Rowling's Goblins = Tolkien's Dwarves?

[Estelyn Telcontar]

I just finished reading the last Harry Potter book and was struck by the author's descriptions of the characteristics of a goblin character. (Don't worry - this is a general comment, no spoiler!) In the chapter "Shell Cottage", we are told that goblins made swords and other objects of metal and jewels. There is animosity between the wizards and the goblins because of differing views on the ownership of some of those objects. Sounds like Tolkien's Dwarves and their relationship to the Elves, doesn't it?!

Now, both Tolkien and Rowling use traditional names for various races in their books, and they redefine them in part - a legitimate technique for authors. I find that much better than an author who simply copies Tolkien's races. It's interesting to compare - there's a world of difference between Tolkien's Elves and Rowling's, and apparently her goblins are not identical with orcs, but have dwarvish characteristics as well.

Have you noticed these differences? What are your thoughts on them? I don't remember information about these races in the past books; perhaps those who have them at hand can add something to my observations.


Two important reminders:

1. This is a Tolkien forum; discussion of other works such as the HP books are permitted only when they are compared to his.

2. No spoilers, please. Not everyone has read all of Rowling's books yet, and it would be unfair to give away plot developments.

[Lalaith]

Yes, I thought that too, Estelyn, particularly with the most recent book.
I don't think there is much to compare between Tolkien orcs (TO) and Rowling goblins (RG). RG have a great sense of aesthetics, creative pride and some honour. TO have none.
I would also add, to the Dwarf comparison (without I hope spoiling anyone) that RG value those who honour their race in the same way that Dwarves do. But I would say that Dwarves are generally a more sympathetic and decent bunch of beings.

[Bêthberry]

Related to Rowlings' goblins I think is her handling of the theme of race generally, of what she does with this idea of Muggle, Half-Muggle, Pure Wizard, and what happens to those who perpetuate such distinctions. She doesn't uphold the special distinction which Tolkien does for the half-elven.

Can't say more for fear of spoilers.

[Lalwendë]

The crucial difference to me is that Rowling's Goblins do not have the sense of honour that Dwarves possess. If you were a Man or an Elf in Middle-earth and you made the friendship of a Dwarf then you would have a loyal friend for life who would defend you. The same is not necessarily true of Goblins in the Wizarding world. The Goblins are also much more possessive creatures with regard to the artefacts they create.

But then this is a big difference between Middle-earth and the Wizarding world. The former is more integrated and races and creatures seem to have a keen awareness of each other whereas in the Wizarding world you get the idea that so much more is unknown and untested - Wizards do not and seemingly cannot really ever understand the true 'nature' of the perilous magic possessed by other beings such as Goblins, Centaurs and House-Elves.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

It's true about the similarity of Goblins and Dwarves in that they craft something the other races cannot etc. But from my point of view, the Goblins of Rowling are more similar in their nature not to the typical Dwarves we know (like Thorin and Gimli and all these folks), but more (and it's the same with the House-elves and so on) the folk oppressed or overlooked by the other races, like the Petty-Dwarves (quite a lot, I think), or even the Drúedain.

Hmm... looks like while avoiding spoilers, I cannot write much more I would say... but I think I said the main things I wanted.

And also - well, I think you can see something similar to Tolkien's Goblins in Rowling's Goblins anyway. Sometimes, just sometimes. Again, in the chapter "Shell Cottage", there is mentioned that even Rowling's Goblin could be unexpectedly bloodthirsty, to laugh at the idea of pain in lesser creatures... then perhaps they could be compared to Tolkien's Goblins, even Orcs.

[Elmo]

I don't think we can take Griphook to represent an entire species, imagine if the goblins did that with Lord Voldemort! Griphook was a kind of extreme Goblin nationalist. Look at his views on goblin ownership, Rowling said in an interview they were an example of a fanatic. Dwarves had their bad bunch as well, apparently all the houses of Dwarves in the far east turned evil.

[sallkid]

Originally Posted by Lalaith

Yes, I thought that too, Estelyn, particularly with the most recent book.
I don't think there is much to compare between Tolkien orcs (TO) and Rowling goblins (RG). RG have a great sense of aesthetics, creative pride and some honour. TO have none.
I would also add, to the Dwarf comparison (without I hope spoiling anyone) that RG value those who honour their race in the same way that Dwarves do. But I would say that Dwarves are generally a more sympathetic and decent bunch of beings.

There are similarities and differences, dwarves in TO fought against the power of mordor, whereas the goblins in HP always attempted to remain completely neutral in the affairs of wizards.

another similarity is that Gringotts (the wizard bank) is guarded by goblins "So you'd be mad to rob it" and from what we know of tolkien dwarves they don't take kindly to robberry either.

[Rhod the Red]

There are differences though, like the pointy ears.

[Sir Kohran]

Rowling's goblins are an interesting lot; they're somewhat ambiguous in their nature. Griphook is the most developed goblin we see, and he doesn't come across very well - he relishes the idea of pain in lesser beings, and (trying not to give out spoilers here) is also quite selfish and arrogant. However, he's noted as being a sort of extremist so it's difficult to tell exactly how indicative he is of goblins overall.

There are other goblins mentioned, some good and some bad. Gornuk accompanies the rebels, but another also reports back to Voldemort.

In comparison with Tolkien's goblins...I think Rowling's are perhaps what Tolkien's goblins could have been if they had developed and become civilised.

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Estelyn Telcontar

Have you noticed these differences? What are your thoughts on them? I don't remember information about these races in the past books; perhaps those who have them at hand can add something to my observations.


Two important reminders:

1. This is a Tolkien forum; discussion of other works such as the HP books are permitted only when they are compared to his.

2. No spoilers, please. Not everyone has read all of Rowling's books yet, and it would be unfair to give away plot developments.

On rereading the first six books, did you find anything about Rowlings' races that pertains here, Esty? I can't recall that the theme of the treatment of other races and their interrelationships was brought out as much in the first three as in this last one.


And, when will the injunction about posting spoilers be ended?

There's a wealth of ways the two authors can be compared, but I think this is a good place to start.

[Formendacil]

It should maybe be noted that in Tolkien's works, by and large, we generally only see the good Dwarves. Mîm is probably the only exception, unless we look into the "Lost Tales" era "Fall of Doriath" Dwarves, who probably provided him with much of his background. And it has already been noted that the Petty-Dwarves are perhaps a great deal more similar to Rowling's Goblins than the Dwarves in general.

Would it perhaps be fair to say, then, that Rowling's Goblins are quite similar to Tolkien's Dwarves gone bad? After all, we potentially have four houses of the Dwarves that went "bad" in eastern Middle-Earth. Like Rowling's Goblins, I don't think anyone really sees them turning out in mass numbers to fight Sauron's wars (we are told, regarding the Last Alliance, that few Dwarves fought, though on both sides), but if we imagine them as more pro-Sauron than pro-West, then we receive a rather similar idea: neutral for their own benefit, dangerous to thieves, and rather malicious.

[Elmo]

i read somewhere that the state of the dragon shows a lot about the goblins and their contempt for 'lesser' beings. Maybe most of them were all nasty little fascists.

[Firefoot]

At first I was inclined to agree that the goblins and dwarves really are rather similar, but then I realized that that's only really in their present states. You also, I think, have to look at their histories and positions in the larger whole.

I get the impression that in Rowling's books, goblins and wizards have never really gotten along. They had an incredibly bloody history, which came to a sort of status quo once goblins were no longer allowed to use wands. Wizards have always had a sort of superiority complex over goblins - and it seems that they must in some respect be more powerful, as they are able to enforce the no-wand mandate on the goblins.

The story on Dwarves is a bit different. Dwarves and Elves at one point were more than allies, they were friends. They may not have quite lived together, but they certainly worked together and fought together. Later on, they got into a bit of a disagreement and became estranged. And while there was clearly animosity, certainly neither race ever ruled the other.

So I suppose what you're left with is this: Goblins are less powerful than dwarves within their respective worlds, Goblins are less likely to make real friends/alliances with those outside their race, and Dwarves are less extremist than Goblins concerning their craft (even taking Griphook as an extremist, Bill did tell Harry about Goblin ideas on ownership that sounded much more widespread than just the fanatics).

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Firefoot

So I suppose what you're left with is this: Goblins are less powerful than dwarves within their respective worlds, Goblins are less likely to make real friends/alliances with those outside their race, and Dwarves are less extremist than Goblins concerning their craft (even taking Griphook as an extremist, Bill did tell Harry about Goblin ideas on ownership that sounded much more widespread than just the fanatics).

I'll admit up front that I haven't read books IV through VI, but in reading Deathly Hallows it was not Tolkien's dwarves that I thought of when reading about the goblins, but Tolkien's elves.

Tolkien's dwarves trade their goods for keeps--at least in LotR. This idea of ownership sounds more like the ultimate artist's control, extending beyond the making into the life of the work. And the artists in Tolkien are the elves. In fact, I thought of the story of the silmarils and of Fëanor 's terrible vengance to recover them and of Maedhros' and Maglor's harrowing pursuit of them as well.

There are many characteristics which the Rowling goblins don't share with the Tolkien elves,. However, there are enough references to the scent of the sea wafting through the Shell Cottage chapter where ownership is discussed and debated so often (not only of the Gryffindor sword but of Muriel's--shades of Miriel!--diadem also) that I recall what the sea meant to Tolkien's elves. They might not be hoarders of gold, but they an aloof race which values creation and their history isn't spotless.

If there is some sort of relationship between Rowling's races and Tolkien's, wouldn't the orcs more likely be the Death Eaters--a far more sophisticated horror.

EDIT: I suppose what I am getting at is that Rowling's races have more mixed characteristics than Tolkien's races.