The latest nerdrage over the depiction of Dwarves in The Hobbit has really hit home to me something I often suspected about fanboys but never really paid much attention to: they don’t actually know much at all about the text they love. They’re much more interested in their personal, often (usually?) quite fantastic misinterpretations of it than they are in the text itself. Thus we have the following misunderstandings about the Dwarves in The Hobbit:
- They were based on nordic myth
- They all had voluminous beards tucked into their belts (1)
- They were just tinkers and blacksmiths, with no special skills (1)
- They didn’t carry any special weapons or armour at the start of the adventure (1)
- They were “just” on a quest for treasure (1)
- Tolkien described them well, and attempts to represent them in the way Jackson has are a betrayal of Tolkien’s original description
- Thorin wasn’t a warrior
- Thorin Oakenshield should have a shield
- All Dwarves should be fat
- They would look better if they were represented as they are in the book
None of these are true, and the ideas I’ve marked with a (1) are direct results of imbibing too much D&D, specifically OSR D&D that envisages all adventurers as starting at 1st level as vulnerable meat on a hook, with no special weapons or armour. The actual facts from The Hobbit are:
- The Dwarves are based on mediaeval images of Jews (as best we can tell) and would not suit “nordic” dwarves, who are generally evil, mischievous and untrustworthy[1]
- Tolkien mostly doesn’t describe the Dwarves’ beards, but in fact only one had a beard tucked into his belt (Dwalin) and the rest were barely mentioned at all; at one point he mentions 4 Dwarves tucking their hands into their belts and explicitly avoids mentioning, e.g. “alongside their beards.” For Tolkien, beards were a fixture on Dwarves but were given no special attention at all
- In the text Thorin states that the Dwarves were at times even reduced to smithing or mining, but he doesn’t suggest that this was their profession – he suggests that they hated this work and did it when they had to
- Tolkien doesn’t mention the Dwarves’ equipment beyond their hoods at any point up until the Troll encounter. We go through five chapters (or is it 3?) with these adventurers without ever finding out what they’re carrying or wearing. However we do know that they had several pack horses (“one of” the ponies was lost in a river before they meet the trolls, but was carrying mostly food). Why should we then assume they were lightly armed and armoured?
- Thorin makes clear from the start that he hopes to kill Smaug and regain his kingdom
- Tolkien’s descriptions of the main characters in this story were “a dwarf” along with a description of their hood colour, belt colour, and sometimes their hair colour or a detail about their eyes or physique. Most of the Dwarves get no description except “a dwarf with a [colour] hood.”
- Thorin is introduced as THE Thorin Oakenshield, clearly acts like a leader (he doesn’t do dishes or speak to closely with Bilbo, only Gandalf) and is later established (in other books) to have distinguished himself at a major Orc battle. He is an experienced warrior and leader. This is not a first level fighter by any stretch of the imagination.
- Thorin is named “Oakenshield” after his shield broke and he used a piece of oak to defend himself. He is explicitly not named “Oakenshield” because of the shield that broke
- Tolkien only singles out one of the Dwarves for any kind of physical description (Bofur, I think) and says he is fat and heavy. The physique of the rest of the dwarves is not mentioned at all at any point. In fact, I don’t think even their height is mentioned explicitly in the book
- Tolkien basically doesn’t describe the Dwarves at all. There is not enough information about any of the Dwarves in the book to motivate a casting decision – Jackson was basically completely on his own and unable to use the source material when choosing how to depict the Dwarves
You would think that people who really care about these books would know some of these things before criticizing Jackson’s efforts, but they don’t seem to. Instead the fanboys just complain as if Jackson’s sole responsibility on this earth was to delve into their mind and design his Dwarves exactly according to their wierd personal amalgam of The Hobbit/D&D/some movie they saw 30 years ago and liked. But they cloak the whole thing in “respect for the original work.” But in order to show this respect, it would really help if they actually paid attention to the original text.
And while I’m at it, if this book is so good, how come none of the main characters actually warrant any kind of physical description? That’s pretty shoddy writing, in my view.
—
fn1: This is a pretty fucking basic thing to have to get right if you are going to valorize Tolkien’s “imaginarium” or whatever it’s being called this month. Nordic dwarves are dodgy vicious magical monsters; the dwarves in The Hobbit are not. Can you reconcile these two facts? No? Then you should be paying more attention to the sources Tolkien used to establish his stories.
July 19, 2011 at 12:49 am
That’s the most rational and well-read comment I’ve heard on this whole issue! Kudos. Hope more people read it.
July 19, 2011 at 5:24 am
Agreed. Well stated!
July 19, 2011 at 8:38 am
Thank you both! It’s my opinion that fanboys don’t do any favours for the work they love, and I can see why creators increasingly (especially in nerdy areas) choose to ignore their opinions when they approach the task of turning these kinds of works into movies.
August 3, 2011 at 5:37 am
What nerdrage?
And while I’m at it, if this book is so good, how come none of the main characters actually warrant any kind of physical description? That’s pretty shoddy writing, in my view.
It’s a kids book. And often less is more. The trick with writing is to use as little space as possible to create an evocative image. I think Tolkien succeeds at this in spades with The Hobbit.
August 3, 2011 at 9:07 pm
I gave you nerdrage links, Noisms. At the risk of seeming all scientific racist, may I suggest that your Britishness renders you a little more temperate than the average OSR blogger? Perhaps you don’t feel the rage that those on the other side of the Atlantic are capable of … it’s all very steamy over there at the moment, after all.
In this instance it’s a case of “less is less” and a very old-looking dwarf on the step with a white beard and a scarlet hood is not a case of “using as little space as possible to create an evocative image. It’s just using as little space as possible.
August 4, 2011 at 8:56 am
I disagree. “A very old-looking dwarf on the step with a white beard and a scarlet hood” is perfect for an 8-year-old kid because their mind fills in all the details. I think if you compare the language used in The Hobbit to any good and successful children’s book (not godawful modern “young adult” shite) you’ll find it’s pretty similar.
August 4, 2011 at 9:07 am
On the rage thing…. Meh. I think Peter Jackson will make a very entertaining film because he usually does. I don’t expect it to be anything like the book, and I wish Guillermo del Torro had stuck around, because everything he said about his ideas for the project made it sound like the best thing since sliced bread. But I’m sure it will be good enough.
September 1, 2016 at 3:18 am
“The Dwarves are based on mediaeval images of Jews (as best we can tell) and would not suit “nordic” dwarves, who are generally evil, mischievous and untrustworthy.”
Wikipedia:
“In Germanic mythology, a dwarf is a small human-shaped being that dwells in mountains and in the earth, and is variously associated with wisdom, smithing, mining, and crafting.”
The Wikipedia description accords well with my (non-expert) impression of Tolkien’s dwarves. They dwelled in the Last Lonely Mountain and in the Misty Mountains and the iron Hills, mostly underground. They viewed Helm’s Deep as a good place to practice their crafts of mining and sculpture. Yes, some of them had an obsession with acquiring gold and gems, both in the nordic story of Fafnir and in LoT, and it can make them do acts of evil and treachery, but we humans have similar urges. It does not mean all dwarves or all humans are bad. In nordic legends there were lots of dwarves, and a few handfuls which were famous for acts of your description. Is this not consistent with the historical tales about humans? Why assume they were all bad? Why should Tolkien have assumed so (and therefore decided to base creatures with the nordic name on some other legend)?
As for being forced to work for others as miners and smiths, and resenting it, of course they had to earn livings doing things they were good at, but wanted to do these things for themselves, according to their own wishes, rather than as wage-slaves. That was the source of their resentment, not that they didn’t like mining or smithing.
Every author can put their own slant on the creatures they imagine, but to imply that Tolkien did not start from the nordic sources he was expert in seems implausible to me.
September 1, 2016 at 10:20 am
Thanks for commenting JimV. Actually this post is the tail-end of a wider debate, which started with this post about dwarves as Jews. Tolkien explicitly states that he imagines dwarves as Jews, and there is evidence that he veered away from the nordic dwarf because of the aspects of their character I mention. The comment about them resenting mining or smithing isn’t intended to be a critique of why or a suggestion they aren’t good at it, it’s purely a data point in opposition to the claim of certain fanboys that the specific dwarves in the Hobbit were not warriors.
I should have put a link in this post to the other one, sorry …