[Nogrod]

Okay, I see Legate has already made some of the arguments I thought I'd make, so I'll just concentrate on the "top choices" as they seem to be at the moment...

Ted Sandyman - Well, sadly he reminds me more of these real life characters who have been given very little in birth and are brought up by their peers of the same kind. And those people may actually believe they are right in opposing the elite and their ways, especially if they feel they have been despised by the elite. So I'd say it is not so much malice as feeling of revenge or a pay-back time that sets things right. It might be petty, egoistic, stupid, narrow-minded etc. in content but I'd not say malice as such. In their own environments those people make good company and trustworthy friends; they just hate what is different or "better" than they are...

The Mouth of Sauron & Glaurung - I think there is a pretty fine fight between the two on being someone who embodies malice the best.

Glaurung clearly has the better "track-record" on a grand scale as to how many and malicious deeds he made. He is as malicious one can get.

But also, he is many other things too; like evil, mighty, terrifying, intelligent, cruel, primordial, the very concept of Dragons itself in physical form...

In comparison one could ask what do we know about the Mouth of Sauron? Nothing. Well, nothing short of that he is malicious. And that is the sole factor we kind of know about him... he is described by Tolkien basically just as through malice and there is more or less nothing else into his character we know about.


Well, a tough choice. Glaurung I think beats the Mouth of Sauron in the scope of his malice but he is also other things than that, while the Mouth is nothing but malice to a reader of the LotR.


PS. I iked the idea of both Huorns and the Fangorn as well, but agree that they are problematical choices - like Gollum, Grima and Eöl are.