Talk:Rings of Power
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle-earth, which aims to build an encyclopedic guide to J. R. R. Tolkien and his legendarium. Please visit the project page for suggestions and ideas on how you can improve this and other articles. | |||||||||||||
|
Assessment
|
||||||||||||||
Contents |
[edit] The Video Game
Rings of Power is also the title of a 1991 Video Game by Naughty Dog Released for the Sega Mega Drive/Sega Genesis. It was in the RPG genre but used some unique concepts such as all attack actions during combat were regarded as spells regardless of each characters class (e.g.: Knight). The overall storyline of the game involved collecting all 11 rings of power that once reunited make up the rod of creation.
See: [1]
- It was also notable for its hidden nudity that didn't cause the media to go ape. [2] --Nintendorulez talk 17:54, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
I move that this paragrpah is moved onto the main page, OR that Rings of Power is listed as a disambiguation.
- The Naughty Dog page has a link to Rings of Power (video game), but it hasn't been notable enough for anyone to actually create an article on as yet. There is thus nothing to disambiguate. If someone does eventually create an article then a disambig line or page can be created. --CBDunkerson 17:43, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi, my name is Sailormarcus and I'm currently creating a Rings of Power (Game) article so I added a disambiguation page.
[edit] Seven Rings - Freud
Seven_Rings redirects here. I don't see a page for Freud's Seven Rings, but don't know enough to write one. According to Peter Watson (A Terrible Beauty, London, Phoenix Press, 2000, 505), these were "early colleagues of Freud pledged to develop and defend psychoanalysis, and given a ring by him to symbolize that dedication." See here: http://www.sospsy.com/Museum/pages/page238.htm . Google has further references to Freud and seven rings, including a theory by Jung and connection to Indian Chakras.
[edit] What is this "power"?
I think what this article fails to state is what, if anything, the rings do and why the characters in the books would even bother to wear them. Power shmower... Tronno 02:53, July 29, 2005 (UTC)
- This is a good question, and one that is not easily answered. It is addressed in part in the articles concerning the invidual Elven Rings. -Aranel (Sarah) 16:45, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Khamul (Aka the Easterling)
I remember Khamul being mentioned as one of the Nazgul in Unfinished Tales. The Nine Rings section may have to be edited if this is true. - shash 16:01, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Basis for this?
"The power of the three still present of the Seven, the Three Elven rings, and the Nine were all shattered upon the destruction of the One." Rich Farmbrough 16:05, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
- Likely derived from;
- "Now the Elves made many rings; but secretly Sauron made One Ring to rule all the others, and their power was bound up with it, to be subject wholly to it and to last only so long as it too should last." - Silm, Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age
- "...when the One goes, the last defenders of High-elven lore and beauty are shorn of power to hold back time, and depart." - Letters #144
- and other similar references. --CBDunkerson 18:33, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Powers of the One
From the article: "it allowed Sauron to quickly corrupt the Numenoreans into evil"
Really? The Númenoreans had already progressed well down that road before Sauron got there; he had merely to encourage an existing tendency. And I don't recall that it was said anywhere by Tolkien that Sauron required the One for this -- but I suppose he may well have, so could somone please point out where if he did? TCC (talk) (contribs) 00:23, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
"Sauron's personal 'surrender' was voluntary and cunning: he got free transport to Numenor! He naturally had the One Ring, and so very soon dominated the minds and wills of most of the Numenoreans." - Letters #211
- The Numenoreans went from 'greedy and somewhat oppressing weaker folk' to 'mass human sacrifice and worshipping Morgoth' in the space of a few decades. That's a pretty radical shift. --CBDunkerson 01:31, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
- I was aware of that quote, but had always interpreted it to mean simply that with the Ring in his possession Sauron had all his native power available to him, as opposed to his relatively attenuated condition during the Third Age. I could just as easily read it the other way, I suppose. But I think I would still call this a matter of intensifying a process that was already underway, ending in large-scale open rebellion against the Valar and the One where it had already existed on a smaller scale. The invasion of Valinor was the sign of the former; worship of Melkor and the human sacrifice that went with it was the sign of the latter. In real-world terms, I think the step from inhumane oppression to human sacrifice (for whatever cause, whether on a literal or figurative altar) is fairly small. TCC (talk) (contribs) 01:39, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Nazghul rings
"Once enslaved, Sauron no longer needed the Nazgûl to wear the rings." Is this claim canonical? JoshuaZ 04:45, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
- You could make a strong case that it is. The text isn't entirely consistent on the question. On the one hand, at the Council of Elrond Gandalf says, "The Nine the Nazgûl keep." On the other hand, in "Shadow of the Past" Gandalf tells Frodo, "So it is now: the Nine [Sauron] has gathered to himself...." Supporting that is the fact that we never see a Nazgûl with a ring even when we might expect to. On balance, the idea that Sauron retained the Nine in his possession seems the most likely. TCC (talk) (contribs) 08:29, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
- More than that actually: I thought I remembered something else and I found it after I posted the above reply. In Letters #246 Tolkien says outright that Sauron held the Nine Rings and that this is what gave him primary control over their wills. TCC (talk) (contribs) 08:41, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
- And also in "The Hunt for the Ring" in Unfinished Tales there's yet another statement to this effect. TCC (talk) (contribs) 08:45, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
we can all agree then that the nazgul did not have their rings with them. Jammi567 15:54, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Terminology
I think the FAQs are wrong here. The "lesser rings" should not be called Rings of Power, while the "Great Rings" should. As Gandalf says,
"In Eregion long ago many Elven-rings were made, magic rings as you call them, and they were, of course, of various kinds: some more potent and some less. The lesser rings were only essays in the craft before it was full-grown, and to the Elven-smiths they were but trifles - yet to my mind dangerous for mortals. But the Great Rings, the Rings of Power, they were perilous." (The Fellowship of the Ring, "The Shadow of the Past")
Of course, I could be wrong. Uthanc 12:39, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
- But you're not. TCC (talk) (contribs) 05:24, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
- I was thinking that maybe Tolkien had changed the terminology later, as shown in a letter or in The History of Middle-earth. Uthanc 09:17, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
- It could be just my hideously poor memory, but I don't recall any extended discussion on the lesser rings anywhere, let alone a redefinition of "Rings of Power". So I edited the text to reflect the correct nomenclature from the book, as you pointed up. TCC (talk) (contribs) 23:19, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
- I was thinking that maybe Tolkien had changed the terminology later, as shown in a letter or in The History of Middle-earth. Uthanc 09:17, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Movement
i added something to the picture caption, and it moved the top line of the poem. Does anybody know how to correct this whilst keeping in the addition? Jammi567 15:52, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Whoever corrected it, thanks Jammi567 12:44, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
