[The Saucepan Man]

I assure you all, that the point in question was made by Saucy himself in all of his clamourous glory. It was made in post #10 to be entirely precise

Ah, confusion solved! We are talking at cross-posts. Tuor's original post that started all this quoted the following:

"I think that this interlude is an important and necessary reminder to the reader that while the story to come is going to be all about the War of the Ring, that this is not the whole story of Middle-Earth."

A pertinent point made by none other than yourself, Mr Hedgethistle. I was just rattling on about trees.

And I will continue to do so ...

Tolkien does seem to have an ambiguous attitude to trees - he likes individual ones, he likes tame woodland - from the woods of the Shire to Lorien, but actual wildwood is always threatening - The Old Forest, Mirkwood, Taur nu Fuin. Come to think of it, all wild nature presents a threat to his created, sentient races ... Truly wild nature is always awe inspiring, potentially threatening - like the trees that 'attacked' the hedge - it is always trying to reassert its old dominance. But that's also 'natural' - the trees are not behaving maliciously, they are simply doing what it is in their nature to do.

A very good point, davem. There is an inherent tension between the wild force of nature and the needs and lifestyles of sentient beings. Yet Treebeard seems to overcome this and see the need for harmony with the other (good) races of Middle-earth. Old Man Willow, on the other hand, carries on the "fight" against them. Perhaps Old Man Willow and Treebeard (plus Bombadil) represent the two sides of nature. On the one hand wild, threatening and unpredictable. On the other helpful and beneficial when treated with respect. So, depending on how it is approached, the natural world can be both hostile to and symbiotic with human existence (as represented by the non-treeish "good" races of Middle-earth).

Hold up! Have I just reached a conclusion. Goodness gracious, put t'kettle on mother!