Gollum's sacrifice
 

Professor, in one his letters, states that if Sam had not be harsh on Gollum, Gollum would have sacrificed himself.
And also:
Professor says Sam prevented Gollum's redemption, and Shelob's Lair becomes invitable. So, if Sam had acted differently, would Gollum have not taken them to Shelob's cave? Gollum had already planned to do so, why Sam's actions affect Gollum so deeply that he cannot come back!
Later, he says that Gollum would have sacrificed his life for Frodo's sake. How was that possible when the pressure of the One was too great for the person who was strongest when it came to resisting it? When Frodo "gave in" and could not do what he desired to, how Gollum could have done: knowing he could not use the Ring, and sacrificing himself?

Presumably no, Gollum would not have betrayed them to Shelob had it not been for the fact that he was pushed over the edge by Sam's mistrust. The precise moment is when Frodo and Sam have been sleeping on the Stairs of Cirith Ungol. Sam wakes up to see Gollum expressing a moment of tenderness - touching Frodo's knee - and thinks Gollum is "pawing at master." He accuses him of "sneaking" and being an "old villain." Gollum's affection for Frodo, one of the only people he had ever met to show him any pity, was perhaps ill-timed, but Sam was possibly overprotective. Gollum is trying to express a long-subdued side and Sam rebukes him. For such a corrupted creature, I don't think it stretches our credibility too far to see how the denial of even such a timid attempt at "human contact" would drive him back into evil permanently.

The answer is in the exact letter you are quoting, Letter 246. In fact I think the exact quotation you provided does, assuming I am reading your question correctly. The only way to simultaneously spite Sauron and to "keep" the Ring (as it were) was to destroy both oneself and it simultaneously. As such one did not have to live without the Ring, but Sauron did not get it back. If you're talking about Frodo (I'm not sure if you're talking about Frodo or Gollum) he says in the same letter that Frodo would have done the same thing. Or at least, he would have done so in the scenario where the Ringwraiths were not quick enough to entice Frodo back outside so that Sauron could come and retrieve the Ring in person.

I both agree and disagree with that guess. Where I disagree is in the assertion that, in that scenrio Gollum would not have led them to Shelob's cave; I think he still might have. As Gollum himself pointed out, the Cirith Ungol path was probably the least watched, and therfore the best bet for getting into Mordor unnoticed. And that patch REQUIRES going through the lair. Sam's actions or lack theof would not have changed that.
What I DO think would probably be the case had Sam not done what he did would twofold. First he probably would have warned them about Shelob and the risk they were getting into. Second he probably would have gone into the cave with them. Gollum would have been a perfect guide in that case, he has incredible night vision (and so could guide then even with all of Shelob's vomited darkness all over the place, and has made it through before (so probably knows the beast hidey holes in the tunnel. At bare minimum, that would probably mean Frodo not being bitten, or failing that Sam knowing not to abandon Frodo's body (Depending on how long gollum spent in the cave the first time, and how much he saw of Shelob and the orcs, he may be well aware that a bite from her is not fatal) as well as an extra pair of hands to carry him till he wakes up (Gollum is quite strong for his build, so he probably could deadman handle Frodo on his own, if allowed.) More than likey they also would not have had to bother with the tower of Cirith Ungol at all. If they slipped by Shelob unnoticed, no alert would have been sounded, so no guards would have been patrolling. That would techically mean dealing with a guard tower still filled with it's compliment of orcs, but something tells me that sneaking by that would have been a lesser challenge than Shelob.

More or less accurate, though, of course, Frodo would get out of the destruction with his full complement of manual digits. Frodo and Sam might have also been in better shape at Orodruin; depending on exactly WHEN Gollum took the Ring back. It he still doesn't reclaim it until Orodruin, things play out more or less the same here, though again, possibly without Gollum having to bite Frodo's finger off to get the ring (if they are "friends at that point, Gollum might actually be able to use that to get just far enough into Frodo's mind to give him the clarity to hand the ring over at the rim. Or failing that, to keep him far enough off his guard that Frodo does not expect Gollum to try for the ring, and so is not defending it as well). If on the other hand he takes posession of it earlier, say at the Cirith Ungol steps, that is another matter. In that scenario, Frodo would probably be healthier than he was in the canon line (since he was relieved before the earlier part) I admit him getting the ring that early is monumentally unlikey, or more accurately getting it and still holding to the other part (since that would require Gollum to be able to resist the rings corruption not for the few nanonseconds needed to push himself over the edge at the mountain, but for the days and weeks it took to get there) still less having Frodo and Sam with him (they'd never trust him if he took it back then, so the only scenario would be Frodo being so convinced of Gollums redeption that he breaks his own words of earlier and GIVES him the ring on the steps.) We migh even lose Frodo and Sam needing rescue at all, Gollum might have told them to stay at the bottom of the mountain (or even out of Mordor entierly, and tried the extremely risky plan of getting the ring to Mount Doom all on his own, simply to save Frodo and Sam.)
This all sounds a little shaky, but part of the problem is that with gollum, the rings corrution is so inherent in who he is that it is hard making scenario's where he can beat it off even temporarily a little hard to concetualize.

Hence why I said "Gollum would not have betrayed them to Shelob" and not "Gollum would not have led them to Shelob's Lair." I never said anything about not going to Shelob's Lair, just that once they were in there in this scenario Gollum would presumably not have run off to direct Shelob towards them, as he actually did, but would in fact, as you suggest, have more safely guided them through.

I suppose the next question is what would have happened on the other side. Would they have evaded the Orcs guarding the pass?

Only too clearly Sam saw how hopeless it would be for him to creep down under those many-eyed walls and pass the watchful gate. And even if he did so, he could not go far on the guarded road beyond: not even the black shadows, lying deep where the red glow could not reach, would shield him long from the night-eyed orcs.

They'd also have to pass very close by the Silent Watchers, who were already "uneasy", according to Gorbag (and the Nazgul too, according to Shagrat), while Frodo and Sam were still climbing the pass. But that brings up another point, which is that the patrols might very well have been sent out anyway, even if Gollum hadn't precipitated the encounter with Shelob. How would that have played out, if our three steadfast adventurers had successfully slipped past the Spider, if Frodo wasn't camatose, and still in possession of the Ring?

In any case, it seems to me it would take at least a smallish eucatastrophe for them to pass the tower safely, Shelob or no. And there's at least a good chance they'd still have to deal with both, even without Gollum's treachery.

I feel Gollum is being seen something he is not, and Professor did not mean him to be: good or saint-like(for the lack of the right word). I don't think Professor (and Frodo, too) really meant that Gollum would do much good(in the text, not the letters). In his letters, he does have some hope for him, but is that only blown by Sam? Why Sam is "accused" of something he cannot be considered guilty for? I feel Gollum would have betrayed them even if it wasn't for Sam. His desire for the Ring would increase, and also his love for Frodo. Would Gollum really be able to feel the affection he has for Frodo-after all he was NOT morally good? As for his sacrifice-- I find it hard to imagine him sacrificing himself for someone else's sake- even if it was Frodo. The letter you're talking about, Zig¨´r, says something else. Professor does not say "Frodo would have sacrificed himself", he instead says that Frodo would have to do the same- sacrificing himself. If he hadn't done so, he'd have failed. Frodo's (Gollum's too) sacrifices would depend on their Free Will. By the end of the book Frodo did not have Free Will, what makes you think Gollum would?
P. S. I apologise as my posts are only about asking questions, instead of answering them.

I suppose that is true. I'd like to say that they'd have the advantage that Gollum at least has actually gone toe to toe with orcs and won (assuming you take the usual conceit of assuming the orcs and goblins are one) but those 1. were young orcs 2. were single orcs 3. was on his home turf and 4. was while he was wearing the ring (which as I pointed out, would probably not be a smart move so close to Sauron, especially for someone already so deeply enthralled by it.) They again would have the andvantage of Gollum having as good (if not better) night vision than the orcs, but that really only works if the orcs sent one or two foot soldiers to investigate up close. If they sent out a large group, or simply adopted a "shoot first and ask questions later" approach to a band of three mysterios strangers (given how close they would have to pass, there are probably several orcish archers in the tower with good enough eyes to shoot them in a manner that would not immediately kill them (so they could be questioned) but leave them incapable of escaping.)
I guess we are getting into a plot corner. It's not only a matter of Gollums redemption changing the focus of the narritive from that point on, it's looking more and more like his lack of betrayal makes the narritive as it stands IMPOSSIBLE from that point on. In a certain sense, Gollums betreyal is NECCECARY for the mission to suceed. No wounded frodo means no Mithrl coat found, no mithril coat means no infighting to decimate the tower, no decimation means no way to get past.

Perhaps their Lórien-cloaks - Frodo would of course still have his - would have aided their cause?
To exactly quote the letter:

Frodo in this tale actually takes the Ring and claims it, and certainly he too would have had a clear vision - but he was not given any time: he was immediately attacked by Gollum. When Sauron was aware of the seizure of the Ring his one hope was in its power: that the claimant would be unable to relinquish it until Sauron had time to deal with him. Frodo too would then probably, if not attacked, have had to take the same way: cast himself with the Ring into the abyss. If not he would of course have completely failed.

So what Professor Tolkien is saying here is that had Gollum not attacked, Frodo would have come to this realisation: he could either go forth and confront Sauron (impossible - he had claimed the Ring, but had to no degree mastered it: in such a confrontation Frodo would be "utterly overthrown") or throw himself into the Fire and so deny Sauron the Ring while simultaneously not having to live without it. We can see here that in this case destroying the Ring has a selfish aspect to it: not destroying the Ring to save the people of Middle-earth, but purely to spite Sauron and serve one's own (corrupt) self-interest. That's why I can see this option as being entirely possible within the Ring-corrupted mindset. Professor Tolkien of course states that it is not definite: the claimant might become sufficiently arrogantly deluded to exit the Sammath Naur with the encouragement of the Nazgûl and be destroyed by Sauron, but the point is that either choice (trying to wield the Ring or destroying it) was possible within the Ring-corrupted mindset because of the selfish and non-righteous motivations which would be behind destroying the Ring in this scenario.

Isn't he saying that Frodo would have had to take the same way, instead Frodo would have taken the same way? And if he wouldn't have done(sacrificing himself), he would have failed completely.
Would you please elaborate? In these circumstances, I do not think Frodo claimed the Ring, it was the Ring that claimed him instead. If Frodo was really going to commit suicide how it becomes selfish?

It's a little complicated to explain, but I'll try.



It has to do with Frodo's possible motivation for throwing himself in with the ring, had he done so. in the scenario he puts out (and that Tolkien's letter seems to insinuate) the destruction of the ring becomes less about destroying the ring and more about doing whatever is necessary to keep Sauron for being able to get it. The ring bearer still wants to posses the ring, and cannot bear to give it up, but realizes that he does not have sufficient power to maintain his grip on it should it come down to an actual face off against Sauron; that Sauron will defeat them and take the ring from them, and there is nothing they can do to stop him. So they throw themselves in with the ring so that they can keep Sauron from getting it without having to give it up themselves. Right up until the moment they die, the ring is theirs and theirs alone. It's sort of a "dog in the manger" situation.

Yes, hence why I said in my original post that Frodo would have cast himself into the Fire if he wasn't enticed to leave the Sammath Naur. Professor Tolkien is saying that casting himself into the fire is the only thing Frodo could have done in his Ring-influenced state of mind if he didn't want Sauron to get the Ring back, but it's not necessarily what he would have done. As I said, he might have been deluded enough to go back outside.
Exactly. Motives are important. Professor Tolkien is not a consequentialist, which is to say that he does not believe that the ends justify the means. His villains often do have that belief - Sauron and Saruman are perfectly content to use force to bring about their respective visions of an ordered world. The Professor takes it a little further, however. The motive is important too. Thus in this scenario the Ringbearer is destroying the Ring as the only way of "keeping" it and spiting Sauron, who would inevitably take it from them otherwise, and that is an evil motive, because the motive is only to not forsake this evil thing and to harm a rival for its possession. The motive is not to save the people of Middle-earth. So even though the outcome is the same as voluntarily destroying the Ring (which is actually impossible) the motivation here derives from the evil inspired by the Ring itself, which engenders only possessiveness and not pity for the suffering of others.

Gollum was a being that had for so long given up on love, in exchange for stealth, cheating, eating other sentient beings. That exchange (love for greedy predation) was, in fact, the first premise of Sméagol's claiming of the Ring. This was the 'original sin' of Gollum's taking of the Ring, which was enacted through Deagol's death. To put this another way, he exchanged love for greed in a murderous act, which is precisely how Sauron seduces. His tools are about setting the context for the being to have a change of attitude about all their commitment to beauty and love. Sauron's lure tricks people into disconnecting from their 'herd', which is the people they came from, and who nurtured them.

Beings who take that road, such as Gollum, and who then begin the great, arduous journey back, are particularly susceptible to succumbing again, to that process that subverted them in the first place. Samwise, through his overuse of scorn, re-shamed Gollum, which was to reopen that very wound in Sméagol's mind where he separated himself from his people, and became two personalities.

Sam's was a cane for his own back in re-entrapping Sméagol within Gollum's control. Gollum only had the balance of power in the dual-personality structure where Sméagol had no join to other souls. What Frodo offered Gollum, was, through identifying with Sméagol's suffering, a love-join for Sméagol, which tilted the balance of power back to Sméagol for a while. That's because Sméagol could identify with Frodo's suffering as Ringbearer, preventing Gollum from getting hold. Until this time, there had not been any living being who Sméagol felt 'seen' and 'understood' by. Frodo's empathy (the love join), then, was a dispelling of great darkness in Gollum's mind, and a point of flow of 'seeing' from Frodo into Gollum. Sméagol must have felt great love for Frodo because of this great power that was Frodo's kindness.

Samwise Gamgee sacrificed all that.

Aha! Thanks, everyone. I'm proved wrong, and I'm glad for that! :)