Why so rough?
Why so rough?
Hail and well met!
At present, I'm recovering from an auto accident that happened this past Monday. A guy pulled across in front of me while Elyon and I were going to work. No serious injuries, but the truck was totaled. I took a trip to the ER and got checked out. Now all of the bruising and soreness have set in.
ANYWAY! On with the purpose of this post. While I am resting up, I've been thinking of ways to make Gimli's axes. I have a firm idea right now so I started looking up what was done for the movie versions. One thing that has struck me is the roughness of his axes according to the replicas that are out there. As a smith myself, there is no way I would let an item out of my shop that looked like that. Dwarves are master smiths, like the Elves. If I would not put out an axe like this, I highly doubt Dwarves would. Does anybody have any thoughts on this? Is there any reason in the books to believe that Dwarves would have done this?
Cheers,
Eric
P.S. I could go completely off the rails and come up with my own ideas for Dwarven axes apart from the movies - I don't know yet.
At present, I'm recovering from an auto accident that happened this past Monday. A guy pulled across in front of me while Elyon and I were going to work. No serious injuries, but the truck was totaled. I took a trip to the ER and got checked out. Now all of the bruising and soreness have set in.
ANYWAY! On with the purpose of this post. While I am resting up, I've been thinking of ways to make Gimli's axes. I have a firm idea right now so I started looking up what was done for the movie versions. One thing that has struck me is the roughness of his axes according to the replicas that are out there. As a smith myself, there is no way I would let an item out of my shop that looked like that. Dwarves are master smiths, like the Elves. If I would not put out an axe like this, I highly doubt Dwarves would. Does anybody have any thoughts on this? Is there any reason in the books to believe that Dwarves would have done this?
Cheers,
Eric
P.S. I could go completely off the rails and come up with my own ideas for Dwarven axes apart from the movies - I don't know yet.
Ichthean Forge (pronounced Ick thee an). Maker of knives, and primitive camping gear.
Re: Why so rough?
Get well!
With me, it's the second day that I really feel stuff like that.
No idea about the roughness.
You're right--the Dwarves are master smiths.
With me, it's the second day that I really feel stuff like that.
No idea about the roughness.
You're right--the Dwarves are master smiths.
Re: Why so rough?
I swear the roads grow less and less safe every day, am really glad both of you are okay.
I have often wondered the same, although almost all of the weapons in the LOTR movies are relatively plain and understated. With regards to the Dwarven weapons I wonder if it's not in part due to racism... no wait hear me out! There seems to be a impression in the films that the elves are otherworldly and almost angelic, I've often wondered if the design team didn't intentionally dull down the dwarvish craft to make them more brutish and the elvish somehow superior.
As to Gimli's specific axes, to play devils advocate - appearance wise plain does not mean they aren't well made. Additionally he had no idea he was going on a round the world trip, he joined his father on an expedition to Imladris and not as a senior member of that envoy. I don't carry my finest gear around in the wild to be rained on so perhaps there's a bit of that in it?
They look absolutely horrible to wield though, I can't imagine they are much fun.
Peter Szabo made a really nice functional double bit axe a few years back
https://www.szabo-weaponsmith.com/produ ... bladed-axe
I have often wondered the same, although almost all of the weapons in the LOTR movies are relatively plain and understated. With regards to the Dwarven weapons I wonder if it's not in part due to racism... no wait hear me out! There seems to be a impression in the films that the elves are otherworldly and almost angelic, I've often wondered if the design team didn't intentionally dull down the dwarvish craft to make them more brutish and the elvish somehow superior.
As to Gimli's specific axes, to play devils advocate - appearance wise plain does not mean they aren't well made. Additionally he had no idea he was going on a round the world trip, he joined his father on an expedition to Imladris and not as a senior member of that envoy. I don't carry my finest gear around in the wild to be rained on so perhaps there's a bit of that in it?
They look absolutely horrible to wield though, I can't imagine they are much fun.
Peter Szabo made a really nice functional double bit axe a few years back
https://www.szabo-weaponsmith.com/produ ... bladed-axe
But the white fury of the Northmen burned the hotter, and more skilled was their knighthood with long spears and bitter. Fewer were they but they clove through the Southrons like a fire-bolt in a forest.
Re: Why so rough?
I’m so sorry to hear about the accident! Hope you’re patching up okay!
As for the axe question, In general I agree with Eofor. I think they wanted the weapons and props in the films to help tell a certain story about the people carrying them, so they went for very hard, angular, brutal geometry with everything dwarven to emphasize strength and toughness above all else. You can see this in their architecture, their clothing, their armor, and indeed their weapons. They definitely could have done better with showing how skilled and careful dwarven craftspeople were, but for me it’s a relatively minor gripe. One thing I definitely will point out though is that almost all of the props, costumes, and weaponry in the films displayed some level of artificial weathering to help make them look used and lived-in - so for the weapons, this often meant adding a kind of rough, pebbly, dark patina on all the steel parts. This was clearly done more on certain pieces than others (the swords of the Nazgul, for instance), but that kind of aging, mixed with the hard, angular, chunkiness of the dwarven aesthetic they choose to use for the movies could be why you’re perceiving them as rough and unprofessional looking.
As for the axe question, In general I agree with Eofor. I think they wanted the weapons and props in the films to help tell a certain story about the people carrying them, so they went for very hard, angular, brutal geometry with everything dwarven to emphasize strength and toughness above all else. You can see this in their architecture, their clothing, their armor, and indeed their weapons. They definitely could have done better with showing how skilled and careful dwarven craftspeople were, but for me it’s a relatively minor gripe. One thing I definitely will point out though is that almost all of the props, costumes, and weaponry in the films displayed some level of artificial weathering to help make them look used and lived-in - so for the weapons, this often meant adding a kind of rough, pebbly, dark patina on all the steel parts. This was clearly done more on certain pieces than others (the swords of the Nazgul, for instance), but that kind of aging, mixed with the hard, angular, chunkiness of the dwarven aesthetic they choose to use for the movies could be why you’re perceiving them as rough and unprofessional looking.
Maerondir Perianseron, also called “Mickel,” Halfling Friend - Ranger of the Misty Mountains
- ForgeCorvus
- Silent Watcher over the Peaceful Lands
- Posts: 312
- Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2021 8:07 pm
Re: Why so rough?
First of all, I'm glad you and yours are ok
Cars are a lot more replaceable then people.
I'm not to struck on the direction the design team went with Dwarven weapons, the armour is not too bad but the weapons just don't work.
"So dwarfs are short and strong right?....... Lets just make their weapons huge then" Bad thinking.
Cars are a lot more replaceable then people.
As someone who's been known to bang a bit of metal on occasion, I'd rather see what you come up with then how well you can copy a film prop.
I'm not to struck on the direction the design team went with Dwarven weapons, the armour is not too bad but the weapons just don't work.
"So dwarfs are short and strong right?....... Lets just make their weapons huge then" Bad thinking.
All debts are paid....... Nothing forgiven. Nothing forgotten.
"All Things Strive" Gd Tak 'Gar
Barron (BAH-Ron) son of Barris (BAH-Ras) AKA Barron 'Blackcap'.
Independent Fellsward, Jobber, Tinker and Traveller in Trifles
"All Things Strive" Gd Tak 'Gar
Barron (BAH-Ron) son of Barris (BAH-Ras) AKA Barron 'Blackcap'.
Independent Fellsward, Jobber, Tinker and Traveller in Trifles
- Iodo
- Thangailhir
- Posts: 2112
- Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2017 5:58 pm
- Location: North west england UK
- Contact:
Re: Why so rough?
glad your OK Eric
I get where this thread is coming from, dwarvish craftsmanship is meant to be the best and the blackened/rough metal doesn't show that image, but my interpretation of dwarvish has always been that stuff that's owned by the wealthy/noble would be immaculate and aesthetically perfect, but the stuff that's owned by everyone else would be every bit as good in functionality/durability even if corners were cut on aesthetics to make the weapon cheaper to make. I guess that the way I see it is that dwarves put function before form, especially Iron hills dwarves (and I know this isn't a law correct interpretation so don't take me to seriously)
It's for this reason that I think I'm ok with Gimli's axe design, and I myself are very partial to the look of rough forged stuff and blackened steel because it comes across as more industrial and more fitting for a people who's life is in mines and building, so above is my way of justifying that look
agreed, your own design would be awesome to seeForgeCorvus wrote: ↑Sun Nov 28, 2021 6:25 pm As someone who's been known to bang a bit of metal on occasion, I'd rather see what you come up with then how well you can copy a film prop.
I get where this thread is coming from, dwarvish craftsmanship is meant to be the best and the blackened/rough metal doesn't show that image, but my interpretation of dwarvish has always been that stuff that's owned by the wealthy/noble would be immaculate and aesthetically perfect, but the stuff that's owned by everyone else would be every bit as good in functionality/durability even if corners were cut on aesthetics to make the weapon cheaper to make. I guess that the way I see it is that dwarves put function before form, especially Iron hills dwarves (and I know this isn't a law correct interpretation so don't take me to seriously)
It's for this reason that I think I'm ok with Gimli's axe design, and I myself are very partial to the look of rough forged stuff and blackened steel because it comes across as more industrial and more fitting for a people who's life is in mines and building, so above is my way of justifying that look
Gimli: It's true you don't see many Dwarf-women. And in fact, they are so alike in voice and appearance, that they are often mistaken for Dwarf-men.
Aragorn: It's the beards.
Aragorn: It's the beards.
Re: Why so rough?
I think a significant part of this that only applies beyond dwarves - but is perhaps seen most starkly in them, due to being craftsmen - is a difference between pre- and post- modern aesthetics.
In premodern societies - speaking very generally, of course, but I think this applies at least to the periods and places relevant in reconstructing the societies of Middle-Earth (and Tolkein avoids it as far as I can tell) - is that the highest quality and aesthetics are usually very finely finished. We see a lot more fine decoration as well for similar reasons, and this is because it's hard, and so makes for a good display of your wealth or skill
But when perfect finishes, even designs, and so on can be done quickly and cheaply (but, of course, with other losses in quality), this is less desirable. We see something similar when sewing machines became popular - initially, an increase in the amount of fabric and seams in garments (more pleating, layers, and eventually things like bustles), because sewing machines enabled this to be done more cheaply, by the Edwardian period the fashion has changed and fine handwork has become prestigious instead (lace, hand embroidery, whatever sewing small objects into clothing is called again)
Similarly, in forging we see marks of what would have been a tough finish to the medieval Smith (forge scale, hammer marks, etc.) and instead these become markers of - well, prestige. Gransfors brúks axes have forge scale on them, but the ones from Canadian Tire do not. It becomes a marker of the higher quality as well, the hand made, etc.
Look at the difference between the traditional yakut knife
Or this finely decorated example
And a modern one
That one just happens to be mine lol, but if you look around almost all the the blades or complete knives floating around are like this - with the forge scale and hammer marks left in the 'dip,' most commonly with an unadorned (though polished) plain hilt of curly birch (which like - absolutely still beautiful, but like I'm saying, minimalist).
There's a sword made of meteoric iron in the Pharoah Tutenkamen's tomb made of meteoric iron, and where today that would include aesthetics that were extremely handmade - perhaps even inclusions that make it still look like a meteorite in places that doesn't interfere with function - the entire blade has a mirror polish so good it's still visible today.
We also see similar patterns in furniture making! Good aesthetics for the modern handmaker are minimalist in decoration, of high quality materials, and with marks of handwork left's intact where possible. This has the dual feature of aesthetically advertising that something was, e.g., actually forged and is if higher quality and also of meaning you can save time and money not doing the finishing and decoration - which may actually be the most time-consuming part of the work - because you are unlikely to be able to do so and make money, industrialization haven driven down the cost of labour so much etc. Obviously this isn't absolutely the case, there are absolutely people doing fine finishes and lots of decoration, but they are ime a small minority and it is a definite market trend
Anyway, tl;dr, this shows up in dwarves because how we think about the aesthetics of modern craftsmen is projected onto them instead of the aesthetics of pre-modern craftsmen
In premodern societies - speaking very generally, of course, but I think this applies at least to the periods and places relevant in reconstructing the societies of Middle-Earth (and Tolkein avoids it as far as I can tell) - is that the highest quality and aesthetics are usually very finely finished. We see a lot more fine decoration as well for similar reasons, and this is because it's hard, and so makes for a good display of your wealth or skill
But when perfect finishes, even designs, and so on can be done quickly and cheaply (but, of course, with other losses in quality), this is less desirable. We see something similar when sewing machines became popular - initially, an increase in the amount of fabric and seams in garments (more pleating, layers, and eventually things like bustles), because sewing machines enabled this to be done more cheaply, by the Edwardian period the fashion has changed and fine handwork has become prestigious instead (lace, hand embroidery, whatever sewing small objects into clothing is called again)
Similarly, in forging we see marks of what would have been a tough finish to the medieval Smith (forge scale, hammer marks, etc.) and instead these become markers of - well, prestige. Gransfors brúks axes have forge scale on them, but the ones from Canadian Tire do not. It becomes a marker of the higher quality as well, the hand made, etc.
Look at the difference between the traditional yakut knife
Or this finely decorated example
And a modern one
That one just happens to be mine lol, but if you look around almost all the the blades or complete knives floating around are like this - with the forge scale and hammer marks left in the 'dip,' most commonly with an unadorned (though polished) plain hilt of curly birch (which like - absolutely still beautiful, but like I'm saying, minimalist).
There's a sword made of meteoric iron in the Pharoah Tutenkamen's tomb made of meteoric iron, and where today that would include aesthetics that were extremely handmade - perhaps even inclusions that make it still look like a meteorite in places that doesn't interfere with function - the entire blade has a mirror polish so good it's still visible today.
We also see similar patterns in furniture making! Good aesthetics for the modern handmaker are minimalist in decoration, of high quality materials, and with marks of handwork left's intact where possible. This has the dual feature of aesthetically advertising that something was, e.g., actually forged and is if higher quality and also of meaning you can save time and money not doing the finishing and decoration - which may actually be the most time-consuming part of the work - because you are unlikely to be able to do so and make money, industrialization haven driven down the cost of labour so much etc. Obviously this isn't absolutely the case, there are absolutely people doing fine finishes and lots of decoration, but they are ime a small minority and it is a definite market trend
Anyway, tl;dr, this shows up in dwarves because how we think about the aesthetics of modern craftsmen is projected onto them instead of the aesthetics of pre-modern craftsmen
Last edited by Charlotte on Thu Feb 17, 2022 7:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Greg
- Urush bithî 'nKi ya-nam bawâb
- Posts: 4502
- Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 8:50 pm
- Location: Eriador; Central Indiana
Re: Why so rough?
Very well summed up, Sorrel! I'd say you're absolutely right. We *want* things to look old if they're intended to be from an old time, forgetting that if we're portraying a persona as though we WERE that person, then things would, of course, look new and quality of finish would be desirable.
Now the sword shall come from under the cloak.
Re: Why so rough?
I think this the negative side of this plays a a part as well... It's not just that they want the dwarves to look like craftsmen, it's that pre-modern elite aesthetics come across as... Tacky, to the modern eye. Gaudy and overdone.
I cannot count how many times I have seen Carolingian metalwork (and others of its kind/period) described as, to put it mildly, ugly;
There's a similar phenomena where the brightly painted Greek statues that was how they looked in period reads, well, gaudy or trashy to the modern eye in comparison to the refined, 'civilized,' minimalist aesthetics of pure white marble
I cannot count how many times I have seen Carolingian metalwork (and others of its kind/period) described as, to put it mildly, ugly;
There's a similar phenomena where the brightly painted Greek statues that was how they looked in period reads, well, gaudy or trashy to the modern eye in comparison to the refined, 'civilized,' minimalist aesthetics of pure white marble
- Elleth
- êphal ki-*raznahê
- Posts: 2940
- Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 5:26 am
- Location: in the Angle; New England
Re: Why so rough?
As regards the Carolingian artwork, we also live in quite a different daily environment.
That gold-and-enamel-and-cabochon work would look amazing by firelight.
Related, I recently learned that the midwest diner food we Americans now call "chicken fried steak" was an imperial delicacy in 19th c. Vienna.
Now our truckers are eating schnitzel and our hoity-toitys are lining up for obscure peasant grains.
The cycling of human aesthetic taste is just fascinating.
oh - PS - the squiggly line on the knife on that butchery picture: anyone else think that hints at a pattern-welded blade?
That gold-and-enamel-and-cabochon work would look amazing by firelight.
Related, I recently learned that the midwest diner food we Americans now call "chicken fried steak" was an imperial delicacy in 19th c. Vienna.
Now our truckers are eating schnitzel and our hoity-toitys are lining up for obscure peasant grains.
The cycling of human aesthetic taste is just fascinating.
oh - PS - the squiggly line on the knife on that butchery picture: anyone else think that hints at a pattern-welded blade?
Persona: Aerlinneth, Dúnedain of Amon Lendel c. TA 3010.
- Greg
- Urush bithî 'nKi ya-nam bawâb
- Posts: 4502
- Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 8:50 pm
- Location: Eriador; Central Indiana
Re: Why so rough?
If not pattern-welded, maybe at least a join between two different materials, like a wrought back or something?
Now the sword shall come from under the cloak.
- ForgeCorvus
- Silent Watcher over the Peaceful Lands
- Posts: 312
- Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2021 8:07 pm
Re: Why so rough?
Steel edge to iron body? Very possible
All debts are paid....... Nothing forgiven. Nothing forgotten.
"All Things Strive" Gd Tak 'Gar
Barron (BAH-Ron) son of Barris (BAH-Ras) AKA Barron 'Blackcap'.
Independent Fellsward, Jobber, Tinker and Traveller in Trifles
"All Things Strive" Gd Tak 'Gar
Barron (BAH-Ron) son of Barris (BAH-Ras) AKA Barron 'Blackcap'.
Independent Fellsward, Jobber, Tinker and Traveller in Trifles
Re: Why so rough?
I would echo this sentiment, I'm struggling to think of a single example of Anglo Saxon utility seax which has pattern welding, even on the weapon ones it was not a common thing.ForgeCorvus wrote: ↑Fri Feb 18, 2022 6:04 pmSteel edge to iron body? Very possible
While I'm not sure exactly what the manuscript image is reflecting, pattern welding also dies out as a commonplace technique by the time these came about.
But the white fury of the Northmen burned the hotter, and more skilled was their knighthood with long spears and bitter. Fewer were they but they clove through the Southrons like a fire-bolt in a forest.
-
- Silent Watcher over the Peaceful Lands
- Posts: 134
- Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2022 5:37 am
- Location: Monroe, Georgia
Re: Why so rough?
One thing I think we should keep in mind for Gimli's double-bit axe is that it was supposed to be the axe Balin had when he was Lord of Moria, and thus had sat in that tomb for, presumably, years. I imagine that would have weathered at least that particular axe quite a bit.
Barandir, a Third Age Dunedain, also known as Brand or the Goshawk.
I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory; I only love that which they defend.
I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory; I only love that which they defend.
Re: Why so rough?
Hello, I thought I would chime in as I have some experience. I am not claiming that I am some mastersmith, and when I am working on a piece in dwarven tradition, I often say to myself: this is what 80 to 150 years of craftsmanship expertise look like? I feel not worthy of dwarven work. However, my work is much finer, than the movie dwarven stuff. I find this roughness unacceptable and hard to believe. There is masterful rustic, like in Japanese concept of wabisabi, but what I see in movies, especially for dwarves is just wrong, rubbery barbarian nonsense. My explanation is, that its easy to be recognised caricature to create marketable visual for dwarves. Ugh, sorry, big pet peeve