|
The governance of the Shire is also relevant to this topic, I think. The Shire is ruled by two divided authorities - the Mayor, who's an elected position, and the Thain, a hereditary office originally appointed by and at one time serving the King of Arnor. I think the Thain has always been a Took; after his return from abroad, Pippin becomes the Thain. Sam, meanwhile, is elected Mayor five or six times in a row on account of his heroism. (It is noteworthy that Aragorn, as king, declares the Shire perpetually off-limits to Big People, but the position of Thain continues to exist.) One could certainly find details in this state of affairs relevant to the question of the origins of class in Middle-Earth. The sequence seems to be: somebody Is Awesome -> they Do Something Great and are recognized for it -> the proof of their greatness is rewarded with power, wealth, and social advancement -> power is inherited. It all is implied to come from some transitive quality of virtue, courage, and competence, but it happens on small scales and large. The Edain assist the Elves in the war against Morgoth, proving their valor, and they're rewarded with Numenor, which is the height of power in all the world. Earendil and Elwing sailed across the Sea to end the war, and they and their sons were rewarded with the chance to choose their fate; among their descendants were the kings of Numenor and the Dunedain, on down to Aragorn. This was granted by the Valar, so that means Aragorn literally rules by divine right; he inherited Elros' longevity, which was given to him as a blessing, so arguably that blessing was inherited. The variable longevity of the kings of Numenor and of Gondor in proportion to their observance of kingly virtues can be interpreted as a way to quantify how much Manwe approved of them! Well, maybe that's a bit much.
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2013 05:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 14:05 |
|
|
Melkor's evil is probably best interpreted as being driven by pride. He coveted the Flame Imperishable, which was Iluvatar's alone and embodied the power of true creation, and he sought to dominate Arda utterly as its supreme god. The distinction between Melkor and Aule is very instructive when talking about pride in Tolkien - both imitated Iluvatar, but while Aule did so to glorify Him, Melkor only wanted to glorify himself.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2013 00:57
|
|
|
Iseeyouseemeseeyou posted:I needed a break from space opera's so I bought these 6 books: Your best bet would either be publication order or to save The Silmarillion for last. Once you're done with The Return of the King, read the appendices, and if you find yourself saying "I want to learn more about that!" go with The Silmarillion, because that's what you'll get. If, on the other hand, you feel at that time like you'd rather read another novel, The Children of Hurin should be fifth.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2013 06:29
|
|
|
Though according to the appendices, the Shire dialect of Westron is the one that sounds highbrow. I could have made something of my life, but instead, I remember things like this.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2013 01:32
|
|
|
I don't know how new this is, but here is illustrations by Evan Palmer of the Ainulindalė from The Silmarillion. Some excerpts:  
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2014 01:51
|
|
|
It refers to how he is the creator and ultimate master of the One, the Seven, and the Nine (but not the Three).
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2014 20:42
|
|
|
In Fellowship of the Rings they call Frodo the Lord of the Rings, then Gandalf (or was it Elrond?) says that that title refers to Sauron, because he alone is the one with authority over them, and proposed instead calling him "ring-bearer." Calling him the lord of something he destroyed would be rather more Roman than English, anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2014 21:13
|
|
|
The only thing The Silmarillion should ever be adapted into is other books about particular chapters. But then adapt those books into whatever, sure.
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2014 02:53
|
|
|
I interpret the defining characteristic of Melkor as an obsession with the possibility of things existing that do not originate with God. Before the Music, he wandered out into the Void, far away from the other Ainur. Before being sent into the world, Iluvatar admonishes him that he'll see that nothing can exist "that hath not its uttermost source in [Him]." Finding that there was nothing except what God made, he tried to make it himself - and failed, in his arrogant presumption that anything could be God's equal.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
He tried three different ways to dominate the Music of the Ainur, but none of the Ainur, not even Melkor, understood that the song described the future of the world they would be living in. Melkor sang his own destiny, which he could not defy. Ea itself is partly intended to teach Melkor his lesson; because he did not cease his discord before the end of the song, he can't choose harmony until the end of the world.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2014 23:15
|
|
|
If you're interested in the lore, be sure not to skip the appendices after finishing The Return of the King.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2014 22:10
|
|
|
The other reason why not the Eagles is because Sauron had an air force.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2014 08:53
|
|
|
Things in Tolkien are called "magic" because humans don't know how to do them. Elves and, to a lesser extent, dwarves don't distinguish between magic and nonmagic things.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2014 03:22
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:Most people in the films are just caricatures of what they were in the books. Especially Boromir and Denethor. And Gimli The movies contain a lot of things, but subtlety is not one of them.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2015 23:01
|
|
, my favourite character. He's just a comic sidekick.
|
He let him think he had escaped, essentially.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 23:29
|
|
|
Here's the thing: balrogs are huge and scary. If one of them that lives in a cave decides he wants to have wings, who is gonna tell him he can't? You? That's what I thought. I like that there is such a strong theological element to Tolkien's fiction. An awful lot of really rewarding and nuanced religious thought might fade from the public consciousness as secularism becomes the order of the day, so expressing it so rigorously in popular art is a good way to preserve it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2015 04:58
|
|
|
As crypto-vikings, the Rohirrim are accustomed to people talking a lot of poo poo about the stupid things they're totally going to do, you guys.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2015 04:36
|
|
|
The Hobbit trilogy exists as a vehicle for developing new film technologies, and I liked all of those, so it's good.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2015 18:03
|
|
|
Expectation is the source of disappointment in adaptations. Seek to escape Samsara and attain Nerdvana.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2015 09:46
|
|
|
Metal, as an aesthetic, is what you get if you combine Tolkien and Loudness.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2015 21:31
|
|
|
Smoking Crow posted:Shut up mortal, elves own I like elves, but I also like to hate elves. It is the great dilemma.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2015 01:38
|
|
|
I have no difficulty imagining different visuals from the movies as I reread, but the score is there every time.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2015 02:55
|
|
|
The best adaptation of the Silmarillion would be similar to Fantasia, I think.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2016 08:57
|
|
|
They are good movies, and just because they have a title in common doesn't mean they are in some way competing for your affections.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2016 02:23
|
|
|
Really, it's all just art inspiring further art.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2016 03:21
|
|
|
Actually, if you can't recreate at least one of the family trees in the appendix from memory, I'm going to flunk you.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2016 07:07
|
|
|
The Hobbit movies were bad, but, hell, I liked them. They are not the worst movies I have enjoyed. But, yes, I think the fact that the latter film trilogy turned out to be less an adaptation of anything Tolkien wrote and more a cynical parody of the former film trilogy (the most interesting way to view it - sort of like it's more of an adaptation of The Last Ringbearer) would not have sat well with Tolkien. It deeply alters the narrative on the most essential thematic level, to the point that there's not really a reason for it to be adapting anything and can't really be called the same story.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2016 18:33
|
|
|
I like that. But it's easier to silence twerps by saying that Sauron had an air force.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2016 05:49
|
|
|
Is an orc just anybody an elf doesn't like, or is it a specific group of peoples?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2016 18:24
|
|
|
I find "orcs are elves" believable, and I also think that the various authors of the books Tolkien translated would have found such a belief intolerably horrifying to entertain, given their opinions on other matters of race and religion.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2016 01:32
|
|
|
TildeATH posted:Pretty sure that's canon. There is no canon on the subject of the origin of orcs.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2016 01:42
|
|
|
They're landowners, yeah. Bagginses, Tooks, and Brandybucks are upper-class. The ones who work, manage; others just inherit. Families like the Gamgees are their tenants, working and living on their lands and giving some portion of the food grown there in exchange. The Took clan is the closest thing the Shire has to royalty; Frodo and Merry are Pippin's cousins.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2016 05:12
|
|
|
Elves convince the plants to farm themselves. They don't till soil, but they do harvest - probably mostly directly before mealtime. Everyone is a craftsman, and some people's craft is gardening. The garden is the entire forest. Doing things the hard way is for men.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2016 17:56
|
|
|
I like to read the Hobbit movies as a cynical parody of the Lord of the Rings movies. The cynicism of their very existence lends itself well to this interpretation, as do the stylistic and structural similarities.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2017 01:54
|
|
|
Video games are good, and even movies protected at high framerates don't look that much like them. I never understood that complaint.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2017 23:29
|
|
|
That's fair, but pedantry demands that I still don't think that "looking like" a video game is the problem.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2017 23:55
|
|
|
The framing and camera work are sometimes similar, but the aesthetic resemblance is usually pretty minimal otherwise. Like even the drat Warcraft movie doesn't look much like the Warcraft games outside of things like prop design and color palette. Similar elements, but no one would mistake a shot from one for a shot from the other. Bongo Bill fucked around with this message at 01:39 on Jan 5, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2017 01:37
|
|
|
Free yourself from the cycle of expectation and disappointment, and attain Nerdvana.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2017 20:11
|
|
|
It was written as two. You can see in the middle of the second movie of three where the original two scripts were stitched together. Their rowing into Laketown is where the second of two would have started.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2017 22:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 14:05 |
|
|
Subtlety is not a necessary quality for a good film, even one that adapts a work that possesses subtlety.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2017 01:18
|
|