Why weren't you supposed to put the one ring of power on?
The movies made it pretty simple of course. It was an evil made thing of inevitable corrupting power; no matter what good you may start to wield it with, ultimately, its true purpose was to simply get you mainlining on one ultimate power drug. And of course, that worked just fine for the movies because they were just so well made all the way round, as storytelling vehicles.
But here's a thought for you. What if our being fundamentally involved in the expression of energy is that very ring of power (do I have to remind you of the whole "closed loop" of self sustaining iteration again?); meaning by default that it is neither good, nor evil, it is just us making choices all of the time.
And what as well if the real issue was between these two opposites: That neither the individual, or the many, in complete defiance of the other, should seize exclusive control of the ring's expressive power.
By the same token then, it should follow that only by having the ring's expressive power in joint control by an ongoing negotiation between the two sides, as to how best to use the ring's power; only by that it can then be used; only then with the one thing that can temper it's, way over the top, power: Compromise. By that, and by that alone, can it be used indefinitely.
Just in case you needed a handy reminder of why the, limited number of, (mostly) guys, who are fighting over the ring right now, should not be allowed to succeed. Frodo and Sam, and all the rest are not going to come along here and save you. You have to chose to do that yourself.
No comments:
Post a Comment