XPost: rec.arts.books.tolkien   
   From: mr@sandman.net   
      
   In article ,   
    Troels Forchhammer  wrote:   
      
   > > ...do the Balrogs have wings or not? :)   
   >   
   > Not.   
   >   
   > Actually I cannot think of any pro-wingers among Tolkien scholars ...   
      
   But surely that's more due to Tokkien scholar being unlikely child of   
   modern popular culture, where the presence of wings would be considered   
   "cooler". I mean, rather than it being attributed to a presumed higher   
   understanding of the pertinent material.   
      
   > My impression is that the pro-wing reading is today fairly   
   > discredited as a likely representation of Tolkien's intention   
      
   Again, discredited by the ones not agreeing with it. Right? Not actually   
   disproven.   
      
   For the record - it matters not to me. Sure, I too think wings would be   
   "cooler"; but the most compelling anti-wing argument is the sheer size   
   of them and how that would have been a problem in the mines of Moria.   
      
   > at the time of writing and publishing _The Lord of the Rings_,   
   > Tolkien intended the balrog in Moria as well as Balrogs in general to   
   > be without wings and to be incapable of flight   
      
   I've seen nothing (from scholars or not) that would make this anything   
   but an slightly educated guess, though.   
      
      
      
   > I think one of the most telling things in all this is Corey's   
   > consistent use of 'misunderstanding' to refer to the position of pro-   
   > wingers :-)   
      
   Which is a bit sad really. Nothing new argument-wise found in that   
   podcast transcript, really. He sees it as a simile, a likeness - which   
   is a perfectly logical way to interprete it, but I dislike Balrog   
   arguments that build upon the "Tolkien used the word X to mean Y" angle.   
   For instance, in the transcript Mr Olsen says that Tolkine used the word   
   "Fly" to mean "run away", which is true - but that doesn't mean that   
   Tolkine didn't use the word "Fly" to mean actual flight. My point being   
   that examples of Tolkien using "fly" to mean "run away" doesn't mean   
   that all instances of "fly" means "run away", or we'll have lots of   
   running eagles and nazgul in the books :)   
      
   I really like an analogy of the two sides I read a while back that   
   highlights that ones preconception forces the interpretation. I.e.:   
      
       "the shadow about it reached out like two vast tentacles"   
       ...   
       "its tentacles were spread from wall to wall"   
      
   Both these are obviously talking about the shadow about the Balrog,   
   since there is nothing that tells us that the Balrog had actual   
   tentacles on its body.   
      
       "the shadow about it reached out like two vast arms"   
       ...   
       "its arms were spread from wall to wall"   
      
   Here, the second part is most likely talking about the Balrog's actual   
   arms, even though its shadow was also spread "like arms", because we are   
   fairly certain that a Balrog has actual arms.   
      
   :)   
      
      
   --   
   Sandman[.net]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)