It’s a poor wizard that blames his fools

T

toddhoffious

New Member
I think gandalf is just mad at himself for trusting such an important task to butterbur. It was a flawed plan to begin with. So gandlaf is spiritually self-scolding.
 
I often wonder what exactly Gandalf means when Frodo wakes up in Rivendell:

"We should never have done it without Strider," said Frodo. "But we needed you. I did not know what to do without you."
"I was delayed," said Gandalf, "and that nearly proved our ruin. And yet I am not sure: it may have been better so."

In what way might it have been better so? I've generally thought it was because the hobbits managed to find unexpected help, including Strider, and gained strength from it. But I'm not sure, and wish Gandalf had said more. Was Butterbur's forgetfulness part of what was "better so?" Or was it better that he himself learned something from it, perhaps that he could let go of the controls without the world ending (literally and figuratively) - or maybe what Prof. Olsen said about Gandalf telling his story in such detail, that it proved that there was some power on their side that all of them could proceed with a little more confidence?
 
Last edited:
I wonder what difference it would have made later in the Quest had Frodo not been stabbed with the Morgul knife? It certainly affected his temperament and sensitivity. One wonders if his experience with resisting the power of the wound maybe helped him to later resist the power of the Ring? Just a blue sky thought...
 
Certainly one benefit of Gandalf's absence that is remarked upon is the acquisition of the Barrow-blades: things might have gone very differently further down the line if not for them.
 
For one thing, Gandalf's delay helped establish Saruman as a traitor. How much worse might things have gone if the good guys didn't know this and started including Saruman in their counsel?

For another, while the timeline may have been different, if the Black Riders had managed to make it to the North in time anyway, having Gandalf and Frodo together would have allowed all Nine to attack at once rather than splitting their forces as they did.
 
The problem with relying on providence and that "in the end that it redoundeth only to my great glory" there's literally no event that can't be turned towards some other end. So if there were no Morgul knife, no Barrow-blade, no Gandalf's absence, something else would have happened instead and we would think it just as crucial.
 
True (though the Barrow blade played an important part in killing the Witch King). We can look at what happened and see what good might have come from Gandalf's delay. But I still would like to know what Gandalf was thinking when he said it.
 
I also wonder, if Gandalf had met Frodo and taken him to safety, would the others even have followed? How different would things have turned out if the Conspiracy had not insisted on joining Frodo's journey?
 
Yes - and Gandalf tells us that Eowyn and Faramir would have been killed, plus Boromir might not have redeemed himself, plus the ents might not have been activated to deal with Saruman. Pretty serious differences.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top