Character Analysis Thread

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

Well, in a way Boromir's fall is the fault of story. Without the examples of those who have succumbed to the lure of the Ring, Frodo's trial would lack effect. .

Not necessarily. There was Isildur’s example, Gollum’s example, Gandalf’s fear to take the Ring even for a time, Galadriel’s lust for the Ring that she had barely overcome, Denethor’s wish to get the ring, Sam’s temptation and finally Frodo’s ultimate fall to the Ring’s lure. The point was made even without Boromir.

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

And on the other hand there's Tom and Sam. If only Boromir had had a bit more sense of silliness and humour about him. .

Tom? But he didn't need the Ring at all - that was the difference. He was a content being. He had no goals in life that he couldn't carry out with his own "stronger songs". Had he wished (for instance) to expand his territory to Fangorn etc., or had he wished for Sauron's downfall, he wouldn't have remained immune to the Ring. Even Sam, the simple gardener and the perfect bodyguard, had more hidden desires that the Ring could explore.
And if "Sam the Ringlord" or "Gollum the Great" sounded silly, "Boromir the Great" didn't - at all. He was a good potential Ringlord, no worse than Isildur or Aragorn - and Sauron himself was most worried when he was led to believe that Aragorn had his Ring.

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

But really, this question of the culpability of the Wise is interesting, for they are not bullies; they do not seek to dominate the will of others. That way lies Sauron's way. It is the quintessetial dilemma of Good, how to combat evil without succumbing to its ways. The only person who could save Boromir from himself was Boromir; any other person would have meant a bullying interference.

I have to disagree. Explaining things and persuading someone is no “bullying interference.” IMO, the Wise failed to give Boromir all the necessary information about the Ring: the reasoning behind WHY it shouldn't be used. In the movies m-Elrond tried to explain it, saying ”the Ring answers only to Sauron”. But that is NOT what Tolkien wrote. Saruman, Galadriel and Boromir thought they could use the Ring and overthrow Sauron. Gandalf certainly could do it – we know it from the Letters- but then he would become the next Dark Lord, even worse than Sauron.
Gandalf did explain it to Frodo, early on, but did he tell the same to Boromir? Did Galadriel try to explain it to Boromir? I doubt it. This reasoning (WHY the Ring should NOT be used) is not easy to grasp: even the wise ancient Galadriel spent countless hours musing on "what if she gets the Ring?" . Boromir was left alone, alone and unprepared to counter the Ring's lure. EVERY Man except the specially trained Aragorn (and at length maybe even he as well) would have been in peril in Boromir's place.

[Bêthberry]

To each his own.

Originally Posted by Gordis

The point was made even without Boromir

I rather think Boromir's fall provided a harrowing, operational example of the breakdown of civil and civic order and was a valuable addition to the story. There's something in Tolkien that wants to explore the old warrior code, its vulnerabilities as well as its honours and dignities. And of course something else interesting to have the "spare", Faramir, turn truer than the "heir."

Originally Posted by Gordis

Tom? But he didn't need the Ring at all - that was the difference

There's something to be said for the ability not to take oneself so seriously. Humour adds distance that counteracts pomposity.

Originally Posted by Gordis

IMO, the Wise failed

In fairy tale, there are characters, often of ambiguous or enigmatic status, whose role is to push other characters towards revealing or discovering their own spirit, often with the all too obvious peril that those so tested may fail. Rather like the Faun in [i]Pan's Labyrinth[/b] or the bowdlerized figure of Mr. Tumnus in Narnia. It is part of the attraction of fantasy.


Still, I suppose, it is the attraction of the character to merit an apologist.