Ch. o/t Wk: LoTR Bk 1 Ch. 10: "Strider"
zett
To host a chapter discussion, or for more information, go to:
http://parasha.maoltuile.org/
I see this chapter as maintaining a "waves of suspense" effect, which
began in the previous chapter-I sense it particularly surrounding the
uncertainty as to Strider's motives.
After Frodo's table mishap and the clearing of the Common Room (as
told in the previous chapter) he, Pippin, and Sam return to the
darkened parlor. (Merry had gone out for ‘a sniff of the air.') Upon
replenishing the fire, they are surprised to find Strider calmly
sitting there. Is Strider a Ninja? ;)
An uneasy discussion between Frodo and Strider ensues, where each
warily and grudgingly divulges knowledge of the Ring plot (broken by
one comic interlude by Barliman Butterbur). Finally, when the aura of
distrust has just begun to decompress with the revelation of Gandalf's
letter, it is ramped up once again by Sam's remaining doubts - it
crests when Strider says:
"If I had killed the real Strider, I could kill you. And I should
have killed you already without so much talk. If I was after the
Ring, I could have it – NOW!"
He stood up and seemed suddenly to grow taller. In his eyes gleamed a
light, keen and commanding. Throwing back his cloak, he laid his hand
on the hilt of a sword that had hung concealed by his side. They did
not dare to move. Sam sat wide mouthed staring at him dumbly. (Was
this Strider's Ring temptation moment?)
It subsides when he says:
"But I am the real Strider, fortunately," he said, looking down at
them with his face softened by a sudden smile. "I am Aragorn son of
Arathorn, and if by life or death I can save you, I will."
[I sigh and get all verkempt every time I read that]
The tension gets put back in place but is of a different kind (no
longer confrontational strangers, but cohorts worrying over a common
cause- especially concern over a missing Gandalf). They talk of him,
and Strider admits that he is troubled for the first time since he has
known him. Then the crest in this secondary tension occurs when a
frightened and breathless Merry arrives. He has seen Black Riders in
Bree! And he was nearly kidnapped!
The chapter ends with this new level of unease maintained. Knowing
the Riders are about, they have decoys put in their bedrooms,
barricade themselves in the parlor, and bed down on the floor with
Strider taking on the role of guardian as he sits up to keep a
sleepless watch.
Questions (only a couple) and Comments (mostly)
Well, first of all, an admission: I took this chapter mostly in order
to have an excuse to kick against a pet peeve of mine – the attitude
some have that Aragorn is a cardboard character. I guess I am just a
sucker for outsiders (and mystery) and that may make me see that which
is not there, but I think there are many layers to Aragorn. As these
weekly discussions go on, I hope to continue putting in my .02 about
Aragorn- if schoolwork permits. (go ahead and groan, if you wish) ;)
All though this chapter we are told about his expressions. He curls
his lip and sneers; he is alternately harsh and friendly; he pushes
Frodo's fear buttons, testing him, ensuring that he is not falling in
a trap set by the Enemy, but also testing Frodo's wisdom and mettle.
This tells me he is cautious and smart. But there is another side:
"Drink, fire, and chance meeting are pleasant enough (read: I wish I
could hang out in bars with friends) but, well – this isn't the Shire.
There are queer folk about. Though I say it as shouldn't, you may
think," he added with a wry smile, seeing Frodo's glance.
Then there's
"…But I must admit," he added with a queer laugh, "that I hoped you
would take to me for my own sake. A hunted man sometimes wearies of
distrust and longs for friendship and to be taken on trust. But
there, I believe my looks are against me."
While he is able to smile wryly at his outsider status, the fact that
he refers to his supposedly untrustworthy looks more than once tells
me that he doesn't like his lack of acceptance. It gives a sense of
burden about the character.
I see in Strider's sad and wry smiles, the desire of the young man
Estel (who had a home, a place) to show forth, but who is in conflict
with the older man who has a greater responsibility and burden that
holds him away from others. It gives me a very lonely and sympathetic
feeling for the man.
Then there is his sarcasm-
After Frodo's screw up in the Common Room:
"Well? Why did you do that? Worse than anything your friends could
have said. You have put your foot in it! Or should I say your finger?"
And to Barliman Butterbur:
"Then who would you take up with? A fat innkeeper who only remembers
his own name because people shout it at him all day?"
IMO, one who is sarcastic is never boring.
Questions:
Did you think, the first time you read this chapter, that Strider
really could have been a rascal? I remember thinking he was a creep
when he admitted he hid behind the hedge and spied on the Hobbits.
Besides being fat, what did Butterbur look like? And did anyone
besides me think he seemed, well, sort of effeminate?
Oh, and about the broken sword: I always laugh a bit nowadays (after
reading the 'why was Strider running around with a broken sword' type
threads) when even Strider admits: "Not much use is it, Sam?" I
almost expect him to look around for Tolkien and say "Why the hell
*do* you you have me running around the Wild with a broken sword?
Dammit, man! Gimme a dagger, a shiv, something!" Heh.
Other, more technical questions, I leave to the NG because I just
don't have any.
Stan Brown
keep track of the threads.
--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com
Tolkien FAQs: http://Tolkien.slimy.com (Steuard Jensen's site)
Tolkien letters FAQ:
http://users.telerama.com/~taliesen/tolkien/lettersfaq.html
FAQ of the Rings: http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/ringfaq.htm
Encyclopedia of Arda: http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/default.htm
more FAQs: http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/faqget.htm
Stan Brown
>After Frodo's table mishap and the clearing of the Common Room (as
>told in the previous chapter) he, Pippin, and Sam return to the
>sitting there.
I really envy people who are reading LotR for the first time. That
initial thrill of suspense is only a dim memory for me. Was Strider
a Black Rider, or working with them? I remember his menacing of Sam,
and the danger of Frodo deciding the wrong way, and how Frodo's "I
think one of [Sauron's] spies would - well, seem fairer and feel
fouler."
>Did you think, the first time you read this chapter, that Strider
>really could have been a rascal? I remember thinking he was a creep
>when he admitted he hid behind the hedge and spied on the Hobbits.
Yes, I really did. When the figure climbed over the gate in the
preceding chapter I assumed it was a Black Rider. On first read of
LotR, at this point the Black Riders are just vague menaces -- we
don't know what they are or whether the have the ability to look
normally human. Frodo was the only one in his party with a bit of
sense, so he had no one to turn to for advice. And he had no
experience of the wide world. Strider could easily have been a
confidence man or trickster, just out to rob Frodo on his own or
even worse to sell him to the Black Riders. Or he might have been a
Black Rider himself, for all I knew then.
>Besides being fat, what did Butterbur look like? And did anyone
>besides me think he seemed, well, sort of effeminate?
I never got that impression. Red-faced, and blustering, is about all
I got. I pictured him in a white chef's-style apron (not too clean
by the end of the day), but I don't think I ever had any idea about
his hair, moustache, or beard.
Erucolindo
> Thanks for the shorter subject line! It makes it easier for me to
> keep track of the threads.
Yeah, but no thanks for changing it all the time, as it defeats my
scorefile. :)
Henriette
(snip excellent summary: thank you, zett!)
> Well, first of all, an admission: I took this chapter mostly in order
> to have an excuse to kick against a pet peeve of mine ? the attitude
> some have that Aragorn is a cardboard character.
LOL. I took the Bombadil chapter partly in order to stand up against
the attitude some have that Tom is a Fool.
> "?But I must admit," he added with a queer laugh, "that I hoped you
> would take to me for my own sake. A hunted man sometimes wearies of
> distrust and longs for friendship and to be taken on trust. But
> there, I believe my looks are against me."
>
That I find a moving quote.
You have done a great job in the unraveling of our first acquintance
with Aragorn. As for myself, I never understood, like Frodo, why
Aragorn never said he was Gandalf's friend in the first place, but the
solution to that riddle may partly be found in your creative
assumption that he is testing the hobbits to see if they are a trap of
the Enemy.
> Questions:
>
> Did you think, the first time you read this chapter, that Strider
> really could have been a rascal?
I have often wondered what my first thoughts were, but I really can't
remember, having read the book ten times since then.
>
> Besides being fat, what did Butterbur look like? And did anyone
> besides me think he seemed, well, sort of effeminate?
>
No, never. Why do you? I hope not because he is confusedly running
around, talks without end and is a caring type of person:-)
Henriette
AC
>
> Did you think, the first time you read this chapter, that Strider
> really could have been a rascal? I remember thinking he was a creep
> when he admitted he hid behind the hedge and spied on the Hobbits.
I expected something troublesome from him. He didn't seem as bad as Black
Riders, but Tolkien did a fairly good job of writing him up as a shadey
character.
>
> Besides being fat, what did Butterbur look like? And did anyone
> besides me think he seemed, well, sort of effeminate?
I never really thought of him being effeminate. I always sort of pictured
him like some sort of Victorian English baker, fat with bright red cheeks.
>
> Oh, and about the broken sword: I always laugh a bit nowadays (after
> reading the 'why was Strider running around with a broken sword' type
> threads) when even Strider admits: "Not much use is it, Sam?" I
> almost expect him to look around for Tolkien and say "Why the hell
> *do* you you have me running around the Wild with a broken sword?
> Dammit, man! Gimme a dagger, a shiv, something!" Heh.
Probably one of the silliest parts of LotR. I know Tolkien was using it for
effect, and probably never really looked back at the notion of Aragorn
running around Eriador and the Wilderland with a busted sword.
--
Aaron Clausen
mightym...@hotmail.com
AC
Alison <news....@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> On 21 Mar 2004 18:47:08 -0800, yze...@yahoo.com (zett) wrote:
>
>>Chapter o/t Week: LoTR Ch. 10 "Strider"
>
>>his lip and sneers; he is alternately harsh and friendly; he pushes
>>Frodo's fear buttons, testing him, ensuring that he is not falling in
>>a trap set by the Enemy, but also testing Frodo's wisdom and mettle.
>>This tells me he is cautious and smart. But there is another side:
>
> Sauron had no inkling that there was an heir of Isildur wandering
> around. Why then should he lay traps for Aragorn?
Sauron must have known about the Rangers, and while he may not have known
that their chieftain was in fact the heir of Isildur, he still would
consider him a foe.
>
>
>>IMO, one who is sarcastic is never boring.
>
> Hmm, I was taught that sarcasm is the lowest form of wit and the
> height of vulgarity, and that one who is habitually sarcastic is
> invariably boring.
>
> But I agree with your general point. Strider as presented in this
> chapter is an interesting character. Potentially sympathetic, but
> still with a possibility of being a wrong 'un. Unfortunately, as the
> book progresses he becomes less and less interesting.
I never found Aragorn less interesting. Though once Gandalf joins the
company, Aragorn takes a second seat, he comes out again in the final
chapters of FotR. Quite frankly I've never understood the accusation.
<snip>
--
Aaron Clausen
mightym...@hotmail.com
AC
Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> "zett" <yze...@yahoo.com> wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien:
>>After Frodo's table mishap and the clearing of the Common Room (as
>>told in the previous chapter) he, Pippin, and Sam return to the
>>darkened parlor. ... they are surprised to find Strider calmly
>>sitting there.
>
> I really envy people who are reading LotR for the first time. That
> initial thrill of suspense is only a dim memory for me. Was Strider
> a Black Rider, or working with them? I remember his menacing of Sam,
> and the danger of Frodo deciding the wrong way, and how Frodo's "I
> think one of [Sauron's] spies would - well, seem fairer and feel
> fouler."
I do remember the Bree chapters as being nail-biters. The first time I read
them, I stayed up late at night from the Barrow Downs all the way to the
Ford of Bruinen. That whole set of chapters kept me captivated. Action.
Fear. Magic.
--
Aaron Clausen
Taemon
> Other, more technical questions, I leave to the NG
> because I just don't have any.
A very silly one: in his letter, Gandalf writes about Frodo that
he is "fairer than most <hobbits>". What do you think, fairer as
in lighter of hair or fairer as in better looking?
T.
Jamie Armstrong
> On 21 Mar 2004 18:47:08 -0800,
> zett <yze...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Did you think, the first time you read this chapter, that Strider
>>really could have been a rascal? I remember thinking he was a creep
>>when he admitted he hid behind the hedge and spied on the Hobbits.
>
> I expected something troublesome from him. He didn't seem as bad as Black
> Riders, but Tolkien did a fairly good job of writing him up as a shadey
> character.
>
Strider: he just never seemed bad enough, so I, like Frodo, was willing
to trust him. However, I did expect the hobbits to be betrayed by
*Pippin*! I was concerned that in the time he'd been outside, wandering
around Bree and then almost kidnapped by the Riders (which always seemed
a strange thing: they could have taken him, yet when Nob called they ran
and left him - maybe they should have taken Nob along instead :) ), he
had either had a spell cast upon him so that the Riders could control
him, or else the Riders had done something to allow them to more easily
track him (and so the others). That would have been a very interesting
story.
Jamie
--
"The more I see of the world, the more am I dissatisfied with it; and
every day confirms my belief of the inconsistency of all human
characters, and of the little dependence that can be placed on the
appearance of either merit or sense."
Jane Austen, Pride and Prejudice
zett
"Why the hell *do* you you have me running around
Why the hell couldn't I have noticed the 2 yous *before* I hit send?
:sigh:
aelfwina
"Taemon" <Tae...@zonnet.nl> wrote in message
news:c3n9lb$29teg1$1...@ID-135975.news.uni-berlin.de...
I always thought of it as being better looking, and maybe paler of
complexion. I have to say that when EW was cast as Frodo, my mind said
"Perfect!" as far as physical appearance went, all the way to the cleft in
the chin.
Barbara
>
> T.
>
>
jojo
>
> Well, first of all, an admission: I took this chapter mostly in order
> some have that Aragorn is a cardboard character. I guess I am just a
> sucker for outsiders (and mystery) and that may make me see that which
> is not there, but I think there are many layers to Aragorn. As these
> weekly discussions go on, I hope to continue putting in my .02 about
> Aragorn- if schoolwork permits. (go ahead and groan, if you wish) ;)
>
> All though this chapter we are told about his expressions. He curls
> his lip and sneers; he is alternately harsh and friendly; he pushes
> Frodo's fear buttons, testing him, ensuring that he is not falling in
> a trap set by the Enemy, but also testing Frodo's wisdom and mettle.
> This tells me he is cautious and smart. But there is another side:
>
> "Drink, fire, and chance meeting are pleasant enough (read: I wish I
> There are queer folk about. Though I say it as shouldn't, you may
> think," he added with a wry smile, seeing Frodo's glance.
>
> Then there's
>
> would take to me for my own sake. A hunted man sometimes wearies of
> distrust and longs for friendship and to be taken on trust. But
> there, I believe my looks are against me."
>
> While he is able to smile wryly at his outsider status, the fact that
> he refers to his supposedly untrustworthy looks more than once tells
> me that he doesn't like his lack of acceptance. It gives a sense of
> burden about the character.
>
> I see in Strider's sad and wry smiles, the desire of the young man
> Estel (who had a home, a place) to show forth, but who is in conflict
> with the older man who has a greater responsibility and burden that
> holds him away from others. It gives me a very lonely and sympathetic
> feeling for the man.
I read this for the first time a million years ago, but as I recall, this is
where I
fell in love with Strider. I have loved him ever since. My terrible crush
turned into
respect when I learned his secrets. When I later learned of his relationship
with Arwen, I came to understand that she was the only person alive that
could
fill the role as his queen. Certianly not a teenage peasant girl like
myself. I was 16
and very easily impressed by older men when I read LOTR for the first time.
;-)
That was 25 years and 12 readings ago. Still love it and him! My King!
jo
Shanahan
> On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 10:27:41 +0000,
> Alison <news....@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>> On 21 Mar 2004 18:47:08 -0800, yze...@yahoo.com (zett) wrote:
>>> Chapter o/t Week: LoTR Ch. 10 "Strider"
>>>
<snip>
>> But I agree with your general point. Strider as presented in this
>> chapter is an interesting character. Potentially sympathetic, but
>> still with a possibility of being a wrong 'un. Unfortunately, as the
>> book progresses he becomes less and less interesting.
>
> I never found Aragorn less interesting. Though once Gandalf joins the
> company, Aragorn takes a second seat, he comes out again in the final
> chapters of FotR. Quite frankly I've never understood the accusation.
Perhaps not so much an accusation as an impression...I become less
interested in Aragorn as the story goes on, but I certainly don't get any
satisfaction out of feeling that way. Been thinking about this aspect of
Aragorn the past few days, and I think it has to do with the tone of the
language Tolkien uses, the level of formality and archaicism.
In the beginning the tone is informal and more modern. As the novel
progresses, the tone of the writing becomes more and more "high", more
formal (by the use of archaic terms and syntax). More remote. As suits
the dignity of the latter passages of the story, of course, and of course
this was completely intentional on Tolkien's part. When the story is
being told from any of the hobbits' points of view, Tolkien reverts to a
more casual tone, again appropriate and intentional.
Also as the depth and dignity of the story increases, so does Aragorn's
depth and dignity as a Man. And so the tone used to describe his
character/actions is increasingly formal and remote as the story goes on.
I believe that it's this formality and remoteness that has made me (and
maybe others) "like" Aragorn less in the later books. Not so much that
he's less likeable, as that he's described in more remote terms and so
becomes less reachable.
- Ciaran S.
_________________________________
"Who is this gentle stranger, with pecs
like melons and knees of fringe?"
-mst3k
Shanahan
In reality (i.e., the book), I think the phrase refers to Frodo's hair
color (see other thread discussion about Aragorn's hair color). But in my
own little private head, after seeing EW as Frodo, I grin and think of it
as referring to his beauty.
zett
> "zett" <yze...@yahoo.com> wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien:
> >After Frodo's table mishap and the clearing of the Common Room (as
> >told in the previous chapter) he, Pippin, and Sam return to the
> >darkened parlor. ... they are surprised to find Strider calmly
> >sitting there.
>
> I really envy people who are reading LotR for the first time. That
> initial thrill of suspense is only a dim memory for me.
Most of it is only a dim memory for me as well, but this chapter (and
the previous one)were my introduction to Tolkien, so somewhat more of
them remain for me. I also envy people readng Tolkien for the first
time, but I also enjoy it when they come back to me going on about how
great it is. Only yesterday I had an OL friend thank me for
encouraging her to read Tolkien. So I still get to live it
vacariously...
Was Strider a Black Rider, or working with them?
I wondered that too, but was afraid to include it in my post, for fear
folks would think I was nuts. LOL Now I'm relieved.
>I remember his menacing of Sam, and the danger of Frodo deciding the
wrong >way,
Yep. I was all like "Argh! What should Frodo do?!"
[snip]
>
> >Did you think, the first time you read this chapter, that Strider
> >really could have been a rascal? I remember thinking he was a creep
> >when he admitted he hid behind the hedge and spied on the Hobbits.
>
> Yes, I really did. When the figure climbed over the gate in the
> preceding chapter I assumed it was a Black Rider. On first read of
> LotR, at this point the Black Riders are just vague menaces -- we
> don't know what they are or whether the have the ability to look
> normally human. Frodo was the only one in his party with a bit of
> sense, so he had no one to turn to for advice. And he had no
> experience of the wide world. Strider could easily have been a
> confidence man or trickster, just out to rob Frodo on his own or
> even worse to sell him to the Black Riders. Or he might have been a
> Black Rider himself, for all I knew then.
And I, like Sam, never *completely* trusted Strider until he came back
with the Athelas at Weathertop.
>
> >Besides being fat, what did Butterbur look like? And did anyone
> >besides me think he seemed, well, sort of effeminate?
>
> I never got that impression. Red-faced, and blustering, is about all
> I got. I pictured him in a white chef's-style apron (not too clean
> by the end of the day), but I don't think I ever had any idea about
> his hair, moustache, or beard.
I pictured him looking rather like Henry the VIII, except without any
facial hair, and of course without the kingly get-up. A definite yes
on the less than pristine apron. I don't know why I think of him as
effeminate, unless it is in comparison to so many warriors, or at
least farmers. Butterbur is one of the few "merchant class"
characters we meet in M-e. That and the impression that he acts
almost like he is going to scream when Strider talks to him about the
Black Riders/leaving Bree. And his chattering...I guess it is just my
impression.
[sig snipped]
zett
> yze...@yahoo.com (zett) wrote in message news:<4bb40450.04032...@posting.google.com>...
>
> (snip excellent summary: thank you, zett!)
>
> > Well, first of all, an admission: I took this chapter mostly in order
> > to have an excuse to kick against a pet peeve of mine ? the attitude
> > some have that Aragorn is a cardboard character.
>
> LOL. I took the Bombadil chapter partly in order to stand up against
> the attitude some have that Tom is a Fool.
All right! You and I together will set them straight, eh? ;)
[snip]
>
> You have done a great job in the unraveling of our first acquintance
> with Aragorn.
Thank you. :)
As for myself, I never understood, like Frodo, why
> Aragorn never said he was Gandalf's friend in the first place, but the
> solution to that riddle may partly be found in your creative
> assumption that he is testing the hobbits to see if they are a trap of
> the Enemy.
I wondered, just like you did. And I never came up with the solution
I did until I agreed to host this chapter. I had also wondered why
Aragorn acted so sneaky-hiding in shadows and all. I thought to
myself, if he wanted the Bree people/Butterbur to treat him like a
normal person, he should have acted more normal.
[snip]
> > Besides being fat, what did Butterbur look like? And did anyone
> > besides me think he seemed, well, sort of effeminate?
> >
> No, never. Why do you? I hope not because he is confusedly running
> around, talks without end and is a caring type of person:-)
Not because he is caring, but yeah, the cofusedly running around and
the chattering definitely takes Butterbur off of the Stud-o-meter for
me. ;)
[sig snipped]
zett
I always took it to mean fairer in complexion and better looking.
Probably a reference to his "elvish air."
zett
[snip]
> > Besides being fat, what did Butterbur look like? And did anyone
> > besides me think he seemed, well, sort of effeminate?
>
> I never really thought of him being effeminate. I always sort of pictured
> him like some sort of Victorian English baker, fat with bright red cheeks.
I'd say you're right. Somehow that seems more like what T would
probably have had in mind.
> >
> > Oh, and about the broken sword: [snip]
>
> Probably one of the silliest parts of LotR. I know Tolkien was using it for
> effect, and probably never really looked back at the notion of Aragorn
> running around Eriador and the Wilderland with a busted sword.
Heh. I am ashamed to admit this, but I never thought about how goofy
it was until I started reading this newsgroup. I got totally caught
up in the "poetic" or "sadly noble" or whatever effect JRRT was
creating. From his POV (if he were still alive to have one) I would
qualify as his perfect reader, 'cuz I never think to question anything
on a pragmatic/plot point level. I get totally caught up in the
emotion of the story and off I go...
BaronjosefR
>> Aragorn never said he was Gandalf's friend in the first place, but the
>> solution to that riddle may partly be found in your creative
>> assumption that he is testing the hobbits to see if they are a trap of
>> the Enemy.
Knowledge is power. As well, I always liked to think that he was testing the
hobbits and their capability of discerning the attentions of strangers while
travelling in foreign lands, knowing that there mightbe a long road ahead.
Glenn Holliday
>
> Did you think, the first time you read this chapter, that Strider
> really could have been a rascal? I remember thinking he was a creep
> when he admitted he hid behind the hedge and spied on the Hobbits.
I thought this chapter was set up like a classic mystery novel.
I kept asking myself "Is Strider the villain? Is the the red
herring? Is he the good guy who looks like the villain?"
I had no idea until they got to Gandalf's letter. And then
I wondered if enough of the clues matched up. Is this person
really the Strider that Gandalf means, or is he impersonating
Strider to deceive Frodo?
> Oh, and about the broken sword:
Among other things, I've always thought it unbelievable because
Narsil was a priceless heirloom. Keeping a priceless heirloom
with you if you're weilding it is one thing, but carrying the
shards around to spill out of the scabbard in the middle of
the night and be lost forever? It still makes no sense to me.
--
Glenn Holliday holl...@acm.org
Troels Forchhammer
Shanahan <pog...@redsuspenders.com> enriched us with:
>
<snip>
> Also as the depth and dignity of the story increases, so does
> Aragorn's depth and dignity as a Man. And so the tone used to
> describe his character/actions is increasingly formal and remote as
> the story goes on.
I never had any problem with the change of tone - I thoroughly enjoy the
more archaic and formal language (which is, IMO regrettably, almost
completely absent from the Danish translation).
The observation, however, is interesting, and this change is also observed
by the characters - Pippin comments on it in III,9 'Flotsam and Jetsam':
" 'Now let us take our ease here for a little!' said Aragorn.
'We will sit on the edge of ruin and talk, as Gandalf says,
while he is busy elsewhere. I feel a weariness such as I have
seldom felt before.' He wrapped his grey cloak about him,
hiding his mail-shirt, and stretched out his long legs. Then
he lay back and sent from his lips a thin stream of smoke.
'Look!' said Pippin. 'Strider the Ranger has come back!'
'He has never been away,' said Aragorn. 'I am Strider and
Dúnadan too, and I belong both to Gondor and the North.'"
While Pippin may comment on Aragorn's appearance, it is, I believe, also a
comment on the general development of the character.
--
Troels Forchhammer
Valid e-mail address is t.forch(a)mail.dk
The idea of being *paid* to govern is terribly middle-class :-)
- Igenlode on AFPH
Jamie Armstrong
> On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 18:34:58 +0000, Jamie Armstrong
> <j.d.ar...@durham.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>>This is interesting. AFAICR, I never expected any trouble to come from
>>Strider: he just never seemed bad enough, so I, like Frodo, was willing
>>to trust him. However, I did expect the hobbits to be betrayed by
>>*Pippin*! I was concerned that in the time he'd been outside, wandering
>>around Bree and then almost kidnapped by the Riders (which always seemed
>>a strange thing: they could have taken him, yet when Nob called they ran
>>and left him - maybe they should have taken Nob along instead :) ), he
>>had either had a spell cast upon him so that the Riders could control
>>him, or else the Riders had done something to allow them to more easily
>>track him (and so the others).
>
>
>
Oh yeah!
Stan Brown
I don't think it was in a letter, but rather was Gandalf's spoken
description or Frodo to Butterbur. Butterbur, speaking to Frodo, is
quoting Gandalf.
I assumed it meant hair and possibly skin color.
Stan Brown
>effeminate, unless it is in comparison to so many warriors, or at
>least farmers. Butterbur is one of the few "merchant class"
>characters we meet in M-e. That and the impression that he acts
>almost like he is going to scream when Strider talks to him about the
>Black Riders/leaving Bree. And his chattering...I guess it is just my
>impression.
I just chalked that up to physical cowardice.
An isolated community like Bree, with no soldiers or even any
permanent police force, would be always at risk to anything roaming
in the empty lands all around. Maybe Butterbur's mother had told him
scary stories to keep him in line when he was a kid!
Stan Brown
>zett wrote:
>> Oh, and about the broken sword:
>
>Among other things, I've always thought it unbelievable because
>Narsil was a priceless heirloom. Keeping a priceless heirloom
>with you if you're weilding it is one thing, but carrying the
>shards around to spill out of the scabbard in the middle of
>the night and be lost forever? It still makes no sense to me.
You have to wonder what the editor was doing when Tolkien submitted
the manuscript. Surely this hole in the plot's logic should have
been questioned. Back in the 1950s, after all, editor actually
_edited_. Tolkien was not then the giant of publishing that he later
became, and I would have thought whoever edited the book would have
asked him for an explanation.
Jamie Armstrong
Pete Gray
<the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>"Glenn Holliday" <holl...@acm.org> wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien:
>>zett wrote:
>>> Oh, and about the broken sword:
>>
>>Among other things, I've always thought it unbelievable because
>>Narsil was a priceless heirloom. Keeping a priceless heirloom
>>with you if you're weilding it is one thing, but carrying the
>>shards around to spill out of the scabbard in the middle of
>>the night and be lost forever? It still makes no sense to me.
>
>You have to wonder what the editor was doing when Tolkien submitted
>the manuscript. Surely this hole in the plot's logic should have
>been questioned. Back in the 1950s, after all, editor actually
>_edited_. Tolkien was not then the giant of publishing that he later
>became, and I would have thought whoever edited the book would have
>asked him for an explanation.
I've got some more questions: how many 'shards of Narsil' were there?
Somehow I always imagined it was just snapped in two (kind of like at
the beginning of 'Branded' -- anybody else remember that
<http://www.fiftiesweb.com/tv/branded.htm>?). Is there any indication
that Aragorn is carrying round all the pieces, or does he just have
the top bit? Is it indicated that he has no other weapons?
--
Pete Gray
while ($cat!="home"){$mice=="play";}
aelfwina
"Jamie Armstrong" <j.d.ar...@durham.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:406055F2...@durham.ac.uk...
> Taemon wrote:
> > zett wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Other, more technical questions, I leave to the NG
> >>because I just don't have any.
> >
> >
> > A very silly one: in his letter, Gandalf writes about Frodo that
> > he is "fairer than most <hobbits>". What do you think, fairer as
> > in lighter of hair or fairer as in better looking?
> >
> I think Gandalf meant he doesn't cheat at Monopoly.
*snicker*
Barbara
Jamie Andrews; real address @ bottom of message
> "Glenn Holliday" <holl...@acm.org> wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien:
> You have to wonder what the editor was doing when Tolkien submitted
> the manuscript. Surely this hole in the plot's logic should have
Here I go shooting off my mouth again without the books,
but there has been so much discussion about this that I have to
ask some questions.
Is there any indication that Narsil is Aragorn's *only*
weapon on this trip? That he carries no other knife, bow,
arrow, etc.? IIRC he mentions to Sam that his broken sword is
not much use against the hobbits, and he attacks the Nazgul with
burning brands, but I don't remember any categorical statement
that he has no other weapons. (Now watch as someone pulls out a
direct quote of Aragorn saying "I have no other weapons; Narsil
is enough for me")
Even if so, is there any indication that Aragorn *always*
carries only Narsil? He may have done so on this trip, for
instance, because he expected Gandalf to mention it to the
hobbits and wanted to show his bona fides; or because he sensed
that when they got to Rivendell it would be reforged; or because
he expected that it would actually be effective, even if broken,
against the kinds of enemies he would be facing.
I doubt that Aragorn carried only Narsil when he was
Thorongil. Pretty much a dead giveaway.
--Jamie. (nel mezzo del cammin di nostra vita)
andrews .uwo } Merge these two lines to obtain my e-mail address.
@csd .ca } (Unsolicited "bulk" e-mail costs everyone.)
Jim Deutch
<j.d.ar...@durham.ac.uk> wrote:
>This is interesting. AFAICR, I never expected any trouble to come from
>Strider: he just never seemed bad enough, so I, like Frodo, was willing
>to trust him. However, I did expect the hobbits to be betrayed by
>*Pippin*! I was concerned that in the time he'd been outside, wandering
>around Bree and then almost kidnapped by the Riders (which always seemed
>a strange thing: they could have taken him, yet when Nob called they ran
>and left him - maybe they should have taken Nob along instead :) ), he
>had either had a spell cast upon him so that the Riders could control
>him, or else the Riders had done something to allow them to more easily
>track him (and so the others). That would have been a very interesting
>story.
/sPippin Merry
I don't remember much about my first reading of LotR, but this topic
brought up a very clear memory: I had the same experience as you. I
kept waiting for the ball to drop and for Merry to betray everyone.
And it never happened! I suppose I eventually forgot about it
entirely: certainly once the Fellowship had broken up it was too
late...
Jim Deutch (Jimbo the Cat)
--
For escape velocity at one gravity of horizontal acceleration, one
radian is needed. - John Stockton
Emma Pease
Andrews; real address @ bottom of message wrote:
[snip]
> Even if so, is there any indication that Aragorn *always*
> carries only Narsil? He may have done so on this trip, for
> instance, because he expected Gandalf to mention it to the
> hobbits and wanted to show his bona fides; or because he sensed
> that when they got to Rivendell it would be reforged; or because
> he expected that it would actually be effective, even if broken,
> against the kinds of enemies he would be facing.
>
> I doubt that Aragorn carried only Narsil when he was
> Thorongil. Pretty much a dead giveaway.
Especially since he would have had to have had a regular sword.
My supposition is that the journey he took after meeting Gandalf in
May was to pick up Narsil from wherever he kept it (possibly at a
settlement of the northern Dunedain, perhaps that of his maternal kin)
because he knew that with the ring found, Narsil would be reforged.
Failing that, where did he go on his journey?
Other thoughts on the chapter, Aragorn does seem to look down a bit at
the hobbits. His comment that Pippin would have to be made of sterner
stuff than he looked if he was to live long enough to be weathered
like Strider. He also doesn't think that highly of Barliaman (in
contrast to Gandalf several chapters in the future). Perhaps part of
Aragorn's growth in the book is a greater appreciation of the worth of
folk like the hobbits.
Emma
--
\----
|\* | Emma Pease Net Spinster
|_\/ Die Luft der Freiheit weht
Igenlode Wordsmith
> On 21 Mar 2004 18:47:08 -0800,
> zett <yze...@yahoo.com> wrote:
[snip]
> > Oh, and about the broken sword: I always laugh a bit nowadays (after
> > reading the 'why was Strider running around with a broken sword' type
> > threads) when even Strider admits: "Not much use is it, Sam?" I
> > almost expect him to look around for Tolkien and say "Why the hell
> > *do* you you have me running around the Wild with a broken sword?
> > Dammit, man! Gimme a dagger, a shiv, something!" Heh.
Well, he probably *did* have a dagger - to serve as an eating-knife if
nothing else...
>
> Probably one of the silliest parts of LotR. I know Tolkien was using it for
> effect, and probably never really looked back at the notion of Aragorn
> running around Eriador and the Wilderland with a busted sword.
>
He carries it, like Boromir's horn or Thor's ring, because it is an
heirloom of his house - more or less a statement of who he is. And of
course, while he's carrying that, he doesn't have a spare slot for an
unbroken sword as well :-)
More seriously: I don't actually get the impression that the Rangers
went in much for sword-fighting in the course of their ordinary
'duties', to be honest. This novel predates the D&D school of fantasy:
Gandalf has described Aragorn as a great traveller and huntsman, and he
himself says "I have hunted many wild and wary things and I can usually
disappear, if I wish". A hunter doesn't go round swinging a sword.
Aragorn son of Arathorn is trained in the use of a blade, and in the
arts of war; but I'm not sure Strider the Ranger has much use for either
in his daily life in Arnor and Eriador.
(Did he carry the Broken Sword when he was in the South? Presumably
not, because he was trying to avoid being recognised, and it would be a
pretty clear assertion of identity.)
Thorin and the dwarves manage to get all the way to the Lonely
mountain, through some pretty hair-raising adventures, without once
raising an axe in anger, if I remember correctly. Bilbo gets to use
Sting on the spiders along the way, but that's about it. Aragorn
proposes - and as it turns out, succeeds - guiding the hobbits through
the dangers of the Wild all the way to Rivendell while pursued by
Nazgul, without any resort to weapons. His sword wouldn't have done any
of them much good if he'd had one. He's obviously experienced in coping
without :-)
The implication of 'Ranger' - again setting aside the D&D
agglomerations - is of 'boundary-keeper', 'game-warden' or 'survival
expert' rather than 'knight' or 'warrior'. In the public inn, Strider
takes care to keep his sword-hilt hidden rather than exposing it openly:
the implication, to me at least, is that Rangers weren't normally seen
with swords at all. Aragorn was carrying an extra, symbolic, burden,
rather than depriving himself of a weapon-slot.
(The *wisdom* of lugging around - and potentially losing - such an extra
encumbrance is of course quite another matter! But of course your true
Heir of Isildur wouldn't turn a hair at that sort of thing...)
--
Igenlode <Igenl...@nym.alias.net> Bookwraith unabashed
* Ain't never gonna stop the rain by complainin'... *
ste...@nomail.com
Aragorn seems to disagree with you.
"Many evil things there are that your strong walls and bright
swords do not stay. You know little of the lands beyond your
bounds. Peace and freedom, do you say? The North would have
known them little but for us. Fear would have destroyed them.
But when dark things come from the houseless hills, or creep
from sunless woods, they fly from us."
Why would evil things fly from unarmed Rangers?
"'Strider' I am to one fat man who lives within a day's march
of foes that would freeze his heart, or lay his little town
in ruin, if he were not guarded ceaselessly."
Again, how do the Rangers guard Bree from foes that could lay it
in ruins? Surely they are armed for this, and prepared for combat
with armed foes.
Stephen
Troels Forchhammer
Igenlode Wordsmith <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> enriched us
with:
>
<snip>
I pretty much agree with this: the that Aragorn carried Narsil around
as an heirloom giving him a sense of identity (and purpose, I'd guess),
and that the rangers, as a rule, didn't have much use of swords (though
bows and knifes probably often came in handy).
I think it's likely that Aragorn did carry other weapons, though possibly
not another sword - he could probably get hold of one fast enough if he
needed it.
> Thorin and the dwarves manage to get all the way to the Lonely
> mountain, through some pretty hair-raising adventures, without once
> raising an axe in anger, if I remember correctly.
Only because Thorin used Orcrist to fight back the goblins in the tunnels
when the party was escaping ;-)
I suppose the tunnels were too narrow for the other Dwarves to fight - at
least, IIRC, it is only Thorin and Gandalf that turn to fight them (their
swords of course had a special effect on the goblins).
--
Troels Forchhammer
Valid e-mail address is t.forch(a)mail.dk
People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which
they avoid.
- Soren Kierkegaard
Troels Forchhammer
Alison <news....@ntlworld.com> enriched us with:
>
> On 21 Mar 2004 18:47:08 -0800, yze...@yahoo.com (zett) wrote:
>>
>> Chapter o/t Week: LoTR Ch. 10 "Strider"
>>
<snip>
> This bit has always bothered me. We are explicitly told in RotK that
> Sauron had no inkling that there was an heir of Isildur wandering
> around. Why then should he lay traps for Aragorn?
Whether Sauron knew of the continuation of Isildur's line or not, I think
it's quite natural that he knew of the rangers, the remaining Dúnedain of
the North, and that he would set traps for their leader no matter what his
descent was.
> Hmm, I was taught that sarcasm is the lowest form of wit and the
> height of vulgarity, and that one who is habitually sarcastic is
> invariably boring.
I suppose that culture has much to do with that - Danish humour often makes
use of irony and sarcasm (and there is even variations within the country),
while others focus more on other kinds of humour.
> But I agree with your general point. Strider as presented in this
> chapter is an interesting character. Potentially sympathetic, but
> still with a possibility of being a wrong 'un.
Certainly.
> Unfortunately, as the book progresses he becomes less and less
> interesting.
I don't really agree with that. He comes clearer into focus, and for the
last half of the book he doesn't develop much, but I don't think he becomes
less interesting (except from a character development PoV).
<snip>
> The image of the broken sword works better at a poetic level than at a
> realistic one. I think Jackson made the right decision for the film on
> that point.
I suppose you're right. It would at least have taken another kind of film
to show Aragorn with the broken stump of Narsil; one that focused far more
on the poetic side of the book.
--
Troels Forchhammer
Valid e-mail address is t.forch(a)mail.dk
Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men
are almost always bad men.
- Lord Acton, in a letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton, 1887.
Troels Forchhammer
zett <yze...@yahoo.com> enriched us with:
>
> Chapter o/t Week: LoTR Ch. 10 "Strider"
<snip>
> Well, first of all, an admission: I took this chapter mostly in order
> to have an excuse to kick against a pet peeve of mine - the attitude
> some have that Aragorn is a cardboard character.
;-)
I'll admit that I never had much patience with that attitude either - I see
him as being one of the most complex and deepest characters in the book.
He, or rather our perception of him, develops quite a lot until about
halfway into the book when he declares himself openly as the heir of
Isildur. But even then he doesn't become just a cardboard character, IMO.
<snip>
> I see in Strider's sad and wry smiles, the desire of the young man
> Estel (who had a home, a place) to show forth, but who is in conflict
> with the older man who has a greater responsibility and burden that
> holds him away from others.
I don't think it's a conflict as much as a duality - one which is shown
forth at his death where "a great beauty was revealed in him, so that all
who after came there looked on him in wonder; for they saw that the grace
of his youth, and the valour of his manhood, and the wisdom and majesty of
his age were blended together."
He is at the same time Estel, Strider, Aragorn and King Elessar - not in
conflict with himself, but a deep and complext person.
> It gives me a very lonely and sympathetic feeling for the man.
Agreed.
<snip>
> IMO, one who is sarcastic is never boring.
It depends, I think, upon how it is used. Sarcasm can easily be overdone
and become, perhaps not boring as such, but seem boorish and become a
nuisance. Used with moderation, however, it works excellently.
> Did you think, the first time you read this chapter, that Strider
> really could have been a rascal?
The ambiguity here is played for all it's worth for as long as possible ;-)
> Besides being fat, what did Butterbur look like?
He is introduced as "a short fat man with a bald head and a red face." He
wears a white apron, "and was bustling out of one door and in through
another."
> And did anyone besides me think he seemed, well, sort of effeminate?
Never that, no.
--
Troels Forchhammer
Valid e-mail address is t.forch(a)mail.dk
If no thought
your mind does visit,
make your speech
not too explicit.
- Piet Hein, /The Case for Obscurity/
Taemon
> "'Strider' I am to one fat man who lives within a day's
> march of foes that would freeze his heart, or lay his little
> town in ruin, if he were not guarded ceaselessly."
What foes are we talking about anyway? Orcs? Trolls?
T.
aelfwina
Orcs. Trolls. Barrow Wights. Wargs. Brigands.
You name it.
Barbara
>
> T.
>
>
Henriette
>
> (snip) I had also wondered why
> Aragorn acted so sneaky-hiding in shadows and all. I thought to
> myself, if he wanted the Bree people/Butterbur to treat him like a
> normal person, he should have acted more normal.
> [snip]
Yes. So he was probably testing the Hobbits. But also, this way JRRT
creates great tension, which is fun.
> > > Besides being fat, what did Butterbur look like? And did anyone
> > > besides me think he seemed, well, sort of effeminate?
> > >
> > No, never. Why do you? I hope not because he is confusedly running
> > around, talks without end and is a caring type of person:-)
>
> Not because he is caring, but yeah, the cofusedly running around and
> the chattering definitely takes Butterbur off of the Stud-o-meter for
> me. ;)
>
LOL. Well, at least when you had a date with Butterbur, you would not
have to worry about who would keep the conversation going, that is, if
he managed to sit still for a while.
But ofcourse, we know well who comes first on your LOTR
Stud-o-meter:-)
Henriette
Henriette
> > Questions (only a couple) and Comments (mostly)
> >
(snip)
> > I see in Strider's sad and wry smiles, the desire of the young man
> > Estel (who had a home, a place) to show forth, but who is in conflict
> > with the older man who has a greater responsibility and burden that
> > feeling for the man.
>
> I read this for the first time a million years ago, but as I recall, this is
> where I fell in love with Strider. I have loved him ever since. My terrible
> crush turned into
> respect when I learned his secrets. When I later learned of his relationship
> with Arwen, I came to understand that she was the only person alive that
> could fill the role as his queen. Certianly not a teenage peasant girl like
> myself. I was 16
> and very easily impressed by older men when I read LOTR for the first time.
> ;-)
> That was 25 years and 12 readings ago. Still love it and him! My King!
And he is obviously also first on Jo's Stud-o-meter:-)
Henriette
AC
Igenlode Wordsmith <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[> wrote:
>
> More seriously: I don't actually get the impression that the Rangers
> went in much for sword-fighting in the course of their ordinary
> 'duties', to be honest. This novel predates the D&D school of fantasy:
> Gandalf has described Aragorn as a great traveller and huntsman, and he
> himself says "I have hunted many wild and wary things and I can usually
> disappear, if I wish". A hunter doesn't go round swinging a sword.
> Aragorn son of Arathorn is trained in the use of a blade, and in the
> arts of war; but I'm not sure Strider the Ranger has much use for either
> in his daily life in Arnor and Eriador.
I don't know. When Narsil is reforged as Anduril, Aragorn doesn't seem to
have much of a problem swinging and hitting targets. I can only assume he
was a skilled swordsman, and that means he must have had practice in the
art.
--
Aaron Clausen
mightym...@hotmail.com
Treetop
>
I always had the impression that he, like other men had knives that he
carried, for cutting meat after a hunt / cutting up fruit / ......
Likewise I think that it shows the true qualities of his abilities,
that he is able to survive in the 'wilderness' without any major
weapons, other than his mind.
zett
> In rec.arts.books.tolkien Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > "Glenn Holliday" <holl...@acm.org> wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien:
> >>Among other things, I've always thought it unbelievable because
> >>Narsil was a priceless heirloom....
> > You have to wonder what the editor was doing when Tolkien submitted
> > the manuscript. Surely this hole in the plot's logic should have
> > been questioned....
[snip]
> Is there any indication that Narsil is Aragorn's *only*
> weapon on this trip? [snip]
No. No indication of that. It just seems like it would have been nice
if Tolkien had mentioned another weapon for him. The way I deal with
it is I assume he carried at least a dagger. It is just the necessity
to assume something like that about a character who is charged with
leading/protecting the Ringbearer that seems not quite right.
> Even if so, is there any indication that Aragorn *always*
> carries only Narsil? He may have done so on this trip, for
> instance, because he expected Gandalf to mention it to the
> hobbits and wanted to show his bona fides; or because he sensed
> that when they got to Rivendell it would be reforged; or because
> he expected that it would actually be effective, even if broken,
> against the kinds of enemies he would be facing.
>
> I doubt that Aragorn carried only Narsil when he was
> Thorongil. Pretty much a dead giveaway.
I have nothing to say to this except I agree with it totally. I think
Narsil was with him *at this one certain time* as a sort of Id badge.
[sig snipped]
zett
[snips]
> Other thoughts on the chapter, Aragorn does seem to look down a bit at
> the hobbits. His comment that Pippin would have to be made of sterner
> stuff than he looked if he was to live long enough to be weathered
> like Strider. He also doesn't think that highly of Barliaman (in
> contrast to Gandalf several chapters in the future). Perhaps part of
> Aragorn's growth in the book is a greater appreciation of the worth of
> folk like the hobbits.
[snip]
I had the same thoughts; but I felt that I had run my mouth (or I my
keyboard rather)long enough in my original post. When we get to the
Council of Elrond chapter, I hope to have the time to post my thoughts
about his attitude as a defender of the Free Peoples vs Boromir's
attitude.
zett
> in <4bb40450.04032...@posting.google.com>,
> zett <yze...@yahoo.com> enriched us with:
> >
> > Chapter o/t Week: LoTR Ch. 10 "Strider"
>
> <snip>
>
> > Well, first of all, an admission: I took this chapter mostly in order
> > to have an excuse to kick against a pet peeve of mine - the attitude
> > some have that Aragorn is a cardboard character.
>
> ;-)
>
> I'll admit that I never had much patience with that attitude either - I see
> him as being one of the most complex and deepest characters in the book.
>
> He, or rather our perception of him, develops quite a lot until about
> halfway into the book when he declares himself openly as the heir of
> Isildur. But even then he doesn't become just a cardboard character, IMO.
>
> <snip>
Thank you. :bows: I think he does become more remote as the story
goes, but even that is interesting to me because I see in it the
reader's journey out of the realm of the heroic and fantastic and back
into the ordinary. The last scene of A in the narrative is as a
distant figure holding up the Elfstone in farewell.
> > I see in Strider's sad and wry smiles, the desire of the young man
> > Estel (who had a home, a place) to show forth, but who is in conflict
> > with the older man who has a greater responsibility and burden that
> > holds him away from others.
>
> I don't think it's a conflict as much as a duality - one which is shown
> forth at his death where "a great beauty was revealed in him, so that all
> who after came there looked on him in wonder; for they saw that the grace
> of his youth, and the valour of his manhood, and the wisdom and majesty of
> his age were blended together."
I do think he is actually conflicted during the Bree chapters, but I
agree duality is a better word for him overall.
> He is at the same time Estel, Strider, Aragorn and King Elessar - not in
> conflict with himself, but a deep and complext person.
Well said!
[snip]
Bruce Tucker
> My supposition is that the journey he took after meeting Gandalf in
> May was to pick up Narsil from wherever he kept it (possibly at a
> settlement of the northern Dunedain, perhaps that of his maternal kin)
> because he knew that with the ring found, Narsil would be reforged.
I'll have to check the appendices, but I thought it had been brought to
Rivendell long ago along with the other heirlooms of Aragorn's house.
And remember the words of Faramir and Boromir's prophetic dream -
"Seek for the sword that was broken,
In Imladris it dwells..."
That doesn't sound like it was safely kept somewhere else but would be
brought to Imladris just in time for one of them to get there for the
Council. Of course, it doesn't sound like it's being dragged all about
the back of beyond by a long-shanked ranger either, but to the extent
Aragorn dwelled in any place, other than his stint in Minas Tirith, it
was Rivendell.
My own unlearned opinion is that Tolkien just got swept up in the
romance and poetry of the moment and didn't give a lot of thought as to
the practicalities of Strider the Ranger wandering around the Wild with
a broken sword. It created the image and scene he wanted, and that was
that.
--
Bruce Tucker
disinte...@mindspring.com
Matthew Woodcraft
>You have to wonder what the editor was doing when Tolkien submitted
>the manuscript. Surely this hole in the plot's logic should have
>been questioned. Back in the 1950s, after all, editor actually
>_edited_. Tolkien was not then the giant of publishing that he later
>became, and I would have thought whoever edited the book would have
>asked him for an explanation.
It does seem that A&U didn't go in for that kind of thing. I don't
remember coming across any examples of editorial changes, or
suggestions for changes. Can you? I'd've expected them to come up in
the letters if there were.
-M-
Gareth Taylor
zett <yze...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Is there any indication that Narsil is Aragorn's *only* weapon on this
> > trip? I doubt that Aragorn carried only Narsil when he was Thorongil.
>
> I have nothing to say to this except I agree with it totally. I think
> Narsil was with him *at this one certain time* as a sort of Id badge.
It makes one wonder what Boromir thought when he arrived at Rivendell.
"I have travelled hundreds of miles, following the message: 'Seek for the
Sword that was Broken; in Imladris it dwells."
"Sorry, but the Sword's out at the moment. Please try again later."
No wonder he got a bit grumpy.
Gareth
The Sidhekin
> zett wrote:
> >
> > Did you think, the first time you read this chapter, that Strider
> > really could have been a rascal? I remember thinking he was a creep
> > when he admitted he hid behind the hedge and spied on the Hobbits.
Nah, a creep would never have admitted that. In fact, a creep would
never need to _dupe_ the Hobbits. He would just resort to physical
violence. Strider was no weakling, after all. I thought it was
obvious what Tolkien was doing. I guess you can say this chapter
never had complete success with me. However, we do get a whole lot of
background, and we are reminded of Gandalf being missing -- a fact
which was somewhat neglected in the chapters since Crickhollow. And
we do get back to the three other Hobbits, who have _also_ been
somewhat neglected, while Frodo, OMW, TB, Goldberry, the barrow wight,
Strider, and Butterbur have been hoarding the spotlight.
So, I still enjoy it. And what do we see of the Hobbits?
Merry is the one we see the least of -- or at least the one who
appears the latest. Later he will be claiming that curiosity is a
Brandybuck trait -- I guess this chapter backs up that claim. He is
also, as Strider remarks, possessed of a stout heart -- and somewhat
silly, though he denies it. The Tookish strain makes itself known.
Sam is Sam. Suspicious of Strider, like he will be of Gollum later.
(Yet it is Sam who trusts Faramir. Remember that.) Also, Sam has
"never heard no good" of folk out of the Wild, and considers that
piece of evidence weighty indeed. He after all has nothing else to
hold against Strider -- but he is protective of Frodo, whom he
considers too trusting: "He's as wise as any, but he's soft-hearted,
that's what he is."
So far, Sam has been trusting towards Gildor and his company,
towards TB & G, and really has distrusted no one but Maggot. This is
the first time we see him distrustful of a real outsider, but it does
not come as a surprise. It fits with the character as established.
Pippin trusts Strider as soon as he has read Gandalf's letter, and
indeed seems to like him -- much like Frodo "wished to" believe
Strider was a friend. He also looked uncomfortable when Sam expressed
his distrust of Strider. I am tempted to suggest that for a Hobbit to
like someone like Strider suggests something of a Fallohidish strain:
The Fallohides were more friendly with Elves, and they were more
likely to take off into the Wild -- and so someone like Pippin and
Frodo would probably be more sympathetic to someone out of the Wild
than Sam is.
Aside from this, Pippin does not get a lot of attention here. He is
presented as immature, to be sure -- laughing at Gandalf's description
of Frodo, getting tired early (as he has before), and generally being
merrier than Merry. Whether it is courage or foolishness, all the
danger and the worry does not daunt him. Call it Tookishness: He is
all heart, which is good, and not much head, which is not.
> > Oh, and about the broken sword:
>
> Among other things, I've always thought it unbelievable because
> Narsil was a priceless heirloom. Keeping a priceless heirloom
> with you if you're weilding it is one thing, but carrying the
> shards around to spill out of the scabbard in the middle of
> the night and be lost forever? It still makes no sense to me.
I have snickered myself at the threads describing him as "running
about Eriador with a broken sword", but there is no real problem, as I
see it.
Since Aragorn was the last heir of Isildur, unless he won the
kingdom, he did not need to preserve the shards for his heirs. It
makes sense to me that Aragorn, once Elrond had presented him with the
ring of Barahir and the shards of Narsil, would keep them with him.
The only safer alternative would be to return them to Elrond for safe
keeping, and that would be -- well, missing the point.
Aragorn _had_ no keep of his own -- no place in which he might keep
treasures safe, other than his own person. Two more treasures of his
were not yet in his possession: The Sceptre of Annúminas, which was
kept in Rivendell, and Arwen Undómiel, who dwelt sometimes in
Rivendell and sometimes in Lothlórien. Both of these Elrond withheld
until Aragorn earned them.
But Elrond _gave_ the ring of Barahir and the shards of Narsil to
Aragorn, and given that, what would you suggest that he do with them?
Return them? I for one would find that even more unbelievable.
Strider's character as introduced here is that of a ranger: He keeps
all his belongings with him. One of these belongings is an heirloom
that must be a useless burden from day to day. Yet he carries it.
Why is that a problem? Because you all have the option of keeping
your property safe at home or in a bank or something? Would it help
if you think of Strider as a nomad, carrying his home with him? When
Halbarad brings him a gift "from the Lady of Rivendell", Aragorn asks
him to "bear it still for me a while". That is as how he goes about
putting things aside for safe keeping. And I dare say his own person
must be safer than that of Halbarad!
I'll go so far as to admit that Tolkien may have been somewhat too
subtle here, and that he could well have provided an explanation. But
I must insist it makes perfect sense -- when you just take a moment to
think about it.
-SK-
--
perl -e 'print "Just another Perl ${\(trickster and hacker)},";'
The Sidhekin *proves* Sidhe did it!
The Sidhekin
> In article <c3q56u$2abgnn$1...@ID-193590.news.uni-berlin.de>, Jamie
> Andrews; real address @ bottom of message wrote:
> [snip]
> > Even if so, is there any indication that Aragorn *always*
> > carries only Narsil? He may have done so on this trip, for
> > instance, because he expected Gandalf to mention it to the
> > hobbits and wanted to show his bona fides; or because he sensed
> > that when they got to Rivendell it would be reforged; or because
> > he expected that it would actually be effective, even if broken,
> > against the kinds of enemies he would be facing.
> >
> > I doubt that Aragorn carried only Narsil when he was
> > Thorongil. Pretty much a dead giveaway.
>
> Especially since he would have had to have had a regular sword.
I wonder what he did with that sword later. :-)
But I still think he carried Narsil also.
> My supposition is that the journey he took after meeting Gandalf in
> May was to pick up Narsil from wherever he kept it (possibly at a
> settlement of the northern Dunedain, perhaps that of his maternal kin)
> because he knew that with the ring found, Narsil would be reforged.
I do not see Aragorn, after having been given Narsil from Elrond,
turning it over to anyone for keeping at any place less safe than
Rivendell. No such place would be safer than his own person.
> Failing that, where did he go on his journey?
Now _that_ is an interesting question. He and Gandalf had just come
from Mirkwood. Why did Aragorn even go to meet with Gandalf again on
May 1st? And why _then_ leave?
By the time the Nazgul entered the Shire, Aragorn was already near
Bree, according to UT. However, he must have left on yet another
journey, because when he returned later, because when he returned, the
word was already about -- the Elven-folk of Gildor told him that
Gandalf was missing. Or maybe JRRT was messing up the dates ... UT is
not to be trusted completely.
Story-externally, I suspect the journey or journeys of Aragorn only
existed to explain his absence from these events. Story-internally,
we can but speculate. Certainly Aragorn had been long gone --
hunting, finding, and delivering Gollum took a long time. He might
have had many neglected duties to look after.
Perhaps he wanted to visit his kin and perhaps Rivendell (though he
and Gandalf must have passed through there returning from Mirkwood)
just to learn what was new? Perhaps he met with Arwen in Rivendell?
Not every duty is unpleasant!
Igenlode Wordsmith
On 22 Mar 2004 Stan Brown wrote:
> "zett" <yze...@yahoo.com> wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien:
> >After Frodo's table mishap and the clearing of the Common Room (as
> >told in the previous chapter) he, Pippin, and Sam return to the
> >darkened parlor. ... they are surprised to find Strider calmly
> >sitting there.
I'm still wondering about his "high boots of supple leather". My mental
image, given that description, is of thigh-length riding boots or
waders, but he could scarcely stride about "at a great pace on his long
shanks" in those! In fact, we don't ever see him ride until months
later, when he acquires a mount in Rohan, although we do eventually
learn that he himself owns a horse in the North. Why would he arrive at
the 'Prancing Pony' in mud-splashed riding-boots - and then propose to
walk all the way to Rivendell in them? :-)
>
> I really envy people who are reading LotR for the first time. That
> initial thrill of suspense is only a dim memory for me. Was Strider
> a Black Rider, or working with them? I remember his menacing of Sam,
> and the danger of Frodo deciding the wrong way, and how Frodo's "I
> think one of [Sauron's] spies would - well, seem fairer and feel
> fouler."
One thing that does puzzle me, re-reading with attention, is the way
that he deliberately seems to set himself up to look sinister. Why on
earth would he say "of course, I have my price" when he means "I offer
you my help in getting to Rivendell"? It comes across as clumsy
manipulation by the author, who wants the character to look sinister on
first reading without considering the odd effect when seen with
hindsight :-(
>
> >Did you think, the first time you read this chapter, that Strider
> >really could have been a rascal? I remember thinking he was a creep
> >when he admitted he hid behind the hedge and spied on the Hobbits.
>
> Yes, I really did. When the figure climbed over the gate in the
> preceding chapter I assumed it was a Black Rider.
[snip]
You mean that was supposed to be Strider? I always thought that *was* a
Black Rider!
--
Igenlode <Igenl...@nym.alias.net> Bookwraith unabashed
I want to ride my bicycle - I want to ride my bike...
the softrat
Barrow-wights.
the softrat
"LotR: Eleven Oscars! Right up there with _Titanic_!"
mailto:sof...@pobox.com
--
God? I'm no God! God has MERCY!
Emma Pease
Except the sword was there. Boromir arrived the night before the
Council several days after Aragorn and his sword arrived.
TeaLady (Mari C.)
news:slrnc63adj.3ns....@alder.alberni.net:
Depending on where the break was, and it was closer to the tip
of the sword, if I am picturing it correctly, the sword would
not be totally useless as a weapon. It would still have the
sharp edge up to the break, and the flat would still work as a
striking weapon. At the most Aragorn would have lost some of
the extension a sword (or any long weapon) gives the wielder and
most (but not all) stabbing ability.
So he may have carried it with him on this particular trip as a
sign of who he was, or to take it Rivendell for reforging (the
Ring is found ! Shit. Oh ! I can be King now !) but it would
not have been totally useless as a weapon, had he needed to use
it.
--
mc
TeaLady (Mari C.)
<Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in
news:2004032500381...@gacracker.org:
> I'm still wondering about his "high boots of supple
> leather". My mental image, given that description, is of
> thigh-length riding boots or waders, but he could scarcely
> stride about "at a great pace on his long shanks" in those!
> In fact, we don't ever see him ride until months later, when
> he acquires a mount in Rohan, although we do eventually
> learn that he himself owns a horse in the North. Why would
> he arrive at the 'Prancing Pony' in mud-splashed
> riding-boots - and then propose to walk all the way to
> Rivendell in them? :-)
>
I always pictured boots that came up to the knees, with a raised
bit - like knee-guard half-shell thingy (I am not good at
describing footwear, sorry) rising up to the center of the knee
in the front and scalloped in the back to below the knee, at the
top rounding of the calf, for ease in running. They'd have a
semi-hard sole, hard enough for protection on rocks, but soft
enough to allow purchase on same rocks, if wet (rocks or boots).
No heel, like riding boots have, but more like mocs, or running
shoes. And they'd lace up, at least 1/2 way, as they would need
to be a fairly tight fit to avoid those irksome blisters that
come of running through marsh and field and stream for days on
end and yet remain easy to put on or take off.
--
mc
aelfwina
"TeaLady (Mari C.)" <spres...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns94B6DCE...@130.133.1.4...
Wow! I'm impressed. You've really thought this through!
Barbara
>
> --
> mc
Hashemon Urtasman
zett wrote:
> Chapter o/t Week: LoTR Ch. 10 "Strider"
>
> To host a chapter discussion, or for more information, go to:
> http://parasha.maoltuile.org/
>
> I see this chapter as maintaining a "waves of suspense" effect, which
> began in the previous chapter-I sense it particularly surrounding the
> uncertainty as to Strider's motives.
> Other, more technical questions, I leave to the NG because I just
> don't have any.
1. I always wonder why Gandalf said he would 'roast' Barliman if he
forgot the letter. How could a wizard say something like that?
2. I noted how Strider kept trying to emphasize that the hobbits must
take him as a partner, and even tries to every so earnestly bargain with
them, eventually saying "Strider can take you by paths that are seldom
trodden. Will you have him?" This tension in Strider is something I
never noticed before today. At once he is anxious for their protection
and yet condescending towards their ability to survive in the wild.
Very amazing, I always loved this part of the book more than any other
but I never noticed this aspect of Striders behaviour before today.
nb. { Strider has more luck with the hobbits than some would-be Messiahs
did in real life. "Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets, and
stones those who are sent to her! How often I would have gathered your
children together, even as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and
you would not!" }
Hasan
AC
> sign of who he was, or to take it Rivendell for reforging (the
> Ring is found ! Shit. Oh ! I can be King now !) but it would
> not have been totally useless as a weapon, had he needed to use
> it.
I dunno. It seems like a bit of a stretch to me. I mean, I can see
carrying a busted sword in a pinch, but I get the impression that
Aragorn carried it around more than that. Unless, of course, he was
intentionally carrying Narsil as a sort of sign of who he was, a sort of
token of his legitimacy.
--
Aaron Clausen
mightym...@hotmail.com
Glenn Holliday
>
> Glenn Holliday <holl...@acm.org> writes:
>
> > Among other things, I've always thought it unbelievable because
> > Narsil was a priceless heirloom. Keeping a priceless heirloom
> > with you if you're weilding it is one thing, but carrying the
> > shards around to spill out of the scabbard in the middle of
> > the night and be lost forever? It still makes no sense to me.
>
> all his belongings with him. One of these belongings is an heirloom
> that must be a useless burden from day to day. Yet he carries it.
I like your thought here. I still think the risk of loss was
high, but perhaps there is more method in the madness than
I had first credited.
--
Glenn Holliday holl...@acm.org
Glenn Holliday
>
> 1. I always wonder why Gandalf said he would 'roast' Barliman if he
> forgot the letter. How could a wizard say something like that?
"Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, for they are subtle
and swift to anger."
Gandalf is using a figure of speech here. Gandalf the Grey
was frequently irritated. I think this threat is very much
in character. It's in the same flavor as "Fool of a Took! ...
Throw yourself in next time, and then you will be no further nuisance."
--
Glenn Holliday holl...@acm.org
The Sidhekin
> The Sidhekin wrote:
> >
> > Glenn Holliday <holl...@acm.org> writes:
> >
> > > Among other things, I've always thought it unbelievable because
> > > Narsil was a priceless heirloom. Keeping a priceless heirloom
> > > with you if you're weilding it is one thing, but carrying the
> > > shards around to spill out of the scabbard in the middle of
> > > the night and be lost forever? It still makes no sense to me.
> >
> > Strider's character as introduced here is that of a ranger: He keeps
> > all his belongings with him. One of these belongings is an heirloom
> > that must be a useless burden from day to day. Yet he carries it.
>
> I like your thought here. I still think the risk of loss was high,
The risk¹ of loss _was_ high, but still negligible compared to the
risk of losing Gondor to Sauron or of losing Aragorn's life.
Which is, one might assume, why Elrond gave these things to Aragorn
in the first place, rather than keep them safe in Rivendell: If either
Gondor or Aragorn is lost, the shards of Narsil are worthless.
> but perhaps there is more method in the madness than
> I had first credited.
:-)
¹ The concept of _risk_ I apply here is that of the product of
probability and consequence: The sheer probability of losing Narsil
is hardly any less than the probability of losing Aragorn. But,
true to habit, I am getting ahead of myself again: Risk management
has not yet been developed at this point in the story.
Henriette
Yes, IMO you should think in that direction. Many people carry around
seemingly useless objects for symbolic/emotional/superstitious
reasons, especially people who are away from home a lot.
Henriette
Henriette
> >As for myself, I never understood, like Frodo, why
> >> Aragorn never said he was Gandalf's friend in the first place, but the
> >> solution to that riddle may partly be found in your creative
> >> assumption that he is testing the hobbits to see if they are a trap of
> >> the Enemy.
>
> Knowledge is power. As well, I always liked to think that he was testing the
> hobbits and their capability of discerning the attentions of strangers while
> travelling in foreign lands, knowing that there mightbe a long road ahead.
As well, there is also his only-too-human remark: "But I admit (...)
that I hoped you would take to me for my own sake. A hunted man
sometimes wearies of distrust and longs for friendship".
Henriette
Jamie Armstrong
> in <2004032405112...@gacracker.org>,
> Igenlode Wordsmith <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> enriched us
> with:
>
> <snip>
>
> I pretty much agree with this: the that Aragorn carried Narsil around
> as an heirloom giving him a sense of identity (and purpose, I'd guess),
> and that the rangers, as a rule, didn't have much use of swords (though
> bows and knifes probably often came in handy).
>
> I think it's likely that Aragorn did carry other weapons, though possibly
> not another sword
Definitely not a sword:
"Strider does not 'Whip out a sword' in the book. Naturally not:
his sword was broken." (Letters, p.273
> he could probably get hold of one fast enough if he
> needed it.
>
Yeah: he'd just take it off whoever was dumb enough to attack him :)
Jamie
--
"The more I see of the world, the more am I dissatisfied with it; and
every day confirms my belief of the inconsistency of all human
characters, and of the little dependence that can be placed on the
appearance of either merit or sense."
Jane Austen, Pride and Prejudice
Jamie Armstrong
> AC <mightym...@hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:slrnc63adj.3ns....@alder.alberni.net:
>
>
>>On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 23:54:28 GMT,
>>Igenlode Wordsmith <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>More seriously: I don't actually get the impression that
>>>the Rangers went in much for sword-fighting in the course
>>>of their ordinary 'duties', to be honest. This novel
>>>predates the D&D school of fantasy: Gandalf has described
>>>Aragorn as a great traveller and huntsman, and he himself
>>>says "I have hunted many wild and wary things and I can
>>>usually disappear, if I wish". A hunter doesn't go round
>>>swinging a sword. Aragorn son of Arathorn is trained in the
>>>use of a blade, and in the arts of war; but I'm not sure
>>>Strider the Ranger has much use for either in his daily
>>>life in Arnor and Eriador.
>>
>>I don't know. When Narsil is reforged as Anduril, Aragorn
>>doesn't seem to have much of a problem swinging and hitting
>>targets. I can only assume he was a skilled swordsman, and
>>that means he must have had practice in the art.
>>
> Depending on where the break was, and it was closer to the tip
> of the sword, if I am picturing it correctly, the sword would
> not be totally useless as a weapon.
Actually it was a foor from the hilt, so it wouldn't be all that useful:
enough to parry another sword though.
Jamie Armstrong
<snip>
>
> Actually it was a foor from the hilt,
Or even "a foot"...
:(
aelfwina
"Hashemon Urtasman" <nos...@spam.com> wrote in message
news:0es8c.44821$5ze....@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
>
>
> zett wrote:
>
> > Chapter o/t Week: LoTR Ch. 10 "Strider"
> >
> > To host a chapter discussion, or for more information, go to:
> > http://parasha.maoltuile.org/
> >
> > I see this chapter as maintaining a "waves of suspense" effect, which
> > began in the previous chapter-I sense it particularly surrounding the
> > uncertainty as to Strider's motives.
>
>
> > Other, more technical questions, I leave to the NG because I just
> > don't have any.
>
> 1. I always wonder why Gandalf said he would 'roast' Barliman if he
> forgot the letter. How could a wizard say something like that?
The same way he threatened to turn Samwise into "something unnatural" when
he caught him eavesdropping, or the same way a parent tells a child "If you
fall out of that tree and break your leg, I'll kill you." It's hyperbole.
> 2. I noted how Strider kept trying to emphasize that the hobbits must
> take him as a partner, and even tries to every so earnestly bargain with
> them, eventually saying "Strider can take you by paths that are seldom
> trodden. Will you have him?" This tension in Strider is something I
> never noticed before today. At once he is anxious for their protection
> and yet condescending towards their ability to survive in the wild.
> Very amazing, I always loved this part of the book more than any other
> but I never noticed this aspect of Striders behaviour before today.
I think Strider was very anxious to fulfill his mission for Gandalf, as well
as worried that Gandalf had not, in fact, shown up. I think that much of
his ambivalent behavior could be laid to worry over this factor.
Barbara
Jamie Andrews; real address @ bottom of message
> I always pictured boots that came up to the knees, with a raised
> bit - like knee-guard half-shell thingy (I am not good at
> describing footwear, sorry) rising up to the center of the knee
> in the front and scalloped in the back to below the knee, at the
> top rounding of the calf, for ease in running. They'd have a
> semi-hard sole, hard enough for protection on rocks, but soft
> enough to allow purchase on same rocks, if wet (rocks or boots).
> No heel, like riding boots have, but more like mocs, or running
> shoes. And they'd lace up, at least 1/2 way, as they would need
> to be a fairly tight fit to avoid those irksome blisters that
> come of running through marsh and field and stream for days on
> end and yet remain easy to put on or take off.
Gosh, you *do* have a fixation. :-)
--Jamie. (nel mezzo del cammin di nostra vita)
andrews .uwo } Merge these two lines to obtain my e-mail address.
@csd .ca } (Unsolicited "bulk" e-mail costs everyone.)
Jim Deutch
<ne...@redbadge.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>I've got some more questions: how many 'shards of Narsil' were there?
>Somehow I always imagined it was just snapped in two (kind of like at
That's always been my impression, too, but if Tolkien says anywhere,
I've never heard.
PJ came up with six pieces, IIRC.
Jim Deutch
--
Cthulhu for President!
Why vote for a lesser evil?
Jim Deutch
wrote:
>
>"Taemon" <Tae...@zonnet.nl> wrote in message
>news:c3rlvh$28jb2a$1...@ID-135975.news.uni-berlin.de...
>> Tolkien wrote:
>>
>> > "'Strider' I am to one fat man who lives within a day's
>> > march of foes that would freeze his heart, or lay his little
>> > town in ruin, if he were not guarded ceaselessly."
>>
>> What foes are we talking about anyway? Orcs? Trolls?
>
>Orcs. Trolls. Barrow Wights. Wargs. Brigands.
>You name it.
Songs of agony, bad poetry to freeze the blood . . . Bombadil, IOW.
Jim Deutch (Jimbo the Cat)
--
Really, I like TB. But he's an easy target...
Stan Brown
rec.arts.books.tolkien:
I do remember that the _printers_ at least altered Tolkien's text.
He was quite indignant about it in Letter 148: "they started
correcting my English without reference to me: elfin for elven;
farther for further; try to say for try and say and so on."
But I don't remember any talk of editorial suggestions from A&U,
other than those driven by production like the number and color of
illustrations, division into volumes, and the like.
--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com
Tolkien FAQs: http://Tolkien.slimy.com (Steuard Jensen's site)
Tolkien letters FAQ:
http://users.telerama.com/~taliesen/tolkien/lettersfaq.html
FAQ of the Rings: http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/ringfaq.htm
Encyclopedia of Arda: http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/default.htm
more FAQs: http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/faqget.htm
Stan Brown
rec.arts.books.tolkien:
>Troels Forchhammer wrote:
>> I think it's likely that Aragorn did carry other weapons, though possibly
>> not another sword
>Definitely not a sword:
> "Strider does not 'Whip out a sword' in the book. Naturally not:
>his sword was broken." (Letters, p.273
Thanks for this reminder. Sadly, that means that Tolkien really did
_think_ about Strider carrying that valuable and useless heirloom
around the Wild, on foot.
What does a sword weigh? Surely a tall Man's broadsword would be a
matter of 10 or 20 pounds (4.5 to 9 kg). That's a lot of dead
weight to carry around, day after day, on foot.
Stan Brown
rec.arts.books.tolkien:
>Depending on where the break was, and it was closer to the tip
>of the sword, if I am picturing it correctly, the sword would
>not be totally useless as a weapon.
"He drew out his sword, and they saw that the blade was indeed
broken a foot below the hilt."
Stan Brown
>1. I always wonder why Gandalf said he would 'roast' Barliman if he
>forgot the letter. How could a wizard say something like that?
It is quite common to be "so angry I could kill" someone. It doesn't
mean you actually intend to commit murder; you're just letting off
steam. I read Gandalf's comment the same way.
Stan Brown
>"Hashemon Urtasman" <nos...@spam.com> wrote in message
>news:0es8c.44821$5ze....@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
>> take him as a partner, and even tries to every so earnestly bargain with
>> them, eventually saying "Strider can take you by paths that are seldom
>> trodden. Will you have him?" This tension in Strider is something I
>> never noticed before today.
>
>as worried that Gandalf had not, in fact, shown up. I think that much of
>his ambivalent behavior could be laid to worry over this factor.
Strider knew that if Sauron's servants got hold of the Ring, Strider
would never be King, never win Arwen, and very probably be killed in
a war where defeat was certain. It was _desperately_ important that
he keep Frodo safe.
Actually it was desperately important that he keep the _Ring_ safe.
It is a mark of his wisdom that he knew that mean it had to stay
with Frodo.
Tar-Elenion
the_sta...@fastmail.fm says...
> "Jamie Armstrong" <j.d.ar...@durham.ac.uk> wrote in
> rec.arts.books.tolkien:
> >Troels Forchhammer wrote:
> >> I think it's likely that Aragorn did carry other weapons, though possibly
> >> not another sword
>
> >Definitely not a sword:
> > "Strider does not 'Whip out a sword' in the book. Naturally not:
> >his sword was broken." (Letters, p.273
>
> Thanks for this reminder. Sadly, that means that Tolkien really did
> _think_ about Strider carrying that valuable and useless heirloom
> around the Wild, on foot.
>
> What does a sword weigh? Surely a tall Man's broadsword would be a
> matter of 10 or 20 pounds (4.5 to 9 kg). That's a lot of dead
> weight to carry around, day after day, on foot.
Pick up an iron bar that weighs 10 pounds and pretend like it is a
sword. Try to swing it. Seems rather difficult amd ineffective. Pick up
one that weighs 3lbs and you will have a much easier time of it.
Historically, real swords seldom weighed much over three pounds or so.
Even the huge two handed swords popularized by the landsknechts in the
1500's might weigh about 6lbs (if intended for combat, some 'decorative'
processional swords might weigh considerably more). Swords being
extremely heavy is a complete myth (to go along side those myths that
have armoured knights needing to be lifted into a saddle by a winch or
not being able to get up if they were knocked over in combat). If you
want I will dig out a page that gives actual weights of historic swords
(not modern reproductions).
--
Tar-Elenion
He is a warrior, and a spirit of wrath. In every
stroke that he deals he sees the Enemy who long
ago did thee this hurt.
zett
[snip]
> > When Narsil is reforged as Anduril, Aragorn
> > doesn't seem to have much of a problem swinging and hitting
> > targets. I can only assume he was a skilled swordsman, and
> > that means he must have had practice in the art.
> >
>
> Depending on where the break was, and it was closer to the tip
> of the sword, if I am picturing it correctly, the sword would
> not be totally useless as a weapon. It would still have the
> sharp edge up to the break, and the flat would still work as a
> striking weapon. At the most Aragorn would have lost some of
> the extension a sword (or any long weapon) gives the wielder and
> most (but not all) stabbing ability.
It says in the chapter that the sword was broken a foot below the
hilt. I reckon that wouldn't be enough to make for a good weapon.
Well, since Aragorn is One Tough Dude (as an old thread on here had
it)he could probably fight with it better than most, broken or not.
>
> So he may have carried it with him on this particular trip as a
> sign of who he was, or to take it Rivendell for reforging (the
> Ring is found ! Shit. Oh ! I can be King now !) <snip>
LOL!
Igenlode Wordsmith
> In rec.arts.books.tolkien Igenlode Wordsmith wrote:
[snip]
> : A hunter doesn't go round swinging a sword.
> : Aragorn son of Arathorn is trained in the use of a blade, and in the
> : arts of war; but I'm not sure Strider the Ranger has much use for either
> : in his daily life in Arnor and Eriador.
>
> Aragorn seems to disagree with you.
> "Many evil things there are that your strong walls and bright
> swords do not stay. You know little of the lands beyond your
> bounds. Peace and freedom, do you say? The North would have
> known them little but for us. Fear would have destroyed them.
> But when dark things come from the houseless hills, or creep
> from sunless woods, they fly from us."
> Why would evil things fly from unarmed Rangers?
How then would evil things that 'bright swords do not stay' fly from
Rangers armed themselves with *swords*? :-)
I doubt they were unarmed; but I doubt also that they went marching in
battle-array as if to duel with human opponents. My guess would be that
the Ranger's weapons would be knife, staff or bow - perhaps noose and
spear - plus wood-lore and a little magic. The Barrow-wight is
ultimately bested by Tom's song, not by Frodo's blow. The Nazgul fear no
man's blade. And one does not from choice fight wild Wolves or any other
four-legged predator with a sword, though Aragorn was forced to do so
outside Moria.
--
Igenlode <Igenl...@nym.alias.net> Bookwraith unabashed
loose (archaic): set free, unleash - lose: mislay, be defeated
zett
[snip]
> I thought this chapter was set up like a classic mystery novel.
[snip]
I think that most of Fellowship of the Ring is like a mystery novel;
at least up through The Council of Elrond the story is a series of
secrets built up and then revealed.
Frodo intends to leave the Shire->Sam caught eavesdropping. Sam and
other hobbits conspire to help Frodo->Revelation at Crickhollow.
Strider's doubtful identity->Identity revealed.
Then the Council itself reminds me of how at the end of a mystery
novel the detective reveals all(except there is a series of
"detectives": Elrond, Bilbo, Gandalf, Frodo)In this case, the whodunit
is a series of individuals - Isildur, Smeagol, Bilbo, Frodo; the
"mystery" being Who Got the Ring (and how). There is a "secondary"
whodunit of Gandalf's imprisonment. Then there is the Whosgonnadoit
of destroying the Ring, but still, it has that sense of revelation.
I love The Council of Elrond, it was a very skillful way to get the
reader up to speed on all that is at stake because of the Ring.
Igenlode
> On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 23:54:28 GMT,
> Igenlode Wordsmith <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[> wrote:
[snip]
> > Aragorn son of Arathorn is trained in the use of a blade, and in the
> > arts of war;
> > but I'm not sure Strider the Ranger has much use for either
> > in his daily life in Arnor and Eriador.
>
> I don't know. When Narsil is reforged as Anduril, Aragorn doesn't seem to
> have much of a problem swinging and hitting targets. I can only assume he
> was a skilled swordsman, and that means he must have had practice in the
> art.
>
Indeed, and that was what I was trying to imply :-)
--
Igenlode <Igenl...@nym.alias.net> Bookwraith unabashed
* Usenet: Warning, may contain Nuts *
the softrat
Deutch) wrote:
>On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 18:18:23 +0000, Pete Gray
><ne...@redbadge.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>I've got some more questions: how many 'shards of Narsil' were there?
>>Somehow I always imagined it was just snapped in two (kind of like at
>
>That's always been my impression, too, but if Tolkien says anywhere,
>I've never heard.
>
>PJ came up with six pieces, IIRC.
>
Yeah, and I don't think that a sword breaks like that. (Where are our
'broken sword' experts?) Swords are not supposed to be brittle.
the softrat
"LotR: Eleven Oscars! Right up there with _Titanic_!"
mailto:sof...@pobox.com
--
When I'm not in my right mind, my left mind gets pretty crowded.
Stan Brown
rec.arts.books.tolkien:
>Historically, real swords seldom weighed much over three pounds or so.
Thanks.
In medieval times, if lucky, I'd have been a cleric. I doubt I'd
have lasted a week in the real world.
Tar-Elenion
the_sta...@fastmail.fm says...
> "Tar-Elenion" <tar_e...@hotmail.com> wrote in
> rec.arts.books.tolkien:
> >Historically, real swords seldom weighed much over three pounds or so.
>
> Thanks.
>
> In medieval times, if lucky, I'd have been a cleric. I doubt I'd
> have lasted a week in the real world.
The earliest (currently) known and available fechtbuch (from ca. 1290,
illustrated with captions) shows/details a system of fighting with the
sword and buckler. The author seems to have been a monk (cleric).
;)
TeaLady (Mari C.)
news:c3tkm6$2brv0i$1...@ID-211612.news.uni-berlin.de:
>> So he may have carried it with him on this particular trip
>> as a sign of who he was, or to take it Rivendell for
>> reforging (the Ring is found ! Shit. Oh ! I can be King
>> now !) but it would not have been totally useless as a
>> weapon, had he needed to use it.
>
> I dunno. It seems like a bit of a stretch to me. I mean, I
> can see carrying a busted sword in a pinch, but I get the
> impression that Aragorn carried it around more than that.
> Unless, of course, he was intentionally carrying Narsil as a
> sort of sign of who he was, a sort of token of his
> legitimacy.
>
Someone made the argument that Aragorn was his own keep - he had
no household to store his things. I can see that, and that he
could carry Narsil with him most, or all, of the time. He'd
need other weapons - knives, a bow, perhaps another sword.
Narsil may have been with him, but it need not have been worn as
a weapon - it might have been carried across his back, or
strapped onto/into a pack of some sort. That would allow for
another sword to be worn belted.
Even so, a broken sword still has use as a weapon, albeit
limited, and not as effective as an unbroken one. I certainly
wouldn't want to be whacked by one, even if broken.
--
mc
ste...@nomail.com
: On 24 Mar 2004 ste...@nomail.com wrote:
:> In rec.arts.books.tolkien Igenlode Wordsmith wrote:
: [snip]
:> : A hunter doesn't go round swinging a sword.
:> : Aragorn son of Arathorn is trained in the use of a blade, and in the
:> : arts of war; but I'm not sure Strider the Ranger has much use for either
:> : in his daily life in Arnor and Eriador.
:>
:> Aragorn seems to disagree with you.
:> "Many evil things there are that your strong walls and bright
:> swords do not stay. You know little of the lands beyond your
:> bounds. Peace and freedom, do you say? The North would have
:> known them little but for us. Fear would have destroyed them.
:> But when dark things come from the houseless hills, or creep
:> from sunless woods, they fly from us."
:> Why would evil things fly from unarmed Rangers?
: How then would evil things that 'bright swords do not stay' fly from
: Rangers armed themselves with *swords*? :-)
It says "your bright swords". Just because these evil things slip
past the swords of Gondor does not mean that they could not be
stayed by swords. Gondor was a long way away, and did not gaurd
the passes of the Misty Mountains for example.
: I doubt they were unarmed; but I doubt also that they went marching in
: battle-array as if to duel with human opponents. My guess would be that
: the Ranger's weapons would be knife, staff or bow - perhaps noose and
: spear - plus wood-lore and a little magic. The Barrow-wight is
: ultimately bested by Tom's song, not by Frodo's blow. The Nazgul fear no
: man's blade. And one does not from choice fight wild Wolves or any other
: four-legged predator with a sword, though Aragorn was forced to do so
: outside Moria.
But you were claiming that the Ranger's were mainly hunters, and
would that warfare was not part of their daily life. But apparently
the Ranger's were responsible for for defending Bree and the other
places and this presumably required some sort of warfare.
Stephen
TeaLady (Mari C.)
news:MPG.1acd2e853...@news.odyssey.net:
> "TeaLady (Mari C.)" <spres...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> rec.arts.books.tolkien:
>>Depending on where the break was, and it was closer to the
>>tip of the sword, if I am picturing it correctly, the sword
>>would not be totally useless as a weapon.
>
> "He drew out his sword, and they saw that the blade was
> indeed broken a foot below the hilt."
>
Erg. I had completely overlooked that small bit of description
- "a foot" - and read it as "boken below the hilt".
Thank you for the quote.
And yet, even so shortened, it could be used if nothing else
were available. Heck, a good sout stick makes a decent weapon,
if wielded as such.
I do agree that Narsil was, at the time of this chapter, most
likely not carried as a weapon. Not until it was reforged would
it be so - but in pinch, I bet he whacked something with it. If
only a rather tough and over-cooked egg.
--
mc
Igenlode
> Troels Forchhammer wrote:
[snip Aragorn's broken sword]
> > he could probably get hold of one fast enough if he needed it.
> >
> Yeah: he'd just take it off whoever was dumb enough to attack him :)
>
Now that I can see :-)
--
Igenlode <Igenl...@nym.alias.net> Bookwraith unabashed
* The Truth Shall Make Ye Fret *
Öjevind Lång
> "Hashemon Urtasman" <nos...@spam.com> wrote in
> rec.arts.books.tolkien:
> >1. I always wonder why Gandalf said he would 'roast' Barliman if he
> >forgot the letter. How could a wizard say something like that?
>
> It is quite common to be "so angry I could kill" someone. It doesn't
> mean you actually intend to commit murder; you're just letting off
> steam. I read Gandalf's comment the same way.
I believe it indicated that Gandalf felt quite peckish. A roasted,
well-nourished innkeeper with French fries, onions and chives - yum!
Öjevind
Odysseus
>
> The earliest (currently) known and available fechtbuch (from ca. 1290,
> illustrated with captions) shows/details a system of fighting with the
> sword and buckler. The author seems to have been a monk (cleric).
> ;)
How many authors from that period *weren't* clerics?
--
Odysseus
Odysseus
>
> Yeah, and I don't think that a sword breaks like that. (Where are our
> 'broken sword' experts?) Swords are not supposed to be brittle.
>
brittle. Much of swordmaking art and technology is about marrying
properties of hardness and ductility in one piece of steel. Even a
blade that can stand up to all kinds of impacts might fail when
subjected to a sustained force, as from someone falling on it.
Moreover I think an overly flexible sword would be pretty useless.
--
Odysseus
Jamie Armstrong
> On Thu, 25 Mar 2004 22:00:50 GMT, 10313...@compuserve.com (Jim
> Deutch) wrote:
>
>
>>On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 18:18:23 +0000, Pete Gray
>><ne...@redbadge.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I've got some more questions: how many 'shards of Narsil' were there?
>>>Somehow I always imagined it was just snapped in two (kind of like at
>>
>>That's always been my impression, too, but if Tolkien says anywhere,
>>I've never heard.
>>
>>PJ came up with six pieces, IIRC.
>
> Yeah, and I don't think that a sword breaks like that. (Where are our
> 'broken sword' experts?) Swords are not supposed to be brittle.
>
or spearhead has been *bent* back upon itself so that the tip is
alongide the hilt (this is commonly interpreted as a ritualistic
'killing' of the weapon to prevent the dead using it against the
living), but I can't think of any examples of a *broken* sword. Not to
say that there aren't any, of course...
Jamie Armstrong
> "Jamie Armstrong" <j.d.ar...@durham.ac.uk> wrote in
> rec.arts.books.tolkien:
>
>>Troels Forchhammer wrote:
>>
>>>I think it's likely that Aragorn did carry other weapons, though possibly
>
>>Definitely not a sword:
>> "Strider does not 'Whip out a sword' in the book. Naturally not:
>>his sword was broken." (Letters, p.273
>
> Thanks for this reminder. Sadly, that means that Tolkien really did
> _think_ about Strider carrying that valuable and useless heirloom
> around the Wild, on foot.
>
> What does a sword weigh? Surely a tall Man's broadsword would be a
> matter of 10 or 20 pounds (4.5 to 9 kg). That's a lot of dead
> weight to carry around, day after day, on foot.
Ah, but he *is* a Numenorean: I'll bet he could carry a lot more than we
could.
Stan Brown
rec.arts.books.tolkien:
Can we say that Narsil broke for partly magical reasons, just
because it had been used on Sauron?
Remember what happened to Frodo's sword when he stabbed the Witch-
king at Weathertop -- "All blades perish that pierce that dreadful
King." Doesn't it make sense that hitting Sauron would destroy
almost any weapon?
Stan Brown
rec.arts.books.tolkien:
>In article <MPG.1acd6b1ac...@news.odyssey.net>,
>the_sta...@fastmail.fm says...
>> have lasted a week in the real world.
>
>The earliest (currently) known and available fechtbuch (from ca. 1290,
>illustrated with captions) shows/details a system of fighting with the
>sword and buckler. The author seems to have been a monk (cleric).
"Them as can, do. Them as can't, teach."
(To which, when I was a student teacher, my supervising teacher
added "Them as can't teach, teach teachers how to teach.")
Tar-Elenion
AC
>
> Someone made the argument that Aragorn was his own keep - he had
> no household to store his things. I can see that, and that he
> could carry Narsil with him most, or all, of the time. He'd
> need other weapons - knives, a bow, perhaps another sword.
> Narsil may have been with him, but it need not have been worn as
> a weapon - it might have been carried across his back, or
> strapped onto/into a pack of some sort. That would allow for
> another sword to be worn belted.
>
> Even so, a broken sword still has use as a weapon, albeit
> limited, and not as effective as an unbroken one. I certainly
> wouldn't want to be whacked by one, even if broken.
I don't really agree with this. Well, I agree that Aragorn had no keep, but
the heirlooms of his house had been kept in Rivendell, and it was Elrond who
fostered him. It would have made a lot more sense that an heirloom as
important and ancient (forged by Telchar in the First Age) would have been
kept there rather be dragged around the wilds of Middle Earth.
--
Aaron Clausen
mightym...@hotmail.com
Jette Goldie
"Tar-Elenion" <tar_e...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1acdf2499...@news.comcast.giganews.com...
> In article <40640078...@yahoo-dot.ca>, odysseus1479-at@yahoo-
> dot.ca says...
> > Tar-Elenion wrote:
> > >
> > > The earliest (currently) known and available fechtbuch (from ca. 1290,
> > > illustrated with captions) shows/details a system of fighting with the
> > > sword and buckler. The author seems to have been a monk (cleric).
> > > ;)
> >
> > How many authors from that period *weren't* clerics?
>
> ????
13th C - the majority of the population were not literate - those
who were, were mainly clerics.
(they might have been educated, but not necessarily literate)
--
Jette
"Work for Peace and remain Fiercely Loving" - Jim Byrnes
je...@blueyonder.co.uk
http://www.jette.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
Tar-Elenion
j...@blueyonder.com.uk says...
>
> "Tar-Elenion" <tar_e...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1acdf2499...@news.comcast.giganews.com...
> > In article <40640078...@yahoo-dot.ca>, odysseus1479-at@yahoo-
> > dot.ca says...
> > > Tar-Elenion wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The earliest (currently) known and available fechtbuch (from ca. 1290,
> > > > illustrated with captions) shows/details a system of fighting with the
> > > > sword and buckler. The author seems to have been a monk (cleric).
> > > > ;)
> > >
> > > How many authors from that period *weren't* clerics?
> >
> > ????
>
> 13th C - the majority of the population were not literate - those
> who were, were mainly clerics.
>
> (they might have been educated, but not necessarily literate)
Most fechtbuchs were not authored by clerics (though the majority of the
fechtbuchs are from 1400's and 1500's). It has been supposed that the
author of the above mentioned manuscript (I.33) was a soldier at one
point, and later entered a monastery (though, as implied with my above
use of 'seems', there are other theories as to who the author was, for a
detailed and full discourse on the matter, Dr. Jeffrey Forgeng recently
produced a facsimile and translation of the I.33 ms entitled 'The
Medieval Art of Swordsmanship', published by Royal Armouries) in any
event the illustrations depict a Priest teaching a Student the art of
combat with sword and buckler.
Archie
>>> In medieval times, if lucky, I'd have been a cleric. I doubt I'd
>>> have lasted a week in the real world.
>"Them as can, do. Them as can't, teach."
>
>(To which, when I was a student teacher, my supervising teacher
>added "Them as can't teach, teach teachers how to teach.")
Another version runs: "Them as can't teach, govern. Them as can't govern, become journalists."
[It is on-topic, since Tolkien could write and he did write. However, his lectures are rumoured
to be far from brilliant - from a bored and average-IQ student's POV, of course].
Archie