XPost: rec.arts.books.tolkien   
   From: mr@sandman.net   
      
   In article <50e5a242$0$56787$edfadb0f@dtext02.news.tele.dk>,   
    "Raven"  wrote:   
      
   > > I know what Tolkien says, yet Gollum is a great example of someone who   
   > > had the ring for centuries without "giving in" to a desire to dominate   
   > > the world. Bilbo had it for some sixty years without a single thought   
   > > about world domination.   
   >   
   > Neither of these, while they possessed the Ring, knew what it was and   
   > what it could do.   
      
   If knowledge about the potential power is required for the ring to   
   corrupt the owner to "dominant the world", then this is not the doing   
   of the ring.   
      
   It is quite clearly established that the ring can make you want it,   
   desire it, murder for it. But as far as we know - the "corruption" of   
   the ring stops there. The ring will not make you evil, nor will it   
   make you want to dominate the world or rule others. We have ample   
   evidence for this.   
      
   > Both of them wanted it as soon as they got near it;   
   > Sméagol so badly that he murdered his cousin for it.  Both of them knew that   
   > it could turn its wearer invisible, and used it for that purpose at need.   
   > Neither knew that it was a tool for domination.  Presumably Gollum knew well   
   > enough much later: between the Dead Marshes and the Black Gate Sam overhears   
   > him muttering to himself about taking it back and becoming strong:   
   >     'No, sweet one.  See, my precious: if we has it, then we can escape,   
   > even from Him, eh?  Perhaps we grows very strong, stronger than Wraiths.   
   > Lord Sméagol?  Gollum the Great?  /The/ Gollum!  Eat fish every day, three   
   > times a day, fresh from the sea.  Most Precious Gollum!  Must have it.  We   
   > wants it, we wants it, we wants it!'   
   >   
   > Annankákai.   
      
   Niether of which points to the "corruption" of the ring being anything   
   but injecting a great desire for it in people that are confronted with   
   it.   
      
   I feel that the distinction is important. Isuldir and Boromir were   
   confronted with the ring and wanted it for their own to wield its   
   power, which - according to Tolkien - would ultimately corrupt them   
   and make them evil rulers. Both desired the ring based on being   
   confronted with it, both men were corrupted in the way that both   
   sought power and the ring would provide them that power. The ring   
   didn't make them want to rule others, that was inherit in them.   
      
   Saruman desires the ring based on knowledge about it, and wanted to   
   wield its power. This was not the doing of the ring at all.   
      
   Gollum, Bilbo and Frodo were the ones exposed to the ring the longest   
   yet neither of them ever once seemed to think to themselves to use it   
   for power - even with the knowledge about the ring (Frodo) did he ever   
   desire to put it on to rule others. The ring made him *desire* it, and   
   there is nothing in the books that suggests that Frodo would ever   
   become "evil" as a result of giving in to that desire. Gollum, while   
   very protective and quite aggressive, is hardly "evil" when comparing   
   to truly evil characters in the story.   
      
   In short, the ring doesn't make you evil, and since it won't make you   
   evil, it doesn't really "corrupt" you any more than alcohol and drugs   
   "corrupts" normal people in the real world. The ring makes you desire   
   it, need it, want it. And it stops with that.   
      
      
   --   
   Sandman[.net]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)