The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum - View Single Post

littlemanpoet · 10-20-2006, 06:52 PM

Exhibit #5: Sam Believes

Toward the beginning of Shadows of the Past, Sam Gamgee's character is established by comparison to Ted Sandyman. The section we're looking at is that which begins with "Sam Gamgee was sitting in one corner near the fire.....", and ends with "He walked home under the early stars through Hobbiton and up the Hill, whistling softly and thoughtfully."

Sam is trying to have a conversation about "queer tales". Ted will have none of it. First he refuses to even listen on the grounds that they're just hearth stories and children's tales thus not worth listening to (we are put in mind of On Faerie Stories in which Tolkien criticizes this view). Sam insists that there's truth in them, such as dragon stories. But Ted will have none of that either, for he'd heard of them when younger (maybe from Bilbo?) but "there's no call to believe in them now".

Sam lets him have his point but brings up tree men - giants - that have been seen on the North Moors. Namely Hal has seen them. Ted suggests that Hal's either a liar or "seeing things that ain't there", et. al., hallucinating. Sam provides more detail: "big as an elm and walking seven yards to a stride". Ted bets it was an elm tree, and stationary. This is worth quoting:

'Then I bet it wasn't an inch. What he saw was an elm tree, as like as not.'
'But this one was walking, I tell you; and there ain't no elm tree on the North Moors.'
'Then Hal can't have seen one,' said Ted. There was some laughing and clapping: the audience seemed to think that Ted had scored a point.

By this point our sympathy is with Sam (if it wasn't before) because Ted is arguing with such bad logic (if any at all) that it's downright confounding for poor Sam. To make sure the reader doesn't miss what has just happened, Tolkien includes authorial commentary that Ted actually had scored no point at all. In fact, Ted had actually made Sam's point for him; but Ted and the hobbits are so sure that there 'ain't no such things as tree men' even if there ain't no such things as elms on the North Moors.

But it would take more intellectual ability than Sam can muster to untangle Ted's confoundment, so Sam insists on what can't be denied: queer folk crossing the Shire or being kept out of it. On this Ted makes no interruption or denial. Then Sam speaks elegaically of Elves; Ted merely laughs, saing it has nothing to do with hobbits, and asserts that no hobbits have seen Elves moving through the Shire. Not this is telling. Ted denies the existence of dragons (which the reader knows is wrong), then denies the existence of Ents (which the reader knows nothing about yet), then all but denies the passage of Elves through the Shire, implying that Elves don't exist either!

Why is Ted so adamant? How can he be so certain? Well, it's because such things are not part of the normal experience of hobbits; therefore they can't exist. This is bad logic, obviously, and begins to sound like the attitude of a philosophical naturalist of the late 19th and early 20th centuries: 'if you can't perceive it with your senses, it can't be real'.

So both Sam's and Ted's characters are being laid out for the reader. Tolkien will draw our attention back to Ted toward the end of the entire story, where Ted's bankrupt attitude toward the things Sam believes results in moral bankruptcy, working with Sharkey's ruffians. Nevermind Ted's illogic; his stubborn cussedness undermines Sam's efforts to put forward his case effectively.

Sam's response to Ted's doubts on Elves is to bring in his trump cards: Bilbo and Frodo for whom Sam already has deep respect and a high opinion (and as we learn later(in A Conspiracy Unmasked) , Sam already knows about the Ring). Ted dismisses them as 'cracked and becoming cracked'. With this final dismissal of Sam's arsenal of evidence, Ted leaves noisily. Sam soon leaves too, quietly and thoughtful. The pairing makes Ted's noisy leavetaking the more glaring for its failure of thoughtfulness.

What do we make of this exchange? Sam believes in dragons, tree men, Elves, and Bilbo and Frodo, and has reason to; supporting evidence. Ted refuses to believe, contrary to the evidence, and does not even care to consider the evidence. He simply doesn't want such things to be part of his life at all, without examination.

What difference this makes will unfold as we take a look at more of the story.

10-20-2006, 06:52 PM	#459
littlemanpoet Itinerant Songster Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: The Edge of Faerie Posts: 7,066	Exhibit #5: Sam Believes Toward the beginning of Shadows of the Past, Sam Gamgee's character is established by comparison to Ted Sandyman. The section we're looking at is that which begins with "Sam Gamgee was sitting in one corner near the fire.....", and ends with "He walked home under the early stars through Hobbiton and up the Hill, whistling softly and thoughtfully." Sam is trying to have a conversation about "queer tales". Ted will have none of it. First he refuses to even listen on the grounds that they're just hearth stories and children's tales thus not worth listening to (we are put in mind of On Faerie Stories in which Tolkien criticizes this view). Sam insists that there's truth in them, such as dragon stories. But Ted will have none of that either, for he'd heard of them when younger (maybe from Bilbo?) but "there's no call to believe in them now". Sam lets him have his point but brings up tree men - giants - that have been seen on the North Moors. Namely Hal has seen them. Ted suggests that Hal's either a liar or "seeing things that ain't there", et. al., hallucinating. Sam provides more detail: "big as an elm and walking seven yards to a stride". Ted bets it was an elm tree, and stationary. This is worth quoting: 'Then I bet it wasn't an inch. What he saw was an elm tree, as like as not.' 'But this one was walking, I tell you; and there ain't no elm tree on the North Moors.' 'Then Hal can't have seen one,' said Ted. There was some laughing and clapping: the audience seemed to think that Ted had scored a point. By this point our sympathy is with Sam (if it wasn't before) because Ted is arguing with such bad logic (if any at all) that it's downright confounding for poor Sam. To make sure the reader doesn't miss what has just happened, Tolkien includes authorial commentary that Ted actually had scored no point at all. In fact, Ted had actually made Sam's point for him; but Ted and the hobbits are so sure that there 'ain't no such things as tree men' even if there ain't no such things as elms on the North Moors. But it would take more intellectual ability than Sam can muster to untangle Ted's confoundment, so Sam insists on what can't be denied: queer folk crossing the Shire or being kept out of it. On this Ted makes no interruption or denial. Then Sam speaks elegaically of Elves; Ted merely laughs, saing it has nothing to do with hobbits, and asserts that no hobbits have seen Elves moving through the Shire. Not this is telling. Ted denies the existence of dragons (which the reader knows is wrong), then denies the existence of Ents (which the reader knows nothing about yet), then all but denies the passage of Elves through the Shire, implying that Elves don't exist either! Why is Ted so adamant? How can he be so certain? Well, it's because such things are not part of the normal experience of hobbits; therefore they can't exist. This is bad logic, obviously, and begins to sound like the attitude of a philosophical naturalist of the late 19th and early 20th centuries: 'if you can't perceive it with your senses, it can't be real'. So both Sam's and Ted's characters are being laid out for the reader. Tolkien will draw our attention back to Ted toward the end of the entire story, where Ted's bankrupt attitude toward the things Sam believes results in moral bankruptcy, working with Sharkey's ruffians. Nevermind Ted's illogic; his stubborn cussedness undermines Sam's efforts to put forward his case effectively. Sam's response to Ted's doubts on Elves is to bring in his trump cards: Bilbo and Frodo for whom Sam already has deep respect and a high opinion (and as we learn later(in A Conspiracy Unmasked) , Sam already knows about the Ring). Ted dismisses them as 'cracked and becoming cracked'. With this final dismissal of Sam's arsenal of evidence, Ted leaves noisily. Sam soon leaves too, quietly and thoughtful. The pairing makes Ted's noisy leavetaking the more glaring for its failure of thoughtfulness. What do we make of this exchange? Sam believes in dragons, tree men, Elves, and Bilbo and Frodo, and has reason to; supporting evidence. Ted refuses to believe, contrary to the evidence, and does not even care to consider the evidence. He simply doesn't want such things to be part of his life at all, without examination. What difference this makes will unfold as we take a look at more of the story.