Homework - Comparing two near identical poems. Especially their context.

Flammifer

Well-Known Member
The two versions of the "All that is gold does not glitter" poem are almost identical. But, not quite.

The last two lines in the poem in the Prancing Pony are:

Renewed shall be blade that was broken,
The crownless again shall be king.


The words are the same when the poem is recited in Rivendell. But, the comma after 'broken' is changed to a colon.

The effect of this greater pause is to add greater emphasis to the last line (which, of course, everyone has been carefully not referring to in the Council until Bilbo puts his foot in it).

The homework instructions were to pay attention to the different contexts in which the two versions of the poem appear.

The contexts are similar, in that the poem appears both times when the identity and trustworthiness of Aragorn seems to be doubted. In Bree, both Butterbur and the Hobbits are doubtful of Aragorn. In Rivendell Bilbo feels that Boromir is doubtful of Aragorn. However, in Bree there is doubt around both Aragorn's identity and his trustworthiness, Whereas Boromir seems to accept Aragorn's identity, but doubt his effectiveness. Bilbo does not seem to discern this distinction (or, if he does, is he presenting his poem as prophecy, rather than hope?).

In Bree, the poem dispels the doubts of Frodo and Pippin (less so Sam). The poem comes from a trusted source (Gandalf). It is complemented by other evidence (in Gandalf's letter). It is confirmed by Aragorn reciting a few lines of the poem, without having read it.

The poem's impact on Boromir is far less certain. The source (Bilbo) is not trusted. Furthermore, in Bree, the poem just acts like a secret password, with the content of the poem being of secondary importance. To Boromir, however, the content is important (especially the last line). To Boromir, the whole structure of the poem, as a riddle poem, and as 'prophetic' has to seem greatly significant. Boromir must be thinking furiously.

"I come with a riddle poem. I get a riddle poem in return? What is the connection? I have found the Sword, as instructed. I think I am now to 'take counsels'. Is this poem 'counsel'? My poem is divine, it came from the Gods. It is prophecy. (Compare and contrast Boromir and Joan of Arc?) Is this poem divine? Is it prophecy? Or is it just mundane and the product of this Halfling? (Yes, I know a Halfling is supposed to be important!) How should I interpret or understand this poem?"

Fortunately for Boromir, he will have time to think, while Aragorn recites his c.v. By the time Aragorn has finished, Boromir has collected himself and decided he will address neither Bilbo's poem, nor Aragorn's announcement that he will go to Minas Tirith. Rather he will attempt to direct the Council back on track after recent diversions. "Elrond started with history. If we get back to history, maybe that will lead on to counsel?" "How do the Wise know that this Ring is his? And how has it passed down the years, until it is brought hither by so strange a messenger?"

(By the way, as a build on last week's question on why Legolas was called 'a strange elf' by the narrator, this marks the third person at the Council referred to as 'strange' or a 'stranger': Legolas, by the narrator; Boromir, by the narrator; and now Frodo, by Boromir.)


Boromir, showing more wisdom and diplomacy, than anyone else at the Council, (though, I think his 'so strange a messenger' is a slight diplomatic slip, indicating that he is not perfectly collected) does succeed in getting the meeting back on to its agenda. But, I don't think he has stopped thinking about Bilbo's poem!
 
Last edited:
I *love* this! I never even noticed the punctuation difference before!

I don't completely agree that Boromir shows the most wisdom/diplomacy (I think Elrond does pretty well for himself), but surely he shows more than most! As stated in my other thread, I do think Boromir is rather prudent, maybe "wise of this world" (to terribly misquote St. Paul). His growth in wisdom "not of this world" makes his [spoilers!] death at the beginning of The Two Towers one of my personally most pathos-filled moments in all of Tolkien.
 
Hi Marielle,

I would love to hear more on your comments about Boromir being 'wise of this world' and your thoughts on his growth in wisdom 'not of this world'. They sound interesting. I do think it possible that Boromir is too 'prudent' and cautious at the council. Perhaps a bit more confrontation and direct communication would have served better than his diplomatic responses? Still, he is amongst strangers, who mostly seem to know each other, whereas he is the outsider, so it is easy to see why diplomatic caution might well have seemed his best course.

As for Elrond, he started out well. But then he lost it. Boromir (very adroitly and diplomatically) took over the agenda of the Council, to get his Dream poem on the table. Then Aragorn jumped the gun by casting the sword on the table, and asking his question rather too early. Bilbo then chimed in with his poem which put the gorilla in the room (which everyone had been trying to ignore). Aragorn took things further tangential by reciting his c.v. and announcing that he would go to Minas Tirith, until Boromir managed to ignore all that and yank the Council back on track.

If Elrond is supposed to be chairing and facilitating this Council, he has let it escape his control, and veer off into difficult waters.

How much differently might things have turned out, if, when Boromir paused after his explanation after the Dream poem, Elrond had intervened before Aragorn could act, and said:

“Thank you Boromir. You and your brother have been truly blessed. Welcome to Imladris! Let me first note for all of us, that the prophecy concerns us here. Let us all strive to make our counsels stronger than Morgul-spells! Now, Boromir, I think that we may have answers to some of the riddles in your Dream. Shall we go through it together, line by line?”

This sort of response would have:
  1. Aknowledged that Boromir's introduction of the Dream poem at this time was appropriate. (Elrond really should have introduced it earlier.)
  2. Embraced Boromir, welcomed him to Imladris, and made him more of a participant, rather than an outsider in the Council.
  3. Signaled to the Council that this was a divine message of supreme importance, and that they should take it seriously.
  4. Cut off Aragorn and Bilbo from their dangerous and premature interventions.
  5. Opened a controlled and collaborative discussion of the possible meanings of the Dream poem and its riddles.
Alas, he did not! Had he done so, I think the chance of more favorable outcomes might have improved.
 
Last edited:
Hi JJ48,

By 'more favorable', I mean more favorable to the characters in the story (especially Boromir), not more favorable to the outcome nor to the story itself. The tragedy of Boromir is a very important element in TLOTR, and it would not necessarily be more favorable to the work of art to change it. I do think, though, that there is blame to be cast all around for the tragedy of Boromir, and it does not all rest on Boromir himself. (Which is often not appreciated sufficiently). I think we have already seen many failures to properly integrate Boromir during the Council, and the greatest failure is yet to come!

One possible story arc for Boromir that would have a more 'favorable' outcome would be to more closely parallel the story of Joan of Arc. Joan and Boromir are both sent divine visions which could be interpreted as 'Save France!' 'Save Gondor!' 'Put the rightful King on the Throne!' Both emissaries are viewed with initial skepticism and defensiveness. Both missions are successful, though both die before final success is achieved. Joan plays a much more critical and active leadership part in achieving the mission than Boromir. Boromir dies after betraying. Joan dies betrayed. Joan becomes a Saint and an Icon of her nation. Boromir does not.
 
Setting aside the specific cultural context in which Sainthood and Iconography reside, I think it likely that each member of the Fellowship (and Faramir) would ensure Boromir is remembered well in their respective domains. (Though the in-universe publication of the work we're reading might muddy that up a bit.)

I would also emphasize that Boromir dies after redeeming himself. The betrayal is meaningful, of course, but Aragorn himself states--and I think we have to believe he means this--that 'You have conquered. Few have gained such a victory. Be at peace!'

The last thing we are told is that 'Boromir smiled.'
 
I agree, Beech27, that Boromir repents and redeems himself. Still his overall character arc is much less 'favorable', impactful, and Iconic than Joan's.
 
I'm just not sure on either of those counts. Without Boromir, the Ents don't march to Isengard, the Witch King isn't destroyed, Faramir likely reacts differently to Frodo, etc. He saves the world!

It is true that he is perhaps mankind's greatest living hammer, and the Council presents him with a screw. Maybe they could have done otherwise, and we can imagine him standing with Aragorn before the Black Gate, playing with Elboron, and who knows what else? (But then, Joan didn't get to enjoy victory either.)

You're right that many readers--and it has to be said, film viewers--don't often view him in a favorable light. But I don't think we have any reason to believe he's less than revered in his own world.
 
Personally, I think Boromir's problem runs much deeper. I'll write more on it later when it becomes more applicable, but in short, I think Boromir's flaws stem from not understanding the Ring on a fundamental level. Altering this would require far more than simply taking more time to explain; it would require Boromir to change his view and understanding of the world. Simply put, Faramir was given the dream for a reason, but Boromir took the journey upon himself, instead. In focusing purely on the physical danger, Boromir ignores the spiritual danger and leaps in over his head.

Now, I like Boromir, and I don't want to discount all the good that comes from his decision, but neither do I think that his foolishness can be excused simply because it turned out well in the end. In The Silmarillion, we have this exchange between Manwë and Mandos while discussing Fëanor's marring and departure:

[Manwë spoke,] "Thus even as Eru spoke to us shall beauty not before conceived be brought into Eä, and evil yet be good to have been."
But Mando said: "And yet remain evil."


I think the same can be said of foolishness or rashness, too.
 
I'm just not sure on either of those counts. Without Boromir, the Ents don't march to Isengard, the Witch King isn't destroyed, Faramir likely reacts differently to Frodo, etc. He saves the world!

It is true that he is perhaps mankind's greatest living hammer, and the Council presents him with a screw. Maybe they could have done otherwise, and we can imagine him standing with Aragorn before the Black Gate, playing with Elboron, and who knows what else? (But then, Joan didn't get to enjoy victory either.)

You're right that many readers--and it has to be said, film viewers--don't often view him in a favorable light. But I don't think we have any reason to believe he's less than revered in his own world.

Although the hand of fate, or the providence of the Gods may have used Boromir's actions to produce favorable results, they were not produced directly by Boromir himself. Joan of Arc lifted the siege of Orleans, proposed and led the attack towards Reims, convincingly won the Battle of Patay, along the way, then liberated Reims, allowing the Dauphin to be crowned and consecrated King of France in the traditional location.

Boromir's direct contributions towards the success of his mission were far less impactful and impressive.
 
Personally, I think Boromir's problem runs much deeper. I'll write more on it later when it becomes more applicable, but in short, I think Boromir's flaws stem from not understanding the Ring on a fundamental level. Altering this would require far more than simply taking more time to explain; it would require Boromir to change his view and understanding of the world. Simply put, Faramir was given the dream for a reason, but Boromir took the journey upon himself, instead. In focusing purely on the physical danger, Boromir ignores the spiritual danger and leaps in over his head.

Now, I like Boromir, and I don't want to discount all the good that comes from his decision, but neither do I think that his foolishness can be excused simply because it turned out well in the end. In The Silmarillion, we have this exchange between Manwë and Mandos while discussing Fëanor's marring and departure:

[Manwë spoke,] "Thus even as Eru spoke to us shall beauty not before conceived be brought into Eä, and evil yet be good to have been."
But Mando said: "And yet remain evil."


I think the same can be said of foolishness or rashness, too.


I think I agree that Boromir does not understand the Ring on a fundamental level (not knowing exactly what you mean, I am not sure that I agree, but I do think that Boromir fails to understand the Ring well). I also agree that the substitution of Boromir for Faramir is important (and the first significant divergence by TLOTR narrative from Joan of Arc's).

I totally agree that Boromir cannot be 'excused' for his betrayal (even though he repents, and can be (and is) forgiven).

I do think, however, that the rest of the Council could have done a much better job in integrating Boromir, and perhaps facilitating his better understanding.
 
Although the hand of fate, or the providence of the Gods may have used Boromir's actions to produce favorable results, they were not produced directly by Boromir himself. Joan of Arc lifted the siege of Orleans, proposed and led the attack towards Reims, convincingly won the Battle of Patay, along the way, then liberated Reims, allowing the Dauphin to be crowned and consecrated King of France in the traditional location.

Boromir's direct contributions towards the success of his mission were far less impactful and impressive.

It's true that Boromir's primary contributions happen with a degree of removal, but I'm still not sure they're less impactful when one considers the apocalyptic stakes.

But I also don't think that's the biggest difference, if we are to continue this comparison. Let as assume that Joan did receive the dreams she reported, and the subsequent stories are essentially true.

1) She was sent, while it seems clear that Faramir was the intended target of the dream's summons.
2) She was of no personal import, and had no pride regarding this. Boromir clearly is, and does. (For which he shouldn't be faulted, frankly. He's a great man, and knows it.)
3) I think, most importantly, we have to examine how Joan meets Charles:

"Then Joan, who had come before the King, made the bows and reverences customary to make to the King, as if she had been nurtured at court, and this greeting done she said, addressing the King: 'God give you life, gentle King.' Whereas she knew him not and had never seen him. And there were present several lords, dressed with pomp and richly dressed more so than the King. Wherefore he answered Joan: 'I am not the King' and pointing to one of the lords said: 'There is the King.' To which Joan responded: "In God's name, gentle dauphin, it is you and none other.'"

Joan identifies the true King, despite manifest difficulties. Boromir has the true King revealed to him, and still fails on some level to identify Aragorn as who and what he is. Is this done as tactfully as can be, and at the right time? We can argue not. But whatever the circumstances, he does not have the sight credited to Joan.

Overall, I think you've done a great and vital job highlighting how difficult a position Boromir is in, and how the Council perhaps fails to properly consider his burdens. But I'm not convinced there is reason to believe he'd have ultimately behaved differently no matter what Elrond et al said, even if it's interesting to imagine hypotheticals.
 
Last edited:
Hi Beech,

Good post. I think the comparison between Boromir and Joan of Arc is interesting. As well as the differences you identify, there are many others.

1. I agree that Boromir going on the quest instead of Faramir is significant. It is the first major divergence between TLOTR and the Joan of Arc story.

2. I agree that the social background of Joan (a commoner and 'Medieval Middle Class' (Joan's father owned 50 acres of land and also had a paid position in the local village of Domremy, collecting taxes and heading the local Watch)), compared to Boromir's background as heir to the Steward, is another big difference.

3. Joan has the decided advantage of receiving numerous and ongoing divine messages, which allow her to convince doubters in her and her mission through the provision of prophecies which turn out to be true. Which also give her some ongoing guidance. Boromir only has the one message.

4. Joan goes to meet the Dauphin, having been divinely instructed that part (the main part?) of her mission is to see him properly crowned and consecrated in the Iconic setting of Reims cathedral. Boromir's instructions are much more cryptic, and less clear. He goes to find a broken sword. If he is also supposed to help restore the line of Elendil to the throne of Gondor, this is left up to his own interpretation. (And, of course, the possibility catches him completely by surprise during the Council).

5. Joan takes an instrumental and leadership role in fulfilling her mission. Boromir's role is minor (unless one takes account of him inadvertently becoming a pawn of Providence).

6. Joan of Arc was possibly betrayed by her companions (She was leading the rear guard in the retreat to Compiegne [somewhat like Boromir in defending the bridge] when the gates of the city were closed before the rear guard could enter. It is disputed whether this was a betrayal by Guillaume de Flavy, the governor of the town, or a necessary action to prevent the Burgundians from taking the gate.) Boromir betrayed his companions, in trying to take the Ring from Frodo. He also betrays his own divine vision, in which he was told that the counsels taken there would be greater than Morgul-spells.

I guess that J.R.R. Tolkien was aware of the similarities between Boromir and Joan of Arc (it is by far the most similar story in all of Catholic legend), and deliberate in the differences.

An interesting question is why Boromir is being portrayed as he is? For being the major character in one of the main story arcs of TLOTR, we actually do not get very much insight into, nor observation of, Boromir. (Another interesting discussion might be: Compare and contrast Boromir and Frodo as pawns of Providence?)

I also, of course, have no idea if Boromir would have behaved differently if leadership in the Council had managed him better. That's not what I am trying to point out. My reading is that Tolkien is simply not placing all the blame on Boromir. I think he has written several failures of leadership into the main leaders of the council, which are not often recognized as well as I think they should be. It is these depths and intricacies, and levels of interpretation which Tolkien has written into TLOTR which, in my opinion, help to make it such a great and compelling work of art.
 
Last edited:
Hi Marielle,

I would love to hear more on your comments about Boromir being 'wise of this world' and your thoughts on his growth in wisdom 'not of this world'. They sound interesting. I do think it possible that Boromir is too 'prudent' and cautious at the council. Perhaps a bit more confrontation and direct communication would have served better than his diplomatic responses? Still, he is amongst strangers, who mostly seem to know each other, whereas he is the outsider, so it is easy to see why diplomatic caution might well have seemed his best course.
My opinion of Boromir's wisdom comes mostly from evidence that comes later on, and especially from his Ring-induced monologue. Which might not be the most fair of evidence, I grant, but still it gives us a critical insight into Boromir's mindset. Also, he's inevitably a contrast to Faramir, who rivals Gandalf for the most "wise not of this world" in LotR, for my money.

Boromir, like Turin, reminds me very much of a Greek tragic hero. Admirable, great, noble, sympathetic ... very much someone those around him will respect and even love. But he is also flawed: even in the Council, we can see an imperfect response to the miraculous or mystical things happening around him. Despite having committed to an arduous journey to get an answer to his riddle, he doesn't speak of it as one might an angel's message or something like that. More like a puzzle to be cracked. And his line "why then should we seek a broken sword?" could imply that his view of the puzzle is too narrow for the circumstances he finds himself in.

His prudence, then, isn't necessarily problematic in his word choice, but in his innate response to the situation. I imagine Faramir's reaction, for example, to the announcement of Aragorn's lineage would be very different -- I've personally actually always imagined he would leap to his feet and embrace Aragorn, weeping -- and not because he would be less aware of the possibilities of treachery or deceit, but because he would be *more* aware of the non-rational, spiritual hints dispersed throughout the circumstances. A careful, open reading of the poem itself would be enough to disperse Boromir's hesitancy, if his mind and heart were in the right place.

tl;dr: Boromir is prudent and even wise in his responses, but he doesn't appear to be open to the spiritual undercurrents surrounding the poem/prophecy and his situation, and therefore fails to react *enough* to the marvelous things happening around him.
 
I think I agree that Boromir does not understand the Ring on a fundamental level (not knowing exactly what you mean, I am not sure that I agree, but I do think that Boromir fails to understand the Ring well).

Basically, Boromir seems to view the Ring and even the greater war primarily from a physical, military level rather than from a spiritual level. He seems to view the Ring primarily as a neutral weapon to be picked up by either side, like a sword or a bow. While the Wise may have been able to do a better job explaining that's not the right way to view it, to impart a fuller understanding and appreciation of the Ring would require that Boromir change how he views and prioritizes the world, which is unlikely to happen simply due to a different introduction. Faramir had the basis for such an understanding; Boromir did not.
 
Yes, Faramir is more 'saintly' and more like Joan of Arc, than Boromir.

I speculate that if he had undertaken the journey, he might still have had a tragic end, but his story might have more closely paralleled the arc of Joan.
 
I was actually thinking more Saint John than Saint Joan, personally, but both work. Does that make Boromir St. Thomas?
 
The two versions of the "All that is gold does not glitter" poem are almost identical. But, not quite.

The last two lines in the poem in the Prancing Pony are:

Renewed shall be blade that was broken,
The crownless again shall be king.


The words are the same when the poem is recited in Rivendell. But, the comma after 'broken' is changed to a colon.

The effect of this greater pause is to add greater emphasis to the last line (which, of course, everyone has been carefully not referring to in the Council until Bilbo puts his foot in it).

The homework instructions were to pay attention to the different contexts in which the two versions of the poem appear.

The contexts are similar, in that the poem appears both times when the identity and trustworthiness of Aragorn seems to be doubted. In Bree, both Butterbur and the Hobbits are doubtful of Aragorn. In Rivendell Bilbo feels that Boromir is doubtful of Aragorn. However, in Bree there is doubt around both Aragorn's identity and his trustworthiness, Whereas Boromir seems to accept Aragorn's identity, but doubt his effectiveness. Bilbo does not seem to discern this distinction (or, if he does, is he presenting his poem as prophecy, rather than hope?).

In Bree, the poem dispels the doubts of Frodo and Pippin (less so Sam). The poem comes from a trusted source (Gandalf). It is complemented by other evidence (in Gandalf's letter). It is confirmed by Aragorn reciting a few lines of the poem, without having read it.

The poem's impact on Boromir is far less certain. The source (Bilbo) is not trusted. Furthermore, in Bree, the poem just acts like a secret password, with the content of the poem being of secondary importance. To Boromir, however, the content is important (especially the last line). To Boromir, the whole structure of the poem, as a riddle poem, and as 'prophetic' has to seem greatly significant. Boromir must be thinking furiously.

"I come with a riddle poem. I get a riddle poem in return? What is the connection? I have found the Sword, as instructed. I think I am now to 'take counsels'. Is this poem 'counsel'? My poem is divine, it came from the Gods. It is prophecy. (Compare and contrast Boromir and Joan of Arc?) Is this poem divine? Is it prophecy? Or is it just mundane and the product of this Halfling? (Yes, I know a Halfling is supposed to be important!) How should I interpret or understand this poem?"

Fortunately for Boromir, he will have time to think, while Aragorn recites his c.v. By the time Aragorn has finished, Boromir has collected himself and decided he will address neither Bilbo's poem, nor Aragorn's announcement that he will go to Minas Tirith. Rather he will attempt to direct the Council back on track after recent diversions. "Elrond started with history. If we get back to history, maybe that will lead on to counsel?" "How do the Wise know that this Ring is his? And how has it passed down the years, until it is brought hither by so strange a messenger?"

(By the way, as a build on last week's question on why Legolas was called 'a strange elf' by the narrator, this marks the third person at the Council referred to as 'strange' or a 'stranger': Legolas, by the narrator; Boromir, by the narrator; and now Frodo, by Boromir.)


Boromir, showing more wisdom and diplomacy, than anyone else at the Council, (though, I think his 'so strange a messenger' is a slight diplomatic slip, indicating that he is not perfectly collected) does succeed in getting the meeting back on to its agenda. But, I don't think he has stopped thinking about Bilbo's poem!
Just replying to the presence of a colon. To an actor, it would be a sign that what follows has special significance. I think it is related to Corey's observation that no one has mentioned the "K" word yet. Bilbo would surely have picked up on this and may even have hesitated before speaking that last line -- but the Took side takes over and he 'goes there.'
 
Personally, I think Boromir's problem runs much deeper. I'll write more on it later when it becomes more applicable, but in short, I think Boromir's flaws stem from not understanding the Ring on a fundamental level. Altering this would require far more than simply taking more time to explain; it would require Boromir to change his view and understanding of the world. Simply put, Faramir was given the dream for a reason, but Boromir took the journey upon himself, instead. In focusing purely on the physical danger, Boromir ignores the spiritual danger and leaps in over his head.

Yes, Boromir has clearly lived a very active extroverted life. He's had precious little time to reflect on or understand himself, and magic in general is about the inner workings of the 'mind' or 'soul'. He gets the basic idea that the Ring augments one's own power, but does not understand the implications of that. Look at what he says to Frodo:
What could not a warrior do in this hour, a great leader? What could not Aragorn do? Or if he refuses, why not Boromir? The Ring would give me power of Command. How I would drive the hosts of Mordor, and all men would flock to my banner!
[from "The Breaking of the Fellowship" in The Fellowship of the Ring]

He realizes that as a captain of Men, a commander, the power that the Ring would give him is more 'charisma' to command Men and inspire them to 'Great Deeds'. But it does not even occur to him there might be a problem with magnifying his own -- 'personality'? I don't want to say 'soul' in this context -- his own character I guess. Whatever there might be within him, all of it would be magnified. Not just the ability to command Men in combat to do 'Great Things', but every petty desire for control over them, and every other whim. The One Ring is just a tool to him, a means to an outward goal. He is oblivious to the deeper implications of using it.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top