Why Can't Movies Be Like Books?

[Sauron the White]

Forget Shippey. I will read Tolkien. Does not Gandalf himself reject having the ring for fear of how he would eventually use it?
The Shadow of the Past
Frodo: You are wise and powerful. Will you not take the ring?
Gandalf: No! cried Gandalf, springing to his feet. With that power I should have power too great and terrible. And over me the Ring would gain a powerstill greater and more deadly.

Does not Galadriel also reject the ring for fear of how she would eventually use it?

The Mirror of Galadriel
Frodo: I will give you the one ring, if you ask for it. It is too great a matter for me.
Galadriel then gives the whole "set up a Queen .... love me and despair .... I pass the test... " speech.
The only one in the entire book who seems immune to the powers of the ring is Bombadil. And what does Tolkien do with this amazing incongruity? Nothing.

Maybe davem is right about the spirituality and pureness of Bombadil. I do not see how that makes him necessary. For me, he adds nothing to the basic story and his appearance and doggerel only make him a bad joke.

I ask again, try to imagine him in the first film spouting the lines

"Hey dol! merry dol! ring a dong dillo.
Ring a dong! hop along! fal lal the willow"

I can hear every comedian on late night TV or cable or in comedy clubs talking about the dongs in the Lord of the Ring movies. And how long before the work dillo becomes something slightly varied and the object of more snickering and derision. And once the comedians were done every crude boy on the playground would repeat it. Any kid who liked the films would be pelted with jokes about them liking dongs and the like.

Bombadil would have been a disaster.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

I ask again, try to imagine him in the first film spouting the lines

"Hey dol! merry dol! ring a dong dillo.
Ring a dong! hop along! fal lal the willow"

The 'ring a dong dillo'/ 'fa la la' stuff is common in folksongs (or in Shakespeare's songs - 'Hey nonny, nonny', etc) There are various explanations - old songs where certain words have been lost or half forgotten over the years so that a kind of 'chinese whispers' effect has taken place, nonsense words inserted to fill in the gaps & complete the metre (you know what I mean - its early), or imitations of musical instruments (as in the Carol 'Ding Dong Merrily On High) - in this context:

Then the voices of the Ainur, like unto harps and lutes, and pipes and
trumpets, and viols and organs, and like unto countless choirs singing with
words, began to fashion the theme of Ilúvatar to a great music; and a
sound arose of endless interchanging melodies woven in harmony that passed
beyond hearing into the depths and into the heights, and the places of the
dwelling of Ilúvatar were filled to overflowing, and the music and
the echo of the music went out into the Void, and it was not void.

I have to say that if we are to sacrifice everything in art or literature that a comedian or schoolchild may be able to turn into a joke we won't have much left...

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Forget Shippey. I will read Tolkien.

Then you're being wilfully closed-minded, unprepared to consider that anyone besides yourself might garner a valid interpretation of Tolkien; one from which you might actually deepen your own understanding. Isn't that what we're doing here?

Does not Gandalf himself reject having the ring for fear of how he would eventually use it?
The Shadow of the Past
Frodo: You are wise and powerful. Will you not take the ring?
Gandalf: No! cried Gandalf, springing to his feet. With that power I should have power too great and terrible. And over me the Ring would gain a powerstill greater and more deadly.
Does not Galadriel also reject the ring for fear of how she would eventually use it?
The Mirror of Galadriel
Frodo: I will give you the one ring, if you ask for it. It is too great a matter for me.
Galadriel then gives the whole "set up a Queen .... love me and despair .... I pass the test... " speech.

What you posted was "it can control everyone who comes in contact with it." Not merely its potential effects on two of the Wise (and powerful), but everyone. It does *not* control everyone- certainly not Faramir, and it was PJ's misunderstanding of the Ring's nature which led to the creation of Filmamir. The Ring seduces those who are prone to temptation. Shippey draws an analogy to heroin; one could also use lust. Different married men will respond differently to a full-on seduction attempt by some luscious babe, depending on the strength of their commitment to fidelity. Faramir is one of those who would say, "I appreciate the compliment, but please put your clothes back on."

[davem]

StW

Have to agree with Mr Hicklin here. When you state:

Galadriel then gives the whole "set up a Queen .... love me and despair .... I pass the test... " speech.

The whole quote is:

And now at last it comes. You will give me the Ring freely! In place of the Dark Lord you will set up a Queen. And I shall not be dark, but beautiful and terrible as the Morning and the Night! Fair as the Sea and the Sun and the Snow upon the Mountain! Dreadful as the Storm and the Lightning! Stronger than the foundations of the earth. All shall love me and despair!' She lifted up her hand and from the ring that she wore there issued a great light that illumined her alone and left all else dark. She stood before Frodo seeming now tall beyond measurement, and beautiful beyond enduring, terrible and worshipful. Then she let her hand fall, and the light Faded, and suddenly she laughed again, and lo! she was shrunken: a slender elf-woman, clad in simple white, whose gentle voice was soft and sad. 'I pass the test,' she said. 'I will diminish, and go into the West, and remain Galadriel.'

She has the freedom to reject the Ring & remain herself. If she takes the Ring & uses it she will be corrupted by it, because in order to use it one has to 'claim' it, effectively become one with it. However, she can reject it completely (with a laugh, take note!). Faramir too can reject it freely.

There are two reasons that the Ring must be destroyed - & that it will inevitably & automatically corrupt everybody is not one of them. The first, main, reason is that If Sauron gets hold of it the only chance of defeating him will be gone forever; the second is that even if Sauron were to be defeated without destroying it, while it exists there is a chance that it may fall into the hands of one powerful enough to use it who will give in & claim it. That doesn't come from Shippey, btw, but from a reading of the text itself.

[Sauron the White]

Did Faramir physically have the ring on his person at any time? I was under the impression he did NOT. In The chapter - The Window On The West - I do not remember him coming in contact with it or possessing it. The Ring never had the chance to exert its influence or power over Faramir. Or am I incorrect in those facts?


Why in the world would I want a second hand source to interpret something for me when I can go to the primary source to see how things worked? As far as I know. Mr. Shippey, for all his intelligence and insight, is still a person who has only read Tolkiens works. Is that correct? He did not help write them or formulate them, only giving his opinion about the situation.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

Did Faramir physically have the ring on his person at any time? I was under the impression he did NOT. In The chapter - The Window On The West - I do not remember him coming in contact with it or possessing it. The Ring never had the chance to exert its influence or power over Faramir. Or am I incorrect in those facts?

Sam had it on him & wasn't possessed, or corrupted, by it.

Why in the world would I want a second hand source to interpret something for me when I can go to the primary source to see how things worked? .

Well, I just pointed out that my last post about the nature of the Ring did not come from Shippey, but from the text itself. Shippey is generally accepted by those in the know to be one of the greatest & most insightful experts on Tolkien's work. Before dismissing him I'd suggest you read his books.

[Annatar]

Originally Posted by davem

Sam had it on him & wasn't possessed, or corrupted, by it.

The movies are not the books.
The books are not the movies.


PJ can increase the corruptive power of the ring, and it doesn't affect the books, because the movies are not the books.

If you don't like the movies, you can always read the books instead.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Why in the world would I want a second hand source to interpret something for me when I can go to the primary source to see how things worked? As far as I know. Mr. Shippey, for all his intelligence and insight, is still a person who has only read Tolkiens works. Is that correct? He did not help write them or formulate them, only giving his opinion about the situation.

To which rather arrogant assertion I can only reply with part of the Oath of the Jefferson Society: "...holding it to be true that opinions arising from solitary Observation and Reflexion are seldom in the first Instance, correct."

It happens that Shippey, one of the last old-school philologists, and who in fact held Tolkien's old Chair at Leeds, might know a few things relevant to textual exegesis (especially linguistic) that you (or I) may not. Christopher Tolkien has read Shippey and considered his observations- perhaps you think your understanding is superior to CT's?

I find it rather interesting that you hold the work of Tolkien scholars to be useless, on the principle that they are just people with opinions, in no way superior to, or even capable of informing, your own; but you expect us to accept as Authorities the "professional fim critics" who loved the movies.

*****

On to Faramir- at least to PJ, simply being in the same room with the Ring is enough to trip Faramir over the edge; and indeed Filmamir does "touch" it with his sword. In the book of course he never sees it.

But touching it is not a factor. Boromir never did; nor did Saruman, nor Denethor. Sam by contrast actually wore it, yet was able to hand it over. It's all about the desire.

But PJ explicitly never understood any of this: by *his own admission* the entire Osgiliation arose from this false idea that any person (or at least Man) who came near the thing would be powerless not to try and grab it. This notion is already present in the Prologue, which claims, incorrectly, that Men "above all desire Power." A little knowledge is dangerous. PJ just didn't get it, but thought he did: he reminds me of the sort of rube who thinks he can fix his own car, and winds up leaving crucial parts on the driveway, and forcing others to 'fit' with a hammer.

PJ should have read Shippey.