Jim Sharkey wrote:
> I'll grant that magic was all around in the books, but I felt it more
> inherent in places and things than in people. I don't know if this helps
> much, but the fact is that "magic users" were few and far between, and the
> ones who did have it were very powerful, but used it sparingly. If you
> consider the way the characters with magic behaved, they were either loathe
> to use it because it would reveal the group's position to Sauron (the idea
> that it was like a beacon in the darkness sort of thing), or they were
> reluctant to use it because, esentially, "power corrupts."
Don't forget that some of the "magic" things were really
the application of advanced knowledge and skill, like Gandalf's
fireworks show for Bilbo's party.
Also, some of the more common displays of magic-wielding seemed
to be a function of super-charisma, such as when the more powerful
characters hold others in thrall and/or seem to excercise extreme
powers of persuasion. I wonder if WWII era politics had anything
to do with that... :-)
But I would agree that most of the magic was bound into objects and
places, not wielded directly.
-- Matt Grimaldi
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
