Re-reading the Lord of the Rings, Chapter 2

The shadow of the past is a chapter that is almost solely plot driven, and hence there are fewer noteworthy differences to Peter Jackson's film. Two things though Tolkien wanted to accomplish, namely firstly to give Sam Gamgee a motivation to join Frodo on his journey and secondly to give a hint of the working of The Ring on the mind of its bearer.

In pursuit of the former Tolkien establishes Sam as interested in tales about Elves and walking trees, mind you, and lets him be mocked for it, so that we understand his outburst of joy after being recruited by Gandalf to accompany Frodo.

As for the workings of The Ring, just like with Bilbo this subject is handled rather subtly. People invent lies, disregard friends, The Ring becomes a little wider, when it wants to be lost and it endears itself to its bearer, so that it isn't lost otherwise.

The overall feel that one is supposed to get from all this is that The Ring gets its way in an untraceable way, through moral suggestions that drive the mean to outrage, the decent to folly and the wise to unprincipledness. The way to show this in a film is through unexpected behaviour, turns out of a blue sky, to created unease, which is what this is about, and not some demonic whisper.

But not only can The Ring spoil its bearer, its bearer can also spoil The Ring. A major aspect of Sméagol's character is his curious curiosity for things burried beneath the surface. Since that's what Sméagol is interested in, The Ring pushes his performance in that field, but it can only push it in that field alone, and once Sméagol sits at the bottom of the Misty Mountains, there remains nothing left to do.

I was speaking about the inevitable break-down of symmetric communication under the rule of a god-king, that doctrine starts to shape all life, and that life stops to shape any doctrine. Tolkien says that The Ring makes you live longer, but that you don't gain new life. I think it is meaningful to read Tolkien and A.E. van Vogt side by side.

The scope of a god-king being of course what The Ring craves for, the sweetest thing it can spoil, that's why it would be quite at home in Gandalf's or later Galadriel's hands as opposed to a Hobbit's.

It is noteworthy that it is said here that Sauron assumed that The Ring had been destroyed.

‘And this is the dreadful chance, Frodo. He believed that the One had perished; that the Elves had destroyed it, as should have been done. But he knows now that it has not perished, that it has been found. So he is seeking it, seeking it, and all his thought is bent on it. It is his great hope and our great fear.’

Of course, if that was true, then Sauron could not have poured (all) his life-force into The Ring and shouldn't die, when The Ring is being destroyed.

At any rate it certainly doesn't appear in this place that The Ring is to be feared because of its connexion with Sauron, visualised in the film by the fiery eye, but because of the way that it alters one's mind, possibly really quite independent of the one who created it.

The point is important, because Gandalf and Saruman are the same as Sauron, Saruman twice so, and Galadriel went to battle Morgoth himself, so why should any of them succumb to Sauron's spirit? At the end of the day Sauron is simply a gifted craftsman.

One way to resolve this issue is to say that Sauron doesn't die in the end, but just gets weaker, and that, had The Ring already been destroyed before, he would have taken longer to manifest again in Mirkwood, but that, as it went, he wasn't able to estimate the necessary power for his timely recovery correctly.

It remains fair to say that both Sauron and The Ring are evil, because they follow in the primordial sin of Morgoth, but that it is actually Sauron's spirit that is poisoning the bearer of The Ring's mind would be an intentional simplification designed for simple minds, such as Hobbits', in reality The Ring would simply be a tool for a very specific purpose, namely co-ercion, that allows no peaceful use.

Granted, even so The Ring still has a mind of its own and is linked in life-force with Sauron, but overall there's a different picture emerging that makes both more sense and is way creepier, because it doesn't rely on a bogyman.

Also, if The Ring is instrumental in nature and not accompliceal, it becomes far clearer why Sauron wouldn't dream of the fellowship trying to destroy it. And on the other hand Gandalf's task becomes far more sacred, difficult and subtle. Which it is, of course, as Tolkien pointed out in the foreword to the second edition.

On the other hand, Sauron might have been mistaken, thinking he was lucky not to have died, or Gandalf's account is wrong, neither of which quite forcing us to assume another nature of The Ring. But be that as it may, in the context of this chapter the passage strengthens the idea of The Ring being a powerful and malicious instrument left behind and definitely weakens the idea of The Ring being the refuge of or a gateway to Sauron's soul.

The invisibility of the bearer of The Ring, apart from the metaphorical meaning I mentioned in the post on the first chapter, which is strenghtened, by the way, by the idea of fading, is at the same time one of the two basic powers, the other being longevity, that The Ring gives to him. This comes about naturally by the conditions of the exercise of power being met so that it can be exercised, i.e. The Ring gives the person who wants to co-erce without assuming the role of a tyrant the invisibility that he needs as well as the longevity, so that he can follow through on his agenda, following through on an agenda of course hindering anyone's further development, once he's committed to it.

However, the likes of Gandalf, Saruman and Galadriel would receive quite different powers from The Ring, the basic ones being no use for them anyway. Gandalf mentions the role of a benevolent dictator in passing - an excuse for being tyrannical.