From: shermanlee1@hotmail.com (Johnny1A) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 2 May 2003 19:59:46 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 13 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.145.156.24 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1051930786 14347 127.0.0.1 (3 May 2003 02:59:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 May 2003 02:59:46 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116546 We're told in the _Akallabeth_ that Ar-Pharazon, when his Navy had reached the actual shores of Valinor, hesitated for a moment, before his pride overcame him. But I wonder, suppose he had had an attack of common sense, and decided to turn back? He had _already_ defied the law of Manwe just by approaching so close to Valinor, but Tolkien said that 'doom hung by a thread'. What happens when the Navy returns to Valinor? Is Pharazon deposed? What happens to Sauron? Etc? Shermanlee ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien From: AC Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: Reply-To: maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Lines: 44 X-Complaints-To: abuse@randori.com - Please include ALL headers, thanks. Organization: http://www.randori.com - Fast, Complete, Great Retention! Date: Sat, 03 May 2003 04:42:09 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.stueberl.de!news.csl-gmbh.net!news-out.nuthinbutnews.com!propagator2-sterling!in.nntp.be!feed.news.sonic.net!69.22.128.15.MISMATCH!newsfeeder2.randori.com!news.randori.com!263039bc!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116427 In article , Johnny1A wrote: > We're told in the _Akallabeth_ that Ar-Pharazon, when his Navy had > reached the actual shores of Valinor, hesitated for a moment, before > his pride overcame him. > > But I wonder, suppose he had had an attack of common sense, and > decided to turn back? He had _already_ defied the law of Manwe just > by approaching so close to Valinor, but Tolkien said that 'doom hung > by a thread'. > > What happens when the Navy returns to Valinor? Is Pharazon deposed? > What happens to Sauron? Etc? I'm assuming that such a defeat would be political suicide for Ar-Pharazon. His claim to the throne wasn't the greatest, and he had had to violate Numenorean law by marrying his cousin. Beyond that, I have a feeling that the Valar would not have permitted Ar-Pharazon to continue as king of Numenor after the failed invasion. Possibly Tar-Míriel would have been given the the throne, but I can't see it myself. It would really depend on what would have happened to Sauron. He had become Ar-Pharazon's chief councillor, and under normal circumstances, that would have made his position untenable. I have a feeling that along with insisting that Ar-Pharazon surrender the Sceptre, the Valar would likely take Sauron into custody. Sauron might try to flee, but he would be in a very difficult position, stuck so close to Aman. Perhaps he could escape, which would still leave the problem of the Ruling Ring and its master at large. If not, then I can presume that the Valar would have themselves destroyed the Ring, which would end the problem of the Lord of the Rings. At that point I'm quite certain that Elendil would have been given the throne, though it would be a difficult prospect. I'm certain that many would view the Faithful as being traitors, and the problem of the Numenoreans still desiring to escape death is still present. Still, the best anybody could hope for is that under the rule of Elendil, time and healing might bring some measure of peace to the realm, though I suspect that you might see a lot of Ar-Pharazon's supporters probably departing from Numenor, unwilling to remain with Elendil as king. -- A. Clausen maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net ###### From: "Jaime Frontero" Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien References: Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Lines: 41 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.118.8.106 X-Complaints-To: abuse@attbi.com X-Trace: sccrnsc02 1051940744 24.118.8.106 (Sat, 03 May 2003 05:45:44 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 03 May 2003 05:45:44 GMT Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Sat, 03 May 2003 05:45:44 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!snoopy.risq.qc.ca!cyclone.bc.net!logbridge.uoregon.edu!nntp-server.caltech.edu!attla2!ip.att.net!attbi_feed3!attbi_feed4!attbi.com!sccrnsc02.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116402 "AC" wrote in message news:slrnbb6i4v.h1a.maureen-taocow-ng1@ts1.alberni.net... > circumstances, that would have made his position untenable. I have a > feeling that along with insisting that Ar-Pharazon surrender the Sceptre, > the Valar would likely take Sauron into custody. Sauron might try to flee, > but he would be in a very difficult position, stuck so close to Aman. > Perhaps he could escape, which would still leave the problem of the Ruling > Ring and its master at large. If not, then I can presume that the Valar > would have themselves destroyed the Ring, which would end the problem of the > Lord of the Rings. > > At that point I'm quite certain that Elendil would have been given the > throne, though it would be a difficult prospect. I'm certain that many > would view the Faithful as being traitors, and the problem of the > Numenoreans still desiring to escape death is still present. Still, the > best anybody could hope for is that under the rule of Elendil, time and > healing might bring some measure of peace to the realm, though I suspect > that you might see a lot of Ar-Pharazon's supporters probably departing from > Numenor, unwilling to remain with Elendil as king. > that sounds pretty much like how it would have to have gone. it would have made a tremendous alternate storyline, if sauron had escaped. sauron back at barad-dur. elendil on the throne of numenor. and the largest loose canon in the history of middle-earth - ar-pharazon's supporters, which would presumably include the bulk of his military - fleeing to ... where? why gondor, of course! the results would be inevitable. mass exodus of the elves out of m-e, and, inevitably, the last alliance *of barad-dur and gondor* arrayed against a tremendously diminished elven force, and... a weakened numenor! who wins that one? j ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien From: AC Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: Reply-To: maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Lines: 44 X-Complaints-To: abuse@randori.com - Please include ALL headers, thanks. Organization: http://www.randori.com - Fast, Complete, Great Retention! Date: Sat, 03 May 2003 15:54:20 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!newsfeed.vmunix.org!news.ticon.net!feed.news.sonic.net!69.22.128.15.MISMATCH!newsfeeder2.randori.com!news.randori.com!263039bc!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116438 In article , Yuk Tang wrote: > AC wrote: >> >> I'm assuming that such a defeat would be political suicide for >> Ar-Pharazon. His claim to the throne wasn't the greatest, and he had >> had to violate Numenorean law by marrying his cousin. Beyond that, I >> have a feeling that the Valar would not have permitted Ar-Pharazon to >> continue as king of Numenor after the failed invasion. >> >> Possibly Tar-Míriel would have been given the the throne, > > [snip etc.] > > How would the Valar have enforced such a decision? They were unwilling to > defend themselves, even on their own land, so would they have actively > deposed Ar-Pharazon? What is more likely is that AP is overthrown by other > Numenoreans, with Sauron probably acting as Kingmaker. Whatever happened, > the Elendili would not have prevailed. I do think the Valar would have interfered if Ar-Pharazon backed down. They were unwilling to strike down the fleet, and in general the Valar seemed to avoid openly showing their power. But Ar-Pharazon, even if he had backed down, had still rebelled against their authority, which comes from Eru. They certainly would not have let Sauron remain in Numenor, since he was a major contributor to the attempted invasion. It is because of Sauron, more than anything else, that I feel it likely that the Valar would have deposed Ar-Pharazon. As to putting Elendil on the throne, that is just more guesswork. Possibly another candidate could be found who could bridge the distance between any possible factions, because, let's face it, Ar-Pharazon's defeat would cause chaos on the home front. I have little doubt that even just the fear that the Valar might decide to take care of any uppety Numenoreans would be sufficient for many to look elsewhere for leadership, if only to appease the Valar. Of one thing I am certain, the Valar would not have permitted Sauron to remain in Numenor. To do that would be to simply see the whole sorry performance repeated by some puppet. -- A. Clausen maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net ###### From: mair_fheal@yahoo.com (coyotes morgan mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Sat, 03 May 2003 10:26:22 -0700 Organization: eden huntersstrand Message-ID: References: X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 8 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-01!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!c59.ppp.tsoft.com!user Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116539 > They certainly would not have let Sauron remain in Numenor, since he was a > major contributor to the attempted invasion. It is because of Sauron, more they hadnt done anything about him before and i think even they would know the way to barad dur do you know the way to baraddur ive got lots of orcs there ###### X-Trace-PostClient-IP: 68.144.28.85 From: "Psycho Psycho" Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien References: Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Lines: 47 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: Date: Sat, 03 May 2003 19:25:23 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.71.223.147 X-Complaints-To: abuse@shaw.ca X-Trace: news1.calgary.shaw.ca 1051989923 24.71.223.147 (Sat, 03 May 2003 13:25:23 MDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 03 May 2003 13:25:23 MDT Organization: Shaw Residential Internet Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!sjc70.webusenet.com!news.webusenet.com!pd2nf1so.cg.shawcable.net!residential.shaw.ca!news1.calgary.shaw.ca.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116531 Jaime Frontero wrote: > "AC" wrote in message > news:slrnbb6i4v.h1a.maureen-taocow-ng1@ts1.alberni.net... > >> At that point I'm quite certain that Elendil would have been given >> the throne, though it would be a difficult prospect. I'm certain >> that many would view the Faithful as being traitors, and the problem >> of the Numenoreans still desiring to escape death is still present. >> Still, the best anybody could hope for is that under the rule of >> Elendil, time and healing might bring some measure of peace to the >> realm, though I suspect that you might see a lot of Ar-Pharazon's >> supporters probably departing from Numenor, unwilling to remain with >> Elendil as king. >> > > that sounds pretty much like how it would have to have gone. it > would have made a tremendous alternate storyline, if sauron had > escaped. sauron back at barad-dur. elendil on the throne of > numenor. and the largest loose canon in the history of middle-earth > - ar-pharazon's supporters, which would presumably include the bulk > of his military - fleeing to ... where? why gondor, of course! > > the results would be inevitable. mass exodus of the elves out of > m-e, and, inevitably, the last alliance *of barad-dur and gondor* > arrayed against a tremendously diminished elven force, and... a > weakened numenor! who wins that one? > > j Compelling idea, what a great alternative story. I could see a Valinorean investigation following Ar-Pharazon back to home port, with overriding judicial authority and Sauron at the top of the most-wanted list. Of course Sauron could have an escape arranged but more likely he would be tossed in prison and then tried. Ar-Pharazon would wind up deposed, he and the most loyal of his fleet captains and apparatchiks sail back to middle-earth. But to Umbar, not Pelargir. So we'd have an Umbarian empire representing a huge threat to Numenor, Pelargir (Gondor) and Cirdan. Another end-of-second age battle ensues, maybe Sauron escapes in the middle of it all. Assuming the bulk of the Numenorean navy is still law-abiding and faithful to the legitimate government, Ar-Pharazon and Sauron still don't stand a chance against such a huge force. ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien From: AC Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: Reply-To: maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net Message-ID: User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Lines: 23 X-Complaints-To: abuse@randori.com - Please include ALL headers, thanks. Organization: http://www.randori.com - Fast, Complete, Great Retention! Date: Sat, 03 May 2003 20:20:20 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!sjc70.webusenet.com!news.webusenet.com!feed.news.sonic.net!69.22.128.15.MISMATCH!newsfeeder2.randori.com!news.randori.com!263039bc!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116421 In article , coyotes morgan mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges wrote: >> They certainly would not have let Sauron remain in Numenor, since he was a >> major contributor to the attempted invasion. It is because of Sauron, more > > they hadnt done anything about him before > and i think even they would know the way to barad dur > > do you know the way to baraddur > ive got lots of orcs there I'm certain the Valar knew the way to Barad-dur. They had a history of doing as little as possible, which had not always worked out for the best. I simply can't believe that if Ar-Pharazon had turned his fleet around and returned to Numenor that the Valar would have sat around. Clearly the Numenoreans, being manipulated by Sauron, were capable of a degree of rebellion against the rightful governors of Arda beyond which even the Noldor had done. -- A. Clausen maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net ###### From: shermanlee1@hotmail.com (Johnny1A) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 3 May 2003 20:57:36 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 78 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.206.150.11 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1052020657 13228 127.0.0.1 (4 May 2003 03:57:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 4 May 2003 03:57:37 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116545 "Yuk Tang" wrote in message news:... > AC wrote: > > In article , Yuk Tang wrote: > >> AC wrote: > >>> > >>> I'm assuming that such a defeat would be political suicide for > >>> Ar-Pharazon. His claim to the throne wasn't the greatest, and he had > >>> had to violate Numenorean law by marrying his cousin. Beyond that, > >>> I have a feeling that the Valar would not have permitted > >>> Ar-Pharazon to continue as king of Numenor after the failed > >>> invasion. > >> > >> How would the Valar have enforced such a decision? They were > >> unwilling to defend themselves, even on their own land, so would > >> they have actively deposed Ar-Pharazon? > > > > I do think the Valar would have interfered if Ar-Pharazon backed > > down. They were unwilling to strike down the fleet, and in general > > the Valar seemed to avoid openly showing their power. But > > Ar-Pharazon, even if he had backed down, had still rebelled against > > their authority, which comes from Eru. > > No evidence of that at that stage. The War of Wrath came about because the > combined children of Eru came to ask for aid against a Vala. The alliance > came to ME to throw down said Vala, with only a small part of his forces > being Eru's creations. The offenders in the 2nd Age were Eruhini (plus one > Maia). Any putting down of this rebellion would involve direct action > against these children, and the Valar were loth to do so even before they > were born. > > The evidence that I see suggests that the Valar, like the elves at the end > of the 3rd Age, were world-weary, and did not wish to further intervene, > even in extreme circumstances. Remember that their previous interventions, > except for the once at the behest of Earendil and Elwing, had turned back on > them. Thus they appealed to Eru to make the decision for them when AP > landed. > > > > They certainly would not have let Sauron remain in Numenor, since he > > was a major contributor to the attempted invasion. It is because of > > Sauron, more than anything else, that I feel it likely that the Valar > > would have deposed Ar-Pharazon. > > The only scenario in which I see the Valar intervening would be if Amandil > had arrived in Valinor to plead his case. Remember that only the > representatives of the combined children of Eru managed to persuade them to > act against Morgoth on their behalf. Similarly, I don't see how any > non-representatives of Numenor would be able to move them to act thus. > > > > As to putting Elendil on the throne, that is just more guesswork. > > Possibly another candidate could be found who could bridge the > > distance between any possible factions, because, let's face it, > > Ar-Pharazon's defeat would cause chaos on the home front. I have > > little doubt that even just the fear that the Valar might decide to > > take care of any uppety Numenoreans would be sufficient for many to > > look elsewhere for leadership, if only to appease the Valar. > > And the Valar have always avoided even risking creating an impression of > fear in the hearts of elves and men. They were created to be the teachers > and guardians of the world. They weren't created to govern the world. > While Gandalf may be a 'steward' of sorts, he did not have the authority to > order the world as he saw fit. Not even Manwe had the authority. That > belonged to Eru, and the children. On the contrary, Manwe is King of Arda and all who dwell therein. He is bound by Eru's laws, and by own preference for a minimalist government, but as far as legal authority goes Manwe is just as much King of the Numenoreans and the Hobbits of Bywater as he is Valimar. Valar, Maiar, Elves, Men, Hobbits, Dwarves, Ents, _everyone_ in Arda is legally Manwe's subject, witin the laws of Eru. It's just that he's not a micromanager. It's true that Manwe and the Valar are not meant to be despots, but that doesn't mean they lack authority. Ar-Pharazon's legal authority (and Aragorn's) derive from Manwe's warrant. Shermanlee ###### From: "Öjevind Lång" Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien,alt.fan.tolkien References: Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Lines: 28 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.101.75.22 X-Complaints-To: news-abuse@swip.net X-Trace: nntpserver.swip.net 1052084310 213.101.75.22 (Sun, 04 May 2003 23:38:30 MET DST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 04 May 2003 23:38:30 MET DST Organization: A Customer of Tele2 X-Sender: s-774765@d213-101-75-22.swipnet.se Date: Sun, 4 May 2003 23:39:25 +0200 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.stueberl.de!news-FFM2.ecrc.net!newsfeed1.swip.net!swipnet!nntpserver.swip.net!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116495 "Jaime Frontero" wrote: [snip] > that sounds pretty much like how it would have to have gone. it would have > made a tremendous alternate storyline, if sauron had escaped. sauron back > at barad-dur. elendil on the throne of numenor. and the largest loose > canon in the history of middle-earth - ar-pharazon's supporters, which would > presumably include the bulk of his military - fleeing to ... where? why > gondor, of course! > > the results would be inevitable. mass exodus of the elves out of m-e, and, > inevitably, the last alliance *of barad-dur and gondor* arrayed against a > tremendously diminished elven force, and... a weakened numenor! who wins > that one? Gondor was the traditional refuge of the Faithful; the King's Men dominated Umbar and other havens even further south. So I don't think Ar-Pharazôn's people would go to Gondor. The next war would have been Gondor, Númenor and the Elves against Mordor and the traditional Black Númenorean areas of southern Middle-earth. Öjevind ###### Message-ID: <3EB628A7.30030589@1.au> From: Jussi Jaatinen <1@1.au> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 33 Date: Mon, 05 May 2003 09:08:04 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 172.21.37.233 X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@nokia.com X-Trace: news2.nokia.com 1052125684 172.21.37.233 (Mon, 05 May 2003 12:08:04 EET DST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 05 May 2003 12:08:04 EET DST Organization: Nokia Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news-FFM2.ecrc.net!uio.no!newsfeed.kolumbus.fi!fi.sn.net!newsfeed1.fi.sn.net!nntp.inet.fi!inet.fi!newsfeed1.nokia.com!news1.nokia.com!news2.nokia.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116506 Yuk Tang wrote: > How would the Valar have enforced such a decision? They were unwilling to > defend themselves, even on their own land, so would they have actively > deposed Ar-Pharazon? What is more likely is that AP is overthrown by other > Numenoreans, with Sauron probably acting as Kingmaker. Whatever happened, > the Elendili would not have prevailed. Another possibility is that if Ar-Pharazon really did "see the light" and turned his fleet back, he could have abdicated and yielded the Sceptre to Tar-Miriel. His abdication would probably have sufficed for the Valar and Tar-Miriel could have renewed the relationship between the Valar and Numenor, perhaps with the change that Mortals could visit Tol Eressea every now and then. The hard-core Kings Men would likely move to Middle-Earth and live there, but these would only be a fraction of the population. The rest would over the next few years see that Tar-Miriel's policies were in the end wiser than his husband's and over a generation or so the corruption of Sauron would be largely undone. As to Sauron, the Numenoreans might imprison him in a "chamber of iron" (as Tolkien might have written) cut deep into bedrock and throw away the key. Or, they might kill him, or banish him, or force him to hand over his Ring and then banish him. The Ring could of course over time become a new corrupting element, but likely Tar-Miriel would listen to advice from Aman and not use it. Then the Numenoreans might constrain Sauron's projects in M-E - if he became too much of a nuisance, they'd threaten to destroy the Ring. -JJ ###### From: conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 5 May 2003 07:02:45 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 40 Message-ID: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.42.51.27 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1052143365 3330 127.0.0.1 (5 May 2003 14:02:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 5 May 2003 14:02:45 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116558 shermanlee1@hotmail.com (Johnny1A) wrote in message news:... > We're told in the _Akallabeth_ that Ar-Pharazon, when his Navy had > reached the actual shores of Valinor, hesitated for a moment, before > his pride overcame him. > > But I wonder, suppose he had had an attack of common sense, and > decided to turn back? Tolkien once described this as a 'trembling moment' and used it alot in his stories. Gollum, Sauron and even Melkor had such moments where they almost, but not quite, turned back and 'did the right thing'. At some level I think this was important to show that they still had 'free choice' but were too far gone to choose the difficult path. > He had _already_ defied the law of Manwe just by approaching so close > to Valinor, but Tolkien said that 'doom hung by a thread'. > What happens when the Navy returns to Valinor? Is Pharazon deposed? > What happens to Sauron? Etc? Hard to say. There were few examples of 'trembling moments' in which the character made the right choice. Hurin set aside his anger at Thingol and thereby avoided a tragedy, but that did not unmake all the other problems in his life. Tolkien speculated in a letter that if Gollum HAD made the right choice (if Sam had not pushed him too far) he would have served Frodo faithfully, but still been subject to the compulsion of the Ring which had corrupted him for so long - eventually taking the Ring and deliberately throwing himself into the fire to save Frodo. From these templates I'd think that Pharazon would have avoided the disaster of the Downfall, but still faced serious consequences. Numenor would probably not have been cast down, but the gifts of the Dunedain would still fade. If they allowed Sauron to remain the Downfall might still happen later. If Pharazon somehow redeemed himself for past evils it could have been a new 'golden age'... that would just be the first of several difficult moments and future decisions would also have consequences. It devolves into too many 'what ifs' to speculate. ###### Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!not-for-mail From: Neil Franklin Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 05 May 2003 20:55:20 +0200 Organization: My own Private Self Lines: 85 Message-ID: <6uznm1ql47.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> References: <3EB628A7.30030589@1.au> NNTP-Posting-Host: chonsp.franklin.ch X-Trace: chonsp.franklin.ch 1052160921 1709 10.0.3.2 (5 May 2003 18:55:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news@chonsp.franklin.ch NNTP-Posting-Date: 5 May 2003 18:55:21 GMT X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116629 Jussi Jaatinen <1@1.au> writes: > Yuk Tang wrote: > > > defend themselves, even on their own land, so would they have actively > > deposed Ar-Pharazon? Unlikely. They would have done the "huh, that was close" thing and gone back to what ever they were doing before. > > What is more likely is that AP is overthrown by other > > Numenoreans, Internal differences, or even quite likely civil war in Numenor. > > with Sauron probably acting as Kingmaker. Too strongly bound to one particular party, the "invaders". > > Whatever happened, > > the Elendili would not have prevailed. It is a multi-party fight: - "invade valinor" hardliners (includes Sauron if party large enough) - "follow the repentant king" party (ex-invade and ex-dont-invade who rejoice at his repentance) - "get rid of this king" as he is week, alllied with get rid of this king because he wanted to invade (but split internally) Trying to predict any outcome here is impossible without enough data on sizes of these parties. > Another possibility is that if Ar-Pharazon really did "see the light" > and turned his fleet back, he could have abdicated and yielded the That would merge the 2nd and 3rd parties. Could win them the fight, unless the 1st party is still very large. > The hard-core Kings Men would likely move to Middle-Earth and live > there, but these would only be a fraction of the population. Yes, as they would have to predict their losing, by being too small. > As to Sauron, Would either win with the 1st party (if large enough) or take them into "exile" in ME, as their leader, using them to build up his new army. > the Numenoreans might imprison him in a "chamber of iron" Unlikely. As he would see the return and know what is on. And get out of the place if he is in danger. > key. Or, they might kill him, or banish him, or force him to hand over > his Ring and then banish him. IIRC the Numenorans did not know of The Ring. They (Elendil and his at least) only found out about this problem when the Elves in ME told them about it, as Sauron started threatening everyone, and the were asking "how could he have survived?". > The Ring could of course over time become > a new corrupting element, but likely Tar-Miriel would listen to advice > from Aman and not use it. More likely it would play its role it did in Tolkien, just with Sauron having the "invader" party remains to start off with. So the battle of the Last Alliance would have to be earlier. -- Neil Franklin, neil@franklin.ch.remove http://neil.franklin.ch/ Hacker, Unix Guru, El Eng HTL/BSc, Programmer, Archer, Blacksmith - hardware runs the world, software controls the hardware code generates the software, have you coded today? ###### From: Stan Brown Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 15:50:10 -0400 Organization: Oak Road Systems Message-ID: References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.60 X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 23 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-06!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116665 Finarfin participated in the Kin-slaying, but repented and was pardoned by the Valar, _and_ made King of the remaining Noldor. If Ar-Pharazôn had truly repented, the Valar might have let him remain King of Númenor and even started letting Elves of Tol Eressëa visit Númenor again. True, he had usurped the throne from his cousin, but if his repentance was genuine the two of them might have ruled jointly. I once started writing a story where Eärendil, Ar-Pharazôn's remote ancestor, was sent to the shore of Valinor and managed to talk his great-to-the-nth-grandson out of landing. I didn't get very far with it, though. -- Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com Tolkien FAQs: http://Tolkien.slimy.com (Steuard Jensen's site) Tolkien letters FAQ: http://users.telerama.com/~taliesen/tolkien/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/tech/faqget.htm ###### From: Tamim Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 5 May 2003 22:30:20 GMT Organization: University of Helsinki Lines: 17 Message-ID: References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: sirppi.helsinki.fi Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1052173820 7716 128.214.205.27 (5 May 2003 22:30:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.helsinki.fi NNTP-Posting-Date: 5 May 2003 22:30:20 GMT User-Agent: tin/1.4.2-20000205 ("Possession") (UNIX) (OSF1/V4.0 (alpha)) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.stueberl.de!feed.news.nacamar.de!uio.no!newsfeed.kolumbus.fi!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116652 Stan Brown wrote: > Finarfin participated in the Kin-slaying, Based on what? His host came the last, and the Silm. tells us that the fight first erupted between Feänor's people and the Teleri but that "the vanguard of the Noldor were succoured by Fingon with the foremost of the host of Fingolfin, who coming up found a battle joined and their own kin falling, and rushed in before they knew rightly the cause of the quarrel" If I understood this correctly only the Fëanorians and some (the fron part) of the Fingolfians participated in the battle. When Finarfin eventually arrived, it was all over. snip ###### From: shermanlee1@hotmail.com (Johnny1A) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 5 May 2003 18:59:40 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 28 Message-ID: References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.206.150.207 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1052186381 7366 127.0.0.1 (6 May 2003 01:59:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 6 May 2003 01:59:41 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!snoopy.risq.qc.ca!headwall.stanford.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116678 Tamim wrote in message news:... > Stan Brown wrote: > > Finarfin participated in the Kin-slaying, > > > > Based on what? His host came the last, and the Silm. tells us that the > fight first erupted between Feänor's people and the Teleri but that "the > vanguard of the Noldor were succoured by Fingon with the foremost of the > host of Fingolfin, who coming up found a battle joined and their own kin > falling, and rushed in before they knew rightly the cause of the > quarrel" > > If I understood this correctly only the Fëanorians and some (the fron > part) of the Fingolfians participated in the battle. When Finarfin > eventually arrived, it was all over. > > snip IIRC it was specifically said that Finarfin was guiltless in the Kinslaying, and being the wisest of the surviving Noldorin princes, the Kinslaying revealed to him the madness and horror that lay ahead on Feanor's path of action. He did have to seek pardon from the Valar for following Feanor in the first place, but this was held a minor crime, esp. since his motive was in much the desire not to have his people led entirely by a supergenius lunatic. Shermanlee ###### From: shermanlee1@hotmail.com (Johnny1A) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 5 May 2003 19:04:54 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 51 Message-ID: References: <3EB628A7.30030589@1.au> NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.206.150.207 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1052186695 7717 127.0.0.1 (6 May 2003 02:04:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 6 May 2003 02:04:55 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116673 Jussi Jaatinen <1@1.au> wrote in message news:<3EB628A7.30030589@1.au>... > Yuk Tang wrote: > > > How would the Valar have enforced such a decision? They were unwilling to > > defend themselves, even on their own land, so would they have actively > > deposed Ar-Pharazon? What is more likely is that AP is overthrown by other > > Numenoreans, with Sauron probably acting as Kingmaker. Whatever happened, > > the Elendili would not have prevailed. > > Another possibility is that if Ar-Pharazon really did "see the light" > and turned his fleet back, he could have abdicated and yielded the > Sceptre to Tar-Miriel. His abdication would probably have sufficed for > the Valar and Tar-Miriel could have renewed the relationship between the > Valar and Numenor, perhaps with the change that Mortals could visit Tol > Eressea every now and then. Not a chance. Eru doesn't permit the Secondborn to just visit the Undying Lands at their wills, even Beren himself was not so permitted. > The hard-core Kings Men would likely move to Middle-Earth and live > there, but these would only be a fraction of the population. The rest > would over the next few years see that Tar-Miriel's policies were in the > end wiser than his husband's and over a generation or so the corruption > of Sauron would be largely undone. Hmm...under Tar-Palantir, it's mentioned that the greatter part of the people did not, at heart, repent. That's part of why Pharazon was able to sieze the Sceptre. > > As to Sauron, the Numenoreans might imprison him in a "chamber of iron" > (as Tolkien might have written) cut deep into bedrock and throw away the > key. Or, they might kill him, or banish him, or force him to hand over > his Ring and then banish him. The Ring could of course over time become > a new corrupting element, but likely Tar-Miriel would listen to advice > from Aman and not use it. Then the Numenoreans might constrain Sauron's > projects in M-E - if he became too much of a nuisance, they'd threaten > to destroy the Ring. > > -JJ They can only do that if they control access to Mordor, and thus the Chambers of Fire, which is not entirely probable if they exile Sauron. He'll return there, and Numenor is now divided and weakened, so driving him out by force becomes iffy. More likely, under those circumstances, Sauron is turned over to the Valar for judgement. Aule, now, I would imagine that he _could_ destroy the One Ring. Shermanlee ###### From: Tar-Elenion Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Message-ID: References: <3EB628A7.30030589@1.au> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Lines: 18 NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.236.164.115 X-Complaints-To: abuse@attbi.com X-Trace: sccrnsc01 1052187921 12.236.164.115 (Tue, 06 May 2003 02:25:21 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 06 May 2003 02:25:21 GMT Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Tue, 06 May 2003 02:25:21 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!irazu.switch.ch!enews.sgi.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!wn13feed!wn12feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.203!attbi_feed3!attbi_feed4!attbi.com!sccrnsc01.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116666 In article <3EB628A7.30030589@1.au>, 1@1.au says... > > As to Sauron, the Numenoreans might imprison him in a "chamber of iron" > (as Tolkien might have written) cut deep into bedrock and throw away the > key. Or, they might kill him, or banish him, or force him to hand over > his Ring and then banish him. The Ring could of course over time become > a new corrupting element, but likely Tar-Miriel would listen to advice > from Aman and not use it. Then the Numenoreans might constrain Sauron's > projects in M-E - if he became too much of a nuisance, they'd threaten > to destroy the Ring. What Ring? The Numenoreans did not know of the Rings of Power; knowledge of them was kept very secret. -- Tar-Elenion Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue. ###### From: Stan Brown Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 23:06:41 -0400 Organization: Oak Road Systems Message-ID: References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.60 X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 34 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-01!sn-post-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116684 Stan Brown wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien: >Finarfin participated in the Kin-slaying, but repented and was >pardoned by the Valar, _and_ made King of the remaining Noldor. Several people have posted disagreements, and I think they are right and I was wrong on this point. I did a fast scan of "The Flight of the Noldor" before posting my earlier article, but it was too hasty. I've now done a less hasty one, and I think I see a contrast between Finarfin's folk on one hand and Fingolfin's folk "not all of [whom] had been guiltless o the Kinslaying" (page 89). I still think Ar-Pharazôn might have been pardoned if he repented. Wicked as he was, he could argue that he had been deceived by the lies of Sauron. He had rebelled against the Valar by sailing too far west of Númenor, but Finarfin had rebelled by marching too far north of Alqualonde. True, Ar-Pharazôn had done worse than Finarfin in usurping the throne and in worshiping Morgoth/Sauron; but the Valar have such a history of light dealings with Men that I bet they would have jumped at the chance to forgive him if he even looked like repenting. But then, what would happen when he returned to Númenor and tried to arrest Sauron, who was wearing the Ring? Probably there would have been a civil war, with the Faithful and some of the King's Men on one side, and the rest of the (former) King's Men fighting for Sauron. It might actually have turned out worse than it did in real life: Sauron might have ended up as the ruler of Númenor and used it as a base to extend his dominion over all of Middle-earth. -- Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com/ "If there's one thing I know, it's men. I ought to: it's been my life work." -- Marie Dressler, in /Dinner at Eight/ ###### Message-ID: <3EB7A4B5.53116A24@1.au> From: Jussi Jaatinen <1@1.au> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB628A7.30030589@1.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 15 Date: Tue, 06 May 2003 11:55:26 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 172.21.37.233 X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@nokia.com X-Trace: news1.nokia.com 1052222126 172.21.37.233 (Tue, 06 May 2003 14:55:26 EET DST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 06 May 2003 14:55:26 EET DST Organization: Nokia Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!uni-erlangen.de!news-nue1.dfn.de!news-fra1.dfn.de!news.f.de.plusline.net!feed.news.nacamar.de!uio.no!newsfeed.kolumbus.fi!fi.sn.net!newsfeed1.fi.sn.net!nntp.inet.fi!inet.fi!newsfeed1.nokia.com!news1.nokia.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116656 Johnny1A wrote: > > Then the Numenoreans might constrain Sauron's > > projects in M-E - if he became too much of a nuisance, they'd threaten > > to destroy the Ring. > They can only do that if they control access to Mordor, and thus the > Chambers of Fire, which is not entirely probable if they exile Sauron. > He'll return there, and Numenor is now divided and weakened, so > driving him out by force becomes iffy. I wouldn't place it beyond the abilities of Numenor at its peak that they could devise a way to break the Ring. -JJ ###### Message-ID: <3EB7A5AD.4B909E41@1.au> From: Jussi Jaatinen <1@1.au> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB628A7.30030589@1.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 24 Date: Tue, 06 May 2003 11:59:35 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 172.21.37.233 X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@nokia.com X-Trace: news1.nokia.com 1052222375 172.21.37.233 (Tue, 06 May 2003 14:59:35 EET DST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 06 May 2003 14:59:35 EET DST Organization: Nokia Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!newsfeed.vmunix.org!uio.no!newsfeed.kolumbus.fi!fi.sn.net!newsfeed1.fi.sn.net!nntp.inet.fi!inet.fi!newsfeed1.nokia.com!news1.nokia.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116659 Tar-Elenion wrote: > > his Ring and then banish him. The Ring could of course over time become > > a new corrupting element, but likely Tar-Miriel would listen to advice > > from Aman and not use it. Then the Numenoreans might constrain Sauron's > > projects in M-E - if he became too much of a nuisance, they'd threaten > > to destroy the Ring. > What Ring? The Numenoreans did not know of the Rings of Power; knowledge > of them was kept very secret. The Numenoreans might consult with the Elves of m-e or indeed the Valar under those kind of circumstances and learn of the Rings of Power. And we don't in fact know that they _didn't_ know of the Rings. They held the palantiri and probably had many, many other ways too to gather intelligence on the goings-on of the world. Although admittedly, if they _did_ know of the Rings there's no point in letting Sauron keep his while in "captivity" in Numenor. If the King knew that the Ruling Ring would indeed grant him eternal life, he'd IMO have taken it. -JJ ###### From: Tar-Elenion Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Message-ID: References: <3EB628A7.30030589@1.au> <3EB7A5AD.4B909E41@1.au> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Lines: 41 NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.236.164.115 X-Complaints-To: abuse@attbi.com X-Trace: sccrnsc04 1052234838 12.236.164.115 (Tue, 06 May 2003 15:27:18 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 06 May 2003 15:27:18 GMT Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Tue, 06 May 2003 15:27:18 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!out.nntp.be!propagator2-sterling!news-in.nuthinbutnews.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!wn14feed!wn13feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.203!attbi_feed3!attbi_feed4!attbi.com!sccrnsc04.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116660 In article <3EB7A5AD.4B909E41@1.au>, 1@1.au says... > > > Tar-Elenion wrote: > > > > his Ring and then banish him. The Ring could of course over time become > > > a new corrupting element, but likely Tar-Miriel would listen to advice > > > from Aman and not use it. Then the Numenoreans might constrain Sauron's > > > projects in M-E - if he became too much of a nuisance, they'd threaten > > > to destroy the Ring. > > What Ring? The Numenoreans did not know of the Rings of Power; knowledge > > of them was kept very secret. > > The Numenoreans might consult with the Elves of m-e or indeed the Valar > under those kind of circumstances and learn of the Rings of Power. And > we don't in fact know that they _didn't_ know of the Rings. They held > the palantiri and probably had many, many other ways too to gather > intelligence on the goings-on of the world. Letter 211: "Sauron's personal 'surrender' was voluntary and cunning : he got free transport to Numenor! He naturally had the One Ring, and so very soon dominated the minds and wills of most of the Númenóreans. (I do not think Ar-Pharazôn knew anything about the One Ring. The Elves kept the matter of the Rings very secret, as long as they could. In any case Ar-Pharazôn was not in communication with them." > > Although admittedly, if they _did_ know of the Rings there's no point in > letting Sauron keep his while in "captivity" in Numenor. If the King > knew that the Ruling Ring would indeed grant him eternal life, he'd IMO > have taken it. > > -JJ > -- Tar-Elenion Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue. ###### From: Tar-Elenion Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Message-ID: References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Lines: 35 NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.236.164.115 X-Complaints-To: abuse@attbi.com X-Trace: sccrnsc03 1052236920 12.236.164.115 (Tue, 06 May 2003 16:02:00 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 06 May 2003 16:02:00 GMT Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Tue, 06 May 2003 16:02:00 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!out.nntp.be!propagator2-sterling!news-in.nuthinbutnews.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!wn14feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.203!attbi_feed3!attbi_feed4!attbi.com!sccrnsc03.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116658 In article <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > Stan Brown wrote: > > > > > But then, what would happen when he returned to Númenor and tried to > > arrest Sauron, who was wearing the Ring? Probably there would have > > been a civil war, with the Faithful and some of the King's Men on > > one side, and the rest of the (former) King's Men fighting for > > Sauron. It might actually have turned out worse than it did in real > > life: Sauron might have ended up as the ruler of Númenor and used it > > as a base to extend his dominion over all of Middle-earth. > > I thought Sauron had left the Ring behind in Barad Dur? "Sauron's personal 'surrender' was voluntary and cunning : he got free transport to Numenor! He naturally had the One Ring, and so very soon dominated the minds and wills of most of the Númenóreans." Letter 211 > > If he had trouble finding the Ring after his later defeat by Elendil and > Gil Galad, evicting [somehow] his spirit from his "manufactured" body, > how would his spirit have located it having been driven from his > original body [surely a more emotionally traumatic affair] in the > Downfall of Numenor? "Though reduced to 'a spirit of hatred borne on a dark wind', I do not think one need boggle at this spirit carrying off the One Ring, upon which his power of dominating minds now largely depended." Letter 211 -- Tar-Elenion Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue. ###### Message-ID: <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quilgey & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 21 Date: Tue, 06 May 2003 16:46:13 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.172.65 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052235984 194.125.172.65 (Tue, 06 May 2003 16:46:24 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 06 May 2003 16:46:24 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.stueberl.de!feed.news.nacamar.de!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!colt.net!newsfeed.esat.net!feeder.news.heanet.ie!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116693 Stan Brown wrote: > But then, what would happen when he returned to Númenor and tried to > arrest Sauron, who was wearing the Ring? Probably there would have > been a civil war, with the Faithful and some of the King's Men on > one side, and the rest of the (former) King's Men fighting for > Sauron. It might actually have turned out worse than it did in real > life: Sauron might have ended up as the ruler of Númenor and used it > as a base to extend his dominion over all of Middle-earth. I thought Sauron had left the Ring behind in Barad Dur? If he had trouble finding the Ring after his later defeat by Elendil and Gil Galad, evicting [somehow] his spirit from his "manufactured" body, how would his spirit have located it having been driven from his original body [surely a more emotionally traumatic affair] in the Downfall of Numenor? M. ###### Message-ID: <3EB849FA.6E2F0ADA@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quilgey & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 26 Date: Tue, 06 May 2003 16:49:14 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.172.65 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052236165 194.125.172.65 (Tue, 06 May 2003 16:49:25 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 06 May 2003 16:49:25 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!zen.net.uk!newspeer.lavaseals.co.uk!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116630 Stan Brown wrote: > > Finarfin participated in the Kin-slaying, but repented and was > pardoned by the Valar, _and_ made King of the remaining Noldor. > > If Ar-Pharazôn had truly repented, the Valar might have let him > remain King of Númenor and even started letting Elves of Tol Eressëa > visit Númenor again. True, he had usurped the throne from his > cousin, but if his repentance was genuine the two of them might have > ruled jointly. Nope. Sorry Stan. Can't see it. He was an evil, overweeningly abitious, greedy, murderous bastard. No chance he would have repented. Mind you IIRC he got his wish. Weren't he and all who landed on Valinorean soil imprisoned under falling hills and kept alive in order to fight in the Last Battle? So immortality such as the Elves had was his in the end. M. ###### Message-ID: <3EB887CF.6400502A@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quilgey & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 422 Date: Tue, 06 May 2003 21:13:03 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.176.232 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052252013 194.125.176.232 (Tue, 06 May 2003 21:13:33 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 06 May 2003 21:13:33 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!zen.net.uk!newspeer.lavaseals.co.uk!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116694 AC wrote: > > In article <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie>, Michael O'Neill wrote: > > Stan Brown wrote: > > > > > > > >> But then, what would happen when he returned to Númenor and tried to > >> arrest Sauron, who was wearing the Ring? Probably there would have > >> been a civil war, with the Faithful and some of the King's Men on > >> one side, and the rest of the (former) King's Men fighting for > >> Sauron. It might actually have turned out worse than it did in real > >> life: Sauron might have ended up as the ruler of Númenor and used it > >> as a base to extend his dominion over all of Middle-earth. > > > > I thought Sauron had left the Ring behind in Barad Dur? > > Not according to Tolkien, who in Letters explains that Sauron had come to > rely upon the Ring to dominate the minds of others. Those damned letters! Y'know, I'm fairly sure at this stage that Tolkien forgot half of what he wrote! His comments make no sense, and here's why. Sauron, you will recall, seduced the Gwaith-i-Mírdain with knowledge. ================================================================= Men he found the easiest to sway of all the peoples of the Earth; but long he sought to persuade the Elves to his service, for he knew that the Firstborn had the greater power; and he went far and wide among them, and his hue was still that of one both fair and wise. Only to Lindon he did not come, for Gil-galad and Elrond doubted him and his fair-seeming, and though they knew not who in truth he was they would not admit him to that land. But elsewhere the Elves received him gladly, and few among them hearkened to the messengers from Lindon bidding them beware; for Sauron took to himself the name of Annatar, the Lord of Gifts, and they had at first much profit from his friendship. And he said to them: "Alas, for the weakness of the great! For a mighty king is Gil-galad, and wise in all lore is Master Elrond, and yet they will not aid me in my labours. Can it be that they do not desire to see other lands become as blissful as their own? But wherefore should Middle-earth remain for ever desolate and dark, whereas the Elves could make it as fair as Eressëa, nay even as Valinor? And since you have not returned thither, as you might, I perceive that you love this Middle-earth, as do I. Is it not then our task to labour together for its enrichment, and for the raising of all the Elven-kindreds that wander here untaught to the height of that power and knowledge which those have who are beyond the Sea?' It was in Eregion that the counsels of Sauron were most gladly received, for in that land the Noldor desired ever to increase the skill and subtlety of their works. Moreover they were not at peace in their hearts, since they had refused to return into the West, and they desired both to stay in Middle-earth, which indeed they loved, and yet to enjoy the bliss of those that had departed. Therefore they hearkened to Sauron, and they learned of him many things, for his knowledge was great. In those days the smiths of Ost-in-Edhil surpassed all that they had contrived before; and they took thought, and they made Rings of Power. But Sauron guided their labours, and he was aware of all that they did; for his desire was to set a bond upon the Elves and to bring them under his vigilance. Now the Elves made many rings; but secretly Sauron made One Ring to rule all the others, and their power was bound up with it, to be subject wholly to it and to last only so long as it too should last. And much of the strength and will of Sauron passed into that One Ring; for the power of the Elven-rings was very great, and that which should govern them must be a thing of surpassing potency; and Sauron forged it in the Mountain of Fire in the Land of Shadow. 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. ================================================================= So much for Sauron needing the Ring to influence people in the ordinary way. The Ring was used ot amplify his native abilities to actually "control" the other Ringbearers. He didn't need such powers for day-to-day dealings with Elves, never mind Mortals. Sauron was Saruman writ large, and had similar powers of persuasion. Tolkien tells us that there were few people "safe" to face Saruman before Helm's deep. Only Theoden, Eomer, Aragorn, Gimli and Gandalf actually challenged him at Orthanc IIRC. That was AFTER his treachery was revealed. Most others present at the time were swayed, despite the losses they knew they, their relatives and their land had suffered. How many people could have faced Sauron directly? Even Gandalf feared that encounter, and Aragorn was shielded in his encounter by his lawful mastery of the Palantír. Whilst we are told that much of Sauron's power and will passed to the Ring, we see in the Third Age that he still retained the ability to dominate others, even from a distance. He didn't need to be wearing the Ring. The Ring's continued existence allowed his spirit to grow and take shape and to exercise his will on the minds of others. Four instances will suffice to show the effects of Sauron minus his Ring on lesser beings. (i) The effect on Frodo on Amon Hen. Without Gandalf ot balance Sauron, he would have yielded the Ring despite his own unwillingness to do so. (ii) The effect of this struggle on Gandalf, as told to the others in The White Rider. (iii) The effect on Pippin of merely being cackled over during his unlawful theft of the Palantír. (iv) The effect on Aragorn of his encounter with Sauron, despite him being the lawful master of the Stone. (v) Finally, and for me most convincingly, the effect on Sauron's slaves when Sauron becomes aware of Frodo claiming the Ring and I quote: =================================================================== And far away, as Frodo put on the Ring and claimed it for his own, even in Sammath Naur the very heart of his realm, the Power in Barad-dûr was shaken, and the Tower trembled from its foundations to its proud and bitter crown. The Dark Lord was suddenly aware of him, and his Eye piercing all shadows looked across the plain to the door that he had made; and the magnitude of his own folly was revealed to him in a blinding flash, and all the devices of his enemies were at last laid bare. Then his wrath blazed in consuming flame, but his fear rose like a vast black smoke to choke him. For he knew his deadly peril and the thread upon which his doom now hung. From all his policies and webs of fear and treachery, from all his stratagems and wars his mind shook free; and throughout his realm a tremor ran, his slaves quailed, and his armies halted, and his captains suddenly steerless, bereft of will, wavered and despaired. For they were forgotten. The whole mind and purpose of the Power that wielded them was now bent with overwhelming force upon the Mountain. At his summons, wheeling with a rending cry, in a last desperate race there flew, faster than the winds, the Nazgûl the Ringwraiths, and with a storm of wings they hurtled southwards to Mount Doom. =================================================================== The operative phrases are: "and throughout his realm a tremor ran, his slaves quailed, and his armies halted, and his captains suddenly steerless, bereft of will, wavered and despaired. For they were forgotten." While it can be argued that Frodo was under the Ring's influence, none of the others were. It is evident that Sauron didn't not need contact with the Ring to exert his will. This argument vanishes. Remember too that Sauron before the Downfall was still *incarnate* as a Maiar, and in his full strength of body. The Sauron of the Third Age could not have been stronger, inhabiting his second simulacrum or "made" body. Now back to Numenór, when Sauron was still of fair appearance and full of good advice. ======================================================================= And Sauron came. Even from his mighty tower of Barad-dûr he came, and made no offer of battle. For he perceived that the power and majesty of the Kings of the Sea surpassed all rumour of them, so that he could not trust even the greatest of his servants to withstand them; and he saw not his time yet to work his will with the Dúnedain. And he was crafty, well skilled to gain what he would by subtlety when force might not avail. Therefore he humbled himself before Ar-Pharazôn and smoothed his tongue; and men wondered, for all that he said seemed fair and wise. But Ar-Pharazôn was not yet deceived, and it came into his mind that, for the better keeping of Sauron and of his oaths of fealty, he should be brought to Númenor, there to dwell as a hostage for himself and all his servants in Middle-earth. To this Sauron assented as one constrained, yet in his secret thought he received it gladly, for it chimed indeed with his desire. And Sauron passed over the sea and looked upon the land of Númenor, and on the city of Armenelos in the days of its glory, and he was astounded; but his heart within was filled the more with envy and hate. Yet such was the cunning of his mind and mouth, and the strength of his hidden will, that ere three years had passed he had become closest to the secret counsels of the King; for flattery sweet as honey was ever on his tongue, and knowledge he had of many things yet unrevealed to Men. And seeing the favour that he had of their lord all the councillors began to fawn upon him, save one alone, Amandil lord of Andúnië. Then slowly a change came over the land, and the hearts of the Elf-friends were sorely troubled, and many fell away out of fear; and although those that remained still called themselves the Faithful, their enemies named them rebels. For now, having the ears of men, Sauron with many arguments gainsaid all that the Valar had taught; and he bade men think that in the world, in the east and even hi the west, there lay yet many seas and many lands for their winning, wherein was wealth uncounted. And still, if they should at the last come to the end of those lands and seas, beyond all lay the Ancient Darkness. 'And out of it the world was made. For Darkness alone is worshipful, and the Lord thereof may yet make other worlds to be gifts to those that serve him, so that the increase of their power shall find no end.' And Ar-Pharazôn said: 'Who is the Lord of the Darkness?' Then behind locked doors Sauron spoke to the King, and he lied, saying: 'It is he whose name is not now spoken; for the Valar have deceived you concerning him, putting forward the name of Eru, a phantom devised in the folly of their hearts, seeking to enchain Men in servitude to themselves. For they are the oracle of this Eru, which speaks only what they will. But he that is their master shall yet prevail, and he will deliver you from this phantom; and his name is Melkor, Lord of All, Giver of Freedom, and he shall make you stronger than they.' ================================================================== Saurons' "hidden will" to my mind is a reference to his dissembling by humbling himself before Ar Pharazon. It certainly isn't a comment that even the most apologetic or inventive of letter-quoters could interpret to mean the "existence" of the One Ring. And we already know that as long as the One Ring existed, Sauron could use his willpower [his "hidden will"] to the full as shown in the LotR. Regarding Sauron's alleged "domination" of Ar Pharazon, we can see in the quotation below that the Ring was not needed or used, that no "domination" took place, per se; =================================================================== Thus Ar-Pharazôn, King of the Land of the Star, grew to the mightiest tyrant that had yet been in the world since the reign of Morgoth, though in truth Sauron ruled all from behind the throne. But the years passed, and the King felt the shadow of death approach, as his days lengthened; and he was filled with fear and wrath. Now came the hour that Sauron had prepared and long had awaited. And Sauron spoke to the King, saying that his strength was now so great that he might think to have his will in all things, and be subject to no command or ban. And he said: 'The Valar have possessed themselves of the land where there is no death; and they lie to you concerning it, hiding it as best they may, because of their avarice, and their fear lest the Kings of Men should wrest from them the deathless realm and rule the world in their stead. And though, doubtless, the gift of life unending is not for all, but only for such as are worthy, being men of might and pride and great lineage, yet against all Justice is it done that this gift, which is his due, should be withheld from the King of Bangs, Ar-Pharazôn, mightiest of the sons of Earth, to whom Manwë alone can be compared, if even he. But great kings do not brook denials, and take what is their due.' Then Ar-Pharazôn, being besotted, and walking under the shadow of death, for his span was drawing towards its end, hearkened to Sauron; and he began to ponder in his heart how he might make war upon the Valar... ======================================================================= Ring domination? I think not. It was simple human greed combined with overweening ambition and a desire for immortality that led Ar Pharazon to defy the Ban of the Valar. > The meaning is clearly > that Sauron was actively using the Ring to subvert and dominate Ar-Pharazon. > For all his wickedness, can you imagine Ar-Pharazon sacrificing people to > Morgoth? Yes. Please stop apologising for Ar Pharazon. Little transgressions occur first. I mean, President G.W.Bush has just butchered a significant proportion of the Iraqi population and I don't see Sauron whispering in his ear, do you? > > If he had trouble finding the Ring after his later defeat by Elendil and > > Gil Galad, evicting [somehow] his spirit from his "manufactured" body, > > how would his spirit have located it having been driven from his > > original body [surely a more emotionally traumatic affair] in the > > Downfall of Numenor? > > The Letter (which if someone else doesn't quote it) is quite clear that > Sauron's spirit could have prevented the Ring from being lost. The Ainur > are fundementally spirit beings, and the Ring was bound to Sauron. This damnable letter. Maia spirit power is not all you make it out to be. Sauron was a Maia, not a Vala, and while their powers of transporting themselves may be evident, only Melian is definitely referred to in this way IIRC. It occurs in the Sil just after the death of Thingol and while she was still *incarnate*, not in spirit form only. She returns to Aman. ===================================================================== Upon Doriath a heavy change had fallen. Melian sat long in silence beside Thingol the King, and her thought passed back into the starlit years and to their first meeting among the nightingales of Nan Elmoth in ages past; and she knew that her parting from Thingol was the forerunner of a greater parting, and that the doom of Doriath was drawing nigh. For Melian was of the divine race of the Valar, and she was a Maia of great power and wisdom; but for love of Elwë Singollo she took upon herself the form of the Elder Children of Ilúvatar, and in that union she became bound by the chain and trammels of the flesh of Arda. In that form she bore to him Lúthien Tinúviel; and in that form she gained a power over the substance of Arda, and by the Girdle of Melian was Doriath defended through long ages from the evils without. But now Thingol lay dead, and his spirit had passed to the halls of Mandos; and with his death a change came also upon Melian. Thus it came to pass that her power was withdrawn in that time from the forests of Neldoreth and Region, and Esgalduin the enchanted river spoke with a different voice, and Doriath lay open to its enemies. Thereafter Melian spoke to none save to Mablung only, bidding him take heed to the Silmaril, and to send word speedily to Beren and Lúthien in Ossiriand; and she vanished out of Middle-earth, and passed to the land of the Valar beyond the western sea, to muse upon her sorrows in the gardens of Lórien, whence she came, and this tale speaks of her no more. ==================================================================== The only other "deaths" of Maiar we are aware of show them having no such putative abilities to "keep it together" after "death". The Balrog that was "killed" by Gandalf. The Balrog that was killed by Glorfindel in the Escape from Gondolin. Saruman, who was killed by Wormtongue. This latter is particularly notable, since we see his spirit "try" to take form, but it blown away [literally] by a West wind. Several nested arguments arise here. (i) Saruman, although a Ring maker, and possessing one himself, would have been following the Ring Lore of the Elves and Sauron and therefore his Ring would have been subject to the One. The rebuttal is that this is mere supposition, not stated anywhere in the canon or other published texts AFAIK. (ii) Saruman was a lesser spirit that Sauron and would not have been so strong, especially with the destruction of the One Ring. He might have bee n able to survive if the One Ring had still be in existence and he had turned not westward but eastward. The rebuttal is that while Saruman made a Ring, it is never referred to as being potent. On the contrary, Saruman's potency is relegated to his voice and his temporal power and might. The implication is that he didn't pit as much of his substance into his essay in ringcraft and therefore should have been able to keep it together. He wasn't able to do so. Regarding the Ring and Numenór, I think the letter you refer to appears to contradict the published text of the Silmarillion. ==================================================================== "For Sauron himself was filled with great fear at the wrath of the Valar, and the doom that Eru laid upon sea and land. It was greater far than aught he had looked for, hoping only for the death of the Númenóreans and the defeat of their proud king. And Sauron, sitting in his black seat in the midst of the Temple, had laughed when he heard the trumpets of Ar-Pharazôn sounding for battle; and again he had laughed when he heard the thunder of the storm; and a third time, even as he laughed at his own thought, thinking what he would do now in the world, being rid of the Edain for ever, he was taken in the midst of his mirth, and his seat and his temple fell into the abyss. But Sauron was not of mortal flesh, and though he was robbed now of that shape in which he had wrought so great an evil, so that he could never again appear fair to the eyes of Men, yet his spirit arose out of the deep and passed as a shadow and a black wind over the sea, and came back to Middle-earth and to Mordor that was his home. There he took up again his great Ring in Barad-dûr, and dwelt there, dark and silent, until he wrought himself a new guise, an image of malice and hatred made visible; and the Eye of Sauron the Terrible few could endure." ===================================================================== The text [see previous quotation] doesn't state he took his Ring to Numenór. The text [see above quotation] doesn't state he took it back with him from the Downfall. The phrase "There he took up again his great Ring in Barad-dûr," implies two things: (i) He had put off the Ring, how otherwise could he take it up "again"? (ii) He didn't take it up again *until* he returned to Barad-dûr. Moreover, if Maiar were able to "keep it together" as you say immediately after the catastrophic collapse [death] of their physical form, how did Isildur get the Ring in the first place? I mean, if Sauron's spirit, buried with his body amidst the Downfall, at a time when the very nature of existence wa being changed by Eru [removal of Aman, flat earth to round earth], was able to take the Ring off his dead form's finger and return to Barad Dur with it, why wasn't he able to do this after the "killing" of his later constructed form by Elendil and Gil Galad? So, to summarize. 1. Sauron didn't need to be proximate to the Ring to influence people using his will. He could impose his will on others while still at a distance of several hundred miles from the Ring in the Third Age. 2. Sauron could still control many minds at once without either being in possession of the Ring or in contact with the mind via a Palantír. He therefore didn't need The Ring in Numenór. 3. No Maia exhibits the ability to influence matter when incorporeal. On the contrary, we are told Melian gained a power over the substance of Arda by becoming trammelled in matter when she bore Thingol's child Lúthien. 4. Neither Sauron nor Saruman were able to directly influence the material world after their bodies destruction. No balrog was able to influence the material world after his body was destroyed. 5. Sauron was unable to take his Ring and flee after the "death" of his reconstructed body at the hands of Elendil and Gil Galad. There is no statement stating explicitly that he was able to do so after the Downfall - except that damned letter! 6. The Akallabeth specifically states that Sauron took up his Ring "again" in Barad Dur, after fleeing from Numenór. It does not state he had the Ring with him there, nor that he salvaged it from the wrack and took it back to Muddle Earth with him. In short, the letter appears to make nonsense of the published texts. For my money, Sauron didn't take the Ring to Numenór. FWIW M. ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien From: AC Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> Reply-To: maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Lines: 45 X-Complaints-To: abuse@randori.com - Please include ALL headers, thanks. Organization: http://www.randori.com - Fast, Complete, Great Retention! Date: Wed, 07 May 2003 22:23:40 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!sjc70.webusenet.com!news.webusenet.com!pd2nf1so.cg.shawcable.net!residential.shaw.ca!out.nntp.be!propagator2-sterling!in.nntp.be!nntp.xusenet.com!feed.news.sonic.net!69.22.128.15.MISMATCH!newsfeeder2.randori.com!news.randori.com!263039bc!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116763 In article <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie>, Michael O'Neill wrote: > Stan Brown wrote: >> >> Michael O'Neill wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien: >> >Stan Brown wrote: >> >> But then, what would happen when he returned to Númenor and tried to >> >> arrest Sauron, who was wearing the Ring? Probably there would have >> >> been a civil war, >> > >> >I thought Sauron had left the Ring behind in Barad Dur? >> >> The evidence is pretty clear that Sauron took the Ring to Númenor >> with him. You might like to have a look at the FAQ of the Rings (URL >> in sig), and specifically at >> >> Where was the One Ring while Sauron was in Númenor? >> http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/ringfaq.htm#1-Numenor > > Neither Tolkien nor the links convince me I'm afraid. Tolkien in letter > 211 and 131 appears to conrtadict the published LotR and what he had > written of the Akallabeth up until that time. > > See my rebuttal to Conrad for a fuller comment. > > I would appreciate your thoughts on the matter also, but please don't > rely on quoting letters that are inconsistent with the works themselves > as your sole supporting argument. > > Remember: I've read Morgoth's Ring. I know how revisionist Tolkien was > both before and after publication of his work. > > Perhaps he might have wished he had written matters differently, but > letter #131 is a howl of impotent revisionism. The Akallabeth exists in a number of forms, and was never published during Tolkien's lifetime. Why would it hold any more weight than the Letters? If none of these were actually published, then the revisionism as you claim cannot logically exist. Without knowing the final intent of Tolkien on the matter of whether Sauron possessed the Ruling Ring or not, I see no reason that Letters cannot be used to clarify what was written in the Akallabeth. -- A. Clausen maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net ###### Message-ID: <3EBA2799.C9ECB2D9@1.au> From: Jussi Jaatinen <1@1.au> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 17 Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 09:52:39 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 172.21.37.233 X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@nokia.com X-Trace: news2.nokia.com 1052387559 172.21.37.233 (Thu, 08 May 2003 12:52:39 EET DST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 12:52:39 EET DST Organization: Nokia Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.freenet.de!feed.news.nacamar.de!uio.no!newsfeed.kolumbus.fi!fi.sn.net!newsfeed1.fi.sn.net!nntp.inet.fi!inet.fi!newsfeed1.nokia.com!news1.nokia.com!news2.nokia.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116780 Michael O'Neill wrote: > Nowhere do we see objects magically flying in the books. Indeed Morgoth > is said to have become trammelled in "matter" partly to gain a power > over it IIRC Tolkien somewhere mused that the one of the Ring's purposes was to allow Sauron to "externalize" (to use a zeitgeist word ;) his power so he could wield greater control over Middle-Earth. The name "Morgoth's Ring" also makes this connection all in itself. I have to admit that I always thought the idea of a dark wind carrying the Ring from the Downfall has been one of the weaker links of Tolkien's work. -JJ ###### From: conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 8 May 2003 06:07:48 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 86 Message-ID: <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.42.51.28 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1052399268 12232 127.0.0.1 (8 May 2003 13:07:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 8 May 2003 13:07:48 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.news2me.com!canoe.uoregon.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116795 Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie>... > My point was that the printed Sil is contradicted by/contradicts the > Letter regarding whether Sauron brought the Ring with him. Again, no... the way YOU read what is printed in Silm contradicts what Tolkien said in Letters. Even if we assume that the wording in Silm is JRRT's and not edited / inserted by Christopher there is nothing preventing it from being read as saying that Sauron took up the Ring again after being unable to do so while he had no body. No part of that passage precludes Sauron from having had the Ring with him in Numenor unless you >assume< that he was 'taking it up again' after a long absence. > To imply the Ring could dominate thousands of Numenorean minds by force > is a nonsense. I don't think anyone was suggesting that. Influence on the other hand... do you really think the Ring would have been useless to Sauron in corrupting the Numenoreans? If not... why wouldn't he take it? > It would appear that Maiar in Middle Earth cannot levitate objects when > discorporate. It would? Can you cite ANY passage which says so? There are texts indicating that the Ainur took on physical forms to interact with the world... but they also >shaped< the world prior to doing so. > They cannot affect the material world one way or another. Again... there WAS the small matter of raising mountains and suchlike. > Nowhere do we see objects magically flying in the books. We hardly see discorporated Ainur at all. > Apart from Tolkien's erroneous letter, there is no basis for supposing > Sauron was endowed with telekinetic abilities. Heh. 'Tolkien's erroneous letter'. Alrighty then. The books imply that Sauron was able to influence the weather. If he can cause a blizzard (or the Fell Winter) is it really so inconceivable that he could move a small ring? For that matter, the Ainur were able to control the bodies they fashioned for themselves out of the matter of Middle-Earth... why wouldn't Sauron be able to similarly control the Ring that was so much a part of himself? > There are three instances of Maiar of Aule being discorporated. > (i) Saruman from his "human" incarnation at the end of the War of the > Ring in the Shire. After he was greatly reduced in power for his mission to Middle-Earth and then further hampered by Gandalf 'casting him out'. > (ii) Sauron from his original incarnated body in the Akallabeth. > (iii) Sauron from his constructed body at the end of the Last Alliance. (iv) Sauron's fall after the destruction of the Ring > In no case do we see the Maiar in question, both originally of the > people of Aule, show any ability to manipulate their form or control > matter immediately after "death". Arguably they would know more about > manipulating matter, whatever form they were in, than any other "type" > of Maiar. In fact, in cases i & iv we don't see them do much of anything except rise up as spirits and get blown away by the wind. In case ii Sauron deliberately rose up out of the ruin of Numenor and flew through the cataclysm to Mordor... clearly more in control of his fate than cases i & iv. In case iii Sauron's spirit stuck around until the Ring was taken and then fled. > If Sauron couldn't do it while the Ring was actually on the finger of > his dead reconstructed body after the Last Alliance and so prevent > Isildur from taking it, it seem highly unlikely that he was able to > retrieve the Ring from the depths of the abyss after the Downfall. So, if Sauron is able to move the Ring at all while disincorporated he must be able to move it so strongly that Isildur would not be able to keep Sauron from yanking it out of his hand? That makes sense? At that, Sauron was weaker when slain by the Last Alliance than when he was killed in the downfall of Numenor. He was no longer able to take on a fair shape and had not had time to fully rebuild his power. ###### From: conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 8 May 2003 10:00:48 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 544 Message-ID: <1178b6d1.0305080900.3ddf02ee@posting.google.com> References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB887CF.6400502A@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305070416.48169c6d@posting.google.com> <3EB9E1D7.2FB78ED8@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.42.51.28 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1052413251 24370 127.0.0.1 (8 May 2003 17:00:51 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 8 May 2003 17:00:51 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116815 Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EB9E1D7.2FB78ED8@indigo.ie>... WAY too much. > Conrad Dunkerson wrote: > Relying on the Ring later on, or not, he didn't need to wear it to use > the power. While the Ring existed Sauron had full access to that power > to dominate, as shown in the quoted text from the LotR by the consequences > for his slaves when his attention was drawn to the Ring and Frodo at > Orodruin. So..... Sauron was just as powerful without the Ring as he was with it? Yes, he retained the ability to dominate others even when he was not wearing it. Indeed, his power to do so was SO great that Tolkien said (in one of those nasty letters) that Gandalf WITH the Ring would be about an equal match for Sauron without it in a battle of wills. However, it remains equally clear that his power to dominate others would be even GREATER with the Ring. >> Quite true... but in Numenor Sauron had to convince the majority of >> the populace that human sacrifice to Morgoth was a good thing. > No he didn't. Um, yes... he did. The majority of the population of Numenor accepted human sacrifice. Sauron convinced them to do so. > Here is one of the pieces you snipped: > The relevant piece is: > "And seeing the favour that he had of their lord all the councillors > began to fawn upon him, save one alone, Amandil lord of Andúnië." > This shows that all Sauron had to do was sufficiently influence the King > and his inner circle. The people, already tending towards arrogance and > mastery, followed the ruler, as they so often do. Post a relevant > excerpt if you want to disprove what I say, because the text doesn't > appear to support your assertion. So.... you are saying that Sauron did not have to convince the majority of the populace because once he convinced the king everyone else fell in line? The text you quote says that is true for all but one of the councillors. It does not say that he did not use his influence to help them along. Nor does it say that he used no power to sway the populace to accept these changes as well. To me the idea that the Numenoreans would so quickly succumb to heinous evil without any sort of influence beyond a corrupted king seems rather a stretch. Particularly as Tolkien clearly said otherwise. The Numenoreans were certainly arrogant and corrupt, but prior to Sauron's arrival they were nowhere near as wholly evil as they quickly became. None of which, for the record, is the least bit relevant to the question of whether Sauron had the Ring with him. If, as you seem to argue, he could corrupt all of Numenor with a minimal use of power he did not NEED the Ring but that does not mean he did not HAVE it. > The Palantír didn't amplify the will of Sauron. > Amon Hen didn't amplify the will of Sauron. I never suggested they did. However, they COULD put someone into direct contact with Sauron. > Both objects simply allowed him to transmit his will. That will was > evidently strong DESPITE the remoteness of the Ring in all cases. Yup. Sauron without the Ring still had a very strong will. Entirely in agreement. Entirely irrelevant. > The Ring, in case you'd forgotten, wasn't made to dominate wills per se, I HAD 'forgotten'. I was tricked by more of those evil letters and other misleading passages; "All shall love me and despair!" FotR, The Mirror of Galadriel "The Ring would give me power of Command. How I would drive the hosts of Mordor, and all men would flock to my banner." FotR, The Breaking of the Fellowship "He was no longer holding the Ring, but it was there, a hidden power, a cowing menace to the slaves of Mordor..." RotK, The Tower of Cirith Ungol "But also they ['all the rings alike'] enhanced the natural powers of a possessor - thus approaching 'magic', a motive easily corruptible into evil, a lust for domination." Letters #131 "He needed time, much time, before he could control the Ring or (which in such a case is the same) before it could control him; before his will and arrogance could grow to a stature in which he could dominate other major hostile wills." Letters #246 > but to see and control the minds of people wearing the other Rings. Yes, that was Sauron's primary goal. However, the Ring also allowed the bearer to influence people who were NOT wearing other Rings of Power. The whole feint where the forces of Gondor were supposedly blindly following Aragorn into Mordor relied upon that fact. > If your implied assertion was true, how could *any* army stand against > Sauron while he was wearing the Ring. You must be reading some other implied assertion than I thought I was making; Sauron without Ring -> Powerful ability to influence others Sauron with Ring -> MORE powerful ability to influence others More powerful does not equate to 'omnipotent' or even 'the ability to crush any army with a thought'. > The Ring had limited powers, was made for a specific purpose, and in no > way could have been greater than Sauron' original powers of domination. LotR says otherwise quite clearly... and STILL with the irrelevance to whether Sauron actually >had< the Ring with him in Numenor. Let's suppose the Ring was absolutely powerless. Guess what? He still could have had it with him. Ergo, NONE of this is evidence that he didn't. > Hold on a second Conrad. You kept the text you could rebut, but snipped > the text that proved my point? Uhh... no? Your point has been proved? Where exactly? > The relevant section is this one: > " From all his policies and webs of fear and treachery, from all his > stratagems and wars his mind shook free; and throughout his realm a > tremor ran, his slaves quailed, and his armies halted, and his captains > suddenly steerless, bereft of will, wavered and despaired. For they were > forgotten." > This section refers to (i) his slaves (ii) his armies and (iii) his > captains. Three distinct groups, One group (slaves) separated into the categories of 'armies' and 'captains'. > of which only the slaves would have been easy to dominate. Agreed, but they were ALL his slaves. > The captains by definition, must have been strong willed men of war, the > armies numbering in the tens of thousands, neither would have been easy to > dominate, or even co-ordinate, yet he made contact and controlled these > minds ot such a degree that they were "steerless, bereft of will, wavered > and despaired" and Sauron did it all without possessing the Ring. > You must concede this point Conrad, I never argued it. Indeed, I agreed that he could do that in the post you are disputing. > and stop snipping relevant text, I see no reason to include several pages of quoted text on which we agree. These posts are ridiculously long as it is. >> He clearly could not have dominated the citizens of Gondor in such a way > That is an unfounded assertion, Oh. My bad. Ok, Sauron could dominate everyone in Gondor so that they obeyed his every whim. Got it. > NOT reasoned argument. Sauron never tried to dominate them. Right... he could have dominated Gondor but he did not feel like it. > It is quite clear, however, that he could have cowed MOST of them, but not > using the Ring to dominate them per se. Can you see where I might get > support for such a claim? No, not really. >> ... OR caused them to take up human sacrifice. > He didn't do this in Numenor. Yes Michael... he really really did. Sauron went to Numenor. He said, 'Hey why don't we have human sacrifices?'. They started sacrificing humans. Guess what? He caused it. Oi! > Read that description again. No matter how many times I re-read it the text still says that Sauron was responsible for Numenoreans starting human sacrifice. > Your earlier point had no foundation. This point makes no sense. He led > the King and subverted the people of Numenor with a false religion based > on the worship of Morgoth. Uhhhhh.... which 'subversion' may have involved some human sacrifice? Possibly? >> Do you really think that even without the Ring Sauron could just have >> walked into Gondor as a prisoner and converted them to his cause as he >> did in Numenor? If so... why didn't he? > This has little to do with Sauron's abilities, and more to do with the > people Gondor being not as amenable to subversion as Numenor was at the > height of its temporal power. Possibly. Denethor was no cup of tea, but he certainly wasn't Ar-Pharazon. > 4. Denethor was proud, but he was still a wiser and more morally upright > man than Ar-Pharazon. Denethor did not become subverted, despite long > and close contact [which by the way, tends to disprove your > Palantír-contact theory]. Denethor committed suicide and attempted to murder his son. I'd argue that suggests that 'subversion' was not entirely out of the question. As for 'my' 'Palantir-contact theory' being disproven... do you really want to get into the extensive and well established evidence that Saruman was subverted through the palantir? You seem to be all over the map here. >> The term 'Vala' was essentially a 'political' title for those Ainur >> who led the shaping of Middle-earth. > This is not so. It is so. The distinction between the Valar and the other Ainur was that the Valar were the leaders / 'governors' of Middle-earth. The Maiar were their followers and assisstants. These are 'jobs' / 'positions' they held rather than differences in essential nature. Granted, the Valar were amongst the more powerful Ainur... that is WHY they were in charge. > The Valar are divided into the Aratar and the others. That is also true. > "With the Valar came other spirits whose being also began before the > World, of the same order as the Valar but of less degree." > Possibly you like to think of such a difference in degree as merely > "political", No. See above. > yet this is not so, and even amongst the Valar, there are differences > in degree. We agree on this. However, the fact remains that the term 'Vala' applied because of the position they held rather than their power. Some of the other Ainur (e.g. Melian & Sauron) were very close to the Valar in power, but were not in leadership positions. Melkor was actually MORE powerful, but was not counted amongst the Valar except as the 'fallen Vala'. The very word 'Vala' means 'Power' in the sense of 'authority'. >> Sauron was not one of them, but he was an Ainu and stated to be nearly >> as powerful as the Vala. Like Melian. > Please post the relevant text. Yeeesssh! What, are you just questioning EVERYTHING? Half of this stuff is commonly accepted by everyone. Now suddenly I'm having to defend the ideas that Sauron was powerful and that he could corrupt people through the palantir. > Oh, wait. Wasn't he beaten by a hound and a girl? Why yes he was, this > near-Vala, as you claim him to be. > Oh yes. Very powerful. One of the Valar's *DOGS* beat him and an > elf/maia half breed *intimidated* him. VERY powerful indeed... > *bweheheheheheheh* Uh. You might want to curb that snide condescension. Doesn't YOUR argument rely on Sauron being massively powerful even without the Ring? Fortunately, we needn't worry about it; "And the Valar drew unto them many companions, some less, some well nigh as great as themselves, and they laboured together in the ordering of the Earth and the curbing of its tumults." Silm, Ainulindale So some of the Maiar were 'well nigh as great' as the Valar. Note also that the Maiar are here said to have been involved in the initial construction of the world. "In my story Sauron represents as near an approach to the wholly evil will as is possible. ... But he went further than human tyrants in pride and the lust for domination, being in origin an immortal (angelic) spirit. * * Of the same kind as Gandalf and Saruman, but of a far higher order." Letters #183 Here Sauron is said to be of a 'far higher order' than Gandalf and Saruman. In the passage you quoted he is described as the most powerful of Melkor's servants. Elsewhere he is said to be amongst the greatest of the Maiar (and no, I don't have the text to hand - if you really want to dispute it I will find the reference). > Look Conrad, We're not arguing about the Rings abilities. I'm saying he > didn't have it on him and that is he did, he couldn't have taken it back > with him. The extant texts support this. If they do you haven't provided any evidence of it. You've gone on at great (excruciating) length about those abilities of its which we are not arguing about... but thus far for him not having it you have presented the one line of text where Sauron 'took up again' the Ring. Which we don't even know for certain was written by JRRT and which doesn't make your case in any event. For his inability to move it you have suggested only that while the Ainur formed the world while incorporeal Sauron being a mere weakling of a Maia would not be able to move a small ring. > Are you on medication? Are you sure you aren't some OTHER Michael? :) > If he was able to flee with the Ring in his spirit form. Why didn't he? He didn't have time? There was this Isildur guy holding it? Or, hey... maybe he lost that ability along with the ability to change his form. > No Maia is shown with the ability to be able to effect matter at a > distance. Weather control. World shaping. > How long is it since you read the Sil last? > "Thus it came to pass that of the Ainur some abode still with Ilúvatar > beyond the confines of the World; but others, and among them many of the > greatest and most fair, took the leave of Ilúvatar and descended into > it. But this condition Ilúvatar made, or it is the necessity of their > love, that their power should thenceforward be contained and bounded in > the World, to be within it for ever, until it is complete, so that they > are its life and it is theirs. And therefore they are named the Valar, > the Powers of the World." > The Valar shaped the world. Not the Ainur. The Valar WERE Ainur. And note that the text you cite does NOT say that the Valar alone shaped the world. Only that 'Valar' was the name given to the greatest of the Ainur who entered into creation. > The main movers at the earliest stage were Manwe, Aule, Ulmo and Melkor. True. Irrelevant. > Moreover the Valar had a specific relationship with all of Arda, imposed > by Eru, so that they could effect their wills on it while incorporeal. > They are its life, and it is theirs. The Maiar did not have this > ability. No Maiar were present for the initial shaping. They came later. False. See quotation from Ainulindale above. > No Maiar were Valar, and not all Valar were Aratar. True. Irrelevant. >> For that matter we are specifically speaking of the >> Ring... which was more part of Sauron than his own body. > > I think the hyperbole has taken you over Conrad. The Ring contained a large portion of Sauron's 'self'. The body was just something he wore. >> They had been so greatly reduced in power as to be helpless. The same >> was not true of Sauron at the fall of Numenor. Indeed, note how >> quickly he reformed after Numenor and how long it took after the Last >> Alliance. The difference being that he had the Ring in the first >> case. > You *assume* that was the difference. It is not stated that it was the > difference. Well, it is clearly A difference and I'd argue it is almost certainly the RELEVANT difference, but whatever... > At the point at which he was "overthrown" why didn't his spirit flee > with the Ring? He was momentarily thrown by the whole 'being dead' thing? > Why couldn't Sauron's spirit take it from him? How much energy do you > think was needed to take it off his finger, hundreds of fathoms down, > overcome the pressure of thousands of tons of water flowing into the > Numenorean abyss and then transport it hundreds of miles to Mordor by > air after the Downfall? > Why could not Sauron just have lifted the ring out of Isildur's grasp? > Is there one convincing argument on this infinitesimally small point? > Was Isildur wearing a magic mitten or something? Apparently Sauron was weakened by losing 'possession' of the Ring. >>> 6. The Akallabeth specifically states that Sauron took up his Ring >>> "again" in Barad Dur, after fleeing from Numenór. It does not state he >>> had the Ring with him there, nor that he salvaged it from the wrack and >>> took it back to Muddle Earth with him. >> Which is only a matter of what we interpret Tolkien to have meant. > That's rubbish Conrad. Sauron went down into the abyss, his body killed. What I say about 'interpretation' applied to the 'took up his Ring again' bit. He took it up again under both interpretations of events - the matter under dispute is when it came off. About which this passage says nothing. >> There is nothing in the wording which prevents Sauron from having the >> Ring with him in Numenor. He 'took it up again' upon reforming. > I thought the basis of your assertion was that he never lost the ability > to take it up, in fact that he was able to take it up out of an abyss. > Where does the "again" bit come in, even in your version of events? Huh? My argument is that Sauron had the Ring. He died in the downfall of Numenor. His spirit carried the Ring back to Middle-Earth. When he reformed he then 'took up' the Ring again. As such, he did not have the power to 'take it up' while he had no body. Here I am reading 'take it up' to mean 'wore' / 'wielded'. You seem to be saying that it is just physically lifting the Ring... which seems bizarre. > Sauron left the Ring in Barad Dur. Seems risky. If Gil-galad or some other 'power' had gotten hold of that Ring Sauron was dead. > After the Lúthien/Huan encounter, he knew he was vulnerable to physical > attack, that he was taking a risk going ot Numenor. The Ring was insurance. > Much-needed insurance as it turned out. This pre-supposes that he was not able to carry it away with him. Thus making it questionable evidence when arguing that very point. >> "Also so great was the Ring's power of lust, that anyone who used it >> became mastered by it; it was beyond the strength of any will (even >> his [Sauron's] own) to injure it, cast it away, or neglect it." >> Letters #131 > The quotation you refer to above is like the one about Sauron taking the > Ring to Numenor - inconsistent with the published texts. Because in the published texts Sauron had absolutely no interest in recovering the Ring? Come on. How is that inconsistent? We see that effect repeatedly on others and Sauron was clearly obsessed with getting the Ring. It is entirely consistent with the published text. > Whatever Tolkien stated he intended in his letters, implying he might > have wished to revise things in the fullness of time [at the cost of > destroying the original work], does not chime with the published texts. In the fullness of time? That letter was written WHILE Tolkien was getting the story published. > What sort of fool do you take Sauron to have been that he'd create > somthing that would enslave him to *its* will? Sauron was already a 'slave' to his obsessions. The Ring was an instrument of achieving those ends powered by HIS will. I can't see where he'd have an objection to enslaving himself to... himself. > Sauron would know that the possibility of defeat existed and would not > have created something that could hold him powerless merely because he > had lost it. Where did anyone say anything about him being powerless because he lost it? PLEASE stop going to such lengths to expand this discussion into infinite tangents. However, that said... Sauron created something that could DESTROY him if he lost it. Being destroyed would, in fact, make him powerless. Ergo... apparently he WAS that 'stupid'. (Though the quotation above explains why it was not stupid at all). > Secondly, the published facts. > No time limit is suggested for the period of use of the Ring in letter > #131 nor is there a period stated after which despair descends on the > user. This in itself contradicts Gandalfs advice to Frodo about Bilbo > and ignores the role played by pity and love in mitigating the Ring;s > effects on its users. But there's a LOT more, and all of it canon. Oi! No, Tolkien did not in that sentence specify an amount of 'use time' required before the Ring would gain a hold over someone. However, attempting to invalidate the sense of what he was saying because it did not include quantifiable measurements is just plain silly. That's great. It also isn't what Tolkien was saying and you know it. > Are you and Tolkien saying, clutching Letter #131 in your grubby and his > very bony little fists, that Sam Gamgee the Hobbit was possessed of a > more powerful will than Sauron the Maia? No. That clearly is not what Tolkien wrote in Letter #131. It is an absurd mischaracterization of his obvious intent. > *bweheheheheh* Ok... you're right. Tolkien was an idiot and obviously had no understanding of Middle-Earth whatsoever. Fortunately you are here to tell us how it REALLY was. :) ###### From: conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 8 May 2003 10:48:08 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 119 Message-ID: <1178b6d1.0305080948.200a60a4@posting.google.com> References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080435.68a8f04f@posting.google.com> <3EBADC40.52C5E72F@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.42.51.28 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1052416089 27112 127.0.0.1 (8 May 2003 17:48:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 8 May 2003 17:48:09 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116814 Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EBADC40.52C5E72F@indigo.ie>... > Conrad Dunkerson wrote: >> False. There is nothing in the published LotR which suggests that >> Sauron did not take the Ring to Numenor. You have argued that there >> is evidence to suggest he did not NEED to do so in order to dominate >> them... but that is a different question from whether he actually DID >> take it. On which point LotR is silent. > On the contrary, and despite rampant and unnecessary snipping by you > Conrad, there is ample evidence. Michael, your posts are ridiculously long. I assure you it is VERY neccessary that they be snipped. If you feel that evidence has been removed you are welcome to point it out. However, you might want to check it first; > Sauron is stated to have returned to Middle Earth as a spirit borne upon > a dark wind, Paraphrase from Letters. NOT LotR. > not himself bearing anything, Actually, that is the letter where he WAS said to be bearing the Ring; "Though reduced to 'a spirit of hatred borne on a dark wind', I do not think one need boggle at this spirit carrying off the One Ring, upon which his power of dominating minds now largely depended." Letters #211 > and at the point he takes up the Ruling Ring *again* in Barad Dur. Paraphrase of Silmarillion. NOT LotR. Note that NONE of this 'evidence from the published LotR' was actually IN LotR... hence no 'rampant and unneccessary snipping' took place and I was quite correct in saying that you have not provided evidence from LotR against Sauron having the Ring in Numenor. > He couldn't have taken it up again if he hadn't first put it down, now > could he? Quite true. And having no body on which to wear it would seem (to me) to qualify. >> Which, again says nothing on the subject UNLESS you assume 'took up >> again' to mean that Sauron had stopped using the Ring not when his >> body was destroyed, but before he left for Numenor.... for which there >> is no evidence. > I don't "assume" the meaning of the phrase "took up again". The meaning > is self evident, requiring no assumption or interpretation on my part. The fact that Sauron then began wearing the Ring again is self-evident from the passage. When he STOPPED wearing it is not. You ARE assuming that Sauron stopped wearing the Ring when he left to go to Numenor because the passage does NOT state that. He could have tossed it aside the moment the Elves took off THEIR Rings for all >this< passage says on the subject. That is... nothing. > He had to have left it down to take it up again. We both agree on that. Just not on when he 'left it down'. > There is no proof he took to Numenor. The letter is just woolly > backtracking by Tolkien as is the assertion that Sauron was weaker > willed than the Hobbits. You know full well that no such assertion exists. > But as you're here, we are all in agreement that the Sil confirms he > "took up again" the Ring on his return to Barad Dur. > You dismiss this point entorely in support of your assertions. Uh.... no, I don't. See above (and numerous times before) where I explain how it is entirely consistent with my view. That passage says Sauron took up the Ring again. I do not dismiss it. I agree entirely - Sauron took up the Ring again. > I dismiss nothing. Except Tolkien's explicit statement that you are wrong? :) >>> Perhaps he might have wished he had written matters differently, but >>> letter #131 is a howl of impotent revisionism. >> A 'howl of impotent revisionism' written three years before LotR was >> published? Interesting. > Interesting? You think his texts *weren't* revised prior to publication? > What planet are you on Conrad? > I describe it as "impotent" because like many other planned revisions, > it mever saw print and the inconsistencies were left in the printed text > and, I suspect, all the galleys. Nice attempt at repositioning. You originally said that Tolkien 'forgot' in the 'fullness of time' after publication. Now you claim that what you meant all along is that Tolkien deliberately changed his mind BEFORE publication but was unable to get the text changed before it went out. Or MAYBE there really isn't any inconsistency at all. > The difference being that the printed test is the story and the letters > contain comments that are inconsistent with the story. They are inconsistent with your interpretation of the story (actually, with your interpretation of texts OUTSIDE the story). They are NOT inconsistent with every reasonable reading of the actual words Tolkien wrote. ###### From: conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 8 May 2003 12:37:34 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 173 Message-ID: <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.42.51.28 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1052422655 507 127.0.0.1 (8 May 2003 19:37:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 8 May 2003 19:37:35 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!snoopy.risq.qc.ca!newsfeed.news2me.com!canoe.uoregon.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116813 Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie>... > Conrad Dunkerson wrote: >>> To imply the Ring could dominate thousands of Numenorean minds by force >>> is a nonsense. >> I don't think anyone was suggesting that. > You didn't just suggest it. You *stated* it. If you believe so then you must be reading as much into my words as Tolkien's. :) > The Ring did not have to be worn on his hand for Sauron to use its > power. Depends on what you mean. If you are suggesting that he could hold it (rather than wearing it) and use the power... that might be true. No source actually says this, but it is completely irrelevant to the issue at hand so... whatever. If you are saying that he retained access to that portion of his native power which was IN the Ring even when he did not have the Ring... that is true. If you are saying that he had just as much power when it was out of his possession as when it was on his hand... that is clearly NOT true. > The stated influence on his forces at the Last Battle in the LotR is > incontrovertible proof of what I say. Not really. That passage proves that Sauron could dominate other wills without having the Ring. This is NOT the same as proving that he could do so because he could use the power of the Ring even when he did not have it. > Once again you have mercilessly snipped all the relevant quotations > while supplying none in support of your assertions. This (false) charge has started to get really annoying... so I went back and looked. There WEREN'T any quotations in the message I supposedly 'mercilessly snipped' them out of. >>> It would appear that Maiar in Middle Earth cannot levitate objects when >>> discorporate. >> It would? Can you cite ANY passage which says so? > I don't have to. *Ypu're* the one saying that this occurred despite all > the evidence that it didn't. Actually... that would be Tolkien. I'm just quoting him. > The challenge is on you to prove that it did. So... Tolkien said it did so the challenge is on me to prove that Tolkien said it did somewhere other than where he said it? You don't have to prove that he never said it didn't because the fact that he said it did doesn't count? Well that makes sense. > I'm saying that there is no evidence in any Tolkien text that any > "spirit" of any Maia could interact with the world physically once it > had left its physical body. Except for the letter and the bit in Silm about the Maiar helping to shape the world. > Believe me when I say you're heading for a fall if you keep up this > attack [there's a pun in there somewhere]. Attack? If you view it as an attack... well, it explains alot about your posts. > Nope. The Alatar shaped the world. All by himself? Didn't Pallando help? :) > The Maiar had no part in it. See the previously quoted Silm passage where Tolkien said otherwise. >> The books imply that Sauron was able to influence the weather. If he >> can cause a blizzard (or the Fell Winter) is it really so >> inconceivable that he could move a small ring? > Where do the books imply this? Caradhras. Gandalf - 'His arm has grown long'. > Caradhras caused the blizzard. Gandalf seems to say otherwise. > No definitive evidence is stated by the author in relation to the Witch > Kings powers, only the superstitions of a primitive people. Probably true - I'd have to search to determine if there are any definitive statements about the Witch King influencing the weather. However, I never said he DID so... why with the page long tangents again? > In any case, causing weather patterns to change is one thing, and > involves making different patterns than those required for levitation. > Didn't you know? My bad... I'm not an expert on practical metaphysics apparently. Though, the claim HAD been that Maiar were unable to influence "matter" from a distance... and air, clouds, et cetera (the weather) are matter. > Because despite your completely unfounded assertion, it *wasn't* part of > himself. How could Smeagol have worn it unmolested for so long if it was > so much a continuing part of Sauron? How did he lose it in the first > instance? How did it stay lost for so long? Your argument makes no sense > whatsoever and is unsupported by the published text. So, my hair isn't part of me because I can lose it? The published text does NOT support the Ring being part of Sauron? Whatever. >> After he was greatly reduced in power for his mission to Middle-Earth >> and then further hampered by Gandalf 'casting him out'. > Ganfalf removed him from his order. He had no power to change his basic > nature. You have no argument. Did I SAY that Gandalf changed Saruman's basic nature? No. > You are imploding again. If he rescued it from the Numenorean abyss, why > couldn't he have lifted it from Isildur's hand? Is my magic mitten > theory gaining credibility? Asked and answered. Any number of reasons are possible. To me the most likely seems that Isildur taking possession of the Ring lessened Sauron's immediate power to the point that he was no longer able to take it with him. >> So, if Sauron is able to move the Ring at all while disincorporated he >> must be able to move it so strongly that Isildur would not be able to >> keep Sauron from yanking it out of his hand? That makes sense? > Yes. Now you have it. If he was able to raise it though several hundred > fathoms of raging sea water and prevent it going down with Numenor inot > the abyss, surely he would be able to levitate it against the mere force > of gravity or the relatively miniscule strength of a human hand. Or... he could have slowly moved it along after the cataclysm had passed. Assume a constant acceleration of 1g (or any other piddling amount)... sufficient to get the Ring to Mordor eventually, but not to take it out of Isildur's hand. > There is no statement in all of Tolkien's published works which confirms > Sauron's relative powere levels (i) after Numenor and (ii) after the > Last Alliance. It is indicated that after Numenor Sauron no longer had the ability to take on fair form. That is a loss of power of some sort... precise amount is as impossible to quantify as his power BEFORE that. After the Last Alliance Sauron took MUCH longer to reform than after Numenor... that certainly implies some further reduction in power. > This is rank speculation on your part and not worthy of you, Conrad. > Try harder. Really not caring. ###### From: Tar-Elenion Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Message-ID: References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB887CF.6400502A@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305070416.48169c6d@posting.google.com> <3EB9E1D7.2FB78ED8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080900.3ddf02ee@posting.google.com> <3EBB59B6.DC3EA505@indigo.ie> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Lines: 118 NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.236.164.115 X-Complaints-To: abuse@attbi.com X-Trace: sccrnsc01 1052445104 12.236.164.115 (Fri, 09 May 2003 01:51:44 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 01:51:44 GMT Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 01:51:44 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!out.nntp.be!propagator2-sterling!news-in.nuthinbutnews.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!wn14feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.203!attbi_feed3!attbi.com!sccrnsc01.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116880 In article <3EBB59B6.DC3EA505@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > Tar-Elenion wrote: > > > > > "Then Ar-Pharazôn in the folly of his pride carried him back as a > > prisoner to Númenor. It was not long before he had bewitched the King and > > was master of his counsel; and soon he had turned the hearts of all the > > Númenoreans, except the remnant of the Faithful, back towards the > > darkness." > > LotR, App. A > > > > This suggests that Sauron had to do more than just convince the king and > > council. > > The Sil would appear to disagree with that assertion. Its quoted > elsewhere in this thread. Why don't you review it and comment. > > M. > You are referring to this: "Yet such was the cunning of his mind and mouth, and the strength of his hidden will, that ere three years had passed he had become closest to the secret counsels of the King; for flattery sweet as honey was ever on his tongue, and knowledge he had of many things yet unrevealed to Men. And seeing the favour that he had of their lord all the councillors began to fawn upon him, save one alone, Amandil lord of Andúnië. Then slowly a change came over the land, and the hearts of the Elf-friends were sorely troubled, and many fell away out of fear; and although those that remained still called themselves the Faithful, their enemies named them rebels. For now, having the ears of men, Sauron with many arguments gainsaid all that the Valar had taught; and he bade men think that in the world, in the east and even in the west, there lay yet many seas and many lands for their winning, wherein was wealth uncounted. And still, if they should at the last come to the end of those lands and seas, beyond all lay the Ancient Darkness. 'And out of it the world was made. For Darkness alone is worshipful, and the Lord thereof may yet make other worlds to be gifts to those that serve him, so that the increase of their power shall find no end.'`" And after quoting this you excerpted as the relevant portion: "And seeing the favour that he had of their lord all the councillors began to fawn upon him, save one alone, Amandil lord of Andúnië." And then stated: "This shows that all Sauron had to do was sufficiently influence the King and his inner circle. The people, already tending towards arrogance and mastery, followed the ruler, as they so often do. Post a relevant excerpt if you want to disprove what I say, because the text doesn't appear to support your assertion." 1) _Even if_ it disagreed with my quote, my quote is from LotR which was approved for publication by JRRT. 2) This portion of the cite "For now, having the ears of men, Sauron with many arguments gainsaid all that the Valar had taught; and he bade men think that in the world, in the east and even in the west, there lay yet many seas and many lands for their winning, wherein was wealth uncounted" shows while he had to gain the favour of the king and his council to have readier access to the populace ("having the ears of men") in general, he still needed to convince ("with many arguments gainsaid") the populace ("men"). 3) You could also try this from 'Of the Rings of Power': "Yet there came at length a stay in the onslaught of Sauron upon the westlands. For, as is told in the Akallabêth, he was challenged by the might of Númenor. So great was the power and splendour of the Númenóreans in the noontide of their realm that the servants of Sauron would not withstand them, and hoping to accomplish by cunning what he could not achieve by force, he left Middle-earth for a while and went to Númenor as a hostage of Tar-Calion the King. And there he abode, until at the last by his craft he had corrupted the hearts of most of that people, and set them at war with the Valar, and so compassed their ruin, as he had long desired." The relevant portion being: "until at the last by his craft he had corrupted the hearts of most of that people" 4) And _even if_ the quote from Akallabêth disagreed with both LotR and RoP, Letter 131 says: "Sauron humbles himself, does homage to Tar-Calion, and is carried off to Númenor as hostage and prisoner. But there he swiftly rises by his cunning and knowledge from servant to chief counsellor of the king, and seduces the king and most of the lords and people with his lies. He denies the existence of God, saying that the One is a mere invention of the jealous Valar of the West, the oracle of their own wishes." And Letter 156: "So Sauron had recourse to guile. He submitted, and was carried off to Númenor as a prisoner-hostage. But he was of course a 'divine' person (in the terms of this mythology; a lesser member of the race of Valar) and thus far too powerful to be controlled in this way. He steadily got Arpharazôn's mind under his own control, and in the event corrupted many of the Númenóreans, destroyed the conception of Eru, now represented as a mere figment of the Valar or Lords of the West (a fictitious sanction to which they appealed if anyone questioned their rulings), and substituted a Satanist religion with a large temple, the worship of the dispossessed eldest of the Valar (the rebellious Dark Lord of the First Age)." And Letter 211: "Ar-Pharazôn, as is told in the 'Downfall' or Akallabêth, conquered a terrified Sauron's subjects, not Sauron. Sauron's personal 'surrender' was voluntary and cunning : he got free transport to Numenor! He naturally had the One Ring, and so very soon dominated the minds and wills of most of the Númenóreans." So let us presume your assertion (that the quote you provided from Akallabêth appears to disagree with LotR) is correct. If so why should I accept that the Akallabeth is correct and thus LotR wrong, especially when LotR agrees with 'Rings of Power' and the three letters I quoted from above? Sauron had to gain the confidence of the King and his councillors first, but he still had to convince the Númenóreans generally. -- Tar-Elenion Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue. ###### From: Tar-Elenion Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Message-ID: References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB887CF.6400502A@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305070416.48169c6d@posting.google.com> <3EB9E1D7.2FB78ED8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080900.3ddf02ee@posting.google.com> <3EBB3A14.7036780@indigo.ie> <3EBB5A48.96E1F49D@indigo.ie> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Lines: 80 NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.236.164.115 X-Complaints-To: abuse@attbi.com X-Trace: sccrnsc01 1052451358 12.236.164.115 (Fri, 09 May 2003 03:35:58 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 03:35:58 GMT Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 03:35:58 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!newsfeed.stueberl.de!small1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!border3.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!wn14feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.203!attbi_feed3!attbi.com!sccrnsc01.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116890 In article <3EBB5A48.96E1F49D@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > Tar-Elenion wrote: > > > > In article <3EBB3A14.7036780@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > > > Conrad Dunkerson wrote: > > > > > > > > Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EB9E1D7.2FB78ED8@indigo.ie>... > > > > > > > > > "With the Valar came other spirits whose being also began before the > > > > > World, of the same order as the Valar but of less degree." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "And the Valar drew unto them many companions, some less, some well > > > > nigh as great as themselves, and they laboured together in the > > > > ordering of the Earth and the curbing of its tumults." > > > > Silm, Ainulindale > > > > > > > So some of the Maiar were 'well nigh as great' as the Valar. Note > > > > also that the Maiar are here said to have been involved in the initial > > > > construction of the world. > > > > > > Nope. Sorry again. These were the other Valar, not the Aratar who came > > > first. > > > > The Valar are 14 in number. The Aratar are 8 in number. So six (or > > perhaps rather actually five since Tulkas was a 'late' arrival) other > > Valar account for for the "many companions" the _Valar_ (the quote > > supplied says _Valar_ not Aratar), "drew unto them"? > > > > As you might say: > > "Bwahaha..." etc. > > 1 = One. > > 2 = A couple. > > 3 = A few. > > 4 = Several. > > 6 = Many. > > Its all relative, you see. Weak. > > *mheheheheh* > > M. > Where does that leave five, Tulkas did not come on to the scene until late (the last to enter when Arda was near complete). Also, the quote given above: ""And the Valar drew unto them many companions, some less, some well nigh as great as themselves, and they laboured together in the ordering of the Earth and the curbing of its tumults." Silm, Ainulindale" ...of which you state that "the Valar" here means the Aratar, while the "many companions" refers to the six (or rather five) other Valar, what is your evidence of that? The quote does not say the Aratar, it says the Valar. We can also note that in context with the 'many companions' being Maiar in Valaquenta it says: "With the Valar came other spirits whose being also began before the World, of the same order as the Valar but of less degree. These are the Maiar, the people of the Valar, and their servants and helpers. Their number is not known to the Elves, and few have names in any of the tongues of the Children of Ilúvatar; for though it is otherwise in Aman, in Middle-earth the Maiar have seldom appeared in form visible to Elves and Men." -- Tar-Elenion Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue. ###### From: Stan Brown Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 00:04:56 -0400 Organization: Oak Road Systems Message-ID: References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.60 X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 17 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-01!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116908 Michael O'Neill wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien: >Neither Tolkien nor the links convince me I'm afraid. Then there's really no room for discussion. If you are unwilling to accept what Tolkien said on the matter, in unambiguous words, then there's no way we can have a discussion since I am handicapped by my belief that what Tolkien wrote he meant. -- Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com Tolkien FAQs: http://Tolkien.slimy.com (Steuard Jensen's site) Tolkien letters FAQ: http://users.telerama.com/~taliesen/tolkien/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/tech/faqget.htm ###### Message-ID: <3EBB59B6.DC3EA505@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB887CF.6400502A@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305070416.48169c6d@posting.google.com> <3EB9E1D7.2FB78ED8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080900.3ddf02ee@posting.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 18 Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 00:33:10 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.176.70 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052436802 194.125.176.70 (Fri, 09 May 2003 00:33:22 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 00:33:22 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!newsfeed.vmunix.org!feed.news.nacamar.de!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.esat.net!feeder.news.heanet.ie!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116829 Tar-Elenion wrote: > "Then Ar-Pharazôn in the folly of his pride carried him back as a > prisoner to Númenor. It was not long before he had bewitched the King and > was master of his counsel; and soon he had turned the hearts of all the > Númenoreans, except the remnant of the Faithful, back towards the > darkness." > LotR, App. A > > This suggests that Sauron had to do more than just convince the king and > council. The Sil would appear to disagree with that assertion. Its quoted elsewhere in this thread. Why don't you review it and comment. M. ###### Message-ID: <3EBB5A48.96E1F49D@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB887CF.6400502A@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305070416.48169c6d@posting.google.com> <3EB9E1D7.2FB78ED8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080900.3ddf02ee@posting.google.com> <3EBB3A14.7036780@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 48 Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 00:35:36 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.176.70 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052436948 194.125.176.70 (Fri, 09 May 2003 00:35:48 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 00:35:48 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!colt.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116828 Tar-Elenion wrote: > > In article <3EBB3A14.7036780@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > > Conrad Dunkerson wrote: > > > > > > Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EB9E1D7.2FB78ED8@indigo.ie>... > > > > > > > "With the Valar came other spirits whose being also began before the > > > > World, of the same order as the Valar but of less degree." > > > > > > > > > "And the Valar drew unto them many companions, some less, some well > > > nigh as great as themselves, and they laboured together in the > > > ordering of the Earth and the curbing of its tumults." > > > Silm, Ainulindale > > > > > So some of the Maiar were 'well nigh as great' as the Valar. Note > > > also that the Maiar are here said to have been involved in the initial > > > construction of the world. > > > > Nope. Sorry again. These were the other Valar, not the Aratar who came > > first. > > The Valar are 14 in number. The Aratar are 8 in number. So six (or > perhaps rather actually five since Tulkas was a 'late' arrival) other > Valar account for for the "many companions" the _Valar_ (the quote > supplied says _Valar_ not Aratar), "drew unto them"? > > As you might say: > "Bwahaha..." etc. 1 = One. 2 = A couple. 3 = A few. 4 = Several. 6 = Many. Its all relative, you see. *mheheheheh* M. ###### Message-ID: <3EBB6390.98E78E65@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080435.68a8f04f@posting.google.com> <3EBADC40.52C5E72F@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080948.200a60a4@posting.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 261 Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 01:15:12 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.176.70 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052439325 194.125.176.70 (Fri, 09 May 2003 01:15:25 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 01:15:25 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116931 Conrad Dunkerson wrote: > > Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EBADC40.52C5E72F@indigo.ie>... > > Conrad Dunkerson wrote: > > >> False. There is nothing in the published LotR which suggests that > >> Sauron did not take the Ring to Numenor. You have argued that > there > >> is evidence to suggest he did not NEED to do so in order to > dominate > >> them... but that is a different question from whether he actually > DID > >> take it. On which point LotR is silent. > > > On the contrary, and despite rampant and unnecessary snipping by you > > Conrad, there is ample evidence. > > Michael, your posts are ridiculously long. My posts are well- researched. Perhaps you don't recognise pertinent and full quotation when you see it Conrad. > I assure you it is VERY > neccessary that they be snipped. Actually the snippage only occurs where there is matter inimicable to your position. Which of course is most of my quotation. > If you feel that evidence has been > removed you are welcome to point it out. I have done so. > However, you might want to > check it first; I think you should be doing the checking, *before* you snip preferably. > > Sauron is stated to have returned to Middle Earth as a spirit borne upon > > a dark wind, > > Paraphrase from Letters. NOT LotR. Wrong - o! > > not himself bearing anything, > > Actually, that is the letter where he WAS said to be bearing the Ring; > > "Though reduced to 'a spirit of hatred borne on a dark wind', I do not > think one need boggle at this spirit carrying off the One Ring, upon > which his power of dominating minds now largely depended." > Letters #211 In case your powers of perception have left you altogether Conrad, it is clear to me from the letter excerpt that the letter is not stating this ab initio, but it quoting another source. There are at least three possible sources for this piece of text. The first is from the Sil, the Akallabeth: "For Sauron himself was filled with great fear at the wrath of the Valar, and the doom that Eru laid upon sea and land. It was greater far than aught he had looked for, hoping only for the death of the Númenóreans and the defeat of their proud king. And Sauron, sitting in his black seat in the midst of the Temple, had laughed when he heard the trumpets of Ar-Pharazôn sounding for battle; and again he had laughed when he heard the thunder of the storm; and a third time, even as he laughed at his own thought, thinking what he would do now in the world, being rid of the Edain for ever, he was taken in the midst of his mirth, and his seat and his temple fell into the abyss. But Sauron was not of mortal flesh, and though he was robbed now of that shape in which he had wrought so great an evil, so that he could never again appear fair to the eyes of Men, yet his spirit arose out of the deep and passed as a shadow and a black wind over the sea, and came back to Middle-earth and to Mordor that was his home. There he took up again his great Ring in Barad-dûr, and dwelt there, dark and silent, until he wrought himself a new guise, an image of malice and hatred made visible; and the Eye of Sauron the Terrible few could endure." The second is from the Sil also: Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age "And there he abode, until at the last by his craft he had corrupted the hearts of most of that people, and set them at war with the Valar, and so compassed their ruin, as he had long desired. But that ruin was more terrible than Sauron had foreseen, for he had forgotten the might of the Lords of the West in their anger. The world was broken, and the land was swallowed up, and the seas rose over it, and Sauron himself went down into the abyss. But his spirit arose and fled back on a dark wind to Middle-earth, seeking a home." Finally, from the Appendices, Lotr "But it was not so. Sauron was indeed caught in the wreck of Númenor, so that the bodily form in which he long had walked perished; but he fled back to Middle-earth, a spirit of hatred borne upon a dark wind. He was unable ever again to assume a form that seemed fair to men, but became black and hideous, and his power thereafter was through terror alone. He re-entered Mordor, and hid there for a time in silence. But his anger was great when he learned that Elendil whom be most hated, had escaped him, and was now ordering a realm upon his borders." You'll see that all three tests are subtly different. However, only one matches the piece of text quoted in letter #211. Its from the Lotr. How embarrassing for you... *giggle* And like I said before, Tolkien is rambling in that letter as in several many others. > > and at the point he takes up the Ruling Ring *again* in Barad Dur. > > Paraphrase of Silmarillion. NOT LotR. > > Note that NONE of this 'evidence from the published LotR' was actually > IN LotR... hence no 'rampant and unneccessary snipping' took place and > I was quite correct in saying that you have not provided evidence from > LotR against Sauron having the Ring in Numenor. Why do you have "evidence from the published LotR" in quotation marks? I referred to the published texts. Plural. I included the Sil and made it plain I was quoting the Akallabeth earlier. Are you trying ot put words into my mouth, Conrad? > > He couldn't have taken it up again if he hadn't first put it down, now > > could he? > > Quite true. And having no body on which to wear it would seem (to me) > to qualify. Semantic bullshit, Conrad. He was either able to bear it back or he wasn't. If he was, he had to take it up from our of the Abyss and therefore had already done so before he got back to Barad Dur. Stating he took it up again when he returned there makes no sense. It could never have gotten back there in the first place! > >> Which, again says nothing on the subject UNLESS you assume 'took up > >> again' to mean that Sauron had stopped using the Ring not when his > >> body was destroyed, but before he left for Numenor.... for which > there > >> is no evidence. > > > I don't "assume" the meaning of the phrase "took up again". The meaning > > is self evident, requiring no assumption or interpretation on my part. > > The fact that Sauron then began wearing the Ring again is self-evident > from the passage. When he STOPPED wearing it is not. You ARE > assuming that Sauron stopped wearing the Ring when he left to go to > Numenor because the passage does NOT state that. He could have tossed > it aside the moment the Elves took off THEIR Rings for all >this< > passage says on the subject. That is... nothing. OTC I am assuming he didn't wear it to Numenor (i) because the text describes him as taking it up again whe nhe returns to Barad Dur. and (ii) No Maia had power over matter while discorporate, least of all Sauron. The fact that Isildur took the Ring from close proximity to Saurons constructed body proves this point irrefutably. > > He had to have left it down to take it up again. > > We both agree on that. Just not on when he 'left it down'. > > > There is no proof he took to Numenor. The letter is just woolly > > backtracking by Tolkien as is the assertion that Sauron was weaker > > willed than the Hobbits. > > You know full well that no such assertion exists. *I* made the assertion earlier in this thread. Don't you read my posts? Or is it that you don't register satirical comment Conrad? > > But as you're here, we are all in agreement that the Sil confirms he > > "took up again" the Ring on his return to Barad Dur. > > > You dismiss this point entorely in support of your assertions. > > Uh.... no, I don't. See above (and numerous times before) where I > explain how it is entirely consistent with my view. That passage says > Sauron took up the Ring again. I do not dismiss it. I agree entirely > - Sauron took up the Ring again. When did he put it down then Conrad? > > I dismiss nothing. > > Except Tolkien's explicit statement that you are wrong? :) Tolkien never stated I was wrong. Tolkien stated somthing in his letters which contradicts the published texts. > >>> Perhaps he might have wished he had written matters differently, > but > >>> letter #131 is a howl of impotent revisionism. > > >> A 'howl of impotent revisionism' written three years before LotR > was > >> published? Interesting. > > > Interesting? You think his texts *weren't* revised prior to publication? > > What planet are you on Conrad? > > > I describe it as "impotent" because like many other planned revisions, > > it mever saw print and the inconsistencies were left in the printed text > > and, I suspect, all the galleys. > > Nice attempt at repositioning. You originally said that Tolkien > 'forgot' in the 'fullness of time' after publication. Now you claim > that what you meant all along is that Tolkien deliberately changed his > mind BEFORE publication but was unable to get the text changed before > it went out. I'm saying Tolkien made a comment in one of his letters and *forgot* to change the published text or add to it to agree with that comment. Given Christopher Tolkien's painstaking research into Tolkien's notes, I fail to see how the Sil was published in the form it was if Tolkien had corrected the galley proofs. The clear implication is that he hadn't. In other words, he *forgot*. Is this crystal to you now, Conrad? > Or MAYBE there really isn't any inconsistency at all. > > > The difference being that the printed test is the story and the letters > > contain comments that are inconsistent with the story. > > They are inconsistent with your interpretation of the story (actually, > with your interpretation of texts OUTSIDE the story). They are NOT > inconsistent with every reasonable reading of the actual words Tolkien > wrote. On the contrary, Comprehension 101 seems to be missing a pupil i nyou Conrad. Tolkien suggests that it was possible that Sauron had a power to levitate matter while in his spirit form. This is nowhere shown to be the case for a Maia, in *any* published text. Not in the Lotr, the SIL, UT, LT1 or 2 indeed any of the HoME books. In regard to matter, Tolkien twice describes instances of Ainur who have incarnated themselves, thereby gaining a power over the matter of Arda. Melian and Melkor are the personages. This principle confounds the assertion that Sauron's spirit form could have retrived a Ring from the middle of the Abyss, against the pressure of millions of tons of seawater and an island. Maiar needed to be incarnate to effect matter. Valar did not. Learn this difference, or I suspect embarrassment may lie ahead for you, Conrad. M. ###### Message-ID: <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 464 Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 02:09:54 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.176.70 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052442618 194.125.176.70 (Fri, 09 May 2003 02:10:18 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 02:10:18 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!nntp.infostrada.it!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!easynews.net!newsfeed3.easynews.net!feeder.news.heanet.ie!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116930 Conrad Dunkerson wrote: > > Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie>... > > Conrad Dunkerson wrote: > > >>> To imply the Ring could dominate thousands of Numenorean minds by > force > >>> is a nonsense. > > >> I don't think anyone was suggesting that. > > > You didn't just suggest it. You *stated* it. > > If you believe so then you must be reading as much into my words as > Tolkien's. :) Nope. You made it clear that in your opinion Sauron used the Ring to dominate the Numenoreans and "make" them commit human sacrifice. > > The Ring did not have to be worn on his hand for Sauron to use its > > power. > > Depends on what you mean. If you are suggesting that he could hold it > (rather than wearing it) and use the power... that might be true. No > source actually says this, but it is completely irrelevant to the > issue at hand so... whatever. It is not irrelevant. You're saying that he needed the Ring in Numenor. I'm stating that he didn't need it, but that even if he did need to use its power he didn't need it to be physically present to access that power. I quoted the LotR to back up the assertion that he could dominate the wills of his slaves, armies and captains without physically being in possession of the Ring. He didn't need to be anywhere near it. Period. > If you are saying that he retained access to that portion of his > native power which was IN the Ring even when he did not have the > Ring... that is true. > > If you are saying that he had just as much power when it was out of > his possession as when it was on his hand... that is clearly NOT true. Please read the two sentences you just wrote again. According to you he *was* able to access the power he put into the Ring while remote from it, yet he was less powerful without the Ring than he would have been witht it. This makes no sense. > > The stated influence on his forces at the Last Battle in the LotR is > > incontrovertible proof of what I say. > > Not really. That passage proves that Sauron could dominate other > wills without having the Ring. This is NOT the same as proving that > he could do so because he could use the power of the Ring even when he > did not have it. You've just admitted this very point above Conrad... > > Once again you have mercilessly snipped all the relevant quotations > > while supplying none in support of your assertions. > > This (false) charge has started to get really annoying... so I went > back and looked. There WEREN'T any quotations in the message I > supposedly 'mercilessly snipped' them out of. I apologise. I should have posted "relevant summations". Here they are again. My point was that the printed Sil is contradicted by/contradicts the Letter regarding whether Sauron brought the Ring with him. Despite everything else Tolkien may have written, three things are clear from the several versions of the Sil and the LotR 1. The need for the Ring in Numenor: The Ring was made to dominate the minds of other Ring wearers. This was a specific power, apart from any military or destructive power it might have had. In this regard, it required ot be a potent device, thus Sauron invested it with much of his native strength and malice. However the Rings power could not have been greater than the sum total of the power that made it and was put into it and Sauron was only a Maia of the people of Aule. Saruman writ large, if you will, and tutored by Aule and then Morgoth. He wasn't omnipotent. To imply the Ring could dominate thousands of Numenorean minds by force is a nonsense. Even Morgoth, a Vala, couldn't dominate other wills en masse in this way. Someone has started this bullshit and forgot to check their facts before driving off in the bandwagon. The mere thought that Sauron magically brow beat thousands of the most advanced humans in Middle Earth into thinking in a particular way is sheer nonsense. 2. The abilities of discorporate Maiar It would appear that Maiar in Middle Earth cannot levitate objects when discorporate. They cannot affect the material world one way or another. Nowhere do we see objects magically flying in the books. Indeed Morgoth is said to have become trammelled in "matter" partly to gain a power over it, and to have been lessened by allowing power to pass out of him into it and into his servants. Melian is spoken of in similar terms, regarding the bearing of Lúthien and the power she gained over Middle Earth. She is said to have "vanished" out of Doriath and gone to Valinor. She performed this feat whilst incarnate. Nowhere do we see discorporate Maiar able to directly influence the real world. Apart from Tolkien's erroneous letter, there is no basis for supposing Sauron was endowed with telekinetic abilities. 3. Effects of, and abilities manifested after, discorporation of Maiar There are three instances of Maiar of Aule being discorporated. (i) Saruman from his "human" incarnation at the end of the War of the Ring in the Shire. (ii) Sauron from his original incarnated body in the Akallabeth. (iii) Sauron from his constructed body at the end of the Last Alliance. In no case do we see the Maiar in question, both originally of the people of Aule, show any ability to manipulate their form or control matter immediately after "death". Arguably they would know more about manipulating matter, whatever form they were in, than any other "type" of Maiar. If Sauron couldn't do it while the Ring was actually on the finger of his dead reconstructed body after the Last Alliance and so prevent Isildur from taking it, it seem highly unlikely that he was able to retrieve the Ring from the depths of the abyss after the Downfall. Tolkien's talking through his hat in the Letters, 211 & 131. > >>> It would appear that Maiar in Middle Earth cannot levitate objects > when > >>> discorporate. > > >> It would? Can you cite ANY passage which says so? > > > I don't have to. *Ypu're* the one saying that this occurred despite all > > the evidence that it didn't. > > Actually... that would be Tolkien. I'm just quoting him. This is true, but he's dead and you're arguing the point. > > The challenge is on you to prove that it did. > > So... Tolkien said it did so the challenge is on me to prove that > Tolkien said it did somewhere other than where he said it? The challenge is on you to prove this principle was established in the printed texts. I don't care which texts. Just show that Tolkien had considered it and intended to publish it as part of any of the works or even th enotes he was workign on. Because as it stands the Sil, LotR, the Ring of Power and the Third Age and the Akallabeth do not state that Maiar had the power to effect matter whilst discorporate. OTC the publisehd works state clearly that Melian the Maia and Melkor the Vala gained power over matter by becoming trammelled in it. > You don't > have to prove that he never said it didn't because the fact that he > said it did doesn't count? That's *your* incorrect summary. > Well that makes sense. I'm happy for you. > > I'm saying that there is no evidence in any Tolkien text that any > > "spirit" of any Maia could interact with the world physically once it > > had left its physical body. > > Except for the letter and the bit in Silm about the Maiar helping to > shape the world. After they had become incarnate. > > Believe me when I say you're heading for a fall if you keep up this > > attack [there's a pun in there somewhere]. > > Attack? If you view it as an attack... well, it explains alot about > your posts. I was punning. > > Nope. The Alatar shaped the world. > > All by himself? Didn't Pallando help? :) > > The Maiar had no part in it. > > See the previously quoted Silm passage where Tolkien said otherwise. The Maiar are not mentioned until after the point at which the Valar become incarnate. All Maiar are incarnate, and in their first bodies have great powers. Melian can vanish from Doriath and arrive in Valinor. Olorin can walk amongst the Elves as one of them or walk unseen. Sauron can change his form from a huge wolf to a giant bat to a fair human. Only one Maia came back from the death of their first body. Sauron. Yet while a spirit he can do nothing. This is shown after the Last Alliance, where he cannot prevent Isildur taking the One Ring. Gandalf's "resurrection" was consequent on the death of his second body, that of his incarnation as a mortal man. He was sent back by Eru with enhanced powers. We don't know what happenned to his first Maiar body. Saruman's attempted comeback was likewise on the death of his second body. He failed utterly. We don't know what happenned to his first Maiar body either. Come to think of it, since Gandalf was incarnated as a mortal man, however long-lived, I don;t see how he could be admitted back into Valinor - but that's another story... > >> The books imply that Sauron was able to influence the weather. If > he > >> can cause a blizzard (or the Fell Winter) is it really so > >> inconceivable that he could move a small ring? > > > Where do the books imply this? > > Caradhras. Gandalf - 'His arm has grown long'. > > > Caradhras caused the blizzard. > > Gandalf seems to say otherwise. That's trite. The passage is as follows: ================================================================ "'I wonder if this is a contrivance of the Enemy,' said Boromir. "They say in my land that he can govern the storms in the Mountains of Shadow that stand upon the borders of Mordor. He has strange powers and many allies.' 'His arm has grown long indeed,' said Gimli, `if he can draw snow down from the North to trouble us here three hundred leagues away.' 'His arm has grown long,' said Gandalf." ================================================================ Boromir is recounting supertition from Gondor - evne so this limits his powers to Mordor. Gandalf is not being definitive here. But that isn't the end of the matter. ================================================================ "`We cannot go further tonight,' said Boromir. `Let those call it the wind who will; there are fell voices on the air; and these stones are aimed at us.' `I do call it the wind,' said Aragorn. `But that does not make what you say untrue. There are many evil and unfriendly things in the world that have little love for those that go on two legs, and yet are not in league with Sauron, but have purposes of their own. Some have been in this world longer than he.' 'Caradhras was called the Cruel, and had an ill name, said Gimli, `long years ago, when rumour of Sauron had not been heard in these lands.' `It matters little who is the enemy, if we cannot beat off his attack; said Gandalf." ================================================================ It is clear that Gandalf had no authoritative view on the matter. Yet othere did. =============================================================== `"Well,' cried Legolas as he ran up, `I have not brought the Sun. She is walking in the blue fields of the South, and a little wreath of snow on this Redhorn hillock troubles her not at all. But I have brought back a gleam of good hope for those who are doomed to go on feet. There is the greatest wind-drift of all just beyond the turn, and there our Strong Men were almost buried. They despaired, until I returned and told them that the drift was little wider than a wall. And on the other side the snow suddenly grows less, while further down it is no more than a white coverlet to cool a hobbit's toes.' `Ah, it is as I said,' growled Gimli. 'It was no ordinary storm. It is the ill will of Caradhras. He does not love Elves and Dwarves, and that drift was laid to cut off our escape.'" ================================================================= And yet again... ================================================================= "After a while Boromir returned carrying Sam. Behind in the narrow but now well-trodden track came Gandalf, leading Bill with Gimli perched among the baggage. Last came Aragorn carrying Frodo. They passed through the lane; but hardly had Frodo touched the ground when with a deep rumble there rolled down a fall of stones and slithering snow. The spray of it half blinded the Company as they crouched against the cliff, and when the air cleared again they saw that the path was blocked behind them. `Enough, enough!' cried Gimli. 'We are departing as quickly as we may!' And indeed with that last stroke the malice of the mountain seemed to be expended, as if Caradhras was satisfied that the invaders had been beaten off and would not dare to return. The threat of snow lifted; the clouds began to break and the light grew broader." ================================================================== Then there is the comment by the omniscnet author, not qualified by the characters in the story. =================================================================== "`The birds again!' said Aragorn, pointing down. 'That cannot be helped now,' said Gandalf. `Whether they are good or evil, or have nothing to do with us at all, we must go down at once. Not even on the knees of Caradhras will we wait for another night-fall!' A cold wind flowed down behind them, as they turned their backs on the Redhorn Gate, and stumbled wearily down the slope. Caradhras had defeated them." ================================================================== "Caradhras had defeated them." You can stop the selective quotations and the bullshit now Conrad. > > No definitive evidence is stated by the author in relation to the Witch > > Kings powers, only the superstitions of a primitive people. > > Probably true - I'd have to search to determine if there are any > definitive statements about the Witch King influencing the weather. > However, I never said he DID so... why with the page long tangents > again? You commented on Sauron's powers. I was being fair. I posted some anecdotal evidence from the Lossoth about the Witche King. What do you care how long the quotations are? At least they're not quoted selectively and misleadingly like your one from Gandalf above. > > In any case, causing weather patterns to change is one thing, and > > involves making different patterns than those required for levitation. > > Didn't you know? > > My bad... I'm not an expert on practical metaphysics apparently. Stick around. you'll learn. > Though, the claim HAD been that Maiar were unable to influence > "matter" from a distance... and air, clouds, et cetera (the weather) > are matter. Only Caradhras [a Mountain, you'll please note, not a Maia OR Vala] is stated definitively to have been able to act maliciously to create and use weather against incarnates. Not Sauron OR the Witch King, whose influence is presented to the reader by the author as local superstition. > > Because despite your completely unfounded assertion, it *wasn't* part of > > himself. How could Smeagol have worn it unmolested for so long if it was > > so much a continuing part of Sauron? How did he lose it in the first > > instance? How did it stay lost for so long? Your argument makes no sense > > whatsoever and is unsupported by the published text. > > So, my hair isn't part of me because I can lose it? The published > text does NOT support the Ring being part of Sauron? Whatever. Not "whatever" Conrad. Your woolly reasoning is what has led to this exchange of views. Your hair is only part of you so long as its growing out of your head. A wig might do the same job visually, but its not a part of you, not even if its made from your own hairs. This is pretty basic stuff to have to explain to a grow man, Conrad... > >> After he was greatly reduced in power for his mission to > Middle-Earth > >> and then further hampered by Gandalf 'casting him out'. > > > Ganfalf removed him from his order. He had no power to change his basic > > nature. You have no argument. > > Did I SAY that Gandalf changed Saruman's basic nature? No. You said Saruman was "further hampered by Gandalf 'casting him out'". What did you mean by that? > > You are imploding again. If he rescued it from the Numenorean abyss, why > > couldn't he have lifted it from Isildur's hand? Is my magic mitten > > theory gaining credibility? > > Asked and answered. Any number of reasons are possible. To me the > most likely seems that Isildur taking possession of the Ring lessened > Sauron's immediate power to the point that he was no longer able to > take it with him. I see, and his body being crushed to smithereens by millions of tons of water and exploding island was somehow less inconvenient? You'll have to do a lot better than *that* Conrad! > >> So, if Sauron is able to move the Ring at all while disincorporated > he > >> must be able to move it so strongly that Isildur would not be able > to > >> keep Sauron from yanking it out of his hand? That makes sense? > > > Yes. Now you have it. If he was able to raise it though several hundred > > fathoms of raging sea water and prevent it going down with Numenor inot > > the abyss, surely he would be able to levitate it against the mere force > > of gravity or the relatively miniscule strength of a human hand. > > Or... he could have slowly moved it along after the cataclysm had > passed. Assume a constant acceleration of 1g (or any other piddling > amount)... sufficient to get the Ring to Mordor eventually, but not to > take it out of Isildur's hand. *BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!* You've GOT to be kidding me! How was he supposed to get the Ring off the dead finger of his dead body hundreds of fathome down, so? It'd take a lot more energy than to give a trinket an acceleration of 9.81 M/sec/sec, I can tell you. > > There is no statement in all of Tolkien's published works which confirms > > Sauron's relative powere levels (i) after Numenor and (ii) after the > > Last Alliance. > > It is indicated that after Numenor Sauron no longer had the ability to > take on fair form. That is a loss of power of some sort... precise > amount is as impossible to quantify as his power BEFORE that. After > the Last Alliance Sauron took MUCH longer to reform than after > Numenor... that certainly implies some further reduction in power. We know from the Lotr that "Sauron was indeed caught in the wreck of Númenor, so that the bodily form in which he long had walked perished; but he fled back to Middle-earth, a spirit of hatred borne upon the dark wind. He was unable ever again to assume a form that seemed fair to men, but became black and hideous, and his power thereafter was through terror alone." This reduction in power that you suggest is not borne out anywhere. He lost a portion of his power in the Downfall with the loss of his first body. No further reduction in power is cited *anywhere*. Moreover, his power level in the LotR if anything appears higher than at any previous time. > > This is rank speculation on your part and not worthy of you, Conrad. > > Try harder. > > Really not caring. M. ###### Sender: jcast@cate0-46.reshall.ou.edu Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <3EBC0024.F7357507@indigo.ie> From: Jon Cast Message-ID: <87he845iwi.fsf@cate0-46.reshall.ou.edu> Lines: 27 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3.50 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Date: 09 May 2003 08:50:05 -0500 NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.15.140.46 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ou.edu X-Trace: news.ou.edu 1052487908 129.15.140.46 (Fri, 09 May 2003 08:45:08 CDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 08:45:08 CDT Organization: The University of Oklahoma Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!sjc70.webusenet.com!news.webusenet.com!pd2nf1so.cg.shawcable.net!residential.shaw.ca!news-out.newsfeeds.com!propagator2-maxim!news-in.superfeed.net!newsfeed.onenet.net!leto.ou.edu!news.ou.edu!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116866 Michael O'Neill writes: > Morgil wrote: > > > > "Michael O'Neill" kirjoitti > > viestissä:3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie... > > > Conrad Dunkerson wrote: > > > > >> The books imply that Sauron was able to influence the weather. If > > > > he > > > > >> can cause a blizzard (or the Fell Winter) is it really so > > > > >> inconceivable that he could move a small ring? > > > > > > > > > Where do the books imply this? > > > > > > > > Caradhras. Gandalf - 'His arm has grown long'. > > > > Better example of Sauron influencing the weather would be > > the darkness he summons upon Gondor during the siege. > > No need to boggle who caused that... > > > > Morgil > > That wasn't weather IIRC. OK, this puts you down to the lowest forms of verbal trickery, now. Jon Cast ###### Sender: jcast@cate0-46.reshall.ou.edu Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBC06C3.6184B7AC@indigo.ie> From: Jon Cast Message-ID: <87d6is5isy.fsf@cate0-46.reshall.ou.edu> Lines: 50 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3.50 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Date: 09 May 2003 08:52:13 -0500 NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.15.140.46 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ou.edu X-Trace: news.ou.edu 1052488036 129.15.140.46 (Fri, 09 May 2003 08:47:16 CDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 08:47:16 CDT Organization: The University of Oklahoma Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!logbridge.uoregon.edu!leto.ou.edu!news.ou.edu!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116870 Michael O'Neill writes: > Morgil wrote: > > > > "Stan Brown" kirjoitti > > viestissä:MPG.1924f2f4e1dbf74798ab9c@news.odyssey.net... > > > Michael O'Neill wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien: > > > >Neither Tolkien nor the links convince me I'm afraid. > > > > > > Then there's really no room for discussion. If you are unwilling to > > > accept what Tolkien said on the matter, in unambiguous words, then > > > there's no way we can have a discussion since I am handicapped by my > > > belief that what Tolkien wrote he meant. > > > > You should take it as an artificial debating challenge, > > like Conrad has: to prove something obvious without > > using the most plainly stated evidence. > > Now you're talking! > > > It would be > > quite interesting actually, if only Michael would not > > write such overlong posts... > > > > Morgil > > Well, in defence, the matter of the downfall and Sauron's return to > Middle Earth is mentioned all over the place. Tar Eleinions recent post > summarizes this nicely. > > Unfortunatly, the evidence in support for my assertions about Maia > abilities or otherwise while discorporate is all over the place too. > > So there you go. Good debate demands accurate and not unduly selective > references. > > An example of the latter would be Conrad's recent post about Sauron's > aability to control weather, which the Author himself ascribes to > Caradhras, and not as Gandalf appears to suggest earlier to Sauron's arm > having "grown long". While I accept Conrad posted it in good faith, it > was an inaccurate comment when taken out of context. > > In fact theone thing evil Maiar cannot control is the West Wind. Both > Sauron and Saruman get blown away by it at their respective "ends". You mean the wind from the Sea (and thus from Osse or Ulmo) or beyond? Well, duh. They couldn't control Sirion, either. Doesn't establish any general rules. Jon Cast ###### From: conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 9 May 2003 07:04:22 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 193 Message-ID: <1178b6d1.0305090604.4a153478@posting.google.com> References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080435.68a8f04f@posting.google.com> <3EBADC40.52C5E72F@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080948.200a60a4@posting.google.com> <3EBB6390.98E78E65@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.42.51.27 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1052489063 18495 127.0.0.1 (9 May 2003 14:04:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 9 May 2003 14:04:23 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!newsfeed.stueberl.de!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116882 Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EBB6390.98E78E65@indigo.ie>... > My posts are well- researched. Your posts are LONG. That does not automatically make them well researched. > Perhaps you don't recognise pertinent and full quotation when you see > it Conrad. Wow. You REALLY sound like Martinez. And no, I'm sorry... several paragraphs of quotation about the Witch King's possible ability/inability to influence the weather are NOT pertinent to whether Sauron had the Ring on him in Numenor or even particularly pertinent to whether Sauron himself could influence the weather. If you MUST bring in such tangents why not do so with a few words (ala 'there is no proof that the Witch King could influence the weather') rather than long blocks of quotation? If that is 'well researched' then it is 'well researched' on a topic completely different than the matter at hand... tons of noise put out as apparent obfuscation of what is really a quite simple question; Does the 'took up again his Ring' passage say WHEN Sauron 'put it down' in the first place? Answer: No, it doesn't. Ergo, that is NOT evidence against him having it with him in Numenor. And all the rest of this is pretty much just noise to avoid that simple truth. > The first is from the Sil, the Akallabeth: Which... is not LotR. > The second is from the Sil also: Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age Which... is not LotR. > Finally, from the Appendices, Lotr Which... IS LotR... but NOT anything you have quoted previously and thus NOT anything which I have 'maliciously snipped because evidence from LotR is so damaging to my position'. At this point you are just outright lying. In short, get off it already. > "But it was not so. Sauron was indeed caught in the wreck of Númenor, so > that the bodily form in which he long had walked perished; but he fled > back to Middle-earth, a spirit of hatred borne upon a dark wind. He was > unable ever again to assume a form that seemed fair to men, but became > black and hideous, and his power thereafter was through terror alone. He > re-entered Mordor, and hid there for a time in silence. But his anger > was great when he learned that Elendil whom be most hated, had escaped > him, and was now ordering a realm upon his borders." Note how this doesn't say anything which implies in the least that Sauron did not have the Ring with him in Numenor. Normally that would get it snipped as irrelevant, but hey... we know how you feel about snipping 'relevant' texts that have absolutely no bearing on the question at hand. >> Note that NONE of this 'evidence from the published LotR' was actually >> IN LotR... hence no 'rampant and unneccessary snipping' took place and >> I was quite correct in saying that you have not provided evidence from >> LotR against Sauron having the Ring in Numenor. > Why do you have "evidence from the published LotR" in quotation marks? Because the supposed evidence was not FROM LotR. None of the materials you quoted from LotR prior to this message had any bearing on the question of whether Sauron had taken the Ring to Numenor... only whether he NEEDED to do so in order to control others. As I have said previously. > I referred to the published texts. Plural. I included the Sil and made > it plain I was quoting the Akallabeth earlier. Are you trying ot put > words into my mouth, Conrad? Oi! You are either retroactively changing your meaning again or being very very odd. If you include those as 'published texts' then you are speaking not of the texts published by JRRT, but ALL the texts... and the distinction you were drawing between the 'published texts' and the... OTHER 'published texts' becomes indecipherable. > Semantic bullshit, Conrad. He was either able to bear it back or he > wasn't. If he was, he had to take it up from our of the Abyss and > therefore had already done so before he got back to Barad Dur. Stating > he took it up again when he returned there makes no sense. It could > never have gotten back there in the first place! Only if you assume 'take it up' to mean something like 'moved'. I do not. I rather believe Tolkien meant 'began wearing' or 'began wielding'. > OTC I am assuming he didn't wear it to Numenor That much is clear. > (i) because the text describes him as taking it up again whe nhe returns > to Barad Dur. Which does not say anything about when he 'put it down'. > (ii) No Maia had power over matter while discorporate, least of all > Sauron. Which is simply not true given Tolkien's statements that they took part in the shaping of the world. > The fact that Isildur took the Ring from close proximity to Saurons > constructed body proves this point irrefutably. I disagree. I have presented several possible explanations for that. Isildur was a person and could take 'possession' of the Ring away from Sauron, reducing his access to its power. His own power was lesser at that point then when he carried the Ring from Numenor. The amount of force needed to move the Ring was negligible and thus might be insufficient to yank it from Isildur's grasp. Et cetera. >>> There is no proof he took to Numenor. The letter is just woolly >>> backtracking by Tolkien as is the assertion that Sauron was weaker >>> willed than the Hobbits. >> You know full well that no such assertion exists. > *I* made the assertion earlier in this thread. Don't you read my posts? Uhhh... ok. So, YOUR assertion is "just woolly backtracking by Tolkien". Makes alot of sense. > When did he put it down then Conrad? When he died and lost his body. He certainly couldn't be wearing it while he had no body. > Tolkien never stated I was wrong. You know that is simply false. Even if you were correct about the letter being 'wrong' Tolkien still wrote it and it still directly contradicts your view. You can say that you do not accept the letter, but the above pretends that it just does not exist. > Tolkien stated somthing in his letters which contradicts the published > texts. Here we go with the 'published texts' game again. If 'Silm' is a 'published text' then so is the letter... and it certainly doesn't contradict itself. If 'published texts' refers to those published by JRRT... we return to my point about you not having supplied ANY evidence of that letter being contradicted by such text. Either way this statement is false. If you want to reword it as, 'Tolkien stated something in his letters which contradicts SOME of the texts published after he died' then I'd still disagree with your interpretation of those other texts, but at least you would not be >obviously< incorrect. > I'm saying Tolkien made a comment in one of his letters and *forgot* to > change the published text or add to it to agree with that comment. Given > Christopher Tolkien's painstaking research into Tolkien's notes, I fail > to see how the Sil was published in the form it was if Tolkien had > corrected the galley proofs. The clear implication is that he hadn't. In > other words, he *forgot*. Oh look... "published text" again. The published text of LotR? That is the only one you could reasonably be talking about "galley proofs" for. However, as has been pointed out numerous times... neither letter #131 or letter #211 is contradicted by anything in LotR. Your supposed contradictions come from Silmarillion... which Tolkien never saw 'galley proofs' for. Or are you now saying that "Tolkien" is CHRISTOPHER and >he< forgot to make changes? > Is this crystal to you now, Conrad? Clear as mud. BTW, Letter #131 was written before LotR was published and said Sauron could not part with the Ring. Letter #211 was written after LotR was published and said that Sauron took the Ring to Numenor. So... I think the rationalization needs to incorporate both pre and post forgetfullness of the concept of Sauron keeping the Ring with him. > On the contrary, Comprehension 101 seems to be missing a pupil i nyou > Conrad. Or maybe you could use 'published text' consistently or... hey, here's a concept... give the NAME of the text(s) you are talking about. For the record... I snipped several repetitions of arguments previously rebutted. ###### From: conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 9 May 2003 09:20:40 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 265 Message-ID: <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> References: <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.42.51.28 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1052497241 25745 127.0.0.1 (9 May 2003 16:20:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 9 May 2003 16:20:41 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!snoopy.risq.qc.ca!cyclone.bc.net!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116896 Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie>... > Please read the two sentences you just wrote again. According to you he > *was* able to access the power he put into the Ring while remote from > it, yet he was less powerful without the Ring than he would have been > witht it. Correct. > This makes no sense. I disagree. So did Tolkien; "But to achieve this he [Sauron] had been obliged to let a great part of his own inherent power (a frequent and very significant motive in myth and fairy-story) pass into the One Ring. While he wore it, his power on earth was actually enhanced. But even if he did not wear it, that power existed and was in 'rapport' with himself: he was not 'diminished'." Letters #131 The power that Sauron put into the Ring was still 'part of him' and did not 'diminish' him even if he was not wearing the Ring. However, if he WAS wearing the Ring his power was actually greater than before he made it. >>> The stated influence on his forces at the Last Battle in the LotR is >>> incontrovertible proof of what I say. >> Not really. That passage proves that Sauron could dominate other >> wills without having the Ring. This is NOT the same as proving that >> he could do so because he could use the power of the Ring even when he >> did not have it. > You've just admitted this very point above Conrad... No... Sauron was still in rapport with the power that he had put INTO the Ring even when he was not wearing it. It was still 'part of him'. He was NOT able to access the ENHANCEMENT to his power that he got while wearing it. The fact that Sauron could influence others without having the Ring does not prove that he had access to all the power of the Ring even when it was not in his possession. Indeed, this is clearly false based on the letter above and numerous statements in LotR. If that WERE the case why would he ever wear it at all? Why would he have been so desparate to get it back? > 1. The need for the Ring in Numenor: Irrelevant. I don't agree with your assessment that the Ring was only meant to dominate the wearers of other Rings, that wearing it did not enhance Sauron's power to manipulate/dominate others, et cetera... but the whole question has no bearing. Even if Sauron did not NEED the Ring for his plans in Numenor that does not indicate that he did not HAVE it. > To imply the Ring could dominate thousands of Numenorean minds by force > is a nonsense. Again, I never said otherwise. I said that Sauron >influenced< them. The Numenoreans were never 'puppets' to the extent of his slaves in Mordor, but they were certainly influenced / corrupted by more than just the subversion of their King and his immediate councillors. > Even Morgoth, a Vala, couldn't dominate other wills en masse in this way. > Someone has started this bullshit and forgot to check their facts before > driving off in the bandwagon. The mere thought that Sauron magically brow > beat thousands of the most advanced humans in Middle Earth into thinking in > a particular way is sheer nonsense. Which is no doubt why you invented this silly straw-man argument in the first place. > 2. The abilities of discorporate Maiar Relevant to the question of whether Sauron could carry the Ring back. However, it has been addressed many times rather than 'snipped and ignored' as you have suggested. > It would appear that Maiar in Middle Earth cannot levitate objects when > discorporate. They cannot affect the material world one way or another. The quotations indicating that they took part in the shaping of the world prove otherwise... and are thus entirely consistent with the quotation about Sauron carrying the Ring back. > 3. Effects of, and abilities manifested after, discorporation of Maiar Seems rather closely tied to '2' above. > There are three instances of Maiar of Aule being discorporated. > (i) Saruman from his "human" incarnation at the end of the War of the > Ring in the Shire. > (ii) Sauron from his original incarnated body in the Akallabeth. > (iii) Sauron from his constructed body at the end of the Last Alliance. Er... so now you are just cut and pasting the same stuff that has been replied to previously? Or you forgot the fourth instance (Sauron at the destruction of the One) again? > The challenge is on you to prove this principle was established in the > printed texts. I don't care which texts. Just show that Tolkien had > considered it and intended to publish it as part of any of the works or > even th enotes he was workign on. Because as it stands the Sil, LotR, > the Ring of Power and the Third Age and the Akallabeth do not state that > Maiar had the power to effect matter whilst discorporate. Shaping of the world quotations. Fully consistent. >> Except for the letter and the bit in Silm about the Maiar helping to >> shape the world. > After they had become incarnate. Where does it say that it was after they had become incarnate? YOU previously claimed that most of the shaping took place before the Valar took on incarnate forms. Are you suggesting that the Maiar incarnated before the Valar? The order of the texts seems pretty clear that the Ainur shaped the world and THEN they took on material form. >>> Nope. The Alatar shaped the world. >> All by himself? Didn't Pallando help? :) > Oh come on... that was a good one. :) > The Maiar are not mentioned until after the point at which the Valar > become incarnate. All Maiar are incarnate, Clearly not true. Olorin was said to seldom take on incarnate form until that little mission to Middle-Earth. > Only one Maia came back from the death of their first body. Sauron. Yet > while a spirit he can do nothing. This is shown after the Last Alliance, > where he cannot prevent Isildur taking the One Ring. > Gandalf's "resurrection" was consequent on the death of his second body, > that of his incarnation as a mortal man. He was sent back by Eru with > enhanced powers. We don't know what happenned to his first Maiar body. NONE of this is supported by the texts. What gives you the idea that the 'old man' form was only the "second body" Olorin had ever taken on? The Ainur (Maiar included) did not all have bodies that they were bound to. They could put them on and take them off like clothing in the beginning. It is only as their power waned or they spent time/energy in physical matters that they became bound into physical form. > Come to think of it, since Gandalf was incarnated as a mortal man, > however long-lived, I don;t see how he could be admitted back into > Valinor - but that's another story... Yeah, "Michael O'neill's 'Lord of the Rings'"... it certainly isn't like anything Tolkien wrote. >>> Caradhras caused the blizzard. >> Gandalf seems to say otherwise. > That's trite. The passage is as follows: > It is clear that Gandalf had no authoritative view on the matter. Not to me. He seems to suggest that Sauron has the power to be the cause and when Aragorn and Gimli suggest that Sauron might not be responsible Gandalf says that it does not matter who is behind it. Gandalf did not state flat out that Sauron WAS the cause, but it seems clear that he believes that Sauron COULD be the cause... which would rather argue against Sauron being unable to manipulate weather/matter from a distance. > "Caradhras had defeated them." > You can stop the selective quotations and the bullshit now Conrad. Again with the pointless hostility. I could point out that various statements from characters other than Gandalf attributing the storm to Caradhras do not invalidate Gandalf's view. OR that the authorial comment quoted above could refer simply to their inability to cross the mountain in general rather than the storm in particular. But why? It still doesn't change the fact that Gandalf treated Sauron as a serious possibility. Whether it WAS Sauron or not that tells us that Gandalf thought Sauron could manipulate the weather from afar. >> Did I SAY that Gandalf changed Saruman's basic nature? No. > You said Saruman was "further hampered by Gandalf 'casting him out'". > What did you mean by that? That Saruman's 'power' was reduced when Gandalf 'cast him out' of the order of Istari. Saruman was still an Ainur... his 'basic nature' did not change. However, he was no longer able to do some of the things he could before. Just another of the numerous instances of Ainur becoming 'less powerful' due to time and events. >> Asked and answered. Any number of reasons are possible. To me the >> most likely seems that Isildur taking possession of the Ring lessened >> Sauron's immediate power to the point that he was no longer able to >> take it with him. > I see, and his body being crushed to smithereens by millions of tons of > water and exploding island was somehow less inconvenient? You'll have to > do a lot better than *that* Conrad! Dead is dead. Whether the body was killed by pointy metal bits or water and dirt seems to me unlikely to make much difference. The issue of 'possession' of an object of power on the other hand is an additional factor that was present in the Last Alliance case but not Numenor. During the fall of Numenor Sauron never lost 'possession' of the Ring (under the view which holds that he had it). When he was killed by the Last Alliance he also lost possession of the Ring to another sentient entity... Isildur. That could logically weaken Sauron further than JUST being physically killed. At that, being physically killed AGAIN would leave him weaker than the first time it had happened. > You've GOT to be kidding me! How was he supposed to get the Ring off the > dead finger of his dead body hundreds of fathome down, so? It'd take a > lot more energy than to give a trinket an acceleration of 9.81 > M/sec/sec, I can tell you. It really wouldn't. And who is to say the body survived / remained intact? > This reduction in power that you suggest is not borne out anywhere. He > lost a portion of his power in the Downfall with the loss of his first > body. No further reduction in power is cited *anywhere*. "After the battle with Gilgalad and Elendil, Sauron took a long while to re-build, longer than he had done after the Downfall of Númenor (I suppose because each building-up used up some of the inherent energy of the spirit, which might be called the 'will' or the effective link between the indestructible mind and being and the realization of its imagination)." Letters #200 > Moreover, his power level in the LotR if anything appears higher than at > any previous time. You think Sauron was more powerful during the War of the Ring than just after he first forged the One? In absolute terms of his personal power that seems absurd. In relative terms compared to his opponents it is quite possible. On his personal power / absolute scale; "Sauron was 'greater', effectively, in the Second Age than Morgoth at the end of the First. Why? Because, though he was far smaller by natural stature, he had not yet fallen so low. Eventually he also squandered his power (of being) in the endeavor to gain control of others." JRRT - MR, Myth's Transformed VII.i ###### From: "TradeSurplus" Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien References: <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Lines: 28 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Message-ID: <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 69.0.16.46 X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net X-Trace: newssvr10.news.prodigy.com 1052500415 ST000 69.0.16.46 (Fri, 09 May 2003 13:13:35 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 13:13:35 EDT Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com X-UserInfo1: O@XMR]GDTRUSP_PXKBNXKQ@@AZJZRVLHWY\Z]\YIBATBDTICYFW[QB[YHL\DHWWIDFCGZAZLUNYZ_J_A[NVC^PPFINVOIPXHDPX@BQ[@J\RJADL^GSF\X\W@@\BQJJFNB\ZMKHRLZY^MFKSSDL^GOIW^GSY@FRWHMQ[GPBGACCFLAQ@F\L@J\\LGY^TUAVBM Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 17:13:35 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!out.nntp.be!propagator2-sterling!news-in.nuthinbutnews.com!newsfeed-east.nntpserver.com!nntpserver.com!diablo.voicenet.com!prodigy.com!newsmst01.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!postmaster.news.prodigy.com!newssvr10.news.prodigy.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116838 Conrad Dunkerson wrote >... >Michael O'Neill wrote >... > >> I see, and his body being crushed to smithereens by millions of tons of >> water and exploding island was somehow less inconvenient? You'll have to >> do a lot better than *that* Conrad! > >Dead is dead. Whether the body was killed by pointy metal bits or >water and dirt seems to me unlikely to make much difference. I presume that the wise of the group already know this but is there a reference for Sauron being killed by the downfall of Numenor (i.e. crushed to smithereens by millions of tons of water and exploding island) rather than voluntarily discorporating as soon as he saw the mile high wave of water coming towards him? We know that Tar-Miriel had enough time to run halfway up the Meneltarma, couldn't Sauron have had time to take evasive action by abandoning a doomed body before it was killed? If so, then Sauron's spirit would presumably have had more power after voluntarily leaving a body than after being killed by the Last Alliance. Trade. ###### From: conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 9 May 2003 10:22:22 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 241 Message-ID: <1178b6d1.0305090922.3c41e726@posting.google.com> References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB887CF.6400502A@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305070416.48169c6d@posting.google.com> <3EB9E1D7.2FB78ED8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080900.3ddf02ee@posting.google.com> <3EBB3A14.7036780@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.42.51.27 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1052500943 28855 127.0.0.1 (9 May 2003 17:22:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 9 May 2003 17:22:23 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!snoopy.risq.qc.ca!headwall.stanford.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116895 Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EBB3A14.7036780@indigo.ie>... >> However, it remains equally clear that his power to dominate others >> would be even GREATER with the Ring. > I don't see where this is made clear. Please cite your source. > The Tolkien quotation above only refers to Sauron's native abilities being > greater than Gandal's by a factor cancelled by the might of the Ring. It > doesn't make it clear that his own power would be incresed > substantially. I previously cited various sources of other characters indicating that >their< ability to dominate / manipulate others would be enhanced by the Ring. Assuming that this would apply to Sauron as well is not a great leap. There is also; "But also they ['all the rings alike'] enhanced the natural powers of a possessor - thus approaching 'magic', a motive easily corruptible into evil, a lust for domination." Letters #131 And any number of other references. Why would you dispute that wearing the Ring made Sauron more powerful? I mean... that is about as bedrock a principle as there can be. >> So.... you are saying that Sauron did not have to convince the >> majority of the populace because once he convinced the king everyone >> else fell in line? The text you quote says that is true for all but >> one of the councillors. It does not say that he did not use his >> influence to help them along. Nor does it say that he used no power >> to sway the populace to accept these changes as well. > This is rubbish Conrad. You cannot argue absences like that. Next you'll > be trying to convinve me that the sky over Numenor was purple not blue > because it *isn't* stated in the text. > You must be the only person on ten newsgroups I've lurked in that uses the > absence of evidence as proof of your assertions. What? Read the text above. Where do I say it is proving my assertions? Where do you GET this nonsense? I was disputing a claim YOU made. You said that a particular quotation proved that Sauron got all the Numenoreans to do what he wanted by manipulating the King alone. I pointed out (above) that it did not SAY that. You were making claims that were not supported by the passage you provided. I pointed out the things which you claimed that were not stated in the text. Suddenly that is ME using 'absence of evidence'? What nonsense. I had no 'assertion' to be founded upon absence of evidence... I was pointing out that YOUR assertion was not supported by the evidence you quoted. >>> The Palantír didn't amplify the will of Sauron. >>> Amon Hen didn't amplify the will of Sauron. >> I never suggested they did. However, they COULD put someone into >> direct contact with Sauron. > Neither made "direct" contact. Please provide a citation to back up this > assertion. The people using those things heard Sauron's thoughts being projected to them and were influenced by his will. If you don't consider that 'direct contact' you may assign whatever other words to it you like... it was not the NORMAL situation that one got when just walking down the road. > If Sauron was still powerful "without" the Ring, why was he so > completely destroyed when it was destroyed? Because Sauron with the Ring > still in existence was still able to access its power. Things built with > its power still persisted [Barad Dur for example]. Sauron and Barad Dur > didn't need the Ring's proximity to avail of its power, but with it > destroyed they were destroyed too. All true EXCEPT that while Sauron was not 'diminished' if the Ring was out of his possession he also was not 'enhanced' in the way that he was when he wore it. Essentially, when the Ring was out of Sauron's possession his power was the same as if he had never made it... still reduced by having died a few times and not enhanced beyond his natural abilities as it was when he wore the Ring. > The Ring didn't confer the power to compel love AFAIK. This was > Galadriel speaking with some poetic license. A possible interpretation. OR... Galadriel believed the Ring would allow her to manipulate others. > Wasn't this Boromir making an ass of himself, by showing how little he > understood the nature of the Ring? A possible interpretation. OR... Boromir believed the Ring would allow him to manipulate others. > I always thought the line you quoted was a piece of padding. > Was Shagrat cowed? No. Ummm... Tolkien said he was. The Ring was 'a cowing menace', remember? It disagrees with your position so it is 'padding'? Even though it is in the published narrative of LotR? A direct 'authorial statement' like the Caradhras bit you went on about? Suddenly that is worthless? I think you know you are wrong and are just being difficult. > Did the Rings presence modify Shagrat's behaviour in the slightest, > never mind reduce him to a quivering pile of Orcshit? No. Right. So big Orcs like Shagrat ALWAYS ran from little hobbits like Sam. Got it. > What active part did the Ring play in this encounter? None whatsoever. You are spouting nonsense. >> "He needed time, much time, before he could control the Ring or >> (which in such a case is the same) before it could control him; >> before his will and arrogance could grow to a stature in which he >> could dominate other major hostile wills." >> Letters #246 > This, while interesting, doesn't support or undermine either of our > positions. That passage does not support the idea that the Ring could be used to dominate wills OTHER than those of ringbearers? Sure it doesn't. >> Yes, that was Sauron's primary goal. However, the Ring also allowed >> the bearer to influence people who were NOT wearing other Rings of >> Power. >> The whole feint where the forces of Gondor were supposedly >> blindly following Aragorn into Mordor relied upon that fact. > I don't know where you drummed this one up, Conrad. The bleeding book? Lord of the Rings? Yeeessshhh! How can you possibly debate this? It is freaking obvious and (I thought) universally accepted. > The bait offered to Sauron was that of the new Ringlord asserting > himself against Sauron before he had properly mastered the Ring. True... but it was carefully orchestrated to appear that everyone was blindly walking into it without a qualm. The pompous pronouncements that 'King Aragorn' was reclaiming land and the forces of Sauron must leave. The plan to send those who were too afraid to press on against Cair Andros so that it would not appear they were deserting. The whole damned thing was staged to look like everyone was spellbound and convinced that Aragorn would lead them to victory. > There was never a question that the Men of Gondor would need persuasion > to follow their new lord against Sauron, or that Sauron woul assume that > any Gondorian would need to be "persuaded" to launch a revenge attack on > Mordor after his attack on Minas Tirith. Ok, whatever... if you have such a FUNDAMENTALLY different understanding of the texts I begin to suspect it is not even >possible< to reason with you. > Bullshit. His armies were not composed of slaves. They were composed of > Orcs, men and beasts. RTFT. All of whom were his slaves. Read the text yourself. > The Witch King weilded fear, not an ability to "doninate" per se, whic > hI regard as enforcing one;s will on another. Fear would have done the > job nicely thank you. But he chose not to do even this. Are you suggesting that Sauron had the power to frighten Gondor into submission but decided not to? That seems to be what you are saying, but I'm hoping I just don't understand you properly. >> No matter how many times I re-read it the text still says that Sauron >> was responsible for Numenoreans starting human sacrifice. > I think thats agreed. I'm saying he didn't need the Ring to do this. > Humans have been making human sacrifices at the behest of their leaders > without any magic rings, whether religious or temporal, for thousands of > years. Maybe. It IS possible that Sauron could have gotten the Numenoreans to do what they did without any sort of supernatural 'mental influence' being involved. However, since he did it so quickly... and there are several texts saying that 'mental influence' WAS involved... I'm inclined to believe it took more than normal persuasion. > Absolutely. In fact it cemented their turning toward Melkor. It just > wasn't "forced behaviour" using the Ring. There is 'forced behaviour' like the puppeting Sauron had with his 'slaves' and then there is 'influence'... pushing someone towards a particular action. We both agree that Sauron was not puppeting the Numenoreans, but I think he was influencing them. Think of it as 'Saruman writ large' if you like... Saruman could influence people to do things they normally would not. They weren't puppets, but they were inclined to think that his suggestions were quite reasonable. Influence. Ditto for Sauron in Numenor. > Sauron was powerful. He couldn't corrupt people through the Palantír by > any virtue of the Palantír. The Palantír was just a machine for remote > viewing. It didn't have any qualities of the Ring in terms of > domination. Not on its own, no. However, Sauron did use the palantir to corrupt others. Read 'The Palantir' in Unfinished Tales if you dispute that. >> "And the Valar drew unto them many companions, some less, some well >> nigh as great as themselves, and they laboured together in the >> ordering of the Earth and the curbing of its tumults." >> Silm, Ainulindale >> So some of the Maiar were 'well nigh as great' as the Valar. Note >> also that the Maiar are here said to have been involved in the initial >> construction of the world. > Nope. Sorry again. These were the other Valar, not the Aratar who came > first. What? Ok, that's it. Not even gonna read the rest. Been nice talking to you, but this is just ridiculous. You can't possibly believe half the things you are saying. If you do... well, then there is STILL no point in continuing this. If you want to discuss specific points I'm game, but I'm done with the fifty-billion word messages of eternal silliness. (yes, that's an exaggeration). ###### From: conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 9 May 2003 10:28:16 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 14 Message-ID: <1178b6d1.0305090928.76f37611@posting.google.com> References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBC06C3.6184B7AC@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.42.51.27 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1052501296 29226 127.0.0.1 (9 May 2003 17:28:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 9 May 2003 17:28:16 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.news2me.com!canoe.uoregon.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116887 Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EBC06C3.6184B7AC@indigo.ie>... > An example of the latter would be Conrad's recent post about Sauron's > aability to control weather, which the Author himself ascribes to > Caradhras, and not as Gandalf appears to suggest earlier to Sauron's arm > having "grown long". While I accept Conrad posted it in good faith, it > was an inaccurate comment when taken out of context. Because Gandalf suggesting that Sauron could control the weather in NO WAY argues against Maiar being unable to control the weather. Everyone got that? Good. ###### Message-ID: <3EBC0024.F7357507@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 23 Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 12:23:16 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.173.49 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052479408 194.125.173.49 (Fri, 09 May 2003 12:23:28 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 12:23:28 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!colt.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116925 Morgil wrote: > > "Michael O'Neill" kirjoitti > viestissä:3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie... > > Conrad Dunkerson wrote: > > > >> The books imply that Sauron was able to influence the weather. If > > > he > > > >> can cause a blizzard (or the Fell Winter) is it really so > > > >> inconceivable that he could move a small ring? > > > > > > > Where do the books imply this? > > > > > > Caradhras. Gandalf - 'His arm has grown long'. > > Better example of Sauron influencing the weather would be > the darkness he summons upon Gondor during the siege. > No need to boggle who caused that... > > Morgil That wasn't weather IIRC. M. ###### Message-ID: <3EBC00E3.E2FEA0E6@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB887CF.6400502A@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305070416.48169c6d@posting.google.com> <3EB9E1D7.2FB78ED8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080900.3ddf02ee@posting.google.com> <3EBB3A14.7036780@indigo.ie> <3EBB5A48.96E1F49D@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 90 Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 12:26:27 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.173.49 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052479599 194.125.173.49 (Fri, 09 May 2003 12:26:39 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 12:26:39 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.stueberl.de!feed.news.nacamar.de!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116832 Tar-Elenion wrote: > > In article <3EBB5A48.96E1F49D@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > > Tar-Elenion wrote: > > > > > > In article <3EBB3A14.7036780@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > > > > Conrad Dunkerson wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EB9E1D7.2FB78ED8@indigo.ie>... > > > > > > > > > > > "With the Valar came other spirits whose being also began before the > > > > > > World, of the same order as the Valar but of less degree." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "And the Valar drew unto them many companions, some less, some well > > > > > nigh as great as themselves, and they laboured together in the > > > > > ordering of the Earth and the curbing of its tumults." > > > > > Silm, Ainulindale > > > > > > > > > So some of the Maiar were 'well nigh as great' as the Valar. Note > > > > > also that the Maiar are here said to have been involved in the initial > > > > > construction of the world. > > > > > > > > Nope. Sorry again. These were the other Valar, not the Aratar who came > > > > first. > > > > > > The Valar are 14 in number. The Aratar are 8 in number. So six (or > > > perhaps rather actually five since Tulkas was a 'late' arrival) other > > > Valar account for for the "many companions" the _Valar_ (the quote > > > supplied says _Valar_ not Aratar), "drew unto them"? > > > > > > As you might say: > > > "Bwahaha..." etc. > > > > 1 = One. > > > > 2 = A couple. > > > > 3 = A few. > > > > 4 = Several. > > > > 6 = Many. > > > > Its all relative, you see. > > Weak. > > > > > *mheheheheh* > > > > M. > > > > Where does that leave five, Tulkas did not come on to the scene until > late (the last to enter when Arda was near complete). > > Also, the quote given above: > ""And the Valar drew unto them many companions, some less, some well > nigh as great as themselves, and they laboured together in the ordering > of the Earth and the curbing of its tumults." > Silm, Ainulindale" > ...of which you state that "the Valar" here means the Aratar, while the > "many companions" refers to the six (or rather five) other Valar, what is > your evidence of that? The quote does not say the Aratar, it says the > Valar. Read the Sil. The previous section of text defines who undertook the work. It was Manwe, Aule, Ulmo and Melkor. Three Aratar and the Morgoth. > We can also note that in context with the 'many companions' being Maiar > in Valaquenta it says: > "With the Valar came other spirits whose being also began before the > World, of the same order as the Valar but of less degree. These are the > Maiar, the people of the Valar, and their servants and helpers. Their > number is not known to the Elves, and few have names in any of the > tongues of the Children of Ilúvatar; for though it is otherwise in Aman, > in Middle-earth the Maiar have seldom appeared in form visible to Elves > and Men." Separate piece, and not one is denying the several powers available to Maiar when they are incarnate. I'm simply reminding people that discorporate Maiar are not shown to have any powers over the material world. Saruman and Sauron were both blown away. M. ###### Message-ID: <3EBC0161.E7785062@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 20 Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 12:28:33 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.173.49 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052479725 194.125.173.49 (Fri, 09 May 2003 12:28:45 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 12:28:45 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!zen.net.uk!newspeer.lavaseals.co.uk!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116926 Stan Brown wrote: > > Michael O'Neill wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien: > >Neither Tolkien nor the links convince me I'm afraid. > > Then there's really no room for discussion. If you are unwilling to > accept what Tolkien said on the matter, in unambiguous words, then > there's no way we can have a discussion since I am handicapped by my > belief that what Tolkien wrote he meant. Really? So you're just going to ignore all he wrote elsewhere in order to support and few lines in an erroneous letter? This is like Kissinger justifying the entore Vietnam War as being in the national interest, they saying at a later date that it wouldn't have mattered much if the Vietnam domino had fallen. Unconvincing. M. ###### Message-ID: <3EBC054C.9807232C@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB887CF.6400502A@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305070416.48169c6d@posting.google.com> <3EB9E1D7.2FB78ED8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080900.3ddf02ee@posting.google.com> <3EBB59B6.DC3EA505@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 58 Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 12:45:16 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.173.49 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052480729 194.125.173.49 (Fri, 09 May 2003 12:45:29 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 12:45:29 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!colt.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116928 Tar-Elenion wrote: [excellent summary of references] > So let us presume your assertion (that the quote you provided from > Akallabêth appears to disagree with LotR) is correct. > If so why should I accept that the Akallabeth is correct and thus LotR > wrong, especially when LotR agrees with 'Rings of Power' and the three > letters I quoted from above? Sauron had to gain the confidence of the > King and his councillors first, but he still had to convince the > Númenóreans generally. The words used to describe Saurons Numenorean Stragtegy are; "cunning" "strength of his hidden will" "flattery sweet as honey" "knowledge... of many things... unrevealed" "with many arguments" "he bade" "accomplish by cunning" "by his craft he had corrupted" "swiftly rises by his cunning and knowledge" "and seduces...with his lies" "So Sauron had recourse to guile" I have no problem with any of this. None of the above needs a Ring to carry it out. Only letter #21 is called into question. After all the above, why would the Ring be necessary? It clearly wasn't in my opinion. I see no disagreement between the LotR and the Akallabeth. Your quotation doesn't mention the Ring. Neither does the Akallabeth. The Letter appers to contradict all that is writtne about Sauron in the pieces you so comprehensively cite. Why would a Maia need a Ring to seduce Men with Words? Even stripped of his authority, Saruman still kept the power of his voice. We have already seen that the Rings effects were limited, even on Hobbits and proto-hobbits. We have seen that Sauron had access to its power from a distance and that it therefore wouldn't have been needed on his person in Numenor. We have seen that no Maia is shown to have power over the material world whilr discorporate. And finally, we see that Sauron could even take possession of the Ring from a human after the Last Alliance, never mind raise it out of the abyss against millions of tons of water and island in the cataclysm of the Downfall that drowned and crushed his body. Morgoth himself became trammelled in matter in order to gain power over it. This is a lot of written evidence against which to set a few erroneous, badly researched and ill-considered lines in that letter #211. FWIW M. ###### Message-ID: <3EBC06C3.6184B7AC@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 44 Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 12:51:31 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.173.49 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052481103 194.125.173.49 (Fri, 09 May 2003 12:51:43 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 12:51:43 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!zen.net.uk!newspeer.lavaseals.co.uk!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116824 Morgil wrote: > > "Stan Brown" kirjoitti > viestissä:MPG.1924f2f4e1dbf74798ab9c@news.odyssey.net... > > Michael O'Neill wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien: > > >Neither Tolkien nor the links convince me I'm afraid. > > > > Then there's really no room for discussion. If you are unwilling to > > accept what Tolkien said on the matter, in unambiguous words, then > > there's no way we can have a discussion since I am handicapped by my > > belief that what Tolkien wrote he meant. > > You should take it as an artificial debating challenge, > like Conrad has: to prove something obvious without > using the most plainly stated evidence. Now you're talking! > It would be > quite interesting actually, if only Michael would not > write such overlong posts... > > Morgil Well, in defence, the matter of the downfall and Sauron's return to Middle Earth is mentioned all over the place. Tar Eleinions recent post summarizes this nicely. Unfortunatly, the evidence in support for my assertions about Maia abilities or otherwise while discorporate is all over the place too. So there you go. Good debate demands accurate and not unduly selective references. An example of the latter would be Conrad's recent post about Sauron's aability to control weather, which the Author himself ascribes to Caradhras, and not as Gandalf appears to suggest earlier to Sauron's arm having "grown long". While I accept Conrad posted it in good faith, it was an inaccurate comment when taken out of context. In fact theone thing evil Maiar cannot control is the West Wind. Both Sauron and Saruman get blown away by it at their respective "ends". M. ###### From: Tar-Elenion Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Message-ID: References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB887CF.6400502A@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305070416.48169c6d@posting.google.com> <3EB9E1D7.2FB78ED8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080900.3ddf02ee@posting.google.com> <3EBB3A14.7036780@indigo.ie> <3EBB5A48.96E1F49D@indigo.ie> <3EBC00E3.E2FEA0E6@indigo.ie> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Lines: 135 NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.236.164.115 X-Complaints-To: abuse@attbi.com X-Trace: sccrnsc02 1052517994 12.236.164.115 (Fri, 09 May 2003 22:06:34 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 22:06:34 GMT Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 22:06:34 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!out.nntp.be!propagator2-sterling!news-in.nuthinbutnews.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!wn14feed!wn13feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.203!attbi_feed3!attbi.com!sccrnsc02.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116876 In article <3EBC00E3.E2FEA0E6@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > Tar-Elenion wrote: > > > > In article <3EBB5A48.96E1F49D@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > > > Tar-Elenion wrote: > > > > > > > > In article <3EBB3A14.7036780@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > > > > > Conrad Dunkerson wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EB9E1D7.2FB78ED8@indigo.ie>... > > > > > > > > > > > > > "With the Valar came other spirits whose being also began before the > > > > > > > World, of the same order as the Valar but of less degree." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "And the Valar drew unto them many companions, some less, some well > > > > > > nigh as great as themselves, and they laboured together in the > > > > > > ordering of the Earth and the curbing of its tumults." > > > > > > Silm, Ainulindale > > > > > > > > > > > So some of the Maiar were 'well nigh as great' as the Valar. Note > > > > > > also that the Maiar are here said to have been involved in the initial > > > > > > construction of the world. > > > > > > > > > > Nope. Sorry again. These were the other Valar, not the Aratar who came > > > > > first. > > > > > > > > The Valar are 14 in number. The Aratar are 8 in number. So six (or > > > > perhaps rather actually five since Tulkas was a 'late' arrival) other > > > > Valar account for for the "many companions" the _Valar_ (the quote > > > > supplied says _Valar_ not Aratar), "drew unto them"? > > > > > > > > As you might say: > > > > "Bwahaha..." etc. > > > > > > 1 = One. > > > > > > 2 = A couple. > > > > > > 3 = A few. > > > > > > 4 = Several. > > > > > > 6 = Many. > > > > > > Its all relative, you see. > > > > Weak. > > > > > > > > *mheheheheh* > > > > > > M. > > > > > > > Where does that leave five, Tulkas did not come on to the scene until > > late (the last to enter when Arda was near complete). Still no responce? > > > > Also, the quote given above: > > ""And the Valar drew unto them many companions, some less, some well > > nigh as great as themselves, and they laboured together in the ordering > > of the Earth and the curbing of its tumults." > > Silm, Ainulindale" > > ...of which you state that "the Valar" here means the Aratar, while the > > "many companions" refers to the six (or rather five) other Valar, what is > > your evidence of that? The quote does not say the Aratar, it says the > > Valar. > > Read the Sil. The previous section of text defines who undertook the > work. It was Manwe, Aule, Ulmo and Melkor. Three Aratar and the Morgoth. Read the Sil yourself. The previous section says the ""chief part". Or are you going to argue that three (or four) is "many"? "Thus it came to pass that of the Ainur some abode still with Ilúvatar beyond the confines of the World; but others, and among them many of the greatest and most fair, took the leave of Ilúvatar and descended into it. But this condition Ilúvatar made, or it is the necessity of their love, that their power should thenceforward be contained and bounded in the World, to be within it for ever, until it is complete, so that they are its life and it is theirs. And therefore they are named the Valar, the Powers of the World." > > > We can also note that in context with the 'many companions' being Maiar > > in Valaquenta it says: > > "With the Valar came other spirits whose being also began before the > > World, of the same order as the Valar but of less degree. These are the > > Maiar, the people of the Valar, and their servants and helpers. Their > > number is not known to the Elves, and few have names in any of the > > tongues of the Children of Ilúvatar; for though it is otherwise in Aman, > > in Middle-earth the Maiar have seldom appeared in form visible to Elves > > and Men." > > Separate piece, and not one is denying the several powers available to > Maiar when they are incarnate. I'm simply reminding people that > discorporate Maiar are not shown to have any powers over the material > world. I have not addressed your contention about the power of the disincarnate Maiar. What I have addressed is your contention that the Maiar were not involved in the initial construction of the world and the "many others" mentioned were the (5) "other Valar" while the Valar mentioned refers only to the Aratar. As for your contention: "The maiden whom the Valar chose from among the Maiar to guide the vessel of the Sun was named Arien, and he that steered the island of the Moon was Tilion. In the days of the Trees Arien had tended the golden flowers in the gardens of Vána, and watered them with the bright dews of Laurelin; but Tilion was a hunter of the company of Oromë, and he had a silver bow. He was a lover of silver, and when he would rest he forsook the woods of Oromë, and going into Lórien he lay in dream by the pools of Estë, in Telperion's flickering beams; and he begged to be given the task of tending for ever the last Flower of Silver. Arien the maiden was mightier than he, and she was chosen because she had not feared the heats of Laurelin, and was unhurt by them, being from the beginning a spirit of fire, whom Melkor had not deceived nor drawn to his service. Too bright were the eyes of Arien for even the Eldar to look on, and leaving Valinor she forsook the form and raiment which like the Valar she had worn there, and she was as a naked flame, terrible in the fullness of her splendour." The Silmarillion Arien seems to manage. --- Tar-Elenion Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue. ###### From: Tar-Elenion Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Message-ID: References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB887CF.6400502A@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305070416.48169c6d@posting.google.com> <3EB9E1D7.2FB78ED8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080900.3ddf02ee@posting.google.com> <3EBB59B6.DC3EA505@indigo.ie> <3EBC054C.9807232C@indigo.ie> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Lines: 84 NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.236.164.115 X-Complaints-To: abuse@attbi.com X-Trace: sccrnsc02 1052519645 12.236.164.115 (Fri, 09 May 2003 22:34:05 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 22:34:05 GMT Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 22:34:05 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!wn14feed!wn13feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.203!attbi_feed3!attbi.com!sccrnsc02.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116911 In article <3EBC054C.9807232C@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > Tar-Elenion wrote: > > [excellent summary of references] > > > So let us presume your assertion (that the quote you provided from > > Akallabêth appears to disagree with LotR) is correct. > > If so why should I accept that the Akallabeth is correct and thus LotR > > wrong, especially when LotR agrees with 'Rings of Power' and the three > > letters I quoted from above? Sauron had to gain the confidence of the > > King and his councillors first, but he still had to convince the > > Númenóreans generally. > > The words used to describe Saurons Numenorean Stragtegy are; > > "cunning" > "strength of his hidden will" > "flattery sweet as honey" > "knowledge... of many things... unrevealed" > "with many arguments" > "he bade" > "accomplish by cunning" > "by his craft he had corrupted" > "swiftly rises by his cunning and knowledge" > "and seduces...with his lies" > "So Sauron had recourse to guile" > > I have no problem with any of this. None of the above needs a Ring to > carry it out. I did not mention the Ring. I took exception with your statement: "This shows that all Sauron had to do was sufficiently influence the King and his inner circle. The people, already tending towards arrogance and mastery, followed the ruler, as they so often do." Which was in response to Conrad asserting that Sauron had to convince the population of Numenor as well as the King and Council. You then challenged him to: "Post a relevant excerpt if you want to disprove what I say, because the text doesn't appear to support your assertion." I just happened to beat Conrad to it, and end up supplying several relevant quotations disproving your assertion. > > Only letter #21 is called into question. After all the above, why would > the Ring be necessary? It clearly wasn't in my opinion. I did not mention the Ring. But whatever your opinion may be, JRRT's direct statement on the matter carries more weight. > > I see no disagreement between the LotR and the Akallabeth. Your > quotation doesn't mention the Ring. Neither does the Akallabeth. (And neither did I). Yet in responce to my quote from LotR you wrote: "The Sil would appear to disagree with that assertion. Its quoted elsewhere in this thread. Why don't you review it and comment." I take it you now with draw your conclusion that the Sil appears to disagree with LotR? If so then we agree that Sauron had to influence the people as well as the rulers of Numenor, correct? > > The Letter appers to contradict all that is writtne about Sauron in the > pieces you so comprehensively cite. No it does not. Letter 211 asserts that Sauron dominated the minds of (most) Numenoreans. The other citations I provided back that up, and contradict your argument that Sauron only had to convince the King and his council. -- Tar-Elenion Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue. ###### Message-ID: <3EBC38E0.4C4F7BCA@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080435.68a8f04f@posting.google.com> <3EBADC40.52C5E72F@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080948.200a60a4@posting.google.com> <3EBB6390.98E78E65@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090604.4a153478@posting.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 406 Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 16:25:20 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.177.153 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052493944 194.125.177.153 (Fri, 09 May 2003 16:25:44 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 16:25:44 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!colt.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116833 Conrad Dunkerson wrote: > > Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EBB6390.98E78E65@indigo.ie>... > > > My posts are well- researched. > > Your posts are LONG. That does not automatically make them well > researched. No, but they *are*, Mr. Conrad "his arm has grown long" Dunkerson. *bweheh* > > Perhaps you don't recognise pertinent and full quotation when you see > > it Conrad. > > Wow. You REALLY sound like Martinez. I'm practising in front of the mirror every evening. > And no, I'm sorry... several paragraphs of quotation about the Witch > King's possible ability/inability to influence the weather are NOT > pertinent to whether Sauron had the Ring on him in Numenor or even > particularly pertinent to whether Sauron himself could influence the > weather. OTC, if it were proved that the Witch King could influence the weather you would have had a plank to your argument. I was being extremely fair to you Conrad. As it happens, it was impossible to prove. > If you MUST bring in such tangents why not do so with a few > words (ala 'there is no proof that the Witch King could influence the > weather') rather than long blocks of quotation? If that is 'well > researched' then it is 'well researched' on a topic completely > different than the matter at hand... tons of noise put out as apparent > obfuscation of what is really a quite simple question; *I* wasn't the one who raised Sauron's ability to influence the weather, Mr. Conrad "don't look now but I'm clutching at Straws" Dunkerson. That was you, Conrad, trying to gain support for rank speculation that if he could influence the weather he could have telekinetically transported the Ring back to middle earth. > Does the 'took up again his Ring' passage say WHEN Sauron 'put it > down' in the first place? Nope. But it means that he "did" put it down sometime. > Answer: No, it doesn't. Ergo, that is NOT evidence against him > having it with him in Numenor. And all the rest of this is pretty > much just noise to avoid that simple truth. So exactly *when* did ht put it down then ehhh? While he still had fingers to take it off I would imagine. While those fingers were still alive, perhaps. Now when would *that* have been, then, ehhh? > > The first is from the Sil, the Akallabeth: > > Which... is not LotR. Brilliant deduction Sherlock! > > The second is from the Sil also: Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age > > Which... is not LotR. Correct again Sherlock. > > Finally, from the Appendices, Lotr > > Which... IS LotR... but NOT anything you have quoted previously and > thus NOT anything which I have 'maliciously snipped because evidence > from LotR is so damaging to my position'. Nor did I say it was, Holmes, but you're missing the point. None of the published writings, including HOME mention this Ring thing being in Numenor. Chris Tolkien is painstakingly efficient in recording every scrap of paper over time, even going so far as to reveal his earlier cock-ups in later editions of HOME et cetera, yer nowhere do we see the matter of the Ring in Numenor discussed or the mode of its transference back to Barad Dur. That should tell you something Conrad. Hiding behind canonical text is not the answer here. If TOlkien was even considering options on this, we should know by now. We don't ergo, the quotation from Letter 211 was an erroneous statement by Tolkien, disregarding all his extant writings at that time and not ratified since in any text we know of. > At this point you are just outright lying. In short, get off it > already. There, there. That kind of attack might work with MM. Not with me, and it seems as though you're running out of rope. > > "But it was not so. Sauron was indeed caught in the wreck of Númenor, so > > that the bodily form in which he long had walked perished; but he fled > > back to Middle-earth, a spirit of hatred borne upon a dark wind. He was > > unable ever again to assume a form that seemed fair to men, but became > > black and hideous, and his power thereafter was through terror alone. He > > re-entered Mordor, and hid there for a time in silence. But his anger > > was great when he learned that Elendil whom be most hated, had escaped > > him, and was now ordering a realm upon his borders." > > Note how this doesn't say anything which implies in the least that > Sauron did not have the Ring with him in Numenor. Normally that would > get it snipped as irrelevant, but hey... we know how you feel about > snipping 'relevant' texts that have absolutely no bearing on the > question at hand. Two things are relevant in that quotation. Firstly, this text does not mention the Ring at all - that the fate of the single most powerful artefact in Middle-Earth was not mentioned suggests it was NOT present. Secondly, and most damagingly for your thesis and Tolkien's cock up, it defines Sauron's power thereafter, with or without the Ring, as being limited to TERROR ALONE. See any mention of telekinesis her Conrad? Nope. Terror alone. And you missed this clear contradiction of your assertion that he brought the ring back with him. How? Did he "terrorise" it into jumping out of the abyss and into the air of its own accord? We know the Ring could seem heavier and lighter, bigger and smaller, of its own accord. Maybe Sauron frightened the bejaysus out of it so that it became as big as the world and it just rolled home of its own accord, ehhh, COnrad? You are now on the bottom of the barrel. Here's the scraper. > >> Note that NONE of this 'evidence from the published LotR' was > actually > >> IN LotR... hence no 'rampant and unneccessary snipping' took place > and > >> I was quite correct in saying that you have not provided evidence > from > >> LotR against Sauron having the Ring in Numenor. > > > Why do you have "evidence from the published LotR" in quotation marks? > > Because the supposed evidence was not FROM LotR. None of the > materials you quoted from LotR prior to this message had any bearing > on the question of whether Sauron had taken the Ring to Numenor... > only whether he NEEDED to do so in order to control others. As I have > said previously. None of the evidence you have quoted stating the Ring WAS TAKEN to Numenor is from the LotR either Conrad. And your point is? > > I referred to the published texts. Plural. I included the Sil and made > > it plain I was quoting the Akallabeth earlier. Are you trying ot put > > words into my mouth, Conrad? > > Oi! You are either retroactively changing your meaning again or being > very very odd. If you include those as 'published texts' then you are > speaking not of the texts published by JRRT, but ALL the texts... and > the distinction you were drawing between the 'published texts' and > the... OTHER 'published texts' becomes indecipherable. I was referring to all published texts which told the story of Middle Earth. I make a distinction between internally cohesive narratives, however much revised, and off the cuff comments by Tolkien in his letters, which do not refer accurately to, and are not supported by any evidence in the stories he wrote. > > Semantic bullshit, Conrad. He was either able to bear it back or he > > wasn't. If he was, he had to take it up from our of the Abyss and > > therefore had already done so before he got back to Barad Dur. Stating > > he took it up again when he returned there makes no sense. It could > > never have gotten back there in the first place! > > Only if you assume 'take it up' to mean something like 'moved'. I do > not. I rather believe Tolkien meant 'began wearing' or 'began > wielding'. Jaysus Conrad, are you becoming senile? How did he get it back to Numenor? He was powerless to take it from Isildur, despite plenty of opportunity! How then could he have retrieved it from the abyss? > > OTC I am assuming he didn't wear it to Numenor > > That much is clear. > > > (i) because the text describes him as taking it up again whe nhe returns > > to Barad Dur. > > Which does not say anything about when he 'put it down'. Exactly. When did he put it down?! > > (ii) No Maia had power over matter while discorporate, least of all > > Sauron. > > Which is simply not true given Tolkien's statements that they took > part in the shaping of the world. No Maia was present for the initial shaping. No Maia is shown flying unaided while incarnate. Live with it. > > The fact that Isildur took the Ring from close proximity to Saurons > > constructed body proves this point irrefutably. > > I disagree. I have presented several possible explanations for that. No valid ones. > Isildur was a person and could take 'possession' of the Ring away from > Sauron, reducing his access to its power. Isildur was unable to wear the Ring. He wore it seldom and we are only specifically told of one instance after he took possession of it, just before he was killed on the homeward journey > His own power was lesser at > that point then when he carried the Ring from Numenor. That's rank speculation on your part. > The amount of > force needed to move the Ring was negligible and thus might be > insufficient to yank it from Isildur's grasp. Et cetera. Are you sure you're functioning on both neurones on this one at all Conrad? Would you please explain how moving a Ring vertically through hundreds of fathoms of seawater and then levitating it through stormy weather hundreds of miles to Middle Earth takes *less power* than swiping it from a human's grasp? > >>> There is no proof he took to Numenor. The letter is just woolly > >>> backtracking by Tolkien as is the assertion that Sauron was weaker > >>> willed than the Hobbits. > > >> You know full well that no such assertion exists. > > > *I* made the assertion earlier in this thread. Don't you read my posts? > > Uhhh... ok. So, YOUR assertion is "just woolly backtracking by > Tolkien". Makes alot of sense. No, you big eejit! I referred to canon and showed that the Ring could not have been as powerfully lust-inspiring as TOlkien states such that Sauron could not bear to put it off. Three hobbits did so. One voluntarily. Two with a bit of persuasion. None of them collapsed into a whining pile of Ring-lust ridden protoplasm on the floor after doing so. > > When did he put it down then Conrad? > When he died and lost his body. He certainly couldn't be wearing it > while he had no body. Acutely, your logic looks completely fucked today. Assuming your assertion that he was wearing it in Numenor is correct, his *body* was still wearing his Ring when it perished. There was no *he* to lose or gain, it. Just s disembodied spirit form. > > Tolkien never stated I was wrong. > > You know that is simply false. Nope. I never met him. > Even if you were correct about the > letter being 'wrong' Tolkien still wrote it and it still directly > contradicts your view. You can say that you do not accept the letter, > but the above pretends that it just does not exist. Nope. I'm saying "he" never contradicted "me". He never met me. Didn't know I existed. He is no longer active in contradicting anyone. You can only contradict people while you're alive to do so. His letters however, disagree with the published texts regarding the location of the Ring at the time of the Downfall and imply a mechanism for transporting the Ring which goes against his own principles of how Maiar and Valar gain a power over matter. > > Tolkien stated somthing in his letters which contradicts the published > > texts. > > Here we go with the 'published texts' game again. If 'Silm' is a > 'published text' then so is the letter... and it certainly doesn't > contradict itself. No game Conrad. The published texts are the stories Tolkien wrote, however much evolved, revised or even abandoned. The tales form a body of literature with their own set of internal consistencies/inconsistencies. The letters are stand-alone commentaries. They purport to be about Tolkein's creation. The letters *must* therefore follow the texts. The letters can *elaborate* on points already implied by the stories. They cannot however *contradict* them, for to do so would be to subvert the very tales which gives them their authority in the first place. > If 'published texts' refers to those published by > JRRT... we return to my point about you not having supplied ANY > evidence of that letter being contradicted by such text. Either way > this statement is false. If you want to reword it as, 'Tolkien stated > something in his letters which contradicts SOME of the texts published > after he died' then I'd still disagree with your interpretation of > those other texts, but at least you would not be >obviously< > incorrect. I don't see how the derogation from my original assertion helps matters. 1. The letters assert Sauron could not have put off the Ring. Three hobbits put it off, one willingly, two with heavy prompting but no physical coercion. The letters' statement implies that Sauron could not do what three mere incarnates could do. The letters are thus totally incorrect on this point. 2. The letters state that Tolkien had the Ring in Numenor. None of the published texts confirm this. One of them, the Akallabeth confirms he took it up again on his return to Barad Dur, clearly implying it was NOT with him in Numenor. Moreover there is no known or described mechanism or ability of Maiar to levitate objects with their own powers while discorporate in a spirit form. The only evidence of spirits potency is that they are utterly impotent to affect the material world until they can fabricate new bodies with which to do so. > > I'm saying Tolkien made a comment in one of his letters and *forgot* to > > change the published text or add to it to agree with that comment. Given > > Christopher Tolkien's painstaking research into Tolkien's notes, I fail > > to see how the Sil was published in the form it was if Tolkien had > > corrected the galley proofs. The clear implication is that he hadn't. In > > other words, he *forgot*. > > Oh look... "published text" again. The published text of LotR? That > is the only one you could reasonably be talking about "galley proofs" > for. However, as has been pointed out numerous times... neither > letter #131 or letter #211 is contradicted by anything in LotR. Neither letter is supported by the LotR. The omission of something does not imply its existence, quite the contrary. > Your > supposed contradictions come from Silmarillion... which Tolkien never > saw 'galley proofs' for. Or are you now saying that "Tolkien" is > CHRISTOPHER and >he< forgot to make changes? I'm saying that Christopher Tolkien prepared the published texts he edited based on Tolkien's extant writings. I'm saying that no published text supports your position. See my definition of "published text" above. > > Is this crystal to you now, Conrad? > > Clear as mud. > BTW, Letter #131 was written before LotR was published and said Sauron > could not part with the Ring. Letter #211 was written after LotR was > published and said that Sauron took the Ring to Numenor. So... I > think the rationalization needs to incorporate both pre and post > forgetfullness of the concept of Sauron keeping the Ring with him. 1. How did the Hobbits part with the Ring? 2. What mechanism, agreeing with what we know if Maiar abilities while in their spirit forms could Sauron have used to retrieve the Ring from the Abyss and bring it back with him? > > On the contrary, Comprehension 101 seems to be missing a pupil i nyou > > Conrad. > > Or maybe you could use 'published text' consistently or... I have. You just haven't been able to grasp it. As soon as you asked, I defined it, although I thought it pretty clear myself. > hey, here's > a concept... give the NAME of the text(s) you are talking about. I did, in all cases where I quoted from them. > For the record... I snipped several repetitions of arguments > previously rebutted. Natch. And you still haven't rebutted them adequately. M. ###### Message-ID: <3EBC396D.8C653452@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBC06C3.6184B7AC@indigo.ie> <87d6is5isy.fsf@cate0-46.reshall.ou.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 59 Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 16:27:41 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.177.153 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052494074 194.125.177.153 (Fri, 09 May 2003 16:27:54 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 16:27:54 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!zen.net.uk!newspeer.lavaseals.co.uk!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116929 Jon Cast wrote: > > Michael O'Neill writes: > > > Morgil wrote: > > > > > > "Stan Brown" kirjoitti > > > viestissä:MPG.1924f2f4e1dbf74798ab9c@news.odyssey.net... > > > > Michael O'Neill wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien: > > > > >Neither Tolkien nor the links convince me I'm afraid. > > > > > > > > Then there's really no room for discussion. If you are unwilling to > > > > accept what Tolkien said on the matter, in unambiguous words, then > > > > there's no way we can have a discussion since I am handicapped by my > > > > belief that what Tolkien wrote he meant. > > > > > > You should take it as an artificial debating challenge, > > > like Conrad has: to prove something obvious without > > > using the most plainly stated evidence. > > > > Now you're talking! > > > > > It would be > > > quite interesting actually, if only Michael would not > > > write such overlong posts... > > > > > > Morgil > > > > Well, in defence, the matter of the downfall and Sauron's return to > > Middle Earth is mentioned all over the place. Tar Eleinions recent post > > summarizes this nicely. > > > > Unfortunatly, the evidence in support for my assertions about Maia > > abilities or otherwise while discorporate is all over the place too. > > > > So there you go. Good debate demands accurate and not unduly selective > > references. > > > > An example of the latter would be Conrad's recent post about Sauron's > > aability to control weather, which the Author himself ascribes to > > Caradhras, and not as Gandalf appears to suggest earlier to Sauron's arm > > having "grown long". While I accept Conrad posted it in good faith, it > > was an inaccurate comment when taken out of context. > > > > In fact theone thing evil Maiar cannot control is the West Wind. Both > > Sauron and Saruman get blown away by it at their respective "ends". > > You mean the wind from the Sea (and thus from Osse or Ulmo) or beyond? > Well, duh. They couldn't control Sirion, either. Doesn't establish > any general rules. The west wind is part of the weather, thus it is in the province of Manwe and Ulmo and thus very likely [rank speculation here] completely untouchable by any evil Maia. Sirion was fouled and Ulmo himself says that his power withdrew from the waters. Learn your Sil, Jon. M. ###### Message-ID: <3EBC39DC.1EC15E74@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <3EBC0024.F7357507@indigo.ie> <87he845iwi.fsf@cate0-46.reshall.ou.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 38 Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 16:29:32 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.177.153 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052494185 194.125.177.153 (Fri, 09 May 2003 16:29:45 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 16:29:45 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!colt.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116831 Jon Cast wrote: > > Michael O'Neill writes: > > > Morgil wrote: > > > > > > "Michael O'Neill" kirjoitti > > > viestissä:3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie... > > > > Conrad Dunkerson wrote: > > > > > >> The books imply that Sauron was able to influence the weather. If > > > > > he > > > > > >> can cause a blizzard (or the Fell Winter) is it really so > > > > > >> inconceivable that he could move a small ring? > > > > > > > > > > > Where do the books imply this? > > > > > > > > > > Caradhras. Gandalf - 'His arm has grown long'. > > > > > > Better example of Sauron influencing the weather would be > > > the darkness he summons upon Gondor during the siege. > > > No need to boggle who caused that... > > > > > > Morgil > > > > That wasn't weather IIRC. > > OK, this puts you down to the lowest forms of verbal trickery, now. > > Jon Cast Does it now? How was that darkness produced? Or have you forgotten your LotR as much as your Sil - see my other respone to you. M. ###### NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 00:30:21 -0500 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien From: Jeff MacDonald Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080435.68a8f04f@posting.google.com> <3EBADC40.52C5E72F@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080948.200a60a4@posting.google.com> <3EBB6390.98E78E65@indigo.ie> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 19:34:15 -0400 Message-ID: Lines: 28 NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.105.72.99 X-Trace: sv3-C4U3k2jQ55RSBkx9g/8pplVc9jybOmzm6/lcaS8Cn678/yOu472gok0p19tDgfAYnjAKY2Se6d/55sy!nSygys/nTQGNibcJCYqFMhORCAzJoyUVzshp73fA4hG0g9GrTqRySFOdjH6GcQInuRgLwDl/TYET!OPfvyq5yD/DLubh/M4A= X-Complaints-To: abuse@speakeasy.net X-DMCA-Complaints-To: abuse@speakeasy.net X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.1 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!out.nntp.be!propagator2-sterling!news-in.nuthinbutnews.com!newsfeed-east.nntpserver.com!nntpserver.com!border1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nntp3.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.speakeasy.net!news.speakeasy.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116914 In article <3EBB6390.98E78E65@indigo.ie>, Michael O'Neill wrote: > The first is from the Sil, the Akallabeth: > >"... shadow and a black wind over the sea, and came back to Middle-earth and > to Mordor that was his home. There he took up again his great Ring in > Barad-dûr, and dwelt there, dark and silent, until he wrought himself a > new guise, an image of malice and hatred made visible; and the Eye of > Sauron the Terrible few could endure." > This seems to say that Sauron returned to Mordor, took up the Ring, and *then* built himself a new body. That implies he took up the Ring while still discarnate. This seems to counter both your arguments. If he takes up the Ring while still a spirit, then the "took up" has to refer to him getting the Ring again, since if he'd brought it back from Numenor as a spirit nothing would have changed. He wouldn't have taken it up, he would have still had it. On the other hand, if he can take it up while a spirit, why couldn't he have carried it from Numenor? -- -- thejeff -- Look before you leap. -- Samuel Butler ###### From: Tar-Elenion Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Message-ID: References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB887CF.6400502A@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305070416.48169c6d@posting.google.com> <3EB9E1D7.2FB78ED8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080900.3ddf02ee@posting.google.com> <3EBB3A14.7036780@indigo.ie> <3EBB5A48.96E1F49D@indigo.ie> <3EBC00E3.E2FEA0E6@indigo.ie> <3EBCBC1D.6F20A834@indigo.ie> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Lines: 216 NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.236.164.115 X-Complaints-To: abuse@attbi.com X-Trace: rwcrnsc53 1052531987 12.236.164.115 (Sat, 10 May 2003 01:59:47 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 01:59:47 GMT Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 01:59:47 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!wn14feed!wn13feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.203!attbi_feed3!attbi.com!rwcrnsc53.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116879 In article <3EBCBC1D.6F20A834@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > Tar-Elenion wrote: > > > > In article <3EBC00E3.E2FEA0E6@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > > > Tar-Elenion wrote: > > > > > > > > In article <3EBB5A48.96E1F49D@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > > > > > Tar-Elenion wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > In article <3EBB3A14.7036780@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > > > > > > > Conrad Dunkerson wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EB9E1D7.2FB78ED8@indigo.ie>... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "With the Valar came other spirits whose being also began before the > > > > > > > > > World, of the same order as the Valar but of less degree." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "And the Valar drew unto them many companions, some less, some well > > > > > > > > nigh as great as themselves, and they laboured together in the > > > > > > > > ordering of the Earth and the curbing of its tumults." > > > > > > > > Silm, Ainulindale > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So some of the Maiar were 'well nigh as great' as the Valar. Note > > > > > > > > also that the Maiar are here said to have been involved in the initial > > > > > > > > construction of the world. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nope. Sorry again. These were the other Valar, not the Aratar who came > > > > > > > first. > > > > > > > > > > > > The Valar are 14 in number. The Aratar are 8 in number. So six (or > > > > > > perhaps rather actually five since Tulkas was a 'late' arrival) other > > > > > > Valar account for for the "many companions" the _Valar_ (the quote > > > > > > supplied says _Valar_ not Aratar), "drew unto them"? > > > > > > > > > > > > As you might say: > > > > > > "Bwahaha..." etc. > > > > > > > > > > 1 = One. > > > > > > > > > > 2 = A couple. > > > > > > > > > > 3 = A few. > > > > > > > > > > 4 = Several. > > > > > > > > > > 6 = Many. > > > > > > > > > > Its all relative, you see. > > > > > > > > Weak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *mheheheheh* > > > > > > > > > > M. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Where does that leave five, Tulkas did not come on to the scene until > > > > late (the last to enter when Arda was near complete). > > > > Still no responce? > > I thought you were taking the piss. Five or six = many. No problem. Ah, yes, keep changing the definition. (And still weak). > > > > > Also, the quote given above: > > > > ""And the Valar drew unto them many companions, some less, some well > > > > nigh as great as themselves, and they laboured together in the ordering > > > > of the Earth and the curbing of its tumults." > > > > Silm, Ainulindale" > > > > ...of which you state that "the Valar" here means the Aratar, while the > > > > "many companions" refers to the six (or rather five) other Valar, what is > > > > your evidence of that? The quote does not say the Aratar, it says the > > > > Valar. > > > > > > Read the Sil. The previous section of text defines who undertook the > > > work. It was Manwe, Aule, Ulmo and Melkor. Three Aratar and the Morgoth. > > > > Read the Sil yourself. The previous section says the ""chief part". Or > > are you going to argue that three (or four) is "many"? > > Nope. > > But given that the ancient earth was defined by earth sea water and > fire, I thought it logical that few others took part. Yavannas seeds and > life in general had not yet occurred. There seemed precious little for > the other Valar to do, given their specialities. Perhaps that is why the "chief part" is given to Manwe, Ulmo and Aule. The others had lesser parts. Still we do know the Sauron was a Maia of the following of Aule. But what is said of his 'early' existence?: "The note goes on to say that Galadriel was not deceived, saying that this Aulendil was not in the train of Aulë in Valinor, "but this is not decisive, since Aulë existed before the 'Building of Arda,' and the probability is that Sauron was in fact one of the Aulëan Maiar, corrupted 'before Arda began' by Melkor."" UT, The History of Galadriel and Celeborn, endnote 7 Seems the Valar had Maiar in their service before entering Arda. They would be, like the Valar, disincarnate. Yet they would, like the Valar have been in Ea and among: "...those of the Ainur who desired it arose and entered into the World at the beginning of Time; and it was their task to achieve it, and by their labours to fulfil the vision which they had seen. Long they laboured in the regions of Eä, which are vast beyond the thought of Elves and Men, until in the time appointed was made Arda, the Kingdom of Earth. Then they put on the raiment of Earth and descended into it, and dwelt therein." Valaquenta And we learn that: "The Great among these spirits the Elves name the Valar..." op. cit. and that: "With the Valar came other spirits whose being also began before the World, of the same order as the Valar but of less degree. These are the Maiar, the people of the Valar, and their servants and helpers." op. cit. These disincarnate beings laboured long to shape the physical universe and seemed quite capable of of manipulating its matter ('the material world') whilst in an 'insubstantial' (or 'discorporate') form. > > > "Thus it came to pass that of the Ainur some abode still with Ilúvatar > > beyond the confines of the World; but others, and among them many of the > > greatest and most fair, took the leave of Ilúvatar and descended into it. > > But this condition Ilúvatar made, or it is the necessity of their love, > > that their power should thenceforward be contained and bounded in the > > World, to be within it for ever, until it is complete, so that they are > > its life and it is theirs. And therefore they are named the Valar, the > > Powers of the World." > > The Valar made the world. Aratar plus the others. Thank you for > underlining this. No Maiar is a Vala. Ergo. > > > > > We can also note that in context with the 'many companions' being Maiar > > > > in Valaquenta it says: > > > > "With the Valar came other spirits whose being also began before the > > > > World, of the same order as the Valar but of less degree. These are the > > > > Maiar, the people of the Valar, and their servants and helpers. Their > > > > number is not known to the Elves, and few have names in any of the > > > > tongues of the Children of Ilúvatar; for though it is otherwise in Aman, > > > > in Middle-earth the Maiar have seldom appeared in form visible to Elves > > > > and Men." > > > > > > Separate piece, and not one is denying the several powers available to > > > Maiar when they are incarnate. I'm simply reminding people that > > > discorporate Maiar are not shown to have any powers over the material > > > world. > > > > I have not addressed your contention about the power of the disincarnate > > Maiar. What I have addressed is your contention that the Maiar were not > > involved in the initial construction of the world and the "many others" > > mentioned were the (5) "other Valar" while the Valar mentioned refers > > only to the Aratar. > > You still have not addressed the issue of Valar. 5 OR 6 = many. > > There seemed little need for more Valar except to fight off Melkor in > some way. We know that there are lesser Valar. No Maiar are mentioned. See above. And also note Rings of Power: "Of old there was Sauron the Maia, whom the Sindar in Beleriand named Gorthaur. In the beginning of Arda Melkor seduced him to his allegiance, and he became the greatest and most trusted of the servants of the Enemy, and the most perilous, for he could assume many forms, and for long if he willed he could still appear noble and beautiful, so as to deceive all but the most wary." > > > As for your contention: > > "The maiden whom the Valar chose from among the Maiar to guide the vessel > > of the Sun was named Arien, and he that steered the island of the Moon > > was Tilion. In the days of the Trees Arien had tended the golden flowers > > in the gardens of Vána, and watered them with the bright dews of > > Laurelin; but Tilion was a hunter of the company of Oromë, and he had a > > silver bow. He was a lover of silver, and when he would rest he forsook > > the woods of Oromë, and going into Lórien he lay in dream by the pools of > > Estë, in Telperion's flickering beams; and he begged to be given the task > > of tending for ever the last Flower of Silver. Arien the maiden was > > mightier than he, and she was chosen because she had not feared the heats > > of Laurelin, and was unhurt by them, being from the beginning a spirit of > > fire, whom Melkor had not deceived nor drawn to his service. Too bright > > were the eyes of Arien for even the Eldar to look on, and leaving Valinor > > she forsook the form and raiment which like the Valar she had worn there, > > and she was as a naked flame, terrible in the fullness of her splendour." > > The Silmarillion > > Well-quoted. > > > Arien seems to manage. > > Manage what? Did you notice was she stated to be levitating any Rings? You contended: "discorporate Maiar are not shown to have any powers over the material world", I have disproven your contention. She seems to be able to manage (or 'have power over') the Sun, which is a 'material' part of the World, despite having forsaken her form. To recap, we have Maiar in the service of the Valar before Arda is made. We have greater and lesser Ainur (later known as Valar and Maiar) entering into the World (Ea) and 'shaping' its physical matter though they are disincarnate. We have a Maia forsake her form and yet have power over physical matter. -- Tar-Elenion Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue. ###### From: Tar-Elenion Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Message-ID: References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB887CF.6400502A@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305070416.48169c6d@posting.google.com> <3EB9E1D7.2FB78ED8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080900.3ddf02ee@posting.google.com> <3EBB59B6.DC3EA505@indigo.ie> <3EBC054C.9807232C@indigo.ie> <3EBCC0D1.D8C1885E@indigo.ie> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Lines: 202 NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.236.164.115 X-Complaints-To: abuse@attbi.com X-Trace: rwcrnsc54 1052537772 12.236.164.115 (Sat, 10 May 2003 03:36:12 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 03:36:12 GMT Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 03:36:12 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!wn14feed!wn13feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.203!attbi_feed3!attbi.com!rwcrnsc54.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116904 In article <3EBCC0D1.D8C1885E@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > Tar-Elenion wrote: > > > > In article <3EBC054C.9807232C@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > > > Tar-Elenion wrote: > > > > > > [excellent summary of references] > > > > > > > So let us presume your assertion (that the quote you provided from > > > > Akallabêth appears to disagree with LotR) is correct. > > > > If so why should I accept that the Akallabeth is correct and thus LotR > > > > wrong, especially when LotR agrees with 'Rings of Power' and the three > > > > letters I quoted from above? Sauron had to gain the confidence of the > > > > King and his councillors first, but he still had to convince the > > > > Númenóreans generally. > > > > > > The words used to describe Saurons Numenorean Stragtegy are; > > > > > > "cunning" > > > "strength of his hidden will" > > > "flattery sweet as honey" > > > "knowledge... of many things... unrevealed" > > > "with many arguments" > > > "he bade" > > > "accomplish by cunning" > > > "by his craft he had corrupted" > > > "swiftly rises by his cunning and knowledge" > > > "and seduces...with his lies" > > > "So Sauron had recourse to guile" > > > > > > I have no problem with any of this. None of the above needs a Ring to > > > carry it out. > > > > I did not mention the Ring. I took exception with your statement: > > "This shows that all Sauron had to do was sufficiently influence the King > > and his inner circle. The people, already tending towards arrogance and > > mastery, followed the ruler, as they so often do." > > > > Which was in response to Conrad asserting that Sauron had to convince the > > population of Numenor as well as the King and Council. > > > > You then challenged him to: > > "Post a relevant excerpt if you want to disprove what I say, because the > > text doesn't appear to support your assertion." > > > > I just happened to beat Conrad to it, and end up supplying several > > relevant quotations disproving your assertion. > > > > > > > > Only letter #21 is called into question. After all the above, why would > > > the Ring be necessary? It clearly wasn't in my opinion. > > > > I did not mention the Ring. But whatever your opinion may be, JRRT's > > direct statement on the matter carries more weight. > > Nope. I think thats a fallacy. He didn't fully consider whathe had > already written on the subject and made a misleading statement. 1). Your assertion ('he didn't fully consider') is unprovable. You have no idea what he considered. 2). How is the statement misleading? Remember this letter is from 1958, and Miss Rhona Beare aske among others the following question: "How could Ar-Pharazon defeat Sauron when Sauron had the One Ring?" There was nothing for Miss Beare to be misled about. 3). In full Letter 211 also includes (is continued by) Letter 212 and together they extend over some 10 pages adressing a variety of subjects (historical, cosmological, practical, linguistic) dealing with LotR and the mythology. It is very well thought out and considered (including footnotes). 4). On the other hand I do have some idea of what he was considering when he wrote the Letter, since he explicitly, whilst answering the 'Sauron and the Ring' query by Miss Beare, referred her App. A with direct page references not once, but twice. So even if you are correct and he did not consider what he had written in (an unpublished) The Akallabeth he certainly considered what he had written in LotR which was published and is canonical, and what was in his mind when considering this work. > > > > I see no disagreement between the LotR and the Akallabeth. Your > > > quotation doesn't mention the Ring. Neither does the Akallabeth. > > I must add something here: Of course The Akallabeth does not mention the Ring. In the 'internal' history The Akallabeth was written was written by Elendil, and as the matter of the Rings was kept very secret, it is probable that when Elendil wrote The Akallabeth he did not even know of the Ring. It is likely that he did not have knowledge of them until the time of the Last Alliance. The only portion of The Akallabeth that mentions the Ring at all is contained within those three paragraphs beginning with "Elendil and his sons..." is an addition not written by Elendil but rather told by Pengolodh to Aelfwine. > > (And neither did I). > > > > Yet in responce to my quote from LotR you wrote: > > "The Sil would appear to disagree with that assertion. Its quoted > > elsewhere in this thread. Why don't you review it and comment." > > I mistook your intention. > > > I take it you now with draw your conclusion that the Sil appears to > > disagree with LotR? > > If so then we agree that Sauron had to influence the people as well as > > the rulers of Numenor, correct? > > > You posted: > > ================================================================== > This suggests that Sauron had to do more than just convince the king > and council. > =================================================================== > > I disagreed. I still disagree. See below for my reasoning. > > > > The Letter appers to contradict all that is writtne about Sauron in the > > > pieces you so comprehensively cite. > > > > No it does not. Letter 211 asserts that Sauron dominated the minds of > > (most) Numenoreans. The other citations I provided back that up, and > > contradict your argument that Sauron only had to convince the King and > > his council. > > They don't back that up. The argument below refers. > > My assertion was that he didn't personally have to enslave minds or > dominate them. He only had to subvert the leaders and the rest followed. > > You assertion seems to be that the phrase: > > "For now, having the ears of men, Sauron with many arguments > gainsaid all that the Valar had taught" > > implies that he had to convince large numbers, and by the sounds of it, > in person. > > I disagree. This just emphasises that the subversion of the King and his > Counsellors was no pushover, and that he won them over by cunning > argument and debate, using his superior knowledge as a Maia, and not any > power of domination. He first had to gain 'control' over the King and Council, then he had go to work on the population. This is explicit in LotR: "It was not long before he had bewitched the King and was master of his counsel; and soon he had turned the hearts of all the Númenoreans, except the remnant of the Faithful, back towards the darkness." LotR App. A Again, taken in context with the canonical statement from LotR and in context with what is written in Letters it is evident that Sauron had to 'coax' the people as well. This is similar, in some ways, to Melkor after his release from imprisonment in Aman, he gained the 'trust' of some (Manwe) but not all, and then was able to work his will among the Eldar. > > In my opinion, it is one thing to have courtiers fawn on the Kings new > favourite. It is quite another to have them reject their lifes > teachings. The "many arguments" in my opinion refers to arguments in > Council, not public rallies. For Sauron to have had to resort to public > rallies would have implied he was unsuccessful in subverting the King > anh the counsellors. It would have formented civil war. This did not > occur. Ergo he spread his influence by subverting the King an Counsel. > This wasn't easy, ergo the need to convince the Counsellors "with many > arguments", but it was a more sure way of proceeding. Except that the quote notes that he worked his will on the King first. Then the councillors fell under his sway, then a change came over the land, then some of the Elf-friends fall away, then he had the ears of _men_ (not just the King, or the Council but _men_. The King and his councillors are already mentioned, then the general populace comes next. This is in keeping with LotR, App. A: "It was not long before he had bewitched the King and was master of his counsel; and soon he had turned the hearts of all the Númenoreans, except the remnant of the Faithful, back towards the darkness." > > Domination using the Ring would have been a very risky business on > people like the Numenoreans. They all had huge mental resilience and > would have been a huge strain on Sauron even with the Ring. Do you have some evidence of this, or is it simply an unsubstatiated opinion? > I think he > proceeded to subvert numenor by taking out the head first, as any normal > politician would. This wasn't easy, but had the benefit that he was one > step removed from the action, if it backfired and blame was laid. Plus > it was a challenge and ultimately a sweeter revenge than mer domination > could have provided, ven if it were possible to achieve. Or the Ring, which enhanced his power, and increased his natural abilities simply aided in this process. -- Tar-Elenion Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue. ###### From: Tar-Elenion Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Message-ID: References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080435.68a8f04f@posting.google.com> <3EBADC40.52C5E72F@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080948.200a60a4@posting.google.com> <3EBB6390.98E78E65@indigo.ie> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Lines: 35 NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.236.164.115 X-Complaints-To: abuse@attbi.com X-Trace: rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net 1052545126 12.236.164.115 (Sat, 10 May 2003 05:38:46 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 05:38:46 GMT Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 05:38:46 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!wn14feed!wn13feed!wn12feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.203!attbi_feed3!attbi.com!rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116869 In article , thejeff@silverfool.com says... > In article <3EBB6390.98E78E65@indigo.ie>, Michael O'Neill wrote: > > The first is from the Sil, the Akallabeth: > > > >"... shadow and a black wind over the sea, and came back to Middle-earth and > > to Mordor that was his home. There he took up again his great Ring in > > Barad-dûr, and dwelt there, dark and silent, until he wrought himself a > > new guise, an image of malice and hatred made visible; and the Eye of > > Sauron the Terrible few could endure." > > > of this quote> > > This seems to say that Sauron returned to Mordor, took up the Ring, > and *then* built himself a new body. That implies he took up the Ring > while still discarnate. > > This seems to counter both your arguments. If he takes up the Ring > while still a spirit, then the "took up" has to refer to him getting > the Ring again, since if he'd brought it back from Numenor as a spirit > nothing would have changed. He wouldn't have taken it up, he would > have still had it. > > On the other hand, if he can take it up while a spirit, why couldn't > he have carried it from Numenor? > Hey, I wanted to disprove the other assertions first before I got to this. -- Tar-Elenion Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue. ###### From: Tar-Elenion Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Message-ID: References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB887CF.6400502A@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305070416.48169c6d@posting.google.com> <3EB9E1D7.2FB78ED8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080900.3ddf02ee@posting.google.com> <3EBB3A14.7036780@indigo.ie> <3EBB5A48.96E1F49D@indigo.ie> <3EBC00E3.E2FEA0E6@indigo.ie> <3EBCBC1D.6F20A834@indigo.ie> <3EBD08BC.E5CBDBE5@indigo.ie> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Lines: 195 NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.236.164.115 X-Complaints-To: abuse@attbi.com X-Trace: rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net 1052552345 12.236.164.115 (Sat, 10 May 2003 07:39:05 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 07:39:05 GMT Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 07:39:05 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!wn14feed!wn13feed!wn12feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.203!attbi_feed3!attbi.com!rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116875 In article <3EBD08BC.E5CBDBE5@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > Tar-Elenion wrote: > > > But given that the ancient earth was defined by earth sea water and > > > fire, I thought it logical that few others took part. Yavannas seeds and > > > life in general had not yet occurred. There seemed precious little for > > > the other Valar to do, given their specialities. > > > > Perhaps that is why the "chief part" is given to Manwe, Ulmo and Aule. > > The others had lesser parts. Still we do know the Sauron was a Maia of > > the following of Aule. But what is said of his 'early' existence?: > > "The note goes on to say that Galadriel was not deceived, saying that > > this Aulendil was not in the train of Aulë in Valinor, "but this is not > > decisive, since Aulë existed before the 'Building of Arda,' and the > > probability is that Sauron was in fact one of the Aulëan Maiar, corrupted > > 'before Arda began' by Melkor."" > > UT, The History of Galadriel and Celeborn, endnote 7 > > Seems the Valar had Maiar in their service before entering Arda. They > > would be, like the Valar, disincarnate. Yet they would, like the Valar > > have been in Ea and among: > > "...those of the Ainur who desired it arose and entered into the World at > > the beginning of Time; and it was their task to achieve it, and by their > > labours to fulfil the vision which they had seen. Long they laboured in > > the regions of Eä, which are vast beyond the thought of Elves and Men, > > until in the time appointed was made Arda, the Kingdom of Earth. Then > > they put on the raiment of Earth and descended into it, and dwelt > > therein." > > Valaquenta > > And we learn that: > > "The Great among these spirits the Elves name the Valar..." > > op. cit. > > and that: > > "With the Valar came other spirits whose being also began before the > > World, of the same order as the Valar but of less degree. These are the > > Maiar, the people of the Valar, and their servants and helpers." > > op. cit. > > These disincarnate beings laboured long to shape the physical universe > > and seemed quite capable of of manipulating its matter ('the material > > world') whilst in an 'insubstantial' (or 'discorporate') form. > > No Maiar were involved in the creation of the World. Later on they took > incarnate form and helped the Valar. Incarnate form was taken during the shaping of _Arda_. _World_ in the above quote is referring to Ea, The World That Is. The physical universe, which Arda is globed amid. Let me repeat the quote: "...those of the Ainur who desired it arose and entered into the World at the beginning of Time; and it was their task to achieve it, and by their labours to fulfil the vision which they had seen. Long they laboured in the regions of Eä, which are vast beyond the thought of Elves and Men, until in the time appointed was made Arda, the Kingdom of Earth. Then they put on the raiment of Earth and descended into it, and dwelt therein." This long labour in the World, Ea, the Universe, was not done while incarnate. And more than just the Valar participated in this labour: "With the Valar came other spirits whose being also began before the World, of the same order as the Valar but of less degree. These are the Maiar, the people of the Valar, and their servants and helpers." If you wish, I can start quoting the Annals of Aman. > > > There seemed little need for more Valar except to fight off Melkor in > > > some way. We know that there are lesser Valar. No Maiar are mentioned. > > > > See above. And also note Rings of Power: > > "Of old there was Sauron the Maia, whom the Sindar in Beleriand named > > Gorthaur. In the beginning of Arda Melkor seduced him to his allegiance, > > and he became the greatest and most trusted of the servants of the Enemy, > > and the most perilous, for he could assume many forms, and for long if he > > willed he could still appear noble and beautiful, so as to deceive all > > but the most wary." > > Again, this is Sauron *incarnate*. Are you deliberately fudging the > issue here? You have contended that the Maiar were not involved in the the making of the World (by which you seem to mean Arda), and are not mentioned, and only came into the world after the Valar made it and only in incarnate form. The quote above from RoP disproves this, because Sauron, a Maia, was seduced by Melkor at the _beginning_ of Arda (before it was made and thus not incarnate). This is supported by the quote from UT that I provided above: "Aulë existed before the 'Building of Arda,' and the probability is that Sauron was in fact one of the Aulëan Maiar, corrupted 'before Arda began' by Melkor." He would be one of those "other spirits" that came with the Valar, one of the Ainur who "entered into the World at the beginning of Time", who long "laboured in the regions of Eä". > > > > > As for your contention: > > > > "The maiden whom the Valar chose from among the Maiar to guide the vessel > > > > of the Sun was named Arien, and he that steered the island of the Moon > > > > was Tilion. In the days of the Trees Arien had tended the golden flowers > > > > in the gardens of Vána, and watered them with the bright dews of > > > > Laurelin; but Tilion was a hunter of the company of Oromë, and he had a > > > > silver bow. He was a lover of silver, and when he would rest he forsook > > > > the woods of Oromë, and going into Lórien he lay in dream by the pools of > > > > Estë, in Telperion's flickering beams; and he begged to be given the task > > > > of tending for ever the last Flower of Silver. Arien the maiden was > > > > mightier than he, and she was chosen because she had not feared the heats > > > > of Laurelin, and was unhurt by them, being from the beginning a spirit of > > > > fire, whom Melkor had not deceived nor drawn to his service. Too bright > > > > were the eyes of Arien for even the Eldar to look on, and leaving Valinor > > > > she forsook the form and raiment which like the Valar she had worn there, > > > > and she was as a naked flame, terrible in the fullness of her splendour." > > > > The Silmarillion > > > > > > Well-quoted. > > > > > > > Arien seems to manage. > > > > > > Manage what? Did you notice was she stated to be levitating any Rings? > > > > You contended: > > "discorporate Maiar are not shown to have any powers over the material > > world", > > I have disproven your contention. > > > > She seems to be able to manage (or 'have power over') the Sun, which is a > > 'material' part of the World, despite having forsaken her form. > > The Sunship is quite *immaterial*. Although created from the last fruit > of Laurelin, it was given a spiritual dimension to its being by Varda, > who hallowed it, and in it the Essece of Laurelin was poured/housed, > which made it rise through the airs. The Sunship as originally > envisaged, bore no relation to the huge physical orb we know today and > understand out Sun to be. Aule made vessels to contain the Flower and Fruit, which Manwe had hallowed. Varda gave them power to traverse the sky. In any event Varda hallowed the Silmarils, which contained the essence of the Two Trees, they remained material objects, part of the physical world. Similarly the Sun guided by Arien remained a material part of Arda. And Arien who forsok her form, guided it (ie had power over the maerial world). > > > To recap, we have Maiar in the service of the Valar before Arda is made. > > We have greater and lesser Ainur (later known as Valar and Maiar) > > entering into the World (Ea) and 'shaping' its physical matter though > > they are disincarnate. We have a Maia forsake her form and yet have power > > over physical matter. > > I disagree. How shocking. ;) > > No Maiar aided in the creation of Arda. Their assistance came later when > the Valar had taken form. Lots of things heppened in the Music. These > things didn't happen suddenly on the arrival of the Valar into Arda. In > fact the Valar are stated to have bee ndismayed at the state they found > Arda in. The things revealed in the Music took time to occur. The > arrival of the helpers was one such thing, and for a very good reason. > It is likely that the primeval forces acting on the earth would have > destroyed any lesser beings than Valar. The Maiar are said to have come with the Valar. Sauron was part of Aule's following before Arda was formed. Sauron was in the World disincarnate along with other Maiar who were the helpers of the Valar. The primeval forces acting upon the Universe do not seem to have adversely effected them. > > Arien attained her form having voluntarily doffed her incarnate body. > She didn't carry the sunship around. She steered it. Steering is not > carrying. In any case the Sunship was not composed of ordinary matter. > Unlike the gold in Sauron's Ring, which you seem to equate with a Legion > of Super-Heroes Flight Ring. I did not mention the Ring. I merely disproved your contention that: "discorporate Maiar are not shown to have any powers over the material world". The Sun is a material part of Arda, and Arien has power over it. Perhaps I should quote 'Of the Coming of the Elves' which has "shadows" and "spirits" watch and "waylay" the incarnate Elves.... -- Tar-Elenion Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue. ###### Message-ID: <3EBCBC1D.6F20A834@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB887CF.6400502A@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305070416.48169c6d@posting.google.com> <3EB9E1D7.2FB78ED8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080900.3ddf02ee@posting.google.com> <3EBB3A14.7036780@indigo.ie> <3EBB5A48.96E1F49D@indigo.ie> <3EBC00E3.E2FEA0E6@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 152 Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 01:45:17 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.175.12 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052527531 194.125.175.12 (Sat, 10 May 2003 01:45:31 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 01:45:31 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!zen.net.uk!newspeer.lavaseals.co.uk!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116825 Tar-Elenion wrote: > > In article <3EBC00E3.E2FEA0E6@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > > Tar-Elenion wrote: > > > > > > In article <3EBB5A48.96E1F49D@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > > > > Tar-Elenion wrote: > > > > > > > > > > In article <3EBB3A14.7036780@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > > > > > > Conrad Dunkerson wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EB9E1D7.2FB78ED8@indigo.ie>... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "With the Valar came other spirits whose being also began before the > > > > > > > > World, of the same order as the Valar but of less degree." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "And the Valar drew unto them many companions, some less, some well > > > > > > > nigh as great as themselves, and they laboured together in the > > > > > > > ordering of the Earth and the curbing of its tumults." > > > > > > > Silm, Ainulindale > > > > > > > > > > > > > So some of the Maiar were 'well nigh as great' as the Valar. Note > > > > > > > also that the Maiar are here said to have been involved in the initial > > > > > > > construction of the world. > > > > > > > > > > > > Nope. Sorry again. These were the other Valar, not the Aratar who came > > > > > > first. > > > > > > > > > > The Valar are 14 in number. The Aratar are 8 in number. So six (or > > > > > perhaps rather actually five since Tulkas was a 'late' arrival) other > > > > > Valar account for for the "many companions" the _Valar_ (the quote > > > > > supplied says _Valar_ not Aratar), "drew unto them"? > > > > > > > > > > As you might say: > > > > > "Bwahaha..." etc. > > > > > > > > 1 = One. > > > > > > > > 2 = A couple. > > > > > > > > 3 = A few. > > > > > > > > 4 = Several. > > > > > > > > 6 = Many. > > > > > > > > Its all relative, you see. > > > > > > Weak. > > > > > > > > > > > *mheheheheh* > > > > > > > > M. > > > > > > > > > > Where does that leave five, Tulkas did not come on to the scene until > > > late (the last to enter when Arda was near complete). > > Still no responce? I thought you were taking the piss. Five or six = many. No problem. > > > Also, the quote given above: > > > ""And the Valar drew unto them many companions, some less, some well > > > nigh as great as themselves, and they laboured together in the ordering > > > of the Earth and the curbing of its tumults." > > > Silm, Ainulindale" > > > ...of which you state that "the Valar" here means the Aratar, while the > > > "many companions" refers to the six (or rather five) other Valar, what is > > > your evidence of that? The quote does not say the Aratar, it says the > > > Valar. > > > > Read the Sil. The previous section of text defines who undertook the > > work. It was Manwe, Aule, Ulmo and Melkor. Three Aratar and the Morgoth. > > Read the Sil yourself. The previous section says the ""chief part". Or > are you going to argue that three (or four) is "many"? Nope. But given that the ancient earth was defined by earth sea water and fire, I thought it logical that few others took part. Yavannas seeds and life in general had not yet occurred. There seemed precious little for the other Valar to do, given their specialities. > "Thus it came to pass that of the Ainur some abode still with Ilúvatar > beyond the confines of the World; but others, and among them many of the > greatest and most fair, took the leave of Ilúvatar and descended into it. > But this condition Ilúvatar made, or it is the necessity of their love, > that their power should thenceforward be contained and bounded in the > World, to be within it for ever, until it is complete, so that they are > its life and it is theirs. And therefore they are named the Valar, the > Powers of the World." The Valar made the world. Aratar plus the others. Thank you for underlining this. No Maiar is a Vala. Ergo. > > > We can also note that in context with the 'many companions' being Maiar > > > in Valaquenta it says: > > > "With the Valar came other spirits whose being also began before the > > > World, of the same order as the Valar but of less degree. These are the > > > Maiar, the people of the Valar, and their servants and helpers. Their > > > number is not known to the Elves, and few have names in any of the > > > tongues of the Children of Ilúvatar; for though it is otherwise in Aman, > > > in Middle-earth the Maiar have seldom appeared in form visible to Elves > > > and Men." > > > > Separate piece, and not one is denying the several powers available to > > Maiar when they are incarnate. I'm simply reminding people that > > discorporate Maiar are not shown to have any powers over the material > > world. > > I have not addressed your contention about the power of the disincarnate > Maiar. What I have addressed is your contention that the Maiar were not > involved in the initial construction of the world and the "many others" > mentioned were the (5) "other Valar" while the Valar mentioned refers > only to the Aratar. You still have not addressed the issue of Valar. 5 OR 6 = many. There seemed little need for more Valar except to fight off Melkor in some way. We know that there are lesser Valar. No Maiar are mentioned. > As for your contention: > "The maiden whom the Valar chose from among the Maiar to guide the vessel > of the Sun was named Arien, and he that steered the island of the Moon > was Tilion. In the days of the Trees Arien had tended the golden flowers > in the gardens of Vána, and watered them with the bright dews of > Laurelin; but Tilion was a hunter of the company of Oromë, and he had a > silver bow. He was a lover of silver, and when he would rest he forsook > the woods of Oromë, and going into Lórien he lay in dream by the pools of > Estë, in Telperion's flickering beams; and he begged to be given the task > of tending for ever the last Flower of Silver. Arien the maiden was > mightier than he, and she was chosen because she had not feared the heats > of Laurelin, and was unhurt by them, being from the beginning a spirit of > fire, whom Melkor had not deceived nor drawn to his service. Too bright > were the eyes of Arien for even the Eldar to look on, and leaving Valinor > she forsook the form and raiment which like the Valar she had worn there, > and she was as a naked flame, terrible in the fullness of her splendour." > The Silmarillion Well-quoted. > Arien seems to manage. Manage what? Did you notice was she stated to be levitating any Rings? M. ###### Message-ID: <3EBCC0D1.D8C1885E@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB887CF.6400502A@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305070416.48169c6d@posting.google.com> <3EB9E1D7.2FB78ED8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080900.3ddf02ee@posting.google.com> <3EBB59B6.DC3EA505@indigo.ie> <3EBC054C.9807232C@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 135 Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 02:05:21 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.175.12 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052528735 194.125.175.12 (Sat, 10 May 2003 02:05:35 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 02:05:35 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.gamma.ru!Gamma.RU!newsfeed.esat.net!feeder.news.heanet.ie!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116830 Tar-Elenion wrote: > > In article <3EBC054C.9807232C@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > > Tar-Elenion wrote: > > > > [excellent summary of references] > > > > > So let us presume your assertion (that the quote you provided from > > > Akallabêth appears to disagree with LotR) is correct. > > > If so why should I accept that the Akallabeth is correct and thus LotR > > > wrong, especially when LotR agrees with 'Rings of Power' and the three > > > letters I quoted from above? Sauron had to gain the confidence of the > > > King and his councillors first, but he still had to convince the > > > Númenóreans generally. > > > > The words used to describe Saurons Numenorean Stragtegy are; > > > > "cunning" > > "strength of his hidden will" > > "flattery sweet as honey" > > "knowledge... of many things... unrevealed" > > "with many arguments" > > "he bade" > > "accomplish by cunning" > > "by his craft he had corrupted" > > "swiftly rises by his cunning and knowledge" > > "and seduces...with his lies" > > "So Sauron had recourse to guile" > > > > I have no problem with any of this. None of the above needs a Ring to > > carry it out. > > I did not mention the Ring. I took exception with your statement: > "This shows that all Sauron had to do was sufficiently influence the King > and his inner circle. The people, already tending towards arrogance and > mastery, followed the ruler, as they so often do." > > Which was in response to Conrad asserting that Sauron had to convince the > population of Numenor as well as the King and Council. > > You then challenged him to: > "Post a relevant excerpt if you want to disprove what I say, because the > text doesn't appear to support your assertion." > > I just happened to beat Conrad to it, and end up supplying several > relevant quotations disproving your assertion. > > > > > Only letter #21 is called into question. After all the above, why would > > the Ring be necessary? It clearly wasn't in my opinion. > > I did not mention the Ring. But whatever your opinion may be, JRRT's > direct statement on the matter carries more weight. Nope. I think thats a fallacy. He didn't fully consider whathe had already written on the subject and made a misleading statement. > > I see no disagreement between the LotR and the Akallabeth. Your > > quotation doesn't mention the Ring. Neither does the Akallabeth. > > (And neither did I). > > Yet in responce to my quote from LotR you wrote: > "The Sil would appear to disagree with that assertion. Its quoted > elsewhere in this thread. Why don't you review it and comment." I mistook your intention. > I take it you now with draw your conclusion that the Sil appears to > disagree with LotR? > If so then we agree that Sauron had to influence the people as well as > the rulers of Numenor, correct? You posted: ================================================================== This suggests that Sauron had to do more than just convince the king and council. =================================================================== I disagreed. I still disagree. See below for my reasoning. > > The Letter appers to contradict all that is writtne about Sauron in the > > pieces you so comprehensively cite. > > No it does not. Letter 211 asserts that Sauron dominated the minds of > (most) Numenoreans. The other citations I provided back that up, and > contradict your argument that Sauron only had to convince the King and > his council. They don't back that up. The argument below refers. My assertion was that he didn't personally have to enslave minds or dominate them. He only had to subvert the leaders and the rest followed. You assertion seems to be that the phrase: "For now, having the ears of men, Sauron with many arguments gainsaid all that the Valar had taught" implies that he had to convince large numbers, and by the sounds of it, in person. I disagree. This just emphasises that the subversion of the King and his Counsellors was no pushover, and that he won them over by cunning argument and debate, using his superior knowledge as a Maia, and not any power of domination. In my opinion, it is one thing to have courtiers fawn on the Kings new favourite. It is quite another to have them reject their lifes teachings. The "many arguments" in my opinion refers to arguments in Council, not public rallies. For Sauron to have had to resort to public rallies would have implied he was unsuccessful in subverting the King anh the counsellors. It would have formented civil war. This did not occur. Ergo he spread his influence by subverting the King an Counsel. This wasn't easy, ergo the need to convince the Counsellors "with many arguments", but it was a more sure way of proceeding. Domination using the Ring would have been a very risky business on people like the Numenoreans. They all had huge mental resilience and would have been a huge strain on Sauron even with the Ring. I think he proceeded to subvert numenor by taking out the head first, as any normal politician would. This wasn't easy, but had the benefit that he was one step removed from the action, if it backfired and blame was laid. Plus it was a challenge and ultimately a sweeter revenge than mer domination could have provided, ven if it were possible to achieve. You'd be surprised how easily a King's beliefs can lead his subjects into that same belief, despite education and known facts to the contrary. If you've been on another plent since 9/11 that is... FWIW M. ###### Message-ID: <3EBCC24D.B641C9A5@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 51 Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 02:11:41 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.175.12 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052529115 194.125.175.12 (Sat, 10 May 2003 02:11:55 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 02:11:55 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.stueberl.de!feed.news.nacamar.de!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116826 TradeSurplus wrote: > > Conrad Dunkerson wrote >... > >Michael O'Neill wrote >... > > > >> I see, and his body being crushed to smithereens by millions of > tons of > >> water and exploding island was somehow less inconvenient? You'll > have to > >> do a lot better than *that* Conrad! > > > >Dead is dead. Whether the body was killed by pointy metal bits or > >water and dirt seems to me unlikely to make much difference. > > I presume that the wise of the group already know this but is there a > reference for Sauron being killed by the downfall of Numenor (i.e. > crushed to smithereens by millions of tons of water and exploding > island) rather than voluntarily discorporating as soon as he saw the > mile high wave of water coming towards him? We know that Tar-Miriel > had enough time to run halfway up the Meneltarma, couldn't Sauron have > had time to take evasive action by abandoning a doomed body before it > was killed? Aha! You're calling me on my artistic license? Well, your supposition has some merit, except for the fact that Sauron is stated to have been taken by surprise in the midst of his merriment. It was a sudden thing. However he might have assumed that he could have survived a wetting, because let's face it Gandalf showed some serious resilience when he fell from the Bridge in Moria. "Long time I fell". Sounds long enough to achieve terminal velocity. And he hit water at that speed. That's a pretty forceful impact. It could shatter a normal human body. Like hitting concrete. Yet Gandalf survived and came up fighting - underwater! And Sauron we know was "stronger" than Gandalf. Ergo what killed his body had to have been pretty catastrophic. Asserting that it was crushed in the catastrophe seems a reasonable conclusion. > If so, then Sauron's spirit would presumably have had more power after > voluntarily leaving a body than after being killed by the Last > Alliance. > > Trade. That sounds like rank speculation. Nowhere are we informed on this matter. M. ###### Message-ID: <3EBCC2DF.B99A1EA@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBC06C3.6184B7AC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090928.76f37611@posting.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 23 Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 02:14:07 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.175.12 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052529260 194.125.175.12 (Sat, 10 May 2003 02:14:20 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 02:14:20 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!colt.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116823 Conrad Dunkerson wrote: > > Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EBC06C3.6184B7AC@indigo.ie>... > > > An example of the latter would be Conrad's recent post about Sauron's > > aability to control weather, which the Author himself ascribes to > > Caradhras, and not as Gandalf appears to suggest earlier to Sauron's arm > > having "grown long". While I accept Conrad posted it in good faith, it > > was an inaccurate comment when taken out of context. > > Because Gandalf suggesting that Sauron could control the weather in NO > WAY argues against Maiar being unable to control the weather. > > Eve- Nope. Because while the passage you quoted in support of your assertion that Sauron could control the weather ["his arm has grown long"] was contradicted by the AUTHOR several paragraphs later when he confirmed Caradhras was the culprit "Caradhras had defeated them." M. ###### Message-ID: <3EBD057B.D87DFA8D@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB887CF.6400502A@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305070416.48169c6d@posting.google.com> <3EB9E1D7.2FB78ED8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080900.3ddf02ee@posting.google.com> <3EBB3A14.7036780@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090922.3c41e726@posting.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 417 Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 06:58:19 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.175.33 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052546331 194.125.175.33 (Sat, 10 May 2003 06:58:51 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 06:58:51 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!zen.net.uk!newspeer.lavaseals.co.uk!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116835 Conrad Dunkerson wrote: > > Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EBB3A14.7036780@indigo.ie>... > > >> However, it remains equally clear that his power to dominate others > >> would be even GREATER with the Ring. > > > I don't see where this is made clear. Please cite your source. > > The Tolkien quotation above only refers to Sauron's native abilities being > > greater than Gandal's by a factor cancelled by the might of the Ring. It > > doesn't make it clear that his own power would be incresed > > substantially. > > I previously cited various sources of other characters indicating that > >their< ability to dominate / manipulate others would be enhanced by > the Ring. Assuming that this would apply to Sauron as well is not a > great leap. There is also; > > "But also they ['all the rings alike'] enhanced the natural powers of > a > possessor - thus approaching 'magic', a motive easily corruptible into > evil, a lust for domination." > Letters #131 > > And any number of other references. Why would you dispute that > wearing the Ring made Sauron more powerful? I mean... that is about > as bedrock a principle as there can be. Not really. Sauron's power was invested in the Ring to make it a potent object. For Sauron, wearing the Ring was like being *normal*. No greater power, but with the addition of a way to control other Ring wearers. Given that we see him able to access the Ring's power from a distance, I'm not convinced that he was diminished by any lack of proximity = more of the same. Others wearing his Ring would find their own powers enhanced in proportion to their natural abilities - by Sauron's own power residing in the Ring. For a hobbit this power would be minimal. For a Maia like Gandalf, even in his mortal incarnation, the power gain would be huge. > >> So.... you are saying that Sauron did not have to convince the > >> majority of the populace because once he convinced the king > everyone > >> else fell in line? The text you quote says that is true for all > but > >> one of the councillors. It does not say that he did not use his > >> influence to help them along. Nor does it say that he used no > power > >> to sway the populace to accept these changes as well. > > > This is rubbish Conrad. You cannot argue absences like that. Next you'll > > be trying to convinve me that the sky over Numenor was purple not blue > > because it *isn't* stated in the text. > > > You must be the only person on ten newsgroups I've lurked in that uses the > > absence of evidence as proof of your assertions. > > What? Read the text above. Where do I say it is proving my > assertions? Where do you GET this nonsense? I was disputing a claim > YOU made. You said that a particular quotation proved that Sauron got > all the Numenoreans to do what he wanted by manipulating the King > alone. I pointed out (above) that it did not SAY that. Conrad, you're becoming shrill. Worse, you seem to be ignoring, rather than rebutting my points. You've just used two double negatives in quick succession. That's claiming a positive, i.e. a proof. "It does not say that he did not use his influence to help them along." Not ---> not "Nor does it say that he used no power to sway the populace to accept these changes as well." Nor ---> no. Don't bother to deny it a second time. > You were making claims that were not supported by the passage you > provided. I pointed out the things which you claimed that were not > stated in the text. Suddenly that is ME using 'absence of evidence'? > What nonsense. I had no 'assertion' to be founded upon absence of > evidence... I was pointing out that YOUR assertion was not supported > by the evidence you quoted. I *said* don't bother... To recap. I claimed he *didn't* do something. You've just admitted that the text didn't state these things. If the text doesn't state them, and I say they weren't done, then I am correct. If the text doesn't state they occurred and I say they did, then I am incorrect, or speculating without supporting evidence - hmmm. That sounds like what you and Tolkien's letter are saying about the Ring beign in Numenor. In which case, you're both wrong. > >>> The Palantír didn't amplify the will of Sauron. > >>> Amon Hen didn't amplify the will of Sauron. > > >> I never suggested they did. However, they COULD put someone into > >> direct contact with Sauron. > > > Neither made "direct" contact. Please provide a citation to back up this > > assertion. > > The people using those things heard Sauron's thoughts being projected > to them and were influenced by his will. If you don't consider that > 'direct contact' you may assign whatever other words to it you like... > it was not the NORMAL situation that one got when just walking down > the road. LOL! You always seem ot get things the wrong way around when you're arguing Conrad. My point is that it was NOT the normal situation one got when walking down the road. *That* is "direct contact". The Palantír and Amon Hen *relayed information* from a distance. That is "indirect contact". Like a TV or a phone. Direct contact is "face to face" in RL. Everything else if a derogation from that intensity of encounter. > > If Sauron was still powerful "without" the Ring, why was he so > > completely destroyed when it was destroyed? Because Sauron with the Ring > > still in existence was still able to access its power. Things built with > > its power still persisted [Barad Dur for example]. Sauron and Barad Dur > > didn't need the Ring's proximity to avail of its power, but with it > > destroyed they were destroyed too. > > All true EXCEPT that while Sauron was not 'diminished' if the Ring was > out of his possession he also was not 'enhanced' in the way that he > was when he wore it. Essentially, when the Ring was out of Sauron's > possession his power was the same as if he had never made it... still > reduced by having died a few times and not enhanced beyond his natural > abilities as it was when he wore the Ring. Well, I admit your argument sounds logical, and in this case we have no absolute yardsticks in the text to refute what you say, so I'll conced this point Conrad. Don't get cocky though... > > The Ring didn't confer the power to compel love AFAIK. This was > > Galadriel speaking with some poetic license. > > A possible interpretation. OR... Galadriel believed the Ring would > allow her to manipulate others. Possibly she *did* belive that. Again I have no problem with this. > > Wasn't this Boromir making an ass of himself, by showing how little he > > understood the nature of the Ring? > > A possible interpretation. OR... Boromir believed the Ring would > allow him to manipulate others. Possibly he *did* believe that too. > > I always thought the line you quoted was a piece of padding. > > Was Shagrat cowed? No. > > Ummm... Tolkien said he was. The Ring was 'a cowing menace', > remember? It disagrees with your position so it is 'padding'? Even > though it is in the published narrative of LotR? A direct 'authorial > statement' like the Caradhras bit you went on about? Suddenly that is > worthless? I think you know you are wrong and are just being > difficult. Nope. My comments below supply the reasoned argument. > > Did the Rings presence modify Shagrat's behaviour in the slightest, > > never mind reduce him to a quivering pile of Orcshit? No. > > Right. So big Orcs like Shagrat ALWAYS ran from little hobbits like > Sam. Got it. "He couldn't fight and keep his burden." Did you miss that? > > What active part did the Ring play in this encounter? None whatsoever. > > You are spouting nonsense. Nope. The Ring did absolutely NOTHING in this encounter. Shagrat couldn't fight and keep his burden. Question: If the Ring was that powerful, why didn't he just fall to his knees in fear after feeling its "coving presence"? Answer: Because that description is just padding. Its not developed within the text. The scene does not revolve around the Orcs changed behaviour as a result of the Ring. Nothing in that scene supports the description of the Ring as a cowing presence to the slaves of Mordor. > the already ludicrous length of this message> > > >> "He needed time, much time, before he could control the Ring or > >> (which in such a case is the same) before it could control him; > >> before his will and arrogance could grow to a stature in which he > >> could dominate other major hostile wills." > >> Letters #246 > > > This, while interesting, doesn't support or undermine either of our > > positions. > > That passage does not support the idea that the Ring could be used to > dominate wills OTHER than those of ringbearers? Sure it doesn't. This is yet another unfounded assertion by Tolkien. We never see the Ring dominating a will, except the attempts on Gollum. These are stated like threats, but are never carried out. Gollum never behaves the way the Ring wants him too. Therefore this all powerful capability of the Ring to dominate others apart fro mRing wearers is a figment of Tolkien's imagination. We never see it happen. We see the contrary happen with Gollum. In fact the crucial, substantive issue about the narrative of the LotR is that Gollum *doesn't* behave according to the wishes of either the Ringbearer or Ringmaker. Funny that, seeing a Tolkien sounded so sure... > > > >> Yes, that was Sauron's primary goal. However, the Ring also > allowed > >> the bearer to influence people who were NOT wearing other Rings of > >> Power. > >> The whole feint where the forces of Gondor were supposedly > >> blindly following Aragorn into Mordor relied upon that fact. > > > I don't know where you drummed this one up, Conrad. > > The bleeding book? Lord of the Rings? Yeeessshhh! How can you > possibly debate this? It is freaking obvious and (I thought) > universally accepted. > > > The bait offered to Sauron was that of the new Ringlord asserting > > himself against Sauron before he had properly mastered the Ring. > > True... but it was carefully orchestrated to appear that everyone was > blindly walking into it without a qualm. The pompous pronouncements > that 'King Aragorn' was reclaiming land and the forces of Sauron must > leave. The plan to send those who were too afraid to press on against > Cair Andros so that it would not appear they were deserting. The > whole damned thing was staged to look like everyone was spellbound and > convinced that Aragorn would lead them to victory. This "spellbound" issue exists only in your mind Conrad. > > There was never a question that the Men of Gondor would need persuasion > > to follow their new lord against Sauron, or that Sauron woul assume that > > any Gondorian would need to be "persuaded" to launch a revenge attack on > > Mordor after his attack on Minas Tirith. > > Ok, whatever... if you have such a FUNDAMENTALLY different > understanding of the texts I begin to suspect it is not even > >possible< to reason with you. Well, why don't you start reasoning and we'll see how we get on... LOL! Nice backpedal BTW. > > > > Bullshit. His armies were not composed of slaves. They were composed of > > Orcs, men and beasts. RTFT. > > All of whom were his slaves. Read the text yourself. They were not slaves. The reactions of the men at the end of the Last Battle prove this. They acted independently, once they recovered. Here is the relevant quotation: "But the Men of Rhûn and of Harad, Easterling and Southron, saw the ruin of their war and the great majesty and glory of the Captains of the West. And those that were deepest and longest in evil servitude, hating the West, and yet were men proud and bold, in their turn now gathered themselves for a last stand of desperate battle. But the most part fled eastward as they could; and some cast their weapons down and sued for mercy." Sauron was not Melkor. Even Melkor was not able to completely control ALL his Orcs, which were like slaves to him. OTC it is likely that he only controlled a core element at any one time. > > The Witch King weilded fear, not an ability to "doninate" per se, whic > > hI regard as enforcing one;s will on another. Fear would have done the > > job nicely thank you. But he chose not to do even this. > > Are you suggesting that Sauron had the power to frighten Gondor into > submission but decided not to? That seems to be what you are saying, > but I'm hoping I just don't understand you properly. That's exactly what I'm saying. The Ringwraiths were terror incarnate. All nine of them together scattered throughout the City of Minas Tirith could have probably [rank speculation] cowed the entire population of that city. Remember that Tolkien himself states that Sauron's power after the Downfall "was through terror alone". > >> No matter how many times I re-read it the text still says that > Sauron > >> was responsible for Numenoreans starting human sacrifice. > > > I think thats agreed. I'm saying he didn't need the Ring to do this. > > Humans have been making human sacrifices at the behest of their leaders > > without any magic rings, whether religious or temporal, for thousands of > > years. > > Maybe. There is no "maybe" about this point whatsoever Conrad. > It IS possible that Sauron could have gotten the Numenoreans > to do what they did without any sort of supernatural 'mental > influence' being involved. However, since he did it so quickly... and > there are several texts saying that 'mental influence' WAS involved... > I'm inclined to believe it took more than normal persuasion. Hold on a second. We appear to agree here. You're saying supernatural mental influence. I have no problem with that. I'm saying that Sauron, a Maia, would have had such an influence. You have already agreed that Sauron could access the Ring's power from a distance and I have already agreed that his summa might be less without the Ring. The difference between us now is one of degree, and the Ring. Let's dispose of the former and leave the latter. I'm saying that Sauron, even with his power level diminished by the lack of proximity to the Ring, but nonetheless still able to avail of its power, was sufficiently powerful in terms of "his secret will" to influence the King and his Counsellors. > > Absolutely. In fact it cemented their turning toward Melkor. It just > > wasn't "forced behaviour" using the Ring. > > There is 'forced behaviour' like the puppeting Sauron had with his > 'slaves' and then there is 'influence'... pushing someone towards a > particular action. We both agree that Sauron was not puppeting the > Numenoreans, but I think he was influencing them. Think of it as > 'Saruman writ large' if you like... Saruman could influence people to > do things they normally would not. They weren't puppets, but they > were inclined to think that his suggestions were quite reasonable. > Influence. Ditto for Sauron in Numenor. No argument on that. The power of his voice was greater than Saruman's and Saruman gulled even Gandalf before he knew of his treachery. What matter if his power level might be down if he didn't have the Ring on him. He was still sufficiently powerful enough to "influence" the King and his Counsellors anyway. Plus, you don't need much sheer power [in terms of qquanta of energy] to speak persuasively. Its a qualitative, not a quantitative thing. > > Sauron was powerful. He couldn't corrupt people through the Palantír by > > any virtue of the Palantír. The Palantír was just a machine for remote > > viewing. It didn't have any qualities of the Ring in terms of > > domination. > > Not on its own, no. However, Sauron did use the palantir to corrupt > others. Read 'The Palantir' in Unfinished Tales if you dispute that. Again, I'm saying that a large part of this was his persuasive "influence", not a dominating evil power transmitted through the Palantír. > >> "And the Valar drew unto them many companions, some less, some well > >> nigh as great as themselves, and they laboured together in the > >> ordering of the Earth and the curbing of its tumults." > >> Silm, Ainulindale > > >> So some of the Maiar were 'well nigh as great' as the Valar. Note > >> also that the Maiar are here said to have been involved in the > initial > >> construction of the world. > > > Nope. Sorry again. These were the other Valar, not the Aratar who came > > first. > > What? > > Ok, that's it. Not even gonna read the rest. Been nice talking to > you, but this is just ridiculous. You can't possibly believe half the > things you are saying. If you do... well, then there is STILL no > point in continuing this. > > If you want to discuss specific points I'm game, but I'm done with the > fifty-billion word messages of eternal silliness. (yes, that's an > exaggeration). No Maiar made the world Conrad. That's a given. That's why the Valar, and not the Maiar, are called "The Powers of the World". Or had you forgotten that small point? "...they are its life and it is theirs." The Maiar aren't that "bound up" with Arda in RL. :-) M. ###### Message-ID: <3EBD08BC.E5CBDBE5@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB887CF.6400502A@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305070416.48169c6d@posting.google.com> <3EB9E1D7.2FB78ED8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080900.3ddf02ee@posting.google.com> <3EBB3A14.7036780@indigo.ie> <3EBB5A48.96E1F49D@indigo.ie> <3EBC00E3.E2FEA0E6@indigo.ie> <3EBCBC1D.6F20A834@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 244 Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 07:12:12 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.175.33 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052547147 194.125.175.33 (Sat, 10 May 2003 07:12:27 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 07:12:27 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!zen.net.uk!newspeer.lavaseals.co.uk!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116837 Tar-Elenion wrote: > > In article <3EBCBC1D.6F20A834@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > > Tar-Elenion wrote: > > > > > > In article <3EBC00E3.E2FEA0E6@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > > > > Tar-Elenion wrote: > > > > > > > > > > In article <3EBB5A48.96E1F49D@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > > > > > > Tar-Elenion wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In article <3EBB3A14.7036780@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > > > > > > > > Conrad Dunkerson wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EB9E1D7.2FB78ED8@indigo.ie>... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "With the Valar came other spirits whose being also began before the > > > > > > > > > > World, of the same order as the Valar but of less degree." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "And the Valar drew unto them many companions, some less, some well > > > > > > > > > nigh as great as themselves, and they laboured together in the > > > > > > > > > ordering of the Earth and the curbing of its tumults." > > > > > > > > > Silm, Ainulindale > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So some of the Maiar were 'well nigh as great' as the Valar. Note > > > > > > > > > also that the Maiar are here said to have been involved in the initial > > > > > > > > > construction of the world. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nope. Sorry again. These were the other Valar, not the Aratar who came > > > > > > > > first. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Valar are 14 in number. The Aratar are 8 in number. So six (or > > > > > > > perhaps rather actually five since Tulkas was a 'late' arrival) other > > > > > > > Valar account for for the "many companions" the _Valar_ (the quote > > > > > > > supplied says _Valar_ not Aratar), "drew unto them"? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As you might say: > > > > > > > "Bwahaha..." etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > 1 = One. > > > > > > > > > > > > 2 = A couple. > > > > > > > > > > > > 3 = A few. > > > > > > > > > > > > 4 = Several. > > > > > > > > > > > > 6 = Many. > > > > > > > > > > > > Its all relative, you see. > > > > > > > > > > Weak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *mheheheheh* > > > > > > > > > > > > M. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Where does that leave five, Tulkas did not come on to the scene until > > > > > late (the last to enter when Arda was near complete). > > > > > > Still no responce? > > > > I thought you were taking the piss. Five or six = many. No problem. > > Ah, yes, keep changing the definition. > (And still weak). > > > > > > > > Also, the quote given above: > > > > > ""And the Valar drew unto them many companions, some less, some well > > > > > nigh as great as themselves, and they laboured together in the ordering > > > > > of the Earth and the curbing of its tumults." > > > > > Silm, Ainulindale" > > > > > ...of which you state that "the Valar" here means the Aratar, while the > > > > > "many companions" refers to the six (or rather five) other Valar, what is > > > > > your evidence of that? The quote does not say the Aratar, it says the > > > > > Valar. > > > > > > > > Read the Sil. The previous section of text defines who undertook the > > > > work. It was Manwe, Aule, Ulmo and Melkor. Three Aratar and the Morgoth. > > > > > > Read the Sil yourself. The previous section says the ""chief part". Or > > > are you going to argue that three (or four) is "many"? > > > > Nope. > > > > But given that the ancient earth was defined by earth sea water and > > fire, I thought it logical that few others took part. Yavannas seeds and > > life in general had not yet occurred. There seemed precious little for > > the other Valar to do, given their specialities. > > Perhaps that is why the "chief part" is given to Manwe, Ulmo and Aule. > The others had lesser parts. Still we do know the Sauron was a Maia of > the following of Aule. But what is said of his 'early' existence?: > "The note goes on to say that Galadriel was not deceived, saying that > this Aulendil was not in the train of Aulë in Valinor, "but this is not > decisive, since Aulë existed before the 'Building of Arda,' and the > probability is that Sauron was in fact one of the Aulëan Maiar, corrupted > 'before Arda began' by Melkor."" > UT, The History of Galadriel and Celeborn, endnote 7 > Seems the Valar had Maiar in their service before entering Arda. They > would be, like the Valar, disincarnate. Yet they would, like the Valar > have been in Ea and among: > "...those of the Ainur who desired it arose and entered into the World at > the beginning of Time; and it was their task to achieve it, and by their > labours to fulfil the vision which they had seen. Long they laboured in > the regions of Eä, which are vast beyond the thought of Elves and Men, > until in the time appointed was made Arda, the Kingdom of Earth. Then > they put on the raiment of Earth and descended into it, and dwelt > therein." > Valaquenta > And we learn that: > "The Great among these spirits the Elves name the Valar..." > op. cit. > and that: > "With the Valar came other spirits whose being also began before the > World, of the same order as the Valar but of less degree. These are the > Maiar, the people of the Valar, and their servants and helpers." > op. cit. > These disincarnate beings laboured long to shape the physical universe > and seemed quite capable of of manipulating its matter ('the material > world') whilst in an 'insubstantial' (or 'discorporate') form. No Maiar were involved in the creation of the World. Later on they took incarnate form and helped the Valar. > > > "Thus it came to pass that of the Ainur some abode still with Ilúvatar > > > beyond the confines of the World; but others, and among them many of the > > > greatest and most fair, took the leave of Ilúvatar and descended into it. > > > But this condition Ilúvatar made, or it is the necessity of their love, > > > that their power should thenceforward be contained and bounded in the > > > World, to be within it for ever, until it is complete, so that they are > > > its life and it is theirs. And therefore they are named the Valar, the > > > Powers of the World." > > > > The Valar made the world. Aratar plus the others. Thank you for > > underlining this. No Maiar is a Vala. Ergo. > > > > > > > We can also note that in context with the 'many companions' being Maiar > > > > > in Valaquenta it says: > > > > > "With the Valar came other spirits whose being also began before the > > > > > World, of the same order as the Valar but of less degree. These are the > > > > > Maiar, the people of the Valar, and their servants and helpers. Their > > > > > number is not known to the Elves, and few have names in any of the > > > > > tongues of the Children of Ilúvatar; for though it is otherwise in Aman, > > > > > in Middle-earth the Maiar have seldom appeared in form visible to Elves > > > > > and Men." > > > > > > > > Separate piece, and not one is denying the several powers available to > > > > Maiar when they are incarnate. I'm simply reminding people that > > > > discorporate Maiar are not shown to have any powers over the material > > > > world. > > > > > > I have not addressed your contention about the power of the disincarnate > > > Maiar. What I have addressed is your contention that the Maiar were not > > > involved in the initial construction of the world and the "many others" > > > mentioned were the (5) "other Valar" while the Valar mentioned refers > > > only to the Aratar. > > > > You still have not addressed the issue of Valar. 5 OR 6 = many. > > > > There seemed little need for more Valar except to fight off Melkor in > > some way. We know that there are lesser Valar. No Maiar are mentioned. > > See above. And also note Rings of Power: > "Of old there was Sauron the Maia, whom the Sindar in Beleriand named > Gorthaur. In the beginning of Arda Melkor seduced him to his allegiance, > and he became the greatest and most trusted of the servants of the Enemy, > and the most perilous, for he could assume many forms, and for long if he > willed he could still appear noble and beautiful, so as to deceive all > but the most wary." Again, this is Sauron *incarnate*. Are you deliberately fudging the issue here? > > > As for your contention: > > > "The maiden whom the Valar chose from among the Maiar to guide the vessel > > > of the Sun was named Arien, and he that steered the island of the Moon > > > was Tilion. In the days of the Trees Arien had tended the golden flowers > > > in the gardens of Vána, and watered them with the bright dews of > > > Laurelin; but Tilion was a hunter of the company of Oromë, and he had a > > > silver bow. He was a lover of silver, and when he would rest he forsook > > > the woods of Oromë, and going into Lórien he lay in dream by the pools of > > > Estë, in Telperion's flickering beams; and he begged to be given the task > > > of tending for ever the last Flower of Silver. Arien the maiden was > > > mightier than he, and she was chosen because she had not feared the heats > > > of Laurelin, and was unhurt by them, being from the beginning a spirit of > > > fire, whom Melkor had not deceived nor drawn to his service. Too bright > > > were the eyes of Arien for even the Eldar to look on, and leaving Valinor > > > she forsook the form and raiment which like the Valar she had worn there, > > > and she was as a naked flame, terrible in the fullness of her splendour." > > > The Silmarillion > > > > Well-quoted. > > > > > Arien seems to manage. > > > > Manage what? Did you notice was she stated to be levitating any Rings? > > You contended: > "discorporate Maiar are not shown to have any powers over the material > world", > I have disproven your contention. > > She seems to be able to manage (or 'have power over') the Sun, which is a > 'material' part of the World, despite having forsaken her form. The Sunship is quite *immaterial*. Although created from the last fruit of Laurelin, it was given a spiritual dimension to its being by Varda, who hallowed it, and in it the Essece of Laurelin was poured/housed, which made it rise through the airs. The Sunship as originally envisaged, bore no relation to the huge physical orb we know today and understand out Sun to be. > To recap, we have Maiar in the service of the Valar before Arda is made. > We have greater and lesser Ainur (later known as Valar and Maiar) > entering into the World (Ea) and 'shaping' its physical matter though > they are disincarnate. We have a Maia forsake her form and yet have power > over physical matter. I disagree. No Maiar aided in the creation of Arda. Their assistance came later when the Valar had taken form. Lots of things heppened in the Music. These things didn't happen suddenly on the arrival of the Valar into Arda. In fact the Valar are stated to have bee ndismayed at the state they found Arda in. The things revealed in the Music took time to occur. The arrival of the helpers was one such thing, and for a very good reason. It is likely that the primeval forces acting on the earth would have destroyed any lesser beings than Valar. Arien attained her form having voluntarily doffed her incarnate body. She didn't carry the sunship around. She steered it. Steering is not carrying. In any case the Sunship was not composed of ordinary matter. Unlike the gold in Sauron's Ring, which you seem to equate with a Legion of Super-Heroes Flight Ring. M. ###### Message-ID: <3EBD09AB.FDD23319@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080435.68a8f04f@posting.google.com> <3EBADC40.52C5E72F@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080948.200a60a4@posting.google.com> <3EBB6390.98E78E65@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090604.4a153478@posting.google.com> <3EBC38E0.4C4F7BCA@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 35 Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 07:16:11 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.175.33 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052547384 194.125.175.33 (Sat, 10 May 2003 07:16:24 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 07:16:24 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!proxad.net!proxad.net!213.253.16.105.MISMATCH!mephistopheles.news.clara.net!news.clara.net!colt.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116827 Morgil wrote: > > "Michael O'Neill" kirjoitti > viestissä:3EBC38E0.4C4F7BCA@indigo.ie... > > Conrad Dunkerson wrote: > > > Would you please explain how moving a Ring vertically through hundreds > > of fathoms of seawater and then levitating it through stormy weather > > hundreds of miles to Middle Earth takes *less power* than swiping it > > from a human's grasp? > > You can try that one yourself, Michael. Find a looooong string, > tie a plain golden ring in it, throw it in the ocean and try to pull > it up. Then give the same ring to some heavyweight bully and > try to wrestle it out of his hand. Then tell us which was harder. > > *bweheh* Why wrestle? I'll just pull it out of his hand using the same string, since he cannot form a fist stronglyenough around the Ring because he is in agony when ever he touches it. > > 1. How did the Hobbits part with the Ring? > > They could resist its power better then anyone else. > I think that much should be obvious from the book. > > Morgil I'm not comparing them with "anyone else". I'm comparing them with Sauron the Maia, the Ringmaker, arguable the greatest single will on Middle Earth. If Sauron couldn't do it, how come thay managed it? M. ###### From: Stan Brown Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 18:00:29 -0400 Organization: Oak Road Systems Message-ID: References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080435.68a8f04f@posting.google.com> <3EBADC40.52C5E72F@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080948.200a60a4@posting.google.com> <3EBB6390.98E78E65@indigo.ie> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.60 X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 50 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-01!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116985 Jeff MacDonald wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien: >In article <3EBB6390.98E78E65@indigo.ie>, Michael O'Neill wrote: >> The first is from the Sil, the Akallabeth: >> >>"... shadow and a black wind over the sea, and came back to Middle-earth and >> to Mordor that was his home. There he took up again his great Ring in >> Barad-dûr, and dwelt there, dark and silent, until he wrought himself a >> new guise, an image of malice and hatred made visible; and the Eye of >> Sauron the Terrible few could endure." >> >of this quote> As indeed everyone should do. >This seems to say that Sauron returned to Mordor, took up the Ring, >and *then* built himself a new body. That implies he took up the Ring >while still discarnate. I agree. >This seems to counter both your arguments. If he takes up the Ring >while still a spirit, then the "took up" has to refer to him getting >the Ring again, since if he'd brought it back from Numenor as a spirit >nothing would have changed. He wouldn't have taken it up, he would >have still had it. I disagree. "Took up" is not the same as "picked up". Think of someone who is a stamp collector, but temporarily loses interest in his hobby while nursing a dying parent. It will be some time till he "takes up again" his hobby, but the stamps have been there all along; they were never out of his possession. I believe Sauron's "taking up again" the Great Ring means resuming his use of it, not resuming his possession of it. >On the other hand, if he can take it up while a spirit, why couldn't >he have carried it from Numenor? Well, precisely. The Maiar (at least the greater ones) could manipulate the physical world by act of will; after all, it's how the world was finished. Ossë yanked a whole island off the sea floor and towed it many miles west to the Bay of Eldamar; I don't see any reason to doubt that a disembodied Sauron could carry a Ring. -- Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com/ "If there's one thing I know, it's men. I ought to: it's been my life work." -- Marie Dressler, in /Dinner at Eight/ ###### Message-ID: <3EBDAE7F.DFB5AB49@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080435.68a8f04f@posting.google.com> <3EBADC40.52C5E72F@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080948.200a60a4@posting.google.com> <3EBB6390.98E78E65@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090604.4a153478@posting.google.com> <3EBC38E0.4C4F7BCA@indigo.ie> <3EBD09AB.FDD23319@indigo.ie> <3EBD63E5.D9871A8D@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 263 Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 18:59:27 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.176.57 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052589594 194.125.176.57 (Sat, 10 May 2003 18:59:54 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 18:59:54 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!zen.net.uk!newspeer.lavaseals.co.uk!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116935 Morgil wrote: > > "Michael O'Neill" kirjoitti > viestissä:3EBD63E5.D9871A8D@indigo.ie... > > > So to conclude. > > Whew! :) > > > To suggest that Sauron as a spirit was able to command the power of even > > a diminished Vala while in spirit form during the Downfall is a > > nonsense. > > Yep. Thereby we must assume that your speculations about the > Ring being buried under tons and tons of rock are incorrect. > Which is easy since Akallabeth only speaks of Sauron's spirit > rising from the depths of the ocean - no mention of the rocks. No mention of the Ring either. Too bad - for you. > Your speculation that since Sauron was unlikely to just have > drowned, he must have been crushed and buried under tons > of rocks is shallow and leaves out other possible options. I never engage in shallow speculation. I engage in involved, even convoluted speculation which usually leaves repetitive types with no reasoning abilities bleating the same old refrain over and over again - no attempt even to reason it out. > As you said, there was millions of tons of water going down > that chasm. Maybe that water flushed his dead body out of > the temple, and away from being buried by the land masses. If so, it must have hit it with such force as to have killed the body. I've already shown that it couldn't have been drowned. > > To suggest Sauron could have located the Ring while in his spirit form > > is nonsense. He wasn't even able to locate it when he regrew his body > > after the Last Alliance. > > In the Numenor case Sauron never lost connection with the Ring, > and he didn't need to locate it in any way. Therefore he was able > to snatch it along when his spirit abandoned the dead body. How exactly did it snatch it, and yet remain unable to snatch from Isildur' finger? > In the Last Alliance case Sauron was suddenly and brutally > disconnected from the Ring, which caused shock element > and an instant loss of power. He wasn't in a shape to do > much anything for many years, so you can't really compare > that situation with what happened in Numenor. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!! I see it at last!. You're arguing as if Isildur obtained the Ring as it happened in the FILM!!!!! I see now. Unfortunately for you, it didn't happen like that. Sauron was overcome in battle by Gil Galad and Elendil, who perished in the deed. Isildur *then* went up to the body and cut off the Ring and the finger wearing it. From The Shadow of the Past: "'But for the moment, since most of all you need to know how this thing came to you, and that will be tale enough, this is all that I will say. It was Gil-galad, Elven-king and Elendil of Westernesse who overthrew Sauron, though they themselves perished in the deed; and Isildur Elendil's son cut the Ring from Sauron's hand and took it for his own. Then Sauron was vanquished and his spirit fled and was hidden for long years, until his shadow took shape again in Mirkwood." From the Council of Elrond: "`I was the herald of Gil-galad and marched with his host. I was at the Battle of Dagorlad before the Black Gate of Mordor, where we had the mastery: for the Spear of Gil-galad and the Sword of Elendil, Aiglos and Narsil, none could withstand. I beheld the last combat on the slopes of Orodruin, where Gil-galad died, and Elendil fell, and Narsil broke beneath him; but Sauron himself was overthrown, and Isildur cut the Ring from his hand with the hilt-shard of his father's sword, and took it for his own.'" From the Tale of Years. 3441 Sauron overthrown by Elendil and Gil-galad, who perish. Isildur takes the One Ring. Sauron passes away and the Ringwraiths go into the shadows. The Second Age ends. In all cases, Sauron's body is killed *before* Isildur cut off the Ring finger. My point remains. Lets allow that he took the Ring to Numenor. If Sauron's spirit was still in the body after the Last Alliance, still "in contact" with the Ring spiritually, in the time elapsed between the body being killed and Isildur cutting off the Ring, then why wasn't he able to leave with it as it is alleged he had done in Numenor? An argument was put forward that he was somehow weaker. How can that be? Dead is dead. Spirit is spirit. Much of Sauron's strength was in the Ring. It was on his body, in "both" cases you propose, within reach of his spirit. > > I rest my case. > > Me too, by saying that it seems to me that Tolkien did > not think it through how Sauron was able to save the > Ring from the downfall of Numenor; Thank you for conceding that point. > but since Sauron > was not planning on going down to the bottom of Sea, > he would not have had any reason to leave the Ring > behind, even if he could have, which he didn't. Saying Sauron did not have any reason t o heave it behind, is not the same as saying he had a mechanism to take it with him! LOL! You're building castles on sand. > Thereby, since we know that the Ring did not end to > the bottom of the sea, the only conclusion is that a > powerful Maia-spirit was somehow able to move > the Ring from one place to another. Then why didn't he do the same after the Last Alliance and save himself thousands of year of grief? Also, given that the Ring was allegedly present both time Sauron was killed, how is it that it takes Sauron approximately ten years to reincarnate himself the first time, assuming he was incarnate at the 3429 attack. "SA3320 Foundations of the Realms in Exile: Arnor and Gondor. The Stones are divided (II, 54). Sauron returns to Mordor. SA 3429 Sauron attacks Gondor, takes Minas Ithil and burns the White Tree. Isildur escapes down Anduin and goes to Elendil in the North. Anárion defends Minas Anor and Osgiliath." He was definitely incanate again 22 years later in 3441 when his body engages in hand-to-hand combat with Elendil and Gil Galad and he is killed. "SA 3441 Sauron overthrown by Elendil and Gil-galad, who perish. Isildur takes the One Ring. Sauron passes away and the Ringwraiths go into the shadows. The Second Age ends. Yet it takes Sauron either (i) 1,300 years [if you see the sign of evil things multiplying again as a sign of his reincarnation] "TA c. 1300 Evil things begin to multiply again. Orcs increase in the Misty Mountains and attack the Dwarves. The Nazgûl reappear. The chief of these comes north to Angmar. The Periannath migrate westward; many settle at Bree." or (ii) 2,060 years [if you accept the comments of the Wise as proof of his rebirth] "TA 2060 The power of Dol Guldur grows. The Wise fear that it may be Sauron taking shape again." to grow himself a new body the second time. In fact neither of these dates may give the actual date of reincarnation, but merely spiritual growth. In which case I cite the following as a definite incarnate act of Sauron. 2460 The Watchful Peace ends. Sauron returns with increased strength to Dol Guldur. Riddle me that one Sherlock. The Ring was present and on the body both times remember. > And since we > don't know the exact mechanism it was able to do > that, we cannot really start guessing the conditions > in which this would be possible or impossible. Correct. But it is the course of least resistance to note all the inconsistencies and say that Tolkien got it wrong. 1. There was no way to extract the Ring from the wrack of Numenor and get it back to middle earth. 2. If it *were* possible for Sauron's spirit to retrieve it from the wrack of Numenor, taking it from the finger of hsi own dead hand, then why didn't Sauron's spirit prevent Isildur taking the Ring from his dead body after the Last Alliance. There was a period of time between Sauron's body expiring and Isildur fetching the hilt of his fathers sword, which fell and btoke beneath him [and he was the tallest of the Numenorean] and taking it and cutting off the Ring. Plenty of time to telekineticaly get the Ring away. 3. While I'm at this review of inconsistency, I see no reason why it took Sauron either 130 or 206 or 246 times longer to reincarnate himself the second time, assuming the first reincarnation took ten years. If it took twenty two years then the reincarnation multiples are slightly less than half the above figures at circa 59, 94 and 112 respectively, still huge differences in timescale, not convincingly explained by some nebulous assertion Sauron was somehow weaker the second time around. > Or more simply: > > a: Sauron had to have the Ring with him in Numenor. No, he didn't. No text says he did and the Akallabeth strongly implies that he didn't. > b: Sauron did have the Ring when he had returned from > Numenor. No he didn't. The illogic of any conceivable mechanism belies this. it reduces simply to two things, (i) if he lost his body, he lost the Ring - if he saved the Ring he should have been able to save his body from perishing. (ii) Maia had no power over matter after the death of their first bodies while in spirit form. (iii) if he was able to save the Ring from Numenor's complete destruction, then why not from the actions of Isildur? > Thereby ----> > > c: Sauron was somehow able to bring the Ring back > from Numenor. > > Morgil "Somehow" What a withering rebuttal. Not. :-) My rebuttal is this. If Sauron was able to affect the material world while a spirit, and accordingly wield the Ring while still in that state, why go to all the trouble of constructing a new body, a huge undertaking without the blessing of either Eru or Mandos, and which was no less vulnerable than the old and had fewer powers? Just for old times sake? I don't think so. The answer is simple and logical. Sauron couldn't affect matter direcltly while in spirit form. Sauron needed his new body to wield the Ring. M. ###### NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 21:26:53 -0500 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien From: Jeff MacDonald Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080435.68a8f04f@posting.google.com> <3EBADC40.52C5E72F@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080948.200a60a4@posting.google.com> <3EBB6390.98E78E65@indigo.ie> <3EBD6756.9D49361@indigo.ie> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 22:24:20 -0400 Message-ID: Lines: 33 NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.105.72.99 X-Trace: sv3-W35OiyBRe95z1JxdXsW2nqL86/No//V7q7JmtfAweYVxH2d1QL+aXSFoFewSIXS6TxKHuU2scrOm+jd!fwfiS9gOj/pwvwpcbAcRXqg6JNPpYZEyOQIF33C6CXQKZLj86nk8lEccmvuUnLf9m1F4073C7JoK!25rbVjP8M9flZsY2ZiU= X-Complaints-To: abuse@speakeasy.net X-DMCA-Complaints-To: abuse@speakeasy.net X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.1 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!small1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nntp3.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.speakeasy.net!news.speakeasy.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116994 In article <3EBD6756.9D49361@indigo.ie>, Michael O'Neill wrote: > Jeff MacDonald wrote: >> >> In article <3EBB6390.98E78E65@indigo.ie>, Michael O'Neill wrote: >> > The first is from the Sil, the Akallabeth: >> > >> >"... shadow and a black wind over the sea, and came back to Middle-earth and >> > to Mordor that was his home. There he took up again his great Ring in >> > Barad-dûr, and dwelt there, dark and silent, until he wrought himself a >> > new guise, an image of malice and hatred made visible; and the Eye of >> > Sauron the Terrible few could endure." >> > > > Sorry. Mope. > >:-) > > In my opinion Sauron had to return to Mordor, build his new body [or at > least get the work started sufficiently to allow him directly interact > with matter] and only *then* take up the Ring. > That may be your opinion, but it disagrees with the quoted text. Again: "...took up again his great Ring in Barad-ûr, and dwelt there, dark and silent, until he wrought himself a new guise" First Ring, then new guise. It seems pretty clear. -- -- thejeff -- Look before you leap. -- Samuel Butler ###### From: "TradeSurplus" Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080435.68a8f04f@posting.google.com> <3EBADC40.52C5E72F@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080948.200a60a4@posting.google.com> <3EBB6390.98E78E65@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090604.4a153478@posting.google.com> <3EBC38E0.4C4F7BCA@indigo.ie> <3EBD09AB.FDD23319@indigo.ie> <3EBD63E5.D9871A8D@indigo.ie> <3EBDAE7F.DFB5AB49@indigo.ie> Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Lines: 32 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 69.0.16.46 X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net X-Trace: newssvr10.news.prodigy.com 1052620110 ST000 69.0.16.46 (Sat, 10 May 2003 22:28:30 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 22:28:30 EDT Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com X-UserInfo1: SCSYASREZZWCRVPXN[OX_TDB[X_LPO@FLA]T]_MIJQR@EPIB_VUKAH_[MTX\IS[K[NGYJJFNOFZR_G[BUNTAOQLFE^TEHRPI]PZZRP_BMDSFQFL_]CBHXRWCMDCUZAZN@D_AKMNLEI]MWHCSXL^]NNC__CZFGSGHYYXWPFG@SCAVA]\FT\@B\RDGENSUQS^M Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 02:28:30 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!eusc.inter.net!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!prodigy.com!newsmst01.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!postmaster.news.prodigy.com!newssvr10.news.prodigy.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116938 Michael O'Neill wrote >... >Morgil wrote: >> As you said, there was millions of tons of water going down >> that chasm. Maybe that water flushed his dead body out of >> the temple, and away from being buried by the land masses. > >If so, it must have hit it with such force as to have killed the body. >I've already shown that it couldn't have been drowned. No, you didn't show that it couldn't have been drowned, you stated it. Sauron's body could very well have perished merely by being covered by a mile or so of water. The lesser of two points first. Just because Maia A is capable of deed X does not mean that all Maiar are, or even that all Maiar of equal or greater power are. The more important point. Being covered by a great depth of water does more than just deprive a body of air, it crushes it. That's why we need special submarines to explore the depths rather than just sending down some guys in scuba gear. Pressure at depth is even more certainly fatal than a rockfall. It doesn't require any more force to lift something from a great depth than from the shallows though. So, if Sauron's body was lying, crushed to the volume of a tin of sardines, at the bottom of the ocean, his spirit could leave it, hang around for a while mustering it's strength, then take the Ring (which couldn't have been crushed since it was indestructible) and bring it back to Mordor. Trade. ###### Message-ID: <3EBDB636.6153E280@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <3EBC0024.F7357507@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 86 Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 19:32:22 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.176.57 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052591569 194.125.176.57 (Sat, 10 May 2003 19:32:49 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 19:32:49 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.stueberl.de!feed.news.nacamar.de!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117001 Morgil wrote: > > "Michael O'Neill" kirjoitti > viestissä:3EBC0024.F7357507@indigo.ie... > > Morgil wrote: > > > > Better example of Sauron influencing the weather would be > > > the darkness he summons upon Gondor during the siege. > > > No need to boggle who caused that... > > > > > > Morgil > > > > That wasn't weather IIRC. > > It was a huge cloud that came from Mordor, according > to Hirgon's comrade.Though it might have been smog > from Orodruin, nevertheless Sauron produced it and > located it over Gondor. Fume from Ororuin, according to no less a personage than Beregond, formerly a plain man of arms of the Third Company of the Guard of the Citadel, latterly Captain of the White Company, the Guard of Faramir Prince of Ithilien. "'You are weary of this day?' said Beregond. 'Yes,' said Pippin, 'very: tired out with idleness and waiting. I have kicked my heels at the door of my master's chamber for many slow hours, while he has debated with Gandalf and the Prince and other great persons. And I'm not used, Master Beregond, to waiting hungry on others while they eat. It is a sore trial for a hobbit, that. No doubt you will think I should feel the honour more deeply. But what is the good of such honour? Indeed what is the good even of food and drink under this creeping shadow? What does it mean? The very air seems thick and brown! Do you often have such glooms when the wind is in the East?' 'Nay,' said Beregond, 'this is no weather of the world. This is some device of his malice; some broil of fume from the Mountain of Fire that he sends to darken hearts and counsel. And so it doth indeed. I wish the Lord Faramir would return. He would not be dismayed. But now, who knows if he will ever come back across the River out of the Darkness?'" > And speaking of mountains, Elrond mentions that > Sauron has power to torment and destroy them. Galdor, an Elf Lord, was speaking of the Bombadil and in a manner that gave credence to the many suggestions that he was the incarnation of the Earth Spirit. "`I know little of Iarwain save the name,' said Galdor; `but Glorfindel, I think, is right. Power to defy our Enemy is not in him, unless such power is in the earth itself. And yet we see that Sauron can torture and destroy the very hills. What power still remains lies with us, here in Imladris, or with Cirdan at the Havens, or in Lórien. But have they the strength, have we here the strength to withstand the Enemy, the coming of Sauron at the last, when all else is overthrown?'" Waste and hills of slag were mentioned in the descriptions of the approaches Mordor, yet we are not told what caused these IIRC. Some were no doubt the result of the Last Alliances battle. However, Saruman was the one with the gunpowder, not Sauron and the Wizards didn't arrive on the scene until much later. Within Mordor, again there was extensive slag and ash deposits, yet I always too this to refer to the waste his slaves had made of Mordor, or the vomit of Orodruin, other magma vents and the result of earthquakes. Barad Dur took 600 years to build and no doubt took a lot of stone, so extensive quarrying would have been on the cards. At no time did I think Sauron "personally" did this, because we never see him expend that kind of power. I equated it with the lesser works Saruman's slave did to the valley surrounding Orthanc, which took no wizardry, just some basic engineering an quarrying skills. > Another case of Maiar influencing the elements: > storms caused by Ossë and Uinen. > > Morgil While INCARNATE!!! Wakey fucking wakey! M. ###### From: "TradeSurplus" Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien References: <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <3EBCC24D.B641C9A5@indigo.ie> Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Lines: 92 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 69.0.16.46 X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net X-Trace: newssvr10.news.prodigy.com 1052621016 ST000 69.0.16.46 (Sat, 10 May 2003 22:43:36 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 22:43:36 EDT Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com X-UserInfo1: SCSYQN_@OHWMRUHXORHD]_LAPJYZTB\MV@BZMVMHQAVTUZ]CLNTCPFK[WDXDHV[K^FCGJCJLPF_D_NCC@FUG^Q\DINVAXSLIFXYJSSCCALP@PB@\OS@BITWAH\CQZKJMMD^SJA^NXA\GVLSRBD^M_NW_F[YLVTWIGAXAQBOATKBBQRXECDFDMQ\DZFUE@\JM Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 02:43:36 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!eusc.inter.net!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!prodigy.com!newsmst01.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!postmaster.news.prodigy.com!newssvr10.news.prodigy.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116936 Michael O'Neill wrote >... >TradeSurplus wrote: >> >> Conrad Dunkerson wrote >... >> >Michael O'Neill wrote >... >> > >> >> I see, and his body being crushed to smithereens by millions of tons of >> >> water and exploding island was somehow less inconvenient? You'll have to >> >> do a lot better than *that* Conrad! >> > >> >Dead is dead. Whether the body was killed by pointy metal bits or >> >water and dirt seems to me unlikely to make much difference. >> >> I presume that the wise of the group already know this but is there a >> reference for Sauron being killed by the downfall of Numenor (i.e. >> crushed to smithereens by millions of tons of water and exploding >> island) rather than voluntarily discorporating as soon as he saw the >> mile high wave of water coming towards him? We know that Tar-Miriel >> had enough time to run halfway up the Meneltarma, couldn't Sauron have >> had time to take evasive action by abandoning a doomed body before it >> was killed? > >Aha! You're calling me on my artistic license? > >Well, your supposition has some merit, except for the fact that Sauron >is stated to have been taken by surprise in the midst of his merriment. >It was a sudden thing. This point (which I think you've even provided a quote for elsewhere on this thread) does indeed strongly indicate, though not prove, that Sauron didn't have time to abandon his body before being caught up in the destruction of Numenor. >However he might have assumed that he could have survived a wetting, >because let's face it Gandalf showed some serious resilience when he >fell from the Bridge in Moria. "Long time I fell". Sounds long enough to >achieve terminal velocity. And he hit water at that speed. That's a >pretty forceful impact. It could shatter a normal human body. Like >hitting concrete. Yet Gandalf survived and came up fighting - >underwater! > >And Sauron we know was "stronger" than Gandalf. Ergo what killed his >body had to have been pretty catastrophic. Asserting that it was crushed >in the catastrophe seems a reasonable conclusion. Either that or crushed by the pressure of water at great depth. >> If so, then Sauron's spirit would presumably have had more power after >> voluntarily leaving a body than after being killed by the Last >> Alliance. > >That sounds like rank speculation. Whew. Good to see that I'm maintaining the standards set by this thread then. >Nowhere are we informed on this matter. I've always had the impression that the Ainur could incorporate and discorporate at will, putting on bodies the way we put on clothes. I'm not aware of any statement that this caused them any significant loss of power, even temporarily. Of course absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. It may be that voluntarily leaving a body was no more or less shocking to a Maia that having that body killed. Trade. ###### From: mair_fheal@yahoo.com (coyotes morgan mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 21:17:23 -0700 Organization: eden huntersstrand Message-ID: References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080435.68a8f04f@posting.google.com> <3EBADC40.52C5E72F@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080948.200a60a4@posting.google.com> <3EBB6390.98E78E65@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090604.4a153478@posting.google.com> <3EBC38E0.4C4F7BCA@indigo.ie> <3EBD09AB.FDD23319@indigo.ie> <3EBD63E5.D9871A8D@indigo.ie> <3EBDAE7F.DFB5AB49@indigo.ie> X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 24 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!proxad.net!freenix!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-06!sn-post-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!c42.ppp.tsoft.com!user Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116980 > The more important point. Being covered by a great depth of water does > more than just deprive a body of air, it crushes it. That's why we increase the pressure on a liquid and it simply increases the pressure it pushes out with without changing its volume its gasses that compress so that means things like lungs and middle ears that compress compressing the lungs is not a problem by itself but it also compresses the ribs when the ribs are compressed to about a third they break and when rnough ribs break you cant breathe naturally for the middle ear the eardrum distends until ruptures submarines have such sturdy construction because they maintain sealevel pressure at all times and have to keep atmosphre from compressing scuba increases the gas pressure to match the water pressure its not about the total pressure but just the difference of pressures on either side of surface ###### From: stephen@nomail.com Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 11 May 2003 17:22:55 GMT Organization: Michigan State University Lines: 22 Sender: stephen@nomail.com Message-ID: References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <3EBC0024.F7357507@indigo.ie> <3EBDB636.6153E280@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: delhi.cse.msu.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: tin/1.4.3-20000502 ("Marian") (UNIX) (SunOS/5.8 (sun4u)) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!logbridge.uoregon.edu!msunews!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:116944 Michael O'Neill wrote: : Morgil wrote: :> Another case of Maiar influencing the elements: :> storms caused by Ossë and Uinen. :> :> Morgil : : While INCARNATE!!! Wakey fucking wakey! : : M. Where is your evidence that Osse and Uinen were incarnate when the were influencing the elements? Cite one passage that describes the physical form they took while controlling the seas. Stephen ###### From: conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 12 May 2003 02:58:27 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 30 Message-ID: <1178b6d1.0305120158.1fd24b8c@posting.google.com> References: <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBC06C3.6184B7AC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090928.76f37611@posting.google.com> <3EBCC2DF.B99A1EA@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.42.51.27 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1052733507 32601 127.0.0.1 (12 May 2003 09:58:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 12 May 2003 09:58:27 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117036 Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EBCC2DF.B99A1EA@indigo.ie>... > Conrad Dunkerson wrote: >> Because Gandalf suggesting that Sauron could control the weather in NO >> WAY argues against Maiar being unable to control the weather. > Nope. > Because while the passage you quoted in support of your assertion that > Sauron could control the weather ["his arm has grown long"] was > contradicted by the AUTHOR several paragraphs later when he confirmed > Caradhras was the culprit "Caradhras had defeated them." You just aren't getting this. Ok, let us assume that you are absolutely correct. The author unequivocably attributed the blizzard to Caradhras. I don't think that is the case, but hey... why not. Guess what? Gandalf STILL suggested that Sauron >could< be behind it. Even if Sauron WASN'T behind it that gives us one Ainur suggesting that another can control the weather far away. Which... would be rather strange if it were as absolutely impossible for them to do as you claim. It does not matter whether Sauron, Caradhras or playful giants caused the storm... no matter WHO actually did it Gandalf still suggested that Sauron COULD. ###### From: conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 12 May 2003 05:06:46 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 36 Message-ID: <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.42.51.27 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1052741206 5868 127.0.0.1 (12 May 2003 12:06:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 12 May 2003 12:06:46 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117032 "TradeSurplus" wrote in message news:<3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com>... > I presume that the wise of the group already know this but is there a > reference for Sauron being killed by the downfall of Numenor (i.e. > crushed to smithereens by millions of tons of water and exploding > island) rather than voluntarily discorporating as soon as he saw the > mile high wave of water coming towards him? "It is mythologically supposed that when this shape was 'real', that is a physical actuality in the physical world and not a vision transferred from mind to mind, it took some time to build up. It was then destructible like other physical organisms. But that of course did not destroy the spirit, nor dismiss it from the world to which it was bound until the end. After the battle with Gilgalad and Elendil, Sauron took a long while to re-build, longer than he had done after the Downfall of Numenor (I suppose because each building-up used up some of the inherent energy of the spirit, which might be called the 'will' or the effective link between the indestructible mind and being and the realization of its imagination). The impossibility of re-building after the destruction of the Ring, is sufficiently clear 'mythologically' in the present book." Letters #200 So; 1: Sauron was physically killed at Numenor 2: Building physical bodies like that took time and energy 3: Doing so weakened Sauron (and the Ainur in general) Also note that this indicates that Sauron (and the other Ainur) were ALL bound within the world until the end... not JUST the Valar as has recently been claimed. I agree that if Sauron HAD returned to spiritual form voluntarily he'd have been better off, but there are various texts which indicate that his body died there. ###### From: conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 12 May 2003 05:13:37 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 36 Message-ID: <1178b6d1.0305120413.24ade99c@posting.google.com> References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <3EBCC24D.B641C9A5@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.42.51.27 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1052741617 6056 127.0.0.1 (12 May 2003 12:13:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 12 May 2003 12:13:37 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!enews.sgi.com!paloalto-snf1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117037 Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EBCC24D.B641C9A5@indigo.ie>... > TradeSurplus wrote: >> If so, then Sauron's spirit would presumably have had more power after >> voluntarily leaving a body than after being killed by the Last >> Alliance. > That sounds like rank speculation. Nowhere are we informed on this > matter. "After the battle with Gilgalad and Elendil, Sauron took a long while to re-build, longer than he had done after the Downfall of Númenor (I suppose because each building-up used up some of the inherent energy of the spirit, which might be called the 'will' or the effective link between the indestructible mind and being and the realization of its imagination)." Letters #200 "So it was also with even some of his greatest servants, as in these later days we see: they became wedded to the forms of their evil deeds, and if these bodies were taken from them or destroyed, they were nullified, until they had rebuilt a semblance of their former habitations, with which they could continue the evil courses in which they had become fixed.' (Pengolodh here evidently refers to Sauron in particular, from whose arising he fled at last from Middle-earth.)" VT 39, Osanwe-kenta note 5 These texts indicate that if an Ainur had become bound into a body then having that body destroyed was a traumatic experience... they could not just form a new body/change shape like they were trying on different clothing (as Sauron did earlier in the confrontation with Huan). Instead it took alot of time and energy to rebuild. There was definitely a difference between Ainur voluntarily unmaking a temporary body and having a 'permanent' (bound) one 'killed'. ###### From: Tord Kallqvist Romstad Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 12 May 2003 16:26:47 +0200 Organization: University of Oslo, Norway Lines: 12 Sender: romstad@aload.uio.no Message-ID: References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: aload.uio.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: readme.uio.no 1052749607 2073 129.240.222.178 (12 May 2003 14:26:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@uio.no NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 14:26:47 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.1 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!newsfeed.stueberl.de!feed.news.nacamar.de!uio.no!nntp.uio.no!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117010 conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) writes: > Also note that this indicates that Sauron (and the other Ainur) were > ALL bound within the world until the end... Hmm... Didn't Gandalf leave Arda after he was killed in the fight with the balrog? -- Tord Romstad ###### From: conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 12 May 2003 10:18:02 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 20 Message-ID: <1178b6d1.0305120918.516207d3@posting.google.com> References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080435.68a8f04f@posting.google.com> <3EBADC40.52C5E72F@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080948.200a60a4@posting.google.com> <3EBB6390.98E78E65@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090604.4a153478@posting.google.com> <3EBC38E0.4C4F7BCA@indigo.ie> <3EBD09AB.FDD23319@indigo.ie> <3EBD63E5.D9871A8D@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.42.51.28 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1052759882 21786 127.0.0.1 (12 May 2003 17:18:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 12 May 2003 17:18:02 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!snoopy.risq.qc.ca!headwall.stanford.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117024 Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EBD63E5.D9871A8D@indigo.ie>... > To suggest Sauron could have located the Ring while in his spirit form > is nonsense. He wasn't even able to locate it when he regrew his body > after the Last Alliance. It is possible that Sauron's spirit remained with the body during the Downfall as it did at the battle with the Last Alliance. There would then be no question of 'locating' the Ring, and if the broken body were NOT buried but merely slain and lost in the water there would then be no need to move vast quantities of earth. Just one small Ring. You only ASSUME that Sauron was buried under tons of earth. You only ASSUME that his spirit was separated from the Ring. You cannot make such assumptions in arguing that 'Tolkien was mistaken'. If you do it is AT LEAST as likely that Tolkien's statements were entirely consistent and it is your assumptions which are mistaken. ###### From: shermanlee1@hotmail.com (Johnny1A) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 12 May 2003 10:47:25 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 22 Message-ID: References: <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.206.150.234 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1052761645 23316 127.0.0.1 (12 May 2003 17:47:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 12 May 2003 17:47:25 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!newsfeed.vmunix.org!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117022 Tord Kallqvist Romstad wrote in message news:... > conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) writes: > > > Also note that this indicates that Sauron (and the other Ainur) were > > ALL bound within the world until the end... > > Hmm... > > Didn't Gandalf leave Arda after he was killed in the fight with the > balrog? That's debatable, actually. It's true that Eru Himself took a hand at that point, transforming Gandalf into Gandalf the White, and giving him a broader mandate, and probably some other instructions and mission orders. But it's never made clear (that I recall) whether Eru brought Olorin (Gandalf) actually out of Arda to do this, or simply reached into Time to accomplish it. Shermanlee ###### From: stephen@nomail.com Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 12 May 2003 17:59:45 GMT Organization: Michigan State University Lines: 29 Sender: stephen@nomail.com Message-ID: References: <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: delhi.cse.msu.edu User-Agent: tin/1.4.3-20000502 ("Marian") (UNIX) (SunOS/5.8 (sun4u)) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!logbridge.uoregon.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!aanews.merit.edu!msunews!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117013 Johnny1A wrote: : Tord Kallqvist Romstad wrote in message news:... :> conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) writes: :> :> > Also note that this indicates that Sauron (and the other Ainur) were :> > ALL bound within the world until the end... :> :> Hmm... :> :> Didn't Gandalf leave Arda after he was killed in the fight with the :> balrog? : That's debatable, actually. : It's true that Eru Himself took a hand at that point, transforming : Gandalf into Gandalf the White, and giving him a broader mandate, and : probably some other instructions and mission orders. : But it's never made clear (that I recall) whether Eru brought Olorin : (Gandalf) actually out of Arda to do this, or simply reached into Time : to accomplish it. : Shermanlee In the book it is not clear at all what happens. But Tolkien is rather clear in Letters that Gandalf left Arda. This was a very exceptional occurrence. Stephen ###### From: conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 12 May 2003 11:05:14 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 136 Message-ID: <1178b6d1.0305121005.3a208b05@posting.google.com> References: <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB887CF.6400502A@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305070416.48169c6d@posting.google.com> <3EB9E1D7.2FB78ED8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080900.3ddf02ee@posting.google.com> <3EBB3A14.7036780@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090922.3c41e726@posting.google.com> <3EBD057B.D87DFA8D@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.42.51.27 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1052762714 24187 127.0.0.1 (12 May 2003 18:05:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 12 May 2003 18:05:14 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117025 Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EBD057B.D87DFA8D@indigo.ie>... > Not really. Sauron's power was invested in the Ring to make it a potent > object. For Sauron, wearing the Ring was like being *normal*. No greater > power I have quoted Tolkien explicitly saying otherwise. More than once. If that is insufficient there is no point in debating the matter. > Given that we see him able to access the Ring's power from a distance, > I'm not convinced that he was diminished by any lack of proximity = more > of the same. > Others wearing his Ring would find their own powers enhanced in > proportion to their natural abilities - by Sauron's own power residing > in the Ring. > For a hobbit this power would be minimal. For a Maia like Gandalf, even > in his mortal incarnation, the power gain would be huge. So, you are apparently arguing that wearing the One would enhance the natural powers of anyone EXCEPT Sauron. How does that make sense? Especially given Tolkien's statements that ALL of the Rings enhanced the natural abilities of their wearers. If Sauron were wearing Narya would he alone get no enhancement from that? Did Celebrimbor get no benefit from wearing Vilya? Why does Tolkien consistently say that all the Rings enhance the native powers of the wearer if there was a single exception to this... Sauron NOT being enhanced by wearing the One. > I claimed he *didn't* do something. You've just admitted that the text > didn't state these things. If the text doesn't state them, and I say > they weren't done, then I am correct. Uh huh... and that is precisely the sort of 'arguing from absence of evidence' that you accused me of. If the text does not say anything on a subject then it does not tell us anything about that subject... the absence of any reference does not automatically prove YOUR point. I could as easily say, 'Tolkien said nothing about simians so clearly King Kong lived in Bree!' >> Right. So big Orcs like Shagrat ALWAYS ran from little hobbits like >> Sam. Got it. > "He couldn't fight and keep his burden." > Did you miss that? No, I didn't miss it. I see that it is a weak attempt to avoid the issue. Michael, if you really want to argue that the behaviour of the Orcs towards Sam while he had the Ring was entirely normal then we have completely different definitions of normal and insufficient common ground upon which to discuss the matter. > Nope. The Ring did absolutely NOTHING in this encounter. Riiiiighhht. > This is yet another unfounded assertion by Tolkien. Ah... everything that Tolkien says which disagrees with your position is 'unfounded' or 'inconsistent'. Or... maybe it is only your reading of a few passages which is inconsistent with Tolkien's intent. > We never see the Ring dominating a will, Frodo? Boromir? The Nazgul? Everyone who comes near the bleeding thing? > Therefore this all powerful capability of the Ring to dominate others > apart fro mRing wearers is a figment of Tolkien's imagination. @wheeeeee! >> Are you suggesting that Sauron had the power to frighten Gondor into >> submission but decided not to? That seems to be what you are saying, >> but I'm hoping I just don't understand you properly. > That's exactly what I'm saying. Right. So... that's um... ridiculous? There is no logical reason that Sauron would have wasted YEARS trying (and failing) to conquer Minas Tirith by force if he could have done so with fear at any time. > The Ringwraiths were terror incarnate. All nine of them together scattered > throughout the City of Minas Tirith could have probably [rank speculation] > cowed the entire population of that city. They tried that (from above). It was effective, but not sufficiently so to crush all resistance. > Hold on a second. We appear to agree here. > You're saying supernatural mental influence. I have no problem with > that. Yeah! :) > I'm saying that Sauron, a Maia, would have had such an influence. Yes. > You have already agreed that Sauron could access the Ring's power from a > distance That portion of his power which was in the Ring was available to him regardless of where the Ring was (so long as no one else had claimed full ownership of it). > and I have already agreed that his summa might be less without the Ring. Earlier in this message, yes. > I'm saying that Sauron, even with his power level diminished by the lack > of proximity to the Ring, but nonetheless still able to avail of its > power, was sufficiently powerful in terms of "his secret will" to > influence the King and his Counsellors. And I agree that this is possible. However, IF wearing the Ring >did< enhance Sauron's abilities then it stands to reason that he could have influenced them more quickly and powerfully. > No Maiar made the world Conrad. That's a given. A given? It is a direct contradiction of what Tolkien wrote numerous times. And this argument of yours that 'when Tolkien wrote "Valar" he meant "Aratar"... and the "others" with these "Valar" were NOT the Maiar, but the OTHER Valar' is just silly. The passage plainly speaks of the Valar and other (non Valar) Ainur... the Aratar are neither mentioned nor implied and trying to redefine 'Valar' as 'Aratar' for this passage alone seems like deliberate obstinancy. ###### From: conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 12 May 2003 11:49:30 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 136 Message-ID: <1178b6d1.0305121049.ea01636@posting.google.com> References: <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080435.68a8f04f@posting.google.com> <3EBADC40.52C5E72F@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080948.200a60a4@posting.google.com> <3EBB6390.98E78E65@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090604.4a153478@posting.google.com> <3EBC38E0.4C4F7BCA@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.42.51.28 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1052765370 26540 127.0.0.1 (12 May 2003 18:49:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 12 May 2003 18:49:30 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117021 Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EBC38E0.4C4F7BCA@indigo.ie>... > Conrad Dunkerson wrote: > None of the published writings, including HOME mention this Ring thing > being in Numenor. Chris Tolkien is painstakingly efficient in recording > every scrap of paper over time, even going so far as to reveal his earlier > cock-ups in later editions of HOME et cetera, yer nowhere do we see the > matter of the Ring in Numenor discussed or the mode of its transference > back to Barad Dur. Clearly you mean 'none of the published writings EXCEPT the letter'. It can also be pointed out that while there is only the one reference indicating that Sauron took the Ring and carried it back there are NONE which say that the Ring was somewhere else or that Sauron could not carry it. You have argued that various passages should be INTERPRETED to suggest that... but NONE state it. There ARE reasonable interpretations of various passages which support the view that the Ring was not in Numenor. However, there are equally reasonable interpretations of those same passages which do NOT support that view. As such I see no inconsistency in Tolkien's TEXTS - only the interpretation. > Firstly, this text does not mention the Ring at all - that the fate of > the single most powerful artefact in Middle-Earth was not mentioned > suggests it was NOT present. Please explain where the Ring was every time the books described Frodo without making any mention of the Ring. (Translation: 'You are kidding, right?') > Secondly, and most damagingly for your thesis and Tolkien's cock up, it > defines Sauron's power thereafter, with or without the Ring, as being > limited to TERROR ALONE. > See any mention of telekinesis her Conrad? Nope. Terror alone. So... terror ALONE. No power to travel back to Middle-Earth? No power to reform? Interesting. (Translation: 'Perhaps you are reading too much into 'terror alone'.) > And you missed this clear contradiction of your assertion that he > brought the ring back with him. You're right... such a... stunning... argument never even occurred to me. > I was referring to all published texts which told the story of Middle > Earth. I make a distinction between internally cohesive narratives, > however much revised, and off the cuff comments by Tolkien in his > letters, which do not refer accurately to, and are not supported by any > evidence in the stories he wrote. Ah ha! Got it... so, when you say 'published texts' you mean 'everything EXCEPT letters'. Which isn't a strictly accurate definition (the letters WERE published), but at least it is a definition. >> His own power was lesser at >> that point then when he carried the Ring from Numenor. > That's rank speculation on your part. Actually, I've quoted Tolkien saying as much. Granted, he did so in those evil letters that so often disagree with you... but it is also implied in the Morgoth's Ring passage I quoted. > Would you please explain how moving a Ring vertically through hundreds > of fathoms of seawater and then levitating it through stormy weather > hundreds of miles to Middle Earth takes *less power* than swiping it > from a human's grasp? I did so previously. Think of it as an acceleration factor equal to 1 or 2 g. That is going to be insufficient to yank the Ring out of a human's hand, but plenty to move it back to Mordor... eventually. > No, you big eejit! I referred to canon and showed that the Ring could > not have been as powerfully lust-inspiring as TOlkien states such that > Sauron could not bear to put it off. Three hobbits did so. One > voluntarily. Two with a bit of persuasion. None of them collapsed into a > whining pile of Ring-lust ridden protoplasm on the floor after doing so. None of them fully satisfied the criteria Tolkien set... the inability to part with the Ring applied to those who had USED it. None of the hobbits ever used anything close to the Ring's full power. Yet Frodo, who used it most, at the end of the book was clearly in just the state Tolkien described. Which shows that the letter in no way indicated that hobbits were 'stronger' than Sauron as you had claimed it did... you defined 'use' as something like 'touched it once' when Tolkien clearly meant more extensive exposure. > Assuming your assertion that he was wearing it in Numenor is correct, > his *body* was still wearing his Ring when it perished. There was no > *he* to lose or gain, it. Just s disembodied spirit form. Which... was still 'him'. > His letters however, disagree with the published texts regarding the > location of the Ring at the time of the Downfall and imply a mechanism > for transporting the Ring which goes against his own principles of how > Maiar and Valar gain a power over matter. The same (snipped) 'logic' you presented about how Tolkien does not 'contradict' you because he is no longer active also invalidates the silliness about his 'principles' above... However, it must also be remarked that Tolkien never stated ANY of these things you hold to be 'his own principles' and 'the published texts'. He wrote things which you have interpreted to support those views but NOT direct statements. And he DID write direct statements to the contrary. > The letters can *elaborate* on points already implied by the stories. > They cannot however *contradict* them, They don't... only your interpretation of the texts. NOWHERE does Tolkien say, 'Sauron did not have the Ring in Numenor' or 'Maiar could not influence physical objects when incorporeal'. He wrote things which can be interpreted that way, things which can be interpreted to contradict those statements, and direct unequivocal contradictions of those statements. > I'm saying that no published text supports your position. See my > definition of "published text" above. No 'text other than Letters' STATES that Sauron had the Ring in Numenor and carried it back to Middle-Earth. I can agree with that. Even that none of the others texts strongly imply this. However, plenty of "support" for the idea CAN be found in the 'non Letters' texts and nothing in those texts states otherwise. As such, the letter is consistent with reasonable interpretations of the other texts. It is INconsistent with other, equally reasonable, interpretations... but that does not make the letter 'wrong'. The letter COULD represent a change OR the interpretations that it is inconsistent with could be different from what Tolkien intended. ###### From: conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 12 May 2003 11:57:11 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 10 Message-ID: <1178b6d1.0305121057.734bef96@posting.google.com> References: <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.42.51.28 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1052765831 26960 127.0.0.1 (12 May 2003 18:57:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 12 May 2003 18:57:11 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117034 Tord Kallqvist Romstad wrote in message news:... > conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) writes: >> Also note that this indicates that Sauron (and the other Ainur) were >> ALL bound within the world until the end... > Didn't Gandalf leave Arda after he was killed in the fight with the > balrog? Yes, but then nobody ever said that Eru couldn't break his own rules. :) ###### From: Flame of the West Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 06:58:17 -0400 Lines: 33 Message-ID: References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: UmFuZG9tSVYWx+s5TsA8lcjmSJwrVawABg/6l7CDABGrm3KN0QEenFbOp4kBNrZI X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 14 May 2003 10:59:49 GMT In-Reply-To: <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> X-Accept-Language: en-us, en User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030507 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed2.news.rcn.net!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117128 Michael O'Neill wrote: > Gandalf the Istari, as opposed to Olórin the Maia, Um, they're the same dude, dude. > was incarnated as a > Mortal Man [something supposedly beyond the power of the Valar - to > change the basic nature of one of their own order, albeit of lesser > degree] and sent to middle earth. Does Tolkien really say that the Wizards were *mortal*? I don't remember reading that. Where does he say it? > He was no longer an Ainu in the strict sense of the word. He was then > Mortal. ??? I know they took the *form* of old Men, but that's not the same thing as being *mortal*. Are you quite sure about this? Is there a reference? And did Tolkien actually say that the Wizards ceased to be Ainur? > This causes not a few problems, quite apart from the obvious > rebuttal to what you said above. -- FotW The Official Return of the King Protest Site http://members.aol.com/rotkprotest/ ###### From: Tamim Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 14 May 2003 11:24:12 GMT Organization: University of Helsinki Lines: 20 Message-ID: References: <3EBD63E5.D9871A8D@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305120918.516207d3@posting.google.com> <3EC28984.BD6B4B1A@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: sirppi.helsinki.fi X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1052911452 28905 128.214.205.27 (14 May 2003 11:24:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@helsinki.fi NNTP-Posting-Date: 14 May 2003 11:24:12 GMT User-Agent: tin/1.4.2-20000205 ("Possession") (UNIX) (OSF1/V4.0 (alpha)) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!nntp.infostrada.it!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!feed.news.nacamar.de!uninett.no!uio.no!newsfeed.kolumbus.fi!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117147 Michael O'Neill wrote: snip > It doesn't go into the shadow form "by itself". Nor does it ever go > there *fully*. > Spirits are already there, fully. > The nature of the transition is that it takes itself and the wearer and > all his possession "with" it, *partially*. > There is still no difference in the way the physical body reacts to the > world. Sight ie lessened, hearing increased but the body wearing the > Ring is not made immaterial in any way, just invisible. The body of an > incarnate can still be killed while wearing the Ring. Yeah, but it's still not a plain golden ring. It has it's "magical" or "spiritual" side and maybe a spirit can thus interact with it in a way it couldn't interact with a fully material object. ###### From: Tar-Elenion Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Message-ID: References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Lines: 16 NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.236.164.115 X-Complaints-To: abuse@attbi.com X-Trace: rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net 1052917921 12.236.164.115 (Wed, 14 May 2003 13:12:01 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 13:12:01 GMT Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 13:12:01 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!newsfeed.stueberl.de!small1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!border3.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!wn14feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.203!attbi_feed3!attbi.com!rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117161 In article <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > Even allowing this rabbit to jump out of the hat for a moment, nowhere > does it state the Valar could change the nature of one of their own, > although the clearly had this power regarding Elves and Men. Lúthien > became Mortal. Tuor became a Noldo. > The Valar did not have the power to change the basic nature of the Children of God. Luthien and Tuor and the position of their descendants were all the result of a direct act of God. -- Tar-Elenion Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue. ###### From: Tar-Elenion Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Message-ID: References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D070.D74BC582@indigo.ie> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Lines: 53 NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.236.164.115 X-Complaints-To: abuse@attbi.com X-Trace: rwcrnsc53 1052927027 12.236.164.115 (Wed, 14 May 2003 15:43:47 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 15:43:47 GMT Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 15:43:47 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!newsfeed.stueberl.de!east.cox.net!cox.net!cyclone1.gnilink.net!wn14feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.203!attbi_feed3!attbi.com!rwcrnsc53.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117156 In article <3EC2D070.D74BC582@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > Tar-Elenion wrote: > > > > In article <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > > > > > Even allowing this rabbit to jump out of the hat for a moment, nowhere > > > does it state the Valar could change the nature of one of their own, > > > although the clearly had this power regarding Elves and Men. Lúthien > > > became Mortal. Tuor became a Noldo. > > > > > > > The Valar did not have the power to change the basic nature of the > > Children of God. Luthien and Tuor and the position of their descendants > > were all the result of a direct act of God. > > Go on, cite the Letters references. They're not in the Sil, or in any of > the other published texts. Letter 153: "Immortality and Mortality being the special gifts of God to the Eruhini (in whose conception and creation the Valar had no part at all) it must be assumed that no alteration of their fundamental kind could be effected by the Valar even in one case: the cases of Lúthien (and Túor) and the position of their descendants was a direct act of God." With that you can keep in mind: "For the Children of Ilúvatar were conceived by him alone; and they came with the third theme, and were not in the theme which Ilúvatar propounded at the beginning, and none of the Ainur had part in their making." The Silmarillion, Ainulindalë And also note: "For Lúthien wove two themes of words, of the sorrow of the Eldar and the grief of Men, of the Two Kindreds that were made by Ilúvatar to dwell in Arda, the Kingdom of Earth amid the innumerable stars. And as she knelt before him her tears fell upon his feet like rain upon stones; and Mandos was moved to pity, who never before was so moved, nor has been since. "Therefore he summoned Beren, and even as Lúthien had spoken in the hour of his death they met again beyond the Western Sea. But Mandos had no power to withhold the spirits of Men that were dead within the confines of the world, after their time of waiting; nor could he change the fates of the Children of Ilúvatar. He went therefore to Manwë, Lord of the Valar, who governed the world under the hand of Ilúvatar; and Manwë sought counsel in his inmost thought, where the will of Ilúvatar was revealed." The Silmarillion, Of Beren and Lúthien Good enough? -- Tar-Elenion Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue. ###### From: the softrat Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 08:57:48 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: <1fn4cvgr0rurbvuc6673mpmu4iafs95ipd@4ax.com> References: <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305130141.590d45fd@posting.google.com> <1178b6d1.0305131353.55cf5a61@posting.google.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 31 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!sjc70.webusenet.com!news.webusenet.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-06!sn-post-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117175 On 13 May 2003 14:53:16 -0700, conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) wrote: >"Matthew Bladen" wrote in message news:... > >> Do you mean 190 years vs. 210 years (Appendix A vs. Appendix B)? > >Yup, that's the one. > >> In the most recent copy I own, Appendix A has been emended so that it too >> reads 210 years. > >Huh, mine too. Hadn't noticed that. Still, the general point was >that not even LotR is 100% 'canonical'. Are you implying that the copies of The Holy Scriptures are totally without error? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! (wipes brow) That was a good one! the softrat ==> Careful! I have a hug and I know how to use it! mailto:softrat@pobox.com -- If Barbie is so popular, why do you have to buy her friends? -- Steven Wright ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien From: AC Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D1C1.60E78C29@indigo.ie> Organization: The Tao of Cow Reply-To: maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Lines: 48 X-Complaints-To: abuse@randori.com - Please include ALL headers, thanks. Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 16:10:35 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!out.nntp.be!propagator2-sterling!in.nntp.be!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!69.22.128.15.MISMATCH!newsfeeder2.randori.com!news.randori.com!263039bc!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117134 On Wed, 14 May 2003 16:31:13 -0700, Michael O'Neill wrote: > Tar-Elenion wrote: >> >> In article <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... >> >> > Even allowing this rabbit to jump out of the hat for a moment, nowhere >> > does it state the Valar could change the nature of one of their own, >> > although the clearly had this power regarding Elves and Men. Lúthien >> > became Mortal. Tuor became a Noldo. >> > >> >> The Valar did not have the power to change the basic nature of the >> Children of God. Luthien and Tuor and the position of their descendants >> were all the result of a direct act of God. > > Actually, here is the reference in Unfinished Tales. No direct Act of > God, but done with his consent. > > "Emissaries they were from Lords of the West, the Valar, who still took > counsel for the governance of Middle-earth, and when the shadow of > Sauron began first to stir again took this means of resisting him. For > with the consent of Eru they sent members of their own high order, but > clad in bodies of as of Men, real and not feigned, but subject to the > fears and pains and weariness of earth, able to hunger and thirst and be > slain; though because of their noble spirits they did not die, and aged > only by the cares and labours of many long years. And this the Valar > did, desiring to amend the errors of old, especially that they had > attempted to guard and seclude the Eldar by their own might and glory > fully revealed; whereas now their emissaries were forbidden to reveal > themselves in forms of majesty, or to seek to rule the wills of Men and > Elves by open display of power, but coming in shapes weak and humble > were bidden to advise and persuade Men and Elves to good, and to seek to > unite in love and understanding all those whom Sauron, should he come > again, would endeavour to dominate and corrupt." Michael, was Melian an Elf? Consider that when you state that Gandalf was a Man. Wearing the physical form of one of the Children does not mean that one is counted among the Children. Clearly the Istari, even in those forms, were able to access at least some of their power. Beyond that, Gandalf was quite altered after his reincarnation. Beyond that, why do you find UT so compelling and yet not Letters? -- A. Clausen maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net ###### From: stephen@nomail.com Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 14 May 2003 16:29:19 GMT Organization: Michigan State University Lines: 25 Sender: stephen@nomail.com Message-ID: References: <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: delhi.cse.msu.edu User-Agent: tin/1.4.3-20000502 ("Marian") (UNIX) (SunOS/5.8 (sun4u)) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!logbridge.uoregon.edu!msunews!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117142 Michael O'Neill wrote: : Yet when his body died his spirit went to Eru and was not bound to Arda. : This yearning beyond is a characteristic of the spirits of Men, not : Elves. So it looks as though Gandalf was not just clad in a mortal body, : but his sould behaved as a mortal man's soul. The fact that Gandalf left Ea had nothing to do with his nature. It was divine intervention on Eru's part. :> Is there a reference? And did Tolkien :> actually say that the Wizards ceased to be Ainur? : No, and this is the problem. How could the Istari have been mortal and : still remain Ainur, or if Ainur, how could Gandalf's spirit have left : Arda to go to Eru after hid body died? : M. The Istari were not mortal. Gandalf's spirit left Ea because Eru willed it so. There is no suggestion that Saruman's spirit left Ea. Gandalf returned to Ea, and then to the Deathless Lands, because it was his normal fate to remain until the end. Eru just gave him a little vacation from time. Stephen ###### From: conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 14 May 2003 10:21:59 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 9 Message-ID: <1178b6d1.0305140921.1678ada4@posting.google.com> References: <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.42.51.28 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1052932920 27901 127.0.0.1 (14 May 2003 17:22:00 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 14 May 2003 17:22:00 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!newsfeed.vmunix.org!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117164 Flame of the West wrote in message news:... > Does Tolkien really say that the Wizards were *mortal*? No, quite the opposite... all texts on the subject (and there are several) indicate that Gandalf remained a Maia and was 'going home' when he sailed into the West. Gandalf took on the appearance of an old man for several centuries, but he did not actually BECOME an old human. ###### From: Tar-Elenion Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Message-ID: References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D1C1.60E78C29@indigo.ie> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Lines: 28 NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.236.164.115 X-Complaints-To: abuse@attbi.com X-Trace: sccrnsc02 1052934376 12.236.164.115 (Wed, 14 May 2003 17:46:16 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 17:46:16 GMT Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 17:46:16 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!out.nntp.be!propagator2-sterling!news-in.nuthinbutnews.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!wn14feed!wn13feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.204!attbi_feed4!attbi.com!sccrnsc02.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117157 In article <3EC2D1C1.60E78C29@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > Tar-Elenion wrote: > > > > In article <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > > > > > Even allowing this rabbit to jump out of the hat for a moment, nowhere > > > does it state the Valar could change the nature of one of their own, > > > although the clearly had this power regarding Elves and Men. Lúthien > > > became Mortal. Tuor became a Noldo. > > > > > > > The Valar did not have the power to change the basic nature of the > > Children of God. Luthien and Tuor and the position of their descendants > > were all the result of a direct act of God. > > Actually, here is the reference in Unfinished Tales. No direct Act of > God, but done with his consent. I prefer my cites above, they are more specifically relevant to your statement. -- Tar-Elenion Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue. ###### Message-ID: <3EC282FA.D0042827@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <3EBCC24D.B641C9A5@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305120413.24ade99c@posting.google.com> <3EC1612E.234B38BD@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305130851.1e516cb5@posting.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 73 Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 10:55:06 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.177.109 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052906132 194.125.177.109 (Wed, 14 May 2003 10:55:32 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 10:55:32 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.stueberl.de!eusc.inter.net!easynews.net!newsfeed3.easynews.net!feeder.news.heanet.ie!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117179 Conrad Dunkerson wrote: > > Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EC1612E.234B38BD@indigo.ie>... > > > I take your point, but are you classing the Numenorean death as one of a > > temporary body? This was the one he had been in since the First Age, > > hardly "temporary". > > No, I was contrasting the 'permanent' embodiments Sauron took on with > those of other Ainur. For instance, prior to the whole 'Gandalf' > assignment Olorin was said to seldom appear in material form. Based > on the quoted texts Olorin temporarily embodying and then returning to > spirit form was (apparently) not as taxing as Sauron remaining in a > body for centuries and then having it killed. I never understood what Gandalf is said to have done as being "temporarily embodying and then returning to spirit form" although I confess I don't have a clue what Tolkien means when he says the Valar can walk amongst Firstborn "clad in forms visible" and then walk amongst them unclad, or unseen. Its not made clear whether Maiar had exactly the same ability but Gandalf certainly either did this, or was able to make his Maiar incarnation both intangible and invisible. > If Sauron HAD been able to just shrug off his physical form and escape > out of Numenor as a spirit he would not have been as seriously > affected... but I agree that from the texts this does not appear to be > what happened. Yep, a physical feat which Gandalf could do, Sauron could surely do, and if Sauron could do it, he couldn't have been destroyed at any time, never mind during the Downfall. Indeed let's not forget that Melian "trammelled" by the substance of Arda as she was after bearing Lúthien, could still "disappear" while incarnate and reappear in Valinor to hurse her sorrows. You know, remembering these two facts, Gandalf and Melian, the more I think about the whole downfall thing, the more I realise it was somehow contrived. Wasn't there a principle that Melkor became more bound to matter to better control it and influence the incarnates through terro of their deaths, and thus fell prey to that same terror? In Morgoth's Ring a comprison of Melkor and Sauron proceeds from the vasr diminishment of Melkor who sought to "infect" all matter, with Sauron's machinations which were limited to the Ring alone, albeit possibly using the latent "Melkor Ingredient" to his own benefit. Yet if Sauron had put out far less power into far smaller an area, it was also because he had far less to give. Proportionately it was as great maybe, even though being concentrated and still available in the Ring Sauron's relative personal diminshment was overall far less. However the very act of empowering the Ring with strength that was native to him in the beginning could be the clue as to why Sauron was unable [depending on the theory you subscribe to] to either: (i) divest himself of his incarnate form [as we suppose Gandalf could in Valinor] or (ii) "spirit" [sic] it "bodily" away from Numenor [as we suppose Melian could, "disappearing" from Doriath]. Mind, you, if he had the Ring with him in Numenor, he would still have been completely "whole" and I fail to see why he couldn't have done that anyway! LOL! M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC28467.616A1ED2@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 36 Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 11:01:11 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.177.109 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052906485 194.125.177.109 (Wed, 14 May 2003 11:01:25 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 11:01:25 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117180 Flame of the West wrote: > > AC wrote: > > > "[Gandalf] was sent by a mere prudent plan of the angelic Valar or > > govenors; but Authority had taken up this plan and enlarged it, at the > > moment of its failure. 'Naked I was sent back for a brief time, until > > my task is done'. Sent back by whom, and whence? Not by the Gods' > > whose business is only with this embodied world and its time; for he > > 'passed out of thought and time'. Naked is alas! unclear. It was meant > > just literally, 'Unclothed like a child' (not disincarnate), and so > > ready to receive the white robes of the highest. Galadriel's power is > > not divine, and his healing in Lorien is meant to be no more than > > physical healing and refreshment." > > Letter #156 > > Clearly an erroneous letter! They're all over! Yet Gandalf was incarnated as a Mortal Man. His spirit left Arda as the spirits of all Mortal Men are meant to do [we are told] and went to Eru, who sent it back. After all, I doubt it hob-nobbed with Melkor in the Outer Void. How this let's Gandalf back into Valinor afterward I do not know. Maybe he died there and went back to Eru, or Maybe Gandalf i nWHite Rider form was re-embodied as a Maiar incarnate - mind you he states that he was Saruman as he wasmeant to be, i.e. Good, and incarnate as a Man. Maybe that boat journey wasn't the only one Gandalf and Frodo took together. M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 47 Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 11:09:18 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.177.109 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052906972 194.125.177.109 (Wed, 14 May 2003 11:09:32 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 11:09:32 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!colt.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117112 AC wrote: > > On Tue, 13 May 2003 13:32:22 -0400, > Flame of the West wrote: > > AC wrote: > > > >>>Didn't Gandalf leave Arda after he was killed in the fight with the > >>>balrog? > >> > >> That was a special intervention by Eru. > > > > I thought that *sending him back* was the special > > intervention by Eru. > > The Ainur that entered Ea were bound to it until the End. Without divine > intervention, there is no reason at all to believe that Gandalf would have > been any different than Sauron or any other Ainur that had been killed. > > The only beings that actually departed were Men. Gandalf the Istari, as opposed to Olórin the Maia, was incarnated as a Mortal Man [something supposedly beyond the power of the Valar - to change the basic nature of one of their own order, albeit of lesser degree] and sent to middle earth. He was no longer an Ainu in the strict sense of the word. He was then Mortal. This causes not a few problems, quite apart from the obvious rebuttal to what you said above. The Valar were intended by Tolkien in his later writings [Morgoth's Ring IIRC] to have the power to allow Elves to reincarnate their original bodies using their spirit form "template" or memory of the body, because of ethical issues Tolkien became concerned with of the Elves being reborn into their children. Even allowing this rabbit to jump out of the hat for a moment, nowhere does it state the Valar could change the nature of one of their own, although the clearly had this power regarding Elves and Men. Lúthien became Mortal. Tuor became a Noldo. Could you put your mind to these inconsistencies and clarify your point a little, please, AC? TIA M. ###### From: Tamim Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 14 May 2003 18:11:41 GMT Organization: University of Helsinki Lines: 17 Message-ID: References: <1178b6d1.0305120918.516207d3@posting.google.com> <3EC28984.BD6B4B1A@indigo.ie> <3EC2D42D.5B4964EA@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: sirppi.helsinki.fi X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1052935901 13755 128.214.205.27 (14 May 2003 18:11:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@helsinki.fi NNTP-Posting-Date: 14 May 2003 18:11:41 GMT User-Agent: tin/1.4.2-20000205 ("Possession") (UNIX) (OSF1/V4.0 (alpha)) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.stueberl.de!feed.news.nacamar.de!uio.no!newsfeed1.funet.fi!newsfeeds.funet.fi!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117149 Michael O'Neill wrote: snip > Rank speculation. I know ;( > *mheh* Yes, mheh. > M. T. -- ###### Message-ID: <3EC2872B.DF597895@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080435.68a8f04f@posting.google.com> <3EBADC40.52C5E72F@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080948.200a60a4@posting.google.com> <3EBB6390.98E78E65@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090604.4a153478@posting.google.com> <3EBC38E0.4C4F7BCA@indigo.ie> <3EBD09AB.FDD23319@indigo.ie> <3EBD63E5.D9871A8D@indigo.ie> <3EBDAE7F.DFB5AB49@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 56 Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 11:12:59 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.177.109 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052907192 194.125.177.109 (Wed, 14 May 2003 11:13:12 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 11:13:12 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!solnet.ch!solnet.ch!newsfeed.freenet.de!news1.dtag.de!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117186 Morgil wrote: > > Michael O'Neill kirjoitti viestissä <3EBDAE7F.DFB5AB49@indigo.ie>... > >Morgil wrote: > > >> In the Last Alliance case Sauron was suddenly and brutally > >> disconnected from the Ring, which caused shock element > >> and an instant loss of power. He wasn't in a shape to do > >> much anything for many years, so you can't really compare > >> that situation with what happened in Numenor. > > > >BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!! > > > >I see it at last!. You're arguing as if Isildur obtained the Ring as it > >happened in the FILM!!!!! > > Wrong again, o Clueless. > > Isildur: "Was it not I who gave the Enemy the death blow?" Hmmm. Sounds good. Where is that from? > > >In all cases, Sauron's body is killed *before* Isildur cut off the Ring > >finger. > > If you read more carefully, you will notice > that in most cases the chronology goes: > > -Sauron is overthrown > -Isildur takes the Ring > -Sauron's spirit flees > > It would seem that Sauron could no longer leave > his bodily form at will, or was only able to do it as > a powerless spirit. So if he had left it there on the battlefield without cutting off the Ring it could neither move nor flee? > > >> but since Sauron > >> was not planning on going down to the bottom of Sea, > >> he would not have had any reason to leave the Ring > >> behind, even if he could have, which he didn't. > > > >Saying Sauron did not have any reason t o heave it behind, is not the > >same as saying he had a mechanism to take it with him! > > Sorry. I meant that Sauron had no reason to leave > the Ring behind when he was taken to Numenor. > And he could not even if he had wanted to. Well last point is incorrect. Hobbits can do it, Sauron can do it. M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC28865.FB1B0AAB@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305050602.37bf253d@posting.google.com> <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080435.68a8f04f@posting.google.com> <3EBADC40.52C5E72F@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080948.200a60a4@posting.google.com> <3EBB6390.98E78E65@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090604.4a153478@posting.google.com> <3EBC38E0.4C4F7BCA@indigo.ie> <3EBD09AB.FDD23319@indigo.ie> <3EBD63E5.D9871A8D@indigo.ie> <3EBDAE7F.DFB5AB49@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 56 Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 11:18:13 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.177.109 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052907507 194.125.177.109 (Wed, 14 May 2003 11:18:27 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 11:18:27 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!irazu.switch.ch!seven.news.surf.net!news.wind.surfnet.nl!feeder.news.heanet.ie!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117117 TradeSurplus wrote: > > Michael O'Neill wrote >... > >Morgil wrote: > >> As you said, there was millions of tons of water going down > >> that chasm. Maybe that water flushed his dead body out of > >> the temple, and away from being buried by the land masses. > > > >If so, it must have hit it with such force as to have killed the > body. > >I've already shown that it couldn't have been drowned. > > No, you didn't show that it couldn't have been drowned, you stated it. No, I showed it. Gandalf, incarnated as a Mortal Man, survived under water. Maiar bodies were inherently resilient. > Sauron's body could very well have perished merely by being covered by > a mile or so of water. True. > The lesser of two points first. Just because Maia A is capable of deed > X does not mean that all Maiar are, or even that all Maiar of equal or > greater power are. Bejaysus! Dont' say that too loud or you'll ruin my Master Argument against Conrad! > The more important point. Being covered by a great depth of water does > more than just deprive a body of air, it crushes it. That's why we > need special submarines to explore the depths rather than just sending > down some guys in scuba gear. Pressure at depth is even more certainly > fatal than a rockfall. It doesn't require any more force to lift > something from a great depth than from the shallows though. Correct. actually its less hard to lift things underwater depending on their overall density. Think why "concrete ships" float. There are many objects which do not float, but are still easier to lift through a distance in a gravity field under water depending on there overall density versus the water they displace. Eureka! As the man said. > So, if Sauron's body was lying, crushed to the volume of a tin of > sardines, at the bottom of the ocean, his spirit could leave it, hang > around for a while mustering it's strength, then take the Ring (which > couldn't have been crushed since it was indestructible) and bring it > back to Mordor. > > Trade. 1. The Ring wasn't indestructible. The LotR wouldn't have an ending if it was. 2. Lifting an island is hard work for a spirit. M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC28984.BD6B4B1A@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EBD09AB.FDD23319@indigo.ie> <3EBD63E5.D9871A8D@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305120918.516207d3@posting.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 34 Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 11:23:00 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.177.109 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052907794 194.125.177.109 (Wed, 14 May 2003 11:23:14 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 11:23:14 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!newsfeed.stueberl.de!peer1.news.newnet.co.uk!peer1.news.newnet.co.uk!shale.ftech.net!news.ftech.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117114 Tamim wrote: > > Morgil wrote: > snip > > > It's quite a stretch I admit, but we know that > > the Ring makes it's wearer invisible by > > transfering him into the shadow-world. > > Including all the clothes and weapons he is > > carrying, *and* including the Ring itself. We > > also know that powerful Ringbearer could > > make the Rings invisible for the eyes of > > others. Perhaps the answer is simply that > > when the Ring was in this shadow-form, the > > normal laws of physics did not affect it in > > the usual way. Yay me! :) > snip > > That's the answer for me at least. Thank you, you are a genius. It doesn't go into the shadow form "by itself". Nor does it ever go there *fully*. Spirits are already there, fully. The nature of the transition is that it takes itself and the wearer and all his possession "with" it, *partially*. There is still no difference in the way the physical body reacts to the world. Sight ie lessened, hearing increased but the body wearing the Ring is not made immaterial in any way, just invisible. The body of an incarnate can still be killed while wearing the Ring. M. ###### From: "The American" Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 15:18:10 -0400 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4920.2300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4920.2300 X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 11 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-01!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117146 "Michael O'Neill" wrote in message news:3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie... Very good! I wish you'd post more on-topic stuff because you're always interesting when you do. T.A. ###### From: Tord Kallqvist Romstad Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 14 May 2003 21:23:34 +0200 Organization: University of Oslo, Norway Lines: 17 Sender: romstad@aload.uio.no Message-ID: References: <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: aload.uio.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: readme.uio.no 1052940214 12111 129.240.222.178 (14 May 2003 19:23:34 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@uio.no NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 19:23:34 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.1 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!newsfeed.stueberl.de!feed.news.nacamar.de!uio.no!nntp.uio.no!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117138 stephen@nomail.com writes: > The Istari were not mortal. Gandalf's spirit left Ea because Eru > willed it so. There is no suggestion that Saruman's spirit > left Ea. Gandalf returned to Ea, and then to the Deathless Lands, > because it was his normal fate to remain until the end. Eru > just gave him a little vacation from time. But why? Wouldn't it have been easier to just reincarnate him in his old body (or a copy, assuming his old body was too badly destroyed in the fight with the balrog) immediately instead of going through the trouble of taking his spirit out of Ea and sending it back? Did Gandalf need to take some kind of course to become a certified white wizard? -- Tord Romstad ###### From: stephen@nomail.com Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 14 May 2003 19:36:52 GMT Organization: Michigan State University Lines: 31 Sender: stephen@nomail.com Message-ID: References: <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: delhi.cse.msu.edu User-Agent: tin/1.4.3-20000502 ("Marian") (UNIX) (SunOS/5.8 (sun4u)) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!logbridge.uoregon.edu!msunews!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117141 Tord Kallqvist Romstad wrote: : stephen@nomail.com writes: :> The Istari were not mortal. Gandalf's spirit left Ea because Eru :> willed it so. There is no suggestion that Saruman's spirit :> left Ea. Gandalf returned to Ea, and then to the Deathless Lands, :> because it was his normal fate to remain until the end. Eru :> just gave him a little vacation from time. : But why? Wouldn't it have been easier to just reincarnate him in his : old body (or a copy, assuming his old body was too badly destroyed in : the fight with the balrog) immediately instead of going through the : trouble of taking his spirit out of Ea and sending it back? Did : Gandalf need to take some kind of course to become a certified white : wizard? : -- : Tord Romstad Why? I do not really know. Personally I have never understood why Tolkien decided that that was what happened, as it does seem rather inconsistent with other parts of the mythology. But Tolkien was quite clear that Eru did remove him from Ea, and then sent him back enhanced. Would it have been easier for Eru to do something else? I am not sure the word "easier" has any meaning to an omnipotent being. Stephen ###### NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 15:06:25 -0500 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien From: Jeff MacDonald Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 16:03:49 -0400 Message-ID: <52kap-2kp.ln1@cynosure.silverfool.com> Lines: 35 NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.105.72.34 X-Trace: sv3-MNRj5wSf9Dp7zavnOY/E47NQVTVCqBqXaCGmU21Kx2oTgbDVTqoqSr84J9lVGP2Lj/BQ+of0+iSNIBf!sTZrSd0n6/HcZ/wg7hxpIlAw4y3cOX9EjSa3AYjZbAAU1e1icC2e1flKvX2hQdIPqASu6hPKNraK!eMokRhgwXQY/8C41H+g= X-Complaints-To: abuse@speakeasy.net X-DMCA-Complaints-To: abuse@speakeasy.net X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.1 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!small1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nntp3.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.speakeasy.net!news.speakeasy.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117160 In article <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie>, Michael O'Neill wrote: > Gandalf the Istari, as opposed to Olórin the Maia, was incarnated as a > Mortal Man [something supposedly beyond the power of the Valar - to > change the basic nature of one of their own order, albeit of lesser > degree] and sent to middle earth. > > He was no longer an Ainu in the strict sense of the word. He was then > Mortal. This causes not a few problems, quite apart from the obvious > rebuttal to what you said above. Michael, You've stated this as fact a couple of times in this thread, but I've never seen it suggested before. Why do you believe Gandalf was a Mortal and shared their fate, rather than being, as I'd always assumed, a Maia clothed in the form of a man, although with certain restrictions on his power? Does this also apply to the other Istari? The only references in the texts that I can think of offhand are "They came therefore in the shape of Men, though they were never young and aged slowly" (Appendix B) and "In the likeness of Men they appeared, old but vigorous, and they changed little with the years, and aged but slowly" (Of the Rings of Power...) Neither of these claims anything other than the shape. This theory also raises a number of problems, as you suggest, and doesn't really seem to explain anything. -- -- thejeff -- Look before you leap. -- Samuel Butler ###### Message-ID: <3EC2D070.D74BC582@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 18 Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 16:25:36 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.172.130 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052925950 194.125.172.130 (Wed, 14 May 2003 16:25:50 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 16:25:50 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!newsfeed.vmunix.org!newsfeed.hanau.net!news-fra1.dfn.de!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!peer1.news.newnet.co.uk!peer1.news.newnet.co.uk!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117183 Tar-Elenion wrote: > > In article <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > > > Even allowing this rabbit to jump out of the hat for a moment, nowhere > > does it state the Valar could change the nature of one of their own, > > although the clearly had this power regarding Elves and Men. Lúthien > > became Mortal. Tuor became a Noldo. > > > > The Valar did not have the power to change the basic nature of the > Children of God. Luthien and Tuor and the position of their descendants > were all the result of a direct act of God. Go on, cite the Letters references. They're not in the Sil, or in any of the other published texts. M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC2D1C1.60E78C29@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 35 Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 16:31:13 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.172.130 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052926287 194.125.172.130 (Wed, 14 May 2003 16:31:27 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 16:31:27 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117184 Tar-Elenion wrote: > > In article <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > > > Even allowing this rabbit to jump out of the hat for a moment, nowhere > > does it state the Valar could change the nature of one of their own, > > although the clearly had this power regarding Elves and Men. Lúthien > > became Mortal. Tuor became a Noldo. > > > > The Valar did not have the power to change the basic nature of the > Children of God. Luthien and Tuor and the position of their descendants > were all the result of a direct act of God. Actually, here is the reference in Unfinished Tales. No direct Act of God, but done with his consent. "Emissaries they were from Lords of the West, the Valar, who still took counsel for the governance of Middle-earth, and when the shadow of Sauron began first to stir again took this means of resisting him. For with the consent of Eru they sent members of their own high order, but clad in bodies of as of Men, real and not feigned, but subject to the fears and pains and weariness of earth, able to hunger and thirst and be slain; though because of their noble spirits they did not die, and aged only by the cares and labours of many long years. And this the Valar did, desiring to amend the errors of old, especially that they had attempted to guard and seclude the Eldar by their own might and glory fully revealed; whereas now their emissaries were forbidden to reveal themselves in forms of majesty, or to seek to rule the wills of Men and Elves by open display of power, but coming in shapes weak and humble were bidden to advise and persuade Men and Elves to good, and to seek to unite in love and understanding all those whom Sauron, should he come again, would endeavour to dominate and corrupt." M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 81 Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 16:40:17 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.172.130 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052926831 194.125.172.130 (Wed, 14 May 2003 16:40:31 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 16:40:31 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!zen.net.uk!newspeer.lavaseals.co.uk!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117115 Flame of the West wrote: > > Michael O'Neill wrote: > > > Gandalf the Istari, as opposed to Olórin the Maia, > > Um, they're the same dude, dude. Not according to Tolkien. > > was incarnated as a > > Mortal Man [something supposedly beyond the power of the Valar - to > > change the basic nature of one of their own order, albeit of lesser > > degree] and sent to middle earth. > > Does Tolkien really say that the Wizards were *mortal*? Yup. "clad in bodies of as of Men, real and not feigned," > I don't remember reading that. Where does he say it? Unfinished Tale: The Isari: "Emissaries they were from Lords of the West, the Valar, who still took counsel for the governance of Middle-earth, and when the shadow of Sauron began first to stir again took this means of resisting him. For with the consent of Eru they sent members of their own high order, but clad in bodies of as of Men, real and not feigned, but subject to the fears and pains and weariness of earth, able to hunger and thirst and be slain; though because of their noble spirits they did not die, and aged only by the cares and labours of many long years. And this the Valar did, desiring to amend the errors of old, especially that they had attempted to guard and seclude the Eldar by their own might and glory fully revealed; whereas now their emissaries were forbidden to reveal themselves in forms of majesty, or to seek to rule the wills of Men and Elves by open display of power, but coming in shapes weak and humble were bidden to advise and persuade Men and Elves to good, and to seek to unite in love and understanding all those whom Sauron, should he come again, would endeavour to dominate and corrupt." > > He was no longer an Ainu in the strict sense of the word. He was > > then Mortal. > > ??? I know they took the *form* of old Men, but that's > not the same thing as being *mortal*. Are you quite > sure about this? No, I'm not. I'm posing questions. As far asI can see, entities that looked like Men, felt like Men, but "because of their noble spirits they did not die" like Men, were ... Elves! Because time and again Tolkien tells us that bodily Men and Elves were the same, it was the Elves spirits that kept their bodies alive and had far greater control over them than Men had. Gandalf, with his survival of the fall from the bridge in Moria into deep water, his survival underwater and his headlong ascent up the Endless Stair and finally the fight with the Balrog, vastly exceeded the abilities of *any* incarnate, Elf or Man, but only Glorfindel, Fingolfin or Feanor came close to duplicating these feats of prowess and endurance. Gandalf therefore seems to be a Super-Elf. Yet when his body died his spirit went to Eru and was not bound to Arda. This yearning beyond is a characteristic of the spirits of Men, not Elves. So it looks as though Gandalf was not just clad in a mortal body, but his sould behaved as a mortal man's soul. > Is there a reference? And did Tolkien > actually say that the Wizards ceased to be Ainur? No, and this is the problem. How could the Istari have been mortal and still remain Ainur, or if Ainur, how could Gandalf's spirit have left Arda to go to Eru after hid body died? M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC2D42D.5B4964EA@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EBD63E5.D9871A8D@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305120918.516207d3@posting.google.com> <3EC28984.BD6B4B1A@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 27 Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 16:41:33 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.172.130 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052926907 194.125.172.130 (Wed, 14 May 2003 16:41:47 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 16:41:47 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.esat.net!feeder.news.heanet.ie!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117113 Tamim wrote: > > Michael O'Neill wrote: > snip > > > It doesn't go into the shadow form "by itself". Nor does it ever go > > there *fully*. > > > Spirits are already there, fully. > > > The nature of the transition is that it takes itself and the wearer and > > all his possession "with" it, *partially*. > > > There is still no difference in the way the physical body reacts to the > > world. Sight ie lessened, hearing increased but the body wearing the > > Ring is not made immaterial in any way, just invisible. The body of an > > incarnate can still be killed while wearing the Ring. > > Yeah, but it's still not a plain golden ring. It has it's "magical" or > "spiritual" side and maybe a spirit can thus interact with it in a way > it couldn't interact with a fully material object. Rank speculation. *mheh* M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC2F3E0.4E406C90@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D1C1.60E78C29@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 64 Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 18:56:48 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.176.216 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052935022 194.125.176.216 (Wed, 14 May 2003 18:57:02 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 18:57:02 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!colt.net!newsfeed.esat.net!feeder.news.heanet.ie!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117182 AC wrote: > > On Wed, 14 May 2003 16:31:13 -0700, > Michael O'Neill wrote: > > Tar-Elenion wrote: > >> > >> In article <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > >> > >> > Even allowing this rabbit to jump out of the hat for a moment, nowhere > >> > does it state the Valar could change the nature of one of their own, > >> > although the clearly had this power regarding Elves and Men. Lúthien > >> > became Mortal. Tuor became a Noldo. > >> > > >> > >> The Valar did not have the power to change the basic nature of the > >> Children of God. Luthien and Tuor and the position of their descendants > >> were all the result of a direct act of God. > > > > Actually, here is the reference in Unfinished Tales. No direct Act of > > God, but done with his consent. > > > > "Emissaries they were from Lords of the West, the Valar, who still took > > counsel for the governance of Middle-earth, and when the shadow of > > Sauron began first to stir again took this means of resisting him. For > > with the consent of Eru they sent members of their own high order, but > > clad in bodies of as of Men, real and not feigned, but subject to the > > fears and pains and weariness of earth, able to hunger and thirst and be > > slain; though because of their noble spirits they did not die, and aged > > only by the cares and labours of many long years. And this the Valar > > did, desiring to amend the errors of old, especially that they had > > attempted to guard and seclude the Eldar by their own might and glory > > fully revealed; whereas now their emissaries were forbidden to reveal > > themselves in forms of majesty, or to seek to rule the wills of Men and > > Elves by open display of power, but coming in shapes weak and humble > > were bidden to advise and persuade Men and Elves to good, and to seek to > > unite in love and understanding all those whom Sauron, should he come > > again, would endeavour to dominate and corrupt." > > Michael, was Melian an Elf? Consider that when you state that Gandalf was a > Man. Wearing the physical form of one of the Children does not mean that > one is counted among the Children. Clearly the Istari, even in those forms, > were able to access at least some of their power. Beyond that, Gandalf was > quite altered after his reincarnation. > > Beyond that, why do you find UT so compelling and yet not Letters? I don't have a preference in that they are writings of the author. I do have a preference for the texts [not hteLetters] because they betray an attempt to make Ard consistent in a logical fashion, whereas the letters keep throwing up inconsistencies with several texts [although the texts themselves are inconsistent in places]. The letters are like so many rabbits out of hats, like this excerpt from Letter 153: "Immortality and Mortality being the special gifts of God to the Eruhini (in whose conception and creation the Valar had no part at all) it must be assumed that no alteration of their fundamental kind could be effected by the Valar even in one case: the cases of Lúthien (and Túor) and the position of their descendants was a direct act of God." "...we must assume..." Nope. Let's r"eason" instead of merely *assuming* things. M. ###### From: Stan Brown Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 17:08:19 -0400 Organization: Oak Road Systems Message-ID: References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.60 X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 27 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!newsfeed.stanford.edu!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-06!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117236 Michael O'Neill wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien: >Gandalf the Istari, as opposed to Olórin the Maia, was incarnated as a >Mortal Man Citation, please? We are told that the Istari _looked_ like Men, not that they _were_ Men. Indeed, if you think for a moment you'll realize they obviously were _not_ incarnated as Men, since their bodies were around 2000 years old at the time of the War of the Ring. >He was no longer an Ainu in the strict sense of the word. He was then >Mortal. This causes not a few problems, If it were true, it might; but as it's not, it doesn't. -- Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com Tolkien FAQs: http://Tolkien.slimy.com (Steuard Jensen's site) Tolkien letters FAQ: http://users.telerama.com/~taliesen/tolkien/lettersfaq.html FAQ of the Rings: http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/ringfaq.htm Encyclopedia of Arda: http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/default.htm more FAQs: http://oakroadsystems.com/tech/faqget.htm ###### From: Stan Brown Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 17:09:41 -0400 Organization: Oak Road Systems Message-ID: References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D1C1.60E78C29@indigo.ie> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.60 X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 20 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-06!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117241 Tar-Elenion wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien: >In article <3EC2D1C1.60E78C29@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... [the usual drivel] > > > >I prefer my cites above, they are more specifically relevant to your >statement. Indeed they are -- which is why Michael doesn't like them! -- Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com Tolkien FAQs: http://Tolkien.slimy.com (Steuard Jensen's site) Tolkien letters FAQ: http://users.telerama.com/~taliesen/tolkien/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/tech/faqget.htm ###### From: stephen@nomail.com Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 14 May 2003 22:43:06 GMT Organization: Michigan State University Lines: 25 Sender: stephen@nomail.com Message-ID: References: <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3EC33372.734EB51C@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: arctic.cse.msu.edu User-Agent: tin/1.4.3-20000502 ("Marian") (UNIX) (SunOS/5.8 (sun4u)) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!logbridge.uoregon.edu!msunews!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117227 Michael O'Neill wrote: : Tord Kallqvist Romstad wrote: :> :> Perhaps not, but from an aesthetical point of view it seems better to :> interfere as little as possible with the natural flow of events in :> Ea. I don't think Eru would do something as drastic and unusual as :> removing a maia's spirit from Ea unless he considered it absolutely :> necessary. : The point is [and I agree with you in principle] *was* it necessary? : Maia were self-incernated beings. The Valar had already been given leave : to incarnate bodies for the Elves who died previously. Why did they not : simply create another body for Gandalf? They had the power and the : authority to do so for Elves and Men, and we are told that the Istari : came "clad in bodies as of Men, real and not feigned". : Why go to Eru at all? : M. They did not go to Eru. Eru intervened. There is no suggestion that the Valar had anything whatsoever to do with Gandalf being restored. That was an independent action of Eru. Stephen ###### From: stephen@nomail.com Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 14 May 2003 22:45:39 GMT Organization: Michigan State University Lines: 42 Sender: stephen@nomail.com Message-ID: References: <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3EC332BA.B6D8AFA2@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: arctic.cse.msu.edu User-Agent: tin/1.4.3-20000502 ("Marian") (UNIX) (SunOS/5.8 (sun4u)) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!logbridge.uoregon.edu!msunews!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117226 Michael O'Neill wrote: : stephen@nomail.com wrote: :> :> Michael O'Neill wrote: :> : Yet when his body died his spirit went to Eru and was not bound to Arda. :> : This yearning beyond is a characteristic of the spirits of Men, not :> : Elves. So it looks as though Gandalf was not just clad in a mortal body, :> : but his sould behaved as a mortal man's soul. :> :> The fact that Gandalf left Ea had nothing to do with his nature. :> It was divine intervention on Eru's part. :> :> :> Is there a reference? And did Tolkien :> :> actually say that the Wizards ceased to be Ainur? :> :> : No, and this is the problem. How could the Istari have been mortal and :> : still remain Ainur, or if Ainur, how could Gandalf's spirit have left :> : Arda to go to Eru after hid body died? :> :> : M. :> :> The Istari were not mortal. Gandalf's spirit left Ea because Eru :> willed it so. There is no suggestion that Saruman's spirit :> left Ea. Gandalf returned to Ea, and then to the Deathless Lands, :> because it was his normal fate to remain until the end. Eru :> just gave him a little vacation from time. :> :> Stephen : Trite and unconvincing. Why was he plucked out of time? How was it that : a Maia, who should have been bound to Arda until the End, ended up in : the Outer Void being turbocharged by Eru? : M. Because Eru willed it. Why? I do not know. But that was clearly Tolkien's intent. Eru could remove Gandalf from Ea if he wanted to, and apparently he wanted to. The published texts says he stayed out of thought and time, and Tolkien tells us what he meant by that in Letters. Stephen ###### From: Tar-Elenion Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Message-ID: References: <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3EC332BA.B6D8AFA2@indigo.ie> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Lines: 52 NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.236.164.115 X-Complaints-To: abuse@attbi.com X-Trace: sccrnsc01 1052953552 12.236.164.115 (Wed, 14 May 2003 23:05:52 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 23:05:52 GMT Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 23:05:52 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!wn13feed!wn12feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.203!attbi_feed3!attbi_feed4!attbi.com!sccrnsc01.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117242 In article <3EC332BA.B6D8AFA2@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > stephen@nomail.com wrote: > > > > Michael O'Neill wrote: > > : Yet when his body died his spirit went to Eru and was not bound to Arda. > > : This yearning beyond is a characteristic of the spirits of Men, not > > : Elves. So it looks as though Gandalf was not just clad in a mortal body, > > : but his sould behaved as a mortal man's soul. > > > > The fact that Gandalf left Ea had nothing to do with his nature. > > It was divine intervention on Eru's part. > > > > :> Is there a reference? And did Tolkien > > :> actually say that the Wizards ceased to be Ainur? > > > > : No, and this is the problem. How could the Istari have been mortal and > > : still remain Ainur, or if Ainur, how could Gandalf's spirit have left > > : Arda to go to Eru after hid body died? > > > > : M. > > > > The Istari were not mortal. Gandalf's spirit left Ea because Eru > > willed it so. There is no suggestion that Saruman's spirit > > left Ea. Gandalf returned to Ea, and then to the Deathless Lands, > > because it was his normal fate to remain until the end. Eru > > just gave him a little vacation from time. > > > > Stephen > > Trite and unconvincing. Why was he plucked out of time? How was it that > a Maia, who should have been bound to Arda until the End, ended up in > the Outer Void being turbocharged by Eru? > > M. > As the Letter states: "He was sent by a mere prudent plan of the angelic Valar or governors; but Authority [Eru] had taken up this plan and enlarged it, at the moment of its failure." What was the "momemnt of its failure"? Gandalf's death. What happens when an incarnate Ainu is slain? While it seems they can 'incarnate' again, this takes time. Thus the necessary intervention by Eru. Gandalf 'returned to life' in a matter of weeks, and in an 'enhanced' state, rather than taking months or years and returning weaker or no better off than before. -- Tar-Elenion Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue. ###### From: Tar-Elenion Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Message-ID: References: <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3EC332BA.B6D8AFA2@indigo.ie> <3EC34B40.5A5B820B@indigo.ie> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Lines: 52 NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.236.164.115 X-Complaints-To: abuse@attbi.com X-Trace: rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net 1052958337 12.236.164.115 (Thu, 15 May 2003 00:25:37 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 00:25:37 GMT Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 00:25:37 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!logbridge.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!wn13feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.203!attbi_feed3!attbi.com!rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117235 In article <3EC34B40.5A5B820B@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > Tar-Elenion wrote: > > > Trite and unconvincing. Why was he plucked out of time? How was it that > > > a Maia, who should have been bound to Arda until the End, ended up in > > > the Outer Void being turbocharged by Eru? > > > > > > M. > > > > > > > As the Letter states: > > "He was sent by a mere prudent plan of the angelic Valar or governors; > > but Authority [Eru] had taken up this plan and enlarged it, at the moment > > of its failure." > > > > What was the "momemnt of its failure"? > > Gandalf's death. What happens when an incarnate Ainu is slain? > > While it seems they can 'incarnate' again, this takes time. Thus the > > necessary intervention by Eru. Gandalf 'returned to life' in a matter of > > weeks, and in an 'enhanced' state, rather than taking months or years > > and returning weaker or no better off than before. > > > > I'd almost buy that. Except for one teensy eensy thing. > > Eru is not mentioned as doing any of this in the LotR OR the appendices. > Given the importance of this action to the ENTIRE STORY, why wasn't this > clarified in the text/appendices? > > Moreover, Gandalf says "wandered". He wasn't even summoned, like the > souls of the Children are, by Mandos, to Aman. There is no other active > agency described, never mind the kind of omnipotent active agency you > suggest. > > M. > Gandalf says: "Then darkness took me; and I strayed out of thought and time, and I wandered far on roads that I will not tell." If he left time he was not within the World, and thus passed beyond the pale of the Valar and their possible actions, as their concern is within Time and the World That Is. This leaves only Eru. -- Tar-Elenion Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue. ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien From: AC Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> Organization: The Tao of Cow Reply-To: maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net Message-ID: User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Lines: 25 X-Complaints-To: abuse@randori.com - Please include ALL headers, thanks. Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 01:19:39 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.freenet.de!easynews.net!newsfeed3.easynews.net!newsfeed.vmunix.org!peer02.cox.net!east.cox.net!cox.net!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!69.22.128.15.MISMATCH!newsfeeder2.randori.com!news.randori.com!263039bc!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117224 On 14 May 2003 21:23:34 +0200, Tord Kallqvist Romstad wrote: > stephen@nomail.com writes: > >> The Istari were not mortal. Gandalf's spirit left Ea because Eru >> willed it so. There is no suggestion that Saruman's spirit >> left Ea. Gandalf returned to Ea, and then to the Deathless Lands, >> because it was his normal fate to remain until the end. Eru >> just gave him a little vacation from time. > > But why? Wouldn't it have been easier to just reincarnate him in his > old body (or a copy, assuming his old body was too badly destroyed in > the fight with the balrog) immediately instead of going through the > trouble of taking his spirit out of Ea and sending it back? Did > Gandalf need to take some kind of course to become a certified white > wizard? Gandalf just didn't pop out of Time, and then return. He was also "enhanced". It is clear that Eru took the plan of the Valar and expanded it, through the instrument of Gandalf. -- A. Clausen maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien From: AC Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> Organization: The Tao of Cow Reply-To: maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net Message-ID: User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Lines: 36 X-Complaints-To: abuse@randori.com - Please include ALL headers, thanks. Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 01:24:34 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!out.nntp.be!propagator2-sterling!in.nntp.be!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!69.22.128.15.MISMATCH!newsfeeder2.randori.com!news.randori.com!263039bc!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117217 On 14 May 2003 22:20:27 +0200, Tord Kallqvist Romstad wrote: > stephen@nomail.com writes: > >> Why? I do not really know. Personally I have never understood >> why Tolkien decided that that was what happened, as it does >> seem rather inconsistent with other parts of the mythology. >> But Tolkien was quite clear that Eru did remove him from Ea, >> and then sent him back enhanced. > > I agree about sending him back, but is it really 100% clear that Eru > actively removed him? It seems like the most likely theory, but I > cannot remember having read it anywhere. The Ainur that entered creation are bound to it. They cannot leave. Thus, for Olorin the Maia to be taken from Ea meant that Eru had to tinker with things. > >> Would it have been easier for Eru to do something else? I am >> not sure the word "easier" has any meaning to an omnipotent >> being. > > Perhaps not, but from an aesthetical point of view it seems better to > interfere as little as possible with the natural flow of events in > Ea. I don't think Eru would do something as drastic and unusual as > removing a maia's spirit from Ea unless he considered it absolutely > necessary. The Letter makes it clear that Eru interfered at the moment of the plan's failure. -- A. Clausen maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien From: AC Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3EC33372.734EB51C@indigo.ie> <3EC34A26.E48EB80@indigo.ie> Organization: The Tao of Cow Reply-To: maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net Message-ID: User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Lines: 51 X-Complaints-To: abuse@randori.com - Please include ALL headers, thanks. Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 01:25:38 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!newsfeed.stueberl.de!east.cox.net!cox.net!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!69.22.128.15.MISMATCH!newsfeeder2.randori.com!news.randori.com!263039bc!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117218 On Thu, 15 May 2003 01:04:54 -0700, Michael O'Neill wrote: > stephen@nomail.com wrote: >> >> Michael O'Neill wrote: >> : Tord Kallqvist Romstad wrote: >> :> >> :> Perhaps not, but from an aesthetical point of view it seems better to >> :> interfere as little as possible with the natural flow of events in >> :> Ea. I don't think Eru would do something as drastic and unusual as >> :> removing a maia's spirit from Ea unless he considered it absolutely >> :> necessary. >> >> : The point is [and I agree with you in principle] *was* it necessary? >> : Maia were self-incernated beings. The Valar had already been given leave >> : to incarnate bodies for the Elves who died previously. Why did they not >> : simply create another body for Gandalf? They had the power and the >> : authority to do so for Elves and Men, and we are told that the Istari >> : came "clad in bodies as of Men, real and not feigned". >> >> : Why go to Eru at all? >> >> : M. >> >> They did not go to Eru. Eru intervened. There is no suggestion >> that the Valar had anything whatsoever to do with Gandalf >> being restored. That was an independent action of Eru. > > Backtrack a bit. > > Why do you say Eru "intervened"? > > Gandalf's comments were: > > "Then darkness took me; and I strayed out of thought and time, and I > wandered far on roads that I will not tell." > > There is no mention in the LotR that Eru "intervened", per se [Letter > wielders converge and put me out of myu misery please]. Gandalf > describes himself as the prime mover. He was neither called nor taken to > Eru. He wandered. That's the problem > > Gandalf and all the other Maiar are bound up with the life of Arda. How > could *he* wander out of Arda? Is there any reason to doubt the veracity of the Letter in question? -- A. Clausen maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien From: AC Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC32D11.4ED02DB5@indigo.ie> Organization: The Tao of Cow Reply-To: maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Lines: 37 X-Complaints-To: abuse@randori.com - Please include ALL headers, thanks. Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 01:28:09 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!69.22.128.15.MISMATCH!newsfeeder2.randori.com!news.randori.com!263039bc!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117215 On Wed, 14 May 2003 23:00:49 -0700, Michael O'Neill wrote: > Stan Brown wrote: >> >> Michael O'Neill wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien: >> >Gandalf the Istari, as opposed to Olórin the Maia, was incarnated as a >> >Mortal Man >> >> Citation, please? >> >> We are told that the Istari _looked_ like Men, not that they _were_ >> Men. >> >> Indeed, if you think for a moment you'll realize they obviously were >> _not_ incarnated as Men, since their bodies were around 2000 years >> old at the time of the War of the Ring. >> >> >He was no longer an Ainu in the strict sense of the word. He was then >> >Mortal. This causes not a few problems, >> >> If it were true, it might; but as it's not, it doesn't. > > Well, I've given the citation elsewhere from UT which defines what he > was. "Real and not feigned" would be the phrase I'd turn on there. > > Over to you, Stan. Are you saying that an Ainu, bound to Arda, would have the ability, even with the aid of the Valar, to become a mortal man. Even if we take that to mean that his flesh was mortal (which I won't argue with), that is no different than Melian clothed as a Firstborn, and thus able to produce offspring. Does that mean that Melian *was* an Elf? Clearly not. -- A. Clausen maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien From: AC Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3EC332BA.B6D8AFA2@indigo.ie> <3EC34B40.5A5B820B@indigo.ie> Organization: The Tao of Cow Reply-To: maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net Message-ID: User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Lines: 55 X-Complaints-To: abuse@randori.com - Please include ALL headers, thanks. Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 01:29:26 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!proxad.net!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!69.22.128.15.MISMATCH!newsfeeder2.randori.com!news.randori.com!263039bc!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117221 On Thu, 15 May 2003 00:25:37 GMT, Tar-Elenion wrote: > In article <3EC34B40.5A5B820B@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... >> Tar-Elenion wrote: > > > >> > > Trite and unconvincing. Why was he plucked out of time? How was it that >> > > a Maia, who should have been bound to Arda until the End, ended up in >> > > the Outer Void being turbocharged by Eru? >> > > >> > > M. >> > > >> > >> > As the Letter states: >> > "He was sent by a mere prudent plan of the angelic Valar or governors; >> > but Authority [Eru] had taken up this plan and enlarged it, at the moment >> > of its failure." >> > >> > What was the "momemnt of its failure"? >> > Gandalf's death. What happens when an incarnate Ainu is slain? >> > While it seems they can 'incarnate' again, this takes time. Thus the >> > necessary intervention by Eru. Gandalf 'returned to life' in a matter of >> > weeks, and in an 'enhanced' state, rather than taking months or years >> > and returning weaker or no better off than before. >> >> >> >> I'd almost buy that. Except for one teensy eensy thing. >> >> Eru is not mentioned as doing any of this in the LotR OR the appendices. >> Given the importance of this action to the ENTIRE STORY, why wasn't this >> clarified in the text/appendices? >> >> Moreover, Gandalf says "wandered". He wasn't even summoned, like the >> souls of the Children are, by Mandos, to Aman. There is no other active >> agency described, never mind the kind of omnipotent active agency you >> suggest. >> >> M. >> > > Gandalf says: > "Then darkness took me; and I strayed out of thought and time, and I > wandered far on roads that I will not tell." > If he left time he was not within the World, and thus passed beyond the > pale of the Valar and their possible actions, as their concern is within > Time and the World That Is. This leaves only Eru. Well said. -- A. Clausen maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net ###### From: "TradeSurplus" Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien References: <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305140921.1678ada4@posting.google.com> <3EC33412.6A8E9ECC@indigo.ie> Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Lines: 81 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 69.0.25.115 X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net X-Trace: newssvr10.news.prodigy.com 1052970022 ST000 69.0.25.115 (Wed, 14 May 2003 23:40:22 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 23:40:22 EDT Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com X-UserInfo1: SCSYQN_@FS@YRQTYFJKXOFXB[B]NQBQLGPQRJRQIMASJETAANVW[AKWZE\]^XQWIGNE_[EBL@^_\^JOCQ^RSNVLGTFTKHTXHHP[NB\_C@\SD@EP_[KCXX__AGDDEKGFNB\ZOKLRNCY_CGG[RHT_UN@C_BSY\G__IJIX_PLSA[CCFAULEY\FL\VLGANTQQ]FN Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 03:40:22 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!out.nntp.be!propagator2-sterling!news-in.nuthinbutnews.com!newsfeed-east.nntpserver.com!nntpserver.com!chi1.webusenet.com!rip!news.webusenet.com!prodigy.com!newsmst01.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!postmaster.news.prodigy.com!newssvr10.news.prodigy.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117202 Michael O'Neill wrote >... >Conrad Dunkerson wrote: >> Flame of the West wrote >> >> > Does Tolkien really say that the Wizards were *mortal*? >> >> No, quite the opposite... all texts on the subject (and there are >> several) indicate that Gandalf remained a Maia and was 'going home' >> when he sailed into the West. Gandalf took on the appearance of an >> old man for several centuries, but he did not actually BECOME an old >> human. > >Look Conrad. Here's my summary reasoning paraphrased from another post. > > >...entities that looked like Men, felt like Men, but "because of their >noble spirits they did not die" like Men, were ... Elves! > >Because time and again Tolkien tells us that bodily Men and Elves were >the same, it was the Elves spirits that kept their bodies alive and had >far greater control over them than Men had. You've got your general->specific relationship mixed up here Michael. Elves were entities that looked like Men but did not die because of their noble spirits. It does not follow that any entity that looked like a Man but did not die because of a noble spirit was an Elf. >Gandalf, with his survival of the fall from the bridge in Moria into >deep water, his survival underwater and his headlong ascent up the >Endless Stair and finally the fight with the Balrog, vastly exceeded the >abilities of *any* incarnate, Elf or Man, but only Glorfindel, Fingolfin >or Feanor came close to duplicating these feats of prowess and >endurance. Gandalf therefore seems to be a Super-Elf. The fact that his physical body was even more powerful and resistant to damage than an Elf is a strong indication that Gandalf was not an Elf, don't you think? I don't think you're really postulating that Olorin was converted to an Elf when he became Gandalf so all this is just superfluous and shouldn't really be included in a summary. >Yet when his body died his spirit went to Eru and was not bound to Arda. Another way of looking at this, more in line with Tolkien's comments in Letters, is that Eru reached into Ea and plucked Gandalf's spirit out, not that Gandalf's spirit naturally left Ea when his body nearly died. >This yearning beyond is a characteristic of the spirits of Men, not >Elves. So it looks as though Gandalf was not just clad in a mortal body, >but his sould behaved as a mortal man's soul. We have no way of knowing how his soul behaved naturally since Eru intervened and did stuff to Galdalf's soul that was not natural. There is nothing written that tells us what would have happened to Gandalf's soul if Eru hadn't intervened. Any assertions on that topic constitute rank speculation (I'm really getting to like that term). Taking the path of least resistance while speculating, I would imagine that Gandalf's spirit would naturally behave like that of any other Ainu disembodied by violence. >Did Tolkien actually say that the Wizards ceased to be Ainur? > >No, and this is the problem. How could the Istari have been mortal and >still remain Ainur, or if Ainur, how could Gandalf's spirit have left >Arda to go to Eru after hid body died? The simplest solution to this apparent dilemma is to assume that the Istari were not mortal and that Gandalf's spirit didn't leave Ea, it was taken out by Eru as a special intervention. Personally, my only reason for thinking of divine intervention at all is that Tolkien specified it in Letters. Going just by LotR I see no need for Gandalf to leave Ea or to be sent back by any beings more powerful than the Valar. Timeless wandering seems like a fairly apt description of a few days of exhausted, trancelike semi-consciousness to me. Trade. ###### From: "TradeSurplus" Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien References: <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3EC33372.734EB51C@indigo.ie> <3EC34A26.E48EB80@indigo.ie> Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Lines: 34 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 69.0.25.115 X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net X-Trace: newssvr10.news.prodigy.com 1052970529 ST000 69.0.25.115 (Wed, 14 May 2003 23:48:49 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 23:48:49 EDT Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com X-UserInfo1: SCSGW\[DRBTQBQH]]RHNO\LI[B]NQHQHDY^L\UQHWIWDUWYADNVOPCKZBL\NX_KHV^GY[KVMG^ZPNHSCZNS[^UXFJVWYXVXKBH[XRWWBBDTN@AX\JSBVH]_@T\EKJHBMZ\_WZJFNRY]YWKSPED_U^NC\HSZ\WS[KEAYI@DO@\K@BP\LD[\GTMPLDFVU]ASJM Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 03:48:49 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!c03.atl99!rip!news.webusenet.com!prodigy.com!newsmst01.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!postmaster.news.prodigy.com!newssvr10.news.prodigy.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117203 Michael O'Neill wrote >... > >Backtrack a bit. > >Why do you say Eru "intervened"? > >Gandalf's comments were: > >"Then darkness took me; and I strayed out of thought and time, and I >wandered far on roads that I will not tell." > >There is no mention in the LotR that Eru "intervened", per se [Letter >wielders converge and put me out of myu misery please]. Gandalf >describes himself as the prime mover. He was neither called nor taken to >Eru. He wandered. That's the problem > >Gandalf and all the other Maiar are bound up with the life of Arda. How >could *he* wander out of Arda? Nothing in the LotR quote requires that Gandalf left Arda. Get yourself good and doped up for a week or so and tell me if you don't stray out of thought and time and wander far on roads that you will not tell? Alternatively almost die in a titanic struggle with a demon of the netherworld, the effect should be more or less the same. The only reason we believe that Gandalf actually meant that he left Arda is because Tolkien says so in Letters. It is terribly inconsistent to accept Gandalf's leaving Arda from Letters but reject Tolkien's explanation for it from the same source. Trade. ###### Message-ID: <3EC32D11.4ED02DB5@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 26 Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 23:00:49 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.176.180 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052949664 194.125.176.180 (Wed, 14 May 2003 23:01:04 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 23:01:04 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.esat.net!feeder.news.heanet.ie!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117258 Stan Brown wrote: > > Michael O'Neill wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien: > >Gandalf the Istari, as opposed to Olórin the Maia, was incarnated as a > >Mortal Man > > Citation, please? > > We are told that the Istari _looked_ like Men, not that they _were_ > Men. > > Indeed, if you think for a moment you'll realize they obviously were > _not_ incarnated as Men, since their bodies were around 2000 years > old at the time of the War of the Ring. > > >He was no longer an Ainu in the strict sense of the word. He was then > >Mortal. This causes not a few problems, > > If it were true, it might; but as it's not, it doesn't. Well, I've given the citation elsewhere from UT which defines what he was. "Real and not feigned" would be the phrase I'd turn on there. Over to you, Stan. M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC33202.5ACD8C01@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <52kap-2kp.ln1@cynosure.silverfool.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 85 Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 23:21:54 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.176.180 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052950942 194.125.176.180 (Wed, 14 May 2003 23:22:22 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 23:22:22 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.stueberl.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117250 Jeff MacDonald wrote: > > In article <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie>, Michael O'Neill wrote: > > > Gandalf the Istari, as opposed to Olórin the Maia, was incarnated as a > > Mortal Man [something supposedly beyond the power of the Valar - to > > change the basic nature of one of their own order, albeit of lesser > > degree] and sent to middle earth. > > > > He was no longer an Ainu in the strict sense of the word. He was then > > Mortal. This causes not a few problems, quite apart from the obvious > > rebuttal to what you said above. > > Michael, > > You've stated this as fact a couple of times in this thread, but I've > never seen it suggested before. Why do you believe Gandalf was a > Mortal and shared their fate, rather than being, as I'd always > assumed, a Maia clothed in the form of a man, although with certain > restrictions on his power? Does this also apply to the other Istari? > > The only references in the texts that I can think of offhand are "They > came therefore in the shape of Men, though they were never young and > aged slowly" (Appendix B) and "In the likeness of Men they appeared, > old but vigorous, and they changed little with the years, and aged but > slowly" (Of the Rings of Power...) Neither of these claims anything > other than the shape. > > This theory also raises a number of problems, as you suggest, and > doesn't really seem to explain anything. The quotation I had in mind was this one: "Emissaries they were from Lords of the West, the Valar, who still took counsel for the governance of Middle-earth, and when the shadow of Sauron began first to stir again took this means of resisting him. For with the consent of Eru they sent members of their own high order, but clad in bodies of as of Men, real and not feigned, but subject to the fears and pains and weariness of earth, able to hunger and thirst and be slain; though because of their noble spirits they did not die, and aged only by the cares and labours of many long years. And this the Valar did, desiring to amend the errors of old, especially that they had attempted to guard and seclude the Eldar by their own might and glory fully revealed; whereas now their emissaries were forbidden to reveal themselves in forms of majesty, or to seek to rule the wills of Men and Elves by open display of power, but coming in shapes weak and humble were bidden to advise and persuade Men and Elves to good, and to seek to unite in love and understanding all those whom Sauron, should he come again, would endeavour to dominate and corrupt." But my honesty compels me to cite this passage also, which diminishes the whole "clad in bodies as of Men, real and not feigned" comment above. "We must assume that they [the Istari] were all Maiar, that is persons of the "angelic" order, though not necessarily of the same rank. The Maiar were "spirits," but capable of self-incarnation, and could take "humane" (especially Elvish) forms. Saruman is said (e.g. by Gandalf himself) to have been the chief of the Istari - that is, higher in Valinórean stature than the others. Gandalf is evidently the next in the order. Radagast is presented as a person of much less power and wisdom. Of the other two nothing is said in published work save the reference to the Five Wizards in the altercation between Gandalf and Saruman [The Two Towers III 10]. Now these Maiar were sent by the Valar at a crucial moment in the history of Middle-earth to enhance the resistance of the Elves of the West, greatly outnumbered by those of the East and South. It may be seen that they were free each to do what they could in this mission; that they were not commanded or supposed to act together as a small central body of power and wisdom; and that each had different powers and inclinations and were chosen by the Valar with this in mind." This was apparently written as late as 1972 according to Christopher Tolkien, yet I think this is Tolkien backpedaling again, a he did in revision mode. The whole classification of the Istari as being "clad in bodies as of Men, real and not feigned" must be called into question. Are the Istari meant to be no more than bockedy auld Elves? Is that why they were classed as Men? Because even old Elves betrayed more vitality that Gandalf in "Greay Wanderer" mode. Why not have a couple of limbs missing, and eye or ear gone, a hump or a pronounced limp, if it was the sympathy vote the Valar were after? FWIW M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC33236.33ACD39F@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 47 Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 23:22:46 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.176.180 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052950981 194.125.176.180 (Wed, 14 May 2003 23:23:01 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 23:23:01 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.stueberl.de!feed.news.nacamar.de!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117256 Stan Brown wrote: > > Michael O'Neill wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien: > >Gandalf the Istari, as opposed to Olórin the Maia, was incarnated as a > >Mortal Man > > Citation, please? > > We are told that the Istari _looked_ like Men, not that they _were_ > Men. > > Indeed, if you think for a moment you'll realize they obviously were > _not_ incarnated as Men, since their bodies were around 2000 years > old at the time of the War of the Ring. > > >He was no longer an Ainu in the strict sense of the word. He was then > >Mortal. This causes not a few problems, > > If it were true, it might; but as it's not, it doesn't. Funnily enough, you seem to at least have a string to your bow, and even *that* causes problems. :-) The quotation, for your convenience: "Emissaries they were from Lords of the West, the Valar, who still took counsel for the governance of Middle-earth, and when the shadow of Sauron began first to stir again took this means of resisting him. For with the consent of Eru they sent members of their own high order, but clad in bodies of as of Men, real and not feigned, but subject to the fears and pains and weariness of earth, able to hunger and thirst and be slain; though because of their noble spirits they did not die, and aged only by the cares and labours of many long years. And this the Valar did, desiring to amend the errors of old, especially that they had attempted to guard and seclude the Eldar by their own might and glory fully revealed; whereas now their emissaries were forbidden to reveal themselves in forms of majesty, or to seek to rule the wills of Men and Elves by open display of power, but coming in shapes weak and humble were bidden to advise and persuade Men and Elves to good, and to seek to unite in love and understanding all those whom Sauron, should he come again, would endeavour to dominate and corrupt." But see also my reply to Jeff McDonald. M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC332BA.B6D8AFA2@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 33 Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 23:24:58 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.176.180 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052951117 194.125.176.180 (Wed, 14 May 2003 23:25:17 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 23:25:17 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.stueberl.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117194 stephen@nomail.com wrote: > > Michael O'Neill wrote: > : Yet when his body died his spirit went to Eru and was not bound to Arda. > : This yearning beyond is a characteristic of the spirits of Men, not > : Elves. So it looks as though Gandalf was not just clad in a mortal body, > : but his sould behaved as a mortal man's soul. > > The fact that Gandalf left Ea had nothing to do with his nature. > It was divine intervention on Eru's part. > > :> Is there a reference? And did Tolkien > :> actually say that the Wizards ceased to be Ainur? > > : No, and this is the problem. How could the Istari have been mortal and > : still remain Ainur, or if Ainur, how could Gandalf's spirit have left > : Arda to go to Eru after hid body died? > > : M. > > The Istari were not mortal. Gandalf's spirit left Ea because Eru > willed it so. There is no suggestion that Saruman's spirit > left Ea. Gandalf returned to Ea, and then to the Deathless Lands, > because it was his normal fate to remain until the end. Eru > just gave him a little vacation from time. > > Stephen Trite and unconvincing. Why was he plucked out of time? How was it that a Maia, who should have been bound to Arda until the End, ended up in the Outer Void being turbocharged by Eru? M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC33372.734EB51C@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 34 Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 23:28:02 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.176.180 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052951297 194.125.176.180 (Wed, 14 May 2003 23:28:17 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 23:28:17 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.esat.net!feeder.news.heanet.ie!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117248 Tord Kallqvist Romstad wrote: > > stephen@nomail.com writes: > > > Why? I do not really know. Personally I have never understood > > why Tolkien decided that that was what happened, as it does > > seem rather inconsistent with other parts of the mythology. > > But Tolkien was quite clear that Eru did remove him from Ea, > > and then sent him back enhanced. > > I agree about sending him back, but is it really 100% clear that Eru > actively removed him? It seems like the most likely theory, but I > cannot remember having read it anywhere. > > > Would it have been easier for Eru to do something else? I am > > not sure the word "easier" has any meaning to an omnipotent > > being. > > Perhaps not, but from an aesthetical point of view it seems better to > interfere as little as possible with the natural flow of events in > Ea. I don't think Eru would do something as drastic and unusual as > removing a maia's spirit from Ea unless he considered it absolutely > necessary. The point is [and I agree with you in principle] *was* it necessary? Maia were self-incernated beings. The Valar had already been given leave to incarnate bodies for the Elves who died previously. Why did they not simply create another body for Gandalf? They had the power and the authority to do so for Elves and Men, and we are told that the Istari came "clad in bodies as of Men, real and not feigned". Why go to Eru at all? M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC33386.4BE4501D@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 16 Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 23:28:22 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.176.180 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052951317 194.125.176.180 (Wed, 14 May 2003 23:28:37 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 23:28:37 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.stueberl.de!feed.news.nacamar.de!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117247 The American wrote: > > "Michael O'Neill" wrote in message > news:3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie... > > Very good! > I wish you'd post more on-topic stuff because you're always interesting when > you do. > > T.A. I'll try. M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC33412.6A8E9ECC@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305140921.1678ada4@posting.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 46 Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 23:30:42 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.176.180 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052951457 194.125.176.180 (Wed, 14 May 2003 23:30:57 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 23:30:57 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!newsfeed.vmunix.org!newspeer1-gui.server.ntli.net!ntli.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117190 Conrad Dunkerson wrote: > > Flame of the West wrote in message news:... > > > Does Tolkien really say that the Wizards were *mortal*? > > No, quite the opposite... all texts on the subject (and there are > several) indicate that Gandalf remained a Maia and was 'going home' > when he sailed into the West. Gandalf took on the appearance of an > old man for several centuries, but he did not actually BECOME an old > human. Look Conrad. Here's my summary reasoning paraphrased from another post. ...entities that looked like Men, felt like Men, but "because of their noble spirits they did not die" like Men, were ... Elves! Because time and again Tolkien tells us that bodily Men and Elves were the same, it was the Elves spirits that kept their bodies alive and had far greater control over them than Men had. Gandalf, with his survival of the fall from the bridge in Moria into deep water, his survival underwater and his headlong ascent up the Endless Stair and finally the fight with the Balrog, vastly exceeded the abilities of *any* incarnate, Elf or Man, but only Glorfindel, Fingolfin or Feanor came close to duplicating these feats of prowess and endurance. Gandalf therefore seems to be a Super-Elf. Yet when his body died his spirit went to Eru and was not bound to Arda. This yearning beyond is a characteristic of the spirits of Men, not Elves. So it looks as though Gandalf was not just clad in a mortal body, but his sould behaved as a mortal man's soul. Did Tolkien actually say that the Wizards ceased to be Ainur? No, and this is the problem. How could the Istari have been mortal and still remain Ainur, or if Ainur, how could Gandalf's spirit have left Arda to go to Eru after hid body died? Look forward to your comments. FWIW M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC33443.632FD1DF@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <1178b6d1.0305121057.734bef96@posting.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 16 Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 23:31:31 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.176.180 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052951505 194.125.176.180 (Wed, 14 May 2003 23:31:45 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 23:31:45 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!skynet.be!skynet.be!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117255 Conrad Dunkerson wrote: > > Tord Kallqvist Romstad wrote in message news:... > > conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) writes: > > >> Also note that this indicates that Sauron (and the other Ainur) were > >> ALL bound within the world until the end... > > > Didn't Gandalf leave Arda after he was killed in the fight with the > > balrog? > > Yes, but then nobody ever said that Eru couldn't break his own rules. :) I can see I'm going to have to pay those celestial Newsgroups a visit! M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC34A26.E48EB80@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3EC33372.734EB51C@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 44 Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 01:04:54 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.176.52 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052957109 194.125.176.52 (Thu, 15 May 2003 01:05:09 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 01:05:09 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!takemy.news.telefonica.de!telefonica.de!newsfeed.gamma.ru!Gamma.RU!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117246 stephen@nomail.com wrote: > > Michael O'Neill wrote: > : Tord Kallqvist Romstad wrote: > :> > :> Perhaps not, but from an aesthetical point of view it seems better to > :> interfere as little as possible with the natural flow of events in > :> Ea. I don't think Eru would do something as drastic and unusual as > :> removing a maia's spirit from Ea unless he considered it absolutely > :> necessary. > > : The point is [and I agree with you in principle] *was* it necessary? > : Maia were self-incernated beings. The Valar had already been given leave > : to incarnate bodies for the Elves who died previously. Why did they not > : simply create another body for Gandalf? They had the power and the > : authority to do so for Elves and Men, and we are told that the Istari > : came "clad in bodies as of Men, real and not feigned". > > : Why go to Eru at all? > > : M. > > They did not go to Eru. Eru intervened. There is no suggestion > that the Valar had anything whatsoever to do with Gandalf > being restored. That was an independent action of Eru. Backtrack a bit. Why do you say Eru "intervened"? Gandalf's comments were: "Then darkness took me; and I strayed out of thought and time, and I wandered far on roads that I will not tell." There is no mention in the LotR that Eru "intervened", per se [Letter wielders converge and put me out of myu misery please]. Gandalf describes himself as the prime mover. He was neither called nor taken to Eru. He wandered. That's the problem Gandalf and all the other Maiar are bound up with the life of Arda. How could *he* wander out of Arda? M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC34B40.5A5B820B@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3EC332BA.B6D8AFA2@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 64 Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 01:09:36 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.176.52 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052957391 194.125.176.52 (Thu, 15 May 2003 01:09:51 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 01:09:51 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!colt.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117252 Tar-Elenion wrote: > > In article <3EC332BA.B6D8AFA2@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > > stephen@nomail.com wrote: > > > > > > Michael O'Neill wrote: > > > : Yet when his body died his spirit went to Eru and was not bound to Arda. > > > : This yearning beyond is a characteristic of the spirits of Men, not > > > : Elves. So it looks as though Gandalf was not just clad in a mortal body, > > > : but his sould behaved as a mortal man's soul. > > > > > > The fact that Gandalf left Ea had nothing to do with his nature. > > > It was divine intervention on Eru's part. > > > > > > :> Is there a reference? And did Tolkien > > > :> actually say that the Wizards ceased to be Ainur? > > > > > > : No, and this is the problem. How could the Istari have been mortal and > > > : still remain Ainur, or if Ainur, how could Gandalf's spirit have left > > > : Arda to go to Eru after hid body died? > > > > > > : M. > > > > > > The Istari were not mortal. Gandalf's spirit left Ea because Eru > > > willed it so. There is no suggestion that Saruman's spirit > > > left Ea. Gandalf returned to Ea, and then to the Deathless Lands, > > > because it was his normal fate to remain until the end. Eru > > > just gave him a little vacation from time. > > > > > > Stephen > > > > Trite and unconvincing. Why was he plucked out of time? How was it that > > a Maia, who should have been bound to Arda until the End, ended up in > > the Outer Void being turbocharged by Eru? > > > > M. > > > > As the Letter states: > "He was sent by a mere prudent plan of the angelic Valar or governors; > but Authority [Eru] had taken up this plan and enlarged it, at the moment > of its failure." > > What was the "momemnt of its failure"? > Gandalf's death. What happens when an incarnate Ainu is slain? > While it seems they can 'incarnate' again, this takes time. Thus the > necessary intervention by Eru. Gandalf 'returned to life' in a matter of > weeks, and in an 'enhanced' state, rather than taking months or years > and returning weaker or no better off than before. I'd almost buy that. Except for one teensy eensy thing. Eru is not mentioned as doing any of this in the LotR OR the appendices. Given the importance of this action to the ENTIRE STORY, why wasn't this clarified in the text/appendices? Moreover, Gandalf says "wandered". He wasn't even summoned, like the souls of the Children are, by Mandos, to Aman. There is no other active agency described, never mind the kind of omnipotent active agency you suggest. M. ###### From: Flame of the West Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 04:35:58 -0400 Lines: 31 Message-ID: References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: UmFuZG9tSVarA/fQFIok06wXtihV62SX/zofizAvGGv7XyANS/XleIheoEusUt7O X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 15 May 2003 08:37:21 GMT In-Reply-To: <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> X-Accept-Language: en-us, en User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030507 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!newsfeed.stueberl.de!small1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!border1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!feed2.news.rcn.net!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117213 Michael O'Neill wrote: > "Emissaries they were from Lords of the West, the Valar, who still took > counsel for the governance of Middle-earth, and when the shadow of > Sauron began first to stir again took this means of resisting him. For > with the consent of Eru they sent members of their own high order, but > clad in bodies of as of Men, real and not feigned, but subject to the > fears and pains and weariness of earth, able to hunger and thirst and be > slain; though because of their noble spirits they did not die, and aged > only by the cares and labours of many long years. And this the Valar > did, desiring to amend the errors of old, especially that they had > attempted to guard and seclude the Eldar by their own might and glory > fully revealed; whereas now their emissaries were forbidden to reveal > themselves in forms of majesty, or to seek to rule the wills of Men and > Elves by open display of power, but coming in shapes weak and humble > were bidden to advise and persuade Men and Elves to good, and to seek to > unite in love and understanding all those whom Sauron, should he come > again, would endeavour to dominate and corrupt." That's not mortality. The Wizards were like the Elves in that they do not die but could be slain, and the Elves are immortal according to Tolkien's taxonomy. -- FotW The Official Return of the King Protest Site http://members.aol.com/rotkprotest/ ###### Message-ID: <3EC36727.6609EC11@1.au> From: Jussi Jaatinen <1@1.au> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 19 Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 10:14:15 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 172.21.37.233 X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@nokia.com X-Trace: news2.nokia.com 1052993655 172.21.37.233 (Thu, 15 May 2003 13:14:15 EET DST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 13:14:15 EET DST Organization: Nokia Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!uni-erlangen.de!news-nue1.dfn.de!news-fra1.dfn.de!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!newsfeed1!bredband!newsfeed2.fi.sn.net!fi.sn.net!newsfeed1.fi.sn.net!nntp.inet.fi!inet.fi!newsfeed1.nokia.com!news1.nokia.com!news2.nokia.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117229 Michael O'Neill wrote: > Gandalf the Istari, as opposed to Olórin the Maia, was incarnated as a > Mortal Man [something supposedly beyond the power of the Valar - to > change the basic nature of one of their own order, albeit of lesser > degree] and sent to middle earth. Gandalf's basic nature wasn't changed, he was merely put inside a "mortal" (unnaturally long-lived) body. Certain constraints to his thought stem from having to use a human brain, but he is not Human. The Valar certainly don't have the power to give the Gift of Men, since they're themselves unable to leave the World. When Gandalf the Grey died, it was a specific divine intervention that allowed him to leave and re-enter the World. -JJ ###### From: conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 15 May 2003 04:10:14 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 31 Message-ID: <1178b6d1.0305150310.48102852@posting.google.com> References: <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D1C1.60E78C29@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.42.51.27 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1052997015 10325 127.0.0.1 (15 May 2003 11:10:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 15 May 2003 11:10:15 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117230 Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EC2D1C1.60E78C29@indigo.ie>... > Tar-Elenion wrote: >> The Valar did not have the power to change the basic nature of the >> Children of God. Luthien and Tuor and the position of their descendants >> were all the result of a direct act of God. > Actually, here is the reference in Unfinished Tales. No direct Act of > God, but done with his consent. The passage in question does not refer to any Eruhini (Elves, Men & Dwarves by adoption) having their basic nature changed. Thus, you are 'refuting' to Tar-Elenion's statement that the Valar could not change the nature of the Eruhini with a quotation that has nothing whatsoever to do with that issue. > but clad in bodies of as of Men, real and not feigned Please tell me you aren't trying to pretend that this means they were really Men? Please? It seems quite clear that Tolkien was saying that they had the appearance of Men ("as of") and that these bodies were solid rather than just illusions projected into the minds of those who 'saw' them. NOT that they were transformed from Ainur into humans.... which, frankly, is nonsense. Even if it weren't complete nonsense... the passage does not say that the Valar DID it. The Valar sent the Istari. The Istari were clad in physical bodies. NOT 'the Valar put the Istari into physical bodies'. ###### From: conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 15 May 2003 04:16:35 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 16 Message-ID: <1178b6d1.0305150316.36b7a0ee@posting.google.com> References: <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.42.51.27 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1052997396 10470 127.0.0.1 (15 May 2003 11:16:36 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 15 May 2003 11:16:36 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117240 Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie>... > No, and this is the problem. How could the Istari have been mortal and > still remain Ainur, or if Ainur, how could Gandalf's spirit have left > Arda to go to Eru after hid body died? Gandalf did not 'leave' Arda. He was TAKEN out of Arda. How could Eru do that? He's 'God'... he can do whatever he wants. At that... if you do not accept the statements in Letters (and elsewhere) that Gandalf remained an Ainu then there is no reason to accept the letter which indicates that Gandalf left the world. The text of LotR says that he passed 'out of time', but hey... without the letter to explain it that is open to interpretation. Gandalf could have just meant that he wasn't really aware of the flow of events while he was dead. ###### From: "TradeSurplus" Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien References: <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3EC332BA.B6D8AFA2@indigo.ie> <3EC34B40.5A5B820B@indigo.ie> Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Lines: 18 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 69.0.25.115 X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net X-Trace: newssvr10.news.prodigy.com 1053001967 ST000 69.0.25.115 (Thu, 15 May 2003 08:32:47 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 08:32:47 EDT Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com X-UserInfo1: SCSYASREZZWCRVPXN[OX_TDB[X_LPO@FLA]T]_MIJQR@EPIB_VUKAH_[MTX\IS[K[NGYJJFNOFZR_G[BUNTAOQLFE^TEHRPI]PZZRP_BMDSFQFL_]CBHXRWCMDCUZAZN@D_AKMNLEI]MWHCSXL^]NNC__CZFGSGHYYXWPFG@SCAVA]\FT\@B\RDGENSUQS^M Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 12:32:47 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!uni-erlangen.de!news-nue1.dfn.de!news-fra1.dfn.de!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!prodigy.com!newsmst01.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!postmaster.news.prodigy.com!newssvr10.news.prodigy.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117200 Michael O'Neill wrote >... > >Moreover, Gandalf says "wandered". He wasn't even summoned, like the >souls of the Children are, by Mandos, to Aman. There is no other active >agency described, never mind the kind of omnipotent active agency you >suggest. Good point about Gandalf's soul not, apparently, being summoned by Mandos to the halls of waiting as all mortal souls are before being sent on their journey out of Ea. This does rather contradict your idea that Gandalf's soul was made the same as that of a mortal Man. If Gandalf's soul behaved as a mortal's would then he should have stopped off at Mandos for a while. There is no hint of that in any text that I'm aware of. Trade. ###### From: "TradeSurplus" Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC33236.33ACD39F@indigo.ie> Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Lines: 39 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 69.0.25.115 X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net X-Trace: newssvr10.news.prodigy.com 1053004423 ST000 69.0.25.115 (Thu, 15 May 2003 09:13:43 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 09:13:43 EDT Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com X-UserInfo1: SCSGW\[DRBTQBQH]]RHNO\LI[B]NQHQHDY^L\UQHWIWDUWYADNVOPCKZBL\NX_KHV^GY[KVMG^ZPNHSCZNS[^UXFJVWYXVXKBH[XRWWBBDTN@AX\JSBVH]_@T\EKJHBMZ\_WZJFNRY]YWKSPED_U^NC\HSZ\WS[KEAYI@DO@\K@BP\LD[\GTMPLDFVU]ASJM Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 13:13:43 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!out.nntp.be!propagator2-sterling!news-in.nuthinbutnews.com!news.astraweb.com!news-small.astraweb.com!prodigy.com!newsmst01.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!postmaster.news.prodigy.com!newssvr10.news.prodigy.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117205 Michael O'Neill wrote >"... . For >with the consent of Eru they sent members of their own high order, but >clad in bodies of as of Men, real and not feigned, but subject to the >fears and pains and weariness of earth, able to hunger and thirst and be >slain; though because of their noble spirits they did not die, and aged >only by the cares and labours of many long years. ...." This quote, in particular the bit about "bodies as of Men, real and not feigned" seems to be at the heart of your interpretation. Let me offer a brief analysis and an alternative interpretation that does not raise the contradictions you see. The Istari's bodies were "as of" Men. Had the text said "of Men" then the most common interpretation would probably be that the bodies were identical to those of Men. However "as of" is normally used to signify having the appearance of something while not being that thing. Thus the most common interpretation of that quote would be that the Istari's bodies looked like Men but in fact were not those of Men. The "real and not feigned" part can be understood as referring to the composition of the bodies. The bodies of the Istari were not illusions, they were made of the stuff of Arda. Since they were "real" they could well have had bones, muscles and organs like many other creatures in Arda. "Real" does not mean "real Men", it just means that the bodies were physically there, not illusions, and probably that they functioned like the bodies of any other creature of Arda. This interpretation is easy to draw form the text, I would argue it is the easiest and most straightforward interpretation of the text. I also think that it is the interpretation that most posters to this thread have, which is why your repetition of this quote doesn't get you the support you expect. Others read the same words and see no support for your contention at all. Trade. ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien From: AC Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC3D789.C553F5D5@indigo.ie> Organization: The Tao of Cow Reply-To: maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net Message-ID: User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Lines: 32 X-Complaints-To: abuse@randori.com - Please include ALL headers, thanks. Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 15:10:37 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!irazu.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!69.22.128.15.MISMATCH!newsfeeder2.randori.com!news.randori.com!263039bc!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117210 On Thu, 15 May 2003 11:08:09 -0700, Michael O'Neill wrote: > AC wrote: >> >> On 12 May 2003 16:26:47 +0200, >> Tord Kallqvist Romstad wrote: >> > conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) writes: >> > >> >> Also note that this indicates that Sauron (and the other Ainur) were >> >> ALL bound within the world until the end... >> > >> > Hmm... >> > >> > Didn't Gandalf leave Arda after he was killed in the fight with the >> > balrog? >> >> That was a special intervention by Eru. > > Show where this is stated in the LotR. Actually, if we are to reject everything but LotR (including your particular love of UT over Letters), then we can surmise almost nothing from the passage. Since the Silmarillion was never published, we can never even bring in details such as the Ainur being bound to Arda, and incapable of leaving Time. In your effort to undermine a specific group of texts (namely Letters) you create a series of logical contradictions so severe that your own argument gets swallowed in it. -- A. Clausen maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien From: AC Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC3D7D4.9E3A527F@indigo.ie> Organization: The Tao of Cow Reply-To: maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net Message-ID: User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Lines: 29 X-Complaints-To: abuse@randori.com - Please include ALL headers, thanks. Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 15:12:14 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!newsfeed.vmunix.org!peer02.cox.net!cox.net!feed2.newsreader.com!newsreader.com!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!69.22.128.15.MISMATCH!newsfeeder2.randori.com!news.randori.com!263039bc!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117211 On Thu, 15 May 2003 11:09:24 -0700, Michael O'Neill wrote: > Flame of the West wrote: >> >> AC wrote: >> >> >>Didn't Gandalf leave Arda after he was killed in the fight with the >> >>balrog? >> > >> > That was a special intervention by Eru. >> >> I thought that *sending him back* was the special >> intervention by Eru. > > Geez! Sometimes you amaze me. Absolutely correct. Gandalf did the > wandering, despite being bound like the Valar to Arda. Eru sent him > back. But how did Gandalf get out in the first instance? Well, if you don't accept the Letter, then you either don't try to guess or you make something up. Since I accept the author's views where they are not directly contradicted, it is clear that only Eru could allow one of the Ainur who had went to Arda to leave, and thus his departure, like his return, is a case of divine intervention. Thus the Letter in question is vindicated, because that's all it was saying. -- A. Clausen maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien From: AC Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC3D864.CDE4AD2B@indigo.ie> Organization: The Tao of Cow Reply-To: maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net Message-ID: User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Lines: 59 X-Complaints-To: abuse@randori.com - Please include ALL headers, thanks. Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 15:13:34 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!irazu.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!69.22.128.15.MISMATCH!newsfeeder2.randori.com!news.randori.com!263039bc!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117214 On Thu, 15 May 2003 11:11:48 -0700, Michael O'Neill wrote: > AC wrote: >> >> On 12 May 2003 10:47:25 -0700, >> Johnny1A wrote: >> > Tord Kallqvist Romstad wrote in message news:... >> >> conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) writes: >> >> >> >> > Also note that this indicates that Sauron (and the other Ainur) were >> >> > ALL bound within the world until the end... >> >> >> >> Hmm... >> >> >> >> Didn't Gandalf leave Arda after he was killed in the fight with the >> >> balrog? >> > >> > That's debatable, actually. >> > >> > It's true that Eru Himself took a hand at that point, transforming >> > Gandalf into Gandalf the White, and giving him a broader mandate, and >> > probably some other instructions and mission orders. >> > >> > But it's never made clear (that I recall) whether Eru brought Olorin >> > (Gandalf) actually out of Arda to do this, or simply reached into Time >> > to accomplish it. >> >> "[Gandalf] was sent by a mere prudent plan of the angelic Valar or >> govenors; but Authority had taken up this plan and enlarged it, at the >> moment of its failure. 'Naked I was sent back for a brief time, until >> my task is done'. Sent back by whom, and whence? Not by the Gods' >> whose business is only with this embodied world and its time; for he >> 'passed out of thought and time'. Naked is alas! unclear. It was meant >> just literally, 'Unclothed like a child' (not disincarnate), and so >> ready to receive the white robes of the highest. Galadriel's power is >> not divine, and his healing in Lorien is meant to be no more than >> physical healing and refreshment." >> Letter #156 > > Why would Gandalf need healing if he had been sent back with a new > improved body by Eru. It was the same body. > > I know this IS supported by the text, but he wasn't convalescing. He was > re-embodied, supposedly stronger than before [although I challenge this > assertion elsewhere]. > > And while I'm at it, where's his old corpse? It was the same body. He died casting down the Balrog and returned in the same place, where he was picked up by Gwahir and brought to Lorien. Thus, there is no old corpse. -- A. Clausen maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien From: AC Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3EC41B77.34802154@indigo.ie> Organization: The Tao of Cow Reply-To: maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net Message-ID: User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Lines: 50 X-Complaints-To: abuse@randori.com - Please include ALL headers, thanks. Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 15:16:34 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!out.nntp.be!propagator2-sterling!in.nntp.be!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!69.22.128.15.MISMATCH!newsfeeder2.randori.com!news.randori.com!263039bc!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117212 On Thu, 15 May 2003 15:57:59 -0700, Michael O'Neill wrote: > AC wrote: >> >> On 14 May 2003 22:20:27 +0200, >> Tord Kallqvist Romstad wrote: >> > stephen@nomail.com writes: >> > >> >> Why? I do not really know. Personally I have never understood >> >> why Tolkien decided that that was what happened, as it does >> >> seem rather inconsistent with other parts of the mythology. >> >> But Tolkien was quite clear that Eru did remove him from Ea, >> >> and then sent him back enhanced. >> > >> > I agree about sending him back, but is it really 100% clear that Eru >> > actively removed him? It seems like the most likely theory, but I >> > cannot remember having read it anywhere. >> >> The Ainur that entered creation are bound to it. They cannot leave. Thus, >> for Olorin the Maia to be taken from Ea meant that Eru had to tinker with >> things. >> >> > >> >> Would it have been easier for Eru to do something else? I am >> >> not sure the word "easier" has any meaning to an omnipotent >> >> being. >> > >> > Perhaps not, but from an aesthetical point of view it seems better to >> > interfere as little as possible with the natural flow of events in >> > Ea. I don't think Eru would do something as drastic and unusual as >> > removing a maia's spirit from Ea unless he considered it absolutely >> > necessary. >> >> The Letter makes it clear that Eru interfered at the moment of the plan's >> failure. > > > > Another erroneous letter. When are you going to stop accepting this > rubbish as authoritative? Michael, why do I get the feeling you're trolling a bit here? The text in LotR, of itself, is far too cryptic to make any sense of, and I never really understood what "out of Time" meant until I actually read the Letter in question. -- A. Clausen maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net ###### Message-ID: <3EC3D35A.905CD678@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305140921.1678ada4@posting.google.com> <3EC33412.6A8E9ECC@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 22 Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 10:50:18 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.175.77 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052992232 194.125.175.77 (Thu, 15 May 2003 10:50:32 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 10:50:32 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!colt.net!newsfeed.esat.net!feeder.news.heanet.ie!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117259 TradeSurplus wrote: [lots of reasonably valid rebuttals which ignore the fact that Gandalf "wandered" apparently at will and nobody is stated to have intervened except to send him back] > Personally, my only reason for thinking of divine intervention at all is > that Tolkien specified it in Letters. Going just by LotR I see no need > for Gandalf to leave Ea or to be sent back by any beings more powerful > than the Valar. My point exactly. Timeless wandering seems like a fairly apt description > of a few days of exhausted, trancelike semi-consciousness to me. I agree an internal consciousness journey could be described in that way. Except that he *did* die. M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC3D5D4.58653BA1@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3EC33372.734EB51C@indigo.ie> <3EC34A26.E48EB80@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 86 Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 11:00:52 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.175.77 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052992867 194.125.175.77 (Thu, 15 May 2003 11:01:07 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 11:01:07 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.stueberl.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!easynews.net!newsfeed3.easynews.net!feeder.news.heanet.ie!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117257 AC wrote: > > On Thu, 15 May 2003 01:04:54 -0700, > Michael O'Neill wrote: > > stephen@nomail.com wrote: > >> > >> Michael O'Neill wrote: > >> : Tord Kallqvist Romstad wrote: > >> :> > >> :> Perhaps not, but from an aesthetical point of view it seems better to > >> :> interfere as little as possible with the natural flow of events in > >> :> Ea. I don't think Eru would do something as drastic and unusual as > >> :> removing a maia's spirit from Ea unless he considered it absolutely > >> :> necessary. > >> > >> : The point is [and I agree with you in principle] *was* it necessary? > >> : Maia were self-incernated beings. The Valar had already been given leave > >> : to incarnate bodies for the Elves who died previously. Why did they not > >> : simply create another body for Gandalf? They had the power and the > >> : authority to do so for Elves and Men, and we are told that the Istari > >> : came "clad in bodies as of Men, real and not feigned". > >> > >> : Why go to Eru at all? > >> > >> : M. > >> > >> They did not go to Eru. Eru intervened. There is no suggestion > >> that the Valar had anything whatsoever to do with Gandalf > >> being restored. That was an independent action of Eru. > > > > Backtrack a bit. > > > > Why do you say Eru "intervened"? > > > > Gandalf's comments were: > > > > "Then darkness took me; and I strayed out of thought and time, and I > > wandered far on roads that I will not tell." > > > > There is no mention in the LotR that Eru "intervened", per se [Letter > > wielders converge and put me out of myu misery please]. Gandalf > > describes himself as the prime mover. He was neither called nor taken to > > Eru. He wandered. That's the problem > > > > Gandalf and all the other Maiar are bound up with the life of Arda. How > > could *he* wander out of Arda? > > Is there any reason to doubt the veracity of the Letter in question? You mean, apart from the fact that the canonical text does not support the assertions it makes? Why no! Let's all write Letters! In case you're not familiar with the theory I'm peddling through verious threads here, its this: people who frame laws must word them to stand alone against scrupulous analysis: their intention at the time of framing cannot be taken as reliable a basis for a legal decision on a case unless the wording of the legislation actually supports it. Tolkiens "texts" are bodies of thought which describe a sub-created world which he himself said had to be seen to be internally self-consistent under logical review. Stating things in his letters which are not supported by the printed texts, even in the scraps published by his son Christopher, goes against this principle even to the extent of undermining the very logical self-consistency the author sought, as in this case. I accept that dealing the concept of Eru in detail was ultra vires the LotR story. However if Eru had acted as suggest then Gandalf wouldn't have "wandered" out of time [he wouldn't have been able to do this in any case, he was bound to Arda, as were all the Ainur who entered it except Melkor and he was another inconsistent "special case", but that's for another thread]. Instead the text would have referred to Gandalf being "called" out of thought and time after he died. This would have been consistent with the oblique references to what happenned to him an dbetray the authors intention regarding Eru. This wasn't done. M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC3D6AA.90DE1759@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3EC33372.734EB51C@indigo.ie> <3EC34A26.E48EB80@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 49 Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 11:04:26 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.175.77 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052993080 194.125.175.77 (Thu, 15 May 2003 11:04:40 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 11:04:40 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!colt.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117191 TradeSurplus wrote: > > Michael O'Neill wrote >... > > > >Backtrack a bit. > > > >Why do you say Eru "intervened"? > > > >Gandalf's comments were: > > > >"Then darkness took me; and I strayed out of thought and time, and I > >wandered far on roads that I will not tell." > > > >There is no mention in the LotR that Eru "intervened", per se [Letter > >wielders converge and put me out of myu misery please]. Gandalf > >describes himself as the prime mover. He was neither called nor taken > to > >Eru. He wandered. That's the problem > > > >Gandalf and all the other Maiar are bound up with the life of Arda. How > >could *he* wander out of Arda? > > Nothing in the LotR quote requires that Gandalf left Arda. Yes it does. [confession of a dope addict removed] > Alternatively almost die in a titanic struggle with a demon of the > netherworld, the effect should be more or less the same. He did die. Read the text again. > The only reason we believe that Gandalf actually meant that he left Arda > is because Tolkien says so in Letters. It is terribly inconsistent to > accept Gandalf's leaving Arda from Letters but reject Tolkien's > explanation for it from the same source. There is no inconsistency in my assertion. My stance is that he shouldn't have had to leave at all. However, "out of thought and time" can mean nothing else except "out of Arda". Work it out for yourself. M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC3D6F3.3207E067@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 29 Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 11:05:39 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.175.77 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052993153 194.125.175.77 (Thu, 15 May 2003 11:05:53 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 11:05:53 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!colt.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117251 AC wrote: > > On 14 May 2003 21:23:34 +0200, > Tord Kallqvist Romstad wrote: > > stephen@nomail.com writes: > > > >> The Istari were not mortal. Gandalf's spirit left Ea because Eru > >> willed it so. There is no suggestion that Saruman's spirit > >> left Ea. Gandalf returned to Ea, and then to the Deathless Lands, > >> because it was his normal fate to remain until the end. Eru > >> just gave him a little vacation from time. > > > > But why? Wouldn't it have been easier to just reincarnate him in his > > old body (or a copy, assuming his old body was too badly destroyed in > > the fight with the balrog) immediately instead of going through the > > trouble of taking his spirit out of Ea and sending it back? Did > > Gandalf need to take some kind of course to become a certified white > > wizard? > > Gandalf just didn't pop out of Time, and then return. He was also > "enhanced". It is clear that Eru took the plan of the Valar and expanded > it, through the instrument of Gandalf. I don't see this enhancement at all. The Istari were deliberately "dumbed down" when they were incarnated as Men. Gandalf the White had the restrictors taken off, that's all. M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC3D765.6C4B3C20@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3EC332BA.B6D8AFA2@indigo.ie> <3EC34B40.5A5B820B@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 58 Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 11:07:33 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.175.77 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052993267 194.125.175.77 (Thu, 15 May 2003 11:07:47 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 11:07:47 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!colt.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117254 Tar-Elenion wrote: > > In article <3EC34B40.5A5B820B@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > > Tar-Elenion wrote: > > > > > > > Trite and unconvincing. Why was he plucked out of time? How was it that > > > > a Maia, who should have been bound to Arda until the End, ended up in > > > > the Outer Void being turbocharged by Eru? > > > > > > > > M. > > > > > > > > > > As the Letter states: > > > "He was sent by a mere prudent plan of the angelic Valar or governors; > > > but Authority [Eru] had taken up this plan and enlarged it, at the moment > > > of its failure." > > > > > > What was the "momemnt of its failure"? > > > Gandalf's death. What happens when an incarnate Ainu is slain? > > > While it seems they can 'incarnate' again, this takes time. Thus the > > > necessary intervention by Eru. Gandalf 'returned to life' in a matter of > > > weeks, and in an 'enhanced' state, rather than taking months or years > > > and returning weaker or no better off than before. > > > > > > > > I'd almost buy that. Except for one teensy eensy thing. > > > > Eru is not mentioned as doing any of this in the LotR OR the appendices. > > Given the importance of this action to the ENTIRE STORY, why wasn't this > > clarified in the text/appendices? > > > > Moreover, Gandalf says "wandered". He wasn't even summoned, like the > > souls of the Children are, by Mandos, to Aman. There is no other active > > agency described, never mind the kind of omnipotent active agency you > > suggest. > > > > M. > > > > Gandalf says: > "Then darkness took me; and I strayed out of thought and time, and I > wandered far on roads that I will not tell." > If he left time he was not within the World, and thus passed beyond the > pale of the Valar and their possible actions, as their concern is within > Time and the World That Is. This leaves only Eru. I agree with your interpretation. I'm disgareeing with the need for this mechanism. I'm noting the text doesn not support active intervention by Eru: that he, Gandalf, did the wandering, that he was not "called": and that this wandering was beyond his abilities or those of the Valar. M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC3D789.C553F5D5@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 19 Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 11:08:09 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.175.77 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052993303 194.125.175.77 (Thu, 15 May 2003 11:08:23 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 11:08:23 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!zen.net.uk!newspeer.lavaseals.co.uk!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117189 AC wrote: > > On 12 May 2003 16:26:47 +0200, > Tord Kallqvist Romstad wrote: > > conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) writes: > > > >> Also note that this indicates that Sauron (and the other Ainur) were > >> ALL bound within the world until the end... > > > > Hmm... > > > > Didn't Gandalf leave Arda after he was killed in the fight with the > > balrog? > > That was a special intervention by Eru. Show where this is stated in the LotR. M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC3D7D4.9E3A527F@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 17 Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 11:09:24 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.175.77 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052993379 194.125.175.77 (Thu, 15 May 2003 11:09:39 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 11:09:39 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!skynet.be!skynet.be!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117192 Flame of the West wrote: > > AC wrote: > > >>Didn't Gandalf leave Arda after he was killed in the fight with the > >>balrog? > > > > That was a special intervention by Eru. > > I thought that *sending him back* was the special > intervention by Eru. Geez! Sometimes you amaze me. Absolutely correct. Gandalf did the wandering, despite being bound like the Valar to Arda. Eru sent him back. But how did Gandalf get out in the first instance? M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC3D864.CDE4AD2B@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 47 Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 11:11:48 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.175.77 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052993522 194.125.175.77 (Thu, 15 May 2003 11:12:02 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 11:12:02 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!colt.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117196 AC wrote: > > On 12 May 2003 10:47:25 -0700, > Johnny1A wrote: > > Tord Kallqvist Romstad wrote in message news:... > >> conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) writes: > >> > >> > Also note that this indicates that Sauron (and the other Ainur) were > >> > ALL bound within the world until the end... > >> > >> Hmm... > >> > >> Didn't Gandalf leave Arda after he was killed in the fight with the > >> balrog? > > > > That's debatable, actually. > > > > It's true that Eru Himself took a hand at that point, transforming > > Gandalf into Gandalf the White, and giving him a broader mandate, and > > probably some other instructions and mission orders. > > > > But it's never made clear (that I recall) whether Eru brought Olorin > > (Gandalf) actually out of Arda to do this, or simply reached into Time > > to accomplish it. > > "[Gandalf] was sent by a mere prudent plan of the angelic Valar or > govenors; but Authority had taken up this plan and enlarged it, at the > moment of its failure. 'Naked I was sent back for a brief time, until > my task is done'. Sent back by whom, and whence? Not by the Gods' > whose business is only with this embodied world and its time; for he > 'passed out of thought and time'. Naked is alas! unclear. It was meant > just literally, 'Unclothed like a child' (not disincarnate), and so > ready to receive the white robes of the highest. Galadriel's power is > not divine, and his healing in Lorien is meant to be no more than > physical healing and refreshment." > Letter #156 Why would Gandalf need healing if he had been sent back with a new improved body by Eru. I know this IS supported by the text, but he wasn't convalescing. He was re-embodied, supposedly stronger than before [although I challenge this assertion elsewhere]. And while I'm at it, where's his old corpse? M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC3D89C.81256C1F@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080435.68a8f04f@posting.google.com> <3EBADC40.52C5E72F@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080948.200a60a4@posting.google.com> <3EBB6390.98E78E65@indigo.ie> <3EBD6756.9D49361@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305130119.312838f7@posting.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 14 Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 11:12:44 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.175.77 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052993578 194.125.175.77 (Thu, 15 May 2003 11:12:58 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 11:12:58 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.stueberl.de!newsfeed.vmunix.org!uio.no!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!colt.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117260 Conrad Dunkerson wrote: > > stephen@nomail.com wrote in message news:... > > > How does he rebuild a body if disincarnate Maiar are incapable > > of manipulating the physical world? > > LOL! > > That DOES seem rather a contradiction, doesn't it? Its actually the best rebuttal to my assertion yet! M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC3D91A.BF416C61@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBC06C3.6184B7AC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090928.76f37611@posting.google.com> <3EBCC2DF.B99A1EA@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305120158.1fd24b8c@posting.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 44 Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 11:14:50 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.175.77 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1052993705 194.125.175.77 (Thu, 15 May 2003 11:15:05 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 11:15:05 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.stueberl.de!newsfeed.vmunix.org!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117188 Conrad Dunkerson wrote: > > Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EBCC2DF.B99A1EA@indigo.ie>... > > Conrad Dunkerson wrote: > > >> Because Gandalf suggesting that Sauron could control the weather in > NO > >> WAY argues against Maiar being unable to control the weather. > > > Nope. > > Because while the passage you quoted in support of your assertion that > > Sauron could control the weather ["his arm has grown long"] was > > contradicted by the AUTHOR several paragraphs later when he confirmed > > Caradhras was the culprit "Caradhras had defeated them." > > You just aren't getting this. > > Ok, let us assume that you are absolutely correct. The author > unequivocably attributed the blizzard to Caradhras. I don't think > that is the case, but hey... why not. > > Guess what? > > Gandalf STILL suggested that Sauron >could< be behind it. Even if > Sauron WASN'T behind it that gives us one Ainur suggesting that > another can control the weather far away. Which... would be rather > strange if it were as absolutely impossible for them to do as you > claim. > > It does not matter whether Sauron, Caradhras or playful giants caused > the storm... no matter WHO actually did it Gandalf still suggested > that Sauron COULD. Conrad, you lost this one, okay? Gandalf Mark I was not omniscient and was full of fears and could feel the cold in his bones. Its stated in the text by the Author the Caradhras was the active agent and corroberated by Gimli that Caradhras was an evil force. HTH M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC41B77.34802154@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 41 Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 15:57:59 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.175.57 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1053010694 194.125.175.57 (Thu, 15 May 2003 15:58:14 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 15:58:14 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117245 AC wrote: > > On 14 May 2003 22:20:27 +0200, > Tord Kallqvist Romstad wrote: > > stephen@nomail.com writes: > > > >> Why? I do not really know. Personally I have never understood > >> why Tolkien decided that that was what happened, as it does > >> seem rather inconsistent with other parts of the mythology. > >> But Tolkien was quite clear that Eru did remove him from Ea, > >> and then sent him back enhanced. > > > > I agree about sending him back, but is it really 100% clear that Eru > > actively removed him? It seems like the most likely theory, but I > > cannot remember having read it anywhere. > > The Ainur that entered creation are bound to it. They cannot leave. Thus, > for Olorin the Maia to be taken from Ea meant that Eru had to tinker with > things. > > > > >> Would it have been easier for Eru to do something else? I am > >> not sure the word "easier" has any meaning to an omnipotent > >> being. > > > > Perhaps not, but from an aesthetical point of view it seems better to > > interfere as little as possible with the natural flow of events in > > Ea. I don't think Eru would do something as drastic and unusual as > > removing a maia's spirit from Ea unless he considered it absolutely > > necessary. > > The Letter makes it clear that Eru interfered at the moment of the plan's > failure. Another erroneous letter. When are you going to stop accepting this rubbish as authoritative? M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC41CCC.D9205AFF@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3EC332BA.B6D8AFA2@indigo.ie> <3EC34B40.5A5B820B@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 44 Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 16:03:40 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.175.57 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1053011040 194.125.175.57 (Thu, 15 May 2003 16:04:00 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 16:04:00 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117195 TradeSurplus wrote: > > Michael O'Neill wrote >... > > > >Moreover, Gandalf says "wandered". He wasn't even summoned, like the > >souls of the Children are, by Mandos, to Aman. There is no other active > >agency described, never mind the kind of omnipotent active agency you > >suggest. > > Good point about Gandalf's soul not, apparently, being summoned by > Mandos to the halls of waiting as all mortal souls are before being sent > on their journey out of Ea. This does rather contradict your idea that > Gandalf's soul was made the same as that of a mortal Man. If Gandalf's > soul behaved as a mortal's would then he should have stopped off at > Mandos for a while. There is no hint of that in any text that I'm aware > of. > > Trade. Point taken but I was presenting an either-or argument. Either he is a Maia and shouldn't therefore be able to leave Arda anyway, OR he is a Man whose soul should first be called to Mandos before being released to go Beyond and who then couldn't be admitted to Valinor. The argument that Eru *had* to intervene to re-cloth Gandalf is clearly a non-runner. Maiar may be self-incarnators, but Gandalf "was clad" passive, he didn't clad himself the first time. The Valar clad him the first time, they could have done so again instantaneously. And none of this would have required Gandalf to expend his own spiritual energy any more than a reincarnated Elf in his/her original body owuld have used his/her spiritual energy to do this. Why leave Arda at all, why didn't the Valar just send him back re-clad and with no shackles on his power this time. That was the internally logical thing to do. FWIW M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC432B0.5EB6012@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 30 Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 17:37:04 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.177.129 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1053016639 194.125.177.129 (Thu, 15 May 2003 17:37:19 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 17:37:19 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!opentransit.net!wanadoo.fr!proxad.net!peer1.news.newnet.co.uk!peer1.news.newnet.co.uk!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117244 Flame of the West wrote: > > Michael O'Neill wrote: > > > "Emissaries they were from Lords of the West, the Valar, who still took > > counsel for the governance of Middle-earth, and when the shadow of > > Sauron began first to stir again took this means of resisting him. For > > with the consent of Eru they sent members of their own high order, but > > clad in bodies of as of Men, real and not feigned, but subject to the > > fears and pains and weariness of earth, able to hunger and thirst and be > > slain; though because of their noble spirits they did not die, and aged > > only by the cares and labours of many long years. And this the Valar > > did, desiring to amend the errors of old, especially that they had > > attempted to guard and seclude the Eldar by their own might and glory > > fully revealed; whereas now their emissaries were forbidden to reveal > > themselves in forms of majesty, or to seek to rule the wills of Men and > > Elves by open display of power, but coming in shapes weak and humble > > were bidden to advise and persuade Men and Elves to good, and to seek to > > unite in love and understanding all those whom Sauron, should he come > > again, would endeavour to dominate and corrupt." > > That's not mortality. The Wizards were like the Elves in > that they do not die but could be slain, and the Elves are > immortal according to Tolkien's taxonomy. Once again, you've hit the nail on the head. Decrepit Elves. M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC43398.C4A51F8E@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305150316.36b7a0ee@posting.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 36 Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 17:40:56 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.177.129 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1053016871 194.125.177.129 (Thu, 15 May 2003 17:41:11 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 17:41:11 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!colt.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117187 Conrad Dunkerson wrote: > > Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie>... > > > No, and this is the problem. How could the Istari have been mortal and > > still remain Ainur, or if Ainur, how could Gandalf's spirit have left > > Arda to go to Eru after hid body died? > > Gandalf did not 'leave' Arda. He was TAKEN out of Arda. How could > Eru do that? He's 'God'... he can do whatever he wants. He "wandered" COnrad. He wasn't taken. He was however "sent", but he didn't need Eru to do that. > At that... if you do not accept the statements in Letters (and > elsewhere) that Gandalf remained an Ainu then there is no reason to > accept the letter which indicates that Gandalf left the world. The > text of LotR says that he passed 'out of time', but hey... without the > letter to explain it that is open to interpretation. Gandalf could > have just meant that he wasn't really aware of the flow of events > while he was dead. A sound comment and not trammelled by the flesh of the Letters! You are correct Conrad. Since the Valar clad him originally [is this in dispute?] they could have clad him again, or the term "naked" could mean that he came back in a Maiar body but chosen so as to look his old body. And of course this time it would be as his fully powered self. The notion of having to turbo-charge something that was originally restricted is a nonsense. Simply remove the original restriction. Why bring Eru into this at all? M. ###### From: Stan Brown Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 21:15:28 -0400 Organization: Oak Road Systems Message-ID: References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC32D11.4ED02DB5@indigo.ie> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.60 X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 34 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!irazu.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-06!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117302 Michael O'Neill wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien: >Well, I've given the citation elsewhere from UT which defines what he >was. "Real and not feigned" would be the phrase I'd turn on there. > >Over to you, Stan. Perhaps this is the quote? If so, it's no wonder you don't post it, since it refutes (not supports) your position: "For with the consent of Eru they sent members of their own high order, but clad in bodies as of Men, real and not feigned, but subject to the fears and pains and weariness of earth, able to hunger and thirst and be slain; though because of their noble spirits they did not die, and aged only by the cares and labours of many long years." Note: not "bodies of Men", but "bodies _as_ of Men" -- i.e., looking like Men's bodies, but not being Men's bodies. The "real and not feigned" means that they were really physical, with physical needs, rather than some sort of illusion, not that they were bodies of Men. Since you seem to like quotes from LotR, except when you don't, consider this from App B: "They came therefore in the shape of Men. though they were never young and aged only slowly. and they had many powers of mind and hand." I think if Tolkien had wanted to tell us that they were Men he would have said so. The phrase "in shape of Men" admits of only one explanation: they looked like men, but they were not Men. -- Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com/ "By 'epic' I wish to suggest heroic, not long and boring." -- Fred Plotkin, in /Opera 101/ (1994) ###### From: Flame of the West Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 21:20:03 -0400 Lines: 16 Message-ID: References: <3EBC38E0.4C4F7BCA@indigo.ie> <3EBD09AB.FDD23319@indigo.ie> <3EBD63E5.D9871A8D@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305120918.516207d3@posting.google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: UmFuZG9tSVaS32tKND4OiX/ymCYOY3+rDT2V/LD6qWG919Gr8IBSQ5C7f6RPTE6Y X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 May 2003 01:53:51 GMT In-Reply-To: X-Accept-Language: en-us, en User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030507 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!newsfeed.vmunix.org!newsfeed.cwix.com!feed2.news.rcn.net!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117272 Tamim wrote: >>Why should Sauron have >>had any trouble with a tiny piece of metal? > > Because it was tiny. Size matters not! -- FotW The Official Return of the King Protest Site http://members.aol.com/rotkprotest/ ###### From: Flame of the West Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 21:24:03 -0400 Lines: 17 Message-ID: References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: UmFuZG9tSVYk1djbGEGXa0jZiujB4eLow60Z9W6jaDjzNPiSCyaRYOcXEhgb0TP1 X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 May 2003 01:53:52 GMT In-Reply-To: X-Accept-Language: en-us, en User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030507 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed2.news.rcn.net!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117273 AC wrote: > The Ainur that entered Ea were bound to it until the End. Without divine > intervention, there is no reason at all to believe that Gandalf would have > been any different than Sauron or any other Ainur that had been killed. > > The only beings that actually departed were Men. Ah, yes, I see. Quite so. -- FotW The Official Return of the King Protest Site http://members.aol.com/rotkprotest/ ###### From: Flame of the West Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 21:25:21 -0400 Lines: 30 Message-ID: References: <3EBC38E0.4C4F7BCA@indigo.ie> <3EBD09AB.FDD23319@indigo.ie> <3EBD63E5.D9871A8D@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305120918.516207d3@posting.google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: UmFuZG9tSVaD7mmXUuMGt/zLRtaqcFjvRVms+NDwX3utt9X1LlG4MwSq0Moj3R+w X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 May 2003 01:53:53 GMT In-Reply-To: X-Accept-Language: en-us, en User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030507 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed2.news.rcn.net!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117274 Morgil wrote: > Perhaps we are looking at this issue from > a wrong angle. Instead of asking how could > Sauron carry the Ring in spirit form, maybe > we should ask how could the Ring be made > bareable for a non-corporeal being? > > It's quite a stretch I admit, but we know that > the Ring makes it's wearer invisible by > transfering him into the shadow-world. > Including all the clothes and weapons he is > carrying, *and* including the Ring itself. We > also know that powerful Ringbearer could > make the Rings invisible for the eyes of > others. Perhaps the answer is simply that > when the Ring was in this shadow-form, the > normal laws of physics did not affect it in > the usual way. Yay me! :) Good point. But don't tell Steuard about physics not applying or he may get depressed. -- FotW The Official Return of the King Protest Site http://members.aol.com/rotkprotest/ ###### From: Flame of the West Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 21:34:15 -0400 Lines: 23 Message-ID: References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D1C1.60E78C29@indigo.ie> <3EC2F3E0.4E406C90@indigo.ie> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: UmFuZG9tSVbCllo4XjFaktxFOWjbDqOhMPZ/4SBuW5MvwbywJLrGgUJASE+MhhCa X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 May 2003 01:53:54 GMT In-Reply-To: <3EC2F3E0.4E406C90@indigo.ie> X-Accept-Language: en-us, en User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030507 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!nntp.abs.net!feed2.news.rcn.net!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117275 Michael O'Neill wrote: > "...we must assume..." > > Nope. Let's r"eason" instead of merely *assuming* things. Let us reason, indeed. Both Silmarillion and UT were drafts, works in progress. He did not know when writing them that Christopher would someday publish them as is. The Letters OTOH were public pronouncements. Tolkien knew he was going on record when writing them, even if he wasn't broadcasting them. For that reason, Letters carries much more weight than Silm. and UT, even if they say things you find difficult to reconcile with LotR. -- FotW The Official Return of the King Protest Site http://members.aol.com/rotkprotest/ ###### From: Flame of the West Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 21:39:33 -0400 Lines: 16 Message-ID: References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC32D11.4ED02DB5@indigo.ie> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: UmFuZG9tSVYRgYMU1hXE2KpengtR+eYC0LnWaumvUXvGddAKvTxgcwZUGM4F3M0/ X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 May 2003 01:53:55 GMT In-Reply-To: <3EC32D11.4ED02DB5@indigo.ie> X-Accept-Language: en-us, en User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030507 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!surfnet.nl!feeder.news.heanet.ie!news.indigo.ie!news-out.cwix.com!newsfeed.cwix.com!feed2.news.rcn.net!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117276 Michael O'Neill wrote: > Well, I've given the citation elsewhere from UT which defines what he > was. "Real and not feigned" would be the phrase I'd turn on there. Yes, their bodies were real and not feigned. But the similarity to Men was feigned and not real. We know this because those bodies lasted thousands of years. -- FotW The Official Return of the King Protest Site http://members.aol.com/rotkprotest/ ###### From: Flame of the West Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 21:41:16 -0400 Lines: 16 Message-ID: References: <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3EC332BA.B6D8AFA2@indigo.ie> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: UmFuZG9tSVYpYfWSWw3XSmOnxH+ftYmRxsA52+1v3brWKjr2n8ZFE9GZ/bcaoj28 X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 May 2003 01:53:56 GMT In-Reply-To: <3EC332BA.B6D8AFA2@indigo.ie> X-Accept-Language: en-us, en User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030507 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed2.news.rcn.net!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117277 Michael O'Neill wrote: > How was it that > a Maia, who should have been bound to Arda until the End, ended up in > the Outer Void being turbocharged by Eru? Because Eru willed it so, in order to make possible the defeat of Sauron. -- FotW The Official Return of the King Protest Site http://members.aol.com/rotkprotest/ ###### From: Flame of the West Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 21:46:11 -0400 Lines: 22 Message-ID: References: <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3EC33372.734EB51C@indigo.ie> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: UmFuZG9tSVZlRcxEIyhY5cbmaEcXxnMv/GbUrzBcH5fHdaMeSB528eNY3beG6We3 X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 May 2003 01:53:57 GMT In-Reply-To: <3EC33372.734EB51C@indigo.ie> X-Accept-Language: en-us, en User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030507 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!newsfeed.stueberl.de!small1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!border1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!feed2.news.rcn.net!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117278 Michael O'Neill wrote: > The point is [and I agree with you in principle] *was* it necessary? > Maia were self-incernated beings. The Valar had already been given leave > to incarnate bodies for the Elves who died previously. Why did they not > simply create another body for Gandalf? They had the power and the > authority to do so for Elves and Men, and we are told that the Istari > came "clad in bodies as of Men, real and not feigned". > > Why go to Eru at all? Possibly because JRRT felt that it made for a more compelling narrative when Gandalf explained what happened to him. -- FotW The Official Return of the King Protest Site http://members.aol.com/rotkprotest/ ###### From: Flame of the West Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 21:50:08 -0400 Lines: 24 Message-ID: References: <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305140921.1678ada4@posting.google.com> <3EC33412.6A8E9ECC@indigo.ie> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: UmFuZG9tSVZ4fPugbwwgnb4YEuDNDqevQPvPXrt8K17GfA6PRyNh9nbydAAgkTBK X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 May 2003 01:53:58 GMT In-Reply-To: <3EC33412.6A8E9ECC@indigo.ie> X-Accept-Language: en-us, en User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030507 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!skynet.be!skynet.be!news-out.cwix.com!newsfeed.cwix.com!feed2.news.rcn.net!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117279 Michael O'Neill wrote: > Did Tolkien actually say that the Wizards ceased to be Ainur? > > No, and this is the problem. How could the Istari have been mortal and > still remain Ainur, or if Ainur, how could Gandalf's spirit have left > Arda to go to Eru after hid body died? It's only a problem because you won't accept what everyone else here is saying: Eru made an exception in Gandalf's case. Gandalf was an exception to the rule that Ainur were bound to Arda. Eru released him for a while because his mission to Middle-earth was so important to the unfolding of Eru's will there. This was Eru performing a miracle, if you will: a direct overriding to the way Arda was set up. -- FotW The Official Return of the King Protest Site http://members.aol.com/rotkprotest/ ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien From: AC Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC3D789.C553F5D5@indigo.ie> Reply-To: maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net Message-ID: User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (CYGWIN_NT-5.0) Lines: 31 X-Complaints-To: abuse@randori.com - Please include ALL headers, thanks. Organization: http://www.randori.com Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 02:44:26 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!69.22.128.15.MISMATCH!newsfeeder2.randori.com!news.randori.com!263039bc!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117290 On Thu, 15 May 2003 17:41:25 -0400, Flame of the West wrote: > Michael O'Neill wrote: > >>>>Didn't Gandalf leave Arda after he was killed in the fight with the >>>>balrog? >>> >>>That was a special intervention by Eru. >> >> Show where this is stated in the LotR. > > It isn't. It's in Letters. I really don't know why you > have such a problem with Tolkien amplifying a bit, > giving us a little more information, in his Letters. > You seem to regard as illegitimate or erroneous > anything he says in Letters that isn't *directly* > implied by the text of LotR. But why *should* > JRRT have so restricted himself? Why *not* tell > us a little bit more than could be deduced from > the text? What I can't understand is why Michael rejects Letters out of hand, and yet quotes from UT and Sil. In purely canonical terms, none of them are on the best footing, and using strictly non-canonical texts to refute strictly non-canonical texts seems rather odd to me. Beyond that, he seems to have stretch the texts he does choose to the point of breaking. -- A. Clausen maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net ###### From: conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 16 May 2003 04:51:56 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 43 Message-ID: <1178b6d1.0305160351.5eeda02@posting.google.com> References: <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305140921.1678ada4@posting.google.com> <3EC33412.6A8E9ECC@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.42.51.28 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1053085917 10439 127.0.0.1 (16 May 2003 11:51:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 May 2003 11:51:57 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!snoopy.risq.qc.ca!headwall.stanford.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117299 Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EC33412.6A8E9ECC@indigo.ie>... > ...entities that looked like Men, felt like Men, but "because of their > noble spirits they did not die" like Men, were ... Elves! Or.... Tom Bombadil. Or... Maiar who chose to look like humans. > Gandalf, with his survival of the fall from the bridge in Moria into > deep water, his survival underwater and his headlong ascent up the > Endless Stair and finally the fight with the Balrog, vastly exceeded the > abilities of *any* incarnate, Elf or Man, but only Glorfindel, Fingolfin > or Feanor came close to duplicating these feats of prowess and > endurance. Gandalf therefore seems to be a Super-Elf. Hmmmm.... what could there be that would live for millenia and be more powerful than an Elf? What possible creature in Tolkien's world could be humanoid in appearance and able to survive something like that? Could it be a freaking MAIA!?!?!?! Why golly... I think it could. > Yet when his body died his spirit went to Eru and was not bound to Arda. ONLY if we take the letter at its word. You have accepted that other interpretations of that passage (in isolation) exist. If you accept that the letter is correct about Gandalf leaving Arda then your insistence that the letter be disregarded in all else is just contrariness. > How could the Istari have been mortal and still remain Ainur, or if > Ainur, how could Gandalf's spirit have left Arda to go to Eru after > hid body died? They were Ainur. Gandalf was taken out by the direct intervention of Eru. It is all explained in the letter. If you reject the letter then you need not assume Gandalf left Arda... nor even that he was EVER an Ainu (which is stated nowhere in LotR). The 'contradiction' exists only thru your willingness to accept some texts outside LotR and not others... or even some parts of a single letter but not others. ###### From: conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 16 May 2003 04:57:17 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 23 Message-ID: <1178b6d1.0305160357.66264d2e@posting.google.com> References: <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3EC332BA.B6D8AFA2@indigo.ie> <3EC34B40.5A5B820B@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.42.51.28 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1053086237 10588 127.0.0.1 (16 May 2003 11:57:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 May 2003 11:57:17 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!snoopy.risq.qc.ca!headwall.stanford.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117297 Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EC34B40.5A5B820B@indigo.ie>... > Eru is not mentioned as doing any of this in the LotR OR the appendices. > Given the importance of this action to the ENTIRE STORY, why wasn't this > clarified in the text/appendices? "Hail Theoden King! I bid you welcome! I apologize for being late, but you see I had to leave the world and speak with God to get new instructions on how to handle things down here! However, please do not be intimidated... I am not supposed to reveal who I truly am or attempt to sway others through fear... so, think of me as just some harmless old man... who was resurrected by God. Got it?" Of course. So very logical. Why would Gandalf NOT have gone into detail about divine intervention. Should have been in the text. Absolutely. Oi! > Moreover, Gandalf says "wandered". Which could mean any number of things. Including, 'I milled around aimlessly and found myself outside of Time - imagine my surprise'. ###### From: conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 16 May 2003 04:58:55 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 7 Message-ID: <1178b6d1.0305160358.5ca916db@posting.google.com> References: <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC3D864.CDE4AD2B@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.42.51.28 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1053086336 10631 127.0.0.1 (16 May 2003 11:58:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 May 2003 11:58:56 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!irazu.switch.ch!newsfeed.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117306 Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EC3D864.CDE4AD2B@indigo.ie>... > Why would Gandalf need healing if he had been sent back with a new > improved body by Eru. This one is in LotR (as well as Letters)... his spirit re-entered the same body. Check the timeline in the appendices. ###### From: conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 16 May 2003 05:00:33 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 8 Message-ID: <1178b6d1.0305160400.6921616e@posting.google.com> References: <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3EC41B77.34802154@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.42.51.28 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1053086433 10685 127.0.0.1 (16 May 2003 12:00:33 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 May 2003 12:00:33 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!snoopy.risq.qc.ca!headwall.stanford.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117295 Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EC41B77.34802154@indigo.ie>... > Another erroneous letter. When are you going to stop accepting this > rubbish as authoritative? I promise to stop doing show the MOMENT you show that you have a better understanding of what JRR Tolkien intended Middle-Earth to be like than JRR Tolkien did. ###### From: conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 16 May 2003 05:07:07 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 9 Message-ID: <1178b6d1.0305160407.111de053@posting.google.com> References: <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3EC332BA.B6D8AFA2@indigo.ie> <3EC34B40.5A5B820B@indigo.ie> <3EC41CCC.D9205AFF@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.42.51.28 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1053086828 11097 127.0.0.1 (16 May 2003 12:07:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 May 2003 12:07:08 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117296 Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EC41CCC.D9205AFF@indigo.ie>... > Maiar may be self-incarnators, but Gandalf "was clad" passive, he didn't > clad himself the first time. The Valar clad him the first time, they > could have done so again instantaneously. Citation? And note that the one you have been using does NOT say that he "was clad" by some outside agency (Valar or otherwise). That 'quotation' ISN'T. ###### From: Flame of the West Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 09:02:05 -0400 Lines: 36 Message-ID: References: <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3EC332BA.B6D8AFA2@indigo.ie> <3EC34B40.5A5B820B@indigo.ie> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: UmFuZG9tSVb6t+cJNMQDCb/DdaN+xZ4FwcqyYfdCC68ZDk9WCK7KMO3qEKAje2gW X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 May 2003 22:39:01 GMT In-Reply-To: <3EC34B40.5A5B820B@indigo.ie> X-Accept-Language: en-us, en User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030507 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed2.news.rcn.net!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117326 Michael O'Neill wrote: > Eru is not mentioned as doing any of this in the LotR OR the appendices. So what? Is Tolkien not allowed to say anything in his Letters that was not spelled out in LotR? Why would he even bother just to repeat what he's already published? > Given the importance of this action to the ENTIRE STORY, why wasn't this > clarified in the text/appendices? The action was important, but the fact that it was Eru rather than (say) the Valar who carried it out is not important to the story. > Moreover, Gandalf says "wandered". He wasn't even summoned, like the > souls of the Children are, by Mandos, to Aman. There is no other active > agency described, never mind the kind of omnipotent active agency you > suggest. Gandalf was reticent by nature. He didn't say much more than he had to, and probably said less than he should have on occasion. In this case he "walked on paths that I will not tell." It would have been unlike Gandalf to give an explicit, metaphysical description of precisely what happened to him. -- FotW The Official Return of the King Protest Site http://members.aol.com/rotkprotest/ ###### From: Flame of the West Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 18:50:42 -0400 Lines: 16 Message-ID: References: <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3EC332BA.B6D8AFA2@indigo.ie> <3EC34B40.5A5B820B@indigo.ie> <3EC41CCC.D9205AFF@indigo.ie> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: UmFuZG9tSVaXRu1vgwIoGEJoqPoXzLP4xzfmJcoCG87r9Op1YSycRpyAS+TxVSVn X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 17 May 2003 17:39:08 GMT In-Reply-To: <3EC41CCC.D9205AFF@indigo.ie> X-Accept-Language: en-us, en User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030507 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!logbridge.uoregon.edu!feed2.news.rcn.net!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117322 Michael O'Neill wrote: > Why leave Arda at all, why didn't the Valar just send him back re-clad > and with no shackles on his power this time. That was the internally > logical thing to do. How do you know that the Valar were allowed to do this? They could reincarnate Elves, but I haven't seen anything about being allowed to reincarnate Ainur. -- FotW The Official Return of the King Protest Site http://members.aol.com/rotkprotest/ ###### From: Flame of the West Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 18:53:37 -0400 Lines: 14 Message-ID: References: <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305150316.36b7a0ee@posting.google.com> <3EC43398.C4A51F8E@indigo.ie> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: UmFuZG9tSVbTb8AVF5q3ALNN4ZtekWO3lJjgIKy4tedcT/JH4bplyk8R4EWcdCB5 X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 17 May 2003 17:39:09 GMT In-Reply-To: <3EC43398.C4A51F8E@indigo.ie> X-Accept-Language: en-us, en User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030507 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!logbridge.uoregon.edu!feed2.news.rcn.net!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117323 Michael O'Neill wrote: > Why bring Eru into this at all? Don't ask us. We didn't do it - Tolkien did. Hold a seance and ask him why he did it. -- FotW The Official Return of the King Protest Site http://members.aol.com/rotkprotest/ ###### From: Flame of the West Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 19:01:01 -0400 Lines: 17 Message-ID: References: <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3EC332BA.B6D8AFA2@indigo.ie> <3EC34B40.5A5B820B@indigo.ie> <3EC41CCC.D9205AFF@indigo.ie> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: UmFuZG9tSVaseFMihI7iA/7Kh/WntsEYkpNlt/SaqX1CnUyrlakIXvS+pdGCBBJe X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 17 May 2003 17:39:10 GMT In-Reply-To: X-Accept-Language: en-us, en User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030507 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!logbridge.uoregon.edu!feed2.news.rcn.net!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117324 TradeSurplus wrote: > There is no error or inconsistency in > Letters in this case, merely a different interpretation of events and > arguably one with more authority than any reader's interpretation. Yes, one could certainly argue that JRR Tolkien could speak with greater authority on matters involving LotR than a mere reader. -- FotW The Official Return of the King Protest Site http://members.aol.com/rotkprotest/ ###### From: Tar-Elenion Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Message-ID: References: <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305150316.36b7a0ee@posting.google.com> <3EC43398.C4A51F8E@indigo.ie> <3EC827FD.18963AF1@indigo.ie> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Lines: 31 NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.236.164.115 X-Complaints-To: abuse@attbi.com X-Trace: sccrnsc01 1053277587 12.236.164.115 (Sun, 18 May 2003 17:06:27 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 17:06:27 GMT Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 17:06:27 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!snoopy.risq.qc.ca!newsfeed.news2me.com!newsfeed2.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!wn14feed!wn13feed!wn12feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.203!attbi_feed3!attbi.com!sccrnsc01.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117385 In article <3EC827FD.18963AF1@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > Tar-Elenion wrote: > > > > In article <3EC43398.C4A51F8E@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > > > > > > You are correct Conrad. Since the Valar clad him originally [is this in > > > dispute?] they could have clad him again, or the term "naked" could mean > > > that he came back in a Maiar body but chosen so as to look his old body. > > > And of course this time it would be as his fully powered self. The > > > notion of having to turbo-charge something that was originally > > > restricted is a nonsense. Simply remove the original restriction. > > > > > > > The term 'naked' means just that, he was naked, no clothes, bare as a > > newborn babe... > > I s'pose they hadn't got around to reincarnating knitwear yet. Gandalf says (to the Three Hunters): "'Naked I was sent back - for a brief time, until my task is done. And naked I lay upon the mountain-top.'" Gandalf says Gwaihir said: "'Light as a swan's feather in my claw you are. The Sun shines through you. '" Gandalf says: "'I tarried there in the ageless time of that land where days bring healing not decay. Healing I found, and I was clothed in white. '" -- Tar-Elenion Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue. ###### Message-ID: <3EC827FD.18963AF1@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305150316.36b7a0ee@posting.google.com> <3EC43398.C4A51F8E@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 18 Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 17:40:29 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.172.36 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1053276044 194.125.172.36 (Sun, 18 May 2003 17:40:44 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 17:40:44 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!newsfeed.vmunix.org!feed.news.nacamar.de!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117364 Tar-Elenion wrote: > > In article <3EC43398.C4A51F8E@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > > > > You are correct Conrad. Since the Valar clad him originally [is this in > > dispute?] they could have clad him again, or the term "naked" could mean > > that he came back in a Maiar body but chosen so as to look his old body. > > And of course this time it would be as his fully powered self. The > > notion of having to turbo-charge something that was originally > > restricted is a nonsense. Simply remove the original restriction. > > > > The term 'naked' means just that, he was naked, no clothes, bare as a > newborn babe... I s'pose they hadn't got around to reincarnating knitwear yet. M. ###### Message-ID: <3EC82819.175B1597@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305150316.36b7a0ee@posting.google.com> <3EC43398.C4A51F8E@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 12 Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 17:40:57 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.172.36 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1053276072 194.125.172.36 (Sun, 18 May 2003 17:41:12 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 17:41:12 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!takemy.news.telefonica.de!telefonica.de!news-fra1.dfn.de!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!colt.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117393 Flame of the West wrote: > > Michael O'Neill wrote: > > > Why bring Eru into this at all? > > Don't ask us. We didn't do it - Tolkien did. Hold a > seance and ask him why he did it. I have consulted with my inner Eru who says Tolkien erred. M. ###### From: jbrock@panix.com (John Brock) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 22 May 2003 11:41:54 -0400 Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp. Lines: 49 Message-ID: References: <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: panix2.panix.com X-Trace: reader1.panix.com 1053618115 9911 166.84.1.2 (22 May 2003 15:41:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@panix.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 15:41:55 +0000 (UTC) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news.stealth.net news.stealth.net!news.stealth.net!panix!panix2.panix.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117517 In article <3ECD0B80.AAEBBA7F@indigo.ie>, Michael 0'Neill wrote: >Flame of the West wrote: >> TradeSurplus wrote: >> > There is no error or inconsistency in >> > Letters in this case, merely a different interpretation of events and >> > arguably one with more authority than any reader's interpretation. >> Yes, one could certainly argue that JRR Tolkien >> could speak with greater authority on matters >> involving LotR than a mere reader. >Bush speaks with great authority. > >Great authority doesn't imply correctness in all cases. > >That comes from checking the printed works before you offer unfounded or >contradictory opinions. > >And knowing your limitations [...tendentious Bush quotes deleted...] President Bush's "authority" is of a very different nature than Tolkien's, and it's silly to compare them like this. Bush has the authority of Office, which has little to do with knowledge or understanding. A policeman has the same sort of authority, and may be forced to exercise it in situations where he has absolutely no idea what is really going on. OTOH there is a very different sort of authority which is directly based on understanding. For example an economist's opinions carry weight only to the extent that people believe he actually knows what he is talking about. Tolkien's authority is of this nature, and while they may not be beyond questioning his assertions about the fictional world *he created* have to command a different order of respect than any politician's assertions about the real world. If you want to argue that Tolkien suffered some sort of brain freeze whenever he wrote letters concerning Middle-Earth then go ahead (although as far as I'm concerned you haven't made your case), but you're going to have to leave Bush out of it. -- John Brock jbrock@panix.com ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien From: AC Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3EC332BA.B6D8AFA2@indigo.ie> <3EC34B40.5A5B820B@indigo.ie> <3EC41CCC.D9205AFF@indigo.ie> <3ECD0B80.AAEBBA7F@indigo.ie> Organization: The Tao of Cow Reply-To: maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net Message-ID: User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Lines: 36 X-Complaints-To: abuse@randori.com - Please include ALL headers, thanks. Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 16:57:21 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!newsfeeder2.randori.com!news.randori.com!263039bc!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117519 On Thu, 22 May 2003 10:40:16 -0700, Michael 0'Neill wrote: > Flame of the West wrote: >> >> TradeSurplus wrote: >> >> > There is no error or inconsistency in >> > Letters in this case, merely a different interpretation of events and >> > arguably one with more authority than any reader's interpretation. >> >> Yes, one could certainly argue that JRR Tolkien >> could speak with greater authority on matters >> involving LotR than a mere reader. > > Bush speaks with great authority. > > Great authority doesn't imply correctness in all cases. > > That comes from checking the printed works before you offer unfounded or > contradictory opinions. > > And knowing your limitations Tolkien is the author of the books and creator of the world. He is the only authority. The rest of us, CT included, are limited on a number of points to guessing by analyzing what the author wrote. -- A. Clausen maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net ###### Message-ID: <3ECD092E.CA901DFC@indigo.ie> From: Michael 0'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305150316.36b7a0ee@posting.google.com> <3EC43398.C4A51F8E@indigo.ie> <3EC827FD.18963AF1@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 42 Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 10:30:22 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.173.127 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1053595838 194.125.173.127 (Thu, 22 May 2003 10:30:38 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 10:30:38 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!colt.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117510 Tar-Elenion wrote: > > In article <3EC827FD.18963AF1@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > > Tar-Elenion wrote: > > > > > > In article <3EC43398.C4A51F8E@indigo.ie>, onq@indigo.ie says... > > > > > > > > You are correct Conrad. Since the Valar clad him originally [is this in > > > > dispute?] they could have clad him again, or the term "naked" could mean > > > > that he came back in a Maiar body but chosen so as to look his old body. > > > > And of course this time it would be as his fully powered self. The > > > > notion of having to turbo-charge something that was originally > > > > restricted is a nonsense. Simply remove the original restriction. > > > > > > > > > > The term 'naked' means just that, he was naked, no clothes, bare as a > > > newborn babe... > > > > I s'pose they hadn't got around to reincarnating knitwear yet. > > Gandalf says (to the Three Hunters): > "'Naked I was sent back - for a brief time, until my task is done. And > naked I lay upon the mountain-top.'" > Gandalf says Gwaihir said: > "'Light as a swan's feather in my claw you are. The Sun shines through > you. '" > Gandalf says: > "'I tarried there in the ageless time of that land where days bring > healing not decay. Healing I found, and I was clothed in white. '" No reincarnated underwear either, ehhh? Gandalf was the first airborne streaker so... M. "He says things about our country, safe as he is across the ocean, which would have him locked up for life as a dangerous lunatic if he said them about his own country." -- Sofrat, our very own latter-day the Mouth of Sauron, showing his allegiance to Mordor in ###### Message-ID: <3ECD0B80.AAEBBA7F@indigo.ie> From: Michael 0'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3EC332BA.B6D8AFA2@indigo.ie> <3EC34B40.5A5B820B@indigo.ie> <3EC41CCC.D9205AFF@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 50 Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 10:40:16 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.173.127 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1053596433 194.125.173.127 (Thu, 22 May 2003 10:40:33 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 10:40:33 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.stueberl.de!peer1.news.newnet.co.uk!peer1.news.newnet.co.uk!mephistopheles.news.clara.net!news.clara.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117514 Flame of the West wrote: > > TradeSurplus wrote: > > > There is no error or inconsistency in > > Letters in this case, merely a different interpretation of events and > > arguably one with more authority than any reader's interpretation. > > Yes, one could certainly argue that JRR Tolkien > could speak with greater authority on matters > involving LotR than a mere reader. Bush speaks with great authority. Great authority doesn't imply correctness in all cases. That comes from checking the printed works before you offer unfounded or contradictory opinions. And knowing your limitations M. "These despicable [suicide attacks] were committed by killers whose only faith is hate. And the United States will find the killers, and they will learn the meaning of American justice." -- President George W. Bush showing that his "Authority" extends beyond the grave, CNN, May 13, 2003 "The [military] academies are really important for a lot of reasons. Obviously, what you learn on the football field is even more important since we're still at war." -- President George W. Bush showing that speaking with all the "Authority" of a selected President can still make no sense, Washington, D.C., May 16, 2003 "I think war is a dangerous place." -- President George W. Bush using his "Authority" to condense four dimensions into three at Washington, D.C., May 7, 2003 "He says things about our country, safe as he is across the ocean, which would have him locked up for life as a dangerous lunatic if he said them about his own country." -- Sofrat, our very own latter-day the Mouth of Sauron, showing his allegiance to Mordor and forgetting about his very own dangerous lunatic in the White House in ###### Message-ID: <3ECD0C86.3320BAFD@indigo.ie> From: Michael 0'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305130141.590d45fd@posting.google.com> <1178b6d1.0305131353.55cf5a61@posting.google.com> <1fn4cvgr0rurbvuc6673mpmu4iafs95ipd@4ax.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 37 Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 10:44:38 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.173.127 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1053596694 194.125.173.127 (Thu, 22 May 2003 10:44:54 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 10:44:54 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.stueberl.de!newsr1.ipcore.viaginterkom.de!btnet-peer1!btnet!zen.net.uk!newspeer.lavaseals.co.uk!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117507 the softrat wrote: > > On 13 May 2003 14:53:16 -0700, conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net > (Conrad Dunkerson) wrote: > > >"Matthew Bladen" wrote in message news:... > > > >> Do you mean 190 years vs. 210 years (Appendix A vs. Appendix B)? > > > >Yup, that's the one. > > > >> In the most recent copy I own, Appendix A has been emended so that it too > >> reads 210 years. > > > >Huh, mine too. Hadn't noticed that. Still, the general point was > >that not even LotR is 100% 'canonical'. > > Are you implying that the copies of The Holy Scriptures are totally > without error? > > HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! > > (wipes brow) > > That was a good one! Aren't you the arsewit that is saying they are? M. "He says things about our country, safe as he is across the ocean, which would have him locked up for life as a dangerous lunatic if he said them about his own country." -- Sofrat, our very own latter-day the Mouth of Sauron, showing his allegiance to Mordor and forgetting about his very own dangerous lunatic in the White House in ###### Message-ID: <3ECD0CBF.C1EED354@indigo.ie> From: Michael 0'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB84945.F80703A1@indigo.ie> <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305130141.590d45fd@posting.google.com> <1178b6d1.0305131353.55cf5a61@posting.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 25 Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 10:45:35 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.173.127 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1053596751 194.125.173.127 (Thu, 22 May 2003 10:45:51 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 10:45:51 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!colt.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117513 Conrad Dunkerson wrote: > > "Matthew Bladen" wrote in message news:... > > > Do you mean 190 years vs. 210 years (Appendix A vs. Appendix B)? > > Yup, that's the one. > > > In the most recent copy I own, Appendix A has been emended so that it too > > reads 210 years. > > Huh, mine too. Hadn't noticed that. Still, the general point was > that not even LotR is 100% 'canonical'. That Conrad Dunkerson is a really nice guy. Very clear thinking. M. "He says things about our country, safe as he is across the ocean, which would have him locked up for life as a dangerous lunatic if he said them about his own country." -- Sofrat, our very own latter-day the Mouth of Sauron, showing his allegiance to Mordor and forgetting about his very own dangerous lunatic in the White House in ###### From: Stan Brown Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 16:29:34 -0400 Organization: Oak Road Systems Message-ID: References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC3D789.C553F5D5@indigo.ie> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.60 X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 25 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-01!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117670 AC wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien: >What I can't understand is why Michael rejects Letters out of hand, and yet >quotes from UT and Sil. In purely canonical terms, none of them are on the >best footing, and using strictly non-canonical texts to refute strictly >non-canonical texts seems rather odd to me. Beyond that, he seems to have >stretch the texts he does choose to the point of breaking. I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that he's a subspecies of troll. Like Looney Epstein over in alt.talk.royalty, Michael seems to have a sort of self-consistent position, but he never under any circumstances honestly addresses any inconsistencies when they are pointed out. They also have in common a seeming inability to trim quotes properly. :-) -- Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com Tolkien FAQs: http://Tolkien.slimy.com (Steuard Jensen's site) Tolkien letters FAQ: http://users.telerama.com/~taliesen/tolkien/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/tech/faqget.htm ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien From: AC Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC3D789.C553F5D5@indigo.ie> Organization: The Tao of Cow Reply-To: maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net Message-ID: User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Lines: 32 X-Complaints-To: abuse@randori.com - Please include ALL headers, thanks. Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 20:54:37 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!newsfeeder2.randori.com!news.randori.com!263039bc!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117566 On Thu, 22 May 2003 16:29:34 -0400, Stan Brown wrote: > AC wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien: >>What I can't understand is why Michael rejects Letters out of hand, and yet >>quotes from UT and Sil. In purely canonical terms, none of them are on the >>best footing, and using strictly non-canonical texts to refute strictly >>non-canonical texts seems rather odd to me. Beyond that, he seems to have >>stretch the texts he does choose to the point of breaking. > > I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that he's a subspecies of > troll. Like Looney Epstein over in alt.talk.royalty, Michael seems > to have a sort of self-consistent position, but he never under any > circumstances honestly addresses any inconsistencies when they are > pointed out. > > They also have in common a seeming inability to trim quotes > properly. :-) Yes, I've been getting that feeling too. I hate to call anybody a troll, but he has pretty much admitted that he likes to stir things up. But claiming that the Istari were actually transformed into mortal men is going beyond the pale. All of that bending and stretching of the text so he can ignore Letters. Well, I guess we've all got our own vision of Middle Earth. Mine doesn't include Ainur that can be presto chango-ed into mortal men, but it does include an omnipotent god that can do anything he pleases. -- A. Clausen maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net ###### From: stephen@nomail.com Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 22 May 2003 21:17:08 GMT Organization: Michigan State University Lines: 14 Sender: stephen@nomail.com Message-ID: References: <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC3D789.C553F5D5@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: arctic.cse.msu.edu User-Agent: tin/1.4.3-20000502 ("Marian") (UNIX) (SunOS/5.8 (sun4u)) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!logbridge.uoregon.edu!msunews!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117601 AC wrote: : Well, I guess we've all got our own vision of Middle Earth. Mine doesn't : include Ainur that can be presto chango-ed into mortal men, but it does : include an omnipotent god that can do anything he pleases. : -- : A. Clausen Does your vision of Middle Earth include an omnipotent god that can presto chango Ainur into mortal men? :) Sorry, I couldn't resist. :) Stephen ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien From: AC Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC3D789.C553F5D5@indigo.ie> Organization: The Tao of Cow Reply-To: maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net Message-ID: User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Lines: 21 X-Complaints-To: abuse@randori.com - Please include ALL headers, thanks. Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 21:38:05 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeeds.sol.net!zeus.visi.com!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!newsfeeder2.randori.com!news.randori.com!263039bc!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117579 On 22 May 2003 21:17:08 GMT, stephen@nomail.com wrote: > AC wrote: >: Well, I guess we've all got our own vision of Middle Earth. Mine doesn't >: include Ainur that can be presto chango-ed into mortal men, but it does >: include an omnipotent god that can do anything he pleases. > >: -- >: A. Clausen > > Does your vision of Middle Earth include an omnipotent god that can > presto chango Ainur into mortal men? :) > > Sorry, I couldn't resist. :) No problemo! I deserved it. -- A. Clausen maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net ###### From: Tamim Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 22 May 2003 23:09:34 GMT Organization: University of Helsinki Lines: 32 Message-ID: References: <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC3D789.C553F5D5@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: kruuna.helsinki.fi X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1053644974 18669 128.214.205.14 (22 May 2003 23:09:34 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@helsinki.fi NNTP-Posting-Date: 22 May 2003 23:09:34 GMT User-Agent: tin/1.4.2-20000205 ("Possession") (UNIX) (SunOS/5.8 (sun4u)) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!newsfeed.vmunix.org!feed.news.nacamar.de!news100.image.dk!fi.sn.net!newsfeed2.fi.sn.net!newsfeed3.funet.fi!newsfeeds.funet.fi!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117619 Stan Brown wrote: > AC wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien: >>What I can't understand is why Michael rejects Letters out of hand, and yet >>quotes from UT and Sil. In purely canonical terms, none of them are on the >>best footing, and using strictly non-canonical texts to refute strictly >>non-canonical texts seems rather odd to me. Beyond that, he seems to have >>stretch the texts he does choose to the point of breaking. > I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that he's a subspecies of > troll. Like Looney Epstein over in alt.talk.royalty, Michael seems > to have a sort of self-consistent position, but he never under any > circumstances honestly addresses any inconsistencies when they are > pointed out. Which Michael are you talking about? > They also have in common a seeming inability to trim quotes > properly. :-) > -- > Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA > http://OakRoadSystems.com > Tolkien FAQs: http://Tolkien.slimy.com (Steuard Jensen's site) > Tolkien letters FAQ: > http://users.telerama.com/~taliesen/tolkien/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/tech/faqget.htm -- ###### From: jbrock@panix.com (John Brock) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 22 May 2003 21:32:24 -0400 Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp. Lines: 149 Message-ID: References: <3ECD0B80.AAEBBA7F@indigo.ie> <3ECD97BB.E1D08272@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: panix2.panix.com X-Trace: reader1.panix.com 1053653545 22477 166.84.1.2 (23 May 2003 01:32:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@panix.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 01:32:25 +0000 (UTC) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!skynet.be!skynet.be!206.252.192.28.MISMATCH!news.stealth.net news.stealth.net!news.stealth.net!panix!panix2.panix.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117572 In article <3ECD97BB.E1D08272@indigo.ie>, Michael 0'Neill wrote: >John Brock wrote: >> >> In article <3ECD0B80.AAEBBA7F@indigo.ie>, >> Michael 0'Neill wrote: >> >Flame of the West wrote: >> >> TradeSurplus wrote: >> >> > There is no error or inconsistency in >> >> > Letters in this case, merely a different interpretation of events and >> >> > arguably one with more authority than any reader's interpretation. >> >> Yes, one could certainly argue that JRR Tolkien >> >> could speak with greater authority on matters >> >> involving LotR than a mere reader. >> >Bush speaks with great authority. >> > >> >Great authority doesn't imply correctness in all cases. >> > >> >That comes from checking the printed works before you offer unfounded or >> >contradictory opinions. >> > >> >And knowing your limitations >> [...tendentious Bush quotes deleted...] >> >> President Bush's "authority" is of a very different nature than >> Tolkien's, and it's silly to compare them like this. >> >> Bush has the authority of Office, which has little to do with >> knowledge or understanding. A policeman has the same sort of >> authority, and may be forced to exercise it in situations where he >> has absolutely no idea what is really going on. >> >> OTOH there is a very different sort of authority which is directly >> based on understanding. For example an economist's opinions carry >> weight only to the extent that people believe he actually knows >> what he is talking about. Tolkien's authority is of this nature, >> and while they may not be beyond questioning his assertions about >> the fictional world *he created* have to command a different order >> of respect than any politician's assertions about the real world. >> If you want to argue that Tolkien suffered some sort of brain freeze >> whenever he wrote letters concerning Middle-Earth then go ahead >> (although as far as I'm concerned you haven't made your case), but >> you're going to have to leave Bush out of it. >On the contrary, the similarity is there for open minds to see. You assert similarity, but you ignore my argument about *why* the authority of an author is of a different nature than the authority of a politician. (BTW, you shouldn't imply that the reason people disagree with you is because their minds are closed. It makes you look like a fool). >Tolkien wrote several inconsistent passages in the canonical works, >Aragorn's age and the descent of Thorin Oakenshield to name but two. > >These were in works which had been proof read by publisher's and agents, >relatives and friends, notwithstanding the great man himself. That such >closely scrutinized works still had flaws going to press, some of which >persisted into further editions, is proof of what I say. > >He might have been the generative force and came up with a largely >cohesive sub-creation, but he was not all knowing, nor all seeing in >respect even for his own sub-creation. Tolkien is human and made many >mistakes an d took many blind turnings in reaching the final text of the >Lord of the Rings and the Hobbit. None of his other works were as >scrutinized as these two. It may be assumed that these are full of holes >because of Tolkien's unco-ordinated revisions. Patching using the in >places logically inconsistent letters is not in my opinion the best way >forward. > >Yet despite his "lawful" Authority being largely confined to his status >as the originator of the work, people accord him authority he does not >deserve in respect of arbitration on all issues of concern and disputes >that may have arisen from the flaws in the masterpiece. This has bred >further confusion and a stifling of honest inquiry and debate with the >imposition of the Letters as canon, despite their own obvious >inconsistencies. > >Tolkien, in short, does not deserve the position of authority that >espousers of the letters as canon accord to him. Telling some of the >learned intellects in this forum that their idol has feet of clay is not >a popular position to adopt. Everything you have said here boils down to one statement: Tolkien sometimes contradicts himself. So? Many authors do -- it's a hazard of the profession. >Regarding President George W. Bush, a similar case obtains. > >Bush has inherited the authority, dignity and respect that goes with the >office of President of the United States, yet every time he opens his >mouth he proves he does not deserve to wield such authority, demeans the >dignity of his office and is undeserving of the respect accorded to that >office. > >Bush is mendacious. He outdoes Kissinger in his mendacity and that takes >some doing, because that fat little fuck was a master at it. > >Bush has wilfully engaged America in an unjust and unjustifiable war, >committed War Crimes in Iraq by use of indiscriminate cluster bombs and >depleted uranium shells and has deliberately misled his own electorate >in the matter of the 9-11 atrocity, the involvement of the Taliban in it >and the role played by the CIA and Military in the lead up to and >execution of this murderous deed. > >Like Tolkien Bush is supported in his authoritative position by people >who think with some other organ than their brains, possibly their hearts >and who resist objective analysis of the man's duplicitous doings by any >means possible. Like Tolkien he needs to be deconstructed fully in order >to be fully appreciated. Only then will he assume his proper place in >history. Everything you have said here again boils down to one statement: President Bush sometimes says things that are not true. Again, a profoundly mundane and uninteresting observation. So you have pointed out that both Tolkien and Bush can say things that are wrong. What you have NOT done is address the difference I pointed out: the difference between authority based on office and authority based on knowledge. No one would claim that a politician, simply by virtue of his office, has any special knowledge of the world. He may happen to know things you don't know, or he may not, but his status does not automatically give him any special knowledge or understanding which is not in principle available to everyone. An author, OTOH, *does* have a special knowledge and understanding of the world he creates, a knowledge and understanding which is ABSOLUTELY UNIQUE AND EXCLUSIVE TO HIM. He will *therefore* always speak with greater authority on matters concerning his fictional world than a mere reader (even when he contradicts himself!). No politician, however upstanding and brilliant, can make a similar claim to special knowledge about the real world. To try to "deconstruct" Tolkien's special authority concerning Middle-Earth by dumping on George Bush is a total non-sequitur. (Incidently, I do find it kind of odd the way you seem to equate Bush -- whom you despise -- with Tolkien. Does the Tolkien of Letters really piss you off that much?) -- John Brock jbrock@panix.com ###### From: conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 23 May 2003 04:36:15 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 11 Message-ID: <1178b6d1.0305230336.2d167d27@posting.google.com> References: <3ECD0B80.AAEBBA7F@indigo.ie> <3ECD97BB.E1D08272@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.42.51.28 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1053689776 12057 127.0.0.1 (23 May 2003 11:36:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 23 May 2003 11:36:16 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!logbridge.uoregon.edu!news.cse.psu.edu!news.ems.psu.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117659 jbrock@panix.com (John Brock) wrote in message news:... > (Incidently, I do find it kind of odd the way you seem to equate > Bush -- whom you despise -- with Tolkien. Does the Tolkien of > Letters really piss you off that much?) Hey, give the guy a break... do you think it is EASY to insert off-topic tangents into EVERY conversation in a constant attempt to sidetrack discussion? Pretending that there are valid reasons to divert on-topic conversations into political rants takes alot of skill you know. ###### From: Stan Brown Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 12:45:58 -0400 Organization: Oak Road Systems Message-ID: References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC3D789.C553F5D5@indigo.ie> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.60 X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 14 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!sjc70.webusenet.com!news.webusenet.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-04!sn-xit-06!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117630 AC wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien: >Well, I guess we've all got our own vision of Middle Earth. Mine doesn't >include Ainur that can be presto chango-ed into mortal men, but it does >include an omnipotent god that can do anything he pleases. Mine too -- it's one of the many differences from reality. :-) -- Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com/ "What in heaven's name brought you to Casablanca?" "My health. I came to Casablanca for the waters." "The waters? What waters? We're in the desert." "I was misinformed." ###### From: Flame of the West Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 00:55:46 -0400 Lines: 22 Message-ID: References: <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3EC332BA.B6D8AFA2@indigo.ie> <3EC34B40.5A5B820B@indigo.ie> <3EC41CCC.D9205AFF@indigo.ie> <3ECD0B80.AAEBBA7F@indigo.ie> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: UmFuZG9tSVYyYLRqtvhLE1OVd034goiCQO3BfOJw5z+2kGTOgIxUNkqEi7ssehDP X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 24 May 2003 05:15:56 GMT In-Reply-To: <3ECD0B80.AAEBBA7F@indigo.ie> X-Accept-Language: en-us, en User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030507 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!newsfeed.stueberl.de!east.cox.net!cox.net!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!feed2.news.rcn.net!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117568 Michael 0'Neill wrote: > Great authority doesn't imply correctness in all cases. > > That comes from checking the printed works before you offer unfounded or > contradictory opinions. How can an opinion of Tolkien's about Middle-earth be "unfounded"? > And knowing your limitations Do you think Tolkien didn't? -- FotW The Official Return of the King Protest Site http://members.aol.com/rotkprotest/ ###### From: Flame of the West Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 01:12:41 -0400 Lines: 75 Message-ID: References: <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3ECD97BB.E1D08272@indigo.ie> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: UmFuZG9tSVYMgkcACurBf9FNf2J4rV7fX6gwgOpVk98tI71nS37EZpvd8tEom5nG X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 24 May 2003 05:15:57 GMT In-Reply-To: <3ECD97BB.E1D08272@indigo.ie> X-Accept-Language: en-us, en User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030507 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!nntp.abs.net!feed2.news.rcn.net!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117569 Michael 0'Neill wrote: > Tolkien wrote several inconsistent passages in the canonical works, > Aragorn's age and the descent of Thorin Oakenshield to name but two. OK, that's two. > He might have been the generative force and came up with a largely > cohesive sub-creation, but he was not all knowing, nor all seeing in > respect even for his own sub-creation. Tolkien is human and made many > mistakes an d took many blind turnings in reaching the final text of the > Lord of the Rings and the Hobbit. Well two anyway. Two is not "many." You don't get to cite two and then claim that there are "many." > Patching using the in > places logically inconsistent letters is not in my opinion the best way > forward. What would you prefer? The speculations of people who don't know what Tolkien was thinking (since only he can)? Weird. > Yet despite his "lawful" Authority being largely confined to his status > as the originator of the work, Yes, that teensy weensy little thing about being the sub-creator. Aside from that he doesn't know jack about Middle-earth. > people accord him authority he does not > deserve in respect of arbitration on all issues of concern and disputes > that may have arisen from the flaws in the masterpiece. This has bred > further confusion and a stifling of honest inquiry and debate Excluding the best sources we have is hardly "honest inquiry." More like revisionism. > with the > imposition of the Letters as canon, despite their own obvious > inconsistencies. The "inconsistencies" you mention are the result of your *interpretation* of Tolkien's work, not the works themselves. > Tolkien, in short, does not deserve the position of authority that > espousers of the letters as canon accord to him. Look, he's the sub-creator of Middle-earth, and he explained further in his Letters many of the issues that arose in his works. He *meant* for these explanations to be normative since they were released into the public arena (since the letters in question were not in confidence). How could you *exclude* them from the canon? And on what grounds to you exclude *all* of them just because you think *some* of them contain inconsistencies? > Telling some of the > learned intellects in this forum that their idol has feet of clay is not > a popular position to adopt. Feet of clay? Aren't you being a little tough here on ol' JRR? -- FotW The Official Return of the King Protest Site http://members.aol.com/rotkprotest/ ###### From: Flame of the West Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 01:13:34 -0400 Lines: 15 Message-ID: References: <3ECD0B80.AAEBBA7F@indigo.ie> <3ECD97BB.E1D08272@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305230336.2d167d27@posting.google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: UmFuZG9tSVZyp/FMp1Ii1EeWdN1tR/gpLndIxoEp0HOb0guN7AZSdNjSg+z2VXrL X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 24 May 2003 05:15:58 GMT In-Reply-To: <1178b6d1.0305230336.2d167d27@posting.google.com> X-Accept-Language: en-us, en User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030507 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed2.news.rcn.net!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117570 Conrad Dunkerson wrote: > Pretending that there are valid reasons to > divert on-topic conversations into political rants takes alot of skill > you know. It's not like he does it well. -- FotW The Official Return of the King Protest Site http://members.aol.com/rotkprotest/ ###### From: "David Joslin" Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien References: <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3ECD97BB.E1D08272@indigo.ie> Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Lines: 27 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 19:35:42 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.91.228.21 X-Complaints-To: abuse@rr.com X-Trace: twister.socal.rr.com 1053804942 66.91.228.21 (Sat, 24 May 2003 12:35:42 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 12:35:42 PDT Organization: RoadRunner - West Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!out.nntp.be!propagator2-sterling!news-in.nuthinbutnews.com!newsfeed-east.nntpserver.com!nntpserver.com!news-west.rr.com!cyclone.kc.rr.com!cyclone2.kc.rr.com!news2.kc.rr.com!twister.socal.rr.com.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117634 In a chapter of The Verbal Icon entitled "The Intentional Fallacy," the literary critic William Wimsatt famously argued that the interpretation and the judgment of a literary work should make no reference to an author's intention, but should reside simply in the work itself, in its language, structure, and figurative resources. Wimsatt gives several arguements for his case. The work itself is the sum of the author's intention, and as it makes no sense to speak of the author's intention apart from the work, the idea of intention is superfluous. Further, the text's language is public, expressive of cultural and historical connotations not necessarily reducible to the individual author's control. Especially in the case of great literature, language is overdetermined, a plethora of significance to which it is besides the point to attach the author's intention. For example, would any one reading of Keat's Ode on Melancholy satisfy you, even if it Keats himself had written it? Or, put it another way: suppose Professor Tolkien himself was a participant in this discussion, and stated categorically that "Balrogs had wings." Would that settle the issue for you? In Wimsatt's argument, the author is just another reader of his own work, whose explanations for it are themselves interpretations, and not in and of themselves authoritative. David Joslin ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien From: AC Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3ECD0B80.AAEBBA7F@indigo.ie> <3ECD97BB.E1D08272@indigo.ie> Organization: The Tao of Cow Reply-To: maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net Message-ID: User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Lines: 44 X-Complaints-To: abuse@randori.com - Please include ALL headers, thanks. Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 19:41:52 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!newsfeeder2.randori.com!news.randori.com!263039bc!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117596 On Sat, 24 May 2003 19:35:42 GMT, David Joslin wrote: > In a chapter of The Verbal Icon entitled "The Intentional Fallacy," the > literary critic William Wimsatt famously argued that the interpretation and > the judgment of a literary work should make no reference to an author's > intention, but should reside simply in the work itself, in its language, > structure, and figurative resources. > > Wimsatt gives several arguements for his case. The work itself is the sum of > the author's intention, and as it makes no sense to speak of the author's > intention apart from the work, the idea of intention is superfluous. > Further, the text's language is public, expressive of cultural and > historical connotations not necessarily reducible to the individual author's > control. Especially in the case of great literature, language is > overdetermined, a plethora of significance to which it is besides the point > to attach the author's intention. > > For example, would any one reading of Keat's Ode on Melancholy satisfy you, > even if it Keats himself had written it? Or, put it another way: suppose > Professor Tolkien himself was a participant in this discussion, and stated > categorically that "Balrogs had wings." Would that settle the issue for you? > > In Wimsatt's argument, the author is just another reader of his own work, > whose explanations for it are themselves interpretations, and not in and of > themselves authoritative. Which is a pretty useless means of judging what an author might have intended. How does this help us, for instance, determine what Tolkien's thoughts were on whether Sauron took the Ring to Numenor, or what sort of being Bombadil was? How does it aid us in determining which of the stories of Galadriel and Celeborn is the true one? If Tolkien stated "Balrog's had wings", and there was no text that pointed against it, can you think of rational, logical reason not to accept the words of the creator of the mythology? Delve deep and consider that we're not here, trying to determine whether Gandalf represented the Virgin Mary or Marilyn Manson, we are trying to gain as much understanding as we can *of the author's intent*. If we ignore the author's intent, could you please explain how this idea of Wimsatt's is of any use at all? -- A. Clausen maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... From: J Swanson References: <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3ECD0B80.AAEBBA7F@indigo.ie> <3ECD97BB.E1D08272@indigo.ie> Organization: Your Company Message-ID: User-Agent: Xnews/5.04.25 Lines: 19 Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 19:44:53 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 217.208.135.41 X-Complaints-To: abuse@telia.com X-Trace: newsc.telia.net 1053805493 217.208.135.41 (Sat, 24 May 2003 21:44:53 CEST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 21:44:53 CEST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news.algonet.se!algonet!news-stob.telia.net!telia.net!217.209.241.173.MISMATCH!masternews.telia.net.!newsc.telia.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117592 "David Joslin" wrote in news:iQPza.8350$x67.195838@twister.socal.rr.com: > suppose Professor Tolkien himself was a participant in this > discussion, and stated categorically that "Balrogs had wings." Would > that settle the issue for you? > > In Wimsatt's argument, the author is just another reader of his own > work, whose explanations for it are themselves interpretations, and > not in and of themselves authoritative. I agree most emphatically with mr Wimsatt. John -- 'You think, as is your wont, my lord, of Gondor only,' said Gandalf. 'Yet there are other men and other lives, and time still to be. And for me, I pity even his slaves.' ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien From: AC Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3ECD0B80.AAEBBA7F@indigo.ie> <3ECD97BB.E1D08272@indigo.ie> Organization: The Tao of Cow Reply-To: maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net Message-ID: User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Lines: 25 X-Complaints-To: abuse@randori.com - Please include ALL headers, thanks. Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 20:01:11 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!newsfeeder2.randori.com!news.randori.com!263039bc!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117583 On Sat, 24 May 2003 19:44:53 GMT, J Swanson wrote: > "David Joslin" wrote in > news:iQPza.8350$x67.195838@twister.socal.rr.com: > >> suppose Professor Tolkien himself was a participant in this >> discussion, and stated categorically that "Balrogs had wings." Would >> that settle the issue for you? >> >> In Wimsatt's argument, the author is just another reader of his own >> work, whose explanations for it are themselves interpretations, and >> not in and of themselves authoritative. > > I agree most emphatically with mr Wimsatt. Why? How will this enlighten the Good Professor's vision of Middle Earth? Or should it just be a free-for-all. Bring on the Neo-Nazis then. And since there can be no authority, we just have to accept their vision as valid, because, well, author's words should hold no more weight than your average freak. -- A. Clausen maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... From: J Swanson References: <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3ECD0B80.AAEBBA7F@indigo.ie> <3ECD97BB.E1D08272@indigo.ie> Organization: Your Company Message-ID: User-Agent: Xnews/5.04.25 Lines: 39 Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 20:46:52 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 217.208.135.41 X-Complaints-To: abuse@telia.com X-Trace: newsb.telia.net 1053809212 217.208.135.41 (Sat, 24 May 2003 22:46:52 CEST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 22:46:52 CEST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news.algonet.se!algonet!news-stob.telia.net!telia.net!217.209.241.173.MISMATCH!masternews.telia.net.!newsb.telia.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117585 "Jon" wrote in news:baoinh$20mot$1@ID-184931.news.dfncis.de: > þus cwæð J Swanson; >> "David Joslin" wrote in >> news:iQPza.8350$x67.195838@twister.socal.rr.com: >> >>> suppose Professor Tolkien himself was a participant in this >>> discussion, and stated categorically that "Balrogs had wings." Would >>> that settle the issue for you? >>> >>> In Wimsatt's argument, the author is just another reader of his own >>> work, whose explanations for it are themselves interpretations, and >>> not in and of themselves authoritative. >> >> I agree most emphatically with mr Wimsatt. > > This Wimsatt wouldn't be a /critic/ would he? Who had a theory that > authors aren't the best interpreters of their own work? Say, I wonder > who he thinks /is/ the best interpreter of a work? Let's take a guess. > > (And if JRRT were to rise from the grave and tell me Twinkies had > wings I'd believe him). Hi Jon, I can't speculate on Wimsatt's motives. I find his idea reasonable, and if JRRT:s ghost told me that balrogs had wings and were made of marshmallows, I'd say fine, thanks, but that's useless information when I read the Moria chapter in LOTR since it has nothing to do with the text there, which still is written in a vague and ambiguous way (much more interesting to read than an exact description of its wings and the smell of burning marshmallows). See also my reply to AC, if you like. John -- 'You think, as is your wont, my lord, of Gondor only,' said Gandalf. 'Yet there are other men and other lives, and time still to be. And for me, I pity even his slaves.' ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... From: J Swanson References: <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3ECD0B80.AAEBBA7F@indigo.ie> <3ECD97BB.E1D08272@indigo.ie> Organization: Your Company Message-ID: User-Agent: Xnews/5.04.25 Lines: 43 Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 20:46:59 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 217.208.135.41 X-Complaints-To: abuse@telia.com X-Trace: newsb.telia.net 1053809219 217.208.135.41 (Sat, 24 May 2003 22:46:59 CEST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 22:46:59 CEST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news.algonet.se!algonet!news-stob.telia.net!telia.net!217.209.241.173.MISMATCH!masternews.telia.net.!newsb.telia.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117580 AC wrote in news:slrnbcvjs7.9en.maureen-taocow-ng1@ts1.alberni.net: >>> In Wimsatt's argument, the author is just another reader of his own >>> work, whose explanations for it are themselves interpretations, and >>> not in and of themselves authoritative. >> >> I agree most emphatically with mr Wimsatt. > > Why? How will this enlighten the Good Professor's vision of Middle > Earth? Or should it just be a free-for-all. Bring on the Neo-Nazis > then. And since there can be no authority, we just have to accept > their vision as valid, because, well, author's words should hold no > more weight than your average freak. Calm down. An interpretation has to be grounded, of course. Whether it's the author's interpretation, yours or mine. At least if it's going to be of public interest, which is a reasonable criterion in a newsgroup. So I don't understand this talk about no authority, free-for-all or Neo-Nazis. But you're first question is good. What are we interested in - Tolkien's "real vision", something that he didn't express clearly into his work, but that we can deduce from unpublished texts? Or of what's actually in the texts, and the "independent" interpretations that can be made? I think the desire to decide if there was seven or hundreds of Balrogs, whether they had wings or not, etc, stems from the deep fascination with the world Tolkien wrote, and the impulse of "realism" - to become historians and geographers of Middle Earth as if it had existed, or even dream of living there as role-players seem to do. The texts are taken as a window into a world. I can understand that and find it a valid approach, as that's how the work itself is written on one level, how it works for the reader. But that doesn't mean that's the only way of _discussing_ it, or even the most interesting way. And it is naïve to believe that there is an objective "truth" about things that are (deliberately?) vague or ambiguous in the text, like the description of the Balrog of Moria. John -- 'You think, as is your wont, my lord, of Gondor only,' said Gandalf. 'Yet there are other men and other lives, and time still to be. And for me, I pity even his slaves.' ###### From: Stan Brown Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 17:11:37 -0400 Organization: Oak Road Systems Message-ID: References: <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3ECD0B80.AAEBBA7F@indigo.ie> <3ECD97BB.E1D08272@indigo.ie> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.60 X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 41 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-06!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117673 David Joslin wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien: >In a chapter of The Verbal Icon entitled "The Intentional Fallacy," the >literary critic William Wimsatt famously argued that the interpretation and >the judgment of a literary work should make no reference to an author's >intention, but should reside simply in the work itself, in its language, >structure, and figurative resources. The key phrase there is "interpretation and judgment". And I think Tolkien would agree with Winsatt's thought as quoted above. Remember his sentence "I think that many confuse 'applicability' with 'allegory'; but the one resides in the freedom of the reader, and the other in the purposed domination of the author" from the Foreword to LotR. >suppose >Professor Tolkien himself was a participant in this discussion, and stated >categorically that "Balrogs had wings." Would that settle the issue for you? Yes, of course it would: because that would take the issue out of the realm of interpretation. If Tolkien said, "Balrogs had wings, and you can tell that because it's implied by the language in the chapter on Gandalf's fight on the bridge of Khazad-dum," _then_ I might agree or disagree, not on whether Balrogs had wings but on whether the passage in question actually implies what he says. Where Tolkien expresses something clearly, we don't have to fall back on interpretation and judgment. When he leaves something unstated, then we can interpret what he _did_ say to try to shed light on what might actually be true in his world. -- Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com Tolkien FAQs: http://Tolkien.slimy.com (Steuard Jensen's site) Tolkien letters FAQ: http://users.telerama.com/~taliesen/tolkien/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/tech/faqget.htm ###### From: Flame of the West Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 23:38:12 -0400 Lines: 16 Message-ID: References: <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3ECD97BB.E1D08272@indigo.ie> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: UmFuZG9tSVaJZSvUMvBfFjJUK9+sH+H0JGLCfGb5HTleIDC5Mx4UfBWy9hDQ6BZ5 X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 25 May 2003 14:53:08 GMT In-Reply-To: X-Accept-Language: en-us, en User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030507 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeeds.sol.net!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!feed2.news.rcn.net!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117588 David Joslin wrote: > In Wimsatt's argument, the author is just another reader of his own work, > whose explanations for it are themselves interpretations, and not in and of > themselves authoritative. Sounds like this Wimsatt guy is an idiot. -- FotW The Official Return of the King Protest Site http://members.aol.com/rotkprotest/ ###### From: "David Joslin" Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien References: <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3ECD0B80.AAEBBA7F@indigo.ie> <3ECD97BB.E1D08272@indigo.ie> Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Lines: 66 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 14:23:16 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.91.228.21 X-Complaints-To: abuse@rr.com X-Trace: twister.socal.rr.com 1053872596 66.91.228.21 (Sun, 25 May 2003 07:23:16 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 07:23:16 PDT Organization: RoadRunner - West Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!out.nntp.be!propagator2-sterling!news-in.nuthinbutnews.com!newsfeed-east.nntpserver.com!nntpserver.com!news-west.rr.com!news-server.columbus.rr.com!cyclone2.kc.rr.com!news2.kc.rr.com!twister.socal.rr.com.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117623 "Stan Brown" wrote in message news:MPG.1939aa15c76f1aae98ac44@news.odyssey.net... > David Joslin wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien: > >suppose > >Professor Tolkien himself was a participant in this discussion, and stated > >categorically that "Balrogs had wings." Would that settle the issue for you? > > Yes, of course it would: because that would take the issue out of > the realm of interpretation. > > If Tolkien said, "Balrogs had wings, and you can tell that because > it's implied by the language in the chapter on Gandalf's fight on > the bridge of Khazad-dum," _then_ I might agree or disagree, not on > whether Balrogs had wings but on whether the passage in question > actually implies what he says. > > Where Tolkien expresses something clearly, we don't have to fall > back on interpretation and judgment. When he leaves something > unstated, then we can interpret what he _did_ say to try to shed > light on what might actually be true in his world. > John Swanson has admirably responded to your objection, Stan, better than I could myself. A statement by Tolkien today would remain outside the Moria chapter itself, and would not in any way change the weight of evidence in the text itself. You might if you chose take Tolkien's statement as authoritative, but that would involve your own standards of evidence in the discussion, another element outside the text. You would still not be able to argue from the text itself to the truth of Tolkien's affadavit. To use your own words, when the text expresses something clearly, we don't have to fall back on interpretation and judgment. But there is all the difference between the text saying so and the author saying so post facto. Tolkien's purported statement would be an interpretation, a part of the history of the response to the Lord of the Rings, especially as that response developed in the later context of the Usenet, where questions such as "Why not fly to Mordor on Eagles?" and "Do Balrogs have wings?" could gain currency in the first place. "What are we interested in - Tolkien's "real vision", something that he didn't express clearly into his work, but that we can deduce from unpublished texts? Or of what's actually in the texts, and the "independent" interpretations that can be made? I think the desire to decide if there was seven or hundreds of Balrogs, whether they had wings or not, etc, stems from the deep fascination with the world Tolkien wrote, and the impulse of "realism" - to become historians and geographers of Middle Earth as if it had existed, or even dream of living there as role-players seem to do. The texts are taken as a window into a world. I can understand that and find it a valid approach, as that's how the work itself is written on one level, how it works for the reader. But that doesn't mean that's the only way of _discussing_ it, or even the most interesting way. And it is naïve to believe that there is an objective "truth" about things that are (deliberately?) vague or ambiguous in the text, like the description of the Balrog of Moria." Mr. Swanson makes the best description I have read of the discussion we conduct here on the newsgroups, with its peculiar pleasures and limitations. Had we gates, these words would belong there. David Joslin ###### From: "The American" Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien References: <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3ECD97BB.E1D08272@indigo.ie> Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Lines: 28 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Message-ID: <075Aa.2345$H84.1189560@news1.news.adelphia.net> Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 15:16:12 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.48.199.84 X-Complaints-To: abuse@adelphia.net X-Trace: news1.news.adelphia.net 1053875772 24.48.199.84 (Sun, 25 May 2003 11:16:12 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 11:16:12 EDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!router1.news.adelphia.net!news1.news.adelphia.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117651 "Flame of the West" wrote in message news:baqlck$f5k$2@bob.news.rcn.net... > David Joslin wrote: > > > In Wimsatt's argument, the author is just another reader of his own work, > > whose explanations for it are themselves interpretations, and not in and of > > themselves authoritative. > > Sounds like this Wimsatt guy is an idiot. > Reminds me of an English Lit class I had in college after a particular arduous literary dissection about the hidden meanings within a particular story. I asked the Prof something like "How do we know this is what the Author meant? Did he ever explain what he meant later after it was published?" I was looked at like I had two heads and dismissed with a comment like "We don't need to know what the author meant. We just know." So...that means you really don't know for sure and it's just your interpretation your feeding me as the truth. T.A. ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien From: AC Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3ECD0B80.AAEBBA7F@indigo.ie> <3ECD97BB.E1D08272@indigo.ie> Organization: The Tao of Cow Reply-To: maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net Message-ID: User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Lines: 35 X-Complaints-To: abuse@randori.com - Please include ALL headers, thanks. Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 17:03:14 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!newsfeeder2.randori.com!news.randori.com!263039bc!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117584 On Sat, 24 May 2003 23:38:12 -0400, Flame of the West wrote: > David Joslin wrote: > >> In Wimsatt's argument, the author is just another reader of his own work, >> whose explanations for it are themselves interpretations, and not in and of >> themselves authoritative. > > Sounds like this Wimsatt guy is an idiot. Well, I don't know about that, but I don't buy it. It is an absolutely useless method of determining what JRRT might have meant. On one level, the personal level, it makes sense. For instance, PJ's image of Frodo is nothing at all like how I envision him, so there is that domain of personal interpretation. But when we are trying, perhaps even vainly, to determine certain events, such as whether Sauron had the Ring in Numenor, Wimsatt's method is useless. Actually,it is worse than useless, because, underlying it all, is the notion that there is no wrong way to determine a fact. I sense this a bit in Michael O'Neill's posts. He will use a passage out of UT and, whether he admits it or not, will supplant a passage in Letters, treating one source as somehow more reliable than the other. Besides, if we are going to have any sort of debate, then we are going to have to decide on a set of ground rules about canonicity. We may not even agree with everything about those rules, but at least we should be on the same map. If we toss that out, then we might as well just shut the whole thing down. Wimsatt's approach is absolutely useless for something like "literary archaeology". -- A. Clausen maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net ###### From: the softrat Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 12:37:55 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: References: <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3ECD97BB.E1D08272@indigo.ie> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 24 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-06!sn-post-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117691 On Sat, 24 May 2003 19:35:42 GMT, "David Joslin" wrote: > >In Wimsatt's argument, the author is just another reader of his own work, >whose explanations for it are themselves interpretations, and not in and of >themselves authoritative. > Wimsatt is one of the silly, ego-centric modernists who does not like the idea of an author contradicting Wimsatt's 'interpretation' of a author's work by saying, "I didn't mean that!" Wimsatt and his fellows leave out the very important feature that an author may not have expressed his meaning well, or that language change has made it obscure. In point of fact, the author is the ONLY person who is the authoritative interpreter of the author's work. All others are at best secondary. Many are merely using the author's work to push their own personal social, economic, or political agenda without regard to the author or actually to the author's work. the softrat ==> Careful! I have a hug and I know how to use it! mailto:softrat@pobox.com -- One tentacle, one vote. ###### From: Stan Brown Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 18:27:37 -0400 Organization: Oak Road Systems Message-ID: References: <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3ECD0B80.AAEBBA7F@indigo.ie> <3ECD97BB.E1D08272@indigo.ie> <075Aa.2345$H84.1189560@news1.news.adelphia.net> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.60 X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 37 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!sjc70.webusenet.com!news.webusenet.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-06!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117647 The American wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien: >Reminds me of an English Lit class I had in college after a particular >arduous literary dissection about the hidden meanings within a particular >story. >I asked the Prof something like "How do we know this is what the Author >meant? Did he ever explain what he meant later after it was published?" >I was looked at like I had two heads and dismissed with a comment like "We >don't need to know what the author meant. We just know." But there are two separate issues: 1. What did the author mean? 2. What meanings does the text have? The two questions need not have the same answer, and typically do not. You were posing question 1, but your prof was answering question 2. For instance, Tolkien consciously rejected any sort of allegory in LotR. Indeed, when he wrote most of it, atomic bombs were unknown. Nevertheless, the text _does_ have some meaning in terms of atomic bombs, unlimited power and all that. Is it an allegory? No, because Tolkien said it is not. Yes (to a limited extent) because it is possible for reasonable people to find allegorical elements in it. -- Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com Tolkien FAQs: http://Tolkien.slimy.com (Steuard Jensen's site) Tolkien letters FAQ: http://users.telerama.com/~taliesen/tolkien/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/tech/faqget.htm ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien From: AC Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC32D11.4ED02DB5@indigo.ie> <3ED1AF64.D333EFD1@indigo.ie> Organization: The Tao of Cow Reply-To: maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Lines: 69 X-Complaints-To: abuse@randori.com - Please include ALL headers, thanks. Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 23:40:04 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!newsfeeder2.randori.com!news.randori.com!263039bc!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117578 On Sun, 25 May 2003 23:08:36 -0700, Michael O'Neill wrote: > AC wrote: >> >> On Wed, 14 May 2003 23:00:49 -0700, >> Michael O'Neill wrote: >> > Stan Brown wrote: >> >> >> >> Michael O'Neill wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien: >> >> >Gandalf the Istari, as opposed to Olórin the Maia, was incarnated as a >> >> >Mortal Man >> >> >> >> Citation, please? >> >> >> >> We are told that the Istari _looked_ like Men, not that they _were_ >> >> Men. >> >> >> >> Indeed, if you think for a moment you'll realize they obviously were >> >> _not_ incarnated as Men, since their bodies were around 2000 years >> >> old at the time of the War of the Ring. >> >> >> >> >He was no longer an Ainu in the strict sense of the word. He was then >> >> >Mortal. This causes not a few problems, >> >> >> >> If it were true, it might; but as it's not, it doesn't. >> > >> > Well, I've given the citation elsewhere from UT which defines what he >> > was. "Real and not feigned" would be the phrase I'd turn on there. >> > >> > Over to you, Stan. >> >> Are you saying that an Ainu, bound to Arda, would have the ability, even >> with the aid of the Valar, to become a mortal man. Even if we take that to >> mean that his flesh was mortal (which I won't argue with), that is no >> different than Melian clothed as a Firstborn, and thus able to produce >> offspring. Does that mean that Melian *was* an Elf? Clearly not. > > Actually I'm NOT saying that. > > I was balancing the equation and looking at the probability of meaning. > > Either the Maiar were incarnated as mortal men and became mortal OR > Gandalf's spirit couldn't have just upped and left Arda. All Maia were > bound to Arda for the duration. Even Manwe when consulting with Eru > doesn't leave Arda. How then could gandalf do so? > > As you can see I wasn't being exclusive. > > The following comments are also pertinent to the debate. > > There was no need for Gandalf to have gone to Eru for a new body. The > Valar had all the necessary means at their disposal to create a new one > for him, in the same way they could re-house Elves that had died, and > NOT by reincarnation through their children. Gandalf did not receive a new body. He came back to the body that he had inhabited before his death. > > There was no need for Gandalf to go to Eru to become "turbocharged". He > had been artificially restricted as Gandalf the Grey - Gandalf the White > was simply under no such restriction. Let me ask one thing. Do you agree that Gandalf left Ea? -- A. Clausen maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net ###### From: "The American" Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien References: <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3ECD0B80.AAEBBA7F@indigo.ie> <3ECD97BB.E1D08272@indigo.ie> <075Aa.2345$H84.1189560@news1.news.adelphia.net> Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Lines: 17 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 00:11:19 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.48.199.84 X-Complaints-To: abuse@adelphia.net X-Trace: news1.news.adelphia.net 1053907879 24.48.199.84 (Sun, 25 May 2003 20:11:19 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 20:11:19 EDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!newsfeed.stueberl.de!east.cox.net!cox.net!rip!news.webusenet.com!router1.news.adelphia.net!news1.news.adelphia.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117681 "Stan Brown" wrote in message news:MPG.193b0d67e97f695198ac4f@news.odyssey.net... > > But there are two separate issues: > > 1. What did the author mean? > > 2. What meanings does the text have? > Maybe it's just me but #1 is far more important than #2. But I do get your meaning. T.A. ###### From: Stan Brown Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 21:34:19 -0400 Organization: Oak Road Systems Message-ID: References: <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3ECD0B80.AAEBBA7F@indigo.ie> <3ECD97BB.E1D08272@indigo.ie> <075Aa.2345$H84.1189560@news1.news.adelphia.net> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.60 X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 34 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-06!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117644 >"Stan Brown" wrote in message >news:MPG.193b0d67e97f695198ac4f@news.odyssey.net... >> But there are two separate issues: >> 1. What did the author mean? >> 2. What meanings does the text have? The American wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien: >Maybe it's just me but #1 is far more important than #2. >But I do get your meaning. I would say that (1) or (2) can be more important, depending on why one is asking. For example, in answering "Why do you keep re-reading LotR?", obviously (2) is much more important. In answering the question "Did the Ring speak?", (1) is more important. What I was trying to say is that I think the reason there's so much heat and so little light over the question of interpretation is that people are talking past each other. Some assume the question is (1), some assume it's (2), and no one seems to make it clear which one they're arguing about. In those circumstances the question obviously will never be resolved. -- Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com Tolkien FAQs: http://Tolkien.slimy.com (Steuard Jensen's site) Tolkien letters FAQ: http://users.telerama.com/~taliesen/tolkien/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/tech/faqget.htm ###### From: Flame of the West Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 22:50:15 -0400 Lines: 26 Message-ID: References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC32D11.4ED02DB5@indigo.ie> <3ED1AF64.D333EFD1@indigo.ie> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: UmFuZG9tSVawTO72beePys62WFmO34MK/JSHSMMxuUOwEclR2iK6osHIchX9BDiV X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 26 May 2003 02:54:42 GMT In-Reply-To: <3ED1AF64.D333EFD1@indigo.ie> X-Accept-Language: en-us, en User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030507 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed2.news.rcn.net!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117595 Michael O'Neill wrote: > There was no need for Gandalf to have gone to Eru for a new body. The > Valar had all the necessary means at their disposal to create a new one > for him, in the same way they could re-house Elves that had died, and > NOT by reincarnation through their children. How do you know they were authorized to re-house Ainur the way they were authorized to re-house Elves? > There was no need for Gandalf to go to Eru to become "turbocharged". He > had been artificially restricted as Gandalf the Grey - Gandalf the White > was simply under no such restriction. Why does it matter whether the Valar could have done the job or not? Tolkien says Eru did it, not the Valar. That's really all we need to know. -- FotW The Official Return of the King Protest Site http://members.aol.com/rotkprotest/ ###### Message-ID: <3ED1AF64.D333EFD1@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC32D11.4ED02DB5@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 58 Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 23:08:36 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.176.233 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1053900533 194.125.176.233 (Sun, 25 May 2003 23:08:53 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 23:08:53 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!zen.net.uk!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117546 AC wrote: > > On Wed, 14 May 2003 23:00:49 -0700, > Michael O'Neill wrote: > > Stan Brown wrote: > >> > >> Michael O'Neill wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien: > >> >Gandalf the Istari, as opposed to Olórin the Maia, was incarnated as a > >> >Mortal Man > >> > >> Citation, please? > >> > >> We are told that the Istari _looked_ like Men, not that they _were_ > >> Men. > >> > >> Indeed, if you think for a moment you'll realize they obviously were > >> _not_ incarnated as Men, since their bodies were around 2000 years > >> old at the time of the War of the Ring. > >> > >> >He was no longer an Ainu in the strict sense of the word. He was then > >> >Mortal. This causes not a few problems, > >> > >> If it were true, it might; but as it's not, it doesn't. > > > > Well, I've given the citation elsewhere from UT which defines what he > > was. "Real and not feigned" would be the phrase I'd turn on there. > > > > Over to you, Stan. > > Are you saying that an Ainu, bound to Arda, would have the ability, even > with the aid of the Valar, to become a mortal man. Even if we take that to > mean that his flesh was mortal (which I won't argue with), that is no > different than Melian clothed as a Firstborn, and thus able to produce > offspring. Does that mean that Melian *was* an Elf? Clearly not. Actually I'm NOT saying that. I was balancing the equation and looking at the probability of meaning. Either the Maiar were incarnated as mortal men and became mortal OR Gandalf's spirit couldn't have just upped and left Arda. All Maia were bound to Arda for the duration. Even Manwe when consulting with Eru doesn't leave Arda. How then could gandalf do so? As you can see I wasn't being exclusive. The following comments are also pertinent to the debate. There was no need for Gandalf to have gone to Eru for a new body. The Valar had all the necessary means at their disposal to create a new one for him, in the same way they could re-house Elves that had died, and NOT by reincarnation through their children. There was no need for Gandalf to go to Eru to become "turbocharged". He had been artificially restricted as Gandalf the Grey - Gandalf the White was simply under no such restriction. M. ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien From: AC Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC32D11.4ED02DB5@indigo.ie> <3ED1AF64.D333EFD1@indigo.ie> <3ED25680.D5D3958E@0.com> Organization: The Tao of Cow Reply-To: maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net Message-ID: User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Lines: 86 X-Complaints-To: abuse@randori.com - Please include ALL headers, thanks. Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 15:57:31 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!newsfeeder2.randori.com!news.randori.com!263039bc!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117589 On Mon, 26 May 2003 11:01:36 -0700, O <0@0.com> wrote: > AC wrote: > > following incredible coment>> > >> Gandalf did not receive a new body. He came back to the body that he had >> inhabited before his death. > > Where does it state that? > > NOWEHRE are we told that either the Valar or the Maiar OR ERU could > re-animate corpses. > > Or is that a convenient fudge to avoid the question I raised about where > his old body was? "[Gandalf] was sent by a mere prudent plan of the angelic Valar or govenors; but Authority had taken up this plan and enlarged it, at the moment of its failure. 'Naked I was sent back for a brief time, until my task is done'. Sent back by whom, and whence? Not by the Gods' whose business is only with this embodied world and its time; for he 'passed out of thought and time'. Naked is alas! unclear. It was meant just literally, 'Unclothed like a child' (not disincarnate), and so ready to receive the white robes of the highest. Galadriel's power is not divine, and his healing in Lorien is meant to be no more than physical healing and refreshment." Letter #156 "Then upon Celebdil was a lonely window in the snow and before it lay a narrow space, a dizzy eyrie above the mists of the world. The sun shone fiercely there, but all below was wrapped in cloud. Out he sprang, and even as I came behind, he burst into new flame. There was none to see, or perhaps in after ages songs would still be sung of the Battle of the Peak... I threw down my enemy, and he fell from the high place and broke the mountainside when he smote it in his ruin. Then darkness took me, and I strayed out of thought and time, and I wandered far on roads that I will not tell. "Naked I was sent back - for a brief time, until my task is done. *And naked I lay upon the mountain-top. The tower behind was a crumbled into dust, the window gone; the ruined stair was choked with burned and broken stone. I was alone, forgotten, without escape upon the hard horn of hte world. There I lay staring upward while the stars wheeled over, and each day was as long as a life-age of the earth. Faint to my ears came the gathered rumour of all lands; the springing and the dying, the song and the weeping, and the slow everlasting groan of overburdened stone. And so at last Gwaihir the Windlord found me again, and he took me up and bore me away." "'Ever am I fated to be your burden, friend at need.' I said" "'A burden you have been,' he answered, 'but not so now. Light as a swan's feather in my claw you are. The sun shines through you. Indeed I do not think you would need me any more: were I to let you fall, you would float upon the wind." --The White Rider > >> > There was no need for Gandalf to go to Eru to become "turbocharged". He >> > had been artificially restricted as Gandalf the Grey - Gandalf the White >> > was simply under no such restriction. >> >> Let me ask one thing. > > Stop ignoring my point, please. That was a very valid one and, taken > together with my first point about the Valar's ability to make new > bodies, completely refutes any need for Eru's intervention. The Valar were not involved in the situation. > >> Do you agree that Gandalf left Ea? > > I'm not here to simplify complex questions by starting a "belief", AC. > I'll leave that approach to acquiring knowledge to the simple minded or > the geniuses. I'm just asking pertinent questions with references. You're an insulting little jerk, and an ignorant one at that. -- A. Clausen maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net ###### Message-ID: <3ED25680.D5D3958E@0.com> From: O <0@0.com> Organization: O X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC32D11.4ED02DB5@indigo.ie> <3ED1AF64.D333EFD1@indigo.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 33 Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 11:01:36 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.175.201 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1053943314 194.125.175.201 (Mon, 26 May 2003 11:01:54 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 11:01:54 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!colt.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117656 AC wrote: > > Gandalf did not receive a new body. He came back to the body that he had > inhabited before his death. Where does it state that? NOWEHRE are we told that either the Valar or the Maiar OR ERU could re-animate corpses. Or is that a convenient fudge to avoid the question I raised about where his old body was? > > There was no need for Gandalf to go to Eru to become "turbocharged". He > > had been artificially restricted as Gandalf the Grey - Gandalf the White > > was simply under no such restriction. > > Let me ask one thing. Stop ignoring my point, please. That was a very valid one and, taken together with my first point about the Valar's ability to make new bodies, completely refutes any need for Eru's intervention. > Do you agree that Gandalf left Ea? I'm not here to simplify complex questions by starting a "belief", AC. I'll leave that approach to acquiring knowledge to the simple minded or the geniuses. I'm just asking pertinent questions with references. M. ###### From: conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 27 May 2003 06:23:59 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 34 Message-ID: <1178b6d1.0305270523.3db8cba9@posting.google.com> References: <3EC2864E.E5954DA7@indigo.ie> <3EC32D11.4ED02DB5@indigo.ie> <3ED1AF64.D333EFD1@indigo.ie> <3ED25680.D5D3958E@0.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.42.51.28 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1054041841 8659 127.0.0.1 (27 May 2003 13:24:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 27 May 2003 13:24:01 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:118024 AC wrote in message news:... > On Mon, 26 May 2003 11:01:36 -0700, > O <0@0.com> wrote: >> AC wrote: >>> Gandalf did not receive a new body. He came back to the body that he had >>> inhabited before his death. >> Where does it state that? >> NOWEHRE are we told that either the Valar or the Maiar OR ERU could >> re-animate corpses. >> Or is that a convenient fudge to avoid the question I raised about where >> his old body was? There is also; January 25, 3019 - "He [Gandalf] casts down the Balrog and passes away. His body lies on the peak." February 14, 3019 - "Gandalf returns to life and lies in a trance." RotK, The Tale of Years Not to mention... Gandalf still had Narya (and Glamdring) when he returned. And we KNOW how Michael feels about spirits carrying rings around with them. Of course, this evidence has been pointed out repeatedly and he seems to be deliberately ignoring it. ###### From: conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 27 May 2003 06:39:45 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 27 Message-ID: <1178b6d1.0305270539.52b81802@posting.google.com> References: <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3ECD0B80.AAEBBA7F@indigo.ie> <3ECD97BB.E1D08272@indigo.ie> <075Aa.2345$H84.1189560@news1.news.adelphia.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.42.51.28 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1054042786 9522 127.0.0.1 (27 May 2003 13:39:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 27 May 2003 13:39:46 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117928 Stan Brown wrote in message news:... > But there are two separate issues: > 1. What did the author mean? > 2. What meanings does the text have? Actually, there are alot of variations on those; 1a: What did the author say he meant? 1b: What did the author actually mean? 1c: What did the author mean in various similar texts? 2a: What meanings does the text allow? 2b: What meanings does the text suggest? 2c: What meanings do parts of the text allow/suggest? Et cetera. I think alot of our debates are really tied up with these finer shadings. Given that Tolkien's ideas changed a great deal as the mythology developed trying to determine what he meant has to be confined to a specific timeframe / set of texts. There is also always the possibility of unconscious influences or changes after the fact. Parts of the text may be read to allow one interpretation, Tolkien could state another after the fact, and yet a third might have been his actual intent at the time of writing. ###### From: stephen@nomail.com Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 27 May 2003 21:12:48 GMT Organization: Michigan State University Lines: 37 Sender: stephen@nomail.com Message-ID: References: <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3ECD0B80.AAEBBA7F@indigo.ie> <3ECD97BB.E1D08272@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: arctic.cse.msu.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: tin/1.4.3-20000502 ("Marian") (UNIX) (SunOS/5.8 (sun4u)) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!logbridge.uoregon.edu!msunews!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:117849 J Swanson wrote: : Calm down. An interpretation has to be grounded, of course. Whether it's : the author's interpretation, yours or mine. At least if it's going to be of : public interest, which is a reasonable criterion in a newsgroup. So I don't : understand this talk about no authority, free-for-all or Neo-Nazis. : But you're first question is good. What are we interested in - Tolkien's : "real vision", something that he didn't express clearly into his work, but : that we can deduce from unpublished texts? Or of what's actually in the : texts, and the "independent" interpretations that can be made? : I think the desire to decide if there was seven or hundreds of Balrogs, : whether they had wings or not, etc, stems from the deep fascination with : the world Tolkien wrote, and the impulse of "realism" - to become : historians and geographers of Middle Earth as if it had existed, or even : dream of living there as role-players seem to do. The texts are taken as a : window into a world. I can understand that and find it a valid approach, as : that's how the work itself is written on one level, how it works for the : reader. But that doesn't mean that's the only way of _discussing_ it, or : even the most interesting way. And it is naïve to believe that there is an : objective "truth" about things that are (deliberately?) vague or ambiguous : in the text, like the description of the Balrog of Moria. : John Nicely said. There is more to literary criticism and apprecation than simply wanting to know more about the world the author was trying to create. Most of the people in this newsgroup, and most of Tolkien fandom, have a historical rather than literary approach and appreciation of Tolkien's work. They want to know what "really" happened. They want to know if Balrog's have wings, and what Tom Bombadil was, and more about the Elvish languages. The fervor displayed is evidence of the power of Tolkien's vision. But story internal explanations and appeals to the author's letters are not part of literary criticism, which focuses on the work as written. Stephen ###### From: the softrat Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 15:41:35 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: <7uj7dvgiesdiavsv0a7lrmabaac95ro5kj@4ax.com> References: <3EC2D3E1.938B9BE1@indigo.ie> <3ECD0B80.AAEBBA7F@indigo.ie> <3ECD97BB.E1D08272@indigo.ie> <075Aa.2345$H84.1189560@news1.news.adelphia.net> <1178b6d1.0305270539.52b81802@posting.google.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 27 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!sjc70.webusenet.com!news.webusenet.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-06!sn-post-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:118102 On 27 May 2003 06:39:45 -0700, conrad.dunkerson@worldnet.att.net (Conrad Dunkerson) wrote: > >Actually, there are alot of variations on those; > >1a: What did the author say he meant? >1b: What did the author actually mean? >1c: What did the author mean in various similar texts? >2a: What meanings does the text allow? >2b: What meanings does the text suggest? >2c: What meanings do parts of the text allow/suggest? > Where are 17, 18, and 19s through zz? Is there really 'meaning' in all this? What *is* the 'meaning' of 'meaning'? I am an old meanie! the softrat ==> Careful! I have a hug and I know how to use it! mailto:softrat@pobox.com -- People must not do things for fun. We are not here for fun. There is no reference to fun in any Act of Parliament. ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien From: AC Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC3D789.C553F5D5@indigo.ie> <3EE7EAAD.3CB1DC5F@o.com> Organization: The Tao of Cow Reply-To: maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net Message-ID: User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Lines: 66 X-Complaints-To: abuse@randori.com - Please include ALL headers, thanks. Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 19:34:45 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!newsfeeder2.randori.com!news.randori.com!263039bc!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:118622 On Wed, 11 Jun 2003 19:51:25 -0700, O wrote: > AC wrote: >> >> On Thu, 15 May 2003 17:41:25 -0400, >> Flame of the West wrote: >> > Michael O'Neill wrote: >> > >> >>>>Didn't Gandalf leave Arda after he was killed in the fight with the >> >>>>balrog? >> >>> >> >>>That was a special intervention by Eru. >> >> >> >> Show where this is stated in the LotR. >> > >> > It isn't. It's in Letters. I really don't know why you >> > have such a problem with Tolkien amplifying a bit, >> > giving us a little more information, in his Letters. >> > You seem to regard as illegitimate or erroneous >> > anything he says in Letters that isn't *directly* >> > implied by the text of LotR. But why *should* >> > JRRT have so restricted himself? Why *not* tell >> > us a little bit more than could be deduced from >> > the text? >> >> What I can't understand is why Michael rejects Letters out of hand, and yet >> quotes from UT and Sil. In purely canonical terms, none of them are on the >> best footing, and using strictly non-canonical texts to refute strictly >> non-canonical texts seems rather odd to me. Beyond that, he seems to have >> stretch the texts he does choose to the point of breaking. >> >> -- >> A. Clausen >> >> maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net > > I have explained my position before in great detail to FotW IIRC. > > Wasted effort. > > When you're in the creative process, you are master of that process. You > encompass it. You are far more cogent than at other times in terms of > knowing what's what with your own work. > > Tolkien was a revisionist par excellence. He was constantly revising and > refining which is why he published so few of his works. > > Yet I see a consistency, even in the contradictions or parallel paths > taken in the texts he wrote, which seem far superior to the pieces of > information in "letters". > > Internal Consistency. I'm sorry Michael, but I don't buy your arguments any more. Now that I've seen the kind of cherry-picking you do with the texts, attempting to dismiss the Appendices, I see no reason to accept any argument. You see what you want to see and simply ignore the rest. Debating with you is well-nigh impossible, and very likely a waste of time. What you want us to accept is your vision of LotR, even if that means ignoring the author's own words, and I won't do that, not after you have just demonstrated the extent to which you are willing to throw inconvenient texts out. -- Aaron Clausen maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net ###### From: maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net (AC) Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... Date: 14 Jun 2003 10:26:47 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 45 Message-ID: <66dc4372.0306140926.4e850875@posting.google.com> References: <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC3D789.C553F5D5@indigo.ie> <3EE7EAAD.3CB1DC5F@o.com> <3EEB895E.2E9724CB@indigo.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.141.6.21 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1055611608 23882 127.0.0.1 (14 Jun 2003 17:26:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 14 Jun 2003 17:26:48 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:118755 Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EEB895E.2E9724CB@indigo.ie>... > AC wrote: > > > > I'm sorry Michael, but I don't buy your arguments any more. Now that I've > > seen the kind of cherry-picking you do with the texts, attempting to dismiss > > the Appendices, I see no reason to accept any argument. You see what you > > want to see and simply ignore the rest. Debating with you is well-nigh > > impossible, and very likely a waste of time. What you want us to accept is > > your vision of LotR, even if that means ignoring the author's own words, and > > I won't do that, not after you have just demonstrated the extent to which > > you are willing to throw inconvenient texts out. > > Unlike you, I at least subject the lext to reasonable analysis and ask > the question, is this logical in Tolkien's universe. > You, OTOH, seem willingt to uncriticall yaccpt any gruel Tolkien dishes > out on the spur of the moment and accept it as canon. > > I am not. > > You OTOH, have yet to examine my argument in any other way except to say > "but Tolkien said that", or "just because he didn't say it doesn't mean > it didn't happenNeither of those responses have any part in a discussion > of the merits or otherwise of a text. > > Do you consider Tolkien a saint then, that he never made an error and > never wound people up? We know for a fact he made errors. > > Where you get your position from that he is omniscient? Within his own creation, he is as close omniscient as we will manage. You support your theories by cherry picking texts. But declaring that the Appendices are lesser than the narrative was the last straw for me. To be blunt, it shows a certain amount of arrogance and dishonesty to do that. And how would you propose someone debate you when you cherry pick texts like that? By what means would you reliably show someone else to be wrong, or visa versa? The fact is that you have chosen a way of dealing with the texts which permits you unlimited latitude in supporting your arguments while being able to simultaneously ignore any argument, *even from the author* that disagrees with your position. Now I'm sure this is fine for you, but it makes rational debate impossible. -- Aaron Clausen maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net ###### Message-ID: <3EEB895E.2E9724CB@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3EB9E36C.E3B72C68@indigo.ie> <3EBA0D2B.4B168DF6@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305080507.63c6c909@posting.google.com> <3EBAD978.2F92ACC@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305081137.14100d09@posting.google.com> <3EBB7062.4F0A98A8@indigo.ie> <1178b6d1.0305090820.319e39f4@posting.google.com> <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC3D789.C553F5D5@indigo.ie> <3EE7EAAD.3CB1DC5F@o.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 84 Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 13:45:18 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.134.74 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1055594741 194.125.134.74 (Sat, 14 Jun 2003 13:45:41 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 13:45:41 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!newsfeed.vmunix.org!newspeer1-gui.server.ntli.net!ntli.net!colt.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:118747 AC wrote: > > On Wed, 11 Jun 2003 19:51:25 -0700, > O wrote: > > AC wrote: > >> > >> On Thu, 15 May 2003 17:41:25 -0400, > >> Flame of the West wrote: > >> > Michael O'Neill wrote: > >> > > >> >>>>Didn't Gandalf leave Arda after he was killed in the fight with the > >> >>>>balrog? > >> >>> > >> >>>That was a special intervention by Eru. > >> >> > >> >> Show where this is stated in the LotR. > >> > > >> > It isn't. It's in Letters. I really don't know why you > >> > have such a problem with Tolkien amplifying a bit, > >> > giving us a little more information, in his Letters. > >> > You seem to regard as illegitimate or erroneous > >> > anything he says in Letters that isn't *directly* > >> > implied by the text of LotR. But why *should* > >> > JRRT have so restricted himself? Why *not* tell > >> > us a little bit more than could be deduced from > >> > the text? > >> > >> What I can't understand is why Michael rejects Letters out of hand, and yet > >> quotes from UT and Sil. In purely canonical terms, none of them are on the > >> best footing, and using strictly non-canonical texts to refute strictly > >> non-canonical texts seems rather odd to me. Beyond that, he seems to have > >> stretch the texts he does choose to the point of breaking. > >> > >> -- > >> A. Clausen > >> > >> maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net > > > > I have explained my position before in great detail to FotW IIRC. > > > > Wasted effort. > > > > When you're in the creative process, you are master of that process. You > > encompass it. You are far more cogent than at other times in terms of > > knowing what's what with your own work. > > > > Tolkien was a revisionist par excellence. He was constantly revising and > > refining which is why he published so few of his works. > > > > Yet I see a consistency, even in the contradictions or parallel paths > > taken in the texts he wrote, which seem far superior to the pieces of > > information in "letters". > > > > Internal Consistency. > > I'm sorry Michael, but I don't buy your arguments any more. Now that I've > seen the kind of cherry-picking you do with the texts, attempting to dismiss > the Appendices, I see no reason to accept any argument. You see what you > want to see and simply ignore the rest. Debating with you is well-nigh > impossible, and very likely a waste of time. What you want us to accept is > your vision of LotR, even if that means ignoring the author's own words, and > I won't do that, not after you have just demonstrated the extent to which > you are willing to throw inconvenient texts out. Unlike you, I at least subject the lext to reasonable analysis and ask the question, is this logical in Tolkien's universe. You, OTOH, seem willingt to uncriticall yaccpt any gruel Tolkien dishes out on the spur of the moment and accept it as canon. I am not. You OTOH, have yet to examine my argument in any other way except to say "but Tolkien said that", or "just because he didn't say it doesn't mean it didn't happenNeither of those responses have any part in a discussion of the merits or otherwise of a text. Do you consider Tolkien a saint then, that he never made an error and never wound people up? We know for a fact he made errors. Where you get your position from that he is omniscient? M. M. ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien From: AC Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC3D789.C553F5D5@indigo.ie> <3EE7EAAD.3CB1DC5F@o.com> <3EEB895E.2E9724CB@indigo.ie> <66dc4372.0306140926.4e850875@posting.google.com> <3EEF4FA4.4E4AE760@indigo.ie> Organization: The Tao of Cow Reply-To: maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net Message-ID: User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Lines: 108 X-Complaints-To: abuse@randori.com - Please include ALL headers, thanks. Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 15:09:29 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsfeeder2.randori.com!news.randori.com!263039bc!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:118848 On Tue, 17 Jun 2003 10:28:04 -0700, Michael O'Neill wrote: > AC wrote: >> >> Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EEB895E.2E9724CB@indigo.ie>... >> > AC wrote: >> > > >> > > I'm sorry Michael, but I don't buy your arguments any more. Now that I've >> > > seen the kind of cherry-picking you do with the texts, attempting to dismiss >> > > the Appendices, I see no reason to accept any argument. You see what you >> > > want to see and simply ignore the rest. Debating with you is well-nigh >> > > impossible, and very likely a waste of time. What you want us to accept is >> > > your vision of LotR, even if that means ignoring the author's own words, and >> > > I won't do that, not after you have just demonstrated the extent to which >> > > you are willing to throw inconvenient texts out. >> > >> > Unlike you, I at least subject the lext to reasonable analysis and ask >> > the question, is this logical in Tolkien's universe. >> > You, OTOH, seem willingt to uncriticall yaccpt any gruel Tolkien dishes >> > out on the spur of the moment and accept it as canon. >> > >> > I am not. >> > >> > You OTOH, have yet to examine my argument in any other way except to say >> > "but Tolkien said that", or "just because he didn't say it doesn't mean >> > it didn't happenNeither of those responses have any part in a discussion >> > of the merits or otherwise of a text. >> > >> > Do you consider Tolkien a saint then, that he never made an error and >> > never wound people up? We know for a fact he made errors. >> > >> > Where you get your position from that he is omniscient? >> >> Within his own creation, he is as close omniscient as we will manage. You >> support your theories by cherry picking texts. But declaring that the >> Appendices are lesser than the narrative was the last straw for me. To be >> blunt, it shows a certain amount of arrogance and dishonesty to do that. >> And how would you propose someone debate you when you cherry pick texts like >> that? By what means would you reliably show someone else to be wrong, or >> visa versa? The fact is that you have chosen a way of dealing with the >> texts which permits you unlimited latitude in supporting your arguments >> while being able to simultaneously ignore any argument, *even from the >> author* that disagrees with your position. Now I'm sure this is fine for >> you, but it makes rational debate impossible. > > On the contrary rational debate > can only be possible when you find > exceptions that prove the rule and > analyze them. No, it appears that the only way to have a rational debate with *you* is to concede all points and permit you to cherry pick (taking the notes that largely make up the chapter on the Istari in UT while declaring Letters invalid). I don't think there is actually any point at all in debating you, because I have no confidence that you would accept any text that didn't agree with your point of view, and would dismiss such texts as revisionistic. > Approaching the canon or anything else > without a degree of irreverance makes > you into a believer. The mind of the believer > is so filled with "things it knows" that it > has nowhere to grow. It stagnates. And here we get a view of what you are really doing. At the core, you like to prod others. We've seen this with your incessant OT posting. I have, on a number of occasions been shown to be wrong, and I have no problem accepting that Tolkien did indeed change things as time went on. But as Conrad as pointing out about the Valar and the Downfall of Numenor, we can see an evolution of an idea. There are indeed some things we will never know for sure (Orcs having souls, for instance), but what I read out of your "irreverance" is in fact a sort of hubris, where you have decided that you will have absolute latitude in interpretation, while everyone else who disagrees with you is either wrong or picking some awful revisionist text. > > I refer you once again to Buddy's > recent post for an example of > Tolkien's lack of consistency > and non-omniscience. I never denied that there were areas where consistency was lacking. Topics such as Galadriel's history are contradictory, and we have to accept that we can never know the truth, as Tolkien himself never seems to have come to a decision. > > > > I apologise for removing your comfort blanket AC, > but is it not time you faced the reality of > Tolkien's fallibility concerning > his sub-creation? YOu haven't removed anything, Michael. All you've done is proven that, when you peel it all away, you have something of a troll in you, that enjoys stirring up the mix for stirring's sake. You have not offered a single reasonable objection to Sauron's taking the Ring to Numenor or Eru's intervention in resurrecting Gandalf. Your argument consists of "it isn't in the canon" and "I don't like Letters". -- Aaron Clausen maureen-taocow-ng1@alberni.net ###### Message-ID: <3EEF4FA4.4E4AE760@indigo.ie> From: Michael O'Neill Organization: O'Neill Quigley & Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Suppose Pharazon backed down... References: <3lRua.5042$I56.1152433245@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com> <1178b6d1.0305120406.60c5b4f3@posting.google.com> <3EC3D789.C553F5D5@indigo.ie> <3EE7EAAD.3CB1DC5F@o.com> <3EEB895E.2E9724CB@indigo.ie> <66dc4372.0306140926.4e850875@posting.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 67 Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 10:28:04 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.125.207.238 X-Complaints-To: news@indigo.ie X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1055842109 194.125.207.238 (Tue, 17 Jun 2003 10:28:29 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 10:28:29 BST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!zen.net.uk!newspeer.lavaseals.co.uk!diablo.theplanet.net!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch rec.arts.books.tolkien:118816 AC wrote: > > Michael O'Neill wrote in message news:<3EEB895E.2E9724CB@indigo.ie>... > > AC wrote: > > > > > > I'm sorry Michael, but I don't buy your arguments any more. Now that I've > > > seen the kind of cherry-picking you do with the texts, attempting to dismiss > > > the Appendices, I see no reason to accept any argument. You see what you > > > want to see and simply ignore the rest. Debating with you is well-nigh > > > impossible, and very likely a waste of time. What you want us to accept is > > > your vision of LotR, even if that means ignoring the author's own words, and > > > I won't do that, not after you have just demonstrated the extent to which > > > you are willing to throw inconvenient texts out. > > > > Unlike you, I at least subject the lext to reasonable analysis and ask > > the question, is this logical in Tolkien's universe. > > You, OTOH, seem willingt to uncriticall yaccpt any gruel Tolkien dishes > > out on the spur of the moment and accept it as canon. > > > > I am not. > > > > You OTOH, have yet to examine my argument in any other way except to say > > "but Tolkien said that", or "just because he didn't say it doesn't mean > > it didn't happenNeither of those responses have any part in a discussion > > of the merits or otherwise of a text. > > > > Do you consider Tolkien a saint then, that he never made an error and > > never wound people up? We know for a fact he made errors. > > > > Where you get your position from that he is omniscient? > > Within his own creation, he is as close omniscient as we will manage. You > support your theories by cherry picking texts. But declaring that the > Appendices are lesser than the narrative was the last straw for me. To be > blunt, it shows a certain amount of arrogance and dishonesty to do that. > And how would you propose someone debate you when you cherry pick texts like > that? By what means would you reliably show someone else to be wrong, or > visa versa? The fact is that you have chosen a way of dealing with the > texts which permits you unlimited latitude in supporting your arguments > while being able to simultaneously ignore any argument, *even from the > author* that disagrees with your position. Now I'm sure this is fine for > you, but it makes rational debate impossible. On the contrary rational debate can only be possible when you find exceptions that prove the rule and analyze them. Approaching the canon or anything else without a degree of irreverance makes you into a believer. The mind of the believer is so filled with "things it knows" that it has nowhere to grow. It stagnates. I refer you once again to Buddy's recent post for an example of Tolkien's lack of consistency and non-omniscience. I apologise for removing your comfort blanket AC, but is it not time you faced the reality of Tolkien's fallibility concerning his sub-creation? M.