[Salocin]

I did not include Beorn, because he is not evidence of the existence of "learned magic". I agree that his magical powers were probably inherent.

All I am saying is that I think being a sorceror constitutes more than just skin changing, although that is the only power we are explicitly told of, and that that is the only power I believe he has inherently. Any other sorceries he knows would have to be learned ones.

But when we are talking in my terms, Burrahobbit, my definitions win. I choose the words with which to present my arguement, not an old philologist who died nigh on thirty years ago.

I think this dismissal of Tolkien is hardly necessary. Since we are discussing his work, and presumably we enjoy, appreciate and value his writing, then we should acknowledge that his intent and considered meaning is relevant to our interpretation of the work....
...Tolkien's definition of magic and power are central to this thread, since his understanding of these terms and how they apply in his work will have directly influenced the narrative, and it is this narrative that we are discussing.

The only definitions that we need to consider in this context are the ones that Tolkien put forth.

I believe there is a slight misunderstanding here (maybe I am the one misunderstanding). It seems to me Iarwain is saying that he will define the terminoligy in his discution, not that he will define Tolkien's terminology. I think we all know Tolkien did not use "power" and "magic" as we are here, but Iarwain clearly stated at the begining of the topic that these were merely temporary definitions to be used in this topic for lack of better ones. We have now been shown that Tolkien, at least in some cases, would refer to the type of magic I tried to define as craftsmanship (and a little of the inherent magic in elves), as art.

And in this context Tolkien said that that there is magic all over the place, even occult style magic.

I do not see were where he said there was occult style magic, please clerify Burrahobbit.