Quote:
Originally Posted by Mithadan
If the latter, then it is entirely possible that the Ring ( as opposed to the ring) may have influenced Bilbo's choices. Just days ago I noted that Isildur, having possessed the Ring for a matter of hours, could not make the right decision: to destroy the Ring. Bilbo, possessing the Ring for a period of time even longer, could have been influenced by its evil animus.
|
Even if you choose to interpret the works of J.R.R. Tolkien as continuous and uniform world, you'd still have to explain why the Ring would play a part in Bilbo's decision to take, keep and give away the Arkenstone. And that's where the argument looses me. Exactly what decision is supposed to be influenced by the Ring? The initial and spontaneous impulse to take the Arkenstone in the first place? Keeping it a secret? Or giving it away to enforce a peaceful compromise?!
For the point of the ongoing discussion I'll take the following as a starting point:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ivriniel
We never find out what measure of Bilbo's treachery was motivated by the then hold the ring exerted over Bilbo
We don't know whether or not he would have conceived the plot to place the dwarves on the back foot had there been no ring
|
It seems you argued that the Ring may (or may not) have influenced the whole
package, from the taking to the giving away of the Arkenstone. Besides, it seems to me that you are implying that Bilbo conceived the plot with the intention to harm the Company and put them in a disadvantageous position. I have a few problems with that. Bilbos motivation for his plot, to give the Arkenstone away, is very well fleshed out in
the Hobbit. He wanted to put an end to a deadlocked and dangerous conflict. He just wanted to get home. To achieve that he gave the only thing away which could be used as leverage against Thorin. He didn't put "the dwarves" on the back foot. He chose to give up his own share and reward to ensure a reasonable and peaceful solution to the given situation. The dwarves would have had the same amount of Gold, Bard would have his fair share and nobody would have to die. I try really hard to understand how the Ring of Power, the pinnacle of evil, could have had any influence in this motivation. Does anything comparable happen in the LotR-novels? The Ring usually doesn't support altruistic and problem solving behaviour. I fail to see how the Ring could have had any effect in Bilbo's decision to give the Arkenstone away. Bilbo doesn't get anything (no power, no wealth and no honor) from his plan, except for the possibility that he may see his beloved Hobbit-hole again. For me, that's as atypical for the kind of influence the Ring has on people, as it gets.
Yes, the Ring does alter the personality and actions of a person. And yes, Bilbo's deed could be (unfairly, imho) interpreted as dishonest and treacherous. But I still don't see a connection between those two things. The Ring influences his owner in a very specific way. It's not like it reinforces immoral actions in general. During the course of the story (LotR) we don't see Bilbo, or Frodo, becoming bad persons, or acting more and more selfish and immoral. At worst they get defensive and delusional when it comes to the question of their claim to the Ring. But usually they are still the normal, generous and kind Hobbits they've always been, despite the fact that they have kept the Ring for such a long time.