The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum - View Single Post

Lyta_Underhill · 02-27-2003, 02:11 AM

This is a great discussion! I think the pity vs. hate question is a way to reflect not only on Gollum, but on one's own values and perceived roles in life. I can pity Gollum, while at the same time, I am wary of him, and I would kill him if he threatened my life in a physical way. I would not enjoy killing him and I would regret having had to do it, but I would not be stupid and fail to defend myself in a situation in which I am in imminent danger of death.

I do think that Smeagol began as a mean soul, who did not have an inkling of the more noble values of life; he was small-minded and his petty greed caused him to commit a rash and evil act beyond his ability to understand the consequences thereof. I do think that the intervening years in the Misty Mountains gave him lots of time to reflect, as well as time to be absorbed by the Ring, and that he may have gained insight into his situation and his former life at this time; it is at this time he recognizes himself and hates himself, but also loses the strength to implement his new insight, for the Ring has him fast now. What good is wisdom that brings no profit to the wise? Smeagol/Gollum gains a sort of twisted wisdom that allows him to understand what has happened to him; and so much more for this knowledge he despairs of his wretched soul.

Also, I think that, just as Frodo recognizes himself in the deteriorated form of Smeagol; so Smeagol recognizes an ideal "first state" in Frodo. While Smeagol was never as good-hearted as Frodo, he sees an ideal he can touch and aspire to. Frodo's so-called betrayal snaps this reality and makes him feel cast out. He is so alone that he cannot understand the necessity of what Frodo had to do and that it was not a betrayal at all, but a benevolent act on Frodo's part.

So, the question: do I pity or hate Gollum? I do pity him, but I also would kill him if I had to, soberly and quickly, without malice, but with much regret. I would not do it lightly, as no one with a conscience can kill without qualms, but at the moment of truth, I would not hesitate to do it.

I could go on about one's role in society and the necessity of some to be more willing to kill than others. For instance, a soldier must not hesitate to kill if the need is there, while a regular citizen will usually do so. The regular Hobbits of the Shire will quail at killing, whereas battle-seasoned warrior hobbits Merry and Pippin convey clearly the will and capability to kill when they return to the Shire. This is necessary, but it is also out of place in the role that Frodo has taken on himself. This is a thought I have not completely come to terms with, so it is still evolving, but Gollum is a true pivotal point in the philosophy.

Thanks so much for this thread, Yavanna!

Cheers,
Lyta

02-27-2003, 02:11 AM	#82
Lyta_Underhill Haunted Halfling Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: an uncounted length of steps--floating between air molecules Posts: 841	This is a great discussion! I think the pity vs. hate question is a way to reflect not only on Gollum, but on one's own values and perceived roles in life. I can pity Gollum, while at the same time, I am wary of him, and I would kill him if he threatened my life in a physical way. I would not enjoy killing him and I would regret having had to do it, but I would not be stupid and fail to defend myself in a situation in which I am in imminent danger of death. I do think that Smeagol began as a mean soul, who did not have an inkling of the more noble values of life; he was small-minded and his petty greed caused him to commit a rash and evil act beyond his ability to understand the consequences thereof. I do think that the intervening years in the Misty Mountains gave him lots of time to reflect, as well as time to be absorbed by the Ring, and that he may have gained insight into his situation and his former life at this time; it is at this time he recognizes himself and hates himself, but also loses the strength to implement his new insight, for the Ring has him fast now. What good is wisdom that brings no profit to the wise? Smeagol/Gollum gains a sort of twisted wisdom that allows him to understand what has happened to him; and so much more for this knowledge he despairs of his wretched soul. Also, I think that, just as Frodo recognizes himself in the deteriorated form of Smeagol; so Smeagol recognizes an ideal "first state" in Frodo. While Smeagol was never as good-hearted as Frodo, he sees an ideal he can touch and aspire to. Frodo's so-called betrayal snaps this reality and makes him feel cast out. He is so alone that he cannot understand the necessity of what Frodo had to do and that it was not a betrayal at all, but a benevolent act on Frodo's part. So, the question: do I pity or hate Gollum? I do pity him, but I also would kill him if I had to, soberly and quickly, without malice, but with much regret. I would not do it lightly, as no one with a conscience can kill without qualms, but at the moment of truth, I would not hesitate to do it. I could go on about one's role in society and the necessity of some to be more willing to kill than others. For instance, a soldier must not hesitate to kill if the need is there, while a regular citizen will usually do so. The regular Hobbits of the Shire will quail at killing, whereas battle-seasoned warrior hobbits Merry and Pippin convey clearly the will and capability to kill when they return to the Shire. This is necessary, but it is also out of place in the role that Frodo has taken on himself. This is a thought I have not completely come to terms with, so it is still evolving, but Gollum is a true pivotal point in the philosophy. Thanks so much for this thread, Yavanna! Cheers, Lyta __________________ “…she laid herself to rest upon Cerin Amroth; and there is her green grave, until the world is changed, and all the days of her life are utterly forgotten by men that come after, and elanor and niphredil bloom no more east of the Sea.”