Music and Magic in Middle Earth

[Mithalwen]

Since I don't know how to link I am quoting this post by davem from the Thread "The Bridge of Khazad Dum" in the chapter by chapter read through. It refers to Gandalf's struggle in closing the door.


"This is interesting, as it seems to show two kinds of magic at work - spell-casting, & the word of Command. It seems that casting spells is easier than speaking a word of Command. It appears the latter is reserved for extreme circumstances.

Spellcasting appears to work by a kind of 'hypnosis' - not simply hypnosis of people, but a kind of hypnosis of reality itself. Gandalf seems to have 'hypnotised' the door into being locked, by casting a 'spell' - sort of 'telling it a new story' - in the 'old' story it was unlocked (unlockable). Gandalf tells a new 'story', in which it is locked. Then the Balrog comes, & casts a counter spell, tells a new 'story' in which it is not locked. Gandalf & the Balrog contend - as do Finrod & Sauron, & the most powerful magician (ie the 'best', most convincing storyteller) wins out & takes control of 'reality' - from that point the world story carries on, including the changes the storyteller has made....

But we also have something different here - the Word of Command. Here we move away from the 'story' that seeks to convince both other minds & the physical matter of Arda to something else, a different kind of power - one that does not attempt to convince but to coerce. Gandalf attempts to Command the world to change rather than persuade it to.

In effect, in the first kind of magic we have the wizard still 'within' the world, trying to convince reality to alter, in the second kind its as if he steps outside the world, & force it to change into something else. Clearly in this case Gandalf is not up to the task, or not used to this way of working, because the door, rather than obeying his Command, simply explodes.

I think this maybe sheds some light on his two confrontations with Saruman - both begin with 'spellcasting' - both wizards attempt to 'persuade' the other into adopting their particular view of 'reality', but then the confrontations move on - in the first it appears it is Saruman who speaks the word of Command - he commands Gandalf to stay in Orthanc - in the second it is Gandalf who speaks the word of Command - Commanding Saruman to return to the balcony & commanding his staff to break. "
This has made me think a lot about magic in Middle Earth. Firstly that it is not a matter to be taken lightly - none of the casual playing around with magic that occurs in, say Harry Potter, also that it is not something that anyone can do .... though this is a clumsy way of putting it but I will elaborate more in relation to my main point.

It is not new to link magic and music - as E. Weatherwax points out, they are only 2 letters different, however the link between music and supernatural power is fundamental to Middle Earth because Arda was shaped in thought, if not in form, in the Music of the Ainur.

The terminology here is hard because it is relative .... one person's magic is another's technology ( and this partly explains the properties of elven swords and cloaks ) but there is another kind of magic, related to power innate to certain individuals - generally the Maia and the "Mighty among the first born".

Spellcraft seems to be something that can be learnt, at least up to a point, and it seems even those with innate power have to learn it (cf Gandalf trying to open the doors of Moria). Not meaning any disrespect but Thranduil, a sindar, is not the first person who springs to mind when you think of powerful elves but he has magic enough to protect his people and gates from random intruders. It is quite likely that he could have learnt spellcraft enough to do this from Melian in Doriath. However if his magic had been challenged by a mightier foe it surely would have cracked.

It is one thing to "hypnotise" objects, another to duel spells with another being. It is not clear whether Glorfindel, trades spells with the nazgul - my feeling is that with the ring-slaves, who seem incapable of much in the way of independent thought, it is a trade of innate power not aided by lore or spells - simply white light against the dark . Spellcraft was no doubt a factor in the flooding of the ford though.

However to get back to what I really want to say, it seems to me that while "defensive" magic , is relatively widespread (though with varying degrees of power from the Girdle of Melian down), the magic that changes reality is closely linked to music and chanting. I would suggest that therefore to change the nature of reality you need to create a "variation" to the music of the ainur. This would explain why the most powerful forms of magic seem limited ot the maiar - Istari / Balrogs who were part of the first music.

I know there have been many discussions on the nature of Luthien, and many ways she is a special case, but I feel it is significant that by the power of her song she gained power over even Morgoth and caused even Mandos to alter reality and allow Beren a second life and herself to die from the world.

Although not Maiar, Felagund and Galadriel both channel power through song. Felagund in his "duel" with Sauron,and Galadriel ( if I am not taking this too literally) in her "creation" of Lothlorien (" I sang of Leaves, of leaves of gold, and leaves of gold there grew"). In a lesser way, Arwen's song of Valinor seems to speed the growth of the White Tree.

I perhaps should have thought this out more before posting. but I think I would have tied myself up in even more knots and posted nothing! So I present a tangled mass of wool for more skilled spinners and weavers to fashion!

[Boromir88]

Mithalwen, great topic! I have one small thing to add right now, because it's all I can think of.

This has made me think a lot about magic in Middle Earth. Firstly that it is not a matter to be taken lightly - none of the casual playing around with magic that occurs in, say Harry Potter,

There have been a lot of people who mistake the power of the Istari with Harry Potter wizards. And we've all heard the question asked if Gandalf is a wizard why doesn't he use his "magic" to just kill all the orcs? Thinking that the Istari can shoot flaming balls out of their staffs, and what not. We both know that the istari were forbidden to match their power with Sauron's power. Now, there have been many times where the Istari are referred to as "wizards." To me, this is a term given by the peoples of Middle-Earth, who see the power of these Istari, and give them the name of "wizard" because their powers are like no one elses. In the eyes of the peoples of Middle-Earth they are indeed "wizards" but they aren't the now adays general thought of wizards being people who shoot laser transmatic beams all over the place.

[davem]

Way too rushed at the moment, but I'd like to thank Mithalwen for starting up this thread.

I will try & put something together on this tonight - there are numerous examples of these wizardly duels in the traditional literature - especially in Northern myth- as I mentioed in the Chapter-by-Chapter post that started this off, we find it in the Mabinogion, The Kalevala, The Eddas, & also in various Irish legends. Also, there are various 'magical ballads' depicting a conflict between, say, a young boy & the False Knight on the Road.

The 'Word of Command' is a more difficult concept - is it more than simply the 'topping phrase' in the duel - is it a qualitatively different power in the legends as it is in Middle earth? - I will have to look into this a bit more.

I suppose we can say that the Ainulindale represents this kind of wizardly duel on a cosmic scale - the Ainur loyal to Eru sing their 'spell' & those who side with Melkor sing theirs, but the 'Word of Command' is spoken by Eru - 'Ea!'.

On second thoughts, maybe this is not a subject that can be dealt with in a single post

[mark12_30]

Interesting.

I don't see the shattering of the door as a failure on Gandalf's part, as much as, the physical thing was caught between two tremendous spiritual energies and couldn't hold up to the strain. To me this testifies more to the powers involved than a failure on either part.

I see the Word of Command more as a pure contest of will (reminding me of Aragorn's striving with the Mouth of Sauron at the Black Gate.) But in casting any "spell", is strength of will disposable? As Frodo sings Tom's spell, his will is strengthened. In certain souls, music and willpower are inextricably linked. Perhaps the singing is a vehicle for the strengthening of the will.

Tom sings about everything. But is his will ever really challenged? "Tom is Master." Within his peculiar 'realm', when is his will ever thwarted? His life is an enjoyable game.

We are not told how Elrond weaves his spell in the River; Gandalf helps, but no singing is indicated.

Galadriel sings, but she also simply exercises her will (reference her description of her ongoing conflict with Sauron, his unsuccessful desire to see her thoughts, and her perception of his will and thoughts.)

Elrond is considered "Mighty"-- he is capable of working 'elf-magic', certainly, but he strikes me more as a formidable presence by his sheer will. That willpower is buttressed by his experience, his wisdom and lore; but it seems to me to be essential to his being. Had the word not been over-trivialised, I would call it good-will; what I mean is the will to do, to be, and to battle for, good. (Cue theme: Samwise The Brave. Voice-over in the background.)

In contrast-- Feanor. Yes, he's magical, etc etc, but more than anything, he is willful-- in a borderline, and eventually, bad way. Yet, before the Silmarils were stolen, his wilfulness was an essential part of his art and hence his power. He set about (rather petulantly, I thought) making the three silmarils once Galadriel refused to give him three doggone strands of her silver-and-gold hair!

Things happen on several different levels, I think; the bottom line (I feel, and as yet I have little evidence to prove it) is strength-- and purity-- of will, not necessarily the mode of expression. And I think it is the will that ultimately matters. Aragorn's will produced the victories ini the War; Frodo's will combined with Sam's will got them both to the Sammath Naur; Galadriel's will shielded Lorien from Sauron; Elrond's will shielded Rivendell likewise...

Ultimately, Gandalf's will defeated the balrog, despite the shattered door and broken bridge.

Much food for thought.

ps. Boromir88-- good point. And it dovetails with my point about Gandalf's will being key, I think; he was reluctant to use what power he had, til hard-pressed; his job was to encourage (read: strengthen the will) of those he was with. Generally speaking, rather than kerblasto the orcs, he rallied the warriors. But he had no problem using his white-light phenomena to rescue Faramir.

[Lalwendë]

One of the intensely satisfying things about magic in Middle earth is that it is vague, esoteric, and intangible. Tolkien’s portrayal of magic is realistically complex. Even those in Middle earth are unable to explain the nature of the Istari, just as we find it difficult to comprehend the nature of magic in our own world. The fear that some people in Middle Earth feel towards Gandalf is certainly mirrored in our society; in both worlds magic is a difficult concept and we do not entirely trust it.

Gandalf appears to have an innate power, with which he may have been born/created, if he is indeed one of the Maiar. It certainly seems that those in Middle Earth who are Maiar, are descended from Maiar, or who have lived in Aman, do have some kind of innate ability to bend the world to their own ends. Interestingly, this is a limited power, e.g. to events of defensive magic in the case of Elves. And even Sauron does not have the omnipotent kind of magic which so many other literary ‘dark lords’ have been invested with. But Tolkien also tells us that the Istari are part of an ‘order’ which suggests that there was enough structure to their existence to enable them to engage in learning. That they did learn was borne out on their arrival in Middle earth; Saruman preferred to learn from texts, while Gandalf learned from interacting with people. This again leads on to the idea that to some extent, one of the Istari could learn the magical skills of another being.

How magic was utilised in Middle earth does vary in many ways. Magic can be cast by singing, by spells, and by ‘word of command’. We also see Saruman’s magic, which seems to rely on his voice, and Goldberry’s magic which appears to be induced by dance. All these varying methods of ‘casting’ give an intelligent portrayal of magic. It is as complex a concept in Middle Earth as it is in our world. Tolkien’s ‘magic’ is not simply spells learned from books.

Magic cast by singing or dance is reminiscent of shamanistic ritual and spell casting. For example, one way of meditating was to concentrate on the spaces between drumbeats, and there are many examples of ritualistic, trance-inducing dance, e.g. whirling dervishes. Music does have an uncanny ability to convey and to alter mood; sounds can even be manipulated to produce unwanted bodily responses, as some experimental musicians have found.

The concept of ‘word of command’ is mirrored in the use of Sigils, i.e. magical symbols, which have been traditionally used in more ritualistic forms of magic as they do not require words – this could be due to illiteracy or a need to hide the practice.

The use of magic in Middle earth is also not done lightly, which is wise. If Gandalf could simply cast spells when he encountered every trouble then there would be a lot less adventure, less challenge and less of a story! Instead he uses his intelligence and cunning, as indeed do Saruman and Sauron. When Gandalf must cast a spell, as in Moria, then we are shown that it is very difficult indeed, and this is ultimately much more satisfying then quickly shouting a few ‘magical words’ and then walking away.

I think that Tolkien was fully aware that magic in itself is ‘magical’ as it is threatening. It confers a sense of power to the ‘magician’; this is why people have both sought to be magicians, and have sought to destroy magicians. Try walking around with the thought in your head that you do indeed possess magical powers and you will soon be infused with a sense of confidence and status where in reality you may have neither of these qualities.

[Mithalwen]

Well I suppose part of the problem I have in defining magic - is because I don't believe in it - at least not in "Harry Potter" point a wand and 'pouf' type magic. It seems to me that so often what is termed magic is simply a failure to understand the technology. And I really don't believe I have "magical" powers.

Maybe this is why I like the fact that the "magic" in Middle Earth is so natural rather than "supernatural". It seems quite logical that to create a variation in the reality you have to use the process used in the creation of that reality. Also much of which seems magical is the product of a superior technology or intelligence (eg Gandalf and the Trolls)!

Music, certainly has great influence both to comfort and disturb - quite often I have to retune the car radio because some music is too disturbing to have on when driving. Anyway I will read and digest before commenting further.

[davem]

To put the ‘Word of Command’ on one side for the time being, its still probably going to be a more complex issue than I thought, this ‘magic’: Can we find any evidence of possible sources that Tolkien may have used? Starting with ‘spellcraft’:

spell:a magic formula; a magic influence; enchantment; to bind with a spell; to enchant; to discourse; (from Old English spell narrative, discourse, spellian to speak, announce) - Chambers Dictionary.

We find numerous examples in the Kalevala, a (the?) major influence on Tolkien:

Vainamoinen, old & steadfast
Passed the days of his existence
Where lie Vainola’s sweet meadows,
Kalevala’s extended heathlands:
There he sang of sweetness,
Sang his songs & proved his wisdom.
Day by day he sang unwearied,
Night by night discoursed unceasing,
Sang the songs of by-gone ages,
Hidden words of ancient wisdom,
Songs which all the children sing not,
All beyond men’s comprehension,
In these days of misfortune,
When the race is near its ending.’

.

Later, we find a wizardly duel between Vainaoinen ( a probable precursor of Gandalf), & a younger rival, Joukahainen, who claims to have seen the creation oof the world:

(Vainamoinen)You at least were never present
When the ocean was first furrowed,
And the ocean depths were hollowed,
And the caves dug for fishes,
And the deep abysses sunken,
And the lakes first created,
When the hills were heaped together,
And the rocky mountains fashioned.

No one ever yet had seen you,
None had seen you, none had heard you,
When the earth was first created,
And the air above expanded,
When the posts of heaven were planted,
And the arch of heaven exalted,
When the moon was shown his pathway,
And the sun was taught to journey,
When the bear was fixed in heaven,
And the stars in heaven were scattered.’

Interestingly, we find this claim to have been in at the creation in The Mabinogion collection, in the Tale of Taliesin, Primary Chief Bard of Britain. He sings:

Primary Chief Bard am I to Elphin,
And my original country is the region of the Summer Stars;
Idno & Heinin called me Merddin,
At leangth every King will call me Taliesin.
I was with my Lord in the Highest Sphere,
On the fall of Lucifer into Hell:
I have borne the banner before Alexander;
I know the names of the stars from north to south;
I have been in the galaxy at the throne of the distributor;
I was in Canaan when Absalom was slain;
I conveyed the Divine Spirit to the level of the vale of Hebron;
I was in the Court of Don before the birth of Gwydion.
I was instructor to Eli & Enoc;
I have been winged by the genius of the splendid crozier;
I have been loquacious prior to being gifted with speech;
I was at the place of the crucifixion of the merciful Son of God;
I have been three periods in the prison of Arianrhod;
I have been the chief director of the work of the tower of Nimrod;
I am a wonder whose origin is not known.’

This follows a confrontation between Taliesin & the bards of the court of the King, Maelgwn Gwynedd:

And as soon as Taliesin entered the hall, he placed himself in a quiet corner, near the place where the bards & the minstrels were wont to come in doing their service & duty to the King...Taliesin pouted out his lips after them, & played ‘Blerwm, blerwm,’ with his finger upon his lips. Neither took they much notice of him as they went by, but proceeded forward till they came before the King, unto whom they made their obeisance with their bodies, as they were wont, without speaking a single word, but pouting out their lips, & making mouths at the King, playing ‘Blerwm, blerwm,’ upon their lips with their fingers, as they had seen the boy do elsewhere. This sight caused the King to wonder & to deem within himself that they were drunk with many liquors. Wherefore he commanded one of his Lords, who served at the board, to go to them & desire them to collect their wits, & to consider where they stood, & what it was fitting for them to do. And this Lord did so gladly. But they ceased not from their folly, any more than before.

In another ancient text, Geoffrey of Monmouth’s Vita Merlini, we find Taliesin apearing in the forest of Caledon, to teach the mad Merlin about the nature of the world, beginning with the creation:

Meanwhile Taliesin had arrived to visit the prophet Merlin. He had been sent by Merlin to discover the nature of wind & clouds, since both were threatening & together forming storm clouds. Taliesin gave the following account, displaying his sharp wit:

‘Out of nothing the world’s creator produced four elements, upon which all creation depends, taking them as its basis, once they have been harmoniously & peacefully united. The sky, which stands at teh summit & encloses everything like a nutshell, He painted with stars. The He made the air, the medium which allows us to speak, & through which the sun & moon give us day & night.

.

Taliesin continues with a description of the whole universe, lands, seas, rivers, magical animals & stones, etc.

In an earlier story in the Mabinogion, Math son of Mathonwy, we find a confrontation between Pryderi & the wizard Gwydion. Gwydion has been sent to claim Pryderi’s pigs - gifts from Arawn, Lord of Annwn, the Celtic otherworld, to Pryderi’s father, Pwyll. Pryderi refuses, so Gwydion casts a spell:

..that night he & his fellows went unto their lodging, & they took counsel.
‘Ah, my men,’ said he, ‘we shall not have the swine for the asking.’ ‘Well,’ said they, how may they be obtained?’ ‘I will cause them to be obtained,’ said Gwydion.
Then he betook himself to his arts, & began to work a charm. And he caused twelve chargers to appear, & twelve black greyhounds, each of them white-breasted, & having upon them twelve collars & twelve leashes, such as no-one that saw them could know to be other than gold. And upon the horses twelve saddles, & every part which should have been of iron was entirely of gold, & the bridles were all of the same workmanship.

With these magically created beasts he persuades Pryderi into a trade.

Finally, we have a ‘magical ballad’, The False Knight on the Road. In this we have a confrontation between a young boy & a Knight:

’O where are you going?, said the False Knight on the Road,
‘I’m going to the school,’ said the wee boy, & still he stood.

‘I wish you were at sea,’ said the False Knight on the Road,
‘Aye, & a good ship under me,’ said the wee boy, & still he stood.

‘I think I hear a bell,’ said the false Knight on the Road,
And its ringing you to Hell,’ said the wee boy, & stilll he stood.

I think there’s enough there to show how Tolkien was influenced by mythic & legendary sources in his development of ‘spellcraft’ in Middle earth. The ‘Word of Command’, though, seems more uniquely ‘Tolkienian’, at least in the way its used in the Legendarium.

It seems that the WoC is a much more subtle concept - Gandalf uses it against the Balrog, but does he also use it to cause the faggot to burst into flame on Caradras? Does Sam use it to get past the Silent Watchers? If not, what ‘force’ is being applied? Sam is able to break the power of the Watchers without using ‘spellcraft’ - is it ‘Elvish Magic’ - ‘Art’?

Which brings up another possibility - that there are three kinds of ‘practical magic’ in Middle earth - Spellcasting, Elvish ‘art’, & the WoC.

But that makes the whole thing even more complicated!

[Boromir88]

I also wanted to know about the Istari staff. What is the importance of this staff? Is the power within the Istari, and the staff is just the necessary "tool" to perform their power, for example the light used to rescue Faramir, or the storm/darkening summoned by Gandalf at Bag End, and again in Meduseld. Or another theory, maybe the staff was necessary in Valinor, a necessary "tool" in Valinor, and the only reason they bought it to Middle-Earth was because they became attatched to it. If that is true, then we ask, why did Gandalf go and get a knew staff, if it wasn't important? As a personal anecdote, I've been working with hockey players for about 3 years now. I know the players can become quite attatched to their hockey sticks, and even when the sticks break, they will pay people to put them back together, or fix them. So, is the staff a "necessary tool" or a "sentimental attatchement?"

Forgive me, and just ignore me if this has no relevance to this thread, but I believe it does, as I truely think their is something magical, or atleast mysterical (is that even a word) about it. It's about Boromir's horn, here's a quote from The Bridge of Khazad-Dum,

The dark figure streaming with fire raced towards them. The orcs yelled and poured over the stone gangways. Then Boromir raised his horn and blew. Loud the challenge rang and bellowed, like the shout of many throats under the cavernous roof. For a moment the orcs quailed and the fiery shadow halted. Then the echoes died as suddenly as a flame blown out by a dark wind, and the enemy advanced again.

This is an interesting paragraph to me because Tolkien uses the term "challenge." As if, the horn's sound is sort of a "shield" or a "challenge" to the evil. Then we have the orcs quailing, and even the Balrog is stopped by the "challenge." Quickly the echoes run out, and once they do they advance again, but when that horn was blowing, it seemed as if it acted as shield, halting the Balrog. So, is it just a really loud horn? Or, is there something magical about it?

Here's the other quote we see, when Boromir blows the horn at Amon Hen.

Even as he gazed his quick ears caught sounds in the woodlands below, on the west side of the river. He stiffened. There were cries, and among them, to his horror, he could distinguish the harsh voices of Orcs. Then suddenly with a deep-throated call a great horn blew, and the blasts of it smote the hills and echoed in the hollows, rising in a mighty shout above the roaring of the falls.

Then we also know, Faramir also heard the horn, so it's obviously pretty loud.

In the first quote Tolkien said "like a shout of many throats," in the 2nd it's "deep-throated." Also, the horn is so loud it "rises" above the falls of Rauros. Again, is there something magical, or mysterious about the horn, or is it just really, really loud?

[Encaitare]

I doubt it's anything magical, but it is certainly a powerful instrument. They seem to be somewhat wary of magic in Gondor. Perhaps it's the strength of the individual blowing it which gives it such a loud and intimidating sound? Does anyone know a more detailed history of the Horn of Gondor, save that the firstborn son traditionally bore it?

[Aiwendil]

Boromir88 wrote:

So, is it just a really loud horn? Or, is there something magical about it?

Now, this only partially relates to your question - but I would suggest that, within Middle-earth, the question "Is x magical" simpliciter is not a well-defined or sensible question. It's a little like asking whether such and such a thing is art. Or perhaps like asking whether it's technology. These are concepts that are not always sharply defined. Forgive me, I seem to be unable to come up with a better analogy, though I suspect there must be one. But magic in Middle-earth is like art or technology in the real world - there isn't one class of things that are magical and another that are not.

Of course, from a certain point of view your question still undeniably does make sense. I think perhaps it can be understood sensibly as a question not about the fundamental nature of Boromir's horn (or anything else) but rather about the actual worth/power/artistry in the horn.

Interesting thoughts, by the way, from everyone in this thread - and especially from Davem in the chapter by chapter discussion. I'm afraid I'll have to ponder the whole business of magic a bit more before I have anything worthy to add to the discussion. I do wonder, though, about the relation of spells as such to "magical items" like the Rings, Elvish artifacts, etc.

[Boromir88]

Aiwendil, you know, I think you are right, "magic" isn't the right word for Boromir's horn. I don't know if the word would be "enchanted," or something, but I do think "magic" is a bad term for it. I just think from the description giving it isn't your typical horn, so maybe it's just a super powerful horn .

[davem]

This subject seems to get more complicated the more you look into it

The closest mythological ‘echo’ to Boromir’s horn I can find is the Gjallarhorn (Clangorous Horn) of Heimdall. Heimdall is the god who guards the rainbow bridge, Bifrost, to prevent the invasion of the frost giants. ‘The Gjallarhorn could be heard throughout all the levels of heaven, earth & the otherworld. It will summon all the gods to battle when the Ragnarok dawns’ (Matthews, The Aquarian Guide to British & Irish Mythology’). ‘When this comes to pass, Heimdallr stands forth & blows lustily on Gjallarhorn to turn out all the gods, who fall in together’ (Branston, ‘Gods of the North’).

There’s also Roland’s horn, Olivant, which he won from the giant, Jutumundus. ‘When he was attacked by the Saracens at Roncevalles he sounded it to give Charlemagne notice of his danger. At the third blast is cracked in two, but it was so loud that birds fell dead & the whole Saracen army was panic struck’ (Brewer’s Dictionary of Phrase & Fable).

Back to Tolkien’s world: we seem to have various kinds of ‘magical’ object - swords, Palantiri, cloaks of Lorien, The Standard of Arwen, hithlain, etc, & then there’s Miruvor & Lembas.

They seem to work in different ways: the swords - Sting, Orcrist & Glamdring, glow blue at the edges when orcs are near, but they don’t have to be activated - it seems to be an innate reaction of the weapons, whoever wields them, & they also induce fear in the orcs who encounter them - is this simply due to their reputation, or is there some psychological or spiritual power at work too? And how, exactly, do they work? Is it that in some way the swords ‘register’ the presence of the orcs & respond - & is there some ‘awareness’ within the swords?

The naming of weapons was commonplace in the ancient world - Arthur’s sword, excalibur is best known, of course, but he also had a spear, called ‘Ron’, & a ship, Prydwen, which he used in his assault on the Otherworld, (as told in the poem, Preiddu Annwn). This ‘naming’ seems important, as if by naming the weapon one gives it a power & a personality of its own, so that it becomes a kind of ‘ally’ in the battle. Its certainly of the utmost significance that when Narsil is reforged it is no longer called Narsil, but renamed Anduril. It isn’t simply put back together, it is ‘reborn’ as something else.

The Palantiri seem to work at the command of the operator’s will, & don’t need to be ‘invoked’ - & neither do the Silmaril’s - they shine, they blaze forth, almost of their own will (sentience again?). The staffs of the wizards seem to be channels for the power of their owners, yet to break a wizard’s staff seems to be symbolic of breaking his power, r at least of removing his ability to act, his authority.

Arwen’s Standard also seems to have some innate power, which doesn’t require invoking. So do the elven cloaks (whose broooches don’t fall ‘idly’.) Galadiel’s Mirror doesn’t seem to require a ‘spell’ to make it work, yet Galadriel tells the hobbits that she can ‘command’ it to show many things’.

Then we have the Phial - when Frodo holds it up in Shelob’s Lair it begins to blaze before he cries to Earendel, but its only after Sam has called out to Elbereth that it glows forth again - yet Tolkien says its

As if his indomitable spirit had set its potency in motion

so ‘that it blazed suddenly like a white torch in his hand’.

Then there are the Rings - The One seems to have a mind & will - but is this its own, or Sauron’s? And do the Elven rings also have their own will?

Miruvor & Lembas seem to have a ‘power’ to strengthen not only the body but also the will & ‘spirit’ of those who ingest them, but how?

I can’t find any explanation of how objects are infused with magical power, or how they will work for some & not for others - how can Lembas sustaing Frodo & Sam, but choke Gollum? Is its ‘power’ selective - does it decide who it will sustain & who it won’t? Probably not, but that means that its power is dependent on who eats it - so must the eater be in a certain ‘spiritual’ state before he can benefit from it? If so, then it must work differently fromn the elven swords, which glow blue in the presence of orcs, whoever is holding them - & the Palantiri, it seems, will work for any individual whose will is strong enough, no matter their moral or spiritual state - Sauron can use one, & the Silmarils shine even in Morgoth’s crown.

Then there is the power of natural places - the Old Forest seems to have a power of its own, so does Caradras - where does this power come from - the Elves taught the Trees to ‘speak’ (ie made them ‘self-conscious’) - did they do the same to the land itself? If Sauron can control the storms in the Mountains of Shadow, it seems that Galadriel also has some control over the elements, even in Mordor:

’There now, Mr Frodo, its you that’s talking of water this time!’ said Sam. ‘If only the Lady could see us or hear us, I’d say to her: ‘Your Ladyship, all we want is light & water: just clean water & plain daylight , better than any jewels, begging your padon.’ But its a long way to Lorien.’

Whether its down to Galadriel or not, when they do find water later on:

Sam sprang towards it. ‘If I ever see the Lady again, I will tell her!’ he cried. ‘Light & now water!’

Is this a ‘spell’ Galadriel has cast, or a Word of Command she has spoken, or is it ‘elvish magic’? How can the elements be controlled? Are they in some way ‘alive’? Or is it possible to bring them to life - on a small scale in metal, glass, cloth, & on a large scale in terms of whole environments? How is it that the earth does not forget the elves if once they have dwelt there? Can something unconscious, something ‘dead’, have memory?

It seems that there is a kind of innate consciousness in the stuff of Arda, which can be roused by those with the ability - it can be awakened & ‘persuaded’ (or controlled) by those with power, to obey their will.

Its been said that there isn’t much ‘magic’ performed in Middle earth - certainly in comparison with other fantasy novels, where magic is wielded with ease by magicians, so much so that it really does become a case of deus ex machina - & all the more unconvincing for that - there isn’t much blatant ‘practical magic’; but ‘magic’ seems to suffuse the very suff of Arda.

Of course, that doesn’t explain what, exactly, it is.

[Boromir88]

Very nice post Davem (as usual) and some really interesting points. It's going to take some time for me to get my thoughts together and some more answers but I will say I agree with you on the "wizard's staff." The breaking of the staff does seem important, now I don't think the "staff" is the Istari's power, the Istari's power is within himself. The Staff is just the necessary weapon to, as you say, "channel" their powers, or to "use" their powers. We see Gandalf has to go to Galadriel and get a new staff and again with Saruman, Gandalf breaks his staff. Even with Saruman's staff broken though, he can still be dangerous, he still has that persuasive, powerful voice, so he still has his powers, but he can't perform the "magic of command or spell casting" without his staff. Those are my thoughts for now.

[Fordim Hedgethistle]

My sense of magic in Middle-Earth is that it is a concept that exists in the attribution rather than in the performance. That is, there are certain phenomena in M-E that to many of the peoples in it are inexplicable or wondrous, and so they call it magic. Like a stone-age hunter suddenly confronted with an airplane or antibiotics, these things seem magical while they are explicable to those who know more about them. The same for magical lands: what if that same stone age hunter were a desert nomad and he suddenly found himself in the arctic, or Amazonia??

The way I like to think about the magical items, moments, places and persons in M-E is through analogy with our modern way of controlling and ordering the world: technology. Elves have a technique that they use in making rope which means that it comes untied when you need it to. This is perfectly sensible and normal to them but unknown to Sam, who calls it 'magic'. In the same manner, Sauron knows how to make the One Ring; his precise technique and motivation are different, but the process is similar -- he has a technique that is unknown to others, with the result that it appears magical.

This works for objects that have beem made in such a fashion that appear magical. When we see spells being cast, I think about it the same way. The analogy I would use here is someone completely ignorant of the internal combustion engine watching a competent mechanic at work. The mechanic goes through a series of very strange actions and rituals that we cannot decipher, moving around parts and laying hands upon things that confoud us, and in the end, the engine comes to life. Magic!

When we then come to use that object -- like Frodo with the Phial -- it responds to us and to our direction (I make the car go where I want it to) but it appears as a magical thing: how is it that this large object is moving from point A to point B simply because I move this wheel and press that pedal??

The difference, obviously, is the sense of wonderment. A phial that glows in the presence of evil is something so alien and new to our experience that the wonderment of it is immediatly perceived as magical. We do not have any idea what kind or technique of art could produce such an effect, so we imagine that there is 'something' behind the phenomenon. Galdariel, however, I am sure understands how it works -- she is the mechanic who could explain the technique whereby the light of the Star is captured in the phial. Of course, like the mechanic who tried to explain the carbeurator (sp?) to me, she might find her audience incapable of understanding, and thus the technique is doomed to appear magical to me forever.

What has this to do with music? To the layperson (that is, someone not trained in music) music has this same nature and effect. I listen to a piece by Mozart and I am transported with wonderment by the effect of the whole. I do not consciously 'get' the combination of notes and their composition; the technique whereby the effect has been achieved is beyond me (and I want it to be) and I am immersed only in the phenomemon. To know the technique is not to lose the 'magic' but to understand it, and to become a magician oneself. Were I to spend a lifetime studying music I could begin to compose pieces of my own, but they would never be as wonderful as Mozart's, making me but a lowly mage to his wizardry.

Magic, like music, is something that may remain beyond the understanding of most individuals, but it is still of this world and within the bounds of human (or Elvish) understanding.

[Encaitare]

This ‘naming’ seems important, as if by naming the weapon one gives it a power & a personality of its own, so that it becomes a kind of ‘ally’ in the battle.

I remember reading or seeing somewhere that smiths gave names to the swords they made, and it was almost like the sword's destiny to fulfull the meaning or implications of its name. I cannot recall exactly where I got this information from... I can tell it will bother me all night, so I'll post the source when and if I think of it.

Galadiel’s Mirror doesn’t seem to require a ‘spell’ to make it work, yet Galadriel tells the hobbits that she can ‘command’ it to show many things’.

As I said of Boromir's horn, it is probably the power behind the one using the mirror which makes it work. Galadriel is one of the most powerful individuals in Middle-earth, as well as the mirror's owner (creator?), so she can make it work for her -- perhaps like Sauron and the Ring? Only Galadriel can bend the Mirror to her will, and only Sauron can bend the Ring to his?. Frodo and Sam have no control over what they see in the Mirror. Perhaps this works similarly to the Ring? Galadriel says that Frodo cannot

see all the others [Rings of power] and know the thoughts of those that wear them

because he has not tried to. She warns him:

Do not try! It would destroy you ... Before you could use that power you would need to become far stronger...

The excerpt goes on to speak more about the Rings, but the part above also seems to describe what is needed to use many magical objects, the Mirror, the Palantiri, and the Rings themselves. Whether the Mirror has the ability to destroy a person I am not sure, although perhaps the sheer number of images would drive a person to madness if he continued to use it but could not discriminate between the "things that were, and things that are, and things that yet may be." If "even the wisest cannot always tell" between them, it's not possible to expect the average person to do so.

Also, Galadriel was with Frodo when he looked into the mirror and saw the Eye. He began to slip forward and it was only her gentle reminder, "Do not touch the water!" which brings him out of the trance-like state. It probably would have been quite unwise for Frodo to have tried to use the Mirror on his own -- perhaps impossible since Galadriel breathed on the water, as if to "activate" it.

Argh... I wish I could continue, but alas, I must depart. More later if brilliance strikes.

[Boromir88]

As I said of Boromir's horn, it is probably the power behind the one using the mirror which makes it work. Galadriel is one of the most powerful individuals in Middle-earth, as well as the mirror's owner (creator?), so she can make it work for her -- perhaps like Sauron and the Ring? Only Galadriel can bend the Mirror to her will, and only Sauron can bend the Ring to his?.

Very interesting thought Encaitare, it makes sense, and I like it .

[davem]

Originally Posted by Fordim

My sense of magic in Middle-Earth is that it is a concept that exists in the attribution rather than in the performance. That is, there are certain phenomena in M-E that to many of the peoples in it are inexplicable or wondrous, and so they call it magic.

Ok; but is there a 'system' of magic in Middle earth? In other words, did Tolkien have a clear idea of how the magical objects worked, or did he simply make up each individual object, with its own rules of working, & just throw them into the story?

In other words, would it be possible to learn the theory behind Middle earth's magical system, or would that be impossible, because it has no 'structure', system of correspondences, magic words, rituals, etc, which together would form a coherent magico-mystical system?

To move on - take Turin's sword & helm. The sword speaks to him at the the end, judging his deeds, & condemning his actions. Is this a 'projection' on Turin's part - is he 'hearing' the voice of his own conscience 'speaking' to him from his sword? The alternative would seem to be that his sword can not only communicate audibly (just to him, or also to others?), but that it has the capacity for moral judgements. By asking it if it will slay him swiftly he also seems to be conceeding that it could choose not to, that it has the power to take his life or not - it will decide whether it will slay him or not - yet if it has the power of life or death over its victim, how can it place all the blame for the death of Beleg on Turin?

But if we go for the second option - the voice/power of life & death is merely a projection of Turin's own subconscious, then how do we account for the power of the Dragon Helm, which Tolkien states has definite innate powers - it will protect its wearer from wounds & death & has the power to intimidate his foes?

What power can infuse a self-conscious, ethical mind in a sword, & give a helmet the power to project a kind of 'force-field' around its wearer? And are this the same power which operates in Lembas, Silmarilli, & elven swords?

In other words, could we write a grimoire on the Complete Middle earth system of Magic, or are we just dealing with the old deus ex machina in various manifestations?

[Mithalwen]

So much here now to absorb ... but with the wizard's staff, I have come to the conclusion (and this is coincidental rather than a contrived response to the topic title) that it is like a musician's instrument. It does not contain the wizard's power anymore than a violin say contains a great performer's musicality yet they are stymied in expressing that innate ability without the instrument - thus is Gandalf "crippled" at Orthanc.

However the staff in itself is not without importance ..it is not merely a stick and maybe would not be "merely" a stick in the hands of a "layman". I love music, but I was a feeble violinist . I remember that my teacher could make my "grotbox" fiddle sound fab but I could only produce slightly warmer toned squawks from her lovely Italian violin ..... .

I am afraid I don't have the "Letters" but I imagine the wizards and their staffs might well have been a subject of correspondence - does anyone know?


On a lighter note - it has just occured that there is a close resemblance between the "tools of the trade" of wizards and Conductors - the wand or baton or the staff .... perhaps it is jsut as well that Gandalf didn't "do a Lully" when he smote the bridge!!!

[Lalwendë]

is there a 'system' of magic in Middle earth? In other words, did Tolkien have a clear idea of how the magical objects worked, or did he simply make up each individual object, with its own rules of working, & just throw them into the story?

I don't think that there is any system of magic in Middle Earth, just as there is no clear system of belief. But I also don't think that Tolkien was entirely random in what he chose to portary as 'magical'. The spiritual is deliberately left obtuse - rightly so in my opinion as this is how these things are in the 'real' world. There could be no one 'grimoire' on the magic in Middle Earth, although there could easily be several!

There are quite a few intriguing links to the use of magic in Middle Earth, although I'm at quite a loss as to explaining if or why Tolkien would have known or even approved of these links. The ceremonial side of magic, which is reflected in the Wiccan world, is represented in Middle Earth. For example, we see wands being used in the staffs of Gandalf and Saruman. These are used to direct some kind of force, as they are by Wiccans, and when broken, this force cannot be channelled. Swords, which are seen as athmes in Wicca are also invested with spiritual properties. The cauldron can be seen refelected (sorry ) in Galadriel's mirror, which is obviously used for scrying.

For further illustration of these 'tools' of Wiccans, I can recommend going googling for an image of the Magician card of the Rider-Waite tarot pack, which clearly shows these.

Wish I could write some more, but I have raging toothache and haven't eaten for 11 hours - hopefully I'll feel more coherent either tomorrow or after I get the pliers out...

[Boromir88]

Here is another observation I just thought of...

I think when we look at Saruman and his powers, most of it deals not with "command," but a form of "hypnosis." We know Saruman is a persuasive talker (and I love Chris Lee for this role, he had a brilliant deep, powerful, voice to really portray Saruman well). And that's Saruman's main power, he uses it against the Dunlanders, he uses it in the Tower of Orthanc when Gandalf comes for his staff, he uses it again when he imprisons Gandalf.

Then moving on to his corruption in the Shire. Is it more "command" or more "hypnosis." Because, The hobbits seem very unhappy at this "sharkey," and the only reason they listen is so they aren't thrown into the lockholes, or worse. In the end, most the Hobbits rallied to overthrow Saruman and the ruffians. So, I would classify Saruman's corruption in the Shire more of a "command," since he didn't trick the hobbits into this false hope of "joining" or "combining" forces, he forced them to do his dirty work, using the Ruffians.

[Mithalwen]

Although I think Christopher Lee was brilliant, his voice wasn't as I imagined Saruman's. Very powerful but not subtle and honeyed. I can't remember the name of the actor in the BBC radio version but I think he got the tone just right. Nevertheless I found Lee's interpretation convincing. I wonder how much of his speech at Orthanc will be in the EE.

I am afraid that little magic was used against the hobbits - they are cowed not enchanted I feel. Peaceful communities coexisting with little formal organisation and government are easy prey for those with more cynicism and aptitude for manipulation and the veneer of authority to intimidate. Just a variation on a standard con trick really....

[Boromir88]

Very powerful but not subtle and honeyed.

Ahh, very true, I think Saruman's voice definately was "honeyed" at some times, certainly using it to his own advantage. Probably definately "honeyed" in his declining days when Gandalf comes for his staff. He comes off to me there in Orthanc as pitable, and sorry (of course he isn't but he's only using his power to his advantage and it appears to work against the weaker minded Rohirrim Soldiers), where as the leaders, more powerful men, Eomer, Theoden, and Gimli aren't fooled by it. I agree, there are times when Saruman uses that powerful voice for as a way of pep-talking (Dunlanders and Orcs) but also, as a pitable, sorryful being (both times at Orthanc). Well the first time with him imprisoning Gandalf, I've always pictured that as not sorryful, but no doubt not in the way of them influential pep-talks. More of a "join me" type voice, or more full of "promises."

And here's an interesting quote to summon up what I mean.

The Tower of Orthanc
The windo closed. They waited. Suddenly another voice spoke, low and melodious, its very sound an enchantment. Those who listened unwarily to that voice could seldom report the words that they heard; and if they did, they wondered, for little power remained in them. Mostly they remembered only that it was a delight to hear the voice speaking, all that it said seemed wise and reasonable and desire awoke in them by swift agreement to seem wise themselves. When others (Eomer, Theoden, Gimli) spoke they seemed harsh and uncouth by contrast; and if they gainsaid the voice (Saruman's voice), anger was kindled in the hearts of those under the spell.

So, as you said, we'll have to wait for the ROTK EE, to see how Chris Lee handles this, because there was no more "power" in his voice, they were kind pitable words.

I also wanted to point out that there were those under Saruman's "spell," as it interchanges "spell" and "voice."

[Mithalwen]

I don't think that this has been raised yet here, but I am sure that it is significant that Gandalf feels drained after speaking the word of command. It does suggests that it requires the use of innate power rather than spell craft or learnt power. It has the safe effect as a great physical exertion. Gandalf himself understands this only when he sees the Balrog. Since they are both in origin Maia, beings of Spirit clothed in bodies, it follows that their battle drains spirit energy.

This would also be a factor in the sparing use of this "Word of Command" magic - it literally takes too much out of them. Also it seems that this power can be channelled into objects - like the ring, and maybe to a lesser degree items such as the Phial. Though I find it hard too explain The Dragon helm unless it is the power of myth... this is because magic seems mainly associated with the Maia and Elves. The Maia are beings of spirit and with the elves as they age, the fea dominates the hroa. Elves pass on some of their own strength to their children so it is not inconceivable that they can transmit strength into things that they make..

Sorry rambling again..

[Mithalwen]

Splendid quote Boromir and while it no longer worked on Theoden it eventually worked on Treebeard. I do think that Theoden's "we will have peace" is so dramatic..... thinking about it this is a very skilfully handled scene. The main focus is on Saruman but he sets up the next piece of drama - the palantir,(another knotty problem in the "technology or magic" debate). I like to think of them as Elvish precursors of the internet .

[Boromir88]

Ahhh, them Palantir, also very fascinating indeed. Has to be some sort of "magic" in them if they can't be destroyed, similar to that of Orthanc.

That's all I can think of right now, there will be more to come.

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

I think (as already had been said in this thread quite a few times) there are two kinds of “magic” in Middle-earth: technology, and the alteration of the Music. In this post I shall be looking at the latter.

Music shaped Eä. Those who can listen to its echoes can learn more about the world. The land continually tells its tale, or, rather, sings its songs, and someone who know what to listen to can hear its voice (qq.v. Voronwë in Ivrin, Legolas in Eregion). In these two instances one can even see the active use of music in “magic”. (WARNING: Speculation ahead.)

Ivrin: This lake and Helevorn were defiled by Glaurung, accompanied by Orcs. But I don’t know how anyone could do that. Were the Orcs carrying huge loads of filth to dump in the lake? But that would not be enough. Perhaps Glaurung, or, through him, Morgoth, sang that the lake was no longer clean. That could make it susceptible to the filth it receives.

Eregion: How did the stones know they were delved, builded, or wrought. Surely they have no tactile sense! Perhaps the Noldor sang songs to the stones while they were being worked on (cf. The spell of Felagund that bound the stones of Minas Tirith).

These are but speculations on how music could affect even the stuff of Arda, but I think they are in the realm of possibility in Arda. As for technology, well, some of the posts above have dealt with the subject better than I could.

[Neithan]

You can see my views on music in magic in my post Summary of Magic in the thread magic in Middle Earth.

As for Ivrin, do you remember the refrences in The Hobbit about Smaug's fumes and his "reek". Glaurung as the father of dragons would probably be very "toxic" so to speek. That would be enough to defile the waters. Also if I remember correctly Ivrin was a very clean, wholesome, almost sacred place. The very presence of those foul creatures would be enough to "defile" its waters.

For my views on the stones of Eregion and other inanimate objects check out my post in the thread The Gift of Speech

I know that the effort of clicking on a link to see my replies is a great one, but I encourage you to do so. I would very much like to discuss my ideas in these areas whether it is praise or criticism.

I can’t find any explanation of how objects are infused with magical power, or how they will work for some & not for others - how can Lembas sustaing Frodo & Sam, but choke Gollum? Is its ‘power’ selective - does it decide who it will sustain & who it won’t? Probably not, but that means that its power is dependent on who eats it - so must the eater be in a certain ‘spiritual’ state before he can benefit from it? If so, then it must work differently fromn the elven swords, which glow blue in the presence of orcs, whoever is holding them - & the Palantiri, it seems, will work for any individual whose will is strong enough, no matter their moral or spiritual state - Sauron can use one, & the Silmarils shine even in Morgoth’s crown.

Throughout Tolkien's works there are many cases of objects made by the 'good' forces that bring special harm to the 'evil' forces. For example: While the Silmarils shined on Melkor's crown; they burned his hand when he touched them. Or when the Elven rope is fastened around Gollum and it harms him. From what we've seen in the stories I wouldn't believe it has so much to do with a characters 'spiritual' state, but more to do with their 'moral alignment' in direct relation to the 'moral alignment' of the item (or its creator) in question. Items made by Elves can't seem to be used by creatures such as Orcs or corrupted beings such as Melkor. On the other-side: things wrought by the 'dark' forces in Arda are perilous to users of the 'good' forces. The Ring is the ultimate example of this. If this is true, it can imply either sentience on the part of the items (unlikely for something like Lembas) or that whenever something is made it gains an 'essence' from its creator. If the latter is true then it stands to ask: is the creator's lost essence replenishable? Or is it gone forever, thus, diminishing their power?

There are examples of being losing power and retaining it after they make these items, such as Melkor's perversion of Eru's creatures which weakened Melkor's actual powers. An example of beings retaining essence would be Galadrial and her servants making the Elven Cloaks for the Fellowship. Were the cloaks so minor that they didn't take anything noticable from their creators? Or is personal 'essence' replenishable to an extent? I don't know the answer to that question. I'll have to think on it and post more later.

Addendum: How come nobody has mentioned Dwarf Runes yet? There was supposedly a type of 'power' within the ancient runes the Dwarves placed upon things.

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

. . . Ivrin was a very clean, wholesome, almost sacred place. The very presence of those foul creatures would be enough to "defile" its waters. (Neithan)

Wouldn't it be the other way around? For example. the Silmarilli burned Morgoth's hand, Sirion protected quite a lot of people, and the Elven-cloak shielded the Fellowship from the Orcs and their arrows. I believe it would take quite a lot of power to do the inverse (i.e. corrupt something holy).

[Kuruharan]

Wouldn't it be the other way around? For example. the Silmarilli burned Morgoth's hand, Sirion protected quite a lot of people, and the Elven-cloak shielded the Fellowship from the Orcs and their arrows. I believe it would take quite a lot of power to do the inverse (i.e. corrupt something holy).

Maybe, but I think there would be degrees in it.

I mean, the Silmarils were about as holy as they came but the elven cloaks did not convey much more than camouflage. They did not do much to protect Merry and Pippin when they were in the hands of the orcs (although they probably did help in the escape).

Hmm…random thought...

Knowing how much the orcs hated all things elven, I wonder why they did not tear the elf cloaks to pieces when they captured the hobbits?

Regarding dwarf runes…

It is kind of hard to say. We are not given a whole lot of information about them (practically nil). They were likely some form of “lore” that the dwarves were capable of performing.

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

The Elven-cloak was just to bring it to the Third Age.

Wait, how about the Barrow-blade? The Uruks feared to hold it. No less than the Witch-King of Angmar succumbed to it.

You see what I'm telling here? Just the mere presence of evil isn't enough to corrupt. You have to go in deep, alter something fundamental, or wait for the person to succumb. A lake can't succumb to evil, so you have to change the fundamental aspect of the lake. Ulmo sang the lake to be holy. Morgoth's music (perhaps through Glaurung) crept in to defile this theme.

That's the magic in it.

[Formendacil]

Perhaps Ivrin was simply a very "clean" place, very pure, unstained, and unblemished, but nothing more than that.

The Silmarils, the barrow-swords, the elven cloaks, lembas, etc., these all had some sort of power imbued in them through their makers, which made them anathema to evil. Need Ivrin have been the same?

After all, Ivrin is never actually said to "repel" evil in the way that any of the above do.

So here's the basic thought I've got going: Ivrin was a place that more or less "untouched" by evil, and was thus very pure and clean, and therefore very soothing to those coming in from a much more stained world. However, Ivrin had no inherent "resistance" to evil of its own, and thus it did not take much for Glaurung to defile its waters.

Just my two cents worth....

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

[In Eithel Ivrin] Gwindor spoke to Túrin, saying: "Awake, Túrin son of Húrin Thalion! On Ivrin's lake is endless laughter.She is fed from crystal fountains unfailing, and guarded from defilement by Ulmo, Lord of the Waters, who wrought her beauty in ancient days."

TS 21 - emphasis mine

[Mithalwen]

bump!

[Farael]

Well, I'm a little weary about actually starting my own thread as I'm new around here but I did a search and I couldn't find any discussions about this topic.

After reading The Silmarillion and LoTR I realized that in many instances in which some character performs some 'magic' he/she does so by means of a song. For example, I think it was Luthien who, by means of a song disguised herself and Beren as two creatures of Morgoth in order to get into Angband and once there, she sang everyone into sleep. Or Tom Bombadil who can manipulate trees and other not-so-nice creatures by singing to them. Or even better, the whole Middle Earth was created by the song of the Valar and Eru himself. We also know that when the elves sang, the hobbits who did not understand their language could still understand the stories that were being told.

Perhaps then, some songs have the power to alter perception and even moods and thoughts? (In Tolkien's works, I mean)

What do you think is the case? and also, if songs are the source of magical power, why is it that Gandalf does not sing his enchantments? are there two ways of casting magical spells or is it the same source but a different form of casting?

Personally, I think that there are two different kinds of magic. Songs can alter perception and moods while other kinds of sorcery can affect the physical world (making fire, attacking your enemy and so on)

I'm looking forward to hear from all you (smart) comunity members!

Farael

P.S: I'm not saying that I don't want to hear from dumb comunity members, what I mean is that you guys (and girls) are all smart!

[davem]

Mithalwen started a thread on this a while back - you might be interested in that http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showthread.php?t=11261

[Estelyn Telcontar]

Nice catch, davem! You're right, and since the theme of both threads is the same, and the older one isn't very long, I'll merge them. Please continue reading and posting (t)here.

[Farael]

Great! A few thoughts on what I read.

I had never considered swords, silmarils and horns as 'magical' because I could always somewhat picture an explanation for them.

The easyest ones are the horns. Any sport player will tell you that if you want to rally your team or get in the collective head of the other teame you want to be loud. I played volleyball for seven years and I've cheered and "been cheered against" and it does have a great effect. The same thing applies with armies and soldiers. A horn would sound to call for help or rally the troups and it's sould would be enough to intimidate the enemy as they would then expect the horn-blower to attack more decisively.

Swords that shine? Well, I always figured that when they were forged, the elves used some sort of ork-detecting material. I can't remember the swords shning for all evil creature but rather just orks, so it's plausible that the elves found some element that recognized somehow that orks were nearby. It didn't loook like magic to me but rather science. Same thing with the cloacks and the rope, some of the elves had THOUSANDS of years to explore all the building materials in the world by themselves, perhaps they found unusual elements.

Same thing with the silmarils, Feanor managed to get the light of the sun and the moon in them, and those were created by the gods (or semi-gods) of the Middle Earth so we would assume they have some sort of inherent power against evil as the Valar (not counting Morgoth as Vala here) stood for all that was good and pure.

What I do agree with of the posts mentioned above, as I said on my original post, is that there were different kinds of magic. I'd say that we have the "magical song" and the "word of comand" (borrowing from what I read before, but I can't remember who said what and I'm trying to churn everything together and state it again, with my thoughts on this matter.)

The Magical Song would be an act of altering reality in a plausible way. People fall asleep and sometimes think they see something when there's something else going on (refering to Luthien's "magic") Doors can be locked or unlocked (Gandalf) winds blow and clowds form (Sauron and perhaps Galadriel altering weather). All those things can be affected by magical songs and it does not seem to take much out of the singer (but he/she has to know the right song or the right way to sing it)

Sweet-talking, like Saruman seems to be able to do would be a variation of this singing. By choosing the right words, someone could alter perception, which is a reality in itself (After all, we only know for 'real' what we percieve as real) and thoughts. Somehow like the songs I mentioned before, but possibly less powerful or resiliant, as ultimately it is up to each individual to accept those words (and fall into the spell) or reject them.

Then we have what... Davem?... called Word of Command. This is something that is in conflict with reality and therefore it spends some of the 'energy' of the caster. Gandalf's "You shal not pass!" is a good example as he is not shutting a door which stands on the way (plausible reality) but rather creating a 'wall' by his sheer strenght of will. This magic is only 'momentary' (as we don't have any indications that forever after people were not able to walk by the place Gandalf pronounced his words) and dissolves once the caster's mind is set elsewhere.

I think I could keep on expanding, but I have to think some more on what I want to add. I'll edit this post later unless someone else replies to what I wrote so far =) Feel free to do so!