The Great Balrog Debate

Noldor_returned · Apr 20, 2006

I think it's time we settled this once and for all. Do Balrogs have wings? Please, nobody bite my head off for this, but I think it had to happen.

So do they or don't they? In tFotR, the Balrog certainly has wings, as it stretches across the Hall. Then we have all the other Balrogs mentioned throughout Sil and UT, such as Gothmog, which there is no evidence of having wings. So if they do, can they fly? I think they do, because none have been created since the First Age, so why would Morgoth make them differently? However, the wings give them no special powers because I don't think they can fly.

YayGollum · Apr 21, 2006

Why would anyone bite your head off for that? Well, let me see in this place. If this is going to be an actual debate thing, we gots to come up with official stances for the two sides to have, then decide how the debate will work. One versus one? Two teams of four? That one person's idea of only one amazingly persuasive post per player? Or at least, a deadline. I would think that the question ---> "Do the Balrog type things have wings?" can't be used, since both sides could point out that not all Balrog type things are necessarily exactly alike. They weren't somehow magically manufactered by the Mel character. They were a bunch of fire spirits who enjoyed the guy's music and decided to hang out with him. The lady who totes the sun around all of the time was a fire spirit, too, and she looks nothing like the Balrog types. I would think that they would all be scary and have something to do with fire, but besides that, some might have chosen their physical clothing to include wings and some might not have thought of that at all. Whoops. I did not intend to start much of a debate, already. *hides*

Noldor_returned · Apr 21, 2006

Well if we make it 2 vs. 2 to begin with, that should work, and if we have others express interest then we can see what can happen to let them in. As for the Balrogs having wings, this debate wouldn't work without that question. Unless you have another question in mind that would work.

YayGollum · Apr 21, 2006

Well, you could just narrow it down to ---> "Did the Balrog dude from that The Lord Of The Rings story have wings?" Or, if you felt an especially burning need to include the entire group of them ---> "Could those creepy Balrog beings fly, in any way besides directly downwards after tripping?" But then, I would feel sorry for anyone choosing the side that they couldn't, in that debate. *hides*

Annaheru · Apr 21, 2006

Noldor_returned said:
In tFotR, the Balrog certainly has wings, as it stretches across the Hall.

Not necessarily- some (myself included) would argue that the "wings" in that passage are a metaphor related to the simile "shadow like wings" found 2 paragraphs above. . .

In a debate like this you'll find that each side of the argument has a different understanding of what key passages actually say.

So first you'll have to establish an "orthodox" interpretation of each disputed passage. And if religious history has taught us anything, it's that very few orthodox interpretations go unopposed.

YayGollum · Apr 21, 2006

I didn't point that out earlier, Annaheru person, because I thought that the point of the thread might end up being a debate on how that part of the story should be interpreted. Isn't that what the debate is usually centered on? oh well. I have no problem with starting a debate on that part, then finding a few judges who would have no problem with tossing their own biases out of the window to judge on which team's point of view was the most persuasive.

Annaheru · Apr 21, 2006

I think examination of this passage is almost inevitable

OR

if the point is to look at balrogs in general, we could exclude the bridge scene, and just examine the other passages, then interpret Durin's Bane according to the results.

just a thought

YayGollum · Apr 21, 2006

Got it. That would be up to the Noldor_returned person. But then, I would probably go for a debate on the first thing that you mentioned, since the second seems too easy. I could be wrong, though. Counts how many debates he has ever actually won. oh well. At least I always enjoy them.

Anyways, I was mostly replying at you to point out that coming up with an "orthodox" interpretation would make no sense, in this debate. If we decided that, for this debate thing, the Balrog in that scene definitely had wings, what would we be debating? Just that they were actual wings that could carry him around or not? oh well.

Alcuin · Apr 21, 2006

Fuzzy slippers. The Balrog is wearing fuzzy slippers.

It’s Schrödinger’s Balrog: he both does and does not have wings until he’s actually observed by the Fellowship, when whether he has wings or not suddenly collapses into one reality or the other. And because it’s Schrödinger’s Balrog, the wings/no wings paradox exists for each of us until we read the passage and the Psi function collapses.

Noldor_returned · Apr 21, 2006

Well you guys have had the ideas. Perhaps we should debate over sections which include Balrogs, deciding whether they do or not in each instance. The Fellowship Balrog should certainly be included, as there aren't many better examples that can be found. So the topic seems to be: "Do Balrogs have wings or are they a figurative image?" Or at least something along those lines.

At the moment we have:
For: NR (me)
Against: None

Bethelarien · Apr 30, 2006

Annaheru--

It's unnecessary to establish an "orthodox" interpretation of the aforementioned passages. Yes, both sides will interpret the passages differently. However--the debate is determined by how well they demonstrate their chosen interpretation. Meaning that whoever is the most convincing wins. That's the point of a debate.

The last debate I was in here, long ago, probably mentioned the same three or four passages, both sides interpreting them differently. That's the whole point, otherwise there would be no need to debate.

I'm willing to debate on either side, whether I agree with it or not, I can still argue either way.

Annaheru · Apr 30, 2006

Bethelarien said:
Annaheru--

It's unnecessary to establish an "orthodox" interpretation of the aforementioned passages.

that particular line was a reference to the first sentence of the first post: "I think it's time we settled this once and for all." If you seek to answer this question "once and for all" then you will be establishing an orthodoxy. That was my point: it won't happen.

And I am well aware of the definition of a debate, and how they are conducted. Thank you

Alcuin · Jul 6, 2006

Hm. Is this idea alive or dead or dormant?

Noldor_returned · Jul 6, 2006

I keep meaning to come back to it, but never quite find the time or the effort. Well, what I was thinking, is that we establish two sides and what we are arguing exactly, then, if someone wants to join in, they can post, and if it will make things too uneven, then they could try and find someone else to join as well on the opposing side to them.

The topic: That Balrogs have wings.
Topic Guidelines: Any reference to Balrog's can be used, and the two sides are affirmative and negative of course. Whether Balrogs can fly or not is irrelevant, unless it involves their wings. No reference to the movie Balrog will be taken seriously. If you want to use the books, go for it.

I think that should just about do it. Now, for some "teams". Well I am against this topic. Anyone else?

YayGollum · Jul 8, 2006

You are against this topic? Then why did you bring it up? Or did you mean that you are for the idea that Balrogs don't have wings? Or did you mean that you are leaning up against this topic in a possessive and nurturing way? oh well. I'll join in, for whichever side thinks that they will lose.

Noldor_returned · Jul 9, 2006

I brought this topic up, Yay, because it is the one thing that divides Tolkienists. I do not personally think that Balrogs have wings, but I brought this up so that a decision could be made. A topic never works if it is negative, so that is why I made it affirmative. And Yay, choose a side that you believe in. If you don't believe in either, then don't choose a side.

YayGollum · Jul 9, 2006

You missed or ignored my ribbing. oh well. Of course, going by the way that you worded how the debate should go, I would say that sure, Balrogs have wings that are in any way involved in flight. I have no problem with hopping to the other side of the argument, if it would balance teams out, though. Also, how often do debates actually settle issues? No, I am sure that people will stick to their opinions, no matter which side wins.

Noldor_returned · Jul 9, 2006

Then we'll help the ishy-washy people choose a side. So, if you want to post an argument, go for it, otherwise I will in the next few days.

YayGollum · Jul 10, 2006

You can go ahead and toss some points out, if you feel like it. In the old days, though, we waited to see who would join what team. We didn't just let random people pop in and help out players who were losing, or pop in and destroy the really good points of their new teammates while trying to help. Crazy impulsive Noldor_returned person!

Sometimes, we even waited for judges to be named before we could start.

Noldor_returned · Aug 3, 2006

Well, that's what can happen, as I don't reeally have the time to start at the moment. Once more people join, and a judge is announced, then let the Great Balrog debate begin!

The Great Balrog Debate

Member

Conscience of TTF

Member

Conscience of TTF

Heruanno, Avronwa Aran

Conscience of TTF

Heruanno, Avronwa Aran

Conscience of TTF

of Zarkanya

Member

The Lost Evenstar

Heruanno, Avronwa Aran

of Zarkanya

Member

Conscience of TTF

Member

Conscience of TTF

Member

Conscience of TTF

Member

Share this page

Similar threads

Today's events

Similar threads

Search Wiki

Share this page

Most viewed threads of 2026