A hundredth re-read of the LotR

[Groin Redbeard]

Originally Posted by skip spence

Well, it's hardly fair too call the Hobbits lax and slothful. By all accounts they worked hard with their respective trade and made the Shire into a rich and well-tended part of ME. Actually, whereas the development in other parts of ME seemed to go backwards, the Shire is the only place we read about where things seem to improve with the passing of the years. The Hobbits of old fex. lived in simple burrows while at the time of the War of the Ring most of them had nice, comfortable houses or holes. Of old they also had no written records, whereas most can read and write at the time of Bilbo and many own books and write letters.

I admit I went a too far calling Hobbits slothful, but Tolkien dosen't give the impression that Hobbits are hard workers. We can see this in Bilbo's mentioning of Pipeweed and how the Hobbits have mastered it to a fine "art" (sounds like they have a lot of time on their hands).

The Shire, is in my opinion, a traditionalists paradise. Bilbo says that change comes slowly in Shire, and I think that this represents Tolkien's traditionalist views. Wouldn't it be great to live in a place were things don't change!

Originally Posted by Skip Spence

The fact that they had no army or police is hardly something they should be blamed for either.

The fact that they had no army was because the Dunedein Rangers patrolled their borders and kept undfriendly things out. They might not have needed an army while they were still protected by the Rangers, but the peace that they had always experienced in the Shire was taken for granted. The scouring of the Shire might have been prevented if they did have some sort of army to prevent Saruman and his hordes from pouring in when the Dunedein when south to join Aragorn.

I'm done now, so we can move along whenever we feel like it, or we can keep on disscussing until then.

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Groin Redbeard

I admit I went a too far calling Hobbits slothful, but Tolkien dosen't give the impression that Hobbits are hard workers. We can see this in Bilbo's mentioning of Pipeweed and how the Hobbits have mastered it to a fine "art" (sounds like they have a lot of time on their hands).

That has to do with the "natural pace" of an agricultural society which Tolkien surely has been familiar with unlike we 21st century Westerners. Unlike in cities of today in the agrarian countryside the year was quite nicely sliced between times of 24/7 work phases (like ploughing & sowing in spring and harvesting in late summer, the times when the animals gave birth, when the repairs had to be made before the winter, when the berries, fruit & mushrooms riped, when the beer / wine had to be made as the crops/grapes were ready etc.) and then the lazier times (like midwinter etc.).

So one worked like mad on certain times of the year and on others one idled - or at least didn't have it so rough. That's the time they built their furniture, all the decorations, new clothes, telling stories, playing games... maybe cultivating pipeweed as well?

Originally Posted by Groin

The Shire, is in my opinion, a traditionalists paradise. Bilbo says that change comes slowly in Shire, and I think that this represents Tolkien's traditionalist views. Wouldn't it be great to live in a place were things don't change!

I agree with you about the Shire being a "traditionalist paradise" but tend to doubt the 100% bliss of it...



-----

Originally Posted by Groin

I'm done now, so we can move along whenever we feel like it, or we can keep on disscussing until then.

Even if the discussion is slowish, let's wait for a few days to see if others wish to join - or we get new ideas. Also it would be nice if we'd have a clear and steady "deadline" when things change so that people would get used to it and know when we change the Chapter.

(Ha-ha, I'm just arguing for stability after saying I wouldn't like to live in a stabile society... but hey, I was calling for the stability of change! )

So how about changing the Chapter on Friday / Saturday as the thread was started around then?

Originally Posted by Lommy

Can we still talk about previous chapters later? Like, if it happened that I didn't have time to read Concerning Hobbits and write about it this week, should I still write about it here next week when others are discussing A Long Expected Party? Or should I just post on the CbC thread for Concerning Hobbits?

I think the initial idea was to make a re-read together so it would be nice if we all could advance with about a same pace. But if the discussions are this easy and slow it should be no problem to go back to some issues when someone is coming a little behind. But I mean "a little" behind. You probably see that if we're discussing the breaking of the fellowship then a discussion on pipeweed or Bilbo's birthday party (without an interesting link to the Breaking...) would be a bit out of the context.

Finally we were thinking of joining the CbC threads when we reach the point the previous re-read halted - or then not. Depending on how this goes. This far it looks pretty nice but we could have more people around.

[Nogrod]

A bit lighter opening to chew...

Has anyone of you noticed this little curiosity?

The part 1 ends talking about the hobbits delighting themselves in things that were accurate (the family trees and all their niceties); "set fair and square" - giving the air of hobbits being nearing precisionists in things relating to their history and organisation. Now the whole account of the Prologue is just about the ordering of the hobbit-kin and telling their history and the organisation of their Shire - which they were especially keen to have "fair and square".

And what happens after that in the book ?

Chapter 2 of the Prologue is 1+ pages of detour into the separate history of the pipeweed coming totally out of the blue... only to come back to the path of telling the story of the hobbits in an ordered fashion in chapter 3 "Of the Ordering of the Shire"!

Surely this was not unintentional by Tolkien?

So was it just a joke - something he had a good laugh with? And if yes, to what kind of laughter does it point at? Was he just laughing with sympathy, Gandalf-like, to the funny little hobbits he loved so much (Frodo / Sam / Merry wishing to make a separate entry on that issue just for the importance of the subject matter) or was it a more literary / structural joke referring to Tolkien's almost obsessive relation to the "Short cuts" and "unintentional bypaths" that finally settles the fortunes of the world in his view? In circles not unknown to Tolkien called providence.

Or was it just about the importance of the weed to Tolkien himself? The professor smoked pipe, didn't he?

[Nogrod]

If anyone has time, please post about the first chapter. I'm going to be more than busy up to Monday so don't you wait for me...

[Nogrod]

Okay. I'll start with two thoughts from just the first pages of the chapter to get this rolling again. I probably have time tomorrow to read the rest of it and to hopefully join a discussion already on its way then...


The chapter begins with the description of Bilbo's reputation and stature in Hobitton. Now some said it was unfair that someone was so rich and blessed with such an old age well-preserved.

"It will have to be paid for," they said. "It isn't natural, and trouble will come of it!"

Now one might say here an author is laying grounds for what will come; kind of hinting to the future and the whole affair, setting the gloomy feeling to the background from where it would eventually come forth.

But is it also Tolkien's own world-view? Do good fortunes need to be earned? Is that the way how a rich man justifies his riches; by suffering or fulfilling a noble destiny? Or is it how things should be? Or is Tolkien just posing the question?

So, is there an eventual balance where normal life (Hobitton way) is easier or requires not the heroical sacrifices which in turn justify the more "nobler lifestyles" or opportunities?

Are there theological implications involved? The mainstream christians who just lead their lives and receive the grace with not too much effort or thought of it and then those existentially anguished romantical "burning souls" who need to take their fill which somehow makes their lives at the same time a torment but also much more rich and fulfilling?


A second thought.

Looking at Gaffer Gamgee one easily finds a servant venerating his master who in turn is "very polite" to him. Even if the relation between the two have been described as somewhat informal with a few examples (Bilbo calling Gaffer "Master Hamfast" etc.) one gets a relation of a servant and a master - however benevolent the master is towards his servant - and the servant is acknowleding his place however the master asks for advice from him.

But could you imagine a similar relationship between Frodo and Sam? In a sense, in the beginning of the journey, their relationship is something reminding one of that and Tolkien indeed keeps on reminding us of it throughout the story, oftentimes in Sam's lines and reactions.

But still in the end it's a lot different even if they never get to be kind of equals as Frodo was the Ringbearer and thence of "nobility" of sorts. But is that a same kind of difference? Sam is indeed given some bits and pieces of the nobility - through him bearing the ring for a while at least - and Frodo openly declares his worth by giving him the mastery of Bag End when he leaves.

What kind of intrigues me is that even if they journeyed along and faced all those troubles together - and Sam saved Frodo and the whole mission a few times - they didn't end up as equals even if they ended up as friends rather than just a master and a servant.

(Something which quite bugs me indeed is that Frodo treats Sam like one who is generous, loving, friendly - I'm not denying his earnest feelings of gratitude or friendship even - and Sam goes along the same route, being the one to receive the honour of being treated that way.)

Is the barrier un-breechable? And which barrier is it? Inherited noblesse as a birthright? Fate-ordered thing? Just something growing from their different socio-economic backgrounds?



A third one just to lighten things up.

Don't you think Bilbo turning 111 and Frodo 33 on a same year is just a bit... well how does one say it... "fantasy-like"? Like a bedtime-story or a fairy-tale where all the numbers must match (or Hegelian philosophy for that matter... )? What did the story gain from that instead of Bilbo having his 114th birthday while Frodo turned 31? Is it a reminder that we're now entering the magical kingdom of myths and tales?

[Nogrod]

And btw.

Happy Birthday Bilbo and Frodo!

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

I think the word you might be looking for is "coincidental" (possibly "contrived"). And perhaps in contriving this remarkable coincidence, Tolkien was making his first essay into the concept that there is no true coincidence in Middle-earth, that all things happen for a reason, even if that reason is never known. Frodo coming of age at this particular time -- when Bilbo was finally feeling the negative effects of keeping the Ring -- made it easier for Bilbo to pass it on to Frodo, along with Bag End and his other possessions. Frodo needed to be old enough to be totally undisputed as Bilbo's heir, and Bilbo needed to be old enough for other hobbits not to question the fact that he never returned (especially since he had gone off once before, and returned at a most inopportune moment for those who had been buying his possessions). Contrived, certainly, but one wonders whose finger within the subcreation caused it to happen in just that convenient, coincidental way.