Login | Register
 
Message Board | Latest Posts | Your Recent Posts | Rules

Thread: PJ's Merry and Pippin

Is this discussion interesting? Share it on Twitter!

Bottom of Page    Message Board > The Lord of the Rings > PJ's Merry and Pippin   << [1] [2] [3] [4] >>
:lol: Touche! Still, why requote your quotes just to put my spin on them. And you're wrong re: the films. I got all that just from the film version. Then went back to re-read the books to see where the changes lay (I had a run through when Fellowship came out, then again after Return of the King). I was more than pleasantly surprised to be reminded that the films characters end up more or less as the "finished" characters of the books. [b:2q5ykchh]GB[/b:2q5ykchh]
I'm not arguing about where they end up I'm taking issue with the motivations for getting there.
Yes, but the motivations in the films make perfect sense. As I said, Aragorn wasn't TRYING to become the King in the films, so his motivations were purely to save Middle Earth, his friends, and to live up to his Love of Arwen ("I am pledged to another"-paraphrase-he tells Eowyn). So he gets to be King precisely because of his Nobility and Purity of Purpose, and of his Love. That is abundantly clear in the films. Only if one is saddled with the book motivation--that Aragorn desires the Kingship--does one become muddled about the motivations of Film Aragorn (who does NOT desire the Kingship). This is as plain as day. You only have trouble with it because of your "Purism" (which you're welcome to of course), but you're now letting it get in the way of seeing the films on their OWN terms. [b:1a91u2go]GB[/b:1a91u2go]
[quote="pettytyrant101":1itxhe9k]I'm not arguing about where they end up I'm taking issue with the motivations for getting there.[/quote:1itxhe9k] Your complaint is primarily that Aragorn's motivations were both his love for Arwen and his fear based on his ancestry, right? Faithfulness issues aside, how is it an inconsistency for Aragorn to have two motivations?
"I am pledged to another"-paraphrase-he tells Eowyn'-GB Not sure where you getting that from GB. Eowyn asks him about the elfstone- it cuts to the scene at Rivendell where he tries to give it back and concludes with Aragorn telling Eowyn Arwen is leaving middle-earth with her people. Arwen is not a motivating factor at all for the Aragorn of the films save as a regret, as far as film Aragorn is concerned the day he left Rivendell is the last time he will ever see her again, ever. There are no return ships from the Undying Lands. PJ's Aragorn isn't looking to a wedding as the mark of his success he ends up looking to a crowning. This is such a stark contrast to the motivation of book Aragorn, who knows he has Arwen fully behind him and knows that the only way he can be with her is to become King. I just don't see how you can think such a significant alterations makes no difference to either Aragorn's motivation or the theme of love Tolkien is using here. The two version are completely at odds. You can't acknowledge PJ changed the fundamentals on one hand but miraculously managed to leave all the themes and motivations in place on the other- he didn't, its impossible to do so. Eldo my point is that Tolkien uses the two separate stories of Frodo and Sam on one side and Aragorn on the other to illustrate the same theme- love can conquer evil, as a reason for doing something its the best and its the only motivation for power that does not corrupt. PJ's Aragorn does not follow this theme at all. He has other motivations. For me this takes away the entire point of the tale of Aragorn and Arwen.
[quote="pettytyrant101":3l2gsfmf]Eldo my point is that Tolkien uses the two separate stories of Frodo and Sam on one side and Aragorn on the other to illustrate the same theme- love can conquer evil, as a reason for doing something its the best and its the only motivation for power that does not corrupt. PJ's Aragorn does not follow this theme at all. He has other motivations. [b:3l2gsfmf]For me this takes away the entire point of the tale of Aragorn and Arwen.[/b:3l2gsfmf][/quote:3l2gsfmf] I hate to say it :P but I agree with GB here. When someone says that a film has inconsistencies, it typically refers to errors in continuity, characterization, etc. [i:3l2gsfmf]within the film[/i:3l2gsfmf]. Much as I agree that PJ went wrong in many places, I think you're making the wrong criticism here. That's my two cents on the matter. <img src='/images/smileys/smile.gif' border='0' alt='Smile Smilie' />
I'm talking about inconsistency of theme here Eldo, the confusion may be arising because earlier in the discussion it got sidetracked slightly to taking into account inconsistency of performance brought about by them making the script up as they went, which is true but a side issue to the greater crime of screwing up the theme. Don't get hung up on definition Eldo, look at the bigger picture!
[quote="pettytyrant101":bis0xrdd]I'm talking about inconsistency of theme here Eldo ... the greater crime of screwing up the theme.[/quote:bis0xrdd] As far as I can tell (and maybe I'm wrong), you consider the theme to be screwed up because it's different from the book. That doesn't make the film inconsistent with itself (i.e., under the usual meaning of the term).
The word 'inconsistent' is the problem here Eldo- ignore it for now. My argument is that by making Aragorn reluctant and by removing Elronds bit about him having to be King before he can marry Arwen and then by having Aragorn leave Rivendell under the impression he will not see Arwen ever again means the causes for which Aragorn is fighting are substantially different from the single cause he is fighting for in the book, which is love. And it has to be a single cause because that's Tolkien's central point about love and power and corruption. By trying to make Aragorn more 'interesting' and less personally secure, by trying to add extra drama to it PJ fumbles the ball and in doing so screws up a central theme. Clearer now?
Well, when Elrond gives Aragorn the sword, he says "I come on behalf of one whom I love" or something like that, and tells him Arwen is dying. That should indicate that Arwen didn't leave, and is waiting for Aragorn. Then his love for Arwen would still be motivation enough to become king. He might even feel like he has to, since Arwen will live or die depending on whether he defeats Sauron and becomes king, or if he bails and Sauron wins.
You are right about that Ringdrotten. But I would argue PJ changes the significance of Anduril too. When its first seen broken in Rivendell its used to emphasis Aragorn's reluctance to be King and his fear of failing like Isildur, first in conversation with Boromir where its the undercurrent of the scene and immediately afterward explicitly in conversation with Arwen. When it is eventually reforged Aragorn first uses it against the King of the Dead where PJ uses it to represent Aragorns right to be King. Other than Elronds one line (which is little more than a vague nod to the actual gift sent to Aragorn at this time in the book by Arwen, which is his banner which she has spent considerable time weaving in secret for him) there's still not much love going on. And you'd think, given Aragorn left believing Arwen was gone for ever that some sort of show of surprise might have been warranted upon hearing she hasn't left at all (there's an inconsistency for you Eldo!) but he seems more interested in the sword than in Arwen and the majority of the scene with Elrond has no mention (other than that line) of Arwen and concerns itself with Elrond persuading Aragorn to be King.
Aragorn in the films makes it clear to Eowyn that he can't love her because his heart belongs to another. I may have mis-attributed the line to Aragorn (I'll have to double-check the film), but he DOES make it clear (to Eowyn AND to the Audience) that he still loves Arwen. Again, the initial motivation of Book Aragorn is to win the Approval of Elrond for Arwen and the Kingdom--but it is based on his underlying motivation of his Love for Arwen and Middle Earth. This is where the character arc of Film Aragorn leads. The underlying motivations, his Nobility and his Purity of Purpose, are still the same. [b:2dkpjsvn]GB[/b:2dkpjsvn]
"but he DOES make it clear (to Eowyn AND to the Audience) that he still loves Arwen." Whether he still loves her or not is not really the point. Film Aragorn, at the time when he meets and interacts with Eowyn has no expectation that becoming King will also lead to marrying Arwen- the opposite in fact, he tells Eowyn she is sailing with her people and leaving forever. And this is what he believes. Film Aragorn is carrying a torch (one that will never relight as far as he's concerned). That's quite different from trying to achieve something in expectation of marriage you have to admit GB.
[quote="pettytyrant101":19dwisqy]there's an inconsistency for you Eldo![/quote:19dwisqy] Have to agree that Aragorn doesn't really seem surprised/happy/sad/whatever that Arwen still hasn't left, so I see the inconsistency here as well. Furthermore I agree with Petty on Film Aragorn. What you say here GB: "Again, the initial motivation of Book Aragorn is to win the Approval of Elrond for Arwen and the Kingdom--but it is based on his underlying motivation of his Love for Arwen and Middle Earth. This is where the character arc of Film Aragorn leads. The underlying motivations, his Nobility and his Purity of Purpose, are still the same." might very well be true, but we don't really see that in the movie clearly enough (if at all?), do we? The reasons why Aragorn wants to become king, apart from his love for Arwen, are quite vague. Though it is perhaps meant that we should be able to see those reasons ourselves, without Jackson spelling them out for us. But I can clearly see where Petty is coming from here, Film Aragorn could be a lot more clear than he is. Don't mistake me for a Purist though, God forbid :lol:
And there I was starting to think I was just shouting into the wind here. Glad to see I'm not the only one can see what I'm on about! Got to admit I was starting to wonder to the point where (the Valar forbid) I was even thinking of watching PJ's effort again to check!
[quote="Ringdrotten":36s09zlb][quote="pettytyrant101":36s09zlb]there's an inconsistency for you Eldo![/quote:36s09zlb] Have to agree that Aragorn doesn't really seem surprised/happy/sad/whatever that Arwen still hasn't left, so I see the inconsistency here as well. Furthermore I agree with Petty on Film Aragorn. What you say here GB: "Again, the initial motivation of Book Aragorn is to win the Approval of Elrond for Arwen and the Kingdom--but it is based on his underlying motivation of his Love for Arwen and Middle Earth. This is where the character arc of Film Aragorn leads. The underlying motivations, his Nobility and his Purity of Purpose, are still the same." might very well be true, but we don't really see that in the movie clearly enough (if at all?), do we? The reasons why Aragorn wants to become king, apart from his love for Arwen, are quite vague. Though it is perhaps meant that we should be able to see those reasons ourselves, without Jackson spelling them out for us. But I can clearly see where Petty is coming from here, Film Aragorn could be a lot more clear than he is. Don't mistake me for a Purist though, God forbid :lol:[/quote:36s09zlb] You're missing my point: Film Aragorn is NOT MOTIVATED by the DESIRE to be King AT ALL :roll: . It's not VAGUE, it's not even THERE in the films. Film Aragorn is ONLY motivated by his Love of Arwen and Middle Earth (that's what makes him [i:36s09zlb]even more[/i:36s09zlb] deserving of the Kingship than Book Aragorn in my view, but that's a whole other issue. Though this is still the same underlying motivation as Book Aragorn's). (Nor am I saying that Aragorn EXPECTED to marry Arwen in the films. The Purity of his Love in the films is expressed in his willingness to let her go, again, making him MORE worthy Marriage). [b:36s09zlb]GB[/b:36s09zlb]
I have to say GB I put this one to the test (all be it a very small test) I asked 5 people at my work who I knew had seen, and importantly, all enjoyed the films but had never read the book and asked them what they thought Aragorn's motivation to be King was. None of them really knew and the top answer was the vague 'it was his destiny'. So clear as mud it would seem from PJ's version. I shall need to flick through the films but I am already fairly certain that if I do the really nerdy thing and count the minutes PJ devotes to Aragorn and love versus Aragorn and fear of failure that love will lose. PJ emphasis Aragorn's right to be King and his fear of that right considerably more than he does Aragorn's love of Arwen. I really do believe you are seeing more than is actually there on screen GB.
Bollocks. :P It's as plain as an Inebriated Scotshobbit in a Dirty Kilt. [size=150:2ov1ugjr]How many ways can I say it? FILM ARAGORN WASN'T MOTIVATED TO BE KING! He EARNED it by his Dedication to Middle Earth. FILM ARAGORN DIDN'T EXPECT TO BE MARRIED TO ARWEN! But it didn't stop him from being TRUE to his LOVE for her. Elrond was finally swayed by Arwen's Devotion to Aragorn when he realized that she had essentially already Betrothed Aragorn in her heart, thus becoming Mortal and tying herself to the fate of Middle Earth. Thus he reforges Anduril and presents it to Aragorn. Then, by Saving Middle Earth (or at least playing a major role) Aragorn SAVED ARWEN, and by REMAINING TRUE TO HIS LOVE, Aragorn EARNED his Marriage to Arwen. He EARNED the KINGDOM and the MAIDEN in the films as surely and as Purely (if not more-so) as he did in the books.[/size:2ov1ugjr] [b:2ov1ugjr]GB[/b:2ov1ugjr]
"Elrond was finally swayed by Arwen's Devotion to Aragorn when he realized that she had essentially already Betrothed Aragorn in her heart, thus becoming Mortal and tying herself to the fate of Middle Earth." -GB Elrond was swayed by Arwen displaying she was becoming mortal in the middle of a conversation. Elrond of the films doesn't make a choice, he has none, he accepts he lost, there's nothing more he can do, there is no ship can bear her away any more- if she had come home and remained an Elf PJ's Elrond would have sent her off to the ships again. "I will not leave my daughter here to die" he tells Aragorn. He doesn't change his mind about this, he just no longer has that choice. "Thus he reforges Anduril and presents it to Aragorn." PJ makes it blatantly clear in FotR that he is using Anduril to represent Aragorns reluctance, not his love. And when it is reforged and returned (as noted in the above posts) the news that Arwen is still there and is now MORTAL barely registers. The scene is largely devoted to Aragorn flourishing Anduril and this is the moment PJ's reluctant Aragorn arc comes to an end, with his acceptance of his destiny. (This is no doubt why destiny was the top answer I got). "But it didn't stop him from being TRUE to his LOVE for her." Yes film Aragorn loves Arwen, that's not the dispute, of course he does, but PJ doesn't emphasis this very well, or in the right way because of the changes he made to the character of Aragorn. It is in no way clear from the films that Aragorn is acting primarily for love-because in the films he isnt. Only that love is one of the factors he is acting upon. And to keep the message that love and love alone is the only good motivation for seeking power is essential to LotR. "FILM ARAGORN WASN'T MOTIVATED TO BE KING! He EARNED it by his Dedication to Middle Earth." In the film Aragorn has two main motivating factors set up by PJ. The one he gives primacy to, and the most screen time too, is Aragorn being destined to be King but being reluctant to take that destiny on because he fears he will fail as his ancestors did. Anduril represents this and the reluctant king arc ends when he is willing to accept it. His love of Arwen is the secondary theme in the film and that's the problem. Aragorn should have only one motivation love, nothing else, crystal clear, never in doubt. That's not what PJ offers in the film. On a side note the changes in film Aragorn also means the scenes with Eowyn either don't work, or show Aragorn to be a very sort of naive King in waiting (depending on your view). With Arwen gone to her ship Eowyn's a decent choice for marriage. And the Kings of Numenor have never been slow to spot a marriage of political convenience. To bluntly reject her is a risky choice. Conceivably, when the dust settles, if Theoden and Eomer had fallen in battle King Aragorn could be dealing with Queen Eowyn of Rohan, the girl he roundly rejected. That's bad politics.
p.s [b:iy7ln8db][color=#FF0000:iy7ln8db]NO NEED TO SHOUT I AIN'T DEAF YOU KNOW![/color:iy7ln8db][/b:iy7ln8db]
[quote="pettytyrant101":1yczh93g]p.s [b:1yczh93g][color=#FF0000:1yczh93g]NO NEED TO SHOUT I AIN'T DEAF YOU KNOW![/color:1yczh93g][/b:1yczh93g][/quote:1yczh93g] You coulda fooled me. <img src='/images/smileys/wink.gif' border='0' alt='Wink Smilie' /> :mrgreen: Your last post simply demonstrates that you're still over-thinking, conflating book and film motivations, and missing the obvious. The only real distinction between your restatement of my points and my points, is of emphasis. You choose to ignore the scenes of Aragorn and Arwen pining for each other as irrelevant, for a "Lack of Choice" you see on Elrond's part that somehow changes everything. Elrond still had a choice; he could have washed his hands of his daughter and Middle Earth, but he "chose" not to because he loved her (as written in the story being told). Your point about the [b:1yczh93g]politics[/b:1yczh93g] of rejecting Eowyn is valid in and of itself (in the context of a Reality in which the outcome is in question and has many potentialities), but not in the context of the story being told. It makes little difference in a story that is inexorably leading to One Destined Outcome, Tolkien's Eucatastrophe, which is essentially the same (for all intents and purposes) in the book and film versions. It is an example of you over-thinking the situation. [b:1yczh93g]GB[/b:1yczh93g]
"You choose to ignore the scenes of Aragorn and Arwen pining for each other as irrelevant"-GB I have never said irrelevant I said secondary to Aragon's main story arc which is about destiny. It being made secondary is basically my beef with it. I don't want less Aragorn Arwen, I would have liked more better told. 'a "Lack of Choice" you see on Elrond's part that somehow changes everything' No I don't. I only mentioned it to counter your statement that "Elrond was finally swayed by Arwen's Devotion to Aragorn when he realized that she had essentially already Betrothed Aragorn in her heart, thus becoming Mortal and tying herself to the fate of Middle Earth"- which is wrong as its not what happens in the film. What happens in the film is she becomes mortal. Which means Elrond can no longer send her away whether he wants to or not. So [i:3n0utqux]it is[/i:3n0utqux] a lack of choice no matter how you look at it. Your idea that he could have washed his hands of her does make sense in the context of the film. Elrond's character as portrayed has a obvious and deep love for his daughter, it would be completely out of character (as they present him) had he done so. "It makes little difference in a story that is inexorably leading to One Destined Outcome, Tolkien's Eucatastrophe" A watching audience knows nothing about this until it happens. All films are predestined, the end is already written, its not an excuse not to make the film logical. And in Tolkien's eucatastrophe he is very careful about who he rewards and for what. Aragorn is rewarded for love, not for overcoming reluctance and love. And this as I've said is important as it dilutes one of the main messages of LotR. It displays to me that PJ was quite happy to alter for heightened drama and spectacle with little regard for what it fundamentally altered about the book themes. Making a mockery of his repeated claims that they had retained the spirit and meaning of Tolkiens work despite the changes.
While I certainly agree that there are some substantive differences in the arrangements and tellings, I fundamentally disagree with your interpretation that Jackson's version subverts Tolkien's Themes. I believe your interpretation to be a bit flawed and overwrought, and I have stated why. No sense beating our heads against a Brick Wall anymore methinks. <img src='/images/smileys/wink.gif' border='0' alt='Wink Smilie' /> [b:1lu0gd7x]GB[/b:1lu0gd7x]
[quote="pettytyrant101":l5kyfmgv]And it has to be a single cause because that's Tolkien's central point about love and power and corruption. By trying to make Aragorn more 'interesting' and less personally secure, by trying to add extra drama to it PJ fumbles the ball and in doing so screws up a central theme.[/quote:l5kyfmgv] It's different from the book, sure, but no one is denying that.* What exactly are you trying to prove here? I've read through to the most recent page and I'm not really sure since you said to ignore the bit about inconsistency. *EDIT: Well, I'm not, but maybe GB is. I'm having a hard time following this discussion.
I'm not denying that the way the story is told, or that Aragorn's Ostensible Motivation in the Books (Actively seeking the Approval of Elrond to marry his daughter and achieve the Kingship by accomplishing a "Herculean" task--as Petty earlier put it), is different from the films. But I am asserting that Aragorn's "Meta"-Motivation is [i:34hp1bgw]essentially[/i:34hp1bgw] the same--Saving Middle Earth and Loving Arwen--Jackson just gets there differently by making Aragorn's "Approval Seeking" a non-issue by NOT having Aragorn wanting the Kingship but striving to save Middle Earth because it's simply the Right Thing to do to try and save the Land and the People you Love from Destruction; and by honouring the Truth of his Love for Arwen, even if he's not certain to see her again. That's the way it actually plays out in the films, and I have trouble seeing how Petty can deny [b:34hp1bgw]that[/b:34hp1bgw]. :roll: But I'm not willing to cyber-club each other to death over it. :lol: (but maybe a Virtual Shout :mrgreen: ) [b:34hp1bgw]GB[/b:34hp1bgw]
I guess we must agree to disagree. (Besides I tend to start backing away when people use the word 'meta'! :mrgreen: ) I just want to sum up my case (people can decide for themselves- hopefully we've at least entertained! <img src='/images/smileys/bigsmile.gif' border='0' alt='Big Smile Smilie' /> ) I think PJ's changes are ill-thought out regarding Aragorn and without PJ thinking though the consequences of those changes on the story. And that in doing so he undermines rather than increases the role which love plays in Aragorn's story in such a manner it at the very least confuses one of the main themes if not subverts it. The nub of the 'inconsistency' I see in the film comes about Eldo because at some points Viggo is playing something close to 'book' version (cause they hadn't decided on scripts whilst shooting) and this is there with material filmed where Viggo is playing the film version. And as noted the two are different and don't quite gel as performances on screen (no discredit to Viggo who is an excellent actor, lots of discredit to the script that let that acting talent down. No wonder he was quite grumpy about how Aragorn panned out!)
I find this Thread quite intriguing. It's called PJ's Merry and Pippin but you seem mostly to debate about PJ's treatment of Arwen and Aragorn. Odo told me you were an eccentric crew and I begin to see his point! :ugeek:
Well yes, things did sort of go off on a tangent, a bit. :oops: But on the other hand its sort of about the same thing- PJ and covens utter contempt for Tokien's characters and the hatchet job he did on them for the films!
Yes ---- yes, when one thinks things out properly --- and opens one's eyes --- and manages to see past one's starry eyed droolings over all things PJ --- yes, I think you do have a point, Petty Tyrant 101.
This has nothing to do with the topic (either of them!) but I didn't think it would warrant a thread on its own, as its just something that struck me as curious. But does anyone know why the Court of Kings and the White Tree is in Minas Tirith? I was reading the Council of Elrond, the bit where Elrond is describing Gondor in its glory days. And seemed odd that Minas Tirith, which seemed the least important of the three main cities should have this distinction. You might think Osgiliath, being the capital of Gondor would have the White Tree. The only two things I could think of, but haven't been able to verify yet, is that either Minas Tirith was built first or simply that's its the most westward. Anyone know for sure?
Well, the original tree was in Minas Ithil, so when Isildur planted a sapling of it in Minas Anor he may have been thinking of security. Minas Ithil had already been attacked, and as the farthest city from Mordor, Minas Anor was probably the safest of the three main cities. It's also possible that he was thinking of his late brother who he had founded Minas Anor.
Are you sure it was first in Minas Ithil, Eldorion? To me, Osgiliath would seem to have been the most logical place for the Tree to be. Could it have been moved? Being deciduous, that should not have been a problem. If so, when would it have been moved? Though the new sapling was found on the mountainside somewhere at Minas Tirith, wasn't it? So is that the geo-location for that kind of tree. Perhaps the Tree was at Minas Tirith all along. Actually, I don't know what species of tree it was. Does anyone know?
A quick check in the Tale of Years shows that; SA 3320 Foundation of the realms in exile:Arnor and Gondor. SA 3429 Sauron attacks Gondor, takes Minas Ithil and burns the White Tree. TA 1 Isildur plants a seedling of the White Tree in Minas Arnor. No hint as to why he choose Minas Arnor over Osgiliath. Nor why the Court of Kings is there, which presumably predates the White tree being there as the seedling was planted in its courtyard.
Thanks Petty. Does this suggest Osgiliath was the main town but not the Royal Seat?
It does point that way. And I've no idea why. Up until it changed from Minas Arnor to Tirith it seems to have been the least important of the three. Which is why I thought it was maybe purely symbolic, being the furthest west and hence closest to the sea and Numenor. But knowing the tree was originally in Minas Ithil weakens that proposition.
I wonder why it was in Minas Ithil?
[quote="pettytyrant101":1b7ndnqw]No hint as to why he choose Minas Arnor over Osgiliath. Nor why the Court of Kings is there, which presumably predates the White tree being there as the seedling was planted in its courtyard.[/quote:1b7ndnqw] The Royal Court was only relocated to Minas Tirith after Osgiliath began to decay, much like the Roman Empire removed the Imperial seat from Rome even before it fell. Osgiliath was the seat of the Kings for many centuries before that. The Appendices elaborate on this issue.
[quote="Grey Pilgrim":11tyx4t8]I wonder why it was in Minas Ithil?[/quote:11tyx4t8] Presumably because Isildur wanted to plant his tree in his city (he founded Minas Ithil).
So presumably, that being the case, the tombs where Denethor makes his funeral pyre would only contain rulers as far back as the relocation. If all the Royal Court and stuff was originally in Osgiliath so too presumably were their tombs as they seem to a part of the complex attached to the Court of Kings.
The tombs in Minas Tirith were rather removed from the Court and the Citadel. I can't think of any comment by Tolkien about where the early kings were interred (aside from Elendil in Unfinished Tales) but I don't think that it was necessarily in the same place as the court.
[quote:2lj1wjym]History First White Tree The first White Tree of Gondor came from a fruit that Isildur, at great personal risk, managed to steal from Nimloth the Fair, the White Tree of Númenor, before it was destroyed at Sauron's insistence. He suffered many wounds at this mission, and he came near death, but when the first leaf opened in the spring, Isildur was healed of his wounds. This sapling was brought to Middle-earth on Isildur's ship, and it was eventually planted in Minas Ithil before the house of Isildur. But when Sauron returned to Middle-earth, he launched a sudden attack that captured Minas Ithil, and he destroyed the White Tree. Second White Tree Isildur escaped the capture of Minas Ithil, taking with him a sapling of the White Tree to Minas Anor where it was planted in the citadel courtyard in memory of his slain brother Anarion. This tree died in 1636 during the Great Plague. Third White Tree A third sapling was planted in T. A. 1640 by King Tarondor. This one lasted until the year 2872 and the death of the Ruling Steward Belecthor II. At this time no seedling of the tree could be found as the tree had rarely flowered after the line of the Kings had failed and therefore no fruit was produced. It was left standing after its death "until the King returns". Fourth White Tree When Aragorn became king he discovered (with Gandalf's help) a sapling of the White Tree upon the slopes of Mindolluin, high above the city, which he reverently planted in the Court of the Fountain. The dead tree was removed from the court but was placed in the Tombs of the Kings with all the honour that would normally be accorded a fallen monarch. In June of T. A. 3019 the sapling was already laden with blossom.[/quote:2lj1wjym] [b:2lj1wjym]GB[/b:2lj1wjym]
Makes most of it all clear. Thanks GB. But the point about [i:2kr1oqyu]what[/i:2kr1oqyu] kind of tree the Tree was is still a mystery.
The origin is the Silver Tree of Valinor. Saplings were then carried to Tol Erssea, Numenor, and finally Middle Earth: [quote:1r2ds4wr]Genealogy Galathilion of Tirion upon Túna made by Yavanna in the image of Telperion, the Silver Tree of Valinor Celeborn of Tol Eressëa Nimloth the Fair of Númenor First White Tree of Minas Ithil planted by Isildur, Second Age Second White Tree of Minas Anor planted by Isildur, TA. 2- TA. 1636 Third White Tree of Minas Tirith TA. 1640- TA. 2852 Fourth White Tree of Minas Tirith Planted by Aragorn, TA. 3019[/quote:1r2ds4wr] [b:1r2ds4wr]GB[/b:1r2ds4wr]
[i:18t0sg3t]"Galathilion of Tirion upon Túna made by Yavanna in the image of Telperion, the Silver Tree of Valinor."[/i:18t0sg3t] Genus not known then?
Wikipedia copy/paste appears to be accurate in this case.
GB relying on wiki? Surely not?! :shock:
Only when it's accurate. <img src='/images/smileys/wink.gif' border='0' alt='Wink Smilie' /> Wikipedia is in fact an excellent resource. The Mods clearly post disclaimers when submissions have no references, use weasel words, or are otherwise unverifiable. This makes them a more reliable resource than most printed encyclopedias. However, I also double-checked the information on a number of other dedicated Tolkien sites (something I always recommend). I reposted portions of the Wikipedia entry only after confirming its accuracy, and chose to post it for its succinctness. The History of the White Tree of Gondor is quite complex, and I found that Wikipedia had the most concise expression of its Lineage. [b:2l5anjjd]GB[/b:2l5anjjd]
I have mentioned before that I could have forgiven PJ most anything if he had included the scouring of the shire; it has taken me a while to understand why I held this part so strongly. It is because it was the fulfilment of a rite of passage from being a boy to a man and more than that from a boy to the type of man that many wish that they were. A man with a warriors heart. You can see this transition reaching its culmination in Merry and Pippin but especially Pippin........ when he cast back his cloak, flashed out his sword, and the silver and sable of Gondor gleamed on him as he rode forward. "I am the messenger of the king,"............. This rite of passage, transition from boy hood to warrior male is there for me in abundance in this section of the book. It is the closure of the story of Merry and Pippin for me. I don't understand to be honest those who can not see this or its importance. In my mind I see it as being of great importance to Tolkein and the reasons he wrote the books. It is a major theme that PJ has wrecked by turning Merry and Pippin into a joke. At least he did not completely ruin the transition of Strider to Aragorn from a wandering masterless warrior, a reluctant leader to that of a King.
"At least he did not completely ruin the transition of Strider to Aragorn from a wandering masterless warrior, a reluctant leader to that of a King."- Noom Reluctant leader?! Into the corner with you. That's pure PJ. Nothing reluctant about Aragorn in the book.
I suspect there was some irony hidden in that comment <img src='/images/smileys/wink.gif' border='0' alt='Wink Smilie' />
  << [1] [2] [3] [4] >>