Posted on 03/14/2002 5:07:26 AM PST by HairOfTheDog
This is a continuation of the infamous thread New Zealander Builds Hobbit Hole originally posted on January 26, 2001 by John Farson, who at the time undoubtedly thought he had found a rather obscure article that would elicit a few replies and die out. Without knowing it, he became the founder of the Hobbit Hole. For reasons incomprehensible to some, the thread grew to over 4100 replies. It became the place for hobbits and friends of hobbits to chit chat and share LoTR news and views, hang out, and talk amongst ourselves in the comfort of familiar surroundings.
In keeping with the new posting guidelines, the thread idea is continuing here, as will the Green Dragon Inn, our more structured spin-off thread, as soon as we figure out how to move all the good discussion that has been had there. As for the Hobbit Hole, we will just start fresh, bringing only a few mathoms such as the picture above with us to make it feel like home, and perhaps a walk down memory lane:
Our discussion has been light:
It very well may be that a thread named "New Zealander builds Hobbit hole" will end up being the longest Tolkien thread of them all, with some of the best heartfelt content... Sorry John, but I would have rather it had been one with a more distinguished title!… post 252 - HairOfTheDog
However, I can still celebrate, with quiet dignity, the fact that what started as a laugh about some wacko in New Zealand has mutated and grown into a multifaceted discussion of the art, literature, and philosophy that is Tolkien. And now that I've managed to write the most pompous sentence of my entire life, I agree, Rosie… post 506 - JenB
Hah! I was number 1000!! (Elvish victory dance... wait, no; that would be too flitty) … post 1001 - BibChr
Real men don't have to be afraid of being flitty! Go for it. – post 1011 – HairOfTheDog
Seventeen years to research one mystical object seems a bit excessive… post 1007 - JenB
Okay...who's the wise guy who didn't renew Gandalf's research grant?… post 1024 – Overtaxed
To the very philosophical:
…Judas Iscariot obviously was a good man, or he wouldn't have been chosen to be one of the Apostles. He loved Jesus, like all of the Apostles, but he betrayed him. Yet without his betrayal, the Passion and Crucifixion would never have occurred, and mankind would not have been redeemed. So without his self-destruction infinite good would not have been accomplished. I certainly do not mean this to be irreverant but it seems to me that this describes the character of Gollum, in the scenes so movingly portrayed above… Lucius Cornelius Sulla
To fun but heartfelt debates about the integrity and worth of some of the characters…
…Anyone else notice how Boromir treats the hobbits? He's very fond of them but he seems to think of them as children - ruffling Frodo's hair, calls them all 'little ones'. He likes them, but I don't think he really respects them… post 1536 - JenB
Yes... Tolkien told us not to trust Boromir right off the bat when he began to laugh at Bilbo, until he realized that the Council obviously held this hobbit in high esteem. What a pompous dolt… post 1538 - HairOfTheDog
…I think almost every fault of his can be traced directly back to his blindness to anything spiritual or unseen. He considers the halflings as children, because that is what they look like. He considers the only hope of the ring to be in taking it and using it for a victory in the physical realm. He cannot see what the hobbits are truly made of, he cannot see the unseen hope of what the destruction of the ring might mean--the destruction of Sauron himself, and he cannot see the unseen danger that lies in the use of the ring itself… I just feel sorry for Boromir--he is like a blind but honorable man, trying to take the right path on the road but missing the right path entirely because he simply cannot see it… post 1548 - Penny1
Boromir isn't a jerk, he's a jock… post 2401 – Overtaxed
-----------------------------------------
Oh, I think by the time Frodo reaches the Cracks, he's not even himself anymore! I think he's not only on the brink of a dangerous place physically, he's on the brink of losing himself completely during the exchange with Gollum. But for some reason, the take-over isn't complete till he actually has to throw the Ring in. The person speaking to Gollum is not Frodo, but the "Wheel of Fire" that Sam sees. After the Ring is destroyed, Frodo not only comes back to himself, but comes back with the unbearable (to him) knowledge of what it's like to be completely without compassion. I think that's why it's so important to him to be compassionate in the Shire… post 2506 - 2Jedismom
…Regarding Frodo's compassion... it's a little too much at the end. Even Merry tells him that he's going to have to quit being so darn nice. But you're right. He's learned a lesson about evil that very few ever learn since it wasn't an external lesson but an internal one. (Those kinds of lessons have the greatest impact) Not only did he totally succumb to it, but he was rather ruthless to my little Smeagol… post 2516 - carton253
Well that Frodo was a big mean bully! (to Smeagol)… post 2519 – Overtaxed
So as you can see, everything JRR Tolkien (and Peter Jackson) is welcome here in our New Row, our soon-to-be familiar New Hobbit Hole…; philosophy, opinion, good talk and frequent silliness.
Looks like the Sean Hannity/Ann Coulter debate on other threads. I believe that, as a general rule, we should respond to folks in the spirit which they approach us, once you make some effort to discover the truth about this. There are rational activist liberals and leftists, and they should be approached in a reasonable way. Then you have the James Carville types, and if you have to deal with them, you should use the Coulter approach.
Of course a lot of people who have liberal ideas are not seriously political, and have just absorbed their ideas from the zeitgeist. They need to definitely be approached in a more gentle way. As far as the Hollywood types are concerned, they have absorbed a value system as warped as most college campuses. But most of them are simply trying to be agreeable with their colleagues, and some really disagree, but take a protective coloration for their own protection. The ones who have a serious radical political attitude, and are intolerant of other views should be responded to accordingly. Naturally I would never adopt a political attitude on someone's authority as an actor.
(but I wasn't talking about talking heads and activists in my post, I said we need to stop calling the soccer moms evil)
I have to say that was one of the most slanted quizes I have come across in a while, at least half of the questions had no good answers. When I completed it I got no score or anything, so whag was the point?
Soccermoms ARE evil. Football rules!
I've lived for a short time in Texas, where there is very little in the way of public lands and then here in the west, where we have quite a lot (maybe some case can certainly be made that we have too much in some places, that's for sure).
The lifestyle advantages of having access to public lands like National Forests are tremendous and there is no question in my mind that they are quite valuable as a public resource.
However, I too have "issues" with the management of these resources in some cases. I believe that the environmentalists have injected a great deal of "unwisdom" into this management in recent years. One of the drawbacks of public lands is that they become susceptible to political influence from well-funded special interests: Like the Sierra Club and other radical environmentalists. Staunching that influence is a tiring and costly fight that many don't have the time, energy or money to wage. But finding a way to acquire and maintan good management over these lands is worth it to keep these lands open to public use.
I'd like to see more use of these lands, not less, with the lands being maintained largely for recreational purposes. For one, I'd like to see ski resorts and areas -- most American ski areas are on National Forest land -- have an easier time making improvements, and even allowing more of them to expand hotel and restaurant offerings.
It was difficult in Texas to find affordable outdoor recreational activities -- whereas here, and in much of the west, it is easy to do so.
altern_activeHmmm... I wonder how many more of us would fit this one!
Hi all, home from school and research grad schools. Asked for information about my dream program...
When all else fails, manipulate the data.
BTW, my brother works for Washington State's Department of Natural Resources, and land that is designated DNR land is specifically ear-marked for multi-use: recreation, logging, etc. Their goal is to have as many different uses of the land to benefit as many segments of the public as possible.
I would not want to lose any of our park, DNR, or wilderness lands.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.