Give me your LotR questions

[Harbal]

Poor Harbal: snubbed by a stranger on-line.

[Astro Cat]

It's tempting to now try to make you seem irrational, but I was just playing with you. Or, maybe your response was just drier humor than I'm used to and you knew that.

Well I didn't actually know if you were being dry, either.

It must be 40 years or more since I read the book, and I don't remember having a problem with the dwarves then. I watched one of the films on Netflix recently, and the dwarves just irritated me beyond belief. I just wanted the little bastards to be wiped out. I suppose it's Peter Jackson's fault as much as Tolkien's.

You probably saw one of The Hobbit films, which were notoriously awful. Those films were nothing but a directionless cash grab.

[Harbal]

You probably saw one of The Hobbit films, which were notoriously awful. Those films were nothing but a directionless cash grab.

So it wasn't my fault then? That's wonderful.

I'm so happy I could hug a dwarf.

[Astro Cat]

Astro,

Gandalf and the other wizards were angels, yeah? Diminished angels (had to be...can't pour all that power into a mortal frame). And each carried a staff. Is a wizard's staff his symbol of station or is it conduit for the metaphysical forces he commands or was it the reservoir for the power he can't contain in his old man body?

Typing on a tiny screen. That’s actually a pretty good question, but a few things can be said about it. Ainur in general (that’s both Valar/gods and Maiar/angels) don’t so much lose their native potency by assuming a form, though they do acquire physical vulnerability by doing so. I think we can imagine this being the case because despite being an “old man,” Gandalf is capable of soloing a balrog.

The Istari/wizards are just under orders from the Valar not to unveil their true power but rather to assist the free peoples in the form of kindling their hearts and offering counsel.

At the same time it’s strongly suggested that it does take some of their power to assume a form in the first place, and perhaps arguably to maintain it: when a bodily instantiated maia is killed, we only have two examples of them returning bodily again (Gandalf, who gets direct divine intervention to do so; and Sauron, whose power is mostly externalized into the One Ring, so he has an “anchor”). Otherwise when Saruman’s form is destroyed, he becomes a tower of white mist that’s blown away by a wind from the Valar and it’s not implied he would ever be seen bodily in the world again.

Most of the time Ainur seem to lose their potency by using it: they pour their power into something externally, like the Ring, the Trees, the sun and moon, etc., and in Morgoth’s case, much of the corruption in his minions and the world itself are where his power went to diminish him so.

So, there I think is our answer: probably the Istari pour some of their fëa into the creation of their staves, such that yes: they are probably diminished when their staves are broken.

[Astro Cat]

What bedroom antics are like with a LotR fan:
1n62pa5omoe91.jpg

There’s a lesbian joke here, somewhere.

[henry quirk]

probably the Istari pour some of their fëa into the creation of their staves, such that yes: they are probably diminished when their staves are broken.

[Astro Cat]

You probably saw one of The Hobbit films, which were notoriously awful. Those films were nothing but a directionless cash grab.

So it wasn't my fault then? That's wonderful.

I'm so happy I could hug a dwarf.

You are loved, Harbal!! Lmao. I’m no dwarf, but hug!!

[Harbal]

You are loved, Harbal!! Lmao. I’m no dwarf, but hug!!

Thank you, I will treasure that hug.

Just tell me then: Which films are worth watching?

[Astro Cat]

You are loved, Harbal!! Lmao. I’m no dwarf, but hug!!

Thank you, I will treasure that hug.

Just tell me then: Which films are worth watching?

In my opinion, the original trilogy (Fellowship, Two Towers, Return of the King). The Hobbit was a cash grab and immensely departed from the tone in some ways (it is a children’s book so I’m not sure I fault them, but it didn’t make for good adult cinema).

[Harbal]

In my opinion, the original trilogy (Fellowship, Two Towers, Return of the King). The Hobbit was a cash grab and immensely departed from the tone in some ways (it is a children’s book so I’m not sure I fault them, but it didn’t make for good adult cinema).

I just checked, and the films I watched were all Hobbit, because they happen to be on Netflix, and I can watch stuff on my daughter's account. It doesn't cost me anything, so I suppose I got my money's worth, even though the films weren't that great. I don't think the proper LotR films are on Netflix.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

I didn't like either the books or the films, which is odd because I'm a huge fantasy book series fan. I suppose it stands to reason that I didn't like the films though, since the reason fans love them so much is because they are true to the books. I think I've read all the best fantasy series. I first got hooked on them as a child with the Enid Blyton 'Faraway Tree' books. As an adult I think my favourite was 'The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant' but there are so many good ones. His Dark Materials, The Amtrak Wars, The Golden Torc series... Robin Hobb is always worth reading and wonderfully imaginative.

[henry quirk]

white gold, wild magic

[vegetariantaxidermy]

And he was quite the 'anti-hero' hero. Always whinging and whining and telling people not to touch him lol

[henry quirk]

And he was quite the 'anti-hero' hero. Always whinging and whining and telling people not to 'touch him' lol

that's cuz he was all full of leprosy: he was a'fear'd he'd lose more digits

[Iwannaplato]

white gold, wild magic

I enjoyed those books.