Wow. That's pretty amazing, thanks for pointing it out.
I find the languages the most fascinating part of his works, and yet they are the aspect I know the least about.
That's a pretty good flag. I love the color palette it employs.
I am enjoying having my national animal be a tree. This issue actually works really well, but not in the way intended.
Upon the planned completion of their vacation estate in northern Lon Kra Con, a Lon Kra Conian billionaire has additionally, and unexpectedly, purchased the vast bulk of a large forest adjacent to their property for the sole purpose of stocking and hunting Rowan Trees.
There are few things I enjoy more, in this world, than reading a new theory about or explanation for Tom Bombadil. So I look forward to the video. Thanks.
One of the top comments stood out to me: "It's always who's tom bombadil, never how's tom bombadil."
Just came across this little tidbit for the first time: The Beatles once tried to make a film adaptation of Lord of the Rings, and their choice for director was Stanley Kubrick. And as a musical, no less.
John wanted to play Gollum; George wanted to be Gandalf; Paul looked to Frodo; and good ole Ringo would've been Sam. I find those roles to be surprisingly well-suited, and struggle to fantasy-cast them any better...
(though, if push came to shove: Paul as Gandalf; George as Aragorn; Ringo as Gollum; John as Saruman. Also, I think it would've been cool had all four of them played one of the four main hobbits)
Sadly, Kubrick thought the work was "unfilmable" (probably correct, before computers). And Tolkien, himself, thought the idea to be a mockery of his work, with the potential that it would just turn his books into a silly Beatles movie (again, probably correct). He also apparently loathed the 60s counter-culture movement.
It appears that this all came out via Peter Jackson, who heard it from Paul during conversations regarding the new film about the Beatles he's directing (another thing I didn't know)
The podcast I heard it from:
I catched that comment too! Quite often to be the case most of the time, although for those that know dear ol' Tom, they see him always chanting and cheering and being a jolly fellow so I assume they expect him to be happy, or at least content with his place in the world.
What an interesting idea! I agree with your other comments related to how it might have been received by Tolkien or by the fans, or even if it could have been created with the technology of that time (although I am not an expert of last-century cinema, I do know some big movie names of 50-70 years ago, so I assume something was still possible - definitely not to the extent of what was done in the 2000's).
Yeah, I really love seeing what comes from collaborations between disparate interesting and creative folks. I would've loved to have seen what would come from theirs.
You're right, perhaps with some real thought and inventiveness, something could have been figured out. They had films that were grand, sweeping epics, and with massive clashing armies, so that takes care of much of it. I guess the most difficult part would have been all of the creatures... Imagine if Kubrick had reached out to Jim Henson and Frank Oz for help on that front!
I love the films of Kubrik, I love the music of the Beatles, and I love the written works of Tolkien. But I just can't see anything good coming out of combining them all. It would have been fascinating to watch the documentary on the making of the film, much as they say it is fascinating to watch a train wreck. The film itself would never have been finished. The only way to combine these three successfully would be if someone else were to do an homage to them all - and that person would need to be very talented themselves.
Now, a collaboration among them to create something new would have been potentially amazing.
He can't be Maiar, and as I recall the Valar are all accounted for. Yet no Maiar would've entered Arda before a Valar.
That was another possibility, that he's an echo of Eru on earth.
I personally don't mind him being unexplainable, I feel Tolkein just liked the character and wanted to shoehorn him into LOTR.
Yeah I think Tolkien has said something to the effect of 'not everything can be explained'. But it is always fun to theorize. I am currently re-reading 'the adventures of Tom Bombadil' but I am afraid there are no real clues in it. It is mostly a book to read to young kids. But maybe that is a clue on itself, maybe it is the personification of the power of childish innocence and the blissfulness of that power in a dark world.
how'd ya know it's password?
One doesn't need to know its password. A resurrection from the Boneyard is not the same nation. It's creating a new nation of the same name.
For example, if you search in the Boneyard for the nation name Lady Eowyn, before the current one which was founded more than 7 years ago, there was another nation of the same name, founded and ceased to exist over 16 years ago. I don't know who used the nation name briefly before. When creating the nation, it is new. No issues answered yet, minimum population, etc.
Another example, if you search in the Boneyard for the nation name Crickhollow, you find three previous nations. Whether they were previously used by three different people, or by one person who forgot their password, is not visible. (I think the former is more likely.) It also shows when the nation name will become available again, because the last nation again did not reach a population of 500 million.
Criteria: A nation name becomes available for re-use unless the former owner
ceased to exist less than 5 years ago
accumulated a population of 500 million or more
founded an existing region
is mentioned in the history page of an existing region
authored or was the subject of a WA resolution, incl. historical ones
authored an issue
was a moderator or admin
was deleted by a mod
is marked by a game mod as blocked from being reused
With a bit of imagination and trying out options, creating a Tolkien themed nation name, new or resurrected, works out fine.