Logical Ring-bearer?

[Lobelia]

Okay, let's see if anyone has a thought on this. I know that dramatically, Frodo had to be the Ring-bearer, but would it, perhaps, have been more logical to appoint someone else? Gimli is the one who springs to my mind. If you've read the Appendices, you'll know Sauron has no control over Dwarves. They're too stubborn. This is why he took back the seven rings (well, the ones he could get). The One Ring can only make them a bit greedier for gold, but Gimli is not in danger of having gold ingots thrown at him by the Nazghul. He's interested in orc-killing and nice caves and not much else. I can see him getting to the Cracks of Doom, being maybe a bit regretful about wiping out gold, but tossing it in and getting back to some serious orc-killing... ; - )
Of course, the novel would have been over in two volumes.

[Lady Alasse]

Gimli would have been to stubborn and I think that he would have been killed soon after taking the ring. He would not have wanted any help from the elves because the dwarves are always fighting with the elves. I don't think Gimli would have been a good ring bearer.

[lord of dor-lomin]

I'm sure that Gimli would've done a great job, but I don't think he would've been able to destroy it willingly. I don't think any being would be able to. (didn't Tolkien state this someplace, in an interview possibly?)

[Deathwail]

Think how hard it would of been to get Gimli to leave Moria and its wealth behind,and with the Balrog dead his lust would only of been fueled the more had he been under the power of the One ring.
Hobbits are known for their stealth while Dwarves are not so not likely Gimli could of gone the way Sam and Frodo did.While Gimli might not of been the worst RingBearer i dont think he would of made it to Mordor let alone Mt Doom.
Now that Samwise their is a RingBearer if there ever was one but thats another thread. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

If Gollum had followed Gimli to the Crack of Doom and attacked him, Gimli would have been able to shrug him off. So there may have been less chance of the Ring going into the fire.

[Kidd2323]

Gimli would be too rough and stubborn a ring bearer. Imagine Gimli trying to persuade Faramir and the other Rangers of Ithilien to let him leave Henneth Annun. Of course this would have been done under the swift strokes of a dwarf axe, and while he may have eliminatd more than one Ranger, he certainly wouldn't have killed them all. His obstinence would have forced Faramir (or whoever was left) to lock him up in chains and drag him back to Minas Tirith. No, Gimli would have failed well shore of his goal, but this is only my opinion.

[Sleeping Beauty]

Dwarves themselves would not have been such a good choice, because as said, they are too involved in their own wealth. The ring would have seduced Gimli into thinking he could have even more wealth if he would return it to its master. As it tempted Sam with the idea of the Lord of the Gardens, it would have said he could have been the keeper of all wealth, mithril, etc, etc. No one is a good choice for the ringbearer. It's too evil for the soul and mind to bear.

[Arwen Imladris]

I think that they should have somehow shared it. That way no-one would have gotten to attached to it. Not every one in the fellowship would have to have it (ie Gandalf) but sharing it around even with like, three of them would have made it a lot easier.

[Luthien_ Tinuviel]

But then one of them would become obsessed with it and try to steal it from the others, and eventually they would'nt take turns and they would keep it for themselves and.....
(deterioration of the Fellowship)

Sam would be good, though. Deathwail, which other thread were you referring to?

[ February 25, 2003: Message edited by: Luthien_ Tinuviel ]

[Daisy Brambleburr]

At the end of the day I think that anyone would become corrupted by the Ring sooner or later. Even Frodo was at the very end. It was luck, coincidence and fate that Gollum bit off his finger and fell.
I cannot think of anyone who would be able to bear the Ring without being corrupted, but if Gimli had become a Ring bearer he probably would be greatly tempted by gold, jeweles and riches (just like Sam was with gardens etc.) It is very difficult to fathom what would have happened if Gimli was the Ring bearer, but ultimatley I think the quest would have failed. He probably would kill Gollum at some point, for I don't think he would have found much pity for him. If he didn't I don't think that he would let Gollum actually bite off his finger, because he was physically stronger than Frodo.
However, I do agree that his stubborness would help him because he would be very uneager to give in.
Interesting topic!

[Finwe]

I think a Hobbit would have been the only one who would have been able to bear the Ring all the way to Mordor. True, Dwarves may be more stubborn, but they don't have stealth, which is what helped Frodo and Sam the most. I think that if not for Frodo, then Sam would have been the next best choice. Sam is the type of person who could truly understand the importance of the quest, and let that emotion drive him to success. Although, I'm not sure if he would have been able to ultimately destroy the Ring, he would have probably shrugged off Gollum.

[Elvenglass]

I like the topic. I think that Gimli's (or the dwarves) stubborness would have worked against him, because he would have been reluctant for anyone to assist him, and then a great number of things could have happened, either with the incident with Faramir, or simply not being able to give up the Ring in the end. I think Frodo was definately ideal for the ringbearer, although he was influenced in the end by Gollum...what with the biting off of the finger....It is fun to speculate who else could have been the ringbearer!

[Lobelia]

Finwe, do you really think Sam would have been able to do the job? While it's true he wasn't much tempted, the fact is,he is a follower. I suspect it's to do with Tolkien's attitude to class.Have another look at what happened for the five minutes he did have the Ring: he saw the orcs come to paw over what he thought was Frodo's dead body and decided the world would just have to come to an end, rather than allow his beloved master's body to be dishonoured. Sam was ideal for the job he did have and Frodo couldn't have made it without him, but Ringbearer? No. I don't think so.

[Noxomanus]

I wonder if Legolas couldn't have been one of those faring better as a Ringbearer.He wouldn't be so easy to twist into evil as this is (virtually) impossible for Elves.But maybe I'm wrong on this one.

[Finwe]

I think you are right Lobelia. Sam is definitely more of a "follower" character than a "leader" like Frodo.
I don't think Legolas or any of the Elves could do it, because look what happened to Celebrimbor and the Gwaith-i-Mirdain. They were so easily seduced, and Celebrimbor was one of the most powerful Noldor at that time. Legolas is only a part-Silvan Elf from Mirkwood (even if he is the Prince). He doesn't have that deep-down common sense and slow-awakening courage that Hobbits do. He would have stormed off to Mordor and challenged Sauron. And we all know how that would turn out.

[kittiewhirl1677]

Yeah, that would surely happen. I really think that Aragorn could do it, since we all know that he wasn't tempted by the ring. I know that he didn't want to, but he would have been ideal! A strong king of Gondor, a ranger, would definately make it to Mt. Doom and cast the ring into the fire.

I probably missed something about why he couldn't have done it while reading some information, so don't murder me, please if this is an insane idea...

[Bekah]

I really think that Aragorn could do it, since we all know that he wasn't tempted by the ring.

No, we don't. We know that Aragorn had the common sense that Boromir didn't, and we know that at the time of Frodo's leaving he was not tempted. But we don't know that it would stay that way...

In the Sil, the orcs are elves turned bad. On no account could anyone say that elves are virtually incorruptible.

Sam couldn't do the job - for one thing, he didn't trust Gollum, and if he had the ring, he would probably have killed Gollum, after which he would become lost in the Marshes.

~ Elentari II

[Scott]

I agree with Bekah here. We simply don't see Aragorn get tempted by the ring when he has the chance to be. He always had enough wits about himself to just stay away from it. Plus there was that whole "destined to fail as my ancestors did" chip he had on his shoulders too. I doubt the thought of taking the ring for himself even entered his mind with any shred of credibility given to the thought.

Remember that Galadriel even attempted to take the ring and use it for her own designs. Would Galadriel, arguably one of the most powerful elves in ME be any worse than a half-silvan prince? But then comes the replying statement that Power corrupts, but absolute power corrupts absolutely - yada, yada, yada.

My vote goes to Sam. I think that his heart was so pure that the will of Sauron would of been in for a big fight to win Sam over to the dark side.

~Scott

[ May 27, 2003: Message edited by: Scott ]

[Bekah]

I think that his heart was so pure that the will of Sauron would of been in for a big fight to win Sam over to the dark side.

He loved Frodo very much, like a brother. But his heart was not pure; he had his faults. He despised and distrusted Gollum. Might not Sauron play on his feeling toward Gollum and thus destroy him? For as Gandalf said: "Pity? 'Twas pity that stayed Bilbo's hand, Frodo." Frodo understood this later in his journey.

Remember that Galadriel even attempted to take the ring and use it for her own designs. Would Galadriel, arguably one of the most powerful elves in ME be any worse than a half-silvan prince? But then comes the replying statement that Power corrupts, but absolute power corrupts absolutely - yada, yada, yada.

And Gandalf was terrified of himself if he should take the ring. Legolas was too proud. "A plague on the stiff necks of Elves!" These two, Aragorn, Gimli, and Galadriel - in fact all of the Fellowship and some other characters, except perhaps Merry and Pippin - would have defied Sauron in the end if not in the beginning, and have become like him. Merry and Pippin would have succumbed to Sauron in the end and become his servants, I think.

Then from the beginning, you look at how the journey would have changed Sam to see where he would have been at the end. It's not about the destination, but the journey itself. I think that he would have been in such a position very similar to Frodo.

True enough. We must start from the beginning. I think the part where they started to differ was when Frodo felt pity for the wretched Gollum when he finally encountered him, whereas Sam hardened his heart.

~ Elentari II

[ May 27, 2003: Message edited by: Bekah ]

[Finwe]

I don't think that Aragorn would have succeeded if he had taken the Ring. He is naturally so powerful that the Ring would have corrupted him faster, even though he was of the Line of Luthien. Gimli says it himself in Return of the King. If Aragorn had claimed the Ring, he could have challenged Sauron himself, and the latter definitely knew that. That was why the whole ruse of the Host of the West worked. Sauron thought that Aragorn had the Ring, and was going to use it against him.

[Scott]

True, Sauron could've used Sam's ill feelings towards Gollum against him, but if Sam was the ring-bearer the whole journey, as Frodo was, might the same wisdom Gandalf gave to Frodo be imparted upon Sam as well?
Yes, throghout the journey, we see why Tolkien set up each character as he did with each one having their own foibles. However, if you look at the begining of the story, many of the same feelings were felt by Sam and Frodo alike. For instance, the scene in Moria concerning Gollum as was afore mentioned is one place where the reader can see that Frodo disliked Gollum very much at first, much like Sam does.
I think that to determine whether Sam could be a possible ring bearer you should not look at where Sam was at the end of the journey, but instead where he was at the beginning. Then from the beginning, you look at how the journey would have changed Sam to see where he would have been at the end. It's not about the destination, but the journey itself. I think that he would have been in such a position very similar to Frodo.

[Lyta_Underhill]

This is a good point, Scott. Sam, at the beginning of the LOTR, is very much a provincial hobbit, fast on the road to becoming a carbon copy of the Gaffer. He is quick to distrust those who would threaten the things and people he loves (i.e. the Shire as seen in Galadriel's mirror, Frodo his master)--so much so, that he does not give sufficient thought to consequences before he would act. The only thing that keeps him from turning 'round and kicking the ruffians out of the Shire at that point is the fact that he is committed to Frodo and his quest. Would Sam have had the strength to continue the quest at this point without Frodo's absolute need for him to do so? If Sam had the Ring at this point, would he turn around and, feeling the power of it, turn it to the Scouring of the Shire right there, and thus doom the quest?

Sam is willful, but he does not think things through, thus his apt moniker "Samwise" or "Half-Wise." He has amazing intuition, more so than most, but a limited viewpoint. I think, even among the hobbits, Frodo is the only one for this job. He is the only one of the hobbits that can see the depths of the importance of the quest. Even if Merry and Pippin knew of the true import (which I think they come to realize towards the end), they would not have handled it as Frodo did. They both have a streak of violence and/or impulsiveness, albeit in the realm of extreme loyalty and love for their friends and eventually their lords. I can see both Merry and Pippin making short work of Gollum, as Sam would have done. Gimli too!

On the subject of Aragorn, I think it is interesting that, until the breaking of the Fellowship at Parth Galen, he was torn in two on this matter. He had a destiny to fulfill and was drawn to Minas Tirith to fulfill it; but he felt an extreme debt to the safety and success of Frodo and the quest, perhaps because of his ties to Isildur and the failure of his line to destroy the Ring the last time around. I think that, if Aragorn had gone to Mount Doom with the Ring, he would have realized sooner or later that this action was the act of a man who is trying to assuage guilt, rather than face the responsibility of taking up the Kingship of Gondor and raising it out of the mire it was in at this time in the Third Age. If Minas Tirith had fallen while Aragorn toiled on Mt. Doom, the victory would be quite bittersweet (if Aragorn had succeeded in the quest), and I wonder if the Gondorians would have accepted Aragorn as readily as a returned king. He perhaps would be rarefied and not understandable, much as Frodo was in the Shire after his return.

I also wonder if Frodo realized this tendency in Aragorn before he sneaked off alone at Amon Hen. He knew Aragorn would follow him, but he also knew Aragorn's heart was in Minas Tirith. Frodo's departure made Aragorn's choice for him, as did the unfortunate (or ultimately fortunate-viz. the Ents!) capture of Merry and Pippin (for to allow them to reach Isengard would mean disaster!). In a way, Aragorn did not make his own choices at this point, and I think that is all to the good. I think this guilt of history could have been Aragorn's undoing at Mount Doom. He had a lot of trouble allowing another to take responsibility for what he felt was his burden.

Thanks for listening to my idle speculations!

Cheers,
Lyta

[akhtene]

IMO, the key to understanding who could/or couldn't be the Ringbearer is ties and responsibilities all the characters have. Frodo seemes the one to be burdened with none...Wait, don't throw heavy objects, I'll explain!.. So, he's got no family (Bilbo left and other relatives don't seem to care), no love, no real occupation. Of course he loves The Shire, but it is contemplative admiration. He is educated and well-read for a hobbit, he absorbs wisdom when it's offered to him, but he hardly has much experience. Thus nothing restrains him from taking that great Burden, the responsibility for the whole world.

As for Sam and Aragorn Lyta_Underhill has said it all. No matter what their intention would be, they would have hardly be able to devote themselves completely to THAT quest.

Boromir's loyalty to his city proved that weekness at which the Ring Caught him.

Gimli and Legolas can't be viewed separately from their races, that have complicated relations with each other and with Men. Their friendship could be theri private business, but carrying the Ring could be well viewed as political affair and trigger more hostility and mistrust.

Somehow if I had to choose the most 'logical ringbearer' I'd consider Merry and Pippin (as a team). Most of what I wrote about Frodo is true for them both. They proved selfless and determined. And perhaps together they could cope with each other's follies.

/criticizm welcome. Hard and heavy things...can't you find a better use for them? [img]smilies/evil.gif[/img] /

[The Saucepan Man]

Somehow if I had to choose the most 'logical ringbearer' I'd consider Merry and Pippin (as a team).

Well said, akhtene. I'll second that. I think that I came to the same conclusion on another thread. Basically, for me it all comes down to the Hobbit's peculiar resistance to magic such as that imbued in the Ring. All the others were too vulnerable to its temptations. If Gandalf was afraid of taking it, then I would not trust any of the others with it either. Not Aragorn, Legolas or even Gimli (Dwarvish resistance notwithstanding - the Ring would have found away to tempt him away from his mission).

Hobbits seem to have this particualr strength which enables them to bear burdens such as the Ring more easily than other races (Smeagol being the obvious exception, and one that I have never quite been able to figure out). So, after Frodo, it's a matter of choosing between the remaining three Hobbit members of the Fellowship.

I go along with what others have said about Sam being a follower. He needed a purpose other than just the destruction of the Ring and being Frodo's companion to the end of the Quest provided that for him.

Which leaves either Merry or Pippin. Neither would have been ready to bear it at the start of the journey. They would have needed experiences similar to those that they underwent to mature them sufficiently to take it all the way into Mordor. But, as Ringbearers, they would no doubt have had those. If I had to choose between the two, I would plump for Merry as the more contemplative and mature of the two. But I agree with your idea, akhtene, of the two of them accomplishing the Quest as a team, although one of them (Merry?) would have had to have been the actual Ringbearer. The Ring does not lend itself to being shared.

Only problem, of course, is that none of them, according to JRRT, would have been able to toss the Ring into the fires of Orodruin. So Gollum had to be there, whoever it was. And, again, I think that Merry and Pippin would be the most likely candidates to take the same approach to Gollum that Frodo did, and so the most likely to accomplish the task.

[Lyta_Underhill]

If I had to choose between the two, I would plump for Merry as the more contemplative and mature of the two. But I agree with your idea, akhtene, of the two of them accomplishing the Quest as a team, although one of them (Merry?) would have had to have been the actual Ringbearer.

An interesting speculation, Saucepan Man! Merry does seem to be the more mature of the two of the hobbit pair; but I've noticed something else about Merry. He needs someone or something to love and protect. He seems lost when Pippin goes off the Minas Tirith; he misses Pippin terribly, and he latches on hard to Theoden and the Rohirrim. He seems to be extremely passionate in this regard, more so than Pippin, who, although loyal and steadfast, is much more the risk taker and active component of the pair.

I shudder to think of the depths of despair that Merry would undergo if he were to bear the Ring, but I know that Pippin would bear up with him. I do not know whether Pippin would have the same discretion and intuition that Sam has when he is called upon to act alone to carry the Ring and save Frodo. Pippin seems to have a charmed life, and he seems to happen into revealing experiences, so it might be fortuitous for this combination to occur. He also resists falling into the depths of despair, viz. the Pyre of Denethor and his wish at the Gate of Morannon that Merry could be with him. I do think Pippin could keep Merry going at the end, and I also think Merry would require it, same as Frodo did from Sam. So, yes, I could see it happening.

I do wonder what would happen at the end, when Merry stands at the Sammath Naur and claims the Ring for his own...the wild card of Gollum of course is unaccounted for in my speculation. I do think that, in the end, Pippin would take Merry and the Ring with him into the Mountain of Doom, just as I believe that Sam would have taken Frodo in had the worst come to the worst in that sense. The wildcard is Gollum, and it would take someone of Frodo's sensibilities and sensitivity to deal with such a factor. I'd say, without Frodo or Gollum, you'd have some dead hobbits in this affair. And I'd hate to see that! (I'm one of the ones who can't bring myself to play Hanghobbit!)

Nice theory though!

Cheers,
Lyta

[Dancing_Hobbit]

only a hobbit could take the ring, because anyone else would not be able to resist it long enough. i think the resistence is due to thier love of happiness and good things, they are so accustumed to them and love them so much, that evil and power just don't have the same pull on them. however, it would have to be an unusual hobbit. mery and pippin, while spirited, are just too hobbity. they don't take the quest seriously for a long time, and they blunder and don't seem to understand just how terrible their danger is. they would have blundered along and been cught quickley. they also probably never would have left the fellowship, which was essential. it allowed the onther members to do other important things, prevented them from being corrupted, and made the party small enough to avoid notice and not to seem as threatening to gollum. sam wouldn't be bad, but as someone said, he is too attached to frodo and doesn't think things through well enough. also, while he is very sweet and kind, he doesn't have frodo's empathy. if frodo hadn't stopped him, he would have killed gollum, without whom, they never would have gotten into mordor, nor would anything, even a hobbit, have had the strength to wilfully destroy the ring.

[Nils]

Gollum was a hobbit and he didn't fair too well. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

I would say that men had to destroy the ring because of the music. Men were about to take control of Middle-earth. They had to earn that right.

[Lobelia]

What a fascinating discussion this is becoming! There have been some wonderful points made. I think that more of the Company would have been able to do it, as they *became* - they all grew and developed, one reason I love this book so much. The question I was debating with myself before starting this thread is - who else might Elrond have appointed? I can see the "Aragorn-guilt" thing, i.e. Isildur started this, I don't like it, but somebody has to do it! but doubt he could have made it the whole way and he is sensible enough to know that. The more powerful the person was in the first place, the more likely they are to do damage with the thing - they'd want to use it to do good, and then they'd end up misusing it. (Gollum was corrupted,yes, but at least he only harmed himself and assorted orcs during the centuries he had the Ring - and Tolkien himself suggested in one of his letters that he was recovering since losing it).

I suggested Gimli because he is very practical, can't be corrupted by the Ring and even Galadriel blessed him as being one over whom gold would have no power. But as someone pointed out, he, like most of the others, had responsibilities (to his people, his father, his king, etc.) - very true! I suppose it's really a suicide mission, and you'd want someone with no ties to do it.

[the guy who be short]

I just had a weird idea: Gollum.
Think about it. Gollum was the one that destroyed the ring. And couldn't they somehow convince him to destroy the ring, seeing as he "loves and hates himself" ( a movie quote, dont trust it). Ok, i know the answers no!
How about Gollum in a bag. So that nobody gets attached to it, the ring is put in a bag. Gandalf seals the bag using magic (if he has a spell for it) and they take it in turns to carry it. Then, since nobody sees it and thus nobody gets attached to it, they all throw it into the mountain together. If gollum was in the bag, theyre destroying two evil things at once!
OK, the gollum idea is stupid, but why not have the ring in a bag?
This would, of course, have the consequence of a) rohan being overrun by Isengard, b) The Battle on the Pellenor fields would probably be lost, c) The Witchking would endure.

[Frodo2968thewhite]

-Any Dwarf would be a horrible ringbearer. If you go back to the first age, the Dwarves seemed like a decent race, but then they stole the silmaril of Doriath, until Beren re-took it.
-Sam would have left Gollum tied up, and Gollum would have died. So when Sam and Frodo (or just Sam) got to Mt. Doom (if they made it), there is no way that Sam would have the will to throw it in. So there is a lesser chance that it would get destroyed.
-Any man would get corrupted, like Boromir.
-An Elf MIGHT be able to destroy it, but they'd have to want to bear it (very unlikely!). Or if they pull a "Galadriel"!
-a Wizard would be corrupted, and turned into a creature like Sauron [img]smilies/evil.gif[/img] .
-Merry and Pippin are around men alot, so BAD CHOICE!

So Frodo is the Best ringbearer!
[img]smilies/redface.gif[/img] [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img] [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

[Ophelia]

[img]smilies/eek.gif[/img] Damn! So much to read......Well...I confess - I have not read all posted replys so l hope for forgivenes incase of repeating somethin' allready written.
I will try not to write too much.I agree that Gimli could be a ring bearer but considering pride of the dwarfs do you think he would take any company of men or elves not to menchion hobbits in this quest (try reading "There and back again or hobbit" to find out abot dwarf character)?Actually no hobbits would wish to go for if Frodo is not the ring bearer than he has no nothin' to do in this "trip" to Mt. Doom so Sam would not have a master to follow and nor would Merry and Pippin go .
And you can never trust a dwarf.They are cunning.Why should a dwarf go anywhere if he can hide the One Ring in a deep and secret cave where no Eye of Sauron could find it?
And : even if Gimli would have taken the same way to Mordor as Frodo did , I agree he would killed Gollum at any chance that means : hov would a dwarf or even more of them cross the Dead Marshes without somebody to show the way?
Nobody can kill a Nazgūl .They can only kill you.
And the final statement : I am satisfied with the ring bearer chosen by J.R.R.Tolkien for the book is interesting this way =)
P.S.In the end this looks like an essay to me even if I tried to write laconic . [img]smilies/tongue.gif[/img]

[Bekah]

b) The Battle on the Pellenor fields would probably be lost, c) The Witchking would endure.

Without Sauron's will (which would stop as soon as the ring was thrown into Mt. Doom), the Nazgul die, having been too long corrupted.

Nobody can kill a Nazgūl .They can only kill you.

Eowyn?

~ Elentari II

[Aratlithiel]

No MAN can kill a Nazgul - the prophecy said nothing about hobbits or women...which is probably why the Merry/Eowyn combo worked so well. [img]smilies/tongue.gif[/img]

[Aratlithiel]

After thinking about this for a minute and having just finished reading 'Letters' it has come to my attention that Frodo did NOT fail. According to Tolkien, to cast the Ring into the fire was an impossible task for anyone in ME - ANYONE. No one really expected Frodo to be able to do it - they only knew that of anyone else in ME, he was the best hope. Frodo's SUCCESS was in his pity for Gollum which later enabled the Ring's destruction. In other words, Frodo assured the success of the quest way back on the Emyn Muil - not at the Sammath Naur.

Which answers the question of who else could have completed the quest - the answer is nobody. Think of anyone else in the Fellowship - each one of them (with the exception of Gandalf who would not touch the Ring)would have cut Gollum down without a second thought - even the other hobbits. Frodo was the only one capable of the pity that was essential to the success of the quest. Therefore, Frodo was not only the most logical choice - but the ONLY choice.

[Lyta_Underhill]

Frodo was the only one capable of the pity that was essential to the success of the quest. Therefore, Frodo was not only the most logical choice - but the ONLY choice.

Interesting thoughts, Aratlithiel! I too have read the letter to which you refer, and certainly I agree that Frodo did not fail. But I can also think of another, more devastating way the Quest could have succeeded. Namely, one fights the other, either for the Ring or to keep the other from falling to its final influence. There need only be a conflict that causes the ultimate Ringbearer to fall into the Cracks of Doom, for, of course, no one could throw it in! I had a depressing thought that, if Gollum had been killed previously, Sam would have had to answer his own question, the one he posed to himself near Mt. Doom when he realized that Frodo couldn't do anything for himself anymore. He knew he would have to make a final choice, and that need was obviated by Gollum. Would Sam have struggled with Frodo to keep him from being taken by Sauron and his minions? Would Sam have had the strength to complete the Quest? He would not have thrown the Ring in, but he might have taken Frodo and himself over the edge to keep Frodo from the ultimate damnation. He loved Frodo that much, anyway! So, a depressing thought, but the Quest would be fulfilled, without Gollum.

Now, the question is: would Merry do this for Pippin or vice versa? It is hard to say, but I think so. Merry's actions on the Pelennor Fields and Pippin's at the Gate of Morannon were both selfless acts with no hope of continuing afterwards. They were completely selfless acts and desperate, done for love of another. It is still hard to say whether one would turn on the other for the destruction of the Ring. I tend to think that Sam would have let Frodo have the Ring awhile, until the Nazgul arrived and Sauron himself showed up, and he finally realizes that the only way out is into the Cracks of Doom. But would it have been in time? Great discussion! Thanks, Aratlithiel!

Cheers,
Lyta

[Aredhel Idril Telcontar]

Like many of you said here: Sam, now there's a ringbearer if there ever was one.
PS I was re-reading the books and wondered for a moment why they didn't throw the Ring into the chasm of Moria [img]smilies/tongue.gif[/img] [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

[Lyta_Underhill]

PS I was re-reading the books and wondered for a moment why they didn't throw the Ring into the chasm of Moria

Probably for the same reason they decided against throwing it into the Sea! I think it was Glorfindel who realized that it could not be effectively hidden and would always threaten to return to a new discovery. It probably would have taken awhile to fish out of Moria though! I wonder if the Balrog would find it and what would a Balrog do with it? [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

Cheers,
Lyta

[Theoric Windcaller]

In my opinion, Gimli, would change the story quite a bit, I mean, think about it. Gimli, would not want help from Elves, as said before earlier in this thread, he would probably want the gold, as is the nature of all Dwarves, and he would probably be too loud to slip through Moria unnoticed, especially when so many vulnerable Orc are around.

[Finwe]

I think that the Merry/Pippin team would have also worked. True, they seem so immature and unrealistic at times, but they are still young. Frodo and Sam are older than they are, and more mature. Merry and Pippin have an utterly selfless streak deep down inside them. Look what they did when it came to rescuing Eowyn and Faramir. Merry was practically reduced to a gibbering wreck from fear, but he still pulled himself together, and realized that something (or someone) that beautiful shouldn't die. He overcame the fear that reduced many of the greatest warriors on that field, and acted. That action saved the life of Eowyn, and helped slay the Witch-King.
In Gondor, when Pippin saw Denethor trying to kill himself and Faramir, the young Hobbit who felt so out of place in this big, wide world melted away, and a strong, hardened warrior emerged. He KNEW that Faramir was alive, and was going to live. He took the risk of being forever ostracized by Gondorians for deserting his post, and went to Gandalf and Beregond for help. Deep down inside his heart, he had that Hobbit-sense that told him that he could do something. That if he couldn't fight on both legs, then he would fight on one leg or reduced to fighting on both knees.
Separately, I don't think that either Merry or Pippin could have destroyed the Ring. They loved each other so much that they would have gone to Mt. Doom itself, by hook or by crook. True, they might not have left Gollum alive, and that would have posed a great obstacle to destroying the Ring.
If they had reached the Sammath Naur, and the Ring had corrupted Merry, then Pippin would have known what to do. If worst came to worst, and he knew that the Nazgul were approaching, then he would have tackled Merry and flung both of them into the heart of the volcano. And the same would have happened if Pippin would have been corrupted.
Merry and Pippin are different from the rest of the Fellowship in that deep down inside, they would risk their lives to ensure the quest's success. I think that scene in the movie where they use themselves as decoys illustrates that perfectly. It was an impulsive action, they both knew it, but they did what they had to do, and Frodo managed to escape. If it had not been for that, then the Ring would have fallen into the hands of the Uruk-hai, and eventually brought to Saruman, which would have been a disaster.
I agree with all those people who said that a Hobbit would be the only logical choice for a Ringbearer. That spark of courage deep in their hearts is something unique. No other race has it. True, they have their weaknesses, but it was that strength that ultimately prevailed.

[Lyta_Underhill]

Beautifully said, Finwe! Merry and Pippin were extraordinary, even for hobbits, and they complemented each other very well, as was illustrated in TTT when they escaped from the Orcs. Pippin had the initiative and cunning to escape, and Merry the sense to figure out what to do once they had got away! And I agree that Pippin would know instantly what to do if the Ring were to ultimately corrupt Merry. Pippin may be impulsive, but his actions become more and more seasoned by a growing maturity and an uncanny sense of right, as if he were connected with the flow of Ea itself. I think this particular concept was explored a bit in the thread here: Pippin's Sixth Sense

Indeed, this quality seems to be present in all the hobbits of the Nine Walkers, but I just tend to dwell on it in Pippin, as I am rather partial to him! I'd say, also, that Frodo, with his added insight and observational powers derived from long possession of the Ring and tendency to pay attention to strange happenings (he followed the passage of the Elves long before leaving the Shire), would be the less intuitive in the worldly sense than the others, but more Elvish, walking in both worlds simultaneously. He seems to have a bit of the Elvish temperament, and as such, is fading from the world and his doings and thinkings bear much less connection with his surroundings as the Quest goes on. I have to wonder if this effect would have been so marked on Merry, were he to carry the Ring. He did have a tendency to go off alone and gather information, even (perhaps especially!) in times of great danger. He seems to have the most wilderness sense of any of the hobbits, although Sam's skills are formidable too in a slightly different way. I wonder if Merry would have faded in this way. There are too many facets to consider, methinks! But I do enjoy the conversation! Carry on!

Cheers,
Lyta