| Author |
Message |
    
Angakuk
hunter
Username: Angakuk
Post Number: 549
Registered: 6-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 28, 2006 - 6:16 pm: |     |
SSR:Of course I knew they had left out the Old Forest, Bombadill (which I think is the most mysterious creatures of the books... I always wonder if it's intended to be a god or something) and the Barrow-Downs...
I was very disappointed that the movie left out Tom Bombadil, he is my favorite character in the book. However, it is easy to see why that whole episode was left out. I would have materially lengthened the movie and it really doesn't contribute much to the development of the plot.
My other principle objection to the movie was the way it padded Arwen Evenstar's part. Although it constitutes, in my opinion, an actual improvement on Tolkien's story, it is definitely a separate creation of the screenplay.
"WOW! Welcome to the group! I couldn't have replied better myself... I may regret this in the future, but 'Angakuk has a finely tuned sense of debative sarcasm'." Cavebear 7/22/05
|
Sweetsunray
storyteller
Username: Sweetsunray
Post Number: 1026
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 28, 2006 - 8:36 pm: | |
Yeah, was surprised with Arwen's appearance instead of the other elf as saviour... but I thought it was a good move to give her some flesh in the movie, instead of the only far away mentioned Arwen, and the other elf doesn't appear anymore afterwards.
As for Tom, I agree he's one of my favourites in there... every time I reread the Fellowship, I'm looking forward to meeting him again.
Everyone has a motive for giving arguments. But only the arguments given matter. |
Ted
hunter
Username: Ted
Post Number: 439
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 28, 2006 - 8:54 pm: | |
(bear)To comment of Matt's point, a horse cannot travel as fast as a man in the long run. A horse needs time to rest, feed and recover from carrying its rider and his equipment. If you had no high energy feed with you, they would lose their condition rapidly. A man in fine shape might be exhausted, but a horse would be lamed or even dead in asked to push too hard to often.
In the context of Ayla's journeys, I once asked a very competent and experienced horsewoman (with a lot of experience of endurance rides for horses) about distances.
She said that under the best conditions, good quality feed and so on, a good sized horse carrying a rider and saddle only (with total weight around 80kg, 175 pounds) would have difficulty making more than 10 miles a day, week in week out.
Ted
Do not go gentle into that good night...Rage, rage against the dying of the light
Benjamin Disraeli: "The Jews are a nervous people. Nineteen centuries of Christian love have taken a toll." |
Cavebear
cave painter
Username: Cavebear
Post Number: 2712
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 28, 2006 - 10:32 pm: | |
It never fails that when you stay away one day, everything gets active! What great discussions
Everyone makes such good points.
The idea that Eomer is judging the distance traveled on foot by his experience on horseback is excellent. I have some doubts about the lesser distance that horses can travel them humans, though, as that would reverse Eomer's opinion. Clearly, his experience is that men on horseback can travel farther than men on foot. Even if Eomer's group traveled farther on horse because they had alternate rides is unlikely because Eomer gave horses to Aragorn et al only because the riders had died fighting the Orcs. Clearly, men on horseback can travel farther than men on foot (at least in Tolkien's knowledge).
I think there may be a question of time involved. Aragorn described the time since the day of Boromir's death. Given all the events of that day, the fighting involved, the sending of Boromir down the river, and solving the mystery of the disappearance of Frodo and Sam, it was late in that day. "Then they left Parth Galen. The afternoon was fading as they came back to the glade where Boromir had fallen. There they picked up the trail of the orcs." So it was late the "fists" day when the 3 set out. At the conclusion of the chase, it was not the end of the 4th day, but the start of it. "Together, they watched the dawn grow slowly in the sky". Before any travel is mentioned, Legolas sees the Riders of Rohan approaching, and the 3 wait for their arrival ( a mere 5 leagues). The, the 3 have pursued the orcs one late afternoon, 2 days, and not at all on the "fourth" day. "Forty leagues and five" in 2 days and a slight part of a 3rd is not 4 full days. Essentially, they traveled 20 leagues per full day.
I note in some interest that they seem to have run much of the time ("like a deer, he sprang away) and searched carefully at other times. At first they traveled at night, but stopped that when they became concerned about missing important clues ("Aragorn searched the ground in a wide circle"). Also "At last! said Aragorn, here are the tracks we seek". And when they found Pippin's brooch they dared not travel by night again. So they were not moving steadily and rested at night for some of the chase.
Again, their travel was up and down, which wears on one I both directions. Traveling down is not as easy as moving on level road. There had to be some high points (and therefore equal low points) because Legolas admitted that the orcs had passed out of his sight (because of distance). "They are far, far away, he said, turning to Aragorn". To see that far, Legolas had to be at a very high point. So they had to be traveling up and down a lot. That's not good for distance
So, between time misunderstandings, non-level terrain, and requirements for stopping to search for clues and paths, I think the chase of the 3 Hunters is truly remarkable and is suitably epic for the story.
Machiavelli was pretty devious. For a guy... |
Cavebear
cave painter
Username: Cavebear
Post Number: 2713
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 28, 2006 - 11:05 pm: | |
(Angakuk) " I was very disappointed that the movie left out Tom Bombadil, he is my favorite character in the book."
I, too, was disappointed to see Tom Bombadil left out. As interesting as the character was, and as one of the very few ancient positive forces in Middle-Earth, I expected to see Bombadil become involved later in the story. But, I understand why. Bombadil was too strange to be used properly. My guess, poorly-qualified as I am to give it regarding a master like Tolkien, is that Tolkien realized he had created too powerful a being, suitable for 'The Hobbit' but too much for the more complex and balanced LotR.
I first read LotR almost 40 years ago, so it is very difficult to recall my impressions then (the only one I have for sure is thinking Frodo was really dead by Shelob and that Sam would carry on the quest). But I do recall thinking Tom Bombadil would have a further place in the story (and certainly could have helped in desolate terrains in Mordor). Heck I thought he might have helped inside Mt Doom. After I finished reading the story, I understood Tom had no place there. But Gandalf (I think) had once mentioned that Tom had his small area to protect and that was all he could do. That he might be the last to fall if Sauron won, but that he would fall in the end.
Stories (and even great stories) can be written in various ways, and it is quite possible that Bombadil could have been important in one possible version. But that's not the version we have. Bombadil is almost a lesser version of Treebeard, and as Treebeard could not have contested against Sauron, neither could Bombadil.
Pity, too. I like him.
Machiavelli was pretty devious. For a guy... |
Cavebear
cave painter
Username: Cavebear
Post Number: 2714
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 28, 2006 - 11:15 pm: | |
(SSR) "Yeah, was surprised with Arwen's appearance instead of the other elf as saviour... but I thought it was a good move to give her some flesh in the movie, instead of the only far away mentioned Arwen, and the other elf doesn't appear anymore afterwards.
While I like "true to the book" movies. That was one change I did not object to. It caused no harm to the plot, consolidated the characters a bit, and created a connection between Arwen and Aragorn that was complicated to express in movie-time. I've met some people that were just utterly offended at the change, but it wasn't a bad idea. I also think it was a good idea to strengthen her character. The books were never very clear on WHY they loved each other. I suspect that Tolkien might even think it was an improvement.
Machiavelli was pretty devious. For a guy... |
Sweetsunray
storyteller
Username: Sweetsunray
Post Number: 1027
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 28, 2006 - 11:51 pm: | |
Day 1: leave near dusk, after Boromir's death in pursuit of Orcs + night travel corssing rocky hills (since they traveled all night + just before evening I count it 1 day travel
Day 2: arrive at Rohan plains, start travel,find brooch... 12 leagues... rest at night... 24 hours has passed since Boromir's death... they traveled for 24 hours (equals 2 days of day travel)
Day 3: travel across Rohan plains, 12 leagues...rest at night... 2 days (48 hours) have passed since Boromir's death... they traveled 36 hours (if you think it's spring/fall) (equals 3 daytimes of travel)
Day 4: travel across Rohan plains, reach hills, pass through the hills... night rest... Boromir died 3 days ago (72 hours before the night rest)... they traveled 48 hours (equals 4 daytimes of travel)
Day 5: meet Eomer
So, CB, you missed a day of travel there.
Everyone has a motive for giving arguments. But only the arguments given matter. |
Cavebear
cave painter
Username: Cavebear
Post Number: 2717
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 12:38 am: | |
It starts with Day 0, Not Day 1.
Zero hour is 6 pm Tuesday (just to assign a day). 6 pm Wed, they find brooch and rest at night. 6 pm Wed, they are the Rohan Plains and rest. 6pm Thurs again on Rohan Plains, they rest for the night. 6 am, Fri they meet Eomer.
6 pm Tues to 6 pm Wed is 24 hours. 6 pm Wed to 6 pm Thurs is 24 hours. 6 pm Thurs is 24 hours. They did not travel after 6 pm Fri. They met Eomer 6 am Sat. 3 days. Your right, not 2.5, but not 4 days either.
Machiavelli was pretty devious. For a guy... |
Catfriend
gatherer
Username: Catfriend
Post Number: 144
Registered: 12-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 7:33 am: | |
A horse? Ten miles a day? Sounds really weird.
That being said, distances a horse can travel vary depending on the size of the party, mounts, weather, terrain, and condition of the roads. Medieval people traveled with everything they needed following in carts behind them. A train of this sort wouldn't move fast. Mounted knights-- all on well-conditioned destriers or palfreys -- would move fairly fast and cover upwards of 50 or 60 miles per day. However, traveling 20 to 30 miles a day would be considered a good day's journey.
http://www.wwwestra.com/horses/history_travel.htm,
And indeed, reading about the crusaders and their movement rates, the knights traveled faster than 10 miles a day.
According to http://www.ultimatehorsesite.com/info/horsespeedmp h.htm, horses can trot at 8 MPH, in average. Even encumbered, are they so exhausted after 2-3 hours of trotting that they cannot go on??
Why would half the cultures in the world use horse-riding, when speed was required, if a well-trained man would be much faster?
One Ring to rule them all
One Ring to find them
One Ring to bring them all
And in the Darkness bind them! |
Ted
hunter
Username: Ted
Post Number: 440
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 8:28 am: | |
(catfriend)Why would half the cultures in the world use horse-riding, when speed was required, if a well-trained man would be much faster?
Because half the cultures of the world rarely travel more than 100 miles from their home, and usually a lot less than that.
It is well documented that horses can cover fifty miles, a hundred miles even, in a day.
Endurance rides vary in distance between 25 and 100 miles in a single day.
But then they are stuffed.
Ted
Do not go gentle into that good night...Rage, rage against the dying of the light
Benjamin Disraeli: "The Jews are a nervous people. Nineteen centuries of Christian love have taken a toll." |
Ted
hunter
Username: Ted
Post Number: 441
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 9:10 am: | |
(catfriend)
And indeed, reading about the crusaders and their movement rates, the knights traveled faster than 10 miles a day.
Yes, as much as twenty miles a day, but their horses did not necessarily make it.
Firstly, the knights had as many as three horses, and secondly they replaced them as they wore out and became lame.
See:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1842122789/103-54 26038-2708616?v=glance&n=283155
Book Description
Nearly 900 years ago, Duke Godfrey de Bouillon set out on the First Crusade--and in our own time, author Tim Severin retraced his steps. The destination: Jerusalem, city of gold. For more than eight years, Severin followed the historic trail, riding through northern Europe's green countryside and into the heat of the Near East. In the process, he covered more than 2,500 miles by horse, past ruined Crusader settlements and ancient battlefields, over arduous mountain passes, and across Anatolian steppes. A dazzling synthesis of adventure, practical history, and exploration, told by one of our finest and most respected travel writers--illustrated with his own photographs.
(snip)
To find out, he and a female companion retraced the route of Duke Godfrey of Bouillon, leader of the first crusade (1096), from Chateau Bouillon in Belgium to Jerusalem, on horseback. In their effort to use horses closely resembling the medieval war horse, Tim and Sarah settled on a sturdy Ardennes stallion and an Irish bog mare. (Alas, neither horse completed the journey).
You hear about the successes, not the failures.
Ted
Do not go gentle into that good night...Rage, rage against the dying of the light
Benjamin Disraeli: "The Jews are a nervous people. Nineteen centuries of Christian love have taken a toll." |
Sweetsunray
storyteller
Username: Sweetsunray
Post Number: 1028
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 11:50 am: | |
CB, I know what you mean...but
a) There cannot be a day 0, like there cannot be a year 0... There can only be a point zero, but a sec afterwards you're already starting year 1. We can only tell time in time elapsed or the positive numbered day or year we start with. But there's no such thing as the nulth day/year. So you can be at the start of the 1st day/year, while not having yet a day passed since. When you start the 2nd day/year, 1 day/year has passed.
b) if you count the hours of travel: 1 night = 12 hours, and then afterwards 3 times 12 daytime hours before meeting Eomer, they have traveled 4 x 12 hours aka 4 daytimes of travel aka 4 days.
I ran into a similar mistifying understanding when one of my best friends congratulated me on my 33rd year of life. My first reaction was to answer, I celebrated being 32, but thinking more on it, I could not say he was wrong either. Because when I turned 32 on my birthday, it meant that I had already lived 32 years, and that the next day would be the first day of my 33rd year. Thinking that through, I wasn't sure how old I was anymore... LOL
Really confusing. So they meet Eomer 3.5 days after Boromir's death, have traveled 4 times 12 hours (taking spring/fall equinox as the time of year), and it's the start of 5th day, if you count the day when Boromir died as the 1st day, the commencement of their trip, which you have to because there does not exist such a thing as the nulth day. Got you confused already?
Everyone has a motive for giving arguments. But only the arguments given matter. |
Cavebear
cave painter
Username: Cavebear
Post Number: 2721
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 4:03 am: | |
SSR, not confused at all. 
I mean day 0 only to start the counting of time of the chase.
At dusk one day, they set off. By dusk the next (24 hours later), they rest after finding Pippin's brooch. Dusk 24 hours later (48 hours total), they rest again "now twice 12 leagues". Dusk the next day, they rest again (72 hours after start). They do not travel again by the morn where they meet Eomer. They have moved only in 3 precise 24 hour periods. They have made the chase for exactly 3 full days (dusk to dusk to dusk to dusk) and slept in place 1 night unmoving and meet Eomer that morn. Three 24 hour "days" of travel exactly.
So Eomer should have been even more surprised. Whatever distance the "Three Hunters" travelled (up and down some serious terrain), they did in 3 real days (3 times 24 hours), not 4.
Machiavelli was pretty devious. For a guy... |
Cavebear
cave painter
Username: Cavebear
Post Number: 2722
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 4:21 am: | |
Ted, the Crusaders weighed a lot more than just themselves. A 150 lb Crusader wearing armor and packing weapons, food, and shelter would have weighed almost twice that (admittedly just a guestimate from some documentaries).
Eomer's men rode light and swift. They were mostly only helmed and bearing spears and bows. Not heavy stuff. From later parts (when they capture Frodo and Sam), we see that that had sanctuaries they rode from and back, so they weren't carrying much.
Apparently, Eomer's riders did not have or need multiple horses. Legolas observes (as Eomer's rider's approach), that they have [only] 3 empty saddles after their fight with the orcs. No extras and no alternates. Three Eomer riders died, three empty saddles. Rather convenient for our Three Hunters, but that is the writer's privilege.
Just pointing out that Eomer's Riders weren't baggaged like Crusaders.
Machiavelli was pretty devious. For a guy... |
Sweetsunray
storyteller
Username: Sweetsunray
Post Number: 1029
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 10:10 am: | |
Wonder how much by the counting of the leagues they did on that first night...
35 leagues is the total, minus 12 leagues, minus 12 leagues, minus at least 8 leagues (last hills they reach about noon). Since on the last travel day they start onthe 8 leagues of the hills close to noon, they must have done about 2 leagues in the morning or so.
That would mean that on the first night, they managed to do between 1 or 2 leagues. 1 league seems more appropriate... that's 3 miles, about 5 km... and with the terrain described that seems very realistic.
Everyone has a motive for giving arguments. But only the arguments given matter. |
Cavebear
cave painter
Username: Cavebear
Post Number: 2725
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, July 01, 2006 - 8:47 pm: | |
SSR, I've always found the term "league" to be rather vague. It seems to define different distances in different contexts in modern times. Indeed, I've always thought it was some combination of distance plus time.
So many distances in earlier times represented body parts (foot, cubit, pace, inch, etc) that it is sometimes hard to figure out the actual distances. Especially when larger numbers of those units are meant. If a "league" means 3 land miles, or 5 kilometers, that helps (but even those start to diverge at sufficient distance).
I may go back and translate into the units I understand better. Or you can (and I feel lazy about that right now).
Machiavelli was pretty devious. For a guy... |
Scott
flint knapper
Username: Scott
Post Number: 1873
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Friday, March 09, 2007 - 6:16 am: | |
There is a new Tokien book coming out on the 17th of April this year.:
The Children of Hurin
quote: The Children of HĪrin é takes the reader back to a time long before The Lord of the Ringsé, in an area of Middle-earth that was to be drowned before ever Hobbits appeared, and when the great enemy was still the fallen Vala, Morgoth, and Sauron only his lieutenant. This heroic romance is the tale of the Man, HĪrin, who dared to defy Morgoth's force of evil, and his family's tragic destiny, as it follows his son TĪrin Turambar's travails through the lost world of Beleriand.
So for those of you that have yet to finish LOTR (gasp!), you had better get reading!
Scott
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Ces gens, Jondalar, ils sourient. Ils me sourient. - Ayla |
Ted
hunter
Username: Ted
Post Number: 539
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Friday, March 09, 2007 - 8:28 am: | |
I bought the Silmarillion when it first came out many years ago, expecting a good read, and was greatly disappointed. I found it less than riveting. I always skip the poetry and songs in LOTR too.
I guess I'm not into the background of the LOTR, wonderful as the tale itself is.
I just like a good story.
Ted
Do not go gentle into that good night...Rage, rage against the dying of the light
Benjamin Disraeli: "The Jews are a nervous people. Nineteen centuries of Christian love have taken a toll." |
Matt
hunter
Username: Matt
Post Number: 535
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Friday, March 09, 2007 - 12:31 pm: | |
Although I enjoy The Silmarillion for the most part, The Tale of Turin (upon which this new book seems to focus) is possibly my least favorite chapter. I like a depressing story sometimes but this one is just too dark, even for me.
Thanks for calling attention to it though, Scott. It is probable that I'll take a gander sometime...
We sit together,
the mountains and I,
until only the mountain remains.
-- Li Po (701-762 A.D.) |
Rhi
hunter
Username: Rhi
Post Number: 480
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 10, 2007 - 6:14 am: | |
Less than enthused, though I do enjoy the Sil. Frankly, I read Scott's post and thought he was trying to hint that our Thal was having a wee one.
Not a big fan of Hurin et all... far too tragic (and creepy) for my tastes. I'm more a Beren and Luthien girl (alas, my Beren betta died last week after many years of life... his sweet Luthien preceeded him by a few months... a fish with such personality I've never met!)
Mostly Harmless
A Knock on the Duir "If ye don't be belaving innything what fun are ye going to get out av life?" Judy Plum, LM Montgomery |
Scott
flint knapper
Username: Scott
Post Number: 1875
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 10, 2007 - 8:12 am: | |
LOL me too Ted!!!
Hurin was really dark and the new novel is supposedly very dark. One has to wonder what the nightmares of these authors are like. On second thought, I don't want to know.
Thal having a wee one? She is far too old for that! Scott goes running, ducking and screaming.....
LOTR was dark enough for me - but I am glad of Tolkien's unpublished stuff is getting out there.
Scott
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Ces gens, Jondalar, ils sourient. Ils me sourient. - Ayla |
Sidescraper_gal
hunter
Username: Sidescraper_gal
Post Number: 472
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, March 10, 2007 - 7:27 pm: | |
Scott:
Interesting. I have family members who absolutely could not read anything Tolkien wrote. One of them has declared that fantasy doesn't interest her at all(she is basically rather unibmaginative about anything other than cooking). There are others who really love the stuff and would be eager to see the new material out. I'm kind of in-between. I read LOTR years ago, and it was an impressive feat, I must admit, but I, myself, just wasn't all that impressed with it, though I saw the movies and thought they were quite good. But then, I saw the Narnia movie too, and have read all the Narnia books. I'm much more impressed with those, but in an entirely different way.
Anne G |
Angakuk
flint knapper
Username: Angakuk
Post Number: 681
Registered: 6-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, March 11, 2007 - 3:43 am: | |
I am a pretty big Tolkien fan, re-reading the whole corpus about once every 10 years since I first read the Hobbit in Jr. High. The last time being just before the LOTR movie came out. I enjoy the Silmarillion, even if it does lack the dramatic unity of the LOTR. I look forward to reading the new book, and it is to be released the day before my birthday. Must send a hint my wife's direction.
To dare is to lose one's footing momentarily; not to dare is to lose oneself.
- Soren Kierkegaard
|
|
Prehistorical Fiction, SF and Fantasy 
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page