[littlemanpoet]

STW: Is it your opinion that there are no such internal logic problems of any kind in the books?

Elempi: Yes. Being an opinion, it could be wrong, but I don't think so.

Morwen: I'm not following, but whether or not an problem of logic exists can't simply be a matter of opinion, can it? The author presents rules governing his/her fictional universe. Determining whether there is an internal problem should then be a question of deciding whether those rules are adhered to it. It's not for the reader to simply decide well that doesn't make sense to me but to ask does it make sense given the rules/laws defined by the author.

You are right, Morwen. However there is a distinction between what is actually there and that which I am able to perceive. Since I have not made a thorough study of the point, I can only offer opinion.

Originally Posted by STW

The Last Alliance of Elves and Men marched right up to [Sauron's] door, rang the bell, and kicked his butt when he came out to play. They even cut that tremendously powerful ring right off of his finger and he vanished like a puff of smoke on a windy day.

Your colorful choice of words is amusing. In any case, you are incorrect. The Alliance of the Free Peoples, though still relatively strong at the end of the Second Age, were on the verge of defeat, but Isildur cut the Ring from Sauron's finger.

Why would Sauron let them get so close as to cut off the Ring? He was arrogant and perceived himself to be invulnerable though he was not. This relates to one of the central themes Tolkien was working with: the will to unjustly lord it over others results necessarily in self-destruction because evil is by its nature self-consumed and cannot understand selfless motivation and action.

The usual justification for this reminds me of what comedians say about a bad or too complicated joke, if you have to go into a detailed explaination, it probably does not work in the first place.

This is a mere truism and assertion absent of any supporting evidence.

Originally Posted by STW

So this idea of Secondary Belief, and all the layers JRRT constructed to make it work, just has a serious flaw right up front in the very bedrock of the story.

But using my Willing Suspension of Disbelief, I can go with it and accept the premise because I love the book - and the movie. And to be quite frank, this entire idea that JRRT's invented Secondary Belief and it simply dwarfs suspension of disbelief sounds to be like more rationalization and self serving mumbo-jumbo.

There is no condescension intended; rather a distinction. There is no hidden agenda here. The distinction is clear. I wonder why you can't comprehend it.

Acceptance of fantasy comes down to willing suspension of disbelief. You can put some lipstick on it and dress it up in a fancy party dress and call it Secondary Belief if it makes you feel better, but in the end, its pretty much the same thing.

I'm trying to picture a concept in a party dress and lipstick and it just isn't happening; no secondary belief, I guess. Feelings have nothing to do with it. It is a clear distinction. Again, why can't you see it, STW?

Originally Posted by STW

He had the ring. It failed to deliver.

Precisely. But it does not mean what you seem to think it means. He made the Ring. It could not deliver that which he was incapable of achieving precisely because he had become evil and therefore, by definition, blind to his own weaknesses. "Wise fool." So the flaw you see is not extraneous of the work, but built into the entire milieu. I suppose it's only really a problem if one wants Sauron to win.

Originally Posted by alatar

Sauron learned from the mistakes that he brashly made the first time, and so this time he had a better chance of getting it right - less elves, less Men of the West (and he hunted them), poorer weaponry, better soldiers (Olog-hai), the fall of Minas Anor and Osgiliath, the recession of Gondor's control of the south, etc. What he didn't add in were the hobbits.

Gobtwiddle. He would have walked right over the hobbits too, except for events that occurred beyond anyone's (including Gandalf's) expectation. Just like during World War 2, there were a series of "hair's breadth" incidents that, had they gone the other way, the Free Peoples would not have had a chance: Bilbo finding the Ring; Gildor's party happening across the three hobbits just as a Ringwraith is about to discover the Ring; Glorfindel showing up just before Rivendell; Sam taking the Ring from Frodo at Cirith Ungol; Frodo having pity upon Gollum; etc.

Originally Posted by Morwen

...as far as I recall, the Three are not used until after the defeat of Sauron at the end of the Second Age.

Actually, Galadriel's ring is used to enhance everything having to do with Lorien, which is part of why she has so much to lose by the Ring's destruction. And Gandalf has Narya, which he uses a lot (fire). But yes, everything done by the three Elven rings would be laid bare if Sauron had recovered the One.

So in order for this to make sense, the reader has to know and understand not only all of this history of the Ring, Sauron, the relative balance of power in the Second Age as compared to the Third Age, the changing ethno-demographics of Middle-earth over time, and vital information contained in Tolkiens essay which appeared at the end of THE SILMARILLION.

This is an absurd suggestion, not only because of its hyperbole. If one reads fiction with this kind of analytical process going on all the time, enjoyment of the work would be deeply compromised.