Sauron/Orcs vs the USA

Graeme Dice · Post by **Graeme Dice** » 2002-07-30 03:49pm

[quote="Smiling BanditI point out that many of the powerful Elven weapons were strong and, mayhap, mystical in some way, but did not display any essentially supernatural power. Not one. Well equiped ancient Elves (Silmarilion) very nearly destroyed Sauron's old boss, but their swords didn't seem to have any obvious power.[/quote]
You didn't happen to notice that Glamdring, Orcrist and Sting all glowed blue in the presence of Orcs?

Shadow WarChief · Post by **Shadow WarChief** » 2002-07-30 04:00pm

Balrogs be screwed.

There are numerous instances of Balrogs being killed by large impacts

Glorfindel v.s. Balrog
Gandalf v.s. Balrog

Falling off a mountain was enough to kill Balrogs and you just know what a few tank shells are going to do now....

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2002-07-30 05:20pm

First of all, I'd like to point something out about Middle Earth. Middle Earth is a world where legends have a very real effect on the world. Take, for example, Anduril, the sword that was reforged from Isuldir's sword. It was of Arnorian make, so it was unnaturally good steel, but it was still a steel sword. But that fact that it was Anduril, the sword that was reforged, in the hands of the true heir or Arnor and of Gondor makes it much more fearsome that the sum of it's parts because the legend of it is so profound in that world.
Or the One Ring. The reason that it was so indestructible was because of legend. The legend was that the One Ring could only be destroyed by the fires of Mount Doom, because that was where it was born. Logically, any volcano should do if they are just as hot as Orodruin, but no it won't do because the legend has a profound effect on the world. It must be Mount Doom.

On the topic of Balrogs, no Balrog was ever killed without either fighting a Noldor or a Istari and never without use of weapons that were deadly to evil. Note that the fall from Khazad-dum did not kill the Balrog when they hit bottom, because it rose up as a "creature of slime" after being dunked in the water at the bottom. Gandalf killed it soon after at the cost of his life.
They aren't even coporeal either. They are described frequently as spirtis of smoke and fire and also as great shadows (they made the one in the move too solid looking). As far as I can tell, the United State has no weaponry that is specifically deadly to evil beings and can effect semi-coporeal spirits. Also, there is the fact that Balrogs, like most powerful evil creatures in Middle Earth, inflict someone with terror and madness when they look at them. It takes a truly powerful Heroic will (note: a Hero is much more profound a term in Middle Earth) to even be able to fight them. It's very likely that any US forces attempting to engage a Balrog will break off and flee before them, because they have absolutely no defense against magic terror. Note: this applies similarly to the Nazgul, who used there power of terror very effectively in the Battle of Pelennor Fields.

Patrick Ogaard · Post by **Patrick Ogaard** » 2002-07-30 06:42pm

quote:

If Sauron is smart, he will deploy his orcs in the same manner as the orcs were deployed while Sauron was still lying low and trying to gather his power: small bands of raiders and bandits, operating from underground lairs near traffic paths. After a few years of making hikers disappear in the deep woods and raiding isolated homes in the dark of night, the orcs should have managed to gather sufficient intel, captives and hardware to be able to reverse-engineer the simpler items of modern human military technology. The orcs were, after all, the foremost technologists of Middle Earth. Copying modern guns by hand, in small shops, is certainly not unprecedented, though reliability and suitable ammunition are potentially tough nuts to crack. A bit of alchemy and patented "orc mischief" might provide an out.

No, the orcs could not simply reverse engineer stuff. For all their cunning they are not very bright and, in any case, have no comparable source of the needed materials. the best they might do would be a cheap rifle.

Yes, they could. 

Specifically, I am specifying the necessary period to be several years, with a lead time of ten to twenty years being preferred. If unlettered modern Pakistanis with simple hand tools can turn rebar and scrap metal into working copies of modern assault rifles and shotguns, and mid-20th century Spanish gunsmiths with the same basic equipment can do the same, the clever orcs that produced healing salve, body armor, nasty sharp weapons and assorted mechanical sundries from their pits should be able to do the same if given ten or twenty years to work on their technique.

quote:

If, and this is a big if, if the orcs manage to continue their covert infiltration campaign for several years or even a decade or two before it comes to public recognition of their existence and actual battle, the orcs can expect to hold large portions of the two mountain ranges against all comers. All things considered, should Sauron himself decide to take up residence, Denver seems like the obvious choice, or rather great delvings covertly dug into the surrounding mountains by some of Sauron's pets and slaves.

Sauron would never try to do that, because he knows we would nuke it. More over, Nazgul or no, we'd get them eventually. We have too many advantages. IUn any event, how the heck are the orcs suposed to sneak up on a city likely containing more guns than the entire orc species? Look at the population differences between the Middle Ages and Today - Ney York City alone could defeat all of Sauron's armies.

The essential idea is the following: after a covert buildup period, with assorted abductions, delving and work to produce simple guns and mortars, a force of Orcs uses captured, slave-operated vehicles to capture assorted towns and cities in the areas of the mountains. With the attack carried out in the dead of night by creatures not needing lights, and with these creatures supported by wargs and nazguls, a force of 10,000 orcs should be able to capture a town of 10,000, for instance. It would, until the true nature of the enemy becomes apparent, be political suicide for the President to order nuclear strikes, or even major artillery barrages or airstrikes, on a town of 10,000 that still has 5,000 living Americans in it.

Initially, there would be massive confusion regarding the nature of the enemy. Are these creatures mutants, are they aliens, are they monsters from a parallel dimension, are they Satan's harbingers of the coming of the Antichrist, or are they Osama's stormtroopers?

Spawning suitably large orc hordes may well take a long time, but it will certainly not be impossible. Given a lead time of 20 years or so, a breeding program like that of Saruman might be effective in producing half-orcs looking rather like ugly humans. Through the simple expedient of living in trailer parks or hollers (if necessary, after having enslaved or murdered the original residents), the half-orcs could begin the infiltration of local police departments and the military, though the timeframe would not allow more than low-level deputies and junior enlisted soldiers. Others would simply set up shop as conventional backwoods hicks, complete with defects from inbreeding. The important thing is that these infiltrators would provide Sauron's forces with legal access to ammunition, guns, books, real property and assorted other gear. The military and police infiltrators would provide knowledge of basic military and police tactics as well as illicit access to military and paramilitary gear.

Nazguls can act to carry out assassinations, and to terrorize populations by acting as serial killers. They and other powerful slaves of Sauron can also act to subvert officials, celebrities and businesspeople. These sorts of folks are every bit as susceptible to the charms of weird cults as ordinary folk, and a cult built around truly freaky creatures of black blood and red-glowing eyes and bodies of smoke may enjoy particularly effective growth.

The big point is that in direct, immediate confrontation, out the dimensional gate and into the teeth of machine guns, the orcs and others will simply die without being able to do anything at all. Only successful subterfuge will be able to secure victory.

Once the actual big push comes, if it even has to, it will be more than a few thousand tufted-eared beasts running around in the mountains swinging swords and shooting arrows.

Sauron's best bet might actually be to become the shadowy power behind worldwide organized crime. A nazgul and a few orcs would be enough to put the fear of Sauron into traditional organized crime families, especially if the orcs are suitably equipped with automatic weapons and a complete disregard for prper criminal procedure.

Enforcer Talen · Post by **Enforcer Talen** » 2002-07-30 08:58pm

that scenario just begs for palpatine to be a rising member of the u.s. congress. . .

Enforcer Talen · Post by **Enforcer Talen** » 2002-07-30 08:58pm

that scenario just begs for palpatine to be a rising member of the u.s. congress. . .

lgot · Post by **lgot** » 2002-07-31 12:00am

I think its a case of not compatible universes. They can not be compared.
Sauron , which cannt be killed by something less than godlike powers, would take all the hits, his shell be destroyed, he would run and return in a new form. But the mostly problem. Tolkien magic belong to that world. Its a link between them, so I would say, here in our world their magic would be weaker. In their world they would bet the hell of anyone coming there, eventually.
And Sauron's old boss, Morgoth was not defeated by normal weapons or enemies. He was defeated by either Valar, Nodor, all of them with plenty of magical weapon. THe normal well equipated people defeated his minnions but Morgoth rarely put his own neck in danger.
And Besides, best weapons of Morgoth and Sauron have never been the orcs, but their inteligence and manipulation. Its unlikely any of them would jump in face - They are also, even powerful, cowards - of unknow enemy of any short.

Post by **AdmiralKanos** » 2002-07-31 12:32am

Why is magic assumed to be invincible to technological countermeasures or replacements? Why can't technology achieve what magic does?

A common theme here is: "it's magic, so no technology can affect it". Has anyone even attempted to justify this leap in logic? What if I said "it's high tech, so no magic can possibly affect it"? Would you accept that too? It carries just as much logical weight!

Let's say that some wizard invents a spell that makes him invincible to any weapon wielded by mortal man. How do you know the spell works as advertised? Because it works on primitive swords and arrows, and yo extrapolate that to nukes? Because he says so? Of course not. Even a wizard can be wrong or simply ill-informed; are we going to start analyzing their dialogue as theology now? Does a wizard know about nuclear weapons? Of course not. So who's to say that a nuclear weapon would not overcome his spell? Since a nuclear weapon would inflict far more devastation than any spell ever cast by anyone in the entire trilogy for any reason in any circumstance, what possible reason is there to conclude that it is not as powerful as any of those magic spells?

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2002-07-31 02:24am

Imminently logical, as usual, Mike.
A Question though: in the Suspending Disbelief thread, you said that when considering a universe, we much ask whether it is rational or irrational. Middle Earth is decidely irrational. One thing that JRR Tolkien spend a great deal of time establishing was how profound the effect of legends and history were on Middle Earth. In Middle Earth, they were more than just mere history, but altered the physical world as well. Remember in Lord of the Rings how the Gollum couldn't even touch something of elven make and it caused him pain? He actually howled in terror when Frodo and Sam threatened to tie him up with the ropes that were made in Lothlorien. They may be exceptionally strong and light, but they are still just ropes. The reason, of course, was the ropes history. It had been woven by elven hands, who were on the side of the light, and Gollum was an evil creature due to his corruption over the centuries by the Ring of Power. Is that rational? Of course not. But it still caused Gollum a great deal of pain.
The same goes with the destruction of the One Ring. Why bother a practical suicide mission into Morder, knowing that they will all likely die horribly, when they could have taken the Ring to Erebor and have the dwarves throw it in that volcano. Surely the lava under Lonely Mountain is as hot as the lava in Mount Doom? Logically that should have worked, besides the fact that Erebor was a much shorter and safer trip (granted, they'd have to cross Mirkwood, but they could have easily done that by the Elven Path like they did in the Hobbit). Not so in Middle Earth, where legend dictates reality. Only Mount Doom could unmake the One Ring, because Sauron forged it there. Not one bit rational, but that's the way Middle Earth works.

Nova Andromeda · Post by **Nova Andromeda** » 2002-07-31 02:40am

--I think even Darth Wong/Admiral Kanos will have to agree that our science does not encompase the laws of Tolkien's universe. In fact, I would argue that there are huge fields missing in our science with respect to that universe. The only way to get out of this is to interpret Toldien's books as fantasy which is the same as saying Star Wars tech. won't work in the Star Trek universe. BTW, you will never convince me the movies override the books as far as evidence is concerned.

--Due to the incomplete understanding of the Tolkien universe I would be very worried if I had to fight any of the major powers from there. Sure it seems our military is vastly superior to their military, but that only accounts for the parts of their military that fit into our science. We could wipe out Sauron's entire army, smash his fortresses, and lay waste to his lands, yet I would still be waiting for the ball to drop.

--For instance, let us consider the issue of souls. It is clear that in Tolkien's universe people have souls. In fact, there is an entire other "dimension" that the Elves, Valar, etc. partially exist in. However, we have not a drop of evidence for any such thing in our world. What happens if we cannot access anything in that "dimension?" It might mean we indeed cannot destroy the one ring. It might also mean we cannot truly destroy Sauron. In my opinion, there are just too many unanswered questions to be sure of final victory. To paraphrase Vadar: "I wouldn't be to proud of the technological terror that we have created." (i.e., our military).

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2002-07-31 03:04am

Me either, Nova Andromeda. The movie, while good, doesn't even touch the books. You'll never see me taking information from the movie, all my LotR information comes from my copy of the books or the Encyclopaedia of Arda, which is a truly amazing indepth online website of all things that have to do with Middle Earth.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2002-07-31 03:18am

Gil Hamilton wrote:Imminently logical, as usual, Mike.
A Question though: in the Suspending Disbelief thread, you said that when considering a universe, we much ask whether it is rational or irrational. Middle Earth is decidely irrational. One thing that JRR Tolkien spend a great deal of time establishing was how profound the effect of legends and history were on Middle Earth. In Middle Earth, they were more than just mere history, but altered the physical world as well.

As long as a universe follows predictable rules, and the word "therefore" has any meaning, it is rational. Look at the universe of a typical computer game. Its rules may be laughable, but every computer game's world is rationally self-consistent (ie- rational), because the rules are set in stone and won't change.

Now, if it is impossible to rationalize with reality as we know it, a "vs" comparison might be impossible as well. That would be a separate question, and one that you might try to make here. But presuming that the confrontation can take place but adding a pre-condition that magic beats technology, and technology can't beat magic (ie- their rules apply to us, our rules don't apply to them) is not reasonable.

Remember in Lord of the Rings how the Gollum couldn't even touch something of elven make and it caused him pain? He actually howled in terror when Frodo and Sam threatened to tie him up with the ropes that were made in Lothlorien. They may be exceptionally strong and light, but they are still just ropes. The reason, of course, was the ropes history. It had been woven by elven hands, who were on the side of the light, and Gollum was an evil creature due to his corruption over the centuries by the Ring of Power. Is that rational? Of course not. But it still caused Gollum a great deal of pain.

And the word "psychosomatic" doesn't apply to Middle Earth either?

The same goes with the destruction of the One Ring. Why bother a practical suicide mission into Morder, knowing that they will all likely die horribly, when they could have taken the Ring to Erebor and have the dwarves throw it in that volcano. Surely the lava under Lonely Mountain is as hot as the lava in Mount Doom? Logically that should have worked, besides the fact that Erebor was a much shorter and safer trip (granted, they'd have to cross Mirkwood, but they could have easily done that by the Elven Path like they did in the Hobbit). Not so in Middle Earth, where legend dictates reality. Only Mount Doom could unmake the One Ring, because Sauron forged it there. Not one bit rational, but that's the way Middle Earth works.

Not necessarily. That's the way people in Middle Earth believe it works. If people believe strongly enough in something, they will do all manner of idiotic things to conform to it, or try to make it come true. There are plenty of examples in real-life to confirm that thesis.

Did anyone ever try dropping the One Ring into a volcano other than Mount Doom? No. So how did they know whether it would work, even in Middle Earth?

Even in a universe dominated by magic, you still don't know if something will work until you try it. Are they just supposed to take Gandalf's word for it? How does he know? What if wizards actively discourage investigation into technology (or even independent investigation into magic) in order to maintain their hegemony over human society? What if they're like priests, just mindlessly repeating dogma?

Shadow WarChief · Post by **Shadow WarChief** » 2002-07-31 03:51am

Darth Wong wrote: Even in a universe dominated by magic, you still don't know if something will work until you try it. Are they just supposed to take Gandalf's word for it?

Yes we are.

Darth Wong wrote:How does he know?

because he is a maia (read: lesser angel) and he has been on middle earth for the past 3000 years in order to fight Sauron who uses the one ring.

What if wizards actively discourage investigation into technology (or even independent investigation into magic) in order to maintain their hegemony over human society? What if they're like priests, just mindlessly repeating dogma?

If the Gandalf sought power over middle Earth, Gandalf would have claimed the one ring for himself when Frodo offered it to him.

And I notice the phrase "What if" in there. Do you have proof of this supposed discouraging of technology.

Only one of the 5 Istari wanted to dominate, and that was Saruman.

as for what will or will not destroy the one ring:

"...But there is no smith's forge in this Shire that could change it at all. Not even the anvils and furnaces of the Dwarves could do that. It has been said that dragon-fire could melt and consume the Rings of Power, but there is not now any dragon left on earth in which the old fire is hot enough; nor was there ever any dragon, not even Ancalagon the Black, who could have harmed the One Ring, the Ruling Ring, for that was made by Sauron himself."
-Gandalf

The shadow of the past. p59.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2002-07-31 05:36am

Darth Wong wrote:As long as a universe follows predictable rules, and the word "therefore" has any meaning, it is rational. Look at the universe of a typical computer game. Its rules may be laughable, but every computer game's world is rationally self-consistent (ie- rational), because the rules are set in stone and won't change.

Now, if it is impossible to rationalize with reality as we know it, a "vs" comparison might be impossible as well. That would be a separate question, and one that you might try to make here. But presuming that the confrontation can take place but adding a pre-condition that magic beats technology, and technology can't beat magic (ie- their rules apply to us, our rules don't apply to them) is not reasonable.

I didn't claim that technology wouldn't be able to defeat magic at all. That isn't my position at all. My point is that Middle Earth is physically effected by it's own legends.

And the word "psychosomatic" doesn't apply to Middle Earth either?

Normally, I'd be inclined to agree with you. But when Sam bound him, he started screaming and concluded that elves made the rope because it was causing him great pain.
Also, there are other examples of evil beings not being able to touch things made by Good people. When the uruk-hai killed Boromir and attempted to take Pippin and Merry back to Isengard, they tried to take Pippin and Merry's swords. Unfortunately for them, they couldn't touch the weapons because they were forged by the people of Arnor, and the uruk-hai were evil. You might claim "psychosomatic" again, but how would they know they were forged by Numenoreans? Arnor was destroyed by Angmar more than a thousand years before (Amon Sul was destroyed in 1409 Third Age, the events at the Anduin were in 3019). I somehow doubt that Saruman educated his uruk-hai in ancient kingdoms and how to recognize their weapons. Yet they couldn't handle the weapons all the same.
There are plenty of examples of this throught the books of evil things being affected by the mere sound or touch of good things (A Elbereth Gilthoniel!). This happens enough and given the circumstances, it's more than psychosomata.

Not necessarily. That's the way people in Middle Earth believe it works. If people believe strongly enough in something, they will do all manner of idiotic things to conform to it, or try to make it come true. There are plenty of examples in real-life to confirm that thesis.

Did anyone ever try dropping the One Ring into a volcano other than Mount Doom? No. So how did they know whether it would work, even in Middle Earth?

Why are we even debating this if you are denying parts of the story? If this is true, then the premise of the books is a sham.
Anyway, Gandalf confirmed that the One Ring could only be unmade by being cast into Orodruin, and Gandalf is about the most reliable source of info in the whole book. Plus, he wanted to destroy Sauron more than anyone, that's the whole reason he was sent to Middle Earth from Valinor.
Besides, if it were just a matter of extreme heat, wouldn't there be some beginning effects at lower levels of heat? After all, even if you don't apply enough energy to melt something, applying some energy will still make it hot. This wasn't the case with the Ring of Power. Remember in Bag End, Gandalf cast the ring into the hottest part of the fire in Frodo's hearth. When he pulled it out, it was still perfectly cool as if he didn't put it in in the first place. It stands to reason that it should have been at least hot if it were effected by anything that produces heat.

Even in a universe dominated by magic, you still don't know if something will work until you try it. Are they just supposed to take Gandalf's word for it? How does he know? What if wizards actively discourage investigation into technology (or even independent investigation into magic) in order to maintain their hegemony over human society? What if they're like priests, just mindlessly repeating dogma?

Firstly, Gandalf wasn't a priest. He was an Istari, one of five Maiar sent to Middle Earth during the Third Age by the Valar for the specific purpose of aiding the people of Middle Earth when Sauron reformed himself after his physical body was killed by Isildur.
Secondly, aside from Saruman, the Istari didn't rule over anyone. Out of the five Istari that came to Middle Earth, Pallando and Alatar went to the East with Saruman and never returned (the Silmarillion never explains what became of them), Radagast was a recluse who ran errands and hung out with woodland creatures, Gandalf was a wanderer, and Saruman lived in Orthanc in his labratory. Only after Sauron corrupted Saruman did Saruman build the uruk-hai and tried to take over anything. Gandalf was the only one that actively interacted with other groups and while Men would listen to him, he didn't rule over any of them (for instance, look at what became of the Steward of Gondor and King Theoden of the Mark).
Finally, Gandalf knew about the creation of the One Ring through Saruman, and learned of the information before Saruman was corrupted by Sauron, back when he was still trying to figure out how to beat Sauron. As of the time of the Hobbit, Saruman was still fighting Sauron, and help boot Sauron out of Dol Guldur.

Smiling Bandit · Post by **Smiling Bandit** » 2002-07-31 09:44am

Sometimes I appreciate Mr. Wong's comments. Sometimes I think he's gone offa da deep end. This is the latter time.

I point out that Gandalf never even tried to take political control over Middle earth. Even when all the more powerful opposing forces had been cast down, he went off across the sea. Not exactly what you'd call power-hungry.

Aside from which, there have been excellent reasons to dispute your assertion that psyochsympotmatic influences ere at work in those instances you mentioned.

And while it may be possible that a sufficiently hot temperature could unmake the ring, Gandalf, for reasons we do not know, truly did not believe it could be destroyed. Presumably, none of the other rings were, except by Dragonfire. In fact, at various places it is mentioned that no ring was destroyed by anything else, ever. In any event, the Wizard hardly had time to run about testing for an instant-magic-ring destroyer, given that Sauron was on the move, Isenguard betraying, and invasions from Sauron's enslaved lands in the East were beginning.

I didn't claim that technology wouldn't be able to defeat magic at all. That isn't my position at all. My point is that Middle Earth is physically effected by it's own legends.

And none of those legends apply here. Fanboys like us might wax poetic over the Swords that shew the whatnot, but the military will be handing out the HEAT rounds and loading up the missiles.

Smiling Bandit · Post by **Smiling Bandit** » 2002-07-31 09:46am

I was, in fact, wrong about the Swords slightly. However, I note they did not display any particularly flashy powers that would have any effect here, nor did the orcs actually have any. Balrogs may have simply made their weapons on demand.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2002-07-31 10:36am

Lemme get this straight: bizarro logic point #1: Gandalf is powerful and very old, so if he feels that nothing on Middle Earth can destroy the Ring besides the fires of Mount Doom, then nothing in the universe can destroy it but Mount Doom, even many man-made and celestial fires which are orders of magnitude hotter than any volcano could possibly be? What kind of logic is this? Gandalf was unaware of plasma torches, so even if he is completely correct, how does it follow that a plasma torch would not affect the ring? Gandalf never even considered the possibility of launching it towards the Sun, so even if he is completely correct, how does it follow that the Sun (or a man-made environment of similar temperature) could not melt the Ring?

Bizarro logic point #2: Gandalf has no interest in power, therefore he cannot lie or be mindlessly spouting dogma designed to maintain the hegemony of wizards over human society? Some priests have no interest in power (others do, but the point remains). Does this mean that a priest cannot possibly be spouting dogma designed to maintain their hegemony over human society? Of course not. Try again.

Smiling Bandit · Post by **Smiling Bandit** » 2002-07-31 12:01pm

I supose that he could be wrong. Nevertheless, he is the sole source of information and has a hell of a lot of experience. There most certainly were other things that could destroy the Ring. Just not many and not accessable. Aside from which, they were operating, as I said, under a bit of a time limit. More over, the ring is feakishly dangerous, and quite possibly would end up corrupting whomever wore it. Even Frodo couldn't throw it into Mount Doom after a year or less of influence on his particularly pure heart..

Wong's bizzaro logic #1: Assume that Fantasy universe charcters must be wrong, despite there being no other source of information.

Certainly, Gandalf *could* be wrong, but you are making an *enormous* leap in logic to the idea that he is probably spouting some pary line. I point out that this idea of th Ring's being able to be detroyed only by Mount Doom does fit in with the known capabilities of the Rings and dark magic of Tolkein in general.

Smiling Bandit · Post by **Smiling Bandit** » 2002-07-31 12:09pm

Darn, forgot to put this...

Bizarro logic point #2: Gandalf has no interest in power, therefore he cannot lie or be mindlessly spouting dogma designed to maintain the hegemony of wizards over human society? Some priests have no interest in power (others do, but the point remains). Does this mean that a priest cannot possibly be spouting dogma designed to maintain their hegemony over human society? Of course not. Try again.

Since you're original point was apparently predicated on the idea that he was searching for power or interested in power over human society (have you even *read* the books?) I submit I answered the point. Do not change your argument on me. I quote:

Even in a universe dominated by magic, you still don't know if something will work until you try it. Are they just supposed to take Gandalf's word for it? How does he know? What if wizards actively discourage investigation into technology (or even independent investigation into magic) in order to maintain their hegemony over human society? What if they're like priests, just mindlessly repeating dogma?

Like I said, Gandalf had no interest in power. He had powers, and was well afreaid of abusing them. he turned down the ring, like Galadriel, becuase he knew he was not strong enough to resist that magical compulsion/temptation. Indeed, the only character he truly did trust to not be overwhelmed by the Ring with time seemed to be the flighty Tom Bombadil. Saruman alone seemed to have any power over human society, and that was via his crippling of the King of Rohan via Grima Wormtongue. The only other wizard we see was radagast, and he, if I remember right, appeared almost as a begger, not a master of humanity.

Mr Wong, I object, extrodinary claims require extrodinary evidence. You make a claim directly contradicting the accepted idea of Gandalf's personality and character, yet offer no evidence. Sly insinuation does not a premise prove. Again I ask, have you read the books?

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2002-07-31 03:30pm

Darth Wong wrote:Lemme get this straight: bizarro logic point #1: Gandalf is powerful and very old, so if he feels that nothing on Middle Earth can destroy the Ring besides the fires of Mount Doom, then nothing in the universe can destroy it but Mount Doom, even many man-made and celestial fires which are orders of magnitude hotter than any volcano could possibly be? What kind of logic is this? Gandalf was unaware of plasma torches, so even if he is completely correct, how does it follow that a plasma torch would not affect the ring? Gandalf never even considered the possibility of launching it towards the Sun, so even if he is completely correct, how does it follow that the Sun (or a man-made environment of similar temperature) could not melt the Ring?

Not at all, he's a Istari who got his information from another Istari who spent the last thousand years studying the Ring of Power.
And you didn't respond to my other point. If it were just a matter of extreme heat, like from a welding torch, then the relatively little heat from Frodo's hearth should have at least warmed it a little, right? It didn't at all.

Bizarro logic point #2: Gandalf has no interest in power, therefore he cannot lie or be mindlessly spouting dogma designed to maintain the hegemony of wizards over human society? Some priests have no interest in power (others do, but the point remains). Does this mean that a priest cannot possibly be spouting dogma designed to maintain their hegemony over human society? Of course not. Try again.

Can I ask a question? Have you read the Silmarillion? Because the picture you are painting of the Istari is much different than the one that Tolkien painted. They were their to aid and protect, not to manipulate and control. Saruman fell from grace, but that was it.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2002-07-31 04:17pm

Again, the problem is Magic Vs. Technology.

Now, magic and technology can duplicate each other.. You can enchant something to fire bullets like a M-16, and a flamethrower is a good duplicate for a wand that shoots fire. However, just because you can make a spatula do the job of a catapult, doesn't mean it is a catapult, or can accomplish everything a sufficiently advanced catapult can.(That's an odd example)

The two just don't play by the same rules. Technology is ironclad in the laws of science. You can't, for example, make a perpetual motion machine. Various laws demand it run down eventually. However, magic runs by common sense. If you're powerful enough, a spell will, in fact, last forever.

To anyone used to thinking logically and scientifically, this is an insult. Where's the energy coming from? Where's it going? How can it be so efficient as to run forever? What's the fuel source? What's the background effect? Is the large concentration of energy enough to harm nearby humans?

To someone used to magic and it's odd rules, they instead think, 'Well, that's fine. What do I have to do to switch it off?'. It doesn't make much sense, if you don't work from the right mindset.

Can technology work with magic? In theory. Magic can provide excellent power sources, and lethal weapon systems, while technology provides reliable interfaces that don't require a lifetime of study to operate. But just because they can work together and of the same jobs, doesn't mean you can impose the rules of one on the other.

You can't have a watch become eternally correct simply by touching it to the Atomic Clock. If it was magic, that would be the Law Of Contagion, but there's no such law in science, so it doesn't work. You can try and duplicate it, but.

Now, as for destroying the One Ring, there is likely a way. The dimensional gateway must be somewhere, after all. A large ground force with tanks and artillery charging through would make getting into Mordor easy.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2002-07-31 06:58pm

Gil Hamilton wrote:Not at all, he's a Istari who got his information from another Istari who spent the last thousand years studying the Ring of Power.
And you didn't respond to my other point. If it were just a matter of extreme heat, like from a welding torch, then the relatively little heat from Frodo's hearth should have at least warmed it a little, right? It didn't at all.

Correction. It didn't warm it to any degree that Frodo found noticeable. Let's say that it's made of a magical material that has one thousand times the specific heat of iron. No such material exists; it could only be made by magic. And in the absence of modern-day technology, it could only be unmade by magic. But what if technology can overcome the barrier set by magic? What if technology can destroy an object with a thousand times the specific heat of iron? There's nothing in the trilogy to deny this speculation; objects in Middle Earth still have physicality; the Rings, imbued as they are with some form of magic, were still forged somewhere, and forging is a simple matter of heat and impact. Does the word "forging" have a different meaning in Middle Earth too?

It's already been mentioned that many of the rings could be destroyed by dragon fire, so it's not as if they must be destroyed only in the place they're forged. Sauron found the hottest place in Middle Earth to force the One Ring, so that's the only place it can be destroyed. However, there is no reason to presume that if someplace hotter than anything on Middle Earth were found (or made), that the Ring would not be destroyed there as well.

I have been accused of trying to apply science to a realm where science does not apply. I would agree that there appear to be phenomena in Middle Earth which do not conform to our understanding of the universe, but as I see it, magic is layered on top of an underlying physical universe like ours, rather than supplanting its rules entirely with new ones. It is like adding "subspace" to the laws of the universe; it adds new phenomena, and it may add new capabilities, but it does not necessarily mean that the conventional rules go out the window.

Even in Middle Earth, a tree is still a tree. Roots are still roots. Mortal men still have a heart, a stomach, a liver, a brain, a skull. The steel sword wielded by a mortal man is still a steel sword. A catapult is still a catapult, and functions on the same laws of physics that it would here. A fall from a great height has the same effect that it would here. A fire has the same effect on human flesh as it would here.

Technology will still work. What separates Middle Earth from our world is that magic works too. But even magic has its limits. Even a wizard can die if knocked off a cliff or stabbed through the heart.

Can I ask a question? Have you read the Silmarillion?

I tried. I read The Hobbit and the LOTR trilogy many years ago, and I tried to read the Silmarillion, only to discover that it was obviously never meant to be read for anything remotely resembling entertainment purposes. To be honest, I don't know how anyone could actually read the entire Silmarillion.

Because the picture you are painting of the Istari is much different than the one that Tolkien painted. They were their to aid and protect, not to manipulate and control. Saruman fell from grace, but that was it.

I have a penchant for finding the bad sides of "good guys". Call it a perverse psychological disorder, or perhaps call it my reluctance to believe in childishly oversimplistic good/evil scenarios. I've done it to the Republic, I've done it to the Judeo-Christian God, and I see no reason not to do it to Tolkien's wizards. One can accept that every fact of a mythology is true, but not necessarily accept a particular interpretation of those facts. Case in point: Christians traditionally paint the Biblical Flood as a cleansing act of retribution for the evil of mankind, but one can easily take those facts and (without altering any of them in the slightest) declare that the Biblical Flood is actually an example of a genocidal mass-murdering psychopath, drunk with his own power and utterly insensitive to the cries of his billions of helpless victims.

Now, let's consider Gandalf and his wizard clan. They have magic. Some of this may require an innate characteristic of being a wizard, but it seems unreasonable to conclude that none of their parlour tricks (not even the silly fireworks) could possibly be taught to mortal man. Have they even tried? It doesn't sound like it. Indeed, when one reads the Tolkien books, one is left with the distinct impression that they don't feel mortal man is capable of handling the power of magic, so they have witheld knowledge of its secrets from him. Normally, this is not considered a bad thing. The accepted interpretation is that the wizards, in their wisdom, do not feel that mortal man should have magic, and we should not question that wisdom.

But why not? Can the world be any more fucked-up than the gods and wizards left it, with mortal men barely holding their own while orcs build their power and the undead roam the night? Who are the wizards and elves to decide that mortal man does not deserve this knowledge? Who are they to say that mortal man cannot handle it, since mortal man was never given the chance? Are they afraid that mortal man cannot withstand temptation? Since Saruman obviously could not withstand temptation either, this seems like a silly excuse. In any case, the behaviour of wizards in LOTR strikes me as one of those "father knows best" attitudes which is all too common in both real society and sci-fi. Think of knowledge as power, and magic as a weapon. LOTR depicts a caste society in which certain races have access to this power while others are denied it. The former races feel that the latter can't handle it because of innate weakness. In effect, the former race denies the latter race the tools with which to effectively defend itself, probably for fear that the latter race will use its newfound power to turn on them. Does this sound familiar to you? It's like every racist society in history, isn't it?

Oh boo hoo, I'm not falling in line with Tolkien's preferred interpretation. I'm not going to lose any sleep over that. I don't fall in line with the Bible's preferred interpretation either. Give me any reason to believe that the preferred interpretation is any more logical than mine (especially since mine merely points out some obvious facts that the preferred interpretation quietly glosses over, rather than introducing any genuinely new elements).

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2002-07-31 07:33pm

I believe George Lucas, Tolkien and God will arrive at Mr. Wong's door and beat the crap out of him for not following the story interpretations they made.

Or he could baffle them with science a la Dexter.

Seriously, despite the obvious real physics in the Tolkienverse, I'd rather leave magic against magic and tech against tech. Only in cases where they can rationalise magic beings and powers (see Reign of Fire) can I really see a proper battle.

Additonally, I have to add how cool Sauron was in the beginning of FotR.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2002-07-31 08:23pm

Darth Wong wrote:Correction. It didn't warm it to any degree that Frodo found noticeable. Let's say that it's made of a magical material that has one thousand times the specific heat of iron. No such material exists; it could only be made by magic. And in the absence of modern-day technology, it could only be unmade by magic. But what if technology can overcome the barrier set by magic? What if technology can destroy an object with a thousand times the specific heat of iron? There's nothing in the trilogy to deny this speculation; objects in Middle Earth still have physicality; the Rings, imbued as they are with some form of magic, were still forged somewhere, and forging is a simple matter of heat and impact. Does the word "forging" have a different meaning in Middle Earth too?

Of course forging means the same thing, but your theory is not consistant with the creation of the Ring of Power. It was forged by Sauron, and after he got done forging it, he dumped the bulk of his power into it,given it it's invulnerablity and special powers. It's not because the ring has a significantly higher specific heat. It's still gold, it's just gold that happens it to contain a hell of alot of magic, making it static. This was stated in the trilogy. When I get home, if you wish, I will dig through the book and find the appropriate passage.

It's already been mentioned that many of the rings could be destroyed by dragon fire, so it's not as if they must be destroyed only in the place they're forged. Sauron found the hottest place in Middle Earth to force the One Ring, so that's the only place it can be destroyed. However, there is no reason to presume that if someplace hotter than anything on Middle Earth were found (or made), that the Ring would not be destroyed there as well.

Yet the very quote you use contradicts you. "...But there is no smith's forge in this Shire that could change it at all. Not even the anvils and furnaces of the Dwarves could do that. It has been said that dragon-fire could melt and consume the Rings of Power, but there is not now any dragon left on earth in which the old fire is hot enough; nor was there ever any dragon, not even Ancalagon the Black, who could have harmed the One Ring, the Ruling Ring, for that was made by Sauron himself."

Technology will still work. What separates Middle Earth from our world is that magic works too. But even magic has its limits. Even a wizard can die if knocked off a cliff or stabbed through the heart.

No doubt, but magic must still work as well. Part of that magic is the legend that the One Ring can only be unmade at Orodruin. Unless, of course, you are claiming that technology works in full but magic does not.

[quoteI tried. I read The Hobbit and the LOTR trilogy many years ago, and I tried to read the Silmarillion, only to discover that it was obviously never meant to be read for anything remotely resembling entertainment purposes. To be honest, I don't know how anyone could actually read the entire Silmarillion.[/quote]
Absolutely correct. The Silmarillion was never for entertainment value. What the Silmarillion is is JRR Tolkiens notes that he prepared before he wrote the Lord of the Rings in order to make sure that the history of Middle Earth was completely consistant. His grandson, I believe, editted and published it,

I have a penchant for finding the bad sides of "good guys". Call it a perverse psychological disorder, or perhaps call it my reluctance to believe in childishly oversimplistic good/evil scenarios. I've done it to the Republic, I've done it to the Judeo-Christian God, and I see no reason not to do it to Tolkien's wizards. One can accept that every fact of a mythology is true, but not necessarily accept a particular interpretation of those facts. Case in point: Christians traditionally paint the Biblical Flood as a cleansing act of retribution for the evil of mankind, but one can easily take those facts and (without altering any of them in the slightest) declare that the Biblical Flood is actually an example of a genocidal mass-murdering psychopath, drunk with his own power and utterly insensitive to the cries of his billions of helpless victims.

Agreed on the Biblical Flood.

Now, let's consider Gandalf and his wizard clan. They have magic. Some of this may require an innate characteristic of being a wizard, but it seems unreasonable to conclude that none of their parlour tricks (not even the silly fireworks) could possibly be taught to mortal man. Have they even tried? It doesn't sound like it. Indeed, when one reads the Tolkien books, one is left with the distinct impression that they don't feel mortal man is capable of handling the power of magic, so they have witheld knowledge of its secrets from him. Normally, this is not considered a bad thing. The accepted interpretation is that the wizards, in their wisdom, do not feel that mortal man should have magic, and we should not question that wisdom.

Not true. They have such magic ability because they are Maiar and mortal men were not magic creatures, though they could learn things, such as Grima Wormtounge did. Men had other strengths and in the end, dominated Middle Earth.
Oddly enough, in his letters, JRR Tolkien hints that Pallando and Alatar actually founded magic schools in the east. What about the rest? Radagast didn't hang out with Men. Saruman did teach people some of his magic. Gandalf never stayed for too long in a place without good reason, and tried not to make out just how powerful he was to the local population. As far as most people knew Gandalf was just a really wise old man that was handy with parlor tricks and had aways been around.

But why not? Can the world be any more fucked-up than the gods and wizards left it, with mortal men barely holding their own while orcs build their power and the undead roam the night? Who are the wizards and elves to decide that mortal man does not deserve this knowledge? Who are they to say that mortal man cannot handle it, since mortal man was never given the chance? Are they afraid that mortal man cannot withstand temptation? Since Saruman obviously could not withstand temptation either, this seems like a silly excuse. In any case, the behaviour of wizards in LOTR strikes me as one of those "father knows best" attitudes which is all too common in both real society and sci-fi. Think of knowledge as power, and magic as a weapon. LOTR depicts a caste society in which certain races have access to this power while others are denied it. The former races feel that the latter can't handle it because of innate weakness. In effect, the former race denies the latter race the tools with which to effectively defend itself, probably for fear that the latter race will use its newfound power to turn on them. Does this sound familiar to you? It's like every racist society in history, isn't it?

Wrong, in the end, Men dominated Middle Earth without magic. Illuvatar creatred Men without magic, but gave them other strengths to make up for it, one of the greatest of all of his gifts was the ability to adapt.
Anyway, you are partially right. The Istari (except for possibly Saruman) never looked down their noses at men, but the Elves did. Tolkien frequently pointed to that when he wrote the story. The Elves were first class snobs. This wasn't true of the Istari though, which is the main point. Nothing in the story indicates at all that they thought Men could not handle magic.

Oh boo hoo, I'm not falling in line with Tolkien's preferred interpretation. I'm not going to lose any sleep over that. I don't fall in line with the Bible's preferred interpretation either. Give me any reason to believe that the preferred interpretation is any more logical than mine (especially since mine merely points out some obvious facts that the preferred interpretation quietly glosses over, rather than introducing any genuinely new elements).

Perhaps we should not take George Lucas' preferred view of Jedi and instead of considering them protectors and peacekeepers, but elitist snobs who travel around butting their noses into things that aren't their business because they can and don't try to instill Jedi training the the general population because of inherent weakness as well.

Nova Andromeda · Post by **Nova Andromeda** » 2002-07-31 08:29pm

--"Let's say that it's made of a magical material that has one thousand times the specific heat of iron."
-Here again you are trying to explain a phenomenon in Tolkien's universe using the laws of our universe. While it may be possible that it works the way you suggest that doesn't mean it does. In fact, there are multiple possibilities and what you suggest is just one of them. Concluding, that we would be able to destroy the one Ring is foolishly premature.

--"... there is no reason to presume that if someplace hotter than anything on Middle Earth were found (or made), that the Ring would not be destroyed there as well."
-Perhaps there is no reason to conclude that the one Ring could not be destroyed by a fire hotter than the ones found in Mount Doom. However, there is also no reason to conclude that it could be. Destruction of the one Ring may not simply be a function of heat. It may require manipulations according laws we know little about.

--"... it does not necessarily mean that the conventional rules go out the window. "
-No it means that when dealing with things falling within the realm of these other laws you must consider those laws before concluding what will happen in a given set of circumstances.

--"... I tried to read the Silmarillion ..."
-I suggest you start from the middle in this case.

--"Give me any reason to believe that the preferred interpretation is any more logical than mine ..."
-Death is not final. The Valar are opperating under a different moral code than you which takes the facts like the previous point into consideration. In fact, when the western humans had good relations witht he western elves knowledge of magic was shared to a great extent. Another point is that there are forces that can over ride a person's reason and fundumentally alter their "soul" (which we do not have). The orcs are probably the best example. They were elves who were corrupted. Given the wrong set of conditions other people may also be corrupted. You have also forgotten that middle earth's history is filled with war. This has hampered the exchange of knowledge as well. You need to take things in context. In short, you have over simplified the people in Tolkien's universe and you judge them the worse for it.