XPost: rec.arts.books.tolkien
From: ertr1013@student.uu.se
In rec.arts.books.tolkien Stan Brown wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 10:30:49 -0800, sean_q wrote:
>> On 9/12/2011 11:29 AM, tenworld wrote:
>>
>> > I think Elrond still held a grudge (maybe not the right word) that
>> > Aragon's ancestor did not destroy the ring when he could.
>>
>> Surely, by the time of the War of the Ring, Elrond understood
>> that Isildur had no choice in the matter.
> Oh, please. It takes time for the Ring to get its full hold over a
> person. Bilbo resisted for 50 years, though it was starting to gain
> the ascendant. I can't accept that Isildur's will was obliterated in
> a few hours (or less). He kept the Ring because he was proud and did
> not want to be led by Elves.
It seems to depend in part on how you acquired the Ring (and I thnk Gandalf
even said something to that effect). Bilbo found it lying on the ground.
Frodo was given it. Isildur as well as Smeagol/Gollum used violence to
take it from its previous owner (Sauron and Deagol respectively.)
Isildur's will may not have been obliterated quite that fast, but he
quickly found excuses for why he should not destroy the Ring.
First of all he possibly did not really believe that the Ring was as
dangerous as as it was. Secondly a natural reluctance to destroy a
precious work of art, which the Ring is. Thirdly a desire to take the Ring
as (partial) payment for the recent death of his father.
All of these (and quite possibly more, like not wanting to take orders from
the Elves) would have been encouraged and strengthened by the Ring.
Also remember how reluctant Sam was to hand back the Ring to Frodo after
having held it for only a brief time - and Sam was probably far more
difficult for the Ring to manipulate than Isildur would have been.
--
Erik Trulsson
ertr1013@student.uu.se
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
