Gandalf is a fraud?!

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Groin Redbeard

As for why Gandalf never used the ring it is quite simple: hide the rings of power from Sauron. All of the ring bearers did this, even the dwarves.

But he didn't hide it - it didn't do much besides vanish fear and despair and get people going. Plus Gandalf, being the obvious fraud that he was, wanted people to think that it was he that was the world's greatest cheerleader.

Also, this guy needs to learn how to spell Cirdan and Thraundil.

Careful there. Thought that it was spelled Thranduil. And though I too see spelling errors and grammatical pretzels as icky, I've learned that for some, writing in this tongue that I should know better than I do may be a very impressive feat in itself.

And Welcome! Lord Tataraus. Hope to read your, and not others, opinions soon.

Originally Posted by Gwathagor

This guy's an idiot.

Ahem...better manners and arguments make the Downs a better place. (alatar goes to look up a better word than 'better.')

[Lord Tataraus]

Originally Posted by alatar

And Welcome! Lord Tataraus. Hope to read your, and not others, opinions soon.

Thank you (and Groin Redbeard) for the welcome!

I waited a bit to see what other's responses are before giving my opinion.

Firstly, while I do not wish to call anyone an idiot, it seems to be unfortunately appropriate. Lord_Kimboat is obviously not very well versed in Tolkein's work nor D&D despite his confidence. Coming from a RPG background I have the advantage of seeing more flaws in Kimboat's theory than others on this forum. Unfortunately, my knowledge of LotR is a bit rusty, its been awhile since last reading it (I've been working my way through The Silmarillion most recently).

So, my rebuttal paragraph by paragraph:

First Post:
(The first paragraph isn't very relevant so I'll skip it.)

1) Kimboat shortly describes "...how noble and righteous everyone and thing is." I do not agree with this statement, Aragon for one was an exceptional and likable man even without his hereditary lordliness. As Kimboat noted, Sam is most likely so loyal to Frodo for cultural reasons, but I also believe they were honest friends especially after traveling together for so long and Frodo being noticeably hindered by the Ring. There were many examples of not-so-noble characters. Many men were corrupt such as Wormtongue and Denethor and even Theoden wasn't always that "...noble and righteous..." as I recall.

2) Here is Kimboat's first sign of ignorance. Apparently he missed the entire discussion beforehand were it was concluded that magic in Middle-Earth is more subtle than in D&D-type fantasy. Additionally, he seems to think that any respectful magic-user would spam his spells at every little opportunity which is not a view supported by most fantasy works. Most such magic-users are wise and intelligent enough to realize it might be better to save their magic for when it is truly needed. I would also refute the idea that Gandalf "...isn't afraid to bluff people..." My interpretation of Gandalf was that he was always concerned about the knowledge he gave out, he was disturbed by the fact that he did not tell Frodo that the quest would most likely destroy him. Gandalf just doesn't strike me as being able to truly lie to people, he is too trusting and kind, he even tried to talk Saruman out of joining with Sauron even though it was obviously in vain.

3) This is one point that I can't really refute with anything except that Gandalf just doesn't seem the type. His character does not suggest that he would lie about something like that or even that he could. He was very devoted to the Fellowship and would have joined up with them, if only to ease their pain, if he could have done so.

Second Post:
1) I do not expect anyone to have much to say about this paragraph as it has to do directly with D&D mechanics, however this does proved another example of Kimboat's ignorance to those who are knowledgeable with such things. Kimboat uses one of the biggest misconceptions about D&D mechanical class balance within the gaming community. Many newer or less knowledgeable gamers think that the Bard is a wholly useless class as Kimboat so aptly describes. Among those more attuned to the topic of class balance, the Bard is one of the more powerful classes in the entire system. Additionally, the forum this was posted at has a reputation for being one of the more mature and knowledgeable ones in the overall gaming community which makes this statement even more ignorant.

2 and 3) These two paragraphs need no explanation. Any one who knows who Cirdan actually is would see the utter idiocy of this scenario. Additionally, the very power of the rings would prevent such thievery since the wearer can choose to hide its presence entirely.

4-7) as was mentioned by others, the poem is just that, a poem. Poems are famous for choosing their wording for poetic meter not for correctness. Additionally, the poem has been translated and in its original langauge the word that is translated into english as "king" might very well refer to a ruler of either sex. As for Elrond, well a kingdom is a nation ruled over by a hereditary house which is the case with Rivendell, they just call it by a different name. And as mentioned before, Gandalf was recorded as being gifted Cirdan's ring.

8) I can agree with this part.

9) I highly doubt Thranduil wants the ring that badly, it seems to bring more trouble than its worth and I doubt he would risk war with Rivendell (and possibly Lorien) when Sauron is the greater threat. Also, I thought that those at the council were summoned, not "happened to show up conveniently at the same time."

10) Legolas respected Gandalf and as I mentioned above, I doubt Thranduil was that envious of such a dangerous object.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Lord Tataraus

Additionally, he seems to think that any respectful magic-user would spam his spells at every little opportunity which is not a view supported by most fantasy works. Most such magic-users are wise and intelligent enough to realize it might be better to save their magic for when it is truly needed. I would also refute the idea that Gandalf "...isn't afraid to bluff people..."

Someone help me here...there's a scene in some fantasy book where an older wizard is teaching a young and thirsty apprentice, and says something like, "Sure, I could make it rain here, but that would take water from a place that truly needed it." The author's point, I think, was to be that one did not use magic in a juvenile fashion. Power, or the use of, has consequences.

Additionally, the poem has been translated and in its original langauge the word that is translated into english as "king" might very well refer to a ruler of either sex. As for Elrond, well a kingdom is a nation ruled over by a hereditary house which is the case with Rivendell, they just call it by a different name.

I think that the original Quenya has it as "Big Cheese."

[Gwathagor]

Originally Posted by alatar

Someone help me here...there's a scene in some fantasy book where an older wizard is teaching a young and thirsty apprentice, and says something like, "Sure, I could make it rain here, but that would take water from a place that truly needed it." The author's point, I think, was to be that one did not use magic in a juvenile fashion. Power, or the use of, has consequences.

Sounds like "A Wizard of Earthsea", if you ask me.

[The Sixth Wizard]

Hee hee, "cast a low-level spell?" Does he think Gandalf's from Morrowind?!

[Thinlómien]

An interesting thread, and while I disagree with this Lord_Kimboat, I think this could spark interesting discussion (like it already has).

Gandalf wasn't maybe lying about his encounter with the balrog - that has been proved unprobable already - but can we take all what Tolkien's characters say as true? This was discussed somewhere some time ago, but it is a very intriguing topic. Tolkien fans are probably the least critic fans in the world when it comes to evaluating whether the heroes of the story are being completely honest or not.

Also, LotR is, although in arguable fashion, written by Frodo Baggins so basically it's from his perspective. He might have exaggerated things or simply not remembered them totally correctly. Nevertheless, we can expect quite high accuracy from it as Frodo is a first-hand narrator in many cases, and we can consider his nature quite honest.

But what about The Silmarillion then? Those are folk tales, hereditary knowledge and ballads. Yet we always consider them facts. It would be interesting to analyse the stories of the Sil the same way people analyse old mythologies and epic tales. But not on this thread, surely...

Originally Posted by alatar

After all is said and done, doesn't Gandalf dress Frodo and Sam just before they meet "King Aragorn?" That gets me, and maybe there're other examples, but we have this Fellow or Fraud, great and wise (or at least considered so) stooping to serve others. He rejects Saruman, who would not serve. Gandalf even pities those caught by Sauron. That's cool stuff.

I never before realised this was more fuel for the Jesus-Gandalf theory... But it is a beautiful scene in any case.

Lastly, I like this thread. It makes me like Gandalf even more than I usually do and it also makes me feel like reading Le Guin... *glares at Gwath*