Quote:
|
hard to say who's the best then. But let's not talk about it, I doubt that Lúthien would have done much better
|
Feanor is listed to be mightiest in a number of aspects, but it's not clarified how broad that assertion is, and it was also stated when Luthien was but a child. (Also note that I never said she would have done better, and really, none of us can concretely go one way or the other.)
I don't think she'd do much better (ultimately) than Feanor or Galadriel, nor any other great elf. Such combat surely called for one of the Ainur, or a great deal of luck. In the letter I cited above, Gandalf says that Elrond or Galadriel would not attempt one-on-one combat - they'd use the same strategy Sauron used: building a great army and win by sheer strength.
Indeed, anyone that bore the Ring after Sauron was destroyed otherwise would simply take his place in time:
Quote:
Gandalf as Ring-Lord would have been far worse than Sauron. He would have remained 'righteous', but self-righteous. He would have continued to rule and order things for 'good', and the benefit of his subjects according to his wisdom (which was and would have remained great).
[The draft ends here. In the margin Tolkien wrote: 'Thus while Sauron multiplied [illegible word] evil, he left "good" clearly distinguishable from it. Gandalf would have made good detestable and seem evil.']
|
We won't get fooled again [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]
[ May 23, 2003: Message edited by: Legolas ]