Why not let a dwarf carry the One Ring to Mount Doom, since their will cannot be dominated by the rings of power?

Question

As we know, the dwarves did not succumb to the seven rings as men did to the nine - it merely made them even more greedy, stubborn and wrathful:

For the Dwarves had proved untameable by this means. The only power over them that the Rings wielded was to inflame their hearts with a greed of gold and precious things, so that if they lacked them all other good things seemed profitless, and they were filled with wrath and desire for vengeance on all who deprived them. But they were made from their beginning of a kind to resist most steadfastly any domination. Though they could be slain or broken, they could not be reduced to shadows enslaved to another will; and for the same reason their lives were not affected by any Ring, to live either longer or shorter because of it.

Lord of the Rings, Appendix A, part III "Durin's Folk".

I am wondering: Which long-term effects would the One Ring have on a dwarf? From the quoted passage above, one could easily conclude that even the "One Ring to rule them all" could not dominate the will of a dwarf. If this is true, why, at the council of Elrond, do they never discuss the possibility to let the dwarves carry the ring to Mount Doom? Hobbits may have great resistance against its powers which allows Bilbo and Frodo to carry the ring for a long time before they would eventually (but surely!) succumb to it, but a dwarf might carry it without succumbing to it ever!

In other words: Just brainwash a dwarf to believe that once he destroyed the One Ring, he will get a huge heap of precious gems and metal and BOOM! you get the ultimate Ring-destroyer!

Answer 1

I think this is the key factor:

The only power over them that the Rings wielded was to inflame their hearts with a greed of gold and precious things

(Source as above)

As we all know, there is nothing more "precious" than the One Ring. So a dwarf would be likely to keep the One Ring for himself, and attempt to use its power to gain more gold and wealth.

Remember that in the end

even Frodo couldn't bring himself to throw the One Ring away

and hobbits are far less interested in material possessions than dwarves are.

Answer 2

The Ring would have been precious to anyone, dwarf or not. We can imagine, though, that a dwarf might have fared at least as well as Frodo. The Council of Elrond, however, was not concerned with choosing the most logical person to carry the Ring. The Council considered the Ring a terrible burden (and the mission suicidal), so they would not have picked anyone to do it: they needed a volunteer. Frodo volunteered himself.

No one answered. The noon-bell rang. Still no one spoke. Frodo glanced at all the faces, but they were not turned to him. All the Council sat with downcast eyes, as if in deep thought. A great dread fell on him, as if he was awaiting the pronouncement of some doom that he had long foreseen and vainly hoped might after all never be spoken. An overwhelming longing to rest and remain at peace by Bilbo's side in Rivendell filled all his heart. At last with an effort he spoke, and wondered to hear his own words, as if some other will was using his small voice. 'I will take the Ring,' he said, 'though I do not know the way.'

Additionally, Gandalf believed that Frodo was meant, or ordained, to have the Ring, that there was some divine agency behind Frodo having the Ring, and as such it would be folly to imagine they could choose a better bearer.

Bilbo was meant to find the Ring, and not by its maker, and you therefore were meant to bear it.

Answer 3

While Royal Canadian Bandit is on to something in his highly approved answer above...

The quote with the question is from a discussion of the 7 Rings of Power given to the Dwarven Lords - NOT a description of what the One Ring would do to them.

There is no reason to believe that the One Ring would be any less effective at corrupting a Dwarf than it was Hobbits.

In fact there is good reason to believe the One Ring can corrupt anyone - Dwarves included. The Council of Elrond shows this quite well. Peter J, in his film, highlights the contention engendered by the One Ring in all those present.

No one was immune except Tom Bombadil, and for that very reason Tom was not a good candidate to bear the One Ring; he was immune because he cared not for power in any guise.

Also, I'll point out that the One Ring corrupted everyone differently - c.f. Sam's vision of Gardening Greatness or Galadriel's vision of being Queen of the World ("beautiful and terrible as the dawn... all shall love me and despair..."), etc.

Answer 4

Dwarves are vulnerable, but in a different way

I feel surprised by your interpretation of those passages as dwarves having some sort of immunity from the corruption of the rings. They quite explicitly state that dwarves were corrupted by wearing the rings and list the effects of this corruption. The only immunity claimed is the resistance from being personally enslaved by Sauron in the same manner as human ringwraiths.

What would a mighty dwarf do with the ring?

"inflame their hearts with a greed of gold and precious things" would imply being overly protective of the most precioussss thing; destroying it or giving it away would be unimaginable.

"They were filled with wrath and desire for vengeance on all who deprived them" implies that someone who would want to take the ring from them and/or destroy it would be treated as enemies; and paranoid suspicions of such acts would be likely.

In short, the described effects of the Seven dwarven rings match the observed effects of the One ring on such characters as Boromir and Gollum. It does not sound like a description of resistance to corruption, far from it.

Answer 5

The council of the ring's plan was a large diplomatic ordeal. Trying to keep it hidden forever in Rivendell would not work in the long run. The elves and dwarfs wouldn't accept either side to take it. Humans have a bad track record of being manipulated by rings. Gandolf didn't want to take ownership for fear that he'd turn evil and replace Sauron. So Frodo, who had more right of 'ownership' on the ring than any, took the task of ringbearer.

There wasn't much discussion of who was least susceptible to the ring's power. As it was a given, that anyone would be in danger of being manipulated, and the ring would do whatever it could to return to its owner.

Answer 6

A dwarf would have been the better choice on the surface, but it would not have been good literature. Tolkien's view of his hobbits was that they were Englishmen. They are reluctant heroes without ego, everyday folk who will rise to any occasion when forced into extraordinary circumstances. See Frodo, the least likely of all heroes. Tolkien felt that even the smallest of us can effect the fate of all.

Aside from that, dwarven pride would have overmastered any dwarven ringbearer.

Answer 7

1. Dwarves love gold so they would NOT want to destroy anything gold - let alone the ring.
2. Dwarves in their greed would not care that the ring(s) are a threat to others so long as they - the Dwarves - are not affected by them!
3. The Ring made the hobbits live longer bringing a measure of security to the ring, as opposed to Dwarves, who do not fade, and so would not live longer or shorter because of the Ring. When a dwarf's life was ending due to age, they would have to pass the Ring over to another dwarf. Each dwarf would have a chance of having some event occur so the Ring would be lost, or the dwarf is greedier than the predecessor and wants even more and MORE gold. The Ring does not affect Dwarves as much as Men but it will STILL affect those around them even though they themselves are not the Ring-bearers. So the Dwarves, like Sauron, will say, "OK, it is not affecting me but I can use it to AFFECT/RULE others! Since I love GOLD and I am super GREEDY, I will make everyone my slaves and tell them to dig more GOLD for me!"

I could go on and on as to why Dwarves would not be such a good candidate. I hope that helps you sir!