The Gift of Speech

[Gurthang]

My sister is reading The Hobbit for the first time, and I happened to walk in and ask what part she was on. After she told me, I exclaimed that she was already past Smaug's demise. I was thinking of that scene, and asked her if the arrow had spoken. I didn't think it had, but I quickly checked anyway. Nope, no talking arrow, just Bard talking to it. I did note however, that the thrush had spoken to Bard.

Now, the thrush talking, and the old raven speaking as well, is not too far fetched, since birds like parrots and crows can talk a little. But as I was thinking about Bard and his arrow, a thought occured to me.

Why was the black sword, Gurthang, able to speak?

Most of Tolkien's writings, although fantasy, follow the general laws of nature as our own world. So why would he give a voice to an inanimate object like a sword. It makes for a good story, but almost feels out of place.

[Rilwen Gamgee]

This is just an obsevation, and I am sorry of this does not answer your question, but perhaps this also applies to Sting's properties; it has the ability to glow. Why is that? Most likely for the same reason that Gurthang speaks.

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

. . . just a cross-reference.)

Talking Swords by Thingol

Hey, the Ring has a will of its own, despite it being an inanimate object. But perhaps it's due to Sauron's power poured on it . . .

Wait a minute. The Ring also spoke on Mt. Doom (q.v.), and coincidentally, both objects spoke on their "deathbeds". Perhaps objects with their own wills could "speak" (project their thoughts) as some sort of farewell. Why? I dunno.

[Gurthang]

It would make sense that whoever made the object would have put some of their own power into it. At least in the case of the Ring, and so maybe Gurthang, too. Maybe it depended on who made them or where they were made. The great hound, Huan, came from Valinor and was allowed to speak three times.

[Morsul the Dark]

well I think It is a matter of when Tolkien wrote his books. The Hobbit and the lost tales delve much more into fantasy than LOTR does when you think about LOTR besides eagles being huge and the fell creatures and the ring the book is basicly realistic while the hobbit is much less serious and more focused on fantasy dragons and d talking birds( yes I remember Gwaihir but Gandalf is a maiar therefore has the power to talk with natural beasts perhaps if gwaihir apporached the hobbits they wouldn't understand him.) so the first few ages are much more fantasy than LOTR. Also maybe the sword didn't talk the weilder just enjoyed his pipeweed a tad too much

[burrahobbit]

Most of the really outlandish stuff in The Hobbit comes from Blbo's fevered imagination. The things in the other books???

[Kuruharan]

It is kind of interesting to ask, "How did anyone know that Gurthang spoke? Nobody else was there at the time."

[King of the North]

Tolkien is notorius for treating inanimate objects like characters. Just look at the One Ring, in the book it has a presence and a force and its own will. The same applies to swords.

[Gurthang]

I mentioned above that Tolkien used the sword because something needed to be said, and there was no one there to say it. Like King stated, Tolkien used inanimate objects as characters sometimes. He used Gurthang in place of a character to make a point, that Turin deserved to die.