Who would have fallen?

[Mister Underhill]

Originally Posted by alatar

...what chance would someone, even Gandalf, have against one of the Fellowship who took the Ring to do something with it?

This is an excellent question, and one whose answer is not as clear-cut as some speculation on this thread would lead you to believe. Letter 246, in which Tolkien expounds at length on the events at the Crack and possible alternative outcomes, is particularly relevant to the question of the Ring's power or lack thereof. Like so many topics in Tolkien, it offers no easy, pat answers, though something caught my eye which suggests that the Ring does have power which would be instantly accessible to a claimant.

The situation as between Frodo with the Ring and the Eight might be compared to that of a small brave man armed with a devastating weapon, faced by eight savage warriors of great strength and agility armed with poisoned blades. The man's weakness was that he did not know how to use his weapon yet; and he was by temperament and training averse to violence. Their weakness that the man's weapon was a thing that filled them with fear as an object of terror in their religious cult, by which they had been conditioned to treat one who wielded it with servility.

Tolkien, Master of Ambiguity, suggests two possible readings here, I suppose: on the one hand, he explicitly attributes great offensive power to the Ring (supposing you know how to use it); then a moment later he relates the Ring's power to that of an icon -- possibly more powerful as an idea than actually powerful.

But I'm also quoting a little bit out of order. A few paragraphs back, Tolkien seems to suggest beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Ring has some power to offer even an unskilled user, supposing that he uses it in the 'proper' spirit, i.e., aggressively:

It is an interesting problem: how Sauron would have acted or the claimant have resisted. Sauron sent at once the Ringwraiths. They were naturally fully instructed, and in no way deceived as to the real lordship of the Ring. The wearer would not be invisible to them, but the reverse; and the more vulnerable to their weapons. But the situation was now different to that under Weathertop, where Frodo acted merely in fear and wished only to use (in vain) the Ring's subsidiary power of conferring invisibility. He had grown since then. Would they have been immune from its power if he claimed it as an instrument of command and domination? Not wholly. I do not think they could have attacked him with violence, nor laid hold upon him or taken him captive...

alatar is also right to bring up the Ring's power of invisibility as a factor which, all by itself, could cause a lot of difficulty for someone trying to take the Ring from a claimant.

[Mister Underhill]

Addendum: Forgot to add that the Ring-claimer's theoretical power over the Nazgûl at the Crack may derive from the Ruling Ring's power over the "nine rings for Men", once again plunging the issue into ambiguity...

[davem]

The man's weakness was that he did not know how to use his weapon yet; and he was by temperament and training averse to violence. Their weakness that the man's weapon was a thing that filled them with fear as an object of terror in their religious cult, by which they had been conditioned to treat one who wielded it with servility.

I suppose the question is whether the Ring would allow itself to be used against the Nazgul - I think this assumes the Ring is morally 'neutral' & has no innate consciousness - which goes against the idea of its calling out to potential users & desiring to get back to Sauron.

Would they have been immune from its power if he claimed it as an instrument of command and domination? Not wholly. I do not think they could have attacked him with violence, nor laid hold upon him or taken him captive...

Again, this assumes that the bearer could use the Ring to make the Nazgul act in a way that they did not wish to - but their desires would have conformed with thehequestion is whether the Ring would have submitted to Frodo in those circumstances.

[Mister Underhill]

I think you credit the Ring too much with a mind and will of its own.

[alatar]

While preparing a new thread regarding the Ring (oddly in regards to the post just made by Mr. Underhill), I came across some information about the One Ring. Anyway, just want to add this thought: who put the Ring on the chain while Frodo was being healed in Rivendell? Assumptions are Elrond or Gandalf, and if we believe the later, then this is yet another instance of Gandalf refusing the Ring.

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by alatar

Anyway, just want to add this thought: who put the Ring on the chain while Frodo was being healed in Rivendell?

The Mysterious 10th Bearer

[davem]

Originally Posted by Mister Underhill

I think you credit the Ring too much with a mind and will of its own.

Well, its either the Ring itself, or Sauron working through the Ring. I think the latter causes many more problems in terms of explaining how it behaves - that would mean that Sauron was in touch with the Ring & so knew where it was & what it was doing.

Where do the fantasies the Ring produces arise? The Ring often behaves as if it has a mind & will of its own - its stated that the Ring decides abandon Gollum for instance, & that it slipped off Isildur's finger, that it temps Frodo to put it on, etc. Now, is all this to be understood metaphorically, or does the Ring have some kind of 'intelligence' - & if so, to what degree? How much of himself did Sauron pour into it? It seems to function autonomously too often simply to be an object of power.

[Mister Underhill]

You make it sound like such a black and white proposition. I agree that the Ring is not a completely inanimate object. But does it have the ability to analyze a situation and then "decide" whether or not it will "allow" itself to be used? How aware is it? How sentient is it? It's also stated that Sauron is "exerting all his power to find it or draw it to himself". Are the Ring's "actions" more "reactions" to this signal that Sauron is broadcasting? You assume that Sauron working on (or through) the Ring means he knows where it is and what it is doing. This need not be so. When I listen to my Walkman, the radio station works through it without knowing where my Walkman is or what it is doing. A computer can act "autonomously", but it obviously does not necessarily follow that it is intelligent or aware. The Ring, when worn, creates a sort of conduit to Sauron -- but clearly it lacks the ability to call out to him or to make a report on its location and situation.

Also, I notice that you were quick to point out earlier in the thread that Gandalf and Galadriel's ideas about how the Ring works are only theoretical and cannot be relied upon, but are now willing to take Gandalf's speculation that the Ring "decided" to "abandon" Gollum at face value. Which way do you want it?

[davem]

Originally Posted by Mister Underhill

You make it sound like such a black and white proposition. I agree that the Ring is not a completely inanimate object. But does it have the ability to analyze a situation and then "decide" whether or not it will "allow" itself to be used? How aware is it? How sentient is it?

Ok, let me try this:

I'd say it is sentient to some degree, but the point is that it is only usable by someone in the 'right' frame of mind (ie someone who has gone a long way down the road to becoming like Sauron, & is able to use it in the only way that it is possible to use it - ie one would not be able to use it to do 'good'. Using it would be very similar to using crack cocaine - the addiction would begin almost instantaneously.

It's also stated that Sauron is "exerting all his power to find it or draw it to himself". Are the Ring's "actions" more "reactions" to this signal that Sauron is broadcasting? You assume that Sauron working on (or through) the Ring means he knows where it is and what it is doing. This need not be so. When I listen to my Walkman, the radio station works through it without knowing where my Walkman is or what it is doing. A computer can act "autonomously", but it obviously does not necessarily follow that it is intelligent or aware. The Ring, when worn, creates a sort of conduit to Sauron -- but clearly it lacks the ability to call out to him or to make a report on its location and situation.

But the Walkman & computer are not 'evil'. I think this is the point. The Ring is evil - evil is a(n im)moral 'force'. Its not a case that the Ring can be used for evil, but that it is evil in & of itself. As if your computer could only be used to access paedophilia because it was designed to do only that & also that if you used your computer you would become instantly addicted to that. More so, as if it was able to draw you to use it, had that purpose as part of its making. That doesn't, I accept, require your computer to be 'autonomous' - but it would bebehaving as if it was.

Also, I notice that you were quick to point out earlier in the thread that Gandalf and Galadriel's ideas about how the Ring works are only theoretical and cannot be relied upon, but are now willing to take Gandalf's speculation that the Ring "decided" to "abandon" Gollum at face value. Which way do you want it?

I'm going by what the Ring does - based on that I think Gandalf's 'speculation' here is correct.