Who knows their trolls? - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

***Mister Underhill*** · 09-12-2000, 10:42 AM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Animated Skeleton
Posts: 0</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
<img src="http://www.barrowdowns.com/images/posticons/redeye.jpg" align=absmiddle> Re: Who knows their trolls?

Well, galpsi, I certainly can't refute arguments that point out that the prof's mythology isn't airtight. After all, JRRT himself realized post-LOTR that many elements of the mythos couldn't stand up under logical scrutiny and would require a comprehensive and fundamental overhaul to be made into a theoretically secure system (if such a revision was even possible, considering that LOTR was already out there). Considering your vast knowledge of all things Tolkien, you've probably already read Part Five of the HoME book Morgoth's Ring, "Myths Transformed", in which the prof wrestles with some of the stickier issues (e.g., the nature and origin of Orcs, a topic which is particularly relevant to our discussion here, since the nature and origin of trolls are also mentioned, albeit with a characteristically less comprehensive treatment).

I was arguing more in a spirit of trying to make what's there "work". If JRRT decided to invent the mention of the Olog-hai in Appendix F as a patch to upgrade trolls v1.0 to v1.1, then I'll download and install the patch in the spirit in which it's offered, and take JRRT at his word that Sauron's Mark IV's were a superior model and were probably the ones who fought in his campaigns.

But you're right that the prof was a bit lazy in his conception of the troll-folk, and I've never argued that they were "integral" to his thinking. In the end, you're right, they're there to provide a bit of variety.

</p>

09-12-2000, 10:42 AM	#11
*Mister Underhill* Dread Horseman Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Behind you! Posts: 2,744	<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Animated Skeleton Posts: 0</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE> <img src="http://www.barrowdowns.com/images/posticons/redeye.jpg" align=absmiddle> Re: Who knows their trolls? Well, galpsi, I certainly can't refute arguments that point out that the prof's mythology isn't airtight. After all, JRRT himself realized post-LOTR that many elements of the mythos couldn't stand up under logical scrutiny and would require a comprehensive and fundamental overhaul to be made into a theoretically secure system (if such a revision was even possible, considering that LOTR was already out there). Considering your vast knowledge of all things Tolkien, you've probably already read Part Five of the HoME book Morgoth's Ring, "Myths Transformed", in which the prof wrestles with some of the stickier issues (e.g., the nature and origin of Orcs, a topic which is particularly relevant to our discussion here, since the nature and origin of trolls are also mentioned, albeit with a characteristically less comprehensive treatment). I was arguing more in a spirit of trying to make what's there "work". If JRRT decided to invent the mention of the Olog-hai in Appendix F as a patch to upgrade trolls v1.0 to v1.1, then I'll download and install the patch in the spirit in which it's offered, and take JRRT at his word that Sauron's Mark IV's were a superior model and were probably the ones who fought in his campaigns. But you're right that the prof was a bit lazy in his conception of the troll-folk, and I've never argued that they were "integral" to his thinking. In the end, you're right, they're there to provide a bit of variety. </p>