When does Verisimilitude break down?

[Celtavian]

re

Also, the "quote" between Shagrat and Gorbag that "proves" the orcs are long-lived is laughable. There is absolutely nothing in that exchange of dialogue that even suggests that either of them have any direct memory of Morgoth except under the most twisted and reaching of interpretations.

No, they specifically state the "bad old times during the great Siege". There is a reference to the great Siege in the Silmarillion. Could simply be historical stories that the orcs know about.

I certainly hope a Tolkien scholar such as yourself discusses this on sites where the people involved are infinitely more knowledgable about things Tolkien such as The One Ring.net. They have quite a few folks who are more well-read on Tolkien than myself, and they often debate a variety of issues such as this.

The final conclusion there was that Tolkien flip-flopped concerning orc lifespans and there origins.

There were many elves captured and tortured during Morgoth's reign. No reason to believe he didn't do something with them given that trolls are corrupted ents. Ents are long-lived, though I am not sure about trolls.

The suggestion that the seige they mention has to be the first age rather than the current seige going on just a little to the west of them is insane.

It is hardly insane. There is only one great Siege in Middle Earth historically, at least one instance referred to as the great Siege, though I am sure there were many sieges. And with the additional qualifying statement the "bad old times" could easily refer to such things.

I'm not saying definitely one way or the other. I am just asserting that your absolute belief that it is not a valid interpretation is also incorrect. Tolkien flip-flopped on alot of issues often for religious reasons like the redeemability of orcs.

Combined with direct quotes from Tolkien in which he stated that the lifespans of orcs are short compared to the Dunedain is the final nail in that coffin, which I'm surprised to still see opened at all.

Hardly the final nail in the coffin. As I said, much flip-flopping by Tolkien. Maybe in that letter he made his final decision, but he certainly didn't seem to have made it in his early writings.

Or can you tell me where in his stories he made this decision? The letters were quite a few years after the story (and backstories). He had alot of time to sit back and decide where the orcs came from. No surprise that he decided later he didn't want corrupted elves after he wrote the chapter in the Silmarillion.

 

[Desdichado]

No, they specifically state the "bad old times during the great Siege". There is a reference to the great Siege in the Silmarillion. Could simply be historical stories that the orcs know about.

Not only does that passage not require that Shagrat and Gorbat have that memory personally, there is a "great siege" going on at Minas Tirith right at that moment chronologically in the plot. The insistence that the "Great Seige" must mean the "Great Siege" of the Silmarillion is ludicrous and completely unfounded, in my opinion.

I certainly hope a Tolkien scholar such as yourself discusses this on sites where the people involved are infinitely more knowledgable about things Tolkien such as The One Ring.net. They have quite a few folks who are more well-read on Tolkien than myself, and they often debate a variety of issues such as this.

Yep. Have done so many times. Heck, I was doing that back when those same discussions were only available on Usenet.

The final conclusion there was that Tolkien flip-flopped concerning orc lifespans and there origins.

Exactly my point. To say authoritatively that orcs are corrupted elves is ludicrous in the light of Tolkien's own changing position on the issue. It appears that at the end of his life he favored another, non-elvish origin for the orcs, but at the end of the day, my point is that no one interpretation can be given authoritatively, and to put one forward that wasy is automatically wrong.

There were many elves captured and tortured during Morgoth's reign. No reason to believe he didn't do something with them given that trolls are corrupted ents. Ents are long-lived, though I am not sure about trolls.

We also don't know that trolls are corrupted Ents. Treebeard hinted at that, and to that, Tolkien wrote in the Letters that Treebeard didn't know everything and his dialogue should not be taken as indicative of "the truth" about the setting. The appendices in LotR that refer to the Olog-hai seem to further make the origin of trolls ambiguous.

It is hardly insane. There is only one great Siege in Middle Earth historically, at least one instance referred to as the great Siege, though I am sure there were many sieges. And with the additional qualifying statement the "bad old times" could easily refer to such things.

There were many great sieges historically in Middle-earth, including the siege going on at that moment at Minas Tirith. The "bad old times" could easily refer to the more independent lifestyle of the orcs as recently as during the time of the Hobbit. All in all, I find that a much more likely interpretation of the passage, as a matter of fact.

I'm not saying definitely one way or the other. I am just asserting that your absolute belief that it is not a valid interpretation is also incorrect. Tolkien flip-flopped on alot of issues often for religious reasons like the redeemability of orcs.

My only absolute belief if that no one interpretation is absolute. I favor the later interpretation that elves are not the origin of the orcs, but I don't believe it absolutely. I simply believe that it works better given the texts we have, and it seems more and more likely that had Tolkien lived a little bit longer he would have made that even more clearly a reality than he did.

Hardly the final nail in the coffin. As I said, much flip-flopping by Tolkien. Maybe in that letter he made his final decision, but he certainly didn't seem to have made it in his early writings.

And wouldn't his later writing be more definitive? Or do you consider the Books of Lost Tales to be as canonical as the Silmarillion, despite the fact that they were clearly early drafts?

Or can you tell me where in his stories he made this decision? The letters were quite a few years after the story (and backstories). He had alot of time to sit back and decide where the orcs came from. No surprise that he decided later he didn't want corrupted elves after he wrote the chapter in the Silmarillion.

He didn't address it in the Lord of the Rings itself; it's all in the backstory, Letters and the like. I'm not sure why you think this invalidates the information in them; to me, it strengthens it.

 

[Desdichado]

No, they specifically state the "bad old times during the great Siege". There is a reference to the great Siege in the Silmarillion. Could simply be historical stories that the orcs know about.

IIRC, they mention the bad old times before the seige. Anyway, I've reread that passage several times with an eye specifically to spot this reference to immortal orcs, and I have to say, I simply don't believe it's there.

Anyway, sorry for the **bump** on a hijack. I do love these discussions, though.

 

[Celtavian]

re

Joshua,

I pretty much agree that there is no real definitive answers concerning orcs. Just didn't think the assertion based on the passage in The Two Towers was all that insane. I myself had never thought of it that way until I read his other works referring to a "great siege". I don't even necessarily think the orcs are elves now, at least not all of them. I would more likely believe that orcs were bred from all the different humanoid types in middle earth because of their different appearances. Then again, I'd just as soon believe Tolkien's letters. I'll flip-flop like him.

I mosly enjoy the books. Discussion is fun. I just hope I never take it as seriously as folks such as China Mieville who seems to attribute some very negative fantasy stereotypes to Tolkien or those people who try to read homosexual overtones into the story. I really despise it when a good fictional story is ruined by overanalysis of it moral content (at least one that isn't meant to be a definitive lesson on morality).

 

[el-remmen]

Verismilitude is something I have wrestled with for the last eight odd years of Aquerra's 14 year lifespan (so far).

I think I have gone the opposite direction of SHARK - having severely slowed level advancement from the 3E standard and adding a great number of limitations on the use of certain magic spells (adding more or higher xp costs or more costly materials) to keep the world from being a place where you can buy an everlasting torch at the market or wipeout a platoon of orcs because the local hedge wizard knows fireball. I have not only used "rule tweaking" to accomplish this - but have gone to great lengths to describe and reinforce societal laws and cultural taboos around magic, divine 'miracles', attitudes about the gods, attitudes towards monstrous races and the like.

This goes along to making a squadron of 2nd level warriors led by their 6th level captain be a match for any but the most powerful adventurers. While there are "epic" NPCs in the world, there are fewer than a dozen and are legenadary figures even to PCs - no one who plays in my games expects to ever get anywhere near that level - and since they do not generally appear in campaigns (no Elminster to always save the day) there is no chance they overshadow the PCs efforts.

This also means that I cannot have the whole range of typical D&D monsters in my campaign setting - I am very careful about the placement of every dragon, and every group of giants,. Every manticore and chimera is basically a "unique creature' to those who run across them because if there were a lot of them life would not be livable to the average person.

But when it comes down to it - in the end it is a fine balance to be kept and takes constant tweaking to maintain.

For example, one way I challenge my 8th level group is not with more wonderous monsters, but with more dangerous environments - while at 2nd level they might have fought a dozen orcs on patrol, at 8th level they descend into an orc lair - the foes are basically the same (except for some leveled leaders) but now they are fighting in a place where their foes have the advantage and know the place, and in the dark and trying to avoid traps and beasts kept around in "abandoned" area of the lair, etc. . .

 

[barsoomcore]

those people who try to read homosexual overtones into the story.

The only homosexual reference in the story that I'm aware of is that great shower scene with Arwen, Eowyn and Galadriel.

...

...

Or did I see a different movie than the rest of you?

 

[el-remmen]

Seems like these days any thread I post to dies a quick and quiet death

Oh, and Barsoomcore, that would not only be homosexual, but incest as Arwen is Galadriel's granddaughter.

 

[Hypersmurf]

... as Arwen is Galadriel's granddaughter.

I'm glad you edited that - I was all confused!

-Hyp.

 

[barsoomcore]

Just to prove to nemmerle that he's not a TOTAL thread-killer --

Barsoom is also an attempt to create a more-or-less realistic world in which the D&D rules apply (sort of -- I rather significantly mangled said rules). Based on the idea that the kind of power the D&D rules provide would lead to a world dominated by freaks, madmen, psychotics and weirdoes.

Which is fun.

 

[hong]

Seems like these days any thread I post to dies a quick and quiet death

Oh, and Barsoomcore, that would not only be homosexual, but incest as Arwen is Galadriel's granddaughter.

SUBSCIRBE!!1!1@