Thursday, July 24, 2014

The Hobbit: Ch5 Riddles in the Dark

A longer chapter that might just be the best one so far and by might I mean definitely is. Can a literary character give a tour-de-force performance? Because I'm pretty sure one just did.

So this chapter was very exciting. We had Bilbo exploring in the darkness, finding out he's got himself a couple of magical items that should vastly improve his burglaring success in the near future, and then facing off against heavily-armed goblins in his flight to freedom. Yep. That's aaaall that happened this chapter. Nothing else. :D

Let's break down some of this: first off, it's cool that he's got himself a magic sword/knife too, now, since I'm still not 100% on what his role is when it comes to dragons and wizards. This one doesn't have a name, though, does it? Or at least nothing is written on it. Either that or Gandalf overlooked it, which he may well be prone to doing. Still, with this much of the book left, I'm sure we'll run afoul of some undead courtesy of a Necromancer and then an enchanted blade will be a fine thing. Shame sneak attack doesn't work against them, but regular attack can make up for that, right?

Speaking of sneak attacks, Ring of Invisibility!!! What an awesome find. Not all that ceremonious a find, mind you, but awesome nonetheless. I like that it has a weakness to bright sunlight, although I bet Bilbo would disagree with me, what with the goblins spotting him and all. THIS will be helpful in dragon mountains and wizard... I still don't know, the Necromancer has dungeons according to Gandalf, but does that imply a fortress or tower, or is he in part of the mountain? Bah. I will find out in due course. Point is, being able to go invisible will go a long way toward making Bilbo look like he's got more ranks in Hide than people (rightly) give him credit for. What an archetypal image, a halfling rogue with a magic dagger and a ring of invisibility. I'd kind of prefer a cloak, really, I like hoods and capes and whatnot. Haberdashery over jewelry any day, that's my position.

So I guess that's all there is to talk about EXCEPT GOLLUM HOLY CREEPING CRACKLY CHIPMUNKS you guys there's a creepy glowing-eyed frogman lurking in the deeps who eats raw fish and dead goblins and doesn't cause a ripple when he moves through the water oh god that is a ridiculously creepy image. I was feeling the cold and the damp (it was a gray and humid day today) and then WELL HOLY SHIT the crazy murderous creature in the darkness has, uh, "introduced," uh, themselves.

Gollum's all over the map and absolutely none of it is charming in any way. He's eerie at best, haunting when anything else would be whimsical or cartoonish, and absolutely terrifying when he's gone off the deep end. If You Know What could talk, swim and obsess over childrens' games, it would act like Gollum. This is, for all intents and purposes, a two-man (one hobbit and one what the fuck is that, actually, but let's not with the splitting of the hairs) play, a whole chapter almost entirely given over to a character we know well enough and one we get tremendously fleshed out through seeing a lot more of his thoughts than anyone else yet in the story except maybe Bilbo himself. A worthy adversary for Bilbo to have to deal with entirely solo, the little flashes of Gollum thinking about his distant past make me think he might be some sort of "dark-hobbit." You know, like a dark elf or svirtzneflungle I don't know how to spell that but you get my point. Small, lived in a hole, sociable, had a grandmother and a Master who ruled over his people; it's certainly feasible that Gollum was a sort of civilized cave-person before losing everyone (goblin attack? I think goblin attack. A victim, perhaps, of the sort of thing that made the Lone-lands so Lone). On the other hand, the glowing eyes, that's not a thing of hobbits, that's just eerie, and the book even says he used to spend his days with other funny creatures living in holes and grottos on the river and the like. So dark-hobbit probably not. Some sort of troglodyte or creature of which far nicer versions might be available to meet? More likely.

Actually, what Gollum reminds me of more than anything, and Roomie came through with a link here, is a creature I remember out of an older D&D book. Like older than the ones I played with. Creepy sort of thing and I'm sure that they ripped it off of Gollum: the blindheim. That picture is pretty close to what I imagined Gollum to look like, certainly far more so than the art in the book. He doesn't get a terrible amount of physical description, because he doesn't really need it. As far as the story is concerned, and the original description makes this plain, Gollum is just the darkness looking back at you. He's the incarnation of the hole, the pit, the darkness in the deeps. He'll threaten you, he'll puzzle you, he'll eat you if you're not careful. There's some cleverness in the riddles that the two contestants pick, in that Bilbo keeps picking positive imagery (even the teeth are a healthy set; as Gollum notes, he's got only six) and Gollum tries for the creep factor every time, even though it's not helpful, per se. I liked the idea that the challenge of riddles was an ancient ceremony with rules that are not broken, it's a cool concept to add to the world. Could you challenge a knight to a riddle duel? I would. I'd lose (I tried my luck at all of these and answered... I'm going to say at least one of them and leave you all guessing). Bilbo, a hobbit from the upper world seeking to get back to it, bears a dagger that sheds light and wields imagery of sunlight on daisies, eggs, sitting at the dinner table. Gollum, the thing of darkness with the life of darkness, lays down cold, clammy fish; biting winds; darkness and the destructive aspect of time.

What a fantastic foe for Bilbo to have to take on alone, and in such a unique way! Neither of them dares try force against the other (initially. Psycho Precious Gollum seems a lot more inclined to dare the dagger). Instead it's a game, a deadly game where both Bilbo and Gollum are resorting to being on the up-and-up like a bizarre, creepy mockery of Bilbo's earlier manners scenes with the dwarves. We get real character development from Bilbo here, finding his courage, keeping his wits about him, and most importantly realizing that he has the power to take life and finding it in himself to empathize with a creature that only a mother could love. I felt sorry for Gollum, reading Bilbo's feelings on what it must be like to live the life of the poor creeping thing, and despite that yes, Gollum did in fact basically threaten to kill him, Bilbo makes not a move against him. Still, he took something precious, possibly the only precious thing in Gollum's creepy underground life, and there's only so much mercy you can measure out when you figure Gollum's got no defense against the goblins anymore.

In a handful of pages, the author managed to serve up a complete, complex and creepy antagonist, whose plight is haunting even as his threat is oh-so-real and stressful. I picture a dark thing with glowing eyes that strangles to kill stalking through a labyrinth of narrow corridors and - well, you know. Gollum is hugely eerie. I'm surprised we got done with him in only one chapter, although since the entire thing was that encounter it makes more sense. If the author is this talented at creating new challenges wholecloth and making them so interesting, then I am really looking forward to what awaits. So long, Gollum, it was something knowing you. On to new adventures with some character development and a few magical trinkets into the bargain! :D

(Side notes: 1) I wish I'd had a DM do riddles half so well. Even though I'm no good at them. 2) I forgot to do my thing this chapter, I was too caught up in it. Don't remember any tricky words sticking out, though).

32 comments:

  1. Another fantastic post! If you think it won't spoil your own image of Gollum in the books, you might find it interesting to check out what has ended up being the somewhat iconic interpretation of him in the Hobbit movie.

    http://www.tdubic.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Gollum01.jpg

    I love that you're tackling multiple forms of media in these viewings/reviews; your thoughts on them always make for a great and insightful read, and have inspired me to look at some of the movies I've watched lately a little more thoughtfully. Keep having fun, and thanks for sharing!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Random trivia: The Hobbit was originally a story for Tolkien's children that, at the time he published, he hadn't particularly bothered to integrate with the larger Middle Earth narrative. When he did went to publish The Lord of the Rings he realized that this scene could be the kickstater to the major plot in LotR but it required revision. So the 2nd edition, from 1951 had a this chapter with a major rewrite

    ReplyDelete
  3. Riddles in the Dark is perhaps one of the best chapters in fantasy literature.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Riddles in the Dark is probably *the* single most iconic chapter of modern medieval fantasy literature ever, anywhere. There is so much, especially in the D&D realm, that's based on it.

      Delete
  4. You have stumbled across another oneness of those amazingly iconic chapters in pop culture and your review shows that it rings true (see what I did there ?).

    No seriously, without giving much away... You've just read what is the pop culture equivalent of a butterfly flapping it's wings that creates a hurricane. A seed has been planted here that will germinate into what will possibly be your most favorite fantasy epic of all time.

    Keep an eye on that little trinket he picked up. Someone's gonna be looking for it.

    ReplyDelete
  5. ... You should read Lord of the Rings after this.

    ReplyDelete
  6. This settles it. Noise MUST read Lord of the Rings after this, and NOT SEE THE MOVIES until he's done that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No! Movies!

      I dread the idea of him succumbing to that long first half of Fellowship. It's beautiful but he must not be allowed to get bored with one of the greatest stories. Smarter men than even him have given up and picked something lighter.

      Delete
    2. Besides, those wonderful performances! McKellen! Wood! Astin! Serkis! That soundtrack that stands so confidently beside the best of anything John Williams has ever done! Jeremy loves epic, bombastic soundtracks, it would be a crime to deny him it!

      Delete
    3. To be honest he can safely skip the Old Forest, Tom Bombadil and Barrow Downs chapters in Fellowship and not really miss *anything* aside from a small handful of references and wondering where Merry's sword came from. In fact I suspect that jumping straight from Shadow of the Past to At the Sign of the Prancing Pony may even be possible for a first-timer.

      Despite that I have a feeling that Noise won't get bored with the first half of the book. There's something about his sense of wonder at being plunged into a well-described world that suggests to me that he'll have no problem with it.

      So: BOOKS!

      Delete
    4. I second the notion that he should read the books first. The movies will always be good, no matter what. You can't rob a man of the opportunity to experience the LotR books blind.

      Delete
    5. Agreed; the movies get the story mostly right but only scratch the surface on the detail, atmosphere, and background. You should definitely read the books first.

      Also, without giving too much away, I must congratulate you on your ability to read between the lines so well.

      Delete
    6. I think that as long as he skips the "concerning hobbits" bit (which isn't part of the story anyway) he'll be fine. His sense of wonder at everything he's read so far should be enough. Plus I believe that certain horseback gentlemen will cause ALL THE STRESS in him, in a good way.

      Delete
    7. I say he should watch the movies first, THEN dive into the LOTR books to see it expand. Reversing the order risks possible disappointment. (Plus then I get to see him watch the movies sooner.) ;)

      Delete
    8. Based on his reading of the Hobbit so far I think Jeremy's totally up to reading Lord of the Rings. He's not going to succumb - heck, he's tackling the Hobbit on a higher level of analysis than the vast majority of its readers already.

      Delete
    9. Movies suck >_>

      He should read the books first, it's important to form own opinions before watching someone else's. All signs point that Jeremy is not a squirrel attentioned whippersnapper, he can read the books just fine.

      Delete
    10. I vote books. Given the way Jeremy is reacting to The Hobbit, I think he'll love the books. And why spoil the ending by seeing the movies first?

      Delete
  7. Ohhhh, Jeremy Jeremy Jeremy Jeremy, you are so deliciously not prepared.

    Funnily enough, there's a 75-minute or so animated version of the Hobbit, and Gollum really does kind of look like a Blindheim in it: https://celemiri.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/gollumpointhobbit.png

    I told you this chapter was brilliant. You're going to love Lord of the Rings, when you see it. Or read it, but I think seeing it is still for the best.

    And not just because I'm excited to get you to read other things already on the list.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm with Rachel. I vote movies, then books.

      And don't bother with the Hobbit movies at all.

      Delete
  8. Why would you recommend the film adaptation of something in advance of the original novel? Especially something as dense as LotR. As far as I'm concerned, reading a novel first can never detract from a film significantly, whereas watching an adaptation first can definitely detract from a novel.

    Also, as an aside, Jeremy should definitely read the Harry Potter books first. I'd argue he should skip the films entirely.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Because there's such a thing as too dense for a newbie, even a smart one like him.

      I'm with you on Harry Potter though. The books are an order of magnitude ahead in priority there.

      Delete
    2. My experience is that short-form adaptations like the movies are always disappointing after you've already seen the original, since you keep spotting what was adapted out/wrong. If you start with the movie, you won't know what you're missing and can enjoy it like the regular cinephiles do, and then the originals will come as fun expansions if you liked what you saw in the adaptation.

      Delete
    3. yes, this. There is also the issue of length - not only are the LOTR movies very well done with a phenomenal score and great performances, they are also something he can conceivably get through in a matter of a couple of days at most. I've been laid up injured and when you're on pain meds, attention span is a thing. I agree that the movies will stand just fine after reading The Hobbit, and then he can expand to the books later as he has time for it. I've read and watched the LOTR series many times apiece and both definitely stand on their respective merits.

      Delete
    4. " If you start with the movie, you won't know what you're missing and can enjoy it like the regular cinephiles do, and then the originals will come as fun expansions if you liked what you saw in the adaptation."
      Jeremy isn't doing this to be a regular cinephile. He wants to be a geek, it's right there at the top. So he should become a geek and that means reading original books.

      -Anonyman

      Delete
    5. I personally think that there's less to be lost in watching the Harry Potter films before reading the books than there is from watching LotR before reading the books (speaking from experience on the former).

      I really think that Jeremy is going to enjoy the books in all their beautiful glory. They really are masterpieces, and it's harder to appreciate just how amazing they are if one watches the films first.

      Delete
    6. I have to second everything Ryan and LFR have to say.

      Delete
    7. Regarding Harry Potter, there may be less to be lost in watching the movies first in that the series could be regarded as less important or less "high literature" when compared to LotR, I guess.

      However, if you purely look at the difference in quality between movie adaptation and novel, I think there's actually much more to be lost in the Harry Potter series by watching the movies first, simply because the adaptations are an order of magnitude worse than the LotR movies. The Harry Potter movies barely hold together as a narrative if you haven't read the books, and so much of what made the series special was cut.

      Sorry to derail the discussion, back to LotR!

      Delete
  9. Try the book. If that for some reason doesn't work, then watch the movie. (But maybe have your buddies skip past the spoilery prologue and skip back at the appropriate point.)

    ReplyDelete
  10. This is incredible. You have essentially boiled down to the utter essence of who Gollum is and why he is the way he is, without actually knowing his full real backstory (yet). Dude, go back and read what you wrote after reading Lord of the Rings and I think you'll be pretty blow away by the clairvoyance and profundity of what you've written!

    ReplyDelete