Why didn't Gollum simply steal back the ring?

[Nomad Colossus]

Here's a question I would like answered! Why didn't Gollum just 'take the ring' from Frodo as Frodo and Sam slept? I mean I know he was loyal (as Smeagol) to Frodo but Gollum was still active as a dark 'ring fueled' entity. Sam tried his best to stay awake to protect Frodo, but there were times he fell asleep - all Gollum had to do then was rip the ring from Frodo's neck > put it on and disappear > then run away into the wilderness.

 

[Olorgando]

I'm guessing here, so correct me if I'm wrong. Your impression may derive from the films.
PJ in the LoTR films totally ruined Frodo compared to the book. Elijah Wood, whatever his merits as an actor may be (I hardly know anything he did besides LoTR, so I am very unqualified to judge), was only 18 when selected in 1999 for the role of Frodo. Who was 33 (coming of Hobbit Age) at the Long-expected Party. Elijah did not look that age.
Then PJ cut out the 17 years between the L-eP and Frodo and Sam (but without Pippin!) left Bag end, just after Frodo had turned 50.
Elijah Wood is only 39 today ...
PJ reduced his "Frodo" to a drug junkie far too early (he messed up Martin Freeman's Bilbo in "The Hobbit" film series almost as badly).
The book Frodo was much wiser, both in the first meeting of Frodo and Sam with Gollum in the Emyn Muil, and very much more forcefully in "The Two Towers", Book Two, chapter III "The Black Gate is Closed". An eye-opener for Gollum, but for Sam, too:

"... You revealed yourself to me just now, foolishly. Give it back to Sméagol you said. Do not say that again! Do not let that thought grow on you! You will never gat it back. But the desire of it may betray you to a bitter end. You will never get it back. In the last need, Sméagol, I should put on the Precious; and the Precious mastered you long ago. If I, wearing it, were to command you, you would obey, even if it were to leap from a precipice or to cast yourself into the fire. And such would be my command. So have care, Sméagol!"

Bear with me.

Sauron interrogated Gollum, and put a fear in him that was certainly the most impressive possible in Middle-earth.
But he let him go (and I can't help but mention my favorite obsession that Sauron detected something in Gollum indomitable even by himself - dang, those Hobbits are tough!)

Gandalf's "interview" with Gollum was probably close to "Geneva Convention" rules compared to Sauron's.

Frodo tells Gollum flat out "I will kill you by making you commit suicide", no ifs, ands or buts.

And perhaps consider that Gollum had no illusions about Sauron or even Gandalf. But that this very distant cousin of his, "just another Hobbit", would threaten him more directly with death than those "biggies" - to continue with my quote:

"Sam looked at his master with approval, but also with surprise: there was a look in his face and a tone in his voice that he had not known before. It had always been a notion of his that the kindness of dear Mr. Frodo was of such a high degree that it must imply a fair measure of blindness. Of course, he also held the incompatible belief that Mr. Frodo was the wisest person in the world (with the possible exception of Old Mr. Bilbo and Gandalf). Gollum in his own way, and with much more excuse as his acquaintance was much briefer, made have made a similar mistake, confusing kindness and blindness. At any rate this speech abashed and terrified him. He grovelled on the ground and could speak no clear words but nice master."

The unexpected from a perceived marshmallow can be more terrifying than the expected from a terrifyingly powerful Maia ...
or something like that. I'm thinking of the swordplay / martial arts tornado that Yoda unleashed on "Saruman's" character in one of the Star Wars prequel films. "Saruman" was reduced to throwing one dirty trick after another at Yoda to save his butt ...

"... rip the ring from Frodo's neck …"
I see technical problems there. "Fellowship" Book Two, chapter I "Many Meetings", when Bilbo wants to see the One Ring again:
"When he had dressed, Frodo found that while he slept the Ring had been hung about his neck on a new chain, light but strong."
What could this be?

Mithril.

That chain would never break. If short enough, no pulling it over Frodo's head, a clasp needs to be opened. How could Gollum "know" this? If there is a mention anywhere before Frodo and Sam (and Gollum) enter Mordor, I haven't found it.
But climbing Mount Doom:

"... Gollum was tearing at his master, trying to get at the chain and the Ring. This was probably the only thing that could have roused the dying embers of Frodo's heart and will: an attack, an attempt to wrest his treasure from him by force. He fought back with a sudden fury that amazed Sam, and Gollum also. … Frodo flung him off and rose up quivering."

Very little of this, in my imperfect memory, made it into PJ's film, too subtle for filmmaking perhaps (an excuse that PJ would gladly put forward, be it true or not). Gollum wasn't a slavish Orc of Sauron's, he had conflicting issues about the One Ring. It was only after Frodo and Sam had escaped the Tower of Cirith Ungol that Gollum apparently realized what Frodo was up to. That time, Sam drove him off, IIRC. Up to Cirith Ungol, Gollum was helping Frodo as he was able, not knowing Frodo's true intentions. Up to then it was Frodo 'n' Sam and Gollum, Afterwards it was Sam 'n' Frodo against Gollum (and some tertiary character depicted as a strange searchlight atop a big tower, at least in PJ's version … ).

 

[Deleted member 12094]

Olorgando makes an accurate comparison between book and movie on this aspect.

Since I just prepared a book-only answer here too, let me follow with my own bit.

In the chapter “The taming of Sméagol” it was shown that Gollum was no match against two armed hobbits. The idea was originally to tie Gollum with the elvish rope, but when that failed Frodo made him swear an oath instead.

For a while Gollum kept to his word, until indeed his evil self started to occupy his mind again. Sam repeatedly warned Frodo, who had a similar impression:

'There is a change in him, but just what kind of a change and how deep, I’m not sure yet.'​

In “The passage of the Marshes”, Sam eventually witnessed a dispute between the Gollum and Sméagol personalities, that almost ended badly:

‘Yes! We wants it! We wants it!’​

​

Each time that the second thought spoke, Gollum’s long hand crept out slowly, pawing towards Frodo, and then was drawn back with a jerk as Sméagol spoke again. Finally both arms, with long fingers flexed and twitching, clawed towards his neck.​

Gollum’s robbery was made impossible due to Sam’s vigilance. However, Gollum had made up a plan by then, that would not require a risky fight: ‘She might help. She might, yes.’

And so he may not have tried again to rob the Ring because he thought he had a better plan.

 

[Olorgando]

...
And so he may not have tried again to rob the Ring because he thought he had a better plan.

And without the Phial of Galadriel and Sting (and Sam), it would have been a foolproof plan. Bingo, Merroe. 👍

 

[Alcuin]

The principle reason Gollum did not try to murder Frodo and steal the Ring was his terror of the Precious. From his long possession and use of the One Ring he was aware, however dimly, of its tremendous power, and he had solemnly sworn on the Precious to serve the Master of the Precious and never let Sauron retrieve it. Faithless as he was, as revealed in his intentions during the riddle-game with Bilbo and his treacherous duplicity in leading Frodo and Sam to Shelob (which he saw as a “loophole” in his promise), he was unwilling to risk breaking his oath taken on the Ring. Only the prospect of Frodo’s imminently destroying the Ring drove him to attack Frodo to seize it.

 

[Deleted member 12094]

BTW - Nomad Colossus: feel very welcome here!

As you might have noticed by now, your contributions here will be well considered.

 

[Sir Eowyn]

I'm guessing here, so correct me if I'm wrong. Your impression may derive from the films.
PJ in the LoTR films totally ruined Frodo compared to the book. Elijah Wood, whatever his merits as an actor may be (I hardly know anything he did besides LoTR, so I am very unqualified to judge), was only 18 when selected in 1999 for the role of Frodo. Who was 33 (coming of Hobbit Age) at the Long-expected Party. Elijah did not look that age.
Then PJ cut out the 17 years between the L-eP and Frodo and Sam (but without Pippin!) left Bag end, just after Frodo had turned 50.
Elijah Wood is only 39 today ... ]

Just have to address that particular point... remember, hobbits live longer. 100 is average, it seems. They come of age at 33, so that's their 21. And then, yes, 17 years pass, but the Ring has kept him frozen in age. You could argue yes, he LOOKS the same, but he would have matured in wisdom, etc. I don't really think so... the chilling thing about the Ring, it seems, is along what Gandalf said, that anyone who possess it does not age, but neither does he grow in life... "he merely continues." So adjusted for that stasis, and for hobbits' longer lifespan, Frodo is in essence 21... which Elijah certainly looks.

 

[Starbrow]

You made a good point, Sir.

 

[Sir Eowyn]

Why, thank you. Just had an idea... Tolkien was a man in his fifties when writing this, but maybe on some level he felt that the War of his earlier twenties had in some way frozen him in time, on some level never going beyond it. This is interesting, and of course the vital difference is that Tolkien got married and sired children, something Frodo (or Bilbo) seems to never consider. It's strange, that Bilbo hangs around Bag End for forty years past his adventure, until Frodo moves in. Then other 20 years, and leaves the Shire. He never felt the urge to marry either, it seems. I know he was considered odd on returning, but that never stopped the Tooks, for example, from finding a bride. Not meaning to imply that a single life is a wasted one, NECESSARILY, but keep in mind bachelor hobbits are very rare, as Tolkien says.

You think the Ring had something to do with this? It seems that in Sam... who still bore the Ring for a little bit, mind you... Tolkien connects with his earthiness, his solid job and large number of offspring (13, I believe), and his remaining still in Middle-earth. Though even Sam takes the ship in the end.

 

[Olorgando]

Just have to address that particular point... remember, hobbits live longer. 100 is average, it seems. They come of age at 33, so that's their 21. And then, yes, 17 years pass, but the Ring has kept him frozen in age. You could argue yes, he LOOKS the same, but he would have matured in wisdom, etc. I don't really think so... the chilling thing about the Ring, it seems, is along what Gandalf said, that anyone who possess it does not age, but neither does he grow in life... "he merely continues." So adjusted for that stasis, and for hobbits' longer lifespan, Frodo is in essence 21... which Elijah certainly looks.

Yes, a good point - about which I have some reservations, though (have I ever mentioned that I like to nitpick? ).
What human age do you compare the Hobbit 100 to? 70, or 80? That would give a bit over 23, or a bit under 27, respectively.
Also, I'd hesitate to make the comparative ages too mathematically proportional.
For Dwarves with their 250, one third would lead to 83.
But Dwarves (granted, a different species) are said to be considered full-grown at about 40, then remaining at "prime age" for about 200 years, decline coming in their last 10 or so (so Dwalin reaching 340 was a big anomaly - 136, even older than Bilbo in "Hobbit years").
And the One Ring definitely does not seem to inhibit one all-too-common side-effect of advancing years. In "Many Meetings", chapter I in Book Two of "Fellowship":
"Looking in a mirror [Frodo] was startled to see a much thinner reflection of himself than he remembered: it looked remarkably like the young nephew of Bilbo who used to go tramping with his uncle in the Shire; but the eyes looked out at him thoughtfully."

 

[Olorgando]

...
You think the Ring had something to do with this? [Bilbo and Frodo never marrying]
...

It definitely makes sense!
The One Ring had, by being brought to the Shire by Bilbo, ended up worse off in some ways than under the Misty Mountains. Now it was hundreds of miles further away from Mordor than before. So preventing anything that would cause its current bearer, first Bilbo, then Frodo, from sinking even deeper roots in that for the Ring totally frustrating location, making them even more immobile, makes sense in some way. Kind of a weak, round-about way of working, though. Actively making them want to go off on longer travels - in the right direction, closer to Mordor, of course - would have served it better. But here it might again have "bonked its head" against a deep-seated Hobbit trait, their aversion to "adventures". It never got beyond Bilbo and Frodo liking to take longer hikes in the Shire (unusual for Hobbits, too?). And when Bilbo did again go travelling long distances, he left the Ring in the Shire (with a lot of prodding by Gandalf, for sure).
The time-line suggests another development, too. When Sauron returned to Dol Guldur in 2460 TA with "increased strength" (I have a serious dissatisfaction with what I perceive as JRRT, almost PJ-like, allowing many baddies to almost "recuperate at will" if slowly), he was still not nearly at full strength (and perhaps focused on Lothlórien across the Anduin). So Gollum actually moved away from Dol Guldur to the north under the Misty Mountains in 2470. Gollum reappeared in 2944 to search for his precious, Sauron declared himself openly in 2951 and began rebuilding Barad-dûr - and at this point Gollum turned towards Mordor (much further away than Dol Guldur had been almost 500 years earlier), even though he by now no longer had the Ring.

 

[Deleted member 12094]

He is indeed nitpicking you, sir Eowyn... stay away from him!

 

[Olorgando]

He is indeed nitpicking you, sir Eowyn... stay away from him!


View attachment 7200

Yikes!
I can state absolutely categorically that I have never been involved in that version of the activity! 😬

 

[Sir Eowyn]

Well, if we take the human span as being threescore and ten (as Tolkien might have), being 70, then hobbits live almost half as long again. So the 21 equal to 33 feels roughly accurate. Maybe not exactly, but then you'd have to look at "lesser men" like Rohirrim, how long they live, to get an average there.

As for Frodo somewhat startled at his changed and thinner reflection... he HAD just been stabbed by a Morgul blade, had just recovered, and never fully would. Don't know if that can be laid at the Ring's door.

 

[Starbrow]

Bilbo was a 50-year-old bachelor before he went on his adventure. I'm not sure what the typical age of marriage is for hobbits, but I would guess it would be closer to when they come of age at 33. The Ring wouldn't have anything to do with his bachelorhood to that point.

 

[Sir Eowyn]

That's true, ain't it? With Frodo you can explain it a bit by his carrying the Ring from his coming of age, but Bilbo, yes, he just never did that, did he? There's something curious there, something that feels like a missing key to his character. I mean, why not? As the head of the Baggins clan, heir to Bag End, a relation of Tooks (grandson of the Thain, no less), he must have been one of the Shire's more "eligible" bachelors.

But then, it also describes him having no close friends, until Frodo.

 

[Alcuin]

Bilbo was a 50-year-old bachelor before he went on his adventure. … The Ring wouldn't have anything to do with his bachelorhood to that point.

True enough. Bilbo’s peculiar bachelorhood was one of the things that caught Gandalf’s attention before the Unexpected Party. From Gandalf’s remarks in “Quest of Erebor” in Unfinished Tales,

​

…I had been attracted by Bilbo long before, … with his eagerness and his bright eyes, and his love of tales, and his questions about the wide world outside the Shire. As soon as I entered the Shire I heard news of him. He was getting talked about… Both his parents had died early for Shire-folk…; and he had never married. He was already growing a bit queer, they said, and went off for days by himself. He could be seen talking to strangers, even Dwarves. … Bilbo had changed, of course. At least, he was getting rather greedy and fat, and his old desires had dwindled down to a sort of private dream. Nothing could have been more dismaying than to find it actually in danger of coming true! He was altogether bewildered, and made a complete fool of himself.​

With Frodo you can explain it a bit by his carrying the Ring from his coming of age, but Bilbo, yes, he just never did that, did he? There's something curious there, something that feels like a missing key to his character. I mean, why not? As the head of the Baggins clan, heir to Bag End, a relation of Tooks (grandson of the Thain, no less), he must have been one of the Shire's more "eligible" bachelors.

But then, it also describes him having no close friends, until Frodo.

Bilbo was also a relation through the Tooks of the other great Shire family, the Brandybucks: one of his aunts married the Master of Buckland. But I had never considered him ‘one of the Shire's more "eligible" bachelors.’ I suppose he must have been, but that distinction escaped me (having never myself much considered who might be "eligible" bachelors). His close friends were the surviving Dwarves of Thorin & Co., of whom only Balin is reported to have visited Bag End in after years, and Gandalf, of course. It is said he was closer to some of his cousins a generation or two younger than he: unbelievable tall tales from crazy Cousin Bilbo and a good table of fare, not to mention the occasional present, must have seemed attractive to them, particularly his more adventurous Took relations. But Frodo’s predicament seems to have caught his especial attention after Drogo and Primula downed in a boating accident in the Brandywine.

 

[Sir Eowyn]

Bilbo was also a relation through the Tooks of the other great Shire family, the Brandybucks: one of his aunts married the Master of Buckland. But I had never considered him ‘one of the Shire's more "eligible" bachelors.’ I suppose he must have been, but that distinction escaped me (having never myself much considered who might be "eligible" bachelors). His close friends were the surviving Dwarves of Thorin & Co., of whom only Balin is reported to have visited Bag End in after years, and Gandalf, of course. It is said he was closer to some of his cousins a generation or two younger than he: unbelievable tall tales from crazy Cousin Bilbo and a good table of fare, not to mention the occasional present, must have seemed attractive to them, particularly his more adventurous Took relations. But Frodo’s predicament seems to have caught his especial attention after Drogo and Primula downed in a boating accident in the Brandywine.

Well, as head of his family, and a relation to the likes of the Tooks and the Brandybucks, I can imagine few more sought after, by the greater families. Hobbits, let's not forget, seem fairly class conscious... a Baggins would marry a Bolger (and have!) but not a Gamgee or the likes of them. Though I wonder about Pippin's mother, Eglantine Banks... perhaps a rebellious Took having married a commoner.

 

[Alcuin]

Eglantine Banks... perhaps a rebellious Took having married a commoner.

 

[Olorgando]

… Also, I'd hesitate to make the comparative ages too mathematically proportional. ,,,

Well, if we take the human span as being threescore and ten (as Tolkien might have), being 70, then hobbits live almost half as long again. So the 21 equal to 33 feels roughly accurate. Maybe not exactly, but then you'd have to look at "lesser men" like Rohirrim, how long they live, to get an average there.

As for Frodo somewhat startled at his changed and thinner reflection... he HAD just been stabbed by a Morgul blade, had just recovered, and never fully would. Don't know if that can be laid at the Ring's door.

Éomer lived to 93 … and on that side, you'd have to include people of Númenórean descent, especially nobility, who seriously exceeded Hobbit ages (though the average Númenórean age continued to do what it had done for about 6500 years, decrease). Which age did the Dunlendings reach on average, the Easterlings, the Southrons?
On the Hobbit side, while they did seem to have more life expectancy, this did not have to mean they matured more slowly (as seems to have been the case with the House of Elros in Númenor, and never mind Elves). They might have simply allowed their "tweens" some additional "ripening time" before coming of age at 33. Something not every one of those tweens seems to have used to profit, if one looks at dear old Pippin, 28 when Frodo set out for Rivendell (ostensibly Crickhollow).

As to Frodo, my point was the other way around: the Ring had not prevented one aspect of advancing age in Frodo, getting tubbier (perhaps also too ingrained an aspect of Hobbits). Yes, Frodo's thinning (in quite another way, too, coming close to Elven "thinning") would seem to be, very likely is extraordinary among the four Hobbits pre Rivendell. But the way Aragorn drove them, had to drive them, especially from Weathertop, none of them would have arrived in Rivendell at nearly the same weight as leaving the Shire. They could go with slim rations if necessary - and could recoup losses in more beneficial circumstances, like a couple of months in Rivendell.