From my perspective, the current debate concerning the “mission†statement is a continuation of the dynamic that began on TORC (and was the cause behind the reason for the exodus to and genesis of B77 [the community was in search of a mission and the unwitting TORC administrators provided the spark]). It was my motivation for posting in the business forum here. I offer an edited selection of posts to commemorate the ongoing mission.
TLE once said to me: “The MF [Movies Forum] is an organic, evolving beast, with the odd cull by the mods. Let it flow.†Since TLE has now been “culled†I thought you all might enjoy this blast from the past. dhspgt does not know how to find old threads and being dead is not liking to find out, but virtual bones may still have a fossil record and I found this record in my yard. I do not remember how it started but I seem to remember that I was responding to a “meta-forum†discussion back some time ago. I opined that “families†or “relationships†which begin spending more time discussing the relationship than simply “relating†are often doomed. You all have had a nice, healthy pillow fight about the nature of your community during the last few days, but I really think it is time to simply “commune†before you loose the knack. Anyway, for the sake of recalling the comment made by TLE (after all, remembering the dearly departed was, I think, the original theme of this thread), I offer the following script:
--dhspgt
“I sit beside the fire and think of all that I have seen.â€
It is a sentimental little hobbit poem but there are those of us who love it. I wish I had heard it sung in the films by a simple voice to a sentimental little tune. Nonetheless, the films work for me, and I am a scholar/fan of Tolkien’s LOTR. Does that mean I am a “purist†or “revisionist†or just dhspgt? I am afraid I am too simple-minded to figure it all out…
or why it should matter.
I do not post often—a self evident statement in a communications environment that describes me to the world at large by “date joined†and “posts.†I do not post or even “lurk†on any other board. The fact is that I dropped in quite by accident when I was searching for information and I began listening in on some of the conversations. I now recognize a dozen or so of the personalities (who may really be all the same person, for all I know) who frequent this forum.
Why have I taken up valuable cyber space with that preamble? The regular members of this forum form an interesting community (even those who seem to specialize in simply being cranky). Communities are a valuable resource. We will ultimately cease to be the remarkable species we have become if our sense of belonging to a community continues to dwindle.
I am concerned about this particular community for fairly obvious reasons. It will be difficult to hold this group together much past the release of the extended edition of ROK. More significantly, it has become increasingly evident to the “regulars†(I do not count myself as a regular) that argument merely for the sake of argument, no matter how intelligent or entertaining, becomes tiresome after a time (and timesome after a tire).
There will come a time in the not too distant future when this community will need a mission to Mars, an enemy to conquer, a war to wage (and this “war†cannot be the fights fought with other members of the community).
Tolkien belonged to a number of close-knit communities during his life, most of them focused (like this community) on writing, on communication, on fellowship. Such communities are difficult to hold together under the best of circumstances. Communities that survive tend to be those whose members have a necessary connection with each other, not one that depends on a conscious decision to stay “joined.â€
In the few post I have made, I have attempted (perhaps too wordily—but if a love of language is not a necessary ingredient of such a community as this then I do not know what else would be) to suggest a direction toward a certain kind of debate or discussion that would be productive of a sustainable community discourse. Others have done so in their own way. I am not asking for the thought police to begin swinging their night sticks, but I do think the graduate teachers need to steer the seminar toward the light. It can be done with gentle good humor.
--TheLidlessEyes:
You could have just said, "Now that that last movie's out, what the hell are you all going to do?"
--dhspgt
I suppose I could have just said what you just said but then I would not have said what I said. If I did not enjoy the process of writing (similar to the pleasure of hearing myself speak but infinitely more enjoyable), I would not publish comment at all and then dhspgt would cease to exist because he/she/it exists only when writing.
--Roaccarsson:
But I am not quite sure whether you have a concrete plan of action in mind, or whether you are just prodding us to start thinking about one.
--dhspgt
Despite the tone of the post that started this thread (“postâ€-“threadâ€: I am amazed at how adept we all are at adopting the specialized language of message boards and how difficult it is for me to restrain my impulse to play off old meanings of these words in this new context), I did not intend either a eulogy or a call to arms. I do not have the stature or the post count to do so. It may indeed be, as TLE suggests, inevitable that this forum will become a “talk†forum. That is not necessarily a bad thing. It may even be a comforting thought. Discourse is the main course. However, I do hope that this particular community will not dwindle into mere chatter.
As I have said before, I do view this forum, in its best light, as a kind of seminar populated by graduate students, undergraduate students and non-student “walk-ins.†A seminar that never adjourns but allows the participants to come and go as they please has the right parts to become a meaningful community of “scholars.†A few of the best (and well intentioned) graduate students ought to hand out assignments to the rest of us now and then, and they will need to persuade some that certain topics are not as valuable to the community as others might be. These things are already ongoing.
I would agree with TLE that forward planning is difficult in such a varied community. So, how about engaging in some backward planning?
It is impossible to study Tolkien without being impressed by the importance he attaches to his fellowship in a close-knit community—in his case, usually a literary society, not entirely dissimilar to the LOTR movies forum.
As a young man, his fellowship in the TCBS may have been the single most influential factor in his original motivation to create the mythology of middle-earth. Garth’s book, Tolkien and the Great War, provides the historical data, if you are interested. The TCBS “Council of London†kindled Tolkien’s aspiration to artistic greatness reflected later in life by this statement (which I love to quote):
Do not laugh! But once upon a time (my crest has long since fallen) I had a mind to make a body of more or less connected legend, ranging from the large and cosmogonic, to the level or romatic fairy-story—the larger founded on the lesser in contact with the earth, the lesser drawing splendour from the vast backcloths—which I could dedicate simply to: to England; to my country…
As an adult, his fellowship in the Inklings no doubt played an important role in his development of the Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings. During Humphrey Carpenter’s “artificial reconstruction†of an Inkling’s evening meeting, C.S. Lewis insists that “the readings—the original raison d’etre of the club—must be kept up.â€
Who will insist that the “readings†be kept up by the LOTR movies forum community? And what are the “readings�
I am even more fascinated by a virtual literary society Tolkien created in The Norton Club Papers (published in Vol IX of the HME).
By the way, if anyone still needs to be convinced that Tolkien would have been quite capable of treating PJ’s “history†as a variant based on different source material (depending, of course, if he was in the right mood and it tickled his considerable fancy to do so), please do yourself a favor and read The Norton Club Papers. Tolkien could have started with some small detail in the films at odds with the hobbit history written by Bilbo and Frodo and taken off into territories “undreamt†of in all of our philosophies.
Anyway…
What do TCBS, Inklings and the Norton Club have to do with the movies forum? I don’t know. I was hoping someone in this community would enlighten me.
--Jnyusa:
Do you recall offhand the title of your thread about the 'new manuscript' from a different source that 'reconciled' PJ's account of Helm's Deep with Tolkien's? There is another thread on the front page right now chopping away at this from a slightly different perspective, and I was wishing to find the thread you started but couldn't remember the title.
--dhspgt
Kezmoid provided the thread. I am delighted that you brought it up because it allows me to make a point overtly that I tried (and failed) to make covertly. Most of those who responded to my thread, Why Frodo failed to mention Haldir at Helm’s Deep, did so by inventing new variant historical material. That is certainly an entertaining thing to do and I enjoyed it. However, given the fact that we are all clever little devils and given the vast amount of raw data Tolkien has provided us directly through his “finished†works and indirectly through his papers edited and published by his son, I like the idea of mining that material in order to find the “historical†variant data needed to play the game (the game of presenting PJ’s film as a work of legitimate historical scholarship). So, I repeat here what a part of what I later posted in my own thread:
On page 14 in Volume VIII HME, War of the Ring, the exchange between Gimli and Legolas runs as follows:
Gimli: “Give me a year and a hundred of my kin and we could make this a place that armies would break against like water.â€
Legolas: “I doubt it not,†said Legolas, “But you’re a dwarf, and dwarves are strange folk. I like it not, and shall like it no more by the light of day. But you comfort me, Gimli, and I am glad to have you stand by me with your stout legs and hard axe.â€
Eomer: “Most have now arrived; but one company is still lacking…â€
In the final draft of Frodo’s history, Legolas’s response to Gimli includes the statement, “But even more would I give for a hundred good archers of Mirkwood.â€
Furthermore, Eomer’s remark that “one company is still missing,†in the rough draft is not contained in the final draft. Since Frodo’s narrative of the events at Helm’s Deep was, of necessity, based on his memory (and perhaps written notes) of reports given to him by those who were present, it is entirely possible that Frodo confused the reference to a late-arriving “company†with a reference to a “hundred good archers†of elves. I believe the issue warrants further investigation.
One would like to have a look at Frodo’s notes. The mere fact that the drafts based on those notes mention both a company of elves and a late-arriving company, considered in light of the fact that none of the hobbits were present at Helm’s Deep, gives us at least a starting point.
Tolkien would, of course, be much better at this sort of thing than any of us. Two illustrations always come to mind: the letter in which he creates an “extended edition†of the history of hobbit-like people in response to a simple question about the apparent conflict between Gollum’s statement that he wanted the ring from Deagol as a birthday present when set against the fact that hobbits give rather than receive presents on birthdays; and the introduction to the Norton Club Papers in which Tolkien presents a scholarly debate and analysis concerning the historicity of the papers themselves.
I suppose I should end by saying what I really think. I offer the ten percent rule. As long as this community keeps up with the “readings†at least 10% of the time, the 90% devoted to “mere†talk will remain enjoyable and the community viable. As TLE might say, I could have just said this last and been done with it—but what would be the fun in that?
--TLE
Jonathan to mods: "Readings are down to 8%. Whip 'em into shape, boys, we got us a quota to meet." Nah. The MF is an organic, evolving beast, with the odd cull by the mods. Let it flow. I don't think a Stalinist five year plan is appropriate, to be honest.
--dhspgt
Yes! Yes! Yes! Bring out the whips! We need discipline. TLE must be our disciple of discipline. TLE can do it. TLE has wit. TLE is virtually omniscient. TLE has a firm hand but a gentle heart. I nominate TLE. The beastly ID must have a super-ego or it will devour itself… or marry its mother. Wait a minute. I withdraw the nomination. I cannot trust a disciple of discipline who labels the beast who married its mother a “MF.†(Are not acronyms a wonderful thing?)
I agree that the MF is an organic, evolving beast. If we adopt that analogy, we should then focus on the requirements necessary for MF to remain a strong, healthy, REPRODUCTIVE animal: discipline, vigorous exercise, a balanced diet. Like any organism, it must have a genetic code. Having a genetic code does not mean that the organism is static and incapable of growth.
A number of other analogies come to mind. I keep coming back to the student-seminar model. If you give a bright student a blank slate and little instruction, the teacher will receive a wastebasket full of chatter—sometimes articulate, entertaining chatter, but nothing really worth saving. In terms of artistic expression, I am a firm believer in the necessity of tension between the medium of expression and the will to express.
Adopting a Stalinist five year plan would be just the thing—not because of the plan itself but because the revolt against the plan would produce enlivened discourse and, ultimately, a new rule.
The quota might be 5% or it might be 50%. Change the percentage and you change the evolutionary pressure. Too high and the reformation comes sooner. Too low and the boiling point may never be reached before the sea simply evaporates.
Do not ever tell anyone where the rule came from or why it exists. The rule itself does not matter as long as there is a RULE.
“Daddy, why do we have to go to the Readings?â€
“Don’t ask why. Because I said so, that’s why; because that is the rule. I don’t make up the rules, I just enforce them. When you get to be the daddy, you can make up the rules.â€
What we require is a set of rules: rules for this discourse, rules for these debates. (With all the recent focus on the “history game,†I would bump my old thread, but it seems too presumptuous.)
Nah—rules are for squares. We don’t need rules. A quest! We need a quest! The TCBS fellowship held a war council and established its goals. Let’s go to war!
--dhspgt
TORN has sniffed it but there may be a more fundamental problem. What if, once the community-formation process formally concludes, those posters whose participatory passion breathed life into their creation struggle to become energized by a new “common cause� Board77 owes its existence to that community-formation process—viewed in its entirety—originating as it did within TORC. There is always “mere chat†of course, but there are those among you who will be disappointed if this community does not prove to be (or at least to appear to be) something more than another chat room.
It has been difficult to find a place (and “place†in cyber space is all that separates my virtual existence from the abyss) for dhspgt to post. I started a thread, my one and only, and I called attention to my plight by naming it: “no where else to post.†Given my nature and certainly based on my posting history, I will never be a frequent participant, but I have looked around for a place to stand—even if for a moment. When I came in the house several people ran off to other rooms to find me a chair. No one has returned yet, but I hear them in the house somewhere. It sounds like they are building me a chair, and it must be a wonderful chair because they certainly seem to be putting a lot of effort into building it, but I am afraid that when they get my chair built we won’t have much to talk about other than the chair.
I will repeat the following: “There is always ‘mere chat’ of course, but there are those among you who will be disappointed if this community does not prove to be (or at least to appear to be) something more than another chat room.â€
Please find a place for dhspgt to post. A chat room is space but it is not a place.