Do you consider the ring a character in LotR?
 

I have a theory that the ring is a separate character in the book. I brought up my theory in another thread so look here to see the theory if you want Gollum vs. the other Hobbits.

Here's my theory I changed part of my theory. I never actually said that I thought it was a character in The Hobbit but I thought adn meant it did when I said my theory. Now I'm not so sure if the ring was really meant to be a separate character in The Hobbit, but I'm still pretty sure that tolkien wanted to make the ring seem like another character in LotR.

Ok, tell me what you think of my theory, but please read the other thread before you respond. Thanks.

[ December 03, 2002: Message edited by: MLD-Grounds-Keeper-Willie ]

Well, since no one has even replied to my topic, I had to in order to keep it from drifting further from the current topics. Has this topic already been discussed? Sorry if it has and please let me know where.

The ring a character. And the Character was Sauron. The ring is merely a portion of the fallen Maia, so it has part of his will and his Fea in it (hmmm Do Ainur have Fea? And can a Fea be split up? And am I spelling the world right at all?).

So yeah the ring was a character, but I would say that it plays a similar role to Morgoth in the Narn i chin Hurin, a sort of dark influence slowly guiding people towards evil, even if it was not as potent as the curse of Melkor.

Hey it worked!!! Thanks for the reply, I hope more come.

Hello? Anyways I think the ring is indeed a character...it was what the story is all about, hell, its named after it [img]smilies/rolleyes.gif[/img]

Actually, it's named after Sauron....

I consider the Ring a character...after all, they say that "it" wants to get back to "it's" master....meaning that it isn't totally Sauron, or else "it" would want to get back to "itself."

Hey! The Ring is Sauron, yep! Thats right...

Yes I consider a character. It is a part of Sauron, he put part of his former self into it.

The Ring is definitely a character, I'd say, albeit one of those slightly odd not-quite-standard characters - rather like Rebecca in "Rebecca" who although she's the title character never appears once - in the sense that it does not actually do anything of its own volition (at least, nothing that couldn't be plausibly ascribed to other things) and never speaks. Yet the whole story would exist if it weren't for the Ring.

Sorry, not very coherent tonight. Basically I just mean that while the Ring is "absent" in the sense that it doesn't physically do anything, it's the catalyst for everything else and certainly has a power of its own.

As I've stated in the 'other thread' that our caretaker posted this topic into, I don't think the Ring was a character but more a force of evil, if you know what I mean. It wasn't Sauron -- Sauron was the Eye in the Black Tower; if it was, he would know what going on around the Ring and he didn't -- but it couldtained his dark power. This is why it seemed to want to go back to him, and why it was hard to give up: it changed people, injected malice into them.

I think there is a good case for arguing that the Ring was at least semi-sentient. It acted on its own behalf to achieve its only goal of returning to Sauron. So I'd agree with the limited character idea.

I am not sure how conscious it was. It more had wills that came from the bit of Sauron in it. For example it corrupted, but I don't think it did it so much as a conscious decision, more because its urge it to corrupt. Also it wanted to have more power, thus it either tried to get back to Sauron or find someone who could wield it then tempt them. So yeah I still think its like Morgoth's Curse in the Narn, something that tried to bend things towards evil.

Exerpts from a conversation between Gandalf and Frodo at Bag End:

Sounds like conscious decision and action to me.

Well, I wouldn't say that the Ring is a character in and of itself so much as an extension of Sauron. It's only "semi-sentient" or whatever it is because Sauron put some of his own life-force in it, linking himself to the Ring inseperably. So I'd say yes and no. (Being a bit Elvish there.) Yes insomuch as it is an extension of Sauron, no insomuch as it is not a character in its own right.

~*~Orual~*~

Thanks Heren. (now I know what someone, I can't remember, was talking about when they said 'Heren! Make him come back.', even though that person explained) Seems like an old friend wants you to post more often. Thanks again for the thread, it showed some good points.

Anyways, back to the discussion. Yes, Keneldil, thanks for the quote to back up our side of the discussion.

Orual, you seem to be torn. Let me help you decide. The ring was bound with the life force of sauron. They are linked, and are a part of each other in certain ways. However, the ring was physically separate from sauron and the ring was made, created. It wasn't taken from sauron's mind or body, the ring had to be sort of born, by sauron. It had its ties with sauron, since he is the ring's maker. You yourself came from your mother and your father, but you aren't part of them. You are separate but you are similar in ways. The ring does however have its link to sauron. It is a servant of sauron, sauron is its master. They want to be together, as sauron had originally intended. The ring had part of sauron in it but it was an individual enough to makes its own decisions and think for itself. If you say, 'then if the ring could choose and sort of had its own free will then it would have disobeyed sauron, or it could have chosen differently.' Then I say to you, it could have, but didn't. The ring was completely obedient to sauron. Also the ring wanted to be with sauron. And it was necessary for the ring to be reunited with its master as soon as possible because it probably knew that others wanted it destroyed, and to the ring, that is death.

Willie we are in agreement for the most part, but I differ slightly from you in how much awareness I think the Ring had.

In my humble opinion, the Ring did not have that degree of free will. It acted in the manner its creator intended it to act, and within a very limited framework. All its actions were oriented toward returning to Sauron. I don’t think it could have chosen not to do that. That’s why I say only semi-sentient. It had one goal and made no choices outside that goal.

Lo! H.I. is in disguise! [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img] Good luck with your technical difficulties.

Well, I see the Ring as being much more a part of Sauron than you appear to, Willie. Sauron is bound to it, and unless it is destroyed, he cannot be. It's not a totally seperate creation, like the other Rings of Power.

If I seem torn, it's only because I can't think straight lately or articulate well. [img]smilies/rolleyes.gif[/img] It's been a long week, and with the holidays coming, the rest of the month only promises to be longer. (Except for the 18th, of course!)

Namarie,

~*~Orual~*~

I don't know whether I'm saying this just to be different, or to inject some more variety into this thread, but has anyone considered my alternate theory? In LoTR, the forces of Good and Evil seem to physically exist (demonstrated most perhaps by Sauron's psionic power over his armies); the Ring may have been simply a well of evil more than anything. Thus it was the general web of evil 'in the air' that tried to return it to Sauron. Who was himself another well of evil. Maybe it's like two gigantic black holes in the centre of the galaxy, drawing each other closer and closer until they merge.

By this idea, it was the same power of malice that emanated from the Ring that made people change when they wielded or were around it.