Split Personality?

[Sauron the White]

This has been brought up before, and I must say the answer has always struck me as --- to be frank --- just full of it. Self serving and mealy mouthed drivel trying to justify an obvious defect. So, again, the one huge flaw that is at the heart of the book LOTR (and thus the film also).

We are told that the One Ring must be destroyed because if Sauron obtains it, the world will be at his mercy and quite possible he will enslave it. The world, as we know it, will come to terrible things with a Dark Lord ruling over nearly everyone.

The problem here is that good old Sauron once had the ring firmly upon his finger. Yes boys and girls - Sauron had that ring right there on his finger and had all the power of it as his disposal. He had ensnared the others to whom he gave other rings and had firmly established himself unchallenged in his own kingdom will protected by legions of slavish devotees. And what good did it do him? Not very much. The Last Alliance of Elves and Men marched right up to his door, rang the bell, and kicked his butt when he came out to play. They even cut that tremendously powerful ring right off of his finger and he vanished like a puff of smoke on a windy day.

So Sauron had the Ring. And it did him no good. No dominion over the Free Peoples of Middle-earth. No lording over everyone. No all powerful kneel down and bow before me. It simply did not work when he had it firmly upon his finger.

But the entire book is predicated upon the belief that the Ring must be destroyed or all of these terrible things will come to pass.

Now, as usual, some will start to post about the legions of powerful Elves who once roamed Middle-earth in massive numbers and were the main obstacle to Sauron at the time he had the ring in the Second Age. So what? That does not cut it for me. If Sauron and that darn ring were so incredibly powerful, he should have been able to deal with them and come out on top. And okay, the Elves are waning in the Third Age, but Men are on the rise. Perhaps not legions of Numenorians, but armed and trained men.

The usual justification for this reminds me of what comedians say about a bad or too complicated joke, if you have to go into a detailed explaination, it probably does not work in the first place. Which is just how the weak explaination hits me.

So this idea of Secondary Belief, and all the layers JRRT constructed to make it work, just has a serious flaw right up front in the very bedrock of the story.

But using my Willing Suspension of Disbelief, I can go with it and accept the premise because I love the book - and the movie. And to be quite frank, this entire idea that JRRT's invented Secondary Belief and it simply dwarfs suspension of disbelief sounds to be like more rationalization and self serving mumbo-jumbo.

Acceptance of fantasy comes down to willing suspension of disbelief. You can put some lipstick on it and dress it up in a fancy party dress and call it Secondary Belief if it makes you feel better, but in the end, its pretty much the same thing.

The book is flawed in its very premise. The film has the same flawed premise. And I love them both.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

So Sauron had the Ring. And it did him no good. No dominion over the Free Peoples of Middle-earth. No lording over everyone. No all powerful kneel down and bow before me. It simply did not work when he had it firmly upon his finger.

That's not true. Sauron ruled all of the Great Lands save Lindon and Rivendell for nearly two millenia- his lordship was only broken by Ar-Pharazon.

[Sauron the White]

So its not true that the Last Alliance marched right into his own backyard, called him out and cut the ring from his hand? Lot of good it did him then. Why is that fact being ignored?

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

The usual justification for this reminds me of what comedians say about a bad or too complicated joke, if you have to go into a detailed explaination, it probably does not work in the first place. Which is just how the weak explaination hits me.

He just needed a few thousand years to contemplate how to best use it, as it's been said about new Ring Lords. Did Sauron simply overreach?

[Morwen]

We are told that the One Ring must be destroyed because if Sauron obtains it, the world will be at his mercy and quite possible he will enslave it. The world, as we know it, will come to terrible things with a Dark Lord ruling over nearly everyone.

The problem here is that good old Sauron once had the ring firmly upon his finger. Yes boys and girls - Sauron had that ring right there on his finger and had all the power of it as his disposal. He had ensnared the others to whom he gave other rings and had firmly established himself unchallenged in his own kingdom will protected by legions of slavish devotees. And what good did it do him? Not very much. The Last Alliance of Elves and Men marched right up to his door, rang the bell, and kicked his butt when he came out to play. They even cut that tremendously powerful ring right off of his finger and he vanished like a puff of smoke on a windy day.

So Sauron had the Ring. And it did him no good. No dominion over the Free Peoples of Middle-earth. No lording over everyone. No all powerful kneel down and bow before me. It simply did not work when he had it firmly upon his finger.

But the entire book is predicated upon the belief that the Ring must be destroyed or all of these terrible things will come to pass.

Yes, the Ring is cut from Sauron's hand. Does Tolkien at any point claim that the One Ring makes the wearer invulnerable? In all that we are told about the properties of the Ring, are we ever told anything to suggest that the Ring gives one invincibility? If it is that the Ring and the Ring alone supposedly made Sauron invincible then to have it cut from his hand would be illogical within the context of the story. Tolkien would have established a rule (Ring = invincibility) that he then proceeds to disregard. But if Tolkien never established such a rule, then where is the flaw?

[alatar]

And just what was PJ's Sauron going to do with the Ring anyway, lacking even a lid within which to place it (piercing an eyelid - ouch!)?

[Sauron the White]

The flaw is a simple one. If Sauron gets the ring then he can rule the world and end all proper civilization. However, he once had the ring, attempted to do just that and was unsuccessful. The ring did not give to Sauron in the Second Age what the Free Peoples fear he will get by obtaining the ring in the Third Age. He had the ring. It failed to deliver. In fact, he had the ring right there in the Barad-dur in his own kingdom of Mordor and the Last Alliance came there, defeated his armies, then laid siege to his fortress for seven full years. What good did the ring do for him in that time? Nothing. Zip. Zilch. Nada.

But the whole premise of LOTR is that if Sauron gets the ring its all over but the dying... and that will soon follow.

But that was not true. Sauron had the ring, did some bad things with it on his finger .... but, in the end, had his sorry behind kicked and he vanished with the winds after it was cut off.

So much for the power of the ring on Saurons hand.

I see this as a huge flaw. I could have accepted the idea that there is this powerful being who is just inches away from total domination of all creatures if he can just get his hands on this powerful weapon. Of course, he has never had his hands on this powerful weapon but now must obtain it. But that is not the case. Sauron is NOT going after some powerful weapon that will tip the scales completely in his favor. He is simply trying to recover what was once his. In fact, the power in the ring was power that came from him in the first place.

[alatar]

• It was an arm's race - predator and prey sort of thing. If Sauron regained the One Ring, the prey may not have the time to adapt.

• It was just PR/spin. The Wise, seeing Sauron rising again and contesting their hold on the world, decided that whipping up the troops with, "If he regains the Ring, then we'll have to go back there again and cut off another finger, and wasn't it so boring the first time?" wouldn't be as successful at raising an army as it was the first time.

• Sauron learned from the mistakes that he brashly made the first time, and so this time he had a better chance of getting it right - less elves, less Men of the West (and he hunted them), poorer weaponry, better soldiers (Olog-hai), the fall of Minas Anor and Osgiliath, the recession of Gondor's control of the south, etc. What he didn't add in were the hobbits.

[Morwen]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

The flaw is a simple one. If Sauron gets the ring then he can rule the world and end all proper civilization. However, he once had the ring, attempted to do just that and was unsuccessful. The ring did not give to Sauron in the Second Age what the Free Peoples fear he will get by obtaining the ring in the Third Age. He had the ring. It failed to deliver. In fact, he had the ring right there in the Barad-dur in his own kingdom of Mordor and the Last Alliance came there, defeated his armies, then laid siege to his fortress for seven full years. What good did the ring do for him in that time? Nothing. Zip. Zilch. Nada.

But the whole premise of LOTR is that if Sauron gets the ring its all over but the dying... and that will soon follow.

But that was not true. Sauron had the ring, did some bad things with it on his finger .... but, in the end, had his sorry behind kicked and he vanished with the winds after it was cut off.

So much for the power of the ring on Saurons hand.

I see this as a huge flaw. I could have accepted the idea that there is this powerful being who is just inches away from total domination of all creatures if he can just get his hands on this powerful weapon. Of course, he has never had his hands on this powerful weapon but now must obtain it. But that is not the case. Sauron is NOT going after some powerful weapon that will tip the scales completely in his favor. He is simply trying to recover what was once his. In fact, the power in the ring was power that came from him in the first place.

When Sauron puts the One Ring on his finger and the Elves realise that they have been betrayed they take off their rings , as far as I recall, the Three are not used until after the defeat of Sauron at the end of the Second Age. The concern that presents itself at the end of the Third Age is that if Sauron gets back his Ring all the work done by the Three would be laid bare. It compounds the problem that the Free Peoples have, that they cannot mount the kind of force sent against Sauron at the end of the Second Age. They are far more vulnerable at the end of the Third Age than they were in the second and it makes sense that they should be more worried about Sauron getting back his Ring. While the Ring may not render him invulnerable, the chances of repeating the feat of Isildur are slim. They may have defeated Sauron once while he bore the Ring. But that victory came at great cost and they, realistically, were skeptical of being able to do so again.

As for why Sauron wants the Ring back, this is an object as you note into which he had put the greater part of his power. Even though he may not have foreseen that his enemies would attempt to destroy it, he would not have been anxious to have one of them show up wielding it. Is it not prudent for him to guard against this?

[alatar]

Sauron got a copy of The Top 100 Things I'd Do If I Ever Became An Evil Overlord and began to act accordingly.

[Sauron the White]

Morwen... lets accept your explaination for the moment. So in order for this to make sense, the reader has to know and understand not only all of this history of the Ring, Sauron, the relative balance of power in the Second Age as compared to the Third Age, the changing ethno-demographics of Middle-earth over time, and vital information contained in Tolkiens essay which appeared at the end of THE SILMARILLION. Only then does my flaw not become a flaw. This is tons more info than was ever delivered in LOTR or at the Council of Elrond. Tons more.

It like comedians say about a joke that is way too complicated. If you got to explain it - forget it.

The entire premise of the book hangs on this plot device. If Sauron gets the ring then we all kiss our collective behinds goodbye. Except for a few things like
---- Sauron already had the ring
---- it did not protect him previously when he did have it
---- the power in the ring came from Sauron in the first place
--- even with the ring upon his hand, a man was able to cut it off and defeat him

Its an internal contradiction that is at the very heart of the plot.

[Morwen]

The entire premise of the book hangs on this plot device. If Sauron gets the ring then we all kiss out collective behinds goodbye. Except for a few things like
---- Sauron already had the ring
---- it did not protect him previously when he did have it
---- the power in the ring came from Sauron in the first place
--- even with the ring upon his hand, a man was able to cut it off and defeat him

Its an internal contradiction that is at the very heart of the plot.

where in the LotR is it stated that the Ring was supposed to protect him or that it operates as a protective device? Where is this suggested?

Where is it stated or suggested that Sauron while wearing the Ring is invulnerable to attack making it impossible for Isildur to in fact cut it from hand?

And if neither of these things is stated or suggested then how is it a flaw if the Ring doesn't do something that it's never said that it could do?

[Raynor]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

Its an internal contradiction that is at the very heart of the plot.

I also don't see such a contradiction. One element that seems to be missing from the conversation is the elves: for one thing, Sauron with the ring would control all that they have created with their rings. For another, the elves are diminishing and leaving Middle Earth. By design, they are far more endowed than Men are or were, in spirit, mind or body. While the elves were capable of keeping even Morgoth's armies at bay, the Men, who make up the dominant opposition to Sauron, cannot face him at this hour, even if Sauron is far less powerful than in the Second Age. While it could be argued that both the strength of the good and evil forces has diminished, the good side suffered most, due to the lessening numbers of the elves. I believe this is the deciding element in the projected success of Sauron if he regained the ring: he would regain much of his former power, control what the elves have achieved - while the strongest element of his opposition is all but gone.