Originally Posted by Corsair_Caruso
I actually do think there's a difference between the two; I interpret the breaking of Gandalf's staff as being less symbolic than Saruman's, because the breaking of Saruman's staff was, specifically, a punative action taken by Gandalf against the rebel Istar. I think Gandalf's increased authority, especially considering his statement that he was "Saruman as he should have been," was given him by Eru in part specifically to address Saruman's rebellion and betrayal. Gandalf took precedence over and above Saruman, gave him the chance to repent, and then punished him and voided his power and authority.
Now, I don't believe the Istari's magical power came from their staves, but I do believe that (if you'll pardon the reference), as the wands in Harry Potter, the staves facilitated the exercise of their native power which, if you'll remember, had been restricted by their embodiment as material, biological beings, as well as by statute of the Valar. I think Saruman's power was lessened by the breaking of his staff, but that Gandalf's authority may have extended even so far as to actually limit Saruman's power further, as punishment for his crimes and to prevent him from using his considerable power to further damage the Free Peoples.
Keep in mind, this is just my personal interpretation.
The loss of Gandalf's staff, on the other hand, was as the result of no punative action, specifically meant to restrict or lessen his status, but likely as a result of Gandalf exercising such a great amount of power against his foe. It may very well have lessened his ability to use "magic," but I don't think it had the same effect as the loss of Saruman's staff had on him.
|