Posted: June 23, 2000 at 06:52:12: by Jason Clarke
The Balrogs Wings debate is a perfect example of what is wrong with Tolkien discussion on the Internet and why it is so difficult to find serious criticism on him.
Why this obsession with fictional history? It's essentially pseudo-anthropology. You're trying to find truths about a non-existent material world through a fictional work - a novel no less, not even a history.
I always thought Balrogs had wings - from my viewings of Howe's paintings - until someone mentioned this debate and I re-read the passage at Moria. Judging from my personal assessment of Tolkien's style and my understanding of writing in general, I quickly came to the decision that the "wings" in the passage were entirely metaphorical, except in the sense that they were extensions of the Balrog's shadow, because the Balrog apparently has the ability to emanate or project darkness and fire simultaneously, a brilliant and creepy invention by Tolkien. This emanated darkness, apparently, resembled a pair of wings in this context. But darkness it remains.
I have never, ever been persuaded by any of the arguments since that the Balrog of Moria had wings, and I never will be. Tolkien didn't say it did; in fact, he inferred that it didn't. And that's good enough for me.
|
