An interesting thread, and while I disagree with this Lord_Kimboat, I think this could spark interesting discussion (like it already has).
Gandalf wasn't maybe lying about his encounter with the balrog - that has been proved unprobable already - but can we take all what Tolkien's characters say as true? This was discussed somewhere some time ago, but it is a very intriguing topic. Tolkien fans are probably the least critic fans in the world when it comes to evaluating whether the heroes of the story are being completely honest or not.
Also,
LotR is, although in arguable fashion, written by Frodo Baggins so basically it's from his perspective. He might have exaggerated things or simply not remembered them totally correctly. Nevertheless, we can expect quite high accuracy from it as Frodo is a first-hand narrator in many cases, and we can consider his nature quite honest.
But what about
The Silmarillion then? Those are folk tales, hereditary knowledge and ballads. Yet we always consider them facts. It would be interesting to analyse the stories of the Sil the same way people analyse old mythologies and epic tales. But not on this thread, surely...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by alatar
After all is said and done, doesn't Gandalf dress Frodo and Sam just before they meet "King Aragorn?" That gets me, and maybe there're other examples, but we have this Fellow or Fraud, great and wise (or at least considered so) stooping to serve others. He rejects Saruman, who would not serve. Gandalf even pities those caught by Sauron. That's cool stuff.
|
I never before realised this was more fuel for the Jesus-Gandalf theory... But it is a beautiful scene in any case.
Lastly, I like this thread. It makes me like Gandalf even more than I usually do and it also makes me feel like reading Le Guin... *glares at
Gwath*
