Lately I've been passing the time spent painting stupid little models listening to various podcasts. One of which is a college lecture podast on Tolkien's works. As such, I've learned a thing or two. Mainly that I've made an incorrect assumption my entire life. Never thought twice about it. I can take some solace in the fact that this is not entirely all my fault. Essentially, 99% of the artwork and imagery associated with the beastie known as a Balrog is incorrect.Balrogs don't have fucking wings.
Turns out it's all a misconstrued simile. When the Balrog shows up in Moria, the flame and shadow it exudes is a representation of its power. A shadowy form is wreathed within the flame and darkness like a cloak of sorts. The line:
"His enemy halted again, facing him, and the shadow
about it reached out like two vast wings."
about it reached out like two vast wings."
- isn't a hard description. It's a simile. The shadow spreads out, but never became solid, real deal wings. The phenomena stands in juxtaposition to the light Gandalf emits. Ol' G-dogg might have ended up with wings as well if Tolkien had worded it as such! Again:
“It stepped forward slowly onto the bridge, and suddenly
it drew itself up to a great height, and its wings were spread from wall to wall”
it drew itself up to a great height, and its wings were spread from wall to wall”
Same deal, just spreading out some more. But still no wings as such. Just the Balrog flexing its power. Besides, the Balrog friggin' fell off the bridge when Gandalf busted it - and was scared. When it took the plunge it let out: “a terrible cry,”.
Now I need to go off and realign my brain. I guess I should have trusted the Ted Naismith depictions all along...
Posts
