I, Nazgûl

The Nazgûl were not always slaves to the ring.

The terrible hooded beings you know from the Lord of the Rings were men once. They were not necessarily evil men. But being men they were prone to certain evils. They desired power and mastery. They lusted after wealth and influence. Kings and princes among them were given rings of power by the chief evil of their age and were slowly corrupted as they used the power conferred by those rings to defeat their enemies and conquer their world. It would be easy to say that the rings corrupted those men simply by giving them the capacity to take what they wanted. Power corrupts.

But that isn't exactly right.

For Tolkien, the story of the Ringwraiths was slow to come together into a cohesive Narrative. What would become The Lord of the Rings was the evolution of a simple children's story about a hobbit named Bilbo who had found a magical ring. Over many years, this simple story merged with a vast philological project and an ambitious legendarium to create the archetypal model for all high fantasy fiction forevermore. The nature of the rings emerged most clearly with the writing of The Mirror of Galadriel, the seventh chapter of the second book of The Fellowship of the Ring. Galadriel, probably the most powerful non-angelic being remaining in Middle-Earth1, already possesses Nenya. This ring of adamant, one of the three fashioned for the elves and unsullied by Sauron's hands, has allowed her to preserve her land against threats which ought to have overwhelmed it. It is but a rearguard action. Her people decline and so does she. There is one thing in this living world which could sustain them: The One Ring. When the young hobbit comes before her bearing it, he offers it to her freely.

Galadriel's response to this temptation2, not the loyalty of Samwise Gamgee nor the bravery of the Three Hunters nor the wisdom of Gandalf the White nor the lesson that a heroic spirit does not require us to be among the great, is the central idea of the novel. She rejects the tool which whispers salvation, knowing that it contains her damnation3. That is what distinguishes her from the men who would become Nazgûl. But the story of the Ringwraiths is not a story of Faustian bargains. It is a story of delusion. It is a story of men telling themselves that they were mastering a thing, oblivious to its encroaching mastery over them. It is a story of men who saw a one-way road to manifest their will, but who unwittingly submitted themselves to the will of another.

There are magic rings in our world, too. Yet they are fashioned not from gold and sorcery but from symbols.

With one hand, these symbols guide us to perceive them as the product of our own reason, yet with the other they supplant that reason with meanings determined in the minds of other men.

They bind our will not to the reason which first led us to our beliefs, but to the symbol with which we now identify them. Once the symbol becomes our point of attachment, we no longer have to be convinced to follow those who determine the meaning of the symbol to some new end. They need only tell us the new meaning of the symbol.

If we are not careful these rings will make wraiths of us all.


Want to continue reading this and the other 1,500+ essays you won't find anywhere else?




Already a subscriber? log in here

To learn more about Epsilon Theory and be notified when we release new content sign up here. You’ll receive an email every week and your information will never be shared with anyone else.

Comments

  1. I admit to being under the power of the ring. I am more aligned against the symbols which I oppose rather than those with which I agree. I applaud this discourse as a contemplation on what should/could be. However, where do we find “reasonable people”? Who are people who do not equate symbols with their personal interests and therefore their motivations? And while I academically contemplate my own associations as dominated by my self interests I see little hope in history or the present of experiencing an alternative behavior pattern.

  2. Avatar for rguinn rguinn says:

    I think there is world of difference between equating them as identities and associating them. There are beautiful symbols, narratives, and stories that can inspire us. I worked through some of my very similar thoughts to your own out loud in a piece from a couple years ago.

    In the end, I think it is useful to think of the word reasonable in its very literal season: one who is able to reason or be reasoned with. If we aim to be one who reasons or may be reasoned with, the willingness and ability to question the symbols of identity as you are doing is often enough. Being able to isolate and internalize them as attachments but not identities is even more, I think.

  3. You mean we aren’t supposed to pick a candidate based on a 30 second ad telling us why their opponent will end the world as we know it?! I needed the embedded link to The Battle of Evermore, which then had to be followed with Stairway to Heaven.

    We are doing Election Night differently this year. My wife and I are hosting 3 of my closest friends (bonds formed as a bowling team) that span the political spectrum. Great bourbon will be sipped, everyone is reasonable and those with opposing views know how to listen. I am looking forward to the evening even if the path/direction it tilts the US towards is as clear as mud.

  4. Avatar for rguinn rguinn says:

    Bad News: I’m flying to Houston late tomorrow for my uncle’s funeral down in Brazoria County on Wednesday
    Good News: I have secured a bottle of Russell’s Reserve 15 Year for my dad and I to sip after I land

  5. Sorry the visit to the Houston area is for that reason. My condolences to you and your family. I’m sure your dad will appreciate both being there for him and the bourbon.

  6. Yikes, I had two more possible Rings of Power flash into my brain while reading your note.

    You had the Ring of Faith used and abortion as the example.
    You had the Ring of Science used and climate change as the example.

    The Ring of Woman might change all pronouns in the note to she/hers. Would the above discussions be perceived differently by some of either/both genders if that would occur? IMO yes.
    The Ring of Man might say “enough of this crap, go team Red”.

    Convenience, unfortunately, sells. Even with enough time the % of people who have the capacity to comprehend Rusty’s note is likely in the low single digits.

    One person = one vote. A double edged sword.

    It’s gonna be a helluva week most likely.

  7. To your point Rob, a poll I read this week had the spread between non-college educated men supporting Trump and college educated women who favor him at 43%!

  8. Love this, yin and yang! We must love and resist. Even ourselves as we see our own shadows.

  9. At this point I am burned out on the election, having had to read a slew of notes on impacts of each candidate’s tax plans and energy plans. I just plan to binge watch a tv series tonight. Hopefully by this weekend we will know who the next president is.

  10. Haha! Who forced you to do THAT? My sympathies….
    A different strategy involves ignoring the majority of other’s opinions and doing a different kind of bingeing with friends - more similar to what Rusty and Patrick seem to be up to.
    In most craziness, as long as one has awareness to potential dangers, there is an entertainment factor.
    Go for it. Now. Next week might be different.
    Dang - a live ET Connect of some sort on a night like this could be EPIC!

Continue the discussion at the Epsilon Theory Forum

Participants

Avatar for bhunt Avatar for rguinn Avatar for jpclegg63 Avatar for RobMann Avatar for mpardieck Avatar for pagingdrlack Avatar for Patel1975

The Latest From Epsilon Theory

DISCLOSURES
This commentary is being provided to you as general information only and should not be taken as investment advice. The opinions expressed in these materials represent the personal views of the author(s). It is not investment research or a research recommendation, as it does not constitute substantive research or analysis. Any action that you take as a result of information contained in this document is ultimately your responsibility. Epsilon Theory will not accept liability for any loss or damage, including without limitation to any loss of profit, which may arise directly or indirectly from use of or reliance on such information. Consult your investment advisor before making any investment decisions. It must be noted, that no one can accurately predict the future of the market with certainty or guarantee future investment performance. Past performance is not a guarantee of future results.

Statements in this communication are forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements and other views expressed herein are as of the date of this publication. Actual future results or occurrences may differ significantly from those anticipated in any forward-looking statements, and there is no guarantee that any predictions will come to pass. The views expressed herein are subject to change at any time, due to numerous market and other factors. Epsilon Theory disclaims any obligation to update publicly or revise any forward-looking statements or views expressed herein. This information is neither an offer to sell nor a solicitation of any offer to buy any securities. This commentary has been prepared without regard to the individual financial circumstances and objectives of persons who receive it. Epsilon Theory recommends that investors independently evaluate particular investments and strategies, and encourages investors to seek the advice of a financial advisor. The appropriateness of a particular investment or strategy will depend on an investor’s individual circumstances and objectives.