|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The One Ring Forums:
Tolkien Topics: Reading Room:
Let me argue that for you then :):
Edit Log
|
|
noWizardme
Gondolin
Aug 9 2020, 10:50am
Views: 3615
|
|
Let me argue that for you then :)
|
|
|
[One could argue that] But I certainly wouldn't that Tolkien likes to have his Lembas and eat it over the Eagle question. I mean he does create this god-like intervention device for use in impossible situations than he complains when people suggest that the Eagles are used more often!
I think that accusation is perfectly fair.
I think Tolkien only has himself to blame. It's quite fun reading his harrumphing at the hapless Z (unless you happen to be Z, I suppose!). And of course Tolkien is right about the silly aspects of eagle over-use. But I think Tolkien is also expertly exploring the plot hole he's already made for himself, and which Z was only proposing to deepen and open up to tourists for the spectacle of the thing.
Yes, an easy eagle expedition spoils the story, but if the characters aren't allowed to think of it for that reason alone, then there goes my suspension of disbelief. What authors more usually do about such problems (I think, and in my experience) is to close the plot-hole within the fictional world. That is, give readers some reason why the disastrous plot-line can't happen, because or something that would make sense to the characters themselves. That way, the story maintains the illusion that the characters are not the author's puppets but that they are acting autonomously according to the personalities and circumstances we find them in. I don't think Tolkien provides such text or clues in LOTR, and I think that ideally he would have done. Or , of course, perhaps he didn't think there was a problem - and I can suggest why that might be.
What I think has happened is that eagles have changed in an important way from Hobbit to LOTR, or that we are catching them in the act of changing as LOTR progresses (I don't think I can see an exact point of metamorphosis). Before, they are one of Middle-earth's sentient peoples, who happen to be giant birds. It seems perfectly reasonable that someone might ask them for favours, or negotiate their help, as indeed we see happening. After, they are so associated with ideas of divine grace that calling upon their help would be something like asking for (or demanding) a miracle. If this is what has happened in Tolkien's head, then it might explain why it's now inconceivable to him that anyone would dare ask for eagle help. Rather, characters should be doing what God allegedly likes and receiving help only once they have helped themselves -- and it might well be self-evident to them that this is so. But in that case I think we lack text that will help a reader to keep up with this change in authorial thinking -- or at least I can't think of where it is, but would welcome someone finding it and quoting it to me.
Eagles of course aren't the only instance of something changing from Hobbit to LOTR -- we often talk about Gandalf when considering this. But as I read LOTR I see enough of the more serious and powerful LOTR-Gandalf that the less impressive Hobbit-Gandalf slips from my mind. So Tolkien takes me with him. He's less successful doing that with the Eagles. I don't remember reading text in LOTR that helps me understand that they are different. Indeed, they seem to be perfectly willing to do message- and people-carrying duties for their friends, just as before. So I don't blame Jackson - (although doubtless the film did put the exciting idea of eagle rides into many new minds - it's Tolkien's fault!
If it's right (as I think, and as I think I'm agreeing with squire) that asking for an eagle lift in LOTR is a bit like praying for or demanding a miracle, then I suppose Tolkien got himself into a further hole. As I understand it, he wants the role of the divine to be implicit in his story, but shuns using it manifestly as an agenda or plot device. If I'm right about that, it makes the Eagles new role rather tricky for Tolkien to explain in the text.
Come to think of it, the eagles aren't the only thing in Middle-earth that evolves before our eyes. The Black Riders of LOTR Book I change into the fell beast-riding foes of later on, leaving readers and fans to scramble for a 'logical' explanation if one is required. (And as with my other examples in this discussion I'm not saying that I don't know what those fan explanations are, and nor do I fail to realise that people can be very convinced that their favoured explanations work. As for the other examples, I'm suggesting that we can't 'know' the answer in the way we might feel we did if Tolkien had provided one).
And that point of the (apparent) mutability of nazgul gives me a welcome opportunity to throw 'Reverend's Balrog' into the mix:
That is, in this matter, as on almost every matter of dispute in Tolkien, the author changed his mind, changed it more than once, and made no effort to impose consistancy on his past writting. Early Balrogs definitely did not have wings and did not fly. Late Balrogs did have wings and definitely flew. This should not surprise us. Tolkien was willing to even change things already in print when it suited him, as when he altered the text of the Hobbit (as first published Gollum GAVE Bilbo the Ring for winning the Riddle Game, as he told the Dwarves), or when he revised Celeborn’s clan affiliation without notifying Galadriel. So, back to the question. Did the Balrog at the Bridge of Khazad-Dum have wings? Here I refer back to my epochal post of several months ago, in which I point out that the Balrog, and Balrogs in general, had been getting bigger, and more traditionally demonic, in each revision. I say that this process continued into print. The second reference to wings is not a metaphor, because somewhere in the process getting about a hundred words on paper, Tolkien changed his mind. The transition between the early Balrog and the late Balrog is preserved for us in ink; the Balrog came into the room without wings and left with them. Don’t say Tolkien was too careful a writer to do this. Nazgul also recieved a radical upgrade over the course of the story; they just managed it off-stage. http://newboards.theonering.net/...rend%20wings;#956757
At this point I must stop. Tolkien's analogy of the ascent of Everest (in his letter about Z's script, quoted by squire) is something I have some ideas about, but no time now. I might return to that if I remember - please do remind me if you dare! (Or indeed 'if you care'!)
~~~~~~
"You were exceedingly clever once, but unfortunately none of your friends noticed as they were too busy being attacked by an octopus."
-from How To Tell If You Are In A J.R.R. Tolkien Book, by Austin Gilkeson, in 'The Toast', 2016 https://the-toast.net/...-a-jrr-tolkien-book/
(This post was edited by noWizardme on Aug 9 2020, 10:52am)
|
|
|
Edit Log:
|
|
Post edited by noWizardme
(Gondolin) on Aug 9 2020, 10:52am
|
|
|
|
