The Lord of the Rings discussion: Foreword and Prologue

[azalea]

Lord of the Rings discussion: Foreword and Prologue

This was certainly more difficult than I think the intros for the actual story chapters will be. It was impossible for me to follow my own given format when writing this, and it ended up being long due to all the information they contain. So I hope it will still allow for discussion. I tried to bring out the points that I felt were important, and I actually cut out a lot of the notes I had written while I read! Although I haven’t asked any questions for discussion, I’ve tried to bring up enough points of interest to get things started. I hope it’s sufficient. So here goes – enjoy J (and participate!)

In my book, which is a newer edition, there is also a note on the text, which I thought I’d include here as well. It was written in 1993 by Douglas A. Anderson, whom I guess was the head of Houghton Mifflin at the time. He starts out by giving some facts about the book and its publishing history. He mentions that Tolkien experienced errors in printing and intentional “corrections� of his usage of some words (dwarves, etc.). Wouldn’t you know that a philologist would be particularly perturbed by this, and you’d think they would have known to consult him. But then he wasn’t as well known at the time, and it would have taken too long by mail, I guess. So in later printings these were corrected. It was interesting to read how involved he was in the publishing process, right down to correcting typos. I wonder if authors still have that kind of involvement, but nowadays so many are published in such a short time. Plus the process is probably much more advanced now, in terms of technology. Interesting to note that so many different versions appeared, some including certain minor details, while they were left out of others unintentionally.
This is one thing that bothers me sometimes. I respect Tolkien’s need to revise, and am happy it added to the end result, but I also in some ways see it as a breach of contract with the reader. One would like to think that what he read originally was complete and accurate in the author’s mind, and for him to change details seems to be unfair to the first readers. ADDING new info, such as in the Appendices, is no problem, nor are corrections of typos and the like; it’s things within the text that are changed that I find to be problematic, which renders previous versions inaccurate. Furthermore, it caused discrepancies in the different editions, and no one could be sure if it was an author’s revision, or simply a printing error. Adding to this problem was that there were too many publishers, A&U, HM, and Ballantine. It would have been better to have had them all printed in the UK and exported, but that would have been too expensive and inefficient, esp. back then. Now that we are in the computer age, hopefully all the different editions will be aligned in terms of correct content.
The new edition put out in the US in the mid-sixties with a new foreword probably helped fuel its popularity in the counterculture.

Foreword

As he begins, he talks about “a war [the story] which it was my task to conduct [this being his acknowledgement of himself as the author], or at least to report [this being a reference to the device of his being the translator of an existing but forgotten history, or perhaps even a reference to a writer’s need to write a story that seemingly comes from no where – that “writes itself�].� He mentions his detractors calling LotR “boring, absurd, contemptible.� They of course have no precedent for reviewing an “adult fairy tale,� which is what a lot of fantasy is. Fantasy heretofore having been children’s literature or classic tales (such as Arthur), they saw this as a failed attempt at contemporary “literature.� Instead it was revolutionary. Tolkien then makes a dig at other genres – ha ha! He mentions his urge to revise it (curb it, man! ;) ), and that it is too short – yes! J
Then comes his bit about allegory, and that any “inner� meaning found by the reader is not intended by the author. But that is not to say that there weren’t intended EXPLICIT meaning in it, and I think people go too far sometimes when they say there is no meaning, that it’s simply a story. There are obvious messages in it; that doesn’t make it an allegory, but it does make it a story where certain actions or character traits mean something. Saying that he has assigned value to things in the story doesn’t contradict his assertion that it’s not an allegory. It’s interesting that he then details how it would look if it HAD been allegorical, and in doing so in so many words he states his contempt for WWII, saying that there would have been no victory for the Hobbits. Did the Hobbits in this allegorical version lose the war indeed, if we are to assume Hobbits are the common folk?
Then his famous paragraph – “I prefer history, true or feigned, with its varied applicability to thought and experience of readers� – meaning freedom for the reader rather than a purpose set by the author. He’s saying, IOW, that LotR is art, not a tool. Furthermore, he admits that he cannot escape his experiences influencing him, but that one should not assume that because you (the reader) see something in it that speaks to a real life issue in your experience, that he has intended it to be that way.

[azalea]

Prologue
In some ways, I see the Prologue as Tolkien’s compromise for not being able to publish The Silmarillion along with LotR. It also serves to reduce the amount of exposition in the tale proper.
It’s funny that he begins by basically suggesting that this amazing and wonderful story is merely an avenue for gaining knowledge about hobbits and their history! He sets up reader attitude – his words guide the reader to view him as the relayer of the story, not the author. This is for suspension of disbelief, essential to a successful fantasy. He does it in a way that makes it even more real. He doesn’t just dive in and expect the suspension by virtue of the reader KNOWING it’s a fantastic tale, he takes the time to make it a history (which also allows him to tie it with The Silm).
The Hobbits = “simple� country folk. They are described as follows: agrarian, surprisingly tough, with no general love of learning, clannish, skillful in craft, good natured but not beautiful, loving to laugh, eat and drink, enjoying simple pleasures, disliking “machines,� having a close friendship w/ the earth, NOT MAGICAL (as opposed to wizards or elves, although this is later qualified), this last being more of the same as mentioned above, making the fantasy realistic, and also making hobbits like the reader. If the “heroes� were magical, the reader would be too separated from them, and also it wouldn’t fit into ME, which is supposed to be our earth.
Bandobras Took: here is given some foreshadowing of M&P’s growth in height. The story of Bandobras makes it even more realistic. It’s one of those details that doesn’t directly involve the plot, but serves to make them like us, as I mentioned above. The Bandobras story is like American tall tales (like Paul Bunyon – riding a horse not something hobbits can normally do, just like, for ex., Paul’s feats as a lumberjack, and his height being so much more than any other human). This in turn is like ancient mythology, with its “hero� figures, which is exactly how Tolkien views Middle Earth – a mythology! J All this adds to the realism and the familiarity. He explicitly states that hobbits are closer relatives to humans than elves or dwarves, which first is in keeping with the mythology, and secondly, further allows the reader to associate them with the “simple� country folk of “our world,� and thirdly it sets them up as sympathetic, the heroes of the story, so the reader can identify with them.
Here’s another aspect about which I’ve disagreed with others who’ve made certain statements about the elves. People seem to think there are no more elves, or that they ALL left when Celeborn did. I think elves are still supposed to exist, or at least did (not just beyond the sea). Tolkien says, “Only the elves STILL [my emphasis] preserve any records of that vanished time…� His tone and use of words tell me that we are not only supposed to believe that hobbits, though scarce, are still around, but also that there are elves that didn’t leave, and still exist here, although we cannot see them (and I don’t mean just the Avari).
The mention of hobbits having “lived quietly before…other folk became… aware of them� is another reference to their being simple country folk; it also sets them up as the “unlikely heroes,� which adds interest for the reader, who would naturally identify with that (the little guy having an influence on events of international importance).

Okay, I’m breaking my own rule here, but I just have to mention this criticism that people had of the movie – the opening line by Galadriel. She says, “the world is changing.� Tolkien says, “the shape of all the lands has been changed� since the events in the book, so it is true that the world was changing, both physically and in terms of the world society, at the end of the third and the beginning of the fourth ages. He establishes that hobbits mainly dwell in Britain and the Nordic countries.
He establishes Shire Reckoning, a convenient device that allows for ease of explanation (no written records of hobbits before then, only legend, which he posits as factual) of their later isolation, establishing them as separate from the world of Men, and how they became blind to the evils of the world outside, wrapped up in their own simple world. It makes their heroism more unlikely, and thus greater, because of the stark contrast to the way hobbits seem. It also gives the reader a sense of time in the world of Middle Earth.
Throughout the Prologue Tolkien mentions language, “evidence of their peculiar WORDS [my emph.] and customs.� He discusses the hobbits’ westwards movement – a Greater Mythology reference. Also, he establishes the Anduin as their “home� (which ties in later to Gollum), and establishes a reason for their movement (“multiplying of Men�), which adds realism – we know that’s why they are scarce now, and also because of a “shadow� – some foreshadowing.

The three types of hobbit (wherein lie a couple of rare references to the fact that hobbits did occasionally wear boots) and my speculation on a family example for each kind (or a family that had strong strains of a type):
Harfoots – Dwarf-like (Bagginses)
Stoors – Man-like (Brandybuck)
Fallohides – Elf-like (Took) “more adventurous,� “skill in language� (another lang reference, we can see he regards this w. importance)

Here he mentions the Dunedain and their relationship with hobbits. Hobbits were allowed to settle in their lands because there was “room for newcomers,� as opposed to the ancient days when lands were protected from each other (somewhat rigid boundaries between elves, dwarves, and men). Also mentions Bree. We see more ties to Men here – learning their letters and language. We see their isolation a kind of contrast to the Kingdom at large, kind of like country folk were isolated from the goings-on in London in the olden days. There is an emphasis here of the unseen protection given; aside from the real world –type parallel, it gives an explanation as to why they were unaware (for the most part) of the growing evil in the world, and why it didn’t enter The Shire. Without this, we’d just have to suspend our disbelief that great evil was in the world, but even though the citizens aren’t magic, no evil ever entered. This protection is discussed in the story. JRRT emphasizes their love of peace, which I believe mirrors his own.
He talks about wolves only being the stuff of tales. This coincides with The Hobbit, in which we are told that Bilbo had never seen or heard a wolf, but knew that the howls he heard were those of wolves because of tales he’d been told. Tolkien also establishes that there are weapons in The Shire, and hobbits’ skills with a bow, which sets us up for the Scouring.

The Elf Towers – I forget, what were those originally?

[azalea]

We are told of the Hobbits’ fear of water, which parallels their fear of outsiders and the unknown, a negative side of their love of the ordinary. This is also a trait of some country folk, but it’s also another reason for their isolation.
Frodo and Bilbo’s bachelorhood is unusual – he sets the heroes up as already being different, as well as in other things. This also gives them a lack of baggage that allows them a little more freedom to take off (it would be sad if they had kids at home and took off to risk their lives, or if they went across the sea and left a wife or something).
Family Trees – JRRT is really describing himself here, mentioning their extreme interest in such things “if they are accurate.�

Concerning Pipeweed – Tolkien is poking a little fun at smoking, a strange when you think about it, but enjoyable habit. He also sets up the Scouring, and gives another bridge from the readers world to that of ME.
Tobold – this story is so detailed, yet so unnecessary, and from this we can see Tolkien’s true pleasure in writing, and such an imagination! It is speculated that pipeweed was originally brought from over the sea – heaven sent! *chuckle*
Here there is a reference to Gandalf. Merry’s explanation helps the reader to reconcile Gandalf and the dwarves’ smoking in The Hobbit.

Of the Ordering of the Shire:
Emphasis on peace, comfort and no need for government. It’s like paradise. The hobbits’ love of order and the status quo helps them to self-govern. They want to stick to the Rules, because that’s how it is, there’s nothing unexpected, and they like to keep it that way. This also sets up the Scouring (all this set up makes me think Tolkien thought the Scouring a very important part of the book J ). The Bounders are mentioned, and we hear that strange characters have been about. This is pulling us in, we want to know who they are, and why they’re suddenly there.

Of the Finding of the Ring:
This establishes the Ring as the central plot of the story.
Talks about Bilbo’s sense of pity toward Gollum, but also of fair play – the goodness in his heart prevails though he’s faced with mortal danger.
There is discussion about the discrepancy in the tale, about why the chapter in The Hobbit changed from the original version. He discusses Bilbo’s lie, and his shame (disguised as anger at Gandalf), and how this is disturbing to the wizard. There is mention of his calling it a present. Therein lies a parallel – both Gollum and Bilbo convince themselves it was freely given to them as a present, which is a loving gesture. But nothing was further from the truth. And they both kept it a secret. Here’s the lead in to the story – it takes up where The Hobbit left off.
Note on Shire Records:
Here he is kind of giving away the ending without really telling anything.
This satisfies Tolkien’s need to relate more “history,� telling how he came across this “account� -- again giving us motivation to suspend disbelief.
Here he uses a device – the Thain’s Book – to explain how we get the more complete history, since the Bagginses didn’t have all of the information, and left before some of it happened (Sam’s kids, etc.). This one was written long enough afterwards to cover everything. He gives an explanation for the lack of a complete Translations from the Elvish, which he thought would be included in the second edition.
More details – Merry’s natural interest in the languages and hist. of Rohan.
The hobbits’ interests in geneology, language and history of Middle Earth strangely mirrors JRRT’s. J
Merry visited Rivendell more than once later on, which again strengthens my assertion that the elves didn’t all immediately leave when the Fourth Age began. It even says his sons long remained there with others. And he says Celeborn’s departure marks the last LIVING memory of the Elder Days, but isn’t saying everyone is gone. It just means that no one that was alive in the Elder Days is still there. Many younger ones remain.

So I hope my rambling has provided some fodder for discussion. As I said, this portion is quite different than the rest (until the Appendices), so it makes sense that the intro look different than the others will. Anyway, there certainly was enough info in these few pages, so if you read something I didn’t mention that you’d like to discuss, please bring it up!

[Valandil]

Originally posted by azalea
The Elf Towers – I forget, what were those originally?

I believe there's mention somewhere that they were built either by Elendil or Gil-galad... the tallest perhaps built by Gil-galad FOR Elendil to house a palantir (the one with a fixed view to the True West). I think JRRT leaves it a little open-ended who actually built them... to make it more like 'ancient history'

These are the ones called the Emyn Beraid.

[Valandil]

btw... great job Azalea - and great start! I'll be back later with more observations, questions and maybe even some points to differ with you on! ;) (but not the one about the Elves hanging around into the Fourth Age!)

[Tuor of Gondolin]

"The Bandobras story is like American tall tales"
_____________________________
So you're saying the Bullroarer didn't invent the game of golf? Bummer.:( Hmm, maybe that first story about the Ring wasn't the only exaggeration Bilbo put in "There and Back Again."
Good thing Frodo and Sam were honester chroniclers.

[Beor]

Excellent intro, azalea, regardless of your format;) :p .

I like what you said about the pipe-weed, how he must have had an incredible imagination. I agree, to just jump off on a tangent like that is cool. Telling the history of such a small thing, in my opinion, is one of the aspects of his writing that makes it so enjoyable, that every detail is explained throughouly (Sp?).

Good job, again.

[azalea]

Originally posted by Tuor of Gondolin
"The Bandobras story is like American tall tales"
_____________________________
So you're saying the Bullroarer didn't invent the game of golf? Bummer.:( Hmm, maybe that first story about the Ring wasn't the only exaggeration Bilbo put in "There and Back Again."
Good thing Frodo and Sam were honester chroniclers.

Well, I'm not really saying that, I meant that when Bilbo says he was 4'5'' and could ride a horse, it may be true (or it could be an exaggeration), but that the way it sounds is like a lot of our tall tales. The invention of golf, well, if you're looking at it as factual, then no, I guess I would say he didn't REALLY invent it, but within the context of the story, sure, I believe it.;)
That's what makes him seem like a "larger than life" figure. I think Bilbo was just writing down what had been told orally, but that aside from the episode with Gollum, what he wrote was pretty factual. He may have embellished it, making it seem perhaps a little more dangerous or scary than it was, but that's part of the point of telling a story isn't it, to make it compelling?:) Then again, any encounter with trolls, goblins, giant spiders, and a dragon would be that scary to me, so maybe it wasn't embellished!:D
Maybe the embellishments were done more on the sections about hobbits -- just like anyone likes to do on their own people when in a strange land. I knew a woman from Omaha, who had just moved to another state. She would always tell us about great things Omaha-ans had done, or that Omaha was the hub of this or the major exporter of that. I guess it was because Omaha is looked at by most Americans as small-townish, or rural because it's in Nebraska, so she wanted to pump up some respect for it. Same with Bilbo -- in telling about his "insignificant" people, he wanted to tell of great things they'd done (this is before two of them had SAVED THE WORLD of course ;) ), and what makes them important or worthy of admiration.

[Tuor of Gondolin]

"Foreword
As he begins, he talks about “a war [the story] which it was my task to conduct [this being his acknowledgement of himself as the author], or at least to report [this being a reference to the device of his being the translator of an existing but forgotten history"
________________________________
Interesting. I've taken that as a reference to his work in World War II, since he mentions 1944, not writing LOTR, but since Tolkien did little that I know of directly about the war (other then taking a turn watching for German bombers- that never attacked Oxford and arranging syllabuses for brief courses by officers at Oxford) such an interpretation seemed curious (what was he reporting about, and to who?). Your interpretation may well be correct.
=============================
About his trouble with proof-readers: In Letters #148:
"Jarrold's appear to have a highly educated pedant as a chief
proof-reader, and they started correcting my English without reference to me: elfin for elven; farther for
further; try to say for try and say and so on. I was put to the trouble of proving to him his own ignorance, as well as rebuking his impertinence. So, though I do not much care, I dug my toes in about nasturtians. I have always said this. It seems to be a natural anglicization that started soon after the 'Indian Cress' was naturalized (from Peru, I think) in the 18th century; but it remains a minority usage. I prefer it because nasturtium is. as it were, bogusly botanical, and falsely learned."
==========================
And for more information on changes in rewriting affecting the Ring in The Hobbit, The Annotated Hobbit [Douglas A. Anderson] has some insights.

[Rían]

Originally posted by azalea
Here’s another aspect about which I’ve disagreed with others who’ve made certain statements about the elves. People seem to think there are no more elves, or that they ALL left when Celeborn did. I think elves are still supposed to exist, or at least did (not just beyond the sea). Tolkien says, “Only the elves STILL [my emphasis] preserve any records of that vanished time…� His tone and use of words tell me that we are not only supposed to believe that hobbits, though scarce, are still around, but also that there are elves that didn’t leave, and still exist here, although we cannot see them (and I don’t mean just the Avari). I guess I thought that referred to the Elves that had taken ship to Valinor. What do you think?

It amazes me, too, how he can just jump off on a tangent, like pipeweed, and write the most interesting stuff, and touch on even other things that he doesn't get into, but you just know there's a story behind those things, too!

I like how in my version he comments about being ripped off by the American publishers and likens it to an act of Saruman! (can't find my FOTR right now, will try to quote it later)

[Rían]

Here it is: from the foreward of FOTR
I hope that those who have read The Lord of the Rings with pleasure will not think me ungrateful: to please readers was my main object, and to be assured of this has been a great reward. Nonetheless, for all its defects of omission and inclusion, it was the product of long labour, and like a simple-minded hobbit I feel that it is, while I am still alive, my property in justice unaffected by copyright laws. It seems to me a grave discourtesy, to say no more, to issue my book without even a polite note informing me of the project: dealings one might expect of Saruman in his decay rather than from the defenders of the West. However that may be, this paperback edition and no other has been published with my consent and co-operation. Those who approve of courtesy (at least) to living authors will purchase it and no other. And if the many kind readers who have encouraged me with their letters will add to their courtesy by referring friends or enquirers to Ballantine Books, I shall be very grateful. To them, and to all who have been pleased by this book, especialy those Across the Water for whom it is specially intended, I dedicate this edition.

(I think an American company had published LOTR in America, which was not technically against copyright laws)

[Artanis]

Originally posted by RÃ*an
I guess I thought that referred to the Elves that had taken ship to Valinor. I thought so too RÃ*an. Nevertheless I agree with azalea in that not all the Eldar left Middle-Earth. It may be that all the Noldor left, Elves who had been in Valinor before, but I would think that many of the Silvan Elves remained and also some of the Sindar. There were still Elves left in Lórien when Celeborn sailed west.

How the Ring was found: This explanation on why the story is changed is simply a stroke of genius. It really adds to the authenticity of the story.

[brownjenkins]

great job!

i did find interesting all the talk he gave about unauthorized copies... i assume it must have been quite an issue back then

on the pipeweed... i think the inclusion was mostly due to it being something he greatly enjoyed... one must remember smoking was quite a different thing in his day

for the rest i just want to pull out one quote about hobbits that i had forgotten about, but truely appreciated:

Hobbits delighted in such things (genealogical trees), if they were accurate: they liked to have books filled with things that they already knew, set out fair and square with no contradictions

quotes like this make me think that in many ways hobbits were a reflection of his own attitude towards life... or at least how he would like it to be

[Tuor of Gondolin]

Originally posted by Brownjenkins
i did find interesting all the talk he gave about unauthorized copies... i assume it must have been quite an issue back then

_______________________
There's a good, and rather entertaining account of "The War
over Middle-earth" in Humphrey Carpenter's Tolkien,
p. 226-229. (Houghton Mifflin, 1977).

An excerpt:
The publishers were Ace Books, who (when challenged) alleged there was nothing illegal in their paperback, even though it was printed entirely withoput the permission of Tolkien or his authorized publishers, and even though no royalty payment had been offered to the author.....clearly a lot of people were going to buy their edition until an authorized paperback could be issued. An urgent request was sent to Tolkien to complete the revisions (which it was assumed he had been working on assiduously)...he turned not to The Lord of the Rings for which revision was urgent, but to The Hobbit for which it was not.....he found a good deal of it 'very poor' and had to restrain himself from rewriting the entire book.....Ace Books for all their 'moral piracy' had employed a cover artist who knew something about the story, but Ballantine's cover picture seemed to have no relevance whatever to The Hobbit, for it showed a hill, two emus, and a curious tree bearing bulbous fruit. Tolkien exploded: 'What has it got to do with the story? Where is this place? Why emus? And what is the thing in the foreground with pink bulbs?" When the reply came that the artist hadn't had time to read the book, and that the object with pink bulbs was 'meant to suggest a Christmas tree', Tolkien could only answer: 'I begin to feel I am shut up in a madhouse.":)
There was a happy ending for all concerned, and Ace for many years published good, and cheap sci-fi with two stories, reversed, with one story starting at each end of a book, and some by quite good sci-fi writers, including Jack Williamson.

[brownjenkins]

why emus?

:p :p :p

[azalea]

I see what you mean, Rian, that is possible. But then how would he KNOW they still do? I assume HE hadn't been to Valinor and back;) . It's just my way of trying to prove to people that hobbits and elves still live here. They DO still live here, they DO, they DO!!:D

I love the line brownjenkins quoted "they liked to have books filled with things that they already knew." Hee, hee!

On my dad's copies, which are the ones I used to read before I finally bought my own, it has the quote on the back about "this paperback edition and no other," etc. I think that was the foreword to the first edition, and the one I have in mine is the one to the second.

"...had to restrain himself from rewriting the entire book..."
SEE!? SEE?! This is unfortunately why we didn't get a whole lot from him published in his lifetime of the same scope as at least The Hobbit, much less LotR. He was perfectionistic. This was partly what made him such an outstanding writer, but I repeat once again what I said about the published work being a kind of "contract" between author and reader, and once it's there you can't tamper with it too much, because it's too late. I think changing the ch. in The Hobbit was great, and probably unprecedented, but it's a slippery slope, and I'm glad he didn't rewrite the whole book. I like it how it is! It would be fun to find out what he had in mind though!(:o ) He probably could have written many tales about Bilbo, the dwarves, etc., but preferred his "higher" tales.

[Nurvingiel]

Originally posted by brownjenkins
Hobbits delighted in such things (genealogical trees), if they were accurate: they liked to have books filled with things that they already knew, set out fair and square with no contradictions
quotes like this make me think that in many ways hobbits were a reflection of his own attitude towards life... or at least how he would like it to be
Didn't Tolkien once describe himself as a Hobbit in all but stature?

Nice work on the intro Azalea, don't worry I don't feel that I need to match you in length. ;)

[Tuor of Gondolin]

Originally posted by Nurvingiel
Didn't Tolkien once describe himself as a Hobbit in all but stature?

"I am in fact a Hobbit (in all but size). I like gardens, trees and unmechanized farmlands; I smoke a pipe, and like good plain food (unrefrigerated), but detest French cooking; I like, and even dare to wear in these dull days, ornamental waistcoats. I am fond of mushrooms (out of a field); and have a simple sense of humour (which even my appreciative critics find tiresome); I go to bed late and get up late (when possible). I do not travel much. I love Wales (what is left of it, when mines, and the even more ghastly sea-side resorts, have done their worst), and especially the Welsh language."

From Letters #213

[Earniel]

I just read the prologue yesterday night in bed, (All those memories came back from reading LoTR in the middle of the night in my old room, constantly turning off my light when I thought my parents where coming upstairs in the hope they wouldn't notice I was still up! :p) and there were two things that struck me in particular.

The first one was that Hobbits liked to dress in bright colours, preferably green and yellow. I had forgotten all about that and IMO it really adds something to the cheerful image of Hobbits. It's a pity that has gotten lost a bit in the movie.

The second things was reading about all the copies of the Red Book; where they were, who had copied them and what they contained. And why they were different from one another because of the accents the copiers wanted to place. It adds such a feeling of reality, of legitimacy to the story of Lord of the Rings: it isn't just history because somebody says it it, you really have the feeling it is just by tracking the sources, in this case the later copies of the Red Book.

[Valandil]

*sigh* this is the 19th reply... so it's doomed to oblivion at the bottom of the first page. Just when I came up with some things to say. :(

First of all... like Tuor, I had thought his reference to 'conducting a war... or rather reporting it' (however exactly worded) had to do with WW2... I had never considered, but think you could be right (because of 'conducting' - changed to 'reporting' in keeping with the 'wilful suspension of disbelief') that he's talking about reporting 'the War of the Ring'... I'll look closer at it and decide.

Second... not sure he was totally dissing the way WW2 was handled by the Allies... I think he was just explaining how HIS story differed from actual recent history. Sauron and The Ring were different problems from Hitler, Germany and Atomic Bombs. Different problems require different solutions. I don't think he was saying that Germany should have been destroyed (as Mordor was), etc. And while he conveys shock elsewhere about the first use of an atomic bomb (sorry if I'm going 'out of bounds' for those just learning about LotR - but there's a book containing a collection of his letters - and he wrote one to a son of his on the topic... I imagine it caught the whole world by surprise in 1945 though), I don't think he was saying that atomic weapons could be destroyed like the One Ring could... the Ring was one thing, in one place... atomic weapons were being developed in many places - and if one place would be wiped out in a raid, the knowledge and will to create them would still exist in another.

Third - types of hobbits: I had never thought of the three types as being representative of Elves, Men and Dwarves... and not sure I'd agree. I see what you're saying though, but you threw me a bit at first by saying that the Harfoots were representative of Dwarves and the Stoors representative of Men... that MAY be right in a representative sense (although again, I see no reason to buy it! :) ), but he DOES mention that the Stoors are the most dwarf-like of the three types of hobbits, physically.

Fourth - about how hobbits like books full of things they know, set out fair and square, with no contradictions: I think he's talking not ONLY about himself, but also about those with simple tastes, maybe country folk in general... heck, maybe even PEOPLE in general. Can't we ALL be like that at times? :p I know I can... and it seems like a lot of 'mooters are that way too.

I'll try to think of more to add later.

[Fat middle]

First of all, thank you, azalea, you've done a wonderful job on the Foreword and Prologue!:) And I'm also ejoying the commets of the others (yep, even yours, Val, at the bottom of the page :p)

Just to add a couple of things:

1. About elves remaining in ME. I agree with you, but I'd add something. I believe it's in Letters where Tolkien speaks pejoratively about Shakespeare's elves... He wanted to make it clear that his inspiration for the elves hadn't been on Shakespeare, but in other sources (cannot remember now). However, when I read in the prologue that bit of elves STILL here and I know all that stuff about the fading of the elves (that is all about LOTR and in HOME X), my conclusion is that those remaning elves (that obviously would have faded, but would be still here) are relatives to Shakespeare's elves and all those "spirits" that populate English tales. I see it as a remnant of Tolkien's original intention of building a mytholgy for the UK.

2. Concerning Pipeweed. I just wanted to say that I love how his explanation of this odd habit of the shirefolk in the prologue uses exactly the same words that Merry uses to explain it to Theoden :) Since Merry is supposed to be the author of the lore-book about herbs and pipeweed, I think it is another way of showing how this all story has "real" sources. :)

Well, I'll re-read again the thread, since I'm sure there is a lot still to say. ;)

[Valandil]

Oh yeah! I also had a thought about the pipeweed: I hadn't really thought about how it came from Numenor, in the West... and you conclude he's saying it's a 'heavenly' gift of sorts. I wonder though, if he was referring to how tobacco originally came to Europe from the Americas...??

Also, I hope everyone makes the connection: Tobold... Old Toby... Tobacco??? ;)

[Fat middle]

Originally posted by Valandil
Also, I hope everyone makes the connection: Tobold... Old Toby... Tobacco??? ;)
oops! I hadn't noticed that! Great!:D

[Tuor of Gondolin]

Right. As an imaginary "real" history i thought a way of JRRT explaining things like potatoes and tobacco was that tobacco came from the far west (which would be the far, far east of a round world?), then died out sometime in later ages until reintroduced in the 16th and 17th centuries.

[Rían]

by Valandil
*sigh* this is the 19th reply... so it's doomed to oblivion at the bottom of the first page. Just when I came up with some things to say.
Time for a spam post! ;) then put the good one at the top of the next page!

[Earniel]

Originally posted by Valandil
Also, I hope everyone makes the connection: Tobold... Old Toby... Tobacco??? ;)

Er... I'm making it now! :D

[azalea]

Earniel -- your comments about the Red Book made me think how funny it is that the actual book is the very same way, as I mentioned about the Note on the Text -- so many different editions and printings, each of which may or may not have very small changes or differences and mistakes! How funny!:)

After re-reading Tolkien's words about conducting the war, I am now quite confident in standing by my assertion that he refers there to the War of the Ring.:) I can go into why, but I think everyone might want to be spared of another long-winded explanation from me!;) Or maybe I'm not being "considerate," just tired.:p
Valandil -- on your second point: I think I see what you mean, but his use of the words "if it were an allegory [of WWII]" to me means "if it were to exactly represent what happened, this is how it would look." He then goes on to describe it. So if he's describing how his own allegory of WWII would look, wouldn't it make sense that those would have been his own observations of the war? That's how I'm looking at it. It may be through a muddy glass, though.:)

Representative -- no, I don't think so, just exhibiting traits that mirror to an extent. The "dwarf-like" partly gave me that opinion, then he says the Stoors were less shy of men, and the Fallohides were more friendly with the elves, and when described seem to have traits that are more elf-like than the others (for instance, taller). In fact, they sound almost like Hobbit versions of the Mirkwood elves. But then it says they mingled with the others, and so you wouldn't find a "pure blooded" one of any of them, but the different strains running through the different families. I think he wanted Frodo especially to have elf-like traits, and in the Appendices, there's the line about Frodo having a great natural ability for Elvish. That was accomplished by he and Bilbo having a lot of Took in them. I don't think they were supposed to be representative, just a little like them, whether by chance or because they tended to hang out with them (the influence of dwarves on hole-dwelling -- or did they hang out with them BECAUSE they both were fond of being underground? The influence of elves on the artistry of the Fallohides -- or were they friendly with the elves BECAUSE of their penchant for that kind of thing?) I think Tolkien even bothered with this (besides giving an explanation for why the Tooks were more adventurous) was to give the Shire citizens some depth (as he did with everything) and to add another genealogical component to their makeup -- just as the average British child reading it might have a mix of Nordic, German, Anglo, etc., heritage.

Oh, and thanks for your thoughtful note to newbies, Val.:D

(That reminds me, I forgot to put the Note to Newbies on the first post -- oops, I'll have to add that!)
I'll respond more tomorrow -- too tired! (where's the sleepy smiley?;) )

[Forkbeard]

Originally posted by azalea
Earniel -- your comments about the Red Book made me think how funny it is that the actual book is the very same way, as I mentioned about the Note on the Text -- so many different editions and printings, each of which may or may not have very small changes or differences and mistakes! How funny!:)


As a medievalist, this is not unlike what Tolkien faced in doing much of his own work. Take the Ancrene Riwle which he edited in the 50s and 60s, there are versions for men and women, versions in Middle English, in Anglo-French, in Latin, some are shorter, some are longer, some include very unique rules and guidelines for anchoress/anchorite etc. Which version is the right one? Or does one finally do what the society Tolkien published this text in do and print editions of the different versions? Both the imagined Red Book of Westmarch as well as simply the physical state of Tolkien's own personal notes and so on, strike as very like that situation of the Anchoress Rule (Ancrene Riwle).

Forkbeard

[Bombadillo]

In his foreward, I think Tolkien was clarifying that there was NO allegory whatsoever in the book that was intentional, but he more or less welcomed us to read into it. I didn't look to hard for any specifically because I'd already been told i wouldn't find any. And i think that was the importance of telling us about it in the beginning. Plus, as any great author would confess to, elements of the story are most likely related to events from Tolkien's own life, but that doesn't mean that they necassarily represent that event. I don't believe the War of the Ring was supposed to be WWII, but I'm sure that Tolkien's descriptions were affected by his knowlege of that war.

Concerning the Suspension of Reality:
When Tolkien states that he is "reporting" the tale, I love it. This one sentence doesn't do much to actually convince the reader to forget all (s)he had previously learned to make the story possible, but I see it more as a way to set the tone, partly with his dull sense of humor he makes reference to, and to keep the foreword and prolouge (sections often ignored) tied in with the story itself. He's making the book make sense, and be effective. (Frodo wouldn't have seemed "the unlikely hero" had the reader not been told of usual hobbit additudes.)
He's establishing his own reality that he was lucky enough to be a part of somehow, and I want a part of it. He's giving all the background information so we can get the most from the story. He's setting the precedent (as the god of fantasy does) of how closely fantasy should relate to reality, and here are his guidelines before the story even begins.

[Earniel]

Originally posted by azalea
Earniel -- your comments about the Red Book made me think how funny it is that the actual book is the very same way, as I mentioned about the Note on the Text -- so many different editions and printings, each of which may or may not have very small changes or differences and mistakes! How funny!:)
Hey, I hadn't looked at it that way! Very interesting POV. I wonder if Tolkien saw the irony: he goes out of his way to create a mythology and he ends up doing it, partly already by only having so many different versions of it! :)

[The Gaffer]

Great job, Azalea. You brought up lots of things I hadn't thought of re: the Prologue.

I also see it as bridging the Hobbit and LOTR by putting them into the broad picture of the same history.

We'll probably come back to this, but making the transition from a kids' fairy tale (where "realism" doesn't matter too much) to one where everything has to be self-consistent is the main challenge for the first few chapters of LOTR.

The Prologue implies that hobbits and elves still exist, thus linking with the kids' Hobbit book, but then grounds it all against this self-consistent backdrop.

It also primes us to deal with lots of other stories (like the elves) and gets us ready to be gobsmacked by the scale of each culture and its mythos.

On a negative note, the first time I read LOTR I started with the Prologue and got bored stiff after about five pages, gave up, and didn't read it for another year.

For this reason, I always recommend to people not to read it until they're finished, unless they haven't read the Hobbit, in which case it's worth reading just the recap of that story.

I agree that it's interesting that he "gives away the ending" to some extent, but that displays supreme confidence in the creation. It actually doesn't spoil it at all, since the fact that the goodies win would hardly come as a surprise to anyone.

[Maedhros]

From the Prologue
There, though Elrond had departed, his sons long remained, together with some of the High-elven folk. It is said that Celeborn went to dwell there after the departure of Galadriel; but there is no record of the day when at last he sought the Grey Havens, and with him went the last living memory of the Elder Days in Middle-earth.
First, it is to be noted that when JRRT refers to High-elves, he refers especifically to the Ñoldor.
We have from the Letter 154
When she weds Aragorn (whose love-story elsewhere recounted is not here central and only occasionally referred to) she 'makes the choice of Lúthien', so the grief at her parting from Elrond is specially poignant. Elrond passes Over Sea. The end of his sons, Elladan and Elrohir, is not told: they delay their choice, and remain for a while.
It is interesting that the Prologue would give us information regarding the fate of the sons of Elrond.
If the sons of Elrond had until their father left ME their choice to either become one of the Eldar or Atani, what do you suppose their choice was?
I have always thought that because they chose to remain in ME when their father left, I supposed that they had accepted to become Mortal but the words of the draft letter to Peter Hastings makes me wonder a little bit. How could they delay their choice?

[azalea]

It could be that they chose mortality, but continued to live with the elves. Or maybe they chose to retain their immortality, but stayed on. That's kind of what I was getting at -- I thought ships continued to depart even after Celeborn left. It's just that all of the oldest elves had gone. The "younger" ones may have stayed on, and (I like to think :) ) maybe even still "existed" when Tolkien wrote this, just hidden, living secretly in deep woods. But then there's the whole issue of "fading" which gets confusing (for me anyway). But maybe faded elves are still here, just unseen. :D

[Valandil]

Originally posted by Maedhros
If the sons of Elrond had until their father left ME their choice to either become one of the Eldar or Atani, what do you suppose their choice was?
I have always thought that because they chose to remain in ME when their father left, I supposed that they had accepted to become Mortal but the words of the draft letter to Peter Hastings makes me wonder a little bit. How could they delay their choice?

My theory is that because Elrond chose to be Elvish, his offspring, while they also might face a choice themselves, were Elvish (because of Elrond's choice) until they decided otherwise... namely by binding themselves to a mortal.

And yeah... if you read all this stuff in the Prologue before you know the story and read the books for the first time, you have NO IDEA what he's talking about and NO CHANCE of keeping up with the names... so in some ways, he's really not giving away anything to new readers... just providing some extra enjoyment to re-readers! :)

[Maedhros]

It could be that they chose mortality, but continued to live with the elves. Or maybe they chose to retain their immortality, but stayed on. That's kind of what I was getting at -- I thought ships continued to depart even after Celeborn left. It's just that all of the oldest elves had gone.
I'm afraid my dear azalea that that is not possible or is it:
From LOTR: The Númenorean Kings
But to the children of Elrond a choice was also appointed: to pass with him from the circles of the world; or if they remained, to become mortal and die in Middle-earth. For Elrond, therefore, all chances of the War of the Ring were fraught with sorrow.
So we have the two conflicting accounts. The one in the Letters, states that Elladan and Elrohir stated and delayed their choice but it contradicts the line from the Númenoreans Kings in which they had to make their choice when their father departed from Middle-earth.
It just makes me wonder.

[azalea]

Probably grasping at straws here, but what if "with him" didn't mean "in the same boat," necessarily? So they had to make their choice, but they could stay on after he left, thus delaying the choice. But eventually they had to either take a boat, or become mortal. Again, just a wild speculation on my part. It probably is a true inconsistancy, at which I'm hardly surprised, considering all the info flying around.:)

[Forkbeard]

Originally posted by Maedhros
I'm afraid my dear azalea that that is not possible or is it:
From LOTR: The Númenorean Kings

So we have the two conflicting accounts. The one in the Letters, states that Elladan and Elrohir stated and delayed their choice but it contradicts the line from the Númenoreans Kings in which they had to make their choice when their father departed from Middle-earth.
It just makes me wonder.


It depends on how literally we take "pass with him"--many take this as literally that they must be on the same ship with Elrond. I'm not so sure that that is what Tolkien means. To pass with him beyond the cirlces of the world doesn't necessarily mean to be physically present in the same time and space breathing the same air as Elrond. It can be more general than that, and mean that they make the same choice he did--to be Elvish and so leave Middle Earth and be with Elrond while the circles of the world remain in Valinor. Thus "with" is more general than "Physically present".

That's my .02 anyway

Forkbeard

[Rían]

Originally posted by The Gaffer
On a negative note, the first time I read LOTR I started with the Prologue and got bored stiff after about five pages, gave up, and didn't read it for another year. I had forgotten this - I did the same thing! And I just started my re-read a couple of weeks ago - and did it again! I'm not that wild about it, and I agree that it's a better read AFTER reading the books.

[Snowdog]

Since I went into the Fellowship fresh from The Hobbit, I pead the Prologue and ate it up. I was like a lost hobbit who had just realized he had missed out on all the stories in his youth.

As for the children of Elrond, I don't think it was a literal having to leave "with him" when he goes, but a 'with him' in joining him in the west when they left.

Which brings up the bit about Cirdan and the 'last ship'.

[azalea]

Originally posted by Forkbeard
It depends on how literally we take "pass with him"--many take this as literally that they must be on the same ship with Elrond. I'm not so sure that that is what Tolkien means. To pass with him beyond the cirlces of the world doesn't necessarily mean to be physically present in the same time and space breathing the same air as Elrond. It can be more general than that, and mean that they make the same choice he did--to be Elvish and so leave Middle Earth and be with Elrond while the circles of the world remain in Valinor. Thus "with" is more general than "Physically present".

That's my .02 anyway

Forkbeard

Didn't I just say that?;) Tee-hee!:D

[Valandil]

Originally posted by azalea
Didn't I just say that?;) Tee-hee!:D

Well... you two WERE cross-posting! His post is stamped one minute later than yours. :)

[azalea]

I know, I was just teasing him.:)

Maybe I wasn't just grasping at straws -- two other poeple had the same thought about it as me.

I disagree about the Prologue. It may bore some people, but I think it should be read. It's better to skip it rather than stop reading LotR altogether, but I read all forewords and prologues no matter how dull. It's a thing with me. I also have to read all afterwords, too. I fugure, if it's included in the book, there must be a reason, and by gum, it must be read! I force it upon myself. I also insist on reading the unabridged versions of everything, and (of topic) I like to brag about how I read the unabridged of Les Miserable, which had some parts that really dragged. But doing so feels like an accomplishment, a battle won -- I lead a dull life, as you can tell.;) :D

[brownjenkins]

i know the feeling azalea... i even go so far as reading title pages, reviews and the back cover synopsis... i think i must have some subconcious fear that i will miss something terribly important :p

[azalea]

Same here -- and oh, I'm a HUGE title page fan! I love to read all the copyright info, etc. Glad to know I'm not alone!:D

[cassiopeia]

I love reading the title page too; I always want to know when the book was written. I like to read the dictionary as well. And thesaurus. :o :)

I should say something OT. I agree, that when Tolkien talks about the LOTR, WWII and allegory, he means that if the LOTR was an allegory of WWII, he would have written it so the Ring was used against Sauron, Sauron would have been enslaved and so on.

I would tell people, if they haven't read the Hobbit, to skip the prologue. We at Entmoot may love it, but I can understand it can be boring if you have no idea what Tolkien's talking about.

My favourite part of the prologue is the discussions about hobbits. It's interesting how there are different strains of hobbits. Merry, Frodo and Pippin have a strong Fallohidish strain, but I wonder what strain Sam is? I would guess he has a strong Harfoot strain, because he has brown hands, and Harfoots are 'browner of skin'. I don't think he would be a Stoor, because he is afraid of water (Stoors being the only hobbits to know a bit about boating, fishing and swimming.) Perhaps Frodo has some Stoor blood as well, since his parents died out boating.

[azalea]

I think the Brandybucks liked the water (or were less afraid of it from living on the river and/or because they were Stoorish), and Frodo's mom was a Brandybuck. Maybe it was Drogo who just didn't have the right boating skills, and sadly caused their demise.:(

I think I did skip the Appendices the very first time, but I can't remember that far back:confused:, but I'm sure I at least read the Prologue. I think I'd still tell people to read Concerning Hobbits and Of the Finding of the Ring if they hadn't read The H., because it gives pertinent info that they wouldn't otherwise know. If they had read The Hobbit, they should want to read it, but it wouldn't be necessary. They'd probably want to go back and read it afterwards, anyway.:)

[Nurvingiel]

Sam has brown hands because he works outside a lot. Maybe that's a Harfoot characteristic as well - being skilled at gardening and forestry. Sometimes I think Sam gets left out a bit because he's not a gentlehobbit. I don't really understand the class aspect though - apart from money, there doesn't seem to be any different between gentlehobbits and non.

As you may have noticed, I don't have a lot to contribute to this part of the discussion. :o I just don't think about Forewards a lot... I do now though!

[cassiopeia]

Originally posted by Nurvingiel
Sam has brown hands because he works outside a lot. Maybe that's a Harfoot characteristic as well - being skilled at gardening and forestry. Sometimes I think Sam gets left out a bit because he's not a gentlehobbit. I don't really understand the class aspect though - apart from money, there doesn't seem to be any different between gentlehobbits and non.

You're probably right about Sam's hands. But Tolkien mentions it a few times in the book, and it kind of sticks in my mind. All of the fellowship would be tanned after travelling for a while, wouldn't they? Perhaps Tolkien wanted to emphasise class differences. I see a big class difference between the gentry and lower classes, especially in the way they speak. Compare Frodo, Merry and Pippin's langauge to Sam, the Gaffer and Robin Smallburrow's.

I can't remember if I read the prologue or not when I first read it, but since I read The Hobbit before the LOTR, I suspect so. Sometimes it's hard to get people to read furthur than the first chapter: I tried to get my Mum to, but she didn't. (And she still refuses to read it. :rolleyes: :mad: )

Enough from me. I must now go and work on the next chapter. :)

[Lady Ravyn]

the part about hobbits species (lol :D ) is soooo interesting! i think your right about sam being part harfoot; not just because of his hands, but because of his characteristics, too. he likes to garden, and to me that seems very...harfoot-ish. :)
it makes you really think about the personalities of the various hobbits you know of.

i wonder what smeagol is?

[Valandil]

Originally posted by Lady Ravyn

i wonder what smeagol is?

I think he's from a group of Stoors.

[The Gaffer]

A question on perspective (apologies if it's already been covered):

Is the prologue supposed to be an extract from the Red Book, and therefore read as if it was written by a hobbit recounting the War of the Ring, or is it supposed to be read as if from a modern perspective, to give background to the story?

[Valandil]

Originally posted by The Gaffer
A question on perspective (apologies if it's already been covered):

Is the prologue supposed to be an extract from the Red Book, and therefore read as if it was written by a hobbit recounting the War of the Ring, or is it supposed to be read as if from a modern perspective, to give background to the story?

I would guess the latter, as though all these old sources have just been 'discovered' and this explains their origin. The Prologue as a whole anyway, seems more 'human-centric' - and talks about hobbits as though describing something different from our experience otherwise. An actual hobbit wouldn't write it this way, would he?

[Forkbeard]

Originally posted by Valandil
I would guess the latter, as though all these old sources have just been 'discovered' and this explains their origin. The Prologue as a whole anyway, seems more 'human-centric' - and talks about hobbits as though describing something different from our experience otherwise. An actual hobbit wouldn't write it this way, would he?

Right, the prologue is the "editor/translator's preface". It is standard practice in medieval and classical fields that when presenting a translation of a work, the translator includes a prologue or preface making some general comments about the contents and about procedures followed and so on. Since the Red Book of Westmarch was "discovered" by Tolkien, this is exactly what he is doing, lending to the fiction that he is presenting here a history that happened in real time.

Forkbeard

[Valandil]

Originally posted by Forkbeard
...lending to the fiction that he is presenting here a history that happened in real time.

Forkbeard

f...f... fiction!?!? :eek:

[Forkbeard]

Originally posted by Valandil
f...f... fiction!?!? :eek:

mea culpa, mea culpa! I meant to say his fictionalization (better word would be novelization) of the history recorded in the Red Book. Sorry for the confusion! ;)

[The Gaffer]

I guess that would seem the most likely, though the passage about "only the Elves still keep records of that time" suggested to me that the "author" of the prologue was supposed to be located at some point in time between the story's events and now.

[Forkbeard]

Originally posted by The Gaffer
I guess that would seem the most likely, though the passage about "only the Elves still keep records of that time" suggested to me that the "author" of the prologue was supposed to be located at some point in time between the story's events and now.

I took the comment to mean that the translator had access to some elven sources. :p Which since he wrote those too.....

[Nurvingiel]

I always love how Tolkien tells the story as if he was honoured to have witnessed it. It really makes you feel like it's real. I can't think of another author who does that as powerfully. :)

[Olmer]

Originally posted by Fat middle

However, when I read in the prologue that bit of elves STILL here and I know all that stuff about the fading of the elves (that is all about LOTR and in HOME X), my conclusion is that those remaning elves (that obviously would have faded, but would be still here) are relatives to Shakespeare's elves and all those "spirits" that populate English tales. ;)

Hi everyone! First i want to praise azalea for starting up such interesting theme. I hope we will go on discussing the chapters of the book through the very end( not like on some other sites).

Secondly, I'm absolutely disagree on conclusion that J.R.R.T wanted us to believe that HIS majestic elves evolved in some kind etherial Shakespearean creatures, for he DISPISED Shakesperian description of the elves, and he thought that is
"unforgivable"(Letter#185) and he was worried that he could not change people perception of elves (formed, by the way, by Christian church with a great help of popular writer) as little creatures unimportant to God, while from Celtic mythology, North legends and even the Bible came to us a description of beings greater in wisdom and skill, mighty and beautiful, which stayed on the ladder next between the God and Men.

My HO is that Celeborn ultimately stayed in Middle-earth .( Here is a quote from my posting on another forum):
If you will compare Tolkien's phraseology about the last sailed to the West Noldor, you will see the difference in the way of wording.
About Cirdan: "...some say he dwells there until the Last Ship sets sail into the West" - this is an AFFIRMATION that he eventually left Middle-earth.
About Celeborn: "...but there is no record of the day when at last he sought the Grey Havens" - and this is a SUGGESTION that he never sailed West.
My impression is that by the way of saying in such unsertain wordage JRRT wanted us to think that some of royal-elves still linger in ME.
Besides, if he (Celeborn) could live through 4 ages, why he cannot linger through a couple of more? ;)
Seems that Tolkien was making very plausible connections suggesting that Middle-earth is Europe before the world had changed, for many hundreds years ago people, who was living on this coninent called it Middleerthe .
Besides in Letter #211 Tolkien states:
"I have, I supose, constructed an imaginary TIME, but kept my feet on my own mother-earth for PLACE"
"I imagine the gap [between the Fall of Barad-dur and modern times] to be about 6000 years; that is we are now at the end of the Fifth Age, if the Ages were of about the same length as Second Age and Third Age. But they have, I think, quickened; and I imagine we are actually at the end of the Sixth Age, or in the Seventh."

So, look out for pointy ears!! :D

[Valandil]

Well Olmer, nice post! Now get those pointy ears right on over to the 'Official Welcome Thread' in General Messages Forum to introduce yourself to the 'Moot at large!

And I bid thee welcome! :)

[Lefty Scaevola]

Originally posted by Olmer
My HO is that Celeborn ultimately stayed in Middle-earth About Celeborn: "...but there is no record of the day when at last he sought the Grey Havens" - and this is a SUGGESTION that he never sailed West. [/B] I think the last part of that sentence "and with him went the last living memory of the elder days im Middle-Earth" is unequivicable that he departed. It also would say that all other person of the first age (Cirdan, any other first age elves, Fangorn, and Bombadil!?) had left ME before him.
It say "and with him went" not "and with him would go" or any orther grammer suggesting incompleted action.

[Olmer]

Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola

It say "and with him went" not "and with him would go" or any orther grammer suggesting incompleted action.

It's all relative and depends on your whole perception of the story. In all Tolkien's work is no definition on this subject, just suggestions, which you can interprete in the way more appealing to your taste.

It also would say that all other person of the first age (Cirdan, any other first age elves, Fangorn, and Bombadil!?) had left ME before him.
Fangorn and Bombadil? Hm...
Can you back up your statement with quote ,possibly, or with description of how you came to such conclusion?

[Lefty Scaevola]

"the last livng memory of the elder days"

'last' is not vague or ambigous.

[Olmer]

Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola
"the last livng memory of the elder days"


...
Had to agree with you that it makes sense...

But then again it just implies that he lingered on ME longer than Fangorn, which believed to live through the Fourth Age.

Considering that the Last Ship sailed at the beginning of F.A. ,and since it was no mentions that such notable figure sailed away 100
years later with supposedly last boat made by Legolas and Gimli, you cann't help to come to conclusion that Celeborn, outliving Threebeard, continued to live on Middle-earth untill he eventually "fade away".

:cool:

[Valandil]

Hmmm... interesting thoughts about Treebeard / Fanghorn and Tom Bombadil, Olmer. I guess too, we could view this as:

1. Did the author really mean this as a literal statement... that there was NO OTHER LIVING MEMORY of the Elder Days?

OR

2. Can we take it as a 'figure of speech'... especially since Treebeard and Tom Bombadil had very limited contact with the rest of 'society' - at least that which the sources derived from and with which we are connected - so that, even if they WERE still around, in some faded, diminished or otherwise indiscernable form, there was no significance in their memories to the society about them. Hah - in other words, since they didn't really TALK to anyone else, and SHARE their memories - those memories don't matter very much... at least not to anyone but themselves.

Lefty, I think it DOES make a good case that Celeborn at least, eventually took ship to the West. Similarly though, playing 'devils advocate' to myself - if the matter of his sailing is unknown/ uncertain, does there remain a chance that he simply faded to the point of no longer having contact with the rest of 'us'? ie, that his memories simply no longer had significance beyond himself? Though one would assume he'd look forward to reunion with Galadriel... ;)

[Valandil]

Either that... or the author simply didn't desire to tie up ALL the loose ends he had created for himself! :p

[Artanis]

Originally posted by Olmer
Considering that the Last Ship sailed at the beginning of F.A. ,and since it was no mentions that such notable figure sailed away 100
years later with supposedly last boat made by Legolas and Gimli, you cann't help to come to conclusion that Celeborn, outliving Threebeard, continued to live on Middle-earth untill he eventually "fade away".

:cool: You say it yourself Olmer - supposedly last boat. Apparently Cirdan and the Elves at the Havens weren't the only ones who was able to build vessels bound for the West. Legolas made his ship in Ithilien long after the Havens were deserted, there's no reason why Celeborn should not do the same.

He would eventually follow me. :)

[Lefty Scaevola]

As for "no record of the day" the overwhelming preporderance of events in the history of the world have no record, even the maority of things known (take the simple example of death, some 35 billion+/- humans have died on Earth, we have record of a few billion). It was not all that long ago in our worl when the majority of knowledge was handed down orally.

[Fat middle]

Originally posted by Olmer
Secondly, I'm absolutely disagree on conclusion that J.R.R.T wanted us to believe that HIS majestic elves evolved in some kind etherial Shakespearean creatures, for he DISPISED Shakesperian description of the elves, and he thought that is
"unforgivable"(Letter#185) and he was worried that he could not change people perception of elves (formed, by the way, by Christian church with a great help of popular writer) as little creatures unimportant to God, while from Celtic mythology, North legends and even the Bible came to us a description of beings greater in wisdom and skill, mighty and beautiful, which stayed on the ladder next between the God and Men.

Well, I already said that Tolkien didn't like Shakespeare elves. Perhaps I didn't explain it well, but I think that the "faded elves" that remained in ME are still here. "Fading" is not the same that "dying".

I'm not sure on this, but IIRC, fading means that the "hroa" gets complety consumed, but the "fëa" still lives. The problem of fading is that without a "hroa" the elves became trapped in ME and couldn't go to the unpersihable West.

[Olmer]

Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola
As for "no record of the day" the overwhelming preporderance of events in the history of the world have no record...
True.
But then we have to define what IS this book.
If you consider that the "LOTR" is to be another children's story, and also has no real basis in history, it pointless to look for the inner meanings at all. Why we, then, would forget about discussions and just take the book as it meant to be - a children's fairy tale? Then we could take things and events as they are in the book - plain and simple.
But I'm looking at it as a historical document based on more than 30 years of scrupulous research and study of separated documents and pieced together by the genius of J.R.R.Tolkien.
Perhaps, Tolkien had a very good reason for specifically highlighting the fact that he "recorded" the history and its varied applicability (true or feigned) is up to the reader, so a different interpretation is allowed and possible. And since all historical recording usually vary with the point of view of chronicler, the examination from another angle could open an unlimited field for unexpected discoveries.
In this case 'no records' could be examined and you can get a glimpse of the lost history by connecting the dots, which I'm trying to do.:cool:
Originally posted by Artanis You say it yourself Olmer - supposedly last boat. Apparently Cirdan and the Elves at the Havens weren't the only ones who was able to build vessels bound for the West. Legolas made his ship in Ithilien long after the Havens were deserted, there's no reason why Celeborn should not do the same
I have never implied that Cirdan was the one-and-only shipbuilder, but as time went by with the beginning of new age and extensive mass-emigration of elves, it was not many places left, where you can build the ship, nor you can found a craftsmen , who knew how to do it.
I assume, that under guidance, providing material and helping hands, you can build a ship in any place, like Legolas did, but since it will be more and more difficult to find such guidance, it will take much longer time eventually ceasing to nothing.
The " open" option to sail West got "closed" with the last ship. Cosidering that the Grey Havens and the most of elves dvellings became deserted somewhere in the beginning of 4 Age that option was not indefinite.
Some of the Elves, who in the past decided to postpone their departure, found that they indefinitelly late and even if now they would greatly desired to pass into the West, they had no means to do so.." There is now no ship that would bear me hence ", ( LOTR. App. A ) regretfully says Arwen and it is sad truth in her words: too late not only for her, but for others of her kindred, like Celeborn or Thranduil.
Originally posted by Valandil ... does there remain a chance that he simply faded to the point of no longer having contact with the rest of 'us'? ... Though one would assume he'd look forward to reunion with Galadriel
Tolkien implies that even in "faded" state some elves can make possible for certain humans to see and to hear them.
Then it goes pure speculation: by saying so, was J.R.R.T giving us a hint that somehow he was the one who had "the encounter"?
As about Celeborn...Where this assumption came from?
Judging by his replies you could say that the big chasm was growing between the"loving couple", and this is the real reason why Celeborn opt to stay in ME and didn't go with his wife.:(

[Artanis]

Some of the Elves, who in the past decided to postpone their departure, found that they indefinitelly late and even if now they would greatly desired to pass into the West, they had no means to do so." There is now no ship that would bear me hence ", ( LOTR. App. A ) regretfully says Arwen and it is sad truth in her words: too late not only for her, but for others of her kindred, like Celeborn or Thranduil.Arwen is not an argument. She couldn't go West because she CHOSE to become mortal, as I'm SURE you know. :rolleyes:

I think this will be my last word on the subject.

[Olmer]

Originally posted by Artanis
Arwen is not an argument. She couldn't go West because she CHOSE to become mortal, as I'm SURE you know. :rolleyes:


It's not about her choice.
It is about her knowing that it's NO ships to sail West.

[Lefty Scaevola]

Legolas built and sailed his own ship 122 years into the fourth age, a little after Ellessar had died. I no of no restriction for any other elf to do so then or afterward. Arwen could not go because she was prohibbited, having made wholely mortal.

[Fat middle]

Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola
Legolas built and sailed his own ship 122 years into the fourth age, a little after Ellessar had died. I no of no restriction for any other elf to do so then or afterward. Arwen could not go because she was prohibbited, having made wholely mortal.
Yep. And also Sam went somehow to the West a little before Legolas.

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by Olmer
...
:cool:

A question: Are you TRYING to be insufferable? Cos we already have one around here, and it's no use trying to take HIS mantle. :p

[cee2lee2]

"bumping" for latecomers, like me, who want to get caught up :)

[The Wizard from Milan]

This is one thing that bothers me sometimes. I respect Tolkien’s need to revise, and am happy it added to the end result, but I also in some ways see it as a breach of contract with the reader. One would like to think that what he read originally was complete and accurate in the author’s mind, and for him to change details seems to be unfair to the first readers. ADDING new info, such as in the Appendices, is no problem, nor are corrections of typos and the like; it’s things within the text that are changed that I find to be problematic, which renders previous versions inaccurate. Furthermore, it caused discrepancies in the different editions, and no one could be sure if it was an author’s revision, or simply a printing error.
As far as I know, all great books of the past were subject to revisions. Newer editions were twiked very often. One of the foundational italian novels (the betrothed) had been revised tons of times and the later edition hardly resembles the first (with full chapters taken out and others put in).

[Butterbeer]

[QUOTE=azalea]Well, I'm not really saying that, I meant that when Bilbo says he was 4'5'' and could ride a horse, it may be true (or it could be an exaggeration), but that the way it sounds is like a lot of our tall tales. The invention of golf, well, if you're looking at it as factual, then no, I guess I would say he didn't REALLY invent it, but within the context of the story, sure, I believe it.;)



I always thought Tolkien was telling how Bullroarer had "pre-invented" golf, pior to our current age (or post middle - earth??)

I don't think he was suggesting the hobbits and strider or elrond, say, were in the habit of doing a leisurally back nine of a sunday? I don't think they actually subsequently played golf in the Shire or the West?

I agree its just a beautiful way of adding history and colour and context to the prologue. Also more importantly i think he sees it as a transitional bridge (in terms of writing) between the styles and worlds of the Hobbit and TLOTR.

[Pitchike12]

Great job Azalea! Hope you will come back ounce again in the forum. :)