The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum


Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page

Go Back   The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum > Middle-Earth Discussions > The Books
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-07-2015, 06:09 AM   #121
Ivriniel
Shade of Carn Dûm
 
Ivriniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 433
Ivriniel has just left Hobbiton.
Information Summary Post: Key Themes and Examples of Information

1. Lalaith's Premises (awesome topic)

a. Arenstone-ian stealth in stealing, stones of staining, the heart of Dwarves - Dwarvish Rage is Thorin's province. 'Moral Outrage, treacherous Bilbo'.
b. Thranduil is the scavenger - 'creature to Crebain - Thranduil-ian craven'.
c. Bilbo, during the Battle of the Five Armies, "preferred on the whole to defend the Elven King". What exactly has Thranduil done to deserve this loyalty?

2. Morality-Legality Distinctions - Propriety and Personality & Cannon

a. The Moral Share/Legal Share distinction. Thraduil-ian-craven - beware!
b. HUMOUR - Legal-ese Rear-ends, and unstoppable cerebral bearing!
c. HUMOUR - Awesome!
d. Balancing motivations - Pride and Loss - Inverted across the Races.
e. Nice Synthesis By Galadriel!
f. Posts 59, 61, 94, 101, 104, and meh, 75/25 weighting to post 80 (it's the restating that weakens it. Once is enough).
g. rIngs of power and Rings of Power - power begone and Power begone - the ring (not the Ring) is everywhere.

3. Arkenston-ean-Dwarvish-Greed-Beware!!! Ash-Nazg Arkenstone, Durbataluk! Arkenstone, Arkenstone, you are EVERYWHERE

a. Some stone in the ground glows a bit like glowsticks at a Nighclub, but more than 1/14th of the wealth to only some.

4. Serious, Thoughtful, Considered -

a. Insights about Warring Peoples

I). "The Common Enemy Unites Us"..
II). Where 'stealing' to one sight, is heroism in self-sacrifice to another. Urgency to Stop Killing - primary motivation.

b). Awesome Redirective Focus Post: Focal Distinctions: The Canon Analysis V And/Or the Narrative Analysis Distinction AndOr Hindsight/Foresight Positioning (at a particular date) During Post Construction

5. Hiding under rocks Or Enjoying Being Flattened as the Rock you thought you were hiding under (and clinging to) started rolling down the Hill...QUICKLY.

a. Hiding without a magic ring is hard!.
b. Backpeddling - after being flattened, correctly.
c. Funny how 'little red squares' have this way of appearing at times.
d. "I don't like ....me.....do you like .....you. Didn't work! The Rock Rolls faster and faster down the hill. I'm getting very flat!

6. Really Bad Posts (Falls from Grace-the Devil's Number 666 - or Melkor Upon Us From the Void - and Grace Repair - Quick Quick Quick)

a. The Lidless Eye is literally hot. Annatar is 'hot'. Context Blunders and Unthoughtful Thunders.
b. Ramblings and Ramblings.

7. Humour I Missed Along the Road - and Special Thank YouZ (A Liberty Taken by Me for Cutting the Post after Summarising)

a. Awesome Post - Thank you kindly for your manners.
b. Awesome Start Here Galadriel - A Belly Laugh Upon Me as I Type! Kind Regards..
c. "....Once again your strain position...." it starts AGAIN, the WORMHOLE EFFECT, ANOTHER BELLY LAUGH, Kind Regards Mor.....gg...Morthor_n! Phew! .
d. "...oh and I did paddle the turgid straits and navigated the frothy....." ungoliants, "...upstream". Another Awesome one.
e. "...you may think your gibberish you are typing..." GRINNING/HURTING STOMACH AGAIN - Funny Bone alert.
f. "...getting closer to ungoliant...." - Kind Regards Morthoron
g. "...circum.."lociously, deliciously, Ungoliantines "...circumlocutious...", "...latitudinal..." arguments, "...rambling...obtuse", migrating patterns of Subterranean Silmarils, Skiing Balrogs, and Balrogs that retire with Needlecraft.
h. I've edited your post for clarity by omitting most ......" of it but! "...I'll leave in the juvenile misspelling of my name" Kind Regards Mor- *coughs..struggles....squirms...* "-thoron.
I. Kindness, and warmth.

And -

MY FAVOURITE POST and
SECOND FAVOURITE of Morthoron's Cited.

[Edit]12/09/2015 @ 7:31 am (Aus-EST): a) Integration of Posts 123 thru 125 & b) Reorganisation of Post[/Edit]

Last edited by Ivriniel; 12-08-2015 at 02:41 PM.
Ivriniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2015, 07:33 AM   #122
Ivriniel
Shade of Carn Dûm
 
Ivriniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 433
Ivriniel has just left Hobbiton.
Response to Posts Deferred For Comment - More to Say With Canon-ites

Post 59
Post 61

Unfinished Business

1. Please, threadkeeper Lalaith, if you want, claim ownership to the Summary Post and modify it!!! It's a really cool idea we all used to do at a really fun Geek Forum that was also ultra serious and ultra fun, all at once. Unfortunately, it's gone now. I realise it's not about me, but everyone. I just wanted to 'kick start' the idea. "Threadkeepers" at the other Forum all used to do it.
2. The thing, that was the original thing, long long ago, I was going to say, at about post minus 10. The "Bilbo Changed" theory (even though and despite, and so it is, and well it is, and Baggines, that it's a look at Hobbit Version -- "that new one I read" (Alias, Title - Terminator Series Adaptation, "The Dreaded White at Bag End") - "Longitudinal Theory about Bilbo's Transmutation". Four Premises:

a. Hobbit's Baseline tendencies for Evil/Treachery/Deception/Greed.
b. Bilbo's Baseline tendencies.
c. How did he change, along the way.
d. Did this influence his 'treachery' to handover the Silmari...Arkenstone.

Or said to the Canon-ites

Where did the prof spot 'R..ing'-consistent themes in the Dancing Dark Lords in Children's Head's (Fairytale) version of Hobbit - ORIGINAL or REVISED - and the key word is **retrospectively**?

Last edited by Ivriniel; 12-07-2015 at 09:10 AM.
Ivriniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2015, 08:51 PM   #123
Mithadan
Spirit of Mist
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Tol Eressea
Posts: 3,310
Mithadan is a guest at the Prancing Pony.Mithadan is a guest at the Prancing Pony.
Ring

Regardless of the commotion that this thread has engendered, there is an interesting theme that is worthy of discussion here. The Ring (or ring) is the bridge between The Hobbit and LoTR. The question of whether Bilbo has come under the effect of the One (by concealing the Ring/ring from Gandalf, by lying about it/ by taking/stealing/earning the Arkenstone) is, in reality, a matter of subjective perspective.

What is your focus? Do you view the texts from the perspective of the (historical) drafter? Do you hone in upon the fact that The Hobbit was completed before the "bridge" of the One Ring was conceived as the basis for interpreting Bilbo's motives? Is this a valid view?

Or do you view the texts from the perspective of the (post revised Hobbit) reader, looking to perceive a smooth transition between the works and, more importantly, a uniform tale from Gandalf's first arrival at Bag End to Sam's sad return to Bag End?

If the latter, then it is entirely possible that the Ring ( as opposed to the ring) may have influenced Bilbo's choices. Just days ago I noted that Isildur, having possessed the Ring for a matter of hours, could not make the right decision: to destroy the Ring. Bilbo, possessing the Ring for a period of time even longer, could have been influenced by its evil animus.

If the former, then Bilbo possessed a curiosity, a ring of invisibility. Interesting, but unimportant except as a device within the tale. The ring could not have influenced events. It had noting to do with Bilbo's choice regarding the Arkenstone or his concealment of the ring from Gandalf. It was not THE ONE.

Which is it? Let's proceed (if at al) in a civil manner, please.
__________________
Beleriand, Beleriand,
the borders of the Elven-land.
Mithadan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2015, 08:01 AM   #124
Leaf
Haunting Spirit
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 87
Leaf is a guest of Tom Bombadil.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mithadan View Post
If the latter, then it is entirely possible that the Ring ( as opposed to the ring) may have influenced Bilbo's choices. Just days ago I noted that Isildur, having possessed the Ring for a matter of hours, could not make the right decision: to destroy the Ring. Bilbo, possessing the Ring for a period of time even longer, could have been influenced by its evil animus.
Even if you choose to interpret the works of J.R.R. Tolkien as continuous and uniform world, you'd still have to explain why the Ring would play a part in Bilbo's decision to take, keep and give away the Arkenstone. And that's where the argument looses me. Exactly what decision is supposed to be influenced by the Ring? The initial and spontaneous impulse to take the Arkenstone in the first place? Keeping it a secret? Or giving it away to enforce a peaceful compromise?!

For the point of the ongoing discussion I'll take the following as a starting point:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivriniel
We never find out what measure of Bilbo's treachery was motivated by the then hold the ring exerted over Bilbo

We don't know whether or not he would have conceived the plot to place the dwarves on the back foot had there been no ring
It seems you argued that the Ring may (or may not) have influenced the whole package, from the taking to the giving away of the Arkenstone. Besides, it seems to me that you are implying that Bilbo conceived the plot with the intention to harm the Company and put them in a disadvantageous position. I have a few problems with that. Bilbos motivation for his plot, to give the Arkenstone away, is very well fleshed out in the Hobbit. He wanted to put an end to a deadlocked and dangerous conflict. He just wanted to get home. To achieve that he gave the only thing away which could be used as leverage against Thorin. He didn't put "the dwarves" on the back foot. He chose to give up his own share and reward to ensure a reasonable and peaceful solution to the given situation. The dwarves would have had the same amount of Gold, Bard would have his fair share and nobody would have to die. I try really hard to understand how the Ring of Power, the pinnacle of evil, could have had any influence in this motivation. Does anything comparable happen in the LotR-novels? The Ring usually doesn't support altruistic and problem solving behaviour. I fail to see how the Ring could have had any effect in Bilbo's decision to give the Arkenstone away. Bilbo doesn't get anything (no power, no wealth and no honor) from his plan, except for the possibility that he may see his beloved Hobbit-hole again. For me, that's as atypical for the kind of influence the Ring has on people, as it gets.

Yes, the Ring does alter the personality and actions of a person. And yes, Bilbo's deed could be (unfairly, imho) interpreted as dishonest and treacherous. But I still don't see a connection between those two things. The Ring influences his owner in a very specific way. It's not like it reinforces immoral actions in general. During the course of the story (LotR) we don't see Bilbo, or Frodo, becoming bad persons, or acting more and more selfish and immoral. At worst they get defensive and delusional when it comes to the question of their claim to the Ring. But usually they are still the normal, generous and kind Hobbits they've always been, despite the fact that they have kept the Ring for such a long time.

Last edited by Leaf; 12-08-2015 at 10:58 AM.
Leaf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2015, 01:47 PM   #125
Mithadan
Spirit of Mist
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Tol Eressea
Posts: 3,310
Mithadan is a guest at the Prancing Pony.Mithadan is a guest at the Prancing Pony.
Let me clarify. It cannot be doubted that Bilbo's decision to turn the Arkenstone over to Bard was motivated by good intentions. But the decision to take the Arkenstone and later conceal it after Thorin began searching for it is a bit out of character for Bilbo. Could this be the Ring's effect (from the perspective of a coherent story)? Perhaps. He thinks to himself that Thorin's offer that he could pick and choose his share might not extend to the jewel. Thorin later names the Arkenstone to himself, but Bilbo does not come forward.

But candidly, the language used by Tolkien suggests another explanation. "Bilbo's arm went to it drawn by its enchantment." One can also refer to the poem The Hoard found in Adventures of Tom Bombadil where he discusses the power and bewilderment of treasure. The original title of this poem (it was first published in 1923 in a Leeds University magazine) Iumonna Gold Galdre Bewunden, meaning Gold of Men Enmeshed In Enchantment (See Annotated Hobbit, p. 288). This is a recurring theme in Tolkien's works, the love of treasure as a motivator towards either evil or bad decisions. I tend to favor this explanation of the Arkenstone incident.

However you slice it, Bilbo's concealment of the Ring from Gandalf and his taking and retention of the Arkenstone is not typical behavior. The cause? It could just as easily be the allure and glamor of fantastic treasure as the emerging effects of the Ring.

By the way, Gandalf's "more than meets the eye" comment after Bilbo explains his escape from Goblin Town (omitting the Ring) and the long stare that Gandalf gives to Bilbo as if he doubts some of the tale is in the original, pre-LoTR edition for those keeping score on the ring vs. Ring issue.
__________________
Beleriand, Beleriand,
the borders of the Elven-land.
Mithadan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2015, 02:17 PM   #126
Inziladun
Gruesome Spectre
 
Inziladun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Heaven's doorstep
Posts: 8,058
Inziladun is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Inziladun is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Inziladun is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Inziladun is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Inziladun is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mithadan View Post
But candidly, the language used by Tolkien suggests another explanation. "Bilbo's arm went to it drawn by its enchantment." One can also refer to the poem The Hoard found in Adventures of Tom Bombadil where he discusses the power and bewilderment of treasure. The original title of this poem (it was first published in 1923 in a Leeds University magazine) Iumonna Gold Galdre Bewunden, meaning Gold of Men Enmeshed In Enchantment (See Annotated Hobbit, p. 288). This is a recurring theme in Tolkien's works, the love of treasure as a motivator towards either evil or bad decisions. I tend to favor this explanation of the Arkenstone incident.
I think back to the time at Bag End where the Dwarves sang their song before setting out.
There, Bilbo listened and was "enchanted" to some extent, sharing the love the Dwarves had for jewels and such, out of character for most Hobbits in itself.
He'd had much time since then to hear the Dwarves talking about all that treasure, and had also spoken with the dragon who stole the hoard. I favor those things as influencing Bilbo's behavior.
__________________
Music alone proves the existence of God.
Inziladun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2015, 02:18 PM   #127
Leaf
Haunting Spirit
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 87
Leaf is a guest of Tom Bombadil.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mithadan View Post
Let me clarify. It cannot be doubted that Bilbo's decision to turn the Arkenstone over to Bard was motivated by good intentions. But the decision to take the Arkenstone and later conceal it after Thorin began searching for it is a bit out of character for Bilbo. Could this be the Ring's effect (from the perspective of a coherent story)? Perhaps. He thinks to himself that Thorin's offer that he could pick and choose his share might not extend to the jewel. Thorin later names the Arkenstone to himself, but Bilbo does not come forward.

But candidly, the language used by Tolkien suggests another explanation. "Bilbo's arm went to it drawn by its enchantment." One can also refer to the poem The Hoard found in Adventures of Tom Bombadil where he discusses the power and bewilderment of treasure. The original title of this poem (it was first published in 1923 in a Leeds University magazine) Iumonna Gold Galdre Bewunden, meaning Gold of Men Enmeshed In Enchantment (See Annotated Hobbit, p. 288). This is a recurring theme in Tolkien's works, the love of treasure as a motivator towards either evil or bad decisions. I tend to favor this explanation of the Arkenstone incident.

However you slice it, Bilbo's concealment of the Ring from Gandalf and his taking and retention of the Arkenstone is not typical behavior. The cause? It could just as easily be the allure and glamor of fantastic treasure as the emerging effects of the Ring.

By the way, Gandalf's "more than meets the eye" comment after Bilbo explains his escape from Goblin Town (omitting the Ring) and the long stare that Gandalf gives to Bilbo as if he doubts some of the tale is in the original, pre-LoTR edition for those keeping score on the ring vs. Ring issue.
That's a different argument all together. If you really want to fit the Idea of the Ring into this situation, I guess you can suspect that it played a role in the taking of the Arkenstone. I still dont find it to be a compelling argument. I don't know of any case in which the Master Ring creates or amplifies greed for worldly things.

And the notion that the taking of the Arkenstone is a out of character moment for Bilbo is a little dubious. Here's a quote from the very first chapter:

"As they sang the Hobbit felt the love of beautiful things made by hands and by cunning and by magic moving through him, a fierce and jealous love, the desire of the hearts of dwarves." It is set up from the very beginning of the story that Bilbo is receptive to this fierce and jealous love for beautiful things.

I agree with you. This explanation seems to be the more elegant and interesting one. It's well founded withing the text of the given novel and doesn't need an exterior explanation to make sense.


Edit: Inziladun beat me to it
Leaf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2015, 02:39 PM   #128
Zigûr
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
 
Zigûr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 785
Zigûr is a guest at the Prancing Pony.Zigûr is a guest at the Prancing Pony.
Yes, to agree with Inzil and Leaf, it seems thematically appropriate to me in The Hobbit that Bilbo's taking of the Arkenstone is consistent with the book's own discussion of the allure of precious things. This theme, I would argue, doesn't require the Ring to be malignant in any further capacity to function in the text.

What is perhaps effective about this in The Hobbit is that the Arkenstone needs no particular "magic" to operate in this way. Its "enchantment" seems to be its own lustre and desirability.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf View Post
I don't know of any case in which the Master Ring creates or amplifies greed for worldly things.
I suppose you could consider the effect the Seven had on the Dwarves ("The only power over them that the Rings wielded was to inflame their hearts with a greed of gold and precious things, so that if they lacked them all other good things seemed profitless, and they were filled with wrath and desire for vengeance on all who deprived them."), but on the other hand that seems to be a peculiar effect the Great Rings had on Dwarves specifically, such that it couldn't be stated definitively that the One Ring would necessarily have the same effect on Hobbits.

On the other hand, it's probably a good thing that the Ring of Thrór was lost before Thorin could inherit it - imagine how much more unreasonable he might have been had he possessed it!
__________________
"Since the evening of that day we have journeyed from the shadow of Tol Brandir."
"On foot?" cried Éomer.
Zigûr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2015, 03:09 PM   #129
Ivriniel
Shade of Carn Dûm
 
Ivriniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 433
Ivriniel has just left Hobbiton.
@ Leaf Hi there Leaf Nice to meet you! I've not 'met' one of your posts yet, so I thought I'd start with this hello, but I'll come back (to this post) to back edit, after the 'hello', in a day or so.

(I loved your post. It's deliciously inventive (in its analysis of my content) and I'm delighted to see your comments).

Kind Regards

Iv-goniel

@ Mithadan - what an awesome summation. I've updated the Summary Post (to put some new stuff in).

@ Reader.

Pondering textual analysis. in meantime

1. Text from the perspective of the historical drafter with focus upon:
a. Some ideas about Tolkien's original draft notes of LotR (see Letters and those for which he has written LotR to conform to Hobbit pre-sequel 'ring-to-Ring' - 1937 version).
b. The significance of that. The professor must have had some ideas, himself, about how to 'multiply infer/interpret' new or bridging ideas from the very one and the same text - himself. This I think goes to the 'Evil Animus' point, made, upstream. I'll --add--here the dormant or hidden Animus of the Ring - after some 3000 years and while Sauron/Necromancer was == weaker.
2. A focus upon the Hobbit-V2 and the Allen and Unwin LotR we all know in the 21st Century on the Shelves (which was where I entered this conversation, many moons ago, and then added in a 'mini research project' where I unearthed stuff I could add in, in 1.)
a. The 'Ring'* in the Hobbit. Despite it being a children's story, in its inception, nonetheless, with its edits in the now Un-ungolianted (or de-Ungolianted, or just UN-golianted) (i.e. revised Chapter V) of the delightful 1966 Edition and so on. (i.e. the chapter that corrected the Tome has been, no doubt, a controversy of various kinds in history. I'm sure Tolkien had a headache at times. Imagine his wrath? exhaustions? when he typed up early materials for LotR, to conform to Hobbit 1, and then hears back from editors 'na, na, na, John. You need to fix the Hobbit and re-work LotR'. I've cited Letters and such, in a post that found this stuff**.
Perhaps I've misinterpreted? I'm not a trained Tolkien Scholar, so I'm happy to be corrected. Does anyone know more on this topic?

*noting that in lower case - as a ring, in the book, observes the 'duality' of this textual item, all the way through to the 21st century.
** left blank

Back later (to this post) Kind Regards

Last edited by Ivriniel; 12-08-2015 at 03:53 PM.
Ivriniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2015, 04:08 PM   #130
Galadriel55
Blossom of Dwimordene
 
Galadriel55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: The realm of forgotten words
Posts: 10,299
Galadriel55 is lost in the dark paths of Moria.Galadriel55 is lost in the dark paths of Moria.Galadriel55 is lost in the dark paths of Moria.Galadriel55 is lost in the dark paths of Moria.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mithadan View Post
Let me clarify. It cannot be doubted that Bilbo's decision to turn the Arkenstone over to Bard was motivated by good intentions. But the decision to take the Arkenstone and later conceal it after Thorin began searching for it is a bit out of character for Bilbo. Could this be the Ring's effect (from the perspective of a coherent story)? Perhaps. He thinks to himself that Thorin's offer that he could pick and choose his share might not extend to the jewel. Thorin later names the Arkenstone to himself, but Bilbo does not come forward.
I want to throw out another couple ideas in regards to this. First of all, regardless of what motivated Bilbo to take the Arkenstone in the first place, I always had the feeling that after that moment of weakness he never really meant to keep it, he just didn't know how to come forwards about it without enraging the Dwarves (who would predictably be disproportionately mad at Bilbo for taking the stone and would not appreciate the effort of conscience and morality that it took to overcome the barriers to breaking the truth to them voluntarily until it would be too late - because that's what happens nearly every time Bilbo pulls off a trick). Thus, I don't see the Ring as a factor at all in keeping the Arkenstone secret. It would be natural for anyone who knows what the Dwarves are like with their gratitude and their jewels to keep something like this quiet; but also, it seems to me that Bilbo didn't want to keep that secret and was looking for an alternative way out of the situation. He does feel rather guilty about the whole thing, and most likely regretted taking the darned stone in the first place. Having the stone - and especially keeping it secret - ain't giving him any pleasure at all.

I can see how it can be argued that the Ring had a hand in pushing Bilbo to take the Stone, though I don't think that's the prime motivator. I suppose it's not out of character for the Ring to whisper thoughts like "It's just fair, you deserve it, what do you owe to them, you're not technically breaking your written contract, you're still a good Gollu... hobbit, it's the Dwarves who are the mean ones and the cheaters". But Bilbo knew when he took the stone that he just wants to feel this way to justify taking the stone. He is aware that he's making excuses for himself, and sad excuses at that. Besides, he's at the point where he appreciates unwritten bonds above written contracts, and he knows that he violates something much more important than the legal definition of "1/14 of the profits". He knows that, and he still takes the stone, because of his own inner weakness. He conquers it, of course, and he wouldn't ever be likely to repeat that mistake, but it was a moment of his own internal weakness.

Finally, I want to bring up a general pattern seen throughout the legendarium in regards to jewels and riches, a pattern in part borrowed from real-world mythologies. The most beautiful things inspire greed and almost unconscious acts of unnecessary harshness. Personalities become distorted, people become cruel and unsharing, and those who aspire to claim some of those treasures evoke a very similar response to the reaction of Ringbearers when someone broaches the subject of taking away the Ring. The First Age is filled with such examples - the Nauglamir, the hoard of Nargothrond, the Silmarili alone could fill up several pages of analysis from their creation until Maglor throws the last one into the Sea. The Arkenstone (and the rest of the dragon hoard as well) is an extension of the same pattern. The examples mentioned above by other posters (Bilbo enchanted by the Dwarves' song, his hand drawn by the stone's enchantement) are referring to this aspect of treasure. Bilbo's action is very much continuous with this pattern, Ring or no Ring - an external source isn't needed to be present to give Bilbo the push. Moreover, ascribing this action to the Ring takes away from the concept of greed and the enchantment of the treasure. Treasure does not need to have this effect anymore, this power, if it's just the Ring at work. If we assume that the Ring is a prime motivator in Bilbo's choice, or the prime reason for his weakness - it is belittling the beauty and power of the Arkenstone both as the element of the story and as a symbol. I think that goes against what the rest of the story has been trying to convey to the readers about this stone.

I think it's possible that the Ring had a hold on Bilbo, but I do not think that in this case it was a motivator. In any situation, his actions seem perfectly explicable without the presence of the Ring, so even if its influence was there, it was too subtle to be a main factor. I cannot think of any such instance, which is why I am asking you - is there any point in the story where Bilbo makes a choice that is aligned with the "desires" of the Ring, that he would not have made without it? If a good examples of that is out there, then the flip side can be argued. As it is, though, it seems that there is no strong evidence to support the Ring influence case.

Lastly, since this has been mentioned previously: yes, Isildur wasn't able to destroy the Ring after possessing it for only a few hours, and Frodo sure didn't like it when Gandalf chucked the Ring into the fireplace. But both of these situations involve some threat to the Ring - and quite a direct threat at that. On the contrary, in Bilbo's case the Ring is quite safe and happy. None of his plans appear to involve any harm (direct or indirect) being done to the Ring. If Bilbo had to give his ring to Bard and Thranduil rather than the Arkenstone - oh how the story might have gone differently. But he wasn't, so there isn't much reason for a burst of activity from the Ring.
__________________
You passed from under darkened dome, you enter now the secret land. - Take me to Finrod's fabled home!... ~ Finrod: The Rock Opera
Galadriel55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2015, 04:28 PM   #131
Pitchwife
Wight of the Old Forest
 
Pitchwife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Unattended on the railway station, in the litter at the dancehall
Posts: 3,355
Pitchwife is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Pitchwife is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Pitchwife is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Pitchwife is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Pitchwife is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.
Thank you, Mithadan, for nudging this meandering/maundering thread back on track.

I've said most of what I have to say about the Arkenstone up in post #77, but I think I concur with Leaf and Inzil that Bilbo's love for beautiful things, together with the stone's own enchantment, was quite enough motivation for him to take it. Let's also not forget that the whole treasure - including, if I'm not very mistaken, the Arkenstone - had long been lain on by a dragon, and a dragon's hoard has a glamour that fascinates and awakes covetousness even more than 'normal' gold, does it not?

You know, I find that the whole scene of Bilbo taking the Arkenstone reminds me a bit of Pippin taking the palantír of Orthanc from Gandalf. Two hobbits, two stones wrought with great art in days long past, one scintillating with light, the other dark, but glowing with a heart of fire. And both hobbits grab the shiny mystery, even though both know they shouldn't. Was it just the Took in Bilbo that made him take the Arkenstone?

Now as for keeping the stone secret even after Thorin had claimed it for himself, I originally thought that quite suspicious behaviour, but Galadriel55 made a valid point that Thorin was showing increasing signs of dragon gold madness at that time, and Bilbo may have been (rightly) afraid that Old Oakenshield would blow up in his face if he learned that Bilbo had found the stone and said nothing. And I think it's fair to assume that Mr Baggins hadn't remained totally untouched by the treasure's glamour himself, as Mithadan already said.
________________________________________

Iviriniel, as for Tolkien's first drafts for LotR: it's a while since I read The Return of the Shadow, Vol. 6 of of The History of Middle-earth, in which they're all published, but IIRC he started with Bilbo leaving Bag-End for more adventures but no clear idea what these would be. One idea was that Bilbo had used up all his gold and was looking for more, driven by the dragon sickness, but he (=JRRT) found that idea unsatisfying. At some point he decided that the hero wouldn't be Bilbo himself but a younger relative of his (long named Bingo but finally renamed Frodo), accompanied by some of his friends/cousins who also went through some wild name changes, but he still had no idea what the adventure would really be about.

At that point, I think, he sat down to consider which motives he hadn't used up in TH, and, ending up with the Necromancer and the r/Ring, jotted down a note (some time in late '37/early '38, but don't pin me down on it): "The ring - where does it come from? Necromancer?" As we know, that was a fruitful idea, and everything started to gel. He first cnsidered the ring harmless if used for good purposes, but harmful if kept too long, but by and by the ring became the Ring, the One, ash nazg durbathulûk,

Once that was clear, the original version of TH Chapter 5, where Gollum was willing to give Bilbo the Ring, became, of course, untenable, because the Prof's conception of Gollum's character had changed and he realized that Gollum could never have given up his precious. So the original Ch. 5 was explained as being a cover-up by Bilbo. Only in the 1966 edition of TH, IIRC, was that chapter told as it was now, after the change, conceived to have really happened, with Gollum planning to murder Bilbo and "Thief! Baggins! We hates it forever!"

Does that answer any of your questions?
_______________________________________________

(x-ed with Gal55; our dogs are bonkers tonight.)
__________________
Und aus dem Erebos kamen viele seelen herauf der abgeschiedenen toten.- Homer, Odyssey, Canto XI
Pitchwife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2015, 05:07 PM   #132
Galadriel55
Blossom of Dwimordene
 
Galadriel55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: The realm of forgotten words
Posts: 10,299
Galadriel55 is lost in the dark paths of Moria.Galadriel55 is lost in the dark paths of Moria.Galadriel55 is lost in the dark paths of Moria.Galadriel55 is lost in the dark paths of Moria.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pitchwife View Post
You know, I find that the whole scene of Bilbo taking the Arkenstone reminds me a bit of Pippin taking the palantír of Orthanc from Gandalf. Two hobbits, two stones wrought with great art in days long past, one scintillating with light, the other dark, but glowing with a heart of fire. And both hobbits grab the shiny mystery, even though both know they shouldn't. Was it just the Took in Bilbo that made him take the Arkenstone?
Ah! *facepalm* How could I leave this out of my example list? That's a great one, thanks for bringing it up.
__________________
You passed from under darkened dome, you enter now the secret land. - Take me to Finrod's fabled home!... ~ Finrod: The Rock Opera
Galadriel55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2015, 05:24 PM   #133
Ivriniel
Shade of Carn Dûm
 
Ivriniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 433
Ivriniel has just left Hobbiton.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pitchwife View Post
<--snip-->Does that answer any of your questions?<--snip-->
Thank you for the assistance "Earthfriend," breathed Pitchwife, "what will you do? (I'm going to from time to time resurrect that ole' thread of yours. It's gunna be one of those 'got new idea' once, that 'keep bouncing back to life'

It's very appreciated Pitchwife, ur response. I'll be back soon to (back-edit this one), as well. I've got to head out, but saw ur light on, and so quickly dropped in.

[PS]: I used to GM at Forum (about 2 years 'way back when' as GM (Game Master), not moderator. Hard going, without powers to curb, one had to invent on-post means. Thread started with my joining (by choice) the most unpopular group - the Half-Elven Foundation. We, over time, made it a 5000 post thread. As you can imagine - skirmishes and blowouts sometimes - but it was a vibrant busy place soon enough. I've always said it's 'coming back' that's best-est of all I'm going to update my sig, and put out a call to 'em. It was pre-Facebook/social media. We all lost each other when the Boards closed around 2005. I found one of them recently.[/PS]

@Mithadan (is this allowed here? or....how strict is the 'on-topic' standard? the 'ps' thing, and variations, was what some of ways we spoke at the Foundations.
Ivriniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2015, 05:26 PM   #134
Pitchwife
Wight of the Old Forest
 
Pitchwife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Unattended on the railway station, in the litter at the dancehall
Posts: 3,355
Pitchwife is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Pitchwife is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Pitchwife is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Pitchwife is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Pitchwife is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.
Let me return the compliments:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galadriel55
First of all, regardless of what motivated Bilbo to take the Arkenstone in the first place, I always had the feeling that after that moment of weakness he never really meant to keep it, he just didn't know how to come forwards about it
This! Haven't we all been in situations like that? I have, at least. You do something you know isn't the best of ideas and mean to put it right after a while, but the situation is never quite right for doing something about it and it gets worse the more you procrastinate. Giving the stone to Bard must have been a relief.

Quote:
Originally Posted by the same
in Bilbo's case the Ring is quite safe and happy. None of his plans appear to involve any harm (direct or indirect) being done to the Ring. If Bilbo had to give his ring to Bard and Thranduil rather than the Arkenstone - oh how the story might have gone differently. But he wasn't, so there isn't much reason for a burst of activity from the Ring.
This, I think, is also a good point. Of course the Ring would be working on Bilbo to corrupt him, but that would have been a slow and subtle process, slowed further by Bilbo's nature - which surely wasn't sterling but basically decent - and the mercy he had shown Gollum, so it wouldn't necessarily show any noticeable results in the short time span covered by The Hobbit.
__________________
Und aus dem Erebos kamen viele seelen herauf der abgeschiedenen toten.- Homer, Odyssey, Canto XI

Last edited by Pitchwife; 12-08-2015 at 05:28 PM. Reason: x-ed with Ivriniel
Pitchwife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2015, 05:57 PM   #135
Inziladun
Gruesome Spectre
 
Inziladun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Heaven's doorstep
Posts: 8,058
Inziladun is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Inziladun is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Inziladun is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Inziladun is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Inziladun is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.
Leaving aside the RL points about the Ring as conceptualized in The Hobbit vs. LOTR, can we look at another Ring-bearer to see if it seems to have pushed him to any treachery?

Frodo began his time as a Bearer after Sauron's power was greater than at the tine of the Battle of Five Armies, after the latter had returned to Mordor and openly declared himself.
Is there any indication on Frodo's part of him betraying his friends, or wanting to? Any suggestion of an usual greed that does not pertain to the Ring itself?
__________________
Music alone proves the existence of God.
Inziladun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2015, 07:11 PM   #136
Galadriel55
Blossom of Dwimordene
 
Galadriel55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: The realm of forgotten words
Posts: 10,299
Galadriel55 is lost in the dark paths of Moria.Galadriel55 is lost in the dark paths of Moria.Galadriel55 is lost in the dark paths of Moria.Galadriel55 is lost in the dark paths of Moria.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inziladun View Post
Leaving aside the RL points about the Ring as conceptualized in The Hobbit vs. LOTR, can we look at another Ring-bearer to see if it seems to have pushed him to any treachery?

Frodo began his time as a Bearer after Sauron's power was greater than at the tine of the Battle of Five Armies, after the latter had returned to Mordor and openly declared himself.
Is there any indication on Frodo's part of him betraying his friends, or wanting to? Any suggestion of an usual greed that does not pertain to the Ring itself?
I generally agree with that point, but just to play devil's advocate, there are a couple counter-points. Firstly, Frodo was aware of the effect the Ring can have on people, and was consciously resisting its pull. He was also among the stauncher people, willpower-wise, to inhabit Middle-earth. Therefore, he might be less susceptible to some of the less subtle influences of the Ring, as he can recognize them and suppress them.

Let's take a glance at yet another Ringbearer, who - like Bilbo - was unaware of the Ring's nature: Smeagol. Within seconds of seeing the thing, he kills his best friend to get hold of it. He then proceeds to sneak around, steal things, be generally nasty to those around him, ruin every relationship he ever had, and get kicked out of his family with shame. While killing Deagol is explained by the Ring evoking possessiveness, and getting chucked out is explained with the formidable grandmother, stealing and sneaking are the aspects of Gollum's behaviour I want to emphasize. He wasn't a model boy before the Ring either, but it seems that such a rapid downfall was augmented and sped up by the Ring's presence. Perhaps it was the power of invisibility, which Smeagol applied to crooked uses (and the new ability just enhanced what character was already present), but here I think the argument that the Ring corrupted Gollum seems just as compelling. Or rather, I should say that it looks like an even mix of the two. There is certainly a meanness in him to serve as the base, but the decline seems too rapid to be of Smeagol's doing alone, and some habits, like muttering or speaking in plural about oneself (really, referring to himself and the Ring) aren't explained by Gollum's initial personality.

So go figure.
__________________
You passed from under darkened dome, you enter now the secret land. - Take me to Finrod's fabled home!... ~ Finrod: The Rock Opera
Galadriel55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2015, 08:45 PM   #137
Inziladun
Gruesome Spectre
 
Inziladun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Heaven's doorstep
Posts: 8,058
Inziladun is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Inziladun is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Inziladun is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Inziladun is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Inziladun is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galadriel55 View Post
I generally agree with that point, but just to play devil's advocate, there are a couple counter-points. Firstly, Frodo was aware of the effect the Ring can have on people, and was consciously resisting its pull. He was also among the stauncher people, willpower-wise, to inhabit Middle-earth. Therefore, he might be less susceptible to some of the less subtle influences of the Ring, as he can recognize them and suppress them.
True enough. Yet, though the reader is given some insight into Frodo's thoughts after he obtained the Ring, there is no mention of his having to suppress the desire to to evil, or even ordinary meanness.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Galadriel55 View Post
While killing Deagol is explained by the Ring evoking possessiveness, and getting chucked out is explained with the formidable grandmother, stealing and sneaking are the aspects of Gollum's behaviour I want to emphasize. He wasn't a model boy before the Ring either, but it seems that such a rapid downfall was augmented and sped up by the Ring's presence. Perhaps it was the power of invisibility, which Smeagol applied to crooked uses (and the new ability just enhanced what character was already present), but here I think the argument that the Ring corrupted Gollum seems just as compelling. Or rather, I should say that it looks like an even mix of the two. There is certainly a meanness in him to serve as the base, but the decline seems too rapid to be of Smeagol's doing alone, and some habits, like muttering or speaking in plural about oneself (really, referring to himself and the Ring) aren't explained by Gollum's initial personality.
The Ring works with what's there in a particular person, sure. It enhanced Sméagol's mean, sneaking (I'm sure he'd been called 'sneak' many times before, explaining why he bristled so when Sam said it ) nature. We don't really know of the time frame involved in the transformation from Sméagol the Stoor into Gollum though, do we? It might not have been a terribly short time. A few years at least, maybe.

Bilbo lacked the 'basic materials' for which the Ring had an affinity, though. He was not a sneak or a thief by nature, and I think it unlikely the Ring influenced his decision to take the Arkenstone.
__________________
Music alone proves the existence of God.
Inziladun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2015, 09:02 PM   #138
Galadriel55
Blossom of Dwimordene
 
Galadriel55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: The realm of forgotten words
Posts: 10,299
Galadriel55 is lost in the dark paths of Moria.Galadriel55 is lost in the dark paths of Moria.Galadriel55 is lost in the dark paths of Moria.Galadriel55 is lost in the dark paths of Moria.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inziladun View Post
True enough. Yet, though the reader is given some insight into Frodo's thoughts after he obtained the Ring, there is no mention of his having to suppress the desire to to evil, or even ordinary meanness.

The Ring works with what's there in a particular person, sure. It enhanced Sméagol's mean, sneaking (I'm sure he'd been called 'sneak' many times before, explaining why he bristled so when Sam said it ) nature. We don't really know of the time frame involved in the transformation from Sméagol the Stoor into Gollum though, do we? It might not have been a terribly short time. A few years at least, maybe.

Bilbo lacked the 'basic materials' for which the Ring had an affinity, though. He was not a sneak or a thief by nature, and I think it unlikely the Ring influenced his decision to take the Arkenstone.
True enough, on all counts. And bottom line - Bilbo doesn't appear to become more sneaky or mean after years of possessing the Ring. It wouldn't make sense that there was so little effect later on if the Ring had a strong enough hold on him already in Erebor to prompt him to take the Arkenstone.
__________________
You passed from under darkened dome, you enter now the secret land. - Take me to Finrod's fabled home!... ~ Finrod: The Rock Opera
Galadriel55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2015, 01:20 AM   #139
Mithadan
Spirit of Mist
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Tol Eressea
Posts: 3,310
Mithadan is a guest at the Prancing Pony.Mithadan is a guest at the Prancing Pony.
Quote:
@Mithadan (is this allowed here? or....how strict is the 'on-topic' standard? the 'ps' thing, and variations, was what some of ways we spoke at the Foundations.
In the event that anyone is curious, staying "on topic" is encouraged but is more a goal than a requirement. Staying on topic means conducting discussions that, at least, loosely relate to the original point of the thread.

Given the gyrations this thread has taken, I wonder how many of the current posters on this thread have read the first post, which framed the "topic". One reason that we encourage staying on topic is to encourage discussion. If a thread goes in too many directions, it becomes hard to respond to and difficult to follow. A new issue that is too far afield from the topic being discussed should be raised as a new thread. This gives us more to talk about and improves the focus of the forum. There are altogether too few new threads being started right now and we encourage it.

So, a brief "ps" is ok occasionally but it should not be longer than the point being made in a post and if directed to a single member should be done in a pm.
__________________
Beleriand, Beleriand,
the borders of the Elven-land.
Mithadan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2015, 03:00 AM   #140
Ivriniel
Shade of Carn Dûm
 
Ivriniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 433
Ivriniel has just left Hobbiton.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mithadan View Post
In the event that anyone is curious, staying "on topic" is encouraged but is more a goal than a requirement. Staying on topic means conducting discussions that, at least, loosely relate to the original point of the thread.

Given the gyrations this thread has taken, I wonder how many of the current posters on this thread have read the first post, which framed the "topic". One reason that we encourage staying on topic is to encourage discussion. If a thread goes in too many directions, it becomes hard to respond to and difficult to follow. A new issue that is too far afield from the topic being discussed should be raised as a new thread. This gives us more to talk about and improves the focus of the forum. There are altogether too few new threads being started right now and we encourage it.

So, a brief "ps" is ok occasionally but it should not be longer than the point being made in a post and if directed to a single member should be done in a pm.
Thank you.

My LAST post, about further thoughts. I've taken enough of your time. Whatever you say about it all (if anything), I'll simply read, accept and move forwards.

I assume (please correct me if I'm off target), terms of manners (e.g. 'sorry', etc ie emoticons stuff) is okay. And also that 'thread cross linking?' (i.e. cross-discussion links), are okay. Some forum frown on it, for different reasons.

Please correct me on any of the following if needed. I'm not at all presuming the ideas are 'permitted'. However:

This topic here, I'm going to make 'home' (it's the one I used to 'land my spaceship). This thread (gut instinct) has about 10,000 X 10,000 X (1.1.1) posts of undiscovered, on topic features that are going to -- over time (you watch) -- come out, and add to this -- most extremely interesting topic, in the strangest of unforseen ways. It's the ring/Ring (why don't you give me a call - Abba - apologies just one stupid joke), with the Hobbit's --TEMPORAL-- facility in a DUAL context - twicely varied (once each for 'real time' - Tolkien-Tolkien - and once each Poster DUAL Time Each-Each and then - something else. Here's the best bit....this one is best discovered by each reader in turn. Because it belongs to everyone. So, I'll PM a trusted poster (cc'ing moderators - to prove the idea is real, and how it looked when it was inspired), soon. But hint:

A.... (the first letter of the idea. The rest I'm putting into notes, to handball soon.)

I'm assuming also it's okay -- across the Tale of the Years (Ages) (thread coming) to return to 'bump' it, upon inspiration. E.g. new posters arrive: it's not a welcome sticky. It's an ontopic compliant standard.

I do this.
"Hey, nice to meet you - hava look at >>The Tale of the Years <<.
Such a post (anywhere) then points to a particular thread. Or someone else please - set it up?

what I want to do, is ***wade*** through (over time) the Forum's extraordinary wealth of prior wisdom to assemble a URL list, with snippets or context thingies etc (it's not a sticky, and it's funner (but strictly on topic and Forum compliant) if it's (not) a sticky. Gives posters ideas about 'on topic synthesis tools as well).

There's a second way I do it. A Thread with an OnTopic, URL-list, plus discussion context of --'synthesis concepts--


e.g. in a

[PS]
Do you like Rings? We have several Meta-Ring themes thread here. Different threadkeepers.
Do you like Orcs? Try these. and
Do you have any ideas you like - post em as you like".[/PS]
So, it's a 'thread about threads' with an Opening Post for Content Standards - but broader than 'one topic at a time'.

Please let me know if these initiatives are too pushy. I'm happy to be guided. But, I'm hoping the concepts will add popularity to these most fantastic boards, but we (me and my long-term poster pals, now sadly lost in Time) found that posting rates skyrocketed.

And I'm missing Morthorond, and want him back. I hope he returns to this very thread - I need the battering at times. It sets me straight. He's an extraordinarily funny person, and I like him. I like a person, either of if he dislikes or likes me. Having posted over 150,000 geek posts over the last 15 years, I welcome absolutely anything anyone wants to say. I also have a feeling - a really good one: it's instinct Mithidan - that something very fruitful is coming of it. If he wants a public apology, I'm giving it here. If he doesn't want it, I'm not giving it here I really want to see the Canon arm of the Bilbo thread continue. I have developed a growing love of it! And - good god, I think I'm going to take the Tolkien subject next year (just one) at our State's major University - where it has been hosted - for decades.

And so...


Kind Regards

Last edited by Ivriniel; 12-09-2015 at 06:08 AM.
Ivriniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2015, 07:14 AM   #141
Galin
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,031
Galin is a guest at the Prancing Pony.Galin is a guest at the Prancing Pony.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pitchwife View Post
Once that was clear, the original version of TH Chapter 5, where Gollum was willing to give Bilbo the Ring, became, of course, untenable, because the Prof's conception of Gollum's character had changed and he realized that Gollum could never have given up his precious. So the original Ch. 5 was explained as being a cover-up by Bilbo. Only in the 1966 edition of TH, IIRC, was that chapter told as it was now, after the change, conceived to have really happened, with Gollum planning to murder Bilbo and "Thief! Baggins! We hates it forever!"
As I think I understand things, Tolkien drafted the revisions in 1944 and sent them to Allen and Unwin in 1947, and after a bit of a misunderstanding with the publishers, the revisions appeared in the Second Edition of 1951.

Of course later on the Ace Books controversy called for more tinkering in general, but I believe the new version of chapter five was already in place, again at least generally speaking.
Galin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2015, 03:00 PM   #142
Pitchwife
Wight of the Old Forest
 
Pitchwife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Unattended on the railway station, in the litter at the dancehall
Posts: 3,355
Pitchwife is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Pitchwife is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Pitchwife is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Pitchwife is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Pitchwife is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.
You're right as usual, Galin. Thanks for the correction!
__________________
Und aus dem Erebos kamen viele seelen herauf der abgeschiedenen toten.- Homer, Odyssey, Canto XI
Pitchwife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2015, 09:53 PM   #143
Leaf
Haunting Spirit
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 87
Leaf is a guest of Tom Bombadil.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galadriel55 View Post
Let's take a glance at yet another Ringbearer, who - like Bilbo - was unaware of the Ring's nature: Smeagol. Within seconds of seeing the thing, he kills his best friend to get hold of it. [...]While killing Deagol is explained by the Ring evoking possessiveness, and getting chucked out is explained with the formidable grandmother, stealing and sneaking are the aspects of Gollum's behaviour I want to emphasize. He wasn't a model boy before the Ring either, but it seems that such a rapid downfall was augmented and sped up by the Ring's presence. [...]
On a side note: I think it's a little more complicated. It's important to emphasize that Smeagol was willing to murder his friend and kindred spirit, Deagol, within the blink of an eye. And I don't think that you can explain this decision simply by the fact that the Ring is evoking possessiveness. Something alike to this never occurs again (and never occurred before) in the dealings of mortals with the Ring of Power!

Never again does the mere presence of the Ring incite a Person, in an instance, to kill the Ring's current owner, to get hold of it. None of Frodo's Hobbit friends instantly go berserk to take the Ring away from him. The council of Elrond doesn't end in a blood bath. Faramir is able to deny the power of the Ring with a sense of reason and prudence.

The obvious exception is, of course, Boromir. But even in this case it took months and a whole lot of good reason (i.e. Boromir's desire to save Gondor) to get him to the point, where he is willing to take the Ring with force, if necessary. But he didn't just kill him slyly and scooted off. Boromir knew about the power of the Ring and wanted to use it for his own agenda. He conciously decided that this was, given the dire circumstances, the right course of action. Smeagol, on the other hand, didn't knew anything. All he knew was that there was this pretty looking golden Ring, and that this was his birthday.

Coming back to the case of Smeagol and Deagol, it seems to me that there are two possibilities:

1. The Ring's power was, at the time of the incident, stronger than it was ever again afterwards.

2. Smeagol's character is distinguishable and profoundly different from that of the whole lot of other people who knew about the Ring and were around to take it.

Last edited by Leaf; 12-10-2015 at 10:03 PM.
Leaf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2015, 08:45 AM   #144
Inziladun
Gruesome Spectre
 
Inziladun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Heaven's doorstep
Posts: 8,058
Inziladun is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Inziladun is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Inziladun is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Inziladun is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Inziladun is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf View Post
Coming back to the case of Smeagol and Deagol, it seems to me that there are two possibilities:

1. The Ring's power was, at the time of the incident, stronger than it was ever again afterwards.
That was not the case. The Ring grew in power along with its maker, for one thing. It was more powerful after Sauron returned to Mordor and openly declared his return, and it continued to increase in potency as Sauron's strength rose.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf View Post
2. Smeagol's character is distinguishable and profoundly different from that of the whole lot of other people who knew about the Ring and were around to take it.
I think this is the key. Sméagol was a mean, sneaking sort from his birth. He had a head for mischief and secrecy
It was said of the Nazgûl that they had been conquered by their rings sooner or later, depending on their native willpower and character. The same would be true to a greater extent with the One.
Sméagol didn't resist the Ring because he lacked the desire to do so. It called to his lowest, deadliest wants, and he responded. Even had he possessed the awareness of Frodo and Sam of the Ring's potential, I doubt he could have been swayed from using the Ring.
__________________
Music alone proves the existence of God.
Inziladun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2015, 09:47 AM   #145
Pitchwife
Wight of the Old Forest
 
Pitchwife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Unattended on the railway station, in the litter at the dancehall
Posts: 3,355
Pitchwife is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Pitchwife is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Pitchwife is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Pitchwife is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Pitchwife is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.
Ring

Let's consider the situation. The Ring had at that time lain on the bottom of the Anduin since Isildur dropped it [insert precise length of time which I can't look up now, being 60 km away from my copy of LotR]. Sméagol and Déagol would be its first chance in many centuries at getting any closer to its maker. Even if it was at an all-time energy low I could imagine it mustering what little power it had in one all-out activity burst, a desperate attempt to get on the finger of a convenient and malleable bearer.

Also, we have a direct contest between two antagonists for possession of the Ring. We shouldn't, in my opinion, look to Boromir or the Council of Elrond for parallels, but consider Frodo's reaction when Bilbo just asks to touch the Ring in Rivendell, or when Sam offers to carry it for him. His first impulse (immediately suppressed and regretted, of course) is to strike, lash out, claim possession. Magnify this impulse enough, and you get Sméagol killing his friend.

But Frodo still killed neither Sam nor Bilbo, even though he had carried the Ring for months then, whereas Sméagol had only just seen it for the first time when he killed his friend. I therefore concur with Inzil that Sméagol's character is key. He had a long headstart in his decline into evil even before he took the Ring. If Boromir didn't just backstab Frodo when they quarrelled it was because even then he was a nobler man than Sméagol had ever been.

[I must, however, object to this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inzil
Sméagol was a mean, sneaking sort from his birth.
Nobody is mean, sneaking or anything of the like from their birth, and I would find such a statement atrocious if made IRL of a real person. Just saying.]
__________________
Und aus dem Erebos kamen viele seelen herauf der abgeschiedenen toten.- Homer, Odyssey, Canto XI
Pitchwife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2015, 10:09 AM   #146
Inziladun
Gruesome Spectre
 
Inziladun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Heaven's doorstep
Posts: 8,058
Inziladun is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Inziladun is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Inziladun is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Inziladun is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Inziladun is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pitchwife View Post
Nobody is mean, sneaking or anything of the like from their birth, and I would find such a statement atrocious if made IRL of a real person. Just saying.]
All right. From birth, perhaps not, at least not so strongly. Nevertheless, it's clear Sméagol was already ripe for the Ring's influence before he first saw it.

Tolkien noted in Letters # 181:

Quote:
The domination of the Ring was too much for the mean soul of Sméagol. But he would have never had to endure it if he had not become a mean sort of thief before it crossed his path.
He 'became' mean and mischievous. Why? Was it something to do with the environment, his personal life? I doubt it. Stoor society would seem to be very hobbit-like in general, and I cannot imagine any traumatic childhood or something similar that could have pushed him to being a ready tool for the Ring against his nature.
__________________
Music alone proves the existence of God.
Inziladun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2015, 10:30 AM   #147
Leaf
Haunting Spirit
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 87
Leaf is a guest of Tom Bombadil.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pitchwife View Post
[...]Also, we have a direct contest between two antagonists for possession of the Ring. We shouldn't, in my opinion, look to Boromir or the Council of Elrond for parallels, but consider Frodo's reaction when Bilbo just asks to touch the Ring in Rivendell, or when Sam offers to carry it for him. His first impulse (immediately suppressed and regretted, of course) is to strike, lash out, claim possession. Magnify this impulse enough, and you get Sméagol killing his friend.
Well, I disagree. I think it's very much appropriate to draw those comparisons. Just like the participants of the Council of Elrond, or Boromir, Sméagol never touched or used the Ring before. He was exposed to it for the first time and had no Idea what it was about. The circumstances of those different people are alike to one another and yet they act fundamentally different. The only reason that those other people are not "antagonists for the possession of the Ring" is that they either don't are tempted by the Ring, or don't act out (as violently) on that impulse.

The Frodo/Bilbo incident at Rivendell, on the other hand, is hardly comparable to the Sméagol/Déagol situation, in that sense. It's clearly a situation of rivalry between two long time Ring-bearers where both of them knew about the powers of the Ring. So the question remains, what was it that "magnified this impulse"?!

As we all seem to agree, the answer is most likely Sméagol's twisted character.

Here's a quote from Gandalf about Gollum:

Quote:
He was very pleased with his discovery and he concealed it; and he used it to find out secrets, and he put his knowledge to crooked and malicious uses. He became sharp-eyed and keen-eared for all that was hurtful. The Ring had given him power according to his stature.
It seems to me that the Ring didn't really corrupt Sméagol in a metaphysical/magical manner as much. It simply gave him the opportunity (and the power) to act out on his malicious desires in a very effective manner.


Although I find it important to say that this doesn't mean that the opposite constellation would be true: A good character obviously doesn't ensure a carefree contact to the Ring, nor does a good character enable an individual to use the Ring as tool for good means.

Last edited by Leaf; 12-11-2015 at 11:07 AM.
Leaf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2015, 02:06 PM   #148
Pitchwife
Wight of the Old Forest
 
Pitchwife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Unattended on the railway station, in the litter at the dancehall
Posts: 3,355
Pitchwife is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Pitchwife is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Pitchwife is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Pitchwife is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Pitchwife is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.
You're right to disagree with me, Leaf ; in my desire to stress the element of contest I neglected the element of first sight vs having been under the influence of the Ring for months.

Inzil, I'm not sure there is such a thing as a person's nature divorced of all environmental influences, but I won't belabour that point. I did, however, look up what Gandalf has to say about Sméagol's character before the finding of the Ring:
Quote:
Originally Posted by LotR Book One Ch. II, The Shadow of the Past
The most inquisitive and curious-minded of that family was called Sméagol. He was interested in roots and beginnings; he dived into deep pools; he burrowed under trees and growing plants; he tunnelled into green mounds; and he ceased to look up at the hill-tops, or the leaves on trees, or the flowers opening in the air; his head and his eyes were downward.
None of these interests of Sméagol's seem particulary evil to me - aren't tunnelling and burrowing pretty normal hobbitish activities? It is, of course, to be noted that he lost interest in the beauty of nature, which is never a good sign in Tolkien. But it's a long way from there to murdering his best friend over a ring, isn't it?

I'm not sure we should keep discussing this here (if at all), because, well, once upon a time this thread used to have a topic, but I think Leaf has hit on a question that is not as easy as it looks.
__________________
Und aus dem Erebos kamen viele seelen herauf der abgeschiedenen toten.- Homer, Odyssey, Canto XI
Pitchwife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2015, 12:23 PM   #149
Morthoron
Curmudgeonly Wordwraith
 
Morthoron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Ensconced in curmudgeonly pursuits
Posts: 2,528
Morthoron is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Morthoron is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Morthoron is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Morthoron is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Morthoron is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivriniel View Post
This is inaccurate actually.
No, it is quite accurate, actually.

I had stated that I wouldn't post on this thread further, but the following bit of insouciant peregrination into the outlandish misses the 'crux of the biscuit' (if I may quote the learned sage F. Vincent Zappa). I have been annoyed about it the entire time, and only now have found time to rebut it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivriniel View Post
*I do not refer to the works as a synthesis, per se. The term, although adaptable as you've used it, I divert from. Because, (and I know you can't start a sentence with 'because' ordinarily, I'm relaxing language boundaries, for having written 20,000 words a week for the last 20 years, and so, I like mangling language up a bit) synthesis as you've used the term, implies -- perhaps -- conscious attendance to the theological, anthropological and other aspects of our modern world.

He was not a theologian, nor an anthropologist, nor was the professorial title for those.

He was a linguist or English master or etymologist, primarily. As such, if there is a 'synthesis', I would suggest it was 'implicit' or not-grounded in the level of mastery of vocabulary attendant to Professorial status for anthropology, and theology. He fervently denies allegorical reference in his works, as I'm hoping everyone knows. This supposition has been hotly debated, over the decades. It so then seems to me that aggrandising a Loremaster such as the prof on terms applied, Morthoron, {although he was Christian and did, indeed, 'synthesise' tacitly from theology} is a beguiling argumentative style, adapting vocabulary for its own sake and extending boundaries of inference past a reasonable point.
I flatly reject your assertion that Tolkien should be limited to being simply a tinker of words, merely a linguist without the philological and philosophical underpinnings to create a theological and anthropological matrix in his subcreative world (or better, a synthesis).

He owned at certain periods the titles of Rawlinson and Bosworth Professor of Anglo-Saxon and Merton Professor of English Language and Literature at Oxford. If we were to simply stop there and ignore his life and studies in context, then perhaps there would be a foundation for his being just a wordsmith. Obviously, his first job was on the staff of the Oxford English Dictionary and his superb lexicographic skills were noted by his senior editors. That Tolkien never used a word that wasn't etymologically apt in its placement (for instance, eschewing words of French derivation when dealing with Anglo-Saxon material in his work) cannot be understated...or marveled at for the length and breadth of their consistency -- even in the dogged insistence of editing out words that weren't proper in context or were anachronistic in their placement.

However, when one makes the baldly absurd statement that because Tolkien had a professorial title to one thing, it precluded a master's knowledge in another thing, it must be pointed out and given a derisive chortle. I emphasized the statement previously, but let me print it again:

He was not a theologian, nor an anthropologist, nor was the professorial title for those.

I would suggest, for instance, that Tolkien's expertise and study of theology would embarrass most degreed theologians (as if having the doctorate title makes one eminent). Tolkien is an internationally recognized Christian and Catholic scholar and one of the most profound Christian thinkers of the 20th century.

Here is a man with an intimate knowledge of Boethius' Consolation of Philosophy and who could read and interpret it in the original Late Latin (just as he read and interpreted Anglo-Saxon Christian poems and Middle-English Christian allegories in their original tongue - name some theologians who can do that), and who used Boethian concepts in his works (see Shippey for further information), as well as integrating Neoplatonic, Augustinian and, it can be argued, even applying syncretistic concepts like Manicheism and paganistic themes (from Norse and Greek myth and the fatalistic Kalevala) in his philosophical stew (again, a synthesizer of the highest magnitude).

This interpolation and synthesis of seemingly contradictory theological precepts was brilliantly illuminated by Tolkien in his landmark lecture "Beowulf: The Monsters and the Critics" (revered by critics as one of the most important pieces on the poem), wherein he embraced the marriage of Northern pagan virtues and Christian theology in Beowulf as invigorating of spirit, and which acted as a template for his integration of pagan and Christian motifs that built the cosmology and mythos of Middle-earth. And one can easily see Beowulf in the Elves suffering the "long defeat" with stoic bravery against incalculable odds, in that fate and doom play their parts as does the Christian inevitability of mortality as Tolkien states, "the wages of heroism is death".

And what did you think the Inklings talked about during their meetings, the score of the latest Lord's Cambridge v. Oxford cricket match? No, here we have a cadre of Christian thinkers unmatched for its time: C.S. Lewis the great Christian apologist (who, of course, was converted by Tolkien himself -- how do you think Tolkien had the ability to turn such a great mind as Lewis, if not for theological acumen?); Owen Barfield the anthroposophist; the theologian and writer Charles Williams; and Adam Fox, Dean of Divinity at Magdalen College, Oxford. Not only did Tolkien fit in here from just a literary standpoint, I would state his theological expertise warranted the inclusion.

I would continue, but my daughter reminds me we have Christmas shopping to do. I may or may not follow up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivriniel View Post
*u spelt spectER wrong, wait, so did I
No, I did not. As an American, the spelling is indeed s-p-e-c-t-e-r. The British spelling is spectre. I also do not spell theater as t-h-e-a-t-r-e, or aluminum as a-l-u-m-i-n-i-u-m.
__________________
And your little sister's immaculate virginity wings away on the bony shoulders of a young horse named George who stole surreptitiously into her geography revision.

Last edited by Morthoron; 12-12-2015 at 12:44 PM.
Morthoron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2015, 09:42 PM   #150
Ivriniel
Shade of Carn Dûm
 
Ivriniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 433
Ivriniel has just left Hobbiton.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morthoron View Post
No, it is quite accurate, actually.

I had stated that I wouldn't post on this thread further, but the following bit of insouciant peregrination into the outlandish misses the 'crux of the biscuit' (if I may quote the learned sage F. Vincent Zappa). I have been annoyed about it the entire time, and only now have found time to rebut it.



I flatly reject your assertion that Tolkien should be limited to being simply a tinker of words, merely a linguist without the philological and philosophical underpinnings to create a theological and anthropological matrix in his subcreative world (or better, a synthesis).

He owned at certain periods the titles of Rawlinson and Bosworth Professor of Anglo-Saxon and Merton Professor of English Language and Literature at Oxford. If we were to simply stop there and ignore his life and studies in context, then perhaps there would be a foundation for his being just a wordsmith. Obviously, his first job was on the staff of the Oxford English Dictionary and his superb lexicographic skills were noted by his senior editors. That Tolkien never used a word that wasn't etymologically apt in its placement (for instance, eschewing words of French derivation when dealing with Anglo-Saxon material in his work) cannot be understated...or marveled at for the length and breadth of their consistency -- even in the dogged insistence of editing out words that weren't proper in context or were anachronistic in their placement.

However, when one makes the baldly absurd statement that because Tolkien had a professorial title to one thing, it precluded a master's knowledge in another thing, it must be pointed out and given a derisive chortle. I emphasized the statement previously, but let me print it again:

He was not a theologian, nor an anthropologist, nor was the professorial title for those.

I would suggest, for instance, that Tolkien's expertise and study of theology would embarrass most degreed theologians (as if having the doctorate title makes one eminent). Tolkien is an internationally recognized Christian and Catholic scholar and one of the most profound Christian thinkers of the 20th century.

Here is a man with an intimate knowledge of Boethius' Consolation of Philosophy and who could read and interpret it in the original Late Latin (just as he read and interpreted Anglo-Saxon Christian poems and Middle-English Christian allegories in their original tongue - name some theologians who can do that), and who used Boethian concepts in his works (see Shippey for further information), as well as integrating Neoplatonic, Augustinian and, it can be argued, even applying syncretistic concepts like Manicheism and paganistic themes (from Norse and Greek myth and the fatalistic Kalevala) in his philosophical stew (again, a synthesizer of the highest magnitude).

This interpolation and synthesis of seemingly contradictory theological precepts was brilliantly illuminated by Tolkien in his landmark lecture "Beowulf: The Monsters and the Critics" (revered by critics as one of the most important pieces on the poem), wherein he embraced the marriage of Northern pagan virtues and Christian theology in Beowulf as invigorating of spirit, and which acted as a template for his integration of pagan and Christian motifs that built the cosmology and mythos of Middle-earth. And one can easily see Beowulf in the Elves suffering the "long defeat" with stoic bravery against incalculable odds, in that fate and doom play their parts as does the Christian inevitability of mortality as Tolkien states, "the wages of heroism is death".

And what did you think the Inklings talked about during their meetings, the score of the latest Lord's Cambridge v. Oxford cricket match? No, here we have a cadre of Christian thinkers unmatched for its time: C.S. Lewis the great Christian apologist (who, of course, was converted by Tolkien himself -- how do you think Tolkien had the ability to turn such a great mind as Lewis, if not for theological acumen?); Owen Barfield the anthroposophist; the theologian and writer Charles Williams; and Adam Fox, Dean of Divinity at Magdalen College, Oxford. Not only did Tolkien fit in here from just a literary standpoint, I would state his theological expertise warranted the inclusion.

I would continue, but my daughter reminds me we have Christmas shopping to do. I may or may not follow up.



No, I did not. As an American, the spelling is indeed s-p-e-c-t-e-r. The British spelling is spectre. I also do not spell theater as t-h-e-a-t-r-e, or aluminum as a-l-u-m-i-n-i-u-m.
It is great to see you back Morth! I just logged in, before I head out to my family's home for Xmas soon.

I'll be back to respond to your -- delicious..gol..ious message. I hope you've been well and merry xmas to you. See you soon.


[edit]I'm laughing uncontrollably again - as I read your most excellent materials!!!! Especially the first few sentences[/edit]
__________________
A call to my lost pals. Dine, Orcy_The_Green_Wonder, Droga, Lady Rolindin. Gellion, Thasis, Tenzhi. I was Silmarien Aldalome. Candlekeep. WotC. Can anyone help?

Last edited by Ivriniel; 12-24-2015 at 09:46 PM.
Ivriniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2015, 06:32 AM   #151
Ivriniel
Shade of Carn Dûm
 
Ivriniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 433
Ivriniel has just left Hobbiton.
@Mor_thoron,

I'm not sure that 'insouciant peregrination' of Frank Zappa's needlecraft in migrating Silmarils best captures Tolkien's degree of religious expertise in his impregnations of his mythology with, perturbingly -divisible- spectral ordinations strewn throughout the cosmology. I would rather instead, compare......Buck's Fizz.....to Abba rather than ....Frank Zappa to ......needlecraft of Balrogs.

For example, theological or anthropological analysis of the last 2000 years doesn't explain how the Arkenstone became (causation direction deliberate) a Silmaril.

As you said Morth, "concision, Ivriniel is not thy name" which of course elicits regular laughter and is becoming a staple in my friendship circles. Everyone who knows me knows I gave all my educators 'headaches' due to breaches of word lengths....

So, I would concede that the professor was etymologically advanced, linguistically gifted, and certainly a wordsmith, and theologically--oriented, and anthropologically - somewhat - oriented. It would be impossible to be otherwise inclined after decades of exposure to the academic environment.

Yet, in my lack of concision....and woolly....felicitations? or semi-abstract, denominations, um or erm, what I mean is, florid vocabulary in incisively precise linguistic focus (wait, the sentence is really not making sense )deters us from the fulcrum or reasoned woman's positioning of Tolkien's denominational abstractions. In sum, he was Christian, and wrote with Christian emphases, not really more. There are no real elucidations in his mythology of the diverse spectrum of liturgical positions taken by theologians about religiosity. Nor was there really anything more than mundane meanderings in any spiritual derivations he presented. I saw no exegeses, nor any of the tools of methodological -- precision -- permitted to theologians of advanced academic heritage.

Bilbo's Migrating Personality Over the Course of the Hobbit

Invisibility in the social contract of the Anglo Saxon social mind is anathema to honesty. Eave's dropping, voyeurism and in our modern world -- spy cams -- undeclared evoke spectREs of serious violation of the social contract and are prosecutable offences.

This basic facility of the civilised mind--where affectations of vanity and god complexes are not the guiding premises of interactions--is the grounding of what has and should be the defining feature of any ring or Ring or trinket imbuing invisibility. The perspective-taking task that elicits the -- vanity -- implicit or hidden in the seduction of the reader into accepting the ring as benevolent requires us to simply imagine having a friend who we discovered had 'visited the home' with their ring on, or 'been in the background' whilst having a private conversation, or worse -- stalked -- us unbeknownst to us.

I recall at my first read of the Hobbit (Ed, version year 3255, AD, ie the 'one handy', which has a lovely picture on the cover of Tolkien's Esgaroth/Barrels and Bilbo afloat) initially having a raised eyebrow at the stealth, creepily, secrecy of Bilbo and the -- obvious -- extended delay of his confession to his apparent 'close pals' of some months.

This serious lapse in morality would not have been lost on the professor, whose life in the University system would have been vexed by 'Romulan' stealth and Tal Shiar Machiavellianism. As a staunch Christian, the notion of an invisible stealthy creature creeping around his Parish would have been of course another serious and obvious moral violation of the then Anglo Saxon social 'contract'. His literary mastery and methodological tools of analysis and an English Professor, no doubt would have been preternatural preoccupations enabling him to fathom conceit, vanity, and deviation of moral fortitude in Bilbo's -- growing -- tendency to -- rationalise, minimise, justify and validate really very dubious moral escapades by the time the Battle of the Five Armies ensued.

Here this analytical premise is supported by explicit concepts apparent in the prose. For example, during Bilbo's longest period wearing the ring in Thranduil's halls, the text reads that "for something to do, he took to wandering the Elvenking's palace". I see - 'for something to do', I know, I'll 'put on my ring and head down town to, um, lets see, the Department of Justice, or um, perhaps the presidential suits, and roam around, while the various senators ready themselves for work in the morning, perhaps during their ablutions or vacating bowels, and, I know, 'just listen in' to any of the equivalent to the "Elven King's" counsels, such as a President or Prime Minister's morning chats to his family and romantic partner. Of course, no one will blink an eye when Mr Bilbo Baggins pops off his ring (or Ring) to decry 'good morning, hope this doesn't startle'. By the way, did you hear, Albatross migratory patterns now included provision for heat resistant feathers, which permit subterranean flights through lava conduits!

Then there's this "Eventually after a week or two of this sneaking sort of life" and he was "....lurking there...", in his lazily attenuated new life, where "listening to Elven guards" without their knowing, was not a bother to his conscience at all!

There goes Mr 'Moral fortitude' traipsing about in Elven Halls, thenCe off he goes, and grabs the Arkenstone (weeks ahead of the presence of the Elves and Bard, and God only knows what other stealthy, disturbingly cunning plots Mr 'Clean living Baggins' was keeping in store!

The competing......thesis....(hahahaha, okay, I'm overdoing lack of ......concision, Ivriniel (*points to Morth* hahaha) erm, um, theory, is that the author seduced the reader into minimising the gravity of the impact of the little old, small r, ring upon an owner's moral -- DECAY. It has to be inevitable that invisibility has these impacts.

"Bilbo,of course, disapproved of the whole turnoff affairs. He had by now had more than enough of the mountains, and being besieged inside was not at all to his taste"

And there you have it. The so called 'bonding of love' of Bilbo in ardour and valour of a year or so, reduced to trite boredom and he was done with the stench of dragon, bored of cram, and little bothered at all to -- hog -- the Arkenstone, rather than feasibly do a manly (Hobbit version) thing and confront openly before the world what his reason, haste, task and mission was, as he then popped on his ring (still this is creepy I read, but a little better).

Bottom line. Ungoliant ate the Silmaril morth. As I said, it's hidden in the subext. Beren didn't find it, at all, and there were only two at the end of the First Age hahahaha.

Ie. it's a fun - analysis - Devil's advocate, and yet holds some grounds. I could at this point extend the analysis into a precursor for a -- thesis -- likening for example, the features of boredom, lack of bonding, and amorality of sociopathy and its impetus to make people do rather seriously bad behaviour, like 'steal a prised jewel - such as Queen Elizabeth's Sceptre" by stealth, "because Bilbo was bored and over the Dwarves". Ie, Biblo dons his ring (it's almost a Ring by this point) and stalks the British monarch's (liken this to 'Elven King's halls) halls until he gets his moment and then runs off with the crown jewels.

How beguiled have you been that this post, several hundred in and these juxtapositions it took to highlight Mr Not-So-Innocent-Baggins growing attachment to stealth by invisibility. At the start of the narrative, to term him a 'Burglar' was antithetical to the reader's ideas about morality, but so numbed are we by the Battle of the Five armies that stealth, stealing, invisible marauding of the Dwarves by the evil Bilbo is not even noticed!

I do indeed see the spectRe of sociopathy as a pall falling upon Bilbo's character by the end of the Hobbit.
__________________
A call to my lost pals. Dine, Orcy_The_Green_Wonder, Droga, Lady Rolindin. Gellion, Thasis, Tenzhi. I was Silmarien Aldalome. Candlekeep. WotC. Can anyone help?

Last edited by Ivriniel; 12-25-2015 at 07:14 AM.
Ivriniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2016, 03:12 PM   #152
Boromir88
Laconic Loreman
 
Boromir88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 7,559
Boromir88 is wading through the Dead Marshes.Boromir88 is wading through the Dead Marshes.Boromir88 is wading through the Dead Marshes.Boromir88 is wading through the Dead Marshes.Boromir88 is wading through the Dead Marshes.Boromir88 is wading through the Dead Marshes.
Send a message via AIM to Boromir88 Send a message via MSN to Boromir88
I don't think Bilbo's motivations to take the Arkenstone and sneak it out to Bard was driven by the Ring. The Ring works by delusions of supreme power, by possessing it and using it. Boromir wants to take the Ring and use it to command armies against Sauron. Sam's temptation is to use it's power against Sauron and grow an extravagant garden in Mordor. Gollum's temptation is to keep it for himself and dine on the finest fish forever. The Ring works by tempting the bearer with a delusion of "claim ownership of me, you can overthrow Sauron and use me to achieve your heart's desires."

Conceptually, the ring in The Hobbit isn't the One Ring in The Lord of the Rings. But even if it was Bilbo's actions to take the Arkenstone were not driven by The Ring. The Ring would not be tempting Bilbo to use the Arkenstone to achieve his desires of reconciliation. It would be tempting Bilbo to use the Ring itself, as the means to achieve his goal. That's how the Ring works to gain a grip on it's bearer.

The original topic has certainly been interesting to ponder...and drag this wight out of his barrow . I haven't read The Hobbit in quite awhile, but it seems to me Bilbo felt forced to take drastic and, in the very least questionable, action in an attempt to be a peacemaker. The result doesn't go as Bilbo planned, but the result doesn't change his intentions. Something you can see in Tolkien is good intentions may lead to unintentional consequences, just as evil intentions may lead to an unexpected positive result. Whatever side you come down on, if you think Bilbo's sneaking and concealing the truth was morally questionable/treacherous (or that he had a legal claim and intentions to bring peace), he's later absolved by Gandalf and then by the person he committed the offense against, Thorin.

Bilbo is by no means perfect, this reminds me of how he concealed the true story of how he got the Ring for many years. However, Bilbo concealing the full truth is so very minor, it's silly to condemn him, or act as if he's committed some great injustice. When confronted with the fact Bilbo hasn't been completely honest, he comes clean, and that's more telling of Bilbo's character than trying to conceal the truth because he's too embarrassed at the time.
__________________
Fenris Penguin
Boromir88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2016, 09:59 PM   #153
Ivriniel
Shade of Carn Dûm
 
Ivriniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 433
Ivriniel has just left Hobbiton.
I'm not exactly sure we get an exact definition of 'what' the Ring does to character and what character traits are varied. I understood that appeals to domination and control were a part of the transition. I see appeals to greed, themes of seduction, to self-serving behaviour, and also lust of sadism implicit in the transition. I'd add increased tendency for objectification, and for callous lack of empathy. If I had to draw on modern day conceptions, I'd be looking at psychopathy/sociopathy for assistance to clarify how the Ring exerted influence.

The explicit themes in the Hobbit did highlight Bilbo's philanthropic/benevolent motivations (war stopping). There are difficulties with that. There are several tacit themes in the book that don't square with the explicit prose. One is the delay Bilbo had in declaring he had the Arkenstone. A number of weeks prior to the arrival of the Elven armies was involved. His delay at telling his comrades about the Ring a second. His habituation/attenuation to long-term use of the Ring a third (which was amoral. He ceased caring that he was an unwanted spy and became duly self-focussed in his motivations). His delivery of the Arkenstone to Bard and the Elven King was also just weird. The explicit prose states that he had no coveting of the stone and was pleased to be relieved of it. But, the problem with the behaviour was lack of affect and attachment to his Dwarf pals after the betrayal.

Having just re-read this part of the book, it sits really strangely with me. There's something missing in the explicit narrative about 'how you'd feel' about being with Bilbo after what we know about him to that point.
__________________
A call to my lost pals. Dine, Orcy_The_Green_Wonder, Droga, Lady Rolindin. Gellion, Thasis, Tenzhi. I was Silmarien Aldalome. Candlekeep. WotC. Can anyone help?
Ivriniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2016, 10:36 AM   #154
Inziladun
Gruesome Spectre
 
Inziladun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Heaven's doorstep
Posts: 8,058
Inziladun is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Inziladun is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Inziladun is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Inziladun is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.Inziladun is a guest of Galadriel in Lothlórien.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivriniel View Post
I'm not exactly sure we get an exact definition of 'what' the Ring does to character and what character traits are varied. I understood that appeals to domination and control were a part of the transition. I see appeals to greed, themes of seduction, to self-serving behaviour, and also lust of sadism implicit in the transition. I'd add increased tendency for objectification, and for callous lack of empathy. If I had to draw on modern day conceptions, I'd be looking at psychopathy/sociopathy for assistance to clarify how the Ring exerted influence.
What the Ring offered its possessor was power, whatever the individual felt he needed such power for was really unimportant.

Isildur was a king with the attendant desire for strength to rule his realm and secure it; Gollum wanted to be able to sneak around and spy on others; Bilbo wanted the Ring's invisibility effect to aid him as the 'burglar', though he had also come to enjoy the power itself, feeling pride when it hid him from Smaug, and so forth.

The Ring called to the chink in one's armor which was one's greatest want, and it offered the power to effect it. Gandalf said the Ring would weigh on his innate feelings of pity and the desire to do good to corrupt him.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivriniel View Post
There are several tacit themes in the book that don't square with the explicit prose. One is the delay Bilbo had in declaring he had the Arkenstone. A number of weeks prior to the arrival of the Elven armies was involved.
After Bilbo took the stone, the more time passed, the more difficult telling anyone he had it became. I can relate to that myself. The longer you keep some unpleasant secret, it gets harder and harder to let it go.
Also, he may have had some inkling that it would be useful in some way unrelated to him, whether that was a conscious thought or not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivriniel View Post
His delay at telling his comrades about the Ring a second. His habituation/attenuation to long-term use of the Ring a third (which was amoral. He ceased caring that he was an unwanted spy and became duly self-focussed in his motivations). His delivery of the Arkenstone to Bard and the Elven King was also just weird. The explicit prose states that he had no coveting of the stone and was pleased to be relieved of it. But, the problem with the behaviour was lack of affect and attachment to his Dwarf pals after the betrayal.
The Ring certainly could have been a factor in Bilbo's keeping it a secret so long. But he also was proud to have shown he wasn't as useless as some of the Dwarves seem to have thought, by the way he made it past Balin with appeared to be clever 'burglar' professional technique.

As for his 'betrayal' of the Dwarves after giving up the stone, he could hardly have stayed with them when Thorin had made it pretty clear he wasn't welcome anymore. Being picked up and threatened with being thrown to one's death wouldn't exactly make one want to stay with the person making the threat.
__________________
Music alone proves the existence of God.
Inziladun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2016, 04:46 PM   #155
William Cloud Hicklin
Loremaster of Annúminas
 
William Cloud Hicklin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,299
William Cloud Hicklin is battling Black Riders on Weathertop.William Cloud Hicklin is battling Black Riders on Weathertop.William Cloud Hicklin is battling Black Riders on Weathertop.
Bilbo sees and is drwn to the Arkenstone just a paragraph after Tolkien describes not only his 'bedazlement' at the hoard, but allure of Dragon-gold; I think he pocketed it primarily because even our stolid Hobbit got a touch of the dragon-sickness, nothing more.

Certainly Tolkien in 1930 or so wasn't thinking of the malign influence of the One Ring!
__________________
The entire plot of The Lord of the Rings could be said to turn on what Sauron didn’t know, and when he didn’t know it.
William Cloud Hicklin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2016, 04:50 PM   #156
William Cloud Hicklin
Loremaster of Annúminas
 
William Cloud Hicklin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,299
William Cloud Hicklin is battling Black Riders on Weathertop.William Cloud Hicklin is battling Black Riders on Weathertop.William Cloud Hicklin is battling Black Riders on Weathertop.
Bilbo sees and is drwn to the Arkenstone just a paragraph after Tolkien describes not only his 'bedazzlement' at the hoard, but allure of Dragon-gold; I think he pocketed it primarily because even our stolid Hobbit got a touch of the dragon-sickness, nothing more.

Certainly Tolkien in 1930 or so wasn't thinking of the malign influence of the One Ring!
__________________
The entire plot of The Lord of the Rings could be said to turn on what Sauron didn’t know, and when he didn’t know it.
William Cloud Hicklin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2016, 08:09 AM   #157
Faramir Jones
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
 
Faramir Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Lonely Isle
Posts: 706
Faramir Jones is a guest at the Prancing Pony.Faramir Jones is a guest at the Prancing Pony.
Silmaril Bilbo, the Ring and the Arkenstone

I've been interested in the recent comments about whether the Ring induced Bilbo to take the Arkenstone and give it to Bard and the Elvenking. I think it quite unlikely; because Gandalf did not mention it in his later conversation with Frodo about the Ring and Bilbo.

When that happened, Gandalf discussed the Ring's influence on Bilbo in terms of the latter not telling the truth about how he got it, i.e. his initial explanation was that Gollum gave it to him due to the former having lost the riddle-game, and him later behaving like Gollum, saying that the ring was his 'precious'.

Nowhere did Gandalf refer to Bilbo taking the Arkenstone as an example of the Ring's influence. As I have mentioned before, Bilbo had an arguable case that the stone was the fourteenth share of the hoard he had been promised by Thorin and Company, and that he was entitled to pick and chose his own fourteenth, which he had done, giving the stone to others.
Faramir Jones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2016, 04:31 PM   #158
Ivriniel
Shade of Carn Dûm
 
Ivriniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 433
Ivriniel has just left Hobbiton.
Hi Boromirs, Farmir, and Inziladun.

@reader

I've been clear to delineate between the explicit prose and the implicit indications in the aspects of text that are discordant. Three factors have been lifted to highlight the problem (the difficulties are not so much with the explicit prose). The factors, instead, of weight to note are:

1. the delay between Bilbo finding the Arkenstone and declaring this to his 'brothers', with several weeks being involved, and prior to the arrival of the Elven King.
2. the delay between Bilbo finding the ring and his uses of it, before his comrades discovered his stealth, secrecy and lurking.
3. the moral decay implied by Bilbo's attenuation to the use of the Ring, and I've cited actual quotes from the book. Several weeks of invisible stealth in the Elven King's halls, and Bilbo's attenuation to this. I liken this to imagining you had the Ring and were skulking around your friends' homes and got caught.

I argue that we are seduced by the author into an amoral alliance with Bilbo over the course of the book. I remember at my first reading of the book feeling like needing to wash then erasing this, then resuming the irky feeling at reading LotR (Shadow of the Past).

There are other indications of implicit variance (not explicit) from the narrative. Bilbo's reaction (or lack of it) and being governed by boredom in the final hours before leaving the mountain is one. Having re-read how he was received by Bard and the Elven King, recently - there was also something really wrong it. The author, again, seduces us into 'buying' the way the story was presented.
__________________
A call to my lost pals. Dine, Orcy_The_Green_Wonder, Droga, Lady Rolindin. Gellion, Thasis, Tenzhi. I was Silmarien Aldalome. Candlekeep. WotC. Can anyone help?
Ivriniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2016, 06:39 PM   #159
William Cloud Hicklin
Loremaster of Annúminas
 
William Cloud Hicklin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,299
William Cloud Hicklin is battling Black Riders on Weathertop.William Cloud Hicklin is battling Black Riders on Weathertop.William Cloud Hicklin is battling Black Riders on Weathertop.
Ivriniel, your argument might have more force had Tolkien in any way revised that section of The Hobbit during or after the writing of The Lord of the Rings, as he did with Chapter 5, but he didn't. We're supposed to assume, what, that Tolkien unconsciously was writing a description of the Ring's influence on Bilbo years before he "discovered" that the Ring had any influence at all?
__________________
The entire plot of The Lord of the Rings could be said to turn on what Sauron didn’t know, and when he didn’t know it.
William Cloud Hicklin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2016, 09:51 PM   #160
Ivriniel
Shade of Carn Dûm
 
Ivriniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 433
Ivriniel has just left Hobbiton.
I'd rather steer away from 'forcing' the reader and instead enjoy some unorthodox positioning of arguments.

So - the points about dates of authorship are well and truly attended to in materials upstream (I'll re-post the summary URL and highlight the post where I address the idem about dates of authorship.

Yes, the dreaded chapter 5 was the revised text, which is the point about back-editing the Hobbit after LotR was begun (but recall, Tolkien also had a first draft of LotR going in the Fellowship for Unwin and Allen to read, that retained the original Hobbit unedited).

However, in accordance with what Tolkien actually did to himself with his own works, my arguments do much the same. Why is it allowable for the author to vary interpretation of his very own text (as he certainly did in the prelude of the 19 sixty something edition), and yet others may not.

Of course, Tolkien has interpreted the very same text in two streams of meaning, pre and post Hobbit revisions.

So - I am not arguing that which has been posited. I have a distinct position.

Kind Regards

Edit: with regards to my use of the term '...interpreted...' I refer to text outside of chapter IV.
__________________
A call to my lost pals. Dine, Orcy_The_Green_Wonder, Droga, Lady Rolindin. Gellion, Thasis, Tenzhi. I was Silmarien Aldalome. Candlekeep. WotC. Can anyone help?

Last edited by Ivriniel; 01-14-2016 at 10:15 PM.
Ivriniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:41 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.