|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pryderi
Ossiriand
Mar 7 2011, 2:27pm
Post #1 of 61
(4800 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Flotsam and Jetsam: Introductory Post
|
Can't Post
|
|
Welcome to our discussion of "Flotsam and Jetsam". When I last led a chapter discussion here I did it on a thematic basis. On this occasion, though, I feel that the text lends itself better to a paragraph by paragraph treatment and that is what I have decided to do. I intend to post each day until we reach the end of the chapter: probably three or four posts. And to finish off with a general invitation to comment on any matters which were not discussed earlier.
The first post on the text will be tomorrow but to whet the appetite I would like to invite comments on the title "Flotsam and Jetsam" itself.
Hammond and Scull's "LOTR Reader's Companion" has it that F&J "…now means 'odds and ends' or 'useless or discarded items', but properly 'wreckage and other goods found in the sea'. Flotsam denotes floating wreckage, and jetsam discarded goods washed ashore."
My Shorter OED under "jetsam" says it was first attested in 1491 and it is a contraction of "jettison". The definition they offer is: "Goods thrown overboard to lighten a ship in distress (and afterwards washed ashore)." This is not too far away from H. and S.'s "discarded goods washed ashore" although the emphasis in the OED is on the throwing overboard part while H. and S. emphasise the washed ashore part.
Interestingly, the OED referring, I think, to "(and afterwards washed ashore)" goes on to say: "The last clause is no part of the etymological meaning, which should be 'that which has been thrown overboard to save the ship', without reference to whether it sinks or floats. Recent Law-books take the word as 'that which is thrown or cast ashore by the sea'; Spelman and Blackstone as 'merchandise thrown overboard and sunk in the sea'. Both explanations evidently arose in the attempt to distinguish jetsam from flotsam."
Flotsam is more straightforward. The SOED says it is a legal term meaning "Wreckage found floating on the surface of the sea. Usually associated with jetsam."
I am pretty confident that language scholar JRR was familiar with all that and he famously enjoyed his little linguistic jokes, double meanings etc so my questions are:
What did Tolkien understand the title to mean?
What did he expect/intend his readers to understand the title to mean?
Having got some sort of grasp on what Flotsam and Jetsam are, are we to take the words literally or figuratively? Or both? Neither? Clearly Isengard is a wreck and flooded to boot. On the other hand the chapter seems to be "about" some old friends catching up with each other and sharing news which may also be news to the reader.
Are we to take the words to refer to the characters in some way? If so who are the flotsam and who are the jetsam?
That’s all for now. Back with episode one some time tomorrow.
Pryderi.
|
|
|
Darkstone
Elvenhome
Mar 7 2011, 5:07pm
Post #2 of 61
(3989 views)
Shortcut
|
Now there's a title for a chapter, or at least a TV situation comedy. Perhaps featuring John Astin and Marty Ingles.
What did Tolkien understand the title to mean?
Dunno.
What did he expect/intend his readers to understand the title to mean?
A meaning personal to each reader.
Having got some sort of grasp on what Flotsam and Jetsam are, are we to take the words literally or figuratively?
Puckishly.
Or both?
Like Balrog wings.
Neither?
“The Tolkien Code”: Nothing Is As It Seems! Break The Code and Uncover The Secret!
Clearly Isengard is a wreck and flooded to boot. On the other hand the chapter seems to be "about" some old friends catching up with each other and sharing news which may also be news to the reader.
^This^
Are we to take the words to refer to the characters in some way?
That too.
If so who are the flotsam and who are the jetsam?
Gandalf: Jetsam - Unwilling tossed into Middle-earth to save Valinor, the world, and everything.
Aragorn: Jetsam - He and his heritage were long ago tossed overboard by Valandil in order to save the two kingdoms from civil war. (Just wait until this particular jetsam washes up on the shore of Gondor! )
Merry: Jetsam - Theoden will refuse to toss him overboard even to save Rohan and Middle-earth, so he and fellow jetsam Dernhelm will have to toss themselves.
Pippin: Jetsam – Previously threatened to be tosssed into a well in Moria so he will be no further nuisance. He will later be tossed overboard to save The Quest and end up in Gondor and save fellow jetsam Faramir.
Theoden: Flotsam - He only recently stopped floating aimlessly and now has regained control of direction and purpose.
Eomer: Jetsam - Thrown overboard (or at least into the dungeon) by Grima in an attempt to save Saruman’s plans, but recovered by a revived Theoden.
Legolas: Flotsam – Drifting in the wake of Aragorn.
Gimli: Flotsam – He floats through Middle-earth guided where needed by the Higher Powers in order to save the day, rescue the innnocent, right wrongs, punish evil, and fight for Truth, Justice, and the Khazâdian Way.
The twenty other Rohirrim: Flotsam - They drifted aimlessly without their king but now have direction and purpose.
******************************************
Pippin: "When you guys fall in the forest, does it make a sound?"
Bregalad: "Are you kidding? Scott fell last week and he hasn't shut up about it since!"
|
|
|
acheron
Mithlond
Mar 7 2011, 5:15pm
Post #3 of 61
(3923 views)
Shortcut
|
|
you're right, Gimli is definitely flotsam
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
After all, nobody tosses a dwarf.
For instance, on the planet Earth, man had always assumed that he was more intelligent than dolphins because he had achieved so much -- the wheel, New York, wars, and so on -- while all the dolphins had ever done was muck about in the water having a good time. But conversely, the dolphins had always believed that they were far more intelligent than man, for precisely the same reasons. -- Douglas Adams
|
|
|
CuriousG
Gondolin
Mar 7 2011, 6:02pm
Post #4 of 61
(3931 views)
Shortcut
|
What did Tolkien understand the title to mean?
What did he expect/intend his readers to understand the title to mean?
Having got some sort of grasp on what Flotsam and Jetsam are, are we to take the words literally or figuratively? Or both? Neither? Clearly Isengard is a wreck and flooded to boot. On the other hand the chapter seems to be "about" some old friends catching up with each other and sharing news which may also be news to the reader.
Are we to take the words to refer to the characters in some way? If so who are the flotsam and who are the jetsam? Interesting question! Not many chapter titles give us points to ponder. I'd never thought about this one.
My take on it is that there is physical wreckage floating around Isengard, though none of it was thrown overboard to save anything. Later, however, the palantir is thrown out the window, not to save a sinking ship, but it does land in the water of a ship that has already sunk (Saruman's power).
Saruman's ambitions are thoroughly destroyed, and even his Voice has lost some of its power: more wreckage floating about in the drowning of Isengard.
Grima turned up and was sent to join Saruman, being obliged to ride some flotsam/jetsam part of the way to the door. Grima is a sort of wreckage himself, though again, he wouldn't qualify for either word since he wasn't thrown out to save the sinking ship.
I'd conclude that Tolkien was using the terms loosely to refer to the physical wreckage seen after a ship sinks, and also to refer to Saruman's wrecked dreams. The choice of the words was maybe to reflect that there wasn't destruction on dry land, but destruction similar to a ship that has crashed and sunk.
But that leaves open a question I can't answer: was anything of value thrown out or discarded in an attempt to save Saruman's floundering and demise? Was sending his whole army to Helm's Deep and leaving his fortress undefended a mistaken jettisoning of valuable cargo, even though at the time he didn't know his ship was about to break apart?
|
|
|
Tolkien Forever
Mithlond
Mar 7 2011, 8:14pm
Post #5 of 61
(3945 views)
Shortcut
|
It's not like we're looking for the crucified Christ in the story of Joseph being thrown in the pit by his brothers & sold for twenty pieces of silver..... 
Tolkien had to choose something for a title to each chapter you know. 
The Ultimate Tolkien Trivia Quiz: http://www.proprofs.com/quiz-school/story.php?title=so-you-want-to-be-tolkien-geek
|
|
|
Pryderi
Ossiriand
Mar 7 2011, 8:45pm
Post #6 of 61
(3912 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Thank you Darkstone. You made me laugh!//
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
|
|
|
Pryderi
Ossiriand
Mar 7 2011, 9:01pm
Post #7 of 61
(3902 views)
Shortcut
|
|
How about Hammond and Scull's definition:...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
...'odds and ends' or 'useless or discarded items'? Possibly our pipe smoking, apart from Legolas, friends are being described as "discarded items". Gandalf and Theoden etc. have gone off to do more important things. At the same time their conversation is tidying up various "odds and ends" in the plot.
If that were all Tolkien had in mind, though, I would be surprised and a bit disappointed. I have no answer here, just the question.
Pryderi.
|
|
|
Pryderi
Ossiriand
Mar 7 2011, 9:14pm
Post #8 of 61
(3921 views)
Shortcut
|
You say: "Tolkien had to choose something for a title to each chapter you know."
Given that he had titled all other chapters I agree that he had to choose a title for this one. He was not, though, obliged to give titles to any of his chapters. He could have used numbers throughout, probably in imposing Roman numerals. He chose not to.
I think it is quite legitimate to consider the chapter titles he chose as a part of the text that we are discussing. However I do agree that it is quite possible that I have not "considered" this particular title very well.
Pryderi.
|
|
|
Tolkien Forever
Mithlond
Mar 7 2011, 10:39pm
Post #9 of 61
(3901 views)
Shortcut
|
He could've gone the way of Christopher Tolkien & Guy (Gee? Is he a hockey player?) Kay and chosen the generic 'Of Found Bacon & Pipeweed' or something along those lines....... 
My point was simply not to be taken literally, but the spirit of the post, that folks these days tend to over analyze TLOR, picking it apart to the most minute degree, very much like scripture, looking for all sorts of hidden meanings that the author never intended to be found. Of course, with scripture, that is the beauty of it ~ it's deeper & deeper with multiple layers no matter how much you dig. 
The Ultimate Tolkien Trivia Quiz: http://www.proprofs.com/quiz-school/story.php?title=so-you-want-to-be-tolkien-geek
|
|
|
squire
Gondolin
Mar 7 2011, 11:00pm
Post #10 of 61
(3928 views)
Shortcut
|
|
You have a point, but still...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I guess it's possible to "over-analyze" The Lord of the Rings - and I too have my own sense of when another reader has gone "too far" in reading the book and finding meanings in it that I sincerely do not believe are there. However, that does not happen often - I want to give my fellow readers space and the benefit of the doubt, rather than the opposite, because I'm sure they might think the same of the ways that I read it!
The book is a great one, and this Reading Room board is in fact dedicated to reading Tolkien's works in the depth they deserve and reward. I have always thought that Tolkien himself would be the first to appreciate the care we put into our discussions here, even of the meanings of his titles, if we are to take seriously his statement:
"...every part [of The Lord of the Rings] has been written many times. Hardly a word in its 600,000 or more has been unconsidered. And the placing, size, style, and contribution to the whole of all the features, incidents, and chapters has been laboriously pondered. (Letters of J. R. R. Tolkien, #131, late 1951)
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'.
Footeramas: The 3rd (and NOW the 4th too!) TORn Reading Room LotR Discussion; and "Tolkien would have LOVED it!"
squiretalk introduces the J.R.R. Tolkien Encyclopedia: A Reader's Diary
 = Forum has no new posts. Forum needs no new posts.
|
|
|
batik
Dor-Lomin
Mar 8 2011, 2:13am
Post #11 of 61
(3900 views)
Shortcut
|
bits and pieces...odds and ends
I associate the title with the above---with regards to tidbits of information that Tolkien decided fit <here>. I am behind on my reading (and don't have the details of this chapter stored in my head) so I have no idea how accurate that assumption may be, if at all. I do like the idea of a connection with the wreckage of a ship and am pretty much always up to *exploring* the words Tolkien chose to use. Now--off to catch up on some reading!
|
|
|
Ethel Duath
Gondolin
Mar 8 2011, 4:02am
Post #12 of 61
(3867 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Without really differentiating between the terms,
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I had always thought of Merry and Pippin as being flotsam and jetsam themselves (as well as the actual stuff floating around)--washed up on the edges of the great battle for Isengard, having been "washed away" (by their own efforts--they "jumped ship") from the battle at the borders of Fangorn. They have been marginalized time and time again; and here at Isengard they are surrounded by it literally. Perhaps they begin to salvage themselves as the book goes on as they salvage Isengard's leftovers here.
|
|
|
Tolkien Forever
Mithlond
Mar 8 2011, 4:03am
Post #13 of 61
(3883 views)
Shortcut
|
Nobody is saying Tolkien did not meticulously construct & reconstruct his work with an incredibly in depth backdrop of historical framework & just plain minutest detail upon detail......
What I'm talking about is folks deciding what Tolkien meant or what is so prevalently done in so many areas of society today called 'revisionist history': putting a post-modern mindset onto a book written in an era that was from a totally different moral lifestyle & mindset.
Take for example Peter Jackson clearly turning 'pipeweed', which is plainly called tobacco into marijuana.
Or the absurd inferences that Frodo & Sam were Gay. 
The Ultimate Tolkien Trivia Quiz: http://www.proprofs.com/quiz-school/story.php?title=so-you-want-to-be-tolkien-geek
|
|
|
Pryderi
Ossiriand
Mar 8 2011, 4:07am
Post #14 of 61
(3870 views)
Shortcut
|
|
You say your point "was not to be taken literally".....
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
..... Why then do you castigate those of us who choose to seek the "spirit", as you call it, of Tolkien's work? Either the words mean what they say or they don't. Your words don't, as you have admitted. Why then should we assume that Tolkien's do?
Pryderi.
|
|
|
Darkstone
Elvenhome
Mar 8 2011, 4:11am
Post #15 of 61
(3867 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Thank *you* for leading this week!
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
This an excellent beginning of a fascinating topic! Keep it up!
******************************************
Pippin: "When you guys fall in the forest, does it make a sound?"
Bregalad: "Are you kidding? Scott fell last week and he hasn't shut up about it since!"
|
|
|
sador
Gondolin
Mar 8 2011, 10:41am
Post #17 of 61
(3861 views)
Shortcut
|
|
This title has often puzzled me
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
So I can easily understand why you devote a whole post to understand it! Of course, I would be the last with any right to criticise...  (http://newboards.theonering.net/forum/gforum/perl/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_threaded;post=198910;so=ASC;sb=post_latest_reply;#198910)
What did Tolkien understand the title to mean?
What it does.
What did he expect/intend his readers to understand the title to mean?
He might have expected them to think of smuggling.
Are we to take the words literally or figuratively?
Yes.
Are we to take the words to refer to the characters in some way?
At first, I thought only Pippin and Merry were refered to, but now I think it is all the five comrades.
If so who are the flotsam and who are the jetsam?
I would take the two hobbits to be the jetsam - after all, they were carried to Fangorn and then Isengard without having any say in the matter (unlike the movie-portrayal).
But the Three Hunters have come of their own volition, however they were tossed by the currents of Middle-earth. So perhaps they are the flotsam.
I'm looking forward to thius discussion! But having The Palantir to prepare, I might not do it justice enough - for which I apologise in advance.
"Let me think!" - Aragorn.
The weekly discussion of The Lord of the Rings is back! Please join us in the Reading Room for Book III.
"Even Saruman with his powers cannot do much more than run when faced with a furious tree giant."
- Canto.
|
|
|
Hamfast Gamgee
Dor-Lomin
Mar 8 2011, 10:44am
Post #18 of 61
(3855 views)
Shortcut
|
Quite a few shortish chapters at the end of book 3 after Helm's Deep. I wonder why Tolkien choose to edit the tale in this manner especially if he was a bit stuck for chapter names 
|
|
|
FarFromHome
Doriath
Mar 8 2011, 11:25am
Post #19 of 61
(3877 views)
Shortcut
|
in England in the 1950s, 'flotsam and jetsam' was an "every schoolboy knows" kind of an expression - it was very common, and it most specifically referred to odd bits of junk you would go looking for on the beach or in the shallow water as the tide went out. So I've always associated it with Merry and Pippin's "English schoolboy" way of speaking. And in fact, Merry does use "flotsam" in the chapter: "We spent a busy time after that, searching the flotsam, and rummaging about." To me, it's one of those deliberately cliched expressions that are often associated with the hobbits - like "Three is Company", or in The Hobbit, "Not at Home" (coincidentally, sador has brought this one up in his post in this thread).
I like it for this chapter title, because it really is about things left behind when the water recedes - the literal "flotsam" that Merry mentions, the food and (perhaps especially, because it reminds us of the expression's link to smuggling) the pipe-weed. But as others have said, it also fits Merry and Pippin themselves, who have finally been thrown up onto "dry land" after living through the flooding of Isengard.
They went in, and Sam shut the door.
But even as he did so, he heard suddenly,
deep and unstilled,
the sigh and murmur of the Sea upon the shores of Middle-earth.
From the unpublished Epilogue to the Lord of the Rings
(This post was edited by FarFromHome on Mar 8 2011, 11:26am)
|
|
|
CuriousG
Gondolin
Mar 8 2011, 1:38pm
Post #20 of 61
(3907 views)
Shortcut
|
Funny that you comment on "weed" being turned into marijuana. The giggles in the movie audience annoyed me at each mention, because Tolkien clearly intended it as regular tobacco. P. Jackson had to make his own interpretations for the movies, but that one seemed to deliberately distort what the author intended.
And it also irks me that it's become somewhat common for people to say Frodo and Sam were gay and Tolkien was writing about that in code since it wasn't acceptable at the time to be more open about it as people are now. ("Not that there's anything wrong with that.") It just seems another deliberate misinterpretation.
Nevertheless, I think there's a difference between post-modernism, crudely defined as giving people the right to interpret anything they read anyway they want regardless of author intent, and regular literary analysis of a very profound epic novel where the author deliberately embedded many nuggets, messages, and layers of an onion to be peeled away by people who are interested. Also a great book to read at face value for those who don't want to analyze it.
I'm not sure that we really know the difference between nitpicking/overanalysis and uncovering Tolkien's genius until we dig into a topic and discuss it. Some are dead ends, and some lead to a great new appreciation. That's part of the fun of exploration.
|
|
|
Tolkien Forever
Mithlond
Mar 8 2011, 1:48pm
Post #21 of 61
(3875 views)
Shortcut
|
But I've always seen this site defend the ultra-liberal position of 'theres' no absolutes' when Tolkien himself believed in a system (Christianity) that was set in absolutes and certainly embedded that to a degree in his work & said so. For example: I despise allegory. Yet people STILL insist his work was an allegory of all sorts of bizarre things.
The Ultimate Tolkien Trivia Quiz: http://www.proprofs.com/quiz-school/story.php?title=so-you-want-to-be-tolkien-geek
|
|
|
FarFromHome
Doriath
Mar 8 2011, 4:25pm
Post #22 of 61
(3900 views)
Shortcut
|
that Peter Jackson turned pipeweed into marijuana? Other than that rather silly EE Flotsam and Jetsam scene, there's no hint of it at all that I can see. Gandalf, Gimli, Aragorn, all smoke what seems like perfectly normal tobacco. The hobbits are rarely shown smoking at all. And even in the F&J scene, there's certainly nothing definite - Merry and Pippin may just be a bit drunk, or having a reaction to all the bad experiences they've just been through. So surely you're making the same kind of assumptions and interpretations about the movies that you were complaining that people make about the book.
They went in, and Sam shut the door.
But even as he did so, he heard suddenly,
deep and unstilled,
the sigh and murmur of the Sea upon the shores of Middle-earth.
From the unpublished Epilogue to the Lord of the Rings
(This post was edited by FarFromHome on Mar 8 2011, 4:26pm)
|
|
|
Curious
Gondolin
Mar 8 2011, 6:55pm
Post #23 of 61
(3860 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I think it is all about the pipeweed.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Merry explicitly calls the pipeweed flotsam: "'It was through our search for man-food that Pippin discovered the prize of all the flotsam, those Hornblower barrels.'"
Although Tolkien does not overplay his hand, I see the title of the chapter as another hint that the discovery of Southfarthing pipeweed in Isengard is significant. Aragorn also draws attention to it after Merry tells his story. After all, most of the chapter clears up loose ends, but the discovery of this prize piece of flotsam and jetsam creates a new mystery, one which may seem insigificant now, but will prove highly significant later.
Okay, maybe Merry and Pippin can be compared to flotsam and jetsam. But for me it's a stretch, especially when there is a much simpler explanation for the title which Tolkien, through Merry and Aragorn, highlights.
(This post was edited by Curious on Mar 8 2011, 7:01pm)
|
|
|
Tolkien Forever
Mithlond
Mar 8 2011, 9:47pm
Post #24 of 61
(3839 views)
Shortcut
|
Where do I get the idea that PJ the Great turns pipeweed into marijuana?
I watched the movies like everyone else, lol.
"You smoke too much" after Pippin runs ourt of 'weed' and has looked into the palantir & caused all the grief.
Pippin & Merry laughing it up in the flotsam & jetsam scene (sorry I only have the EE ~ I don't send my life on TLOR movies, knowing each version)
The Ultimate Tolkien Trivia Quiz: http://www.proprofs.com/quiz-school/story.php?title=so-you-want-to-be-tolkien-geek
|
|
|
Silverlode
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Mar 8 2011, 10:23pm
Post #25 of 61
(3861 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Dope is in the eye of the beholder, apparently....
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
as I've watched the movies many times and never seen the need to put that interpretation on it at all. I see nothing inconsistent with the movie pipeweed being tobacco as Tolkien intended.
Silverlode
"Of all faces those of our familiares are the ones both most difficult to play fantastic tricks with, and most difficult really to see with fresh attention. They have become like the things which once attracted us by their glitter, or their colour, or their shape, and we laid hands on them, and then locked them in our hoard, acquired them, and acquiring ceased to look at them.
Creative fantasy, because it is mainly trying to do something else [make something new], may open your hoard and let all the locked things fly away like cage-birds. The gems all turn into flowers or flames, and you will be warned that all you had (or knew) was dangerous and potent, not really effectively chained, free and wild; no more yours than they were you." -On Fairy Stories
|
|
|
|
|
1
