Facts you didn’t know about Lord of the Rings and J. R. R. Tolkien:

1) Tolkien fought in WWII but only enlisted because his family pressured him. In fact, he applied for a program that allowed him to complete his degree. He only made it out of the war alive because he contracted Trench Fever, which is a disease that is carried by lice. It isn’t serious, just pretty unpleasant and was pretty common during WWI. He was deemed “unfit for general services.”

2) Tolkien was friend with C. S. Lewis (he wrote Chronicles of Narnia if anyone has been under a rock for the last few decades.

3) The Special Editions of all three of the movies are 158 minutes longer than the Theatrical releases.

4) WHAT EVERYONE COMPLAINS ABOUT. Tolkien did not have the eagles fly the crew to Mount Doom because he did not want to give the impression that they were “Middle-Earth taxis.” They are their own race. Also, he found them one-dimensional and did not like them.

5) The first Portuguese version of The Hobbit was changed into O Gnomo (the Gnome).

6) Christopher Lee (Saruman) is the only actor in the Lord of the Rings films to have met Tolkien. In fact, Tolkein’s dying wish was to have Lee play Gandalf if there was ever a Lord of the Rings film. Adding to his badassory, Lee formed a metal band, holds the Guinness Book world record for being the tallest leading actor in Hollywood (6 foot 5), and he was related to Emperor Charlemagne.

7) When Tolkein’s son Michael went into the army, he had to fill in paper work. Under his father’s profession, he wrote ‘Wizard.’

8) In the 1960s the Beatles approached Stanley Kubrick with an idea: they wanted to make a live action version of the Lord of the Rings.  It would have featured John Lennon as Gollum, Ringo Starr as Sam, George Harrison as Gandalf, and Paul McCartney as Frodo. But Kubrick wasn't interested.

9) Sean Connery turned down the role of Gandalf because he didn't understand the story.

10) Tolkien would often start lectures off in an energetic way. Sometimes he would put on full chain mail armor or come in reciting the first lines from Beowulf at the top of his lungs.

11) Tolkien did not see Frodo as the hero of The Lord of the Rings he said that the true hero was Sam. From that perspective, it would change the opinion of any first time reader.

4 of 5

Harry Potter is a cool guy

So my mom was the one who first told me about Harry Potter.  I think I was in third grade or so when it happened.  My mom convinced me to let her read me the first chapter.  Just the first chapter and if I did not like it then she would stop reading it to me.  Well when she was done reading it I told her that it was alright but I did not want to keep reading it.  Later that day though I saw the book on a table in our house, picked it up and kept reading it.  It was out of pure curiosity.  But a few chapters later I was hooked on it.  And the same goes with the subsequent books.  I liked all of them, and there was actually not one part of any book that I thought was bad and didn't need to be in there.

I'm not someone who is obsessed with the series but I haven't really forgotten anything from any of the books, the stuff has just stuck with me and I'm not mad about it at all.  One reason I found them so appealing when I was younger was because it just made you were at that gullible age and it made you believe that there was this other side to  the world where there was real magic and wizards and witches.  It was a place to get away.  I mean yeah all of that stuff is not real but for young kids who do not know any better then it was awesome for them.

I liked all of the movies as well. Some of them definitely left out important stuff that was in the books but I got over that eventually.  I never watched the movie until I finished the book that movie was from too.  And every time I see one of the movies or read a part of one of the books it just reminds me of the time where you really believed in it.  It was something to look forward to doing when you got home from school.  Some times I would get in trouble because I was up so let reading the books but they are that good and they can really hook you into them.  There wasn't one bad character in them.  The key to reading them I think is to start off with an open mind because if your first thought when you're reading it is that it is stupid then you will never be able to get that thought out.  If you can give the first book a chance then you will definitely want to read the second and so on.

Freaking Patriarchy, Man

When discussing Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings in class the other day, the opportunity was taken to discuss why both Dumbledore and Gandalf were both men, which ultimately lead to the discussion ending on the cry of “freaking patriarchy, man.”

For the sake of playing Devil’s Advocate (so put down your pitchforks and stop looking for a photo of me wearing a fedora) I would like to take just a quick moment to suggest that, with regard to the character situation itself, it may be entirely possible that the characters were simply written as male, because why not? I say this out of the same curiosity that asks “Why wasn’t Dumbledore a woman?” but came to the opposite conclusion - that it really doesn’t matter one way or another, because nothing in the story particularly deals with Dumbledore’s gender identity. (His sexuality was such a non-issue, partly because he was an old man and this was a children’s book, that it wasn’t until Rowling made a statement after the fact that we knew he was gay.)

There’s very real concerns spawned by “patriarchy,” including Joanne Rowling being told to have the front of her book list her name as ‘J.K. Rowling” out of a concern that boys wouldn’t read her book if they thought she was a woman, but I really and truly fear that we’re approaching a reductio ad absurdum kind of moment by questioning why these two characters were both male. Rowling was clearly inspired by Tolkien, who wrote a male mentor-wizard because it was probably something he felt like he was capable of writing.

If I’m horrifically wrong or if you just have a very strong opinion, let me know in the comments. I kinda just wanted to throw a possibility out there.

---

4 of 5

Harry Potter, my life in a nutshell

Harry Potter was introduced to me by simply hearing it every night my mom would read it to me. I was just getting the concept of reading at that time. Because I couldn't read, the entire time I sat there and listened I created my own world in my head. Once I got to reading, the world only got more and more vivid and an escape. The very same can be said about Lord of the Rings. Out of the two, Lord of the Rings is usually my favorite, but it depends on the day because I really love Harry Potter too.

However, the real emphasis I want to make on this post is what both of these books/movies did for me. Every kid has something they like barbies, cars, guns, sports, you name it. Well my hobbies were drawing, writing, movies and books. The thing that all of those have in common is that they all had to deal with different types of people, places, and creatures. I loved the idea of living in a world far from ours.

The moment I read the books, even more watching the movies, I became obsessed. I was taken away, quite literally. The pure magic, no pun intended, that was created on the pages and screen were beyond my comprehension at the time. Ever since I ever heard the words Harry Potter or Frodo Baggins, I’ve always wanted to make my own story. It’s definitely one of my life time goals that is definitely in the making.  

Harry Potter

Personally, I am not a big fan of Harry Potter. I know 'Gasp' right? I just never could get into any of the books. I think it had something to do with the big hype around how good they were, and I am not much of a reader to begin with too. Every one was saying they were the best book sat the time, but I got to like the third chapter and was just like "This is boring I am going to go play video games."
Now having said all that, I can totally understand why they became such a big success, and why everyone loves the Wizarding World of Harry Potter so much. For one thing, I think the books did so well due to the hype of the books, and not just the positive hype. When the books first came out there was this huge hype about not allowing the books in school because some parents got upset with the whole"wizards" thing, think the book is like satanic and goes against the christian religion. Which as we have learned in class, Christianity has a big problem with magic and witches and wizards dating back to like 400 a.d in Europe (even further probably but 400 is the date on our Kors and Peters Book) Now you may be thinking, "well if the book was possibly being banned then how did it get so popular?" Well that's just it, it became popular because it became so well known for being a controversial book. When you think about it, being infamous gets just as much attention as being famous, Hitler, Stalin, Italian dictator named Montecelli or something, Osama Bin Laden for example. All these names are well known, but not in a positive way at all. The same thing goes for books, Harry Potter was flagged as controversial, and so everyone wanted to see why it was controversial so they read it. Even if you didn't read it you still knew about it and knew like 30 people who had read it and so it became famous/infamous. And by the time all the controversy around the book being not suitable for schools died down, it was already one of the most well known books of the time. If you hadn't read it you would have been a social pariah since every one else would have been talking about it. I know that why I tried to read it, every one else talked about it all the time and because I hadn't I had very little input on conversations revolving around the book. As they say in the entertainment world, "There is no such thing as bad press." What they mean is even if people are saying bad things about a product, its still being talked about and people learn more about it and recognize it more and more. Harry Potter wasn't even the first book to become popular partly due to controversy. "The Catcher in the Rye" became infamous when the guy who shot John Lennon said the book made him do it. Nowadays in school, everyone reads The Catcher in the Rye, South Park even made an episode revolving around that book.
That's just my thoughts on why Harry Potter became so famous, we didn't talk actually talk about this reason in class so discuss your thoughts in the comments or hold them for the next class and maybe we will bring this topic up then.

Lord of the Railroads

Ok so for an alternate universe of Lord of the Rings, we have Lord of the Railroads. It is a western take on LOTR set in roughly 1880's. The main character would be a young general store clerk and well rounded nice guy named "Fred Oscar" but people call him Fred O. for short. This young man is a well liked man in his small town community of Shirefields, Oklahoma. His parents were even one of the first people to settle on this land way back like 20 years ago in the 1860's. However, due to very unforeseen circumstances, Fred O's parents mysteriously pass away and Fred O is left with an inheritance of stocks in a railroad company. When Fred O first finds out about these stocks he is very skeptical as his parents were not the type to invest in any big corporate railroad conglomerates. With his curiosity peaked, Fred O decides to attend a stockholders meeting for this railroad conglomerate all the way out in Chicago. He walks up to the corporate building which is a huge skyscraper of a building, of course skyscrapers at this time period are only like three stories tall however. It is here at this meeting though that our fateful hero Fred O learns about the railroad corporation's big plan to buy up all the land around Fred O's town and make a super railroad track that plows right throuhg it. Fred O is shocked to say the least and decides to talk to the head of the railraod company, a man named Samuel R. Omahn, but known to his underlings as S.R. Oman. This man looks pretty much exactly like Snidley Whiplash from Dudley Do Right (Pic Related).

Needless to say when S.R. Omahn hears Fred O's plea to not run a railroad though his town, S.R. Omahn pays no attention to him and shews him away. Fred O hurries back to his small town and calls a town meeting to tell his neighbors of this oncoming monstrosity. The town goes into full panic and tries to come up with a way to deter the railroad company. The town mayor, Grant Dolph, who is an old and wise mayor of the town, with a long white beard and a pointy hat, decides that it should be up to Fred O to talk to go on a quest to talk to the other share holders of the railroad company and convince them to not run a railroad through their town. If Fred O can turn enough of the share holders against S.R. Omahn then they can stop the production of the railroad all together. Mean while the other townsfolk will do every thing in their power to hinder constrution of the railroad. In one scene Grant Dolph will even blow up a bridge that the railroad is being built on whil shouting "You Shall Not Cross!" (I can't be exactly like LOTR and say pass, that would just be too cheesy).  That scene would definately be in the teaser trailer as well.
Personally, i feel this movie would be just as big a hit, if not bigger, than Lord of the Rings. Like who doesn't love a good western? Just look at Django Unchained, and True Grit. I would definately cast like Clint Eastwood as Mayor Grant Dolph, and probably Jeff Bridges as Samuel R. Omahn. COMING OUT THIS SUMMER!

Earth, Wind, & The Shire- Too Funny Not To Use As A Title!

I can't even begin to explain how happy and excited about having Lord of The Rings and Harry Potter as some of the required readings for this course. The Lord of The Rings movies are among some of my favorite. I think it is interesting viewing the central ideas of Harry Potter and the central ideas in Lord of The Rings- because believe it or not they're not terribly different because they contain a lot of similar elements. I also thought it was awesome to see how schooling or the topic of being in school takes an effect or role in Harry Potter because the book was initially created as a children's book and so therefore the idea of school certainly makes it a lot more relatable. It also allows for a place in a story where kids can be with other kids and certainly away from their parents and it provides them an opportunity to figure out who they are and where there are going in their lives. As Harry Potter develops from a shy and quiet boy, you see a growth towards a confident and certainly courageous young man. Or better known as a bildungsroman, as Dr. Mitchell-Buck stated, it is definitely a coming of age story- a story as to where you see someone develop and grow up through age. Being at a school implies that it has a lot of structure as well- they have a school, ministry, sports, hospitals, etc. Further on, I thought it was definitely interesting to see why there was an importance of having a clear cut separation- as far as having a muggle world and a magic or wizard world. The world is just viewed as amazing and spectacular because the muggle world is just so plain, bland, and ordinary. As to where the muggle world also has that element of surprise and mystery and you can always expect something unique, extraordinary, and new happen.

Who is Gandalf?

At the end of our last class we were asked to think about Gandalf’s powers and where they came from. That question caught me a bit off guard as I had never really questioned the source of Gandalf’s magic. To fully answer this question, we have to go far back into Middle Earth’s past to a time before even The Hobbit.

              

 First and foremost, Gandalf is not human, nor is his name actually Gandalf. He is a Maia (plural Maiar), which were spirits that helped the Valar (More spirits. These were created by Ilúvatar, the supreme deity that created Middle Earth, to help him keep order in creation.) shape the world. The Maiar are immortal, so Gandalf was not only around the first time Sauron (Also a Maia) fell, but for thousands of years before that. Gandalf’s true name is Olórin and he is the wisest of the five Maiar sent to Middle Earth. These five Maiar are the five wizards of Middle Earth and were sent solely to help the people of Middle Earth overcome Sauron. While in Middle Earth, they appear as old Men, but are capable of changing their appearance at will. All five of the wizards have a staff, and their powers are focused through this staff. The exact extent of his powers are uncertain, especially since the Valar instructed him not to use his full power while in Middle Earth, but the abilities he does show include controlling lightning, creating a magic shield, making fire, communicating with animals and destroying the bridge when facing the Balrog.

So long story short, where does Gandalf’s power come from? In a way it comes from himself, but ultimately it comes from Ilúvatar, the creator and supreme god of Middle Earth. And despite how rarely he uses it, I have a feeling Gandalf is more powerful than most people assume.

(P.S. This is the barest of summaries of Gandalf and the Maiar and doesn’t even scratch the surface of most of the backstory to Middle Earth. I would definitely check these links out if you want to know more)

Sources:
http://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Gandalf
http://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Maiar
http://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Wizards

Magic in Once Upon a Time

After watching Desperate Souls I realized that Once Upon A Time approaches magic in a very interesting way. [Beware lots of OUAT  spoilers] Through out the series magic is pretty much universally bad and "always comes with a price." Rather early on we are introduced to Rumplestiltskin (though how evil Gold/Rumple is rather that enabling and clever is debatable) and Regina, a time later we meet Cora who also has magic and is Regina's mother. In all circumstances magic is used for evil purposes*. All the "good" characters cannot perform magic; however they do use magic through enchanted potions and objects they get from Gold/Rumple "for a price." It is not until later seasons that magic is wielded by a good character.

Often when "good" characters use magic to get what they want they are often shown to have been corrupted, sometimes rather literally. Snow uses magic to kill Cora and we are shown that her heart has begun to blacken. We have seen other characters who have killed with arrows and otherwise, and their hearts have not been blackened (the huntsmen killed people for Regina and yet his heart was pure when it was eventually crushed).

In the current season of Once Upon a Time we are seeing developments in the way that magic is being portrayed. As Rumple and Regina begin to become more caring and "nice" characters that don't only care about themselves and their power we seen this reflected in the portrayal of magic. Magic is becoming a more and more neutral subject that is really just a tool to be used for either good or bad.  Emma Swan, a relatively un-magical character joins forces with Regina and Gold to try and get their son back from Peter Pan (yeah Peter Pan is a bad guy in this show, long story short he essentially wants eternal youth and all that jazz). During their journey to retrieve Henry Regina helps Emma use the magic that she seems to have inside of her. Together they use magic to help save Henry, however to use magic rage is the easiest source. This again steeps magic in angry evil thoughts even though they are doing good with it. More and more frequently in this season we are seeing magic do good, we see Regina try and sacrifice herself to save the city, Rumple aid in the journey to save Henry, and Emma using magic periodically through the season.

Another interesting part of magic in Once Upon a Time is how Fairies get their magic. Like most stories fairies have dust and wands and such that let them do magic. A lot of this magic has to do with "love," "purity," and "good." When Pinocchio was turning into wood the fairy could only turn him back again if essentially repented and was turned into a young boy full of innocence. Fairy dust also has the power to show you the path to your true love. In many of the stories that we read by the Grimm Brothers it was not magic but rather fate and destiny that brought them together. I felt like this was an important difference considering that they are using a lot of the same stories, and that Once Upon a Time was adding magic into many other facets of the stories.

I think that this is not only relevant to our class because it has to do with magic but because we've been looking at the context that magic has been placed in. In once upon a time we see the transition from all magic is bad to only some magic wielders are bad, while in history we see the opposite. We also see a lot of the "bad" magic wielder in many fairy tales as typically you have the witches and fairies that either help or hinder you.


* Fairies do seem to have some magical powers however they seem to hinge on their wands and dust rather than being able to conjure all the time

Fishing for Power: A Flounder Can Only Do So Much

When I read The Fisherman's Wife, several thoughts crossed my mind. First: Talking animals are all the rage in Fairy Tales, whether they're malicious (Red Riding Hood) or helpful (The fish in this story). Second: A case can easily be made that this story is commenting on a flawed aspect of human nature. Essentially, it is a story of a fisherman who catches a (seemingly normal) flounder. But nooooo, it's a Brothers Grimm fairy tale, guys. This fish HAS to be able to talk/perform magic/do a flip or something.

The fish promises to give the man anything he wants in return for the fish's freedom. (What a sweet deal!) The man returns home and tells his wife of his experience. After no doubt feeling the man's forehead for a high, and thus hallucination inducing, fever, his wife tells him to wish for a nicer living arrangement. The man obliges and calls the fish. When the scaled sorcerer (I got tired of saying "fish") answers his call, he tells the man to return home immediately, for his wife already has what she wished for. The man returns home to find his wife in a nicer living arrangement than they previously inhabited. The wife, he realizes, is not completely satisfied and demands more of the fish. The man goes out and requests a castle instead of the cottage that had replaced his shack. The flounder instructs the man to return home again, and when he does he finds his wife in a castle. The wife then reveals that she is not done with her rampant pleonexia and demands more of the fish. This scene takes places several times more, and, long story short, the wife demands that the fish make her God. That's right. You're reading that right. Here it is again just in case you think I made a typo (I'll even italicize it): the wife demands that the fish make her God. Wow. In response to this, the flounder tells the man to return to his wife, for she is inhabiting the shack they originally lived in.

This story is a very interesting commentary on greed, but I am not ignoring the strong religious overtones presented. For one thing, the story revolves around the wife's greed. I, for one, am curious as to why the husband was not a major character or one of significant influence. I get that the tale is not exactly pushing the Fisherman to the forefront, but he's the one that catches the flounder! And what does he get in return? He plays Messenger for his power hungry spouse. This is most likely intentional in order to emphasize the focus on the wife. If the Fisherman had more intense interactions with his wife or the flounder, the focus on the wife (and the central theme of greed in the story) would be compromised and diminished.

The previously mentioned religious overtone is strong when one examines the decision of the authors to make God the final step. The flounder is fine about changing their shack to a cottage.

"What's that? Cottage to Castle? No Prob! What now? You want to be am empress? Done! Wait, the Pope? We already have one of those but sure! Wait... now you want to be God?" *scoff* "aaaaaaand you're back in your shack".

 This brings the focus onto both the unrelenting greed of the wife and God's unattainable status.Overall, the themes present here are as follows: "God is perfect and you cannot be no matter how many magical fish you catch" and "Please have the decency to appreciate what you're given." The wife was never going to be content with Earthly pleasures, and so they vanished as if by magic. ;)







Post 1 of 5

Hauling witches up a tower to Gold Spinner Splits in half....Grimm Tales has Something for Everyone......

When I was reading the Grimm fairy tales I could not help but think, “Wow, these outcomes are extreme”. I do not think that the punishment fits the crime for all these stories. In addition, there are some cases where there is no punishment at all.

             For instance, the story Rapunzel: the witch steals a baby and locks her in a tower. On top of that, the witch makes Rapunzel haul her up and down the tower with her hair. Then she cuts off her hair banishes her, and pushes the prince out the window and blinds him. Once Rapunzel and the prince are reunited the story ends. Well, what about the Witch? Shouldn’t she get her comeuppance? However, on the complete opposite end of the spectrum, there is the story of Cinderella.

            Cinderella’s mother died and her father remarried before the snow melted. The stepmother and stepsisters were cruel to little Cinderella. However, the father showed no compassion towards Cinderella, he did not even let her go to the ball, let her sit home, and pick lentils out of the ash. In the end, the stepsisters were invited to the wedding only to have their eyes pecked out by birds. In some instances, they cut off their toes and heels to fit in the shoes. I think this is extreme. Moreover, the father and stepmother, they were cruel to her too but they were allowed to keep their eyes and toes.

             I always wondered how the endings to these stories were thought up. Rumplestiltskin, I think he technically had every right to take the child, but the hero of the story is the queen who guesses his name. He ends up being stuck in the floor, ripping in half, and dying. On the other hand, in some versions he just falls through the floor and dies. What is up with that? I guess they are called Grimm tales for more than just the names of the authors......

Blog 3 of 5