I think someone did a read through chapter-by-chapter on this point at one point, but it was by someone who’d already read it once. Fun, but I’m ready to go along for the ride with you whenever you’re ready!!
Meantime, here’s one of my very favorite funny LOTR links: http://www.mcsweeneys.net/2003/04/22fellowship.html
Its’ the "U N U S E D A U D I O C O M M E N T A R Y B Y ** H O W A R D Z I N N A N D N O A M C H O M S K Y** , R E C O R D E D S U M M E R 2 0 0 2 , F O R T H E F E L L O W S H I P O F T H E R I N G ( P L A T I N U M S E R I E S E X T E N D E D E D I T I O N ) D V D ,
P A R T O N E . "
Heck, if you get a thread like that, I might join in. I’ve been told (in this thread, no less) that I would really like the books. I’d been putting it off because I’ve heard so many people disparage Tolkien’s style (of including too much unnecessary detail.) But within a group like this, even that might be fun.
So, which do you think would be better for beginners, an abridged version, a full version, or an annotated version? If the latter, which one? I might not be able to get my hands on the one you suggest, but I’d at least know to purchase that version when I can get the money.
Edit: I don’t know how, but I already knew choie was female. Hmm.
Oh dang, I didn’t edit my post very well. Anyway the “Howard Zinn-Noam Chomsky” FOTR DVD commentary is worth clicking to, even if my post isn’t very pretty.
And BigT, there is really only one standard version of the LOTR out there, text wise. Just grab a new or used copy of FOTR and jump in. Don’t worry about annotations, you’ve got the Straight Dopers.
Cool, I’ll have a look for that old thread first, though. Don’t want to repeat anything.
Okay that is hilarious! I’ve just read through the opening stuff and it’s amusingly spot on.
It does remind me of another question, though this may have been answered in the first movie and I just forgot. What did happen to all the other rings, and why is it only “the one ring” that is so dangerous? I think I know the answer … I seem to recall Galadriel/narrator telling us that Sauron poured in all his hatred and greed or some such thing … but is there anything else? And couldn’t the other rings have been any use in stopping the other one?
I was gonna ask the same question, thanks BigT! I would love to get an annotated version, because I’m fairly intimidated by the books (even the brief snippets that were posted here, such as Eowyn’s downing of the Witch King, seem rather dense, prose-wise). But sometimes annotated versions are subject to the editor’s whims and opinions, so I don’t know if they’re always the best option for a first time read-through.
My nauseating fangirl squeeing on how cute David Wenham and Sean Bean are, mayhap. Or my tender affections toward Smeagol (in TTT, that is – by the end of ROTK I was gleeful to see that bastard fry)?
This goes back about 15 years, to the early days of the internet, and the usenet group rec.arts.books.tolkien. Somebody raised the question “do balrogs have wings?” and the debate raged for years and terabytes of bandwidth. The problem is that Tolkien’s language was a bit metaphorical – “the shadow about it reached out like two vast wings.” So if it had wings, why didn’t it fly?
Well, there are annotated editions of The Hobbit (by Douglas Anderson) and of The Lord of the Rings (the notes by Wayne Hammond and Christina Scull are published separately from the novel and are titled The Lord of the Rings: A Reader’s Companion), but I don’t recommend that you use either one of them for a first reading. The books are useful for scholars, but it’s not necessary for most readers. In comparison, I think the annotated editions of the Alice in Wonderland books (by Martin Gardner) are of more importance to a first-time reader of those books.
From what I read so far, it seems delightfully irreverent to both the source material and the fans, both those who take what is written at face value, and those with alternate interpretations (the whole WW2 analogy that Tolkein denies, for example). It *is *funny, but I can see why it might be rejected as DVD commentary (if it really was rejected). The people who buy platinum editions are uberfans, and they wouldn’t want to offend those who don’t get this type of humor.
Please forgive me if that statement was, well, completely obvious.
Edit: And wouldn’t Occam’s Razor say that it was more likely that Bilbo performed some sort of illusion, rather than all the hobbits seeing the exact same hallucination. Sure, the pipe weed may have mad them less critical of the situation, but it couldn’t cause the whole effect.
With the exception of the last three elven rings, Sauron was involved in the making of all the rings of power, so when he made the Master Ring, he made it so that anyone that wore one of the rings of power could be dominated by his will.
The Ringwraiths were originally humans who each had a ring of power, and were all dominated by Sauron through their rings.
Not even Narya, Nenya and Vilya(the three elven rings),which he never touched, could be used openly while Sauron possessed the Master Ring.
Right, even the Three were still based on fundamental principles of Ring-making that Sauron (in disguise) had taught the Elves.
Originally, all of the Great Rings (except for the One) were intended for Elves, but Sauron stole 16 of them, and gave nine of them to humans and seven to dwarves with the hope of corrupting them. This pretty much worked for the humans, who became the Ringwraiths, but he found that dwarves were more difficult to corrupt: The Seven enhanced the natural dwarvish tendency towards hoarding and avarice, but didn’t really weaken their wills. Thrain, father of Thorin (the leader of the dwarves in The Hobbit) was the last wielder of one of the Seven; the rest had all been destroyed or reclaimed by Sauron (as was Thrain’s, shortly before The Hobbit).
When the bridge collapsed, the Balrog was more interested in dragging Gandalf down with it than in escaping. On the mountainside, it fell down because it was dead, or at least dying.
To summarize:
First, the lines in Fellowship of the Ring: The first description of the Balrog says “the shadow spread out like two vast wings”, and a later mention says something about its wings touching the walls, without a clarification of whether the second mention is metaphorical or not.
Balrogs make several appearances in the Silmarillion, and can apparently arrive on a scene very quickly.
There are also known instances of a Balrog falling to its death. Even if you don’t count the one that Gandalf fought, Glorfindel slew one back in the First Age by dragging it down into a canyon with him. This was outdoors, so one assumes there was enough space to spread wings if necessary.
The Balrogs were among the earliest servants of Morgoth, being (like Sauron and Gandalf) Maiar, spirits which pre-existed the World. Early in the World’s history, Morgoth spent a lot of effort trying to wrest the secret of flight from the Eagles, without success, so one assumes that none of his early servants had the ability to fly.
Personally, my stance is that Balrogs did have wings, but that their wings were literally composed of shadow, and shadow-stuff wings are insufficient to enable a corporeal creature to fly.
An off-topic fist bump for Wendell Wagner. The Annotated Alice rocks. When I found an original hard-cover copy in Half-Price Books, my little heart leapt with joy.
I’m also big Martin Gardner fan. Interesting how he’s so into “Alice”. I think I read that Salman Rushdie is a big “Wizard of Oz” fan.
Anyway, if any newbies want to start a CafeSociety reading group adventure for LOTR, I think it would be a great idea. I think the first time readers should start with The Long Expected Party and skip the Prologue, but that’s just me. We could have threads discussing individual chapters in order or groups of chapters. Any thoughts?
To be exact, Salman Rushdie is a big fan of the movie of The Wizard of Oz. He wrote a book about it for the BFI Film Classics Series. He talks there about much of an influence it was on his early writing. He says that it’s closer to typical Bollywood films than to Hollywood ones.
This all makes good sense to me. I believe balrogs did have wings, but that they were vestigial or, in the case of the balrog that fought Gandalf, atrophied from many long years of disuse and weren’t powerful enough to lift it.
Hey guys, I rewatched Fellowship of the Rings yesterday, the extended edition. I’ll address my new thoughts in a different post, but I’ll say this: wow, the experience was so much better seeing it a second time! Astonishing.
Thanks! And to Chronos too. Okay, this makes sense. Rest assured, when I was rewatching the film, I looked carefully for Balroc wing-age. Interestingly, I noticed that they were fairly obscured by flame and smoke much of the time. Of course, I’m watching on a widescreen computer monitor, not a huge-ass movie screen, so maybe they were obvious to those seeing it in the movies. But I was specifically looking for the wings this time because of this very conversation, and I noticed that it almost seemed as if Jackson was teasing us. Probably will be more obvious in the ROTK opening, some of which is outside in a snowy mountain that will make the Balroc’s physionomy much easier to see.
Yeah, y’know, I think it would be distracting after all. If we go with a group reading, I’ll be able to get my annotations interactively.
Thanks, Mogle. Now I get it. Honestly, I’m embarrassed that I asked the question after re-watching FOTR – all this stuff is in the prologue (and lightly scattered throughout the film, such as in some comments by Elrond and Galadriel), and I obviously heard it before but didn’t get it. In my weak defense, it’s a helluva lot to take in for a first-time viewer and I think I plumb forgot after nearly nine hours of mythology and names and various royal lineages to absorb.
Hey, just wait. Soon you’ll take on the books then move to Silmarillion, Lost Tales, Letters of JRRT, and the whole 12 volume HOME series, followed by the 2 volume HOTH series.
Then we can talk about Bingo Baggins, son of Bilbo. And debate about how Trotter the hobbit ranger got his wooden feet resoled.
