Quote:
|
Surely Tolkien spends a lot of time trying to make these connections, but often they seem to be more like abstract ideas or ideals dressed into the story (pity, accepting a preordained fate, standing for one's values etc.) than building a real living character in the story. So being a hero in a story with moral connotations thins the character?
|
I see what you mean about Frodo. Thinking about it a little more, I have to say that Frodo could be the central "hero" in that his place is to make an enormous sacrifice. That is a real-world theme that Tolkien wove into the story through Frodo's character: the truly heroic act is one of sacrifice. Frodo ends up being the sacrifice by bearing the burden of the ring for the rest of his life - not only when he possessed the ring physically. In that way, Frodo is the noble, tragic hero of the story; and certainly Sam is not. If you think of Frodo's character always in light of his sacrifice, his place in the story makes more sense. Frodo was never meant to have the depth of character that most of the Fellowship has. His role is to be a
sacrifice; this is actually emphasized by the lack of depth. There is nothing to distract you from one of the most important parts of the story this way.
That's Frodo's role, in my opinion. I still say that, though Frodo may very well be the principle (I avoid saying
real) hero, Sam remains the central object of the reader. All the other characters have their very high, noble, and important purposes; Sam is just the plain little Hobbit who happens to be touched by their lives, and therefore is most like the reader. I may have been unconsciously illustrating this in my earlier post when I said that most people would want to be Sam, not Frodo: in fact, this is exactly what happens. The reader experiences the story vicariously through Sam in the fullest sense. In a way, the effect all the events have on Sam is the effect they are intended to have upon the reader (emotionally, at least).
Anyhow, that's a little more expansion on my view. Excellent points in this thread so far
EDIT: I guess my post has a lot to do with Sardy's question a couple posts back. Concisely, it is obvious that Frodo sacrificed more than Sam, and that is an important distinction between the two hobbits, in my opinion. Frodo's sacrifice saved Sam from suffering the same thing, even if Sam wanted to (he certainly longed to help his master bear the Ring on those last days to Mount Doom).