Character Analysis Thread

[Gordis]

Curious that you have posted the link to the "Shadow of the West", Bethberry, as I have (quite independently) spent three evenings reading this RPG. I have just finished. Great story: I loved all of it but the very ending...

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

In a weird way, it is possible for Boromir to have "less true" blood than his brother. I remember, oh, so very long ago, the introduction to genetics we were given in biology class back in high school. Using a simpler genetic structure, the teacher showed how certain traits pass from parents to children, and how, depending on the parents' own genetic structure, it's possible for one child to show all the dominant genes while another child shows all the recessive. If the characteristics of Numenorean blood to which Gandalf refers are carried in the genes, it's possible (depending on the genes of Denethor and Finduilas and the ancestors of both) for Faramir to have those traits inherent to pure Numenorean blood, and for Boromir to have more of those inherent to their non-Numenorean ancestors. Just thinking along rather peculiar lines.

That said, I do tend to think Gandalf was speaking metaphorically rather than literally, but one never knows.

[MatthewM]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

I think it is fairly clear what Gandalf's thoughts are about the two sons.

Well obviously he prefered Faramir, for Faramir was the "wizard's pupil" (nothing wrong with that) but I do not think he disliked Boromir at all. Sure, Boromir called him out on a few things, such as when Gandalf could not think of the password to Moria. There's nothing wrong with that...this guy who has been all over the place and knows so many tricks and spells can't open this door, and this foul pool is really getting to me. What gives? I would have called him out on it too. If Gandalf was so understanding, like we think he probably was, he would let it slide I'm sure.

It's also made very apparent that Gandalf showed true pity towards Boromir. After he returned from the grave and found Legolas, Aragorn, and Gimli he said to them upon hearing of Boromir's fall-

"Poor Boromir! I could not see what happened to him. It was a sore trial for such a man: a warrior, and a lord of men. Galadriel told me that he was in peril. But he escaped in the end. I am glad.

Even Gandalf knew Boromir was a lord of men, and that he passed the test in the end.

Ibrîniðilpathânezel, I do not have enough knowledge of genes and science to take you up on this, but I must say that Gandalf must have been talking metaphorically. There's no way Boromir and Faramir didn't share the same blood.

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by MatthewM

Ibrîniðilpathânezel, I do not have enough knowledge of genes and science to take you up on this, but I must say that Gandalf must have been talking metaphorically. There's no way Boromir and Faramir didn't share the same blood.

All siblings share the same blood - but that doesn't mean they must be identical twins. Ibrin is 100% right - genes may be expressed or not. Genotype is one thing, phenotype is another: thus brothers can be (and often are) very unlike, both in appearance and in character. And even the Numenoreans from the line of Elendil were not all alike: we are told in UT that Aragorn most resembled Elendil himself, as well as Isildur’s son Elendur, while Boromir was much alike to Earnur the last King and to Boromir I, Steward of Gondor.

Boromir was a great man - we see him only as a member of the Fellowship, but he was first and foremost the Captain of the White Tower, military commander of Gondor, loved and respected by everyone in Gondor - and the future steward.
And it was not only for his personal benefit that Boromir wanted the Ring, but mostly for the good of his country.

It looks like Gandalf and the Wise failed to realize that by his position and his personality, Boromir would be in grave danger from the Ring's lure. Aragorn would have been even more susceptible, but for his training: I think Elrond and Gandalf made it abundantly clear to him over the years that Isildur his ancestor was wrong to take the Ring and why. Boromir has never heard about the Ring before the Council and I don't think that he ever understood WHY the Ring should not be used against Sauron. In a way Boromir's fall is the fault of the Wise.

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Gordis

Boromir was a great man - we see him only as a member of the Fellowship, but he was first and foremost the Captain of the White Tower, military commander of Gondor, loved and respected by everyone in Gondor - and the future steward.
And it was not only for his personal benefit that Boromir wanted the Ring, but mostly for the good of his country.

It looks like Gandalf and the Wise failed to realize that by his position and his personality, Boromir would be in grave danger from the Ring's lure. Aragorn would have been even more susceptible, but for his training: I think Elrond and Gandalf made it abundantly clear to him over the years that Isildur his ancestor was wrong to take the Ring and why. Boromir has never heard about the Ring before the Council and I don't think that he ever understood WHY the Ring should not be used against Sauron. In a way Boromir's fall is the fault of the Wise.

Well, in a way Boromir's fall is the fault of story. Without the examples of those who have succumbed to the lure of the Ring, Frodo's trial would lack effect. So short of seeing how the Nazgul fell--but being given depictions of their malevolence--we have Gollem and Boromir as examples of how both the weak and the strong are susceptible. (And on the other hand there's Tom and Sam. If only Boromir had had a bit more sense of silliness and humour about him. )

But really, this question of the culpability of the Wise is interesting, for they are not bullies; they do not seek to dominate the will of others. That way lies Sauron's way. It is the quintessetial dilemma of Good, how to combat evil without succumbing to its ways. The only person who could save Boromir from himself was Boromir; any other person would have meant a bullying interference.

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

Well, in a way Boromir's fall is the fault of story. Without the examples of those who have succumbed to the lure of the Ring, Frodo's trial would lack effect. .

Not necessarily. There was Isildur’s example, Gollum’s example, Gandalf’s fear to take the Ring even for a time, Galadriel’s lust for the Ring that she had barely overcome, Denethor’s wish to get the ring, Sam’s temptation and finally Frodo’s ultimate fall to the Ring’s lure. The point was made even without Boromir.

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

And on the other hand there's Tom and Sam. If only Boromir had had a bit more sense of silliness and humour about him. .

Tom? But he didn't need the Ring at all - that was the difference. He was a content being. He had no goals in life that he couldn't carry out with his own "stronger songs". Had he wished (for instance) to expand his territory to Fangorn etc., or had he wished for Sauron's downfall, he wouldn't have remained immune to the Ring. Even Sam, the simple gardener and the perfect bodyguard, had more hidden desires that the Ring could explore.
And if "Sam the Ringlord" or "Gollum the Great" sounded silly, "Boromir the Great" didn't - at all. He was a good potential Ringlord, no worse than Isildur or Aragorn - and Sauron himself was most worried when he was led to believe that Aragorn had his Ring.

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

But really, this question of the culpability of the Wise is interesting, for they are not bullies; they do not seek to dominate the will of others. That way lies Sauron's way. It is the quintessetial dilemma of Good, how to combat evil without succumbing to its ways. The only person who could save Boromir from himself was Boromir; any other person would have meant a bullying interference.

I have to disagree. Explaining things and persuading someone is no “bullying interference.” IMO, the Wise failed to give Boromir all the necessary information about the Ring: the reasoning behind WHY it shouldn't be used. In the movies m-Elrond tried to explain it, saying ”the Ring answers only to Sauron”. But that is NOT what Tolkien wrote. Saruman, Galadriel and Boromir thought they could use the Ring and overthrow Sauron. Gandalf certainly could do it – we know it from the Letters- but then he would become the next Dark Lord, even worse than Sauron.
Gandalf did explain it to Frodo, early on, but did he tell the same to Boromir? Did Galadriel try to explain it to Boromir? I doubt it. This reasoning (WHY the Ring should NOT be used) is not easy to grasp: even the wise ancient Galadriel spent countless hours musing on "what if she gets the Ring?" . Boromir was left alone, alone and unprepared to counter the Ring's lure. EVERY Man except the specially trained Aragorn (and at length maybe even he as well) would have been in peril in Boromir's place.

[Bêthberry]

To each his own.

Originally Posted by Gordis

The point was made even without Boromir

I rather think Boromir's fall provided a harrowing, operational example of the breakdown of civil and civic order and was a valuable addition to the story. There's something in Tolkien that wants to explore the old warrior code, its vulnerabilities as well as its honours and dignities. And of course something else interesting to have the "spare", Faramir, turn truer than the "heir."

Originally Posted by Gordis

Tom? But he didn't need the Ring at all - that was the difference

There's something to be said for the ability not to take oneself so seriously. Humour adds distance that counteracts pomposity.

Originally Posted by Gordis

IMO, the Wise failed

In fairy tale, there are characters, often of ambiguous or enigmatic status, whose role is to push other characters towards revealing or discovering their own spirit, often with the all too obvious peril that those so tested may fail. Rather like the Faun in [i]Pan's Labyrinth[/b] or the bowdlerized figure of Mr. Tumnus in Narnia. It is part of the attraction of fantasy.


Still, I suppose, it is the attraction of the character to merit an apologist.

[MatthewM]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

And on the other hand there's Tom and Sam. If only Boromir had had a bit more sense of silliness and humour about him. )

No. That "silliness" you speak of is quite annoying in my opinion. Boromir had a sense of humor, he used sarcasm more than once on the journey. He just didn't have (thankfully) the senseless dummy humour that Sam and Tom had. And I'm extremely glad about that. Boromir's stern and proud nature made him stand out, and made him who he was.

Originally Posted by Gordis

All siblings share the same blood - but that doesn't mean they must be identical twins. Ibrin is 100% right - genes may be expressed or not. Genotype is one thing, phenotype is another: thus brothers can be (and often are) very unlike, both in appearance and in character. And even the Numenoreans from the line of Elendil were not all alike: we are told in UT that Aragorn most resembled Elendil himself, as well as Isildur’s son Elendur, while Boromir was much alike to Earnur the last King and to Boromir I, Steward of Gondor.

You misunderstood me. I never said they were supposed to be identical. Why did you make that up? I already know everything that you said. Obviously siblings come out differently. My argument is that Tolkien was definitely not talking physical blood, he was using it as a metaphor to say that Boromir did not have the same Numenorean mind qualities that Faramir and Denethor had. But he had everything else that was Numenorean. He was of high Num. lineage.

I can't stand when people take the blood quote literally. All Gandalf implied was character traits.

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by MatthewM

No. That "silliness" you speak of is quite annoying in my opinion. Boromir had a sense of humor, he used sarcasm more than once on the journey. He just didn't have (thankfully) the senseless dummy humour that Sam and Tom had. And I'm extremely glad about that. Boromir's stern and proud nature made him stand out, and made him who he was.

I hope my reply above to Gordis elaborates on my comment--do note please my use of the smilie--that sometimes those who can distance themselves from their most passionate wishes and nature are those who can the most successfully avoid falling prey to those passions and wishes. And a sense of humour provides that distance. Given both Sam's heroic stature and Tom's immunity to the Ring's lure I would humbly suggest that it is worthwhile to ponder with some degree of respect this ability of theirs. Sarcasm can sometimes be taken humorously but more often it denotes derision and contempt, something quite different from what I was suggesting as a way of understanding oneself and knowing onself.

Originally Posted by MattewM

I can't stand when people take the blood quote literally. All Gandalf implied was character traits.

Why get so riled up by different interpretations? Why does that idea of a literal meaning bother you so much?

[MatthewM]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

Why get so riled up by different interpretations? Why does that idea of a literal meaning bother you so much?

Because it doesn't make any sense and simply is not true. Boromir was every bit of Numenorean that Faramir and Denethor were. The only difference was that Faramir did not possess Boromir's position or pride and had a different demeanor than his brother. The great part about this is the unshakable bond the brothers had, despite their character differences.

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

Why get so riled up by different interpretations? Why does that idea of a literal meaning bother you so much?

Good question, especially considering that I basically agreed with you, MatthewM. Cool down, please.

What I meant was that IF it were blood alone that determined person's features, THEN any siblings would have been identical twins, as they share exactly the same blood. Yet, they are usually NOT identical: the fact that Gandalf was surely aware of. "Blood" that may or may not "run true" was simply a figure of speech - before the mankind acquired knowledge about genes. It is the same as to say "I love you with all my heart", despite the fact that a heart as such has nothing to do with any emotions.

Bethberry - I have a feeling that humor directed on one's self and Bombadil-ish silliness were hardly desirable in leaders of men, like Aragorn and Boromir. Both were proud and deadly serious about their fate, their place and lineage.
Look like Aragorn bristled when Gimli asked him about his talk with Sauron:

‘Did you say aught to - him?
‘You forget to whom you speak,’ said Aragorn sternly, and his eyes glinted. ‘Did I not openly proclaim my title before the doors of Edoras? What do you fear that I should say to him?"

Rangers of the North were characterized as "grim" in general: even the nine nazgul showed more humor than they did.
Frodo by the end of the quest lost all his sense of humor altogether, as did Denethor by the end of the siege. And I can't really blame them...

[MatthewM]

Originally Posted by Gordis

Good question, especially considering that I basically agreed with you, MatthewM. Cool down, please.

Alright. I apologize...

Originally Posted by Gordis

What I meant was that IF it were blood alone that determined person's features, THEN any siblings would have been identical twins, as they share exactly the same blood. Yet, they are usually NOT identical: the fact that Gandalf was surely aware of. "Blood" that may or may not "run true" was simply a figure of speech - before the mankind acquired knowledge about genes. It is the same as to say "I love you with all my heart", despite the fact that a heart as such has nothing to do with any emotions.

Exactly. I wasn't clear of your stance.

Originally Posted by Gordis

Bethberry - I have a feeling that humor directed on one's self and Bombadil-ish silliness were hardly desirable in leaders of men, like Aragorn and Boromir. Both were proud and deadly serious about their fate, their place and lineage.
Look like Aragorn bristled when Gimli asked him about his talk with Sauron:
Rangers of the North were characterized as "grim" in general: even the nine nazgul showed more humor than they did.
Frodo by the end of the quest lost all his sense of humor altogether, as did Denethor by the end of the siege. And I can't really blame them...

Exactly.

[Bêthberry]

Gentlemen, Tolkien probably has the best lines to express my opinion of this discussion about humour and distance:

Originally Posted by Tolkien, Letters

As for Tom Bombadil, I really do think you are being too serious, besides missing the point. [...] You rather remind me of a Protestant relation who to me objected to the (modern) Catholic habit of calling priests Father, because the name father belonged only to the First Person.

And that I believe sums up all I wish to say.

I am, however, glad that amends have been made about the anger over the blood issue. Really, I was wondering if people were thinking that the comment implied some sort of hanky panky by Finduilas or some more dire event (hence her increasing dark spirits, long decline, and ultimate death after marrying Denethor) and that's what drew the ire.

[ArathornJax]

I brought it up so just to discuss some differences between Faramir and Boromir and their father for that matter, since there was a comment that is what the discussion is focused on. I had expected more of a discussion along the lines of what is found in Appendix A. For me, Boromir is less Numenorean and more traditional man, as expressed better by Appendix A. He loves war and battle, is strong and fearless, takes no wife like King Earnur (whom he is compared to), an relishes the non-tranditional Numenorean interests of battle and arms. Boromir has little interest in the tranditional Numenorean interests of lore (except in ancient or former battles) and music, while not possessing the foresight and seeing into the hearts of men like Faramir and his father.
Faramir is the opposite and loves music and lore, is equally bold and daring when the situation calls for it, but not just for glory's sake. Faramir could "read the hearts of men as shrewdly as his father, but what he saw did not lead him to scorn others but to pity what he saw" in them. Faramir in many ways reminds me of Aragorn.

Appendix A makes it very clear that both are Denethor's son because it states that Boromir was like his father in face and pride, but in nothing else. Faramir was like his father in both looks and in mind.

So I have to believe that genetically Boromir received less Numenorean traits then his father had, or that his younger brother received. That is not a slight to him, but for me it is a fact of who Boromir is. It helps us to understand who he is, and why he does what he does. I would also say that his environment had a lot probably to do with each son as well as parental expectations.

In the end Boromir was all warrior and is very prideful like his father. It is his pride/ego that lead him to being tempted by the ring, and his attempt to take it. Faramir though, because of his insight and his wisdom, is able to resist the very temptation of the ring outright. Faramir stated "Or I am wise enough to know that there are some perils from which a man must flee." For me then it is Faramir's Numenorean traits that allow him to not be tempted by the ring, while Boromir's ego and pride, that lead him to succumb to the influence/temptation of the ring. I don't think that lessens Boromir, for like his brother it is easy to see that Boromir was a great leader in battle. It does make for a nice compare and contrast on the two.

So, I think both brothers are fascinating for different reasons, one of them being how different they are, yet how much they loved and either supported or accepted each other. They are true brothers and family members who understood each other's stengths and weaknesses. Much like them, we may have our favorites, but I think it is important to remember that both play their role in the novel in helping it reach its conclusion.

[MatthewM]

Originally Posted by ArathornJax

I brought it up so just to discuss some differences between Faramir and Boromir and their father for that matter, since there was a comment that is what the discussion is focused on. I had expected more of a discussion along the lines of what is found in Appendix A. For me, Boromir is less Numenorean and more traditional man, as expressed better by Appendix A. He loves war and battle, is strong and fearless, takes no wife like King Earnur (whom he is compared to), an relishes the non-tranditional Numenorean interests of battle and arms. Boromir has little interest in the tranditional Numenorean interests of lore (except in ancient or former battles) and music, while not possessing the foresight and seeing into the hearts of men like Faramir and his father.

I disagree. Boromir was every bit Numenorean that Faramir and Denethor was. He was not like them in mind! That is one sole aspect that Tolkien cites. Boromir was of the same lineage of his sibling and his father. He was not more of a traditional man- he was 6'4", built like an ox, and the strongest man in Gondor! He was of "high Numenorean lineage" as Tolkien points in a letter located in the Bodleian Library in Oxford (p.229, The Lord of the Rings: A Reader’s Companion by Wayne G. Hammond and Christina Scull). A man from a simple background could not claim such a title. Fact is fact, Boromir was every bit of Numenorean that Faramir and Denethor was! He was unlike them in every aspect of mind (because he shared Denethor's pride)- that's IT!!!

Originally Posted by AJ

for like his brother it is easy to see that Boromir was a great leader in battle. It does make for a nice compare and contrast on the two.

It is easy to see?! Of course it was, he was the Captain General! Boromir was ten times the warrior that Faramir was!!! Faramir did not even compare to Boromir in the realm of battle!

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by ArathornJax

I brought it up so just to discuss some differences between Faramir and Boromir and their father for that matter, since there was a comment that is what the discussion is focused on. I had expected more of a discussion along the lines of what is found in Appendix A. For me, Boromir is less Numenorean and more traditional man, as expressed better by Appendix A. He loves war and battle, is strong and fearless, takes no wife like King Earnur (whom he is compared to), an relishes the non-tranditional Numenorean interests of battle and arms. Boromir has little interest in the tranditional Numenorean interests of lore (except in ancient or former battles) and music, while not possessing the foresight and seeing into the hearts of men like Faramir and his father.
Faramir is the opposite and loves music and lore, is equally bold and daring when the situation calls for it, but not just for glory's sake. Faramir could "read the hearts of men as shrewdly as his father, but what he saw did not lead him to scorn others but to pity what he saw" in them. Faramir in many ways reminds me of Aragorn.

Appendix A makes it very clear that both are Denethor's son because it states that Boromir was like his father in face and pride, but in nothing else. Faramir was like his father in both looks and in mind.

So I have to believe that genetically Boromir received less Numenorean traits then his father had, or that his younger brother received. That is not a slight to him, but for me it is a fact of who Boromir is. It helps us to understand who he is, and why he does what he does. I would also say that his environment had a lot probably to do with each son as well as parental expectations.

In the end Boromir was all warrior and is very prideful like his father. It is his pride/ego that lead him to being tempted by the ring, and his attempt to take it. Faramir though, because of his insight and his wisdom, is able to resist the very temptation of the ring outright. Faramir stated "Or I am wise enough to know that there are some perils from which a man must flee." For me then it is Faramir's Numenorean traits that allow him to not be tempted by the ring, while Boromir's ego and pride, that lead him to succumb to the influence/temptation of the ring. I don't think that lessens Boromir, for like his brother it is easy to see that Boromir was a great leader in battle. It does make for a nice compare and contrast on the two.

So, I think both brothers are fascinating for different reasons, one of them being how different they are, yet how much they loved and either supported or accepted each other. They are true brothers and family members who understood each other's stengths and weaknesses. Much like them, we may have our favorites, but I think it is important to remember that both play their role in the novel in helping it reach its conclusion.

This is an interesting look at the Appendix, ArathornJax and I think a very fair analysis. Quite true that we all have our favourites.

It is interesting that it is pity and mercy which give Faramir strength rather than raw brawn--no wonder he welcomes Gandalf, which his father regretfully would or could not do, out of pride and fear that the Wizard would take the Steward's inheritance.

The comparison of Boromir with Earnur is very interesting, for in the Appendix we are told something about Earnur's nature as a leader.

Originally Posted by Appendix A

Earnur was a man like his father in valour, but not in wisdom. He was a man of strong body and hot mood; but he would take no wife, for his only pleasure was in fighting, or in the exercise of arms. His prowess was such that none in Gondor could stand against him in those weapon sports in which he delighted, seeming rather a champion than a captain or a king, .

Now, the Appendix is, I take it, written in the Narrator's Omniscience and we have little in the story proper of LotR to contrast and compare his (I assume 'he' is the correct gender) comments. Normally I suppose we assume that the Narrator is speaking with full authorial authority. Yet when Farmir speaks with Frodo and Sam, we have Faramir making a comment which the Appendix later supports. Here is Faramir's explanation to Sam and Frodo of the relations between the Rohirrim and the Gondorian peoples.

Originally Posted by Tolkien, The Window on the West

"Yet now, if the Rohirrim are grown in some ways more like to us, enhanced in arts and gentleness, we too have become more like to them, and scarce can claim any longer the title High. We are become Middle Men, of the Twilight, but with memory of other things. For as the Rohirrim do, we now love war and valour as things good in themselves, both a sport and an end; and though we still hold that a warrior should have more skills and knowledge than only the craft of weapons and slaying, we esteem a warrior, nonetheless, above men of other crafts. Such is the need of our days. So even was my brother, Boromir: a man of prowess, and for that he was accounted the best man in Gondor. And very valiant indeed he was: no heir of Minas Tirith has for long years been so hardy in toil, so onward into battle, or blown a mightier note on the Great Horn." Faramir sighed and fell silent for a while.

Quite intriguing, eh wot?

[MatthewM]

The extreme similarities between King Earnur and Boromir are well known.

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by MatthewM

The extreme similarities between King Earnur and Boromir are well known.

Just putting the comparison between Earnur and Boromir in the context of the brother's understanding of each other and of Numenorean values.

It was Eanur after all who put the kingdom into the constitutional crisis which led to the creation of the Ruling Stewardship.

It's really quite an interesting comparison because of the similarities to Tolkien's thoughts on ofermod and the right duty of a warrior in The Homecoming of Beorhtnoth. There's an old thread around here someowhere on the topic. Perhaps if I find it I can edit this with a link to that discussion.

EDIT: found it: Here's the link

Barrow Downs thread discussing "The Homecoming of Beorhtnoth". Some fab contributions by Squatter and davem in particular.

[Nazgûl-king]

Ah, I see this topic is doing good now.

This week: Gandalf and Saruman

Gandalf and Saruman are both important characters in Lord of the Rings, I find it interesting how they seem to be two different sides of the same character. Everything Gandalf is Saruman seems to be the opposite, when Gandalf returns he even goes so far as to say that he is “Saruman as he should have been”. So what do you guys think of these two Istari?

[ArathornJax]

Seems to be a theme in the thread; that of pride and ego versus selflessness and sacrifice. Anyway, going through Unfinished Tales I found some interesting comparisons.

First, Saruman as we know, is linked to Aule while Gandalf is linked to Manwe. Gandalf/Olorin felt he was too weak to go and that he feared Sauron, thus showing to Manwe another reason why he should be sent. Curumo/Saruman was froced to take Aiwendil/Radagast because Yavanna wife of Aule begged Curumo to do so. This may explain the contempt that Saruman had for Radagast in the FOTR. So, to summarize the first compare, we see that both Mair were sent to Middle Earth as ambassadors to the free people there.

Another compare is that both were sent in the bodies of men (who aged but did not die from old age) and their former life became as a dream that they reflected on, and wanted to get back to as long as the remembered their duty and to fulfill it. I find it interesting in UT that Tolkien made the connection that unlike the mistake the Valar did with being overprotective of the Eldar and showing their glory to get the Eldar to comply, the Istari were not allowed to show their power or their true self at any time. The Istari were forbidden to rule the wills of men and elves. Thus the reason for the humble bodies. The Istari were to seek to persuade and advise to unite men and elves in love and understanding so they would oppose the oppression and captivity that Sauron wanted over them.

Another compare is that upon arriving at Middle Earth at the Havens (Saruman first, Gandalf last of the five Chief Istari appointed to the North of Middle Earth; does this imply there may have been lesser or more?), both undertook journeys. Saruman went with the two Blue Wizards to the east where the Blue did not return, and Gandalf focused on the North, West and south assuming Gondor. We know from the text that Gandalf did not reveal himself in this journey but studied the hearts of men and elves to get to know them better.

To contrast. Saruman upon returning from his journeys went to Gondor and then settled in Isengard. Gandalf never settled but continued to wander to inspire hope in the hearts of men. I believe that both could continue their missions from where they abode or wandered, Gandalf would just have more presence and personal connectiosn by being a pilgrim, though early on it appears that Saruman did wander at least up to Fangorn and built a relationship with Treebeard.

Saruman arrived with raven black hair and a fair voice and was very skilled with crafts by the hands. Indeed his Elven name Curunir means man of craft.

Gandalf was the least tall of the five that arrived, and was clad in grey, had more grey hair and looked aged. Cirdan though perceived him to be the wisest and thus gave him the Red Ring, Narya, knowing that Gandalf would need it to "kindle all hearts to courage."

Further contrasts are that Saruman fell from his high calling and became "proud, impatient, and enamoured of power sought to have his own will by force, and to oust Sauron, but was ensnared by that dark spirit mightier than he.'

Gandalf on contrast, is much different and I believe much of this comes from his fear of Sauron and his own proclaimed feeling of being weak. Gandalf had an "eager spirit" when it came to doing his task "opposing the fire that devours and waste and with the fire that kindles and succors . . ." Gandalf's joys and his swift anger were hid by his garments so much that only those close to him could see the inner flame inside of him. He could be kindly and merry to the young or the simple minded. The text further reflects that he could be sharp and rebuking at times, but that this did not come from being proud, nor did he seek power or praise.

The final contrast of course is that Saruman failed at his task, and when killed at the "hand of an oppressed slave" and his spirit departed wherever "it was doomed to go (according to UT)", leaving Middle Earth. Gandalf on the other hand suffered greatly and died, and was sent back and successfully fulfilled his assignment and was taken back to the West.

So much for the compare and contrast. Is Saruman the opposite of Gandalf? I would have to say that when they were selected and then sent, no. I believe from the text that they had different abilities and varying interests, but this did not make them become opposites in Middle Earth at first. Like all of us, it is the choices they made that eventually made them become opposites. Saruman gave up on his mission and got caught up in the quest for power, domination and control, even wanting to supplant Sauron. This was contrary to their mandate from the Valar. They were not to seek to control or dominant the will of men or elves. They were to inspire, persuade and unite the free people against Sauron. Gandalf stayed true to that mandate and as such, fulfilled it. Thus because he chose to remain true to the mandate of the Valar, that brought about the opposition and Gandalf's statement that he had become as Saruman should have.

For me, this is one of the themes of LOTR, obedience to duty/calling, fulfilling it and magnifying it or giving in to pride, desire for control and domination, and thus losing one's way and purpose. We see it here with Gandalf and Saruman, and see it with other characters, both major and minor throughout the book.

[Nazgûl-king]

Ok, moving on to the next set of characters>

This week: Frodo, Sam, and Gollum

Three of the most important characters in the Lord of the Rings, Frodo and Sam have a very strong friendship; they are very loyal to each other, and care about each other greatly. They experienced much together, through their journey to destroy the Ring. However the two hobbits, have a very different relationship with Gollum; Sam did not like nor trust Gollum, while Frodo wished to help him, seeing in him what the Ring could do to him and having pity on him. So what are your thoughts on the relationship between these three most important characters?

[Gordis]

I personally doubt that Frodo and Sam "shared a very strong friendship". Maybe they did - after the Quest.
But at first it was more like benevolent master- faithful servant relationship. Frodo had been friends with Pippin, Merry and Fredegar - but not with Sam.
When they had to travel to Mordor alone, Frodo learned to rely on Sam more and more - but then he had no choice. Sam's devotion has gradually become all-consuming - more akin to that of a faithful dog.

[Lush]

OK, I'm actually replying to something about Boromir, please, please forgive me,

The point was made even without Boromir.

Well, I think that Boromir's fall, redemption, and death is what gives us an extra dimension there, MatthewM. Boromir shows us how the Ring's corrupting influence wormed its way into the heart of the Fellowship. There's something very visceral about it, this idea of all-important bonds of friendship and duty compromised in this manner.

And then there's the fact that we lose Boromir, but not before he realizes his mistake and repents. I've been revisiting that part of the book since I first read it - it's a huge tragedy, and Tolkien uses great, understated language there (instead of piling it on).

It's one of the reasons why I love his character even more with each passing year, I think.

Sorry, back to your regular scheduled posting now.

[Groin Redbeard]

I think Frodo took pity on Gollum because he could relate to the burden that Gollum carried for so lone, but Sam was naturally suspicious of Gollum. Indeed I think any person would be if a creature like that attacked you in the middle of the night. Gordis makes an interesting point with the "faithful dog" analogy, but Frodo surely had to have some relationship with Sam if they were going to travel together.

Sam, to me, represents the ordinary man. He isn't awfully smart, but he is loving and loyal to those that he knows. Sam was always looking out for Frodo whenever danger arrived. Maybe he had something to prove to himself while doing this.

Gollum represents the inner struggle between good and evil. The Ring is what he wants, but he can't make up his mind whether to let the evil thing go and have long lasting happiness or hold onto it and be happy for the moment.

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by Groin Redbeard

I think Frodo took pity on Gollum because he could relate to the burden that Gollum carried for so long

Indeed, Frodo was in unique position to understand Gollum - he could do it better than anyone else in ME. He knew exactly how Gollum felt, why he couldn't give up the Ring and was horrified seeing the end result of the ring-addiction.
If you forgive me this lame analogy, Frodo is like a person just starting using drugs who sees another totally wrecked by them - but still he cannot stop. He cannot drop the Ring and go away not only because he has promised to carry out the Quest and save Middle-Earth, but also because he has no strength left to do it, even if he wished to. It is the road with no return - and even the destruction of the Ring is no cure for him.

No taste of food, no feel of water, no sound of wind, no memory of tree or grass or flower, no image of moon or star are left to me. I am naked in the dark, Sam, and there is no veil between me and the wheel of fire. I begin to see it even with my waking eyes, and all else fades.

He can't help feeling mental kinship with Gollum.

Groin: ...but Sam was naturally suspicious of Gollum.

He was suspicious of right about everyone they met, but his beloved Elves: Strider, Boromir, Faramir, and Gollum. It was a usual narrow-minded mistrust of strangers/foreigners so common in the Shire + his over-possessiveness towards Frodo. Remember, he had suspected Aragorn almost all the way to Rivendell, at least before they met Glorfindel. Maybe it was a good thing, as Frodo seems a bit too trusting, at least at the beginning. What if instead of Aragorn they had met Saruman's or Sauron's agent in disguise?

Groin: but Frodo surely had to have some relationship with Sam if they were going to travel together.

Sure, they had a strong relationship involving trust and affection, but it was hardly friendship. As I said, it was more like a master-dog thing, but not quite. Such relationships are all but extinct nowadays, but in Middle-ages they seemed to be quite common, and are often met in English literature (Walter Scott etc.).

Groin The Ring is what he wants, but he can't make up his mind whether to let the evil thing go and have long lasting happiness or hold onto it and be happy for the moment.

I don't think Gollum had any choice. He certainly had NO strength left to let the Ring go after 500 years with it. Even Frodo had none. And how could he hope for "long lasting happiness" if the destruction of the ring literally meant his death? Strange that he still had some good feelings left...

[Nazgûl-king]

This week: Treebeard

Treebeard also know as Fangorn is the oldest of the Ents and described as the oldest being in Middle-earth. He is patient and wise, though he takes a long time to make up his mind. What are your thoughts on this character?

[Gwathagor]

Whether or not being slow to make his mind constitutes a weakness on Treebeard's part is debatable, but he certainly has a sympathy for living, growing things, which works as a strength and a weakness - it contributed to the Ents' decision to destroy Isengard, and which Saruman later manipulated to escape Orthanc. Thus it seems to be a crucial part of both his character - as the protection of living plants is his occupation - and also of the story as a whole. Our strengths are our weaknesses, I suppose.

[Nazgûl-king]

Alright, now for our first character from The Hobbit.

This Week: Beorn

A rather mysterious character, Beorn can turn into a bear. He is strong and powerful. By the time of Lord of the Rings, he has a son Grimbeorn who leads a race of people the Beornings, who can also turn into bears. His having a son implies that he became married at some point. What are your thoughts on this character?

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Redux on the Steward and his sons:

I suppose it's also possible that Faramir, but not his brother, inherited from his mother something of Dol Amroth and thus the thread of Elven lineage.

[Hot, crispy nice hobbit]

EEP!!! I'm two years late for a surprise exam on Middle Earth and Hobbit!!!

Oh well, better late than never ...

By the time of The Hobbit, there seemed to be only two santuaries of Men from which Beorn could have found his mate: Woodsmen village and Dale. Of course, that is discounting the possibility of the random Ranger and wandering Wizard. It may also be possible that some teenage Eldar maiden or bearded dwarf spinster discovered the masculine appeal of the hairy macho man of Carrock.

I certainly find the prospect of Beorn laying with some Eldar entaintaining, though implausible as that would give rise to another line of super-Men with shape-changing elvish lineage.

(How'd I do for my first paper after 3 years of truant?)

[Groin Redbeard]

I was/am always troubled by what Beorn really is. I know that he's a skin changer and all that, but what are the origins of his people? Where did they come from and how did they get their gift of skin changing?

[Hot, crispy nice hobbit]

For that matter, where did the hairs on hobbits' feet came from, and how did they shrink? No mention of hobbits at all in Arda 1st or 2nd age either. I believed that there had been some pun drawn at the hobbit feet: something about letting the grass (hairs) grow on feet; i.e. to idle around. But other than literary significance, I've written off the hairs as just another magical element of Middle Earth.

In fact, Beorn's shape shifting ability was very much up there in the Tookish Book of Untouchable Wonders, sitting comfortably with wandering wizards and mad baggins.

[Nazgûl-king]

This week: Bilbo Baggins

What are your thoughts on the character of Bilbo Baggins?

[Kitanna]

Bilbo is quite the corrupted, yet uncorrupted character.

His possession of the Ring for six decades left him accusing Gandalf of trying to take it and in Rivendell a strange shadow passes over him as he contemplates getting it back from Frodo. From the very beginning he lied about it and his "winning" it from Gollum. Yet he manages to overcome its hold by giving it up as Gandalf requested.

Even though he knows it's evil he still longs for it in a childlike manner. And in that childlike manner I say he's uncorrupted. Because children can be easily swayed by what they want, they even resort to throwing fits, but they're never moved to a state of true violence. Bilbo's accusations and his lying from the beginning make me think of him as a small child hoarding some secret treasure he's not supposed to have. As for children (at least when my siblings and I were growing up) our treasures corrupts us, makes us act out, but after a time we were taught or came to realize we shouldn't keep it.

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

Bilbo does appear to have a habit of picking up things that later prove troublesome (the Ring, the Arkenstone). It has always struck me as odd, however, that the Ring -- which is an object of malice and evil with a sort of will of its own -- was something he picked up casually, in the dark, simply because his hand happened to fall on it, and in so doing, it put the Ring in what turned out to be the best place to lead to its eventual destruction. He chose to take the Arkenstone, not just because he happened upon it in the dark, and for him personally, the repercussions were more immediately bad. Just goes to show that Gandalf was right when he said that Bilbo took so little harm from the Ring because he began his ownership of it with pity. Not so the Arkenstone, and in that case, he lost friends in the battle that followed.

I tend to think that Bilbo is very much the embodiment of the Hobbit tendency to be "brave in a pinch." He's really a poet and scholar, and if he yearned for adventure, I think it was mostly because he wanted to know what it was like, to have such an experience so that he could feel he understood the heroes he heard about in story and song. When needed, he displays considerable courage, but doesn't really step up and volunteer for the job very often. I can't help but think that at the Council of Elrond, he volunteered to take the Ring to Mordor with a rather certain knowledge that he would not be allowed to do so because of his age. It doesn't diminish the value of his offer, because he's the kind of person who would stick to his word, but it could well explain why some of the others at the council smiled when he volunteered.

[Nazgûl-king]

This week: Fëanor

This week is our first analysis of a character from The Silmarillion, so what are your thoughts on Fëanor the maker of the silmarils?