quote:

---

The Road was running steadily downhill, and there was now in places much grass at either side, in which the hobbits walked when they could, to ease their tired feet. In the late afternoon they came to a place where the road went suddenly under the dark shadow of tall pine trees, and then plunged into a deep cutting with steep moist walls of red stone. Echoes ran along as they hurried forward; and there seemed to be a sound of many footfalls following their own. There at the bottom of a sharp incline they saw before them a long flat mile, and beyond that the Ford of Rivendell. On the further side was a steep brown bank, threaded by a winding path; and behind that the tall mountains climbed, shoulder above shoulder, and peak beyond peak, into the fading sky.
There was still and echo as of following feet in the cutting behind them; a rushing noise as if a wind were rising and pouring through the branches of the pines. One moment Glorfindel turned and listened, then he sprang forward with a loud cry.
'Fly!' he called. 'Fly! The enemy is upon us.!'
The white horse leaped forward. The hobbits rand down the slope. Glorfindel and Strider followed as rear-guard. They were only half-way across the flat, when suddenly there was a noise of horses galloping. Out of the gate in the trees that they had just left rode a Black Rider. He reined his horse in, and halted, swaying in his saddle. Another followed him, and then another; then again two more.

---

quote:

---

Something was coming up behind them. What is was could not be seen: it was like a great shadow, in the middle of which was a dark form, of man shape maybe, yet greater; and a power and terror seemed to be in it and to go before it.
[Skipping some]
The Balrog reached the bridge. Gandalf stood in the middle of the span, leaning on the staff in his left hand, but in his other hand Glamdring gleamed, cold and white. His enemy halted again, facing him, and the shadow about it reached out like two vast wings. It raised the whip, and the thongs whined and cracked. Fire came from its nostrils. But Gandalf stood firm.
[Skipping some more, Gandalf says some stuff]
The Balrog made no answer. The fire in it seemed to die, but the darkness grew. It stepped forward slowly on to the bridge, and suddenly it drew itself up to a great height, and its wings spread from wall to wall; but still Gandalf could be seem, glimmering in the gloom; he seemed small, and altogether alone: grey and bent, like a wizened tree before the onset of a storm.

---

quote:

---

...it was like a great shadow, in the middle of which was a dark form,

---

quote:

---

His enemy halted again, facing him, and the shadow about it reached out like two vast wings.

---

quote:

---

The fire in it seemed to die, but the darkness grew.

---

quote:

---

and suddenly it drew itself up to a great height, and its wings spread from wall to wall;

---

quote:

---

All at once, as if through a gate of light, the Road ran out again from the end of the tunnel into the open.

---

quote:

---

Out of the gate in the trees that they had just left rode a Black Rider.

---

As you can clearly see when you read the quotes in their context (which I have graciously supplied above), Tolkien compares the light at the end of the trees to a gate, and then uses the term "gate" all by itself to mean "end of the trees." If he can do it with the gate, surely he can do it with the wings.

Anyway, now that I have resolved this debate once and for all, you can now go back to talking about silly fluff like the Iraq war and the election and whatnot.

[ January 22, 2004, 05:03 PM: Message edited by: Hazen ]
 

---

Posted by Saruman (Member # 2275) on :
 
*scours Hazen*
 

---

Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
 
I think this should settle the dispute once and for all.
 

---

Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
 
Hazen, I hate to break it to you, but every time I'VE tried to settle a dispute like this by referring to the original source, I get ignored.

Therefore - all your quoting bears no meaning to the point of the discussion which is this . . . sibling rivalry and quarrels for all us only children . . .
 

---

Posted by Saruman (Member # 2275) on :
 
Linky.
 

---

Posted by pholly1 (Member # 6110) on :
 
"the shadow about it [the balrog] reached out like two vast wings"

We don't know the wings exists yet. We see what the Fellowship sees and no more.

"and suddenly it drew itself up to a great height, and its wings spread from wall to wall;"

Now we do know for sure that the balrog has more than wing-shaped shadows extending from him, but actual wings.

learn some hermeneutics # 161
 

---

Posted by Hazen (Member # 161) on :
 
But the shadow is described in different ways than just wings. Once it has been established that a writer uses a particular form, it can be used to interpret later passages. He uses this style of figurative language earlier, and we have no reason to think that he doesn't use it here.
 

---

Posted by pholly1 (Member # 6110) on :
 
Your comparison to the end of the trees & gate is a long shot. A really long shot.

And the burden of proof is on you to prove figurativie language.

You're probably just mad that the vision of the Balrog you imagined when reading the text was wrong the first time around.
 

---

Posted by Hazen (Member # 161) on :
 
To more directly address your first point, if the Fellowship were just then seeing the wings clearly for the first time there would be some hint of that in the text. There isn't any. There are, however, many hints that it is figurative language- the same style of hints as the author is know to have used. That is strong evidence. This besides the evidence listed in Saruman's link.
 

---

Posted by pholly1 (Member # 6110) on :
 
you're still wrong

and I'm just here to pick a fight anyway

but now I have some things do so and probably won't come back

kthxbye...

loser
 

---

Posted by Ryuko (Member # 5125) on :
 
Does it matter whether Tolkein actually wrote the wings in? Even he'd agree that they look darn cool in the movie...
 

---

Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
 
So when eating Balrog, is it socially acceptable to pick up the pieces as with poultry?
 

---

Posted by sarcasticmuppet (Member # 5035) on :
 
pooka
 

---

Posted by Princess Leah (Member # 6026) on :
 
If the Balrog had wings, why would falling into the depths matter to it? Wouldn't he just fly on up again?

Besides, he was awoken from "the deep places in the world". Or was that just in the movie?

I give up on citing evidence. (see the deagol/smeagol brother/friend argument) Listen to my logic above the quote from the movie.
 

---

Posted by Shigosei (Member # 3831) on :
 
Anyone who thinks the Balrog has wings is a stupid facist commie who eats babies for breakfast!
 

---

Posted by Saruman (Member # 2275) on :
 
A balrog is a creature of shadow. If it has wings, they're made of shadow too. I don't see what's so difficult about this.
 

---

Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
 
I think the Balrogs, while asleep in the depths of the earth, have varied and more interesting lives than you lot.

Sheesh.
 

---

Posted by aka (Member # 139) on :
 
The physical form of this guy may possibly not be like that of ordinary creatures with which we are more familiar. It seems that cells and bones and things don't always apply to Morgoth's gang. It's my contention that a creature like that is aiming for a body that looks incredibly badass and scary. Wings are a great accessory to such a body, especially if they are made of shadow. But the structrual compromises required to actually fly aloft are extensive. For one thing, you don't get much mass left over for whip-arm muscles. Plus the huge flight muscles you need seriously interefere in 3D space with whatever whip-arm muscles you might need. Let's face it, Balrogs love the dark underground places, same as most of Morgoth's buddies. They don't need to fly so much as they need to look really badass. I think they have wings, made of some shadowy stuff that they can control with their very high powered spirits (they are Maia, same as the Istari), but they don't allow for flight.

Hah! Problem solved!

[ January 22, 2004, 12:44 PM: Message edited by: aka ]
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 
The "Gandalf flew" argument on the linked site is ridiculous.

Fly also means "To move with great speed; rush or dart" or To flee; escape". Tolkien uses it consistently that way ("Fly, you fools!").

It's clear Tolkien uses simile and metaphor constantly - their use elsewhere does not help us determine which way a word is used in this instance.

Dagonee
 

---

Posted by Ryuko (Member # 5125) on :
 
O_o; AK said badass... (hides)
 

---

Posted by Saruman (Member # 2275) on :
 
I'm still wondering where the "shocking new evidence" is. You can't quote the original material and call it "shocking new evidence."

Also, the title says "infammatory" instead of "inflammatory."

[ January 22, 2004, 02:29 PM: Message edited by: Saruman ]
 

---

Posted by AndrewR (Member # 619) on :
 
And I say...

"You bash the Balrog, you bash the Balrog,
You bash the Balrog and I'll climb the tree.
And they sang as they went out to get their share of pelf,
You bash the Balrog and I'll climb the tree."

(Sang to "Waltzing Matilda," of course.)
 

---

Posted by Hazen (Member # 161) on :
 
I knew I had misspelled something.
 

---

Posted by aka (Member # 139) on :
 
Maybe he meant defamatory, defaming our beloved movie Balrog. He looked so great! Of all the wonderful special effects and visuals there were in the movie, I loved the Balrog best.

Abby, is badass a bad word? I didn't know. What is a non-vulgar alternative that means the same thing? Can you think of one? If you can, let me know, and I promise I will use it from now on. <halo smilie>
 

---

Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
 
I'm fascinated by the uss of "ass" as a post-positioned adverb denoting intesification of a adjective. Is it because donkeys are notoriously stubborn?
 

---

Posted by aka (Member # 139) on :
 
I believe that is the correct etymology. I didn't realize references to donkeys were considered vulgar but I suppose that's because they are often quite rude.
 

---

Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
 
The movie balrog looked fabulous, he was in fact quite studly.

The fact that he was shown as having wings when in fact balrogs don't is one of the things I can accept where Jackson deviates from canon. Like, Arwen at the fords. Or a blonde Legolas.

In my mind's eye Glorfindel still rides to the rescue and Frodo stands alone against the Black Riders and Legolas is the dark haired Sindar he should be.

Not that I can't appreciate Orlando Bloom in a wig, but my stars he would have looked so much better if he had kept his natural coloring, a la Pirates of the Caribbean.
 

---

Posted by Ryan Hart (Member # 5513) on :
 
Actually Balrog Wings are like Buffalo Wings, just a lot spicier.

A party snack of shadow and flame!
 

---

Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
 
Ahhh - but what microbrew goes best?
 

---

Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
 
I watched "I Spy" last night and there was quite the panoply of adverbial [donkey] usage.
 

---

Posted by aka (Member # 139) on :
 
I don't think this topic got the kind of serious and thoughtful consideration it deserved here, so I'm bringing it back up to get people to give it another look.

It seems completely clear to me that Balrogs have real wings, though they are made of shadow, and aren't used for the purpose of flight, but rather as extensions of their powerful spirits for the purpose of horror and intimidation.

Any other hypothesis seems completely unwarranted. I suppose the lack of discussion is meant to signal that you all are in total agreement with this indisputable conclusion.
 

---

Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
 
Oh, all right - for the sake of argument - taken from Hazen's first post:

quote:

---

The Balrog made no answer. The fire in it seemed to die, but the darkness grew. It stepped forward slowly on to the bridge, and suddenly it drew itself up to a great height, and its wings spread from wall to wall;

---