July 16, 2003

Sauron's Folley
Danny

To say that Sauron was wiser than Gandalf is also weak because Sauron himself made a multitude of foolish mistakes.

Sauron knew that halflings were in Mordor, and he knew that the Ring was last reported in posession of a halfling. Even when Aragorn rode to challenge him and divert attention from Frodo, a wise leader would have held even 1000 orcs to guard the slopes of Mount Doom. Certainly Sauron could have spared enough forces to protect from that possability. Obviously, it wasn't enough for Sauron to trust in the power of the ring to prevent its destruction. Wisdom would have one protect against all eventualities, especially if one has the resources to do so. When Sauron knew the halflings had escaped he was beyond foolish to have emptied Mordor entirely. He was blinded by ambition and hatred.

Sauron was a fool because he failed to do what wisdom requires. That is he failed to examin the situation through another's eyes. Wisdom is understanding others and recognizing their differences. A wise tactician will analize the battle through his enemies eyes (as Gandalf did) as well as from other perspectives. Sauron saw the world as a bunch of aspiring Dark Lords. He never had the wisdom to see that other motives and other methods were even considered. If that is not foolishness I don't know what is.

Sauron was a fool for creating the ring in the first place. Sauron was a fool to make a ring that his existence depended on. It would be like the Greek hero Achiles giving himself the Achiles heel in exchange for a stronger breast plate. If Sauron had been wise, he would have done more to protect the ring from destruction from the very begining. To not do so is like adding a layer of armor, but leaving the neck exposed. And a wise tactician would know that if the neck is exposed, that is where your foe will strike, but Sauron refused to acknowledge the vulnerability in the first place.

If Gandalf was a fool for hoping in victory, Sauron was a greater fool for loosing a battle he had in the bag. Any general who goes against a few thousand with hundreds of thousands holding every tactical advantage yet looses had to have made some pretty unbelievable blunders. And any general in the reverse side of that conflict who wins did many things right even if they made a few mistakes or won by a risky and arguably lucky strategy. It can be wise to place your hands in luck if all other choices are certain doom. If I had to face the guillotene or play Russian Roulete with 4 bullets in the revolver, I think wisdom would call for the choice that has the greatest chance of survival even if it is foolish in other circumstances.