April 24, 2003

Response to Lilly's Changes
Mithril Miner

Lilly, I can't agree with you.

First off, let me say that Sam and Frodo are two of my favorite characters (and anyone who says Boromir handled the ring better than Frodo is nuts!).

It would not be in Sam's character to push Gollum off thee cliff. Sure he was mad at Gollum, but in all the times I've read it I've been under the impression that Sam wouldn't kill something just for revenge. And even when he wants to get rid of Gollum in the beginning, he says "Let's tie him up and leave him." I don't think it would be in Sam to shove Gollum into Mount Doom (Gollum was falling, anyway.) My recompense for Gollum's treatment of Sam was that, in the end, Sam lived and Gollum didn't, and, by Tolkien's brief mention to him, Sam saw Valinor, and all Gollum saw was the inside of Mount Doom. If Gollum had held on just a little bit longer, he would have been all right, but he was past the Point of No Return (yes, the Phantom of the Opera is one of my favorite musical/opera!)

Another thing about Sam is that, though he wanted to kill Gollum with Shelob, it was because he wanted to save Frodo. Sam would hardly find that kind of courage just to save himself. If Gollum had been pulling Frodo into Orodruin, sure Sam would have pushed Gollum, just so he would get his hands off of Frodo, but he wouldn't do that kind of thing for himself. No descent, well-bred hobbit would push a pitiful creature like GOllum over the edge (yes, believe it or not, Sam felt pity for Gollum!).

As to Frodo, (once again) it would not be in his character to shove Gollum over the edge, even after having his finger bit off. Frodo, like Sam, did not have the heart to do that. And if Frodo had been able to do anything, he probably would have tried to pull Gollum up, because, among other things, he had the ring, and Frodo was still under the sway of it.

In addition to which (here come the other things) Frodo still had pity for Gollum, because he knew that, if he held on to the Ring, Gollum is what he would become. And Frodo was still clinging to the hope that Gollum could be brought back. He wanted Gollum to find a happily ever after ending...but it was just not to be.

In addition to the derivation of the characters' character, the change preposed would be a serios derivation from the theme of the books themselves. All throughout the book we witness the corruption of man (and/or other...beings) and how it affects the quest and the fate of the world. To me, Frodo and Sam pushing Gollum would be a sign of the utmost corruption, simply because no-one could kill a living being like that without having a touch of evil in them. Gollum, for instance, killed his friend. Boromir tried to kill one of his close companioins. Saruman imprisoned another Maiar. In all my reading I have gotten the feeling that Sam, Frodo, Merry, Pippin, Aragorn, and Gandalf were above such things (I don't mean to exclude Gimli and Legolas, but their honor is not one of the things that sticks out like a sore thumb in them: they do have honor, though!). Having Frodo and Sam stoop to such level as pushing their guide (who started off with at least the slightest bit of care for his master--though not necessarily his master's friend!) off a cliff to his death does not strike me as being particularly honorable.

I think that Tolkien was very deliberate with how he made things happen: Frodo was not able to complete the task, and Gollum was eventually put out of his misery, and the Ring was destroyed, and Sam gave his all to save his master, all withing the span of a minute. It seems, when you are reading it in the book, it is in slow motion.

Not that I'm discouraging any changes made to the book (in the movie or elsewhere: the TT was one of the best movies I have ever seen (right up there with the Fellowship!)), I'm only saying that, Lilly, the change that you preposed is not compatable with Frodo and Sam's characters, along with not being compatable with the book's themes itself.

Sorry for how long this was!