Hope everyone enjoyed this remake of my first video. A discussion of not only one of my favourite characters from The Lord of the Rings but one of my favourite confrontations - Gandalf and Saruman at Orthanc. I have some ideas for future Saruman videos but please feel free to share your ideas in the comments! Support The Red Book - www.patreon.com/theredbook
I hate to beg you to make a video, but (lol) Amazon is making Galadriel into a Amazonian warrior and I would like to know how you feel about her being a sword wielding warrior at the end of the Second Age. Personally, I think she had a kind of conversion experience in Menegroth after she met and fell in love with Celeborn and got mentored by Melian. I think love is key the element in my perception of the change in her character arc. To me, it is similar to what happened to Amazonian Ëowyn in the Houses of Healing. Anyway, I think she forsook ruling "her own" kingdom and was content to be a co-ruler with Celeborn and later a mom to Celebrian and a grandmother to Arwen. We know she participated in White Council meetings and cast down Dol Guldor with her magic, but did she ever wield a sword after her time in Menegroth? We also know she left Beleriand long before the War of Wrath, obviously to avoid getting killed by Morgoth's forces, but actually to avoid getting killed by Dwarves. No Amazonian warrior would walk away from a battle. She also was called "Lady" in the places where she ruled, not seeking the title "Queen." I think that is how Tolkien shows the affect of God's love for us on our lives in his Legendarium. What say you?
Very thoughtfully done! I’m very curious what your thoughts are on the effects that might have been had if the Istari had not scattered upon arrival in Middle Earth but rather stayed together in Orthanc (or elsewhere) or at the very least, came together with greater frequency and determination for the purpose of rooting out and ending Sauron. I suspect that that sense of connection and brotherhood might have served to keep Saruman’s aspirations in check and allowed him to feel the sense of order that he felt was lacking. He is, after all, nearly completely isolated from any peers for vast amounts of time, and that, no doubt, had a significant hand in shaping his view of the world as one of chaos. On another note, it’s curious that Saruman of Many Colors still chose to employ the White Hand as his symbol.
@@christoclow9644 no one had really heard a whisper of sauron until I believe several Millenia into the third age. These wizards would need to wander around, learning from elves and men, reading ancient texts about those times, etc, while keeping a sharp eye out and getting elves and men ready far war if the need arose. Sauron also was known in the east, where Saruman and the blue wizards first went. They needed to be warned and equipped also. Some could stay there and others could be elsewhere. Searching out sauron was like prepping for an earthquake really. When the earth is still, people are supposed to be stocking up on water and making prep, such as making sure their house is structurally sound, remaining informed about earthquake preparedness, maybe doing drills at schools and in homes, and putting plans in place in case they may have to evacuate their homes, but otherwise living their lives as normal. When the earthquake finally hits you are ready as you can be, with a plan of how you will bear through the shaking and also the aftermath, if your electricity is out, water off, food not available for awhile. Gandalf and company had over 2 millenia of earthquake preparedness drills when it came to sauron. He was absent for so long, all the wizards but Gandalf got complacent and started doing their own thing, with Saruman learning how to make his own quakes of sorts, that he could control and use to terrorize people. If he had that last bit of magic ring knowledge, he certainly would have created his own ring to do exactly what sauron was doing with his.
Gandalf is like the good twin of Big Hat Logan in Darksouls. Logan also sought knowledge for knowledge's sake, without care for morality. AND he wore a big pointy hat!
I’m honored to support your work. The best I believe of any other Tolkien channel. You plumb the depths of the Legendarium and keep consistent with the world Tolkien manifested. I’m in my mid-60’s now and first read LOTR when I was 11 … reading it and all the surrounding works (not limited to the Silmarillion) and am constantly impressed by your insights. Keep it going.
Thank you for the continued support Dovid! I still feel happy when those reading Tolkien from decades before I was born enjoy what I have to say about it 😀
Brilliant as always. Unlike other Tolkein channels, you explore the complex ideas of his work rather than just recounting plots or the lives of characters.
@@TheRedBook Well if you need any ideas I always love delving into why Illuvatar allowed for Melkor to play his part of the song of creation. And also how In many elements including Gollum and Frodos own reluctance to overcome temptation (an Evil) was also how Good in the end won. Frodo would hold the shame of this after Mount Doom for the rest of his life. I believe it's part of Tolkeins philosophy that Good often relies upon Evil in order for Good to succeed, or Evil inevitablly destroys itself. Sorry for the paragraph, love the content!
Glad to hear from you again! When it comes to Saruman, I would like to see a comparison of his deaths in the book and film. A lot was lost when Jackson omitted The Scouring of The Shire, but how Saruman’s defiance at Orthanc was reworked into his death was well-written to me. I especially like how after Saruman was impaled, the water wheel rotated 1 last time to send him to a watery grave. What a fitting visual for Curunír the “man of skill”, whose evil industrializing scheme failed, to be sent off ignobly by a literally wheel of industry. Was Saruman’s adapted death good enough in place of his canonical one? That’s what I want to know.
"Was Saruman’s adapted death good enough in place of his canonical one? That’s what I want to know." A big fat no from me on that one. The fall onto the wheel was a bit too on the nose and it's missing the important words with Frodo. Saruman had to be at his lowest - a former head of the Order resorting to wrecking the Shire out of spite and because he couldn't manage anything 'greater' with the will he had left. Obviously all that had to be left out cause Scouring wasn't going to be included - but I think the quick and slightly goofy exit could have been done better. I probably won't do a comparison video but maybe a video about just how good Saruman's exit is in Tolkien's story.
@@TheRedBook Good points! Did you know that Tolkien was actually alright with omitting The Scouring?! In a letter to 1 of many directors who hoped to adapt the novel in his lifetime, he wrote something as follows: After Saruman confronts Gandalf and Co. as he did in The Voice Of Saruman, a frustrated Gandalf ends things with, “If you will not help or come down, Saruman, then you can rot in your tower!” And that’s it! Saruman and The Scouring are both pruned off like that. What do you think? As for Saruman’s death being too “on the nose”, it was Peter Jackson’s idea. Since Christopher Lee is most famous for playing Count Dracula, he had him impaled on the water wheel because he wanted to be “the last person to put a stake through Sir Lee’s heart”. What do you think?
Yes, Tolkien understood that an adaptation was an adaptation. I think it might have been worse if the Scouring of the Shire was given 10 minutes. It's a significant development and deserves proper attention. It's the problem with adaptations. Leaving it out robs us of signficant character development but it would have been impossible to fit into that movie - showing the weaknesses related to adapting such stories. I think Saruman still would deserve a send off since he's the physical and present antagonist for a large portion of the tale. Yeah, I have heard that last part too - again very on the nose since it's Christopher Lee - almost a tasteless way to send off Saruman though. I think a shot of a weakened and frail Saruman relegated to sitting in his tower surrounded by enemies would have been better. His betters then leaving to continue the fight and forgetting all about him. Him realising he is broken and insignificant but clinging onto it out of bitterness anyway.
@@TheRedBook I think Saruman deserved that stake through the heart. After seeing all the evil Morgoth and Sauron did over 3 Ages, he still chose evil. He made Man and Orcs interbreed, for Eru’s sake! Such inexcusable evils did not merit Saruman any sort of ‘tasteful’ death to me. But I must say, I like your alternate take too. A last shot of Saruman, isolated and insignificant, but bitter to the end. I like that too!
It's a 'no' from me - I don't like any of the adaptations made by Jackson, and losing the final episode of TLOTR, where the 'fine young lordlings' have the war brought to door of Bag End was a great shame. The death as portrayed in the movie was just another example of Jacksons heavy handed mis-direction. to me at least.
This is really good. Much better than channels with names like Geek of Tolkien etc., you get a lot deeper into the psychological and moral intricacies of the legendarium.
Geek of Tolkien :D haha. I'm surprised a channel doesn't have that name! It was pretty much why I wanted to transfer over to RUclips. There aren't many channels that go beyond recounting stories and events. That's fine but there's always room for somethijng a bit more in-depth.
Saruman, it seems to me had a very long fall...perhaps it began even before he was sent to Middle Earth... And we don't know much about what happened to the Blue Wizards but they went East and didn't come back but Saruman went there too and came back...not proof but food for thought... Thanks S.W.
There is a logic to Saruman, he believes in progress at any cost leading to a well-ordered society of productive individuals that is better capable of fighting Sauron. In reality it's an oppressive system that believes that hard toil is good for the common people when it is in fact a form of exploitation slavery. The only difference is that I think that Saruman always found the world of Middle Earth distasteful, too individualistic and inefficient and the Hobbits of the Shire must have been the worst possible people in the whole of Middle Earth, living a simple life that he must have found unbearable, that's why he turns the Shire into the equivalent of a Victorian workhouse and reforge the character of the Hobbits into becoming productive through hard labour. If his power is taken from him at least he can fix that blight. Gandalf understand that this simple life is what makes Hobbits so unique, he tested a few of them, most notably Bilbo and discovered they are incredibly resilient, resourceful and wise if given a good push. And their strength is that they are diametrically opposite to Sauron or even Saruman. They are often flawed, but they don't have great vices like the other races.
hell yeah, looking forward to this one. i wonder how Sauron and Saruman met, how they agreed and disagreed. would be cool to see for a video. they both would have plenty to chat because they are basically brothers.
Saruman takes the attitude now shared by our own civilization (for the past 3 years at least), choice of subjective -reality- in place the actual objective reality...
Normally I'm not the biggest fan of what-if scenarios or pouring into the minute details of characters but you handle both of these discussions very well in your videos. Being a LotR fan my entire life, I never would've thought I could see myself being fascinated by a video about Saruman and the meaning behind "the many colors". But here I am. Keep up the good work, Red Book.
This was fabulous. Thank you Steven. I remember you talking about this topic in an earlier video but I had forgotten a lot of what you said. Back then, your videos were a breath of fresh air and that was because of your voice and how you patiently educate and entertain us at the same time. I honestly didn't pay much attention to what was on the screen. I often listened to your videos while washing dishes or doing something else. Of course, your production is much better nowadays, but that doesn't, or shouldn't, diminish what you produced earlier. I don't think anyone minds watching a remake of any of your videos, especially if you change your mind on anything you have said on video. Keep up the great work.👍
"But it is, with the thought-factory, like with a woven tapestry, where one pass rouses a thousand threads, the shuttle crosses to and fro, the threads flow unseen, one knot strikes a thousand ties. The scholar steps up, and proves eager, it would have to be so, the first is so, the second is so, and thus, the third an fourth like so, and if the first and second were not, the third and fourth would not be, either. The students praise this in all places, though they never made any woven pieces. Who wishes to know and ken something alive, seeks first to drive the Geist aside. Then he has the parts in his hand, just lacking, sadly, the woven band." ~Goethe - Faust, The first part of the Tragedy, 1808~ In this scene, the devil ridicules the entire university education system of Europe at the time. By solely concentrating on what makes the parts and seeing the sum of the parts as the whole you lack the connections of each piece that make the tapestry of wisdom and multiply the meaning behind them. Even scholars from the 19th century were aware of this fact (though few) and Tolkien definitely was influenced by their thinking. Gandalf and Saruman denote two sides of the same coin. The destructive approach and the constructive approach to science. Similiar to how at first the human body was compared to a clockwork, then to a well-oiled machine, now to a computer. It's more than just its parts. Gandalf sees it that way. Saruman does not WANT to see it that way.
I've missed your sober, thoughtful musings on Middle Earth lore. I had gotten stuck in the book long ago on the thought that being of 'many colors', as Saruman called himself, is not a bad thing. In fact, the idea of diversity, the idea of many being one, the idea that light carries so many colors, etc., is amazing. So I couldn't understand why Gandalf called it 'leaving the path of wisdom'. Your summation at the end of the video wrapped up your thoughts nicely. What I got from it, in my own words, is that knowledge for its own sake at the expense of others, or knowledge for the sake of power, or knowledge and power at the expense of others' well being, is leaving the path of wisdom. Technology isn't bad in itself, but how it's created and how it's used can be if it hurts or disrespects the world or its beings. Technology leaves the path of wisdom if it does not respect or learn from the wisdom of the earth. I took it a little farther ;) I did notice that your production values and presentation have become more polished. Very nice. A pleasure to listen to and watch.
I concur. Gandalf is no Luddite. He marvels at the Palantir and considers using it to look into the past to see its creation at the hand of Feanor. Saruman forgot that he was in Middle Earth to give and not to take. He treated Orthanc like his own even though he was it's steward. Within is not better encapsulation of the fall of Saruman like the contents of his iron closet. He has become a hoarder of stolen treasure and knowledge meant to be shared just like a dragon. Whatever Saruman did or what happened to him in the East will never be known, but he doesn't return to the West until over 1400 years have past. By the time he gets back, the Great Plague has harrowed the West, Arnor has fallen, the Dwarfs of Khazad-Dum have been evicted by a balrog, and Gondor has endured a senseless civil war and wave after wave of a variety of Easterling tribes looking to make East Gondor and Wilderland their new homes. Hope you had fun learning Asian swordsmithing and origami with Alatar and Palando. Maybe a White Wizard would have made a difference for Arnor, the House of Durin, and Osgiliath had one been around?
Who can say? For all we know what Saruman did during those years may have prevented vastly larger hordes of Easterlings and Southrons from attacking the West.
Very insightful stuff Steven. I feel that Tolkien, was at least inspired by the poem Lamia, by John Keats. This also is more subtle than just being anti science and is an appeal for understanding and wisdom not just knowledge. As for Tolkien being anti-technology, this too is a simplistic view. He said himself,that he loved cars, “ Love riding in them.” Thanks and keep up the good work.
What if Saruman ACCEPTED Gandalfs offer of repentance in the Voice of Saruman? Would he have rejoined the right against Sauron? Tolkein hunts Saruman came very close to repenting several times but his hatred overcame him, pride conquered him.
I know that this this an old video, but Saruman is one of my favorite characters and the interaction between he and Gandalf is worth the discussion. I really enjoyed this. Thank you. ( would you also be open to doing a video on Gollum in the future?)
Why didn't Saruman as a maya started displaying his full power in Middle Earth when he turned openly evil? If I recall correctly mayar wield incredible power, but as Istari were forbbidden to use much f it.
I enjoy your videos. I, too, marked this passage out as a favorite. Tolkien had a deep love, reverence, and understanding of his Catholic faith. When I first read this passage, I thought Saruman's explanation of why he chose to be Saruman of many colors was a perfect description of the Gnostic heresy.
This passage always sounded to me like a debate over ethics and morality, which Saruman makes obvious towards the end when he tries to tempt Gandalf to allying with him. Saruman espoused the idea of moral compromise and ethical greys (hah) in order to achieve the greater good. By breaking your “white”, your code and conduct, you have entered the realm of many shades and hues which can be used to justify whatever actions or behaviors you might take. They can change on a dime, the same way that Saruman’s new clothes will change color the moment he moves or an observer blinks. Thus he is Sauruman of Many Colours. But as Gandalf points out with the most straightforward logic, once you break your code of conduct, you have ceased to be White any longer.
It could be argued that Saruman was corrupted by desire for the One Ring, much as Boromir from the fellowship was tempted towards folly. And so isn't necessarily fully to blame for his own actions.
One could take the (initial) white of Sarumans robes as an expression of his original mission; Guiding, but not interfering with the races of middle earth. Leaving it to the free peoples to "dye, write, or break" their world themselves, if you will. Claiming to be "of many colours" rejects that mission. And this would make the fact that Gandalf later is clad in white not just an expression of the shift of authority between the two, but also an affirmation that Gandalf is the wiser of the two, and has stayed truer to Sarumans mission than Saruman himself.
You should be very proud of this channel. It is a triumph of insight and knowledge. I'm sure Tolkien would very much approve which is more than can be said of the most modern interpretation of his work.
This is going to be long, I apologize in advance. I agree especially with the statement about "seeking knowledge at the expense of wisdom" but there is a dimension to this point, and indeed to this whole dialogue between Gandalf and Saruman that is lost on most modern people. There is a deeper philosophical point that Tolkien is referencing. This has to do with a metaphysical point that does bear heavily on the modern scientific view of the world. In philosophy, metaphysics deals with the study of Being as Being. You might say it looks at the questions of what things are and how they exist. One of the changes in thought that hallmarks the development of modern thought is a shift from trying to understand things in and of themselves, to trying to understand how things work. In other words trying to understand what a thing is, as opposed to understanding how a thing works, and can be used. This shift is exemplified by Francis Bacon's famous maxim that "Knowledge is power". In pre-modern philosophy knowledge was seen as its own reward. It was not fundamentally seen as a means to power. The ideal was that you sought to understand things, simply because they were worth understanding. This shift has profound implications because the idea that knowledge is power is fundamentally exploitative. In this view the whole point of knowing a thing is to be able to control it, exploit it, and use it to your own purposes. You impose your own purpose on things, and ultimately on the whole world. In the old view, the pursuit of knowledge was a kind of love. Thus "philosophy" the "love of wisdom". In the old model a person sought to understand the world because the world was beautiful and love drew them to desire to understand. Just like when you fall in love with someone you want to know all about them. In the modern view that is lost, and people begin to seek knowledge for the sake of being able to manipulate and control. The modern view has another major effect in that it leads people to view the world mechanistically. There is a profound difference between a being, and a machine. A machine is an assembly of parts that all serve a role in making the machine work. You understand the machine by taking it apart and looking at what each part does. A being, on the other hand, is a metaphysical unity. A being is indivisible. It literally can't be taken apart without destroying it. A machine is just the sum of its parts. A being is more than the sum of its parts. If you "break" a being, and take it apart, you may have an assemblage of parts, but you no longer have a being. Thus, it is actually not even entirely true that you can learn about things by taking them apart, because the thing itself is lost once it is broken. The white page, cloth, and light illustrate the point, but they themselves are not the point. There is nothing wrong with writing on a page, or dying cloth, or diffracting light. There are two things wrong here that stand out immediately. One is Saruman's disdain for the color. He sees it ONLY as something to be used for some other purpose. He does not see it as beautiful and worthwhile in itself. This expresses his utilitarian view. The thing is worthless to him, except as a beginning point for his own plans and uses. The second thing wrong here is that Saruman has completely shifted how he sees the world. He has committed one of the sins of modernity in that he no longer views things as a unified whole in themselves, as beings. Instead he now sees everything mechanistically. He thinks that he can understand the world by tearing it apart and breaking it down. This is often difficult for modern people to see or to understand because we are, ourselves, so indoctrinated with this view. The mistake of this view is perhaps easiest to see if we use the example of a human being, or even an animal. In modernity we tend to view human beings and animals as simply biological machines. Your body is a machine in which eat part fulfills a function to keep the whole machine running. But that is not fundamentally what YOU are. You are a person, not a body. If you take a body apart, you can learn a lot about how a body functions, but you can't really learn much, or anything about a person. Once a body has been broken down, it is no longer a person. Saruman's great mistake here is akin to thinking that you can learn about a person, by dissecting them. This is not only inhumane, it is also simply incorrect. You can't learn much about a person by dissecting them, because by that point the person is gone. Both things that Saruman is doing wrong here also have to do with relationship. The question being, what is our relationship to the world and the things in the world. Gandalf, the Elves, the Hobbits, etc see trees as beautiful things to be loved for their own sake. They have a relationship with trees in which they appreciate trees as they are, and are enriched by the experience. Saruman, on the other hand, has come to see trees only as firewood to fuel his industry. Probably the most direct and most perfect counterpoint to Saruman in this respect is Tom Bombadil. Tom is the master of his domain, yet he allows everything in his domain to be itself. His relationship with the world is one of mutual benefit, simply by each thing being what it is. He gets milk from the cows, honey from the bees, he rides his pony when he needs to, but he doesn't dominate them, or control them. He benefits from them, simply by letting them be what they are. They benefit from him as well. This also gets into another major difference between classical philosophy and modernity. In classical philosophy there is a concept called Telos, or Teleology. This is the notion that everything has its own perfect identity, which is also its purpose. Everything fulfills its purpose by being what it was meant to be. Everything is growing into itself. In modernity the idea of teleology basically doesn't exist anymore. This relates directly to the exploitive nature of knowledge. If things don't have their own purpose then we are free to use them however we want. If, on the other hand, each thing has its own purpose that is built in to its identity, then it is morally dangerous, at the very least, for us to use them in ways that don't align with their own innate purpose. This leads to something that Tolkien was very conscious of and deliberately meant to address in his stories. There is a real danger, both moral and existential, in machines and the technological worldview. We think of machines and technology simply as tools that we use. In that role they are fine. For example the water mill in Hobbiton. However, what actually often happens is that technology changes us and changes our relationship with the world. A tool properly used does not change the person using it. It is a real danger, however, when things cease to be merely tools and become something reshapes us, our society, and our relationship with the world. If, for example, we allow our use of technology to change us to the point where we view the whole world mechanistically. This is also true of science. Science necessarily takes a mechanistic view of the things it studies. That, again, is fine and very useful if it is kept in its proper place. We've accomplished great things with science. However, the scientific view of the world is very limited. It can only view the world in one limited, narrow way. Thus it is necessary for us to always keep in mind that the mechanistic, scientific view is not the fullness of reality. When we see the world scientifically, we can learn a lot of useful things, but we are also not seeing the fullness of the world. When we view things scientifically, we are not seeing those things fully as they are in themselves. This is not at all meant to say that science is invalid, or that technology or machines are invalid. Rather it is a recognition that those things are not really the full picture. It is a call to remember that the world is more, and that each thing is more than just its parts. The danger here can perhaps be seen by looking at two modern maxims combined. Knowledge is power, and power tends to corrupt. If knowledge is based on and motivated by love for things and for the world, then it brings wisdom. If knowledge is only about power, then it corrupts.
According to physics, light is the carrier of information and each color of light corresponds to a certain frequency or wavelength of light. Accordingly, each color of light carries a certain aspect of knowledge. White light is a combination of all colors (informations) and is factual and represents an abstract concept such as wisdom.
Thanks for just leaving the old one on the channel. It’s nice going back and watching older videos, even after a remade version of higher quality has been made.
Yes, the newer version of the video is clearly better but don't sell the original short. It was all I needed to know I wanted to hear more of what you had to say. Please post the date & time of your livestream as soon as possible so I can try to make sure I can be there for it.
This is one of those passages that I still feel like I don’t have a good grasp on, which makes me think it’s also probably one of the deepest and best in the book. 😅 Your commentary is elucidating but I still think there are unplumbed depths.
Definitely. I haven't explained it all by any stretch of the imagination. There's a whole 'path of Eru' side I didn't get into at all. Or as someone on my Discord said Divine Truth vs Moral Relativism. One reason why the whole conversation is one of my favourite Tolkien moments.
A great video, you did a great job here, and frankly I do think Gandalf made a good point about the difference between wisdom and knowledge. The difference between wondering if something could be done and thinking it over properly so to speak as implied in JP. I do think that Gandalf is quite right here and that Saruman's unveiling of his many colours as a sign of true madness. Though I would bring up Lewis's words that the worst tyrants out there will often claim to be doing it for our own good when it is really for their own benefit.
Excellent work Mellon! Keep up the great work. I always believed that Blue Wizards went incognito to hide from Saruman. They knew that his new found power would inevitably betray them(blue guys).Sarumans eventual treacherous nature would cause their downfall as well as his. So they disappeared from history...though their deeds still noble, regretfully they remain unknown.
Beautiful video! The meaning of this passage wasn’t clear to me, but now I think I understand, thanks to your analysis. You also remind us of the importance of ‘rule’ and ‘order’ to Saruman, which brings to mind the importance of rules & order to the Nazis c. WWII. As we know, they used truly heinous means of gaining knowledge, especially in their medical experimentation on people (IMHO still occurs with animals). I don’t know if Tolkien even knew what the Nazis were up to as he wrote this piece, but the parallels are chilling.
Another fine insight to the written canon - Your channel is always thought provoking, and constantly make me love the books more and more. Brilliant, Steven.
Excellent video dwelving deep into the lore again. I think Gandalfs way to see right and wrong has to do with something being natural or not. Evil seem often to twist what is natural or break it... And that was the path Saruman took.
The ones I'd remove would be for copyright reasons. I have some videos that use a lot of art from artists who no longer want people to use it. In those cases, I'd take the old videos down.
@@TheRedBook - I have noticed you using some work by Pete Amachree. I've interacted with him on Twitter, and he's really a nice guy. HIs painting of Fingolfin challenge Morgoth at the gates of Angband was the one that first caught my eye.
I think it's silly not to trust the audience to know the difference but it would have been ok if there had been some consistency. I can't believe that he is called Saruman AND Aruman in the same movie. Some of the designs are mental haha, the Balrog, Aragorn, Sam, Elrond. I could go on.
Good points.A suggestion:how about possible(or none)correlations of initiation as in a "cult" hidden in Tolkien's text...namely at Bombadil's home and Galadriel's mirror and/or,maybe somewhere else?!...Anyway,a Simple possibility,no more.
Destructive tests are actually some of the most informative tests we can perform. Assuming you’re okay with destroying the thing to learn the properties of its kind.
I didn't realize this was a remake of your first video. Way cool, keep up the good work! And please do your livestream as soon as you can please please please 😊
You should check out the first video and laugh at how awkward it is 😂 . And yeah, I will definitely be doing it in June anyway - I've only tried one before for Patreon members so it is all still quite new to me. It's something I'm attempting on the channel though and people will get notice about when it is happening.
That's Red Book, a nice video. If I could gently make one request though... would it be possible to narrate a little faster? Even at 2x speed, which is the maximum available, it is a little slow to listen to.
You can understand me at 2x speed? I don't think I can understand myself at that speed. But no, I definitely will not be changing how I narrate. If you watch the original version of this video you will hear me narrating at speed and it's terrible. What I am comfortable with is the most important and I like my current narration.
No. Fuck that! The speed at which he speaks is an essential part of communicating these thoughts. If you want to speed it up…you have the playback controls at your fingertips!
Hope everyone enjoyed this remake of my first video. A discussion of not only one of my favourite characters from The Lord of the Rings but one of my favourite confrontations - Gandalf and Saruman at Orthanc. I have some ideas for future Saruman videos but please feel free to share your ideas in the comments!
Support The Red Book - www.patreon.com/theredbook
Definately an improvement!
I hate to beg you to make a video, but (lol) Amazon is making Galadriel into a Amazonian warrior and I would like to know how you feel about her being a sword wielding warrior at the end of the Second Age.
Personally, I think she had a kind of conversion experience in Menegroth after she met and fell in love with Celeborn and got mentored by Melian. I think love is key the element in my perception of the change in her character arc. To me, it is similar to what happened to Amazonian Ëowyn in the Houses of Healing.
Anyway, I think she forsook ruling "her own" kingdom and was content to be a co-ruler with Celeborn and later a mom to Celebrian and a grandmother to Arwen. We know she participated in White Council meetings and cast down Dol Guldor with her magic, but did she ever wield a sword after her time in Menegroth? We also know she left Beleriand long before the War of Wrath, obviously to avoid getting killed by Morgoth's forces, but actually to avoid getting killed by Dwarves. No Amazonian warrior would walk away from a battle. She also was called "Lady" in the places where she ruled, not seeking the title "Queen." I think that is how Tolkien shows the affect of God's love for us on our lives in his Legendarium. What say you?
Very thoughtfully done! I’m very curious what your thoughts are on the effects that might have been had if the Istari had not scattered upon arrival in Middle Earth but rather stayed together in Orthanc (or elsewhere) or at the very least, came together with greater frequency and determination for the purpose of rooting out and ending Sauron. I suspect that that sense of connection and brotherhood might have served to keep Saruman’s aspirations in check and allowed him to feel the sense of order that he felt was lacking. He is, after all, nearly completely isolated from any peers for vast amounts of time, and that, no doubt, had a significant hand in shaping his view of the world as one of chaos.
On another note, it’s curious that Saruman of Many Colors still chose to employ the White Hand as his symbol.
@@christoclow9644 no one had really heard a whisper of sauron until I believe several Millenia into the third age. These wizards would need to wander around, learning from elves and men, reading ancient texts about those times, etc, while keeping a sharp eye out and getting elves and men ready far war if the need arose. Sauron also was known in the east, where Saruman and the blue wizards first went. They needed to be warned and equipped also. Some could stay there and others could be elsewhere. Searching out sauron was like prepping for an earthquake really. When the earth is still, people are supposed to be stocking up on water and making prep, such as making sure their house is structurally sound, remaining informed about earthquake preparedness, maybe doing drills at schools and in homes, and putting plans in place in case they may have to evacuate their homes, but otherwise living their lives as normal. When the earthquake finally hits you are ready as you can be, with a plan of how you will bear through the shaking and also the aftermath, if your electricity is out, water off, food not available for awhile. Gandalf and company had over 2 millenia of earthquake preparedness drills when it came to sauron. He was absent for so long, all the wizards but Gandalf got complacent and started doing their own thing, with Saruman learning how to make his own quakes of sorts, that he could control and use to terrorize people. If he had that last bit of magic ring knowledge, he certainly would have created his own ring to do exactly what sauron was doing with his.
Gandalf is like the good twin of Big Hat Logan in Darksouls. Logan also sought knowledge for knowledge's sake, without care for morality. AND he wore a big pointy hat!
I’m honored to support your work. The best I believe of any other Tolkien channel. You plumb the depths of the Legendarium and keep consistent with the world Tolkien manifested. I’m in my mid-60’s now and first read LOTR when I was 11 … reading it and all the surrounding works (not limited to the Silmarillion) and am constantly impressed by your insights. Keep it going.
Thank you for the continued support Dovid! I still feel happy when those reading Tolkien from decades before I was born enjoy what I have to say about it 😀
Amen, amen and amen!
"A wizard should know better!" Treebeard.
“A wizard *does* know better”
Brilliant as always. Unlike other Tolkein channels, you explore the complex ideas of his work rather than just recounting plots or the lives of characters.
Thanks! That's my backup plan for when I run out of ideas 😅
@@TheRedBook Well if you need any ideas I always love delving into why Illuvatar allowed for Melkor to play his part of the song of creation. And also how In many elements including Gollum and Frodos own reluctance to overcome temptation (an Evil) was also how Good in the end won. Frodo would hold the shame of this after Mount Doom for the rest of his life. I believe it's part of Tolkeins philosophy that Good often relies upon Evil in order for Good to succeed, or Evil inevitablly destroys itself. Sorry for the paragraph, love the content!
@@kingkoi6542 it was fine till he started hurting others then eru got mad
@@kingkoi6542 wow my doubts too you got this down to a tee. Definitely need more analysis on these.
Glad to hear from you again! When it comes to Saruman, I would like to see a comparison of his deaths in the book and film. A lot was lost when Jackson omitted The Scouring of The Shire, but how Saruman’s defiance at Orthanc was reworked into his death was well-written to me.
I especially like how after Saruman was impaled, the water wheel rotated 1 last time to send him to a watery grave. What a fitting visual for Curunír the “man of skill”, whose evil industrializing scheme failed, to be sent off ignobly by a literally wheel of industry.
Was Saruman’s adapted death good enough in place of his canonical one? That’s what I want to know.
"Was Saruman’s adapted death good enough in place of his canonical one? That’s what I want to know."
A big fat no from me on that one. The fall onto the wheel was a bit too on the nose and it's missing the important words with Frodo. Saruman had to be at his lowest - a former head of the Order resorting to wrecking the Shire out of spite and because he couldn't manage anything 'greater' with the will he had left. Obviously all that had to be left out cause Scouring wasn't going to be included - but I think the quick and slightly goofy exit could have been done better. I probably won't do a comparison video but maybe a video about just how good Saruman's exit is in Tolkien's story.
@@TheRedBook Good points!
Did you know that Tolkien was actually alright with omitting The Scouring?! In a letter to 1 of many directors who hoped to adapt the novel in his lifetime, he wrote something as follows:
After Saruman confronts Gandalf and Co. as he did in The Voice Of Saruman, a frustrated Gandalf ends things with, “If you will not help or come down, Saruman, then you can rot in your tower!” And that’s it! Saruman and The Scouring are both pruned off like that. What do you think?
As for Saruman’s death being too “on the nose”, it was Peter Jackson’s idea. Since Christopher Lee is most famous for playing Count Dracula, he had him impaled on the water wheel because he wanted to be “the last person to put a stake through Sir Lee’s heart”. What do you think?
Yes, Tolkien understood that an adaptation was an adaptation. I think it might have been worse if the Scouring of the Shire was given 10 minutes. It's a significant development and deserves proper attention. It's the problem with adaptations. Leaving it out robs us of signficant character development but it would have been impossible to fit into that movie - showing the weaknesses related to adapting such stories.
I think Saruman still would deserve a send off since he's the physical and present antagonist for a large portion of the tale.
Yeah, I have heard that last part too - again very on the nose since it's Christopher Lee - almost a tasteless way to send off Saruman though. I think a shot of a weakened and frail Saruman relegated to sitting in his tower surrounded by enemies would have been better. His betters then leaving to continue the fight and forgetting all about him. Him realising he is broken and insignificant but clinging onto it out of bitterness anyway.
@@TheRedBook I think Saruman deserved that stake through the heart. After seeing all the evil Morgoth and Sauron did over 3 Ages, he still chose evil. He made Man and Orcs interbreed, for Eru’s sake! Such inexcusable evils did not merit Saruman any sort of ‘tasteful’ death to me.
But I must say, I like your alternate take too. A last shot of Saruman, isolated and insignificant, but bitter to the end. I like that too!
It's a 'no' from me - I don't like any of the adaptations made by Jackson, and losing the final episode of TLOTR, where the 'fine young lordlings' have the war brought to door of Bag End was a great shame. The death as portrayed in the movie was just another example of Jacksons heavy handed mis-direction. to me at least.
This is really good. Much better than channels with names like Geek of Tolkien etc., you get a lot deeper into the psychological and moral intricacies of the legendarium.
Geek of Tolkien :D haha. I'm surprised a channel doesn't have that name! It was pretty much why I wanted to transfer over to RUclips. There aren't many channels that go beyond recounting stories and events. That's fine but there's always room for somethijng a bit more in-depth.
Saruman, it seems to me had a very long fall...perhaps it began even before he was sent to Middle Earth...
And we don't know much about what happened to the Blue Wizards but they went East and didn't come back but Saruman went there too and came back...not proof but food for thought...
Thanks
S.W.
There is a logic to Saruman, he believes in progress at any cost leading to a well-ordered society of productive individuals that is better capable of fighting Sauron. In reality it's an oppressive system that believes that hard toil is good for the common people when it is in fact a form of exploitation slavery. The only difference is that
I think that Saruman always found the world of Middle Earth distasteful, too individualistic and inefficient and the Hobbits of the Shire must have been the worst possible people in the whole of Middle Earth, living a simple life that he must have found unbearable, that's why he turns the Shire into the equivalent of a Victorian workhouse and reforge the character of the Hobbits into becoming productive through hard labour. If his power is taken from him at least he can fix that blight.
Gandalf understand that this simple life is what makes Hobbits so unique, he tested a few of them, most notably Bilbo and discovered they are incredibly resilient, resourceful and wise if given a good push. And their strength is that they are diametrically opposite to Sauron or even Saruman. They are often flawed, but they don't have great vices like the other races.
hell yeah, looking forward to this one. i wonder how Sauron and Saruman met, how they agreed and disagreed. would be cool to see for a video. they both would have plenty to chat because they are basically brothers.
Saruman takes the attitude now shared by our own civilization (for the past 3 years at least), choice of subjective -reality- in place the actual objective reality...
For the algorithm.
Normally I'm not the biggest fan of what-if scenarios or pouring into the minute details of characters but you handle both of these discussions very well in your videos. Being a LotR fan my entire life, I never would've thought I could see myself being fascinated by a video about Saruman and the meaning behind "the many colors". But here I am. Keep up the good work, Red Book.
Great video. Thanks for sharing
What audio version of The Lord of the Rings are you drawing from when you play quotes? It sounds REALLY good. I'd like to listen.
Hi Matthew, it's Phil Dragash's Soundscape. A link to his site is in the description of all my videos.
This was fabulous. Thank you Steven.
I remember you talking about this topic in an earlier video but I had forgotten a lot of what you said. Back then, your videos were a breath of fresh air and that was because of your voice and how you patiently educate and entertain us at the same time. I honestly didn't pay much attention to what was on the screen. I often listened to your videos while washing dishes or doing something else.
Of course, your production is much better nowadays, but that doesn't, or shouldn't, diminish what you produced earlier. I don't think anyone minds watching a remake of any of your videos, especially if you change your mind on anything you have said on video. Keep up the great work.👍
Fantastic. Thank you.
Most underrated LOTR channel on YT.
Thank you for another refreshing take on one of the most timeless tales of the 20th Century.
Thank you :D
"But it is, with the thought-factory,
like with a woven tapestry,
where one pass rouses a thousand threads,
the shuttle crosses to and fro,
the threads flow
unseen, one knot strikes a thousand ties.
The scholar steps up, and proves eager,
it would have to be so,
the first is so,
the second is so,
and thus, the third an fourth like so,
and if the first and second were not,
the third and fourth would not be, either.
The students praise this in all places,
though they never made any woven pieces.
Who wishes to know and ken something alive,
seeks first to drive the Geist aside.
Then he has the parts in his hand,
just lacking, sadly, the woven band."
~Goethe - Faust, The first part of the Tragedy, 1808~
In this scene, the devil ridicules the entire university education system of Europe at the time. By solely concentrating on what makes the parts and seeing the sum of the parts as the whole you lack the connections of each piece that make the tapestry of wisdom and multiply the meaning behind them. Even scholars from the 19th century were aware of this fact (though few) and Tolkien definitely was influenced by their thinking.
Gandalf and Saruman denote two sides of the same coin. The destructive approach and the constructive approach to science. Similiar to how at first the human body was compared to a clockwork, then to a well-oiled machine, now to a computer. It's more than just its parts. Gandalf sees it that way. Saruman does not WANT to see it that way.
I've missed your sober, thoughtful musings on Middle Earth lore.
I had gotten stuck in the book long ago on the thought that being of 'many colors', as Saruman called himself, is not a bad thing. In fact, the idea of diversity, the idea of many being one, the idea that light carries so many colors, etc., is amazing. So I couldn't understand why Gandalf called it 'leaving the path of wisdom'.
Your summation at the end of the video wrapped up your thoughts nicely. What I got from it, in my own words, is that knowledge for its own sake at the expense of others, or knowledge for the sake of power, or knowledge and power at the expense of others' well being, is leaving the path of wisdom. Technology isn't bad in itself, but how it's created and how it's used can be if it hurts or disrespects the world or its beings. Technology leaves the path of wisdom if it does not respect or learn from the wisdom of the earth. I took it a little farther ;)
I did notice that your production values and presentation have become more polished. Very nice. A pleasure to listen to and watch.
I concur. Gandalf is no Luddite. He marvels at the Palantir and considers using it to look into the past to see its creation at the hand of Feanor. Saruman forgot that he was in Middle Earth to give and not to take. He treated Orthanc like his own even though he was it's steward. Within is not better encapsulation of the fall of Saruman like the contents of his iron closet. He has become a hoarder of stolen treasure and knowledge meant to be shared just like a dragon. Whatever Saruman did or what happened to him in the East will never be known, but he doesn't return to the West until over 1400 years have past. By the time he gets back, the Great Plague has harrowed the West, Arnor has fallen, the Dwarfs of Khazad-Dum have been evicted by a balrog, and Gondor has endured a senseless civil war and wave after wave of a variety of Easterling tribes looking to make East Gondor and Wilderland their new homes. Hope you had fun learning Asian swordsmithing and origami with Alatar and Palando. Maybe a White Wizard would have made a difference for Arnor, the House of Durin, and Osgiliath had one been around?
Who can say? For all we know what Saruman did during those years may have prevented vastly larger hordes of Easterlings and Southrons from attacking the West.
I don't think so. There were already 2 wizards there.
Very insightful stuff Steven. I feel that Tolkien, was at least inspired by the poem Lamia, by John Keats. This also is more subtle than just being anti science and is an appeal for understanding and wisdom not just knowledge. As for Tolkien being anti-technology, this too is a simplistic view. He said himself,that he loved cars, “ Love riding in them.” Thanks and keep up the good work.
What if Saruman ACCEPTED Gandalfs offer of repentance in the Voice of Saruman? Would he have rejoined the right against Sauron? Tolkein hunts Saruman came very close to repenting several times but his hatred overcame him, pride conquered him.
I know that this this an old video, but Saruman is one of my favorite characters and the interaction between he and Gandalf is worth the discussion. I really enjoyed this. Thank you. ( would you also be open to doing a video on Gollum in the future?)
Why didn't Saruman as a maya started displaying his full power in Middle Earth when he turned openly evil? If I recall correctly mayar wield incredible power, but as Istari were forbbidden to use much f it.
I enjoy your videos. I, too, marked this passage out as a favorite. Tolkien had a deep love, reverence, and understanding of his Catholic faith. When I first read this passage, I thought Saruman's explanation of why he chose to be Saruman of many colors was a perfect description of the Gnostic heresy.
This passage always sounded to me like a debate over ethics and morality, which Saruman makes obvious towards the end when he tries to tempt Gandalf to allying with him. Saruman espoused the idea of moral compromise and ethical greys (hah) in order to achieve the greater good. By breaking your “white”, your code and conduct, you have entered the realm of many shades and hues which can be used to justify whatever actions or behaviors you might take. They can change on a dime, the same way that Saruman’s new clothes will change color the moment he moves or an observer blinks. Thus he is Sauruman of Many Colours. But as Gandalf points out with the most straightforward logic, once you break your code of conduct, you have ceased to be White any longer.
I thought this was familiar.
You have definitely improved, but the first version was still really good.
Happy birth(?)day
It could be argued that Saruman was corrupted by desire for the One Ring, much as Boromir from the fellowship was tempted towards folly. And so isn't necessarily fully to blame for his own actions.
One could take the (initial) white of Sarumans robes as an expression of his original mission; Guiding, but not interfering with the races of middle earth. Leaving it to the free peoples to "dye, write, or break" their world themselves, if you will.
Claiming to be "of many colours" rejects that mission.
And this would make the fact that Gandalf later is clad in white not just an expression of the shift of authority between the two, but also an affirmation that Gandalf is the wiser of the two, and has stayed truer to Sarumans mission than Saruman himself.
You should be very proud of this channel. It is a triumph of insight and knowledge. I'm sure Tolkien would very much approve which is more than can be said of the most modern interpretation of his work.
This is going to be long, I apologize in advance.
I agree especially with the statement about "seeking knowledge at the expense of wisdom" but there is a dimension to this point, and indeed to this whole dialogue between Gandalf and Saruman that is lost on most modern people. There is a deeper philosophical point that Tolkien is referencing.
This has to do with a metaphysical point that does bear heavily on the modern scientific view of the world. In philosophy, metaphysics deals with the study of Being as Being. You might say it looks at the questions of what things are and how they exist.
One of the changes in thought that hallmarks the development of modern thought is a shift from trying to understand things in and of themselves, to trying to understand how things work. In other words trying to understand what a thing is, as opposed to understanding how a thing works, and can be used. This shift is exemplified by Francis Bacon's famous maxim that "Knowledge is power". In pre-modern philosophy knowledge was seen as its own reward. It was not fundamentally seen as a means to power. The ideal was that you sought to understand things, simply because they were worth understanding.
This shift has profound implications because the idea that knowledge is power is fundamentally exploitative. In this view the whole point of knowing a thing is to be able to control it, exploit it, and use it to your own purposes. You impose your own purpose on things, and ultimately on the whole world. In the old view, the pursuit of knowledge was a kind of love. Thus "philosophy" the "love of wisdom". In the old model a person sought to understand the world because the world was beautiful and love drew them to desire to understand. Just like when you fall in love with someone you want to know all about them.
In the modern view that is lost, and people begin to seek knowledge for the sake of being able to manipulate and control.
The modern view has another major effect in that it leads people to view the world mechanistically. There is a profound difference between a being, and a machine. A machine is an assembly of parts that all serve a role in making the machine work. You understand the machine by taking it apart and looking at what each part does. A being, on the other hand, is a metaphysical unity. A being is indivisible. It literally can't be taken apart without destroying it.
A machine is just the sum of its parts. A being is more than the sum of its parts. If you "break" a being, and take it apart, you may have an assemblage of parts, but you no longer have a being.
Thus, it is actually not even entirely true that you can learn about things by taking them apart, because the thing itself is lost once it is broken.
The white page, cloth, and light illustrate the point, but they themselves are not the point. There is nothing wrong with writing on a page, or dying cloth, or diffracting light. There are two things wrong here that stand out immediately. One is Saruman's disdain for the color. He sees it ONLY as something to be used for some other purpose. He does not see it as beautiful and worthwhile in itself. This expresses his utilitarian view. The thing is worthless to him, except as a beginning point for his own plans and uses.
The second thing wrong here is that Saruman has completely shifted how he sees the world. He has committed one of the sins of modernity in that he no longer views things as a unified whole in themselves, as beings. Instead he now sees everything mechanistically. He thinks that he can understand the world by tearing it apart and breaking it down.
This is often difficult for modern people to see or to understand because we are, ourselves, so indoctrinated with this view. The mistake of this view is perhaps easiest to see if we use the example of a human being, or even an animal. In modernity we tend to view human beings and animals as simply biological machines. Your body is a machine in which eat part fulfills a function to keep the whole machine running. But that is not fundamentally what YOU are. You are a person, not a body. If you take a body apart, you can learn a lot about how a body functions, but you can't really learn much, or anything about a person. Once a body has been broken down, it is no longer a person.
Saruman's great mistake here is akin to thinking that you can learn about a person, by dissecting them. This is not only inhumane, it is also simply incorrect. You can't learn much about a person by dissecting them, because by that point the person is gone.
Both things that Saruman is doing wrong here also have to do with relationship. The question being, what is our relationship to the world and the things in the world.
Gandalf, the Elves, the Hobbits, etc see trees as beautiful things to be loved for their own sake. They have a relationship with trees in which they appreciate trees as they are, and are enriched by the experience. Saruman, on the other hand, has come to see trees only as firewood to fuel his industry.
Probably the most direct and most perfect counterpoint to Saruman in this respect is Tom Bombadil. Tom is the master of his domain, yet he allows everything in his domain to be itself. His relationship with the world is one of mutual benefit, simply by each thing being what it is. He gets milk from the cows, honey from the bees, he rides his pony when he needs to, but he doesn't dominate them, or control them. He benefits from them, simply by letting them be what they are. They benefit from him as well.
This also gets into another major difference between classical philosophy and modernity. In classical philosophy there is a concept called Telos, or Teleology. This is the notion that everything has its own perfect identity, which is also its purpose. Everything fulfills its purpose by being what it was meant to be. Everything is growing into itself. In modernity the idea of teleology basically doesn't exist anymore. This relates directly to the exploitive nature of knowledge. If things don't have their own purpose then we are free to use them however we want. If, on the other hand, each thing has its own purpose that is built in to its identity, then it is morally dangerous, at the very least, for us to use them in ways that don't align with their own innate purpose.
This leads to something that Tolkien was very conscious of and deliberately meant to address in his stories. There is a real danger, both moral and existential, in machines and the technological worldview. We think of machines and technology simply as tools that we use. In that role they are fine. For example the water mill in Hobbiton. However, what actually often happens is that technology changes us and changes our relationship with the world. A tool properly used does not change the person using it. It is a real danger, however, when things cease to be merely tools and become something reshapes us, our society, and our relationship with the world. If, for example, we allow our use of technology to change us to the point where we view the whole world mechanistically.
This is also true of science. Science necessarily takes a mechanistic view of the things it studies. That, again, is fine and very useful if it is kept in its proper place. We've accomplished great things with science. However, the scientific view of the world is very limited. It can only view the world in one limited, narrow way. Thus it is necessary for us to always keep in mind that the mechanistic, scientific view is not the fullness of reality. When we see the world scientifically, we can learn a lot of useful things, but we are also not seeing the fullness of the world. When we view things scientifically, we are not seeing those things fully as they are in themselves.
This is not at all meant to say that science is invalid, or that technology or machines are invalid. Rather it is a recognition that those things are not really the full picture. It is a call to remember that the world is more, and that each thing is more than just its parts.
The danger here can perhaps be seen by looking at two modern maxims combined. Knowledge is power, and power tends to corrupt. If knowledge is based on and motivated by love for things and for the world, then it brings wisdom. If knowledge is only about power, then it corrupts.
According to physics, light is the carrier of information and each color of light corresponds to a certain frequency or wavelength of light. Accordingly, each color of light carries a certain aspect of knowledge. White light is a combination of all colors (informations) and is factual and represents an abstract concept such as wisdom.
Excellent video! You are very intelligent. I hope to be like this in several years.
Thanks for just leaving the old one on the channel. It’s nice going back and watching older videos, even after a remade version of higher quality has been made.
Of course! For the ones I am remaking due to artwork issues, I'll (unfortunately) have to take those ones down!
Yes, the newer version of the video is clearly better but don't sell the original short. It was all I needed to know I wanted to hear more of what you had to say.
Please post the date & time of your livestream as soon as possible so I can try to make sure I can be there for it.
This is one of those passages that I still feel like I don’t have a good grasp on, which makes me think it’s also probably one of the deepest and best in the book. 😅 Your commentary is elucidating but I still think there are unplumbed depths.
Definitely. I haven't explained it all by any stretch of the imagination. There's a whole 'path of Eru' side I didn't get into at all. Or as someone on my Discord said Divine Truth vs Moral Relativism. One reason why the whole conversation is one of my favourite Tolkien moments.
"A wizard puts his wand wherever he wishes!" - Saruman probably
I love this moment.
Hey that is a cool lore channel you got here!
It's not bad!
Great art work that augments the narration. Really enjoyed it :)
My main interpretation is: as one abandons purity, one is open to darkness.
Excellent as ever.
Knowledge is knowing tomato is a fruit, wisdom is not putting one in a fruit salad.
I love that you use Phil Dragash’s audio
Your first efforts are better than most creators ever make. And of course I enjoyed this video as well Thank you
What a progression in such a short time
Yes definitely a better production, quality art wise .
Nice work dude thanks
Great topic, excellent video!
Bathing in Scouse tears here
Just a shame it had to be Real Madrid instead!
I really liked this analysis a lot
I think this is the best video on your channel!
👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
A great video, you did a great job here, and frankly I do think Gandalf made a good point about the difference between wisdom and knowledge. The difference between wondering if something could be done and thinking it over properly so to speak as implied in JP.
I do think that Gandalf is quite right here and that Saruman's unveiling of his many colours as a sign of true madness. Though I would bring up Lewis's words that the worst tyrants out there will often claim to be doing it for our own good when it is really for their own benefit.
Excellent work Mellon! Keep up the great work. I always believed that Blue Wizards went incognito to hide from Saruman. They knew that his new found power would inevitably betray them(blue guys).Sarumans eventual treacherous nature would cause their downfall as well as his. So they disappeared from history...though their deeds still noble, regretfully they remain unknown.
Beautiful video! The meaning of this passage wasn’t clear to me, but now I think I understand, thanks to your analysis. You also remind us of the importance of ‘rule’ and ‘order’ to Saruman, which brings to mind the importance of rules & order to the Nazis c. WWII. As we know, they used truly heinous means of gaining knowledge, especially in their medical experimentation on people (IMHO still occurs with animals). I don’t know if Tolkien even knew what the Nazis were up to as he wrote this piece, but the parallels are chilling.
This exchange between Gandalf and Saruman is one of the most interesting ones. I'm real happy this was covered on this channel :)
To be tens of thousands of years old, Saruman is kinda stupid.
The nature of evil. I wouldn't say stupid but would certainly say unwise.
@@TheRedBook Correct, not stupid, but unwise enough and arrogant enough and jealous enough of Gandalf to be classified as unwise.
Another fine insight to the written canon - Your channel is always thought provoking, and constantly make me love the books more and more. Brilliant, Steven.
Excellent video dwelving deep into the lore again. I think Gandalfs way to see right and wrong has to do with something being natural or not. Evil seem often to twist what is natural or break it... And that was the path Saruman took.
Thank you man.
Saurmans fall almost doomed the people's of middle earth
You should leave up ALL the old ones; no point in removing them, really.
The ones I'd remove would be for copyright reasons. I have some videos that use a lot of art from artists who no longer want people to use it. In those cases, I'd take the old videos down.
@@TheRedBook - Fair enough. If it's a legal question, their permission might not be rescindable, but if it's just you being courteous, go for it.
@@TheRedBook - I have noticed you using some work by Pete Amachree. I've interacted with him on Twitter, and he's really a nice guy. HIs painting of Fingolfin challenge Morgoth at the gates of Angband was the one that first caught my eye.
Very interesting video about Saruman, he is a really interesting character to analyze and discuss
Saruman of Many Colors is another reason why I've always preferred the animated version of the adaptations.
Saruman and Aruman 😅
@@TheRedBook I do see where they were coming from, making the name a bit more distinct from Sauron. But Aragorn's shorts are the icing on the cake 😂
I think it's silly not to trust the audience to know the difference but it would have been ok if there had been some consistency. I can't believe that he is called Saruman AND Aruman in the same movie. Some of the designs are mental haha, the Balrog, Aragorn, Sam, Elrond. I could go on.
@@TheRedBook I'm sure many would appreciate a full list on your thoughts, re. book vs. film.
Good points.A suggestion:how about possible(or none)correlations of initiation as in a "cult" hidden in Tolkien's text...namely at Bombadil's home and Galadriel's mirror and/or,maybe somewhere else?!...Anyway,a Simple possibility,no more.
Doors of Durin are a freemasonic arch, initiation in Moria
Another fantastic video!
💯👍
👍👍
Great job!
Destructive tests are actually some of the most informative tests we can perform. Assuming you’re okay with destroying the thing to learn the properties of its kind.
I didn't realize this was a remake of your first video. Way cool, keep up the good work! And please do your livestream as soon as you can please please please 😊
You should check out the first video and laugh at how awkward it is 😂 . And yeah, I will definitely be doing it in June anyway - I've only tried one before for Patreon members so it is all still quite new to me. It's something I'm attempting on the channel though and people will get notice about when it is happening.
That's Red Book, a nice video. If I could gently make one request though... would it be possible to narrate a little faster? Even at 2x speed, which is the maximum available, it is a little slow to listen to.
You can understand me at 2x speed? I don't think I can understand myself at that speed.
But no, I definitely will not be changing how I narrate. If you watch the original version of this video you will hear me narrating at speed and it's terrible. What I am comfortable with is the most important and I like my current narration.
No. Fuck that!
The speed at which he speaks is an essential part of communicating these thoughts.
If you want to speed it up…you have the playback controls at your fingertips!