How the mighty do fall!

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

Yes. Boromir was the proud one, so the Ring found its way easier into him. But his was the desire to do good, not actual pride in his strength.

On the other hand Denethor wanted the Ring, trusting to his own strength and wisdom. I doubt the Ring's sphere of influence had reached him. He had become like Saruman; proud.

Still, pride kills.

[Hookbill the Goomba]

Without them, we would constantly be rebelling to seek out limits. This is why many kids who "experiment" with various forms of rebellion (major euphemism there)

Hum, don’t try and start a rebellion, I don’t think the Barrow Wright would like that!

Anyway, yes, pride kills. Another example of this could be Feánor, it seemed to me that he went mad with pride, did he not? Perhaps the fact that he got so many people behind him made him feel in power, and so, as Finwe said, he tried to test his boundaries. Maybe I’m seeing patterns in things that aren't there... (Oooh pretty colours)

"know what I’m shayin"

Also, the fact that Gandalf did not abuse his power shows that he was the wisest of the miar, yes? But what of Faramir? Did he refuse the ring dew to some dark foreboding? Or did he have some fore sight?

[Lalwendë]

This has got me thinking that maybe this shows Tolkien's own beliefs were reflected in his work. Those such as Feanor, Saruman, Denethor were 'tempted' and then fell into evil. Characters such as Aragorn and Faramir are those who are offered temptation and do not take it. Boromir is interesting as he was tempted, but then admitted his sins, and he dies honourably. Also, I've often thought that the downfall of Numenor reminded me of the Tower of Babel story.

This topic has got me thinking now, it's possibly yet another way of seeing influences in Tolkien's work. What does anyone else think about this idea? Im not saying it's spot on, just a thought that's occurred to me after reading these posts!

[Finwe]

The way that I see it is, wisdom and knowledge are two vastly different things. All of these people (Fëanor, Boromir, Denethor, Saruman, etc.) knew that what they were doing was wrong. Even if it was subconscious, they knew that it was wrong. They had the knowledge, but not the wisdom. In my opinion, wisdom is the ability to not react to situations. Had these characters not reacted to the temptations they were offered in the way that they had, many fates would have been changed.

[Althern]

Without some form of limits placed by someone higher on the pecking order, we'd go completely crazy.

This argument implies that you completely discount the importance of self imposed limits. These limits, otherwise known as principles or morals, have a greater affect on human behaviour than any imposed by legislation or the social contract. To choose an extreme example to demonstrate an elementary point, it is within my power to murder somebody, but I choose not to do so, not on the threat of any legal sanction, but rather on the revulsion I would feel for the violation of a core tenet of my morality. In this case, only a sociopath would act in a way that tested these externally imposed limits. The examples you present are of children and teenagers whose moral development is incomplete, and who have immediate authority figures imposing a code of behaviour that they would like to see emulated. To extend this kind of argument to the overwhelming majority of adults is erroneous.

To return to the topic, a description of a group of people behaving morally, but not heroically, is at variance with the requirements for interesting narrative. I argue that people such as Saruman are necessary for an appealing story. There are many more examples in the books of individuals remaining true to their principles and achieving their goals, which would imply that this is a stronger theme than the corrupting nature of power (with the exception of ring-acquired power of course).

[Hookbill the Goomba]

I think the main reason i started this topic is to ask whether Tolkein was trying to make some kind of statement about how people act these days. He himself says that he hates allegory, yet he see LotR as more applicability, this would seem to fit more into the theory. Did he mean us to think that Power is something that corrupts the human, (Elf, Miar, ect) mind.

I know it goes against everything Tolkien said in his forward, but i would like to say I’m not connecting it directly with LotR, but Hitler and his Nazis many have said that the power sent him mad. But i think we should look more into Middle Earth itself, and so I think that Tolkien is trying to show this, with so may characters turning to evil and only a few taking the 'wise' root and turning from it. Yet if you look more into it you begin to see that it is mainly the unexpected characters that resist the temptation (With the possible exception of Gandalf), The Hobbits, Faramir (Being the brother of Boromir and wanting to prove himself to his father), and others. I think that the message that runs through most of Tolkien's righting is that Power in the wrong hands can lead to disaster, but the most unlikely people can help prevent evil from completely taking over.

One could also look into Tolkien's religion, this would undoubtedly have had an effect on his work, if you read stories like David and Goliath; you see this message portrayed clearly.

[Nimiriel]

I think Tolkien is (was) clearly trying to get a lot of messages through to his readers, among them the importance of not giving in to the desire for power (or wealth). What he say in the foreword is that the story itself is not to be seen as a picturing of the WW2 or anything like that. The story is a story in itself, but it still contains lots of messages and viewpoints on the world today, society and industry.