Why wasn't Gollum turned into a wraith?

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by Landroval

I see; what would you suggest under the circumstances? That he should pet Gollum on the back and assure him nothing was wrong with his criminal tendencies?

I an not suggesting anything. He had to do it, and he did do it, but there was a price.

Originally Posted by Landroval

Are you saying that Frodo mastered the ring??

I am saying no such thing. If he HAD mastered the Ring, he would have cowed anyone, save Sauron himself. As it is, he only had power over poor Gollum.

Originally Posted by Landroval

Saruman still had great insight.

That he had. He saw immediately the change in Frodo. There are some things that Saruman respected, but not those you imply: he had respect and admiration for Sauron, but not for Gandalf and Co.

[Landroval]

I an not suggesting anything. He had to do it, and he did do it, but there was a price.

The fact that he claimed the ring had nothing to do with his behaviour towards Gollum. Frodo would still have claimed the ring, even if there was no previous threat to Gollum. He was 'doomed' to do so, according to letter #181.

I am saying no such thing. If he HAD mastered the Ring, he would have cowed anyone, save Sauron himself. As it is, he only had power over poor Gollum.

If you are not saying such a thing, why do you missleadingly call him a Ringlord?? And if he mastered the ring, why wouldn't he threaten Sauron?

And what sort of power did he have over Gollum, if it didn't change him one bit in his purposes? Gollum broke even his oath by the ring not to attack Frodo. Sure, Frodo was stronger than a a 4 centuries wreak, we can find some affinity between them and their destinies, but I don't see Gollum as dominated by anything else than his hunger for the ring. Indeed, Tolkien speculated that, if it wasn't for Sam's rather harsh treatment of Gollum, he would have sacrificed himself for Frodo - but that would be out of love.

That he had. He saw immediately the change in Frodo. There are some things that Saruman respected, but not those you imply: he had respect and admiration for Sauron, but not for Gandalf and Co.

He didn't see only it, he experienced it first hand; Frodo twice saves his life that day, and the second time was when Saruman tried to kill him. Frodo displays an unshakeable faith in restoration of Saruman; one could also point out that there may be some truth in Saruman's threat that if the hobbits kill him, the Shire will be cursed - it was Frodo who had the resolve to restrain the hobbits. He displays enough moral superiority, wisdom, faith, authority - and authority at least Saruman could admire.

[CAB]

Originally Posted by Gordis

That he had. He saw immediately the change in Frodo. There are some things that Saruman respected, but not those you imply: he had respect and admiration for Sauron, but not for Gandalf and Co.

I agree and disagree with you here. It is implied in The Hunt for the Ring that Saruman did have some respect for Gandalf, specifically for his power and “good fortune”. I would guess he had similar feelings for others with these qualities (mostly power, I suppose), primarily Galadriel probably, who he seems to have feared.

But I think you right that he was unimpressed by strength of moral character.

Saruman rose to his feet, and stared at Frodo. There was a strange look in his eyes of mingled wonder and respect and hatred. ‘You have grown, Halfling,’ he said. ‘Yes, you have grown very much. You are wise, and cruel. You have robbed my revenge of sweetness, and now I must go hence in bitterness, in debt to your mercy. I hate it and you!

Wisdom may be considered tied to strong morals (but probably not in Saruman’s mind), however cruelty is absolutely opposed to it. Saruman’s evil and petty nature had clouded his vision. He didn’t really understand Frodo.

Originally Posted by Landroval

He displays enough moral superiority, wisdom, faith, authority - and authority at least Saruman could admire.

I would guess that you are right that Saruman could admire authority. But if he saw much authority in Frodo, then he was mistaken. It would seem that the only people in the Shire who placed great weight on Frodo’s words were Sam, Merry, and Pippin.

Originally Posted by Landroval

The fact that he claimed the ring had nothing to do with his behaviour towards Gollum. Frodo would still have claimed the ring, even if there was no previous threat to Gollum. He was 'doomed' to do so, according to letter #181.

Originally Posted by Gordis

I an not suggesting anything. He had to do it, and he did do it, but there was a price.

I agree that Frodo would have claimed the Ring regardless of his actions towards Gollum. But, I think that Gordis is right that there was a price. Not so much in his refusal to destroy the Ring, but rather his change in attitude later.

The Ring’s main power was to give it’s holder control over other wills. The Ring clearly scarred Frodo. So why wouldn’t it mark Frodo in this way?

Frodo seems a bit ‘high and mighty’ after he first returns to the Shire. This isn’t a terrible thing, but it is a change in him. There are several instances of this. Here are a few:

To the discomfiture of the Shirriffs Frodo and his companions all roared with laughter. ‘Don’t be absurd!’ said Frodo. ‘I am going where I please, and in my own time. I happen to be going to Bag End on business, but if you insist on going too, well that is your affair.’

‘All the same,’ said Frodo to all those who stood near, ‘I wish for no killing; not even of the ruffians, unless it must be done, to prevent them from hurting hobbits.’

‘Wormtongue!’ called Frodo. ‘You need not follow him. I know of no evil you have done to me. You can have rest and food here for a while, until you are stronger and can go your own ways.’

Originally Posted by Landroval

If you are not saying such a thing, why do you missleadingly call him a Ringlord??

Well, I at least wasn’t mislead. Gordis never called Frodo a ringlord. She simply said that he acted as a ringlord could be expected to act. I could make the observation that a small dog acted like a lion without meaning that the dog is a lion.

Originally Posted by Gordis

Yes, being a kind hobbit, Frodo felt pity for Gollum, but he cowed him nonetheless, as a Ringlord would.

[Landroval]

But I think you right that he was unimpressed by strength of moral character.

I don't think that he considered the fulfilled Quest a trifle; and it was moral strength that made it possible.

Wisdom may be considered tied to strong morals (but probably not in Saruman’s mind), however cruelty is absolutely opposed to it. Saruman’s evil and petty nature had clouded his vision. He didn’t really understand Frodo.

It depends; one can have a certain amount of wisedom AND a certain amount of cruelty too, as long as neither are developed fully.

It would seem that the only people in the Shire who placed great weight on Frodo’s words were Sam, Merry, and Pippin.

I disagree; most, if not all, of the hobbits wanted to kill Saruman, but they still obeyed "Frodo's command"; and, as it looked, he probably would have averted Wormtongue's death, had he had the time to speak his command.

Not so much in his refusal to destroy the Ring, but rather his change in attitude later.

That may be true; Tolkien predicted he would be "ennobled and rarefied by the achievement of the great quest"; he has more insight, due to "suffering and experience (and possibly the Ring itself)"; he may even be less interested in how others would second guess his actions - after all, he did went to the bowels of hell (and was honored by the greatest heroes of the time). Others too may be impressed by his history, or at least by the changes in him. His aura of sanctity, if I may say so, could also command respect; but domination of others' wills is a far cry from any of these.

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by Landroval

The fact that he claimed the ring had nothing to do with his behaviour towards Gollum. Frodo would still have claimed the ring, even if there was no previous threat to Gollum

The Ring was slowly corrupting Frodo. The way he frightened Gollum was a big step in the process. The Ring's grip over Frodo became stronger.

Originally Posted by CAB

I agree that Frodo would have claimed the Ring regardless of his actions towards Gollum. But, I think that Gordis is right that there was a price. Not so much in his refusal to destroy the Ring, but rather his change in attitude later.

Yes, I agree. Once he sampled the sweetness of being a Ringlord, even if only for Gollum, he could never forget the feeling. The world became empty without the Ring.

Originally Posted by Landroval

If you are not saying such a thing, why do you missleadingly call him a Ringlord?? And if he mastered the ring, why wouldn't he threaten Sauron?

As for the first part of this question, CAB has answered it for me (Thank you, CAB! ). As for the second part, I refer you to the letter #246:

Sauron would not have feared the Ring! It was his own and under his will. Even from afar he had an effect upon it, to make it work for its return to himself. In his actual presence none but very few of equal stature could have hoped to withhold it from him. Of 'mortals' no one, not even Aragorn.

Originally Posted by Landroval

And what sort of power did he have over Gollum, if it didn't change him one bit in his purposes?

No power of Love, surely. Only the oath made on the Ring kept Gollum from trying to murder the hobbits in their sleep during the long journey. For Gollum (and for Gollum only) Frodo became a Ringlord. Yes, a cat is no lion, but it is enough of a predator for a mouse. And his broken oath on the Ring led him into the fire. That is how I see it.

Originally Posted by Landroval

Tolkien speculated that, if it wasn't for Sam's rather harsh treatment of Gollum, he would have sacrificed himself for Frodo - but that would be out of love.

That would be out of love for the Precious, IMHO, not for Frodo. Tolkien is speculating over his own text in this letter. But the text doesn't necessarily convey the same impression as Tolkien wished it to do.

Originally Posted by Landroval

Frodo displays an unshakeable faith in restoration of Saruman

Why do you think so? I guess he spared Saruman as a part of his policy of no more killing.

Originally Posted by CAB

It is implied in The Hunt for the Ring that Saruman did have some respect for Gandalf, specifically for his power and “good fortune”. I would guess he had similar feelings for others with these qualities (mostly power, I suppose), primarily Galadriel probably, who he seems to have feared.

You are right. Saruman did have a grudging respect for Gandalf's power and good fortune and he envied his Ring. But the one he admired was Sauron.
So, what qualities did Saruman come to respect in Frodo? His newly acquired "wisdom" and good fortune - really it was extremely good luck that the quest didn't fail miserably.

Originally Posted by CAB

Wisdom may be considered tied to strong morals (but probably not in Saruman’s mind), however cruelty is absolutely opposed to it. Saruman’s evil and petty nature had clouded his vision. He didn’t really understand Frodo.

Wisdom for Saruman equalled "cunning", I think. I agree that he didn't understand Frodo's selfishness, as he never understood Gandalf's. But what he fully understood, was Frodo's residual lust for the Ring and his deep wound with it gone. After all, he made a clear prophesy about Frodo's fate:

You have grown, Halfling,’ he said. ‘Yes, you have grown very much. You are wise, and cruel. You have robbed my revenge of sweetness, and now I must go hence in bitterness, in debt to your mercy. I hate it and you! Well, I go and I will trouble you no more. But do not expect me to wish you health and long life. You will have neither. But that is not my doing. I merely foretell.’

[Butterbeer]

ringbearers recognise other ringbearers and can see their rings right?they cannot be witheld from other ringbearers ...

saruman had made a lesser ring...

Yet he doesn't see one of 'the three' on gandalf?
or was it only the bearer of the one that other rings could not be hidden from?

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by Butterbeer

ringbearers recognise other ringbearers and can see their rings right?they cannot be witheld from other ringbearers ...

saruman had made a lesser ring...

Yet he doesn't see one of 'the three' on gandalf?
or was it only the bearer of the one that other rings could not be hidden from?

In UT it is written that Saruman knew about Gandalf's ring and envied it.


But there are worse things. How could Gandalf bearing Narya, NOT understand that Bilbo had the One?

[CAB]

I remember that Olmer all but proved that Gandalf did know that it was the One, almost immediately after Bilbo revealed it to Gandalf. I can’t recall where he said this, but the evidence was pretty much undeniable. It seems this was just a slip by Tolkien to me, but if we look at things from a story-internal perspective...

[Forkbeard]

Originally Posted by Gordis

IWhy hobbits were more or less immune to the Rings? I don't think it was anything "biological"- a feature of their hroa, no, it was because of their minds. Simply, unlike Men, Power and Domination were the last things Hobbits wanted.

Hobbits weren't immune to the Ring. Gollum killed over it, killed his best friend. Bilbo lied to his friends about it almost immediately and displayed odd behaviors, including a possessiveness, an avarice even, for the "precious" Ring. Frodo was able to "resist" because he had never worn it up until the fateful moment at Bree. That the 3 hobbits weren't going around with the Ring seeking domination, at least not until they entered Mordor, indicates the insularity of the hobbit mind rather than anything else, but hardly indicates "immunity."


Frodo initially was much like Smeagol or Sam, but, during the Quest, he became more vulnerable to the Ring's appeal. Saruman was right: Frodo, has "grown" and became "wise and cruel" Not really "cruel", of course, but, indeed, his mind became more Man-like, than Hobbit-like when he started to " train his will to the domination of others".

Oh, I don't know about "Man-like". Is wisdom indeed a "human" possession? In Tolkien's world it is indeed the elves and Gandalf who have wisdom--Frodo perhaps has beomce more "elvish" in outlook, a vestige, a sign, of the light of the Undying Lands.

I think it was a very important moment in Frodo's character development when he unconsciously used the Power of the Ring not just for invisibility, but for something the Ring was really made for.
Cawing Gollum like Frodo did had a heavy price to pay later: he claimed the Ring instead of destroying it.

This is an edited comment. I agree, he does threaten to use the Ring to exact the promise from Gollum. And while he certainly has to do something, nonetheless, that this is what he chooses to do, and Sam's altered vision of Frodo for a moment, let's us see what is slowly happening to Frodo. No delusions of grandeur or dreams of conquering the world or anything like that, so we can't read too much into it. But it is nonetheless a step down that road.

[Forkbeard]

Originally Posted by Gordis

I was referring to this:


Yes, being a kind hobbit, Frodo felt pity for Gollum, but he cowed him nonetheless, as a Ringlord would. I wouldn't be surprised if "love" Gollum felt for Frodo, were also the Ring's doing.

Well, first, with Landroval I object to the term "ringlord". Nor am I certain that we can say that that moment Frodo is acting like a ringlord in any way. He's acting very much the hobbit, a hobbit who is taking a step down a deadly path, but a mere hobbit nonetheless. And I doubt very much that the Ring, given its nature, would engender love, or know what "love" was. I'll have to look it up, but as I recall there's a letter or two that indicate that Gollum's love for Frodo was genuine.

Of course, Frodo's mental power permitted him to dominate only weak creatures, like Gollum, but still he fancied that in time he could dominate even a ringwraith:

Good eyes...I had forgotten about this quote. But then this is MUCH farther down the road, much closer to Mordor, and the temptation is becoming greater, physically weighing him down. So certainly this is part of the progression, but really indicates nothing about the original scene with Gollum.


[QUOTE]There was a great change in Frodo during the Quest. Saruman was wise enough to notice it:

Why would Saruman feel respect for Frodo? For his high moral qualities? For his love of peace? No, he respected the qualities of a ringlord the hobbit had acquired.{/QUOTE]
So, respect for life, hopes in redemption even after all that Saruman had done, are qualities of a Lord of the Rings? Only 3 "ringlords" exhibited those qualities: Elrond, Galadriel, and Gandalf. Sauron, the 9 Nazgul, and the dwarves who had had rings certainly didn't.

And Landroval, why are you sure that the future nazgul knew what sort of rings they were being given and, especially that it was Sauron who was giving it to them? He could have come in any fair guise and told anything about the rings...

Well, unless Sauron changed his personality for the men....we have merely to look into Sauron's promises to the elves in the Second Age, to the Numenoreans, and later in LoTR to the dwarves to discern the kind of promises he was likely to make to the kings of men to whom he would give rings, token of his friendship. They needn't know it was Sauron giving them, or know him to be evil, but even in fair form, Sauron's fair words had discernible foulness underneath that the observant noted. The 9 were they so inclined to goodness failed to be observant.

[Forkbeard]

Originally Posted by Landroval

Whatever threats he uttered were simply meant to restore a balance of relations, necessary for the fulfillment of the quest; the fact that Frodo restrained himself to doing only that is a sing of superiority on the moral plane, but also of 'folly', on the rational plane.

True, but he used the threat of wearing the Ring and using its power to command Gollum to do himself in to achieve that detente. So as I said in another post, its a step on the path to the failure at the Cracks, but only the first step.

Gollum loved the ring a lot, he may also have loved Frodo, but to say that his will was dominated by Frodo is a huge leap from that.

Agreed!~

[Landroval]

For Gollum (and for Gollum only) Frodo became a Ringlord.

I give up; you seem to have a very personal interpretation of what a Ringlord is, which is contrary to the very quotes you give.

As for the second part, I refer you to the letter #246:

Rewind please. You stated:"If he HAD mastered the Ring, he would have cowed anyone, save Sauron himself. " Now, to address your supposition, I asked: if he had mastered the ring, why wouldn't he threaten Sauron? That letter simply says that no mortal could master the ring; it doesn't say that should a mortal master the ring, he wouldn't threaten Sauron.

Only the oath made on the Ring kept Gollum from trying to murder the hobbits in their sleep during the long journey.
...
That would be out of love for the Precious, IMHO, not for Frodo. Tolkien is speculating over his own text in this letter. But the text doesn't necessarily convey the same impression as Tolkien wished it to do.

I disagree:

Originally Posted by Letter #246

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.

Why do you think so?

I say it was his wisdom, enhance by the trials and sufferings; Gandalf too behaved in a similar manner, offering Saruman a chance.

[Landroval]

or was it only the bearer of the one that other rings could not be hidden from?

Yes, that is true:

Originally Posted by Of the rings of power and the third age, Silmarillion

And while he wore the One Ring he could perceive all the things that were done by means of the lesser rings, and he could see and govern the very thoughts of those that wore them.

however, according to the same source, even the elves became aware of Sauron and his evil thang.

I agree, he does threaten to use the Ring to exact the promise from Gollum.

I disagree; it is Gollum who requests to swear _on_ the ring. I don't think there is any mention of Frodo even touching it. Frodo realised that Gollum just wanted to "see it and touch it".

Sam's altered vision of Frodo for a moment, let's us see what is slowly happening to Frodo. No delusions of grandeur or dreams of conquering the world or anything like that, so we can't read too much into it. But it is nonetheless a step down that road.

Yes, Frodo isn't immune to the corruption of the ring, that much I agree.

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by Forkbeard

So, respect for life, hopes in redemption even after all that Saruman had done, are qualities of a Lord of the Rings? Only 3 "ringlords" exhibited those qualities: Elrond, Galadriel, and Gandalf. Sauron, the 9 Nazgul, and the dwarves who had had rings certainly didn't.

Frodo did have respect for life etc. but I am saying that it were NOT those qualities that Saruman admired. He respected cunning and cruelty, and thought he saw them in Frodo. Same in Gandalf he respected cunning and "good luck", but not other qualities. Sauron had none of "respect for life and hopes in redemption", still Saruman admired him and tried to emulate him.

Originally Posted by Forkbeard

Well, unless Sauron changed his personality for the men....we have merely to look into Sauron's promises to the elves in the Second Age, to the Numenoreans, and later in LoTR to the dwarves to discern the kind of promises he was likely to make to the kings of men to whom he would give rings, token of his friendship. They needn't know it was Sauron giving them, or know him to be evil, but even in fair form, Sauron's fair words had discernible foulness underneath that the observant noted. The 9 were they so inclined to goodness failed to be observant.

Discernible foulness? Well, then ALL the Mirdain, (and a good part of them were Calaquendi Elves, not mere men) failed to see this foulness. Only Galadriel mistrusted him, but Tolkien didn't give an exact reason for this mistrust. Mostly, I think, it was that she couldn't remember any "Aulendil" among Aule's followers.

As for the Numenoreans during Sauron's stay in the island, they did trust him, though they knew full well his true identity.

The dwarves at Erebor didn't believe the promises of the messenger, because they knew that he came from Mordor - it was no secret.

Now, in case of the future nazgul, he could have come in any fair guise - as an Elf (was it easy to tell an incarnate Maia from an Elf? - next to impossible for a human, I think).
He could have told them anything: for instance that he was an Elf, sent by Gil-Galad and who wished to give one of the Rings to the King of Men for safekeeping. Where is the "discernible foulness"?

[ecthelion]

Originally Posted by Gordis

I don't think it was anything "biological"- a feature of their hroa

Gordis, where did you take the word "hroa" from?

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by ecthelion

Gordis, where did you take the word "hroa" from?

"fëa" and "hröa" are terms used for "soul" and " body" in Tolkien's latest writings

fëa, pl. fëar 'soul, indwelling spirit, of an incarnate being' (MR:349,470). Also cf. WJ:405.
hröa, pl. hröar 'body (of an incarnate being)' (MR:350,470). Also cf. WJ:405.
(Editorial glossary to the Ósanwe-kenta: "MR" is Morgoth's Ring. "WJ" - War of Jewels)

Here is from Myths Transformed:

On earth the Quendi suffered no sickness, and the health of their bodies was supported by the might of the longeval fear. But their bodies, being of the stuff of Arda, were nonetheless not so enduring as their spirits; for the longevity of the Quendi was derived primarily from their fëar, whose nature or 'doom' was to abide in Arda until its end. Therefore, after the vitality of the hröa was expended in achieving full growth, it began to weaken or grow weary. Very slowly indeed, but to all the Quendi perceptibly. For a while it would be fortified and maintained by its indwelling fëa, and then its vitality would begin to ebb, and its desire for physical life and joy in it would pass ever more swiftly away. Then an Elf would begin (as they say now, for these things did not fully appear in the Elder Days) to 'fade', until the fëa as it were consumed the hröa until it remained only in the love and memory of the spirit that had inhabited it.
But in Aman, since its blessing descended upon the hröar of the Eldar, as upon all other bodies, the hröar aged only apace with the fëar, and the Eldar that remained in the Blessed Realm endured in full maturity and in undimmed power of body and spirit conjoined for ages beyond our mortal comprehension.

[Forkbeard]

Originally Posted by Butterbeer

ringbearers recognise other ringbearers and can see their rings right?they cannot be witheld from other ringbearers ...

saruman had made a lesser ring...

Yet he doesn't see one of 'the three' on gandalf?
or was it only the bearer of the one that other rings could not be hidden from?

I don't think we know whether your first statement is true. We know Sauron, wearing the One Ring sees all others. We know that Celebrimbor was aware of Sauron when the latter put the One Ring on and that he was evil, and so hid the rings. And we know the Ringbearer once he has seen the Eye in Galadriel's pool can now see Galadriel's ring, though he hasn't previously perceived it, or Gandalf's, or Eldrond's. We don't know that the Nine and the 7 acted in the same way. So I think its something of a disconnect to think that Saruman's ring would give him the ability to discern other rings unless he successfully made a ring designed to give him that ability.

[Forkbeard]

Originally Posted by Gordis

In UT it is written that Saruman knew about Gandalf's ring and envied it.


But there are worse things. How could Gandalf bearing Narya, NOT understand that Bilbo had the One?

Because unlike Sauron, Bilbo didn't use it: Bilbo was effected by it (turned invisible).

[Forkbeard]

Originally Posted by Gordis

Frodo did have respect for life etc. but I am saying that it were NOT those qualities that Saruman admired. He respected cunning and cruelty, and thought he saw them in Frodo. Same in Gandalf he respected cunning and "good luck", but not other qualities. Sauron had none of "respect for life and hopes in redemption", still Saruman admired him and tried to emulate him.

I don't believe that the context fits your interpretation here. Saruman speaks these words AFTER Frodo has insisted to his fellow hobbits that Saruman not be killed, even after Saruman just tried to kill Frodo: and Frodo says..."He is fallen and his cure is beyond us; but I would still spare him, in the hope that he may find it." Then Saruman responds. There is no cruelty here, nor cunning. In fact, the charge of cruelty is explained in Saruman's next sentence: "You have robbed my revenge of sweetness." I'm afraid I just don't see Saruman here seeing Frodo as a smaller version of himself or Sauron exhibiting cunning and cruelty. I think he sees a wise hobbit and is surprised by it.

Discernible foulness? Well, then ALL the Mirdain, (and a good part of them were Calaquendi Elves, not mere men) failed to see this foulness. Only Galadriel mistrusted him, but Tolkien didn't give an exact reason for this mistrust. Mostly, I think, it was that she couldn't remember any "Aulendil" among Aule's followers.

Yes, indeed, and isn't that part of the point of the story (larger story that is?)

As for the Numenoreans during Sauron's stay in the island, they did trust him, though they knew full well his true identity.

And this works in your argument's favor, how? It proves my point precisely: for that trust in Sauron is what caused Numenor's fall and the reshaping of the world.

The dwarves at Erebor didn't believe the promises of the messenger, because they knew that he came from Mordor - it was no secret.

Not entirely true. Were that the sole cause they would not have delayed answering three times. Dain replies "I say neither yay nor nay. I must consider this message and what it means under its fair cloak." And so the dwarves debated and eventually send representitives to Elrond to gain wisdom on how to decide. So it isn't simply disbelief and distrust because the message and messenger are from Mordor.

Now, in case of the future nazgul, he could have come in any fair guise - as an Elf (was it easy to tell an incarnate Maia from an Elf? - next to impossible for a human, I think).
He could have told them anything: for instance that he was an Elf, sent by Gil-Galad and who wished to give one of the Rings to the King of Men for safekeeping. Where is the "discernible foulness"?

Sure, he could have told them anything. Yet every time we find Sauron appearing in fair guise, there is always something that gives him away to the discerning....

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by Forkbeard

Hobbits weren't immune to the Ring. Gollum killed over it, killed his best friend. Bilbo lied to his friends about it almost immediately and displayed odd behaviors, including a possessiveness, an avarice even, for the "precious" Ring. Frodo was able to "resist" because he had never worn it up until the fateful moment at Bree. That the 3 hobbits weren't going around with the Ring seeking domination, at least not until they entered Mordor, indicates the insularity of the hobbit mind rather than anything else, but hardly indicates "immunity."

Perhaps "immunity" was not an appropriate word. But still, I believe, hobbits were more resistant to temptation than Men, Elves and Maiar. If not, Gandalf or Aragorn would have carried the Ring themselves. Frodo was able to resist wearing and wielding the Ring even when he knew that it was the Ruling Ring. Gandalf couldn't do the same. Denethor believed he could keep the Ring hidden, yet Gandalf said he didn't trust him with it, he didn't trust even himself. But he trusted Frodo.

Originally Posted by Forkbeard

Oh, I don't know about "Man-like". Is wisdom indeed a "human" possession? In Tolkien's world it is indeed the elves and Gandalf who have wisdom--Frodo perhaps has beomce more "elvish" in outlook, a vestige, a sign, of the light of the Undying Lands.

The "Elvish" outlook was certainly mentioned. Why a Morgul wound brings about "more elvish" outlook is a mystery. There was some hint of translucency about the hobbit. I should say "more wraith-ish" would be more appropriate description.

Originally Posted by Forkbeard

And I doubt very much that the Ring, given its nature, would engender love

The One ring contains all the powers of the other Rings.
I interpret it this way: it could give invisibility and turn a human into a wraith - like the 9, it could make a dwarf greedy - like the 7, and, if wielded properly, it could "kindle hearts" as Narya and do whatever Nenya and Vilya were able to do. Galadriel says:

In place of the Dark Lord you will set up a Queen. And I shall not be dark, but beautiful and terrible as the Morning and the Night! Fair as the Sea and the Sun and the Snow upon the Mountain! Dreadful as the Storm and the Lightning! Stronger than the foundations of the earth. All shall love me and despair!

We can't say that, before she got the One, Galadriel was universally loved, was she? So she refers to the power of the One, IMO.

Originally Posted by Landroval

That letter simply says that no mortal could master the ring; it doesn't say that should a mortal master the ring, he wouldn't threaten Sauron.

The letter is about a creature (Frodo/Aragorn/Gandalf/Galadriel) trying to withhold the Ring from Sauron in a direct confrontation. It is supposed that the person in question is wielding the One. Would he be able to beat Sauron? "Master him" means master Sauron, not the Ring.

L # 246: Even from afar he had an effect upon it, to make it work for its return to himself. In his actual presence none but very few of equal stature could have hoped to withhold it from him. Of 'mortals' no one, not even AragornOf the others only Gandalf might be expected to master him – being an emissary of the Powers and a creature of the same order, an immortal spirit taking a visible physical form. In the 'Mirror of Galadriel', 1381, it appears that Galadriel conceived of herself as capable of wielding the Ring and supplanting the Dark Lord. If so, so also were the other guardians of the Three, especially Elrond. But this is another matter.

Originally Posted by Forkbeard

And this works in your argument's favor, how? It proves my point precisely: for that trust in Sauron is what caused Numenor's fall and the reshaping of the world.

Read back, please. Your point in this argument was not what you say now, it was this:

Originally Posted by Forkbeard

Well, unless Sauron changed his personality for the men....we have merely to look into Sauron's promises to the elves in the Second Age, to the Numenoreans, and later in LoTR to the dwarves to discern the kind of promises he was likely to make to the kings of men to whom he would give rings, token of his friendship. They needn't know it was Sauron giving them, or know him to be evil, but even in fair form, Sauron's fair words had discernible foulness underneath that the observant noted. The 9 were they so inclined to goodness failed to be observant

You gave three examples to support your point: that Sauron's foulness was perceivable under his fair guise. I've discussed your examples and I have pointed out that the cases of the Numenoreans and the Dwarves differ significantly from the cases of the Mirdain and the future Nazgul. The Numenoreans and the Dwarves knew full well they were dealing with Sauron, while the Mirdain and the future Nazgul didn't. Among the Mirdain, NO ONE doubted Sauron. Why would you want the nazgul to be more suspicious?

Originally Posted by Forkbeard

Not entirely true. Were that the sole cause they would not have delayed answering three times. Dain replies "I say neither yay nor nay. I must consider this message and what it means under its fair cloak." And so the dwarves debated and eventually send representitives to Elrond to gain wisdom on how to decide. So it isn't simply disbelief and distrust because the message and messenger are from Mordor.

I don't agree- the Dwarves didn't believe the messenger from the start:

'Heavy have the hearts of our chieftains been since that night. We needed not the fell voice of the messenger to warn us that his words held both menace and deceit; for we knew already that the power that has re-entered Mordor has not changed, and ever it betrayed us of old. Twice the messenger has returned, and has gone unanswered. The third and last time, so he says, is soon to come, before the ending of the year.

And only delayed the reply to gain more time:

'And so I have been sent at last by Dáin to warn Bilbo that he is sought by the Enemy, and to learn, if may be, why he desires this ring, this least of rings. Also we crave the advice of Elrond. For the Shadow grows and draws nearer. We discover that messengers have come also to King Brand in Dale, and that he is afraid. We fear that he may yield. Already war is gathering on his eastern borders. If we make no answer, the Enemy may move Men of his rule to assail King Brand, and Dáin also.'

Originally Posted by Forkbeard

Sure, he could have told them anything. Yet every time we find Sauron appearing in fair guise, there is always something that gives him away to the discerning....

When Sauron appeared in disguise in Ost-in Edhil there was nothing to give him away to the Mirdain. He was universally trusted. Even Galadriel had nothing definite against him. Why should there be anything to give him away when he spoke with the future nazgul?