# Gollum the Fanged?



## Beorn (Nov 20, 2002)

> "S-s-s-s-s," hissed Gollum. "It must give us thee guesseses, my preciouss, three guesseses."
> "Very well! Guess away!" said Bilbo.
> "Handses!" said Gollum.
> "Wrong," said Bilbo, who had luckily just taken his hand out again. "Guess again!"
> ...



Well, that's the Riddle game from The Hobbit. Why do you suppose that Gollum had fangs? Never before have I read that hobbits have fangs, and supposedly Gollum was a hobbit ancestor....

Do you think J. R. R. T. did not catch this? Maybe he left it in to leave the story for a child?


----------



## Confusticated (Nov 20, 2002)

I think it might have been over looked Beorn. Could also be that Gollum sharpend his teeth _into_ fangs.


----------



## Azog (Nov 20, 2002)

Interesting point. Here is a possible suggestion:

I might lean to think that while Gollum was being corrupted, his body would have drastically transformed (As depicted in the books). He mostly ate fish, and the bones most-likely would have eventually sharpened his teeth. He then decided to do the job himself, using a rock.


He might also have been a descendant of a vampire/hobbit.


----------



## Maedhros (Nov 20, 2002)

Well Beorn, very interesting observation about Gollum. He's tricksssssssssssssssssssssssy.
I think that Nóm has the correct answer IMO. I guess if you're diet is fish, then you need more *sharp fangs*.


----------



## Ancalagon (Nov 20, 2002)

I can only imagine he developed into a product of his environment. An 'evolution' of sorts, enhanced by the potency of the ring, the desire to hide from sunlight, to hunt for food!


> 'It must make haste, haste!' said Gollum, beginning to climb out of his boat on to the shore to get at Bilbo. But when he put his long webby foot in the water, a fish jumped out if fright and fell on Bilbo's toes.


 I am not so sure Hobbits.....or at least Stoors, Gollums closest relation, had webbed feet, especially as they were alledged to have worn some type of footwear! So, it seems apparent that evolution, necessity and the Power of the Ring combined to make him a formidible hunter, with the right tools for the job!


----------



## Nanaki (Nov 22, 2002)

Having webbed feet has nothing to do with it. Despite the fact that Gollum is a decendant of a Hobbit, who is to say that there was an absence of natural selection in Tolkiens bizarre world? I'm not saying that that's the way it is, but it is a mere possibility. Also, due to the fact that Gollum doesn't swim or hunt in water (as he is in his boat) what help would webbed feet bring?

To do with the fangs; considering Gollum feasted on fish, and also goblins when he got the chance to, whether or not Gollum originally had fangs, sharpening his teeth would be essential for his diet... as you all know that the kanine teeth are used for tearing meat, who is to say that kanine teeth aren't _the_ fangs in Tolkiens book? And if that was so, the whole idea of natural selection would be outrightly abserd. But hey, you are free to think what you like, aren't you???


----------



## Calimehtar (Nov 25, 2002)

*Webbed Feet*

You were saying he has a boat and doesnt need webbed feet, but I just got done reading the Hobbit last wk. and I remember it saying that he was using his feet to paddle the boat. So evolution could have given him webbed toes. As for the fangs, I'm with the others /\ up there. His teeth were molded into fangs from either fish bones, or Gollum himself carved them into fangs maybe to help kill the goblins that wander too near his lake... (You know while he is 'throttling' he might bite them in the throat or something.)


----------



## kohaku (Nov 26, 2002)

actually, evolution is not something that happens to an individual, but to a population over generations. i will not go into the details... i doubt JRRT tried to make everything biologically sound.

but i wonder also, is it possible that this description of gollum could have been written before his history was invented? if i remember correctly gollum's history is not given in the hobbit but i could be wrong. after all, the ring's history and significance had not yet been invented, so it may be that gollum was not originally supposed to be a withered old hobbit.


----------



## Nanaki (Nov 26, 2002)

Reading LotR, I have realized that Gollum was a very distant relative of the Hobbits and he had webbed feet when he was living with the rest of his family. So the chances are he had sharp teeth while he was living with his family also. LotR also portrays that Gollum and his family also caught fish in the lake that they lived close too, and they fished in the lake where the Ring was first found by Gollum's brother (The shores of Gladden Fields). In the book, Gollum and his friend or brother were shown in a boat. I am not denying the fact that Gollum and relatives did swin in the lake. For they are shown clearly that they did.



> ... there lived on the banks of the Great River of Wilderland a clever-handed and quiet-footed people. I guess they were of Hobbit-kind; akin to the fathers of the Stoors, for they loved the River, and often swam in it, or made little boats of reeds





> On a time they took a boat and went down to Gladden Fields, where there were great beds of iris and flowering reeds. There Smaegol got out and went nosing about the banks but Deagol sat in the boat and fished.





> Then he came spluttering, with weeds in his hair and a handful of mud; and he swam to the bank.



We now see that evolution had nothing to do with it. It is blatantly clear that Gollum's family was of distant relation to Hobbits, and perhaps nothing to do with Hobbits. The fact is, Gollum most probably had sharp fangs to eat the fish they caught anyway. So it should now be very easy for you all to understand that Gollum does have fangs, and Tolkien didn't mix anything up. So you should now be able to rest in peace, knowing that Gollum didn't evolve in such a rediculous way.

Did you all forget about the time-line in which the book was written? Perhaps you should try to make a simple conclusion that Evolution would have been very young and a theory that would have not even become to being believable or even proved. The chances are, most people of that time, had not belief at all in evolution, and the installment of such a preposterous belief would be less common than it is today... and with a person of such intelligence (JRR Tolkien) would perhaps never lead anyone to believe in such a stupid theory.


----------



## Ancalagon (Nov 26, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Nanaki _
> *Reading LotR, I have realized that Gollum was a very distant relative of the Hobbits and he had webbed feet when he was living with the rest of his family. So the chances are he had sharp teeth while he was living with his family also. LotR also portrays that Gollum and his family also caught fish in the lake that they lived close too, and they fished in the lake where the Ring was first found by Gollum's brother (The shores of Gladden Fields). In the book, Gollum and his friend or brother were shown in a boat. I am not denying the fact that Gollum and relatives did swin in the lake. For they are shown clearly that they did. *


Where does it say that Gollums kin had 'webbed feet?' 


> The FOTR; The Stoors were broader, heavier in build; their feet and hands were larger, and they preferred flat lands and riversides.


If you are suggesting that because they fished in the river, they had webbed feet as a rule, then you have lost me entirely. IF this was the case, why would they even bother with fishing rods?


> There Sméagol got out and went nosing about the banks but Déagol at in the boat and fished. Suddenly a great fish took his hook, and before he knew where he was, he was dragged out and down into the water, to the bottom. Then he let go of his line, for he thought he saw something shining in the riverbed; and holding his breath he grabbed at it.


It is worth pointing out that Déagol was his friend, not his brother.


> 'He had a friend called Déagol, of similar sort, sharper-eyed but not so quick and strong.





> _Originally posted by Ancalagon _
> *I can only imagine he developed into a product of his environment. An 'evolution' of sorts, enhanced by the potency of the ring, the desire to hide from sunlight, to hunt for food!
> I am not so sure Hobbits.....or at least Stoors, Gollums closest relation, had webbed feet, especially as they were alledged to have worn some type of footwear! So, it seems apparent that evolution, necessity and the Power of the Ring combined to make him a formidible hunter, with the right tools for the job! *


 I will stick with my first post until you convince me with actual evidence to the contrary. I look forward to your reply Uli....sorry....Nanaki.


----------



## Confusticated (Nov 26, 2002)

> _Originally posted by kohaku _
> *actually, evolution is not something that happens to an individual, but to a population over generations. i will not go into the details... i doubt JRRT tried to make everything biologically sound.
> *


Physical evolution of the kind that would have happend had Gollum evolved fangs, is not something that happens to one person. Which is why I figured he sharpend his own teeth.
The thing is that Gollum had that Ring which did unnatural things to him, that being so he may well have defied evolution as we know it, afterall he did defy lifespan as his own people knew it.

I have a hard time imagining his teeth growing into fangs, but I see no reason why I should.


----------



## Nanaki (Nov 27, 2002)

Lol, I read your post, and found it somewhat ammusing. 



> If you are suggesting that because they fished in the river, they had webbed feet as a rule, then you have lost me entirely. IF this was the case, why would they even bother with fishing rods?



Isn't that cute... a man in his 30's asking me why would they bother with fishing rods if they had webbed feet. Hehe, sorry sir but fishing rods are a much better substitute to fishing than webbed feet. Sorry sir but what you're asking is an obtuse question with a mere obtusely obvious answer. 


It is a known fact that most or even all Hobbits cannot swim. Now, I had made the assumption that in order to help a distant relative of a hobbit, that webbed feet would be something essential to help such a small obese race swim. It is never layed down before you, that they had webbed feet back then, but you have to take the text out of context. That may be somewhat difficult for you, but you have to keep an open mind.

Yes, the part about Gollum's friend, I came across a line in the book where Gandalf said something along the lines of "after Gollum killed his brother, he continued to voice a lie to his 'precious'." I was not entirely sure whether or not it was either Gollum's brother or friend... but I made the assumption that he was his brother, because of the similar names and the line that I recall reading. Again you can't hold your opinion with a simple line, you have to take Tolkien's works out of context, otherwise you'll never understand it.


----------



## Confusticated (Nov 27, 2002)

> Hehe, sorry sir but fishing rods are a much better substitute to fishing than webbed feet.


Absolutely!
If I suddenly found myself with webbed feet, I'd rather cast a line out than jump in and try to catch a fish manually! 

However, if I had webbed feet (via natural selection, not sudden mutation) it would stand to reason that my people for many generations before me had spent a _great_ amount of time swimming. In fact, I would reason just as much (if not more so) than walking.
Though even if we only spent a third of our life swimming, I think we'd be mighty good at catching fish by hand.

Now, why would the hobbitish people spend enough time swimming to develope webbed feet, if not to catch food?


----------



## Ancalagon (Nov 27, 2002)

My my, this is going from enhanced, evolutionary adeptness to illogical ineptitude!!!

Tell me why 'Marine Boy' Gollum, the Patrick Duffy of his 'Stoor-like' river dwelling people, would bother his backside sitting in a boat hoping a fish might bite, when he, with his alledged web-feet, would not simply dive in and catch them with increased pace and fish-like swimming ability?


> Now, I had made the assumption that in order to help a distant relative of a hobbit, that webbed feet would be something essential to help such a small obese race swim.


 Tell you what, rather than assume something so ludicrous, produce some evidence to support the fact rather than loose imaginings that have no actual foundation 

But thank-you for the advice, I will promise to read Tolkiens work in the wider context......I am so annoyed at myself for not doing so for the past 20 years!


----------



## Nanaki (Nov 27, 2002)

^_^, this is very futile...

You believe that Gollum has evolved at the potency of the ring... Yet, not once do I hear of Bilbo or any other ring barer evolving at the potency of the ring... You ask me to prove you wrong with something with foundation, yet your own beliefs have no foundation themselves. I believe that you should have to prove yourself correct in some shape or form, before I should have to type up a rebuttal when I'm battling against something that has no real body.

Also, what foundation do you have that proves that if Gollum had webbed-feet that he would be able to travel faster than a fish? Again you are trying to prove me wrong with something that has no bite. 

You obviously don't understand what I'm saying...



> But thank-you for the advice, I will promise to read Tolkiens work within context......I am so annoyed at myself for not doing so for the past 20 years!


 
I said take it out of context, not within context... because that's obviously all you've done... you've only read the books within the context. You seem to only believe what you read, and what has proof... that's leads me to believe that wouldn't a be a christian and you in reality would believe in something so "ludicrous" like evolution... that in turn would lead you to believe that Gollum has evolved...

Yet, all of the rest in this discussion fail to see what Ancalagon
is saying, he's not saying that Gollum evolved in the belief we have in our modern times; he is saying that Gollum had evolved at the potency of the ring... I just thought I’d clarify that for all of you... as you obviously think he's saying that he evolved in his life-time by himself... Just didn't want any of you to waste your time and what is predominantly our time.

Ancalagon - this is not a battle of proof or evidence, this is a battle of imagination, for it is clear that neither sides have evidence backing up either sides completely.

You seem to like sitting on the defensive side, and fail to prove yourself from the start... you just sit there and deflect anything thrown at it. Quite a good tactic, but I believe it shows that you are unconfident in your ability to debate.

You seem to believe that on my part it is illogical ineptitude, yet you don't stop and think whether or not your part is illogical or even inept.
Evolution? Evolution at the potency of the ring... how is that logical? Yes the books of Tolkien are mystical and magical... but to that extent? I think not. Hehe, I'd have to say that that is some imagination you've got there, but it's no less logical than my part. If anything, your belief is more obtuse than mine. I respect your beliefs but I don't out rightly call it illogical or even inept...You think by saying those words, it disproves my beliefs?????


----------



## Ancalagon (Nov 27, 2002)

Excellent answer Nanaki my good friend

I see now we have many issues to resolve over the course of this discussion and the objective for us all is to try and actually find some common ground, based on both myth and fact from whatever source we can glean it. I look forward to it...........however, I am off to work, so for my part this scientific study will begin later today


----------



## Confusticated (Nov 27, 2002)

> Yet, all of the rest in this descussion fail to see what Ancalagon
> is saying, he's not saying that Gollum evolved in the belief we have in our modern times; he is saying that Gollum had evolved at the potency of the ring... I just thought i'd clarify that for all of you... as you obviously think he's saying that he evolved in his life-time by himself...


All the rest? You are mistaken about that, as I did not fail to see Ancalagon's point. Looking back over the thread I do not think that anyone has mistaken him in the way that you say that all have.
You either missed the point in my last post, or misuse the word "all".

To spell it out:
The point in my last post was not to contradict Ancalagon's theory, nor yours, but to contradict your arguement against his theory: that a web-footed person would be better off using a fishing poll.

I did such by pointing out that any people who have developed webbed feet through natural selection would have to be spending enough time in water to easily catch fish by hand.


----------



## Nanaki (Nov 27, 2002)

> actually, evolution is not something that happens to an individual, but to a population over generations. i will not go into the details... i doubt JRRT tried to make everything biologically sound





> . So evolution could have given him webbed toes.



Yes, you are excluded when I said "all", but I found that easier than sayin "all but Nom"... ohwell, I know that you out of the vast majority have not thought that Ancalagon was talking about normal evolution... please forgive me for my inconvenience. Nom did have understanding... But I'm sure I got the message I wanted to get across.



Now Ancalagon,
It is obvious that Gollum _was_ a distant relative or in a very small way related to Hobbits... now who is to say what Gollum looked like before he gathered the ring. He obviously wasn't and more than 20% hobbit, so other characteristics must have been apart of his genetic make-up. Now say Gollum doesn't have evolved feet... Gollum obviously has come from a society where they use boats and rods. Now why would Gollum's feet adapt to the water? He obviously has a hold of a fishing rod, as that is the only logical thing to do... especially being in Gollum's situation. I believe that Gollum may have tried to catch fish by swimming, but soon realized he couldn't do it... so he moved on very quickly and did was most probable and that would be to use a fishing rod. This in turn not giving his body enough time to realize that he needs to adapt (whether his body have the aid of the ring or not).

I now raise the point again that the society Gollum originated from were able to swim, as we see that Gollum's friend was able to swim to the shore... And most Hobbits struggle to swim... whether that be they have some form of phobia to the water, or they just can't swim... it's obvious that they had something other hobbits didn't have... and it is now clear that they weren't authentic hobbits so we have no way of proving he didn't have webbed feet from the start. 

The most arousing thing I find, is that he had no need to alter the way his feet were. He had a boat, and most probably either had a fishing rod with him, or made one... and merely paddling a boat doesn't give a body a good reason to evolve... again with or without the aid of the ring.


----------

