On Riddles
Often in epic stories, characters come upon riddles that need to be solved. Riddles are used as a matching of wits as a change of pace to the regular matching of brawn. This occurs in Greek mythology, Norse mythology, the Hobbit, Batman and the Dark Tower. Like epic matches of brawn, lives are almost always on the line and the fighting is almost never fair.
Riddles often rely on metaphors. What has four legs in the morning, two at noon and three in the evening? Once one connects days to lives and legs with arms and canes, the riddle solves itself. Riddles often rely on puns. When is a door not a door? When is a door not adore? When it’s a jar. When it’s ajar.
What is frustrating about riddles is that both metaphorical riddles and pun based riddles are almost impossible to solve because they exist in worlds of infinite solutions. Anything could be the solution to a riddle. On top of that, one doesn’t know how clever, complicated or fitting the answer is supposed to be. The result of this is solutions are almost always dependent on whether you’ve heard the riddle or something similar before.
True heroes answered riddles based on their wits; they fought fairly. Batman would actually figure out the Riddler’s riddles. Oedipus’ wit actually defeated the Sphinx. These feats, though, are as unrealistic as Gilgamesh’s weeklong wrestling match with Enkidu.
Other tales highlight the problems of riddles. In a number of tales, the heroes change the game. Odin, when faced against the giant Vafthruthnir asked “what did Odin whisper to his son Balder before he was placed on the pyre?” Bilbo Baggins asked Gollum “what’s in my pocket?” Eddie of New York asked Blain the Mono “what’s the difference between a truck of bowling balls and a truck of woodchucks?” These tales take riddles to their logical end- ultimate obscurity (a single person knows), infinite possibilities and no clues.
Some may see Odin, Bilbo and Eddie as cheaters, but they are actually playing the game ruthlessly well. Riddles are not games of logic and intelligence. If logic and intelligence were truly at play, everyone would have sat down to do math problems. Riddles are pedantic and are purely about delivering questions in ones’ own realm of knowledge and not in the opponents. Our anti-heroes recognized that obscurity was the game and saw that personal knowledge was the best way to achieve that.
David killed Goliath by not fighting him hand-to-hand and instead hitting him with a missile. Was that fair? No, but neither would hand-to-hand. Competitions are usually designed, presented and participated in by people who are adept at them. Only a fool would box a boxer. Wit is the same. “Smart” people are usually just people who choose to engage people on things they happen know about.
Riddles often rely on metaphors. What has four legs in the morning, two at noon and three in the evening? Once one connects days to lives and legs with arms and canes, the riddle solves itself. Riddles often rely on puns. When is a door not a door? When is a door not adore? When it’s a jar. When it’s ajar.
What is frustrating about riddles is that both metaphorical riddles and pun based riddles are almost impossible to solve because they exist in worlds of infinite solutions. Anything could be the solution to a riddle. On top of that, one doesn’t know how clever, complicated or fitting the answer is supposed to be. The result of this is solutions are almost always dependent on whether you’ve heard the riddle or something similar before.
True heroes answered riddles based on their wits; they fought fairly. Batman would actually figure out the Riddler’s riddles. Oedipus’ wit actually defeated the Sphinx. These feats, though, are as unrealistic as Gilgamesh’s weeklong wrestling match with Enkidu.
Other tales highlight the problems of riddles. In a number of tales, the heroes change the game. Odin, when faced against the giant Vafthruthnir asked “what did Odin whisper to his son Balder before he was placed on the pyre?” Bilbo Baggins asked Gollum “what’s in my pocket?” Eddie of New York asked Blain the Mono “what’s the difference between a truck of bowling balls and a truck of woodchucks?” These tales take riddles to their logical end- ultimate obscurity (a single person knows), infinite possibilities and no clues.
Some may see Odin, Bilbo and Eddie as cheaters, but they are actually playing the game ruthlessly well. Riddles are not games of logic and intelligence. If logic and intelligence were truly at play, everyone would have sat down to do math problems. Riddles are pedantic and are purely about delivering questions in ones’ own realm of knowledge and not in the opponents. Our anti-heroes recognized that obscurity was the game and saw that personal knowledge was the best way to achieve that.
David killed Goliath by not fighting him hand-to-hand and instead hitting him with a missile. Was that fair? No, but neither would hand-to-hand. Competitions are usually designed, presented and participated in by people who are adept at them. Only a fool would box a boxer. Wit is the same. “Smart” people are usually just people who choose to engage people on things they happen know about.
posted by American Dilettante at
3:34 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home