The doom of the Ring

[Ivriniel]

Originally Posted by Leaf

I created this thread to discuss a thought (or two) about the doom of the Ring. Let's begin with a very brief summery of the events that let to the destruction of the One Ring:

Frodo and Sam succeed in bringing the Ring to the right location, Mount Doom. They overcome many obstacles and are at their physical and psychological limit. Frodo fails to do the deed and claims the Ring of Power to himself. 'Luckily' Gollum appears in the nick of time to take the Ring from Frodo and then, again 'luckily' (in sort of a morbid way), destroys the Ring (and himself) seemingly by accident. Middle-Earth is saved.

I interpret Frodo's failure to be inevitable. I don't think any other being, or 'person', would have been able to destroy the Ring of Power willingly. Maybe with the exception of Tom Bombadil, but I won't dive into this topic right now. As I see it, the person who destroys the ring willingly, at the cracks of Mt. Doom, would have to be a person who rejects the very possibility of any kind of influence to the world around him, a person without any interest in his own fate and in the fate of others. The problem is that this 'being' would be, essentialy, an 'un-person'. So, I don't put any blame on Frodo. I think his decision, if you could call it that way, is very understandable in the given situation.

It's necessary to stress that Frodo's actual achievements are different from that. He made it to Mt. Doom and brought the Ring to the right place. A indispensable requirement for the destruction of the Ring. He also, against his initial attitude, didn't kill off Gollum and, more so, allowed him to accompany him. This was, in hindsight, the second requirement, as Gandalf vaguely (and wisely) predicted.

Now, there's one quote from the relevant chapter that irks me every time I read it:



How literal can we take Sam's vision?! Did the Ring really speak to Gollum, or was this just Sam's imagination? Those questions are highly debatable. But let's just assume, for the following thought, that it was indeed the voice of the Ring of Power. The thing that irks me is that the Ring's verdict (or doom) towards Gollum comes true. Gollum dares to touch the thing again and is cast into the Fire of Doom. This includes, ironically, the Ring itself.

Here comes, finally, my question to you: Do you think that it's plausible to say that the Ring, due to his very nature, settled his own doom? Is evil, with it's inherent immutable determination and fatalism eventually disadvantaged?! In the end it was Gandalf's way of thinking that saved the day. Frodo took his careful indecision towards Gollum to heart and, "irrationally", trusted this advice. The Ring itself, on the other hand, condemned Gollum beyond a doubt and issued a non-revocable death sentence, so to speak.

I have never been able to be precise and prescriptive about Tolkien's ideas about the nature of evil. I can get at it by 'vibe', as apparent in Nazgul-ian screeching, Ungoliant's Unlight and how it clothed or hides or is an impenetrable screen. I struggle with its notion with Orcs, which are basically, boorish, under-socialised beings but that lack the trappings of vanity in how we know them, and yet are innately sadistic (innate? I'm not sure how far one could get with rearing them differently). This does not seem really Evil, but perhaps only evil, or merely, just a variation on an animal kingdom to me. Sentient beings that purposefully inflict pain upon others - that to me, is not really 'magically' evil, but more about narcissism, perhaps, or perhaps not even that.

Sauronic evil in Necromancy (Wights, the men of Carn Dum whose powers waxed over winter when it was darker longer) is some kind of perversion of the Word - Ea. I recently waded through letters for a particular cause (another thread) and found what I was looking for (for another topic) which overlaps with this topic.

Tolkien was devoutely Christian. His notions of Satanic evil are implicated in the mythology. This is done tacitly, not explicitly though. This does bear upon what -- again -- I saw in your quote. That stuff about 'lust and greed', and Sauronic E-vil. We saw that at the Sammath Naur when the Ring Spell was completed. We see it in a number of citations, and Annatar, who 'seduced' (again, Tolkien's notions of some kind of sexual or non-sexual seduction) the Noldor.

Greed, lust, and power were the hallarks of the Nine's racial 'signature' whereas 'lust for gold' was the Dwarven variant. And The Three - untouched, but Sauron 'seduced' the Noldor through their pursuit of knowledge (and it is interesting that Sauron was a Maia of Aule's emphasis/portfolio - crafting/knowledge. And the Noldor were, I suppose, closest to Aule c.f. the other two Eldar branches.

Evil in Tolkienian rendition also has the egocentric blinding that limits sight for cause/action/alliancing through the Love/Empathy spectrum of wisdom, foresight, interactions, hindsight and remedy. The egocentrism of Sauronic purpose, so inflated that the narcissism he could make 'contagious' or 'force it into' another by 'possession' or 'seduction/greed appeals'.

Inherently, Tolkien also had an insight about possessiveness, control, and attachment to ownership in all its forms as a root cause? pathway? to Evil (not evil).

So - yes - Evil's inevitable blinding to Love's/Empathy's remedies -- dooms -- Sauronic narcissism. But, as we know, there was also 'Eru-ian' or 'Valar-ian' unspoken influences in events beyond the reach and touch of Sauron.

I just read excerpts about The Quest for Erebor in Unfinished Tales (UT), which reminded me again, that "...Bilbo was meant..." to find the Ring. Frodo was "...meant..." to receive it, but it was not Sauron who chose the finder.

The Erebor transcripts then moved into Gandalf's pre- and post-Zirak Zikil (Zoro-Zumm Zumm - or whatever it is ) thoughts about what "...meant..." meant.

Pre- Zouch Zumm Zumm, he felt something down deep in instinct of heart about "...meant..." and post Zumissh Zoo Zat, he had conscious Lore of Olorin that he reserved from his little chat with Gilmi Merry and Pippin in Minath Anor after the Ring was destroyed.

That chat re-stated stuff about 'Evil's blindness' and the Sauronic Eye and the failure of the Evil being to imagine that anyone would want to, or could, destroy the Ring. Inevitable? Here's the funny thing. Similarly, all Good realms end, as well. All things must pass.

So, as always, the good ole ambiguity of Tolkien-ian Lore resurfaces in the final analysis.