Sméagol: Hero of the Third Age

[Rikae]

I don't know how well I'll be able to express this thought, but I'll try: does any human being (we've established Smeagol is human, right?) ever act with only one single motivation- and if not, can they ever be, in this life, wholly good or wholly wicked? It seems to me that there were, in Smeagol (as in Frodo) several different impulses at war with each other; furthermore, some of these were more purely his own than others. His wickedness, which seems to have 'won' in the sense that it influenced most of his actions, was strongly influenced by the power of the ring; on the other hand, any chink of light in him existed in spite of the ring's imfluence, and was therefore more truly his own.
If we judge him, we have to not only weigh the objective morality of each action, but also the degree to which that choice was freely made (think of the Catholic idea of mortal sin requiring not only grave matter, but full knowledge and consent). Certainly, Frodo better resisted the power of the ring; but Frodo also had more help; he was armed with more knowledge, and had Gandalf to guide him from the moment the ring came into his possession. If he had first encountered the ring under the circumstances Smeagol did, he might not have resisted it very well at all.

[Fordim Hedgethistle]

lmp: so, OK, "wholly wicked" does not rule out the (theoretical?) possibility of grace...this is good, for my sense of LotR is that nobody is ever completely beyond redemption.

So here's an idea. When Gollum goes into the fire can we see that as a moment in which not only is M-E saved by the "grace" or Eru (or whomever) but so is Gollum? Perhaps in that fleeting second, whatever part of Gollum remains human is sufficient to gain forgiveness of his "sins" as he destroys the Ring....? The point is, as Rikae so elegantly points out, is that we will never know.

There is no moment so private, so entirely individual and so profoundly our own, as the moment of our death. I like to think that as Gollum went into the flames he realised in some manner the depth and breadth of his depravity, and that he died with that thought in his mind. That's some manner of redemption.

[Raynor]

So here's an idea. When Gollum goes into the fire can we see that as a moment in which not only is M-E saved by the "grace" or Eru (or whomever) but so is Gollum?

The least that can be said is that Gollum won't sin anymore, which is also a manifestation of Eru's grace, holding one from perpetual error, which threaten's to lead to an even lower morality - I make this argument often in referrrence to the drowning of Numenor by Eru, as they resorted to killing, torturing, slaying each other, enslaving, etc. Ending such dramas is necessary; in the end, as Tolkien states in letter #212, a divine punishment is also a divine blessing.

[Boromir88]

Is it because Gollum did so much evil? But, actually, isn't it so that in all his evil deeds, it has actually been the Ring who made him to do those things? Even in the murder of Déagol, he was attracted by the ring.~Glaurung

Raynor brings up some very good points about Gollum that I'd like to expand upon just a little bit.

I think there is this general thinking that Smeagol was a victim of the Ring. The Ring brought out 'Gollum' and turned this nice little, loving Smeagol into the little wretch he becomes. I disagree, Gollum was already within Smeagol, it's just the Ring that brings out the 'Gollum.'

Before coming across the Ring I kind of think of Smeagol's mind with two opposite extremes. There's the good side that we get a brief glimpse at (him and Deagol beforethey came across the Ring), but also the evil that was already within Smeagol even before he came across the Ring. I kind of think of Smeagol's mind as a scale of conscience - which is something I think we all possess as humans. (Note: this is all before he comes across the Ring):

Evil (Gollum)----------------------------------------------------------------------Good (Smeagol)

Raynor quotes Letter 181 and to add in some descriptors Tolkien describes Smeagol as 'damnable' a 'mean soul' and a 'mean son of a thief.'

But, also I think if we look at how Smeagol acts when he gets the Ring we can see just what type of persona he had before coming across the Ring. The Ring plays with the nature of its bearer. It gives power according to the person's stature, but it also brings out the nature of the individual.

Just for some examples, when Bilbo gets the Ring he acquires it out of Pity. Why is it that when Bilbo acquires the Ring that he doesn't turn into an angry, bitter, murdering Gollum? Because Bilbo prior to the Ring wasn't a Gollum. He uses the Ring as an occasional trick and to avoid the Sackville-Bagginses.

Boromir desires for Gondor's victory and to achieve his own glory along with it. So, he sees the Ring as a weapon, and the Ring uses this desire:

What could not a warrior do in this hour, a great leader? What could not Aragorn do? Or if he refuses, why not Boromir? The Ring would give me power of Command. How I would drive the hosts of Mordor, and all men would flock to my banner!"~The Breaking of the Fellowship

The Ring doesn't 'create' any feeling or sense of evil within anybody. It uses what is already within the person and brings that desire out. It works with what is already within the person.

Let's look at what Smeagol does after killing Deagol to get the Ring:

'No one ever found out what had become of Deagol; he was murdered far from home, and his body was cunningly hidden. But Smeagol returned alone; and he found that none of his family could see him, when he was wearing the ring. He was very pleased with his discovery and he concealed it; and he used it to find secrets, and he put his knowledge to crooked and malicious uses. He became sharp-eyed and keen-eared for all that was hurtful. The ring had given him power according to his stature. It is not to be wondered at that he became very unpopular and was shunned (when visible) by all his relations. They kicked him, and he bit their feet. He took to thieving, and going about muttering to himself, and gurgling in his throat. So they called him Gollum, and cursed him, and told him to go far away; and his grandmother, desiring peace, expelled him from the family and turned him out of her hole.'~Shadow in the Past

1. Not only does Gollum murder Deagol to get the Ring, but he also hides the body and covers up what he did. No one found out what had happened to Deagol until Gollum spilled the beans to Gandalf.

2. He uses the Ring for malicious purposes. He doesn't use it as a trick, or use it on occasion. He uses it to start thieving, spying, and other 'malicious uses.'

3. We see the expulsion by the grandmother was not wrong either. She had desired it out of peace. Peace is good...right?

The Ring didn't 'create' Gollum and turn Smeagol into some wicked, spiteful, creature. Smeagol was already pre-disposed to evil, and the Ring takes that to use to it's advantage. Gollum is brought out from within Smeagol, because of the Ring, and becomes the dominant personality, but that personality had already existed in Smeagol before he came across the Ring.

So, to answer the question. I still pity him, as he comes so close to his own redemption, yet because of Sam's attitude towards him and the strong influence of the Ring, Smeagol is unable to overcome it and he falls short. Which is truly the sad part, as he comes so close to redemption, yet just falls short. The fact remains though that he did fall short.

His intentions weren't in anyway honorable at all. He didn't take the Ring from Frodo so Sauron wouldn't get it. He wanted the Ring for himself. I do believe that he wanted to keep it away from Sauron, but he also wanted to keep it away from everyone else. Gollum made very clear from when he first set eyes on the Ring, he deserved it and only him. It was his birthday present and his justification to claim the Ring as to why he's the only one that deserves it. Since, Gollum is only after the Ring to appease himself, this to me, doesn't make him honorable or a hero at all. Eventhough he does fall into Mount Doom with the Ring, it wasn't some voluntary act to save Frodo or anyone else. It was all about him getting the Ring and only him. The means don't justify the ends....and sociologists would term that as an innovater...with a corrupted official as a great example. An innovator agrees with the ends, but will go about illegal practices (the means) to reach that end....which begs the question is it 'right?' Do the means justify the end? Does it even matter?

[Rikae]

Why is it that when Bilbo acquires the Ring that he doesn't turn into an angry, bitter, murdering Gollum? Because Bilbo prior to the Ring wasn't a Gollum. He uses the Ring as an occasional trick and to avoid the Sackville-Bagginses.

I'm not denying Bilbo is different than Smeagol, but it is also implied that the circumstances in which a person obtains the ring affect the subsequent power the ring has over that person:

'Pity? It was Pity that stayed his hand. Pity, and Mercy, not to strike without need. And he has been well rewarded, Frodo. Be sure that he took so little hurt from the evil, and escaped in the end, because he bagan his ownership of the Ring so. With Pity." (FOTR 69)

If beginning his ownership of the ring with pity had a protective effect on Bilbo, as Gandalf implies (it doesn't seem as if he's referring merely to Bilbo's innate good nature, but to the specific events surrounding his finding the ring), beginning with a murder would have the opposite effect: increasing the ring's influence all the more over the person's subsequent actions.
The influence of the Ring doesn't seem, initially at least, to be to turn people toward a sort of generalized 'evil'; rather, it seems mostly to draw people to it, to create a powerful desire to own it and use it. Bilbo didn't act against this influence when he spared Gollum; he already had the ring and was able to escape with it.

Desire for the ring, though, can bring out a darker side even in Bilbo, who began his ownership with Pity:

'Well, if you want my ring yourself, say so!' cried Bilbo. 'But you won't get it. I won't give my precious away, I tell you.' His hand strayed to the hilt of his small sword. (FOTR 42)

When Smeagol killed Deagol, it wasn't because the Ring amplified his personality; it was because he was possessed with an overpowering desire for it, and Deagol stood in the way. The desire was the effect of the Ring; the same effect it had on everyone who encountered it. Whether this desire inspired actual violence would have depended on:
1. Whether violence would help one get or keep the ring (obviously if one finds or inherits it, there is no need to resort to violence)
2. How violent, impulsive, weak etc. the person is by nature.
3. How much prior knowledge the person had:
-knowing that the Ring is perilous, and that it will be tempting, would help a person resist its power.
-knowing the Ring is evil.
4. Whether the person had time to consider his actions, or acted on impulse.

Was Smeagol 'more evil' than Bilbo, before encountering the Ring? I don't doubt it. Was he 'evil' in the absolute sense? I would say he was only a rather unstable, impulsive and ignorant young hobbit who encountered a temptation that he could not resist was subsequently very quick to succomb to the ring's influence.

[Boromir88]

When Smeagol killed Deagol, it wasn't because the Ring amplified his personality; it was because he was possessed with an overpowering desire for it, and Deagol stood in the way.~Rikae

I think that's the main point where we disagree (which isn't a bad thing ).

The thing is, I don't think the Ring creates any sort of different feelings within anyone. It uses what the person is already like, and what is already within the individual.

As an example with Bilbo, he is a good-natured, well-intentioned hobbit, with really no signs of wanting to commit evil. You are right, in that the circumstances one acquires the Ring are very important about the effect of the Ring. And Bilbo getting the Ring out of his pity for Gollum is a tribute to Bilbo's character as a person. He wasn't a violent/weak-minded person. He was a good-natured, caring hobbit.

Also, the example I gave with Boromir, where the Ring plays with Boromir's desires of Victory for his country and his own glory with it. The Ring doesn't create these feelings within Boromir, they are already there, and the Ring uses that to it's advantage. As Faramir notes:

I can well believe that Boromir, the proud the fearless, often rash, ever anxious for the victory of Minas Tirith (and his own glory therein), might desire such a thing and be allured by it.~Window of the West

The Ring uses the desire for his own glory that is already within Boromir to get Boromir tempted and eventually attempt to take the Ring from Frodo.

Let's take the Ring tempting Sam for another example:

He felt that he had from now on only two choices: to forbear the Ring , though it would torment him; or to claim it, and challenge that Power that sat in its dark hold beyond the valley of shadows. Already the Ring tempted him, and he saw Samwise the Strong, Hero of the Age, striding with a flaming sword across the darkened land, and armies flocking to his call as he marched to the overthrow of Barad-dur. And then all the clouds rolled away, and the white sun shone, and at his command the vale of Gorgoroth became a garden of flowers and trees and brought forth fruit. He had only to put on teh Ring and claim it for his own, and all this could be.~The Tower of Cirith Ungol

That's what I mean with the Ring playing with the very nature of the individual. Is it any coincidence that Sam is a gardener, and the Ring says puts me on and the Gorgoroth will become a great and splendid garden at your command? The Ring uses the very desires of the individual, and plays with their nature.

So, Gollum's murdering for the Ring only shows his weak-mind in that he couldn't resist it upon seeing it. But, my point was that the way he uses the Ring is a great insight to what Smeagol's character was like before he came across the Ring.

To an extent you are right, eventually the Ring will make people do things that they would not have initially done...as you show with Bilbo snapping at Gandalf upon asking for it. But, good-natured and strong individuals don't feel this effect from the very beginning. As Gandalf mentions:

"But I have so little of any of these things! You are wise and powerful. Will you not take the Ring?"
"No!" said Gandalf, springing to his feet. "With that power I should have power too great and terrible. And over me the Ring would gain a power still greater and more deadly." His eyes flashed and his face was lit as by a fire within. "Do not tempt me! For I do not wish to become like the Dark Lord himself. Yet the way of the Ring to my heart is by pity, pity for weakness and the desire of strength to do good...."~Shadow of the Past

Eventually Gandalf realizes the the Ring would make him more like Sauron, over time. However, the way of the Ring, what the Ring would do to accomplish that, is to use Gandalf's pity and desire to do good.

The Ring uses already what is in the individual to get control of them. It brings out their greatest desires and makes them believe, claim me and it so shall be.

Gollum's murdering of Deagol speaks to his weak mind. But what Gollum does shortly after he gets the Ring shows the nature of Gollum even before he came across the Ring. We know before Smeagol came across the ring he was a 'mean soul' and that further is shown with the way Smeagol uses the Ring for malicious intent and thieving upon getting it. The Ring didn't create these desires, or actions in Smeagol, they already were there. The Ring just brought it out of Smeagol and made Gollum (the thieving, the just overall 'evil' already dormant within him) the dominant factor.

[Rikae]

Actually, it's similar, but it seems to me the ring's action still is to create a desire for it. The "clothing" of that desire with the person's own personality is an attempt to rationalize an irrational desire: Gandalf would rationalize his desire for the Ring with pity, Boromir by telling himself it would benefit Gondor, Sam by telling himself he will create gardens, but it seems to me it was the desire that preceded these "reasons". Gandalf, Galadriel, Frodo and Sam all know the ring is evil, and know that anything they do with it will turn to evil; and yet, there is still a temptation they must resist; it seems the temptation is seperate from the reason they might find to give in to it.

"A mean soul", I wonder...mean as in cruel, or as in poor? At any rate, once he has murdered Deagol and taken the ring, he's under its influence more powerfully than either Bilbo or Frodo ever were. I also wonder how many people (especially social outcasts), if they had a ring of invisibility, wouldn't use it to spy (and quite a few even to steal). There is also the question of the influence of guilt on his psyche. We know he was tormented by guilt, since Tolkien tells us. I really don't see a description of an evil being; a pathetically weak one who knew he was weak and hated his weakness, knew, eventually, the ring influenced him and hated its influence even though he loved it. That's why I find it entirely believable that he would have, subconsciously, desired his own and its destruction.