[Bêthberry]

Fordim wrote
Who among us finds the final line of the book "happy"? Joyful, yes, but there is a sense that as fulfilling as Sam's life will be now, it is somehow lesser and smaller. The whole story "winds down" rather than ends, and there are more stories to be told (the Appendices) not all of them entirely happy.

This reminds me quite forcibly of T.S.Eliot's "The Hollow Men."

This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
Not with a bang, but a whimper.

I think for both Tolkien and Eliot, the wrenching changes of the early twentieth century were cause for profound melancoly at the passing of a world, an ethos, an entire cultural reference. Both writers in many ways strove to gather what they could of those passing values in hopes they would not be lost entirely. So, Fordim, I would suggest that reading Bilbo might require less a recourse to "our own experience of life" and more a consideration of the tenor of the story. To me, Bilbo's comments about writing should be seen within the gentle humour the elves show him and an almost sweetly or gently patronising attitude about the writer who is always talking about writing but never getting it done. Bilbo acknowledges, "I can't count the days in Rivendell." To me, Bilbo's time there has always signified an affectionate and gentle senility lived out in an "assissted living environment" , if I can use those words without being thought too negative.

davem posted:

Its certainly interesting to speculate on how far Tolkien had gone down the road to the idea of 'Morgoth's Ring' at this stage. Had he formulated the idea that Middle earth had been infected by an external evil in the form of Morgoth's malice yet, or was it more a case of 'the world, the flesh & the devil' - ie, the material world, matter itself, is a source of evil?

Seen in the context of the later idea, we could see Morgoth's malice deliberately targetting the Fellowship, but this isn't what comes across to me - nor does any feeling of Middle earth being 'evil' - its more that it has its own 'desires', its own emotions, almost, anger, pain, joy, etc,

I would agree that, in terms of LotR alone--which is all I think we should consider here-- there is no sense of malice. Indeed, I would even go farther to suggest that such an attitude might reflect a serious error: to see the world solely in terms of the needs of men or hobbits. This would be, for my reading of the book, the arrogance of human centrism, believing that Eru had created Arda solely for the personal use of the human races and not for, well, whatever reason motivated his creation. This is why I think it is important that the first defeat of the Fellowship comes not at the hand of an Enemy but of a world which is not designed solely for their own egotistic drives.

My own understanding is that they had to make sure all the Nazgul had been completely 'disembodied', which would force their return to Mordor, as they could not 're-embody' themselves. It seems, though I may be wrong, that only Sauron could provide them with the means to function, to have any presence at all, in the physical realm.

I know that is the reason given in the text, but I asked why Elrond had to delay because I think it is related to my point above: it is a decision which puts the Fellowship in more harm by causing their departure under inclement conditions. The messengers had no trouble passing over the mountain. Yet the Fellowship had to have trouble. Had Nazul been discovered to be embodied, how would that have changed the plans? Indeed, I cannot see how it would. The decision reflects, to me, a good intention but a flawed one and in that flaw lies part of the inexpressible melancoly of LotR, the poignancy of the 'long defeat.'