What was Frodo's temptation

[Mnemosyne]

I'm honestly not even sure if I want to know. I love the things that Tolkien left silent (especially about Frodo) for what they are.

Personally, I think that whatever the Ring had tried in the past Frodo was able to beat down sufficiently that eventually it became a simple war of attrition. Frodo doesn't forget the Shire because he doesn't want it preserved as his mental refuge (he says WAY back in Shadow of the Past that even knowing the Shire exists will comfort him); he forgets it because that's one of his lifelines and the Ring is cutting all of them down.

And this would be the point to bring up that famous "I do not choose" line, and the brief scene where Frodo asks Sam to take his hands so he can't take the Ring. That doesn't sound like temptation to me, at least not in its classic sense.

I've seen lots of various answers to this in (where else?) fan fic but they're all based on the fanauthors' interpretations of Frodo and not on canon.

The only canon-based theory that comes to mind right now is the idea of personal recognition: Frodo despairs at Minas Morgul because he's been too late and everyone is going to be killed before he has a chance to do anything. How he masters himself is by then reminding himself that he has to do it anyway, even if no one will know. Similarly (from the same time that he talks about the Shire being a spiritual comfort) he mentions about how dull everyone there is, which when coupled with the note in Letters about how there was still probably after all this time some part of him that wanted to be recognized back home for his deeds (Frodo seems to be pretty uncomfortable with praise abroad) I think that this could have been one flaw for the Ring to exploit (if indeed we are going with that theory about the Ring's nature).

Finally, this is not a false dilemma. He could have been going through anything and more. But whatever it was that finally cracked Frodo, it must have been a pretty small temptation in its natural state if he resisted it this long.

Apologies for the rambles, but if anyone does want to get to the bottom of this (and I for one think that the "Dark Lord" interpretation, while dramatic, is too simple) I think we need to redefine some of the assumptions that go into the question.

[Pitchwife]

Originally Posted by Mnemosyne

The only canon-based theory that comes to mind right now is the idea of personal recognition: Frodo despairs at Minas Morgul because he's been too late and everyone is going to be killed before he has a chance to do anything. How he masters himself is by then reminding himself that he has to do it anyway, even if no one will know. Similarly (from the same time that he talks about the Shire being a spiritual comfort) he mentions about how dull everyone there is, which when coupled with the note in Letters about how there was still probably after all this time some part of him that wanted to be recognized back home for his deeds (Frodo seems to be pretty uncomfortable with praise abroad) I think that this could have been one flaw for the Ring to exploit (if indeed we are going with that theory about the Ring's nature).

Nice to see you posting here, Mnemi! And I think you're on the right track with this.
Let's not forget that, apart from his few younger friends, Frodo was pretty much an outsider in the Shire, just like Bilbo before him. The other hobbits thought them both eccentric, to say the least, if not worse. Some even suspected Frodo of conspiring with Gandalf to do away with Bilbo and get at his money!
Couldn't Frodo's deepest desire - his one 'flaw', if that's not too strong a word - have been something as simple and human as the wish to be accepted and respected by the community he lived in? To come home and be able to tell all those narrow-minded, self-complacent Grubbs, Chubbs, Proudfeet and Burrowses that they would all be dead or enslaved if the Mad Bagginses hadn't saved them? To make them see and admit how wrong they'd been all the time - not only about him and Bilbo, but also about Elves and Dragons and the world in general?
Understandable as this desire was, it was something the Ring could exploit, twist and distort. 'Just claim me, Frodo, and once we've overcome the Dark Lord, they'll have to acknowledge you as their saviour. We'll make them love you and give you the honour you deserve. We'll teach 'em, yes we will, my precious...'

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by Pitchwife

Couldn't Frodo's deepest desire - his one 'flaw', if that's not too strong a word - have been something as simple and human as the wish to be accepted and respected by the community he lived in?

I don't think you are on the right tack here. If t were his deepest desire, he could have worked in this direction long before the Quest and obtained wondrous results. Frodo was a Baggins, the wealthy heir of a very respectable family, the owner of Bag End, not some poor gardener or miller. He could have easily become Mayor of the Shire if he had just set his mind on it (and the Ring he kept could have helped a lot). But it seems the attitude of other hobbits towards him bothered him little. He was more interested in lonely strolls, chatting with Elves and Dwarves and reading books.

[Formendacil]

I've been following this thread from Day 1--because it's a Fordhim thread, and words cannot express how happy that makes me--but I've been unable--sadly--to think of anything to add. Going through the additional half of the thread added since yesterday, however, I feel like precious little--or no--mention is made of Bilbo, which is rather odd.

Perhaps the thing is that Bilbo, like Frodo, does not have a given temptation in The Lord of the Rings--unless the desire to hide from Sackville-Bagginses counts. I discount The Hobbit here, not so much because it's non-canonical (still spoiling for that canonicity debate ) as because, admittedly, Tolkien's perception of the Ring's effects changed from the writing of the one work to the other--indeed, in the first, there were no ill-effects for the Ring was not known yet as Sauron's.

Still, we see enough of Bilbo in The Lord of the Rings that you would think we might see his temptation. Not so. Like Frodo, we see that he desires possession of the Ring, but that's about it. Even in the pivotal parting scene at the end of "A Long-Expected Party," we see his projected descent into Gollumry, but we see no temptation. Nor, indeed, is one hinted at.

It occurs to me, perhaps, that insofar as Bilbo and Frodo are remarkably alike, Bilbo can be treated as a control scenario for Frodo--a Frodo who did not have to go to Mordor and to Sammath Naur. Granted, there are legitimate personality differences between the two; Frodo is not Bilbo's alter ego, born exactly 78 years later. All the same, Gandalf especially suggests on a few occasions that they are extraordinarily similar on the points that matter to this discussion--on the points of being Ringbearer.

Gandalf says of Bilbo:

Originally Posted by The Shadow of the Past

'Of course, he possessed the ring for many years, and used it, so it might take a long while for the influence to wear off--before it would be safe to see him again, for instance.

My point here being that Bilbo--despite doing more than any Ringbearer save Gollum in terms of use of the Ring--does not at any point seem to awaken thoughts of domination and power, even though it is patently clear from his actions upon parting with the ring that, in Gandalf's words, he:

Originally Posted by The Shadow of the Past

He said and did things then that filled me was a fear that no words of Saruman could allay. I knew at last that something dark and deadly was at work.

Sauron, by this time, is seeking the One Ring, I believe, and until Frodo ventures to Mordor it might be fair to say that the Ring, of its own volition, might not have worked harder on a Ringbearer than that night to retain its hold on Bilbo--so it is impossible, I think, to say that the Ring was merely dormant in Bilbo's time, as one might say of Gollum.

Obviously, I'm finding it impossible to see Bilbo having any dreams of grandeur or temptations generally--which supports the hypothesis that Frodo, in what might be called his "natural state" would not either, since it removes him from the category of uniqueness.



*Oh*

It has also occurred to me, reading through, to speculate about whether or not Frodo's encounter with the Morgûl-blade might have affected him. We know he was never the same after. Again, from Gandalf's perspective:

Originally Posted by Many Meetings

But to the wizard's eye there was a faint change, just a hint as it were of transparency, about him, and especially about the left hand that lay outside the coverlet.

Now, admittedly, a physical change in Frodo need not equal a change in his mental framework. However, as it seems to me that the Wraith-ifying process is related to the Ring's effects on the Ringbearer (Hobbit toughness is specifically linked to their slowness at becoming Wraiths), one has to wonder to what extent, if any, the Morgûl-knife had an effect on the process.

[Fordim Hedgethistle]

I just wanted to say here how much I am admiring Tolkien's craft in all this. The mere fact that we not only can but are having this debate is I think the point. Tolkien did not give us a hero with an easily understood and simple motivation...either for good or for his eventual 'evil' (e.g. his 'failure'). I'm really quite at a loss to think of any hero in heroic literature who is so very opaque on this score. You always know what they are 'about' and what their motivations are. Heroes are simple.

And I admit that I have in the past been rather too simple minded in my approach to Frodo. I figured he was simple too: Ring must be destroyed, so I will destroy it, Ring too strong, but it still gets destroyed by Frodo's goodness. The goodness has never been questionable or dubious to me. Not even mysterious. But now it is.

Nerwen put it best: "But... Fordim, this is all based on your personal interpretation of how the Ring works. If it works by twisting a person's nature, rather than by simply developing it, there's no reason to think Frodo always wanted to be the Dark Lord, is there?" That's what we're working through here...a set of differing interpretations of the book. No big deal in normal circumstances, but what we're differing on, what is mysterious, remains:

a) what was Frodo's motivation for destroying the Ring?

b) what was it in Frodo that made him vulnerable to the Ring and how is that connected to point a)?

c) why is it that his corruption/seduction by the Ring (and is it seduction or corruption--very different things) is so very different in nature from what happens to others?

I still think that it's too simple to brush aside the observation that Frodo was tempted in a way qualitatively (and disturbingly) different from the others. They all wanted to destroy Mordor with their own vision of the world (with them at the helm of course), while Frodo seemed to want simply to take over Mordor. He doesn't wish to mimic the Dark Lord and his works but to usurp him. Chilling stuff if you think of it. To paraphrase Aragorn in Moria, this hobbit is indeed made of sterner stuff than I'd imagined.

[PrinceOfTheHalflings]

Originally Posted by Fordim Hedgethistle

a) what was Frodo's motivation for destroying the Ring?

Duty ... a desire to do "the right thing" no matter how hopeless the cause.

b) what was it in Frodo that made him vulnerable to the Ring and how is that connected to point a)?

Formendacil just mentioned Bilbo and the things that Bilbo and Frodo have in common. The qualities that Bilbo has that makes the difference are pity and mercy. He spares Gollum when he could killed him. So does Frodo. Of course, it is Frodo's act of mercy that means that Gollum can reappear at the climactic moment to enact the providential snatching of the Ring that ensures its destruction.

But ... is this connected with Frodo's desire to claim the Ring? Could it be that at that moment in the Sammath Naur the Ring appealed to Frodo's sense of pity and mercy towards ... Sauron?

Could the Ring have deceived Frodo into thinking that instead of destroying the Ring, and therefore Sauron, he should instead take the Ring for himself and therefore spare Sauron? So at that moment (of madness) it might have seemed to Frodo that becoming the new Dark Lord was the merciful thing to do.

[Fordim Hedgethistle]

Originally Posted by PrinceOfTheHalflings

"the right thing"

Define, please.

[Farael]

Originally Posted by PrinceOfTheHalflings

But ... is this connected with Frodo's desire to claim the Ring? Could it be that at that moment in the Sammath Naur the Ring appealed to Frodo's sense of pity and mercy towards ... Sauron?

I must beg to differ here. While you do bring up a very interesting idea, I think that any self-proclaimed Ring Lord knew that before his dominion was complete he would've had to challenge and defeat Sauron. Furthermore, anyone who knew a bit of Sauron's history (like Frodo did) would've recognized that there was simply no way that Sauron would give up his claim to the ring while he had any hope to regain it left.

I am with Boromir88 on this one. I the thought that Frodo was completely and utterly defeated and in a way overthrown mentally and physically appeals to me in ways that no other "excuse" for his behaviour might. He was the "perfect" Ring Bearer and yet even he couldn't make it in the end. The corruption the Ring had on Frodo was that of wakening him to the point where he could no longer oppose the Ring's will. In the end, up until Gollum bit his finger off, Frodo was a slave to the ring. Certainly not a slave to Sauron directly, but a slave to Sauron's will by proxy.