|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Like, I'm not suddenly believing in Jesus or a big imaginary skyfriend or anything, but fallen flawed world, forgive us our sins as we forgive those who trespass against us, "Inasmuch as ye have done it to one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it to me" ? All starting to creep into my worldview! 
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 08:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 18:39 |
|
|
It was 4 am and I made a stupid joke. In all seriousness I've always thought them to be smoldering shadows in the vague shape of humanoids. Like a darker than night core tinged by the color of burning coals and flames. I don't know how correct it is but I find the suggestion of shape over an actual shape to be far more impressive and worrisome.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 10:02
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Right, but it's also an alternate name for Utumno, Morgoth's fortress *before* the first age (I had to go look that up: http://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Utumno). I never picked up on this before, but I think you're right. Even almost 30 years after I first read the trilogy, I keep finding additional layered meanings in the text.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 14:11
|
|
|
There's real-world precedent for a "real" place becoming the concept of Hell. The Jewish concept of Gehenna is thought to have grown out of stories told about the Valley of Hinnom outside Jerusalem. IIRC it AAS the equivalent of a flaming trash pile. Morgoth's fortress of Utumno/Udun being the metaphorical equivalent of Middle-Earth's Hell is something I could see Tolkien modelling off something like that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 14:34
|
|
|
When Beren and Tinuveil/Luthien invade Angband, Angband is explicitly described as being hellish. Its gate is even guarded by a giant dog!
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 14:53
|
|
|
What do y'all think of The Final Battle (Dagor Dagorath)? Personally, I never thought it fit very well with the Third Age stuff. Lord of The Rings is all about how magic and divine intervention are fading, the smallest people can make their own fates, we live in the shadow of giants, etc. Ending things in a huge Norse/Old Testament style showdown just seems dissonant. On the other hand, I never really got into the theology of Tolkien; maybe there's a nuanced Catholic reason for why the Apocalypse still has to happen?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 15:13
|
|
Bendigeidfran posted:What do y'all think of The Final Battle (Dagor Dagorath)? Personally, I never thought it fit very well with the Third Age stuff. Lord of The Rings is all about how magic and divine intervention are fading, the smallest people can make their own fates, we live in the shadow of giants, etc. Ending things in a huge Norse/Old Testament style showdown just seems dissonant. Tolkien discarded Dagor Dagorath after LOTR was published, but he never wrote anything to fill in what happens and how the world is finally redeemed, so Chris just used Dagor Dagorath in the published Silmarillion. There are some pretty big holes, because originally Dagor Dagorath was the War of Wrath, before the Drowning of Anadune and LOTR entered the mythology. The world has to be destroyed and remade so long as Melkor refuses to repent, because he put his essence into the world and corrupted it (thus the title of HOME X, Morgoth's Ring). If he were to genuinely repent of the works of his hands and seek forgiveness, then there would be no need for an apocalypse, for the essence of Melko would turn to good and the paradise of Valinor would spread across all of Arda, and even be surpassed. So it all comes down to whether you believe that everyone can repent or not, and Tolkien was generally of the former opinion. Thus Dagor Dagorath was cut out.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 16:21
|
|
|
This might be a dumb question, but how do Gandalf et al. KNOW know that they can't take command of The One Ring without turning into an evil jerk themselves? It's not like anyone other than Sauron ever uses it to its full potential. EDIT: On the subject of repentance, I started reading The Simarillion and Tolkein says that after the War of Wrath Sauron genuinely wanted to repent but flees because he's afraid that the Valar will be as harsh on him as they were with Morgoth, and eventually he falls back on his old habits. Similarly, on the steps of Crinith Ungol Gollom appears to have a moment of genuine empathy while observing Frodo and Sam asleep, but then Sam wakes up and mouths off at him and the moment disappears. It seems a reoccurring theme that the biggest obstacle to evil repenting is ironically those that would most benefit from their change of heart. Does Tolkein ever address this conundrum in his letters? SirPhoebos fucked around with this message at 18:52 on Mar 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 18:44
|
|
|
Because it's evil and they're genre savvy enough to know that evil doesn't win in a universe where God's angels are literally a boat trip away
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 18:48
|
|
|
SirPhoebos posted:This might be a dumb question, but how do Gandalf et al. KNOW know that they can't take command of The One Ring without turning into an evil jerk themselves? It's not like anyone other than Sauron ever uses it to its full potential. That's where it would begin.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 18:50
|
|
|
Okay, but to play Devil's Advocate, the Ring's Destruction and Sauron's downfall doesn't mean the Shadow has been removed from Middle Earth for good. While Tolkein gave up on writing a 4th Age Chronicle because he got bored of it, his mythology still implies that a new evil will eventually take Sauron's place. EDIT: On the observed history question, what are the other examples of Superpowers driving their users crazy?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 18:58
|
|
SirPhoebos posted:This might be a dumb question, but how do Gandalf et al. KNOW know that they can't take command of The One Ring without turning into an evil jerk themselves? It's not like anyone other than Sauron ever uses it to its full potential. Because the Ring's purpose is to control people. You can't use it ethically, except via the unintentional side-effect of being thrust into the spirit world.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
SirPhoebos posted:This might be a dumb question, but how do Gandalf et al. KNOW know that they can't take command of The One Ring without turning into an evil jerk themselves? It's not like anyone other than Sauron ever uses it to its full potential. I don't know if the point about Sauron is entirely true. I think the discussion in the Silm is about how he doesn't want to go back to Valinor and be "stuck" serving everyone else as a punishment, because he is an incredibly prideful dude and a big part of the reason he fell in the first place was his desire to boss other people around and remove the "wasteful friction" they kept causing when left to their own devices. The Valar were pretty lenient with Morgoth at first - he was stuck alone in Mandos for a long while (bad, but probably if you are an immortal power not impossible to deal with) and then sent around to help all the Elves with things. It seems like what Sauron really feared most was being on the bottom of the pyramid for a really long time (in a way like the Noldor who chose to remain in ME instead of leaving after the 1st age) rather than having his feet cut off and being chucked out into the Void. The other reason re: the Ring is that it's Sauron's tool and it probably "inherited" his whole shtick of convincing people that awful, dangerous ideas are actually great and they should throw caution to the wind, honestly, it'll work out guys!
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 19:02
|
|
|
SirPhoebos posted:EDIT: On the observed history question, what are the other examples of Superpowers driving their users crazy? "Superpowers" like the Seeing Stones and the Rings of Power flow from the overall theme that strength of arms is nothing without strength of character. So people like Saruman and Denethor tried to use the Palantir against evil but in the end they were deceived by Sauron and corrupted. More directly, the 9 Rings of Men probably gave their owners a lot of power in life. But they also, you know, doomed them to eternal slavery as ghosts. If you switch the word "superpower" with "untold riches" or "military force" then you have the recipe for every villain in the History of Middle Earth.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 19:25
|
|
|
TildeATH posted:Didn't MERPS have the "you trip on an imaginary turtle and are confused" fumble? Yes, yes it does 
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 20:31
|
|
|
SirPhoebos posted:This might be a dumb question, but how do Gandalf et al. KNOW know that they can't take command of The One Ring without turning into an evil jerk themselves? It's not like anyone other than Sauron ever uses it to its full potential. As others have pointed out - Tolkien held to the old adage that "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Which is why virtuous characters such as Gandalf, Galadriel, Tom Bombadil, etc - did "not desire mastery, but rather understanding." Hope that helps!
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 03:41
|
|
|
SirPhoebos posted:This might be a dumb question, but how do Gandalf et al. KNOW know that they can't take command of The One Ring without turning into an evil jerk themselves? It's not like anyone other than Sauron ever uses it to its full potential. In addition to what everyone else posted, here's a relevant excerpt from Tolkien's letters: quote:In any case Elrond or Galadriel would have proceeded in the policy now adopted by Sauron: they would have built up an empire with great and absolutely subservient generals and armies and engines of war, until they could challenge Sauron and destroy him by force.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 08:01
|
|
|
Thunder Moose posted:As others have pointed out - Tolkien held to the old adage that "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Which is why virtuous characters such as Gandalf, Galadriel, Tom Bombadil, etc - did "not desire mastery, but rather understanding." Does that mean Eru is horribly corrupt 
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 15:56
|
|
|
Thunder Moose posted:As others have pointed out - Tolkien held to the old adage that "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Which is why virtuous characters such as Gandalf, Galadriel, Tom Bombadil, etc - did "not desire mastery, but rather understanding." I don't think that is true. Or at least, Tolkien's work is more nuanced than that. Power does not corrupt. It is the desire to dominate and create which corrupts. Sometimes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 16:15
|
|
|
The themes about power and corruption in Tolkien are a bit more complex than that. The idea is that power is itself dangerous but it doesn't automatically mean you're headed for iron towers and enslaving free people just because. So long as your power is paired with humility, pity, and mercy, then power will not corrupt you -- because the holder understands how dangerous their position is. This is partly why Galadriel, Thranduil, Elrond and even Tom Bombadil hide in their strongholds instead of squaring off in military campaigns against Sauron. Especially for Galadriel who lived to see the literally earth-shattering consequences of pride, arrogance, and wrath during the Kinslaying and the crossing of the Helcaraxë, and the wars that followed, all for a pack of stupid gems. (Valuable ones to be sure but not worth the innocent lives and the tales of betrayal and woe that followed.) This theme is everywhere. It is why the power of the Elven Rings is NOT in dominance and exerting will over others, and Sauron's Ring IS. The Elven Rings are about preservation, growth, and are used in Lorien, Rivendell and even the depths of Moria as a way to withstand the blows of evil and NOT CRUMBLE, a very important point. In the first chapter in Lothlórien Galadriel describes the eternal battle with Evil as "the long defeat," because in the Catholic mythology that envelopes the series, the point of Good is NOT to defeat Evil, it is to withstand against it until the ultimate reinforcements arrive and the Big Good picks up a sledgehammer and remakes the world in the picture of forgiveness and love. This is why Saruman is corrupted by Sauron and ends up in his thrall: nothing starts out as evil, not even Melkor, but wanting dominion, to "win" and become king of the mountain, is the true corrupting force. Saruman wanted to win against Sauron, something the Istari were explicitely forbidden to do as being bloody obvious about their true nature and stature was not in the mission statement -- they were there to give counsel in need, consolation in grief, and inspire goodness and mercy. Remember how Gandalf admired Bilbo's act of mercy towards Gollum while Saruman is willing to do whatever it takes to solidify his own position, even being so spiteful as to raze the Shire in a flagrant display of his own power. And that brings me back to my point about humility and strongholds. The temptation of Galadriel with the One Ring illustrates this vital test. "I have passed the test. I will diminish, and go into the West, and remain Galadriel." She will remain as she is: Queen of the Elves, wielder of the Ring of Adamant, preserver of beauty and growing things, not exerting her great power to dominate others, not even over Sauron who bloody well deserves it. It isn't her task, it isn't her doom, and while her intentions would start well (she would sort out people like Sandyman!) it never ends there because dominion is not about humility and mercy and love. It is always about the power trip, even if the intention is good. That is what caused the downfall of the prideful Saruman who wanted to do good, by being the best there ever was. Gandalf is also tempted by the One Ring but also passes the test because of his humility and acknowledging his own weakness instead of falling into the arrogance trap, thinking that he could triumph over his own foibles. 
HIJK fucked around with this message at 16:52 on Mar 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 16:42
|
|
|
Galadriel was a lot closer to the line. She may have witnessed Feanor going nuts, but then she lived with Melian for like 10000 years and grew to desire her own kingdom. Which is what Loth Lorien is. With Loth Lorien she basically - iirc - took over a bunch of woodland elves and made herself ruler. loving Noldor.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 16:53
|
|
|
Thanks for all of your answers. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 17:11
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Galadriel was a lot closer to the line. She may have witnessed Feanor going nuts, but then she lived with Melian for like 10000 years and grew to desire her own kingdom. Which is what Loth Lorien is. With Loth Lorien she basically - iirc - took over a bunch of woodland elves and made herself ruler. To be fair she did this after the previous rulers had died in the wars with Sauron.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 17:12
|
|
|
Levitate posted:Does that mean Eru is horribly corrupt Eru does not dominate, but provides free will.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
Levitate posted:Does that mean Eru is horribly corrupt I suppose I should amend my answer - as it was a very simplistic and in hindsight flawed view. The desire to wield power over others and control their wills is what truly corrupts. As Eru does no such thing, no.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2015 15:07
|
|
|
I've started on Return of the King now, and I've added an entry to my "Cameos That Should Have Been" list: Jerry Garcia as King of the Dead 
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 20:10
|
|
|
Also, why do all the Rohanim seem mystified by Aragorn igoing down the Paths of the Dead when he explicitly says why he's going there?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 03:11
|
|
|
As crypto-vikings, the Rohirrim are accustomed to people talking a lot of poo poo about the stupid things they're totally going to do, you guys.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 04:36
|
|
SirPhoebos posted:Also, why do all the Rohanim seem mystified by Aragorn igoing down the Paths of the Dead when he explicitly says why he's going there? Because the Rohirrim have much less sense and knowledge of history than most of Middle-Earth (even random mountain orcs have collective memory of the First Age). Anything from before Eorl is somewhere between legend and myth. So what they know of the Paths of the Dead is that it killed Baldor, who was as far away from them as Elizabeth the First is to us, and that it's some serious bad poo poo that's as old as the hills.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 04:39
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Because the Rohirrim have much less sense and knowledge of history than most of Middle-Earth (even random mountain orcs have collective memory of the First Age). Anything from before Eorl is somewhere between legend and myth. So what they know of the Paths of the Dead is that it killed Baldor, who was as far away from them as Elizabeth the First is to us, and that it's some serious bad poo poo that's as old as the hills.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 18:44
|
|
|
Does anyone have additional information on what Tolkein wanted to write about post ROTK? Obviously it never happened but there has been some information on what might have been. I know it had something to do with Aragon's descendant uncovering a secret plot by a cult of Morgoth's and that is about it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 18:49
|
|
|
Thunder Moose posted:Does anyone have additional information on what Tolkein wanted to write about post ROTK? Obviously it never happened but there has been some information on what might have been. He talks about it in the letters. He said he abandoned it because it would have been a political thriller and he wasn't interested in writing that kind of story.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 19:24
|
|
Thunder Moose posted:Does anyone have additional information on what Tolkein wanted to write about post ROTK? Obviously it never happened but there has been some information on what might have been. HOME XII has the first chapters of the planned sequel and a planned story set in the Second Age involving Numenorean exploration, both of which were abandoned shortly after he wrote the drafts as far as we can tell. HOME IX has a large section based on his second, post-LOTR attempt to write The Lost Road and make the downfall of Numenor into an actual novel. But he spent a lot of his later years attempting to rewrite the Silmarillion.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 01:33
|
|
|
Ah well, I would have enjoyed reading that - though it sounds like Mr.Tolkien would not have enjoyed writing it...
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 14:49
|
|
|
I imagine someone else WILL write that once JRRT's work gets into the public domain... is that going to ever happen, actually, or did he publish late enough that the various laws meant to protect Mickey Mouse are also protecting Frodo and Gandalf?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 22:39
|
|
|
Who cares if someone else writes about it, it won't matter what they write cause they ain't Tolkien.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 22:50
|
|
|
Copyright for Tolkien is currently set to expire in 2043 for every jurisdiction that grants life + 70 years, although due to the vagaries of international copyright law I'd hesitate to entirely blame Mickey Mouse. On the other hand, if you happen to have a Russian view of copyright... (I read it and laughed a lot, although it loses most of its steam after having been in Umbar a while; it runs out of LotR happenings to poke fun at, and it sadly just devolves entirely into being a third-rate spy story.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 00:11
|
|
|
Nessus posted:I imagine someone else WILL write that once JRRT's work gets into the public domain... is that going to ever happen, actually, or did he publish late enough that the various laws meant to protect Mickey Mouse are also protecting Frodo and Gandalf? I think technically the copyright only applies to published works. Things like "there is a place called Middle Earth that have Hobbits and Dwarves and evil rings" fall under something else (trademark?).
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 00:51
|
|
|
Book series being taken over by others after the original author's death sometimes kindasorta work, usually don't, and almost never retain the same feel. Ruth Plumly Thompson amirite?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 05:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 18:39 |
|
|
Didn't someone basically write Lord of the Rings over, just changing the names and poo poo a little to avoid copyright issues?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 05:37
|
|