|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TheNazgul
Rivendell
Jul 12 2010, 5:11am
Post #1 of 98
(2787 views)
Shortcut
|
|
why was Faramir not tempted by the Ring?
|
Can't Post
|
|
Both his father and brother were temted by the ring (sad part is Denethor never saw it) but yet he such as Aragorn was not in the least bit tempted by the ring we know of aragorns adamant will so that explains him but what of faramir thoughts?
Et Earello Endorenna utulien. Sinome maruvan ar Hildinyar tenn` Ambar-metta!
(For those who dont read Elvish)
Out of the great sea to Middle-Earth I am come. In this place I will abide,and my heirs, unto the ending of the world
|
|
|
elostirion74
Rohan
Jul 12 2010, 6:52am
Post #2 of 98
(2132 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Faramir was more aware of the dangers of absolute power
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
The Ring works mainly through the weaknesses of the characters and their desire to do what seems good or their desire to have the power to carry out things they otherwise wouldn't be able to do. Usually the characters justify their desire for the Ring as something to be used for a just and neccessary cause, for instance Boromir, who's thinking of it as a way to protect Minas Tirith and a useful weapon to defeat a great enemy.
I think Faramir rejected the Ring partly because he didn't lust for power and glory and partly because he was aware of the dangers of having such a power as the Ring could give. In the book he says something to the effect that he understands that "there are some dangers from which a man must flee". I think Gandalf is aware of the same problem when he says that he will not take the Ring, knowing how tempting it could be to wield it.
|
|
|
FarFromHome
Valinor
Jul 12 2010, 9:07am
Post #3 of 98
(2133 views)
Shortcut
|
he wasn't?
Tolkien writes a very subtle and ambiguous scene that, if you read it carefully, leaves you wondering.
Here's Faramir's first reaction to hearing that Frodo has the Ring:
So it seems,’ said Faramir, slowly and very softly, with a strange smile. ‘So that is the answer to all the riddles! The One Ring that was thought to have perished from the world. And Boromir tried to take it by force? And you escaped? And ran all the way – to me! And here in the wild I have you: two halflings, and a host of men at my call, and the Ring of Rings. A pretty stroke of fortune! A chance for Faramir, Captain of Gondor, to show his quality! Ha!’ He stood up, very tall and stern, his grey eyes glinting."
I'd say he's tempted all right. He's tempted as Galadriel is, or (as elostirion says) as Gandalf is in Bag End. He gets a sudden desire of his own, to "show his quality", to make up for his brother's failure - that would be the way the Ring would tempt him, I'd say.
And at first the hobbits sense the danger too:
"Frodo and Sam sprang from their stools and set themselves side by side with their backs to the wall, fumbling for their sword-hilts.
And Faramir's strange behaviour also attracts the attention of his men:
There was a silence. All the men in the cave stopped talking and looked towards them in wonder.
So I'd say that, unlike Aragorn who is never faced with the temptation of the Ring at all, Faramir feels the temptation strongly. Unlike his brother and father, though, he is not tempted by personal ambition, which is the weakness most easily exploited by the promise of power that the Ring seems to offer. He's tempted by the desire to "show his quality" - but he soon understands that his "quality" lies not in finishing his brother's job, or in pleasing his father, but in staying true to his own principles:
"We are truth-speakers, we men of Gondor. We boast seldom, and then perform, or die in the attempt. Not if I found it on the highway would I take it I said. Even if I were such a man as to desire this thing, and even though I knew not clearly what this thing was when I spoke, still I should take those words as a vow, and be held by them."
His sense of honour is what what saves him, I think.
His temptation may be fleeting, but it's real enough, I'd say. As real as Galadriel's and Gandalf's - and Sam's.
They went in, and Sam shut the door.
But even as he did so, he heard suddenly,
deep and unstilled,
the sigh and murmur of the Sea upon the shores of Middle-earth.
From the unpublished Epilogue to the Lord of the Rings
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 12 2010, 12:14pm
Post #4 of 98
(2081 views)
Shortcut
|
And I disagree for the same reason you claim that Aragorn was never tempted by the Ring. We can imagine both Aragorn and Faramir being tempted -- they both have the power and opportunity to take it, and we don't really get inside their heads at the crucial moment. Both of them tell the hobbits that if they wanted the Ring they could take it. But they both reject that option with no signs of true temptation.
Actually, I'm not at all convinced that Galadriel is truly tempted to take the Ring, either. Nor Gandalf. I think they are both showing Frodo why they cannot take the Ring, but I never get the sense that they are truly tempted to do so.
Again, since we only see what the hobbits see, and hear what they hear, and don't get inside the heads of Gandalf, Aragorn, Galadriel, or Faramir at the crucial moments, it is possible to imagine all four of these people being internally tempted. But I don't buy it. To me, they never seem seriously tempted. Which is a good thing, because it would have been ridiculously easy for any of them to take the Ring.
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 12 2010, 12:30pm
Post #5 of 98
(2047 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Why wasn't anyone other than Boromir and Gollum tempted by the Ring?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I would broaden your question considerably. Of the people who came in close proximity to Frodo and knew of the Ring, only Boromir and Gollum seem to me to be truly tempted to take it.
Saruman and Denethor don't come in direct contact with the Ring, so I would say they are tempted by something else, by the lure of power in general or by the influence of Sauron in the palantirs or both. But the Ring doesn't really enter into it, except as a symbol of power. Judging by their behavior, I'm quite sure they would be tempted by the Ring if it came into their power -- but it didn't.
And look at all the people who were not, I judge, seriously tempted to claim the Ring. Bilbo (yes, he had a hard time releasing it, but he did release it), Frodo (except at the last possible moment under the greatest possible strain -- and in a letter Tolkien says it wasn't temptation, it was more like possession), Gandalf, Sam, Merry, Pippin, Bombadil, Aragorn, Glorfindel, Elrond, Legolas, Gimli, Galadriel (I don't think she was seriously tempted), Celeborn, all the other elves in Lothlorien, and, yes, Faramir.
For all the talk about the temptations of the Ring, it doesn't really do a very good job of tempting anyone but Gollum and Boromir. Now maybe that's just because Frodo was lucky enough to associate with paragons of virtue, but I think it more likely that the tempting power of the Ring is overblown. Boromir, like Saruman and Denethor, was tempted by Power as much as by the Ring. Gollum was a creepy guy before he found the Ring. For such people, who are already half way down the slippery slope to evil, the Ring proves irresistible. But such people are not as common as Sauron might believe.
Indeed, this may have been Sauron's biggest mistake. He, too, was tempted by Power, and he judged others by his own standards. So he assumed that everyone who came in contact with the Ring would want to claim it. But that wasn't true at all.
Now being tempted to claim the Ring is different from finding the strength to destroy it. Isildur couldn't find that strength, but in Unfinished Tales Tolkien says that Isildur recognized that he had made a mistake. Frodo couldn't find that strength, but Tolkien implies that no one really could. Sauron rightly trusted that it would be difficult, and perhaps impossible, to willingly destroy the Ring, and only an extraordinary sequence of events made it possible.
But the temptation to claim the Ring seems to me totally overblown.
Also, those who bear the Ring may be tempted to use it. That's why the hobbits were chosen to bear it, because they showed the greatest resistance to that temptation. But that's different from the temptation to steal it and claim it.
And frankly, this argument that the hobbits had to bear the Ring because others would be too sorely tempted to use it always struck me as a bit weak. It's convenient for the plot, but I'm not convinced that Gandalf or Aragorn or Faramir, if they were chosen to go to Mount Doom, would really find the Ring irresistible any more than Frodo did. I think rather, that the Council of Elrond trusts the Higher Powers to choose the Ringbearer, and that the hobbits are the best instruments of Divine Will.
(This post was edited by Curious on Jul 12 2010, 12:37pm)
|
|
|
CuriousG
Half-elven
Jul 12 2010, 12:37pm
Post #6 of 98
(2078 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Disagreeing with disagreement :)
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
There's compelling evidence that Galadriel was tempted by the Ring. She tells Frodo that in her hidden thoughts (which he can perceive and many who are accounted Wise cannot) that she has long pondered what she would do if she had it. So she's been tempted by it for centuries in a speculative way, and also tempted in the way Gandalf and Sam are--to do good with it.
Then it's there in front of her, and as you say, she could easily take it from Frodo. She said so herself. Part of the temptation is exactly what you say: it would be ridiculously easy to seize the Ring. And really, isn't that what temptation is all about--to do what's easy in a situation, not what's impossible or difficult? Get caught doing something wrong in real life, and you're tempted to lie your way out rather than admit guilt, because lying is easier and offers the potential to escape bad consequences, even if it's wrong. Or get really angry with someone who's weaker than you, and you're tempted to hit them or say something hurtful. You aren't so easily "tempted" to act out your anger against someone who's going to beat you to a pulp if you punch them first.
Galadriel then plays out what would happen if she took the Ring and what she would become. Was this for the hobbits' sake? No, because quite significantly, she then says "I have passed the test." If she wasn't tempted, what test is there to pass?
I think the whole point about the Ring's temptation is that it DOES tempt people who COULD seize it. They have an inner struggle, which we witness from the outside. We don't need to be in their heads. We were never inside Boromir's head when he was tempted and had to judge him by his words and actions as outside observers. Unlike Boromir, the others reject it after their inner struggle but only with great effort, and usually because of the virtue in their character. We also see this virtue in them from the outside, not from being in their heads, i.e., we never hear first-person accounts of Gandalf or Galadriel waking up in the morning and thinking over coffee, "Hmm, what good things can I do today?"
As for for Faramir, I thought his temptation scene bore a strong resemblance to Galadriel's, and not by coincidence. He was of lesser stature so he didn't appear as the highly powerful dark queen that she saw herself becoming, but he was tempted, and as noted, he scared the hobbits and disturbed his own men, who normally adored him. I think that was a deliberate ploy by JRR to show the difference between him and Boromir: the latter was indisputably long on courage in battle and physical strength, but short on personal, internal strength, which Faramir possessed.
Another reason to think that Faramir was genuinely tempted is that Men are depicted as easily corruptible in LoTR, including the Dunedain. The Nine corrupted every single one of their nine Men wearers. Not one dwarf or elf was corrupted by their rings.
|
|
|
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor
Jul 12 2010, 1:30pm
Post #7 of 98
(2044 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Aragorn, Faramir, Gandalf, Galadriel and Sam are all tempted by the Ring
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
They just resist the temptation much more effectively than Gollum and Boromir (and Denethor, from a distance) do.
'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'
www.arda-reconstructed.com
|
|
|
Kangi Ska
Half-elven
Jul 12 2010, 1:49pm
Post #8 of 98
(2068 views)
Shortcut
|
|
One's reaction to the Temptation of the Ring
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Is a measure of ones will. It is like quitting smoking. Some people are good at resisting the desire and others are not.
Kangi Ska
Make the Hobbit Happen!
|
|
|
FarFromHome
Valinor
Jul 12 2010, 2:02pm
Post #9 of 98
(2024 views)
Shortcut
|
"why didn't anyone other than Boromir and Gollum give in to the temptation of the Ring?"
The answer is, I guess, that the others had the strength of will to resist. But that doen't mean they weren't tempted. Some characters aren't tempted at all - possessing the Ring never seems to cross their minds. Aragorn, Elrond, Merry, Pippin, Legolas and Gimli fall into this category. But Gandalf, Galadriel, Frodo, Sam, Gollum, Boromir and Faramir do feel the temptation of the Ring - as, in my view, do Saruman and Denethor just by thinking about it (their thoughts enhanced, no doubt, by what they see in their palantirs). Of the ones who are tempted, four succumb - Gollum, Boromir, Saruman and Denethor, and four resist - Gandalf, Galadriel, Sam and Faramir. That leaves Frodo, who resists to the bitter end, and succumbs at the final, excruciating moment. Resistance takes not just strength of will, but also an understanding of one's own limitations - a natural humility that is signally lacking in the characters who fail.
They went in, and Sam shut the door.
But even as he did so, he heard suddenly,
deep and unstilled,
the sigh and murmur of the Sea upon the shores of Middle-earth.
From the unpublished Epilogue to the Lord of the Rings
|
|
|
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor
Jul 12 2010, 2:09pm
Post #10 of 98
(2039 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I don't understand why you think that Aragorn was not tempted by the Ring
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
His temptation was at least as clearly described as Faramir's, or Gandalf's, or Galadriel's.
'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'
www.arda-reconstructed.com
|
|
|
PhantomS
Rohan
Jul 12 2010, 2:25pm
Post #11 of 98
(2023 views)
Shortcut
|
Gandalf warns Denethor that Boromir wouldn't come back as the filial son he was when he left, and indirectly casts aside Denethor's plan to bury it deep under the earth in some vault; Boromir was motivated by pride, but Denethor was motivated by fear- he'd sooner try to hide the ring than try to use it. To his credit though, he (unlike Boromir) does not presume to elevate the Stewardship to higher than it is ("how many years before a steward becomes a king?") and defends his station to the end- though he never saw the Ring itself.
Faramir is tempted quite sorely by the Ring- but he has developed a clarity that his father and brother lack, to see the big picture for what it is and that the Ring must be delivered, not used. He speaks to Frodo of history, his people, his learning of things other people have nearly forgotten, his affinity for Gandalf and the nature of the Rangers of Ithillien- as a captain serving the lord, as a cog in the wheel. Boromir is singleminded and very driven, putting Gondor as a super bulwark and the last refuge of man with his father on top. Thus he has no clarity , no view of the situation at large. Even with the Fellowship his intent was to go home, as if the Council of Elrond was some diversion of his real purpose. Thus the ring fed on Boromir's desire to be the One True Hero , since its master is also the One True Master of the ring. Faramir is almost always in the company of his men and faces the exact same dangers.
It's interesting that Faramir sees his brother's body looking at total peace; finally free of temptation and also the burden of being Denethor's son. Faramir himself, even when pained and disturbed has that air of Numenor Pippin sees, one that Boromir seemingly didn't inspire.
So Faramir was tempted by the Ring, but can gather his wits to say no and leave it to Frodo, the only one to be able to carry the ring. Aragorn and Gandalf refuse outright to do anything with it, but that is due to incredibly important personal destinies that don't require the Ring to fulfill.
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 12 2010, 3:13pm
Post #12 of 98
(2021 views)
Shortcut
|
that I question whether they were really tempted at all. It seems to me that the Ring was only effective on people who were already corrupt, and those people were not so much tempted as acting true to their corrupt nature. If Saruman or Denethor had been given the opportunity to claim the Ring and had done so, would that have been proof of the Ring's powers of temptation, or of Saruman and Denethor's corruption?
The Ring never tempts anyone to act in opposition to their own nature or secret desires. At most it possesses Frodo so that in extreme circumstances he has no will at all, and acts according to the Ring's will. But that's not how I define temptation.
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 12 2010, 3:28pm
Post #13 of 98
(2030 views)
Shortcut
|
that there is evidence Galadriel struggled with her own internal temptations long before she came in contact with the Ring, and overcame them long before that moment. Therefore she is not tempted by the Ring; rather, she was formerly tempted by her own pride and desire to maintain her refuge in Middle-earth. But before she ever came into contact with the Ring, she had decided that she was not able to preserve Lothlorien by claiming the Ring, and she demonstrates that fact to Frodo. There is a test, but it isn't a tribute to the power of the Ring; the test was created by her own pride.
Faramir's scene does bear a resemblance to Galadriel's. But like Galadriel, Faramir had dealt with his temptations long before he had an opportunity to take the Ring. And therefore the test came long before that moment.
The Ring acts upon people according to their natures. If people are corrupt, they find the Ring tempting, but no more tempting than any other means to power. If people are not corrupt, the Ring does not change their natures, unless they actually bear the Ring, and even then it takes extreme circumstances to beat down their own will in the matter so that the Ring can take control.
The Nine were tempted according to their natures. They were corrupt long before they were given rings. The dwarves were tempted according to their natures, which were different from the Nine -- the Seven dwarves became greedier than ever, digging too deep in Moria and creating giant hoards that attracted dragons elsewhere. They were not tempted to become immortal because that was not what they desired.
The elves were also tempted according to their natures, even though the Three were less evil than the Seven and the Nine. Elrond and Galadriel were tempted to use their rings to create little paradises, even though they did not truly know the fate of the One. When the One Ring was found, all that they had created in Rivendell and Lothlorien was endangered, and in the end the best they could do was lose everything they had built with their rings.
Only Cirdan and Gandalf made the right use of one of the Great Rings -- Cirdan by giving it to Gandalf, and Gandalf by using it to kindle resistance to Sauron, rather than creating a refuge from Sauron and his ilk. But again, that was more a credit to Cirdan and Gandalf than a comment on the nature of the ring that they held, which was no more or less tempting than the other two Elven Rings.
(This post was edited by Curious on Jul 12 2010, 3:33pm)
|
|
|
FarFromHome
Valinor
Jul 12 2010, 3:36pm
Post #14 of 98
(2020 views)
Shortcut
|
|
You mean at the Prancing Pony?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I've always seen that as Aragorn pretending that he wants the Ring, just to show the hobbits what they might be up against if they trust the wrong person. The difference between this scene and the Faramir one is subtle, but perhaps the details are telling. Here's Aragorn's "Ring-moment":
He stood up, and seemed suddenly to grow taller. In his eyes gleamed a light, keen and commanding. Throwing back his cloak, he laid his hand on the hilt of a sword that had hung concealed by his side. They did not dare to move.
And here's Faramir's:
"'So it seems,' said Faramir, slowly and very softly, with a strange smile."
Aragorn's "keen and commanding" look is in contrast to Faramir's slow soft speech and "strange smile", I find. It's true that Faramir's reaction looks very like Aragorn's: "He stood up, very tall and stern, his grey eyes glinting." Yet I sense a difference. Aragorn seems to be in command of himself throughout ("looking down at them with his face softened by a sudden smile" once the demonstration is over) while Faramir has to regain control: "Faramir sat down again in his chair and began to laugh quietly, and then suddenly became grave again."
But it's an interesting point - the very ambiguity caused by the fact that we never see these characters from the "inside", but only through the hobbits' eyes, leaves a complex question about the reality of temptation. Aragorn had every reason to feel tempted by the Ring - how much easier it would have seemed for him to win the throne and the hand of Arwen - and yet I sense that he was only acting out the temptation for the benefit of the hobbits. I feel that he's already come to terms with his own duty in regards to the Ring before he finds the hobbits. Faramir will get to that level of understanding too, but not before we see his temptation in "real time".
I hadn't noticed how similarly the two scenes are framed until I looked them up to write this post - they are even both triggered by a challenge from Sam - and yet I still sense a difference in tone. Faramir ends up in the same place as Aragorn - understanding that his duty is to help the Ringbearer, not take the Ring - but I think Aragorn is only acting what Faramir is really feeling. I wonder if Aragorn's demonstration helped Frodo and Sam face up to the challenges of Boromir and Faramir later - Frodo was able to escape from Boromir, while I suspect that Sam's challenge to Faramir to show his "quality" may have been an important deciding factor that showed Faramir where his duty really lay. Without that first "safe" experience with Aragorn perhaps things would have gone differently.
But having just looked at the two scenes side by side, I have to agree that there are great similarities. Perhaps Aragorn was really tempted. Or perhaps Faramir was just having "some jest or other" with the hobbits, as his men concluded. But I doubt it. I see the two scenes as a study in contrasts, pointed up by the superficial similarities.
They went in, and Sam shut the door.
But even as he did so, he heard suddenly,
deep and unstilled,
the sigh and murmur of the Sea upon the shores of Middle-earth.
From the unpublished Epilogue to the Lord of the Rings
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 12 2010, 3:42pm
Post #15 of 98
(2013 views)
Shortcut
|
perhaps I am being unclear about what I mean. I'm not saying that no one feels temptation except for Boromir and Gollum. I'm saying that the temptation is not the work of the Ring.
Galadriel, for example, was tempted by pride long before she was offered the Ring, and overcame that temptation before she was offered the Ring. Frodo's offer simply demonstrates that she passed her own test -- not a test created by the Ring, but a test created by her own pride.
Gollum and Boromir started on the slippery slope to corruption before they encountered the Ring. That they succumbed is not a testimony to the power of the Ring, but to their own serious character flaws. Boromir at least fights it, but is he fighting the Ring, or his own desires?
I'm also drawing a distinction between the Ring's effect on people nearby but not wearing it -- which I see as no different from the effect of any valuable treasure, and not magical at all -- versus the Ring's effect on the ringbearers. The Ring does affect those who bear it, but even then I don't think it tempts them. Rather, it assaults their independent will, until, in extreme circumstances, it possesses them and causes them to do things that are not at all consistent with their natures.
|
|
|
Kangi Ska
Half-elven
Jul 12 2010, 3:52pm
Post #16 of 98
(2051 views)
Shortcut
|
|
The Ring Tempts: Individuals react: It is a test
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
and Galadriel's case, a final test. The One Ring is not a passive object. It is often subtle but it is actively trying to corrupt those who might possess it.
Kangi Ska
Make the Hobbit Happen!
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 12 2010, 4:03pm
Post #17 of 98
(1987 views)
Shortcut
|
|
It's remarkably ineffective, then.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
The only people who succumb to the "temptation" of the Ring are those who were already corrupt, and probably would succumb to a similar temptation from a chest of gold or a bowl of fruit. Others feel not the slightest twinge.
Heck, the palantirs are far more tempting than the Ring, capturing not just Saruman and Denethor but also Pippen. Gandalf admits he was sorely tempted to use the palantir, and gives it to Aragorn in part to resist such temptation. Aragorn is also tempted, although he proves strong enough to make it work for him. No one, it seems, is safe from the temptation of the palantir.
But the Ring? Plenty of people are quite safe, exhibiting no desire to steal it or use it whatsoever.
|
|
|
FarFromHome
Valinor
Jul 12 2010, 4:06pm
Post #18 of 98
(1989 views)
Shortcut
|
The Ring never tempts anyone to act in opposition to their own nature or secret desires.
As I understand it, temptation urges one to act in accordance with one's secret desires, not in opposition to them. If the Ring seems to be effective only on people who are already "corrupt", that's because they have been corrupted by the pull of those secret desires, often to the point of convincing themselves that their secret, selfish desires are also their right and/or their duty.
It's begging the question to ask why the Ring is only effective on people who are already "corrupt" - corruption being just the visible result of giving in to temptation. If others are not corrupted, it's because they find ways to resist the temptation to act out their secret desires - Sam is hard-headed and humble enough to know that power is not for him; Faramir is honorable and principled enough to remember his oath and live up to his "quality" as a truth-speaker. Galadriel also learns humility when she finally comes face to face with the Ring - she had thought about it long and hard beforehand, but it's only when she sees the Ring that she knows for sure that she can renounce her pride once and for all. It's not that they don't feel temptation, it's that they resist their own desires, and act instead "in opposition" to them - for the good of others.
They went in, and Sam shut the door.
But even as he did so, he heard suddenly,
deep and unstilled,
the sigh and murmur of the Sea upon the shores of Middle-earth.
From the unpublished Epilogue to the Lord of the Rings
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 12 2010, 4:33pm
Post #19 of 98
(2231 views)
Shortcut
|
If temptation is a power of the Ring, then shouldn't it be more than the usual temptation anyone would feel for an item that is powerful or valuable?
The tempting power of the palantir (as affected by Sauron) is a good example. Pippin does not just exhibit the usual temptation of a curious hobbit, he acts as if he has been magically affected by his glimpse into the palantir. From what we know, the same may have been true of Saruman and Denethor before they looked into the palantirs. If Aragorn had lacked strength and the rights of a king, he might have ended up like Saruman or Denethor. Now that's against nature.
With the Ring, I only see that kind of behavior from those who bear the Ring, not those who are nearby, and even then only long exposure to the Ring actually causes Bilbo or Frodo to act unnaturally, not so much because they are tempted as because the Ring has broken down their will.
(This post was edited by Curious on Jul 12 2010, 4:34pm)
|
|
|
elostirion74
Rohan
Jul 12 2010, 4:40pm
Post #20 of 98
(1990 views)
Shortcut
|
I agree that it's ambiguous whether Faramir is tempted or not. If he is tempted, it's quite fleeting, but it's definitely a possibility. I've often interpreted Faramir's words as words of somewhat bitter irony, as if he's considering what Denethor would have said and is partly angered by the thought, partly laughing bitterly at it and the irony of fate. The glint in his eyes I've often thought of as being either anger or defiance when thinking of Denethor's words. This is purely guesswork on my part, of course, but it makes sense to me that Faramir in this situation would experience a lot of mixed emotions at this point due to both knowing what Denethor feels and at the same time knowing the cause of Boromir's death and how fate just as well could have made him the messenger to Rivendell instead of his brother.
|
|
|
Kangi Ska
Half-elven
Jul 12 2010, 4:50pm
Post #21 of 98
(1986 views)
Shortcut
|
|
A remarkable set of test subjects:
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
You must admit that the group of people we see tested is an exceptional group. Also the effect of the ring is insidious and grows with time of contact.
Kangi Ska
Make the Hobbit Happen!
(This post was edited by Kangi Ska on Jul 12 2010, 4:51pm)
|
|
|
squire
Half-elven
Jul 12 2010, 4:56pm
Post #22 of 98
(2006 views)
Shortcut
|
|
The Nine Kings were not necessarily "corrupt" in the beginning
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Unless by "corrupt" you mean "human" or "powerful" in the sense that Kings are powerful. But that is not the sense of Gandalf's explanation to Frodo of how the Nine rings destroyed their owners:
‘A mortal, Frodo, who keeps one of the Great Rings ... sooner or later - later, if he is strong or well-meaning to begin with, but neither strength nor good purpose will last - sooner or later the dark power will devour him.’ ‘Nine he gave to Mortal Men, proud and great, and so ensnared them.’ (LotR, I.2)
"Well-meaning" and "good purpose" and "ensnared", to me, means at least some of the Nine were not originally evil men by the story's standards, and were not originally "corrupted" even after accepting a Ring whose entire point is Power. Interestingly, in the apocryphal "Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age", the same phrase "sooner or later" re-emphasizes that a Ring of Power, once in the "keeping" of a mortal, will corrupt the owner to evil whether or not the owner was corrupt in the first place.
'And one by one, sooner or later, according to their native strength and to the good or evil of their wills in the beginning, they fell under the thraldom of the ring that they bore...' (Silmarillion, "Of the Rings of Power")
These texts, I think, might help us out of the circular argument being waged in this discussion, whereby the Ring corrupts only those who are already corrupt, and tempts only those who are open to temptation. Tolkien admits here that those most interested in holding a Great Ring are those "that desired secret power beyond the measure of their kind." (from "Rings of Power") And that would seem to explain why only the Wise and Great among the Istari and Eldar and Dunedain are primarily tempted by the Ring in the book, as opposed to (say) Gimli or Legolas. But he also warns about just "keeping" a Great Ring, in the manner that Bilbo or Gollum did, and that Frodo will do in the course of the story. Even a humble hobbit - "sooner or later" - will fall under the Ring's sway.
I think the biggest flaw in the construction of the Ring's operation is that we never see Elrond's reaction to the Ring coming within his grasp. In all the other moments of temptation of the Wise (Gandalf, Strider, Galadriel, Faramir, Denethor), the language betrays the thought of the speaker that he or she has contemplated using the One Ring. Only Elrond, after explaining in general terms that mere desire for the Ring (as opposed to possession as Gandalf spoke of) corrupts anyone who has the power to use it, even the Wise, and after reminding us that Sauron was not evil in the beginning, flat out rejects it: 'I fear to take the Ring to hide it. I will not take the Ring to wield it.’ (LotR, II.2)
squire online:
RR Discussions: The Valaquenta, A Shortcut to Mushrooms, and Of Herbs and Stewed Rabbit
Lights! Action! Discuss on the Movie board!: 'A Journey in the Dark'. and 'Designing The Two Towers'.
Footeramas: The 3rd TORn Reading Room LotR Discussion; and "Tolkien would have LOVED it!"
squiretalk introduces the J.R.R. Tolkien Encyclopedia: A Reader's Diary
 = Forum has no new posts. Forum needs no new posts.
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 12 2010, 4:59pm
Post #23 of 98
(1987 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Are the hobbits that exceptional?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
And isn't the Ring supposed to be even more tempting to exceptional people?
The palantir as affected by Sauron, now there's an item that tempts the greatest and the least alike -- Gandalf, Saruman, Aragorn, Denethor, Pippin -- and does so instantly and effectively. The Ring, as far as I can tell, only affects the ringbearers, and even then I wouldn't really call it magical temptation -- more like magical possession after a long struggle.
The Ring can be tempting, don't get me wrong -- but only to the extent that any valuable and powerful object would be tempting to a corrupt soul.
|
|
|
elostirion74
Rohan
Jul 12 2010, 5:04pm
Post #24 of 98
(1974 views)
Shortcut
|
I think you're stretching this point about temptation a bit, Curious, but it makes for an interesting discussion all the same. Power to achieve the things which seem just and desirable is a very strong temptation in itself, with timeless relevance, which makes the Ring an extremely interesting literary object in my opinion. The fact that the Ring can directly affect the mind of those who wear it is more than what an ordinary powerful item would be able to as I see it. One also needs to bear in mind that The Ring was made by someone who above all wanted to dominate others and who sees desire for power as the ultimate measure of any character or creature. The nature of its power and its temptation fits this pattern.
As I've understood the Palantirs, the craft that made them is more subtle than Sauron's. I'm not so sure, though, that I agree with your interpretation that Pippin exhibits more than his usual curiosity. Pippin has shown that he can be very curious before, so curious that he gets restless and is unable to sleep (consider for instance the lure of the "well" in Moria into which he drops a stone). It's the first glimpse of the depths of the palantir which makes it so mysterious and tantalizing to him, stirring his curiosity and his desire to know more than what can be seen in just a brief glimpse. I believe Denethor was tempted to look into the palantir because he wanted to get knowledge that would help him preparing precautions for wartime, being a step ahead of his enemies etc.
|
|
|
Kangi Ska
Half-elven
Jul 12 2010, 5:07pm
Post #25 of 98
(1982 views)
Shortcut
|
|
The One Ring's functions are more complex.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Remember, the ring is imbued with a portion of Sauron's life force or power. The ring has its own ulterior motives and acts upon the individual according them as well as that person's level of knowledge & wisdom. It might not have tested Faramir as strongly because it thought it had a better chance of getting back to Sauron by staying with Frodo.
Kangi Ska
Make the Hobbit Happen!
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 12 2010, 5:11pm
Post #26 of 98
(1213 views)
Shortcut
|
I would think that the Nine would be affected like Frodo was, even if they were good in the beginning. But even Tolkien did not characterize Frodo claiming the Ring as succumbing to temptation; rather, in extreme circumstances, Frodo lost the ability to fight the will of the Ring. Of course, if any of the Nine were already corrupt, then the process would be much simpler.
I agree that ringbearers feel the effect of the Ring. But I'm not convinced what they feel should be called temptation. It's closer to attempted possession. And as for non-ringbearers, I'm not convinced that they feel anything different when they are in the presence of the Ring from what they feel at a distance. Either they lust for power or they don't -- the Ring just presents an opportunity, not a magical influence.
And yes, many of the Great and the Wise have contemplated what they would do with the Ring if they found it, and whether it would be wise to use it. But few came to the conclusion that it would be wise, and none had the Ring in their possession when they contemplated the possibility. So I don't see what the Ring had to do with the temptation they underwent, except as a symbol of power, remote and abstract.
As for Elrond, perhaps he is an exception because of his experience with Isildur. He never contemplated using the Ring because the first time he saw the Ring he also saw how it affected Isildur.
Speaking of which, why wasn't Elrond tempted to take the Ring from Isildur, as Smeagol was tempted to take it from Deagol? Because the temptation came not from the Ring, but from Smeagol's corrupt nature in the presence of a shiny object? If Deagol had found a gold piece instead of a golden ring, or an ordinary golden ring instead of the One Ring, are we sure Smeagol would have acted any differently?
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 12 2010, 6:21pm
Post #27 of 98
(1193 views)
Shortcut
|
The fact that the Ring can directly affect the mind of those who wear it is more than what an ordinary powerful item would be able to as I see it.
True, and I do make a distinction between the ringbearers and others. The ringbearers are magically affected by the Ring, but even there I see it more as possession than temptation.
As I've understood the Palantirs, the craft that made them is more subtle than Sauron's.
Yes, but the palantirs were not always so tempting or so dangerous -- it is Sauron himself who has made them so, since he captured one of them.
Pippin has shown that he can be very curious before, so curious that he gets restless and is unable to sleep (consider for instance the lure of the "well" in Moria into which he drops a stone).
I don't think that was natural either. But I will concede that Pippin seems more susceptible to such influences than the other hobbits.
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 12 2010, 6:24pm
Post #28 of 98
(1209 views)
Shortcut
|
|
So you agree that Faramir was not tempted?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
At least not magically tempted, above and beyond normal?
|
|
|
Kangi Ska
Half-elven
Jul 12 2010, 7:20pm
Post #29 of 98
(1168 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I would say that he had the resolve to resist whatever the temptation was.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
The idea of "magical temptation" evades me. Magic in the Lord of the Rings is a relativistic concept. Magic to Hobbits is not magic to elves and so on. The attraction of the ring, to the ring is only temptation in so far as the one "tempted" sees it as a potential means to an end and desires it knowing full well that it is really problematic. This is more like symptoms of addiction than possession in the this early phase. As the individual submits to the "will" of the ring, or is unable to resist the will of the ring the function becomes more like daemonic possession.
Kangi Ska
Make the Hobbit Happen!
|
|
|
Kangi Ska
Half-elven
Jul 12 2010, 7:23pm
Post #30 of 98
(1191 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Hobbits are exceptional: at least Gandalf says that they are remarkable
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
ln their ability to resist the influence of the One Ring.
Kangi Ska
Make the Hobbit Happen!
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 12 2010, 7:53pm
Post #31 of 98
(1165 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Then it is the non-hobbits who are not exceptional?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
As they say in The Incredibles, if everyone is special, no one is special.
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 12 2010, 8:04pm
Post #32 of 98
(1182 views)
Shortcut
|
might work for me when it comes to ringbearers, but not for people who never hold the Ring. They, I judge, are simply tempted by what the Ring represents, i.e., power or the means to power. The Ring has no influence over them.
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 12 2010, 8:09pm
Post #33 of 98
(1168 views)
Shortcut
|
there is, on the one hand, the temptation to start smoking, which is purely a matter of will and knowledge versus lack of will and ignorance. Then there is the temptation to continue smoking after developing an addiction to nicotine, which is not just a matter of will and knowledge, but is also influenced by a chemical addiction.
The Ringbearers are in the position of people with a chemical addiction. Their willpower helps, but must overcome a much higher hurdle. But the nonringbearers are not so influenced, and if they lust after the Ring it is purely because of their own desires.
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 12 2010, 8:13pm
Post #34 of 98
(1186 views)
Shortcut
|
to say that Faramir was tempted but Aragorn was not. I do see a basis to say we just don't know because we are not privy to their thoughts. I also see a basis to say neither were tempted by the Ring, as opposed to whatever inner demons they fought, because I see no evidence that the Ring magically influences anyone other than Ringbearers.
To me, the weakest argument is to say that they were certainly tempted. No, wait, that's the second-weakest argument. The weakest is to say one was definitely tempted and the other was not, when there is no significant difference in the scenes.
|
|
|
squire
Half-elven
Jul 12 2010, 8:32pm
Post #35 of 98
(1189 views)
Shortcut
|
'[The Ring] belongs to Sauron and was made by him alone, and is altogether evil. Its strength, Boromir, is too great for anyone to wield at will, save only those who have already a great power of their own. But for them it holds an even deadlier peril. The very desire of it corrupts the heart. Consider Saruman.' (LotR, II.2)
As I said in my previous post, I find this helps explain why we only see the Ring "tempting" the most noble and high of the characters - "those who already have a great power of their own" - who interact with the Fellowship and Frodo.
It quickly becomes meaningless to parse too closely the difference between wanting the power of the Ring because one corruptly wants power in any case, and wanting the power of the Ring because it is subjectively ("magically") tempting one as if it were an independent and evil actor. As has been said, the blurring of the two perspectives is what makes the Ring such an excellent literary device. Tolkien makes it clear from beginning to end that good will or good intent, whether of bearer or beholder, only delays or disguises the Ring's imperative towards evil. If we compare the "temptation" of the Ring to other temptations such as gold or sex or vice, all we discover is that the Ring is an excellent metaphor for the mystery of sin, expressed through the medium of exercising power over others.
squire online:
RR Discussions: The Valaquenta, A Shortcut to Mushrooms, and Of Herbs and Stewed Rabbit
Lights! Action! Discuss on the Movie board!: 'A Journey in the Dark'. and 'Designing The Two Towers'.
Footeramas: The 3rd TORn Reading Room LotR Discussion; and "Tolkien would have LOVED it!"
squiretalk introduces the J.R.R. Tolkien Encyclopedia: A Reader's Diary
= Forum has no new posts. Forum needs no new posts.
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 12 2010, 9:04pm
Post #36 of 98
(1192 views)
Shortcut
|
Consider Saruman, indeed. He never came into contact with the Ring, and yet was tempted by it. Don't you think he would have been equally tempted by a non-magical means to power? It was power, or the means to power, that tempted him. It was not the Ring that corrupted Saruman's heart, but the desire for the Ring.
This reminds me of the Bible quote that the "love of money is the root of all kinds of evil." 1 Timothy 6:10. Not money, as often misquoted, but the love of money, which is internal and present when money is not.
Tolkien makes it clear from beginning to end that good will or good intent, whether of bearer or beholder, only delays or disguises the Ring's imperative towards evil.
I don't see this for people who don't actually bear or behold the Ring, such as Saruman. It was not the Ring's imperative towards evil that corrupted him, but the desire in his heart. Similarly, many who behold or touch the Ring briefly show no ill effects, and even those who bear the Ring -- Bilbo, Frodo, and Sam -- are very slow to show ill effects, in sharp contrast to Gollum, who was already corrupt.
Contrast this with the Sauron-tainted palantir, which quickly and severely affects all who look into it even briefly, and is only safe in Aragorn's hands because he has the right to use it and the ability to defeat Sauron in a contest of wills. The implication is that if Aragorn had not defeated Sauron, he would have become at least as mad as Denethor, if not as corrupt as Saruman. It is simply not safe to look into the palantir, just as it is not safe to bear the Ring. But beholding the Ring or even touching it briefly seems perfectly safe, except for those who are already tempted by the very thought of the Ring.
(This post was edited by Curious on Jul 12 2010, 9:06pm)
|
|
|
Kangi Ska
Half-elven
Jul 12 2010, 9:25pm
Post #37 of 98
(1176 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Those in the story that are in the position to be tempted by the One Ring
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
are not a random sample of Middle-earth's population. They are exceptional within their peoples. They are of ancient "royal" blood or the high elven wise or wizards of significant personal power. The Hobbits seem to violate this but they prove that they are each and all heroes, which sets them apart from Hobbits in general.
Kangi Ska
Make the Hobbit Happen!
|
|
|
FarFromHome
Valinor
Jul 12 2010, 9:40pm
Post #38 of 98
(1180 views)
Shortcut
|
in the way the scenes are framed, and the subtle differences in the language, to interpret Aragorn's behaviour in one way and Faramir's in another. Aragorn is already aware of the Ring before he even meets the hobbits, and he's already been trying to impress on them the dangers they face. Now he's exasperated as Sam raises more objections about whether he's the "real" Strider, and decides to show them how an impostor might behave. He puts his hand to his sword not because he's tempted to kill the hobbits and steal the Ring - he knows perfectly well that his sword is "not much use", just the shards of Narsil that, more than anything, must remind him of how his ancestor failed and where his own duty lies.
Faramir, on the other hand, has only just realised what "the answer to all the riddles" is. His response is immediate and spontaneous, and there's no reason whatsoever for him to think this is an appropriate moment to jest with the hobbits, or mislead them in any way. If he finds himself blurting out his thoughts about having the hobbits in his power, then I see no reason to believe those thoughts aren't sincere.
The subtleties of language that I mentioned previously also point this way, I feel. Compare Aragorn's conditional tenses: "If I had killed the real Strider, I could kill you. And I should have killed you already without so much talk. If I was after the Ring, I could have it – NOW!", with Faramir's softly-spoken, simple present tense: "And here in the wild I have you." Faramir is contemplating a real possibility, while Aragorn with his conditionals is doing exactly the opposite - pointing out how impossible Sam's suspicions are. Yes, it's subtle, but I don't see that as a weakness - rather the opposite. We are in the same position as the hobbits through whose eyes we see both scenes - we have to judge for ourselves what's really going through the minds of the men whose thoughts we are not privy to.
I agree that my argument would be weak if I was claiming that either man was "definitely" tempted or not tempted. But "definitely" is your word, and one I wouldn't use because I don't believe there are any definitive answers to these questions. The interest is in the interpretation.
They went in, and Sam shut the door.
But even as he did so, he heard suddenly,
deep and unstilled,
the sigh and murmur of the Sea upon the shores of Middle-earth.
From the unpublished Epilogue to the Lord of the Rings
|
|
|
squire
Half-elven
Jul 12 2010, 10:21pm
Post #39 of 98
(1176 views)
Shortcut
|
|
The hobbits do not violate the principle of only high powers being tempted by the Ring
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
The only hobbits who are tempted by the Ring are Bilbo and Frodo, who held it for years and in Frodo's case, in increasing proximity to Mordor; Sam, who took the Ring within sight of the Dark Tower; and Smeagol who is a special case (he is the only example of a previously corrupted hobbit in the entire history - because something has to explain how Gollum acquired the Ring). "Temptation" is being used rather freely today. We should note the difference between temptation to seize the Ring and then use it, in the cases of the Wise and High; and temptation of an innocent bearer to "claim" and use the Ring as it is meant to be used, in the cases of the hobbits.
Frodo's heroism is undoubted, but it is partly circumstantial. We have the heroism of Merry and Pippin to compare it to, and they are never once tempted to seize the Ring from Frodo - because they are not powerful enough to come under its spell unless they were to bear it for a long time like their cousin.
squire online:
RR Discussions: The Valaquenta, A Shortcut to Mushrooms, and Of Herbs and Stewed Rabbit
Lights! Action! Discuss on the Movie board!: 'A Journey in the Dark'. and 'Designing The Two Towers'.
Footeramas: The 3rd TORn Reading Room LotR Discussion; and "Tolkien would have LOVED it!"
squiretalk introduces the J.R.R. Tolkien Encyclopedia: A Reader's Diary
= Forum has no new posts. Forum needs no new posts.
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 12 2010, 10:32pm
Post #40 of 98
(1161 views)
Shortcut
|
that you were arguing that anything was definite, I said that there is weak support for such an argument. Thank you for confirming that is not your argument. Apparently you are simply arguing that there is room for an interpretation that Faramir was tempted and Aragorn was not. I'm okay with that as one of the possibilities, although I think that to the extent anyone was tempted, it had more to do with their internal desires than the power of the Ring.
Unfortunately, the language you use when interpreting Faramir's motives seems rather, er, definite.
Faramir, on the other hand, has only just realised what "the answer to all the riddles" is. His response is immediate and spontaneous, and there's no reason whatsoever for him to think this is an appropriate moment to jest with the hobbits, or mislead them in any way. If he finds himself blurting out his thoughts about having the hobbits in his power, then I see no reason to believe those thoughts aren't sincere.
That doesn't leave room for other interpretations.
While you could be right about Faramir's internal thought process, we aren't privy to it. We do know that Faramir has a very good guess at the nature of "Isildur's Bane," which he has thought about for many months, with good reason. He's a smart cookie, and I don't think he is surprised by Sam's revelation that the dark instrument in question happens to take the form of a ring. The revelation only confirms what he has already guessed. He's been duelling Frodo with words, and he's well aware of the hobbits' distrust, yet he wants to impress upon them that they are in his power.
So he plays with them yet again, briefly implying that he may take the Ring. But it is brief, and he quickly changes his tune -- so quickly and easily that it is not clear he was ever tempted in the first place. After all, if he was really tempted, what stopped him? Not the hobbits, to be sure. At least I think there is room for that alternative interpretation of the scene.
I just don't think we know whether or not Faramir was truly tempted. What I am arguing elsewhere is that if he was tempted, or if anyone who did not bear the Ring was tempted to take it, it was not because the Ring manipulated people from afar, but because it is normal to be tempted by an object as powerful as the Ring. (Although in the case of Smeagol, I think he would have been just as tempted by an ordinary piece of gold.)
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 12 2010, 10:40pm
Post #41 of 98
(1157 views)
Shortcut
|
|
It is precisely because they are exceptional that they are
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
particularly vulnerable to the offer of power. Therefore their exceptional qualities do not explain their resistance to the Ring -- on the contrary, they make it harder to explain.
Elrond points to Saruman as an example of the danger of the Ring, but does not explain the difference between Saruman, Gandalf, and himself. Certainly it is not proximity to the Ring or opportunity to take it, for Gandalf and Elrond are in closer proximity and have far more opportunity than Saruman.
I think the difference lies not in the Ring, but in the people. The fact that Gandalf and Elrond do not claim the Ring shows that Saruman was not manipulated by the Ring, for the Ring had far more opportunity and incentive to manipulate Gandalf and Elrond than it did to manipulate Saruman.
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 12 2010, 10:46pm
Post #42 of 98
(1276 views)
Shortcut
|
to use the power of invisibility, a temptation which disappears entirely after the hobbits realize it won't work. For me, the nature of the temptation isn't the point. Smeagol is tempted by nothing more than something shiny, Frodo in the Barrow mound by invisibility, Boromir by power.
For me, the point is the source of the temptation: is the Ring manipulating the characters, or would these characters be equally tempted by a substitute for the ring? For nonringbearers, and sometimes for ringbearers as well, I think the temptations are quite natural and in line with their personalities and secret desires. I see no reason to blame such tempations on the manipulation of the Ring.
|
|
|
elostirion74
Rohan
Jul 13 2010, 6:48am
Post #43 of 98
(1173 views)
Shortcut
|
Curious wrote:
"Yes, but the palantirs were not always so tempting or so dangerous -- it is Sauron himself who has made them so, since he captured one of them"
I don't see any evidence in the text or in Tolkien's later writings that Sauron had the power to really alter the function of the Palantirs or make them more tempting.
Sauron could influence what others looking into the palantir would see and thereby affect their perspective of their own situation. It seems from the text that if you had contact with Sauron through the Palantir over time, it was also possible for him to summon or call the person holding the other Palantir.
Curious wrote:
"True, and I do make a distinction between the ringbearers and others. The ringbearers are magically affected by the Ring, but even there I see it more as possession than temptation".
I think the vision Sam has of himself as a great hero was a vision of temptation offered by the Ring. In the case of Frodo, who we mostly see from the outside, we see few clear instances of temptation. The Ring is rather wearing down his own will and sense of self. The power of the Ring is far beyond Frodo's stature, which is one of the major reasons it affects him so heavily. A character who is more powerful and not mortal would probably be affected in a different way.
|
|
|
Kangi Ska
Half-elven
Jul 13 2010, 7:50am
Post #44 of 98
(1171 views)
Shortcut
|
|
The All Purpose Ring of Wonder: It does everything its creator wanted it to do.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
It is desirable to all but Bombadil yet the desire to possess it poisons/corrupts the soul. The actual possession of it diminishes the will and eventually leads to the wraithing of the individual. It is sentient, an actor with a will to return to Sauron. It is not consistent in its effect. Its influence varies from place to place, time to time and person to person. It is perfect just as its creator intended. Oh, did I mention that J.R.R. Tolkien created it.
Kangi Ska
Make the Hobbit Happen!
|
|
|
FarFromHome
Valinor
Jul 13 2010, 8:35am
Post #45 of 98
(1156 views)
Shortcut
|
your assumption of "no manipulation from afar" in the Ring's lure towards people who aren't in physical possession of it. But I also don't imagine that there's any such manipulation even for those who are in possession of it. The temptation is in the promises that the Ring seems to offer - as you say, it's a "normal" temptation, just writ magically large, and the difference between ringbearers and others is in the intensity of the temptation, not the agency of it.
Personally, I don't see a real difference between "normal" and "magical". "Magic" is just a kind of metaphorical way of viewing the world, that still has to conform to "normal" behaviour if it is to have any meaning. Frodo's temptation is intense and eventually irresistible - yet it's still essentially temptation as we know it. It could be "applicable" to addiction, for example, or perhaps to something like the Stockholm syndrome, or even to the overwhelming pressure to conform that a demagogue can stir up in a population. The "magic" is in the fact that none of these normal triggers has to be present - the magic becomes an overarching metaphor for any of them.
As for my "I see no reason" arguments, I don't intend them to prove anything - they are an attempt to look at the scene as written, and state my own conclusions. Can you explain how you read Faramir's reaction to Sam's blurting out of the secret of the Ring? If he's not suddenly tempted, why does he do and say the things he does? Do you think he's joking? Or what?
What I am arguing elsewhere is that if he was tempted, or if anyone who did not bear the Ring was tempted to take it, it was not because the Ring manipulated people from afar, but because it is normal to be tempted by an object as powerful as the Ring.
If this is all you mean, then of course I agree. It is normal to be tempted, and that's all we see. We just see it expressed through a "magical" worldview, in which inanimate objects are imbued with wills of their own. That makes the Ring appear as something incredibly powerful, so that even the thought of it draws people to desire it. The desire is "normal", the "magic" is in the metaphorical way it's depicted.
They went in, and Sam shut the door.
But even as he did so, he heard suddenly,
deep and unstilled,
the sigh and murmur of the Sea upon the shores of Middle-earth.
From the unpublished Epilogue to the Lord of the Rings
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 13 2010, 11:45am
Post #47 of 98
(1157 views)
Shortcut
|
that the palantiri were always tempting, even before Sauron made looking into one so dangerous. But I always had the impression that Sauron lured Saruman and Denethor and Pippin to look into the palantiri, and that it wasn't just a function of the device. I don't think there is any conclusive evidence one way or the other.
Sam does have a grandiose vision while wearing the Ring. I'm not certain that was caused by the Ring. Boromir and Gollum have grandiose visions while just thinking about the Ring. It could be that Sam's vision comes from within, and not from the Ring. At any rate, the vision has zero effect on Sam, who quickly shrugs it off.
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 13 2010, 11:57am
Post #48 of 98
(1153 views)
Shortcut
|
That means you don't quite agree, which is okay.
Frodo's temptation is intense and eventually irresistible - yet it's still essentially temptation as we know it.
Not according to Tolkien, who opined that Frodo was not guilty of any moral failing, but simply lacked the strength to resist the Ring.
Can you explain how you read Faramir's reaction to Sam's blurting out of the secret of the Ring?
I thought I already did. I see it as very similar to Aragorn's behavior when he impresses upon the hobbits that he could take the Ring if he liked, or Galadriel's behavior when she shows Frodo what would happen if she claimed the Ring. Faramir is impressing upon the hobbits that he could take the Ring if he liked, but very quickly states that he has no intention of doing so. I see no evidence of an internal struggle, although since we do not get inside Faramir's head, that is one possible interpretation.
We just see it expressed through a "magical" worldview, in which inanimate objects are imbued with wills of their own.
Not everything that happens in LotR can be attributed to the will of the Ring. I have a very restrictive view of what can be attributed to the will of the Ring. Frodo deciding to claim the Ring -- that's the Ring speaking through Frodo. But Boromir trying to claim the Ring -- that's Boromir speaking, not the Ring.
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 13 2010, 12:00pm
Post #49 of 98
(1168 views)
Shortcut
|
I'm talking about people who "might" possess the Ring, not those who do possess the Ring.
Ringbearers are influenced by the Ring, although I still wouldn't characterize that influence as temptation. It's more like a contest of wills, with the Ring attempting to possess the bearer.
|
|
|
CuriousG
Half-elven
Jul 13 2010, 1:26pm
Post #50 of 98
(1134 views)
Shortcut
|
|
No point in tempting other hobbits
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I'd also say that while the other hobbits were in proximity to the Ring, there was no reason for it to tempt them. What's the purpose of jumping from one hobbit to another? (It's temptation of Sam was in totally different circumstances.) The Ring sought out *exceptional people* because it needed them to rule, or in its devious way, to attempt to challenge Sauron and then be crushed by him by other means. It's not an invincible device. Sauron was defeated twice by conventional armies while he wore the Ring.
|
|
|
CuriousG
Half-elven
Jul 13 2010, 1:44pm
Post #51 of 98
(1323 views)
Shortcut
|
|
The Ring starts with the good natures, then leads to evil
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Tolkien is very explicit about this.
The Ring acts upon people according to their natures. If people are corrupt, they find the Ring tempting, but no more tempting than any other means to power. If people are not corrupt, the Ring does not change their natures, unless they actually bear the Ring, and even then it takes extreme circumstances to beat down their own will in the matter so that the Ring can take control.
The Ring starts by appealing to the good in people: Sam as gardener turning Mordor's wastelands into a fertile garden. Sam's common hobbit sense helps him see this is but a deceit to ensnare him for more sinister purposes. Gandalf says the Ring would get its power over him by initially appealing to his sense of pity, but it would wind up gaining control in the end, and he would become evil. When Sam asks Galadriel to take the Ring to stop the damage to the Shire, she replies "That is how it would begin, but it would not end there, alas."
In conclusion, the Ring does corrupt people. There's a difference between wearing it and bearing it. Frodo was beaten down over time just by bearing it. It didn't bestow invisibility or other powers unless it was worn. then it really took over (see Gollum).
Also, it doesn't appear to only corrupt the corrupt. Boromir wasn't corrupt. He was guilty of hubris, but also brave and honorable. He was committed to defending Gondor and defying Sauron, not supplanting him. Or enslaving people like Saruman, etc. Even being weak-willed isn't what I would call corrupt, just a normal human flaw. Instead, the Ring played on him as an heir to the Steward's seat of Gondor and someone with potential to exploit for strategic ends (gaining control of smaller, distant kingdoms like Dain's and Thranduil's would be less strategically useful, plus the Ring was trying to get back to Sauron, not farther away. So no point in tempting Gimli and Legolas.)
Maybe this great debate is that you see things as more clear-cut than the rest of us, Curious, which is fine with me. Just wanted to add my own personal perspective.
|
|
|
CuriousG
Half-elven
Jul 13 2010, 1:54pm
Post #52 of 98
(1327 views)
Shortcut
|
From the American Heritage Dictionary, which lists the most common and accepted definitions first (as a selling point; I used to sell it).
"Tempt: To try to get (someone) to do wrong, especially by a promise of reward."
Since a lot of debate is about what "temptation" is, I thought would bump this up to the top.
I don't think Elrond and Galadriel were "tempted" to do wrong in creating their mini-paradises. They were doing what the Three were intended for, and their realms lived up to those good intentions. They weren't responsible for the fate of the One once it was lost beyond knowledge or discovery, and it could have remained that way forever for all they knew. The Three weren't meant to sit in a cupboard when they could be doing good in the world, just as Gandalf used Narya to do good in the world. And of course, Narya lost its power when the others did. And had Sauron regained the One, Gandalf would have been obliged to stop using it, so it would have been just as incapable of doing good as the other two of the Three.
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 13 2010, 3:10pm
Post #53 of 98
(1330 views)
Shortcut
|
when he was given his grandiose vision. Gandalf and Galadriel are talking about what would happen to anyone who claimed the Ring with the best of intentions. Gollum wore it for hundreds of years. I've never disputed that the Ring affects those who wear it, and I'm sure it has a much greater effect on those who claim it, although we never get a chance to see that happen.
Boromir, though, seems to me more like Saruman or Denethor. None of them bear the Ring, and I don't think the fact that Boromir sees it makes his actions appreciably different. Although Boromir speaks to Frodo of his grandiose vision, it's not at all clear that the Ring is influencing him. To me it seems more likely that Saruman and Denethor and Boromir have grandiose visions on their own, without the influence of the Ring, and in contrast to people who have such visions only because they wear or claim the Ring.
So no, the Ring didn't corrupt Boromir. Like Denethor, he was treading the line between rightful pride and hubris. Boromir did redeem himself in the end, but only by sacrificing his life. Denethor crossed the line into madness and despair. Saruman crossed the line into absolute villainy. None of that was the work of the Ring, as I see it, although I'll admit the evidence is far from conclusive.
I hope my view does not seem gratuitously contrarian. To me it seems to make sense, but I'll admit that discussing it helps me bring it into focus. Sometimes I struggle with my explanation because I'm still trying to figure it out myself. And Tolkien doesn't make it easy, since he deliberately cloaks what happens in ambiguity.
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 13 2010, 3:25pm
Post #55 of 98
(1282 views)
Shortcut
|
somewhere that creating Rivendell and Lothlorien with the aid of the Elven Rings was an act of pride on the part of the Elves, and was unwise because if the One was found it would all be jeopardized. I'm sorry, I don't have the cite available. Maybe someone else has it. But I am giving you Tolkien's opinion, as best I can remember it.
On the other hand, we don't have to accept Tolkien's opinion if it does not appear in the text of LotR. But don't you think Elrond and Galadriel regretted using their rings in such a manner when they lost it all at the end of the Third Age? Elrond and Galadriel do speak to this issue. I don't think they did evil, but I think they might regret what they did. Cirdan and Gandalf chose a different way to use the third ring, and what they did had a much more lasting effect.
There are several definitions of temptation, some of which imply an active, sentient temptor, and others which do not.
dispose or incline or entice to; "We were tempted by the delicious-looking food" entice: provoke someone to do something through (often false or exaggerated) promises or persuasion; "He lured me into temptation" give rise to a desire by being attractive or inviting; "the window displays tempted the shoppers" charm: induce into action by using one's charm; "She charmed him into giving her all his money" try to seduce try presumptuously; "St. Anthony was tempted in the desert"
Food is tempting, but not sentient or purposeful about it. Window displays are in the middle -- designed to be tempting, but not themselves sentient or willful. The Ring was both tempting as an object, at least for ringbearers, had the ability to actively tempt the bearer through visions and manipulation. It is not clear to me that the Ring had the same ability to actively tempt non-bearers that it had to affect bearers.
But it is hard to distinguish grandiose visions that come from pride and grandiose visions that come from the Ring. So it is possible that I am wrong, and that the Ring sent visions to pre-ring Smeagol and Saruman and Boromir and Denethor even though they did not bear the Ring.
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 13 2010, 3:32pm
Post #56 of 98
(1300 views)
Shortcut
|
what CuriousG had said, although I gave it a different meaning.
Do you understand the distinction I am trying to make between the Ring actively influencing and manipulating those who wear or claim it, and the Ring as a symbol of power in the minds of those who do not wear or claim it, but would like to do so? In both cases we could loosely say that the Ring corrupts, but in the first case the Ring has a direct influence, often overpowering the natural inclinations of the bearer, while in the second case it is really the pride and greed and lust of the would-be ringbearer that is responsible.
It isn't the Ring that affects Boromir, but his lust for the Ring. It isn't Frodo's lust for the Ring that affect him, but the Ring itself. That is the distinction I am trying to draw, however inartfully.
|
|
|
CuriousG
Half-elven
Jul 13 2010, 3:55pm
Post #57 of 98
(1303 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I do agree with this distinction
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Frodo had no lust for power or wealth or even a big garden in Mordor. Maybe the Ring tempted him with one or more visions, but I don't think we ever learned of them, even when the story was told rather intimately from his point of view until it shifted to Sam's. So yes, the Ring corrupted Frodo without Frodo having any evil in him to corrupt (that we can see, anyway),and without Frodo wearing it except for a few brief moments. [As an aside, since the Ring has a quasi-personality, I bet it hated Frodo that much more because he provided so little fodder for corruption and temptation.]
There was Frodo's urge in the Barrow Downs to put on the Ring and abandon his friends, but it's debatable if that's the fear any normal person would have or if it's Ring-inspired. In any event, he overcame it quickly.
But to draw another distinction about what you say about the Ring corrupting its bearer/wearer vs not really corrupting those who don't wear or bear it, it seems to me that the Ring's power is active in its proximity. Boromir is around the Ring for months, and I do think it eats at his mind by being close to him. Saruman, by contrast, is corrupted as you say by his own great lust for power and desire to supplant Sauron without ever having seen or been near the Ring. He wants it badly, but he's already gone over to the dark side without it.
Galadriel was tempted by what she could do with the Ring long before a hobbit brought it within arm's reach. But then I think the Ring exerted its influence on her because it was in arm's reach, and her temptation went from a daydream or an abstraction to something very real. Well, okay, it's more complicated than that, because what really set her off was Frodo feeling overwhelmed by the Ring and offering it to Galadriel as a better keeper. But I don't think Frodo was evil or manipulated by the Ring at this point. I think he was just overwhelmed as he felt for most of the quest and thought he had found a safe and responsible way to get rid of it and avoid his own failure at completing the quest.
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 13 2010, 4:16pm
Post #58 of 98
(1312 views)
Shortcut
|
that proximity to the Ring has an effect, and that Boromir's proximity to the Ring, in particular, gave the Ring an opportunity to affect him, sending him grandiose visions he would not otherwise have had. It's possible, but it's inconsistent with how other people were or were not affected.
Plenty of other people were in proximity to the Ring and show no signs of being affected, not even visions that they quickly shrugged off. And Saruman and Denethor were never close to the Ring, and yet were even more affected by desire for it than Boromir. To me the simplest explanation is that Boromir carried his lust and desire for power with him, and his proximity to the Ring only mattered because it gave him the opportunity to act. And Occam's Razor says the simplest explanation is most likely to be correct.
|
|
|
Kangi Ska
Half-elven
Jul 13 2010, 5:52pm
Post #59 of 98
(1288 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Saruman and Denethor were never close to the Ring
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
but they were both in direct contact with the One Rings Master who desired the ring's return very much, The Wizard and the Steward both failed the test of pride and were manipulated by Sauron. The desire for the ring as a means to overthrow the Dark lord was part of the delusional state induced by Sauron himself. Boromir on the other hand had been in direct contact once with the One Ring and in its vicinity for the trip south from Rivendel. The twisting of Boromir's thoughts comes from the ring, which is imbued with a great deal of Sauron's original power. The Ring & the Master are One. The goal of both is the domination of Middle-earth through their reunification. The sum of the One Ring's power and Sauron's reincorporated power would be far greater if reunited than if each remained in isolation. Both sought the other in the belief that the reunion would make Sauron invincible in the the world of fading Elves and fallen Numinor
Kangi Ska
Make the Hobbit Happen!
|
|
|
xy
Rohan
Jul 13 2010, 5:53pm
Post #60 of 98
(1285 views)
Shortcut
|
The real question is why Gimli, Legolas or Merry and Pippin weren't tempted. Members of the Fellowship, and quite close to the Ring a lot of time.
|
|
|
Kangi Ska
Half-elven
Jul 13 2010, 6:19pm
Post #61 of 98
(1369 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Gimli, Legolas or Merry and Pippin weren't apparently tempted
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
as they neither held the ring nor desired dominion over others.
It struck me just now that this entire debate reflects the age old Christian debate on the nature and source of sin and the idea of free will versus determinism. I am sure that Tolkien intended this to be the case.
Kangi Ska
Make the Hobbit Happen!
|
|
|
xy
Rohan
Jul 13 2010, 6:32pm
Post #62 of 98
(1289 views)
Shortcut
|
Desiring dominion or actually holding the Ring aren't technically necessary to fall under its influence/be tempted (Boromir, Saruman, Faramir).
I guess it depends a little whether or not the person is evil to begin with (Gollum, Sauron), can be corrupted (Saruman, Boromir) or scared into the Ring's influence (Denethor). It seems the more benevolent parties around the Ring can resist it more (Frodo, Bilbo, Gandalf, Elrond, Galadriel, Sam, Faramir).
I'd also guess the more potent the Ring-bearer, the more the Ring wields its Power. Frodo, Bilbo and Gollum endured a long time because they were humble hobbits - I don't doubt anyone else (Men, Istari, Elves, Dwarves) would not have lasted as long.
(This post was edited by xy on Jul 13 2010, 6:33pm)
|
|
|
squire
Half-elven
Jul 13 2010, 6:38pm
Post #63 of 98
(1268 views)
Shortcut
|
Does Occam's Razor apply when analyzing the actions of a character in a literary fantasy, rather than the natural phenomena for which it was originally formulated? I am dubious, to say the least. Occam's Razor is neither a law of nature or of logic, but of decision-making. It favors not "simplicity" per se, but explanatory models of the real world that depend on the fewest introduced preconditions. And what is fantasy but an imaginary construct defined by an arbitrary number of introduced preconditions?
But even if it does apply to understanding Tolkien's creation, shouldn't our acceptance of the "simplest" explanation for Boromir's actions still depend on all of us agreeing on what is "simplest" here - a condition not satisfied by your preceding judgment that "to you" your preferred interpretation is simplest? It's easy to win an argument with oneself.
As in my other posts, I feel we should be paying a lot more attention to what Tolkien wrote, rather than what we remember that he wrote. Interpretations of Tolkien's writing may still vary according to the readers' sensibilities, of course. But surely he is using words like temptation and corruption, or writing about those behaviors, in ways that satisfy his literary requirements regarding the Rings of Power, rather than according to dictionary definitions, or pure and consistent logic, or our instincts about the psychology of real people.
squire online:
RR Discussions: The Valaquenta, A Shortcut to Mushrooms, and Of Herbs and Stewed Rabbit
Lights! Action! Discuss on the Movie board!: 'A Journey in the Dark'. and 'Designing The Two Towers'.
Footeramas: The 3rd TORn Reading Room LotR Discussion; and "Tolkien would have LOVED it!"
squiretalk introduces the J.R.R. Tolkien Encyclopedia: A Reader's Diary
= Forum has no new posts. Forum needs no new posts.
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 13 2010, 7:16pm
Post #64 of 98
(1268 views)
Shortcut
|
It could be that Sauron influenced Saruman and Denethor, while the Ring was influencing Boromir. It still doesn't explain why Boromir was the only member of the Company influenced by the Ring, but I suppose we can speculate that the Ring selectively worked on the most vulnerable member of the Company. I can see that as another valid interpretation that holds together well.
It doesn't make my interpretation (that Saruman, Denethor, and Boromir simply succumb to their own internal failings without significant outside influence) invalid, though. I judge that both interpretations hold together well. And my theory has the advantage of consistency -- all ringbearers are influenced by the Ring, all non-ringbearers are influenced only by their own desire for the Ring.
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 13 2010, 7:31pm
Post #65 of 98
(1272 views)
Shortcut
|
I'm trying to explain something that Tolkien cloaked in ambiguity, and I admit that it is hard to find a consistent explanation, and impossible to find a definitive explanation. Only the fact that Tolkien is the author leads me to believe that a consistent explanation exists, or existed at one time in Tolkien's head.
I'm unclear about your explanation for the behavior of those tempted by the Ring, including ringbearers and nonringbearers, and what distinguishes them from those who showed no signs of temptation. It's easy to poke holes, and hard to construct a plausible theory.
For example, I like Kangi Ska's alternate theory, which he just proposed in this thread, that Saruman and Denethor were influenced by Sauron through the palantiri, while Boromir was influenced by the Ring. It helps make their behavior consistent, but doesn't quite explain why Boromir was the only member of the Company so affected. In order to make the theory complete, we have to speculate that the Ring was capable of selecting its victims, and selected Boromir. Still, it's an alternative theory that holds together pretty well. I think my theory holds together pretty well too, though.
Do you have any alternative theories, or do you think theorizing on this subject is a waste of time, or do you think I'm just not doing it rigorously enough because I'm not citing the text?
(This post was edited by Curious on Jul 13 2010, 7:32pm)
|
|
|
Arwen Skywalker
Lorien
Jul 13 2010, 8:00pm
Post #66 of 98
(1521 views)
Shortcut
|
Boromir is the only one of the Company from a country that is taking the brunt of the damage from Sauron. The Ring is simply feeding off his desperation for a quick fix. Even in the movies, where his hubris is downplayed, that's still the case. There was an interview with Sean Bean that confirms this, but I don't remember the source.
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 13 2010, 8:15pm
Post #67 of 98
(1500 views)
Shortcut
|
Boromir was already both proud and desparate when we first met him at the Council of Elrond that I'm not convinced the Ring influenced him or changed his natural behavior. Boromir was never happy with the Council's decision, and always wanted to bring the Ring to Minas Tirith. The only thing that had changed when he finally confronted Frodo is that a final decision had to be made, and Aragorn had put the decision in Frodo's hands. Boromir started out trying to persuade Frodo, and when Frodo did not respond became frustrated. None of this seems abnormal or unusual for Boromir.
Contrast that with the behavior of Bilbo in Chapter One, Book One, or Frodo when he claims the Ring. Bilbo and Frodo, under the influence and control of the Ring, act counter to their natures and are not recognizable. There's no doubt that the Ring influences their behavior.
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 14 2010, 11:16am
Post #68 of 98
(1238 views)
Shortcut
|
between falling under the Ring's influence and simply finding it tempting? And if evil or corruptible characters are the only ones who find it tempting without actually holding or even coming near the Ring (Smeagol, Saruman, Boromir, Denethor), how can we be sure they fell under the Ring's influence? Couldn't it be that they simply acted according to their nature, and found the Ring tempting without falling under its influence?
For ringbearers, it's different. I have no doubt that they fall under the Ring's influence, because we see Bilbo and Frodo act completely at odds with their nature.
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 14 2010, 11:21am
Post #69 of 98
(1270 views)
Shortcut
|
eats at Boromir's mind. But why must we conclude that he fell under the Ring's influence? He always thought the Council was wrong to send it to Mordor. His opinion never changes. Why can't his actions be the result of his own desire, not influenced by the Ring?
I contrast his behavior with that of Bilbo and Frodo under the obvious influence of the Ring. It's obvious because they act completely at odds with their normal behavior, more like Gollum than the hobbits we know and love. That isn't true of Boromir. He acts consistently throughout.
|
|
|
Kangi Ska
Half-elven
Jul 14 2010, 11:57am
Post #70 of 98
(1231 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Free will and determinism are both equally true. It is the great paradox.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
It is not completely against their nature that they act. The ring takes advantage of small character flaws as well as large ones.
Smeagol and Boromir were both in the presence of the One Ring when they acted to take it. Saruman and Denethor were both under the influence of Sauron and not the ring. Sure you might desire the ring without it influencing that desire but that does not necessarily mean that it is not influencing that desire. It seems that the ring's ability to influence diminishes with distance and is enhance by flawed character. It also appears to have a strategy of its own in regards to whom it attracts.
Kangi Ska
Make the Hobbit Happen!
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 14 2010, 12:05pm
Post #71 of 98
(1255 views)
Shortcut
|
I've acknowledged that your theory holds together, but I'm not ready to abandon mine. To turn around what you said, sure the Ring might choose to influence the desire of those who get near it but that does not rule out the possibility that Boromir and Smeagol desired it without being influenced.
I'm sorry, for Frodo to claim the Ring is, I judge, completely against his nature. That's why he is chosen to bear the Ring. He is the least likely person to succumb. But even he, in the end, succumbs.
|
|
|
Kangi Ska
Half-elven
Jul 14 2010, 12:26pm
Post #72 of 98
(1254 views)
Shortcut
|
|
So I concede that the ring is very powerful
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
and in time can completely overwhelm one as pure of purpose as Saint Frodo. It is a very powerful object. So powerful that it can exert its will on anyone who is in its presence. Those effected react according to their better and worse natures.
Kangi Ska
Make the Hobbit Happen!
|
|
|
FarFromHome
Valinor
Jul 14 2010, 1:27pm
Post #73 of 98
(1249 views)
Shortcut
|
Quote
Frodo's temptation is intense and eventually irresistible - yet it's still essentially temptation as we know it.
Not according to Tolkien, who opined that Frodo was not guilty of any moral failing, but simply lacked the strength to resist the Ring.
I don't have my Letters at the moment (my books are in storage), but although Tolkien does defend Frodo by saying the temptation he faced was ultimately beyond anyone's strength, I don't think he says that he was "not guilty of any moral failing". As I recall it, Tolkien's point is that Frodo was technically "guilty" but was saved by a grace that he had earned by his struggle to resist his temptation, and by his pity towards Gollum. Frodo himself seems to have been haunted by feelings of guilt.
The Ring's power, even on a Ringbearer, is still analogous to "temptation as we know it", I believe - and if it wasn't it would just be a meaningless object with no metaphorical power to make it applicable to the real world. I think Kangi Ska's and squire's points, about the Ring as a metaphor for sin, are essential elements of the power as the Ring as a narrative device. If you turn it into nothing but a mechanical "irresistible force", that is lost.
In the same way, I find that dismissing all the mentions of other people's apparent temptations again strips the Ring of its narrative power. Whether Aragorn and Galadriel's temptations are shown in "real time", or whether they are demonstrating the strength of the emotions they have already conquered beforehand, they seem to me to be real and important elements in the story. The same goes for Faramir's strange behaviour, which for me loses any real meaning if it doesn't include a sense that Faramir is working through his sudden sense of temptation.
Contrasting the Ring's effect on Frodo as "magic" and on Faramir as "normal" seems to me counterproductive and ultimately impossible to pin down anyway. The "magic" of the Ring is shown throughout the story as slippery, ambiguous, difficult to separate from "normal" thought processes - and this is as true for Frodo as for anyone else. The point is that even the apparently gentle, kindly hobbits have a hidden core of selfishness - as do we all, which is the point. Everyone has "original sin" - everyone, if pushed to the limit, will fall and can only be saved by grace. That's how the metaphor works, and to try to pin it down (this is magic, this isn't) in an analytic, restrictive way just kills the metaphor, for me.
They went in, and Sam shut the door.
But even as he did so, he heard suddenly,
deep and unstilled,
the sigh and murmur of the Sea upon the shores of Middle-earth.
From the unpublished Epilogue to the Lord of the Rings
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 14 2010, 1:53pm
Post #74 of 98
(1238 views)
Shortcut
|
Or, possibly, those who act consistent with their worse natures are simply acting according to their natures.
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 14 2010, 2:06pm
Post #75 of 98
(1249 views)
Shortcut
|
|
"I do not think that Frodo's was a moral failure."
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
That is the exact quote.
Letter #246 "From a letter to Mrs Eileen Elgar Sept 1963 (A reply to a reader's comments on Frodo's failure to surrender the Ring in the Cracks of Doom)
Frodo's failure...is a very important point. It became at last quite clear that Frodo after all that had happened would be incapable of voluntarily destroying the Ring. Reflecting on the solution after it was arrived at, I feel that it is central to the whole 'theory' of true nobility and heroism that is presented.
Frodo indeed 'failed' as a hero, as conceived by simple minds: he did not endure to the end; he gave in.
I do not think that Frodo's was a moral failure. At the last moment the pressure of the Ring would reach its maximum - impossible, I should have said, for any one to resist, certainly after long possession, months of increasing torment, and when starved and exhausted. Frodo had done what he could and spent himself completely (as an instument of Providence) and had produced a situation in which the object of his quest could be achieved. His humility (with which he began) and his sufferings were justly rewarded by the highest honour; and his exercise of patience and mercy towards Gollum gained him Mercy: his failure was redressed. ..Moral failure can only be asserted, I think, when a man's effort or endurance falls short of his limits.
I do think Tolkien draws a distinction between Frodo's failure of strength and the moral failures of Smeagol, Saruman, and Denethor, or the near moral failure of Boromir. I don't think I'm imagining things.
I haven't dismissed the temptations of others who did not bear the Ring. I agree that Gandalf and Galadriel and probably Aragorn and Faramir as well had to deal with their own pride and desire. But I think they did so long before then encountered the Ring -- indeed, the fact that they did so shows that the influence of the Ring is not necessary. For the Wise and the Powerful, just the knowledge that the Ring exists is enough to create temptation, and when it is in their grasp or offered to them the temptation becomes that much stronger. The Ring does not need to intervene, even if it could.
(This post was edited by Curious on Jul 14 2010, 2:10pm)
|
|
|
squire
Half-elven
Jul 14 2010, 3:11pm
Post #76 of 98
(1362 views)
Shortcut
|
If we accept the commonplace that people's natures are variable and range from "better natures" to "worse natures", what then does it mean to say that we are acting "according to our natures" when we, in a specific moment of choice, act for the "worse"? It seems to say that if you are capable of evil, you are already inescapably evil. That is rather circular.
I don't think that's what's being portrayed by these characters' behaviors regarding the Ring, at any rate. Consider the portrait of Boromir during the moment he loses control and attacks Frodo:
'For I am too strong for you, halfling,’ he cried; and suddenly he sprang over the stone and leaped at Frodo. His fair and pleasant face was hideously changed; a raging fire was in his eyes. (LotR II.10) As written, this is not a man who has been evil all along and suddenly reveals himself when the Ring comes within his grasp. Rather the scene is consistent with all the other instances of the Ring's effect on great and powerful persons: Boromir was tested to resist the temptation of the Ring, which his own native talent for leadership and power made him vulnerable to. The Ring appeals to ones instinct to use power to do good - but through evil means, which only a native sense of high morality can recognize and refuse. In particular this scene contrasts directly with Galadriel's moment of temptation just a few chapters back. She too is 'hideously changed' ('terrible and worshipful') but pulls back at the last possible second; Boromir unfortunately does not. Unlike Gandalf, Strider, Elrond, Galadriel and later Faramir, Boromir fails the test.
Why should we doubt Boromir's virtue, or call him "corrupt from the beginning", because of this? On the one hand, his fall is foreshadowed by the writing and so in retrospect we accept it as realistic. But on the other hand, his goodness and nobility (like Denethor's) are equally presented, so that we can feel the power of the Ring on the great folk of the West. The whole point of the Ring is that power (the ability to dominate others' wills) is inherently fraught with moral peril. As Elrond tells us, the Ring only tempts those who can make use of it.
It is rather sophistic to continue debating whether the Ring or the will to power of the great person is the source of the temptation, rather like debating whether guns or people kill people. Clearly both elements are required: since only the powerful can use the Ring, only the powerful are tempted. As noted, this explains instantly why the rest of the Fellowship do not attempt to seize the Ring. It is above the natures of the other hobbits, the Elf and the Dwarf; while Gandalf and Aragorn have already confronted and mastered their own responses to the Ring. That leaves only Boromir. His growing conflict that ends with his assault on Frodo is clearly pictured as the consequence of traveling alongside it for so long. To repeat Elrond's words, 'The very desire of it corrupts the heart'. He is describing a process, and we witness the process taking place over several weeks in Boromir's heart.
If Boromir was so evil from the beginning, clearly he would never have been allowed to travel with the Company. Gandalf later admits he did not think Boromir would fail the test, and notes that Galadriel, with more grounds for suspicion, also let him go on with Frodo:
‘Poor Boromir! I could not see what happened to him. It was a sore trial for such a man: a warrior, and a lord of men. Galadriel told me that he was in peril. But he escaped in the end.' (LotR III.5)
Boromir's death is seen by Aragorn and Gandalf as a redemption, and also shows that his fall was barely over the edge - it barely happened. His better nature and his worse nature were in conflict; the worse triumphed for a moment but only due to the Ring's influence over a long period of time and at the crisis point of finally having to part ways with it. Thanks to Frodo's quick wits and the fateful luck of knocking himself out, Boromir's better nature reasserted itself almost instantly. Had he still been under the influence of the Ring after Frodo escaped, he would not have defended Merry and Pippin, but would have continued to hunt down Frodo - one could imagine (as Tolkien did in an earlier draft) Boromir fighting it out in a duel with Aragorn.
One can say that Boromir was always corruptible, but so are all the others who are tempted by but decide to foreswear the Ring. Corruptible does not mean corrupt, no more than having a "worse nature" compels one always to act according to it.
squire online:
RR Discussions: The Valaquenta, A Shortcut to Mushrooms, and Of Herbs and Stewed Rabbit
Lights! Action! Discuss on the Movie board!: 'A Journey in the Dark'. and 'Designing The Two Towers'.
Footeramas: The 3rd TORn Reading Room LotR Discussion; and "Tolkien would have LOVED it!"
squiretalk introduces the J.R.R. Tolkien Encyclopedia: A Reader's Diary
= Forum has no new posts. Forum needs no new posts.
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 14 2010, 4:34pm
Post #77 of 98
(1344 views)
Shortcut
|
|
You think Galadriels' tranformation
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
was the work of the Ring? That she had no control over it? That Frodo -- nay, the whole world, was in genuine danger? I've never interpreted it that way. I've always thought she was just showing Frodo why she could not take it. I think both interpretations are valid.
As for Boromir, I'm willing to contemplate that the Ring transformed his visage, but are you willing to contemplate that his temptation was not influenced by the Ring? That he was just tempted, in the ordinary sense of that word? I don't think the evidence is conclusive either way. Do you?
|
|
|
squire
Half-elven
Jul 14 2010, 5:16pm
Post #78 of 98
(1340 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I'm willing to contemplate that we are getting nowhere
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Of course all interpretations of these scenes are valid, to the readers that make them. What does that mean, anyway? No interpretation of literature is factual, after all, and proof is never possible in discussions like these. We are trading interpretations for the fun of the exercise itself, and the fun of learning from others. Of course we strive for civility here. I hope I haven't offended anyone by implying they are "wrong" in their reading of the Ring's nature in The Lord of the Rings. But that doesn't mean I should say that everyone's readings are equally "right", either, or pretend I don't believe in my own argument.
I have showed you all the evidence I could, that made an argument conclusive to me. That is, after I read and thought about the relevant passages, I concluded - made my interpretation and felt prepared to present it to others like you and the rest of the board. Obviously, I do think my evidence is conclusive both that his desire for the Ring transformed Boromir's visage, and that his temptation to seize the Ring from Frodo was influenced by the Ring. But how can I ensure you will conclude the same things from my evidence and reasoning? In the end I can't. I feel that to try further would simply mean repeating myself for a third time, which seems unproductive. And it doesn't bother me very much if we don't agree in the end; we have a lot of water under the bridge by now.
squire online:
RR Discussions: The Valaquenta, A Shortcut to Mushrooms, and Of Herbs and Stewed Rabbit
Lights! Action! Discuss on the Movie board!: 'A Journey in the Dark'. and 'Designing The Two Towers'.
Footeramas: The 3rd TORn Reading Room LotR Discussion; and "Tolkien would have LOVED it!"
squiretalk introduces the J.R.R. Tolkien Encyclopedia: A Reader's Diary
= Forum has no new posts. Forum needs no new posts.
|
|
|
FarFromHome
Valinor
Jul 14 2010, 5:31pm
Post #79 of 98
(1332 views)
Shortcut
|
And thanks for giving such a long passage - very useful for me since I couldn't look it up myself.
Despite the "not a moral failure" statement, the gist of Tolkien's letter seems to be saying essentially what I was arguing - that Frodo is saved by Providence because of the great sacrifices he had already made - as Tolkien puts it, "his failure was redressed." Not that he didn't fail at all, but that he earned redemption. As did Boromir, and as Denethor and Saruman both failed (through their pride) to do - deliberately refusing all Gandalf's efforts to give them the chance to make amends for their failure.
So I think it's too much to draw from this letter that the quality of the temptation was different for Frodo than for others (whether or not they came into physical contact with the Ring). The difference is only in the intensity - and Frodo's ultimate redemption from failure is due not to the fact that he was facing a "magical" and irresistible force, but because he struggled to the last to resist his temptation - and because of his mercy to Gollum.
They went in, and Sam shut the door.
But even as he did so, he heard suddenly,
deep and unstilled,
the sigh and murmur of the Sea upon the shores of Middle-earth.
From the unpublished Epilogue to the Lord of the Rings
|
|
|
PhantomS
Rohan
Jul 14 2010, 5:33pm
Post #80 of 98
(1341 views)
Shortcut
|
Merry and Pippin barely understand what the Ring truly is, and what it means to be around it. It is not particularly bothered with them either, since they have no noticable power or desire for power. They've come along for Frodo and Sam, hopefully to dump this silly thing and to go home. The Ring is probably not going to try to influence people who have come just to be company. The Palantir was different because Sauron himself was on the direct line, waiting for an answer from Saruman. Even Aragorn had to fulfill his Palantir-craving and picked a fight with Sauron out of nowhere. The ring is more like a beacon with a switch.
As for Legolas and Gimli they were chosen to be Frodo's company; neither also understand the Ring as much as Gandalf and Elrond do. It could call out to them and offer a resurgence of their peoples, but both Legolas and Gimli are rather young and thus don't really have much to recall outside of songs and granddad-tales. If it was Dain Ironfoot and Thranduil going on this trip the temptation for Khazad-dum (or rather, to foolishly challenge Durin's Bane) or Doriath might awaken and we'd be in trouble. It helps that Legolas is practically a wood-elf and thinks simple much of the time for an Elf. Galadriel is more complex thinking than him and shows us how hard it was to overcome the Ring temptation and become 'diminished'.
The Ring also knows Frodo is going to Mordor, so for the most part it never tries to escape ala Gollum and Bilbo since Sauron awaits right at home. Legolas and Gimli would have taken it northwards and away.
|
|
|
CuriousG
Half-elven
Jul 14 2010, 6:20pm
Post #81 of 98
(1312 views)
Shortcut
|
The "magic" of the Ring is shown throughout the story as slippery, ambiguous, difficult to separate from "normal" thought processes - and this is as true for Frodo as for anyone else.
I think you brought us back to reality on this one, FFA--thanks! Some discussion has revolved around "why didn't the Ring always do the same thing to everyone?", assuming that it acts consistently and predictably. This is my own prejudice when reading fantasy: why doesn't magic always work the same way that a mechanical device does? We are creatures of our own age just as we say that about people in other eras, and in this age of mobile phones, iPods, etc, we expect these "wondrous" devices to be reliable and consistent. If an iPod works for me, it should work for you too.
The Ring is magical. It doesn't obey any laws we try to assign to it. It's outside the laws of science. There's no reason why it should corrupt everyone who comes near it; hence there's no reason why it HAD to tempt the other hobbits, Gimli, and Legolas. Magical things are inherently unpredictable and "slippery," as you say. It's a mysterious element in the story, not a predictable one. The only thing we're sure of is that it's evil; we can't be certain how, when, or if it will enact its evil.
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 14 2010, 6:25pm
Post #82 of 98
(1312 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Why do you think Legolas and Gimli
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
were less powerful, or less used to power, than Boromir? I'm not sure I buy that.
I do find it fascinating that all these years I read the book with a completely different perspective from, apparently, everyone else. I have never thought that Smeagol (before he held it), Gandalf, Strider, Elrond, Galadriel, Boromir, or Faramir were influenced by the Ring. When the movie portrayed Gandalf as reluctant to touch the Ring, or Galadriel as truly recovering her senses after going nuclear, that was very different from my interpretation. Yet what I'm reading in this thread leads me to believe that I am, perhaps, the only one who thought that the Ring had nothing to do with the temptation of the nonringbearers, except as an object of desire. Fair enough.
|
|
|
Kangi Ska
Half-elven
Jul 14 2010, 6:31pm
Post #83 of 98
(1296 views)
Shortcut
|
Anyone who owns a Personal Computer knows that sufficiently complex machines are capable of doing evil.
Kangi Ska
Make the Hobbit Happen!
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 14 2010, 6:37pm
Post #84 of 98
(1358 views)
Shortcut
|
I've enjoyed the thread a great deal, but I think squire is right, we are beginning to go in circles. I've made my position clear to myself and others as best I can. I continue to think it fits all the evidence, but it seems clear that I am in the minority -- perhaps a minority of one.
I do think we can agree, though, that, as you say, at least the quality of the tempation was different for the ringbearers. The Ring seems to have had a much greater effect on those who wore it than those who were close to it, and probably would have had a much greater effect on those who claimed it than on those who merely wore it.
Maybe the effect on those who were near it was greater than zero, despite the ability of the hobbits and Gimli and Legolas to shrug it off. Or perhaps the Ring could select its victims, and chose Boromir because he was the most vulnerable. I still think it is equally plausible that the Ring did not affect people who were not ringbearers, but I'm not sure anyone else agrees with me about that. So be it. Maybe I'm just stubborn.
You know, now that I think of it, perhaps the greatest evidence that the Ring can affect those who don't bear it comes Unfinished Tales and the passage through Moria in LotR. In Unfinished Tales Tolkien tells of Isildur's last stand, and writes that orcs who really had no business knowing of the presence of the Ring turned into berserkers while fighting Isildur. Similarly, in Moria we have the Watcher in the Water and the berserker orc targeting Frodo as if they knew he had the Ring. It's quite possible that the Ring influenced the behavior of these monsters, and that may be evidence that it also influenced the behavior of non-monsters like Boromir. Indeed, perhaps the Ring influenced the behavior of Pippin when he dropped the stone into the well in Moria! Hmm, I like that theory!
|
|
|
dernwyn
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Jul 15 2010, 2:30am
Post #85 of 98
(1329 views)
Shortcut
|
when he had his vision:
His thought turned to the Ring, but there was no comfort there, only dread and danger. No sooner had he come in sight of Mount Doom, burning far away, than he was aware of a change in his burden. As it drew near the great furnaces where, in the deeps of time, it had been shaped and forged, the Ring's power grew, and it became more fell, untameable save by some mighty will. As Sam stood there, even though the Ring was not on him but hanging by its chain about his neck, he felt himself enlarged, as if he were robed in a huge distorted shadow of himself, a vast and ominous threat halted upon the walls of Mordor. He felt that he had from now on only two choices: to forbear the Ring, though it would torment him; or to claim it, and challenge the Power that sat in its dark hold beyond the valley of shadows. Already the Ring tempted him, gnawing at his will and reason. Wild fantasies arose in his mind; and he saw Samwise the Strong, Hero of the Age...He had only to put on the Ring and claim it for his own, and all this could be.
In that hour of trial it was the love of his master that helped most to hold him firm; but also deep down in him lived still unconquered his plain hobbit-sense: he knew in the core of his heart that he was not large enough to bear such a burden, even if such visions were not a mere cheat to betray him. The one small garden of a free gardener was all his need and due, not a garden swollen to a realm; his own hands to use, not the hands of others to command.
'And anyway all these notions are only a trick,' he said to himself. 'He'd spot me and cow me, before I could so much as shout out.'
The Ring, unworn, is tempting Sam to claim it "with the best of intentions" - in vain. It cannot defeat the "mighty will" of this simple Hobbit.
And speaking of Sam, let me add his observations about Boromir into the mix: "Now I watched Boromir and listened to him, from Rivendell all down the road...and it's my opinion that in Lórien he first saw clearly what I guessed sooner: what he wanted. From the moment he first saw it he wanted the Enemy's Ring!"
So: did Boromir's attitude make him want the Ring - or was the Ring working on him, tempting him with its prowess as a weapon? Clear as mud, isn't it?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I desired dragons with a profound desire"
"It struck me last night that you might write a fearfully good romantic drama, with as much of the 'supernatural' as you cared to introduce. Have you ever thought of it?"
-Geoffrey B. Smith, letter to JRR Tolkien, 1915
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 15 2010, 3:25am
Post #86 of 98
(1332 views)
Shortcut
|
bearing the Ring at the time.
And speaking of Sam, let me add his observations about Boromir into the mix: "Now I watched Boromir and listened to him, from Rivendell all down the road...and it's my opinion that in Lórien he first saw clearly what I guessed sooner: what he wanted. From the moment he first saw it he wanted the Enemy's Ring!"
So: did Boromir's attitude make him want the Ring - or was the Ring working on him, tempting him with its prowess as a weapon? Clear as mud, isn't it?
Precisely my point. It's just not clear how much the Ring has to do with it when a ringbearer is not involved.
|
|
|
FarFromHome
Valinor
Jul 15 2010, 9:23am
Post #87 of 98
(1286 views)
Shortcut
|
... human thought?
So: did Boromir's attitude make him want the Ring - or was the Ring working on him, tempting him with its prowess as a weapon? Clear as mud, isn't it?
I think it helps to consider the Ring as a "magical" metaphor for ordinary, human temptation - temptation made concrete, you might say.
So everything that happens to people in terms of the Ring reflects the different ways people might react to temptation. If you take a mundane example, you could imagine the Ring as, say, a donut (mmm...). People who aren't hungry won't be tempted at all (Gimli and Legolas apparently have no need for power), and may have the added inhibition of knowing that the donut belongs to someone they love (Merry, Pippin, Sam). But someone who's hungry (like Boromir) will feel his mouth watering immediately. He knows he shouldn't take someone else's donut, but the longer he has to look at it, the more his hunger grows. Anybody who's ever been on a diet knows how that feels...
That's how temptation works on a trivial scale, and fundamentally, serious temptations follow the same psychology. If you're sensible, you will make sure the tempting object is put away out of your sight. That's how I see Faramir's reaction - his mouth waters instantly because he too is hungry (both to finish off his brother's job and to do his father's will), but he's already put himself "on a diet" by swearing that he won't take whatever it is that Frodo has, and he's wise enough to get that donut out of his sight before it starts to play on his mind: "there are some perils from which a man must flee."
For me, the magic of Middle-earth is natural, and follows the nature of the world as we know it. A magical object like the Ring doesn't contradict nature, it just magnifies and illuminates it by turning thoughts and beliefs into concrete metaphors. The real magic isn't mechanical and external, like Gandalf's fireworks, but deeply internal - "right down deep where [you] can't lay your hands on it" as Sam puts it. And yet, as Frodo replies, "‘you can see and feel it everywhere" - because it's deep inside us, reflecting our most human - and most complex and "clear as mud" - thoughts and emotions.
They went in, and Sam shut the door.
But even as he did so, he heard suddenly,
deep and unstilled,
the sigh and murmur of the Sea upon the shores of Middle-earth.
From the unpublished Epilogue to the Lord of the Rings
|
|
|
dernwyn
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Jul 15 2010, 10:36am
Post #88 of 98
(1317 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I love your Ring/donut comparison!
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Thus, it's like Sam says: a man brings his peril with him!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I desired dragons with a profound desire"
"It struck me last night that you might write a fearfully good romantic drama, with as much of the 'supernatural' as you cared to introduce. Have you ever thought of it?"
-Geoffrey B. Smith, letter to JRR Tolkien, 1915
|
|
|
dernwyn
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Jul 15 2010, 11:34am
Post #89 of 98
(1296 views)
Shortcut
|
I suppose one could say that at this point, within sight of Orodruin, "wearing" and "bearing" the Ring become nearly the same thing, due to the increased "activity" of the Ring near its source.
Which leads me to wonder: had Sam been bearing the Ring when they came near the blasted lands north of the Morannon, would his "I feel sick" have led to grandeur illusions then, a fantasy that he could have healed that land?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I desired dragons with a profound desire"
"It struck me last night that you might write a fearfully good romantic drama, with as much of the 'supernatural' as you cared to introduce. Have you ever thought of it?"
-Geoffrey B. Smith, letter to JRR Tolkien, 1915
|
|
|
FarFromHome
Valinor
Jul 15 2010, 12:33pm
Post #90 of 98
(1290 views)
Shortcut
|
don't you think?
I don't recall anyone having delusions once they've given in to temptation and put the Ring on. Instead they feel "uniquely visible" and vulnerable.
Kind of the way you feel when you give in and take a bite of that forbidden donut...
(I feel sick, indeed!)
They went in, and Sam shut the door.
But even as he did so, he heard suddenly,
deep and unstilled,
the sigh and murmur of the Sea upon the shores of Middle-earth.
From the unpublished Epilogue to the Lord of the Rings
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 15 2010, 1:50pm
Post #91 of 98
(1266 views)
Shortcut
|
|
|
|
xy
Rohan
Jul 15 2010, 3:09pm
Post #92 of 98
(1298 views)
Shortcut
|
I always thought Ring tempting (pretty much) everyone is it's influence...
- Smeagol murders his best friend merely seconds upon viewing the Ring. I'm not convinced he was always a murderer.
- Saruman only studied the lore on the Ring(s) of Power and he fell under the influence (although I'd also argue using the Pallantir helped a lot). Surely he wasn't evil from day one in Middle Earth...
- Boromir hears stories of Isildur's Bane, and is quite quickly tempted as well. Of course his intentions are only do defend his home town, but we all know it would not stop there...and Denethor wants to hide it in in Minas Tirith, only to be used in dire need. I'm not convinced Boromir set out to Rivendell already planning to take over the Ring (although it's certainly plausible Denethor sent him with that in mind). He began plotting once he saw the Ring "live" sort of speak.
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Jul 15 2010, 4:02pm
Post #93 of 98
(1272 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Apparently everyone agrees with you.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I've been fighting a losing battle on this one, and I've finally given up. But at the very least, the Ring seems to be selective about who it influences. Gimli and Legolas and Merry and Pippin are apparently unaffected, for example. I also think that the Ring has a much greater influence on ringbearers than anyone else. And as for Saruman and Denethor, I find it more persuasive to assume that they were directly influenced by Sauron through the palantiri, since they never came near the Ring.
|
|
|
dernwyn
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Jul 15 2010, 4:13pm
Post #94 of 98
(1277 views)
Shortcut
|
you can't have your donut and eat it too?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I desired dragons with a profound desire"
"It struck me last night that you might write a fearfully good romantic drama, with as much of the 'supernatural' as you cared to introduce. Have you ever thought of it?"
-Geoffrey B. Smith, letter to JRR Tolkien, 1915
|
|
|
FarFromHome
Valinor
Jul 20 2010, 1:03pm
Post #96 of 98
(1271 views)
Shortcut
|
in his admission of fear, perhaps: "I fear to take the Ring to hide it...."
That is, he knows he would be tempted if he allowed himself access to the Ring. It's true that we don't see him actually confronted with it, and it would nicely complete the set if we had, but he's following the wisdom that Faramir describes later: "I am wise enough to know that there are some perils from which a man must flee."
Now I come to think about it, this is a possible solution to a point that Bilbo raises in conversation with Frodo - why could the Ring not have been brought to Rivendell much sooner, before things got so dangerous: "I could have brought the thing here myself long ago without so much trouble. I have thought several times of going back to Hobbiton for it; but I am getting old, and they would not let me: Gandalf and Elrond, I mean."
Gandalf and Elrond were wise enough, it seems, to know that it had to stay out of their reach.
They went in, and Sam shut the door.
But even as he did so, he heard suddenly,
deep and unstilled,
the sigh and murmur of the Sea upon the shores of Middle-earth.
From the unpublished Epilogue to the Lord of the Rings
|
|
|
CuriousG
Half-elven
Jul 20 2010, 1:23pm
Post #97 of 98
(1258 views)
Shortcut
|
Thanks, FFH. I've wondered the same thing myself: if Gandalf had a smidgeon of a doubt about the true nature of the Ring, why leave it in Bag End? Admittedly, the Shire was unknown and it wasn't a likely place for anyone to come plundering to steal it, but it would have been safer in Rivendell. Except, as you point out, that it would have used its corrupting power there.
Denethor rationally (despite his otherwise irrational persona) said he wouldn't use but would keep it locked up in Minas Tirith. Gandalf retorted that the Ring would eat at his mind until he did retrieve it from his deepest treasury and claim it as his own. It seems it would have done the same thing in Rivendell. Under Frodo's care, the Ring extended his life, but it didn't enslave him into putting the Ring on and declaring himself the new Lord of the Rings. So it was safer to leave it in Hobbiton, it turns out.
|
|
|
squire
Half-elven
Jul 20 2010, 4:19pm
Post #98 of 98
(1571 views)
Shortcut
|
Nice phrase!
Yes, we might conclude that Elrond is confessing his own confrontation with the Ring in that one statement. Of course, he does let it come to Rivendell, and he hosts it for months while the "scouts" are out and about that fall. Likewise, Galadriel allows the Ring (against her better judgment, it seems) into Lothlorien, and Gandalf and Aragorn, having foresworn the Ring, travel with it for weeks or months. I think these are interesting examples of the power of words or oaths in the story: the Wise and Powerful are largely safe against the Ring's immediate proximity if they have said to themselves and others that they will not take it. Faramir (weaker and less sure of himself) is true to his word too, but a bit more hasty, pushing Frodo out the door the next morning.
I don't see Bilbo's words as implying that Gandalf and Elrond were nervous about the Ring coming to Rivendell, because it would then tempt them. The situation would have been the same as it ended up: Rivendell could only have been a rest stop before sending the Ring to the Fire. Rather, the remark seems to me to refer to the idea (supported elsewhere in the text) that the Ring has passed from Bilbo, and cannot be taken back by him since he is so close to being enslaved by it.
It does beg the question of when Elrond first discovered from Gandalf that Bilbo's ring was a Great Ring of Power, if not the actual One Ring. In Gandalf's other narratives, he implies that the question of the hobbit's ring was a puzzle that only he and Aragorn were working on, leaving Saruman out of the loop - no mention of wise old Elrond at all. As I've asked before regarding Gandalf's wisdom, I'll ask again about Elrond's: why the delay? why no haste? why wait for decades when Sauron was weak, when no harm could have come from assuming the worst and acting quickly?
squire online:
RR Discussions: The Valaquenta, A Shortcut to Mushrooms, and Of Herbs and Stewed Rabbit
Lights! Action! Discuss on the Movie board!: 'A Journey in the Dark'. and 'Designing The Two Towers'.
Footeramas: The 3rd TORn Reading Room LotR Discussion; and "Tolkien would have LOVED it!"
squiretalk introduces the J.R.R. Tolkien Encyclopedia: A Reader's Diary
= Forum has no new posts. Forum needs no new posts.
|
|
|
|
|
