We have detected that cookies are not enabled on your browser. Please enable cookies to ensure the proper experience.
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5
Results 101 to 120 of 120
  1. #101
    We seem to have gotten away from the original question, but I suppose it has been answered already. Please do not make personal attacks at me for my thoughts or opinions. If you can prove me correct or incorrect, please share. My PERSONAL THOUGHTS, though they can't be proven in any way that I can think of, is the Flame of Anor that Gandalf refers to his Narya, the Ring of Fire. This, IN MY OPINION, is one of the main reasons Gandalf has such an affiliation with fire, flaming pinecones, fireworks, etc. I also believe the ring was what allowed him to withstand the Balrog. "Flame of Udun" could be taken as either synonymous with Balrog or perhaps the Fire of Morgoth(Dark Fire?) that Balrog's wielded as their power. As for the flood argument, I think Sauron could guess where Elrond was. He had a palantir at his disposal, and if he hears a rumor about a magical elven river valley, who does he think could be hiding out there? He knows of Galadriel and Celeborn in Lothlorien, why should Rivendell be any different? As far as I can tell, the argument was based around why the horses appeared in the flood. my answer to this is
    "Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, for they are subtle and quick to anger!"
    Leave it alone. It doesn't really affect anything, except your need to be right. Professor Tolkien isn't here to tell you which one is right, and we can only speculate.
    DI
    [charsig=http://lotrosigs.level3.turbine.com/2621a0000001fff86/01008/signature.png]undefined[/charsig]

  2. #102
    We also seem to have gotten away from the civil discussions, concession of valid points and respect for other points of view that made this forum interesting to read. Sometimes the high road is the better choice. My 2 coppers...
    "You can't fight the Enemy with his own Ring without turning into an Enemy" - J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter # 81



  3. #103
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,120
    Rad you are correct on many things you said, but definitely need to accept that there is magic in LOTR been a fantasy-mythology-historic kind of book. Unaccepting magic at all doesn't help you point.

  4. #104
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    6,283
    Quote Originally Posted by Al. View Post
    Rad you are correct on many things you said, but definitely need to accept that there is magic in LOTR been a fantasy-mythology-historic kind of book. Unaccepting magic at all doesn't help you point.
    Sorry, what? I said no such thing. What I've actually been saying is that the latterday Men of the Free Peoples aren't seen to possess any magic at all during LOTR, that no such Man other than Aragorn (who's a teensy bit more than human) actually does any magic throughout the entire course of the book. All we hear about are sorcerers who work for Sauron. This seems to bother you for some reason, but I truly cannot imagine why.

  5. #105
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,242

  6. #106

    For appeals to peace, civility and humour,

    Thanks should go out to Torweld, DarkIstar, tuor66, bambu~, and Haunt123.

    I initially intervened after questions asked had been answered, and this thread had been hijacked to nitpick over minutiae. At this time, there seems to be no longer any danger that this thread will be flown into JRRT's tombstone.

    On the one hand, I am content that any disputes dropped have been conceded; otherwise, this specific information might still be of use to someone,

    From The Fellowship of the Ring, HarperCollinsPublishers, paperback, 2002,

    Quote Originally Posted by 'Book II, Chapter 1 "Many Meetings", pg.294'

    'Who made the flood?' asked Frodo.

    'Elrond commanded it,' answered Gandalf. 'The river of this valley is under his power, and it will rise in anger when he has great need to bar the Ford.... I added a few touches of my own: ... some of the waves took the form of great white horses with shining white riders ....'
    In the same scene, Gandalf reports that Glorfindel knew the flood would come, and that he stooped to kindle fire at the edge of the Ford, and that the trailing Nazgul, and their horses, were thrown into dismay and cast into the deluge by Glorfindel's and Aragorn's subsequent charge.

    HoG

  7. #107
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    6,283
    Quote Originally Posted by Harper_of_Gondolin View Post
    On the one hand, I am content that any disputes dropped have been conceded
    What, including all that nonsense you posted about why Gandalf got all creative with the flood? I asked you to post quotes to substantiate what you said and lo and behold, nothing appeared. Funny, that.

  8. #108
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    6,283
    Quote Originally Posted by DarkIstar View Post
    "Flame of Udun" could be taken as either synonymous with Balrog or perhaps the Fire of Morgoth(Dark Fire?) that Balrog's wielded as their power.
    Hardly the latter given the context in which it's used:

    "I am a servant of the Secret Fire, wielder of the flame of Anor. The dark fire will not avail you, flame of Udûn. Go back to the Shadow! You cannot pass."

    He's addressing the Balrog as 'flame of Udûn', there. This may be more obvious when those lines are spoken, as in the same scene from the movie (skip to 2:10):


  9. #109
    Hardly the latter given the context in which it's used:

    "I am a servant of the Secret Fire, wielder of the flame of Anor. The dark fire will not avail you, flame of Udûn. Go back to the Shadow! You cannot pass."

    He's addressing the Balrog as 'flame of Udûn', there. This may be more obvious when those lines are spoken, as in the same scene from the movie (skip to 2:10)
    Sorry I tried to squeeze too many thoughts into one sentence and they blurred together. I see you are correct, my intended meaning was that the dark fire may have referred to the Fire of Morgoth. I apologize that I didn't make that more clear. Thanks for clearing that up Rad.
    DI
    [charsig=http://lotrosigs.level3.turbine.com/2621a0000001fff86/01008/signature.png]undefined[/charsig]

  10. #110
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    The Perilous Realm
    Posts
    2,488
    Quote Originally Posted by Torweld View Post
    Don't mind Rad. He and some of the other 'purists' have their own specific definition of 'magic' that fits better for them with Tolkien's opinions on such matters.

    It is almost certainly best to agree to disagree on the subject as good luck getting any of them to accept any other definitions.
    Tolkien spoke at length very explicitly in his letters about the nature of magic in Middle-earth. And there is no such thing as "Tolkien's opinions" about Middle-earth. He is its creator and its sole indisputable authority. You either agree with what Tolkien said or you are wrong.

    So what is there to argue about?
    [URL="https://sarahmccabemythopoet.wordpress.com/"][COLOR=#b22222]Falling Toward Mythopoesis[/COLOR][/URL][COLOR=#ffd700]~[/COLOR] My personal blog.

    [URL="https://lotromusic.wordpress.com/"][COLOR=#008080]LOTRO Music[/COLOR][/URL][COLOR=#ffd700]~[/COLOR] ABCs, guides and resources for the compleat LOTRO musician.

  11. #111
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,152
    Quote Originally Posted by Fionnuala View Post
    Tolkien spoke at length very explicitly in his letters about the nature of magic in Middle-earth. And there is no such thing as "Tolkien's opinions" about Middle-earth. He is its creator and its sole indisputable authority. You either agree with what Tolkien said or you are wrong.

    So what is there to argue about?
    'Nuff said.
    Today is a good day for Pie.

    Do not meddle in the affairs of Burglars, for they are subtle and quick to shank you.

  12. #112
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,120
    Quote Originally Posted by Fionnuala View Post
    Tolkien spoke at length very explicitly in his letters about the nature of magic in Middle-earth. And there is no such thing as "Tolkien's opinions" about Middle-earth. He is its creator and its sole indisputable authority. You either agree with what Tolkien said or you are wrong.

    So what is there to argue about?
    This, rad and torweld should listen to this and "engrain" it in their mind.

  13. #113
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    6,283
    Quote Originally Posted by Al. View Post
    This, rad and torweld should listen to this and "engrain" it in their mind.
    Differing with things you say isn't arguing with what Tolkien wrote.

  14. #114
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,120
    Quote Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU View Post
    Differing with things you say isn't arguing with what Tolkien wrote.
    I never claimed that, re-read my previous post you should "engrain" in your mind what tolkien wrote takes more value than anything you can cast your opinion about.

  15. #115
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    6,283
    Quote Originally Posted by Al. View Post
    I never claimed that, re-read my previous post you should "engrain" in your mind what tolkien wrote takes more value than anything you can cast your opinion about.
    I take full account of what he says and frankly, rather than badgering me about that you should think again about what you've been saying instead. I don't recall Tolkien saying that foresight was magic, for example, but you insist upon it. Try taking due account of what's said (or not said) rather than your own preconceptions.

  16. #116
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    The Perilous Realm
    Posts
    2,488
    Quote Originally Posted by Al. View Post
    This, rad and torweld should listen to this and "engrain" it in their mind.
    As much as I'm not a fan of the way Rad often expresses himself, I cannot find any fault with his complete loyalty to the Middle-earth canon and the words of Tolkien. Unlike most others, I don't think I have ever seen him try to "interpret" the texts to support his own arguments. My words were not directed at him.
    [URL="https://sarahmccabemythopoet.wordpress.com/"][COLOR=#b22222]Falling Toward Mythopoesis[/COLOR][/URL][COLOR=#ffd700]~[/COLOR] My personal blog.

    [URL="https://lotromusic.wordpress.com/"][COLOR=#008080]LOTRO Music[/COLOR][/URL][COLOR=#ffd700]~[/COLOR] ABCs, guides and resources for the compleat LOTRO musician.

  17. #117
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Himring
    Posts
    713
    Daerons name in quenya was Sairon, Sairon was Quenya for Wizard LT:337, this is distinct from Nola meaning wise or the Sindarin gul that means sorcery. So we have Tolkien coining a word for wizard distinct from sorcerors/necromancers and witch kings four to five thousand years prior to the Herion Istarion setting foot in middle earth depending on which arrival date you subscribe to, which can only mean there were other wizards in middle earth because you dont name what doesnt exist.
    [charsig=http://lotrosigs.level3.turbine.com/042080000001019a8/01007/signature.png]undefined[/charsig]
    "Of course I am the only elf in the village"

  18. #118
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,120
    Quote Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU View Post
    I take full account of what he says and frankly, rather than badgering me about that you should think again about what you've been saying instead. I don't recall Tolkien saying that foresight was magic, for example, but you insist upon it. Try taking due account of what's said (or not said) rather than your own preconceptions.
    Ok, he didn't delve into it, but really foresight isn't just a common skill is just as Elrond's command of Ford Bruinen, Its magic even if Tolkien didn't say literally it was, sure if you can come with a quote by Tolkien himself saying "There is no magic" or "foresight is no magic" or even Beornings didn't exist in LOTR I will say Im wrong but until then you are wrong.

  19. #119
    Quote Originally Posted by Morthaur View Post
    Daerons name in quenya was Sairon, Sairon was Quenya for Wizard LT:337, this is distinct from Nola meaning wise or the Sindarin gul that means sorcery. So we have Tolkien coining a word for wizard distinct from sorcerors/necromancers and witch kings four to five thousand years prior to the Herion Istarion setting foot in middle earth depending on which arrival date you subscribe to, which can only mean there were other wizards in middle earth because you dont name what doesnt exist.
    Sairon is derived from saira meaning 'learned'. Wizard is derived from the word 'wise'. The problem is that it is difficult for us to determine whether Tolkien meant Sairon to mean 'wizard' as in the sense of magician, or 'wizard' as in the sense of learned or wise person, especially when we know that Tolkien was well aware that the word wizard in Middle-English originally possessed no magical connotations whatsoever.
    I am not saying you are wrong Morthaur, but the polysemous nature of the word 'wizard' precludes you from being absolutely right.

  20. #120
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    6,283
    Quote Originally Posted by Al. View Post
    Ok, he didn't delve into it, but really foresight isn't just a common skill is just as Elrond's command of Ford Bruinen, Its magic even if Tolkien didn't say literally it was, sure if you can come with a quote by Tolkien himself saying "There is no magic" or "foresight is no magic" or even Beornings didn't exist in LOTR I will say Im wrong but until then you are wrong.
    This is at least the third time I've had to point out that I have never said that there was no magic. This is your very last chance to take heed of that. Don't make me repeat myself again.

    Tolkien didn't say foresight was magic and there are good reasons to suspect it wasn't. For example, Frodo gets that gift in small measure as a result of his experiences, but hobbits don't do magic so by implication it's something else. You therefore cannot hold it up as an example of undoubted magic. It isn't, traditionally: it's very often seen as an inexplicable gift someone has (i.e. they're not making it happen through magic, glimpses of the future just come to them in dreams or waking visions) or more explicitly some higher power granting a chosen person (a prophet) glimpses of what's to come. Sure, there's the Mirror of Galadriel but she's at pains to point out that it's not really magic; she humours the hobbits about that. A fundamentally natural power or art that's inexplicable to some because they cannot perceive or understand how it works just seems like magic (something supernatural) to hobbits and Men, when really it'd be just another aspect of nature. (It'd perhaps be akin to how quantum physics challenges your preconceptions of the nature of the world, because it's so deeply counter-intuitive, utterly foreign to everyday experience).

    Neither did I say Beornings did not exist in LOTR. I said Tolkien pushed them well into tbe background, which is a simple matter of observation, that they never appear in person. I also said that I would not consider their skin-changing to be magic but another case of an innate 'natural' gift; we know it's inherited. And again, because there's room for doubt there you can't insist it's magic.

    Anyway, back to the real point: the near-total lack of magic among Men in LOTR. It's no good you insisting that there were magicians among the Men of the Free Peoples at the time of LOTR just because you think there ought to be for some reason of your own. We haven't got a single living example of anyone who is. There are those Barrow-blades, sixteen hundred or more years old and very evidently a lost art, and that's it. There's nothing else.

 

 
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.

Reload