My pal Allison has made a heartfelt plea that I only read LOTR chapters when I'm able to post a report for each chapter soon after, rather than continue to read it on my own even if I don't have online access. Since this LOTR reading journal wouldn't exist without Allison, I'd like to honour the request. Plus as I mentioned before, reading all your feedback as I finish each report greatly enhances the whole experience for me...Hopefully I won't have to wait too long between each chapter, which could be difficult now that things are starting to move towards the climax.
Great chapter about Sam. Wow, has he ever come a long way since his safe days back at the Shire, hasn't he? Lots of great Sam quotes in this chapter, such as:
Scary when Sam puts on the Ring; I fear for him since I've seen what the Ring can do to others. It seems, though, that his love for Frodo is keeping him on the right path. His "I'm coming, Mr. Frodo!" never fails to move me because it is so heartfelt. Didn't I say that Sam would be a good guardian for the Ring? Sam's so cool:
Was amused by Sam's use of the "Elf-warrior" nickname for himself from earlier in the story.
And I was both amused AND horrified when Sam burst into song whilst in the heart of Mordor, with bad guys all around. How hobbit-like. :-D But it seemed to do the trick in getting Frodo's attention.
POOR FRODO!!!! AUGH! I was highly upset at the description of poor Frodo lying naked on a heap of filthy rags, obviously much mistreated. I can just imagine how distraught Sam was to find his master in such a state...it was moving to see how tenderly he lifted Frodo up.
Disturbing to see Frodo snap at Sam a few minutes later when he discovered that Sam had the Ring...his reaction was too Gollum-like for comfort.
Great chapter, the suspense is building! I'll do my best to hold off reading the next chapter until I know I'll be able to post a report...
Replies: 67 comments
Debbie,
As an avid reader and (like so many others) vicariously re-experiencing my own first reading, I feel that, like Allyson, posting soon after reading will give us your freshest impressions.
Thank you so much for giving us this gift and being willing to temper your (growing!) enthusiasm of the books with consideration for your "fans!"
Posted by Doug @ 2001 Jun 08 12:14 PM EST
What about Shagrat, Gorbag, and
Snaga? Deb, I love your comments.
I only wish they were longer.
Posted by Ufthak @ 2001 Jun 08 12:15 PM EST
Debbie,
This is definitely one of my favorite Sam moments. It crystalizes so many of the things that have been brewing since the beginning of the story. Of all the races of Middle Earth, Hobbitts seem to be the most suitable to carry the Ring, because of this innate humility. Even Gollum, who carried it for many decades never used it to try to dominate others, and was actually able to recover somewhat after losing it. Can you imagine Denethor or some other "great" character being able to do the same? It's themes like this that make me wonder why people who rabidly dislike Tolkien (as in the Village Voice critic of late) can't at least give him some credit for moral and ethical subtlety. It's fine to dislike the books, but to accuse them of being morally simplistic is just not true or fair.
Posted by Jeff Bohnhoff @ 2001 Jun 08 12:17 PM EST
This is my favourite section of the book, it's also the hardest. I know what's coming and want to slow down but I always get caught in the words and find my self at the end befoe I know it. Perhaps I should continue to read a chapter behind you.
Sam certainly does prove to be more valuble than most people would have figured, he's come a long way from eavedropping under the eaves.
Don't be to hard on Frodo, the ring is a terrilbe burden, and he does appologize to Sam alomost in the next paragraph.
Personally I would recommend kleenex soon, and not reading in public. I hope that's not to much of a spoiler.
Posted by Heather @ 2001 Jun 08 12:21 PM EST
Oops, now everyone knows how selfish I am :). It's true, I wrote to Deb last night and said -don't- read Book 6 on your own! We've walked this entire road together- I want to go the rest of the way! :) And really, didn't you want to see Deb's fresh response to Chapter 1? And Chapter 2? And 3? And 4? And 5? And chapter 7??? And the last chapter? Heck, there isn't a chapter left in LOTR that I don't want to see Deb's response to.
Speaking of which, wow, chapter 1 here is -so- powerful, another fabulous chapter for Sam. Here's a favorite quote of mine after Sam's been tempted by the Ring,
"The one small garden of a free gardener was all his need and due, not a garden swollen to a realm; his own hands to use, not the hands of others to command".
I love Sam :).
And there is so much emotion and relief in seeing Sam and Frodo together again. That is such a tender scene.
And, yes, if there's any single moment that defines for me the evil of the Ring it's when Frodo turns on Sam and calls him a thief when Sam offers to continue to carry the Ring so his master won't be burdened with it again. It's a very upsetting moment.
And I'm very sentimentally attached to Sam's song in this chapter, but for reasons I can't say yet.
Posted by Allison @ 2001 Jun 08 12:24 PM EST
I have been awaiting your reaction to this chapter. You being such a huge Sam fan. This is one of Sam's best moments. I love when he dreams of covering every thing with a beautiful garden.
So we found Frodo and he is not in such bad shape considering all tha he has been through in the last little bit. It was very dangerous for Sam to use the ring so close to Mordor. I think that if Frodo had used the ring like that he would have been found by Sauron. Mostly because Frodo had almost reveiled him self to Sauron before and he is always thinking about it. Sam's heart is only concerned with his master and I think that saved him from being "felt" by Sauron whiile wearing the ring.
Posted by Big Mike @ 2001 Jun 08 12:31 PM EST
Wow! You've soon finished! :))
The last book, the return of the king, is the saddest, i think. When i was younger, I used to skip the depressing journeys with Gollum, cause it was too dark for me. I have to read the books again this summer to get a fresh image to the movie. :))
And I already love Eliah Woods as Frodo, in fact Im gonna fall in love with the hobbits all over again!! :) The pics looks great!
Cant wait...must have...movie now!
Jennix
Posted by Jenny @ 2001 Jun 08 12:34 PM EST
my only problem with Sam comes up when he decides to go back to get Frodo. He was fully aware of everything at stake, of what hung in the balance. He had the Ring in hand and (seemingly) the will to at least try to make it to Mount Doom. But instead, he turned back; and not for an altruisic reason (I can't just leave him to die), but because he couldn't deal with it. he didn't know that Minas Morgul had been emptied of orcs, so for all he knew he was, in a very real sense, intending to give the Ring back to the Enemy. He decides that his desire at that moment (to continue using Frodo as a crutch) overrides the need of the rest of the world.
Maybe I'm a little harsh, but I really can't stand Sam at that moment. But after that, he works hard to get my respect back, fortunately.
Posted by Nathan @ 2001 Jun 08 12:39 PM EST
I don't know what you mean, there ain't no eaves at bag end :o)
Yes, indeed Sam seems to have come a very long way. To tell the truth, I didn't like Sam as much as Frodo the first time I read the book. I thought he was too unforgiving of Gollum and an idiot for lighting that fire in Ithilien. I was so scared that he would give them all away! I didn't start to really warm to Sam until this chapter. I finally began to understand how completely he was devoted to Frodo. Now, of course, when I reread LOTR, Sam's the best!
Allison: I think that's a great idea to keep a list of spoilers to present after Debbie has finished. I haven't been able to see some of them before they were (greatfully) removed from the posts and it would be funny to see what we all almost gave away ;o)
Posted by Phil @ 2001 Jun 08 12:46 PM EST
Very interesting points, Nathan; I never thought of it that way.
However, I think Tolkien's point here is, all good arises from the love of one individual for another. And in making his love for Frodo his first priority, Sam follows his heart, and that leads him onto the correct path, despite first appearances.
Posted by Paul Mendenhall @ 2001 Jun 08 12:57 PM EST
The ver last paragraph of this chapter is one of my favorites. Tolkien could really write!:
'Aiya elenion ancalima!' cried Frodo once again behind him.
The will of the Watchers was broken with a suddenness like the snapping of a cord, and Frodo and Sam stumbled forward. Then they ran. Through the gate and past the great seated figures with their glittering eyes. There was a crack. The keystone of the arch crashed almost on their heels, and the wall above crumbled, and fell in ruin. Only by a hair did they escape. A bell clanged; and from the Watchers there went up a high and dreadful wail. Far up above in the darkness it was answered. Out of the black sky there came dropping like a bolt a winged shape, rending the clouds with a ghastly shriek.
Posted by Phil @ 2001 Jun 08 12:58 PM EST
Ah, Nathan, Sam couldn't have acted in any other way once he knew Frodo was alive and still be true to his character. Sam isn't using Frodo as a crutch, Sam loves Frodo. He couldn't have left him to torture and death, even with the urgency of the quest calling to him (forget the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one :)). Sam acted in the only way he could.
Posted by Allison @ 2001 Jun 08 01:01 PM EST
but that's the problem - that's a despicable way of thinking in the circumstances. as far as he knows going in, he -will- die, and the Ring -will- be retaken. He's condemning the world to the Shadow because of his own inability to cope with this situation. If it was at least altruism driving him I could appreciate the situation more, but he says (and I don't have the book here, so I can't quote) that he simply can't (read: "won't") go on without Frodo. Its not the imperative of the situation that drives Sam, its Sam's need to have Frodo there.
Posted by Nathan @ 2001 Jun 08 01:08 PM EST
Sorry Nathan, but Sam MUST go get Frodo for the quest to succeed. If Frodo had fallen into the hands of the Nazgul, as was imminent, it would not have taken long for Sauron to discover what was afoot.
Posted by EricD @ 2001 Jun 08 01:15 PM EST
So what is this talk about "not enough love interest in LotR"? Yes, I understand that there is not very much of Man loves Woman and vice versa, and a many of the characters seem very asexual (but not a-sensual).
But the story of Frodo and Sam is one of the most beautiful stories about love between PEOPLE (even though they are hobbits) that I have ever read! It was especially clear to me when I listened to the BBC radio play. My Kleenex almost ran out during this chapter!
So yes, Sam needs Frodo. And his love for Frodo is a kind of "card" on the good side that Sauron would never now how to play, or understand.
Posted by Katarina @ 2001 Jun 08 01:21 PM EST
Debbie,
This is what I was accused of giving spoilers for! Galadriel's gift to Frodo turned out to be quite useful, no?
Can only echo what so many others have said - Sam rocks!
Posted by Charly @ 2001 Jun 08 01:21 PM EST
...I mean "know how to play..." Sorry. :)
Posted by Katarina @ 2001 Jun 08 01:23 PM EST
But you're looking at it from Tolkien's point of view, not Sam's (and I must be careful here not to make any spoilers); as I said, Sam goes back with -no- hope of freeing Frodo. He goes back simply because he feels that he's not able to go on by himself (notice, he doesn't actually prove this to himself, he just can't bear the thought of facing challenges alone). From Sam's perspective, knowing nothing of what might happen and only aware of what -must- be the case (though it turns out not to be), he has condemned the world.
Of course, its arguable that the Fellowship's quest has this same character - struggle without hope because its the only thing that can be done. But Sam does have a choice - either go on without Frodo, or go back and give himself to the enemy. The fact that this -isn't- what happens has no bearing on what I'm trying to say; I'm saying that the decision itself reflects very poorly on Sam (and on the way he was raised; the Gaffer basically taught him that he was inherently worthless - just look at the quotes Sam uses)
Posted by Nathan @ 2001 Jun 08 01:23 PM EST
I see your point Nathan,
But....I think Sam is just picking his was to die. The Quest from the start looks hopeless. Even Frodo believes that he will never get to Mt. Doom and deystroy the ring. Sure Sam's choice to forgo the quest to go after Frodo is selfish in the Big picture. Would Sam rather die while trudging through Mordor by himself with Frodo held captive or would he rather die trying to save Frodo. And if he did save Frodo, the Quest would have a much better (although very slim) chance of success.
Posted by Big Mike @ 2001 Jun 08 01:41 PM EST
well, I can see that point. and its true that neither Sam nor Frodo really seem to hold out any hope of getting through (heck, just look at the fact that they're first plan was to get into Mordor through the Black Gate!) This one situation just grates on my nerves, I guess. Its the clearest example of the damage done to Sam's self-image by the social-system and by the Gaffer's verbal abuse (how's -that- for a post modern reading?! 8-)>
Posted by Nathan @ 2001 Jun 08 01:55 PM EST
I have never thought of The Gaffer's negative effects on Sam's self esteem. I do think that Sam got his "plain hobbit sense" from the Gaffer as well. Which has done more to help than to hinder Sam's plight.
Posted by Big Mike @ 2001 Jun 08 02:33 PM EST
I just don't agree with you, Nathan. You keep focusing on the fact that Sam returns for Frodo because you feel he doesn't have the confidence to carry the Ring to Mount Doom himself. Clearly Sam does have that confidence because when he thought Frodo was dead he made the decision to do just that. His primary purpose, to travel with Frodo and protect him had come to a tragic end, so he could focus on a noble, but to Sam, secondary task. If the Orcs hadn't shown up just when they did, Sam would have been on his way to Mount Doom.
I just see the bond betweeen Sam and Frodo to be so much greater than master and servant by this point in the story. As I said before, Sam isn't returning for Frodo because he doesn't have the self-esteem to finish the quest alone, he returns for Frodo because his feelings for him are so strong he can't bear to think of him suffering in the tower if there is any way Sam can prevent it. Wisest choice for Middle-Earth? Maybe not. Wisest choice for Sam? Undoubtedly.
Posted by Allison @ 2001 Jun 08 02:45 PM EST
What makes matters worse is that when Sam decides to attack the Orcs on the pass, fully aware that they will kill him, he still believes Frodo to be dead. He chooses pointless heroism over responsible action. (Granted, it's a choice in a very stressful situation, but still ...)
I like Sam, but I sometimes get slightly irritated when people paint him as a paragon of virtue and moral ideal. He isn't, and Tolkien himself was fully aware of that.
Posted by Giirov @ 2001 Jun 08 02:55 PM EST
Getting right to the heart of Sam now, aren't we! And finding him nicely flawed. How human. My take on his choice is that he started this quest out with a premonition that he had 'a job to do' before the end. All along it seemed it was to care for Frodo. When he thought Frodo dead, he changed his mind - his job was to 'see it through' alone. Now he finds Frodo is alive & realizes his mistake in thinking he was wrong - his job WAS to take care of Frodo & he knew it! So now, it is go back to his original job, hopeless though it is.
Was the Gaffer teaching him humility, or was he doing worse? tough call...
Cheers,
-Steve
Posted by Steve S. @ 2001 Jun 08 03:04 PM EST
I have to agree with Nathan here. I think this chapter shows that Sam was not a good candidate for Ring-bearer. His devotion to Frodo is perfectly in line with his character, but it is not appropriate for the ring-bearer. Sam definitely tends to think with his heart and not his head.
Someone suggested that he was rescuing Frodo so that the enemy wouldn't find out about them and the plan. However, Tolkien is great about showing us what the hobbits feel and think. And all that he says is that Sam couldn't go on and leave his master to the orcs. As Nathan said, he doesn't know that it will all work (the orcs have taken care of each other). He is willing to die (which would give the ring to the enemy) in any attempt to rescue Frodo.
This is not our first glimpse of this in Sam, though. When he looked in the mirror of Galadriel, he was tempted to go back to the shire. I believe it was only for the love of Frodo that he continued on at that point. I wonder how much of this Galadriel could have known, even at that point, and was trying to show Sam, because she knew this was coming.
Posted by Royce @ 2001 Jun 08 03:39 PM EST
But Sam was never meant to be the Ringbearer and, yes, he does think with his heart, not his head, which gives him the tremendous devotion and courage we've seen in him so far. And I think that was Gandalf's intention from the start, he knew Sam's character well, Sam wasn't to go on the quest to protect the Ring, Sam was to go to protect the Ringbearer. And throughout the novel we've seen just that- Frodo's absolute devotion to the quest, Sam's absolute devotion to Frodo. In fact, a much more sobering question to ask, especially for those of us who love Frodo and Sam's relationship, is would Frodo have gone after Sam if their fates had been reversed? I would like to think so, despite the horror of more practical folks here :), but Frodo has always been more dedicated to the destruction of the Ring first than Sam ever was.
Oh, now all the other Frodo and Sam fans will hate me... :)
Posted by Allison @ 2001 Jun 08 03:55 PM EST
VERY interesting discussion here! One thing I read recently is that Frodo and Sam together make up a complete being, particularly at this point where Sam still has some growing up to do during the challenges ahead. I think if Sam was by himself he wouldn't show any mercy to Gollum, and if Frodo was by himself he might just give up and die. Sam would be coarser and Frodo weaker, and both would give in to despair. Shades of good Kirk/bad Kirk, in that episode where Kirk was split in two by a transporter accident! The ruthless and merciful aspects of a person's character are both essential.
But I think part of the flaw Nathan sees in Sam here is that Sam just isn't quite mature enough to carry on the Quest by himself -- he doesn't have faith enough in himself to do it without Frodo, in spite of how important it is. One of the many instances where the Quest hangs on a thread!
And reading back over what I said -- what's the amount of overlap between Tolkien and Trek fandom? There's a paper in there somewhere for somebody.....
Posted by Janet Croft @ 2001 Jun 08 04:00 PM EST
Good discussion here 8-)> That's what I love about these books - one can read them in so many different ways, and still all be profoundly touched. Simplistic characters my ass! ;-)>
Posted by Nathan @ 2001 Jun 08 04:21 PM EST
I have to agree with Allison on the question of Sam's choice to rescue Frodo. Throughout LOTR, Tolkien explores the idea that "oft evil will evil mar". This is what brought Saruman and Denethor down, despite the fact that they had reasoned their courses of action to fine degree. Merry and Pippin were brought to Fangorn to meet Treebeard through the operation of Saruman's will, and it ultimately redounded to his defeat. Sam's choice here is the mirror of this. He makes a seemingly irrational choice, but for the right reasons, and so it works out to the good. My feeling is that had Sam abandoned Frodo and taken the Ring, this choice would have caused him to succumb to it. This seems to me to be consistent with the ethical/moral structure that Tolkien builds in LOTR.
Posted by Jeff Bohnhoff @ 2001 Jun 08 04:39 PM EST
Ehm, I don't know what to say after this discussion. I agree that Sam's choice was a risk but the whole quest was a risk. Only going to Mordor was a risk and everybody knew it. I don't disagree with Nathan absolutely but I think there's no reason to be upset because of Sam's behaviour. Just compare it with following situation - it is from the chapter where Gandalf saves Faramir. (IMHO, you all would agree Gandalf is much mor WISE than Sam):
"Gandalf ... clenched his hand. 'I must go ' he said. 'The Black Rider is abroad, and he will yet bring ruin on us. I have no time.'
'But Faramir!' cried Pippin. 'He is not dead, and they will burn him alive, if someone does not stop them....Can't you save Faramir?'
'Maybe I can,' said
"Gandalf; 'BUT IF I DO, THEN OTHERS WILL DIE, I FEAR. WELL I MUST COME, SINCE NO OTHER HELP CAN REACH HIM.'
Gandalf made a decision to save Faramir though "many others will die". He preferred Faramir because he liked him.
Posted by Katerina Str. @ 2001 Jun 08 05:37 PM EST
This is a scene in which I think I will dread to watch when it finally is released several years from now. Watching Sam find Frodo in that condition will be hearbreaking for me. The elation of finding him and then having Frodo yell at him is just too hard to take. I get a lump in my throat every time I read this chapter.
Posted by Mary @ 2001 Jun 08 05:57 PM EST
Katerina,
Gandalf doesn't save Faramir because he likes him better, he saves him because he's the only one that can. Those fighting on the Pelennor are all able to at least defend themselves, and have the choice to flee and save their own lives. They aren't unconcious and about to be burned by their own father.
Sam's situation is totally different. Its not just the lives of a bunch of soldiers hanging in the balance - its the lives and fates of everyone in the world. Slightly different stakes, and for someone to throw -everyone- in the world away just because they feel like it is appaling. I understand that its consistent with Sam's character, and I don't disagree with the fact that Tolkien had him do this, nor with the consequences. I'm just saying that the -fact- that Sam made the decision he did, at the moment he did, reflects badly on him. The outcome is irrelevant in the debate - only the choice matters. Kinda like saying that a person who points a gun at someone's head at pulls the trigger isn't guilty of anything if it turns out that the gun isn't loaded.
Posted by Nathan @ 2001 Jun 08 06:27 PM EST
Allison,
I agree that Sam was never meant to be the ring-bearer, but I was responding to Deb's comment that Sam would be a better ring-bearer than Frodo (tamed down to "a good guardian for the ring" at this point). On the other hand, at this point, when Frodo was assumed dead, Sam took it upon himself to be the ring-bearer. As mentioned before (maybe by you), only when Frodo reenters the picture, does he change his mind. So, he has assumed the mantle himself, but IMO doesn't follow thru with it.
And,
Katerina,
I don't feel that these two situations are that comparable. Gandalf was deciding between the almost certain death of Faramir (who was a strong leader of men, and would soon be the leader of this people) and his fear/dread of what the Morgul Lord would yet do. However, through all of this, Gandalf's hope was not in victory by warfare, but in reducing the damage caused by the enemy. Thus he chose to do what he could about the known 'evil' instead of the uncertain possibility of evil.
On the other hand, Sam chose "perishing is more likely" in an attempt to save Frodo (thus giving the ring to the enemy) over continuing on to destroy the ring which was their only real hope for victory. He really seems to have no hope that he can rescue Frodo and continue the quest.
On a less serious note, I think it's amusing that Deb liked Sam singing in this chapter as opposed to the first few comment about 'why is everyone always singing.'
Posted by Royce @ 2001 Jun 08 06:36 PM EST
I agree with an earlier poster that Sam's real crisis came at the end of The Two Towers, when he thought Frodo was dead but ran after the orcs carrying off his body anyway. He flings aside the fate of the world not to save his friend but to keep his corpse from being molested. It's his heart, not his head doing the thinking. And the irony is that no other series of choices on Sam's part -- his reluctant resolution to take the Ring, his hesitation to actually go down into Mordor, and then mad dash back to the tunnel after the orcs -- would ultimately have saved Frodo.
In other words, Sam in fact didn't just stick by Frodo no matter whether he was alive or dead. There was a mixture of motives sufficient for him to start off for Mt. Doom alone, and then to fling his previous resolution aside at the spur of the moment.
So I don't see Tolkien as being preachy or prescriptive here, saying "Stick by your friends and all will work out for the best." If Sam had done so from the first, it would have meant disaster. A very complex situation, with complex moral impulses.
Posted by Fred @ 2001 Jun 08 06:39 PM EST
Until this chapter, I don't think we really have had such a clear window into the Ring's seductive temptations. The Ring allowed Frodo to see things more clearly, such as at Weathertop. Galadriel told Frodo the Ring would make her so beautiful and terrible all would love her and despair. Gandalf said the Ring tempts him through pity for weakness and strength to good. For Boromir and Denethor, it offered deliverance of their people.
Here, in a lovely passage, from Sam's very personal point of view, we see that the Ring offers nothing more than one's own heart's deepest desire.
Posted by Tish @ 2001 Jun 08 06:46 PM EST
Nathan you are naught but a ninnyhammer... though I have no idea what that means. But seriously I couldn't disagree with you more. This discussion is reminding me of a hinduism class I took in college a long time ago. We read the story of Arjuna the warrior in the Bhagavad-gita. Arjuna begins to question his place in the world and the rightness of his actions ie: killing lots of people. Arjuna learns that he has a particular role to fulfill in the world and what is right for others is not right for him. He will succeed by being the best warrior he can be. Now I'm not suggesting that Tolkien espoused hindu doctrine through Sam. I think he was simply trying to show that faith, loyalty and following your heart will win out in the end though it may not seem logical in the cold light of day. But I bring up Arjuna because I wonder if Sam could really have acted otherwise and still been Sam? He quotes the Gaffer because he knows he's no tactician, that his heart is the strongest part of him, not because he was psychologically abused as a youth. So he follows his strengths, and his humility and fealty to Frodo tell him he should go down with the ship as it were, though instead he unknowingly rights its course by doing what is in his nature. Logically one can argue that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, but looking from another view, can you picture Spock curled up at Frodo's feet? I certainly can't.
Posted by John Mc @ 2001 Jun 08 07:14 PM EST
Nathan, there's another comparison with Gandalf and Sam's decision that's far more appropriate than the Faramir illustration, and that's the Balrog.
Tolkien himself wrote about it in one of his letters. At the moment the Balrog appeared, Gandalf knew that HE ALONE had the power to aid the Free People in resisting Sauron. He knew that without him, all was probably lost. He could have turned, grabbed Frodo and run for it, leaving the others to face the Balrog and die.
HOWEVER, Gandalf willingly chose to sacrifice himself (and, conceivably, the world) for love of his friends. This decision was honored by Illuvitar (God) and Gandalf was "sent back." (Not by the Valar - he left this worlds-realm entirely - see Tolkien's own explanation of this in Letters.)
This theme of ultimate sacrifice for love of friends is repeated several times in Tolkien's writings.
Posted by Tim @ 2001 Jun 08 07:23 PM EST
Hey, I agree! I'm not saying that Tolkien should have written Sam any differently. My point all along (though I guess I haven't made it very well) is just that the decision that Sam made puts him in a bad light. It makes me really angry, actually, when I read that part of the book. And I imagine that, in real life, we'd all be pretty angry if someone (and I'll use a crazy for instance here) who could deactivate the count-down for a nuclear attack decided not to so they could sit and die by the side of a friend of theirs. Or would you still argue that its alright, because "they were just being true to themselves"?
As for everyone following their "right path", don't you think that any individual has the right and the ability to determine that for themselves, to some degree? If a person is capable of questioning their role, then they're capable of changing it. And even if one argues that this isn't the case, that doesn't mean that their actions are above reproach. If, in the course of being a great soldier, a person murders an innocent family, that person is still a murderer.
Posted by Nathan @ 2001 Jun 08 07:31 PM EST
whoops. my previous post was to John Mc. To Tim; there's a huge difference between what Sam did (going back to die with his master, thus throwing the Quest to the wind) and what Gandalf did (confronting the Balrog so the rest of the company would have the chance to escape without being pursued by it).
I must apologize for one thing; I think I was misremembering something in the book earlier. What I'm talking about was when Sam ran back to stand by Frodo's (apparently) dead body, not when he went to save him from Cirith Ungol. Being at work always manages to cross my wires. My point remains the same, though (I think ;-)>
Posted by Nathan @ 2001 Jun 08 07:39 PM EST
Ah! finally. here's the passage that annoyed me - so this actually should've been a discussion back when Deb read The Choices of Master Samwise. Oh well 8-)>
"With a dreadful stroke Sam was wakened from his cowering mood. They had seen his master. What would they do? He had heard tales of the Orcs to make the blood run cold. It could not be borne. He sprang up. He flung the Quest and all his decisions away, and fear and doubt with them. He knew now where his place was and had been: at his master's side, though what he could do there was not clear."
Sorry if this has confused the discussion at all. Its certainly confused me! *sheepish grin* 8-)>
Posted by Nathan @ 2001 Jun 08 08:13 PM EST
Debbie, I love this chapter. The Ring tempts everyone with their heart's desire. It's a thing of evil and power and that's what its good at tempting with. But with Sam, it has to dig from the bottom of the barrel - the whole world covered with gardens! Never in the Ring's experience has it had to deal with such a heart! I love Sam. To deny his own heart would have created an opening the Ring could have exploited. In a choice between heart and head, the head is seldom correct. It is too easily deceived with false data. Look at Denethor.
Drogo Broadbelt
Posted by dave @ 2001 Jun 08 10:03 PM EST
Nathan is being very tough on Sam.
You could criticise Faramir on the same basis. He could have taken the Ring. Surely he would have a greater chance of reaching Mount Doom with the help of picked warriors, than a couple of hobbits.
In the cold light of day, it appears that Sam chose unwisely. But unlike the orcs and Ufthak, Sam would not sacrifice Frodo. It was simply not the right thing to do.
Could Tolkein be trying to say that a world in which the end justifies the means is a world in which the Dark Lord has already triumphed?
Posted by Alan C @ 2001 Jun 08 10:37 PM EST
Nathan,
I think we agree more than it might seem at first. We both agree that Tolkien should not have written Sam differently, and I also agree that one should avert total nuclear meltdown even at the expense of one's friendship. I personally believe that the good of the many outweighs the good of the few.
That being said I don't have any problems with Sam's actions in this chapter because I always viewed them within the context of middle earth. In our world I have sadly seen little evidence of a master plan at work (take a look at the japanese man who just stabbed eight 1st and 2nd graders to death and please tell me where that fits in). In our world I would want Sam in a garden where he belongs. Keep him as far away from the levers of power as possible. But in middle earth Tolkien is god and he definitely has a plan. And what Tolkien is saying about loyalty and love through Sam is true, in the same way that Thomas Jefferson's "all men are created equal" is true. I believe it in the abstract but in the real world, well, it gets messy.
I do believe you make choices all the time that affect your role and future in the world. However I don't believe that people can choose their beliefs, things just make sense to you or they don't. This, i guess could be said to be your nature and if you're true to it and you still disrupt others should you be judged? Certainly, a paranoid schizophrenic or addict's nature needs to be contained for the good of others. But in Tolkien's world we see gollum freed several times and this is used as a lesson in the value of mercy that I deem true, crazy japanese men notwithstanding.
Posted by John Mc @ 2001 Jun 08 10:56 PM EST
Oh, I'm going to get all weepy if I keep reading these posts :). Because I'm so convinced that Sam did the right thing, too. And even in that passage you quote, Nathan, where Sam goes running back even though his head still thinks Frodo is dead, in some unknowing way he knows he's missed something, which is why he's truly torn about leaving Frodo even then. When he discovers Frodo is alive he'll say, "You fool, he isn't dead and your heart knew it. Don't trust your head, Samwise, it isn't the best part of you."
As for Sam going into the tower to die with Frodo, despite his grumbling, I don't think he's ever really given up hope that he can find Frodo and rescue him and continue the quest (that song in the tower had to rise from somewhere :)). When he finally finds Frodo he immediately takes the lead in getting them equipped and out of there. And in keeping the faith Sam gets back both Frodo and their hope to complete the quest.
Can you tell I'm passionate about this topic? Maybe just a bit :).
Posted by Allison @ 2001 Jun 08 10:58 PM EST
Well Nathan, you've had a lot of answering to do. I can see your point on Sams choice but I believe even though he wasn't able to reason in his mind clearly what he needed to do, it was the correct choice to go back for Frodo. Poor Sam was by himself in the enemies land and he had to make a decision unlike any decision he has ever had to make. Samwise had just escaped from that dark, horrible tunnel, fought off gollum, battled Shelob and won, only to find that his friend that he loved so much is dead. His heart told him that his first decision was wrong and he wasn't going to ignore his heart the second time. To take your nuclear weapon analogy I would say, in his heart (or subconcious), he knew that. without Frodo, he did not have the code to deactivate the weapon and, after all he had been through to save Frodo, there was no way he was going abondom him now.
Posted by ccs @ 2001 Jun 09 04:13 AM EST
Nathan,
I don't agree with you about Sam's actions. I think that you're wrong when you say "can't (read: won't)". How do you know that he doesn't really mean "can't"? I think that that's the case. I think Sam realizes (even if Tolkien doesn't tell us that) two things: there's no way he could get the ring to Mount Doom on his own (and I think that he was right about that so things would have actually gone very wrong had he tried), and it's just emotionally not possible for him to leave Frodo behind in this way. It's just as possible to be emotionally unable to do something as it is to be physically unable to do something. I don't think he actually had any choice in the matter, so judging him on his actions at this point is not fair IMHO...
Posted by Pepijn Schmitz @ 2001 Jun 09 05:25 AM EST
Nathan
Thank you for provoking such an interesting discussion! :)
Many people have already stated what I will say, but I still want to add my HO:
Sam is acting out of love, with his heart and not his head, as someone put it. And that is exactly what is expected from him, by Gandalf and other leaders with insight on the good side!
Frodos devotion to the Quest to destroy the ring , and Sam's devotion to Frodo, and their FREE WILL to do whatever seems necessary with those qualities, are Gandalf's et al most important weapons against Sauron. Since these three elements are impossible to fathom for an evil force like Sauron.
But I agree. I is a bit irritating when Sam so quickly turns his back to the Quest, and can't leave his master. But just a reflection: maybe that is because you (and I) expect too much of him here? We expect him to be somenone else than he is, to "come to his powers" and not be so dependant on the one he loves and having such a servile (OK word?) attitude. Because in our time and culture, dependance and being in service the way Sam is, is not considered a virtue.
Sam never wishes to be in the frontline. Many people don't. I for one. But we sometimes feel shame or guilt because we don't. Maybe because the strong forces of modern western individualism tells us that we're not OK if we don't strive to make it on our own and get to the top...
I think Sam does come to his powers in these chapters. To HIS powers.
Posted by Katarina @ 2001 Jun 09 06:19 AM EST
Sam didn't come on this quest to destroy the Ring. He came to take care of Frodo. Why should anyone expect different? His heart is so full of love of Frodo and beautiful things that the Ring can't corrupt him. The temptations become so ridiculous that his "plain hobbit sense" sees them as the lies they are. The Ring wanted him to go alone. Even if he used his head and not his heart, this would give pause as to the correctness of that course. The Ring is not just an inert object like other rings. It is a character with a talent greater than Saruman's tongue. It wants to get to Sauron as much as he wants it.
Posted by Dave @ 2001 Jun 09 06:38 AM EST
I want to thank you for this discussion thread, too, Nathan, it's been fascinating :).
One of the things I like best about this journal is how Debbie and others (like you) have challenged notions I've long taken for granted about LOTR. It often hasn't changed how I feel about those issues, but it has caused me to examine much more closely why certain events and characters in the book have affected me the way they have. It's been a very enlightening experience.
Posted by Allison @ 2001 Jun 09 07:26 AM EST
"The Ring wanted him to go alone". Good point, Dave! :) I didn't think about it that way. That would explain a lot.
Posted by Katarina @ 2001 Jun 09 07:32 AM EST
You really have a talent for summing things up beautifully, Allison! :-) Just my feeling.
Debbie/Allison : Is it possible to save this "chapter comment + feedback" somewhere on this site later so that we and others can come back to it? I plan to reread LotR in English this fall, after The Silmarillion. It would be nice to reread these discussions then too.
And great for other first time readers, later too? But then you can't put back the spoilers, Allison...You will have too put a "removed spoiler exhibition" at the end, I guess... :)
Posted by Katarina @ 2001 Jun 09 08:04 AM EST
Allison + CCS + Pepijn + Katarina + Dave!
Yessssss! I absolutely agree with you concerning all that about Sam! Don’t touch my Sammie’s inducements! :o)))))
In my opinion there is a huge difference between those two situations. Sam was invisible and protected. Shelob was hurt thus not dangerous. It means that it wasn’t such a big risk to follow the Orcs. He had no clear idea what to do, he was blinded, that’s sure, and not for the first time - remember as he jumped in water after Frodo but couldn’t swim? Would be a drowned Sam worth something? I know, I know, it’s not the same situation but it has never came to me to be angry because of he acts on impulse.
(But I admit my that example with Gandalf and Faramir was not exactly a good one :o)
Posted by Katerina Str. @ 2001 Jun 09 01:23 PM EST
Katarina: I'm positive that Deb intends to leave this journal and comments up after she finishes LOTR. In fact, that was another reason I was so hopeful that she would continue to post chapter by chapter reports in Book 6, even if the suspense is deadly for her. I think this will remain a fascinating study of a first-time trip through LOTR and the reaction of the Tolkien fans who watched the journey first-hand and I wanted to see it complete. In fact, I have to assume after Deb finishes Book 6 there will still be newcomers stumbling onto this page and reading the whole thing and leaving their comments, too. The discussion could stay on-going for a long time.
And, no, I don't ever intend to go back and re-enter the spoilers, but I will post a list of them for everyone to see after Deb finishes with the appendices :). Personally, I hope I have a complete list now...
Posted by Allison @ 2001 Jun 09 01:39 PM EST
Thank you for a very satisfying reply! :-)
Posted by Katarina @ 2001 Jun 09 02:22 PM EST
Wow, a lot of opinions (strong ones!). Someone out there correct me if I am wrong, but isn't this situation (Sam's decision to go back for Frodo) the one that Tolkien himself described like this (paraphrasing): "I have gotten my characters into a situation in which it will be difficult to get them out of, even for an AUTHOR!"?
Maybe Sam's psychology is not what should be questioned here. After all, Tolkien knew that he wanted Frodo to carry on past this point, with Sam, and he needed that to happen somehow. Sure, it can be viewed as a character flaw in Sam, but remember the story must go on! I will concede that Sam should probably have hitched his belt, left Frodo to his fate and pushed on without hope of success (they thought there was little or no hope of success anyway). Try placing yourself in that situation though - would you really be able to go on alone? What if it was your spouse or child you had to leave to the Orc's tender mercies? I doubt if I could have done it, even if it was the right thing to do.
RCHRIS
Posted by RChris @ 2001 Jun 09 11:04 PM EST
I don't believe it was the right thing to do. I believe it only appears to be the right thing. Sam had already rationalized leaving Frodo. Rationalization is the way the Ring works its evil. It is so easy to start finding what seem to be good reasons for doing an evil act. This is why I think so much of Frodo. He really has to deal with the Ring more than Sam or anyone else, and in Mordor where it is strongest. It's like Nathan's nuclear countdown. Maybe what Sam would do alone would be to start the countdown or cause the explosion to happen immediately because the skill to stop it is not in him. Denethor was very wise and learned, but exposion to the Palintir without control caused him to make some very bad decisions and to despair. The Ring also affects your mind and fills it with falsehoods. I'm not sure I could have held the Ring, even for an instant.
RChris (is that as in the Goblin Cleaver?) and Nathan thanks very much for starting a very interesting conversation topic.
Posted by dave @ 2001 Jun 10 08:23 AM EST
RChris? Orcrist? Hadn't thougt of that (but I like it).
Thank Nathan for starting this discussion - I jumped in way later.
One thing I like about is how hard and far some (many!) will go to defend Sam. He has a lot of very serious fans out there (and I think he deserves them!)
RChris
Posted by RChris @ 2001 Jun 10 10:38 AM EST
It is possible to get a little too analytical here. Tolkien wasn't necessarily trying to "make a point" about anything. He was telling a story. Sam did what he did because that's who Sam was, and that's what Sam would do.
Posted by Tom @ 2001 Jun 11 11:09 AM EST
I also thank Nathan for being the "Devils advocate" on this Sam topic. That's why we are here isen't it?
Also, Good point Tom.
It reminds me of studying Shakespear in high school. We break down the plays into such detail that it's sickening. I didn't think that Shakespear meant anyone to analize them that much. It's a story meant to entertain, pure and simple. If the story invokes some good questions....we call it good writing.
Posted by Big Mike @ 2001 Jun 11 03:20 PM EST
Right on, Tom and Big Mike! I think that your points are what I was trying to get at in my post, above. Sam did what I would have done, no doubt about it. But I would never have gotten as far as he did in the first place, 'cause Sam is way too incredible!
I think we tend to analyse things like this because we like them so much. But Mike is absolutely right, it can (and possibly has been) taken too far. I never stopped to really think about what Sam's decision to go back for Frodo could mean to the "world" - mostly because I am always so caught up in the moment, that I am just experiencing the story as it appears on the pages - and being riveted by it, and accepting of it exactly as it is written.
RChris
Posted by RChris @ 2001 Jun 11 03:30 PM EST
I love the analysis, I really do. I love to hear all the theories about the motivations of the characters and how the back history of Middle-Earth fits into it all. I love debating to the nth degree why Sam must return for Frodo and its impact on the Greater Picture. I love exploring the setting and the scenery and how the landscape impacts on the story and characters. And though LOTR is just a story, meant to amuse and move, it is certainly fun to explore thoroughly why it's amused and moved me more than any other novel I've ever read.
It's in my blood, I fear- I was an English literature major :). I am a major science fiction and fantasy fan and a devoted student of media studies and popular culture. And the way LOTR and the mainstream are going to collide this December is going to be endlessly fascinating to watch. This journal is one of the first places where I'm watching it happen and participating in it, too.
Posted by Allison @ 2001 Jun 11 04:20 PM EST
In response to my own post, above, I wanted to make sure I didn't come across as trying to discourage discussion. Talking about Tolkien on sites like this is a great enjoyment. And discussing our likes and dislikes of certain characters and their actions is a worthwhile pasttime. But I always like to come back to Tolkien's own statement that the only real purpose (that he knew of) in writing the book, was his desire to tell a good story. I think that's one of the main reasons that I love LOTR so much... it's just such a great story! As a bit of a writer, myself, I often come back to that statement of Tolkien's. When I get too bogged down in trying to "say" something, or trying to figure out what a character should do next, I think, "do what the story demands, don't worry so much about the meaning."
Posted by Tom @ 2001 Jun 11 04:31 PM EST
Oh, no, I understood that, Tom. I just feel like rapsodizing about how much I like the discussion on this website, anyway :).
Posted by Allison @ 2001 Jun 11 06:05 PM EST
Well, my computer was down and I missed this discussion. I'd still like to throw in my spare change on the subject. Has anyone heard of the emotional mind, rational mind, wise mind concepts. It would appear that Frodo was the more rational hobbit, whereas Sam was obviously more emotional. Together they formed the Wise-mind, the ideal of the two. Yin/Yang concept? They both form one ring-bearer, and one could not seriously attempt to accomplish the mission without the other. Gandalf and the gang must have known this on some level.
Back in the first few chapters, Gandalf must have been thinking that Bilbo was just too old and corrupted to do the job. He found Frodo and was probably scrambling for a more "impulsive" hobbit to jump in when brains would get in the way of a decision. Don't you think he was all too eager to have Sam come along? He barely knew him. But he realized that Frodo was just too rational for his own good.
Makes me wonder if this is why I liked Frodo from the beginning (more than Sam, who always seemed to be flying by the seat of his pants). Maybe we should have a vote on who everyone's favorite hobbit is between Frodo and Sam. What do you think? It might reflect on one's own personality or mind set.
Posted by Roland @ 2001 Jun 11 11:53 PM EST
Speculation for the sheer fun of speculation: Gandalf might have known Sam better than we think. We're told in Chapter 1 that Gandalf visited Hobbiton on occasion and no doubt spent most of his time at Bag End while he was there visiting Bilbo. The Gaffer tells us that Sam spends half his time in and out of Bag End, listening to Bilbo's stories, learning his letters, much to the amusement of other hobbits. Gandalf could have been well-aware of the young hobbit lad with the stars in his eyes and the fierce devotion to the Bagginses. He certainly knew Sam by name when he pulled him through the window in Chapter 2. He might have had good reason to know he had found the perfect travelling companion for Frodo.
Hey, what is the fun of loving LOTR if you can't spin tales between the lines sometimes? :)
Posted by Allison @ 2001 Jun 12 11:44 AM EST
Quite an insightful thought, Allison.
Posted by Tom @ 2001 Jun 12 12:15 PM EST
I agree with Allison. Gandalf had been visiting the Shire very regularly for many years. It seems almost impossible to me that he would not have known Sam quite well.
Posted by Jeff B @ 2001 Jun 13 01:21 PM EST
