Imagine No Redemption

[Alfirin]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

Radgast the Brown is an interesting case in the context of this thread, and this has caused me to re-examine my thoughts of him.

Ragagast did indeed "fail" in the task set before him and his Istari cohorts, in that he "went native", and forgot the higher purpose that was supposed to have been his focus.
However, as I recall other threads here discussing at times, his actions, relating to his apparently being chosen to go along to Middle-earth by Yavanna, as a representative of her interests, could have been foreseen by the Valar.
I wonder what would have happened if his failure hadn't occurred; if he had been involved with the White Council, planning strategies for defeating Sauron with them, Gandalf, and Saruman. Would Saruman in time have been able to wheedle or, if need be, cow Radagast into serving Saruman's increasingly self-serving policies? How much of a factor could Radagast have been in aiding Saruman to locate the Ring? Was it in fact better that he apparently lost a good deal of interest in the fight against Sauron?
With that in mind, especially as his fall was not a result of any evil intent, would repentance for Radagast have been necessary?

The fact that Radagast was in Yavanna's service actually brings up another matter. By definition, we really don't know what happened to the blue wizards, except that Tolkein say's he "fears" they fell (i.e. somehow became corrupted, as Saruman was) Specifically, nothing is said of whether they died or not, which leaves the possibility that they are still out there somewhere. Even if Tolkien was wrong and they were not corrupted (i.e. they "failed" only in the sense that they were unable to turn the hearts of the men of the east against Sauron) there does remain the fact that each Istari does take a large measure of his attitude and methods, from the Valar he personallly serves, and by nature that "stain" does effect the ministrations they give, and by extenstion the form a world aided by them would become. They all have the same mission, but how they would go about it would not neccearily take the same from For example, in some bizarre world where 1. Saruman had NOT become corrupted and 2. I was he, and not Gandalf, who wound up taking center stage in the deafeat of Sauron, I would imagine that that, since he is of Aule, defeat of Sauron would have come largely through mechanical methods; making a free people who could literally "out tech" Sauron (a tough order given that Sauron himself is originally one of Aule's servant's but possibly not impossible). In one where Radagast was the champion, you would likey have wound up with a fourth age that was extremely naturalistic, the great cities abandoned, most tools abandones and forgotten, and what free people remailend living in small hunter gatherer communities. So one would assume that the natures of Alatar and Pallando would take a large measure from the fact that they are in the service of Orome, the Huntsman. With them still possibly around and the fact that there are two of them (i.e. twice the ability to pass on thier form of the message) I'm wondering if Ragast went native for fear that if he didn't the natural world would be destroyed (either by Alatar and Pallando driving manking to extol in the hunt so greatly they literally hunted ME bare or Saruman (by convincing the people of ME that the natural word held no value outside of raw materials) The intial love would still be Radagasts own nature, but the decison to turn from his path may have been for reasons more complex than simply that. I even think it slightly possible that, given how intent Yavanna was in making sure her interests were protectect, Radagast may have been instucted to turn from his path on purpose , to fail his great mission (and give up his chance of returning) intentionally so as to serve the lesser more personal mission that a child of Yavanna would be inclined to, and not to swerve back all the way save at very great need (Say, if Gandalf had fallen permanently (i.e. not come back) and Radagast was literally left as the ONLY Ishtari left to stand against Sauron.)

[Hookbill the Goomba]

Originally Posted by Pitchwife

A character who turns from good to evil and back has exhausted their narrative potential - you can hardly write anything more interesting about them to top that, so they're best written out of the story; and in an adventure story set in a heroic age, how better to accomplish this than by having them slain.

I think this is probably the issue. There don't seem to be any characters that start out evil, depending on how you count orcs. An orc turning good would have been a bit odd, I suppose. So you're stuck, in a narrative sense.

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

But in Middle-earth it's not simply a case of hoping to be redeemed for your sins, you have to achieve your purpose in life in order to attain real grace.

Which, I suppose, would make the 'failing' of the wizards more profound. They 'knew' their purpose, or at least had an idea of their general mission, and only one of them actually seemed to care enough to carry it through. I suppose they all started out fully intending to fight Sauron, but one thing after another drove it out of their minds.

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Definitely harsh for Radagast who is more environmentally and animal-loving conscious than the other wizards, but nope...still fails.

Failing and falling aren't always the same, really. And I think Radagast is the perfect example to look at in some detail on this point. He failed, but did he 'fall'?

Originally Posted by Letters of JRR Tolkien #156

"The wizards were not exempt, indeed being incarnate were more likely to stray or err. Gandalf alone fully passes the tests, on a moral plane anyway (he makes mistakes of judgement)."
(Emphasis mine)

The use of 'fully' here is an interesting one. Perhaps Tolkien didn't want to call Radagast a complete failure as he clearly had no ill intent and indeed was willing to help, his biggest failings being trusting the wrong people (though even Gandalf trusted Saruman, so perhaps he is guilty of the same 'mistakes of judgement'), and a shift of priorities to the birds and animals rather than the sentient peoples.
Indeed, as I've read around the subject of Radagast, I do get the impression Tolkien was not quite sure what to do with the fellow. In The History of Middle Earth Part 7, 'The Treason of Isengard, in the fourth chapter as Tolkien struggles to get Gandalf away to see Saruman, he introduces Radagast to 'solve the problem', as it were. CT gives an endnote;

Originally Posted by HoME7 The Treason of Isengard Chapter 4 endnote 15

"Radagast as been named, but no more, in previous texts (VI 379, 397) and with no indication of what part my father was envisaging for him."

Poor Radagast got roped into the narrative, and such seems his actual role, being roped into helping Saruman. His 'betrayal' of Gandalf was unintentional, as was his 'betrayal' of Saruman (inadvertently giving Gandalf a means of escape). He bumbles his way through his 'task', so I fear Tolkien couldn't quite bring himself to be too harsh on him.

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

Note that Radagast did not seem unhappy or anything

However, another point to consider is the only scene in which Radagast appears there is a great sense of his unease. Perhaps he is uneasy at the news, the dark times, or the fact that he has a job to do at all.

Originally Posted by The Fellowship of the Ring, Book 2, chapter 2: The Council of Elrond

"It was Radagast the Brown, who at one time dwelt at Rhosgobel, near the boarders of Mirkwood. He is one of my order, but I had not seen him in many a year.
...
'...You were never a traveller, unless driven by great need.' [said Gandalf]
'I have an urgent errand,' [Radagast] said. 'My news is evil.' Then he looked about him, as if the hedges might have ears. 'Nasgul,' he whispered.
...
Radagast is, of course, a worthy wizard, a master of shapes and changes of hue; and he has much lore of herbs and beasts, and birds are especially his friends.
...
And with that he mounted and would have ridden straight off.
...
and [Radagast] rode off as if the Nine were after him."

A note on something Tolkien adds in an earlier draft...

Originally Posted by HoME7 The Treason of Isengard Chapter 6, The Council of Elrond

"And with that [Radagast] he mounted and rode off without another word - and that seemed to me very strange."

Here Gandalf notes that Radagast's haste to depart is strange. I wonder how strange, and in what way. Is it out of character for him? Another endnote (where Radagast seems to spend a lot of his time) makes for interesting reading...

Originally Posted by HoME7 The Treason of Isengard Chapter 6, The Council of Elrond, endnote 30

"... it is seen from the addition that Radagast first entered the story as the means by which Gandalf was lured to Saruman's dwelling. The abrupt haste of Radagast's departure seemed to Gandalf 'very strange', and it is possible that when first drafting the story my father supposed that Radagast's part was not simply that of innocent emissary: later, at Isengard, Saruman says 'He must have played his part well, nonetheless'. This is not in FR. When the addition here was made, Radagast became also the means by which the Eagles knew where to find Gandalf; and this development necessarily disposed of the idea that Radagast had been corrupted..."

So Radagast was not corrupted. Saruman may have been right, he was simply foolish. He had nothing to 'repent' of, as such.
Though I'm now slightly curious about the mentions of Rhosgobel as being Radagast's 'former' residents. Presumably he moved after the... incident... with the Necromancer. He was never much of a traveller, so presumably he has a new house. I hope it was a nice house.

Anyway, I get the impression Tolkien did not consider Radagast a complete failure, and, indeed, initially planned to reward him!

Originally Posted by HoME7 The Treason of Isengard, Chapter 11, The Story Foreseen from Moria

"Isengard is given over to the Dwarves... Or to Radagast?"

Personally, I think that would have been brilliant, for Radagast to end up with this gigantic tower. He'd probably turn it into a massive greenhouse.
However, ultimately, Radagast seems to be regarded as a bit dim by those on the evil side, so perhaps they saw him as not worth turning...

Originally Posted by HoME10, Morgoth's Ring, Part five - Myths Transformed, note on motives

"But certainly he [Sauron] had already become evil, and therefore stupid enough to imagine that his [Gandalf's] different behaviour was due simply to weaker intelligence, and lack of firm, masterful purpose. He was only a rather clever Radagast - clever, because it is more profitable (more productive of power) to become absorbed in the study of people than of animals."

Radagast 'failed' in the sense that he did not "remain faithful".

Originally Posted by Unfinished Tales - Part 4, Chapter 2 The Istari

Indeed, of all the Istari, one only remained faithful, and he was the last-comer. For Radagast, the fourth, became enamoured of the many beasts and birds that dwelt in Middle Earth, and forsook Elves and Men, and spent his days among the wild creatures.

I don't know if you can call Radagast a 'fallen' character, and certainly not evil. He seems vaguely good, but mostly neutral. He doesn't commit to either side. He doesn't openly fight Sauron unless given strict orders. He doesn't really help the enemy except by accident, and the same accident repays it, though who knows if he ever knew it?

Originally Posted by Inziladun

However, as I recall other threads here discussing at times, his actions, relating to his apparently being chosen to go along to Middle-earth by Yavanna, as a representative of her interests, could have been foreseen by the Valar.

I can buy this. Although, Tolkien seems to suggest that he 'failed' or 'forsook' the task set before him. unless Yavanna had given him a secondary task which he then took as his main task. But he was 'enamoured' of Middle Earth. Interestingly, he found Middle Earth more enamouring than Valinor. Perhaps it was all too clean and neat over there for his liking. I always imagined him being a bit shabby-looking.

Originally Posted by Alfirin

For example, in some bizarre world where 1. Saruman had NOT become corrupted and 2. I was he, and not Gandalf, who wound up taking center stage in the deafeat of Sauron, I would imagine that that, since he is of Aule, defeat of Sauron would have come largely through mechanical methods; making a free people who could literally "out tech" Sauron (a tough order given that Sauron himself is originally one of Aule's servant's but possibly not impossible).

Interesting notion. Aule wasn't good at having none-evil maiar, was he?
Though it does make me wonder why there was so little interaction between Saruman and the Dwarves. Perhaps there was and it is not mentioned; Saruman wanted to learn about Ringcraft, so perhaps he talked to the Dwarves and tried to find some of their Rings of power?

Going back to a 'fallen' character, here's a thing I stumbled upon; in an earlier plan, Tolkien asks...

Originally Posted by HoME7 The Treason of Isengard Chapter 11, The Story Foreseen from Moria

"What about Boromir? Does he repent? No - slain by Aragorn."

Tolkien paints Boromir as someone who needed to 'repent'. His character was in such need that he almost had him killed by Aragorn, becoming such a threat to the Fellowship, perhaps, that he had to be stopped.

[Alfirin]

Originally Posted by Hookbill the Goomba

Personally, I think that would have been brilliant, for Radagast to end up with this gigantic tower. He'd probably turn it into a massive greenhouse.

Actually, in circumstances where the tower was an issue (i.e. one where Aragorn decided that Isengard/Orthanc needed to be at least partially rebuilt (it is a major watchtower after all) Radagast might actually be the best all around choice. Anyone residing at Isengard in the 4th age is going to have to deal with having Ents as close neigbors, Ents who 1. Are now well aware of what they can do if someone at Isengard does things they do not care for and 2. now have Royal Legal Title to the whole forest (i.e. if they defend thier rights, the King is more than likey to come in on thier side, not the side of the interlopers.) In short, anyone put in charge of Isengard better be someone the Ents will approve of. And Radagast might easily fit that bill. He is well versed in lore (even a wizard considered "dim" by the standards of his bretheren is probably quite wise by mannish standards) likes solitude, has an avowed interest in doing what such a job would actually majorlly entail (Keeping and Protecting Fangorn) and as Yavanna's emissary, is likey the Wizard dearest at heart to the Children of Yavanna. Treebeard is fond of Gandalf, but I imagine a wizard who has made the preservation of nature his whole life's calling and values it above the affairs of Men and Elves would be truly one Ents would love (Beren likes him, and he sort of half animal).

Originally Posted by Hookbill the Goomba

Interesting notion. Aule wasn't good at having none-evil maiar, was he?

I think the problem is as Gandalf saw it. Aule is a Maker, and so are those who serve him. To be a maker is in a certain sense to also be a destroyer (you can't make without breaking first) and posessed with a curiosity as to how things are put together. And as Gandalf says "He who breaks a thing to see how it is made does a wicked act" (or something like that) To be gifted with making comes with a belief that you can make better than that which already is, and that pride is an easy one to fall from.

[Hookbill the Goomba]

Originally Posted by Alfirin

Actually, in circumstances where the tower was an issue (i.e. one where Aragorn decided that Isengard/Orthanc needed to be at least partially rebuilt (it is a major watchtower after all) Radagast might actually be the best all around choice. Anyone residing at Isengard in the 4th age is going to have to deal with having Ents as close neigbors, Ents who 1. Are now well aware of what they can do if someone at Isengard does things they do not care for and 2. now have Royal Legal Title to the whole forest (i.e. if they defend thier rights, the King is more than likey to come in on thier side, not the side of the interlopers.) In short, anyone put in charge of Isengard better be someone the Ents will approve of. And Radagast might easily fit that bill. He is well versed in lore (even a wizard considered "dim" by the standards of his bretheren is probably quite wise by mannish standards) likes solitude, has an avowed interest in doing what such a job would actually majorlly entail (Keeping and Protecting Fangorn) and as Yavanna's emissary, is likey the Wizard dearest at heart to the Children of Yavanna. Treebeard is fond of Gandalf, but I imagine a wizard who has made the preservation of nature his whole life's calling and values it above the affairs of Men and Elves would be truly one Ents would love (Beren likes him, and he sort of half animal).

If only Radagast had sent his résumé to Aragorn!
It would have been nice to know the fate of Radagast, and this sort of job would have been a nice touch. Perhaps he failed to fight Sauron properly, but perhaps the Valar could find new tests for him and the other two. They gave Gandalf a second chance, though those were extraordinary circumstances. However, I'm not sure how Radagast would fair against a Balrog...
(An conversation between Radagast and Treebeard would be very odd indeed, I'm imagining).

Originally Posted by Alfirin

To be gifted with making comes with a belief that you can make better than that which already is, and that pride is an easy one to fall from.

Aule seems to embody this, doesn't he? The episode with the Dwarves is very much a commentary on the idea of sub-creation. At this point we could de-rail and I'd have to get out my copy of 'On-Fairy Stories' and we'll be here for months.
But that may indeed be a point of interest to look into...

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Alfirin

I'm wondering if Ragast went native for fear that if he didn't the natural world would be destroyed (either by Alatar and Pallando driving manking to extol in the hunt so greatly they literally hunted ME bare or Saruman (by convincing the people of ME that the natural word held no value outside of raw materials) The intial love would still be Radagasts own nature, but the decison to turn from his path may have been for reasons more complex than simply that.

I think there was no "decision", really. It simply happened. He had simply "forgotten", sort of in the sense "it's not worth the trouble": "I am supposed to go to Isengard to an urgent meeting... uh... but the birds are singing so nicely today, sun is shining, I think I'll just lie down under that oak and dream". Also, I certainly think that he did not go native for the fear for the natural world. If he had such fear, it would be a reason for him to join the cause to oppose the Enemy. And that was his original purpose, I believe, and part of it had still remained in him - he had only grown a bit, well, lax in that.

Originally Posted by Inziladun

However, as I recall other threads here discussing at times, his actions, relating to his apparently being chosen to go along to Middle-earth by Yavanna, as a representative of her interests, could have been foreseen by the Valar.

Originally Posted by Alfirin

I even think it slightly possible that, given how intent Yavanna was in making sure her interests were protectect, Radagast may have been instucted to turn from his path on purpose , to fail his great mission (and give up his chance of returning) intentionally so as to serve the lesser more personal mission that a child of Yavanna would be inclined to, and not to swerve back all the way save at very great need (Say, if Gandalf had fallen permanently (i.e. not come back) and Radagast was literally left as the ONLY Ishtari left to stand against Sauron.)

Originally Posted by Hookbill

The use of 'fully' here is an interesting one. Perhaps Tolkien didn't want to call Radagast a complete failure as he clearly had no ill intent and indeed was willing to help, his biggest failings being trusting the wrong people (though even Gandalf trusted Saruman, so perhaps he is guilty of the same 'mistakes of judgement'), and a shift of priorities to the birds and animals rather than the sentient peoples.

Indeed. But I would even put it differently - I think everyone here thus far failed to see, or misinterpreted the important point that was mentioned: That Radagast was specifically sent by Yavanna to protect her interests. "So what, didn't he fail?" or "Was he supposed to fail?" I think this is completely unnecessary and confusing path to take.

I have always thought it clear: Radagast's purpose, had he succeeded and fulfiled his task, would have been to help the Free Peoples, with special focus on the animals and plants and whatnot. That was why Yavanna had picked him. In other words, he was supposed to be a counterweight to Saruman.

Imagine the ideal bunch of non-fallen Wizards: Gandalf boosts the morale like he always does, Saruman makes the Free People use their creative potential to the best in order to outwit Sauron, while Radagast is there to nudge Saruman and keep him in line in case he started to make grand plans of building ten thousand forges for Gondorian army while using the entire Mirkwood for fuel. Likewise, Saruman, in his ideal place, should have reminded Radagast of his task and stopped him from "going too native".

Also, Radagast would have specifically taken care about the nature while the others would be primarily concerned with Men and Elves and Dwarves and Hobbits - so, while Gandalf et al. would be coming with disturbing rumors of "hey, Sauron's Orcs have descended from the mountains and are killing Woodmen!", Radagast would have also added: "But there are also wargs who are killing poor rabbits by hundreds!" I'm making it sound ridiculous, but Radagast, I believe, was chosen because he was meant to "fight for animal rights" as well as the Free Peoples'.

Originally Posted by Hookbill the Goomba

Interesting notion. Aule wasn't good at having none-evil maiar, was he?
Though it does make me wonder why there was so little interaction between Saruman and the Dwarves. Perhaps there was and it is not mentioned; Saruman wanted to learn about Ringcraft, so perhaps he talked to the Dwarves and tried to find some of their Rings of power?

Perhaps he was just a sort of "racist". He seemed like that. He certainly didn't seem much for Elves, he counsidered them "old and gone". I think he might have thought something similar about the Dwarves, however it is true that being Aulë's maia, it is somewhat strange.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

I have always thought it clear: Radagast's purpose, had he succeeded and fulfiled his task, would have been to help the Free Peoples, with special focus on the animals and plants and whatnot. That was why Yavanna had picked him. In other words, he was supposed to be a counterweight to Saruman.

Even without giving Radagast's failure the "excuse" of Yavanna's special instructions, I wouldn't see him as being in need of repentance. He seems to have made no conscious decision to distance himself from his primary task, and his actions could not necessarily be construed as harmful to Middle-earth or its denizens, in sharp contrast to Saruman.
The UT essay makes it clear that the Istari were especially vulnerable to such failings because of their "real" bodies, which subjected them to all temptations and trials of lesser beings. That obviously was no excuse for Saruman's deeds, but in the case of Radagast, I still wonder if his distraction might not have been merely an accepted foregone possibility, if not an expressed order from Yavanna.

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

Imagine the ideal bunch of non-fallen Wizards: Gandalf boosts the morale like he always does, Saruman makes the Free People use their creative potential to the best in order to outwit Sauron, while Radagast is there to nudge Saruman and keep him in line in case he started to make grand plans of building ten thousand forges for Gondorian army while using the entire Mirkwood for fuel. Likewise, Saruman, in his ideal place, should have reminded Radagast of his task and stopped him from "going too native".

Indeed the Istari and their varied gifts do seem intended to counter-balance one another. Again though, given the very nature of the way the Istari were clothed in real flesh, I would think the Valar should have known it was unlikely to work out that way in practice.

x/d with BB

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

Even without giving Radagast's failure the "excuse" of Yavanna's special instructions, I wouldn't see him as being in need of repentance. He seems to have made no conscious decision to distance himself from his primary task, and his actions could not necessarily be construed as harmful to Middle-earth or its denizens, in sharp contrast to Saruman.

No, of course not, and I think that much has been very well said already by, I believe it was Hookbill, above: Radagast did not "fall", he did simply "fail". He did not break the glass, he simply failed to fill it, to speak metaphorically. (In such a case, Gandalf alone had managed to fill the glass, while Saruman - how appropriate - broke it; I am not sure what is the status of the Blue in this respect, but Tolkien seemed not to know either, from what we are told - as someone also had cited earlier in this thread.)

But I still argue for this fact that Radagast had a specific mission, which was the same for all the Istari, to help the denizens of Middle-Earth against Sauron, and in Radagast's case, it was specifically with the assumption that he would take special care to protect the nature against Sauron.

If I exaggerate a bit, in order to show how I envision Radagast's ideal behavior, in the ideal state where neither of the Wizards had failed, Radagast would have roused the Woodmen and the Pukel-Men and the fiercest bears and badgers in order to make them defend their homelands. While Saruman and Gandalf would encourage Elves and Men to resist Orcs from the mountains and armies of Mordor, and the Blue Wizards would "enlighten" the Easterlings and make them strong enough to resist the Dark Lord's temptation of their chieftains, then Radagast would counsel and rouse the wildlife of Mirkwood to get rid of the spiders and all sorts of evil things, probably also prevent Ents and huorns to turn to having "black hearts" like Old Man Willow and somesuch.

Originally Posted by Inzil

The UT essay makes it clear that the Istari were especially vulnerable to such failings because of their "real" bodies, which subjected them to all temptations and trials of lesser beings. That obviously was no excuse for Saruman's deeds, but in the case of Radagast, I still wonder if his distraction might not have been merely an accepted foregone possibility, if not an expressed order from Yavanna.

Given that he "failed", it obviously wasn't. He simply failed, in a similar manner to Saruman - I mean: before Saruman turned to evil (started building his own empire, desired the Ring, made his own Orcs), he also, firstly, only "failed" in the similar way. The first step was, he had only locked himself up in Isengard and started studying the arts of craft, ring-lore, knowledge of the Enemy etc. That was basically in line with his original mission - but the problem was, he ceased to use the knowledge for the good of the Free Peoples, but kept it only to himself. That is technically the same thing that Radagast fell into, not using his contact with the nature in some constructive way to oppose the Dark Lord, but simply playing with the animals and not doing anything else. I don't know how much more clear can I express myself...

Originally Posted by Inzil

Indeed the Istari and their varied gifts do seem intended to counter-balance one another. Again though, given the very nature of the way the Istari were clothed in real flesh, I would think the Valar should have known it was unlikely to work out that way in practice.

How well are Valar able to predict or manage things is disputable in the light of e.g. the battle of Utumno which they themselves considered a bad thing in retrospect (though they seem to have learned and "developed" throughout the later Ages). But I think they just had a certain concept, an ideal picture of how things might work if they worked all right, and they did their best. I think the Valar saw it possible that the Istari, as they were, all of them, would succeed, otherwise they would not have sent them in the first place! Such "games beyond games" are seemingly reserved for the omniscient Eru, who seemingly had known about e.g. Frodo's final decision to claim the Ring at Mount Doom, yet made it part of his plan. But the Valar have their own devices, and they use them as well as they can - because they are not omniscient, especially in regards to the future (it is said in Ainulindalë that the Valar did not see many of the things, especially of the later Ages, in their vision of Arda in the beginning). That way, they would simply choose the best among their Maiar whom they could trust well enough that they will do their job. Their failure to predict the Istari's failure is in no way different from the failure of e.g. Elrond to predict that Boromir will try to take Frodo's Ring. I think it comes with the trust in people (or Maiar in human form).

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

There's been many an interesting post between this one of Hook's and mine, but I thought it might be helpful to consider the fact that Frodo, too, failed to complete his mission. He was unable to destroy the Ring. But if memory serves me well, Tolkien in a letter argues that Frodo was able to bring about conditions that allowed for the destruction of the Ring.

Perhaps Radagast's behaviour can be considered in this way: how did his actions (or inactions) enable ultimate victory over Sauron?

Interesting idea. I would just like to point out - to potential other readers - that this is a different kind of question than the one I am arguing above. In other words: perhaps Radagast's failure has been accounted for from the start in Eru's plan, but certainly not in Yavanna's. So: the idea was not "you shall go to Middle-Earth and fail" (just like nobody told Frodo to go to Mount Doom and claim the Ring there!), but the idea was "you shall go... and do your best". I think in the beginning, all the Wizards had the intention to do their best, just like Frodo.

I think, however, that - at least from what we are told (but we are not told much! The Mirkwood/Radagast/animal relations to Sauron/similar areas are not very much accounted for in the tales, are they...) - Radagast's contribution to the victory was only in the things where he had stayed true to his quest, i.e. things he would have done anyway. For example: sending Gwaihir to Orthanc. It was something he was in fact obliged to do by his mission, and he did it. He probably did a few similar things throughout the years - I can e.g. imagine he might have provided some scouting of the area before the assault of Dol Guldur. Things like that.

I can think of some random nice things, too. For example, how can we know that it was not because of him that Beorn had accepted Gandalf so happily (in the end) to his dwelling? Perhaps he would have acted differently had Gandalf not mentioned his "good cousin Radagast" So, in that way, perhaps the Dwarves would have had no place to resupply, would have had to take some much tougher route, where either they would perish without Gandalf, and the Ring would be lost in some Orc cave again, or had they journeyed south, captured and taken to Dol Guldur (!), or maybe Gandalf would have had to continue accompanying the poor Dwarves, which would have prevented him from attacking Dol Guldur, and that might also have shifted the balance... Possibilities, as always, are endless

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Hookbill the Goomba

Which, I suppose, would make the 'failing' of the wizards more profound. They 'knew' their purpose, or at least had an idea of their general mission, and only one of them actually seemed to care enough to carry it through. I suppose they all started out fully intending to fight Sauron, but one thing after another drove it out of their minds.


Failing and falling aren't always the same, really. And I think Radagast is the perfect example to look at in some detail on this point. He failed, but did he 'fall'?

There's been many an interesting post between this one of Hook's and mine, but I thought it might be helpful to consider the fact that Frodo, too, failed to complete his mission. He was unable to destroy the Ring. But if memory serves me well, Tolkien in a letter argues that Frodo was able to bring about conditions that allowed for the destruction of the Ring.

Perhaps Radagast's behaviour can be considered in this way: how did his actions (or inactions) enable ultimate victory over Sauron?