hobbit culture

[imrahil]

in the books and movies, it seems like hobbits are culturally in our 18th or 19th century (clothing, ect.), but the Gondorians and Rohan seem to be in the middle ages. Has anybody else noticed this?

[Valandil]

Yes imrahil, JRRT seems to have presented the Shire as something from times not long past in the English countryside. We don't, otoh, see things we associate strongly with the Industrial Revolution.

btw - Welcome to Entmoot! We always encourage new members to post in "The Official Welcome Thread" at the top of General Messages forum, as a way of introducing themselves. So please do so. Beyond that, happy posting in areas of your own interest. Let me know if you have questions.

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

welcome to the 'moot, imrahil!
i will comment on your discussion later!
nice topic BTW

[Lefty Scaevola]

Hobbit culture:

Finely mince one hobbit, mix with nutrient broth, and smear on multiple petri dishes.

[Ragnarok]

Originally posted by imrahil
in the books and movies, it seems like hobbits are culturally in our 18th or 19th century (clothing, ect.), but the Gondorians and Rohan seem to be in the middle ages. Has anybody else noticed this?

Yes, the hobbits have very similar qualities to 18th/19th century England. Even the words used by the hobbits for example the various names of towns etc.. are derived from English culture.

[Michael Martinez]

Originally posted by Valandil
Yes imrahil, JRRT seems to have presented the Shire as something from times not long past in the English countryside. We don't, otoh, see things we associate strongly with the Industrial Revolution.

That's not entirely correct. The Hobbits have a postal system much like the modern, Industrial Age postal systems. They also have clocks and umbrelllas.

The smoking mills (introduced by Isengard) are another example of industrialization in the Shire.

What the Shire lacks, in terms of industrial age culture, is factories, cities, railroads, steam ships, firearms (actually a precursor to the industrial age), and the usual social ills which accompanied those things.

[Maerbenn]

Originally posted by Michael Martinez
They also have clocks and umbrelllas.

Michael, as you probably know, The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings are supposed to be a modern translation of ancient texts discovered. The 'translator' of the Red Book is using terminology that would approximate the intended meaning. This is made clear in section II 'On Translation' in Appendix F:

In presenting the matter of the Red Book, as a history for people of today to read, the whole of the linguistic setting has been translated as far as possible into terms of our own times.

So modern terms like 'clock', 'umbrella' and 'express train' could probably be explained in this way.

[Michael Martinez]

Originally posted by Maerbenn
Michael, as you probably know, The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings are supposed to be a modern translation of ancient texts discovered.

Not a translation of the Red Book. They are alleged to be based on a translation of the Red Book.

The 'translator' of the Red Book is using terminology that would approximate the intended meaning. This is made clear in section II 'On Translation' in Appendix F:So modern terms like 'clock', 'umbrella' and 'express train' could probably be explained in this way.

The express train passage is merely a narrative comment on the sound made by one of Gandalf's fireworks. The clocks and umbrellas are actual things mentioned in the stories. Time is even reckoned in hours and minutes on the clocks, though the earliest historical clocks only used hour hands.

There is no escaping the obvious anacronisms, which can only be explained by the assumption of lost technology (as steam power was discovered and then abandoned by the Roman empire).

[Maerbenn]

Michael, what I think I meant was that I don't disagree with your opinion that the Shire was "industrialized", I only thought that perhaps the clocks and umbrellas weren't really exactly like our clocks and umbrellas (or like the ones of the Industrial Age), but devices with the same function and not less developed than ours.

But I admit that in such a case, we would have a problem knowing which things really are what they are called in the text, and which ones are not.

Perhaps my quote only concerns 'enhancing phrases' like "like an express train" and "hell-hawks".

[Michael Martinez]

"Express train" is a narrative expression intended only for the reader's consumption. It in no way implies anything about the fictional world. That passage is one of the most-often mis-cited passages in the book.

That said, I AM a literalist. That puts me squarely on the opposite of many issues from a great number of people. I don't understand why people want to recast the vivid images in terms of "interpretation" and "reading".

We all miss things on the first, second, third, and subsequent readings. So, I am not talking about how people miss things.

I am talking about how, if something in its literal sense doesn't fit in with a reader's point-of-view, suddenly the story has to take on a whole new meaning. And then we have an interpretation which doesn't fit with the facts.

There are ambiguities, of course. Take what I said about the Red Book versus what you said. Technically, we're both correct. There are portions of The Lord of the Rings which are allegedly attributed to the Red Book -- the supposed citations in Appendix A, for example.

And what about the songs? And the Elvish? Those must be assumed to be translations or direct lifts from the Red Book, right?

And what about the native names? Not Sam, Frodo, Smeagol, or Eowyn, but Fangorn, Celeborn, Arvedui, and Aragorn.

There is plenty of room for interpretationg and reading there. Where does the Red Book end and The Lord of the Rings begin? I think that is a matter for opinion.

But the facts of things which are said to exist in that world -- clocks, umbrellas, gunpowder -- people try to explain them away because of one fallacious complaint: they are not "medieval".

Gunpowder is, of course, "medieval" because it came from the medieval period. And ironically, chain mail -- one of the "surest" signs of medievality in the story -- is NOT medieval. It comes from the classical Mediterranean world.

The real issue seems to be that people assume Middle-earth is supposed to be like medieval Europe -- but few of us really have much detailed knowledge about medieval Europe, and so we all have these idealized visions of what medieval Europe (or, it may be more appropriate to say, stories based on medieval Europe) should look like.

Hence, when we run into these little "inconsistencies" in the LoTR text, we feel the need to explain them away. Otherwise, Middle-earth cannot be medieval, can it?

And it is NOT medieval -- not in the sense that most readers want it to be. It certainly draws upon medieval literature and medieval conventions for many things. But it doesn't limit itself to medieval Europe, and in fact explores a great many details of other times and cultures.

The literalist's point-of-view is that it's okay to have clocks and umbrellas in Middle-earth. It doesn't matter if they have digital faces or just an hour hand turned by a little fairy trapped in a cage. All that matters is that, if the story says there is a clock and the clock in itself makes sense, then there is no need for interpretation and reading (with or without the quotes).

And the literalist point-of-view embraces the literary analysis, too. That includes all the medieval ideas, all the narrative tricks used to make the world seem familiar to the modern reader, etc.

[Nerdanel]

I guess many things in the different places remind of different times, but I don't think Tolkien wanted to or felt like he had to follow this in any strict way.

sorry if I'm being confusing, my head is gone.

[Michael Martinez]

Originally Posted by Nerdanel

I guess many things in the different places remind of different times, but I don't think Tolkien wanted to or felt like he had to follow this in any strict way.

sorry if I'm being confusing, my head is gone.

Tolkien did not intend for Middle-earth to be perceived as medieval, modern, or anything in particular. He borrowed freely from all periods of history (including very ancient classical periods -- there are strong Egyptian influences on Gondor and Arnor, for example).