|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News From Bree
spymaster@theonering.net
Apr 6 2012, 4:48am
Post #1 of 60
(1593 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Out On A Limb with Quickbeam: "Wherefore Art Thou, Radagast?"
|
Can't Post
|
|
 Greetings all, Quickbeam here.
Rumors are flying as far as the Great Eagle's sight that our newest wizard, Radagast the Brown, will have a more prominent role in the first installment of THE HOBBIT: 'An Unexpected Journey.' I am very excited by what Sylvester McCoy may bring to the role. The rumors are strongly suggesting Radagast's rustic home on the eaves of Mirkwood Forest -- Rhosgobel -- will be more heavily featured than first suspected.
Color me intrigued! This kind of "newly added" material in Peter Jackson's film adaptation is not canonical, strictly speaking, within the pages of "The Hobbit." Yet it is canon from another Tolkien book! This stuff comes from the Appendices in the hinter-lands of "The Return of the King," and therefore the most intriguing as to how it'll play out in the new films. Among purists it might be cause for alarm.
Let's investigate what we know from Tolkien -- keeping in mind what the Professor seemed to be confused about himself may leave us with a minor mystery. Let's also speculate on how P.J. is going to make Rhosgobel fit into the narrative of his first HOBBIT installment.
POTENTIAL SPOILERS WARNING
JUST THE FACTS, MA'AM:
- Radagast seems to have been the fourth (of a total five) Istar, or Wizard, to arrive in Middle-earth sometime in the early Third Age.
- Back in the Undying Lands, before he became the animal-friendly Brown Wizard, he was a Maia of Yavanna, with the original name Aiwendil: "Lover of Birds."
- Gandalf said of his friend: "he is a master of shapes and changes of hue." This gives us tantalizing ideas as to what powers Radagast could employ within the Hobbit story.
- Saruman did not shy from showing open contempt for poor Radagast, calling him "a fool." Indeed it seems he didn't accomplish too much during the War of the Ring, seemingly distracted as he was by his love of animals and birds -- yes, it's that Yavanna thing.
- He settled in Rhosgobel (Sindarin for "rustic town" or "enclosure") which was on the western edges of Mirkwood.
- Radagast at some point abandoned this location, we don't know when or why.
THE CONFUSION:
Okay, we all get the gist of how an avian-friendly Maia ended up becoming the Doctor Doolittle of Middle-earth. But where *exactly* did he live? Was his home, Rhosgobel, within the boundaries of Mirkwood right by the Carrock and our friendly Bear Guy Beorn? Or was it hundreds of miles to the south within range of an orc-infested Dol Guldur? Why does it show up in two different places when we look it up on the Encyclopedia of Arda? Heck, even in "The Atlas of Middle-earth," we see it marked in two locations.
Well, according to the Gandalf/Beorn conversation in Chapter 7 of "The Hobbit," Radagast "lives near the southern border of Mirkwood." And then in "Fellowship of the Ring" we learn that Elrond's scouts 'had come down into Wilderland and over the Gladden Fields and so at length had reached the old home of Radagast at Rhosgobel.'
That is uncomfortably close to Benedict Cumberbatch. Err, I mean, close to the evil Necromancer. Here's where we get our panties in a twist: a much later note published by Christopher Tolkien in "Unfinished Tales" says Rhosgobel was located 'in the forest borders between the Carrock and the Old Road.' That's a totally different spot that would change everything about Radagast's ability to navigate from place to place and how viable he could be at certain times of the story.
What gives? Why would Tolkien be so confused himself? We are not really sure, but what survives in the actual pages of "The Hobbit" and "LOTR" says this feathery-friended fellow was much closer to the threat of Sauron than anyone else during the time of Bilbo's journey.... And that is KEY!
THE SPECULATION, FINE-TUNED:
If Rhosgobel was indeed located that far south, we are immediately clued into what might happen on movie screens this December. It seems to make certain decisions easier for the screenwriters. Put this character within strategic distance of the Enemy, and look what we've got! A viable way to launch into showing the White Council's attack on the Necromancer, which happened concurrently with Bilbo traipsing around with the spiders away to the north.
Going a but further, if PJ decides to put Rhosgobel that far south, it's also within range of a lovely blonde neighbor to the immediate west, Our Lady of Galadriel. Yes, she could be on-hand so much easier this way if she decides to put on battle-armor herself and bring some Galadhrim into the fray of battle!
Yes, that's right, I said FRAY of BATTLE. You think PJ is going to let the whole first Hobbit movie go by without epic fight scenes? You don't really believe he'll save all the axe-clashing and goblin-decapitations for the Battle of Five Armies only to be witnessed in the second installment in 2013? That's not how you build a better blockbuster. I think we're definitely gonna see a good scrape in the first film, and I predict Radagast will be there with bells on.
On the other hand, if PJ decides to put the movie-version-Rhosgobel way up near the Old Forest Road and Beorn, then the Character-Who-Can-Speak-Bird could end up critical to the story in a wholly different way. Imagine that Radagast can change "hue and shape" and gets involved while Bilbo and the Dwarves are caught in spiders' webs? Wouldn't that be something if he crashes the dinner party at Beorn's bachelor pad?
It seems likely in this scenario the rescuing Eagles might carry Thorin & Company (and Gandalf) from the burning pine trees and Goblin/Warg attack right over to Rhosgobel first, and the Carrock won't appear at all. With Radagast this close to Beorn, maybe the traveling heroes get some advice on how to deal with a were-bear and then go sauntering up to visit him later on.
For my money, I would bet on the southern placement of Radagast's rustic enclosure.
GOOD NIGHT, SWEET BIRDMAN:
There's plenty of hard-arguing still going on with Ringer fans about whether the animals/ eagles/ spiders will be shown onscreen speaking any dialogue. Most people say at this point there are no actors announced to play any voices for such creatures. To which I say, *drat* and double-drat, simply because the voiceover actor in me would've loved to provide a spidery voice. With no casting announcement, there's not going to be any talking Eagles onscreen, sorry.
 Methinks that's what we have Radagast there for -- he will most likely be the one character shown speaking to the animals, albeit in secret or silent "off mic." I am fully convinced in the 2nd movie 'There and Back Again' we will see Radagast sending a certain thrush to watch over a certain Bilbo and accompany him within the dragon's chamber. It makes so much sense to me. It also allows the writers to condense characters and does away with the need for the Roäc/Thorin talking-bird scene. Why bother having to establish how Dwarves can also communicate with birds, which may just confuse the uninitiated audience? Well, if Radagast is the one behind all the avian allies, that gives the character much more to do.
I'm still left wondering, however, exactly how Bard will understand a critical message that comes to his ear, but we will see how that plays out. Radagast can't be everywhere at all times deciphering every tweet! Hmmmm. Tweet....
Wait and see what clever bits (in less than 140 characters) come out of the Twitterverse in relation to this character. "I just flew in from Rhosgobel and boy, are my arms tired!" Ah, comedy for the picking.
Much too hasty,
Quickbeam
|
|
|
DanielLB
Elvenhome
Apr 6 2012, 12:33pm
Post #2 of 60
(616 views)
Shortcut
|
Although, one thing, does Quickbeam know more than he is letting on? Are there subtle hints in there of what we should expect? I hope so 
In terms of Radagast's home - I too am hoping for it being located near to Dol Guldur. It may slow the film down having the eagles drop the company off at Rhosogbel to meet a strange wizard, then leave for Beorn, only to meet another strange man (I also secretly want to see Carrock  ). 2 strange men, one after the other, may come across a bit strange?
It makes more sense to me to have Rhosogbel in the south, so that Gandalf meets Radagast there (and perhaps Galadriel/Elrond/Bombadil) so that they have a vantage point. It would also make more sense strategically - to have a wizard close to Dol Guldur and keeping an eye on what's going on.
(This post was edited by DanielLB on Apr 6 2012, 12:34pm)
|
|
|
dernwyn
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Apr 6 2012, 1:43pm
Post #3 of 60
(581 views)
Shortcut
|
|
What? Possibly no Carrock scene?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
No naked Dwarves bathing in the Anduin?
Great article, Quickbeam! Interesting speculation, and it does make sense for Rhosgobel to be a staging area for an attack on Dol Guldur.
But I do hope you're wrong about the voices for certain animal characters; I'd love to hear hissing spider-speak, and the aged croaky Roac!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I desired dragons with a profound desire"
"It struck me last night that you might write a fearfully good romantic drama, with as much of the 'supernatural' as you cared to introduce. Have you ever thought of it?"
-Geoffrey B. Smith, letter to JRR Tolkien, 1915
|
|
|
DanielLB
Elvenhome
Apr 6 2012, 1:51pm
Post #4 of 60
(563 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I've just realised my horrible spelling mistakes of Rhosgobel :-O
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Someone hit me! 
(This post was edited by DanielLB on Apr 6 2012, 1:52pm)
|
|
|
Black Breathalizer
Nargothrond
Apr 6 2012, 2:35pm
Post #5 of 60
(569 views)
Shortcut
|
Quickbeam wrote: I am fully convinced in the 2nd movie 'There and Back Again' we will see Radagast sending a certain thrush to watch over a certain Bilbo and accompany him within the dragon's chamber. It makes so much sense to me. It also allows the writers to condense characters and does away with the need for the Roäc/Thorin talking-bird scene. Why bother having to establish how Dwarves can also communicate with birds, which may just confuse the uninitiated audience? Well, if Radagast is the one behind all the avian allies, that gives the character much more to do.
This speculation sounds dead-on to me. Having Radagast linked with the thrush and the rescue of the company by the eagles makes total sense to me. I have long expected the thrush plotline to be seriously tweaked. Quickbeam's approach allows the film makers to remain truer to Tolkien's vision without the need for the awkward Roäc/Thorin talking-bird scene.
|
|
|
Eruonen
Gondolin
Apr 6 2012, 2:38pm
Post #6 of 60
(584 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I don't think Tom Bombadil will have any role (nor did he in the White Council)
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
...this is a good article in that it shows how PJ has the textual freedom to develop the story along several different lines, however, he cannot use Christopher Tolkien's published material unless it is also in The Hobbit or the LOTR. PJ can make a case for whatever version he chooses as being consistent with the works.
|
|
|
Kelvarhin
Gondolin
Apr 6 2012, 3:01pm
Post #7 of 60
(542 views)
Shortcut
|
Hey you did ask for it!   
Ok, ok, I just couldn't resist. I've been behaving for way too long
Bag ENZ Home of the Hobbit *with thanks to cameragod ;D*
 
One by one they faded, and fell into shadow...
One book to rule them all
One book to find them
One book to bring them all
And in TORn bind them
In the land of TORnadoes...where the brilliant play
|
|
|
Bladerunner
Mithlond
Apr 6 2012, 4:12pm
Post #10 of 60
(558 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I think the Dwarven/Raven connection is still necessary and important....
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
The ravens keep the dwarves informed of what the men and elves are doing, thereby eliminating the element of surprise when these hosts appear at the dwarves' doorsteps. They also provide a secret means of communication between Thorin and Dain. This is a role the thrush would not be suited to fill in the film.
Secondly, The Thorin/Roac connection also reinforces the deep historical connection that the dwarves have to Erebor and its surroundings (i.e. - they are in their home turf) which gives them an advantage over the elves.
Lastly, Radagast and Beorn should not be the only ones shown to have specific understanding and alliances with animals...
(This post was edited by Bladerunner on Apr 6 2012, 4:15pm)
|
|
|
Shelob'sAppetite
Doriath
Apr 6 2012, 7:14pm
Post #11 of 60
(502 views)
Shortcut
|
Sounds much, much better and more interesting (and dare I say, cooler) than the Radagast/thrush compression, which would eliminate Roac.
This large ancient crow, which is deeply connected to these Northern dwarves, is far more evocative.
I hope PJ takes the more interesting, and less neat, route on this.
|
|
|
Lacrimae Rerum
Hithlum
Apr 6 2012, 7:39pm
Post #12 of 60
(492 views)
Shortcut
|
I have to say I think the probability of any talking birds is slim. The probability of several is positively emaciated.
LR
|
|
|
Kangi Ska
Gondolin
Apr 6 2012, 8:34pm
Post #13 of 60
(488 views)
Shortcut
|
are Ravens and should never be confused with crows.
Kangi Ska Resident Trickster & Wicked White Crebain
Life is an adventure, not a contest.
At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.
|
|
|
Bladerunner
Mithlond
Apr 6 2012, 9:38pm
Post #14 of 60
(462 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I didn't mention talking birds in my previous post...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
although I have expressed my opinion on that subject several times in past posts (in a nutshell - I prefer they speak);
however, regardless whether the raven does or doesn't speak, I think its participation should not be omitted from the second film.
So bring on the eagles, the bees, the butterflies, the stag, the thrush, the raven, the bats...
(This post was edited by Bladerunner on Apr 6 2012, 9:44pm)
|
|
|
Finrod
Nargothrond
Apr 6 2012, 9:59pm
Post #15 of 60
(463 views)
Shortcut
|
The word wherefore basically means something like "so", "therefore", or "(which is) why", or some combination of those things. Wherefore I can't get the title of the article to scan. Can the author please tell us what in the world is the title supposed to mean? "Wherefore" doesn’t mean "where", you know! This is what the word wherefore actually means:
I. Interrogative uses.
1. For what? esp. for what purpose or end?
2. For what cause or reason? on what account? why?
II. Relative uses.
3. For which. Now distinguished by stress and spelling (whereˈfo.r)
4. On account of or because of which; in consequence or as a result of which. Chiefly with sb. (esp. reason or cause) as antecedent.
5. Introducing a clause expressing a consequence or inference from what has just been stated: On which account; for which reason; which being the case; and therefore. (Now always ˈwhe.refore.)
b. Followed by soever: For whatever reason; on whatever account.
III. 6. as sb. A question beginning with wherefore, or (more usually) the answer to such question; cause, reason. Often following why similarly used.
I cannot for the life of me figure out which of those definitions from the Oxford English Dictionary applies here. It just doesn't scan.
…all eyes looked upon the ring; for he held it now aloft, and the green jewels gleamed there that the Noldor had devised in Valinor. For this ring was like to twin serpents, whose eyes were emeralds, and their heads met beneath a crown of golden flowers, that the one upheld and the other devoured; that was the badge of Finarfin and his house.The Silmarillion, pp 150-151 while Felagund laughs beneath the treesin Valinor and comes no more
to this grey world of tears and war.The Lays of Beleriand, p 311
|
|
|
Shelob'sAppetite
Doriath
Apr 6 2012, 10:01pm
Post #16 of 60
(454 views)
Shortcut
|
are members of the "crow" genus ("corvus," to be precise), so ravens are indeed crows. Big ones.
So,
(This post was edited by Shelob'sAppetite on Apr 6 2012, 10:02pm)
|
|
|
DanielLB
Elvenhome
Apr 6 2012, 10:02pm
Post #17 of 60
(450 views)
Shortcut
|
"Wherefore art though Romeo" - Shakespeare and all that - in that conext means why rather than where.
(This post was edited by DanielLB on Apr 6 2012, 10:02pm)
|
|
|
PattyJB
Ossiriand
Apr 6 2012, 10:04pm
Post #18 of 60
(443 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Just a paraphrase of Shakespeare
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
but the author does not understand that "Wherefore art thou Romeo" means "WHY are you Romeo?"
|
|
|
Shelob'sAppetite
Doriath
Apr 6 2012, 10:05pm
Post #19 of 60
(456 views)
Shortcut
|
The title can mean:
For what cause or reason art thou Radagast? Or why art thou Radagast?
In other words, how is he being used in the narrative of the films? For what cause or reason is he in the films?
We should not rush to judgment that the author does not know what wherefore means in this case. Maybe he doesn't, but we cannot be sure.
Know-it-all-ism must be tempered here, as there is uncertainty about the author's intent.
(This post was edited by Shelob'sAppetite on Apr 6 2012, 10:08pm)
|
|
|
Finrod
Nargothrond
Apr 6 2012, 10:11pm
Post #20 of 60
(450 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Ok fine, why is he Radagast then?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I realize that the most reasonable reading is "Why are you Radagast?"
I couldn't find the answer to said question in the article. Did I miss it?
…all eyes looked upon the ring; for he held it now aloft, and the green jewels gleamed there that the Noldor had devised in Valinor. For this ring was like to twin serpents, whose eyes were emeralds, and their heads met beneath a crown of golden flowers, that the one upheld and the other devoured; that was the badge of Finarfin and his house.The Silmarillion, pp 150-151 while Felagund laughs beneath the treesin Valinor and comes no more
to this grey world of tears and war.The Lays of Beleriand, p 311
(This post was edited by Finrod on Apr 6 2012, 10:17pm)
|
|
|
Finrod
Nargothrond
Apr 6 2012, 10:14pm
Post #21 of 60
(447 views)
Shortcut
|
[some deleted article text that was misplaced in the subject line]are members of the "crow" genus ("corvus," to be precise), so ravens are indeed crows. Big ones.
Ravens are not crows, nor crows ravens. Both are corvids, which is not the same thing.
…all eyes looked upon the ring; for he held it now aloft, and the green jewels gleamed there that the Noldor had devised in Valinor. For this ring was like to twin serpents, whose eyes were emeralds, and their heads met beneath a crown of golden flowers, that the one upheld and the other devoured; that was the badge of Finarfin and his house.The Silmarillion, pp 150-151 while Felagund laughs beneath the treesin Valinor and comes no more
to this grey world of tears and war.The Lays of Beleriand, p 311
|
|
|
DanielLB
Elvenhome
Apr 6 2012, 10:14pm
Post #22 of 60
(437 views)
Shortcut
|
|
The title of the article is wrong
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
The person who wrote it didn't realise wherefore means why and not where. Thus they intended it to be where is Radagast, but actually reads why is Radagast. You won't find the answer to why Radagast is Radagast
|
|
|
Kangi Ska
Gondolin
Apr 6 2012, 10:20pm
Post #23 of 60
(438 views)
Shortcut
|
Tolkien even distinguished the Ravens of The Lonely Mountain and the Crows (that Balin did not trust).
Kangi Ska Resident Trickster & Wicked White Crebain
Life is an adventure, not a contest.
At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.
|
|
|
DanielLB
Elvenhome
Apr 6 2012, 10:20pm
Post #24 of 60
(431 views)
Shortcut
|
that is like saying Blue whales are the same as Humpback wales - since they are both from the same genus - and that isn't the only example I can give.
|
|
|
Shelob'sAppetite
Doriath
Apr 6 2012, 10:22pm
Post #25 of 60
(437 views)
Shortcut
|
|
No, that's not right. Crows...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
...are of the genus corvus, which includes ravens...
Corvids (Corvidae) is the broader family which the corvus belong to. But both crows and ravens of the same genus, and that is corvus, which translates into crow.
Corvids have a much broader range, from ravens to blue jays to magpies.
|
|
|
|
|
1
