Who would have fallen? [Archive] - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

alatar

08-23-2005, 09:14 AM

Think that an choice was left out. How about none of the above?

We read that Boromir is set on taking and using the Ring in Rivendell. His desire for the Ring doesn't start at Parth Galen; it just comes to a head there as he ran out of maybe tomorrow's for which to wait for some chance to get it. And yet even he did not react with glee (if memory serves ;) ) when Frodo got speared in the Chamber of Mazarbul - "haha! And now there be Eight..."

One might assume that the Ring's proximity to Mordor may also have something to do with Boromir's fall, but I would say that Boromir fell due mostly to the pen of Master Tolkien than from any influence of the Ring. His character is doomed to try, and yet even Boromir, shown to be muttering to himself during the Anduin boat ride, still does not take the Ring in the end. He was penned to be the most flawed of the Nine Walkers, and yet even he redeems himself and dies a hero's death. The Fellowship is made up of nine "best of the best." Tolkien's first string came to dance, and they weren't going to disappoint.

Gollum walks alongside Frodo and Sam around and almost into Mordor, yet his desire grows no stronger. His desire exceeds that of Boromir's, and though they are of different natures (hobbit and man), Gollum is able to abstain from taking the Ring for most of the journey. If he were able to resist even when the Ring were puportedly more powerful, than what does this say for Boromir and the other? Could they also have resisted?

Anyway, if Boromir were the best candidate for being the Ring-Taker, then who would be next to fall?

Gandalf? - He'd already rejected a freely proffered Ring.
Aragorn? - He's the ultimate human hero, doomed to be King or to die trying. His desire to be the Second Isuldur ("by one all were cursed, and by one all would be redeemed") coupled with his love for Arwen would shield him from the lures of the Ring. He needn't have waited so long if he did indeed want the Ring, and could have taken it in Bree, at Weathertop or in the long trip to Rivendell ("Frodo's going to die anyway, and I'm the obvious heir of this 'loom..."), but Aragorn didn't take it. His past actions can be used to predict his future behavior.
Legolas? - As an elf, he would be wise enough to know the dangers of the Ring. He never comes off as does Galadriel, who has an agenda for Middle Earth. Legolas to me simply would not want it.
Gimli? - I think that Gimli, like the Elf, would know the dangers of the Ring. His anti-domination dwarvish nature may also shield him somewhat from the temptation, and his sense of honor and duty (demonstrated when he proposed to take an oath as the Fellowship leaves Rivendell) would help.
Sam? - Sam is tempted by the Ring, yet his 'Hobbit sense' and thereafter his love for Frodo lets him resist the Ring's temptation.
Merry and Pippin? Arguing that these two would not try to take the take the Ring is more difficult. Surely like Sam they have some hobbit sense (maybe?) and they too have a love for Frodo. I would throw in that hopefully the Ring would reject these two if any other choices were available - look what happened to Saruman, the Uruks, the Witch-King and even Sauron when at least one of the two were present...My concern is that they would try to get it to use it unwittingly, not to gain power and dominion but just to try it. And Pippin fell to the palantir's call, and so he might try for the Ring. One would have to set his temptation against his love for Frodo and the betrayal of his kin - it's one thing to steal a palantir from a wizard but another thing to try for your kin's stuff.

I assume that this thread is in regards to the Fellowship, or I would nominate my choice ++Denethor.

Glirdan

08-23-2005, 09:21 AM

I am sorry for all those Aragorn lovers out there, but I will have to say Aragorn. These are the reasons why:

1) Gandalf knew what kind of power he would have if he held the Ring and he didn't like that thought.

2) It took Frodo a long time to actually succumb to the power of th Ring. It happened only after he was captured at Cirith Ungol. Therfore, even if the other Hobbits are younger than he, we must assume that Hobbits (as said in the book numerous times) have more strength in them then it appears and so it would have taken a while for the other Hobbits to succumb to the power of the Ring.

3) The race of Men is weak, right? And in the movie, we see that when Frodo offered the Ring to Aragorn, the desire to take it came upon him. So, instead of letting Frodo keep the Ring, Aragorn could have taken it.

I could not find an excuse for Legolas and Gimli, but I have a feeling that if Legolas was offered it, he still would not have taken it. As for Gimli, I can not think of anything for a reason whe he would not have taken it.

Morsul the Dark

08-23-2005, 10:18 AM

Legolas and here is why

Sam merry pippin all know about the ring all refuse to take but rather help frodo in his quest

Aragorn-he may be a man but a man smiled upon by Eru to fulfill a prophecy of becoming king(also avoids ring as seen in Bree)

Gandalf already refused the ringthat leaves gimli and legolas

well let's see, Gimli has no use for the ring i understand dwarves care little for such things i mean the dwarf rings were destroyed and taken and they just do not care

legolas....as gimli said in the film"No one trust an elf" hes too sketchy if you ask me Im not fond of him book or movie and think nay know that he would have succumbed to rings power for being and immortal elf he would consider himself mighty enough to wield it falling to his own pride(may add especially if he is captain obvious leggy)

The Saucepan Man

08-23-2005, 10:37 AM

Er, I hesitate to speak for either Fordim or Boromir88, but I should imagine that it was their intention that this poll apply to the characters that we meet in the book, rather than those portrayed in the films. They are (in case anyone had not noticed ;) ) different.

Morsul the Dark

08-23-2005, 10:48 AM

Thats was my fault on legolas i trailed off into movie leggy. Let me rephrase what I said about him to be more book specific...

Legolas was the son of mirkwood's king so he kind of had the sam scenario as boromir going and he as was mentioned somewhere else on the site not at the battle of five armies we could consider his father upset with him so legolas would be more prone to bring him a "mighty Gift" to make peace of mind with his father

Mithalwen

08-23-2005, 10:49 AM

Pippin would not have seized the ring.. but if it fell into his hands I think it is inevitable that he would have tried it out simply because "he won't be said" .... his personality is that he has to drop stone into wells and find out the hard way - Boromir is also a stone thrower - think of the watcher in the water!

Boromir88

08-23-2005, 11:01 AM

This poll was suggested by Boromir88 so don't come blaming me.
Oh darn, you found my evil plan. I was hopeing to sick one of the Mod's on you so you can no longer be competition in the points standings, but as I said you found out.... :mad:

Anyway, onto the thread...

Now I did vote for Legolas, but I think it would be pretty close between him, Aragorn, or Pippin. So let me explain some of my decisions.

First, people on why I don't think they would fall next...

Gimli- Maybe the strongest case can be made for him (besides Gandalf). One he doesn't see the ring as a weapon as Boromir would have. That was Boromir's biggest flaw, and how the Ring was able to take hold of him easily. To dwarves, I don't think they would see the Ring as a weapon, but as to acquire more wealth. Which, of course could be a downfall, and why Gimli would eventually fall to the Ring. But, I don't see him as being as strongly tempted by it as Boromir was, since he saw it as a weapon. Also, while dwarves may get greedy and want the ring to acquire more wealth, Gimli can be a special case as Galadriel declares
"and Gold shall never have dominion over you."~Farewell to Lorien.

Sam, Merry and Frodo- Hobbits seem to be more resistant to the Ring than the other races, again they don't desire the power. Sam was tempted, but he succeeded, and his love for Frodo drove him on. Merry, I honestly can't see much temptation in him. And Frodo was able to hold off his temptation until the decision to throw it into Mount Doom came up (and as shown by Tolkien in his letter to Milton Waldman this was deemed as impossible for anyone).

Gandalf- Obvious answer, already refused to take the Ring. Though he did show a fear in being tempted by it, so he could be a little weaker than what some think.

As for who would fall and the reasons, I must depart, but promise I shall continue. Sorry, to make you wait. (Though I'm sure you're all anxious) :rolleyes:

Glirdan

08-23-2005, 11:53 AM

Ok, if you are going by the book characters, than I honestly have no idea who I would chose. Maybe Pippin seeing as he fell to the lure of the palantir. Gandalf, for obvious reasons, would not. Frodo succumbed to it, but only when he was going to throw it into the Cracks of Doom. I do not see Merry succumbing to it. Maybe it's because of his close kinship with Frodo and out of love, he would not even dare to try it. Sam is Frodo's "servant" and Sam loves Frodo deeply, so that's why he would not. Not to mention, when he carried the Ring and gave it back to Frodo, he was somewhat reluctant to give it back. In that case, he COULD have kept it, or done what he did. So he is another one up on the chopping block. Now this is where it gets difficult. Aragorn had a lot of chances to take the Ring and he never did so, if I could, I would change my vote and make it some one else. Gimli and Legolas both knew the power that the Ring contained and they both have strong will power. So if I had to change my vote to anybody it would be ++Pippin.

Fordim Hedgethistle

08-23-2005, 12:10 PM

Think that an choice was left out. How about none of the above?

Ermmm...as one of the above includes Frodo I'm not sure that such a choice makes much sense....

And to add my clarification to Saucy's I would just point out that this poll is in fact in the Books forum and not Movies.

The Saucepan Man

08-23-2005, 12:19 PM

Maybe Pippin seeing as he fell to the lure of the palantir... I do not see Merry succumbing to it. Maybe it's because of his close kinship with Frodo and out of love, he would not even dare to try it. Sam is Frodo's "servant" and Sam loves Frodo deeply, so that's why he would not.How come Pippin always seems to be regarded as having less love for Frodo than Merry? Is it his "lighter" nature?

Aragorn had a lot of chances to take the Ring and he never did soBoromir had a lot of chances to do so too, but never did until he did, if you take my meaning. We have to assume that the next person to "succumb" does so after Boromir's attempt. For the reasons stated in the link I provided above, I believe that it would have been Aragorn. At the outset, the distance from Mordor and his strength of character mean that he is in no danger. But had they all stayed with Frodo on the journey to Mordor, I believe that, of them all, he would have been in the most danger.

Then again, I believe that given sufficent time and exposure, they would all have succumbed to the lure of the Ring - with the exception, perhaps, of Gandalf.

Glirdan

08-23-2005, 12:35 PM

How come Pippin always seems to be regarded as having less love for Frodo than Merry? Is it his "lighter" nature?

I never said he had less love for Frodo. He does have lots of love for him seeing as they are also closely related. I said that because Pippin was the one who touched the palantir is the one who is most curious and if the Ring just magicly appeared in his hand, he would probably try it out to see what it does.

Then again, I believe that given sufficent time and exposure, they would all have succumbed to the lure of the Ring - with the exception, perhaps, of Gandalf

I would have to agree with you on this one. The lure would have been to strong for them to resist for long, with the exception of Gandalf of course.

alatar

08-23-2005, 12:53 PM

Ermmm...as one of the above includes Frodo I'm not sure that such a choice makes much sense....

Oh, so now there is the requirement to make sense?!? Hmmm..I may have a little trouble with that, but then again I guess that there's a first time for everything. ;)

Boromir had a lot of chances to do so too, but never did until he did, if you take my meaning.

But not as many as did Aragorn. Strider was alone in the woods with fours hobbits unchaperoned. When Boromir enters the story, the Ring Bearer is surrounded by some pretty big body guards, and so he might have been put off by them. And what is hinted at by the temptations of Galadriel? Did she see Ring lust in Aragorn's eyes? My point is that Boromir and Aragorn are different.

But had they all stayed with Frodo on the journey to Mordor, I believe that, of them all, he would have been in the most danger...Then again, I believe that given sufficent time and exposure, they would all have succumbed to the lure of the Ring - with the exception, perhaps, of Gandalf.

It's possible that Aragorn would have succumbed, yet I see that happening with no more or less probability than any of the others (with the exception of the witless Pippin thing). I know that the Ring tempts and tempted, yet when I read the text I never got the sense that any of the others felt as Boromir did, meaning that I was told of the Ring's irresistable siren song, but never heard it in any of the characters' ears.

And, to quote Sauron, Aragorn's fall may have happened when the world were in dire straights (that text about a time of strife when a new Ring Lord would appear and put down all of the others or something), yet when would this strife have occurred? If Aragorn accompanied Frodo, when would possessing the Ring appear to be the better deal? Would Aragorn need it to get through the Black Gate? Or if they followed Gollum's path to Cirith Ungol, would Aragorn need to take the Ring to put down the Witch-King? If he were in Minas Tirith when the siege started, then maybe he would have felt more like Denethor, but again I just don't see it.

Boromir was Tolkien's fall guy.

Glirdan

08-23-2005, 01:04 PM

Oh, so now there is the requirement to make sense?!? Hmmm..I may have a little trouble with that, but then again I guess that there's a first time for everything.

I know, why do things have to make sense?? Oh well. Guess I will just have to restrain myself then. :p

But not as many as did Aragorn. Strider was alone in the woods with fours hobbits unchaperoned. When Boromir enters the story, the Ring Bearer is surrounded by some pretty big body guards, and so he might have been put off by them. And what is hinted at by the temptations of Galadriel? Did she see Ring lust in Aragorn's eyes? My point is that Boromir and Aragorn are different.

I agree with you on this alatar. Aragorn was with the four alone a lot after they left Bree. When Boromir comes, he would have to face a man who claims to be king of Gondor, a Dwarf with a bad temper, an elf with a good shot on a bow, and a very powerful wizard. Not to mention Frodo's kin and "servant". He would have had a really hard time getting it from him. Aragorn and Boromir are VERY different from each other.

Folwren

08-23-2005, 01:16 PM

I haven't voted yet, but I have to say that I doubt it is Peregrin. I take the question to mean that if the Fellowship never broke and Frodo still carried the Ring, who would fall next, not 'if it fell into someone's hands, who would succumb to it?' If that were the case, well...I think if anyone had it long enough they would succumb.

Anyhow, taking the question as I percieve it (i.e. Frodo carries it, the others see it now and again and it's always near them, who falls next?), I don't think Pippin would even care. Several here have said that because of his witlessness and his proneness to curiosity he would have fallen, but I say because of his lack of knowledge and lack of contact with the thing, he would hardly be aware of its presence. He sees no application for it (like Boromir saw it as a weapon, or other people might see it as power) and he can only see the misery it brings. Like a child, he'll do his utmost to avoid that.

Until later, then, when I figure out who I think WOULD be next...

alatar

08-23-2005, 01:37 PM

Several here have said that because of his witlessness and his proneness to curiosity he would have fallen, but I say because of his lack of knowledge and lack of contact with the thing, he would hardly be aware of its presence. He sees no application for it (like Boromir saw it as a weapon, or other people might see it as power) and he can only see the misery it brings. Like a child, he'll do his utmost to avoid that.

Not to be impolite, but do you have children? I have one such child that repeatedly tries to harm herself - not that she's stupid or not abled and as normal as one of my children can be - it's just that she continually attempts things that are outside of her abilities. We are on constant 'suicide watch.' Finding a screwdriver, she would immediately go to the nearest electrical outlet...

My other two somehow have more sense.

That and that she is overly curious. How many coins do you think one can fit inside the box of a computer (when it's turned on)? She means no harm, it's just that she found the coins near the computer, saw the slots, and must have figured that one belonged inside the other. I am continually amazed by (and tired from) her actions.

I see Pippin in the same light. He would not mean harm, nor would he seek power. I would agree that he might even be deaf to the call. My assertion has been that if the Ring were in reach, Pippin would try it on just to see what would happen/what it would do. I would posit the same would happen if he saw Frodo's star glass, Gandalf's staff, Boromir's horn, etc.

He just can't his hands in his pocketses.

Boromir88

08-23-2005, 02:51 PM

Well to finish what I intended...

I thought about Pippin, but seeing as he was a Hobbit, I don't see him as being the next one to fall to the Ring. I think his curiosity is what would get him eventually.

Saucepan brings up good points about Aragorn, and these are similar reasons to why I considered him to falling after Boromir. Yes, Aragorn did have chances to take it already, alone with the four hobbits, but Aragorn at the end of FOTR (well beginning of TTT) is in total shambles. He questions his own leadership, he wishes Gandalf didn't die, he wishes he wasn't the leader because anything he's decided has gone wrong. Right now at the beginning of TTT he begins questioning himself, and goes through a hard time...perhaps some fuel for the Ring to work with?

Anyway, onto who I voted for and why. Aye, it was Legolas. Simply for the reasons that he could be in the same boat with Boromir. Mirkwood is a piece of junk at this time, it's dark, crappy, and infested with spiders, could the Ring use this to work on Legolas? Maybe, maybe not. But it seems like Legolas and Boromir are sort of on the same road here. Boromir wants to save Gondor, though he wants to do it himself. Legolas perhaps wants to make Mirkwood beautiful again, and clear of spiders, but Boromir was just an easier target.

Now, we don't get too many characters thoughts on the Ring. We get some on Aragorn, a bit on Gandalf, Sam much later on, and Frodo. Other than that how the others are effected by it isn't said.

We must remember, that just because some people don't show an effect of the Ring, doesn't mean they COULDN'T become corrupted. Through the journey of the Fellowship, the Ring had no need to work on anyone else besides Boromir. Boromir was easy prey for the Ring, and the Ring had no need to try to go after anyone else at this time. Once Boromir is out of the picture, Gollum comes in, more easy prey for the Ring. So, the Ring I don't think is something all powerful that effects anyone that comes near it. It tends to focus on one person, and when that person is alone.

Examples:

Smeagol killing Deagol for the Ring.
Frodo offering it to Gandalf in Bag End.
Frodo offering it to Galadriel.
Boromir and Frodo alone at Amon Hen.
Sam's temptation in Cirith Ungol, alone with Frodo.

Bêthberry

08-23-2005, 03:20 PM

We must remember, that just because some people don't show an effect of the Ring, doesn't mean they COULDN'T become corrupted. Through the journey of the Fellowship, the Ring had no need to work on anyone else besides Boromir. Boromir was easy prey for the Ring, and the Ring had no need to try to go after anyone else at this time. Once Boromir is out of the picture, Gollum comes in, more easy prey for the Ring. So, the Ring I don't think is something all powerful that effects anyone that comes near it. It tends to focus on one person, and when that person is alone.

That could be true, but I have to wonder about Bilbo's reputation for eccentricity in The Shire--or perhaps it is Bag End's reputation as a slightly questionable place. Maybe the Ring, while lying in wait all those years, was secretly reaching out to the various visitors, whose behaviours might be skewed by its efforts. So poor Bilbo gets the reputation as somewhat or highly irregular and Bag End as a place best to avoid.

So perhaps it wasn't that the hobbits were so parochial or small minded, but that in fact there was sufficient cause for strange things overcoming hobbits in Bag End. And because no one knew the real source for the troubling influence, Bilbo got tagged with a bad rep.

Just a thought.

Lyta_Underhill

08-23-2005, 05:32 PM

How come Pippin always seems to be regarded as having less love for Frodo than Merry? Is it his "lighter" nature? I think this impression might come from the fact that Pippin CAN throw away a treasure at need, and he seems less attached to the things of the world, more Gandalf-like in that respect. Merry is constantly pulled back to Earth and admonishes himself ("Frodo and Sam! I am forgetting them!) and it pulls him back to his cares and his worry. He is depressed when Pippin is not there, and seems to need others around him, whereas Pippin treads lightly upon Middle Earth, one of the aspects of his personality I've tried to emulate, except where it creates conflicts with the more sensitive members of the world. It is a skill that works only when it is finely honed, and without this honing, it comes off as foolishness and mindlessness, perhaps childishness even! It is another question whether the Ring would have gotten Pippin before he could "grow up," but he does seem vulnerable to the unexplained drawing power of unseen forces, viz. the Palantir incident. So he probably would have tried it, but only if it had been in proximity to him.

I see Pippin in the same light. He would not mean harm, nor would he seek power. I would agree that he might even be deaf to the call. My assertion has been that if the Ring were in reach, Pippin would try it on just to see what would happen/what it would do. I would posit the same would happen if he saw Frodo's star glass, Gandalf's staff, Boromir's horn, etc. Too true, except I don't think the 'call' would take an earthly form, as it did for Boromir, as it might for Aragorn, or even as it did in the end for Frodo. Pippin wishes to know the otherworldly, the names of things, all the stars in the sky, the lands of the world, etc. etc.,. I think his desire is much like Gandalf's desire to have looked into the Palantir and seen the hands of Fëanor at work long ago, a desire for knowledge. But the Ring would have merely given him grandiose notions. And then, like Sam, he would have realized he isn't big enough for grandiose notions and taken it off like a good Hobbit!

On a last note, I think I would have thrown the book against the wall and stomped on it if Pippin fell to the Ring. I'm glad this is only hypothetical! ;)

Cheers!
Lyta

Fordim Hedgethistle

08-23-2005, 06:36 PM

Stunned, yes, I am stunned that Aragorn and Pippin are garnering so many votes, when the most likely to have succumbed is clearly ++GANDALF.

My reasoning? Each and every time someone is tempted to seize the Ring it is with the express purpose of using it to confront Sauron and to raise him or herself above the Enemy: Boromir wishes to become a great captain and lead an army against Mordor; Galadriel will become the Dark Queen; Sam dreams of throwing down the Dark Tower; even Gollum dreams of being Gollum the Great and eating fish every day.

What prevents Frodo from succumbing for so long is his ability to set aside that desire to confront evil in this mano y mano model of combative, militaristic heroism (that Boromir personifies). Instead, he clings to his love of and for other people: his duty, as he understands it, is to protect the Shire. Sam, Merry and Pippin see their duty as being to protect Frodo; Aragorn’s duty is to return to Gondor and save it; and Legolas and Gimli share the duty of the Halflings (to aid Frodo) but increasingly to each other in their remarkable friendship. The point of the Quest is to destroy the Ring and to this they are all dedicated – it’s only when people move away from this goal and embrace a more combative one (attack Sauron directly) that they run into trouble.

And this is where I come to Gandalf. His sole and only purpose in being sent to M-E is to combat Sauron: not directly, to be sure, but he has been placed there as the opponent to the Enemy. Unlike the hobbits – who are there to save the Shire – or Aragorn – who is there to win Arwen (by saving Gondor) – or Legolas and Gimli – who are there to save the Greenwood and the Mountain, and to forge a new bond between both – Gandalf is in M-E to defeat Sauron.

The lure of the Ring (“Take me, and you can destroy Sauron”) would find its readiest ear in the Wizard…don’t forget, it’s already corrupted one White Wizard…

(Why do you think that when Gandalf returned he made sure that he went west toward Aragorn, or -- more precisely -- away from Frodo, when he could have just as easily gone into Mordor to help the Ringbearer? I suspect that deep down, or even not so deep down, he knew that he was the greatest threat to Frodo.)

Glirdan

08-23-2005, 06:52 PM

I see Pippin in the same light. He would not mean harm, nor would he seek power. I would agree that he might even be deaf to the call. My assertion has been that if the Ring were in reach, Pippin would try it on just to see what would happen/what it would do. I would posit the same would happen if he saw Frodo's star glass, Gandalf's staff, Boromir's horn, etc.

I agree with you alatar, he can't seem to keep his hands off of everything. For that reason, I believe he would be the first to succumb to the power of the Ring.

On a last note, I think I would have thrown the book against the wall and stomped on it if Pippin fell to the Ring. I'm glad this is only hypothetical!

You're not the only one Lyta. If ANY of the others succumbed to the power of the Ring, I would have flipped because I liked them all.

Son of Númenor

08-23-2005, 06:58 PM

Most of your argument for Gandalf being the first to crack could be used, with minor tweaking, for Aragorn.Each and every time someone is tempted to seize the Ring it is with the express purpose of using it to confront Sauron and to raise him or herself above the Enemy: Boromir wishes to become a great captain and lead an army against Mordor; Galadriel will become the Dark Queen; Sam dreams of throwing down the Dark Tower; even Gollum dreams of being Gollum the Great and eating fish every day.Why would Aragorn be less likely than Gandalf to be tempted to seize it for the purpose of defeating Sauron? If anything he probably felt a greater pressure than Gandalf to save Gondor and the people of Middle-earth, given his bloodline.The lure of the Ring (“Take me, and you can destroy Sauron”) would find its readiest ear in the Wizard…don’t forget, it’s already corrupted one White Wizard…It also caused Boromir to assail Frodo, and Isildur was unable to give it up of his own accord.

Gandalf would succumb to the Ring eventually, perhaps before most other members of the Fellowship - but not before Aragorn. The two have similar objectives, but there are major differences. Aragorn is a Man, a Man of noble breeding but of a fallen race all the same. His desire to reclaim the throne of Gondor and usher in an era of peace would magnify the Ring's effect on him. While Gandalf's mission - and great desire - is likewise to defeat Sauron and make way for a peaceful Fourth Age, he is not bound to this quest in the same way as Aragorn is. He can return to immortal lands if Middle-earth falls to Sauron.

Edit: Cross-posted with Glirdan

HerenIstarion

08-24-2005, 01:19 AM

I wish there were an entry for 'no one'

Fordim Hedgethistle

08-24-2005, 07:21 AM

I wish there were an entry for 'no one'

Again, I will point out that one of the choices is Frodo who, as I recall, did finally succumb to the Ring...

Fordim Hedgethistle

08-24-2005, 07:37 AM

Sorry Sono, but I don’t buy your rebuttal. Aragorn’s primary goal was not to defeat Sauron but to become worthy of Arwen by saving Gondor, and to thus reunite the bloodlines of the Half-Elven. His historical/mythic purpose – his Duty – is to procreate, not to destroy.

Not so Gandalf: he is entirely sexless and wholly devoted to the combative overthrow of Sauron. In this regard he is like Boromir – can you imagine Boro ever settling down with a nice girl from Rohan in the greenwoods of Ithilien? Nuh-uh. The same is true for Gandalf – he’s not going to be doing anything after the War. One way or another, his purpose is fulfilled; his job is finished with its conclusion.

So while I agree that the Ring would have corrupted Aragorn in time (terrible thought) I still don’t think he would have succumbed before Gandalf. The Wizard was thinking at every point, “How can I defeat Sauron?” and to that the Ring gives a ready answer; Aragorn was thinking at every point, “How can I save Gondor and thus marry Arwen?” – the Ring would have found a way to deceive him into thinking he could have that, but it would take much longer insofar as it’s hard to see how Aragorn could be fooled into thinking that seizing the Ring would give him Arwen until he was completely corrupted. Gandalf, on the other hand, was already pretty desperate to defeat Sauron: so desperate that he conceived of the hare-brained idea of sending the Ring into Mordor in the care of a Halfing!

alatar

08-24-2005, 09:05 AM

I cannot stand by and watch the good name of Gandalf besmirched. With all of the talk about Gandalf taking or succumbing to the Ring, you are dragging this character through the mud. I just can't believe what I'm reading...why don't you just break his staff and lay him prone before some lesser being...like the Witch-King or something...wait...didn't someone already do that?!? ;)

Anyway, I would argue that Gandalf would have resisted the Ring longer than any. This noble soul was offered this very Ring, yet turned it down freely - he passed the test. So why would he stretch out his hand to take something that he'd already once refused?

I would assume that you might say that if it came down to either he or Sauron getting the Ring, that Gandalf would take it. Okay, maybe in this extreme case; maybe not. I think that he wouldn't. Gandalf believed that it would all work out, and surely his ring encouraged him in this feeling. He believed that something guided him into meeting with Thorin, and something helped Bilbo take possession of the Ring. Gandalf knew that he was not alone in his fight. His other self, the White part, saw things that were previously unknown to him, and I think that he foresaw that his plan had a good chance of working.

If he thought that the Ring would allow him to succeed in his task, then even though he didn't have it, then why not ally with Saruman? This was the next best thing to having the Ring. Maybe he and Saruman could put their heads together and counter Sauron, recover the Ring or even make a new ring that would help.

So why take the Ring? Surely not to help in the Siege of Gondor or to fight the armies of the Dark Lord - these were defeated without the Ring. I might be a bit confused but didn't he believe that even if Gondor were overrun that there were other places from which to fight? What other event would make him so desperate to reject all of his own wisdom, the wisdom of others, honor, duty, love, etc? The other four Istari fell, yet not Gandalf. He had many many year when he could have made other choices - set himself up as a 'Power,' quit the fight, travel out East, die - but this Steward was faithful and resolute to the end. In desperation and despair one might do many of stupid and foolish things.

But Gandalf wasn't desperate. Nor did he despair.

So go ahead, ruminate on Aragorn, vote for Legolas or Gimli or even consider the hobbits, but leave the Wizard off of the list. Gandalf would never take the Ring. :p

Glirdan

08-24-2005, 11:50 AM

So go ahead, ruminate on Aragorn, vote for Legolas or Gimli or even consider the hobbits, but leave the Wizard off of the list. Gandalf would never take the Ring.

I agree completly. He, out of the rest of the company, also had MANY (to many to count) chances to take the Ring from Frodo AND Bilbo. But did he? No! So I say leave Gandalf out of the equation completly. Yes he has a greater cause and reasons for taking the Ring, but he didn't. I still say that Aragorn or Pippin (and I say now if they would have, I would have flipped) would probably become succumbed before any of the others. Pippin because of his curiosity and Aragorn simply because of the weakness in men. Boromir fell and if the Ring were brought before Denethor, Théoden or Eomer, they probably would have done the same as Boromir, Denethor more than the others.

CaptainofDespair

08-24-2005, 12:30 PM

So go ahead, ruminate on Aragorn, vote for Legolas or Gimli or even consider the hobbits, but leave the Wizard off of the list. Gandalf would never take the Ring. :p

I think he would. It's like the cookie jar, that Ring is. Gandalf openly refused The One Cookie, but the temptation to eat that cookie grows, as he wonders at the possibilities. Gandalf wanted to defeat Sauron, and he wanted to help Frodo. So, why not do both (at least the Cookie would tell him that :D)?

He could take the Ring, and destroy Sauron with it, and maybe find enough strength in his friends to cast the Ring into the Fire. He would then have saved Frodo from that horrible experience, and not have risked his life any further. These thoughts would be in the back of his mind, and he might act on them.

Besides, the One Cookie is tasty.

alatar

08-24-2005, 01:11 PM

I think he would. It's like the cookie jar, that Ring is. Gandalf openly refused The One Cookie, but the temptation to eat that cookie grows, as he wonders at the possibilities. Gandalf wanted to defeat Sauron, and he wanted to help Frodo. So, why not do both (at least the Cookie would tell him that :D)?

How would taking the Ring accomplish either? Gandalf might think that with the Ring he could throw down Sauron, but he also knew that he would be taking the Dark Lord's place...I guess he would be the 'Grey Lord?' Frodo would suffer under this dominion, as would many others. Gandalf, a loremaster, knew the price of the stupid/wrong/easy path. I think that he even alludes to past failures...but I can't remember the quote (got to get my brain defragged) and later sees the folly of choosing the wrong path in Saruman. Also, Gandalf is the Prime Motivator. It's not for him to uproot Sauron but to aid others in the task. Think about the Siege of Gondor (the Book version). Just how many times does Gandalf's sword come out of its sheath?

He didn't need the Ring to show people the right path. Theoden was under the spell of a Maia, and Gandalf was still able to set him on the right road. Treebeard acted on his own, not because he was controlled by Gandalf. Aragorn took the Paths as a free man, not as a Ring-controlled robot.

He could take the Ring, and destroy Sauron with it, and maybe find enough strength in his friends to cast the Ring into the Fire. He would then have saved Frodo from that horrible experience, and not have risked his life any further. These thoughts would be in the back of his mind, and he might act on them.

Mayhap, yet I think that the evidence points elsewhere. Aragorn and Gandalf were ready to sacrifice all for the goal, and Frodo was of the same caliber. Surely Gandalf wanted to spare Frodo any pain, yet knew that as Frodo accepted the task freely that he was solely responsible for his own destiny.

Glirdan

08-24-2005, 01:41 PM

He didn't need the Ring to show people the right path. Theoden was under the spell of a Maia, and Gandalf was still able to set him on the right road. Treebeard acted on his own, not because he was controlled by Gandalf. Aragorn took the Paths as a free man, not as a Ring-controlled robot

Everything the others did was led by fate, if that's what you want to call it, destiny if that makes you happier. Merry and Pippin getting captured by the orcs for instance. And they were the ones who set in motion the acts of the Ents, not Gandalf. Aragorn chose to follow the orcs to rescue the Hobbits, Gandalf didn't force him. They're are a list of things that you could go on about that is all fate (i.e. Bilbo finding the Ring, Frodo receiving the Ring).

I'm sorry to say, even though I have long fought against it, that yes, Gandalf COULD have succumbed to the power of the Ring. But let me make it clear, not for a long, LONG time.

The lure of the Ring (“Take me, and you can destroy Sauron”) would find its readiest ear in the Wizard…don’t forget, it’s already corrupted one White Wizard…(Why do you think that when Gandalf returned he made sure that he went west toward Aragorn, or -- more precisely -- away from Frodo, when he could have just as easily gone into Mordor to help the Ringbearer? I suspect that deep down, or even not so deep down, he knew that he was the greatest threat to Frodo.)

He turned West because he probably thought that the people in the West would need his help more than Frodo and Sam. I mean, what if he did turn East and go with Frodo and Sam. Théoden would not have recovered and Rohan would utterly be destroyed. Then Gondor would have been enclosed from East, West and South because they wouldn't have one the battle at Helm's Deep and Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli would persih and the corsairs would not have been stopped. Yes, Saruman would be stopped, but as Treebeard stated before, Ents don't bother with the wars of Men, so they wouldn't have come to the help of Gondor or Rohan. So many things would have happened if Gandalf had turned East. In my belief, I believe he had foresight on what would have happened if he turned East and decided to turn West instead.

Bêthberry

08-24-2005, 01:44 PM

Perhaps one way to answer this or resolve the various choices is to ask one question. Yes, the one question! ;)

Which character knows himself best? Who has the greatest self-knowledge? I think that someone who is aware of his own weaknesses, desires, failings, strengths, and needs is likely someone who would be more aware of his own actions and temptations, and who would be more master of himself and less liable to the siren call of the Ring.

And then, who has the next strongest sense of self-awareness? And so on .... until we find the character who has the least or most undeveloped self-knowledge.

One reason why Boromir falls is that, while his heart is noble, he is so self-assured, has questioned himself and his actions so little, that he is unable to see what the Ring is doing to him. In contrast is Frodo, who constantly questions himself. (He thus is not "the weakest link" Frodim (sic). ;)

The problem with this idea, of course, is that it assumes every character is as well developed as any other in the Fellowship. Yet a stab can be made, no?

So, instead of a one anwer poll, we should be filling out a hierarchy. Sort of a Middle earth Maslow's hierarchy of needs, for those of you who know 7th Age psychology. :D

Fordim Hedgethistle

08-24-2005, 02:00 PM

Oh great, now I'm being taken to task for not writing a computer code which would allow for a poll which would allow a hierarchical ranking... sheesh!

But back to matters at hand...

I still think that in all of Tolkien's stories, the one thing that comes through is that the more powerful a being is, the more dangerous he/she/it will be. Sauron is the mightiest being in M-E by the time of the War, and the most perilous person the Fellowship meets is Galadriel. Saruman becomes a terrible threat to the free peoples, and Aragorn -- we are told at one point -- is a dangerous person as well.

After Gandalf becomes the White Wizard, he is the second most powerful being in the West (perhaps third, behind Shelob); as such, he is all the more dangerous. In light of Bb's comments I could easily argue that he has the least self-knowlege insofar as he is not 'really' a self but an embodied being in a physical form. Unlike the others of the Fellowship who have a place in this world -- a society, family, history, body, life -- he is a maiar who does not change, is exempt for the natural processes of living, and who is only visiting Middle-Earth as a messenger from without.

But I think I have flogged this dead wizard long enough...it just really boils my tea to see people who think that Aragorn could have taken the Ring. I mean, how can you think that after Faramir gave it up? Faramir! The ultimate pallid Aragorn-wannabe! If he can resist the Ring, Aragorn certainly can.

(Hmmmmm....I'm dissing Faramir again.....best watch for flying gauntlets....)

alatar

08-24-2005, 02:30 PM

I'm sorry to say, even though I have long fought against it, that yes, Gandalf COULD have succumbed to the power of the Ring. But let me make it clear, not for a long, LONG time.

I would agree that it would happen sometime after the sun became a charcoal briquette...;)

I still think that in all of Tolkien's stories, the one thing that comes through is that the more powerful a being is, the more dangerous he/she/it will be.

Well, that at least explains the presence of the Eagles at the opening of the Black gate - Eru was trying to get the Ring! :eek: ;)

It's little known but there are whispers that Eru was paying more attention to making a good cup of tea than to what was going on in ME. When he looked down, he saw the Frodo, Sam and Gollum at Sammath Naur and all that he could think to do was to send the Eagles (it's his default action). But even he was thwarted by the act of Gollum, who seems to be some type of rogue entity unbeholden to anyone or anything except himself and his Ring-lust.

But I think I have flogged this dead wizard long enough...it just really boils my tea to see people who think that Aragorn could have taken the Ring. I mean, how can you think that after Faramir gave it up? Faramir! The ultimate pallid Aragorn-wannabe! If he can resist the Ring, Aragorn certainly can.

If the Wizard is off of the list, as is Aragorn, then we're down to the Hobbits (probably not Sam) and the Odd Couple. Flogging yet another dead horse, I still believe that none but Boromir was penned to be a Ring-Taker.

Mister Underhill

08-24-2005, 02:33 PM

You've made a powerful case for Gandalf, Fordie, though balanced against your analysis is very strong evidence of Gandalf's self-knowledge/self-control in this matter: his knowledge of the Ring's whereabouts -- easily within his reach -- for decades; his chance to claim it not once but twice -- first when it is left more or less in his stewardship, albeit briefly, when Bilbo departs, and second when Frodo openly offers it to him.

Of course we are to imagine some desperate extremity in Mordor, no doubt -- Nazgûl on the hunt, the Ring's power waxing, etc. In fact, probably the most dangerous moment of all is Shelob's lair, when Frodo appears dead. Now there's a breaking point if ever there was one. Suppose the Fellowship were still intact then, with the Bearer down. Who takes the Ring?

I agree with your point that the more powerful and ambitious are more easily tempted, but I think you're underestimating a few factors that still weigh in Gandalf's favor. His knowledge, having passed through sacrifice, death, and regeneration, that selfish will to power is the antithesis of victory in Middle-earth. His long experience with resisting the Ring's lure. His knowledge, both as a Ring-bearer and a Maia, of the consequences of claiming the Ring. And -- and I think this is perhaps most important of all -- his resources of power, via both his native power as a "wizard" and his possession of a Ring of his own, which give him hope of successfully contending with the Enemy and/or his agents without the extra power of the One Ring.

On the other hand, I'm not sure I buy your thesis re: Aragorn. Who was it who actually sought a direct confrontation with Sauron? Why, Aragorn, of course. And was this a hasty or improvised course of action? Nay: 'Dangerous indeed, but not to all,' said Aragorn. 'There is one who may claim it by right. For this assuredly is the palantír of Orthanc from the treasury of Elendil, set here by the Kings of Gondor. Now my hour draws near. I will take it.'

Gandalf looked at Aragorn, and then, to the surprise of the others, he lifted the covered Stone, and bowed as he presented it.

'Receive it, lord!' he said: 'in earnest of other things that shall be given back. But if I may counsel you in the use of your own, do not use it – yet! Be wary!'

'When have I been hasty or unwary, who have waited and prepared for so many long years?' said Aragorn.

'Never yet. Do not then stumble at the end of the road,' answered Gandalf. Is it possible that Aragorn's sense of entitlement, of mission to oppose Sauron mano y mano, would be his undoing in the end, at the last extremity?

Maybe. Maybe.

I'm not voting yet because the jury's still out as far as I'm concerned. But I'm leaning away from Gandalf...

Glirdan

08-24-2005, 09:27 PM

Well, that at least explains the presence of the Eagles at the opening of the Black gate - Eru was trying to get the Ring!

OH MY GOD!! IT EXPLAINS EVERYTHING!!!! Oh my, what if he's controlling eveything we say!?!? :eek: Oops, there goes my insanity again.

If the Wizard is off of the list, as is Aragorn, then we're down to the Hobbits (probably not Sam) and the Odd Couple. Flogging yet another dead horse, I still believe that none but Boromir was penned to be a Ring-Taker.

We've made up a defence for Gandalf and Aragorn, so who's next? Because I complely agree with you that Boromir was doomed from the start, and no one else. I really wish there was a "no one" option, even if Frodo did eventually succumb to the power of the Ring.

Elladan and Elrohir

08-24-2005, 09:47 PM

I think one key component that some if not all of you are leaving out is the power of the Ring. Let us be clear. In the end, at the Crack of Doom, NO ONE could resist it. No one. Not Gandalf, not Aragorn, and as we see in the book, not Frodo. The will of the Ring rules supreme. Indeed, though Tolkien may think differently (and he has every right to be wrong if he wants to, ;)), I think that the way everything happened in the book was the ONLY WAY it could have happened, for the Ring to be destroyed.

Things could not have happened differently than they did in the books. Yes, I suppose you can still ask "what if" but in reality there is no "if." IF the Fellowship does not break, then Merry and Pippin will not spark the wrath of the Ents on Isengard, and Aragorn, Legolas, Gimli, and Gandalf will not heal King Theoden and win the Battle of the Hornburg. In which case Isengard will conquer Rohan and attack Gondor. Since Gondor does not have the aid of Gandalf and Aragorn, or of Rohan for that matter, it will fall quickly. And when that time comes, there is no longer any hope.

The Fellowship HAD to break. If it did not, Middle-earth was doomed. Boromir, in trying to take the Ring from Frodo, was saving Middle-earth, though unknowingly. The will of Eru prevails.

OK, I've given the lecture, you all have sat back and listened patiently, now continue with the discussion. It's still fun to ponder "what ifs" like this one. I have not made up my mind, but Fordim's argument for Gandalf currently seems very strong. Pray continue!

the phantom

08-24-2005, 11:03 PM

Fordim has made a good case for Gandalf, and I'd like to try and add to it a bit.

In TTT, The White Rider, Gandalf says-
"War is upon us and all our friends, a war in which only the use of the Ring could give us surety of victory....'
He rose and gazed out eastward, shading his eyes, as if he saw things far away that none of them could see. Then he shook his head. 'No', he said in a soft voice, 'it has gone beyond our reach. Of that at least let us be glad. We can no longer be tempted to use the Ring.
It seems to me that a part of him wishes the Ring was still around, just in case. That's how Gandalf's temptation would begin, correct? It would start as better not let the Ring get too far away- just in case, and then when crossing into Mordor in would move to don't take the Ring, but be ready to grab it- just in case, and by the time Gandalf got to Mount Doom the voice might be saying you know Frodo won't be able to destroy it when he gets there- he couldn't even throw it into his fireplace in the Shire. You had better take it now.

And since, as Fordim said, Gandalf's purpose is to counter Sauron, I imagine that being in the heart of Mordor and feeling the massive weight of Sauron's power, Gandalf would be extremely tempted to do something to boost his own power in an attempt to match his opponent.

And when Gandalf says "only the use of the Ring could give us surety of victory", isn't he showing the influence the Ring has on him? I will explain.

In Tolkien's letter 246 where he talks about good guys using the Ring to beat Sauron, he states that the Ring purposefully made people think they could be more powerful than truly possible (think of Gollum, Galadriel, and Sam's temptation). Tolkien does not give Galadriel much of a chance of winning force versus force and no chance whatsoever of winning one on one and actually destroying Sauron (JRRT said one-on-one was not even contemplated). The only person he mentioned that might win was Gandalf, and it was far from being a guarantee, which clearly means that the Ring would not give "surety of victory".

And so, when Gandalf makes his "surety" statement he is showing his temptation to use the Ring, because he is placing more faith in it than he should. It has become overly valuable to him.

HerenIstarion

08-24-2005, 11:44 PM

I wish there were an entry for 'no one'

Again, I will point out that one of the choices is Frodo who, as I recall, did finally succumb to the Ring...

I stand by what I've said. This is 'what if' kind of poll, ain't it?

Suffering from hardships of the lone wandering, captivity, hunger and Shelob's venom, Frodo managed to carry the Ring to the very end. Guided by a ranger, morally and bodily supported by his companions, not gnawed by doubt and hesitation, inspired by Gandalf with Narya (and probably having healthy diet of lembas in abundant quantities ;)), Frodo would be less prone to 'succumbing'.

I know the counter arguments. I believe he would have given in anyway, but in 'what if' kind of poll, possibility of 'no one' should have been accounted for :p

Besides, it is not correct to place them all in line an ask away - it is Frodo who stands direct attack of temptation, other get aftereffects, no more. Fair way would be to imagine each of them in turn being appointed Ring-Bearer and than speculate. What if Gimli was appointed by the Council to carry it? What if Legolas was appointed... etc

The Saucepan Man

08-25-2005, 07:53 AM

I don't hold with this "X had the chance and didn't seize the Ring" argument. I think that we can all agree that, in terms of vulnerability to the lure of the Ring, Boromir was the weakest. So, we do not even begin to consider who would be next until following Boromir's attempt. Any opportunities that any of them may have had up to that point are irrelevant because they all would have resisted given the same opportunities. The primary reason being that (in my opinion), the Ring's power (and its need to "take action" to avoid destruction) grows in strength the closer that it gets to Mordor.

The question for me, therefore, is who would have been the next person to fall to the Ring's lure had they all stayed with Frodo on his Quest to Mordor. It is quite possible that none of them would have succumbed. I believe that they all would have succumbed eventually (with the possible exception of Gandalf, being as he is described as being equal in "power" to Sauron), given sufficient time and exposure but it is possible that they would have reached Mount Doom before the Ring had an opportunity to corrupt any of them. But, if I have to choose one (which this poll requires), then I choose Aragorn.

My reasons are stated in the link that I provided. My assumption was that the character in question would have to physically seize the Ring from (and therefore either rob or attack) Frodo, as Boromir did. I agree that if it came down to a question of who would (or should) have taken the Ring in the event of Frodo's death (or apparent death), then the analysis might be different.

I also identified the order in which I thought each member of the Fellowship would "fall", given sufficent time and exposure.

...it just really boils my tea to see people who think that Aragorn could have taken the Ring. I mean, how can you think that after Faramir gave it up? Faramir! The ultimate pallid Aragorn-wannabe! If he can resist the Ring, Aragorn certainly can.The point is that Faramir did not have anything like the exposure to the Ring that the Fellowship would have had if they had accompanied with Frodo on his Quest all the way to the Crack of Doom. Had you included Faramir as a "putative Fellowship member" I would have chosen him, as I agree that he would have "fallen" before Aragorn.

alatar

08-25-2005, 08:38 AM

The primary reason being that (in my opinion), the Ring's power (and its need to "take action" to avoid destruction) grows in strength the closer that it gets to Mordor.

Not sure about this. We have the Fellowship traveling with the Ring, and step by step they all get closer to Mordor. Boromir is affected, yet (as stated previously) I think the reason that he acted upon his desire at Parth Galen was that the Fellowship was at a crossroads. Boromir was soon to go East or West; the Ring was going East or West. Boromir tried to get the Ring to go West; the Ring most likely wanted to go East - why would it have wanted to go West (but that's an idea for another thread)? Anyway, my point is that the Ring's influence at Parth Galen was X.

So Sam and Frodo continue to approach Mordor, and then they are joined by Gollum. We are told that the Ring's power and influence is increasing as it approaches the Crack. We have three individuals by which we can measure this increase in power of the Ring. Unluckily our subjects are all of the same type (hobbits**).

Sam seems to be unaffected by the Ring's power. Don't remember a moment when he thought of taking it from Frodo - and after a moment of hesitation even returns it to Frodo. Yes, I know that he wanted to help Frodo carry it, yet I never read that as Sam wanting to possess the Ring - he just wanted to lighten his master's burden. Sam is present when the Ring is in the heart of Mordor, yet he is no more affected than when at Parth Galen.

Gollum wants the Ring back - he's a bit of a 'one note'. Now that he knows who carries it, and its location, he wants it more. Yet I did not read that Gollum wanted the Ring more at Cirith Ungol or when near the Black Gate or when in Ithilien when the three were 'closer' to Orodruin than they ever would be before entering Mordor. Only at the end, when Gollum sees that his chances of recovering the Ring are at a crossroads, does he act. But was this due to the Ring's or Gollum's desire?

Frodo, unlike the others, is affected more as the Ring approaches Mordor.

So it would seem, based on this thin data, that the power and influence of the Ring did not increase beyond X except for the Bearer.

**Note that humans and other Free Folk may be affected differently and could experience serious side effects including headache, intestinal discomfort and delusions of grandeur. Please consult with your Wizard before using any Ring of Power.

the phantom

08-25-2005, 10:21 AM

Sam seems to be unaffected by the Ring's power.
That might be because the Ring didn't care about tempting him. The Ring was content to work on Frodo and Gollum. The Ring wants the quickest way back to its master, and it knew that Sam was a sturdy little fellow that It would have to work on a bit to get him under control. It wasn't worth the effort.

Boromir, on the other hand...

If Boromir had taken the Ring it would've gotten back into Sauron's hands fairly quickly, because Boromir fully intended on using it against Sauron. There's no quicker way for Sauron to get the Ring back than for someone to stand up and say "I have your Ring and I'm going to defeat you!"

The Ring would try and tempt people who had that sort of attitude- people who would use the Ring.

Sam and Frodo (probably hobbits in general) were not the type to try and use the Ring to contest with Sauron. When Sam had the Ring and the Ring tempted him to challenge Sauron, Sam knew he wasn't powerful enough. Here are his thoughts from ROTK when the Ring was in his possession-
He felt that he had from now on only two choices: to forbear the Ring, though it would torment him; or to claim it, and challenge the Power that sat in its dark hold... Wild fantasies arose in his mind; and he saw Samwise the Strong, Hero of the Age, striding with a flaming sword across the darkened land, and armies flocking to his call as he marched to the overthrow of Barad-dur... but also deep down in him lived still unconquered his plain hobbit-sense: he knew in the core of his heart that he was not large enough...
Notice two things-
1) Sam's thoughts are much like Galadriel and Boromir's when they are tempted. They all see themselves overthrowing Sauron. That proves that the Ring can have the same sort of effect on those surrounding the bearer as it does on the actual bearer.
2) When it comes down to it, Sam doesn't think he is capable, therefore he is unlikely to make the attempt. Galadriel and Boromir on the other hand, because of their pride and power, seemed to believe that they were capable, and I believe that is why they were influenced second-hand by the Ring where as Sam really wasn't.

I think its completely possible that the Ring picks its targets, and tries to work on certain individuals. If Boromir wasn't there, who would the Ring have gone to work on?

When you consider Sam's temptation and his unconquered "hobbit sense", it seems unlikely that a hobbit would be the first to fall.

A hobbit (Frodo) took the Ring farther than anyone else could, a hobbit (Bilbo) gave the Ring up, and a hobbit (Sam) supported the Ring bearer to the end. Given the evidence, I think that Merry and Pippin would have fared as well as anyone.

The Saucepan Man

08-25-2005, 10:45 AM

I think its completely possible that the Ring picks its targets, and tries to work on certain individuals. If Boromir wasn't there, who would the Ring have gone to work on?I thoroughly agree. And, if one discounts Gandalf (since he was on a level with Sauron and therefore could, as Tolkien suggests, potentially have mastered the Ring sufficiently to use it against him), who was the next most powerful member of the Fellowship, both physically and politically? The answer seems obvious to me.

Also, if we regard the Ring as a character in its own right (and I believe that we should), would it not take great glee in corrupting the descendant of he who separated it from its Master in the first place?

Bêthberry

08-25-2005, 12:48 PM

I thoroughly agree. And, if one discounts Gandalf (since he was on a level with Sauron and therefore could, as Tolkien suggests, potentially have mastered the Ring sufficiently to use it against him), who was the next most powerful member of the Fellowship, both physically and politically? The answer seems obvious to me.

It isn't a question of power, either physically or politically. It is a question of self-knowledge, or rather, lack of self-knowledge.

Or are you suggesting that the Ring seeks out he who would provide the best bit of sport for him (assuming the Ring as a character is a he), which then might be someone nearer his/its/her own level of self-control/ knowledge. Is the Ring's delight in the sport or in the victory?

davem

08-25-2005, 03:23 PM

The Ring is at once the single most powerful object in Middle-earth & the least powerful, because it can do nothing on its own - it needs a wearer to corrupt to its will. It would 'choose' to corrupt the most powerful person, because its questionable how much power it could actually bestow on an individual. It seems to work by twisting the individual's mind so that they mis-use their own innate 'power'. If everyone was to take Faramir's approach & leave it by the wayside, it would be the single most useless thing in M-e. (Inspired by the essay 'Tolkien, King Alfred & Boethius' in Tolkien Studies vol 2).

In other words, like Gandalf, it cannot 'burn snow'. It has to find someone with the potential to be corrupted. As Bb states, its down to the self knowledge of the individual. Neither Faramir nor Aragorn are seducible because of this. Not because they are incorruptible, but because, like Gandalf, Galadriel & Elrond, they know they are & so would not listen to its call. As I said, if everyone was as wise as them the Ring could just be thrown away. It has to be destroyed because not everyone is.

Lalwendë

08-25-2005, 04:19 PM

And yet the most horrible thing about the way the Ring works is that if you were Faramir or Aragorn and you knew that you ought not to pick it up, you would still not be able to leave it be. Because you would know the risk in leaving it where it was.

What would you do? Guard it and send a colleague to get help? Then you would run the risk of a weaker person coming to the rescue and just taking it. Or you could indeed just walk away, but gnawing away at you would be the knowledge that you had left this Ring lying around where anyone could find it. :eek:

The only way it can be left is if it lies somewhere it is unlikely to be discovered. But where would this be? It lay in the depths of the Anduin for centuries and it was still found. And some knew it was there and tried to find it as they were so interested in it. Then it lay under the Misty Mountains and even there it was found.

The Saucepan Man

08-25-2005, 06:38 PM

It isn't a question of power, either physically or politically. It is a question of self-knowledge, or rather, lack of self-knowledge.Mental strength (whether that be self-knowledge, wisdom, strength of will or whatever) is relevant to the degree to which a member of the Fellowship might be able to resist the lure of the Ring were it to call to him. Physical and/or political power is relevant to the question of what the Ring might be able to achieve once one of them had succumbed to it. If we are considering which "victim" the Ring would be likely to select, all of these qualities are relevant. I consider Aragorn to be a prime target.

Is the Ring's delight in the sport or in the victory?I would say that the "sport" would be incidental to the victory - a bonus, if you like. ;)

If everyone was to take Faramir's approach & leave it by the wayside, it would be the single most useless thing in M-e.But Tolkien tells us that (with the exception of Tom Bombadil) there is no such person in Middle-earth. Given sufficient time and exposure, no one could resist the lure of the Ring. I suppose that you could draw a distinction between the Ringbearer and those who accompany him, but that is merely a matter of degree to my mind. The Ringbearer's exposure is (significantly) greater and therefore requires a greater strength of will to resist. But we can see from what happened to Boromir that it can work effectively on those who are with the Ringbearer for prolonged periods.

Neither Faramir nor Aragorn are seducible because of this. Not because they are incorruptible, but because, like Gandalf, Galadriel & Elrond, they know they are & so would not listen to its call. As I said, if everyone was as wise as them the Ring could just be thrown away. It has to be destroyed because not everyone is.It had to be destroyed because no one is. I am not saying that Aragorn lacked self-knowledge, wisdom or strength of will. He had all of these qualities in spades. But each member of the Fellowship had qualities that could assist them to resist the lure of the Ring. They would all have been able to resist for a good length of time, perhaps even sufficient time to get them to Mount Doom. The question is which of them, after Boromir, would have buckled first.

There are a two things in particular about Aragorn that make him the most vulnerable in my eyes. First and foremost, he was a Man (albeit one with Elven blood). And time and time again, Tolkien makes the point that, of all the (originally good) races, Men are mentally the weakest. It was Men who were persuaded to serve both Morgoth and Sauron and it was Men who succumbed to the Rings of power. Not Elves and not Dwarves. (Although some Dwarves are said to have served Sauron, I see this as less because they could be bent to his will and more because they believed that they could get something out of it.) As for Hobbits, they are noted for their indomitability of spirit and their particular resistance to the kind of temptation that the Ring represented. And it was Aragorn's forefather who was unable to destroy the Ring when he cut it from Sauron's finger and who instead kept it for himself.

Secondly, Aragorn's wisdom, most particularly his knowledge of the nature and power of the Ring, made him vulnerable to it. Gandalf recognised this, and that is why he refused to bear the Ring. But would he have been able to do so, to resist the lure of the Ring, had he accompanied Frodo on the last stages of his Quest? Perhaps Gandalf would have been able to resist. But I do not think that Aragorn would have been able to.

Mister Underhill

08-25-2005, 07:23 PM

Adding to Saucepan's case is the fact that Aragorn alone of the Fellowship has a legitimate claim on the Ring. You can almost imagine him being able to give the palantír speech I cited above about the Ring with only a few changes in the wording.

Lyta_Underhill

08-25-2005, 11:47 PM

originally posted by Lalwende:
What would you do? Guard it and send a colleague to get help? Then you would run the risk of a weaker person coming to the rescue and just taking it. Or you could indeed just walk away, but gnawing away at you would be the knowledge that you had left this Ring lying around where anyone could find it.
Perhaps the question is not "what selfish desire does the Ring offer fulfillment for for each individual," but rather, "what is the path of the Ring to his/her heart?" Gandalf, in fact, knows the path of the Ring to his heart and confides this knowledge to Frodo in Bag End. Whether or not Gandalf has the strength to wield the Ring or not is irrelevant. It is a danger that he knows as well as any of his fellows, and perhaps he questions Aragorn's ability deep down when he admonishes him not to "stumble at the end of the road." If he and Aragorn stood side by side with the Ring untaken between them, which of them would wield it most wisely? Gandalf would know in his heart that Aragorn did not have the power to wield the Ring, and if he let him take it, he would be dooming all of Middle Earth. But then we come to the question of whether Gandalf could destroy the Ring. "I will have such need of it," he says to Frodo at Bag End. At the Cracks of Doom, his need may encompass saving Middle Earth from Aragorn taking the Ring, for he knows Aragorn would fall, and he, Gandalf would be right there, the Steward of Middle Earth, failing in his task, dooming Aragorn by allowing him to fall. Certainly, if Gandalf had been there with Frodo, the danger of this happening would be even greater, for even though he thought Frodo the "best Hobbit in the Shire," he would still have doubts to his strength and sure knowledge that the dear fellow didn't have the strength to forbear claiming the Ring (and he was right, too). Here I am arguing for Gandalf's fall to the Ring, but I merely say that the path to his heart is the same as the hobbits' path to his heart--compassion.

At the Crack of Doom, Gandalf's challenge would have been the greatest, as he knows his abilities and those of his fellows. If he himself cannot destroy the Ring, then he may decide he must take it in order to save the others from it and from Sauron.

Cheers!
Lyta, just knocking off some thoughts late at night...

davem

08-26-2005, 01:48 AM

As for Hobbits, they are noted for their indomitability of spirit and their particular resistance to the kind of temptation that the Ring represented.

Of course, from a more practical point of view it could be argued that, as the Ring cannot actually bestow any 'extra' power on an individual, only corrupt them to mis-use the 'power' they already have, putting it into the hands of a Hobbit was the samrtest thing Eru caould have arranged.

Weakness can be a useful thing to exploit if you're a Deity trying to save your world.

(See what happens when you hang around with cynics.... :p )

The Saucepan Man

08-26-2005, 04:21 AM

... putting it into the hands of a Hobbit was the samrtest thing Eru caould have arranged.I agree. Hence, my list of the order in which each member of the Fellowship should have taken the Ring if Frodo had fallen is different to my list of the order in which they would have succumbed:

Pippin - Merry - Sam - Gimli - Legolas - Aragorn - (Boromir) - GandalfIt was suggested on a thread which considered this question (and which I unfortunately cannot now find) that the best "B-Team" for the journey into Mordor would have been Pippin/Merry, with Merry playing Sam to Pippin's Frodo. I tend to agree.

davem

08-26-2005, 05:52 AM

Didn't realise my spelling had been that bad :o The display here is stuck at about 2pt & I can't increase it, so I can't read what I'm writing too well - have to wait till its posted.

Mister Underhill

08-26-2005, 08:44 AM

Pippin - Merry - Sam - Gimli - Legolas - Aragorn - (Boromir) - Gandalf Huh. Pippin? Really? Even considering the episode with the palantír? Pippin seems by far too immature and careless to be considered as the Bearer. I'd put him near, or at, the bottom of the list myself. Though I suppose I could see him playing Sam to Merry's Frodo.

I can't see any of the Fellowship besides Boromir attacking Frodo and wresting the Ring from him by force, even at the Crack -- at least until Frodo had "cracked" himself and claimed the Ring, which would make Frodo first to fall again. alatar's comments about Sam seem spot on here.

I'm more interested in scenarios where someone would have to take the Ring. Suppose Frodo had died in Moria, for instance? Who takes up the Ring then? Or, as I mentioned before, suppose Frodo were down in Cirith Ungol -- a more desperate situation. But I suppose we get deep into "what-ifs" then, because presumably with Gandalf and/or Aragorn in the lead, they might not have taken the Cirith Ungol route, or if they did, they'd be more wary about Shelob, more knowledgeable about the effects of her poison, etc.

Lalwendë

08-26-2005, 09:03 AM

Of course, from a more practical point of view it could be argued that, as the Ring cannot actually bestow any 'extra' power on an individual, only corrupt them to mis-use the 'power' they already have, putting it into the hands of a Hobbit was the samrtest thing Eru caould have arranged.

It was suggested on a thread which considered this question (and which I unfortunately cannot now find) that the best "B-Team" for the journey into Mordor would have been Pippin/Merry, with Merry playing Sam to Pippin's Frodo. I tend to agree.

Hmm, good points! When the Fellowship was being 'set up' at Rivendell it's almost inevitable that a Hobbit will be chosen to be Ringbearer. How fortunate for the 'powers that be' it was that Bilbo found the Ring, or Hobbits may have never been considered. Different races turn up for the Council, including Dwarves, Elves and Men but Hobbits are the one race which until Gollum, had never been involved with Rings of Power.

It's interesting how someone from each of these races is chosen to join the Fellowship but the majority group is of Hobbits. That cynical voice inside tells me that Gandalf noticed the potential of Hobbits right away, and he took every opportunity/advantage he could, including getting Sam to join in. I agree that it seems Merry/Pippin did make up a good B team.

Thinking about Bilbo, he set a good example with his period bearing the Ring; it was a lengthy time, but he survived relatively well. Gollum held it for much longer and he used it to hide from those he preyed upon whereas Bilbo seems to have kept the Ring to use simply to hide from his neighbours when he wanted privacy. Maybe goodness of heart (or at least lack of malicious intent) has something to do with the Ring not corrupting certain individuals quite as much as we might think it would. Maybe it is the humility of the bearer which is important?

It does make me shudder to think of what would have happened had Aragorn decided to take the ring. :eek:

Glirdan

08-26-2005, 09:11 AM

Pippin - Merry - Sam - Gimli - Legolas - Aragorn - (Boromir) - Gandalf

I myself would have put Sam before Merry and not Pippin, but I would put him before the rest of the Fellowship because the Hobbit's have greater will power than the rest. I'm not trying to put down Pippin or anything, but he's the type that would try anything out just to see what it does. Sam, on the other hand has more "hobbit sense" to not use it unless he is in great peril (ie. Cirith Ungol).

Idealy I'd place it like this:

Sam- Merry- Pippin- Legolas- Gimli- Aragorn- (Boromir)- Gandalf

As said before, I see Pippin as Frodo's Sam. Gimli and Legolas, Legolas for Frodo, Gimli for Sam. Finally Aragorn and Boromir or Gandalf, Aragron for Frodo and Boromir(if he lived) and Gandalf for Sam.

I'm more interested in scenarios where someone would have to take the Ring. Suppose Frodo had died in Moria, for instance? Who takes up the Ring then? Or, as I mentioned before, suppose Frodo were down in Cirith Ungol -- a more desperate situation. But I suppose we get deep into "what-ifs" then, because presumably with Gandalf and/or Aragorn in the lead, they might not have taken the Cirith Ungol route, or if they did, they'd be more wary about Shelob, more knowledgeable about the effects of her poison, etc.

The problem with that, as you said, is that there are to many if's. The route they would have taken into Mordor would have been completly different if Aragorn and/or Gandalf went with them. If they did go by Cirith Ungol, then as you said, they would have been aware of Shelob's poison effects and they would not have let the Orc band take Frodo away. They would have continued on, Aragorn probbaly carrying Frodo on his back. But, if Aragorn did go with them to Morodor, he wouldn;t have gone to the Paths of the Dead and Gondor and Rohan would have fallen. So if any of the Fellowship should have gone, it should have been Legolas and/or Gimli seeing as they didn't really do a whole lot of anything of importance. Pippin and Merry are the ones who awakened the wrath of the Ents, Gandalf was the mover of all the pieces on the the board, Aragorn had to go to the Paths of the Dead in order to save Gondor. What did Legolas and Gimli do? Accomanied Aragorn, nothing else. They didn't really have anything to do accept accompany Aragorn.

The Saucepan Man

08-26-2005, 09:19 AM

What did Legolas and Gimli do? Accomanied Aragorn, nothing else. They didn't really have anything to do accept accompany Aragorn.Whaddya mean? Legolas brought down an Oliphaunt single-handedly. :p ;)

The reason that I would place Pippin ahead of Sam and Merry is that, for all his (early) immaturity and his undoubted curiosity, he comes across to me as having a greater spiritual strength than the other two. Sam and Merry are more down to earth and practical, which is what makes them great "side-kicks". Pippin just seems to be much more akin to Frodo than either of them, on a spiritual level.

Mister Underhill

08-26-2005, 09:55 AM

Of course, from a more practical point of view it could be argued that, as the Ring cannot actually bestow any 'extra' power on an individual, only corrupt them to mis-use the 'power' they already have...What's the basis for this? Gandalf seems to think it would give him "extra" power: Yet the way of the Ring to my heart is by pity, pity for weakness and the desire of strength to do good. Do not tempt me! I dare not take it, not even to keep it safe, unused. The wish to wield it would be too great, for my strength. I daresay Galadriel's speech at her temptation and her discussion of the nature of the Ring implies the same.

davem

08-26-2005, 11:47 AM

They didn't really have anything to do accept accompany Aragorn.

In the early drafts Malbeth's prophecy required three princes of different race to summon the Dead. I think this is why the Three Hunters went together. By the time Tolkien had changed his mind about this it was probably too late to alter the storyline.

What's the basis for this? Gandalf seems to think it would give him "extra" power:

Depends how you understand their words. My understanding is that in taking the Ring they would have rejected all moral responsibility over their own innate power & become like Sauron. Hence Gandalf would have had too much power (his own) to use 'freely'. He would have no longer been a servant of the Secret Fire, but in his own mind have become a 'Master' of it. He feared to become another Saruman. The Ring deceives one into misusing their own power - thinking like Sauron.

I see no evidence that innate power can be 'transferred' in the way you're talking about. If we look at Boromir's 'fantasy' of what he would become if he had the Ring it is nothing more than he could have done anyway. The Ring worked by convincing its bearer that it alone could give them power to do what they wished to do. It actually convinced them they could do nothing without it, that they were weak & helpless victims of circumstance. All it really seemed to do in practical terms was make them invisible.

Sauron is a 'deciever' & I see no reason to believe that his Ring would do anything else. Have you noticed that none of the bearers of the Ring become suddenly more powerful? What exactly did it enable Isildur to do? Or Gollum, or Bilbo? It merely enslaved their minds. Actually it makes them weaker, if anything - subject to their own desires. Of course, if Sauron got it back he would regain the power he put into it. I just don't see it empowering anyone else.

Mister Underhill

08-27-2005, 09:24 AM

Depends how you understand their words. My understanding is that in taking the Ring they would have rejected all moral responsibility over their own innate power & become like Sauron. While I agree in principle that the Ring is deceitful, and that the price you pay in power gained is ultimately corruption and betrayal, I disagree with your assessment of the Ring as having no practical power at all.

Gandalf is not tempted to have a lack of conscience, but to have extra "strength" that he can "wield" and "use".

Galadriel: "I do not deny that my heart has greatly desired to ask what you offer. For many long years I had pondered what I might do, should the Great Ring come into my hands, and behold! it was brought within my grasp."

I daresay that Galadriel's heart doesn't desire a rejection of moral responsibility, but power. The secret hope, the temptation, is that her will will be strong enough to master the Ring's corruptive influence and use its power for good. How much native power do we suppose that Galadriel has, anyway? When her Ring loses its power, we see that what she has done in Lorien wanes and fails.

As bearers of rings themselves, both Gandalf and Galadriel have insight into how they work. Would they even be tempted by a Ring that confers no practical power? No. The power, and not just an empty promise of power, is the temptation.
Have you noticed that none of the bearers of the Ring become suddenly more powerful?In fact, Galadriel expressly says that Frodo has gained some power even though he has made no effort to use or to try to learn to use the Ring: "Before you could use that power you would need to become far stronger, and to train your will to the domination of others. Yet even so, as Ring-bearer and as one that has borne it on finger and seen that which is hidden, your sight is grown keener. You have perceived my thought more clearly than many that are accounted wise. You saw the Eye of him that holds the Seven and the Nine. And did you not see and recognize the ring upon my finger?"

The Ring is a little bit like a car. You can gain certain benefits from a car just by sitting in it: you are protected from the elements, you can listen to the radio, etc. But to enjoy the full power the car has to offer, you have to will to use it -- and you have to learn how to use it.

davem

08-27-2005, 10:00 AM

Gandalf is not tempted to have a lack of conscience, but to have extra "strength" that he can "wield" and "use".

What's interesting is that the very 'power' that Gandalf rejects in refusing the Ring is actually given to him by Eru when he returns as Gandalf the White. So it is not that the Ring is the only means to the kind of power that Gandalf wishes for. The Ring does something else - & that is the significant thing about it. We'll never know what kind of power the Ring would (or would not) bestow. This 'power' may simply be power without responsibility - ie, the Ring removes any sense of moral responsibility.

I daresay that Galadriel's heart doesn't desire a rejection of moral responsibility, but power. The secret hope, the temptation, is that her will will be strong enough to master the Ring's corruptive influence and use its power for good. How much native power do we suppose that Galadriel has, anyway? When her Ring loses its power, we see that what she has done in Lorien wanes and fails.

This assumes that the Three work in exactly the same way as the One. Being made by Sauron I would speculate that it works differently. The Three certainly enhance the innate abilities of their wielders, but we cannot state that the One will do the same thing. My feeling is that rather than transferring its power to the wielder it subsumes their own abilities & takes them over - rather than bestowing its power on them it uses their power & 'forces' them to obey its will. They don't recieve any power from it, the power in the Ring works according to its nature & cannot be controlled or directed by the individual wearer. They get to be no more powerful than they ever were.

In fact, Galadriel expressly says that Frodo has gained some power even though he has made no effort to use or to try to learn to use the Ring: "Before you could use that power you would need to become far stronger, and to train your will to the domination of others. Yet even so, as Ring-bearer and as one that has borne it on finger and seen that which is hidden, your sight is grown keener. You have perceived my thought more clearly than many that are accounted wise. You saw the Eye of him that holds the Seven and the Nine. And did you not see and recognize the ring upon my finger?"

I accept that is what she believes, & certainly Frodo sees more than he had been able to. But Galadriel has only known her Elven Ring. She is speaking about something she does not have direct experience of - & this is something Tolkien warns about repeatedly. The true nature of the Ring is never clearly explained in the book. What she is effectively saying to Frodo is that in order to 'use' the power of the Ring he would have to think more like Sauron - the more he was like Sauron the more he would gain power from the Ring. Which is simply another way of saying that the Ring would find it easier to work its will through him.

Again, the Ring is both the most powerful & the least powerful object in Middle-earth. If it finders a wearer who 'attunes' him/herself to it its power will be the better able to work through them. If everyone rejects it it is useless.

Gandalf & Galadriel are tempted by the desire for absolute power - which corrupts absolutely - something they both realise when it comes to the test, & so reject the Ring when it is offered. The desire for absolute power may be motivated by a wish to do good, but having it will inevitably corrupt one who has no right to it - to whom it is not innate.

In Galadriel's words I think we see a glimpse of her mind - she has come to believe that the One is controllable by an act of will & she states as much to Frodo. If she had believed for all those centuries that all it could do was enslave its user she would not have desired it for so long. Yes, she states that its power is controllable & accessible to one who trains his/her will to that task - Tolkien wrote that, but he also wrote the accounts of the Ring bearers & none of them gain any real power from the Ring beyond invisibilty & expanded awareness.

EDIT

Thinking about it, it may be that Galadriel was correct in what she said - in that Frodo would have been able to 'use' the Ring's power to do things - but only if the Ring allowed him, & only in order that it could gain control over him more easily. I still don't believe it would be possible to dominate it & use it freely.

Lyta_Underhill

09-06-2005, 11:19 AM

Again, the Ring is both the most powerful & the least powerful object in Middle-earth. If it finders a wearer who 'attunes' him/herself to it its power will be the better able to work through them. If everyone rejects it it is useless. An interesting way to phrase it, davem! I've heard this very thing applied to religious dogma and political systems as well. One could apply it to the written word in many forms--words are dangerous, but impotent if none read them or heed them. But once read, they cannot be forgotten. This is a vague corollary to Frodo's loss of innocence in his assumption of the Ring quest and appears to be backed by the law of Entropy, the original Fall of Man and many other human observations/history/literature, etc.

Is the evil, like Melkor's unwitting introduction of the beauty of snowflakes, better to have been, or is it simply entropy, a one way inevitable road that corrupts everything (better to have been, and yet still it remains evil.) . I can't help but wonder if this phenomenon is a psychological byproduct of a civilization trapped by the philosophy of time and its one way nature. I still haven't gotten the brainpower together to sit down and figure out "The End of Time" by Julian Barbour. Maybe one day, if it isn't too late! ;)

Cheers!
Lyta (sorry for the divergence from the topic!)

davem

09-06-2005, 12:47 PM

An interesting way to phrase it, davem! I've heard this very thing applied to religious dogma and political systems as well. One could apply it to the written word in many forms--words are dangerous, but impotent if none read them or heed them. But once read, they cannot be forgotten. This is a vague corollary to Frodo's loss of innocence in his assumption of the Ring quest and appears to be backed by the law of Entropy, the original Fall of Man and many other human observations/history/literature, etc.

I think the thing about the Ring is that you can never 'control' it - it is impossible to become 'Lord of the Ring'. You can only become its slave. You make yourself like Sauron & you will do what Sauron did & nothing other. The 'power' it offers is an illusion, because the Ring will never surrender its control. When your mind & its' are one it will work through you. Its like a gun offers you the power of life & death over others, but in order to have that power you have to make yourself into a murderer. The Ring does not offer one the chance to be an all powerful good person. Like the Ringwraiths one must make oneself into what the Ring/Sauron wants in order to make use of the 'power' the Rings offer. That comes from within the individual, not outside them.

If you claim the Ring you become weaker, not stronger - the 'power' is a delusion. In the end you are 'neither living nor dead', merely a 'wraith', a means for the Ring to be operative in the world. So, in the end, it is still the Ring which is powerful. Hence, to reject the Ring, to leave it by the wayside, makes it impotent. The Ring, & the Ring alone, is 'Lord of the Ring'. Even Sauron himself was a 'victim' of his own creation. He could not exist if it did not & he could only use it in the way he designed it to work. Effectively, he enslaved himself.

I think this in part accounts for Frodo's feeling of failure at the end - he realised that all he had chosen at the end was 'slavery'.

Formendacil

09-06-2005, 05:38 PM

Turning back to the original question of the thread, and not the interesting, verbose discussion it has currently sidled into, I have to confess that I voted with Master Fordhim.

This is due, mainly, to reading the thread title, seeing it was a poll, reading the POLL, and making my selection- all before reading the initial post of Fordhim's.

As a general rule, I post before reading so that my opinion before anyone has a chance to affect it, is most clearly shown. That is, after all, the point of a poll.

Normally, this works well enough, but this time, I fear that my answer may be somewhat confused.

When I voted for Gandalf, I was answering the question of the POLL: "Which of the Fellowship would succumb to the Ring first?". I interpreted this in the sense of "if every member of the Fellowship was given a 'One Ring', who would succumb first?" And I stick by my answer. Gandalf had the greatest power and the greatest ambitions. If he were to receive a Ring (and not rid himself of it), he would turn to evil the most quickly.

However, I then read, to my chagrin, the question posed in the opening POST: "If the Fellowship remained together, who would crack next?"

This is, in my opinion of course, a very different question. Naturally, it assumes that Gandalf didn't fall in Moria, and that the Fellowship stuck together- assumptions that I am willing to make for the sake of discussion. However, my answer now changes drastically. If the Fellowship remained together, I do not think that it would be Gandalf who would go first, but rather, one of the younger hobbits. I think it would be Merry.

My reasoning is that the Ring would be putting out its siren call to ALL the Fellowship, but that Gandalf and Aragorn would be the most immune by reason of their very conscious decisions to refuse the Ring. Gandalf in Bag End, and Aragorn in Bree have both clearly refused to take the Ring. Legolas is an Elf who has pretty much no ambitions that we are shown, and is probably the best in the Fellowship at taking things on faith. "Gandalf said so, so it must be so." Gimli, as a Dwarf, has what might be called genetic immunity. He'd be tempted, but the Rings don't work all that well on Dwarves to begin with, as demonstrated by the Seven.

That leaves the three Hobbits. Sam is easily eliminated by his return of the Ring to Frodo in the RK- a giving up of the Ring not done by any other. Even Bilbo needed help.

We are now left with Merry and Pippin. For reasons given, many people seem to think that Pippin would go first. He is, after all, the less wise, more curious, and more foolhardy of the two. But I think it would be Merry.

The Ring would be more attractive to Merry. Merry is more worldwise, and knows more of what it could do. The temptations for him on that score would therefore be greater. Furthermore, Merry IS the closer friend to Frodo. Pippin is close, but Merry is closer. Merry knew him longer, for one thing, going back at least to the Party, and probably to Frodo's orphanage in Brandy Hall. What's more, Merry sometimes acts more like Frodo's caretaker. He worries more about Frodo's health than Pippin does. Pippin is a good deal more blythe about things. And I see the temptation striking Merry through his caring heart. Frodo wilted the closer they got to Mordor, and I don't see that being any easier for Merry than for Sam, but I CAN see Merry taking the Ring away out of compassion.

And don't anyone say that being a hobbit gives Merry immunity. Smeagol fell to the Ring's call at a glance. It's only AFTER the Ring has taken hold that being a hobbit adds any advantage.

However, based on the question that the POLL was asking, I still feel that Gandalf was the right answer. Even more than Boromir. If the Fellowship was all given Rings, somehow made to take them, and someone yelled "Ready, Set, GO!", I think Gandalf would have gone first. Boromir second. Aragorn third.

davem

09-07-2005, 01:55 AM

I think the problem is that no-one apart from Gandalf & Aragorn could use the Ring more or less straight away. Any of the others would, as I pointed out earlier, have to 'train their minds' to its use - ie attune themselves to it. This would have taken a good while in the case of the Hobbits, Gimli, Legolas & even Boromir. If any of them had taken the Ring the others would have simply slapped them around & taken it & given it back to Frodo - & I include Legloas, Gimli & Boromir as 'slappees'.

So, we're not talking about who might desire the Ring but about who was a real threat if they had it. Only Gandalf & Aragorn were potential Ring users - both have a 'dark side' to their characters, & a willingness, in the 'right' circumstances to 'do what's necessary' - think back to their treatment of Gollum when they captured him. Both were 'ungentle' which we can only take to mean they were fairly brutal.

Yet we know that both Gandalf & Aragorn were aware enough of the danger the Ring presented not to go that way.

In short, no-one who was a potential Ring user was a potential Ring claimer. All those likely to fall were not strong enough to get away with taking it.

alatar

09-07-2005, 08:15 AM

In short, no-one who was a potential Ring user was a potential Ring claimer. All those likely to fall were not strong enough to get away with taking it.

davem, though I understand your argument, I'm not sure that the Ring could successfully be reclaimed from one of the slappees. Gandalf was able to help Biblo let go of the Ring, yet this was many years and many miles from Bag End (e.g. they are now a lot closer to a more potent Sauron). Boromir unsuccessfully tried to take it from Frodo; what chance would someone, even Gandalf, have against one of the Fellowship who took the Ring to do something with it?

What if Boromir got the Ring from Frodo? Would Aragorn or Gandalf have been able to get it back? Would Boromir have run off to Minas Tirith with his prize, leaving the Fellowship to fend for themselves? Somehow I feel that if he did take the Ring, then he would have died shortly thereafter by misadventure.

Would Gandalf have to break 'one of the rules' to rend the Ring from Boromir? Would Aragorn have to kill him? What would or could they do against an invisible warrior?

Anyway, Merry and Pippin would have done something foolish after acquiring it (I don't see them as takers), and a storyline could have developed in which the Ring would have to be recovered from Orcs or something. Legolas, Gimli and Sam would not take the Ring, and if they did, they would give it back.

Dimcollowen

09-07-2005, 08:53 AM

I agree i don't think Gandalf would have succombed to its power....althought it would be a lot stronger nearer to Suaron.
I know that Aragorn would never succomb the Ring...no matter what he or any else thinks.
I think that if Sam had taken it he would have just given it back to Frodo...and I think Frodo might have succombed to the Ring....he sort-of did by the end. (at Mt. Doom where he decides to keep the Ring.....)
Legolas i don't think would have fallen. Elves are powerful enough to be able to resist it. but you never know. If he had fallen and taken the RIng there would be numerous problems...i think that he Legolas had taken it he would have been able to wield it....not entirely but just alittle.
If Gimli got the Ring i have no clue what he would have done....I am not to sure would ever have fallen to the power of the RIng.
The ones I would definatley say would be Merry and Pippin. They wouldn't have known what to with it though so they probably would just pull pranks and stuff like that.

Lyta_Underhill

09-07-2005, 10:43 AM

Legolas i don't think would have fallen. Elves are powerful enough to be able to resist it. but you never know. If he had fallen and taken the RIng there would be numerous problems...i think that he Legolas had taken it he would have been able to wield it....not entirely but just alittle.
If Gimli got the Ring i have no clue what he would have done....I am not to sure would ever have fallen to the power of the RIng.
I can't see Legolas OR Gimli falling right away, either. Legolas has to be the most humble elf I've ever seen, even with his proud words at the beginning. He learns easily and quickly, and bows to others (worthy others) with no qualms (i.e., the total nonexistence of any explicated possibility or even inkling in Legolas' mind of taking over Mirkwood/Eryn Lasgalen after his father). He seems to have no desire to rule even his own realm,though he is the heir of Thranduil. (Unless there are other siblings first in line I know nothing of, but I imagine them also playing Tra-la-la-lally with the addition of lots of wine...holdover from The Hobbit!).

Gimli is one over whom gold has no dominion, as Galadriel has noticed; what is more, Sauron had a whole lot of trouble bending the Dwarves to his will using the seven Dwarven Great Rings and just set himself to gather them up again. It is said Dwarves are slow to change and keep their affairs to themselves. I can't see them expanding their realms, unless it was someplace Dwarves had claimed, occupied and had been lost (i.e., Moria). Even then, in the hands of a Dwarf, the Ring would fare much the same as it did with Gollum, hoarded, hidden away, never to see the light of day.

As for Merry and Pippin, I could see Merry falling before Pippin, although I think Pippin would also fall eventually and possibly in an attempt to save Merry from the Ring. (Clarification: I think Merry is in deeper danger of falling, Pippin in more immediate but less complete danger, if that makes any sense.) Pippin wanted to stop Frodo from heading toward Mordor, and I imagine Merry would know more of the Ring than Pippin does, having observed its use even before Sam or Pippin (his surreptitious watching of Bilbo). I can see Merry having more concrete plans for the future at the time of the War of the Ring than Pippin, who is on the Quest to protect Frodo, because he cares for his friend. (This, BTW, looks like a mirror and an echo to his observations later of Beregond's daring deeds done for love of Faramir, during which time what is buried subconsciously in Pippin comes to conscious realization--at Rauros, however, he only knows he should stop Frodo because he is afraid for him.)

SPM's designation of the B-Team seems apt, as Pippin, having fewer 'plans' and dreams for application of power than Merry, would be the best choice to carry something as abstractly menacing as the Ring. However, he is also too immature at that point to resist properly (on second thought, I think Frodo had a bit of trouble with this himself!). Who can tell if Pippin would have heeded the striving of Gandalf with Sauron on Amon Hen--"take it off, fool!" as Frodo did at the last moment. One thing I do think is that he would have realized it was Gandalf, not necessarily in reality, but in a spiritual realm. Pippin and Gandalf have this very similar serendipity about them, and they are very connected--after all, Pippin is Gandalf's 'project.' Perhaps this is mere fancy, but there does seem to be something, a "Sixth Sense" (http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showthread.php?t=2280&highlight=sixth+sense) if you will, behind Pippin's actions, like unto perhaps the extraordinary senses that Frodo gains through his carrying the Ring, and which Sam seems to have innately through his connection with the Earth.

One thing I could say is that Pippin, not having the harsh teachings that Frodo had already had on the road (or having had them only secondhand, as did everyone else) would not be nearly as equipped as Frodo to carry the Ring at this closer locale to Mordor. Pippin would have been more vulnerable, and if he had the Ring, he would make the same mistakes Frodo made earlier, but he wouldn't have the distance and time buffer that Frodo did, so it would be MUCH more dangerous. I hate to think of it! I'll stop now, but I wanted to put out these few thoughts!

Cheers!
Lyta

davem

09-07-2005, 11:05 AM

davem Boromir unsuccessfully tried to take it from Frodo; what chance would someone, even Gandalf, have against one of the Fellowship who took the Ring to do something with it?

What if Boromir got the Ring from Frodo? Would Aragorn or Gandalf have been able to get it back? Would Boromir have run off to Minas Tirith with his prize, leaving the Fellowship to fend for themselves? Somehow I feel that if he did take the Ring, then he would have died shortly thereafter by misadventure.

Would Gandalf have to break 'one of the rules' to rend the Ring from Boromir? Would Aragorn have to kill him? What would or could they do against an invisible warrior?

I don't think any member of the Fellowship could have taken the Ring & 'done anything with it'. It wasn't someting you could use instantly - as Galadriel points out to Frodo. I also suspect that Gandalf & very probably Aragorn could have overcome even an invisible Boromir. How long had Frodo borne the Ring - yet he still knew Boromir was strong enough to take it from him. You also have to take into account that the Ring did not call to just anybody - it was seeking Sauron & seemed to display some degree of intelligence. I'd say that only someone who had 'mastered' it (ie become enslaved by it to the point that it could work through them) would have been able to wear it & remain visible - ie like Sauron. Anyone who was made invisible by it would not have been able to do anything with it - does that make sense? And in bright sunlight the bearer would still cast a shadow.

I don't think Gandalf or Aragorn were potential victims because they knew the nature of the Ring - so why would it bother trying to tempt them? It chose the weakest - the ones most easily dominatable. If Boromir or anyone else had worn the Ring for any period of time they would have drawn the servants of Sauron to themselves - particularly the Ringwraiths, who the bearer could not have dominated.

VanimaEdhel

09-07-2005, 11:25 AM

My reasoning is very similar to many people before me, so I won't go into great detail, repeating the reasoning behind my decision.

Like so many others, it came down to Merry and Pippin in my opinion. A major contributing factor is the fact that those were the two that seemed to have the least knowledge regarding the ring. Through either recently acquired knowledge (especially first-hand) or old lore, the others seemed to be more aware of the ring's position in the world - its history and power. I think that Merry, if the Fellowship had stayed together, would have seen the subtle effects of the ring - seen how it was changing all of them. While he is in no regard unintelligent, I don't think that Pippin would have been quite as aware of the power beginning to turn him and his companions. I think Merry would have been perceptive enough to realize the danger, however. Pippin was also the most curious of the group - more than once his curiosity put the group in danger. If they remained together, I think it would have only been a matter of time before the seduction of the ring, mixed with his own curiosity, would have overcome him. As all of his other blunders, Pippin would have had no harm in mind - in fact he may not have even had good deeds in mind - but would have found himself in danger.

Then, however, falls the fact that it seems that Hobbits were particularly strong when it comes to the ring. They, as a race, have far less ambition than men, Dwarves and Elves. And I don't see any particular desire for power coming from Merry or Pippin. But the others knew of the power so well - Gandalf, Aragorn and Legolas best of all. Gimli did not seem to have enough personal drive to be affected and Sam is another Hobbit - he did begin to feel the effects when he was wearing the ring himself, but he was far stronger than any mortal would have been.

Mister Underhill

09-07-2005, 03:04 PM

...what chance would someone, even Gandalf, have against one of the Fellowship who took the Ring to do something with it?This is an excellent question, and one whose answer is not as clear-cut as some speculation on this thread would lead you to believe. Letter 246, in which Tolkien expounds at length on the events at the Crack and possible alternative outcomes, is particularly relevant to the question of the Ring's power or lack thereof. Like so many topics in Tolkien, it offers no easy, pat answers, though something caught my eye which suggests that the Ring does have power which would be instantly accessible to a claimant. The situation as between Frodo with the Ring and the Eight might be compared to that of a small brave man armed with a devastating weapon, faced by eight savage warriors of great strength and agility armed with poisoned blades. The man's weakness was that he did not know how to use his weapon yet; and he was by temperament and training averse to violence. Their weakness that the man's weapon was a thing that filled them with fear as an object of terror in their religious cult, by which they had been conditioned to treat one who wielded it with servility.Tolkien, Master of Ambiguity, suggests two possible readings here, I suppose: on the one hand, he explicitly attributes great offensive power to the Ring (supposing you know how to use it); then a moment later he relates the Ring's power to that of an icon -- possibly more powerful as an idea than actually powerful.

But I'm also quoting a little bit out of order. A few paragraphs back, Tolkien seems to suggest beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Ring has some power to offer even an unskilled user, supposing that he uses it in the 'proper' spirit, i.e., aggressively:
It is an interesting problem: how Sauron would have acted or the claimant have resisted. Sauron sent at once the Ringwraiths. They were naturally fully instructed, and in no way deceived as to the real lordship of the Ring. The wearer would not be invisible to them, but the reverse; and the more vulnerable to their weapons. But the situation was now different to that under Weathertop, where Frodo acted merely in fear and wished only to use (in vain) the Ring's subsidiary power of conferring invisibility. He had grown since then. Would they have been immune from its power if he claimed it as an instrument of command and domination? Not wholly. I do not think they could have attacked him with violence, nor laid hold upon him or taken him captive...alatar is also right to bring up the Ring's power of invisibility as a factor which, all by itself, could cause a lot of difficulty for someone trying to take the Ring from a claimant.

Mister Underhill

09-07-2005, 03:47 PM

Addendum: Forgot to add that the Ring-claimer's theoretical power over the Nazgûl at the Crack may derive from the Ruling Ring's power over the "nine rings for Men", once again plunging the issue into ambiguity...

davem

09-08-2005, 03:48 AM

The man's weakness was that he did not know how to use his weapon yet; and he was by temperament and training averse to violence. Their weakness that the man's weapon was a thing that filled them with fear as an object of terror in their religious cult, by which they had been conditioned to treat one who wielded it with servility.

I suppose the question is whether the Ring would allow itself to be used against the Nazgul - I think this assumes the Ring is morally 'neutral' & has no innate consciousness - which goes against the idea of its calling out to potential users & desiring to get back to Sauron.

Would they have been immune from its power if he claimed it as an instrument of command and domination? Not wholly. I do not think they could have attacked him with violence, nor laid hold upon him or taken him captive...

Again, this assumes that the bearer could use the Ring to make the Nazgul act in a way that they did not wish to - but their desires would have conformed with thehequestion is whether the Ring would have submitted to Frodo in those circumstances.

Mister Underhill

09-08-2005, 09:12 AM

I think you credit the Ring too much with a mind and will of its own.

alatar

09-08-2005, 10:20 AM

While preparing a new thread regarding the Ring (oddly in regards to the post just made by Mr. Underhill), I came across some information about the One Ring. Anyway, just want to add this thought: who put the Ring on the chain while Frodo was being healed in Rivendell? Assumptions are Elrond or Gandalf, and if we believe the later, then this is yet another instance of Gandalf refusing the Ring.

The Saucepan Man

09-08-2005, 10:34 AM

Anyway, just want to add this thought: who put the Ring on the chain while Frodo was being healed in Rivendell? The Mysterious 10th Bearer (http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showthread.php?t=10997)

davem

09-08-2005, 10:41 AM

I think you credit the Ring too much with a mind and will of its own.

Well, its either the Ring itself, or Sauron working through the Ring. I think the latter causes many more problems in terms of explaining how it behaves - that would mean that Sauron was in touch with the Ring & so knew where it was & what it was doing.

Where do the fantasies the Ring produces arise? The Ring often behaves as if it has a mind & will of its own - its stated that the Ring decides abandon Gollum for instance, & that it slipped off Isildur's finger, that it temps Frodo to put it on, etc. Now, is all this to be understood metaphorically, or does the Ring have some kind of 'intelligence' - & if so, to what degree? How much of himself did Sauron pour into it? It seems to function autonomously too often simply to be an object of power.

Mister Underhill

09-08-2005, 11:00 AM

davem

09-08-2005, 01:16 PM

You make it sound like such a black and white proposition. I agree that the Ring is not a completely inanimate object. But does it have the ability to analyze a situation and then "decide" whether or not it will "allow" itself to be used? How aware is it? How sentient is it?

Ok, let me try this:

I'd say it is sentient to some degree, but the point is that it is only usable by someone in the 'right' frame of mind (ie someone who has gone a long way down the road to becoming like Sauron, & is able to use it in the only way that it is possible to use it - ie one would not be able to use it to do 'good'. Using it would be very similar to using crack cocaine - the addiction would begin almost instantaneously.

It's also stated that Sauron is "exerting all his power to find it or draw it to himself". Are the Ring's "actions" more "reactions" to this signal that Sauron is broadcasting? You assume that Sauron working on (or through) the Ring means he knows where it is and what it is doing. This need not be so. When I listen to my Walkman, the radio station works through it without knowing where my Walkman is or what it is doing. A computer can act "autonomously", but it obviously does not necessarily follow that it is intelligent or aware. The Ring, when worn, creates a sort of conduit to Sauron -- but clearly it lacks the ability to call out to him or to make a report on its location and situation.

But the Walkman & computer are not 'evil'. I think this is the point. The Ring is evil - evil is a(n im)moral 'force'. Its not a case that the Ring can be used for evil, but that it is evil in & of itself. As if your computer could only be used to access paedophilia because it was designed to do only that & also that if you used your computer you would become instantly addicted to that. More so, as if it was able to draw you to use it, had that purpose as part of its making. That doesn't, I accept, require your computer to be 'autonomous' - but it would bebehaving as if it was.

Also, I notice that you were quick to point out earlier in the thread that Gandalf and Galadriel's ideas about how the Ring works are only theoretical and cannot be relied upon, but are now willing to take Gandalf's speculation that the Ring "decided" to "abandon" Gollum at face value. Which way do you want it?

I'm going by what the Ring does - based on that I think Gandalf's 'speculation' here is correct.

Mister Underhill

09-08-2005, 02:25 PM

I think this is the point. The Ring is evilWell, I've not said otherwise. Is this the point? I thought we were discussing the degree to which the Ring is sentient or not, capable of "submitting" to use or not, etc.

What I get from your argument is that you go all the way to the sentience side of the scale with the Ring, attributing to it mind, awareness, will, agenda. For my own part, I'd probably slide it down the scale a ways, not all the way to inanimate computer, but more like a blind, dumb, animalistic, radioactive sort of evil. If it were indeed as sentient as you posit, it could and would, I think, have devised a much more effective plan for returning to its master.

davem

09-08-2005, 02:55 PM

What I get from your argument is that you go all the way to the sentience side of the scale with the Ring, attributing to it mind, awareness, will, agenda. For my own part, I'd probably slide it down the scale a ways, not all the way to inanimate computer, but more like a blind, dumb, animalistic, radioactive sort of evil. If it were indeed as sentient as you posit, it could and would, I think, have devised a much more effective plan for returning to its master.

No - it had to work with the 'raw materials' to hand. Not everyone would succumb to its call. In fact, it had to be subtle & work mostly on those who were ignorant of its true nature. The Ring was not a Shelob - who would fit your description:

a blind, dumb, animalistic, radioactive sort of evil.

I think the Ring is much closer to Sauron: conscious, logical, purposeful, but rather limited in what it could do to get its way. I think the movies were correct in that at least.

The Saucepan Man

09-08-2005, 04:53 PM

Is this the point?I suppose the point that davem is making is that something cannot be evil if it is not sentient. Not least because a non-sentient "being" has no will and cannot therefore make a choice for itself between good and evil.

The way I see it, the Ring is able to influence its surroundings and adapt itself to its environment in order to achieve its goal of returning to its master. But it does not do so in a logical, coherent, intelligent manner. It is acting out of instinct, if you like. And the "instinct" can be described as evil because the one who instilled it with such "instinct" was evil.

Mister Underhill

09-08-2005, 05:50 PM

something cannot be evil if it is not sentient Ah, very interesting idea, even though it seems to contradict--But it does not do so in a logical, coherent, intelligent manner. It is acting out of instinct, if you like.--which I agree with very much. This is what I was trying to articulate in my last post.

Is the Ring "evil" because of the "choices it makes" or is it "evil" because of the intrinsic effect it has, aside from any sentience? A lump of plutonium carried around in my pocket would have a pretty evil effect on me after awhile, but not because of sentient intent, if you can see what I mean and not read my metaphor too literally.

The Saucepan Man

09-08-2005, 06:35 PM

Well, I am not so sure that I agree with davem that the Ring itself is evil. It's "effect" or "influence", the product of its "instinct", is evil because it was made by someone who was evil and who intended it to behave in that way.

But I think that davem is correct in the sense that, unlike a lump of plutonium or a gun, it can, if used, only be used for evil. Or, to put it another way, only evil can come of using it.

Mister Underhill

09-08-2005, 07:12 PM

But I think that davem is correct in the sense that, unlike a lump of plutonium or a gun, it can, if used, only be used for evil. Or, to put it another way, only evil can come of using it. True enough, and I've never disputed that -- though I suppose I could by pulling out that well-thumbed Eru quote: "...no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in me, nor can any alter the music in my despite. For he that attempteth this shall prove but mine instrument in the devising of things more wonderful, which he himself hath not imagined." :p

Lyta_Underhill

09-08-2005, 09:06 PM

True enough, and I've never disputed that -- though I suppose I could by pulling out that well-thumbed Eru quote: "...no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in me, nor can any alter the music in my despite. For he that attempteth this shall prove but mine instrument in the devising of things more wonderful, which he himself hath not imagined." Well thumbed, indeed! I think I made reference to it earlier obliquely (the "better to have been" thought). The conclusion is, of course ambiguous and no conclusion at all: these evils that have wrought good unintentionally may have been part of Eru's plan, the theme unaltered in his despite, but still remain evil. A contradiction? Perhaps, perhaps not. "Evil will shall evil mar" also follows in this line of thought. And we come to the inevitable question of whether evil as such was part of Eru's original plan or not...and so on, ad infinitum.

Or, we could apply set theory to the problem (without using symbols, since I can't remember them):

Sauron=Evil
One Ring=Subset of Sauron
One Ring=Evil

Of course, I am being reductionist and a little silly, but I had fun. I hope you had fun reading it! Just thought: you could substitute the characteristic "Sentient" for Evil and I guess you'd get the same relationship. The real question is "what characteristic parts of himself did Sauron transfer to the Ring, and how do these characteristics interact with the non-Sauron bearers?

Cheers!
Lyta

Groin Redbeard

12-22-2007, 07:31 PM

I think that pretty much all the of the Fellowship are as easily corrupted by the ring as the next person, with the exception of a few. The Hobbits would be the first to succome to the temptation that the Ring offers. Frodo has shown that he can withstand the Ring for quite some time, and Sam has shown us that he can do as equally well. That leaves Merry and Pippin. Out of those two I'd have to say Merry.

obloquy

12-23-2007, 02:35 AM

Or, we could apply set theory to the problem (without using symbols, since I can't remember them):

Sauron=Evil
One Ring=Subset of Sauron
One Ring=Evil

Of course, I am being reductionist and a little silly, but I had fun. I hope you had fun reading it! Just thought: you could substitute the characteristic "Sentient" for Evil and I guess you'd get the same relationship. The real question is "what characteristic parts of himself did Sauron transfer to the Ring, and how do these characteristics interact with the non-Sauron bearers?

Cheers!
Lyta

I don't see how this is silly reductionism. It's exactly accurate. We aren't talking about something that was once good that Sauron gave life to, but rather a piece of Sauron himself. It is evil as Sauron is evil, as it is a separate embodiment of Sauron himself: its will is his will, and its power is his power. Saucepan's generalization--that to define something as evil is to attribute to it sentience--may be sound in a very non-magical world. However, since the Ring is not inhabited by a distinct fea with its own conscious mind, but does "live" as an appendage of Sauron, I think it is a patent exception to the rule.

Legate of Amon Lanc

12-23-2007, 07:17 AM

This question ain't easy, I'd say. The question is whom the Ring would pick to focus on, as he chose the "weakest link", the one who was easiest for it to corrupt. So the questions are in fact two: who is the other "weakest link" besides Boromir, i.e. whom the Ring would choose, and how would each member of the Fellowship end if he was chosen by the Ring and tempted.

Concerning the ways everyone could be tempted, I believe we can see a hint of "what ifs" in the meeting with Galadriel.

And with that word she held them with her eyes, and in silence looked searchingly at each of them in turn. None save Legolas and Aragorn could long endure her glance. Sam quickly blushed and hung his head.

I consider it only a hint. But I mention it here so that you know on which I also base my thoughts. Soo...

SAM
is the easiest question and easiest answer. He was faithful and never wanted to use the Ring. I doubt the Ring would have chosen to tempt him of all the people. We can see how he reacts towards the Ring when he wields it in Mordor: there was no other subject to tempt, except for Sam, and look what the Ring did. It was a short time, on the other hand it was in Mordor itself, but the situation was very specific. And Frodo was out of the way when Sam took the Ring in the first place. Had Frodo still wielded the Ring, it will be very, very hard for Sam to choose to take it (or to threaten Frodo, imagine that!).
Chosen by the Ring: **
Fallen if chosen: *

MERRY/PIPPIN
I guess are very similar case. Maybe Pippin was a little bit more curious and everything, but as Gandalf said, he was a fool, but honest fool. There will be, I believe, a serious problem for the Ring to choose them. Also, as with Sam, Frodo would have to be out of the way for them to take the Ring. I can imagine only that after a serious pressure by the Ring, they would take the Ring from Frodo for his own good. Very unlikely.
Chosen by the Ring: *
Fallen if chosen: **

GANDALF
This is another cup of tea. We all know what Gandalf was and all his traits, so not necessary to repeat this here. Only let me say that Gandalf would surely be a very, very good bait for the Ring to focus on. He was aware of the danger, but that also means the threat to him was real.
Chosen by the Ring: ****
Fallen if chosen: ****

ARAGORN
is a controversial character. I believe we know the arguments: one of the "weak" Men, son of Isildur, all this stuff. I don't doubt for a second that the Ring would choose him as its next target. However, I doubt it would succeed. Hereby I would like to refer to Aragorn's long labour and his journey in the past days, in resisting all temptations till the end. He could manage well even with the Palantír of Orthanc. He was not specifically tempted by the Ring as Boromir was, so maybe his reactions to Frodo are not as much of an argument. Also, all the way from Bree to Rivendell, among all the hobbits he would be the target for the Ring - yet it was not the goal of the Ring at that time to turn them against each other, rather to give them away to the Riders. So in fact, I believe Aragorn was never under the continuous temptation. Nevertheless, we have his reaction to Galadriel's gaze. That shows his devotion to his quest and that he was not willing to abandon it. It will be hard to imagine him threatening Frodo and taking the Ring from him by force.
Chosen by the Ring: *****
Fallen if chosen: ***

FRODO
Frodo is a special case as he was the Ringbearer. The only question is, would he fall to the Ring before his quest was completed? The answer is easy: no. I believe the scenario we know, with Mount Doom in the end, would have remained the same. No failure until the very end, where it was inevitable and the fate of the Ring was no longer in Frodo's hands.

GIMLI
is partially an enigma, though not necessarily. He never desired for gold nor power. There were, I believe, far better subjects for the Ring to choose. The places where the Ring could focus on Gimli would have been scarce: Moria, so that Gimli could become a Lord of Khazad-Dum; and Aglarond (the same reason). A funny idea I got is also after Lórien, if there were problems inside the Fellowship, Gimli could choose to give the Ring to Galadriel (or so the Ring would have persuaded him to think). However, I don't think any of the above scenarios are possible. Gimli always remained very calm. And in Moria, when the Orcs attacked, he didn't furiously respond "Moria is ours you filthy creatures! Now you will pay for Balin and Durin and all!" but when the immediate threat was removed, we read that "in spite of the peril he lingered by Balin's tomb with his head bowed". No, I believe Gimli was a very strong person, and if you take a closer look at Tolkien's dwarves they are all very strong and good in heart. Even Thorin, technically, was holding only what was rightfully his, and even then he wasn't completely consumed by that. I doubt the Ring could have lead Gimli to fall, even if it chose to tempt specifically him of all the company.
Chosen by the Ring: **
Fallen if chosen: **

LEGOLAS
is the second enigma. For me maybe more than Gimli. But like Gimli, he seems very little concerned by things that do not belong to him. No: I wouldn't say the Ring could choose him and succeed to tempt him. Thranduil's folk was always reserved and even Thranduil himself, despite his desire for beautiful things and gems and everything, in The Hobbit shows as a very reasonable person in the end. What else could the Ring give to the Elves of Mirkwood? Something like in Gimli's case, regaining the Southern Mirkwood and reestablishing their settlements they used to have on Dol Guldur? (personal joke ;) ) Middle-Earth lingering under the dominion of Elves, stopping the upcoming age of Men? Legolas would have been tempted no more than, let's say, Treebeard. And as we know, Treebeard "has not plotted to cover all the world with his trees and choke all other living things". No, not Legolas.
Chosen by the Ring: **
Fallen if chosen: **

So, that leaves me with Gandalf. Very strange, very stupid, and it would take a lot of effort, but if you look at the rest, there is no one better. In other words: If anyone were to fall, it would be him.

And that is, I am not taking any "good luck" and divine influences from the outside into account here. Simply based on the characters themselves and what we know about them.

William Cloud Hicklin

12-23-2007, 07:34 AM

I'm not sure I go with the idea of the Ring 'choosing' targets, especially not having some sort of directional 'seduction ray' capability. To the extent it was 'sentient' at all it was pretty insectoid, and it never displayed any autonomous abilities other than "slip off finger".

The factor that matters, consistent throughout the book, lies in the individual: lust for power. This in a sense was strongest in Gnadalf, but tempered in his case by wisdom. It would have been weakest I think in the hobbits. Legolas was a Nandorized Sinda, not a Noldo- those techno-elves were alien to his mind. Gimli? maybe closer, but Dwarves are mentally tough, and have an overriding sense of duty and obligation. Which leaves Aragorn. Aragorn appears to have wisdom on a par with Gandalf and Elrond. Were he actually in the Smath Naur, though.....

Legate of Amon Lanc

12-23-2007, 07:42 AM

I'm not sure I go with the idea of the Ring 'choosing' targets, especially not having some sort of directional 'seduction ray' capability. To the extent it was 'sentient' at all it was pretty insectoid, and it never displayed any autonomous abilities other than "slip off finger".

Well, not exactly. I believe there was some reason why Sméagol murdered Déagol and why it didn't simply stay with Deal and be happy for the moment. The Ring made people see things, made people think of it still, and that was not merely their own attachment to the Ring that would make them do it, that much is clear. And I am convinced it could aim its will on other people who were around (at least we know about a similar way it could "call" to the Nazgul).

William Cloud Hicklin

12-23-2007, 08:12 AM

Call the Nazgul? I would say rather that it was a sort of omnidirectional 'evil minion' beacon, to which the Nazgul naturally were especially sensitive. The Ring exercised a pull on the Orcs who destroyed Isildur's army, even though they had no idea of it.

I don't think the Ring 'ordered' or 'directed' or 'persuaded' Smeagol to kill Deagol at all: Smeagol was an odious and greedy little swine who was especially susceptible to the Ring's broadcast temptation. I see no suggestion it 'chose' him over Deagol.

You're attributing to the Ring a calculating intelligence which far, far overstates its 'sentience'

Lyta_Underhill

12-25-2007, 06:30 PM

Call the Nazgul? I would say rather that it was a sort of omnidirectional 'evil minion' beacon, to which the Nazgul naturally were especially sensitive. The Ring exercised a pull on the Orcs who destroyed Isildur's army, even though they had no idea of it. The omnidirection evil minion beacon is an apt turn of phrase. After all, the Watcher in the Water seems to have singled Frodo out...the influence of the Ring perhaps vibrates on the frequency inhabited by the dark creatures of Middle Earth, a call they are specially attuned to. In a way, the Ring's sentience vs. simple nature begs a comparison to Evolution vs. Intelligent Design, but perhaps that is a road best left untrodden. It is easy to see intent in things that seem to 'act' in a certain way, however, and maybe the appearance of the Ring "choosing" a possible victim is merely the victim's susceptibility to the ever-present call it exerts on that subterranean frequency, which might even be likened to an ancient effect of Morgoth on those who followed him--Sauron, for one.

radagastly

12-25-2007, 07:47 PM

I've heard all the arguments. I chose Legolas simply because he is an elf. While man is always shown to be weak overall, Elves are the ones who seem to succomb to temptation most easily, and fail the most miserably as a result. much of the first age is about elves succumbing to one kind of temptation or another. Why not the Ring?

Indeed, this would have been a totally different story if SOMEONE had succombed to the lure of the Ring. It would not have been a bad story, as stories go, but it would not have been the story Tolkien presented to us.

The whole story of the first age (and indeed, some of the second age) is about the tragedy of the weakness of the elves. The slaying at Alqualonde (sp.?) is probably Feanor's weakest moment, surrendering to his own passion. Legolas was probably no stronger in this than Feanor, he simply had less passion to work from. He had so much less at stake at that time.

I will elaborate more. Gotta go now. Sweeny Todd starts in twenty minutes, and I still have to buy popcorn and soda-pop.

Must finish later.

MatthewM

12-25-2007, 11:07 PM

Pippin, no doubt - if he went for the Palantir held by GANDALF, he would definitely have succumbed to the Ring quickest out of the 8 mentioned.

Lindale

12-26-2007, 12:50 AM

Old Gandalf comes nearest to Sauron's "innate" powers. Being a Maia and all. I suppose he was more relieved than he revealed when he met Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli without the Ring, but this: his wisdom shields him from the lure of the Ring. Also, his humility. And the task that the Valar, notably Manwe and Varda. He got a special mention, didn't he? And he said he was afraid of Sauron. This could be one of his most potent shields: the fear of Sauron, not just for the fear of Sauron dominating and lording ME but also maybe the fear of becoming Sauron.

The others, the hobbits, Gimli, Aragorn and Legolas, I think the latter three are the next-in-line.

Aragorn, because the Ring knows that it has a particular hold on the hearts of Men. But I think that the guys who said that Arwen's love shields him has a major point--love is a power greater than the Ring in Arda isn't it? Also, the knowledge that his ancestor fell for the Ring, you know, sorta like learning from the mistakes of others. Maybe he would've fallen for the Ring in the same manner Frodo does at the very end only.

Legolas, the same reason why the Three Rings appealed to the Elves, but not so much because I didn't get the impression that he was a Feanorian-proud Elf. (a thought: Feanor would've been loved by the Ring, maybe? And he would have loved the Ring too!).

Gimli, maybe, but it is in his Dwarvish nature that he's tough and all, and besides, if the Ring falls on the hands of a Dwarf it won't do as much "damage" as, say, a proud Elf or a high Man or a Wizard. And apart from his innate toughness I think his humility also is a virtue against the Ring. Remember that he is not Thorin-proud, and the only hint that he shows his pride is when Legolas entered the Paths of the Dead first; and maybe this was just a joke on his part, only half-true.

Merry, Pippin: what "use" would they have been to the Ring? So one can argue that they may become Smeagol-turned-Gollum numbers two and three, but I doubt it: Pippin especially, since the Ring may render him curious but not greedy. And I suppose that if a Hobbit had the Ring, it would just produce another Smeagol.

Sam? I doubt it, unless Sam is dwelling ever more in the Ring's forte because Sam has his duty to Frodo and the Fellowship. (Note: I don't think Sam values Frodo more than the Quest, because he left Frodo to continue. So maybe the Ring can use this "obligation" thingy of Sam for its own end, had Sam continued to wield the Ring longer in Mordor? Arrgh, then again, maybe not, because Hobbits have an extraordinary resilience to the Ring, them hobbits being too simple relative to the other races. And Sam loves Frodo and his Shire and that may be shield enough.)

Frodo? I think the fact that he was seduced only at the very end is makes him toughest with regard to the Ring. Sure he put on the Ring to escape the madness of Boromir, but during the time of Faramir he does not, knowing that by doing so the Ring will drive him madder. Wisdom shields him, much like Gandalf.

Groin Redbeard

12-26-2007, 09:42 AM

Four out of Nine, in the Fellowship, have already rejected the ring. That makes: Aragorn, Gandalf, Frodo, and Sam the only people in the Fellowship who have rejected the ring. Which leaves Legolas, Gimli, Pippin, and Merry the only ones who haven't.

TheGreatElvenWarrior

12-26-2007, 01:02 PM

Seeing what Legate has said, I would have to vote Gandalf, the ring would not want to take most of the Fellowship except for maybe Aragorn.

Thenamir

12-26-2007, 01:23 PM

Oh dear. An unfortunate juxtaposition of subjects has been triggered in my mind by this statement:However, since the Ring is not inhabited by a distinct fea with its own conscious mind, but does "live" as an appendage of Sauron, I think it is a patent exception to the rule.I am forced to conclude that the Ring is indeed...a horcrux!! (insert brief revelatory orchestral bit here) Sauron is indeed He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named! :eek:

Nogrod

12-26-2007, 04:23 PM

Tolkien's world seems to be fatalistic by nature. What happens, happens under the guidance of providence of Eru - or whatever term you wish to apply here.

That means that things went as they did because they were meant to go that way. That's why Gollum was left alive or Faramir let Frodo go etc. So a divine plan of sorts.

Keeping this in mind no one else but Boromir could have fallen because everything was prescribed. Aragorn fought against the weakness of his humanity but was meant to overcome it as well as Gandalf was meant to die and overcome the seduction of the Ring and Frodo was not to fail even if it required the help of his mate Sam in the end. But that was all preordained. Nice and tidy in a universe whose creator meant it to be nice and tidy under this divine guidance the author created himself to work under that presupposition.

~*~

But if we go for the "what if?" scenarios and forget the providence Tolkien weawed into his world I'd say that Gandalf, Legolas, Aragorn and Gimli could be the ones the Ring could have lured.

Why not the hobbits? Well, what would they have done with it? I think they were too much afraid of it - and seeing Frodo's transformation they were even more sure that was none of their bussiness (remember Pip played with the Palantír because he didn't know what it was... of the ring he knew it was something too big for him). Sam surely is a questionmark. Had Frodo died in the hands of the orcs he might have tried to fulfill the mission but what would have followed?

And we should remeber that fex. Gandalf (and possibly even Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli together) would have been able to deal with a "Ring-master Merry gone wrong" anytime.

Now Gimli could have taken the ring to protect the dwarf-kingdom and that might have proven a real challenge for Sauron. The same goes with Legolas. He could have raised a formidable fight against the dark forces, not in front of Minas Tirith but around Lorien or something... gathering all the forces of good under the same banner (Cirdan with his borrowed ring included). But the corruption argument bites here as well. In the end it would have turned evil and looking at this one would say Gimli would be less knowledgeable than Legolas to that effect.

So Legolas with his knowledge of the world and it's history probably would not have taken it but Gimli then? Without Tolkien-scripted providence Gimli might have taken it?

But Gandalf is there too. He stood against the seduction in Hobbitton but what if he had lived later and things had looked grim enough? He knew the dangers but in the situation where there seemed to be no hope anymore, would he have been lured to try the ring? Who knows? He was dead and out of game at the moments when the real decisions were made...

I'd say Gimli would not be as aware of the dangers and might have used the ring and Gandalf might have been persuaded by the graveness of the situation to use it even if he knew the hazards.

So Gimli or Gandalf?

Or Aragorn?

Without the providence of Eru Aragorn is the number one aim of the Ring and the one who should indeed use it. He should be the human hero trying to save his people with the help of the ring! Looking at Boromir's death he should be awaken to the debt he owns to the humankind and he should have taken to the tracks of Frodo bringing the ring to Minas Tirith. Why follow some "insignificant hobbits" when the fate of the whole world was at stake?

He should take it if he was to be a king.

But Tolkien wished it otherwise. There was the providence of Eru to twist his mind from the good of his kin (the human kind) to sidetrack him to help the hobbit-friends he had made and that decision later led to the final victory. That's the providence Tolkien wrote denying believability of the characters.

So Aragorn it is.

Without the pre-decided fate (by the author) he would have taken the ring as it was the only decent possibility back there at the shores of Anduin.

Eönwë

12-27-2007, 12:35 PM

Welll, if Gandalf took the ring, I'm sure there would be trouble in Valinor. Manwë chose him because he knew that he would not succumb.

And if I remember correctly, didn't Manwë say something like "And he shall be the last". Maybe it disn't mean the last one, as in what Varda said when she answeres "Not the last" (maybe she was making reference to his self control and will in fact, we will never know, or maybe that fact that he thonks a lot?). Anyway, maybe Manwë meant that he would be the last one to remain true his mission (though we don't know about the blue wizards, but Tolkien says somewhere that he thinks they failed, and started cults themselves).

I'm sure if Gandlf (obviously now back to being Olórin) came back to Valinor having succumbed to the ring (maybe even bringing it with him but most probably he would have stayed and ruled the Great Lands) Manwë would have given him a serious talking to (because he chose him), and Eönwë too (Lets not forget he played a similar part to Gandalf, though it was against a mightier foe).
And when I say a serious talking to, I mean it might end up him being chained up like Melkor (or maybe you would calll him Morgoth, even though he no longer had any power by then).

Just thinking, what happened to Curumo (Saruman in middle earth) after Gríma kills him in the scouring of the shire (I won't even start mentioning the bad things that he did)???

Eönwë

12-27-2007, 12:36 PM

woops, double post

Galendor

12-27-2007, 04:04 PM

Good arguments, but I choose Aragorn, for reasons already given. Primarily: 1) he is the only man on the list, 2) son of Isildur, 3) has a will to power.

Legate of Amon Lanc

12-27-2007, 05:33 PM

And if I remember correctly, didn't Manwë say something like "And he shall be the last". Maybe it disn't mean the last one, as in what Varda said when she answeres "Not the last" (maybe she was making reference to his self control and will in fact, we will never know, or maybe that fact that he thonks a lot?). Anyway, maybe Manwë meant that he would be the last one to remain true his mission (though we don't know about the blue wizards, but Tolkien says somewhere that he thinks they failed, and started cults themselves).
Actually, it is not known what Manwë said. He said "something something [undecipherable words, no one knows what Tolkien exactly wrote there] last". Then Varda: "Not the last." And Saruman remembered these words and did not like Gandalf because obviously, he considered himself the First and now it seemed like there was something special on Gandalf.

I'm sure if Gandlf (obviously now back to being Olórin) came back to Valinor having succumbed to the ring (maybe even bringing it with him but most probably he would have stayed and ruled the Great Lands) Manwë would have given him a serious talking to (because he chose him), and Eönwë too (Lets not forget he played a similar part to Gandalf, though it was against a mightier foe).
First and foremost, Gandalf having succumbed to the ring would not have come back to Valinor at all. Even if he wanted, they won't let him. And yes, maybe if he caused trouble in M-E, they would send someone after him - not necessarily Eönwë, as he was more for these "military actions", but some other, well, really, "Gandalf the White", or "Gandalf the Gray as he should be". Maybe even some Radagast could raise opposition, suddenly returning to his real mission ("awakened", so to say, by Valar/Eru)? Who knows.