Did Gollum deserve death?

[Boromir88]

I'm with you, but (and this may be off-thread and opening a can of worms) at what point is someone culpable for their actions?~alatar

Well said...those who commit acts of 'evil' I think have to always be held accountable to a point. The 'evil-doers' see themselves as being in the right and what they're doing is not wrong at all...however does that make them not evil? I don't think so; everyone has to be held accountable for the decisions they make. The Ring may have been too strong of an influence for Smeagol to face, but what he did was inexcusable.

I would like to bring up what is exactly 'evil' in the Lord of the Rings; as I think it could clear some things up. Tolkien does paint us a good picture of evil at various times...and though I don't think 'good and evil' is so 'black and white' (as has been discussed in this thread); but still we can get an idea what is 'evil' in Tolkien's story:

It may become possessive, clinging to the things made as ’its own’, the sub-creator wishes to be the Lord and God of his private creation. He will rebel againast the laws of the Creator.~Letter 131

Letter 131 also talks about one who 'bulldozes and seeks to dominate' over someone's will. This is also an evil act. Taking these into account I think Morgoth and Sauron fit quite nicely with the concept of evil in the story. And as Tolkien remarks both were in 'absolute satanic rebellion' against Eru:

But in this ’mythology’ all the ’angellic’ powers concerned themselves with world were capable of many degrees of error and failing between the Absolute Satanic Rebellion of Morgoth and his satellite Sauron, and the faineance of some of the other higher powers or ’gods.’~Letter 156

So, Tolkien sets up these varying 'degrees of error and failing' that anyone is capable of committing. Morgoth and Sauron are the 'most evil' as they do seek to dominate over other's wills/bulldoze, and there were in direct rebellion against Eru.

Which leads me to say that I think Child and Squatter have hit the nail on the head, Eru is the important factor in this matter over Gollum. Gollum did horrible deeds and broke laws that society had in place. But, did Gollum willingly rebel against Eru? Did Gollum willingly want to dominate over other people? Those are the questions.

The defense of 'I believe what I'm doing is the right thing' just doesn't fly, for me. Everyone believes they are doing the 'right' thing (whether good or evil). Eventhough if good and evil isn't always easily defined...I would call rebelling against Eru and seeking to dominate others' wills the two greatest evils (in Tolkien's story that is).

As an interesting side note, just to let everyone know ignorance to the law is no excuse for breaking the law. I found that out the hard way. In the States, laws vary from state to state (in my case it was driving). You see I had no clue in Pennsylvania you were only allowed to stay in the passing lane for a maximum of 2 miles (don't ask me how they keep track of this stuff)...the officer didn't care. I was hit with a little fine and was told it's the drivers responsbility to know the laws of the states they're driving through. I forget who brought it up...but not knowing what the 'laws of the land' isn't an excuse for breaking the law.

[Raynor]

Originally Posted by Boro

But, did Gollum willingly rebel against Eru? Did Gollum willingly want to dominate over other people? Those are the questions.

Are you arguing that only rebellion against Eru per se (and no indirect instances of it, such as stealing, killing, etc), or willing to dominate others are immoral? Seeing that you call this the greatest (not the only) evil acts, I am inclined to think no.