Odd Departure in Appearance Scene

[Dininziliel]

This is first time I've posted a new topic, so bear with me.

I don't think I have to look back to know that the question of whether it was Gandalf or Saruman that Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli saw in Fangorn has been discussed here in our happy home for the dead. Gandalf said it was not he that they saw. However, it still strikes me as strange.

First, as many times as I've read it, I find myself wondering who they saw each time I read it. It seems that Tolkien took a departure from his usual inimitable story-telling style with this one instance.

There is deliberate vagueness about something that is not a matter of the invisible. You expect discussion and conjecture on matters of faith and hope, but not about identity. In fact, I am suggesting that Tolkien is purposely being ambiguous--the horses would normally react calmly to Gandalf, not Saruman; Saruman is not known for wearing a hat, yet the stranger wore a hat. Why would Tolkien do this? It is as if Tolkien wants to get some amusement from watching us readers puzzle this out.

Do you agree? If so, is there any other place that Tolkien deliberately obfuscates for no apparent reason? If you disagree, can your answer be supported by evidence from the text? Where does he provide clarity other than Gandalf's denial? Why isn't Gandalf's denial enough to satisfy us (or maybe just me [img]smilies/eek.gif[/img] )?

Bear this in mind--Gandalf was still recovering from a post-death experience, if you will. He might have not been able to recall such a corporeal event. This fact throws yet another veil over the whole thing.

Again, this is not to open a debate on whether or not it was Gandalf; rather it is a discussion as to whether Tolkien perhaps had an off moment or was deliberately, albeit inexplicably (to me) mysterious.

[lathspell]

Hey Dininziliel!

This is not the only time that Tolkien left us a mysterie. Another few are ofcourse the question: Did Hal see an Entwife in the North Moors? and many people once suspected Tolkien of being Iluvatar, though Tolkien denied this last one. I think that just as the two given above (and there will be more), this one also seems unexplainable with facts. But we can always speculate!

No, I don't think Tolkien wrote that part in an off-guard moment, for he himself said that every word in LotR was once, twice or thrice overthought. So that includes this bit when The Hunters see the old man. Tolkien put it there with a reason, but I do not know which one that is.

the horses would normally react calmly to Gandalf, not Saruman

I do not see why the horses would react differently by Gandalf or Saruman. None of them have an air of evilness, just as the Nazgul, to make the horses flee before them. Legolas mentions in the LotR - the White Rider - that: 'whether they fled at first in fear, or not, our horses met Shadowfax, their chieftain, and greeted him with joy.'
There is no evidence whatsoever that the horses were indeed scared away or that they just wondered off. The only thing Legolas hears the night they see the strange man is a happy whinnying and neighing.

The question who that man was I can not answer, but I do think that Tolkien wouldn't just put it in his books. Personally I think Tolkien didn't have any off-guard moments with his books, and if he had he would rewrite those parts.

greetings,
lathspell

[Finwe]

As a writer, albeit an amateur, I will say that sometimes, a story as epic as Lord of the Rings sometimes sweeps the author off his feet while he's writing it. Events, characters, and settings seem to spontaneously generate themselves on paper, and only later does the author realize that they have a purpose. The mind is a complex machine, so something desired or looked forward to in the subconscious could easily assert itself in such a way. I will end with a quote (or rather, a paraphrase)referring to Faramir, the character most dear to Tolkien:

He came walking out of the woods of Ithilien

Perhaps we should look at this "appearance" in the same way.

[Dininziliel]

lathspell writes:

Did Hal see an Entwife in the North Moors?

Heehaw! I forgot about that one--it is in the same category of inexplicable fuzziness.

lathspell also writes:

he himself said that every word in LotR was once, twice or thrice overthought.

Then Finwe writes:

a story as epic as Lord of the Rings sometimes sweeps the author off his feet while he's writing it. Events, characters, and settings seem to spontaneously generate themselves on paper, and only later does the author realize that they have a purpose.

I recall a couple of nights ago coming across Tolkien's account of Faramir's arrival on Tolkien's writing paper in Letters of . . .. He goes on to say that Faramir seemed to be "taking over" [my awkward paraphrase]. It supports your points about what might have happened to account for Tolkien's seeming departure in narrative style.

However, there is still lathspell's point about Tolkien consciously considering every line in LotR at least twice. I would be apt to say that no matter how many times one proofs and reconsiders, it is still possible to overlook lapses or detours as Finwe said. But, I have read enough of Tolkien's essays and letters to believe that this was a man of exceptionally keen awareness as well as intellectual brilliance.

Regarding the horses liking/not liking Saruman . . . perhaps I am stereotyping Saruman (nasty, evil, mean, treacherous) as well as horses (pure of heart, noble, wary of those who go on two legs). [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img] It seems, though, that since we are given the choice between Saruman and Gandalf, horses would hearken to Gandalf and shun Saruman. Therefore, when Legolas says "I would have guessed that they were beasts wild with some sudden gladness," it seems a safe assumption that Shadowfax was there and, ergo, Gandalf. But, Gandalf tells Gimli that it must have been Saruman.

And, Aragorn says, " . . . but I cannot read the riddle, unless they [the horses] return." Even when the horses return and Gandalf is there to answer, we are still left wondering how to account for it all.

The passage containing that quote is evidence that Tolkien took deliberate care to set up a puzzle to be resolved later; yet when that resolution arrives in Gimli's "Wait a minute! . . . There is another thing that I should like to know first. . ." it feels like an afterthought.

Gee whiz, it just gets curiouser. This is one of those little things that one usually sets aside due to its apparent unresolvable nature!

[lathspell]

...that no matter how many times one proofs and reconsiders, it is still possible to overlook lapses or detours...

No doubt true, but I think that those would be things as misspellings or a grammatic error. Not a whole phrase in a book. It is ofcourse possible, but I find it extremely unlikely.

Therefore, when Legolas says "I would have guessed that they were beasts wild with some sudden gladness," it seems a safe assumption that Shadowfax was there and, ergo, Gandalf.

I'd like to put this against another quote, the one of Legolas given in my first post, but a bit larger.

'"Now I understand part of last night's riddle," said Legolas as he sprang lightly upon Arod's back. "Whether they fled at first in fear, or not, our horses met Shadowfax, their chieftain, and greeted him with joy. Did you know that he was at hand, Gandalf?"
"Yes, I knew," said the wizard. "I bent my thought upon him, bidding him to make haste; for yesterday he was far away in the south of this land. Swiftly may he bare me back again"'

So, as Legolas says, they certainly met Shadowfax. Gandalf arranged him to be there to bare him to Meduseld. However, about Gandalf there seems to be no definite answer. I think Gandalf would have said so in his conversation if he had come across Hasufel and Arod. I don't think he met them, but knew that Shadowfax did.

it feels like an afterthought.

Yes, but that it is an afterthought is in this part perfectly in place. It is at the return of a friend thought dead that he is supposed to ask these questions. Seems reasonable to be excited about the returned friend first.

The thing Finwe says might make sense, but unfortunately we'll never know if Tolkien meant to do something with that phrase.

Again, I won't try to answer the question of who it was, for there are too many possibilities to choose from. Till this moment we thought only of Gandalf and Saruman, but there are other old people, however unlikely it may seem.

greetings,
lathspell

[Daisy Brambleburr]

I always thought that it was Saruman that they saw in the night, and Saruman who set their horses free. It would have been easy for Saruman to get a Gandalf-style hat (thought I'm not sure why he could have wanted to wear one. A disguise, perhaps? Maybe Saruman was the one trying to confuse us).
And as for the horses sounding glad when they were set free, we know that Saruman's voice has many powers, so I'm assuming he could have easily spoke a few words to to calm them.
Would Gandalf have had a reason for setting the horses loose? I think that Saruman would be interested in spying on Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli, and by taking their horses he was effectivley slowing them down.
And of course, Gandalf said that they must have seen Saruman, and I think that's an important point too [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

[Kransha]

I would think it be Saruman. Anyone can get a hat, even a nice pointed hat like Gandalf's. Deception is Saruman's specialty's, second only to his voice. I don't doubt that he could've done it and did. It seems that Gandalf would have little reason to do what the figure did unless he had a hidden purpose, which is not apparent. He says its not him, we assume its not him, we assume it's Saruman, simple and logical. But that's not the end of it. I commem your perception of this little storyline quirk. Also, what I might say has been summed up by Finwe's post, so I won't bother re-hashing the opinion.

[The Saucepan Man]

Did Hal see an Entwife in the North Moors?

That depends upon whether you want to believe that he did or not. It is equally possible that he simply imagined it. Tolkien leaves it to the reader to decide, based upon his or her preference. Either way, the incident is easily explicable.

The appearance of the old man in Fangorn is less easily explicable, for the reasons that dininziliel has stated.

As a literary device, I believe that this passage is intended to help make the reader think (at first) that Aragorn and co have encountered Saruman in The White Rider, when it in fact turns out to be Gandalf.

It is an effective literary device, but it does leave us with the problem of explaining it (assuming that we feel the need to [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] ). Gandalf denies that it was him, and we must (as always with Gandalf, I think) take him at his word. I had always thought that it was Saruman, but at the same time, I was puzzled why he did not cause more harm than simply scaring the horses off.

Surely, it must have been left deliberately ambiguous by Tolkien, since he has Gimli raise the question, but never provides us with the solution. He could, for example, simply have had Gandalf say: "Oh yes, that was me, by the way" (although perhaps he might have put it better than that [img]smilies/rolleyes.gif[/img] [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] ).

We are left, I think, with two possible solutions. Either it was Saruman and there was some reason why he didn't feel the need to (or perhaps was unable to) cause any great harm to the three hunters (perhaps he was just as surprised by the encounter). Or it was a shade of Gandalf appearing to them in some kind of collective premonition.

Or perhaps it was just some other crazy old man wandering in Fangorn. [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

Radaghast? [img]smilies/eek.gif[/img] [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

<font size=1 color=339966>[ 8:14 PM February 06, 2004: Message edited by: The Saucepan Man ]

[lathspell]

Yes, Saucepan-Man... it is your own view that decides who the old man was as with the Entwife-discussions, as I tried to point out in my first post. Yet I am, and I guess the rest too, trying to get through the paragraphs about the old man to get an idea of who it probably is!

and Saruman who set their horses free

I don't think the horses would be needed to set free. I guess they were wandering free for themselves, so scared off would be a more accurate description. Taken in mind that Legolas mentions: 'Whether they fled at first in fear, or not...' It seems that the horses just wandered free.

I've hastily searched in LotR if Saruman mentions anything that might be about the old man if you read it between the lines, but I found nothing of the kind. Which makes me wonder, because the personality of Sauron taken in mind I would think he would sneer something to the three Hunters when they meet him at Orthanc.
What do others think of this?

greetings,
lathspell

[lathspell]

because the personality of Sauron taken in mind

This is ofcourse Saruman.

[Lobelia]

Re the Entwife: I am fairly sure that Tolkien said in one of his letters that the Entwives had been killed a long time ago, I forget the details, but they were dead. I think if Gandalf said it wasn't him in the forest, it wasn't him - I just want to know what Saruman was doing wandering around shooing horses away. I mean, why? I have a vague memory of Treebeard saying that Saruman used to come into Fangorn and talk to the Ents, but hasn't done it for a while.

[lathspell]

Lobelia,

Tolkien has indeed written something about the Entwives being killed, but at a later time he said something like he thought the Entwives were either killed or captured, but he wasn't sure.

I agree about Gandalf!

It is still not definite that Saruman was the actual man Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli saw near Fangorn and it's also unexplained if the horses were scared away or just wandered off to their chieftain.
Saruman did indeed visit Fangorn alot and talked much with Treebeard, always being interested and polite, but he was already spying and learned many secrets of wisdom from Treebeard.

[The Squatter of Amon Rûdh]

From the descriptions in The Riders of Rohan and The White Rider I'd say that the horses went looking for Shadowfax. They were not cut free, but "dragged their pickets", and Legolas says that "But for the darkness and our own fear I would have guessed that they were beasts wild with some sudden gladness. They spoke as horses will when they meet a friend that they have long missed."

Also I would draw attention to Éomer's words concerning Saruman when speaking with Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli: "He walks here and there, they say, as an old man hooded and cloaked, very like to Gandalf, as many now recall."

I think that Tolkien is deliberately ambiguous about this point. He is putting the reader into the same frame of mind as the Three Walkers: that of not knowing what is happening so that they are distrustful of hooded and cloaked old men. However, there would be no need for Gandalf to spy on their camp, nor to lie about it afterwards. That he was in the area is hinted at by the horses' behaviour, but I'm sure that the old man was Saruman, spying out the fate of his raiding party and its captives.

[lathspell]

spying out the fate of his raiding party and its captives.

Knowing that Saruman didn't know that Merry and Pippin escaped and the Ring wasn't with them, it is reasonable.
Congrats Squatter, I am convinced! [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

greetings once more,
lathspell

[Dininziliel]

Woo hoo—I checked in and found some delightfully intriguing notions (as well as the expected erudition!)

Lathspell wrote:

"Yes, I knew," said the wizard. "I bent my thought upon him, bidding him to make haste; for yesterday he was far away in the south of this land. Swiftly may he bear me back again'

[Dininziliel casts eyes down, laments her ADD, and makes small circles in the dirt w/left foot] I’d hastily glossed over this bit of information earlier—the horse action happened because Gandalf was around & needed Shadowfax. Thanks!

Also lathspell:

but there are other old people, however unlikely it may seem.

Saucepan-Man offered a suggestion on this:

Radagast?

Probably not Radagast (his color is brown), though it is an intriguing thought about someone else altogether. Sadly, it is unlikely because that would be even more of a departure than the one being discussed. However, it is fun to play with! What if Radagast had undergone the same death & transfiguration [nod to Strauss] as Gandalf? How might that have happened? What if all the wizards—even the ones in other regions of ME—had undergone the same experience and were returned arrayed in white by the Valar (Ainur?) to help deal with and heal the damage done by evil?

Daisy Brambleburr wrote:

It would have been easy for Saruman to get a Gandalf-style hat . . . A disguise, perhaps? . . . Saruman's voice has many powers . . . I think that Saruman would be interested in spying on Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli, and by taking their horses he was effectively slowing them down.

Kransha supported this:

Deception is Saruman's specialty, second only to his voice.

These observations made me wonder if Saruman was perhaps sending a shadow of his present self to spy instead of actually being there in the flesh. I can see him being anxious to know what’s going on w/Aragorn & Co., yet being loath to leave his lair of safety as well risking losing control of his army.

However, Squatter offers convincing evidence to the contrary (of which this is a snippet):

. . . Éomer's words concerning Saruman . . . "He walks here and there, they say, as an old man hooded and cloaked, very like to Gandalf, as many now recall."

Still, it could be a Saruman spirit-self. I just like the fun of that idea.

Saucepan-Man brings up an excellent point:

That depends upon whether you want to believe that he did or not.

Squatter's comment relates to this:

I think that Tolkien is deliberately ambiguous about this point. He is putting the reader into the same frame of mind as the Three Walkers: that of not knowing what is happening so that they are distrustful of hooded and cloaked old men.

I had never thought of this before—Tolkien deliberately departed from his narrative pattern in order to have fun with us and provide us with some fun as well, with the added richness of an empathic connection to the characters. We get specifically “invited” to do what we are doing now—using clues and our scholarly skills to solve an amusing mystery! I like this "solution" a lot!

But just as we begin to feel all warm and resolved, Lathspell writes:

I would think he [Saruman] would sneer something to the three Hunters when they meet him at Orthanc.

Agreed--this lack of taunting was another puzzling addition to the mystery! I recall thinking the same when studying the matter before I met you bright, shiny dead people!

This has been a lot of fun for a small topic, and, as ever, instructive. Thanks!
[img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

[Dininziliel]

I can't resist. This has probably been in an old thread, but . . . the sneering at Gandalf, Aragorn, Theoden, and everyone else by Saruman at Orthanc brought to mind Monty Python & the Holy Grail classic scene of French taunting--"I fart in your zsenerale deeRECshun!" Esetelyn could edit it out and substitute, "I pick mahy neuse at yeu!" [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

[Finwe]

*dies*

It's nice to know that I wasn't the only person who thought of that, except for me, it was the other way around. When I saw that part in Monty Python and the Holy Grail, I was instantly reminded of that scene from the Books.

I think that general lack of mockery added to the mystery. Perhaps Saruman only mocked when he knew that all other courses had failed? When he taunted Gandalf & Co., Isengard had completely fallen and all of Saruman's power had come to naught. He was a desperate man, or rather, desperate Istar. He probably lost his temper completely and betrayed his true feelings.

In other words, I don't really think that we should use that taunting scene as a template for Saruman's character, since he was desperate at that time, and when people are desperate they tend to be a lot more rash and thoughtless than they normally are.