Nebulous "It" and Absolutes

[Dininziliel]

In spring of 1420, post-Shire scouring, Frodo became ill in early March. In "The Grey Havens" we are told that Farmer Cotton

found Frodo lying on his bed; he was clutching a white gem that hung on a chain about his neck and he seemed half in a dream. 'It is gone for ever,' he said, 'and now all is dark and empty.'

While it seems obvious that the "it" for which Frodo mourned was the Ring, there is something about those absolute terms, "forever," and "all" that causes my curiosity to nibble at the corners of possible meanings. The Ring may have been destroyed, but weren't some other things also gone forever--innocence, for instance? Was he speaking only of the emptiness in his life, or might he also have been registering the passing of a particular light and joy from ME?

The nature of the Ring has been discussed in eloquent detail, so this is not a thread about the Ring itself.

The question is: what does Tolkien tell us in his various stories, essays, and letters about the loss incurred through great and profound struggles--even when light triumphs over darkness. Is it possible to have the opposite outcome where "all is light and full of joy"?

[Gorwingel]

Oh, of course the innnocence was gone. The hobbits especially were forever changed, and the Shire was too. But that is something that too has been talked about many times in the B-D's before. And the "particular light and joy" passing from Middle Earth that you talk about could be the elves (or are you talking about just Frodo?). Because the War of the Ring brought the passing of the elves and that was definitely the taking of a "light and joy" that would never be seen on the shores of Middle Earth again.

Loss in victory is something that Tolkien has threaded through many of his works. I guess you could compare it to someones experience in war. You may have won the battle overall, but you could have lost your friends, and you have most definitely lost your innocence.

But I can't really answer the last part though, because that is just a thing where I can't seem to find a good example for. I think it maybe exsists, a conflict where everything and everyone comes out good, but maybe just in a perfect world

[Evisse the Blue]

I take it to mean: "It (the ring) is gone, and now all (the world devoid of all the bad - but also the good things that the existance of the ring made possible) is dark and empty." It's something that we readers can relate to - the story has come to an end.

The question is: what does Tolkien tell us in his various stories, essays, and letters about the loss incurred through great and profound struggles--even when light triumphs over darkness. Is it possible to have the opposite outcome where "all is light and full of joy"?

I'm not sure I understand what you mean here. Are you asking 'can there be complete triumph without any loss and pain whatsoever?' or am I getting the wrong idea?

[Nimikôi Angarauko]

I am getting the same idea Evisse, but this thread is bringing to my mind a couple of phrases "War is hell" and "In war there are no winners only losers". In my opinion I do not tihnk any one can go thruogh war, be it real or fanciful, and not be effected by it, What happens to the warriors when there is nothing left to fight? Perhaps it was the lose of innocence Frodo was talking about considering that there hadn't been a battle involving Hobbits since the battle of the greenfields, and yes i know Bilbo was in the battle of the five armies but he didn't see much action. I don't think it was the lose of innocence Frodo was talking about,but more along the lines of the lose of the world much change followed after the destruction of the Ring, which adds to the symbolism of the end of third age and begining of the fourth, Frodo was a relic of the third age ,just like Gandalf, trapped in a new era without the ability to adapt to shift of power. crap cant finish post peroid over AAHHHH

[davem]

What is gone, is everything the Ring came to symbolise for Frodo - power over his life, his world, his destiny. Hope (both estel & amdir ). In the end the Ring came to symbolise/mean way too much for Frodo, which stopped him being able to destroy it. Everything he cared about was symbolised by the Ring. So without it there was nothing at all. His state is possibly best understood by the fact that for him, even his innocence had become bound up with the Ring, so when it was destroyed his innocence was also.

What does the Ring not come to symbolise/contain for Frodo? What is not destroyed along with it?

The state of despair he had entered into by the end of the story is one which probably none of us can truly understand. He had no hope - neither in life, or in death. There was no light & joy here in this world - not for Frodo, & one wonders if there was for Tolkien.

Though, one has to wonder if contemplating Frodo's mindset is wise - what did Nieztsche say about staring into the void...

[Finwe]

By the end of the War of the Ring, Frodo had become attached to the Ring. He even refused to destroy it, deep in the heart of Mount Doom. It had become an integral part of him. When Gollum fell into the lava with the Ring, the emotional effect on Frodo was similar to if someone had ripped a limb or two off of him. Those scars would have still been there for a very long time.

[Firefoot]

The question is: what does Tolkien tell us in his various stories, essays, and letters about the loss incurred through great and profound struggles--even when light triumphs over darkness. Is it possible to have the opposite outcome where "all is light and full of joy"?

I don't think it is. In any of the great struggles or conflicts there was at least some loss. On an even broader scope than just Frodo, in the War of the Ring think of all the losses there were. There were several people that died, for example Théoden, Hama, Halbarad, and many others. Arwen became mortal and the Elves passed away into the West. In all that suffering, victory is at best bittersweet. It can't be truly joyous because of all the loss. How can anyone come away unmarked or unaffected from a war or other bitter struggle?

[Child of the 7th Age]

Dininziniel,

This is an interesting thread but I think you've raised two related issues rather than simply one.

First, there is the general theme of "loss versus joy" in Tolkien's writing. You pose the question in these terms:

The question is: what does Tolkien tell us in his various stories, essays, and letters about the loss incurred through great and profound struggles--even when light triumphs over darkness. Is it possible to have the opposite outcome where "all is light and full of joy"?

Tolkien clearly thought there could be no joy that was pure and unblemished. At least three influences helped mold this view:

• Tolkien's personal experience as a child and young adult, namely the loss of both his parents, and his guardian's subsequent order to separate from Edith.
• His basic Catholic belief that the world is inherently flawed and there can be no real victory until the end of time
• The influence of the Northern epics and legends that were equally or even more somber in tone than his own writing

All of these influenced Tolkien's portrayal of loss, which is a consistent theme throughout his writing. Which of these had the greatest impact? We can only guess, but I would think his serious difficulties in childhood had a great deal to do with how he came to feel underneath. Perhaps the other two gave intellectual expression to what lay below.

Your second question centers on Frodo and the extent to which he personally suffered loss. I find myself in a strange position here. On the one hand, no one could possibly argue that Frodo was not profoundly affected by the Ring. What happened to him left a lasting mark, and Davem has summed up this idea very well.

Yet, I wonder whether Davem hasn't portrayed Frodo in too stark terms? He and I have had a similar discussion before on suffering, so I don't think he'll be too surprised at what I'm going to say.

First, here is what Davem wrote:

The state of despair he had entered into by the end of the story is one which probably none of us can truly understand. He had no hope - neither in life, or in death. There was no light & joy here in this world - not for Frodo, & one wonders if there was for Tolkien.

I would not say this, and I am not sure Tolkien would either.....Frodo being in a state of despair so extreme that he has no hope in life or death. That is further than I am willing to go. When I read Davem's post, I had a vivid image of the poem "Sea-Bell" in my head. There is no doubt that the nightmare Tolkien depicts in Sea-Bell was part of Frodo's experience when he returned to the Shire. But it was, in my estimation, only one part. There was more going on than that. Frodo acted as deputy mayor, and managed to live with Sam and his family.

For many years, I acted as a grief support counselor and briefly as a crisis counselor. Grief is very strange. One moment it can totally overwhelm you, and the next you manage to stagger on and go through the motions of living. I imagine Frodo's experience was similar to that: very, very bad times alternating with times where he felt empty and sad but was able to get through the day. This is how Tolkien depicts Frodo's periodic "episodes".

Strangely enough, one of the dominant expressions of ongoing grief and depression is not overt despair and reckless action but complete exhaustion and immobility. You feel as if you can't take another step forward. Because of this, it is difficult to make decisions or act in a concerted way. The fact that Frodo decided to go West in hope of finding help tells me that, as sick as he was, there was enough left inside him to try and seek a better path.

I do not see Frodo as totally devoid of hope. He still had feelings for Sam and the Shire. Because of this, Frodo was capable of recognizing that on a certain level the Shire had been saved and could even tell this to his friends. What he wasn't capable of doing was taking an active role in that saved Shire, or fitting in again.

Near the end of the book, we see the shores of Tol Eressea through Frodo's eyes:

Frodo smelled a sweet fragrance on the air and heard the sound of singing that came over the water. and then it seemed to him that is in the house of Bombadil, the grey rain-curtain turned all to silver glass and was rolled back, and he beheld a white shores and beyond thema far green country under a swift sunrise.

This verbal portrait suggests a tiny glimmer of light underneath all Frodo's grief and guilt. When a person is totally immersed in despair, they are incapable of appreciating either goodness or beauty. The fact that Frodo could look on those shores and sense their underlying purity suggests that something in him was still capable of responding to goodness.

This really brings us back to Din's initial post, how Tolkien saw joy and loss as intertwined. The feeling at the end of LotR is not utter despair but rather bittersweet loss. As hurt as Frodo was, I think that this was even true for him.


Frodo was hurt, terribly hurt, but I do not see it as a hurt without hope. We don't know what happens to Frodo in the end, perhaps because Tolkien himself did not know. Perhaps he found healing in this world, and perhaps he did not. But the way Frodo is depicted in the final chapter at least suggests to me that a tiny measure of hope was there and healing was still possible.

[Lotrelf]

I'll read this thread soon. I'm sure it is good.

[Lotrelf]

Originally Posted by Dininziliel

In spring of 1420, post-Shire scouring, Frodo became ill in early March. In "The Grey Havens" we are told that Farmer Cotton

While it seems obvious that the "it" for which Frodo mourned was the Ring, there is something about those absolute terms, "forever," and "all" that causes my curiosity to nibble at the corners of possible meanings. The Ring may have been destroyed, but weren't some other things also gone forever--innocence, for instance? Was he speaking only of the emptiness in his life, or might he also have been registering the passing of a particular light and joy from ME?

The nature of the Ring has been discussed in eloquent detail, so this is not a thread about the Ring itself.

The question is: what does Tolkien tell us in his various stories, essays, and letters about the loss incurred through great and profound struggles--even when light triumphs over darkness. Is it possible to have the opposite outcome where "all is light and full of joy"?

Yes, this "it" Frodo's talking about is the Ring. As has been said the Ring represented Everything to Frodo, and Frodo had lost it all. The Ring gone left him with scars that never healed. It wasn't just loss of innocence but more than that. Had the Ring been an object that needed to be destroyed and it got destroyed the way it did, it wouldn't have Frodo as much. The thing was that the quest had cost him his very being. Something that could not come back. So, this "it is gone forever, and now all is dark and empty" refers to the loss of something greater than innocence.
There can be no victory without suffering and loss, it is evident. Changes are often disasterous; and are the demand of this universe. So, there HAS TO be someone who gives up their life for us. Boromir, Theoden and Frodo sacrificed their lives for the greater good. Middle-earth won, a new Age came that was free of evil of Sauron. But it cost people a lot. Thousands of people died. How could there be any victory without this sacrifice, suffering and loss? No, there can be no victory without loss. Also Prof. Tolkien says, "Victors can not enjoy victory." The loss is inevitable and unavoidable.

I'd like to address someone here who said Frodo was a "pawn" of Eru, who Eru used to save the world. I disagree. Please someone let me know if I've got him wrong. Frodo being pawn means he had no free will, and having no free will sounds odd to me, and makes Eru and Valar sound sort of petty. The task might have been appointed for Frodo but it was upto him whether he wanted to take the task or not. And he did. That is more than being "pawn".