Sam or Frodo

[Lotrelf]

Originally Posted by E�0‹2nw�0Š5

Everyone would ay Frodo, but if you read the book, Sam wears the ring while in Mordor, the worst place to do that, and nothing bad happens to him...

You missed it! Sam is also tempted to keep the Ring as his own. Not saying he'd become greedy like Gollum or Saruman, but he doesn't give up the Ring; Frodo snatches it back. Gandalf's temptation was to do good, that's how/why he'd have fallen prey to the Ring's temptation. Galedriel rejects it for the same reason as well. Aragorn wouldn't take it for the same reasons too. Even, Boromir, who falls into the temptation doesn't want the Ring for his own use, instead he wants it for the country he loves. So, is there a different between any of them and Sam? Sam also desperately wants to ease his master's burden and pain, that's how the Ring tricks him. In the beginning he's smart enough to let the Ring go-or reject the temptation- but when he sees Frodo, he can't take it. And that is how the Ring attacks him.
If it comes to Frodo being less resilient than Sam or anyone else. You guys are forgetting, the Ring was in Bag End for 78 years; and for 17 years, it was in his possession. Carrying the Ring to MD wasn't like going for a picnic. The temptation Sam rejects for a couple of hours, Frodo has been rejecting it for SEVEN months. So, give him the credit. Sam's strength is in something else, not in fighting the Ring. He loves people fearlessly, that's who Sam is.

[Orphalesion]

Exactly, Sam did have the advantage of not having carried the ring for long. His mind might be more difficult for the ring to corrupt, on account of Sam's humbleness, but still Sam is not free of desire (his desire for a nice garden, a happy family, a good "Hobbitish" life) and the ring is capable of corrupting every form of desire no matter how simple or innocent.