The Fellowship's True Purpose?

[gorthaur_cruel]

The Fellowship was supposed to protect the Ringbearer Frodo from harm, while he pursues his Quest of destroying the One Ring...or so they say. But there seems to be either a big miscalculation on Gandalf's part, or the Fellowship had a darker purpose.

In The Shadow of the Past, Gandalf tells Frodo to try throwing the Ring into his fireplace. Frodo could not do so, and puts it in his pocket. Then Gandalf says:

Gandalf laughed grimly. 'You see? Already you too, Frodo, cannot easily let it go, nor will to damage it. And I could not "make" you - except by force, which would break your mind.'

So Gandalf knew that Frodo could not throw the Ring into his fireplace. How did he expect Frodo to throw the Ring into Mount Doom at the end of the Quest? After all, the Ring took more and more hold of Frodo's mind as he drew nearer to Mt. Doom and as Sauron's power grew. Therefore, perhaps the Fellowship was meant to do what Gollum did - take the Ring from Frodo by force and throw it in before it took a hold of their minds(One could argue that if Frodo could not do it, neither could any member of the Fellowship, but that's another matter). Perhaps they were even meant to push Frodo into Mt. Doom if needed

But seriously, if that was not the Fellowship's purpose, why did Gandalf send Frodo on a Quest that was doomed to fail? He did not foresee Gollum's role. He merely says that he felt that Gollum would play a part "for good or for ill".

Perhaps Gandalf truly was clueless. He knew Bilbo's Ring was one of the Twenty Rings of Power yet did nothing for 60 years, sent Frodo with 8 "defenders"(of which 3 did not know how to fight) to the very heart of Sauron's realm, and expected Frodo to destroy the Ring at the end, which he couldn't do even in the very beginning. Everything that happened was purely luck, if you think about it. The only logical explanations are that Gandalf was a dolt, or his Maia foresight told him that sending Frodo on this quest would turn out to be good. Gandalf is personally my favorite character, so I'll take choice #2, but he does seem to have some holes...Boromir did the logical thing in trying to take Frodo's Ring, IMO. It turned out to be evil, but he saw that the Quest was hopeless.

Well, I sorta strayed from my original topic now.

[The Saucepan Man]

Gandalf trusted in providence ...

[Boromir88]

Right now, I don't know the "true purpose" of the fellowship, besides the fact to get the ring to Mount Doom, where it atleast has an oppurtunity of being destroyed. And of course the quest was supposed to fail, or well, was a "desperate task."

The one good thing I saw the Fellowship for however, is it created long lasting friendships. You have the Sam-Frodo friendship, Merry-Pippin, Aragorn-Legolas-Gimli, and then everybody, it all created a lasting friendship between the companions.

For some added info on Boromir, I have read this interesting little discussion topic. But, Boromir took the ring, in thought that it wouldn't corrupt the righteous, it's not that he wanted it for himself (eventhough once he had it he would have taken it for himself). But his thought was it wouldn't be able to corrupt "the righteous" people. And here is a quote from The Council of Elrond.

"I do not understand all this" Boromir said "Saruman is a traitor, but did he not have a glimpse of wisdom? Why do you speak ever of hiding and destroying? Why should we not think that the Great Ring has come into our hands to serves us in the very hour of need? Wielding in the FREE LORDS of the FREE may surely defeat the Enemy. That is what he most fears, I deem."

The "righteous" people I mean are these "free lords" Boromir wishes to give the ring to.

[gorthaur_cruel]

Gandalf trusted in providence ...

Yeah, that was what I believed. "The only logical explanations are that Gandalf was a dolt, or his Maia foresight told him that sending Frodo on this quest would turn out to be good. Gandalf is personally my favorite character, so I'll take choice #2, but he does seem to have some holes..."

But I still think relying 100% on providence is wrong, when all the 'logical' explanations say that Frodo would fail.

And of course the quest was supposed to fail, or well, was a "desperate task."

True, but wouldn't it have been better to use the Ring then? Then Sauron could be defeated, and then they could worry about the new guy next. Maybe the new Ring-user would take a while to become corrupted. After all, Bilbo did last 60 years, and still didn't show too much signs of becoming corrupted.

For some added info on Boromir, I have read this interesting little discussion topic. But, Boromir took the ring, in thought that it wouldn't corrupt the righteous, it's not that he wanted it for himself (eventhough once he had it he would have taken it for himself). But his thought was it wouldn't be able to corrupt "the righteous" people. And here is a quote from The Council of Elrond.

That's why I support Boromir. He knew that the Quest had a 99% chance of failure, while using the Ring to defeat Sauron had a 99% chance of success. He believed that strong Men wouldn't be corrupted, so he disregarded the "second Sauron" thing. His main goal was to defeat Sauron, and whatever happens after would happen.

But, actually, Boromir did want it for himself, though he suggested Aragorn first (he believed himself to be one of those "strong Men").

'Or if he refuses, why not Boromir? The Ring would give me power of Command. How I would drive the hosts of Mordor, and all men would flock to my banner!'

[the phantom]

He knew that the Quest had a 99% chance of failure

Nah... logic and reasoning seem to suggest that the quest had a 100% guarantee of failure (or something really close to that).

while using the Ring to defeat Sauron had a 99% chance of success

No way. The only person who would really have a chance would be Gandalf and even his chances wouldn't be anywhere close to 99%.

However, the chances of successfully overthrowing Sauron using the Ring still would be higher than the chances of destroying the Ring, so I agree that Boromir's actions were understandable.

I've been sitting here thinking for a while and I'm fairly certain that if I would've been in Boromir's position (I hate to say this) I probably would've tried to take the Ring like he did.

[Firefoot]

True, but wouldn't it have been better to use the Ring then? Then Sauron could be defeated

The problem with this statements is that Sauron never could be truly defeated as long as the Ring existed. He could come back in another couple thousand years, and then you are back where you started. The point of destroying the Ring was (I'm paraphrasing) to take care of the problem once and for all, not just for one age of men. In addition, anything done with the Ring becomes evil and ultimately works for Sauron. Gandalf also said that it would take too long for one person to learn how to use the Ring adequately enough to be able to overthrow Sauron, and in that time Sauron would learn exactly where it was and 99% chance says he gets it back.

Maybe the new Ring-user would take a while to become corrupted. After all, Bilbo did last 60 years, and still didn't show too much signs of becoming corrupted.

Gandalf hints that this has something to do with Hobbits. Hobbits appear to be more resistant to this type of evil than Men, Elves, and Dwarves. Bilbo did not use the Ring with the intention to dominate others, which also slowed his corruption. It took Bilbo a long time, but look how long it took Isildur or Sméagol. I wouldn't want to take the chance that the next ring-bearer would be the same way. And let's say you give the Ring to someone who already has a good share of power in order for that person to weild it to defeat Sauron. Galadriel would not take it because she knew that it would just be replacing one dark lord for dark and terrible queen. Gandalf pr Elrond would not take it either. Another example of hobbits resisting evil is that Frodo lasted 17 days with the shard of the Morgul blade whereas Gandalf says he knows many strong men that would not have lasted nearly that long.

He believed that strong Men wouldn't be corrupted, so he disregarded the "second Sauron" thing.

Isildur was strong.

His main goal was to defeat Sauron, and whatever happens after would happen.

The whole problem with this is that what happens after this would be bad, almost guaranteed. If it hadn't been for divine providence and Mt. Doom, the Ring wouldn't have been destroyed. There might be no stroke of divine providence later on, and short of pushing the bearer into Mt. Doom there is no way of destroying the Ring. It would not let itself be destroyed while Sauron existed, and as long as the Ring existed Sauron existed. So if the Ring was kept around, even if it was guarded under lock and key, Sauron would probably get it eventually if it wasn't destroyed.

[gorthaur_cruel]

No way. The only person who would really have a chance would be Gandalf and even his chances wouldn't be anywhere close to 99%.

I'm assuming you're talking about Tolkien's letter where it said only Gandalf would have a chance of beating Sauron. But if you re-read it, it actually says only Gandalf had a chance of defeating Sauron 1v1 with the Ring. Elrond and Galadriel could wield the One Ring to build up armies and defeat Sauron. Here's the quote:

In any case Elrond or Galadriel would have proceeded in the policy now adopted by Sauron: they would have built up an empire with great and absolutely subservient generals and armies and engines of war, until they could challenge Sauron and destroy him by force. Confrontation of Sauron alone, unaided, self to self, was not contemplated.

However, the chances of successfully overthrowing Sauron using the Ring still would be higher than the chances of destroying the Ring, so I agree that Boromir's actions were understandable.

I've been sitting here thinking for a while and I'm fairly certain that if I would've been in Boromir's position (I hate to say this) I probably would've tried to take the Ring like he did.

My point exactly.

The problem with this statements is that Sauron never could be truly defeated as long as the Ring existed. He could come back in another couple thousand years, and then you are back where you started. The point of destroying the Ring was (I'm paraphrasing) to take care of the problem once and for all, not just for one age of men.

Really? Tolkien says that if Gandalf mastered the Ring and defeated Sauron, then...

If Gandalf proved the victor, the result would have been for Sauron the same as the destruction of the Ring; for him it would have been destroyed, taken from him for ever. But the Ring and all its works would have endured. It would have been the master in the end.

The difference with that case and Isildur's case is that the Ring did not adopt Isildur as his new master. Isildur never mastered the Ring's powers. If somebody else masters the Ring, Sauron loses his mastery over it. But the Ring would then eventually master the one who mastered it. I think I said enough "master"s now.
Also, if there was a 99~100% chance of failing to defeating Sauron once and for all, wouldn't it be better to take the high chance of defeating Sauron for now?

Isildur was strong.

I know...I was just saying what Boromir thought. But even then, you see, Isildur wasn't corrupted by the time he died, so we don't know how long he'd have held out. The effect of not wanting to lose the Ring is only the signs of corruption, not corruption itself. He never tried to do any evil before he died.

[Son of Númenor]

The 'true purpose' of the Fellowship was to destroy the Ring. Gandalf knew that it was a hopeless task, but knew equally well that it was the best alternative - the others being to hide it somewhere and let it lie until it was found generations later and Sauron was able to regain it; to slip it on his finger and declare open war on Sauron; or to send it over the sea and hope against hope that it would be hidden there forever - or that the Valar would accept it. The only hope of the people of Middle-earth was in the destruction of the Ring - even if they had hidden it, Sauron would have been strong enough to defeat the Free Peoples of Middle-earth (they won the War of the Ring only because Sauron was destroyed), Likewise, the only hope in destroying the Ring was in taking it secretly to Mordor - an open assault on Sauron's realm with the purpose of winning a path to Mount Doom was pure folly. And, since it was already known to Gandalf that no one can destroy the Ring of his own free will, who better to take it than the one who bore it all the way from the Shire to Rivendell, and indeed for seventeen years before that? After the decision was made and the Fellowship was formed - a group of of keen thinkers, keen fighters and friends of the Ringbearer, representative of all the Free People - Gandalf had only, as The Saucepan Man said, to trust in providence.

[Boromir88]

Firefoot:

Bilbo did not use the Ring with the intention to dominate others, which also slowed his corruption.

I think another reason why Bilbo was able to resist and give it up, after 60 years of having it, was because he wasn't aware of the Ring's power. Frodo was aware of The Ring as "evil" and "never put it on," he was aware it needed to be destroyed for Sauron to be defeated, and of course his trek to Mount Doom would also eat away at him. Where as Bilbo, Bilbo used it and saw the Ring as a present, and used it to play pranks, or hide from people, he wasn't aware of The Ring's "evil" so therefor it didn't effect him as much as it did Frodo.

[the phantom]

But if you re-read it, it actually says only Gandalf had a chance of defeating Sauron 1v1 with the Ring.

No. The letter reads-

Of the others only Gandalf might be expected to master him - being an emissary of the Powers and a creature of the same order, an immortal spirit taking a visible physical form. In the "Mirror of Galadriel", it appears that Galadriel conceived of herself as capable of wielding the Ring and supplanting the Dark Lord. IF so, so also were the other guardians of the Three, especially Elrond. But this is another matter. It was part of the essential deceit of the Ring to fill minds with imaginations of supreme power. But this the Great had well considered and had rejected, as is seen in Elrond's words at the Council. Galadriel's rejection of the temptation was founded upon previous thought and resolve. In any case Elrond or Galadriel would have proceeded in the policy now adopted by Sauron: they would have built up an empire with great and absolutely subservient generals and armies and engines of war, until they could challenge Sauron and destroy him by force.

That's the section that discusses people's military chances against Sauron (not one on one chances), and as you can see it says "only Gandalf might be expected to master Sauron", and it also suggests that Galadriel thought she could supplant Sauron because "It was part of the essential deceit of the Ring" (ie she really couldn't).

It says what policy Elrond and Galadriel would attempt to follow but Tolkien obviously doubts their chances of success. Not to mention that destroying Sauron's armies and such still wouldn't destroy Sauron. You'd still have to destroy the Ring. The only way you would pursue the policy "use the Ring and destroy Sauron by military force" is if you believed that you would be able to remain uncorrupted and destroy the Ring when it was all over.

This, I believe, is what Boromir wanted and what I probably would've tried. That way I would be trusting in my own ability to resist the Ring rather than trusting in a hobbit to do something that was logically impossible. Sure, it would've failed, but at the time it would've seemed like a better idea than what they actually did.

Anyway, the stuff about confronting Sauron one on one is after the part that I posted above-

Confrontation of Sauron alone, unaided, self to self, was not contemplated.

Then it gives a hypothetical Gandalf vs Sauron situation, but the others (Elrond, Galadriel, etc) are not even mentioned. Their chances of success one on one are not even addressed (other than where it says it "was not contemplated", ie they didn't have enough of a chance to even try thinking about it).

[Lyta_Underhill]

After the decision was made and the Fellowship was formed - a group of of keen thinkers, keen fighters and friends of the Ringbearer, representative of all the Free People - Gandalf had only, as The Saucepan Man said, to trust in providence.

Somehow, SoN, this makes me think of an alchemist pouring the required ingredients into an alembic and then allowing the little understood "force of Providence" work it into the Philosopher's Stone. Perhaps Gandalf was simply following an old Maia recipe!

I think another reason why Bilbo was able to resist and give it up, after 60 years of having it, was because he wasn't aware of the Ring's power.

Boromir88, if we were to follow this line of reasoning to its conclusion, Smeagol should not have been corrupted either, and yet he was--almost instantly. I think Firefoot hit the hobbit on the head with this one. so to speak!

Cheers!
Lyta

[Son of Númenor]

Perhaps Gandalf was simply following an old Maia recipe!

Indeed, I believe that recipe calls for plenty of stirring. And one mustn't forget to kindle a fire.

[Boromir88]

Lyta

Boromir88, if we were to follow this line of reasoning to its conclusion, Smeagol should not have been corrupted either, and yet he was--almost instantly.

An explanation to that would be, Gollum was corrupted from the start. The Ring attacked Gollum's weakness, and made Gollum kill to get it. Where Bilbo, Bilbo was a lot kinder of heart, which is why he doesn't kill Gollum over it. Although, we do see a bit of the "nasty" Bilbo side, but still, doesn't kill in order to keep, or gain the ring.