The White Council

Re: Rings DO become powerless! (was Re: Fate of the Rings)

Tolkien and Inklings Discussion

: : : : : : Can you show me a place where Tolkien explicitly says ALL rings lose ALL power. I just remeber something about all that has been achieved becoming undone. And even this is untrue. All Gandalf's counsels (made with the help of Narya) obviously don't become undone. It's would be a good idea for a story though if they did... imagine Gollum falling into the cracks, and seconds later the Ring is in Sauron's hand and the West defeated...

: : : I'm afraid David is correct. The lesser rings lost their power when the One was destroyed. In part that's what Galadriel is talking about when she mentions "the long defeat". Whether the Ring is destroyed or returned to Sauron they would lose Lorien, a land where time is held at bay by the power of Galadriel's ring. She and others knew that it was unlikely that the One Ring would remain "lost" forever. As long as Sauron did not possess the One Ring they could safely use the three and hide the knowledge of who held the rings from the Dark Lord. Don't ask how this happens, I just know what Tolkien wrote. The only weak analogy I can come up with is all the Christmas tree lights going out because one of them burnt out. In Sauron's case his was a proprietary ring that unlike a light bulb, could not be replaced.

Let's say there is a weapon, a very strong one. But- it's in the hands of your enemies. Fortunatly, you hack into the control computer of that weapon, so now you can control this weapon. Wouldn't you enter some command which will destroy the weapon if you lose control of it?

: : I think we're talking about two fundamentally different things here. I never claimed that the destruction of the Ring would not cause certain things the other rings had done to become undone. The fate of Lorien was interwoven with that of the One Ring because Galadriel's Ring had been used to protect and create the magic of Lorien. The power of that ring depended in turn on the power of the One Ring. What I am objecting to strongly is the idea that the destruction of the One Ring would instantly immediately undo everything that had ever been achieved with the other rings. There is no evidence for this to my knowledge. Lorien obviously retained some magic. Why else would Arwen go there? Surely there were enough uninhabited corners where she could have gone. This was after the One Ring had been destroyed and after the three rings had gone West. Yet some of that magic was still in Lorien. Certianly in a lesser form and gradually fading, but it didn't go kabumm along with the Nazgul and Barad Dur when the One Ring was destroyed.

: : : What happened to the posts regarding Saruman's ring? I don't believe we ever reached a conclusion on that topic.

: : I think we worked out there was just insufficient evidence to judge either way, so you can believ what you want unless Christopher Tolkien digs out further unpublished documents .... : : (which would be nice ;-))

: You are correct about Lorien not just going "kaboom" when the One Ring was destroyed. Some "magic" lingered, but my guess was that it was the residual magic that had previously been expended, and that the Galadriel's ring no longer worked to maintain the magic. Sort of like turning the heat off under a pot of boiling water, the heat is off but the water still boils for a short period, and then remains slowly cools. That's my theory, but you may be correct in saying that the ring itself held some power that was more or less slowly diminished. I don't know if there is any way of knowing for sure, unless there's some statement in the book. And there were other sources of "magic" in Middle-Earth not dependent on any ring as is proven when Sam sprinkles the Galadriel's gift to him around the Shire and plants the seed of the Mallorn tree. Or does this growing of a Mallorn tree after the destruction of the One Ring complicate the whole question? I had previously thought that the Mallorn trees in Lorien were an extension of the Undying Lands, and thus doomed to fade when the rings lost their power. Obviously there was a magic or power in the gift from Galadriel that was separate from that of the rings or Sam's efforts to grow a tree would have been thwarted. The other way of looking at it was that Lorien existed as a result of the power of the Elves with the ring only enhancing the effect. Thus even after the loss of the ring Galadriel could keep a portion of Lorien alive with perhaps a loss of territory. But now we have to wonder why the Elves had to leave (or wanted to), if they could maintain a smaller Lorien (if the ring's enhancement was to allow Galadriel to control a larger area). But I get the impression that Lorien was going to fade, no matter what, so perhaps Galadriel di not have the power within herself. This argument (and I'm arguing with myself here) seems to be going in circles. Help!

Something like: the Elves, and the Elven realms, would have faded anyway. The main power of the Ring was that it could preserve the "power of old" (or something like that...). So when the power of the rings was gone, the fading would have occured faster- in a few decades there will be no Lorien, no Rivendell, not beacause of any magical thing, but just because of what would seem like natural things. And beacause of the grief caused by the dying of thier lands- no Elves either. So the Elves probably decided it is better to go to the Undying Lands, then to see thier former homes fade and die.