All posts by StingString
@Fandyllic I edited the comment to fix this.
It is likely that they learned of Sauron's demise and departed for Valinor.
@GandalfTheWhite11 Tolkien's work was inspired from other previous works, especially Icelandic and Norse Sagas, as well as Beowulf, perhaps more prominently than all. However, this does not cross the line to the near-blatant plagiarism that J.K. Rowling's books contain.
The King of the Golden Hall gives the listener the impression of a great empire, once towering in might and strength, was reduced to a humble group of people, scattered across a land that was not theirs.
It gives the viewer a pride of those people, in all their glory, before their fall.
The King of the Golden Hall
@Atlas D. Aeradon I am confused as to why you included the War of the Great Jewels, because that war encompasses all of the other options.
The good portions were blatantly stolen, and the bits she invented were the most ill-conceived parts
I see the Elves bond to the world as singular, not default. Therefore, all other creatures are mortal, as Men, and their fëa, or souls, would likely go with them.
@Fandyllic By that logic, his poll is perfectly fine; if anyone can say anything, then this poll should not be attacked.
@Atlas D. Aeradon Would that be free-for-all, or one character specifically against another? If it were the former, I think that Ancalagon or Ungoliant would win.
Against whom?
@Zesty Pablo If I were in your position, I would get Unfinished Tales: it contains that as well as other texts that were later in development than the ones which you have.
The Children of Húrin is NOT contained within THOME; there is an older version of it, contained within THOME, but the most recent story is entirely different from the older version.
Precisely as advanced as ours. Middle-Earth is meant to be the same world as ours; a 'lost history' of sorts. Thus, we are simply 'in the future' of Tolkien's mythology.
@Fandyllic @Scothe This conversation is immature, and does not become either of you. Please end it.
The Rohirrim.
@UnboundBeartic The hole of 'character development' is a perilous one, and is often praised to superfluous in modern literature. The concept that people change heavily and noticeably during the course of an adventure like that is a modern romanticization; it does not stem from fact, but rather from sheer fantasy.
Often the people in this case (specifically in a quest-setting, as opposed to a trauma situation) change gradually, barely enough to notice its happening; the character development in LOTR is actually suburb in this aspect, and this is reflected into the Trilogy.
The place where character development will shine through most noticeably is the 'return'; or the return to where they began. This is obviously clearly exhibited in The Hobbit; Bilbo's transformation upon the Quest for Erebor is scarcely seen page-by-page, but upon his return he is seen in the Shire as an extreme oddity. Again, it is shown in Frodo's return in the LOTR books and movies; each character in that series, while not obviously changing in a single moment (apart from Gimli's sudden love of Elvendom), has changed throughout the course of the books.
For example, each of the Hobbits (Merry, Pippin, Sam, and Frodo) gain courage; enough to fight the Ruffians in the Scouring of the Shire. Frodo, however, was wounded by far the most physically and emotionally; and thus was unable to recover from them. Legolas is consumed with sea-longing; and has even grown a love of things similar to that of a Dwarves. He changes second to least; for he who has seen the most will be least affected by more. Gimli assimilates willfully to Elven-culture, which he had previously despised; this is kick-started, of course, by his trip to Lothlórien. Boromir accepts Aragorn as King of Gondor; an idea which he had previously resented. Aragorn, sadly, changes little noticeably; other than, perhaps, that he accepted his role as King of Gondor. Gandalf, however, barely changes (emotionally; he becomes Gandalf the White, but I am unsure if that could be called true 'character development') for the same reasons I cited on Legolas.
I am sorry for the lengthy body text; but I am often very irritated by this assumption, and wanted to prove beyond much doubt that this is correct.
I first read the Hobbit as a seven-year-old, but my family was poor and could not afford LOTR until I was eleven, and I read The Silmarillion a year later.
Judging from the trailer that another user supplied the community (I suspect that it was Fandyllic), I think that I will not like it. The story seems to focus on Helm's daughter too much; a poor decision on the writer's part, as she was an unnamed character in the original texts.
The saga should rather shine the spotlight on Helm Hammerhand and Fréaláf Hildeson; they were the ones to actually accomplish that victory, as opposed to an unmentioned daughter in a patriarchal society.
I am not denying that the daughter may have had skill with a horse, or even battle potential; but not nearly enough that would allow her to make any sort of difference in a battle. Éowyn was an exception; and indeed extremely 'lucky' to have been in that place and time, which afforded her the opportunity to slay the Witch-King of Angmar. What are the odds of such a rare thing happening twice?
I apologize for the length of this comment, but I wished to make it clear that this opinion does not stem from misogyny, but rather from fact.
Tolkien wished to leave the matter extremely ambiguous for a reason; as he wanted Arda to be a sort of 'lost history', he wanted to leave the manner of Men's deaths (OUR deaths) unclear enough as to allow for other religions; and to embody the idea that even Christians know not with perfect certainty where exactly they are going. For even in the minds of the most stalwart and faithful Christian is the nagging doubt that you are wrong.