[LadyBrooke]

(This is every thought I’ve had reading the entire thread, so some of this deals with stuff from pages back. It is also very long and possibly incoherent.)

To me the greatest horror (or victim) of war is not the dead, but those who, though living, are unable to cope or recover from what they experienced. This is what struck me the most about the ending of Lord of the Rings - Frodo is unable to find healing when he goes home. And though we can hope that he does find it over the sea, is that really a happy ending? I can’t consider it one because he (and Bilbo) are separated from their friends and families. And that to me is the greatest tragedy - one that I have seen too often in real life - those who are living but at the same time not, who are still fighting the war everyday in their minds. And Tolkien shows this with Frodo.

Dealing with the issue of lung cancer and Hobbits smoking, forgive me if I’m wrong, but was it even known at the time Tolkien was writing the books that smoking could kill people. From what I recall from my last Health class that link was only discovered in the late 60s or the 70s, while the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings were written/published before that - in which case it would have been impossible for Tolkien to have dealt with that issue - in the same way it would have been impossible for say Shakespeare to have predicted that one day some idiots would try to dislike “A Midsummer’s Night Dream” because they think Oberon’s use of that flower resembles a date rape drug - yes, that is what some people I have the misfortune to have to spend time with think. Also some people have mentioned that people of Tolkien’s generation and the next would have been able to comprehend the reality of war and fill in the blanks but later generations wouldn’t. And this is one reason given for why Tolkien should have filled in the details. I have to disagree, for I believe that a writer’s utmost responsibility is to write the story they like, not a story for people generations and decades later. I haven’t seen the fact that very few people can comprehend the reality of life in Greece or Medieval Britain given as a reason to not read the Iliad or the legends of King Arthur.

The fact that Tolkien doesn’t describe agonizing deaths in LotR doesn’t mean that they aren’t there. Theoden’s death for one would have been absolutely horrific - especially if the horse wasn’t instantly dead but managed to kick him before dying. A horse lying across any part of your body can crush/shatter the bones. As somebody who has owned or taken care of 7 different horses and a miniature horse in the past year and some odd months I can safely say that a terrified horse is dangerous and will hurt you even if you are their favorite person in the world. The fact that he was able to gasp out a final speech does not mean that it wasn’t horrific. There is also the Dead Marshes which show that contrary to my generations view (and here I show how young I am, that the only war I have ever seen is the Iraqi war) that soldiers’ bodies are always brought home, they aren’t. Sometimes they are left on the battlefield due to the sheer logistics of bringing them back. Sometimes they aren’t enough people left (Didn’t Tolkien say that Thraundial only brought a third of his people back?) The idea of faces staring back at me from where they fell in battle - orcs, elves, humans all mixed together - haunted me for weeks.

Also you can find examples of horrific deaths in the other books - especially the Sil with Finrod being torn to shreds by a werewolf, Morgoth trampling Fingolfin (or was it orcs and Fingon), that guy that got killed in the Paths of the Dead etc. But they too, aren’t described in deep detail - we don’t get “and Finrod’s blood was splattered all over the walls, with his one of his arms lying in the corner, blah, blah, etc. etc.,” and that is part of what sets Tolkien apart. The fact that the horror is expressed without having to be graphic about it. He doesn’t have a responsibilty to describe the horrors of war to the public. Indeed, why should the reality of war have to be described to people in fiction? I would far prefer to have it taught in the schools, where people would have to deal with the reality of it, but so far none of my history classes have really touched on it. And I think most parents would throw a fit if school books started describing the reality of war for teenagers - Even when dealing with the Holocaust and Anne Frank most of my teachers have glossed over the eventual fate of her and the others.

Hmmm.......Trying to think of bad behavior on the part of the good guys (without actually going and getting the books, which requires going to the basement which does not have a good heating system, and it is currently in the 20s) all I can think of off the top of my head is the hunting of the Drudain (is that right?) by the Rohirrim. Certainly not good behavior.