Gandalf: the Unilateral Coalition Builder

[lindil]

Listening to my kids read the Hobbit outloud the other day I was struck by Gandalf's propensity by the time of the Hobbit, to trick, cajole, manipulate and otherwise sneakily get non-allies and former allies working together again.

1- Thorin forced to take Bilbo, esp. see UT's the quest for erebor
2- Bilbo likewise.
3- Elrond forced to accomadate dwarves seemingly for the first time in a long time. The leaders of Durin's house seemingly had no clue where Rivendell was and [no longer?] had access to it as a re-supply point between the Forsaken Inn and whomever in the Wilderland. Despite the 'anscestral road' going right over the ford nearby.
4-Beorn perhaps the most classic and blatant manipulation. G was so pleased w/ himself he even explains it to thorin and co.
5-Sending Thorin and co, straight down a trail that must pass through Thranduil's realm w/ out even a letter of introduction or a word of advice.

By the time Bilbo has grown depressed w/ the seige of Erebor by Men and Elves [w/ G looking on!] he takes a page right out of G's book and uses the Arkenstone for crass manipulation.

A final episode of G's was supposed to be the fellowship busting in on hitherto isolated Lothlorien. Galadriel was undoubtedly supportive but the rank and file was, if Haldir's reaction is any indicator, habitually suspicious.

I have mainly looked at 'The Hobbit'. But trend continues unabated in Rohan,and Minas Tirith's seige.

I have some theories but would love to hear from others first...

[Eruanna]

Gandalf's ability, "to trick, cajole, manipulate and otherwise sneakily get non-allies and former allies working together again."

When I first read this lindil I thought, 'but that's Gandalf's purpose'. However,it is only after the events in 'The Hobbit' that we learn about the existence of the elven rings and Narya's enhancing effect on Gandalf's powers of persuasion.
As I am reading 'The Hobbit' with a class of eleven to twelve year olds I am going to ask them what they think of Gandalf's manipulations. He certainly does seem to resort to trickery and 'forceful' suggestion (I hesitate to use the word bully) in order to get people to do as he wants.
I do think, however, that he has changed considerably by the time of The Lord of the Rings. It is a much gentler Gandalf that we see in Rohan, with Theoden. Here he offers advice: "Counsel I could give, and words I could speak to you. Will you hear them?"
But doesn't seem manipulative...of course, Theoden has just lost his son, Gandalf himself has returned from the dead, maybe that accounts for his change in attitude.
An interesting topic, Lindil. I'd be fascinated to hear what others think.

[davem]

Maybe one could argue that Bilbo has 'spun' Gandalf's role in TH to make him seem responsible for a respectable Hobbit going off into the wild & having adventures I do think that the Gandalf of TH is different to the Gandalf of LotR (or of The Sil for that matter). Perhaps this is due to Tolkien's changing of the character as the Legendarium developed. Certainly, in TH Gandalf is more of a typical 'wizard', & often a deus ex machina. I think a comparison between the way he's played in the BBC radio adaptations of The Hobbit & LotR & the movies shows up the difference clearly. The way Heron Carvic plays him in The Hobbit captures the Gandalf of the book perfectly, sharp, mercurial, affectionate but exasperated, in love with his own cleverness. This Gandalf would not have worked in LotR but is right for TH.

Wish I could find a clip of Carvic's Gandalf to make the point clearer, but I think, in answer to your question, Gandalf does manipulate others - he is a 'steward' & has responsibilities, & perhaps sometimes takes 'short cuts', but then he is out to try & save the world, often having to get aid from those who are too caught up in themselves. His heart is in the right place, but I wonder whether his horrified response on being offered the Ring by Frodo might have had something to do with a realisation of this tendency in himself?

[Boromir88]

I did an interesting thread on Gandalf's manipulating ways here.

Some fine posts have been made already. Perhaps we can expand this to a discussion between Gandalf and Saruman in LOTR? How Gandalf uses his persuasion for good purposes. And he does it because it's the right thing to do, not to gain anymore power in which is the big reason Saruman manipulates.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Some fine posts have been made already. Perhaps we can expand this to a discussion between Gandalf and Saruman in LOTR? How Gandalf uses his persuasion for good purposes. And he does it because it's the right thing to do, not to gain anymore power in which is the big reason Saruman manipulates.

Interesting idea. Its almost as if the Istari had a tendency to take control - perhaps their sense of having a 'mission' from their superiors affected them more deeply & gave them a greater sense of driving urgency than we generally think? Maybe Saruman felt more driven than Gandalf & so succumbed to the lure of the Ring. He must have been caught first by the idea that the Ring could enable him to defeat Sauron & thereby achieve his mission. Gandalf, on the other hand, was aware of where this would eventually lead, & so, while his sense of mission may have lead him to 'push' other's in the direction he needed them to go, he would never force them against their will. However much he may 'manipulate' Thorin, Bilbo, Elrond, Beorn, etc, they all retained the freedom to reject him & carry on as they were.

I wonder if the reason they went along with him was that deepdsown they had the sense that while he might be so 'pushing' them, they were being pushed in the right direction? Gandalf was felt to be simply helping them along the way they should have been going anyway. Saruman, & Sauron, were attempting to force people down the wrong road, & deep down their victims knew it.

So, I think that Gandalf was doing what he had been sent to do - which was not simply to wait around till someone could be bothered to do something against Sauron & them offer to 'hold their coat', but actually to 'inspire', to 'push' the inhabitants of Middle earth to do the right thing.

Of course, the question is widened when we bring in the other wizards - the Blue Wizards may have gone east to inspire the people there, but why did Radaghast not feel so driven - or maybe he was 'manipulating' the birds

[Eruanna]

Thanks for the link to the other thread Boromir, an interesting discussion.

Originally posted by Davem:
Its almost as if the Istari had a tendency to take control - perhaps their sense of having a 'mission' from their superiors affected them more deeply & gave them a greater sense of driving urgency than we generally think?

I think you're spot on here. The Istari are powerful beings, but their mission is to guide and help others, not to control them. They are not allowed to reveal themselves or their powers to their full extent (almost like having one hand tied behind their backs) It must have been very frustrating!
However, Gandalf uses his powers to 'nudge' people in the right direction. He 'multi-tasks' throughout the tale, not only orchestrating Sauron's demise but helping all of the 'good' people to achieve their destinies. Although he occasionally gets exasperated with his companions he does not seek to force them to follow his advice. As a consequence he is much loved and respected as one of the wise.
Saruman, on the other hand does not use his power to advise or help, but uses it to dominate others. He is ruthless in achieving his own desires, in direct conflict with 'the mission'.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Eruanna

Saruman, on the other hand does not use his power to advise or help, but uses it to dominate others. He is ruthless in achieving his own desires, in direct conflict with 'the mission'.

This is clearly the case by the end, but I can't help wondering whether it wasn't the sense of 'mission' that drove him to seek power & control in the frst place. Perhaps he was simply too single minded, too obsessed with achieving his goal, so that the longer the struggle took, the more desperate things became, the more he sought the power he felt he needed to carry out his mission. Soon though, winning out over Sauron became so important in his mind that he started thinking that the end justified the means - as long as it brought about the defeat of Sauron anything was justified.

In other words I think he forgot whyhe was fighting - that it wasn't just about defeating Sauron, it was about liberating the people of Middle earth. He never forgot that he was there to defeat Sauron, he just forgot why Sauron had to be defeated, & so became like Sauron.

Gandalf seems to have always kept in mind the reason for defeating Sauron. This made his job difficult. Gandalf always had to keep in mind that the end doesn't justify the means - it is determined by the means: ie, the means you employ will determine the end. If you use Sauron's methods to defeat Sauron you just end up replacing him. This is why Gandalf had to be so careful - he had to avoid the methods of Sauron while finding an effective way to defeat him.

Luckily, it seems that by following their destinies the people of Middle earth naturally worked against Sauron. They just had to be honest with themselves & do what they knew was right. Gandalf's job was to enable them to do that.

If that makes sense.

Saruman's way seemed to him (at least at first) the only way to defeat Sauron - yet Gandalf's way was the only one that could bring about Sauron's defeat without producing a replacement. Gandalf walks a very fine line all through through the story.

[Lalwendë]

Thinking of how the Istari are described in Unfinished Tales, before they are sent to ME, and then looking at the outcome of what they did or did not achieve, it is clear each had a strong personality of his own. Gandalf seems to have been fully aware of the notion of 'service', while Saruman sought to use his own reasoning to think around the problem he was sent to 'solve'. In Saruman's behaviour we can see that he was incredibly clever, that he also had a huge thirst for knowledge and learning. He went beyond his mission by trying to find his own solutions, almost as though he had his own agenda which he carried to ME with him.

Gandalf on the other hand seems keenly aware of his duty and folows this as closely as he can. His duty is not to any of the people in ME, it is to those who sent him there; part of that duty is to guide but not to push. Yet sometimes it does seem he 'pushed' people. I've said before that Gandalf has something of the spin doctor about him, and while he has none of the more sinister manipulative qualities of our modern day spin doctors, he is fully aware of how to use diplomacy, how to point people in the right direction. He acts as a mentor to Aragorn, and to do this he is not didactic but says the correct words to make Aragorn stop and think, to consider his actions.

I'd say that Gandalf is persuasive rather than manipulative. He acts as an expert, on hand to help the people of ME, but not to take their decisions for them. Keeping his purpose in mind, he sees the longer term view, you could say he takes the strategic viewpoint, while Saruman allows himself to become bogged down in the detail and hence cannot see where he is ultimately going wrong.

[Boromir88]

I'm liking this thread more and more. To back up what davem and Eruanna have said about Saruman possibly being "single-minded," or in a search so strong to complete his task he becomes the person we see in LOTR, I think we have to look at when we first see signs of unusual behavior.

We know in LOTR that Saruman seems to be on his own. The good guys know what he's up to and now realize he's a traitor. And he's not really with Sauron, since he's trying to plan Sauron's own downfall. He's in this on his own.

I think the first strange thing we see from Saruman is when he finds Sauron's servants searching near the Anduin, he is alarmed, but he doesn't tell the Council. At this point Saruman is not "evil," he ends up agreeing to get Sauron out of Dol Guldur, but I've always been baffled by why Saruman didn't tell anyone about Sauron looking near Gladden Fields. I think you two have just answered that. Saruman took his mission the wrong way, he concentrated too hard on succeeding in his mission, he missed the point. Perhaps he felt like to succeed he needed to defeat Sauron by himself? This leads him down the wrong path and to the power-hungry and independent person we see in LOTR.

I'd say that Gandalf is persuasive rather than manipulative.

I agree, Lal, it seems like Gandalf is good at getting people to do what he wants. But, as been said he let's the people have the final say. The first example that comes to mind is Theoden. He advises, and let's Theoden have the final say, and Theoden is wise enough to listen to Gandalf's advice. On the other side we have Denethor, who could care less about Gandalf, but again, Gandalf let's Denethor makes the decisions. As long as Denethor remains in charge, Gandalf may not like Denethor's decisions, but he let's the "Lord" rule as he see's fit. Where manipulation I think goes more towards forcing people and it has more of a negative connotation to it.

[Lhunardawen]

Very interesting discussion.

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Perhaps we can expand this to a discussion between Gandalf and Saruman in LOTR?

Let's look at the chapter "The Voice of Saruman," then. The way the Rohirrim heard Gandalf's and Saruman's voice suggest a way of how they try to persuade people.

Saruman's voice to them was smooth and enticing, like music to the ears. But looking at the logic behind what he says, we can he see that his "gentle persuasion" is actually a self-serving manipulation. It "sounds fair but feels foul."

Gandalf, on the other hand, had a seemingly more uncouth manner. It looks as if he is trying to get people to see everything his way, forcibly. But he might as well do so if all else fails, for what he has in mind is actually for their benefit. He might "sound foul," but he sure as Mordor "feels fair." Perhaps what gives him the aura of being "bossy" is his accurate grasp of a sense of urgency. He has an idea of what is about to happen, so he knows that if anything needs to be done about it, it has to be done right away.

Another thing, it is painfully obvious that Gandalf is not out to deliberately manipulate, because otherwise he would not let Aragorn out of his sight. He would not have let Aragorn choose his own way, but he did so because he knows that Aragorn would do just as he would in such situations. Gandalf was a mentor towards Aragorn, and apparently Aragorn is a good student (mentee? ) because eventually they became of similar minds. Compare this to the case between Saruman and Grima.

[Anguirel]

I liked davem's point about Saruman's single-minded pursuit of his mission being his downfall. After all, even at his worst he intended to one day topple Sauron.

I am reminded of Celegorm and Curufin, (my heroes!) who kidnapped Luthien and usurped Nargothrond with the ultimate intention of battling Morgoth and retaking the Silmarils-but only once all the realms and resources of Beleriand were under their control, thus making an attack on Morgoth feasible. It's a case of mistaken consequentialist reasoning, and often leads to getting absorbed by the treacherous means and forgetting the noble end.

Gandalf, on the other hand, while he persuades and tricks, thus assuming a "higher" position than his "victims", always does so for their own good, rather than his. Saruman becomes devoid of altruism; Gandalf, even to the very end, advises his Hobbit friends for their benefit:

"I will not say do not weep, for not all tears are an evil."

[davem]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Perhaps he felt like to succeed he needed to defeat Sauron by himself? This leads him down the wrong path and to the power-hungry and independent person we see in LOTR.

This would likely have been the case if he took his mission so seriously that it became an obsession, drifted into paranoia, & began to feel that no-one else was safe to be entrusted with the mission. Only he had any chance of succeeding as far as he was concerned. He certainly makes himself increasingly isolated, ending up with no-one to talk to or discuss things with. It was almost inevitable that he would end up brooding on his fantasies of becoming the 'saviour' of Middle earth, defeating Sauron & bringing in an age of 'peace & plenty'. Sauron couldn't have wished for easier prey. From this point of view being given the keys of Orthanc, a place where he could isolate himself & make his plans in peace, was possibly the worst thing that could have happened to him.

Gandalf seems to have chosen the wandering life to enable him to perform his task of rallying all good people against Sauron, but either directly or indirectly, planned or not, that life forced him into contact with others, & into dependence on the hospitality & charity of others - in other words, it kept him humble. If pride was Saruman's downfall, humility was Gandalf's 'salvation' - he never lost touch with people, so they never became just 'numbers', expendable means to an end in his mind, as I think they did with Saruman.

[Celuien]

Unfinished Tales:

Of major interest, however, is a brief and very hasty sketch of a narrative, telling of a council of the Valar, summoned it seems by Manwë ("and maybe he called upon Eru for counsel?"), at which it was resolved to send out three emissaries to Middle-earth. "Who would go ? For they must be mighty, peers of Sauron, but must forgo might, and clothe themselves in flesh so as to treat on equality and win the trust of Elves and Men. But this would imperil them, dimming their wisdom and knowledge, and confusing them with fears, cares, and weariness coming from the flesh." But two only came forward: Curumo, who was chosen by Aulë, and Alatar, who was sent by Oromë. Then Manwë asked, where was Olórin ? And Olórin, who was clad in grey, and having just entered from a journey had seated himself at the edge of the council, asked what Manwë would have of him. Manwë replied that he wished Olórin to go as the third messenger to Middle-earth (and it is remarked in parentheses that "Olórin was a lover of the Eldar that remained," apparently to explain Manwë's choice). But Olórin declared that he was too weak for such a task, and that he feared Sauron. Then Manwë said that that was all the more reason why he should go, and that he commanded Olórin (illegible words follow that seems to contain word "third"). But at that Varda looked up and said: "Not as the third;" and Curumo remembered it.

I think this passage can be interpreted as an early sign of Saruman's pride. Saruman puts himself forward as Sauron's equal while Gandalf fears him. Plus, Saruman's volunteering for the mission despite being warned of the potential of "dimming their knowledge and wisdom" could be a sign that he thinks he is immune to the problem. The only one of the Istari who succeeded was the one who did not volunteer because he didn't think that he was capable of accomplishing the task. Thus, Gandalf would be more alert to the potential for failure through his weaknesses and would be more likely to take steps to correct himself if he saw a problem arising. Maybe the basic inability to recognize his weaknesses is the ultimate source of Saruman's downfall.

I'm also wondering if Varda's "Not as the third" is the beginning of Saruman's jealousy of Gandalf. I think that his making special note of the statement can be read that way if we take it as meaning that Gandalf is not the third ranking of the Istari. It sets up the idea that Saruman is annoyed that Varda would place Gandalf as an equal to him. I can imagine Saruman being nettled by Manwë choosing Gandalf (at least in part) because of the humility that Saruman lacks.

[davem]

That Aule person seems to have either a lot of bad luck in his choice of pupils, or to suffer from a major case of bad judgement! I wonder, though, whether his own 'presumption' might not have rubbed off on his servants. He tended to act without considering the meaning & possible consequences - his creation of the Dwarves being the prime example. Of course, he may have been motivated by the idea of 'set a thief to catch a thief (- whoa! is that behind the 'burglar' idea in TH?).

Saruman, it seems, needed someone around him, with whom he could talk about his plans & desires, someone who could basically tell him he was in danger, but as with so many who go the way he did, that's the very thing he sought to cut himself off from. I wonder if his anger & frustration with Gandalf at Orthanc was due to his having been cut off from both criticism & challenge for so long? Gandalf seems to have spent so long on the recieving end of such things that any pride he may have had to begin with was knocked out of him. Certainly if one is challenged & criticised for long enough one will tend to look deeply at oneself & question ones motives & desires. I think Gandalf, for all his manipulations (as opposed to Saruman's machinations), was acting selflessly - nothing he did was designed to enhance his own position. He even gave up his life to save his friends. He had reached a point of absolute submission to his mission (aarrgh!!!). It had become, in his mind, greater than himself, whereas for Saruman its as if he felt himself to be greater than the mission.

Gandalf does what he must do, Saruman does what he wants - I think this is what's behind his interchange with Gandalf - Saruman states that the white light may be broken, the white cloth dyed, the white page overwritten, & its clear he means that he may do these things. Gandalf effectively challenges not his statements that these things may be done (they are simple facts) but rather his presumption that he has the right to do those things. Saruman is claiming authority, Gandalf is repsonding that his role should be to serve not to control. Of course, by that time Saruman is too far gone to listen, let alone admit he is wrong. For Gandalf, wisdom is dependent on humility, for Saruman it is the opposite.

[Eruanna]

Good points Celuien and davem. It must surely follow then, that Gandalf's humility and 'submission to the mission' (sounds like a rap!) was the very reason that he was chosen to be a ring bearer. Another reason to incur Saruman's jealousy!
That, actually, is something that I've always wondered about. It's clear from the chapter in UT on The Istari, that Saruman knew that Gandalf had a ring of power. So why didn't Saruman try to take it from him when he had Gandalf locked up in Orthanc?

[davem]

Originally Posted by Eruanna

That, actually, is something that I've always wondered about. It's clear from the chapter in UT on The Istari, that Saruman knew that Gandalf had a ring of power. So why didn't Saruman try to take it from him when he had Gandalf locked up in Orthanc?

Me too.Does anyone know how easy it would be to take a Ring of Power from someone? Would it just be a matter of knocking them unconscious & pulling it off their finger? Would Saruman have risked trying to take the Ring by force? Wouldn't Gandalf have fought back in desperation? We know that if he had to he could defeat a Balrog. Its one thing to subdue & imprison him, because I suspect that neither of them unleashed their full powers in that confrontation, but I think that Gandalf decided that discretion was the better part of valour & let Saruman have that one so he could gain time to make other plans. Perhaps Saruman knew that if he tried to take the Ring from him Gandalf would have gone the whole hog, even if that meant one or both of them ending up dead.

Of course, I'm writing this off the top of my head & I may be totally wrong....

[Lalwendë]

I think that Saruman genuinely believed he could get Gandalf 'on side', and that he was somewhat taken unawares when Gandalf challenged his behaviour. Saruman had become so convinced that he was taking the right path, that he had found a solution to the problem he was trying to solve that he became blinded to what was going an around him, as seen in his surprise at the actions of the Ents.

Which leads me on to what I was going to say...

The difference between Gandalf and Saruman provides an important lesson in Tolkien's world. Gandalf has entered into service while Saruman seeks power. Drawing an analogy from something I know about myself, Gandalf behaves as a civil servant ought to, accepting a role and carrying out the orders from above that he is given, without bringing his own agenda to what he does. He acts without prejudice. Saruman on the other hand exploits the position he has been given. Instead of doing what he has been instructed to do, he goes beyond his brief and in so doing, acts upon his own agenda.

Gandalf in this respect is similar to Frodo, who also accepts a task he is given and enters into service. Both display behaviour which defines the word.

[Lhunardawen]

Originally Posted by Eruanna

So why didn't Saruman try to take it from him when he had Gandalf locked up in Orthanc?

I'm thinking - and I could be wrong - that this is another manifestation of Saruman's pride. Yes, it hurt him and made him jealous to know that people in Middle Earth (at least Cirdan, and the rest of the White Council) trust Gandalf more than him (ouch! a double blow!), but I guess he was confident that his job could be done without the ring.

[Boromir88]

So why didn't Saruman try to take it from him when he had Gandalf locked up in Orthanc?

Could it be as simple as the ring being invisible while on it's bearers hands? We see in the Mirror of Galadriel that Sam does not see Galadriel's ring on her finger, but Frodo does for he is the bearer of the one. Could it be that Gandalf's ring was also invisible on his finger, and that Saruman just forgot Gandalf even had a ring?

I wonder if another factor could be that Saruman made his own ring of power. While there is not proof that the ring ever did anything for him and it seemed like a failed attempt. He obviously kept it on his finger for some purpose.

[Eruanna]

Could it be that Gandalf's ring was also invisible on his finger, and that Saruman just forgot Gandalf even had a ring?

I don't think that Saruman would forget any of the perceived slights against him.
However, thanks for reminding me that Saruman made his own ring. As you say Boromir there's no evidence that it did anything for him, but it does illustrate his immense knowledge of the Rings of Power and ringcraft in general.

I was still thinking about the question and I wonder if perhaps Saruman didn't try to take Gandalf's ring because he had no need of it?
Gandalf's ring has the power to enhance his abilities to influence the hearts and minds of others. Saruman, even without a Ring of Power, already possesses the ability to cloud minds and influence people, mainly through the use of his voice; as we see with Theoden and Treebeard for instance.

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

I wonder if another factor could be that Saruman made his own ring of power. While there is not proof that the ring ever did anything for him and it seemed like a failed attempt. He obviously kept it on his finger for some purpose.

Originally Posted by Eruanna

I was still thinking about the question and I wonder if perhaps Saruman didn't try to take Gandalf's ring because he had no need of it?

That's a very good point, it tallies with other things about Saruman. If he was prepared to go his own way in trying to break the Light, and become Saruman of many colours, then why should he not also seek to make his own ring of power? And as he seemed to be thoroughly convinced that his renegade way was the right way, then why wouldn't he also assume that the ring he created was better than anything Gandalf possessed?

[Celuien]

Rattling around in the back of the barrow:

Why didn't Saurman take Narya? and Saruman the Ring-maker

And here you will stay, Gandalf the Grey, and rest from journeys. For I am Saruman the Wise, Saruman Ring-maker, Saruman of Many Colours!

Saruman could also have thought that he had Gandalf exactly where he wanted him. He probably was not expecting an escape, and told Gandalf that he would stay in Orthanc until the One Ring wa found. If Saruman took possession of the One, he wouldn't have a need to take Narya, since the One would give him control over all of the rings anyway, in addition to giving him all of the study sources he needed to perfect his own ring-making sklls.

[lindil]

Lots of interesting posts. Perhaps the Saruman oriented stuff will resume in the links Celuien posted for us [thanks]. Perhaps not....

Saruman's pride was evidenced from the first, Gandalf seems to have come slowly to his role as 'leader of the resistance to Sauron'. Indeed he only fully took up the job it seems when it was clear that the Council would remain locked in a 'protect Lothlorien and Rivendell mode' and that Saruman had turned to the dark side, seemingly convinced he was not.

Gandalf did w/ the Hobbit events set the whole stage for the final resistance to Sauron. But it was still being done in a subtle way compared to his assuming temporary command at Minas Tirith and being declared the real Leader by Aragorn in the War tent of Pellenor.

It is an unusaual thing to find a cheif leader who has no personal interest in the role. Virtually all of Tolkiens hero's and leaders had a 'taste for power':

Feanor
Fingolfin
Galadriel
Thingol
Turin
Hurin
Isildur
Elendil
Boromir
Denethor
Thorin
Balin
Finrod
Saruman

or at least a natural desire or did not resist an obligation to lead:
Aragorn
Faramir
Elendil
Beren
Cirdan[?]
Gandalf
Frodo


IN the top list we see more ultimate failures and pyrrhic victories than outright success.

In the latter we find what we could term as the more pure success stories [a generalization admittedly].

But of these only Gandalf was not born into this kind of leadership role [even though a Maia he was a rather retiring one 'seeking to understand not be understood], even Frodo was Bilbo's heir.

So he was not by temperment suited to his task, he had to reshape his own self if you will to adapt to the task and it seemingly happened slowly. There is little to say about Gandalf's adventures prior to his Dol Guldor break in and aiding the shire during the White Wolf invasion. Indeed had Saruman heard of it, he may have thought it a waste of time for a Maia...

So I wonder if this does not perhaps explain his unorthodox technique of forcing alliances and his knack for intuiting when to put himself [or others] in impossible situations.

Probably he was 'trusting to Eru', At these moments.

" How will I get the dwarves across Mirkwood and through a hostile Thranduil's realm, without being there?"

Why does Bilbo need to go? surely he asked himself this, but all we know is that he told Thorin in earnest, " If he goes you may succeed, if not - you won't and I am done with you."

So his boldness was perhaps [ring of fire aside] purely a product of clearly seeing, the correct action at any given moment.


Oner final point, how impossible it seems today that America [where I live] could ever have such a leader to lead us out of the quagmire the country [not too mention the world] is in on every level.

I am not trying to point the finger at W. so much as point out that even a minor Gandalfian figure could never navigate the political process intact.

And thus our leaders instead of building 'unlikely coalitions' resort to pushing the interests of those who paid for their elections.

An aside I admit, but that is one of things that fascinates me about M-E and Tolkien [and loved to draw such parallels between M-E and current politics in the Letters] if one takes the examples their and tries to apply them [minus magic and rings] you will almost certainly come to a different valuation and understanding of a situation than off thinking only 'within the box - or bun]

[Estelyn Telcontar]

I just read this fascinating discussion in the course of catching up with threads after my vacation - very enjoyable and highly interesting contributions! Thanks to all, especially including those I can't yet rep because they seem to catch my eye with good posts so often.

One thought on the contrast between Saruman and Gandalf occurred to me - Gandalf's humility resulted in his paying attention to the seemingly small, unimportant things - Hobbits, for example. He was not above enjoying their company, just because they were obscure and rustic. Saruman (and Sauron, for that matter) ignored everything that he did not consider worth his attention - and oversaw the details that led to the downfall of both.