The Sword and Laser discussion

So, what do you guys think of the differences between the Elves in The Hobbit and those in The Lord of The Rings? Which do you prefer? Also, do you agree with Jackson's decision to tone down these differences and others like them in order to preserve the "feel" of LOTR?

I have to say, I think he made the right call. The book is able to stand apart from LOTR a lot easier than the movies would have. Whether consciously or subconsciously, people will go into these films with LOTR on their minds. I think a more exact translation of the book would feel...strange. But that's just my opinion. :)

Chip wrote: "So, what do you guys think of the differences between the Elves in The Hobbit and those in The Lord of The Rings? Which do you prefer? Also, do you agree with Jackson's decision to tone down these ..."

peter jackson made so many changes ( i don't recall elves In helm's deep) that one or too won't make a difference but at the same time will give a sense of continuity.

Personally, the elves were one of the things I hated about the hobbit, and even when reading Lord of the Rings afterwards, I found it nearly impossible to take Rivendell seriously. To me, they were stupidly cheerful, chattery things singing daft songs all the time. Only when I saw the film was I able to imagine them otherwise, so I'll trust Peter Jackson.

I'm having trouble separating the movie from the LOTR books when it comes to elves - but I don't remember Rivendell ever being as grand as its depicted in the movie. Certainly in the Hobbit, Rivendell is more like an Inn hidden in the wood.

Victor Hugo wrote: "Well, I definitely prefer the elves from The Silmarillion, the most important book written by J.R.R. Tolkien (in fact compiled by his son, Christopher and with the help of Guy Gavriel Kay) regardin..."

I'm not sure if I agree with it being the "most important" but I agree that I liked the elves in that one better. I loved that book, I've always liked the beginings of mythology for a big series, and the stories were beautifull.

I've never really felt that the elves changed much from one book to the next. The lenses through which we see them does change. In The Hobbit we see them through Bilbo's eyes--an ignominious and unlikely adventurer--as they make fun of him. In the Lord of the Rings we see them through Frodo's. More serious elves for a more serious time--even though they still spend a good deal of time singing and making up poems. Then, in the Silmarillion, you get the untainted mythology. There's no real point of view, it reads more like an epic world creation myth--which is what it is.

You have to remember that the Lord of the Rings was written by Frodo, and the The Hobbit was written by Bilbo. As such you get their perceptions of peoples, places, and events.

^ I totally agree with the above comment and I thought it was very well put. Different narrators and different times make for different seeming elves.

Daran, I agree to a certain extent. Bilbo's perspective definitely accounts for a lot of the perceived difference. But I don't think it accounts for all of it. Bilbo's point of view doesn't change the words/actions of the Elves, only his reaction to them. Outside of Bilbo's/Frodo's perspective, there is still a change in Elven behavior. They are far more childlike in The Hobbit. I would chalk that up to it primarily being a childrens book and Tolkien not knowing that he would write LOTR and The Silmarillion. But it does provide some interesting continuity issues.

My view of the elves were firmly fixed by Glorfindle, in Lord of the Rings:

There are few even in Rivendell that can ride openly against the Nine; but such as there were, Elrond sent out north, west, and south.

I think Tolkien did an amazing job of making the Elves difficult to fully understand, they are at times foolish, naive, wonderous, awesome or terrifyingly powerful.

I think that some people may be giving a bit too much credit to Tolkien for consistency across works that were composed many years apart, and for wildly different audiences. J.R.R. himself admitted openly that he revised the Hobbit to accord more with the events of LotR because at the time of the former's composition, he hadn't any idea of the works which would eventually become the grand trilogy.

Even within Hobbit, there are elves and then there are elves...the light-hearted flibbertigibbets which inhabit Rivendell seem a far cry from the arrogant drunkards who make their homes in Mirkwood. To be clear, I don't think this inconsistency is a problem. Just the opposite. If Tolkien has a signal strength to his writing, it's breadth. The severe differences between the two elf encampments make their isolation from one another clear, which lends itself to the sense that Bilbo and company are crossing wild lands, infrequently travelled.

P. Aaron wrote: "I think that some people may be giving a bit too much credit to Tolkien for consistency across works that were composed many years apart, and for wildly different audiences. J.R.R. himself admitte..."

Also, imagine a book that contained the characters: Snooki, the Dali Lama, General Petraeus, Stephen Colbert, Lance Armstrong and Hillary Clinton. Now imagine the complaint being that the humans in the book were too inconsistent for "humans" to be believable ...

To be honest I never really distinguished the two. The entire tone of the Hobbit is different than LOTR. The dwarven party seems pretty foolish and Bilbo at least recognizes that he is out of his league. The Elven singing at Rivendell seems rather appropriate mockery.

The elves of Mirkwood definitely appear to be the more imposing force.

The mirkwood elves, if my middle-eart knowledge serves me right have a thougher existance, being under constant attack. it might've altered their normal inclination

Robert wrote:"Also, imagine a book that contained the characters: Snooki, the Dali Lama, General Petraeus, Stephen Colbert, Lance Armstrong and Hillary Clinton. Now imagine the complaint being that the humans in the book were too inconsistent for "humans" to be believable ... "

"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't." --Mark Twain

I'm also pretty sure Snooki and Stephen Colbert count as fictional characters.

Robert wrote: "Also, imagine a book that contained the characters: Snooki, the Dali Lama, General Petraeus, Stephen Colbert, Lance Armstrong and Hillary Clinton. Now imagine the complaint being that the humans in the book were too inconsistent for "humans" to be believable..."

Yes, but nobody is complaining about differences between individual Elves. That would make sense. It's the grand changes within the race as a whole that provides the inconsistency. A more apt analogy would be that ALL of the Elves in The Hobbit are Steven Colbert and, in LotR they suddenly all become the Dalai Lama! I'm not complaining, I just find it interesting.

Chip wrote: " A more apt analogy would be that ALL of the Elves in The Hobbit are Steven Colbert and, in LotR they suddenly all become the Dalai Lama! I'm not complaining, I just find it interesting. "

But that's not true -- even within the Hobbit, the Elves of Mirkwood are very different from the Elves of Rivendel.

Sean wrote: "But that's not true -- even within the Hobbit, the Elves of Mirkwood are very different from the Elves of Rivendel."

True. I was only half serious about the Steven Colbert thing. :) I was simply making the point that the inconsistency is with the Elven race, not individual Elves. There are obviously differences between the Elven groups within The Hobbit. But there is still a change in the Elves as a whole, between books.

There is certainly a big difference between the Rivendell elves in The Hobbit and in Lord of the Rings, but I think a lot of that can be attributed to their situation in each book.

In The Hobbit, Middle Earth must seem like one long vacation to the Elves. They've defeated the great evil of their age, and whilst they know it may someday return they also know that they are not fated to defeat it. At the same time, they know that their remaining time in that world is short - already they feel the first tugs of that call from across the sea which will, within a few score years, call them away to Numenor, where they can leave all cares behind.

Perhaps their frivolity as Bilbo and the dwarves arrive is a little put-on, simply because they know it will annoy the stodgy dwarves, but really, why should they not feel playful and gay? They have few more cares in this world, if any.

Contrast this with the time in which Frodo arrives at Rivendell. Sauron has re-established himself in Mordor, the One Ring has been revealed, and strife threatens to engulf all the lands. It is clear that, whilst it may not fall to elves to defeat Sauron, he may very well yet march forth and defeat them before they have the opportunity to depart Middle Earth. Suddenly, this semi-retired race is faced with burdens as great as any they faced in the days of their full youthful strength. Little wonder, then, that they present a more serious face, and have far less time for fun and laughter than they once did.

The difference is not that much if you consider that everyone can be very different. Most people don't live their lives as archetypes. They are the lover, the warrior, the clown, the teacher, the patient parent, etc, it would depend on when and under what circumstances you find them.

If you were to meet me at the concert you might consider me a sweet affable fellow. If you were to meet me in my place of conducting business, you might think you had had the misfortune to have stepped into Hell.

Both would be equally true, so I do not see any large inconsistencies. That being said, J.R.R. Didn't write these books for the same audience. Read the adult version of the Grimms fairy tales and read the children's version. Same basic story, very different tone.

Oh my goodness, the elves in Rivendell kind of weird me out. They're far too happy. Of course, the Hobbit was written for children, so I'll forgive Tolkien the difference between the Hobbit elves and LOTR elves, even if it is a large gap. The Mirkwood elves seem far more like I would expect elves to behave, even if they do like to get drunk. :)

Ruth wrote: "Personally, the elves were one of the things I hated about the hobbit, and even when reading Lord of the Rings afterwards, I found it nearly impossible to take Rivendell seriously. To me, they were..."

You should read Bored of the Rings for a similar view of the Elves and Rivendell.