Sam or Frodo

[Eönwë]

Who do you think is more powerful/resilient to the ring.

Everyone would ay Frodo, but if you read the book, Sam wears the ring while in Mordor, the worst place to do that, and nothing bad happens to him...

PS. I would make this a poll, but I don't know how to

[Groin Redbeard]

Sam was new to posessing the ring, Frodo had carried it for thirteen months. So Frodo resistance wore down over the months, while Sam only had it for a couple of hours tops.

As for Sam wearing the ring in Mordor, I don't know how Sauron could have missed him.

[Nazgûl-king]

Sam was new to posessing the ring, Frodo had carried it for thirteen months. So Frodo resistance wore down over the months, while Sam only had it for a couple of hours tops.

As for Sam wearing the ring in Mordor, I don't know how Sauron could have missed him.

Yeah, there’s the possibility that he was distracted by the war, but I would think that Sauron would hold finding the ring to be of greater importance. So how did Sauron miss Sam's use of the ring in his own land?

[Eönwë]

Yes, and Sam even used it to help him see in the dark and fight orcs, so wouldn't Sauron notice the disturbance?

Or maybe Sam has control and power over the ring we are not told about...

[The Might]

Indeed strange.
I first thought it might be Aragorn that Sauron was searching for at that time, but on the day Sam put the Ring on Aragorn was only in Pelargir and had defeated the corsairs. It was only some time later that he openly challenged Sauron, so that theory is pretty weak.
Not sure why he was so arrogant and wouldn't think that anyone would dare enter Mordor after feeling that.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Might: Aragorn openly challenged Sauron at the Hornburg, before he ever reached Dunharrow or entered the Paths of the Dead.

Sauron's 'arrogance,' as you say, was a key point Tolkien was making. Sauron cannot imagine what it is to be 'good;' in other words, he cannot imagine that anyone who possessed the Ultimate Weapon would do anything other than he would himself: use it. The idea that anyone would consider actually destroying it was a concept he was incapable of formulating (he also knew nobody *could* destroy it).

The Ring (contrary to the movies) was not some sort of Locator Beacon the moment someone put it on. The near-miss on Amon Hen is somehow to be associated with the peculiar power of that place- and of course at the Sammath Naur Frodo was openly claiming the Ring, at the zenith of its power.

[Folwren]

In actual fact....I do not believe that Sam or Frodo ever put the Ring on while actually in Mordor. I just read that part in the book, and he took it off as he entered... If he had it on at all, he put it on before entering Mordor proper and took it off after a couple steps within.

As for who was more resiliant? I don't know. Sam was childish and pure and perfectly simple. Frodo, on the otherhand, was not so childish. He had proper learning and higher, more elvish thoughts. They were both of them strong in their different ways. Sam was strong because there was not as much reason to be powerful or to rule...he had no wish to. Frodo was strong in another way...a more knowledgeable way, if that makes any sense.

I think, though, that Frodo was more cut out for the task than Sam was, and that was why Frodo got the job of carrying it to Mount Doom, and Sam got the job of taking care of Frodo on the way there. :)

-- Folwren

[Galadriel55]

I think you hit the nail on the head with your Frodo-vs-Sam-theory, Foley! I absolutely agree.

As for why didn't Sauron becoe alert as soon as Sam put on the Ring, it happened at the same time as the battle on Pelennor fields. I think he'd pay more attention to the battle than to some knee-jerk thingy.:D

[narfforc]

When The Witch-king led his troops out of Minas Morgul, he stopped for a moment sensing another power in his vale, this was of course missed in the film due to moving him from horse to winged beast. He was more sensitive to the presence of the ring than the other nazgul, and at this point a whole lot closer. Sauron's mind was elsewhere, directing all his minions and thinking about which of the wise had found the ring, he knew of Gandalf, Denethor and had only just been notified of the existance of Isildur's Heir, he was not above doubt. He could not think for one minute that anyone would destroy such a powerful weapon, what would anyone be doing in Mordor, he believed it was impregnable. If one of the wise had put the ring on in Mordor I think Sauron would have sensed that, but the ring only gave power by stature (not size), Frodo was no ordinary hobbit, he was wise and learned, the ring held more danger for him than Sam. I think that so little energy was given off by the ring when Sam wore it outside or inside Mordor, that it would probably go unnoticed unless in the direct gaze of The Eye.

[The Sixth Wizard]

In terms of the story, you'd have to say that Sam and Frodo represent two different aspects of the "good" world which they fight to protect.

Sam is exemplary of the innocence, innate courage and kind-heartedness of those simple people of the Shire - it is his destiny to return and live a long, happy life, with fourteen lovely children. His role in the story is to illustrate that those who are pure, no matter how small or how simple (Sam isn't really that intelligent) are capable of standing up against evil. Tolkien says things like "even the smallest can achieve great things". Sam is never capable of the great deeds of Aragorn, Gandalf and Frodo himself - he fails to protect his master in the face of Shelob and Gollum, and he is easily outwitted and outmatched, but of course he doesn't fall prey to the temptation of the ring. In the end it is Sam's strength and purity of heart which allows Frodo to literally "climb the mountain" - perhaps Tolkien is trying to say that even the greatest achievements are always built on the dedication, literally on the backs of the smallest of us. While Smeagol and Frodo were pryers, looking for the secrets of the world, I think Sam was the more resistant to the Ring's powers because, as he says when he is tempted, he knows, deep down, that he could never be the Lord of the Ring. He is too humble and too simple for that. The Ring would consume him, given enough time, but it would have to destroy him first.

[Lotrelf]

Everyone would ay Frodo, but if you read the book, Sam wears the ring while in Mordor, the worst place to do that, and nothing bad happens to him...
You missed it! Sam is also tempted to keep the Ring as his own. Not saying he'd become greedy like Gollum or Saruman, but he doesn't give up the Ring; Frodo snatches it back. Gandalf's temptation was to do good, that's how/why he'd have fallen prey to the Ring's temptation. Galedriel rejects it for the same reason as well. Aragorn wouldn't take it for the same reasons too. Even, Boromir, who falls into the temptation doesn't want the Ring for his own use, instead he wants it for the country he loves. So, is there a different between any of them and Sam? Sam also desperately wants to ease his master's burden and pain, that's how the Ring tricks him. In the beginning he's smart enough to let the Ring go-or reject the temptation- but when he sees Frodo, he can't take it. And that is how the Ring attacks him.
If it comes to Frodo being less resilient than Sam or anyone else. You guys are forgetting, the Ring was in Bag End for 78 years; and for 17 years, it was in his possession. Carrying the Ring to MD wasn't like going for a picnic. The temptation Sam rejects for a couple of hours, Frodo has been rejecting it for SEVEN months. So, give him the credit. Sam's strength is in something else, not in fighting the Ring. He loves people fearlessly, that's who Sam is.

[Orphalesion]

Exactly, Sam did have the advantage of not having carried the ring for long. His mind might be more difficult for the ring to corrupt, on account of Sam's humbleness, but still Sam is not free of desire (his desire for a nice garden, a happy family, a good "Hobbitish" life) and the ring is capable of corrupting every form of desire no matter how simple or innocent.