Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot, crispy nice hobbit
Despite sounding hopelessly opportunistic, it is certainly not ideals that drove Tolkien's world. It was pre-destination, and a set of debatable moral values. Greed made Gollum save the day. If Gollum had not gloated over his success, the end would have come all the same.
It is certainly another complicated topic whether the characters in Tolkien's Middle Earth were guided by the hands of Illuvator, or their own free will. But ultimate failure of ideals remained: the mercy of Gandalf/Bilbo/Frodo was abused by the greed of Gollum, Frodo finally became disillusioned with the hardships he went through, and was persuaded by the Ring to claim it for himself. (Unless, one forgoes entirely the responsibility of individuals over their own choices.)
Of course, after the fall of Sauron and Gollum, Frodo can feint possession by other worldly powers, and still be hero of the Third Age... (I'd bet that J.R.R. T is turning in his grave somewhere) Certainly, that's not modernism that griped Middle Earth or our Earth. Just hopeless self-interest.
|
First, in what way are you sounding opportunistic? Second, how are moral values (debatable or not) different from ideals? Third, how does the existence of fate preclude the existence of ideals? Fourth, doesn't the ultimate success of the quest demonstrate that, in the end, the forces of good (defined by their virtue and ideals) triumph over the forces of evil, even if by the unwitting aid of their enemies? Fifth, how do the lines regarding the Ring "it would possess him" and "he had no will left in the matter" allow for the possibility that Frodo freely abandoned his Quest in favor of the persuasion of the Ring out of disillusionment with his ideals, as opposed to simply succumbing to the dominating power of the Ring?