Isfin/Aredhel and Nienor

Hurin and all of his children were the most tragic. Boromir was not truly tragic he repented and gave his life so Merry and Pippin could live although his death was sad(not tragic). Gollum was not tragic but his story is sad. Feanor was sad not tragic I would not call him evil I would rather say he had excessive hubris. Maedhros was tragic. Fingolfin was sad but inspiring.

[ March 24, 2002: Message edited by: Ahanarion ]

Sorry, Mho - didn't recognize those female names! [img]smilies/rolleyes.gif[/img] Please accept humble apology!

Gollum was definitley a tragic character! Okay not according to the definition of tragic at the start of this forum, but even if he wasn't a great hero in the begining, the books don't claim that "before" he got the Ring he didn't do any bad things and it was the Ring's power over him that caused him to turn into the small, obsessed, twisted (the list goes on and on) shadow of a hobbit. All the Preicousss' fault... gollum.... [img]smilies/frown.gif[/img]

Actually, he murdered Deagol before he ever touched the Ring. As someone on BD once pointed out, this is the only recorded case of murder-by-hobbit. Seems like he was bad from the start, though I admit he is a pathetic and somewhat pitiable character during the War of the Ring.

[ March 28, 2002: Message edited by: Turambar ]

Ofcourse hurin and all his family were striken by doom, just as happened to beren and luthien.
But that's all one sort of doom.
The Sackville-Bagginses to are tragic in another way. How would you feel if you want to have something really bad and you're waiting for year after year and then you hear it doesn't come to you at all. (Bilbo taking Frodo as his heir)

greetings, lathspell

personally i feel for eowyn, after she loved someone so much and he didnt love her back. i can identify with that, though i wouldnt go to a war for it...

hmm... yes i think so

I don't regard Eowyn as tragic, for though she came through hardship she was rewarded with happiness [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]
Feanor is the most tragic character because he had the greatest gifts, but caused the downfall of the Noldor

A scholar could conceivably read "The Silmarillion" as a 'how-to' of greek-type tragedy with every archetypal tragic hero represented from Feanor, whose ego was the root source of all the tragic events that followed (and whose brilliance was the root cause of all the great deeds) to Turin whose sufferings never seemed to be his fault but were the source of his great deeds.
But what about Frodo?
Certainly he was capable of 'greatness' or he would never have reached the Cracks of Doom, despite Sam's help. The torment of the ring would have consumed a lesser mortal and yet he struggled on. But, ultimately, he failed. Literally on the brink of Doom, he declared the ring his own, and it was only Gollums lust for the ring that achieved its destruction, a fitting end for its evil. But Frodo's ultimate failure ended his life, the life he had known, as surely as a knife in the heart. More surely, for the catharsis of this climax is all the more poignant as we witness chapter after chapter of Frodo's demise into ennui--far more moving than his mere death would have been.

I don't agree with you about that. I think everybody has hopes and dreams, and sometimes they get crushed. Should we call the lifes of the "Gaurwaith" tragic, since they were outcasts and homeless. No, the were greedy, treacherous,ad thought more with their swords then with there heads. Much like Lobelia Sackville-Bagginses(without the sword). And if you are talking about Otho and Lobelia getting Bag End, they did after Frodo left, although I thing that Otho had already died.

Tragic? Maybe female dwarves? Its not really tradgic, but sad none-the-less. Female dwarves only represent about 1/3 the dwarven population. And many of the dwarves(f and m) chose not to marry or reproduce. That sure will cut down on the surplus population. I think its more "tragic", that we don't read more about it. Only "Dís", and Gimli's rare but heartfelt love for Galadriel.

[ March 29, 2002: Message edited by: zifnab ]

You forgot the most tragic feature of Dwarvish females, ziffy -- facial hair!

I must disagree on one of your points: I hardly think that they would consider the 2:1 ratio of male:female tragic.

Hmm... 2 to 1 ratio, facial hair... sounds like more than one college party I can recall.

[ March 29, 2002: Message edited by: Mister Underhill ]

Even though he hadn't touched the ring he was still in its power because of its beauty and though he hadn't touched it he would have been lusting for it then and there.
Also Deagol refused to give Smeagol the ring so he was probably in its power as well.
So there Turambar [img]smilies/mad.gif[/img] [img]smilies/mad.gif[/img] [img]smilies/mad.gif[/img] [img]smilies/mad.gif[/img] [img]smilies/mad.gif[/img]

Did we mention the ents? I didn't but they should be on my list.

[ March 31, 2002: Message edited by: Mhoram ]

but Gollum was already turning away from light when the Ring was found.

Ents. Good one Mhoram. Through all the chaos of the world, the Ents still stayed true to their reason of creation. The Shepherds of the Trees.

[ April 01, 2002: Message edited by: zifnab ]

When I first opened this thread I had intended to name Finrod as the Most Tragic Figure. He is (in my opinion) the most noble and gentle of the Noldor who took part in the Kinslaying at Alqualondë. This evil deed was his tragedy, a fatal flaw which was in part his fault, in part the fault of others, and it was the means by which Sauron was able to pierce his disguise and eventually slay him.

However, I am now not sure that Finrod fits comfortably into the definition of a tragic hero. His fatal flaw was perhaps not significant enough; it was not a character trait. Also, his redemption is too complete. He atones so completely that even nassty old Mandos lets him go. He returns again to walk with his father Finarfin in Tirion. In case you can't tell, the deeds of Finrod in the Tale of Beren and Lúthien are now my favourite part of The Silmarillion!

Red said (Dr Suess, anyone?):
I wholeheartedly agree. Going back to the well researched quotes of Mister Underhill, Aristotle advises:Túrin, villain? Yes. No pity from the platypus for him. Húrin is a different story on the other hand. His only flaw was the pride that did not allow him to embrace Thingol as a friend (the slaying of Mîm was understandable), but most of his woes came from Morgoth, which Aristotle would have considered poor tragedy:My list of the Most Tragic Figures:

1. Thingol
2. Maedhros
3. Turgon
4. Thorin Oakenshield
5. Finduilas
6. Boromir

My criteria are firstly how good the character was in the beginning, and secondly how much of an impact their tragedy had on others. Thingol started as one of the most noble and powerful Children of Ilúvatar, but brought about the ruin of his kingdom through greed and haughtiness. Boromir would not have made my list if it had not been for his portrayal in the movies (he was a character that was actually improved by them IMHO). Maglor I have not included, since he seemed to be following more than leading (he was willing to set aside the Oath in the end, if not entirely able). Also he gets extra credit for looking after Elrond and Elros.

1. Frodo & Gollum
2. Beleg & Gwindor

I did a quick & dirty reconnaisance of my previous (and very dusty) classical literature training--which means I did a quick search on the internet & in my big, fat, 30 lb. Webster's 3rd New (actually, not so new ;) ) International Dictionary, which around here is known as the Final Word. According to the definitions given in each of those (very simply--a noble being brought low by situations/fate beyond his/her control), those people fit.

Frodo & Gollum need no discussion.

I always agonize a bit when Beleg & Gwindor appear--they are so noble, heroic, brave, and kind--yet they attach themselves to Turin and are brought to highly ignoble ends. Of the latter two, I'd say Gwindor is the more tragic because, knowing how he would be perceived, he still stood true to what he knew was right.

At any rate, all these characters remained steadfast in their chosen courses to the bitter end, and suffered bitterly for it. True, Frodo was healed in Aman, but before that he suffered greatly.

Can you provide a quote that states that Finrod took part in the kinslaying at Alqualondë. I had always thought that he didn't take part in that.

According to Aristotle, if I recalled correctly Oedipus Rex is the perfect tragedy. Túrin is of course in many ways very similar to Oedipus. Túrin along with his family has to be one of the greatest tragedies in the legendarium.
Personally, I think that Maeðros is one of the most tragic figures. He took the Oath, and participated in the Kinslaying of Alqualondë, then he repented for the desertion of Fingolfin and waived his right to be the High King of the Ñoldor. He positioned himself in a place where the attack of Morgoth would fall heavily. He was of course hanged for ca. 292 years in Thangorodrim.
One could almost see how the Oath changed him, but the thing that I like about him is that when he took the leadership of the House of Fëanor, before the 2nd and 3rd Kinslaying, he gave the other side the opportunity to surrender the Silmaril. At the end, when he finally regained a Silmaril, IMO, he finally repented of his deeds and threw himself into the fire. :(

I agree with the nominations on behalf of Maédhros and Túrin, but for me the most tragic figure is Fëanor, and the Valar agree with me on this ;)

I think Fëanor fits the mold of a tragic figure by the extent of his fall from greatness, and in his own personality defects playing a critical role in his fall. Certainly his personality and rather complicated family situation made him much more susceptible to Melkor's machinations than any others of the Noldor. For me he seems rather reminiscent of Hamlet (well, except for the indecisiveness) just as Túrin does of Oedipus.

You make a very good case, Angry Hill Troll. Most of us would shy away from placing Fëanor as a tragic figure. He was largely to blame for the suffering of many, many Eldar, and his good qualities are often overlooked. Mainly because there seem to have been so few of them! :(

Incidentally, if anyone is still interested, here is a link to the thread about the possible guilt of Finrod being associated with the Kinslaying:

Finrod and the Kinslaying

I'm not clear on how these two could be considered as tragic figures. Dilinziliel, when was Gollum ever noble? And how was Frodo brought low? He may have ended up in a worse position than he started in, but morally he was in fact superior by the end of the story. The Aristotleian definition provided by Mister Underhill would not consider Frodo as a tragic figure, I believe.

Ok, I know that this may sound very strange, but what about Melkor, Morgoth?
We don't know much about the time before Ainurs song, but we do know that Melkor was the greatest of Ainur. He was one of Iluvatars creations and he wasn't evil to start with, he just wanted to create something that wasn't exactly as Iluvatar had planned. He didn't do it to destroy something, he just felt that there was something missing.

From being one of the greatest Ainur to become Morgoth, that must be the biggest downfall ever, if thats the definition we're going to use of "tragic".

Apart from Melkor then... After reading only the headline, I thought of Turin. After reading the threads (well, not all of them) a want to name Feänor too, I agree with Angry Hill Troll

Do you think Melkor is terribly wrong???

Gothmog, the thought of Melkor had crossed my mind as well. Thanks for suggesting it!

While reading the Ainulindale I felt quite a bit of sympathy for Melkor. All he was doing was being so in awe of the whole creation concept that he wanted to take part in it himself. Nor can we really blame him for being the way he was, since after all that was how Ilúvatar made him...

I think what is missing in the case of Melkor is that most tragic heroes either die fairly quickly after their "fall", or at least come to a transcendental moment of clarity, realizing their own faults and taking responsibility for the consequences of their misguided actions. Melkor never does acknowledge his wrongdoings, except as a ruse to corrupt Valinor, and by the time he finally dies, we the readers have long since run out of sympathy for him. Simply stated, he wore out his welcome as a tragic hero.

Also, one of Aristotle's points is that a good tragedy produces fear in the part of the audience, because what happened to the tragic hero (being undone by a combination of circumstances and one's own faults) could conceivably happen to them as well--after all, who is without faults? But Melkor's fall is unique: no other being was in a position to be the ultimate source of all that is evil in the world. To some extent the same applies to Fëanor as well--no other child of Ilúvatar could fall so far simply because no other was as great to begin with. But Fëanor was the first, and most poignant example, of the power of Melkor's evil to corrupt the Children of Ilúvatar in general . For this reason his fall strikes fear in the Valar (since they now realize just how much damage Melkor is capable of doing) and in the other Eldar.

Thoughts, anyone?

2 words
 

Beren
luthien

and someone, i forgot who, had a great point. That their end - though tragic was still a happy death for both of them. But it was still tragic for others, to see the heroes, who fought for love, who took a silmaril from Morgoth himself - dead.

If a tragic hero is defined as a noble person with a fatal flaw that brings them to a low, then I would argue that Faramir is too one of the books tragic heroes. His fatal flaw being his will to prove his value to his father, even when it means almost killing himself. At no time during the book does it seem that he has pleased Denethor.

I guess in a way, the entire family is tragic.

Your right Hill Troll, you don't feel any compassion with Melkor, he's fallen too far and for too long time. Therefore I nominate Feanor and Turin for the Most Tragic Figure. Why? Well, read the the other posts...

Isildur
 

Somehow, Isildur's fate made very sad impression on me. He was great man, who did lots of heroic things (such as saving the seeds of White tree from Sauron in Numenor, what costed him many serious wounds), founded Gondor along with his brother, fought many battles, made Gondor and Arnor powerfull kingdoms, been wise king: but, he is rememberd mostly by his unfortunate desision to keep the ring, what brought him and to his sons, death at Gladen fields. So, everything good that he did became annuled by this.
So, I vote for Isildur.

Isildur
 

Fair points, Vanya, particularly as Isildur was on his way to Rivendell to seek counsel on what should be done with the Ring, having realised his error in not destroying it, when he was waylaid and killed.

But it has been pointed out that, to be a truly tragic figure, an individual's own personality defects should play a critical role in his downfall. I wonder how much of Isildur's refusal to destroy the Ring was his own pride, and how much was the influence of the Ring itself. Tolkien makes the point in his Letters that no one could willingly have destroyed the Ring. Can Isildur really be described as tragic, when the failing which led to his downfall was something which no one could be expected to resist?

Isildur
 

Well, in my oppinion, tragic means just the oposite, when someone is doomed without any guilt of it's own. I think that great deal of missfortune that happened to Turin, he brought to himself, because his temper. So this is just the reason Isildur is tragic for me - because he died because he could't rule the Ring. It wasn't his fault, since the real question is whether he was proud or he wasn't aware of Ring's nature?

doug*platypus--ahem . . . [shakes her head slowly, still trying to recall the iron-clad, sterling logic that had added up to a sum that turned out to be far less than its parts] um, gosh . . . having gone back and read my own criteria, I guess there's not much to defend Gollum. He could never have been considered as possessing a noble character. Tolkien says as much in Letters of . . . ; Gollum merely had the potential to become noble in that one brief moment of pity & love for Frodo. Gollum could have opted for forgiveness and transcended the fate of his path to that point; however, he chose that path and its fate. I think this may have been what was on my mind--he could have been a contender and all he "got" was a lousy one-way ticket to palookaville. Sad, yes; tragic, no. Now, if he had opted for forgiveness in that moment w/Frodo and gone on to carry the Ring to Doom and then wrestled w/himself on the edge and fallen to a firey, molten death below . . .

Frodo, though, we could argue, albeit the points are fine and feathery. Frodo was definitely a noble character pitted against a situation in which he was doomed to fail and fall low. The falling low part is the wishbone of contention. This is what is most fascinating to me this week about Frodo--if he had not been gifted with a healing in Aman, he would, indeed, be a candidate for tragic hero. He was fading out to the world and the world was fading out to him--all was joyless and gray. But, he did get the healing in Aman. The question as I consider it now is: can Frodo qualify as a tragic hero because of his suffering and certain end in this world (ME), or must he be disqualified for being healed out of this world?

Turin and Hurin had it pretty bad and there was gollum which was obsessably evil and weird but still....

I haven't had time to read the whole thread but so far nobody seems to have mentioned Denethor. I find that he is a sad character. I pity him because he has fallen so far. In his younger days he was a brilliant steward but he ended up being corrupted by Sauron. Not only that, he went mad as well. As if that wasn't enough his favourite son had to be killed as well.

Of course Gollum is an obvious choice and thus Denethor becomes forgotten. Bu another character I pity is Saruman. At first he was good but in the end he has become almost as evil as Sauron. However, if he had stayed at the good side of things he could have achieved so much more.

Re:
 

Faramir.

Faramir was the most tragic character.

His brother died, and suddenly he was forced to be two people ... himself, who his father ignored largely, because of the reminder of his mother and her death, because of the reminder of Gandalf and his own petty rivalry with the Wizard, and because of personal differences in ethics.

And then he was forced to fill Boromir's role, which was something impossible to do. For starters, as far as being a Captain and commander of Gondor, Faramir was already one, and already loved by the people, but bearing the brunt of his father's superior love of Boromir, and being for all intents and purposes sacrificed for a lost cause (retaking Osgiliath) ... not good.

There are remarkable parallels and reversals in the Boromir and Faramir stories that are something to note;

Aside from talking about what would have happened had their roles been switched ... and how things would have probably worked out better (for the most part, Faramir would probably have lived, helped track Merry & Pippin, stemmed any problems with Eomer, met Eowyn much sooner, fought in Helm's Deep and really lent a hand, offered a direct line to Gondor and their take to Theoden, and rode with Gandalf back to Minas Tirith, while Boromir did a better job of holding the River) ...

Boromir was slain by arrows, Faramir was nearly slain by arrows ... they both really got along with the younger hobbits, they were very much alike, even though Frodo noted that Faramir was more like Aragorn, compared to Boromir being like Denethor ...

Anyway, he was the most tragic character for me, but luckily his fate wasn't sealed in that tragedy like Boromir ... he got to live happily ever after.

Re:
 

Shoot ... folks, that post was mine (Faramir, blah, blah, tragic).

My sister (Feanor of the Peredhil) forgot to log out the last time she used my computer ...

And, since I don't really pay much attention, I hopped on and started posting.

No big deal ... but if anyone feels like repping me or something ... rep me. Heck, boost her rep too if you feel like it ...

Moderator's suggestion
 

Keeper, there's a simple way to solve that problem - copy, paste, repost. Then it's obviously your own contribution!

(This post will self-combust when it has been seen... )

I'm very sorry if I missed anyone saying this but... has anyone mentioned Galadriel?

Exile is tragic too, and few experience such exile as Galadriel.

(Although it is clear that on some level she doesn't really want to go back to Valinor, at least at first, it is also clear that part of this desire stems directly from anger AT being exiled - making it even more tragic.)

I also felt personally sorry for Celebrimbor, although I don't think tragic is quite the word. He was misled into creating the most beautiful works of his life, and before he was cruelly killed he had the majority of them usurped from him, saw his favourite of them taken forever into hiding, and witnessed the ultimate destruction of his people.

Pretty harsh.
-Craig

I just read the entire thread... And not one person mentioned Eol.

Am I the only person who looks at him with some sort of pity, at least, because he was at least as much marred by his anger at the Noldor for what they'd done as his own bents...

Also, his wife and son betrayed him. And stuff.

And this is a really horrible post that probably won't make anyone feel sorry for Eol, but I just felt I had to throw him out there.

(Oh, and I must concede with the majority that Turin is the most classically tragic figure.)

To my mind Frodo, Gollum, Boromir, Finrod and others mentioned here elicit sympathy, there are elements of tragedy in their actions and eventual fates. However, after reading the thread I would still have to support Turin Turambar's claim to the title 'Most Tragic Figure'.
His country is destroyed, his people massacred, he kills his best friend, marries his own sister, she dies and he commits suicide...Everything he does seems to end in tragedy! Yes, he has his flaws, he is prideful and selfish; but his story is tragedy on a Shakespearean scale.

There are many tragic figures in Tolkien....

One could go so far as to say that EVERYBODY is tragic. Think about it: you could probably make a case that every single character in Tolkien has a tragic life, or at least elements of one. Of course, that's rather the nature of a normal human life...

Still, you could say, with justification, that every major character in The Lord of the Rings and The Silmarillion has a majorly tragic life, up to and including Manwe, Frodo, Aragorn, and Earendil. The only exceptions that I come up with are Varda and Gandalf.

However, I am forced to admit that I find the story of the family of Hurin to be the most tragic. Turin and Nienor have the most tragic story, in my opinion. Their entire story was written with the express purpose of tragedy, whereas with most of the others, tragedy is just sort of a thing that you seem to come by as a part of being in middle-earth.

We just did Aristotle's definition of a Western tragic hero in English class for another character, based on that definition I feel in Middle-Earth the most fitting tragic hero is Turin. First of all the hero must have a great status, and Turin is the son of Hurin. He also became the legendary Blacksword and always turns out to be a lord in some places. An tragic hero also needs to be "neither completely evil nor completely good", which Turin is again, an good example. He is definitely not evil, he tried to protect everybody from the Golden Worm and Morgorth's army. But judging from what he did to Beleg (even though it was an accident), Finduilas,etc. he is not competely good either, he is very easily thrown into rage and hurt people. A typical western tragic hero must be catapulted into a huge fall, which Turin experienced many, but the ultimate one is when he realized he married his sister of course. Aristotle also said that after the death of the tragic hero the readers feel relieved and even elevated. After Turin's death I certainly felt relieved of the heavy sorrow he bore with him and transmitted to the reader. So I think Turin is the best candidate for this position as "the most tragic hero in Tolkien's story by Aristotle's definition"