You’re pretty much spot on. It’s also why in the movies and books, the Ring Wraiths generally just look like black cloaks; not even dark shadowy figures in cloaks, literally just the black cloaks. But when Frodo puts on the ring when surrounded on Weathertop, he can clearly see their distinct faces and features, and they can immediately tell who has the ring.
Comment on Anon gains a superpower
Jax@sh.itjust.works 2 days agoWhat the ring does:
The chief power (of all the rings alike) was the prevention or slowing of decay (i.e. ‘change’ viewed as a regrettable thing), the preservation of what is desired or loved, or its semblance – this is more or less an Elvish motive. But also they enhanced the natural powers of a possessor – thus approaching ‘magic’, a motive easily corruptible into evil, a lust for domination. And finally they had other powers, more directly derived from Sauron (‘the Necromancer’: so he is called as he casts a fleeting shadow and presage on the pages of The Hobbit): such as rendering invisible the material body, and making things of the invisible world visible.
So the Ring… does things. One of which is pulling the bearer into the wraith world. I believe the reason Sauron doesn’t turn invisible is that he is already of the wraith world (implying he is invisible without the Ring, but I have no confirmation of that).
papalonian@lemmy.world 1 day ago
WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Basically, Tolkein liked the invisibility ring bit in Sky Island and decided to rip it off for The Hobbit. Then, when he made a sequel to The Hobbit he threw in a bunch of important-sounding bullshit to paper over the fact that his macguffin needed to do a bunch of completely different things than what it had been established to do earlier.
Apparently it worked.
Jax@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
No, I’m pretty sure the One Ring was inspired by the Kalevala — but it’s ok. You don’t have to like Tolkien’s work.
thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 1 day ago
This is one of the things I like about Tolkiens approach to magic: It’s very diffuse.
We understand that Gandalf and Saruman are powerful, but it is very unclear exactly how they use their power. We don’t see them bringing down castle walls or throwing lightning bolts. Some rare examples are when Gandalf breaks the bridge the Balrog is on, and when he breaks Sarumans staff. None of these are feats of magic that would lead you to think they are by far among the most powerful beings in middle earth.
When Gandalf battles the Balrog, the books state something like “they battled for three days”, without specifying how a physically frail (at least by appearance) Gandalf could defeat a Balrog.
With the ring(s), we just learn that they “grant the user immense power”, without ever learning exactly how Sauron would become unstoppable if he had the ring. I think it makes the story great, because it makes the story inherently character-driven, with magic being a diffuse “force” in the background rather than concrete abilities someone like Gandalf could use to teleport, shield someone, or set a building of fire.
Baggie@lemmy.zip 1 day ago
I can’t remember where I heard this, but I recall that the wizards were basically constantly holding back their power as part of their existence in middle earth. They could do wild stuff, but the idea is to not interfere with the progression of the world too much, much like a star trek crew
Jax@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
One thing I’ve noticed is that the more answers you give, the less magic that ‘magic’ seems.
Stormlight Archives and the Cosmere are the best examples I can give of this. The magic systems that Sanderson has created are awesome, but the more you learn the more it becomes like science rather than magic. Not only does it become more like science, it becomes far more important to the actual narrative. Sanderson doesn’t capture the same kind of mystic, arcane nature that Tolkien’s magic does - and I think it’s entirely because we just don’t have answers about what magic actually is.
Not to say that Sanderson is a bad author, by any means - I love his work. Magic is cool because you don’t know how it works, though. Otherwise it’s just a power system/ platform for cool stuff happening. I’m all for it, but the former is the reason I can love and enjoy the latter.
ThoGot@lemm.ee 1 day ago
That’s basically the difference between hard magic systems (Sanderson) and soft magic systems (Tolkien)
Jax@sh.itjust.works 13 hours ago
Why use many word when few word do trick?
(You’re right, and thank you — I just thought it was funny that all I said was boiled down to soft and hard, accurately)
GunValkyrie@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Magic explained is just science.
thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Some famous quote or something, can’t remember where I read it.
Seleni@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I agree. I think that’s why I like Kate Griffin’s Matthew Swift series (and the other novels she sets in the same ‘verse). The general rules of the magic system are explained, but the magic still feels wild and mysterious and… well, magical.
SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Saruman did cause a landslide/avalanche which was pretty nifty.
thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I seem to remember that a blizzard is also attributed to Saruman at one point. What I love though is that it’s not Saruman waving his arms and chanting some formula to cause the blizzard, but rather a situation where a blizzard was already possible and Saruman kind of “nudging” nature to ensure the blizzard hits in the right place and is especially violent. In a sense, it feels like the blizzard happens just because Saruman wants it to happen.
I seem to remember that it’s also implied that the ride of the Rohirim to Helms Deep should have been near impossible, but because Gandalf was with them they had the speed and stamina to make it. He doesn’t explicitly do anything, but kind of “wills” them to be faster.