Boromir, Gollum and Eowyn

[The Saucepan Man]

Great topic, Fordim, and a fascinating analysis.

Unfortunately, I have no time now save to make a few passing comments.

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

They are some of the most interesting characters because they are psychologically in complex and perhaps more realistic than the more consistently noble characters who disregard their own feelings with regard to the greater good.

I heartily agree with this, and it was a point that became clear to me during the discussion on the Psychological Depth thread. Together with Denethor, they are the most psychologically complex characters in the book, and it seems to me, therefore, that it is natural that they should be grouped together in an analysis such as this. Is there a place for Denethor too here, I wonder? Probably not, despite his psychological complexity:

1. Although he certainly despairs, he does not triumph.
2. He is not an unwitting player and is more aware of his "part in the Story" than many others - hence, in many ways, his despair.
3. Desire did not play a great role in his actions, save perhaps the desire to preserve his position.
4. His failure to achieve his ends does allow the Return of the King unopposed.
5. He certainly opposes the will of the "heroes".
6. But he occupies a different place in the structure of the narrative than the three subjects of this thread.

So there are some parallels, but they are not borne fully out. Nevertheless, I feel that Denethor does have some place in this discussion, as Boromir's father, if for no other reason. Alas, no time to develop this further.

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

It is one of those neat little twists that the hobbits who Boromir dies saving facilitate the survival of Faramir and Eowyn. Little Hobbit cupids bringing them together at thehouses of healing

Good point. Merry and Pippin do form a link between Boromir and Eowyn/Faramir, although their connection with Gollum is less clear ...

One final thought. Eowyn can be distinguished from the other two, it seems to me, on one analysis. The selfish and disobedient actions of Boromir and Gollum (ie going against their oaths and attempting to seize the Ring) are unambiguously portrayed as "wrong", even though they have (unintended) fortuitous consequences. On the other hand, Eowyn's selfish and disobedient act (disobeying her King's orders) has an intentionally fortuitous consequence - she kills the Witch King and saves her King from a grisly end. Admittedly, she did not set out to kill the Witch King, but she did set out to do battle. The consequences of her acts are more within the scope of that which she intended to achieve. Accordingly, her "wrongful" act seems, to me at least, to be of a different character - less unambiguously "wrong" than the acts of Boromir and Gollum.

Sorry, my disordered and incomplete thoughts are the result of haste. I will return ...

[Boromir88]

I think some other connections between the three, are their parents. Eowyn's parents died, Boromir's parents died (yes his father died after him, but he died). With Gollum, his own family kicked him out.

In Boromir's case, a reason for his glory lust, and valour, could be Denethor. Denethor saw Boromir as Gondor's only hope left, and put a lot of pressure on him. Eager to please his father, and to see Gondor victorious, he feels the only way to do that is through the Ring.

Eowyn's parents died at a very young age, Boromir's mom died when he was young, his father was a good strategist, but a bad parent, and Gollum, as mentioned was shunned by his own family. So, none of them have this strong relation with their parents.

I'm not sure about Gollum, but in Boromir and Eowyn's case they have people to help them out. With Boromir, it's Faramir, who he's always looking after, and as it states in the appendix, despite the father's favortism they rarely fought. Eowyn has Theoden she's looking after, and Eomer is looking after her. I'm not sure where Gollum fits in, because he really doesn't have anyone, except the Ring.

This is just some of the my thoughts, with the three characters parents, it could quite honestly lead to no where.

[Mithalwen]

It occurs, remembering that lovely scene when Faramir has given his mother's mantle that she is filling various voids in his life - it could be a bit creepy but it could be seen more positively in that they are everything to each other * sleps self before getting too gooey thinking about Faramir and Eowyn... * :P

[Fordim Hedgethistle]

Some very interesting initial responses – and much, as I predicted, that I had not considered.

Sauce: I don’t think that Denethor ‘belongs’ in this grouping of characters for the reasons you outline, but I agree that he is definitely important to the discussion. I think of all the characters in the story he is the one who most obviously, or most fully, gives way to despair. Saruman also gives up all hope of defeating Sauron, but he is motivated by his desire to replace him as well. Gollum, Boromir and Éowyn all give in to despair, but they never really give up. Denethor’s ‘madness’ is really not psychological or even emotional, but spiritual. He has been tricked by Sauron into believing that hope is impossible. In this way he stands as an important foil to the GBE triad (and I can already see how I’m going to regret putting it that way…). He is the unredeemed version of despair, and the result of this is that he seeks to destroy himself and others (Faramir directly, and Minas Tirith indirectly, through inaction).

Mithalwen: I can readily appreciate your resistance to my proposition that Éowyn does evil, but I really do think that it is important to recognise that she has done evil. You cite Faramir and Éomer as also doing evil in that they go against their fathers/Kings, but these are decidedly different. Unlike Éowyn they take counsel on their actions and do what they think is best for everyone involved; more importantly, they are forced into these positions by having fathers/parents who are no longer in their right minds. When Éowyn goes against Theoden and Aragorn, the former has been healed and the latter is, well, Aragorn! She also breaks her duty to them both entirely on her own. Yes, her motivations might be noble and even rewarded, but she’s an oath-breaker – like them fellows in that there mountain!

Mark: I also would resist the absolute characterisation of Gollum as evil, if by that you mean he is beyond all hope of redemption, untouchable and untouched by the good. There are a number of times in his journeys with Frodo that we see him very much moved by and toward the good, and the possibility of penance is there for him all along. Yes, he has done appalling things – evil things – but he is not evil in the way that Sauron or Melkor or Shelob are evil.

These questions that Mark and Mith rather demonstrate what I think makes these three characters so very interesting insofar as there’s not going to be much debate about whether Frodo, Aragorn, Sam, Gandalf, Merry, Pippin, Legolas, Gimli (and on and on and on) are good or if Sauron, Saruman, Grima, Shelob (and on and on and on) are evil – but with Boromir, Éowyn and Gollum (BEG?) there is a discussion possible. They are good people, who do evil things, but these evil things in the end are in the service of good. It gets even more complicated: they are good people who are doing what they think are good things, but which are evil anyway, despite their intentions or how sympathetic we might feel toward them. I find it interesting that so far we’ve had people come forward in defence of Éowyn and in condemnation of Gollum, but so far no-one has weighed in on Boromir – is this the result of G and E being far more sympathetic characters, insofar as they are more pathetic and vulnerable, victims even, whereas Boromir is a mighty warrior who ‘brings it on himself’ or is even ‘asking for it’?

B88: you (quite wonderfully) write that:

I'm not sure about Gollum, but in Boromir and Eowyn's case they have people to help them out. With Boromir, it's Faramir, who he's always looking after, and as it states in the appendix, despite the father's favortism they rarely fought. Eowyn has Theoden she's looking after, and Eomer is looking after her. I'm not sure where Gollum fits in, because he really doesn't have anyone, except the Ring.

I had not considered this in the slightest, but I think it’s brilliant. Gollum very much has a ‘place’ in here, too insofar as he looks after Frodo and is looked after by Frodo on their journey. Their bond is an odd one, and an adversarial one, but it is one that is as emotionally charged as the one between Sam and Frodo. There are many ways in which Frodo and Gollum understand one another better than any else could ever understand them: who but they know the full torment of bearing the Ring? What’s interesting to me is how each of the three (GEB?) is redeemed by the person they care for: Éowyn saves Theoden after breaking her duty to him; Faramir succeeds in letting the Ring go where Boromir failed; Gollum gets the Ring into the Fire because Frodo has let him live.

And this matter of parents that you raise is also interesting, particularly in reference to the mothers: Faramir is much more like his mother than his father, Gollum was kicked out of his society by his grandmother (whom Gandalf singles out as “a mighty person” in her own right), Éowyn is a woman utterly isolated in a world of men to the point where her own mother is entirely non-existent in the tale. Her own redemption takes the form, in part at least, of her willing adoption of a motherly role for herself. Not really sure where to go with this, but it’s interesting…

[Lalwendë]

There is something within Eowyn which I think would stop me from ever calling her actions in any way evil. She does abandon her command and go off to war in disguise, but this in itself is not as evil as actions of many many other characters. Presuming she goes to war in order to find some way to assuage her love for Aragorn, her actions are not unusual. Legolas says of Aragorn's devoted followers:

all those who come to know him come to love him after their own fashion, even the cold maiden of the Rohirrim.

This perhaps says more about Aragron and the kind of devotion he engenders than Eowyn's 'love'; he may have this effect on many more people. We do not know if Aragron meets any other young women trained to the sword, but I feel that if he did, then they too would feel the same 'love' that Eowyn feels. It is a high-minded, admiring love rather than the love for any kind of soul-mate. Faramir describes the love she has felt for him thus:

You desired to have the love of the Lord Aragorn. Because he was high and puissant, and you wished to have renown and glory and to be lifted far above the mean things that crawl on the earth. And as a great captain may to a young soldier he seemed to you admirable. For so he is, a lord among men, the greatest that now is. But when he gave you only understanding and pity, then you desired to have nothing, unless a brave death in battle.

It seems that Aragorn is well aware of the nature of Eowyn's 'love' for him. He is not altogether comfortable with it, but he he knows that this love she has is born of desperation, coming from the days when she is unloved and threatened by Grima, trapped with an elderly uncle, and in a household filled with tough fighting men. He sees that Eowyn sees him as a leader as much as a love interest:

For she is a fair maiden, fairest lady of a house of queens. And yet I know not how I should speak of her. When I first looked on her and perceived her unhappiness, it seemed to me that I saw a white flower standing straight and proud, shapely as a lily, and yet knew that it was hard, as if wrought by elf-wrights out of steel. Or was it, maybe, a frost that had turned its sap to ice, and so it stood, bitter-sweet, still fair to see, but stricken, soon to fall and die? Her malady begins far back before this day, does it not, Eomer?'

Aragorn does try to stay Eowyn, and keep her from an awful fate. Has he had this situation before? He also gives her a lecture on her dereliction of duty if she leaves Meduseld unattended; in so many words, he says that this would be an evil act. But then contrast this with the effect that Faramir has on her:

'I would have you command this Warden, and bid him let me go,' she said; but though her words were still proud, her heart faltered, and for the first time she doubted herself. She guessed that this tall man, both stern and gentle, might think her merely wayward, like a child that has not the firmness of mind to go on with a dull task to the end.

With this man, she is prepared to listen and he even seems to have the effect on her that she ought to behave better in some way. He has some kind of control over her, though not of misplaced power. Does this show how she did not really love Aragorn? That he could not command her, but Faramir clearly can. Faramir can see that she has been besotted with Aragorn, partly due to his leadership qualities; he can see that she has been inspired by him. While with Faramir, she finds real love. The following scene between Eowyn and Faramir is quite beautiful (it also describes the tension on the edge of the cracks of doom) as it describes how time does indeed seem to stop and the world almost disappears when we fall in love:

And they said no more; and it seemed to them as they stood upon the wall that the wind died, and the light failed, and the Sun was bleared, and all sounds in the City or in the lands about were hushed: neither wind, nor voice, nor bird-call, nor rustle of leaf, nor their own breath could be heard; the very beating of their hearts was stilled. Time halted.

And as they stood so, their hands met and clasped, though they did not know it.

I cannot think that Eowyn was evil in any way for going AWOL. She was driven by something desperate, not entirely of Aragorn's making. And she saw in him some kind of freedom offered, or another way of life better than being nurse maid to an old man. Yet then she is rewarded by a rare thing, finding instinctive, real love with Faramir. That can't surely be a reward for an evil person? Or can it be? I think Eowyn was definitely in despair - for much more than her 'crush' on Aragorn, but as for whether she is acting out of free will, I'm not sure. She seems to do much on an instinctive level, from falling for Aragorn to making the decision to abandon her post and ride to war. In fact, she does not seem to act of free will until she falls in love with Faramir and suddenly is then hit by the fact as though she has woken from a nightmare:

Then the heart of Eowyn changed, or else at last she understood it. And suddenly her winter passed, and the sun shone on her.

[Boromir88]

I find it interesting that so far we’ve had people come forward in defence of Éowyn and in condemnation of Gollum, but so far no-one has weighed in on Boromir – is this the result of G and E being far more sympathetic characters

I'm always sympathetic to Boromir, but I thought most people had seen my rantings about him already. I'll gladly jump to Boromir's defense if one wishes it .

As for another comment...

As Fordhim says, none of them are downright "evil," compared to Sauron and Saruman, they are good at heart, they just make bad decisions. Could this also be connected with eachother's places in the story? For all these characters seem out of place, at least at some part (if not through the whole story).

Boromir- He's out of place in Lorien, and very well could be out of place in the fellowship. He cares not for lore, and history, but battle, so the only time he fits in "place," is during chances of fighting (Moria, Gondor, Amon Hen...etc). However, when it comes to other occasions, like deciding where the Fellowship goes, or Lorien, he is out of place.

Eowyn- being amongst men practically her whole life. And even when she disguises herself as Dernhelm she is out of place. As far as we know the only ones that know she is actually is Eowyn, that set out from Dunharrow, are Elfhelm and Merry.

Gollum- Once he took the Ring he was out of place amongst his family members. Shunned upon and cast out.

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Fordim Hedgethistle

These questions that Mark and Mith rather demonstrate what I think makes these three characters so very interesting insofar as there’s not going to be much debate about whether Frodo, Aragorn, Sam, Gandalf, Merry, Pippin, Legolas, Gimli (and on and on and on) are good or if Sauron, Saruman, Grima, Shelob (and on and on and on) are evil – but with Boromir, Éowyn and Gollum (BEG?) there is a discussion possible.

That's it! You have put your finger on it! That's what makes me think that Denethor belongs in this discussion. As you say, there is much scope for discussion in connection with the motives and actions of Boromir, Eowyn and Gollum because (unlike the other central characters) they are neither entirely good nor entirely evil. And this applies to Denethor too. He was once a great and noble Steward and he has served Gondor with distinction. Even at the time of the War of the Ring, despite his despair, he retains his dignity, powerful intellect and strategic nouse (no, we are not talking about the villain of the films here ). He is never entirely evil (in the Sauron/Saruman/Shelob sense), yet his final act is an evil one - and one which goes unredeemed. He kills himself (presumably a sin, according to Tolkien's beliefs) and tries to take his one remaining son with him (a sin in anyone's book). And he achieves nothing by doing so, save to ease Aragorn's ascent to the throne - hardly a consequence which redeems his final act.

Denethor’s ‘madness’ is really not psychological or even emotional, but spiritual. He has been tricked by Sauron into believing that hope is impossible.

Actually, I believe that his madness comprises all three. The emotional, and therefore psychological, element is present in the heightening of his despair with the loss of his beloved firstborn and the belief that he has lost his remaining son too. And Sauron's trickery could only work on him by virtue of the emotional (as well as dutiful) love that he felt for his country. Seeing its fall as inevitable works emotionally and psychologically on his mind. So, his ambiguity - in terms of good v evil - may be discussed on all three levels.

But, ultimately, I believe that you are right when you say:

In this way he stands as an important foil to the GBE triad

He is similar to them in his psychological/spiritual complexity, yet he goes unredeemed. Why is this? What did he do that was so wrong that he doesn't deserve redemption (in life at least)? Is it perhaps that he is brought down directly by Sauron rather than indirectly (through the Ring or, in Eowyn's case, the circumstances of her country and her unrequited love for Aragorn)? Surely that is rather unfair on him since, of them all, he had the least chance, being directly in contention with the Dark Lord's will. And, as I have suggested, his despair was heavily influenced by the loss of his sons and the inevitable (as he saw it) loss of the realm for which he was responsible, factors played upon by a power far greater than him. Surely, viewed in these terms, his madness is at least understandable, and possibly excusable.

[davem]

Jumping in here....

I'm interested in what SpM has said about Denethor:

What did he do that was so wrong that he doesn't deserve redemption (in life at least)?

Is there redemption for Denethor after death? And then there's the question as to whether Gollum is truly evil. In Middle earth there is no 'Hell'. No-one goes (as far as we're told) to any place worse than Mandos. Sauron, Saruman & the Lord of the Nazgul seem simply to dissipate into nothingness, rather than be dragged off to eternal damnation. Each individual's fate (self inflicted or otherwise) seems to play itself out within Middle earth.

I'm uncomfortable with labeling any of the characters as Evil, because accepting Tolkien's statements that 'nothing is evil in the beginning', that evil is merely a perversion of the Good, we really have originally innocent, individuals who have made a series of increasingly bad choices, & become locked into a certain mindset.

From this point of view, any decision to act against what the individual knows to be the Good is an evil act. Any such choice puts that individual on the road that leads to becoming a Sauron or Shelob. Some choose evil but pull back & manage (often with some help) to redeem themselves, other's don't.

In other words, no-one in Middle earth is 'evil' per se - ie, evil in their essential nature, because Nothing is evil in its beginning. There is simply an option to remain in the 'light' or move away from it, into the 'darkness' which is not a thing in itself, but an absence of that Light.

Eowyn's confrontation with the Lord of the Nazgul is on one level a confrontation with that 'unlight' which she has been 'dallying' with for most of her adult life. She defeats him not so much because of some ancient prophecy as because she refuses, at the last, to go the whole way & let that unlight swallow her up & consume her. She asserts her Eru given uniqueness - 'You look upon a woman. Eowyn I am, Eomund's daughter.....For living or dark undead, I will smite you if you touch him.'

Smeagol carries his own 'unlight' within him. And in the end he gives in to it & is consumed by it. Does he find redemption after his death? Is there anything left of 'Smeagol' to be redeemed? Aren't such choices made in this life, rather than after death. Are there any in Mandos who have chosen the unlight willingly, chosen it totally, & rejected the Good? Or have they all sacrificed their existence through their choices made in this life?

Rambling thoughts posted too early in the morning.....

[mark12_30]

Wonderful stuff.

However:

5) They oppose the wills of the heroes, even try to hinder them, but they are not evil.

This is probably the most important point about them. They are the story’s only truly flawed characters who undergo some process of redemption transformation. It is why they are the most interesting characters in some ways. They do evil things (even Éowyn, who breaks her oath to her King) but they are not evil. They are, in fact, good, but mistaken in their actions and desires.

I think it's a stretch to say that Gollum isn't evil.

"Nothing is evil in the beginning-- even Sauron was not so." I would say the same thing about Smeagol. The fellow had every intention of eating Bilbo; um, ex-hobbit eats hobbit, that's cannibalism. In Mirkwood there was the rumor of some evil creature that drank blood and made small children disappear. We know that while still in the caves, when he tired of fissssh he ate goblins. (Aside: "And they don't taste very good, does they, precioussss?" Great line.)

Who else has he eaten?

Sam's fear that Smeagol would strangle them in their sleep was not an unfounded one. If the Ring hadn't had a still stronger hold on Smeagol than hunger, Frodo and Sam would have been lunch.

IMO this makes Smeagol's near repentance that much more profound and amazing. We're not looking at the repentance of someone who's been caught stealing cookies. ONe would guess that five centuries of cannibalistic murder produces a tremendous hardening of the heart and soul. Frodo's persistent love and mercy and kindness and compassion actually whittled through THAT kind of hardening. It's like pondering, for the sake of argument, the repentance of one of the ringwraiths-- hard to imagine, and I doubt Tolkien would go for it; but Smeagol's repentance is somewhat like that. The odds against it are seemingly insurmountable, and if Sam hadn't seen it with his own hasty eyes, would you believe it?

Compared to that, the repentance of Boromir and Eowyn is in a different league.

I don't think that hurts your arguments all that much, Fordie, except for the part that "the three of them aren't evil". Two aren't, and the third wasn't evil in the beginning-- that works for me.