The other day I was watching the movie "Lord Of the Rings - The Return of the King", for probably the nth time. As usual I couldn't help but marvel at the character of "Gollum" and the transformation of Smeagol to Gollum. The story kept lingering at the back of my mind and then suddenly I realized the reason why it kept coming back. The thing was, that I was surprised by the fact that how a virtous and consummate feeling like love can cause irrepairable damage when the boundaries are crossed!
In the case of Smeagol it was the unrestricted love for the ring that transformed him into the evil Gollum and finally took his life. It was the this love which made him take the life of his dearest friend, and it was this love that outcast him and made his life hell. Albeit he never realized this , staying, as he did, behind the blinds of the overpowering love for the ring. One might argue that the connivance of the ring, with its evil and ineluctable charms, was also responsible for the plight of Smeagol. But come to think of it, the ring could conjure its charms only because Smeagol's attraction to it, actually provided it with a proliferating medium to cast its powers and bind Smeagol. Otherwise what harm does an inanimate object do to a strong human psyche? In fact the character of Sam Gamgee depicted this very fact; he was the only character in the movie who was not once affected by the ring even thought he stayed in its vicinity as much as Frodo.
Coming back to the point of discussion, at this juncture its worth quoting the popular adage that goes as "Anything beyond is poison"; how veritable! Yes, how many times in our lives have we seen access of the purest and most serene human feelings go wild and cause irreparable damage to the people who manifest it and to others connected to these unfortunate souls by the web of human society. May be it be the love for one's child, love for one's religion, love for one's country; we have all witnessed the fallout of the inordinate. There are more crimes that are caused by passion then actually reported by the newspapers under cheeky headlines and spiced up stories. What is more dangerous is that one is so overwhelmed by this flow of excess emotion that one never realizes that he is carving the path of ignominy for himself. In fact one tends to find palatable justifications for one's actions under such and influence, however unacceptable they might seem in the light of unbiased reason.
The question that still remains is that how we, who are indulging in these emotions themselves, check our own selves from crossing the limits? How do we demarcate the boundaries when our own vision is obscured?
In the case of Smeagol it was the unrestricted love for the ring that transformed him into the evil Gollum and finally took his life. It was the this love which made him take the life of his dearest friend, and it was this love that outcast him and made his life hell. Albeit he never realized this , staying, as he did, behind the blinds of the overpowering love for the ring. One might argue that the connivance of the ring, with its evil and ineluctable charms, was also responsible for the plight of Smeagol. But come to think of it, the ring could conjure its charms only because Smeagol's attraction to it, actually provided it with a proliferating medium to cast its powers and bind Smeagol. Otherwise what harm does an inanimate object do to a strong human psyche? In fact the character of Sam Gamgee depicted this very fact; he was the only character in the movie who was not once affected by the ring even thought he stayed in its vicinity as much as Frodo.
Coming back to the point of discussion, at this juncture its worth quoting the popular adage that goes as "Anything beyond is poison"; how veritable! Yes, how many times in our lives have we seen access of the purest and most serene human feelings go wild and cause irreparable damage to the people who manifest it and to others connected to these unfortunate souls by the web of human society. May be it be the love for one's child, love for one's religion, love for one's country; we have all witnessed the fallout of the inordinate. There are more crimes that are caused by passion then actually reported by the newspapers under cheeky headlines and spiced up stories. What is more dangerous is that one is so overwhelmed by this flow of excess emotion that one never realizes that he is carving the path of ignominy for himself. In fact one tends to find palatable justifications for one's actions under such and influence, however unacceptable they might seem in the light of unbiased reason.
The question that still remains is that how we, who are indulging in these emotions themselves, check our own selves from crossing the limits? How do we demarcate the boundaries when our own vision is obscured?
