Was Gollum's slip the only way?

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

I have been wondering if it was possible for anyone to willingly cast the Ring into the fires of Mount Doom. Gollum slipped and that was how it was destroyed. If Gollum hadn't have been there, what would have happened?
I reckon Sam would have had to push Frodo in to get the job done, whether Sam could do that is a question in itself.
Did anyone in Middle Earth have power over the Ring?

[Tarthang]

Short of a Vala coming to Middle-Earth, it is doubtful that anyone in middle-earthhad power over the ring (discounting Sauron). Tom Bambadil was not affected by the ring, but weather or not he had power over it is debatable.
Personally, I believe Sam would have been able to shove Frodo into the Cracks of Doom were it necessary. But then again, while Frodo had lost the battle to resist the Ring's influence to put it on, we never fully got to see wether or not Frodo mastered the Ring or it he.

[Parmawen]

Originally Posted by Tarthang

Personally, I believe Sam would have been able to shove Frodo into the Cracks of Doom were it necessary. But then again, while Frodo had lost the battle to resist the Ring's influence to put it on, we never fully got to see wether or not Frodo mastered the Ring or it he.

I'm assuming Frodo was mastered by the ring, as opposed to mastering the ring. I thought that he had succumbed to the ring at last and could not resist it's pull, hence putting it on. Besides, Frodo was so weak at that point there's no way he could have won over the force of Sauron.

As for Sam, I don't really believe he could have pushed his master into Mount Doom. His love and devotion for Frodo were stronger than his feelings for Middle-Earth, as far as I could tell. He always seemed to have a smaller perspective of the world, and he'd hold the smaller, familiar things like Frodo closer to him than the wide, broader idea of the world.

In the big picture, I don't think Frodo himself would have been able to destroy the ring, and Sam wasn't about to push him over, so I suppose, sad as it is, it really was the only way for it to be destroyed. I hated in the movie how it's Frodo and Gollum fighting that ends with Gollum slipping over, while in the book, he was dancing with glee, was he not? The movie shows a darker, more evil side of Frodo that I don't like to believe really was there. The ring began with violence, and ended in violence in the movie. It just didn't seem like something Frodo would do. Although he had changed a lot through the movies, so it could have been part of his change. Still, I thought Tolkien handled it much better in the books, leaving us with faith in Frodo and his soul, and content that the Ring was destroyed.

Perhaps the finality of Gollum being destroyed along with the rest of evil (orcs, Sauron, the ring itself) puts an official end to everything, guaranteeing no cheesy sequals and leaving all ends tied up. That way we never have to wonder about if Gollum was recovering from his ownership of the ring afterwards.

[Kath]

Just to pick out something that Parmawen mentioned about how in the film Frodo fought Gollum for the Ring. I always thought that was a little odd because we see Bilbo give up the Ring and see him suddenly become free of it and so it seems the same should happen with Frodo. But then there is some conflict with this idea because Gollum cannot feel free, he is compelled to forever search for the Ring. Is this difference then because of the length of time each bearer had it for, and should Frodo have felt free after Gollum had taken it as he does in the books or should he have been desperate to get it back as in the films?

[Firefoot]

Kath, the difference is that Bilbo gave the Ring away of his own volition; he wanted to. Frodo had the Ring forcibly taken from him - that is, bitten off. Gollum lost it; he had no desire to let the Ring go. When Frodo and Gollum each lost the Ring, neither had any desire to part with it.

The other difference between the book and the movie is that after Gollum bit the Ring off, Frodo did not get back up in the book. Sam had to carry him out of the mountain once Gollum had toppled into the Crack. If Frodo could have, he may well have gotten up and battled Gollum for the Ring in the book. But I don't think that he could have - the Ring, while still in existance, still had power over his mind. If the Ring had not been destroyed, I think it is possible that Frodo himself may have been destroyed (mentally, not physically) by having the Ring so forcibly taken from him after claiming it for his own. Frodo was only at peace after the Ring was destroyed. Even Gollum only lost the Ring; it had not been taken directly from him. Frodo was in such a bad mental state at that point that I don't know if he could have recovered.

[Parmawen]

To bounce off of what Kath said, it could also be the difference in their minds. Gollum had a much weaker mind, and had grown used to possessing the ring after succumbing to its power. It's easy to think that Bilbo had a stronger mind and therefore was able to escape from its power more often, while it was the only thing Gollum had ever loved. Of course, they were both some form of Hobbit, relatively, so the hobbit-strong mind characteristic doesn't quite work...

[Mithadan]

In one of his Letters, Tolkien speculates on what might have happened if Gollum had failed to wrest the Ring from Frodo and fall into the fires. He suggests that Sam would not have the will or the heart to kill his master. The Ringwraiths would have been summoned to Orodruin. Frodo would not have had the time to learn how to control the Ring nor the strength to truly master it. The Wraiths, nonetheless, would not have been able to assault him. Rather, they would feign obedience and invite him to survey his kingdom. Once Frodo had left the Cracks of Doom, they would have contrived to seal the entrance and either Sauron would have come to seize the Ring or the Wraiths would have carried him to Barad Dur.

I do not think that anyone could destroy the Ring after possessing it as long as Frodo did. This is why the Fellowship was formed; to provide him with assistance to carry the Ring to its destination and to help him marshal the will to destroy it or to do so on his behalf. Whether they would have succeeded is another story. For this reason, I have several times argued that Frodo did not fail in his quest. He did as much as could have possibly been done and perhaps no one else could have done as much. To destroy the Ring was beyond his capacity and would have likely been impossible for anyone who had possessed it for any length of time.

[Tarthang]

Thanks for the info Mithidin. I only have copies of the Hobbit, LOTR, Silm and Lay's of Beleriand (the last two I've only read once). Did not know that Tolkien had addressed the issue. I had also not taken into account the proximity of the Rings master and his servants when mentioning Frodo's possible domination of the ring.

[Tarthang]

Sorry. Thanks Mithadan.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

I wonder if it is about the length of time Frodo had been a Ringbearer. What if Sam had wrestled the Ring from Frodo (lets forget that Sam had already held the Ring) Even if a Hobbit had the Ring for one second, would he have been able to do the task?

[Child of the 7th Age]

We really don't know what would have happened if Sam had managed to wrestle with Frodo and grab the Ring from him. You have to remember that the Ring's power was at its highest when it was near the crack of Doom, where it had originally been forged. So Sam might have had an unpleasant surprise; the Ring might have felt much more powerful and its pull more alluring than it had the last time he held it.

Plus, Tolkien clearly says in his Letters that no being in Middle-earth could voluntarily throw away the Ring, unless that being was "perfect", i.e., had no flaws or shadows in his heart. Now, I like Sam a lot, but I wouldn't call him perfect. Just witness his attitude towards Gollum which was much less charitable than that of Frodo. My guess would be that Sam would not be capable of tossing the Ring once he had it in his possession. Remember how hard it was for Frodo to toss it into the fireplace at Bag End when Gandalf told him to do it, and this was before he even understood the nature of the Ring.

Plus, I think Tolkien is trying to say something here about the nature of human effort and of providence. It was the job of Frodo to get the Ring up to the crack of Doom, which he did, despite enormous sacrifice and suffering. But human effort can only do so much. Providence had to intervene and make sure that the final step came about. It was the pity shown by Bilbo, Frodo, and even Sam at the end which allowed providence to operate and use Gollum as an instrument to discard the ring. I think Tolkien felt that human beings can only do so much. There are certain things beyond our limited capabilities. And this was one of them. sharon, the 7th age hobbit

[Halfir]

Mithadan and Child of the 7th Age: it's always a pleasure to read your well argued posts, even if I don't always find myself in agreement with them!

With regard to Tolkien's view on what mighthave happened if Gollum had not snapped off Frodo's Ring finger, I am going to quote his own theory of applicability (FOTR; Foreword), in which he stresses the freedom of the reader against the purposed domination of the author. In other words, in this instance, what the reader might believe is as good as what the author might believe!

If Gollum had not finished the Fellowship journey in his destruction of the Ring (albeit inadvertently!) I don't think the Nazgul - driven by the purposed intent of their master - would have feigned obedience to Frodo. I think the Ring - now returned to its womb, the center of power where it had been created -would have taken control- and Frodo (and Sam ) would have been obliged by it to return with the Nazgul to Barad - Dur and Sauron's welcome.

The debate over who speaks, Frodo or the Ring, when Frodo makes his decision not to destroy it, has engendered endless comment. I have always subscribed to the view that here, at the the very center of its power, it was the Ring speeking and not Frodo. At this point, Frodo, as would anyone else in Middle Earth who had made that same journey with the Ring as a burden, surrenders his will to that of the Ring's.

Tom Shippey in his excellent biography of Tolkien makes a very telling point in this respect:"Frodo does not say 'I choose not to do', but 'I do not choose to do'. Maybe (and Tolkien was a professor of language) the choice of words is absolutely accurate. Frodo does not choose; the choice is made for him."

Child of the 7th Age makes a very powerful point about the intervention of Providence, in the form of Gollum biting off the Ring finger. Interestingly enough Tolkien does not use the word 'providence', he uses 'chance'.It was chance, or Providence that Bilbo found the ring, chance or Providence that Gandalf met with
Thorin Oakshield, chance or Providence that Tom Bombadil hapened to be nearby to save the hobbits from Old Man Willow, although Tom enigmatic as ever! says:"Just chance brought me then,if chance you call it." So some Providential power or 'chance' is clearly at work, although it has to be delivered through some agency residing in ME, and seems to favor those who both act positively on their own behalf and use 'luck' in a positive way, and not to harm others.(Shippey)

Gollum's 'luck' was to be accepted by Frodo as a traveling companion, but in the final sequence at Mount Doom, that 'luck' turns against him because he uses it for ill - he reposseses the Ring - only to lose his own life - and that of his precious which he values so dearly.

Which brings me full-circle to my earlier comment regarding the Fellowship journey -in which I included Gollum! Gollum's role in the Fellowship might not be on the same lines as the Nine who set out from Rivendell (Boromir's error not withstanding) but his role as the 'tenth' member of the Fellowship is fundamental to the final cataclysmic destruction of the Ring. Indeed, at that point Gollum is what Frodo might have become if left under the domination of the Ring, and Gollums death might be seen as the 'death' of that part of Frodo's spirit that the Ring had finally controlled.

Though it is not entirely clear what the power was that cast Gollum into the fires of doom, there was definitely some great power at work. Gollum attacked Frodo and Sam on the side of Mount Doom. They could have killed him there, but showed him mercy. There is a paragraph that has describes Sam's view of the scene. He see's Frodo as a tall figure in white clutching at the ring under his shirt. Frodo tells Gollum that if he ever touches him again, he shall be cast into the fires of doom. I believe it is the power of the ring itself that binds the curse and becomes the source of its own destruction when it is in Gollums posession at the time he is cast into the fires of doom. NOTE: I have read The Lord of the Rings several times over the years and it was only in my most recent reading that I realized this relationship.

[Balin999]

Hm there are other discussions about the same topic, so try to search for it, maybe you'll get some answers.

[Kath]

Even if a Hobbit had the Ring for one second, would he have been able to do the task?

Well we know from FotR that even if you have only had the Ring for a minute amount of time you are unable to try to harm it. When Gandalf tells Frodo to throw the Ring into the fire he is unable to do so and Frodo has only really had hold of it for the length of their conversation.

Therefore if any Hobbit had it even for one second the Ring would probably have already exerted an influence strong enough to dissuade the bearer from throwing it into Mount Doom so an accident such as Gollum's fall would have to be the only way unless, as Tolkien said, the bearer was completely pure and flawless - unlikely in a Hobbit.

[Elianna]

It probably should be taken into the picture that Sam was able to resist the Ring, despite having it in his possesion on the border of Mordor with all hope of Frodo living gone.

Even so, Child's probably right (as usual), about Sam not being able to destroy the Ring.

*thinks about it for a while* Gosh, it does seem rather hopeless with Gollum. He had a part to play, and that was it: to die with the Ring.

[Findegil]

Maybe we should look at Letter no. 246 again. It provides not only one allternative ending, but 3 or 4. In on Tolkien started with the scene before Shelobs lair, where Gollum is did nearly repend from his badness and is to easily driven back to by Sam. Had that scene gone other wise Tolkien said Gollum would have helped Frodo to the cracks of Doom. But in the end he would have robbed him of the Ring as well and then jumped in by his one will, seeing in it the only way to help Fordo, to protect the Ring for ever from Sauron and to have it for him self for ever. And with the next sentence Tolkien does tell us that such a deed could have been what Frodo would have done with the Ring if he had have the time to think of it.

Some scatter remarks:
Posted by Kath:

When Gandalf tells Frodo to throw the Ring into the fire he is unable to do so and Frodo has only really had hold of it for the length of their conversation.

Frodo recieved the Ring in the 3001 and the conversation between him and Gandalf was in 3018 so he had it already in his possesion for 17 years. But that does not render the point much: He was nearly not effecte than and was already not able to make such even silly try to harm the Ring.

Posted by Elianna:

Gosh, it does seem rather hopeless with Gollum. He had a part to play, and that was it: to die with the Ring.

That seems to be exactly what Prof. Tolkien thought about him. But if that means there was no Hope for him is a nother question.

Respectfully
Findegil