What happened at Mount Doom?

[davem]

The problem with A is that it is too 'coincidental'. It reduces the end of Sauron to a fluke. For an 'accident' to save the whole world from disaster seems beyond belief. There must have been a purpose behind it, or it kind of makes all the struggles up to that point 'pointless'.

The problem with B is that it makes Eru a murderer.

The problem with C is that he didn't jump.

The problem with D is that it doesn't actually make sense

I go for option n....

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by davem

The problem with A is that it is too 'coincidental'. It reduces the end of Sauron to a fluke. For an 'accident' to save the whole world from disaster seems beyond belief. There must have been a purpose behind it, or it kind of makes all the struggles up to that point 'pointless'.

The problem with B is that it makes Eru a murderer.

Ah, but Sauron was NOT killed, merely reduced to an impotent spirit. Therefore, to call Eru a murderer is not necessarily incorrect.

Of course, there is the whole issue that there is no reason why Gollum's slip can't both be a completely natural slip AND a fulfillment of the Divine Will...

[davem]

Originally Posted by Formendacil

Ah, but Sauron was NOT killed, merely reduced to an impotent spirit. Therefore, to call Eru a murderer is not necessarily incorrect.

I meant Gollum - if Eru was responsible for him 'tripping'...

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by davem

The problem with A is that it is too 'coincidental'. It reduces the end of Sauron to a fluke. For an 'accident' to save the whole world from disaster seems beyond belief. There must have been a purpose behind it, or it kind of makes all the struggles up to that point 'pointless'.

At the risk of my morning tea 'n' toast, I have to disagree.

The 'point' to me is that the whole quest was the true battle, the true heroism. it was the getting there that was the difficult part. That Frodo then could not destroy the Ring and that it was destroyed by accident is beside the point - and in any case, having the Ring destroyed in this way would avoid making a kind of uber-hero, the all-conquering-Ring-destroyer (or something along the lines of grand hyperbole usually found in fantasy). to have that would only replace the Dark Lord with his opposite, an unbearably perfect hero.

If it was a fluke that Sauron ended this way then that is just perfect, as it proves that despite having as much power as anyone could hope for, a simple accident can quite literally bring it all crashing down. It could be a lesson in pride?

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by davem

I meant Gollum - if Eru was responsible for him 'tripping'...

That begs the question then, of whether Eru is to be considered a murderer for killing off his own creatures- made by Him, and Him alone, and subject to his will. If one thinks of the fate of Ar-Pharazon and his men as "murder", then he's guilty.

For that matter, if the very fact that he made Men (and Hobbits) mortal- thus killing even the healthiest of them in the end, is murder, then we have a major killer here...

But I would contend that IF Eru "fated" Gollum to trip, that does not mean that he killed him. As far as fate goes, if Gollum was fated to trip, then Frodo was fated to go to Valinor, Isildur was fated to lose the Ring and die, and Turin was fated to kill himself.

I don't personally think that Eru "pushed" Gollum (ie. Murdered him), but I do sense His hand in it...

[tar-ancalime]

I'll take choice "e":

The story had to end this way because otherwise (assuming Frodo had destroyed the Ring), they would have had to let Gollum take the ship West from the Havens as a Ringbearer.

Joking aside, I agree with Lalwende when she says:

If it was a fluke that Sauron ended this way then that is just perfect, as it proves that despite having as much power as anyone could hope for, a simple accident can quite literally bring it all crashing down. It could be a lesson in pride?

I've got more to say but I haven't had any coffee yet, so it's not coming out in coherent form.

Sentences.

Paragraphs.

I'll try again later.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Formendacil

But I would contend that IF Eru "fated" Gollum to trip, that does not mean that he killed him.

Well, it must mean something pretty close to that. Maybe Eru willed that the Ring was going to go into the Fire at that point & Gollum just happened to be holding onto it at the time - it pulled him in?

[The Saucepan Man]

Davem, to draw on your argument from the Feanor - Self-Important? thread, might it be that Eru willed that Gollum be the instrument of the Ring's destruction but that Gollum had free-will as to precisely how he would play his part? Once he chose not to destroy it willingly or to aid Frodo in doing so, then the "accident" was the only means of bringing about that which was fated to occur.

The problem, of course, is that this sets Gollum an impossible task, as not even Frodo could bring himself to destroy the Ring willingly.

Another thought occurs to me. Was there perhaps a way in which Gollum could "accidentally" have destroyed the Ring without falling into the Crack of Doom himself?

Bêthberry asked me:

Just out of curiosity, could you provide us with a brief outline of what you can imagine?

I did give this some thought. One alternative which (I think) would maintain the essence of the story would be to have Gollum trip while triumphantly holding the Ring and lose his grip on it. The Ring then rolls over the edge of the Crack, but Gollum doesn't follow it in. Having had his life preserved well beyond his natural life by the power of the Ring, Gollum then dies of old age with its destruction. Would that fit the bill? Eru could certainly not be labelled a "murderer" in those circumstances as Gollum would have been bound to die with the detruction of the Ring, whatever else happened. There might even be scope for Gollum to renounce his sins, thereby setting up the possibility of his redemption, in his dying words to Frodo.

Any thoughts?