Communications

During the production of the Lord of the Rings film trilogy, linguist David Salo translated and expanded upon Tolkien’s invented languages. For Elvish, his work was mostly in translation. In the case of Black Speech, however, he created new words based on minimal source material. As in the novels, the ring inscription is one of the only instances. Beyond this, in the films Sauron’s voice comes through the ring itself, speaking in Black Speech. Its sonic characteristics separate it from other sounds in the diegetic space and thus internalize the voice in the minds of both the characters and audience.
Likewise, in the film The Return of the King, the speech of the Mouth of Sauron is processed in such a way that it is not part of the diegetic space. While this calls into question the nature of the Mouth’s “presence,” he does represent the embodiment of Sauron’s voice. Previously, Sauron/The Ring was what Michel Chion calls an “acousmetre” or disembodied voice. Chion further claims that when a voice becomes tied to a source it loses its power. In the film, the Mouth is subsequently defeated by Aragorn.
The more recently produced Hobbit film trilogy features considerably more Black Speech as well as Orkish. While The Necromancer’s speech remains heavily processed, the increased use of Black Speech and direct conversations between he and orcs further “embodies” the voice. This also follows a trend from the LOTR films that James Buhler describes as moving from “enchanted” to “disenchanted.” That is grounding in reality what once was discarnate. This presentation will examine how depictions of Black Speech evolved between the two film trilogies, the subsequent effect of “embodiment” or “disenchantment,” and how this potentially influences the narrative and aesthetic linkage between the six films.