Seeing Tolkien's Long Defeat

If the six books of The Lord of the Rings gave three films, and the one of The Hobbit will give three too, what next? If Jackson et al. follow Lucas/Disney to push for a third trilogy, there's no lack of sources.

Most obviously "The Scouring of the Shire" was left out last time. By this rule of increasing bloat, could this one chapter be stretched over three more? It's not hard to imagine a spin-off mini-series, just one with less emphasis on the 'mini'. How about those Adventures of Tom Bombadil? He was also left out.

But why? What justifies such major removals? Is it as simple as overlong running time? After all, Jackson's LotR was three long films and special editions. Pacing is a better argument, but Tolkien left them in. And rightly so I think. To my mind the Scouring and Tom Bombadil are more or less the heart of it all.

Bombadil especially. Have a read of this overview if you haven't seen the arguments.

If so, maybe that's why both were cut, as supposedly unfit for a 21st-century audience.

What could that mean? There's plenty at this post from earlier today, on zombies too.

Tolkien once wrote: "I do not expect 'history' to be anything but a 'long defeat'", and we have Galadriel verbalise the thinking in the fiction, or rather in the generally recognised fiction: "together through the ages of the world we have fought the long defeat." Really?

Why all the gloom? My reading of Bombadil suggests Tolkien did see, maybe even see, past. As he wrote of Bombadil: "he represents something that I feel important, though I would not be prepared to analyse the feeling precisely." As his Goldberry says: "He is."

Look at the feel for landscape Tolkien has, in fine distinctions. He sees the wood for the trees, and surely saw the cycles, the flow of atoms. It may be that if we spend too much time worldbuilding, a demiurge of sorts, we see a little further than the paradigm, even if we have to use the language of that paradigm to communicate this and to understand it.

If Spinoza was a bee, what is Tolkien? And what are we? Who's your Bombadil? We get to choose, and happily Jackson has given us space to do that so far, although if he has Stephen Colbert playing him (we don't know yet), it may go from one extreme to another.

So which Bombadil are you making, know it or not, as Tolkien's long defeat rumbles on?

_

dʒ is for Dune, Jokaero...

How might Dune have inspired GW? Warp Signal has that post up now, along with a working definition of science fantasy. To explore one of the key themes of the novels - free will - try the latest instalment of the Spinoza series I mentioned here.

On the subject of early GW, the Jokaero are back! Tabletop Fix has an image of what is likely to be a choice from the Grey Knight codex. Do I want to know more about this! All Things Fett recently spotted a possible alternative model, good for variety.

Update: The Veil's Edge has just posted a look at the Jokaero in the 40K universe.

Update: Tales from the Maelstrom has a classic Jokaero mini painted up too, good
             for more variety if you can find one; BoLS is saying here it's a 1985 release.
.

Dreams of bees

I've mentioned the ideas of Spinoza here a couple of times, notably in the post on 2001: A Space Odyssey. I like the wide-open subtlety and inclusion of his thinking, even if I don't agree with every conclusion. He has a lot to say about our interests too.

If anyone wants to know more, but hasn't found a good starting point, I've just come late to an ongoing series of bite-sized posts: part one here; part two here. I recommend reading carefully through both, to see how expansive that thinking can be.

Here's that poem again too; you'll need to scroll down.
.

Sensor range

Anyone who's never visited Riskail should take a good look, for descriptions of a Truly Weird World. Sci-fi fans could try these recent posts on a transhuman type and various planets, while fantasy fans might find more in a new take on wizards or a dozen cults. The blog always inspires me. I am going somewhere with this, somewhere in the clouds.

In the last day or so I've visited Ghost Hunting Theories for the first time, and read this post at The Digital Cuttlefish. Things started happening in my mind.

How can we reconcile ghosts with hard sci-fi, or even high fantasy? How does the soul fit into deep physics? What remains of us in the world when measurable life signs end?

I will now speculate on these ideas, but in the far-out spirit of Riskail, as if getting ready to write something of that calibre. Sit tight.

They live among us (3) - The enabling force

Carrying on the occasional series. Part one here. Part two here. Or use the series label.

I was planning to keep the series relatively short and jump straight to the late 1970s and Alien, but then I realised what I'd be missing. Not least what I'd consider one of the mainstream alien lifeforms least considered in the mainstream. Which fiction?

Listen.

It's 2001: A Space Odyssey of course. I'll say now it will be the film only. For discussing influence, it seems best. Despite close collaboration between author and director, more minds ultimately shaped movie than book, and this series is about the mood of the time, mass experience. I will include spoilers, if the idea can be said to apply to this film.