Denethor's plunge

[Quempel]

Even a fantasy world has an internal structure that it must adhere to. That is fundamental

This is where I see the difference, to me a fantasy world does not have to have an internal structure to adhere to. It is not a fundamental part of the fantasy world, unlike reality. This is why I can wrap my head around the Three Hunters being able to run for miles on end, its not real. It is also why I can believe (even if it is a bad choice on PJ's part) that Denathor can run on fire and jump off a cliff. It is also why I can wrap my head around the idea that hobbit's, jedi's and whatever else can be in the middle of a spewing volcano and not have their lungs burnt to crisp by the sulfiric acids in the air, much less the heat.

I do find it interesting that some people can accept certain portions of the fantasy world, without being able to accept other parts.

Why is it so hard to imagine that Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli are fantasy characters in a book/movie and could possibly run that far, yet it is easy to accept some of the other non-reality issues? The fact is there are no Elves on this planet. There are no Hobbits, Lembas, Orcs, Giant Eagles, or Tree Herding Ents. Why apply the standards of reality to the fantasy? Fantasy is something we all love to think about and some even wish could happen. But the reality is there is no Aragorn coming to save the day, no great war of good and evil, and no way a real person could run that far.

You assume that our standards and rules apply to those living beings in middle earth, and it is my opinion those rules and principles do not need to apply to middle earth.

What I have a problem with is not the whole Denethor running while on fire, sure it didn't make sense, but why the change at all. The book Denethor death was much better, it almost was a redeaming death for Denethor, the movie made him look like a weak fool, not a greedy jerk (for lack of better terms here) that I had always pictured him to be who finally realized what a jerk he had been, especially to Faramir.

[Sauron the White]

There are times I feel like someone who has been preaching to the villagers at some backwater in Appalachia about the evil of incest. They keep shaking their heads marvelling at the crap that stranger keeps babbling. They are happy with their ways and accept them completely. But they smile at him and keep on keeping on.

[Knight of Gondor]

I will fight the urge to proudly beat my chest and proclaim that all these intellectual gymnastics only again prove my ultimate point

Your point being that Tolkien fans adhere to an inconsistent need to defend Tolkien while attacking Peter Jackson? I have already illustrated the differences, and already stated that I feel no inner compulsion to prove or disprove the capability of the Three Hunters to do so. I entertained the challenge strictly for the intellectual challenge it provided.

Allow me to illustrate.

It is simply a physical impossibility that an untrained individual can run the equal of 1.6 marathons three days in a row.

No it isn't. It has been done before.

There are times I feel like someone who has been preaching to the villagers at some backwater in Appalachia about the evil of incest. They keep shaking their heads marvelling at the crap that stranger keeps babbling. They are happy with their ways and accept them completely. But they smile at him and keep on keeping on.

Please avoid being offensive. Pointing out inconsistent fans is one thing. Insulting those fans is quite another.

[Sauron the White]

What is now obvious to me is this. Many here believe all or some of the following:

1- if JRRT wrote it - its right and shut your mouth otherwise.
2- it does NOT matter if it makes sense to you, it makes sense to us because we believe
3- this is a fantasy and in a fantasy there does not have to be anything real
4- magic stuff like super races of people, magic foodstuffs and will power can make anything possible despite the rules of science and physiology
5-Peter Jackson sucks .... and what else needs to be said
6- Jackson did not make a page for page word for word translation of the book to film so anything that deviates from that is heresy... and what did I do with that bundle of kindling
7-if any of items 2 through 6 do not work for a particular argument, please always refer back to item #1

You have a wonderful all encompassing Catch 22 here. If Tolkien created his world, anything he has his creations do in his world is perfect and thus cannot be worng. Thus, there are no errors in the work, there are no holes (other than the previously mention major loophole), there are no lapses in logic or reason, and there can be no defying of scinece, physiology or anything else we might normally call reality. We got it covered and can never be wrong.

Since Peter Jakcson did not create that same world, any deviation on behalf of Jackson from the Written Word is automatically wrong and in error.

Now who is insulting who with that type of reasoning? And you hide behind the presumption that you are engaging in free and open intellectual debate. Gimme a break.

I give Alatar a lot of credit. He admits his sacred cows. He makes good arguments but still admits there is some hypocrisy involved. I guess to some others even that admission is heresy.

I went to a catholic school for 12 years taught by priests and nuns. Eavery semester we took religion class - not really religion but Catholic Religion. In the end, every discussion came down to two things:
1- This is Church doctrine is right and proper and correct because the Pope says it is so.
2- The Pope speaks with the word and approval from God and can never be wrong.

This discussion and the arguments posed forth take me back to those 12 years of education.

[alatar]

Being a picker of bones and a quibbler extraordinaire:

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

What is now obvious to me is this. Many here believe all or some of the following:

Many assumes more than 50%. That to me is way to high considering the persons posting in the Movies.

1- if JRRT wrote it - its right and shut your mouth otherwise.

You might want to check your keyboard cable. Surely some will disagree with you when you take on Tolkien, but you can post all the same. Think of it as posting, "Go Browns!" on a Pittsburgh Steelers (American football) fan site. At least here people will use good grammar.

2- it does NOT matter if it makes sense to you, it makes sense to us because we believe

I came from this from the other side. I was very anti-PJ all due to the Gandalf vs Witch-King scene. I was amazed that everyone did not agree with me that the scene was the worst thing PJ could ever do. Now, with some help from posters on the other side, I have learned to love the bomb.

3- this is a fantasy and in a fantasy there does not have to be anything real

Not true. The reason Tolkien's world works ("Praise him beyond all praise!") is that, for much of it, it is internally consistent. Dragons talk but do not farm. Ale never gives anyone a hangover. Tolkien sets up and follows his own rules...er...for the most part. Check out the Books section for talking foxes, talking trolls, steam locomotives and other oddities (dare I say mistakes?!?) noted by members here.

4- magic stuff like super races of people, magic foodstuffs and will power can make anything possible despite the rules of science and physiology

By accepting Tolkien's world, you accept his rules. Lembas help the body and will but will not sate your thirst. Elven cloaks will not stop arrows. And again, concerned the 'running' topic, you assume that his world works like ours when the magic etc would indicate otherwise.

5-Peter Jackson sucks .... and what else needs to be said

Count the pages posted by me in the Sequence by Sequence, and yet I'm still going (it's a gift).

6- Jackson did not make a page for page word for word translation of the book to film so anything that deviates from that is heresy... and what did I do with that bundle of kindling

It's out back by the garage. I swallowed many changes, like many (there's that word again) others here did as well. But, even you have to admit, some of the changes were just silly.

Since Peter Jakcson did not create that same world, any deviation on behalf of Jackson from the Written Word is automatically wrong and in error.

What I hope is apparent is when you know the lyrics to a song - Beatles, The Who, Avril Lavigne - and when some one covers the song, the difference is magnified due to the difference in singer and the change in words. You note a change in the expected pattern and so examine it more closely.

Then you just pile on for lack of other entertainment.

Now who is insulting who with that type of reasoning? And you hide behind the presumption that you are engaging in free and open intellectual debate. Gimme a break.

Think that the Faithful, the Heretic and the Stormcrow (that would be me) all post here.

I give Alatar a lot of credit.

I accept PayPal.

He admits his sacred cows. He makes good arguments but still admits there is some hypocrisy involved. I guess to some others even that admission is heresy.

As I've said many many times before: "Take a breath - remember, we’re typing on an internet site regarding a man’s work. Our eternal destiny and that of the world is not going to be decided here." Unless you cannot accept that the Three Hunters ran 135 miles in 3.5 days...

I went to a catholic school for 12 years taught by priests and nuns. Eavery semester we took religion class - not really religion but Catholic Religion. In the end, every discussion came down to two things:
1- This is Church doctrine is right and proper and correct because the Pope says it is so.
2- The Pope speaks with the word and approval from God and can never be wrong.

This discussion and the arguments posed forth take me back to those 12 years of education.

Maybe your argument is with someone else then. I can truly understand that.

Anyway, I've posted here in fun, I'm done and care not how far Denethor did run.

[Knight of Gondor]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

What is now obvious to me is this. Many here believe all or some of the following:

1- if JRRT wrote it - its right and shut your mouth otherwise.

I'm looking around and trying to figure out who you are talking to. Or about.

2- it does NOT matter if it makes sense to you, it makes sense to us because we believe
3- this is a fantasy and in a fantasy there does not have to be anything real

You seem intent on ignoring the previous points posted by Alatar and myself which indicate not a free-styling "anything goes" world, but a world where events extend just beyond our borders of mortality. C.S. Lewis once likened the miracles of Christ to a game of chess, where this move or that move may be taken back at certain points, but at no time do you suppose you can move any piece anywhere at any time. This destroys the value of the game, and creates unruly anarchy. So it would seem to be with fantasy. And again, if these little things continue to nag and irritate you (still further, that they don't bother others) then I submit for a second time that perhaps fantasy just isn't your cup of tea.

5-Peter Jackson sucks .... and what else needs to be said

You are either not referring to me, or did not read what I wrote. Either way, you owe it to us to make clear to whom you refer.

You have a wonderful all encompassing Catch 22 here. If Tolkien created his world, anything he has his creations do in his world is perfect and thus cannot be worng. Thus, there are no errors in the work, there are no holes (other than the previously mention major loophole), there are no lapses in logic or reason, and there can be no defying of scinece, physiology or anything else we might normally call reality. We got it covered and can never be wrong.

Again, you are putting words in my mouth at least, and to my knowledge, Alatar's. I do not believe anyone here suggests Tolkien is perfect, or is averse to highlighting flaws in the book. Tolkien himself was constantly rewriting the series.

I went to a catholic school for 12 years taught by priests and nuns. Eavery semester we took religion class - not really religion but Catholic Religion. In the end, every discussion came down to two things:
1- This is Church doctrine is right and proper and correct because the Pope says it is so.
2- The Pope speaks with the word and approval from God and can never be wrong.

This discussion and the arguments posed forth take me back to those 12 years of education.

The truth seems to come forth, and I believe that in revealing latent hostility towards religion, we have taken a step beyond the scope of this forum. For the record, as a born-again Christian, I reject the notion that any mortal (Pope or not, "Saint" or not, "Mother of God" or not) can attain perfection in word or deed on earth, save one, Jesus Christ. Anyone who claims to be without sin is a liar.

Nonetheless, this thread, this forum and this website were not created to debate or discuss specifically religious themes apart from Tolkien's world. If you would be so kind as to e-mail me, I would look forward to continuing the discussion there.

[Sauron the White]

First, I am sorry if I went to far in expressing my frustration at not being able to make my point.

Second, I was not expressing any hostility or anti-religious views - only attempting to show a comparison between the catch all the Catholic Church has to explain why they are right in matters of docctrine and why Tolkien purists are right. It is maddening at times.

Allow me to answer a specific point raised by Knight of Gondor. Sometimes I start typing a response when I should be rereading and soaking it up first. I guess the rule should be engage mind before fingers. I went back and read and reread your computations for running and times. Allow me to engage with you on that topic.

Okay, let's get mathematical about this. The average mortal human running speed is about 15 miles an hour. Faster runners can achieve faster speeds, but let's stay with 15 mph.

15 mph equals a four minute mile. No highly trained athlete runs a four minute mile for anything beyond a mile. Winning marathon times (26+miles) are always at about 5 minutes per mile or 12 mph. That is a difference in your calculations reducing them by 25%.

But again, we are not talking about your "average normal human". Not by a long stretch. We are talking about a highly trained superior athlete who has just run the equal of the Olympic Marathon making them the best in the world.

You want to use your "average normal human" - they cannot run one mile in ten minutes without training.

Discounting for the moment the need for sustenance and rests, running at the average 15 miles per hour, one could achieve 135 miles' distance in nine hours of solid running.

The world record for running 50 miles -just a bit more than the 45 miles per day we are using here - is four hours and 50 minutes. Please keep in mind two things when you think about that record. Running ultra marathons is a speciality, and extreme of an extreme that not even 1% of marathon runners attempt. Now we are taking the world record holder and we have the extreme of an extreme of an extreme. We are talking about the best long distance runner of all time. I will take a liberty here- and round that off to five hours. Even if a person were able to run that time for three straight days - the best distance runner in the history of the world would need 15 hours of time to run - not the 9 you calculate.

Obviously, mortal humans cannot keep up a constant speed of running. Let's say, for more than 15 minutes, or one quarter of an hour at a time. Multiplying nine hours by four, we can surmise that 36 intervals of 15 minutes at a time running at 15 miles an hour would achieve the same distance as 9 hours of solid running.

Many people here probably know tons more about the writings of JRRT than I could ever hope to do. I admit that. One thing I do know about is distance running. It is easier to run for a longer length of time in one sustained period than it is to run for a shorter distance - stop - rest- cool down - get up and run some more. The idea of running a long distance using this method is not really practical given the mechanics of muscles, how they work, how they cool down, and how fatigue begins to set in soon after. Your interval method is not the way long distances are run.

Now let us allot 72 hours (three days) and not count the extended "day four" period of time during which the Three Hunters meet Eomer. Multiplying 72 by 4, we find that there are a total of 288 quarter-hour periods in the span of three 24-hour days. Therefore, the Three Hunters need only have spent nine percent of their journeying time running at a constant speed of 15 miles an hour for fifteen minutes at a time.

The average person has difficulty running even an 8 minute pace. And that is giving them the benefit of the doubt that they could run a mile. An untrained person rarely can.

The Three Hunters did their ultra -marathon over a three day period in late February in a northern hemisphere climate. If you check sunrise and sunset tables you will find 12 hours of daylight available. Much is made in the books of travelling in daylight time. So they have 36 hours to run 145 miles or they must cover 4 miles every hours of every daylight hour available to them. They must cover 45 miles per day.

Running two-a-days is brutal and most runners reject it in favor of one longer run. Again, your interval method simply does not work for distance running. Nobody uses it. It contradicts basic anatomy and physiology.

The best you could hope to do would be two sessions of 22 miles each. Go and look up marathon times for the 26 mile race. When I used to run marathons my best time was 3:15 - thats a 7:30 mile for 26 straight miles. That put me in the top 15% of finishers out of nearly 4,000 trained runners. The average finishing time was over 9 minutes per mile. The Three Hunters were not trained marathon runners who could expect an average time of 9 minutes per mile. Even at that pace it would be only 5.5 miles covered in an hour. To get your 22 miles each of the Three Hunters would have to run for four straight hours. Then they could rest and have to do it all over again before the sunsets. Eight of the 12 hours available to them would be spent running at a 9 minute mile pace.

Here are some questions to consider about that run.

What is one their feet? The records and runners we are talking about are wearing highly developed running shoes of very light but durable material designed for one thing - running. The book describes two of our Three as wearing a type of heavy boot. Go and get a construction type workboot and try running in it for even a half mile. Again, this is not a matter of wil power, or motivation or desire. Its basic mechanics.

What is the terrain they are covering? Runners we are talking about run on solid and flat ground without holes or rocks or streams or anything that impedes their progress. Even through a winding city course, they run on a course that has been selected as runner friendly. Is that the terrain the Three Hunters were covering over their three days. I think not. It was much tougher in all respects. Whhat do you think that would do to both their times and increasing the wear and tear on their bodies?


There is not the space here - nor would anyone care to read it - if I attempted to explain the biomechanics of muscles and how they store and process glycogen to power them. It takes the average person nearly six months of training to properly prepare their muscles to store and use enough glycogen to run one race of 26 miles. And then most people can barely lift their feet the remainder of the day. Runners then take off several days or even weeks to recover. You cannot run a marathon a day - let alone over 1.6 marathons a day for three straight days.

To be merciful, we could cut the periods of running down to 10 minutes' time. The distance could then be achieved with 54 intervals running 15 miles an hour, or only about one-fifth of the alloted time of 72 hours.

To be further merciful (accounting for the time(s) of rest and sleep), let's only allot 60 hours. That's 240 periods of 15 minutes each running at 15 miles an hour for ten minutes at a time. Thus requiring only 23% of the time to be used to run.

As you can see the remainder of your calculations are way off. You do not have 60 hours but only 36 hours of daylight.... and perhaps a few hours of daylight on the morning of the fourth day. Maybe 40 hours. Your time available has been reduced by a full one-third. Your 15 minute interval period does not work. Your average speed given is wildly impractical. And you make no consideration at all for terrain and footwear. And as to the subject of muscles and glycogen, you did not even attempt to address that.

On the negative side, there were breaks to find tracks and breaks for rest and sustenance

How much time would that take away from you remaing four hours per day?

Funny thing is when I first read LOTR in 1971, I had never run long distances and the whole Three Hunters thing went by without a question from me. It worked and made sense. I started running in 1976 and marathons a year later. When I reread LOTR that chapter stood out like a sore thumb and it now borders on absurdity.

[Nazgûl-king]

I am kinda currious how he got that far that fast, but it is a pretty cool looking scene.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

It is simply a physical impossibility that an untrained individual can run the equal of 1.6 marathons three days in a row.

It's the 'marathon' model that's leading you astray. Running 26+ miles in three hours or so is indeed a killing endeavor (athough triathletes seem to have energy left over).

But this is not what the Three Hunters did. They travelled from dawn to dusk (actually before dawn the first day). At the end of February in a northern latitude that would mean 9-10 hours/day of travel time. This means an average speed of 3.5-3.9 mph: that's a walking pace.

Perspective: most experienced backpackers will do 3.5 mi/hr in mountains, and 4 on the flat. Why on earth is it 'impossible' for the 3H to have done this over the rolling plains of Rohan? As to 'untrained": Aragorn is supposedly the greatest traveller in the world, and is moreover of the Line of Elendil. Legolas is an Elf, not given to human weariness, and (we are told) capable of sleeping on the move. This isn't exactly a human physiology! And Dwarves, within Middle-earth, are legendary for being stone-hard and enduring.

And you claim that these 3 explicitly superhuman individuals couldn't do what Stonewall Jackson's 'foot cavalry' did many times?

[Sauron the White]

wch - Tolkien describes them as running. They did not walk. JRRT also used the term "striding" which I take to mean a type of race walking where you are power walking at a pace much faster than a walk pace. They mixed is some race-walking with the running, but he mainly describes running.

I said in the beginning that I condede Legolas being able to perform this feat given that Elves are so very different and there is written evidence of that.

And for purposes of civility allow me to say that given the description of Aragorn, I could stretch myself to allow the possibility that he could possible do it IF there was far more walking involved than running.... and IF the terrain was almost completely flat without obstruction ..... and IF he had proper footwear to allow him to rack up those miles without long periods of recuperation .... and IF he was not tracking and looking for signs along the way. But okay, for purposes of debate, lets say Aragorn, being really special and unique could do it also.

Now we come to the most problematic of the bunch. Gimli. How tall is Gimli? My guess would be about 4 feet, maybe 4 feet 2 inches. Is that right or wrong? And he is a dwarf with a massive chest and very strong upper body and shorter, stunted legs. He weighed in the area of 200 pounds give or take and I would guess that most of his bulk and power was abovethe hips an his legs were the weakest part of his body. That type of body is the direct opposite of what body type is conducive to running or even power walking. If I am wrong, please scour the list of marathon finishers and name the one person with that type of body who ran a marathon recently.

And what was Gimli wearing on his feet? And what was he dressed in? And what weapons did he carry? Do you think for a minute that any of this was conducive to a long distance ultra- marathon of three days while they stopped and tracked repeatedly along the way? And all this on top of the fact that Gimli was untrained in such an undertaking?

But to believe JRRT, it was simple will power and desire that allowed him to overcome all of these practical, physical and scientific realities. Okay, thats called willing suspension of disbelief. You believe because you want to believe. You believe because you really like the story and the characters and want to go with it and not be a pain in the butt.

Fine. We all do it. Thats the way lots of books and films work.

But William, my point from the very start was a simple one. Many people here on this site love the books and will give them the largest dose of willing suspension of disbelief possible. We can accept that fact that an untrained dwarf can run 145 miles in three days over varied terrain while a modern marathon runner could not do it. Fine. But when it comes to the movies, watch out brother because the charts and graphs and maps and logic and reason and deduction and common sense all comes out in massive quantities to prove that Peter Jackson is either
a- a jerk
b- a moron
c- a heretic
d- a bad filmmaker
e- all of the above

What made me post about this was the excellent use of film stills on page one of this thread by Knight of Gondor. Using the exact stills from the film, he shows that the distance between where Denethor catches fire to the distance where he plunges to the ground was impossible to cover by a man engulfed in flames. I congratulate him on his effort. It is honest, straight forward and can be checked and rechecked for accuracy.

And then poster after poster piles on pretty much taking the position that Peter Jackson is indeed either a,b,c,d, or e from my above list. And what does this do? It reinforces preconveived beliefs that
a- the book is something on the level of Holy Writ and should never be altered, changed or deviated from, and
b- those LOTR movies sure did suck and lets laugh at them some more.

There is one other problem with this thread as I see it. I have just viewed the Denethor plunge scene on my DVD player. It is the same one as seen by the hundreds of millions of people who paid over a billion dollars to see it in the theaters. From the time Denethor starts his flaming run to the time he flies off the end of the rampway, exactly ten seconds of film time elapses. Ten seconds. What everyone in the theater saw was a man on fire for ten seconds. How many films over the years have given us a man on fire for far more of a length of time than that?

Theviewers of the film DID NOT SEE the series of stills that Knight of Gondor put up on the first page here with a description of the length of each area and an estimate of the time it would take to travel each. If we had seen Denethor completely run that entire length in flames and it take two to three minutes the result would have been absurd.

But that is not what was in the film and that was not what the viewers saw and that was not what was in the mind of those viewers. For them, it worked just like the rest of the film did.

Willing suspension of disbelief. That is at the heart of this. I use it when I read the books and I use it again when I view the films. I love both and cherish both.