# Wagner's Ring--Who is the Worst Character



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

I tried to pick the worst characters from the cast of the Ring, but threw in a few not so worst that maybe some will see as the worst. So, who do you think is the nastiest, most evil, treacherous, bad guy of them all?


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Well I think somebody would be picking Alberich as the worst bad guy since he is the one who started it all as far as the curse of the ring goes.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Florestan said:


> Well I think somebody would be picking Alberich as the worst bad guy since he is the one who started it all as far as the curse of the ring goes.


Alberich may be the principal villain, but I can't help liking him somehow. Wagner has a way of making us empathize with his baddies, with their feelings of having been wronged, and with their sometimes justified contempt for the so-called good guys.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

The Woodbird in Siegfried. If it hadn't been for that garrulous, meddlesome bird then it would all have been over by act 3 of Siegried. As it is we ended up with one more act and still had all of Gotterdammerung to sit through.


----------



## Sonata (Aug 7, 2010)

I went and picked Wotan. What kind of creep tries to SELL his sister in law to a couple of giants? 
He doesn't respect his wife (not that she's such a prize spouse either, but..)
He tries to act all godly, but he's no better than the mortals. Which would be ok if he OWNED it but he doesn't. He tries to sneak himself out of trouble, or relies on his brother to get him out of a scrape.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Sonata said:


> I went and picked Wotan. What kind of creep tries to SELL his sister in law to a couple of giants?
> He doesn't respect his wife (not that she's such a prize spouse either, but..)
> He tries to act all godly, but he's no better than the mortals. Which would be ok if he OWNED it but he doesn't. He tries to sneak himself out of trouble, or relies on his brother to get him out of a scrape.


A controlling son of a gun too. Kind of a hint of Charles Manson in him perhaps. A true demon. Present a lovable image but is actually a dirty, rotten, conniving, self-centered deceiver.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

It's a tough field. Alberich seems to be determined to show the world that he is not just the nasty little gnome he appears to be, while Hagan seems to relish manipulating and destroying everyone around him even if it means the end of everything. (I feel a little sorry for Gutrune.)


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

JAS said:


> It's a tough field. Alberich seems to be determined to show the world that he is not just the nasty little gnome he appears to be, while Hagan seems to relish manipulating and destroying everyone around him even if it means the end of everything. (*I feel a little sorry for Gutrune.*)


Right. Gutrune seems like a weak willed pawn. Also, I wonder if Wagner meant for Gutrune to be rather unattractive, the more the need for a potion to make a man go for her.


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

The entire Ring reminds me of the famous saying from "Pogo " - we have met the enemy - and he is us ! ".


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

superhorn said:


> The entire Ring reminds me of the famous saying from "Pogo " - we have met the enemy - and he is us ! ".


If I hadn't recently renewed my signature I would quote this as my new signature, but maybe I will soon anyway.


----------



## Morton (Nov 13, 2016)

Fafner for me, he kills his brother in a fight over Alberich’s gold, & when he has gained possession of the treasure merely hides it in a cave & turns himself into a dragon to guard it.
I am struggling to see any redeeming traits to his character.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

As they are mostly unpleasant characters it's difficult to say. Like choosing between Hitler and Stalin


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Morton said:


> Fafner for me, he kills his brother in a fight over Alberich's gold, & when he has gained possession of the treasure merely hides it in a cave & turns himself into a dragon to guard it.
> I am struggling to see any redeeming traits to his character.


Well, he was a master builder (Valhalla)


----------



## gardibolt (May 22, 2015)

Kind of had to go with Hagen, since he has the fewest redeeming qualities. Alberich has been treated very badly on all sides especially by those damp ****s in the river, Wotan is trying incompetently to remedy his errors of judgment, Gutrune and Gunther are pretty much pawns, Fafner has been cheated first by Wotan and then by his own brother, Hunding would be justified in his homicide in a lot of places, and Mime is such a twerp who has been manipulated that even his murderous qualities are hard to take seriously (not to mention he took in Sieglinde and Siegfried, so not all bad there either). The best you can say for Hagen is that he's a respected leader of men who is trying to please his father (who may or may not be imaginary when he talks to Hagen).


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

I was thinking last night that each opera has it's own bad guy:

Alberich in Rheingold for enslaving a whole race.
Hunding in Walkure for taking a woman in marriage against her will.
Mime in Siegfried for raising a baby purely for his own benefit and then plotting to murder him.
Hagen in Gotterdammerung for poisoning a marriage with his magic potion in order to get the ring.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

I am waiting for someone (hpowders perhaps) to say that Goodall is the bad guy for producing such a slow tempo Ring. :lol:

But I like Goodall's ring, so there!


----------



## gardibolt (May 22, 2015)

I finally got the last two parts of Goodall last night in the mails, so I'll have to see what the hubbub is about.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

gardibolt said:


> I finally got the last two parts of Goodall last night in the mails, so I'll have to see what the hubbub is about.


You are in for a really great treat. And, for all who love the ring and can't get enough of it in the traditional 15 hours, turn to Goodall's Ring for a very satisfying 17 hours!


----------



## Autumn Leaves (Jan 3, 2014)

For me, Wotan and Siegfried are tied for the first place on the worst guy list. As Siegfried isn't on the poll and anyway Wotan was the first one chronologically, I voted for Wotan.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

Florestan said:


> You are in for a really great treat. And, for all who love the ring and can't get enough of it in the traditional 15 hours, turn to Goodall's Ring for a very satisfying 17 hours!


(I should perhaps note that my "like" is not necessarily a recommendation of Goodall's Ring, which I do not know at all.)


----------



## Sonata (Aug 7, 2010)

gardibolt said:


> Kind of had to go with Hagen, since he has the fewest redeeming qualities. Alberich has been treated very badly on all sides especially by those damp ****s in the river, Wotan is trying incompetently to remedy his errors of judgment, Gutrune and Gunther are pretty much pawns, Fafner has been cheated first by Wotan and then by his own brother, Hunding would be justified in his homicide in a lot of places, and Mime is such a twerp who has been manipulated that even his murderous qualities are hard to take seriously (not to mention he took in Sieglinde and Siegfried, so not all bad there either). The best you can say for Hagen is that he's a respected leader of men who is trying to please his father (who may or may not be imaginary when he talks to Hagen).


As flawed as they are I don't think **** is really a fair term for the Rhinemaidens. Quite the opposite, they are teases.


----------



## Sonata (Aug 7, 2010)

Florestan said:


> I am waiting for someone (hpowders perhaps) to say that Goodall is the bad guy for producing such a slow tempo Ring. :lol:
> 
> But I like Goodall's ring, so there!


I liked his Rhinegold very much, Walkure was pretty good too. Siegfried I didn't enjoy as much. I still need to listen to Gotterdammerung


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

gardibolt said:


> Kind of had to go with Hagen, since he has the fewest redeeming qualities. Alberich has been treated very badly on all sides especially by those *damp ****s in the river*, Wotan is trying incompetently to remedy his errors of judgment, Gutrune and Gunther are pretty much pawns, Fafner has been cheated first by Wotan and then by his own brother, Hunding would be justified in his homicide in a lot of places, and Mime is such a twerp who has been manipulated that even his murderous qualities are hard to take seriously (*not to mention he took in Sieglinde and Siegfried,* so not all bad there either). The best you can say for Hagen is that he's a respected leader of men who is trying to please his father (who may or may not be imaginary when he talks to Hagen).


I don't see any indication in Wagner's libretto that the Rheinmaidens were ****s. Teases maybe, but not ****s. They act like teenage girls who first have become interested in boys but still keep them at a distance.

Mime took in Sieglinde, possibly thinking he could have his way with her, and probably soon found out about the prophecied hero who would wield the famous sword. So Mime, dissapointed at losing a prospective "date" (I speak generously here), quickly latches on to the opportunity to guide the hero to be for his own selfish end.


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

Fricka - which I like to call the Control-Freacka. She is a deity, and all she cares about is her own darned honor. And she is willing to kill a few people for it. 

As for Hagen, who seems to be winning so far: he is Alberich's child and Alberich's instrument. He has probably been infused with hate since his very childhood and knows no other way of living. He is merely human. But a deity should know better.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

SiegendesLicht said:


> Fricka - which I like to call the Control-Freacka. She is a deity, and all she cares about is her own darned honor. And she is willing to kill a few people for it.
> 
> As for Hagen, who seems to be winning so far: he is Alberich's child and Alberich's instrument. *He has probably been infused with hate since his very childhood and knows no other way of living.* He is merely human. But a deity should know better.


The most remarkable lines given to Hagen occur when Alberich appears to him (in a dream?) and encourages him to pursue their goal boldly. Hagen says,

_Though my mother gave me valour
I have no mind to thank her
for falling victim to your guile:
prematurely old, pale and wan,
I hate the happy
and am never glad!_

If I'm not mistaken, all of Wagner's villains have moments like this, moments when they appear as wronged, as victims of life, seeking justice as they understand it, and almost sympathetic. Wagner didn't see either his heroes or his villains in one dimension. To me it's a reflection of his own complex psychology, and I seem to recall that late in life he remarked, "I love them, these creatures of darkness" - or something to that effect.


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

^ I guess it comes down to the characters "personal baggage" vs. their own will to overcome that baggage and take responsiblity for their own life. Those that do it (the Wälsung twins, Siegfried, Brünnhilde) become heroes, those that do not, eventually fall.


----------



## gardibolt (May 22, 2015)

Sonata said:


> As flawed as they are I don't think **** is really a fair term for the Rhinemaidens. Quite the opposite, they are teases.


Apparently it's not quite clear when I am joking.

Yes, they're teases. And as guardians of the Rheingold, they demonstrate that they're utterly incompetent by broadcasting its magical powers and ability to grant extreme wealth and then telling the first comer exactly what you need to do to steal it.

So does "moist saucy morons" work better?


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

Florestan said:


> Mime took in Sieglinde, possibly thinking he could have his way with her, and probably soon found out about the prophecied hero who would wield the famous sword. So Mime, dissapointed at losing a prospective "date" (I speak generously here), quickly latches on to the opportunity to guide the hero to be for his own selfish end.


I have always imagined it somewhat differently: Mime somehow got to know about the prophecy of the "world's noblest hero" being born from Sieglinde, so he sought her out just as she was about to give birth, stole the child and the sword, and left her to die in the woods.


----------



## gardibolt (May 22, 2015)

How would Mime have found out about that prophecy, though?


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

All jokes aside (don't worry, we'll get back to them), we really aren't meant to view the "Daughters of the Rhine" as characters, or as one character with three heads (and tails). Like all mythical sirens or mermaids, they represent Nature in her feminine aspect - innocent, beautiful, seductive, capricious, and potentially dangerous. We should be grateful that they made sport of Alberich's childish advances and that he reacted with rebellious anger, else the journey toward consciousness which the _Ring_ traverses would never have gotten off the ground - or out of the water. If the river is the womb of life, the dwarf is the male child who needs to emerge from it and establish his independence, which entails renouncing the illusion of irresponsible intimacy with the female he most desires but can't possess: the Mother.

Wagner extends the Primal Woman idea in the figure of Erda. If the Rhinemaidens embody Nature's innocence, capriciousness and seductiveness, Erda embodies Nature's wisdom: deep, inscrutable, and containing in her mind eternal consciousness of the beginning and ending of things. It's significant of the difference between Alberich and Wotan that Alberich wants from Mother Nature merely an immature sexual pleasure which is forbidden him, while Wotan can successfully mate with the Mother in pursuit of wisdom - the fruit of which is Brunnhilde, who enacts in wisdom what Wotan himself, divided in spirit between law and love, cannot.


----------



## WaterRat (May 19, 2015)

SiegendesLicht said:


> Fricka - which I like to call the Control-Freacka. She is a deity, and all she cares about is her own darned honor. And she is willing to kill a few people for it.


When I saw The Ring I remember taking a dislike to Fricka, moreso than any other character. My vote is for Fricka (other)

Of the names in the poll I'd vote Hagan.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

The ash tree. Too wooden.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

SiegendesLicht said:


> Fricka - which I like to call the Control-Freacka. She is a deity, and all she cares about is her own darned honor. And she is willing to kill a few people for it.


It does seem that way after contemplating that, while she was promoting good in not breaking up a marriage, she failed to condemn that same marriage as a forced marriage, which in essence is a form of slavery.


----------



## 1846 (Sep 1, 2021)

I was thinking Fricka, too.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

1846 said:


> I was thinking Fricka, too.


In hindsight, I should have included her as a poll option.


----------



## McCall3 (Nov 18, 2020)

I’d say Hagen is the worst character. He betrays and murders both his (half) brother and his “friend”, betrays his (half) sister and Brunnhilde, lies to and uses the Gibichung people, and causes all the destruction at the end. The only character he doesn’t betray is Alberich, but who knows what he would have done if he got the ring. Also Hagen still trying to get the ring even after Brunnhilde’s immolation is just shameless.


----------



## BachIsBest (Feb 17, 2018)

SixFootScowl said:


> It does seem that way after contemplating that, while she was promoting good in not breaking up a marriage, she failed to condemn that same marriage as a forced marriage, which in essence is a form of slavery.


I think you need a little historical context here, as I'm not sure 19th century audiences would have quite viewed it this way, and I'm almost positive pre-Christian Norsemen would have not viewed it this way.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

Fricka is worse than Bertie Woosters' aunt Agatha but enforcing the marriage vs. the (accidentally incestuous but this does not seem to matter) love of Siegmund and Sieglinde is just one reiteration of the "necessary but fateful contracts" theme that goes through the whole epic. After some primordial fall? the world has to be bound up in contracts symbolized and guarded by Wotan's Spear not to fall into chaos. The problem is of course that Wotan himself tries to get around such contracts all the time but it never really works (as it should not because it is Wotan working against himself as Lord of contracts). 

The most poignant failure is his son Siegmund who gets the sword and the girl but Wotan has to punish both the break of marriage and the disobedience (not really, as she points out she tried to do what Wotan wanted but could not do) of Brünnhilde. Even the free hero Siegfried who shattered the contract-guarding Spear gets himself into a similar mess (with his ties to both Brünnhilde and Gutrune, admittedly he was the victim of the Gibichungs and Hagen) and cannot survive but the ending then supposedly restores something of the primordial harmony by returning the gold/ring to the Rhine and freeing the world from its enslavement to contracts. 

Why with the end of Gods it's not going to be again a chaos of giants and dwarfs (and clueless rhinemaidens) but a free realm of free men and women, I am not sure. Wagner did have anarcho-communist leanings at an earlier stage as there are textual sketches for Brünnhilde's final words that include a renunciation of gold, earthly possessions etc. but this changed to a more general renunciation of about everything (influenced by Schopenhauerian pseudo-buddhism).


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

I would have gone for Hagen but I get the impression that Alberich exploits Hagen's filial duty instinct to the full, thus dissipating what decent qualities he may have had. But I'm inclined to agree with those who suggest Wotan - chief of the gods he may be but it was his irresponsibility, arrogance and heavy-handed meddling which brought about most of the trouble. He feels remorse only when it's too late, realising that he has been ensnared by the rules of his own games.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

It's funny - the Ring reminds me a bit of "The Godfather".....it's a great story in which basically all of the characters are jackasses!! nasty, obnoxious, stupid, whatever...great tale of awful characters!!

In the Ring, Brunnhilde seems to be about the only one who has a clue!! Wotan does, too, but he's such a meddler, wheeler-dealer that he authors his own downfall....Sieglinde is ok, tho the stereotypical frail, "damsel in distress" type...
Alberich and Hagen are horrible, Fricka a strait-laced bitch, Mime a whiny, sniveling conniver, Siegmund an inveterate whiner, "O woe is me" type, Hunding a brutish bully, Fafner a fratricidal clod....and the easily duped Siegfried is too stupid to be afraid of anything...
So, that's my one paragraph psychoanalysis of Ring characters!! lol!! :lol::lol:

PS - I voted for Alberich - he sets the whole thing in motion....


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Kreisler jr said:


> Why with the end of Gods it's not going to be again a chaos of giants and dwarfs (and clueless rhinemaidens) but a free realm of free men and women, I am not sure.


Giants, dwarves and Rhinemaidens (and Loge, who doesn't go up in flames but IS the flame) don't run things. The gods did (or wanted to). If the _Ring_ is a symbolic representation of the evolution of consciousness - moral consciousness in particular - those primitive beings represent elements of the psyche that remain in existence and influence humankind but can - hopefully, and in theory - be kept in their place within the emerging order. Even the gods lost their power to determine the course of the world long before their actual demise; this is represented by Wotan's assumption of the role of observing wanderer, by the gods' silent presence as shrines in the Gibichung's domain, by the breaking of the Norns' rope, and by Waltraute's failure to persuade Brunnhilde to give up the ring.

There might still be chaos in the world after the _Gotterdammerung_, but it will be the failure of men and women to live up to their responsibilities as self-determined, rational beings - _our_ failure, in short. Contrary to the misnomer "redemption by love" applied to the final music we hear, the world is not fully redeemed. Wagner called that theme the "glorification of Brunnhilde," who represents the new morality, transcending divine commands and cold contracts, on which humanity will have to base a new kind of order.


----------



## HenryPenfold (Apr 29, 2018)

Fafner, coz he killed his brother. No need for that sort of behaviour. I blame Wagner - there's enough in the story already about the deleterious impact of avarice.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

None of it would have happened if it weren't for the Rheintöchter - Woglinde, Wellgunde and Floßhilde - who were apparently too bored to think about what they were doing (or not doing) and keep their mouths shut.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

Becca said:


> None of it would have happened if it weren't for the Rheintöchter - Woglinde, Wellgunde and Floßhilde - who were apparently too bored to think about what they were doing (or not doing) and keep their mouths shut.


If I was destined to spend virtually all of my time swimming in a cold river I think I would occasionally take my eye off the ball as well. :lol:


----------



## Dick Johnson (Apr 14, 2020)

I have always viewed the Ring as a tapestry of action that unfolds with characters that are subject to their assigned stations and personal needs... with a couple of exceptions for the ultimate hero (Brunhilde) and villain (Loge).
Perhaps this will be a controversial interpretation, but Loge seems to be the true villain of the Ring for me. Loki was the "mischief-maker" in Norse mythology who was the driving force behind Ragnarok. In the text of the Ring, Loge's several mischievous suggestions in Rheingold set the plan in motion to literally burn the place down in Gotterdammerung - an elaborate and deliberate plan on his part. The text hints that Loge had enmity toward Wotan and the gods because of actions preceding the start of Rheingold - so he had motive and means for his destruction. He even teases the audience at the end of Rheingold: 'Wer wiss, was ich tu'? 
If one reads the text in this way, Brunhilde's free choice to return the Ring in the end balances the Loge's fire of Gotterdamerung with the water of the overflowing Rhine.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

I don't think there really is a villain. Closest is Alberich but my interpretation is that there would be no culture or civilization, just nature without him stealing the gold, it is a necessary evil. And he does make a sacrifice, renouncing love. 
And one pessimist point seems to be that the whole edifice of culture and technology is built on that renunciation and the primeval robbery. 
Loge is not quite the mischief maker of the older myths, his status seems more in between the elementary spirits like the Rheintöchter and Erda and the Walhalla gods; maybe that's why he does not like them, but he could also just be annoyed by Wotan not taking him as an equal but relying on him to get him out of the fix anyway. It's a bit like a tycoon treating his lawyers he utterly depends on, badly because he pays them. 
Loge sees through their machinations and knows the gods are doomed (I'd want "Ihrem Ende eilen sie zu, die so stark im Bestehen sich wähnen" (they go to their ending while deeming themselves powerful) recited loudly at any election or inauguration!), because their ruling is based on injustice (tricking the giants and Alberich and also inheriting the latters curse) and internal contradictions.


----------



## MaxKellerman (Jun 4, 2017)

Kreisler jr said:


> I don't think there really is a villain.


It's hard for me not to see Hagen as truly villainous -- a manipulator bent on the destruction of others.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Kreisler jr said:


> I don't think there really is a villain. Closest is Alberich but my interpretation is that there would be no culture or civilization, just nature without him stealing the gold, it is a necessary evil. And he does make a sacrifice, renouncing love.


I don't see that as a sacrifice for him. He was interested in lust, not love.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Dick Johnson said:


> I have always viewed the Ring as a tapestry of action that unfolds with characters that are subject to their assigned stations and personal needs... with a couple of exceptions for the ultimate hero (Brunhilde) and villain (Loge).
> Perhaps this will be a controversial interpretation, but Loge seems to be the true villain of the Ring for me. Loki was the "mischief-maker" in Norse mythology who was the driving force behind Ragnarok. In the text of the Ring, Loge's several mischievous suggestions in Rheingold set the plan in motion to literally burn the place down in Gotterdammerung - an elaborate and deliberate plan on his part. The text hints that Loge had enmity toward Wotan and the gods because of actions preceding the start of Rheingold - so he had motive and means for his destruction. He even teases the audience at the end of Rheingold: 'Wer wiss, was ich tu'?
> If one reads the text in this way, Brunhilde's free choice to return the Ring in the end balances the Loge's fire of Gotterdamerung with the water of the overflowing Rhine.


Loge has a role in setting the plot in motion, but I wouldn't call him the villain of the story. I don't think he has true agency in bringing about the end of the gods, or that he has deliberate plans or a desire to do so. It's the nature of fire to burn things, but as an elemental being Loge is not malevolent but amoral and playful, as the Rhinemaidens are. The elementals stand outside the moral order and the evolution of moral consciousness at the heart of the _Ring_'s story; "black Alberich" and his mirror-image "light Alberich" - Wotan - are the moral agents who set things in motion, and if there is villainy in the story it resides primarily in them. (I say "if" because villainy in Wagner is never pure; there is no equivalent in the _Ring_ to the seemingly causeless malevolence, the pure psychopathology, of Iago. Even Hagen can be seen as an extension of Alberich, and Wagner feels the need to soften even his villainy with the remark to Alberich, "old in youth, weak and wan, hating the happy, I am never glad.")

In calling upon Loge for advice Wotan is playing with fire, which is both our servant and our nemesis. The gods, like us, are mortal; our ability to use the elements for our purposes is limited and temporary, and the elements will win in the end. If we use them unwisely we will hasten their triumph over us. Anyone who lives on the west coast of the United States in this time of climate change is now feeling Loge's power and contemplating the unwise uses of nature that have fed the flames.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Dick Johnson said:


> I have always viewed the Ring as a tapestry of action that unfolds with characters that are subject to their assigned stations and personal needs... with a couple of exceptions for the ultimate hero (Brunhilde) and villain (Loge).
> Perhaps this will be a controversial interpretation, but Loge seems to be the true villain of the Ring for me. Loki was the "mischief-maker" in Norse mythology who was the driving force behind Ragnarok. In the text of the Ring, Loge's several mischievous suggestions in Rheingold set the plan in motion to literally burn the place down in Gotterdammerung - an elaborate and deliberate plan on his part. The text hints that Loge had enmity toward Wotan and the gods because of actions preceding the start of Rheingold - so he had motive and means for his destruction. He even teases the audience at the end of Rheingold: 'Wer wiss, was ich tu'?
> If one reads the text in this way, Brunhilde's free choice to return the Ring in the end balances the Loge's fire of Gotterdamerung with the water of the overflowing Rhine.


When the giants demanded the ring to fill the last little gap in the pile of gold, Loge intervened saying that the ring belongs to the Rhinemaidens and that Wotan will give it back to them. When Wotan declares that he will not give the ring back to the Rheinmaidens, Loge says that it will then go badly with him for he had promised to get the ring back to them. I do think that Loge is an honorable fellow.


----------



## HenryPenfold (Apr 29, 2018)

SixFootScowl said:


> When the giants demanded the ring to fill the last little gap in the pile of gold, Loge intervened saying that the ring belongs to the Rhinemaidens and that Wotan will give it back to them. When Wotan declares that he will not give the ring back to the Rheinmaidens, Loge says that it will then go badly with him for he had promised to get the ring back to them. I do think that Loge is an honorable fellow.


But at the end of RG, Loge is a bit two-faced .......


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

HenryPenfold said:


> But at the end of RG, Loge is a bit two-faced .......


Well, he sees they are headed to destruction and wants no part of it. Then he gets angry and considers burning them who once tamed him. So I guess that would be a payback. After all, he did just get stiffed out of keeping his promise to the Rheinmaidens, and he was sort of Wotan's slave (who tamed him), so I still think he is by and large a decent character. But maybe there is more. I need to go through the libretto again. Oh, and he does help Wotan protect Brunnhilde on the mountain top, or is that another instance of Wotan taming Loge?


----------



## Richannes Wrahms (Jan 6, 2014)

Speaking of Wontan, I think his spear was too long.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Richannes Wrahms said:


> Speaking of Wontan, I think his spear was too long.


Definitely too long, and rather clumsy to wield.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Richannes Wrahms said:


> Speaking of Wontan, I think his spear was too long.


I agree. Next time I order Wontan at a Chinese restaurant, I'll ask for a short spear.


----------



## Dick Johnson (Apr 14, 2020)

Wooduck and SixFootScowl - I have learned a great deal from your many erudite postings on this site - I do, however, respectfully disagree with the idea that Loge is merely a passive elemental force. In the spirit of friendly debate, let me offer the following text excerpts to try to support the view that Loge was an active and deliberate agent of destruction (John Deathridge's translation):

Rheingold Scene II: Wotan says that he signed the contract with Fasolt and Fafner on Loge's advice - and later explicitly asks for his help to "sort out the dreadful deal you closed." Wagner's stage instructions say that Loge answers this "ironically". Later in the scene, as Loge explains the power of the ring to Wotan, Wagner's stage notes say that: "For a moment, the _demonic element _in Loge erupts, but straight away reverts to his _apparent friendliness_". Wagner wants us to know that Loge is hiding his scheming from the gods.

Rheingold Scene IV: Loge says "I feel pleasantly tempted to turn myself back into a flaming blaze, to engorge with fire those who once tamed me…I'll bear it in mind…who knows what I'll do?. Stage direction is that he says this "in a lackadaisical frame of mind".

Walkure, Act II, Wotan again blames Loge for the contract: "Loge, everywhere yet nowhere, tricked me into it."

Prologue to Gotterdammerung: the Norns refer to a time prior to Rheingold "when Loge burst into bright flame…Wotan brought him under control with the magic of his spear...his tooth gnawed at the notches of the shaft, draining their power." I interpret this to mean that Loge was able to influence/damage the contract Runes on Wotan's spear.

Wotan frequently emphasizes that he is not free - he is bound by his station and its duties as well as his contracts (the Runes on his spear that Loge damaged). Loge's scheme set the plot of the Ring into motion and brought Wotan and the gods into their final, fatal conflict. This is supported by one of the primary sources for the text - the Norse myth from the Poetic Edda - in which Loki has been restrained by the gods but breaks free and contributes to the Ragnarok. Wagner, of course, always adapted and changed his source material. Nevertheless, in this case, many hints of Loge's agency in the downfall were included in the libretto - indicating to me that Wagner did not completely move away from this idea as he incorporated the old story into his new text.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Dick Johnson said:


> Wooduck and SixFootScowl - I have learned a great deal from your many erudite postings on this site - I do, however, respectfully disagree with the idea that Loge is merely a passive elemental force. In the spirit of friendly debate, let me offer the following text excerpts to try to support the view that Loge was an active and deliberate agent of destruction (John Deathridge's translation):
> 
> Rheingold Scene II: Wotan says that he signed the contract with Fasolt and Fafner on Loge's advice - and later explicitly asks for his help to "sort out the dreadful deal you closed." Wagner's stage instructions say that Loge answers this "ironically". Later in the scene, as Loge explains the power of the ring to Wotan, Wagner's stage notes say that: "For a moment, the _demonic element _in Loge erupts, but straight away reverts to his _apparent friendliness_". Wagner wants us to know that Loge is hiding his scheming from the gods.
> 
> ...


I stand corrected. Based on these facts, Loge is anything but an honorable fellow. In fact, for the Ring, he may well be the Devil himself!

EDIT: Who know if Loge were able to get the ring on the pretext of returning it to the Rheinmaidens and may well have kept it for himself and taken control.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Dick Johnson said:


> Wooduck and SixFootScowl - I have learned a great deal from your many erudite postings on this site - I do, however, respectfully disagree with the idea that Loge is merely a passive elemental force. In the spirit of friendly debate, let me offer the following text excerpts to try to support the view that Loge was an active and deliberate agent of destruction (John Deathridge's translation):
> 
> Rheingold Scene II: Wotan says that he signed the contract with Fasolt and Fafner on Loge's advice - and later explicitly asks for his help to "sort out the dreadful deal you closed." Wagner's stage instructions say that Loge answers this *"ironically".* Later in the scene, as Loge explains the power of the ring to Wotan, Wagner's stage notes say that: "For a moment, the _*demonic element *_in Loge erupts, but straight away reverts to his _*apparent friendliness*_". Wagner wants us to know that Loge is hiding his scheming from the gods.
> 
> ...


I appreciate this close look at the libretto. From a certain point of view Loge can be seen as a schemer, and this is consistent with his traditional persona of trickster. But this is a precise personification of nature and its ways. Fire is probably the most obviously dangerous and destructive of the elements - useful, but tricky, hard to control, and potentally deadly. If you're going to embody its deceptively friendly but treacherous ("demonic") nature in a character in a drama, how better to do it than the way Wagner has? Nature always wins in the end - it will destroy even the runes on Wotan's spear - but the choice, the moral choice, of what we do in this world doesn't reside in fire or any other element outside us. When the elements present us - tempt us - with possible courses of action it's up to us to act wisely and responsibly. Loge does with Wotan what nature does with us: it proposes and tempts, suggesting possibilities which may give us unrealistic ideas of what will benefit us. We can't blame nature for the outcome; nature isn't out to get us, and Wagner doesn't depict loge as malevolent but rather as ironic, detached and amused. Wotan may initially blame Loge for the mess he's got himself into - and isn't that what people typically do to rationalize their bad choices? - but ultimately he resigns himself to accepting the consequences of his own nature and actions.

I think it's important not to take Wagner's mythic symbolism too literally - not to regard all of his personifications, his embodiments of forces and ideas in dramatis personae, as separate and fully independent agents. The _Ring_ depicts an evolution of consciousness through the interactions of characters who each play a part in the whole, existing to varying degrees as aspects or functions of each other rather than as separate, independent people. Loge is what he is to Wotan because of what Wotan is, and tempts him only because Wotan's nature, torn between the rigid structure of a prescriptive moral code and the yearning for a freer concept of morality rooted in empathy (a tension played out again, with a different outcome, in _Parsifal_), invites temptation. "The devil made me do it" doesn't cut it in life's court of law.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Richannes Wrahms said:


> Speaking of Wontan, I think his spear was too long.


If Wontan destroyed things with it, it would be Wanton destruction.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

hammeredklavier said:


> If Wontan destroyed things with it, it would be Wanton destruction.


Right, we'd all really be in the *soup*!!


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

How about those Rhine maidens. Teasing and tempting poor, ugly, lonely Alberich until he steals the gold, which starts the whole thing. Pretty low down no?


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Itullian said:


> How about those Rhine maidens. Teasing and tempting poor, ugly, lonely Alberich until he steals the gold, which starts the whole thing. Pretty low down no?


Yes but I think they unwittingly do this as they seem to be a bunch of air heads.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

SixFootScowl said:


> Yes but I think they unwittingly do this as they seem to be a bunch of air heads.


Could they be seen as mean and seductively evil?


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Itullian said:


> Could they be seen as mean and seductively evil?


I suppose that could be the case. They do stupidly tease Alberich, but it may have been partly out of boredom, like a bored kid who starts twisting the tail of a cat for excitement. But I can't see them purposefully leading him to take the gold, especially since they got Loge to promise to get it back--assuming Loge was telling the truth. But maybe that was part of their tease, thinking he would never forsake love. They also tease or get cheeky with Siegfried causing him to give up any thought of giving them the ring. Yeah, maybe they just thought it was great entertainment and that in their watery world, they would be unaffected by the final destruction, and it does seem that if anyone survived, it was the Rheinmaidens.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

Alberich must have been able to score at some juncture - hence Hagen. Perhaps he was something of a sugar daddy during the time when the Rhinegold was in his possession.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Getting back to Loge, I found an interesting article that may be somewhat speculation. Some of this seems a bit far fetched, but interesting:


> It is Loge who shows Wotan how to trick Alberich into giving up the ring. It is Loge who serves as Wotan's spy on Earth and who pokes and prods the various characters and situations in the gleeful expectation of mayhem while simultaneously spreading alarm and despondency around Valhalla. Loge is the little bird who tells Siegfried about the beautiful maiden imprisoned on a rock and Loge is the one who tells Hagen and his Gibich siblings about Siegfried and who shows him the way to the Gibich Castle.


Here is the article for those interested in more of the Loge story:
https://gardenezi.com/2014/01/11/loge-the-rings-evil-genius/


----------

