• Welcome to the Fantasy Writing Forums. Register Now to join us!

Question: "Fog on the Barrow Downs"??

Xanados

Maester
I have never read the LotR trilogy.

What a strange, unexpected chapter is "Fog on the Barrow Downs."

I have one question: Why on earth does Merry awake from the wight's dream (??) and say to himself "What in the name of wonder? Of course, I remember! The men of Carn Dum came on us at night, and we were worsted. Ah! The spear in my heart! No, no. What am I saying? I have been dreaming!"

I read somewhere that he was reliving an experience not in his own life...
This makes no sense to me. Why did no one even speak up after he said that? Frodo doesn't even ask him.

No explanation is given whatsoever in this chapter about anything.


I'VE RE-READ IT TWO TIMES! What a completely unnecessary, weird chapter.

Edit: "The ghosts of the Barrow-downs in the Old Forest seem to possess Merry, Pippin, and Sam."

That isn't even told in the book!

Edit: This doesn't even seem like the films that I know and love...
 
Last edited:

Codey Amprim

Staff
Article Team
I think it was one of those things you just throw in there to make the world a little bit more interesting and give the reader something to 'hmm' about. I said the same exact thing when I read that, and various other points in the story.

It should have been wrapped up or answered in some way, but wasn't.
 

Xanados

Maester
I think it was one of those things you just throw in there to make the world a little bit more interesting and give the reader something to 'hmm' about. I said the same exact thing when I read that, and various other points in the story.

It should have been wrapped up or answered in some way, but wasn't.
I'm really not a fan of things that go unchecked or are in many ways quite unofficial. What I have read so far completely blows my mind when referencing the movies that I love.
 
Last edited:

Xanados

Maester
If anything it's just making me bloody confused and sad, actually. It feels like I'm reading from a different universe at this point. I do flip through to see the name "Denethor" and that makes me happier. This feels more like a Disney cartoon.

Edit: It just doesn't feel real... The hobbits wake up and seem to hardly care AT ALL about what has just happened to them.
 
Last edited:

Codey Amprim

Staff
Article Team
How about when Gandalf fell? There barely seemed to be a tear shed. I put the book down for two months after I found out that is how it was written
 

Xanados

Maester
How about when Gandalf fell? There barely seemed to be a tear shed. I put the book down for two months after I found out that is how it was written
I'm only on chapter 8. As I said I haven't read the trilogy yet!
Ugh that sounds horrible. There was so much emotion in the film.

Thanks for making me feel better :(
 

Philip Overby

Staff
Article Team
Lord of the Rings is one of those classics that some people love and some give up after reading a couple of chapters. It certainly has its flaws, but most people say "Why be a fantasy writer if you haven't read Lord of the Rings?" I agree to an extent, but I haven't read it yet either. Although I've read "The Hobbit" which I struggled with at first, but then quite enjoyed it. I think a lot of modern readers may have difficulty with Tolkein's text. I had a friend that read the "Simarillion" and forced himself to finish it even though he hated it the whole time. I personally don't get that. If I hate reading something, then I don't finish it. But that's just me.
 

Xanados

Maester
Lord of the Rings is one of those classics that some people love and some give up after reading a couple of chapters. It certainly has its flaws, but most people say "Why be a fantasy writer if you haven't read Lord of the Rings?" I agree to an extent, but I haven't read it yet either. Although I've read "The Hobbit" which I struggled with at first, but then quite enjoyed it. I think a lot of modern readers may have difficulty with Tolkein's text. I had a friend that read the "Simarillion" and forced himself to finish it even though he hated it the whole time. I personally don't get that. If I hate reading something, then I don't finish it. But that's just me.

I will finish the trilogy. I don't hate it. I just disagree wholly with Tom's chapters...

I love the films, to the point of shedding manly tears every time I watch the full extended edition. I WILL read the trilogy.
 
As I understand it, Tom Bombadil was really interesting to Tolkien as this sort of personification of the world-spirit... or something. Even Tolkien knew that Bombadil wasn't really important to the story structure, but he liked exploring that character, which is why he's in the novel.

I had more or less the same reaction the first time I read LotR: "What was the point of that, exactly? Oh well, they're on to other adventures now."
 

Xanados

Maester
I think I'm annoyed at the obliviousness of the hobbits after almost dieing than anything...
 

Kit

Maester
Xanados said:
I have never read the LotR trilogy.

What a strange, unexpected chapter is "Fog on the Barrow Downs."

I have one question: Why on earth does Merry awake from the wight's dream (??) and say to himself "What in the name of wonder? Of course, I remember! The men of Carn Dum came on us at night, and we were worsted. Ah! The spear in my heart! No, no. What am I saying? I have been dreaming!"

I read somewhere that he was reliving an experience not in his own life...

Sometimes places can hold traces of past events, especially very traumatic events. You can be more vulnerable to inadvertantly tapping into such an energy trace and "reliving" the event if you are stupid enough to sleep on a site that was an old battlefield or a gravesite.
 
Funny thing is a lot of fans hated the fact that tom Bombadil and the barrow downs were never included.

I love the books, more so than the film. But Tom Bombadil was a bit superflous and odd within LOTR, though he would have fit in with the Hobbit perfectly. Perhaps Tolkien was trying to remind readers of some of the magic of the legacy Hobbit with its more fairy tale aspects?

The Barrow Downs I could live with, though again Tom bombadil's deux ex machina appearance was kinda lazy, I would have preferred to see the Hobbits find their own way out. And yes Merry was awakening from a dream of the history of the dead people of the barrows.

I think part of the apparent lack of fear and concern comes from the intrinsic nature of the Hobbits, don't forget these are practically fairy folk with a different outlook to Humans. Merry and pippin especially have curious and mischief making personalities that cause many problems for the group as the story evolves.
 
Edit: This doesn't even seem like the films that I know and love...
well of course not, since when was any film faithful to the book?

Jackson took many liberties with the books, even to the point of merging characters together to make new characters. He even invented whole new scenes and plotlines.
 

Steerpike

Felis amatus
Moderator
Those chapters were not my favorite, but I didn't mind them. Tom Bombadil serves to further characterize the world as a whole and even the Ring itself. And of course it sets up Frodo's departure from the Shire, right?
 

myrddin173

Maester
I haven't read LotR in a while so my recollection is a bit fuzzy. I agree with Graham about Hobbits not being humans and therefore having a different outlook on life, they knew they were safe at that point so why worry about what happened. I also have to admit, Bombadil is one of my favorite characters, tied with Gandalf for first of course (Treebeard and Galadriel are tied for second), precisely because no one, not even Tolkien, knows what he is and yet he is this incredibly powerful being.

I also saw the movies before I read the books, and the movies have a dear place in my heart, but I hold the books more dearly. In many ways it amuses me that you liken reading the books to Disney cartoon because I would argue the opposite. Disney takes things and waters them down in the same way Peter Jackson did. A lot of the fans absolutely hate him for what he did to the books, notably leaving out Bombadil and more importantly the Scouring of the Shire which DRASTICALLY changed the story and its meaning.

P.S. "Fog on the Barrow Downs" may seem like an unneeded chapter but it is actually an important plot point by the time you get to Book Five.

P.P.S. I still can't read the last quarter of Book One because of nightmares I had about the Black Riders when I was younger...
 
The fog on the barrow downs is also the source of their semi magical swords too from what I remember, although Frodo's was later replaced by sting.

I actually read the books long before the film - several times, so like many I was disappointed at the loss of magic from the story. Nearly everything that made LOTR enchanting and magical was stripped out to make room for more action. As much as I enjoyed them, the films in my opinion are flat and two dimensional compared to the books.
 
Last edited:

WilliamElse

Dreamer
I believe Tolkien once said that Tom Bombadil was intentionally 'an enigma', which explains (or rather doesn't explain) his oddly discordant appearance in the book. Personally, I've always liked him, although it wouldn't hurt if he laid off the singing once in a while...

I can see that the emotional responses of the characters in the book could sometimes seem a little odd and unrealistic from a modern perspective. It's worth remembering, however, that Tolkien steeped his world in the lore and mindset of the dark ages. You'll find similar outlooks in the Mabinogion or the Norse sagas. The past, as they say, is a foreign country.

I love the films and think Peter Jackson made the right choice in watering down the books' content to make it more accessible, but I still find the books far more atmospheric and the characters in them more credible as products of Middle Earth.
 

gerald.parson

Troubadour
I am not surprised at the changes, I am actually surprised there wasn't many more. At first they were just going to make one, 3 hour movie, but it wasn't until New Line Cinema stepped in that the project was expanded. Sadly not many people that got involved with the project actually cared for the book's, even Mr.Jackson him self has taken plenty of shots at it. He in fact wanted to take out "the army of the dead" and rewrite that whole segment, he thought it was a cheap and quick way to progress the story and didn't like it, but he kept it in there because that would in fact be quit the overhaul. In short they had no intention of making the movie(s) spot on accurate to the book(s), they wanted to appeal to a broader demographic so they went a more mainstream route. I suspect they will do the same with the hobbit too.
 

Ivan

Minstrel
Probably the hobbits think nothing of Merry's words because they all have experienced the same thing. They were spellbound into being like the men that were buried in the barrows; men who fought against an ancient evil realm in the north ruled by one of the Black Riders. I think it gives the story some history and sets what will become the background of one of the chief characters of the story. Many things in the book that seem to be loose ends actually are whole threads which extend out of sight.
 

Shockley

Maester
While an earlier poster was correct in pointing out that the events in the Barrow-Down have increasing significance as the story goes on, there's something from outside of Lord of the Rings that I'd like to bring into the discussion.

Tolkien wrote lots and lots of things. Some of them were published in his life time (The Hobbit, LotR), some of it was published post-mortem (the Silmarillion) and some of it wasn't published at all (and probably won't be). Christopher Tolkien put out a fifteen volume on the writing process behind the Lord of the Rings, and that probably didn't even begin to scratch the surface. The important part to take away from this is that, when originally writing, Tolkien didn't always conceive of his events as happening in the same universe. When writing the Hobbit (after he had laid out most of the Silmarillion in some form or another) he did not see it as part of the same world. Only when writing Lord of the Rings did he decide to make that connection, and he included a lot of stuff in the early chapters to clarify that connection.

One obvious example is the evolution of Aragorn as a character. He was originally intended to be a maimed Hobbit. Only when Tolkien decided to implement the ideas of Sauron and the One Ring of Power did Aragorn begin to flesh out as a man. Another one, and this is the meat, is the presence of Tom Bombadil. The Adventures of Tom Bombadil was an epic poem that Tolkien wrote in 1934 (Predating the Hobbit. Based on the text of the poem, it's interesting that Bree also predates the Hobbit.). When putting everything together into one universe, he made the decision to tie in Tom Bombadil as well.

I think it improves the story, but I might be one of the few.
 
Top