|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Milieuterrien
Rohan
Jun 25 2015, 8:00pm
Post #1 of 15
(1334 views)
Shortcut
|
|
"We're on our own"
|
Can't Post
|
|
That's what Thorin answers to Bilbo, when the Hobbit asks him about Gandalf just after they discovered Dale.
By the movies, we're accustomed to know that Gandalf left the dwarves because he had a major task coming in Dol Guldur.
But in the book, nothing of this is mentioned and we learn about it long after, in the Appendices.
So we might think about the initial motivations of Tolkien when he decided to have the Magician out of the way.
May it have been planned in order to improve Bilbo's involvement ?
Do you think Gandalf's absence enhanced the whole storyline ?
|
|
|
Hobbity Hobbit
Lorien
Jun 25 2015, 8:04pm
Post #2 of 15
(1270 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Well, it showed character traits, like he was a very busy and powerful.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
But because of this I never really appreciated Gandalf as a character until Lord of the Rings. In the movie-verse, I like it a lot better and we find out the true plans of "the Necromancer" which were some scenes I really like.
"Obviously the idea of being human is a very human idea."
-Dominic Monaghan
(This post was edited by Hobbity Hobbit on Jun 25 2015, 8:05pm)
|
|
|
Otaku-sempai
Immortal
Jun 25 2015, 8:11pm
Post #3 of 15
(1263 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Gandalf does hide the reason that he's leaving.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
At the same time, in the book, Gandalf is quite open about the fact that he does not expect to accompany the Dwarves all the way to Erebor. They know all along that he has other business even if he doesn't explain what it is until the return trip to Bag End.
"At the end of the journey, all men think that their youth was Arcadia..." - Phantom F. Harlock
|
|
|
Milieuterrien
Rohan
Jun 25 2015, 8:20pm
Post #4 of 15
(1261 views)
Shortcut
|
|
We find the same narrative structure in LOTR
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
First, Gandalf launches the story and helps, then he disappears, then he comes back and helps again, then he disappears much longer, then shows himself again.
|
|
|
Hobbity Hobbit
Lorien
Jun 25 2015, 9:01pm
Post #5 of 15
(1223 views)
Shortcut
|
I like his character actions a lot better in The Hobbit movies than the books. In the book he just seemed like a wise man, and I didn't really remember him or was as affected by him as I was with other characters. He was an interesting character, and not to say he wasn't a good one, but I didn't really like him as much as some other characters until I read LoTR.
In the Lord of the Rings books, I liked him a lot more because he was much more important and had more character arch. Also because he has a lot of memorable lines in Lord of the Rings. But yeah it does follow the same structure.
"Obviously the idea of being human is a very human idea."
-Dominic Monaghan
(This post was edited by Hobbity Hobbit on Jun 25 2015, 9:02pm)
|
|
|
Kilidoescartwheels
Valinor
Jun 25 2015, 10:14pm
Post #6 of 15
(1187 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Tolkien and the Hobbit as children
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I read/heard somewhere that one of the things that was happening in England when he started writing (and some Tolkien expert may correct me on this) is that children were working in factories and such, which he thought was appauling. And that he did write Hobbits as being somewhat child-like, in both their height and world-view of just wanting to be left alone to live simple lives. So, possibly in the first book Gandalf represented the wiser Parent that has to come in and take care of the children. Of course I'm not sure what that says about the Dwarves. If I remember correctly, the Dwarves really didn't want him to leave and tried to talk him into staying with the Company. I can see the Dwarves being a little child-like in the Hobbit book, as opposed to the fierce warrior-type in PJ's movies, or even in subsequent books (I confess I haven't read any beyond LOTR).
It's a good question, one that I think about frequently as a wannabe author. I've conceived an idea for a set of books, and have nearly completed the first one. But having NOT written the others (only formulated the ideas for them), it's hard to know what I will need to explain/develop in the future books. I'm thinking that, at the time Tolkien may have thought this was a one-book story, only later writing LOTR as the subsequent history, and from some things he said he realized there were shortcomings in the story. So maybe it wasn't motivation so much as rookie mistakes.
I've said before that I feel Gandalf going MIA in The Hobbit was a problem, and one I'm glad the movie "fixed," though clearly others don't agree with me on this. Still, everyone's entitled to their opinion on this.
Proud member of the BOFA Denial Association
|
|
|
Glorfindela
Valinor
Jun 25 2015, 11:02pm
Post #7 of 15
(1160 views)
Shortcut
|
I always thought Tolkien based his Hobbits on the men he knew during the First World War? I may be wrong on that, though, since I don't follow the lengthy writings about and by Tolkien very much, just pick things up here and there
|
|
|
elostirion74
Rohan
Jun 25 2015, 11:05pm
Post #8 of 15
(1156 views)
Shortcut
|
I prefer not to speculate about the writerīs motivation.
Already before they come to Beornī house Gandalf prepares the dwarves and Bilbo that he will soon leave them to fend for themselves. He doesnīt say what kind of urgent business he has, but already from the first adventure with the trolls it seems clear that Gandalf is working quite independently (disappearing without explaining himself) and when heīs talking with the dwarves about his reasons for leaving them heīs clear about the fact that the quest after all isnīt his adventure and that he has already delayed other important priorities of his rather too long.
The reader doesnīt know the exact reasons for Gandalfīs absence before after the battle of the five armies, when sea re told briefly what Gandalf has been up to. Iīve never had any problems with not knowing the exact reasons before then, because it wasnīt relevant to Bilboīs involvement in the story. The main focus of the story throughout is after all on Bilbo.
I think the story is better when Gandalf isnīt always there to save the day - it makes for a more interesting and less repetitive story and it also allows us to better know and understand the motivations of the dwarves.
|
|
|
Otaku-sempai
Immortal
Jun 25 2015, 11:09pm
Post #9 of 15
(1152 views)
Shortcut
|
So, possibly in the first book Gandalf represented the wiser Parent that has to come in and take care of the children. Of course I'm not sure what that says about the Dwarves. If I remember correctly, the Dwarves really didn't want him to leave and tried to talk him into staying with the Company. I can see the Dwarves being a little child-like in the Hobbit book, as opposed to the fierce warrior-type in PJ's movies, or even in subsequent books (I confess I haven't read any beyond LOTR).
Well, there aren't really any books set in the Third Age and featuring Gandalf the Istari beyond The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. There are essays and fragments in volumes such as Unfinished Tales, The Silmarillion and The History of Middle-earth series, but that's about it. And you're right, the Dwarves in The Hobbit were a bit underdeveloped and naïve (except when compared to Bilbo, who was even more inexperienced as an adventurer). Certainly they had come to depend on Gandalf quite a bit by the time the company had reached Mirkwood.
"At the end of the journey, all men think that their youth was Arcadia..." - Phantom F. Harlock
|
|
|
Eleniel
Tol Eressea
Jun 26 2015, 6:54am
Post #10 of 15
(1074 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Yes, that's the whole point...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
The reader doesnīt know the exact reasons for Gandalfīs absence before after the battle of the five armies, when sea re told briefly what Gandalf has been up to. Iīve never had any problems with not knowing the exact reasons before then, because it wasnīt relevant to Bilboīs involvement in the story. The main focus of the story throughout is after all on Bilbo.
I think the story is better when Gandalf isnīt always there to save the day - it makes for a more interesting and less repetitive story and it also allows us to better know and understand the motivations of the dwarves.
...of Tolkien removing Gandalf from the action at Mirkwood: the Company were relying on Gandalf to get them out of every adverse situation they got themselves into and Bilbo had to be given the chance to come into his own, earning the Dwarves' respect and admiration, up to the point where they began looking to him for all answers and solutions, just as they once looked to Gandalf.....
"Choosing Trust over Doubt gets me burned once in a while, but I'd rather be singed than hardened."
Ŋ Victoria Monfort
|
|
|
Milieuterrien
Rohan
Jun 26 2015, 11:40am
Post #11 of 15
(1017 views)
Shortcut
|
If Gandalf had been there all along,
the Book could never call itself 'The Hobbit', but only "Grey Bird and the Thirteen Dwarves."
|
|
|
dormouse
Half-elven
Jun 26 2015, 2:30pm
Post #12 of 15
(980 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Well, I'm not sure that child labour has a lot to do with it...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Children did work in factories in 19th century Britain - other countries too - but official acceptance of that had ended long before Tolkien was even born. From 1818 onwards there was a series of measures passed in Parliament to limit the abuse until by 1878 employment for older kids - I think it's 12 to 18 or 13 to 18, something like that - could only happen if the youngester had a satisfactory educational record and younger kids had to be in school. Of course, abuses don't end because you pass a law against them, attitudes have to change as well, but by the time Tolkien was alive the widespread acceptance of child labour in Britain was long gone. Any commentary you've read was probably written by someone who knows this country only through Dickens and thinks that's what it's like today (it happens a lot!)
As far as Gandalf goes, I agree with you completely about his disappearing only to come back at the vital moment. I don't think it would have worked in the film.
|
|
|
elostirion74
Rohan
Jun 26 2015, 6:44pm
Post #13 of 15
(915 views)
Shortcut
|
itīs just important for me to underline that I donīt see Gandalf going away at the edge of Mirkwood as something coming out of the blue or as an example of weakly developed incident/faulty and insufficiently explained device on Tolkienīs part. (Iīm not saying you do either btw, just wanted to explain my own reasoning). I think Gandalfīs absence follows quite naturally from other events and discussions earlier on in the story: even in the first chapter in his conversation with Bilbo we get a hint that Gandalf is actually a kind of launcher, someone who contributes to settings events into motion rather than actually doing all the work himself.
|
|
|
Milieuterrien
Rohan
Jun 27 2015, 9:49am
Post #14 of 15
(848 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Characters do react after being launched
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I think those schemes do not happen very often in litterature.
Gandalf comes first as a kind of strategist, then he lets dice roll and does almost nothing after that.
Couldn't the dwarves be killed by spiders in Mirkwood ? Yes they could
Couldn't they rot in Thranduil's jail ? Yes again
Couldn't the white council be beaten by Sauron in Dol Guldur ? Once more yes.
Thranduil got angry against the launch
Laketowners families who got their losses could also get angry against Gandalf's launch.
|
|
|
tgshaw
The Shire
Jul 4 2015, 3:48pm
Post #15 of 15
(675 views)
Shortcut
|
I don't know that Tolkien says that all hobbits were based on the "bat men" he knew in WWI - he says that Sam was. That analogy makes Frodo the officer that Sam would have been taking care of, which makes sense.
In the book, at least, Gandalf is never considered part of the "company" - If so, there would have been fourteen to begin with and no need to add another person to avoid the unlucky thirteen.
|
|
|
|
|
