# Was Gandalf wise in letting Frodo bear the Ring?



## BlackCaptain (May 26, 2003)

I don't have any quotes right now, becase I have no idea where my book is, but when Gandalf first tells Frodo to destroy the Ring, with a hammer and his small fire, Frodo obviously won't try to destroy it. Now at the Council of Elrond, Gandalf allows for it to be decided for Frodo to try to destroy the Ring. Why would he do that! He must have remembered Frodo wouldn't even let harm be done to it way before he got to Rivendell, why does the think that Frodo will try to destroy it when it would be the most precious?


----------



## Celebthôl (May 26, 2003)

Whoo that is a very good question, but i guess Gandalf thought that he would be with Frodo at Orodruin at the crunch point, man was he ever wrong , and that he would destroy it etc one way or another...and i guess that was one of the main purposes of the fellowship...


----------



## BlackCaptain (May 26, 2003)

But Gandalf mentioned earlier that he wouldn't be able to take the Ring from Bilbo physicaly without completely breaking his morale, er something like that. And the want for the Ring would be just as high in the Orodruin as it would for as long as Bilbo had it, because of location and all. It just all makes so little sense... I wish I had quotes. Haha


----------



## Celebthôl (May 26, 2003)

Well he did cause Bilbo to leave the ring didnt he, why not do it with Frodo...only...des...troy it...hmm, seems to get difficult about here


----------



## baragund (May 26, 2003)

Perhaps it was because Gandalf had so few options at the time. Put yourself in Gandalf's position. He wouldn't carry the Ring himself, not even for such a short time as to find somebody else to carry it wherever; he had a inkling of Bilbo's tough will in his discovery that Bilbo had carried the Ring for something in the order of 50 years without drastic change; he had another inkling that he could persuade a hobbit, like Bilbo, to do certain things with the Ring (in Bilbo's case, turn it over to Frodo). These inklings could have lead Gandalf to have a hunch that Frodo (who was young and physically strong enough to have a chance at getting to Mt. Doom) could somehow pull it off. I never had the impression that Gandalf had a plan in mind precisely how to do this. 

As far as figuring out what to do once they got to Mt. Doom, there seemed to be a heavy dose of "We'll cross that bridge when we get there" style of thinking.

It was a desperate gamble on Gandalf's part but I really can't see what else he could have done given the experiences he had up to that time.


----------



## Celebthôl (May 27, 2003)

> _Originally posted by baragund _
> *As far as figuring out what to do once they got to Mt. Doom, there seemed to be a heavy dose of "We'll cross that bridge when we get there" style of thinking.*



 great quote, and its so true, but if they planned ahead then if the plans changed due to unforseen events, i.e. the attack at Amon-Hen etc they would be all sorts of trouble, especialy if Gandalf had fallen and passed on what he intended to do...


----------



## BlackCaptain (May 27, 2003)

But by the time the whole company would have been in the Sammath Naur, Frodo would not by any means give the Ring up. He didn't even without the Fellowship there. I just can't understand how Gandalf couldn't see that. 

And being the super wize Wizard that Gandalf is, why in the world would he base the fate of Middle earth on "inklings"?


----------



## Feanorian (May 27, 2003)

I think Frodo was still iggnorant to the fact of what the Ring truly was and could truly do if it were to fall into Sauron's hands, I think he still thinks of it as an heirloom from his uncle which Gandalf thinks is sketchy to say the least.


----------



## baragund (May 27, 2003)

BC, maybe "intuition" would be a better term than "inklings" but Gandalf seemed to be able to read people very well; and had an excellent ability to determine their character. However, Gandalf did not have a crystal ball and he couldn't predict specific events. Think of all of the references throughout LOTR to "hope" when the characters are describing some major turn of events. There isn't much in the way of objective calculated risk or detailed scientific predictions.

Put another way, Gandalf had faith in Frodo and the Hobbits.


----------



## BlackCaptain (May 27, 2003)

I like that idea. It seems that Gandalf and the Fellowship are saved by "Hope" very often. It's almost eerie how blind hope, and faith in the immpossible, could be a backround for the wisest being in Middle Earth's desciscion on the very fate of everyone. I would think Gandalf would know better than to risk the very well being of Middle Earth in a false hope that Hobbits could destroy the Ring, when Frodo clearly even wouldn't do it the first day he had the Ring. Was he planning on Gollum getting the Ring and falling into the Sammath Naur? 

I can see where you get this hope in the Hobbits and all, but Gandalf had a clear reason to not have this hope when Frodo wouldn't even harm it when he first got it.


----------



## baragund (May 27, 2003)

I pulled my copy of ROTK to make sure I was right with my timelines. In The Shadow of the Past, when Gandalf first tells Frodo about the Ring, something in the order of 25 or 30 years had elapsed since Bilbo had given the Ring to Frodo. So the Ring had an awful long time to work on Frodo by the time Gandalf threw it into the hearth fire, causing the hobbit to freak out a little.

The 80 years or so that elapsed since Bilbo found the Ring gave Gandalf a couple of pieces of important insight. First, Bilbo and Frodo proved that hobbits could keep the Ring for extended periods of time without being totally consumed, even remain outwardly normal. Second, Gandalf was able to persuade Bilbo to _voluntarily_ give up the Ring after his 111th birthday, something nobody else (as far as I know) could do. Despite the initially poor response from Frodo when Gandalf threw the Ring into the hearth fire, Gandalf probably thought he could persuade Frodo to somehow give up the Ring just like he persuaded Bilbo 25 years earlier.

There is no arguing that the quest to destroy the Ring was an incredibly long shot, but Gandalf's hope wasn't entirely false or unfounded and his faith wasn't completly blind. Again, there really was no viable alternative.


----------



## Elendil3119 (Jun 4, 2003)

_The Council of Elrond_


> No one answered. The noon-bell rang. Still no one spoke. Frodo glanced at all the faces, but they were not turned to him. All the Council sat with downcast eyes, as if in deep thought. A great dread fell on him, as if he was awaiting the pronouncement of some doom that he had long foreseen and vainly hoped might after all never be spoken. An overwhelming longing to rest and remain at peace by Bilbo's side in Rivendell filled all his heart. At last with an effort he spoke, and wondered to hear his own words, as if some other will was using his small voice. 'I will take the Ring,' he said, 'though I do not know the way.'


Obviously here, Frodo was guided by some other power than his own: fate, what Eru ordained. I believe that Gandalf was aware that Frodo's choice was not completely 'voluntary', so to speak. Notice that Gandalf did not even speak at this point of the Council; he realized that it was what Eru had planned. In my opinion, that is the main reason he 'trusted' the Ring to Frodo on the Quest. So yes, I think that Gandalf was wise in letting Frodo carry the Ring, since it was obviously the choice of a higher Power.


> 'If you want to know, the only real eye-openers, as you put it, were you and Frodo; and I was the only one that was not surprised.'


Gandalf probably forsaw this event, which could explain why he did not say anything when Frodo spoke up at the Council.


----------



## Arvedui (Apr 20, 2004)

This thread has been moved out of the Guild of Scholar's Hall, and will hopefully be filled with the thoughts of more members.


----------



## Arthur_Vandelay (Apr 20, 2004)

Let me add my two cents worth in the form of a few questions. Did Gandalf intend for Frodo to bear the Ring to Mt. Doom _from the outset_? 

In "The Shadow of the Past," Gandalf says:



> There is only one way: to find the Cracks of Doom in the depths of Orodruin, the Fire-mountain, and cast the Ring in there, if you really wish to destroy it, to put it beyond the grasp of the Enemy for ever.



Further down the page he adds:



> I will help you bear this burden, as long as it is yours to bear.



But a little further on, in "Three is Company," Gandalf says:



> It may be your task to find the Cracks of Doom; but that quest may be for others: I do not know.



Did Gandalf really expect that Frodo would be entrusted with the quest to destroy the Ring? Who else might he have had in mind for the job?


----------



## Inderjit S (Apr 20, 2004)

Do you think Gandalf had enough truth in Eru's providence to think things would "work out o.k"?

Gandalf hints on several occasions on divine intervention-does this show he knows either Eru or the Valar will be there to lend a helping hand?

Frodo resigns himself to the fact that it was _his_mission. He even hints at fate playing an important part in the thing. i.e. his talk about Gollum's possible perfidy.

Even Elrond thinks the ring may be assigned to Frodo beforehand. Did Frodo resign himself to this when the "other will" was speaking for him at the council?


----------



## Ravenna (Apr 21, 2004)

As previous posts have shown, the Wise were in a real dilemma here, nobody with innate power dared to even touch the Ring, let alone carry it for many months, yet they were also fully aware that it must be destroyed if at all possible.
In one way, it almost seem as if Frodo is being set up for the task. As Elrond says.




> And neither strength will carry us far upn it. This quest may be attempted by the weak with as much hope as the strong. Yet such is oft the course of deeds that move the wheels of the world: small hands do them because they must, while the eyes of the great are elsewhere.



After all, who else was there at the Council who was small, weak etc apart fom Frodo and Bilbo? (and Sam of course). Obviously Bilbo was never going to be a choice, so it had to be Frodo.

On the other hand we come back to the thread running through the entire story, that of preordainment (if that's the term to use  ) Elrond also states




> If I understand aright all that I have heard, I think that this task is appointed to you Frodo; and that if you do not find a way, no one will.



I know there have been some good threads regarding this matter of free will vs pre ordained fate, and think that this is a prime example. Was Frodo indeed fated to carry the Ring, or was he in a sense conned into doing it by others wiser than he who were at their wits' end trying to come up with a solution to an impossible situation?


----------



## Melian_the_Maya (Apr 22, 2004)

I think that indeed there was something like mysticism that determined Gandalf. If I am not mistaken, there is a little something he said... I don't have the book on me right now, but something of the sort: Bilbo was meant to find the Ring against its Master's will - in which case Frodo was also meant to have it. Which is why Gandalf did not oppose what seemed to be a Higher Will of some sort at the council of Elrond.


----------



## Isthir (Apr 22, 2004)

Ahh yes, the return of my thoughts...how long has it been? Oh well, on to the subject.

To me the whole situation seemed a bit like gurilla warfare. Think about it, hobbits are strong willed (which helps in the opposition against the Ring's power), small, stealthy, and pretty much unknown to the enemy. I too do not have my books here so I cannot give any quotes or dates, yet the Enemy knew very little about the Halflings...just like the rest of the world. So who better to make it into Mordor and the Cracks of Doom besides a strong willed unknown race?
I may just be really tired and none of this makes sense, but those are my thoughts at the moment.
-Isthir


----------



## Inderjit S (Apr 22, 2004)

Don't want to give a glib reply, but who else was there?


----------



## Thorondor_ (May 14, 2005)

Why not take the ring to Aman? Couldn't the Valar use it, without being affected by it? Or just destroy it?

Maybe it was a test for Middle-Earth to resist such a temptation, to overcome it and to destroy it.


----------



## Arthur_Vandelay (May 14, 2005)

Thorondor_ said:


> Why not take the ring to Aman? Couldn't the Valar use it, without being affected by it? Or just destroy it?
> 
> Maybe it was a test for Middle-Earth to resist such a temptation, to overcome it and to destroy it.



The glib response: I imagine the Valar's taking or destroying the Ring would have a similar effect upon the story to Gwaihir's scooping up the Ring in his talons on the doorstep and depositing it soon after in the Cracks of Doom. 

The non-glib response: You raise an interesting point, which someone more learned in matters Valinorean would be better equipped to address. I'm not sure about the idea that the Ring was a 'test' for Middle-earth. Clearly the Valar took the threat of it--or Sauron himself--seriously enough to send the Istari to Middle-earth. But for reasons of which I am not myself aware (but hopefully someone on TTF might be), the Valar would never accept the Ring itself in Valinor. It "belongs to Middle-earth," but that is not a complete answer. Perhaps the Ring in Valinor, even if it would have no effect upon the Valar themselves, might have an evil influence on others there: but-for-the-grace-of-Eru, there are plenty of would-be Dark Lords among the Maia and Quendi of the West.


----------



## Inderjit S (May 14, 2005)

They did not intervene because it was not their problem-they had sent their stewards, but in the end it was up to the people of Middle-Earth to deal with it.


----------



## scotsboyuk (May 14, 2005)

These questions are often fascinating to discuss, but of course they are always within the context of the story. A very glib reply might be that the story works well with Frodo carrying the One Ring to Mordor! 

I suppose the question really is 'who else was there'? Bilbo was perhaps too old and showed signs of giving in to the One Ring's machinations; Gandalf refuses the One Ring knowing full well its power to corrupt; that really just leaves a Hobbit.

Frodo was an unassuming sort; devoid of any pretensions to great power or high office and content with his own little corner of the world. The One Ring's power doesn't have much to offer someone like that.


----------



## Thorondor_ (May 15, 2005)

> Frodo was an unassuming sort; devoid of any pretensions to great power or high office and content with his own little corner of the world. The One Ring's power doesn't have much to offer someone like that.


In my opinion, Sam was even more humble than Frodo, both in expectations and in origin, and he still became enslaved by the visions of the ring (at some point). Like Gandalf said in the Hobbit, Bilbo had some hidden gifts, and these were more important than the traits you mentioned. In my opinion, it is those hidden gifts that Frodo inherits that make him the perfect choice, Frodo is the secret weapon (of Eru )


----------



## scotsboyuk (May 15, 2005)

Thorondor_ said:


> In my opinion, Sam was even more humble than Frodo, both in expectations and in origin, and he still became enslaved by the visions of the ring (at some point). Like Gandalf said in the Hobbit, Bilbo had some hidden gifts, and these were more important than the traits you mentioned. In my opinion, it is those hidden gifts that Frodo inherits that make him the perfect choice, Frodo is the secret weapon (of Eru )



Quite an interesting point old boy and I would agree to a certain extent, namely that I imagine it may be a combination of these factors.

Frodo did eventually succumb to the One Ring of course, but then there is also Sam there to save him. I rather wonder whether we should consider Frodo as the sole ring bearer, not in a physical sense of course. I think that it can be argued rather well that Frodo wouldn't have it made it without Sam, so I wonder if we shouldn't actually consider the two of them together in this matter.

Another point for consideration would be what those hidden qualities were?


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (May 15, 2005)

Tolkien said:


> No one answered. The noon-bell rang. Still no one spoke. Frodo glanced at all the faces, but they were not turned to him. All the Council sat with downcast eyes, as if in deep thought. A great dread fell on him, as if he was awaiting the pronouncement of some doom that he had long foreseen and vainly hoped might after all never be spoken. An overwhelming longing to rest and remain at peace by Bilbo's side in Rivendell filled all his heart. At last with an effort he spoke, and wondered to hear his own words, as if some other will was using his small voice. 'I will take the Ring,' he said, 'though I do not know the way.'





Elendil3119 said:


> Obviously here, Frodo was guided by some other power than his own: fate, what Eru ordained.



Excuse me but it's not at all obvious to _me._ When I first read the passage — and when I still read it — I come to the conclusion that the reality of the situation is closing in on Frodo (rather than fate or specific ordination) and he sees more and more that since the ring has been given to him, logically, it is his mission to see to its destruction. He finally succumbs to the pressure of the moment and takes on the quest. Of course it can be argued that since Eru exists, _everything_ is ultimately ordained by him, but this just doesn't do it for me. That would take away individual choice and free will.

Barley


----------



## scotsboyuk (May 15, 2005)

Barliman Butterbur said:


> Of course it can be argued that since Eru exists, _everything_ is ultimately ordained by him, but this just doesn't do it for me. That would take away individual choice and free will.
> 
> Barley



I suppose one could make the argument that it is Eru's individual choice and free will, which are being exercised.


----------



## Thorondor_ (May 15, 2005)

I would agree with that. Religion says that at all times God's light is reflected in us, but it is also "distorted" by our own nature/structure/psychology/memory - what we would call our spirit, our identity - with its our free will. In the end, our "identity" is actually a burden that separates us from Him.


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (May 15, 2005)

Thorondor_ said:


> I would agree with that. Religion says that at all times God's light is reflected in us, but it is also "distorted" by our own nature/structure/psychology/memory - what we would call our spirit, our identity - with its our free will. In the end, our "identity" is actually a burden that separates us from Him.



For me however, what religion says is really what man says and attributes to God.

Barley


----------



## Thorondor_ (May 15, 2005)

First of all, religion is a revealed aspect, not something a human can devise by mere speculation. Second, as you posted in the "Gandalf and religion" thread, to you, religion is equivalent to self-induced illusion. It is so - _only_ when devised by humans, to suit earthly purposes. Are we getting off the topic here?


----------



## ingolmo (May 16, 2005)

Remember that Gandalf said that Gollum might have a part to play before the end, maybe Gandalf knew that Gollum would destroy the ring. Or Gollum was under his orders to destroy the ring, or Gandalf just somehow knew; But how could that be.


----------



## Thorondor_ (May 16, 2005)

I would guess he saw a special connection between Gollum and the ring the same way he saw it between Bilbo (and Frodo for that matter) and the Ring. I REALLY wonder how he came to meet Bilbo in the very first place... what led him ...


----------



## Bergil (Jun 1, 2005)

Gandalf had not planned falling in Moria, so at the council he must have felt that maybe he could have helped Frodo throw it in Mt Doom. Gandalf had already helped relieve one hobbit of the ring who had had it for 60 years, so one who had it for a few years wouldn't be to difficult, would it?


----------

