Split Personality?

[littlemanpoet]

STW, you make much real world sense. Trouble is, we're talking about Middle Earth here. Gimli's famous run with Aragorn and Legolas is not the only instance in which Tolkien describes a Dwarf or Dwarves with such incredible running endurance. In The Hobbit, the Dwarves of the Iron Hills run a "forced march" trot all the way from the equivalent of the Aral Sea to Finland in (I believe) three days. That's a lot of miles. So Tolkien apparently intended Dwarves to be understood as capable of the kind of thing he describes.

That's all I have time for right now. I'll see to your previous post directed to me when time avails.

[Sauron the White]

Thanks for pointing that out. I will check it out.
Does anyone here get my higher point about double standards on these boards?

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

Thanks for pointing that out. I will check it out.
Does anyone here get my higher point about double standards on these boards?

I think your comment regarding double standards is well understood. You've certainly hammered at it enough that only the densest should fail to get it. Put simply put, you want us to overlook the unrealities in the movies in the same way we do with the books.

Which is a fair point, in my opinion--and the reason I left the Denethor plunge alone has nothing so much to do with the fact I'm no scientist/runner/pyromaniac (though that is case), but because when I watch the movies I'm able to suspend disbelief there.

There. Not everywhere else.

Basically, I think our willingness to suspend disbelief has to do with the "magic" cast by the work in general. Yes, for the Book, most fans are willing to go to outrageous lengths to gloss over how an inconsistency works out. That is a suspension of disbelief in practice, as you point out. And the reason so many fans will do it is because of the "magic". That is, they love the book.

Most book fans, simply put, found that the "magic" did not translate evenly into the Movies--regardless of consistencies in story, adaptation of plot, and other situations requiring suspension of belief. Myself, I found the "magic" there in the Fellowship, albeit dimmed from the book, and less so in the latter two movies.

Without the "magic" to motivate it, there is little or no point to the suspension of disbelief. It isn't just a rational exercise. If so then you would go to the movie, gloss over the part you needed to, then either forget about it, or deem the need to gloss in the first place a defect in the movie.

For a lot of fans--particularly those enamoured of the book magic--the "magic" was not in the movies, so the need to suspend disbeliefs was a defect in the movies.


I hope I'm making some sense... it seems clear up here.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

Does anyone here get my higher point about double standards on these boards?

Obviously not.

I've actually considered resurrecting or creating a thread where we can hash out which is better, the movies or the books and any piece, person or part therein, but then immediately realized while the thread would provide much heat (or not), little light would shine through. Neither side, when it comes down to it, can provide an objective argument as to why one is better than the other. In the end, it will boil down to opinion, and so we'd be no farther than we are today. If you think otherwise, go for it, and let's see me proved wrong - and I have no problem posting for posting's sake.


Speaking of dwarves, Galadriel or Arwen? Sound familiar?

We nitpick Jackson as he's given us the large target and some arrows to use. The movies are easy to criticize given the medium, to my knowledge we always rate movies and it's not hard in that we can look and see that! just ain't right. Doing the same thing in the books is a little harder as one might have to do more research before nocking an arrow (and in some cases, we only have one shot to get it right before persons return fire).

My previous post was yet another attempt to get this thread back on track for those so inclined.

[Sauron the White]

Thank you to both Formendacil and Alatar for the very good explainations. Some very good points were raised - and I like the part about "magic" since that seems the prime motivation for excercising ones willing suspension of disbelief. I will give it up on the running and Gimli --- for the time being bowing to discretion.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

Some very good points were raised - and I like the part about "magic" since that seems the prime motivation for excercising ones willing suspension of disbelief.

I've been thinking about this as well, and even considered a new thread. Is it truly "willing?" I can never remember ever sitting, either in the theater or at home with a book, saying to myself, "Oh, this Balrog thing is going to take some belief suspension." alatar assumes the lotus position..."Hmmm. Hmmm. Balrogs exist. Balrogs exist..."

Whether Jackson or Tolkien, I think that when they're at their best, you don't even have to try to suspend belief. That, to me, is why LotR is so good, and why PJ really scored with Gollum.

I will give it up on the running and Gimli --- for the time being bowing to discretion.

Note that Sisyphus would quit if he could.

[littlemanpoet]

I also understand your point on "double standard"; I just disagree, for one simple reason: Middle Earth is Tolkien's creation. Jackson was given permission to borrow it. So the standard lies with Tolkien, and Jackson had a responsibility to be true to the standard.

Subsequent posts on "the magic" and "willing suspension of disbelief" bring to mind what may be objective distinctions between the book and movie, something to which I need give more thought: with "magic", are we talking perhaps about those old "mythic unities" that are all over the book but not in the movie? And with willing suspension of disbelief, Tolkien posited a higher level, which he called "secondary belief". I think these two concepts may bear upon this larger discussion.

By the way, I have no problem with this thread detouring onto bigger topics, so long as the original is considered to have been more or less resolved, and these new detours arise naturally from discussion of the initial topic.

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by alatar

Is it truly "willing?" I can never remember ever sitting, either in the theater or at home with a book, saying to myself, "Oh, this Balrog thing is going to take some belief suspension." alatar assumes the lotus position..."Hmmm. Hmmm. Balrogs exist. Balrogs exist..."

Whether Jackson or Tolkien, I think that when they're at their best, you don't even have to try to suspend belief. That, to me, is why LotR is so good, and why PJ really scored with Gollum.

A good belt of sub-creation beats suspenders any day, hey?

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

STW, you make much real world sense. Trouble is, we're talking about Middle Earth here. Gimli's famous run with Aragorn and Legolas is not the only instance in which Tolkien describes a Dwarf or Dwarves with such incredible running endurance. In The Hobbit, the Dwarves of the Iron Hills run a "forced march" trot all the way from the equivalent of the Aral Sea to Finland in (I believe) three days. That's a lot of miles. So Tolkien apparently intended Dwarves to be understood as capable of the kind of thing he describes.

That's all I have time for right now. I'll see to your previous post directed to me when time avails.

To my mind there's no reason why a Dwarf would not be able to run an exceptional long distance at speed, after all, they are not homo sapiens! It's no more odd to me than an Elf having exceptional long life or the ability to walk on snow (or custard ) lightly as the fact that they are different species explains a lot. I have more problems with accepting that the Dunedain could live for a few hundred years as that seems to be not compatible with the species.

Middle-earth of course has three species of 'human ape' - Men, Elves and Dwarves. At one point in prehistory the earth itself supported at least three species too - homo sapiens, neanderthals and homo erectus. We can accept that each of these had quirks and big differences, so why not accept these between Men, Elves and Dwarves? They are not all the same, biologically speaking.

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

To my mind there's no reason why a Dwarf would not be able to run an exceptional long distance at speed, after all, they are not homo sapiens! It's no more odd to me than an Elf having exceptional long life or the ability to walk on snow (or custard ) lightly as the fact that they are different species explains a lot. I have more problems with accepting that the Dunedain could live for a few hundred years as that seems to be not compatible with the species.

Middle-earth of course has three species of 'human ape' - Men, Elves and Dwarves. At one point in prehistory the earth itself supported at least three species too - homo sapiens, neanderthals and homo erectus. We can accept that each of these had quirks and big differences, so why not accept these between Men, Elves and Dwarves? They are not all the same, biologically speaking.

One might also add that the home sapiens of the Middle-Earth seem to break down into three very distinct subspecies themselves: homo sapiens, homo sapiens hobbitas, and homo sapiens drúadan--that is, regular man, Hobbit, and Drúadan. And, if one wants to add the Dúnedain as an effective subspecies as well, you get four.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

TMiddle-earth of course has three species of 'human ape' - Men, Elves and Dwarves.

I'm guessing that the Dwarves were completely different as they were made in private by Aulë. Now, in his mind he may have had some of Eru's thinking, but from my point of view, the Dwarves were distinctly different from the other two races.

Now, we know that elves and humans can mate, meaning that at best each is a subspecies. I cannot think of any Dwarf-human/hobbit/elf cross, and so I'm guessing that they are completely different.

Not that Gimli didn't didn't consider the experiment with Galadriel...

[Sauron the White]

Wide wonder came into Eomer's eyes. 'Strider is too poor a name, son of Arathorn' he said. 'Wingfoot I name you. This deed of the three friends should be sung in many a hall."

- from The Riders of Rohan, THE TWO TOWERS -


Okay... for the purposes of posing a question lets go with this speculation about Dwarves being as different from Men as Elves are.

If indeed all of these explainations have some validity in them, perhaps Eomer was greatly exaggerating the case for praising the Three Hunters for thier achievement at running and striding those leagues. Ater all, if Dwarves have all these special abilities, and Elves have all these special abilities, and Aragorn is of superior race with gifts not given to mere mortals, then Eomer was judging what they did by human standards and he was wildly off base to do so.

Perhaps any old run of the mill elf or dwarf or Dunedain could have done this on most days of the week. Seems to be that all these explainations greatly reduce the significance of the achievement.

People here say I was wrong because I was judging Gimli by human standards in the real world. Okay. Seems that is just what Eomer was doing in proclaiming their achievement as so worthy of being sung about.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

If indeed all of these explainations have some validity in them, perhaps Eomer was greatly exaggerating the case for praising the Three Hunters for thier achievement at running and striding those leagues. Ater all, if Dwarves have all these special abilities, and Elves have all these special abilities, and Aragorn is of superior race with gifts not given to mere mortals, then Eomer was judging what they did by human standards and he was wildly off base to do so.

Arguably Eomer may not have been the best judge in this matter. And again, as I've stated, these three are the best of the best at the top of their game. They are so good in fact that one day they might even appear in movies.

Perhaps any old run of the mill elf or dwarf or Dunedain could have done this on most days of the week. Seems to be that all these explainations greatly reduce the significance of the achievement.

That would be, "run of the mine" in regards to Dwarves. And note that half - if not more - of the running/walking was down hill as the Three were traveling south.

People here say I was wrong because I was judging Gimli by human standards in the real world. Okay. Seems that is just what Eomer was doing in proclaiming their achievement as so worthy of being sung about.

And that's exactly why Peter Jackson cut most of Eomer's part from LotR, as he is of little worth except that he has a famous sister who ends up doing something or other then runs from a dough-malled orc.

[Folwren]

I think the point that you're missing, STW, is that it is possible for the dwarf, man, and elf, but it also is very difficult. Tolkien never wrote that it was easy, and Jackson never protrayed it to be. It wasn't an everyday occurance in Rohan for someone to run so far in just three days. These three hunters had motivation and a long journey behind them, giving them will power and endurance, giving them the ability to do something that was uncommon and surprising to Eomer.

-- Folwren

[Sauron the White]

from Alatar

Arguably Eomer may not have been the best judge in this matter. And again, as I've stated, these three are the best of the best at the top of their game.

I wonder if Eomer had access to the rules and regulations issued by the equal of the Middle-earth Olympic Committee? Without a doubt, records set with the aid of substances such as lembas would have been invalidated in much the same way as the recent biking scandal in Paris. Superhuman individuals hopped up on lembas with muscles which do not process gylcogen - or even need it - yeah, Eomer did not know what he was talking about.

from Folwren

I think the point that you're missing, STW, is that it is possible for the dwarf, man, and elf, but it also is very difficult. Tolkien never wrote that it was easy, and Jackson never protrayed it to be. It wasn't an everyday occurance in Rohan for someone to run so far in just three days. These three hunters had motivation and a long journey behind them, giving them will power and endurance, giving them the ability to do something that was uncommon and surprising to Eomer.

Sounds to me like you want it both ways here. Eomer was right in that it was an achievement for the ages even though
a- each of the three was in some ways non-human and had special physical gifts or abilities beyond the normal possessed by humans
b- the normal rules about running, glycogen and muscles do not apply to the three
c- they were hopped up on a special athletic performance enhancement substance which gave them prolonged strength, vigor and power
d- they may have some divine intervention assisting them as well as some here speculate that Eru himself willed it

Nope, sounds to me like its either they did something that is pretty near darn impossible or what they did was vastly overrated by Emoer who was judging them by his own standards.

I really do not think it is fair to try and have it both ways.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

StW:

I appreciate the obvious physical impossibiliy of the Three Hunters running, marathon-like, all that distance.

But the point is they *didn't*. Just do the math. They moved from dawn to dusk- that's eleven or twelve hours per diem. I fully agree that nobody could run for 36 hours out of 72. You're absolutely right. But then, had they somehow nonetheless done so they would have covered some 375 miles!

By the same token, 33-36 hours on the move divided into 135 miles shows that they weren't 'running' in your sense.

A real-world comparison: a standard day's march for a Roman legion in light order (ie with pack-mules rather than oxcarts) was 24 miles in eight hours, with a brief rest every three miles. This comes to just over 3 mi/hr- a steady but certainly not hurried marching pace. On a forced march the pace wasn't increased, merely the duration: 36 miles over 12 hours, and in some exceptional circumstances even farther during long European summer days.

If Caesar's boys (and mules) could cover 108 miles in the time alotted by Tolkien, why couldn't our three do 135?

On to the capabilities of mythical races- here's what Tolkien said about Orcs' ability to cover ground: they could move at a steady 4 mph for five hours, and then needed 1 hour's rest; they could keep up this pace uninterrupted for five days, but then required an extended rest. Thus 4 x 5 x 4 = 80 miles per day, and 400 miles in a single forced march! Talk about tough! Better yet, at need they can jog at 6mph for 50 miles (over 4 hrs!) And that's just regular Uruks- Saruman's hybrids move faster and only need a half-hour's rest in six.

Elsewhere T states that Grishnakh and his companions covered the 100+ miles from Sarn Gebir to the eaves of Fangorn between midnight and 11:20 AM two days later- about 35 hours, which accords with the previous numbers.

At an earlier point in the Time-scheme, T says that Orc-runners bring news of the Bridge of Khazad-dum from Moria to Isengard (260 miles) in four days, which comes to a 'mere' 65 mi/diem- but perhaps we have to allow for mountainous terrain, since perforce they bypassed Lorien on the west.

Even so, this is still a mere fraction of a marathoner's pace (10 mph or better). It's just steady, brisk walking.

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

People here say I was wrong because I was judging Gimli by human standards in the real world. Okay. Seems that is just what Eomer was doing in proclaiming their achievement as so worthy of being sung about.

Iconoclasm, my friend, is easy.

But mayhap it can be said that Elves, Dwarves, and Dunédain are exceptional. Eomer's exclamation does not necessarily reduce the accomplishment of the Three Hunters, who together can still be said to have done something exceptional by Eomer's standards, as well as by "exceptional Dwarf/Elf/Dunedain" standards.

But back to "mythic unities" and "secondary belief". (I have passed by most of page 3 in order to say this, so if someone feels neglected, apologies).

"Willing suspension of disbelief" is a concept invented by Samuel Taylor Coleridge, to account for the reader's task of setting aside 'real world' doubts in order to accept some 'difficult to believe' things in works of fiction.

"Secondary belief", a concept invented by J.R.R. Tolkien, means that a reader does not merely suspend disbelief, but for the purpose of full enjoyment of the work of fiction, chooses to believe the story, on the whole, on its own merits. Within this understanding, the author's dedication is to realize the world s/he creates as believably and completely as possible.

Tolkien made every attempt to make Secondary Belief possible for his readers. The result is that readers and lovers of LotR "believe in" Middle Earth in a way that they do not necessarily believe in other created settings from fiction.

Enter the movie.

Lovers of Middle Earth watch the movie and find their secondary belief in Middle Earth compromised, countered, and even violated, by images with which they are confronted in the movies, such as the glaringly different character of Faramir (among numerous other examples).

"But such people are not being realistic," one might say. That's not the point. The point is that Tolkien did something that had never been done before by a writer, at least not to the degree that he did it, which makes LotR qualitatively different from any other book out there. It is the most completely realized world of imagination ever created. Therefore, Peter Jackson was dealing with something with which he was completely out of his reckoning. So I think J.R.R. was right: the thing should not have been turned into film. That it was, is a fact. That it did not succeed for lovers of Middle Earth is an undeniable fact. That some of these same lovers of Middle Earth are willing to accept the movies as far as they can (such as myself), such that they enjoy what they can while wincing at other parts, is also - - a fact.

I guess I better show how "mythic unities" has to do with this in another post. I gotta go to bed now. G'night all.

[littlemanpoet]

Here's one additional thought. Due to the completeness of LotR in terms of Secondary belief, perhaps we lovers of Middle Earth are to a certain degree spoiled? Clearly Jackson is not of the same calibre as Tolkien; could we with justification expect better than having to suspend disbelief? I'm not certain; it's a query.

I have a little time for "mythic unity".

Actually, I started a thread with those words in the title, and it might be well for those interested, to take a look at that. I'd link to it here, but this computer (at work) is severely limited in its capabilities.

Suffice it to say that with "mythic unity", one sees a world writ large and whole. In terms of many things that we in the modern era have become used to seeing as distinct, Tolkien achieved a unity. Gollum/Smeagol is one example. He is not psychologically ill, something deeper and more complete is going on. Something more unified. With the movie, only one aspect of this unity was achieved. Could better than that have been done? That's debatable.

Are there any movies that DID achieve mythic unity? Food for thought.

[Sauron the White]

So I think J.R.R. was right: the thing should not have been turned into film.

Ah but it was. And who do we have to thank for that?

JRRT sold the film rights with full knowledge of the process. This is not like some author in 1918 selling film rights to a fledgling film industry and then claiming that they had no idea of what they were getting into. To this day I wince when I read the comments of JRRT in is letters saying that he felt they could not make the film anyways. "Okay, I will sell you this swamp land to build a highrise building on since I know you cannot do it ." That certainly brings up some ethical questions.

There is an obvious relationship between willing suspension of disbelief and secondary belief. Many of us like to think that the things we love are so very different than anything else and their are special rules which only apply to that one thing. "Don't tell me about that other stuff because my love is unique and special." Almost everything is unique and special in its own way but still can have much in common with other things. I think these two concepts are certainly family members and not so different from one another.