From: Chris Barrera Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Galadriel's mirror Date: 27 Feb 2001 16:17:14 GMT Organization: Texas Instruments Lines: 70 Message-ID: <97gjua$dc5$1@tilde.csc.ti.com> References: <3AA72E51@MailAndNews.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: luna1-hme1.dal.mslp.ti.com X-Trace: tilde.csc.ti.com 983290634 13701 172.24.195.151 (27 Feb 2001 16:17:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.ti.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 27 Feb 2001 16:17:14 GMT User-Agent: tin/pre-1.4-19990216 ("Styrofoam") (UNIX) (SunOS/5.7 (sun4u)) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!isdnet!grolier!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!cyclone.bc.net!logbridge.uoregon.edu!news.smu.edu!news.ti.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:33046 The answer may be in Unfinished Tales, where Galadriel is described is the female equivalent of Feanor. We know the Feanor, a mere Elf, crafted the most fantastic, and certainly magical, jewels: the Silmarils. If Galadriel is indeed the equivalent, the mirror and the other objects of her gifts would certainly be possible. We also know that she held one of the three elven rings. Again, these are magical creations of the Noldor in Eregion. Even if Galadriel was not another "Feanor", it clearly shows that the Noldor had the arts of imparting magical capability. While indeed the learned of the crafting of rings from Sauron, they did also learn crafting directly from Aule, of whom Sauron originally was a servant. As far a magical creation fortelling the future, were not the Palantiri capable of this to some extent? Again, these are magical items created by the Elves, imported I believe from Tol Eressea. Chris Barrera cbarrera@ t i . c o m Jabba McJabba wrote: : Hi all, : hardships seems to gather on the path my messages are taking to you.First : it was that my ISP do not forward messages to the rec. groups, then it was : that deja was acquired by Google which does not have Usenet posting.Finally : , : through the grace of mailandnews.com I can speak to you again. : Here it is , a quetion that seem so obvious that I wonder why nobody : asked : it before.For sure, it is not in the FAQ. : What was Galadriel's mirror?In the world of the ME, the "magic" - as we : modern men are defining - it is generally limited to Valar and Ainu actions, : which is logical.However, both Noldor and Vanyar having direct contact with : the greater power had learned various skills and crafts from them, which : allowed them ,for example, to create magical swords (that we see in The : Hobbit, the ones that shine in the dark when orcs nearby) or other magical : and : semi-magical items.There are however cases that far surpasses these : little-demanding items. : One of this is the mirror, which may foretell the future (roughly : speaking, because people can see various things, in there).Or, excepting : Mandos, : no other being or entity in ME can supply the info (the facts due to happen : future) for this mirror to work.I exclude a direct connection to Illuvatar : from the beginning, since he is recognized not to meddle at all with Middle : Earth - once the primal music was over.So, : -who build the fountain? : -how did Galadriel got it? : -what can it show? : -how does it works?I have only fount the above few hints... : To a larger extent, this take me to the Elves relation to magic, and to : magic : in the middle earth, but I will open another thread for this. : Best regards, : Jabba : ------------------------------------------------------------ : Get your FREE web-based e-mail and newsgroup access at: : http://MailAndNews.com : Create a new mailbox, or access your existing IMAP4 or : POP3 mailbox from anywhere with just a web browser. : ------------------------------------------------------------ ###### From: Ermanna Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Galadriel's mirror Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 09:25:36 -0500 Organization: Earth One Lines: 24 Message-ID: <3A9D0A5E.F3BE2B5A@erols.com> References: <3AA72E51@MailAndNews.com> <97gjua$dc5$1@tilde.csc.ti.com> Reply-To: jsolinas@erols.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: UmFuZG9tSVahWe5oD0+kzZDQ/Vtq2ru6or0kxxLe7QMs8hZ2lkP/gjSUlpAicDyP X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 1 Mar 2001 01:56:20 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; I; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!kanja.arnes.si!news-hub.siol.net!newsfeed.wirehub.nl!news.tele.dk!209.50.235.254!europa.netcrusader.net!207.172.3.44!feed2.news.rcn.net!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:33104 Chris Barrera wrote: > Galadriel is described is > the female equivalent of Feanor. > If > Galadriel is indeed the equivalent, the mirror and the other objects > of her gifts would certainly be possible. Question: Does anyone know if Galadriel left the Mirror in Lothlórien when she went to the Undying Lands, or if she took it with her? Heck, do we even know if anyone else could use it? > Chris Barrera > cbarrera@ t i . c o m Ermanna the Elven Jedi Knight Elbereth Gilthoniel! ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Galadriel's mirror References: <3AA72E51@MailAndNews.com> <97gjua$dc5$1@tilde.csc.ti.com> <3A9D0A5E.F3BE2B5A@erols.com> X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test70 (17 January 1999) From: sbjensen@midway.uchicago.edu (Steuard Jensen) Lines: 11 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 04:35:49 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.135.12.7 X-Trace: newsfeed.uchicago.edu 983421349 128.135.12.7 (Wed, 28 Feb 2001 22:35:49 CST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 22:35:49 CST Organization: The University of Chicago Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!news.tesion.net!news.belwue.de!news-stu1.dfn.de!news-koe1.dfn.de!news-fra1.dfn.de!news.tele.dk!171.64.14.106!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsfeed.uchicago.edu!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:33179 Quoth jsolinas@erols.com in article <3A9D0A5E.F3BE2B5A@erols.com>: > Does anyone know if Galadriel left the Mirror in Lothlórien when she > went to the Undying Lands, or if she took it with her? Heck, do we > even know if anyone else could use it? I have generally thought that the "substance" of the Mirror was at least in large part ordinary (if very pure) water, and that the "magic" came mostly from Galadriel herself. I can't really think of _why_ I believe that, though, so I'm quite interested in seeing any textual support that's out there. Steuard Jensen ###### From: "Tuor" Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien References: <3AA72E51@MailAndNews.com> <97gjua$dc5$1@tilde.csc.ti.com> <3A9D0A5E.F3BE2B5A@erols.com> Subject: Re: Galadriel's mirror Lines: 26 Organization: Gondolin Defense Force (retired) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 05:08:09 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 63.26.156.98 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net 983423289 63.26.156.98 (Wed, 28 Feb 2001 21:08:09 PST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 21:08:09 PST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.dplanet.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news-fra1.dfn.de!news-lei1.dfn.de!news-nue1.dfn.de!uni-erlangen.de!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!newsfeed1.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!newsmaster1.prod.itd.earthlink.net!newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:33129 "Steuard Jensen" wrote in message news:Fkkn6.76$w4.1278@newsfeed.uchicago.edu... > Quoth jsolinas@erols.com in article <3A9D0A5E.F3BE2B5A@erols.com>: > > Does anyone know if Galadriel left the Mirror in Lothlórien when she > > went to the Undying Lands, or if she took it with her? Heck, do we > > even know if anyone else could use it? > > I have generally thought that the "substance" of the Mirror was at > least in large part ordinary (if very pure) water, and that the > "magic" came mostly from Galadriel herself. I can't really think of > _why_ I believe that, though, so I'm quite interested in seeing any > textual support that's out there. I agree. I think it was an example of the power of her Ring, and also the power of a Silmaril. Note that the Star of Earendil was shining down onto the mirror; the Phial contained water from the Mirror which had captured the light of the Earendil's silmaril. I've always thought that the mirror was made of ordinary stone and ordinary (but very pure) water, but that Galadriel, by blowing upon the water, was imparting some of her power upon it. She seems aware of many things without the use of the Mirror. Perhaps *she* did not need the Mirror, but used it so that Celeborn could see some of what she saw; that idea is complete speculation on my part. Tuor ###### From: brahms@mindspring.com (Stan Brown) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Galadriel's mirror Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 01:08:11 -0500 Organization: Oak Road Systems Lines: 22 Message-ID: References: <3AA72E51@MailAndNews.com> <97gjua$dc5$1@tilde.csc.ti.com> <3A9D0A5E.F3BE2B5A@erols.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 3f.35.6f.9d X-Server-Date: 1 Mar 2001 06:08:19 GMT X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.10 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!news.tesion.net!news.belwue.de!fu-berlin.de!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!newsfeed1.earthlink.net!newsfeed2.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!news.mindspring.net!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:33228 Quoth Steuard Jensen in rec.arts.books.tolkien: >I have generally thought that the "substance" of the Mirror was at >least in large part ordinary (if very pure) water, and that the >"magic" came mostly from Galadriel herself. I can't really think of >_why_ I believe that, though, so I'm quite interested in seeing any >textual support that's out there. "With water FROM THE STREAM Galadriel filled the basin to the brim, and breathed on it, and when the water was still again she spoke." (emphasis added) That sounds to me like pretty good support for your view: it was ordinary river water. Otherwise anyone could dip a basin in the stream and have a ready-made Palantír. -- Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA http://oakroadsystems.com Tolkien FAQs: http://home.uchicago.edu/~sbjensen/Tolkien/ Encyclopedia of Arda: http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/default.htm more FAQs: http://oakroadsystems.com/tech/faqget.htm ###### From: Flame of the West Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Galadriel's mirror Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 04:27:43 -0500 Lines: 16 Message-ID: <3A9E160E.D5051EDD@erols.com> References: <3AA72E51@MailAndNews.com> <97gjua$dc5$1@tilde.csc.ti.com> <3A9D0A5E.F3BE2B5A@erols.com> Reply-To: jsolinas@erols.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: UmFuZG9tSVZjJ+VG73DaJNzyYsgh9PGsMzHnetu/T/3+ZWhRT/wCrdX+TTv3t39O X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 1 Mar 2001 09:28:47 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; I; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news-fra1.dfn.de!fu-berlin.de!news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed2.news.rcn.net!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:33103 Ermanna wrote: > Question: Does anyone know if Galadriel left the Mirror in Lothlórien > when she went to the Undying Lands, or if she took it with her? Heck, > do we even know if anyone else could use it? I think I saw it for auction recently on eBay. I was tempted, but the bidding got too rich for my blood. -- -- FotW Reality is for those who cannot cope with Middle-Earth. ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Galadriel's mirror References: <3AA72E51@MailAndNews.com> <3A9D0A5E.F3BE2B5A@erols.com> X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test70 (17 January 1999) From: sbjensen@midway.uchicago.edu (Steuard Jensen) Lines: 16 Message-ID: <2Xsn6.98$w4.1611@newsfeed.uchicago.edu> Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 14:22:54 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.135.12.7 X-Trace: newsfeed.uchicago.edu 983456574 128.135.12.7 (Thu, 01 Mar 2001 08:22:54 CST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 08:22:54 CST Organization: The University of Chicago Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!kanja.arnes.si!news-hub.siol.net!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!newsfeed.uchicago.edu.MISMATCH!newsfeed.uchicago.edu!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:33177 Quoth brahms@mindspring.com (Stan Brown) in article : > Quoth Steuard Jensen : > >I have generally thought that the "substance" of the Mirror was at > >least in large part ordinary (if very pure) water... > "With water FROM THE STREAM Galadriel filled the basin to the brim, > and breathed on it, and when the water was still again she spoke." The other possibility that I was considering (though it may not have been absolutely clear from my phrasing) was that the basin itself was enchanted, in which case the magic involved would be an extra step removed from Galadriel, so to speak. (It would still be _her_ power that created the mirror in either case, of course.) Steuard Jensen ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Galadriel's mirror References: <3AA72E51@MailAndNews.com> <3A9D0A5E.F3BE2B5A@erols.com> X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test70 (17 January 1999) From: sbjensen@midway.uchicago.edu (Steuard Jensen) Lines: 17 Message-ID: <75tn6.99$w4.1620@newsfeed.uchicago.edu> Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 14:33:39 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.135.12.7 X-Trace: newsfeed.uchicago.edu 983457219 128.135.12.7 (Thu, 01 Mar 2001 08:33:39 CST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 08:33:39 CST Organization: The University of Chicago Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.skycache.com!Cidera!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.uchicago.edu!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:33176 Quoth "Tuor" in article : > "Steuard Jensen" wrote: > > I have generally thought that the "substance" of the Mirror was at > > least in large part ordinary (if very pure) water, and that the > > "magic" came mostly from Galadriel herself. > I think it was an example of the power of her Ring, and also the > power of a Silmaril. I agree with most of your other comments, so of course I've picked out the one bit that I disagree with to comment on. :) Why must it be Galadriel's Ring and a Silmaril, rather than Galadriel herself? Tolkien makes it clear (in later writings, at least) that Galadriel was Feanor's equal in "power", in some sense anyway. Why couldn't she create a "magical" thing on her own? Steuard Jensen ###### Message-ID: <3A9E6CAC.5BA05B53@uchicago.edu> From: Roberto Ullfig Organization: University of Chicago X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; SunOS 5.7 sun4u) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Galadriel's mirror References: <3AA72E51@MailAndNews.com> <3A9D0A5E.F3BE2B5A@erols.com> <75tn6.99$w4.1620@newsfeed.uchicago.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 31 Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 09:37:16 -0600 NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.135.99.44 X-Trace: newsfeed.uchicago.edu 983461041 128.135.99.44 (Thu, 01 Mar 2001 09:37:21 CST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 09:37:21 CST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news-fra1.dfn.de!news-lei1.dfn.de!newsfeed.freenet.de!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!blackbush.xlink.net!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.uchicago.edu!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:33111 Steuard Jensen wrote: > > Quoth "Tuor" in article > : > > "Steuard Jensen" wrote: > > > I have generally thought that the "substance" of the Mirror was at > > > least in large part ordinary (if very pure) water, and that the > > > "magic" came mostly from Galadriel herself. > > > I think it was an example of the power of her Ring, and also the > > power of a Silmaril. > > I agree with most of your other comments, so of course I've picked out > the one bit that I disagree with to comment on. :) Why must it be > Galadriel's Ring and a Silmaril, rather than Galadriel herself? > Tolkien makes it clear (in later writings, at least) that Galadriel > was Feanor's equal in "power", in some sense anyway. Why couldn't she > create a "magical" thing on her own? Right, but wasn't her ring, the Ring of Water? I always thought that her Ring enhanced her own powers and also that her Mirror would be one of the things that ended when the One Ring was destroyed. I never thought of the Mirror itself (or the water) being "magical", though the fact that the water came from the heart of Lothlorien was important. So, the Mirror is still there in Lothlorien but only as a reminder of the past. -- Roberto Ullfig : robo@suba.com ###### From: brahms@mindspring.com (Stan Brown) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Galadriel's mirror Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 12:11:59 -0500 Organization: Oak Road Systems Lines: 26 Message-ID: References: <3AA72E51@MailAndNews.com> <3A9D0A5E.F3BE2B5A@erols.com> <2Xsn6.98$w4.1611@newsfeed.uchicago.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: 3f.35.6f.35 X-Server-Date: 1 Mar 2001 17:10:45 GMT X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.10 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.tele.dk!209.50.235.254!europa.netcrusader.net!63.208.208.143!feed2.onemain.com!feed1.onemain.com!newsfeed2.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!news.mindspring.net!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:33215 Quoth Steuard Jensen in rec.arts.books.tolkien: >Quoth brahms@mindspring.com (Stan Brown) in article >: >> "With water FROM THE STREAM Galadriel filled the basin to the brim, >> and breathed on it, and when the water was still again she spoke." > >The other possibility that I was considering (though it may not have >been absolutely clear from my phrasing) was that the basin itself was >enchanted, in which case the magic involved would be an extra step >removed from Galadriel, so to speak. (It would still be _her_ power >that created the mirror in either case, of course.) It would, and you're right, I did not get that other possibility from your earlier article. But note that she breathed on the water. That suggests to me that it was her breath (symbol and carrier of her power) and not the basin that was the active ingredient. -- Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA http://oakroadsystems.com Tolkien FAQs: http://home.uchicago.edu/~sbjensen/Tolkien/ Encyclopedia of Arda: http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/default.htm more FAQs: http://oakroadsystems.com/tech/faqget.htm ###### From: "Tuor" Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien References: <3AA72E51@MailAndNews.com> <3A9D0A5E.F3BE2B5A@erols.com> <75tn6.99$w4.1620@newsfeed.uchicago.edu> Subject: Re: Galadriel's mirror Lines: 46 Organization: Gondolin Defense Force (retired) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2001 09:44:42 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 63.22.5.3 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net 983526282 63.22.5.3 (Fri, 02 Mar 2001 01:44:42 PST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2001 01:44:42 PST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed2.news.rcn.net!rcn!newsfeed1.earthlink.net!newsfeed2.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!newsmaster1.prod.itd.earthlink.net!newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:33114 "Steuard Jensen" wrote in message news:75tn6.99$w4.1620@newsfeed.uchicago.edu... > Quoth "Tuor" in article > : > > "Steuard Jensen" wrote: > > > I have generally thought that the "substance" of the Mirror was at > > > least in large part ordinary (if very pure) water, and that the > > > "magic" came mostly from Galadriel herself. > > > I think it was an example of the power of her Ring, and also the > > power of a Silmaril. > > I agree with most of your other comments, so of course I've picked out > the one bit that I disagree with to comment on. :) Why must it be > Galadriel's Ring and a Silmaril, rather than Galadriel herself? > Tolkien makes it clear (in later writings, at least) that Galadriel > was Feanor's equal in "power", in some sense anyway. Why couldn't she > create a "magical" thing on her own? We know that she came to Lothlorien already in possession of one of the Three. If you had an object that could focus and magnify your power, why would you not make use of it? IMO, the power of all of the Great Rings comes ultimately from the weilder of said Ring. So, in a manner of speaking, the power used to create the Mirror was her own, only focused and magnified by Nenya. But as to the comparison of Galadriel to Feanor I have this to say: could not their powers have been focused in different areas, yet still be equal? Certainly there would be some overlap, as I image they were both skilled speakers. Feanor's primary focus was as an artificer -- a smith even Aule respected. We do not know what skills Galadriel focused on (at least, I don't recall reading about it). It may be that Galadriel's talents did not lie in creating things of power as Feanor did. Galadriel created the Phial as well. This was a very potent item, providing light and hope when there was none. Unlike the Silmaril whose light it held, it was not the object of lust, division, trechery, and betrayal. The Phial did, in fact, more good than the Silmarilli ever did while in Middle-earth. Again, as I said, I think that her Ring only amplified the talents she already had. Tuor ###### From: brahms@mindspring.com (Stan Brown) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Galadriel's mirror Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2001 02:11:58 -0500 Organization: Oak Road Systems Lines: 80 Message-ID: References: <3AA72E51@MailAndNews.com> <3A9D0A5E.F3BE2B5A@erols.com> <75tn6.99$w4.1620@newsfeed.uchicago.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: 3f.35.6f.51 X-Server-Date: 3 Mar 2001 07:12:18 GMT X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.10 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!kanja.arnes.si!news-hub.siol.net!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed2.news.rcn.net!rcn!news.mindspring.net!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:33219 Quoth Tuor in rec.arts.books.tolkien: >We know that she came to Lothlorien already in possession of one of the >Three. If you had an object that could focus and magnify your power, why >would you not make use of it? Because doing so would lay all your thoughts, plans, and actions open to the Enemy. >IMO, the power of all of the Great Rings comes >ultimately from the weilder of said Ring. Well, you're entitled to your opinion, but I don't think the text supports you. We've discussed this question pretty thoroughly in reference to the One Ring in particular. In creating it Sauron let "a great part of" his power pass into it, but as a sort of lever that gave him access to even greater power. If the Ring's power came entirely from Sauron, then why would he need or want such a ring? Similarly for the other rings: people wanted them precisely because with the rings they could do things that they could not do without them. Look at Gollum, Bilbo, and Frodo: surely you aren't saying that they had innate power to turn invisible and to live for decades or centuries beyond the normal life span of their kind? >But as to the comparison of Galadriel to Feanor I have this to say: could >not their powers have been focused in different areas, yet still be equal? Here I think we agree. I'm always uncomfortable with questions of "who is mightier?" because I think they miss the point: different Elves, like different peoples, have different skills that don't fall onto a linear skill. So I think your thought is fairly clear to mine on this point. >Galadriel created the Phial as well. This was a very potent item, providing >light and hope when there was none. Unlike the Silmaril whose light it >held, it was not the object of lust, division, trechery, and betrayal. Now this is a thought I don't remember ever seeing in the newsgroup (or anywhere else), and it is quite intriguing. I had always thought of the Phial as a convenient plot device for driving off Shelob: after all, Frodo could hardly have whipped out a flashlight. :-) But when you make me compare it to the Silmarils it seems both more marvelous and less ad hoc. This was indeed a great work Galadriel made, of the same order as Fëanor's. I have some qualms about your last sentence, though. The Silmarils were indeed the objects of l, d, t, and b. But I don't think it was because of their nature; it was because of the nature of the people around them. Unlike say the Ring, which was inherently corrupting, the Silmarils were not evil in themselves. When people did evil deeds to possess them, it was just the same as if they had done evil deeds to possess any other great treasure. So I think if the story had been carried forward, the Phial could very well have been the object of the same sorts of problems. >Again, as I said, I think that her Ring only amplified the talents she >already had. Here I think we have a fundamental disagreement. You might want to look back at "The Council of Elrond", where Elrond says "The Three were not made by Sauron, nor did he ever touch them. ... But they were not made as weapons of war or conquest: that is not their power. Those who made them did not desire strength or domination or hoarded wealth, but understanding, making, and healing, to preserve all things unstained. These things the Elves of Middle-earth have in some measure gained, though with sorrow.". Unless I am completely misunderstanding you, that seems a direct contradiction: the Elves made the Three Rings for understanding, making, healing, and preservation. Why make the Rings if they could have done those things without? -- Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA http://oakroadsystems.com Tolkien FAQs: http://home.uchicago.edu/~sbjensen/Tolkien/ Encyclopedia of Arda: http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/default.htm more FAQs: http://oakroadsystems.com/tech/faqget.htm ###### From: "Tuor" Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien References: <3AA72E51@MailAndNews.com> <3A9D0A5E.F3BE2B5A@erols.com> <75tn6.99$w4.1620@newsfeed.uchicago.edu> Subject: Re: Galadriel's mirror Lines: 212 Organization: Gondolin Defense Force (retired) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Message-ID: Date: Sat, 03 Mar 2001 10:34:09 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 63.21.255.165 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net 983615649 63.21.255.165 (Sat, 03 Mar 2001 02:34:09 PST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 03 Mar 2001 02:34:09 PST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!isdnet!grolier!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed1.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!newsmaster1.prod.itd.earthlink.net!newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:33126 "Stan Brown" wrote in message news:MPG.150a6346da0d1c2e98bf39@news.mindspring.com... > Quoth Tuor in rec.arts.books.tolkien: > >We know that she came to Lothlorien already in possession of one of the > >Three. If you had an object that could focus and magnify your power, why > >would you not make use of it? > > Because doing so would lay all your thoughts, plans, and actions > open to the Enemy. Yes, but with or without using her Ring, her works would've been opened to the Enemy, IMO, because *she* personally made them and thus would be open to the Enemy regardless. > >IMO, the power of all of the Great Rings comes > >ultimately from the weilder of said Ring. > > Well, you're entitled to your opinion, but I don't think the text > supports you. We've discussed this question pretty thoroughly in > reference to the One Ring in particular. In creating it Sauron let > "a great part of" his power pass into it, but as a sort of lever > that gave him access to even greater power. If the Ring's power came > entirely from Sauron, then why would he need or want such a ring? > Similarly for the other rings: people wanted them precisely because > with the rings they could do things that they could not do without > them. As much as I hate doing this, I'm going to have to wax logical about magic. The Rings all used the same magical 'technology' or, if you prefer, employed the same methods to produce various results -- logically speaking, they used the same logic form, even though the specifics of each Ring were different. Sauron knew all about the technology behind how the Rings worked, having taught the Elves some of it himself. So when he created the One, he did it in such a way as to tie the power of all the Rings with the One, binding their fates together. This was done through 'technique' or 'knowledge', not raw power. Now it is my belief, as I have said, that *all* of the Rings were powered by the will of the Wielder. Those with weak wills were unable to achieve much with even an ordinary Ring, and a Great Ring entirely overpowered them -- if they attempted to *use* them. Merely possessing a Great Ring gave one a longer term of existance, but not more life. Wearing a Great Ring would make *any* mortal invisible *unless* they possessed a will strong enough to prevent that, in which case only the *Ring* was invisible to other eyes unless (again) the Wielder wanted others to see it -- this, IMO, required an enormous willpower to achieve. What about Dwarves? One may ask. Well, I would say that Dwarves are highly resistant to most things, including magical things. They remain very fiercely themselves, but I think that if any of them had worn the One, it would have rendered them as invisible as any other mortal. Now simply wearing a Ring implies excercising Free Will because a person willingly puts it on. The fact that their choice may have been influenced by outside factors is not relevent -- they could have been resisted. Once a person wears a Ring, then they have by their own Free Will placed themselves under the magical technology of the Ring and so are made vulnerable to all aspects of that magic. Sauron, knowing this, inbued his Ring with enough of his native power so as to all other Rings susecptible to it, the wearers of the other Rings were unable to resist because they had of their own Free Will subjected themselves to that same form of magic. However, it can be seen that Sauron misjudged the amount of power necessary. Implicit subjection of Free Will is not the same as explicit subjection. The Wearers of the Three balked when confronted by the One and would not continue using the powers of the Three even though they dearly wanted to. I doubt Sauron expected them to resist their own desires that way. The Keepers of the Seven also did not cave in like he expected, though they did become subtly twisted by their use of the Great Rings. In fact, it seems to me that the Seven had less effect and were less powerful in the hands of the Dwarves than they were for anyone else. However, as I have not managed to read much about the results of the Seven upon the Dwarves, that is mostly speculation. The Rings Sauron gave to Men, however, worked just as he expected them to on everyone else. This is partly due to the fact that he seems to have picked men who were already evil, and thus already less able to resist their own power-hungry impulses. Even when they felt Sauron put on the One, the power the Nine gave them was too sweet to turn down, and so being enslaved by their lusts, they became enslaved by their Rings. Wow. After all that, I realize that I haven't said much to support my view that the Rings were powered by the wills of the Wearers. Well, we do know that the Ring gave power according to the abilities of the Wearer because both Gandalf and Galadriel said as much. In fact Galadriel is so kind as to answer Frodo when he asked why he couldn't see into the minds of the other Wielders. She said not to try it because it would destroy his mind...this I translated to mean that his Will was not strong enough to directly command the Ring (which is what that would amount to) and it would be destroyed attempting it. On the other hand, Aragorn or Gandalf *could* command the Ring, but in doing so they would be corrupted by it. One may look at it as if the One were like a Palantir: those of weak will can only get a Palantir to look at a few basic things such as other Palantiri while those of strong will could 'wrest control' and make the Palantir do much more. So, with the Ring, a weak-willed person might be able to do some default tricks which are more a result of the Ring running roughshod over the Wearer than anything. If the Wearer had a strong will, he could make the Ring obey his will. All of the Keepers of the Three had strong wills. The fact that the Three used the magic 'technology' in order to achieve non-violant ends is not the point. If Pippen had been given Elrond's Ring, for example, it would have made him invisible, prolonged his life, and maybe given him a few interesting insights into Elven magic. It would *not* have given him command of the Loudwater (to use an explicit example) or maintained the 'air' found in Rivendell (to use an implicit example). In fact, it would've been more or less wasted and probably have done something nasty to Pippen to boot. As Gandalf says, even regular magical rings are dangerous; the Great Ring are extremely perilous to mortals. > Look at Gollum, Bilbo, and Frodo: surely you aren't saying that they > had innate power to turn invisible and to live for decades or > centuries beyond the normal life span of their kind? No. I also don't think that a man has the innate ability to generate electricity, but if you get some magnets, some wire, some metal, and a crank, you can make a device that you can crank around and round and it will generate electricity from *the muscular strength of the person turning the crank*. This, IMO, is what the Rings did: they 'converted' the Wearers will into a particular effect or effects. Weak willed people could not control what effects a Ring produced, but strong willed persons could...within the overall limitations 'built in' to the Ring. > >But as to the comparison of Galadriel to Feanor I have this to say: could > >not their powers have been focused in different areas, yet still be equal? > > Here I think we agree. I'm always uncomfortable with questions of > "who is mightier?" because I think they miss the point: different > Elves, like different peoples, have different skills that don't fall > onto a linear skill. So I think your thought is fairly clear to mine > on this point. > > >Galadriel created the Phial as well. This was a very potent item, providing > >light and hope when there was none. Unlike the Silmaril whose light it > >held, it was not the object of lust, division, trechery, and betrayal. > > Now this is a thought I don't remember ever seeing in the newsgroup > (or anywhere else), and it is quite intriguing. I had always thought > of the Phial as a convenient plot device for driving off Shelob: > after all, Frodo could hardly have whipped out a flashlight. :-) > > But when you make me compare it to the Silmarils it seems both more > marvelous and less ad hoc. This was indeed a great work Galadriel > made, of the same order as Fëanor's. I wouldn't say it was on the same order as Feanor's. My point was that it was more useful and more helpful than the Silmaril. It gave hope while they caused division. > I have some qualms about your last sentence, though. The Silmarils > were indeed the objects of l, d, t, and b. But I don't think it was > because of their nature; it was because of the nature of the people > around them. Unlike say the Ring, which was inherently corrupting, > the Silmarils were not evil in themselves. When people did evil > deeds to possess them, it was just the same as if they had done evil > deeds to possess any other great treasure. So I think if the story > had been carried forward, the Phial could very well have been the > object of the same sorts of problems. I didn't mean that it was the Silmarili's *nature* to cause this. In fact, they were so pure and powerful, that their light made slight defects clear and big defects overwhelming to those that had them. They made those who may have had a faint tendency toward arvarice almost insane with the desire to possess the Silmarilli. They made Feanor's pride grow so great it overwhelmed him and sent him into folly. In short, they inflamed the passions beyond the self-control of many Elves and Dwarves. This is not the fault of the Silmarilli, but of those who could not control themselves. > >Again, as I said, I think that her Ring only amplified the talents she > >already had. > > Here I think we have a fundamental disagreement. You might want to > look back at "The Council of Elrond", where Elrond says "The Three > were not made by Sauron, nor did he ever touch them. ... But they > were not made as weapons of war or conquest: that is not their > power. Those who made them did not desire strength or domination or > hoarded wealth, but understanding, making, and healing, to preserve > all things unstained. These things the Elves of Middle-earth have in > some measure gained, though with sorrow.". I would say that the Mirror was an object that promoted knowledge and understanding. By using it, Galadriel gained much knowledge of what was going on, and that perhaps led to a deeper understanding of the things she saw. > Unless I am completely misunderstanding you, that seems a direct > contradiction: the Elves made the Three Rings for understanding, > making, healing, and preservation. Why make the Rings if they could > have done those things without? Because they enhanced, focused, and transformed. They did themselves have some power, but I view it as a sort of 'force multiplier.' Galadriel's Ring opened new avenues in ways she could use the power that was contained within her. She could sense the mind of Sauron, for example. She could maintain the timeless nature of Lothlorien. She could capture the light of a Silmaril in a glass. Maybe she could have done some of these without her Ring, but not all of them, IMO. But all of these things are a result of her will acting through her Ring. Let us say she wanted to make Lothlorien timeless. I think we can agree this is not something she could have done on her own. So, wearing the Ring, she puts forth her will, and her will is strong enough that the Ring accomplishes her desire...that is, it transforms her wish into reality because her will is strong enough to bring it about. If Pippen had attempted the same thing, he probably would've gotten a migrane and absolutly no other effect. Tuor the Long-winded ###### From: brahms@mindspring.com (Stan Brown) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Galadriel's mirror Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2001 17:07:31 -0500 Organization: Oak Road Systems Lines: 178 Message-ID: References: <3AA72E51@MailAndNews.com> <3A9D0A5E.F3BE2B5A@erols.com> <75tn6.99$w4.1620@newsfeed.uchicago.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: 3f.35.6f.9a X-Server-Date: 4 Mar 2001 22:07:28 GMT X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.10 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!enews.sgi.com!newsxfer.eecs.umich.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newshub2.home.com!news.home.com!news.mindspring.net!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:33326 Quoth Tuor in rec.arts.books.tolkien: > >"Stan Brown" wrote in message >news:MPG.150a6346da0d1c2e98bf39@news.mindspring.com... >> Quoth Tuor in rec.arts.books.tolkien: >> >We know that she came to Lothlorien already in possession of one of the >> >Three. If you had an object that could focus and magnify your power, why >> >would you not make use of it? >> >> Because doing so would lay all your thoughts, plans, and actions >> open to the Enemy. > >Yes, but with or without using her Ring, her works would've been opened to >the Enemy, IMO, because *she* personally made them and thus would be open to >the Enemy regardless. As I said before, you're entitled to your opinion. But your opinions don't seem to agree with the _texts_. Can you show some text that supports your view that Galadriel's thoughts and plans would be open to the Enemy without the Rings? >> >IMO, the power of all of the Great Rings comes >> >ultimately from the weilder of said Ring. >> >> Well, you're entitled to your opinion, but I don't think the text >> supports you. We've discussed this question pretty thoroughly in >> reference to the One Ring in particular. In creating it Sauron let >> "a great part of" his power pass into it, but as a sort of lever >> that gave him access to even greater power. If the Ring's power came >> entirely from Sauron, then why would he need or want such a ring? >> Similarly for the other rings: people wanted them precisely because >> with the rings they could do things that they could not do without >> them. > >As much as I hate doing this, I'm going to have to wax logical about magic. >The Rings all used the same magical 'technology' or, if you prefer, employed >the same methods to produce various results -- logically speaking, they used >the same logic form, even though the specifics of each Ring were different. > >Sauron knew all about the technology behind how the Rings worked, having >taught the Elves some of it himself. So when he created the One, he did it >in such a way as to tie the power of all the Rings with the One, binding >their fates together. This was done through 'technique' or 'knowledge', not >raw power. Before, I thought you might be unaware of the texts involved; since you repeat this assertion it seems you just don't accept them. Gandalf tells us that Sauron let a great part of his own former power pass into the One Ring. This was not just technique or knowledge. Even given the same knowledge, you or I could _not_ have made a Ruling Ring. >Now it is my belief, as I have said, that *all* of the Rings were powered by >the will of the Wielder. You keep saying this, but repetition does not support your argument. > Wearing a Great Ring would >make *any* mortal invisible *unless* they possessed a will strong enough to >prevent that, in which case only the *Ring* was invisible to other eyes >unless (again) the Wielder wanted others to see it -- this, IMO, required an >enormous willpower to achieve. I can't imagine where you got such an idea. Since you have ignored my citations, please provide the citations that support your view that a mortal can choose to remain visible while wearing a Great Ring. >Now simply wearing a Ring implies excercising Free Will because a person >willingly puts it on. No. Counterexample 1: When Bilbo was fleeing Gollum under the Misty Mountains, the Ring slipped itself on his finger Later it slipped itself off again -- both entirely without any volition by Bilbo, express or implied. Counterexample 2: In the Inn at Bree, the Ring slipped itself onto Frodo's finger, again without any volition of his. Counterexample 3: More than once later in the story, we read of Frodo's hand creeping toward the Ring, even though he doesn't want it to. >In fact, it seems to >me that the Seven had less effect and were less powerful in the hands of the >Dwarves than they were for anyone else. However, as I have not managed to >read much about the results of the Seven upon the Dwarves, that is mostly >speculation. This has been discussed before. The Seven and the Nine were not different categories of Rings, merely sixteen rings that Sauron divvied up among Dwarves and men in that manner. The different effects occurred because Men are (were) different from Dwarves, not because the Seven rings were different from the Nine. >The Rings Sauron gave to Men, however, worked just as he expected them to on >everyone else. ... Even when they felt Sauron put on the One, the power >the Nine gave them was too sweet to turn down, and so being enslaved by >their lusts, they became enslaved by their Rings. You seem to be saying that Sauron first gave out the sixteen Rings, and then created the One Ruling Ring. Citation, please? >Wow. After all that, I realize that I haven't said much to support my view >that the Rings were powered by the wills of the Wearers. No kidding. > If Pippen had been given Elrond's Ring, for example, it would have >made him invisible, No. Tolkien tells us that the Three do not confer invisibility. (Letter 131) Though the Nine and the Seven are not different from each other, the Three are different. For one thing, they "endure no evil" ("The Shadow of the Past"). The Three were made by the Elves alone, without any participation by Sauron. > It would *not* have given him >command of the Loudwater (to use an explicit example) Of course not. And nor did it give Elrond that power. The Elven- rings were for healing and preservation, not shows of force. > In fact, it would've >been more or less wasted and probably have done something nasty to Pippen to >boot. No. The Three "endure no evil". >> Look at Gollum, Bilbo, and Frodo: surely you aren't saying that they >> had innate power to turn invisible and to live for decades or >> centuries beyond the normal life span of their kind? > >No. I also don't think that a man has the innate ability to generate >electricity, but if you get some magnets, some wire, some metal, and a >crank, you can make a device that you can crank around and round and it will >generate electricity from *the muscular strength of the person turning the >crank*. Bad analogy. A more apt one would be generating hydroelectricity. The skill and labor of making the ring correspond to the skill and labor of building the dam and the turbines, but the power is from nature. And as for using a Ring that someone else made, the analogy is flipping a switch or plugging an appliance into the wall. One can tap the power withou6t knowing how it is generated. >> >Again, as I said, I think that her Ring only amplified the talents she >> >already had. >> >> Here I think we have a fundamental disagreement. You might want to >> look back at "The Council of Elrond", where Elrond says "The Three >> were not made by Sauron, nor did he ever touch them. ... But they >> were not made as weapons of war or conquest: that is not their >> power. Those who made them did not desire strength or domination or >> hoarded wealth, but understanding, making, and healing, to preserve >> all things unstained. These things the Elves of Middle-earth have in >> some measure gained, though with sorrow.". > >I would say that the Mirror was an object that promoted knowledge and >understanding. By using it, Galadriel gained much knowledge of what was >going on, and that perhaps led to a deeper understanding of the things she >saw. Perhaps -- but you have not responded to my point. -- Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA http://oakroadsystems.com Tolkien FAQs: http://home.uchicago.edu/~sbjensen/Tolkien/ Encyclopedia of Arda: http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/default.htm more FAQs: http://oakroadsystems.com/tech/faqget.htm ###### From: "Tuor" Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien References: <3AA72E51@MailAndNews.com> <3A9D0A5E.F3BE2B5A@erols.com> <75tn6.99$w4.1620@newsfeed.uchicago.edu> Subject: Re: Galadriel's mirror Lines: 338 Organization: Gondolin Defense Force (retired) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2001 11:17:09 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 63.21.254.116 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net 983791029 63.21.254.116 (Mon, 05 Mar 2001 03:17:09 PST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2001 03:17:09 PST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.dplanet.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!enews.sgi.com!newshub2.rdc1.sfba.home.com!news.home.com!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!newsfeed1.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!newsmaster1.prod.itd.earthlink.net!newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:33294 "Stan Brown" wrote in message news:MPG.150c86b3174e05f598bf50@news.mindspring.com... > Quoth Tuor in rec.arts.books.tolkien: > > > >"Stan Brown" wrote in message > >news:MPG.150a6346da0d1c2e98bf39@news.mindspring.com... > >> Quoth Tuor in rec.arts.books.tolkien: > >> >We know that she came to Lothlorien already in possession of one of the > >> >Three. If you had an object that could focus and magnify your power, why > >> >would you not make use of it? > >> > >> Because doing so would lay all your thoughts, plans, and actions > >> open to the Enemy. > > > >Yes, but with or without using her Ring, her works would've been opened to > >the Enemy, IMO, because *she* personally made them and thus would be open to > >the Enemy regardless. > > As I said before, you're entitled to your opinion. But your opinions > don't seem to agree with the _texts_. You mean they don't agree with your interpretation of the text. Okay. I'll try to fix that. Apparently I haven't been doing well so far. > Can you show some text that supports your view that Galadriel's > thoughts and plans would be open to the Enemy without the Rings? My point was that she had a Ring in her possession, therefore anything she made would be open to the Enemy because he would simply take from her mind the knowledge and understanding of it. That is *she* would be open to him, and therefore anything she had done, with or without the Ring, would be laid bare. *Everything* she saw, heard, felt, knew -- all of her strengths and weaknesses, her dreams and ideas, and her powers would be made plain to him. > >> >IMO, the power of all of the Great Rings comes > >> >ultimately from the weilder of said Ring. > >> > >> Well, you're entitled to your opinion, but I don't think the text > >> supports you. We've discussed this question pretty thoroughly in > >> reference to the One Ring in particular. In creating it Sauron let > >> "a great part of" his power pass into it, but as a sort of lever > >> that gave him access to even greater power. If the Ring's power came > >> entirely from Sauron, then why would he need or want such a ring? > >> Similarly for the other rings: people wanted them precisely because > >> with the rings they could do things that they could not do without > >> them. > > > >As much as I hate doing this, I'm going to have to wax logical about magic. > >The Rings all used the same magical 'technology' or, if you prefer, employed > >the same methods to produce various results -- logically speaking, they used > >the same logic form, even though the specifics of each Ring were different. > > > >Sauron knew all about the technology behind how the Rings worked, having > >taught the Elves some of it himself. So when he created the One, he did it > >in such a way as to tie the power of all the Rings with the One, binding > >their fates together. This was done through 'technique' or 'knowledge', not > >raw power. > > Before, I thought you might be unaware of the texts involved; since > you repeat this assertion it seems you just don't accept them. > Gandalf tells us that Sauron let a great part of his own former > power pass into the One Ring. This was not just technique or > knowledge. Even given the same knowledge, you or I could _not_ have > made a Ruling Ring. He imbued his Ring with his native power in order for it to be able to overpower the other Wielders of the Great Rings. Hmm...think of having radio transmitters working on the same frequency, and then making a transmitter that worked on the same frequency as the others, but at a far higher wattage -- it would drown out the others. But the skill of making the transmitters would be the same for them all, the difference would be in the power possessed by that last transmitter. But I will admit that I may be wrong in whether it was technique (the skill of Ring making) or power (his native power imbued into the One) that caused the fates of the Rings to be tied together. I was speculating as to that particular aspect of Ring-lore (as a whole). It made sense to me (and still does) but I can see that it doesn't make sense to you...at least not so you'd agree with it. > >Now it is my belief, as I have said, that *all* of the Rings were powered by > >the will of the Wielder. > > You keep saying this, but repetition does not support your argument. I'll try to do a better job later on. > > Wearing a Great Ring would > >make *any* mortal invisible *unless* they possessed a will strong enough to > >prevent that, in which case only the *Ring* was invisible to other eyes > >unless (again) the Wielder wanted others to see it -- this, IMO, required an > >enormous willpower to achieve. > > I can't imagine where you got such an idea. Since you have ignored > my citations, please provide the citations that support your view > that a mortal can choose to remain visible while wearing a Great > Ring. I never said a mortal could. I said the *wielder* could. Frankly, I doubt any mortal has the strength of will to accomplish it. Perhaps Isildur could if he had wanted to, but in the only recorded incidence of him wearing the Ring, he most certainly wanted to remain invisible. I think if Gandalf, for example, were to have worn the One, he would not have become invisible anymore than Tom did...not unless he wanted to. > >Now simply wearing a Ring implies excercising Free Will because a person > >willingly puts it on. > > No. > > Counterexample 1: When Bilbo was fleeing Gollum under the Misty > Mountains, the Ring slipped itself on his finger Later it slipped > itself off again -- both entirely without any volition by Bilbo, > express or implied. The Hobbit. Hmm...I'll have to give you this one, though I could argue that Tolkien hadn't yet realized that the 'magic ring' was the One Ring and didn't want to heavily revise the story in order to make the two more synonymous. Unfortuantely, I think such an argument would be pretty weak, so I wont try to use it as a defense. > Counterexample 2: In the Inn at Bree, the Ring slipped itself onto > Frodo's finger, again without any volition of his. Wrong. That is what he said, just as Bilbo said he won the Ring in a riddle-contest. IMO, Frodo didn't want to admit that his will had been lulled. Aragorn said it wasn't an 'accident' and didn't seem to cut Frodo a lot of slack over the matter (though he didn't make a big deal of it, either.) A better counter-example, IMO, would be that the Ring willfully slipped from Isildur's finger, which one cannot imagine Isildur ever wanting to have happen. OTOH, we can look at it as Providence (note the capital P) saving him from being corrupted by it...the same Providence which caused the Ring to 'decide' to fall away from Gollum and the same Providence Gandalf made mention of when he said that Bilbo was 'meant' to find and therefore Frodo was 'meant' to carry it. I do think that the One had some amount of its own 'mind' -- the strength native to Sauron the he imbued into it -- but only a sliver of limited ability. The One was certainly different than the other Great Rings in many respects, but whether it can all be laid to Sauron's empowerment or to his great skill and knowledge and Ring-lore, I cannot say. > Counterexample 3: More than once later in the story, we read of > Frodo's hand creeping toward the Ring, even though he doesn't want > it to. I have a great liking for chocolate. I sometimes feel a desire to have some pudding and start towards the fridge, then I stop myself and remind myself that I am on a diet. Is the pudding calling me or am I calling the pudding? If I succumb to my desire, does it mean I have no free will in the matter, or that my will was not strong enough to constrain my desire? I would say that the desire to wear the Ring was far greater than my desire for chocolate pudding, but in both cases my free will is maintained. One might bring up the fact that Frodo's free will was finally overcome on the slopes of Mount Doom. This is true and is the only instance of such a thing I have seen in Tolkien's works. Tolkien doesn't seem to like it much himself, because in one of his letters he talks about the subject, and says that Frodo was not at fault because it was *impossible* for him to resist the Ring. Tolkien goes on to say that Frodo was not considered to be responsible for his actions at that point, which is why Divine Providence was able to save him even though he claimed the Ring for his own. > >In fact, it seems to > >me that the Seven had less effect and were less powerful in the hands of the > >Dwarves than they were for anyone else. However, as I have not managed to > >read much about the results of the Seven upon the Dwarves, that is mostly > >speculation. > > This has been discussed before. The Seven and the Nine were not > different categories of Rings, merely sixteen rings that Sauron > divvied up among Dwarves and men in that manner. The different > effects occurred because Men are (were) different from Dwarves, not > because the Seven rings were different from the Nine. I did not mean to imply they were different categories. I was thinking more about the differences in whom they were given to, rather than the Rings themselves. I called them the 'Seven' because they were the Rings given to the Dwarves, not because they were different than the Nine. Note, however, that if there were no major differences between them, then how is it that the Seven were (at least in the case of the one that ended up in the possession of Thrain) used to make gold out of gold, yet the Nine seemed to have far different effects? I think that the effects were determined by the wearers, which would imply that their souls (fear) had some sort of bearing on their effects. > >The Rings Sauron gave to Men, however, worked just as he expected them to on > >everyone else. ... Even when they felt Sauron put on the One, the power > >the Nine gave them was too sweet to turn down, and so being enslaved by > >their lusts, they became enslaved by their Rings. > > You seem to be saying that Sauron first gave out the sixteen Rings, > and then created the One Ruling Ring. Citation, please? Let's see. All of the Great Rings (except the One) were forged by the Ring-smiths of Eregion. Sauron had a hand in the forging of all of them except the Three. Sauron then withdrew to Orodruin and forged the One. Once he was done, he uttered those words Gandalf repeated in Rivendell. Celebrimber knew he and his fellows had been betrayed. Sauron marched an army into Eregion and wrecked devestation, killing lots of the Smiths and *taking the Great Rings*...except the Three, which Celebrimbor took with him into Khazad-Dum...and maybe one other Ring which he may have given to Durin. So, having given the above story, it becomes clear that Sauron *could not* have given anyone any of the Great Rings until after he made the One. It's so fun to destroy your own argument. > >Wow. After all that, I realize that I haven't said much to support my view > >that the Rings were powered by the wills of the Wearers. > > No kidding. > > > If Pippen had been given Elrond's Ring, for example, it would have > >made him invisible, > > No. Tolkien tells us that the Three do not confer invisibility. > (Letter 131) Fine. Let's use one of the other sixteen, then. > Though the Nine and the Seven are not different from each other, the > Three are different. For one thing, they "endure no evil" ("The > Shadow of the Past"). The Three were made by the Elves alone, > without any participation by Sauron. But they still used knowledge given them by Sauron. That is why their power faded after the One was destroyed, IMO. > > It would *not* have given him > >command of the Loudwater (to use an explicit example) > > Of course not. And nor did it give Elrond that power. The Elven- > rings were for healing and preservation, not shows of force. So, how do you explain the river rising up against the evil of the Nazgul? How do the Three prevent an evil person from wearing them? > > In fact, it would've > >been more or less wasted and probably have done something nasty to Pippen to > >boot. > > No. The Three "endure no evil". As above, insert one of the other sixteen rings. I am attempting to show general characteristics of the Great Rings, not show attirbutes particular to a few of them. > >> Look at Gollum, Bilbo, and Frodo: surely you aren't saying that they > >> had innate power to turn invisible and to live for decades or > >> centuries beyond the normal life span of their kind? > > > >No. I also don't think that a man has the innate ability to generate > >electricity, but if you get some magnets, some wire, some metal, and a > >crank, you can make a device that you can crank around and round and it will > >generate electricity from *the muscular strength of the person turning the > >crank*. > > Bad analogy. A more apt one would be generating hydroelectricity. > The skill and labor of making the ring correspond to the skill and > labor of building the dam and the turbines, but the power is from > nature. The 'skill and labor' would be the Elven-smiths of Eregion (with various levels of help from Sauron) -- that is, lore and craft. Power is from the individual. So, the analogy I made is bad if you disagree with it, not in and of itself. > And as for using a Ring that someone else made, the analogy is > flipping a switch or plugging an appliance into the wall. One can > tap the power withou6t knowing how it is generated. So...the Ring gave Sam better hearing, but Frodo better sight. Why? Galadriel (or maybe Gandalf) says that the Rings give abilities in accordance with the stature of the Wielder. If we used your analogy, then each particular Ring would give particular results utterly independant of whomever was wearing it. So, not only invisibility would remain a common attribute (except for the Three), but everything else as well. Yet, as I said earlier, the One improved Sam's hearing and Frodo's sight. > >> >Again, as I said, I think that her Ring only amplified the talents she > >> >already had. > >> > >> Here I think we have a fundamental disagreement. You might want to > >> look back at "The Council of Elrond", where Elrond says "The Three > >> were not made by Sauron, nor did he ever touch them. ... But they > >> were not made as weapons of war or conquest: that is not their > >> power. Those who made them did not desire strength or domination or > >> hoarded wealth, but understanding, making, and healing, to preserve > >> all things unstained. These things the Elves of Middle-earth have in > >> some measure gained, though with sorrow.". > > > >I would say that the Mirror was an object that promoted knowledge and > >understanding. By using it, Galadriel gained much knowledge of what was > >going on, and that perhaps led to a deeper understanding of the things she > >saw. > > Perhaps -- but you have not responded to my point. The point about...whether power resides entirely in a magical object or whether the object facilitates and directs the power of a person? Are you saying that Gandalf could have created a Mirror using his Ring of Fire? You keep coming back to the Three in your arguments, yet I imagine you'll say something about how each of the Three was unique with different attributes and focus. I'd agree with you. Do you think that Narya worked the same for Cirdan as it did for Gandalf? My concept of how the Rings work is similar to Tolkien's stated concepts on how the Palantir work. I simply applied the theory from one to the other making allowances where appropriate. So far, nothing has entirely disproven the idea. Tuor ###### From: brahms@mindspring.com (Stan Brown) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Galadriel's mirror Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2001 12:39:56 -0500 Organization: Oak Road Systems Lines: 55 Message-ID: References: <3AA72E51@MailAndNews.com> <3A9D0A5E.F3BE2B5A@erols.com> <75tn6.99$w4.1620@newsfeed.uchicago.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: 3f.35.6f.21 X-Server-Date: 5 Mar 2001 17:39:48 GMT X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.10 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news-fra1.dfn.de!news.tele.dk!199.60.229.5!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!newsfeed1.earthlink.net!newsfeed2.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!news.mindspring.net!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:33330 Quoth Tuor in rec.arts.books.tolkien: >My point was that she had a Ring in her possession, therefore anything she >made would be open to the Enemy because he would simply take from her mind >the knowledge and understanding of it. >"Stan Brown" wrote in message >news:MPG.150c86b3174e05f598bf50@news.mindspring.com... >> As I said before, you're entitled to your opinion. But your opinions >> don't seem to agree with the _texts_. > >You mean they don't agree with your interpretation of the text. Okay. I'll >try to fix that. Apparently I haven't been doing well so far. This is not a matter of interpretation. The text says in so many words that the Enemy could see and even control the thoughts of those who _used_ the rings, not of those who _held_ the rings. "And while he wore the One Ring he could perceive all the things that were done by means of the lesser rings, and he could see and govern the very thoughts of those that wore them. But the Elves were not so lightly to be caught. As soon as Sauron set the One Ring upon his finger they were aware of him; and they knew him, and perceived that he would be master of them. ..." -- "Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age" "But secretly ... 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, ... The moment he assumed the One, they ... hid the Three Rings, so that not even Sauron ever discovered where they were and they remained unsullied." -- Letter 131, page 152 in the hardback Note again that having a ring in one's "possession" does not lay bare one's thoughts to Sauron, contrary to hat you say. I really don't see how any reasonable interpretation of the texts can come to any other conclusion. >But I will admit that I may be wrong in whether it was technique (the skill >of Ring making) or power (his native power imbued into the One) that caused >the fates of the Rings to be tied together. I was speculating as to that >particular aspect of Ring-lore (as a whole). It made sense to me (and still >does) but I can see that it doesn't make sense to you...at least not so >you'd agree with it. Sigh. I see you wrote a lot more, but I stopped reading at this point. Earlier I suggested you read Letter #131. I suggest it again. -- Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA http://oakroadsystems.com My reply address is correct as is. The courtesy of providing a correct reply address is more important to me than time spent deleting spam. ###### From: "Tuor" Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien References: <3AA72E51@MailAndNews.com> <3A9D0A5E.F3BE2B5A@erols.com> <75tn6.99$w4.1620@newsfeed.uchicago.edu> Subject: Re: Galadriel's mirror Lines: 121 Organization: Gondolin Defense Force (retired) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2001 04:52:45 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 63.22.5.236 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net 983940765 63.22.5.236 (Tue, 06 Mar 2001 20:52:45 PST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2001 20:52:45 PST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news-fra1.dfn.de!news0.de.colt.net!colt.net!newspeer.clara.net!news.clara.net!feed2.onemain.com!feed1.onemain.com!newsfeed2.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!newsmaster1.prod.itd.earthlink.net!newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:33353 "Stan Brown" wrote in message news:MPG.150d9974d66f77b598bf56@news.mindspring.com... > Quoth Tuor in rec.arts.books.tolkien: > >My point was that she had a Ring in her possession, therefore anything she > >made would be open to the Enemy because he would simply take from her mind > >the knowledge and understanding of it. > > >"Stan Brown" wrote in message > >news:MPG.150c86b3174e05f598bf50@news.mindspring.com... > >> As I said before, you're entitled to your opinion. But your opinions > >> don't seem to agree with the _texts_. > > > >You mean they don't agree with your interpretation of the text. Okay. I'll > >try to fix that. Apparently I haven't been doing well so far. > > This is not a matter of interpretation. The text says in so many > words that the Enemy could see and even control the thoughts of > those who _used_ the rings, not of those who _held_ the rings. > > "And while he wore the One Ring he could perceive all the things > that were done by means of the lesser rings, and he could see and > govern the very thoughts of those that wore them. > But the Elves were not so lightly to be caught. As soon as Sauron > set the One Ring upon his finger they were aware of him; and they > knew him, and perceived that he would be master of them. ..." > -- "Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age" > > "But secretly ... 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, ... The moment he assumed the One, they ... hid the Three > Rings, so that not even Sauron ever discovered where they were and > they remained unsullied." -- Letter 131, page 152 in the hardback > > Note again that having a ring in one's "possession" does not lay > bare one's thoughts to Sauron, contrary to hat you say. I really > don't see how any reasonable interpretation of the texts can come to > any other conclusion. I never said it. I used the word 'wielder' and 'wearer' repeatedly, not 'bearer'. For more on this, see below. > >But I will admit that I may be wrong in whether it was technique (the skill > >of Ring making) or power (his native power imbued into the One) that caused > >the fates of the Rings to be tied together. I was speculating as to that > >particular aspect of Ring-lore (as a whole). It made sense to me (and still > >does) but I can see that it doesn't make sense to you...at least not so > >you'd agree with it. > > Sigh. '...Sauron made the 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 lesser rings, could govern all that they did, and in the end could utterly enslave them.' -- Letter #131 He then talks about how Sauron attacked Eregion, captured a bunch of Great Rings, and gave them out to corrupt those who accepted them. Tolkien says that while Sauron wore the Ring, his power was enhanced, but he doesn't say why that should be so or exactly how that comes about. Is the enhancement due to the Ring acting as a magnifying glass? One could say a telescope enhances the power of sight. Or does the Ring act like a power pack? Nothing I read in the Letter preclude the idea that the Ring enhances by focusing the wearer's natural abilities and, as we see with Sam when he wears the One, often at the expense of some other ability (the 'fog' Sam was in while wearing the One). > I see you wrote a lot more, but I stopped reading at this point. > > Earlier I suggested you read Letter #131. I suggest it again. Fine. When do you think Galadriel started using her Ring? Or do you think she merely kept it on a chain around her neck? Hmm? Well? So, she uses her Ring because she knows Sauron no longer has the One. She uses the Ring to create the sort of atmosphere in Lothlorien as described in LotR. Right? She hoped the Ring would never be found. Her whole conversation to Frodo was about the fact that all she'd built using her Ring was in jeapordy. She couldn't *stop* wearing her Ring without losing all that she'd built. Otherwise, she wouldn't be in the lose-lose situation she described to Frodo. Gah. I just read Letter #131. It was long. One of the interesting things about it is that the Three may have been pure, but they were made for reasons that were not entirely pure: that is, the Elves wanted to use Magic to halt the natural functioning of Time upon the world (or at least parts of it). I also found some interesting things about the size and power of the Numenorean Armada sent to Aman, but that's for a different argument. Tolkien says that the Noldor used magic in the creation of the Rings as a sort of substitute for a Machine whose purpose was to prevent the Elves from 'fading.' I got the impression that many Elves it was better to reign in Middle-earth than to be of little note in Aman. At any rate, I found nothing in Letter #131 that precluded my viewpoint on the idea that anything made by Galadriel would be revealed to Sauron should he get hold of the One. As I said above, I don't think Galadriel would've been willing to take off her Ring and give up all that it perserved. I think I said something about how I thought Sauron was weaker after having had his Ring removed. Tolkien says that he was not weakened so long as the One existed. He was merely unable to make use of the features built into the One. Only if the One were destroyed or successfully used against him by someone of sufficent strength would he be weakened. I'm still left wondering, then, why it took him so long to reform after Isildur chopped the One from his finger when he reformed rather quickly after being destroyed in Numenor. Tuor PS : You should've read the rest of my message. I do a good job destroying one of my own assertions. I rather enjoyed doing it.