...right out of my subject heading. I like your idea that we can see a
tension in the logic of the story when trying to answer the question of whether
Frodo (and Sam) are saints or Everyman.
On the one hand, Frodo is considered the best hobbit in the Shire by Gandalf
and Bilbo, and he does seem to be destined by some providential power to take
on the adventure. Also, it’s clear from the beginning that he is not like
other hobbits – he seems to be “deeper,” to have an interest in things that are
more important than the narrow-minded concerns of most of the Shirefolk. So in
these ways, Frodo doesn’t start out as being completely ordinary, although he
does share a love of many of the ordinary things beloved by other hobbits. His
reluctance and lack of confidence in setting out on the quest make him seem
like an unheroic Everyman. However, later in the journey, when Sam sees at a
couple of different times a light shining from within Frodo, Sam seems to be
looking on some extraordinary being, a creature who is transcending ordinary
physical existence.
While I agree with Curious that Frodo’s humility, self-sacrifice, and spiritual
strength are what make him special, even saintly, I don’t see his mission as an
uncomplicated success. To be completely saintly, I think that Frodo would
have had to give up the Ring at the final moment. He falls just short of
an impossible ideal when he claims the Ring – not that we blame him because who
else could have taken the Ring even that far? – but there is this moment of
failure. And I think that it’s in that moment that Frodo looks most like
the modern “failed” hero that drogo-drogo was talking about. I also
wonder whether this moment isn’t a reflection of how men often thought about
the events of the First World War -- no matter what kind of heroic effort
an individual might make, there were forces that were too overpowering to allow
them to succeed. The book that Squire mentions in another post, Paul
Fussell’s The Great War and Modern Memory, talks about how ironic twists
in events and situations seemed to characterize the experiences of those in the
First War -- just when they thought things were going one way, there would be a
sudden turn of events in an unexpected direction. Having Frodo get to
Mount Doom, after an incredibly harrowing quest, just at the point of
completing his mission, and then having Frodo suddenly claim the Ring, with
Gollum popping up and destroying it for him, strikes me as one of those ironic
twists that characterized many World War One experiences. (Paul Fussell also
talks about how soldiers could be idealized by war writers as Christ-like
figures – this view is reflected in the saintly Frodo, I think.)
I think that Sam is much closer to the ordinary Everyman, although he too
shares some of Frodo’s and Bilbo’s beliefs in a life beyond ordinary Shire
concerns. There is something special about him even before they set out
on their journey. But through most of the journey, he is like the
ordinary soldier or batman who gets called on to do progressively more and more
courageous things, until you see the extraordinary stuff he’s made of.
And then, like most ordinary soldiers in the First War, he just wants to get
back home and reintegrate into ordinary life. Frodo, on the other hand,
is like those soldiers who were wounded either physically or mentally and could
not make that return to ordinary
life.
The Reading Room
Ooo... another great book on philology!
