[Kransha]

I will take this in stride, I suppose.

Are we being SPECIFIC or GENERAL? There are quite a lot of characters in Tolkien's trilogy/hexology/book. I could simply get rid of Dunhere, Radbug, Beechbone, Muzgash, Galdor, Lagduf, Bain, Ingold, Folco Boffin, and Tolman Gardner. Nobody really cares that much about them, unless you're looking for petty, subtle symbolisms and nitpicking. Is there a requirement that we adhere to some master list of 'main' characters. Are we not, perhaps, being either discriminatory or semi-communist in our delusions, regardless of which way you look at the equation. I will pretend, despite all this, that this is not the topic of debate, and select some *ahem* 'main' characters to be cast into the obviously voracious waters.

Denethor: I love the character, in a friendly way, and find his persona intriguing, but pyromaniacs and wooden boats don't mix in the nautical profession. I suggest he be allowed to frolic in the ocean's depths. That'll teach him to play with fire.

Bert the Troll: Heavy, yes, but that is not my reason. Obviously someone so eager to eat would soon consume others on the boat. This simply can't go on. I mean, sooner or later, the rabid fellow might actually eat someone of importance to the marine cause, like Earendil the Mariner, Isengar the Likewise, and Cirdan, the Right-ship.

Tom Bombadil: We all know that the poets on Survivor are the first to go.

The Nazgul (I'll count them all as one): One ought not to have wraiths with an aversion to water and an emphatuation with soul-sucking on a boat either. Think of the plausible consequences. Not only is their movie patented Fran-Walsh-Screaming triggered whenever the water gets restless, but sooner or later some fine boaters might suddenly become a little under the weather, if you get my thrifty drift. No, no; no stab-happy Ringwraiths in MY ship, thank you very much.

Grima Wormtongue: Again, a character I love, but there's always that risk that he might get hungry. I'm not prejudiced because he's a dastardly, tongue-twirling villain, simply because his appetites are not quite to my 'taste' (Muahaha, I am Kransha the Mighty, Master of Pitifully Bad Jokes!).

Bergil: I run a shape-ship ship-shape, gentlemen. No Bergils (and when I say that, I mean, no BergilS, plural. One Bergil is allowed, just not the other, if there were two. Since there aren't two, none are allowed). I am wholly with Master B-W on this one. That punk couldn't hoist a mizzen if his pittance depended on it.

Bilbo Baggins: He did well in a barrel, but his boat-rocking is too revolutionary for me. Go back to the 40's (2940's), you rebel without a cause. I'm sure Frodo and the rest would miss him, but better to miss what's lost than join what's drowned, as they say in Numenor...and, trust me, I have less idea who 'they' are then you do.

Orc #567 (the one who 'turned Boromir's blade' in the Chambers of Mazarbul): He's just unnecessary. I'd hate to have to tell him that to his face, though. All he did was pove to us that mortality exists, and other hooplah to that effect. Apparently, my theoretic and philogical skills have dwindled or evaporated. Pity, that.

The Third Eagle: What good is a deus ex machina if he doesn't do anything?

Legolas: He may be light, have mad skillz with a bow and arrow, and have hair that could be debated until the cows come home, but NO ONE, and I repeat, NO ONE, needs a character who attracts rabid sea-fangirls from the dark and murky depths. As soon as ol' Greenleaf set foot in my meager craft, aquatic, mermaidery fangirls would already be swarming onto the vessel, weighing it down, and, by technicality, drowning us all. Thus, the math can be done. Legolas = fangirls, fangirls = doom (Fangirl Amarth, so called in Sindarin).