Gandalf's Staff

[narfforc]

I have always felt that the Staff represented a link between the physical body/world and the spirit/power within. It is a tool to focus whatever that power is, and bring it forth in the form of energy, a conduit maybe. If Saruman the White was more powerful than Gandalf the Grey he may have had the will to break that contact to Gandalfs Staff. Therefore once Gandalf returned as The White Wizard, the breaking of Sarumans Staff maybe have been caused be either overloading that power, or the contest of the wills within the Staff itself.

[Essex]

as I've said on different threads - the staff was a SYMBOL of their power to me - no more, or no less.

notice in the book (and film methinks) - Gandalf breaks Saurman's staff WITH HIS VOICE - his own power within him. no mention of a staff.

he did use the staff to light up a fire back in the fellowship book wise - but I think that's about it.

To hold the Balrog from following them from the chamber in moria he used a Word of Command. Now here, to me, is his REAL power. And something I've always been interested in, but have not found much to read about. Exactly what were the words of Power? anyone know?

[narfforc]

Gandalf broke The Bridge of Khazad-dum with his staff. The Staff was used to scare off the Nazgul and save Faramir. The reports of lightning on Weathertop and its burned appearence, all point to Gandalfs use of his Staff

[davem]

Originally Posted by Essex

Exactly what were the words of Power? anyone know?

We discussed something along these lines
here

As to the question of staffs having innate power, clearly there are many objects in Middle-earth which have innate power: Silmarils, Palantiri, swords, Galadriel's Mirror ('Do not touch the water!'). But they all also have a symbolic significance as well.

So it seems that certain objects are symbols, 'batteries' which can store & discharge power & conduits of the wielder's own power. Of course, others may take up the objects & make use of their power, so its clear that certain objects do store power & are powerful in their own right. Its also clear, though, that its not always possible for someone to pick up a magical object & just use it. Frodo is told by Galadriel he must train his will to be able to use the One.

As to the Wizard's staff. We know from the example of Sauron & the Ring that it is possible for an individual of sufficient ability to pour some of their power into a physical object. Is there a qualitative difference between the Wizard's staff & the One - or is the same technique behind the process? Does a magical object have to be imbued with power by its user/creator? Does Feanor pour some of his fiery spirit into the Silmarils as Sauron pours some of his into the Ring?

Certainly, if Saruman did pour some of his innate power (a great deal of it?) into his staff then Gandalf's breaking of it would be equivalent on a much lesser scale to the effect on Sauron of the destruction of of the One.

[Raynor]

Does Feanor pour some of his fiery spirit into the Silmarils as Sauron pours some of his into the Ring?

I think that the following passage from Of the flight of the noldor, Silmarillion is relevant:

Yavanna spoke before the Valar, saying:
- The Light of the Trees has passed away, and lives now only in the Silmarils of Feanor. Foresighted was he! Even for those who are mightiest under Iluvatar there is some work that they may accomplish once, and once only. The Light of the Trees I brought into being, and within Ea I can do so never again. Yet had I but a little of that light I could recall life to the Trees, ere their roots decay; and then our hurt should be healed, and the
malice of Melkor be confounded.'
...
Feanor spoke then, and cried bitterly:
- For the less even as for the greater there is some deed that he may accomplish but once only; and in that deed his heart shall rest. It may be that I can unlock my jewels, but never again shall I make their like

There is either a limit on the sub-creative power or a limit on creating unique objects: Yavanna can only make the Trees once, Feanor can make the silmarils once.

I don't thinkt that the wizards imbued their staffs with a tremendous amount of energy of their own, but it could be that at least for Saruman this is an irrepeatable act.

[Roa_Aoife]

Ah, yes, symbols. Like the Crucifix, a church, the Star of David, etc, etc, etc. Not to get too deep into theology, or off topic, but when we hear of exorcisms, miracles, and the like, it always involves a symbol. Catholics/ Orthodox Christians pray to paintings of saints, a statues of Mary. Do these objects hold any power? Well, that's a faith issue, but I would say no. They are symbols of the Greater Power.

I had a discussion once with friends about Vampires. (Bear with me, I have a point.) Purely theorizing and the like, we decided that a cross alone couldn't ward one off- it's just two intersecting lines. It has to be a Crucifix. Then we decided that with out faith behind the Crucifix, it can't do anything. So the faith is what really matters, but it needs a symbol to bring the meta-physical power into a physically oriented world. People are simply incapable of dealing with abstractions like magic. It can't just happen- something has to cause it, whether it is a word, a gesture, or a symbol.

The wizard's staff if like this. It can't just be a stick; that would be pointless. It has to be designated as the symbol. But even then it can't do anything without the wizard's power. So, the staff allows the meta-physical and the physical to connect, and the power comes straight from the wizard. It's like a point of contact, or an = in an equation.

[Essex]

understand all the points on the staff being a conduit of power possibly. But why do we have times when Gandalf does not use his staff? Ie on the fields of pellenor and (most importantly) in breaking Saruman's own staff.

so why the inconsistencies? ie sometimes he uses his staff, and others he doesn't? is this just a fault of tolkien? (shock, horror!)

[Folwren]

Does it say that he didn't use his staff while breaking Saruman's staff? Let me grab the book. . .

Hm. It says that he 'raised his hand' and nothing else. And yet. . .you'd think that with such a thing happening, Saruman's power being taken from him and then the staff being broken, that Tolkien wouldn't have made a mistake while concerning with Gandalf's staff.

I don't know.

-- Folwren

[Gothmog]

o why the inconsistencies? ie sometimes he uses his staff, and others he doesn't? is this just a fault of tolkien? (shock, horror!)

If we keep using Roa's Crucifixes and paintings of saint as an example it's easy to explain. A christian can direct his/her prayers directly to God, but can also use symbols. The human being can't always comprehend abstract things and uses real, physical items as help. A wizard's staff may be something that help the wizard to focus and makes it easier to perform magic, but they can manage without it.

Most of us seem to agree that the it's the wizard that holds the greatest power and the staff is there as an tool to increase the power or focus it. Then it's only natural that wizards can perform magic without it, even if it might be harder or not as efficient. A fault by Tolkien? The thought is horrifying!