The Motives of Frodo and Sam

[Faramond]

[Note: This post was split off from a thread in Tol Eressëa. Faramond, if you don't like the title, please feel free to change it. VtF]

Jn: The choice we are given to make is not between selflessness and selfishness but between short-term self-interest and long-term self-interest.

What about Frodo?

What did his choice to bear the ring and not claim it have to do with any sort of self-interest, long or short term?

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Faramond, I have some thoughts about this, but I'm going to hold off for a bit in the hopes that Jn responds to your question first.

[truehobbit]

The question as such sounds interesting, but the way it pops up here, it's plain that it's taken out of context.
I'm not sure if we are meant to have read the thread this was taken from for background or if it would be ok to just discuss the question freely - in which case, however, I hope either Jny or Faramond will post to explain, because reading the first post just like that leaves me confused.

[axordil]

Frodo did what he did to save the Shire, which he loved. That it might be destroyed was a real and terrible possibility; that his action, howsoever painful it might be (and how could he possibly know when he started?) might save it was a glimmer of hope for him.

So his quest was both self-sacrificing AND in his long-term self-interest, since he identified the interests of the Shire with his own interests. However, by the time he left Middle-earth, he had certainly learned to distinguish, if not separate, the two. And yet I find it hard to detect any regret on his part. Even if he had known when he started, I think he would have stepped out on the road.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I think so too, Ax.

Unfortunately, Jn has been having some kind of strange problem accessing the site today, so she hasn't been able to respond. Hopefully, it will be fixed soon.

[Jnyusa]

Ax gave the answer I would have given. (Don't know if this will post or not. Having serious server problems today with this site and our support forum.)

Frodo's long-term self-interest lies with saving his community - the Shire, Bilbo, and his friends.

from The Shadow of the Past

“I should like to save the Shire, if I could - though there have been times when I thought the inhabitants too stupid and dull for words, and have felt than an earthquake or an invasion of dragons might be good for them. But I don’t feel like that now. I feel that as long as the Shire lies behind, safe and comfortable, I shall find wandering more bearable: I shall know that somewhere there is a firm foothold, even if my feet cannot stand there again.”

from Fog on the Barrow Downs

“But though his feat was so great that it seemed to be part of the very darkness that was round him, he found himself as he lay thinking about Bilbo Baggins and his stories, of their jogging along together in the lanes of the Shire and talking about roads and adventures. There is a seed of courage hidden ... in the heart of the fattest and most timid hobbit, waiting for some final and desperate danger to make it grow.”
<snip>

“At first Frodo felt as if he had indeed been turned into stone by the incantation. Then a wild thought of escape came to him. He wondered if he put on the Ring, whether the Barrow-wight would miss him, and he might find some way out. He though of himself funning free over the grass, grieving for Merry, and Sam, and Pippin, but free and alive himself. Gandalf would admit that there had been nothing else he could do.

"But the courage that had been awakened in him was not too strong; he could not leave his friends so easily.”

[vison]

There is this in here that troubles me: the implication that somehow Frodo would have been "more heroic" if it had been against his self-interest to carry the Ring to Mordor. To put it in the reverse, was he "less heroic" because it was in his self-interest?

For me, the answer is: Frodo acted out of Love: he valued what he loved as he valued himself. Indeed, he was what he loved. Frodo was not, maybe, the wisest Hobbit when he left the Shire, but somewhere within him was the wisdom to know that much.

Frodo could have stayed home and waited for the Dark Lord to come. But he chose to go out and meet him, and to attempt by that meeting to preserve the Shire and all the silly Bracegirdles and Boffinses there were. Some call his deeds "sacrifice" but that's a word I cordially dislike. It smacks of smarmy self-abnegnation.

Frodo was a great and courageous person. He conquered fear and suffering and saw the triumph of Good, that triumph made possible by his actions. Even in the midst of his last despair I think Frodo was proud of what he'd done. He had passed the test.

He was tested. The weapons of evil are doubt and despair and fear. Those weapons pierced his heart as surely as the deadly blade pierced his shoulder. No warrior can go against such an enemy as Sauron and come away unscathed. Some wounds never heal, some scars never fade.

Since I never saw LOTR as a "religious" book, I never saw the story or Frodo's character through any lens but of my own thoughts. I always admired Frodo. Despite his gentle demeanor, his hesitations, his doubts, he was a man who came to understand what was at stake, and what it was going to cost.

[superwizard]

Yes Frodo was very honorable and courageous but I think -and this is my personal opinion mind you- that Sam was even braver. Sam did not really understand what was at stake when he went with Frodo, he followed Frodo simply out of love for him. Day after day he realized how hopeless this cause seemed and even after Frodo had pretty much given up hope Sam pushed him further. Now you are talking about long term self intrest and I don't think Sam saw it that way, he just followed his master because he loved him. I think Sam is the real hero of the story.

[Primula Baggins]

I think Sam is the real hero of the story.

Them's fightin' words in these here parts, pardner.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Yes, if certain people see that, there will be a reckoning.

(For the record, it is my contention that the single entity that Frodo and Sam together formed is the real hero of the story. They are essential to each other, like peanut butter and jelly.)

[Primula Baggins]

In an essay on LotR, Ursula LeGuin contends that Frodo/Sam/Gollum/Sméagol all together form a single character.

[Pearly Di]

Yes, if certain people see that, there will be a reckoning.

I don't mind people thinking that Sam is as heroic as Frodo. He is.

I can even cope with people thinking that Sam is the 'real hero'. Tolkien said as much in the Collected Letters - although he also clearly implies elsewhere that Frodo is the central protagonist.

A friend of mine summarises it nicely: she says that Frodo is the Tragic Hero, Sam the Fairytale Hero and Aragorn the Traditional Hero.

I'll go along with that.

What will get me on my hobby horse (once more with feeling) is people thinking that Sam is more heroic than Frodo.

Frodo's quiet, introspective style of heroism has sometimes been misunderstood, IMO. Sam is easy to love, of course.

But then I find Frodo easy to love. Sigh.

As the tragic hobbit, he moves me.

(For the record, it is my contention that the single entity that Frodo and Sam together formed is the real hero of the story. They are essential to each other, like peanut butter and jelly.)

I would say so, V-Man.

[Teremia]

I actually prefer my peanut butter without jelly.

If it's "self interest" to carry the Ring to Mt. Doom because you happen to love the world you're trying to save, then it seems to me nothing could ever qualify as true altruism. Perhaps that's your point, Jn? But then that becomes a little bleak, at least to my mind. Could we think of it as a little bit selfless, anyway, and just blur our eyes to the long-term benefits?

[superwizard]

Frodo and Sam have totally different types of bravery and as such I personally don't think they should be compared. However what I can't stand is when people assume that just because it was Frodo that bore the ring, he should recieve all the credit

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Frodo and Sam have totally different types of bravery and as such I personally don't think they should be compared.

Hmmmm? I wonder who it was who first compared Frodo and Sam in this thread?



Teremia, so does Beth.

[Pearly Di]

Frodo and Sam have totally different types of bravery and as such I personally don't think they should be compared. However what I can't stand is when people assume that just because it was Frodo that bore the ring, he should recieve all the credit

Not if it was a joint effort, no.





Frodo would not have got to Mount Doom without Sam's courage, perseverance and devotion. Frodo's integrity throughout is not in question but Sam's great love for him helped him when he was most weak and beaten down. The Ring would not have been destroyed had Frodo not had the wisdom and love to show Gollum mercy. Nobody could have withheld the power of the Ring at the crucial moment: not Gandalf, not Aragorn, not Sam, not Frodo.

Providence - and the self-sacrifice of humble hobbits Frodo and Sam - brought it all about.

Frodo, of course, pays the biggest price of all for bearing the token of Sauron. His soul is permanently scarred, which is why he must leave Middle-earth.

And I think that's why I love him best.

[superwizard]

Frodo, of course, pays the biggest price of all for bearing the token of Sauron. His soul is permanently scarred, which is why he must leave Middle-earth.

And I think that's why I love him best.

That is why you love Frodo the most. I however love Sam for a totally different reason; Sam-to me- symbolizes the power of friendship and loyalty. It is Sam's blind love that truly won my heart.

[Pearly Di]

We certainly all need a true and loyal friend like Sam in our lives!



Back to the topic: I see nothing of self-interest in Frodo's motive in offering to take the Ring to Mordor. He starts out as a courageous yet naive hobbit, scarcely understanding the magnitude of the task. Enlightened by the wisdom and counsel of the Wise, he eventually finds himself on the point of no return. He 'sets his face like flint', to quote from the Bible (!) and determines to take the darkest road to its bitter end. He does so at enormous cost to himself. The quest does, in the end, cost him his life - not physically, he doesn't die on the Mountain, but he is robbed of his peace forever in Middle-earth.

I see Frodo as a pilgrim. And I him.

CS Lewis described Sam as 'the most selfless character of all' and I don't think I would argue with that. Not that Frodo isn't selfless, far from it, but Sam's amazing courage and stoicism in Mordor keeps them both going. It's in Mordor that Sam 'sets his face like flint' towards Mount Doom - by then, he realises that there will be no going back, that they will both die on the Mountain.

Frodo, of course, is Endurance Beyond Hope, while Sam is Hope Unquenchable.

[Sassafras]

Frodo, of course, is Endurance Beyond Hope, while Sam is Hope Unquenchable.



What Di said.

[superwizard]

Back to the topic: I see nothing of self-interest in Frodo's motive in offering to take the Ring to Mordor.

But he did have some interest. Now you may not like to hear this but the truth is part of the reason he proposed to take the ring to Mordor was to keep the ring himself. Had he not volunteered someone else would have taken the Ring and I am pretty sure Frodo would not have wanted to part with the Ring.