LibriumArcana.Games

[youtube][/youtube]

In this clip, Stephen Colbert interviews one of the prominent land-owners of Middle Earth, a notable fiscal conservative who also specialized in business takeovers and mergers. He and Stephen discuss conservative values in such a context - including how the Stand Your Ground laws could apply to such folk as Bilbo Baggins.

I do have to wonder how it looked from the audience, but that was wickedly cool.

That was pretty cool.

"Go back to the Gold Standard!"

As in he who has the Gold makes the Standard?

LadyTevar wrote:"Go back to the Gold Standard!"

As in he who has the Gold makes the Standard?

Exactly! This should be an economy of hoarders, not takers!

rhoenix wrote:

Spoiler: show

Also, random Middle Earth note I noticed - in the First Age, Morgoth kidnapped and tortured Elves in order to make the first Orcs. It was also said that Morgoth never actually created anything, merely twisting things already present for his own ends. So, if Morgoth also created Smaug's kin (the fire drakes), what did Morgoth make them from?

There's things deep under the world, at the very roots of the mountains themselves, dark things that lurk where even angels fear to tread. Perhaps Morgoth found the prototypical drakes there, as serpent-like creatures that coiled and slithered in the cold, fire, and darkness at the depths of the earth. He uplifted and twisted them into his servants, perhaps by pouring parts of his own spirit into them, perhaps by breeding them with embodied maiar, perhaps by tapping into some primordial force of the world itself. However the method, they became the vastly powerful yet petty and prideful creatures we know them as.

Alternatively, dragons already were as we know them from the eventual narrative and Morgoth just unleashed them and took the credit for creating them.

There's a part of me that thinks that the fire drakes had to have been different from what they were, since what they are now (at least, the "now" of The Hobbit) focuses on how such a being can usurp and destroy, but it has the potential for far more. They do not craft anything, they do not sing, they do nothing but take what is already built and crafted from others, either to lay on (as with gold) or to light on fire (everything else)... and yet there are hints that they were once greater in their past.

From the book, Smaug had six limbs, not four (as in the movie). He had arms, wings, and legs, plus his tail, and the hands on his forelimbs had a thumb. One does not have thumbs if one's people has never thought about using tools. Smaug was intelligent enough to not only fully understand Westron, but speak it articulately enough to play riddle games with Bilbo - however, he never used that intelligence for much except speaking, and figuring out who Bilbo was allied with so he could set them on fire. He made no alliances with others, he built nothing, he designed nothing, he planned for nothing - all he did was sleep, usurp, and destroy.

Those things combined suggest to me that whatever Smaug's people were in the First Age before Morgoth "reshaped" them, they at least had the qualities of tool-using hands, and the intelligence to use them. Much like how Orcs can use tools but show no real curiosity for improving them, contrasted with Elves, who take great pride in their skill with designing and using various tools (whether tools or war, or otherwise); this suggests to me that the disparity between the fire drakes of the present and the dragons of old is similar to that of the orcs and the elves.

And with that said, perhaps the original dragons of the First Age weren't too different from how dragons were shown in Skyrim - intelligent, with their own mystic ways, their own lore, their own stories and traditions, their own heroes, and their own tragedies.

With all that said, I'm guessing that the dragons of old got along with the eagles about as well as the dwarves and elves get along presently. And this idea is suddenly hilarious to me.

There is also the fact that Dwarves have the same hunger for wealth as Dragons.

LadyTevar wrote:There is also the fact that Dwarves have the same hunger for wealth as Dragons.

True; but turning a dwarf into a dragon seems like a bit of a stretch. I mean, if you could do that, why wouldn't you make the orcs scarier too, if you're starting with elves? I can definitely see dwarves or hobbits being the template for goblins though, as much as I'm sure neither species would be happy to know about it.

I have to ask, what does Smaug need with tools? We started making tools to cover for physical weaknesses (stone tools were used to cut and smash things we didn't have the strength or claws to handle). We are after all not very physically impressive.

Dragons on the other hand

[youtube][/youtube]

What does smaug need to craft tools for exactly?

I think that's exactly what bothers me about Smaug. Smaug has articulated hands and thumbs, but doesn't use or need tools. Smaug has intelligence enough to understand and play riddle-games, but isn't shown using it for more than deducing who was helping Bilbo. Smaug appears highly attractive to gold and other shiny objects, but never uses those things for more than a bed.

It's very possible that I'm overthinking Smaug and his people here. However, for Smaug to be effective at what he does, he doesn't need to be able to speak, he doesn't need thumbs, and he doesn't need the gold he sleeps on. They are effectively extraneous details for who and what he is, and my brain is almost convinced that there has to be a reason for it, basically.

The reason for it might be nothing more than intelligent servants capable of speech being more useful to Morgoth. There was in the beginning only one dragon: Glaurung, Father of Dragons. He was basically a giant fire-breathing lizard, but more importantly he was a talking giant fire-breathing lizard, which meant that Morgoth could send him out to not just crush his enemies but also command his armies. In fact he did just that at the Battle of the Sudden Flame, leading the orcs and balrogs in breaking the siege of Angaband while spitting the great gouts of flame that gave name to the battle. Essentially, a dragon is an officer and an artillery piece in the same package. The pridefulness and lust for wealth may simply be an artefact of having intelligence, as more complex minds generally require more abstract motivations.

He's also air support, don't forget that.

Dragons are quite explicitly stated in the Silmarillion and in Tolkien's letters as having been formed, like all of Morgoth's workings, from corruptions of existing creatures. Thus as Orcs were formed from corrupted Elves, and Trolls from debased Ents, so were Dragons originally designed from the great Eagles of Manwe. Presumably he had to tinker with them for a bit before they could fly like their predecessors.

General Havoc wrote:Dragons are quite explicitly stated in the Silmarillion and in Tolkien's letters as having been formed, like all of Morgoth's workings, from corruptions of existing creatures. Thus as Orcs were formed from corrupted Elves, and Trolls from debased Ents, so were Dragons originally designed from the great Eagles of Manwe. Presumably he had to tinker with them for a bit before they could fly like their predecessors.

From the eagles?

Huh.

If that's the case, then Smaug's presentation in the recent movies actually makes more sense than the book, if only because in the movie, his forelimbs are part of his wings.

frigidmagi wrote:He's also air support, don't forget that.

Glaurung isn't air support, he had no wings, dragons with those came later, but once they did then yes. Also air superiority, because the forces of light had giant fucking eagles as their own air support, which meant aerial battles between eagles and dragons. I have to wonder whether the fighting on the ground didn't just stop when that happened, as everyone stared up agape at a sky torn by fire and claw.

General Havoc wrote:Dragons are quite explicitly stated in the Silmarillion and in Tolkien's letters as having been formed, like all of Morgoth's workings, from corruptions of existing creatures. Thus as Orcs were formed from corrupted Elves, and Trolls from debased Ents, so were Dragons originally designed from the great Eagles of Manwe. Presumably he had to tinker with them for a bit before they could fly like their predecessors.

All that Tolkien says is that the dragons were devised by Morgoth, and separately that he could only twist and corrupt, not create. The how and from what are not explained. Personally, I generally find the idea that they are corrupted eagles to be unsatisfactory, precisely because the earliest of their kind were serpent-like and the wings came later. Instead, I'm party to the idea that Glaurung was bred from an incarnated maia and some manner of reptilian creature, perhaps something Morgoth found deep under the earth as I said above.

I dug out my anthology of the letters of JRR Tolkien, and several times he mentions in them that Eagles were the derivation for Dragons, and that Morgoth most likely had corrupted them beyond the ability to fly and only slowly restored them closer to the original template.

I bow before your superior command of Tolkien's writings, seems it was the eagles indeed. I still don't much like it, but if the man said so, then clearly so it is.

Turning Eagles into Dragons is waaayyyy beyond corruption to me. I mean you're taking a bird... And turning it into a reptilian fire breathing creature... That's like a complete transformation. Way beyond what he did with the orcs or even the trolls.

Yeah, that's kind of my objection to it, it seems like quite a stretch. Though it's not quite farfetched enough that I'm willing to straight up say that Tolkien's full of shit on this one, especially because I have a lot of respect for Tolkien's world building. It's pushing it, but like I said if the man says it was eagles then it was eagles.

I suppose it's possible Morgoth is suppose to be number 2 and all that.

Yeah, it's a pretty thin connection, but it's from the horse's mouth itself, so what can I say? He also mentioned that Orcs were corrupted Elves, and Trolls corrupted Ents.

General Havoc wrote:Yeah, it's a pretty thin connection, but it's from the horse's mouth itself, so what can I say? He also mentioned that Orcs were corrupted Elves, and Trolls corrupted Ents.

Those, I can see. Ents becoming corrupted into Trolls, and Elves corrupted into Orcs. Even Dwarves or Hobbits being corrupted into Goblins, I can see.

I know we discussed this last night, but the whole thing about starting with eagles and ending with dragons is just hitting my brain wrong. It kinda fits insofar as giant eagles are meant to be more noble creatures in his work, and dragons are a direct corruption of values in what the eagles value, so it fits some of the themes involved. It's just the whole "hey, I'mma start with eagles, rip their wings off, turn them into giant lizards, and let them breathe fire. Oh wait, they should've had wings, huh? Ok, I'll give them wings again, OH SHIT WAR OF WRATH" part that makes my brain look at the whole thing side-eyed.

Yes, I know, of all the things to nitpick Tolkien's work about, it had to be this. We're such pedants, and that makes me happy.