You have here the beginnings of a superb paper. You have obviously thought a great deal about your topic and you develop your ideas well.
You need to spend a LOT of time with the documentaries included in the Special Expanded Edition of the films — in some ways Jackson pays more attention to the weapons than Tolkien does.
You are having some problems with grammar and punctuation — I would strongly suggest showing the finished version of your paper to one of the tutors at the Writing Help Desk in Butler Library 214. Lydia Fish November 24, 2008, at 06:01 PM
I am impressed and surprised to see your development of this paper for I had believed it to be a hard topic to pursue. You have great ideas and I am interested to see what material you get from those DVD’s. Steven Wilser? November 13, 2008, at 04:31 PM
I think that your topic is very interesting as I found it interesting Tolkien wants to give a name to everything. You have some minor spelling errors but everything else seems to be very good. I hope you watched all of the bonus features on the movies to write about your topic. I would suggest printing out your paper and having people read it and mark it up to correct all your grammar errors. Donald Turner
I’m pretty impressed with the topic as I always felt the weapons had great histories that were never fully developed. You have a lot of nice work with discussing the naming and the “personalities” of the weaponry. While I see that Jackson’s importance in the visual representation of the weapons, I do agree that more focus on Tolkien and the literary representation of weaponry is important. I would say just try to mix in more information with wha tyou already have about Jackson. Eligh Hanning
So far so good. The DVD’s of the Lord of the rings will certainly be helpful to you. If you need them I am done with them so far for my paper, I could bring them in for you. There is good sections on it, mostly in the Weta Workshop documentaries. The Building and Designing of the Lord of the Rings ones are not going to be much help for you project. Just letting you know so you don’t have to sit through as much. Hope that helped! Brittany Thrun ? November 13, 2008, at 03:01 PM
This is a really interesting topic. When reading and eatching LOTR, I could see that there was a lot of importance behind these weapons. I think it will be really interestingto find out the importance and history behind these weapons. Looks like this will be a great paper.Sarah Chudyk? November 13, 2008, at 08:31 AM
I am impressed on how you have developed your paper. You have a lot of really interesting information incorporated throughout your paper that is well developed. The idea of Tolkien giving some weapons a sense of consciousness, like Gandalf’s sword Glandring was very interesting. You are off to a great start and by the sounds of it your paper is only going to get better when you receive the additional dvd’s. Good Luck, you definitely took on a challenge and are doing a great job! Carly Lopez? November 12, 2008, at 10:48 PM
You make some very interesting points. I was hoping someone would do this topic, just because of the depth and importance Tolkien puts on weapons caught my attention - and you’ve captured that dynamic wonderfully. Try to find more examples for your individual ideas, like how other weapons show how their respective characters growth through the books. Also, I’m sorry, but I’m not a big fan of the title. Brian Nacov November 12, 2008, at 09:52 PM
You have good transitions and the paper is in great shape right now. You did a great job at deciphering the symbolism of the weapons which is inter-connected to the characters who bear the weapons. Make sure to cheack some of your sentences since they tend to be too long. Trudy Antwi November 12, 2008, at 09:47 PM
I’m going to jump on the bandwagon and say that your title is very clever. Having a catchy title just makes the entire paper more interesting to read. My suggestions would be to watch out for vague statements like, “Tolkien believed that words mean things.” What kind of things? That and you have to keep an eye out for comma use. You have a few sentences that tend to run on. Overall, though, you have great observations and intriguing information. Devon Cozad? November 12, 2008, at 07:02 PM
I love your description of Peter Jackson and how you state that he was very passionate about the Lord of the Rings. I feel that your paper is going to be great once you are able to watch the DVD extras. I can’t wait to read the final draft because your topic is very interesting. Great Job!Elizabeth Delano? November 12, 2008, at 05:06 PM
I find it interesting that each weapon is almost like its own character. I like how you used the weapons as symbols to show the way that the characters are changing throughout the story. The addition of adjectives in your paper is very nice. Great paper so far. Keilah Bradley November 12, 2008, at 02:48 PM
When you first mentioned in class that you were writing your paper on the weaponry, I thought that maybe you would attempt to describe them as they had been created within the films. However, you have really started a decent frame to your paper. Describing, stating the history, and discussing the consciousness of the weapons are strong subjects. When you are writing your final paper, make sure you don’t write run-ons or fragments of sentences. Also, try not to add questions since this is a formal paper. You should focus on facts, not hypotheticals. (Reword them as statements!) Lauren Brych? November 11, 2008, at 05:04 PM
I am very impressed how you found so much interesting material on such a specific topic. I especially liked the parts that talked about weapons being included as a morphing part of the characters that changes over time as they do. Also interesting, was how weapons are renamed when changes happen to them, I entirely agree with the item of combat almost being like characters themselves. No real problems with structure. Nice paper! Sarah McNutt
I think your title is very clever and that your analysis of the different functions of weapon-naming really effective. I think that your first two paragraphs focus too much on Jackson, and should include more about Tolkien. It makes it confusing because the reader is expecting a paper completely on Jackson and the movies. I also think that you should move your paragraphs about Legolas and Gimli to follow the one about Bilbo, as these three characters’ weapons you describe as “representing growth.” It is somewhat confusing to separate these similar characters by Aragorn’s sword, which is more of a “supplement.” Good job! Kelsey Till November 09, 2008, at 01:25 PM
Great paper about the weapons in The Lord of the Rings! I suggest that you italicize the title “The Lord of the Rings” and include “The” in the title; this is done inconsistently within your paper. Also, I don’t think sentences should start with “but.” The other things you need to do is to make it more clear in your introduction that you will be specifically talking about weapons, capitalize “middle” in the second paragraph for “Middle Earth,” and you citations should, for example, look like this: (Smith 29). There is no comma needed between the author and the page number. Emily Marvin? November 09, 2008, at 12:24 PM
I think your title provides a great start to the paper. It gives the reader an idea of what you will be writing about. You could use more quotations from The Lord of the Rings to flesh out your ideas. Try to rephrase the questions in your paper as statements. Other than that, you have a nice start. Annika Laughlin? November 11, 2008, at 07:51 PM
Medieval Weaponry and Lord of the Rings: Swords as Sharp as the Story
J.R.R. Tolkien created a following rivaled by few entities when he wrote and published the Lord of the Rings trilogy. With millions upon millions of books sold, a person is hard pressed today to find any part of a developed country that hasn’t at least heard of The Lord of the Rings. And the people responsible for bringing the story to the silver screen are some of the most avid enthusiasts around. Peter Jackson, the producer and director of the Lord of the Rings, spent years tirelessly working to try and do justice to Tolkien’s story when transferring it from paper to film. But besides the obvious “story versus script” aspects of taking a book to film, his passion and dedication for Lord of the Rings spread into the sets, props, and costumes used for the movies. His goal, similar to Tolkien’s, was to make The Lord of the Rings as realistic and tangible as possible.
Additionally, there is tremendous history behind the swords and other weapons found in the Lord of the Rings, both in the real world and in the Tolkien-contrived world of Middle Earth. Jackson and his team utilized this real-world history of weapons as well as Tolkien’s created history of the specific weapons found in the story to help impress on the audience a genuine (as opposed to fake) feel to the films. They spent lots of money and time in developing the swords and armor of middle Earth, so much so that even the harshest critics are still flabbergasted at the effort invested in the weaponry of The Lord of the Rings.
Tolkien gave many of the featured weapons (mostly swords) of Middle Earth a history and lineage of their own. Some argue that Tolkien wrote about the weapons in such a way that they almost become their own characters in the story (Byko, 2). It’s hard to disagree with such a stance. First of all, nearly every weapon worth mentioning in the story has a name. Tolkien believed that words mean things, so logically, names must mean even more. In my view, they give an identity to characters, and begin down the road of giving whatever is named a sense of humanity or awareness. Naming also helps to forge connections and relationships between a person and a thing or animal. Why does one name their pets, for example? Is not calling it “the dog” sufficient? No, not really; many pet-owners feel as though their animals are more than a simple animal. Talk to anybody who owns a pet, and they will likely tell you that their dog or cat or horse is “part of the family”. You can’t get that emotional connection without a name, it’s nearly impossible. So by naming the weapons, Tolkien is making that extra push to draw readers in.
As mentioned earlier, the weaponry of the Lord of the rings largely has a history or story to tell – if it they could talk. Providing a history for these weapons is a way of adding a sense of depth to the story. For Instance, Anduril, Aragorn’s main weapon for three-quarters of the story, and possibly the single most important weapon in the story, has a lineage that can be traced all the way back the First age of Middle-Earth. It was at this time that it was forged for Elendil, the King of Gondor, by the dwarven blacksmith Telchar (Smith, 29). However, its name was Narsil, originally. And not only did it have a name, but this formidable weapon even had a title: “Light of the Sun”, and “Light of the Moon”. This is significant, because the original two great cities of men also had names that payed homage to the sun and the moon. During the great battle in front of Mordor, Narsil was the sword that cut the ring of power from Sauron’s hand and banished him into dormant exile for hundreds of years. Unfortunately, the sword was shattered during this great feat. Later, in The Fellowship of the Ring, Aragorn has the sword reforged by elven blacksmiths and renames it Anduril, flame of the west.
This history is told to the readers and viewers of either the books or the films. But when you think about it, how else can the historical circumstances be set for the story besides a boring dialogue? Tolkien uses Narsil/Anduril as a tool to give his readers background information and history of the war of the ring. And due to the almost natural interest in the sword, people are bound to be pulled right into the story. However, this point can be made further by offering an alternative history (or lack thereof) of Anduril. Such a history would go something like this in that part of The Fellowship of the Ring: “Aragorn pulled a broken sword out of his scabbard, and asked the elves to fix it.” There’s no importance in that, no reason to care, and a misuse of a perfectly good opportunity to help tell readers/watchers why the characters are fighting this evil force.
Then there is the factor that Tolkien writes about the weapons as though they have an actual sense of consciousness. Glamdring, Gandalf’s sword, is unique in that it was made by elves in the elder days, and was once owned by the Elven King of G0ondolin, however that region was destroyed and the sword assumed lost forever. Somehow, miraculously, Glamdring was found by Gandalf in a Cave during his journeys in The Hobbit (Smith, 68). In the story, Tolkien gives it a personality, by writing that the sword
“…flashed in the dark by itself. It burned with a rage that made it gleam if goblins were about; now it was bright as blue flame for delight in the killing of the great lord of the cave.”
It’s hard not to visualize a sword glowing with an inner battle-lust. A reader can connect with that innate object through writing like this. And by connecting, he/she is drawn closer to the story, and maintains interest.
Every weapon with a name in The Lord of the Rings has a history behind it. But Tolkien took a unique route with Sting, Bilbo’s –and later, Frodo’s- sword. He uses the sword to symbolize, and in some ways – amplify, changes in Bilbo Baggins (Whetter, 21). All of the other weapons hold historical value in Middle Earth, and Tolkien uses them to add detail and a sense of realism to The Lord of the Rings. However, when Bilbo first found that sword it was unnamed and therefore completely anonymous to a reader, and Tolkien regarded it as such for a time in his writing. Later in the story, though, Bilbo decided to name the sword himself after an encounter with some spiders. This is important, because up until now the dwarves that Bilbo traveled with discounted him as baggage and a hindrance to their quest. But Bilbo performed heroically compared to previous encounters with enemies (when he usually hid, or ran away). This is a turning point in the demeanor and attitude of Bilbo, because it’s this change that helps him get through future trials in the story. So, due to the way it stung those spiders, Bilbo decided to name it such. And as K.S. Whetter points out, naming a sword is much more likely for a Hero to do than a pampered, wealthy gentleman, as Bilbo had been portrayed as for some time by the dwarves; helping symbolize a dramatic shift in Bilbo’s value to the story as a whole (Whetter, 21).
Many of the weapons supplement the characters in the story, too. In some senses they “complete” them. On Weathertop, Frodo and Aragorn find a poem left behind by Gandalf. The last part of it reads “remade shall be blade that was broken, the Crownless again shall be King.” This is prophetic and mystical, which provides some depth to the story, again, by alluding to a supposedly-known history behind the sword; but it’s also excellent foreshadowing. We, as readers/viewers know at this point that Aragorn has in his possession a broken sword, and the poem seems to connect the sword and the king…so gears begin to turn, and things begin to make sense; Aragorn is more than he’s first seemed to be. But also, in Rivendell, we remember this poem as the sword is reforged, and we realize that Aragorn is the rightful King of Men! Without this sword, again, this storyline would be reduced to a silly monologue by somebody, effectively killing any interest or mystery behind Aragorn and his birthright.
Where some weapons complete characters, others represent growth. Legolas, the elf-prince that travels with the company is proficient in bow and arrows. In a more direct sense, this is appropriate, because Legolas, as an elf, has extraordinary sight. He can see for miles, and a ranged weapon, such as a bow compliments that natural skill wonderfully. Illustrated throughout the story, his skill with a bow was virtually unmatched. Later in LothlÓrian, Legolas is gifted a great bow of high strength and quality that far surpasses his original. This represents a growth and development of his character, through the kindred of the fellowship, and his experiences abroad, he has grown as a person, and symbolically so has his weapon.
Gimli, the dwarf has a very similar situation as the elf, which by itself, that comparison is important due to the cultural separation between the elves and dwarves becomes non-existent between these two characters by the end of the story. By watching the movies, it is evident that Gimli fought originally with a one-bladed axe. But as he traveled through the mines of Moria with the fellowship, he picks up a two-headed battle-axe in the tomb of his cousin Balin (Whetter, 54). The change in Gimli is, in my opinion, his attitude towards the quest. After finding out his cousin and his cousin’s followers have been killed, he develops a heightened sense of humility. And now doubt a lust for vengeance. I think the new, bigger, more powerful axe represents all of that………………
Unfortunately, I cannot add more, because I’m waiting on DVD’s from Netflix….But when I get them, I’m going to go into how Jackson’s team dealt with the weapons as far as creation, and integration in the movies. And I’m going to add real-world facts and references throughout the paper. What you’re reading right now is essentially a little more than the first half of the paper. I’m writing according to the thesis I state in the first to paragraphs, so whatever I haven’t addressed is what I will be adding.
Thanks for reading! Joseph Bella? November 06, 2008, at 01:42 AM
