Re: Glorfindel's 'prophecy'

On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 04:39:45 -0400, Michael O'Neill <onq@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Troels Forchhammer wrote:

<snip>

[#] The Witch-king was not necessarily invulnerable as such, but
knowing for sure that you are never going to be killed by any 'living
man' is as good as being invulnerable, regardless of whether that is
brought about by a spell of invulnerability or by chance (at they
might say in Middle-earth <G>).

<snip>

Many people have missed this similarity between logic and magic.


not only did my friend have her baby

but she went into labor during a showing of X Men

are you as impressed by the similarity as I am



Logic, it seems ot me, allows you to understand things you can comprehend
"logically". Things that fall outside logic's yardstick are, by
definition incomprehensible to those who seek to understand their
universe through logic alone.

Similarly, magic, it seems to me, is only useful within systems that are
understood, in attacking and defending against enemies or forces that you
know about. In particular, trying to achieve some "ultimate protection
spell" effectively seeks a way to cut one off from the universe, since
literally anything can be used as a weapon and most of hte universe is
unknown.

In relation to the defeat of the Witch-King, he appeared to have two weak
spots that had ot be attacked in a specific sequence.

1. Unbind his sinews from his will by someone other than a man piercing
him with an enchanted blade - possible also behind the knee was his
"achilles heel", a very difficult place to strike an able-bodied warrior.

2. A direct attack on his head by somone not a man.

I note that I always took this to mean "male" as opposed to "human male"
but then how did a hobbit male do this?

If hobbits are related to Men, another branch of the family so to speak,
I fail to see why the magical defenses were not proof against Merry's
sword/knife stroke.

Moreover, if the "anti-male" was solely against Men, did it exclude Elves
and Dwarves?

Finally, if the limitation was intended to be "Men", i.e. "human", I fail
to see how Eowyn dealt the death blow, being part of humanity.

I suspect my theories above are overworked and that Tolkien was simply
referring to the agents of his death, not the means, when he referred to
"men" because the "magical logic" of the thing seems not to add up.

M.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Glorfindels prophecy
    ... brought about by a spell of invulnerability or by chance (at they ... universe through logic alone. ... in attacking and defending against enemies or forces that you ...
    (rec.arts.books.tolkien)
  • Re: Special Relativity is Dead (second proof)
    ... a big difference between attacking ideas and attacking individuals. ... I am convinced that there is no velocity symmetry in the universe and ... two clocks in orbit experiment. ... I can make bold statements. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Special Relativity is Dead (second proof)
    ... | a big difference between attacking ideas and attacking individuals. ... | two clocks in orbit experiment. ... | I can make bold statements. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Special Relativity is Dead (second proof)
    ... a big difference between attacking ideas and attacking individuals. ... I am convinced that there is no velocity symmetry in the universe and ... two clocks in orbit experiment. ... I can make bold statements. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Loading