Tolkien thread: places in the books where the narrator is full of shit

Looking around the first page of Cafe Society, I note to my horror that there are no threads on Tolkien visible. I blame myself. To atone, I am destroying my copies of the Firefly season five box set (including the all-nude, all-lesbian four-episode arc guest starring Natalie Portman and Shelly Radley) which I obtained on my last visit to Earth Analog 78434-q. I no longer deserve to own them.

Anyway…

Are there any portions of the legendry of Middle-earth which you read and think to yourself, “Sorry, Professor, it just CAN’T have happened that way. Not that I’m questioning your skills in composition or philology; I’m just saying that–whoever the Noldorian poet, Gondorian scribe, or hobbit scrivener was who originally wrote this passage was–he was full of shit.”*

In the “Akallabêth” portion of The Silmarillion, we are told that Sauron was taken to Numenor as a prisoner when Ar-Pharazôn, determined to show that he was the mightiest warlord in Arda, assailed Mordor with so vast an army that the legions of Orcs quailed at the mere sight of them. I’ve always found this difficult to believe. Partly because I just can’t see the Numenoeian forces as being that mighty; partly because Sauron, being a Ainu by nature, could smply have cast off his material form and withdrawn. It’s always seemed more likely to me that either Sauron deliberately threw the battle because he always intended to subvert the Numenoreans subtly, rather than being forced into it by exigencies of circumstance, or that he went to Numenor entirely willingly, having persuaded Ar-Pharazôn from the get-go that they should be allies. Some time during the history of Gondor and Arnor, the story got mixed up a bit; someone in Minas Tirith wanted to exaggerate the puissance of the Numernoreans."
Anyway, that’s just me. What parts of The Lord of the Rings, The Hobbit, or The Silmarillion would you say are full of crap?

*For purposes of this thread, we are pretending that JRRT was indeed the translator, not the creator, of the works in question.

The first edition of The Hobbit had quite a few parts rewritten to fit with the later Lord of the Rings and is explained as Bilbo being an unreliable narrator because of the influence of the One Ring.

I was just thinking to myself last night that Beorn just doesn’t seem to fit in with the rest of the whole Middle-Earth thing. Whence does he derive his powers?

I am told that in his later years, Tolkien started revising the backstory on Celeborn and Galadriel, trying to turn them both into plaster saints.

Sorry, Professor, she is much more interesting (and believable) as a rebellious Noldo who walked across the Arctic.

He could simply be one of the creatures created from various Morgoth experiments I suppose. What are his people’s powers: to turn into bears, right? That doesn’t seem so ultra powerful that it conflicts with the basic theology. It might not even require “magic” as it were, at least in the physics of Middle-Earth.

It’s Tom Bombadill that’s the real mythological enigma imho, and all the more so because he was in LOTR proper. He seems more like a pagan nature spirit than something that fits into the Middle-Earth pantheon.

Spiders don’t have stingers like bees or wasps. They inject venom by biting with their jaws. I don’t care if Shelob was some sort of mythic monster and therefore should be “exempt” from this rule. It’s just wrong.

Yup, that whole sequence just doesn’t seem to fit with the rest of the story.

(My wife refers to it as “young hobbits on an acid trip.” Me, I wonder what sort of mushrooms Farmer Maggot was growing…)

Tom Bombadil where was I always got irritated. But bits and pieces of most everything mentioned here sticks out at one time or another.

But then I never thought Tolkien was the end-all be-all of authors, just that he spun a decent yarn.

I don’t think that Beorn and his skin-changing kin are really any more remarkable than the Druadain who could call statues to serve them. Beorn could change his skin because he was a skin-changer, enough said.

I concur. JRRT began to identify Galadriel quite strongly in his mind with the virgin Mary, rather to Galadriel’s detriment, IMHO.

When i read the books for the first time when i was young i always pictured Shelob as a spider like monster, not an actual giant spider. I hadn’t read the hobbit yet though.

The Bombadil episode was made up so that those hobbits wouldn’t have to confess to Gandalf that they wasted time on their trip getting stoned on bad pipe-weed.

As for the OP’s question, the total absence of women for certain species (hidden for Dwarves, lost for Ents, absent (?) for Orcs and Uruk-hai) strikes me as extreme simplification of the narrative.

A similar thread; you’ll see some familiar beefs aired there. My first post is #39: LOTR fans - What's the book's weakest point? - Cafe Society - Straight Dope Message Board

While I agree that he’s more fitting in a fairy tale like The Hobbit, Bombadil did give the hobbits the magical daggers to stab the witch king. (I’m glad that Peter Jackson took Bombadil out of the movies.) I got the impression from the book that Gandalf was worried about fighting TWK, ie, wasn’t sure that he could take him in a straight-up fight, so the daggers and Éowyn were the deus ex machina to solve that problem.

Speaking of deus ex machina, the Eagles. They’re going to fly into the ash cloud of an erupting volcano to rescue a couple hobbits? I don’t think so, Professor. You might as well have them carry the hobbits into Mordor & air drop them into the caldera of Mt. Doom, and we’ve had that discussion too many times already.

I perhaps wasn’t clear in my OP. I’m not so much thinking of “weak points” of the books; rather, I’m treating this as part of the game where we pretend the story is historical and that the Perfesser was the translator rather than the author of the story that went through many hands before reaching his, and looking for spots in which earlier redactors had differed from the “true” history.

So we’re the Bree Street Irregulars.

For a slightly off-color video treatment of the “Eagles” SNAFU, check out
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6xHwUZHkJ0 Gandalf-raping day…

:: growling at no one in particular ::

It was always my understanding that that was Tolkien’s intention.

The alert reader can only marvel at the wealth of common threads joining the tales of the Elder Days preserved in the Silmarillion with the historical accounts set down in the Red Book of Westmarch. Traditions; artifacts; lineages of Elves and Men; even the histories of certain individuals can be traced unambiguously from one to the other, even across thousands of years.

We may therefore be reasonably confident that, extraordinary as it may seem, the Silmarillion presents a generally accurate history of the Elder Days, as assembled from first- and second-hand accounts, the teachings of the Valar, and the lore of the Wise.

However, despite our confidence in the work as a whole, certain features remain suspect, even allowing for the very nature of the world being altered wholesale by the hand of Eru. Of these, the verdict of scholars and masters of lore is unanimous on one crucial and unambiguous point:
Elrond’s dad does not drive Venus.
Scholars and lore-masters also agree that there is no such damn thing as a magic talking Troll purse. “Bilbo, you stinking liar,” they say, shaking their heads sadly.