orcs???

ok why, in the hobbit, are only the biggest of the king goblin's bodyguard called orcs, rare things by all acounts, but in LOTR they seem to cover everything from the tiniest goblin to the largest beats? also, when did they stop having skin like stone? this happens in many books, where it deviates from the original "path" in LOTR, gandalf is more powerful, people are more affected by the ring, and there are no more references to "the wild" i find this irritating what about everyone else?

Hernalt will certainly have a more involved, precise, textbook answer, bordering on genius. (Probably complete with pics) :P

I had the same thought, anduin... :P I remember reading about it somewhere, but I think Tolkien didn't want to confuse people, and use descriptions that people would understand. We all know, including children, what goblins are, but prior to LotR, who knew what an orc was? In the few pages of BoLT I could take, I read that Tolkien originally wanted to call some elves "Gnomes," but decided against it because the general audience would confuse it with the dwarves or other visions of "gnomes" they had in their head.

Still waiting for Hernalt...

Hey guys. Mostly, Tolkien explained that how the Hobbit was written, in its intended genre as a children's bedtime story, was to encompass the naive, youthful, inexperienced perspective of the Hobbits, who had been protected by the Rangers for years and had harked little of evils outside the Shire. "The Hobbit", from Bilbo's perspective, is chock-full of child-like *wonderment*, freshness and novelty. But the world-view in LOTR is much more seasoned and weary, full of 'gray areas' and darkness. Many of the oddities of The Hobbit translate more or less as the difference between the story-telling (POV) Hobbits' level of exposure to the outside world. They finally get a clearer definition of goblin and orc; namely, that they are synonymous, but that 'Orc' goes back farther. They get background on the spiders of Mirkwood and their lineage from Ungoliant and kindred to Shelob. The stone-throwing "giants" of the Misty Mountains are perceived from Halfling size, yet are echoed in later learnings of 'mountain trolls' and 'stone trolls'. The Necromancer (one hell of a name) of southern Mirkwood is shrouded in irrelevance - for the moment. The broken battlements on the hills above Weathertop are given not a moment's thought. By the time of ROTK, the reader has transcended Hobbit view, even if the storytelling persepctive is from Frodo, and has instead taken on the weary wisdom of Aragorn and Gandalf - surely, matters too weighty for any but the Wise. Yet we the reader are given credence as one of the Wise, and are privy to their reeds of council, nearly to the point of wishing for the same naivete we had when we first transgressed the first page of The Hobbit. Once again - 'world weary' was one of the messages Tolkien implanted in every wisdom, the assurance that some things ended better than endured ad infinitum. And yet the dichotomy he tries to instill is that Gandalf never lost his subterranean mirth, nor Aragorn his orchid smile that might bloom but once in scores of years. Lastly, "The Hobbit", proper, is just a doorstep that leads to the 'Road Goes Ever On' - smooth, kind, civil... and easy. bmilder's right - Traditional myth which features elves and dwarves, (mostly European but including (east) Indian and Chinese), will sometimes make them synonymous with each other. So Gnomes was a word nearly doomed to confusion from the start.

Hernalt, who are you?

Yes, from the Tale of Tinuviel: "Beren was a gnome" Of course those lost tales and thiings were just ideas, but I have to disagree with those who feel that Tolkien somehow "discovered" Middle-Earth; he made it up--though that doesn't diminish at all the amazingness of it!! Gandalf seems particularly amazing to me in that he's so humble and interested in the doings of hobbits, while everyone else sees them as peripheral. Frankly, the Simarillion and the loftier parts of LotR scared me--give me good old hobbits any day.

anduin - No one of consequence. I'm not on any of the traditional Tolkien language boards, if that's what you mean. Do you post on those?

btw hernalt, you're a genius when it comes to tolkien

Hernalt... I must commend you for your explanation. I was going to say the same thing, but I doubt I could've explained it that well.

I don't think anyone could.

Hernalt, you should write a book.

I thought he was......

He could just use the questions we ask hm, then put in the answers he gives, and there ya have it...the longest Tolkien refrence book in history!

Hi guys. I'll be no more than a Never-Was author. It's more for recreation, even if I used to have fierce dreams of seeing it on the bigscreen. If I ever get a real computer, it might take off again. This thing I am sure of: every person bumps into brilliance at one time or another, but few bump into the determination to push creativity to realization. I'm not one of those few, as life is fulfilling and beautful enough that adding to it is not necessarily.. necessary.

Hernalt, do you ever check your hernalt@hotmail.com address? It was the only one of yours I could find, and I've sent you something. If you never check it, please email me your current address

Bmilder, I can't use that hotmail account or email. I set it up just to get another username with JC when my original died in the firey server crash of October '99. But I'm always at robert.thompson@eds.com Send me what you got!

Ok, sent. Let me know if you didn't get it.

There is quite a bit in detail in the Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien. Let's see if I can find any of it when I want it. For those of you with the Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, there is some information on Orcs in letter 144. I believe his feeling was that there is a pre-set picture of a goblin in our minds, much like there is with "gnome" or "wizard" and he later wished to avoid this picture and create his own. Finduilas (first time poster)

Hi Finduilas! Very nice explination.