The Revived Tolkien Trivia

[farntfar]

The object of the action is different in all four cases.
The performer of tha action is different in all cases except 2 which involve the same performer.
The second, self inflicted (?), case is not one of those 2. It is also rather less violent than the others.

I agree that the 2nd is probably going to be the most difficult to find.

 

[HareBrain]

OK. And now I've found the passage for what I thought was the second one, it says the action was only "attempted".

 

[farntfar]

In the second case the act was definitely performed by the perpetrator on himself, or parts of himself.
You'd have to be pretty inept to attempt to perform the action and fail. (Except possibly if you had already overindulged in performing it before. I had a workmate who failed regularly for exactly that reason.)

 

[HareBrain]

You'd have to be pretty inept to attempt to perform the action and fail. (Except possibly if you had already overindulged in performing it before. I had a workmate who failed regularly for exactly that reason.)

I'm still sure I have the first and fourth, but I cannot for the life of me make sense of the above in relation to that action!

 

[farntfar]

All will doubtless become clear in time.
If you knew my workmate it might be more obvious, but I think many of us know someone who does this (*), even if not to the point of being unable to continue.
(*) you may even do it yourself.

The third case is a little obscure perhaps and not wonderfully clear.

Earlier than both of these we hear of much the same action when performed by a large group (and combined with several other actions) which provoke largescale distress in multiple other characters. This is explained so as to account for retaliatory measures performed by one of the second group against two of our heroes.

So I will restate it.
A large and fairly generic group performs a number of actions on a regular basis, one of which is specified (by a further/separate character) as the action in question.
A second group, he says, is distressed by these actions, but is for the most part is unable to protest.
One member of this second group, however, finds him/herself able to protest, at least at a fairly local level, and does so in a way that threatens harm to some of our central characters.

 

[HareBrain]

I have cases one, three and four. I know what two is (I think) but can't at the moment recall it taking place in the books.

 

[farntfar]

good work then , HB.

I shall calmly await your final answer.

 

[HareBrain]

Or someone else's! I really have no clue who 2 can be. (I'm pretty sure it's not Galadriel!) You might have to narrow it down in a few days, but you never know, it might come to me in a dream.

 

[Grimward]

*Thumbs in vain thru his scarcely-touched copy of "The Lord of the Rings: A Behavioral Study*

 

[farntfar]

Anything float up to the surface overnight, HB?

 

[HareBrain]

Anything float up to the surface overnight, HB?

Nope. I was awake for one of the small hours, and in my mind went through the whole plot between cases 1 and 4 (I'm assuming it's before 4, because you say "final" for that one, but that might be my mistake), and couldn't identify any character likely to do that thing that I hadn't already checked. Or not when there were two main characters in the vicinity likely to be distressed by it. (To be honest, I'm not sure who would be distressed by it apart from a particularly sheltered Victorian gentlewoman.)

 

[farntfar]

I'm not entirely sure you know what "it" is if you think only victorian gentlewomen would be distressed by it.
The characters in question are distressed by the implication of what's going through the other character's mind as he does "it".
I may also have offered a gentle hint as to location previously.

 

[HareBrain]

I may also have offered a gentle hint as to location previously.

More gentle than even the most innocent Victorian damsel, as far as I can see. (Unless by "may have" you also imply "may not have".)

But the "implications" line might help.

 

[farntfar]

Whilst I can see that finding case 2 may be difficult, certain of HB's comments (particularly about squeemish victorian girls) make me question if he really is as close as he suggests. Consequently, if anyone else has any ideas, please feel free to get involved.

 

[HareBrain]

Yes, please do for God's sake, so my life stops being consumed by this.

 

[farntfar]

HB.
If it's really causing you that much trauma, then drop case 2 and answer the others.

Case 2 was a rather ridiculous play on the whole thing and isn't worth your personal distress.
If you get the others, I'll give you the answer to case 2 for free.

 

[HareBrain]

Thanks, you've probably saved my sanity. I'll do it without exact quotes if you don't mind.

The common theme is biting.

Case 1 is Gollum biting Aragorn when Aragorn captures him (as related at the Council of Elrond)

Case 3 are the "things that go free upon the earth, gnawing, biting" etc, which spur Old man Willow into retaliatory action against Pippin and Merry. (The words are Tom Bombadil's.)

Case 4 is Gollum biting off Frodo's finger, and the Ring.

I'm dying to know what case 2 is. I thought after your comment about your workmate that it must be something to do with biting one's nails (and being unable to carry on once they are gnawed right down), but I think I must have got hold of a wrong end of a stick there.

 

[farntfar]

But you are absolutely correct about all four.

Case 2 is from when they were floating down the Anduin, on the way to Rauros.

Merry and Pippin in the middle boat were ill at ease, for Boromir sat muttering to himself, sometimes biting his nails, as if some restlessness or doubt consumed him, sometimes seizing a paddle and driving the boat close behind Aragorn's. Then Pippin, who sat in the bow looking back, caught a queer gleam in his eye, as he peered forward gazing at Frodo.

 

[farntfar]

Well done indeed, sir.

A half-chewed bell to you , and the next question.

 

[HareBrain]

Case 2 is from when they were floating down the Anduin, on the way to Rauros.

Ah, I ruled out Boromir on the grounds that one of such noble blood would never have developed such a habit.

Anyway, good set of questions, Farny. Here's mine.

A variation on "don't shoot the messenger" might be "don't decapitate those you get news from". Who doesn't hold with this? (Quote/s or detailed justification please.)