Curious
Half-elven
May 13, 10:16pm
Views: 72364
|
1. Q. What is the change in Bilbo? Is it just that he's creating verse?
A. No, the poetry is a symptom, not a cause of the change.
Q. Has he come to have a new appreciation of the Shire itself outside of Bag End?
A. Yes! There's nothing like travel to help you appreciate what you have at home.
Q. Do friendships with the Dwarves, Beorn, Gandalf, and the Elves indicate that Bilbo the solitary bachelor has learned to form relationships?
A. Yes and no. Bilbo has grown closer to non-hobbits, but farther from hobbits, who now consider him "queer," a word which has nothing to do with his sexual orientation but everything to do with his failure to conform to social norms. Bilbo's new relationships are with characters who live far away and rarely visit. And there's no regular mail service to his new friends, either.
2. Q. Is Bilbo buying the affection of these mercenary youngsters?
A. Bilbo's generosity does not buy the affection of older hobbits, so it's not money alone that attracts the younger hobbits, especially on the Took side. The Tooks have a long history of young hobbits going on adventures, so they aren't as suspicious of the idea as other hobbits. Indeed, just like Bilbo himself, part of them is quite proud of those adventurous ancestors.
Q. Do the Hobbiton hobbits resent Bilbo because he's "Tookish"?
A. No, they resent Bilbo because he left without a word for a year and now is friendlier with outsiders than with hobbits. He also has wealth of unknown origin, and if you ask him about it he tells unbelievable tales, suggesting he's either delusional or dishonest or both.
Q. Are they jealous of his wealth?
A. Maybe, although the Shire is so prosperous that few hobbits have any cause to be jealous. And those few hobbits who are actually in need find Bilbo to be generous, so all they have to do is ask. I don't think it's Bilbo's wealth that makes him seem queer to other hobbits. It's his adventures and how its affected him that does that.
3. Q. How do you think about the Shire when viewed only through The Hobbit?
A. As you have noted, in The Hobbit there's minimal description of anything in the Shire other than Bilbo's home. So it's hard to know what to think of the Shire at large. It's mostly a big void in the narrative. We do know, however, that Gandalf considered Bilbo the most suitable hobbit for his wild adventure, which suggests other hobbits are even more stuffy and suspicious of outsiders or adventure than Bilbo was at the beginning of The Hobbit. We also know that hobbits typically live underground, although Bilbo's home is particularly large and grand by hobbit standards.
4. Q. Do the Shire and its residents seem to have changed between Bilbo's return in The Hobbit and Bilbo's departure in A Long Expected Party?
A. The Shire and its residents haven't changed, but their hostility reflects the changes they see in Bilbo. Perhaps from Bilbo's perspective they seem to have changed, but it's really he who has changed, not them.
Q. Has the opinion of the "narrator" changed?
A. The narrator of The Hobbit is Tolkien himself, as when he told the stories to his children. The narrator of The Lord of the Rings is much more reticent and hidden.
For the most part, instead of seeing the story from the point of view of a modern narrator who breaks the fourth wall by speaking to the reader, in The Lord of the Rings we see the story from the perspective of one of five hobbits, Bilbo, Frodo, Sam, Merry, and Pippin. In one long stretch of the story we see the action from the perspective of Gimli, since hobbits are not present. Only very rarely do we see the action from the point of view of an objective narrator.
Of course, the fiction is that Frodo himself writes most of the story, consulting with his fellow hobbits for details he didn't witness. Sam finishes it off after Frodo leaves. But that fiction doesn't always hold up.
After all, how can Frodo report on his first sighting of Valinor on his journey to the West? How can anyone report on the perspective of Gollum when no one is awake to observe him, or of Shelob, or of the fox? Sometimes it's worth remembering that it's not really Frodo's memoir, despite the pleasant fiction that it is.
5. Q. Does The Prologue change how you perceive the Shire?
A. The Prologue to The Lord of the Rings certainly provides a lot more information about the Shire and makes it feel real. It also gives away the happy ending, which may provide comfort if we remember it when the going gets tough.
Of course, it does not guarantee that everyone survived or that everyone lives happily ever after. Nor does it explain how Frodo accomplishes what seems impossible. So there's still some suspense.
Q. How about narrative style of A Long Expected Party and The Shadow of the Past?
A. We learn a lot about Bilbo being unappreciated by all but a few in those chapters. Bilbo does openly bribe hobbits to come to his birthday party. Only a few come voluntarily, the same few who continue to celebrate on Bilbo's birthday with Frodo in years to come. And Frodo is by far the oldest of those few, meaning that for maybe 75 years, until Frodo was old enough to get to know Bilbo, Bilbo simply had no friends in the Shire. That makes me think less of hobbits and the Shire, and more of Bilbo for enduring it.
6. Q. Does Bilbo and/or Bilbo's experience of the Shire change between The Hobbit and The Fellowship of the Ring?
A. The only change was already discussed at the end of The Hobbit. We just see what being considered queer means in the Shire in much more detail, and it's not always pretty. We also see that Bilbo never loses his good humor, except maybe when dealing with his closest relatives and, before adopting Frodo, his apparent heirs.
7. Q. Would Frodo, as a character, have fit into the Shire of The Hobbit?
A. Frodo had more friends than Bilbo, at least. If Frodo had less harrowing adventure with no wounds, he would have been okay.
In fact, that's what's so bittersweet about Frodo's departure with Gandalf and the elves. Frodo's actually leaving some hobbits who love him dearly.
Q. Is [Frodo] a more nuanced character than Bilbo as the Shire is more nuanced in The Fellowship of the Ring?
A. No. We learn much more about the Shire in The Lord of the Rings, but Bilbo in The Hobbit was every bit as complex and nuanced as Frodo in The Lord of the Rings.
8. Q. Did the Shire "grow-up" because The Fellowship of the Ring is a different sort of story than The Hobbit?
A. No. If anything the hobbits of the Shire seem more immature in The Lord of the Rings than in The Hobbit, not less. Even though we learn a lot more about the Shire in The Lord of the Rings, in a way it makes the Shire look even more insignificant than when it isn't described in detail in The Hobbit.
Q. Did Tolkien "grow-up" as a writer?
A. No. But Tolkien did decide to write The Lord of the Rings for adults, and not so much for children. So in a sense it was his intended audience that grew up, not the author.
9. Q. Do you overlook the faults of gossip, gluttony and greed in Shire hobbits?
A. Yes. First of all, we learn that some hobbits like Farmer Maggot or Fatty Bolger cannot be judged by how they look or sound. One of Tolkien's consistent themes is that the hobbits are better than they seem.
Hobbits are hardy, brave, and surprising when a crisis calls for it. We see that in the Scouring. They may desperately need leaders like Merry, Pippin, Sam, and Frodo, but they answered the call and drove out the ruffians. Even the most ordinary hobbits have stout hearts as well as bodies.
Q. Are [gossip, gluttony and greed] part of the charm of hobbits along with toughness, good cheer, and loyal friendships?
A. The only thing I find charming about gossip, gluttony and greed in the Shire is that it normally doesn't result in anything more serious than a mild argument in a tavern. There's almost no real crime in the Shire, unless you count Bilbo's missing silver spoons, which he does not.
(This post was edited by Curious on May 13, 10:21pm)
|
