[The Saucepan Man]

Like many others who have posted here, I enjoy the light-hearted atmosphere in this opening chapter immensely. The highlights have been addressed already: the gossipy banter about Bilbo and Frodo, the pithy comments of the Gaffer, the labels on the gifts left at Bag End and, of course, Bilbo’s speech. Squatter stated:

Surely anyone who has been present at a wedding will recognise this sketch of a sympathetic audience, their knowledge of the host's oratorical eccentricities lulled by a sufficiency of food and drink.

Those were my thoughts exactly when I re-read the speech this time round. I was put precisely in mind of a slightly boozy but good-natured audience listening to the best-man’s speech at a wedding dinner. The scene is a familiar one, and thus helps to draw us in (more on this aspect of the chapter later).

The humorous “Hobbity” feel to this chapter is, to my mind, essential, as it provides a provides a “bridge” between the light style of The Hobbit and the much darker tone evident in much of LotR. But it is equally essential that the light-hearted passages are interspersed with the more serious moments concerning the Ring which foreshadow the events which are to come. They counter-balance each other and therefore help ease those who have read and loved The Hobbit into the deeper story that he is now telling and prepare them for the darker moments to come. In this regard, it is interesting that the chapter opens with a passage which combines the two:

“It will have to be paid for,” they said. “It isn’t natural, and trouble will come of it!”

This concludes what at first appears to be a light-hearted and affectionate dig at the tendency of Hobbits to gossip about anything slightly out of the ordinary, in this case the fact that Bilbo appears to be remarkably “well-preserved”. But, as Squatter pointed out, the cause of Bilbo’s apparent youthfulness for his age is indeed unnatural and will have to be paid for (although not by Bilbo). It is, of course, the Ring – the very focal point for the darker tone which later becomes more prevalent.

I was struck, on re-reading this chapter, by the manner in which Tolkien introduces (or should I say re-introduces us) to the Ring. Simply by means of the actions and conversations of the characters, he tells us two very important things about it:

1. It is “unnatural”. While not directly stated, it is implicit that it is the Ring which is the cause of Bilbo feeling “like butter that has been scraped over too much bread”, ie the cause of his “unnatural” preservation.
2. It has a seductive effect on the minds of those who come into contact with it. This, of course is evident from the dramatic exchange between Bilbo and Gandalf occasioned by Bilbo’s reluctance to leave it behind. And, as Child has noted, its power in this regard is apparent from Frodo’s temptation to put it on to escape the attentions of the Sackville-Baggins the very day after having “inherited” it.

Another aspect of this chapter that has been commented on (particularly by Gorwingel and Child) is the way that Frodo is introduced in such a way that makes him stand out from other Hobbits. We know from The Hobbit that Bilbo is regarded as rather “queer” by his fellow Hobbits, and the chapter opens by reasserting this: “Bilbo was very rich and very peculiar”. Frodo is introduced by reference to his relationship with Bilbo and therefore by association becomes peculiar too. And this sense of Frodo being somehow special is affirmed by the conversation in The Ivy Bush, where reference is made to his childhood with the “queer breed” in Buckland.

What I found really interesting was the discussion of the death of Frodo’s parents. Reference has been made already to the parallel between Frodo losing both his parents and Tolkien’s own childhood (which I hadn’t picked up on, but find very interesting). But it is the manner in which their death is referred to that intrigues me. Boating itself is a strange pursuit to the folks of the Shire (west of the Brandywine) and so that in itself makes their manner of death unusual. But the rumour-mill goes further than this. Drogo and Primula supposedly “went on the water after dinner in the moonlight” and Sandyman adds that he heard that Primula pushed Drogo in and that he pulled her in after him. Now, while the Gaffer dismisses such rumours, they nevertheless lend a strange and possibly sinister feel to Frodo’s background and this too marks him out as different.

And all this before we actually meet Frodo!

Also, while on the subject of Drogo and Primula, is there perhaps further material here to support the parallels which Fordim draws between Bilbo and Frodo on the one hand and Gollum on the other? Frodo’s parents died in a boating accident, while Gollum was “born” of a rather earlier boating incident which led to Deagol’s discovery of the Ring.

Child referred to Bilbo’s comment of Frodo that:

It's time he was his own master now.

An interesting reference since, in addition to its literal interpretation as signifying Frodo’s inheritance of Bag End (and of course the Ring), it might also be taken as a signal to readers that Bilbo is no longer the central figure in the story. Frodo is taking over that role. Also, ironically, Frodo is in one sense never the master of the Ring which he inherits. Rather the opposite is true. He becomes subject to it. To mis-quote Gandalf from later on in the book, there is only one Lord of the Ring and it’s not Frodo.

I would also add that it’s not just Bilbo and Frodo who are marked out in this chapter as different from other Hobbits. Although there is only a relatively fleeting reference to him, Sam gets the same treatment too. He is closely associated with Bilbo and Frodo by reference to the fact that both he and his father are “on very friendly terms” with them. Some might think this unusual in what is effectively a master and servant (or, as Squatter puts it, officer and batman) relationship. What’s more, he has in one sense been “raised above his station” by Bilbo having “learned him his letters”. And of course, we have an immediate reference here to Sam’s love of tales of Elves and Dragons. So Sam too is marked out at the outset as being somewhat special in comparison with his fellow Hobbits.

Davem said:

Or to put it another way, does the Shire feel like the familiar & 'everday' world to everyone, or does it have the same kind of 'otherness' about it as Lorien or Gondor - does anyone start the book with the feeling that they're [I]already[/] in another world?

As an Englishman myself, I would agree entirely with what both davem and Squatter have said regarding the familiarity of the place-names in the Shire. The same applies to the general atmosphere of the Shire, the role of pubs as meeting places and the references to post-offices and postmen. All of these are very “normal” (to an Englih reader, at least) and help to lend an air of familiarity to Shire life. Even the Hobbit family names, while quaint, have an oddly familiar ring to them. This, I think, ties in very much with what I said in the Prologue thread about the reader identifying with the Hobbit characters and so setting out with them on a journey into the unknown of the “other world” outside the Shire. Arkenstone asked:

Do you think it is possible that Tolkien was trying to show how normal the Hobbits were and how they could very well be us ? Except for the hairy feet and short stature. I think it is the overall normalness of this chapter that at once draws folks into the book.

To which I would reply very much so.

And so to answer davem’s (rhetorical) question:

if Tolkien had set his stories in some typically outlandish fantasy world, would we care as deeply (or at all) whether it was saved or not?

No, quite possibly not, as far as I am concerned. Which is probably at least a part of the reason why no other fantasy novel has ever made quite the same impression on me as LotR.

Finally, mention has already been made of the anachronisms that may be found in this chapter and which certainly jumped out at me this time round. Now, carriage clocks and umbrellas I can live with in Middle-earth. But express trains? This seems wholly incongruous. I am sure that Tolkien would have spotted this reference (in the description of the “dragon” firework) when re-working the chapter, so I wonder why he chose not to change it. This seems strange to me, particularly given his dislike of machinery and his portrayal of the Shire as an agrarian society. Trains have a much greater association with industrialised societies than rural societies. Might there be some reason why he left it in, or was it simply an oversight after all?
______________________________

Edit: I cross-posted with Fordim, who touches on a number of the points discussed above, particularly the contrast between the "normal" and familiar surroundings in which we start and the strange lands into which Tolkien later takes us.

Interesting point questioning whether Bilbo did in fact give the Ring up willingly. For me, you are spot on in your analysis of this passage, Fordim. I wonder whether Tolkien re-worked this when he realised that Frodo would not be able to give up the Ring voluntarily, or whether he knew that this would be the case from the outset? Anything in HoME on this? Child?