[Hookbill the Goomba]

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hicklin

Er, that would be vambraces, and plate forearm-guards go back at least as far as the Greeks.

Still, the point is quite well taken. For whatever reason Tolkien chose to freeze military technology at about the time of Hastings. Probably because he was concerned with *decline*- the weapons of the Elder Days were, by authorial fiat, better than those of the decadent Third Age. Of course, that's pretty much exactly the way his beloved Old English viewed things: Roman ruins were 'eald enta gweorc,' ancient works of giants.

Or perhaps he does not see the advent of automatic or more advanced weapons / armor and such as being 'progress'.

Originally Posted by davem

I do know that Tolkien had experienced war at first hand, & thus if he refuses to acknowledge what really happened that is his freely made choice.

I agree that this is indeed strange. As I mentioned, you have to keep in mind that The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit were written for Tolkien's "own satisfaction" more than anything. While nowadays writers are encouraged to face up to realities and deal with horrors, I'm not sure Tolkien was, or if he was, it was probably by people that annoyed him. And you know what academics can be like with people that annoy them.

I'm speculating, of course.

We can say what Tolkien should have done until the end of days. A different writer may have focussed on the gore, but Tolkien did not. My feeling is that the horrors of war were well known to his audience, the first two World Wars still a raw memory.

Originally Posted by davem

Yes, its horrible & graphic, but its also heartbreaking & brings home the true horror & pain of war in a way that nothing in Tolkien does.

Here, I fear, we must agree to disagree. Without the knowledge of characters the section loses much of its effect. The loss in itself of a favored or enjoyed character is often enough, for me anyway. The details can add something, but a lack of them does not take anything away. For example, had Tolkien gone to great lengths to talk about the blood pouring from Boromir's arrow wounds or how it had pierced his lungs and so forth, I do not think it would make the scene any more powerful than it is. Not to me, anyway. But then, perhaps I am a little squeamish.

More than torn skin and bleeding faces, what brings the horror of war home, from my own view, was the souring of the Shire. Indeed, the Hobbits comment on how "it really brings it home to you because it is home".

Not that there isn't something to be said for graphic detail having a power. But I think it is of a different sort. I actually admire Tolkien for taking a different look at the realities and affects of war; destroyed homes and lives, things never being the same again. These are the long lasting, even generation-spanning effects.

Or something like that.