In regards to Frodo AND sam, and their heroic reasons, ect
Sam ALWAYS seemed to think they were going to do the task, and then return home to the way they were, living in the shire, gardening, and peace...Frodo I think believed that for a while, but then started to relize towards the end...but SAM even to the very very very end.
Sam never gave up hope, Always had his eyes set on the task of returning home, and getting on with life.
Frodo had his eyes set on the task-his task...The ring, He didn't know he was going to ultimatly sacrifice his life in the end...That he would never fulfill Sam's task...And that he would give up so much, for so many. But in the end I think He relized it, and began to understand...That sometimes In order to save the world, HE had to loose it.
Originally posted by darbanana
I think that Frodo was influenced by the ring to a point that he wasn't able to care anymore, he was wounded by a "some wounds never heal" wound, he DID destroy the ring saving middle earth, he DID carry the splinter of the knife for 17 days or 22 or something like that, he never gave up and, except at the end, but he really did keep on going... they're all heroes, really, actually Legolas and Gimli are less heroic than Frodo I think...
21 days 😐
Oh yes the post that "im dead" posted was definetly a wonderful explanation to frodo being a hero *applaudes*
Frodo DID give up his life, his home and his future to get the task done, most people dont realize it what he sacrificed to do the task, and it was brave of him to step in and say he would take it. Frodo deserves the much needed respect he deserves, as Gandalf says "Hobbits are truly amazing creatures"
I think it was all the more heroic considering the life he had as a child.
He was orphaned at 12, and then Bilbo left him when he was 33.
That would stir things up I think. I get the impression that all Frodo really wanted out of life was the odd adventure here and there, maybe learn a little more Elvish than he already knew, and then to settle down, start a family of his own and have someone, a soul mate, to share all his things with.
The fact that he accepted the burden and admitted to losing the life he could have possibly had makes him a hero, in my opinion.
Originally posted by Camellia
I think it was all the more heroic considering the life he had as a child.He was orphaned at 12, and then Bilbo left him when he was 33.
That would stir things up I think. I get the impression that all Frodo really wanted out of life was the odd adventure here and there, maybe learn a little more Elvish than he already knew, and then to settle down, start a family of his own and have someone, a soul mate, to share all his things with.
The fact that he accepted the burden and admitted to losing the life he could have possibly had makes him a hero, in my opinion.
So in order to be a hero...you have to Loose something? Just asking?
is that what it is...Loose your home? Life?...Is that what true heros are? It is interesting to note, that the heros we here about most often, are the ones that die. but not always...
coughSPIDERMAN2-9DAYS!cough
Uhm, Smodden wanted me to post the poems I made. They're not really good...but...they're kinda about Sam and Frodo and their perilous journey to Mordor. 🙂
1.
Through darkest night
I see the light
I'm here with you
You'll get me through
We're far from home and
We're far from friend
But on we go
To journey's end
2.
Twilight comes
The shadow is rising;
growing, consuming
The dark mist that once
shrouded the face
of evil is clearing
The world once known is fading
The bright day comes to a close
Time, once a gently passing stream,
now flows swiftly, inevitably
Mirth is not lost
and courage strengthens
Twilight lingers
and with it memories
of times past
The leaves fade
The seasons change
and time grows ever shorter
yet mirth is not lost
as the golden sun shines
and the silver rains fall
3.
Rolling hills of peaceful ire,
greenary doth reign in passive Shire,
Land of Halflings of little known,
where seeds of bravery were hence sown.
In Hobbiton where Halflings dwell,
A tale so great, it here fell,
to little hands and little Ring,
to feet so swift as Eagle's great wing.
To one so Wise as to lead them all,
Gandalf remained true to his call.
Yet he fell in darkness, in mines so deep,
to where the demon his lair did keep.
To one so Small as to trust them all,
Frodo climbed the steepest wall.
Destroy the Ring, a mission sincere,
To quell the strength of his own fear.
To one so Great as to rule them all,
to Aragorn, a past did call,
to reclaim the throne of a Land unknown
Ranger of Anor, the kingdom of old.
To one so Loyal as to help them all,
to Sam did the fated decision fall,
yet heart stayed true and Seed was sown,
To get his beloved Master home.
Rolling hills of peaceful ire,
greenary doth reign in passive Shire,
Land of Halflings of little known,
where seeds of bravery were hence sown.
🙂
Originally posted by Discos
mmm.....I dont aprove of the spiderman 2 advertisement 😖hifty:
I'm tempted to go on a huge 100page rant on how spiderman 2 will be the greatest thing in cinematic history with the exception of the lord of the rings...and that this movie will change my life forever, and that I can relate to peter parker in numerous ways, and that i would gladly advertise the movie, as to boost its sucess that much more, to ensure that more marvel movies will come...but I think I'll just say:
your entitled to your on oppinon sir hector....😛
OK...bumping up from page 5, but see, I've been reading the books again lately, and I've been watching the movies too, and for some reason, Frodo is growing in me more and more. I appreciated his deeds before, but I think from further reading and watching, Frodo is becoming one of my favorite characters. 😐 *coughdejavucough*
Yes, it's quite certain that Frodo would have failed without Sam's help. Without Sam's physical assistance, Frodo literally wouldn't even have made it up the ashen slopes of Mount Doom. Even more importantly, the only way for Frodo to stave off the power of the Ring, to push down its incessent clamor in his heart and mind, was to bind himself to others. And this is what Sam allowed Frodo to do by providing that opportunity for closeness and caring, a mode of caring which Frodo extended even to the character of Smeagol/Gollum itself.
Yet, by this same standard, Sam also needed Frodo. He relied on Frodo to teach him gentleness towards a miserable creature also bound to the Ring and to share the quiet stories and memories that helped push these two determined hobbits onward through the Shadow.
Since we all know this to be true, why does this question come up--the endless task of trying to weigh and measure the exact contribution of Frodo and that of Sam? Fan sites debate this issue endlessly, and critics also chip in with articles explaining why Sam is or is not the "real" hero of "The Lord of the Rings". I can't think of any other characters we do this with. There are few heartfelt threads weighing the comparative contributions of Merry/Pippin, Gimli/Legolas, or any other possible pair you care to imagine. With these folks, we're content to appreciate their individual contribution without trying to weigh and measure it down to the tiniest degree.
I myself have done it as an admirer of Frodo Baggins. "Heh, why doesn't Frodo get the credit he deserves from the Shire? So Sam thinks it's so easy to bear the Ring, just let him try! What do you mean that Frodo sailed to Elvenhome purely out of despair, while Sam had the courage to return to the Shire and bring life to the earth? How can you say that? Can't you see that Frodo hears the call of the Elves at least as strongly as he feels the tug of the Shire?"
Just why do I, and we, do this? Certainly, these are the two chief characters in the story. Tolkien created an ensemble cast but no one else, neither Gandalf nor Aragorn, played quite the same role as Sam and Frodo. After thinking about this for some time, I feel there's something else going on. That "something" focuses not merely on the story but on ourselves as individuals, our hopes and ways of looking at things.
At heart, I think, when readers meet Sam and Frodo, each individual feels a natural empathy to one of the two archetypes that these characters represent. And these two hobbits are so very different, and so very good for each other's souls, because they do represent two distinct ways of dealng with and looking at life. In a very real sense, Sam fills the holes in Frodo's heart and Frodo does the same for Sam.
Sam is the practical doer, who does things because he has a basic and unswerving commitment to the people he loves in his life. He has a direct and often simple view of things that enables him to surmount any obstacle and to go on when hope seems lost. His eyes stay focused on the close horizon because this is where he can do so much good. Within the circle of his friends and community, he gives of himself again and again without question. He is the loving spouse and friend who can appreciate the secrets of Elves, but who can also go through every daily disaster and come out on top.
And Frodo? Frodo is the seer and the prophet whose eyes and ears are tuned to distant music. He is the one who understands what sacrifices must be made to reach out beyond ourselves and grasp on to something higher whose meaning we can barely comprehend. He never forgets the sound of the Sea or the vision of the green distant land. He brings gifts of love to his small group of dear friends--gifts like laughter, stories, and the teaching of mercy. His way is less practical so the world will often shake its head in bewilderment or even turn aside, not understanding his growing reluctance to wield a sword or his trusting in strange and flawed creatures. Above all, he will bind himself to an idea, and make that commitment the center of his soul, without thought of personal happiness or reward.
It is the sad ending of the book that each of these character has grown to the point that they must take a different path in life. Sam and Frodo, so good for each other but so unlike, come to the parting of ways at Grey Havens, and we are left with a tremendous sense of sorrow and loss. We wish Tolkien were here to tell us exactly how it turned out for the two of them. We do know a bit about Sam, but for Frodo there is only a sad blank page. And that makes it so much harder for us to comprehend his choice.
I am certain, however, that they each took the path that was right for them. And, whether in the Shire or in the West, they continued to grow and learn, one perhaps with less effort and the other perhaps with more pain, but still going on.
And so each of us, as readers, feels a natural empathy towards either Sam or Frodo, largely dependent on our own ideals and attitudes towards life. We may respect and admire them both, but there is one who will tug more naturally at our heart.
In regards to the comments made about Frodo "doing nothing": That is as far from the truth as anything is possible to be. Every moment, even in his sleep, he had to battle the will of Sauron. Can you imagine that? This small hobbit battling the will of the Dark Lord himself, something that Gandalf, Elrond and Galadriel all said they could not do. He didn't just have one person to be loyal to. By accepting the Ring, he took upon himself the burden of the future of all of Middle-earth and its inhabitants. His responsibility was to everyone. He had to make the choices that would determine the fate of the world, and he was hunted; physically, emotionally and mentally, at every step of the way. The hordes of Sauron were after him. The Ring bore down on him with relentless evil will. He saw his friends torn apart. He suffered the guilt that if he did succeed, he saved Men but doomed the Elves, and if he lost, he doomed everything and everyone. He was beset from without and within. The Ring tried to control him and the people around him. After the Ring's power grows stronger on the way to Mordor, he staggers on. Frodo had all he could do to stumble forward one foot in front of the other. Sam was his Rock, and Frodo couldn't have made it without him certainly; but Frodo was neither selfish, self-centered, weak, wimpy, or wishy-washy. Frodo would not bring himself to kill, but that does not in any way make him weak. His body may have been weakened but not his soul. Frodo learned from Gandalf, with the Gollum debate about dealing out death in the name of justice. He learned it from one of the wisest beings in Middle earth. The Valar did not kill people such as Feanor, even though he did many terrible things, does that make them weak? Frodo killed in the book--remember the cave troll? He killed only when absolutely necessary. Remember it was he who kept the Shire hobbits from killing the ruffians in the Scouring of the Shire, when it would have been tempting to punish them for ruining the Shire? He even wanted Grima to stay alive, not out of weakness but out of mercy--just as the Valar were merciful to Melkor in the beginning. In a similar situation, Aragorn was merciful to Beregond, when he committed an offense punishable by death in spilling blood in the citadel. It is tempting to call peacemakers weak, but it takes a stronger person to stay the hand in mercy than it takes to strike with the hand.
If what Frodo did was nothing, then nobody in LotR did anything, and it is a book about nothing.
Sorry about the rambling, but I love Frodo. I cried for him so many times in the book when he was tired or naked or cold. And in the movie, Elijah Wood was so amazing that at the end, when he's standing by the water and later when he's embracing Sam, he looked so sorrowful and haunted that it broke my heart.
They are all heroes, but remove one of their "party" and that heroism would crumble.
Sam and Frodo are a double act. Frodo was amazingly gifted in that he could hold the ring for so long and not be affected. Look at how quickly others had given in to the power. Frodo lasted a near eternity next to these guys. The likes of Aragorn and Co are all noble heroes surely, but not even Gandalf wanted to even look at the ring.
Look at Sam. It was clear that during his time as the bearer, the ring had already started to affect him, showing that Frodo was essential.
Tolkien proved Frodo and Sams essential qualities time in and time out during the saga. Why can't people realise this? Without Sam, Frodo would be screwed. He'd have nobody to fall back on during desperate times, he'd have no-one close enough to get his rear in gear and keep going. Without Frodo, how the hell would the ring get to Mordor at all? Only Frodo could hold the thing longer than anyone else.
Frodo had every right to fall over, act like a wuss and be a bit annoying. His battle was in his mind, he was constantly distracted. He was fighting The Ring all the time. Nobody else had the task of fighting The Ring did they? People only seem to judge on what the characters do with their fists rather than what's goin on in their head.
Frodo was a hero.
Nice post, Red Superfly. 🙂
Frodo and Sam basically kept each other sane. They were in a situation that was completely hopeless -- dead men walking. At this point their relationship was just raw uninhibited emotion. Sam was sustaining Frodo and vice versa. If something had happened to Sam, Frodo would have laid down and died. Likewise, if something had happened to Frodo, Sam would've died with Sting in his hand, slashing amid a horde of Orcs. They each gave the other the love and support that he needed to sustain the will to live. Sometimes, Sam's love of Frodo seemed to be mixed with pity, somewhat like the man who will sit for hours on end and watch his comatosed friend drift further from life.