horncall of buckland

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

Turin's sword? Nah. I don't believe in it. I just read that as an element added to the myth by subsequent generations. I can genuinely believe in the ancient character of Turin (well, not believe in him, but you know what I mean) but suspension of disbelief only goes so far.

Actually, Eomer, Tolkien borrowed that scene directly from the Finnish Kalevala. It is as it was intended, without embellishment. It's Tolkien's version of fan-fic.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Actually, Eomer, Tolkien borrowed that scene directly from the Finnish Kalevala. It is as it was intended, without embellishment. It's Tolkien's version of fan-fic.

You know, Morth, I thought I had read it somewhere, but my memory is bad and my Tolkien knowledge goes only so deep. Fascinating!

If we talk Kalevala, I can 'believe' in many of the characters and the struggles they encountered; however I wouldn't believe the talking sword scene actually happened. Same with Tolkien's myths. It might be a bit odd to divide a fiction into parts you believe and parts you don't, but there you go.

[mark12_30]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Actually, Eomer, Tolkien borrowed that scene directly from the Finnish Kalevala. It is as it was intended, without embellishment. It's Tolkien's version of fan-fic.

Morth, I'm glad that you brought that up. Sil is so heavily mythical, that seems to me to be the heart of this whole discussion; what works in the myth and what might not. LittleManPoet describes it as "what breaks the enchantment." Apparently for some on this thread, too much magic breaks the enchantment. Odd, but there it is.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by mark12_30

Morth, I'm glad that you brought that up. Sil is so heavily mythical, that seems to me to be the heart of this whole discussion; what works in the myth and what might not. LittleManPoet describes it as "what breaks the enchantment." Apparently for some on this thread, too much magic breaks the enchantment. Odd, but there it is.

You are right, in a manner, Mxii_xxx. But it is more like too much magic where it doesn't belong, and who wields it. Prior to the 4th Age in the Shire, none but a small coterie of 5 or 6 Hobbits out of thousands (Bilbo, Frodo, Sam, Merry, Pippin and perhaps Fredegar) knew anything of magic rings, elvish swords that glowed blue, the true nature of wizards or of Sauron, for that matter. Most Hobbits were xenophobic isolationists, and even considered other Hobbits who lived beyond their borders as 'queer'. It was even 'queer' to wear boots! The Gaffer doesn't even go in for ironmongery "whether it wears well or no."

So, along comes a poster -- who I am sure is an affable, logical and decent person -- and mistakes a metaphor for actual magic in the Shire. A speaking horn? What exactly is the point? Why not just scream "Fear, Fire, Foes"? Unless, of course, the magic horn had a clip-on microphone running through a Marshall Stack and was blown at 120 decibels like a Who concert. Maybe magic Hobbit amplifiers go up to 11.

I am being facetious. Only the lead guitarist of Spinal Tap has an amp that goes up to 11.

[mark12_30]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

So, along comes a poster -- who I am sure is an affable, logical and decent person -- and mistakes a metaphor for actual magic in the Shire. A speaking horn? What exactly is the point? Why not just scream "Fear, Fire, Foes"? Unless, of course, the magic horn had a clip-on microphone running through a Marshall Stack and was blown at 120 decibels like a Who concert. Maybe magic Hobbit amplifiers go up to 11.

I am being facetious. Only the lead guitarist of Spinal Tap has an amp that goes up to 11.

I was unclear; I do not (personally) believe that the horn of Buckland was magical or spoke with a voice; I am pro-bugle-tune-lyrics. I was actually pursuing the Troll's talking purse, which never bothered me, but which apparently breaks the enchantment for certain others.

I like loud amplifiers, though. When I am in the mood for them.

[skip spence]

Originally Posted by mark12_30

I was actually pursuing the Troll's talking purse, which never bothered me, but which apparently breaks the enchantment for certain others.

But surely you can see where we are coming from though? I mean, there's no reason why the talking purse would bother a casual reader of the Hobbit and it does add some fun to the story. But many of us here are übernerds who have even ploughed through various volumes of HoME (and that ain't always easy) in order to better understand the metaphysics of this fictional world, and from this perspective the idea of cockney Trolls with talking purses fits poorly into the later, more elaborate world of Arda that Tolkien develoved.

[mark12_30]

Originally Posted by skip spence

But surely you can see where we are coming from though? I mean, there's no reason why the talking purse would bother a casual reader of the Hobbit and it does add some fun to the story. But many of us here are übernerds who have even ploughed through various volumes of HoME (and that ain't always easy) in order to better understand the metaphysics of this fictional world, and from this perspective the idea of cockney Trolls with talking purses fits poorly into the later, more elaborate world of Arda that Tolkien develoved.

Skip, I can definitely see where you are coming from. I have ploughed through a fair amount of HoME myself. I am very intense about canonicity (reference the thread of that name) and, now that I think about it in this vein, if I were writing a fanfic (or an RPG) and a cockney troll's talking purse entered the scene, my red pen would be out in a flash. Ditto for a talking sword.

However, and on the other hand-- I personally do not choose to criticise the professor for indulging his whimsy in a children's tale nor for introducing something uber-mytological into his mythology. He has that right.

Farmer Giles of Ham does not stand well beside Elrond of Rivendell, but that doesn't mean I would edit either one.

In case you have not yet guessed, my canonicity vote goes heartily towards "the author".

[alman]

Thank you all for the intellegent replies to my question. After reading the replies, and some other reading on horns as suggested, i agree that the sounds were just sounding like or stood for words. This, i think, was difficult for me due to the fact that these first chapters have a different feel that the rest of the book. They are a bridge from the hobbit to the bigger world, from a childrens story to a more grown up version. the locomotion , talking fox, fireworks, multiple magical presents from Dale, and some Dwarf make ones(dwarves make magic toys?!) and the strangeness/childlikeness of ol Tom B.
These lighter elements helped enable my belief in the horn. that was how my 12y.o. brain saw it, and I never questoned it in my multiple re-reads over the years.
Also, the way most hobbits are described as not getting involved, and adventures making one late for dinner, and not into reading mostly, unless it was bout a family tree, that training alerts on a horn was very out of character. I suppose this is only the norm in Buckland, where invasions from the Old Forrest, or other gates and borders (being on the edge of the Shire) were a bit more of a problem than in Hobbiton. I do recall reading that the borders were more active in the years leading up to the leaving of the ring. I suppose the Bucklanders had retrained in the years of intruders on the borders.