XPost: rec.arts.books.tolkien   
   From: mr@sandman.net   
      
   In article ,   
    Lewis  wrote:   
      
   > >> > Only, that was not something done by the ring. He lusted for power in   
   > >> > the same way most people would. The ring for him was a means for that   
   > >> > power. I am trying to make a distinction between Sarumen being   
   > >> > "corrupted" simply by wanting to have more power, and "corrupted" as   
   > >> > an active force by the ring, which incidentally doesn't actually seem   
   > >> > to exercise a force to make you want to use it for world dominantion   
   > >> > (in spite of what Tolkien himself says).   
   > >>   
   > >> I disagree. The Ring, inasmuch as it was possible, was searching for a   
   > >> power able and willing to wield it. That is not to say that it was   
   > >> active in its search;lets think of it, perhaps, as a force like gravity,   
   > >> bending the world around it so that things fall toward it. Saruman fell.   
   >   
   > > Gandalf explicitly states that the ring wanted to be found and wanted   
   > > to get back to its master, not that it sought someone powerful to   
   > > wield it.   
   >   
   > "Wield" was wrong, it was seeking its master.   
      
   Exactly - not just anyone more powerful than the current user.   
      
   > > There is nothing in the books that suggest that the will of the ring   
   > > had any remote effect at all upon Saruman. The corruption of Saruman   
   > > was solely the inherit corruption in himself - i.e. lust for power.   
   > > The ring was a means for that lust, not a source of it.   
   >   
   > I'm not sure there is any evidence that the Ring had a will. Yes,   
   > Gandalf speaks of the ring 'wanting' but that seems to me simply a word   
   > that is used because the word that is needed doesn't exist. I don't   
   > think the Ring had a will, other than an inherent tendency to happen   
   > into the paths that might lead it back to Sauron. I think ascribing an   
   > intelligence or even agency to the Ring is a mistake.   
      
   The will of the ring is what makes it fall off Isildurs finger. I   
   think the "other than" part of the above paragraph most certainly is a   
   will of its own. Or the will of its master if you will. Whether the   
   ring was *sentient* is another story, and I don't think "will"   
   necessarily leads to sentience. There are many items in Middle Earth   
   that seemingly has a will of its own   
      
   > Why did Bilbo find the ring? Because Bilbo was going to take it out into   
   > the world. Did the ring do something specific to be found? No, but some   
   > power draw the ring to be lost where Bilbo would find it.   
      
   That doesn't make sense. Gollum losing the ring to be found by Bilbo   
   is either a huge coincidence or the will of the ring. Gollum had 500   
   years to lose the ring, yet lost it just a few hours before Bilbo   
   found it.   
      
   > That's why I described it as something more like gravity. Or simply   
   > that it was attracted to the power of Sauron, and as his power grew   
   > so did the affinity the Ring had to seek that power. This is why,   
   > after all, Bilbo and Frodo kept the Ring on a chain, is it not?   
      
   Was it not because otherwise they would be invisible all the time? I   
   mean, on a chain seems like a logical safe place...   
      
   > Still, I liken it to a marble on a tilting table more than to any will   
   > or intelligence on the part of the Ring. Magnets. That's it, lots of   
   > magnets.   
      
   It seems this marble has the power to tilt the table in its favor,   
   though. :)   
      
      
   --   
   Sandman[.net]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)