![]() |
|
|
|
Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
|
|
#6 | |
|
A Voice That Gainsayeth
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: In that far land beyond the Sea
Posts: 7,431
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Well, basically, had there not been the quote that narfforc mentioned, I'd say the Rings really were on Sauron's hand all the time... the more on what you brought forth here, TM... this was actually my first idea in this topic...
As we have only Gandalf's word on that, maybe he was simply mistaken? He didn't even see the Ringwraith - only at Weathertop (or from the height of Orthanc, which is not of any value), and while Galadriel's word might not be that important, the Author's word seems to imply that indeed the Rings were not in the possession of the Nazgul, and the Author's word should be considered of the highest authority. The trouble is that the word "held", at all the times, can be interpretated as "had in power" or something like that, whereas that the Nine Riders "kept" the rings is pretty clear - and also, it is them who are the subjects, not Sauron. As when TM mentioned UT, I looked there and this part took my interest: Quote:
__________________
"Should the story say 'he ate bread,' the dramatic producer can only show 'a piece of bread' according to his taste or fancy, but the hearer of the story will think of bread in general and picture it in some form of his own." -On Fairy-Stories |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|