The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum - View Single Post

Faramir Jones · 12-05-2015, 09:58 AM

You started a very interesting thread, Leaf. For those of us interested in discussing the doom of the Ring, Tolkien discussed at length the failure of Frodo to surrender the Ring in Mount Doom, in drafts of a reply to a Mrs. Eileen Edgar of around September 1963, Letter 246 of his published Letters.

He first talked about Frodo's failure:

I do not think that Frodo's was a moral failure. At the last moment the pressure of the Ring would reach its maximum - impossible, I should have said, for any one to resist, certainly after long possession, months of increasing torment, and when starved and exhausted.

He then spoke about Sam's failure to 'notice the complete change in Gollum's tone and aspect'. While Sam 'did reach the point of pity at last', deciding not to kill Gollum, for the latter's good it was 'too late'.

He then moved to discussing what might have happened had Sam not spoken harshly to Gollum:

The course of the entry into Mordor and the struggle to reach Mount Doom would have shifted to Gollum, I think, and the battle that would have gone on between his repentance and his new love on one side and the Ring. Though the love would have been strengthened daily it could not have wrested the mastery from the Ring. I think that in some queer twisted and pitiable way Gollum would have tried (not maybe with conscious design) to satisfy both.

At some point 'not long before the end', he would have stolen the Ring or taken it by violence. But once he did this, Gollum would then 'have sacrificed himself for Frodo's sake and have voluntarily cast himself into the fiery abyss'.

His 'partial regeneration by love' would have given him 'a clearer vision when he claimed the Ring'. He would have perceived the evil of Sauron and 'suddenly realized that he could not use the Ring and had not the strength or stature to keep it in Sauron's despite'. The only way to keep it and hurt Sauron was 'to destroy it and himself together'.

So Tolkien's view was that in this scenario Gollum would still have died; but he would have done so as a voluntary act, to ensure that, whatever happened, Sauron would not have the One Ring.

Tolkien then looked at Frodo. If the latter had not been 'immediately attacked' by Gollum, once he took the Ring and claimed it, he 'too would have had a clear vision'. Frodo, if not attacked, would 'probably have had to take the same way', casting himself with the Ring into the abyss. If not, 'he would of course have completely failed'.

Tolkien then said that 'an interesting problem' would be how Sauron would have reacted or if the claimant had resisted. Sauron sent the Ringwraiths. Frodo, since Weathertop, had 'grown'. Tolkien first posed this question: 'Would they have been immune from its power if he claimed it as an instrument of command and domination?'

To that question he gave this answer:

Not wholly. I do not think they could have attacked him with violence, nor laid hold upon him or taken him captive; they would have obeyed or feigned to obey any minor commands of his that did not interfere with their errand - laid upon them by Sauron, who still acted through their nine rings (which he held) had primary control of their wills. That errand was to remove Frodo from the Crack.

Once Frodo lost the power or opportunity to destroy the Ring, 'the end could not be in doubt'.

The situation of Frodo with the 8 Ringwraiths '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 weapon was such that the Ringwraiths were conditioned to treat its weilder with servility. In terms of what what they would have done:

I think they would have shown 'servility'. They would have greeted Frodo as 'Lord'. With fair speeches they would have induced him to leave the Sammath Nur - for instance 'to look upon his new kingdom, and behold afar with his new sight the abode of power that he must now claim and turn to his own purposes'. Once outside the chamber while he was gazing some of them would have destroyed the entrance.

Frodo would have been 'too enmeshed in great plans of reformed rule', which would have been 'far greater and wider' than Sam's 'to heed this'. If he had refused now to go with them to the Dark Tower, 'they would simply have waited. Until Sauron himself came'.

We have a clear account of alternative scenarios by the author himself. 1. If Gollum had improved, due to Sam not speaking harshly to him when seeing him close to his sleeping master; 2. If Frodo had not been immediately attacked by Gollum; 3. If Frodo had 'completely failed', and persisted in claiming the Ring.

12-05-2015, 09:58 AM	#5
Faramir Jones Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Lonely Isle Posts: 706	What Tolkien said in Letter 246 You started a very interesting thread, Leaf. For those of us interested in discussing the doom of the Ring, Tolkien discussed at length the failure of Frodo to surrender the Ring in Mount Doom, in drafts of a reply to a Mrs. Eileen Edgar of around September 1963, Letter 246 of his published Letters. He first talked about Frodo's failure: I do not think that Frodo's was a moral failure. At the last moment the pressure of the Ring would reach its maximum - impossible, I should have said, for any one to resist, certainly after long possession, months of increasing torment, and when starved and exhausted. He then spoke about Sam's failure to 'notice the complete change in Gollum's tone and aspect'. While Sam 'did reach the point of pity at last', deciding not to kill Gollum, for the latter's good it was 'too late'. He then moved to discussing what might have happened had Sam not spoken harshly to Gollum: The course of the entry into Mordor and the struggle to reach Mount Doom would have shifted to Gollum, I think, and the battle that would have gone on between his repentance and his new love on one side and the Ring. Though the love would have been strengthened daily it could not have wrested the mastery from the Ring. I think that in some queer twisted and pitiable way Gollum would have tried (not maybe with conscious design) to satisfy both. At some point 'not long before the end', he would have stolen the Ring or taken it by violence. But once he did this, Gollum would then 'have sacrificed himself for Frodo's sake and have voluntarily* cast himself into the fiery abyss'. His 'partial regeneration by love' would have given him 'a clearer vision when he claimed the Ring'. He would have perceived the evil of Sauron and 'suddenly realized that he could not use the Ring and had not the strength or stature to keep it in Sauron's despite'. The only way to keep it and hurt Sauron was 'to destroy it and himself together'. So Tolkien's view was that in this scenario Gollum would still have died; but he would have done so as a voluntary act, to ensure that, whatever happened, Sauron would not have the One Ring. Tolkien then looked at Frodo. If the latter had not been 'immediately attacked' by Gollum, once he took the Ring and claimed it, he 'too would have had a clear vision'. Frodo, if not attacked, would 'probably have had to take the same way', casting himself with the Ring into the abyss. If not, 'he would of course have completely failed'. Tolkien then said that 'an interesting problem' would be how Sauron would have reacted or if the claimant had resisted. Sauron sent the Ringwraiths. Frodo, since Weathertop, had 'grown'. Tolkien first posed this question: 'Would they have been immune from its power if he claimed it as an instrument of command and domination?' To that question he gave this answer: Not wholly. I do not think they could have attacked him with violence, nor laid hold upon him or taken him captive; they would have obeyed or feigned to obey any minor commands of his that did not interfere with their errand - laid upon them by Sauron, who still acted through their nine rings (which he held) had primary control of their wills. That errand was to remove Frodo from the Crack. Once Frodo lost the power or opportunity to destroy the Ring, 'the end could not be in doubt'. The situation of Frodo with the 8 Ringwraiths '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 weapon was such that the Ringwraiths were conditioned to treat its weilder with servility. In terms of what what they would have done: I think they would have shown 'servility'. They would have greeted Frodo as 'Lord'. With fair speeches they would have induced him to leave the Sammath Nur - for instance 'to look upon his new kingdom, and behold afar with his new sight the abode of power that he must now claim and turn to his own purposes'. Once outside the chamber while he was gazing some of them would have destroyed the entrance. Frodo would have been 'too enmeshed in great plans of reformed rule', which would have been 'far greater and wider' than Sam's 'to heed this'. If he had refused now to go with them to the Dark Tower, 'they would simply have waited. Until Sauron himself came'. We have a clear account of alternative scenarios by the author himself. 1. If Gollum had improved, due to Sam not speaking harshly to him when seeing him close to his sleeping master; 2. If Frodo had not been immediately attacked by Gollum; 3. If Frodo had 'completely failed*', and persisted in claiming the Ring.