Read: Narn i Chîn Húrin (The Children of Húrin)
GREAT. Great, great, great, great, great. For the (legions of) people who appreciate the character-driven, powerful portrayal of daily trials, personalities, and themes of friendship and loyalty found in The Lord of the Rings, and for the (somewhat smaller number of) people who appreciated the sweeping, cataclysmic majesty of The Simarillion; The Children of Húrin is a most satisfying blend of the two. Set against the giant, almost Biblical backdrop of the 'First Age' of Middle Earth as depicted in the Simarillion, The Children of Húrin is far more accessible (quite a quick read); expanding upon the tragic character of one Túrin, son of Húrin, as he does his heroic best to aid the the races of men & elves against what is essentially the forces of an evil, fallen god; yet, by rash disregard of wise counsel or plain ill fortune, ultimately brings ruin to everyone and everything he holds dear. Lord of the Rings will forever make my blood run swiftly, inciting noble thoughts of friendship, heroism, and perserverence. The Children of Húrin will always break my heart. A small and beautiful, yet heartbreaking little tale against an annihilative backdrop involving the fall of Kings and the fall of cities, ever in the background but inexorably tied to Turin's doom.
Seen: Husbands and Wives:
Well, it's tough to follow that. But this was a really good Woody Allen character film. Fairly recent, it follows two married couples and examines the forces that to drive the unions apart and keep them together through typically (for Allen) witty dialogue and clever story-development. Not unlike Crimes & Misdemeanors (which I actually preferred, as a movie), in it's cynicism, but it definitely throws some interesting characters into the blender - even if (like in most Woody Allen movies), I can't really relate to very much of his uptown-Manhattan lifestyle.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
8 comments:
So, as to CoH, basically it's a more accessible but equally tragic piece of The Silmarillion? GOOD LORD the lives of everyone in the first couple of ages was absolute MISERY. Heroic deeds done ultimately for naught. Much hope, some promise but in the end suffering.
Much better to be an oblivious hobbit in any age, frozen Brandywine, wolves and all.
Possibly the only time in history someone called an appendix (in your comments to a previous post) an accessible read.
Lives of Beren & Luthien not tragic.
Not all deeds done were for naught: relationships between races & great houses of men & elves would continue to influence the coming ages as their descendents made their way into the East.
Hobbits not around yet - in Beleriand(sp?), anyway.
The appendices to Lord of the Rings - the various stories telling about the histories of some of the kings & stewards of Gondor, as well as what befell the assorted members of the Fellowship, were quite fun & easy to read, I thought.
Also - as we get into more depth of character & are privvy to various counsel & conversation, I think you may have been casting a wide net of aspersion on the Elves of the 1st age. There were a few of the sons of Feanor (Maeglin, for one), and Feanor himself, certainly, who were hawkish, single-minded, and responsible for a lot of woe. But there were a lot of existing Noldor (ones who never left in the first place) and assorted other heroes who were wise, did not desire the Simaril, and just wanted to live in peace - but were similarly ill-fated. It was just a bad age in general.
It's just tough to stave off an enemy with orc-making technology - in any age.
The elves wrought what they had sown, Morgoth or no Morgoth. Sure it may have been only a few of them, but what a global shitstorm they created.
Beren and Luthien happy right up until Beren died tragically and Luthien subsequently died from grief. Dying from grief sounds like a hoot. They did get a second chance, but theirs was a likely uniquely joyous end.
I knew Hobbits were not part of the first age, I just meant it was better to be one no matter when it happened.
I understand your point about those specific appendices, but they may be unique in their eminent readability, hence naming them as such would strike most as bizarre.
Still, gotta read those books someday.
As for H and W: I remember one of the technical aspects of this film was the "shaky camera", which caused a little controversy for some folks who feel all shots should be composed on a stand or steaycam. I also remember the infamous line from Sydney Pollack to his young girlfriend: "Get in the fucking car!" I've wanted to use that as a in-joke in real life, but I've never had the opportunity.
Seems like there's a large number of opportunities to use that line, so long as your audience is open-minded.
It did use the "shaky cam." I agree with Mixdorf. You can tell anyone to get in the fucking car.
plan to read
Post a Comment