Sauron | A Response To Screenrant | Part 1

Sauron isn't confusing, he's layered, and his history is wonderfully detailed. And thank you Professor for creating him for the world.

Something Rose seems to not understand about Tolkein's works is that Power is finite in his universe. Every powerful object or person must have a source for that power which in turn drains that original source to whatever degree is relevant to the power created. We see this in Morgoth, where I remember it being explained in the Silmarillion (where exactly I don't remember) that he became weaker over time because he kept pouring himself into the corruption of life into forms that would serve him. His power, like all power in Arda, was finite and consumable, as well as able to be weakened over time. Additionally, there are the Swan Ships of Alqualonde. When Faenor demands the ships of the Teleri, they respond that they cannot give him the ships because they are so specially crafted and unique that they cannot be reduplicated, no matter what skill was involved. This was a common theme in Tolkien's works, craftsmanship was special and exceptional work can only occur once before needing to take on a different form. So, no, Sauron could not recreate the Rings of Power and just make more of them at will. That runs contrary to the very definition of power in Arda. Any attempt to duplicate those Rings of Power and their effects would only create inferior items of lesser and lesser power. Anyways, great video Red Book, thanks for making it!

Excellent rebuttal of some really sloppy, poorly researched thinking. While your deep understanding of the legendarium should really be put to better purpose, I'm glad you took the time to do this.

My impresson of the Screenrant author: I'd also like to know why Sauron didn't just Google "Baggins" to find Biblo, as there is clearly only one Bilbo Baggins in all of Middle-earth, so that would have been a super easy what to find him and the ring. So there's at least 16 reasons why Sauron is just an old dude who probably can't even use Google or Apple maps well and that's why he's dead.

About number 15, sauron also believed very confidently that no onw would destroy the ring willingly, I don't think he saw it as a risk because he would live on through the ring that no one was strong enough to resist it's lure. And the best thing is that he was right, no one was able to willingly destroy the ring

The original article doesn't deserve such a detailed response. All 15 points could be disposed of in ten minutes. You have put 1000x much effort into this as the clickbait author did.

"Raises, not begs." Haha! I winced when you read that part of Rose's article aloud, and laughed when you said precisely what I was thinking.

He was melkors second in command. When melkor was banished to the void Sauron took his place. Not complicated at all

The whole article seems to just be a collection of "there is no reason why X" assumptions. If she did read the book then she is 100% intentionally trying to make Sauron confusing, either because of some personal agenda against LotR/Tolkien or because she wants clicks for her article.

I wasn't aware of the article (no big loss), but I think you could have responded to it in a much shorter way: "Is Sauron a confusing character? No. Is Rose a very confused and frankly ignorant writer on this matter? Yes." This said, I welcome the in-depth, well considered point-by-point rebuttal. My only fear/concern is that such a lengthy response (in 3 parts, no less!) will drive away those that are taken in by a 2,500 words, poorly written article by someone who - as likely most of her readers - hasn't even bothered to read the Lord of the Rings with any care if at all.

For Goodness sake, Sauron couldn't find the ring and he created it. Great work, thorough, insightful, and logical. Well Done.

One thing not noted in this commentary is The One Ring MAIN PURPOSE was not domination of the other (Men and Dwarves) Rings but preservation: the rings of Men allowed them to live longer and last after their death. The same can be presumed for the Dwarfs. Celebrimbor forge the Elvish Rings not to preserve from aging and death (no need for it) but to preserve the things elvish loved from decaying and being corrupted by mortality. What Sauron saw with his eyes was Melkor to slowly wither away, losing power as he built greater armies and dragons. In some way he understood the reason was Middle Earth was for mortals alone and mortality would sip in everything there. So he sought the elves and forged the rings and someone would suggest he drained some power from them to create his One Ring later as he was able to locate the Three Rings when they were weared and he weared the One Ring, but he had no direct involvement in creating the Three. One testimony of this is when he goes to Numenor (and leave the One Ring in Mordor, probably entrusted in the Ringwraiths). His beautiful corporeal form is destroyed but he can return Mordor anyway and return in a material form but lose the ability to shapeshift he had before and he take back the One Ring. If he had the One Ring in Numenor, it would be lost forever or destroyed there. He needed the One Ring in the Middle Earth, to be anchored there forever. In fact we can think Sauron was destroyed in Numenor and the One Ring allowed him to return like a glorified/superpowered Nazgul. The Sauron they fight in LoTR is a lich looking for his phylactery. It is an undead Maiar. The Wizards must not match power with power because they can not destroy him with power if the One Ring exist. They can just crush his corporeal form, if they are lucky, but his spirit would last and rebuild a new body later.

For the sake of my Silmarils, what an article that was, Pointing out extremely lazy questions that, with a relatively quick survey, could have been answered. Nevertheless, excellent video, very well edited.

Best part of the week

As soon as I've heard "screenrant" I knew it would be total reconstruction

Another excellent video as always - an intelligent perfectionist’s rebuttal to a “good enough’s” article attempting to trivialize and dismiss works we love

Thanks for pointing out that "begs the question" is used improperly. It astounds me, how so many writers will parrot this, trying to sound intelligent. It's like nails on a chalkboard every time I hear it.

“The wise speak only of what they know, Rose Graceling-Moore."

Excellent video! I have not yet read the article, but seeing the questions you quoted in the video, they author of that article clearly had a poor grasp of the narrative, with huge misconceptions. As you said, Sauron had to invest a lot of himself, his power, his spirit, his essence (or however you prefer to put it) into the Ring, or it would not be potent enough to be the master ring he wanted it to be. It came with a small risk of backfiring if someone else mastered the Ring or it was destroyed, but if the Ring had not existed, he could have been slain. Nor were the Rings of Power a cheap investment of power, as the article implied. Objects of great power in Tolkien’s works can only be made so many times by their makers. Two Trees in Valinor, three Silmarils etc. Nor was Sauron particularly weak without the Ring, at least not towards the end of the Third Age, and at least not to anyone below a Vala. He just wasn’t as strong in certain ways as he would have been had he been reunited with the Ring. Ridiculous criticism of the story, but you definitely answered their ”points” well. The author of that article was clueless.

This is great content and as you say, it's all based on the source, JRRT, not adaptations. I especially liked your explanation about invisibility. Good job.