Least favorite parts of the Lore

  • Minecraft Middle Earth is a Minecraft community that recreates the world described by JRR Tolkien and his writings. Everyone can participate in organized events in which we collaborate to create major landmarks, terrain, caves, castles, towns, farms and more.

    To get started, visit The New Player Guide

superminer4563

Aspiring Commoner
Jun 11, 2014
120
78
17
16
#1
I know lots of people on here love Tolkien's lore. Is it amazing? YES! Is it perfect? Almost. Like many story's, Tolkien's has it's ups and downs. Here is where you can post your "downs" about Tolkien's tales. Here is mine:

Why is Túrin called an Elf-Friend?
Seriously, he killed Beleg, ridiculed Gwindor's council, led to the destruction of Nargothrond, etc. I mean he killed Glaurung but that's it. Why is he called an Elf-Friend if he did soooo much bad?
 

JordD04

One Of Us
Mar 1, 2014
1,021
3,600
74
21
United Kingdom of Great Britain and N. Ireland
Languages
English
#3
Why is Túrin called an Elf-Friend?
Seriously, he killed Beleg, ridiculed Gwindor's council, led to the destruction of Nargothrond, etc. I mean he killed Glaurung but that's it. Why is he called an Elf-Friend if he did soooo much bad?
He's called an Elf Friend because for a long time he lived peacefully in Menegroth under Thingol.
 

Top_Gun

Aspiring Commoner
Mar 5, 2014
159
194
17
#4
To be fair, it was an Elf's insult that landed Turin in hot water in the first place. It was just one huge downward spiral of Greek tragedy from there.

As for the question, while I don't actively dislike him or anything, and I'll probably make somebody mad by saying this, but I'm not the biggest Bombadil fan. He feels like he was transplanted from some other story (which is actually true, come to think of it), and I don't think his scenes fit very well tonally into Middle-earth as a whole. I can't at all blame Jackson from choosing to leave him out of the films.
 

superminer4563

Aspiring Commoner
Jun 11, 2014
120
78
17
16
#5
To be fair, it was an Elf's insult that landed Turin in hot water in the first place. It was just one huge downward spiral of Greek tragedy from there.

As for the question, while I don't actively dislike him or anything, and I'll probably make somebody mad by saying this, but I'm not the biggest Bombadil fan. He feels like he was transplanted from some other story (which is actually true, come to think of it), and I don't think his scenes fit very well tonally into Middle-earth as a whole. I can't at all blame Jackson from choosing to leave him out of the films.
Yeah my only guesses as to why Tom bombadil is there are
A. Tolkien like to write about him
B. He's symbolic
 

Portalrules333

Dirt Conaisseur
Apr 9, 2014
767
565
30
17
Canada
#8
To be fair, it was an Elf's insult that landed Turin in hot water in the first place. It was just one huge downward spiral of Greek tragedy from there.

As for the question, while I don't actively dislike him or anything, and I'll probably make somebody mad by saying this, but I'm not the biggest Bombadil fan. He feels like he was transplanted from some other story (which is actually true, come to think of it), and I don't think his scenes fit very well tonally into Middle-earth as a whole. I can't at all blame Jackson from choosing to leave him out of the films.
Yeah, after reading so much about how the ring corrupts everyone, it just feels wrong to have a guy who can resist it perfectly.
 

nevik45

Yellow Flower Puncher
Mar 2, 2014
228
239
21
18
#10
and I'll probably make somebody mad by saying this
Got that right. Bombadil (correct me if I'm wrong) is meant to represent Tolkien, just as Treebeard is meant to represent C.S. Lewis. Even if he doesn't fit, he's a cool guy, and he adds to the mystery of the story. Jackson left him out because the movies were already too long. Also, Bombadil is, like, the ultimate good guy. Of course he can resist corruption. and if anyone, ANYONE, says Bombadil is actually an evil guy that means to lead evil spirits to kill all of the hobbits, I honestly don't know what I'd do, except that I'd be mad.
 

Top_Gun

Aspiring Commoner
Mar 5, 2014
159
194
17
#14
I'm not feeling any catharsis, sorry.
In Turin's case, I think his catharsis was death, which to be fair is how many Greek tragedies wound up in the end too.

Got that right. Bombadil (correct me if I'm wrong) is meant to represent Tolkien, just as Treebeard is meant to represent C.S. Lewis. Even if he doesn't fit, he's a cool guy, and he adds to the mystery of the story. Jackson left him out because the movies were already too long. Also, Bombadil is, like, the ultimate good guy. Of course he can resist corruption. and if anyone, ANYONE, says Bombadil is actually an evil guy that means to lead evil spirits to kill all of the hobbits, I honestly don't know what I'd do, except that I'd be mad.
I'd never seen Bombadil portrayed as representing Tolkien himself (he always seemed more of a Hobbit sort to me); I know the character came from stories Tolkien made up for one of his children based on a toy doll. I didn't mean to imply that he isn't an interesting character, but just his whole demeanor and characterization make it fairly clear that he wasn't originally from the overall legendarium.
 

Lady_of_Rohan

Manual Treebuilder
Jul 5, 2014
364
2,346
50
18
Brasília, Brazil
lady-of-rohan-ig.deviantart.com
Languages
Portuguese (native), English, Spanish, and German
#15
I just don't like Tolkien's character development... It could be much better.

I love most of the rest of the lore <3 at least what I've read. What doesn't include some books from the History of Middle-Earth. Yet.

I'd never seen Bombadil portrayed as representing Tolkien himself (he always seemed more of a Hobbit sort to me); I know the character came from stories Tolkien made up for one of his children based on a toy doll. I didn't mean to imply that he isn't an interesting character, but just his whole demeanor and characterization make it fairly clear that he wasn't originally from the overall legendarium.
Ikr. He doesn't seem to fit any of the races of the lore and it kinda bothers me. But I like him.
 

superminer4563

Aspiring Commoner
Jun 11, 2014
120
78
17
16
#16
I just don't like Tolkien's character development... It could be much better.
(On Tom Bomadil)
He doesn't seem to fit any of the races of the lore and it kinda bothers me. But I like him.
Well on the character development, wow. If you read ALL the lore there is some amazing and interesting things, like the character of Galadriel (probably the most developed character.) The Lord of the rings also happens over only about a year, and there isn't too much room for development, as he was writing it as a history of the end of the third age instead of a story about the end of the third age.
I like Tom too! He is a interesting character, and he is fun to write (source: various stories I wrote about him for fun.) I think he symbolizes childhood and innocence more than anything else. The pure spirit of him and how he isn't affected by evil, and also how the hobbits encounter him right before they start to develop are reasons I have that conclusion
 

Ardelenia

Slab Fanatic
Mar 1, 2014
576
1,062
43
19
Chicago, USA
#17
Having reread some parts with Tom in them just today, I must say that I love how even when he speaks he is in meter, as if he simply lacks the pitch variation to always be in song.
 

Lady_of_Rohan

Manual Treebuilder
Jul 5, 2014
364
2,346
50
18
Brasília, Brazil
lady-of-rohan-ig.deviantart.com
Languages
Portuguese (native), English, Spanish, and German
#19
Well on the character development, wow. If you read ALL the lore there is some amazing and interesting things, like the character of Galadriel (probably the most developed character.) The Lord of the rings also happens over only about a year, and there isn't too much room for development, as he was writing it as a history of the end of the third age instead of a story about the end of the third age.
I like Tom too! He is a interesting character, and he is fun to write (source: various stories I wrote about him for fun.) I think he symbolizes childhood and innocence more than anything else. The pure spirit of him and how he isn't affected by evil, and also how the hobbits encounter him right before they start to develop are reasons I have that conclusion
It's because you know the characters could have more personality, more depth, and be more real. Like George Martin's characters, they feel so real. I imagine how it would be if Tolkien and Martin wrote a book together, it would be like the best book EVER, with Tolkien's world building and Martin's character development.

Sam and Gollum are the best developed characters in LOTR, IMO.
And in the rest of the lore... Túrin Turambar maybe. And Lúthien Tinúviel?

But it's been over a year and a half since I read those stories. So I'm not entirely sure.
 

superminer4563

Aspiring Commoner
Jun 11, 2014
120
78
17
16
#20
The Lord of the Rings describes events between the 22nd of September T.A. 3001 to the 29th of September, T.A. 3021 . It takes place over a period of twenty years, not one.
The bulk of the story takes place over a year, my bad.