Talk:Mouth of Sauron

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Middle-earth Wikiproject This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle-earth, which aims to build an encyclopedic guide to J. R. R. Tolkien and his legendarium. Please visit the project page for suggestions and ideas on how you can improve this and other articles.
Assessment
Start
This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
Mid
This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.

Article Grading:
The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.


This article is part of WikiProject Films, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to films and film characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start
This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Unknown
This article has not been rated on the importance assessment scale.
It is requested that a screenshot or screenshots be included in this article to improve its quality.

- for the 1980 cartoon

Contents

[edit] Arose again how many times?

I'm deleting the segment about first and second "re-arisings" of the Dark Tower. The first one referred to appears (from the date given) to be a reference to Sauron's return from Númenor, but Barad-dûr had not then been destroyed - he simply moved back in. It was destroyed twice and rebuilt once.

On second thoughts, I'll leave it in as a "theory".

-- Perey 22:22, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] GAMMEN GORTHAUR

The words written on his helmet in ROTK extended edition read GAMMEN GORTHAUR, and I've been informed by Ausir that Gorthaur was an old name for Sauron, so I'm assuming this means Mouth of Sauron, but I can't put it in the article without confirmation. silsor 08:08, Dec 5, 2004 (UTC)

Gammen means 'hand', so his title would be '(Right) Hand of Sauron'. In any case this is not a "canon" title, but a plausible translation. The Sindarin word for 'mouth' is not known, IIRC ('ethir' is a river "mouth" only). Possible 'nîf' (front of face) might be used here for mouth, but I doubt it is what Tolkien would have used, had he given the translation. Anárion 23:06, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
There's no Google entry for Gammen Gorthaur, but there are several for Lammen Gorthaur. Lammen is established in LOTR as meaning "voice" (as in Gandalf's incantation before the doors of Moria: "Fennas nogothrim, lasto beth lammen" - "Doors of the Dwarves, listen to my voice" - and "Gorthaur" ("Abominable dread", according to The Complete Guide to Middle-earth) is an Elvish epithet for Sauron. Hence Lammen Gorthaur = Voice (Mouth) of Sauron. Lee M 20:13, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Sounds plausible enough, asides of course from the rather dubious suggestion Sauron's lieutenant would use the language of Sauron's enemies and not the Black Speech or his native (Black) Adûnaic... Anárion 21:55, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
[Don't be dumb! Sauron used elvish letters for the inscription on the inside of the 'One Ring', so why would his lieutenant object to their use on his own gear? In any case, 'The Mouth' was an ambassador (his own phrase), so it would make perfect sense for him to label himself in an alphabet and a language that 'foreigners' could understand!] -- Herumor Stormraven
The Ring was inscripted in Black Speech, not Sindarin. An alphabet is not the same as a language. Jordi·✆ 14:11, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I guess it's no more implausible than he should break his master's rule never to use the name Sauron, by calling himself The Mouth of Sauron...! Lee M 23:53, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
In the book at least, he does not call himself such: the author voice (therefore Frodo, possibly assisted by Aragorn or Gandalf) does. But we know that Sauron liked the name 'Gorthaur', so Lammen Gorthaur is possible. Anárion 07:48, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Yes he did. The first words out of his mouth are, "I am the Mouth of Sauron." Eric119 08:38, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Original research here

There is too much speculation in this article, it needs to be cut to that which is actually know (which is very little). Thu 15:06, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Not to worry. I deleted all the speculative part (except the part about his being 68 years in service). I also added an info box. --Barnikel 13:12, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I think you cut too much. One theory is that the 'first arose again' refers to Sauron's return and rebuilding after the Downfall of Numenor... making the Mouth much older. The '68 years version' is just a theory also. I happen to agree with it, but there is no proof for that interpretation either. We should probably either stick to the stated facts with no interpretation of how long the Mouth had been in Sauron's service or present the reasons behind the different theories in a factual (rather than speculative) way. --CBDunkerson 14:29, 12 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Personal Interpretation on Thematic Elements in Film

I think that this: this nicety of international diplomacy is set aside entirely, and the theme of just leadership, and its difficulties, with it is pure opinion with regard to the theme of just leadership. I think it should be changed to omit this editorializing on Jackson's alteration. Thoughts? --Gûm-ishi Ashi Gurum 21:48, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

None of the editorializing presented on Aragorn's slaying of the Mouth in the movie takes into account that, much as the Armies of the West are a diversion tactic, the Mouth of Sauron is stalling them from functioning as a diversion. For the diversion tactic to succeed, and distract Sauron from the search for Frodo, Aragorn would do better to incite a real fight and dispense with diplomacy. --MattBattison 7 December 2006

Not to mention the fact that those at the Black Gate were being thrown into despair at the Mouth's tauntings. Aragorn quickly decided to end this enervation of will decisively. Yes, this change will inevitably lead to different thematic interpretations than one gleaned from events in the book, but a Wiki entry is no place to opnionatedly disparage one over the other. I'm going to remove said subjective editorializing. --Gûm-ishi Ashi Gurum 20:24, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] who cares?

Why does anyone care at all whether a few fanboys on a forum think that Aragorn "shot the messenger" by beheading the "mouth"? Does that really have to be cited? 66.92.170.227 19:57, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree. It should be removed as well. If someone wants to make a more formal, distinct section along the lines of reaction to the Mouth of Sauron, that is one thing. But a few anecdotal fans' impressions hardly constitutes as evidence of much at all. --Gûm-ishi Ashi Gurum 20:27, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I do care and I don't agree. It is "shooting the messenger" - punishing the person bringing bad news - and don't be so quick to label such people "fanboys" or "few". Not everyone agrees with Jackson's changes. It does go against the themes of the book - but I removed the "shooting the messenger" links and noted that instead, only stating "in contrast..." with no editorializing. Uthanc 13:25, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Peter Jackson is a fanboy, of his own admission. Or did you not watch the 25 hours of "extras" on the dvd's? The point is, it doesn't matter whether you care or not, it matters whether it's significant. There is a long standing forums-are-not-sources policy. ... aa:talk 18:50, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
This is now moot anyway as the forum citations are now replaced with book ones. Uthanc 16:19, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/o/u/Talk%7EMouth_of_Sauron_5c12.html"