The Lord of the Rings discussion: Foreword and Prologue

[Valandil]

Originally posted by azalea
Didn't I just say that? Tee-hee!

Well... you two WERE cross-posting! His post is stamped one minute later than yours.

[azalea]

I know, I was just teasing him.

Maybe I wasn't just grasping at straws -- two other poeple had the same thought about it as me.

I disagree about the Prologue. It may bore some people, but I think it should be read. It's better to skip it rather than stop reading LotR altogether, but I read all forewords and prologues no matter how dull. It's a thing with me. I also have to read all afterwords, too. I fugure, if it's included in the book, there must be a reason, and by gum, it must be read! I force it upon myself. I also insist on reading the unabridged versions of everything, and (of topic) I like to brag about how I read the unabridged of Les Miserable, which had some parts that really dragged. But doing so feels like an accomplishment, a battle won -- I lead a dull life, as you can tell.

[brownjenkins]

i know the feeling azalea... i even go so far as reading title pages, reviews and the back cover synopsis... i think i must have some subconcious fear that i will miss something terribly important

[azalea]

Same here -- and oh, I'm a HUGE title page fan! I love to read all the copyright info, etc. Glad to know I'm not alone!

[cassiopeia]

I love reading the title page too; I always want to know when the book was written. I like to read the dictionary as well. And thesaurus.

I should say something OT. I agree, that when Tolkien talks about the LOTR, WWII and allegory, he means that if the LOTR was an allegory of WWII, he would have written it so the Ring was used against Sauron, Sauron would have been enslaved and so on.

I would tell people, if they haven't read the Hobbit, to skip the prologue. We at Entmoot may love it, but I can understand it can be boring if you have no idea what Tolkien's talking about.

My favourite part of the prologue is the discussions about hobbits. It's interesting how there are different strains of hobbits. Merry, Frodo and Pippin have a strong Fallohidish strain, but I wonder what strain Sam is? I would guess he has a strong Harfoot strain, because he has brown hands, and Harfoots are 'browner of skin'. I don't think he would be a Stoor, because he is afraid of water (Stoors being the only hobbits to know a bit about boating, fishing and swimming.) Perhaps Frodo has some Stoor blood as well, since his parents died out boating.

[azalea]

I think the Brandybucks liked the water (or were less afraid of it from living on the river and/or because they were Stoorish), and Frodo's mom was a Brandybuck. Maybe it was Drogo who just didn't have the right boating skills, and sadly caused their demise.

I think I did skip the Appendices the very first time, but I can't remember that far back, but I'm sure I at least read the Prologue. I think I'd still tell people to read Concerning Hobbits and Of the Finding of the Ring if they hadn't read The H., because it gives pertinent info that they wouldn't otherwise know. If they had read The Hobbit, they should want to read it, but it wouldn't be necessary. They'd probably want to go back and read it afterwards, anyway.

[Nurvingiel]

Sam has brown hands because he works outside a lot. Maybe that's a Harfoot characteristic as well - being skilled at gardening and forestry. Sometimes I think Sam gets left out a bit because he's not a gentlehobbit. I don't really understand the class aspect though - apart from money, there doesn't seem to be any different between gentlehobbits and non.

As you may have noticed, I don't have a lot to contribute to this part of the discussion. I just don't think about Forewards a lot... I do now though!

[cassiopeia]

Originally posted by Nurvingiel
Sam has brown hands because he works outside a lot. Maybe that's a Harfoot characteristic as well - being skilled at gardening and forestry. Sometimes I think Sam gets left out a bit because he's not a gentlehobbit. I don't really understand the class aspect though - apart from money, there doesn't seem to be any different between gentlehobbits and non.

You're probably right about Sam's hands. But Tolkien mentions it a few times in the book, and it kind of sticks in my mind. All of the fellowship would be tanned after travelling for a while, wouldn't they? Perhaps Tolkien wanted to emphasise class differences. I see a big class difference between the gentry and lower classes, especially in the way they speak. Compare Frodo, Merry and Pippin's langauge to Sam, the Gaffer and Robin Smallburrow's.

I can't remember if I read the prologue or not when I first read it, but since I read The Hobbit before the LOTR, I suspect so. Sometimes it's hard to get people to read furthur than the first chapter: I tried to get my Mum to, but she didn't. (And she still refuses to read it. )

Enough from me. I must now go and work on the next chapter.

[Lady Ravyn]

the part about hobbits species (lol ) is soooo interesting! i think your right about sam being part harfoot; not just because of his hands, but because of his characteristics, too. he likes to garden, and to me that seems very...harfoot-ish.
it makes you really think about the personalities of the various hobbits you know of.

i wonder what smeagol is?

[Valandil]

Originally posted by Lady Ravyn

i wonder what smeagol is?

I think he's from a group of Stoors.

[The Gaffer]

A question on perspective (apologies if it's already been covered):

Is the prologue supposed to be an extract from the Red Book, and therefore read as if it was written by a hobbit recounting the War of the Ring, or is it supposed to be read as if from a modern perspective, to give background to the story?

[Valandil]

Originally posted by The Gaffer
A question on perspective (apologies if it's already been covered):

Is the prologue supposed to be an extract from the Red Book, and therefore read as if it was written by a hobbit recounting the War of the Ring, or is it supposed to be read as if from a modern perspective, to give background to the story?

I would guess the latter, as though all these old sources have just been 'discovered' and this explains their origin. The Prologue as a whole anyway, seems more 'human-centric' - and talks about hobbits as though describing something different from our experience otherwise. An actual hobbit wouldn't write it this way, would he?

[Forkbeard]

Originally posted by Valandil
I would guess the latter, as though all these old sources have just been 'discovered' and this explains their origin. The Prologue as a whole anyway, seems more 'human-centric' - and talks about hobbits as though describing something different from our experience otherwise. An actual hobbit wouldn't write it this way, would he?

Right, the prologue is the "editor/translator's preface". It is standard practice in medieval and classical fields that when presenting a translation of a work, the translator includes a prologue or preface making some general comments about the contents and about procedures followed and so on. Since the Red Book of Westmarch was "discovered" by Tolkien, this is exactly what he is doing, lending to the fiction that he is presenting here a history that happened in real time.

Forkbeard

[Valandil]

Originally posted by Forkbeard
...lending to the fiction that he is presenting here a history that happened in real time.

Forkbeard

f...f... fiction!?!?

[Forkbeard]

Originally posted by Valandil
f...f... fiction!?!?

mea culpa, mea culpa! I meant to say his fictionalization (better word would be novelization) of the history recorded in the Red Book. Sorry for the confusion!

[The Gaffer]

I guess that would seem the most likely, though the passage about "only the Elves still keep records of that time" suggested to me that the "author" of the prologue was supposed to be located at some point in time between the story's events and now.

[Forkbeard]

Originally posted by The Gaffer
I guess that would seem the most likely, though the passage about "only the Elves still keep records of that time" suggested to me that the "author" of the prologue was supposed to be located at some point in time between the story's events and now.

I took the comment to mean that the translator had access to some elven sources. Which since he wrote those too.....

[Nurvingiel]

I always love how Tolkien tells the story as if he was honoured to have witnessed it. It really makes you feel like it's real. I can't think of another author who does that as powerfully.

[Olmer]

Originally posted by Fat middle

However, when I read in the prologue that bit of elves STILL here and I know all that stuff about the fading of the elves (that is all about LOTR and in HOME X), my conclusion is that those remaning elves (that obviously would have faded, but would be still here) are relatives to Shakespeare's elves and all those "spirits" that populate English tales.

Hi everyone! First i want to praise azalea for starting up such interesting theme. I hope we will go on discussing the chapters of the book through the very end( not like on some other sites).

Secondly, I'm absolutely disagree on conclusion that J.R.R.T wanted us to believe that HIS majestic elves evolved in some kind etherial Shakespearean creatures, for he DISPISED Shakesperian description of the elves, and he thought that is
"unforgivable"(Letter#185) and he was worried that he could not change people perception of elves (formed, by the way, by Christian church with a great help of popular writer) as little creatures unimportant to God, while from Celtic mythology, North legends and even the Bible came to us a description of beings greater in wisdom and skill, mighty and beautiful, which stayed on the ladder next between the God and Men.

My HO is that Celeborn ultimately stayed in Middle-earth .( Here is a quote from my posting on another forum):
If you will compare Tolkien's phraseology about the last sailed to the West Noldor, you will see the difference in the way of wording.
About Cirdan: "...some say he dwells there until the Last Ship sets sail into the West" - this is an AFFIRMATION that he eventually left Middle-earth.
About Celeborn: "...but there is no record of the day when at last he sought the Grey Havens" - and this is a SUGGESTION that he never sailed West.
My impression is that by the way of saying in such unsertain wordage JRRT wanted us to think that some of royal-elves still linger in ME.
Besides, if he (Celeborn) could live through 4 ages, why he cannot linger through a couple of more?
Seems that Tolkien was making very plausible connections suggesting that Middle-earth is Europe before the world had changed, for many hundreds years ago people, who was living on this coninent called it Middleerthe .
Besides in Letter #211 Tolkien states:
"I have, I supose, constructed an imaginary TIME, but kept my feet on my own mother-earth for PLACE"
"I imagine the gap [between the Fall of Barad-dur and modern times] to be about 6000 years; that is we are now at the end of the Fifth Age, if the Ages were of about the same length as Second Age and Third Age. But they have, I think, quickened; and I imagine we are actually at the end of the Sixth Age, or in the Seventh."

So, look out for pointy ears!!

[Valandil]

Well Olmer, nice post! Now get those pointy ears right on over to the 'Official Welcome Thread' in General Messages Forum to introduce yourself to the 'Moot at large!

And I bid thee welcome!