The Ring and the other races

[Boromir88]

How would a dragon put on a ring, anyway?

I wonder if a Dragon would eat the Ring, and in that way work it's magic.

[the phantom]

We should start a thread entitled "What if a dragon ate The Ring?"

I'm sure we could spend hours going over Tolkien's many essays on the subject.

But such a serious title would probably discourage newbies from joining in.

[obloquy]

But such a serious title would probably discourage newbies from joining in.

Hahahaha!!!! I'll bet!!!

[Legolas]

I believe Tolkien speculates at one point that if Gandalf had mastered the Ring and overthrown Sauron in this manner, the end would still be a corruption of his power and intentions,

This was discussed in Letter No. 246:

Of the others only Gandalf might be expected to master him – being an emissary of the Powers and a creature of the same order, an immortal spirit taking a visible physical form. In the 'Mirror of Galadriel', 1381, it appears that Galadriel conceived of herself as capable of wielding the Ring and supplanting the Dark Lord. If so, so also were the other guardians of the Three, especially Elrond. But this is another matter. It was part of the essential deceit of the Ring to fill minds with imaginations of supreme power. But this the Great had well considered and had rejected, as is seen in Elrond's words at the Council. Galadriel's rejection of the temptation was founded upon previous thought and resolve. In any case Elrond or Galadriel would have proceeded in the policy now adopted by Sauron: they would have built up an empire with great and absolutely subservient generals and armies and engines of war, until they could challenge Sauron and destroy him by force. Confrontation of Sauron alone, unaided, self to self was not contemplated. One can imagine the scene in which Gandalf, say, was placed in such a position. It would be a delicate balance. On one side the true allegiance of the Ring to Sauron; on the other superior strength because Sauron was not actually in possession, and perhaps also because he was weakened by long corruption and expenditure of will in dominating inferiors. If Gandalf proved the victor, the result would have been for Sauron the same as the destruction of the Ring; for him it would have been destroyed, taken from him for ever. But the Ring and all its works would have endured. It would have been the master in the end.

Gandalf as Ring-Lord would have been far worse than Sauron. He would have remained 'righteous', but self-righteous. He would have continued to rule and order things for 'good', and the benefit of his subjects according to his wisdom (which was and would have remained great).

[The draft ends here. In the margin Tolkien wrote: 'Thus while Sauron multiplied [illegible word] evil, he left "good" clearly distinguishable from it. Gandalf would have made good detestable and seem evil.']

[obloquy]

Thanks, Lego. That's the bit I was referring to and it's just how I remembered it. Tolkien's belief is that the Ring would continue to corrupt even after Sauron is overthrown.

But doesn't this open up a can of worms in regard to the created nature of Sauron's spirit? If the power he invested in the Ring was evil independent of his will or his existence, wouldn't the implication be that Sauron was, by nature, evil? Or was the impotent spirit that Sauron would become (since we know no spirit could be wholly destroyed except by Eru) enough to keep the Ring's malice persistent?

Thoughts?

It occurs to me now that Tolkien was not saying Gandalf would be corrupted to evil, but that Gandalf would be capable of too much good. He would direct his subjects according to his superior wisdom--for their own good, of course--and in this way he would deprive them of their free will.

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by obloquy

Or was the impotent spirit that Sauron would become (since we know no spirit could be wholly destroyed except by Eru) enough to keep the Ring's malice persistent?

That's my reading of what Tolkien is saying. Which, in a way, makes the creation of the Ring a "win-win" scenario for Sauron, doesn't it? At least until the final battle.

Originally Posted by obloquy

It occurs to me now that Tolkien was not saying Gandalf would be corrupted to evil, but that Gandalf would be capable of too much good. He would direct his subjects according to his superior wisdom--for their own good, of course--and in this way he would deprive them of their free will.

But isn't that evil by another name? If it is undesirable to those (good people) affected by it, imposed on them by force and, most importantly, contrary to the will of Eru (denial of free will), then surely it falls within Tolkien's conception of evil.

[obloquy]

But isn't that evil by another name?

I think this is exactly what Tolkien means when he says that Gandalf would blur the lines of good and evil and thus be worse than Sauron.

So, Tolkien was looking farther into the future than I was. The Ring can be mastered and used for good, but ultimately, the bearer's self-righteous imposition of his wisdom on others would be tantamount to enslavement.