'The Lord of the Rings and Philosophy'

[Eurytus]

Lyta, I like your characterisation of Frodo's failure at Sammath Naur. It was, I suppose, a failing to succumb to temptation in the way that he did. Since the Ring was evil, it was an immoral act for him to try to claim it as his own. As you say, however, it was an unpassable test. Bombadil apart, no one could have resisted the lure of the Ring in that final moment. Perhaps this does represent a moral failing inherent in all peoples of Middle-earth (with the exception of Tom?. It seems to me harsh that a character who has displayed such moral fortitude in getting to that point should have to suffer the consequences of this one inevitable moment of immorality ever after. But, as I said, no one seems to escape the consequences of immoral action in Tolkien's world.

When I first read the LOTR I thought that Frodo had, in the end, failed in his quest. It was only later that I realised that in reality he had not really failed in his quest at all. The burden laid on him was to take the ring to Mount Doom, and to go as far along this road as he was able. This he did.

I later read a letter of Tolkien’s that expanded on this. Tolkien states that Frodo’s only duty was to take the ring as far as he was able and that, on Mount Doom where the Ring’s power was strongest, it would have been beyond anyone’s ability to destroy it. In short, the Wise had never expected Frodo to be able to destroy the ring. Tolkien speculates that Frodo’s triumph was both in getting to Mount Doom and in his application of pity towards Gollum that resulted in the events that followed. So in truth Frodo did in fact triumph. Though he may not have been able to see that fact.

Incidentally, in the same letter Tolkien makes some very interesting points about what would have happened had Gollum not fallen into the crack of doom, and what would have happened had Frodo not been attacked by Gollum.

I can recommend the Letters of JRR Tolkien to anyone. There is some great stuff in there.