Which are the Two Towers?

You speak of a 'struggle' between Saruman and Sauron. But it couldn't have been a very serious struggle, because although Saruman is very powerful, Sauron is even more so! He could have 'bent his will' right into Orthanc and blasted Saruman to smithereens!
But seriously: Sauron saw Saruman as his little pawn that was quite useful, and would not get in his way. I think that any 'struggle' going on between them was purely metaphorical. What Sauron wants, Sauron gets, basically. On the other hand, he didn't capture Frodo at any point.. Oh yeah, he didn't know about him.. Never mind.
Another question: if the 'struggle' was such a small thing in the WR, why would Tolkien (or Unwin or whoever) name an entire section of the book after it? Hmmm..

Originally posted by Pontifex
You speak of a 'struggle' between Saruman and Sauron. But it couldn't have been a very serious struggle, because although Saruman is very powerful, Sauron is even more so! He could have 'bent his will' right into Orthanc and blasted Saruman to smithereens!

Click to expand...

I think the struggle was quite serious. While it's true that Saruman was the unwitting pawn of Sauron, he was still a force to be reckoned with. Remember that Sauron and Saruman were both Maia and had the One Ring come into Saruman's possesion, Sauron would have had much to fear of Orthanc.

As for "bending his will" and "blasting ... to smithereens". I hope you are exaggerating -- I may be wrong but I don't believe the powers of anyone in ME extended to that extreme.

This leads me to ask a new question though (and I'll start a new topic as it is well off THIS topic): When Pippin looked into the Palantir and said "It is not for you, I will send for it" (no book to refernce, sorry ) Would a Nazgul have been able to take Pippin from Saruman or "Was Saruman really under Sauron's control to that extent?"

Gosh Pont! Can't quite agree with you. Saruman was a Maia as was Sauron and would only have been slightly less powerful than Sauron. If he was as powerful as you make out.... why didn't he just blow Aragorn up when they confronted one another via the palantar before Aragorn walked the Paths of the Dead? Why didn't he just beam Pippin up to Barad-dur when Pippin peered into the palantar? Surely he didn't need to send a Nazgul to pick him up. The fact is.... Sauron was far from full power. He still didn't have his ring which held much of his power and what power he did have was being used to 1) control the Nazgul, 2) re-establish the power of Barad-dur, 3)maintain control over his minions, 4) keep Denethor misled about what he was actually seeing using the palantar of Minis Tirith. These are just a few things that were sapping his power. I also think that Saruman led Sauron to believe that he was in collusion with him while all the while planning on betraying Sauron and finding and claiming the ring for himself.

Just my thoughts.

Hmm, yes I see now. I have just been under the impression that Saruman was not very powerful, as he does not excercise his power anywhere in the story, as far as I remember. All of the traps that set the Ents on fire were purely mechanical, and if he really was very powerful, why did he have to use machines to do the jobs for him? The only form of 'magic' that Saruman demonstrates is his voice. In fact, Tolkien doesn't tell much about the magical powers of the Istari, or any of the Maiar. I had just gathered from the book that Saruman was not very powerful, and had to resort to machines. And while Sauron was doing all of the things you listed, what was Saruman doing? Controlling the minds of gullible orcs and men and half-orcs with the power of his voice, and talking those same creatures to work the machinery beneath Orthanc. Oh, and keeping Wormtongue as his personal slave, under the threat of fire, or of being sent to Mordor. Grima knew that Saruman had some kind of ties with Sauron, but he was too afraid of him to do anything about it.
And Sauron was also searching for the Ring, whilst doing all of the other things. If he had seen it, he would have obviously sent the Nazgul (sorry, no accents, I know) to retrieve it. And controlling about a million (only a bit of exaggeration) orcs and men all around Middle-earth could not have been a small feat. Remember that Sauron was pretty battered up during the war with the Numenorians, or sometime (I'm a bit behind in Silmarillion-lore), and before that he was extremely powerful. I think that at the height of his power Sauron was more powerful than Saruman. That's all.

And yes, Scooter, I was exaggerating. I am sorry if I gave you a false interpretation of my views. *bows low*

I do absolutely agree with you Pont. Sauron was by far the more powerful entity; however, My whole point is to warn people not to underestimate Saruman, for he was indeed very powerful too. You said it yourself, he had his voice. His voice was what he used to form and lead one of the largest armies in the world at that time. Remember he had hoards of orcs and all of the Dunlanders (spelling) under his control. He far outnumbered the Riders of Rohan and was kicking their butt to a great degree before Gandalf restored King Theoden to health and got him out of Grima's control. Rohan would still not likely survived but for the Ents uprising.

Saruman was not known for having magical powers, his power was in his ability to control others, using his silver tongue to convince them that they were ignorant and that he was wise and noble and far superior to them. That is, indeed, a great power and one that allowed Saruman to lead the White Council for a long period of time.

Yes indeed. And I think that Saruman and his 'voice' might be a (not-so-) subtle metaphor to advertisement-companies and propaganda agencies during the first World War, where Tolkien fought in the trenches. Their almost paralyzing and mind-penetrative slogans have, or are designed to have, the same kind of effect on people that Saruman had on his minions. Saruman also grew greedy and lusted after power, as most if not all product-selling companies w/ their copywriters and advertisement officials also are.

TOLKIEN DID NOT WRITE ALLEGORY.

Sorry. I'm a freak, I know.

An interesting remark, Greymantle -- I know a lot of people have tried to indicate that LotR was "really" about WW2 or the Bible etc etc etc. and I do believe that they're incorrect -- Tolkien was just telling a story about Middle-Earth. BUT, the events and beliefs of Tolkien's life cannot be discarded when analyzing his work and his craft.

Knowing that Tolkien was in WW1 and received propaganda can lead the reader to infer that Tolkien was aware of how people can be persuaded and the power of that form of persuasion and that it may have influenced his story telling.

I think the overt impact of WW1 propaganda on his works could be easily argued against, but do not discount the technique.

Scooter... I can't help but agree with you. While I absolutely accept the proposition that Tolkien did not write allegory (I actually wrote a detailed research paper on the WWII, A-Bomb supposition in college in 1973), I can't help but believe that his experiences in both WWI and WWII had a great impact on his view of the world. While he wasn't making direct references to worldly events, the tenor, tone and characterization of TLOTR is sufficiently different from that of The Hobbit to justify our opinion. (That doesn't make our opinions right..... but, boy, I love to stir things up.)

Well, certainly different aspects of his life totally influenced an affected his writing. I would maintain, however, that no part of his works was intentional metaphor to any specific real-life situation (i.e. allegory). Tolkien said himself that while none of his works were allegorical, they could all have applicability-- so on that point I would agree with you.

Saruman was the head Honcho when it came to the Istari. He trapped gandalf for a start. Also Gandalf himself says that he (Saruman) would have the power to resist Sauron whilst in Orthanc. He was also called Curinir(or along those lines)a maiar of Aule-thats were his power lay-in his devices-same as Sauron. He only lost much when Gandalf destroyed his Staff, so altho he wasn't as powerful as Sauron, he could have put up a fight-he was the white remember

Hi friends.
I think that the Two Towers are Minas Tirith for sure, and the other one is...I'm undecided.
I'm undecided between Minas Morgul ande Barad-Dur.
I'm so sure about the Minas Tirith because in the book a great part take place there, moreover Minas Tirith represent the symbol of Well.
In fact is the only Tower of middle Earth that represent the possible symbol of Well-if we exclude Edoras, that is no a Tower, naturally, but a Palace.
But there are many Towers Symbol of Evil in the book.
I don't know surely what is the right one.
And what do you think about my own answer?
Hi, dear Tolkien works lovers.
IMPORTANT
P.S.My real nickname is Legolas Greenleaf, not lestatdelion.
Hi again friends.

I absolutely agree with Greymantle:
Tolkien didn't write allegory.

Welcome lest...**shoots a glance around the forum...and everyone notices a corny joke coming on** Let me welcome you lest someone else does...That was horrible...I know...Anyway, you recieve the word

One

Click to expand...

Well, I'm not sure if someone posted this already on this thread but...In the back of my OLD OLD OLD FotR, there reads:

Here ends the first part of the History of the War of the Ring. The second part is called The Two Towers, since the events recounted in it are dominated by Orthanc, the citadel of Saruman, and the fortress of Minas Morgul that guards the secred entrance to Mordor. . .

I'll check the thread later on...I'm in a rush...if it is posted, I'll delete this...


EDIT: Someone had posted this, but debate still continued...

Ahhhhhhhhhhh.... Good ole Mike B. I'd finally fully convinced myself that it was Orthanc and the Barad-dur and he blows a cannon size whole in the lot. Drats......

But all in all, I'd rather know the truth. Thanks be to thee... Mike B!!
*Grond applauds loudly from the top of Minas Morgul*

I just editted it, so look again Grond...Gil-estel was the first, but I wrote it out

I am glad you folks

got this straightened out, because I was thinking the two towers were Andre the Giant and Big Show from the WWF. Wesley.

After all this time is THAT what he meant-how could i have missed it

The Two Towers?

Help. I have been wondering about the title "The Two Towers" since I first read the work way back in the early seventies.

Which of the three principal towers does the title allude? My personal theory is that the title corresponds with the Towers of Oppisition. Namely Orthanc and Barad Dur. But they could just as easily denote any of the possible combinations. But having it mean Orthanc and Minas Tirith (sp) or Minas Tirith and Barad Dur makes just as much sense (albeit less romantic).

What are your opinions?
thanks
RD