Gandalf Vs. The Witch King

[Essex]

I ask (again) why did Tolkien write the passage with the WK entering the city and confronting Gandalf? To show that the Rohirrim SAVED THE DAY. Not to show that Gandalf could have beaten the WK or vice versa.

In the movie, PJ just takes this a level or two higher (yes, I would have rathered Gandalf not looking so 'fearful', but this was PJ's way of showing that the 'world of men' has not failed, but were about to prevail).

This is EXACTLY what this scene is in the movie AND BOOK for. To highten the tension, to ratchet it up until we hear the horns of the rohirrim who save the day. This scene is not for us to see who would win in a battle between Gandalf and the WK. THAT IS IMMATERIAL TO THE STORY.

We all know that Gandalf WOULD not beat the WK because of the Prophecy. Note, this is not to say he COULD not have beaten, but WOULD not beat the WK. That is left to a hobbit and a woman.

So let's put this question into perspective. To me, it's at the same level of 'My dad's bigger than your dad' or 'Tom's older than Treebeard.'

[davem]

Originally Posted by Essex

We all know that Gandalf WOULD not beat the WK because of the Prophecy. Note, this is not to say he COULD not have beaten, but WOULD not beat the WK. That is left to a hobbit and a woman.

Just for the sake of having another argument with Essex - Its entirely possible that Gandalf could have defeated the WK - its even possible that that was one of the reasons he was 'sent back'. The prophecy spoke only of 'no living man'. As Gandalf was not a 'living man' but (to use Tolkien's term) 'an incarnate angel', its very likely that he could have brought down the WK. In fact that seems to have been exactly what he was in the process of doing when the Rohirrim turned up. I have to say that in my reading Gandalf seems pretty damn annoyed that he has to leave the WK to go rescue Faramir & says somewhat to the effect that others will suffer because he has been called away.

( I will use this as an excuse to link to another painting by my favourite Tolkien artist, S. Juchimov)
http://www.elvish.org/gwaith/ru_gand...zguL_minas.jpg

[Essex]

Just to carry on the argument with Davem

its very likely that he could have brought down the WK. In fact that seems to have been exactly what he was in the process of doing when the Rohirrim turned up.

Please explain where you get this reasoning from. He was facing up to the Witch King. Not, in fact, bringing him down.

and

I have to say that in my reading Gandalf seems pretty damn annoyed that he has to leave the WK to go rescue Faramir

Absolutley. i stated that earlier. He had to possibly sacrifice the lives of many to save one. As he said - no one else could help Faramir, so he had to. Of COURSE Gandalf wanted to go after the WK. I'm not disputing that.

[obloquy]

That's an amazing piece, davem.

[davem]

Just to carry on the argument with Davem

Please explain where you get this reasoning from. He was facing up to the Witch King. Not, in fact, bringing him down.

Well, as I said, its my reading of the text, but I think that it was Gandalf's intention to bring down the WK - & he surely knew the prophecy concerning him:

When the dark shadow at the Gate withdrew Gandalf still sat motionless. But Pippin rose to his feet, as if a great weight had been lifted from him; and he stood listening to the horns, and it seemed to him that they would break his heart with joy. And never in after years could he hear a horn blow in the distance without tears starting in his eyes. But now suddenly his errand returned to his memory, and he ran forward. At that moment Gandalf stirred and spoke to Shadowfax, and was about to ride through the Gate.
'Gandalf, Gandalf!' cried Pippin, and Shadowfax halted.
'What are you doing here?' said Gandalf. 'Is it not a law in the City that those who wear the black and silver must stay in the Citadel, unless their lord gives them leave?'
'He has,' said Pippin. 'He sent me away. But I am frightened. Something terrible may happen up there. The Lord is out of his mind, I think. I am afraid he will kill himself, and kill Faramir too. Can't you do something?'
Gandalf looked through the gaping Gate, and already on the fields he heard the gathering sound of battle. He clenched his hand. 'I must go,' he said. 'The Black Rider is abroad, and he will yet bring ruin on us. I have no time.
''But Faramir!' cried Pippin. 'He is not dead, and they will burn him alive, if someone does not stop them.'
'Burn him alive?' said Gandalf. 'What is this tale? Be quick!'
'Denethor has gone to the Tombs,' said Pippin, 'and he has taken Faramir, and he says we are all to burn, and he will not wait, and they are to make a pyre and burn him on it, and Faramir as well. And he has sent men to fetch wood and oil. And I have told Beregond, but I'm afraid he won't dare to leave his post: he is on guard. And what can he do anyway?' So Pippin poured out his tale, reaching up and touching Gandalf's knee with trembling hands. 'Can't you save Faramir?'
'Maybe I can,' said Gandalf; 'but if I do, then others will die, I fear. Well, I must come, since no other help can reach him. But evil and sorrow will come of this. Even in the heart of our stronghold the Enemy has power to strike us: for his will it is that is at work.'[/b]

Why must Gandalf go? Why does he have no time if he has no chance of defeating the WK? I still feel that Gandalf believed it was his task to defeat the WK, & that that was the only chance to avoid the deaths of 'others'. So, he clearly felt he was equal to the task...

Originally Posted by Obloquy

That's an amazing piece davem

I take it you're referring to the painting. You can see all of the illustrations here:
http://www.elvish.org/gwaith/juchimov.htm

[Essex]

gandalf MUST help him as he says himself

Well, I must come, since no other help can reach him. But evil and sorrow will come of this.

He 'had no time' until Pippin explained the situation fully and Gandalf realised clearly what was happening.

It's another example of Sacrifice that tolkien introduces. The first few times I read the book as a kid I fretted over his decision, but as I grew up, I finally came to terms with it. No one else could help Faramir, so Gandalf felt duty bound to do so.

I compare this (although loosely) with the view a get when I see trauma teams working in hospitals (via documentaries/films etc). You see literally dozens of people fighting to save one person's life. Now this person could be a low life, nasty, good for nothing wretch, but their DUTY is to save him. It brings a warm feeling to my heart to know we have such dedicated people in the real world.

This is how I feel towards Gandalf as he leaves the WK to his own devices, and turns to save the heir of the Steward. I no longer feel any nagging doubts towards Gandalf as he pursues this aim, and forgoes his battle with the WK. I admire his stance, even though, as he says, sorrow will come of it. - Perhaps he could have saved Thedoen if he followed the WK, but then again, perhaps not....

[narfforc]

In Unfinished Tales (The Istari) I found the following sentences to be quite interesting: To the overthrow of Morgoth he (Manwe) sent his herald Eonwe. To the defeat of Sauron would he not send some lesser (but mighty) spirit of the angelic people, one coeval and equal, doubtless, with Sauron in their beginnings, but not more? Olorin was his name. But of Olorin we shall never know more than he revealed in Gandalf. Eonwe is considered to be mightier than Sauron, but his might is in arms. The Valar did not want another devasting war, so they sent back the Wise, So from the very beginning there was never going to be direct confrontation. Gandalf was sent to move peoples hearts and minds, that is exactly why the war was won, by outhinking Sauron.

We know that Gandalf was a Maia diminished, yet we are never told how much so. By clothing themselves (The Istari) in the flesh of Arda they are subject to the dimming of their knowledge and wisdom, and are confused by fears, cares and the weariness that come from that flesh. they are also told that they must forgo might. Yet in saying all this, Gandalf the Grey has been enhanced twice, firstly by the giving of Narya by Cirdan, and secondly by his elevation to Gandalf the White and being sent back with greater sanctity. Holding one of the Elven Rings of Power must account for something or it becomes a worthless piece of metal, and being sent back by The Valar with more power speaks for itself. So we come to Sauron, this incarnation (Third Age) is not the Sauron of old, he also is diminished by the fact that he passed a great deal of his power into The One Ring, something he no longer holds. This is why destroying it is so important, for if he recaims it, he also reclaims his lost power. We can only speculate as to the outcome of any meeting between these two Maia at the end of The Third Age, but I feel it would not be as one-sided as many think. First Age Sauron was deafeated by Luthien, a Half-Maia. So we are given the image of Gandalf the White as a very great power, how could the shade of a mortal hope to win that contest, it is not possible. The Witch-King is the High Nazgul, the Ringwraiths main weapons are fear (lets not think of The Spanish Inquisition), and the effect of that is lessened on those of strong heart and mind ala Gandalf and Aragorn on Weathertop. The thing that sets The Morgul Lord apart is that he is a sorcerer, yet this magic has its source in his being, and that was mortal, so it is of less power than even one of the Silvan Elves, had they have had the same knowledge.
We are told that Sauron had given The Lord of the Nazgul more power, yet this has to come from somewhere, if so then it came from Saurons already lessened being, therefore it cannot be as great has the power that The Valar has given back to Gandalf. So to have The Lord of the Nazgul break Gandalfs staff is ridiculous. The excuse that it was for the non-reading cinema public cannot be used, for it was not in the theatre version, it is only in the Extended version, I cannot believe that Jackson put this in for the benefit of us true fans, so what motivated him to think he could better the works of Tolkien.


NOOOOOBODY EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION.

[Guinevere]

first posted by Nafforc:
I cannot believe that Jackson put this in for the benefit of us true fans, so what motivated him to think he could better the works of Tolkien.

I don't think PJ thought or even knew so much about all these things you all write about! He probably looked at it from quite a different point of view. After all he isn't a Tolkien scholar, but a moviemaker. Consider what he said at one place in the commentaries to RotK:

" my memory is just so muddy about all this stuff because I hadn't obviously picked up the book and actually read the book for years I only read little bits and pieces of it. Just reading sections of it, you loose the experience of the book as a whole..."

[alatar]

Nice post, narfforc.

However, as Essex would say, there are examples throughout Tolkien's world where a being that is ontologically 'lower' defeats/hampers/fights a being that is higher in the scheme of things. Here are a few that I could easily cite:

- Morgoth vs Luthien/Beren
- Sauron vs Luthien
- Morgoth vs Fingolfin
- Glaurung vs Dwarves
- Smaug vs Bard
- Gothmog (Lord of Balrogs) vs Ecthelion of the Fountain
- Balrog vs Gandalf Diminished
- King Nazgul vs Eowyn
- Troll vs Pippin

Not that PJ cares...

[narfforc]

Point taken Alatar, But we din`t want to see Gandalf humiliated did we. And Guinivere, PJ made great claims as to being a fan of Tolkien, I think we now see that he meant that he had read LotR a couple of times.

[Keeper of Dol Guldur]

We come to it at last ... my post on this topic.

Haha, that sounded vain.

Alright.

The mechanics of the confrontation weren't that bad. Yes, in the book, Gandalf stood atop Shadowfax while W-K waltzed in on his own black horse ... Gandalf told him to go back to abyss ... the W-K would have just waltzed in anyway, and fought Gandalf right there if the horns hadn't sounded. He may even have won ...

In the movie, Gandalf told him to go back to the abyss ... and he again lit his sword on fire, taunted Gandalf, and got ready to do his worst.

The difference is ... in the movies, the Nazgul had lost their horses in Fellowship, and in Two Towers got new rides. The whole film showed W-K on a fell beast, why suddenly swap in a horse just for riding through the front gate?

So, he landed on the second wall. That's a big change, but not a vastly important, OH NO THE MOVIE IS RUINED one.

Here's my problem.

First of all, it seemed rushed and not dramatic enough. Gandalf rode through the bastion of stone, and W-K just lands there ... then Gandalf just tells him to go back to the abyss.

There should have been a long standoff, silent, for like ... 20 seconds.

I wanted a "You shall not pass!" style yelling match. "GO BACK TO THE ABYSS". Loud, we know Gandalf can do it.

And they should have spent more time on the landing ... Gandalf is riding along, and the Witch-King spots him from the air and flies "On his tail", like he told Pippin he hoped wouldn't happen any time soon. Then Witch-King flies forward, and lands right in front of Gandalf, and Shadowfax rears up, throwing Pippin and Gandalf.

I did like how Shadowfax stood his ground there against a frigging dragon.

Anyway, the staff breaking thing ... seemed pointless, but whatever. The idea is when a wizard comes up against something that outpowers him enough to break his staff, they're screwed. PJ wanted the staffs to be an important part of wizardry.

Oh, and I think that the very first horn note of the Rohirrim was too subdued. They should have made it just a little louder. So everyone knew why Witch-King bailed.

But other than the fact that it was too brief, lacked a powerful intro, and Gandalf's lines were too succint ... I loved it. That sword on fire stuff rocked.

[alatar]

Agree with Keeper of Dol Guldur that the scene was rushed. Have to make time for that drinking scene...(sigh).

On a slightly different tack, don't you think PJ could have spared one moment having someone in Gondor (1) acknowledge the Rohirrim's arrival and (2) cheer? Again, now that I've completed my therapy and have accepted Gandalf's staff-breaking, I'm on to complaining elsewhere. Would that have made sense regarding the sudden 'retreat' of the Witch-King? He could leave Gandalf's demise to another time (he took his staff - what else was there to do?), but he would want to put out the Rohirrim-inspired hope before that got out of hand.

[Snorri Swifthammer]

While on a business trip I stumbled upon irrefutable proof that in the battle of Gandalf vs. the Witch King that Gandalf wins.

While playing with my Lord of the Rings playing cards I noticed the WK is lumped in with the other Ringwraiths as a Queen, while Gandalf is an Ace! Well, I think that more or less wraps up this discussion.

Move along nothing to see here...

[obloquy]

Originally Posted by Snorri Swifthammer

While on a business trip I stumbled upon irrefutable proof that in the battle of Gandalf vs. the Witch King that Gandalf wins.

While playing with my Lord of the Rings playing cards I noticed the WK is lumped in with the other Ringwraiths as a Queen, while Gandalf is an Ace! Well, I think that more or less wraps up this discussion.

Move along nothing to see here...

Your evidence is silly (intentionally, I realize), but you're right. There's really no question.

All you have to do is read JRR Tolkien's book......Gandalf learns of Theodens death
It quotes: Shall we weep or be glad? Beyond hope the Captin of our foes has been destroyed, and you have heard the echo of his last despair. But he has not gone without woe or bitter loss. And that I might have averted but for the madness of Denethor.
Gandalf is an Marai exactly the same as Sauron himself but is not permited to use all of his power which was part of the bargin of the chossen wizards coming to middle earth.
He is without question more powerful than the witch king....But all would know this if they really read the book and not just take what they want from words within and creat their own meanings

[Essex]

Ha Ha! The Movie page's most infamous thread has come back to haunt us.

Thank you, Valar, for resurrecting it, even though I disagree with the 'certainty' you state is shown in the book re Gandalf's power over the WK.

read your post again Valar. You will see a particular word highlighted here:

And that I might have averted but for the madness of Denethor.

Now if Gandalf was one thing, he definately wasn't modest. If he felt he could do something he would come right out and say it. But here we have him questioning himself re the possibility of defeating the WK, by the use of the word 'might'

PS your point

But all would know this if they really read the book and not just take what they want from words within and creat their own meanings

That is exactly why we have this forum for. You can have your own opinions on what Tolkien is saying. That is one of the reasons why the book is loved so much. For example, just one word taken a different way from Glorfindel's Prophecy re the Witch King sets up endless hours of conversation.

PPS Welcome to the Downs by the way

PPPS My eariler points on the WK being perhaps more Stronger in the film because this film needed a 'Baddie' to focus on. I feel vindicated because I've finally listened to the Directors' commentaries on the WK scenes, and they say pretty much what I implied. Because we don't see Sauron (after they made the wise decision to airbrush him out of the black gate fight scene) PJ and co decided they needed a 'baddie' to focus on, and the WK was next in line.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Valar

It quotes: Shall we weep or be glad? Beyond hope the Captin of our foes has been destroyed, and you have heard the echo of his last despair. But he has not gone without woe or bitter loss. And that I might have averted but for the madness of Denethor.

My favorite thread is back!

Anyway, though the misguided souls thoroughly entrenched in the 'Witch-King is stronger' camp may disagree , a fair reading of the entire quote would reveal that Gandalf is not talking about his encounter with the Witch-King, nor does the word might mean that he was in doubt as to the outcome of such a battle.

Gandalf is simply saying that the death of Theoden might have been averted. He may also be speaking about Eowyn, as if she were to die in the depths of the Black Breath, then that would be pretty bitter. The statement simply means that even if Gandalf fought the Witch-King to a 'tie' (as if!), the Witch-King might not then have had the time to make Snowmane kill Theoden.

Where the might comes in is that Gandalf does not know if Theoden would still have found his death on the battlefield, though by less interesting devices (stray arrow, stomped by a mumakil, impaled on a sharp stick after tripping over a prone Hobbit...).

And being a very wise wizard (aren't we all? ), Gandalf already has an alibi in case a pack of ravishing lawyers from Rohan show up with a wrongful death lawsuit - he's pinned the blame on the dead Steward. Dead men don't argue very well, Pippin is the only 'objective' witness and if Aragorn ascends to the throne, he would be able to sweep the whole incident under the rug.

[Essex]

Alatar, your point:

Where the might comes in is that Gandalf does not know if Theoden would still have found his death on the battlefield, though by less interesting devices (stray arrow, stomped by a mumakil, impaled on a sharp stick after tripping over a prone Hobbit...)

disagree, but again it comes down to how one reads the line and the character's traits.

As I said, Gandalf was not in the least Modest, and would state exactly what he meant and wanted whenever he could. Here, to me, he seems DOUBTFUL as to whether he could have stopped the WK's attack on Thedoen. Hopeful, yes, but not CERTAIN (and that is what I was trying to explain). And why would Gandalf state the obvious anyway? Of course Theoden could have been killed by arrow, etc, but that's War. It could have happened to anyone, and for Gandalf to say this would seem redundant.

And for the millionth time (but maybe the first for Valar), we are talking about what the Director and co had to do from a 'Movie' point of view. Having the WK ride in on a horse, speak a few words to Gandalf and then leave again would not have worked on film (as it DOES in the book). We needed a 'cliffhanger' , tension etc, and to show that the Rohirrim SAVED the DAY. This is how they chose to do it.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Essex

As I said, Gandalf was not in the least Modest, and would state exactly what he meant and wanted whenever he could. Here, to me, he seems DOUBTFUL as to whether he could have stopped the WK's attack on Thedoen. Hopeful, yes, but not CERTAIN (and that is what I was trying to explain). And why would Gandalf state the obvious anyway? Of course Theoden could have been killed by arrow, etc, but that's War. It could have happened to anyone, and for Gandalf to say this would seem redundant.

Maybe Gandalf, like Galadriel, is aware of what could happen. He may have known that if he turned aside from the task of saving Faramir that a worse outcome would have resulted. And even knowing this, he still might have felt some guilt knowing that if he were at Thoeden's side that things may have turned out differently for Theoden and Eowyn. Can't be everywhere at once.

And for the millionth time (but maybe the first for Valar), we are talking about what the Director and co had to do from a 'Movie' point of view. Having the WK ride in on a horse, speak a few words to Gandalf and then leave again would not have worked on film (as it DOES in the book). We needed a 'cliffhanger' , tension etc, and to show that the Rohirrim SAVED the DAY. This is how they chose to do it.

Yep. In the movie there is no indication that Gandalf's presence on the battlefield would have made one whit of difference. Surely he is shown as a capable captain of men. After the staff-breaking he was reduced a leader who could wield a sword and do a few card tricks...

Note that I love the Rohirrim 'attack' scene - it's pretty emotional. PJ could have done something similar with Gandalf if he wanted to show him in a greater role - the gate scene wasn't as emotional.

Doesn't Gandalf 'down' one of the trolls? Have to review the scene again, but I think that he does. Note that though the Rohirrim save the day, they did not face any trolls.

And regarding the Rohirrim (and maybe this is another thread), was it the best thing for Theoden to line up his forces and meet the mumakil charge head on? I would have split up a bit and try to flank them.

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Valar

Gandalf is an Marai exactly the same as Sauron himself but is not permited to use all of his power which was part of the bargin of the chossen wizards coming to middle earth. He is without question more powerful than the witch king....But all would know this if they really read the book and not just take what they want from words within and creat their own meanings

It is important to remember that the films do not portray the same story as that told in the book. Nor do they feature precisely the same characters. As far as I can recall, there is no reference in the films to Maiar, let alone any explanation of what they were.

There is little indication in the films that Gandalf is anything more than a Mannish wizard, albeit a very powerful one. Given the suggestion (for which there is book justification) that the Witch-king was "powered up" before the assault on Gondor and in light of what Essex points out concerning the film needing a major "baddie", I see no reason why, in the film, the Witch-king (after his "power up") should not be seen as equal in power to Gandalf. And, as I have said before, even if one were to view Gandalf as the stronger, there is no particular reason why he should not be bettered by a weaker opponent.

The main reason for PJ to make the Witch King seem more superior to Gandalf was probably to make up for the fact that Sauron himself could not be used properly for battle in the film. Therefore, another character of great power had to be used as the main source of terror and invincibility, If Gandalf was to be potrayed as more powerful than the WK, it would have made a laughing stock of the WK as the main threat from Mordor. In the book, Gandalf appears a little anxious of the might of the WK, sensing that he is close to Gandalf's power, and while I don't think the WK would defeat him, I think he could still withstand Gandalf, so the real fear of resulted from the idea of who could destroy him?

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Mansun

The main reason for PJ to make the Witch King seem more superior to Gandalf was probably to make up for the fact that Sauron himself could not be used properly for battle in the film. Therefore, another character of great power had to be used as the main source of terror and invincibility, If Gandalf was to be potrayed as more powerful than the WK, it would have made a laughing stock of the WK as the main threat from Mordor. In the book, Gandalf appears a little anxious of the might of the WK, sensing that he is close to Gandalf's power, and while I don't think the WK would defeat him, I think he could still withstand Gandalf, so the real fear of resulted from the idea of who could destroy him?

Think that you've hit it on the head. What could PJ do with the 'Eye' that he'd constructed? Make it glare menacingly at Gondor? It was a bit ridiculous when the Eye (of which I'd had my own imaginings about from reading the books) become the 'searchlight of Mordor.'

Anyway, as you say, if Sauron could not come to Minas Tirith, then PJ would have to use the next best thing to scare the defenders and show to the audience that there existed a threat to not only the unnamed extras but also to the Big G himself.

I guess what didn't work for me is that (as we all have read me saying many times before) is that I can't see Gandalf getting owned, and also the Witch King wasn't that scary for me. I could see how the Balrog was going to be a problem, but the Witch King on wings wasn't shown to be as menacing as he was in the books.

Maybe if PJ had added a few scenes showing how terrible WK was, then maybe I'd buy into it a bit more.

By the by, welcome to the Downs Mansun.

[Essex]

Originally Posted by alatar

Think that you've hit it on the head. What could PJ do with the 'Eye' that he'd constructed? Make it glare menacingly at Gondor? It was a bit ridiculous when the Eye (of which I'd had my own imaginings about from reading the books) become the 'searchlight of Mordor.'

Anyway, as you say, if Sauron could not come to Minas Tirith, then PJ would have to use the next best thing to scare the defenders and show to the audience that there existed a threat to not only the unnamed extras but also to the Big G himself.

Yes, that's what I've been saying for the past 5 months. see my earlier post:

PPPS My eariler points on the WK being perhaps more Stronger in the film because this film needed a 'Baddie' to focus on. I feel vindicated because I've finally listened to the Directors' commentaries on the WK scenes, and they say pretty much what I implied. Because we don't see Sauron (after they made the wise decision to airbrush him out of the black gate fight scene) PJ and co decided they needed a 'baddie' to focus on, and the WK was next in line.

Have a listen to the commentaries that the director et all pretty much say this during the witch king scenes (including the scene when we see his helmet placed on his head)

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Essex

Yes, that's what I've been saying for the past 5 months. see my earlier post: Have a listen to the commentaries that the director et all pretty much say this during the witch king scenes (including the scene when we see his helmet placed on his head)

I'm sure that you did, it's just that I can hardly remember yesterday; that and I think that I'm over the movies, and so may be more inclined to listen to reason .

Firstly, In the book, quite a separate debate from the film altogether, I think everyone can agree that Gandalf was the second most powerful opponent after Sauron in the Lord of the Rings, as he was quoted as being "more dangerous that anything else you would ever meet, unless you were brought before the seat of the Darklord". The WK could possibly be viewed as relatively minor when compared in terms of some of the powers that dwelt in the first and second age in ME. I wouldn't put it past Glorfindel and the alike to smite him in single combat, nevermind Gandalf, even if the WK tested them to the limits. His strongest weapon really was fear, and his strength of will over others, but they were of no use against these two.

Also, referring more to the film, just because there was a prophecy that no living man would kill the WK, that does not mean nobody had the power to destroy him. It was just a comment to add hype to his character, being as Sauron would play so little a part in LOTR. We are reminded that there exists other threats from Mordor to ME than just Sauron himself, so it worked well to make the WK a little like how Sauron was shown as being mighty in the beginning of the FOTR.

I think the WK was pretty scary in the book, and in the films (for his enemies that is). Though the balrog was clearly another proposition, more menacing, a larger opponent. If Gandalf could defeat the Balrog, he would be strong favourite against the WK.

We don't really see enough of Sauron in the film though, or the book. I am a big fan of him, and I could see him creating havoc in the ranks of Gondor, though he'd probably be too lazy to march so far to war, nor would there be any need for him 2 get off his thrown, unless he was forced to by the threat of Gondor, as in the last alliance battle. I'd love to see a film based on that part of ME history!!!

Anyone else agree?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boromir88
While reading an excellent post on another forum it posed the question of whether Gandalf saying that he was also a "steward" is more symbolic/metaphorical or if we can see Gandalf as actually being a "steward."


Tolkien establishes a difference between Denethor's definition of "Steward", and Gandalf's definition of "steward." Notice the use of capitilized, uncapitilized.

There can be two different meanings behind the word Steward. Denethor takes his "Stewardship" as he is the "Lord of Gondor," he is it's absolute ruler, and he throws this lackluster response at the end..."I remain in power! Ohhh...unless the king returns." Where another possible word for steward is "guardian." They look over, protect, land/property for it's master.

I think we can all see that throughout the book Gandalf fulfills this stewardship role, he is the caretaker of Middle-earth. But is this supposed to be taken more symbolically? Or is Gandalf the actual steward of Middle-earth? The "steward" of Eru? "I am a servant of the Secret Fire, wielder of the flame of Anor." In that matter, could we also think that all the Istari were the "stewards of Middle-earth," just they strayed from their "stewardship" task?



The above post clearly implies that Gandalf was actually a much more powerful opponent than the WK, but was forbidden by Eru to reveal his true power against the enemy, as that was not the reason Eru sent the Istari to ME. Thats why Tolkein decided not to allow a direct battle between him and the WK. I think that the WK (and almost everybody in ME for tht matter) was not aware of the true nature of Gandalf, hence his abusive curses as the two confronted each other.

The WK could not have killed Gandalf, only a being of similar or greater stature, such as a Balrog, or Sauron, could have done so. Gandalf might have been anxious to face the WK, but that was probably because the WK was more than a match for anybody else in Gondor, and could sway the outcome of the fate of ME during the siege of Gondor, unless Gandalf confronted him, and also of the folly of Denethor. Gonder was vulnerable even with the aid of Rohan.

PJ did not work with this idea as it would not suffice in the film to draw the audience.

[Essex]

Originally Posted by Mansun

The WK could not have killed Gandalf, only a being of similar or greater stature, such as a Balrog, or Sauron, could have done so

At the expense of repeating myself. WHY?

Did David beat Goliath?

Did a hobbit and a woman beat the Witch King?

Does a favourite win every horse race?

What a boring place the world would be if only the strongest won every battle.

[obloquy]

Originally Posted by Essex

Did David beat Goliath?

No, God beat Goliath.

Did a hobbit and a woman beat the Witch King?

No, the Dagger of Westernesse beat the Witch-King.

Does a favourite win every horse race?

The difference between one horse and another is nothing like the difference between a Man and one of the more powerful Maiar.

What a boring place the world would be if only the strongest won every battle.

We're not talking about our world, we're talking about a world where there are different tiers of spiritual puissance among physical beings. The Witch-King could only have defeated Gandalf if Gandalf had allowed it through a willful restraint of power, as he did in his duel with the Balrog.

Because Gandalf is not an ordinary creature like the others you mentioned, including the WK. He is an angelic spirit. Only a similar being could destroy him. There is no weapon, even that of the one used by Merry to defeat the WK, that could harm Gandalf.

Argonath must be pleased about how many posts and views his thread has had!

[Essex]

All your points re gandalf definately being able to defeat the Witch King are based on one thing:

CONJECTURE


Was Sauron the greatest, strongest 'being' on Middle-earth - Perhaps. Was he beaten by a pair of Hobbits? Yes.

As has been metioned before on this thread, Gandalf was not 'allowed' to use his great power in the use force on Middle-earth. If he HAD been allowed to, why not storm the Tower himself?

I find it amusing that so many people have a 100% certainty that Gandalf would have beaten the Witch King in a fight. I am saying that it is NOT certain.

Show me proof that Gandalf would definately defeat the Witch King. You can't.

PS - the sword of westernesse WAS instrumental in defeating the Witch King, but it did not kill him alone. The fatal blow was delivered by Eowyn, after Merry had 'unknit' the spell holding the WK's sinews together. Don't detract from the hobbit and maiden's heroism by saying a sword alone killed the witch king.

Sauron was defeated because his major source of power in the One Ring was destroyed. The WK was defeated because his spell of immunity to ordinary weapons was broken. But these circumstances cannot be applied to Gandalf - there is no way he could be defeated unless there was somebody of the required power to break him and his staff (i.e. like how Saruman was stripped of his power and removed from the Order by Gandalf the White).

Who is there that could do that? Gandalf does not depend on a spell to protect him like the WK, nor the Ring as with Sauron. As with Balrogs, only a greater power is assured of victory against the Istari. They are therefore not as vulnerable as the enemy.

As for Gandalf storming the Dark Tower - Eru forbid the Istari to reveal their true power against the enemy, so he could not have done so. Eru intended to get them to reunite the free people of the world against Sauron, rather than ask them to have direct battle with the Darklord (which would take away any point writing LOTR the way it was at all). Even if Gandlaf had demanded a duel, as Sauron belonged to an even higher Mair order, he would most likely break him through possessing the greater power.

[Essex]

As for Gandalf storming the Dark Tower - Eru forbid the Istari to reveal their true power against the enemy, so he could not have done so.

that's exactly what I'm saying. he was forbidden to use his 'true' powers in force against the enemy.

So how could he have defeated the Witch King?

I did not say Gandalf would definately defeat the WK, even though he could if he was not restrained of his full power. I meant rather that the WK could not defeat Gandalf. The Wizard's role in the confrontation was to hold off the WK. Gandalf would have only revealed his true power if he had really been forced to and had no choice, as with his battle against a foe of his equal, the Balrog of Morgoth. Even against the Balrog, the Wizard tried to avoid a direct battle by breaking the bridge at the feet of his enemy. He tried instead to hold off the Balrog.

[alatar]

A bit harsh, obloquy, don't cha think?

And it amazes me that this horse, dead for some time now, still gets whipped.

And to make a much repeated point, one must consider that (1) we are in the Movies part of the forum and so (2) we must restrict ourselves to Peter Jackson's Middle Earth and not that of Professor Tolkien.

Not that that ends the discussion.

Cheers.

I agree Altar to some extent. But Tolkein's world will always be compared to PJ's version of ME.

[obloquy]

Originally Posted by alatar

A bit harsh, obloquy, don't cha think?

And it amazes me that this horse, dead for some time now, still gets whipped.

And to make a much repeated point, one must consider that (1) we are in the Movies part of the forum and so (2) we must restrict ourselves to Peter Jackson's Middle Earth and not that of Professor Tolkien.

Not that that ends the discussion.

Cheers.

I only know how to beat dead old hobby horses. If I'm not posting about Gandalf, I'm probably posting about Balrogs.

I did forget that we're in the forum for the movies, though.

[Essex]

Obloquy.

let me explain the argument.

My argument is for posters who say that Gandalf could definatley defeat the Witch King need to show me proof that Gandalf could do this. They cannot, including your attempt on your last post to me. They can offer only conjecture, however well pointed out. And now I'm talking about the books, never mind the film.

All my points above are to show that The Lord of the Rings, if it shows anything, is to show that the weak/ the common man etc can defeat the Strong.

It's not a a case of my dad's bigger than you're dad so he can beat you up.

And therefore, I am stating that if a certain being is stronger than another being in the books, it does not give us certainty that that being will alwys win.

Do you understand my point now? If you don't, that's a pity, but one thing you have done is shown me your quality with your last reply to me. It's a pity we have comments like this on the forums.

[Essex]

double posting here, but getting back to replying to someone (Mansun) who raises some good points and in a friendly manner.

I did not say Gandalf would definately defeat the WK, even though he could if he was not restrained of his full power.

Then my comments above were not directed at you then, sorry.

I meant rather that the WK could not defeat Gandalf.

see my point below on the Istari from Unifinished tales. Why not?

The Wizard's role in the confrontation was to hold off the WK. Gandalf would have only revealed his true power if he had really been forced to and had no choice, as with his battle against a foe of his equal, the Balrog of Morgoth.

but would he be allowed? reading the unfinished tales, I would say he was not allowed to do this. If he was going to show his True power to defeat the sources of evil, why bother with the Witch King. Like I said above, why not just confront Sauron?

Even against the Balrog, the Wizard tried to avoid a direct battle by breaking the bridge at the feet of his enemy. He tried instead to hold off the Balrog.

totally agree. again he could not use his 'latent' powers, but tried to indirectly win by breaking the bridge. And, (to start another flurry of posts!), I'm rereading LOTR for the umpteenth time, and Gandalf's just told me about the Balrog's death. How exactly DID he die? It's not made clear. 'I threw down my enemy, and he fell from the high palce and broke the mountain-side where he smote it in his ruin'. Did the fall kill the balrog, or did Gandalf? Is this why Tolkien had them falling into water from the bridge, inasmuch to break their fall?

Sauron was defeated because his major source of power in the One Ring was destroyed. The WK was defeated because his spell of immunity to ordinary weapons was broken. But these circumstances cannot be applied to Gandalf - there is no way he could be defeated unless there was somebody of the required power to break him and his staff (i.e. like how Saruman was stripped of his power and removed from the Order by Gandalf the White).

to answer the point I've highlighted in bold above, here is part of the text from the Unfinished Tales, the Istari

For with the consent of Eru they sent members of their own high order, but clad in bodies of as of Men, real and not feigned, but subject to the fears and pains and weariness of earth, able to hunger and thirst and be slain.

Yes, he had his staff, (which we have had numerous posts on on this thread earlier on!) but, to me ata least, this seems to show that Gandalf COULD be slain by a weapon.