The image at right, part of Lee’s analysis, is certainly food for thought.

I know I’m late to this party, but I finally got around to seeing The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey after hearing much belly-aching over how the story of a single book is split into three separate movies: it seems like a blatant cash grab by the studios, a cynical move that put franchise movie economics ahead of things like storytelling and pacing.

After seeing the movie, I can definitely sympathize with these complaints. It felt slow at times, particularly during the multiple expository scenes in the first half and the interminably long action sequence in the second half. Most importantly, I felt like the story didn’t advance far enough to justify taking up an entire movie on its own, especially compared to the Lord of the Rings movies.

So me being me, I decided to put this issue into quantitative terms. Specifically, I wanted to compare the length of the Hobbit movie to that of the source text, and run the same analysis for the three Lord of the Rings movies.

[Read More]

Tom Bombadil – Master and Mystery

By Tedoras

            Mention the name of Tom Bombadil around Tolkien fans and you are likely to spark a debate: a debate which, in Tolkien fandom, remains one of the most controversial and longest-argued of them all. This is perhaps because even the most fundamental questions surrounding Tom Bombadil are hard to answer; certainly, he is the most enigmatic character in The Lord of the Rings. Because of his uncanny nature, Tom Bombadil remains unique among all of Tolkien’s characters: as readers, we have the same understanding of him today as readers did when they first discovered him—that is to say, while scholarly works on Aragorn and Frodo abound, we are no closer to uncovering the true Tom Bombadil today than we were almost sixty years ago. In writing this article, I hope to accomplish a few goals: first, to present a thorough character study of Tom Bombadil (i.e. to lay out what we know); second, to discuss the main or popular theories in the debate (i.e. to lay out what we think); and third, to draw a conclusion (or, rather, an inference) as to the true nature of Tom Bombadil. Whether you are a veteran of this debate or are just now being exposed to it, I hope you will join me on a journey of herculean proportions to answer the most testing of all questions: who (or what) is Tom Bombadil?

As Saruman coldly says in The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey: “Let us examine what we know.” Well, in this instance, that is very apt advice, indeed. Tom Bombadil, as many of you already know, stumbles upon the hobbits in the Old Forest in September of the Third Age 3018; he proceeds to rescue them from Old Man Willow, and then brings them along to his home deep in the Forest where he lives with his (also rather enigmatic) wife Goldberry. Tom is marked throughout these episodes with a light and cheery tone: from his colorful attire to his seemingly continual singing (and his ring a dong dillo’s). Yet Tom’s light-hearted nature—while ostensibly unwarranted, considering where he lives—is, in fact, well-attributed: he is a very, very old and wise man (or rather, being that looks like a man). We will, in time, return to look more closely at the importance and uniqueness of Tom’s personality, but for now, let us focus on his age.

Readers quickly become aware that Tom is a special character, even from our very first meeting with him. One of the reasons for this is his fantastic age. And while it may not surprise us that Tom is indeed old, just how old may. Frodo, who appears just as confused about Tom as we are as readers, asks him repeatedly, “Who are you?” (Tolkien 129). Tom replies that he is “eldest,” and then he proceeds to explain:

“Tom was here before the river and the trees…He made paths before the Big People, and saw the Little People arriving…When the Elves passed westward, Tom was already here, before the seas were bent…before the Dark Lord came from Outside.” (129)

Since Tom’s own information is arguably the most accurate about him, let us use the above quotation to determine just how old he is. First, we know Tom has lived in Arda since “before the river and the trees,” a reference to the Spring of Arda. The Spring of Arda is the period from 1900 to 3450 (in Valian Years, not solar years, mind you—though we will return to this soon) of the Years of the Lamps, in which the world was populated with living things. Secondly, he has been in Middle-earth since year 1 of the First Age, when Men awoke; additionally, he saw the hobbits migrating west around T.A. 1300. Tom also saw the Elves pass west: this refers to the Sundering of the Elves and, more precisely, to the First and Second Sunderings in the Years of the Trees 1105 and 1115, respectively. The “seas were bent” in F.A. 587 following the War of Wrath. Most interestingly, though, is that Tom was in Arda before Morgoth (and, in turn, all the Valar) came there during the First War, from year 1 to about 1499 of the Years of the Lamps. Thus, we know that Tom Bombadil was one of the first—if not the very first—inhabitants of Arda following the Music of the Ainur and the creation of Eä.

Now, knowing that Tom has existed (it is, as yet, impossible to say that he was born or created, or even that he entered Arda) since year 1 of the Years of the Lamps, we can calculate his exact age. We must note, however, the sort of ripple that exists in time in Tolkien’s works: each year in the Years of the Lamps and Years of the Trees is a Valian year (about 9.582 solar years). The First Age, with the rising of the Sun, marks the use of solar years in counting. So, we can use the range from 1 Years of the Lamps to T.A. 3018 (when Tom meets the hobbits) to calculate his age. We simply multiply 3500 (the number of Valian years in the Years of the Lamps) by 9.582 (3500 x 9.582 = 33,537), repeat this process for the Years of the Trees (~1500 x 9.582 = 14,373), and add the total number of solar years from all the Ages up until T.A. 3018 (590 + 3,441 + 3018 = 7049). So, by T.A. 3018 Tom Bombadil is already some 54,959 (solar) years old!

Beyond his age, Tom is characterized by a few other unique traits. First is his reaction (or lack thereof) to the Ring. “Show me the Ring!” he says to Frodo, who, surprisingly, hands it right over without any qualms (much in contrast to the very protective, hesitant Frodo we see later on). Tom proceeds to “put it to his eye and laugh[s]” (130). Yes, the reaction of Tom Bombadil to the One Ring, the most powerful and dangerous object in the world, is laughter—not worry nor despair, and certainly not fear. Then, when Tom puts the Ring on his finger, there is “no sign of [him] disappearing” (130). And how does Tom react to this instance? You’ve got it right: he laughs and, to further show how little he cares for the Ring, he does what appears to be a little sleight of hand with it before returning it to Frodo “with a smile” (130).

Not only is Tom unaffected by the Ring himself, but he notices its effects on others. When Frodo slips on the Ring (to check that is, in fact the Ring after lending it to Tom), Tom immediately notices the invisible hobbit sneaking off:

“‘Hey there!’ cried Tom, glancing towards [Frodo] with a most seeing look in his shining eyes. ‘Hey! Come Frodo, there! Where be you a-going? Old Tom Bombadil’s not as blind as that yet. Take off your golden ring!” (131)

Clearly, Tom is unaffected, personally or otherwise, by the Ring. And he is the only character in the whole of the novel to have this ostensible immunity to the Ring. It is certainly a powerful being that holds this trait.

Yet what do we typically associate with power and wisdom? Perhaps visions of age-worn, rather tough and callous individuals spring to mind—yet this is not the case with Tom Bombadil. As I noted before, Tom has a rather affable, light-hearted personality. He is certainly not a man of affectation: no matter the circumstance nor the people involved, Tom is always in a joyous mood, singing and bouncing around (or at least disposed to do so). Tom is so happy-go-lucky because he has no concept of fear. Take the following examples: (1) he rescues the hobbits from the clutches of Old Man Willow as if he were reprimanding a child, not challenging a great evil; (2) he lives in the Old Forest, a place ripe with fearful beasts and about which tales of fright abound; (3) he saves the hobbits from a barrow-wight, coming with song and a spring in his step to one of the most dreadful and dangerous mishaps in the story. Take this quotation from “Fog on the Barrow-Downs,” for example:

“’You won’t find your clothes again,’ said Tom, bounding down from the mound, and laughing as he danced round them in the sunlight. One would have thought that nothing dangerous or dreadful had happened; and indeed the horror faded out of their hearts as they looked at him, and saw the merry glint in his eyes.” (140)

It is plain to note: where others would fear, Tom Bombadil does not. It is not even that Tom is simply not afraid, nor that he has overcome his fear; rather, he has no concept, no idea whatsoever, of fear. He is entirely composed of the good-natured, light-hearted fibers that render him capable of laughing in the very face of the One Ring.

And this lack of fear (especially with regards to the Ring) is unique. Gandalf certainly shows a sense of fear on many occasions: from his fear of entering Moria, to his fear of the Ring and the Enemy. Galadriel and Elrond both fear the Ring, for in either using it or keeping it hidden they know it will bring about their ruin. Even the Enemy is not free from the grasp of fear: when he learns of Aragorn’s return and the possibility of united opposition to him, Sauron begins to feel afraid. While the fear that all of these characters experience may differ in many ways, fear it is nonetheless. And it is exactly this sense of fear that Tom Bombadil does not possess.

There remains now just one last point regarding Tom’s character that I believe is worth noting: his repeated association with the earth. Frodo, the night the hobbits spend in Tom Bombadil’s house, has a vivid dream of

“a song that seemed to come like a pale light behind a grey rain-curtain, and growing stronger to turn the veil all to glass and silver, until at last it was rolled back, and a far green country opened before him under a swift sunrise.” (132)

This dream—a clear reference to Valinor—is interrupted: Frodo awakens to see “Tom whistling like a tree-full of birds” and he notes “the sun was already slanting down the hill…Outside everything was green and pale gold” (132). Here, we note Tom’s stark association with the earth or, perhaps more prominently, his dissociation from Valinor. Tom interrupts this dream (in essence, the thought that he may be associated with Valinor), and he immediately brings Frodo back to the earth: to the birds, trees, and green of the living, mortal earth. The notion that Tom is more an earthly, temporal being is quite important: it is vindicated by what we have learned of his age, and it will greatly help us in deciding what Tom is and isn’t.

Knowing what we do about Tom Bombadil now, we can move on to the second half of this task: discovering who Tom truly is. We will be looking at the main and other popular theories of this debate, and one by one, we will see which, if any of the pre-proposed categories, Tom fits. After thoroughly examining all options, then—and only then—will we be able to make a final conclusion. (And, if we are lucky, such a conclusion may not be that we will simply never know the answer.)

Is Tom…

A Man, Elf, Hobbit, Dwarf, etc?

Tom is decidedly not a member of any of the races or kindreds of Middle-earth. We can most certainly eliminate him from all such groups (especially from Men and Elves, which would be the two most likely groups) by noting his age (i.e. he was around before them), his physical characteristics (size, beard, etc.), and how the Ring does not affect him.

A Vala?

It is certainly difficult to claim that Tom is one of the great Powers of the World for many reasons. First, all fourteen of the Valar are accounted for, and Tom is not named among them. Second, as we noted before, Tom was living in Arda before the Valar (led by Morgoth) entered the world. Third, Tom refers to himself as “Eldest,” a title to which all the Valar are beholding, not just he (if indeed he were a Vala). Lastly, we know that Tom calls Morgoth “the Dark Lord” (as quoted above). It is hard to imagine any of the Valar referring to their greatest rival, the embodiment of Evil, by this name: certainly, the Valar reserved such reverence in the title “Lord” for Manwe alone. Additionally, fans over at The Encyclopedia of Arda have noted that characterize we would expect to note that Tom is a Vala (such as Gandalf, one of the Maiar), do not.

A Maiar?

This theory is, in some ways, a rather attractive one. We know, first of all, that not all of the Maiar were named by Tolkien—this, of course, allows for hypothesizing that Tom is indeed one of them. However, some good counterpoints contest this argument. First, Tom is unaffected by the Ring. We know for certain that other Maiar, from Gandalf to Sauron, were affected by the power and draw of the One Ring. Additionally, remember the total lack of a sense of fear we discussed before? Well, a sense of fear regarding the Ring (or its fate, for the Enemy) pervades the Maiar involved with this struggle. Yet such is not the case with Tom. Also, it is interesting to note how these Maiar are all allied, with one side or another, while Tom remains independent from the conflict.

The One?

Some have even pushed the idea that Tom is The One, Eru Ilúvatar. Yet for all the auspicious remarks made about Tom (how he is “eldest,” etc.), this theory does not hold water either. At the Council of Elrond, we learn many of the reasons why this theory is false. Gandalf states that “he cannot alter the Ring itself, nor break its power over others,” a trait that we would assume the mightiest being of them all, the creator himself, would possess (259). Glorfindel also comments on the idea of giving Tom the Ring to keep safe: “in the end, if all else is conquered, Bombadil will fall, Last as he was First” (259). The notion that Sauron and his folk could defeat Eru (indeed, the notion that Eru is even capable of being killed, defeated, or otherwise harmed) seems rather ridiculous. Furthermore, evidence from Tolkien himself puts a final end to this theory: in Letter 181, Tolkien explicitly states that there is no embodiment of Eru, who exists apart from the World entirely.

A Spirit?

In many of his earlier writings on what would become The Silmarillion (as collected by Christopher Tolkien in The Book of Lost Tales), Tolkien had a concept of Middle-earth as much more similar to his idea of Faerie. Originally, many spirits and sprites (of all kinds and names) entered the World just as the Ainur did—and this notion was not entirely lost in the final published form of The Silmarillion. It is an attractive theory (for many reasons) to say that Tom is a sort of spirit.

The best route to take within this theory is to propose that Tom is a “nature spirit” (perhaps even a “Father Nature,” if you like). First, it makes sense that Tom would come from the Music of the Ainur—this is in accord with his inhabiting Arda from the very beginning. Second, the notion that spirits exist in nature is evident in Middle-earth: from Ents to Old Man Willow to the great prevalence of personification, nature is much more “alive” in Middle-earth than we take it to be. As noted before, Tom is starkly associated with nature and the earth. The way he lives so harmoniously with bird and beast (and how he seems to command nature in his dealings with Old Man Willow) certainly supports this theory. Additionally, we know that Tom is not concerned with the Ring (Gandalf notes that “he would not have come” to the Council of Elrond, and we noted before how remains “unallied” despite the times). He, actually, shows a total disconnect from the affairs of all other human-like beings; he is, rather, concerned only with the natural world. Tom’s neutrality greatly parallels the neutrality that we prescribe to nature. Since we, as fans, do accept the existence and the role of Ents such as Treebeard, I believe making the jump from a natural “spirit of nature” to a man embodying the “spirit of nature” is not so difficult nor controversial. Yet still, we must ask ourselves why, then, does the Ring not affect Tom, when it can certainly affect other aspects of the natural order?

An Incarnation of the Music of Ainur?

This theory is rather unique, and more recently developed than the others. Basically, we know that of all the above theories, only the notion that Tom is a “nature spirit” is relatively sound; branching from that theory, a fan known only as “Ranger from the North” developed a theory in which he posits Tom is “the incarnated spirit of the Music of the Ainur.” The “Ranger” notes two flaws with the basic “nature spirit” argument: first, Tom is not most closely associated with nature (he, personally, shows this discord by fighting against Old Man Willow and the darkness of the Forest); second, Tom is, however, associated with song and music throughout (the way in which he fights nature, for example, is with song). So, it is agreed upon by many (and I am of the same opinion) that Tom is, in fact, a spirit (an incarnate/embodiment) of sorts (i.e. that he has some relation to the Music). The question now becomes whether or not you believe he is more closely related to nature or to the Music itself.

“Ranger from the North” makes a stellar case for the latter. First, he works with the evidence from the “nature spirit” theory, showing how entirely probable the existence of other, extraneous spirits/beings is in Tolkien’s cosmology. Second, he shows how Arda itself is not the incarnation of the Music, distinguishing Middle-earth from the means by which it was created. Then, the “Ranger” makes a very clever comparison between Ungoliant and Bombadil: he notes how, since Ungoliant exists in many ways as an incarnation of the discord of the Music, she parallels Tom; these two are, he says, antitheses, and should be considered in the same way. Just as Ungoliant embodies the evil and darkness with which she was made, so too does Tom embody the light and happiness of the source of his creation. The “Ranger,” additionally, notes a detail of paramount importance: Tom’s name is not all it appears. Certainly, we hear “Tom” and think of our odd uncle or younger brother—yet such is not the case, says the “Ranger.” He notes the story of the great gong Tombo in the Unfinished Tales—coincidence that “t-o-m-b-o” are the first six letters of Tom Bombadil? Is it also coincidental that we find yet another association between Tom and music here? I think not.

The “Ranger from the North” has written extensively on his theory, and I seek not to describe all of his arguments. If you would like a much more detailed and thorough examination of the Music of the Ainur theory, I highly recommend reading what the “Ranger” himself has written here: http://www.whoistombombadil.blogspot.com/

So, we have reached the end of our journey through the “Bombadil Problem.” We have examined the arguments, waded through confusion, sorted out messes, and procured evidence. It is, in my opinion, certain that we must continue to think of Tom as unique, that we must give credit to the enigma that he (intentionally) is. The true “Master” here is perhaps the Professor himself: the truly contradictory nature of this enigma—his simplicity in character and simultaneous complexity in literature—was well crafted. The mystery of Tom reaches far back into the deeps of Tolkien’s mythology, and roots may be found stretching back to the Professor’s first tales of Faerie. While the “riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma” that we call Tom Bombadil will continue to challenge us, so too will it excite us. For through continued debate and discussion, we return time and again to the tales and stories we hold so dear, pouring of pages for hours, scouring word-by-word for some secret hint, trying to piece the puzzle back together. We know that the mystery about Tom was intentionally crafted, and that the Professor may have taken the truth about this character and his own motives in designing him to the grave, yet our drive to uncover more about this most enigmatic of beings is not diminished—why? Perhaps it is precisely because of Tom’s nature that we are fascinated by him: in a Middle-earth so divided by light and dark, good and evil (i.e. clear answers to the “who” and “what”), Tom exists as an uncommitted, uncategorized blank slate. He is the one being so open to interpretation, so predisposed to our imagination, so designed for our wondering. It is not surprising that we love Tom so much, that we pursue this debate so tirelessly, because we each craft our very own Tom Bombadil in our minds—and it is the Professor who intentionally left Tom open to such interpretation. Perhaps we can accept that Tom is simply a mystery—though, no doubt, we will continue discussing and searching for the “truth.”

All references to the text from:

The Lord of the Rings by JRR Tolkien, single-volume edition, Houghton Mifflin (HarperCollins), 2001 (1994 edition of the text)

More information about Tom Bombadil, as well as links to other arguments, can be found below:

1)      http://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Tom_Bombadil/Nature

2)      http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/t/tombombadil.html

The literary legacy that members of the Tolkien Estate want to protect

By:  Brian Tither

Introduction

I think that the reason why some members of the Tolkien Estate have sued Saul Zaentz and its subsidiaries over JRR Tolkien’s literary legacy is because of their overriding concern for protecting that legacy above all else. In particular I think that this is the intention of Christopher and Priscilla Tolkien, the surviving children of Tolkien. And as a former student of Tolkien’s academic speciality in Old and Middle English and Old Icelandic in New Zealand I personally support this intention after being frustrated at The Hobbit production being only valued for the other Hollywood productions and tourist dollars that it may bring into New Zealand. I am also frustrated at the way a lot of the people involved in the production seem to only value it for its enhancement of their individual film projects.

The literary legacy of JRR Tolkien

Tolkien was the Professor of Anglo Saxon at Oxford University in the years that Christopher and Priscilla and their deceased brothers John and Michael were children and Tolkien would come home and tell them stories based on the literature that he was teaching at Oxford. This came from Old Icelandic texts like Voluspa, which describes the rise and fall of Midgard, the Old Icelandic Middle-earth, where Tolkien got his names for his Dwarves, and The Saga of the Volsungs, where Tolkien got his ideas for Bilbo’s encounters with Gollum and Smaug from the God Loki taking off Andvari the Dwarf a ring which causes problems for its bearers and Sigurd’s slaying of Fafnir the dragon, which are supplemented by similar things in the Old English poem Beowulf. This was also supplemented by Tolkien getting his ideas for Beorn, which translates as ‘warrior’ from Old English and as ‘bear’ from Old Icelandic, and Bilbo Baggins, which translates as ‘dweller in a dwelling in a bag’ from Middle English and ‘dweller with a sword from ones in a bag’ from Old English, from characters such as Bodvar Bjarki, which translates as ‘the bear warrior’, and Hott Hjalti, which translates as ‘the small sword hilt’, from The Saga of King Hrolf Kraki, where Hott’s parents are described as living in what appears to be a house built in a hole in the ground.

Given that the name Hott and the Old English word holbytla for ‘hole-builder’ conflate together as hobbit, which means ‘small hole-builder’, and given the oral tradition that developed between Tolkien and his children, it is easy to see how Tolkien took it a step further with his children and got them to help him with creating a story from him one day writing down the words: ‘In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit’. And from there the story developed as an oral tradition between them until Tolkien decided to write it down in a manuscript and this was published as The Hobbit some years later after he happened to show it to someone who recommended that he got it published. Then he wrote The Lord of the Rings, in which he referred to the mythology, later published as The Silmarillion, that he had been creating since before his children were born, while incorporating a character that he and his children devised from a doll that they owned, which they named Tom Bombadil.

The legacy of the Tolkien Estate

But the story of his children’s involvement did not stop there because Tolkien consulted Christopher on virtually every turn of The Lord of the Rings as he wrote it, while Christopher went on to become a university lecturer in Old and Middle English and Old Icelandic as well. Then when Tolkien passed away he had Christopher appointed as his literary executor and charged him to complete The Silmarillion, which Christopher did. And he also appointed him with John, Michael and Priscilla to take care of other estate matters as well.

This included taking care of matters regarding his selling off the film rights to the books to Saul Zaentz, which Tolkien did to cover the high inheritance taxes that the books accrued upon his death, all which grew out of his experiences with being swamped by the royalty taxes that he had to pay due to the sale of the books from the popularity that he did not anticipate for them. And this included the estate ensuring that Saul Zaentz and its subsidiaries did not step out of parameters that were set by Tolkien to protect the literary legacy of his works, which by implication stretched into his academic speciality to the original texts where he got his ideas from that have no copyright on them. And this experience grew out of seeing what Walt Disney did to the works of the Grimm’s Brothers the latter who Tolkien had a particular affinity for because the Grimm’s brothers also created philological principles, which Tolkien applied in his academia and works. Hence Tolkien did not want to see tangible things like this in his works being turned into intangible things like theme parks, which by implication extends into things like video games and gambling outlets such as slot machines.

And there is a need to protect this literary legacy if this literature is not to become something only valued by the money that people might make out of it at the expense of accessing that literature to many. And one of the things that I have been perturbed about as a student of Old and Middle English and Old Icelandic is experiencing both The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit productions consulting linguistic and Old and Middle English and Old Icelandic experts for the purpose of developing the movies without considering how such expertise comes from the collective intellectual property of teachers and students in these specialities, even though such intellectual property was strangely fused with Hollywood action movie conventions in the films. And possibly this is why The Hobbit movies have so far not had such experts promoting them like The Lord of the Rings movies had, which probably made it expedient for the first trilogy of movies to be nominated for Oscars in categories like Best Director and Best Film, which they won on the third movie, while the second trilogy so far has not received any such nominations.

The valuation of the legacy in New Zealand

Meanwhile, as I said above, The Hobbit movies have been only valued as a means to bring more Hollywood productions and tourist dollars into New Zealand and it has been seen by people involved in the production as only a means to develop their individual film projects. The latter was made clear to me in October 2010 when allegedly there was industrial action going on which was allegedly having Warner Brothers considering moving the production elsewhere. The impression I got then from such individuals was that if the production went offshore it would severely jeopardise their projects, which was enhanced to me by someone who spoke at The Hobbit rally, which occurred a few days before Warner Brothers decided to keep the production in New Zealand. This person referred to how The Lord of the Rings production created a community of filmmakers, which has left me the impression that this community has been dependent on both that and The Hobbit production for its existence.

Consequently I have decided that I will only support the film projects of individuals involved in these productions if they demonstrate to me sufficient appreciation for the intellectual property that was drawn on for these productions. And for me the benchmark that has been set for that is that shown to me by a prominent New Zealand Maori writer, some of whose works have been turned into films, who supported the teaching of Old and Middle English and Old Icelandic at the New Zealand university that he used to work for. He also left me with the impression that the term ‘Middle-earth’ should not be used as a means for cultural groups to promote their culture to gain tourist dollars without acknowledging the culture that Middle-earth comes from as Tolkien acknowledged and intended it, who said Middle-earth was a use of the Middle English middel-erde, which derived from the Old English Middangeard and is thus related to the Old Icelandic Midgard.

Meanwhile, universities have had to cut their Old and Middle English and Old Icelandic courses even when they have had a reasonable number of students doing them due to a reallocation of university funding from a government who has used The Hobbit production so far for political gain. And I think that this is abysmal given the free promotion that The Lord of the Rings movies got from the New Zealand experts in these specialities through public lectures that they delivered like other experts in the specialities in other places in the world on the release of each movie, which if it had of been picked up on by The Hobbit production might have meant that the media surrounding the movies would have been less focussed on the apparent lack of material in the first Hobbit movie and the technology used, which not all the movie viewers were happy with.

The actual legacy in New Zealand

Also, for the New Zealand world premiere of the first Hobbit movie such experts could have highlighted how it was part of New Zealand’s culture and heritage that our education system produced Kenneth Sisam, a graduate of both Auckland and Oxford Universities, who was Tolkien’s New Zealand born tutor when Tolkien first started learning these specialities. Sisam introduced texts to Tolkien that Tolkien said that he had previously never heard of before, which included the Old English poem Crist, which had words in it translated as: ‘Hail Earendil, brightest of angels/ above the middle-earth sent unto men’. This led to the first draft of the poem of Earendil the mariner that Bilbo sings in Rivendell the night before the Council of Elrond in The Lord of the Rings, which, in turn, Tolkien wrote after his first year of having Sisam as his first tutor, which was the beginning point of his legendarium.

In addition, these New Zealand specialists could have also highlighted how Tolkien alluded in his valedictory address, when retiring from being Professor of English language and literature, to the contribution that New Zealanders (and Australians) made to the Oxford School of English and the close contest which he had with Sisam for Professor of Anglo Saxon. The latter was also referred to in an interview just before the first Lord of the Rings movie’s release with an English born former lecturer in the speciality at a New Zealand university who was at Oxford when Tolkien was Professor there at the time the book was published who said that most undergraduates thought that Sisam should have been Professor.

Conclusion

This lecturer also told my classmates and me that the undergraduates at Oxford formed the basis for the Hobbits in Tolkien’s legendarium, them being derived from the undergraduates living in study groups with a tutor and a servant called a scout who looked after their personal needs assigned to each group. That is, Frodo Baggins and his cousins were based on the undergraduates, Bilbo Baggins on the tutor and Samwise Gamgee on the scout. And hence, whereas The Hobbit was something derived by Tolkien from his telling of stories to his children based on his academia, The Lord of the Rings was derived from his actual teaching of that academia. And I experienced an evolved version of that at university from a former PhD graduate of Oxford who got some of her Bilbos to teach Sams like me our letters like Bilbo does for Sam in the book. And according to one of those Bilbos my classmates and I are the envy of many who learn these letters around the world for having had this lecturer as a teacher, which is a sure foot in the door for any of her Frodos into universities such as Oxford and Cambridge. And it is such legacies that Christopher and Priscilla Tolkien are concerned with protecting knowing full well that without it their father’s legendarium would not even exist.

Brian lives in Wellington New Zealand on the main drag to both Victoria University where he was he was taught Old and Middle English and Old Icelandic at undergraduate level by an Oxford University PhD graduate and the Embassy Theatre where the red carpet rolled out for all New Zealand premieres for The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit movies. He goes under the pen name of Brian Boru, which refers to his family descent from a famous Gaelic warrior-king of a millenium ago called Brian Boroimhe who is part of a Gaelic literary canon that he also wants to study.

NO two Tolkien fans are the same. Yes, we harbor a deep and abiding love for all things Middle-earth, but (I like to believe) our tastes differ, even if only in the minutia. Some may enjoy the philological phantasmagoria that permeates Tolkien’s works, while others draw inspiration from the detailed locations and their histories. Personally, I have a thing for maps. However with the recent addition of Tauriel to the Middle-earth mythos, my thoughts have been drawn to the characters that inhabit our collective imagination and, more specifically, those of the female gender.

Tolkien, unlike many other fantasy writers of the twentieth century, was entirely willing to create strong, vividly imagined female characters. One that immediately comes to mind is Lúthien Tinúviel, who was so prominent in Tolkien’s world that she is not only mentioned in The Lord of the Rings, but is also a major character in The Silmarillion and even features in the epic poem The Lay of Leithian.

The latter work, which Tolkien never completed, chronicles the love between Beren and Lúthien. Another well-known character from the Legendarium is Elwing the White*, mother of Elrond and Elros. How prominent was she? After several unsuccessful attempts by Eärendil the Mariner to try and sail to Valinor, Middle-earth’s most-renowned seaman was only successful after Elwing joined him on Vingilot.

The two most well-known heroines, thanks in no part to the films, are of course Arwen and Éowyn. Yes, Arwen’s romance with Aragorn did seem a tad campy on the big screen (in a beautiful, melancholic fashion that truly added to the story), but let’s not forget: this is the same elf who faced down the Nine (even if it didn’t happen in the books) and single-handedly saved Frodo from certain death. And Éowyn’s fantastic line, “I am no man!” when taunted by the Witch-king? It still raises the hairs on the back of my neck. So good. Also, I would be remiss to neglect Galadriel, of Lothlórien. Not only is she a Ring-bearer of immense power, but she also sits upon the predominantly male (even if the Mair aren’t technically Men) White Council.

So, where does this leave us? Ah, yes: Tauriel. As a Tolkien fan, I’m ecstatic to see a fresh addition to the lore. As someone who considers himself to be rather versed in the ways of the entertainment industry, I see it as a shameless attempt to attract the ever-elusive demographic of young women (insert Orlando Bloom joke here) and adolescent males (insert scantily clad bikini picture here). Honestly? If she’s anything more than a Disney princess in elf ears, I’ll be satisfied.

What I’m trying to say, in a less cynical fashion, is that I trust Peter and Fran, I really do. But I’m also aware of the climate in which they have to operate. Big money means a big emphasis on making a big profit, and a necessary part of show business is trying to target as many demographics as possible. Time and time again, we see corporations put pressure on directors and writers to change their movies in ways that reach a larger audience, but harm the overarching narrative.

Will Evangeline Lilly be fantastic? I’m sure she will. Will her and Orlando’s on-screen chemistry, and indeed their very presence, contribute to the overall narrative of the trilogy? I’m sure they’ll make it work. Is it necessary? I remain to be convinced, largely because I’ve seen how sterile and bureaucratic the industry can be.

In the best of all possible worlds, I see Tauriel as the embodiment of the inner strength and outward beauty of all the aforementioned characters. Why Tauriel? Because The Lord of Rings trilogy had its strong female protagonists, as did the Silmarillion and the Legendarium before it. Therefore, in the spirit of a more diverse, modern telling of The Hobbit, I see it as only natural that Jackson and company would want to introduce a fresh female character. In truth, the only part of me that is uneasy is the fervently cynical, text-obsessed fanboy who’s shaking the bars of his cage and muttering, “but she’s not in the book!”

Until more elements of the plot are revealed, Tauriel remains a positive yet potentially unnecessary addition to Peter Jackson’s cinematic vision. In the end it all boils down to the spirit in which these changes are made to the source material. Who knows? I could be completely off the mark. When it comes to the Hobbit films I’ve yet to be disappointed.

In Jackson we trust.

* Bootnote. Most would automatically think of Aredhel with the appellation “the White”. However, there is one single reference that seems to indicate that the label also applied to Elwing. It’s from The Fellowship of the Ring where Aragorn is speaking to the four hobbits of Beren and Lúthien. As it’s direct speech, it does seem to be part of an oral tradition of either the Dunedain, or of the Noldor (or both). The quote in full: “For of Beren and Lúthien was born Dior Thingol’s heir; and of him Elwing the White whom Eärendil wedded, he that sailed his ship out of the mists of the world into the seas of heaven with the Silmaril upon his brow. And of Eärendil came the Kings of Númenor, that is Westernesse.” A Knife in the Dark, The Fellowship of the Ring.

Noah Smith is a freelance writer operating out of the woods of Pennsylvania, though he leaves often and for great lengths of time. The proud owner of more pet projects than any sane person deserves, he peddles his craft in various portions of the internet and local collegiate magazines, writing poetry, commentary, speculative fiction and erroneous remarks in the comment sections of videos. He writes on a blog called Utumbria and can also be found on Twitter. His opinions do not necessarily reflect those of TheOneRing.net or its staff.

WITH the theatrical home video release of The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey the audiences witnessed something unique. Whereas usually a title gets released with a similar cover design throughout the world, the amount of different cover artworks, package types and release dates for TH:AUJ was overwhelming and distracting. The release date was somewhere between March (USA) and May (Australia, NZ) — more than a month’s span! Also, almost each country had its own cover artwork as well as additional editions (four steelbook editions in France alone!).

Despite this diversity of packaging, the release per-se made a rather cheap impression. The menu was just some uninspired collage with static subscreens, as opposed to the excellent LOTR TE DVD menus. Menus on non-US-releases were even worse: they had purple all-purpose buttons and Arial font on the menu points overlayed. The disc labels were simple black for the most countries AUJ was released in.

As far as the SEE is concerned, we already have an announcement for a UK steelbook box, which for me is a clear hint that Warner Bros. still has no idea how to market this film, and is likely to continue the same approach with a multitude of different editions, packagings etc.

If you remember the theatrical DVDs for The Lord of the Rings, they all were quite similar in design. Also, they were released on a single day worldwide, even though the release was handled by many small release independent companies (as opposed to Warner Bros. who owns The Hobbit almost worldwide). They also had all the same menu designs.

As I think, the basic idea behind the menu and package design of LOTR TE / LOTR SEE on DVD was to give the audience a feeling of an “exquisite framing” for the content by assessing what the makers of the discs would like to see themselves. For instance, animated menus can be very annoying if you have to navigate through several screens of them, and have overlong transitions between these screens. On LOTR the transitions are still there but they are meticulously timed to be not intrusive. And the menus are done in such a stylish and elegant way that it is a joy just watching them.

Also, considering the package design: if anyone still owns the LOTR SEE DVD (as I do) — they are still a pleasure to hold in the hand, a truly elegant design made for collectors. (There was some difference between the normal SEE editions and giftset SEE editions in Europe where the normal SEE was made of thinner cardboard — however, the design and the gold lettering were still the same). And the SEE is, in fact, targeted at collectors as opposed to the majority who is just happy with the TE.

What I suggest:

There should be just one great design for the SEE, like it was the case with the LOTR SEE DVD editions. Or two variations of this design — for there should be a LOTR-like giftset as well. One which would deserve this name.

This package design should mirror the design of the available LOTR SEE DVDs (not the BluRays, mind you – they suck in comparison).

The menus should reflect the same approach the LOTR SEEs used to have. Michael Pellerin is already involved in the documentaries — let him do the production for the SEE as well! The menus of the LOTR SEE DVDs were state of the art in terms of elegance, the amount of thought put into programming and the structuring of the bonus features. Although animated, the menus were never annoying.

Also, there should be no qualitative difference between English-language menus and non-English menus — that’s cheap.

By doing this, Warner Bros. would show:
* That the label actually knows what it does when it tries to market The Hobbit;
* That it recognizes that the target area for the SEE are collectors who mind such aspects;
* That it cares about giving the target audience what it wants: excellent content put into an exquisite framing;
* That the label releasing the SEE is not cheap.

TheHutt runs the Russian language LOTR and Hobbit site Henneth-Annun.ru. His opinions do not necessarily constitute those of TheOneRing.net or its staff.

And a reminder, next weekend (Saturday August 3 at 6pm EDT (New York time)) we’ll be discussing the next chapter in our read-through of The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers: Book III, Chapter XI: The Palantir. It’s the final chapter of Book III, so don’t miss it!

And remember, tomorrow (July 20 at 6pm EDT (New York time)) we’ll be discussing the Hero and the Heroic in The Lord of the Rings.

Yet there are a number of minor (some even without a name!) characters who either serve an important purpose, give us a great deal of food for thought, or even go against established yet hard-to-overcome stereotypes about the content of Tolkien’s writing.

In no particular order, here are my leading six.

1) Sam’s dead Southron warrior.

“…suddenly straight over the rim of their sheltering bank, a man fell, crashing through the slender trees, nearly on top of them. He came to rest in the fern a few feet away, face downward, green arrow-feathers sticking from his neck below a golden collar. His scarlet robes were tattered, his corslet of overlapping brazen plates was rent and hewn, his black plaits of hair braided with gold were drenched with blood. His brown hand still clutched the hilt of a broken sword.”
Of Herbs and Stewed Rabbit, The Lord of the Rings.

A common criticism of Tolkien is that evil is evil and good is good and ne’er the twain shall meet. The bad guys only exist to be Othered… and then gloriously hacked to death. Yet Sam’s thoughts on the dead Southron are a direct repudiation of this view.

Sam wonders at the man’s name, where he came from. The questions run thick and fast. Was he was really a bad man? Was he deceived into serving Sauron to march far from his home to die fruitlessly in the woods of Ithilien? Would he really rather have stayed there in peace?

The narrator gives no answers, but the questions in themselves are a powerful reminder that conflict cannot be easily reduced to “us” and “enemy”.

“It was Sam’s first view of a battle of Men against Men, and he did not like it much.”

Considering Sam, of all the hobbits, is our perspective character — the “Everyman” — it’s more important than you might think. Pippin has similarly uneasy thoughts as he watches Saruman’s forces march away south to Helm’s Deep from Isengard.

2) Ghân-buri-Ghân

“There sat Théoden and Éomer, and before them on the ground sat a strange squat shape of a man, gnarled as an old stone, and the hairs of his scanty beard straggled on his lumpy chin like dry moss. He was short-legged and fat-armed, thick and stumpy, and clad only with grass about his waist.”
The Ride of the Rohirrim, The Lord of the Rings.

Another misunderstood criticism: evil is always ugly, and those on the side of good are strikingly handsome. Enter the Woses of Drúadan Forest. The descendents of the solitary and tribal Drúedain folk who fought in the First Age against Morgoth, and abandoned Numenor long before its destruction, there’s nothing pretty about the Wild Men of the Woods. Yet, they assist the Rohirrim to reach the Pelennor in time to save the folk of Gondor.

Of course there are other examples. Most prominently, Sauron assumed a fair form to deceive the elves of Eregion and start the chain of events that leads to the forging of the One Ring.

Icing on the cake, the Woses use poison arrows, and the Marshal of the Mark Elfhelm seems to imply that they’ve even been used on the Rohirrim. If the good folks never resort to foul means to win, the Woses don’t seem to have got the message.

3) Lúthien Tinúviel

“Tinúviel rescued Beren from the dungeons of Sauron, and together they passed through great dangers, and cast down even the Great Enemy from his throne, and took from his iron crown one of the three Silmarils, brightest of all jewels, to be the bride-price of Lúthien to Thingol her father.”
A Knife in the Dark, The Lord of the Rings.

Lúthien doesn’t even directly enter the events of The Lord of the Rings, yet her influence is felt throughout the tale.

Her example, and that of Beren, inspires Frodo to resist the commands of the Nazgúl at the Ford of Bruinen. Her arts of healing — more than once she saved Beren from death’s door — are in a smaller measure seen in her descendents Elrond and Aragorn. And as Sam observes just before he and Frodo enter Torech Ungol, the light of the Silmaril she helps Beren recapture is in the Phial of Galadriel that later proves so vital in keeping hope alive for the Quest.

And make no mistake, Beren could not have wrested the Silmaril from Morgoth alone. Lúthien plays an equal part — probably the key role in my opinion — in the success of that particular quest.

And remember, tomorrow (July 13 at 6pm EDT (New York time)) we’ll be discussing the next chapter of The Two Towers: The Voice of Saruman.

Tolkien’s earliest mythology of Middle-earth, 1915–1916

by John Garth

TOLKIEN’S Middle-earth did not spring fully-formed into what we see in The Hobbit, The Lord of the Rings and The Silmarillion. Its complex development is laid out in Christopher Tolkien’s History of Middle-earth, going back to The Book of Lost Tales begun in late 1916 in hospital after the Battle of the Somme.

But there is an even earlier phase of Tolkien’s work on Middle-earth: from 1915–16, glimpsed fragmentarily in poems and in a lexicon of Qenya, his first invented Elvish language.

Here, in a passage from Tolkien and the Great War, I tentatively piece together the way the mythology stood in about March 1916, shortly before embarkation for the Somme. For those interested, brief notes on how I did so may be found at the end. Some details (and spellings or diacritics) are quite familiar, many are not. Some details (and spellings or diacritics) are quite familiar, many are not. Beings and places which survive in the later legendarium appear here under earlier names: for example, Eru (God) is Enu, which Tolkien relates to a Qenya verb meaning ‘devise’. Some names eventually found an entirely different use: decades later, ‘Sangahyando’ was given to a rebel royal of Gondor in The Lord of the Rings. Some concepts, such as the Valar and Eldamar, were to undergo many further developments.

[Read More]

And remember, tomorrow (July 13 at 6pm EDT (New York time)) we’ll be discussing the next chapter: The Voice of Saruman.

Let’s have a closer look at what brings such huge interest and different fandoms together at this amazing show — and prep you for what we will reveal during our presentation! Bring your questions and comments to the chat!

We launch TORn TUESDAY every week at 5:00PM Pacific: brought to you by host Clifford “Quickbeam” Broadway and producer Justin “I Make Excellent T-shirts” Sewell — Our innovative live show includes worldwide fans who join us on the Live Event page with a built-in IRC chat (affectionately known as Barliman’s Chat room). Be part of the fun and mischief every week as we broadcast *live* from Meltdown Comics in the heart of Hollywood, U.S.A.!

WE APOLOGIZE that there is no available archive of this particular installment on our YouTube channel —- it was a “sneak preview” after all!

————————————————-

Follow us on Twitter:  @theoneringnet

Follow Cliff Broadway:  @quickbeam2000

Like us on Facebook:  www.facebook.com/theoneringnet