Progress on The Fellowship of the Ring, Part 4

[bunnyboo]

This chunk of reading spans Frodo’s escape from the Shire, the group’s meeting with Tom Bombadil and Strider, and the encounter at Weathertop. I, uh, just let it get away from me, I guess. Focused critique, commentary, and analysis? Nope!

 

There’s this running consciousness throughout nature in Fellowship. I first noticed it when a fox had a little internal monologue about the hobbits traveling through the woods instead of on the roads, but I think that was only the first overt indication. The birds are said to not all be “trustworthy” and may be spies for the Enemy too, implying that they can reason (and make informed choices) too. It’s something that’s brought up again and again—coming to the forefront in the Old Forest and Tom Bombadil. I think the Romans used to call something similar “genius loci” (though my first thought was that it was “spiritus mundi” because I must have Yeats on the brain)—where a guardian spirit protects a natural place. Heck, the Wikipedia page for genius loci references The Lord of the Rings! But I don’t think that’s necessarily all of what’s happening here. Nature is a thinking, living, and aware thing in Fellowship, not just the personification of it—which are 100% Tom Bombadil and Goldberry. The biggest example, like I mentioned, are the trees in the Old Forest, who actively attack and nearly kill the hobbits as they pass through. It’s not just because they’re evil either; they have an old history of conflict with the hobbits, perhaps even an ancestral memory of it, and they have a way of communicating that among themselves. Old Man Willow even chooses to be evil, and the rest of the trees are under his control or presumably his orders if they share the same level of consciousness. That’s really interesting. I think Tolkien gets this reputation as a tree-hugging environmentalist, something that I can definitely understand, but I’m not sure what to make of this to fit into that perspective. What I do know is that this fits into the theme of evil being a choice.

Sam’s character continues to evolve, even if it’s subtle. He’s the ever faithful servant to Frodo who puts aside his hobbit-y inclinations (drinking beer at the Golden Sheaf Inn is what springs to mind) to serve him. He’s the voice of suspicion when he meets old Farmer Maggot—who’s not only an outsider (by Sam’s standards) but who also treated Frodo poorly in the past—and Strider, even after Gandalf’s letter is revealed. Sam does warm up to old Farmer Maggot after being his guest in a very traditional hobbit-y fashion, but he draws a sword on Strider when Frodo falls at Weathertop! Strider still hasn’t won his trust despite all the help he’s given them, despite all the assurances Gandalf gave in his letter, and despite Frodo’s own feelings. While Sam’s subservient to Frodo, he does seem to think that he knows better than him and is willing to act accordingly and throw off hobbit convention. I think that’s love, be it a bit misguided at times. I know Sam/Frodo is a popular ship, but I don’t see that in the text necessarily. (It’s a completely valid interpretation though!) Sam cares for Frodo like a parent or an older brother with a bit of a submissive twist. He may outwardly follow his commands, but he does doubt his master—the earliest example being skipping the Golden Sheaf Inn’s famous beer. I think their relationship is more equal than it seems.

Sam’s willingness to judge and be suspicious is a character flaw to be sure and will eventually come to a head in the Sam/Frodo/Gollum relationship. He’s prejudiced against others—more so the more the person strays from traditional hobbit-y-ness (fun fake word I just made up)—but he’s not malicious about it… yet. I wonder how this all fits in to the theme of evil being a choice. Sam seems to think that all people of such-and-such a group (hobbits outside of Hobbiton, big people) are equally worthy of suspicion because of what they are instead of who they are and what they do (what they choose).

Tying into that, I don’t have enough in-text evidence to say that creatures in Middle-Earth are inherently evil no matter what, but it does seem that way after reading The Hobbit. Dragons and dwarves are greedy, goblins and orcs are cruel, hobbits are passive and silly. But again, The Hobbit refutes at least two of these stereotypes—Bilbo being the most obvious example, but Thorin’s deathbed repentance subverts what we’d been told about dwarves. So I don’t think Sam is right, in-universe, to judge others based off of their outward appearances and his own biases, and I think the narrative supports this. I’m interested to see how this idea of inherent evil and prejudice is expanded throughout the series. I know it’ll come up with Gollum, but I’ll keep my eye out for anything else too. A lot of recent critics of Tolkien’s work will bring up that “orcs are always evil,” arguing that The Lord of the Rings applies that to real world groups (or implies it), but there hasn’t been that much discussion of it in Fellowship so far other than talk of “evil creatures” here and there. Just something I want to think about moving forward.

This kind of turned into a mini-essay on Sam, and I'm totally okay with that. Sam fans unite!