[Note to current readers: since these comments were written, I have substantially changed my position on this issue. Come to think of it, I'm not even sure why I still have this message on the web, though it does raise some good points. To see my current thoughts on giants (and why I'm pretty sure they are "real" in Middle-earth), take a look at the "Other Possible Nature Spirits" section in my comprehensive essay on Tom Bombadil: http://tolkien.slimy.com/essays/Bombadil.html. To see my current thoughts on "canonical" texts, look at my essay "Tolkien's Parish": http://tolkien.slimy.com/essays/TolkParish.html. And for the record, the question _is_ now discussed in the Tolkien Meta-FAQ: see its "Natures of the Races" section, at http://tolkien.slimy.com/.] Re: Giants in The Hobbit? Author: Steuard Jensen Email: sjensen -aaatt- hmc -daht- edu Date: 1998/05/24 Forums: rec.arts.books.tolkien, alt.fan.tolkien ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Quoth Mike Kew <<>>: > On Sat, 23 May 1998, Boris A. Berdnikov wrote >> I don't recall reading about [giants] in any other place [than The >> Hobbit] (LOtR, Silmarillion, unifinished tales, etc.). Does anyone >> know, what are they? > No, it's not there. If anyone can answer this, I'd be grateful too. This question probably should be mentioned in the FAQ, ans it seems to come up fairly regularly. However, there isn't really a good consensus on the issue, which is actually tied to quite a few other debates (most notably to the question of which books are "canon"). Let's see if I can summarize. (For more information, search these groups in Deja News for similar subjects, as well as for discussions on which books are canon.) Giants are not mentioned in any of Tolkien's writings about Middle-earth apart from _The Hobbit_. This is one of many pieces of evidence that a number of people (including me) cite to argue that _The Hobbit_ should not be taken as an authoritative source of information about Middle-earth. (Another is the fact that Tolkien didn't decide to fully incorporate its story and characters into the same world as _The Silmarillion_ until he began writing LotR. When actually writing _The Hobbit_, he used the greater mythology as a source for background detail for the story, but didn't really focus on making the new story a true part of the old.) In this view, the "true" Middle-earth contains no giants; I have suggested that (internal to the story) they may have become a part of _The Hobbit_ as a result of the growth and evolution of the "Mad Baggins" myth over many years. Others, on the other hand, are quite strongly of the opinion that _The Hobbit_ should be taken as an authoritative source. I disagree, but there's something to be said for giving credit to _everything_ the author publishes; after all, who are we to decide which books are canon and which aren't? (I, at least, do not believe that I am the reincarnation of Tolkien...) Naturally, those who hold this view believe that there are, in fact, giants in Middle-earth, who clearly have no real allegiance to good or evil and spend most of their time throwing rocks at each other in the mountains, leaving all others alone. There are occasional attempts to find a middle ground (on giants, at least); I once suggested that the term "giants" might refer to a breed of large trolls. However, this sort of argument doesn't shed any light on the large question of which books can be trusted to what degree. As a shameless plug, as long as you're looking through Deja News for giant threads, look up the rather long article I wrote on "canon" within the last few months. I rather liked the metaphor I came up with, and it quite successfully summarizes my opinions on the matter. Steuard Jensen