posted
Yes, but those are the people who are the Tolkienesque equivalents of people who speak Klingon. And no-one listens to them, either... :-)
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Although I found the songs tedious to read myself, I would guess that they were included by Tolkien in order to enhance the depth and atmosphere of the book.
-------------------- "Out of doubt, out of dark to the day's rising I came singing in the sun, sword unsheathing. To hope's end I rode and to heart's breaking: Now for wrath, now for ruin and a red nightfall!"
The Battle of the Pelennor Fields.
Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Don't forget Tolkien was not only creating a world he was creating a mythology for a country who had lost theirs over the centuries - mostly due to the Norman invasions.
-------------------- "Bears. Beets. Battlestar Galactica." - Jim Halpert. (The Office)
posted
Well, walking down the main street of Stockholm I noticed a little fantasyshop I've ignored my whole life, and they had imported the three LOTR-swords! I got to feel them, they weren't light and cheap at all, but very solid, without feeling clumsy. Wish I'd had room to swing them, Conan-Kata style. ;-)
The Nazg�l sword was big as hell, and the blade looked appropriately worn and tarnished, like in the movie. My favourite was Glamdring, of course, but they were all very sharpened, I used the flat side of my thumbnail to scratch the blade and it made a rather wide white mark.
I don't understand why "mere stainless steel" would be negative to a sword, it must be a fuck of a lot better than aluminum or tin. And wtf are these supposed "rat-tail tangs"???
Sting scared me a bit, because it was as functional as a very big knife would be, especially for stabbing...
They were more expensive here, of course, the equivalent of 335$, 527$ and 575$ for Sting, Glamdring and the Nazg�l blade.
[ March 14, 2002, 09:07: Message edited by: Nim Pim ]
-------------------- "I'm nigh-invulnerable when I'm blasting!" Mel Gibson, X-Men
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Because there isn't really a fantasy forum around here?
Besides, every library I've ever entered has had Science Fiction and Fantasy grouped together. But, if you think this is a travesty, what until I start a thread in here on Jason X.
So, Nim, these were the actual swords used in the movies? It sounds like it was a pretty cool experience. My friend is planning on making his own swords (god help us all). I'll ask him if he knows what's up with stainless steel.
-------------------- The philosopher's stone. Those who possess it are no longer bound by the laws of equivalent exchange in alchemy. They gain without sacrifice and create without equal exchange. We searched for it, and we found it.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
you dont have to participate in a fantasy thread if you see one (i usually dont, but i dont bitch up and down about how people are discussing a movie i dont have any plans to see yet)
no ones forcing you, and resurrecting month-old threads about things you dont want to talk or read about hardly seems to make sense.
-------------------- "Are you worried that your thoughts are not quite.. clear?"
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
Chris StarShade
Ex-Member
posted
No, they weren't the actual ones I'm sure, simply replicas.
I have a sword shop in my town that's selling 'em now.
GLAMDRING! THE FOE HAMMER!
Okay, it's a hammer despite the fact that it is a sword.... ahh well, who said poetics had to be taken literally?
IP: Logged
I saw "Fellowship" for the third and last time yesterday, it will go off the cinemas in Sweden in a short while, and just because I bothered (love it even more now that I've read Silmarillion), they had added a lovely 3-minute preview, just as the end credits were about to start, showing selected scenes from "The Two Towers", and I just want to say...DAMN!!!
[ May 05, 2002, 23:47: Message edited by: Nim Pim ]
-------------------- "I'm nigh-invulnerable when I'm blasting!" Mel Gibson, X-Men
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
I hope it's not too much to ask that the forks and knives on the table during the famous scene in the restaurant in 'When Harry met Sally' are their next additions?
Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Nim Pim: I don't understand why "mere stainless steel" would be negative to a sword, it must be a fuck of a lot better than aluminum or tin.
Stainless steel is a poor choice of metal for swords for several reasons: It does not hold an edge very well. It cannot be properly heat treated and tempered. It is a brittle steel with little or no flex. A good sword that has been properly tempered will bend at least 5 inches (if not more) out of line and return true. Try that with a stainless steel sword and you end up with one bent sword.
Real swords throughout the Medieval and Renaissance periods were forged from what is typically referred to today as “carbon spring steel.” (That is somewhat of a misnomer, since all steel by definition, has SOME carbon in it.) I do not know all the metallurgical properties of stainless steel, but I do know that it does not contain enough carbon and cannot be properly tempered. The steel is too brittle for real swordplay, and has almost no flexibility.
Real swords were forged from iron, and carbon was added by using charcoal in the forging process. This created a strong flexible steel that would hold an edge very well. A sword undergoes a lot of torque when being using in combat, and contrary to popular belief, the flat of the blade (as opposed to the edge) was used a great deal in parrying and/or blocking. Thus, one can see how a sword would need good flexibility. Additionally, a real sword will rust, and it must constantly be oiled.
quote:Originally posted by Nim Pim: I got to feel them, they weren't light and cheap at all, but very solid, without feeling clumsy.
When it comes to a sword’s weight, light is a GOOD thing. Again, contrary to popular belief, real Medieval and Renaissance swords were quite light. (After all, who would want to fight on the battlefield with a 10-pound longsword?) A “typical” Medieval longsword (about 4 feet in overall length) weighed anywhere from 2 to 3.5 pounds. Anything beyond 3.5 lbs. would certainly have been considered too heavy.
quote:Originally posted by Nim Pim: And wtf are these supposed "rat-tail tangs"???
The tang is the part of the metal blade that extends into the handle. On any good quality “functional” sword, the tang will have actually been forged as part of the blade. A good tang will usually be fairly wide. On poorer quality swords, the tangs are actually welded onto the blade at the point of the shoulder. Often in this case, the tang is nothing more than a thin metal bar, and this type of tang is usually referred to as a “rat-tail-tang.”
I would contend that in the world of swords and swordsmanship: Stainless steel = junk United Cutlery = junk
I think it is safe to say that most (if not all) serious sword enthusiasts would agree with this assessment.
Good quality swords are usually produced by folks such as: Angus Trim Armart of Europe Del Tin …Just to name a select few.
For additional information on swords and swordsmanship on the net, I recommend: Sword Forum International: http://www.swordforum.com The Association for Renaissance Martial Arts: http://www.thearma.org
For additional reading on swords, check out: "The Martial Arts of Renaissance Europe" by Sydney Anglo "Medieval Swordsmanship: Illustrated Methods and Techniques" by John Clements "Swords & Hilt Weapons" by Michael D Cole, et. al. "European Weapons and Armour" by Ewart Oakeshott "Records of the Medieval Sword" by Ewart Oakeshott.
[ June 03, 2002, 18:00: Message edited by: Commander Dan ]
-------------------- “My experience with Rick Berman is, you know, he does not understand what he's doing, he does not understand science fiction.” -- Andrew Probert
Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
