Significance of Gollum and Danger of the Ring

For me, Gollum has always been one of the most complex characters in the stories I have read.  His part in The Hobbit is so brief that we leave that story with the image of a solely evil, violent, pitiful creature.  So , when we see him mentioned and appear again in The Lord of the Rings, we feel like we can already predict what this is going to be like.

However, the Gollum in this story is much more developed and influential in many chapters.  Tolkien no longer uses his character just as a quick encounter to show the negative effects of the ring, but makes him an essential part of the journey to mount doom, and eventually, the destruction of the Ring.

Gollum is much more of a dimensional character in The Lord of the Rings.  We see him being helpful in being a guide and catching food for Sam and Frodo.  Although this is mainly due to the fact that he wants to remain close to the ring in hopes that he can grab hold of it, its surprising to see that he is even still capable of guiding and keeping a promise.

Even so, Tolkien does a great job of showing the inner struggle within Gollum.  By writing about frequent disappearances and reappearances, the reader, like Sam, can never truly trust Gollum.  He is still somehow  able to show some uncorrupt qualities, but ultimately cannot escape the influence of the ring.  I think this duality is a great demonstration of how the ring takes over the person who carries it, it takes over their thoughts and actions, but not enough to keep them from realizing they are being corrupted.  The idea that even after hundred of years with the ring, there is some part of Smeagol inside of Gollum is really very sad.  It highlights the dangers of the ring, and how cruel its way of destruction really is.

Rules and Promises--"Riddles in the Dark"

"Riddles in the Dark" is perhaps my favorite chapter in The Hobbit.  It introduces the reader to the Ring, to Gollum, and to the event that set forth the events of The Lord of the Rings.  Yet, never before had I deeply considered the role of ancient rules in the great riddle battle between Bilbo Baggins and Gollum.  It seems somewhat odd that I would neglect such a detail.  After all, had I been in Bilbo's shoes lost in the deep darkness of the mountains discovered only by a strange creature intent on devouring me whole, I do not believe I would have put my life on the line through answering riddles.  For one, I am not very adept at answering or asking riddles, but also I would be in possession of a sword and might have used that first when approached by a mysterious creature in the bowels of a goblin pit.  All this made me wonder why both Bilbo and Gollum were content to settle such a matter through a game and whether Bilbo himself would have held to the outcome had he failed to answer one of Gollum's questions.

Gollum himself was intent on breaking the rules of the game by failing to live up to his promise to show Bilbo out if he lost.  When he could not answer Bilbo's famous question concerning pockets and their mysterious contents, Gollum resorted to what would have been cold-blooded murder had he the Ring in his possession.  So while Gollum adhered to the rules during the game, when he had lost, he discarded them and would have carried on in his wicked ways had he the tools to do so.

Bilbo suspected this treachery and was prepared to respond should Gollum suddenly attack him, but I wonder what Bilbo would have done if he could not devise an answer to Gollum's last question.  Would he have allowed himself to be eaten?  If I were in Bilbo's shoes, would I?  Absolutely not.  Thus, could it be possible that both Bilbo and Gollum were prepared to break the ancient rules of riddling when they first agreed to such a game?  I think this is highly likely unless both were firm in their belief that they would walk away victorious and were willing to put their lives--or dinner--on the line.  Perhaps, though, Bilbo had an inkling that Gollum would live up to his word and show the hobbit out, though I believe Bilbo was overall distrustful of the creature, and such unwarranted trust would be terribly naive.  Ultimately, Bilbo probably felt as though he had no other choice and did not wish to antagonize such a dangerous character who was bent on having hobbit for supper.

Whatever the explanation might be, I was glad that a new element was added to my enjoyment of this scene.  I wonder what other subtleties lie within The Hobbit just waiting to come out into the light!