Kevin's Watch

dANdeLION wrote:I can't believe you guys doubt they are lions! What, are you going to start doubting me next?

Hmmm ... my theory is that this "dANdeLION" is in actuality a forum inhabiting softbot.

I always saw them as not actually lion-shaped, but still sentient entities made of fireyness. When it eventually occurred to me years later that they might be just lava, I was quite disappointed.

dANdeLION wrote:I can't believe you guys doubt they are lions! What, are you going to start doubting me next?

Yeah, you're just a liquid flow too.

High Lord Tolkien wrote:

Blackhawk wrote:I have to agree with Wayfriend, didnt Berek Call upon the firelions after his binding agreement with the earthpower destroying all his enemies but himself?Lava would have no distinction between Berek and a Cavewight. Also Amok said that if Elena were to call upon the Firelions of Mt thunder to attack Lord Foul THEY would instantly obey,...mere lava would take quite some time to get from MT thunder to Ridjeck Thome, and once it did what could it do? he could just summon up some water and make a firelion statue.

Well that was the whole point of the unintended consequences that goes with the Power of Command.
If Elena had made that command it would have happened whether they were fire-beings or mere lava, much to the harm of the earth/Land.
Btw, this was talked about in another thread, we have no way of knowing what Foul's powers are. Who says he could summon water?

well i figure if Calendrill could summon the rivers attempting to put out the fire at revelwood and Satansfist could reserect the old death, not to mention Kinslaughterer summoning a Tidal wave that would have torn Coercri to rubble (so it says).. its very likely that Foul would have no problem at all summoning some water to slow up Lava, . I bet Foul could even summon up a Thomas Covenant Ice sculpture with his other hand at the same time if he wanted.

yes Amok used a few examples of what could and could not be commanded. the fact he mentioned the Firelions attacking fouls Creche as one of the examples made me believe they are more than enchanted Lava. not so much Lion shaped but Rolling Fire would resemble a running group of Lions I suppose

well damn..if it is just lava..i might as well call the Worm of the worlds end a bad earthquake and the earthblood a pool of un refined Oil and Hurtloam just plain old mud with fools gold in it and treasure berries are really just blueberries that have that salty Lime peach taste because kresh pee on them, and last but not least...there is no land.>TC is just dreaming and when he wakes up someone is going to say, you know ...that police car didnt even hit you, so we were amazed you were comatose for the last 3 years...... No linden Avery No Berenford or rescued little girl, just a Coma dream starting in book One. hehe ..Im sure Thoola would love that.

Blackhawk wrote:treasure berries are really just blueberries that have that salty Lime peach taste because kresh pee on them

Well, these go on the "don't eat" list right after yellow snow.

Quote: "I always thought that they were just lava with maybe a little of what Gandalf did to make the rushing water at the Fords look like horses."





Uh, I thought it was Arwen who did that thing with the water, when she was running with Frodo and the Nazgul were chasing her. Am I wrong???

Rocksister wrote:Quote: "I always thought that they were just lava with maybe a little of what Gandalf did to make the rushing water at the Fords look like horses."





Uh, I thought it was Arwen who did that thing with the water, when she was running with Frodo and the Nazgul were chasing her. Am I wrong???

You're just quoting the movie to make my head explode right?

Rocksister wrote:Quote: "I always thought that they were just lava with maybe a little of what Gandalf did to make the rushing water at the Fords look like horses."
Uh, I thought it was Arwen who did that thing with the water, when she was running with Frodo and the Nazgul were chasing her. Am I wrong???

I think Arwen (or some "standing" spell) caused the river to react to the entry of the Nazgul, but Gandalf did the horse effects.

High Lord Tolkien wrote:

Rocksister wrote:Quote: "I always thought that they were just lava with maybe a little of what Gandalf did to make the rushing water at the Fords look like horses."





Uh, I thought it was Arwen who did that thing with the water, when she was running with Frodo and the Nazgul were chasing her. Am I wrong???

You're just quoting the movie to make my head explode right?

hehe...i was going to say that but remembered the book is different.

IrrationalSanity wrote:

Rocksister wrote:Quote: "I always thought that they were just lava with maybe a little of what Gandalf did to make the rushing water at the Fords look like horses."
Uh, I thought it was Arwen who did that thing with the water, when she was running with Frodo and the Nazgul were chasing her. Am I wrong???

I think Arwen (or some "standing" spell) caused the river to react to the entry of the Nazgul, but Gandalf did the horse effects.

No no no NO!.....
Arwen didn't do any shit like that!

Well, I said it could have been a standing spell to repel dark forces, which it appears to have been. I didn't have the books immediately to hand when I wrote that.

But, I have now checked, and you are quite right that Arwen had nothing to do with any of it.

As much as I appreciate Liv Tyler, Glorfindel would have been quite a sight if he had made it into the movie...

I forgot to mention that I hated many parts of the LotR movie, btw.
It had nothing to do with anyone's posts.
I meant it all in good humor.

At least you got me to go back and check the source.

On the plus side, the movies (as much as they did deviate from the books) were decent enough in their own right, and relatively self-consistent.

But you have to consider, if they took that much out of LotR to make them into movies, (ditto Harry Potter), how much damage would they - by definition - have to do TC in order to get it on film?

IrrationalSanity wrote:At least you got me to go back and check the source.

On the plus side, the movies (as much as they did deviate from the books) were decent enough in their own right, and relatively self-consistent.

But you have to consider, if they took that much out of LotR to make them into movies, (ditto Harry Potter), how much damage would they - by definition - have to do TC in order to get it on film?

I agree.
But if they would only put the words "based on" in the title I would praise them all with great praise.

In the Gradual Interview was wrote:Rigel: Recently, we've had a discussion on the Watch concerning the nature of the Fire Lions of Mount Thunder.

Myself, I hold the position (backed by the glossary in the books) that it's just poetic language for the lava flow from the mountain.

Others think they FLs are actual creatures resembling Lions that are made out of either lava or fire.

So first, what exactly *is* the nature of the FLs?

And second, who actually wrote the glossary, and are the descriptions given in it considered "canon"?

• I'm entirely responsible for the Glossary. But I have always intended it more as a kind of mnemonic device than as any form of real definition. Otherwise it would be ridiculously long--and rife with spoilers, since so many names, characters, etc. change during the course of the stories.
  
  With that in mind:
  
  "What exactly *is* the nature of the FLs?" Your question is either a "RAFO" or a "Some things are better left to the imagination of the reader" or a "Why do you suppose the people of the Land call them *Fire-Lions*?" The Glossary does use the word "living".
  
  (09/17/2008)

So, SRD is cagey, but I think he's leaning away from "poetic description".

wayfriend wrote:

Bloodguard Bob: They know not to attack us, right?

Lord Mormon: Ah ... not so much.

Banner: Here kitty ... here kitty ... here kitty ... <bolts>

Episode 39 MUST be mentioned in this thread.

HEY!!!! THATS MY EPISODE!!!

lucimay in drool costume: was that shrill enough?

mormon (seth): uh...i don't know about anybody else but you scared the hell outa me!

wayfriend wrote:

In the Gradual Interview was wrote:Rigel: Recently, we've had a discussion on the Watch concerning the nature of the Fire Lions of Mount Thunder.

Myself, I hold the position (backed by the glossary in the books) that it's just poetic language for the lava flow from the mountain.

Others think they FLs are actual creatures resembling Lions that are made out of either lava or fire.

So first, what exactly *is* the nature of the FLs?

And second, who actually wrote the glossary, and are the descriptions given in it considered "canon"?

• I'm entirely responsible for the Glossary. But I have always intended it more as a kind of mnemonic device than as any form of real definition. Otherwise it would be ridiculously long--and rife with spoilers, since so many names, characters, etc. change during the course of the stories.
  
  With that in mind:
  
  "What exactly *is* the nature of the FLs?" Your question is either a "RAFO" or a "Some things are better left to the imagination of the reader" or a "Why do you suppose the people of the Land call them *Fire-Lions*?" The Glossary does use the word "living".
  
  (09/17/2008)

So, SRD is cagey, but I think he's leaning away from "poetic description".

3 Chrons -

Spoiler

If its a RAFO i hopewe get a Skurj versus Fireloin epic.

For what it's worth, I always envisioned the Fire Cat in Mordant's Need to be a little bit of an in-joke/series cross-over, translated over from Mount Thunder.

Rigel wrote:Check the Glossary in the books. They state that the Fire Lions are the lava flow of Mount Thunder.

The index in my copy of LFB actually says "fire-flow of Mount Thunder" as opposed to "lava flow". To me that is not an insignificant difference.

Cail wrote:Lava. It's just flowery imagery.

Of course I respect everyones interpretation, but to borrow Cail's term it is all too flowery for me to think it is just imagery. Examples from LFB:

P. 387 "Great yellow fires began to burn on the shrouded peak. ... Suddenly the flames erupted. With a roar as if the air itself were burning, fires started charging like great, hungry beasts down every face and side of the mountain."

P. 389 "Coventant could not focus his vision. He caught a glimpse of fiery Lions pouncing toward the crevice..."

P. 390 "They sprang down the walls into the ravine, and some of them bounded upward toward the crevice."

The fact that SRD keeps using the term "fires" combined with their mobility makes me doubt that they are lava flows.

Just my 2 cents.

The thing is, if TC was there, and generally what we were reading was from his perspective. If what he saw was just lava, the point in the books where he witnessed it would have indicated just lava, but it said something like "Covenant was momentarily blinded by the Lions" or something.

Surely Covenant could tell the difference between Lava and glowing Lions of firey death.

I also found it interesting that SD suggested that the solution to this question could be RAFO.. If that's the way, I can't wait... He's not usually the sort to leave questions unanswered.

Agreed. To me it goes on too long to be a metaphor.