Logical Ring-bearer? - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Lobelia · 02-24-2003, 07:54 PM

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.

02-24-2003, 07:54 PM	#1
Lobelia Wight Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 150	Logical Ring-bearer? 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.