XPost: alt.fan.tolkien

https://preview.tinyurl.com/tcc4acf

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sat, 7 Mar 2020 22:37:02 -0000 (UTC), Steve Morrison wrote:

https://preview.tinyurl.com/tcc4acf

BTW, the original URL is https://www.tor.com/2020/01/31/one-does-not-simply-go-to-facebook-to- seek-owner-of-the-one-ring/

The article begins:
A police force in England recently put out a Facebook appeal to
try and track down the owner of a "distinctive silver ring"
that was recovered at a crime scene. The ring? A replica of the
One Ring from J.R.R. Tolkien?s The Lord of the Rings.

I don't quite understand how a silver ring can be a "replica" of the
One Ring, which we know was made of gold. (The Foreword says
unambiguously that Gollum's ring was "a ring of gold". On the other
hand, "The Shadow of the Past" [I 2] says "It looked to be made of
pure and solid gold", and Gandalf contrasts it to "ordinary gold".)

But then, I've never understood why anyone would want to own a symbol
of ultimate evil. If I were going to have a replica of a Ring of
Power, I'd want it to be one of the Three. How do others feel about
this?

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://BrownMath.com/
http://OakRoadSystems.com/
Tolkien FAQs: http://Tolkien.slimy.com (Steuard Jensen)
Tolkien letters FAQ: http://preview.tinyurl.com/pr6sa7u
FAQ of the Rings: http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/ringfaq.htm
Encyclopedia of Arda: http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/default.htm

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> schrieb:

On Sat, 7 Mar 2020 22:37:02 -0000 (UTC), Steve Morrison wrote:

https://preview.tinyurl.com/tcc4acf

BTW, the original URL is https://www.tor.com/2020/01/31/one-does-not-simply-go-to-facebook-to- seek-owner-of-the-one-ring/

The article begins:
A police force in England recently put out a Facebook appeal to
try and track down the owner of a "distinctive silver ring"
that was recovered at a crime scene. The ring? A replica of the
One Ring from J.R.R. Tolkien?s The Lord of the Rings.

I don't quite understand how a silver ring can be a "replica" of the
One Ring, which we know was made of gold.

In its shape, I guess.

But then, I've never understood why anyone would want to own a symbol
of ultimate evil. If I were going to have a replica of a Ring of
Power, I'd want it to be one of the Three. How do others feel about
this?

Well, this was recovered at a crime scene. If you're an evil dude doing
evil deeds, that might appeal to you.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote:

On Sat, 7 Mar 2020 22:37:02 -0000 (UTC), Steve Morrison wrote:

https://preview.tinyurl.com/tcc4acf

BTW, the original URL is https://www.tor.com/2020/01/31/one-does-not-simply-go-to-facebook-to- seek-owner-of-the-one-ring/

The article begins:
A police force in England recently put out a Facebook appeal to
try and track down the owner of a "distinctive silver ring"
that was recovered at a crime scene. The ring? A replica of the
One Ring from J.R.R. Tolkien?s The Lord of the Rings.

I don't quite understand how a silver ring can be a "replica" of the
One Ring, which we know was made of gold. (The Foreword says
unambiguously that Gollum's ring was "a ring of gold". On the other
hand, "The Shadow of the Past" [I 2] says "It looked to be made of
pure and solid gold", and Gandalf contrasts it to "ordinary gold".)

But then, I've never understood why anyone would want to own a symbol
of ultimate evil. If I were going to have a replica of a Ring of
Power, I'd want it to be one of the Three. How do others feel about
this?

I recall Tolkien's writing that some admirer of the books had sent
him a goblet on which the "Ash nazg..." verse had been custom-inscribed
and remarked,"I of course have never drunk from it,but use it for
tobacco-ash."

-=-=-
The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,
at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Mon, 09 Mar 2020 03:18:50 +0000, Louis Epstein wrote:

Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote:

On Sat, 7 Mar 2020 22:37:02 -0000 (UTC), Steve Morrison wrote:

https://preview.tinyurl.com/tcc4acf

BTW, the original URL is
https://www.tor.com/2020/01/31/one-does-not-simply-go-to-facebook-to-
seek-owner-of-the-one-ring/

The article begins:
A police force in England recently put out a Facebook appeal to
try and track down the owner of a "distinctive silver ring"
that was recovered at a crime scene. The ring? A replica of the
One Ring from J.R.R. Tolkien?s The Lord of the Rings.

I don't quite understand how a silver ring can be a "replica" of the
One Ring, which we know was made of gold. (The Foreword says
unambiguously that Gollum's ring was "a ring of gold". On the other
hand, "The Shadow of the Past" [I 2] says "It looked to be made of
pure and solid gold", and Gandalf contrasts it to "ordinary gold".)

But then, I've never understood why anyone would want to own a symbol
of ultimate evil. If I were going to have a replica of a Ring of
Power, I'd want it to be one of the Three. How do others feel about
this?

I recall Tolkien's writing that some admirer of the books had sent
him a goblet on which the "Ash nazg..." verse had been custom-inscribed
and remarked,"I of course have never drunk from it,but use it for tobacco-ash."

-=-=-
The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,
at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.

Well, to answer my own question: I see no reason not to return
_this_ ring to its rightful owner. After all, it's made of silver,
and we're told in /Morgoth's Ring/ that the Morgoth-element is
concentrated in gold but not especially in silver. So even if the
original owner is some kind of Dark Lord, they shouldn't be able to
do much with it.

As for Stan's question: I probably wouldn't want to own a replica
of the One Ring, complete with inscription yet. I suspect most of
us who are deeply invested in the story wouldn't. As you point
out, in Letter #343 Tolkien says "I had a similar disappointment
when a drinking goblet arrived (from a fan) which proved to be of
steel engraved with the terrible words seen on the Ring. I of
course have never drunk from it, but use it for tobacco ash." But
people whose engagement with LotR is more casual probably see such
a thing as merely a symbol of the book itself, rather than of
Sauron's evil.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 3/14/20 2:12 PM, Steve Morrison wrote:

On Mon, 09 Mar 2020 03:18:50 +0000, Louis Epstein wrote:

Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote:

On Sat, 7 Mar 2020 22:37:02 -0000 (UTC), Steve Morrison wrote:

https://preview.tinyurl.com/tcc4acf

BTW, the original URL is
https://www.tor.com/2020/01/31/one-does-not-simply-go-to-facebook-to-
seek-owner-of-the-one-ring/

The article begins:
A police force in England recently put out a Facebook appeal to
try and track down the owner of a "distinctive silver ring"
that was recovered at a crime scene. The ring? A replica of the
One Ring from J.R.R. Tolkien?s The Lord of the Rings.

I don't quite understand how a silver ring can be a "replica" of the
One Ring, which we know was made of gold. (The Foreword says
unambiguously that Gollum's ring was "a ring of gold". On the other
hand, "The Shadow of the Past" [I 2] says "It looked to be made of
pure and solid gold", and Gandalf contrasts it to "ordinary gold".)

But then, I've never understood why anyone would want to own a symbol
of ultimate evil. If I were going to have a replica of a Ring of
Power, I'd want it to be one of the Three. How do others feel about
this?

I recall Tolkien's writing that some admirer of the books had sent
him a goblet on which the "Ash nazg..." verse had been custom-inscribed
and remarked,"I of course have never drunk from it,but use it for
tobacco-ash."

-=-=-
The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,
at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.

Well, to answer my own question: I see no reason not to return
_this_ ring to its rightful owner. After all, it's made of silver,
and we're told in /Morgoth's Ring/ that the Morgoth-element is
concentrated in gold but not especially in silver. So even if the
original owner is some kind of Dark Lord, they shouldn't be able to
do much with it.

As for Stan's question: I probably wouldn't want to own a replica
of the One Ring, complete with inscription yet. I suspect most of
us who are deeply invested in the story wouldn't. As you point
out, in Letter #343 Tolkien says "I had a similar disappointment
when a drinking goblet arrived (from a fan) which proved to be of
steel engraved with the terrible words seen on the Ring. I of
course have never drunk from it, but use it for tobacco ash." But
people whose engagement with LotR is more casual probably see such
a thing as merely a symbol of the book itself, rather than of
Sauron's evil.

...especially since it was used as a primary design element on early
dust jackets and hard covers.


--
John W. Kennedy
"The blind rulers of Logres
Nourished the land on a fallacy of rational virtue."
-- Charles Williams. "Taliessin through Logres: Prelude"

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In message <news:MPG.38ce033a7b4ace2398fcfa@news.individual.net>
Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> spoke these staves:


Re. various varieties of copies/replica of the "One Ring" film prop:

But then, I've never understood why anyone would want to own a
symbol of ultimate evil.

Agreed!!

I am always shocked when seeing apparently sensible young people
proudly showing that they have used such a replica of the film prop
as their wedding ring ...

"With this symbol of evil and domination to the utter eradication of
thy free will, I thee wed ..."


I do not want to make it a generation thing, because I do not
believe that it is. It is, I believe, rather a question relating to
/how/ different people "consume" the work.

Christopher Tolkien, in his famous interview with Le Monde, opined that
This level of commercialisation eviscerates the aesthetic and
philosophical vigour of his literary creation.[*]

Possibly that is part of it? If you are mearly a consumer of this commercialised product without aesthetic and philosophical vigour
(or, indeed, depth), it might be easier to overlook this; to ignore
the philosophical and ethical symbolism? And, mind, he is not
merely speaking of the Jackson films here, he is speaking of what it
had done to his father's work as a whole. The full passage goes:

The divorce between the literary work and all the rest will
systematically be expedited by the films. "Tolkien has become a
monstrosity, devoured by his own popularity and absorbed by the
absurdity of our times", Christopher Tolkien observes sadly. "The
chasm that has opened up between the beauty and the seriousness
of his works and what has become of them is beyond imagination.
This level of commercialisation eviscerates the aesthetic and
philosophical vigour of his literary creation. There is only one
thing left to me: to turn away from it all."[*]

The implication here, as I understand it, is that the book is also a
part of this commercialised monstrosity -- meaning that there are
people who consume the book at this level, as a commercial
monstrosity eviscerated of all aesthetic and philosophical vigour
(there's a certain 'something' to that phrase that makes me wish to
just repeat it and repeat it ;) ). We cannot merely point our
fingers at film-fans and say that it is all down to them; it is a
process that has been expedited by the films, but which was
nonetheless going on even before the Jackson atrocities.

So far, I have managed to avoid reaching the same conclusion as
Christopher Tolkien did -- I have not "turned away from it all" --
not it /all/, that is, but there are, I admit, things that I find
that I can only react to by turning away from them.

If I were going to have a replica of a Ring of Power, I'd want
it to be one of the Three. How do others feel about this?

It'd be a bit of a Gedankenexperiment for me, as that opening "if"
expresses something very unlikely. But, yes, IF I should ever wish
to have a replica (by any meaning of this word) of a Ring of Power,
it would definitely have to be one of the Three. What other options
could one have?


P.S. I am quite pleased to find that my usenet set-up still works
nicely :)


[*] "Tolkien, the Ring of Discord", Interview with Christopher Tolkien
in Le Monde, 7 July, 2012. Quotations from the French language
interview come from a privately shared translation done by Tolkien
experts.

--
Troels Forchhammer
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.

Your theory is crazy, but it's not crazy enough to be true.
- Niels Bohr, to a young physicist

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, 09 Apr 2020 09:41:53 +0200, Troels Forchhammer wrote:

In message <news:MPG.38ce033a7b4ace2398fcfa@news.individual.net>
Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> spoke these staves:

Re. various varieties of copies/replica of the "One Ring" film prop:

But then, I've never understood why anyone would want to own a
symbol of ultimate evil.

Agreed!!

I am always shocked when seeing apparently sensible young people
proudly showing that they have used such a replica of the film prop
as their wedding ring ...

"With this symbol of evil and domination to the utter eradication of
thy free will, I thee wed ..."

I do not want to make it a generation thing, because I do not
believe that it is. It is, I believe, rather a question relating to
/how/ different people "consume" the work.

Christopher Tolkien, in his famous interview with Le Monde, opined that
This level of commercialisation eviscerates the aesthetic and
philosophical vigour of his literary creation.[*]

Possibly that is part of it? If you are mearly a consumer of this commercialised product without aesthetic and philosophical vigour
(or, indeed, depth), it might be easier to overlook this; to ignore
the philosophical and ethical symbolism? And, mind, he is not
merely speaking of the Jackson films here, he is speaking of what it
had done to his father's work as a whole. The full passage goes:

The divorce between the literary work and all the rest will
systematically be expedited by the films. "Tolkien has become a
monstrosity, devoured by his own popularity and absorbed by the
absurdity of our times", Christopher Tolkien observes sadly. "The
chasm that has opened up between the beauty and the seriousness
of his works and what has become of them is beyond imagination.
This level of commercialisation eviscerates the aesthetic and
philosophical vigour of his literary creation. There is only one
thing left to me: to turn away from it all."[*]

The implication here, as I understand it, is that the book is also a
part of this commercialised monstrosity -- meaning that there are
people who consume the book at this level, as a commercial
monstrosity eviscerated of all aesthetic and philosophical vigour
(there's a certain 'something' to that phrase that makes me wish to
just repeat it and repeat it ;) ). We cannot merely point our
fingers at film-fans and say that it is all down to them; it is a
process that has been expedited by the films, but which was
nonetheless going on even before the Jackson atrocities.

So far, I have managed to avoid reaching the same conclusion as
Christopher Tolkien did -- I have not "turned away from it all" --
not it /all/, that is, but there are, I admit, things that I find
that I can only react to by turning away from them.

If I were going to have a replica of a Ring of Power, I'd want
it to be one of the Three. How do others feel about this?

It'd be a bit of a Gedankenexperiment for me, as that opening "if"
expresses something very unlikely. But, yes, IF I should ever wish
to have a replica (by any meaning of this word) of a Ring of Power,
it would definitely have to be one of the Three. What other options
could one have?

P.S. I am quite pleased to find that my usenet set-up still works
nicely :)

[*] "Tolkien, the Ring of Discord", Interview with Christopher Tolkien
in Le Monde, 7 July, 2012. Quotations from the French language
interview come from a privately shared translation done by Tolkien
experts.

The one thing which annoyed me was when the police admitted that
their "movie knowledge" wasn't what it might be. So now the One
Ring and its inscription are "movie knowledge"?

Troels, nice to see you again after all this time. I hope you, and
everyone, are safe. Or, well, as safe as we can be in such times.
These days I keep thinking of Aragorn's line: "Many hopes will
wither in this bitter Spring".

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 4/19/20 4:12 PM, Steve Morrison wrote:

The one thing which annoyed me was when the police admitted that
their "movie knowledge" wasn't what it might be. So now the One
Ring and its inscription are "movie knowledge"?

Statistically, it probably is.

--
John W. Kennedy
"The blind rulers of Logres
Nourished the land on a fallacy of rational virtue."
-- Charles Williams. "Taliessin through Logres: Prelude"

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

John W Kennedy <john.w.kennedy@gmail.com> wrote:

On 4/19/20 4:12 PM, Steve Morrison wrote:

The one thing which annoyed me was when the police admitted that
their "movie knowledge" wasn't what it might be. So now the One
Ring and its inscription are "movie knowledge"?

Statistically, it probably is.

As I must remind the movie-philes,
this dainty is not for them.
I say just that.

-=-=-
The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,
at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In message <news:r7ibai$8bh$1@dont-email.me>
Steve Morrison <rimagen@toast.net> spoke these staves:

On Thu, 09 Apr 2020 09:41:53 +0200, Troels Forchhammer wrote:

<snip>

I am always shocked when seeing apparently sensible young people
proudly showing that they have used such a replica of the film
prop as their wedding ring ...

<snip>

The one thing which annoyed me was when the police admitted that
their "movie knowledge" wasn't what it might be. So now the One
Ring and its inscription are "movie knowledge"?

Aye, I noticed that, too ... but then, it /was/ specifically a copy
of a film crop, so maybe the police can be excused in this one case
:)

Troels, nice to see you again after all this time. I hope you, and
everyone, are safe. Or, well, as safe as we can be in such times.

I am doing fine, thank you.

I do hope that you are also all doing fine.

I've been following the groups always, but rarely having the time to
post anything these days -- not just because of paid work, but also
because of having taken on more obligations within Scouting.

These days I keep thinking of Aragorn's line: "Many hopes will
wither in this bitter Spring".

The Tolkien Society have had to cancel Oxonmoot this year ... and the Mythopoeic Society have cancelled MythCon, too. A lot of things will
be very different, but hopefully there are strong roots that will not
wither in this frost.

Though, admittedly, I do worry quite a lot about the effect on our
young people, our saplings, to stay in the arboreal imagery :)


--
Troels Forchhammer
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.

Elen síla lúmenn' omentielvo
- /The Fellowship of the Ring/ (J.R.R. Tolkien)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Troels Forchhammer <Troels@thisisfake.invalid> wrote:

In message <news:r7ibai$8bh$1@dont-email.me>
Steve Morrison <rimagen@toast.net> spoke these staves:

On Thu, 09 Apr 2020 09:41:53 +0200, Troels Forchhammer wrote:

<snip>

I am always shocked when seeing apparently sensible young people
proudly showing that they have used such a replica of the film
prop as their wedding ring ...

<snip>

The one thing which annoyed me was when the police admitted that
their "movie knowledge" wasn't what it might be. So now the One
Ring and its inscription are "movie knowledge"?

Aye, I noticed that, too ... but then, it /was/ specifically a copy
of a film crop, so maybe the police can be excused in this one case
:)

Troels, nice to see you again after all this time. I hope you, and
everyone, are safe. Or, well, as safe as we can be in such times.

I am doing fine, thank you.

I do hope that you are also all doing fine.

I've been following the groups always, but rarely having the time to
post anything these days -- not just because of paid work, but also
because of having taken on more obligations within Scouting.

These days I keep thinking of Aragorn's line: "Many hopes will
wither in this bitter Spring".

The Tolkien Society have had to cancel Oxonmoot this year ... and the Mythopoeic Society have cancelled MythCon, too. A lot of things will
be very different, but hopefully there are strong roots that will not
wither in this frost.

Though, admittedly, I do worry quite a lot about the effect on our
young people, our saplings, to stay in the arboreal imagery :)

At least such musings can keep one Ent-ertained?

We are hardly as beset as the realm of King Telemnar...
San Marino is the only country to have lost even a thousandth
of its population to the infamous disease.

-=-=-
The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,
at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)