Taking Another Crack at Doom

Mount Doom

Suddenly Sam saw Gollum’s long hands draw upwards to his mouth; his white fangs gleamed, and then snapped as they bit.  Frodo gave a cry, and there he was, fallen upon his knees at the chasm’s edge.  But Gollum, dancing like a mad thing, held aloft the ring, a finger still thrust within the circle.  It shone now as if wrought of living fire.

Sometimes we find ourselves facing truths that must be confronted, but they are so colossal and insurmountable that we know we cannot face them alone.  We need help.  Faced with such circumstances, we can believe that for some things our human hands could never suffice, unaided.  This assumption shaped how JRR Tolkien viewed humankind.  As a devout Christian, he saw humankind as fallen imperfect beings who need divine intercession and mercy – the folk of this Middle-earth need help!

Mount Doom

With this idea in mind, he also wished to encourage readers of The Lord of the Rings to trust in a sense of hope, even if it often materializes as an inexplicable mystery.  Tolkien wanted us to share his sense that hope can always be found near to hand for morally worthy folk in dire situations.  This optimism permeates Middle-earth.  A suffusion of virtuous hope helps us negotiate the risks we take when we set our feet upon our various dangerous winding roads.

So when Tolkien brought Frodo and Sam to the slopes of Mount Doom, he preferred not to abandon them totally.  And discussing “Mount Doom” one evening at Grey Havens, Liritar pointed out to us a very interesting passage.  Peering through Sam’s eyes, Tolkien springs this somewhat inscrutable moment upon us: “Suddenly a sense of urgency which he did not understand came to Sam.”  Here we find Sam experiencing a mystery, “as if he had been called.”  Frodo also feels this inward “call.”  Inspired, they resume their grueling journey to Sammath Naur, the Crack of Doom.

Tolkien nowhere explains this mystery.  Perhaps it is safe to assume that this enigmatic “call” was intended to be Providential in nature.  That is, originating from a deity yet to be revealed in Middle-earth, still unknown to pre-Christian hobbits.  This incident probably reflects Tolkien’s belief that ideal moral accomplishments often stand somewhere beyond our reach.  Frodo and Sam of their own free will succeed in taking the ring to Mordor, but they nevertheless need mysterious help.

And this also explains why, when Tolkien brings the two hobbits to Sammath Naur, the overwhelming evil of the place surpasses Frodo’s moral ability to cast the ring into the fire.  Who among us, Tolkien argues, could actually choose to throw the horribly powerful One Ring into the fires of Mount Doom?  If not good Frodo, then surely no one!  Tolkien decided that Frodo must fail because there are moral missions beyond our capacities.

“Precious, precious, precious!”  Gollum cried.  “My Precious!  My –” Gollum’s eyes fell upon the bloody ring.  Here was the terrible thing that had warped Sméagol into Gollum.  An implacable instrument of evil, this ring had cruelly refashioned him into its own heartless image.  It looked vicious, unforgiving.

In Tolkien’s pre-Christian Middle-earth, Providence may come to our aid, and in the absence of divine intervention, moral ideals can still find fulfillment, but perhaps our highest achievements must happen by accident.  Our merely human intentions can never truly suffice.  So it is Gollum who destroys the One Ring.  By accident.  A chance misstep!

Mount Doom

For Tolkien, the fate of the world is a mighty matter beyond what our humanity can manage.  One might argue that the invisible hand of Providence has acted at Sammath Naur, nudging poor ecstatic Gollum over the edge.  But Tolkien more likely wants us to see Gollum’s ecstasy as the outcome of a long indulgence of evil, and this precipitates his fall into fire.  One thing is certain.  It was not the hands of good Frodo or the hands of brave Samwise that settled the fate of Middle-earth – Christopher Tolkien notes that his father long toyed with having Sam do the deed, but ultimately he rejected this option.

Staring now at the way the ring seemed to exult, clasping Frodo’s bloody finger, Gollum turned his eyes away.  There knelt Frodo, holding his pained hand.  That hand with its four fingers – Frodo’s wounded hand – that hand knew the malevolence that Sméagol had endured.  That torn hand knew the power of the ring to warp poor Sméagol into cruel Gollum, the implacable authority to twist everyone’s sad truths into bitterly harsh realities.  Sméagol blinked.  He knew what Frodo had endured, carrying the ring.  In the end, Frodo had surrendered to his own inner Gollum.

I have never felt satisfied with the accidental nature of the outcome at the Crack of Doom.  I do not see humankind as “fallen” from a more capable noble state or as inherently lacking the highest forms of moral wherewithal.  I do not see humankind as deficient in the way Tolkien believed when he wrote that “man produces evil as the bee produces honey.”  We do have the moral competence to act beyond selfish interest.  I think that we lonely folk, all alone, with no Providential help, can indeed accomplish the greatest articulations of heroic selflessness.

Mount Doom

So I find it interesting to read the sudden “call” felt by Sam and Frodo at Mount Doom in a way that avoids invocation of divine will.  This is possible in a narrative sense because at the very moment when Sam and Frodo feel the “call,” Tolkien renders a very odd picture of Aragorn, standing beleaguered before the Black Gate – a leader of men who should be hewing at foes: “Aragorn stood beneath his banner, silent and stern, as one lost in thought of things long past or far away; but his eyes gleamed like stars that shine the brighter as the night deepens.”

Frodo’s eyes rose.  He peered into Gollum’s face.  A feeble light flickered across the wounded twists of Gollum’s victorious malice.  And suddenly there stood before Frodo a wizened pitiful old hobbit like himself, but cruelly used by the ring.  Sméagol!  Frodo saw in Sméagol’s sudden gaze an unexpected memory of insight that had become very wispy, very tattered.

For those who would seek some answer other than Providence for the mystery of inspiration that calls to Frodo and Sam on the slopes of Mount Doom, perhaps we can say that it is Aragorn’s magic at work.  The Fellowship did not fail.  Whether one chooses to see this as a magical intervention or simply as Aragorn’s expressive empathy for his distant companions, I prefer to see the mystical aura of friendship and love and selflessness as somehow coming to the aid of the weary hobbits at Mount Doom.  When we encounter such generosity of spirit in our companions, the power of such gifts deserves to make a difference in our storytelling.

It is surely worthwhile for Christians to find inspiration in Tolkien’s words, to feel uplifted by Tolkien’s implied religious undercurrents and outcomes.  Tolkien would find this result agreeable to his moral purpose in telling the story as he told it.  And no one should reasonably object to the idea that Christians might well find in their religion an inspiration to keep trying to save the world from utter destruction.

Sméagol stood holding the ring with its gory finger.  He knew that the ring could never be surrendered.  Gollum would never let go of it.  But there should never again be another tortured Sméagol; no more tormented Frodos.  No more Gollums!

In the end, it is easy to treasure the story that Tolkien gave us; it is a wonderful tale, full of mercy and compassion.  But if we are told that we must appreciate the tale because it is essentially Christian in its underlying mysteries, how are we to do so when some of us hold other faith traditions?  What about readers who do not adhere to any formal religious system?  Whatever answer one may prefer for such questions, it would be orc-like to diminish or belittle the Christian undertones that  Christian readers may appreciate in reading Tolkien. Whatever ideological moral traditions we might value, all who love Middle-earth ought to cultivate and treasure a shared fellowship.

Discussing the doom of Middle-earth at Grey Havens in our July 26 meeting, I thought it seemed useful to propose an alternate ending at Sammath Naur – Reodwyn kindly helped to fine-tune my vague idea.  To envision such a thing is not to reject what Tolkien gave us; it is instead an effort to see the tale from a different angle.  As an exercise in humanistic logic, we can explore a view of humankind that looks for strength beyond our flaws.  Some of us may trust Providential aid for moral strength, but some of us may trust that humankind often wishes for more strength of that kind.  And whatever we make of the human condition, we can bestow agency upon ourselves as actors with choices, and resist the impulse to see ourselves as helpless victims of implacable evil.  And we can look to one another to share the risks we take when we set our feet together upon our various dangerous winding roads in life.

Mount Doom

Frodo saw what passed through the old hobbit’s eyes.  His own strength at an end, he whispered, “Sméagol, you must do what –” Frodo faltered.  Sméagol felt very weak.  He sensed Gollum lurking, battering angrily at his will.  But he knew Frodo meant to say: “– what I could not!”

Gollum threw back his head and cried out, “My Precious!”  Sméagol wanted to dance madly.  But the shrunken hobbit gripped the bloody finger with its heavy ring.  He would never again let go of the precious golden thing, the anguished weight of it.  His gaze returned again to Frodo.  He stepped back.

And with a shriek Gollum fell.  Out of the depths came his last wail, Precioussss!  And Sméagol was gone.

Mount Doom

3 thoughts on “Taking Another Crack at Doom

  1. While reading this, I was just struck by how incredibly multifaceted and complex and sometimes seemingly full of paradox our human brains and persona can be. In the light of that, it doesn’t seem odd at all if the Smeagol/Gollum polarity happened just like you wrote, by the crack of Mount Doom. And what is interesting with that idea is that…for a Christian or other person of a deist faith, this could still mean that Gollum played the part that he seemingly does, and yet, the scenario you describe could be likewise completely true. How can we as independent readers, if we take a step back from Prof. T’s artistic intentions and see TLOTR also as a self-standing piece of art, free to be individualistically interpreted, how do we then, as readers be sure about what went through Gollum’s head those last seconds, or through the mind of Frodo? We have freedom here, just as Christian interpreters have, who see Tom Bombadil as the holy spirit (which I disagree with but don’t mind per se).

    I also like the vein in which you wrote those passages. Perhaps, I’d want you to re-visit it and write out more of how it simply *felt* for Smeagol. The emptiness, the disappointment or angst or other complexities. Not necessarily so coherent ans spelled out, yes? I’d be curious to see how that would look. And then that very brief exchange of looks between Frodo and Smeagol. Maybe that’s all that is really needed in the end. That and a step back…

  2. I think you’re right, Reodwyn. It would be more appropriate to focus on Smeagol’s feelings rather than his thoughts. He would no doubt feel things more than think them through! And I’m glad you mentioned Jim Denney’s idea about Bombadil, which Badgaladriel shared with us on the Grey Havens Group facebook page. My experimental alternate ending is something that takes artistic license with the Sammath Naur scene to make a point that is compatible with my view of humankind, while the argument made by Jim Denney is more analytical, exploring Tolkien’s possible covert design. I don’t find Denny’s argument very compelling, though many Christian readers may find it interesting. His proposed idea about Bombadil does have the merit of drawing upon the well-known fact that Tolkien enjoyed hiding puzzles in his work (in that spirit, here’s one such enigma, courtesy of Mark T. Hooker in A Tolkienian Mathomium: “In Thomae laude resono Bim Bom sine fraude”). For readers who find themselves hopelessly fascinated by our discussion on this point, here’s the link to Denney: http://jimdenney.wordpress.com/2012/07/05/the-enigma-of-tom-bombadil-in-the-lord-of-the-rings-part-1/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s