vlog ☁ I read Lord of the Rings for the first time!
Vložit
- čas přidán 29. 07. 2024
- Head to www.squarespace.com/christyan... to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain using code CHRISTYANNEJONES ☁️
Lord of the Rings is THE most influential fantasy novel ever published, and until this vlog, I had never read it! As someone who loves fantasy (who generally only writes fantasy and speculative writing), I desperately wanted to read lotr and experience J.R.R. Tolkien's magical trilogy for myself.
☁️ patreon / christyannejones
☁️ writings christyannejones.com
☁️ instagram / christyannejones
☁️ twitter / christy__jones
☁️ goodreads / christy-anne-jones
Time stamps ~
0:00 - intro ~
1:08 - concerning lotr
2:04 - the fellowship of the ring
8:08 - thank you, Squarespace!
8:53 - the two towers
15:00 - the return of the king
20:07 - why did I read lotr
22:19 - my thoughts and rating
Equipment I use:
*Main camera: amzn.to/3gnhQKA
*Main lens: amzn.to/3vbRIaU
*Vlogging camera: amzn.to/3iwfWdk
*Microphone: amzn.to/35aTTkq
*Tripod: amzn.to/3vqWSA9
*Get the Japan Rail Pass: click.jrpass.com/aff_c?offer_...
Music //
www.epidemicsound.com/referra...
Links marked with * are affiliate links 🌼
Hey guys 😊 there are a lot of insightful comments going on here which is lovely~ but I just wanted to gently mention: this is just my honest reaction and response to reading lotr for the first time.
I mentioned that I've researched Tolkien's influence and I have memories of watching the films in childhood, but other than that, I don't know the story. I'm SURE I've gotten plenty of things wrong and, because this is just my honest experience of reading the book: no, I didn't feel the need to google every single plot point before talking about it.
I love how passionate you guys are about Tolkien, but please keep that in mind. Take care everyone and happy holidays 💛💛
I was so saddened that Peter Jackson omitted my favorite character as a child, Tom Bombadil. His songs were fascinating a d inspired me to write lyric poetry as a teen in the early 90s. I especially was looking forward to his rescuing Frodo from Old Man Willow. And his yellow boots would have stood out on screen.
I came to better understand pacing and narrative flow and recognize Mr. Jackson did a wonderful job adapting these works to film, but miss Glorfindel.
Oh, I was just reclarifying about the eagles. I was trying to be helpful. I hope you didn't read this like an attack. XD
@@AseAPS No, not at all--I appreciated your comment and the clarification is good! Thank you 😊
Hi Christy, I hope you had a pleasant Christmas :) i was given a boxed paper-back version of the LOTR trilogy about 30 years ago which I still own today, but i like the appearance of the hard-cover version you own.. your arms must be buff from holding it for over a week :D
@@jub8891 The version I have in this video is also about that age! It was printed in 1991 😊 (And yes I think my arms got stronger hahah)
Ohhh yesterday my husband and I finished the three extended version movies. It's a tradition. We always watch them at this time of the year. I love the book and the movies.
My sister and I are just getting through the extended versions on HBO Max since we always just watched the theatrical release/director’s cut. We are loving the longer versions 💖
My friend and I have done this a few time (not during Christmas though). But we are not in the same country atm but the extended versions are the only ones which should exist
My husband and I did the same yesterday too! We do it every Boxing Day!
You must be a glutton for punishment, because the movies are terrible.
@@Brian-qn7fn whhhhaaaat???!!! The movies are so close to the books. They're so good!!! Different strokes for different folks indeed
Oh dear, the comments are a lot. So, as others have pointed out, the eagles couldn't carry the ring or someone with the ring because the enemy had eyes everywhere and would have attacked. Also, the ring would have corrupted the eagles and that's never a good thing. One of the reasons why Frodo is the only one who could take the ring was because Hobbits as a whole are really hard to corrupt, the ring even tried it on Sam and it didn't take because he's just not built for greed and power. I too am not a fan of Tom Bombadil, his chapter drags on the story and he's a really annoying character.
Now Eowyn, on first reading you think she gets a crap ending and this is where a rushed reading of the books is bad. She went looking for glory and renown in battle and discovered that war is none of that. It's death, terror and losing those you care for. She lost her uncle and was at death's door herself. As she recovers and becomes close to Faramir (also a fellow soldier who has seen battle and death) she see's that there's more to life than seeking glory and renown. That healing and loving is just as important and brings it's own renown, Eowyn chose to live and love. That's an amazing ending for her. Also, her brother lives, he becomes king of Rohan.
The eagles were also Lords of eagles and very arrogant. Just being near the ring so close to Morder could have corrupted them.
@@youdontneedthis6804 yeah, I kind of pointed that out but didn't get into detail.
You are the only one who I have seen point out the power of the Eagles was actually a draw back. It would be as bad as Gandolf carrying it.
The Eagles might not have been able to carry the ring to Mordor, but the humans really needed some air support in the battle of Minas Tirith.
The enemy had fell beasts and other flying horrors that stopped the eagles from flyings the ring in. Also, the reason they didn't fly the dwarves further in the Hobbit is because they didn't want to get shot by arrows. Mordor certainly had more bow and arrows than the country folk there. Also, the eagles didn't move in until after it was safe enough.
Also, the Eagles are agents of the Valar Manwë, and at this point he's pretty fed up with all the goings on in Middle Earth, where the Elves and Men just keep screwing everything up. They've had three previous opportunities to deal with Sauron, and failed every time because of their stupidity and greed. At this point the Valar are being very much hands off. They've come in to clean up messes in Middle Earth repeated before this point, and every time the Elves and Men just screw things up again, so now the Valar are pretty much saying "This is your mess! You clean it up!"
And the Eagles were not present at the Council of Elrond where the decision of what to do with the Ring and how to do it was made. They could not have made a plan involving the Eagles if the Eagles were not there to agree to it. They were sentient beasts not beasts of burden people could use whenever they liked.
The eagles are the agents of Manwe (chief of the Valar, who are basically gods) and represent divine intervention. However, they decided not to use eagles to help since they already sent the wizards (including Gandalf) to help defeat Sauron. More subtle that way and gives the people of Middle Earth a chance to take responsibility. It's not a very satisfying reason, but it was probably the reason in the author's mind.
The reason given above in OP about flying monster defenders was mentioned by the film writers (I think Fran Walsh) on the DVD commentary track.
Please don't call them "fell beasts". It's a description, not a name - they were beasts, and they were "fell" (deadly). You could equally describe lions, tigers (and wargs) as "fell beasts".
Here’s why they didn’t use eagles. In a couple words, “Ring Wraiths”, but here’s a simple analogy.
Imagine for a moment you’re tasked with killing some 300 foot tall nigh invincible monster. It breaths fire. And it’s only weakness is stabbing it in the back of its throat with a tiny dagger. What would you rather do:
A) wait until it’s sleeping to carefully make your move
B) YOLO and rush it in broad daylight and full vision
Everyone who says they should’ve rode the eagles is basically saying strategy B is a good idea.
So yeah, the POV thing. I think it works amazing in LOTR, because Book 3 and 5 give you NO idea what’s going on with Frodo and the Ring. It gave me that feeling like I was Aragorn, not truly knowing if Frodo is even alive, but having hope, and still charging the Black Gate anyway.
....not really....
When Tolkien says he hates allegory he means what might be called a “closed”allegory where the author has intended a singular meaning for an element of their story. He isn’t opposed to readers finding their own meanings in the work-for him that’s essential to anyone enjoying a work of fiction. He preferred “open” symbols where readers have the freedom to see whatever is meaningful to them in a work. That’s why he refused to explain to people what the Ring symbolizes.
Allegory is the pun of literature.
Something to groan at, not something to admire.
I think he called it "applicability". However Tolkien wrote allegory with "Leaf by Niggle".
Yes, he objected to most allegory as it was usually done badly. He much preferred "applicability". I got in many an argument with my English teachers in high school who insisted Lord of the Rings was allegorical. One was so stubborn they insisted he had inserted allegories and was just denying it in his letters.
@@mudageki and deserving of punitive measures ? ;)
Too bad because the Bible is Allegorical and must translated @ Genesis 32:30 Jacob meets God face to face names the placed. Toluene would be shocked to learn the truth about the Catholics and about OUR origins @ Mauro Biglino & The 5Th Kind channels. & @ Adam 1414 The Lie the Vatican Told
The Scene with Sam saying: "one more step and it's the farthest from home I've ever been" does happen just not in the same way. It's during chapter five: a conspiracy unmasked when on the ferry crossing the Brandywine river. All the other Hobbits are looking forward to the other side of the river, whist Sam looks back. Seeing the crossing of the river as the passing of his life as he has known it.
Tolkien was a master worldbuilder. The Lothlorien chaptera made me want to live there. Other fantasy worlds feel shallow in comparison. Sam is definitely a fan favourite. Faramir is also such a great character.
This video made my day thank you and you are awesome
I would not call other fantasy worlds "shallow". That is a terrible insult if you're blinded by your own faboyism.
Each fantasy world that was crafted has its unique feel and possibly dedication to its construction.
@@mercianthane2503 I don't think its an insult. Tolkien spent decades building out the world. There is a lot of depth in LotR and much more in other books, such as the Silmarillion. While there is definitely value in other fantasy worlds, very few have such a fleshed out and comprehensive wider world.
@@randyward2766
He was a hardcore fantasy worldbuilder, sure.
Still, it is way more important to have a well told story, with fantastic characters, and then you can have the rest.
You might have created 1000 fictional languages for your story; yet if you fail telling a good story, none of that matters. It's meaningless.
Once you've read the Silmarillion Lothlorien takes on a special poignance.
Regarding Eowyn, she did fight in the battle of Minas Tirith as Dernhelm, and she still has her brother Eomer. She ends up marrying Faramir, Boromir's brother, and they're actually a really good match.
To add to this, she and Merry together slew the Witch King of Angmar, the Lord of the Nazguls. That is quite a feat, even shared between them. Aside for Gandalf who defeated the balrog can any other lay claim to such an individual victory? If you include the Hobbit, you can add Bard's slaying of Smaug, but other than that....
@@sableghost Glorfindel slaying Gothmog comes to mind, or Fingolfin wounding Morgoth.
that wedding is filmed but on the cutting room floor. Jackson might release a super extended cut
I have the same edition of Lord of the Rings, isn't it so beautiful? I'm so glad you read it, I did it last year and it was such an amazing experience. I think Eowyn actually did have a satisfying ending - she got to fight and played a significant part in saving Middle Earth, and she ended up marrying Faramir who fit with her more than the idea of Aragorn that she fell in love with. Honestly, Faramir is one of my favourite character in the books. They deserve each other.
I love Faramir. I wish we had a little more focus on them growing their relationship, but I do agree that they fit very well. I am still a little salty about movie Faramir (and Eowyn for that matter 😂)
What edition is that? I have a 50th anniversary 3 volume edition but I'm looking into getting a single volume edition.
@@goosewithagibus It's the edition illustrated by Alan Lee. It was first published in a single volume in 1968, and my particular edition was published in 1991 by BCA. I bought it second-hand and I'm so happy with it!
I will say the reading experience is pretty difficult with this edition, because it's quite a heavy thick book. But it's really beautiful!
@@xJillie As a huge Tolkien LOTR fan growing up, I was super excited for the movies and wanted to love them too. First one was great (despite lack of Tom and Agent Smith Elrond), but then went downhill from there. The way they destroyed Faramir's character was kind of the last straw. And the overly dramatic and overly repeated use of slow motion, especially towards the end is just poor movie making in my opinion, and never fails to distract me out of the moment
I love Faramir. And I love that in their relationship he’s the tender romantic one (bringing his mother’s cloak to wrap around her as she stood on the city wall) and she’s the fierce one. And I love that the two of them who struggled so much with despair and with inadequate fathers/father figure are able to find each other and find healing together. It’s a beautiful ending for someone who wanted to join the battle at the Black Gate for the explicit purpose of being killed.
Everyone forgets the flying wyrms that where there even before the ring wraiths rode them into battle. Not until the ring was destroyed and Sauron's hold over the wyrms faltered was it possible to send the eagles into Mordor. If the Great Eagles had appeared in the sky over Mordor before this, his great eye would be upon them and they would have been set on by the flying wyrms. That is a battle that wouldn't have likely given Frodo the chance to get the ring to Mount Doom. Distraction was key. The battle at the gates of Mordor was necessary. Sauron believed that the ring would be there with the men of Gondor. He was wrong thanks to the efforts of two brave little hobbits. Anyway, I hope that makes sense. Not really a plot hole.
Not to mention, well... archers.
Also Sauron, if he got an inkling of what was happening, could have mustered his army to defend Mount Doom specifically, preventing landings and making sure that the Nazgul were on the scene to intercept the Ring.
It really isn't as simple or straightforward a plan as it sounds like when you ask the question and then don't consider how it would actually go down if they did it.
Eowyn wanted to be a warrior but it's something which is not truly for her when she gets the chance. She wants glory and has feelings for Aragorn believing that together she will get great glory and become well-known, instead Aragorn rejects her feelings and this sends Eowyn into a death wish- she wants to die in battle as she wants nothing else in life. By chance she finishes off the witch king of Angmar (the black captain, the leader of the Nazgul) after Merry stabs him with a blade which has a deadly curse against wraiths such as the Nazgul- so thank God Frodo and his friends stumbled into Tom Bombadil, took the wrong way by going to the Barrow-Downs and then were rescued by Tom and Tom then encouraged Merry to keep that enchanted sword!
Eowyn suffers from the "black breath" the worst as her heart is full of despair and bitterness, she is barely revived by Aragorn and when she awakens she feels purposeless and takes no joy in victory. It is only when Faramir says that Eowyn can do something else- be more than a maiden or a warrior, that Eowyn's heart lightens and she acknowledges her love for Faramir. The two have seen much tragedy, death and destruction and both wish to build and don't place the glory of the warrior above all else. Faramir becomes a prince and is given the east Gondor land of Ithilean to rebuild it- so Faramir and Eowyn go to Ithilean to build a new a deserted land. Eowyn and Faramir represent the future for Middle Earth and perhaps a change for the coming 4th Age. Lastly, Eowyn is partly Gondorian which may explain why she ends up permanently living in Gondor.
In later years Tolkien began rewriting some characters and for some of the female characters he greatly increased their significance: for instance Galadriel was to be considered the greatest of all the Noldor Elves save for Feanor, and Melian (the mother of Luthien and Luthien whose line extends all the way to Aragorn!) was to be the head of the wizard order- not Saruman. I'm not sure what Tolkien's views on feminism were but he was clearly becoming more interested in the female characters he wrote.
From what I understand, there’s a few reasons out there of why Gandalf didn’t use the eagles but the one I’ve always liked is that Gandalf didn’t want to hand over that much power to the eagles who are practically God like creatures. It’s the same reason he himself didn’t take it and why Galadriel didn’t either. Whether that’s right or wrong I have no idea.
I believe the whole idea was only unassuming Hobbits could carry the ring right under the enemies nose without being noticed. Flying giant Eagles certainly would have been very noticeable. At least that was always my take.
The passing of Boromir is rather understated in the original text... which is why I am so glad it was handled with more nuance and detail in the movie.
Its kind of weird how two pages are spent on his death and than 50 pages is spent on tom bombadil....over rated....
In regards to the eagles there’s two reasons it’s not a plot hole. First, if they had tried to fly the fellowship to Mordor, they could have been easily stopped by Sauron. He both can command animals like fell beasts, and conjure storms.
Also, it is very important to note that eagles are sentient beings in this universe. They would be at just a big a risk of being corrupted as Boromir was. The same reason Frodo couldn’t stay with the fellowship would apply to the flying with an eagle. Brings of great power pose the greater risk of failing.
tom bombadil is one of my favorite characters. hes the forest itself and the only thing not affected by the ring. his silly songs are the best part!!
yes!
That whole Old Forest episode is to me the most mysterious and haunting part of the story. I also believe it is crucial to the story as its hallucinogenic quality creates the necessary level of creative imagination in the mind of the reader that establishes the Middle-Earth experience as mythical rather than just imaginary adventure.
I really believe on some level Tolkien was a Catholic mystic, or at least heavily informed by the more amazing mystic saints.
Yeah. Even in the world of Lord of the Rings there's still unknown and mysterious powers at work deep in the old forests of the world.
Bombadil was in some ways the Alpha & Omega. We caught some rare glimpses into the history of the north during his reminiscences.
How to start a fight with LOTR fans: "Why didn't they just fly to Mordor on the Eagles?" 😂
Or "Why aren't there more women characters in Lord of the Rings? Did Tolkien hate women?"
You have caused a rift in the matrix !
@@whateveryousay5674 they are the eagles of Manwe and Manwe do what he mf want so do they? Nuff said
I could never get through Fellowship. It's just some guys taking a walk. FOR THE ENTIRE BOOK
Sauron is watching
Fokin Nazguls flying around
Eagles are bitch
I think you said that Eowyn did do any fighting. But what? She fought the most dangerous enemy in Middle-earth, the Witch-king, and killed him (Merry helped, but she actually killed him). That was the actual turning point of the battle and without that who knows how long they would have lasted before being overrun. And who knows if even Gandalf would have survived if the Witch-king had not been taken out.
I mean some parts of the battle weren't described at length. Obviously Eowin fought in the battle, but the part where she fights the Witch King is the primary feat that was described. So it's one of those things where we know she's there, we know she's fighting, but we don't have it described directly. I also kind of forgot the death of Boromir was fairly unceremonious as well. That's where the movies had to show us these moments, whereas the books kind of get away with just referencing it.
When it comes to the Eagles, I think everyone is missing the fact that , as the servants of Manwe, they aren’t supposed to be involved in the affairs of middle earth. Remember. Since everyone rejected the rule of the Ainur, they are all on there own in dealing with Sauron, manwe was merciful enough to send the istari. This also goes to why Gandalf restrained himself from acts of wizardry outside of basic or dire need.
Tolkien pioneered the concept of a secondary world in contemporary fiction. Secondary worlds existed before Tolkien, but they were mostly considered fairytales, myths, or pulp fiction. Any modern adult story taking place in an alternate world owes its thanks to Tolkien.
Eowyn did get to fight! She killed the Witch-King. Also, King Eomer is her brother so not all her family died.
Great stuff. A few notes, if you're interested.
1. Tolkien acknowledges that Sam is the real hero of the narrative in several of his correspondences. Of course, Frodo was meant to carry the Ring, but it was Sam that was needed to get Frodo to Mount Doom.
2. Arwen is a late addition to the story (and, as others have mentioned, most of their story is in Appendix A). To dip into opinion a bit, I'm confident that the original intention was for Éowyn and Aragorn to marry, but then Tolkien decided that Aragorn needed a 'higher status' wife. You can see the same sort of revisionism in the changing history of Galadriel (except in that case he kept changing their history but not their names). However (and this is typical of his revision process) he left all of the Éowyn foreshadowing in, so it reads now like the narrative is cobbled together from competing traditions, e.g. one oral version says he married Éowyn, one version says he married Arwen and the scribe just combined both versions as much as possible. (See the other comments about the framing story of this being a found narrative for why that works.) So he gets to the end of Return of the King, invents Arwen, and then revises the text to include her... she only shows up in Rivendell and only at the dinner, so it's easy to miss.
2a. I personally suspect that if Tolkien had had time for further revisions, he would have given Arwen more prominence, She might even have replaced Legolas in the Fellowship. Of course, since Tolkien very rarely changes lines and just instead gives the old lines to the new character, that could have made Arwen and Gimli kind of flirty. :)
3. Sorry about all the eagle stuff. With any long-existing narrative, this discussion has been running in circles for about 70 years (see also, Balrog wings).
4. Remember that Éowyn did get to fulfill her destiny. Without her, the Witch-King could not have been defeated and he was a notch or two below Sauron (and probably Gandalf the White) in power terms. She's literally saved the world, and getting to explore/reclaim Ithilien with Faramir is a reward, not a consolation prize.
And there is one of the important things that were cut out in the films: the Old Forest. Without entering the Old Forest and meeting Tom Bombadil, the hobbits would have got their blades from Westernesse out of the Barrow Downs. Which is important, as the Witch-King of Angmar could not be injured with ordinary weapons. But Merry's sting into the Witch-King's leg made it only possible that Eowyn could stick her sword between neck and crown, thus killing the Witch-King.
Aragorn was always intended to marry Arwen and reunite the two lines of the half-elven. The decision to include this in LotR occurred late. Arwen only shows up briefly but does have a significant impact, she weaves the banner of Elendil that Aragorn flies. Remember this is a story told by the hobbits and is the story as they see it. They don’t see the romance between Arwen and Aragorn so it isn’t a big thing.
Eowyn’s meeting Faramir is the thing that heals her and makes her whole in a way that her feats of arms cannot.
The film collapses a large number of elven characters into just 3, Elrond, Arwen and Galadriel. We lose glorfindel and both of Elrond’s sons (and Aragorn’s cousins) and miss the rangers riding to Aragorn with the banner of Elendil.
@@davidwright7193 Arwen took a lot of the role of Glorfindel and Elrond's sons in the movies. However, if you read the book, his proposal to Arwen becomes quite clear when he has to reject Eowyn's love interest. For a long time, Eowyn is a bitter woman by both the fact that she is the one to stay back and Edoras and the woman who was rejected by Aragorn. It took her regular meetings with Faramir in the Houses of Healing to change her mind. And when she did so and agreed to marry the Steward of Gondor and settle with him in Ithilien, she was finally declared to be healed.
Sam. The one and only character to have and even wear the ring but gave it up without hesitation. (In the books, in the movie they do have him hesitate a moment, likely to show that the ring did try to entice Sam, but ultimately it seemed he was not swayed by it.)
Very nice video, but I'd like to throw my two cents in on a few of your qualms that I haven't seen addressed:
"Does he ever actually kill characters?"
I would argue that he kills the characters that are necessary. Tolkien also was a firm advocate for what he called "eucatastrophe" in his Endings (meaning the opposite of catastrophe). Essentially, the end of a story should be entirely happy and complete, and all of the characters should receive what they deserve (Hence why it takes so long to wrap up Rotk). So, while some characters do die, using main character death in order to encourage development would keep it from being a full eucatastrophic, escapist conclusion.
"It's a disappointing end for Eowyn"
I disagree with this take. She was able to fight, first when she was chosen by her people to rule when Theoden had to leave for Helms Deep. Then, in the battle of Pelennor fields, she snuck her way onto the battlefield and was the last one standing in the fight with the Witch King, arguably one of the fiercest opponents in the 3rd age. With the help of the Hobbit she snuck into battle, she killed the Witch King, earning her a permanent place as a maiden warrior in the legendarium. Because of her, Theoden died with dignity. Due to the trauma she sustained, she was unable to continue to fight, but she met Faramir and they were able to find healing of their bodies and minds together. She became the Lady of Faramir's lands, no small position, and although she gave up fighting to he one a healer, I believe that this is her way of owning her trauma, and processing it into a healthier, more sustainable outlet. Sure, she doesn't get Aragorn in the end, but she is also a twenty four year old woman, crushing on a man who is nearly 90 years old. She is able to find a much better match in Faramir. It may not be what she initially wanted but I think her story is one of realizing that what you want may not be what you will always want, and it's alright to adjust your dreams as you grow and change.
"Sam doesn't get nearly enough recognition"
A lot of people have mentioned in comments that the Fandom does recognize Sam as the hero, but I totally get why reading it would make you feel that he didn't get what he deserved. In the context of the story, Sam certainly isn't recognized as the hero, but that's what makes him so admirable. In his role as the servant, he is completely humble and does not seek the limelight, even if he is the strongest character in the story. Tbh, I think if he saw the amount of love he gets on the internet now, he would be profoundly uncomfortable with it, so perhaps it's best that he can remain a humble servant in the story, but the hero of our hearts.
Overall, lovely video though! Gorgeous cinematography and some beautiful sentiments.. Hopefully this first dip into LotR will keep you coming back for more, it really is one of those timeless tales where you can always come back and immerse yourself and learn more. Thanks for sharing!
The whole video feels like a massive "tell me you haven't read the book without actually saying you haven't read the book" moment.
HANG ON!
Eowyn rides to war, takes part in the charge at the Pelenor fields, Kills the Witch King of Angmar in single combat, though is badly wounded. She the meets someone who loves her back (unlike Aragorn), and her brother is on the throne of Rohan. How is that a disappointing ending for her?
I never saw the eagles as a plot hole. They fly to mordor after Sauron is destroyed. At that point Gandalf could've openly walked to Mt Doom on his own and rescued them, except he'd be too slow.
If everyone else had just marched into Mordor after the ring was destroyed, would people say "Oh well they should've marched to Mt Doom in the first place?"
The eagles are not mere animals or pets that can be commanded. They are intelligent creations and servants of the very gods of Middle Earth, just as Gandalf is. This is why Gandalf always asks them for help and never commands them. They are basically peers of Gandalf, on the same level as him, but with their own divine tasks and directives.
The eagles are also not so physically powerful that they could bear riders across the world, even though they are large enough to carry people short distances. If Sauron had spotted the eagles carrying his ring then could have sent his flying Nazgul after them. The trek the fellowship takes is based on secrecy and misdirection, which is the reason for all the warfare. Countless people were sacrificing their lives just to distract Sauron.
And finally, it might be that the eagles would never have agreed to physically bear the ring on their persons, just as Gandalf refused to carry it himself, as it was that seductive.
Yes, it is an easy takeaway to think of the Eagles as simple mounts with some basic ability to communicate and think if one has only read the trilogy. On a random note, I think one area that the movies didn't portray well was the serious danger Gwaihir (and Meneldor and Landroval) were in when they agreed to Gandalf's request to recover Frodo.
@@Telthar I wish they had shown the eagles as intelligent in the movies. Even if they didn't make them speak, they could have had Gandalf speak to them and then had him acknowledge their answer to his question. Just something to make viewers aware they are intelligent and capable of conversation.
Picky detail: the two towers are not Orthanc and Barad-dur but Orthanc and the tower of Cirith Ungol (where Frodo was taken after being poisoned by Shelob).
I'd have to disagree that Tolkien was a compulsive world-builder. It's often said that he wrote backstory for decades before he got down to the story and wrote _The Lord of the Rings,_ but that is misleading. Those decades were spent writing the stories he wanted to write, but the publishers couldn't be convinced that they would sell. They became backstory only in retrospect.
I loved this vlog! It’s been ages since I read LOTR, but I believe you can find Aragorn and Arwen’s whole story in the appendix.
I agree. "The Tale of Aragorn and Arwen" alone makes reading the appendices worthwhile.
Also theme: friendship. The power and importance of friendship and shared experience. A lot of Tolkien's writing is driven by his great friendships and those friends he lost in the horror of WWI.
I really really liked in the foreword to the first book how he explains like “i didn’t set out to write about a war or anything, i just wanted to write as long a story as i could and make it a history of a place, but then a war happened in real life, so, it ended up the story that it is ¯\_(ツ)_/¯”
The scene where Sam rescues Frodo and when he carries him up Mount Doom; I cried.
The change from "cannot pass" to "shall not pass" is great, because it puts the ownership of the line with Gandalf. You cannot implies that the Balrog is incapable of passing, but changing it to shall not implies that Gandalf is so much more powerful than the Balrog, that HE will not let him pass
If Tolkien wrote "cannot", being a linguistic expert, you can bet there was a good reason.
I think he implied that Gandalf could not allow the Balrog to pass and also that it couldn't, if Gandalf was prepared to sacrifice himself.
"Shall not" implies Gandalf had decided not to let it pass. (Pretty sure that the phrase, in that form, comes from the Spanish Civil War).
Frodo did not throw the ring in the fire. He failed, but the ring was destroyed because of his earlier act of mercy in not killing Gollum whose greed in the end destroyed himself and the ring.
I wouldn't say Frodo "failed" - the One Ring was destroyed and he was material in getting it to that point - it was a "team" effort and each member (not just the fellowship, but the vast stage) that enabled the ring to be destroyed. If you are of the understanding that Frodo "personally" had to be the one to actually throw the ring into the fire of Mt. Doom then he "failed", but my feeling is he "almost" failed, and that spectacularly, but Gollum saved not only Middle Earth, but Frodo himself in the end.
I loved this video! Your video essays are such a delight. Thank you so much for taking us along on your journey reading Lord of the Rings - you've definitely inspired me to reread it in the new year :)
I loved this vlog, Christy! It was fun to watch you experience reading The Lord of the Rings for the first time. And you are right, Sam is the true hero in this story.
Love that you took us on this journey. The thoughts, the questioning 😍 I could watch the whole nine days 😂
The first time I read these books, after reading the beginning of Two Towers, I went back and checked to see if I missed a chapter. One of the things Jackson did that I really liked is he showed Boromir's death, instead of having it happen off the page.
Regarding Shelob and He-lob, probably. Allow me to refer you to Bilbo's line in The Hobbit where he says "Lazy lob and crazy cob are weaving webs to wind me". I believe both lob and cob are dialectal English words to refer to spiders (cf. cobwebs).
This is your first video I happened across and I think it was wonderful. I loved this style of reaction and the commentary involved. Thanks for sharing it all.
Yaay this vlog gave me such joy! I find it so interesting that you considered writing a thesis on LOTR despite not having read it. It's clearly one of those books that everyone seems to absorb via a kind of cultural osmosis. There was loads of great fantasy before Tolkien as well, and sometimes I'm a bit upset that it gets forgotten that Tolkienesque High Fantasy is just one small corner of a very expansive genre, but it's obvious why he's had the influence he's had.
I hope you have a lovely Christmas!
Hi Christy 😊 In the version I read there's a description of Boromir's death, I'm quite sure, but the book was in Portuguese, are there that much difference between versions? Happy holidays to you 💕💕
I've been waiting for this! Thank you, Christy! Love your contents! 💕
Thank you so much! 😊💛
"Tolkien, do you ever actually kill your characters?"
*Laughs in The Silmarillion*
See also: The Children of Hurin (Greek tragedy levels!)
My sister gifted me this series ages ago and I still haven't read it. I only read The Hobbit so far. This is really encouraging me to pick it up soon!!
it's so worth it! The first book might take a little to get into, just because of the writing style at points (or at least I had a bit of difficulty with it in the beginning lol) but once you're in you don't come out lol.
I love how you described Frodo as a tragic character and how you compared him to Bilbo. Interesting insight! Arwen is mentioned more in the appendices than the book, and I like that the movie adaptation gave her a stronger role. In case you’re interested, I have a wonderful Lord of the Rings discussion on my channel with Medievalist, Philip Chase, who has a brilliant channel dedicated to critical examination of fantasy. Thank you for another wonderful vlog!
Really enjoyed this! I'm so glad you had fun reading this! I'm very intimidated by its size, but I've promised myself to read it one day too. This video was actually very motivating, and maybe that day will come sooner now that I know you've read it and loved it. Take care, Christy! 🌸
Loved hearing your reactions to reading the books! I've never managed to get through it but you've inspired my to add it to my reading list for next year.
On a reread of the series I came upon a part I had not noticed before. When Theoden was going off to war the people picked Eowyn to be their leader until/if he didn't return. It is easy to skip over since she instead puts on armor and hides among the soldiers but I found it interesting.
Tolkien said the two towers were Isengard (Saruman's tower) and Cirith Ungol (the tower where Frodo was taken prisoner), because those are the two towers that dominate the story in the second "book". (Sorry, it's all one book to me.) Lots of people think Sauron's Dark Tower is one of them, but that tower does not come strongly into the story until the last part. :)
Not really it’s kind of wrong there in a white
@@bullrun2772 What does that mean, exactly?
how ast do you read? How long does it take you to read a page?
and could you make a video on reading faster?
What did you have with your eggs and toast? looks tasty. Eggs, pepper, cucumber and tomato? what's the red stuff around the eggs?
I understand that many readers aren’t too enamoured with the Bombadil chapters but I personally love them. However, I also understand why they weren’t included in the movies.
What edition of the book is this? It's gorgeous and I'd love to get hold of a copy
I read the books before the movies and I remember getting to the balrog scene and I just slammed the book closed and went in my room and sobbed for like two hours
I personally love the long descriptive passages but to each their own. I’ve immersed myself in this world several times over the years, will likely do so several more times before my demise, and am always rather sad when it comes to an end. I always end up continuing on to The Silmarillion but that book is rather different in nature and not everyone’s cup of tea.
I think I've watched this vlog four or five times through now! I just keep coming back to it because it's such a cozy comfort in a way and beautifully put together. I haven't read these books before either so I'm thinking it'll be an exciting new adventure for this next year!
What is the ISBN of the LOTR book edition you read?
I agree with you about Sam being the main reason that Frodo made it to Mount Doom at all, but I think it’s important to mention that it wasn’t Frodo who destroyed the ring but Gollum. It was Frodo’s pity and compassion for him and refusal to kill him when virtually everyone else wanted to that allowed Gollum to be there at the end and fulfil the quest. In the end the power of evil was destroyed by an act of mercy.
Ah! First read this masterpiece as a 12yr old boy and was completely spellbound. Subsequent readings change preferences for favourite chapters. The parts I initially thought slow and rather tiresome have now emerged as my favourites (The Old Forest, A Shortcut to Mushrooms, The Council of Elrond). This book is ageless as it addresses fundamental human themes all backed up by (still) unparalleled foundations of research & lore.
Same here!
I cant stand it older books have better pacing than this
14:30 “There's a big difference between mostly dead and all dead.” - Miracle Max, _The Princess Bride_ (1987)
Eowyn killed the Witch King! What do you mean she didn't really get a chance to fight?! One of the biggest "Hell yeah!" moments of both the books and the movies. And she marries Faramir, one of the few people in the books that is not tempted by the Ring. He is essentially the "vanilla mortal" version of Aragorn. (If you go on to read the appendices, it is made clearer that everything Aragorn does in the books is to be be worthy to marry Arwen.) - And you absolutely are right, Sam is the true hero of the books! ( Frodo did not throw the ring into the fire. He did not give up the ring, Gollum took it from him.))
You put so much into your videos and it shows in the overall quality! I always look forward to the next one ♥️ I’ve always been a bit intimidated by the books even though I know the movies by heart, but I just might try to read them in 2022!
Side note: I’ve binged Arcane and it was absolutely incredible.
I was just wondering how many days it took you to read the whole book? Many thanks
What did you think about the scouring of the shire? That was completely cut in the movies
Good one on the representation of the two towers. Like the Ring. Tolkien said in a letter that the Rinf works like in the Our Father -- lead us not into temptation and deliver us from evil. It draws evil out from inside you, like it did to Saruman, and it attracts evil from outside you to you, like Sauron.
Really enjoyed watching this. Thanks for sharing Christy! I’m delighted you enjoyed the book so much. It was great fun seeing your reactions throughout. It’s been my favourite book since I was 8 or so. We called a cat we adopted Bilbo and I named the house we moved to later Rivendell! Hard core :) Oh and your board game collection looked interesting, glimpsed briefly in the background. Eg Gloomhaven really jumped out, but I was pausing the video tying to spot the others. Anyway thanks again, and all the best for the festive season.
I've never seen a kettle like that before.
May I ask where you got it?
Oh gosh watching you read the LOTR is honestly a treat and I love how you are trying to match the movie and the book with what you remember. Also, if you would like to read a book where Tolkien kills a lot of people and rips your heart out in the process, I recommend the Silmarilion (sarcasm as I start tearing up thinking about it)
Love that a lot of people are reading or rereading Lord of the Rings this month and you posted this video on the 20th anniversary of the Fellowship of the Ring movie.
I'm about to start The Return of the King.
So happy to see a reaction video to this book! This is the book that sparked my deep love for fantasy when I was a kid. My dad, a Tolkien fanatic as well, gave me this to read when I was 10. So, when most kids were reading short novellas or choose-your-own-adventure books, I was reading this masterpiece
So impressed you read that so quickly! Your edition of LotR is beautiful and it made me want to read this daunting big book!!
I agree that the ending was sad. I think that it makes sense when you remember that Tolkien fought in World War 1 and he would have had experience with people who had come back from the war who were never truly whole after that. The imagery of The Dead Marshes also has parallels with the horrors of no man's land, particularly at Passchendaele. I was surprised to find that he'd never served in that particular battle.
Have you read anything by Terry Brooks? I was obsessed with his books in high school and college starting with The Elfstones of Shannara. That's actually the second book. I read the first one later and was bored but the rest were excellent.
I think one of the main reasons Frodo suffered more than Bilbo was not just the ring. He was stabbed by a ring wraith with the morgul knife. Which would have eventually turned him into a ring wraith himself if not for Glorfindel in the books. Arwen played this part in the movies. This injury is also part of the reason he departs to the undying lands. I also believe the ring fought to not be destroyed the closer they got to Mordor the heavier the burden of the ring became which is why Sam had to help him so much. Just a few observations of why Frodo was so much more affected than Bilbo.
another word on the eaglels, as well as the other races in LOTR. these days, fantasy tends to view races of people quantitatively, as in a series of abilities, subject to deductive logic. one hundred dwarves on a mountain would beat 150 elves due to....etc. a very important element of lotr races, and tolkien's view of them, is "what are their natures?" for example, magic (an ability) is rarely referenced. elves dont have the magic ability to walk on snow, that is what they tend to do. they are not a species defined by magic and bowmanship, rather a people defined by memory, grace, and sadness.
the reason we don't see dwarf and elf armies in lotr is not just because they are fighting their own battles, but because they are all fading as peoples as we evolve into a world of humanity and the mundane. the dwarves hide deeper in their mountains, the ents become tree-ish, and the elves despair and return to valinor to steep for the rest of their lives in sad remembrance.
the eagles are not animals, but demigods, representative of the god of the wind in middle earth. they have watched scores of great battles, fom morgoth to the wars or mortals and elves, and sauron. their leige lord has drawn away from middle earth and the grace of the world is fading to the time of men. i've just assumed they really just stay out of it until their drawn in by the movement of destiny. they come when it's their time to come.
also remember that all the happenings in middle earth are a song and story sung by god (eru illuvatar). the story is the key. sam is more important than the eagles, elrond, galadriel, even gandalf. not because of power or even strength, but because he is expressive of such an important theme in this sung story: earnest, selfless faith. more powerful than flight.
and that's why the eagles didnt bring the ring to mt doom. because that's not how the story goes.
I love this video! So lovely to hear your thoughts about such an iconic piece of literature 💙
"Tolkien, do you kill any of your characters?"
Somehow, Tolkien foresaw the casting of Sean Bean before he was even born.
For more Arwen, you would need to read the appendices. Many of the appendices are non-narrative, but one is "The Tale of Aragorn and Arwen"
edit: People always forget Lobelia Sackville-Baggins. She's probably the third-most developed female character (after Eowyn and Shelob) in the book.
She was a brave woman after Saruman took over the Shire.
And Ioreth in the Houses of Healing. She's the kind of person that leaves you breathless listening to her speak.
@@ericstoverink6579 Because she talks without taking a breath.
Where would you rank Galadriel and Goldberry? Before or after Shelob?
I first read the book in the late '70s. And I've reread it many times, including this fall (I am currrently reading the appendices). When Gandalf falls, it still hits me so hard I have to shut the book. I have reread the books because the movies sort of take over and I have to get back to the original story to reorient my brain. Is that wierd?
Just to clarify something about the eagle “plot hole” that isn’t clarified elsewhere, to my eye: the eagles couldn’t fly into Mordor, even if they could bear the Ring (which other people have explained below that they couldn’t), because the land of Mordor was wreathed in thick smog and gloom put forth by Sauron’s magic. Only his eye could see through it, which would mean that the eagles would struggle to navigate and be spotted. To cap it off, Sauron has aerial forces to counter any avian interloper - the Nazgûl and their Fellbeasts. So a plan to send the eagles in would most likely have played right into Sauron’s hands.
Agreed. Any 'forceful' attempt, ground-based or aerial, to take the Ring to Mount Doom would have been met with greater force and Sauron would have reclaimed the Ring. Many people seem to struggle with this. The only way was stealth and the only characters who could have pulled this off without being totally corrupted and while retaining a shred of themselves are the Hobbits. And even they needed Gollum's 'help' in the end. Masterful story crafting.
@@timwebber9277 Yeah. I suppose it really just shows you that military strategy is not obvious to the human mind. It is an Art of War, as Sun Tsu put it. People don't seem to recognise how foolish it would be to risk losing the Ring, corrupting the Eagles, and/or getting them killed, in such an obvious aerial assault. A moment's thought leads to the conclusion that they'd be disadvantaged by Sauron's darkness because they are physical more than spiritual beings, unlike the Nazgul (who can see better in the dark, and certainly better than less spiritual beings). It's a gamble, a bad gamble. Sauron is always on the alert for the things that pose the greatest threat to him - such as the Eagles - hence they are a bad bet. That is the entire reason Gandalf picked the hobbits for his heroes, they are strategically a very sound bet - nobody think to look out for them.
One sound principle of strategy is not to attack where you are strongest, but to attack where your enemy least wants to be attacked. It is even better if you can attack in the way they least expect to be attacked. Your enemy has a big land army in the North? Then an aerial assault on their capital in the South is now a big problem: they have a long march to make and a hard puzzle about how to fight a mobile airforce with infantry. Essentially, this is Gandalf's play: Sauron's preparations are all for what he perceives to be his mightiest foes (Gondor, Lothlórien, the Eagles, Erebor), so Gandalf plots that which Sauron can't conceive (destroying the Ring rather than using it) with the foe that is literally beneath Sauron's notice (the hobbits). Strategically, it's perfect.
@@FizzLeeague Your phrase '..beneath Sauron's notice..' is perfectly put. And we should not forget that he has a Palantir too. It will show him a lot, but only those things that he turns his mind to look for. He simply would not conceive that Gandalf might send two weak Hobbits *into* Mordor to destroy the Ring. He *would* suspect that Gandalf might send someone strong *with* the Ring *to* Mordor to openly attack him. And Aragorn played this part perfectly to distract Sauron at the critical hour.
@@FizzLeeague Different topic, I suppose, but there are strong hints that Gandalf didn't really *choose* the Hobbits. A greater power (i.e. the Valar) probably caused Bilbo to 'find' the Ring in the first place and set the whole thing up. Gandalf was just 'their *Man* on the ground' as it were.
@@timwebber9277 I am glad you appreciated it. I admit, I smiled to myself as I typed the phrase as it seemed so apt. I agree with all of the above. Nevertheless, I think the application of the strategic frame simply envelopes this information, taking it within its compass. Yes, Gandalf did not choose for Bilbo to find the Ring, for instance. It may very well be that higher powers meddle in the world. But for the strategist, this is simply a fact of good strategy: adaptation is the mark of the brilliant strategist, and distinguishes her/him from the merely good strategist. In poker terminology, Gandalf is almost never "married to his hand". When new information presents itself, Gandalf is excellent at analysing its strengths, its weaknesses, and the opportunities that it entails.
More specifically to your point, Gandalf chooses a hobbit, Bilbo, for the quest for the Lonely Mountain before Bilbo has ever proven such qualities. Once again, he is demonstrating that first point of strategy that we discussed. Smaug has never encountered a hobbit, therefore he will be surprised by it. Furthermore, Smaug being greedy, and only acquainted with dwarves and men, will not conceive that someone would merely wish to pilfer a single item from his treasure trove. Dwarves and men generally seek to slay dragons in order to acquire their whole hoard. In summary, Gandalf foreshadows his strategy in LotR: use the least expected resource to attack the enemy in the way it least expects, is least prepared for, and desires the least. Smaug knows exactly how to fight dwarves and men and their armies, and he is equipped to do so brilliantly; he doesn't want or know how to fight invisible hobbits, nor is he particularly well equipped to.
To conclude, Gandalf does choose the hobbits, or at least recognises their aptitudes clearly, from the outset. However, you are right that he recognises new information for what it is and with a very open-mind. Where once he may have advocated for the Long(est) Defeat (hiding the Ring), or removing it for Valinor and finally abandoning Middle-earth (total defeat really), when he sees Bilbo toting a Ring of Power and being reasonably responsible (with a bit of harmless mischief thrown in) he notes it, adapts to it, and incorporates it into his strategic thinking. Thanks to this open-mindedness to the qualities of all things, great and small, Gandalf conceives of the only tactic that can lead to a victory against totalitarian domination (at least temporarily).
In a totally tangential observation, Saruman would not have been able to adapt this way, seeing the qualities of folk like hobbits, because he is close-minded. Saruman's mind became stagnant and entrenched, recognising power only where he had witnessed it previously, in its obvious manifestations. He is a great educational opportunity, in an analysis of Tolkien, to explore the importance of being not elitist or patronising towards people or ideas, merely because of humble or base origins.
Sorry for the essay, but Tolkien is my specialism (so I'm not really sorry ;) )
I made a joke yesterday that if all the songs from the book were in the movies they'd be musicals.
I like the edition you are reading. Can you tell us which edition it is? Thank you!
You do Eowyn a great disservice, she was one of the biggest heroes in the story...she killed the Witch-King of Angmar, lord of the Nazgul, it would do you good to both rewatch the movie and reread the chapter on the Ride of the Rohirrim
I was wondering how did she miss that part?
I'm thinking she must skim books to save time. There were definitely other times she didn't have a grasp of what really went on in the story. Video editing and setting up multiple shots for baking and tea take time you know.
@@mikelarsen5836 I agree.. The editing in between meals are the most interesting parts..
The ginger-bread man is definitely my least favourite character in Lord of the Rings.
@@JudgeU77 Hey, just to clear this up: I didn't skim read the story. Filming baking obviously takes time lol, but it's absolutely realistic to read lotr in the time I did. I didn't miss that part, I just wanted more for Eowyn. I wanted her to be in the story more and I wanted her to keep being a warrior after the story ended. But as I've mentioned: those were just my honest thoughts while reading lotr for the first time. Take care!
A note: Lord of the Rings is not a trilogy ot a series; Tolkien wrote it as a single novel and intended it to be published in one volume in a box set with The Silmarillion. His publisher split it into 3 volumes to save on printing costs due to post-war paper shortages.
My biggest disappointment from the movies (which I loved for the most part) was the elimination of The Scouring of the Shire. I've always felt that the transformation of the sweet & innocent hobbits into very capable defenders of the Shire was both impressive and sad (but necessary). I would love to hear your perspective.
Similarly, my disappointment was the lack of sharkey.
I’m not the strongest reader and I don’t know which version to read, there’s the original and there’s apparently one that’s written so it’s easier to read? So I don’t know which one to commit to 😅 I really want to read them but I’m a very slow reader
hristy this was a lovely video, engaging through and through
Yay! My new years resolution for 2022 is to read all of Tolkien's work. As a fantasy lover, I also haven't read them all. Just The Hobbit! 💕
I'm only 41 but read the books at around the age of 16, before the movies were released. It's funny to hear a younger person's perspective where the movies are the baseline and initial impression of Tolkien. Where you sort of want the book to comform to the films, instead of the other way around. It sounds strange to me but I know there's millions of people with your perspective because of the success of the movies. The books are so much better and I'm glad a younger generation that started out with the movies were inspired to read the original books because of the them.
Watching u read is like u are reading to me ! Love it 😍... I used to read LOTR when i was in high school but i didn't finish reading it cos the movie was out 🤣 ...but you are making me wanting to start reading it (and finish it this time!)
I admire Middle-earth and Tolkien’s works greatly. So great to see someone else share that compassion and love for Tolkien!
“Still no word from Frodo and Sam” is how I feel watching the films. “Oh yeah, Frodo and Sam are in this.”
What an incredibly lovely video :) And absolutely agree on Sam being the greatest hero!
I REALLY enjoyed watching this video of your read-through of LOTR. I am slowly reading it for the second time. What website did you consult that estimated it would take you 20 hours to read the book? I have some other books I would like filtered through. Anyway, thanks for sharing your read-through with us! Tolkien rocks!
I also reread the Lotr this year in German and now for Christmas I finally ordered the English edition, I am so excited! It's such a lovely vlog, thanks! 🤗
A side note to your tea drinking - on my green tea package they recommend boiling the water only up to 80 degrees, not a 100, so the taste develops better. I've been doing that and can only recommend it! Plus you save electricity ☕️
Great video!
- You can't spell Da-Bomb without Bombadil because he was, in fact, THE BOMB.
- Tolkein is so iconic now that people forget he was actually subverting certain tropes. For instance, Eowyn killed the Witch King of Angmar (the most powerful Nazgul) because she was "no man," subverting the prophesy. Of course, Tolkein was so influential that he established new tropes in so doing.
- Tolkein claimed he did not like "allegory," but the LOTR clearly has elements that are symbolic or allegorical of the real world. Maybe it's not an allegory in the very strict sense that you can say this character is so-and-so in the real world (like George Orwell's Animal Farm), but clearly the themes of power, corruption, industrialization, etc. all apply to the real world and England specifically.
There are so many comments disputing with what she had to say on the book and her experience reading it. I know there are many passionate fans however there is a lot to unpack in this book as a whole and it was great to just see her reading journey! I think it is great that she tackled the intimidating read regardless what her opinions were on plot and characters! Those were her thoughts and that’s ok ☺️
I don't argue with her opinion on plot or character though I don't agree with all of them either. It almost dumbfounding to see you refer to how she : . . .tackled the intimidating read". It was a joy to read and reread and reread. I actually used to read it aloud to my wife when she was suffering from migraine headaches that prevented her from reading. The pronunciation was sometimes difficult but the reading was grand. To think of reading as intimidating is just a foreign almost alien concept to me. Please understand I am not criticizing you or your opinion it is just a very strange concept to me.
In the edition I have, there is a note at the end of The Fellowship of the Ring stating that the The Two Towers named after Orthanc and Minas Morgul. This is different to the films, where Saruman talks about "the alliance of the two towers" between Orthanc and Barad-dûr. The films move the Minas Morgul and Shelob scenes to The Return of the King. Tolkien hadn't planned for the series to be published in three volumes, so their titles were afterthoughts.
Right - the publisher (Houghton Mifflin) came up with the titles, and Tolkien wasn't happy about the book being split up in that way. Despite what the movie and some copies of the books say, I have heard various other combinations of the following through the years - Orthanc, Barad-dûr, Minas Morgul (aka Minas Ithil), Minas Tirith, and Cirith Ungol all are possibilities.
I don’t know if it’s cannon or just a theory, but I read somewhere that the Ring corrupts anyone who holds it and can reduce them into a shell of a creature, like how it turned Sméagol into Gollum. There’s a fanfic where it turned dragons from free-flying creatures into treasure-hoarders, or slaves to Sauron. And it’s implied that the more powerful you are, the more terrible the effects of that corruption are, which is why Gandalf and Galadriel didn’t dare touch it. So it’s possible the Ring would’ve turned the eagles into lesser beings, hence why they weren’t used, and Tolkien just never explained it.
But I think this is just a theory, so take from that what you will.
Loved the video 💛 it has been such a long time since I read LOTR, a re-read is definitely due. Please more videos like this 😊
Thank you so much! I'm glad you liked it 💛
I need to say that I really love your videos. And it's very awesome that you posted this on the 20th anniversary of FOTR ✨
BUT, as a LOTR fan, I got kinda upset when you talked about Eowyn, the eagles and allegories 😂
Nonetheless, I found all of this very interesting and also enjoyed the fact that you express your genuine point of view.
Keep going, Christy!❤️
14:07 The movies ran with Isengard and Barad-dur as the two towers, but the books are much less clear. I don't remember which ones, but I once thought of several other possibilities, leaning towards the keep at Helm's Deep and the orcish watchtower at Cirith Ungol. They're towers the heroes actually go to, one in each book.
17:13 Just curious; what is on your toast? It looks good.