The Black Gate Is Closed


Sam said nothing. The look on Frodo's face was enough for him; he knew words of his were useless. And after all he never had any real hope in the affair from the beginning; but being a cheerful hobbit he had not needed hope, as long as despair could be postponed.


Love that last bit. Could make a good life philosophy in some ways. :-)

Sam thinks of himself as slow, but I think he's anything but. He also has a wonderful sense of humour, not as sharp-witted as Pippin's, but comforting in the face of all the grimness he and Frodo are encountering. His "Slinker and Stinker" nickname for the Smeagol and Gollum halves, for example.

Good to see that Frodo isn't as trusting and naive as he first appeared. Perhaps he has always been like this, but I can't help but think that his experiences with the Ring so far have made him somewhat more cautious, not always taking things at face value. Which is a good thing.

One thing I'm really enjoying about LOTR is that the characters are actually developing in response to their experiences. They don't just react to events in isolation...everything becomes part of who they are and influences what they do in the future.

And I liked Sam's Oliphaunt poem. :-)

And I trust Gollum even less than before.

[Previous entry: "Two Towers: BOOK IV - Chapter 2"] [Next entry: "Two Towers: BOOK IV - Chapter 4"]

Posted by Jupiter @ 2001 May 24 09:37 AM EST

Keep it up Deb, It's getting good.

Character development is one of the best parts of LOTR. There is a "Loss of innocence" theme for these small hobbits in the big lands of Middle Earth. Sometimes it just makes you want to curl up in front a fire at Bag End and pretend that Frodo and Sam are there and Safe from harm.

Posted by Big Mike @ 2001 May 24 10:07 AM EST

Debbie:

It really tickles me to read your comments and see how much you seem to be enjoying the story.

This part of the book really does contain some of the most sublte yet rich character development, so full of nuance. And, as you've seen so far, the psychological tension between the two hobbits and Gollum is downright delicious.

I love your comments about the
characters "developing in response to their experiences" and that they "don't just react to events in isolation". This is absolutely true - and so obvious to me. I simply can't understand those who complain that Tolkien's characters aren't properly developed or "fleshed out". It seems to me that this particular criticism is nothing more than literary snobbery.

Ah, well...I'll hush up now before I get carried away.

I've really been enjoying everyone's postings. None of my friends or family are at all interested in Tolkien, so this provides a great forum for me. Thanks for coming up with such a great idea!

Posted by Ken @ 2001 May 24 10:42 AM EST

"They don't just react to events in isolation...everything becomes part of who they are and influences what they do in the future." And for me, and others I think, this story becomes part of who you are. It's not like you wear it around all the time, but it certainly has an influence.

I know this isn't where the question was about reading this the first time, but as I said somewhere else, I read it for the first time 25 years ago in 1976, when I was 25. Now that I've thought about it, I remember that everyone I knew had either read or was reading this story. There was a new calendar every year. I remember standing in lines to see Star Wars in the summer of 1977 and people talking about how great it would be if someone would make LotR into movies. Then people would argue that no movie could do justice to it, blah, blah, blah. I guess we're going to see about that...

Anyway, I read the books again in February after seeing the trailer for the films. It was amazing that after 25 years, I had the same trouble putting the books down and am amazed that you can put them down at this point in the story.

I, too, check this site everyday to see what you think and read the comments and am enjoying it very much. By the way, I'm in Montgomery, Alabama.

Posted by Jan @ 2001 May 24 11:50 AM EST

I must confess that I have sometimes skimmed or even skipped the "Frodo and Sam Go To Mordor" chapters of LOTR. My excuse was that they seemed somewhat boring to me compared to the eventful chapters regarding the war in the west. But the real reason was, they are so intense - and tense - as to be almost unbearable to me. And yet, they are the heart of the story in many ways, and must be read with attention to fully appreciate Tolkien's accomplishment.

As for that "lack of character development" line that some critics have taken, it is too idiotic for words. I suspect that the reason these critics can't perceive the character's growth is because it is too profound, too "spiritual" for their shrunken contemporary sensibilities to comprehend.

The next few chapters will go far toward helping you understand Sam's (and the other's) love for Frodo.

Posted by Paul Mendenhall @ 2001 May 24 12:18 PM EST

Paul:

Beautifully put!

I agree with you 150% regarding Tolkien's critics. You managed to express my thoughts much more effectively than I did!

Posted by Ken @ 2001 May 24 12:42 PM EST

Paul,

I also agree with you about Tolkien's critics, at least regarding the supposed lack of character development. It seems that in much of "modern" drama and art, the only "emotion" that is not viewed with suspiscion (or outright derision) is irony. Tolkien had an admitted distrust of modernism, and I don't find myself completely in agreement with him. Nevertheless, LOTR is actually a trimphantly "modern" work, in that it beautifully frames questions that pertain to the modern world without denying the need for personal heroism, restraint and responsibility. I think it's fine for critics to dislike the novel as not being their "cup of tea", but to put out specious arguments that the characters are shallow or under developed simply tells me that someone has not really read the book, but rather has read into it what they wanted (or did not want) to see.

End of rant...:-)

Posted by Jeff Bohnhoff @ 2001 May 24 01:55 PM EST

Jeff -- great comment. I find it quite fascinating that Tolkien served in WWI and lived through the between-the-wars era without succumbing to the irony and modernism affected by his fellow veteran writers. Have you read Patrick Curry's Defending Middle Earth, in which at one point he discusses Tolkien as a post-modern writer? And it's interesting that critics who dislike Tolkien so often make errors of fact or spelling in their rants -- as if they just couldn't be bothered to pay attention. Sure makes their arguements sound weak when they get the basics wrong.

Posted by Janet Croft @ 2001 May 24 02:45 PM EST

Okay y'all - I've been reading all your comments for about a week and now I just have to comment - but not all about LOTR. Which is odd, because I love LOTR. I first read the Hobbit as a twelve year old kid at the beach. I loved it. A year later, back at the beach, I was ecstatic when I finally discovered the Trilogy, and I hardly did anything at all at the beach - except go outside, only to lay on the sand and walk through the mines of Moria with the Fellowship. I finished all three books in a week, at the age of thirteen - and ever since then, I've read the whole trilogy at least twice a year, every year. Now at age 21, I am passing on this love of Middle Earth to my youngest sister. who is fourteen and enthralled with Sam. And we haven't even gotten to Weathertop yet! Alright, now that everyone knows what a hobbit-lover I am, I will say, Debbie, you are doing a wonderful job and I would not change a thing that you are doing. Keep up the good work!

My REAL reason for posting - to Jan in Montgomery, Alabama, I hope you read this, because I know someone from there pretty well, and I live all the way out in Paradise, Northern California (don't laugh, it really is a real place, and quite nice, too!). Anyways, I am just curiously wondering if you know Sean Armster? To the rest of you who are reading this huge post, I am sorry about all the extra stuff - if I had Jan's email, I would spare you all this. Thank you!

Posted by Laural @ 2001 May 24 03:16 PM EST

Sorry, Laural, but I don't know Sean. And I CAN believe there's a Paradise, California! Sorry about no E-mail before, but I was posting that from work...just couldn't wait I guess.

Also, wanted to say that Paul's comment "But the real reason was, they are so intense - and tense - as to be almost unbearable to me." IS, I agree, a perfect description. I couldn't stop reading it, but it was almost more than I could take.

Posted by Jan @ 2001 May 24 06:34 PM EST

Jeez, I'm beginning to think I was a bit too young when I read the book for the first time. I must have been about 14 or 15, and I read it in English (with my native language being Dutch). I loved the book, but I don't think I appreciated the development of the characters as much as I do now.

I realize that more, by reading your reports. Keep it up, they're great!

Posted by Martijn @ 2001 Jun 01 10:12 AM EST

Which character would you say changes the most? Open for discussion. Frodo becomes much more solemn at least, and Sam seems more Resourceful than at the beginning. Both Pippin and Merry sobered up and become more powerful, sometimes they look even... Dare I say it... Heroic. Which isn't very hobbitlike at all, is it?

Posted by Glen @ 2001 Jun 01 03:29 PM EST

Great topic for a discussion! Will you please remember to bring it up in the final debate that I guess we will have after Debbie's finished LoTR? It's difficult to post anyting now on this issue without giving away spoilers. ;)

Posted by Katarina @ 2001 Jun 07 07:18 AM EST