The age old debate coming back!

Discussion in 'Debates' started by Boomer, Aug 14, 2003.

  1. elvenarcherinarms

    elvenarcherinarms Fellow Archr of Mirkwood

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Messages:
    165
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    West Australia
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0
    Sunday Times CROSSWORD...

    CAN you believe? An Australian Newspapr, the Sunday TIMES, has a TV Extra liftout for the week's viewing details............anyways, they have this crosswrd comp as a regular, AND this week's delivr'd this clue>
    Q. WHO is the LOTR Baddie? [6]...... A. Balrog !!! :mad:
    *Now, I'm thinkin' SAURON yeh? the DARK Lord for crying out loud! WTF! They seriously should have the editor demoted or sumthing for committing such a travesty [my dear God] ...a *BALROG* ...eheh. twas NOT impress'd.
     
  2. Crusader

    Crusader Disturber of the Peace

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2003
    Messages:
    12,265
    Likes Received:
    91
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Englands Green and Pleasant Lands
    Ratings:
    +91 / 0 / -0
    he should also be demoted for using a term like "Baddie" for such a serious film/book
    :balrog: :balrog: :balrog: :balrog: :balrog:
     
  3. elvenarcherinarms

    elvenarcherinarms Fellow Archr of Mirkwood

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Messages:
    165
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    West Australia
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0
    i reckon yeh? ....and i didn't use any personal improvisation there, that's exactly how he put it !!! :mad: [it's sooooo SHOCKING!] ..... :eek:
     
  4. Turin

    Turin Valar Morghulis

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2003
    Messages:
    5,496
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    BFE
    Ratings:
    +24 / 0 / -0
    The fact the they state it as "THE" LOTR Baddie is what is controversial to me. The :balrog: was definately a baddie.
     
  5. Crusader

    Crusader Disturber of the Peace

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2003
    Messages:
    12,265
    Likes Received:
    91
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Englands Green and Pleasant Lands
    Ratings:
    +91 / 0 / -0
    can we all stop saying baddie, its very annoying if your over 5 years of age, and yes the balrog was A LOTR enemy but not THE LOTR enemy.
     
  6. Turin

    Turin Valar Morghulis

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2003
    Messages:
    5,496
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    BFE
    Ratings:
    +24 / 0 / -0
    sorry about the Baddie thing, oops I said Baddie again, sorry about Baddie
     
  7. elvenarcherinarms

    elvenarcherinarms Fellow Archr of Mirkwood

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Messages:
    165
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    West Australia
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0
    i knowe, that's what ticks me off the most [:mad:] ..... how could you term such a serious book that tells the greatest story evr told with such childish terminology? !!! that word...BURN it! gah! it makes no sense! :confused:
     
  8. Turin

    Turin Valar Morghulis

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2003
    Messages:
    5,496
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    BFE
    Ratings:
    +24 / 0 / -0
    I think that we have strayed from the debate that started in this thread.
     
  9. elvenarcherinarms

    elvenarcherinarms Fellow Archr of Mirkwood

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Messages:
    165
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    West Australia
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0
    i think we've exhausted ourselves a bit, but why not pick it up again? I state: "The Balrogs of Tolkien's lore do not have *wings* and hence do not possess the gift of flight" ....hit me with your interjections !!! :D i'm waiting ...
     
  10. Crusader

    Crusader Disturber of the Peace

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2003
    Messages:
    12,265
    Likes Received:
    91
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Englands Green and Pleasant Lands
    Ratings:
    +91 / 0 / -0
    i agree ;)
     
  11. Tilion

    Tilion Was never a

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2003
    Messages:
    171
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Netherlands
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    I wrote an article about this in 2002, using shear logic and the corpus. Comparable to the article on the encyclopedia of Arda. In fact I borrowed some of their arguments too, which make very much sense. I came to my own conclusion that the arguments for wings can be countered easily and definatively, but the arguments against wings can only be countered by weak arguments that are easily proven assumption upon assumption or countered again. Therefor, using Ocham's Razor (No more things should be presumed to exist than are absolutely necessary) I have found it far more likely than not, that these wings were indeed metaphorical. Probably the same sort of Darkness Ungoliant the spider had about her, only shaped like wings (which does't make them wings per se).
     
    Last edited: Aug 25, 2004
  12. isengard111

    isengard111 The Master Chief

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    466
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    None yo' damn business
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0
    "It stepped foward slowly on to the bridge, and suddenly drew itself up to a great height, and its wings were spread from wall to wall..."
    "His enemy halted again, facing him, and the shadow about it like two vast wings."
    LotR, FotR, Bridge of Khazad-Dum, page 344. On my version


    We've all heard these quotes before, right? They may not mean much to most, but the first literally mention wings as being there, even if they were not physically there.

    I believe they did have wings, but I saw the movie before I read the book, so my perspective is ****ed up.
     
  13. Aenónar

    Aenónar Elf of Arda Tauréndor

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2004
    Messages:
    198
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Sweden
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0
    1. Morgoth couldn't create wings, he tried by taking the wings of the great eagles. but that didn't work either. Morgoth created the Balrogs, therefor they shouldn't have wing (that were functionable) therefor he had to use the fireworms (don't know how they are named in english) in the assault of Gondolin. cause if they had wings, why did they have to get lifted up?

    In LOTR Tolkien wrote that "it spanned from pillar to pillar" (or something like that) that doesn't nessesarily mean that it were the wings that spanned from pillar to pillar but the balrog itself, and if it had wings, then it wouldn't fall down (unless they were just there for show or to little space to use them properly)

    My conclution: The Balrogs didn't have wings.

    edit: just saw the last post, don't really know about the english version, but some version had the text as "spanned" without the word wings. but still, they shouldn't have been functionably
     
    Last edited: Aug 29, 2004
  14. Tilion

    Tilion Was never a

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2003
    Messages:
    171
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Netherlands
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    First I would like tot comment on Isengard111. Those are indeed the quotes that are usually the first one to be brought up. Most people think to end the argument there but the matter of the fact is that the text is contradicting itself.

    Aenónar: though I am more on your side of the discussion there are some mistakes, in fact and logic. Morgoth did not create the Balrogs, they were maiar that he had perverted. There was indeed too little space to use any if all wings. If you take the "it's wings were spread..." quote literal, then indeed you can assume that they were very large, and that there was only room in the chasm or fissure to spread the wings out, nothing more than that. If it had wings, it could not have flown in that space and because of that, fell. It's more logical too assume the simpler explanation when two theories occur. The Balrog had no wings, and as a result fell. Therefore I think you cannot use the "if it had wings it wouldn't fall down" argument, but you kind of allready nullified your own argument.
     
  15. isengard111

    isengard111 The Master Chief

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    466
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    None yo' damn business
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0
    I think they have wings because that's how I picture them. We all have a picture in our head of what each character, being, and place looks like, and my Balrog happens to have wings.

    Also, since a Balrog is just shadow and fire, they could never fly. They has no physical body. So unless a Balrog can Will himself through the air, they are staying on the ground.
     
    Last edited: Aug 29, 2004
  16. Iluvatar2004

    Iluvatar2004 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2005
    Messages:
    58
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    hmmm obviously i cant answer this question...but a possible explaination of why the Balrog of Moria DIDNT fly when falling off the bridge....maybe his wingspan was too large to fly there
     
  17. Patkun

    Patkun Patkun, lover of bread

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2005
    Messages:
    174
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Ireland
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0
    Also, I'm fairly sure that most large birds (Vultures, condors) need a substantial run-up before taking off. The bridge cracks underneath the unsuspecting Balrog, so it falls.

    Balrog is also the name of a guy in "Street fighter".