|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
merklynn
Menegroth
Apr 29 2008, 5:32pm
Post #1 of 38
(633 views)
Shortcut
|
This is in response to Entmaiden who wrote:
Tolkien's books have long been derided by literature "professionals". From a structural point of view, the story meanders for too long, it contains references that lie outside the material, the hero in The Hobbit (Bard) appears without warning at the climactic point, the eagles are a convenient deux et machina in both The Hobbit and LOTR.
There are very amateurish. That doesn't mean they aren't compelling or worthy.
That's very true, and I avoid pointing those plot devices out because I like to pretend they aren't that bad. I like to find my own excuses for these as a fan. Still, it is possible for human beings to justify anything... some can justify the most despicable acts of violence. So I'm sure fans with a bit of thought can justify why or how certain occurences in TH and LOTR aren't actually quick contrivances for the plot.
So what deux ex machina do my fellow TORN members notice in the books and how might you reconcile them so that they are not so? The easiest way is to suggest a whole sequence of misadventures prevented the eagles from assisting any earlier... a story in itself... and one I'd love someone to write. :-) But what else and any imaginative explanations from anyone out there?
|
|
|
DiveTwin
Nargothrond
Apr 29 2008, 7:42pm
Post #2 of 38
(498 views)
Shortcut
|
I realize Tolkien was considered "amateurish" in his writing - but I wish I could write that poorly! Since LOTR is (I believe) the second most-read book behind the Bible, I think people who read it didn't see the work as such. And that being the case, I don't mind that type of situation with Bard or the eagles - it's what the story says, so I'll just say "trust it".
However, I'm sure if it makes sense cinematically to flesh out the story more by adding such plot devices then I'm confident in how GDT, PJ and Phillipa will plan to do it. It's funny that you brought up the eagle's arrival - I was asking myself a few weeks ago "why did they choose to show up?". Maybe it's as simple as that they have no love lost for the Orcs/Goblins, attack them whenever they see they out of the mountains and are always suspicious of them, maybe a story/reference that Gandalf can tell to Bilbo or the dwarves after the eagles take them up to the cliffs.
Later in the story you could then have one of the great eagles catching a glimpse of the huge mass of Orc's streaming out of the mountains on their way to the Lonely Mountain - and the eagle watches for awhile and then flies off. Only later when the eagles show up at the Battle Of Five Armies do you realize he needed time to gather his own army, as anytime the orcs leave the mountains en mass there is trouble brewing. Nothing surprising for those that read the books, but just a simple way to give them a reason to be there.
Very simplistic, I know - but better minds can (and will) come up with the right link.
|
|
|
merklynn
Menegroth
Apr 29 2008, 7:52pm
Post #3 of 38
(463 views)
Shortcut
|
Yeah, I'm NOT really talking about any future movie, but just the books themselves. Whether people have any amusing or leftfield ideas to explain things that come across as slightly too convenient, or any examples anyone has of such instances.
I need to dig some up myself and put my pointed thinking cap on.
P.S. I never thought of Tolkien as amateurish at all. He was a paid writer afterall.
(This post was edited by merklynn on Apr 29 2008, 7:53pm)
|
|
|
Ataahua
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Apr 29 2008, 7:52pm
Post #4 of 38
(473 views)
Shortcut
|
is the arrival of the Huorns at Helm's Deep - but there is background to it, thanks to Treebeard mentioning the 'dark heart' of Fangorn Forest and the trees' anger to those who walk on two feet. So their arrival fits within the story without it feeling like the last-miute arrival of an unknown cavalry ... which they are, at least to Theoden's army.
Celebrimbor: "Pretty rings..."
Dwarves: "Pretty rings..."
Men: "Pretty rings..."
Sauron: "Mine's better."
"Ah, how ironic, the addictive qualities of Sauron’s master weapon led to its own destruction. Which just goes to show, kids - if you want two small and noble souls to succeed on a mission of dire importance... send an evil-minded b*****d with them too." - Gandalf's Diaries, final par, by Ufthak.
Ataahua's stories
|
|
|
Darkstone
Elvenhome
Apr 29 2008, 8:46pm
Post #5 of 38
(467 views)
Shortcut
|
I don't really agree that Tolkien's writing was amateurish.
First, as a product of turn of the last century British Public School he doubtless knew more of the principles of Rhetoric and Composition, as well as the details of Aritotle's Poetics, than the vast majority of professional writers today.
Second, before LOTR he had 80 published works, hardly amateurish.
Third, when one reads Homer, Virgil, and Beowulf one realizes he is indeed creating a modern epic, and is writing in that style. Quite professionally.
Finally, Jackson and Co. took Tolkien's book and retold its story using the modern convenitons professional writers would use. So which is better, the book or the movies? QED.
But anyway, back to your question. The major plot device I find interesting is how so many main characters "die" then miraculously pop back up. (Except poor Boromir.) I note that even Jackson and Co. extended this device by having Aragorn fall off a cliff and "die". But fans weren't as accepting of that as they were with the "deaths" of Bilbo, Frodo, Gandalf, Merry, Pippin, Frodo again, Faramir, Eowyn, and probably a few more others I forgot.
******************************************
The audacious proposal stirred his heart. And the stirring became a song, and it mingled with the songs of Gil-galad and Celebrian, and with those of Feanor and Fingon. The song-weaving created a larger song, and then another, until suddenly it was as if a long forgotten memory woke and for one breathtaking moment the Music of the Ainur revealed itself in all glory. He opened his lips to sing and share this song. Then he realized that the others would not understand. Not even Mithrandir given his current state of mind. So he smiled and simply said "A diversion.”
|
|
|
Idril Celebrindal
Dor-Lomin
Apr 29 2008, 9:03pm
Post #6 of 38
(469 views)
Shortcut
|
|
The Nine have taken on the guise of riders in black
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Nobody will ever figure out that they're minions of Sauron now!
Perhaps they should have taken on the guise of riders in mauve. Or chartreuse. Or even plaid....
With caffeine, all things are possible.
The pity of Bilbo will screw up the fate of many.
(This post was edited by Idril Celebrindal on Apr 29 2008, 9:04pm)
|
|
|
dernwyn
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Apr 29 2008, 9:10pm
Post #7 of 38
(463 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Well, if Wizards can be different colors...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
...then why not Riders?
Being clad in various pastels would have made them seem "friendlier", and they might have been able to get more cooperation out of folks like the Gaffer.
Or better yet: how about a specific tartan for each one!
(Would Kilted Riders have to ride sidesaddle?  )
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"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
|
|
|
Dreamdeer
Doriath
Apr 29 2008, 9:15pm
Post #8 of 38
(453 views)
Shortcut
|
Eagles do like fresh carrion--a free meal always looks better than some kicking, bleating sheep that will argue with your menu choice all the way to the aerie. Why not flock to a battlefield? It's not like it would be cannibalism or anything--they're not even mammals.
My website http://www.dreamdeer.grailmedia.com offers fanfic, and message-boards regarding intentional community or faerie exploration.
|
|
|
Dreamdeer
Doriath
Apr 29 2008, 9:20pm
Post #9 of 38
(447 views)
Shortcut
|
So...the challenge would be to figure out some justification for the riders wearing black? (Unlike a certain tiedye-wearing undead ponyite I could think of) Let's see--it hides dirt better, and being more dead than alive, they're always forgetting to wash their things, so Sauron said to heck with it, best to dress them in something that won't show just how grubby they really are? What's a Dark Lord to do with a pack of zombies, anyway? You have to tell them everything!
My website http://www.dreamdeer.grailmedia.com offers fanfic, and message-boards regarding intentional community or faerie exploration.
|
|
|
Aunt Dora Baggins
Elvenhome
Apr 29 2008, 9:22pm
Post #10 of 38
(448 views)
Shortcut
|
That is a great image :-D
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"For DORA BAGGINS in memory of a LONG correspondence, with love from Bilbo; on a large wastebasket. Dora was Drogo's sister, and the eldest surviving female relative of Bilbo and Frodo; she was ninety-nine, and had written reams of good advice for more than half a century."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"A Chance Meeting at Rivendell" and other stories
leleni at hotmail dot com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
|
|
Dreamdeer
Doriath
Apr 29 2008, 9:29pm
Post #12 of 38
(446 views)
Shortcut
|
...then why not Riders? (Would Kilted Riders have to ride sidesaddle? )
Invisibility makes modesty a moot point for Nazgul. And heaven knows what the get into when they cast the robes aside and have total anonymity? Oh, the merry pranks that cause the Morgul Vale to ring with laughter!
Which brings up an interesting point. Earlier we discussed the limitations of the Ring's invisibility My premise, at least, is that if an invisible person touches more than 30% of something's surface, such as clothing, it becomes invisible, too. Or if something touches something thus rendered invisible on more than 30% of its surface, such as belts, weskits over shirts, or swords still in the hilt strapped to one's side, that also becomes invisible. But, as others pointed out, things that glow, such as elvish blades or magic phials, still cast off a visible light, whether or not the original object itself becomes visible.
Apparently, Nazgul invisibility operates on a different principle. They can wear visible robes. Odd, since theoretically the magic is based on the same ring technology. Perhaps Sauron cast some sort of spell on the robes to make them invisibility-resistant?
My website http://www.dreamdeer.grailmedia.com offers fanfic, and message-boards regarding intentional community or faerie exploration.
|
|
|
Elven
Doriath
Apr 29 2008, 9:35pm
Post #13 of 38
(442 views)
Shortcut
|
that awful schreeching sound like bagpipes with a hole in them - oh wait a minute - they did! 
so tartan - is the new black!? 
Nice one Dernwyn
Were off to Hobbiton finally!
Tolkien was a Capricorn!!
Russell Crowe for Beorn!!
|
|
|
Elven
Doriath
Apr 29 2008, 9:44pm
Post #15 of 38
(442 views)
Shortcut
|
I see the BR's invisability related to the loss of their will and their soul - diminished by greed and lack of inner substance, they forfeited blindly and witlessly their integrity and wisdom - (which doesn't leave them alot really  ) .. they are wraiths - shells in black robes - so not necessarily 'invisable' by the same principles.
I liked your 30% take on things - its intruiging!
Were off to Hobbiton finally!
Tolkien was a Capricorn!!
Russell Crowe for Beorn!!
(This post was edited by Elven on Apr 29 2008, 9:46pm)
|
|
|
Eowyn of Penns Woods
Doriath
Apr 29 2008, 10:18pm
Post #16 of 38
(453 views)
Shortcut
|
Bagpipes do NOT screech or shriek-- I do! --they skirl! And skirl beeeeautifully!
No, tartan is the new 'camo'. Most clans do have a "hunting" or "weathered" tartan so's to blend into the surroundings-- invisible-like, ya know? BTW, Bill Ferny was a MacDuff, I hear.
As for the side-saddle question, well, it's a family board, but those Riders have been bloodless and desiccated for how long...? ;)
|
|
|
merklynn
Menegroth
Apr 29 2008, 11:53pm
Post #18 of 38
(419 views)
Shortcut
|
Here's a more serious thought... given that we know the dwarves are pretty competent sturdy fighters (or at least in their own estimation... and by the later example of Gimli) then can anyone rationalize why twelve Dwarves got captured by three trolls? Surely twelve armed Dwarven warriors have at least a decent advantage over three trolls. I'd hate to think of the dwarves as needy and relying on Gandalf... but they kind of whine and complain about his absence when he's not around. Do they need coddling? I realize the threats they face demand the aid of a wizard given their low number... but three trolls?
:-D
(This post was edited by merklynn on Apr 29 2008, 11:55pm)
|
|
|
Unspoken_Request
Nevrast
Apr 30 2008, 12:07am
Post #19 of 38
(413 views)
Shortcut
|
|
The Dwarves in the Hobbit are not really proficient or
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
resourceful. Most of the time they make some mistakes and someone (Gandalf or Bilbo) takes them out of it. I hope these numerous difficulties are toned down a bit for the movie. They need to look very impressive to Bilbo at the beginning.
In the case of the three trolls, they were taken by surprise one by one. The problem is that when you've got 3 or 4 scouts who are not coming back from where they went. You change your plan. They didn't and that was rather stupid of them.
This whole episode doesn't really question their ability as warriors. It question their intelligence. I don't know how they'll deal with if for the movie, but it would look ridiculous if Thorin keeps sending his 12 companions one after the other without anyother form of tactics. Some dwarves may be foolish at times for the sake of comic relief (Bombur...) but Thorin needs to be better than that.
|
|
|
Annael
Elvenhome
Apr 30 2008, 12:13am
Post #20 of 38
(429 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I get to get on my soapbox again!
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
About the Eagles (I've said this before many times). It's a rule of the Heroic Quest story that magical intervention cannot be used to help the Hero fulfill the Quest. Same reason why the Wizard/Wise Guide has to die or disappear before the Hero faces the critical moment: the Hero has to do the job on his own, using only his own wits and strength and resolve. He can have a sidekick along, but not someone with any special powers. If the Hero can't do this, he doesn't deserve the title and the rewards that will come to him; he doesn't deserve to become the King or get the Princess.
Basically, he can't cheat on the test.
But once the Quest is fulfilled, the ban is relaxed, so there can be and often is a magical return journey. Sinbad gets to ride home on a magic carpet, Dorothy can use the ruby slippers to travel home, the Eagles come pick up Frodo & Sam. I wouldn't call this a deus ex machina, since the only reason for it is to spare the reader or listener from being bored by a description of just how long it took the Hero to get back down the mountain and home again. We've already traveled that route, no need to go over it again.
Tolkien was a bit clumsy in how he introduced Bard, yes. It would have been a lot better had we met Bard earlier and come to care for him a bit. I think he was pretty clumsy with Arwen too, putting her in the background at Rivendell and forgetting all about her until the very end when suddenly she pops up and marries Aragorn. But I chalk that up to his inexperience as a fiction novelist. JK Rowling makes similar errors in the first couple of Harry Potter books, bringing in a character or plot device right at the moment it's needed instead of earlier. But I wouldn't condemn the entire work on the basis of those small imperfections.
"The person who strives for security will never be free. The person who believes that she's found security will never reach paradise."
- Tom Robbins
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
NARF and member of Deplorable Cultus since 1967
(This post was edited by Annael on Apr 30 2008, 12:14am)
|
|
|
merklynn
Menegroth
Apr 30 2008, 12:35am
Post #21 of 38
(413 views)
Shortcut
|
Tolkien was a bit clumsy in how he introduced Bard, yes. It would have been a lot better had we met Bard earlier and come to care for him a bit. I think he was pretty clumsy with Arwen too, putting her in the background at Rivendell and forgetting all about her until the very end when suddenly she pops up and marries Aragorn. But I chalk that up to his inexperience as a fiction novelist. JK Rowling makes similar errors in the first couple of Harry Potter books, bringing in a character or plot device right at the moment it's needed instead of earlier. But I wouldn't condemn the entire work on the basis of those small imperfections.
I think this is due to Tolkien's writing style, which I'm guessing was largely write as you go, and less structured and pre-determined. Hence the need to use plot devices to explain things that didn't get explained earlier because the writer didn't realize at the time exactly how things would play out. I think that when there are a lot of these in a book it shows the author's approach to writing. With a tome like LOTR it's hardly surprising, and I'm sure damn near impossible to catch everything. Arwen was probably more of an afterthought, as was Bard...
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Gondolin
Apr 30 2008, 12:36am
Post #22 of 38
(430 views)
Shortcut
|
I think he was pretty clumsy with Arwen too, putting her in the background at Rivendell and forgetting all about her until the very end when suddenly she pops up and marries Aragorn.
Not that it matters for the how the published book affects readers, but (as you may know), it wasn't written that way: Arwen was created relatively late in the writing process, and at one point Tolkien considered having Aragorn marry Éowyn. (Cue dernwyn, our HoLotR expert, to explain in more detail.) And Tolkien was himself aware that Arwen hadn't been fully integrated into the tale; he noted this in a letter. (But I don't think he could have arrived at a solution like the film's, without radically re-working his story, which has no place for cross-cutting to Rivendell.)
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
We're discussing The Lord of the Rings in the Reading Room, Oct. 15, 2007 - Mar. 22, 2009!
Join us Apr. 28-May 4 for "Treebeard".
|
|
|
dernwyn
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Apr 30 2008, 1:02am
Post #23 of 38
(402 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Ah, the haunting lilt of "Black Land the Brave"! ;-D //
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"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
|
|
|
entmaiden
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Apr 30 2008, 1:06am
Post #24 of 38
(414 views)
Shortcut
|
aren't a deux et machina at the end, but Gandalf's rescue in The Two Towers, and the eagles in the Battle of Five Armies in The Hobbit fit the definition. Now, I LOVE the eagles, even the singing ones in Gondor, but their appearances are sometimes a little contrived.
Each cloak was fastened about the neck with a brooch like a green leaf veined with silver.
`Are these magic cloaks?' asked Pippin, looking at them with wonder.
`I do not know what you mean by that,' answered the leader of the Elves.
NARF since 1974.
Balin Bows
|
|
|
Annael
Elvenhome
Apr 30 2008, 3:31am
Post #25 of 38
(412 views)
Shortcut
|
has always felt anticlimactic and tacked-on to me. Bilbo's quest is done when he faces Smaug and gets the Arkenstone, which he does all alone.
"The person who strives for security will never be free. The person who believes that she's found security will never reach paradise."
- Tom Robbins
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
NARF and member of Deplorable Cultus since 1967
|
|
|
|
|
1
