|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Apr 16 2008, 1:53pm
Post #1 of 17
(1739 views)
Shortcut
|
|
The Riders of Rohan -- 3. "Well, father, what can we do for you?"
|
Can't Post
|
|
Our heroes reach Fangorn and the site where the orcs were destroyed on the evening of the fourth day following Boromir's death, but cannot find any hints as to the hobbits' fate in the fading light. They camp just inside the forest, and Gimli has the first watch:
Suddenly Gimli looked up, and there just on the edge of the firelight stood an old bent man, leaning on a staff, and wrapped in a great cloak; his wide-brimmed hat was pulled down over his eyes. Gimli sprang up, too amazed for the moment to cry out, though at once the thought flashed into his mind that Saruman had caught them. Both Aragorn and Legolas, roused by his sudden movement, sat up and stared. The old man did not speak or make a sign.
‘Well, father, what can we do for you?’ said Aragorn, leaping to his feet. ‘Come and be warm, if you are cold!’ He strode forward, but the old man was gone. There was no trace of him to be found near at hand, and they did not dare to wander far. The moon had set and the night was very dark.
Why doesn't Saruman catch them?
Aragorn notes that the old man is not dressed exactly as Éomer had described Saruman -- why does Tolkien bother with this tiny difference?
How does Saruman disappear so easily, if as Gandalf says later, "he has no woodcraft"?
Just then, Legolas realizes the horses are gone.
Why does Tolkien want us to think that Saruman drove away their horses?
Are we meant to recall the lost ponies at the beginning of "A Knife in the Dark"? Also, in that chapter, Frodo's "dreams were... troubled with the noise of wind and galloping hooves." And earlier in this one, Strider says of hoofbeats that "they troubled my dreams: horses galloping, passing in the West."
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
We're discussing The Lord of the Rings in the Reading Room, Oct. 15, 2007 - Mar. 22, 2009!
Join us Apr. 14-20 for "The Riders of Rohan".
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Apr 16 2008, 3:57pm
Post #2 of 17
(1377 views)
Shortcut
|
And as I recall in one of the drafts this was Gandalf, not Saruman, so perhaps Tolkien, too, was uncertain of the old man's identity. At any rate Tolkien kept this scene because it raises the level of tension, especially when immediately afterwards the horses apparently flee the scene, and it sets up hostile reaction to the appearance of the White Wizard the next day, when the hunters all draw their weapons.
So there is the story-external reason for the scene. It also explains why Tolkien bothers with the hat vs. the hood and leads us to believe that the old man drove away the horses.
But is this scene plausible within the confines of the Secondary World? It seems a bit flamboyant. It's not so much what Saruman does as how he does it, seemingly appearing out of nowhere and disappearing just as suddenly. Although there are hints that Gandalf might be capable of moving very quickly when necessary, for the most part he walks or rides Shadowfax.
Furthermore, it doesn't make much sense. Why would Saruman appear now, at night, long after the battle? Why, then, would he disappear, rather than taking some action against this unlikely trio? I find it somewhat implausible, but since it is such a brief scene, it's not something I dwell on.
I've even seen one person on Google Groups suggest this is Radagast, not Saruman, although I find that even more of a stretch.
|
|
|
ArathornJax
Lorien
Apr 16 2008, 8:40pm
Post #3 of 17
(1339 views)
Shortcut
|
Saruman is not there to catch them. In The White Rider Gandalf states, "He was so eager to lay his hands on his prey that he could not wait at home, and he came forth to meet adn to spy on his messengers. But he came too late, for once, and the battle was over, and beyond his help before he reached these parts. He did not remain here long, I look into his mind and I see his doubt." Gandalf also confirms here to Gimli that it was not he they saw the night before but Saruman. Saurman was coming to spy on his forces and to examine the hostages. He also knew according to this passage on this page that the "horsemen" had slew his group and burned them, but still did not know whether they actually had prisoners or not. Thus when he saw the three, he may have assumed that they were part of the "horsemen" and didn't want to stick around and deal with them, especially since the deed was done and he needed to get back to Isengard to unleash his attack on the "horsemen. Gandalf points out in the chapter of The White Rider that Saruman did not stick around because he feared Theoden may have gotten the ring and may learn of its power. As such Saruman has to "double and triple his assult on Rohan." This will explain the haste Gandalf gives later to getting to Edoras to free Theoden from Grima's controls.
Tolkien llkes detail and the rumor is usually different then the fact, and here I believe he is showing that. More important, he knows that Gandalf the White is coming back and wants to set up the fact that they may look alike in order to bring about the scene in the chapter The White Rider.
I have never taken it to mean from the passage that Saruman drove away the horses. Gimli applies that it was Saruman that drove off or took their horses but from The Hobbit and from LOTR if one reads close, dwarves tend to take things at face value (often) and make quick judgements. Aragorn takes the watch to reflect on the events and to think. Later in the The White Rider Aragorn shows on his thinking by asking Legolas if the horses sounded like they were in terror. Legolas replies in the negative and said they spoke with "gladness," like they were meeting an old friend to paraphrase. This series has always since my first reading led me to believe something else was happening with them and even though Saruman did appear, he had nothing to do with the horses. Often as a reader, it is best also to not be like Gimli and be quick to a judgement, but to let the scene and clues evolve.
No, the ponies were either driven away or fled in horror so I see no connection betwen these events and the events in The Knife in the Dark.
In terms of previous works we know in one of the time lines in the Scheme it confirms Gimli's suspicion, "February 30th, Saruman appears on battlefield adn is seen by Aragorn and companions at night."
The Treason of Isengard on p. 428 also confirms that this is Saruman "Aragorn and his companions spend night on the battle-field, and see "old man" (Saurman). There is no doubt that this is Saruman.
" . . . (we are ) too engrossed in thinking of everything as a preparation or training or making one fit -- for what? At any minute it is what we are and are doing, not what we plan to be and do that counts."
J.R.R. Tolkien in his 6 October 1940 letter to his son Michael Tolkien.
(This post was edited by ArathornJax on Apr 16 2008, 8:46pm)
|
|
|
Tolkien Forever
Gondor
Apr 16 2008, 9:50pm
Post #4 of 17
(1334 views)
Shortcut
|
Our heroes reach Fangorn and the site where the orcs were destroyed on the evening of the fourth day following Boromir's death, but cannot find any hints as to the hobbits' fate in the fading light. They camp just inside the forest, and Gimli has the first watch:
Suddenly Gimli looked up, and there just on the edge of the firelight stood an old bent man, leaning on a staff, and wrapped in a great cloak; his wide-brimmed hat was pulled down over his eyes. Gimli sprang up, too amazed for the moment to cry out, though at once the thought flashed into his mind that Saruman had caught them. Both Aragorn and Legolas, roused by his sudden movement, sat up and stared. The old man did not speak or make a sign.
‘Well, father, what can we do for you?’ said Aragorn, leaping to his feet. ‘Come and be warm, if you are cold!’ He strode forward, but the old man was gone. There was no trace of him to be found near at hand, and they did not dare to wander far. The moon had set and the night was very dark.
Why doesn't Saruman catch them?
Let's not forget that just several days later, Saruman has his staff broken by Gandalf & all indications are that Saruman is losing his power. Perhaps he doesn't have the 'magical' power to disarm the three? There's no indication that Saruman ever engaged in military battle like Gandalf either.
Aragorn notes that the old man is not dressed exactly as Éomer had described Saruman -- why does Tolkien bother with this tiny difference?
To point out that it might not be Saruman, as it indeed turns out.
How does Saruman disappear so easily, if as Gandalf says later, "he has no woodcraft"?
One does not need any special woodcraft to disappear into a group of trees (especially in Fangorn) in the dark of night. The three did not look for him either......
Just then, Legolas realizes the horses are gone.
Why does Tolkien want us to think that Saruman drove away their horses?
Well, actually, we just think Saruman drove away the horses until next morning. I think the real point is that Tolkien wants us to think the Three are now stranded on foot in the possible hands of Saruman.
Are we meant to recall the lost ponies at the beginning of "A Knife in the Dark"?
Well, I never thought of that, but it is a valid point - but I don't think it is meant to bring up a memory of 'A Knife in the Dark' (Don't you mean 'Fog on the Barrow Downs'?)
In one case. it's fear, in the other, joy, although we don't know that at the time.
Also, in that chapter, Frodo's "dreams were... troubled with the noise of wind and galloping hooves." And earlier in this one, Strider says of hoofbeats that "they troubled my dreams: horses galloping, passing in the West."
Good connection.
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Apr 16 2008, 10:48pm
Post #5 of 17
(1352 views)
Shortcut
|
Why does Tolkien want us to think that Saruman drove away their horses?
Well, actually, we just think Saruman drove away the horses until next morning. True enough, but "next morning" doesn't come until two more chapters have passed.
I don't think it is meant to bring up a memory of 'A Knife in the Dark' (Don't you mean 'Fog on the Barrow-downs'?) I didn't, but that's a good point: they lose their ponies there too, temporarily! I was thinking of the ponies lost at Bree, driven off by the ruffians working for the Riders.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
We're discussing The Lord of the Rings in the Reading Room, Oct. 15, 2007 - Mar. 22, 2009!
Join us Apr. 14-20 for "The Riders of Rohan".
|
|
|
Tolkien Forever
Gondor
Apr 17 2008, 3:19am
Post #6 of 17
(1316 views)
Shortcut
|
Quote
I don't think it is meant to bring up a memory of 'A Knife in the Dark' (Don't you mean 'Fog on the Barrow-downs'?)I didn't, but that's a good point: they lose their ponies there too, temporarily! I was thinking of the ponies lost at Bree, driven off by the ruffians working for the Riders.
Right.....
I forgot that was the beginning of that chapter & that incident totally slipped my mind.
It seems so far from Bree to Weathertop to be the same chapter.
BTW: I realized it was 2 chapters (3 actually) between the two days with the horses disappearing in fear & joy, so I agree with you there.
|
|
|
sador
Half-elven
Apr 17 2008, 11:08am
Post #7 of 17
(1344 views)
Shortcut
|
|
To answer your questions, we must deal with another question first
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Which is: did Saruman know who it was in front of him?
Let us weigh the evidence. - In 'The White Rider', Gandalf looks into Saruman's mind: "He came forth to meet and spy upon his messengers... he does not know whether the Orcs were bringing any prisoners or not. And he does not know of the quarrel between his servants and the Orcs of Mordor; nor does he know of the Winged Messenger".
- In 'The Palantir', Gandalf reiterates this belief to Merry: "Who you are; how you came there, and why; what you know; whether you were captured, and if so, how you escaped when all the Orcs perished - it is with those little riddles that the great mind of Saruman is troubled"
But wait! Gandalf said these things, before he knew Saruman had and used a palantir. Shouldn't that change our evaluation?
From the essay in 'Unfinished Tales', I would suppose Saruman spied on his messengers all the time, and knew exactly who they were carrying. and probably who were the three strange pursuers who were engaged in a futile race over Rohan. So the first assumption must be that Gandalf was wrong.
But let's suppose he was right, and Saruman did come with that purpose. Why wasn't the palantir enough? Several possibilitirs, none of which seems very convincing, come to mind: - Saruman simply didn't realise he could survey around with the palantir. The records in Minas Tirith spoke mainly about the stones' use in communication, not for espionage. The point missed him. For instance, I don't believe Sauron used the stone for that purpose, either - I'll come to that presently.
- Ugluk's troop was one of several, sent out to look for the Fellowship. Mauhur was in the Forest; there might even be a Lurtz somewhere - possibly going towards the fens of the Entwash?
- The Orthanc stone was 'fixed' upon Barad-dur, and could not be dislodged towards other directions. If the Dark Lord had the Osgiliath stone, such a theory would seem plausible. As it is, we must say Saruman lacked the mental strength to break away - which makes his hubris in trying to swindle Sauron, acting as his serving while taking the Ring for himself and using it to defeat him, really pathetic. He can't even tear the stone away, as could Aragorn and Denethor!
- One might counter these arguments by saying Denethor was not corruptible in the same way that Saruman was, and Aragorn was quite pure. It is even posible that Aragorn, despite his claim that he managed to wrench the stone away to his will, didn't - he was bluffed by Sauron (since I don't have time to write the coming week, please don't anyone argue me about this! I promise to try and air this thought again when we get to 'The Passing of the Grey Company').
- Tolkien himself raised to possibilities: one is that Saruman's use of the stone was unauthorised (unlike Aragorn or Denethor), and therefore weaker.
- Or that his using was relatively recent (according to 'The Tale of Years', only 19 years before), and he didn't have time to learn it's full use (as opposed to Denethor; for Aragorn we will need to fall upon theory 3 or 4).
None of these theories seem very appealing, and I would fall upon the theory Saruman actually knew pretty well what happened (though he couldn't see how P&M escaped), and that was the actual reason for his coming to the battlefield - to search it first, before Aragorn and co. do so. As a matter of fact, the mere fact they have abandoned Frodo and went after the Orcs, might have convinced Saruman Ugluk actually had the Ringbearer with him! (That might have weighed with Grishnakh as well, had he known of the pursuit - a Nazgul might have sent him just for that purpose)
But I am afraid we must adopt one of them, because of the closing sentence of 'The Uruk-hai':
So ended the raid, and no news of it came ever back either to Mordor or to Isengard...
Was Tolkien talking about Ugluk's last stand? I think not. I'm even afraid we'll need to discard the assumption that Grishnakh received orders from the Nazgul in the middle of it (he must have took time, and took his own counsel). And once Tolkien uses this authoritive narrator's voice (as opposed to the academic speculative discourse of the essay on the Palantiri), we can't assume he was wrong - unless anyone takes the conceit of Frodo as an author to the extreme, and claims Frodo himself didn't properly understand what he wrote - which I don't. (It might be nice, though, to add another option to the Balrog's wings question: 'Tolkien thought it had/hadn't, but we know better')
And now, to your questions:
Why doesn't Saruman catch them?
If he saw them in the Palantir, he was busy looking for the Ring, and was more concerned in satisfying himself they didn't have it.
If he didn't, he was as surprised as they were - and had no reason to pick up a fight with three unknowns while searching for his troops.
Aragorn notes that the old man is not dressed exactly as Éomer had described Saruman -- why does Tolkien bother with this tiny difference?
Others answered that before.
This very chapter, we found out that a malicious rumor was false; and now we are picking on a minor inaccuracy in another one!?
How does Saruman disappear so easily, if as Gandalf says later, "he has no woodcraft"?
How did Gandalf disappear so easily in the Misty Mountains, when the goblins attacked Thorin and co.? Did he have any special mountaincraft?
It's a wizard thing. Saruman having no woodcraft refers to his being unable to read the signs of Pippin and Merry's escape into Fangorn.
Why does Tolkien want us to think that Saruman drove away their horses?
But he did; or at least, that's what Legolas thinks in 'The White Rider':
Whether they fled at first in fear, or not, our horses met Shadowfax, their chieftain, and greeted him with joy.
The horses dragged there pickets and disappeared at the same time Saruman did. Only afterwards, "they heard, far off in the night, the sound of horses whinnying and neighing".
"This is a bitter end to our hope and to all our toil!" - Gimli
|
|
|
Darkstone
Immortal
Apr 17 2008, 3:18pm
Post #8 of 17
(1316 views)
Shortcut
|
Why doesn't Saruman catch them?
It’s like a dog chasing a car: What’s he going to do with them if he catches them? Anyway, Saruman’s out looking for the ring, so he’s not going to bother with three strangers. Except of course for being naturally ornery and driving off their horses. It’s a petty crime of opportunity, nothing personal. I bet he also kicks dogs.
Aragorn notes that the old man is not dressed exactly as Éomer had described Saruman -- why does Tolkien bother with this tiny difference?
To set us up thinking maybe Gandalf has returned. Which he has, except that this isn’t Gandalf, but actually it was, only not in this version, but the reader doesn’t know that, so it does act as a subtle hint.
How does Saruman disappear so easily, if as Gandalf says later, "he has no woodcraft"?
As sador notes, Saruman does have “wizardcraft”.
Just then, Legolas realizes the horses are gone.
Captain Obvious strikes again. (And people wonder where Jackson and Co. got the idea from.)
Why does Tolkien want us to think that Saruman drove away their horses?
Character development. Cause there’s nothing worse than a lowdown, double dealing, bushwacking hoss thief.
Are we meant to recall the lost ponies at the beginning of "A Knife in the Dark"?
And (as Tolkien Forever notes) the missing ponies in “Fog on the Barrow-Downs”, as well as Boromir’s missing horse in “The Council of Elrond”, the missing Bill in “A Journey in the Dark” and the missing horses in ”The Black Gate Opens”. Peter Jackson of course takes this important ongoing leitmotif of mysterious and ominous equestrian absences and uses it to great effect in the films.
Also, in that chapter, Frodo's "dreams were... troubled with the noise of wind and galloping hooves." And earlier in this one, Strider says of hoofbeats that "they troubled my dreams: horses galloping, passing in the West."
Well, at least somebody noticed the horses were leaving, even if only subliminally.
******************************************
The audacious proposal stirred his heart. And the stirring became a song, and it mingled with the songs of Gil-galad and Celebrian, and with those of Feanor and Fingon. The song-weaving created a larger song, and then another, until suddenly it was as if a long forgotten memory woke and for one breathtaking moment the Music of the Ainur revealed itself in all glory. He opened his lips to sing and share this song. Then he realized that the others would not understand. Not even Mithrandir given his current state of mind. So he smiled and simply said "A diversion.”
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Apr 17 2008, 3:42pm
Post #9 of 17
(1317 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Could this be the work of Saruman's ring?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Saruman models himself after Sauron, and in his assault on Rohan often foreshadows all the weapons Sauron will use in the siege of Minas Tirith, except that Saruman's power is always less than Sauron's. So here we have Saruman projecting himself or an image of himself across a great distance, apparently, in search of the Ring, the hobbits, or his orc troops. I don't recall Gandalf doing anything similar. Does Sauron do anything similar?
Well, how about Frodo's encounter with Sauron on Amon Hen, when Sauron's arm seemed to reach out all the way from Barad-dur? How about Sauron's micromanagement of his troops from a distance, which is so important that when Sauron turns his attention away from the Tower of Cirith Ungol, the orcs begin fighting amongst themselves, and when he "dies," the orcs go mad? And Sauron doesn't even have his Ring; imagine what his control would be like with the Ring. His Eye would be everywhere, and his control absolute.
Saruman, like Sauron, and like Morgoth before, (and to some extent like Denethor as well -- bad sign) has become a spider in a web, exerting control through his armies from a distance, while he remains safe (or so he thinks) in Orthanc. Therefore like Sauron, and unlike Gandalf, Saruman needed a means of seeing, acting, and perhaps even projecting his image from a distance. The palantir allowed Saruman to see from a distance, but not always to be seen or to communicate. Plus, Saruman soon discovered that the palantir was a party line, and he didn't always want Sauron to know what he was doing. Saruman did not have lieutenants who could seemingly channel their master like the Witch-king or the Mouth of Sauron, unless you count Wormtongue. But I don't think the Uruk-hai counted Wormtongue. So perhaps Saruman developed this device as a means of controlling his troops.
And as I recall, there is a brief reference to Saruman's ring, modeled, it seems, after Sauron's Ring. So my UUT (haven't said that for a long time!) is that one of the powers Saruman's ring gave him was the ability to project himself from a distance in order to speak to his troops, or perhaps to investigate something when he did not want to use the palantir. At any rate, even without the UUT or the ring, I'm now satisfied that it makes sense for Saruman to develop this power which Gandalf either never developed or never used.
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Apr 17 2008, 4:34pm
Post #10 of 17
(1313 views)
Shortcut
|
...is, at least, more attentive than his two companions.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
We're discussing The Lord of the Rings in the Reading Room, Oct. 15, 2007 - Mar. 22, 2009!
Join us Apr. 14-20 for "The Riders of Rohan".
|
|
|
dernwyn
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Apr 17 2008, 5:10pm
Post #11 of 17
(1300 views)
Shortcut
|
Indeed did Tolkien waffle on this stranger's identity.
A page of notes, headed "Sketch" for both this chapter and "White Rider", contains this line: "Old man appears...They think he is Saruman. Revelation of Gandalf...", as if this were to be the scene where he returns as the White Wizard.
When the chapter was written out, the appearance of the old man was the same as in its final form except that he was "clad in rags" with a "battered" hat, reflecting both Frodo's song in Lorien: "an old man in a battered hat", and part of the original vision Trotter saw as he sat on Amon Hen: "Down a long path came an old man, very bent, leaning on a staff. Grey and ragged he seemed, but when the wind tossed his cloak there came a gleam of white, as if beneath his rags he was clad in shining garments." But the three still wondered if it had been Saruman.
Note how pieces of Trotter's vision ended up being used later, when Gandalf was finally revealed.
Also of note, in the original passage: "the horses were restive, straining at their tether-ropes, showing the whites of their eyes. It was a little while before Legolas could quiet them." The horses are still there - so when they go missing, the Elf gets the line!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I desired dragons with a profound desire"
"It struck me last night that you might write a fearfully good romantic drama, with as much of the 'supernatural' as you cared to introduce. Have you ever thought of it?"
-Geoffrey B. Smith, letter to JRR Tolkien, 1915
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Apr 17 2008, 5:19pm
Post #12 of 17
(1308 views)
Shortcut
|
|
A projection of Saruman created by Gandalf.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
As I recall, that was another explanation that Tolkien considered: that Gandalf was concentrating so strongly on Saruman that he accidentally projected an image of him into the woods. The idea can be found in the sketches of Gandalf's conversation with the Hunters on his reappearance.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
We're discussing The Lord of the Rings in the Reading Room, Oct. 15, 2007 - Mar. 22, 2009!
Join us Apr. 14-20 for "The Riders of Rohan".
|
|
|
Beren IV
Gondor
Apr 17 2008, 7:58pm
Post #13 of 17
(1289 views)
Shortcut
|
although this is among the most unexplained things in the book.
Why doesn't Saruman catch them?
Why bother? And even if he tried, these are no ordinary travelers.
Aragorn notes that the old man is not dressed exactly as Éomer had described Saruman -- why does Tolkien bother with this tiny difference?
Suspense... maybe it's Gandalf?
How does Saruman disappear so easily, if as Gandalf says later, "he has no woodcraft"?
Magic - come on, do you really think we actually see all of the Wizards' tricks?
Why does Tolkien want us to think that Saruman drove away their horses?
Suspense
Once a paleontologist, now a botanist, will be a paleobotanist
|
|
|
Beren IV
Gondor
Apr 17 2008, 8:30pm
Post #14 of 17
(1295 views)
Shortcut
|
I have wondered what Saruman's ring did, and I assumed it had something to do with controlling his army of orcs. But if Saruman, and Sauron also, can make themselves these avatars that they can throw around. Do you think he could do more than simply observe and terrify in this state?
Once a paleontologist, now a botanist, will be a paleobotanist
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Apr 17 2008, 9:12pm
Post #15 of 17
(1313 views)
Shortcut
|
did more than make avatars. They seemed to be able to possess their lieutenants and speak through them, as Morgoth did through Glaurung or Sauron does with the Witchking at the gate of Minas Tirith (but not at Weathertop) or with the Mouth of Sauron at the Black Gates. But Sauron also seems to have the ability to control even the least of his orcs to some degree, and in fact needs to do so at all times, or else they go out of control. He's the ultimate micromanager.
I would think that Saruman must do something similar, but less effective, as everything he does is in imitation of Sauron. Perhaps, with great effort, he can appear on the scene and observe, terrify, and presumably speak -- although he did not speak when the Three Hunters observed him. But he isn't observing at all times if he doesn't use the palantir, and in the matter of the Ring he dare not use the palantir. He sent his orcs to intercept the hobbits and they succeeded, and perhaps he heard that they succeeded, but after waiting an appropriate time there was no sign of the orcs. He cast his spell and "went" to the place where the orcs were supposed to enter the safety of Fangorn Forest (safe from the horsemen, that is), but instead found a pile of orc carcasses and the Three Hunters around a fire. He may or may not have scared off the horses but he had no reason to speak to these strangers.
|
|
|
dernwyn
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Apr 18 2008, 1:17am
Post #16 of 17
(1298 views)
Shortcut
|
'I must guess that you saw Saruman [or a vision >] or some wraith of his making.'...Against Gandalf's words my father wrote in the margin: Vision of Gandalf's thought. Christopher then goes into speculation on Gandalf's concentration creating an apparition of either himself, or more likely, Saruman.
But it seems that the main intent was for the "old man" to be something noncorporeal, and hence easily disappeared.
Another of Tolkien's little enigmas!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I desired dragons with a profound desire"
"It struck me last night that you might write a fearfully good romantic drama, with as much of the 'supernatural' as you cared to introduce. Have you ever thought of it?"
-Geoffrey B. Smith, letter to JRR Tolkien, 1915
|
|
|
Penthe
Gondor
Apr 19 2008, 11:19am
Post #17 of 17
(1330 views)
Shortcut
|
I very much like your theory about Saruman projecting himself to observe his minions at work, and to see how his power is faring out in the world. There are clues earlier in the book, where there is the confusion in the mountains about whether the malice is directed by Saruman, or not. Saruman's reach is not equal to Sauron's, but it is clearly greater than most of the other characters. One of Gandalf's strengths, in the end, is that while he is aware of distant events he keeps his ability to act locally and specifically, to react quickly to events and changes. Saruman and Sauron (and Denethor) all sacrifice this to an extent by focusing on what is distant.
I'm not sure that Saruman's ring needs to be the agent for these powers, but there's no reason it couldn't be. I'm not a fan of seeing power in all the artefacts that turn up in LOTR. I probably should be, since destroying a powerful artefact creates all the action. But most of the powers in objects are quite explicitly explained in my opinion, or their powers are demonstrated through action. One Ring - evil domination and invisibility, Three Rings - preservation and inspiration, Arwen's gem - solace and recovery, Sting - blue glowing orcometer and so on.
I prefer to see other things in a more symbolic way; The elfstone - the kingship and Arwen's love, Saruman's ring - try-hard wannabe.
No improvement is too small or trivial to be worthwhile.
|
|
|
|
|
