c8059f05   
   XPost: rec.arts.books.tolkien   
   From: mmikeda@erols.com   
      
   derek  wrote in   
   news:190b8d09-1d4a-4819-906d-c65fcb753e8a@bl1g2000vbb.googlegroups.   
   com:   
      
   > On Sep 14, 10:03 pm, 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.   
   >   
   > And yet it had enough hold over Gollum in minutes to have him   
   > murder his cousin.  I don't think it's unreasonable to say that   
   > the Ring had the power to prevent Isildur destroying it in the   
   > first few hours of his possession.  Bilbo "resisted", but he   
   > never once tried to destroy it.  Frodo tried - and failed   
   > (though admittedly he had it far longer than Isildur).   
      
   I'd agree that the real reason Isildur did not destroy the Ring was   
   the influence of the Ring.   
      
   I do suspect that there was at least the possibility of choice at   
   that point--that someone else coming into possession of the Ring at   
   that time (or even perhaps Isildur if he had known that destroying   
   the Ring was also the only way to permanently destroy Sauron) might   
   have destroyed the Ring.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)