Chapter One - An Unexpected Party [Archive]

baragund

09-14-2005, 04:11 PM

Let's get Nenya's walk through The Hobbit started. Here are some initial thoughts I had as I read through the chapter last night. Feel free to pile on, shred, heartily agree, add to, etc. as you like.

Chapter 1 – An Unexpected Party

This is the twenty-some pages that got me hooked on Tolkien almost thirty years ago. There is the description of the hobbit hole that draws you in and gives you such a feeling of being there without reams of text. There is the playful banter and word play of the first dialogue between Bilbo and Gandalf. (What a delightful conversation over the phrase ‘Good Morning’!). There is the hilarious introduction of the dwarves and Bilbo’s ‘confusticated and bebothered’ reaction to them. And there is the setup of the purpose and intent of the story; the quest for mystical dragon gold. The tantalizing references to magical abilities… even hobbits could practice the “ordinary, everyday sort” that is just enough to get your interest without going over the top.

Along the way, Tolkien already offers tantalizing glimpses of a larger world. Who are these other warriors and heroes who are off fighting other battles and don’t have time for this little job? Who is the Necromancer? What about these dragons who came from the North? What are these places Moria, Dale, Greenfields, What about these elves, goblins, dragons and dwarves?

For those of you whose visual impression of Tolkien’s world has been influenced (one could say contaminated) by the recent films, what do you think of the written descriptions of the characters? The films recreated Bag End and Gandalf pretty faithfully, but what about Bilbo and the Dwarves? Tolkien describes Hobbits are described as liking to dress in bright colors (mainly yellow and green), and they have brown hands with long nimble fingers. This gives me a picture that hobbits look kind of like Indians (Asiatic as opposed to Native American). And tell me it’s unreasonable to get an image of the Dwarves not unlike how they were portrayed in Disney’s ‘Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs’, with all of the emphasis on the description of their colored hoods and belts, their musical instruments and their Keystone Kops quality. Quite different from how they look in the films.

A student of Tolkien’s Middle-earth could spend a lot of time picking apart little references throughout the chapter, like where would Bilbo get coffee? What other hobbits did Gandalf recruit for mad adventures and what were those adventures? Who were the motherless sons and rescued princesses that Gandalf described? How many dragons were there running around the Withered Heath and the northern lands and what happened to them? How many Dwarves were there in the four corners of the world? Where is the Last Desert in the East of East and what are the wild were-worms?

What an introduction to a wonderful world! For fun I am attaching an illustration from the Brothers Hildebrandt that beautifully captures the essence of An Unexpected Party.

Ithrynluin

09-14-2005, 07:47 PM

That is a great introduction, baragund. You sum up my own feelings about this chapter perfectly. :)

I would like to tackle a few small points:

1.

My edition of the book (Harper Collins paperback, 1993) has a short introduction or preface of sorts just before chapter one begins. There we are told, concerning the map found in the book:

On the Map the compass points are marked in runes, with East at the top, as usual in dwarf-maps, and so read clockwise: E(ast), S(outh), W(est), N(orth).

Why do you think the dwarves made a habit out of putting East at the top of their maps? Was it because their original 'homeland' was more or less the east of Middle-earth?

2.

Isn't it neat how the title of this chapter reappears in slightly modified form as the first chapter of the LoTR?

3.

It is quite amazing to witness Bilbo saying yes to Gandalf (e.g. inviting him to tea), when we know how reluctant Bilbo was to set out on even the smallest ramble, let alone an adventure fraught with peril, as the one Gandalf was offering. Do you think it is possible that Gandalf employed some of his 'magic' or used his ring to influence Bilbo's decisions?

4.

"Dear me!" he went on. "Not the Gandalf who was responsible for so many quiet lads and lasses going off into the Blue for mad adventures. Anything from climbing trees to visiting Elves - or sailing in ships, sailing to other shores!

I don't know why exactly, but the 'sailing to other shores' part instantly made me think of Frodo and Bilbo (and Sam) sailing off into the West. Did anyone else think of this? Though it is very improbable, or impossible, that any hobbit sailed to the West before Bilbo and Frodo. It is likely that the rumours Bilbo heard about Gandalf's affairs have been exaggerated; if some hobbits did indeed sail somewhere at Gandalf's bidding, I would imagine it wasn't especially far.

5.

Then the dwarves come pouring in one by one. I consulted the Encyclopedia of Arda on all of them, and a particularly interesting issue is raised concerning Dwalin (III 2772 - IV 91); it appears that he lived extraordinarily long:

From the Encyclopedia of Arda
It is unusual for a Dwarf to live longer than about 250 years, so at 340, Dwalin seems to have lived almost a century longer than almost any other his kind. This hints at an error, but Christopher Tolkien notes (in The History of Middle-earth volume 12) that Dwalin's date of death, given as as '3112' in years of the Third Age, remained consistent over several drafts. However, there is a very indefinite suggestion in an early document that his age at death should have been 251, in which case he would have died in the second year of the Fourth Age.

Meaning: Apparently 'dawdler'.
At least, in the Norse poem Völuspá, the source of many of Tolkien's Dwarf-names, this seems to be the meaning.

To dawdle means to spend time idly or spend something fruitlessly. Not very flattering to poor old Dwalin, especially having in mind how long he lived!

***

These are my thoughts so far, I may come up with more later.

Thorondor_

09-14-2005, 09:24 PM

Was it because their original 'homeland' was more or less the east of Middle-earth?
I think it's a good reason. It could also relate to:
- opening the gate to the Lonely Mountain required the light of the setting sun of Durin's Day. This could imply that the path of the sun (east-west) was more important for them than the north-south axis (also, the sun might be the supreme form of fire, an element which they used a lot in their craft);
- if east is at the top, then Aman would be at the base of the map; this could imply their belief that everything stems from Aman, (or maybe from Aule, their would-be creator?).
Do you think it is possible that Gandalf employed some of his 'magic' or used his ring to influence Bilbo's decisions?
I don't necessarily think so; while you are right that Bilbo is overtly against adventures, there is a hint that there is more to it inside of him:
[He] got something a bit queer in his makeup from the Took side, something that only waited for a chance to come out. The chance never arrived, until Bilbo Baggins was grown up, being about fifty years old or so, and living in the beautiful hobbit-hole built by his father, which I have just described for you, until he had in fact apparently settled down immovably
I don't know why exactly, but the 'sailing to other shores' part instantly made me think of Frodo and Bilbo (and Sam) sailing off into the West. Did anyone else think of this?
I confess I did :). Though I find it rather impossible.

Ithrynluin

09-15-2005, 12:33 AM

I think it's a good reason. It could also relate to:
- opening the gate to the Lonely Mountain required the light of the setting sun of Durin's Day. This could imply that the path of the sun (east-west) was more important for them than the north-south axis (also, the sun might be the supreme form of fire, an element which they used a lot in their craft);
- if east is at the top, then Aman would be at the base of the map; this could imply their belief that everything stems from Aman, (or maybe from Aule, their would-be creator?).

Thorondor_, that is a wonderful theory you've come up with. Plausible and intriguing!

Some more observations I found interesting:

6.

"Carefully! Carefully!" he said. "It is not like you, Bilbo, to keep friends waiting on the mat, and then open the door like a pop-gun! Let me introduce Bifur, Bofur, Bombur, and especially Thorin!"
"At your service!" said Bifur, Bofur, and Bombur standing in a row. Then they hung up two yellow hoods and a pale green one; and also a sky-blue one with a long silver tassel. This last belonged to Thorin, an enormously important dwarf, in fact no other than the great Thorin Oakenshield himself, who was not at all pleased at falling flat on Bilbo's mat with Bifur, Bofur, and Bombur on top of him.

"Now for some music!" said Thorin. "Bring out the instruments!"
Kili and Fili rushed for their bags and brought back little fiddles; Dori, Nori, and Ori brought out flutes from somewhere inside their coats; Bombur produced a drum from the hall; Bifur and Bofur went out too, and came back with clarinets that they had left among the walking-sticks Dwalin and Balin said: "Excuse me, I left mine in the porch!" "Just bring mine in with you," said Thorin. They came back with viols as big as themselves, and with Thorin’s harp wrapped in a green cloth. It was a beautiful golden harp, and when Thorin struck it the music began all at once, so sudden and sweet that Bilbo forgot everything else, and was swept away into dark lands under strange moons, far over The Water and very far from his hobbit-hole under The Hill.

Does the colour of Thorin's hood and the kind (and colour) of his instrument have any relevance for you, e.g. being kingly or noble colours or his instrument being a bit more elegant and elevated than the others', or do you think of these colour choices as more or less random?

7.

He shuddered; and very quickly he was plain Mr. Baggins of Bag-End, Under-Hill, again.

The Lord of the Rings; The Shadow of the Past
The Ring will not be able to stay hidden in the Shire much longer; and for your own sake, as well as for others, you will have to go, and leave the name of Baggins behind you. That name will not be safe to have, outside the Shire or in the Wild. I will give you a travelling name now. When you go, go as Mr. Underhill.

In the LoTR, we are not offered any background as to Gandalf's choice of the name Underhill for Frodo to travel under. It appears Under-Hill is simply a part of Hobbiton, where Bag End is located. Was it wise of Gandalf to use such a name for one who lived there? Or perhaps this name was not well known at all?

8.

"We might go from there up along the River Running," went on Thorin taking no notice, "and so to the ruins of Dale-the old town in the valley there, under the shadow of the Mountain. But we none of us liked the idea of the Front Gate. The river runs right out of it through the great cliff at the South of the Mountain, and out of it comes the dragon too-far too often, unless he has changed."
"That would be no good," said the wizard, "not without a mighty Warrior, even a Hero. I tried to find one; but warriors are busy fighting one another in distant lands, and in this neighbourhood heroes are scarce, or simply lot to be found. Swords in these parts are mostly blunt, and axes are used for trees, and shields as cradles or dish-covers; and dragons are comfortably far-off (and therefore legendary).

The question that arises here is why Gandalf did not engage the dragon himself. Would he have been able to counter him to begin with (he did defeat the Balrog)?

If yes, why didn't he?

Would engaging Smaug directly have violated the rule that had been laid upon the Istari not to confront Sauron directly, and Smaug qualified as an extension, as it were, of Sauron?

9.

"Undoubtedly that was what brought the dragon. Dragons steal gold and jewels, you know, from men and elves and dwarves, wherever they can find them; and they guard their plunder as long as they live (which is practically forever, unless they are killed), and never enjoy a brass ring of it.

Do you think dragons are immortal?

Or even just immortal in the sense of elvish immortality (i.e. as long as the world itself lasts)?

Or do you think immortality had been attached to them because they outlived many generations of dwarves, and these could not keep effective track on them, or simply did not know of dragons dying of natural causes?

I find the last option the most likely. I doubt Morgoth could have imparted life eternal upon his own creations.

Gothmog

09-15-2005, 08:14 AM

First, I agree with Ithy, that is a very good and interesting theory Thorondor_ very plausible.

Now on to a couple of Ithy's questions.
The question that arises here is why Gandalf did not engage the dragon himself. Would he have been able to counter him to begin with (he did defeat the Balrog)?

If yes, why didn't he?

Would engaging Smaug directly have violated the rule that had been laid upon the Istari not to confront Sauron directly, and Smaug qualified as an extension, as it were, of Sauron?As to why, Gandalf himself explains this as a need to deal with the Necromancer. It would seem that at this point in time Gandalf was busy and so could not engage the dragon then. Now as for his ability to counter Smaug, I think that he would have had far more trouble with the dragon than he did with the Balrog. This has to do with the differences between the two creatures. The Balrog's main weapon was the fear that went before it while the dragon's main weapon was its flame. Gandalf was more or less immune to the fear of the Balrog and so was about equal with it while the breath of the dragon could have ended a battle between them before Gandalf could come close enough strike.

Do you think dragons are immortal?

Or even just immortal in the sense of elvish immortality (i.e. as long as the world itself lasts)?

Or do you think immortality had been attached to them because they outlived many generations of dwarves, and these could not keep effective track on them, or simply did not know of dragons dying of natural causes?

I find the last option the most likely. I doubt Morgoth could have imparted life eternal upon his own creations.I don't think that dragons are immortal. My view is that they live far longer than Dwarves and that it is quite likely that there has never been a case of a dragon dying of 'natural causes'. Since dragons collect gold and jewels they make many enemies. No doubt as a dragon ages it weakens and at some point those trying to gain the dragon-hoad would be able to defeat it. Therefore all the dragons may well have died by battle. This would then give the view that unless killed in battle a dragon will live for ever.

Ithrynluin

09-15-2005, 02:13 PM

As to why, Gandalf himself explains this as a need to deal with the Necromancer. It would seem that at this point in time Gandalf was busy and so could not engage the dragon then.

If it was lack of time that prevented him from dealing both with the Necromancer and Smaug, why did he arrange for the Quest of Erebor to transpire at this point in time? Unless he himself really was no match for the dragon.

Now as for his ability to counter Smaug, I think that he would have had far more trouble with the dragon than he did with the Balrog. This has to do with the differences between the two creatures. The Balrog's main weapon was the fear that went before it while the dragon's main weapon was its flame. Gandalf was more or less immune to the fear of the Balrog and so was about equal with it while the breath of the dragon could have ended a battle between them before Gandalf could come close enough strike.

I would say that terror and fear were only some of the Balrog's main weapons. A Balrog also wielded fire and had great physical strength. It would seem strange that a mere mortal could shoot an arrow and slay Smaug, but Gandalf with all his powers could not defeat him? It's interesting to note how all the dragons we know by name were taken down by humans, while the Balrogs took a great elf or a Maia to slay.

Gothmog

09-15-2005, 04:53 PM

If it was lack of time that prevented him from dealing both with the Necromancer and Smaug, why did he arrange for the Quest of Erebor to transpire at this point in time? Unless he himself really was no match for the dragon.

Although it is not explained in The Hobbit, Tolkien did address this question and in UT The Quest of Erebor we find Gandalf thinking of the problems of the Necromancer and Smaug The Dragon Sauron might use with terrible effect. Often I said to myself: "I must find some means of dealing with Smaug. But a direct stroke against Dol Guldur is needed still more. We must disturb Sauron's plans. I must make the Council see that.It was at this time that Thorin came to Gandalffor help with getting rid of Smaug or taking back the treasure of the Dwarves from the Lonely Mountain. So Since the Dwarves were there and ready it was simply Gandalf turning their quest to his purposes. It may be that Gandalf had no more chance against Smaug than did a Man.

I would say that terror and fear were only some of the Balrog's main weapons. A Balrog also wielded fire and had great physical strength. It would seem strange that a mere mortal could shoot an arrow and slay Smaug, but Gandalf with all his powers could not defeat him? I give Fear as the Balrog's main weapon because that fear could have a greater effect than the physical weapons of Whip of fire, sword or mace. But we do not know just what powers Gandalf had for such battles. It's interesting to note how all the dragons we know by name were taken down by humans, while the Balrogs took a great elf or a Maia to slay.
In the case with the Balrog, Gandalf had no choice but to do battle and was killed himself defeating it. All except Anc. Earendil was a representative of both Elves and Men (and had a flying boat too) ;)

Thorondor_

09-15-2005, 06:28 PM

Or do you think immortality had been attached to them because they outlived many generations of dwarves, and these could not keep effective track on them, or simply did not know of dragons dying of natural causes?

I find the last option the most likely. I doubt Morgoth could have imparted life eternal upon his own creations.
I agree:
Again after a hundred years Glaurung, the first of the Uruloki, the fire-drakes of the North, issued from Angband's gates by night. He was yet young and scarce half-grown, for long and slow is the life of the dragons, but the Elves fled before him
Of the return of the Noldor, Sil.
Imo, this implies that their life is just long, not that they are "immortal".
I give Fear as the Balrog's main weapon because that fear could have a greater effect than the physical weapons of Whip of fire, sword or mace.
Well, at the bridge of Moria, only Gimli seems to be impressed by the balrog ("Gimli stared with wide eyes. `Durin's Bane! ' he cried, and letting his axe fall he covered his face"), but the rest don't seem to be much affected: Boromir and Aragorn stand their ground by Gandalf, and the rest of the company stands by him also, "unable to leave their leader to face the enemy alone".

Gothmog

09-15-2005, 07:51 PM

Well, at the bridge of Moria, only Gimli seems to be impressed by the balrog ("Gimli stared with wide eyes. `Durin's Bane! ' he cried, and letting his axe fall he covered his face"), but the rest don't seem to be much affected: Boromir and Aragorn stand their ground by Gandalf, and the rest of the company stands by him also, "unable to leave their leader to face the enemy alone".

Well good for Boromir and Aragorn. It would seem that the blood of Numenor still has some strength. However, it was not only the Dwarf that was 'impressed'

Legolas turned and set an arrow to the string, though it was a long shot for his small bow. He drew, but his hand fell, and the arrow slipped to the ground. He gave a cry of dismay and fear.
And the reason for this display of concern?
'Ai! ai! ' wailed Legolas. 'A Balrog! A Balrog is come! '

Thorondor_

09-15-2005, 08:38 PM

True, but I would dare put Legolas' reaction to his knowledge of the power of the balrog, and not to fear.
More on the issue of balrogs and dragons: in the war of wrath, the balrogs are no match for the host of the the valar:
There was marshalled the whole power of the Throne of Morgoth, and it had become great beyond count, so that Anfauglith could not contain it; and all the North was aflame with war.
But it availed him not. The Balrogs were destroyed, save some few that fled and hid themselves in caverns inaccessible at the roots of the earth
However, the dragons were a totally different story:
Then, seeing that his hosts were overthrown and his power dispersed, Morgoth quailed, and he dared not to come forth himself. But he loosed upon his foes the last desperate assault that he had prepared, and out of the pits of Angband there issued the winged dragons, that had not before been seen; and so sudden and ruinous was the onset of that dreadful fleet that the host of the Valar was driven back, for the coming of the dragons was with great thunder, and lightning, and a tempest of fire.

baragund

09-15-2005, 09:05 PM

Thanks for the compliment Ithy! :) I thought it would be nice that the person who makes the opening post for a chapter thread give a combination overview and book review. I also like to hear how the chapter or even particular passages within the chapter had an impact on the reader.

But let me give my two cents on the questions you posted over the past couple of days…

General: One of the things that I think will come up again and again as we discuss these chapters is the relationship between The Hobbit and Tolkien’s larger mythology. Now it’s my understanding the Tolkien’s original intention that The Hobbit was to be a stand alone work separate from the mythology he had been working on. It was only when he was asked to write the sequel of LOTR, and that story grew into the epic that it is, that Tolkien realized he needed to “retrofit” The Hobbit into Middle-earth.

This “retrofit” left some inconsistencies and quirks in The Hobbit as it relates to the mythology than LOTR. The retrofit becomes apparent when one compares the original edition of The Hobbit that came out in 1937 vs. the 1966 edition. The 1966 edition incorporated The Hobbit into Middle-earth more but there were still seems connections to Middle-earth in the 1937 edition. The biggest connection that comes to mind is the Elrond character. He existed in the mythology as Tolkien had it in 1937 and he was a character in The Hobbit. I’m not sure on this one but I also believe that the major land forms of the Misty Mountains and Mirkwood existed in the mythology by the time Tolkien wrote The Hobbit. These connections that existed in the 1937 edition tells me that Tolkien may have considered The Hobbit to be a story apart from his mythology but still within Middle-earth.

If somebody out there has a copy of “The Annotated Hobbit” or, better yet, the 1937 edition, they could tell us the differences between the two editions and verify if my thoughts on this holds water.

1. Map Orientation: Thorondor’s suggestion of the map orientation being a reference to their origins and their reverence to Aule is interesting. My impression is it was one of the subtle devices Tolkien used to convey to the reader the message that the setting he created was fundamentally different from the mundane world of today. A world where “there was less noise and more green”.

2. Chapter Title: I have to believe that the symmetry in chapter titles between “An Unexpected Party” and “A Long Expected Party” was intentional. It really links the two books together even before one begins reading the sequel.

3. Inviting Gandalf to Tea: I agree with the others that Gandalf did not use magic to compel the invitation to tea. The chapter already establishes Bilbo’s adventurous “Tookishness” conflicting with the sensible Baggins.

4. Hobbits Sailing in Ships: I too would like to know what hobbits Gandalf recruited for adventures and what those adventures might have been. Did he persuade Bullroarer Took to ride the horse and knock the goblins head off with the club at the Battle of Greenfields? But it never occurred to me that any hobbit would go sailing into the West before Bilbo and Frodo. Any voyages would have been local.

5. Thorin’s Hood and Harp: I agree that the color of Thorin’s hood and the musical instrument he played were indicative of his high status. The color is finer than the usual browns, greens or reds and a harp is a finer instrument than drums, flutes or even fiddles.

6. Underhill: That’s the first time I noticed that term used in The Hobbit. I wonder if it was in the 1937 edition. I think it was added to be a specific link to the use of that name in LOTR, whether Tolkien added the name to LOTR or if he ‘retrofitted’ the name to the 1966 edition of The Hobbit.

7. Gandalf Taking on the Dragon: As was pointed out above, Gandalf was busy with Sauron as The Necromancer. Interesting point about Gandalf fighting the Balrog, though. Perhaps the more dire straits that the Fellowship was in allowed Gandalf to break his rule of not directly intervening. Or perhaps he was allowed to intervene with those of his own kind in order to make a more level playing field for the others.

8. Lifespan of Dragons: The “practically forever” description always gave me the impression of not being immortal or even having life spans linked to Arda like the Elves, but simply extremely long lived, even to the thousands of years. If Smaug was one of the flying dragons that fought alongside Ancalagon in the War of Wrath so that would make him over 6000 years old by the time Bilbo and company came along. But immortality is something that is given to the gods by Eru and the lifespan of the Elves was a special gift to his Firstborn children from Eru.

Thorondor_

09-15-2005, 10:16 PM

Thanks baragund and all for the kind remarks :).
Underhill: That’s the first time I noticed that term used in The Hobbit. I wonder if it was in the 1937 edition. I think it was added to be a specific link to the use of that name in LOTR, whether Tolkien added the name to LOTR or if he ‘retrofitted’ the name to the 1966 edition of The Hobbit.
Imo, the name Underhill is part of the original universe of the Hobbit, in which the phrase seems to have a nice use:
You may indeed! I come from under the hill, and under hills and over the hills my paths led. And through the air, I am he that walks unseen.
....
We came over hill and under hill, by wave and win, for Revenge
Since hobbit houses are much related to hills, I think it's part of their folklore - as there is also a riddle of Gollum which also makes use of this phrase, the one about darkness.

AraCelebEarwen

09-15-2005, 10:47 PM

3. Inviting Gandalf to Tea: I agree with the others that Gandalf did not use magic to compel the invitation to tea. The chapter already establishes Bilbo’s adventurous “Tookishness” conflicting with the sensible Baggins.
And don't we all at times deal with this "what was I thinking?!!" thing? :D

I read the first chapter just now and found that I had forgotten a lot about hobbits and their homes and many other things. :o Again I thank people for starting this idea! Now if only I could find something to say... :rolleyes:

And just because I can't think if I'm right or not; who or what is Necromancer? Sauron with another name?

Thorondor_

09-15-2005, 10:58 PM

And just because I can't think if I'm right or not; who or what is Necromancer? Sauron with another name?
Yes; in the chapter The last stage it is mentioned:
It appeared that Gandalf had been to a great council of the white wizards, masters of lore and good magic; and that they had at last driven the Necromancer from his dark hold in the south of Mirkwood.
and in the Council of Elrond it is stated that:
Some here will remember that many years ago I myself dared to pass the doors of the Necromancer in Dol Guldur, and secretly explored his ways, and found thus that our fears were true: he was none other than Sauron, our Enemy of old, at length taking shape and power again

baragund

09-15-2005, 11:45 PM

I still wanna know where Bilbo got his coffee. Was there a Starbucks in downtown Hobbiton? :D

Actually, this is a little like the Wines of Dorwinion thing that we will find when our merry little band reaches the realm of the woodland elves. Would it be reasonable to think there was trade from such far-off tropical places like Khand or the Harads? They are the only places in Middle-earth that could grow coffee.

AraCelebEarwen

09-16-2005, 12:07 AM

I still wanna know where Bilbo got his coffee. Was there a Starbucks in downtown Hobbiton? :D
I thought that was funny, a very good idea if you ask me though! :D I think I'll have to try ordering some next time I'm in the Fat Balrog or something, just to see what happens. ;)

Tolkien really mixed some interesting little things in, words and the like. It truly is fun to read and I find myself once again falling in love with his use of words and ideas. Little bits here and there that really don't have much to do with the story but just make it that much richer. The colors of the cloaks, Bilbo knocking over the fire poker and the green smoke gathering around Gandalf's head to bring up a few. :D

((and again, I top yet ANOTHER page! :eek: :) sorry, started that comment somewhere else. ))

Gothmog

09-16-2005, 01:17 AM

True, but I would dare put Legolas' reaction to his knowledge of the power of the balrog, and not to fear.
More on the issue of balrogs and dragons: in the war of wrath, the balrogs are no match for the host of the the valar:

However, the dragons were a totally different story:
In the time of the Fellowship both Balrogs and Winged Dragons were known to have existed. This was not so in the War of Wrath. While Balrogs were expected and therefore the fear they projected could in some measure be foreseen and countered, Winged Dragons were at the time unexpected and therefore had a greater Short-term effect. Even Ancalagon the Black did not last long after he first appeared. How long were Balrogs used by Melkor before that War? somewhat more than the Day and Night that Anc lasted in battle against Earendil. Few were the things that Legolas feared. The Balrog was indeed one of those few and probably the greatest fear of any Elf. Had Legolas's reaction been due only to his knowledge of the power of the Balrog I doubt that he would have cried out in fear as is stated by Tolkien.

Thorondor_

09-16-2005, 06:38 AM

Even Ancalagon the Black did not last long after he first appeared.
Yes, but he was destroyed by Earendil (who was "shining with white flame") and the host of eagles, the great birds of heaven, led by the maia Thorondor.
Had Legolas's reaction been due only to his knowledge of the power of the Balrog I doubt that he would have cried out in fear as is stated by Tolkien.
Well, he didn't cry out in fear, he wailed.. When the noldor first met the balrogs there is no mentioning of fear on their behalf.

octoburn

09-16-2005, 07:46 AM

And tell me it’s unreasonable to get an image of the Dwarves not unlike how they were portrayed in Disney’s ‘Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs’, with all of the emphasis on the description of their colored hoods and belts, their musical instruments and their Keystone Kops quality. Quite different from how they look in the films.
I don't think there's a huge discrepency in the way dwarves are presented in LOTR between Jackson and Tolkien. I think the discrepency may be between the Hobbit and LOTR. maybe not even really a discrepency, but maybe a change in the culture of the Erebor dwarves during the 60-ish years after they reclaimed Erebor. I don't recall any mention of any instruments or hoods from Gimli in LOTR (other than the cloak given by the Elves) though he certainly did sing a few songs :D I think the hoods and instruments are the biggest discrepency between the Hobbit and LOTR dwarves, in both instances.

and I'm sure if/when a Hobbit movie is made, the dwarves will be accurate to those in the Hobbit book.

Gothmog

09-16-2005, 01:38 PM

Yes, but he was destroyed by Earendil (who was "shining with white flame") and the host of eagles, the great birds of heaven, led by the maia Thorondor.
I am aware of who destroyed Anc. I was simply pointing out that the problems of the Winged dragons was a very short-term thing. They drove the Host of the Valar back for a very short time and then were defeated along with the rest of Melkor's forces.

Well, he didn't cry out in fear, he wailed.. When the noldor first met the balrogs there is no mentioning of fear on their behalf.
From The Fellowship of the Ring: The Bridge of Khazad-dûm
Legolas turned and set an arrow to the string, though it was a long shot for his small bow. He drew, but his hand fell, and the arrow slipped to the ground. He gave a cry of dismay and fear. Two great trolls appeared; they bore great slabs of stone, and flung them down to serve as gangways over the fire. But it was not the trolls that had filled the Elf with terror. The ranks of the orcs had opened, and they crowded away, as if they themselves were afraid. Something was coming up behind them. What it was could not be seen: it was like a great shadow, in the middle of which was a dark form, of man-shape maybe, yet greater; and a power and terror seemed to be in it and to go before it.
It came to the edge of the fire and the light faded as if a cloud had bent over it. Then with a rush it leaped across the fissure. The flames roared up to greet it, and wreathed about it; and a black smoke swirled in the air. Its streaming mane kindled, and blazed behind it. In its right hand was a blade like a stabbing tongue of fire; in its left it held a whip of many thongs.
'Ai! ai! ' wailed Legolas. 'A Balrog! A Balrog is come! 'There is certainly not only Fear but Terror for Legolas. The problem with using the Sil and other writings is that none of those were completed by JRRT. The only 'Final View' we have for the characteristics and effects of the Balrog are found in TLoR.

Thorondor_

09-16-2005, 07:29 PM

This balrog-dragon issue is becoming pretty interesting (to me at least).
Of the Fifth Battle: Nirnaeth Arnoediad
There came wolves, and wolfriders, and there came Balrogs, and dragons, and Glaurung father of dragons. The strength and terror of the Great Worm were now great indeed, and Elves and Men withered before him; and he came between the hosts of Maedhros and Fingon and swept them apart.
Imo, Glaurung achieved more than any balrog in this battle.
From the Fall of Gondolin, Home II
But the rede that Meglin gave to Melko was that not all the host of the Orcs nor the Balrogs in their fierceness might by assault or siege hope ever to overthrow the walls and gates of Gondolin even if they availed to win unto the plain without. Therefore he counselled Melko to devise out of his sorceries a succour for his warriors in their endeavour. From the greatness of his wealth of metals and his powers of fire he bid him make beasts like snakes and dragons of irresistible might that should overcreep the Encircling Hills and lap that plain and its fair city in flame and death
So, Imo, there are three instances where dragons are "stronger" than balrogs.

Gothmog

09-16-2005, 09:36 PM

Yes, it is an interesting subject. However, I think that we are getting a little too far from the subject of the thread which is The Hobbit. :)

Perhaps you would like to start a new thread in the Sil forum where we could continue this more general comparison of dragons and Balrogs before we have the rest of the members pulling their hair out by the roots :D

AraCelebEarwen

09-16-2005, 09:45 PM

Thanks Gothmog. :o I was wanting to ask the same. Good subject but wrong place. Please and thank you. :)

I might even go back and read the first chapter over again just for the fun of it. I might even find something I missed and have something to bring up!

Inderjit S

09-22-2005, 12:21 AM

Sorry to diverge but; "led by the maia Thorondor", is not strictly correct because Tolkien decided he wasn't a Maia.

Bergil

09-22-2005, 02:57 AM

I wholehartedly agree with Baragund, this is what got me hooked on the books was this first chapter. Im not going to even try to put in words what fascinates me about these books, so I won't all im going to say is that Tolkien was a GENIUS, and that I offer him my service.

DGoeij

09-22-2005, 03:35 PM

Just something I let my mind wandering about when reading the first chapter. According to the good professor, Bilbo is about 50 years old at the beginning of the tale. Now considering a Hobbit is deemd an adult at the age of 33 and I do remember some remark somewhere that they 'live to reach a hundred years old as often as they do not'.

If one would consider 18 the amount of years at which a human is considered to be an adult and the average age of men in the 1930's was about sixty, could we say that in human years, Bilbo was about thirty when he had his adventure?

Gothmog

09-22-2005, 05:04 PM

If you are using 1930's life expectancy as the basis then it also should be the 1930's age for being considered an adult. I will have to check but I believe that this was 21 years old at that time.

So with 'Coming of Age' being 21 for men and a life expectancy of around sixty this would be at one third of of his life. Hobbits 'Came of Age' at 33 and expected to live to around one hundred. So again one third of his life. With this I would say that it is not unreasonable to think of Bilbo at fifty to be the equivalent of a Man in his thirties. :)

DGoeij

09-22-2005, 07:54 PM

Oops, something I failed to take into my account when using statistics from the 1930's, the age at which one would considered to be an adult. Thanks for pointing that out. :)

I still wasn't far of though, those three years aren't much when dealing in averages. It seems now reasonable to me that Gandalf would pick a hobbit like Bilbo to join the dwarves. A bachelor, old enough to be somewhat wise, young enough to be fit (although he was a hobbit well used to the comfortable living he had been doing) and one with Tookish blood in him. Makes you wonder if Gandalf would have passed the Hill, if a happily married Bilbo had been living there? Which again makes me wonder why such a well to do hobbit-bachelor would be living alone at his fifties (thirties). Shouldn't the maidens of the Shire been hovering around Bag End, hoping to be noticed? :D

Gothmog

09-22-2005, 08:32 PM

No you were not far out at all :) Had Bilbo been married (happily or not) I doubt that Gandalf would have picked him to go. It is one thing to shove a single somewhat confused Hobbit out of his home and into an adventure that could result in his death but it is quite another to ask a wife to risk becoming a widow for the sake of a treasure that she may never even see.
Which again makes me wonder why such a well to do hobbit-bachelor would be living alone at his fifties (thirties). Shouldn't the maidens of the Shire been hovering around Bag End, hoping to be noticed?Perhaps he was very quick on his feet. ;)

Walter

09-23-2005, 11:34 AM

General: One of the things that I think will come up again and again as we discuss these chapters is the relationship between The Hobbit and Tolkien’s larger mythology. Now it’s my understanding the Tolkien’s original intention that The Hobbit was to be a stand alone work separate from the mythology he had been working on. It was only when he was asked to write the sequel of LOTR, and that story grew into the epic that it is, that Tolkien realized he needed to “retrofit” The Hobbit into Middle-earth.

This “retrofit” left some inconsistencies and quirks in The Hobbit as it relates to the mythology than LOTR. The retrofit becomes apparent when one compares the original edition of The Hobbit that came out in 1937 vs. the 1966 edition. The 1966 edition incorporated The Hobbit into Middle-earth more but there were still seems connections to Middle-earth in the 1937 edition. The biggest connection that comes to mind is the Elrond character. He existed in the mythology as Tolkien had it in 1937 and he was a character in The Hobbit. I’m not sure on this one but I also believe that the major land forms of the Misty Mountains and Mirkwood existed in the mythology by the time Tolkien wrote The Hobbit. These connections that existed in the 1937 edition tells me that Tolkien may have considered The Hobbit to be a story apart from his mythology but still within Middle-earth.

If somebody out there has a copy of “The Annotated Hobbit” or, better yet, the 1937 edition, they could tell us the differences between the two editions and verify if my thoughts on this holds water.
Please forgive my jumping in here...

That is indeed a most interesting point, IMHO and that was what made my first reading of The Annotated Hobbit - some 2 years ago - most interesting...

Something which always irks me a little when I read discussions of The Hobbit is that the participants usually take their full knowledge of Tolkien's Middle-earth into consideration and in part use information which probably existed not even in Tolkien's imagination at the time The Hobbit was written.

I suspect, for example, that by the time The Hobbit was written, Middle-earth in Tolkien's imagination resembled more closely the Miðgarð - or Middangeard - of Germanic and Nordic myths than the Middle-earth of the LOTR...

The major changes to bring The Hobbit into accordance with the rest of the legendarium - namely LOTR - were made in Chapter 5, most other changes that were made after 1937 concern minor issues, IIRC.

Some annotations (which can be deleted if they are not of interest), many of which are common knowledge by now:

Tolkien had borrowed the names for his Dwarves from northern mythology, namely the Voluspa, which is part of the Poetic Edda. Originally - in the manuscript - Gandalf was the leader of the Dwarven Party whereas the Wizard was named Bladorthin (and the dragon Pryftan). By that time, it appears, Tolkien had not yet pondered about the meaning of the name gand-alfr which can be taken to mean something like 'Elf of the Wand'. Other inspirations for Gandalf's character are a painting of the German artist J. Madlener titled "Der Berggeist" (http://www.houghtonmifflinbooks.com/features/lordoftheringstrilogy/hobbit/1_7insert.shtml) (transl. 'the mountain-spirit') and - IMO - the Man-in-the-Moon of Roverandom.

In his first appearance (1937) Gandalf is described as "a little old man with a tall pointed blue hat", very much like wizards are pictured in children's tales, not at all like a mighty Maia Olórin...

----
Edit:

I still wanna know where Bilbo got his coffee. Was there a Starbucks in downtown Hobbiton? :D

Oh No!!!!!

Hobbits - in the way I picture them - are leaning more towards "Slow-Food", they are Connoisseurs. Starbucks, thus, is definitely out of question.... :p

Espresso Vivace....maybe... ;)

baragund

09-23-2005, 03:06 PM

Something which always irks me a little when I read discussions of The Hobbit is that the participants usually take their full knowledge of Tolkien's Middle-earth into consideration and in part use information which probably existed not even in Tolkien's imagination at the time The Hobbit was written.

Exactly! It's very easy to fall into the trap of trying to reconcile Tolkien's mythology as it existed when he died to the original writing of The Hobbit. Middle-earth changed an awful lot between 1937 and 1973.

What I've been doing is trying to cross reference those glimpses into the rest of Middle-earth that is scattered throughout The Hobbit with the mythology as it existed in 1937. I've been using the version of The Silmarillion that is in vol. IV of The History of Middle-earth to do this. Most of these references are absent in that version of The Silmarillion but there are a few. For instance, in "An Unexpected Party" there is a passing reference to King Azog and Moria. Neither the goblin king or the place existed in the mythology at that time. However, Elrond and Gondolin did exist.

...and by all means jump in with both feet, Walter! :) If you are familiar with The Annotated Hobbit, I for one could benefit from your insight on how the two editions of the story differs.

Walter

09-23-2005, 05:59 PM

Nenya Evenstar

09-24-2005, 07:34 PM

A couple thoughts that I've had while reading:

Concerning the past discussion of why Gandalf did not go along with the dwarves as their "warrior;" I have always attributed this to two things: 1: Gandalf's business (as has already been discussed) and 2: I have always believed that Gandalf wanted the dwarves and Bilbo to learn some valuable lessons from their journey. If Gandalf had hung around, none of the lessons these characters learned would have been learned. Of course I have nothing to back this up with. It's just a thought. :

Not the fellow who used to tell such wonderful tales at parties, about dragons and goblins and giants and the rescue of princesses and the unexpected luck of widow's sons?
This part caught my attention and I thought of the storm on the Misty Mountains where the giants are out throwing rocks back and forth to each other. Did Tolkien mean the giants to be a separate race? Or did he mean them to be part of the already existing race of Men? We know that in our world there is proof that giants existed in the past. Was Tolkien perhaps meaning simply very large Men (similar to our history's 'giants'), or a different race altogether? We know Tolkien was fond of pretending that Middle-earth was actually our world a long, long time ago. Perhaps he was consciously writing the giants into his works to tie them into our history?

It was a dwarf with a blue beard tucked into a golden belt, and very bright eyes under his dark-green hood.
It was two more dwarves, both with blue hoods, silver belts, and yellow beards; and ech of them carried a bag of tools and a spade.
Blue beards? Yellow beards? Talk about Snow White! Dwalin's beard was blue, Fili's and Kili's beards were yellow, Balin's beard was white. None of the other dwarves have specified colors for their beards. All we're given is blue, yellow, and white. I can't help but wonder what color the other nine dwarves' beards were?

And, on a literary note, I couldn't help but remember the first time I read Chapter 1 in the Hobbit. My mother read it to my brothers and I. We shrieked with laughter when she read the dishes song! Chip the glasses crack the plates! Blunt the knives and bend the forks! I still smile every time I read it!

baragund

09-26-2005, 02:57 PM

My "Tolkienology" is probably a bit rusty as I have not read anything Tolkien for quite a while now, but I think the writing of The Hobbit happened around 1930, which would put even some parts of the legendarium published in HoMe4 in question, I think, since most of HoMe4 was written in the early 1930s IIRC.

These parts may or may not yet have existed in Tolkiens mind when he conceived The Hobbit...

This is getting serious! I'm actually now pulling out my books and checking my stuff before posting... :)

The Quenta Silmarillion in HOME IV was pretty much finished by 1930. It is also described as the most "complete" version of The Silmarillion Tolkien ever wrote. Some of the links I mentioned in my earlier posts above between the mythology and The Hobbit (namely the Misty Mountains and Mirkwood) did not exist in the mythology at this time. However, Elrond and Gondolin were certainly in there.

Also, (I found this most interesting.) There was a specific account of two winged dragons surviving the War of Wrath. Could one of these have been Smaug? It could be more than coincidence because this account would have been pretty fresh in Tolkien's mind as he set out to write The Hobbit.

Nenya, another post giving my thoughts on your comments are on the way...

Walter

09-26-2005, 05:01 PM

This is getting serious! I'm actually now pulling out my books and checking my stuff before posting... :)

The Quenta Silmarillion in HOME IV was pretty much finished by 1930. It is also described as the most "complete" version of The Silmarillion Tolkien ever wrote. Some of the links I mentioned in my earlier posts above between the mythology and The Hobbit (namely the Misty Mountains and Mirkwood) did not exist in the mythology at this time. However, Elrond and Gondolin were certainly in there.
For your convenience: Mellonath Daeron (http://www.forodrim.org/daeron/md_hmch.html) has a chronological listing of the HoMe texts. According to their list QS was written in the later 1930s with last revisions 1937-8 (but I didn't actually cross-check with CT in HoMeIV)...

Mirkwood means 'dark wood' or 'gloomy wood', the term 'mirk' comes in Beowulf (there: myrcan mor; B1405), and William Morris - another one of Tolkien's sources - uses Mirkwood-water. Thus mirkwood most probably already existed in Tolkien's mind at that time. I would assume the same goes for the Misty Mountains, but here I can't recall where exactly I have read it...

Edit: I just recalled that Tolkien somewhere makes a few remarks about the etymology of 'mirkwood' (it is in Letters #289), could've spared me browsing through Beowulf, Gawain and the 'Roots of the Mountains'... :rolleyes:

Walter

09-26-2005, 05:12 PM

This part caught my attention and I thought of the storm on the Misty Mountains where the giants are out throwing rocks back and forth to each other. Did Tolkien mean the giants to be a separate race? Or did he mean them to be part of the already existing race of Men? We know that in our world there is proof that giants existed in the past. Was Tolkien perhaps meaning simply very large Men (similar to our history's 'giants'), or a different race altogether?
Giants were quite common in ancient northern tales, Ents (cf. eald enta geweorc) or Trolls (a northern name for giants though sometimes also referring to dwarfs) are but other names for these people.

According to legend, giants were the first inhabitants of England (a giant Albion their king; Albion was indeed the first reported name of England) there also exists a legend of two giants throwing stones at one another (one at Windover, the other at Firle Beacon)...

The mythological origin of giants is a little more complex - and its discussion way off-topic here, but Greek gigantes (Spirits/Creatures of Mother-earth) represent the etymological root for their name.

I think Tolkien "borrowed" or "inherited" them from his many sources, but it appears he never gave much thought to them, regarding his legendarium.

We know Tolkien was fond of pretending that Middle-earth was actually our world a long, long time ago. Perhaps he was consciously writing the giants into his works to tie them into our history?
And he didn't just have to pretend ;)

Middangeard, according to Northern legend, of old was the 'fenced region' were mankind lived, there they were protected by the gods (Aesir)...

Ithrynluin

09-26-2005, 06:29 PM

Also, (I found this most interesting.) There was a specific account of two winged dragons surviving the War of Wrath. Could one of these have been Smaug? It could be more than coincidence because this account would have been pretty fresh in Tolkien's mind as he set out to write The Hobbit.

That is quite fascinating, and I agree it is feasible that Tolkien consciously "transferred" one of these two dragons from the Silmarillion drafts into his outline for the Hobbit. It would also be interesting to learn about the other winged dragon. Most likely he also took up his abode in the Withered Heath, but who was he, what was his history, what became of him... These are all questions that sit at the back of one's mind (or at least those who are fascinated in dragons). At least we can hope that an avid fan takes up the pen one day and writes a nice piece of fan fiction about this dragon, in sync with Tolkien's Middle-earth of course. Till then... :)

This part caught my attention and I thought of the storm on the Misty Mountains where the giants are out throwing rocks back and forth to each other. Did Tolkien mean the giants to be a separate race? Or did he mean them to be part of the already existing race of Men? We know that in our world there is proof that giants existed in the past. Was Tolkien perhaps meaning simply very large Men (similar to our history's 'giants'), or a different race altogether? We know Tolkien was fond of pretending that Middle-earth was actually our world a long, long time ago. Perhaps he was consciously writing the giants into his works to tie them into our history?

I always imagined these giants to be some subspecies of trolls, a mountain troll, if you will. I never connected them to the race of Man, let alone made any real life comparisons. You certainly provide food for thought.