|
While we are on the topic of Saruman compared to the Dark Lords though, I was wondering if you guys agreed with my assessment of why Saruman achieved so little. I made this post in defense of Saruman when someone scoffed at me claiming he was a peer of Sauron:
Saruman was a very small and petty man in the end and that is why I sympathize with him more than Sauron or Melkor, who both fell to much greater wickedness than Saruman ever managed. It's kind of a shame he will always be seen as a "Sauron wannabe" when he is a far more fleshed out character than Sauron in terms of depth or development. He's also often made fun of simply because he never achieved much when compared to the Dark Lords he aspired to be. But therein lies the difference between Lord of the Rings and The Silmarillion. The Sil is all about the mightiest of the mighty and LOTR is about humility and the underdog. Saruman being a failed tyrant is crucial to the story's tone I think.
|