"Rings of Power" trailer analysis

[Tar Elenion]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

My argument though is that their choice accomplishes less twisting. If you are portraying the FA directly, then do it FA style. Don't make 3rd Age rhymes and riddles into a reality no one will recognize. Of course, we might rather that they did not touch the FA at all. But assuming they do anyways... would you really rather they depicted Valinor without the Two Trees cosmology? In my mind that would have been the much greater evil.

Yes. I would rather they depicted the sun and moon in existence at the same time as the Two Trees as per LotR and The Hobbit.

As for rights, wasn't there a clause somewhere that they couldn't contradict published material?

Not having seen the contract, I don't know for sure.
My understanding is that they can, on a case by case basis, get permission to use some items from the posthumously published works (e.g. the Numenor map), as long as it does not contradict what they have the rights to (Hobbit, LotR).

[mhagain]

I'd take issue with the claim that LotR has the Sun coexisting with the Trees; for example on the basis that Gildor's party's song has a reference to Varda's creation of the Stars in "the Sunless year". Unless you can give a reference that establishes otherwise, there seems no reason to suppose that the cosmology of LotR, as presented in the book and the book only, is any different to that of the published Silmarillion.

Nonetheless LotR doesn't include any explicit references to the myth of the Sun and Moon, so far more interesting to me is the fact that the trailer references it. That's information the show is not supposed to have, and must surely be a knowing wink for us to pick up on.

[Tar Elenion]

I did already give references. See my post with the quotes.
Tie that in with Tolkien's deliberate revision of the Hobbit.

[Huinesoron]

Originally Posted by Tar Elenion

Yes. I would rather they depicted the sun and moon in existence at the same time as the Two Trees as per LotR and The Hobbit.

This would mean pulling material not just from the Silmarillion, but from HoME texts - the Appendices are crystal clear that the Two Trees "gave light to the land of the Valar", so they would have to use the Dome(s) of Varda to make sense of it, and it/they isn't/aren't in Silm or UT.

Without invoking the idea that the Valar just shoved a giant lid on Valinor because, by golly, they'd had this idea for shiny trees and didn't want to let a ball of flaming gas ruin it, it's perfectly possible to reconcile the LotR and Hobbit texts you reference with the "young Sun" worldview:

- The Hobbit is written in Bilbo's editorial voice, and was written before he read the Elvish tales; Hobbit folk-tales make no mention of the creation of the Sun and Moon. (It is clear that Tolkien was thinking of the Dome of Varda/Melkor's smokes cover the Sun story here, but that doesn't mean it's the only possible interpretation.)

- Durin: there was no stain on the Moon because there was no Moon. The "light of sun and star and moon" is either a later metaphor (like the Winged Sun on Finwe's heraldic device), or an indication that Durin ruled until after the Sunrise.

- Galadriel says "beyond" and means in time.

- Gandalf is explicitly covering a broad timeline in his riddle - he mentions rings, which is the mid-Second Age! Or: he's referring to mountains that are now under the Moon. Or: he's saying that Treebeard and the Ents came to Fangorn after the Moonrise, leaving the lands where iron and hewing and woe were found. (Heck, Woe Was Wrought by Melkor before the land was even solid!) Or even: 'when young was mountain under moon' is a Rohirric idiom not otherwise attested.

And there are references which imply (but again do not state) the Silmarillion cosmology:

- The "stain on the moon" from the Durin rhyme is only ever explained in terms of Tilion and his ship, not a giant orbiting rock.

- There are explicit references to a Man in the Moon throughout Hobbit lore (and indeed a woman in the Sun).

- The "Sunless Years" reference from Gildor's song.

- Tom Bombadil talks of "the young Sun" shining down on battles on the Barrow-Downs.

- Bilbo's song tells of Earendil flying behind the sun; for a Silmaril to be visible at that distance the Sun must be pretty close (or the Silmarils once lit the entirety of Beleriand!).

- Haldir mentions that the light of the Sun is not as it was aforetimes, which actually sounds most like one of the very old legends about the death of Arien. It definitely doesn't make sense with an Old Sun model, unless Haldir is complaining that the sun isn't washed-out and obscured enough. (Perhaps he is English and longing for grey summers?)

And that's only from Fellowship! I'm sure you could find more in the other volumes. This isn't an obvious "the Sun always existed" situation by any means.

hS

[mhagain]

"The sun always existed" was the "destructive idea" that CJRT referenced in a number of places in HoME. It's certainly not as simplistic as saying "the sun always existed, get over it, move on" - and it's incredibly disingenuous to imply so.


If nothing else, consider everything that would need to be rewritten to support it:

• The Myth of the Lamps
• The Sleep of Yavanna
• The Myth of the Trees
• The first reckoning of Time
• The Darkening of Valinor
• The Myth of the Sun and the Moon
• Remind me what's so special about these Silmaril things again, anyway?
• Etc.
• Oh, and the Change of the World at the end of the Second Age; including everything about the Straight Path to Valinor.

And these were never rewritten.


Whichever way you slice it, you're going to need to handwave away something.


So which is easier to handwave away? Some oblique references, some of which came in via subsequent edits or editions, and most of which can be easily explained away? Or the entire first half of the Silmarillion? And so much other important stuff?


Nope, not buying it. Tolkien may have had intentions towards rewriting everything, but the key thing is: he never did. Ultimately all that we're left with is the latest completed cosmology, and, despite some offhand references and subsequent edits, that is the Cosmology.

[Tar Elenion]

Originally Posted by mhagain

"The sun always existed" was the "destructive idea" that CJRT referenced in a number of places in HoME. It's certainly not as simplistic as saying "the sun always existed, get over it, move on" - and it's incredibly disingenuous to imply so.

I did not say that. And it is disingenuous to imply that I did. Is that what you are attempting?

[Galin]

Originally Posted by mhagain

( . . . ) And these were never rewritten.

I argue that Tolkien eventually realized that they didn't have to be, although interestingly, if I recall correctly, he did add a reference to the Dome of Varda to LQ2 -- but again, there's no explicit-ness there (on purpose I would say).

The reference is there to be picked up on, but it doesn't have to hit the reader over the head. I read the "Death of Ambarussa" text (as no one calls it), as a Western Elvish tradition of a pre-existing sun . . .

. . . and I see no reason why it can't stand in the fuller Legendarium alongside the Quenta Silmarillion tradition with its time without a sun, and see no reason why it can't stand alongside the reference to the "Sunless Year" in The Lord of the Rings, or alongside Appendix F (Trolls): "Unlike the older race of the Twilight they could endure the Sun . . ."

Okay, so what exactly is the Twilight here, when not informed by the tradition of The Silmarillion?

Also in my opinion, the "natural default interpretation" of the world and its sun -- when considering everything Tolkien himself published -- is that the world was always round, and the Sun pre-existing -- and all I mean by that is that it's just a natural thing for modern readers to think* without anything explicit to necessarily think otherwise.

Or if I'm wrong, I'll speak for myself at least: I don't think I ever imagined Tolkien's world as "once flat" or "once sunless" until the constructed Silmarillion was published.

Or maybe I'm just too thick headed


_______

*I note A Guide To Middle-Earth by Robert Foster, the edition published before the constructed Silmarillion was published:


Twilight: "Figurative name for the Undying Lands, derived from their darkened state after the Rebellions of Morgoth and the Noldor.

Twilight: "A period early in the First Age of Middle-earth, perhaps the domination of Morgoth."


But in Foster's revised, post-Silmarillion Guide, the two entries for Twilight are quite different of course!

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Do you really think this show is going t deal in complex metaphysics and sophisticated cosmology?

These are people who still think bearded Dwarf women were a Peter Jackson joke (as stated just yesterday at Comicon)

So it will be really interesting - in the way reconstructing an air disaster is “interesting “ - to see hoe these hacks try to build a “second age” out of the Appendices alone without violating copyright. My guess? They will do it with nonstop Hollywood and pulp-fantasy cliches.

PS They claim to be advised in this project by “Tolkien scholars.” To which my reaction is similar to that of Indiana Jones when told the Ark would be examined by “top men”….

Who?

Which Tolkien scholars? I know who pretty much all if the reputable ones are, and to my knowledge none of them has touched this thing - except Shippey, who quit or was fired within just a few weeks.

[Blind Guardian]

I agree with William. This is going to be a "poop emoji"-show. I expect nothing less than "Fate: The Winx Saga" level of bad. Except "Fate" is based off of an increasingly terrible show and can only go up from here.

RoP is based off of pure magic, that I never thought would be tarnished. At least it will give me a visual of what people look like, and, hopefully (!!) help me pronounce the names. And it did get me to reread the Sil after like 2 years.

You guys are debating twilight and stuff, and while I appreciate it and enjoy the discussion, I don't think it's realistic. These story writers are clearly not following the established lore. I mean, didn't Elrond already know about Sauron being evil and doesn't need Galadriel to tell him about it?

I would like to start a betting pool of how much money Amazon is going to lose because of this show. Anyone want in?

Edit: I made a meme, but I don't know how to upload it. https://imgur.com/a/cPuPkIQ

[Galin]

Originally Posted by Blind Guardian

You guys are debating twilight and stuff, and while I appreciate it and enjoy the discussion, I don't think it's realistic.

Well, for my part, I'm mostly commenting on the Tolkienian stuff . . . aside from what is realistic or not with respect to a show (any show). I mean I'm not unaware of the context of the thread, but I don't get to post on this subject that often.

[Tar Elenion]

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hicklin

So it will be really interesting - in the way reconstructing an air disaster is “interesting “ - to see hoe these hacks try to build a “second age” out of the Appendices alone without violating copyright. My guess? They will do it with nonstop Hollywood and pulp-fantasy cliches.

My guess is they don't really need to worry too much about copyright violations, as there is some sort of 'case by case' agreement with the Estate. And Simon 'Jackson was too faithful to the books' Tolkien is some sort of 'advisor', (isn't he basically in charge of the Estate since CT's death?).

PS They claim to be advised in this project by “Tolkien scholars.” To which my reaction is similar to that of Indiana Jones when told the Ark would be examined by “top men”….

Who?

Which Tolkien scholars? I know who pretty much all if the reputable ones are, and to my knowledge none of them has touched this thing - except Shippey, who quit or was fired within just a few weeks.

Top secret Tolkien scholars. Probably intimately familiar with all the materials in:
Appendix BS

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hicklin

PS They claim to be advised in this project by “Tolkien scholars.” To which my reaction is similar to that of Indiana Jones when told the Ark would be examined by “top men”….

Who?

Which Tolkien scholars? I know who pretty much all if the reputable ones are, and to my knowledge none of them has touched this thing - except Shippey, who quit or was fired within just a few weeks.

I was going to say, Shippey leaving (or being fired, depending on whether you believe he kept complaining the show runners were "polluting the lore") is certainly an ominous tell as to the nature of this cluster****. Of course, one only has to watch a few minutes of the trailers to see the inanity already bubbling over.

[Blind Guardian]

I made my meme better: https://imgur.com/a/pFZ5M49

I'm not good at making memes, but I think you guys get the point. Do you hear that noise? It's Melkor laughing.

[Tar Elenion]

Originally Posted by Huinesoron

This would mean pulling material not just from the Silmarillion, but from HoME texts - the Appendices are crystal clear that the Two Trees "gave light to the land of the Valar", so they would have to use the Dome(s) of Varda to make sense of it, and it/they isn't/aren't in Silm or UT.

No more than pulling materials to invoke the sun and moon not in existence.

Without invoking the idea that the Valar just shoved a giant lid on Valinor because, by golly, they'd had this idea for shiny trees and didn't want to let a ball of flaming gas ruin it, it's perfectly possible to reconcile the LotR and Hobbit texts you reference with the "young Sun" worldview:

- The Hobbit is written in Bilbo's editorial voice, and was written before he read the Elvish tales; Hobbit folk-tales make no mention of the creation of the Sun and Moon. (It is clear that Tolkien was thinking of the Dome of Varda/Melkor's smokes cover the Sun story here, but that doesn't mean it's the only possible interpretation.)

It is clear that Tolkien deliberately revised the passage to have an extant sun and moon.

- Durin: there was no stain on the Moon because there was no Moon. The "light of sun and star and moon" is either a later metaphor (like the Winged Sun on Finwe's heraldic device), or an indication that Durin ruled until after the Sunrise.

Then it would have been 'before' the moon.

- Galadriel says "beyond" and means in time.

In time would be 'before'.

- Gandalf is explicitly covering a broad timeline in his riddle - he mentions rings, which is the mid-Second Age! Or: he's referring to mountains that are now under the Moon. Or: he's saying that Treebeard and the Ents came to Fangorn after the Moonrise, leaving the lands where iron and hewing and woe were found. (Heck, Woe Was Wrought by Melkor before the land was even solid!) Or even: 'when young was mountain under moon' is a Rohirric idiom not otherwise attested.

The semicolon indicates a distinct separation between the two parts of the riddle.

And there are references which imply (but again do not state) the Silmarillion cosmology:

- The "stain on the moon" from the Durin rhyme is only ever explained in terms of Tilion and his ship, not a giant orbiting rock.

- There are explicit references to a Man in the Moon throughout Hobbit lore (and indeed a woman in the Sun).

- The "Sunless Years" reference from Gildor's song.

It is "Sunless Year". Which was when?

- Tom Bombadil talks of "the young Sun" shining down on battles on the Barrow-Downs.

Perhaps the only possible one. The sun young compared to what?

- Bilbo's song tells of Earendil flying behind the sun; for a Silmaril to be visible at that distance the Sun must be pretty close (or the Silmarils once lit the entirety of Beleriand!).

- Haldir mentions that the light of the Sun is not as it was aforetimes, which actually sounds most like one of the very old legends about the death of Arien. It definitely doesn't make sense with an Old Sun model, unless Haldir is complaining that the sun isn't washed-out and obscured enough. (Perhaps he is English and longing for grey summers?)

And that's only from Fellowship! I'm sure you could find more in the other volumes. This isn't an obvious "the Sun always existed" situation by any means.

hS

None of seem these have any relevance to the existence of the sun and moon.

And it all fails on Tolkien's deliberate revision.