A few questions occur
teepee
questions occur.
1) Why does Denethor not discover the plan for the ring while questioning
Pippin (as he plainly doesn't)? Why did Pippin withhold all the information
relating to that, having just sworn an oath to obey Denethor? And what
damage would have come from withholding it anyway? Boromir knew everything
already, and telling him was no different from telling Denethor.
2) What proof is there that the Elven rings failed when the One was
destroyed? Is it explicitly stated anywhere?
3) Why did Sauron not give his 'Dwarf' rings to men, and have a couple more
Nazgul? There was nothing explicitly dwarfish about them in their creation
as far as I know? Alright it would have ruined the poem but so what?
4) Why did no-one question the source of the dream sent to Faramir that sent
Boromir to Rivendell? Who did send it? If it was the Valar does that not
give a broad wink to Gandalf that fate had already decreed that Frodo would
succeed?
5) Was the character who threatened Dain, as related at the council of
Elrond, the Mouth of Sauron?
6) Why was no attempt made to destroy the Balrog before? He wasn't that
powerful compared to the White Council given that Gandalf killed him on his
own. Glorfindel could have done it = he'd done it before after all. Given
Moria's strategic importance it would have been a fairly obvious thing to
do.
Be interested if anyone has any answers to a curious rereader
tp
Raven
news:4b2aafac$1...@newsgate.x-privat.org...
> 1) Why does Denethor not discover the plan for the ring while questioning
> Pippin (as he plainly doesn't)? Why did Pippin withhold all the
> information relating to that, having just sworn an oath to obey Denethor?
> And what damage would have come from withholding it anyway? Boromir knew
> everything already, and telling him was no different from telling
> Denethor.
Plainly? It seems to me that Denethor does know. Certainly he knows
that the Ring is being carried into Mordor, and he despises that plan. He
goes mad in part because he believes that Sauron has recovered the Ring and
is therefore now invincible - and part of his madness is this belief.
> 2) What proof is there that the Elven rings failed when the One was
> destroyed? Is it explicitly stated anywhere?
It is not explicitly stated, after the fact of the destruction of the
One. But we do see both Rivendell and L�rien fading, and they were upheld
partly by the power of the rings that Elrond and Galadriel wore. A hint,
though not proof, is that after the destruction of the One Gandalf openly
wore Narya and Galadriel openly wore Nenya. At the last riding, when all
the bearers of the Three went to the Havens, Elrond openly wore Vilya. This
fact indicates, but does not prove, that the Three had been shorn of (most
of) their power, but were still revered, and quite valuable bits of jewelry
in their own right.
> 3) Why did Sauron not give his 'Dwarf' rings to men, and have a couple
> more Nazgul? There was nothing explicitly dwarfish about them in their
> creation as far as I know? Alright it would have ruined the poem but so
> what?
The guess is that he recovered those Dwarf rings only after he lost the
One. The Nine he had already enslaved at the time, before Isildur cut the
One from his hand, but enslaving more victims using more of the lesser rings
would have required him to have the One.
However, there is some evidence that the Seven were in origin different
from the Nine, in that Celebrimbor, when captured by Sauron, seems to have
yielded the Nine fairly willingly, but the Seven only after torture. And
knowledge of the whereabouts of the Three not even Sauron's torture made him
yield.
> 4) Why did no-one question the source of the dream sent to Faramir that
> sent Boromir to Rivendell? Who did send it? If it was the Valar does that
> not give a broad wink to Gandalf that fate had already decreed that Frodo
> would succeed?
It is not known that nobody wondered about the source of that dream. But
I suppose the people in Middle-earth who knew the most about these matters,
such as the High Elves and the Wizards, believed that help from the Valar or
from Il�vatar would be limited. "Here are a few tools, but you have to do
the job yourselves. If you fumble this one, *you* pay the price."
Remember that sending the Wizards to Middle-earth was the Valar's plan,
and that plan failed: Gandalf was killed by the Balrog, Saruman became evil,
Radagast went native, and none knows what happened exactly to Alatar and
Pallando, if they died or faded away or became dominated by Sauron in the
mysterious East, or if they did succeed in some measure but not enough to
annul Sauron's power in the East.
> 5) Was the character who threatened Dain, as related at the council of
> Elrond, the Mouth of Sauron?
I don't think anyone knows. Probably one of the questions Tolkien
deliberately left unanswered.
> 6) Why was no attempt made to destroy the Balrog before? He wasn't that
> powerful compared to the White Council given that Gandalf killed him on
> his own. Glorfindel could have done it = he'd done it before after all.
> Given Moria's strategic importance it would have been a fairly obvious
> thing to do.
Gandalf paid a heavy price for killing the Balrog. He died himself, but
in such noble circumstances that Il�vatar restored him to life to finish the
job that he had been originally sent to do. The Wizards were in origin sent
by the Valar; Gandalf's resurrection and increase in power were Il�vatar's
taking up of the Valar's plan, rescuing and improving it at the point of its
failure. Also it was not known that Durin's Bane was a Balrog. Gandalf was
surprised to discover it, when it rushed at them near Durin's Bridge, past
all the Orcs that were known to also infest Moria.
Hr�fn.
Derek Broughton
> I just reread LoTR after a few years of not doing so and a few fresh
> questions occur.
>
> 1) Why does Denethor not discover the plan for the ring while questioning
> Pippin (as he plainly doesn't)? Why did Pippin withhold all the
> information relating to that, having just sworn an oath to obey Denethor?
> And what damage would have come from withholding it anyway?
I guess there's a missing "not", there. The obvious damage that could have
occurred is that Denethor couldn't have been trusted not to reveal what he
knew (accidentally, of course) to Sauron.
> Boromir knew
> everything already, and telling him was no different from telling
> Denethor.
Except that Boromir is dead, and we all know the dead tell no tales.
> 2) What proof is there that the Elven rings failed when the One was
> destroyed? Is it explicitly stated anywhere?
None whatsoever. It was a "best guess" on the part of very wise people.
It's almost certain that they _didn't_ fail, outright. They just dwindled,
like their owners.
> 3) Why did Sauron not give his 'Dwarf' rings to men, and have a couple
> more Nazgul? There was nothing explicitly dwarfish about them in their
> creation as far as I know? Alright it would have ruined the poem but so
> what?
I've never quite understood that, myself. The last of the Dwarf rings was
probably recovered far too recently to make a new Nazgul - I don't know how
long that would take, but surely longer than the natural lifespan of a man.
I'm not sure we know how many others Sauron had, and how many were destroyed
by dragons.
> 4) Why did no-one question the source of the dream sent to Faramir that
> sent Boromir to Rivendell? Who did send it? If it was the Valar does that
> not give a broad wink to Gandalf that fate had already decreed that Frodo
> would succeed?
I think it's just accepted that some people have the gift of prophecy - we
know Glorfindel did.
> 5) Was the character who threatened Dain, as related at the council of
> Elrond, the Mouth of Sauron?
I think so, but I'm not sure I have good reason to believe so :-)
> 6) Why was no attempt made to destroy the Balrog before? He wasn't that
> powerful compared to the White Council given that Gandalf killed him on
> his own. Glorfindel could have done it = he'd done it before after all.
> Given Moria's strategic importance it would have been a fairly obvious
> thing to do.
I think not. Moria had lain empty for centuries, without anybody being
overly concerned. It wasn't that important, except to the Dwarves.
Glorfindel _might_ have killed another Balrog. I think it's pretty obvious
that signing up as a Balrog killer would be a short career - didn't the last
one kill him? Which means that of all the Balrog killings we know of in
LOTR, nobody who has slain one has survived (it's almost as if successfully
killing one gets you a Free Play!).
Anyway, while the combined White Council should have been able to kill a
Balrog, it would have done serious damage to them, and over all the years
since the fall of Morgoth it hadn't bothered anyone outside Moria. It was
hardly a threat to divert them from the real business of stopping Sauron.
--
derek
Steve Morrison
Re question #2, the most explicit statement I can think of offhand is
in the final paragraph of "Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age":
White was that ship and long was it a-building, and long it
awaited the end of which C�rdan had spoken. But when all these
things were done, and the Heir of Isildur had taken up the
lordship of Men, and the dominion of the West had passed to
him, then it was made plain that the power of the Three Rings
also was ended, and to the Firstborn the world grew old and
grey. In that time the last of the Noldor set sail from the
Havens and left Middle-earth for ever. And latest of all the
Keepers of the Three Rings rode to the Sea, and Master Elrond
took there the ship that C�rdan had made ready. In the twilight
of autumn it sailed out of Mithlond, until the seas of the Bent
World fell away beneath it, and the winds of the round sky
troubled it no more, and borne upon the high airs above the
mists of the world it passed into the Ancient West, and an end
was come for the Eldar of story and of song.
#3 is discussed in Stan's /FAQ of the Rings/ at
http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/ringfaq.htm
Re #5, it's very hard to say; I doubt there is any statement as
to who the emissary of Mordor was. I can think of one small bit
of evidence against his being the Mouth of Sauron, though. Shippey
observes in /Author of the Century/ that the emissary to D�in has
a tendency to use threefold repetitions, but the Mouth show no
sign of the speech pattern.
Re #6, nobody had any real idea what Durin's Bane was until the
Fellowship encountered it, and so didn't know what it would take
to overcome it.
Weland
Good info. Yes, as I recall, the Seven were all recovered in the Third
Age, but I suspect that you are right: to enslave others he would need
the One Ring.
>
>> 4) Why did no-one question the source of the dream sent to Faramir that
>> sent Boromir to Rivendell? Who did send it? If it was the Valar does that
>> not give a broad wink to Gandalf that fate had already decreed that Frodo
>> would succeed?
>
> It is not known that nobody wondered about the source of that dream. But
> I suppose the people in Middle-earth who knew the most about these matters,
> such as the High Elves and the Wizards, believed that help from the
> Valar or
> from Il�vatar would be limited.
Two things: first, the dream even if from the Valar or Iluvatar only
directs Faramir to go look for things in Imladris that will aid in the
battle/war...not the outcome of the war. Second, fate doesn't operate
that way in Middle Earth....ask Troels!
"Here are a few tools, but you have to do
> the job yourselves. If you fumble this one, *you* pay the price."
> Remember that sending the Wizards to Middle-earth was the Valar's
> plan, and that plan failed: Gandalf was killed by the Balrog, Saruman
> became evil, Radagast went native, and none knows what happened exactly
> to Alatar and Pallando, if they died or faded away or became dominated
> by Sauron in the mysterious East, or if they did succeed in some measure
> but not enough to annul Sauron's power in the East.
>
>> 5) Was the character who threatened Dain, as related at the council of
>> Elrond, the Mouth of Sauron?
>
> I don't think anyone knows. Probably one of the questions Tolkien
> deliberately left unanswered.
I suspect not. For one thing, the description sounds more like one of
the Nine searching for Hobbiton in Book I than the encounter with the
Mouth. Second, Shippey notes the speech pattern is different from the
Mouth.
>> 6) Why was no attempt made to destroy the Balrog before? He wasn't that
>> powerful compared to the White Council given that Gandalf killed him on
>> his own. Glorfindel could have done it = he'd done it before after all.
>> Given Moria's strategic importance it would have been a fairly obvious
>> thing to do.
>
> Gandalf paid a heavy price for killing the Balrog. He died himself, but
> in such noble circumstances that Il�vatar restored him to life to finish
> the
> job that he had been originally sent to do. The Wizards were in origin
> sent
> by the Valar; Gandalf's resurrection and increase in power were Il�vatar's
> taking up of the Valar's plan, rescuing and improving it at the point of
> its failure. Also it was not known that Durin's Bane was a Balrog.
> Gandalf was surprised to discover it, when it rushed at them near
> Durin's Bridge, past all the Orcs that were known to also infest Moria.
There's also the matter of timing. Durin's Bane was Second Age. Even
at the time in the TA of the War of Dwarves and Goblins, there doesn't
seem to be any real evidence of the Balrog being active save Dain's
statement after he peeked in...and he had to peek in and be at the door
to perceive it, and the dwarves didn't exactly send the news round to
the other free peoples. Aragorn had entered and exited Moria
unmolested. Gandalf had passed through. It wasn't until Balin and
company were extinguished that Galadriel and Celebrimbor became aware of
something happening in Moria--by that point, the White Council was no
more if I recall the timeline correctly.
Öjevind Lång
meddelandet news:4b2ad492$1$56790$edfa...@dtext02.news.tele.dk...
[snip]
>> 2) What proof is there that the Elven rings failed when the One was
>> destroyed? Is it explicitly stated anywhere?
>
> It is not explicitly stated, after the fact of the destruction of the
> One. But we do see both Rivendell and L�rien fading, and they were upheld
> partly by the power of the rings that Elrond and Galadriel wore. A hint,
> though not proof, is that after the destruction of the One Gandalf openly
> wore Narya and Galadriel openly wore Nenya. At the last riding, when all
> the bearers of the Three went to the Havens, Elrond openly wore Vilya.
> This fact indicates, but does not prove, that the Three had been shorn of
> (most of) their power, but were still revered, and quite valuable bits of
> jewelry in their own right.
I think it is ratehr explicitly stated in mroe than one place. For example,
when the comapny ridign north voertake saruman and Wormtongue, Saruman mocks
Galadriel and Gandalf with the following words: "You have doomed yourselves,
and you know it. And it will afford me some comfort as I wander to think
that you pulled down your own house when you destroyed mine, And now, what
ship will bear you back across so wide a sea?"
�jevind
Derek Broughton
> "teepee" <nom...@nomail.com> skrev i meddelelsen
> news:4b2aafac$1...@newsgate.x-privat.org...
>
>> 2) What proof is there that the Elven rings failed when the One was
>> destroyed? Is it explicitly stated anywhere?
>
> It is not explicitly stated, after the fact of the destruction of the
> One. But we do see both Rivendell and Lórien fading, and they were upheld
> partly by the power of the rings that Elrond and Galadriel wore. A hint,
> though not proof, is that after the destruction of the One Gandalf openly
> wore Narya and Galadriel openly wore Nenya.
I don't see that as even being a hint. After the destruction of the One,
there was no need to hide them, and I've always felt that hiding the rings
was something the bearer did rather than an innate ability of the ring.
>> 3) Why did Sauron not give his 'Dwarf' rings to men, and have a couple
>> more Nazgul? There was nothing explicitly dwarfish about them in their
>> creation as far as I know? Alright it would have ruined the poem but so
>> what?
>
> The guess is that he recovered those Dwarf rings only after he lost the
> One. The Nine he had already enslaved at the time, before Isildur cut the
> One from his hand, but enslaving more victims using more of the lesser
> rings would have required him to have the One.
Very good point.
--
derek
Derek Broughton
> teepee wrote:
>
>> I just reread LoTR after a few years of not doing so and a few fresh
>> questions occur.
>>
>> 1) Why does Denethor not discover the plan for the ring while questioning
>> Pippin (as he plainly doesn't)? Why did Pippin withhold all the
>> information relating to that, having just sworn an oath to obey Denethor?
>> And what damage would have come from withholding it anyway?
>
> I guess there's a missing "not", there. The obvious damage that could
> have occurred is that Denethor couldn't have been trusted not to reveal
> what he knew (accidentally, of course) to Sauron.
Yes, Raven's right that Denethor _does_ seem to know, but Pippin doesn't
know that he knows (and I'm not even sure that _at the time_ Denethor knows
- he may suspect, but it's only when he's shown the spoils of Frodo's
capture that he puts 2 & 2 together).
--
derek
Derek Broughton
> "Raven" <jon.lennart.be...@mail.its.in.danmark> skrev i
> meddelandet news:4b2ad492$1$56790$edfa...@dtext02.news.tele.dk...
>
> [snip]
>
>>> 2) What proof is there that the Elven rings failed when the One was
>>> destroyed? Is it explicitly stated anywhere?
>>
>> It is not explicitly stated, after the fact of the destruction of the
>> One. But we do see both Rivendell and Lórien fading, and they were
>> upheld
>> partly by the power of the rings that Elrond and Galadriel wore. A hint,
>> though not proof, is that after the destruction of the One Gandalf openly
>> wore Narya and Galadriel openly wore Nenya. At the last riding, when all
>> the bearers of the Three went to the Havens, Elrond openly wore Vilya.
>> This fact indicates, but does not prove, that the Three had been shorn of
>> (most of) their power, but were still revered, and quite valuable bits of
>> jewelry in their own right.
>
> I think it is ratehr explicitly stated in mroe than one place. For
> example, when the comapny ridign north voertake saruman and Wormtongue,
> Saruman mocks Galadriel and Gandalf with the following words: "You have
> doomed yourselves, and you know it. And it will afford me some comfort as
> I wander to think that you pulled down your own house when you destroyed
> mine, And now, what ship will bear you back across so wide a sea?"
I guess it depends on your definition of "explicit" - that seems more
implied, to me. :-) I think it's easy to deduce from this, Galadriel's
words after she refuses Frodo's offer of the One Ring, and other comments
from Gandalf and Elrond, but nobody ever comes right out and says that the
Elven rings will _fail_ with the destruction of the One. In fact, I doubt
they have actually failed at all; they are, like the Elves themselves,
diminished.
--
derek
Derek Broughton
> In article <136sv6-...@morgen.pointerstop.ca>,
> Derek Broughton <de...@pointerstop.ca> wrote:
>
>> I think it's easy to deduce from this, Galadriel's
>> words after she refuses Frodo's offer of the One Ring, and other comments
>> from Gandalf and Elrond, but nobody ever comes right out and says that
>> the Elven rings will _fail_ with the destruction of the One. In fact, I
>> doubt they have actually failed at all; they are, like the Elves
>> themselves, diminished.
>
> The power of the Elven-rings lie in their ability to heal the world,
> that is how Elrond or Galadriel put it. We don't see much of that
> after the war of the rings is over. I take that as another indication
> that the Elven-rings lose their power after the One Ring has been
> destroyed.
Actually, we see quite a bit of it, albeit it's glossed over fairly quickly.
Sam rejuvenates the entire Shire with Galadriel's gift. So there must be
Elven power left in the world, but it's fading (and fading quickly, I
believe).
--
derek
Matthew Woodcraft
> There's also the matter of timing. Durin's Bane was Second Age.
It was 1980 Third Age. But I think that supports your argument: by that
time, Gandalf and the White Council were already concentrating on the
Necromancer.
-M-
Matthew Woodcraft
> I guess it depends on your definition of "explicit" - that seems more
> implied, to me. :-) I think it's easy to deduce from this, Galadriel's
> words after she refuses Frodo's offer of the One Ring, and other comments
> from Gandalf and Elrond, but nobody ever comes right out and says that the
> Elven rings will _fail_ with the destruction of the One.
I think the clearest statement is from Gandalf, just before he shows
Aragorn the new Tree: << the power of the Three Rings also is ended >>.
-M-
Weland
Thanks.
Stan Brown
>
> I just reread LoTR after a few years of not doing so and a few fresh
> questions occur.
>
> 1) Why does Denethor not discover the plan for the ring while questioning
> Pippin (as he plainly doesn't)? Why did Pippin withhold all the information
> relating to that, having just sworn an oath to obey Denethor? And what
> damage would have come from withholding it anyway? Boromir knew everything
> already, and telling him was no different from telling Denethor.
Pippin's loyalties were divided, IMHO. He swore to Denethor, but I
don't think he really regarded himself as totally under Denethor's
orders. He still looked to Gandalf for guidance. Remember that he
still lodged with Gandalf, and after telling his story to Denethor,
as soon as they left Denethor he asked Gandalf if he had done well.
> 2) What proof is there that the Elven rings failed when the One was
> destroyed? Is it explicitly stated anywhere?
Yes, in Silm but not in LotR. References are in the FAQ of the Rings
(URL in my sig).
> 3) Why did Sauron not give his 'Dwarf' rings to men, and have a couple more
> Nazgul? There was nothing explicitly dwarfish about them in their creation
> as far as I know? Alright it would have ruined the poem but so what?
By the time he recovered them, he no longer had the One and therefore
if he had dealt out any of the Seven they would have been independent
of him, just like the Three.
(Again, the FAQ of the Rings goes into more detail.)
> 4) Why did no-one question the source of the dream sent to Faramir that sent
> Boromir to Rivendell? Who did send it? If it was the Valar does that not
> give a broad wink to Gandalf that fate had already decreed that Frodo would
> succeed?
We are not told, but again based on Silm I believe it was Ulmo. In
Silm, Ulmo sends dreams to Men and Elves and even appears in waking
life to Tuor.
> 5) Was the character who threatened Dain, as related at the council of
> Elrond, the Mouth of Sauron?
I don't know.
> 6) Why was no attempt made to destroy the Balrog before? He wasn't that
> powerful compared to the White Council given that Gandalf killed him on his
> own. Glorfindel could have done it = he'd done it before after all. Given
> Moria's strategic importance it would have been a fairly obvious thing to
> do.
I don't think Moria *had* any strategic importance until the War of
the Ring, and even then only as a passage when the aboveground route
was blocked. Furthermore, no one really knew that the Balrog was
there. Remember that Gandalf did not suspect a Balrog on the other
side of the door; it wasn't till he saw it that he knew.
--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com
Tolkien FAQs: http://Tolkien.slimy.com (Steuard Jensen's site)
Tolkien letters FAQ:
http://mysite.verizon.net/aznirb/mtr/lettersfaq.html
FAQ of the Rings: http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/ringfaq.htm
Encyclopedia of Arda: http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/default.htm
more FAQs: http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/faqget.htm
Stan Brown
> as I recall, the Seven were all recovered in the Third
> Age
The dragons consumed some of them.
Stan Brown
<de...@pointerstop.ca>:
> I guess it depends on your definition of "explicit" - that seems more
> implied, to me. :-) I think it's easy to deduce from this, Galadriel's
> words after she refuses Frodo's offer of the One Ring, and other comments
> from Gandalf and Elrond, but nobody ever comes right out and says that the
> Elven rings will _fail_ with the destruction of the One. In fact, I doubt
> they have actually failed at all; they are, like the Elves themselves,
> diminished.
I don't see any explicit statement in LotR, not even in the
Appendices. But it *is* explicitly stated both in Silm and in
Letters: the Three Rings lost their power as soon as the One went
into the fire.
See the FAQ of the Rings for references.
Simon J. Rowe
> 5) Was the character who threatened Dain, as related at the council of
> Elrond, the Mouth of Sauron?
From the brief description
At that his breath came like the hiss of snakes, and all who stood by
shuddered,
my guess is that it was one of the Nine,
Simon
David Trimboli
> Thu, 17 Dec 2009 22:24:32 -0000 from teepee<nom...@nomail.com>:
>>
>> Boromir to Rivendell? Who did send it? If it was the Valar does that not
>> give a broad wink to Gandalf that fate had already decreed that Frodo would
>> succeed?
>
> We are not told, but again based on Silm I believe it was Ulmo. In
> Silm, Ulmo sends dreams to Men and Elves and even appears in waking
> life to Tuor.
I am certain the source was the Valar, whether or not it was Ulmo�though
Ulmo is the usual source of dream-messages. The voice of the dream came
out of a light in the West. If the source had been Il�vatar himself, it
would not have come out of the West.
Boromir speaks of how no one but Denethor understood the /message/, but
says nothing further about the source. It could be that the source was
pretty clear to anyone with a noble education: voices coming from lights
in the West come from the Valar.
Gandalf, Aragorn, and Elrond completely understood the dream, because by
the time they heard it all of its elements had come to Rivendell. There
was no indication in the dream that Frodo would succeed. Only that (1)
they should find the Sword That Was Broken, (2) in Imladris, (3) where
there would be great council in which (4) a sign of Doom would be shown,
which involved (5) the return of Isildur's Bane and (6) the appearance
of a Halfling. The moment Frodo shows the Council the Ring, the prophecy
of the dream is fulfilled.
I think a more interesting question is what the purpose of the dream
was. What were the Valar hoping to accomplish in sending Faramir to the
Council? How did that differ from what happened with Boromir? (Faramir
wouldn't have been tempted by the Ring; Frodo wouldn't have had the
courage or need to leave the Fellowship, who would have all gone with
him into Mordor; and Aragorn wouldn't have challenged Sauron in the
Palant�r, causing Sauron to empty Mordor prematurely and giving the
Ring-bearer relatively free access to Mount Doom.)
--
David Trimboli
http://www.trimboli.name/
Troels Forchhammer
Matthew Woodcraft <mat...@woodcraft.me.uk> spoke these staves:
>
The Three Rings losing their power after the destruction of the One:
> I think the clearest statement is from Gandalf, just before he
> shows Aragorn the new Tree: << the power of the Three Rings also
> is ended
I think the statement in 'The Tale of Aragorn and Arwen' is a close
contestor ;-)
When the Great Ring was unmade and the Three were shorn of
their power, then Elrond grew weary at last and forsook
Middle-earth, never to return.
--
Troels Forchhammer <troelsfo(a)googlewave.com>
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.
If quantum mechanics hasn't profoundly shocked you, you
haven't understood it yet.
- Niels Bohr (1885-1962)
Prai Jei
continuum:
> I think a more interesting question is what the purpose of the dream
> was. What were the Valar hoping to accomplish in sending Faramir to the
> Council? How did that differ from what happened with Boromir? (Faramir
> wouldn't have been tempted by the Ring; Frodo wouldn't have had the
> courage or need to leave the Fellowship, who would have all gone with
> him into Mordor; and Aragorn wouldn't have challenged Sauron in the
> Palantír, causing Sauron to empty Mordor prematurely and giving the
> Ring-bearer relatively free access to Mount Doom.)
Who would have looked after Frodo, Sam and Smeagol/Gollum at Henneth Annun,
hiding and guarding from the Southrons? A lesser Ranger of Ithilien would
have had them all like coneys in a trap. No, this scene *needed* Faramir,
so it had to be somebody else sent up to Elrond.
--
ξ:) Proud to be curly
Interchange the alphabetic letter groups to reply
Stan Brown
<da...@trimboli.name>:
> I think a more interesting question is what the purpose of the dream
> was. What were the Valar hoping to accomplish in sending Faramir to the
> Council? How did that differ from what happened with Boromir? (Faramir
> wouldn't have been tempted by the Ring; Frodo wouldn't have had the
> courage or need to leave the Fellowship, who would have all gone with
> him into Mordor; and Aragorn wouldn't have challenged Sauron in the
>
This is indeed fascinating. What would have happened if Boromir had
found Frodo and Sam in Ithilien?
maybe Boromir would have failed to perceive the Ring. He had less
"book-larnin'" than his brother, and far less respect for lore.
True, in the story it was Sam who revealed that Frodo was carrying
the Ring, but he did that under astute questioning from Faramir.
Boromir would not likely have asked the same kinds of questions.
Even knowing about the Ring, maybe Boromir would not have fallen
under its influence in that brief time, which was after all not even
24 hours. (IDHTBIFOM, so I could be wrong, but IIRC the hobbits were
captured by daylight, had an evening meal, helped to capture Gollum,
had a morning meal, and went on their way.)
But Boromir might have considered the Ring (if he knew about it) as a
military asset to be sent to his father. Or he might have followed
the law and sent the hobbits to Minas Tirith as prisoners, even if he
didn't know about the Ring.
But the answer I think most likely is this: if Faramir had gone to
Rivendell instead of Boromir, then the hobbits wouldn't have been
captured by Rangers of Ithilien because they wouldn't have been
wandering in Ithilien alone in the first place. If Faramir had been
in the Fellowship, he would not have tried to take the Ring(*) by
force, Frodo would not have been frightened into putting it on, and
he and Sam would not have sneaked off across the River.
Aragorn's original plan had been to go with the two hobbits into
Mordor, and he would have been able to stick to that while the others
went to Minas Tirith. (He might have had some trouble getting Merry
and Pippin to stay west of the River.) The hobbits would have been
guided by him rather than Gollum, and he would not have taken them to
Cirith Ungol, probably not even to the Black Gate. Most likely he'd
have swung north and east around the Dead Marshes and found a passage
through the mountains north of Mordor and thence to Mount Doom.
(*) I say Faramir would not have tried to take the Ring, but I am not
so sure. In the actual story Faramir comes off as noble and Boromir
as corrupted, but they did not start off so differently. Faramir was
a military man too, after all. Boromir was a shade more proud and
self willed, and Faramir a shade more humble, but they both had a
strong sense of honor and a keen desire to see Gondor preserved.
Perhaps over the months, Faramir too might have succumbed to the
Ring's evil, influenced just like his brother by visions of what the
Ring could do to help his beloved Gondor.
David Trimboli
But Faramir would have been with Frodo and the rest of the Fellowship,
since there would have been no break at Parth Galen. They'd have gone
east from there.
And with the Fellowship intact, Gollum wouldn't have guided Frodo to
Cirith Ungol, and Frodo probably wouldn't have encountered the
Southrons. Even if he had, Faramir, Aragorn, Gimli, and Legolas would
have been there to protect him.
Of course, Gollum was certainly required for the final destruction of
the Ring, so you've got quite a conundrum there...
David Trimboli
> (*) I say Faramir would not have tried to take the Ring, but I am not
> so sure. In the actual story Faramir comes off as noble and Boromir
> as corrupted, but they did not start off so differently. Faramir was
> a military man too, after all. Boromir was a shade more proud and
> self willed, and Faramir a shade more humble, but they both had a
> strong sense of honor and a keen desire to see Gondor preserved.
> Perhaps over the months, Faramir too might have succumbed to the
> Ring's evil, influenced just like his brother by visions of what the
> Ring could do to help his beloved Gondor.
Faramir was different that Boromir in that the blood of N�menor ran true
in him, whereas it did not in Boromir, or even in Denethor. I believe
Gandalf stated this opinion.
No one was above temptation by the Ring, and given enough time /anyone/
would eventually succumb. Both Gandalf and Galadriel refused it as a
freely given gift, but only with a great deal of angst. If Frodo had
offered it to Faramir maybe he would have been tempted, but Faramir's
choice was to take it by force, and this he would not do.
I believe that even if Faramir had been in the Fellowship he would have
been more like Aragorn than like Boromir in his strength and nobility.
It's interesting to note that it seems to be the Valar who try to get
Faramir to go to Rivendell, but it's apparently Il�vatar who arranges
Gollum's guidance and crucial role at Mount Doom, which probably
wouldn't have happened if Faramir had gone. It's as if the Valar have
missed the mark by a hair, and Il�vatar adjusts the shot. (That Boromir
also received the dream I consider inconclusive: he may have just been
dreaming normally about something he had been dwelling on, since the
meaning of Faramir's dreams were so important to him.)
Clams Canino
"David Trimboli" <da...@trimboli.name> wrote in message
news:4b2e52c4$0$22547
> Faramir was different that Boromir in that the blood of N�menor ran true
> in him, whereas it did not in Boromir, or even in Denethor. I believe
> Gandalf stated this opinion.
I must disagree with this.
-W
Paul S. Person
<the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
<snippo>
>But the answer I think most likely is this: if Faramir had gone to
>Rivendell instead of Boromir, then the hobbits wouldn't have been
>captured by Rangers of Ithilien because they wouldn't have been
>wandering in Ithilien alone in the first place. If Faramir had been
>in the Fellowship, he would not have tried to take the Ring(*) by
>force, Frodo would not have been frightened into putting it on, and
>he and Sam would not have sneaked off across the River.
>
>Aragorn's original plan had been to go with the two hobbits into
>Mordor, and he would have been able to stick to that while the others
>went to Minas Tirith. (He might have had some trouble getting Merry
>and Pippin to stay west of the River.) The hobbits would have been
>guided by him rather than Gollum, and he would not have taken them to
>Cirith Ungol, probably not even to the Black Gate. Most likely he'd
>have swung north and east around the Dead Marshes and found a passage
>through the mountains north of Mordor and thence to Mount Doom.
If they went through Moria, Gollum would still have been around,
somewhere nearby.
What role he would have played, if any, is very hard to say.
--
Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, "I never knew him."
Paul S. Person
<da...@trimboli.name> wrote:
<snippo>
>It's interesting to note that it seems to be the Valar who try to get
>Faramir to go to Rivendell, but it's apparently Il�vatar who arranges
>Gollum's guidance and crucial role at Mount Doom, which probably
>wouldn't have happened if Faramir had gone. It's as if the Valar have
>missed the mark by a hair, and Il�vatar adjusts the shot. (That Boromir
>also received the dream I consider inconclusive: he may have just been
>dreaming normally about something he had been dwelling on, since the
>meaning of Faramir's dreams were so important to him.)
Combined with the outstanding lack of success of Manwe's main plan
(five hobbled Maiar, two of which we know nothing of, one of which
contented himself with talking to animals, one of which tried to use
the Ring for personal gain, and the last of which died killing the
Balrog in Moria), I would say that the Valar were, at that point in
history, completely incapable of any effective or useful action.
Eru had to intervene. The incompetence of the Valar demanded it.
Steve Morrison
In fact Gandalf stated that the blood of N�menor /almost/ ran true in
both Denethor and Faramir:
'He is not as other men of this time, Pippin, and whatever be
his descent from father to son, by some chance the blood of
Westernesse runs nearly true in him; as it does in his other
son, Faramir, and yet did not in Boromir whom he loved best.
He has long sight. He can perceive, if he bends his will
thither, much of what is passing in the minds of men, even of
those that dwell far off. It is difficult to deceive him, and
dangerous to try.
Troels Forchhammer
Weland <gi...@poetic.com> spoke these staves:
> Raven wrote:
>>
>> "teepee" <nom...@nomail.com> skrev i meddelelsen
>> news:4b2aafac$1...@newsgate.x-privat.org...
>>>
>>> 1) Why does Denethor not discover the plan for the ring while
>>> questioning Pippin (as he plainly doesn't)? Why did Pippin
>>> withhold all the information relating to that, having just sworn
>>> an oath to obey Denethor? And what damage would have come from
>>> withholding it anyway? Boromir knew everything already, and
>>> telling him was no different from telling Denethor.
>>
>> Plainly? It seems to me that Denethor does know. Certainly he
>> knows that the Ring is being carried into Mordor, and he despises
>> that plan.
I believe Teepee was asking specifically to that first day when
Denethor interrogated Pippin. I don't think we can tell when exactly
Denethor learned about the plan -- he discusses it with Gandalf after
hearing Faramir tell about Frodo, but that merely establishes an
upper bound.
As Gandalf and Pippin approach the throne-room, Gandalf cautions
Pippin, saying 'Do not tell him more than you need, and leave quiet
the matter of Frodo's errand. I will deal with that in due time. And
say nothing about Aragorn either, unless you must.' After swearing
allegiance to Denethor, Pippin is closely questioned by Denethor
about the journey from Rivendell to Amon Hen, and when leaving he
asks Gandalf, 'Are you angry with me, Gandalf?' [...] 'I did the best
I could.' Gandalf then lists some items that Pippin could not hide
from Denethor, but these are more concerned with Aragorn, and it
would appear that Gandalf at least, at this point, is not worried
that Denethor has learned about Frodo's errand.
However, as we hear Faramir tell about his encounter with Frodo,
there is no hint that Denethor is surprised -- though of course this
may not mean anything.
Overall, I think that Pippin, despite his newly-sworn allegiance to
Denethor, elected to follow the caution of Gandalf, and that he was
successful in hiding the full purpose of the Company of the Ring, so
that Denethor didn't learn until Faramir came backhe following day.
<snip>
>>> 3) Why did Sauron not give his 'Dwarf' rings to men, and have a
>>> couple more Nazgul?
[...]
>> The guess is that he recovered those Dwarf rings only after he
>> lost the One. The Nine he had already enslaved at the time,
>> before Isildur cut the One from his hand, but enslaving more
>> victims using more of the lesser rings would have required him
>> to have the One.
[...]
>
> Good info. Yes, as I recall, the Seven were all recovered in the
> Third Age, but I suspect that you are right: to enslave others he
> would need the One Ring.
It has been speculated that this was also why he collected the Nine
-- in order to use their Rings to control the Nazg锟絣 so completely.
The idea in this would be that this was his only way of controlling
the Nine after he lost the One.
>>> 4) Why did no-one question the source of the dream sent to
>>> Faramir that sent Boromir to Rivendell? Who did send it? If it
>>> was the Valar does that not give a broad wink to Gandalf that
>>> fate had already decreed that Frodo would succeed?
>>
>> It is not known that nobody wondered about the source of that
>> dream.
Well, at least we may surmise that if anyone did so wonder, their
wonderings were not interesting enough to make it into the story ;-)
However, I don't think that anyone really wondered about the origin.
The gift of prophetic visions was an accepted fact in Middle-earth,
and it would be like asking from whence comes my aptitude for
mathematics. It is perhaps even more strange that it appears that
nobody questions the prophetic nature of the dreams either -- not
even Denethor appears to have doubted that the dream was genuine,
even if he was loth to give Boromir leave to go to Rivendell.
>> But I suppose the people in Middle-earth who knew the
>> most about these matters, such as the High Elves and the Wizards,
>> believed that help from the Valar or from Il锟絭atar would be
>> limited.
>
> Two things: first, the dream even if from the Valar or Iluvatar
> only directs Faramir to go look for things in Imladris that will
> aid in the battle/war...not the outcome of the war.
That might be a good argument in favour of their belief that it came
from one of these sources, if ever they did wonder -- if you expect
only very limited help (if any), something subtle such as the dream
would be a good guess.
> Second, fate doesn't operate that way in Middle Earth....
> ask Troels!
I'm not sure where exactly fate fits in. If we say that Faramir was
_meant_ to go to Rivendell (since he was sent the first and the most
dreams), then the question may still remain as to whether it was his
fate to go -- whether it was contained in the Music (as it were at
that time)? On the other hand, if something is 'fate', then the best
best even the wise can do is to accept that this is _meant_ to
happen, just as they did at the Council of Elrond, where the chair
acknowledged Frodo's fate:
`If I understand aright all that I have heard,' he said,
`I think that this task is appointed for you, Frodo; and
that if you do not find a way, no one will. This is the
hour of the Shire-folk, when they arise from their quiet
fields to shake the towers and counsels of the Great. Who
of all the Wise could have foreseen it? Or, if they are
wise, why should they expect to know it, until the hour
has struck?
`But it is a heavy burden. So heavy that none could lay
it on another. I do not lay it on you. But if you take it
freely, I will say that your choice is right; and though
all the mighty elf-friends of old, Hador, and H锟絩in, and
T锟絩in, and Beren himself were assembled together your seat
should be among them.'
[LotR II,2 'The Council of Elrond']
But 'fate' is not the same as help from the Ainur -- the faithful
Ainur do their best to follow Eru's will, but they are actors within
the drama and so they don't have perfect foreknowledge.
All this just to say nothing ;-)
It may well have been Faramir's fate to go to Rivendell, but fate
itself doesn't send any dreams. The dream would have been sent as
part of some kind of 'plan' -- a plan that would have, by intention
and great foreknowledge, tried to support and follow through on what
was in the Music, but not the Music itself. It may even be that it
was really Boromir's fate, but the Powers got it slightly wrong in
their plan, sending the dream primarily to Faramir in an attempt to
get Faramir going; as I said, their foreknowledge is far from
perfect. This is, of course, presuming that the dream was sent by one
or more Ainur (Ulmo?) -- if sent by Eru, the story would obviously be
different.
There's an interesting article in _Tolkien Studies VI_ by Tolkien /
Carl Hostetter -- some linguistic notes on the Elvish words for the
'world' and for 'fate' ('umbar' and 'ambar' in Quenya, 'amar' and
'amarth' in Sindarin) including a note on the Elvish view on fate and
free will. In addition to that, there is an article by Verlyn Flieger
on the same subject, fate and free will. I still haven't had time to
read the Flieger article, and I need some time to digest the very
terse information in Tolkien's notes. This reminds me -- Carl
Hostetter refers to an earlier note on the same subject published in
_Parma Eldalamberon_ XVII, in particular 104-10, 123-4 and 163-4 -- I
wondered if anyone has access to this copy of _Parma Eldalamberon_
and could help with the contents of this note? (The otherwise
excellent Danish library system has let me down on this request, and
my Tolkien-related budget is spent for a while -- I need to make room
for it while the dollar is cheap, though.)
>>> 5) Was the character who threatened Dain, as related at the
>>> council of Elrond, the Mouth of Sauron?
>>
>> I don't think anyone knows. Probably one of the questions
>> Tolkien deliberately left unanswered.
>
> I suspect not. For one thing, the description sounds more like
> one of the Nine searching for Hobbiton in Book I than the
> encounter with the Mouth. Second, Shippey notes the speech
> pattern is different from the Mouth.
Aye, I agree.
Someone said that the description, vague as it is, is more
reminiscent of a Black Rider (the hissing and the shuddering of the
listeners) and we know that a couple of them were stationed at Dol
Guldur, which would in any case be the closest of Sauron's
strongholds to Erebor, but there are also differences -- notably none
of the Nazg锟絣 whose speech is given verbatim has this repetition-in-
triplicate pattern that characterizes the emmisary to Dale and
Erebor.
--
Troels Forchhammer <troelsfo(a)googlewave.com>
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.
It is the theory which decides what can be observed. - Albert
Einstein (1879-1955)
Troels Forchhammer
"Clams Canino" <cc-m...@earthdink.net> spoke these staves:
statement quoted above, since that is entirely correct:
'[Denethor] is not as other men of this time, Pippin, and
whatever be his descent from father to son, by some chance
the blood of Westernesse runs nearly true in him; as it
does in his other son, Faramir, and yet did not in Boromir
whom he loved best.
[LotR V,1 'Minas Tirith']
Gandalf then goes on to say about Denethor
He has long sight. He can perceive, if he bends his will
thither, much of what is passing in the minds of men, even
of those that dwell far off. It is difficult to deceive
him, and dangerous to try.
[ibid.]
The way these things are juxtaposed makes the former into the
explanation of the latter, and so Faramir would share much of the
characteristics that are listed for his father. This _is_ a very real
difference between the brothers, but if the implication is that this
explains all differences between the brothers, then I must also
disagree: Boromir is closer to Denethor's political perspective on
power than is Faramir, and this difference, while hugely important in
the two brothers' response to the One Ring, cannot be traced back to
the purity of their N�men�rean blood.
--
Troels Forchhammer <troelsfo(a)googlewave.com>
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.
Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not
simpler.
- Albert Einstein
Clams Canino
"Troels Forchhammer" <Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns9CE7E730...@130.133.4.11...
> In message <news:j4adnZT-0vEVy7PW...@earthlink.com>
> "Clams Canino" <cc-m...@earthdink.net> spoke these staves:
> >
> > "David Trimboli" <da...@trimboli.name> wrote in message
> > news:4b2e52c4$0$22547
> >
> >> Faramir was different that Boromir in that the blood of N�menor
> >> ran true in him, whereas it did not in Boromir, or even in
> >> Denethor. I believe Gandalf stated this opinion.
> >
> > I must disagree with this.
>
> I hope that you don't disagree with the explicit contents of the
> statement quoted above, since that is entirely correct:
I was dissagreeing the portion of the above quoted statement that claimed
the blood did not run true in Denethor.
That portion of the statement is indeed incorrect.
-W
Troels Forchhammer
<snip>
> I was dissagreeing the portion of the above quoted statement that
> claimed the blood did not run true in Denethor.
>
> That portion of the statement is indeed incorrect.
So it is, my apologies!
Even after reading it for the umpteenth time I completely overlooked
that error and quietly substituted my own recollection of Gandalf's
statement :)
--
Troels Forchhammer <troelsfo(a)googlewave.com>
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own
image when it turns out that God hates all the same people
you do.
- Anne Lamott
Clams Canino
"Troels Forchhammer" <Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid> wrote in message
> In message <news:-Z-dnQvt6aTQArPW...@earthlink.com>
> "Clams Canino" <cc-m...@earthdink.net> spoke these staves:
> >
>
> <snip>
>
> > I was dissagreeing the portion of the above quoted statement that
> > claimed the blood did not run true in Denethor.
> >
> > That portion of the statement is indeed incorrect.
>
> So it is, my apologies!
>
> Even after reading it for the umpteenth time I completely overlooked
> that error and quietly substituted my own recollection of Gandalf's
> statement :)
Apology accepted......... Captain Needar
-W
Derek Broughton
> I always thought the earth from Galadriel's garden that Sam uses for the
> Shire is the Elvish influence "preserved in a tin". So it wouldn't need
> the presence of Galadriel's ring.
Actually, I agree - I just don't think you can argue that the rings must be
powerless because we don't see the "ability to heal the world", because we
_do_ see that quite clearly.
--
derek
David Trimboli
That pretty much sums up almost everything the Valar ever did.
teepee
"Derek Broughton" <de...@pointerstop.ca> wrote
I don't think anybody has claimed he knew at
> the time he interviewed Pippin. I'm saying he figured it out later, and
> while I can't speak for Raven, I don't think he said anything inconsistent
> with that.
Ahwell that was really my point. Why was it concealed from him? It wasn't
felt necessary to conceal it from Boromir, and telling Boromir was the same
as telling Denethor.
> Except that he _was_ killed. You're quite right - Boromir would have told
> his father everything he knew, and nobody would have asked him not to.
> However, with Boromir's death, Denethor didn't _need_ to be told, and much
> as Pippin respected him, he also didn't quite trust him. Gandalf never
> did
> trust him. I don't think anybody tried to conceal anything - but they
> didn't volunteer it either.
That's what I found odd. Not just that Pippin swore loyalty and then
immediately betrayed his oath by withholding vital strategic information
because he didn't trust his new master. But also that he was able to avoid
the subject. A few simple questions would have exposed either the truth or
his unwillingness to reveal it. For example, where was this large group
going? Why were the forces of the enemy chasing them. Why did they go
through Moria?
>I think there was _always_ an assumption on the
> part of Aragorn and Gandalf, that Denethor would have accepted Aragorn as
> the King Returned. In which case that part of the plan would have gone
> off
> identically.
I find it almost unthinkable that Denethor would have reacted to Aragorn in
that fashion. But I may have been contaminated by Peter Jackson on this
point 8-)
>
>> and it's not like he
>> could have taken the ring himself at that point (unlike Boromir.)
>
> Why do think so?
Because the ring was in an unknown place by this time. Denethor would have
known that, and would also presumably have known he couldn't use it, not
being an elf or a magician. Besides, the lust for the One seems to be
related to proximity among mortals.
Glenn Holliday
>> part of Aragorn and Gandalf, that Denethor would have accepted Aragorn as
>> the King Returned. In which case that part of the plan would have gone
>> off
>> identically.
>
> I find it almost unthinkable that Denethor would have reacted to Aragorn in
> that fashion. But I may have been contaminated by Peter Jackson on this
> point 8-)
An excellent question. Token portrays Denethor as
consumed by introspection and broken by hubris, under
Sauron's influence without recognizing or admitting it.
If Aragorn declared himself to Denethor, I think
Denethor would drive himself mad by conflicting desires
and emotions. I think the core of his being would
remain loyal to his Stewardship, and he would
choose to die to prevent himself acting against
the King.
--
Glenn Holliday holl...@acm.org
Weland
> "Derek Broughton" <de...@pointerstop.ca> wrote
>
> I don't think anybody has claimed he knew at
>> the time he interviewed Pippin. I'm saying he figured it out later, and
>> while I can't speak for Raven, I don't think he said anything inconsistent
>> with that.
>
> Ahwell that was really my point. Why was it concealed from him? It wasn't
> felt necessary to conceal it from Boromir, and telling Boromir was the same
> as telling Denethor.
The big difference being that the Council was where Boromir heard of it,
that the journey of the Fellowship showed what a man like Boromir,
closer in temperament to his father than his brother was, would be like
with the knowledge of the Ring, and of course, by the time they arrived
in Minas Tirith, Boromis is dead. Much has changed in the few months
since Boromir went north.
>> Except that he _was_ killed. You're quite right - Boromir would have told
>> his father everything he knew, and nobody would have asked him not to.
>> However, with Boromir's death, Denethor didn't _need_ to be told, and much
>> as Pippin respected him, he also didn't quite trust him. Gandalf never
>> did
>> trust him. I don't think anybody tried to conceal anything - but they
>> didn't volunteer it either.
>
> That's what I found odd. Not just that Pippin swore loyalty and then
> immediately betrayed his oath by withholding vital strategic information
> because he didn't trust his new master.
Not at all. In such situations one does not betray old loyalties in
taking on the new: that is, while completely loyal in the present to the
new master, it doesn't follow that everything one knows and every
loyalty before that point is now open to the new master....that would be
a sign of disloyalty.
But also that he was able to avoid
> the subject. A few simple questions would have exposed either the truth or
> his unwillingness to reveal it. For example, where was this large group
> going? Why were the forces of the enemy chasing them. Why did they go
> through Moria?
Signs that Denethor likely knew more than he let on and didn't need to
pursue such questioning.
>> I think there was _always_ an assumption on the
>> part of Aragorn and Gandalf, that Denethor would have accepted Aragorn as
>> the King Returned. In which case that part of the plan would have gone
>> off
>> identically.
>
> I find it almost unthinkable that Denethor would have reacted to Aragorn in
> that fashion. But I may have been contaminated by Peter Jackson on this
> point 8-)
I think you're right: Denethor would never have just stood down and
accepted Aragorn as king, and I think that is certainly intimated in the
appendices among other places.
Derek Broughton
>
> "Derek Broughton" <de...@pointerstop.ca> wrote
>
> I don't think anybody has claimed he knew at
>> the time he interviewed Pippin. I'm saying he figured it out later, and
>> while I can't speak for Raven, I don't think he said anything
>> inconsistent with that.
>
> Ahwell that was really my point. Why was it concealed from him? It wasn't
> felt necessary to conceal it from Boromir, and telling Boromir was the
> same as telling Denethor.
Yes, but there was never any option of not telling Boromir - unless they
simply told him he couldn't join the Fellowship. That would have been a
tactically poor idea.
>> Except that he _was_ killed. You're quite right - Boromir would have
>> told his father everything he knew, and nobody would have asked him not
>> to. However, with Boromir's death, Denethor didn't _need_ to be told, and
>> much
>> as Pippin respected him, he also didn't quite trust him. Gandalf never
>> did
>> trust him. I don't think anybody tried to conceal anything - but they
>> didn't volunteer it either.
>
> That's what I found odd. Not just that Pippin swore loyalty and then
> immediately betrayed his oath by withholding vital strategic information
> because he didn't trust his new master.
Well, Pippin is really still a child (even if he has reached his age of
majority) and wasn't entirely aware what he was doing by swearing to
Denethor, but he had prior and superceding loyalties.
> But also that he was able to avoid
> the subject. A few simple questions would have exposed either the truth or
> his unwillingness to reveal it.
Certainly. As I say - nobody tried to conceal anything. But why volunteer
the information? It can serve no useful purpose. Surprisingly (and one of
the reasons why Gandalf was so pleased with the way Pippin handled himself
with Denethor) Pippin actually showed some sense and didn't just blab
everything.
> For example, where was this large group
> going? Why were the forces of the enemy chasing them. Why did they go
> through Moria?
None of those questions seem odd. They were coming to Gondor, of course.
Denethor wouldn't have expected them to go anywhere else. Since he
distrusted Wizards, I dare say he thought it very smart of them to try to
avoid the direct route via Isengard.
>>I think there was _always_ an assumption on the
>> part of Aragorn and Gandalf, that Denethor would have accepted Aragorn as
>> the King Returned. In which case that part of the plan would have gone
>> off
>> identically.
>
> I find it almost unthinkable that Denethor would have reacted to Aragorn
> in that fashion. But I may have been contaminated by Peter Jackson on this
> point 8-)
You're completely right - but _Aragorn's_ actions suggest (at least to me)
that he really thought the Steward could be convinced that he was the
rightful King and that the Steward should accept him as such. I imagine
Gandalf would be less ready to think it would be easy, but I can't see how
they thought Aragorn could ever become King without the support of the
Steward (and, in fact, he didn't - fortunately the new Steward was of a
different sort).
>>
>>> and it's not like he
>>> could have taken the ring himself at that point (unlike Boromir.)
>>
>> Why do think so?
>
> Because the ring was in an unknown place by this time.
Ah. I'm not quite sure whether I've misunderstood you or merely disagree
with you :-) I thought you were saying that if everything had gone
according to the plan made in Rivendell, Denethor would never have come
within reach of the Ring, and I disagree. otoh, at "this" time, it's true
that he can't reach the Ring, but it doesn't mean he can't bring attention
to Frodo, which is what Gandalf is now trying to avoid.
As I understand it, the original plan was for the _whole_ fellowship to go
to Gondor (on their way to sending the Ring to the fire). Frodo was having
other ideas well before the enforced dissolution of the Fellowship (and
Boromir's death), but if they had safely arrived in Gondor, I imagine
Boromir and Denethor would have fought over the Ring. If, otoh, Boromir had
succeeded in taking the Ring from Frodo, he would have brought it to Gondor
himself - and there'd still have been a fight over it.
> Denethor would have
> known that, and would also presumably have known he couldn't use it, not
> being an elf or a magician.
But he _could_... Throughout the story, there's an assumption that the Ring
_could_ be used against Sauron. The reason it exerted so little influence
on Bilbo and Frodo (and even Gollum) was because they never tried to use it
for anything large.
--
derek
Troels Forchhammer
desperately for it earlier, so I've re-instated the earlier
conversation for the convenience of readers from RABT -- and there's
a couple of points that have been snipped, that I wish to comment
upon anyway ;-)
In message <news:4b2f...@newsgate.x-privat.org>
"teepee" <nom...@nomail.com> spoke these staves:
>
> "Derek Broughton" <de...@pointerstop.ca> wrote
>>
>> teepee wrote:
>>>
>>> "Derek Broughton" <de...@pointerstop.ca> wrote
>>>>
>>>> In message <news:ivuqv6-...@morgen.pointerstop.ca> Derek
>>>> Broughton <de...@pointerstop.ca> spoke these staves:
>>>>>
>>>>> teepee wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) Why does Denethor not discover the plan for the ring while
>>>>>> questioning Pippin (as he plainly doesn't)? Why did Pippin
>>>>>> withhold all the information relating to that, having just
>>>>>> sworn an oath to obey Denethor?
I think you answer the question yourself -- Denethor does
(apparently) not discover the plan because Pippin withheld that
information. Pippin did so on the explicit behest of Gandalf just
before they were admitted into Denethor's throne room. The newly-
sworn oath to Denethor did not, as Larry points out, void or even
supersede Pippin's pre-existing loyalty to Gandalf (and, by
implication, to Frodo). As to why Gandalf wished this information
withheld, that has to do with the last question you pose.
>>>>>> And what damage would have come from withholding it anyway?
>>>>>
>>>>> I guess there's a missing "not", there. The obvious damage
>>>>> that could have occurred is that Denethor couldn't have been
>>>>> trusted not to reveal what he knew (accidentally, of course)
>>>>> to Sauron.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, Raven's right that Denethor _does_ seem to know, but
>>>> Pippin doesn't know that he knows (and I'm not even sure that
>>>> _at the time_ Denethor knows - he may suspect, but it's only
>>>> when he's shown the spoils of Frodo's capture that he puts 2 &
>>>> 2 together).
>>>
>>> Forgive me but I see no sign of Denethor knowing the plan for or
>>> even the existence of the One until Faramir spills the beans
>>> later on.
>>
>> No need for forgiveness :-) I don't think anybody has claimed he
>> knew at the time he interviewed Pippin. I'm saying he figured it
>> out later, and while I can't speak for Raven, I don't think he
>> said anything inconsistent with that.
>
> Ahwell that was really my point. Why was it concealed from him? It
> wasn't felt necessary to conceal it from Boromir, and telling
> Boromir was the same as telling Denethor.
A number of things happened between Rivendell and Minas Tirith that
changed the situation dramatically.
The first thing was Boromir himself. As can be seen in Gandalf's
comments when he met the Three Hunters in Fangorn he was certainly
aware of the danger to Boromir, and though he redeemed himself in the
end, there is a very direct danger there.
This, however, is not the most important thing that had happened. The
direct reason why Gandalf was wary of Denethor and wanted to wait
before trusting him too much was the revelation following the visit
to Isengard -- the palant�r if Orthanc and Pippin's experiences with
it. In 'The Palant�ri' in UT (part four ch. III) Tolkien writes about
this:
In his talk to Peregrin as they rode on Shadowfax from
Dol Baran (_The Two Towers_ III 11) Gandalf's immediate
object was to give the Hobbit some idea of the history of
the _palant�ri_, so that he might begin to realize the
ancientry, dignity, and power of things that he had
presumed to meddle with. He was not concerned to exhibit
his own processes of discovery and deduction, except in
its last point: to explain how Sauron came to have control
of them, so that they were perilous for _anyone_, however
exalted, to use. But Gandalf's mind was at the same time
earnestly busy with the Stones, considering the bearings
of the revelation at Dol Baran upon many things that he had
observed and pondered: such as the wide knowledge of events
far away possessed by Denethor, and his appearance of
premature old age, first observable when he was not much
above sixty years old, although he belonged to a race and
family that still normally had longer lives than other men.
Undoubtedly Gandalf's haste to reach Minas Tirith, in
addition to the urgency of the time and the imminence of
war, was quickened by his sudden fear that Denethor also
had made use of a _palant�r_, the Anor-stone, and his
desire to judge what effect this had had on him: whether in
the crucial test of desperate war it would not prove that
he (like Saruman) was no longer to be trusted and might
surrender to Mordor. Gandalf's dealings with Denethor on
arrival in Minas Tirith, and in the following days, and
all things that they are reported to have said to one
another, must be viewed in the light of this doubt in
Gandalf's mind.[8]
[_Unfinished Tales_ part four, chapter 3 'The Palant�ri' p.525-6]
[8] Denethor was evidently aware of Gandalf's guesses and
suspicions, and at once both angered and sardonically
amused by them. Note his words to Gandalf at their meeting
in Minas Tirith (_The Return of the King_ V 1): 'I know
already sufficient of these deeds for my own counsel
against the menace of the East,' and especially his mocking
words that followed: 'Yea; for though the Stones be lost,
they say, still the lords of Gondor have keener sight than
lesser men, and many messages come to them.' Quite apart
from the _palant�ri_, Denethor was a man of great mental
powers, and a quick reader of thoughts behind faces and
words, but he may well also have actually seen in the
Anor-stone visions of events in Rohan and Isengard.
[Author's note.] - See further p. 531.
[ibid. p. 533]
Sorry about the extensive quoting, but I believe this answers the
question of why Gandalf would want Pippin to keep silent about the
key points: Frodo's mission and Aragorn.
>>> But the point is that Boromir would certainly of told him and he
>>> was a trusted guest at the coucil of Elrond from whom nothing
>>> was concealed. Unless the coucil knew he was going to get
>>> killed, Elrond and Gandalf were already working on the
>>> assumption that Denethor would know everything sooner or later.
>>> Why then try to conceal it from Denethor?
>>
>> Except that he _was_ killed. You're quite right - Boromir would
>> have told his father everything he knew, and nobody would have
>> asked him not to. However, with Boromir's death, Denethor didn't
>> _need_ to be told, and much as Pippin respected him, he also
>> didn't quite trust him. Gandalf never did trust him. I don't
>> think anybody tried to conceal anything - but they didn't
>> volunteer it either.
>
> That's what I found odd. Not just that Pippin swore loyalty and
> then immediately betrayed his oath by withholding vital strategic
> information because he didn't trust his new master. But also that
> he was able to avoid the subject. A few simple questions would
> have exposed either the truth or his unwillingness to reveal it.
> For example, where was this large group going? Why were the forces
> of the enemy chasing them. Why did they go through Moria?
My guess: despite his eagerness to hear news, Denethor was primarily
interested in hearing about Boromir. This desire blinded him to other
aspects of the story that he ought to have enquired more closely
about -- quite possibly he thought that Pippin was a minor player and
not really privy to the goal of the mission, or perhaps Pippin
phrased it so cleverly that Denethor believed that they were going to
Minas Tirith with the halfling of the dream-poem in order to
understand the poem fully. Finally Denethor might have chosen not to
test Pippin's obviously conflicting loyalties just yet -- time for
that later, when the annoying wizard wasn't around.
Whatever the details, Denethor _did_ fail to ask the questions that
would have either exposed the limits of Pippin's loyalty or told him
about the full plan of the Council.
>>> His help would have been required in any case to draw Sauron out
>>> of Mordor,
>>
>> I'm not sure that's true. I think there was _always_ an
>> assumption on the part of Aragorn and Gandalf, that Denethor
>> would have accepted Aragorn as the King Returned. In which case
>> that part of the plan would have gone off identically.
>
> I find it almost unthinkable that Denethor would have reacted to
> Aragorn in that fashion. But I may have been contaminated by Peter
> Jackson on this point 8-)
I agree that Denethor would never have accepted Aragorn -- it is even
hinted in the appendices that he already hated Aragorn when Aragorn
served his father in the guise of Thorongil precisely because he had
discovered that Thorongil was the heir of Isildur. The question,
however, is not what was really possible, but rather what Gandalf
and/or Aragorn may have believed or hoped. Some of the things Gandalf
say to Denethor after they arrive in Minas Tirith suggests that
Gandalf was hoping to move Denethor to accept his role as a faithful
steward.
>>> and it's not like he could have taken the ring himself at that
>>> point (unlike Boromir.)
>>
>> Why do think so? Even without ever being in proximity to the
>> Ring, Denethor seemed to believe that he should have been offered
>> it, for the defense of Gondor. I think if the Ring had come to
>> him, he would have seized it (or at least tried to - I think
>> civil war would probably have broken out for its control).
>
> Because the ring was in an unknown place by this time. Denethor
> would have known that, and would also presumably have known he
> couldn't use it, not being an elf or a magician. Besides, the lust
> for the One seems to be related to proximity among mortals.
I really don't think proximity has anything to do with it -- or
rather, the important issue is whether the character can believe that
they have a 'real' chance of gaining the One Ring -- Saruman did
think it was possible that he would find the One Ring by observing
Sauron and searching near the Gladden, Boromir thought that he could
seize the Ring from Frodo. Proximity comes into it because it is
usually easier to seize something that you know is close by, not
because there is some mysterius range-effect (some inverse-square
law) of the Ring's effect on anyone.
Denethor would, in the end, _not_ have realized that the Ring was too
strong for him, and wielding it, he would have fallen. This is made
quite plain by Gandalf.
However, had he been told earlier about the course of action chosen
by the Council of Elrond he would have reacted as he did when he was
finally told. He was angry, he considered the plan 'madness' (while
he considered using it only 'perilous'!), but in the end he resigned,
saying 'If I had! If you had! Such words and ifs are vain. It has
gone into the Shadow, and only time will show what doom awaits it and
us.'
However, Gandalf's choice to keep this information from him must be
seen in the light of his doubts as described above.
>>>>>> 2) What proof is there that the Elven rings failed when the
>>>>>> One was destroyed? Is it explicitly stated anywhere?
>>>>>
>>>>> None whatsoever. It was a "best guess" on the part of very
>>>>> wise people. It's almost certain that they _didn't_ fail,
>>>>> outright. They just dwindled, like their owners.
I am sure that they lost their power fairly quickly, and that when
Gandalf said to Aragorn, on the slopes of Mount Mindolluin, that
'though much has been saved, much must now pass away; and the power
of the Three Rings also is ended.' Gandalf was saying exactly what he
meant -- the power of the Three had, at that point, already ended,
and their only powers were in their histoyr and the reverence they
were held in. The failure of all that depended upon the power of the
Master Ring may not have been completely instantaneous, but I believe
that it happened within a rather short time -- days at the most.
--
Troels Forchhammer <troelsfo(a)googlewave.com>
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.
People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom
of thought which they avoid.
- Soren Kierkegaard
teepee
"Troels Forchhammer" <Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid> wrote
> Sorry about the extensive quoting, but I believe this answers the
> question of why Gandalf would want Pippin to keep silent about the
> key points: Frodo's mission and Aragorn.
Yes that is an excellent point I hadn't considered. I would take that as the
definitive answer. Many thanks.
teepee
"Derek Broughton" <de...@pointerstop.ca> wrote
> Ah. I'm not quite sure whether I've misunderstood you or merely disagree
> with you :-) I thought you were saying that if everything had gone
> according to the plan made in Rivendell, Denethor would never have come
> within reach of the Ring, and I disagree. otoh, at "this" time, it's true
> that he can't reach the Ring, but it doesn't mean he can't bring attention
> to Frodo, which is what Gandalf is now trying to avoid.
I'm suggesting that at the point the conversation occured the ring had gone
beyond Denethor's reach. He could have alerted Sauron to it, true, but that
would be pointless. So telling him was safe. But I hadn't considered the
Palantir point.
>> Denethor would have
>> known that, and would also presumably have known he couldn't use it, not
>> being an elf or a magician.
>
> But he _could_... Throughout the story, there's an assumption that the
> Ring
> _could_ be used against Sauron.
I have to disagree there. Elrond said explicitly only those with a great
native power could use it. That pretty much means a wizard or an elf in the
context. Would Aragorn or Denthor qualify?
Chris Hoelscher
"teepee" <nom...@nomail.com> wrote in message
news:4b2fefde$1...@newsgate.x-privat.org...
> I have to disagree there. Elrond said explicitly only those with a great
> native power could use it. That pretty much means a wizard or an elf in
> the context. Would Aragorn or Denthor qualify?
>
Aragorn was able to wrench the Palantir to his own uses (away from
domination of Sauron) - i would guess that would qualify him .....
Glenn Holliday
> I have to disagree there. Elrond said explicitly only those with a great
> native power could use it. That pretty much means a wizard or an elf in the
> context. Would Aragorn or Denthor qualify?
It is clear Sauron thought Aragorn could. Based on
the scenes with Aragorn and the Palantir, and Aragorn
on the Paths of the Dead, I believe Sauron was correct.
As the Rightful King, Aragorn had a nature comparable
in kind (maybe not degree) to others of the Wise.
Denethor was the Steward of the Rightful King. He
used the Palantir by right, but failed to use it
successfully - and he did not recognize his failure.
I believe Denethor could have claimed the Ring and
would have attempted to use it, but Sauron would have
overpowered that attempt. Denethor would not have
known what hit him.
--
Glenn Holliday holl...@acm.org
Öjevind Lång
news:hgpegb$u16$1...@aioe.org...
I agree with you, but later on, years after LotR was published, Tolkien
apparently changed his mind and declared that the only one on the good side
who could have tamed the Ring and become a Ring-lord was Gandalf.
�jevind
teepee
"�jevind L�ng" <ojevin...@bredband.net> wrote
> I agree with you, but later on, years after LotR was published, Tolkien
> apparently changed his mind and declared that the only one on the good
> side who could have tamed the Ring and become a Ring-lord was Gandalf.
Elrond and Galadriel certainly thought they could. Presumably Glorfindel as
well.
Öjevind Lång
news:4b30...@newsgate.x-privat.org...
Many of Tolkien's later statements about his work were questionable. He
revised the story, so to speak, while leaving the books in their original
shape (thank God).
�jevind
Derek Broughton
When Troels speaks, it's usually best to consider it a definitive answer :-)
And he's not really sorry about the extensive quoting - but neither are the
rest of us. Where most of us discuss mostly from memory, and can
occasionally drag up a proper citation, Troels invariably can find the
precise passage to put an argument to rest.
And sorry for losing the RABT cross-post, Troels, it was probably my fault
again...
--
derek
Derek Broughton
>
> "Derek Broughton" <de...@pointerstop.ca> wrote
>
>> Ah. I'm not quite sure whether I've misunderstood you or merely disagree
>> with you :-) I thought you were saying that if everything had gone
>> according to the plan made in Rivendell, Denethor would never have come
>> within reach of the Ring, and I disagree. otoh, at "this" time, it's
>> true that he can't reach the Ring, but it doesn't mean he can't bring
>> attention to Frodo, which is what Gandalf is now trying to avoid.
>
> I'm suggesting that at the point the conversation occured the ring had
> gone beyond Denethor's reach. He could have alerted Sauron to it, true,
> but that would be pointless. So telling him was safe. But I hadn't
> considered the Palantir point.
Well, even Gandalf didn't believe that Denethor would have _told_ Sauron, or
intentionally alerted him, but it would have been possible for Denethor to
unintentionally reveal it, while using the Palantir.
>
>>> Denethor would have
>>> known that, and would also presumably have known he couldn't use it, not
>>> being an elf or a magician.
>>
>> But he _could_... Throughout the story, there's an assumption that the
>> Ring _could_ be used against Sauron.
>
> I have to disagree there. Elrond said explicitly only those with a great
> native power could use it. That pretty much means a wizard or an elf in
> the context. Would Aragorn or Denthor qualify?
"native" power. I think that better describes the Dunedain than a common
Elf. Gandalf surely could have used it (as could have Galadriel or Elrond)
but probably not most Elves. Aragorn _certainly_ could have used it, and I
believe Denethor could too (as somebody quoted earlier - the blood of the
Numenoreans [ie, Elrond's kin] ran almost true in him)
--
derek
Weland
If Aragorn declared himself to Denethor, the latter would probably not
have stood down, just as his forebears had refused to recognize the
overlordship of the North. He would have demanded absolute proof.
Weland
> "Derek Broughton" <de...@pointerstop.ca> wrote
>
>> Ah. I'm not quite sure whether I've misunderstood you or merely disagree
>> with you :-) I thought you were saying that if everything had gone
>> according to the plan made in Rivendell, Denethor would never have come
>> within reach of the Ring, and I disagree. otoh, at "this" time, it's true
>> that he can't reach the Ring, but it doesn't mean he can't bring attention
>> to Frodo, which is what Gandalf is now trying to avoid.
>
> I'm suggesting that at the point the conversation occured the ring had gone
> beyond Denethor's reach. He could have alerted Sauron to it, true, but that
> would be pointless. So telling him was safe. But I hadn't considered the
> Palantir point.
I disagree. Even if beyond Denethor's reach, it would not have been
pointless at that point for Sauron to be informed, whether explicitly by
Denethor or picking it out of Denethor's mind via the palantiri. It
would indeed have been disastrous.
>
>>> Denethor would have
>>> known that, and would also presumably have known he couldn't use it, not
>>> being an elf or a magician.
>> But he _could_... Throughout the story, there's an assumption that the
>> Ring
>> _could_ be used against Sauron.
>
> I have to disagree there. Elrond said explicitly only those with a great
> native power could use it. That pretty much means a wizard or an elf in the
> context. Would Aragorn or Denthor qualify?
Maybe. Isildur certainly tried, but then the Ring was fresh off
Sauron's hand. More importantly the entire stratagem depended on Sauron
believing that someone would try and master the Ring and so challenge
him and perhaps win...hence his precipitous attacks before he was as
fully prepared as he wished.
Stan Brown
Well, yes, but so did Boromir and so did Gollum. Remember that the
Ring traps people by giving them an exaggerated notion of their own
importance.
I'm not saying Elrond and Galadriel and Glorfindel necessarily
couldn't, just that a person's own assessment of his or her abilities
to master the Ring must be taken with a large pinch of salt.
--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com
Tolkien FAQs: http://Tolkien.slimy.com (Steuard Jensen's site)
Tolkien letters FAQ:
http://mysite.verizon.net/aznirb/mtr/lettersfaq.html
FAQ of the Rings: http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/ringfaq.htm
Encyclopedia of Arda: http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/default.htm
more FAQs: http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/faqget.htm
Stan Brown
<ojevin...@bredband.net>:
> years after LotR was published, Tolkien apparently changed his mind
> and declared that the only one on the good side who could have
> tamed the Ring and become a Ring-lord was Gandalf.
Where was that passage, please? I'm guessing you refer to /Letters/,
but the only relevant passage I know is this one from number 246:
"self to self. ... It would be a delicate balance." But Tolkien goes
on to say that even that victory would have been a defeat: "If
Gandalf proved the victor, the result would have been for Sauron the
same as the destruction of the Ring. ... But the Ring ... would have
been the master in the end."
But that is referring to a face-to-face confrontation. More from the
same Letter: "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."
That passage, however, says nothing about taking the Ring and
building up an independent force, not confronting Sauron till after
one had mastered the Ring. True, that mastery would be an illusion,
because the Ring would win in the end. But Sauron would still lose.
Stan Brown
> If Aragorn declared himself to Denethor, the latter would probably
> not have stood down, just as his forebears had refused to recognize
> the overlordship of the North. He would have demanded absolute
> proof.
I don't think you go far enough. He might have demanded proof as a
delaying tactic, but even if he were convinced of Aragorn's identity
I don't believe he would have just turned the Kingdom over to him.
As you suggest, Gondor had already made the decision to prefer rule
by the Stewards over rule by "foreign" kings from the north.
See Appendix A(iv), "Gondor and the Heirs of An�rion".
Troels Forchhammer
�jevind L�ng <ojevin...@bredband.net> spoke these staves:
I am very sorry to say so, but I do think you are distorting the
facts rather a lot here.
Obviously not _everything_ Tolkien wrote later was in full
accordance with the story -- in some cases he revised the story, but
in many cases (in particular when we're talking about the letters)
it seems rather to have been a case of Tolkien misremembering
details from his own book. Overall, however, these cases are few and
far between (though, if listed it will still make a fairly long
list), and in the vast majority of cases, such as the discussion of
_how_ the various characters might have used the One Ring, Tolkien's
later writings support the published text with additional details
that one could never have guessed from reading the text itself. It
is, however, simply untrue that _any_ statement in the letters is
questionable -- they are all perfectly true representations of
Tolkien's opinion when he wrote them. A small minority of them are
inconsistent with the book, and it is quite likely that there is a
greater fraction that contain details that Tolkien had not
considered when writing the book, but which are fully consistent
with the book and are better (i.e. having a greater likelihood of
being correct) representations of (the direction of) Tolkien's
intentions when writing the book than any interpretation by some
other reader. The rest of the statements (within a fairly large
margin this fraction is, in my estimate, roughly the same as the
previous fraction) Tolkien is correctly describing his intention
when actually writing the book.
In the present case, the discussion of how various characters would
have used the Ring in a confrontation with Sauron, the information
comes from letter #246, a draft letter to a Mrs Eileen Elgar written
in September 1963. The lettter has been quoted here in parts and in
whole many times, and it can be read in full in this post:
<http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.books.tolkien/msg/324eda9176e604e7>
<http://preview.tinyurl.com/4o9asp>
Here Tolkien discusses _how_ different characters could have used
the Master Ring, and he explains that only Gandalf might have stood
a chance in a direct confrontation with Sauron, 'alone, unaided,
self to self', but that this was not contemplated by any other.
In any case Elrond or Galadriel would have proceeded in the
policy now adopted by Sauron: they would have built up an
empire with great and absolutely subservient generals and
armies and engines of war, until they could challenge
Sauron and destroy him by force.
Prior to this discussion, Tolkien states that no mortal, not even
Aragorn, would have stood a chance 'in [Sauron's] actual presence'.
Unfortunately Tolkien never gets around to discuss the situation of
Aragorn using the Ring as described above for Elrond and Galadriel,
but this was very clearly scenario that they decided to emulate as
they 'attacked' Mordor after the victory on the Pelennor, and we
must assume that Aragorn at least had the power to have been a
considerable obstacle to Sauron if he had used the One Ring _in this
way_ since Tolkien seems open to the possibility that Galadriel,
Elrond or C�rdan might have actually ultimately defeated Sauron by
using the One Ring like this.
I think it is highly unlikely that Denethor could have done the
same, but we see how the desire for the power of the Ring causes
visions of grandeur in other characters, in Denethor's son, Boromir,
and even in the lowly Gollum and Samwise, who would _definitely_ not
have the personal power to achieve the empire- and army-building
necessary to challenge Sauron, so I believe that Gandalf was right
in his belief that Denethor eventually would attempt to use the Ring
if it had come within his reach (Gandalf didn't even trust himself
in this), but I believe that Denethor would have failed -- he would
not have set himself up as a new Ring-lord, but instead he would
have been defeated by Sauron in the final test: quite possibly
Denethor would have been lured to a personal confrontation, 'alone,
unaided, self to self' with Sauron, just as King E�rnur was lured to
a personal confrontation with the Witch-king (we don't even know if
he even got to face the Witch-king, though I think it likely that he
did). Denethor, in any case, clearly believed himself a better
guardian of the Ring than Frodo or Gandalf.
--
Troels Forchhammer <troelsfo(a)googlewave.com>
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.
As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they
are not certain, as far as they are certain, they do not
refer to reality.
- Albert Einstein
Troels Forchhammer
>>
>> "Troels Forchhammer" <Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid> wrote
>>>
>>> Sorry about the extensive quoting, but I believe this answers
>>> the question of why Gandalf would want Pippin to keep silent
>>> about the key points: Frodo's mission and Aragorn.
>>
>> Yes that is an excellent point I hadn't considered. I would take
>> that as the definitive answer. Many thanks.
>
> When Troels speaks, it's usually best to consider it a definitive
> answer :-)
I'd really rather you didn't!
I believe I've said so before, but I don't mind saying it again: I do
enjoy having my opinion challenged by intelligent counter-arguments,
and though I may, in the individual discussion, seem to have my
opinions set in stone and willing to go on discussing the details
until I've beat the bush to wood-pulp, I _do_ learn -- it is just
that my opinion tend to change over a longer time-scale than the time
a normal thread survives here . . .
Another point is that I don't necessarily discuss in order to achieve
consensus or agreement -- I often discuss in order to learn both from
fresh perspectives and from being forced to express my thoughts,
forced to attempt to achieve the clarity necessary to convey my
position to others (it should be obvious to all that while I may
strive for clarity, I am not much concerned about brevity ;-)
So, please -- please, please -- challenge my views!
> And he's not really sorry about the extensive quoting - but
> neither are the rest of us.
Well -- certainly not sorry enough to refrain from it :-)
Here I had better stop lest the praise turns my head -- but thank you
anyway ;-)
--
Troels Forchhammer <troelsfo(a)googlewave.com>
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.
And he that breaks a thing to find out what it is has left
the path of wisdom.
- Gandalf, /The Fellowship of the Ring/ (J.R.R. Tolkien)
teepee
"Derek Broughton" <de...@pointerstop.ca> wrote
> "native" power. I think that better describes the Dunedain than a common
> Elf. Gandalf surely could have used it (as could have Galadriel or
> Elrond)
> but probably not most Elves. Aragorn _certainly_ could have used it, and
> I
> believe Denethor could too (as somebody quoted earlier - the blood of the
> Numenoreans [ie, Elrond's kin] ran almost true in him)
Presumably the blood ran true in Isildur as well, but it didn't do him much
good. It just made him invisible.
teepee
"Stan Brown" <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote
> Well, yes, but so did Boromir and so did Gollum. Remember that the
> Ring traps people by giving them an exaggerated notion of their own
> importance.
I had an impression, and I can offer no textual specific backup to this,
that there is significance to the fact that when a mortal puts on a ring of
power he disappears from sight, drawn into the invisible realm, where an
immortal does not. This I take to mean that the immortal has a simultaneous
presence in that realm of power already - "the other side" I believe from
memory Gandalf called it in relation to Glorfindel. It was this kind of
power that I felt Elrond referred to when he said only beings of power could
wield the ring. I took from this that no mortal could master its power, no
matter their status.
This may well be wrong of course. Many here seem to think Aragorn could have
mastered the ring. Gandalf suggested that he thought that Sauron thought he
might, which is somewhat roundabout, but we don't know for sure if Sauron or
Gandalf actually did think that themselves.
Troels Forchhammer
>>
>> "native" power. I think that better describes the Dunedain than
>> a common Elf. Gandalf surely could have used it (as could have
>> Galadriel or Elrond) but probably not most Elves. Aragorn
>> _certainly_ could have used it, and I believe Denethor could too
I think that much depends upon what we mean by 'using' the Master
Ring. Frodo certainly 'used' it -- he became invisble when he put it
on, and it enhanced his perception enough for him to perceive not
only Galadriel's Ring, but also her secret desire for the One, but he
couldn't make it do any magic tricks as such.
I don't think that Aragorn could have used the Ring to make magic
tricks either -- he wouldn't be able to e.g. control the Three or
turn their keepers into slaves of his will, but he could have used it
to enhance his abilities as a military commander and empire-builder,
making his generals and soldiers alike fanatically loyal and so on.
Denethor probably could have used it in the same way, but I don't
believe that Denethor stood any chance of successfully vanquishing
Sauron -- something that I think Aragorn might have had a small
chance of actually pulling off.
>> (as somebody quoted earlier - the blood of the Numenoreans [ie,
>> Elrond's kin] ran almost true in him)
I am very nearly completely certain that the Stewards did _not_ have
any royal blood -- that they weren't counted to 'the race of
L�thien'. The reference, IMO, is to the mingling of the blood of
N�men�r� with the blood of lesser Men, Men of the Twilight, as
Faramir puts it, with Faramir and Denethor having nearly pure
N�men�rean, but 100% purely Mannish, blood.
> Presumably the blood ran true in Isildur as well, but it didn't do
> him much good. It just made him invisible.
Isildur had the One Ring for nearly a year, and he knew what he had,
but, as you say, all it did for him at the Gladden Fields was to make
him invisible. According to a late essay (published in UT) he had
tried hard to force the Ring to his mind, but had given up and
planned to hand the Master Ring over to the Keepers of the Three
(most likely to Elrond since he was heading for Rivendell).
--
Troels Forchhammer <troelsfo(a)googlewave.com>
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own
image when it turns out that God hates all the same people
you do.
- Anne Lamott
Troels Forchhammer
>>
>> Well, yes, but so did Boromir and so did Gollum. Remember that
>> the Ring traps people by giving them an exaggerated notion of
>> their own importance.
>
> I had an impression, and I can offer no textual specific backup to
> this, that there is significance to the fact that when a mortal
> puts on a ring of power he disappears from sight, drawn into the
> invisible realm, where an immortal does not.
There is no textual evidence suggesting that an Elf, or even an
Istar, wouldn't become invisible if they were to put the Master Ring
on their finger.
The Three Rings did _not_ confer invisibility, and thus Elrond,
Galadriel and Gandalf are still visible when wearing their Rings,
but it is unknown what would happen should any of them try on the
One -- or even one of the Nine or the Seven.
Tom Bombadil's lack of reaction to the One Ring is treated as
something very special at the Council -- surely Erestor wouldn't
have been quite so impressed with Tom's performance if Elves didn't
become invisble when wearing the One?
> This I take to mean that the immortal has a simultaneous presence
> in that realm of power already - "the other side" I believe from
> memory Gandalf called it in relation to Glorfindel.
Two points.
1: Gandalf's words refer only to the Caliquendi, the Elves who had
lived in Valinor.
2: I am _not_ convinced that this 'other side' is the same as the
wraith-world. There seems to me to be too many inconsistencies for
these to be equivalent.
> It was this kind of power that I felt Elrond referred to when he
> said only beings of power could wield the ring. I took from this
> that no mortal could master its power, no matter their status.
I believe Elrond says that the Ring gives its wearer power according
to his stature -- or something like that. That it enhances what is
already there, so to speak. This means that the more powerful a
character is _before_ wielding the Ring, the more power they would
gain by wielding it.
I also think that Gandalf is quite specific in stating that Sauron
_feared_ Aragorn as a Ringlord -- feared what Aragorn might achieve
by wielding the One (searching) Oh, the statement I was thinking of
was by Legolas:
In that hour I looked on Aragorn and thought how great and
terrible a Lord he might have become in the strength of his
will, had he taken the Ring to himself. Not for naught does
Mordor fear him.
[LotR V,9 'The Last Debate']
I do think, however, that Gandalf pretty much confirms that Sauron
would fear Aragorn as a Ringlord
And therefore he is now in great doubt. For if we have
found this thing, there are some among us with strength
enough to wield it. That too he knows. For do I not guess
rightly, Aragorn, that you have shown yourself to him in
the Stone of Orthanc?
[ibid.]
Gandalf states that there are 'some' among the commanders that, in
_Gandalf's_ opinion did have the strength to wield the One Ring, and
he states his belief that Sauron knows that this is so because
Aragorn has shown himself to Sauron.
> This may well be wrong of course. Many here seem to think Aragorn
> could have mastered the ring. Gandalf suggested that he thought
> that Sauron thought he might, which is somewhat roundabout, but we
> don't know for sure if Sauron or Gandalf actually did think that
> themselves.
I think it is very important to be clear about what level of
'wielding' and 'using' we're discussing. As I've discussed elsewhere
in this thread, nobody thought Aragorn could put on the one and
stride into Mordor and cast down Sauron -- Aragorn would be
dangerous if he wielded the Ring, withdrew behind safe walls and
build up a military strength to vanquish Sauron's -- in such an
endeavour Aragorn would be helped by the One Ring, but only Gandalf
would stand any chance of actually _mastering_ the One Ring, making
it entirely their own, forcing it completely to their mind and
wresting the Ring's allegiance from Sauron. See further in the
letter I linked to in another message.
--
Troels Forchhammer <troelsfo(a)googlewave.com>
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.
Taking fun
as simply fun
and earnestness
in
earnest
shows how thouroughly
thou none
of the two
discernest.
- Piet Hein, /The Eternal Twins/
Glenn Holliday
> Isildur had the One Ring for nearly a year, and he knew what he had,
> but, as you say, all it did for him at the Gladden Fields was to make
> him invisible. According to a late essay (published in UT) he had
> tried hard to force the Ring to his mind, but had given up and
> planned to hand the Master Ring over to the Keepers of the Three
> (most likely to Elrond since he was heading for Rivendell).
That would have been an interesting scene had
he made it to Rivendell. I have an image of Isildur
with good intent, but the Ring twisting his behavior
as it did Bilbo's and Frodo's when it came time to give
up the Ring.
Since Isildur had consciously tried to claim the Ring,
he might not have fared as well as Bilbo did. He might
have ended up attacking his friend Elrond, with bad
results for all.
--
Glenn Holliday holl...@acm.org
Öjevind Lång
news:Xns9CE9E49A...@130.133.4.11...
[snip]
> Prior to this discussion, Tolkien states that no mortal, not even
> Aragorn, would have stood a chance 'in [Sauron's] actual presence'.
> Unfortunately Tolkien never gets around to discuss the situation of
> Aragorn using the Ring as described above for Elrond and Galadriel,
> but this was very clearly scenario that they decided to emulate as
> they 'attacked' Mordor after the victory on the Pelennor, and we
> must assume that Aragorn at least had the power to have been a
> considerable obstacle to Sauron if he had used the One Ring _in this
> way_ since Tolkien seems open to the possibility that Galadriel,
> Elrond or C�rdan might have actually ultimately defeated Sauron by
> using the One Ring like this.
With all due respect, I think this is quibbling. In the book, we are told
that several people, including Aragorn, could have tamed the Ring and used
it to become a Dark Lord/Lady. That would inevitably have entailed
confronting Sauron. It was not just a matter of Aragorn being an "obstacle"
to Sauron. And when Tolkien says that no mortal could have stood a chance in
Sauron's actual presence, that is a prime example of what I was referring to
when I said that many eyars after having written the book, Tolkien changed
his mind about variuot things. I mean, how could Aragorn become a Dark Lord
without facing down Sauron? Tolkien's self-contradictions may indeed be due
to the circumstance that he, as you suggest, didn't remember exactly what he
had written in the book; after all, there are inadvertencies in the book
itself which are rather clearly due to Tolkien being forgetful. The name
"Moria" above the western entrance to Khazad-d�m, for example.
�jevind
Öjevind Lång
"Stan Brown" <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> skrev i meddelandet
news:MPG.259acbe87...@news.individual.net...
> Tue, 22 Dec 2009 07:38:30 +0100 from �jevind L�ng
> <ojevin...@bredband.net>:
>> years after LotR was published, Tolkien apparently changed his mind
>> and declared that the only one on the good side who could have
>> tamed the Ring and become a Ring-lord was Gandalf.
>
> Where was that passage, please? I'm guessing you refer to /Letters/,
> but the only relevant passage I know is this one from number 246:
>
> "self to self. ... It would be a delicate balance." But Tolkien goes
> on to say that even that victory would have been a defeat: "If
> Gandalf proved the victor, the result would have been for Sauron the
> same as the destruction of the Ring. ... But the Ring ... would have
> been the master in the end."
>
> But that is referring to a face-to-face confrontation. More from the
> same Letter: "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."
>
> That passage, however, says nothing about taking the Ring and
> building up an independent force, not confronting Sauron till after
> one had mastered the Ring. True, that mastery would be an illusion,
> because the Ring would win in the end. But Sauron would still lose.
Anyone who put on the Ring became visible to Sauron. That is to say, he
confronted him. There was no way anyone could have built up an independent
force while learning to master the Ring, because learning to master the Ring
inevitably entailed putting it on.
�jevind
Weland
> Tue, 22 Dec 2009 10:46:34 -0600 from Weland <gi...@poetic.com>:
>> If Aragorn declared himself to Denethor, the latter would probably
>> not have stood down, just as his forebears had refused to recognize
>> the overlordship of the North. He would have demanded absolute
>> proof.
>
> I don't think you go far enough. He might have demanded proof as a
> delaying tactic, but even if he were convinced of Aragorn's identity
> I don't believe he would have just turned the Kingdom over to him.
> As you suggest, Gondor had already made the decision to prefer rule
> by the Stewards over rule by "foreign" kings from the north.
>
> See Appendix A(iv), "Gondor and the Heirs of An�rion".
>
Thanks, I agree. I didn't go far enough at all.
teepee
"Troels Forchhammer" <Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid> wrote
>> I had an impression, and I can offer no textual specific backup to
>> this, that there is significance to the fact that when a mortal
>> puts on a ring of power he disappears from sight, drawn into the
>> invisible realm, where an immortal does not.
>
> There is no textual evidence suggesting that an Elf, or even an
> Istar, wouldn't become invisible if they were to put the Master Ring
> on their finger.
Well Sauron apparently didn't become invisible wearing the One, for what
that's worth, but other than that, you're correct about the evidence point.
But it was my impression (and I think there is textual support for the
proposition) that the unnatural immortality conferred upon a human wielding
a ring of power was linked to their fading out of one realm and into
another. In that context (as I remember it, IDHTBIFOM) when Frodo was fading
into that realm due to the Nazgul knife, he could see Glorfindel as he was
on the other side, and that suggested to me it was the same realm. And since
such beings of power are already in that realm, it seems reasonable they
wouldn't fade into it if they put on the master ring.
Derek Broughton
> In message <news:cml507-...@morgen.pointerstop.ca> Derek
> Broughton <de...@pointerstop.ca> spoke these staves:
>>
>> When Troels speaks, it's usually best to consider it a definitive
>> answer :-)
>
> I'd really rather you didn't!
>
Sorry. I really should have said, "when Troels _cites_". We don't always
agree on your conclusions - though you usually convince me - but your
sources are always impeccable!
--
derek
Derek Broughton
>
> "Troels Forchhammer" <Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid> wrote
>
>> There is no textual evidence suggesting that an Elf, or even an
>> Istar, wouldn't become invisible if they were to put the Master Ring
>> on their finger.
>
> Well Sauron apparently didn't become invisible wearing the One, for what
> that's worth, but other than that, you're correct about the evidence
> point.
I think Sauron has to be considered quite separately from everyone else. He
is, quite literally, a self-made man (or at least "creature"). Since any
body he has is a creation of his own power, I don't know that we can
extrapolate from any other known Ring-wielders. otoh, I don't know that we
have any evidence that he _didn't_ become invisible, either. Perhaps he
didn't generally wear the Ring, and perhaps when he did, he wore clothes to
give shape to his invisibility, just as the Wraiths did.
> But it was my impression (and I think there is textual support for
> the proposition) that the unnatural immortality conferred upon a human
> wielding a ring of power was linked to their fading out of one realm and
> into another. In that context (as I remember it, IDHTBIFOM) when Frodo was
> fading into that realm due to the Nazgul knife, he could see Glorfindel as
> he was on the other side, and that suggested to me it was the same realm.
> And since such beings of power are already in that realm, it seems
> reasonable they wouldn't fade into it if they put on the master ring.
I agree with that, but I'm pretty sure not everyone here will.
--
derek
Troels Forchhammer
> "Troels Forchhammer" <Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid> wrote
>>
<snip>
>> There is no textual evidence suggesting that an Elf, or even an
>> Istar, wouldn't become invisible if they were to put the Master
>> Ring on their finger.
>
> Well Sauron apparently didn't become invisible wearing the One,
> for what that's worth, but other than that, you're correct about
> the evidence point.
I agree entirely with Derek that Sauron is a special case -- not only
is he an Ainu, but he is also the designer of all the Rings, the
creator of the One Ring and the direct origin of the Rings' power of
invisibility.
I was, however, careful not to say anything about Maiar in general --
I speak of the Istari, the Wizards, who had become _incarnate_ as a
part of their mission, and thus they suffered from the weaknesses of
their bodies in ways that not even Sauron did (even though he had
become unable to assume a fair shape, and was impotent without a
physical body to work through).
The only 'real' Maiar we see handling the Ring are Sauron, whose role
was very special with respect to the Ring and who had become bound to
his body, and possibly Tom Bombadil (it is an argued point whether he
was a Maia at all) for whom Tolkien provided a different explanation
of the Ring's lack of power of any kind over him.
One possibility is that staying visible while wearing the Ring is
only possible if you have truly _mastered_ the Ring (not 'just'
wielding it in the way that was imagined for Aragorn or Galadriel,
but this is pure speculation on my part.
> But it was my impression (and I think there is textual support for
> the proposition) that the unnatural immortality conferred upon a
> human wielding a ring of power was linked to their fading out of
> one realm and into another.
No! I have to reject that. The ability to prolong the life of a human
owner is, IMO, related specifically of the primary power of all the
Rings: to preserve, to stay the decay of Arda Marred (i.e. in Middle-
earth) -- to prevent change (not just decay, but also necessary
change, evolution). This is seen also in the phrases Tolkien uses to
describe the effect on mortals; e.g. in the descriptions of Bilbo as
'well-preserved' though 'unchanged' would have been more true. This
phrasing relates directly to what Tolkien says about the powers of
_all_ the Rings of Power, including the Three.
> In that context (as I remember it, IDHTBIFOM) when Frodo was fading
> into that realm due to the Nazgul knife, he could see Glorfindel as
> he was on the other side, and that suggested to me it was the same
> realm.
I'm not sure I can come up with a scenario that will satisfy even
myself, but I nevertheless have to reject this interpretation as too
inconsistent for me to accept it.
The wraith-world -- the world into which material items are drawn
when wearing one of the seventeen Rings of Power to which Sauron gave
this power -- is still a _material_ world. The Nazg�l are _not_ dead,
and material items that are drawn into this world are not changed in
any way, _except_ with respect to their interaction with light. They
retain their shape, their weight, the tangible qualities etc. etc.
On the other hand, the quality referred to when Glorfindel appears as
a shining figure is certainly a spiritual quality. This is seen also
later with respect to Frodo -- both when Gandalf predicts that he may
become like a glass filled with light for eyes to see that can, and
when Sam later sees that light. Since is a quality that belongs to
'the other side', then this other side must be of a spiritual nature,
and therefore cannot be the same as the Unseen, the wraith-world.
This is, however, about as far as I can get. I suspect that there is
a relation between the different worlds, so that one aspect of the
Unseen is to make more visible the qualities of the spiritual world,
but this is no more than speculation -- an attempt to bridge the
remaining gap -- but it explains both why Frodo, while in the wraith-
world, could see Glorfindel as he would appear in the spirit-world,
and also why Sam could later see the spiritual light shining through
Frodo's body, which had long been exposed to the wraith-world.
--
Troels Forchhammer <troelsfo(a)googlewave.com>
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.
The truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head.
- /Hogfather/ (Terry Pratchett)
Troels Forchhammer
<ojevin...@bredband.net> spoke these staves:
> "Troels Forchhammer" <Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid> skrev i
> meddelandet news:Xns9CE9E49A...@130.133.4.11...
>>
>> Aragorn, would have stood a chance 'in [Sauron's] actual
>> presence'. Unfortunately Tolkien never gets around to discuss the
>> situation of Aragorn using the Ring as described above for Elrond
>> and Galadriel, but this was very clearly scenario that they
>> decided to emulate as they 'attacked' Mordor after the victory on
>> the Pelennor, and we must assume that Aragorn at least had the
>> power to have been a considerable obstacle to Sauron if he had
>> used the One Ring _in this way_ since Tolkien seems open to the
>> ultimately defeated Sauron by using the One Ring like this.
>
> With all due respect, I think this is quibbling.
Well, we agree on that at least ;-) However, I don't mind a bit of
quibbling at times.
> In the book, we are told that several people, including Aragorn,
> could have tamed the Ring and used it to become a Dark Lord/Lady.
I don't agree with your use of 'tamed'. They could have 'wielded',
but the book is quite clear on the point that there is a significant
difference between 'wielding' the Ring and 'mastering' it. The book
clearly says that Aragorn could have wielded the One Ring, and it
suggests that he might even have overthrown Sauron wielding the Ring
(I think the implication is a military campaign and a military
victory over Sauron, not a direct confrontation of Sauron), but I am
not sure that it suggests that Aragorn could have truly _mastered_
the Ring.
> That would inevitably have entailed confronting Sauron.
Certainly not directly, 'alone, unaided, self-to-self'! Ultimately
Sauron would be defeated as he were at the end of the Second Age, but
only after all his military strength had been slaughtered and only
with the help of an entire army to stand between Sauron and Aragorn
(or whoever would be wielding the One). This is very clearly the
impression I get from the book.
> It was not just a matter of Aragorn being an "obstacle" to Sauron.
I very clearly said that Tolkien never discussed the case of Aragorn
pursuing a military campaign with the Ring, so the phrasing 'at least
[...] a considerable obstacle' was obviously my own interpretation.
If you wish to strengthen that, then by all means -- I firmly believe
that Aragorn could have overthrown Sauron given the right
circumstances (plenty of time, the right strategy, the right
underlings and so on, and so forth), but I wanted to speak as broadly
as possible('at least', not 'at most').
> And when Tolkien says that no mortal could have stood a chance in
> Sauron's actual presence, that is a prime example of what I was
> referring to when I said that many eyars after having written the
> book, Tolkien changed his mind about variuot things.
I disagree. I think that this was _precisely_ what Tolkien had in
mind when writing the book -- or rather, I think this is what he
would have arrived at if he had, at that point, considered in details
what strategy Aragorn should have pursued if he were to have a chance
of supplanting Sauron as the dark Ringlord.
> I mean, how could Aragorn become a Dark Lord without facing down
> Sauron?
When he has an entire army that has just ground Sauron's armies into
the ground, and with both Sauron and Denethor exemplifying the
strategy?
The book even has Denethor explain it to Pippin:
Nay, not yet, Master Peregrin! He will not come save only
to triumph over me when all is won. He uses others as his
weapons. So do all great lords, if they are wise, Master
Halfling. Or why should I sit here in my tower and think,
and watch, and wait, spending even my sons?
[LotR V,4 'The Siege of Gondor']
I'd say that Tolkien is very careful to explain exactly how.
> Tolkien's self-contradictions may indeed be due to the
> circumstance that he, as you suggest, didn't remember exactly what
> he had written in the book; after all, there are inadvertencies in
> the book itself which are rather clearly due to Tolkien being
> forgetful. The name "Moria" above the western entrance to
> Khazad-d锟絤, for example.
Indeed. And you will get no argument from me that this happens --
rather the opposite.
My point is merely that it is, overall, rather rare even in Tolkien's
letters that he makes this kind of 'gaffes', and I disagree with you
that this is one of these cases. The more I study it, the more it
seems to me clear that the explanation of this question given in
letter #246 is precisely the answer Tolkien would have given at the
time he was writing LotR (though I am not sure that he did consider
it in this detail at that time).
Another point that I should have made is that Tolkien also a few
times comes up with two different explanations of the same thing,
both of which are entirely consistent with the book, and both of
which present a very plausible representation of the direction of
Tolkien's intention[*] at the time of composition, but which are,
unfortunately, mutually exclusive. However, I think this situation,
in Tolkien's letters and various post-LotR essays about LotR events,
is more rare than any of the other situations I described in my
previous post (it is far more common in the evolution of the
Silmarillion material and in the composition-aids such as the Hunt
for the Ring).
--
Troels Forchhammer <troelsfo(a)googlewave.com>
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.
Scientific reasoning works only with measurements: only
when we have a number and a unit. Thus, topics for which
we have no measurements, scientific investigation is not
useful. No math, no science. When we do have
measurements, scientific reasoning cannot be ignored.
- Dr Nancy's Sweetie on usenet
Message-ID: <ds159c$p45$1...@pcls4.std.com>
Stan Brown
<ojevin...@bredband.net>:
> Anyone who put on the Ring became visible to Sauron.
Not true. Even when Sam put on the Ring at the very borders of
Mordor, Sauron did not see him.
Stan Brown
<Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid>:
> Unfortunately Tolkien never gets around to discuss the situation of
> Aragorn using the Ring as described above for Elrond and Galadriel,
> but this was very clearly scenario that they decided to emulate as
> they 'attacked' Mordor after the victory on the Pelennor, and we
> must assume that Aragorn at least had the power to have been a
> considerable obstacle to Sauron if he had used the One Ring _in this
> way_ since Tolkien seems open to the possibility that Galadriel,
> Elrond or C�rdan might have actually ultimately defeated Sauron by
> using the One Ring like this.
And if I recall correctly, some time around the discovery of the
Palant�r, Gandalf says that Sauron fears Aragorn will do exactly
that.
David Trimboli
I agree with this. Why would Sauron give his ring the power to make him,
or anyone else, invisible? Invisibility is just a side-effect.
I think perhaps the two worlds are the worlds of the f�a and hr�a. The
Ring draws the hr�a of mortals farther into the other world.
Glorfindel's f�a is bright and shining. Aragorn and the hobbits have
dimly seen f�ar. The Nazg�l are mortal men, but their hr�ar can be seen
clearly where their f�ar should be seen. Frodo, with his potential
clear-glass look, was getting his hr�a and f�a mixed together, and his
f�a was becoming brighter.
--
David Trimboli
http://www.trimboli.name/
Steve Hayes
wrote:
>Tue, 22 Dec 2009 22:28:21 +0100 from Troels Forchhammer
><Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid>:
>> Unfortunately Tolkien never gets around to discuss the situation of
>> Aragorn using the Ring as described above for Elrond and Galadriel,
>> but this was very clearly scenario that they decided to emulate as
>> they 'attacked' Mordor after the victory on the Pelennor, and we
>> must assume that Aragorn at least had the power to have been a
>> considerable obstacle to Sauron if he had used the One Ring _in this
>> way_ since Tolkien seems open to the possibility that Galadriel,
>> Elrond or C�rdan might have actually ultimately defeated Sauron by
>> using the One Ring like this.
>
>And if I recall correctly, some time around the discovery of the
>Palant�r, Gandalf says that Sauron fears Aragorn will do exactly
>that.
When he meets Merry and Pippin after his return from battling the Balrog.
It is one of the most telling passages in the book.
--
Steve Hayes
Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/litmain.htm
http://www.goodreads.com/hayesstw
http://www.bookcrossing.com/mybookshelf/Methodius
hen...@swirve.com
<jon.lennart.beck.its.my.n...@mail.its.in.danmark> wrote:
> "teepee" <nom...@nomail.com> skrev i meddelelsennews:4b2aafac$1...@newsgate.x-privat.org...
<snip>
> Gandalf paid a heavy price for killing the Balrog. He died himself, but
> in such noble circumstances that Ilúvatar restored him to life to finish the
> job that he had been originally sent to do. The Wizards were in origin sent
> by the Valar; Gandalf's resurrection and increase in power were Ilúvatar's
> taking up of the Valar's plan, rescuing and improving it at the point of its
> failure. Also it was not known that Durin's Bane was a Balrog. Gandalf was
> surprised to discover it, when it rushed at them near Durin's Bridge, past
> all the Orcs that were known to also infest Moria.
Gabdalf rightly died a horrible death and was resurrected by sunshine
and honeydew. Peter Cottontail's treatment was entirely different.
Instead of evisceration, he got a turpentine and cedar-oil enema
before being placed in natron. Herodotus, the famed Greek historian,
wrote about the procedure in the fifth century B.C., but scholars
debate his reliability. In this case, the experiment proved him right.
All Peter's innards dissolved except the heart - the one organ ancient
Egyptians always left in place.
IOW, "in this case" Herodotus happened to be right this once.
Marvellous!
Horus Engels
Troels Forchhammer
Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> spoke these staves:
>
> Wed, 23 Dec 2009 06:04:13 +0100 from �jevind L�ng
> <ojevin...@bredband.net>:
>>
>> Anyone who put on the Ring became visible to Sauron.
>
> Not true. Even when Sam put on the Ring at the very borders of
> Mordor, Sauron did not see him.
Sam is convinced that Sauron will see him only if he wears the Ring
_inside Mordor_ -- and of course Frodo does both this and at the same
time claims the Ring as his own and does this in the heart of Sauron's
realm, in the Sammath Naur, something that is certain to get Sauron's
attention. In the Jackson films, however, Sauron is aware of Frodo as
the Ring accidentally slips on his finger in Bree . . .
--
Troels Forchhammer <troelsfo(a)googlewave.com>
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.
Lo! we have gathered, and we have spent, and now the time
of payment draws near.
- Aragorn, /The Lord of the Rings/ (J.R.R. Tolkien)
Clams Canino
"Troels Forchhammer" <Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid>
> In the Jackson films, however, Sauron is aware of Frodo as
> the Ring accidentally slips on his finger in Bree . . .
This reminds me. I just saw Peter Jackson in an interview, and he's lost
over 100 pounds. He actually looks almost "thin".
And remember "films" is as much of a misnomer for LotR as "books" is.
1 film - 3 installments (volumes).
-W
Troels Forchhammer
Steve Hayes <haye...@telkomsa.net> spoke these staves:
> On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 22:18:29 -0500, Stan Brown
> <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>
>> Tue, 22 Dec 2009 22:28:21 +0100 from Troels Forchhammer
>> <Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid>:
>>>
>>> Unfortunately Tolkien never gets around to discuss the situation
>>> of Aragorn using the Ring as described above for Elrond and
>>> Galadriel, but this was very clearly scenario that they decided
>>> to emulate as they 'attacked' Mordor after the victory on the
>>> Pelennor, and we must assume that Aragorn at least had the power
>>> to have been a considerable obstacle to Sauron if he had used
>>> the One Ring _in this way_ since Tolkien seems open to the
>>> possibility that Galadriel, Elrond or C�rdan might have actually
>>> ultimately defeated Sauron by using the One Ring like this.
>>
>> And if I recall correctly, some time around the discovery of the
>> Palant�r, Gandalf says that Sauron fears Aragorn will do exactly
>> that.
>
> When he meets Merry and Pippin after his return from battling the
> Balrog.
>
> It is one of the most telling passages in the book.
Are you thinking of this passage?
[Sauron] supposes that we were all going to Minas Tirith;
for that is what he would himself have done in our place.
And according to his wisdom it would have been a heavy
stroke against his power. Indeed he is in great fear, not
knowing what mighty one may suddenly appear, wielding the
Ring, and assailing him with war, seeking to cast him down
and take his place. That we should wish to cast him down
and have no one in his place is not a thought that occurs
to his mind. That we should try to destroy the Ring itself
has not yet entered into his darkest dream. In which no
doubt you will see our good fortune and our hope. For
imagining war he has let loose war, believing that he has
no time to waste; for he that strikes the first blow, if he
strikes it hard enough, may need to strike no more.
[LotR III,5 'The White Rider']
It's shortly after Gandalf (the White) meets up with the Three
Hunters in Fangorn -- ''What then shall I say? This in brief is how I
see things at the moment, [...]'
In any case I think this is a _very_ telling passage :-)
Concerning Aragorn specifically, there's the passage where Legolas
speaks, recalling the defeat of the Corsairs by the fear of the dead:
'In that hour I looked on Aragorn and thought how great and
terrible a Lord he might have become in the strength of his
will, had he taken the Ring to himself. Not for naught does
Mordor fear him. But nobler is his spirit than the
understanding of Sauron; for is he not of the children of
L�thien? Never shall that line fail, though the years may
lengthen beyond count.'
[LotR V,9 'The Last Debate']
This is when Legolas and Gimli are recounting the tale of their
journey by the Paths of the Dead to Merry and Pippin in the Houses of
Healing. Gandalf, as I've quoted in another post, confirms this at
the debate of the Captains, saying
'Now Sauron knows all this, and he knows that this
precious thing which he lost has been found again; but he
does not yet know where it is, or so we hope. And therefore
he is now in great doubt. For if we have found this thing,
there are some among us with strength enough to wield it.
That too he knows. For do I not guess rightly, Aragorn,
that you have shown yourself to him in the Stone of
Orthanc?'
And a little later,
'He is not yet sure,' said Gandalf, 'and he has not built
up his power by waiting until his enemies are secure, as we
have done. Also we could not learn how to wield the full
power all in a day. Indeed it can be used only by one
master alone, not by many; and he will look for a time of
strife, ere one of the great among us makes himself master
and puts down the others. In that time the Ring might aid
him, if he were sudden.
There's probably also a few other passages that deal with this, but
overall I think that the suggestion is that of a military campaign. I
should probably not have spoken of Aragorn as 'at least [...] a
considerable obstacle to Sauron' -- I do agree that Aragorn did have
the power, the strength of will, to use the One Ring to overcast
Sauron through a military campaign, ultimately emulating Denethor and
even Sauron himself in sacrificing friends and family and only
appearing personally _after_ Sauron had been completely vanquished.
--
Troels Forchhammer <troelsfo(a)googlewave.com>
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.
"He deserves death."
"Deserves it! I daresay he does. Many that live deserve
death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to
them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in
judgement. For even the very wise cannot see all ends."
- Frodo and Gandalf, /The Fellowship of the Ring/ (J.R.R. Tolkien)
Troels Forchhammer
<da...@trimboli.name> spoke these staves:
>
<snip>
> I agree with this. Why would Sauron give his ring the power to
> make him, or anyone else, invisible? Invisibility is just a
> side-effect.
Nothing about reasons, but still:
The chief power (of all the rings alike) was the
prevention or slowing of decay (i.e. 'change' viewed as a
regrettable thing), the preservation of what is desired or
loved, or its semblance - this is more or less an Elvish
motive. But also they enhanced the natural powers of a
possessor - thus approaching 'magic', a motive easily
corruptible into evil, a lust for domination. And finally
they had other powers, more directly derived from Sauron
('the Necromancer': so he is called as he casts a fleeting
shadow and presage on the pages of The Hobbit): such as
rendering invisible the material body, and making things of
the invisible world visible.
The Elves of Eregion made Three supremely beautiful and
powerful rings, almost solely of their own imagination, and
directed to the preservation of beauty: they did not confer
invisibility. But secretly in the subterranean Fire, in his
own Black Land, Sauron made One Ring, the Ruling Ring that
contained the powers of all the others, and controlled them,
so that its wearer could see the thoughts of all those that
used the lesser rings, could govern all that they did, and
in the end could utterly enslave them.
[Letters #131 to Milton Waldman, late 1951]
Notice that this is written shortly after Tolkien finished writing
LotR and before he revised it for publication in a letter where he
gave a synopsis of the stories (of the Silmarillion and LotR) in
order to persuade a publisher to publish both of the books.
The implication is possibly that the power to confer invisibility was
instilled in the Seven and the Nine by Sauron _after_ he captured
them from the Elves.
> I think perhaps the two worlds are the worlds of the f�a and hr�a.
As pointed out in another message, this simply doesn't work. The
wraith-world is _clearly_ still corporeal and material -- the wraiths
still have bodies in both the wraith-world and the normal world and
they are _not_ dead -- they are _not_ ghosts as is the Army of the
Dead. Whatever it is, the wraith-world is _not_ a spirit world, and
as I firmly believe that the light Frodo sees coming from Glorfindel
and which Gandalf and Sam speaks of as coming from Frodo hass a
spiritual nature (associated with the ennoblement of their _f�ar_),
this light cannot belong to the wraith-world. It is, IMO, simply not
a logically sustainable position to identify the wraith-world with a
spirit-world nor features of the spirit-world (the light) with
features of the wraith-world.
--
Troels Forchhammer <troelsfo(a)googlewave.com>
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.
++?????++ Out of Cheese Error. Redo From Start.
- /Interesting Times/ (Terry Pratchett)
Troels Forchhammer
"Clams Canino" <cc-m...@earthdink.net> spoke these staves:
> "Troels Forchhammer" <Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid>
>>
>> In the Jackson films, however, Sauron is aware of Frodo as the
>> Ring accidentally slips on his finger in Bree . . .
>
> This reminds me. I just saw Peter Jackson in an interview, and
> he's lost over 100 pounds. He actually looks almost "thin".
I really wish I could do that . . . :-)
> And remember "films" is as much of a misnomer for LotR as "books"
> is. 1 film - 3 installments (volumes).
I think not. The official site for the New Line trilogy at
<http://www.lordoftherings.net/index.html> explicitly uses the words
'trilogy' and 'films' to describe their adaptation of 'The Lord of the
Rings.' However, as you note, the book is _not_ a trilogy, but one
story divided into six books (plus appendices) and often conveniently
published in three volumes of two books each (but also occasionally in
one, six or seven volumes -- I haven't heard of a two-volume edition,
though that, too, ought to be a practical solution).
--
Troels Forchhammer <troelsfo(a)googlewave.com>
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.
The errors hardest
to condone
in other people
are one's own.
- Piet Hein, /Our Own Motes/
Clams Canino
"Troels Forchhammer" <Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid> wrote in message
> I think not. The official site for the New Line trilogy at
> <http://www.lordoftherings.net/index.html> explicitly uses the words
> 'trilogy' and 'films' to describe their adaptation of 'The Lord of the
> Rings.' However, as you note, the book is _not_ a trilogy, but one
> story divided into six books (plus appendices) and often conveniently
> published in three volumes of two books each (but also occasionally in
> one, six or seven volumes -- I haven't heard of a two-volume edition,
> though that, too, ought to be a practical solution).
And I think that you "listen" too much to the New Line "marketing boys" and
not enough to Mr. Jackson who actually made the film. And "the artist" is
always right. :)
Jackson has explicitly stated that "his vision" of LotR was filmed all at
once as "one film" which was then finished one at a time (editing and CGI)
and released in three installments.
Therefore, I'm at least as comfortable referring to Jackson's work as "a
film" as I am referring to Tolkien's work as "a book" (disregarding the 6
books for a moment).
Regardless of what New Line says, Jackson's work as well as Tolkien's work
is not properly called a "trilogy".
Let's pause and remember that New Line Cinima wasn't even smart enough to
pay Jackson or Christopher T. properly for thier rights and work. Who'd want
to take thier word for anything to do with anything?
-W
Clams Canino
"Clams Canino" <cc-m...@earthdink.net> wrote in message news:L5udnXK2-
> Regardless of what New Line says, Jackson's work as well as Tolkien's work
> is not properly called a "trilogy".
Troels,
I note that you noted that you are "slow to change your opinions". :)
I have been a "good student" of the Jackson films.
As a result of this effort, I feel that I can speak "ex cathedra" on certain
aspects of them. (much as I feel that you may speak "ex cathedra" on many
aspects of Tolkien's works)
No matter who claims what.. it *is* one film in three installments.
There's alot I don't know about a lot of things. But I don't feel that
comes close to being one of them. :)
-W
Derek Broughton
> In message <news:4b32e2e2$0$4992$607e...@cv.net> David Trimboli
> <da...@trimboli.name> spoke these staves:
>>
>> I think perhaps the two worlds are the worlds of the f�a and hr�a.
>
> As pointed out in another message, this simply doesn't work. The
> wraith-world is _clearly_ still corporeal and material -- the wraiths
Well, you point it out but we don't have to believe it :-)
> still have bodies in both the wraith-world and the normal world and
> they are _not_ dead -- they are _not_ ghosts as is the Army of the
> Dead. Whatever it is, the wraith-world is _not_ a spirit world,
Why not? Hröa and Fëa are words not explained in the sources available to
me, but are they not at least roughly equivalent in Tolkien's religious
background to Body and Soul? No matter how warped they are, the Ringwraiths
must still have souls. The wraiths have bodies in this world, but they're
invisible, and they have souls in _that_ world, that appear corporeal (Note
- they appear corporeal, but we have no actual evidence that they really
have solidity). That's the sort of inversion that happens frequently in
Fairy tales. I bet JRR had something to say of that in /On Fairy Tales/.
(fwiw, this goes to your comments regarding learning from our disagreements
- I've always believed this was true, but only your insistence on being
absolutely wrong :-) has brought me to the idea of 'inversion'!).
> and
> as I firmly believe that the light Frodo sees coming from Glorfindel
> and which Gandalf and Sam speaks of as coming from Frodo hass a
> spiritual nature (associated with the ennoblement of their _f�ar_),
> this light cannot belong to the wraith-world. It is, IMO, simply not
> a logically sustainable position to identify the wraith-world with a
> spirit-world nor features of the spirit-world (the light) with
> features of the wraith-world.
imo it's not logically sustainable that the light of Glorfindel's Fëa
"cannot" belong to the wraith-world - or that the wraith-world is not a
spirit-world.
--
derek
Derek Broughton
> In message <news:MPG.259ca70e7...@news.individual.net>
> Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> spoke these staves:
>>
>> Wed, 23 Dec 2009 06:04:13 +0100 from �jevind L�ng
>> <ojevin...@bredband.net>:
>>>
>>> Anyone who put on the Ring became visible to Sauron.
>>
>> Not true. Even when Sam put on the Ring at the very borders of
>> Mordor, Sauron did not see him.
>
> Sam is convinced that Sauron will see him only if he wears the Ring
> _inside Mordor_ -- and of course Frodo does both this and at the same
> time claims the Ring as his own and does this in the heart of Sauron's
> realm, in the Sammath Naur, something that is certain to get Sauron's
> attention. In the Jackson films, however, Sauron is aware of Frodo as
> the Ring accidentally slips on his finger in Bree . . .
This isn't inconsistent with Tolkien. Sauron certainly was aware of Frodo
at other times while he is wearing the Ring, though it was probably worst on
Amon Hen (?) which I expect is partly due to the nature of the place. From
Weathertop on, every time Frodo wore the Ring, he felt Sauron searching for
him. The implication was that if he wore it long enough, Sauron _would_
find him. Amon Hen was also the time where he wore it longest, and so was
most exposed to the Eye.
--
derek
Derek Broughton
> In message <news:WqidnXfAFczLD67W...@earthlink.com>
> "Clams Canino" <cc-m...@earthdink.net> spoke these staves:
>>
>> "Troels Forchhammer" <Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid>
>>>
>>> In the Jackson films, however, Sauron is aware of Frodo as the
>>> Ring accidentally slips on his finger in Bree . . .
>>
>> This reminds me. I just saw Peter Jackson in an interview, and
>> he's lost over 100 pounds. He actually looks almost "thin".
>
> I really wish I could do that . . . :-)
>
>> And remember "films" is as much of a misnomer for LotR as "books"
>> is. 1 film - 3 installments (volumes).
>
> I think not. The official site for the New Line trilogy at
> <http://www.lordoftherings.net/index.html> explicitly uses the words
> 'trilogy' and 'films' to describe their adaptation of 'The Lord of the
> Rings.'
That's not fair to Jackson. HIS vision was a single film. New Line can
call it anything they want, but it wasn't _their_ adaptation, either.
--
derek
Stan Brown
<Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid>:
> In message <news:MPG.259ca70e7...@news.individual.net>
> Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> spoke these staves:
> >
> > Wed, 23 Dec 2009 06:04:13 +0100 from �jevind L�ng
> > <ojevin...@bredband.net>:
> >>
> >> Anyone who put on the Ring became visible to Sauron.
> >
> > Not true. Even when Sam put on the Ring at the very borders of
> > Mordor, Sauron did not see him.
>
> Sam is convinced that Sauron will see him only if he wears the Ring
> _inside Mordor_ -- and of course Frodo does both this and at the same
> time claims the Ring as his own and does this in the heart of Sauron's
> realm, in the Sammath Naur, something that is certain to get Sauron's
> attention. In the Jackson films, however, Sauron is aware of Frodo as
> the Ring accidentally slips on his finger in Bree . . .
But I thought we were discussing Tolkien's work, not Jackson's. :-)
Stan Brown
mar...@earthdink.net>:
> Jackson has explicitly stated that "his vision" of LotR was filmed all at
> once as "one film" which was then finished one at a time (editing and CGI)
> and released in three installments.
He has also explicitly stated that he was faithful to Tolkien. I
don't think we can put too much faith in his explicit statements, as
they may be motivated by marketing considerations and not by a love
of truth.
Clams Canino
news:MPG.259db4bec...@news.individual.net...
> Thu, 24 Dec 2009 12:10:06 -0500 from Clams Canino <cc-
> mar...@earthdink.net>:
> > Jackson has explicitly stated that "his vision" of LotR was filmed all
at
> > once as "one film" which was then finished one at a time (editing and
CGI)
> > and released in three installments.
>
> He has also explicitly stated that he was faithful to Tolkien. I
> don't think we can put too much faith in his explicit statements, as
> they may be motivated by marketing considerations and not by a love
> of truth.
Ummm. The fact that it was shot as one movie is part of the public record.
-W
Steve Hayes
<Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid> wrote:
>In message <news:jor5j59kf7b4oajfm...@4ax.com>
>Steve Hayes <haye...@telkomsa.net> spoke these staves:
>>
>> On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 22:18:29 -0500, Stan Brown
>> <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>>
>>> Tue, 22 Dec 2009 22:28:21 +0100 from Troels Forchhammer
>>> <Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid>:
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately Tolkien never gets around to discuss the situation
>>>> of Aragorn using the Ring as described above for Elrond and
>>>> Galadriel, but this was very clearly scenario that they decided
>>>> to emulate as they 'attacked' Mordor after the victory on the
>>>> Pelennor, and we must assume that Aragorn at least had the power
>>>> to have been a considerable obstacle to Sauron if he had used
>>>> the One Ring _in this way_ since Tolkien seems open to the
>>>> possibility that Galadriel, Elrond or C?an might have actually
>>>> ultimately defeated Sauron by using the One Ring like this.
>>>
>>> And if I recall correctly, some time around the discovery of the
>>> Palant? Gandalf says that Sauron fears Aragorn will do exactly
>>> that.
>>
>> When he meets Merry and Pippin after his return from battling the
>> Balrog.
>>
>> It is one of the most telling passages in the book.
>
>Are you thinking of this passage?
>
> [Sauron] supposes that we were all going to Minas Tirith;
> for that is what he would himself have done in our place.
> And according to his wisdom it would have been a heavy
> stroke against his power. Indeed he is in great fear, not
> knowing what mighty one may suddenly appear, wielding the
> Ring, and assailing him with war, seeking to cast him down
> and take his place. That we should wish to cast him down
> and have no one in his place is not a thought that occurs
> to his mind. That we should try to destroy the Ring itself
> has not yet entered into his darkest dream. In which no
> doubt you will see our good fortune and our hope. For
> imagining war he has let loose war, believing that he has
> no time to waste; for he that strikes the first blow, if he
> strikes it hard enough, may need to strike no more.
> [LotR III,5 'The White Rider']
Yes, that's the one.
>It's shortly after Gandalf (the White) meets up with the Three
>Hunters in Fangorn -- ''What then shall I say? This in brief is how I
>see things at the moment, [...]'
>
>In any case I think this is a _very_ telling passage :-)
>
>Concerning Aragorn specifically, there's the passage where Legolas
>speaks, recalling the defeat of the Corsairs by the fear of the dead:
>
> 'In that hour I looked on Aragorn and thought how great and
> terrible a Lord he might have become in the strength of his
> will, had he taken the Ring to himself. Not for naught does
> Mordor fear him. But nobler is his spirit than the
> understanding of Sauron; for is he not of the children of
> L?n? Never shall that line fail, though the years may
Whether it is wielded by Aragorn or another, it is what Sauron fears, but
Aragorn was certainly one of those who might have done so, and Boromir
succumbed to the temptation.
Bill O'Meally
> Troels Forchhammer wrote:
>> [Ringwraiths] still have bodies in both the wraith-world and the
>> normal world and
>> they are _not_ dead -- they are _not_ ghosts as is the Army of the
>> Dead. Whatever it is, the wraith-world is _not_ a spirit world,
>
> Why not? Hr�a and F�a are words not explained in the sources
> available to me, but are they not at least roughly equivalent in
> Tolkien's religious background to Body and Soul? No matter how
> warped they are, the Ringwraiths must still have souls. The wraiths
> have bodies in this world, but they're invisible, and they have
> souls
> in _that_ world, that appear corporeal (Note - they appear
> corporeal,
> but we have no actual evidence that they really have solidity).
> That's the sort of inversion that happens frequently in Fairy tales.
> I bet JRR had something to say of that in /On Fairy Tales/.
I agree. I think what Tolkien is really discussing are "Seen" and
"Unseen" worlds, the terms being in relation to what Mortals are
capable of perceiving. One might substitute "spiritual" and
"physical", but that confuses matters a bit. As you state, the Nazgul
still have both spirits and bodies, but they are invisible to Mortals.
It is, perhaps, an oversimplification, but I think making it more
complex is an Ockham's Razor. ;-) I think Gandalf used the term
"Wraith-world" to simplify things for Frodo during his recovery in
Rivendell.
Gandalf implies that the two "worlds" in which the High Elves dwell
and that which the Ringwraiths dwell is one in the same: "[High Elves]
do not fear the Ringwraiths, for those who have dwelt in the Blessed
Realm live at once in both worlds...." What one chooses to call those
worlds is matter of debate.
The quote goes on to say, "... and against both the Seen and Unseen
they have great power."
Tolkien uses the terms "Seen" and Unseen", in capitals to boot giving
them some significance, so I will choose to use these terms as well.
:-)
<snip>
>
>> and
>> as I firmly believe that the light Frodo sees coming from
>> Glorfindel
>> and which Gandalf and Sam speaks of as coming from Frodo hass a
>> spiritual nature (associated with the ennoblement of their _f?ar_),
>> this light cannot belong to the wraith-world. It is, IMO, simply
>> not
>> a logically sustainable position to identify the wraith-world with
>> a
>> spirit-world nor features of the spirit-world (the light) with
>> features of the wraith-world.
Frodo was on the cusp of entering that "Unseen World" when he nearly
became a wraith. He, like Glorfindel, was "at once in both worlds".
Indeed, even in recovery, Gandalf noted a slight transparency to
Frodo, especially in the arm that recieved the Morgul blade wound.
> imo it's not logically sustainable that the light of Glorfindel's
> F�a
> "cannot" belong to the wraith-world - or that the wraith-world is
> not
> a spirit-world.
I would say, rather, that the "wraith-world" is *part* of the "spirit"
or "Unseen" world.
--
Bill
"Wise fool."
Gandalf _The Two Towers_
(The Wise will remove 'se' to reach me. The Foolish will not!)
Prai Jei
> 2) What proof is there that the Elven rings failed when the One was
> destroyed? Is it explicitly stated anywhere?
That follows from a quantum-theoretical analysis of Ring-lore. The sets of
Rings must be made in *consecutive* odd numbers. Without the One, the
Three, Five, Seven and Nine, along with the "lesser rings" (the Eleven,
Thirteen, etc. all lumped together under this title) would cease to
function.
We don't hear much of the Five gold rings, apart from a passing reference in
a silly cumulative song sung at this time of year. I have two contradictory
hypotheses on what the Five were for - take your pick or follow up with
your own:
(a) They were given to the Ents, their effect being to make them somewhat
lethargic and tree-ish, but (so we read in the legends) given the right
stimulus, their effect was overcomeable. The cultural legacy of this is
that a "gold ring" (in practice a yellow ribbon) around a tree, is a symbol
of release from captivity.
(b) They were made for the Hobbits, whose advent had been prophesied in
ancient lore, but since the Halflings did not actually appear on the scene
until well into the Third Age, by which time the hidden agenda behind this
whole Ring business had been discovered, the Five were never issued.
--
ξ:) Proud to be curly
Interchange the alphabetic letter groups to reply
teepee
"David Trimboli" <da...@trimboli.name> wrote
> The Nazg�l are mortal men, but their hr�ar can be seen clearly where their
> f�ar should be seen. Frodo, with his potential clear-glass look, was
> getting his hr�a and f�a mixed together, and his f�a was becoming
> brighter.
The ring wraiths aren't mortal, it seems to me. Nor are their bodies normal
human bodies, since when they are destroyed they don't leave behind a corpse
but return (presumably to Mordor) to be reconstituted.
Stan Brown
<pvstownse...@ntlworld.com>:
> That follows from a quantum-theoretical analysis of Ring-lore. The sets of
> Rings must be made in *consecutive* odd numbers. Without the One, the
> Three, Five, Seven and Nine, along with the "lesser rings" (the Eleven,
> Thirteen, etc. all lumped together under this title) would cease to
> function.
:-)
> We don't hear much of the Five gold rings, apart from a passing reference in
> a silly cumulative song sung at this time of year. I have two contradictory
> hypotheses on what the Five were for - take your pick or follow up with
> your own:
>
[snip]
(c) They were made for the Unclassifiables -- creatures that did not
belong to any known order. Like the Three, they were kept secret,
but by the end of the Six.Twoth Age it was known to the Small and
Foolish that they had been bestowed on:
- Tom Bombadil (who of course promptly lost his)
- Goldberry (who lent hers to Tom Bombadil, so it too was lost)
- The talking fox in the Shire (who parlayed it to a career in
Warner Brothers cartoons)
- Ungoliant (who ate it when she had trouble sticking to her no-
jewels diet)
- Beorn (who used it to learn shape shifting and the growth of
enormous bees)
Stan Brown
Of course they are mortal. They were men in origin, and no one, not
even the Valar much less Sauron, can take away the Gift of Men. The
Rings postpone death, but they do not eliminate it.
Nazg�l are Men. When they die they truly die and go out of the
World, like other Men. They are not Elves whose spirits fly back to
some spot to be rehoused.
Regarding the destruction of their bodies, I don't think you read
carefully the "Many Meetings" chapter. "Their horses must have
perished, and without them they are crippled. But the Ringwraiths
themselves cannot be so easily destroyed," says Gandalf. They had to
make their way by foot back to Mordor to get new steeds.
teepee
"Stan Brown" <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote
> Of course they are mortal. They were men in origin, and no one, not
> even the Valar much less Sauron, can take away the Gift of Men. The
> Rings postpone death, but they do not eliminate it.
Well one can apply different definitions. If someone does not age or die
unless some magical prop is removed, I would define that as immortal -
though they still ultimately share the fate of men to be sure, and do not
enjoy the reincarnation reserved for Elves and others. So mortal in the
narrow Tolkein sense at least.
> Regarding the destruction of their bodies, I don't think you read
> carefully the "Many Meetings" chapter. "Their horses must have
> perished, and without them they are crippled. But the Ringwraiths
> themselves cannot be so easily destroyed," says Gandalf. They had to
> make their way by foot back to Mordor to get new steeds.
Yes I had misremembered somewhat, my apologies. Though I don't believe it
specifically said they made their way back on foot, that's a perfectly
reasonable interpretation. But what of the Witch King? Did he leave an
invisible body behind upon the Pelenor? I suppose he must have. It seems
odd, but perhaps that's because it never occurred to me that might be the
case.
Derek Broughton
> teepee set the following eddies spiralling through the space-time
> continuum:
>
>> 2) What proof is there that the Elven rings failed when the One was
>> destroyed? Is it explicitly stated anywhere?
>
> That follows from a quantum-theoretical analysis of Ring-lore. The sets of
> Rings must be made in *consecutive* odd numbers. Without the One, the
> Three, Five, Seven and Nine, along with the "lesser rings" (the Eleven,
> Thirteen, etc. all lumped together under this title) would cease to
> function.
>
> We don't hear much of the Five gold rings, apart from a passing reference
> in a silly cumulative song sung at this time of year. I have two
> contradictory hypotheses on what the Five were for - take your pick or
> follow up with your own:
I've never understood why there were 9 and not (obviously) 5. Surely a
quantum-theoretical analysis shows that the Rings should be made in
consecutive _Prime_ numbers. Even the first time I read it, when I was
twelve, or so, I thought Men should have either had 5 or 11 Rings.
--
derek
Derek Broughton
> Fri, 25 Dec 2009 12:10:14 -0000 from teepee <nom...@nomail.com>:
>>
>> "David Trimboli" <da...@trimboli.name> wrote
>>
>> > The Nazgûl are mortal men, but their hröar can be seen clearly where
>> > their fëar should be seen. Frodo, with his potential clear-glass look,
>> > was getting his hröa and fëa mixed together, and his fëa was becoming
>> > brighter.
>>
>> The ring wraiths aren't mortal, it seems to me. Nor are their bodies
>> normal human bodies, since when they are destroyed they don't leave
>> behind a corpse but return (presumably to Mordor) to be reconstituted.
>
> Of course they are mortal. They were men in origin, and no one, not
> even the Valar much less Sauron, can take away the Gift of Men. The
> Rings postpone death, but they do not eliminate it.
>
> Nazgûl are Men. When they die they truly die and go out of the
> World, like other Men. They are not Elves whose spirits fly back to
> some spot to be rehoused.
>
> Regarding the destruction of their bodies, I don't think you read
> carefully the "Many Meetings" chapter. "Their horses must have
> perished, and without them they are crippled. But the Ringwraiths
> themselves cannot be so easily destroyed," says Gandalf. They had to
> make their way by foot back to Mordor to get new steeds.
I think a couple of comments along the way have misled. Somebody mentioned
the "unnatural immortality bestowed by the Rings", and that's arguably true,
but the point is that the Ring preserves its owner's life, both extending it
(possibly infinitely, possibly only for a very, very, long time - we don't
know) and to an extent probably protecting it. But in any case, the only
time we know of a Nazgûl being killed (the Witch King), we _do_ know that he
was dead. It's true he left no corpse, but the prevailing opinion on that,
I think, is that upon death he quickly returned to the condition he would
have reached if he'd never possessed one of the Nine - returned to his
constituent atoms. Literally, dust to dust. Sauron is not Eru - he has no
power to reincarnate, and even Eru couldn't (or at least wouldn't, as it
would violate one of the most basic rules of his universe - the Gift of Man)
provide a new body for a Man, anyway.
--
derek
Troels Forchhammer
Broughton <de...@pointerstop.ca> spoke these staves:
> Troels Forchhammer wrote:
>>
>> In message <news:4b32e2e2$0$4992$607e...@cv.net> David Trimboli
>> <da...@trimboli.name> spoke these staves:
>>>
>>> I think perhaps the two worlds are the worlds of the f�a and
>>> hr�a.
>>
>> As pointed out in another message, this simply doesn't work. The
>> wraith-world is _clearly_ still corporeal and material -- the
>> wraiths
>
> Well, you point it out but we don't have to believe it :-)
Certainly not -- I can only hope that the longer you insist that I am
wrong, the better I will become at explaining why I believe as I do :-)
>> still have bodies in both the wraith-world and the normal world
>> and they are _not_ dead -- they are _not_ ghosts as is the Army
>> of the Dead. Whatever it is, the wraith-world is _not_ a spirit
>> world,
>
> Why not? Hr�a and F�a are words not explained in the sources
> available to me, but are they not at least roughly equivalent in
> Tolkien's religious background to Body and Soul?
They are indeed very close to these concepts (with any differences
being related only to the nature of things in Arda).
> No matter how warped they are, the Ringwraiths must still have souls.
Indeed -- and these souls still inhabit their bodies. This is an
important thing to remember: since the Ringwraiths are _not_ dead their
f�ar still indwell their hr�ar. If you kill the body so that the soul
is forced to leave it, then this soul will be completely impotent; this
is what happened to the Witch-king when �owyn and Merry killed his body
on the fields of the Pelennor. I suppose that it is possible that
Sauron might be able to provide the soul of a Ringwraith whose body has
been killed with a new body (obviously not one created anew as the
Valar do for the Elves when they are allowed to leave Mandos, but
perhaps Sauron the Necromancer could oust one soul from a body and then
help the soul of the wraith to dwell therein), but such is certainly
very shaky speculation (possible, I'd say, only the realm of 'this
works for me' speculation).
However, forgetting for a moment the Witch-king after the Pelennor, the
souls of the Ringwraiths are always indwelling their bodies whenever we
see them in the book.
> The wraiths have bodies in this world, but they're invisible, and
> they have souls in _that_ world, that appear corporeal (Note - they
> appear corporeal, but we have no actual evidence that they really
> have solidity).
Nope. It is their _bodies_ that are shifted into the wraith-world along
with e.g. the clothes they wear.
One might make a case of the clothes being a kind of 'memory' of the
clothes they wore, except that when Frodo is drawn into their world,
his clothes are taken with him (since very obviously his clothes also
become invisible). The dagger that Frodo is stabbed with at Weathertop
also exist materially in both worlds etc. etc.
Men proved easier to ensnare. Those who used the Nine Rings
became mighty in their day, kings, sorcerers, and warriors
of old. They obtained glory and great wealth, yet it turned
to their undoing. They had, as it seemed, unending life,
yet life became unendurable to them. They could walk, if
they would, unseen by all eyes in this world beneath the
sun, and they could see things in worlds invisible to
mortal men; but too often they beheld only the phantoms and
delusions of Sauron. And one by one, sooner or later,
according to their native strength and to the good or evil
of their wills in the beginning, they fell under the
thraldom of the ring that they bore and under the
domination of the One, which was Sauron's. And they became
for ever invisible save to him that wore the Ruling Ring,
and they entered into the realm of shadows. The Nazg�l were
they, the Ringwraiths, the Enemy's most terrible servants;
darkness went with them, and they cried with the voices of
death.
[Silm, 'Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age']
Notice the plural: 'and they could see things in _worlds_ invisible to
mortal men' (emphasis added) -- by being pulled into the 'wraith-
world', or the 'unseen world' (both singular), the wearer could see
things in _worlds_ (plural) that were normally invisible.
Another quotation has been quoted already in this thread in another
context:
And finally they had other powers, more directly derived
from Sauron ('the Necromancer': so he is called as he casts
a fleeting shadow and presage on the pages of The Hobbit):
such as rendering invisible the material body, and making
things of the invisible world visible.
[Letters #131, to Milton Waldman, ?late 1951]
Notice that it is the power is to render invisible the _material body_.
The Seen and the Unseen, where the latter is (probably?) the same as
the wraith-world, are both very much _material_ worlds, based on the
evidence of the book this can be in no other way. Your body becomes
invisible when you put on one of the seventeen Rings of Power with this
ability because your _body_ is shifted from the Seen to the Unseen.
Along with your body, your clothes are shifted from one world to the
other. While your body is shifted, it doesn't cease to exist in the
normal world, it merely becomes invisible, and I wonder if the same
doesn't apply the other way around: that all matter exist also in the
Unseen world at all times, but that it is merely not as visible (IIRC,
the material surroundings appear blurred and unclear while you wear the
One Ring). In the world of the Unseen, the wraith-world, you can see
what is hidden in the normal world, the world of the Seen, including
the light of the spiritual ennoblement that comes from yet a third
world, the spirit-world.
But please note that I don't lay claim to be presenting a complete
picture, nor even to present one that explains everything -- I just say
that the idea that the wraith-world is a spirit-world is logically
inconsistent with the known facts. The rest is merely guesswork,
speculation, surmise, and extrapolation on my part. I associate the
light coming from Glorfindel and Frodo respectively as a spiritual
quality, but I guess that the association of this with this 'other
side' is sufficiently vague for 'the other side' to refer to the
wraith-world, in which case this, too, is not a spirit-world and
therefore not the 'origin' or native world of this spiritual light (I
don't recall any other case of this phrase, 'the other side', being
used with a similar meaning, though there is possibly some in the
History of LotR, and I'd have to study this point closer to be
completely certain about that). The only point where I do remain
adamant is that the wraith-world (by whatever name) is _not_ a spirit-
world.
Perhaps I ought to gather together all the evidence that I can find and
present it, but that will require quite a bit of work and is therefore
not something that I will be able to do anytime soon.
> That's the sort of inversion that happens frequently in Fairy
> tales. I bet JRR had something to say of that in /On Fairy
> Tales/.
What can I say -- please post it if you find it, for I haven't found
it.
> (fwiw, this goes to your comments regarding learning from our
> disagreements - I've always believed this was true, but only your
> insistence on being absolutely wrong :-) has brought me to the
> idea of 'inversion'!).
I shall insist on my right to remain pig-headedly wrong, then ;-)
And of course my comments regarding slowly shifting my position doesn't
mean that I will change my opinion in every case -- the present
discussion is an example of a discussion where nobody has yet presented
me with any evidence that has been able to make me fundamentally change
my position.
>> and as I firmly believe that the light Frodo sees coming from
>> Glorfindel and which Gandalf and Sam speaks of as coming from
>> Frodo hass a spiritual nature (associated with the ennoblement of
>> their _f�ar_), this light cannot belong to the wraith-world. It
>> is, IMO, simply not a logically sustainable position to identify
>> the wraith-world with a spirit-world nor features of the
>> spirit-world (the light) with features of the wraith-world.
>
> imo it's not logically sustainable that the light of Glorfindel's
> F�a "cannot" belong to the wraith-world - or that the
> wraith-world is not a spirit-world.
Well, if you insist that the wraith-world is a spirit-world, then it
obviously follows that Glorfindel's light belongs to this world -- that
much is simple logic. The point, however, is that everything in the
wraith-world is _corporeal_, it is not a world of f�ar, but of hr�ar
(insofar as it makes sense at all to distinguish these as long as the
person isn't dead), just as our normal world, the Seen.
P.S. This post has been developed in the course of several sittings,
and so I inevitably tend to repeat myself, and perhaps to do so
overmuch. If so, I beg you to accept that it is result of the
composition of the post rather than for any other reason.
--
Troels Forchhammer <troelsfo(a)googlewave.com>
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no
basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power
derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some
farcical aquatic ceremony.
- /Monty Python and the Holy Grail/
Troels Forchhammer
It is hopefully known that I do not feel particularly favourably
disposed towards Mr Jackson -- the statements Stan refer to, where
Jackson claimed that he wanted it to be Tolkien's films rather than
his own, is certainly a part of my antipathy towards the man, though
his willful twisting and distortion of Tolkien's book has more to do
with it than that. So obviously everything I say about the LotR films
and Jackson should be read in that light.
That said, the films do not, to me, feel as installments of one
overarching vision. The three films feel rather, to me, as very
distinct films, though they try to tell parts of the same story using
the same visual language -- actually, apart from the obvoius fact
that they _do_ use the same visual language, they feel more like the
Harry Potter films that have changed directors between each (except
for the first two). It is very likely that these differences are a
part of their applicability to my personal viewing situation, since I
can very clearly relate much of these differences to the the clear
differences in their attitudes towards Tolkien, but it is
nevertheless a very pronounced difference that I cannot simply
disregard: to me they are certainly three distinct and different
films in a way that would have been easier to explain had they had
three different directors or three different script-writers.
--
Troels Forchhammer <troelsfo(a)googlewave.com>
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.
Knowing what
thou knowest not
is in a sense
omniscience
- Piet Hein, /Omniscience/
Paul S. Person
<Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid> wrote:
<snippo>
>That said, the films do not, to me, feel as installments of one
>overarching vision. The three films feel rather, to me, as very
>distinct films, though they try to tell parts of the same story using
>the same visual language -- actually, apart from the obvoius fact
>that they _do_ use the same visual language, they feel more like the
>Harry Potter films that have changed directors between each (except
>for the first two). It is very likely that these differences are a
>part of their applicability to my personal viewing situation, since I
>can very clearly relate much of these differences to the the clear
>differences in their attitudes towards Tolkien, but it is
>nevertheless a very pronounced difference that I cannot simply
>disregard: to me they are certainly three distinct and different
>films in a way that would have been easier to explain had they had
>three different directors or three different script-writers.
I suspect the reason for this is PJs increasing anxiety about getting
an Academy Award for at least one of them.
Well, that and his rather apparent loss of any control whatsoever over
what was happening on the screen.
--
Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, "I never knew him."