Dumbledore vs the Balrog

[The Immortal Watch Dog]

The wings debate always struck me as really pointless any way, given how swiftly they attacked Ungoliant, either they can port, or they have the ability to turn themselves into smoke or mist and ride the wind to whatever location they desire or otherwise propel themselves insanely fast and it certainly wasn't by flying. Plus you have older versions of the legendarium where they used winged Dragons as cavalry Targaryen style..so the wings were either vestigial and part of their "use our appearance as a psychological weapon "schitck or else it just meant their flaming smokey aura?

[Cthulhu_of_R'lyeh]

I say we mix this fight up a bit...

Durin the DumbleRog vs. Albus BalDore.

[moonknight11]

I say we bring in the superior Balrog to punch out both Albus and Durin's Bane.

[Cthulhu_of_R'lyeh]

[The Drunkard Kid]

I say we bring in the superior Balrog to punch out both Albus and Durin's Bane.

[The Immortal Watch Dog]

hmm

"you shall not pass!!"

vs

"AH JUST GOT PAID!!"

[The MunchKING]

Query: Has Transfiguration ever been used on anything close to as large as a Balrog before?

Giants and Dragons were supposed to be immune, so there's feats for "big tough guys" shrugging off the lesser spells.

Even Hagrid no-sold a dozen or so stunners cast by the Magic police.


The Unforgivable curses are different, in that we rarely ever see them used, but there are feats of ancient and powerful magics blocking them. (specifically the whole sacrifice of the mother for the son thing for Harry).

[Cthulhu_of_R'lyeh]

hmm

"you shall not pass!!"

vs

"AH JUST GOT PAID!!"

There's only one answer.

[master of read]

how about we go one better and get a puerto rican balrog?

[The Transient Guest]

I'm sorely tempted to take up Matt's argument just to see how I would do. But I'm not.

Instead I'm going to ask if the people posting prefer the Hogwarts School of Magic, ie BIG SPELLS, or the Tolkien Take on it, ie subtle magic?

[Endless_Legend]

I'm sorely tempted to take up Matt's argument just to see how I would do. But I'm not.

Instead I'm going to ask if the people posting prefer the Hogwarts School of Magic, ie BIG SPELLS, or the Tolkien Take on it, ie subtle magic?

Much prefer Tolkien's magic.

Also, people call it "subtle magic", but many times, it was not subtle. It just wasn't obnoxious, whiz-bang D&D pop-style magic. Magical beings in Tolkiens world are not walking elemental artillery guns.

Besides creating the high fantasy genre as it is today, Tolkien was also the first (and probably still the best) author to portray enchantments, mind-magic, curses, and that sort of thing in a really interesting way, and show that kind of magic as powerful beyond measure.

Think about this: What are the Nazgul? If you want to get reductive, they're basically just ghosts possessing suits of armor, with cursed swords. Doesn't sound very impressive to us, if you say it that way, since we're used to high-powered video game heroes. But put a single Nazgul on a battlefied and entire armies run from it, because of that terrible, horrifying supernatural aura of fear that surrounds the, the Black Breath, which can kill you even if somehow you're suicidally brave enough not to run from it.

Modern fantasy and video games and pop-culture stuff just isn't good at communicating the terrible power that something like the Black Breath would have over people. It can make even hardened veterans who've been fighting Orcs their entire lives, who are toughened to war and violence and ordinary fear, still run screaming in hysterical terror or just fall down weeping where they stand.

That's just one example. Almost all the magic in Tolkien's world was well thought out, interesting, and had many deep layers.

The magic in the Harry Potter verse is whiz-bang pop-magic. It might as well have come out of a videogame.

[Sharpandpointies]

I'm going to go with Tolkien Magic. I don't actually enjoy Harry Potter magic. It's lacking gravitas in my opinion, and has no consequences. That is to say, it's taught to wizards as part of schooling, in their own society, they don't actually lose anything for the having of it, there is no cost.

I prefer my magic to have cost.

I also don't like the wizard society in Harry Potter and its condescending attitude toward 'muggles', as well, but that's a different thing I suppose.

By contrast, to word slightly different what Endless Legend described, the magic in the Tolkien verse is deeper, weightier. I would say it contributes to the mood of Tolkien's writing, heavily. The few times Gandalf pulls out the stops - witness the Redhorn battle - it's written as something amazing, shocking, and mighty. It carries drama, in part because of how it's written and in part because of its rarity. The background of the Nazgûl makes them terrible and terrifying; ghosts in armor indeed, but they are tragic beings made into immortal, potent servants of a dark power beyond human reckoning, trapped by their very human weaknesses and forced to serve in agony for eternity. They have a solid place in the background. It's not just 'These are dangerous things. They just are. Fear them.' And it's written with impact.

AND they're rare, again. There aren't hosts of wraiths around (well, there ARE, but even then it's very situational and very rare, and doesn't come up in the story at every other turn), and the ones that are around are really nothing to these particular ones.

Then there's the Elves and their arts. Most of what the Eldar do isn't 'magic', according to Tolkien. And he goes into that in the books, when the Elves talk to Sam about rope. Elves being more spiritual beings, being actually greater beings than men, etc, etc, their normal day-to-day life contains stuff that we would consider 'magic' and they would consider 'no, that's just how we do things'. Like talking mind to mind. Or making rope where the knots won't come undone unless the person who tied the knot really wants it to come undone (that wasn't an enchantment, it was just 'how elves make rope'). Or potent swords and armor that 'are just that good'. Or whatever.

If I recall correctly, Tolkien likened a lot of magic to technology - a change to the world that wasn't natural. Hence, 'sorcerers' universally being evil. 'Necromancers'. His 'wizards'? They were actually angelic beings, so one might consider their magic more Theurgy than anything, or even expressions of their Maiar power.

The elven rings, despite not being touched by Sauron, were still the wrong way to go (which is upheld by the fact that they weren't made solely with Elven art, they were made in part using Sauron's instructions). They were an attempt to hold back nature, to go against the natural order. Two of them assisted in the creation of 'timeless' places where the Eldar could basically forget about their quite natural weariness. The third was made to generally kindle hope and strength in hearts grown weary - useful, but one can again see the attempt to create something that would get the Eldar feeling that yeah, nothing was wrong, everyone was feeling good, it's all great (certainly Celebrimbor didn't make it with the sole intent of helping people going to war, seeing as there wasn't any war at the time and they weren't really expecting anything horrible to come again - everyone thought the Shadow was gone).

But the real Elven stuff, while magic to us, was just natural to them.

Perhaps people have become jaded, thanks to being inundated with explosive, high-FX magic. But there's something that can be transmitted in good writing that just doesn't come through in the video games - the horror and/or power of magic that isn't all about 'blowing up that group of people', or the like.

There's an absolutely fantastic passage in Alan Garner's The Weirdstone of Brisengamen (a children's book written back at a time when people didn't think 'we must protect children from the idea of fearful things and death', then hand them video games containing all manner of blatant violence and slaughter) that really covers this, for me. I'll put it down here tonight, when I remember.

Anyway, yeah, Tolkien's magic all day every day. It's not my favourite style of magic use in fiction, but I like it. I don't like Harry Potter magic.

Mileage obviously may vary. :D

[Farealmer]

Instead I'm going to ask if the people posting prefer the Hogwarts School of Magic, ie BIG SPELLS, or the Tolkien Take on it, ie subtle magic?

BIG SPELLS for me, though I will say I think the use of Harry Potter magic on the BIG SPELLS side is misleading. You can have stories/settings like Dr. Strange, Anima, or WoD that have BIG SPELLS without the silliness HP magic goes into. While I like HP magic the issue with it is it seems too disconnected from the plot. Huge world changing stuff just comes and goes without being addressed why it wasn't being used during the conflict for example.

[Cleric of Hell’s Brigade]

Albus wins. Just way, way, way too many options for him, mostly from transmutation or just general charms. Petrificus Totalus comes to mind.

As to the magic systems, well, that depends. Tolkien magic is less........all encompassing. Towards the end, Potterverse wizards could pretty much do anything they needed, so long as they had the spell. Tolkienverse ones never get that much leeway. In terms of sheer horse power, Tolkienverse magic is stronger, but Potterverse is much more jack of all trades and handy, all around.

[Sharpandpointies]

You can have stories/settings like Dr. Strange, Anima, or WoD that have BIG SPELLS without the silliness HP magic goes into.

Getting into Anima? :)

As to the magic systems, well, that depends. Tolkien magic is less........all encompassing. Towards the end, Potterverse wizards could pretty much do anything they needed, so long as they had the spell. Tolkienverse ones never get that much leeway. In terms of sheer horse power, Tolkienverse magic is stronger, but Potterverse is much more jack of all trades and handy, all around.

So, the question being 'which do you prefer?'...

...got an answer? :D