more than 9?

[alatar]

Didn't the rings require time and use to enslave the owner? I assume that the men who took the Nine weren't idiots, and if I remember the text regarding the same it says that they fall to Sauron's dominion over time.

Assume an addictive substance. Some people partake, find nothing therein and walk away. Others get a rush of some kind, and so take additional hits. Wow! This makes me feel sooo good! After a while they need the substance just to be normal. Finally, they completely lose all willpower and so are enslaved to the substance.

It would be silly to say that alcohol, crack-cocaine, a Ring, etc enslaves the addict, as we are talking about inanimate objects with no life, will, souls, minds. It is the user that does the enslaving, yet one normally says that one is controlled by the substance.

And if the good feeling is wealth (dwarves) or control of other wills (men) or paradise/stasis/whatever (elves) or dominion (Sauron), over time one becomes addicted. Galadriel and Elrond were addicted to what their Rings provided; when the Rings finally failed, they left Middle Earth. Each Ring extracted payment for what it gave; some such payments may not be readily seen and also may be worth paying.

I assume that the Nine enjoyed the power, status, abilities and 'things' that the Rings gave them, but obviously they thought that they could skip out on paying the bill. Instead of living out their allotted time, they continued on and on and on as wraiths, under the domination of Sauron, feared by their former kind, desiring yet hating life - sounds wonderful.

Even Sauron, by dumping some of himself into the One Ring made himself an Achille's heel by which he was finally destroyed. Though his abilities were enhanced by the Ring he also was then able to lose it.

You'd think that maia would know better.

Sorry to deviate from your main subject here, but I've been wondering. If Sauron captured however many (3 or 4) of the seven Dwarf rings, and the others were consumed by dragon fire, what did Sauron do with those Dwarf rings. He used the nine to enslave the Nazgul, why then did he not use those additional rings?

[Boromir88]

Turin, I believe it's in the conversation between Gandalf and Frodo in the Shadow of the Past. Sauron for some reason wants to gather all the rings. He's already got the nine, he's got the dwarven rings that weren't eaten by dragons, and he's been looking for the three. However, whatever his plans are with the rings of power, won't matter if he gets the one back. I think he just wanted all the rings as in a way to be more powerful

"So it is now: the Nine he has gathered to himself; the Seven also, or else they are destroyed. The Three are hidden still. But that no longer troubles him. He only needs the One; for he made that ring himself, it is his, and he let a great part of his own former power pass into it, so that he could rule all the others."~Gandalf, The Shadow of the Past.

I think it's just Sauron trying to gather whatever power that he can from the rings that are left, but now that he's getting closer to catching The One, the other rings don't matter.

alatar, very neat post about addiction. In an interview with Andy Serkis he said he did Gollum's character based off a person addicted to drugs or alcohol. That's how Gollum was, only instead of drugs/alcohol he had a ring addiction, and on a side note I think Serkis nailed the role well.

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by alatar

It would be silly to say that alcohol, crack-cocaine, a Ring, etc enslaves the addict, as we are talking about inanimate objects with no life, will, souls, minds.

While the addicition analogy is a good one, and one which I have used myself in the past, it does not fully explain the effect of the One Ring, which is portrayed as an entity in its own right and played an active role in seeking to ensnare its bearers and find its way back to its Master.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

While the addicition analogy is a good one, and one which I have used myself in the past, it does not fully explain the effect of the One Ring, which is portrayed as an entity in its own right and played an active role in seeking to ensnare its bearers and find its way back to its Master.

Much agreed, but wasn't sure how else to explain my thoughts regarding the Nine. The One is truly a being in itself. Not sure of the right word (it'll come to me sometime after I'm away from my computer), but is not the One Ring a 'little Sauron,' or id?

[Kath]

Do we know for sure though that Sauron only put his will and strength etc. into the One Ring alone? Is it possible that every ring made by him contained some of this - maybe explaining why even with him unable to take physical form and so 'hold' the nine rings the Nazgul did not rebel.

[Legolas]

The 'rules' that apply to the One Ring are no doubt different from the Nine and Seven, but not completely. Just as we see Frodo, Gollum, and Bilbo lust after the Ring when it is taken from them, it seems the Nazgul would do the same if Sauron gave them away to others with similar intentions of corruption and control. Sauron himself holding the Nine Rings would not be the same because he is the controller of the Nine and those enslaved to them...it's not the same as someone else gaining posession of one of the Nine Rings.

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by alatar

Much agreed, but wasn't sure how else to explain my thoughts regarding the Nine. The One is truly a being in itself. Not sure of the right word (it'll come to me sometime after I'm away from my computer), but is not the One Ring a 'little Sauron,' or id?

This is an interesting concept, that the will Sauron put into the Ring was what we might call his [i]id[/b] rather than his ego. How far could we push this? Can we characterise Sauron's psychology in this way? I mean, can we differentiate different aspects of him this way? Do we know him well enough?

[A_Brandybuck]

Originally Posted by alatar

Even Sauron, by dumping some of himself into the One Ring made himself an Achille's heel by which he was finally destroyed. Though his abilities were enhanced by the Ring he also was then able to lose it.

You'd think that maia would know better.

I think, that Sauron would have never thought, that someone could take his Ring from him. That's a good example, how someone could be blended by his own power.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by A_Brandybuck

I think, that Sauron would have never thought, that someone could take his Ring from him. That's a good example, how someone could be blinded by his own power.

Isn't that usually the case in which one is one's worst enemy?

And regarding the 'other' rings: my assumption has always been that except for the dwarven Seven that the other rings were worn by the owners. Elrond, Galadriel and Gandalf wore theirs; Sauron did until he got an Isuldurian manicure, and I assume that the Nine had theirs, and so Sauron had no need to physically hold them. The 'control' of the Nine was via the Rings - like a cell phone that (1) you couldn't get rid of, (2) you always had to answer, and (3) you had to do whatever the caller told you to do ("Hi...ya, this is the Eye...hey, go to the Shire and find some midget called Baggins...").

The Dwarves, immune to becoming wraiths, were able to 'give up' their Rings - not that they did so until the very end, and of course not willingly, but my point is that they were not held by the Rings as were the Nine. Sauron collected what remained of the Seven so that, if necessary, he could use them again to corrupt a new family of Dwarves.

[Anguirel]

Originally Posted by alatar

Sauron collected what remained of the Seven so that, if necessary, he could use them again to corrupt a new family of Dwarves.

Need it have been Dwarves, in fact? I don't recall any innate difference between the lesser Rings of Power not made by Celebrimbor-that is, the Seven and the Nine. Could Sauron not have gifted human followers with the recovered Dwarven rings? The Mouth of Sauron, for instance, or Herumor of "the New Shadow"? (Herumor is a particularly interesting case as possession of a ring might just justify his being the same Herumor that lorded it over the Haradrim in the Second Age.)

[Eruanna]

I like Alatar's analogy of the Ring being like a drug and the Ring bearers like addicts. It certainly goes a long way towards explaining the effect it had on certain people, for just as some seem to be able to resist drugs (alcohol, tobacco whatever) so some could resist the Ring.

I had always assumed that Sauron possessed the rings himself and that they were not worn by the Nazgul. When Frodo puts on the Ring as the Nazgul attack on Weathertop, he sees them in their wraith form; hair, helmets, swords and hands are described. Rings are not. In Lothlorien, Galadriel tells Frodo that none of the rings can be hidden from the Ring bearer, so surely he would have seen rings if they had been worn.

As for using the three remaining Dwarf rings to corrupt others. Would the rings have been able to exert a corrupting force if Sauron had not yet regained the One Ring? It was the 'Master Ring', for want of a better title, made in secret to control and corrupt the others. Without it, would not the other rings made originally by the Elves have reverted to their original purpose and therefore been useless to him?

Originally posted by Alatar: The One is truly a being in itself. Not sure of the right word (it'll come to me sometime after I'm away from my computer), but is not the One Ring a 'little Sauron,' or id?

This idea of the One Ring being 'sentient' has always fascinated me. It seems like a living being at times and is often referred to as such in the books. It adapts its size to the bearer's finger, it abandons its bearer(s) and appears to slip onto Bilbo's finger of its own accord. I suppose that it is open to interpretation, being magical and all. The idea of it being a 'little Sauron' conjures up all sorts of pictures!

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Anguirel

Need it have been Dwarves, in fact? I don't recall any innate difference between the lesser Rings of Power not made by Celebrimbor-that is, the Seven and the Nine. Could Sauron not have gifted human followers with the recovered Dwarven rings? The Mouth of Sauron, for instance, or Herumor of "the New Shadow"? (Herumor is a particularly interesting case as possession of a ring might just justify his being the same Herumor that lorded it over the Haradrim in the Second Age.)

Sorry, not exactly sure what you mean. Are you saying that one of the dwarven rings could have been recovered and redistributed to ensnare men? Would these men become wraiths like the Nine or simply covetous/greedy?

My point (if I were making one) was that Sauron knew of the Three, knew where the Nine were and was collecting the Seven. Some of these were consumed by the Dragons, yet a few (four?) still existed. Wasn't Thráin's Ring taken from him in Dol Guldur, and wasn't this the same ring that Balin was looking for in Moria? Could one of these be the same promised by Sauron, base father of lies, to Dáin Ironfoot in return for information regarding Bilbo Baggins?

[Anguirel]

You are right in every respect.

However...I was under the impression that the Seven and the Nine were intrinsically identical in their effects. The difference was extrinsic, in that men were utterly corrupted as the twist in their power, and Dwarves made covetous as the twist in their wealth. Working on this principle, one of the Seven given to a man ought to have the same properties as one of the Nine given to a man. Am I correct?

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Anguirel

However...I was under the impression that the Seven and the Nine were intrinsically identical in their effects. The difference was extrinsic, in that men were utterly corrupted as the twist in their power, and Dwarves made covetous as the twist in their wealth. Working on this principle, one of the Seven given to a man ought to have the same properties as one of the Nine given to a man. Am I correct?

Was going to say 'disagree,' but started to think about it a bit...

As Celebrimbor and Annatar have not yet returned my calls, I'll speculate on the Rings specificity. The Seven and Nine, as far as we know, were never worn by people of different races (races referring to Elves, Dwarves, Men, Hobbits, etc), so there is no information there. Two of the Three, as far as we know, were worn by Elves exclusively. Narya was worn by both Cirdan and Gandalf, and so we have an example where the same ring imparted the same power to wearers of different races.

The One, which is a bit different than the others, was worn by a Maia, a Man and three hobbits. To each power was given, yet only in accord to each's innate ability. Don't think that the Ring made Sauron invisible, but this ability was given to the other four bearers. Hobbits and Men could be subsets of the same species/race, and so not sure how much information we get here.

Not even going to mention Bombadil...

So based on this scant evidence I would assume that a dwarven ring on the hand of a man would ignite a fierce desire for gold. A human ring on the hand of a dwarf would allow for some 'power' yet I don't think that a dwarf would be able to (1) use it to dominate the wills of other dwarves or (2) become a wraith. It may open the dwarf to suggestion by the bearer of the One, and turn the dwarf to the dark side, but I don't think that you would get a dwarven Nazgul (which is a good thing as they would look silly atop black horses...).