Discussion:
Chapter of the Week: LotR Book 2, Chapter 9 The Great River
(too old to reply)
Archie
2004-06-14 13:49:20 UTC
Permalink
Chapter of the Week 9, Bk II. "The Great River"
"The Great River"

Please subscribe to new chapters at http://parasha.maoltuile.org
(courtesy of David Flood). Please comment on, criticise and follow this
posting as long as you feel interested.

Contents:
0.Preface
1.Tolkien goes boating
2.First impression from the regatta
3.Synopsis
4.On the landscape: from the Gladden to the Emyn Muil
5.On time in the Elf-land of Lorien
6.On bows
7.Trotter becomes Aragorn
7.Boromir's temptation
8.Eagles vs. hideous flying beasts
9.The Gate of Argonath
10.Miscellaneous remarks


0.Preface
Due to slightly unforeseen (but generally beneficial)
developments in the local labour market I have been cut
off from the AFT/RABT discussions for 3 long months; I am
quite reluctant to google the preceding CotW threads lest
my hard drive overflows, but I hope that this piece will
need few if any flashbacks to them.
It is my duty and pleasure to discuss chapter 9, "The
Great River", but before plunging into the waters of
Anduin I'd like to express my sincere gratitude to
Christopher Tolkien for publishing the UT and the volumes
of HoME, and to all AFT/RABT posters who would wait just
a moment before throwing Molotoff cocktails onto this
review/introduction.

1.Tolkien goes boating
It is desirable that this chapter be discussed with its
HoME-based textual history in mind. JRRT had drafted the
outline of the Breaking of the Fellowship before sitting
down to sketch the Great River; this is understandable
since the former is indeed much more important to the
overall plot and the moral ramifications of the story
than the details of the voyage down the Anduin. His pen
dashed away from the River and followed Frodo, Sam and
Gollum to the borders of the Dark Land while Frodo was
betrayed twice: first by Boromir, then by Gollum.
So the destination of the voyage was fixed, and the Great
River had to be the transition between dramatic scenes
and foreshadowing of the first betrayal (and Boromir's
temptation). It came out to be much more than that.

2.First impression from the regatta
There are two texts that I'd like to compare: the first
draft of the "Scattering of the Company" and the final
FotR one. It is remarkable to see at a glance how much of
the first draft survived in terms of syntactic structure
and wording; it is no less interesting to witness the
writer at work, changing words, swapping them, adding
little adverbs and compressing ideas and shades of ideas
into separate clauses.
The geographic and personal names are shuffled around and
changed quite noticeably, distances are stretched and the
map is altered; interested readers may be referred to the
HoME itself for further details, but by far the most
significant change from the first draft to the final one
is the coming of Aragorn in Trotter's place (see section
7.Trotter becomes Aragorn).

3.Synopsis
/*Ideas not present in the first draft are bracketed by
{curly braces}.*/
The Fellowship drifts down Anduin (see section 4.On the
landscape: from the Gladden to the Emyn Muil). Aragorn
fears delay and hastens travellers {with due regard to
their physical condition}. After two days they come in
sight of the Brown Lands on the east bank {and even
Aragorn doesn't know why the lands are that desolate and
lifeless}. {Once they see black swans in the sky. Aragorn
shows off his navigator's skills.} Pippin notices strange
gleam in Boromir's eyes. {Sam tells Frodo about his
suspicions of a certain Gollum following them only to
have his suspicions confirmed by Frodo and Aragorn.}
Aragorn urges the company to {keep watch and} speed
ahead, travelling by night to avoid detection. {Sam sees
a new Moon on the 7th day. Legolas spots an eagle in the
sky (see section 9.Eagles vs. hideous flying beasts).}
The boats enter the area of the Emyn Muil in the dark.
{Aragorn is uncertain whether they are close to the
rapids and assigns the watchman's duty to Sam.} At
noticing the rapids of Sarn Gebir Aragorn turns back; the
Fellowship is attacked by orcs from the east bank.
Despite being caught between the stream and the hail of
arrows, the company manages to escape {to the west bank}.
A great winged creature approaches them from the south,
but Legolas shoots it down, dismaying the orcs. Frodo has
the symptoms of a Nazgul syndrome; Boromir is too curious
about it.
Sam remarks that a whole month has passed since their
coming to Lorien (see section 5.On time in the Elf-land
of Lorien). Frodo is foolish enough to try to show off
his knowledge of wise matters by revealing the
whereabouts of one of the Elven Rings. Aragorn reprimands
him.
When the dawn breaks, the company sees dense fog on the
rapids and discusses the way to the Emyn Muil. Boromir
suggests going through Rohan to Minas Tirith; Aragorn
objects to this, offering instead taking the old portage
way round Sarn Gebir and then rowing down to climb upon
the Amon Hen. Boromir holds out till he gets to know that
Frodo would follow Aragorn... and suddenly changes his
mind. The Fellowship follows the trail found by Aragorn
and Legolas and toils to carry boats and luggage to the
other end of the trail. The next day they find themselves
speeding down a ravine with rocky walls until they descry
at a distance the mighty Pillars of Argonath. Everybody
is awed; everybody is frightened by the gigantic figures of the
Kings guarding the Gate - but Aragorn. He is
coming back to his kingdom from exile (see section
7.Trotter becomes Aragorn). Yet he is torn between duty
of helping Frodo and desire to come to Minas Tirith. The
boats enter the pale Nen Hithoel and moor at Path Galen
on the west bank. The Fellowship stands now on the
crossroads and the hour of decision is nigh.

4.On the landscape: from the Gladden to the Emyn Muil
One of my strongest feelings from the book. The forests
of the middle course of the Great River, the immense vast
spaces of the Brown Lands, the irises of the Gladden, the
sorrowful reeds and meadows of the field of Celebrant,
the cragged sides of the Emyn Muil and above all, the
area of Nen Hithoel, Argonath and the Rauros Falls, are
extremely vividly visualised in my mind, being places I'd
like to see most of all in M-E.
Questions:
1. Why doesn't Tolkien tell us when the company passes
the Gladden Fields?
2. What is the origin of the Brown Lands (they are more
like volcanic badlands - but time heals even those)? Why
is Sauron's malice there so enduring after 3000+ years?
3. Aragorn has little to say about the history of Rohan
on the way down to the Emyn Muil. I hypothesize it is a
remnant from the times there was not much known about
Rohan in Tolkien's imagination. Please tell me this is
not true - for any story-internal reasons.

5.On time in the Elf-land of Lorien
HoME lays out three successive timing schemes of the
journey of the Fellowship conceived by Tolkien (there are
several minor variations of the 1st and the 2nd):
I II FotR
Departure from Rivendell 24/XI 25/XII 25/XI
Arrival to Eregion 6/XII 6/I 8/I
Caradras (snow-storm) 9/XII 9/I 11/I
Entrance into Moria 11/XII 11/I 13/I
Escape from Moria 13/XII 13/I 15/I
Crossing the Silverlode 14/XII 14/I 16/I
Departure from Lorien 15/XII 15/I 16/II
Arrival at Tol Brandir/ 25/XII 25/I 25/II
Parth Galen
Flight of Frodo 26/XII 26/I 26/II

In the first two schemes the "outer world" time-span
spent in Lorien is 1 night, in the final one - a full
month. It is obvious that the final scheme is much less
magical. Why?
/* Of course, we know from trad.folk tales, Lord
Dunsany's 'KoE's D.' and JRRT's own 'On Fairy Stories'
that the Elves' time differs from our own.*/

-
Legolas stirred in his boat. "Nay, time does not tarry
ever," he said; "but change and growth is not in all
things and places alike. For the Elves the world moves,
and it moves both very swift and very slow. Swift,
because they themselves change little, and all else ?eets
by: it is a grief to them. Slow, because they do not
count the running years, not for themselves. The passing
seasons are but ripples ever repeated in the long long
stream. Yet beneath the Sun all things must wear to an
end at last."
-
Legolas' remark is one of the most philosophical in the
whole LotR (rivalled only by his conversation with Gimli
in Minas Tirith about the deeds of men.) In other
versions his words are partly taken by Frodo.

6.On bows
a) Aragorn tells the hobbits that the orc-bows will
easily shoot across the river. How are orc-bows different
from Mannish ones (made from yew, presumably)? Are they
better or worse?
b) Tolkien rejected the idea of Legolas shooting from the
boat. Maybe he realised the inherent difficulties of
marksmanship in the dark from a rocking platform.

7.Trotter becomes Aragorn
This passage in the final text is forceful and quite
impressive:
"Fear not!" said a strange voice behind him. Frodo turned
and saw Strider, and yet not Strider; for the weatherworn
Ranger was no longer there. In the stern sat Aragorn son
of Arathorn, proud and erect, guiding the boat with
skilful strokes; his hood was cast back, and his dark
hair was blowing in the wind, a light was in his eyes: a
king returning from exile to his own land.
"Fear not!" he said. "Long have I desired to look upon
the likenesses of Isildur and Anárion, my sires of old.
Under their shadow Elessar, the Elfstone son of Arathorn
of the House of Valandil Isildur's son heir of Elendil,
has nought to dread!"
-
Tolkien starts writing the passage with Trotter and, one
emendation after another, Trotter's background changes
profoundly: from Elfstone son of Elfhelm he becomes
Eldamir son of Eldakar son of Valandil, then turning into
Aragorn son of Arathorn and accepting the kingly name of
Elessar (the Elfstone). Thus Aragorn's genealogy deepens,
now going back for several thousand years.

8.Boromir's temptation
It is painted by 3 short sketches: Boromir bites nails
and peers at Frodo's boat; Boromir is too curious about
Frodo's feelings; Boromir suddenly changing his mind when
Frodo follows Aragorn. This is quite enough for Sam to
become suspicious, and more than enough for a reader. Or
is it not? I'd like everyone who remembers his/her first
reading of the FotR to say honestly whether these pieces
aroused any suspicions. Let's see how it works out.
A question: does Boromir's behaviour influence Aragorn's
decision to double night watches?

9.Eagles vs. hideous flying beasts
1. IIRC Legolas sees an eagle on January 24. What is that
eagle doing there?
2. Tactics of air support in Sauron's army aren't
perfect. Why is the Nazgul that reckless to fly in range
of elven bows? After all, he has already experienced the
level of defences around the Bearer at the Ford across
the Bruinen.

10.The Gate of Argonath
1. Stonework endures for 3 millennia despite water and
wind erosion. Is it plausible?
2. Mt.Rushmore, the Pillars of Argonath and the Sphynx
- who borrowed from whom :-)? As an addition: there are
gigantic statues of Stalin (torn down) and Lenin (still
standing) near Moscow, where >65 years ago a Moskva-Volga
channel was built by prisoners.
3. Why does the Wilderland end there? (silly, but
interesting)

11.Miscellaneous remarks
1. ":new Moon as thin as a nail-paring" - Samwise is
downright poetic, isn't he?
2. Boromir bites nails - what is that? Tolkien's deep
psychological insight or an out-of-character remark?
3. The next chapter's discussion is going to treat the
subject of the Hills of Sight and Hearing in depth (How
do they differ? Where do the powers of hearing and sight
come from? How is the power of the Ring enhanced by the
power of the hills?)
4. Gimli doesn't boast before Boromir as it may seem
upon the first reading; the Dwarf sounds insulted when
Boromir puts him into the same group with the hobbits and
doubts his strength. Is my impression correct? Boromir,
OTOH, is poking fun at "our sturdy dwarf" - in other
circumstances such jokes could lead to a severe rift in
the Fellowship.
5. Gollum re-appears. How does he know that he should
be waiting at the Gore and not at other borders of
Lorien? Is it 'chance as you call it in M-E' or smth.
else?
6. The swans are black. Why? Are they from Oz? Is it
another artefact of Tolkien's limited knowledge of the
natural sciences? (I admit mine is much more limited).

Archie
Jamie Andrews; real address @ bottom of message
2004-06-14 16:57:13 UTC
Permalink
Excellent summary, Archie... just 2 points.
Post by Archie
1. Why doesn't Tolkien tell us when the company passes
the Gladden Fields?
IDHTBIFOM, but ISTR that, in the final version at least,
the Gladden Fields are north of Lorien. The Fellowship never
passes them.
Post by Archie
6. The swans are black. Why? Are they from Oz? Is it
another artefact of Tolkien's limited knowledge of the
natural sciences? (I admit mine is much more limited).
There is a species of swan which is black with red beaks.
I believe it is a Eurasian or African species. I recall seeing
two domesticated black swans in the Reifel waterfowl refuge in
Ladner, BC sometime in the 1970s. Maybe Tolkien saw or heard of
domesticated black swans at some point too.

--Jamie. (nel mezzo del cammin di nostra vita)
andrews .uwo } Merge these two lines to obtain my e-mail address.
@csd .ca } (Unsolicited "bulk" e-mail costs everyone.)
Archie
2004-06-14 18:12:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jamie Andrews; real address @ bottom of message
Post by Archie
1. Why doesn't Tolkien tell us when the company passes
the Gladden Fields?
IDHTBIFOM, but ISTR that, in the final version at least,
the Gladden Fields are north of Lorien. The Fellowship never
passes them.
Jamie (and other AFT/RABT posters), please forgive me: a moment of
forgetfulness - and out pops a silly remark that could have been
eliminated by a simple look on the map. The Gladden Fields _are_ to the
North of Lorien in the FotR and the UT, halfway between L. and the ford
(or the destroyed old bridge). /*Otherwise the Hobbits would not have
become mythical creatures in Rohan etc.*/
Post by Jamie Andrews; real address @ bottom of message
Post by Archie
6. The swans are black. Why? Are they from Oz? Is it
another artefact of Tolkien's limited knowledge of the
natural sciences? (I admit mine is much more limited).
There is a species of swan which is black with red beaks.
I believe it is a Eurasian or African species.
<g>...What is its air speed?</g>
Post by Jamie Andrews; real address @ bottom of message
I recall seeing
two domesticated black swans in the Reifel waterfowl refuge in
Ladner, BC sometime in the 1970s. Maybe Tolkien saw or heard of
domesticated black swans at some point too.
My shaky knowledge of the phenomenon and origin of black swans comes from
a refutation of "hunter's stories" in an old book for children (i.e.
black swans live in Australia, commonly observed black swans are white
but seen a contre jour they look black :-). Holding in my hand an equally
old book "Nature of the USSR" (L.S.Berg, Moscow, Geografgiz, 1955, 3rd
ed.), I can find only 1 place where he mentions a member of Cygnidae
(sp?) (Cygnus bewicki, a tundra swan), and they are not black.

A Tolkien's black swan should be of African or Eurasian origin to fit
into ME better (unless we have a potato-like story).

Archie
Christopher Kreuzer
2004-06-15 00:22:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Archie
6. The swans are black. Why? Are they from Oz? Is it
Post by Archie
another artefact of Tolkien's limited knowledge of the
natural sciences? (I admit mine is much more limited).
There is a species of swan which is black with red beaks.
I believe it is a Eurasian or African species. I recall seeing
two domesticated black swans in the Reifel waterfowl refuge in
Ladner, BC sometime in the 1970s. Maybe Tolkien saw or heard of
domesticated black swans at some point too.
Actually, it is an Australian/NZ swan species:

http://www.nzbirds.com/BlackSwan.html

http://www.scz.org/animals/s/bswan.html

Google images gets some nice pics as well.

Christopher
--
---
Reply clue: Saruman welcomes you to Spamgard
Jamie Andrews; real address @ bottom of message
2004-06-15 22:03:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Archie
6. The swans are black. Why? Are they from Oz? Is it
Post by Archie
another artefact of Tolkien's limited knowledge of the
natural sciences? (I admit mine is much more limited).
There is a species of swan which is black with red beaks.
I believe it is a Eurasian or African species. I recall seeing
two domesticated black swans in the Reifel waterfowl refuge in
Ladner, BC sometime in the 1970s. Maybe Tolkien saw or heard of
domesticated black swans at some point too.
Aha, so they *are* from Oz! Though that is probably what
Archie meant all along, and I just missed it to start with. :-)

I Googled too, and found many references to the fact that
they had been introduced in Sweden, and are now well-established
there. I couldn't find *when* they were introduced there.
However, the page
http://web.uct.ac.za/depts/fitzpatrick/docs/hypolist.html
says that they were introduced to South Africa in 1926. That
was too late for Tolkien to have seen them as a child, but they
may have been introduced into Europe around the same time. JRRT
may have heard about them being in Sweden, or may have seen them
himself in a park somewhere.

--Jamie. (nel mezzo del cammin di nostra vita)
andrews .uwo } Merge these two lines to obtain my e-mail address.
@csd .ca } (Unsolicited "bulk" e-mail costs everyone.)
Igenlode Wordsmith
2004-06-22 22:56:06 UTC
Permalink
On 15 Jun 2004 Jamie Andrews; real address @ bottom of message wrote:

[snip black swans]
Post by Jamie Andrews; real address @ bottom of message
http://web.uct.ac.za/depts/fitzpatrick/docs/hypolist.html
says that they were introduced to South Africa in 1926. That
was too late for Tolkien to have seen them as a child, but they
may have been introduced into Europe around the same time.
Actually, I was wondering if the black swans - like the crebain and the
'black squirrels' in Mirkwood - were intended in the story as a sign of
evil spreading in the natural world...
--
Igenlode <***@nym.alias.net> Bookwraith unabashed

The sceptic, unlike the cynic, will never utterly banish the possibility,
however remote, that people on the other side of an argument might be right.
Jette Goldie
2004-06-26 00:39:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Igenlode Wordsmith
[snip black swans]
Post by Jamie Andrews; real address @ bottom of message
http://web.uct.ac.za/depts/fitzpatrick/docs/hypolist.html
says that they were introduced to South Africa in 1926. That
was too late for Tolkien to have seen them as a child, but they
may have been introduced into Europe around the same time.
Actually, I was wondering if the black swans - like the crebain and the
'black squirrels' in Mirkwood - were intended in the story as a sign of
evil spreading in the natural world...
There are black squirrels in Canada.
--
Jette Goldie
***@blueyonder.co.uk
"If you don't care where you are, then you aren't lost"
http://www.jette.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
s***@nomail.com
2004-06-26 06:09:58 UTC
Permalink
In rec.arts.books.tolkien Jette Goldie <***@blueyonder.com.uk> wrote:

: "Igenlode Wordsmith" <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in message
: news:***@riot.eu.org...
:> On 15 Jun 2004 Jamie Andrews; real address @ bottom of message wrote:
:>
:> [snip black swans]
:> >
:> > http://web.uct.ac.za/depts/fitzpatrick/docs/hypolist.html
:> > says that they were introduced to South Africa in 1926. That
:> > was too late for Tolkien to have seen them as a child, but they
:> > may have been introduced into Europe around the same time.
:>
:> Actually, I was wondering if the black swans - like the crebain and the
:> 'black squirrels' in Mirkwood - were intended in the story as a sign of
:> evil spreading in the natural world...


: There are black squirrels in Canada.

There are black squirrels in Michigan, but they are not supposed
to be here. They were brought here by somebody and are now nearly
as common as the native brown squirrels.

Stephen
Jamie Andrews; real address @ bottom of message
2004-06-28 18:18:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@nomail.com
:> Actually, I was wondering if the black swans - like the crebain and the
:> 'black squirrels' in Mirkwood - were intended in the story as a sign of
:> evil spreading in the natural world...
And re. the other articles on black squirrels... I don't
want to post too many pedantic articles on the natural world! --
but I happen to know some things about black squirrels too,
since I live in a city (London, Ontario) in which it is almost
impossible to avoid seeing at least a few of them every day,
even in the winter. (The term "day-rats" is used by some of the
more curmudgeonly denizens of the city.)

The Eastern Grey Squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis) occurs
naturally in most of the eastern woodlands of North America.
There are two main colorations. One is grey (I have sometimes
seen ones with grey back and whitish belly -- I assume that's
still the same species). The other coloration is black.

The squirrels themselves do not make any difference between
black and grey colorations -- individuals mate freely with one
another. Thus there can't be said to be two separate races.
However, the black coloration is, AFAIK for unknown reasons,
more common in the northern part of its range.

Around here, most of the Eastern "Grey" Squirrels are in
fact completely black, the black of a black Labrador dog.
Sometimes you see young ones with some brown or white on their
tails, but usually most are all black. Occasionally you see the
grey colorations too. Presumably the official English name was
given by people in the largish country to the south of us, where
the black coloration is less common.

I have heard of northern black squirrels of S. carolinensis
being imported to some town in I think Missouri, where they are
considered a strange and distinctive feature of the town.
However, I think black squirrels in Michigan (the state next
door to me) are native to the region.

I have never understood why people ever had a desire to
bring species native to one continent to another continent. But
for some reason, someone once introduced S. carolinensis to
Great Britain, where it is now a destructive pest species that
is pushing out the native squirrels. I once heard an amusing
interview on the radio with an English aristocrat who had
published a book of recipes featuring squirrel, the promotion of
which was intended to help cut back on the number of black
squirrels on his and others' property. JRRT may have heard of
black squirrels in the UK in his lifetime as well. The native
species of squirrel in the UK is, I think, red.

--Jamie. (a Dover edition designed for years of use!)
andrews .uwo } Merge these two lines to obtain my e-mail address.
@csd .ca } (Unsolicited "bulk" e-mail costs everyone.)
Jim Deutch
2004-06-28 20:01:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@nomail.com
:>
:> [snip black swans]
:> >
:> > http://web.uct.ac.za/depts/fitzpatrick/docs/hypolist.html
:> > says that they were introduced to South Africa in 1926. That
:> > was too late for Tolkien to have seen them as a child, but they
:> > may have been introduced into Europe around the same time.
:>
:> Actually, I was wondering if the black swans - like the crebain and the
:> 'black squirrels' in Mirkwood - were intended in the story as a sign of
:> evil spreading in the natural world...
: There are black squirrels in Canada.
There are black squirrels in Michigan, but they are not supposed
to be here. They were brought here by somebody and are now nearly
as common as the native brown squirrels.
If I'm not mistaken, black squirrels and gray squirrels are the very
same species, just like pink and brown humans are. I'm guessing that
black and brown are just differences in intensity of pigments.
Interesting that the frequency of the melanistic gene(s) is
increasing: it must confer some advantage (concealment, perhaps?).

Jim Deutch (Jimbo the Cat)
--
After things go from bad to worse, the cycle will repeat itself.
s***@nomail.com
2004-06-28 21:45:52 UTC
Permalink
In rec.arts.books.tolkien Jim Deutch <***@compuserve.com> wrote:
: On 26 Jun 2004 06:09:58 GMT, ***@nomail.com wrote:

:>In rec.arts.books.tolkien Jette Goldie <***@blueyonder.com.uk> wrote:
:>
:>: "Igenlode Wordsmith" <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in message
:>: news:***@riot.eu.org...
:>:> On 15 Jun 2004 Jamie Andrews; real address @ bottom of message wrote:
:>:>
:>:> [snip black swans]
:>:> >
:>:> > http://web.uct.ac.za/depts/fitzpatrick/docs/hypolist.html
:>:> > says that they were introduced to South Africa in 1926. That
:>:> > was too late for Tolkien to have seen them as a child, but they
:>:> > may have been introduced into Europe around the same time.
:>:>
:>:> Actually, I was wondering if the black swans - like the crebain and the
:>:> 'black squirrels' in Mirkwood - were intended in the story as a sign of
:>:> evil spreading in the natural world...
:>
:>
:>: There are black squirrels in Canada.
:>
:>There are black squirrels in Michigan, but they are not supposed
:>to be here. They were brought here by somebody and are now nearly
:>as common as the native brown squirrels.

: If I'm not mistaken, black squirrels and gray squirrels are the very
: same species, just like pink and brown humans are. I'm guessing that
: black and brown are just differences in intensity of pigments.
: Interesting that the frequency of the melanistic gene(s) is
: increasing: it must confer some advantage (concealment, perhaps?).

I apparently misremembered something or was trusting an unreliable
source. But there is some truth to what I said, but the black
squirrels really are not foreign. They were wiped out and were then
reintroduced.

http://www.statenews.com/editionsfall96/111496/nw_squirrels.html

Stephen
the softrat
2004-06-29 01:14:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim Deutch
If I'm not mistaken, black squirrels and gray squirrels are the very
same species, just like pink and brown humans are.
You *are* mistaken. They are two different species in the northeastern
US. The grey squirrels are larger and bulkier -- more like the cartoon
squirrel. The red squirrels are smaller and kinda scrawny -- like
Gollum.

the softrat
"Honi soit qui mal y pense."
mailto:***@pobox.com
--
A man without a woman is like a bicycle without a fish.
Jamie Andrews; real address @ bottom of message
2004-06-29 14:36:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by the softrat
Post by Jim Deutch
If I'm not mistaken, black squirrels and gray squirrels are the very
same species, just like pink and brown humans are.
You *are* mistaken. They are two different species in the northeastern
US. The grey squirrels are larger and bulkier -- more like the cartoon
squirrel. The red squirrels are smaller and kinda scrawny -- like
Gollum.
You are correct that the Eastern Gray (sic) Squirrel
(Sciurus carolinensis), the Fox Squirrel (Sciurus niger) and the
Red squirrel (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus) are all separate species.
I have seldom seen any S. niger or T. hudsonicus here, and if I
have I haven't known which, but IIRC they are both
brownish/reddish species. However, AFAIK Jim was referring to
the grey and black colorations of S. carolinensis.

http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/classification/Sciurinae.html#Sciurinae

You would think a fellow rodent would know that!!!1!!

--Jamie. (a Dover edition designed for years of use!)
andrews .uwo } Merge these two lines to obtain my e-mail address.
@csd .ca } (Unsolicited "bulk" e-mail costs everyone.)
Jim Deutch
2004-07-02 20:24:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jamie Andrews; real address @ bottom of message
Post by the softrat
Post by Jim Deutch
If I'm not mistaken, black squirrels and gray squirrels are the very
same species, just like pink and brown humans are.
You *are* mistaken. They are two different species in the northeastern
US. The grey squirrels are larger and bulkier -- more like the cartoon
squirrel. The red squirrels are smaller and kinda scrawny -- like
Gollum.
You are correct that the Eastern Gray (sic) Squirrel
(Sciurus carolinensis), the Fox Squirrel (Sciurus niger) and the
Red squirrel (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus) are all separate species.
I have seldom seen any S. niger or T. hudsonicus here, and if I
have I haven't known which, but IIRC they are both
brownish/reddish species. However, AFAIK Jim was referring to
the grey and black colorations of S. carolinensis.
http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/classification/Sciurinae.html#Sciurinae
You would think a fellow rodent would know that!!!1!!
I begin to doubt his very rodenthood, though I can't deny his obvious
rattitude. Could he have been deceiving us all this time as to his
species???

Jim Deutch (Jimbo the Cat)
--
Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.
TeaLady (Mari C.)
2004-07-04 02:36:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim Deutch
Post by s***@nomail.com
In rec.arts.books.tolkien Jette Goldie
: wrote in message
:>
:> [snip black swans]
:> >
:> > http://web.uct.ac.za/depts/fitzpatrick/docs/hypolist.htm
:> > l says that they were introduced to South Africa in
:> > 1926. That was too late for Tolkien to have seen them
:> > as a child, but they may have been introduced into
:> > Europe around the same time.
:>
:> Actually, I was wondering if the black swans - like the
:> crebain and the 'black squirrels' in Mirkwood - were
:> intended in the story as a sign of evil spreading in the
:> natural world...
: There are black squirrels in Canada.
There are black squirrels in Michigan, but they are not
supposed to be here. They were brought here by somebody and
are now nearly as common as the native brown squirrels.
If I'm not mistaken, black squirrels and gray squirrels are
the very same species, just like pink and brown humans are.
I'm guessing that black and brown are just differences in
intensity of pigments. Interesting that the frequency of the
melanistic gene(s) is increasing: it must confer some
advantage (concealment, perhaps?).
Perhaps heat-wise - doesn't a dark color absorb more heat than a
light one ? It would not increase concealment in a wintry
setting - black fur on white snows would be a stark contrast.
--
TeaLady / mari conroy

Rainbow Canyon is back
Andy Cooke
2004-06-26 10:10:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jette Goldie
Post by Igenlode Wordsmith
[snip black swans]
Post by Jamie Andrews; real address @ bottom of message
http://web.uct.ac.za/depts/fitzpatrick/docs/hypolist.html
says that they were introduced to South Africa in 1926. That
was too late for Tolkien to have seen them as a child, but they
may have been introduced into Europe around the same time.
Actually, I was wondering if the black swans - like the crebain and the
'black squirrels' in Mirkwood - were intended in the story as a sign of
evil spreading in the natural world...
There are black squirrels in Canada.
There are black squirrels in Brampton, near Huntingdon, UK.

God only knows how they got here.
--
Andy Cooke
Christopher Kreuzer
2004-06-26 14:17:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andy Cooke
Post by Jette Goldie
Post by Igenlode Wordsmith
Actually, I was wondering if the black swans - like the crebain and
the 'black squirrels' in Mirkwood - were intended in the story as a
sign of evil spreading in the natural world...
There are black squirrels in Canada.
There are black squirrels in Brampton, near Huntingdon, UK.
Someone else said there are black squirrels in Michigan.

OMG! The black squirrels are taking over the world!
Neil Anderson
2004-06-26 16:40:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
Post by Andy Cooke
Post by Jette Goldie
Post by Igenlode Wordsmith
Actually, I was wondering if the black swans - like the crebain and
the 'black squirrels' in Mirkwood - were intended in the story as a
sign of evil spreading in the natural world...
There are black squirrels in Canada.
There are black squirrels in Brampton, near Huntingdon, UK.
Someone else said there are black squirrels in Michigan.
OMG! The black squirrels are taking over the world!
They're cute, they're black-furred and they're eating all our nuts.

Holy moly, they are a triple threat!!

Neil Anderson
Henriette
2004-06-26 16:20:39 UTC
Permalink
***@privacy.net (Jamie Andrews; real address @ bottom of message) wrote in message news:<***@uni-berlin.de>...
[black swans]
(snip)says that they were introduced to South Africa in 1926. That
was too late for Tolkien to have seen them as a child, but they
may have been introduced into Europe around the same time. JRRT
may have heard about them being in Sweden, or may have seen them
himself in a park somewhere.
Synchronicity arranged for me to see two black swans in a pond in The
Hague last week. Maybe synchronicity also arranged for this pond to be
near the International Court of Justice....

Henriette
Christopher Kreuzer
2004-06-15 00:15:43 UTC
Permalink
Archie <no-longer-on-the-map-***@mail.ru> wrote:

<great summary and discussion>

Very interesting way of approaching this chapter!
Post by Archie
1.Tolkien goes boating
2.First impression from the regatta
LOL!

<btw, you missed out some chapters from the contents...>

<snip>
Post by Archie
It is my duty and pleasure to discuss chapter 9, "The
Great River", but before plunging into the waters of
Anduin I'd like to express my sincere gratitude to
Christopher Tolkien for publishing the UT and the volumes
of HoME, and to all AFT/RABT posters who would wait just
a moment before throwing Molotoff cocktails onto this
review/introduction.
Nice! No Molotov cocktails from me, just complete agreement with your
fulsome praise of Christopher Tolkien.

[on the drafts]
Post by Archie
It is remarkable to see at a glance how much of
the first draft survived in terms of syntactic structure
and wording; it is no less interesting to witness the
writer at work, changing words, swapping them, adding
little adverbs and compressing ideas and shades of ideas
into separate clauses.
Hmm. This could inspire me to read the LotR HoME volumes.
Some people have said they are boring.
Your description is intriguing though.
Post by Archie
3.Synopsis
<snip>
Post by Archie
Sam remarks that a whole month has passed since their
coming to Lorien (see section 5.On time in the Elf-land
of Lorien). Frodo is foolish enough to try to show off
his knowledge of wise matters by revealing the whereabouts
of one of the Elven Rings. Aragorn reprimands him.
Is Frodo really showing off? Surely he is caught up in the magic of
Legolas's comments about time. And who can blame him!

<snip>
Post by Archie
The next day they find themselves
speeding down a ravine with rocky walls until they descry
at a distance the mighty Pillars of Argonath. Everybody
is awed; everybody is frightened by the gigantic figures of the
Kings guarding the Gate - but Aragorn.
I would say some are awed, some frightened. Not all frightened. Boromir
bows his head, but I wouldn't say he is frightened. And Sam's fright
seems to be more to do with the fast flowing water and dark cliffs.
Post by Archie
He is
coming back to his kingdom from exile (see section
7.Trotter becomes Aragorn). Yet he is torn between duty
of helping Frodo and desire to come to Minas Tirith.
I strongly suspect that this section of the text inspired the Jackson
film-Aragorn. Specifically the "exile" comment. Pity they mangled their
interpretation of what exile means in this context.
Post by Archie
The Fellowship stands now on the
crossroads and the hour of decision is nigh.
Indeed!
Post by Archie
4.On the landscape: from the Gladden to the Emyn Muil
<snip>
Post by Archie
2. What is the origin of the Brown Lands (they are more
like volcanic badlands - but time heals even those)? Why
is Sauron's malice there so enduring after 3000+ years?
They were the gardens of the Entwives. War had passed over it in the
time of the war between Sauron and the Men of the Sea (as said in the
'Treebeard' chapter). 3000 years is bit too long, I agree, but volcanic
destruction can endure for a long time.
Post by Archie
3. Aragorn has little to say about the history of Rohan
on the way down to the Emyn Muil. I hypothesize it is a
remnant from the times there was not much known about
Rohan in Tolkien's imagination. Please tell me this is
not true - for any story-internal reasons.
He wanted to write about Rohan later?
Post by Archie
5.On time in the Elf-land of Lorien
/* Of course, we know from trad.folk tales, Lord
Dunsany's 'KoE's D.' and JRRT's own 'On Fairy Stories'
that the Elves' time differs from our own.*/
But see my comments below.
Post by Archie
-
Legolas stirred in his boat. "Nay, time does not tarry
ever," he said; "but change and growth is not in all
things and places alike. For the Elves the world moves,
and it moves both very swift and very slow. Swift,
because they themselves change little, and all else ?eets
by: it is a grief to them. Slow, because they do not
count the running years, not for themselves. The passing
seasons are but ripples ever repeated in the long long
stream. Yet beneath the Sun all things must wear to an
end at last."
-
There was no way I was going to snip that! :-)
Post by Archie
Legolas' remark is one of the most philosophical in the
whole LotR (rivalled only by his conversation with Gimli
in Minas Tirith about the deeds of men.) In other
versions his words are partly taken by Frodo.
But you have to balance this view, which leads many people to believe
that time actually flowed differently in Lorien, with Aragorn's
response:

"...in that land you lost your count. There time flowed swiftly by us,
as for the Elves."

In other words, the same amount of time was experienced, but the
subjective rate of passage of time was different.

<snip>
Post by Archie
7.Trotter becomes Aragorn
<snip>
Post by Archie
"Fear not!" he said. "Long have I desired to look upon
the likenesses of Isildur and Anárion, my sires of old.
Under their shadow Elessar, the Elfstone son of Arathorn
of the House of Valandil Isildur's son heir of Elendil,
has nought to dread!"
Tolkien starts writing the passage with Trotter and, one
emendation after another, Trotter's background changes
profoundly: from Elfstone son of Elfhelm he becomes
Eldamir son of Eldakar son of Valandil, then turning into
Aragorn son of Arathorn and accepting the kingly name of
Elessar (the Elfstone). Thus Aragorn's genealogy deepens,
now going back for several thousand years.
There was a recent discussion here about Aragorn's titles, and how they
change throughout the book. I think these two links are the most
relevant:

http://www.google.com/groups?selm=3b26e128.0406012202.7d0849de%40posting.google.com&output=gplain

http://www.google.com/groups?selm=aVqvc.2484%24ng.26376366%40news-text.cableinet.net&output=gplain

<snip>
Post by Archie
9.Eagles vs. hideous flying beasts
1. IIRC Legolas sees an eagle on January 24. What is that
eagle doing there?
I always thought it was sent out by Gandalf to gather news.
Post by Archie
10.The Gate of Argonath
1. Stonework endures for 3 millennia despite water and
wind erosion. Is it plausible?
The Egyptian pyramids have lasted over 4000 years. The Sphinx was doing
OK too, until Napoleon's army started taking pot-shots at it...
Post by Archie
3. Why does the Wilderland end there?
Because it was the ancient border of Gondor? Everything south of that
point was tributary to Gondor. Everything north was, well, Wilderland!
Remember Elrond's admonishment to Boromir in Rivendell about not blowing
his horn again until stood "once more upon the borders of [his] land and
dire need is upon [him]."
Post by Archie
11.Miscellaneous remarks
1. ":new Moon as thin as a nail-paring" - Samwise is
downright poetic, isn't he?
That is one thing that has been a constant refrain in these CotW
discussions. "Ooh. Look. Sam is very insightful/poetic/thoughtful." ;-)
Post by Archie
5. Gollum re-appears. How does he know that he should
be waiting at the Gore and not at other borders of
Lorien? Is it 'chance as you call it in M-E' or smth.
else?
Maybe the lure of the Ring helped?

Christopher
--
---
Reply clue: Saruman welcomes you to Spamgard
Henriette
2004-06-17 12:04:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
Very interesting way of approaching this chapter!
Yes, very original, and nice I didn't have to scroll.
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
Post by Archie
1.Tolkien goes boating
2.First impression from the regatta
LOL!
Yes, that *is* funny, the regatta!
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
Post by Archie
Frodo is foolish enough to try to show off
his knowledge of wise matters by revealing the whereabouts
of one of the Elven Rings. Aragorn reprimands him.
Is Frodo really showing off? Surely he is caught up in the magic of
Legolas's comments about time. And who can blame him!
No, IMO is he not at all showing off, but carried away by the
conversation and not thinking of the fact that he has to be on guard
even amongst friends.
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
Post by Archie
1. Stonework endures for 3 millennia despite water and
wind erosion. Is it plausible?
The Egyptian pyramids have lasted over 4000 years. The Sphinx was doing
OK too, until Napoleon's army started taking pot-shots at it...
I see many people (Joe, Odysseus, John)in this thread mention very old
stone buildings which survived the millenia, and I would also answer
that it *is* plausible.

Henriette
Archie
2004-06-18 00:35:32 UTC
Permalink
[...]
Post by Henriette
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
Post by Archie
Frodo is foolish enough to try to show off
his knowledge of wise matters by revealing the whereabouts
of one of the Elven Rings. Aragorn reprimands him.
Is Frodo really showing off? Surely he is caught up in the magic of
Legolas's comments about time. And who can blame him!
No, IMO is he not at all showing off, but carried away by the
conversation and not thinking of the fact that he has to be on guard
even amongst friends.
Frodo is deemed to be the wisest hobbit in the Shire; he saw Sam
eavesdrop, he knows that Gollum is nearby, yet he doesn't pay attention
to the simplest precautionary measures.

Archie (too suspicious to trust others and himself)
Henriette
2004-06-18 18:43:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Archie
Post by Henriette
No, IMO is he not at all showing off, but carried away by the
conversation and not thinking of the fact that he has to be on guard
even amongst friends.
Frodo is deemed to be the wisest hobbit in the Shire; he saw Sam
eavesdrop, he knows that Gollum is nearby, yet he doesn't pay attention
to the simplest precautionary measures.
LOL. But is he aware that he is not supposed to talk about the Lady's
Ring? Why is Aragorn not supposed to know, when Galadriel herself
tells about it to Sam?

Henriette
Belba Grubb from Stock
2004-06-15 01:14:36 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 17:49:20 +0400, Archie
Post by Archie
8.Boromir's temptation
It is painted by 3 short sketches: Boromir bites nails
and peers at Frodo's boat; Boromir is too curious about
Frodo's feelings; Boromir suddenly changing his mind when
Frodo follows Aragorn. This is quite enough for Sam to
become suspicious, and more than enough for a reader. Or
is it not? I'd like everyone who remembers his/her first
reading of the FotR to say honestly whether these pieces
aroused any suspicions.
Not so much suspicion as a realization that something was wrong with
Boromir -- it never dawned on me that he was thinking about the Ring
until he confronted Frodo later on. I think this was because the
hints given to us about Boromir's realizing it was the Ring he wanted
in Lorien really weren't clear enough to lay the foundation. It felt
a little artificial. He might have worked Boromir's growing interest
in the Ring a bit more.

Re: time --
Post by Archie
Legolas stirred in his boat. "Nay, time does not tarry
ever," he said; "but change and growth is not in all
things and places alike. For the Elves the world moves,
and it moves both very swift and very slow. Swift,
because they themselves change little, and all else ?eets
by: it is a grief to them. Slow, because they do not
count the running years, not for themselves. The passing
seasons are but ripples ever repeated in the long long
stream. Yet beneath the Sun all things must wear to an
end at last."
I can't help wishing wickedly that Boromir had given one of his stage
whispers at this point: "I thought our time in the Golden Wood would
NEVER end."

And then Aragorn reaches over with his hand and whacks Boromir up side
the head. (g)
Post by Archie
10.The Gate of Argonath
1. Stonework endures for 3 millennia despite water and
wind erosion. Is it plausible?
Depends on the type of stone. There is a lot of geology in this
chapter. At first the terrain the river carries them through appears
to have been once glaciated -- there's a lot of dirt and stony beaches
and gravel shoals. This would explain Rohan's flatness and fertile
soil, too.

Then they get to the Emyn Muil region, which appears to be a
sedimentary rock area -- perhaps all limestone, or perhaps of
intermixed limestone and some other, slightly harder rock. I think
the latter, because some rock like sandstone would work much better
than limestone to create the "sharp rocks" of Sarn Gebir and some of
the other rocks and stony eyots in the river. I have no idea from
this chapter what sort of rocks might make up the "high ridges crowned
with wind-writhen firs," but from later descriptions on either side of
the river, particularly the cracks in them and the relative ease with
which water cuts through them both east and west of the Anduin, those
could be limestone.

The Company hauls the boats up through "grey limestone-boulders" to a
small pool that seems to have been "scooped" out by the action of the
water on a pier of rock that juts out into the river; this would also
likely be limestone, especially since it rises into an impassable
"grey cliff."

Since JRRT describes limestone as grey throughout, and also describes
the Argonath (did anybody think of "Argonauts" when they first read
that name?) as grey, likely those are made of limestone, too. This is
borne out because of the weathering described in just a few milennia,
with their "blurred eyes and crannied brows" and "crumbling helm and
crown." Granite or sandstone wouldn't weather much at all in such a
short period of time, geologically speaking (there were no glaciers
during Gondor's history, of course).

So, yes, plausible indeed. And awesome, that scene of the entire
River Anduin gathered up and rushing through this huge canyon...wow!
Post by Archie
3. Why does the Wilderland end there? (silly, but
interesting)
Just a guess -- because Gondor put the Argonath there?

Barb
Joe
2004-06-15 15:22:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Belba Grubb from Stock
Depends on the type of stone. There is a lot of geology in this
chapter. At first the terrain the river carries them through appears
to have been once glaciated -- there's a lot of dirt and stony beaches
and gravel shoals. This would explain Rohan's flatness and fertile
soil, too.
Then they get to the Emyn Muil region, which appears to be a
sedimentary rock area -- perhaps all limestone, or perhaps of
intermixed limestone and some other, slightly harder rock. I think
the latter, because some rock like sandstone would work much better
than limestone to create the "sharp rocks" of Sarn Gebir and some of
the other rocks and stony eyots in the river. I have no idea from
this chapter what sort of rocks might make up the "high ridges crowned
with wind-writhen firs," but from later descriptions on either side of
the river, particularly the cracks in them and the relative ease with
which water cuts through them both east and west of the Anduin, those
could be limestone.
The Company hauls the boats up through "grey limestone-boulders" to a
small pool that seems to have been "scooped" out by the action of the
water on a pier of rock that juts out into the river; this would also
likely be limestone, especially since it rises into an impassable
"grey cliff."
Since JRRT describes limestone as grey throughout, and also describes
the Argonath (did anybody think of "Argonauts" when they first read
that name?) as grey, likely those are made of limestone, too. This is
borne out because of the weathering described in just a few milennia,
with their "blurred eyes and crannied brows" and "crumbling helm and
crown." Granite or sandstone wouldn't weather much at all in such a
short period of time, geologically speaking (there were no glaciers
during Gondor's history, of course).
So, yes, plausible indeed. And awesome, that scene of the entire
River Anduin gathered up and rushing through this huge canyon...wow!
Post by Archie
3. Why does the Wilderland end there? (silly, but
interesting)
Just a guess -- because Gondor put the Argonath there?
Barb
Good response, and to that may I add, at least one bridge across the Tiber
in Rome is still intact and in use after around 2000 years.

I have seen other Roman stonework, notably Pont du Garde in France,
aqueduct, mortarless, three tiers of arches spanning a gorge, and the
structure is still very strong. The Garde River ocassionally flash floods,
notably this spring wiping out many herds of cattle but the Pont stood firm.

Of course, Aragonath could have steel piles driven deep into the underlying
gravels and rock. Nûmenoreans were outstanding civil engineers.
Belba Grubb from Stock
2004-06-19 00:24:16 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 15:22:36 GMT, "Joe"
Post by Joe
I have seen other Roman stonework, notably Pont du Garde in France,
aqueduct, mortarless, three tiers of arches spanning a gorge, and the
structure is still very strong. The Garde River ocassionally flash floods,
notably this spring wiping out many herds of cattle but the Pont stood firm.
I'd have to get a geologic map of the area to get an idea of what sort
of rock was used in the aquaduct, but while googling I found the
following description, worth including here because it describes the
condition of that rock in 1763:

About five in the afternoon, I had the first glimpse of the
famous Pont du Garde, which stands on the right hand, about
the distance of a league from the post-road to Nismes, and
about three leagues from that city. I would not willingly pass
for a false enthusiast in taste; but I cannot help observing,
that from the first distant view of this noble monument, till
we came near enough to see it perfectly, I felt the strongest
emotions of impatience that I had ever known; and obliged our
driver to put his mules to the full gallop, in the
apprehension that it would be dark before we reached the
place. I expected to find the building, in some measure,
ruinous; but was agreeably disappointed, to see it look as
fresh as the bridge at Westminster. The climate is either so
pure and dry, or the free-stone, with which it is built, so
hard, that the very angles of them remain as acute as if they
had been cut last year. Indeed, some large stones have dropped
out of the arches; but the whole is admirably preserved, and
presents the eye with a piece of architecture, so unaffectedly
elegant, so simple, and majestic, that I will defy the most
phlegmatic and stupid spectator to behold it without
admiration.
-------- Tobias Smollett, from "Travels...", Letter X

http://www.worldwideschool.org/library/books/geo/travel/TravelsThroughFranceandItaly/chap16.html
Post by Joe
Of course, Aragonath could have steel piles driven deep into the underlying
gravels and rock. Nûmenoreans were outstanding civil engineers.
I had imagined the two figures carved out of the living rock and so
without need of base support, but that is certainly another option and
the Numenoreans (who fashioned, among other things, Isengard) were
quite capable of it as you point out.

I have seen a disused Roman lighthouse near Dover Castle, and of
course, there is the Tower of Hercules, built by the Emperor Trajan at
what is now La Coruña in Spain, and renovated a bit in the 19th
Century, but still in operation as the oldest working lighthouse in
the world (picture at
http://onlae.terra.es/loteria/sorviajeros/2003/SORTEO_04/Torredehercules.htm
but caption is in Spanish).

The Dover lighthouse looked a bit rugged, but was by no means in
ruins; its stones were in good shape (that is a limestone area, too --
white cliffs of Dover and all that -- so maybe it's a good comparison
to the rocks in this chapter of the book). I think the difference
between it and the Tower of Hercules is human use. And this ties in
with the impression of the Argonath -- they are blurry and a bit
crumbling around the edges because Gondor has shrunken and for many
years no king has sat on the throne.

Barb
Dirk Thierbach
2004-06-20 08:44:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Belba Grubb from Stock
On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 15:22:36 GMT, "Joe"
Post by Joe
I have seen other Roman stonework, notably Pont du Garde in France,
aqueduct, mortarless, three tiers of arches spanning a gorge, and the
structure is still very strong. The Garde River ocassionally flash floods,
notably this spring wiping out many herds of cattle but the Pont stood firm.
I'd have to get a geologic map of the area to get an idea of what sort
of rock was used in the aquaduct,
Maybe Google Images can dig up a picture of it that is close enough
to give you some hints.
Post by Belba Grubb from Stock
but while googling I found the following description, worth
including here because it describes the condition of that rock in
The climate is either so pure and dry, or the free-stone, with
which it is built, so hard, that the very angles of them remain as
acute as if they had been cut last year. Indeed, some large stones
have dropped out of the arches; but the whole is admirably
preserved, and presents the eye with a piece of architecture, so
unaffectedly elegant, so simple, and majestic, that I will defy
the most phlegmatic and stupid spectator to behold it without
admiration.
It still looks very much like this, and you can actually walk from one
end of the bridge to the other end.

- Dirk
Belba Grubb from Stock
2004-06-23 21:42:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dirk Thierbach
Post by Belba Grubb from Stock
On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 15:22:36 GMT, "Joe"
Post by Joe
I have seen other Roman stonework, notably Pont du Garde in France,
aqueduct, mortarless, three tiers of arches spanning a gorge, and the
structure is still very strong. The Garde River ocassionally flash floods,
notably this spring wiping out many herds of cattle but the Pont stood firm.
I'd have to get a geologic map of the area to get an idea of what sort
of rock was used in the aquaduct,
Maybe Google Images can dig up a picture of it that is close enough
to give you some hints.
Oh, those sorts of pictures don't really help -- you'd need to have
really close-up views of small parts of the rocks, which are unlikely
to be found in general tourism pictures, or to have to look at the
rock itself, test its hardness if you can (questionable for such a
beautiful and historic landmark), examine its crystalline structure or
lack therefore, check out any inclusions, fossils, foreign bodies,
etc., in it, and so forth. Next time you're there, want to break off
a chunk and mail it here? No, please don't!!!! Just kidding.

Given that it's near a river, and also perhaps on land that has been
glaciated one or several times, even the geologic map might not be too
helpful.

But I'm sure it's very beautiful, and it's intriguing that a
description of it in 1763 is still precise today. Wonderful.

Barb
Emma Pease
2004-06-16 02:11:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Belba Grubb from Stock
On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 17:49:20 +0400, Archie
Post by Archie
8.Boromir's temptation
It is painted by 3 short sketches: Boromir bites nails
and peers at Frodo's boat; Boromir is too curious about
Frodo's feelings; Boromir suddenly changing his mind when
Frodo follows Aragorn. This is quite enough for Sam to
become suspicious, and more than enough for a reader. Or
is it not? I'd like everyone who remembers his/her first
reading of the FotR to say honestly whether these pieces
aroused any suspicions.
Not so much suspicion as a realization that something was wrong with
Boromir -- it never dawned on me that he was thinking about the Ring
until he confronted Frodo later on. I think this was because the
hints given to us about Boromir's realizing it was the Ring he wanted
in Lorien really weren't clear enough to lay the foundation. It felt
a little artificial. He might have worked Boromir's growing interest
in the Ring a bit more.
Any thoughts on Boromir's mindset? Is Sam's judgment of Boromir
correct?

The ring plays on Boromir's desire to save Gondor and even more on his
desire to be the hero but I think Boromir for the most part is
resisting because he is an honorable man. The ring then plays on the
foolhardiness of sending the ring off into Sauron's lands.

I also think that Boromir is very alone in the group and this made him
more vulnerable. The hobbits have each other, Legolas and Gimli
become friends and can depend on each other, Aragorn and Boromir are
the two loners. If Gandalf were still around and leader, Boromir
might have been able to talk to Aragorn since they would have been
more equal within the group and both were intending initially to split
from the party and go to Minas Tirith. But with Gandalf gone, Aragorn
is the leader and less approachable and his duty is now different.
Aragorn is also alone but he had more experience, more knowledge about
the risks of the ring, and more strength.

Boromir is slowly sliding down a steep slope in this chapter but he
does not fall completely until Parth Galen when talking to Frodo.

Emma
--
\----
|\* | Emma Pease Net Spinster
|_\/ Die Luft der Freiheit weht
Belba Grubb from Stock
2004-06-16 14:19:18 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 02:11:26 +0000 (UTC), Emma Pease
Post by Emma Pease
Post by Belba Grubb from Stock
On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 17:49:20 +0400, Archie
Post by Archie
8.Boromir's temptation
It is painted by 3 short sketches: Boromir bites nails
and peers at Frodo's boat; Boromir is too curious about
Frodo's feelings; Boromir suddenly changing his mind when
Frodo follows Aragorn. This is quite enough for Sam to
become suspicious, and more than enough for a reader. Or
is it not? I'd like everyone who remembers his/her first
reading of the FotR to say honestly whether these pieces
aroused any suspicions.
Not so much suspicion as a realization that something was wrong with
Boromir -- it never dawned on me that he was thinking about the Ring
until he confronted Frodo later on. I think this was because the
hints given to us about Boromir's realizing it was the Ring he wanted
in Lorien really weren't clear enough to lay the foundation. It felt
a little artificial. He might have worked Boromir's growing interest
in the Ring a bit more.
Any thoughts on Boromir's mindset? Is Sam's judgment of Boromir
correct?
The ring plays on Boromir's desire to save Gondor and even more on his
desire to be the hero but I think Boromir for the most part is
resisting because he is an honorable man. The ring then plays on the
foolhardiness of sending the ring off into Sauron's lands.
I also think that Boromir is very alone in the group and this made him
more vulnerable. The hobbits have each other, Legolas and Gimli
become friends and can depend on each other, Aragorn and Boromir are
the two loners. If Gandalf were still around and leader, Boromir
might have been able to talk to Aragorn since they would have been
more equal within the group and both were intending initially to split
from the party and go to Minas Tirith. But with Gandalf gone, Aragorn
is the leader and less approachable and his duty is now different.
Aragorn is also alone but he had more experience, more knowledge about
the risks of the ring, and more strength.
Boromir is slowly sliding down a steep slope in this chapter but he
does not fall completely until Parth Galen when talking to Frodo.
Emma
Yes, I think you've got it. Not only is he alone: I recall something
someone said during the "Council of Elrond" discussions, that Boromir
handled himself very well there considering that he was confronted for
the first time with beings -- Elves, halflings and dwarves, not to
mention the legendary Elrond Halfelven, and especially the Heir of
Isildur -- that were outside the usual scope of life in Gondor and in
spite of all this had to speak for Gondor and also make decisions that
would be in Gondor's best interest. He really did the best he could,
and maybe his resistance in this chapter is rewarded later on by his
repentance and confession to Aragorn. What a strong character Boromir
really is.

Barb
Henriette
2004-06-17 11:53:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Belba Grubb from Stock
On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 02:11:26 +0000 (UTC), Emma Pease
Post by Emma Pease
The ring plays on Boromir's desire to save Gondor and even more on his
desire to be the hero but I think Boromir for the most part is
resisting because he is an honorable man. The ring then plays on the
foolhardiness of sending the ring off into Sauron's lands.
I also think that Boromir is very alone in the group and this made him
more vulnerable. (snip)
Yes, I think you've got it. Not only is he alone: I recall something
someone said during the "Council of Elrond" discussions, that Boromir
handled himself very well there considering that he was confronted for
the first time with beings (snip) He really did the best he could,
and maybe his resistance in this chapter is rewarded later on by his
repentance and confession to Aragorn. What a strong character Boromir
really is.
LOL. Considering I also stood up for Boromir recently, I can only
conclude that he must be a popular character with the ladies. Thinking
of Jette I can only add: both in the book and in the film:-)

Henriette
Belba Grubb from Stock
2004-06-23 21:43:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Henriette
Post by Belba Grubb from Stock
On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 02:11:26 +0000 (UTC), Emma Pease
Post by Emma Pease
The ring plays on Boromir's desire to save Gondor and even more on his
desire to be the hero but I think Boromir for the most part is
resisting because he is an honorable man. The ring then plays on the
foolhardiness of sending the ring off into Sauron's lands.
I also think that Boromir is very alone in the group and this made him
more vulnerable. (snip)
Yes, I think you've got it. Not only is he alone: I recall something
someone said during the "Council of Elrond" discussions, that Boromir
handled himself very well there considering that he was confronted for
the first time with beings (snip) He really did the best he could,
and maybe his resistance in this chapter is rewarded later on by his
repentance and confession to Aragorn. What a strong character Boromir
really is.
LOL. Considering I also stood up for Boromir recently, I can only
conclude that he must be a popular character with the ladies. Thinking
of Jette I can only add: both in the book and in the film:-)
They made a film?

;^)
Igenlode Wordsmith
2004-06-22 23:07:38 UTC
Permalink
On 16 Jun 2004 Emma Pease wrote:

[snip]
Post by Emma Pease
Boromir is slowly sliding down a steep slope in this chapter but he
does not fall completely until Parth Galen when talking to Frodo.
He really is being jolly obnoxious by this point - the main reason why
I remember him as a surly boor, I think. He comes across like a sulking
child, grumbling about the rapids: "This is madness", their craft:
"abandon these cockle-boats" and his fellows' ingratitude: "if my help
has not earned the reward of any companionship". He virtually calls
Aragorn a liar over the portage-way: "Seldom in my life has any boat
come out of the North", grumbles about carrying the boats, and jibes at
Aragorn and Gimli afterwards: "even if Aragorn had a fancy to pass the
Gates of the Argonath by night" (an allusion to Aragorn's
miscalculation of the night before) "we are all too tired - except, no
doubt, our sturdy dwarf." He seems to spend the entirety of the chapter
carping about one thing or another, without a single positive reaction.
--
Igenlode <***@nym.alias.net> Bookwraith unabashed

** Sometimes change is improvement. Sometimes it is only change. **
AC
2004-06-15 15:06:20 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 17:49:20 +0400,
Archie <no-longer-on-the-map-***@mail.ru> wrote:

<snip>

Very interesting form of presentation.
Post by Archie
10.The Gate of Argonath
1. Stonework endures for 3 millennia despite water and
wind erosion. Is it plausible?
I doubt it's possible in the real world for the features to be so well
preserved, but sure, I think it's possible. We're also talking about people
who fashioned Orthanc so that the most even a pack of angry ents could do
was chip it.
Post by Archie
2. Mt.Rushmore, the Pillars of Argonath and the Sphynx
- who borrowed from whom :-)? As an addition: there are
gigantic statues of Stalin (torn down) and Lenin (still
standing) near Moscow, where >65 years ago a Moskva-Volga
channel was built by prisoners.
Kings building grand monuments is hardly new. The Numenoreans are pretty
heavily modelled on the Egyptians, and we know their love of grand monuments
to rulers.
Post by Archie
3. Why does the Wilderland end there? (silly, but
interesting)
I kinda thought that it might be the northern border of Gondor.
--
Aaron Clausen
***@hotmail.com
Archie
2004-06-15 22:50:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Belba Grubb from Stock
On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 17:49:20 +0400,
[...]
Post by Belba Grubb from Stock
Post by Archie
10.The Gate of Argonath
1. Stonework endures for 3 millennia despite water and
wind erosion. Is it plausible?
I doubt it's possible in the real world for the features to be so well
preserved, but sure, I think it's possible. We're also talking about people
who fashioned Orthanc so that the most even a pack of angry ents could do
was chip it.
Is it the same magic of preservation, staving off decay that
characterised the Three Rings? First, Orthanc surely looks magical.
Second, the Pillars of Argonath are standing in a swift stream and are
subjected to humid air, roaring winds (in a 'wind tunnel'!!), temperature
variations of unknown magnitude and even snow (cf. Aragorn's words to
Frodo). Their RL counterpart (the Sphynx) lives in a desert with stable
weather. Do we have enough trust in Numenorean engineering to attribute
to it the preservation of the Gate in adverse conditions? The extent of
the 'unexplained' and 'implausible' may vary, but I reckon it to be quite
large, warranting resort to 'magic'.
Post by Belba Grubb from Stock
Post by Archie
2. Mt.Rushmore, the Pillars of Argonath and the Sphynx
- who borrowed from whom :-)? As an addition: there are
gigantic statues of Stalin (torn down) and Lenin (still
standing) near Moscow, where >65 years ago a Moskva-Volga
channel was built by prisoners.
Kings building grand monuments is hardly new. The Numenoreans are pretty
heavily modelled on the Egyptians, and we know their love of grand monuments
to rulers.
Did Numenoreans use free labour to build all this??! In a subsistence
economy this trick won't do, and in any other economy you need huge
supplies of surplus food/money/materials to undertake such projects. Even
assuming that Gondor had all this plus machines and skillful engineers,
I'd bet construction workers' union would be pushing the limit... A
possible explanation is the desire of the people of Gondor (and not
only its kings) to commemorate the dearly bought victory.
Post by Belba Grubb from Stock
Post by Archie
3. Why does the Wilderland end there? (silly, but
interesting)
I kinda thought that it might be the northern border of Gondor.
:-) How do we know what the 'natural' border of an exilic Kingdom is? I
agree that Anduin and the Emyn Muil are the best candidates in a
strategic sense, but we don't know the exact borders of the princedoms of
Rhovanion.

Archie
AC
2004-06-15 22:51:57 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 02:50:22 +0400,
Post by Archie
Did Numenoreans use free labour to build all this??! In a subsistence
economy this trick won't do, and in any other economy you need huge
supplies of surplus food/money/materials to undertake such projects. Even
assuming that Gondor had all this plus machines and skillful engineers,
I'd bet construction workers' union would be pushing the limit... A
possible explanation is the desire of the people of Gondor (and not
only its kings) to commemorate the dearly bought victory.
I can't comment on forced labor in Russia during the Soviet Era, but I can
tell you that the notion that the pyramids were built with slave labor is a
Hollywoodism, and not based upon the historical evidence. The pyramids were
not built by slaves. I'm sure that the Numenoreans were much the same at
the height of their power.
--
Aaron Clausen
***@hotmail.com
Archie
2004-06-18 00:23:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by AC
On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 02:50:22 +0400,
Post by Archie
Did Numenoreans use free labour to build all this??! In a subsistence
economy this trick won't do, and in any other economy you need huge
supplies of surplus food/money/materials to undertake such projects. Even
assuming that Gondor had all this plus machines and skillful engineers,
I'd bet construction workers' union would be pushing the limit... A
possible explanation is the desire of the people of Gondor (and not
only its kings) to commemorate the dearly bought victory.
...I can tell you that the notion that the pyramids were built with
slave labor is a Hollywoodism, and not based upon the historical
evidence. The pyramids were not built by slaves. I'm sure that the
Numenoreans were much the same at the height of their power.
Aaron, I haven't seen any Hollyvoid movies on ancient Egypt, but my
(Soviet-era) textbooks on ancient history cite Egypt as a classical
example of a society where slavery was _the_ norm (everybody was a slave to
the pharoah but to a different extent). I'd be grateful to learn
counterarguments and/or any new ideas on the construction of pyramids.

Archie
the softrat
2004-06-18 02:27:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Archie
Aaron, I haven't seen any Hollyvoid movies on ancient Egypt, but my
(Soviet-era) textbooks on ancient history cite Egypt as a classical
example of a society where slavery was _the_ norm (everybody was a slave to
the pharoah but to a different extent). I'd be grateful to learn
counterarguments and/or any new ideas on the construction of pyramids.
Well, kinda, yeah, just like everyone in the CCCP was a slave to the
CP. However the Ancient Egyptians had special classes of 'owned'
people. It is to these persons that we refer when we say 'slave'. The
builders of the pyramids apparently were ordinary Egyptian farmers,
working for money and glory in their off-time. Of course, they were
kinda 'drafted' for the service, but governments have been doing
*that* as long as there have been governments (if not longer! "It is
for the Good of the People!").



the softrat
"Honi soit qui mal y pense."
mailto:***@pobox.com
--
Half the people you know are below average. -- Steven Wright
Jette Goldie
2004-06-18 21:33:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by the softrat
Post by Archie
Aaron, I haven't seen any Hollyvoid movies on ancient Egypt, but my
(Soviet-era) textbooks on ancient history cite Egypt as a classical
example of a society where slavery was _the_ norm (everybody was a slave to
the pharoah but to a different extent). I'd be grateful to learn
counterarguments and/or any new ideas on the construction of pyramids.
Well, kinda, yeah, just like everyone in the CCCP was a slave to the
CP. However the Ancient Egyptians had special classes of 'owned'
people. It is to these persons that we refer when we say 'slave'. The
builders of the pyramids apparently were ordinary Egyptian farmers,
working for money and glory in their off-time. Of course, they were
kinda 'drafted' for the service, but governments have been doing
*that* as long as there have been governments (if not longer! "It is
for the Good of the People!").
Beg pardon, but some of the work done on the pyramids
required very specialised skills - the modern thinking is
that the workforce were neither slaves, nor farmers
temporarily drafted (though temporary workers may
have swelled the workforce from time to time) but
a kind "civil servant" class, handing down from generation
to generation.
--
Jette
"Work for Peace and remain Fiercely Loving" - Jim Byrnes
***@blueyonder.co.uk
http://www.jette.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
the softrat
2004-06-18 22:20:20 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 21:33:16 GMT, "Jette Goldie"
Post by Jette Goldie
Beg pardon, but some of the work done on the pyramids
required very specialised skills - the modern thinking is
that the workforce were neither slaves, nor farmers
temporarily drafted (though temporary workers may
have swelled the workforce from time to time) but
a kind "civil servant" class, handing down from generation
to generation.
Hokay! I grant you what you begged for!

Just NOT slaves!

the softrat
"Honi soit qui mal y pense."
mailto:***@pobox.com
--
"I don't want to tell you any half-truths unless they are
completely accurate." -- Dennis Rappaport, boxing manager
Odysseus
2004-06-17 02:05:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Archie
Post by Belba Grubb from Stock
On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 17:49:20 +0400,
[...]
Post by Belba Grubb from Stock
Post by Archie
10.The Gate of Argonath
1. Stonework endures for 3 millennia despite water and
wind erosion. Is it plausible?
Sure. I could add little to Belba's discussion upthread.
Post by Archie
Post by Belba Grubb from Stock
I doubt it's possible in the real world for the features to be so well
preserved, but sure, I think it's possible. We're also talking about people
who fashioned Orthanc so that the most even a pack of angry ents could do
was chip it.
Is it the same magic of preservation, staving off decay that
characterised the Three Rings? First, Orthanc surely looks magical.
Second, the Pillars of Argonath are standing in a swift stream and are
subjected to humid air, roaring winds (in a 'wind tunnel'!!), temperature
variations of unknown magnitude and even snow (cf. Aragorn's words to
Frodo). Their RL counterpart (the Sphynx) lives in a desert with stable
weather. Do we have enough trust in Numenorean engineering to attribute
to it the preservation of the Gate in adverse conditions? The extent of
the 'unexplained' and 'implausible' may vary, but I reckon it to be quite
large, warranting resort to 'magic'.
Three thousand years isn't all that long in the lifespan of massive
stonework -- as long as no-one dismantles it to recycle the
materials. Aren't the giant statues from Abu Simbel (that were
relocated during the construction of the Aswan Dam) about that old? I
imagine the footings of the Pillars could have been protected from
the currents by "rip rap", after the fashion of modern bridge piers
and breakwaters. I'm not sure what you mean by "stable weather" in
the Sphynx's environment (note that it's likely some *five* thousand
years old), but I would think the abrasive effect of desert
sandstorms to make up for a slow rate of erosion by water, at least
to some extent.
--
Odysseus
John Jones
2004-06-14 19:32:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Archie
6.On bows
a) Aragorn tells the hobbits that the orc-bows will
easily shoot across the river. How are orc-bows different
from Mannish ones (made from yew, presumably)? Are they
better or worse?
Orcs - ordinary ones, anyway - are smaller than Men so they would be unable
to use a self-wood bow, which needs to be very long to gain any efficiency.
They would probably (IMO) use Asian composite bows, which were designed for
use by short horsemen. These bows had a useful long range.
Post by Archie
b) Tolkien rejected the idea of Legolas shooting from the
boat. Maybe he realised the inherent difficulties of
marksmanship in the dark from a rocking platform.
If (as I suggested a few days ago) Logolas has a heavy war-bow (givern to
him by Galadriel), he would definately have to brace his feet against the
ground! It takes a considerable effort to draw this sort of bow (which is
where the expression 'Put your back into it' comes from).
Post by Archie
2. Tactics of air support in Sauron's army aren't
perfect. Why is the Nazgul that reckless to fly in range
of elven bows? After all, he has already experienced the
level of defences around the Bearer at the Ford across
the Bruinen.
But no-one shot at them at that time. It is in fact very difficult to hit a
moving target with an arrow (I've tried) and it must be very much more so to
hit a flying target!
Post by Archie
10.The Gate of Argonath
1. Stonework endures for 3 millennia despite water and
wind erosion. Is it plausible?
Certainly. There are plenty of them around.
Post by Archie
4. Gimli doesn't boast before Boromir as it may seem
upon the first reading; the Dwarf sounds insulted when
Boromir puts him into the same group with the hobbits and
doubts his strength. Is my impression correct? Boromir,
OTOH, is poking fun at "our sturdy dwarf" - in other
circumstances such jokes could lead to a severe rift in
the Fellowship.
They were all exhausted, so it is not surprising that some of them were a
bit snappish.
Archie
2004-06-18 00:15:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Jones
Post by Archie
6.On bows
a) Aragorn tells the hobbits that the orc-bows will
easily shoot across the river. How are orc-bows different
from Mannish ones (made from yew, presumably)? Are they
better or worse?
Orcs - ordinary ones, anyway - are smaller than Men so they would be unable
to use a self-wood bow, which needs to be very long to gain any efficiency.
They would probably (IMO) use Asian composite bows, which were designed for
use by short horsemen. These bows had a useful long range.
I had this idea in the back of my mind, but presumably different races of
Orcs used different bows (according to their stature and strength?).

I wouldn't be surprised to learn that Tolkien imagined the Uruks using
self-wood bows. It is difficult to tell whether JRRT even _knew_ about
composite bows.

[...]
Post by John Jones
Post by Archie
2. Tactics of air support in Sauron's army aren't
perfect. Why is the Nazgul that reckless to fly in range
of elven bows? After all, he has already experienced the
level of defences around the Bearer at the Ford across
the Bruinen.
But no-one shot at them at that time. It is in fact very difficult to hit a
moving target with an arrow (I've tried) and it must be very much more so to
hit a flying target!
Ummm... What was the Nazgul up to, after all? Did he intend to grab Frodo
and fly away?
Post by John Jones
Post by Archie
10.The Gate of Argonath
1. Stonework endures for 3 millennia despite water and
wind erosion. Is it plausible?
Certainly. There are plenty of them around.
This has been extensively commented upon by other posters as well, and I
have to admit that cited reasons are valid and acceptable. If Gondor opens
a tourist trail through the Argonath, I'll be the first to go there...

Archie
Huan the hound
2004-06-18 09:57:00 UTC
Permalink
Archie posted on 6/18/04 8:15 AM:
[snip]
Post by Archie
Ummm... What was the Nazgul up to, after all? Did he intend to grab Frodo
and fly away?
He was out for a test drive (flight).
--
Therefore he sent a wolf to the bridge. But Huan slew it
silently. Still Sauron sent others one by one; and one by
one Huan took them by the throat and slew them.
John Jones
2004-06-18 19:35:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Archie
Post by John Jones
Orcs - ordinary ones, anyway - are smaller than Men so they would be unable
to use a self-wood bow, which needs to be very long to gain any efficiency.
They would probably (IMO) use Asian composite bows, which were designed for
use by short horsemen. These bows had a useful long range.
I had this idea in the back of my mind, but presumably different races of
Orcs used different bows (according to their stature and strength?).
I wouldn't be surprised to learn that Tolkien imagined the Uruks using
self-wood bows. It is difficult to tell whether JRRT even _knew_ about
composite bows.
He probably did - you remeber the little orc which was tracking Frodo and
Sam in the Morgai? He had a 'bow of horn' ... composite bows were made of
horn and sinew on a wooden former.
Post by Archie
[...]
Post by John Jones
Post by Archie
2. Tactics of air support in Sauron's army aren't
perfect. Why is the Nazgul that reckless to fly in range
of elven bows? After all, he has already experienced the
level of defences around the Bearer at the Ford across
the Bruinen.
But no-one shot at them at that time. It is in fact very difficult to hit a
moving target with an arrow (I've tried) and it must be very much more so to
hit a flying target!
Ummm... What was the Nazgul up to, after all? Did he intend to grab Frodo
and fly away?
I take it that you mean the Nazgul at Sarn Gebir here? Wasn't this one
taking Grishnakh to oversee the Isengard orcs on Sauron's behalf? Having
dropped G. off, he than undertook some tactical reconnaissance and so got
too close to Legolas. IMO, of course.
Belba Grubb from Stock
2004-06-23 21:36:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Archie
Ummm... What was the Nazgul up to, after all? Did he intend to grab Frodo
and fly away?
Yes; I think he was drawn by the Ring, even if Sauron didn't know it
was there. He could have wiped out the Fellowship right there, and
gotten the Ring, if Legolas hadn't been a good shot.

Barb
Belba Grubb from Stock
2004-06-19 00:24:59 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 20:32:27 +0100, "John Jones"
Post by John Jones
Post by Archie
6.On bows
a) Aragorn tells the hobbits that the orc-bows will
easily shoot across the river. How are orc-bows different
from Mannish ones (made from yew, presumably)? Are they
better or worse?
Orcs - ordinary ones, anyway - are smaller than Men so they would be unable
to use a self-wood bow, which needs to be very long to gain any efficiency.
They would probably (IMO) use Asian composite bows, which were designed for
use by short horsemen. These bows had a useful long range.
Post by Archie
b) Tolkien rejected the idea of Legolas shooting from the
boat. Maybe he realised the inherent difficulties of
marksmanship in the dark from a rocking platform.
If (as I suggested a few days ago) Logolas has a heavy war-bow (givern to
him by Galadriel), he would definately have to brace his feet against the
ground! It takes a considerable effort to draw this sort of bow (which is
where the expression 'Put your back into it' comes from).
Thanks - I didn't know that! FWIW, JRRT mentions in "On Fairy-stories"
that he always had a strong and unfulfilled desire to shoot well with
a bow, so it is likely he put a lot of thought into this particular
scene. More than that this archery-challenged reader cannot say (g).

Barb
Belba Grubb from Stock
2004-06-19 23:43:09 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 20:32:27 +0100, "John Jones"
Post by John Jones
Post by Archie
2. Tactics of air support in Sauron's army aren't
perfect. Why is the Nazgul that reckless to fly in range
of elven bows? After all, he has already experienced the
level of defences around the Bearer at the Ford across
the Bruinen.
But no-one shot at them at that time. It is in fact very difficult to hit a
moving target with an arrow (I've tried) and it must be very much more so to
hit a flying target!
For anyone who wants to practice on "simple" stationary targets for
free, safely** and in this online medium, there is Bowman:
http://www.xeron.org/cosas/bowman/bowmanf.html

** do NOT shoot the arrow straight up in the air when you practice

Be sure to have your audio on.

Somebody ought to ask them to institute a "Flying Nazgul" choice (g).

Barb
Henriette
2004-06-17 12:27:48 UTC
Permalink
Archie <no-longer-on-the-map-***@mail.ru> wrote in message news:<caka22$1jii$***@gavrilo.mtu.ru>...

Hi Archie, WB! I was wondering if you would return in time for your
chapter treatment, but you were, and what's more, it is impressive
work!
Post by Archie
Due to slightly unforeseen (but generally beneficial)
developments in the local labour market I have been cut
off from the AFT/RABT discussions for 3 long months;
Congratulations, good for you! (bad for us though....)
Post by Archie
Frodo has the symptoms of a Nazgul syndrome;
very nicely put:-)
Post by Archie
Everybody
is awed; everybody is frightened by the gigantic figures of the
Kings guarding the Gate - but Aragorn.
I think Christopher already said they were awed yes, but frightened
no, at least not Boromir. I think so too.
Post by Archie
This passage in the final text is forceful and quite
"Fear not!" said a strange voice behind him. Frodo turned
and saw Strider, and yet not Strider; for the weatherworn
Ranger was no longer there. In the stern sat Aragorn son
of Arathorn, proud and erect, guiding the boat with
skilful strokes; his hood was cast back, and his dark
hair was blowing in the wind, a light was in his eyes: a
king returning from exile to his own land.
"Fear not!" he said. "Long have I desired to look upon
the likenesses of Isildur and Anárion, my sires of old.
Under their shadow Elessar, the Elfstone son of Arathorn
of the House of Valandil Isildur's son heir of Elendil,
has nought to dread!"
There is no way I am going to snip *this* quote, as it is indeed
impressive.
Post by Archie
A question: does Boromir's behaviour influence Aragorn's
decision to double night watches?
No. IMO Aragorn hasn't got a clue.
Post by Archie
2. Boromir bites nails - what is that? Tolkien's deep
psychological insight or an out-of-character remark?
Deep psychological insight indeed. Our heroes, Boromir, and in the
former chapter Galadriel, have despite their power and strength a very
"human" side to them. Why can't a warrior bite nails when under severe
stress?
Post by Archie
4. Gimli doesn't boast before Boromir as it may seem
upon the first reading; the Dwarf sounds insulted when
Boromir puts him into the same group with the hobbits and
doubts his strength. Is my impression correct?
I didn't have that impression. I thought Gimli merely corrected
Boromir, understanding he could not have known. But I project, that he
may have been irritated at the "sturdy dwarf"-remark. I didn't like
it.

Henriette
Archie
2004-06-17 23:46:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Henriette
Hi Archie, WB! I was wondering if you would return in time for your
chapter treatment, but you were, and what's more, it is impressive
work!
... with 3 silly questions it is indeed impressive (a huge F on
critical skills is guaranteed :-)
Post by Henriette
Post by Archie
Everybody
is awed; everybody is frightened by the gigantic figures of the
Kings guarding the Gate - but Aragorn.
I think Christopher already said they were awed yes, but frightened
no, at least not Boromir. I think so too.
Agreed. I'd add that Boromir is biting too deeply into his nails
to be frightened...
[...]
Post by Henriette
Post by Archie
A question: does Boromir's behaviour influence Aragorn's
decision to double night watches?
No. IMO Aragorn hasn't got a clue.
Finally we see a clueless Aragorn (with his suicidal decision to
force the rapids and now his blindness as a leader to the "problems
inside" the Fellowship.

[...]
Post by Henriette
Deep psychological insight indeed. Our heroes, Boromir, and in the
former chapter Galadriel, have despite their power and strength a
very > "human" side to them. Why can't a warrior bite nails when
under severe > stress?
I have never done that; but I'm not a warrior.
Post by Henriette
Post by Archie
4. Gimli doesn't boast before Boromir as it may seem
upon the first reading; the Dwarf sounds insulted when
Boromir puts him into the same group with the hobbits and
doubts his strength. Is my impression correct?
I didn't have that impression. I thought Gimli merely corrected
Boromir, understanding he could not have known. But I project, that
he > may have been irritated at the "sturdy dwarf"-remark. I didn't
like > it.
Boromir is disrupting the air of co-operation. His pride works badly
on the Fellowship.

Archie
Henriette
2004-06-18 18:52:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Archie
Post by Henriette
Hi Archie, WB! I was wondering if you would return in time for your
chapter treatment, but you were, and what's more, it is impressive
work!
... with 3 silly questions it is indeed impressive (a huge F on
critical skills is guaranteed :-)
Don't bash yourself! I love silly questions. They give me a chance to
stand out:-)
Post by Archie
Post by Henriette
I think Christopher already said they were awed yes, but frightened
no, at least not Boromir. I think so too.
Agreed. I'd add that Boromir is biting too deeply into his nails
to be frightened...
I notice you don't like Boromir. Maybe that will still change in the
course of the upcoming chapters..... Are you not sorry for him and his
kinsmen in their desperate fight?
Post by Archie
Post by Henriette
No. IMO Aragorn hasn't got a clue.
Finally we see a clueless Aragorn (with his suicidal decision to
force the rapids and now his blindness as a leader to the "problems
inside" the Fellowship.
He has a hard time. You're a severe judge!

Henriette
Count Menelvagor
2004-06-18 06:20:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Archie
5.On time in the Elf-land of Lorien
HoME lays out three successive timing schemes of the
journey of the Fellowship conceived by Tolkien (there are
<snip time tables>
Post by Archie
In the first two schemes the "outer world" time-span
spent in Lorien is 1 night, in the final one - a full
month. It is obvious that the final scheme is much less
magical. Why?
/* Of course, we know from trad.folk tales, Lord
Dunsany's 'KoE's D.' and JRRT's own 'On Fairy Stories'
that the Elves' time differs from our own.*/
-
Legolas stirred in his boat. "Nay, time does not tarry
ever," he said; "but change and growth is not in all
things and places alike. For the Elves the world moves,
and it moves both very swift and very slow. Swift,
because they themselves change little, and all else ?eets
by: it is a grief to them. Slow, because they do not
count the running years, not for themselves. The passing
seasons are but ripples ever repeated in the long long
stream. Yet beneath the Sun all things must wear to an
end at last."
-
Legolas' remark is one of the most philosophical in the
whole LotR (rivalled only by his conversation with Gimli
in Minas Tirith about the deeds of men.) In other
versions his words are partly taken by Frodo.
This is the most interesting part of the chapter. Verilyn Flieger, in
A Question of Time, discusses this poassage and compares with earlier
versions in HOME. Fascinating reading; but unfortunately it's been a
long time since I read it, and I've forgotten her precise argument.
IIRC she develops the contrast between mortal and immortal
perspectives on time? If anyone has read this more recently and can
refresh my memory, I'd be grateful.

Meanwhile, I'll just have to take a stab at the passage myself:

Sam begins the discussion by describing how he experienced time in
Lorien, and puzzling over the apparent contrast between this
experience and his current observation.

Frodo offers a possible explanation: Not only do Elves have a
different time from mortals -- *objectively* different. Elvish time,
Frodo suggests, is actually a past time embalmed.

Legolas, in the passage quoted above, begins by correcting Frodo:
Lorien is not a land that time forgot. But change (a property of
time) varies from place to place -- a notion Legolas doesn't really
develop, at least directly.

Legolas shifts instead from the objective character of time to its
subjective experience, wich he divides into experience from the inside
and experience from the outside. From the inside, Elves experience
time as slow, since they change little (we see again the connection
between time and change); but from the outside, they experience it as
swift, again because of the rapidity of change.

Legolas concludes that everything, or at least, eveything "beneath the
Sun" is subject to time -- including the Elves. a dim foreshadowing,
here, of the eventual fading of the Elves.

Frodo deduces from the main body of Legolas's speech (or perhaps
rather from the bit on different places having different rates of
change) that time at least moves more slowly in Lorien. For the
attribution of this quality to the e;f-ring, compare the statement in
"Council of Elrond" to the effect that the rings of the Elves were
meant to preserve; the rings are a kind of symbol of the Elves'
relation to their past, and therefore to time. The passage "rich are
the hours, but few they seem" is suggestive; Iu believe it means that
mortals experience time in Lorien as if they were immortals.

Postscript: The discussion of time echoes Gimli's remark about memory
in the precedung chapter (for what is memory if not the relation
between the mind and time?): "Memory is not what the heart desires.
That is only a mirror, be it as clear as Kheled-zaram. Or so says the
heart of Gimli the Dwarf. Elves may see things otherwise. Indeed I
have heard that for them memory is more like to the waking world than
to a dream. Not so for the Dwarves."
Michael Martinez
2004-06-18 19:09:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Count Menelvagor
Post by Archie
5.On time in the Elf-land of Lorien
HoME lays out three successive timing schemes of the
journey of the Fellowship conceived by Tolkien (there are
<snip time tables>
Post by Archie
In the first two schemes the "outer world" time-span
spent in Lorien is 1 night, in the final one - a full
month. It is obvious that the final scheme is much less
magical. Why?
/* Of course, we know from trad.folk tales, Lord
Dunsany's 'KoE's D.' and JRRT's own 'On Fairy Stories'
that the Elves' time differs from our own.*/
-
Legolas stirred in his boat. "Nay, time does not tarry
ever," he said; "but change and growth is not in all
things and places alike. For the Elves the world moves,
and it moves both very swift and very slow. Swift,
because they themselves change little, and all else ?eets
by: it is a grief to them. Slow, because they do not
count the running years, not for themselves. The passing
seasons are but ripples ever repeated in the long long
stream. Yet beneath the Sun all things must wear to an
end at last."
-
Legolas' remark is one of the most philosophical in the
whole LotR (rivalled only by his conversation with Gimli
in Minas Tirith about the deeds of men.) In other
versions his words are partly taken by Frodo.
[snip]
Post by Count Menelvagor
Frodo offers a possible explanation: Not only do Elves have a
different time from mortals -- *objectively* different. Elvish time,
Frodo suggests, is actually a past time embalmed.
Lorien is not a land that time forgot. But change (a property of
time) varies from place to place -- a notion Legolas doesn't really
develop, at least directly.
Legolas shifts instead from the objective character of time to its
subjective experience, wich he divides into experience from the inside
and experience from the outside. From the inside, Elves experience
time as slow, since they change little (we see again the connection
between time and change); but from the outside, they experience it as
swift, again because of the rapidity of change.
Legolas concludes that everything, or at least, eveything "beneath the
Sun" is subject to time -- including the Elves. a dim foreshadowing,
here, of the eventual fading of the Elves.
Frodo deduces from the main body of Legolas's speech (or perhaps
rather from the bit on different places having different rates of
change) that time at least moves more slowly in Lorien. For the
attribution of this quality to the e;f-ring, compare the statement in
"Council of Elrond" to the effect that the rings of the Elves were
meant to preserve; the rings are a kind of symbol of the Elves'
relation to their past, and therefore to time. The passage "rich are
the hours, but few they seem" is suggestive; Iu believe it means that
mortals experience time in Lorien as if they were immortals.
Frodo concludes with reference to the Elven Ring, and though Legolas'
perspective of time is very important for the reader wanting to get
into the Elven psyche, what happened in Lorien is due to the power of
the Ring.

Many commentators have noted that what happens in Lorien is very
similar to the effect experienced by mortals in fairy-tales where they
enter Faery for what they think is a few days or a night and they come
out many years later.

However, Tolkien provided a mechanism which explains this effect in
both Rivendell and Lothlorien (Bilbo mentions to Frodo that it is hard
to keep track of time in Rivendell). These effects are clues for the
reader that Rings of Power are at work, holding back the effects of
Time.
Troels Forchhammer
2004-06-20 22:42:42 UTC
Permalink
In message <news:***@posting.google.com>
***@xenite.org (Michael Martinez) enriched us with:
<snip interesting discussion>
Post by Michael Martinez
However, Tolkien provided a mechanism which explains this effect
in both Rivendell and Lothlorien (Bilbo mentions to Frodo that it
is hard to keep track of time in Rivendell). These effects are
clues for the reader that Rings of Power are at work, holding back
the effects of Time.
I agree.

One would expect that the same effect could have been observed in Grey
Havens before Círdan handed over his Ring to Gandalf, which makes me
wonder whether Gandalf used this power of his Ring while wandering
Middle-earth, and if so, how?

With respect to the various time schemes Archie presented in the
chapter introduction, where the stay in Lórien first was barely
perceptible in the outer world (one day), and later became a whole
month. If Tolkien had decided that the 'temporal distortion' was due to
the Rings, could this change be a reflection of his wish for
consistency; wanting to have the effect to be the same in Rivendell and
Lórien (and it is clear already in the Hobbit that time passed at the
same rate in Rivendell and outside).

I am also reminded of another question that rise out of the
conversation being considered here.

" 'But the wearing is slow in Lórien,' said Frodo. 'The
power of the Lady is on it. Rich are the hours, though
short they seem, in Caras Galadhon, where Galadriel wields
the Elven-ring.'
'That should not have been said outside Lórien, not even
to me,' said Aragorn. 'Speak no more of it!'"

My question is, did Aragorn know before this that Galadriel wielded one
of the three?

The 'preface' to the Third Age in the Tale of Years states explicitly
that "Throughout the Third Age the guardianship of the Three Rings was
known only to those who possessed them," which of course seems to
answer at least part of this question, but did Aragorn perhaps guess
that Galadriel was one of the keepers?

And does his comment mean that it could safely have been said to him
inside Lórien?
--
Troels Forchhammer
Valid mail is <t.forch(a)email.dk>

Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great
men are almost always bad men.
- Lord Acton, in a letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton, 1887.
Michael Martinez
2004-06-21 02:33:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Troels Forchhammer
<snip interesting discussion>
Post by Michael Martinez
However, Tolkien provided a mechanism which explains this effect
in both Rivendell and Lothlorien (Bilbo mentions to Frodo that it
is hard to keep track of time in Rivendell). These effects are
clues for the reader that Rings of Power are at work, holding back
the effects of Time.
I agree.
One would expect that the same effect could have been observed in Grey
Havens before Círdan handed over his Ring to Gandalf, which makes me
wonder whether Gandalf used this power of his Ring while wandering
Middle-earth, and if so, how?
Hard to say, since it's not clear when Tolkien fully understood what
the Rings of Power were for, or how they worked.

THE ANNOTATED HOBBIT makes some cogent points regarding the Elven
feasts and hunt in Mirkwood, mentioning the influence of Celtic
folklore and medieval courtly customs on that part of the story.

Tolkien wove a traditional thread of fairy-lore into both THE HOBBIT
and THE LORD OF THE RINGS, and he provided more explanations in THE
LORD OF THE RINGS (or, his correspondence pertaining to that book)
than in THE HOBBIT.
Post by Troels Forchhammer
With respect to the various time schemes Archie presented in the
chapter introduction, where the stay in Lórien first was barely
perceptible in the outer world (one day), and later became a whole
month. If Tolkien had decided that the 'temporal distortion' was due to
the Rings, could this change be a reflection of his wish for
consistency; wanting to have the effect to be the same in Rivendell and
Lórien (and it is clear already in the Hobbit that time passed at the
same rate in Rivendell and outside).
I think he wanted similar but slightly different effects in the two
places. The time-delaying effect is present in both but is more
obvious (to the characters and, hence, to the readers) in Lothlorien.
But Elrond's benefits seem to include a freshness or crispness (I
don't know how to describe it) which is not present in Lothlorien,
whereas Galadriel's benefits seem to include a steadfastness which is
not as visible in Imladris.

Tolkien emphasizes certain qualities about Imladris and Lothlorien in
his narrative commentary. The stars are brighter over Imladris,
Lothlorien feels like a land preseved in the timeless beauty of the
First Age, and so forth.
Post by Troels Forchhammer
I am also reminded of another question that rise out of the
conversation being considered here.
" 'But the wearing is slow in Lórien,' said Frodo. 'The
power of the Lady is on it. Rich are the hours, though
short they seem, in Caras Galadhon, where Galadriel wields
the Elven-ring.'
'That should not have been said outside Lórien, not even
to me,' said Aragorn. 'Speak no more of it!'"
My question is, did Aragorn know before this that Galadriel wielded one
of the three?
I don't think Aragorn HAD to know that Galadriel had the Ring, but he
certainly seemed to be as aware as any Elf of the history of the
Rings. He may have shared the general Elvish conclusion that a Ring
of Power was probably resident in Lothlorien.

In any event, his words first and foremost convey a sense of prudence.
Post by Troels Forchhammer
The 'preface' to the Third Age in the Tale of Years states explicitly
that "Throughout the Third Age the guardianship of the Three Rings was
known only to those who possessed them," which of course seems to
answer at least part of this question, but did Aragorn perhaps guess
that Galadriel was one of the keepers?
And does his comment mean that it could safely have been said to him
inside Lórien?
I think he would not have reacted quite the same way had Frodo made
the remark in Lothlorien.
Count Menelvagor
2004-06-22 06:02:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Troels Forchhammer
With respect to the various time schemes Archie presented in the
chapter introduction, where the stay in Lórien first was barely
perceptible in the outer world (one day), and later became a whole
month. If Tolkien had decided that the 'temporal distortion' was due to
the Rings, could this change be a reflection of his wish for
consistency; wanting to have the effect to be the same in Rivendell and
Lórien (and it is clear already in the Hobbit that time passed at the
same rate in Rivendell and outside).
I think the main difference between Lorien and Rivendell is that
Rivendell is oriented to the outside, welcoming outsiders, while
Lorien is turned inwards. This inwardness explains perhaps the
distortion of time in Lorien? (Anyone in Lorien xperiences time as
the Elves do, while in Rivendell they continue to experience time
according to the nature of their kind.)
Count Menelvagor
2004-06-22 05:54:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Martinez
Post by Count Menelvagor
Legolas shifts instead from the objective character of time to its
subjective experience, wich he divides into experience from the inside
and experience from the outside. From the inside, Elves experience
time as slow, since they change little (we see again the connection
between time and change); but from the outside, they experience it as
swift, again because of the rapidity of change.
Legolas concludes that everything, or at least, eveything "beneath the
Sun" is subject to time -- including the Elves. a dim foreshadowing,
here, of the eventual fading of the Elves.
Frodo deduces from the main body of Legolas's speech (or perhaps
rather from the bit on different places having different rates of
change) that time at least moves more slowly in Lorien. For the
attribution of this quality to the e;f-ring, compare the statement in
"Council of Elrond" to the effect that the rings of the Elves were
meant to preserve; the rings are a kind of symbol of the Elves'
relation to their past, and therefore to time. The passage "rich are
the hours, but few they seem" is suggestive; Iu believe it means that
mortals experience time in Lorien as if they were immortals.
Frodo concludes with reference to the Elven Ring, and though Legolas'
perspective of time is very important for the reader wanting to get
into the Elven psyche, what happened in Lorien is due to the power of
the Ring.
Interesting ... The Rings seem to focus on the deepest desires of the
races for which they have been made. The Elves' deepest desire is
apparently that of slowing down change in the wrold around them;
mortals desire immortality; Dwarves desire wealth. The One Ring
similarly appeals to its holders' deepest desire for domination,
having been made for Sauron, in order that he might control the other
Rings.
Tar-Elenion
2004-06-22 06:04:45 UTC
Permalink
<snip>
Post by Count Menelvagor
Post by Michael Martinez
Frodo concludes with reference to the Elven Ring, and though Legolas'
perspective of time is very important for the reader wanting to get
into the Elven psyche, what happened in Lorien is due to the power of
the Ring.
Interesting ... The Rings seem to focus on the deepest desires of the
races for which they have been made. The Elves' deepest desire is
apparently that of slowing down change in the wrold around them;
mortals desire immortality; Dwarves desire wealth. The One Ring
similarly appeals to its holders' deepest desire for domination,
having been made for Sauron, in order that he might control the other
Rings.
Except that the Rings were all (save the One) made for the Elves and not
any other race (possible exception made for Durin's Ring per Dwarvish
lore).
--
Tar-Elenion

He is a warrior, and a spirit of wrath. In every
stroke that he deals he sees the Enemy who long
ago did thee this hurt.
AC
2004-06-22 21:16:38 UTC
Permalink
On 21 Jun 2004 22:54:43 -0700,
Post by Count Menelvagor
Interesting ... The Rings seem to focus on the deepest desires of the
races for which they have been made. The Elves' deepest desire is
apparently that of slowing down change in the wrold around them;
mortals desire immortality; Dwarves desire wealth. The One Ring
similarly appeals to its holders' deepest desire for domination,
having been made for Sauron, in order that he might control the other
Rings.
The notion of rings to races is something that came about after Sauron had
captured the Nine and the Seven (with the possible exception of Durin's
ring). When the Nine, Seven and Three were first forged, the intent was to
stave off decay, so obviously these would reflect the deepest desires of the
Elves. Sauron seems to have done some fiddling when he captured the Nine
and the Seven.
--
Aaron Clausen
***@hotmail.com
Count Menelvagor
2004-06-23 06:32:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by AC
On 21 Jun 2004 22:54:43 -0700,
Post by Count Menelvagor
Interesting ... The Rings seem to focus on the deepest desires of the
races for which they have been made. The Elves' deepest desire is
apparently that of slowing down change in the wrold around them;
mortals desire immortality; Dwarves desire wealth. The One Ring
similarly appeals to its holders' deepest desire for domination,
having been made for Sauron, in order that he might control the other
Rings.
The notion of rings to races is something that came about after Sauron had
captured the Nine and the Seven (with the possible exception of Durin's
ring). When the Nine, Seven and Three were first forged, the intent was to
stave off decay, so obviously these would reflect the deepest desires of the
Elves. Sauron seems to have done some fiddling when he captured the Nine
and the Seven.
OK, I see what you and Tar-Elenion are saying. "Made" was a bad
choice of words on my part in any case. "Invented" would be better.
That is, Tolkien fitted the effects of the Rings to the "kind" that
held them -- just as he varied the effects of the One Ring according
to the personality of the person it was tempting at the time (compare
Boromir, Sam, and Gollum).

The contrast between the Three Rings and the Nine ties in an
interesting way with the discussion of time -- and the different ways
in which mortals and immortals experience it -- that began the thread.
Christopher Kreuzer
2004-06-18 19:55:54 UTC
Permalink
Count Menelvagor <***@mailandnews.com> wrote:

[On Legolas's quote on Time while on the Great River]
Post by Count Menelvagor
Frodo deduces from the main body of Legolas's speech (or perhaps
rather from the bit on different places having different rates of
change) that time at least moves more slowly in Lorien. For the
attribution of this quality to the elf-ring, compare the statement in
"Council of Elrond" to the effect that the rings of the Elves were
meant to preserve; the rings are a kind of symbol of the Elves'
relation to their past, and therefore to time. The passage "rich are
the hours, but few they seem" is suggestive; I believe it means that
mortals experience time in Lorien as if they were immortals.
Frodo says the wearing of time in Lorien is slow. Rich are the hours
though short they seem. Aragorn confirms this with the phrase "There
time flowed swiftly by us, as for the Elves."

It is important to realise that _objectively_ (if they had watches for
example) the same time is flowing inside and outside Lorien. It is only
the people in Lorien that are affected and experience a different
_subjective_ rate of time. The same _amount_ of time has passed inside
and outside Lorien.

Sam and Frodo initially think they have lost time, but they are
corrected by Legolas and Aragorn. They have merely lost track of time.

Christopher
--
---
Reply clue: Saruman welcomes you to Spamgard
Dirk Thierbach
2004-06-20 08:53:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
It is important to realise that _objectively_ (if they had watches for
example) the same time is flowing inside and outside Lorien. It is only
the people in Lorien that are affected and experience a different
_subjective_ rate of time. The same _amount_ of time has passed inside
and outside Lorien.
I still don't agree with this, see other post. And anyway, it doesn't
make much difference whether they just "subjectively" experienced
a slower rate of time, or whether "objectively" really time flows
slower. The important thing is the effect on the observer, as we
know from relativity theory. "For them", they only spend a few days
in Lorien, though in the outside world, more than a month passed.
That is the point.

But still I think if they had watches, or if they looked at their
aging process, or at the physical function of their bodies (how often
did they eat?), they could have measured a "real" effect (see the
absence of the moon).

- Dirk
Christopher Kreuzer
2004-06-21 23:05:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dirk Thierbach
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
It is important to realise that _objectively_ (if they had watches
for example) the same time is flowing inside and outside Lorien. It
is only the people in Lorien that are affected and experience a
different _subjective_ rate of time. The same _amount_ of time has
passed inside and outside Lorien.
I still don't agree with this, see other post. And anyway, it doesn't
make much difference whether they just "subjectively" experienced
a slower rate of time, or whether "objectively" really time flows
slower. The important thing is the effect on the observer, as we
know from relativity theory.
Huh? This is Faerie. Not Einstein's universe.
Post by Dirk Thierbach
"For them", they only spend a few days
in Lorien, though in the outside world, more than a month passed.
That is the point.
Nope. They _think_ they've only spent a few days there. But they
discover that they were wrong. It is more correct to say that Lorien
preserved them so that although a month passed by, they only experienced
the effects of a few days.
Post by Dirk Thierbach
But still I think if they had watches, or if they looked at their
aging process, or at the physical function of their bodies (how often
did they eat?), they could have measured a "real" effect (see the
absence of the moon).
Hold on. You snipped an important part of my post. I said:

"Sam and Frodo initially think they have lost time, but they are
corrected by Legolas and Aragorn. They have merely lost track of time."

Sam said: "Anyone would think that time did not count in there".
Frodo says: "And perhaps that was the way of it."
Frodo also says: "[upon leaving Lorien] we returned to the time that
flows through mortal lands."

But Legolas corrects them: "Nay, time does not tarry ever. But change
and growth are not in all things and places alike."

Frodo then realises that: "the wearing [of time] is slow in Lorien."

He means that the _effects_ of time are reduced, the preserving effect
of the Ring that Galadriel wields. This is not a slowing of time, but a
protection from the effects of time. It _seems_ to be a slowing of time,
but it is not. It actually appears, to the observer, to be a speeding up
of time, as shown by Aragorn's bit:

"But so it is, Sam: in that land you lost your count. There time flowed
swiftly by us as for the Elves."

It is important to distinguish between the "wearing of time" and the
"passage of time". These effects, normally indistinguishable, are
somehow separated in Lorien.

Christopher
--
---
Reply clue: Saruman welcomes you to Spamgard
Michael Martinez
2004-06-22 06:08:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
Sam said: "Anyone would think that time did not count in there".
Frodo says: "And perhaps that was the way of it."
Frodo also says: "[upon leaving Lorien] we returned to the time that
flows through mortal lands."
But Legolas corrects them: "Nay, time does not tarry ever. But change
and growth are not in all things and places alike."
Frodo then realises that: "the wearing [of time] is slow in Lorien."
He means that the _effects_ of time are reduced, the preserving effect
of the Ring that Galadriel wields. This is not a slowing of time, but a
protection from the effects of time. It _seems_ to be a slowing of time,
but it is not. It actually appears, to the observer, to be a speeding up
"But so it is, Sam: in that land you lost your count. There time flowed
swiftly by us as for the Elves."
It is important to distinguish between the "wearing of time" and the
"passage of time". These effects, normally indistinguishable, are
somehow separated in Lorien.
I think that is possibly the best summation (and interpretation) of
this passage I have ever read, barring none.
Tar-Elenion
2004-06-22 06:45:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Martinez
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
Sam said: "Anyone would think that time did not count in there".
Frodo says: "And perhaps that was the way of it."
Frodo also says: "[upon leaving Lorien] we returned to the time that
flows through mortal lands."
But Legolas corrects them: "Nay, time does not tarry ever. But change
and growth are not in all things and places alike."
Frodo then realises that: "the wearing [of time] is slow in Lorien."
He means that the _effects_ of time are reduced, the preserving effect
of the Ring that Galadriel wields. This is not a slowing of time, but a
protection from the effects of time. It _seems_ to be a slowing of time,
but it is not. It actually appears, to the observer, to be a speeding up
"But so it is, Sam: in that land you lost your count. There time flowed
swiftly by us as for the Elves."
It is important to distinguish between the "wearing of time" and the
"passage of time". These effects, normally indistinguishable, are
somehow separated in Lorien.
I think that is possibly the best summation (and interpretation) of
this passage I have ever read, barring none.
Have you changed your veiws on this (the substance of the effect)?
--
Tar-Elenion

He is a warrior, and a spirit of wrath. In every
stroke that he deals he sees the Enemy who long
ago did thee this hurt.
Michael Martinez
2004-06-22 16:17:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tar-Elenion
Post by Michael Martinez
I think that is possibly the best summation (and interpretation) of
this passage I have ever read, barring none.
Have you changed your veiws on this (the substance of the effect)?
My views are always subject to change, but you've piqued my curiosity.
What have I agreed with that you feel I have disagreed with in the
past?
Tar-Elenion
2004-06-22 17:30:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Martinez
Post by Tar-Elenion
Post by Michael Martinez
I think that is possibly the best summation (and interpretation) of
this passage I have ever read, barring none.
Have you changed your veiws on this (the substance of the effect)?
My views are always subject to change, but you've piqued my curiosity.
What have I agreed with that you feel I have disagreed with in the
past?
I don't know that you are agreeing with the post (as opposed to just
complimenting it), but Mr. Kreuzer summed his thoughts on the matter as:
"He means that the _effects_ of time are reduced, the preserving effect
of the Ring that Galadriel wields. This is not a slowing of time, but a
protection from the effects of time. It _seems_ to be a slowing of time,
but it is not. It actually appears, to the observer, to be a speeding up
of time, as shown by Aragorn's bit:..."

IIRC in the past you have argued that the passage of time itself was
literally changed, while this is emphasizing that it was not time itself
but rather that the passage of time is only perceived to have been
retarded because of the effects of the passage of time are reduced.
--
Tar-Elenion

He is a warrior, and a spirit of wrath. In every
stroke that he deals he sees the Enemy who long
ago did thee this hurt.
Michael Martinez
2004-06-22 22:50:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tar-Elenion
Post by Michael Martinez
Post by Tar-Elenion
Post by Michael Martinez
I think that is possibly the best summation (and interpretation) of
this passage I have ever read, barring none.
Have you changed your veiws on this (the substance of the effect)?
My views are always subject to change, but you've piqued my curiosity.
What have I agreed with that you feel I have disagreed with in the
past?
I don't know that you are agreeing with the post (as opposed to just
"He means that the _effects_ of time are reduced, the preserving effect
of the Ring that Galadriel wields. This is not a slowing of time, but a
protection from the effects of time. It _seems_ to be a slowing of time,
but it is not. It actually appears, to the observer, to be a speeding up
of time, as shown by Aragorn's bit:..."
I see what you are getting at. I have, on occasion, used "slowed the
effects of time" and "slowed the passage of time" somewhat
interchangeably. I understand the effect Tolkien was describing more
comfortably now than, say, five years ago.

But I have also often compared what happened in Lothlorien to the
traditional 1 night in Faery = 100 years in mortal time effect, too.
Post by Tar-Elenion
IIRC in the past you have argued that the passage of time itself was
literally changed, while this is emphasizing that it was not time itself
but rather that the passage of time is only perceived to have been
retarded because of the effects of the passage of time are reduced.
I did a quick search for such articles but didn't find anything
conclusive. I have to go out shortly so I cannot really comment on
this further.

My position on the subject may have shifted over the years. I don't
know. I would say, today, that time's effects were delayed but that
chronological progression was not altered. That is, a month passed
inside Lothlorien, but it didn't feel like a month.

If what Tolkien wrote in early material for the appendices accurately
describes the effect, then it should have felt like 3 days. But that
is not to say it should have only allowed Sam 3 days' worth of
memories.
Tar-Elenion
2004-06-23 00:19:45 UTC
Permalink
<snips contained herein>
Post by Michael Martinez
Post by Tar-Elenion
I don't know that you are agreeing with the post (as opposed to just
"He means that the _effects_ of time are reduced, the preserving effect
of the Ring that Galadriel wields. This is not a slowing of time, but a
protection from the effects of time. It _seems_ to be a slowing of time,
but it is not. It actually appears, to the observer, to be a speeding up
of time, as shown by Aragorn's bit:..."
I see what you are getting at. I have, on occasion, used "slowed the
effects of time" and "slowed the passage of time" somewhat
interchangeably. I understand the effect Tolkien was describing more
comfortably now than, say, five years ago.
Thanks.
Post by Michael Martinez
But I have also often compared what happened in Lothlorien to the
traditional 1 night in Faery = 100 years in mortal time effect, too.
Post by Tar-Elenion
IIRC in the past you have argued that the passage of time itself was
literally changed, while this is emphasizing that it was not time itself
but rather that the passage of time is only perceived to have been
retarded because of the effects of the passage of time are reduced.
I did a quick search for such articles but didn't find anything
conclusive. I have to go out shortly so I cannot really comment on
this further.
I was probably recalling this:
http://www.sf-fandom.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2927
I think there was a similar one before the 'crash' as well.
--
Tar-Elenion

He is a warrior, and a spirit of wrath. In every
stroke that he deals he sees the Enemy who long
ago did thee this hurt.
Michael Martinez
2004-06-23 19:32:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tar-Elenion
Post by Michael Martinez
I did a quick search for such articles but didn't find anything
conclusive. I have to go out shortly so I cannot really comment on
this further.
http://www.sf-fandom.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2927
I think there was a similar one before the 'crash' as well.
Why didn't you say so in the first place? :)

I wrote: "No, Tolkien made it clear in the published text that time
flowed at a different rate inside Lorien than outside. However, the
difference in timeflow was due to the power of Galadriel's Ring."

Well, that is a considerably different point of view.

I will say I have changed my mind on the basis of Christopher
Kreuzer's explanation of the passage.

Of course, you never know, I might flip-flop on the subject again.
I've just changed my posiion on another point (when the second and
third Thror Maps were drawn) after doing some exhaustive research.
Christopher Kreuzer
2004-06-22 22:10:23 UTC
Permalink
<snip>
Post by Michael Martinez
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
It is important to distinguish between the "wearing of time" and the
"passage of time". These effects, normally indistinguishable, are
somehow separated in Lorien.
I think that is possibly the best summation (and interpretation) of
this passage I have ever read, barring none.
Hey, thanks!

I can't claim all the credit though. I was prompted to look more closely
at what Sam and Frodo and Legolas say by this post by Count Menelvagor:

http://www.google.com/groups?selm=6bfb27a8.0406172220.255f55af%40posting.google.com&output=gplain

I took my own views on what this all means, and added the crucial bit
about what Aragorn says, which many commentators seem to miss out for
some reason.

Christopher
--
---
Reply clue: Saruman welcomes you to Spamgard
Troels Forchhammer
2004-06-22 07:40:24 UTC
Permalink
in <qRJBc.2340$***@news-text.cableinet.net>,
Christopher Kreuzer <***@blueyonder.co.uk> enriched us with:
<snip>

Brilliant!
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
It is important to distinguish between the "wearing of time" and the
"passage of time". These effects, normally indistinguishable, are
somehow separated in Lorien.
As "time flowed swiftly by", but with less effect - thus more time had to
pass to produce the same perceived effect (slow wearing).

I'm tempted to return to Einsteinian relativity here, where objects
become shorter when you pass them swiftly (Lorentz-contraction, IIRC),
and where time slower for the observer who moves quickly ;-)

--
Troels Forchhammer

Elen síla lúmenn' omentielvo
Christopher Kreuzer
2004-06-22 22:20:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
<snip>
Brilliant!
Thanks!
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
It is important to distinguish between the "wearing of time" and the
"passage of time". These effects, normally indistinguishable, are
somehow separated in Lorien.
As "time flowed swiftly by", but with less effect - thus more time
had to pass to produce the same perceived effect (slow wearing).
I'm tempted to return to Einsteinian relativity here, where objects
become shorter when you pass them swiftly (Lorentz-contraction, IIRC),
Yes. Published before Einstein's papers. Both Lorentz and Poincare
independently came up with the idea of relativity. It is not quite as
simple as that, though...
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
and where time slower for the observer who moves quickly ;-)
Hmm. Here's a Faerie versus RW contest for you:

Einstein versus Galadriel (plus Nenya) in a time warping contest.

Who wins?

Christopher
--
---
Reply clue: Saruman welcomes you to Spamgard
Troels Forchhammer
2004-06-23 20:15:42 UTC
Permalink
In message <news:5h2Cc.202$***@news-text.cableinet.net>
"Christopher Kreuzer" <***@blueyonder.co.uk> enriched us with:
<snip>
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
Einstein versus Galadriel (plus Nenya) in a time warping contest.
Who wins?
LOL!

How fast is Einstein allowed to travel - and can he use rotating black
holes?

;-)
--
Troels Forchhammer
Valid mail is <t.forch(a)email.dk>

This isn't right. This isn't even wrong.
- Wolfgang Pauli, on a paper submitted by a physicist colleague
Dirk Thierbach
2004-06-22 09:08:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
He means that the _effects_ of time are reduced, the preserving effect
of the Ring that Galadriel wields.
But this "preserving effect" seems to include everything to make the
observer think that time inside Lorien is going slower: There is no
moon visible at all, and the number of nights they have spent in Lorien
is *really* smaller than the number nights that have passed outside.
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
This is not a slowing of time, but a protection from the effects of
time. It _seems_ to be a slowing of time,
Yes. So what's the difference, besides musings about "how things
really are"? If I go to Lorien, I'd age slower (compared to the outside
world), I sleep less often, and if I had a clock with me, the clock
would go slower, too (as the "natural" clocks of the body and the sky
do). So for all I can measure, time really (subjectively) *is*
slower.
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
but it is not. It actually appears, to the observer, to be a
That's a matter of viewpoint, of course. For the observer in Lorien,
the outside time speeds up. For the observer outside Lorien, time
in Lorien slows down.
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
It is important to distinguish between the "wearing of time" and the
"passage of time". These effects, normally indistinguishable, are
somehow separated in Lorien.
I don't think so. If just the "wearing of time" is slower, why don't
they see a moon? Why do they sleep less often? Why do they eat less
often? All this seems to indicate that it is really the "passage of
time" that is slower in Lorien.

And Legolas gives the reason for that: Because of "magic", mortals in
Lorien experience time as the Elves do, and that means that it
actually *seems* to pass slower for them, even though the main
intention is to slow the "wearing of time".

- Dirk
Christopher Kreuzer
2004-06-22 23:37:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dirk Thierbach
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
He means that the _effects_ of time are reduced, the preserving
effect of the Ring that Galadriel wields.
But this "preserving effect" seems to include everything to make the
observer think that time inside Lorien is going slower: There is no
moon visible at all, and the number of nights they have spent in
Lorien is *really* smaller than the number nights that have passed
outside.
Frodo does say: "I don't remember any moon, either new or old, in Caras
Galadhon: only stars by night and sun by day." and Aragorn says "The old
moon passed and a new moon waxed and waned in the world outside, while
we tarried there."

I think that this only means that they don't see any moon in Lothlorien.
Quite why I am not entirely sure. This does not have to be due to any
time effect. Rather, I would go back to the Lothlorien chapter and look
at quotes like this:

Frodo felt he had "stepped over a bridge of time into a corner of the
Elder Days, and was now walking in a world that was no more." [and] "he
had stepped through a high window that looked on a vanished world."

Maybe Galadriel doesn't like the Moon and just wants stars in her
Lorien!!
Post by Dirk Thierbach
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
This is not a slowing of time, but a protection from the effects of
time. It _seems_ to be a slowing of time,
Yes. So what's the difference, besides musings about "how things
really are"? If I go to Lorien, I'd age slower (compared to the
outside world)
I agree that it is probable [but not certain - the effects on mortals
might be different], from the descriptions, that you would age more
slowly in Lorien, being protected from the ravages of Time.
Post by Dirk Thierbach
I sleep less often
Yes. This causes you to lose count, like Sam did (Aragorn: "in that land
you lost your count"). Your natural body clock measures time by the
natural changes, and when these slow down or are absent, it is deceived
into thinking that less time is passing by.
Post by Dirk Thierbach
and if I had a clock with me, the
clock would go slower, too (as the "natural" clocks of the body and
the sky do).
Well, first, I don't think the sky clock [Moon] is slower. It is just
absent. As for your natural body clock, I think it just adjusts to the
different stimuli and deceives you into thinking that less time is
passing by.

And I still think that a real clock would be unaffected by this. Though
bringing technology into this is probably a bit dodgy.
Post by Dirk Thierbach
So for all I can measure, time really (subjectively) *is*
slower.
But _only_ subjectively. Objectively it "does not tarry ever".
Post by Dirk Thierbach
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
but it is not. It actually appears, to the observer, to be a
That's a matter of viewpoint, of course. For the observer in Lorien,
the outside time speeds up. For the observer outside Lorien, time
in Lorien slows down.
I would disagree. The same amount of time passes. The effects are
different though. In Lorien, you think that only a few 'days' pass, but
each of those 'days' are actually several real days long ("rich are the
hours though short they seem"). Outside Lorien, the events of a single
day would end with going to sleep. Inside Lorien, the same amount of
time would be followed by more waking activity, and only much later
would sleep be needed. [This ties in nicely with the Elves not needing
much sleep]. Michael stated this better in another post, saying that
Sam's memories of three 'days' in Lorien would actually be more than the
memories of three real days.

In other words, Sam did 30-days worth of stuff in Lorien, but it felt
like three days to him. That does _not_ mean that it _was_ three days.
You can call it 3 Lorien-days, but not three (real) days.
Post by Dirk Thierbach
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
It is important to distinguish between the "wearing of time" and the
"passage of time". These effects, normally indistinguishable, are
somehow separated in Lorien.
I don't think so. If just the "wearing of time" is slower, why don't
they see a moon?
It's not there.
Post by Dirk Thierbach
Why do they sleep less often?
They need less sleep. They do not weary so quickly.
Post by Dirk Thierbach
Why do they eat less
often? All this seems to indicate that it is really the "passage of
time" that is slower in Lorien.
Just the _effects_ of time. A suitable analogy might be a flowing river
(=Time). The real world is immersed in the river of Time, and the water
wears people down. When you enter Lorien (and possibly always if you are
an immortal), you are raised slightly out of the waters of Time. You are
sitting on the bank of the river with your feet in the water, rather
than being neck deep in the water. Time is still flowing by, but you are
now slightly removed from it. Legolas refers to Time as the "long, long
stream" and says that seasons are but ripples in it. Elves are not
immune to the effects of time though. Also, Aragorn says that "time
flowed swiftly by us, as for the Elves". They are sitting in boats on a
river as they say these things!

You seem to be saying that in Lorien the current of time is slower. That
Lorien is in an eddy of the stream, a place where the waters run slower.
Or that Galadriel and her Ring have actually diverted the waters of Time
around Lorien, erected a dam upstream to make the water run slower.

Maybe an argument can be made for both cases?
Post by Dirk Thierbach
And Legolas gives the reason for that: Because of "magic", mortals in
Lorien experience time as the Elves do, and that means that it
actually *seems* to pass slower for them, even though the main
intention is to slow the "wearing of time".
Can you quote the exact passage from Legolas that you are thinking of? I
think that in your statement above we come closest to agreement! :-)

Christopher
--
---
Reply clue: Saruman welcomes you to Spamgard
Dirk Thierbach
2004-06-26 15:49:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
I think that this only means that they don't see any moon in Lothlorien.
Quite why I am not entirely sure. This does not have to be due to any
time effect. Rather, I would go back to the Lothlorien chapter and look
Frodo felt he had "stepped over a bridge of time into a corner of the
Elder Days, and was now walking in a world that was no more." [and] "he
had stepped through a high window that looked on a vanished world."
Yes. Now if you take this comparison ("they stepped into a different
world, i.e. into Fairy") and also suppose that passage of time is
different in this world (because this, as Legolas says, is the world
as the Elves perceive it), you have a good explanation of the time
discrepancies.
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
Your natural body clock measures time by the natural changes, and
when these slow down or are absent, it is deceived into thinking
that less time is passing by.
And this applies to *all* bodily functions: Hunger, for example.
(Tho hobbits would have noticed if they felt the need to eat
20 times a day...)
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
And I still think that a real clock would be unaffected by this. Though
bringing technology into this is probably a bit dodgy.
Post by Dirk Thierbach
So for all I can measure, time really (subjectively) *is*
slower.
But _only_ subjectively. Objectively it "does not tarry ever".
That's fine with me. As I said, this difference is mainly a philosophical
one.

So can we agree that the *subjective* *passage* of time is slower
(because the intention is to slow the *wearing* of time), and that
we don't really know about the *objective* passage of time? Legolas
comments hint that is "does not tarry ever", while other things
(absence of moon, "entering a different world") indicate that it
might be also different.
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
Michael stated this better in another post, saying that Sam's
memories of three 'days' in Lorien would actually be more than the
memories of three real days.
I don't think so. If Sam's memory would be really "more", he should
have a feeling that more time passed. But he hasn't; on the contrary.

- Dirk
Christopher Kreuzer
2004-06-26 17:08:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dirk Thierbach
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
I think that this only means that they don't see any moon in
Lothlorien. Quite why I am not entirely sure. This does not have to
be due to any time effect. Rather, I would go back to the Lothlorien
Frodo felt he had "stepped over a bridge of time into a corner of the
Elder Days, and was now walking in a world that was no more." [and]
"he had stepped through a high window that looked on a vanished
world."
Yes. Now if you take this comparison ("they stepped into a different
world, i.e. into Fairy")
The whole of ME is Faery, but for the sake of argument, yes.
Post by Dirk Thierbach
and also suppose that passage of time is
different in this world
I think that goes too far. I think they are out of synch with time. Time
is still flowing at the same rate but does not affect them in the same
way. This leads to their (mistaken) perception that time is flowing at a
different rate.
Post by Dirk Thierbach
(because this, as Legolas says, is the world
as the Elves perceive it)
Where: "time does not tarry ever".
Post by Dirk Thierbach
you have a good explanation of the time
discrepancies.
A good explanation, but one that does not explain Legolas's comment
about time. Your view seems to be that of Sam and Frodo, but Legolas
corrects them and Aragorn (in less poetic language) agrees with Legolas.
Post by Dirk Thierbach
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
Your natural body clock measures time by the natural changes, and
when these slow down or are absent, it is deceived into thinking
that less time is passing by.
And this applies to *all* bodily functions: Hunger, for example.
(Tho hobbits would have noticed if they felt the need to eat
20 times a day...)
Yes. But only an effect of time, not the _real_ passage of time.
Post by Dirk Thierbach
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
And I still think that a real clock would be unaffected by this.
Though bringing technology into this is probably a bit dodgy.
Post by Dirk Thierbach
So for all I can measure, time really (subjectively) *is*
slower.
But _only_ subjectively. Objectively it "does not tarry ever".
That's fine with me. As I said, this difference is mainly a
philosophical one.
So can we agree that the *subjective* *passage* of time is slower
Yes.
Post by Dirk Thierbach
(because the intention is to slow the *wearing* of time)
Wrong way round. The slowing of the wearing of time manifests itself as
the subjective slowing of time. i.e. the mistaken perception that time
is moving more slowly relative to the outside world.
Post by Dirk Thierbach
and that
we don't really know about the *objective* passage of time?
But we do.
Post by Dirk Thierbach
Legolas
comments hint that is "does not tarry ever"
_Not_ a hint. A plain (if somewhat poetic) statement correcting Sam and
Frodo mistaken thoughts: "Nay, time does not tarry ever, but change and
growth are not in all things and places alike".
Post by Dirk Thierbach
while other things
(absence of moon, "entering a different world") indicate that it
might be also different.
Just mysterious. Unknown. Not _necessarily_ to do with any time effect.
Post by Dirk Thierbach
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
Michael stated this better in another post, saying that Sam's
memories of three 'days' in Lorien would actually be more than the
memories of three real days.
I don't think so. If Sam's memory would be really "more", he should
have a feeling that more time passed. But he hasn't; on the contrary.
Because, as Aragorn says, Sam "lost his count". His body clock is
telling him that he spent only a few days there, but the possible truth
of the matter is that the effects of Galadriel's Ring _sustained_ people
in Lorien so that they only needed to sleep a few times, and quite
naturally (given the absence of a Moon to correct them) thought that
only a few days had passed. "Rich are the hours, though short they
seem..."

Now if someone had made notches on a stick for the number of times they
saw "stars by night and Sun by day", I'd be interested to see how many
days they measure that way. I may have to postulate that not only does
Galadriel make the Moon disappear, but she increases the length of the
day and night...

Christopher
--
---
Reply clue: Saruman welcomes you to Spamgard
Larry Swain
2004-06-26 19:36:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
Post by Dirk Thierbach
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
I think that this only means that they don't see any moon in
Lothlorien. Quite why I am not entirely sure. This does not have to
be due to any time effect. Rather, I would go back to the Lothlorien
Frodo felt he had "stepped over a bridge of time into a corner of the
Elder Days, and was now walking in a world that was no more." [and]
"he had stepped through a high window that looked on a vanished
world."
Yes. Now if you take this comparison ("they stepped into a different
world, i.e. into Fairy")
The whole of ME is Faery, but for the sake of argument, yes.
Not really. Middle Earth is the habitation of men, the real world ..."in
use specifically to opposed to imaginary worlds (as Fairyland) or unseen
worlds (as Heaven or Hell). The theatre of my tale is this earth, the one
in which we now live, but the historical period is imaginary." Letter 183,
Notes on W. H. Auden's Review of the _Return of the King_. This certainly
has implications for other threads, but I'll mention it there too.
Christopher Kreuzer
2004-06-26 20:29:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Larry Swain
The whole of ME is Faerie, but for the sake of argument, yes.
Not really. Middle Earth is the habitation of men, the real world
..."in use specifically to opposed to imaginary worlds (as Fairyland)
or unseen worlds (as Heaven or Hell). The theatre of my tale is this
earth, the one in which we now live, but the historical period is
imaginary." Letter 183, Notes on W. H. Auden's Review of the _Return
of the King_. This certainly has implications for other threads, but
I'll mention it there too.
I meant Tolkien writing his tale of ME as a fairy-tale. In that sense
you enter Faerie when you open the pages of the book. Belba explained it
better than I can in this post:

http://www.google.com/groups?selm=ma8vb0l1igbst7ts8im9oqdqbdc3o58fbc%404ax.com&output=gplain

"Lorien is only a part of Faerie, one of the nice parts, perhaps the
nicest part of all. Faerie can be unremittingly terrible, horrible and
ghastly almost beyond belief, and we are bound to travel that way: to
Mordor. The Dreamflower is passed; the nightmare still lies ahead. Both
are necessary parts of Faerie."

I admit that your Tolkien's quote does specifically contrast Fairyland
with ME being the real world, but that should be seen in the context of
this being part of Tolkien's conceit that he was the translator of this
tale. He is playing up that aspect of his creation. I am sure it is
possible to find other quotes where he talks of the whole story as
having elements of a fairy-tale and aspects of Faerie, and in those
cases he is talking as either the author of a fairy-tale, or as some
commentator on the history pointing to how the story links with
real-world legends of Faerie, which returns once more to the conceit
that he was the translator of this tale.

There is also the possibility that you can see Lorien as ME's Faerie,
but others have disagreed with me on this.

Christopher
--
---
Reply clue: Saruman welcomes you to Spamgard
Count Menelvagor
2004-06-27 07:10:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Larry Swain
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
The whole of ME is Faery, but for the sake of argument, yes.
Not really. Middle Earth is the habitation of men, the real world ..."in
use specifically to opposed to imaginary worlds (as Fairyland) or unseen
worlds (as Heaven or Hell). The theatre of my tale is this earth, the one
in which we now live, but the historical period is imaginary." Letter 183,
Notes on W. H. Auden's Review of the _Return of the King_. This certainly
has implications for other threads, but I'll mention it there too.
Yah, the "faery" element fades in the Third Age and, I suppose, almost
disappears in the Fourth (though not entirely).
the softrat
2004-06-27 07:34:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Count Menelvagor
Yah, the "faery" element fades in the Third Age and, I suppose, almost
disappears in the Fourth (though not entirely).
But not forever. There are a lot of faeries around now...

the softrat
"Honi soit qui mal y pense."
mailto:***@pobox.com
--
"I don't want to tell you any half-truths unless they are
completely accurate." -- Dennis Rappaport, boxing manager
Dirk Thierbach
2004-06-28 06:51:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
Post by Dirk Thierbach
So can we agree that the *subjective* *passage* of time is slower
Yes.
Good. I guess that's the main point.
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
Post by Dirk Thierbach
and that we don't really know about the *objective* passage of time?
But we do.
I disagree. Let's just leave it at that.

- Dirk
Christopher Kreuzer
2004-06-28 18:54:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dirk Thierbach
Post by Christopher Kreuzer
Post by Dirk Thierbach
and that we don't really know about the *objective* passage of time?
But we do.
I disagree. Let's just leave it at that.
Fair enough.
Jim Deutch
2004-06-28 20:01:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dirk Thierbach
And this applies to *all* bodily functions: Hunger, for example.
(Tho hobbits would have noticed if they felt the need to eat
20 times a day...)
Nope: that's *normal* for hobbits!

Jim Deutch (Jimbo the Cat)
--
There is a Time and a Place for spontaneity.
Trevor Barrie
2004-06-27 19:31:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dirk Thierbach
(Tho hobbits would have noticed if they felt the need to eat
20 times a day...)
But are unlikely to have considered such a feeling unusual.
Igenlode Wordsmith
2004-06-27 18:56:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Archie
Chapter of the Week 9, Bk II. "The Great River"
"The Great River"
[snip]

More thoughts:

Aragorn says to Frodo that he wishes he could capture Gollum again on
the grounds that "we might make him useful" - how? Does he plan to use
him as a guide to Mordor?

Looking at the map - why does Boromir object when Aragorn plans to
carry the boats to the foot of Rauros falls and take to the water
again, declaring that in that case he will leave the others at the
Tindrock and proceed overland to Minas Tirith across the Entwash?
Surely his own quickest way home from Rauros is straight down the river?
--
Igenlode <***@nym.alias.net> Bookwraith unabashed

In Europe 100 miles is a long way; in America 100 years is a long time.
Christopher Kreuzer
2004-06-28 00:56:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Igenlode Wordsmith
Post by Archie
Chapter of the Week 9, Bk II. "The Great River"
"The Great River"
Aragorn says to Frodo that he wishes he could capture Gollum again on
the grounds that "we might make him useful" - how? Does he plan to use
him as a guide to Mordor?
Probably.
Post by Igenlode Wordsmith
Looking at the map - why does Boromir object when Aragorn plans to
carry the boats to the foot of Rauros falls and take to the water
again, declaring that in that case he will leave the others at the
Tindrock and proceed overland to Minas Tirith across the Entwash?
Surely his own quickest way home from Rauros is straight down the river?
Boromir did not mean overland from Rauros.
Boromir meant overland from upstream of Sarn Gebir.

The actual conversation you refer to above took place above the rapids
of Sarn Gebir, not at the Falls of Rauros. Boromir is suggesting that it
will be too difficult to find the old path that would allow them to
carry the boats past Sarn Gebir. Boromir is probably suggesting that
they leave the river above Sarn Gebir, skirt the western Emyn Muil on
foot, and go south and slightly west across the Entwash and thence south
and east to Minas Tirith through Anorien. Aragorn mentions problems with
this, as the vale of Entwash is flat and fenny and fog is also a danger.

Once the Fellowship reach the foot of Rauros, Boromir's quickest journey
would indeed be _by_ _boat_ straight down the river past Cair Andros.
But it is clear from what Boromir says that he is worried that they will
not be able to find the way down to the foot of Rauros, or at least will
not be able to take the boats that way:

"...what will you do then? Leap down the Falls and land in the marshes?"

He would be right to worry about trying to go on foot from the bottom of
Rauros, as there are indeed marshes close by at the meeting points of
Anduin and the Entwash: the marshes known as the Nindalf or Wetwang.

But Aragorn reassures Boromir by saying that there is an ancient path by
which they can take the boats down and take to the water once more.

Having said all that, I don't quite understand Boromir's reluctance to
go the way Aragorn proposes. Maybe it is simply not trusting Aragorn's
knowledge of the geography of the area, or maybe it is his knowledge
that going down the river after Rauros might not be safe, with all those
orcs holding the eastern bank. He probably thinks that his route is the
safest way to get to Minas Tirith (where he would like to see the Ring
go), but remains with the company because he feels he must remain close
to Frodo and the Ring.

Christopher
--
---
Reply clue: Saruman welcomes you to Spamgard
AC
2004-06-28 16:17:55 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 19:56:30 +0100,
Post by Igenlode Wordsmith
Looking at the map - why does Boromir object when Aragorn plans to
carry the boats to the foot of Rauros falls and take to the water
again, declaring that in that case he will leave the others at the
Tindrock and proceed overland to Minas Tirith across the Entwash?
Surely his own quickest way home from Rauros is straight down the river?
I would imagine his concern over the enemy would play here, particularly if
he desired the Ring.
--
Aaron Clausen
***@hotmail.com
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...