The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum - View Single Post

Tar-Palantir · 02-22-2003, 10:18 PM

Very good. However, I think there is a difference between the phenomena of denial and the act of denying oneself something. I don't think elaboration is necessary save to say that true denial is a subconscious act, hence it's destructiveness.

Your thoughts on hope or the lack thereof, might play a large part here, but not so was not the case with Smeagol, or with Bilbo who, even with out dramatic events on either end of, or during, his possession, struggled with the release of the Ring. With neither was it a case of grasping for their last hope like what might have been felt by Boromir. So there is definitely an addictive quality manifesting with the ownership of the Ring - quite a different subject than the lure it brings to the non-bearer, as they truly cannot know what it feels like to bear the Ring.

Although I rather like the analogy of the dangerous spouse, I am skeptical of it's application towards Bilbo. For my part, I am more likely to believe the comfort and security of bearing the Ring or possessing the Ring, for whatever unknown gifts it may give (strength, peace, plain old endorphin release). It must have some physical effect (as you noted earlier), maybe beneficial in the short term but obviously destructive in the long term, and the fallout must have been similar to withdrawal symptoms because even Gollum could not wear it 24/7, too painful. Frodo in this line of thought is made to look even more heroic in his resistance to the Ring, being a bearer, and a wearer, like he was.

On to hope (or lack of it). This lack cannot be the reason either Bilbo or Frodo ended up with the Ring, it came to them. Perhaps a Smeagol lover will claim otherwise, but I would be hard convinced that he did it for any reasons other than his own selfish ones. In fact, the example of these three draws a very clear line in the sand - who knew beforehand of the power of the Ring? This hope you speak of can only fall into the equation when ones knows what one is taking. Appearing to their eyes as their 'last', 'only' or 'best' hope.

Elrond, Gandalf and Galadriel all had their own rings, knowing what is was to bear such a Ring - the drawbacks and advantages, they more than any could see the true nature of the One. Their hope would be bolstered and not so easily lost (or they could always run away to Valinor, hehe [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img] ). The remainder of the Fellowship I do believe would have struggled and perchance failed to deliver the Ring to Orodruin with Frodo, as Boromir did.

Boromir, why oh why did you fail? Was not his hope bolstered by the successful journey through Moria and Lothlorien? Could he not see that perhaps a chance at victory existed now? Maybe you are correct that he already had fallen into evil, it would explain much. But his act of theft came from lack of hope in the path that he was on, and he needed to change it, no? Why was it up to him? What made him the arbiter of the fate of all?

Haha, here is yet another characteristic of addicts and alcoholics, self-centerdness. The ability to let ones own needs, wants, and wishes to supercede those of all others. Surely this trait cannot be attributed to any but the pair of Boromir and Smeagol. Forget about what brought this to be, as the reasons of each are surely opposite to those of the other character. The end result however is a narrowing of awareness, a lack of any vision beyond their own desire. Lack of hope (boromir), fear of abondonment or lost in regret (Smeagol) are pitiable states of mind, but if they are not addressed one loses perspective. Self-seeking, that is the heart of their dilemna. As if they do not see the plain as day facts that their behavior or choices are focused purely on self. That is delusional.

May I add that to the pile of addictive traits? Self-seeking? The lost ability to listen to those about you, those wiser (Elrond, Galadriel, Gandalf), those more skilled (Aragorn), those more clear-headed (rest of the fellowiship).

I have to stop typing now as I think my points are made and I'm rambling.

Tar

[ February 22, 2003: Message edited by: Tar-Palantir ]

02-22-2003, 10:18 PM	#87
Tar-Palantir Shade of Carn Dûm Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: napa valley, ca Posts: 496	Very good. However, I think there is a difference between the phenomena of denial and the act of denying oneself something. I don't think elaboration is necessary save to say that true denial is a subconscious act, hence it's destructiveness. Your thoughts on hope or the lack thereof, might play a large part here, but not so was not the case with Smeagol, or with Bilbo who, even with out dramatic events on either end of, or during, his possession, struggled with the release of the Ring. With neither was it a case of grasping for their last hope like what might have been felt by Boromir. So there is definitely an addictive quality manifesting with the ownership of the Ring - quite a different subject than the lure it brings to the non-bearer, as they truly cannot know what it feels like to bear the Ring. Although I rather like the analogy of the dangerous spouse, I am skeptical of it's application towards Bilbo. For my part, I am more likely to believe the comfort and security of bearing the Ring or possessing the Ring, for whatever unknown gifts it may give (strength, peace, plain old endorphin release). It must have some physical effect (as you noted earlier), maybe beneficial in the short term but obviously destructive in the long term, and the fallout must have been similar to withdrawal symptoms because even Gollum could not wear it 24/7, too painful. Frodo in this line of thought is made to look even more heroic in his resistance to the Ring, being a bearer, and a wearer, like he was. On to hope (or lack of it). This lack cannot be the reason either Bilbo or Frodo ended up with the Ring, it came to them. Perhaps a Smeagol lover will claim otherwise, but I would be hard convinced that he did it for any reasons other than his own selfish ones. In fact, the example of these three draws a very clear line in the sand - who knew beforehand of the power of the Ring? This hope you speak of can only fall into the equation when ones knows what one is taking. Appearing to their eyes as their 'last', 'only' or 'best' hope. Elrond, Gandalf and Galadriel all had their own rings, knowing what is was to bear such a Ring - the drawbacks and advantages, they more than any could see the true nature of the One. Their hope would be bolstered and not so easily lost (or they could always run away to Valinor, hehe [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img] ). The remainder of the Fellowship I do believe would have struggled and perchance failed to deliver the Ring to Orodruin with Frodo, as Boromir did. Boromir, why oh why did you fail? Was not his hope bolstered by the successful journey through Moria and Lothlorien? Could he not see that perhaps a chance at victory existed now? Maybe you are correct that he already had fallen into evil, it would explain much. But his act of theft came from lack of hope in the path that he was on, and he needed to change it, no? Why was it up to him? What made him the arbiter of the fate of all? Haha, here is yet another characteristic of addicts and alcoholics, self-centerdness. The ability to let ones own needs, wants, and wishes to supercede those of all others. Surely this trait cannot be attributed to any but the pair of Boromir and Smeagol. Forget about what brought this to be, as the reasons of each are surely opposite to those of the other character. The end result however is a narrowing of awareness, a lack of any vision beyond their own desire. Lack of hope (boromir), fear of abondonment or lost in regret (Smeagol) are pitiable states of mind, but if they are not addressed one loses perspective. Self-seeking, that is the heart of their dilemna. As if they do not see the plain as day facts that their behavior or choices are focused purely on self. That is delusional. May I add that to the pile of addictive traits? Self-seeking? The lost ability to listen to those about you, those wiser (Elrond, Galadriel, Gandalf), those more skilled (Aragorn), those more clear-headed (rest of the fellowiship). I have to stop typing now as I think my points are made and I'm rambling. Tar [ February 22, 2003: Message edited by: Tar-Palantir ] __________________ History shows again and again How nature points up the folly of men Go, go, Godzilla!