The Lord of the Rings

WeirdRaptor · **Reply #20 on:** September 16, 2006, 02:32:34 PM

Yep. Right now its being barrowed by a cousin who's just now getting into Tolkien. It was a really good British actor reading it!

Hmm. Sending me the German sets might want to wait until after I've successfully mastered the language.

Malte279 · **Reply #21 on:** September 16, 2006, 04:53:17 PM

Quote

When I went to Germany 5 years ago, I found I was able to converse pretty well in German.

Kannst Du mir ein bisschen was auf Deutsch schreiben Nick?

f-22 "raptor" ace · **Reply #22 on:** September 16, 2006, 11:04:01 PM

i can also speak some german just not enough to talk to someone.

Nick22 · **Reply #23 on:** September 18, 2006, 02:15:46 PM

Ja, verstimmt mein Freund. Ich habe sehr viel zu lernen von mich bis im Deuschland.

Malte279 · **Reply #24 on:** September 18, 2006, 04:35:39 PM

If you would like to get some correction, practice, whatever to improve your German I would be happy to help, as there is so much about the language which can be mixed up, confused etc.

Nick22 · **Reply #25 on:** September 21, 2006, 01:05:49 PM

Are you refering to me or raptor?

Malte279 · **Reply #26 on:** September 21, 2006, 01:12:40 PM

The offer goes to both of you. Perhaps I was refering to you in particular as I have seen some of your German already, but the offer goes to both of you.

Nick22 · **Reply #27 on:** September 21, 2006, 01:17:14 PM

How is my German, on a scale of 1 to 5? 1 means pathetic, and 5 means execellent. Personally, I'm just Ok, in my virew, but as a native german you'd have a better idea of my abilities...

Malte279 · **Reply #28 on:** September 21, 2006, 01:33:33 PM

I dislike to grade anyone on a scale. While I know what you meant to say what you wrote in German literally means:
"Yes, angry my friend. I have very much to learn from myself to in Germany."
So there is room for improvement

Nick22 · **Reply #29 on:** September 21, 2006, 01:57:48 PM

So much for those 4 semesters of college German

: But I was merely average , gradewise in them anyway.

Dwalin · **Reply #30 on:** May 18, 2007, 08:23:46 PM

I have 2 questions I was wondering about for a long time:

1) What happened to the Entwives? Were they all killed? In some sources Tolkien says they probably were, but then I found this quote:

As for the Entwives: I do not know. ... But I think in TT, 80-81 it is plain that there would be for the Ents no re-union in 'history' -- but Ents and their wives being rational creatures would find some 'earthly paradise' until the end of this world: beyond which the wisdom neither of Elves nor Ents could see. Though maybe they shared the hope of Aragorn that they were 'not bound for ever to the circles of the world and beyond them is more than memory.' .... Letters, 419 (#338)

This is rather confusing. If the Ents cannot have any reunion in “history”, so why is paradise that they are supposed to find called “earthly”? Do you have any ideas?

2) Who killed the leader of the Nazgul - Merry or Eowyn? Eowyn struck him on his head while Merry just wounded him in his knee, but Eowyn's sword was just a normal weapon, so it shouldn't do any harm to a magical creature, while Merry's sword was able to do so.
There can be also some misunderstanding about the prophecy: it stated that “no living man could harm the Nazgul”. But does the term “man” indicate a gender, so it means that the Nazgul wouldn’t be killed by a man, but by a woman or did it indicate a race, so that means he wouldn't be killed by a man, but by a hobbit?

WeirdRaptor · **Reply #31 on:** May 18, 2007, 10:57:24 PM

Quote

1) What happened to the Entwives? Were they all killed? In some sources Tolkien says they probably were, but then I found this quote

As for the Entwives: I do not know. ... But I think in TT, 80-81 it is plain that there would be for the Ents no re-union in 'history' -- but Ents and their wives being rational creatures would find some 'earthly paradise' until the end of this world: beyond which the wisdom neither of Elves nor Ents could see. Though maybe they shared the hope of Aragorn that they were 'not bound for ever to the circles of the world and beyond them is more than memory.' .... Letters, 419 (#338)

This is rather confusing. If the Ents cannot have any reunion in “history”, so why is paradise that they are supposed to find called “earthly”? Do you have any ideas?

To my knowledge, that bit in "The Lord of the Rings" is the only source disclosing the entwives, really. However, the story never really does conclude what happened to them, but an acquaintance of Sam Gamgee did see a walking tree in some woods, once.
Yes, Tolkien said they probably were killed. Perhaps, but he never reveals outright, to my knowledge, anyway.
"Earthyl paradise" is basically just that. As good as its gonna get on this earth, then at the End, they'll be reuinited, one way or the other.

Quote

2) Who killed the leader of the Nazgul - Merry or Eowyn? Eowyn struck him on his head while Merry just wounded him in his knee, but Eowyn's sword was just a normal weapon, so it shouldn't do any harm to a magical creature, while Merry's sword was able to do so.
There can be also some misunderstanding about the prophecy: it stated that “no living man could harm the Nazgul”. But does the term “man” indicate a gender, so it means that the Nazgul wouldn’t be killed by a man, but by a woman or did it indicate a race, so that means he wouldn't be killed by a man, but by a hobbit?

Eowyn. Merry just jabbed enough to distract him long enough for the other "non-man" to finish him off. The prophesy surrounding the Witch King was very literally minded. No "human male" could harm the Witch King, but a hobbit and a woman could. Its as simple as that.

Malte279 · **Reply #32 on:** May 19, 2007, 07:10:36 AM

As for the ents the males probably were very much decimated as well. They had to fight yet another battle after they took Isengard:

Quote

'Hoom, well that is fair enough,' said Treebeard; 'for to be sure Ents have played their part. And not only in dealing with that, hoom, that accursed tree-slayer that dwelt here. For ere was a great inrush of those, bu·rum, thosos evileyed-blackhanded-bowlegged-flinthearted-clawfingered-foulbellied-bloodthirsty, morimaitesincahonda, hoom, well, since you are hasty folk and their full name is as long as years of torment, those vermin of orcs; and they came over the River and down from the North and all round the wood of LaurelindÛrenan, which they could not get into, thanks to the Great ones who are here.'He bowed to the Lord and Lady of LÛrien.
'And these same foul creatures were more than surprised to meet us out on the Wold, for they had not heard of us before; though that might be said also of better folk. And not many will remember us, for not many escaped us alive, and the River had most of those. But it was well for you, for if they had not met us, then the king of the grassland would not have ridden far, and if he had there would have been no home to return to.'

Quote

Treebeard's face became sad. 'Forests may grow,' he said. 'Woods may spread. But no Ents. There are no Entings.'
'Yet maybe there is now more hope in your search,' said Aragorn. 'Lands will lie open to you eastward that have long been closed.'
But treebeard shook his head and said: 'It is far to go. And there are too many Men there in these days. [...]

Quote

Then Treebeard said farewell to each of them in turn, and he bowed three times slowly and with great reverence to Celeborn and Galadriel. 'It is long, since we met by stock or by stone, A vaimar, vanim·lon nostari!' he said. 'It is sad that we should meet only thus at the ending. For the world is changing: I feel it in the water, I feel it in the earth, and I smell it in the air. I do not think we shall meet again.'
And Celeborn said: 'I do not know, Eldest.' But Galadriel said: 'Not in Middle-earth, nor until the lands that lie under the wave are lifted up again. Then in the willow-meads of Tasarinan we may meet in the Spring. Farewell!'

The wikipedia article on Ents (for whose relieablility I can give no guarantee) reads:

Quote

There used to be Entwives (literally "Ent-women"), but they started to move farther away from the Ents because they liked to plant and control things, so they moved away to the region that would later become the Brown Lands across the Great River Anduin, though the male Ents still visited them. The Entwives taught the race of Men much about the art of agriculture. However, this entire area was destroyed by Sauron (most likely during the War of the Last Alliance), and the Entwives disappeared. The Ents looked for them but never found them. It is sung by the Ents that one day they will find each other. In The Fellowship of the Ring, Samwise Gamgee mentions his cousin Hal claims to have seen a treelike giant in the north of the Shire. However, this might have been merely a reference to the size of the creature. At the time of writing, the concept of Ents had not yet entered Tolkien's mind, and nothing further was done with the idea.
During the Fangorn episode, Merry and Pippin tell Treebeard about the Shire. Treebeard says the Entwives would like that land. This, combined with the giant-sighting by Sam's cousin Hal mentioned above, has led to some speculation that the Entwives may now live near the Shire. However, Tolkien has stated in Letters #144: 'I think that in fact the Entwives have disappeared for good, being destroyed with their gardens in the War of the Last Alliance….[citation needed]

Malte279 · **Reply #33 on:** May 19, 2007, 07:11:11 AM

As for the prophecy of the ring wraith, it may have refered to both, gender and "species". However, I do have the impression that the role of Eowyn was stressed. From what I read Tolkien was very dissatisfied with the outcome of the prophecies in Shakespeare's Macbeth. One of the prophecies was:

Quote

Macbeth will never be vanquish'd until Great Birnam wood to high Dunsinane Hill shall come against him"

Shakespeare had that prophecy fulfilled by having the soldiers attacking Macbeth attaching treebranches to their armour to camouflage their numbers (Tolkien came up with the Ents as a way which he thought Shakespeare should have taken). The other Macbeth prophecy Tolkien "improved" was this one:

Quote

"none of woman born shall harm Macbeth"

Shakespeare fulfilled that prophecy by having Macduff, the slayer of Macbeth, being born by Caesarean section while Tolkien took the more obvious approach by making a woman the vanquisher of the Witchking. Fighting women (e.g. Joan of Arc, Margaret of Anjou) are usually presented very negative in Shakespeare's plays.

Nick22 · **Reply #34 on:** May 19, 2007, 01:21:09 PM

Yes, the Entwives are gone, at least they are assumed to be.,.. It was Eowyn who killed the Witch-King...Merry's attempts only cost him his blade, for it was consumed by fire after piercing the Witch King..

Malte279 · **Reply #35 on:** May 19, 2007, 01:59:38 PM

Speaking of blades:

Quote

Eowyn's sword was just a normal weapon, so it shouldn't do any harm to a magical creature, while Merry's sword was able to do so.

While there are many magical swords in the lord of the rings there I don't think there is any statement claiming that it takes a magical blade to hurt a ring wraith.

Nick22 · **Reply #36 on:** May 19, 2007, 02:17:54 PM

While Eowyn's sword was not magical, like Merry's was, it didn't matter. Merry's magical sword was unable to kill the Witch king, yet Eowyn's normal sword was, because she was a woman, and thus fuilfilled the prophecy. She was the only one who could have fulfilled the prophecy..

Kor · **Reply #37 on:** October 23, 2007, 10:35:17 PM

Or perhaps Merry's sword was able to break the key enchantments protecting the Witchking, as well as distracting him, so that Eowyn's blade could finish the job. Just one idea.

Tails_155 · **Reply #38 on:** October 23, 2007, 11:00:07 PM

As you've already noticed by our previous skirmish I have a moderate to strong disliking for extremely popular things... I never got into this series, and I thought the movies (mainly the first one, the second one was better about it) were rather long, I don't read a lot of books though, I just don't prefer it, but that's just my opinion

Malte279 · **Reply #39 on:** October 24, 2007, 03:15:00 AM

I guess it partly depends on our readiness to invest more time in reading a book than it would take to watch a movie. The fascination of a book also depends on our phantasy and our ability to imagine what we see spelled out in letters rather than having it presented in actual pictures which are more prescriptive than descriptive. As far as I am concerned books usually are much better than any movies based on the books. The only case I can think of where I think a movie exceeded the book it was based on was "The animals of Farthing Wood" (and as it was made a TV series they had a lot more time to tell the story than they would have if they had tried to make it one single movie).

As for the killing of the witch king I still don't see any line in the lord of the rings that would suggest that it took any magical blade to injure him. The prophecy (who was the one to make that prophecy anyway? I don't think they mention this important detail anywhere in the book) is about who can(not) kill the witch king, not about which kind of weapon it takes.