Lord of the Rings question

Fingolfin met Morgoth in combat, and scored some points against the God before he was crushed. Glorfindel killed the Balrog at Gondolin. Turin killed Glaurung the dragon.

I would say Fingolfin > Turin > Glofindel, but that is just me
 
Is it possible to have a literary discussion around here without being called nerds, virgins, or gay? Nevermind.
It's easy to see which posters never read the books, and are only judging LOTR from the movies.
 
Worthy of note for Elrond, he is truly half elven, but only 37.5% human. His great-great-gandmother was Melian the Maiar. Elrond the half elven could also be called Elrond the 13% Angel.
 
I did mean Turin v. Glorfindel- hard not to put Fingolfin way up at the top.

And I'd take Turin- I think he gets big points for surviving his encounter (as Glorfindel perishes during the Fall of Gondolin).
 
I'm not sure I've read a geekier thread than this (and, yes, I did like the movies, so don't go there).

All I can think of now is the William Shatner Star Trek convention skit on SNL.
 
^^^

Well too bad the majority of this thread is not about the movies, rather Tolkien's books themselves.

But, thanks for playing, cool guy
 
I read the book and watched the movies, and the way almost every little change has a group of fans dedicated to hating it is a bit annoying. The 180º reversal of Faramir's character is the biggest thing to complain about.
 
I thought leaving out the scouring of the Shire was what set most people off. It's the part that I noticed anyway.

Was Pippin as annoying in the books? I honestly can't remember. I found the Silmarillion more confusing than Ligers.
 
Faramir's character didn't need to be changed, he was noble, and above reproach, able to withstand the temptation to take the ring of power when he had it within his grasp. Boromir lacked such resolve, or wisdom.
Why tinker with the basic makeup of key elements of the books? I can see where some things needed to be different for the sake of brevity or because the story is visual rather than on a printed page, but I don't get some of the changes.
 
As does my complaint on Denethor.

I agree, all of the other decisions (Bombadil, the shire, etc) were acceptable as they were omissions required to get the films down to the +10 hours they were. Changing the essessence of Faramir/Denethor, though, has greater consequence. The underlying theme of the story is the passing of worlds. The elves are leaving, the last great mystical evil Sauron is prepared to make his last stand. The world is passing exclusively to the hands of men. As such, men must be worthy of task. The implication of denethor and faramir being douchebags is that men are not worthy. Sure, Aragorn saves the day, but as said from the first movie even his time is limitted. Faramir is meant to represent the good that men are capable of and while ultimately the movies allow him to sit in that role (or at least somewhat near it), his claim is at best tenuous.
 
The are from the other books... well, "books" may be a bit much. There was the Silmarillion, and all of the other books, which are really source works for the Silmarillion. In addition to the story of the Silmarrils the book also includes the entire history of middle earth up until the third age of men (which ends with the LotR), including the creation story. You get a fairly complex layout of the Gods (which is both a monotheism and a polytheism), the history of the dwarves Elves and to a much less extent the early history of men. Taken as a history more than a narative, it is quite interesting.
 
They are in the books, though some just in passing:Glorfindel is an elf at Rivendell- in the books he is the one that takes Frodo to the Fords of Bruinen. He's also present at the council of Elrond. It's not mentioned in the books, but he shares his name with an Elven hero who perished fighting a Balrog during the fall of the Elven city of Gondolin (from which Elrond's grandfather Tuor escaped). Tolkien used the same name for both characters and ultimately decided they were the same person.

Turin is mentioned only in passing, during the council of Elrond when Gandalf says the mightiest weapons in Middle Earth cannot destroy the ring "even..if the hand of Beren or Turin" should wield it.

Fingolfinis not mentioned in the body of LOTR- I don't remember if he comes up in the appendices.

Always amazes me that LOTR seemed to be a sort of side project for Tolkien, and his true world building (from things like the Silmarillion and Akallabeth) is hinted at throughout. He really spent his lifetime developing the stories and mythologies, and that polish really helps make the books as rich as they are.
 
And if you want to try your hands at the other material beyond LOTR, I'd start by reading the first section of the Silmarillion (it's called the Music of the Ainur) sitting in your local bookstore. If it seems compelling and the number of names present doesn't throw you, give it a shot. If you have to fight hard to read it, probably not worth hurting yourself over.

I love the Silmarillion and think it makes for fantastic storytelling, but it's a difficult read. Many similar sounds people and place names to keep straight- the first time I read it I was hitting the appendix to look up names every couple of pages.
 
Not to mention that this person took time out of their lives to post on a Lord of the Rings thread- nerd by association!
 
Please allow me to make full diclosure: I am certain that there are people who would consider me a nerd, so I am not attempting to set myself apart. I simply found it amusing that a question about how long a mythical elf could live would generate (now) 5 pages of blog discussion.
If you can't see the humor in that, sorry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top