Tolkien General Discussion

[Macilrille]

It is only part of the explanation though; Soul/Spirit and spiritual Power, not willpower, as well as Fate has a large role in Middle-earth.

Consider if you will the essay about the nature of Glorfindel, he is said after his death and resurrection to have been much strenghtened by his self-sacrifice and subsequent stay in Valinor, on a spiritual level, and to be almost the equal of a Maia; on a spiritual level. This spirituality and soul and fate permeates Middle-earth, not just will, and it seems clear to me that in order to perform "magic" you need both willpower and spiritual strength; that one is moot without the other. I would also question Sam's ability to defeat Sauron; defy the temptation of the Ring is not the same as defeat Sauron in a battle of will. It is "simply" that; defying a temptation. And Sam does it not as much by willpower, but more by spiritual strength that comes from his simple, unsophisticated purity of spirit and devotion to his Master, his "grounding" in the simple soil of the Shire.

[Ngugi]

I would also question Sam's ability to defeat Sauron; defy the temptation of the Ring is not the same as defeat Sauron in a battle of will. It is "simply" that; defying a temptation. And Sam does it not as much by willpower, but more by spiritual strength that comes from his simple, unsophisticated purity of spirit and devotion to his Master, his "grounding" in the simple soil of the Shire.

(...)
In any case a confrontation of Frodo and Sauron would soon have taken place, if the Ring was intact. Its result was inevitable. Frodo would have been utterly overthrown: crushed to dust, or preserved in torment as a gibbering slave. Sauron would not have feared the Ring! It was his own and under his will.
Even from afar he had an effect upon it, to make it work for its return to himself. In his actual presence none but very few of equal stature could have hoped to withhold it from him. Of 'mortals' no one, not even Aragorn.
In the contest with the Palantír Aragorn was the rightful owner. Also the contest took place at a distance, and in a tale which allows the incarnation of great spirits in a physical and destructible form their power must be far greater when actually physically present.
Sauron should be thought of as very terrible. The form that he took was that of a man of more than human stature, but not gigantic. In his earlier incarnation he was able to veil his power (as Gandalf did) and could appear as a commanding figure of great strength of body and supremely royal demeanour and countenance.
(...)

- Letter 246

[Morkonan]

Note - The "strength" I refer to concerns the contest that was chosen, and won, by those I mentioned. If Frodo had claimed the Ring for his own, he would have certainly lost. His will would be corrupted and he would have chosen the less noble path. The "contest" there was Sauron's will and its manifestation through the Ring, with a will of its own, and the attempted domination of Frodo.

Battles are won before they are ever fought. It all depends on which battles the heroes chose to fight. There is no denying that battles were fought in LoTR without the lifting of a blade and no denying who the victors were.

[conon394]

A few quibles:

Why was Frodo able to resist most of the temptation of the Ring? His will, even when pitted against some of the most fearsome situations, his will prevailed. Why was Theoden overcome and manipulated by Grima? He poisoned his mind. Why could Aragorn turn the Palantir to his purposes, something which even Saurumon and Denethor could not do? How did Tom Bombadil resist the Ring and even its effects? How did Merry and Pippin become as well regarded as the most able warrior if not for their perserverence against all odds? Why was Bilbo not corrupted as was Gollum?

I think maybe you are pushing for a unified theory a little much. I would Bombadil is unaffected not so much becuse of will, but because of utter disinterest. For example - I really don't like sweet deserts of any kind - thus it no act of will to not order desert when I out at a restaurant, I don't even consider it, but it is an at of will to avoid too many pints...
Also of course JRTT does leave fair number of examples of Magic in a a more traditional sense - Gandalf's comment about spells for example

Why was Frodo able to resist most of the temptation of the Ring? His will, even when pitted against some of the most fearsome situations, his will prevailed.

Well realistically Frodo failed to resist the ring with some regularity and but for Sam he was a goner.

Sauron's will was supreme in Middle Earth, even though his physical might may not have been the equal of others. There is no doubt that Sauron was the supreme power amongst all the notable evils (Balrog, Ungoliant's children, like Shelob, etc..) But, that they remained to do whatever they wished happened to be well within his own plans. Shelob guarded the one access to Morder that someone could sneak through, the Balrog prevented the Dwarves from gaining the stronghold of Moria and even Tom Bombadil was left to his own designs, since he had sequestered himself from the mundane world.

I just don't think I can agree. Sauron was mighty indeed but I think the fact that he avoided all to many fights suggest he could hardly be as confidant as you suggest, and recall Gandald is usually trying to motivate people to follow his mostly hair brained, poorly though out ideals and do most of the dying, every time he opens his mouth super S is one good way to overrule and measure consideration of an alternative plan. In any case I would agree the Balrog or Shelob or Smaug should be seen as cats-paws of S, had they done things that agrivated him I more or less doubt he could do much about it.

On a battlefield, standing in front of Sauron, most peoples on Middle Earth would be quickly overcome by the strength of his will. Others succumbed and even carried the taint of his will as gifted by the Nine - The Black Breath. (IIRC, that's what it was called.) None save a handful could have hoped to have resisted Sauron's will in a direct contest. Galadriel, Elrond, Gandalf, Aragorn... Bilbo, Frodo and Sam. That's a very short list. Even Gollum resisted the results of the corruption of the Ring for short periods.

Well I doubt both Bilbo and Frodo in reality, Sam certainly. Your list of the wise is too short. Surely Saruman and Radagast, Cirdan (a fact) I would assume Denathor, Faramir, Angbor the Bold, the Prince of Amroth, Why not Gildor Inglorian? Anyone who can still name himself an exile and of the house of Finrod is likely to stand against Sauron, The Ents - they all have a bitter grudge against S and clearly Saruman could not influence them with his voice. I would suspect the sons of Elrond certainly, Celeborn, Glorfindel (I mean he killed a Balrog, was returned and gave Nazgul nightmares), had they lived I would have to think men like Beorn and Bard likely fall into this catigory, Eowen (although she was become fey almost when she fought the Nagul). As I said before its not that the west lacked strength, but that is was all at discord or ambivalent,or detached and not moving with the unified purpose S had. That's why the ring quest or the Last debate strategy have dramatic tension because there where other options with frankly better odds.

[Macilrille]

A few quibles:



I think maybe you are pushing for a unified theory a little much. I would Bombadil is unaffected not so much becuse of will, but because of utter disinterest. For example - I really don't like sweet deserts of any kind - thus it no act of will to not order desert when I out at a restaurant, I don't even consider it, but it is an at of will to avoid too many pints...
Also of course JRTT does leave fair number of examples of Magic in a a more traditional sense - Gandalf's comment about spells for example



Well realistically Frodo failed to resist the ring with some regularity and but for Sam he was a goner.



I just don't think I can agree. Sauron was mighty indeed but I think the fact that he avoided all to many fights suggest he could hardly be as confidant as you suggest, and recall Gandald is usually trying to motivate people to follow his mostly hair brained, poorly though out ideals and do most of the dying, every time he opens his mouth super S is one good way to overrule and measure consideration of an alternative plan. In any case I would agree the Balrog or Shelob or Smaug should be seen as cats-paws of S, had they done things that agrivated him I more or less doubt he could do much about it.



Well I doubt both Bilbo and Frodo in reality, Sam certainly. Your list of the wise is too short. Surely Saruman and Radagast, Cirdan (a fact) I would assume Denathor, Faramir, Angbor the Bold, the Prince of Amroth, Why not Gildor Inglorian? Anyone who can still name himself an exile and of the house of Finrod is likely to stand against Sauron, The Ents - they all have a bitter grudge against S and clearly Saruman could not influence them with his voice. I would suspect the sons of Elrond certainly, Celeborn, Glorfindel (I mean he killed a Balrog, was returned and gave Nazgul nightmares), had they lived I would have to think men like Beorn and Bard likely fall into this catigory, Eowen (although she was become fey almost when she fought the Nagul). As I said before its not that the west lacked strength, but that is was all at discord or ambivalent,or detached and not moving with the unified purpose S had. That's why the ring quest or the Last debate strategy have dramatic tension because there where other options with frankly better odds.

Though I agree to disagree with Morkanan, there are a few points you keep pushing that I fail to see any evidence for in Tolkien's works. In fact quite the contrary.

1. Sauron's non-might; I and Ngugi have already pointed to contrary evidence while you merely have hints.
2. Sauron's Might2; I am pretty certain that your list of people who could resist Sauron is too long if anything Conon.
3. The power and possibilities of the West if unified; You keep repeating this, but that does not make it more true, and I fail to see evidence for it anywhere in any of Tolkien's texts. Middle-earth is not TATW...

Now, I hope my brewity in disagreeing does not insult you. I do not mean to be rude or personal. I am just spending 10- 13 hours/day on my new job and by necessity cannot elaborate as I use and prefer to.

PS, I like both sweet desserts and pints- provided the pints are quality beer/ale and not some Carlsberg-Heinecken p*ss ;-)

[conon394]

Now, I hope my brewity in disagreeing does not insult you. I do not mean to be rude or personal. I am just spending 10- 13 hours/day on my new job and by necessity cannot elaborate as I use and prefer to.

Hey no worries what is a discussion and debate w/o disagreement...

1. The power and possibilities of the West if unified; You keep repeating this, but that does not make it more true, and I fail to see evidence for it anywhere in any of Tolkien's texts. Middle-earth is not TATW...

... So let me at least start to try lay out my argument on this one ( I realize a couple others have also disagreed - called me on this one) and while I have stared a few replies I never really posted a comprehensive defense of my argument. I can't promise anything until maybe tonight or later but I will focus on this 3rd point and table the first two of your other points until I can finish a comprehensive defense of my argument on the latent strength of the West.

[Morkonan]

I think maybe you are pushing for a unified theory a little much.

It's more of a main theme than a G.U.T. of "Magic" in Middle Earth. Though, the old "Middle Earth Roleplaying Game" game manuals also focused on the will of characters. (But, it is clear in my interpretation of the books, not because I read that old manual.)

I would Bombadil is unaffected not so much becuse of will, but because of utter disinterest. For example - I really don't like sweet deserts of any kind - thus it no act of will to not order desert when I out at a restaurant, I don't even consider it, but it is an at of will to avoid too many pints...
Also of course JRTT does leave fair number of examples of Magic in a a more traditional sense - Gandalf's comment about spells for example

Good point on Bombadil. There are also "spells" mentioned in the books by other characters. But, they're typically not your standard D&D fare. The "Big Ones", those prominent in backstory myth and current story plotlines, suborn another's will, corrupts their mind or saps their spirit instead of "lighting bolt! lightning bolt!"

Well realistically Frodo failed to resist the ring with some regularity and but for Sam he was a goner.

Yes. That's one reason Sam is such a pivotal character. But, some of the "Sam Element" has to do with Sam serving as a reminder to Frodo, a tether to a "normal life" that he sometimes can't connect with, instead of physical prevention or overpowering.

I just don't think I can agree. Sauron was mighty indeed but I think the fact that he avoided all to many fights suggest he could hardly be as confidant as you suggest, and recall Gandald is usually trying to motivate people to follow his mostly hair brained, poorly though out ideals and do most of the dying, every time he opens his mouth super S is one good way to overrule and measure consideration of an alternative plan. In any case I would agree the Balrog or Shelob or Smaug should be seen as cats-paws of S, had they done things that agrivated him I more or less doubt he could do much about it.

Power must be used wisely. Contesting Moria against the Balrog would be a waste of power. Sauron was, above all, an artificer and a manipulator. He was a pscyho-babble engineer. Where he couldn't construct an artifact or strongehold, he would corrupt minds or, in a few cases, even change his own physical form. Sauron could have bested the Balrog of Moria, though maybe could not have bested the Lord of Ballrogs in a stand-up slugfest. But, Sauron wouldn't have chosen a stand-up slugfest and if one of the two is going to choose the ground for the battle, it would be Sauron.

Well I doubt both Bilbo and Frodo in reality, Sam certainly. Your list of the wise is too short. Surely Saruman and Radagast,

Little was mentioned of Radagast, though it is assumed that he went "native" and prefered his birds and nature to fulfilling his primary duty and some comments suggest that Saruman may have manipulated Radagast into serving his own needs.

Cirdan (a fact) I would assume Denathor

Cirdan, yes. Denethor, no - His interpretation of his own visions from the Palantir was clouded by Sauron, leading to his madness.

Anyone who can still name himself an exile and of the house of Finrod is likely to stand against Sauron, The Ents - they all have a bitter grudge against S and clearly Saruman could not influence them with his voice.

Perhaps that is why Sauron considered them to be such hated foes? As far as the Ents are concerned, they're the Elves' attempt at trolls, so to speak. (Well, vice-versa.) Yes, much wiser and much longer lived, but not a serious contender. Saruman's gift-at-gab fell on deaf ears. But, would a concerted effort by Sauron have the same effect?

I would suspect the sons of Elrond certainly, Celeborn, Glorfindel (I mean he killed a Balrog, was returned and gave Nazgul nightmares), had they lived I would have to think men like Beorn and Bard likely fall into this catigory, Eowen (although she was become fey almost when she fought the Nagul). As I said before its not that the west lacked strength, but that is was all at discord or ambivalent,or detached and not moving with the unified purpose S had. That's why the ring quest or the Last debate strategy have dramatic tension because there where other options with frankly better odds.

I was just limiting myself to those main characters present in the trilogy. Elrond would also be in that number, but he also wielded a pure, untainted ring of power of his own.

In a story, it helps not to have too many Heroes of equal strength, else the idea that everyone is a Hero sort of gets old. That's why the ones that I mentioned stand out.

[conon394]

I was just limiting myself to those main characters present in the trilogy. Elrond would also be in that number, but he also wielded a pure, untainted ring of power of his own.

Although he did not during the battles of the Last Alliance

[Macilrille]

When Sauron held the One all other Rings and their bearers could have their will dominated by him; even the Three. Elrond, Cirdan and Galadriel would thus not have worn theirs in the latter half of the Secons Age, but could do so freely in the Third.

[Vaskill]

This just popped into my head and was rather curious. What happened to Gandalf and Frodo when they reached Valinor? I'm curious what happened to them personally. Every other Hobbit married someone did Frodo marry an Elven woman? As well as Gandalf?

[Thangaror]

Well, Gandalf is actually Olorin. He is a Ainu, a being of angelic power. Although the Ainur were familiar with love and did actually marry, it does not really fit Gandalf's character IMHO. Also he had already lived as Olorin for many thousand, possibly tenthousands, of years and he had not married until then.

Frodo also never married, although he already was in his fifties when he set out to destroy the Ring. The same is the case with Bilbo. Also, although living in Valinor, both remained mortal and will have died eventually.

[alreadyded]

Well, Gandalf is actually Olorin. He is a Ainu, a being of angelic power. Although the Ainur were familiar with love and did actually marry, it does not really fit Gandalf's character IMHO. Also he had already lived as Olorin for many thousand, possibly tenthousands, of years and he had not married until then.

Frodo also never married, although he already was in his fifties when he set out to destroy the Ring. The same is the case with Bilbo. Also, although living in Valinor, both remained mortal and will have died eventually.

They may have died even faster than normal in Valinor, much like Beren did with the silmaril. Something about the "fire burning twice as hot and half as long" for mortals.

[Macilrille]

For once we agree. It is stated (I think in the Akkalabéth) that Mortals in Valinor would burn out like moths too close to a flame. Presumably the only exception to this is Tuor. But could one have been made by Eru for the Hobbit Ringbearers?

[alreadyded]

But could one have been made by Eru for the Hobbit Ringbearers?

Direct intervention? Doesn't sound like any God I know...

I figured Valinor is such a surreal and fantastical place that time, or dying while there, may not really be an issue. Beren did keep the silmaril willingly and Tolkien made it sound like everything in the vicinity was MUCH better because of it. Twice the pleasure and half the time I guess, it all balances out in the end. Your brain synapses would be so flooded with dopamine that you wouldn't even know or care how much time has actually gone by, kinda like being on opium I guess. Its all making sense now... the silmarils were full of opium! No wonder everyone wanted them so badly. Deduction completed.

[Mhaedros]

Kind of like Lothlorien is described in FotR. When the Fellowship left it, the mortals suddenly realized how long a time they'd actually spent there, even if it felt like a couple of days or something like that

[avenging angel]

Kind of like Lothlorien is described in FotR. When the Fellowship left it, the mortals suddenly realized how long a time they'd actually spent there, even if it felt like a couple of days or something like that

Yeah. I mean it was a paradise on earth in a sense. A kind off mini Valinor...

Now im back on a more frequent basis after being away ill, i have two questions. 1, if it had come down to a battle between sauron and gandalf at the siege of minas tirith instead of teh witchking, who do you think couldve won? and secondly, if you were in saurons postion, how would you direct your stategy to conquer middleearth and why?

[Thangaror]

For once we agree. It is stated (I think in the Akkalabéth) that Mortals in Valinor would burn out like moths too close to a flame. Presumably the only exception to this is Tuor. But could one have been made by Eru for the Hobbit Ringbearers?

Nah, Hobbits are tough!

[p00pwater]

Yeah. I mean it was a paradise on earth in a sense. A kind off mini Valinor...

Now im back on a more frequent basis after being away ill, i have two questions. 1, if it had come down to a battle between sauron and gandalf at the siege of minas tirith instead of teh witchking, who do you think couldve won? and secondly, if you were in saurons postion, how would you direct your stategy to conquer middleearth and why?

well, one of the rules of the istari was that they were never to directly challenge sauron, but that they were meant rise up the free peoples of middle earth, to give them strength and courage.

secondly, idk, i suppose he should be able to since sauron put so much of his own strength into the ring that he was weakened, but i thinjk that the maiar sent were decreased in strength in their istari forms.

[Ngugi]

Sauron actually was not weaker without the Ring, he just got stronger when he had it. It was not to become 'normal' but actually stronger, as well to remove some potential threats. http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/ringfaq.htm#Q1-Rapport

But to achieve this he had been obliged to let a great part of his own inherent power (a frequent and very significant motive in myth and fairy-story) pass into the One Ring. While he wore it, his power on earth was actually enhanced. But even if he did not wear it, that power existed and was in 'rapport' with himself: he was not 'diminished'.

Unless some other seized it and became possessed of it. If that happened, the new possessor could (if sufficiently strong and heroic by nature) challenge Sauron, become master of all that he had learned or done since the making of the One Ring, and so overthrow him and usurp his place. This was the essential weakness he had introduced into his situation in his effort (largely unsuccessful) to enslave the Elves, and in his desire to establish a control over the minds and wills of his servants.
There was another weakness: if the One Ring was actually unmade, annihilated, then its power would be dissolved, Sauron's own being would be diminished to vanishing point, and he would be reduced to a shadow, a mere memory of malicious will. But that he never contemplated nor feared.
Letter 131 (1951)

Gandalf did not expected himself to be able to battle Sauron one on one

'I am Gandalf, Gandalf the White, but Black is mightier still.'

- TTT; The White Rider

While Tolkien expected him to least have a shot if given the Ring (see letter 131).

Of the others only Gandalf might be expected to master him – being an emissary of the Powers and a creature of the same order, an immortal spirit taking a visible physical form.
- Letter 246

[conon394]

The problem is Ngugi is the good sir doth contradict himself to some extent in Letter 131

LOTR Shadow of the Past

"This is the One Ring that he lost many ages ago, to the great weakening of his power." [would seem to indicated a diminished Sauron].

"He believed that the One had perished; that the Elves had destroyed it..." [Not much rapport if he did not even know it was still around]

HoME:

"-but without the Ring he is still shorn of much of his power,... and without it is weaker than of old"

edit: for reference I will call note this post in my argument about the West to the point that S is weaker w/o the ring in a real way. I do not think letter 131 trumps the LOTR and HoME - but that is of course a judgment call.