|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sador
Half-elven
Feb 12 2015, 8:28am
Post #1 of 28
(2273 views)
Shortcut
|
|
** 'The Fellowship of the Ring' ch. 9-2, 'At the Sign of the Prancing Pony': Dramatis Personnae
|
Can't Post
|
|
And when they ask me, "What are you looking at?"
I always answer, "Nothing much, not much"
I think they know that, I'm looking at them
I think they think I must be out of touch
But I'm only in the outskirts and in the fringes
On the edge and off the avenue
And if you want me you can find me
Left of center wondering about you.
- Suzanne Vega
In the previous thread, we have quoted in length two conversations; however, these do not seem to be 'proper' conversations: in one we have Strider trying to connect with a recalcitrant Frodo; and in the other, Butterbur is fending off the indignant crowd.
In fact, this seems to be a chapter without any 'real' conversations: there is the confrontation with Harry at the gate, but after that – conversations with Butterbur usually turn into soliloquies, Frodo does his best to avoid Strider's questions, and even the hobbits don't talk among them – Sam and Frodo have one exchange about going to the inn; and Pippin and Merry another about going to the common room. But that's it – even supper is "about three quarters of an hour's steady going, unhindered by unnecessary talk".
What do you make of this? Is this really so unusual in The Lord of the Rings?
In a previous thread, I've referred to Letter no. 31. Here is the exact quote (I just saw that Brethil posted a fuller quote here):
I am personally enamoured of hobbits as such, and can contemplate them eating and making their rather fatuous jokes indefinitely; but I find that is not the case even with my most devoted 'fans'… Mr Lewis says hobbits are only amusing when in unhobbitlike situations.
Might Tolkien have taken this criticsm into account, and have restrained himself in purpose?
Be that as may, it turns out that character is not revealed through dialogue in this chapter – which makes analysis a bit more difficult. In this thread, we'll look at the different characters, and see what we can glean from it about them.
|
|
|
sador
Half-elven
Feb 12 2015, 8:30am
Post #2 of 28
(2164 views)
Shortcut
|
In this chapter (as throughout The Fellowship of the Ring), our main point of view is Frodo's; we do get an overview of Bree, and a bit is told as if by an observer, sitting in the crowd at the Common Room. But still, Frodo is our main character, and deserves attention as such.
At first, Frodo seems at a loss when confronted by Harry's questions at the Gate; he has his suspicions of the gatekeeper (which does show some sense), but finds himself unable to overcome him, until helped by Merry.
Once in Bree, Frodo quells Sam's misgivings about the inn, relying on Bombadil's recommendation, and then assumes the mantle of the leader when talking to Butterbur. He gives his comrades' real names (as opposed to the first draft, in which he made up names for all four), but gives 'Underhill' as his own, in accordance with Gandalf's recommendation.
Wouldn't it be better if all four hobbits were travelling incognito? Sam's family is obscure, so giving his name doesn't really matter; but won't a Took and a Brandybuck be immediately inquired after? Or was Pippin and/or Merry already known in Bree – and Frodo preferred not to try hide what can't be hidden effectively?
In the 'debate' about the Common Room, we do not hear Frodo's position.
But wasn't Strider right, that they should not join the company? Why didn't Frodo heed Merry's warning?
Once in the Common Room, Frodo tries to mingle with the hobbits. He gives out that he is thinking of writing a book, but doesn't seem to be keen on doing it; he never really gathers the information he is abundantly plied with – and we never learn what it was. On the other hand, he does seem interested in the Southrener's speech, and news from the outside world.
Couldn't he keep up the charade a bit longer?
Did the company notice that he was not really quite interested in hobbits out of the Shire, or did they ascribe his shift of attention to his professed interest in history and geography?
Then Frodo is attracted by Strider – and against all that caution would dictate, he joins the ruffianly-looking Man in a quiet corner!
Especially after Butterbur's not-entirely-encouraging description of him, why would Frodo do this?
Even after hearing Pippin narrating Bilbo's farewell party, Frodo needs Strider to prompt him into action; and the action is near-disasterous.
But why didn't he try to control Pippin in the first place? Didn’t he know what the Fool of a Took was likely to do? Or did Pippin gain a new, overrated respect from Frodo after the unmasking of the Conspiracy?
I would like to conclude with Curious' words:
There's slapstick humor involved in Frodo's pratfall. Frodo is the least likely of the hobbits to perform such a stunt, and my heart goes out to him in his embarrassment. Do you also feel so?
Of course, this pratfall is a relic of the first drafts, in which the hero was the ridiculous Bingo.
But considering the way Frodo is described throughout the chapter, is it really so unlikely to happen to him?
And last – seeing that Frodo went to the inn because of Bombadil's recommendation, used the name that Gandalf picked up for him, and needed Strider to push him into action:
Would it be fair to observe that Frodo relies quite a lot on his elders' authority, but seems less good when thinking on his feet. Does he seem so throughout the book? For the person entrusted with the Quest – is this a commendable trait, or a fault?
|
|
|
sador
Half-elven
Feb 12 2015, 8:36am
Post #3 of 28
(2164 views)
Shortcut
|
Merry
Merry has only two lines in this chapter:
When Frodo fails to get across Harry at the Gate, Merry stands up and rebukes Harry for his lack of hospitality. Harry baks down, and lets them in – despite his being (as we later learn) a pretty shady figure.
What do you make of this show of authority? Was Merry already 'lordly' (as he will be called by Shirefolk in the last chapter of the book)? And why did Harry back down?
Or was the mere name 'Brandybuck' a guarantee of respect in Bree – enough to give a Mr. Brandybuck and all his companions a free pass? If so, why? It couldn't be because of the Bree blood in the Brandybuck family.
However, after entering Bree, Merry slips back into the background, and lets Frodo take the lead. The only other time he speaks is when he refuses to join the company, warning the other hobbits against standing out too prominently.
Makes sense. Why does Merry take the back seat, and let Frodo blunder into trouble?
Even after he is outvoted, and the hobbits sally out into the common room, Merry stays behind.
Why? Was he in Bree before, and afraid of being recognized?
The reason he gives for declining is that it would be too stuffy, and that he wants to stroll for a breath of fresh air. But (as Pippin says), this is also dangerous.
Did he really just want to breath, or did he have a hunch there was something outside that needed exploring?
Sam
Sam has only one line in this chapter, but we do get a moment of identifying with him, when he is frightened by the three-storied inn, and imagines Black Riders looking at them from the top windows. Perhaps this is only natural that the weakest, least confident, most stay-at-home (the meaning of his father's name, according to appendix F) hobbit would be the one who recommends taking shelter with fellow-hobbits – as we saw in the discussion of A Short-cut to Mushrooms, being prejudiced against hobbits from other places often means you prefer them to any other folk! But the Black Riders in the windows…
Is this flight of fancy typical to Sam? For one thing, he was the only hobbit who slept like a log in the House of Tom Bomdabil, and he also kept his cool enough to estimate the Black Rider can't lead his horse down the bank coming down from Woody End. So why does he have these fears here?
Later, he gets over his fears enough to join the crowd in the Common Room. Doesn't this seem inconsistent?
Perhaps it would behoove us to remember that already in the Marish, Sam's animosity towards Farmer Maggot were dispelled by the excellence of the Farmer's beer. And here the beer is clearly good (Sam will say so himself in Homeward Bound), and then they had a lovely, Shire-like meal…
Is the way to Sam's heart through his stomach?
Pippin
Well, what is there to say about this young rascal? He does give Merry counter-advice, and in the Common Room becomes the life of the party, entertaining the company with his comedic talent (of which we will be reminded later, when Denethor asks him to sing), and forgetting all caution by telling the story of Bilbo's disappearance. One wonders if he indeed had too much to drink.
No specific question this time. Your comments?
(This post was edited by sador on Feb 12 2015, 8:36am)
|
|
|
sador
Half-elven
Feb 12 2015, 8:41am
Post #4 of 28
(2188 views)
Shortcut
|
In this chapter, the hobbits encounter Men for the first time.
Well, they did see the Black Riders, and later were guests of Tom Bombadil – but you’ll probably agree that neither are ‘Men’ in the ordinary sense of the word.
Four men are quoted in this chapter. Two have minor roles to play in the story, so will be left for a different post; in this post, we’ll discuss the more important two.
Butterbur
In a way, Butterbur has a claim to being the chief character of this chapter. He is the master of the house after which this chapter is named, a distinction he shares with only two others (a riddle: who?) – not counting The Houses of Healing. In each of the three chapters, it appears that the masters of the house and the house itself reflect upon, and even complement, each other.
How do you see this in The Prancing Pony?
We have discussed Butterbur’s name in a previous thread. What about the name of the inn? Any comments about it?
As seen above, most of Butterbur’s traits have been in place from the very first draft, when he was still supposed to be a hobbit.
He is always busy: the hobbits bump into him when he is rushing from one place to the other, carrying a full tray. He lays the table himself, and introduces the hobbits to the company. And all the while, he is talking.
Why does he need to talk so much? Is this a personality disorder of some kind?
Do you think he has a family, or is the Pony the sole focus of his life?
Another point I want to make here is about his sense of humour. We get a few instances of it: a few self-depreciating remarks (“'Tis hard work for two legs, but I don’t get any thinner”, and some more in the following chapters), and some more, which are playfully offensive: he calls Nob a “wooly-footed slow-coach”, and suggests shouting for him if he doesn’t answer the bell; and the conversation with Mugwort, with his comment about the thick air in the common room.
Is this a delightful trait of the landlord; or is the self-depreciating part a manner of self-defense, while the offensive part is just nasty? To add a more sinister twist – is it of significance that the offense is always directed at hobbits?
I must say that I prefer the first, simpler reading. But if the less endearing reading is correct – it does offer some justification for Aragorn’s rude words to Barliman in the next chapter, and his abuse of him at the Council of Elrond.
Could it be that he just got what he deserved?
After Frodo’s fall and disappearing, Butterbur looks unperturbed – pacifying both the company and Frodo. But it turns out (spoliers!) that he knew of Bilbo’s disappearance and made the connection, as well as knowing of the Black Riders, that Strider asked about them, and that he is about to get in trouble with Gandalf.
How does he keep so calm?
And in the very last sentence of the chapter:
He [Frodo] began to suspect even old Butterbur's fat face of concealing dark designs. Did Butterbur do anything which might justify such a suspicion?
Strider
Strider is the hero of the next chapter (and a few other!), so we can postpone the discussion of him to next week
However, a few short questions are in place:
Suddenly Frodo noticed that a strange-looking weather-beaten man, sitting in the shadows near the wall, was also listening intently to the hobbit-talk. He had a tall tankard in front of him, and was smoking a long-stemmed pipe curiously carved. His legs were stretched out before him, showing high boots of supple leather that fitted him well, but had seen much wear and were now caked with mud. A travel-stained cloak of heavy dark-green cloth was drawn close about him, and in spite of the heat of the room he wore a hood that overshadowed his face; but the gleam of his eyes could be seen as he watched the hobbits. What impression did Strider make on you at first? Intriguing? Threatening? Romantic?
Could the reader be expected to connect him with the “sons of forgotten kings walking in loneliness” Bombadil told of in the previous chapter? Could Frodo?
Like Butterbur, Strider also indulges in a bit of self-depreciating humour.
Should this be taken as a hint that he is actually a good guy?
In general, how do you read Frodo’s reaction to him? If he is to be trusted, why doesn’t he? If not yet, why does he listen to him, then return to him after falling from the table – even establishing the connection between them to the crowd?
So back to the beginning of this post:
What impression do the two Men we meet here make on Frodo?
Note: I haven’t referred to Gandalf’s estimate of them in Many Meetings. If you want to add it to the mix – feel free to do so.
|
|
|
sador
Half-elven
Feb 12 2015, 8:44am
Post #5 of 28
(2153 views)
Shortcut
|
|
9-1 IV: Patrons and Travellers
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
In this chapter, for the first time since leaving Hobbiton, the hobbits mingle in a crowd; this naturally leads to the introduction of a few minor characters.
Harry Goatleaf
The grumpy gatekeeper was quite an important person in the drafts: in the third phase, he was involved in no less than three scenes at the gate – first encountering the Black Riders, then Gandalf and Odo (according to the plotline that had them riding ahead), and then with Frodo and his companions; later Frodo is said to have noticed Harry in the Common Room, and wondered why he had left his post. In this version, he seems to reflect the reactions of an ordinary man – terrified of the Riders but also afraid of Gandalf.
In the fourth version, the meeting with Gandalf was cut out (as Gandalf was conceived to be behind the hobbits, as in the published book); but another scene was introduced, in which Frodo’s surprise was addressed – after the four hobbits entered Bree, Harry was supposed to call his brother Ned and ask him to take the position at the Gate, as he has business at the Pony.
In the published book, we have none of these – only Harry’s accosting Frodo at the Gate, and giving in to Merry’s assertive insistence to be let in; Frodo’s not liking Harry’s look and voice are mentioned, as well as his chumming with Ferny and the southerner.
Should his character be developed more, as in the drafts?
As it wouldn’t, we’ll just have to consider his job as a Gatekeeper.
Who pays for it?
What of the east side? Is there no gate? Later we learn that Bill Ferny’s house was the last on that side of the Road. Was he supposed to keep the gate?
Why does Harry back down at Merry’s words? In general, how would you rate him as a gatekeeper?
Nob and Bob
From the first drafts, Nob and Bob were the two household workers (at some point, Tolkien considered naming them Rob and Lob, but stuck with these names).
In this chapter, we have nothing to say about Bob. He is the ostler, and does not appear in this chapter at all. In the first phase, he was probably a hobbit like all the other Bree-folk, and a Man in the third. In this book – well, Tolkien didn’t say one way or the other. In te previous discussion, I have argued that he was likely to be a hobbit; but boith dernwyn and FarFromHome disagreed.
On the other hand, I’m not sure Nob was ever anything but a hobbit. Christopher Tolkien doesn’t say anything about this, and it is natural to assume that he was a Man in the third phase – but Butterbur’s call “you wooly-footed slow-coach” seems to have been retained throughout the different phases of writing. Perhaps this was an oversight at that stage, and rather than delete the phrase he found delightful, Tolkien reverted back to the original concept, of Bree as a land of mixed population.
At any rate, Nob has got a well-defined personality: he is curious, active and cheerfully subservient. He seems not to mind his employer’s good-natured abuse, and to wink at the hobbits while Butterbur scolds him.
Does he view the hobbits as his equals?
Any other comments about Nob?
Bree Names
The Men of Bree seemed all to have rather botanical (and to the Shire-folk rather odd) names, like Rushlight, Goatleaf, Heathertoes, Appledore, Thistlewool and Ferny (not to mention Butterbur). Some of the hobbits had similar names. The Mugworts, for instance, seemed numerous. But most of them had natural names, such as Banks, Brockhouse, Longholes, Sandheaver, and Tunnelly, many of which were used in the Shire. There were several Underhills from Staddle, and as they could not imagine sharing a name without being related, they took Frodo to their hearts as a long-lost cousin. What do these names say about the Men of Bree? And about the hobbits?
One Bree-lander stands out – but not in this chapter; so I won’t say anything this time about Bill Ferny, save noting that “Ferny” was Tolkien’s first idea for Frodo’s alias, which changed to Hill, and finally to Underhill.
Which brings me back to Frodo’s consternation when one of the Underhills asks about his relations in the Shire.
Again, why? Didn’t Frodo anticipate this question, and do a bit of minimal research? Or didn’t he expect to meet any other hobbits on the way? He must have known of Bree – and Gandalf should have known that the Underhills were numerous in Bree! And after all, where except for Bree would Frodo use this undercover name?
Guests at the Inn
Butterbur explains that the inn is nearly full, having two groups which have come in that evening: a group of Men from the South, which came up the Greenway; and a group of dwarves. Luckily, he has a couple of rooms built especially for hobbits, so he can host Frodo and his companions.
The inn has three stories, and a couple of wings… how large were the two groups of travelers? Or were there other guests in the inn, which Butterbur didn’t mention?
The dwarves seem to be concerned with their own affairs, and not over-talkative; but the Men from the South (Dunland?) are concerned with troubles in their lands. There is one Southerner who speaks about an influx of such people to the North, as discussed above.
Later, we find out that he was not a part of their group; he does not even sleep at the inn. But do you think they identified with his rhetoric? Was his speech intended to threaten the Bree-landers, or to inflame the refugees?
Mugwort
One more hobbit is named – one of the numerous Mugworts. He argues with Butterbur, insisting on what his eyes saw (or didn’t).
Is there any significance to his being a Mugwort? Did they gain confidence from there numbers – would a local hobbit with a smaller clan to back him dare argue with Butterbur?
In general – what do you make of Mugwort? How is he like ordinary hobbits of the Shire we know – the Gaffer? Sandyman? The Sackville-Bagginses? Fatty Bolger?
Anything more about someone or the other?
|
|
|
Bracegirdle
Valinor
Feb 12 2015, 1:45pm
Post #6 of 28
(2162 views)
Shortcut
|
Wouldn't it be better if all four hobbits were travelling incognito? Sam's family is obscure, so giving his name doesn't really matter; but won't a Took and a Brandybuck be immediately inquired after? The Nazgul are looking for “Baggins”. Took or Brandybuck would have no meaning.
Then Frodo is attracted by Strider – and against all that caution would dictate, he joins the ruffianly-looking Man in a quiet corner!
Especially after Butterbur's not-entirely-encouraging description of him, why would Frodo do this? Purely an accidental meeting after the unfortunate disappearance. But after Strider mentions the Ring (I should say “the finger”) curiosity sets in.
(In haste… thanks Sador)
|
|
|
Darkstone
Immortal
Feb 12 2015, 8:41pm
Post #7 of 28
(2147 views)
Shortcut
|
|
"...not a hobbit walking-party."
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
In fact, this seems to be a chapter without any 'real' conversations: there is the confrontation with Harry at the gate, but after that – conversations with Butterbur usually turn into soliloquies, Frodo does his best to avoid Strider's questions, and even the hobbits don't talk among them – Sam and Frodo have one exchange about going to the inn; and Pippin and Merry another about going to the common room. But that's it – even supper is "about three quarters of an hour's steady going, unhindered by unnecessary talk".
What do you make of this?
They're uneasy, out of their element, among strangers, being pursued by really bad guys, on an important mission for a Wizard. I'd be a bit tight-lipped too.
Is this really so unusual in The Lord of the Rings?
After riding for about an hour, slowly and without talking, they saw the Hedge looming suddenly ahead.
-The Old Forest
They now mounted their ponies and rode off silently into the evening.
-Fog on the Barrow-Downs
As they walked through Caras Galadhon the green ways were empty; but in the trees above them many voices were murmuring and singing. They themselves went silently.
-Farwell to Lorien
In a previous thread, I've referred to Letter no. 31. Here is the exact quote (I just saw that Brethil posted a fuller quote here):
I am personally enamoured of hobbits as such, and can contemplate them eating and making their rather fatuous jokes indefinitely; but I find that is not the case even with my most devoted 'fans'… Mr Lewis says hobbits are only amusing when in unhobbitlike situations.
Might Tolkien have taken this criticsm into account, and have restrained himself in purpose?
'This is a serious journey, not a hobbit walking-party. Throw yourself in next time, and then you will be no further nuisance. Now be quiet!'
-A Journey in the Dark
******************************************
I met a Balrog on the stair,
He had some wings that weren't there.
They weren't there again today,
I wish he would just fly away.
|
|
|
Darkstone
Immortal
Feb 12 2015, 10:09pm
Post #8 of 28
(2146 views)
Shortcut
|
“Keep your distance, Chewie, but don’t, y’know, look like you’re keeping your distance.”
"*grhowl?*"
“I don’t know.... Fly casual.”
-Return of the Jedi
Wouldn't it be better if all four hobbits were travelling incognito?
It’s possible to be too inconspicuous. And I’m sure Pippin for one could do it.
Sam's family is obscure, so giving his name doesn't really matter; but won't a Took and a Brandybuck be immediately inquired after?
The Brandybuck name did cow Goatleaf.
And if they work it right the party’s cover is that of two scions of the Shire, their nondescript hanger-on, and a servant, all four on a slightly extended hobbit walking-party.
Guess where all the attention is going to be?
Or was Pippin and/or Merry already known in Bree – and Frodo preferred not to try hide what can't be hidden effectively?
As he found out when other Underhills started inquiring about relations. If the other hobbits also used pseudonyms they’d have the same problem times four.
In the 'debate' about the Common Room, we do not hear Frodo's position.
But wasn't Strider right, that they should not join the company?
Merely because someone looks foul but feels fair don’t mean you should listen to them.
And someone dragging a broken sword all over the Wild may not be the best source of advice.
Why didn't Frodo heed Merry's warning?
Why didn’t Pippin and Sam?
(I’m still convinced they were looking for desert.)
Once in the Common Room, Frodo tries to mingle with the hobbits. He gives out that he is thinking of writing a book, but doesn't seem to be keen on doing it; he never really gathers the information he is abundantly plied with – and we never learn what it was. On the other hand, he does seem interested in the Southrener's speech, and news from the outside world.
Couldn't he keep up the charade a bit longer?
“Everybody does have a book in them, but in most cases that's where it should stay.”
-Christopher Hitchens
Did the company notice that he was not really quite interested in hobbits out of the Shire, or did they ascribe his shift of attention to his professed interest in history and geography?
“Artists are weird, but writers are crazy.”
Then Frodo is attracted by Strider – and against all that caution would dictate, he joins the ruffianly-looking Man in a quiet corner!
“Some enchanted evening,
You may see a stranger,
Across a crowded room…”
Especially after Butterbur's not-entirely-encouraging description of him, why would Frodo do this?
Frodo does seem to have a bit of contrariness in him.
The ring, maybe?
“Oft evil will shall evil mar.”
Even after hearing Pippin narrating Bilbo's farewell party, Frodo needs Strider to prompt him into action; and the action is near-disasterous.
But why didn't he try to control Pippin in the first place?
How can you ask Pippin not to be Pippin?
Didn’t he know what the Fool of a Took was likely to do?
Obviously should have left him with Bombadil. Or back in Crickhollow. Or locked him in a prison. Or sent him home tied in a sack.
Or did Pippin gain a new, overrated respect from Frodo after the unmasking of the Conspiracy?
It’s hard to berate someone willing to die for you. Even if they have absolutely no idea that they might.
I would like to conclude with Curious' words:
________________________________________ Quote ________________________________________
There's slapstick humor involved in Frodo's pratfall. Frodo is the least likely of the hobbits to perform such a stunt, and my heart goes out to him in his embarrassment.
________________________________________
Do you also feel so?
At the office party it’s always the quiet ones who put on lampshades, dance on desks, then go sit on the copier sans pantaloons.
Of course, this pratfall is a relic of the first drafts, in which the hero was the ridiculous Bingo.
But considering the way Frodo is described throughout the chapter, is it really so unlikely to happen to him?
He is his uncle’s nephew. Or at least his cousin’s cousin.
And last – seeing that Frodo went to the inn because of Bombadil's recommendation, used the name that Gandalf picked up for him, and needed Strider to push him into action:
Would it be fair to observe that Frodo relies quite a lot on his elders' authority, but seems less good when thinking on his feet.
It’s not like he has the knowledge, skill, instincts, or courage to strike out on his own.
Yet.
Does he seem so throughout the book?
The death of Gandalf is the turning point.
For the person entrusted with the Quest – is this a commendable trait, or a fault?
There’s a reason the group is called a “fellowship.” Frodo is a scholar being tutored and he graduates with honors at Amon Hen.
******************************************
I met a Balrog on the stair,
He had some wings that weren't there.
They weren't there again today,
I wish he would just fly away.
|
|
|
Darkstone
Immortal
Feb 12 2015, 10:42pm
Post #9 of 28
(2146 views)
Shortcut
|
When Frodo fails to get across Harry at the Gate, Merry stands up and rebukes Harry for his lack of hospitality. Harry baks down, and lets them in – despite his being (as we later learn) a pretty shady figure.
What do you make of this show of authority?
Merry’s been the de facto leader of the group for some time.
Was Merry already 'lordly' (as he will be called by Shirefolk in the last chapter of the book)?
The son of the Master of Buckland would be used to authority. And once you have it it becomes apparent in one’s manner and attitude.
And why did Harry back down?
Bullies do that.
Or was the mere name 'Brandybuck' a guarantee of respect in Bree – enough to give a Mr. Brandybuck and all his companions a free pass?
That too.
If so, why?
Follow the money. The Brandybucks control the Brandywine, and thus the trade between Breeland and the Shire.
It couldn't be because of the Bree blood in the Brandybuck family.
Money is thicker than blood.
However, after entering Bree, Merry slips back into the background, and lets Frodo take the lead. The only other time he speaks is when he refuses to join the company, warning the other hobbits against standing out too prominently.
Makes sense. Why does Merry take the back seat, and let Frodo blunder into trouble?
He’s taking the initiative to reconnoiter, and leaving the other three where he thinks they’ll be safe.
Even after he is outvoted, and the hobbits sally out into the common room, Merry stays behind.
Why?
As leader he’s got other plans.
Was he in Bree before, and afraid of being recognized?
Just the opposite. That’s why he’s confident he can wander around the streets of Bree without much danger. Who’s going to harm the son of the Master of Buckland?
The reason he gives for declining is that it would be too stuffy, and that he wants to stroll for a breath of fresh air. But (as Pippin says), this is also dangerous.
Did he really just want to breath, or did he have a hunch there was something outside that needed exploring?
His Brandybuck sense was tingling.
But the Black Riders in the windows…
Is this flight of fancy typical to Sam?
No, which is precisely why there might well be Black Riders in the windows. Or at least some other shadowy figures on the look-out for them.
For one thing, he was the only hobbit who slept like a log in the House of Tom Bomdabil, and he also kept his cool enough to estimate the Black Rider can't lead his horse down the bank coming down from Woody End. So why does he have these fears here?
Because he’s got something?
Later, he gets over his fears enough to join the crowd in the Common Room. Doesn't this seem inconsistent?
He’s going to let Frodo go without him? Especially with Black Riders upstairs?
Is the way to Sam's heart through his stomach?
Worked for Gildor.
He does give Merry counter-advice, and in the Common Room becomes the life of the party, entertaining the company with his comedic talent (of which we will be reminded later, when Denethor asks him to sing), and forgetting all caution by telling the story of Bilbo's disappearance. One wonders if he indeed had too much to drink.
No specific question this time. Your comments?
Almost like he’s deliberately drawing any attention away from Mr. Underhill.
So why does Frodo thwart him?
******************************************
I met a Balrog on the stair,
He had some wings that weren't there.
They weren't there again today,
I wish he would just fly away.
|
|
|
a.s.
Valinor
Feb 13 2015, 2:51am
Post #10 of 28
(2145 views)
Shortcut
|
|
any difference between an "ostler" and a "groom"?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I have always thought Bob was a hobbit, until I began reading on Tolkien related boards that the category was in question. 
Sometimes the argument is that he was the ostler, and had to handle horses, and thus had to be "tall"--or taller than a hobbit, at any rate. And yet as far as I know, the ostler is like a groom or stablehand, and a boy-sized person could perform grooming of horses just fine--they do to this day. A horse inside a stall can be brushed standing on a box, after all, to reach the highest part if necessary.
So: anyone know if "ostler" is equivalent to "groom"?
a.s.
"an seileachan"
"A safe fairyland is untrue to all worlds." JRR Tolkien, Letters.
|
|
|
arithmancer
Grey Havens
Feb 15 2015, 1:43am
Post #11 of 28
(2127 views)
Shortcut
|
I nonetheless think the ostler is a Man. Throughout the stories Hobbits never seem to have or want anything to do with horses (preferring ponies), as for that matter do Dwarves also. So I do not think, even in Bree, that a hobbit would choose to pursue a line of work that required him to tend to horses all day.
|
|
|
a.s.
Valinor
Feb 15 2015, 11:37pm
Post #12 of 28
(2119 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I don't have a determined opinion on Bob, actually, but
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
...do think a servant would be happy to have a living. Not sure there would be much choice in careers, in that regard.
I do think too much is made of draft versions of things. All fiction writers have drafts full of ideas being worked out, dead ends, and plots and characters never found in final copy.
a.s.
"an seileachan"
"A safe fairyland is untrue to all worlds." JRR Tolkien, Letters.
|
|
|
CuriousG
Half-elven
Feb 18 2015, 10:01pm
Post #13 of 28
(2092 views)
Shortcut
|
Traveling incognito: since Tooks and Brandybucks are about the only Shire hobbits who venture to Bree anymore, it was wise that Merry & Pippin kept their names. It makes me think Frodo should have gone by Brandybuck too: no one would have questioned another Shire hobbit of that name showing up in Bree, and if someone asked, "Are you related to _____ Brandybuck?", Frodo could have reasonably and knowledgeably said "yes." As it was, he got into a little trouble using the Underhill alias. Though I like that alias on a personal level: it describes how all hobbits like to live and thus is as close to a generic name as possible.
Joining the Common Room: I'm not sure myself that it was a mistake to join it. Would the gossip have inflamed suspicions more among Bree-folk if four Shire-hobbits showed up at the inn and kept to themselves? Why were they being so secretive? What did they have to hide? Showing themselves and making idle small talk should have been a safe bet.
More dubious to me is Merry going outside, alone, in the dark, for a walk, but he had every reason to believe that within the walls of Bree, he was safe. These are the same hobbits that crossed the Shire on abandoned roads, thinking it was safe--it always had been, so that's reasonable enough.
Why does Frodo talk to Aragorn? I'm not sure about that at all, except that Frodo seems drawn to him in some way. Was Frodo drawn to Aragorn's essential virtue and heroism? That he was on the same side? Would Frodo have had a private chat with Bill Ferny if summoned over by him? I think Frodo's people instincts are reasonably good, and he thought talking to Aragorn in the middle of a crowded room was safe enough.
|
|
|
CuriousG
Half-elven
Feb 18 2015, 10:07pm
Post #14 of 28
(2097 views)
Shortcut
|
I think Sam is reasonably presented as an organic character. We all play shifting roles in groups of friends and don't stick to one note, so Sam is afraid/suspicious of some things, but adaptable to others. He's the least-worldly of them and the most likely to be bothered by anything that's not from Hobbiton, but he can adapt to a pub and a pub crowd that is similar to what's back home.
For me, I'm never entirely sure Pippin was being all that dangerous. What did people in Bree know that people in Hobbiton didn't? When Bilbo disappeared, Hobbiton folk didn't all say, "It's that magic Ring from the Enemy that did it!" So why should Bree folk be any wiser? Wouldn't it just be another quaint story from far away?
|
|
|
sador
Half-elven
Feb 19 2015, 9:12am
Post #15 of 28
(2082 views)
Shortcut
|
|
|
|
sador
Half-elven
Feb 19 2015, 9:20am
Post #16 of 28
(2091 views)
Shortcut
|
And if they work it right the party’s cover is that of two scions of the Shire, their nondescript hanger-on, and a servant, all four on a slightly extended hobbit walking-party... If the other hobbits also used pseudonyms they’d have the same problem times four.
Merely because someone looks foul but feels fair don’t mean you should listen to them.
Certainly.
It’s hard to berate someone willing to die for you. Even if they have absolutely no idea that they might.
I agree. But isn't that the essence of leadership?
It’s not like he has the knowledge, skill, instincts, or courage to strike out on his own.
Yet.
So true.
|
|
|
sador
Half-elven
Feb 19 2015, 9:56am
Post #17 of 28
(2095 views)
Shortcut
|
Traveling incognito: since Tooks and Brandybucks are about the only Shire hobbits who venture to Bree anymore, it was wise that Merry & Pippin kept their names.
Darkstone thought so, too. I guess that does make sense - especially if, as I speculated, Merry had been in Bree before and might be recognised.
It makes me think Frodo should have gone by Brandybuck too
That's an interesting idea - although if the idea was that Frodo would keep low, and leave the talking to M&P (Darkstone again), it is better to have another name.
But in that case, Strider's telling Frodo to stop Pippin was wrong.
On the other hand - you can't just have any ordinary, generic hobbit writing a book! Even knowing to read and rare (as the Gaffer said in the first chapter). If say, a Puddifoot of Marish would go about planning to write a book - any Bree Puddifoot would, and should, be alarmed, and send a message (orally) to the family and inform them of the disgrace.
Which does answer my question why was Frodo concerned by the Underhills enquiring.
Joining the Common Room: I'm not sure myself that it was a mistake to join it. Would the gossip have inflamed suspicions more among Bree-folk if four Shire-hobbits showed up at the inn and kept to themselves? Why were they being so secretive? What did they have to hide? Showing themselves and making idle small talk should have been a safe bet.
Excellent!
But, alas, it shows that Strider was wrong again...
More dubious to me is Merry going outside, alone, in the dark, for a walk, buthe had every reason to believe that within the walls of Bree, he was safe.
If he didn't share Frodo's suspicion of Harry.
I think Frodo's people instincts are reasonably good, and he thought talking to Aragorn in the middle of a crowded room was safe enough.
This is typical Tolkien - the idea that following one's heart rather than the head is often the best course (see The Window on the West, and even Frodo's pity on Smeagol).
And it seems correct that Frodo should have this instinct (and likewise with Harry).
So yes, I really like this idea.
|
|
|
Darkstone
Immortal
Feb 19 2015, 7:46pm
Post #18 of 28
(2088 views)
Shortcut
|
|
"If I'm lying, may lightning hit my mother!"
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
(Good luck, Mom!)
This particularly rapid unintelligible patter,
Isn’t generally heard and if it is it doesn’t matter.
-William S. Gilbert, The Pirates of Penzance
Never play cards with a man called Doc. Never eat at a place called Mom's. Never go into a bar with the word ‘prancing’ in its name.
-The first two rules are from Nelson Algren's "Three Rules of Life" from his 1956 novel “A Walk on the Wild Side”. The third one is not.
Butterbur
In a way, Butterbur has a claim to being the chief character of this chapter. He is the master of the house after which this chapter is named, a distinction he shares with only two others (a riddle: who?)
In the House of Tom Bombadil? The House of Eorl? Shelob’s Lair? The King of the Golden Hall? The Council of Elrond?
– not counting The Houses of Healing.
Me neither. The herb-master is a Vienna sausage; i.e., a mini-weinie.
In each of the three chapters, it appears that the masters of the house and the house itself reflect upon, and even complement, each other.
How do you see this in The Prancing Pony?
Butterbur tries to be all things to all people.
We have discussed Butterbur’s name in a previous thread. What about the name of the inn?
Out of the night that covers me,
Black as the pit from pole to pole,
I thank whatever gods may be
For my unconquerable soul.
In the fell clutch of circumstance
I have not winced nor cried aloud.
Under the bludgeonings of chance
My head is bloody, but unbowed.
Beyond this place of wrath and tears
Looms but the Horror of the shade,
And yet the menace of the years
Finds and shall find me unafraid.
It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll,
I am the master of my fate,
I am the captain of my soul.
-Invictus by William Ernest Henley (1875)
Any comments about it?
Lessee. Tolkien made a series of lectures about the Hengest of "The Fight at Finnsburg" and Beowulf that were edited and collected in a 1982 book called Finn and Hengest. . Hengest means “stallion”, and supposedly he and brother Horsa (“horse”) were Jutish invaders who arrived in Kent (whose motto became "Invictus") in 449 under the banner of a “horse rampant” which is basically the same as a “prancing pony”.
Why does he need to talk so much?
Several very good business reasons.
For example, to build good will. You talk to patrons and get to know them. That way you can welcome them by their first names, ask after specific family members, commiserate with continuing problems, and in general act like an old friend. (Even if you actually hate them. Business is business.) So rather than going down the street to where the ale is cheaper, instead they go to your place where you know their name and where you always act like you’re glad they came.
Also to get kickbacks. You chat up a customer, find out if they’re currently in the market for something, then recommend a specific merchant in town and add “Tell them Butterbur sent you”. If they do buy something then the merchant will send a little commission your way. Of course that same merchant would reciprocate and send anyone looking for a good inn your way. (So now we know the real reason why Bombadil recommended The Prancing Pony!)
A bit more shady reason is to distract customers with a constant flow of fast patter so they don’t notice little things like their cup wasn't quite refilled all the way, their change was short, and you never did bring that appetizer they paid for.
Is this a personality disorder of some kind?
Either a free market entrepreneur creating wealth and jobs for the good of the community or else an amoral money-grubbing monopolist pitilessly exploiting the poor and powerless for obscene profits.
Do you think he has a family, or is the Pony the sole focus of his life?
Yes. Who do you think does all the cooking, cleaning, washing, etc? Bombadil has already corralled all the house-elves in the region.
Is this a delightful trait of the landlord; or is the self-depreciating part a manner of self-defense, while the offensive part is just nasty?
Some merchants tell offensive jokes about “those people” to get you to see they share the same good old-fashioned all-Numenorean values as you do so you trust them more.
To add a more sinister twist – is it of significance that the offense is always directed at hobbits?
Shows Butterbur knows who has the money in Bree. And the power.
I must say that I prefer the first, simpler reading. But if the less endearing reading is correct – it does offer some justification for Aragorn’s rude words to Barliman in the next chapter, and his abuse of him at the Council of Elrond.
Could it be that he just got what he deserved?
Strider is so far down the social ladder in Bree even the hobbits make fun of him.
After Frodo’s fall and disappearing, Butterbur looks unperturbed – pacifying both the company and Frodo. But it turns out (spoliers!) that he knew of Bilbo’s disappearance and made the connection, as well as knowing of the Black Riders, that Strider asked about them, and that he is about to get in trouble with Gandalf.
How does he keep so calm?
A successful merchant has lots of experience dealing with bad customers under stressful conditions. A really good merchant can even turn such dealings to his advantage.
And in the very last sentence of the chapter:
________________________________________ Quote ________________________________________
He [Frodo] began to suspect even old Butterbur's fat face of concealing dark designs.
________________________________________
Did Butterbur do anything which might justify such a suspicion?
No one can keep up a façade 100% of the time. Is this the one single occasion in the book where a servant of the Enemy actually does look fair but feel foul? (I mean all the other times they not only look foul, but feel, smell, sound, and taste foul as well!)
What impression did Strider make on you at first?
A spy!
Intriguing?
Robin Hood!
Threatening?
A burglar casing the joint!
Romantic?
What happens in The Prancing Pony stays in The Prancing Pony.
Could the reader be expected to connect him with the “sons of forgotten kings walking in loneliness” Bombadil told of in the previous chapter?
Possibly the second reading. Definitely the third.
Could Frodo?
That’s why he remembered to write that phrase in the Red Book.
Like Butterbur, Strider also indulges in a bit of self-depreciating humour.
Should this be taken as a hint that he is actually a good guy?
Either that or he’s a connection to the black market: Southron Gold, Harad Red, Mordor Skunk, all those kinds of weed you just can’t get in the Shire.
He might also be the guy who knows a guy, if you know what I mean.
In general, how do you read Frodo’s reaction to him?
Fascination.
If he is to be trusted, why doesn’t he?
Playing hard to get.
If not yet, why does he listen to him, then return to him after falling from the table – even establishing the connection between them to the crowd?
Poor little moth!
So back to the beginning of this post:
What impression do the two Men we meet here make on Frodo?
Butterbur meets his prejudices (kind and stupid) quite deliberately
Strider represents something strange, new, exciting, vaguely frightening, and, in the end, endearing. (That’s what can happen when you go into a place with the word “prancing” in its name!)
Note: I haven’t referred to Gandalf’s estimate of them in Many Meetings. If you want to add it to the mix – feel free to do so.
Oh, nuts! Busted!
******************************************
I met a Balrog on the stair,
He had some wings that weren't there.
They weren't there again today,
I wish he would just fly away.
|
|
|
squire
Half-elven
Feb 19 2015, 7:54pm
Post #19 of 28
(2087 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Matter, matter, matter, matter, matter, matter, matter, matter!
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Joseph Papp has a lot to answer for here:
That particularly rapid unintelligible patter
Is in Ruddigore not Pirates and it kinda sorta matters.
Song credits aside, thanks for a very entertaining and insightful analysis of Butterbur!
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 & 4th TORn Reading Room LotR Discussion and NOW the 1st BotR Discussion too! 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.
|
|
|
Darkstone
Immortal
Feb 19 2015, 10:18pm
Post #20 of 28
(2089 views)
Shortcut
|
Should his character be developed more, as in the drafts?
Less is more, especially with Evil.
As it wouldn’t, we’ll just have to consider his job as a Gatekeeper.
Who pays for it?
Probably out of the town’s watch budget. Plus whatever “gratuities” he might accrue. I’m surprised he didn’t demand one from the hobbits.
What of the east side?
Most of the traffic is from the west. Thus most of the "gratuities". So why bother?
Is there no gate?
Probably. But I bet it’s left open during the day, closed at night, and mostly unattended.
Later we learn that Bill Ferny’s house was the last on that side of the Road. Was he supposed to keep the gate?
He probably collected “gratuities” when the mood struck him.
Why does Harry back down at Merry’s words?
Bullies do that.
In general, how would you rate him as a gatekeeper?
Bad as an honest one, worse as a dishonest one.
At any rate, Nob has got a well-defined personality: he is curious, active and cheerfully subservient. He seems not to mind his employer’s good-natured abuse, and to wink at the hobbits while Butterbur scolds him.
Does he view the hobbits as his equals?
As potential tippers, so he plays by ear.
Any other comments about Nob?
Given “Nob” is a town settled by the tribe of Benjamin, I’m tempted to say Nob is Butterbur’s youngest son, and, given that he’s referred to as “woolyfooted”, that means Butterbur’s wife is a hobbitess.
Based on the pronunciation of “Hobab”, I’m also tempted to say Bob is Butterbur’s brother-in-law, and if, as argued elsewhere in the thread, a Man, then Bob is a sister’s son.
So The Prancing Pony is definitely an enterprise of an extended family!
The Men of Bree seemed all to have rather botanical (and to the Shire-folk rather odd) names, like Rushlight, Goatleaf, Heathertoes, Appledore, Thistlewool and Ferny (not to mention Butterbur). Some of the hobbits had similar names. The Mugworts, for instance, seemed numerous. But most of them had natural names, such as Banks, Brockhouse, Longholes, Sandheaver, and Tunnelly, many of which were used in the Shire. There were several Underhills from Staddle, and as they could not imagine sharing a name without being related, they took Frodo to their hearts as a long-lost cousin. ________________________________________
What do these names say about the Men of Bree? And about the hobbits?
Besides keeping non-nobles from giving themselves names of nobility, restrictions on names are usually enacted to prevent names that conflict with the traditional customs and culture of a people.
Given the apparent universality of obedience to naming customs, one can only wonder at how draconian the penalties must be for any violation of the Bree-land Naming Act.
Obviously Bree is being ruled by an iron fist.
One Bree-lander stands out – but not in this chapter; so I won’t say anything this time about Bill Ferny, save noting that “Ferny” was Tolkien’s first idea for Frodo’s alias…
Rather a dead giveaway, as ancient belief held that fern seeds bestowed invisibility.
…which changed to Hill, and finally to Underhill.
There seem to a lot of Underhills in Kent England and Kent Maryland.
Which brings me back to Frodo’s consternation when one of the Underhills asks about his relations in the Shire.
Again, why?
Ring?
Didn’t Frodo anticipate this question, and do a bit of minimal research?
One would think that with everyone being related to everyone else in the Shire, along with a hobbit’s natural enthusiasm for genealogy, that Frodo would have already researched his Underhill relations long before.
Or didn’t he expect to meet any other hobbits on the way?
Probably anticipated meeting hobbits, but not any Hobbits, if you get my drift.
He must have known of Bree – and Gandalf should have known that the Underhills were numerous in Bree!
Maybe Gandalf planned on having Frodo discard the Underhill name on arrival and assume yet another cover identity.
And after all, where except for Bree would Frodo use this undercover name?
Maybe like leaving Fatty to play Frodo Baggins in Crickhollow, Gandalf planned to immediately transfer Frodo’s cover identity to a real Underhill at Bree and leave behind yet another decoy for the Enemy, the poor sap.
Guests at the Inn
Butterbur explains that the inn is nearly full, having two groups which have come in that evening: a group of Men from the South, which came up the Greenway; and a group of dwarves. Luckily, he has a couple of rooms built especially for hobbits, so he can host Frodo and his companions.
The inn has three stories, and a couple of wings… how large were the two groups of travelers?
Larger than a breadbox, but smaller than a streetcar.
Or were there other guests in the inn,…
Don’t forget any residents staying at economical monthly rates.
…which Butterbur didn’t mention?
Of course he didn’t mention them! What prances in The Pony, stays in The Pony!
The dwarves seem to be concerned with their own affairs, and not over-talkative; but the Men from the South (Dunland?) are concerned with troubles in their lands. There is one Southerner who speaks about an influx of such people to the North, as discussed above.
Later, we find out that he was not a part of their group; he does not even sleep at the inn. But do you think they identified with his rhetoric?
Obviously this guy learned his cover much better than Mr. Underhill.
Was his speech intended to threaten the Bree-landers, or to inflame the refugees?
Yes. Both would fit the tactics of a fifth columnist.
Mugwort
One more hobbit is named – one of the numerous Mugworts. He argues with Butterbur, insisting on what his eyes saw (or didn’t).
Is there any significance to his being a Mugwort?
Possibly from “midge root”, which might indicate where his family comes from.
Then again, I remember the Republicans who bolted the party to vote Democratic in the 1884 US Presidential election. They were called “Mugwumps”, sitting on the political fence of the Republican-Democratic divide with their “mugs” on one side and their “wumps” on the other.
Did they gain confidence from there numbers – would a local hobbit with a smaller clan to back him dare argue with Butterbur?
The customer is always right, unless he consistently costs the merchant a profit, in which case "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone, this means you!"
In general – what do you make of Mugwort?
Another ale shuts him up. He knows his priorities. As does Butterbur.
How is he like ordinary hobbits of the Shire we know – the Gaffer?
Gaffer gripes about things but respects the gentry as long as they keep to their responsibilities.
Sandyman?
Sandyman gripes and will turn on the powers-that-be if given what seems to him a profitable opportunity.
The Sackville-Bagginses?
They’ll gripe and hold grudges until someone finally either kills and eats them or throws them in lockholes.
Fatty Bolger?
Has the sense to know his limitations.
Anything more about someone or the other?
There was a round table, already spread with a white cloth, and on it was a large hand-bell. But Nob, the hobbit servant, came bustling in long before they thought of ringing.
-At the Sign of The Prancing Pony
That seems to indicate that Nob is a hobbit, but then again maybe he may be a Man who serves them, so then we might venture even further down the hobbit hole and wonder if there's a book in the kitchen entitled "To Serve Hobbit".
******************************************
I met a Balrog on the stair,
He had some wings that weren't there.
They weren't there again today,
I wish he would just fly away.
|
|
|
Brethil
Half-elven
Feb 21 2015, 1:01am
Post #21 of 28
(2077 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Well, if not for the foreknowledge of Gollum's interrogation...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
For me, I'm never entirely sure Pippin was being all that dangerous. What did people in Bree know that people in Hobbiton didn't? When Bilbo disappeared, Hobbiton folk didn't all say, "It's that magic Ring from the Enemy that did it!" So why should Bree folk be any wiser? Wouldn't it just be another quaint story from far away?
...it wouldn't be, I think. But knowing that Gollum has told 'Shire' and 'Baggins', I think JRRT laid the groundwork for the peril of loose lips at Bree. Without that, it would be nothing to get quite so worked up about. For the folks of Bree in general, or travelling Dwarves, I am sure it still would be. But if roads from the Shire are being watched, and hired ne'er-do-wells are told to look for something odd about a Hobbit, well there you have it.
|
|
|
Rembrethil
Tol Eressea
Feb 22 2015, 2:54am
Post #22 of 28
(2063 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Well... (Some thoughts on Hobbit Height)
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Just thinking here...
The ostler would have to care for horses for all the guests, including Men. So... Would a Hobbit have been tall enough to care for fully grown stallions or mares? Would he need a stepladder?
Call me Rem, and remember, not all who ramble are lost...Uh...where was I?
|
|
|
a.s.
Valinor
Feb 22 2015, 3:55pm
Post #23 of 28
(2056 views)
Shortcut
|
|
well....that is my question: boys work as grooms in stables
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
If ostler = groom, (which I don't know) then a boy sized person (read "hobbit") could easily be an ostler. Simply saying someone needs to be full man size to stable and groom horses overnight at an inn doesn't mean it's actually so. Many an innkeeper's sons did that down through time, after all.
a.s.
"an seileachan"
"A safe fairyland is untrue to all worlds." JRR Tolkien, Letters.
|
|
|
Rembrethil
Tol Eressea
Feb 22 2015, 7:50pm
Post #24 of 28
(2047 views)
Shortcut
|
|
At an average height 3 foot 6...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
(Or ~1.07 metres for the Metrically inclined), I'd think they would be of a sufficient size to do so if they had a step ladder or some other kind of stool. However, I also think it would not be easy for them to do so.
Although my first impression is that Bob does care for the horses in a groom and ostler capacity, when I think about it, it seems unlikely. I am now thinking that perhaps the ostler was next door, and Bob had to simply walk the ponies over and back. Setting up an hostelry by an inn would be quite lucrative, I think. Bob and Nob with their seemingly shirking ways, do not seem the type to stick to the job, anyway, driving Butterbur to distraction.
What do you think?
Call me Rem, and remember, not all who ramble are lost...Uh...where was I?
|
|
|
sador
Half-elven
Feb 23 2015, 1:47pm
Post #25 of 28
(2044 views)
Shortcut
|
Merry’s been the de facto leader of the group for some time. Then why did Frodo speak first, and then to Butterbur?
Money is thicker than blood.
Which is why it tends to clot.
That’s why he’s confident he can wander around the streets of Bree without much danger. Who’s going to harm the son of the Master of Buckland? Nice!
His Brandybuck sense was tingling. For family business opportunities?
No, which is precisely why there might well be Black Riders in the windows. Or at least some other shadowy figures on the look-out for them. The Man with the Twisted Lip?
Almost like he’s deliberately drawing any attention away from Mr. Underhill.
So why does Frodo thwart him?
He was propmpted by Strider.
Which actually makes the question stronger: why did Strider urge Frodo to thwart him?
|
|
|
|
|
1
