XPost: rec.arts.books.tolkien
From: Troels@ThisIsFake.invalid
In message
Stan Brown spoke these staves:
>
> On Thu, 15 Sep 2011 12:12:03 +0000 (UTC), Erik Trulsson wrote:
>>
> [on ability to destroy or give away the Ring]
And perhaps more generally on the way possession, and the taking of
it, of the Master Ring influences the actions and choices of the
bearer . . .
>> 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.)
>
> I think Gollum goes against your argument. Yes, he used violence
> to acquire it -- but that means he had murdered Déagol before ever
> touching the Ring, after having just seen it for a few minutes. I
> think that says a lot more about Gollum than it does about the
> Ring.
I, on the other hand, think it says something significant about both
-)
Sméagol, though already a 'mean sort of thief' before Déagol ever
came across the Ring, would not have killed his friend for any old
gold ring found in the water: it was, in my opinion, a combination of
the two -- of the powers of the One Ring and the specific
vulnerability of Sméagol, that caused the murder of Déagol.
Another factor that /possibly/ helps Sméagol and Bilbo is the
resilience of Hobbits. Gandalf expresses some surprise that Gollum
had not become a wraith and that there was still some small hope of
healing (we see it come to balance on a knife's edge before the oaf
speaks up in a scene reminiscent also of Tulkas driving Fëanor to
reject Yavanna's request for the Silmarils after the darkening of
Valinor), and he seems convinced that Hobbits have a toughness that
protects them against the ruining of the person that is the effect of
the Ring. This effect is only demonstrated as a long-term effect,
but it might also give an extra edge against the immediate effect of
the Ring -- in particular if you have obtained it without taking it
with violence from the former owner.
> Unless you think the Ring chose Sméagol over Déagol? That seems
> pretty far fetched to me. We understand that in some sense it was
> always "trying" to get back to its Master, but I can't think that
> it could make fine character distinctions between two Stoors.
I don't think that that is the way the Ring really works. It seems
to me that it works by making itself extremely desirable -- not only
by appearing to be a thing of surpassing beauty, but also by working
on more base desires, in particular the desire for more /power/ --
more power than is, so to speak, your birthright.
We know that actually seeing the Ring, and, even worse, touching it,
makes a difference, but though I am not sure how exactly this works,
it seems to me that it only increases the attraction and desirability
of the Ring in the mind of the watcher / 'toucher'.
The way that this, then, works in the mind of the individual person
depends on the make-up of that person. Bombadil had absolutely no
desire for any more power than what was his in the beginning, and so
the Ring has no influence over him, but Sméagol, who had already
become a mean-spirited character, was affected far more strongly by
the Ring than was Déagol. /Not/, in my opinion, because the Ring made
a conscious choice to trap Sméagol, but because he was far more
susceptible to its general influence. This, in my thinking, is how
the Ring 'chooses' someone: the more mean-spirited and power hungry a
person is from the beginning, the stronger an effect the Ring will
have immediately, and the stronger the person is, the chance does he
stand of seizing the Ring even against competition. This way we get
a natural selection model that ensures that the Ring goes to the
character with the optimal mix of innate power and pre-existing evil.
In letter #181, Tolkien explained
The domination of the Ring was much too strong for the mean
soul of Sméagol. But he would have never had to endure it
if he had not become a mean sort of thief before it crossed
his path.
My own view of the Ring has been slowly approaching Tom Shippey's
description of the effect of the Ring as an addiction -- an evil
influence that works through the evil and the weaknesses of the
people around it, and which will inevitably grow on the mind of
anyone possessing it (with the possible exception of Tom B. over whom
the Ring had no hold at all). I really don't think the Ring actively
controls the minds of others -- Sam's visions, for instance, come
from Sam and they arise as his mind is trying to justify his taking
that extremely attractive and desirable object: /me/ wants!
> A new thought: Gandalf knew that Frodo could not destroy the Ring.
> In Frodo's own home, in Book I Chapter 2, Frodo is unable to put
> the ring into the hearth fire. When Gandalf sent Frodo to the
> Black Land to throw the Ring into the fires of Mount Doom, the
> idea that Frodo would ever have been able to destroy it was
> *really* nuts. I suspect that Gandalf had planned all along to
> accompany Frodo, and if necessary, to take the Ring by force and
> destroy it.
Hmm . . . I'm not sure, though I suppose it's possible.
Gandalf surely could not have forced Frodo to destroy the Ring -- not
without turning to evil himself, at least.
Gandalf laughed grimly. 'You see? Already you too, Frodo,
cannot easily let it go, nor will to damage it. And I
could not 'make' you - except by force, which would break
your mind.
(LotR, I,2 'The Shadow of the Past')
The big question is whether Gandalf would have been able to take the
Ring by force, and against the will of Frodo, and still be able to
throw it into the fire (and whether he believed himself to be so
able). I don't doubt that Gandalf would be able to throw the Ring
into the fire if he was given it on the edge of the fire, but taking
it by force would probably leave him more vulnerable to its lure to
power, and possibly put the outcome in doubt.
I am more inclined to believe that Gandalf had no specific plans --
that he simply trusted his gut feeling that this was /right/ and that
providence would make sure that the Ring was destroyed unless the
people involved strayed too far from the side of Good.
--
Troels Forchhammer
Valid e-mail is
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.
Original thought
is a straightforward process.
It's easy enough
when you know what to do.
You simply combine
in appropriate doses
the blatantly false
and the patently true.
[continued in next message]
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
