Tuesday, April 14, 2015

For Thursday: Finish The Hobbit!


For Thursday: The Hobbit, Chs. 12-End 

Answer 2 of the following (I've given you 5 questions this time!)...

How is Smaug a lot like the dwarves (especially Thorin) as well as some of the Men (and Hobbits!) in the story?  Though he is a great dragon and a creature of old, how has his heart been corrupted by a lack of fantasy and a narrow view of “business?”

Bilbo exclaims to himself, “Now I am a burglar indeed!” when he finally steals something—in this case, the Arkenstone.  Why does he take it and say nothing to the dwarves?  Does it do this because it calls to him, the same way as the Ring did?  Or does he have a larger plan from the beginning? 

In the passage with Smaug, we learn that “there was one smell [Smaug] could not make out at all, hobbit-smell; it was quite outside his experience and puzzled him mightily” (201).  Additionally, Bilbo refuses to tell his name, and instead indulges in a series of “kennings,” an Anglo-Saxon poetic form.  What effect does this have on Smaug, and what might be his purpose in doing this?  Why taunt an already awake and angry dragon in this manner? 

Why is the Battle of the Five Armies dispatched in little more than five pages?  Why do we get so little human drama here, but more “telling” rather than “showing”?  Is this an example of Raffel’s claim that The Hobbit is a good story but definitely not “literature”?  Would literature have included the battle?  Do other ancient epics? 

At the very end of the book, Gandalf teases Bilbo by saying, “Surely you don’t disbelieve the prophecies, because you had a hand in bringing them about yourself?  You don’t really suppose, do you, that all your adventures and escapes were managed by mere luck, just for your sole benefit?  You are a very fine person, Mr. Baggins, and I am very fond of you; but you are only quite a little fellow in a wide world after all!”  (272).  How are we supposed to read this passage?  Is it sarcastic?  Serious?  Self-mocking?  Is Gandalf really negating Bilbo’s role in the book—which is actually his story—or is he questioning whether or not Bilbo is a reliable narrator?  

8 comments:

  1. 2. I don't think that Bilbo necessarily always intended to do something with the arkenstone, but I definitely believe that he didn't like the sort of power it had over Thorin. He was worried for his friend's well being. The desire for the stone so completely overcame the dwarf that Bilbo was actually frightened of giving it to him, he did not know what it would do to the dwarf. The inspiration to give it to the human/elf army did not come until Thorin refused to reason with them. However, I do not believe that the stone called to Bilbo himself as it did to Thorin, or in the way that the ring did. He picked it up and stuck it in his pocket for safe keeping, then when he say Thorin's obsession with it, he decided to keep a hold of it for a little bit longer to see how things would play out. He had good intentions.

    5. I would say that Gandalf was being serious. Throughout the entire book, every time Bilbo did something right or even remotely heroic, someone would credit it to luck. Bilbo himself, the dwarves, or the narrator, someone always said that he was lucky. I think that Gandalf is trying to say here that luck only takes you so far. The success of their journey may have had a lucky moment or two, but it was predominately because of Bilbo himself. He's not negating Bilbo, if anything he is building him up. Why should such a "little fellow in a wide world" receive so much help from the universe? No, as Gandalf stated from the beginning, there is so much more to Bilbo than meets the eye.

    ReplyDelete
  2. 4. I think why we are given less detail about the battle is because that isn't the main focus of the book. It is my opinion the main focus is on the adventure. Of course I would've loved to have more detail on the battle, but maybe this was the authors intention. In most fantasy books there is heavy emphasis on battles and the sort, but this book ,as we have discussed in class, really bucks the norm. I think the Tolkien didn't want to create a book like countless other stories. It reminds me of how Gene Austen writes about love at the end of Sense and Sensibility. Just because these two authors bypass what is deemed popular by a lot of people, doe that mean we completely toss the book? Absolutely not! If anything it makes the work that much more unique.

    5. This really puzzled me. On the one hand I think it could be sarcastic and then on the other hand it could be serious. When we look at the hobbit being a metaphor for humans, this quote really is somewhat true. After all, aren't we all a very small piece of the world today? We might do some great things in our lifetime, but so have many other people before us. I'm not discrediting our roles to be great, but we can't believe we are the greatest individual who ever walked the face of the earth. We are merely a small piece of a puzzle that paints a grand picture of our species.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Ashley Bean
    2. At first, Bilbo seemed drawn to the Arkenstone, "Suddenly Bilbo's arm went towards it drawn by its enchantment" (217). After that, he reasoned that they did promise him one 14ths share, and the Arkenstone could be his share. Soon after, I believe he held on to it to see how things went while the bargaining took place between Thorin and Bard, and soon he hatched a plan. Unlike the dwarves though, he was able to overcome the taint of the treasure, but he was not completely unaffected: "The Bilbo, not without a shudder, not without a glance of longing, handed the marvellous stone to Bard.." (248).

    5. I take this as a positive compliment. He isn't negating Bilbo's role, he is negating luck's role. Luck is mentioned again and again every time Bilbo does something extraordinary. Gandalf is pointing out that luck wouldn't stop for a little fellow in the world, that Bilbo accomplished those things himself. Just because there is a prophecy doesn't mean it could have come true without the actions of those involved. Bilbo seems to take it as a compliment as well, and seems relieved: "Thanks goodness!" (276) is what he says after Gandalf speaks. I think this shows that he is relieved that it wasn't all luck, and if it wasn't all luck then it won't run out on him. He has a hand in his "luck" after all.

    ReplyDelete
  4. 4. I think that he didn't include more information about this battle because more information and more detail weren't really needed for what he was trying to accomplish. This book was about a great adventure. It tended to bypass a lot of detail, stories within the story, and fighting. It is a great adventure with many enemies, but the whole story isn't nearly as violent as it probably should be in reality, if this world was a reality. To include insane amounts about a one battle when we don't see this throughout the rest of the book just wouldn't make sense or fit in. However, the main focus of the story, as we've discussed, was about adventure, and especially about a creature who has never adventured before.

    5. I think that Gandalf was definitely serious. I don't see why he wouldn't have been. I think that he is emphasizing that Bilbo cannot attribute all of his accomplishments to luck in his strange Gandalf way. He does not say anything that would mean he does not believe that Bilbo deserves credit for his accomplishments. He only says that luck isn't just for Bilbo and is not the only cause. I think that he emphasizes the fact that Bilbo is a "little fellow" because he is, and the world is a very big place. I think he is also saying that there is a lot more going on in the world than just their one adventure, hence The Lord of the Rings trilogy.

    Cora-lee Snow

    ReplyDelete
  5. Smaug has a lot in common with dwarves as well as some of the men, like the Master, because they value money over all else. Even though a dragon can never use money and has no use for it, Smaug guards his hoard for many years, and killed and destroyed entire towns to come in possession of it. He is so consumed in laying in his bed of gold that he doesn’t notice a chink in his amour of gems. Tolkien describes the frenzy or madness that come from obsessing with gold as “dragon sickness”. Thorin contracts dragon sickness when he is willing to starve himself and his company in order to stay with the gold instead of giving help to people that helped him. The Master tool all of his fold and tan away so no one could have it, and he eventually starved to death anyway in the wilderness alone. Dragon sickness makes those infected out their treasure over everything else, even friendships, family, and eating.
    The Battle of Five Armies might only be described in a little more than five pages because Tolkien was trying to imitate an older Anglo-Saxon tale. Like Beowulf’s fight with the dragon, the Battle of Five Armies basically reads like a report of the battle rather than a firsthand account described blow by blow. Bilbo even gets knocked out, and we find out how in is concluded later on when he wakes up. Like the rest of the book, it doesn’t read as a firsthand account, but more like a story told orally. I don’t think this way of writing discounts Tolkien’s work as literature because many older works, like Beowulf, do the same thing to battles. Tolkien tried to write The Hobbit to read like an older work, so it makes since it would describes battles in the same way.

    Raegan Sampson

    ReplyDelete
  6. 2. I think the narrator said something about Bilbo following a feeling whenever he took the Arkenstone and decided not to tell the dwarves about it. Even though he knows the company of dwarves would not think of it this way, he kind of justifies his keeping it as his fourteenth of the share. But I don’t think he has any grand schemes in mind such as giving it over to the men for them to use as leverage because he’d already spoken with Smaug and realized that he wasn’t sure how he was going to get his share of the treasure all of the way back home through Mirkwood forest and the Misty Mountains and countless other dangers. Even though it seems like on some level it was appealing to his greed, I think at least a small practical part of him thought of it simply as a valuable treasure that is easily hidden and portable.
    3. I thought this was clever of Bilbo and was reminded of his experience in the Misty Mountains with Gollum. His ambiguous and hyperbolic speech caused Smaug to become interested in what he was saying instead of killing him outright so Bilbo was buying time until he could figure out what to do. Plus I think it made the dragon like him a little better because dragons like to be flattered even if he played the compliments off or didn’t really believe it. On the other hand, I think dragons are traditionally very cunning, and you’re not supposed to speak directly or offensively towards them or they might eat you. When Bilbo smarts off to Smaug at the end he gets chased up the tunnel by a stream of fire that burns some of his hair off, and I think he only got that because Smaug was intrigued by him having never encountered a hobbit before.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Sarah Bolitho
    1. Smaug could represent the cumulative greed of the inhabitants of the world. He is the very personification of greed. He irrationally hoards gold and seeks to destroy anybody that may diminish his wealth even by a minute fraction. He becomes irrationally enraged even by a hint that he may lose any amount of treasure.
    2. I don't think Bilbo had any large scheme for the Arkenstone. He is caught up in the "business" of acquiring his share. He is displaying some paranoia in suspecting the dwarves will not give him his equal share. He is susceptible to the greed that Smaug and the dwarves display. We see that Bilbo is reluctant to give up the Arkenstone, though he overcomes his greediness in a way that Thorin could not until it was too late.

    ReplyDelete
  8. 4. I think the battle is relatively unimportant in this book. I think it is brought up as sort of a side note just to add to the overall experience of adventure. Tolkien wasn’t trying to create a work that followed the norm. I think for that reason alone it makes the Hobbit literature. I think we might wish to know more about the battle, but that’s just because we aren’t looking at how epic the story is as a whole. Books don’t have to include a battle to be considered literature, and they don’t have to have a battle to be considered epic either.


    5. I love this part, I think it really showcases Gandalf’s personality. He believed in Bilbo all along. I don’t think he ever doubted him, even when everyone else did. This last interaction between the two perfectly captures their relationship. Even after this big adventure, Bilbo is still a little naïve, and Gandalf is letting him know in a proud mentor sort of way. I don’t think this comment is discrediting Bilbo, in fact I think it makes him a reliable character. He got to see a world outside of the Shire, and he had many new experiences, but at the end of the day, Bilbo is still a Hobbit. Being a Burglar didn’t go to his head.

    ReplyDelete