''Three cheers for Captain Frodo, Lord of the Ring''

Pippin: Gandalf has been saying many cheerful things like that.

In Gandalf's world, humour is strictly forbidden, it seems. What a miserable fellow he was.

[Groin Redbeard]

Originally Posted by Mansun

In Gandalf's world, humour is strictly forbidden, it seems.

I think that we could cut Gandalf a bit of slack here. He has seen and done things that Pippin wouldn't even dare do. It was Gandalf who came up with the master plan to defeat Sauron, so let's not be to hasty to accuse Gandalf of being "Mr. serious!"

Originally Posted by Groin Redbeard

I think that we could cut Gandalf a bit of slack here. He has seen and done things that Pippin wouldn't even dare do. It was Gandalf who came up with the master plan to defeat Sauron, so let's not be to hasty to accuse Gandalf of being "Mr. serious!"

What is the use of filling young Hobbits with dread all the time, even when no imminent danger exists, such as in Rivendell? Frodo had nearly become undead, and was for the first time conscious and talking merrily to the other Hobbits. Some humour would have cheered him up, I would have thought. Gandalf was not the lord of Rivendell, after all! Elrond was the master here. Would he have objected like this?

[Kitanna]

Originally Posted by Mansun

Elrond was the master here. Would he have objected like this?

Probably.

Gandalf is like a parent scolding a child who has screamed in church. He does it in a way that suggests to the naughty child (in this case Pippin) he should refrain from doing so in the future. Gandalf was wise and he cared deeply about the hobbits. It was safer to scold Pippin for mentioning the Ring and the Lord of the Ring in Rivendell than running the chance of it coming out in the open when spies are abroad.

I think Gandalf acted appropriately given what we know of his character. This would be quite a different story if Gandalf had issued a spanking to Pippin for his words.

Originally Posted by Kitanna

I think Gandalf acted appropriately given what we know of his character. This would be quite a different story if Gandalf had issued a spanking to Pippin for his words.

Do you think, in great anger, Gandalf could ever have lost control and beat the Hobbit?

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

No imminent danger exists? At this point, they do not know what became of all of the Nazgul, who are at their most dangerous when they are unclad. Frodo should not have survived his wounding with the Morgul knife, and though he did, can anyone in Rivendell say precisely WHY he did not? Do they yet know for certain that this is simply because of Frodo's "hobbit tenacity," or because of some design of the Ring itself? And there is the very imminent and immediate danger in the very presence of that Ring in Rivendell. Gandalf we know has felt its pull, and though he has refused it, does not trust himself to touch it again -- do we know how others would fare in the presence of that danger? We know that it was in Rivendell that Boromir first saw the Ring and began to desire it -- who else might have felt that same desire? The very presence of the Ring is a terrible danger, and to make light of it is potentially offering an invitation for it to start looking for a new bearer in the person who might not consider it dangerous, and would not be so careful in protecting it. In my opinion, Gandalf is not being a wet blanket because he is a gloomy, snarky person; he is demonstrating concern for Pippin, because of his affection for him. It is noted by Tolkien that one of Gandalf's shortcomings is a quick temper for the rebuking of folly, and after spending a good long while as Saruman's prisoner because of Saruman's lust for the Ring (a thing that he, unlike Pippin, has never seen nor even been its presence), any apparent flippancy regarding the Ring would likely seem to him the worst of folly. I believe that Gandalf acts as he does because he fears for the hobbits, who are comparatively young and inexperienced, and he feels it is better to risk getting a reputation as someone gloomy and grumpy than it is to let them (or anyone, for that matter) treat too lightly something that is a danger to their entire world. They may be sitting in a fortress inside Rivendell, but in bringing the Ring within that fortress, they have brought with them the very heart of their enemy -- and it would be best not to stir that heart unnecessarily. IMHO, of course.

Originally Posted by Ibrîniðilpathânezel

No imminent danger exists? At this point, they do not know what became of all of the Nazgul, who are at their most dangerous when they are unclad. Frodo should not have survived his wounding with the Morgul knife, and though he did, can anyone in Rivendell say precisely WHY he did not? Do they yet know for certain that this is simply because of Frodo's "hobbit tenacity," or because of some design of the Ring itself? And there is the very imminent and immediate danger in the very presence of that Ring in Rivendell. Gandalf we know has felt its pull, and though he has refused it, does not trust himself to touch it again -- do we know how others would fare in the presence of that danger? We know that it was in Rivendell that Boromir first saw the Ring and began to desire it -- who else might have felt that same desire? The very presence of the Ring is a terrible danger, and to make light of it is potentially offering an invitation for it to start looking for a new bearer in the person who might not consider it dangerous, and would not be so careful in protecting it. In my opinion, Gandalf is not being a wet blanket because he is a gloomy, snarky person; he is demonstrating concern for Pippin, because of his affection for him. It is noted by Tolkien that one of Gandalf's shortcomings is a quick temper for the rebuking of folly, and after spending a good long while as Saruman's prisoner because of Saruman's lust for the Ring (a thing that he, unlike Pippin, has never seen nor even been its presence), any apparent flippancy regarding the Ring would likely seem to him the worst of folly. I believe that Gandalf acts as he does because he fears for the hobbits, who are comparatively young and inexperienced, and he feels it is better to risk getting a reputation as someone gloomy and grumpy than it is to let them (or anyone, for that matter) treat too lightly something that is a danger to their entire world. They may be sitting in a fortress inside Rivendell, but in bringing the Ring within that fortress, they have brought with them the very heart of their enemy -- and it would be best not to stir that heart unnecessarily. IMHO, of course.

Gandalf said to Frodo that they were all safe for the present in Rivendell. The Nine would not have been able to enter the House of Elrond, and I doubt they would dare to. No imminent danger existed, except perhaps paranoia or complacency. Sauron would not have sent an army to Rivendell anytime soon, having a small matter of Gondor and other enemies to contend with first. Isengard was no match for Rivendell, of course.

If Gandalf was as hot-headed against folly as you say, what stopped him from sending home the foolish Pippin?

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

Sauron doesn't need to send an army, nor Isengard. Physical safety is not the issue when the biggest danger is that of corruption from within. As we see later in RotK ("The Pyre of Denethor"):

"'Work of the Enemy!' said Gandalf. 'Such deeds he loves: friend at war with friend, loyalty divided in the confusion of hearts.'"

Now or later, that trait of Sauron, the Base Deceiver, remains. The Ring is in Rivendell, as the palantir is in Minas Tirith, a more potent device of the Enemy, potentially able to spark dissent and confusion even more surely than the palantir. To the unwary and prideful, the Ring is, I believe, always a clear and present danger, no matter the location. Galadriel's temptation and moment of crisis came, after all, in the very heart of her own realm. It was no protection from the lure of the Ring; it was her personal strength, gained from thousands of years of experience which provided that. When it came to allowing Merry and Pippin to be part of the Company, Gandalf himself admitted that he did not see the path ahead clearly, and yet felt moved to think it wiser to trust to their friendship rather than to wisdom. As we know, that presentiment turned out to be a good one, since even Pippin's foolish acts eventually led to some key events in the outcome of the war. But for his dropping of the stone in Moria, Gandalf might not have faced and defeated the Balrog, died, and returned in a more powerful form. But for Pippin stealing the palantir to have a look at it, Aragorn might not have reclaimed it at a point when his act made Sauron fear that he had the Ring, and thus pushed him to begin his war too soon. Gandalf's impatience with foolishness is his own character flaw, and one that I believe makes him more believable, more "human." If he never made mistakes, never had doubts, never said things he later regretted, he would be too perfect, and thus, I think, not as interesting.

Well, we're all entitled to our opinions and interpretations, of course, and on some things, I believe it is wiser to simply agree to disagree.

Originally Posted by Ibrîniðilpathânezel

Sauron doesn't need to send an army, nor Isengard. Physical safety is not the issue when the biggest danger is that of corruption from within. As we see later in RotK ("The Pyre of Denethor"):



Now or later, that trait of Sauron, the Base Deceiver, remains. The Ring is in Rivendell, as the palantir is in Minas Tirith, a more potent device of the Enemy, potentially able to spark dissent and confusion even more surely than the palantir. To the unwary and prideful, the Ring is, I believe, always a clear and present danger, no matter the location. Galadriel's temptation and moment of crisis came, after all, in the very heart of her own realm. It was no protection from the lure of the Ring; it was her personal strength, gained from thousands of years of experience which provided that. When it came to allowing Merry and Pippin to be part of the Company, Gandalf himself admitted that he did not see the path ahead clearly, and yet felt moved to think it wiser to trust to their friendship rather than to wisdom. As we know, that presentiment turned out to be a good one, since even Pippin's foolish acts eventually led to some key events in the outcome of the war. But for his dropping of the stone in Moria, Gandalf might not have faced and defeated the Balrog, died, and returned in a more powerful form. But for Pippin stealing the palantir to have a look at it, Aragorn might not have reclaimed it at a point when his act made Sauron fear that he had the Ring, and thus pushed him to begin his war too soon. Gandalf's impatience with foolishness is his own character flaw, and one that I believe makes him more believable, more "human." If he never made mistakes, never had doubts, never said things he later regretted, he would be too perfect, and thus, I think, not as interesting.

Well, we're all entitled to our opinions and interpretations, of course, and on some things, I believe it is wiser to simply agree to disagree.

If Gandalf was so worried about Ring corruption over Pippin's comments, he may as well have sent the Ring into the Great Sea, where no hand would be able to use the Ring for thousands of years. Reading too much into small details can lead to gross exageration of a situation that is relatively low key. In any event, Gandalf answered to Elrond, and not the other way round. What can and cannot be said in his own house is his choice alone, the Master of Rivendell.