The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum - View Single Post - LotR -- Book 6 - Chapter 3

Aiwendil · 10-13-2005, 06:37 PM

I think there are two issues being confused here.

First, there is the question of what in fact happened. Did the Ring compel Frodo or did he choose?

Second, there is the moral question. Is Frodo to be blamed? Is he to be forgiven? Is he to be excused?

These are separate issues; and while a moral evaluation of Frodo certainly does depend on the facts of the situation, I think it is important to note that the facts of the situation do not depend on the moral evaluation. In other words, one cannot argue "Frodo is not to be blamed, therefore the Ring compelled him" - though one could of course argue the converse.

Personally, I see Frodo's actions at Mt. Doom as being the result of his own choice - and I see them as wrong, even "evil". However, I also see them as being entirely forgivable, or even excusable. I doubt that anyone short of a Vala would have succeeded where Frodo failed. That, in intra-Legendarium terms, is not because Frodo was constrained and therefore not responsible for his actions, but rather because Arda is a fallen world; because none of its inhabitants is perfect; because all the Children of Iluvatar have a certain inherent evil. The Ring worked upon this evil.

There is a wonderful ambiguity in the nature of the Ring and its power. Personally, I don't see the need to try to resolve this ambiguity by making a simple decision - "he was compelled; he should be excused" or "he chose; he should be blamed". If you ask me, the ambiguity is central to the Ring and indeed to the whole work.

10-13-2005, 06:37 PM	#40
Aiwendil Late Istar Join Date: Mar 2001 Posts: 2,224	I think there are two issues being confused here. First, there is the question of what in fact happened. Did the Ring compel Frodo or did he choose? Second, there is the moral question. Is Frodo to be blamed? Is he to be forgiven? Is he to be excused? These are separate issues; and while a moral evaluation of Frodo certainly does depend on the facts of the situation, I think it is important to note that the facts of the situation do not depend on the moral evaluation. In other words, one cannot argue "Frodo is not to be blamed, therefore the Ring compelled him" - though one could of course argue the converse. Personally, I see Frodo's actions at Mt. Doom as being the result of his own choice - and I see them as wrong, even "evil". However, I also see them as being entirely forgivable, or even excusable. I doubt that anyone short of a Vala would have succeeded where Frodo failed. That, in intra-Legendarium terms, is not because Frodo was constrained and therefore not responsible for his actions, but rather because Arda is a fallen world; because none of its inhabitants is perfect; because all the Children of Iluvatar have a certain inherent evil. The Ring worked upon this evil. There is a wonderful ambiguity in the nature of the Ring and its power. Personally, I don't see the need to try to resolve this ambiguity by making a simple decision - "he was compelled; he should be excused" or "he chose; he should be blamed". If you ask me, the ambiguity is central to the Ring and indeed to the whole work.