Questio about LOTR, Aragorn and Arwen

[Bluegill]

A friend asked me some questions today, and I didn't have good answers. He hasn't read the books, but I have, but I'm not nearly enough of a Tolkienphile to more than speculate.

Elrond's depiction of Arwen's life with (and life after) Aragorn is pretty bleak. But he didn't seem to factor in the possibility of lots of little Aragorns and Arwens poppin' out, taking care of mom, that sort of thing.

They'd be incredibly long-lived too, right? Or immortal? Is Jackson's (and, ultimately, Tolkien's) bleakness dependent upon the likely scenario that these kiddos would eventually wander off on their own paths, maybe living a bleak existence of their own somewhere? Is there a time limit for taking ships back to Valinor? How long does Arwen have to depart? Does this "waning" of Arwen have a direct relationship to the waning of the elven magic and influence in Middle Earth?

Mark

 

[Marc]

The scene from the movie is taken from the apendicies of Return of the King. Aragorn is long lived, I believe well past 300, and they have several kids.

However by that time the elves have all left and there are no more boats leaving for Valinor. Also in the first film Jackson kind of refers to this when Frodo is dying and she says something like "what providence has given to me let it pass to him". So she kina gave him her ride to the west. Anyway, she leaves for the empty forest of Lothlorien where she eventually passes away.

In Silmarlion the story shows when the first half-elves were born the higher powers were rather confused. They hadn't expected that, so they left it to them to decide if they would live like elves or humans. Elrond chose to live as an elf. I would expect with the passing of the elves that Aragorns children would be as humans, though very long lived.

 

[RSLancastr]

Elrond chose to live as an elf. I would expect with the passing of the elves that Aragorns children would be as humans, though very long lived.

You would "expect?"

YOU WOULD "EXPECT?"

God's teeth, man - this is a skeptic's board: Where is your proof?!?!

 

[Doubt]

http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/

That is the Encyclopedia of Arda.

Good place to get answers about LOR universe.

 

[Marc]

You would "expect?"

YOU WOULD "EXPECT?"

God's teeth, man - this is a skeptic's board: Where is your proof?!?!

!) Their children would likely be more than 50% human DNA as Arwen is the child of a half-elf

2) The children would be raised in a human city, with only one elf ever seen by them. The might have very little idea what true elf lifestyle would be like.

3) The magic has faded, and with it what makes an elf an elf. As Galadriel said "I shall deminish". Even if the kids choose to live as elves they would not be the same as what we know elves to be like, sort of a faded copy at best.

4) Choosing to be as elves is unlikely as they would be the only ones. That would isolate them socially.

5) They would be heirs to the throne, and as heirs they would be expected to produce heirs of their own, and with only human women to choose from they would more likely live as humans.

It's all rather logical.

 

[Azathoth]

... the possibility of lots of little Aragorns and Arwens poppin' out, taking care of mom, that sort of thing.

They'd be incredibly long-lived too, right? Or immortal?

Elrond's brother was Elros (who chose to be human). Elros founded the human kingdom of Numenor, and he and the Kings of Numenor were indeed longer-lived than ordinary men. As time went on, their longevity was not quite so pronounced. Aragorn, of course, is at the end of the line of the Kings of Numenor (who moved to Gondor when Numenor sank beneath the waves) and Aragorn is so studly and cool that his longer life is a bit of a throwback back to the good old days of Numenor.

Here's a hyperdetailed lineage of Elros. Looks like the first few generations lasted about 400 years. A bit before the time of Elendil, 200 seems to be the average. By the time of LotR, I think Elrond comments that the lives of the Dunedain have dwindled to match those of other men.

 

[Mark]

Only a perv would have sex with an elf in the first place!!! I tells ya, it is an abomination before Eru!!!!!!

Except for Galadriel who is really hot.

 

[asthmatic camel]

A friend asked me some questions today, and I didn't have good answers. He hasn't read the books, but I have, but I'm not nearly enough of a Tolkienphile to more than speculate.

Elrond's depiction of Arwen's life with (and life after) Aragorn is pretty bleak. But he didn't seem to factor in the possibility of lots of little Aragorns and Arwens poppin' out, taking care of mom, that sort of thing.

They'd be incredibly long-lived too, right? Or immortal? Is Jackson's (and, ultimately, Tolkien's) bleakness dependent upon the likely scenario that these kiddos would eventually wander off on their own paths, maybe living a bleak existence of their own somewhere? Is there a time limit for taking ships back to Valinor? How long does Arwen have to depart? Does this "waning" of Arwen have a direct relationship to the waning of the elven magic and influence in Middle Earth?

Mark

Peter Jackson's interpretation of the books is questionable at many points. In the book, Arwen does not rescue Frodo at the ford of Rivendell, Glorfindel does. Nor does she say at any point "what providence has given to me let it pass to him". The closest reference is in chapter 6 of The Return of the King where she says to Frodo "A gift I will give you. For I am the daughter of Elrond. I shall not go with him now when he departs to the Havens; for mine is the choice of Luthien, and as she so have I chosen, both the bitter and the sweet. But in my stead you shall go, Ring-bearer, when the time comes, and if you desire it" .

Elrond's bitter speech regarding the weakness of men and Arwen's future appears nowhere in the books, indeed, in Appendix A it is stated that "When Elrond learned the choice of his daughter, he was silent".

Also in appendix A, Aragorn says that "Eldarion our son is a man full-ripe for kingship" so there was at least one nipper produced. He also states that he has been given a life span "thrice that of Men of Middle-Earth", 210 sounds likely as Arwen dwelt with him for "six score years in great glory and bliss".

How long Eldarion would have survived, I have no idea and will not lose any sleep worrying about it.

Regards,

AC

 

[Mark]

Re: Re: Questio about LOTR, Aragorn and Arwen

Peter Jackson's interpretation of the books is questionable at many points. In the book, Arwen does not rescue Frodo at the ford of Rivendell, Glorfindel does. Nor does she say at any point "what providence has given to me let it pass to him". The closest reference is in chapter 6 of The Return of the King where she says to Frodo "A gift I will give you. For I am the daughter of Elrond. I shall not go with him now when he departs to the Havens; for mine is the choice of Luthien, and as she so have I chosen, both the bitter and the sweet. But in my stead you shall go, Ring-bearer, when the time comes, and if you desire it" .

Elrond's bitter speech regarding the weakness of men and Arwen's future appears nowhere in the books, indeed, in Appendix A it is stated that "When Elrond learned the choice of his daughter, he was silent".

Also in appendix A, Aragorn says that "Eldarion our son is a man full-ripe for kingship" so there was at least one nipper produced. He also states that he has been given a life span "thrice that of Men of Middle-Earth", 210 sounds likely as Arwen dwelt with him for "six score years in great glory and bliss".

How long Eldarion would have survived, I have no idea and will not lose any sleep worrying about it.

Regards,

AC

You know, I didn't have a problem with replacing Glorfindel with Arwen. It seemed to work, and provided what was probably a badly needed "sexual" updating for a work written 60+ years ago. However, the mangling of Faramir troubled me a lot, and, in fact, is making it hard to sustain my interest to a certain extent. It was completely pointless, from ANY standpoint.

 

[Bluegill]

Re: Re: Re: Questio about LOTR, Aragorn and Arwen

You know, I didn't have a problem with replacing Glorfindel with Arwen. It seemed to work, and provided what was probably a badly needed "sexual" updating for a work written 60+ years ago. However, the mangling of Faramir troubled me a lot, and, in fact, is making it hard to sustain my interest to a certain extent. It was completely pointless, from ANY standpoint.

I read a pretty well thought-out little essay about Jackson's treatment of Faramir. The essay argued that the Faramir of the movie was, in attitude and behaviour, very much the Faramir portrayed in the book. It was very interesting--but I can't recall where I saw it! I think it might have been on the Rotten Tomatoes forum, but I'm not sure. Also, it was a long time ago. Last January, maybe. I'll see if I can find it.

The person who wrote it took the descriptions, actions, and quotes of Faramir from the book and matched them up to the movie portrayal. The point was that the Faramir in the book was very coercive, very threatening (albeit in subtle ways, much of the time), and very suspicious of the hobbits. Jackson took these attitudes and just packed them into the more constrained movie format.

I can't say that the essay was completely convincing, but it was pretty thoughtful.

And Doubt and Azathoth, thanks for the links.

 

[Marc]

From... somewhere... there were explinations for some of the changes. Like the Ents first not deciding to go to war. This was done because Merry and Pippin were not honestly doing anything but being passengers for much of the movie. Changing it so they figure a way to convince the Ents gave their characters something to do.

The argument for Faramir (I hated the changes too) was that in the book he was little more than exposition man. He didn't do all that much other than pass on information. This way he created a bit more conflict and tension, kinda needed for Frodo/Sam/Gollum since they put off the encounter with Shelob until next time.

 

[Mark]

From... somewhere... there were explinations for some of the changes. Like the Ents first not deciding to go to war. This was done because Merry and Pippin were not honestly doing anything but being passengers for much of the movie. Changing it so they figure a way to convince the Ents gave their characters something to do.

The argument for Faramir (I hated the changes too) was that in the book he was little more than exposition man. He didn't do all that much other than pass on information. This way he created a bit more conflict and tension, kinda needed for Frodo/Sam/Gollum since they put off the encounter with Shelob until next time.

Well, the tension could still have been there. In the book he wastempted to take the ring, but resisted the temptation because of his personal honor and integrity; he stood as a contrast to Boromir and Denethor. In the movie, he simply waffled and lost the opportunity through events not under his control. It was utterly unncessary IMO. I'm not nitpicking...most of the other changes I understood and (mostly) agreed with.

Now it will appear the entire "Denethor" family was a bunch of opportunists.

 

[hgc]

Well, the tension could still have been there. In the book he wastempted to take the ring, but resisted the temptation because of his personal honor and integrity; he stood as a contrast to Boromir and Denethor. In the movie, he simply waffled and lost the opportunity through events not under his control. It was utterly unncessary IMO. I'm not nitpicking...most of the other changes I understood and (mostly) agreed with.

Now it will appear the entire "Denethor" family was a bunch of opportunists.

You are entirely correct. The difference of Faramir from Boromir is crucial to the story of this family. In the book he displays more of a 'nobility,' as it were, like Aragorn, in passing up the opportunity to get the ring.

 

[Bluegill]

Well, the tension could still have been there. In the book he wastempted to take the ring, but resisted the temptation because of his personal honor and integrity; he stood as a contrast to Boromir and Denethor. In the movie, he simply waffled and lost the opportunity through events not under his control. It was utterly unncessary IMO. I'm not nitpicking...most of the other changes I understood and (mostly) agreed with.

Now it will appear the entire "Denethor" family was a bunch of opportunists.

I don't think I agree with you. In what way, in the movie, did Faramir lose the opportunity to take the ring? I thought he let them go because Frodo and Sam finally convinced him that it was the right thing to do.

In the book, he threatened to kill them and held them captive for a while. Except for the fact that he made them come with him to Osgiliath in the movie, it doesn't seem fundamentally different.

 

[Mark]

I don't think I agree with you. In what way, in the movie, did Faramir lose the opportunity to take the ring? I thought he let them go because Frodo and Sam finally convinced him that it was the right thing to do.

In the book, he threatened to kill them and held them captive for a while. Except for the fact that he made them come with him to Osgiliath in the movie, it doesn't seem fundamentally different.

If I recall correctly, they got away while Osgiliath was being attacked (another odd change), and Faramir was too busy to deal with them. I bought the DVD yesterday and will watch it tonight!

 

[Bluegill]

If I recall correctly, they got away while Osgiliath was being attacked (another odd change), and Faramir was too busy to deal with them. I bought the DVD yesterday and will watch it tonight!

Aha! I suppose you can be forgiven for being wrong...about a relatively minor detail in a three-friggin'-hour movie that you probably haven't seen since it came out eight months ago

I'm pretty sure that I recall correctly that Frodo and Sam were permitted to leave after Sam's stirring speech. (Though after Frodo's little freak-out, I think that Faramir would logically have been more inclined than ever to drag them back home with him.)

Faramir does come off as more brusque and demanding in the movie. But in the book, he has much more time to play mind games to get to the bottom of Frodo and Sam's mission. I suspect that in ROTK, Faramir will come off as much more sympathetic.

 

[Mark]

Aha! I suppose you can be forgiven for being wrong...about a relatively minor detail in a three-friggin'-hour movie that you probably haven't seen since it came out eight months ago

I'm pretty sure that I recall correctly that Frodo and Sam were permitted to leave after Sam's stirring speech. (Though after Frodo's little freak-out, I think that Faramir would logically have been more inclined than ever to drag them back home with him.)

Faramir does come off as more brusque and demanding in the movie. But in the book, he has much more time to play mind games to get to the bottom of Frodo and Sam's mission. I suspect that in ROTK, Faramir will come off as much more sympathetic.

You're probably right. I'll watch it tonight!

 

[hgc]

I don't think I agree with you. In what way, in the movie, did Faramir lose the opportunity to take the ring? I thought he let them go because Frodo and Sam finally convinced him that it was the right thing to do.

In the book, he threatened to kill them and held them captive for a while. Except for the fact that he made them come with him to Osgiliath in the movie, it doesn't seem fundamentally different.

It just occurred to me that Jackson may have made this whole change for a plot device to set a scene in Osgiliath.

 

[Mark]

It just occurred to me that Jackson may have made this whole change for a plot device to set a scene in Osgiliath.

That's what I thought originally, but now I don't know what to think!!!!

 

[EdipisReks]

there are few things or people on earth that i hate, but peter jackson is one of them. i find his mangling of the Lord of the Rings to be abominable. i understand the decisions that had to be made in order to translate the books to film, but so many changes were made that were totally unnecessary and which turned what might have been half way decent movies (i think they should never have been made, myself) into excrement. maybe jackson should have written his own damn books if he wanted to make something original.