I think a general point about chronological bias can be made (albeit as qualified by Maril), although I did at various times in my contribution try and stress the nobility and dignity with which Tolkien imbued Sam's role, and I think Sharon's analysis of his development illustrates that Tolkien created a valid and rounded character who epitomises many virtues, not least humility and generosity of spirit. My point was more about the relationship of Sam and Frodo, and the centrality of the romanticised master-servant aspect.
As I pointed out, the notion of duty or societal hierarchies IS one that we in the West tend to question - for example, it is perhaps difficult for a 21st century Western mind to feel comfortable with the nation of caste-restricted arranged marriages (although the British colonial powers often encouraged certain kinds of 'divide-and-rule' practices that might otherwise have died out). But I was not stating a personal opinion, or that this changing interpretation of duty is either a good or bad thing - but what I would say is that in Tolkien it is shown in its most heroic and noble sense.
My other point was that 'self-actualisation' (a part of Maslow's hierarchy of need), in effect the way in which Western society has become individuated and identity-centred, is in some ways antithetical to the conscientious fealty (which is a voluntary obligation well above run-of-the-mill patriotism or loyalty) which Sam, and more explicitly Pippin and Merry, exhibit in such a touching way.
A critique of Tolkien that highlighted the hierarchical aspect would, in my view, need to take into account the genuine friendship (and indeed love) between Merry and Theoden, and the subtlety of Frodo's status as 'master' - any sense of superiority is certainly not evident in his own actions or expectations, as the excellent insights by contributors above clearly show. He is a beautifully gentle and compassionate figure, whose humility becomes suffused by wisdom and, yes, the scars of his moral and physical struggle. I hope that here and earlier I have shown that in many ways the expressly political critique is at best tenuous given the actual narrative of the leading characters. But across Tolkien's works as a whole, perhaps there is a point to be made.
Littleman, you rightly suggest that I read Tolkien in the last few years - this is true (fortunately well before the film). In my teens I read avidly across many genres, and always with a love and empathy for both traditional myth, fantasy and science fiction - from Homer to Le Guin, Milton to Clarke, Beowulf to Solaris etc. I played Dungeons and Dragons at an early age, and wrote stories extensively. But incredibly, I rather disdained Tolkien ... for too many reasons (some of them good) to go into now [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img] . However, I am really glad both to have re-discovered his work, and to have the opportunity on these boards to share, discuss and of course argue about them [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] . Naturally I defer to Maril's consummate steeping in Tolkienology ... (hmm - I'm not sure if being consummately steeped is quite right, it sounds a little decadent [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img] )
Peace
[ May 29, 2002: Message edited by: Kalessin ]
|