The Unfair Fate of Saruman

[Ivriniel]

Galadriel was tempted. Gandalf was tempted. Elrond, no doubt also. Certainly, Saruman was tempted, though he had no direct contact with the Ring. I'm not sure direct proximity was necessary for that kind of temptation, sometimes.

Isildur and Boromir were both tempted and succumbed to the Ring's call. It wouldn't have been long for Isildur, I've always imagined, until bad things started happening. He was warned at Orodruin about the Ring.

I'm not sure that ranking needs, wants, temptation and capacity for resisting the Ring is achievable, or easily achievable. There were qualitative imperatives rather than quantitative ones bearing upon the Ring's influence. Galadriel, a realm and love of Light of Aman in a realm she could oversee. Gandalf, a Maia who had no real territorial imperatives bearing upon his feelings for the Ring (the citation upstream notes 'pity' was the way to his temptation) for labours dark ahead. Galadriel's was overlordship and preservation or her realm.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Ivriniel

Galadriel was tempted. Gandalf was tempted. Elrond, no doubt also. Certainly, Saruman was tempted, though he had no direct contact with the Ring. I'm not sure direct proximity was necessary for that kind of temptation, sometimes.

It is self-evident that Saruman was tempted to seize the Ring, since he in fact tried to do so. The question is whether he can meaningfully be said to have "resisted" the Ring earlier in his career, before the opportunity to claim it had presented itself. Actually, it seems to me there's a sort of sleight-of-hand involved: the author admits Saruman never got near the Ring, then (I suppose) uses this to argue that, since just *thinking* about the darn thing could corrupt him, he deserves Brownie points for ever having thought about it without *immediately* turning evil. Something like that, anyway.