Zifnab, I considered Beorn, but put him more in the supernatural catagory. He and his kind are more like pookas or shape shifters than actual bears.
The Mûmakil or Oliphaunts; I felt sorry for them more than anything, another species being used and corrupted by the Dark Lord. Perhaps not so much ferocious as big and terrified. Still a bad combination, granted. But when you think of the intelligence and beauty of the elephant, though, the treatment of them in Tolkien's tale seems horrific to me.
Huan was a hound, a domestic animal. So he doesn't really count. I'm thinking more about the roles of the wild creatures.
I don't know the tale of Tuor and the swans, or even if there was a tale.
On the other hand...I did forget the role of the thrush and Roäc the Raven, who both played very important parts in The Hobbit, and had a bond with the Men and Dwarves in the story.
This is lacking in LOTR. Plenty of evil, corrupted creatures. No helpful, friendly creatures, except the Eagles. That bond seems to have disappeared, except for the case of Radagast, who is treated like a fool. You'd think that at least the Elves would have had good will of the animals and birds of Middle Earth.
Ah well, maybe since I was raised on the works of the great naturalist writers like Ernest Thompson Seton and Felix Salten, I feel the loss more than others. But I still think wildlife got a bum rap in LOTR.
[ March 13, 2002: Message edited by: Birdland ]
|