Quote:
|
Originally Posted by davem
Could just touching the Ring make one evil?
|
I certainly doubt it. Given Gandalf's words, it would take a rather long time, especially if one's nature is good and moral.
Quote:
|
Why couldn't the Free folk get together and create an anti-Ring and send it gift-wrapped to Barad-dur?
|
In the event that this is not a joke (I usually fail to make such distinctions, so have mercy
), the Free folk didn't have the ability to match Sauron's power in making a great ring, let alone one that could affect his nature.
Quote:
|
Anyone claiming the One Ring, sooner or later, would become evil - controlling, forcing others to do something that they would not freely choose to do (see Orwell's 1984 for a definition) - even if it were via a thousand slices from a chocolate cake that could have been left alone for one's spouse; eventually, you've eaten the whole thing and then you're there.
|
I agree.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by lmp
It seems to me that this debate about evil breaks in two what Tolkien wrought whole.
He gives evidence for both "schools of thought" on evil because he presents it as it truly is, whole-cloth. It's an example of mythic unity. We can debate as much as we like "what Tolkien really meant", and it's just only half the story, or less. What he evoked is what evil is in its realistic complexity.
|
I am not sure, what part of evil has my argument left out? On occasion, I rather enlarged its sphere in this discussion, compared to other positions presented.