Episode 0-2

Trish Lambert

Administrator
Staff member
  • What rhetorical level will we use?
    • Archaic language? Modern language?
    • Diff between dialog and voiceover/frame (if any)?
    • Other issues?
  • How will we handle the chronology?
    • Bounce back and forth between contemporaneous plots?
    • Jump around in time?
 
Are we going to give each narrator their own "writer's voice?" Could we change storytelling styles per narrator since their age and cultures differ?

Personally, I wouldn't mind a voiceover if it was done in the same manner as it was in the beginning of 300. It would have to be a small story. Perhaps if we had two frame narrators and one introduced a story thread (sort of like how Bilbo introduced Erebor in An Unexpected Journey) and another finished in regular narration form. It's fine for 3-5 minutes, but an entire episode (or even a season!) I think that would be a bit much!

I think we should have a specific ancient language for the Valar/Maiar that they use in order to perform "magic." That would be an elegant way to handle such a thing.

There needs to be some storyline that is over the entire series. Otherwise you're going to be jarring your audience *cough* Marvel Cinematic Universe *cough* with a story that ultimately seems to be going nowhere! If we stay within the arch I think we can play with the order a bit! :)
 
Last edited:
I think we can be very true to the nature of Tolkien's writing by shifting register when necessary. Most of the dialogue can be...well, not modern, but in line with what we heard in Jackson's films. But in moments of authority or grave importance, we could shift to the more archaic language as written by Tolkien in The Silmarillion. In general, the characters would speak in a familiar tone to one another. But certain moments would merit a more formal shift. I'm thinking Mandos delivering the Doom of the Noldor, Feanor threatening Fingolfin, Beren sassing Thingol, etc. Save the thee's and thou's for the important, lofty moments.

As far as chronology, I actually think for the most part, The Silmarillion is wonderfully linear. Some storylines are separated by chapter, and would therefore overlap each other. Which works better and naturally on screen. We're naturally going to cut between parallel action. For instance, we'll be cutting between scenes of Tuor in Gondolin with scenes of conflict with Doriath/Sons of Feanor, yadda yadda. I think it'll all fall into place naturally.
 
Last edited:
Here's an idea for the language: use it to show the relative ages between cultures. For instance, if you have the Valar and the Eldar talking together, go with more modern (but not too modern ;) language, where as the Valar are speaking far more archaically. Then again with the Elves/men. I think that would also give a very interesting dynamic with the second person singular (thee, thou, thine, ect.) since now it's seen as very formal.

Of course, if we go with that, we will need to make sure we know which century we're basic this English off of, and get the rules right. ;)

With the timeline, NicoleHobbitday is right, the Silm is fairly linear. I don't think we'll have too many problems with it.
 
I would argue against bouncing back and forth between contemporaneous but distinct stories. Doing so would cause the unique thrusts and themes of said stories to get lost in a melting pot and would also make it harder to show clear parallels/applicability between particular stories and the frame narrative(s) (since contemporaneous stories might be better placed with different situations in the frame narrative.

If anything, we should blend stories not on the basis of them being contemporaneous but on the basis of them being thematically linked. Flashback relating thematically related backstory is a familiar enough trope to modern audiences (via Lost or Once) that doing so would not be too confusing. Having a kind of three tier system (Frame Narrative telling the Narrative interspersed with Flashbacks) would further hammer home the idea of applicability and the idea of history proceeding according to certain patterns (and also the sense of the heavy weight of memory that the elves are carrying with them). It would also help the narrative pace of the story, not forcing us to dedicate entire episodes to what could be scenes delivered in flashback or forcing us to start with stories that would not be as immediately gripping to audiences. It could also prove thematically interesting, since flashbacks would add a layer of unreliability concerning said scenes and could also open new directions for more difficult to depict sections like the Ainulindale.

An example of what this could look like: starting the show not at the Ainulindale but with the birth of Feanor or even the return of the Noldor to Beleriand. Allowing their flashbacks to then fill in the preceding history as we go along (even as their stories are themselves being told from a LOTOR frame).
 
Hi.
I think we should try to follow Tolkien's language as far as possible. His style is one of the things making the books great. Different groups can of course have slightly different style. Don't think we will gain anything by using "modern" language. Have never understood why some claim Tolkien's language is difficult, and English is not my native language.

I have nothing against voiceover, as long as it don't get to long. So the frame could go over til a short narration of the start of the Ainulindalë, until the Valar start to speak themselves.

When it comes to chronology, I think it might be best to follow most story-lines without to much jumping between different ones, even if they are contemporary in the time of the Silmarillion. This will make the tales stronger in my view. Starting with the Ainulindalë might be hard, but I think this would be cool if done properly.
 
Something Trish said in reference to the Ainulindale being "thorny" echoed something that I had been thinking about. I think it's at least worth considering starting out with a more "story-like" story, to draw people in. Especially people who've had trouble getting into the Silmarillion. I think some of this trouble stems from the large amount of metaphysical stuff you have to get through before you get to the more engaging stories.

This is such a great project, btw! I'm really looking forward to years of fun listening and commenting. Although, I have a feeling that the more we get into this, the more disappointing it will be that it's not actually going to ever be onscreen :)
 
An example of what this could look like: starting the show not at the Ainulindale but with the birth of Feanor or even the return of the Noldor to Beleriand. Allowing their flashbacks to then fill in the preceding history as we go along (even as their stories are themselves being told from a LOTOR frame).

I should have seen this comment before making mine yesterday (#7). I really like the idea of opening with something about Feanor. Since his strengths and flaws are pretty much the wellspring of everything that happens later. Plus it could be really great visually...I'd love to see "how" he makes the Silmarils ;)
 
I don’t know how I would describe the language use in Peter Jackson's films but I think they did a good job. I really enjoy Tolkien's ability to switch register when the situation calls for it and I think we should endeavor to imitate it as best we can. I definitely think there are moments when characters should shift into more "high language" but in large portions of the story we are seeing the struggles of the elves of the first age and I think that having them speak in plainer language would be beneficial.

As many other people have mentioned, the Valar should speak a bit more ….archaically? I'm not sure if archaic is the best word maybe formally? I'm not sure how the best way to do it is but I think language would be a good way to differentiate them from the incarnate races (elves, men and dwarves).

Another issue, how are we / are we going to differentiate Sindarin and Quenya? Is one going to be completely foreign and needing subtitles? Having such large chunks of the show be in subtitles is not something I think we should do. This is a really important issue because 1. Languages were so important to Tolkien and I think to not even try to portray them would be disingenuous but also, important story moments happen concerning languages. The biggest one that sticks out would be when Thingol bans Quenya, that’s really important. But also I always thought that the langauge break that occurs in the elvish language in the first place due to the Noldor and Vanyar being in Valar and the Sindar still being in Middle Earth is likewise significant. Similarly, the Numenorians preservation of Quenya as a language of lore is significant.

Does anyone have any suggestions for how to do this? Accents? Speaking style? Actual Sindarin and Quenya and heavy use of subtitles?


As for chronology, I agree with what a lot of people have said, the Silmarillion is pretty linear and I think we should aim too follow that without too much jumping around. However, I think we should follow stories rather than time. An example of what I'm referring to is the Turin story and the Tuor story. There is a moment where those two stories intersect. But I think we should tell the Turin story to its completion and the Tuor story to its completion rather than jump back and forth between the two. I think if you were to do the constant jumping you would lose something in the story.

That being said, I don’t think we should rule out flashbacks or flash forwards. I know we arent talking about the Ainlulindale in this episode or specifically how we will start the series but I don’t know if the Ainlulindale would be the best place to start, which then raises the question of when we would start and how would we handle the chronology . I like Trish's suggestion that we include something about Numenor at the beginning. Actually, my thoughts about the Ainluindale are that it should contain flash forwards of snippets of future events, i.e. the drowning of Numenor and should be repeated as a title sequence throughout the series so that whole aspect is never forgotten and Illuvatar's presence is always there even if not in the actual story.
 
  • What rhetorical level will we use?
    • Archaic language? Modern language?
    • Diff between dialog and voiceover/frame (if any)?
    • Other issues?

I was distracted by all the other great threads forming on here, that I'm only just now getting to aroun to supplying my own opinion concerning the questions for the actual upcoming episode.

Rhetoric level is tricky because there are so many different levels within Tolkien own work. The Lord of the Rings films did an okay job at using the lines from the text as directly as they could and just smoothing them over here and there... The Hobbit did the same thing but were less consistent. However, because of the Hobbits, the later chronology, and even closer perspective in terms of the reader observing conversations between the characters, the Lord of the Rings have a naturally more modernized style of language compared to the Silmarillion anyways, film adaption or no.

I say keep as much what's represented in the text of the published Silmarillion verbatim, only smoothing out lines here or there when necessary for the purposes of clarity and screen-time economy; essentially a case by case basis. Any dialogue incorporated from earlier drafts would have to be converted to the rhetoric of the Silmarillion, as many of the drafts are even more archaic.

Overall, I see no reason to hand-hold a modern-day audience; I have always detested treating the audience like complete idiots instead of challenging them to actually use their brains for once. There's no reason movies should be dumbed-down just because they're targeted towards a mass market nor because they're a visual medium. Art shoud not be a slave to a perceived audience. People still watch period pieces, people still watch Shakespeare, they can handle the Silmarillion, especially when the text of the Silmarillion will be even more clear on screen when aided by addition of ques from the composition, music, acting, and even more subtitles that are absent in the book.

  • How will we handle the chronology?
    • Bounce back and forth between contemporaneous plots?
    • Jump around in time?

In terms of chronology, I say just go in order, as was mostly done in the book, no need to make things more confusing. I'm not a fan of the frame narrative to begin with, but even if there were a frame, jumping back and forward to wouldn't really be necessary because all jumps in time could easily and more efficiently be conveyed through simple editing alone.

However, in my own attempts at scripting the Silmarillion I have found it better for the story to displace at least one storyline, that is the tale of 'Of Maeglin.' In the text of the book itself, it is somewhat displaced, but to have it where it is in the book would be too soon on screen in relation to the Fall of Gondolin, since it is a precursor of the events there.

I personally moved it so that it became a flashback in the second act of The Fall of Gondolin (after Tour has already arrived and before Maeglin's captivity by Melkor). True, this means his appearance at Gondlin while Hurin and Huor are there now precedes his former introduction, but having a backstroy for a then minor character would make little sense as a prelude into the tale of Turin Turamabar. Moving that backstory into the midst of the Fall of Gondolin allows for a more concentrated character study of Maeglin, since he really is the most interesting character of that part of the story and the main driving force leading up to the white city's fall. I could talk all day about Maeglin, especially concerning a film-adaptation version of him, so I will stop myself now.
 
Overall, I see no reason to hand-hold a modern-day audience; I have always detested treating the audience like complete idiots instead of challenging them to actually use their brains for once. There's no reason movies should be dumbed-down just because they're targeted towards a mass market nor because they're a visual medium. Art shoud not be a slave to a perceived audience. People still watch period pieces, people still watch Shakespeare, they can handle the Silmarillion, especially when the text of the Silmarillion will be even more clear on screen when aided by addition of ques from the composition, music, acting, and even more subtitles that are absent in the book.

Yes, yes, yes! I don't think we want to sound archaic just for the sake of sounding archaic, but I think that if we were to "modernize" everything, we would lose a lot of the beauty of the Silmarillion. Tolkien was a master wordsmith, choosing words that fit the occasion perfectly, both semantically and phono-aesthetically. If we simplify everything to the point where it is easily understood by the modern-day audience, we'll lose a lot of that.

So along those lines, I'd say we use the style that suits the character (and the scene). If the person is of great stature, make their words match that stature. If the person is more of a "commoner," lower the register a bit to suit them. Similarly, if the occasion is one of solemnity or formality, elevate the style. If the occasion is commonplace, lower the style.
 
  • I recently watched a TV adaption of a great Australian book, "Cloud Street" by Tim Winton. In the behind the scenes interviews he commented that he was amazed that others in the project referred to the book as a "sacred text". He was quite taken aback at that and because he had written the book a decade or two earlier he had not memorised the passages like many of the fans and did not hold it in the same regard. Tolkien himself rewrote entire passages when he came back to them years later. What I am trying to say is that we shouldn't get caught up with the concept of a "sacred text". We are planning an adaption for today's audience and we want to make the Silmarillion accessible to that audience. I agree with earlier comments on this thread about the Peter Jackson films. I think the language used was appropriate, changing to a higher formal register when it was called for. I also liked the occasional use of other languages in the movies. I objected to the wholesale use of Black Speech by Azog and cohorts in the Hobbit movies and I think that use of Tolkien's languages (Sindarin, Quenya, Khazdul, etc) should be used occasionally and not all the time. If we want to get across the drama of a scene (even for the Valar) it needs to be in everyday language (I would prefer to depict the Valar in a less formal way acknowledging that they are flawed beings).
  • I think the frame voice should recede once we get into the episode story unless there are dramatic reasons for coming back to the frame. One of the other threads referred to the old 80's TV series The Storyteller. I had a quick look on YouTube and noted that the storyteller's voice was intrusive and continually interrupted the story which was cute, but not something that I would want to see in the SilmFilm. Also the frame doesn't always have to be the formal storyteller like in the first Hobbit movie. It can be two people reminiscing, someone thinking or dreaming, reading or writing something. It could also be the frame story progressing along with the episode story and there being parallels. We can use different storytelling techniques which is why I think there was such opposition to the frame just being Bilbo in Rivendell which would be very static with not much drama if it was done purely as a storyteller or compiler. I think we can do it in a more imaginative way
  • The style of the Silmarillion is effectively a summary of the Elder Days. The prose are quite condensed and lack the richness of LOTR and has little dialogue. Our adaption will need to add significantly to the dialogue that exists in the book to make it accessible to the audience and to make it into a true drama. When you read the "Children of Hurin", you suddenly get a richer view, characters and scenes leap out of the page more.
  • As to the chronology, Tolkien's use of a single episode from one character's point of view was done effectively in both the Silmarillion and in LOTR. I like the way most of the Two Towers is written. Remember the first half with the three hunters tracking the Uruks over Rohan. We got a chapter from Merry and Pippin followed by a chapter from Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli, and sometimes you only knew as much as the characters did. This lets us play around with the chronology a little, but like the Silmarillion itself our adaption should broadly be in chronological order (note the overlap of the Turin and Tuor stories). Not all stories need to be told in chronological order (Catch 22) and out of order can lead to some interesting drama. The introduction of a minor character in one story who then becomes the main character in the next story can be very effective. This was demonstrated in another good Australian TV adaption, "The Slap". That had 8 chapters and each chapter was from the point of view of a different character sometimes retelling the same events (I believe an American adaption is currently underway of "The Slap")
  • I am warming to the idea put forward by another person (sorry I can't remember who) about starting at the awakening of the elves and include Cirdan at Cuivienen. Remember The Silmarillion is effectively an elvish story. This would allow the Ainulindale and the Beginning of Days which were not witnessed by the elves to be done out of order and could be revealed as the elves gradually learn of the Valar. This will also bring in suspense. The elves (and the viewer) do not know the Valar and do not know if they can be trusted (and of course Melkor cannot be trusted and at that time lures some away and begins to corrupt them into orcs). Suspense and the timely revealing of information can be very effective. We can either choose to experience the joy that the Valar feel when they discover that the children of Iluvatar have arrived, or the suspicion of the elves at not knowing who these strange beings of larger stature are. One scene I missed seeing in the Return of the King movie was when Sam took the ring thinking that Frodo was dead. The filmmakers decided to forego Sam's agony and replace it with the suspense of thinking that the ring had been lost to the orcs of Cirith Ungol. I actually object to the overuse of suspense in the PJ movies and I believe there are more satisfying ways of telling a story which I trust we will do.
 
I listened to the podcast today and one solution that occurred to me concerning the problem of both conveying the language difference while at the same time avoiding doing everything closed captioned would be to resort to the frame narrative - depending on what we preferred, this could look like a comment by the narrator overlaid in the midst of a scene where the language difference was relevant (something along the lines of "Of course, so and so didn't speak Quenya and so he didn't have a clue what they were talking about" or a brief introductory comment prior to telling the story where the narrator notes that he's going to have to translate everything for his listener.
 
(something along the lines of "Of course, so and so didn't speak Quenya and so he didn't have a clue what they were talking about" or a brief introductory comment prior to telling the story where the narrator notes that he's going to have to translate everything for his listener.

I think to me this would feel a bit contrived, and might be hard to work naturally into the story.

I do think, though, that the frame narrator is an important factor in this. After all, the frame narrator is going to be speaking English, yes? So, presumably he would be translating everything into English for his listener(s). So if we just keep the main dialogue in English, it could work quite naturally. At certain points, the narrator probably would make a point of highlighting a particular other language, say, Hurin's cry of "Aure entuluva," or the fact that Sindarin was unintelligible to the hosts of the Noldor at first. I think we can take these instances on a case by case basis...have Hurin's cry be subtitled Quenya, maybe, and have the Sindar actually speaking Sindarin in that episode (unsubtitled. The point, after all, is the unintelligibility to the Noldor).

So, here's my proposal for how we make it work: Whenever the focus is on the content of the speech and not on the language, leave it in English (although I would still say we differentiate between Quenya and Sindarin via accents/dialects of English. Have Quenya sound archaic and formal, perhaps an elevated RP, or an almost Shakespearean style. Sindarin, on the other hand, would work beautifully as a light Welsh accent.). Whenever the focus is on the language itself, leave it in the original language, be it Sindarin, Quenya, Dwarvish, etc. Whether or not it is subtitled can be handled on a case by case basis.

Hopefully this makes some level of sense? I sometimes have a bit of trouble organizing my thoughts into a coherent order that makes sense to others. My apologies.
 
Hey guys.
I just listened to the episode and i wanted to make a quick point. In the episode, the scale of the Valar/Maiar is discussed. I realise that the project is not required to remain consistent with the Jackson universe, however, it is worth noting that Jackson depicts Wizards to have a larger scale than men and Elves. Gandalf, Saruman amd Radigast appear to have either a larger frame or greater height than the other characters in LOTR. Thus, there is some precedent for up scaling the Valar/Miara.
 
At one point in the episode the question was considered if one story could be told by multiple narrators, so that multiple stories could interact. One way of doing that, could be in an interview setting, for example if the meta-frame is Bilbo talking to people to collect the stories for his book. Some shows have done this with great effect. 'True Detective' comes to mind.
 
Waaaaaay late to the party, of course, so here are my completely irrelevant by now thoughts ;)

Getting the language right is one of the most important things for getting Tolkien right. On one level, avoiding modern anachronisms is sufficient, but there is clearly a lot more nuance to that in being true to this story. My only advice is - lots and lots of rewrites when working on the script. Attempts to write archaic dialogue will almost always come out clunky and overly silly...at first. You have to get into the voices of these characters, and that isn't going to happen on the first try. I think it was a really good point that the language of the published Silmarillion is the language of the narrator (whom we are not using), so.....staying true to the book doesn't mean keeping that.

It would be VERY sad to never hear spoken Sindarin or Quenya in this project. I hope we can find a way to work it in. Certainly for the battle cries, but possibly also greetings? And any time characters on screen are speaking different languages, only one of them should be English. Unfortunately, this means a lot of orcish snarling in unintelligible (and entirely made up) Black Speech. Well, unless we can find a reason for them to say 'fire,' 'old man,' or 'one ring'.....

As far as time compression goes, I agree that '500 years later' is no way to demonstrate the bliss of Valinor. (Nor are flickering Two Trees.) I think the most organic way to show the passage of time is to show the new generations of children growing up and the works of the Eldar. They have to build Tirion upon Tuna, and Alqualonde, and.....if we show those places as completely open and then half-constructed, and then later show them as old well-worn and lived in towns, that will immediately let the viewer know that this is not 'tomorrow'.....though it could still look foolish if it appears they built the town overnight. That's why you have to go from Finwë marrying Míriel to the birth of their son, to Fëanor as a young man meeting Nerdanel, to *their* children growing up.

And anyone who thinks the Bliss of Valinor is boring has clearly forgotten the intense drama of the house of Finwë, when Míriel dies and he remarries Indis, much to the chagrin and disapproval of Fëanor ;). I mean, the whole thing is an elvish soap opera!
 
Back
Top