638
Anon gains a superpower
(sh.itjust.works)
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
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.
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
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.
That's basically the difference between hard magic systems (Sanderson) and soft magic systems (Tolkien)
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)
Magic explained is just science.
Some famous quote or something, can't remember where I read it.
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.
Saruman did cause a landslide/avalanche which was pretty nifty.
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 also 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.