# Gollum - good or evil?



## daisy

In the trilogy, there were many characters who easily fell into either the 'good' or 'evil' category. Yet Gollum cannot be placed in a clearcut category.

Any thoughts? Gollum - a good character with 'issues' or an evil character bent on destruction?

And give reasons!!!


----------



## lilhobo

there are no such thing as 'good or evil" 

one man's "freedom fighter" is another man's "terrorist"


----------



## Beleg Strongbow

Gollum must be put into evil. He only went after frodo and sam cause of da ring he betrayed them in the end. Also Saruman is also like that.


----------



## Eonwe

Gollum was kind of screwed up from the beginning. He's digging in holes, getting to the roots of things, perhaps starting to enjoy a good worm or two, and then Deagol's birthday comes along. He's not too good.

It seems like perhaps Deagol wasn't completely in love with his brother (little evidence either way I guess), and Gollum has this thing about gifts for his birthday. He's even worse.

That's the original Gollum.

With the Ring he "deserves death" for some of the things he has done, including the murder of Deagol.

When Bilbo has the riddle game with Gollum, Gollum plans in the back of his mind to get this little juicy man. He is darn right evil.

With the Ring stolen, he searches, wanders, and whines about his position in life, feeling the stretch in years the Ring has given him. He still is nasty, and enters Mordor.

I would submit that something good remained in him, which can be seen in his conversations with Frodo in the dead marshes and after the Emyn Muil. I think that something changed in him a little after Sauron put him on the rack. I think maybe he felt the evil behind the Ring and understood it better. So from this point out, he perhaps a tad less evil, just lustful for the Ring.

His plan to have Frodo and Sam gobbled up by Shelob, and then for him to get the Ring after Shelob forgets about it, is similar to his plans perhaps at the end of the riddle game, find an easy way to kill to solve the problem.

And finally hunting Sam and Frodo down on the plateau of Gorgoroth, again lustful for the Ring.

I think its a hard question to answer, but he was both really, constantly pulling himself from side to side. I think overall he was a 7 out of 10 on the evil meter, with a standard deviation of 2.


----------



## Kuduk

Geez, Daisy, you sure are a hard poster to keep up with. I haven't even answered your Gandalf threads properly, and now you've already moved onto Gollum! (Were you an aerobics instructor once? Maybe drill sergeant? Hey, just kidding! You can put away the knife, or fork, or whatever utensil you're favoring right now! ) I guess I need to spend more time here and less in the real world.....

I like to apply W.H. Auden's interpretation of Tolkien's depiction of good and evil in ME. He feels that the chief difference between good and evil in ME is a lack of imagination. Good can imagine itself becoming Evil, while Evil can't imagine anything else but itself. When Good forgets this, it has set out on a course to become Evil. However, this course is not necessarily irreversible. Good and evil may be seen like being rich and poor... in that at any given moment a character is either one or the other, but the potential for the other still exists. Of all the characters in LotR I think Gollum/Smeagol illustrates this idea most eloquently.

As you say, Gollum is not clear cut and Eonwe's well-stated (albeit statistically suspect ) answer illustrates well the conflict of Smeagol vs. Gollum (or as Sam put it, Slinker vs. Stinker). In the story, this is most intensely shown during Book IV in TTT, particularly in the passages where Sam overhears, during the passage of the Dead Marshes, Gollum's internal debate about whether to betray Frodo, and then again in Cirith Ungol just before they enter Shelob's Lair when Gollum goes to wake the two hobbits:


> Gollum looked at them. A strange expression passed over his lean hungry face. The gleam faded from his eyes, and they went dim and grey, old and tired. A spasm of pain seemed to twist him, and he turned away, peering back up towards the pass, shaking his head, as if engaged in some interior debate. Then he came back, and slowly putting out a trembling hand, very cautiously he touched Frodo's knee - but almost the touch was a carees. For a fleeting moment, could one of the sleepers have seen him, they would have thought that they beheld an old weary hobbit, shrunken by the years that had carried him far beyond his time, beyond friends and kin, and the fields and streams of youth, an old starved pitiable thing.


I find this to be one of the most heartbreaking paragraphs in the book. This is probably the clearest statement that despite Smeagol's fall from grace into the evil Gollum, even then, there remained some small, minuscule potential to return to Good. The chance was small he would, but probably no smaller than the chance that Frodo would succeed in destroying the Ring.... Difference is Gollum wasn't quite as lucky.

How's that for reasons, Daze? (If you don't like being called 'Daze' just poke me with that fork of yours. I'll get the hint quickly enough!)


----------



## lilhobo

sounds a bit like a certain fall from grace guy called darth vader 

DARTH SMEAGOL: i am your father, Frodo. Search your feelings you it to be true

FRODO: gandalf why didnt you tell me??

DARTH SMEAGOL: give me the ring Frodo, and together we can rule the universe! The valar have forseen it


----------



## daisy

*Frodo...you have a sister....*

I have to say, Kuduk, that so far i lean towards your posting. Of course, as lilhobo mentioned, there are few things clear cut as good or evil, but you have to say that most characters in LOTR are pretty clearly one or the other. I get NO evil vibes from Arwen, the hobbits ( except for Bilbo's annoying cousins), Legolas...some characters are a little more complex, like Boromir, Saruman, Theoden...
But even though Smeagol killed Deagol because he wanted the ring, is there any evidence that he was nasty before the ring was found?
If not, can we blame the ring for Gollum's dark heart?

And Eonwe, eating worms ain't too bad! Woops, i've revealed too much.....


----------



## My_Precious

Hmmmmm......... Gollum was corrupted by the ring, that's why he did what he did. About Deagol (they were brothers???? - translators in my book put that they were friends) - maybe he was that kind of a brother that tears up your homework, draws tattoos with your mascara, and tells your friends to [email protected]#$ off...  

*My_Precious gives her little cousin hungry evil look*  

My conclusion is - Gollum was not as bad as some people think.


----------



## Courtney

We have to remember that in the end it was Gollum who saved middle earth, not Frodo or Sam.


----------



## Greenleaf

I don' think that it was Gollums intent to save any thing except the ring. It was an accident that he fell. He was consumed by it. Any part of him that was once good had all but disappeared. He is really a very sad character though.


----------



## Walter

Well, Gollum was - as he himself put it so well - "poor Smeagol". Certainly not good, but not evil to the bone either...torn!


----------



## SarumansTreason

Gollum is both good an evil purposefully. (Tolkien intended this.) 

"Sam's guess was that Smeagol and Gollum halves (or what in his own mind called Slinker and Stinker) had made a truce and a temporay alliance: neither wanted the Enemy to get the ring; both wished to keep Frodo from capture, as long as possible- at any rate as long as Stinker still had the chance of laying handson his 'Precious'."
Lord of the Ring, Page 665

Also recall the "Good vs Evil" conversation.

"Smeagol promised," said the first thought.
"Yes, yes my precious," came the answer, "we promise: to save our Precious, not to let Him have it- never. But it's going to him, yes, nearer every step. What's the hobbit going to do with it, we wonders, yes we wonders."
" I don't know. I can't helo it. Master's got it. Smeagol promised to help the master."
"Yes, yes, to help the master, the master of the Precious. BUt if we was the master, then we could help ourselfs, yes, ad still keep promises."
"But Smeagol said he would be very very good. Nice Hobbit! He took cruelrope off Smeagol's lef. He speaks nicely to me."
....................etc.... 
To read the rest of he conversation please see Page 658 of the Lod of the Rings.

Yup. Gollum was both evil and good. No doubt about it.


----------



## DreamingDragon

I think that gollum was what is usually referred to as the classic "innocent bystander". He found the Ring, took it and was swayed by it's power. That doesn't make him bad or good...Gandalf was good, but didn't want to be tempted by the Ring because he knew it would corrupt him. Elrond and Galadriel had the same convictions. Gollum, while in the presence of the Ring, both hated and loved it. But once parted from it's power, began "healing", as Gandalf explained to Frodo. 

Good or bad? No more than most of the characters in the books. Bad luck??? You bet....


----------



## YayGollum

Yay people defending Gollum! You handled it well! I don't have anything else to say except that I really hated what Eonwe said about Gollum wanting to eat Bilbo. He only wanted to after he figured out that Bilbo had stolen his ring. Also, let's not forget that it's all Sam's fault that Gollum won out in the end when he got mad at him for just looking at Frodo!


----------



## Mormegil

I think....

Smeagol = Good

Smeagol under the influence of The Ring (Gollum) = Evil


----------



## Eonwe

Sorry yAyGoLlUm, the first thing Gollum says to Bilbo is:

"Bless us and splash us, my precioussss! I guess it's a choice feast; at least a tasty morsel it'd make us, gollum!"

He wanted to eat Bilbo like a sheet pizza and wings...

That was before he found out that Bilbo had the Ring...


----------



## andromeda

well, he's good AND evil. he did get sam and frodo to mordor. but then betrayed them. so i would say more evil than good


----------



## YayGollum

"he was not really very hungry at the moment, only curious; otherwise he would have grabbed first and whispered afterwards." That quote comes after yours, so Ha! He only wanted to eat him after he figured out that Bilbo was an evil thief! Gollum is good, Smeagol is evil. Or the other way around.


----------



## Elanor2

I can really say that Smeagol was good. He did murder his friend, with very little provocation. Of course the ring gave a nudge in the right direction, but there must have been a bad part in Smeagol to begin with, or he would not have fallen so easily.

Bilbo, for example, did not kill Gollum, and he had a better ground for it. He was alone and threatened by Gollum, he had clearly heard that Gollum wanted to kill him and Gollum was barring him from freedom. A heavy temptation that he controlled, because Bilbo had more goodness in him than Smeagol ever had.

I do not think that we can blame the ring for all of Smeagol's disgraces (That's what Smeagol would do!!!  ) Smeagol had a very bad side from the beginning, I fear, and that bad side came to dominate him and made him (with the help of the ring) into Gollum. In the Smeagol/Gollum dialogs we can see how Gollum is winning more and more.... I find it surprising that the Smeagol part managed to have enough presence to discuss with the more powerful Gollum side. Nevertheless, I liked the double-personality parts. They were funny and interesting.

But I am with Sam on this. I would not trust either of them!


----------



## Lantarion

I agree with DreamingDragon, I don't think Gollum was particularly evil, at least before the Ring came along. He was nosy, curious and liked to explore unexplored places, with perhaps some glint of mischief in his mind. But I think his mind was so open to everything, and all new things and knowledge it could aquire, that he was so prone to the evil power of the Ring (which was reverbitating rather tremulously at the time, because it was looking for a new Hand for itself) that he became ensnared in its trechorous trap. His evil side was brought out and maximised, and perhaps it even grew during his ownership of the Ring. But I don't think he was evil before that.
And even with the Ring, he did try to fight its influence (as we can see from Slinker, ie. Sméagol). But the Ring did have the upper hand for the most part, and ever more so when he, Sam and Frodo drew nearer and nearer to Orodruin. Gollum was desperate, and confused, and was being controlled by the evil urges and needs controlled by the Ring; and funny enough these 'needs' brought Gollum to Sauron, even though he was not wearing the One. 
But on the whole, Gollum was a nice guy, and sometimes even likable (remember his jokes and cackles with S&F), but the Ring had corrupted him far from aid, and even though he might have wanted to be free of the seething curse, the need for the One Ring, he could not. *sniff*


----------



## andromeda

i, in a way, felt sorry for him. all he wanted was the ring, it was basically everything to him. but then i hate him, for leaving sam and frodo in that spider/orc cave thing


----------



## My_Precious

> _Originally posted by andromeda _
> *i, in a way, felt sorry for him. all he wanted was the ring, it was basically everything to him. but then i hate him, for leaving sam and frodo in that spider/orc cave thing *


He did it with the thought that if Shelob will eat Frodo, she will throw his stuff away, with the ring... So, basically, it was for the ring again... Poor corrupted Smeagol...


----------



## Risen-Paladin

For sure, Gollum isn't good. But perhaps Smeagol is good. Gollum appears to have two personalities, Smeagol and the one born from the Ring. But the fact it was a hobbit one time, resists the magic evil power of the Ring. Maybe that has to do with the word of Eru, the One, at the end of the third Theme(Silmarillion) "He who resist to my will, and brings evil against good, he will lose, and wonderus things will happen that he couldn't imagine". Perhaps hobbits are Eru's favorite race, so hobbits destroy the Evil at the end. So Gollum falls with the Ring into the fire. Also that explains Gandalf's denial to kill Gollum.


----------



## Lantarion

Hey, interesting thought! I'm sure Ilúvatar knew of their coming, and most probably told Manwë of them. And it would suport Tolkien's overall "little hero"- ploy which he encourages in his stories, where the least likely or least probable character ends up being the most important and strong-willed person in the book. But Eru doesn't make people do his will: they have to realize it and do it for themselves. But perhaps Ilúvatar's ideal creature is one who loves peace and quiet, and wants to avoid strife and grief and such at all costs, but will fight for their freedom. Elves were like that, but didn't have much chance to show the world that because of good ol' Melkor. 
Anyway, perhaps he had designed Hobbits, or Halflings, or Periannath (I don't know what language Eru thought in, so it really doesn't matter what you call them) to be these great heroes without them knowing it, by creating a bit more understanding and general, hidden and unconscious knowledge, also presented as morals and kindness. Frodo was sacrificing, kind, generous, loyal and brave. Perhaps Ilúvatar made (at least most) Hobbits to be at least a bit like that, but Frodo was the "peak" of Hobbitkind, at that time. Maybe Ilúvatar did this so the other peoples of Middle-Earth would realize how silly they have been warring and feuding for their angry pride and nobility, and that they should take the lifestyle of the Hobbits as an example. I dunno, but I'm sure He does.


----------



## Varda

*Concerning Gollum*

In the beginning, Gollum was easily corrupted. I'll grant the ring was affecting him greatly, but why didn't Bilbo or Frodo act that way when they came into possession of the ring? Bilbo didn't murder anyone to get it and when he had the chance to kill Gollum, "pity stayed his hand". Gollum simply showed a weakness in character when he first found the ring and the ring did the rest to make him evil. Without the ring, I think Gollum was a weak but ultimately good person-creature.


----------



## daisy

I also think there is some confusion concerning what type of creature Smeagol was - Gandalf makes mention somewhere of him being a 'hobbit-like' creature but not a hobbit .

So I always chalk up Gollum's evil turn to the fact that he was slightly nasty to begin with and the hobbits are discussed by various people as having a sort-of immunity to the more twisted influence of the ring, at least longer than others.

Gollum is what he is...but I still find him such a complex character because of his duality in Mordor with Sam and Frodo. Why didn't he just kill Frodo when they were sleeping? I know someone has a quote for me....

daisy the smeaol fearing sunflower


----------



## Goro Shimura

If any other mortal but a hobbit had born the ring as long as Gollum did... they would have faded.

None of the wise could have expected this sort of resistance to it's power-- especially from such a remarkably small/weak race!


----------



## daisy

*Gobbit??? Smobbit?*

Well, now I did find a quote where Gandalf actually mentions that Smeagol was a hobbit of some kind..the fathers of the fathers of the Stoors - so he was a hobbit at some point and it did take awhile for him to become Golllum, but he must have had an underlying evil of some kind because the other hobbits who came into possession of the ring were much better with it - I mean, Smeagol killed Deagol pretty much as soon as the ring came out of the muck...

Okay, now I'm just talking to myself...

daisy the droning daffodil...


----------



## Goro Shimura

I think you're right, daisy.

Bilbo got the ring by accident and spared Gollum's life.

Gollum murdered Deagol to get the ring.

Bilbo, Frodo, and used the ring to help their friends.

Gollum used the ring to find secrets and work mischief.


There was hope for Smeagol (Gollum), but he definitely did not have the same character qualities of the other hobbits that bore the ring.


----------



## Harad

Gollum may have been a hobbit like Odo or Lobelia. What would they have become if they found the Ring? Murderers and thieves, perhaps, my precious. Gollum was too little to be Good or Evil, just a nasty sort, unleashed by the power of the Ring.


----------



## daisy

*darkness*

And what is with Gollum and sunlight? Is this because of the ring or what? No other Ringbearer - except Sauron himself - had a sunlight problem....

Perhaps the ring takes natural characteristics of some kind and twists them, because Smeagol was always a creature who " burrowed under trees and growing plants" so he ended up under a mountain...


----------



## Goro Shimura

Some essayists have refered to the ring as a "psionic amplifier."

It gives power according to your stature.

Remember in the movie "Swamp Thing" how drinking that potion makes you more of what you already are? Maybe that's how the ring works....


----------



## Nazgul_Lord

Neither, he has been corrupted by the ring's evil, but he himself is not evil, he only desires the ring


----------



## Bill the Pony

Daisy, I always assumed it was because he had just spent a few hundred years in the dark. My eyes already hurt if I only spend a few hours in the dark, and then get outside in the sunlight. But I just found a quote from a shadow from the past:



> He wandered in loneliness, weeping a little for the hardness of the world, and he journeyed up the River, till he came to a stream that flowed down from the mountains, and he went that way. He caught fish in deep pools with invisible fingers and ate them raw. One day it was very hot, and as he was bending over a pool, he felt a burning on the back of his head) and a dazzling light from the water pained his wet eyes. He wondered at it, for he had almost forgotten about the Sun. Then for the last time he looked up and shook his fist at her



so it may be that the ring enhanced this anger, but it does not seem to be: if you wear the ring long enough you will get a sunlight problem...


----------



## daisy

I didn't think that the ring equalled sunlight problem, I just wondered why Gollum went underground for a long time - if he started off as a hobbit then what would drive away from sunlight? A sunburn or the sun in his eyes once? It just seemed sort-of mysterious....


----------



## Bill the Pony

Tolkien himself did not think too highly about "Sméagol before the Ring". He writes in letter #214, (a useful one for looking at whether Gollum was a hobbit. Someone noticed that if he was a hobbit, then how did the habit change from getting presents on your birthday to giving presents on your birthday. JRRT actually writes 5 pages about it). Anyway, he says when talking about Déagol having already given a birthday present earlier


> [Déagol] being a mean little soul he grudged it. Sméagol, being meaner and greedier, tried to use the 'birthday' as an excuse for an act of tyranny.


So Tolkien thought Sméagol was mean and greedy. (does that equal evil? Don't know...)


----------



## Ingwë

At the beginning Gollum wasn't evil. He was little creature, not so powerful to use such thing as the One Ring. He desired to control the other because he was too small. Finally he found the One Ring and he was corrupted by the Ring. 
He wasn't evil - just corrupted.


----------



## Alatar

Of course not! How would you feel driven out of your mind by the one ring! I was not his fault!


----------



## ingolmo

I think that Gollum is bad, Smeagol is good. But as this thread is on Gollum, I think that my evidence would be all the bad things he did. 
-Killing his friend
-Betraying Frodo and Sam
-Giving information to Sauron on the whereabouts of the ring. 
The people who say that Gollum is good say that only because he was the one who cast the Ring into Mt.Doom, though he cast himself with it. Let's look at the facts:
-He didn't throw it in intentionally. He was dancing in joy when he fell into the Fire himself. 
-Had he not fell in right then, he would have probably wore it, causing Sauron to get it almost without any effort, and evil would have truimphed.

I hope I've made my point clear.


----------



## Thorondor_

> I think that Gollum is bad, Smeagol is good. But as this thread is on Gollum, I think that my evidence would be all the bad things he did.
> -Killing his friend
> -Betraying Frodo and Sam
> -Giving information to Sauron on the whereabouts of the ring.



It was "Smeagol" who killed his friend, not "Gollum". And giving away information under torture isn't a qualifier for evil.


----------



## Barliman Butterbur

There was hope for Gollum for a while. But Sam inadvertantly tipped him over the edge, and the possibility of redemption vanished forever. As Tolkien put it:

"For myself, I was prob. most moved by Sam's disquisition on the seamless web of story, and by the scene when Frodo goes to sleep on his breast, and the tragedy of Gollum who at that moment came within a hair of repentance – but for one rough word from Sam." 

And again:

"For me perhaps the most tragic moment in the Tale comes in II 323 ff. when Sam fails to note the complete change in Gollum's tone and aspect. 'Nothing, nothing', said Gollum softly. 'Nice master!'. His repentance is blighted and all Frodo's pity is (in a sense ) wasted. Shelob's lair became inevitable."

Sources: Tolkien's Letters, #s 96 and 246.

Barley


----------



## Alatar

I just reread that now, but if sam hadn't thaen gollum would of repented, and though he would be saved, they still would not be able to enter mordor.


----------



## Thorondor_

Alatar said:


> I just reread that now, but if sam hadn't thaen gollum would of repented, and though he would be saved, they still would not be able to enter mordor.


 
Not necessarily; Gollum could still tell them of the danger ahead and could help them deal with Shelob one way or the other. But, in this case, after Cirith Ungol, it's everyone guess what would happen...


----------



## Barliman Butterbur

Alatar said:


> I just reread that now, but if sam hadn't thaen gollum would of repented, and though he would be saved, they still would not be able to enter mordor.



That's the trouble with playing all these "what-if" games, m'friend. 

We get so caught up in these characters that we forget that it's all a done deal: Tolkien's LOTR is final, set in stone. It's a story that will never change. Sometimes we wish it would or could I guess — but it's as permanent as a statue or a painting or a piece by Bach. But that's the _good_ thing. No matter what "outsiders" (Peter Jackson for instance, or those who've turned it into musicals or plays) may do to or with it adding their own "stuff", the original is forever beyond harm, forever safe in book form! 

Barley


----------



## Meselyn

He sort of is inbetween; depending on which personality is present. When we first meet Gollum he's evil, but Smeagol quickly takes over, and is innocent. This progresses through the two towers, and return of the king. So when smeagol is present he's good. When Gollum is present he's evil. Though when Smeagol agrees with Gollum he's pure evil.


----------



## Alatar

I think that that seen would have been good in the movie, i mean who wants to separate sam and frodo, and this way peter gets to use some of his beloved CG effects and show that gollum is not that evil.


----------

