|
Post by Stormrider on Jan 14, 2009 23:20:24 GMT -6
From: Stormridr (Original Message) Sent: 3/30/2003 6:47 PM The Púkel-men Copyright Kaja Foglio. All Rights Reserved The statues are very worn. How long have the Púkel-men been around and who carved them? Why is Merry saddened by their appearance? Why do the Riders pay no attention to them? What is meant by no power or terror is left in them? Where they meant to scare anyone? If so, who or what?
|
|
|
Post by Stormrider on Jan 14, 2009 23:21:35 GMT -6
From: DaleAnn Sent: 4/18/2003 7:50 AM Now that we've passed Book 5 chap 5: The Ride of the Rohirrim, we can talk more about this.
The Pukel-men seem to be the ancestors of the Wild Men. Merry remarks about this when he sees Ghan buri Ghan. Later in the chapter when Ghan is talking to Theoden, Ghan says, "...leave Wild Men alone in the woods and do not hunt them like beasts any more."
The Riders pay no attention to the statues, not only because they are used to them as Olorin suggests, but also, because they do not respect them.
Apparently, the "Pukel Men" civilization was more advanced at one time, but because their numbers decreased (by being hunted?) and their territory taken over, they were reduced to the state of the Wild Men, wood dwellers, rarely seen. I think it is Tolkien who is saddened by the lack of reverence for those that came before and he "gave" it to Merry to voice. I'd like to guess that this may have been a comment on the Norman invasion of Great Britain, where much of what was "English" was lost. --DA * * * From: Merlin the mad Sent: 4/19/2003 6:26 PM Oh, now you've done it DA: maligned the Norman Conquest I think Tolkien liked English History (he said the Rohirrim were enough like the Normans in the Bayeux Tapestry in appearance to "fit them well enough" - "Letters" No. 211), and I haven't seen anything which suggests to me that he thought the Normans any less worthy to rule than the English of those times. In other words: Tolkien was not an Edward Augustus Freeman fan, who said of the Norman Conquest: "...it is from the memorable day of Saint Calixtus (that's 14 October 1066, the battle of Hastings) that we may fairly date the overthrow, what we know to have been only the imperfect and temporary overthrow, of our ancient and free Teutonic England. In the eyes of men of the next generation that day was the fatal day of England, the day of the sad overthrow of our dear country, the day of her handing over to foreign lords. From that day forward the Normans began to work the will of God upon the folk of England, till there were left in England no chiefs of the land of English blood, till all were brought down to bondage and to sorrow, till it was a shame to be called an Englishman, and the men of England were no more a people." But as with all conquerors, they inculcated more of the native ways than they imposed their own. And as England has never been conquered since by an outsider, it follows that what we view as "English" today is the evolution of what would largely have occured in the other case (England remaining Anglo-Saxon). Our lingo would be closer to Germanic than it is today (hardly an improvement); but other than that, I cannot see any huge changes. The Normans adopted the English language far more than they supplanted it: and as the laws favored the control of their kings they adopted English common law too, modifying it to create even more freedoms for the common man. The Pukel-Men were a completely different race than the Rohirrim or men of Gondor: a throw-back to an ancient race seen nowhere else in Middle-earth. Their lost culture is therefore sad because it is unknown, not something people miss. I think if Tolkien was expressing a sadness of things lost (using Merry as "the voice"), then it must be more like the things we see hinted at on Easter Island: utterly devoid of any messages left behind to tell us what happened. Surely even the Pukel-Men themselves had no memory or lore to tell them what sort of men their ancestors might once have been. MtM
|
|