LotR -- Book 2 - Chapter 10 - The Breaking of the Fellowship

[Aldarion Elf-Friend]

Originally Posted by Aldarion

Some might argue that this is because Sam is so close to Frodo, but I don't think that's the case, yet.

Originally Posted by Firefoot

Which is exactly what I am going to argue.... He (Sam) is particularly protective of Frodo and has known him for a long time, so this characteristic of understanding people is very pronounced in his closeness to Frodo. Also, Frodo says to himself, "But surely they will understand. Sam will." Frodo knows Sam nearly as well as Sam knows Frodo, and he knows that Sam understands him. Sam is a very smart character with a lot of common sense - he just tends not to show it so much in the company of all these 'high' and 'fine' folk.

Sorry to steer the conversation in a different direction, I think I'm going to contend for my position a little more

I re-read this chapter again last night, and I think that the interaction between Frodo and Sam is still characterized between a master and a trusted servant. In many ways, Sam never really grows beyond this in the whole series, at least not in his speech and subservient attitude. I point to his brief time as ring-bearer in Cirith Ungol. He doesn't get far before he decides his place is by his Master's side. Sam certainly knows his master well - has learned over the last several weeks - and takes his responsibilities seriously.

Meanwhile, Frodo's treatment of Sam is still of a trusted servant - one that he is coming to love as a brother. While I don't think that Sam ever gets over the rolls that they played in the Shire, by this time Frodo is beginning to.

I wonder if this point of view is so contested here because in contemporary culture we find the idea of a master/servant relationship somewhat repulsive.

Bado go Eru, Aldarion

[Boromir88]

I get it now Davem, I think you're onto something in saying the external vs. internal "voices and eyes" of Frodo here. I think in every person rests a battle of "good and evil," or "good conscious and bad conscious." Boromir, atleast in this chapter, is a representation of Frodo's "evil desires," so in a way he does represent the personified evil's of Frodo. Also,

Originally posted by Davem:
Frodo may not have realised he has the kind of desires you're attributing to Boromir, but I can't help suspecting they are already there, deep down.

I think all we have to look at is as early on as in the Shire. Frodo can't bring himself throwing it into the fire. So, already, IN THE SHIRE, he can't bring himself to throwing it away, how is he going to do it when he gets to Mordor, sort of makes you wonder.

[Bêthberry]

Much as these thoughts are intriguing, I'm going to weigh in here on the negative side. If Boromir respresent anything in this "not an allegory", he represents the easy way in which the Ring can appeal to human desires.

Against delay. Against the way that seems easiest.

In terms of the story, I think readers should be thankful that Boromir does not know Frodo as well as Sam does. Sam understands Frodo's hesitation or fear of doing what he knows he must. Boromir does not. Boromir believes Frodo does not know what to do.

And so Boromir argues his old case of the Northern warrior.

We shall fall in battle valiantly.

Boromir's is the way of arrogance and self-assurance that men can know absolutely what is the right thing to do. The characters who are arrayed on the side of "the good", Aragorn, Gandalf, Frodo, are known very much for their lack of complete confidence, for their hesitation, for their willingness for reflect upon their ways, for their fear that they might not do the right thing.

Boromir remains the voice of the arrogance of the race of man

It is by our own folly that the Enemy will defeat us," cried Boromir. "How it angers me! Fool! Obstinate fool! Running willfully to death and ruining our cause. If any mortals have claim to the Ring, it is the men of Numenor, and not Halflings. It is not yours save by unhappy chance. It might have been mine.Give it to me!"

It is, however, absolutely essential for readers to have this scene and for that reason I think Boromir is pivotal to the story. Tolkien shows his readers what the effect of the Ring is, not on one of the great elves or wizards, but on the sorry race of mankind, especially in the denigration of the hobbits. I think it is more important to Tolkien's theme to understand what he means by the seductive powers of evil than to argue a Manichean split, which presumbably for him was herisy.

What I don't really understand--and I think someone else on this thread has already mentioned this point--is why Frodo puts the ring backon. Assuredly it is so he can pass by the other members of the Fellowship without being seen, but it appears almost too easy and unexplored a decision. It is ominous to me.

[Firefoot]

Aldarion -

I'm not arguing the master/servant relationship between Frodo and Sam (It's certainly there, and I don't have any problems with it); I'm just saying there is more to it than that. I think we might be on the same side of this issue, as I don't really disagree with anything you've said. You pointed out that you didn't think that Sam's understanding of Frodo was because of their closesness (or at least, that is what I think you are arguing with me), so why is it that you think Sam was able to figure out Frodo's intent?

[Aldarion Elf-Friend]

Originally Posted by Firefoot

You pointed out that you didn't think that Sam's understanding of Frodo was because of their closesness (or at least, that is what I think you are arguing with me), so why is it that you think Sam was able to figure out Frodo's intent?

Here's the rub of our disagreement, although I offer my response with caveats (see below). My initial point was that Tolkein was presenting us with a contrast between the wisdom of the "Wise", which fails to understand the answer in this case, and the wisdom of the "Simple" as represented by Sam. Tolkien is saying to me, here, not to look down on the wisdom of this "simple" and dismiss it as that would be prideful. Aragorn responds correctly to Sam in this case by acknowledging that Sam "has the right of it."

Okay, having said all that, I re-read this section last night, and I can certainly see where the idea of 'relational wisdom" comes from - Sam even thinks to himself how much better he knows his master than any of the others. Let's just say that my initial posistion is much weaker in my own mind now than it was yesterday.

[Fordim Hedgethistle]

OK, back to Boromir (I'm almost happy that the guy is going to be dead soon. . .oops. . .did I type that. . .? )

I think that it might be a bit of red herring trying to ferret out whether he is "addicted" or "tempted" or "corrupted" or what have you by the Ring. Not that it's a useless endeavour, far from it as the discussion is illuminating, but I rather think that perhaps Boromir's fate in this chapter, which concludes the long sweep of his characterisation right from the Council of Elron, deserves a more subtle and complex form of understanding. That is, there is no single or easy answer to what 'happens' to him with the Ring. Which is why I always like to see him as a tragic hero.

Now, he is not as 'successful' a tragic hero as the really great ones (he's no Oedipus or Hamlet, that's for sure), but a tragic hero he remains. The basic definition of a tragic hero (get ready to write this down for future reference) is someone whose greatness is his own downfall -- that which makes him a hero is what dooms him to destruction and perhaps even villainy. Oedipus, for example, is a restless solver of riddles, he finds things out. Had he not been this way he would never have gone after the truth of his birth so relentlessly, and never would have found out that he's married to Mom after killing Dad. Hamlet's the other great example. He is a thinker of no small measure: he is brilliant and moral and possesses a capacity for understanding that goes beyond anyone in his world. Because of this, he is too aware of the implications to what he is supposed to do -- he knows that to murder Claudius is to commit a sin, whereas leaving well enough alone is also a sin. He tries to find some way to do what he has been ordered to do, without creating more problems. It's an impossible situation and he knows it, and this is what makes him great and doomed.

So on to Boromir. His greatness is his heroic stature among Men. He is a hero and unproblematically so. He is great and noble and smart and strong and honourable -- it is his tragedy that he is drawn to the Ring for all of these reasons. I don't think that we need to start going into a search for the "flaws" in his character that lead to his destruction, since the Ring plays on his strengths. He is a military commander of no small measure, a leader of Men, and totally devoted to his kingdom. These are the things that the Ring offers him, and he falls.

So all this gets into the disturbing ambiguities that beset all tragic heroes. Does his fall mean that his values are wrong or 'bad'? Is his mode of heroism being undercut or devalued? I don't think so, since Aragorn, Eomer and Faramir are going to be doing a lot of leading and killing and fighting of their own soon enough. Does his fall mean that he isn't really great or heroic at all? Again, I don't think so -- if he weren't such hero, he would not have attempted to seize the Ring, as he would not have desire to save his city.

The thing about effective tragedy is that it makes us uncomfortable, I think. There are two reactions to this discomfort. The natural response is to seek easy answers with which to do away with the discomfort -- these easy answers usually take the form of some kind of distancing between ourselves and the tragic hero: he is 'flawed' in some way that we can identify and safely categorise and say we are not flawed that way (Hamlet "thinks too much" -- a ridiculous idea, as in the play it's when people don't think that they get into trouble). Boromir is "proud" or "arrogant" or somesuch -- but he is right to be proud: proud of himself and of his achievements, proud of his land. It is because of this pride that he has come on this journey and suffered along with the rest. But it's because of this heroic pride that he falls to the Ring.

Like all tragic heroes, Boromir is neither good nor bad, right nor wrong, perfect nor flawed. And he's not all of those at once. He's just human, which is to say he is what he is, and there's nothing he can do to change that.

[the phantom]

He is great and noble and smart and strong and honourable -- it is his tragedy that he is drawn to the Ring for all of these reasons. I don't think that we need to start going into a search for the "flaws" in his character that lead to his destruction, since the Ring plays on his strengths.

if he weren't such hero, he would not have attempted to seize the Ring

Yep yep yep... you hit the nail on the head, Fordim, and then hit it again and again.

There are two reactions to this discomfort. The natural response is to seek easy answers with which to do away with the discomfort -- these easy answers usually take the form of some kind of distancing between ourselves and the tragic hero: he is 'flawed' in some way that we can identify and safely categorise and say we are not flawed that way

Excellent observation.

I have nothing to add except- read Fordies awesome post again.

(I would've just repped you, F, but it wouldn't let me- said I had to spread the wealth a bit)

[the phantom]

So, already, IN THE SHIRE, he can't bring himself to throwing it away, how is he going to do it when he gets to Mordor, sort of makes you wonder.

This is something I always try to point out. In our discussion a couple of chapters ago I said this about Boro's desire for the Ring-

I'm not sure I agree that his desire was "irrational".

This is irrational-> expecting a hobbit to safely enter a heavily guarded land, travel for miles and miles without getting caught, and destroy a ring he could not willingly throw into his little fire at home.

To Boromir this idea seems much more irrational than attempting to use the Ring.

Sometime in the past year (can't remember when) I came to the realization that I was Boromir. In other words, had I been inserted into Lord of the Rings as every character, the things I would have done and said as Boromir would have deviated less from the original character than if I were inserted for Frodo, Elrond, or anyone else.

So it is now my sacred duty to defend Boromir's words and actions.

This next part might swing off-topic a bit, but bear with me- for I am fulfilling my sacred duty.

Boromir remains the voice of the arrogance of the race of man

When I look up "arrogant" I see this-
having or showing feelings of unwarranted importance out of overbearing pride
proceeding from undue claims or self-importance
giving one's self an undue degree of importance
Consistently thinking you are right or that others are wrong is not necessarily arrogance. Notice the words "unwarranted" and "undue" in the definition.

Here's a little example-> Imagine that you are the best wine-taster in the world and that you have just taken a sip of a wine that you recognize immediately as a Montelena Cabernet 1978. Several other wine tasters say "I do believe this is a 1988 Rayas Chateauneuf Du Pape".

You say "You're wrong and I'm right" and when the answer is revealed you are, indeed, correct.

Were you arrogant? No, you were right and you knew it.

I am currently working on a group research project at school and I refused to do our project a certain way, even though every person in my group voted against me. The way I wanted to do it is better and they just didn't know enough to understand why.

But I put my foot down and they finally gave in (after calling me "selfish", "arrogant", and all sorts of other things). But now that the project is nearly complete they have all said "I'm sorry, you were right, and I'm glad we did it your way".

Was I being arrogant? No, I was right and I knew it.

You see, many people misunderstand characters such as Boromir because they don't think the same. I think it's possible that Tolkien himself didn't completely understand Boromir, he just knew that some people acted like him. This means that Boromir's words and actions would be written, for the most part, correctly but his inner motivations and thoughts would be guesses.

(Anyone who has tried to write a character different from themselves should definitely understand this dilemma.)

Anywho... everything that is logical suggests that the quest to destroy the Ring was crazy, where as using the Ring- who had ever actually tried to use the Ring against Sauron? No one. There was no precedent set for believing that using the Ring's power would for sure corrupt an individual. There was no Ring Manual that said "If you attempt to use the Ring's power the Ring will make you turn to evil".

What Elrond and Gandalf said was not as provable or logical as this-> if you walk into Mordor with a homing beacon you're going to get caught.

So, as you can see, there's a rational reason not to do it the way they did, and the reason not to do it Boromir's way was not gospel-truth at all.

I've gone on this tirade just to say this- Boromir's actions can be explained without defining him as arrogant or corrupted. I'm sitting in a computer lab right now completely free from the Ring's influence, and yet I tell you that I would have tried to take the Ring from Frodo like Boromir did.

is why Frodo puts the ring backon. Assuredly it is so he can pass by the other members of the Fellowship without being seen, but it appears almost too easy and unexplored a decision. It is ominous to me.

Hmm... I've never even thought about it, but you know... it is a bit weird. I mean, right after being pinned down (almost, anyway) by Sauron and saving himself by taking off the Ring, you'd think he'd be scared to put it on again. Unless... he knew that Sauron located him so easily only because he was on a magic hill. Ya know... kind of like looking into a palantir when Sauron's got one too.

(whew- this was a long post- a pat on the back to anyone who read the whole thing- thanks for putting up with me)

[Boromir88]

Interesting thoughts phantom. I took that personality test here on the downs and was most like Boromir. Interestingly enough the one that I was "next closest to" was Sam. Sam is definately thought of as the most loyal companion to the Fellowship, and is Frodo's best friend, in most regards he is almost exactly opposite as Sam. So, why then would I be most like Boromir but also close to Sam. Well here's some traits I see that Sam and Boromir hold.

They both don't like running away from a fight. Sam is the more protective one, and would lay his life on the line for Frodo, Boromir will lay his life on the line for Gondor. They are both loyal. Sam to Frodo, Boromir to Denethor. Also, was Boromir not a loyal member of the Fellowship? Yes, he went crazy on Frodo, but did he also not say we men of Minas Tirith do not abandon friends in need? So, despite all the arguments Boromir still considered these people his "friends," and travelling all these long miles together I'm sure they came pretty close to one another.
The Ring incident, as I go back to an earlier point, I don't think Boromir was in control of what he was doing. There's this battle, within Boromir, even down to his last moments of "sanedom." Once he goes crazy, he doesn't know what he has done, "What have I said? What have I done?" He literally "wipes the tears from his eyes," so that right there I think should show Boromir is good of heart, and he wasn't in control of his actions during this brief lapse of madness.

Good points about "arrogancy." I see Boromir has this "swagger" about him, he's got his "pride." But it's good pride, it's not pompous or arrogant. He's a very patriotic person, and I think all his bragging of Minas Tirith isn't arrogant, it's his own patriotic pride.

As an example, its like me saying the United States is the greatest place in the world to live. Now, maybe somebody from France, Germany, England, Australia....etc would surely disagree with me. But, I don't find this as arrogant? I find this as pride in one's country, I won't go into a big debate about how free we are, and all the great things, I think you get the connection. There is a difference between being patriotic and being arrogant. I think me saying the US is the best nation in the world, is no more arrogant then Boromir bragging non-stop about the greatness of the men of his country.

[Encaitare]

I just found this line interesting:

"It is by our own folly that the Enemy will defeat us."

Boromir says this to Frodo when he refuses to give him the Ring. Boromir is under the Ring's influence, but it surely just reveals the doubts he has had all along. He still cannot accept that the only hope is to destroy that which he would seek to take for his own.

However, Boromir is partly right. If they had demonstrated "folly" and decided to try and use the Ring against Sauron, Sauron might have fallen, but could have risen once more while the world of Men destroyed itself fighting over who would keep the Ring. Frodo himself was nearly defeated; he eventually gave in to the Ring. Now, he had gone through so much torment that it's not really fair to call this act "folly," but the world could have been defeated had Gollum not done his part in finishing the job.

[Lhunardawen]

I just had this crazy thought...
Amon Hen + Amon Lhaw = Taniquetil + Manwë + Varda

Anyway, to get on...Has anyone noticed how much Boromir contradicted himself while he was under the power of the Ring, so to speak? He said:

But each to his own kind. True-hearted Men, they will not be corrupted...We do not desire the power of wizard-lords, only strength to defend ourselves, strength in a just cause.

And then he says, in the same statement:

The Ring would give me power of Command. How I would drive the hosts of Mordor, and all men would flock to my banner!

Sure, Boromir, you need the strength. But you were not able to hide your desire for power; despite the noble cause, you thirst for power all the same. (Sorry, Boromir... )

Now for Aragorn: he was well aware of the task at hand and the need for Frodo to decide quickly. But he understood Frodo's need to "decide" (actually, some way to overcome his fear), and looked at him with kindly pity, giving him more time. Swoon!

I have been thinking...could it be that Frodo in some way expected someone to come after him, giving him the final nudge he needed? This could have been the reason he chose to walk away. He knew what to do; he was just afraid. Maybe he was trying to "tempt" anyone to come after him, to show him that indeed, the Ring's evil has begun to work even in the Company. Silly, I know.

[The Saucepan Man]

But of course. As Bêthberry has said, he is a pivotal character. And this, to a large extent, is his Chapter. It is where all that we have seen him do and heard him say, ever since he was first introduced to us at the Council of Elrond, comes to fruition. I have to say that, in my view, davem, Bêthberry and the phantom have all made valid points concerning Boromir, even though they may appear to be slightly at odds. But let me attempt to reconcile them.

Firstly, I would like to comment on the manner in which Tolkien portrays the dialogue between Boromir and Frodo. It is perfectly done and utterly credible. First Boromir offers compassion, expressing concern over Frodo's safety and a desire to help Frodo with his burden. Frodo at first responds positively to his words. However, it becomes clear to Boromir that compassion and comforting words alone will not assist him in achieving his purpose. And so he goes on to set out his argument, logically and rationally. He seeks to persuade Frodo of his cause, and his words are very persuasive. And, as the phantom says, Boromir's approach is entirely rational (I will come back to this later). Frodo continues to participate in the conversation, trying to explain to Boromir the flaw in his approach. But Boromir gets carried away in his argument. Frodo participates less in the dialogue as he begins to see that his words are of no effect. Gradually, he begins to fear Boromir, and backs away from him. Finally, having worked himself up with his own words (to the extent that his hands are "trembling with suppressed excitement") and in frustration at Frodo's stubborn resistance to his argument, Boromir "snaps" and violence takes hold of him.

Marvellous! An atmosphere of foreboding hangs over the entire encounter, commencing as it does with Frodo feeling “unfriendly eyes” upon him, and the tension is built up wonderfully throughout the conversation from its almost placid beginning to its climax, where Boromir leaps at Frodo, undoubtedly with the intention of seizing the Ring by force. But it is also portrayed with complete credibility. The gradual escalation (on Boromir's part) is precisely how one would imagine the encounter to go. And even though Boromir starts the conversation with friendly and reassuring words, his climactic fury is utterly credible when it comes.

Come back! A madness took me, but it has passed.

On reading these words again, I am intrigued by them. They could be interpreted in one of two ways. Either the “madness” is the Ring’s influence and it no longer has any hold over him, or it is the fury which drove him to attempt to seize the Ring by force. I tend towards the latter interpretation, in which case it is quite possible, as Estelyn suggests, that he still desires it. It seems to me that we will have wait until the next Chapter for true repentance on Boromir’s part.

But it is the logical and persuasive nature of Boromir's argument that is key for me in this Chapter. We know something of the nature of Elrond, Gandalf and Galadriel (particularly if Elrond and Gandalf are "old friends" from having previously read The Hobbit) and so we trust their wisdom and judgment. But we, as readers, are in somewhat of a privileged position in that respect. Boromir is not. Were we to be actors in the scene, rather than readers (knowing all that we do concerning Gandalf, Frodo et al), would we not respond similarly to Boromir? Like the phantom, I think that I would. It certainly would seem like folly to walk into Sauron's backyard with the Ring with the intention of destroying it. Without the knowledge that we have been privy to, Boromir's approach would seem the more logical to me.

But Bêthberry is right too. Although he is in a less privileged position than us, Boromir was nevertheless present at the Council of Elrond when the dangers of using the Ring against Sauron were explained. He is aware that all who are considered wise are in agreement that the Ring should be destroyed. Yet he thinks that he knows better. And, in this regard, he is definitely arrogant and self-confident to the point of over-confidence. But he is a Man, and, as Bêthberry says,

Tolkien shows his readers what the effect of the Ring is, not on one of the great elves or wizards, but on the sorry race of mankind ...

And therefore, as humans ourselves, Tolkien is reflecting our own natures back at us. Even without the active participation of the Ring, Boromir's plan is appealing. Add to that the fact that the Ring is itself actively working on his mind, and it becomes very difficult for me to say in all honesty, that, in Boromir's position, I would not have acted as he did.

This, I think, is reflected in Frodo's approach too and, in this regard, I agree with davem that Boromir represents an aspect of Frodo's inner conflict. Frodo knows deep down what he must do. This is clear from his own words, as well as Sam’s subsequent reflections. Frodo acknowledges that Boromir‘s counsel would seem like wisdom "were it not for the warning of my heart". But he nevertheless needs time alone to make his decision. There is a part of Frodo that wants someone to take this terrible burden away from him. But, as his words to Boromir suggest, that would be taking the easy way out:

Against the way that seems easier.

To my mind, these words are of critical importance. Frodo’s approach here represents a crystallisation of the basic truth underlying the entire Quest. Yes, it may well seem the easier way to use the Ring against its Master. But it is not the right way. And this is perhaps the message which resonates most strongly with me of all the themes in the book. How many times are we faced with situations in our daily lives where the option which seems the easiest is not the right one? How many times do our leaders and politicians tell us that the straightforward "short term" solution is best, when deep down we know that it is not? And how many times have we, like Boromir (and like Frodo very easily could have), given in and taken the line of least resistance? I cannot deny that I have, and that I will probably do so again. But it is at least an important step to recognise that the easier path is not always the correct one. There is an important message in Boromir's folly. And Boromir himself realises it too late.

It is also illuminating, in this regard, to consider the reactions of the other members of the Fellowship. Legolas and Gimli would both counsel Minas Tirith, as would Merry and Pippin. So, while they would not go to the lengths of Boromir in forcing their view on Frodo (and do not desire the Ring in the same way that he does), it is clear that they would nevertheless endeavour to persuade him of this course. They may accept that the Ring must be destroyed, but they would nevertheless counsel the "easier" option (west rather than east) and thereby delay the moment when the Ring became irreversibly bound for Mordor. Aragorn is unsure as to the correct path, although he is content to abide by Frodo's choice. It is only the quiet, instinctive wisdom of Sam that accepts without question that the hardest course is the one which must be taken. For all the wise words of Gandalf and Elrond and Galadriel, it is in Sam's words here, and in Frodo's (ultimate) choice, that this basic truth is most convincingly conveyed.

As an aside here, I do find Merry and Pippin's resolve to stick with Frodo immensely touching. It is reminiscent of their determination to go with him back in Crickhollow, but even more poignant now that they have a much greater appreciation of the danger and terror that this entails. Sam, of course, has taken an oath to stick by his Master and that is no doubt of great importance to him. But, to my mind, it is not, and never was, the main reason for his loyalty to Frodo. There is a bond of trust and friendship between them, perhaps stronger at this point on Sam's part (although that will change as their story develops), which transcends their "Master and Servant" relationship (or at least goes beyond our modern understanding of this kind of relationship - it was based on a relationship which is rare, and perhaps no longer exists, today). It is significant, in this regard, that Sam displays such an informed insight into Frodo's mind.

And so, finally, to Amon Hen. Clearly, Frodo has enhanced sight when he sits on the Seat of Seeing wearing the Ring. The world seems to have shrunk to his eyes, and so he is able to see much farther and with much greater clarity. It seems that what he sees is, partially at least, a vision of what will come since, although war was building, it had not by this stage, I think, escalated to the extent that Frodo witnesses. Whether his enhanced sight is brought on by the power of the Chair or the power of the Ring is difficult to say. I will sit on the fence and say that it is a combination of both. It is, after all, a Seat of Seeing, so it cannot be mere coincidence that it is Frodo‘s vision that is enhanced. In any event, it seems to me clear that this is not a safe place wear the Ring. As well as being the Seat of Seeing, it appears also to be the Seat of "Being Seen". The power of the Seat allows Frodo, wearing the Ring, to "see" Sauron in his tower, but it also alerts Sauron to Frodo’s “presence”. This, I think, is why little is made of Frodo later donning the Ring to slip past his companions. It is, again, the combination of the Ring and the Seat that allows Sauron almost to find him.

It is indeed Gandalf that struggles with Sauron and tells Frodo to take off the Ring. Later, in The White Rider, he speaks of this to Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli:

Very nearly it was revealed to the Enemy, but it escaped. I had some part in that: for I sat in a high place, and I strove with the Dark Tower; and the Shadow passed. Then I was weary, very weary; and I walked long in dark thought.

And, in any event, who else is prone to calling Hobbits fools.

But the first time reader will not be aware of Gandalf's intervention. He or she will not even be aware that Gandalf is alive (although there have been hints). So, as far as he or she is concerned, the words are Frodo's - to himself, and it is Frodo's strength of will that allows him to remove the Ring. But, given that Gandalf is involved, the question arises as to whether Frodo would have been able to remove it without his intervention. Tolkien tells us that Frodo was "free to choose", but would he have had that freedom of choice without Gandalf's aid? Certainly, as with Frodo's difficulty in throwing the Ring into the fire at Bag End, it does not, as Boromir88 suggests, bode well for the outcome of the Quest ...

Apologies as always for the length.