Middle-earth Journeys

Sorry I am late to this discussion. It seems to be my lot these days.

Note on "Bingo": I honestly think the name was lost when Tolkien realized he was no longer writing a childrens' story. Bilbo and Frodo are lighthearted enough as are all the Hobbit names for the most part. I agree that Bingo had to go. But that whole beginning seems to have been convoluted for a long time before Tolkien sorted it out.

As for the evolution of Trotter to Aragorn, I believe that in the HoM-E, there is a passage somewhere explaining that Tolkien realized at some point around the breaking of the Fellowship that Trotter would have to be a man because of the physical requirements that the character was now assuming. I always thought it odd that it was that fact that transformed hobbit to man, and then Tolkien subsequently built the King in exile story around it. Tolkien most certainly did not conjure up this tale in the traditional way and I marval on how he kept it all staright and tied it all together. A mark of his genius?

A minute of your time to consider the word Bilbo and why Tolkien may have used it. A friend gave me a gift of a book entitled "The Hobbit Companion" by David Day. In it, the author explores the names of places and characters in Tolkien's ME world. Here is what the author says about the name Biblo;

The word bilbo came to English in the 15th century through the name Bilboa, a Portuguese city once renowned for the making of delicate swords of flexible, but almost unbreakable, steel...

This is an excellent description of Biblo's sword, the charmed Elf knife called Sting...

The name Bilbo apparently immediately suggested certain actions in the plot to Tolkien, because in the first draft of The Hobbit we find that Biblo's bilbo, Sting, is the instrument of the Dragon's destruction when it is thrust into the small unarmoured spot in the monster's belly....

In The Hobbit , however it was sharp wit rather than a sharp sword tha gives Bilbo the edge...

In the end, the Dragon's downfall came through Bilbo exploiting the monster's vanity by means of a "sting," or confidence trick, that resulted in the discovery of how the Dragon might be slain.

I hope this helps with the discussion of why the name Bilbo no Bingo was used in Tolkien's stories.

Interesting that in the first draft Smaug isn't killed by an arrow fired at his soft underbelly but by Sting. Tolkien must have either considered it impossible that a Hobbit could kill a dragon, or that it somehow wasn't in Bilbo's character to do it, or that he wanted the excitement of a flying dragon turning a town to toast...

I like the fact that the sword and Bilbo are tied together etymologically.

Riv Res wrote:I always thought it odd that it was that fact that transformed hobbit to man, and then Tolkien subsequently built the King in exile story around it. Tolkien most certainly did not conjure up this tale in the traditional way and I marval on how he kept it all staright and tied it all together. A mark of his genius?

And the extraordinarily vivid life of his sub-creation that seems to have almost been there in his unconcious for him to find - its as though his story is full of threads and as he wrote and re-wrote he was searching for the right ones to tie together. It is genius!

Reading the posts in this thread, I am filled with joy that people are finding my work interesting. A lot of tedious research lies behind this first part of the thesis. I have tried to compress it as much as possible, which makes it hard to keep the flow, and I am pleased that you still find it readable, although a tad redundant in places... (I assume this is to do with Lindariel's great familiarity with LotR)

I have kept my comments to a minimum, which many have problems with. I have a background in science, so I like to show the facts first and analyze them afterwards. This is meant to make it easier for the reader to learn what they need in order to create their own ideas and thoughts before the author really get going with his/her own ideas. In the Arts, people are often used to a more mixed approach, with analysis throughout. It is therefore interesting for me to read comments from readers who have only read the first part of the presentation of facts.

Maybe, when the second part has been published in Mallorn, I could upload a PDF with the second part of the presentation only first. This particular part is the reason my thesis has been failed at my university, and I am wondering what to do about it. Hearing your thoughts on it would be invaluable to me. Maybe I could even upload it before it is published in Mallorn, as a sneak peak...

Iolanthe, Faramir was born in 1944, well after it was decided that Boromir would die on Amon Hen; a result of Tolkien's love for a character that he had killed off perhaps.

Riv Res, I do not think Trotter becoming a man has much to do with the breaking of the Fellowship, since Tolkien at that point had not written any drafts that go further than Moria, and had not yet decided the fate of Boromir. Aragorn the hobbit as the Heir of Isildur is of course absurd, but the idea of the returning king did not come from Trotter becoming a man. Tolkien set the scene for Aragorn before he thought of whom he was building it for. Trotter needed to be e a man to fill the shoes of a the descendant of Elendil, and therefore the wooden shoes and the hobbit in them had to go...

Philipa, as far as I know, Bingo was never considered as an alternative name for Bilbo, but I have not read the drafts for The Hobbit. Bingo was meant for the character of Frodo...

Reading over the first part myself, I went away with one thought in my head. Who is Faramond? At the time in question, it is the name for Pippin, but many of the hobbits were possible candidates for the name. Tolkien had a lot of trouble with Frodo's name. He was dissatisfied with Bingo at an early stage, but it took him a very long time to finally stick with Frodo. Faramond, for instance, is one of the names he toyed with for this character. It can be said that there are parts of old Faramond in many of the final hobbits, including Fredegar Bolger (Fatty). The name, along with Aramir, may also have led to the name Faramir.

Please feel free to ask me any questions you may have. I know there is not much to argue about yet, and I would rather not discuss my analysis before you have read the rest of the thesis. However, if you do feel like criticizing or arguing about anything in what you have already read, then by all means feel free to do so.

In the meantime, I am looking forward to your responses to my controversial first paper "The Ring" in another thread.

Cheers,
Per

Per, speaking for all of here, I think, we'd love to have a 'sneak peak' at the second part of your paper. (We'll never tell the Mallorn folks, and I doubt they'll find us here!)

I'm a bit confused over your academic issues: is it the case that you think your readers at the University didn't like your paper because you put the facts first and the analysis second? May I ask what academic department are you writing for?

Thanks for clarifying the point about Faramir, Per. I'm finally reading Tolkien's letters - so many books, so little time - and realising how late (and how interestingly) he came into the story.

As you've pointed out yourself - one benefit from your presentation of this first part (facts first, analysis to come) is the chance for us to think over everything ourselves. I must say I like this . I'm really looking forward to your analysis and we'll probably be in a better position to have some interesting conversations having had the chance to reach some conclusions of our own!

Per, I would really love to read the second part of this paper. In fact, I've been champing at the bit to see it ever since Riv Res posted the first part! But please don't get yourself in trouble with Mallorn! We may be a restive bunch here at MeJ -- always anxious for something new to read, ruminate upon, and discuss -- but we are blessed with the capacity for patience when necessary. Thanks so much for being willing to share your work with us!

Merry wrote:I'm a bit confused over your academic issues: is it the case that you think your readers at the University didn't like your paper because you put the facts first and the analysis second? May I ask what academic department are you writing for?

The English Department. What can I say, some academics work differently...

I will send Riv Res the second chapter, bundled with the first part, to replace the Mallorn scan. Missing will be my discussion. I think that it will be more interesting to hear what you have to say without knowing too much about what I really want to discuss...

My University has given me a new deadline, so I am very interested in what you think that I could do to make the second chapter better. I will have no option but to find more material in the manuscripts, especially the first five volumes of HoME. I just don't know if there is enough to mine that would justify a completely different approach.

I would like to show how Tolkien rewrote The Silmarillion after he found out who Aragron really was. Question is whether this can be firmly established using the published manuscripts, or not... Maybe I am wrong all together. That would be interesting too. I need lots of evidence either way...

© Per Håkan Arvidsson: Used by Permission

Just a quick big thank you to Per for letting us have a preview of this .

I've downloaded in and I shall hopefully read it very soon but I seem to be having technical difficulties with Acrobat Reader at the mo . Maybe if I kick the computer...

Per, thanks so much for sharing your paper with us. I'm printing it now (all 53 pages!) and look forward to reading it over the weekend.

The younger Miss L is sick today -- stomach virus + 5-year-old = LOTS of comforting AND lots of extra laundry -- otherwise I'd get started on it today.

Per, I think we're missing the analysis portion of your paper. The copy I downloaded goes straight from "The Fourth Age of the Sun" (page 50) to the Bibliography (page 65). While I appreciate the great lengths you went to in order to summarize all of the extant information on Trotter/Strider/Aragorn/Elessar from all available Tolkien sources, what I am most interested in reading is your analysis, which you set forth so tantalizingly in the Introduction:

In the discussion, I will question the significance of the character of Aragorn in relation to the major themes of the novel, and determine whether this character helps to shape and sustain these themes mythologically, philosophically, ideologically, and technially; i.e., through representation or archetypes and images in the myths that inspired Tolkien; by being connected to questions about existentialism and essentialism; via representing a moral ideal; and by being important as a narrative device.

Could we have that section please?

Lindariel wrote:Per, I think we're missing the analysis portion of your paper. The copy I downloaded goes straight from "The Fourth Age of the Sun" (page 50) to the Bibliography (page 65).

Could we have that section please?

Like Lindariel, I too have the impression that there should be more. I've just finished reading what we've seen so far and found it most interesting!

Indeed. I did tell Riv Res that this is only the twoi first chapters, i.e. the presentation part.

I am very interested in hearing what you have to say about it, before you read the analysis.

The second chapter is the reason I been failed twice. The alternative is to make it more similar to the first chapter, which would mean a close study of the rest of HoME. Question is whether you feel this would be a good idea, or even give enough material to make it worth while.

Or, maybe you can think of an alternative approach?

Sorry for the confusion,
Gwaihir

Per, I'm reluctant to comment further without seeing the rest of your paper. I'm not an academic - I haven't done any literary study or analysis for over thirty years - so I hope you will accept that any remarks I do make will be purely from the point of view of the woman in the street

I will say that I found the first chapter extremely interesting and informative, particularly because I'm not familiar with HoME. One throwaway remark - about Peregrin being a more suitable name for Aragorn than for Pippin - has set me off on a train of thought which might even inspire me to write an essay

In the second chapter I think that your short version of The Sil - and Aragorn's biography - is an excellent resource in itself, which I intend to keep and refer to. But - so far - it doesn't tie into anything, which is why I would like to see your conclusion, as it presumably links everything together. One shouldn't review a play without seeing the final act, or judge a meal before eating the dessert!