Nebulous "It" and Absolutes

[symestreem]

Originally Posted by davem

But Firefoot, Frodo goes through all that, loses everything, & then says to Sam, that's how things are in the world - what does that mean? He can only be saying the world is like that. Sometimes life (or God) requires some of us to sacrifice ourselves - our entire selves, so that others can be saved. Some of us have to be lost so that others can be found, & that's what's happened with me. I've lost everything so that you can go on living. My life for yours, my happiness for yours, my peace for yours, my hope for yours.

Has he given those things willingly, or have they been taken from him. Was there a point in his journey where he made that sacrifice willingly?

Frodo made this choice willingly. He had many chances to turn back or to give up. Perhaps he did not understand the consequences of his actions; but either way he did them willingly.
Perhaps I say "willingly" to hastily. Frodo was, in a way, compelled to fulfill his Quest. But there were no outward forces compelling him; instead, there was a desire to save the world, a fear of what would happen if he did not succeed, and a nobleness that drove him to do it for the sake of the world.
Perhaps, too, he realized that the Ring would wreck his life whatever he did- for if he had not left on the Quest, he would have been consumed by it and Middle-earth would have fallen- and thought that he might as well save the world. This is a rather simplistic view, but I see Frodo's situation not as an unwilling sacrifice, but a "lesser of two evils". True, the two evils are both forced on him by the world- but no one has complete control of their lives.
On a related note, what indicates that Frodo was miserable or deep depression? My impression of the end of RotK is that he is merely changed. Remember Elrond's quote "He may become like a glass filled with light" at Rivendell? My feeling is that Frodo had changed, become more elf-like and like a "glass filled with light" and so was more suited for life over the Sea- but I don't think he was necessarily unhappy in the Shire.

[Child of the 7th Age]

Firefoot - I liked your post.

Would Frodo willingly have made the sacrifice he did if he had known the outcome?

Davem ---- The cold truth is that none of us know the outcome when we agree to stick our neck out and venture on a new course. This is certainly true of a situation like Frodo's where a person does something because he is asked and he believes it to be "right". He feels compelled to do it to protect that which he loves. But it is even true of other situations in life. As Bilbo said, when you step out onto the Road, you are never certain where it might take you. You might decide to learn something new, to give your trust to someone, or perhaps to start a family. In effect, you are walking into the great unknown because none of us has the slightest idea how anything is going to turn out. We are asked to go forward on faith or hope or "estel", whatever term you prefer to use, trying to make the best choices we can. And sometimes, despite all we do, all our best efforts, our world is broken, and we are asked to deal with the results.

Frodo was in this boat. And he was certainly unique in having to face all the combined evil in the world. But in another sense, he is an "everyman", whether we look at the sad lessons of history or even each other's personal lives. So many of us are asked to deal with the unthinkable at some point: to come to grips with something that rocks us to the core. I think this is one reason we can identify with what Frodo is feeling, although the cause of his loss and suffering is different than what we have faced.

In this sense, Davem, I feel that the question you've raised is artificial. Your question simply can't be answered as long as we are mere mortals. No one, but no one, has this kind of assurance or foreknowledge: not Frodo, nor any of us.

Also, regarding your statement that there could never be any rebirth for the "old" Frodo. I totally agree with you. If and when healing comes, Frodo will be a different Hobbit. He can't go backward: it's simply impossible. But there is the possibility that he can find healing and peace and go beyond what he was before in the Shire. Somewhere in Tolkien's writings, perhaps his Letters (?), there are references to what Arda will be like at the end of time. Tolkien makes a point of saying that it will not be a replica of the world before Morgoth since there is absolutely no way to duplicate that. Because the world has been marred, it will be different in its final outcome. But it will be no less beautiful or full of meaning. This seems to go along with that famous quote in the Silm where even Morgoth's evil acts will be used by Eru to fashion wonders that Morgoth can not even imagine.

I think it is the same way for a person. If and when you go through a wrenching experience, you can't pretend it never happened. You don't forget the suffering and you can't magically turn yourself into the old person you were before. But you can become something more, something different. If Frodo can somehow find healing in the West, he would have an understanding of things that would go far beyond what he had before living peacefully in the Shire.

Symestream - I agree with you that at some point on his journey, Frodo recognized that the outcome was unlikely to be good, yet he took on the task of his own volition, even with that understanding. That recognition came only gradually. It did not fall on his head in one swift lightning bolt. But, step by step on the path to Mordor, Frodo grew in understanding.

You are right to point out Gandalf's statement about Frodo becoming like a glass filled with light, a clear reference to the phial of Galadriel, that tiny sliver of a silmaril. And also Frodo had become more elf-like. Samwise mentioned that the light in Frodo's eye was growing as the Hobbit continued on the path. Another "positive" reference that could be added to this list was Frodo's dream in Bombadil's house. Surely this early premonition of the shores of Tol Eressea suggests that Frodo was "meant" to go West, and that meaning extends beyond any immediate need for healing.

Yet I agree with Davem that Frodo was suffering at the end....the illness that came on him on March 13, the anniversary of his poisoning by Shelob and also on October 6, the date of the wounding at Weathertop. In his Letters, Tolkien discussed the fact that Frodo felt disappointed that he had been a mere instrument of Providence rather than a conventional "hero", and that part of him still desired the Ring and felt guilt about all that. So, in my view, Frodo's trip to the West was required for two reasons: to find healing and to fulfill that part of his nature that Gandalf alluded to and which found expression in the dream at Bombadil's (as well as the other dream where he climbed the tower and looked out on the Sea).

Din ,

I think you are right. It comes down to faith in Eru, or at least a basic belief in the meaning of life. And yet, if you think about, how much did Frodo actually know?

One of the things that intrigues me is that the Hobbits as a whole really had very little idea of who Eru even was. They certainly had no formal worship.

Did Frodo know about Eru? He and Sam did make reference to a few of the Valar, mainly Elbereth. Probably something, because of Bilbo's interest in the Elvish tales.When Frodo saw Faramir's men rising to face the West after eating, he felt rustic and unlearned, wishing that his own people had such a custom. Knowledge of Eru (or even the Valar) was not widespread in the Shire and worship was unknown.

According to Shippey, one of the questions Tolkien wanted to investigate in LotR was how people chose the right path before formal religious revelations had been given to the world, i.e., in the so-called "pagan" world. One of the things that strikes me is how generally moral the Hobbits are, a morality based on instinct rather than formal belief. Their fidelity puts our own world to shame! As Frodo said, there was no instance of one Hobbit killing another since they had lived in the Shire. Would that we, with all our formal beliefs, could make such a claim!

[davem]

Child, Ok, I've put the most extreme case in regards to Frodo's sacrifice. Clearly he was drawn to things Elvish even before the Quest, & the desire for spiritual things grew the further down the road to Hell he went. There was a growing desire for things beyond the world he knew. The hole that was opened up in him by the loss of the Ring was maybe necessary - maybe he had to be deprived - by life or God - of those little things, so that he could grow sufficiently in spiritual terms to be able to enter that greater world. Frodo as 'Everyman' does reflect our own journey, & on that level the Shire is a pre-pubescent boy's fantasy world - the world of our own childhood which must be outgrown & lost forever (save in memory). Hence Frodo's experience is 'the way things are in the World' - whether we like it or not.

But Sam also grows, without the extreme suffering & loss. And Sam's love of the Elvish/spiritual world is no less than Frodo's. Perhaps the explanation lies in the fact that while Sam loves the Elvish world, Frodo needs it. Sam is perhaps like the regular church-goer who believes, but lives a life in the world, while Frodo is like the Monk or Nun (or if we accept the Sea Bell, the Hermit), who has to leave the world & everything & everyone they love for a life of the spirit.

Frodo's last days are a dark night of the Soul, & we can only speculate how long it will go on for, even after he leaves M.E. Sam seems to think or hope it will not go on for long. Perhaps Frodo ultimately does get what he wants, as well as what he needs, but we aren't told. I still think its a valid question to ask - is there a point where Frodo does truly realise what the cost will be, & agree too pay it, or is he just swept along the Road , by God or fate, or destiny - the way things are in the world. Does he agree to 'grow', is he made to 'grow'. Does God stand back & let us grow only when we want to, or does he ''hot-house'' us (sometimes, at least)? But, in an extreme case like Frodo's, shouldn't we have to agree to that?

[symestreem]

Going back to Din's original question, I found another quote:

But when all these things were done, and the Heir of Isildur had taken up the lordship of Men, and the dominion of the West had passed to him, then it was made plain that the power of the Three Rings was ended, and to the Firstborn the world grew old and grey.

Perhaps Frodo left not because of his pain, which was not seriously ruining his life, but because the world had grown 'old and grey' and 'dark and empty'.
I disagree that Frodo's experiences were necessarily negative ones. He grew, he changed; he became something higher. When you change, you are no longer what you were (duh!); in becoming higher and more elf-like, Frodo did lose some things- he became less like a hobbit, and so could no longer fit into their world. But, he gained some things too- he became higher and more elf-like, and was now going where he belonged. I don't want to oversimplify or reduce what Frodo went through, but I sort of compare it to growing pains.
Davem, Sam does grow; but he grows in a different way from Frodo. He is still in awe of the elves, not in sympathy (?) with them. He has become a stronger person and a nobler one- he has been "tempered", if you will- but he is not spoiled for life in the Shire. He did not have to bear the Ring, after all. He is inherently different from Frodo even at the beginning of the book; I think these inherent differences dictate in which direction each hobbit grows. OK, think of two trees. They are very short, and they lean slightly apart. If you take care of them, they will grow tall and wide, but they will still grow in the same direction they were before (barring uncommon events, which is another story...)
And, I just forgot the rest of what I was going to say.

[Firefoot]

Thanks, Child.

Sam does grow, but I believe that he also suffered some as well. Not nearly to the extent that Frodo did or in the same way, but suffering none the less. Seeing Frodo suffer hurt Sam, and I think that this was his chief source of suffering: that Frodo was suffering and Sam couldn't really do anything about it. That would have been really hard for Sam. Sam grows from the journey - he becomes wiser and stronger, and like Symestreem said

he is not spoiled for life in the Shire.

Sam didn't go through the pain that Frodo did, though there was some suffering. He was able to go back to Hobbit life. I think one of the biggest differences is that Sam gained much more than he lost, whereas Frodo lost much more than he gained.

Originally posted by Davem:
Does he agree to 'grow', is he made to 'grow'. Does God stand back & let us grow only when we want to, or does he ''hot-house'' us (sometimes, at least)? But, in an extreme case like Frodo's, shouldn't we have to agree to that?

Frodo could have chosen to turn back at any time. He willingly went on. Whether Frodo realized it or not, by going on he was choosing to grow.

I agree with Symestreem: Frodo grew into something higher. He had to grow, and he grew into something more strong and wise. This had to be, in order that he could pass into the West and experience healing.

"No Sam!" said Frodo. "Do not kill him even now. For he has not hurt me. And in any case I do not wish him to be slain in this evil mood. He was great once, of a noble kind that we should not dare to raise our hands against. He is fallen, and his cure is beyond us; but I would still spare him, in the hope that he may find it."
Saruman rose to his feet, and stared at Frodo. There was a strange look in his eyes of mingled wonder and respect and hatred. "You have grown Halfling," he said. "Yes, you have grown very much. You are wise, and cruel. You have robbed my revenge of sweetness, and now I must go hence in bitterness, in debt to your mercy.

This is one of the places where Frodo's growth is most evident: in the mercy he shows to Saruman. He had grown in understanding and wisdom and this is shown in how he treats Saruman. He knows that it would be better to let him go rather than to kill him.

[symestreem]

Here is a quote I found from Understanding Tolkien and the Lord of the Rings by William Ready. Not canon, of course, but expresses some of the points in clearer language. Emphasis is mine.

All seems well, but Frodo has lost his living for his kin. While Sam, Pippin and Merry gleefully contemplate their return to the Shire, where Sam is to flourish and weather for years as the Mayor, Frodo is no more for this world; he has transcended hobbitry. His wounds will not altogether mend again in this life, and he bids farewell to Sam, wishing he were returning with him:

An interesting excerpt, and it raises the question of which wounds Mr. Ready is referring to. Do we actually know the extent of the damage to Frodo's mind and soul? If, as has been expressed here, Frodo went through "hell" and "deepest darkness", but Sam did not, then the torment must have come in the actual Ringbearing itself, for Sam went through almost all of the same physical experiences as Frodo. But Bilbo, a former Ringbearer, is serene after he loses the Ring. So what evidence do we have to support the theory that Frodo's last days were miserable? I'm not implying that his life was a bed of roses (yuck, allergies!); I just don't think it's in a hobbit's nature to be utterly cast down.
I don't mean to harp on this theme; I'm just not convinced.

[Imladris]

I believe I heard years ago, that the Ring symbolised pure evil. Thus, inevitably, Frodo would be affected more than Sam. As for Bilbo, the Ring was asleep...it's power of evil was not awake, and thus could not do as powerful and lasting damage.

As for Frodo's hopelessness, I'm also not convinced of that.

Still round the corner there may wait
A new road or a secret gate;
And though I oft have passed them by,
A day will come at last when I
Shall take the hidden paths that run
West of the Moon, East of the Sun.

This was the song that Frodo sang as he left the Shire. It doesn't quite have the ring of despair to me.

[davem]

Maybe you're right - I must be honest, I've been kind of using this thread to make sense of an incident, which it wouldn't be right to go into here, but it involved something very bad which happened to a person I knew.

It all comes down to suffering & its effects. Do we grow through suffering - & even if we do, is that enough to absolve the Creator, or fate. If the suffering is so extreme it breaks us (even if we're re-made into something higher, more spiritually aware) would that be enough to make it ok to have broken us.

Sam & Frodo come through the quest at opposite ends of an extreme. They stand at the Sammath Naur, Ring gone into the Flames, & Sam tells Frodo they should get out of there, becuase its not like him to just give up, & Frodo reponds, maybe not, but its like things are in the world. Sam speaks subjectively. Frodo objectively. Sam says 'Never say die', Frodo says 'Everything dies'.

Frodo may have become more Elvish - but he's a Hobbit, not an Elf. He's lost himself - & in the end I suppose that's the 'It' we're talking about - everything that made him who he was, which became bound up with & symbolised by the Ring.

I just can't shake the feeling that what happened to Frodo was 'wrong' - even if he chose it - but it wasn't a free choice. as someone has said, it was the lesser of two evils, & that seems just plain wrong - you afre faced with choosing the lesser of two evils, & that choice breaks you. Yet, it is like things are in the world.