What is your heroic ideal?

[Eorl of Rohan]

While typing a reply for the "Which good guy do you least like?",
I realized that I seemed to have a preference for certain type of characters in LOTR.

Boromir, Denethor, Turin, Feanor, Hurin, perhaps Maedhros.

I am not quite sure yet exactly what they have in common except that I like them;
(They died? No, wait, Maedhros didn't die. Hm. I don't know. Someone help me out on this one?)
but I think somehow they reveal my thoughts on what an ideal hero should act like.

So tell me,

What kinds of characters do you think of as 'heroic' in Tolkien's works,
and what does that tell you about your concept of heroic ideal? What makes a character a hero?

[Urwen]

Mine is in ....Fingolfin and his children...

[Eorl of Rohan]

Hmm. But what's so heroic about them?

[Urwen]

Well, Fingolfin pretty well cut off Melkor's foot, Fingon showed Glaurung his devil, Turgon showed up at N.A.,and Aredhel made Morgoth's defeat possible.(If Gondolin survived, would Earendil be able to call his kin to help defeat him?)

[Andsigil]

Boromir.

He was a stalwart warrior- among the very best in Gondor at both generalship and personal fighting prowess. Yet, he was seduced by the ring, just as any other man would have been.

Unlike others, however, Boromir achieved redemption, and did it in heroic fashion. This was stunning in both its rarity and inspiration.

[Eorl of Rohan]

Nice to meet another Boromir fan

Heroic redemption motif is cool, but I think Boromir's attractiveness also comes from the fact that he was seduced.
Boromir was all too human in his tragic flaw of hubris. He was not a hero, nor a maiar, but a man -
Man who had to live with the choices that he had made and acted as best as he could.
Like Hurin, lashing out at the Elf-King in his grief, or Feanor, his home awash with blood in his battle for the silmarils.
They made the wrong choice, but only consequences tells us that these choices were wrong;
like Thomas Hardy says: "these purblind doomsters had as readily sown blessings in my path as pain."
Now that I think about it, perhaps this is why I love that motly assortment of characters; because they were Man.

And it is only the Man that makes a Hero.

(Well, yeah, that and dying awesomely and horribly and tragically. Possibly marrying your own sister.
Or getting yourself mutiliated by your half-brother. Or trying to burn yourself and your son to death on the pyre. Er...)

[Pitchwife]

Let me provide some contrast and nominate Sam Gamgee.
It isn't that much of a feat to be heroic when you were raised to be a trained warrior. But for a humble hobbit gardener who's never wielded anything more deadly than a pair of pruning shears to beat the last child of Ungolianth, face the Orcs of Cirith Ungol and give them the scares of a great elven warrior running loose - that's heroism of the kind I'd hope to emulate if ever the need arises.

[mormegil]

Originally Posted by Andsigil

Boromir.

Unlike others, however, Boromir achieved redemption, and did it in heroic fashion. This was stunning in both its rarity and inspiration.

I am not a fan of Boromir so help me understand how he achieved redemption? He fought Uruks at the end. Who wouldn't? I don't see this as redemption I see it as doing what any would do to try and preserve their own life.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by mormegil

I am not a fan of Boromir so help me understand how he achieved redemption? He fought Uruks at the end. Who wouldn't? I don't see this as redemption I see it as doing what any would do to try and preserve their own life.

Now now now! He tried to redeem himself, that was his reason to go and fight the Uruks - he came to save Merry and Pippin, since he could not turn back the clock and save Frodo anymore. He was not forced to fight, he could have slipped away, drowned in his self-pity or returned to Gondor on foot and pretended that nothing has ever happened, but he decided to go and fight to save the Hobbits. He did not succeed, but he was ready to - and he eventually did - lay down his life.

[Thinlómien]

I seem to like the best the ones who are proud and hot-tempered but good-hearted and loyal, as well as good leaders. No wonder my favourites include such characters as Maedhros (who died, btw ), Boromir, Galadriel, Gandalf and Húrin. All of them are heroes, but they all have their flaws: Maedhros keeps the horrible oath he swore, Boromir is seduced by the Ring, Galadriel and Gandalf are tempted by the Ring's power to do good, Húrin's pride (in a way) causes the misfortune of his children and his bitterness gives out the secret city... A hero is not a hero if he's flawless and thus boring (although Finrod Felagund makes an exception here, he's just cool! )

[Folwren]

I really like the down to earth, simple heroes the best. Sam Gamgee is my favorite hero from LotR, and he's just so natural and down to earth. I also love Bilbo. Faramir is another favorite of mine, and I think that something both Faramir and Sam have in common is that neither of them are looking to become great or anything. They just want to do what is right, no matter the cost, really. And they care very deeply about the people they love.

By the way, Morm - Boromir acheived redemption by asking forgiveness at the end.

-- Folwren

[mark12_30]

Oh, I could write an essay on this one... perhaps I shall, one post at a time.

Let's start with Aragorn. He had his desires: marry Arwen, reign as king in Gondor. But first: he roamed the countryside anonymously for decades, just Doing Good: guarding those who needed guarding, protecting those who needed protection, hunting the enemy wherever he found darkness. THen the hunt for Gollum. Then back to guarding hobbits. Then escorting the hobbits to Rivendell... THen departing from Arwen (yet again) to head for Minas Tirith and glory: but because of losing Gandalf as they passed through Moria, choosing to cross the Anduin with Frodo, and forsake all that. THen when Frodo slipped away with Sam-- Aragorn went in search of Merry and Pippin rather than go to Gondor as he had planned. Self-denial, self-sacrifice. There's one.

Eomer and Faramir and Boromir and yet More to come.

[Andsigil]

Originally Posted by mormegil

I am not a fan of Boromir so help me understand how he achieved redemption? He fought Uruks at the end. Who wouldn't? I don't see this as redemption I see it as doing what any would do to try and preserve their own life.

He didn't just fight Uruks; he fought to protect Merry and Pippin.

I'd also add that, considering the disparity between them and Boromir in importance, it seems an even more noble act for a distinguished scion of Gondor to lay down his life to protect two inconsequential hobbits.

Boromir's was an act of pure friendship and brotherly love.

[Loslote]

My favorites are Felagund, for sheer awesomeness, as well as for honoring his oath to Beren's father and for sacrificing himself to honor said oath, Aragorn, for being selfless, and Beleg, for being loyal to his friend even when said friend didn't appreciate his help.

[Eorl of Rohan]

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

No wonder my favourites include such characters as Maedhros (who died, btw ), (...) And yeah, A hero is not a hero if he's flawless and thus boring (although Finrod Felagund makes an exception here, he's just cool!

I thought Maedhros was the one who got his hand cut off. Didn't he live to a long age, but always wielded his sword by his left hand better than his right? oh, yeah, I just remembered, he later threw himself into a chasm with his silmaril rather than to surrender it. Forgot that one.

I really like the down to earth, simple heroes the best. Sam Gamgee is my favorite hero from LotR

So does my boyfriend, for some unfathomable reason. Back in my younger days, I would have never understood that. I thought Sam too sappy and without a backbone, and probably had a crush on - (No, I shouldn't instill evil thoughts into the pure minds of the barrow-downers!) But now that I think back on it, I can finally understand the reason why so many people think Sam with his unswaying devotion and faithfulness is heroic. Tho' Beleg is perhaps a better candidate for your admiration, perhaps, since he was (1) faithful (2) died tragically. (Tragedy is awesome!) While my heroic ideal is irreversibly fixated on a tragic-flaw-leads-to-death concept, I am finding a newfound respect for Sam Gamgee as well.

He didn't just fight Uruks; he fought to protect Merry and Pippin. I'd also add that, considering the disparity between them and Boromir in importance, it seems an even more noble act for a distinguished scion of Gondor to lay down his life to protect two inconsequential hobbits.

I completely agree with you. He didn't die to save a golden-tressed maiden that he was in love with, or lords and ladies. He gave his life to save two little trembling hobbits who had no one else to protect them; a truly heroic deed.

[deagol]

I don't think Boromir's inability to withstand the lure of the Ring makes him any less heroic. He had the sad misfortune of being a plot device introduced for the express purpose of illustrating exactly that weakness in man. I've got to figure a guy like Boromir is destined to perish amid a burgeoning swath of slain orcs even under the best of circumstances. That he was able to go out on his own terms, valiantly undertaking an impossible task -- a metaphor for all of Gondor if ever there was one -- seems heroic enough to me. For me, heroism requires a clear choice, and LoTR complicates this because of the varying affects (or lack thereof) of the Ring upon each character and how it manipulates each individual according to his or her own stature and character (and lucky for Faramir that it did). In this context, it's hard not to recognize Sam as the most heroic figure in the saga. Not simply because he rises from the humblest of origins, but specifically because of those origins. I mean, who is the perfect foil for the Dark Lord, who likes nothing better than to see living things wither and die?

Why, a gardener, of course.

[Nogrod]

I'm not sure if all the people mean the same thing here with the "heroic ideal"...

Actually, now thinking of it, a "heroic ideal" sounds like something quite boring. The ideal hero eg. no flaws, no vices, no personality... Maybe Elrond?

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

I'm not sure if all the people mean the same thing here with the "heroic ideal"...

Actually, now thinking of it, a "heroic ideal" sounds like something quite boring. The ideal hero eg. no flaws, no vices, no personality... Maybe Elrond?

For the last time, i.e., Nogrod, i.e.

What I would imagine when hearing "heroic ideal" is simple - some person whom I see and say "wow, this is a hero".

So in general, I would probably imagine some guy in shiny armor who killed seventy Glaurungs, but who apart from that was admirably kind and noble and all that. Even though there are more admirable things - and I would likely not pick my, how would you call it, "admirable person", from among those "heroes". But "hero" in this sense of the word to me means mainly somebody who is fighting his heavy battle and is admirable for the way he does that. Usually however, I think of physical battle (or at least of heroic deeds in the sense of Sam or Frodo). I would not think of Galadriel, for instance, or Gandalf, although both of them would be among my picks for the really most admirable characters of all or something (well... although at least in Galadriel's case that'd be based on a few particular decisions or deeds and then the sort of general attitude to things).

But if you asked me "hero", I might think of Boromir (since I already defended him up there) - and I consider his final redemption a part of the true heroism. You actually see very few of these guys putting their life at stake like this, resp. sacrificing themselves, basically. And what is bigger than to sacrifice oneself for the other? (Of course it is not such a clean matter with Boromir either, as he did not probably have much of a chance of winning, but it might have had the perspective of giving the Hobbits at least a bit of time to escape.)

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

For the last time, i.e., Nogrod, i.e.

Heh. I actually know quite well what the abbreviations stand for from my own latin-studies but once you build the wrong habit it just seems to stick....

But maybe what I tried to point out was not so much about who you would call a hero, but who you would call an ideal hero... or heroic ideal as the title of the thread says.

And even in that case one should probably make the difference between the real life and phantasy-literature. I think RL heroes are of a quite different stock indeed. And quite luckily so (I'm not sure I would like to live in a world were the strongest would be the only candidates for heroism ).

[Folwren]

Eorl....out of curiosity (but not curiosity alone) I want to know how you can think that Sam has no backbone?

For your info, I do like Beleg. He was pretty awesome, too.

-- Folwren

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

And even in that case one should probably make the difference between the real life and phantasy-literature. I think RL heroes are of a quite different stock indeed. And quite luckily so (I'm not sure I would like to live in a world were the strongest would be the only candidates for heroism ).

I would tend to agree with that, but even so, for me, some of Tolkien's strongest heroes are far from the mightiest. To me, an "ideal" hero is one that is accessible on a human or humane level (meaning that they need not be of the human race), and Tolkien provides them in LotR. Those that speak most strongly to me are ones like Gandalf and Frodo, who were faced with an insurmountable task, one which they knew full well they had little or no chance of completing successfully -- and they took in on nonetheless, seeing it through as far as they were able. The hero isn't necessarily the one who defeats the enemy personally. They are often the ones who make that defeat possible by others. They often are little rewarded for their efforts, if those efforts are even recognized, but their victory comes from the same source are their heroism: in hearts and spirits willing to make sacrifices for the good of others.

[Eorl of Rohan]

Originally Posted by Folwren

Eorl....out of curiosity (but not curiosity alone) I want to know how you can think that Sam has no backbone? - Folwren

I *used* to think that when I was a kid. But then, I also wanted to marry Leonardo Decaprio. Funny, how age gives you new perspective.

I guess I thought Sam fawned over Frodo too much, that he was more of a loyal lackey than a true friend. A true friend would stand on equal footings; be able to assert himself as well as support his friend. This is the psychologically healthy relationship, at least. (Not that Sam-Frodo relationship is unhealthy; just that it has the potential to be unhealthy if it was re-enacted in real life where problems are not to simple as throwing a ring over a precipice.) But since then, I've rethought my views.

[Eorl of Rohan]

And before I get mobbed by Sam fans for my blasphemy on saying that he was lackey-like, I've since then rethought my views.

+runs away and hides self behind Feanor fans+

[mormegil]

Okay not to get side tracked too much but essentially what Boromir did to qualify him as a hero was defend two hobbits instead of running away and asking Aragorn for forgiveness at the end? The ring had left him ergo temptation was gone. Uruks and Goblins were his enemies and nobody doubt Boromir's bravery but plenty of men had bravery.

Maybe my problem is my ideal hero is more 'ideal' so to speak and it a bit cliche yes but I'm more a Samwise/Faramir type. What I don't like though are those heroes that are almost too noble however, Faramir flirts with that line but doesn't cross it.

[Nogrod]

The one thing I have entertained in my mind sometimes is that is Boromir (the one whose every action is depicted in the books) true to "Boromir" (the "character" he is in the books before the last events) in the way Tolkien handles him in that death-scene of his?

There is a question to be made, whether a captain of Gondor so keen to save Minas Tirith with all costs, would go for the seemingly futile suicide trying to save two hobbits of no consequence or value to Minas Tirith? (And please note, it's not me and my values talking here, but how Tolkien had made Boromir to be, and the discrepancy one can see within the inner logic of him portrayed by the prof.!)

Also the fact that Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas decide to go after the two in that dreadful situation just feels odd and / or unbelivable to me. Why follow two insignificant hobbits when there is a real war pouring in? So either after the Ring-bearer or to muster a war... those would have been the choices laid in front of them. But no, they decide to just run after two hobbits taken by the Uruks? That makes no sense for a king to come. "Heh, I'll just avoid these big issues I should decide on and go for the side-track so that no one notices me..."

I mean yes, you can make fine points on how that was meant to happen - and it's clear that was the case looking at the basic storyline. But wasn't Tolkien here bending his characters in favour of the plot he had in mind? Boromir included? So he had to find room for providence (or fatalism) even if it twisted his characters?

And to come to the point, didn't he make Boromir a different kind of a hero he was? From the "mighty public hero of good" into the "private defender of the few close to him"?

I can see the Christian ramifications here and will not wish to bring them to the fore more than this: did Tolkien change Boromir in the end to allow him to become a Christian hero instead of the pagan hero he was before?

[Andsigil]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

Also the fact that Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas decide to go after the two in that dreadful situation just feels odd and / or unbelivable to me. Why follow two insignificant hobbits when there is a real war pouring in? So either after the Ring-bearer or to muster a war... those would have been the choices laid in front of them. But no, they decide to just run after two hobbits taken by the Uruks? That makes no sense for a king to come. "Heh, I'll just avoid these big issues I should decide on and go for the side-track so that no one notices me..."

As I was discussing here, perhaps Aragorn knew (after seeing Boromir, most likely knowing the toll the Ring took on Galadriel, and the temptation it presented to Gandalf) that if he stayed in the company of the Ring, he too would be corrupted.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

The one thing I have entertained in my mind sometimes is that is Boromir (the one whose every action is depicted in the books) true to "Boromir" (the "character" he is in the books before the last events) in the way Tolkien handles him in that death-scene of his?

There is a question to be made, whether a captain of Gondor so keen to save Minas Tirith with all costs, would go for the seemingly futile suicide trying to save two hobbits of no consequence or value to Minas Tirith? (And please note, it's not me and my values talking here, but how Tolkien had made Boromir to be, and the discrepancy one can see within the inner logic of him portrayed by the prof.!)

Also the fact that Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas decide to go after the two in that dreadful situation just feels odd and / or unbelivable to me. Why follow two insignificant hobbits when there is a real war pouring in? So either after the Ring-bearer or to muster a war... those would have been the choices laid in front of them. But no, they decide to just run after two hobbits taken by the Uruks? That makes no sense for a king to come. "Heh, I'll just avoid these big issues I should decide on and go for the side-track so that no one notices me..."

I mean yes, you can make fine points on how that was meant to happen - and it's clear that was the case looking at the basic storyline. But wasn't Tolkien here bending his characters in favour of the plot he had in mind? Boromir included? So he had to find room for providence (or fatalism) even if it twisted his characters?

And to come to the point, didn't he make Boromir a different kind of a hero he was? From the "mighty public hero of good" into the "private defender of the few close to him"?

I can see the Christian ramifications here and will not wish to bring them to the fore more than this: did Tolkien change Boromir in the end to allow him to become a Christian hero instead of the pagan hero he was before?

Well, there are few things to consider.

First, the general thing about why all of them (Boromir, Legolas, Gimli...) would stay, one factor is friendship. It has not been such a long time together for them, but they went through quite dramatic experiences. I don't know any people who have some experiences of being together in a war or in prison or something, but I would imagine if you go through something like that along with somebody else, it creates rather strong bonds. And such a stressful experience like being on the brink of death several times (esp. Watcher in the Water, the dark Moria, Orcs and Balrog) is certainly immesurable times more memorable. That much at least for Legolas and Gimli (not to speak of Aragorn, even, who's been around there for longer time even with the Riders), remember all their very colorfully portrayed reactions when they saw the Hobbits alive and well, or the words uttered during the pursuit, like Legolas': "The thought of those merry young folk driven like cattle burns my heart." There is obvious personal affection for the Hobbits, also in case of Legolas and Gimli, I can imagine their thinking being slightly different from normal human thinking: Legolas not being so "calculative" (he's a prince of Mirkwood, but never ever I see him thinking about that, he's just here and now one of the Nine), Gimli again probably having some deeper codes of honor (all Dwarves seem like that to me - sort of very "personal" in some ways - think Thorin or Balin). Aragorn then was just used to do things like this (I am the Ranger, the protector of innocents), and there was also his sort of uncertainity and feeling that he failed as the leader, and without Boromir, the idea of going to Minas Tirith was probably making him uncomfortable at least. I can believe that this was genuinely the moment of crisis for him. Nevertheless, when deciding, there was probably this "Christian part" of him winning over cold rationality, as you say, not wishing to get the Hobbits tortured and killed, and rejecting the possibility of just giving them up and heading for "what has to be done". Of all people, Aragorn is probably the easiest to imagine to think like that, but this really strikes be as deeply Christian if anything else: going totally against the "worldly logic", believing that Minas Tirith will not fall even though rationally it would be the best to have as long time as possible to help to build its defenses (though again, what could he do at this point, coming as a King might do more harm than good). Maybe there's also wisdom in that, and some sort of freedom given by this mode of thinking: as that leads to realising that effectively, Minas Tirith does not depend on one Aragorn, even though he might be a King. There is something more immediate where he can help, though. And still he can have the faith that eventually, his steps will lead to Minas Tirith - even though he does not see exactly the way. If anything, that's actually perfect illustration of the steps of faith one takes as a Christian (I can confirm that).

Back to the question of whether this would be "in character" for some of the guys. Another answer to this, of course, you are giving yourself. If it's Christian, then there are people even in this primary world - (some) Christians, "explicite" or "implicite" ones - who would act like that, so it is not by any means illogical. With some characters it is a bit easier to imagine them acting in such a way, with some it may be harder as it is not as "natural" for them, but you also have to bear in mind that they were sort of "under the influence" of e.g. Gandalf for a long time (meaning: having him around, seeing his manners, actions, everything, which is bound to leave an impact - that's said from the Christian point of view, which, even if you don't believe it works like that yourself, Tolkien certainly did believe it that way, so in his inner logic it certainly works).

And so at last, Boromir, I believe in the end, also understood something. I am not sure if he understood the sort of underlying truth - that in the end, the fate of Middle-Earth is not in the hands of the strong whatever he does, and that the war against Sauron must be won by other means. But what he understood - or at least at that very moment - was that the power of arms is not the most important thing now: by his actions, actually, now whether he liked it or not, the fate was with the Ringbearer. He knew that - being at the Council and in the Fellowship everything - the fate of Middle-Earth will be decided by the Ring, okay, either by some Gondorian Lord taking it to defeat Sauron, or by some Hobbit casting it to the Fire, but now after his vain attempt to convince Frodo, the first option was gone. Also, I would think that Boromir understood after his experience that he, or no Man like that, can bear the Ring, seeing how it corrupts - Boromir obviously acknowledged that there was something wrong, that it was not really him acting (cf. his words "What have I said? What have I done? A madness took me, but it has passed!"). We can be left to speculate what would Boromir do had he lived on. Maybe he will give in to despair, thinking that Frodo has no chance, but there is no chance to reach and find him anymore, and he could end up something like Éomer when he was crying "Death! Death!" on Pelennor.

Which turns to the last thing and sort of ties the loose ends: maybe this actually was part of Boromir's motivation, too. I could very, very well imagine his frustration, the feeling of guilt, the despair and the sort of more pagan-ish decision (here you go ) to drown it in death. As in: I am utterly guilty, how can I redeem myself? (Maybe even the suppressed thought haunting him somewhere in the back of his head, but which he would really not like to admit to start thinking of consciously: "Have I now caused Frodo to leave alone? He has no chances - have I caused all this? Have I caused his death? And then Sauron gets the Ring - have I caused the fall of all?" I think you can imagine this.) So basically these mixed feelings, half-despair half-wish to do at least something, saving one Hobbit if he could not save another, so to say; also the wish to fulfil Aragorn's wish (who, sort of, offered him a kind of redemption: "I do not know what part you have played in this mischief, but help now! Go after those two young hobbits, and guard them at the least, even if you cannot find Frodo." In his state of mind, I believe Boromir would regard this as an important thing to fulfil this last command - and definitely even in general, he was the soldier of Gondor, and he would obey such a command, when he was given one; and he held Aragorn in high esteem, as we are told, so he would even take it as a command from his liege).

And all in all, the decision to go back to Minas Tirith would have to be made either before coming back to the camp at all (which does not make that much sense, since if Boromir repented, he wanted to return, and he himself said that he hoped to find Frodo back there), or then after Aragorn's command was given - thus, disobeying him. I cannot imagine the soldier Boromir turning into a coward with the utilitarian excuse "I have to just stay alive to go and save my city". That'd really be totally against the portrayal of Boromir as we know him. Also, he would have to make that decision in the short amount of time after he saw the Orcs running at Merry and Pippin, which, with all respect, sounds even more ridiculous (I am now imagining this picture from children's animated cartoons, where somebody runs, then sees the enemies are too many, "brakes" and says "um... whatever guys", and then turns around and runs away). Last but not least, under such circumstances - and especially with the shock and guilt of what he experienced just a while ago - you don't really think in calculative rational way, but rather irrationally and impulsively. Hence attacking the Orcs (let's not forget, also, that originally there were not as many, probably, and only later "reinforcements" arrived - at which point there probably was no turning back).

And if somebody does not like long posts, sorry... it was not my idea *points at Nog*

[Mithalwen]

Faramir has always been my beau ideal (as well as a beau sabreur who made a beau geste). In fact he is at least the second best hero in my knowledge of literature (may be pipped by Kester Woodseaves who has similarly great qualities but is of much lower birth, which seems to me he should get credit for). Faramir is a verray parfit gentil knight and loves Eowyn for her inner self rather than her beauty.

However Beleg and Felagund score highly on the laying down your life for your unworthy friends scale (maybe a reason I hate Beren and Luthien so much is that I blame them for Finrod's death?) and Elrond's personal sacrifice when he might have done otherwise always seems heroic to me.

[Inziladun]

I think, out of all the characters I admire for various reasons, my 'hero' would be Frodo.

He accepted the burden of the Ring, first, with Gandalf's urging, agreeing to take the Ring to Rivendell. Arguably, he at that time knew little of the dangers he would face, but still: he did what he did out of love for his homeland, and he had no expectation of any kind of reward, not even great honour and glory.
At the Council of Elrond, after having endured many frightening and unexpected events, including nearly becoming a wraith for ever in the service of Sauron, he still agreed to take the Ring and bear it to Mordor, if he could. Again, he had no reward dangling in front of him; no promises of money of renown. He belived Elrond and Gandalf when they said he was meant to be the Ring-bearer, so he answered the call. That time, he had a much greater idea of the sort of perils that might await him, and he still did not hesitate when the moment of decision came.
I really admire that sort of courage and devotion to 'duty'. For duty was what he accepted: that he and he alone was the one chosen to get the Ring as far as he could, to leave all that he had known behind, as far as he knew, forever.

To aid him, he had no native 'angelic' power, as did Gandalf. He did not have the strength or fighting prowess of Boromir, or the sense of tradition as an enemy of Sauron. He lacked the motive of romantic love that helped Aragorn stay on the right path. Sam, Merry, and Pippin had the simple love and friendship of Frodo to drive them, but Frodo himself had no such inspiration. It seems to me that he was ultimately alone, and had nothing to guide him but his own sense of 'right', and he disregarded all else to follow that ideal.

Others were willing to lay down their lives for the cause, but it seems to me they had various props and comforts to aid them, and Frodo alone did not.

[Eorl of Rohan]

Wow. It's amazing how people read the same book and come up with so many different and colorful interpretations of the text. Even something as predictable as 'who do you think is the hero?' comes up with so many varied answers: Frodo, Sam, Aragorn, Beleg, Turin, Feanor, Faramir, Boromir, Fingolfin, Gandalf...

And as for Frodo, I must admit that I never thought of him as a hero, which is strange because he is the de facto main character and the ringbearer with the fate of middle-earth on his shoulders. In my mind heroes (1) either die tragically in the moment of their victory, or (2) courageously live on after their adventure is over. Instead, Frodo is broken forever. Examples of (1) are King Theoden or Boromir. Examples of (2) are Sam, who marries (I do not remember her name, but a cute holbytlan lass) and settles down to a quiet and happy domestic life, and King Elessar and Faramir as well. However, the cycle of life is denied to Frodo; he does not die or live on, but exists as a grey wraith, a scar on his heart that will never heal.
,

[ecthelion]

One of Middle earths biggest heros to me would definetly be Ecthelion (bet you didnt see that coming). He fought at the nirnaeth, bravely defended Gondolin, and killed Gothmog which saved Tuors life but cost him his own.

[Gothbogg the Ripper]

I think the fate of Gollum kind of exemplifies how I see herosm. Above all, the adulation of others is fickle. They cast you as hero and villain often in the same breath. So quick to laud you when times are good, so eager to doubt you when things go wrong.

Gollum destroyed the ring, by accident. He did something heroic purely by fluke. And I feel that's what heroism is, a fluke. People may read selflessness into actions that were done without any thought or consideration beyond self-preservation.

Heroes and madmen are often one and the same in my opinion.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Gothbogg the Ripper

I think the fate of Gollum kind of exemplifies how I see herosm. Above all, the adulation of others is fickle. They cast you as hero and villain often in the same breath. So quick to laud you when times are good, so eager to doubt you when things go wrong.

Gollum destroyed the ring, by accident. He did something heroic purely by fluke. And I feel that's what heroism is, a fluke. People may read selflessness into actions that were done without any thought or consideration beyond self-preservation.

Heroes and madmen are often one and the same in my opinion.

Eh? I don't think anyone, ever, read "heroism" into Gollum's destroying of the Ring, or "lauded" him for it.

And I have personally known many perfectly sane people do brave and/or selfless things intentionally. In fact– not to boast– but I believe I may claim to have pulled off a few myself, in my time. So there.

Besides, bitter, cynical misanthropy is getting a little, well, boring, don't you think? *yawns*

[Morthoron]

Bravery takes an extraordinary effort; cynicism takes none.

Wait a minute, did I just say that?

[Galadriel]

Wow, Heroes. There are a LOT of heroes in Middle-earth! My personal favourites are:

1. Beleg Cúthalion (for his undying loyalty and skills as an archer)
2. Finrod Felagund (For his gentleness and his strength. He slew a werewolf with his hands and teeth!)
3. Maglor (Such a compassionate dreamer)
4. Maedhros (Tragic hero. Was good of heart, but a bit too hasty. I liked his humanity)
5. Sam Gamgee (Need I explain?)
7. Fingon (For his forgiving nature and capacity as a warrior)

[morwen edhelwen]

I think that what makes a character or real-life person a hero for me is courage, a strong sense of what is right or the best thing to do and willingness to adjust their moral code and take moderate risks when it is needed, not because they were too stupid to overlook something that could've make that risk unnecessary.

For example, a motorcyclist with a malfunctioning brake making the bike go over the speed limit "sacrificing" himself because he only took along one helmet is not a hero because the risk was unnecessary- he could easily have taken another helmet so that his girlfriend wouldn't have to wear his. (Add a smiley to your reply if you know what I mean- reference for those who know the story I'm talking about, posted on message boards, or sent by friends).
-Morwen

[morwen edhelwen]

Oh and this may be obvious, but I think my heroic ideals are Frodo, Sam, and Aragorn. I think it shows that I admire people who would 'leave their comfort zones" to fight to defend what they love because they know how important it is and who would do anything to both defend what they love and fulfil their personal ambitions.. probably because I'm not sure if I would do the same in a similar situation. I probably would, when push comes to shove... and like Frodo it would probably stick in my brain for a long time sorry, there isn't really a 'contemplative, thoughtful' smiley.