Is the One Ring sentient?
No.
Thanks for joining me for today’s blog entry.
….oh, you want more? Fine.
This is a question which comes up quite a bit, and a question that you likely have some opinion on, even if you haven’t actually thought about it. The nature of the One Ring is, after all, at least somewhat ambiguous, both in terms of its powers and its own agency, and it is this question that I wanted to examine.
A great deal of our information regarding the Ring and its methods comes from the beginning of “The Fellowship of the Ring”, when Gandalf lays out the history of this artefact to Frodo. To be fair, much of what he says implies at least a degree of agency for the Ring, as the following quotes show.
‘A Ring of Power looks after itself, Frodo. It may slip off treacherously, but its keeper never abandons it.
…………………
‘It was not Gollum, Frodo, but the Ring itself that decided things. The Ring left him.’
…………………
‘The Ring was trying to get back to its master.’
The Lord of the Rings, Book I, Chapter II, ‘The Shadow of the Past’, by J.R.R. Tolkien
Later, when speaking with Gollum, Frodo also describes the Ring as possessing a degree of independence. Compare and contrast, however, what is perhaps the most famous quote about the One Ring’s treacherous desires – a quote which, as far as I can tell, is a movie invention.
Always remember Frodo, the Ring is trying to get back to its master. It wants to be found.
The Fellowship of the Ring, New Line Cinemas
The films consistently made choices that frame the Ring in this light, thus deliberately making the Ring the most present, most influential villain – and that choice makes a lot of sense for a cinematic telling, as it lends a tangible threat and menace to an object that could appear as a Macguffin if not handled carefully.
But, of course, we’re here for the One Ring as Tolkien imagined it – the book version, which does not possess the same explicit desire or goal laid out in the films – or at least, is not granted the same agency to act upon this desire. And there are a few excellent pieces of evidence that show the Ring’s true nature in the books, that should serve to prove that, though the Ring is both threatening and evil, it is not possessed of free will, sentience, or even necessarily full awareness.
I believe the first piece of evidence to be the most compelling and conclusive as well – namely, that it is truly impossible for Sauron, or for any being other than Eru Ilúvatar, to create. Sauron, of course, was a superb craftsman, but he forged the Ring, he did not Create it. The gold used in its crafting was Created by Eru, and while Sauron undeniably imbued this gold with a portion of his own power, he likewise did not create a spirit to dwell within it, a spirit capable of independent thought. We know that Sauron did not, because his old master, Melkor, had sought this power without success many ages prior.
To Melkor among the Ainur had been given the greatest gifts of power and knowledge, and he had a share in all the gifts of his brethren. He had gone often alone into the void places seeking the Imperishable Flame; for desire grew hot within him to bring into Being things of his own, and it seemed to him that Ilúvatar took no thought for the Void, and he was impatient of its emptiness. Yet he found not the Fire, for it is with Ilúvatar.
The Silmarillion, “Ainulindalë: The Music of the Ainur”, by J.R.R. Tolkien
Had Sauron somehow succeeded where the most powerful of the Ainur failed, then the history of the Third Age would have been very different indeed. As it is, though, we know that Eru alone can create fëar. It is perhaps tempting to imagine that Sauron passed his spirit into the Ring, leaving his physical body as a shell controlled solely by the Ring, but this fancy would then leave Barad-dûr unoccupied. We are told that Sauron, in all his malice and intelligence, dwells there and works from there, meaning that the Ring is devoid of his fëa (or, more strictly speaking, his ëala), possessing only some portion of his power.
Alright, but the Silmarillion changed a fair bit over Tolkien’s lifetime, I hear you sceptics say. Well, actually, I don’t hear you say it, since the above is pretty damn conclusive, and quite coherent with Catholic theology, which was always a concern for Tolkien, but let’s say that we need additional support – support that we can find in the Ring’s behaviour and history.
See, if the Ring were conscious, were possessed of some measure of free will, that means that it must have been capable of exercising that free will, and making decisions that further its agenda – which, as we know, is primarily to serve Sauron, and to return to him if separated. With this in mind, it seems very strange that the Ring would try and use its power to ensnare Isildur at the first – better for it to remain with its master’s corpse in Mordor, to be scooped up by a passing Nazgûl at the earliest opportunity.
Even if the Ring had some purpose, it’s difficult to explain away its further opportunities later in the 3rd Age. Sméagol, to his credit, made it difficult for the Ring to make a move back to Sauron. Bilbo, however, takes the Ring to Sauron’s doorstep in Mirkwood, into danger, whilst making use of it heavily. Had the Ring been aware of the Necromancer’s proximity while Bilbo was chopping spiders up, is there any possible reason for it to have remained with him? Why not abandon Bilbo, leave him to a quick and gruesome end, and wait undetected for a chance to move closer to Dol Guldur? If the Ring had even the semblance of intelligence, this would have been an ideal move, yet it does nothing of the sort.
The final, and probably least possible consequential, piece of evidence comes from the very title of the book: The Lord of the Rings. It’s only on thinking about this now that I realise how surprising it is that more authors and publishers don’t follow Tolkien’s extremely simple naming convention – take the central element of a story, and that’s your name. The Hobbit, The Silmarillion, Roverandom, Farmer Giles of Ham….even Smith of Wootton Major (originally titled “The Great Feast,” which is an important event at the story’s beginning and at its resolution, but bears little upon the second act)….and The Lord of the Rings.
LOTR is, first and foremost, about Sauron’s plots, and about the heroes who attempt to foil his strategies. Sauron may never bear physically upon the story, but it does not lessen his impact. Had the book been titled, say, The Rings of Power, or better, The One Ring, then I think that would be a clue toward Tolkien intending the Ring to indeed be the central element of the work, but it is not, and I do believe that to be significant. The Ring (well, Rings) does appear in the title, but this serves to focus Sauron’s story, not that of the Ring – had it been titled “The Necromancer,” then we surely would have focused more upon Sauron’s native power; while “Lord of Mordor” would speak more to his military and strategic might. “The Lord of the Rings” places Sauron both as our central focus, while also defining why he is the focus. I’d contend that this is better represented in the books (and likely deliberately), and that the films could be fairly titled “The One Ring Trilogy,” as they direct their focus upon this object, and imbue it with a more intelligent malevolence.
Like I said, I think the Flame Imperishable is argument enough to convince me that the Ring cannot possesses sentience, but it’s not bad to examine it through these other lenses as well. Naturally, we’re also left with a big question to answer – if the Ring is not possessed of a fea, what does it have? It is clearly no mere powerful trinket, either – it displays more independence than, say, Harry Potter’s Invisibility Cloak ever manages. Yet it also cannot be truly living, so how do we explain this intelligence?
In checking this topic to see what had been written, I saw many comparisons between the Ring and a computer program. Under this model, the Ring has a function – serve Sauron – and seeks to carry out that function – return to Sauron if separated from him; if united with Sauron, enslave and kill everyone in the world. Typical programming stuff, I assume.
I actually like this explanation, particularly for a contemporary audience’s comprehension – though that does lead to the first of my minor quibbles; namely, that I doubt Tolkien, an English professor with little fondness for machines who was born in the 19th century, would have perceived it that way….coding was a slightly less popular school subject in his day. Secondly, it feels odd to me to break down individual actions of the Ring with this mindset – is it coded to grow and shrink at predetermined intervals if not borne by its master? Is it programmed to weigh heavier upon its bearer in the presence of the Nazgûl?
The solution I’m currently comfortable with (though I would be open to further suggestions and considerations) is that the Ring possesses a certain instinct. In the same way that a flower turns to face the sun, the Ring is able to act upon some base necessity, and the native power instilled within it makes these instincts have powerful effect. However, they are little more than that.
As to what might trigger this instinct, I had initially wondered whether the Ring might be particularly hostile toward those who show it hostility. When turning back to “The Shadow of the Past”, though, we learn from from Gandalf, speaking of Bilbo, that this is not necessarily the case.
‘He thought the ring was very beautiful, and very useful at need; and if anything was wrong or queer, it was himself. He said that it was “growing on his mind”, and he was always worrying about it; but he did not suspect that the ring itself was to blame. Though he had found out that the thing needed looking after; it did not seem always of the same size or weight; it shrank or expanded in an odd way, and might suddenly slip off a finger where it had been tight.’
LOTR, Book I, Chapter 2
Gandalf himself hints toward a possible reason later in the same chapter.
So now, when its master was awake once more and sending out his dark thought from Mirkwood, it abandoned Gollum. Only to be picked up by the most unlikely person imaginable: Bilbo from the Shire!
…………………
These Rings have a way of being found. In evil hands it might have done great evil. Worst of all, it might have fallen into the hands of the Enemy. Indeed it certainly would; for this is the One, and he is exerting all his power to find it or draw it to himself.
LOTR, Book I, Chapter 2
Perhaps another explanation, then, is that the Ring was ‘awakened’ by Sauron’s own increased activity. We see support for this possibility in Gandalf’s words regarding Sauron’s renewed activity. It is also well worth pointing out that nowhere does Gandalf speak of the Ring acting as some sort of ‘beacon’, which does something to resolve the problem of Bilbo’s extended use of the Ring in Mirkwood. Distance is likely no object to the Ring’s connection with Sauron, but this also means that bringing the Ring closer to him does not necessarily strengthen this connection.
There is a wrinkle in this idea too, alas. With closer scrutiny, it becomes apparent that when the Ring betrayed and escaped Isildur, it happened scarce years after Sauron’s defeat at the end of the Second Age, a defeat that left Sauron at his absolute weakest thus far. Therefore, the Ring’s activities cannot be explained away by Sauron’s calling for it.
Nonetheless, while one explanation alone does not seem to cover how the Ring works, I see no reason why both cannot be combined in some way. Just because the Ring is not alive does not mean that it cannot have multiple methods for achieving the goals it was created for, after all. Indeed, the last quote from Gandalf above – that a Ring of Power tends not to stay lost – could be read as being supportive of this reading. This may also partly explain the catastrophic effects the Ring has on Frodo (the external injuries and suffering Frodo endures also obviously greatly weaken him). A combination of his own hostility and mistrust toward the Ring, along with Sauron’s renewed activity, made the Ring especially potent in its operation.
Hence, the Ring’s natural treacherous instinct, amplified by Sauron bending his will toward it and Frodo’s doomed suspicion of if, manifests in the Ring acting with greater aggression than it has done across the entirety of the Third Age through The Lord of the Rings. This increased activity is nothing more than an instinct, however – an instinct lent great power by the Ring’s own native power – but it should not be confused with independent thought or awareness. Indeed, as we have seen, had the Ring possessed true awareness, it surely would have chosen to escape both Isildur and Bilbo far earlier than it actually did, and this, coupled with Sauron’s inability to Create as Eru can, provides us with all the information we need to reach this conclusion.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thanks for reading – feel free to check out anything else you may be interested in on the blog, there’s plenty more to discover! Follow me on Facebook and on Twitter to stay up to date with The Blog of Mazarbul, and if you want to join in the discussion, write a comment below or send an email. Finally, if you really enjoyed the post above, you can support the blog via Paypal, and keep The Blog of Mazarbul running. Thanks for reading, and may your beards never grow thin!
