Our Sponsor Sideshow Collectibles Send us News
Lord of the Rings Tolkien
Search Tolkien
Lord of The RingsTheOneRing.net - Forged By And For Fans Of JRR Tolkien
Lord of The Rings Serving Middle-Earth Since The First Age

Lord of the Rings Movie News - J.R.R. Tolkien
Do you enjoy the 100% volunteer, not for profit services of TheOneRing.net?
Consider a donation!

  Main Index   Search Posts   Who's Online   Log in
The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: Reading Room:
The 2019 Rookie Reader Review
First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 Next page Last page  View All

Starling
Half-elven


Jan 7, 11:25pm

Post #51 of 94 (521 views)
Shortcut
That's funny [In reply to] Can't Post

When I was little I thought a hobbit was some sort of insect, sort of like a fancy mosquito. This was because my sister had this version:

To this day I still can't see this drawing as a dragon. Instead, it is a weird insect with a black head (facing forward) and red decorative antennae. Crazy




squire
Half-elven


Jan 7, 11:55pm

Post #52 of 94 (518 views)
Shortcut
"That belongs to the next chapter" [In reply to] Can't Post

Imagine reading that line out loud to a young child, curled up in bed, raptly following the story. It worked for me when I was that child, and it worked for me when I read it to my own children. A chapter a night, and each chapter ends with some kind of resolution, very often with Mr. Baggins drifting off to sleep. It's really an almost perfect story of its kind, once one adjusts to that point of view.

I am really enjoying your voyage of discovery, from a starting point I can barely imagine! I think and hope you're enjoying it too.

The Lord of the Rings, by the way, does not have an overt narrator nor a children's book's tone (with just a few exceptions, well worth talking about when you get there). In the mean time, have fun with "There And Back Again"!



squire online:
RR Discussions: The Valaquenta, A Shortcut to Mushrooms, and Of Herbs and Stewed Rabbit
Lights! Action! Discuss on the Movie board!: 'A Journey in the Dark'. and 'Designing The Two Towers'.
Archive: All the TORn Reading Room Book Discussions (including the 1st BotR Discussion!) and Footerama: "Tolkien would have LOVED it!"
Dr. Squire introduces the J.R.R. Tolkien Encyclopedia: A Reader's Diary


= Forum has no new posts. Forum needs no new posts.


Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor

Jan 8, 12:42am

Post #53 of 94 (509 views)
Shortcut
One way borrowing [In reply to] Can't Post

As you are no doubt aware, the term “one way borrowing” comes from John Rateliff, who has done by far the most extensive analysis of the relationship between the writing of The Hobbit and the Silmarillion tradition as it existed at that time. In his discussion about the Elvenking, he writes:

"Given the fluid nature of the unpublished myths, where Tolkien was willing to play around with concepts and occasionally contemplate major changes in the legends, we should ask the obvious question: is the elvenking Bilbo meets Thingol himself or an entirely new character closely modelled upon him – an analogue, as it were? The answer seems to be both: just as the status of The Hobbit itself hovered in Tolkien’s mind between being part of the legendarium and standing apart from it, so too within the book the identification of the elvenking straddles both options and cannot conclusively be resolved either way. Even after Tolkien eventually, towards the end of the work on The Lord of the Rings, committed to the decision that the wood-elf king was a separate character, he never fully reworked the original story to completely support that decision.”

In the course of his analysis, John notes that the Elvenking in The Hobbit is far more consistent in character with the original figure of Tinwelint (Thingol’s predecessor in the earlier versions of the legendarium), than the more ennobled Thingol himself. He concludes, “In the end it seems clear that when he wrote The Hobbit Tolkien drew on the old story (which was, after all, unpublished and likely to remain so), changing it as he did so, to make the material more suited to his new purpose. But he left his options open as to whether the Elvenking was a new character or an old familiar character appearing in a new story, slightly altered to fit his new surroundings. In time he decided that the Elvenking was indeed a new character and gave him a new name and history of his own, but this decision postdated the publication of The Hobbit, probably by more than a decade, and he never went back and re-wrote the key passage in The Hobbit to distinguish what was now the analogue from the original. Thus to this day we are left with two contradictory accounts of which elvenking was responsible for provoking the elf-dwarf war, the one in the Silmarillion tradition, and the other within The Hobbit.”

Then, in addressing the thorny question of whether the Arkenstone could have actually been one of the Silmarils, John reminds us that while decades after the posthumous publication of The Silmarilion “it seems inevitable that the three jewels would be lost beyond recovery” at the time that he was writing The Hobbit, “Tolkien had in fact at that point changed his mind four times in the previous fifteen years about the holy jewels’ fate, all in a series of unpublished works that remained in flux and were each to be replaced by a new version of the story; the one constant had been that the story ended with all three of the jewels remote and inaccessible. Just as the sword of Turgon King of Gondolin had somehow survived the fall of his city and found its way through the ages into that troll-lair and hence Bladorthin/Gandalf’s hands, it is thus more than possible that Tolkien was playing in The Hobbit with the idea of having one of F¸anor’s wondrous Jewels re-appear, no doubt the one that had been thrown into a fiery chasm and lost deep within the earth – which is, after all, exactly where the dwarves find the Arkenstone, buried at the roots of an extinct volcano. As with his borrowing regarding Tinwelint’s quarrel with the dwarves in “The Nauglafring" for the chapter about the wood-elves and their king’s old quarrel with the dwarves, Tolkien drew on his legendarium without committing himself: it was a one way borrowing in which elements from the 1930 Quenta and Early Annals found their way into The Hobbit but that ‘unofficial’ usage did not in turn force changes in what Tolkien was still thinking of as the main line of the legendarium.”

To this I have little to add, other than to say that if you have not read John’s cogent and extensive analysis, please pick up a copy of his History of The Hobbit. It is well worth the time.

'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'

The Hall of Fire


Ethel Duath
Half-elven


Jan 8, 1:58am

Post #54 of 94 (506 views)
Shortcut
That's one of my favorite things about Tolkien's works. [In reply to] Can't Post

It's a Place to Go. For any number of reasons.

A hankering for adventure.
A need for inspiration.
Hope that people actually can get along, overcome differences, and work together, even in the worst circumstances.
A respite from the difficulties of RL (Real Life)

And like you said, a place to fall asleep under the stars.



hanne
Lorien

Jan 8, 2:49am

Post #55 of 94 (495 views)
Shortcut
Hee! [In reply to] Can't Post

So it wasn't just me! I love childhood imagination. :)


Cygnus
Rivendell


Jan 8, 3:28am

Post #56 of 94 (493 views)
Shortcut
Youth [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
So it wasn't just me! I love childhood imagination. :)

You're only young once but you can be a child forever.
(The original version of this that I heard was "You're only young once but you can be immature forever")

"I found it is the small things.....everyday deeds of ordinary folk that keeps the darkness at bay.....simple acts of kindness and love." - Gandalf


noWizardme
Valinor


Jan 8, 5:05pm

Post #57 of 94 (462 views)
Shortcut
feigned history, versus legend [In reply to] Can't Post

Thanks for this! You are right - I had read enough of John Rateliff to pick up his term 'one-way borrowing', but not enough to know about his opinions on the elvenking.But now I do.

I think the whole one-way borrowing thing is interesting. It's easy to think of Tolkien's stories as a kind of feigned history, and to an extent of course, he encouraged this game. But in real events there is, at least in principle, one correct explanation for events, which we coud know if only there were good enough evidence.

I find it interesting that Tolkien's approach here is quite like one seen in legends and folk-lore: figures from other stories or from history get borrowed for a tale, or aspects of another tale are borrowed to fit around a storyteller's current needs.

~~~~~~
"Go down to the shovel store and take your pick." Traditional prank played on dwarves when they start down the mine.


Cygnus
Rivendell


Jan 8, 5:23pm

Post #58 of 94 (474 views)
Shortcut
entertaining then not [In reply to] Can't Post

The chapter "Barrels out of Bond" was pretty fun. I'm surprised at how long Bilbo wears the ring. There seems to be no negative side effects to wearing it which I didn't see coming. It seems like the movies make the ring-wearing moments seem uncomfortable and burdensome but now I'm wondering why that was the case. Why didn't Bilbo have the same problems Frodo did? Was it because Sauron wasn't as strong when Bilbo wore it or did Tolkien simply make a literary adjustment?
The chapter "A Warm Welcome" was pretty boring by comparison. I'm sure it's because my movie mind caused me to expect more. Of course, Peter Jackson had the ability to expand it (and the need since he was making 3 movies from one book). As I mentioned earlier, I knew there was not going to be a white orc in the book but that is the only thing I knew about the differences. At this point in my reading I suspect there will be no Bard or Alfrid. (please let me know....I don't care if I find out now. In fact, it wouldn't bother me to see a list of all the characters who won't be in this book, or any of the other 3 books for that matter).
I was surprised that there was little mention of the ring in "A Warm Welcome". By that I mean you'd think that the dwarves would have been pestering Bilbo to see more of it. Of course, they might have but Tolkien just didn't put it in. I was also surprised that there was no resistance by the citizens when the dwarves left for the mountain. I guess, without a Bard around nobody got any resistance organized. Also, without a Bard I'm wondering how Smaug is going to die (BUT PLEASE DON'T GIVE THAT PART AWAY!)
This isn't important but I notice that spell-check says dwarves should be dwarfs. Was this a result of the Americanized version of English? I haven't noticed anything else, like colour for example but maybe I simply haven't been looking.

"I found it is the small things.....everyday deeds of ordinary folk that keeps the darkness at bay.....simple acts of kindness and love." - Gandalf

(This post was edited by Cygnus on Jan 8, 5:30pm)


noWizardme
Valinor


Jan 8, 6:07pm

Post #59 of 94 (464 views)
Shortcut
no negative side effects [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
I'm surprised at how long Bilbo wears the ring. There seems to be no negative side effects to wearing it which I didn't see coming. It seems like the movies make the ring-wearing moments seem uncomfortable and burdensome but now I'm wondering why that was the case. Why didn't Bilbo have the same problems Frodo did? Was it because Sauron wasn't as strong when Bilbo wore it or did Tolkien simply make a literary adjustment?


Well, one answer is that Bilbo's ring is not yet the One Ring - it's entirely clear from Tolkien's papers that the idea for the Rings of Power emerged as he tried to work out what his new Hobbit story should be about. As Tolkien wrote what you are reading now, we don't think he was imagining any powers for the Ring other than invisibility.

I've seen people squaring the resulting circle and restoring consistency by arguing (as you say) that Sauron was not then as powerful, as later. But what I don't know is whether that's an idea Tolkien himself used, or whether it's a fan idea. In any case its merits as an idea depend, I suppose, on how one thinks the Ring corrupts people - and a usual Tolkien doesn't provide much information about mechanisms.

~~~~~~
"Go down to the shovel store and take your pick." Traditional prank played on dwarves when they start down the mine.


Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor

Jan 8, 6:28pm

Post #60 of 94 (460 views)
Shortcut
No Alfrid [In reply to] Can't Post

You are quite correct that Alfrid was a completely made up character in the films, but Bard is very much an important player in the book, as you will find out soon.

'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'

The Hall of Fire


enanito
Lorien

Jan 8, 8:22pm

Post #61 of 94 (459 views)
Shortcut
Bilbo - is he Rankin/Bass', Peter Jackson's, or still my Bilbo? [In reply to] Can't Post

The most recent time I re-read the Hobbit, I found myself vacillating between how I envisioned Bilbo (and everything else in the Hobbit). As a book-firster (3rd grade school teacher reading to class during quiet time), then seeing the animated version and then finally all 3 P.J. movies (plus LOTR which shows some of the same sites), I've found my visuals of the Hobbit have definitely evolved. Truth be told, it's now hard for me to remember exactly how I envisioned Bilbo prior to seeing the movies (although other aspects of the Hobbit remain as I saw them as a child).

As geeked as I was when the LOTR movies were first announced, I had extreme trepidation regarding how my personal vision of Middle Earth would be portrayed -- would I be dismayed, delighted, or disgusted?

I've always found it interesting to see Forum Posts from movie-firsters as they then read the books, since it's such an opposite experience for them.

I won't pass judgement on the Hobbit films in this post, but one thing I will say, is that I'm happy that the visual in my mind of Bilbo from the animated movie has been mostly replaced by Martin Freeman (although I understand not everyone shares my feelings) Wink


CuriousG
Half-elven


Jan 8, 11:28pm

Post #62 of 94 (437 views)
Shortcut
And no Tauriel or Legolas [In reply to] Can't Post

As for the spelling of "dwarves," I have a vague memory of reading somewhere that Tolkien felt quite strongly that it should be "dwarves" and "elves", not "dwarfs" and "elfs," but unfortunately I forget his reason.


Ethel Duath
Half-elven


Jan 9, 12:15am

Post #63 of 94 (434 views)
Shortcut
I believe it had something to do with [In reply to] Can't Post

his feelings about "the sillier tales of latter days." He wanted these races taken seriously, and from what I remember "feigned" that the original plurals had the "v."



(This post was edited by Ethel Duath on Jan 9, 12:15am)


entmaiden
Forum Admin / Moderator


Jan 9, 2:00am

Post #64 of 94 (425 views)
Shortcut
I think Tolkien put that in the foreword to LOTR [In reply to] Can't Post

but I will have to check. He had trouble with his editors and insisted on "dwarves" and "elves".


Cygnus
Rivendell


Jan 9, 12:33pm

Post #65 of 94 (385 views)
Shortcut
makes sense [In reply to] Can't Post



Well, one answer is that Bilbo's ring is not yet the One Ring - it's entirely clear from Tolkien's papers that the idea for the Rings of Power emerged as he tried to work out what his new Hobbit story should be about. As Tolkien wrote what you are reading now, we don't think he was imagining any powers for the Ring other than invisibility.
.

That clears it up. I am learning so much here thanks to everybody's help. The next time I wonder something like that I should probably put myself in Tolkien's shoes (at the time he wrote those words) and imagine that LOTR doesn't exist. As I recall, others on this thread have suggested something similar to that. I just need to remember! Of course, my primary goal is to have fun and enjoy the fantasy. Since analyzing it is my secondary goal I'm not always focusing as well as I could.

"I found it is the small things.....everyday deeds of ordinary folk that keeps the darkness at bay.....simple acts of kindness and love." - Gandalf

(This post was edited by Cygnus on Jan 9, 12:34pm)


Chen G.
Lorien

Jan 9, 2:04pm

Post #66 of 94 (376 views)
Shortcut
However [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
Well, one answer is that Bilbo's ring is not yet the One Ring - it's entirely clear from Tolkien's papers that the idea for the Rings of Power emerged as he tried to work out what his new Hobbit story should be about. As Tolkien wrote what you are reading now, we don't think he was imagining any powers for the Ring other than invisibility.


Although I still think that Ring was always somewhat based upon Andvaranaut, and so that it always had the potential of becoming what it ended up being.

It wasn't a foreign idea to Tolkien, either: When he first wrote the story of the Nauglafring, he at one point toyed with the idea that the item around which the quarrel with the Dwarves ensues was not a necklace by a "Ring of Doom".


(This post was edited by Chen G. on Jan 9, 2:11pm)


noWizardme
Valinor


Jan 9, 2:44pm

Post #67 of 94 (369 views)
Shortcut
It’s fascinating... [In reply to] Can't Post

...how a lot of Tolkien’s ideas seem to have more than one origin, meaning, or layer. Maybe that is part of what attracts me to Tolkien’s work: the feeling of reality that comes from things having many layers, rather than being straightforward symbols or equivalencies.

Thanks for this Chen!

~~~~~~
"Go down to the shovel store and take your pick." Traditional prank played on dwarves when they start down the mine.


Chen G.
Lorien

Jan 9, 2:55pm

Post #68 of 94 (364 views)
Shortcut
No problem [In reply to] Can't Post

I guess it all stems from his academic background.

As an academic myself, in a discipline not too dissilimar to Tolkien's, I really relate to his work on a unique level.

Reading them, especially his more mythological works, his academic stature punches through the pages. Reading something like The Lord of the Rings, is so clear that it is the work of an actual professor; a scholar who knows his ancient literature, as well as a host of other topics, inside-and-out.


(This post was edited by Chen G. on Jan 9, 2:55pm)


noWizardme
Valinor


Jan 9, 2:57pm

Post #69 of 94 (361 views)
Shortcut
Please don’t stop having fun though! [In reply to] Can't Post

For some of us analysis only adds to the fun. But there’s be nothing wrong with someone who found that for them, analysis spoiled things.

Also, to echo what others have said, I’m enjoying your fun. So I’d hope to enhance - and hate to spoil - your enjoyment.

~~~~~~
"Go down to the shovel store and take your pick." Traditional prank played on dwarves when they start down the mine.


Cygnus
Rivendell


Jan 9, 5:29pm

Post #70 of 94 (352 views)
Shortcut
Smaug [In reply to] Can't Post

I just finished "On the Doorstep" and "Inside Information" (clever title).
I really am enjoying all the differences in the book. It is so full of surprises compared to what I am familiar with. It's not all good though. I'm missing some characters. Of course I'm told that Bard will eventually show up but I'm suspecting that Radagast and Legolas won't. For awhile there I thought I wouldn't be hearing of the Arkenstone but it just got mentioned....much later than I expected.
I love the little things I'm learning. I never knew that the thrush was smacking the wall because it was busting a snail shell open....although there was certainly more to it than that.
And yes, now that I am paying attention there are differences in spellings (besides the dwarves thing I mentioned). In these two chapters I ran across vapour, favourite and draught....all underlined in red as I type this in America. I'm surprised I hadn't even noticed the spellings before.....too busy into the fantasy I suppose.

"I found it is the small things.....everyday deeds of ordinary folk that keeps the darkness at bay.....simple acts of kindness and love." - Gandalf


Otaku-sempai
Immortal


Jan 9, 7:13pm

Post #71 of 94 (346 views)
Shortcut
Radagast, Legolas and Dwarves [In reply to] Can't Post

Yes, Radagast only appears in The Hobbit by name, never in person (though we do finally meet him through Gandalf in The Lord of the Rings). Tolkien didn't create the character of Legolas until he wrote his sequel; he did, however, use the name for another Elf of the First Age.

Tolkien coined 'dwarves' as the plural of 'dwarf' to distinguish his fantasy race from persons born with the condition of dwarfism. An old, out-of-use plural for 'dwarf' is 'dwarrow' which we find in the name Dwarrowdelf (Khazad-dûm).

"I reject your reality and substitute my own." - Adam Savage


squire
Half-elven


Jan 9, 8:01pm

Post #72 of 94 (343 views)
Shortcut
I think Tolkien joked (!) that it would be Dwarrows as the proper plural for Dwarf. [In reply to] Can't Post

Dwarf (s.), Dwarrows (pl.)

"...the dictionaries tell us that the plural of dwarf is dwarfs. It should be dwarrows (or dwerrows), if singular and plural had each gone its own way down the years, as have man and men or goose and geese." - Tolkien, in LotR Appendix F.

This one always puzzled me until I figured out that he was working with a common and confusing set of sounds and spellings that we inherit from Old English: the varieties of -ough, -ow that we know in several other words.

1) enough is often spelled enow in older (19th C and earlier) texts. Enough is pronounced 'enuf'.

2) plough is often spelled plow in newer (19th C and later) texts. Plough is pronounced 'plau'.

3) though is sometimes shortened to tho' in dialect transcription. though is pronounced 'thoh'.

In short, -ough has three different sounds, depending on the words; and it often has an alternate spelling that drops the silent -gh and ends in a pure vowel. But oddly enough (ha ha) one of the variations has a distinct 'f' sound, without losing the option to go with just a vowel spelling.

So, unless I've misunderstood this completely, Dwarrow as Tolkien saw it was a variation on Dwarrough; and Dwarrough has the sound in (1) above, that we use in 'enough': the -uff ending.

Get it? Dwarrow is pronounced Dwarruf, (Dwarf), and was eventually simplified to the latter spelling. The plural Dwarrows is pronounced Dwarrufs, (Dwarfs). It has come down with the latter spelling as well, but Tolkien suggests that in similar cases (he gives goose, geese or man, men) a divergent plural spelling might well have been preserved by the chances of language.



squire online:
RR Discussions: The Valaquenta, A Shortcut to Mushrooms, and Of Herbs and Stewed Rabbit
Lights! Action! Discuss on the Movie board!: 'A Journey in the Dark'. and 'Designing The Two Towers'.
Archive: All the TORn Reading Room Book Discussions (including the 1st BotR Discussion!) and Footerama: "Tolkien would have LOVED it!"
Dr. Squire introduces the J.R.R. Tolkien Encyclopedia: A Reader's Diary


= Forum has no new posts. Forum needs no new posts.


hanne
Lorien

Jan 9, 9:14pm

Post #73 of 94 (329 views)
Shortcut
Touches like the thrush behaviour remind me... [In reply to] Can't Post

...how the book is so very English, a flavour the films didn't capture. Tolkien would have seen thrushes using a stone to break a snail shell. (In fact, there are several videos of this well-known behaviour on youtube, but don't click if you feel sorry for snails!) It is so lovely to see you enjoying the book so much :)


Otaku-sempai
Immortal


Jan 10, 1:04am

Post #74 of 94 (311 views)
Shortcut
Dwarrows [In reply to] Can't Post

Thanks, I'm sure I've read that but I keep forgetting.

"I reject your reality and substitute my own." - Adam Savage


Cygnus
Rivendell


Jan 10, 3:13am

Post #75 of 94 (294 views)
Shortcut
Wrapping things up [In reply to] Can't Post

I can hardly believe it. This is going so fast. Actually it's been a couple years since I've read a book that wasn't astronomy related. I'm learning a lot but mostly this is just pure fun. All my astronomy books are the opposite.... fun but mostly designed to learn a lot. It looks like I'm going to be finishing this up tomorrow. I never would have imagined it would go this quick. I told myself to read slow because I wanted to absorb it all and it feels like I've done that but still, 10 days! I guess that's what happens when you can't put it down. I just finished "Not at Home", "Fire and Water" and "The Gathering of the Clouds". The thing I found the most unexpected is that they didn't find out until later that Smaug was killed. To be honest, I did miss Smaug's bath in liquid gold.
It was nice to find out how Dain got word of Smaug. I was pretty intrigued with Roac. For the short time that old raven appeared he fascinated me. What a character! Like the Lord of the Eagles I hope he appears again.
There doesn't seem to be enough pages left for a lengthy battle of 5 armies so I'm guessing PJ did some lengthing on the silver screen. Thanks for all the comments. I am very grateful for them.

"I found it is the small things.....everyday deeds of ordinary folk that keeps the darkness at bay.....simple acts of kindness and love." - Gandalf

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 Next page Last page  View All
 
 

Search for (options) Powered by Gossamer Forum v.1.2.3

home | advertising | contact us | back to top | search news | join list | Content Rating

This site is maintained and updated by fans of The Lord of the Rings, and is in no way affiliated with Tolkien Enterprises or the Tolkien Estate. We in no way claim the artwork displayed to be our own. Copyrights and trademarks for the books, films, articles, and other promotional materials are held by their respective owners and their use is allowed under the fair use clause of the Copyright Law. Design and original photography however are copyright © 1999-2012 TheOneRing.net. Binary hosting provided by Nexcess.net

Do not follow this link, or your host will be blocked from this site. This is a spider trap.