📊Poll: Do Balrogs have wings?

[Celebthôl]

there are quotes, i cant be naffed to find em now but they go against the wings thing and generally the theroy of a being with massive wings in a cramped mine is weird and wouldnt work etc, but i personally believe they did have wings!

 

[FoolOfATook]

it is the most dedated thing ever to do with Mr Tolkiens works save Mr Bombadil!

I think the real question is whether or not Bombadil had wings.

 

[Niniel]

I think the whole idea of Balrogs not having wings was created by people who think that Balrogs consisted of only 'shadow and flame'. In that case, they would have no corporeal bodies but be immaterial. Then it would also be weird for them to have wings, since of they have no body they wouldn't need wings to go anywhere. But since JRRT himself said they had wings, I believe Balrogs are corporeal beings. The shadow is the darkness that is inside them, and the flame the fire that surrounds them, but they do have a body. And wings.

 

[Baranlas]

i thought the main arguement was wether they could use there wings, but it seems i was wrong

 

[Rúmil]

http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/b/balrogs.html

That's about the most complete presentation you'll ever find of both sides of the debate.

I do think they have wings, by the way

 

[Isenho]

- JRR Tolkien said they had wings

- The movie showed them having wings

- John Howe, Ted Nasmith, and Alan Lee painted Balrogs with wings

SO yes Balrogs had wings!

 

[Arvedui]

And here is another site that gives you a lot more insight:

Do Balrog's have wings?

That is written by people from this Forum.

 

[Ol'gaffer]

ah, but a balrog with wings just makes things just a little more dramatical.

 

[Nardil]

Tolkien makes it pretty clear that they do, in fact, have wings. The question that remains is what do these wings consist of? Like the rest of the Balrog, these wings are of shadow and flame.

 

[Beorn]

Wings or No?

 

[Rúmil]

Beorn, PLEASE! not that one again!

 

[goldmare]

GROAN! Oh jeez, not again. Hasn't this already been argued? Another thing a believer in no wings might say is that why did the Balrog fall from the Bridge of Kazad-dum if he had wings, but please do not start discussing this, I just though it should be added. One thing, though- when or where did Tolkien ever say that Balrogs have wings? I have never heard that and it would seriously help me in this argument I am having with a friend of mine. Could someone please tell me where you found this out?

 

[faila]

th bridge of kazadumthat last page or so

"and its wings spread from wall to wall"
(not exact quote)

 

[Rúmil]

Please, faila at least assume we know the relevant quotations That passage is possibly the most quoted passage of Tolkien ever: I'm pretty sure goldmare has read the line. The problem is, that line may refer not to actual wings, but to the comparant of a metaphor. We'll never know for sure, though I myself stand in the 'wings' party. (I used to be a no-wings but grew out of it)

 

[Tuor]

I am a proponent of the "no-wings" view. this is primarily based on the fact that while they were standing parallel to a long chasm on the bridge, the Balrog spread it's wings "from wall to wall", a n impossibility in the space, unless they were hypothetical wings. earlier, too, it says that "the shadow about it reached out like two vast wings". also, it went up the secret way out of Moria. if this was about the same size as that in the hobbit, which i suspect, it could not have gone with wings. did you guys notice that in the movies it had shadows between the stiff parts of its wings instead of membrane or leathery skin? it also had a tail. typical fantasy demon, but i think somewhat dissimilar from tolkien's concept. speaking of fantasy, warcraft III has really cool demons. you should all see it.

 

[goldmare]

What my question really referred to was did Tolkien ever say in a place other than the books whether or not balrogs have wings? The way someone said it, I had assumed they meant that he had said it in an interview or a letter or something, although now that I go back and look at it, they probably meant in the books. I wish he had said it more plainly, and he's probably turning in his grave to think that people are discussing such an irrelevent and pointless topic in connection to him.

By the way, I am on the fence about this issue. I have come to the timid conclusion that they did have wings, but the wings were made of shadow, probably for effect. And people, please do not refer to the movie when discussing this topic, because Tolkien did not help make the movie and it is therefore not a very reliable source.

 

[Barakul]

Balrogs had wing! well at least I think they did. Well maybe it was my imagination. Or...well...ok...I'll shut up now. PEACE OUT YALL!

 

[faila]

Originally posted by goldmare
What my question really referred to was did Tolkien ever say in a place other than the books whether or not balrogs have wings? The way someone said it, I had assumed they meant that he had said it in an interview or a letter or something, although now that I go back and look at it, they probably meant in the books. I wish he had said it more plainly, and he's probably turning in his grave to think that people are discussing such an irrelevent and pointless topic in connection to him.

I think he would actually be happy. I believe he purposely left points like the balrogs wings or tombombadil, for people to argue about. And yea we did men in the books that last couple pages of the bridge of kazadum

 

[redline2200]

I don't understand why this is a thread. When Tolkien says it had wings then THEY HAD WINGS! He says its wings spread from wall to wall; what more evidence is needed? How else could Tolkien have said they had wings than by specifically pointing out that Durin's bane had wings?

 

[Rúmil]

Garr! I don't like quoting myself, but here goes:

Please, faila at least assume we know the relevant quotations That passage is possibly the most quoted passage of Tolkien ever: I'm pretty sure goldmare has read the line. The problem is, that line may refer not to actual wings, but to the comparant of a metaphor