Hobbit Literary analysis podcast

A few people here may have access to iTunes U, among which is offered a series of lectures by a certain professor Corey Olsen about the Hobbit.

I normally find literary scholarship to be a rather silly enterprise, but in the context of the Hobbit it's rather comforting to hear somebody talking about something you know.  I'm about 1/4 of the way through, but there's been some insights:

The dwarf band is definitely meant to be a comical troop.  In support of this the following points:
• They are travelling with harps and clarinets(!) and fiddles and viols, the last being described as being almost as large as the dwarves playing them.  Yet they are setting out on an adventure, they don't seem to acquire ponies until the morning they leave, and it just doesn't make sense to be carrying such things.
• They have no weapons until they acquire them at the Troll cave, and are reduced to fighting trolls largely with sticks and stones.  And yet they are going to attack a dragon.  Again, comically nonsensical.

The journey seems to be predestined and blessed with extraordinary luck:
• What would a sword worn by Turgon in Gondolin be doing in the home of petty troll thieves?  Olsen compares this to breaking into the garage of neighborhood robbers and finding they picked up a staff carried by Rameses the Great.
• Moon letters can only be read one evening every few years, and yet they just happened to pass the map to Elrond on exactly the right day.
Tolkien doesn't hide such fortuitous events, in fact he's at pains to point them out.  This can only mean the journey is under the guidance of some higher power even beyond the scope of Elrond and Gandalf, two of the most powerful beings in Middle Earth!

The famous contract given to Bilbo to sign was likely intended as a joke by the dwarves.
• When Bilbo says the night before he'd like to say everything laid out clear and proper, Thorin wonders why the song wasn't good enough for him. Is this really the mindset of someone who writes contracts?
• The contract is obvious ridiculously overdone, not something a band of dwarves would be writing unless they were drunkenly having a bit of fun at Bilbo's expense after his request to have things laid out clear and proper.

Anyway, I thought these were entertaining insights.  I'll share more as it goes along.

I've actually wondered about the same things myself, all except the last two, which are quite funny now that you mention them :lol:I was never really bothered about them, though, The Hobbit being a children's book after all, but the no weapons thing always seemed a bit ambitious to me

Thanks for sharing, by the way, this could be fun

Wow, this is really interesting questions to ask, i like

More from the podcasts:

In the movies the two sides of Gollum are portrayed as good/evil. But in the books the two sides are optimist/pessimist. The optimist side seems more good because it believes it can trust people. Note that Sam refers to the two sides as "slinker and stinker", neither of which has good connotations.

The Daisy and Sun riddle from the Hobbit would be much easier for a person from the middle ages. "Daisy" comes from the medieval "day's eye", and the sun was often referred to as "heaven's eye". This is why Bilbo can make up the riddle on the spot.

this is so interesting

thats interesting. I didnt know about the Daisy.

I would say the two halves of Gollum were like, beaten dog/starving wolf. Slinker has his tail between his legs and he begs for titbits while fawning and afraid of punishment. whereas Stinker is totally savage and little else other than cunning survival is on his mind.

That's perfect, Figgy!

This is really interesting. I might download some of these and bring them to the gym to listen to.

Yeah, podcasts usually give you just the right pump

Well I usually bring along a book to read on the exercise bike anyway, so it's not like I'm there to become a super-ripped Fjordian army man.

what, u do gym?! and u listen to podcasts and read at the same time?!

well, that's not what  do when i work on my six-pack

Only if I'm on an exercise bike. It's not like I'm reading while I'm lifting (on the rare occasions I do that ).

In case you weren't aware Corey Olsen is also the author of a book on this very matter;

http://www.amazon.com/Exploring-J-R-R-Tolkiens-The-Hobbit/dp/0544106636

As I understand it he treats the hobbit almost entirely on its own merits as a stand alone children story (bit different to a certain bearded filmaker...) I have heard lots of good stuff about it so I might order a copy soon.

Eldorion wrote: Well I usually bring along a book to read on the exercise bike anyway, so it's not like I'm there to become a super-ripped Fjordian army man.

Now, the image of me as some sort of super navy seals guy I blame Norc and Amarië for

[[[[{{{{I just try to live up to the image on here and pray they never spot me on the street somehow! }}}}]]]]]

*innocent whistling*

Spoiler:

Is this the same stuff that used to be free to listen to on his Tolkien Professor site? It was very good.

I'm pretty sure it is. I used to listen to it for free off itunes.

You can still download them from free from his site-

http://www.tolkienprofessor.com/wp/lectures/the-hobbit/

His LotR's ones are interesting too.

Pettytyrant101 wrote:Is this the same stuff that used to be free to listen to on his Tolkien Professor site? It was very good.

Don't know if it's the same, but his podcasts on iTunes are still free.

Yep the Tolkien professor on iTunes.

got through the last of the Hobbit chapters. He makes the very interesting point that while most people consider the arrival of the Eagles at the battle of the five armies to be the eucatastrophe of the Hobbit, a better case can be made for the arrival of the Goblin armies. Before they showed up you had deadlock, greed on all sides, no chance of the Kingdom under the Mountain being founded in the old spirit of happy collaboration it had under Thror and Thrain. The goblin attack brought everyone together, and Dain became the type of King under the mountain that Thorin should have been, but never had what it took until the real enemy attacked.

In another lecture he also said Tom Bombadil is clearly a Maia and Balrogs don't have wings.

Well he's right about the Balrogs. Bombadil was never a subject of particular interest to me; I've always liked the Maia theory but I think there's room for other interpretations since Tolkien made Bombadil a deliberate enigma.  But I haven't put nearly as much thought or research into that question.

I like his theory about the eucatastrophe in The Hobbit.  That sort of literary analysis (as opposed to more in-universe thoughts) is really interesting to me because it was never my focus when I was a really into Tolkien debates when I was younger.  I don't think it has the same divine intervention element as the examples of eucatastrophe that Tolkien himself gave (since the goblins are acting on their own and are motivated by greed and a desire for revenge).  Insofar as eucatastrophe is a literary device more than a philosophical concept, this interpretation is rather fitting, but I think the religious elements are crucial to understanding Tolkien's intentions and why he ended LOTR in a way that some people see as a cop-out.

Well he's right about the Balrogs -Eldo

Was that a deliberate attempt at starting a debate?

What's there to debate?

Well... the wings. They are in PJs film so must be right.

Lancebloke wrote:Well... the wings. They are in PJs film so must be right.