness) or when subjected to fire, an associated element of Darkness.

3) The Eye of Sauron.

As described by Saruman (indeed, as shown) ...

A great eye, lidless, wreathed in flame...

A final symbol, though not directly associated with Sauron, nevertheless is a potent symbol of Darkness, and meant to provide the exclamation point that fire and Darkness are intertwined within LOTR.

Boromir: What is this new devilry?

Gandalf: A Balrog. A demon of the ancient world.
This foe is beyond any of you. Run!

And then the scene, where Light and Dark are most conspicuously contrasted ...

Gandalf:You cannot pass!

I am a servant of the Secret Fire,
Wielder of the flame of Anor.
Dark fire will not avail you, Flame of Ud�n.
Go back to the shadow!

You shall not pass!!

Wait, there are some contradictory uses of fire here you might say :)

Gandalf is not in fact literally talking about physical fire with the term "Secret Fire". He instead is referring to an aspect of Illuvatar, the creator, which might easiest be called his "spirit" (though Tolkien does not call it "spirit"; he calls it the "Flame Imperishable"). By his use of the term "Secret Fire," Gandalf perhaps is even referring to Illuvatar himself.

Either way, "Secret Fire" is associated with the source of Light and not with any tangible fire ie. symbols of Darkness. When Gandalf says, "I am a servant of the Secret Fire" ... he means to say, that he is a servant of good.

The same is true for the term "flame of Anor". Gandalf is again not speaking of an actual "fire". "Anor" is an Elvish word for "sun" ... which in turn is a clear symbol of Light.

As for the meaning of "Ud�n", Ud�n is merely another fortress of evil, much like an ancient Barad-Dur.

So thus, Gandalf is merely contrasting his role on the side of good to the Balrog's role on the side of evil. "Flame of Anor" is metaphorical, and as Gandalf applies it to himself, means something along the lines of "beacon/champion of good". "Flame of Ud�n" likewise means "champion of evil" (in addition to the obvious). An ironic and poignant comparison between the two Maia.

All together, the scene with the Balrog is meant to bring to the fore a key theme: the difference between true Light and false light; a related theme to good versus evil, but more along the lines of reality versus illusion, truth versus untruth.

And here I believe, is evident motive for why Tolkien chose to use the element of fire as a symbol of Darkness. Fire gives off light. It can easily be seen as a symbol of Light, a symbol of Good.

But fire is not the same thing as pure light. Pure light is all around. It's the blue of the sky, the green of the plants, the red of the fire ... it is not the fire itself. Fire burns, and within LOTR, it's main purpose is to destroy.

The fires of Mt. Doom and Isengard are used to forge implements of war.
Both the fiery Eye and Ring, are intent solely on reuniting Sauron's power so he can further unleash his ill-will.
And of course the Balrog, it really only shows up to spread shadow, to cause death.

Here another question may be raised, if fire is meant to be a symbol of evil in LOTR, then what about lamps, torches, fireworks, hearths/fireplaces?

Well to that I answer, Tolkien is placing clear limits on the symbolism of fire :) He is in effect saying, that one should not interpret his views on the use of fire in the book, with his views on the use of fire in Real Life. Tolkien is not advocating that we stop using matches or anything silly like that [razz]

By maintaining the common "Real World" uses of fire more or less the same within his book, Tolkien is basically saying don't take it too far [smile]

When it's a huge flaming (mythical) eyeball ... that type of fire is meant to have added symbolism. When it's a torch (more or less realistic) ... that type of fire is just fire, no added symbolism ;)

Confusing? Perhaps, yes! [smile]

But then, that's the nature of illusions.

What about the "Ring of Fire" Gandalf wears?!
I didn't see it in the films, so I won't explicitly adress that here :)

However, if you are so inclined to answer, I'll ask you, what is the symbolism of Gandalf's Great Ring of Power, Narya, the Red Ring/Ring of Fire? Also, is there another reason why Tolkien chose to use fire as a symbol of Darkness?

Finally, I guess I should add that I've been using "Darkness" (with a capital "D") to distinguish the difference between darkness as the absence of metaphorical light ie. evil ... with darkness as the absence of literal light ie. actual physical darkness. A parallel usage applies to my use of "Light" as opposed to "light".

I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless [bounce]

Re: 30 Days of Fellowship

by - Mrs_Rosie_Forkbeard 6 days ago (Wed Aug 13 00:44:29)

Ignore this User | Report Abuse

Thank you sinaes dear - you are such a nice ringnut!

FB took Rosie into the Misty Mountains and there they dwelt awaiting the birth of the baby.

Day 18 - Elements (part 2) ... Air, Earth, and Water

by - sinaes 5 days ago (Wed Aug 13 23:56:02)

UPDATED Tue Aug 19 01:49:51

Air, earth, and water ... elemental symbols of Light in Tolkien's world.
That air, earth, and water are portrayed as good in the text/film is fairly clear.

First, all the protagonists have homes where these elements are in noticeable abundance.

The Shire, Rivendell, Lorien, Rohan, Gondor, even the Misty Mountains ... homes to Hobbits, Elves, Dwarves, and Men; including all members of the Fellowship.

By contrast, the main place where these elements aren't noticeable (or at least would be perceived as being in an impure, diluted state) is Mordor, home to the antagonists. There, the air is full of toxic fumes, the earth is covered in ash, and the water is scarce; the abundant element is fire.

Second, the domains of the protagonists are replete with life. By comparison, Mordor is a place devoid of life, the major exception being the corrupted elves, the orcs. Indeed, Mordor is really mostly a barren wasteland.

Finally, Isengard. As Saruman openly turns from the side of Light to that of Darkness, the land of Isengard goes from being like the homes of the other protagonists, to being like that of the main antagonist. That is, the earth is turned to pits of fire, the waters cease to flow, and the land is made more barren and lifeless.

The many passages devoted to the portayal of air, earth, and water as Light is translated onto screen by the extensive use of the New Zealand landscape. It's fairly clear that these elements are meant to have a prominent and positive role within Tolkien's story.

In fact, there are only 3 times in FOTR where any of these elements are shown as potentially negative: the incidents involving Caradhras, Watcher in the Water, and Sam's near drowning.

1) Caradhras.

In the film it's clearly portrayed as not the elements themselves, but Saruman's will which turns back the Fellowship.

In the book, Saruman doesn't actually cause the avalanche, but nevertheless he's ultimately the reason why the Fellowship goes up Caradhras in the first place. Caradhras is still portrayed as an inhospitable place, but that's probably just Tolkien nudging in a little awe-inspiring humility.Yes, that's an aspect of Light too [smile]

Though if you prefer, you can think of it as Light helping the Fellowship [wink]

Gandalf: So do all who live to see such times, but that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us. There are other forces at work in this world, Frodo, besides the will of evil. Bilbo was meant to find the Ring, in which case you were also meant to have it. And that is an encouraging thought.
Indeed, the main net effect of going through Moria is that a Shadow is vanquished, and Gandalf is made more radiant. So if as Gandalf states, "there are other forces at work" it seems the mountain wanted the Fellowship to go under and not over it.

2) The Watcher in the Water outside Moria.

More or less the same reasons as with Caradhras can be argued why this incident really wasn't anything bad, and thus why the element of water is still being shown as working for Light in this case. Indeed, the only "bad" thing that happened is that the Fellowship got a little scare. I can well imagine how terrible things would have turned out, if the Fellowship had tried one of the remaining routes instead of going through Moria.

3) Sam's near drowning.

This is the only case where the inherent dangers of an element associated with Light are shown. And yet, it's not really the elements that are responsible, but Sam himself. So it's not as if water is actually being portrayed as negative. I don't think anyone would think to blame the "bad" water, if Sam had in fact drowned.

Why did Tolkien choose air, earth, and water to represent Light and solely fire to represent Darkness?

Well, aside from fire lending itself well to the theme of illusion vs. reality (as false Light) ... it's my belief that Tolkien intended to highlite another theme related to good versus evil, balance versus imbalance.

Afterall, the three symbolic elements of Light have been associated with almost all of Middle-Earth. By comparison, the symbolic element of False Light is only associated with a few places; indeed revolving around a few individuals.

Of course the themes of balance vs. imbalance, illusion vs. reality, good vs. evil are all intertwined. Thus, the symbolic association that Tolkien has given the four elements to these themes, speaks further nuances which I'll leave for someone else to elaborate.

I noticed that there's one place in Middle-Earth where all these elements meet, the Misty Mountains. Indeed, I still don't know what to make of the fact that the mountains seem to be in the middle of Middle-Earth, but there's probably something to that too [smile]

It got me to thinking about Gollum's Cave, where for a time all the elements co-exist in the same room, and my question is whether Gollum himself is meant to be a micoscosm for all of Tolkien's major themes?

I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless [bounce]

bump

by - sinaes 4 days ago (Fri Aug 15 00:13:51)

I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless [bounce]

bump

by - sinaes 3 days ago (Sat Aug 16 00:20:14)

I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless [bounce]

bump

by - sinaes 2 days ago (Sat Aug 16 23:16:31)

I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless [bounce]

bump

by - sinaes 1 day ago (Sun Aug 17 23:54:18)

I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless [bounce]

will be back!

by - appletree 1 day ago (Mon Aug 18 10:29:01)

Ignore this User | Report Abuse

Looks good sinaes. I'm sure a lot of people will benefit from your analyses. But I'm writing dissertation for the moment and don't have time to read it yet. Will do when I get a break! But keep up the good work!

SK

Re: will be back!

by - sinaes 1 day ago (Mon Aug 18 11:34:17)

Thanks.

I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless [bounce]

bump

by - sinaes 22 hours ago (Mon Aug 18 23:59:08)

I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless [bounce]

Back to the top