Of rings and things . . . the relationship
between Smeagol and Grima and what Tolkien was trying to tell
us.
I was thinking today about my favorite character
from TTT, and came across a thought that I would like to share with
you. It is still in the works, so feel free to jump in and add your
thoughts.
There are two characters in LOTR which facinate
me, and I find striking similarities between them: Smeagol and
Wormtongue. Certainly, there are differences, the biggest one is the
influence of the
Ring. Noone could deny that the weight of the Ring's evil pushed
Golllum
over the edge. But if we look at the actions of Smeagol "Before" he had
posession of the Ring, he killed desired it for himself and was willing
to
kill Deagol in order to get it. This sort of "me first at whatever the
cost"
is one of the hallmarks of Grima and is different from the sort of
"Ringlust"
that we see elsewhere in the story.
Boromir may have been willing to hurt Frodo to
gain the Ring by the time of their parting, but he KNEW what the Ring
was
and what it could do and had much time and exposure to it to get to
that
point. Samwise had posession of the Ring for a time, and yet was able
to
give it back to Frodo (something which Frodo was unable to do with his
uncle
Bilbo). Smeagol, however, when the murder of Deagol occurred, had no
knowledge
of the Ring or it's power. Smeagol, nevertheless, was willing to kill
this
friend of his, in an effort to get it. Once he did, he was started on
the
path of 'selfserving me first' which led him to the lake under the
Misty
Mountains, (and which, interestingly enough, held the Ring captive
there
for untold years!).
Grima is similar to this. He works for Saruman
not out of love (and perhaps only marginally out of fear) in an effort
to
gain what he really desires--Eowyn. Willing to deal out death and
trechery
in order to gain his own ends.
We can also see their duplicity towards their masters. Smeagol first
tries to steal the Ring, then offers to help "nice master,"
then betrays him again to Shelob in order to gain the Ring. Grima,
tries
to weaken Theoden for Saruman, then when he is discovered, tries to
warn
Him about the coming war, then attempts to leave Saruman but is stopped
by
the Ents and forced to go to Orthanc and face him.
One final similarity is that both Smeagol and Wormtongue
are both the cause for the final downfall to their ultimate masters.
Wormtongue
distroys Saruman and kills him with a knife: Smeagol bites the Ring
from
Frodo's hand, and falls into the fire, distroying the Ring and Sauron
as
well, betraying "all" of his masters.
All of this led me to wonder what Tolkien was trying
to tell us in these characters. If we are to take his claim of wanting
to
create a "Mythology" then we must assume that as much of the myths
function
was to teach us or explain things (Persephone's eating the food of the
dead
is why we have seasons, Icarus teaches us not to let pride go to our
head
. . .), then we must see what we were to get from these two.
It seems, that in putting Wormtongue into the picture,
he doesn't allow us to slip off the hook with thoughts that "evil is
only
from without." Otherwise, "the Ring made me do it" would excuse all of
the
evil. Noone would be responsible for their own actions, which would
leave
someone like Tolkien, a teacher, in a lot of hot water. Yet we see in
Wormtongue
a character who makes similar choices to Smeagol, but is inherently
less
forgivable, as he is not under the spell of the ring. Perhaps he was
ensnared
by the voice of Saruman, but we see him continue in this vein until his
master's
demise, despite Saruman's power waning. And if he was able to finally
get
beyond the spell to kill him (when he was in the Shire), then he could
have
escaped him before this.
So perhaps we are not only left on the hook to
be accountable for our actions, we are also forced to accept that not
everyone
is a friend (which seems to go against the findings of Frodo on this
journey
. . . Strider, Faramir, etc.) and we must guard against letting others
lead
us where we know we shouldn't go.