Was Gollum's slip the only way?

[Balin999]

Hm there are other discussions about the same topic, so try to search for it, maybe you'll get some answers.

[Kath]

Even if a Hobbit had the Ring for one second, would he have been able to do the task?

Well we know from FotR that even if you have only had the Ring for a minute amount of time you are unable to try to harm it. When Gandalf tells Frodo to throw the Ring into the fire he is unable to do so and Frodo has only really had hold of it for the length of their conversation.

Therefore if any Hobbit had it even for one second the Ring would probably have already exerted an influence strong enough to dissuade the bearer from throwing it into Mount Doom so an accident such as Gollum's fall would have to be the only way unless, as Tolkien said, the bearer was completely pure and flawless - unlikely in a Hobbit.

[Elianna]

It probably should be taken into the picture that Sam was able to resist the Ring, despite having it in his possesion on the border of Mordor with all hope of Frodo living gone.

Even so, Child's probably right (as usual), about Sam not being able to destroy the Ring.

*thinks about it for a while* Gosh, it does seem rather hopeless with Gollum. He had a part to play, and that was it: to die with the Ring.

[Findegil]

Maybe we should look at Letter no. 246 again. It provides not only one allternative ending, but 3 or 4. In on Tolkien started with the scene before Shelobs lair, where Gollum is did nearly repend from his badness and is to easily driven back to by Sam. Had that scene gone other wise Tolkien said Gollum would have helped Frodo to the cracks of Doom. But in the end he would have robbed him of the Ring as well and then jumped in by his one will, seeing in it the only way to help Fordo, to protect the Ring for ever from Sauron and to have it for him self for ever. And with the next sentence Tolkien does tell us that such a deed could have been what Frodo would have done with the Ring if he had have the time to think of it.

Some scatter remarks:
Posted by Kath:

When Gandalf tells Frodo to throw the Ring into the fire he is unable to do so and Frodo has only really had hold of it for the length of their conversation.

Frodo recieved the Ring in the 3001 and the conversation between him and Gandalf was in 3018 so he had it already in his possesion for 17 years. But that does not render the point much: He was nearly not effecte than and was already not able to make such even silly try to harm the Ring.

Posted by Elianna:

Gosh, it does seem rather hopeless with Gollum. He had a part to play, and that was it: to die with the Ring.

That seems to be exactly what Prof. Tolkien thought about him. But if that means there was no Hope for him is a nother question.

Respectfully
Findegil

[Kitanna]

This thread makes me think of little old Bilbo Baggins. He was the only one in the history of the Ring to actually give it up and not have it taken by force or it slipping from his finger and betraying him. And the only reason he gave it up was because of Gandalf.
So would it have been destroyed if Gollum had not fought Frodo for it? I highly doubt it. Sam could never kill Frodo and the Ring had too much of a hold on Frodo for him to even reconsider his choice.
However what if Gandalf had not fallen in Moria and he had gone on with the Fellowship? If he had gone on with Frodo does anyone think Gandalf could have persuaded Frodo like he had Bilbo? Afterall Frodo did not have the Ring as long as Bilbo.
Still nothing short of a sudden character change by Sam would have destroyed that Ring.

[Kath]

If he had gone on with Frodo does anyone think Gandalf could have persuaded Frodo like he had Bilbo? Afterall Frodo did not have the Ring as long as Bilbo.

I always thought (personal opinion though not based on any real facts) that the reason Frodo was so much more affected by the Ring than Bilbo was because when the latter had the Ring Sauron was not really searching for it. He did not know that it had been found and so was not actively seeking it out. When Frodo has the Ring Sauron knows of its existence and (as is said in the film) all his thought is bent on it.

So even if Gandalf was around it would have been far harder if not impossible for him to have persuaded Frodo to let it go as the Ring has had more of an influence on him than it did on Bilbo.

[VanimaEdhel]

Originally Posted by Kath

I always thought (personal opinion though not based on any real facts) that the reason Frodo was so much more affected by the Ring than Bilbo was because when the latter had the Ring Sauron was not really searching for it. He did not know that it had been found and so was not actively seeking it out. When Frodo has the Ring Sauron knows of its existence and (as is said in the film) all his thought is bent on it.

This is actually how I always saw it. At the time when Bilbo was in possession of the ring, Sauron was still fairly weak. He did not yet possess the power to begin actively seeking out the ring. It seems that he and the ring both grew equally in power - each tied to the other, so every burst of energy from one causing an increase in the other. It is almost as though, through the connection, they bolstered each other up to full strength. At the time that Frodo had the ring and was prepared to destroy it, I don't think that any being could have possessed the will power to throw the ring into the fire. Even Sam, who most consider to be even more selfless than Frodo, felt the weight of the ring pretty quickly during the short period of time where he had to hold it. Though he was not yet Mr. Possessive, he began to understand the torture Frodo endured - feeling it much more quickly than Frodo, in fact. I think that the ring had this much effect on Samwise so quickly because Sauron was so close to regaining his former strength.

So even if Gandalf was around it would have been far harder if not impossible for him to have persuaded Frodo to let it go as the Ring has had more of an influence on him than it did on Bilbo.

The ring still did have an effect on Bilbo though. It was a very, very powerfully dark object: even in the depths of its weakness, over time it could still wear away at a person. Look at what it did to Smeagol, corrupting him even as its creator lay almost helpless. It had nowhere near the power it would eventually take on as Sauron regained strength, but it still had the power to inflict and plant evil in the most innocent of places. In so many ways the ring is more powerful than its true creator and master - Sauron depended on it for his own survival, but the ring did not seem to need Sauron to carry on itself. It continued to fulfill its role even when Sauron was incapacitated.

In my mind, the ring is sort of a form of artificial intelligence. It seems to possess a mind of its own - know who it wants to burden and who it wants to remain with. It tries to guide its bearer to a certain location and has such a persuasive manner about it. But, at the same time, it does not express a certain human quality - perhaps spirit or emotion. This makes it even more frightening - it continues its spread of darkness despite what appears to be defeat. It is so vigilant - it does not know fear or hopelessness, it only knows its job and continues so effectively. It controls not only beings such as Frodo and Sam, but its creator as well - Sauron, originally the master (or lord, if you will) of the ring, now finds himself dependent on the ring as the ring is not so dependent on him. I feel that if Sauron had been reunited with the ring and had continued to gain power, even if some being had found the means of destroying Sauron, the ring would survive, find a new bearer to control, and would endure.

[Halbarad]

Originally Posted by Kitanna

This thread makes me think of little old Bilbo Baggins. He was the only one in the history of the Ring to actually give it up and not have it taken by force or it slipping from his finger and betraying him. And the only reason he gave it up was because of Gandalf.
So would it have been destroyed if Gollum had not fought Frodo for it? I highly doubt it. Sam could never kill Frodo and the Ring had too much of a hold on Frodo for him to even reconsider his choice.
However what if Gandalf had not fallen in Moria and he had gone on with the Fellowship? If he had gone on with Frodo does anyone think Gandalf could have persuaded Frodo like he had Bilbo? Afterall Frodo did not have the Ring as long as Bilbo.
Still nothing short of a sudden character change by Sam would have destroyed that Ring.

I'm surprised that no-one picked this up. Bilbo was NOT the only one to have given up the ring. Sam wore the ring for an extended time on the borders of Mordor, and gave it back to Frodo.

'And it hasn't failed. Not yet. I took it, Mr Frodo, begging your pardon. And I've kept it safe. It's around my neck now, and a terrible burden it is too....But I suppose you must take it back.' Now it had come to it, Sam felt reluctant to give up the Ring, and burden his master with it again.

Sam gave it up, of his own free will, although Frodo did demand it back, and would have probably fought with all his (little) remaining strength to get it back. Now there is a case for the Ring using Sam's reluctance to burden Frodo to try to retain its control over Sam (Sam being, in my opinion being made of less stern stuff than Frodo, even with Frodo's wounds, and easier to dominate). However, it is my view that Sam gave up the Ring because he knew that it was Frodo's task. Despite his love for Frodo, and the knowledge that Frodo would be under enormous pressure from the Ring, he gave it up because he knew the task was Frodo's. Now, in Sammath Naur Sam undergoes a great shock, as he realises what Frodo has done. Frodo has already undergone transformation: his voice is filled with power, but we don't get to see or hear what Sam thought about this.
Now Sam was a simple soul. but I think that he would have been able to realise that Frodo was no longer the master he loved, and, if he had been able to locate Frodo, there is a chance that Frodo would have not been able to dominate Sam.
Sam was an indomitable spirit, but if his spirit had been crushed by Frodo's fall to the Power of the Ring I am uncertain if he would have been able to recover sufficiently to do what had to be done. Or, if he had been able to do it he would have done it and died there.

I'm not sure that I've made a point or not.

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

In so many ways the ring is more powerful than its true creator and master - Sauron depended on it for his own survival, but the ring did not seem to need Sauron to carry on itself. It continued to fulfill its role even when Sauron was incapacitated. (Vanima)

It was more powerful than its creator--he had to pour out a large amount of his power to make the little thing.

On a related note, see The True Master by Gurthang.

If we're not to push Frodo in, what happens? How do we destroy the Ring? (Elladan and Elrohir)

If we're looking for someone perfect to destroy the Ring, I believe he resides beyond Arda, unfailing in his commitment to save his Children. A way will be found.

What it is, though, I do not know.

how important is the preservation of free will when the fate of Middle-earth hangs in the balance? (Elladan and Elrohir)

If one is willing to sacrifice free will "for the good of all," then he progresses towards the same path as Sauron. Remember, the Ring was created to dominate other races, so Sauron could build his "paradise" as a rival to Aman (where he refused to go).

Hmmm . . . Second Age-Noldor and Sauron?