My take on Grima.
This is a really interesting thread! I’ve had quite a few thoughts about the nature of Grima lately, and I’ll be interested to hear what other ‘Downers might think, so here goes…
Who is he? His role is something of a ‘clerk’ or adviser, and we must assume that even in Rohan such people were needed to ensure the smooth running of the country. The king would no doubt have gathered tithes, or else had to ensure that some system of ‘military service’ (is this more properly termed ‘tribute’?) was running within his country. Rohan seems to be based on models of Anglo Saxon society, where personal advisers to the monarch would most likely be drawn from nobility or military. Grima is not a military man, so we must assume he is from the nobility if he is to have gained such privileged access to his King.
There is textual evidence that Grima is a man of Rohan, and that he had some status to begin with, as his lineage is named. The question is, would it be considered higher status in Rohan to be a horseman or to be a ‘clerk’? If the former, then Grima may have ended up in such a post either through superior intelligence or because he was not strong or skilled enough to excel as a horseman. Either of these would have a bearing on his personality. If it was that he was intelligent then he may have thought himself somewhat ‘apart’ from people such as Hama. And a further thought to add to this is that Tolkien seems to have been showing how Saruman’s thirst for greater knowledge led him into foolish deeds (e.g. overuse of the palantir), so it would be interesting if Grima’s ‘fall’ was due to the same reason. If, however, Grima ended up as a ‘clerk’ due to his lack of physical prowess, then he could have wished to prove his power in other ways, as he may have experienced resentment or even a feeling of inadequacy in comparison to the cultural ‘norm’ of Rohan, and sought to be ‘special’ in other ways.
So why was Grima vulnerable to the influence of Saruman? I think that Saruman may have been looking for a way of influencing the king and if Grima was already vulnerable by feeling his potential status had been belittled in some way, then he would be more likely to listen to someone like Saruman who may have had all manner of ideas about how he could ‘climb’ the power ladder in Edoras. It is something that those of us who work can see every day in office politics; there are those who seek status simply for its own sake and who play the game to perfection. I think this is what Grima did. You can see that other men do not like or trust him, and he works by ‘eliminating’ his competition e.g. Eomer, by getting the ‘boss’ to deal harshly with such people.
When Gandalf compares Grima to a serpent then draws a good comparison, as the man has achieved his success by clever and crafty use of politics; his actions have not been for the good of Rohan, but for his own good. In the circles which surround our leaders such figures are unfortunately common, and I remember reading in Tolkien’s Letters of how he didn’t like ‘officials’, so the notion of Grima as a corrupt, self-serving official could well be a good one.
How did Grima work on Theoden? I think he made great use of negative talk,
influencing the king through looking on the doubtful, pessimistic side of everything. Theoden is worn down by the words of Grima; hearing such negative words each day, eventually Theoden would come to expect the worst and to hear positive words would seem somehow wrong. Of course, to gain the king’s ear in the first place, Grima will have had to begin by telling the king precisely what he wanted to hear. This kind of talk is shown by Saruman himself, who uses flattery at Orthanc in his attempt to win round the group who are listening to him.
I think that there is no actual magic as we might perceive it involved in the gradual decline of Theoden. Rather, I think that Grima has learned from Saruman exactly how to talk to and deal with the king. So the ‘poison’ is very much Saruman’s, but the vessel is definitely Grima.
As to whether he ever repents, it is not clear that he does, even the act of killing Saruman is rather an act of desperation than an attempt to put right what his master has done. Grima has been left with little choice, he cannot go back to his privileged position in Rohan (especially since he made an enemy of the new king or ‘boss’), and Saruman, who promised to be powerful, is now reduced to petty crime himself. Grima sought status and now he has none, nor any chance of ever gaining any, he is at the bottom of the social heap and so has little to lose when he acts out of a sense of vengeance. Is he redeemed in any way? He is certainly brought low, so in that sense he can be said to have been punished, as he ends up with quite the opposite of what he sought in life. But is this reason enough? Does he ever admit to his lust for power, and does he have to do that in order to repent?
About Grima and Eowyn, I think that something of the timescale must be taken into account here. We don’t know how old Grima is, nor do we know how long he has been Theoden’s adviser, but we could assume that it has been some time, and so the promise of Eowyn might not have been made from the outset. I like to think not, as Eowyn is still a very young woman! Maybe the promise of Eowyn was made as she grew to adulthood, as a way of keeping or maintaining Grima’s loyalty to Saruman; he could have told Grima that if he kept up his work, then he would be able to ask for and successfully gain the hand of Eowyn. And what of Grima’s interest in her? We can’t assume it was either love or lust that he felt; it could have simply been due to the fact that she was the highest status woman in Rohan that he sought her hand. She would have been his ‘trophy wife’, and to be married to her would have brought him even closer to the centre of power in that country.
I think Grima shows us that it is not just Rings of Power or Silmarils or Palantiri which can corrupt, that other, more intangible desires can have a detrimental effect. This is quite clever, as we know that the downfall of Numenor was due to similar intangible desires in the hearts of Men, or, we know this if we have read the Silmarillion; to include this idea in the form of Grima makes for good writing as it gives us a glimpse into another aspect of how Men can fail.
Also, it might be interesting to compare Grima and Gollum. Which is the more evil of these two? Surely Gollum has been unwittingly corrupted only by desire for a ‘magical object’? Can we blame him for that? He is the more damaged of the two, certainly, and the one most beyond salvation, but is he more evil?
I'll stop here, I've gone on quite long enough!
