A Most Unusual Dwarf

[Boromir88]

I tend to agree with you Mormegil. The Hobbit started out as a bedtime story, LOTR is in more depthful thinking with deeper meanings. There is a thread somewhere around here, I'll try to find it, where davem comments that Tolkien tried to go back and fix The Hobbit, because it created too many problems with his other books. He felt the characteristics between people/races were too dramatic, for instance, he wanted to change Gandalf's character in The Hobbit, because he felt like it didn't fit well with his character presented in LOTR.

I don't think one could compare The Hobbit, and LOTR, because they are just written for two different audiences. As good as The Hobbit is, it was a bed time story to his kids. That's why we get the "shifts/changes" in character from one to the next. I read The Hobbit as an entertaining book, but I don't think you could compare a race/person's actions/characteristics from The Hobbit to LOTR, since they are just different mediums.

However, even if we are to forget these differences, I would still disagree with you lmp. I believe there is some mentioning of Thorin's party, and their ancestors as "owing" Bilbo A LOT, for all that he did. I take it more as Gimli is such a committed member, and travels with Frodo for as long as he can, because they owed Bilbo so much, and to repay him Gimli commits himself to Bilbo's heir.

[Imladris]

Though I do tend to agree with Boromir and mormegil, I would like to say that Gimli probably did mature and "become a better dwarf" (alas, I view that he was one of the secondary characters neglected by Tolkien) during the journeys of the broken Fellowship. People just aren't born heroes...

However, even if we are to forget these differences, I would still disagree with you lmp. I believe there is some mentioning of Thorin's party, and their ancestors as "owing" Bilbo A LOT, for all that he did. I take it more as Gimli is such a committed member, and travels with Frodo for as long as he can, because they owed Bilbo so much, and to repay him Gimli commits himself to Bilbo's heir.

I disagree here....Gimli had many chances to turn back...especially when the Fellowship broke up. Surely more than the fact that they owed Bilbo a lot kept him going with Aragorn and Co. after the breaking.

[Keeper of Dol Guldur]

Well, though, Imladris , to be fare, it was Gimli who went on about "faithless is he who turns aside before the task is done", and his decision seemed set in stone, and even after the loss of Gandalf, Galadriel likely was inspiration for him to continue, and of course, his dislike for Legolas evaporated and was replaced by friendship and commaraderie, and Aragorn's staunch, amazing tenacity and kindness won him over ... Aragorn won over everybody ... even Boromir. Aragorn befriended those two so well, they were willing to go to war with him, and like Legolas later mentioned ... if they returned home they'd find war there too, so it wasn't a big deal where in the West they were fighting in the war.

And ALSO, Boromir's death cemented the Three Hunter's resolve, (mainly Aragorn's, but Legolas and Gimli didn't go unaffected), and where would Gimli have gone? He would have turned north and toiled in the Wilderland by himself.

Plus, Gimli, like the other two, was somewhat indebted to rescuing Merry and Pippin, who were captured on his watch, and who were his friends.

So, Gimli didn't even get a chance to act all petty and dwarfish. Dwarvish tendencies showed through all over, pointing out rocks and stonework, smithcraft and that sort, being a little cocky, a little proud, but a generally decent fellow.

I'd say his growth was there. He was just the "Son of Gloin" but he had his own key moments. Balin's Tomb ... Durin's Bane (it affected everyone) ... Galadriel ... Amon Hen ... Eomer ... Helm's Deep ... and Flotsam & Jetsam stand out for me. Also, in Minas Tirith when he and Legolas recount the Paths of the Dead ... they really come across in this great symbiotic friendship ... almost like Merry and Pippin's. Not bad development all in all, for this uncharacteristically heroic dwarf's character.

[littlemanpoet]

Yes, you make a valid point that the tone of the two works is so different that comparisons of TH to LotR are tricky at best.

Still, there's another Dwarf worth consideration by way of comparison, which is Mîm, from the Sil. If anything, the tone of the Sil is even more dire than that of LotR, especially in the tale of Turin Turambar! What kind of character does Mîm turn out to have? It has been a long time since I read this, but just scanning based on the index in the short time I have right now (Sil pp. 202-206), Mîm was a traitor and a liar, and a coward. Granted, he grieved for his sons, and had cause for redress of wrongs, but he betrayed good men to orcs. Yes, he did it to save his life, but he still did it.

The Hobbit is loaded with references back to the legends in the Sil. So here we have a description of Dwarven character which I think applies to most Dwarves, whether in the Sil, TH, or LotR. Which is why Gimli stands out as unusual. So there's my defense of this definition. Any takers as to the original questions?

[Bêthberry]

littlemanpoet,

I have little time now to peruse the context of your quotation from The Hobbit, but something did strike me as I read it here, so I throw this idea out for consideration.

The quotation seems to me to partake very strongly of the kind of humour in TH and also, more tellingly, of the kinds of dwarves found in traditional folk tales.

I wonder if the differences can be explored through considering this idea: that in TH Tolkien was working particularly with the characteristics of dwarves from old mythologies (which might also pertain to Mîm, but I would want to reread his story closer before I completely subscribed to this idea) but that in LotR he was striving to broaden those characteristics along the lines of (for want of a better word) realism, just as he attempted to develope the idea of elves and give them a fuller psychology. Part of the nature of Tolkien's writing to show a progression of ideas, development. And I hope you understand that I don't mean realism as opposed to fairie here.

And, no, I won't conclude with that overused food metaphor. How about a sip of wine to stimulate discussion?

[littlemanpoet]

Fair enough, Bethberry. I await your stimulating erudition on this matter.

That said, I hope that someone will please consider the questions I posed above, of Gimli's development within the story of LotR, which is certainly in keeping with the realism Bethberry speaks of?

[Estelyn Telcontar]

I am a great fan of the character of Gimli in the book, and would very much like to join in this discussion. However, it will have to wait a bit, as I'm busy preparing for the Barrow-Downs birthday party and don't have the necessary time to research for an answer to your question, LMP. Rest assured - I'll be back!

[mormegil]

Well in consideration of Gimli independent of any other dwarf, yes he grew immensely in the LoTR as did all others who were a part of it, with the possible exception of Boromir and Denethor. That's what this kind of adventure/trial will do; it will either cause you to grow and develop or to fail. By far one of the greatest things Gimli did was help mend the rift between elves and dwarves that was apparent at the time. So, yes Gimli rose above what the conception is of most dwarves.

I do have a bit to say about Mim. I don't agree that Mim is a good character to base behavioral norms for dwarves on. Mim is a petty dwarf and from my understanding, petty dwarves are different than the great dwarven civilizations that we know and are discussing (i.e. Durin's folk)

[Aiwendil]

The quote from The Hobbit got me thinking about the different ways Dwarves are portrayed throughout Tolkien's works. If we take an overview, I don't think that we find the paucity of heroic Dwarves that The Hobbit suggests. It's true that Mim is not a particularly admirable figure. Nor are the Dwarves of Nogrod who quarrel with Thingol, particularly their lord (Naugladur). But the Dwarves of Nogrod and Belegost were quite heroic on several occasions, particularly in the First and Fifth Battles of Beleriand. Azaghal's valor there may be set against Naugladur's acts.

But the truth is that Tolkien's conception of the Dwarves changed quite significantly over the course of the development of the Legendarium. In the Book of Lost Tales, they appear only in the story of their quarrel with Thingol and in the person of Mim; they are said to have great traffic with both the Noldoli and the Orcs and soldiers of Melko. In the Quenta Noldorinwa of 1930 it is said that "they are not friend of Valar or of Eldar or of Men, nor do they serve Morgoth; though they are in many things more like his people" and that the Feanorians "made war" upon them. This passage was later softened so that the Feanorians instead "had converse with them", and the statement that they were "more like" the people of Melko was removed. In the Quenta Noldorinwa the heroism of the Dwarves at the Nirnaeth is entirely absent; the Dwarves "went not themselves to war. 'For we do not know the rights of this quarrel,' they said, 'and we are friends of neither side - until it hath the mastery.'" This rather cold and calculating account was essentially retained in the 1937 Quenta Silmarillion.

The view of Dwarves immediately prior to the writing of The Hobbit, then, was not very complimentary at all. In fact, their portrayal in The Hobbit, even including the quote given by littlemanpoet, is significantly more positive than anything written about them previously.

Later ("long after", CRT guesses), a note was put against the QS passage that portrayed the Dwarves as opportunistic with regard to the Nirnaeth: "Not true of Dwarvish attitude". This, and the introduction of Azaghal that followed from it, seem to be a clear indication that Tolkien's ideas about the Dwarves had changed. Even Mim is portrayed far more sympathetically in the Narn than in the Book of Lost Tales.

So I think that the harsh statement found in The Hobbit can be seen as a vestige of the old conception of the Dwarves; by the time of LotR, the view had changed so that a noble Dwarf like Gimli was not all that astonishing.