Failure and Punishment

[Galadriel55]

I was almost finished typing my awesome post when the computer decided to delete it. ><

Firstly, I want to say that I did not read all the posts, but I agree with Lotrelf. I say that there's a huge difference between a punishment and a consequence. Even on a basic level - a punishment is done purposefully (!) by someone or something (who? Eru? fate? some little angel on your shoulder with a checklist of sins?) with the intention to either restore justice (BS) or teach a lesson (like Frodo doesn't actually know). Secondly, one is punished for something wrong. What has Frodo done wrong? What is he punished for? For being a human being? His faults are not sins. His faults are not even faults.

For one thing, folly was never one of his qualities. Ever. It was not folly ("let's put on the Ring and see what happens! Oooh, shiny!") that made him put on the Ring, but a lack of wisdom and experience. The act could be considered folly from an objective or retrospective point of view, but not the same folly as that which drives Pippin to throw the rock in Moria. It it a fault to be susceptible to the Ring? It wouldn't be the Ring if it was. Frodo putting on the Ring was a consequence of universal susceptibility to the Ring and the pressure of being surrounded by the Nazgul. Being stabbed was a consequence of that. I see no fault and no punishment. Considering that he was the strongest person in ME in terms of resisting the Ring (the discussion about Gollum aside), the whole of Middle-earth would have to be punished.

Since when is being overjoyed to see an opening out of Shelob's lair and rushing to get out a sin? If you think it is, I dare you to spend a day or two wandering in sme pitch-black musky caves, and se if you don't rush for the first opening or light that you see. And overconfidence? "I can openly run all the way thrugh Mordor completely unharmed!" was the last thing one could expect to be in Frodo's mind at that time. He was blinded by the joy of getting out of Shelob's lair - a completely normal and human emtion. As a consequence he did not look behind him, and as a consequence was stabbed by Shelob. The whole reasoning of Lin Carter is flawed from the start: there is no fault, there is no overconfidence, there is no punishment.

Finally, the last scene she addresses, when Frodo does not throw the Ring away at Sammath Naur. Number one. It is not weakness that makes him hesitate. If he was weak, he would not have been on this quest, or he would have given in a long time ago. He is not weak, he is just not strong enough, and no one in Middle-earth is. Number two. The fight between him and Gollum is a climax of the whole story, and the climax of their relationship. Both begin with greed and desire for the Ring, but when Frodo snaps out of his trance does he only fight for the Ring's sake? or maybe he recalls his greater purpose and fights for ME? or he remembers his former connection with Gollum, and fights for Gollum's sake as well? Whatever you think the significance of the scene is, it is not a punishment. It does not happen because it is willed by someone due to Frodo's hesitation. Yes, it comes about as a consequence of his hesitation - Gollum has time to catch up - but not as a punishment. The build up to this scene from all perspectives begins back in the Shire, when Frodo learns of both the Ring and of Gollum. How can it be a punishment of something that occurs much later? Number three. The loss of a finger is only Frodo's most gruesome consequence in physical terms. If Lin Carter thinks this is his most severe wound, she's missed the whole point of the book. Nuff said.

I don't see any of these as a punishment, and I don't see any of these as a fault. The whole concept implies that either Frodo is expected to turn into a saint, or everyone in ME is watched over constantly and punished for stepping out of line even in the slightest. Moreover, things do not happen because they come about, but because some omnipotent creature (Eru) or concept (fate) sits up there somewhere and makes them happen. By that logic, Saruman gets killed necessarily, as a punishment and not a consequence of his deeds, and Wormtongue is killed necessarily for the same reason. Boromir dies necessarily and purposefully. Everything loses its beauty and its meaning - all the subtle but overwhelming emotions in all these people, and their choice to act the way they did that lead up to their end. I prefer to think that Saruman dies as a consequence of his cruelty, not as a punishment for it. I prefer to think that Wormtongue dies as a consequence of the war-like attitude of the hobbits, who unlike Frodo do not have as much empahy or pity for "enemies". I prefer to think that Boromir sacrifices himself to absolve his guilt. What is the point of all of this, and so many other beautiful stories, with Lin Carter's philosophy? I just can't accept it.