Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
02-06-2003, 11:43 AM | #1 |
Relic of Wandering Days
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: You'll See Perpetual Change.
Posts: 1,480
|
THE RING and corruption
Forgive me if something similar has already been posted but....
Of late I have been getting the impression that folks feel the ring can corrupt people without any direct contact with them. This runs counter to what I had always believed, which is: A) The ring acted on the one who possessed it. This can be illustrated by Sam's close proximity to the ring without effect until he actually wore it. B) "The desire of the ring corrupts the heart." (from The Counsel of Elrond) as opposed to the ring itself doing the corrupting. What are the views of the venerable Wrights? Am I mistaken? |
02-06-2003, 12:02 PM | #2 |
Corpus Cacophonous
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: A green and pleasant land
Posts: 8,390
|
Good topic, Hilde.
I'm not a venerable BD'er, but thought I'd pitch in anyway. Doesn't Elrond's quote at your B) provide the answer? Merely seeing the Ring and/or being aware of it can trigger a desire for it in those who are particularly vulnerable to its power. Hence Boromir and Gollum are "corrupted" by their mere desire for it. I don't believe that Boromir ever actually touches the Ring in the book. (I don't think he handles it at the Council of Elrond, but I may be wrong - I haven't got the book to hand to check.) As for Gollum, he is, in my opinion, persuaded to kill Deagol by his desire for the Ring, before he ever touches it. I don't believe that he would have murdered Deagol otherwise. It is intersting to note that, while great play is made of Gandalf not touching the Ring in the FotR film, he does actually handle it in the book (in A Shadow of the Past). Although even he admits to being vulnerable to its power (when Frodo offers it to him), such passing contact appears to have little or no effect on him. [ February 06, 2003: Message edited by: The Saucepan Man ]
__________________
Do you mind? I'm busy doing the fishstick. It's a very delicate state of mind! |
02-06-2003, 12:07 PM | #3 |
Haunting Spirit
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: London
Posts: 71
|
I agree with Saucepan Man. The Ring can corrupt even if you don't have it. Just take Borimir in FOTR, he never had it, but because men is such a weak race compared to Elves and such.....he fell under the power of the ring. Anymore thoughts on this interesting subject?
__________________
"He is Aragorn, Son of Arathorn, Heir to the Throne of Gondor!" |
02-06-2003, 07:04 PM | #4 | ||||
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
|
Here's what I said from this thread Gollum do you pity him or hate him?
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Do Not Touch -Willie |
||||
02-06-2003, 07:16 PM | #5 |
Relic of Wandering Days
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: You'll See Perpetual Change.
Posts: 1,480
|
It's odd, but the way I see Boromir's situation, his heart was corrupted from the desire for the ring rather than the ring itself corrupting him. It was the result of his own internal pressures. The ring represented to him the chance to save his world, to please his father and gain glory in one action. Not trying to obtain it, meant to be let opportunity pass and perhaps let the enemy gain a most powerful advantage. As I mentioned in another thread, at that point it was obvious that Aragorn would not be going to Minas Tirith. Boromir would return empty handed after a long absence.
Gollum like-wise desired the ring and that lead to his corruption. Also Saruman. But Frodo, Aragorn, Sam, Merry, Pippin, Gandalf, etc. did not desire it and Frodo & Sam were not tainted by it until after touching it. I would think Gandalf would have recognized the ring sooner if he felt its power tugging and drawing people under its influence. Perhaps it has more to do with the person's character. [ February 06, 2003: Message edited by: Hilde Bracegirdle ] |
02-06-2003, 07:32 PM | #6 | ||
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Do Not Touch -Willie |
||
02-06-2003, 07:41 PM | #7 |
Beholder of the Mists
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Somewhere in the Northwest... for now
Posts: 1,419
|
Boromir didn't even handle the ring in the movie, so that basically means that he never handled it in the book.
I never thought of that, that the people who had prior knowledge of it almost never became very corrupted about it, it almost took them by surprise. Though Frodo eventually became corrupted with it, even though he knew about it being evil (Ooops, movie moment, realizes that he has the ring for a few years or so before Gandalf actually comes back and tells him all about the ring) but that is probably because he was going to Mordor
__________________
Wanted - Wonderfully witty quote that consists of pure brilliance |
02-06-2003, 07:41 PM | #8 | |
Corpus Cacophonous
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: A green and pleasant land
Posts: 8,390
|
Hilde, isn't it a bit artificial to make a distinction between the power of the Ring over one who bears it and the desire for the Ring on the part of one who sees or hears of it? Both stem from the power of the Ring and what it represents to the "corruptee". Boromir desired the Ring precisely because of its power, which he felt could be used to save his people and fight of Sauron, so it is the power of the Ring that corrupts him.
As for Gollum, surely he is directly influenced by the Ring without touching it. Had Deagol found just a nice but otherwise unremarkable ring, it's unlikely that Gollum would have been moved to murder him. There must have been something more than just a fancy for a pretty ring. However, he has no idea what the Ring is. So, it must be the power of the Ring itself, rather than any conception of what it represents, that provokes Gollum to kill his friend. Quote:
[ February 06, 2003: Message edited by: The Saucepan Man ]
__________________
Do you mind? I'm busy doing the fishstick. It's a very delicate state of mind! |
|
02-06-2003, 07:52 PM | #9 | |
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
|
Quote:
__________________
Do Not Touch -Willie |
|
02-06-2003, 08:17 PM | #10 |
Corpus Cacophonous
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: A green and pleasant land
Posts: 8,390
|
Ah, good point Willie. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]
__________________
Do you mind? I'm busy doing the fishstick. It's a very delicate state of mind! |
02-06-2003, 08:29 PM | #11 |
Hidden Spirit
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,424
|
Too much talking, too much movie. It goes like this:
Desire for the Ring corrupts the soul. The Ring causes you to desire it. Therefore, the Ring corrupts the soul. Not to say that the Ring always causes a person to desire it, but it often does. Sam's mind would have been on Frodo too much for there to be any time to think about the Ring.
__________________
What's a burrahobbit got to do with my pocket, anyways? |
02-06-2003, 08:43 PM | #12 |
Master of the Secret Fire
|
It didn't have as much effect, the simpler the person was. With Sam to Tom Bombadil for example, it had less effect.
[ February 06, 2003: Message edited by: Beren87 ] |
02-07-2003, 07:33 PM | #13 | |||
Relic of Wandering Days
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: You'll See Perpetual Change.
Posts: 1,480
|
Thanks for all the responses!
Quote:
For the Ring stems from the power of the Ring. I can easily imagine substituting some other major heirloom or powerful weapon and having the same response from the characters who were drawn to the ring without having touched it. Quote:
Are you saying the ring inspires desire or actively instigates it? Quote:
effect Sam as long as he wore it, but didn't appear to have had a lasting influence. I’ve been mulling over what has been said and want to pose an additional inquiry. Which do you hold to be true: The Ring is an in inanimate object and a powerful tool of Sauron. The Ring is a powerful servant of Sauron. The Ring is has an independent will. Or is there another view I’ve missed. As you can probably guess, I choose the first statement. [ February 07, 2003: Message edited by: Hilde Bracegirdle ] |
|||
02-07-2003, 07:46 PM | #14 |
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
|
I think ( and knowing me I'm probibly wrong, but) that the ring is a sort of physical manifastation of Sauron. I mean, Sauron put some of himself into the Ring when he forged it, right? So then the Ring is Sauron in a sense. Maybe I'm just ranting, but anyway it's something to think about.
"They are one. The Ring and the Dark Lord
__________________
I have no idea what you just said, but I'm inspired! |
02-07-2003, 07:52 PM | #15 | |
Corpus Cacophonous
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: A green and pleasant land
Posts: 8,390
|
Quote:
Which brings me on to your second question. As I understand it, Sauron put part of himself into it when it was forged, so that it magified his power when he was in possession of it, but lessened him without it. It does have a will, but it is not an independent will - it is a part of Sauron's will. I think that this is suggested by the way Gandalf refers to the Ring. He talks of it trying to find its way back to its Master. For example, he suggests that it was the Ring that decided to part with Gollum, hoping to be picked up by a Goblin or the like (and not an unassuming Hobbit lost in the dark). So, in my opinion, the Ring does have a will, and is able wilfully to use the power that Sauron infused it with to influence the acts of those who are most vulnerable to that power. Possibly that is those with the weakest wills, and it is only able to influence the stronger willed characters, such as Frodo and Sam, while they are Ringbearers. [ February 07, 2003: Message edited by: The Saucepan Man ]
__________________
Do you mind? I'm busy doing the fishstick. It's a very delicate state of mind! |
|
02-07-2003, 09:09 PM | #16 | |
Hidden Spirit
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,424
|
Quote:
__________________
What's a burrahobbit got to do with my pocket, anyways? |
|
02-07-2003, 09:16 PM | #17 |
Relic of Wandering Days
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: You'll See Perpetual Change.
Posts: 1,480
|
Yes, yes, very good. I see your point. I took Gandalf's statements to mean that it will always gravitate back towards Sauron, not seek him out. Perhaps the power the Ring magnifies the darkness and despair of certain predisposed hearts, driving them to do what they would not.
Thanks again. |
02-11-2003, 05:57 PM | #18 | ||
Relic of Wandering Days
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: You'll See Perpetual Change.
Posts: 1,480
|
Ran across this last night while reading Unfinished Tales (Disaster of Gladden Fields) and think that it would be good to add it to this thread, before it ends up on page 150 of the Book section of the Forum! [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]
Quote:
Quote:
[ February 12, 2003: Message edited by: Hilde Bracegirdle ] |
||
02-11-2003, 06:10 PM | #19 | |
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
|
Quote:
|
|
02-11-2003, 06:38 PM | #20 | ||||
Wight
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: austin
Posts: 169
|
Gandalf's response when Frodo tried to give him the ring:
Quote:
In Galadriel's temptation: Quote:
After she has already turned down the ring and "passed the test", Frodo says again: Quote:
Quote:
[ February 11, 2003: Message edited by: greyhavener ] [ February 11, 2003: Message edited by: greyhavener ]
__________________
Do justly, love mercy, walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8 |
||||
02-11-2003, 07:15 PM | #21 | |
Fair and Cold
|
Quote:
__________________
~The beginning is the word and the end is silence. And in between are all the stories. This is one of mine~ |
|
02-11-2003, 07:29 PM | #22 |
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
|
I just noticed something. Sam had no real ambition.All the other people of were tempted by the Ring did. Maybe the Ring brings out natural ambition and expolts it.
__________________
I have no idea what you just said, but I'm inspired! |
02-11-2003, 07:47 PM | #23 | |
Fair and Cold
|
Quote:
I don't think that Sam's secret is lack of ambition, I think his secret is his ability to keep his priorities straight, never forget his principles, and remain humble throughout. And I don't think that humility equals lack of ambition. It equals lack of selfish ambition, that's for sure. There's a difference between the two. But you are absolutely right in the sense that it seems as if the Ring zeroes in on the subject's inherent weakness (such as selfish ambition) and works to magnify it.
__________________
~The beginning is the word and the end is silence. And in between are all the stories. This is one of mine~ |
|
02-11-2003, 07:49 PM | #24 | ||
Shade of Carn Dûm
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: napa valley, ca
Posts: 496
|
Quote:
Can you cite your source please? As stated in Book 2, Chapter 1: Quote:
__________________
History shows again and again How nature points up the folly of men Go, go, Godzilla! |
||
02-11-2003, 07:58 PM | #25 |
Fair and Cold
|
Oh yeah?
[img]smilies/mad.gif[/img] It was a wig he borrowed from Galadriel. Sheesh.
__________________
~The beginning is the word and the end is silence. And in between are all the stories. This is one of mine~ |
02-11-2003, 08:54 PM | #26 |
Shade of Carn Dûm
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: napa valley, ca
Posts: 496
|
Oh. That makes sense. He must have worn it to sneak into Arwen's chamber without raising suspicion, which validates your last statement. Sorry I jumped the gun, I won't question your knowledge again...
With regards to the the Ring though, why is then that only two characters actually made an attempt to take the Ring? Boromir and Smeagol. What is it that sets these two apart? Many people have desires of differing influence, and in addition have their individual low moments that might make them further susceptible to temptation. But yet only two strike out. Obviously Smeagol had some problems to begin with, whether evil or not, he was greedy. But this time the greed caused him to kill, I think that was not commonplace previously. Boromir obviously had some issues going on as well, but what was the trigger? Conversely, some of those tempted face to face with the Ring, even having it offered to them, were able to refuse it. This is a huge difference in behavior, not minor. Boromir using force vs. Galadriel feeling temptation towards a freely given gift. Not really a fair comparison. Another category could be those who knew of it's existence, yet were not offered it nor did they use force to acquire it. The Hobbits, those of the Council at Rivendell, and those two noble men of Numenor, Aragorn and Faramir. Was it not said that there was a difference in Farimir's blood from that of his father and brother? He was more noble in many ways? I forget the passage, I'll look it up later. That only leaves Isildur. And he fits in this group because he came upon it. Neither was he offered it, nor was he violent (thieving) in it's taking. His crime was in not being as resistant to it's wiles as were Bilbo, Frodo, Sam and Tom. Perhaps I created more questions than answers, but these are some of the rudementary differences I see. -If you are resistant to magic (Tom, Hobbits) you may get away with actually wearing/possessing the Ring. -If you are of High birth and demeanor (Galadriel, Elrond, Gandalf, Aragorn, Faramir) you are equipped to refuse a direct chance at possession. But actual possession would cause corruption just the same, just faster than those more 'magic proof' Isildur would fit into this category -If you are a lower born, lower moral being you have no defense over the influence of the Ring. This would include both Boromir and Smeagol. Yes Boromir, even though he was of prominent position and character, he was not of the 'quality' that Faramir and Aragorn were. Had any other members of this category learned of the Ring, I would presume they would follow suit in behavior to Boromir and Smeagol, just in varying degrees, like some sort of continuum that solely reflects 'how long' corruption will take, not 'if' it will happen. An example would be Butterbur VS. Ferny - one would take longer, but both would be inevitable. So what do you think, will this boat float? [ February 11, 2003: Message edited by: Tar-Palantir ]
__________________
History shows again and again How nature points up the folly of men Go, go, Godzilla! |
02-11-2003, 09:36 PM | #27 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
The subject of this topic has been one of the eternal questions. May it be explored and debated until there is no need to consider evil anymore!
Please forgive the somewhat random organization of the following. I was taking notes from previous posts and am under a tight time restriction ... The Ring embodies evil. Evil is a verb, more than a passive concept--it requires an object to exist, a host, in fact, since it must feed. And it feeds best on fear. However many ways our choices can be swayed away from God/Love is how it begins to work. Those who are corrupted and never answer the call to choose again are obsessed with the products of fear--defending, controlling, attacking, protecting--all centered upon the Ring. Gollum first responded to the rich glint of gold. Gandalf and Galadriel understood they would be ensnared by intentions of good. Boromir = noble cause. Bilbo = something shiny, then the simple possession of something unique with the power of invisibility. Frodo = well, it was thrust on him and he was eventually ensnared by the evil embodied in the Ring, yet he was redeemed. This brings up an essential point that I believe Tolkien was trying to make in addition to the importance of awareness of choices--alone, we cannot stand against evil. It is only when we are part of a fellowship that we have a chance. What the Ring awakens, or calls to, is the desire or belief that, given the right circumstances, we can be like God--create & control people, places, and things. Every character in LOTR and Silmarillion came to a sorry end because of the attempt to usurp God. This brings up another vital aspect--that of nature. In my opinion, nature and its manifestation of creation and, well, natural laws, embodies God. Those who were closest to the harmonies of nature were least likely to be corrupted quickly, if at all. Tom Bombadil wasnature, if you will. To him, the Ring was hardly more than an amusing piece of jewelry. Gollum was an intellectual, if you will, in the Stoor clan--curious and pretty much a loner. (I know this seems like a stretch, but look up his origins and think about it.) Boromir was a rather solitary guy who was certainly up in his head a lot, excellent warrior skills notwithstanding. I agree with the person who mentioned humility. Before someone mentions that Faramir was clearly on the intellectual side (and I think intellect is a fine thing, btw), I will hasten to add that he also portrayed a person of true humility. Boromir thought more of himself although he rationalized it by saying he wanted to save Gondor; Faramir thought of himself less and was willing to surrender Self to a greater cause. We all have our own Ring, and a neverending series of choices to choose our own quest--for Mt. Doom, or Self. Fear, and its myriad manifestations, and the delusion of being able to be God, even if for a Very Good Cause, are how our Rings ensnare us. I believe this was Tolkien's purpose for the Ring in LOTR. And the Ring is just a junior player compared to how all this is illustrated in the Silmarillion. Okay, that's it. If you stayed this long, thank you for listening! |
02-11-2003, 10:38 PM | #28 | ||||
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Do Not Touch -Willie |
||||
02-11-2003, 11:55 PM | #29 | ||
Shade of Carn Dûm
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: napa valley, ca
Posts: 496
|
Quote:
Quote:
And I did not "speak of men as being weak". Boromir being ignorant? I do not think you understand the word ignorant. Ignorant means you are unaware or do not have the knowledge of something. Boromir had more information and advice than anyone could ask for. He knew the dangers of the Ring as well as anybody, he heard the warnings at the Council of Elrond, he even agreed to help destroy it. No, he was not ingorant, rather, he was full knowing. [ February 12, 2003: Message edited by: Tar-Palantir ]
__________________
History shows again and again How nature points up the folly of men Go, go, Godzilla! |
||
02-12-2003, 02:00 AM | #30 | |||
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
|
Sorry Tar-Palantir.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Do Not Touch -Willie |
|||
02-12-2003, 08:57 AM | #31 | |
Wight
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: 3rd star from the right over Kansas
Posts: 108
|
What is behind greed, if not fear? The fear of not having enough, of someone having what you want, of what will happen if you do not have it all? Greed is a product of fear because when it is taken to its conclusion, there is a "must have or else" obsessive quality to it. Greed is obsessive, and when one is obsessed one is fearful of what will happen to the object of obsession and/or self if that object is not obtained.
The Ring speaks to that within each of us that is closely connected to fear--we are not used to looking for the roots of our reactions & rationalizations. Quote:
__________________
"It is a journey without distance to a goal that has never changed." |
|
02-12-2003, 12:04 PM | #32 | ||
Relic of Wandering Days
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: You'll See Perpetual Change.
Posts: 1,480
|
Quote:
Tonight I must reread the Gladden fields chapter again, because it certainaly seemed as though Isildur did intend to give up the ring (like Frodo) if he succeeded in escaping that dreadful evening. I’m not saying that he could have easily; just the intentions were there. The fact that he acknowledged he made the wrong choice makes me feel he was not so far gone. Quote:
|
||
02-12-2003, 02:43 PM | #33 |
Animated Skeleton
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Monkey Island, of course!
Posts: 30
|
Oh, how addictively confusing! Keep this thread going!
__________________
"Nothing that actually occurs is of the slightest importance." |
02-12-2003, 03:14 PM | #34 | |
Shade of Carn Dûm
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: napa valley, ca
Posts: 496
|
Quote:
Unwise Stubborn Short-sighted Overbold Misguided I don't blame Boromir, as he was up against a mighty power, but he was not ignorant.
__________________
History shows again and again How nature points up the folly of men Go, go, Godzilla! |
|
02-12-2003, 04:14 PM | #35 | |
Wight
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: 3rd star from the right over Kansas
Posts: 108
|
[quote] It's like he was hearing the advice, but he wasn't listening to it. He know what they were saying, but he either didn't understand it, or he refused to understand it. Do you see what I mean?/QUOTE]
Quote:
The Ring would use denial--the Ring uses anything and everything to keep us into our small "s" selves and to turn us from Love/God or the large "S" Selves which would be the one connected to Love/God through others. I'm gonna have to find more concrete examples when I get home and have my books. I know this sounds rather waffly.
__________________
"It is a journey without distance to a goal that has never changed." |
|
02-12-2003, 05:09 PM | #36 |
Shade of Carn Dûm
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: napa valley, ca
Posts: 496
|
Thanks dininziliel and Willie, for the feeback. But I think our posts are coming from different angles. We'll simply never know how the Ring works, try as we might. This is why I was taking another tack, trying just to figure out who specifically did something quantifiable, and how did that manifest and relate to others involved. Guessing at a charcters emotions and levels of denial and even specific desires is just that, guessing.
It's especially difficult when some people don't know what the word ignorant means. Which, by ironic definition, would make them ignorant. Unless, of course, they are suffering through a case of denial and as such refuse better counsel or to simply open a dictionary. [img]smilies/tongue.gif[/img] [img]smilies/tongue.gif[/img] [ February 12, 2003: Message edited by: Tar-Palantir ]
__________________
History shows again and again How nature points up the folly of men Go, go, Godzilla! |
02-12-2003, 09:47 PM | #37 | ||||
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
ooooohhh, I wish I knew how to wield the powers of this board--how someone can get quotes from more than one person inside their replies is beyond me at this point.
anyway ... Quote:
No, we may never know the answers, but what we discover along the way and the connections we make with others on that path may be of more value than answers to quantifiable questions. What was called "guessing" is "exploration" to me. And, yes, these terms are a bit juxatposed. And, I think we know what "ignorant" means. It was defined a few posts back quite adequately. I think (but do not know) [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img] that exploringthe role of ignorance in LOTR makes a terrific topic--especially when the context is that of evil as embodied by the Ring. Bilbo and Gollum certainly did not know (were ignorant) that the Ring was evil/a creation of Sauron when they found/saw it. Nor did they seem aware of its evil as time passed. Only Bilbo awoke to that fact after the incident at Rivendell w/Frodo (book and movie). We must assume Gollum had passed that particular threshold of awareness long before Bilbo found (and took, albeit peacefully in contrast to Boromir's attempt) the Ring. However, in this context, the interesting thing is that Gollum had a window of opportunity to choose again when Frodo's pity and kindness entered Gollum's awareness. Gollum's ignorance of the experience of kindness caused him to deny that call to Love, and he chose to return to darkness. And then there's Frodo, who started the Quest full of information about the Ring, but ignorant of the experience. I suggest that it was his experience that enabled him to have pity/empathy for Gollum which proved to be all that was necessary for Iluvatar's ultimate will to triumph. (Recall Iluvatar's statement to Morgoth in Silmarillion that nothing Morgoth could do or conceive of could ultimately thwart Iluvatar's design? Frodo's solo failure atop Mt. Doom and subsequent success via his connection to both Sam & Gollum are absolutely wonderful illustrations of how Love/God/Iluvatar work--those "mysterious wonders to perform." Okay, so that's another aspect of ignorance. Bear with me, I know this is long and getting longer ... Now, for your good, popular notion of old-fashioned ignorance, Boromir is your man. [img]smilies/cool.gif[/img] He definitely obtained information about the Ring during the Council of Elrond from among the wisest sources around. Yet, despite this informational knowledge, he still attempted to take the Ring and was even moved to violence to get it. What do Boromir and Gollum have in common and how do they compare/contrast from the rest of the characters? Well, one can count and correlate acts of violence, the number of times someone uses a certain word or phrase, and other measurable variables in connection to the Ring, but I suspect one will come up with interesting statistics and averages but no real conclusions, only conjectures (aka "guesses"). Why? Because Tolkien did not write a traditional mystery story nor a gigantic archaeological account. He may have begun creating a world to support his languages, but when he finished he had illustrated the greatest questions, issues, elements of human experience using a fairy story/myth. Okay, I'm done with my own thoughts. Here are some brief excerpts using the index heading "effects of the Ring upon the bearer" from The Letters of JRR Tolkien, HarperCollins, publ. 1995: Letter 131, p. 154: Quote:
Letter #153, p. 191: Quote:
Letter #131 again, p. 160: Quote:
[ February 12, 2003: Message edited by: Fain Clawmirth ] |
||||
02-13-2003, 12:48 AM | #38 | ||
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
|
Fain Clawmirth
Quote:
Oh yeah, and welcome to the downs. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img] dininziliel Quote:
And welcome to the downs also. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]
__________________
Do Not Touch -Willie |
||
02-13-2003, 11:34 PM | #39 | |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Grounds-Keeper-Willie wrote:
Quote:
Gollum was a classic Greek tragic figure--his actions doomed him from the start by setting off the natural consequences of trying to usurp God's/Iluvatar's place (the taking of Deagol's life). The addiction to the Ring just sealed the deal. Regarding greed vs. fear (or the chicken and the egg question). This is another outstanding dialogue and I hope it continues awhile longer! Greed is the reaction to a perceived lack. How could you want something if you already had it? And what is the source of this reaction to a perceived lack? Why not just say, "aw, well--I can do without that," or "It's not that important." Why not have the feeling of peaceful disinterest? Because one becomes fearful of what will happen if a desire is not fulfilled. Fear is usually thought of as what happens when a bus or monster or terrorist is bearing down on you at 90 miles per hour. It is this and much, much more. It is a primitive, fundamental state of mind. It's what accounts for the physical reactions or sensations that accompany greed or any other product of fear--heart rate, hypersensitivity of the senses, etc. In other words, greed and the other deadly "sins" would not have their destructive power without their source--fear. LOTR/Silmarillion are illustrations of our relationship to God/Iluvatar/Love. We are either moving toward it, are for it, and willing to surrender ourselves to it in trust that no matter what happens and no matter how hopeless, things will be all right (Frodo, Sam, the Fellowship). Or, we are moving away from it, are against it, and unwilling to surrender anything because we have no trust--we are afraid. We are afraid because we have chosen to separate (or believe separation is possible) from God. I suppose in a sense the definition of greed might be stretched to include what created fear. Tolkien's letters and several quotes tell that one of the basic tenets in LOTR/Silmarillion is what happens when one chooses/desires to create like God. This desire to be God is similar in nature to greed. So, in that sense, your argument is correct. But I think it is more akin to pride. Jeepers, are we on the verge of another thread here? [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] Or ... maybe it is simply evil doing its job. [img]smilies/evil.gif[/img] Where is Udun (Hell) located? In Mordor, of course. What is Mordor but the epitome, the absolute monument to and center of fear? And on that note, I send my brothers and sisters peace amid the insanity of the world. |
|
02-14-2003, 12:56 AM | #40 | |
Shade of Carn Dûm
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: napa valley, ca
Posts: 496
|
Quote:
Frodo had Gollum's drug, his mistress; that is the only reason he showed any respect or caring of Frodo. Otherwise Gollum would have been gone in a flash...
__________________
History shows again and again How nature points up the folly of men Go, go, Godzilla! |
|
|
|