[Raynor]

Originally Posted by obloquy

This is a film treatment, so he knows things will have to be adjusted.

I agree; he hinted at this at the beginning of the letter, when he said "the canons of narrative an in any medium cannot be wholly different".

Originally Posted by obloquy

but why are these issues of accuracy important to Tolkien? ... Many of the items are extremely minor, and don't compromise anything fundamental to the narrative. But they're important because of the impression they make:

He did express irritation (and resentment) for errors varrying from carelessness to the pan of the story being "simply murdered". On many 'details' he also said that are important to him (such as the names of persons).

Concerning the factor of impression and its relation to the actual world the story depicts, I would note that he believes that a successful writer makes a believable story, in which what "he relates is “true”: it accords with the laws of that world" (sorry for the long quote):

Originally Posted by On fairy stories

Children are capable, of course, of literary belief, when the story-maker's art is good enough to produce it. That state of mind has been called “willing suspension of disbelief.” But this does not seem to me a good description of what happens. What really happens is that the story-maker proves a successful “sub-creator.” He makes a Secondary World which your mind can enter. Inside it, what he relates is “true”: it accords with the laws of that world. You therefore believe it, while you are, as it were, inside. The moment disbelief arises, the spell is broken; the magic, or rather art, has failed. You are then out in the Primary World again, looking at the little abortive Secondary World from outside. If you are obliged, by kindliness or circumstance, to stay, then disbelief must be suspended (or stifled), otherwise listening and looking would become intolerable. But this suspension of disbelief is a substitute for the genuine thing, a subterfuge we use when condescending to games or make-believe, or when trying (more or less willingly) to find what virtue we can in the work of an art that has for us failed.

My question would be: why would Tolkien risk producing an impression on his reader (an increase in stature of the witch-king) which is not actually reflected in the reality of that world - esspecially since it would cost him 'nothing' to close that gap and it would be 'necessary' (if I may say so, considering Sauron's desperation)? If this aspect is important (and from the letter it would seem so), why risk having some readers not get it (because it would be based on mere impression, not 'facts') while others would get it, but wouldn't believe it, for lack of actual support? Would anything justify this complication? I believe his interest in plausibility is underline even in this letter, when he underscores the importance of seasons (" The Lord of the Rings may be a 'fairy-story', but it takes place in the Northern hemisphere of this earth: miles are miles, days are days, and weather is weather.")

Originally Posted by obloquy

The real false dilemma is that even if the sentence were proven to be intended the way The 1,000 Reader claims, it does not prove that the Witch-King had been elevated to a level commensurate with his master.

I agree that this quote does not adress their comparative powers at all; I intended to mention that in my post as well, but I forgot from "hand to mouth". In the text, there is, at most - to my knowledge, one other refference (besides Gandalf's 'softness' in regards to Denethor's remarks) which might indicate that Gandalf admits he is overpowered, although it is marred by its generality (emphasis added):

Originally Posted by The White Rider, TTT

I have spoken words of hope. But only of hope. Hope is not victory. War is upon us and all our friends, a war in which only the use of the Ring could give us surety of victory. It fills me with great sorrow and great fear: for much shall be destroyed and all may be lost. I am Gandalf, Gandalf the White, but Black is mightier still.

Originally Posted by obloquy

the note's (putative) claim that the Witch-King was literally enhanced is otherwise uncorroborated

I believe the following could be relevant to our discussion:

Originally Posted by The siege of Gondor

The Nazgul came again, and as their Dark Lord now grew and put forth his strength, so their voices, which uttered only his will and his malice, were filled with evil and horror.

Not definitive, but still, in line with the witch-king uttering words of power that apparently help shatter the city gate, approaching the gate alone and having flames run down his sword.