[Lalwendë]

A bit of a wormy thought here... What is a hero? Does a hero have to be perfect? Does he or she have to achieve their aims? Is it OK for a hero not to be perfect or even to not achieve what they set out to do?

I'm asking this as it seems to me that in LOTR there are no all-conquering heroes. Frodo and Sam are absolutely heroic, yes, but I question if they are traditional heroes. Frodo does not destroy the Ring, in fact he allows it to claim him, or else he claims it for himself; the latter is even worse than the former. In part, the memory of this is what ultimately destroys Frodo's future contentment. Sam too is flawed as he allows his anger to rule him in his judgement of Gollum; does he care too much for his master and not enough for the success of the quest?

Even amongst the other characters we see flaws. Aragorn can be high-handed and both Boromir and Faramir perhaps show a little too much loyalty to their father.

At the end of the book there is victory but it is tinged throughout with sadness. They have not regained a paradise in Middle-earth as much of it lies in ruins, and they are just one generation who have been victorious in fighting that 'long defeat'.

Maybe this shows how 'modern' LOTR is as a book. The traditional hero as a flawless, all-conquering figure doesn't exist in real life, and nor does it in this story. War is shown as something that can be won with effort and courage, but it is shown as something that does not 'elevate' people to the level of Hero.

Or does the book show that even ordinary people who are flawed and not at all perfect can at least act like a Hero?