View Single Post
Old 05-08-2002, 12:08 AM   #55
Child of the 7th Age
Spirit of the Lonely Star
 
Child of the 7th Age's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 5,133
Child of the 7th Age is a guest of Tom Bombadil.
Silmaril

Thank you, Frodo Baggins, for pulling up this thread again. This humble, admiring hobbit certainly thanks you for all that you've accomplished on behalf of the Shire and Middle-earth.....

I had not read this thread before so I'm glad to get a chance to look at it. So many excellent things have been said here that there isn't a lot to add, except I do have one personal comment.

Yes, it's quite certain that Frodo would have failed without Sam's help. Without Sam's physical assistance, Frodo literally wouldn't even have made it up the ashen slopes of Mount Doom. Even more importantly, the only way for Frodo to stave off the power of the Ring, to push down its incessent clamor in his heart and mind, was to bind himself to others. And this is what Sam allowed Frodo to do by providing that opportunity for closeness and caring, a mode of caring which Frodo extended even to the character of Smeagol/Gollum itself.

Yet, by this same standard, Sam also needed Frodo. He relied on Frodo to teach him gentleness towards a miserable creature also bound to the Ring and to share the quiet stories and memories that helped push these two determined hobbits onward through the Shadow.

Since we all know this to be true, why does this question come up time and time again-- the endless task of trying to weigh and measure the exact contribution of Frodo and that of Sam? Fan sites debate this issue endlessly, and critics also chip in with articles explaining why Sam is or is not the "real" hero of the Lord of the Rings. I can't think of any other characters we do this with. There are few heartfelt threads weighing the comparative contributions of Merry/Pippin, Gimli/Legolas, or any other possible pair you care to imagine. With these folk, we're content to appreciate their individual contribution without trying to weigh and measure it down to the tiniest degree.

I myself have done it as an admirer of Frodo Baggins. Heh, why doesn't Frodo get the credit he deserves from the Shire? So Sam thinks it's so easy to bear the Ring, just let him try! What do you mean that Frodo sailed to Elvenhome purely out of despair, while Sam had the courage to return to the Shire and bring life to the earth? How can you say that? Can't you see that Frodo hears the call of the Elves at least as strongly as he feels the tug of the Shire?

Just why do I, and we, do this? Certainly, these are the two chief characters in the story. Tolkien created an ensemble cast but no one else, neither Gandalf nor Aragorn, played quite the same role as Sam and Frodo. After thinking about this for some time, I feel there's something else going on. That "something" focuses not merely on the story but on ourselves as individuals, our hopes and ways of looking at things.

At heart, I think, when readers meet Sam and Frodo, each individual feels a natural empathy to one of the two archetypes that these characters represent. And these two hobbits are so very different, and so very good for each other's souls, because they do represent two distinct ways of dealng with and looking at life. In a very real sense, Sam fills the holes in Frodo's heart and Frodo does the same for Sam.

Sam is the practical doer, who does because he has a basic and unswerving commitment to the people he loves in his life. He has a direct and often simple view of things that enables him to surmount any obstacle and to go on when hope seems lost. His eyes stay focused on the close horizon because this is where he can do so much good. Within the circle of his friends and community, he gives of himself again and again without question. He is the loving spouse and friend who can appreciate the secrets of elves, but who can also go through every daily disaster and come out on top.

And Frodo? Frodo is the seer and the prophet whose eyes and ears are tuned to distant music. He is the one who understands what sacrifices must be made to reach out beyond ourselves and grasp on to something higher whose meaning we can barely comprehend. He never forgets the sound of the Sea or the vision of the green distant land. He brings gifts of love to his small group of dear friends--gifts like laughter, stories, and the teaching of mercy. His way is less practical so the world will often shake its head in bewilderment or even turn aside, not understanding his growing reluctance to wield a sword or his trusting in strange and flawed creatures. Above all, he will bind himself to an idea, and make that commitment the center of his soul, without thought of personal happiness or reward.

It is the sad ending of the book that each of these character has grown to the point that they must take a different path in life. Sam and Frodo, so good for each other but so unlike, come to the parting of ways at Grey Havens, and we are left with a tremendous sense of sorrow and loss. We wish Tolkien were here to tell us exactly how it turned out for the two of them. We do know a bit about Sam, but for Frodo there is only a sad blank page. And that makes it so much harder for us to comprehend his choice.

I am certain, however, that they each took the path that was right for them. And, whether in the Shire or in the West, they continued to grow and learn, one perhaps with less effort and the other perhaps with more pain, but still going on.

And so each of us, as readers, feels a natural empathy towards either Sam or Frodo, largely dependent on our own ideals and attitudes towards life. We may respect and admire them both, but there is one who will tug more natually at our heart.

Has anyone else sensed this in their reading?

sharon, the 7th age hobbit
__________________
Multitasking women are never too busy to vote.

Last edited by Child of the 7th Age; 12-07-2004 at 08:01 PM.
Child of the 7th Age is offline   Reply With Quote